Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-03-19 Support Documentation Town Council Work Session ~v~ VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, MARCH 19, 1991 1:00 P.M. AGENDA 1. Planning and Environmental Commission/Design Review Board/Town Council Joint Meeting to review and discuss final draft of Vail Streetscape Improvement Project 2. Discussion regarding approval request to proceed to Design Review Board to allow for the renovation of the playground at Red Sandstone School 3. Discussion regarding 1991 Town of Vail Resident Survey 4. Discussion of Special Events Money Allocation 5. Information Update 6. Other 7. Discussion and Site Visit of a Proposed View Corridor, extending from Frivolous Sal's to the east, over the Red Lion roof to the Gore Range (Applicant: Town of Vail) 8. Adjournment VAIL TOWN. COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, MARCH 19, 1991 1:00 P.M. EXPANDED AGENDA 1:00 1. Planning and Environmental Commission/Design Review Mike Mollica Board/Town Council Joint Meeting to review and discuss final draft of Vail Streetscape Improvement Project Action Requested of Council: This is a joint work session with the PEC and DRB, to review and comment on the Streetscape Plan. Jeff Winston and Paul Kuhn, of Winston Associates, will present the draft plan. Staff is requesting comment so that the project may be revised if necessary and then proceed to final design. Background Rationale: The Streetscape Plan is nearing the final phase of design. Numerous public meetings have been held during the span of the project and many of the public's comments have been incorporated into the proposed design. In order to address as many site planning issues as possible, coordination with all utility companies, as well as with the Town's drainage plan consultants (Muller Engineering), has also occurred. 3:00 2. Discussion regarding approval request to proceed to Design Betsy Rosolack Review Board to allow for the renovation of the playground at Red Sandstone School Action Requested of Council: Deny/grant permission for project to proceed to DRB. Background Rationale: The property belongs to the Town. The plan includes relocating the slides so that they are closer to the existing jungle gym, constructing steps (at grade) between the upper and lower parking lots, and refurbishing the exterior of the school. Staff Recommendation: Grant approval to allow the project to proceed to DRB. 3:05 3. Discussion regarding 1991 Town of Vail Resident Survey Caroline Fisher Pam Brandmeyer Action Requested of Council: Input and feedback from the Council regarding this year's resident survey - including sample size, specific survey questions, etc. Council members were given copies of last year's survey in your Council packets for this week. We requested that you review the survey and be prepared to give suggestions for changes, deletions, etc. Background Rationale: Last year the TOV resident survey was sent to approximately 8,300 residents, business owners, and second home owners. This was the first year that such a large survey sampling was conducted. For public outreach purposes, as well as a more complete view on public opinion, the large sampling was effective. Last year at this time, the possibility of conducting a reduced sampling every other year was discussed. General opinion was that Town service levels and areas of interest do not change that drastically from year to year, and perhaps an extensive survey is needed on an every-other-year basis. Staff Recommendation: We might want to consider doing a random sampling of 1,000 residents, business owners, and second home owners for this year's survey population. 3:25 4. Discussion of Special Events Money Allocation Rob Robinson Sylvia Blount Action Requested of Council: Council will receive specific proposals for the next two community-wide special events, Memorial Day and Vail America Days (July 4th), at the work session. VRA and URD are in concert on these monetary requests and "taking the lead" on each event. Following a joint meeting of these two groups, the Foundation, and the Town of Vail, VRA and URD have held 2-3 subsequent meetings, have agreed upon the orchestration of these two specific events, and will be bringing forth additional .requests for the remainder of this year. In the future, a bid process for special events will be implemented. Background Rationale: Council requested Ron to meet with the UUF, URA, and URD regarding monetary allocations for town-wide special events, and who is designated to take the lead on orchestrating events, .and therefore should be receiving the Town's financial support. The future process was discussed, comments from each group noted, and these requests are the outcome of that meeting. 3:35 5. Information Update Ron Phillips 3:40 6. Other 3:45 7. Discussion and Site Visit of a Proposed View Corridor, Andy Knudtsen extending from Frivolous Sal's to the east, over the Red Lion roof to the Gore Range (Applicant: Town of Vail) Action Requested of Council: Discuss the proposed view corridor, commenting specifically on the boundaries proposed by staff, the assumptions made by staff to define the corridor, and the "grace period" proposed, which would provide time for projects currently in design development to be approved. The proposed ordinance adopting the corridor would also clarify wording in the existing view corridor ordinance. Background Rationale: The PEC voted 6-0 on March 11, 1991, recommending approval of the corridor. The enclosed staff memo provides an analysis of the issues the PEC discussed. 4:15 8. Adjournment -2- memorandum TO: Vail Town Council Members • FROM: Caroline Fisher Pam Brandmeyer DATE: March 7, 1991 RE: 1991 Vail Resident Survey It is Vail Resident Survey time again and we will be seeking your input at the March 19 Town Council work session regarding the specifics of this year's survey effort. Attached is a copy of the annual Vail Resident Survey sent last year to 8,300 residents, business owners, and second home owners throughout the community. Please read through carefully and give us suggestions regarding question style, areas of inquiry, rating system, etc. Last year was the first time that a sampling of such magnitude took place, and we felt it was a positive effort not only for public outreach purposes but also for a broader range of feedback. The effort was considered fairly successful, with 1,416 completed surveys returned. We discussed last year the possibility of conducting reduced and random samplings every other year, alternating with samplings of last year's magnitude. It was felt that areas of concern don't change that drastically from year to year and perhaps a random sampling in the off years would be adequate. Please give us your thoughts on the possibility of this year conducting a random sampling of 1,000 Vail residents, business owners, and second home owners. We are hoping to get the survey out by the beginning of April. Thanks for your input. MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: March 11, 1991 SUBJECT: A request to amend Ordinance No. 13, 1983, to establish an additional view corridor, and to clarify .wording in the ordinance. The view to be protected extends from Frivolous Sals to the east over the Red Lion Building toward the Gore Range. Applicant: Town of Vail Since the PEC work session on February 11, 1991, staff has rephotographed the Gore Range and identified the view corridor more clearly. Attached to this memo are two photographs taken from a 5'-2" height that show alternative ways to set the boundary of the corridor. The first is staff's recommendation, which runs the boundary along the roofs of the existing Red Lion and Christiania buildings. The second reflects PEC's discussion during the work session, which runs the boundary directly between two balcony railings on either side of the corridor. The vertical boundaries which frame the two sides of the corridor are the same on both alternatives since there was general agreement on that issue. The 5'-2" height is consistent with the height staff used to photograph other view corridors in the past. Staff believes this is a typical eye level height for pedestrians. Two other photographs are attached to this memo which were .used at the work session, which were taken from a 3'-10" height. A potential Christiania expansion has been identified on one of the photographs by Paul Johnston's architect. Regarding the text of the proposed ordinance, staff has changed it so that it is clearly understood that existing encroachments which are focal points (like the Clock Tower) are intended to remain. During the PEC work session, it was mentioned by Jay Peterson that the Council, when discussing the proposed changes to the Red Lion, had said that. view corridor number one was to exclude the Red Lion chimney. Staff has included the chimney as part of view corridor number 4. Staff could find no portion of Town Council minutes stating that the Red Lion chimney should be excluded from the view corridor. Staff understands from individuals involved with the original definition of this view corridor that the boundary was placed around the chimney, excluding it. Staff would like to enable pedestrians to see as much of the Gore Range as possible, and as a result, staff recommends including it within the boundary. By including it, staff would encourage the Red Lion to remove a portion of the chimney if and when the Red Lion applies for a major remodel. Even though the .original discussions may have excluded it, staff believes that corridors in general should be defined with building roofs and walls, not architectural projections like chimneys. Before this view corridor is established, it must be considered by Town Council twice and adopted as an ordinance. .Staff believes that this addition to the code should be treated similarly to other code changes. There should be some kind of "grace period" for developers to pull building permits for projects designed under the current regulations. Staff proposes to use the same process that was used for the .recent code change limiting the number of woodburning fireplaces. Once adopted by the Town Council, staff proposes that there be a six week period for individuals to submit a complete DRB application for projects that would otherwise encroach into View Corridor #4. Approval of the project by DRB, or any other board, is not needed. A complete application submittal is all that would be necessary. The staff memo from the February 11, 1991 PEC work session is attached to this cover memo. It has been modified to reflect the concerns the PEC expressed, including the discussion of the chimney and clarifying the language regarding focal points like the Clock Tower. ' MEMORANDIIM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Department of Community Development DATE: February 11, 1991 (Revised March 11, 1991) SUBJECT: A request to amend Ordinance No. 13, 1983 to establish an additional view corridor and to clarify wording in the ordinance. The view to be protected extends from Frivolous Sals to the east over the Red Lion Building toward the Gore Range. Applicant: Town of Vail I. BACKGROUND The primary purpose of this request is to add another view corridor to the four existing view corridors the Town Council has adopted. These four views_ are numbered 1, 2, 5 and 6. These numbers are based on a large list that was put together in an effort to comprehensively identify as many view corridors as possible. The view that is under consideration with this proposal is number four from that list. In addition to adding a view corridor, the proposed ordinance would clarify some of the language in the current view corridor ordinance. II. PROPOSED VIEW CORRIDOR The proposed view corridor will read as follows: "View No. 4 - The point of origin for this view is 8'-2" east of the southern side of the door frame of Frivolous Sals, located at 244 Wall Street. The view was established by setting a camera five feet two inches above this point, using a 50 millimeter lens. The Hill Building and the Plaza Lodge buildings flank the corridor on either side. It then extends above the Red Lion roof, then above the Christiania roof over Hansen Ranch Road, to the Gore Range." III. PROPOSED LANGUAGE The current ordinance is attached to this memo for reference. The portions which are proposed to be changed are marked with an asterisk in the margin. A. The first change is to delete the following sentence: "Minor modifications to the roofs or structures (i.e. a new flue) located above the line may be permitted if appropriate approvals from the Community Development Department are obtained." Staff proposes that this sentence be replaced with: "any modifications to the roofs or structures which are proposed to be located above the line of the view corridor may be permitted if approved by the PEC and Town Council." B. The second change is to modify the following paragraph: "As circumstances affecting views change, such as rezonings, variances and height or new buildings, the view corridors will be reviewed and if necessary revised. If a conflict exists between the maximum height allowed and the view corridors, the more. restrictive regulation will apply:" Instead of the above, staff proposes the following language be added: "If the maximum height allowed by the zoning code exceeds the resulting height as defined by the view corridor, the more restrictive height as defined by the view corridor shall apply." C. A third issue which staff would like to add to the ordinance reads as follows: "Any expansion proposed above the view corridor line, even if it is proposed to be built below, behind or in front of an existing structure that is in a view - corridor (a chimney or other architectural feature for example) shall not be allowed.'! There are three reasons why staff would like to add this section. First, it clarifies the existing wording of the ordinance which is presently interpreted in this manner. Secondly, it will prevent new buildings from competing with existing focal points like the Clock Tower. Third, it will help keep corridors open so that, eventually, when existing encroachments are removed, corridors will be completely clear. Hypothetically, new construction could impact existing view corridors in the following ways: View 1: (From the parking structure looking out to the ski mountain.) Potential applicants may want to construct additions above the view corridor line, which would not exceed the height of the Gold Peak House. This is the situation that occurred with the Red Lion. A thorough review of the encroachment shall be required, which staff believes is appropriate. View 6: (From Gore Creek Drive looking east over Gorsuch to the Gore Range.) Additions to buildings could be done in such a way that the mountain views are preserved. However, staff believes the prominence of the Clock Tower should not be reduced with any other construction that would exceed the height defined by the view corridor. View 4: (Proposed new view from Frivolous Sals looking east to the Gore Range.) Expansions to the Red Li-on or Mill Creek Court Building could be located behind the Red Lion chimney. This should not be allowed as the existing chimney blocks part of the Gore Range from view which, ideally, should be removed. The reason staff would like to add this to the ordinance is to clearly communicate to developers that the view corridor boundaries are not exclusively determined by existing buildings but instead are determined by the view corridor line. This clarification is needed to make the point that no new construction above the view corridor line is allowed. D. Lastly, a fourth point that staff would like to add to the ordinance is that: ~~Some view corridors include portions of existing structures that currently encroach into the corridor. Pre-existing encroachments in view corridors shall not be expanded or enlarged to. create further .encroachment. For example, decks which extend out into a corridor will not be allowed to be enclosed or expanded. Appli- cants requesting changes .to buildings within view ' corridors should be aware that any existing encroach- ments will be encouraged to be removed from the view corridor as part of any major building modification. Encroachments like the Clock Tower and Bell Tower, which are focal points identified in the View Corridors described in the View Ordinance, are excluded from this policy. IV. CONCLUSION Staff recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission recommend that Town Council adopt these revisions to the view corridor ordinance. Staff believes that the clarifications will make the development review process simpler for both applicants and the Town in the future. Staff believes that adding view corridor number four, to those already adopted by the Town Council, is important as it is a beautiful view of the Gore Range from a high use pedestrian area of Vail Village. M y - Y . - . - a_~. 4 y _ _ ~ ~ - _ iii - " ~ ~K~. di J , r ~'Y _ l':~ r : ?.+ti.: _;j.. t ~~r. - - { z i { ;.p . ~7`. t _ ' ~ , ; ~ , :vim-.r=~ 1- ~ `~i 9't . ~ ~ ? ~ ~ ~ _ .ter a ; - ~ / ~ - ~1:'-~ ~`r-'~''''-~ 'fir. -N' _ '~C:a'drY't'_ _ - .:r ti=p'%r, i -s . = ~ ~1L ' : icy . i ~ ' - - t ~"a . . y • ~ r < a " rVa -b:~ - j, _ ~ i K J was . F..~- . ~ ff-~:~ ~ ! ~~Il III .r ~ Y L J•I/j• - ~ .wn I ~ Staff Recommendation ` ,~r _ 5' 2" height . - , 50 mm lens N ~ fit. 5 s - . ~ t ~ ~ _ ~ - ' - ~ ~ ` I _ is ~ i • _ _ j.: l 1 f µ~k ' t ~ y, •?.f"-.. t ~ ._"J.. ~ ~ ~ . der N,~ ' i'' ~i' J... ~ r _i , _ - - . ?y',t. _ j-^7iF. -4. I~ .ice .-pct. R_ 'X.. ? ~ ~ ~ / .fit i i~` ,a4., ? .Y. y s"" ; ,tee •~~~ti ~ l~~ +y Conclusion of YEC discussion ~ from worUsession on 2-11-91 • S'2" height " - j SO ~ lens ` ` ~ ' t. y1; ? 7t 1 ~ 1 yir ZI ~v; :w` L. 1 h ~ 1 `f` ~ ~ ~ y.;t.., t 4 t. . r rr r'••K~ •'`~''l• ~+t ~ . 'kl~ . { ;i~ 'd; ~ 'rte 1:1. ~ '~1 t ~ .t,. 4 t :.;If~,~ n l y. ;,.i; r'~~r J' • ~ Vic, ~.p~ L 3"~•Rti~1 r ~ r' x~ • %i t t r- : V.~•~i v , Iq a , ti a fit, + ` . RSr ~ ~ • ' "f' ~ l p 1 ~•i,y~u~,•~ 1 J~" r, , ; r ~ j ~ i ~ ,fir". ~ ; c z.~ ~ i;, r,: ~ ~4~ , r i. i ' ~ ..R. i t ~ < < * ` ,.f* ~ ' ~ 1'1 . y 'art l:~ ' { ~J ,tY tv 1, y' ) ~ J ~ ~~.4, s t ~ ~ n>wi 1 ~ ~ 1 .t ~ 1 at~ Z 4. j ~ y t~~ 4 r'• s1~ t y t ~ ,;,yam' a ~,1, ~ x ~ ~ t sy 'n-~ ' } 1 1;':Ot~~"` 'rte 3 4 `+y~: } •1'~ r 4 i ~ ~1 ~'~J~'• y.". , p r A4' v ~ r t ~ S y~~f ~ n R t~. !e}S r~ ~ t Sry F^,. . tMr ~ ~:r~ t ~ FJhvt j., s~,~1.. h ~M~~.~Il rt V r iy • ,`>ra R ~ t.t 1t +l yp. ~s ~t tt t ~ 3~ ! ~t, t i a s e .R S 4 1L r o a r ~ ~ +r, ~ t ~ ~ gph f ram wo ~ . w ' ~i~``~~t*`~K' ~ `"1 ' ;F a~ s •ri ~ j Yhotog i , r t18 1 r 1 4 x L~~ ~ . I ~ ` h ~'i '\1 `fit. I '~%j. •~ry '~.A ' ..n.i'' ,,tt r ~ • ~ ~F ~ ~ rte , 14 i . ~•~a' ~C , + ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~r'(~. ACS :b } ~ r ~ . F , w+` ~ Y. Y , _ ~ ` ~ .til, 3x7, ~ 4~. '4i• ,iA"~; is ~ a t ~M a. r^,i; ~i•.i;~~ i ;~;:~•sst '~`1.,~ ' ti, y;~ ta^ ~ n''1,}!~~~r'.3a., jar, ' ' ~ y A t 1, ~~.'j~;. 'n ','r'~' ~j~' <3: .tea r ~ ~ . 1 i . A7~T i. or ~1n ::J~.~'.:itit~re, rjc x~ _ 4 R { J.. _Iyyi ra , ~ 1K.,~ !dl ~ '~r~ rye 1't ' ~ ` ~-~:Nf.s;~~~. ~t s ~ ~ ^ Y ~~y M 'i• pansion a1l~WQ x ex , > ~ Christiania y . w ' r. t.. " • ','.N Y~'~'~^" ~"'1i. ' 'S, _ 1 Ia , ~ ~ 3~ ip++ height ~ .tea' '~`~",~"'rr~ ~ .,:u' ..c: l ^ ~,y ` , • ' ~ W ~t~ ,r ~ _ ~ . AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE VAIL VILLAGE URBAN DESIGN GUIDE PLAN - DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS: VIE1v SECTION :1 `;D ~'i~:;W c'pI{?;I1)~R 11:1P TO Rri~[:CE THE N G ;i13i: R V 1•~ ::1:?J Jlt V I ~ .V C~~lclt [ UUIiS A.WD 'f U ELIhIINATE MINOR VIEW CORRIDORS; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN RELATION THERETO. WHEREAS, the-revision to the view section of the Urban Design Guide Plan -Design Considerations and the View Corridor ?4ap has been under study by staff, Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council for a considerable time.perioci; and ~ WHEREAS, it is the opinion of the Town Council that preservation of certain existing view corridors is essential to the character of Vail as a mountain resort; and WHEREAS, the preservation of such views will protect the municipalities attraction to tourists and visitors and, therefore, • enhance and protect its economic vitality. WHEREAS, it is the opinion of Council that the several most important view corridors be entirely preserved as they exist; and _ WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission has recom- mended adoption of the nine view corridors, one focal point and amendments to the language in the view section to the Council, NOjY, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY•THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL: -t Section 1 Section G. Views of the Vail Village Design Considerations is hereby amended to read as follows: G. VIEWS AND FOCAL POINTS . Vaills mountain/valley setting is a fundamental part of its ;:-~3;Y;-• identity. Views of the mountains, ski slopes, geologic features, , , ;:,~~K etc. are constant reminders of the mountain environment and, by ~~~.r:~::,.repeated visibility, orientation reference points. Certain building features are also important character features, orientation refer- • 3 ences and visual focal points . r~.9~:?""The most significant and obvious view corridors have been designated S -r;..: • -~r.l,.on the View Corridor Map (an element of the Vail Village Urban Design ~~t ) p g p y (.photos on file in ~~Framework Plan and hoto ra hicall documented "r,~~'==~.the Community Development Department) . However, the view corridors. ~'~~~tY,~,~~: depicted on the maps and in the photographs should not be considered ~q,:-,;;,exhaustive. There are obviously many other important views too ~'•.numerous to map. When evaluating a development proposal, first riorit should be given to an anal sis of the impact of the yy.~.,-•~~;,.;_.:.~.~-~:project on views from pedestrian areas, whether designated or not. The views designated to be preserved originate from either major ",.pedestrian areas or public plazas. They are views of the ski sd.:, _~;~t~"-:' mountain, the Gore Range ~ • " or the Clock Tower. ~~Y~'-'~' ' The views of the ski slopes and of the Clock Tower which were selected to be preserved were chosen due to their significance, not only from an aesthetic standpoint, but also as orientation - reference points to help the guests determine their location. L~:{,,.;.,,w,,~,~ ~~~And, of course, looking east' from the Vail Village area one views the dramatic Gore Range providing some of the most beautiful Scenic views a~lywhere . • ~ a~¦..~ r -2- , The official photographs and field surveys of the view corridors and focal point contain the area to be protected. No encroachment will be allowed above the top of the black and white line on the photographs or in the protected area as depicted by the field ~:~~~i:;~,~ . surveys. The field surveys are on file with the Department of Conununity Development and will be used to aid staff and applicants~;~,.,•:~ in determining the specific dimensional restrictions produced by •.~s'_'-;~`.~~. .the view corridors. Minor modifications to the roofs or structures•.•~• (i.e. a new flue) located above the line ma be y permitted if appro;-. priate approvals from the Community Development Department are . ;::`r:~•' ~ obtained. ~ ` ~ To demonstrate the impact on other views, all submittals should ~ include a visual impact analysis. This analysis could be in the~•:':~:~.".' form of sketches, photographic overlays, photographic touch-ups, ~.'~:°:.'r. models, or other simulation techniques. A means of demonstrating in the field (on site) the impact on views will also be required by the zoning administrator. ~ As circumstances affecting views change, such as rezonings, variances in height or new buildings, the view corridors will be reviewed and, if necessary, revised. If a conflict exists between the maximum height allowed and the view corridors, the more restrictive regulation ' The following is a listing and verbal description of the adopted will view corridors and focal point: apply NO. DESCRIPTION 1 This view occurs from two flights of steps above the photographic point on the south side of the Vail Transportation Center. The view is significant in that it contains the Clock Tower and the Rucksack Tower as focal points, but also is one's first view of the ski slopes as one comes out of the Transportation Center. 2 This is a significant view because .it allows one to see the ski slopes from upper Bridge Street as well as directing one to the ticket and lift facilities in the Village. 5 This is a view of the Gore Range from Hanson. Ranch Road dust east of the Mill Creek Bridge and west of the Mill Creek Court B1 6 This is probably the best known and most spectacular view in the Village area. It is looking east to the Gore Range from Gore Creek Drive between The Lodge at Vail retail shops and the Gore Creek Plaza Building. The Clock Tower is a focal point in this view. ~ • t-- r \ j • / • 1 1 pl _ ) ~ -3- \ 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 effect 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 ~ ..::.r? ' 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 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 or 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 ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL, this drL` G day of ~~~~P/Lc.~ 1983 . A public hearing. shall be held hereon on the o?/.Q.f day of Q,u,,~c_ 1983, at the regular meeting of the Town Council of.th~Town of Vail, Colorado, in • The Municipal Building of the Town. Rodney E. ~lif~r, M or ATTEST:: , ~tclk~A• .r~c.u.~~c-a./ 3t Town Clerk Pamela A. Brandmeye , READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this c~/•.~.~ day of ~ - 1983 . ~~r Rodney E. Slifer', Ma~or' ATTEST : • r~ Pamela A. Brandmeyer,~Town Clerk 1 ' 1 r +/1 , ~ I . ~ t. ~ k tit i~ , f ..ii ~ ~ . , 1 ` r ~S"+ J . ,t' ~ -b5 . 't Y , ~ i r a M r ~ 1 r~, ;a ~i s'! ~ r r~ ~ a ~ - i 1. 1 1 ~ 1. 9'~' +.a 's.~ ~ ~ ,r i `J f~_. j?Y. ~ r `~`~~4 r r ~ `~,.M R 1. r t Iry,E~ „1 ~ ~ t. ~I • ~t}~~•",'L' , ~ ~ ~.~r: ~ ~*~1 T.P. t'j ~ ~ Ly b . !.I C~f~l- ms's V1 ~'R~1C'.....~1~~'w ~ i r 1 a _ ~ - ~ . ~ _ `s-~'!' , ~ -3: ~ • • - r st~M +~j?, 'r yy ' • Y~ ..•~:a.A ~J. S -i-~, ~ :r+••+ ~ ice., --•~.r-• 'YF~ t s .Y -!sue "'.~,.f(~`d~2 ` . Jy ,s+~- • . .~C~y~ ~ ° = i" ~ _ i c • .i: ~ ice' 7 ~.w ,mow, - f ~ .~s: ~ el ~ ..rte f ,,ft -s~' 3~^. ~fyyy aw`.. _~-Y^ >yti ~,s~ :'r.- ~ a~".s. 3 4 may. ~'1~'~,~ ~ i.F ~1 Kam, x Vf{; +7i.~ r ~ mar-t±~ :.y y t¢ ,~l K., y,'I~';. F:r h.,- ,y.:: J~'~`f+X,r 3Y'h''q~~ ~ br~'~ 4~ +rJ.. ` -S/ k S rY _ . 1 rII ~ t~ ~ ~ -a.:~:. r- - z.v7~` ,rs ^gX:'~. ~ ~ Y '~F E~~3!SMIC:~~_, 'H ~ ~ i a t -k~ ~ ~y i 44~~ :y ~ ' 2 ' i ~,,''~f' ~ ` ~ ,a' Wj. t ~ r I tz~ t.. t •r ' ~ t •.,r~+ 1, x~ ~~a,• G ~C t~Il' . » t 7 ,~rt + ~?S~~ _ , y r"~• F. ~ iA •6 +t f'1 YjcY,'~ ? rb ky th . ~!s 1rr 1 t ~ ! . ` r ~ r f ti. ; • Yrr {t'./~~t~j~ '~''~~a ` s 4 JT~ Y r 1- 7 ~ ' ~ r . ~ 't~.'1 7.?~ !1~ I~,• l.~'"+k:; u'"F!.~' ~~a~.~' ",,~~j .'1r i I .~qr. i t 1 'ta r ~ ~ y .~e~',• ~t •c y~~ r~T +MN.r~. ~ ;,7~•~1t 'per. ~ I', ir~•~M. .Zla'j g~•.p~ ~ I ~ r; t '•.~:C r` ••1'+» i"1Q'r+ j ?~F.k~`° '~1 .•y~ 1 3+,p1+•'4y}I~ l ~;f t ~ ~ tr ti'i~ b Gy° ¢ , , QE , +~i~q ` ~ 6 ~ r ar~~ r, t .x~, R~ . i lril +.r ~ Y .:-i - ~ , ~ L~,y,. ~ ~ t s ~ 'j~~ ,.'n If. t Q'"~'rTl ,r, t 1i~r^` ! !'~h,~ .Ry .r ,tlaiY,r~ L •.~•'.J:. ~ ~~tlsr ' r M L ~jp~, ~ + v ~f F 'tY y ~ . Y .+t.' j-f y '+;.y 1 ~t' ~..ss~.r•~ ,l i'~i'~ ~Y~~RT~. ^'tt 1 1~..`c:. '*T~'~ r , ,~1 , ~ v r ?PF t t ! ' • a ~ • T ~ F ~ 7 a ~ ' ,.4• Jam. 'hi"wfi.' a~~ ~ v~: ei b ~Il, ~ ~ 4~~ L d~;,~~+ q . 4 t t zM.. Y,n... + ,113, ~ yL w ~ P w 1~,1 } .k #~,i ~`~iffY.•Y. f ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '+'i'~ ` ,F+f'~' H• u~ ACS :.t ~X s ' ' s., T M1' 1 3 a - ~ r ~ ~ ~`-t , „ry. • Yin Y • a I" y ;f - -'j'v-f•'~ `•~a~t~f~?~jsS" ~%i t~'F'~ .r.. .i. r. ~ a I.i~ '414~i~.~, ~!}:r f l~n 7 r, ' y `A117.*°`a • _r ,1~ Y 9 - t ~ t~, r~ ~ ; •w 1~ ~ ~ y ,4 ri .Ko,~~i.i+ 1~'. / { I~ I~..:. C~~ ~l.ib ~ 1 ~ ~ iT ~ I~. rw~1N_ ~ a Y i i A f , nl ,'y ' !4 ~h J !Ar w J, i ~ E.: 1 t . ~ a . ~ ,~a. . ~ +tiy. a. ~'1`'~~ Y r~ 1• 1 aR~' w ' S i p j rl 1 1. 1 6PT p V 1 ; •!~c~:~M1, •'~r .'r ~')1~~.~,~A//~~?I~~M V x'11 ~ N 1 ~ , 'i~. ~ t ~ ~ ! r ~ 'mot. ( ~ i ~i ; ' r~. e y, i~ ~ +r ~ SN i :K,- ~ „ ` ~ t ~ , ~ '~~j ,'fi`r~ •~`yF. 'y?)I ,./at - ti,•~~. ~ .R ' CEO' ~ 1 ~t ~ ~ ..~1 l~y~.I L`) .c 4'I~~...id. ~ `r~.ii .V ~ ~ ! f , ~ r" ~ j ti•1 ~I 1~8.~ tiC t a~ i Y~1fa1 a4r~J ~~;9• Al~f• ,~7~ •4.;. ,A ~k~' ~Irl~ 1'~~' w, • _ r ~ ,