Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-06-21 Support Documentation Town Council Evening Session VAIL TOUVN COUfVCIL EVENING MEETING TUEsDAY, JuNE 21, 1ss4 7:30 P.M. BP9 TO!! COUNCIL Ciid4MBERS EXPANDED AGENDA 7:30 P.M. 1. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION. 7:35 P.M. 2. Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1994, second reading, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Section 18.69.050 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, setting forth new procedures for measuring slope of a proposed development site and permitting retaining walls six feet in height in the front setback when associated with a permitted garage structure. Applicant: Town of Vail. 7:40 P.M. 3. Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1994, second reading, an ordinance repealing Section Ken Hughey 9.56- Concealed Weapons and 8.24.030- Discharqinq Firearms of the Town of Vail Buck Allen Municipal Code and enacting Chapter 9.56 - Offenses Relatinq to Weapons - Tom Moofiead Criminal Attempt, and Complicity. Action Requested of Council: Table second reading until July 5, 1994. , Backqround Rationale: The ordinance was first proposed by Councilmember Merv Lapin who will be present and availabe to participate on July 5, 1994. The staff continues to reviewr the suggestions and requests made by Council on first reading. 7:45 P.M. 4. Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1994, first reading, an ordinance amending Chapter Mike Mollica 18.40, Special Development Districts. Applicant: Town of Vail. Action ReQUested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1994, on first reading. Backqround Rationale: Please see the Community Development DepartmenYs memo to the PEC dated June 13, 1994, included in the Council packet. On June 13, 1994, the PEC voted unanimously (7-0) to recommend approval of the amendment to the Special Development District chapter. Staff Recommendation: The staff recommendation is for approval of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1994, on first reading. 8:15 P.M. 5. Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1994, first reading, an ordinance making supplemental Steve Thompson appropriations from the Town of Vail General Fund, Capital Projects Fund, the Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund, and Bond Proceeds Fund, of the 1994 budget and the financial plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado; and authorizing the expenditures of said appropriations as set forth herein; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny/mod'rfy Ordinance No..ll, Series of 1994, on first reading. Backqround Rationale: 8:30 P.M. 6. Resolution No. 17, Series of 1994, a resolution establishing conditional support by Russ Forrest the Vail Towrn Council for the Piney Valley Ranch Trust Land Exchange. Tom Moorhead Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Resolution No. 17, Series of 1994. 1 Backaround Rationale: Council directed staff to prepare a resolution consistent with intent expressed at last presentation on May 24, 1994. There was additional discussion concerning this resolution earlier this date at Work Session. 9:00 P.M. 7. Town Manager's Report. 9:30 P.M. 8. Adjournment. NOT'E UPCOM11VCa MEE1'ING START TIMIES BELOW: (ALL TIMES SUBJECT TO CHANGE) YHE NE1CT VAIL TOVl/N COUNCIL FiEGULAR WORK SESSION lAlILL BE OR9 7'l9ESDAY, 6/28/94, BEGINAIING A1T 1:00 P.M. IN 'fOV COUNCIL CFiAMBERS. THE FOLLOWlING VAIL TOVlIN COUNCIL FiEGULAR VUOFiK SESSION W0LL BE ON TUESDAY, 7/5/94, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IIV Tpy COUNCIL ChiAMBERS. YHE FOLLOliUBNG VAIL TOWR9 COUIdCEL REGULAR EVENING MEE'TING WOLL BE ON TIDESDAV, 7/5/94, BEGIIVNING AT 7:30 P.M. IIV TOV COUIdCIL CHAIIflBEIRS. ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ C:WGENDA.TCE . 2 ~ 61flEMORANDUNd TO: Staff FROM: George Ruther DATE: June 16, 1994 SUBJECT: Wail Height Ordinance fVo. 13, Series of 1994 XXX On May 23, 1994, a memorandum was presented to the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) describing a proposed amendment to Section 18.69.050 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. The purpose of the amendment was to clarify how slope is to be measured and to allow for retaining walls up to 6 feet in height (associated with a permitted garage) to be constructed in the front setback for projects where the average slope of the site beneath the proposed structure and parking area is in excess of 30%. The amendment, request was prompted by the PEC as a means of streamlining the development review process and encouraging development practices which result in less site disturbance and are more sensitive to sites with steep slopes. It was felt by the members of the PEC that the development review process could be streamlined if retaining walls up to 6 feet in height were permitted in the setback when associated with a garage already permitted in the setback by Section 18.69.050 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. Prior to this code amendment, garages were permitted, at the discretion of the DRB, in the front setback, however retaining walls greater than 3 feet in height in the front setback required a height variance. Most instances of a garage in the front setback on lots with slopes greater than 30% require retaining walls greater than 3 feet in height. Such a situation created what appeared to be a contradiction in the Code and to the intent of allowing garages to be located in the front setback when the average slope of the site beneath the proposed structure and parking area was in excess of 30%. In addition to streamlining the development review process, the PEC members felt that the proposed amendment to Section 18.69.050 would result in less site disturbance. By moving the garage and any associated retaining walls into the front setback, less site area was disturbed in the construction process. The amount of disturbance is often an issue when building on steep lots. Lastty, the intent of the amendment was also double checked and approved by the chairperson of the PEC. Retaining walls up to 6 feet in height are only intended to be permitted in the setback when directly associated with a garage also in the setback. The intent of the amendment is not to allow 6 foot high retaining walls in the setback if they are not associated with a garage in the setback. The amendment has been written by staff to allow DRB to review each retaining wall request as referenced to Section 18.69.050(L) of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. . p . ORDINANCE FVO. 13 SERIES OF 1994 AN OFtDINAiVCE REPEALIbVG AND REEiVACTING SECTIOiV 18.69.050 OF T'FiE MUNICIPAL CODE OF T'HE TOUVN OF V,41L, SETTIIVG FORTH FVENV PROCEDURES FOR ij/IEASVJRIIV(a SL.OPE OF A PROPOSED DEVELOPn(IENT SITE AOVD PERMIlTItV(a FiETAINING 1NALLS SIX FEET IN IiEIGH7' IIV THE SETBACK WHEN ASSOCIATED VVITH A PERMITTED GARAGE-STRUCTURE. WHEREAS, the Town Council believes that the following amendment will result in development that is more sensitive to the site with less site disturbance. WHEREAS the Planning and Environmental Commission voted 7-0 in favor of the amendment. WHEREAS, the Town Council believes that the following amendment will streamline the development review process for proposed developments on sites where the average slope is greater than 30 percent. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1. Section 18.69.050 - Special restrictions for developments on lots where the average slope of the site beneath the existing or proposed structure and parking area is in excess of thirty percent in hillside residential, single-family residential, two-family residential, and two-family primary/secondary residential zones - of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby repealed and reenacted as follows: The following additional special restrictions or requirements shall apply to development on any lot in a hillside residential, single-family residential, two-family residential or two-family primary/secondary residential zone district where the average slope of the site beneath the existing or proposed structure and parking area is in excess of thirty percent: , A. A soil and foundation investigation, prepared by and bearing the seal of a registered professional engineer shall be required. B. Foundations must be designated and bear the seal of a registered, professional engineer. C. A topographic survey prepared by a registered surveyor, with contour intervals of not more than two feet, shall be required. D. Structures must be designed by a licensed architect. E. Site coverage as it pertains to this chapter, as permitted by Sections 18.09.090, 18.10.110, 18.12.110 and 18.13.090, is amended as follows: Not more than fifteen percent of the site area may be covered by buildings; and not more than ` d f ~ 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order; resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 7th day of June, 1994, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the 21 st day of June, 1994, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READIIVG AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of , 1994. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk ~@ • ORDBIVA?NCE BVO. 1 2 SERIES OF 1994 AN ORDiNANCE REPEAL@NC SECTION 9.56 - C06dCEe4LED WEAPOR9S AND SECT@0N 8.24.030 - DISCFIARGING FIREARIVIS ~F THE T011VR9 OF VA1L AfldJNICSPAL CODE AND EIVACTIIVC CBiA?PTER 9.56: OFFENSES RELATBNG TO VVEAPONS, CRIMIIVAL ATTElVIPT, AND COMPLSCITY. 1IVHEREAS, it is incumbent upon Town Council to provide for the public peace, morals, health and welfare; and WHEREAS, there are issues concerning weapons, conduct that constitutes criminal attempt, and complicity that are not presently addressed in the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail. NOV1l, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOlIVN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT: Section 1 Section 8.24.030 and 9.56.010 are hereby repealed. Section 2 Chapter 9.56 will be enacted as follows: 9.56.010 - DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS, DEADLY 1IVEAPONS AND DESTRUCTIVE DEVICES PROHIBITED. It shall be unlawful for any person to discharge firearms, deadly weapons, explosive devices, guns, pistols, shotguns, rifles, airguns, gas operated guns, spring guns, or a weapon of any kind or description within the limits of the Town; provided, however, that this Section shall not apply to police officers in the discharge of their duties. 9.56.020 - EXCEPTIONS; PERMITS. The Town Council may at any time, upon receipt of proper application, grant permits to shooting galleries, gun clubs, rifle ranges, and other establishments for shooting in fixed localities and under specified rules. Such permits shall be in writing attested by the Town Clerk, conforming to such requirements and conditions as the Town Council shall demand, and the permit thus issued shall be subject to revocation at any time by action of the Town Council. 9.56.030 - ILLEGAL VVEAPONS, USE OR POSSESSIOiV PROHIBITED. A. It is unlawful for any person to knowingly possess, conceal, or cause to be concealed on their person or in any vehicle, or to use, any blackjack, gravity knife, multi-fixed bladed stellate throwing knife, switchblade knife, nun-chucks, or brass or metallic knuckles. B. IVothing in this Section shall apply to peace officers or to members of the armed 1 Ordinarce No. 12, Series of 1994 1 e Q J ' forces of the United States or the Colorado IVational Guard acting in the lawful discharge of their duties so long as such weapons have been issued or approved by their supervisor or superior officer. 9.56.040 - UiVLAVVFUL COiVCEALMEIVT OF DEADLY UVEAPONS. A. It shall be unlawful for any person to wear under his clothes, or conceal about his person, any dangerous or deadly weapon. B. _For purposes of this Section only, "conceal" shall mean placement of the dangerous or deadly weapon in question about the person, or within his immediate reach, in such a manner as to be either completely hidden from viewr or partially hidden to such an extend that another person making normal contact with that person cannot ascertain the true nature of the weapon. C. ft shall be an affirmative defense that the defendant was: 1. A person in his own dwelling or place of business or on property owned or under his control at the time of the act of carrying; or 2. A person who, prior to the time of carrying a concealed weapon, has been ' issued a written permit to carry the wreapon by an official lawfully authorized to issue such permit, and the written permit states that it shall be effective in all areas . of the State; or 3. A peace officer, as defined in Section 18.1.901(3)(I) of the Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended; or " 4. Carrying a folding-type knife with a blade not exceeding three and one-half inches (31/2") in length. 9.56.050 - POSSESSION VIIITHIN LICEIVSED PREMISES. A. It shall be unlawful for any person as a patron of an establishment where alcoholic beverages are sold for consumption on the premises, to possess or carry or display any dangerous or deadly weapon, whether concealed or not, while on the premises of such establishment. B. It shall be an affirmative defense to a charge of possession or carrying a dangerous or deadly wreapon under this Section that said weapon was a folding-type knife with a blade not exceeding three and one-half inches (31/2"). This defense does not apply to a charge of displaying such a weapon. C. It shall be an affirmative defense to a charge of possession or carrying a dangerous or deadly wreapon under this Section that the person is in that person's own dwelling 2 Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1994 -S L. or place of business or on property owned or under that person's control at the time of the act of carrying or possessing. 9.56.060 - SELLING UVEAPOiVS TO IfVTOXICATED PERSONS. It shall be unlawful for any person to purchase, sell, loan, or furnish any dangerous or deadly weapon to any person intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol or any narcotic or dangerous drug or glue. 9.56.070 - EXCEPTIONS. fVothing in Sections 9.56.010, 9.56.030, 9.56.040, and 9.56.050 of this Chapter shall be construed to forbid any enforcement officer of the various law enforcement agencies of the United States government, or the State of Colorado, or any sheriff or his deputies, or any regular, special or ex-officio peace officer from carrying, wearing, or using such weapon as shall be necessary inAhe proper discharge of his duties so long as such weapons have been issued or approved by their supervisor or superior officer. , 9e56.080 - FORFEITURE. Any dangerous or deadly weapon as defined by this Chapter used or possessed in violation of Sections 9.56.010, 9.56.030, 9.56.040, 9.56.050, and 9.56.060, inclusive, of this Chapter, is hereby dectared to be contraband and shall be forfeited to the Town upon a conviction resulting from such use or possession. 9.56.090 - DISPOSITIOIV OF COIVFISCATED WEAPONS. It shall be the duty of every peace officer, upon making an arrest and taking such a weapon, thing, or substance from the person of the offender to deliver or cause to be delivered the same to the Chief of Police to be held in his custody until the final determination of the prosecution of said offense. The Chief of Police, or his authorized agent, shall dispose of uveapons forfeited pursuant to ordinance by destruction or retention for Department use in accordance with procedures and regulations of the Police Department. 9.56.100 - CRIMIfVAL ATTEMPT. A. A person commits criminal attempt if, acting writh the kind of culpability otherwise required for commission of an offense, he engages in conduct constituting a substantial step toward the commission of the offense. A substantial step is any conduct, whether act, omission, or possession, which is strongly corroborative of the firmness of the actor's purpose to complete the commission of the offense. Factual or legal impossibility of committing the offense is not a defense if the offense could have been committed had the attendant circumstances been as the actor believed them to be, nor is it a defense that the crime attempted was actually perpetrated 3 ' Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1994 by the accused. B. A person vvho engages in conduct intending to aid another to commit an offense commits criminal attempt if the conduct vuould establish his complicity under Section 9.56.120 were the offense committed by the other person, even if the other is not guilty of committing or attempting the offense. C. It is an affirmative defense to a charge under this Section that the defendant abandoned his effort to commit the crime or otherwise prevented its commission, under circumstances manifesting the complete and voluntary renunciation of his criminal intent. 9.56.110 - COMPLICITY. A person is legally accountable as principal for the behavior of another constituting a criminal offense if, with the intent to promote or facilitate the commission of the offense, he aids, abets, or advises the other person in planning or committing the offense. 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 wrould 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 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. Section 6 All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. 4 ~ Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1994 .T INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AfVD ORDERED PUBLISHED O(VCE IN FULL ON FIRST READIiVG this 7th day of June, 1994, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the 21 st day of June, 1994, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Touvn Clerk READ AIVD APPROVED OfV SECOND READING AfVD ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of , 1994. , Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk C:\OFD94.12 5 Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1994 ~ , 9 tltll EIYA Of7P11\ D7.I Itl0 TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 13, 1994 SUBJECT: A request for an amendment to Section 18.40, Special Development Districts, to eliminate the use of the SDD in certain zone districts. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Nlike Mollica 1. DESCR9PTV0N OF THE REQ9.BEST The Special Development District (SDD) section of the Town of Vail Municipal Code currentty allows for the establishment of an SDD in any of the Town's zone districts. The Town Council has directed the planning staff to proceed with an amendment to the SDD section of the zoning, code which would eliminate the possible establishment of an SDD in the following zone districts: -Single Family Residential -Two Family Residential -Primary/Secondary Residential -Hillside Residential In addition to the above low density residential zone districts, staff would recommend that the establishment of an SDD also be prohibited in the following zone districts: -Agricultural and Open Space . -Green Belt and fVatural Open Space District -Parking District -Public Use District 111. BACKGROUND & H6STORV Staff believes that the SDD ordinance was originally intended to provide for flexibility in the development of land and to facilitate design, which is sensitive to the site, and to provide for the site specific review of mixed-use and large-scale development projects. The purpose of this proposed amendment to the SDD chapter is to clarify this initial intent. r. : For background information, the following are the four SDD's which would not have been allowed had this proposed language been initially incorporated into the SDD ordinance: 1. SDD #13 - Wirth/UVheeler (Lots 7, 8, 9, Block H, Vail Das Schone 2nd Filin . This SDD request was made in 1984 and involved three lots in the Vail Das Schone area, all three of which had an underlying zoning of Primary/Secondary Residential. One of the lots was a"flag lot" with an approximate 20% slope in the area whE;re the lot accesses Garmisch Drive. The approved SDD allowed for the site planning of all three lots to occur simultaneously, thereby improving the sensitivity of the development on the site by reducing the number, and severity, of the driveway cuts. The SIDD request also reduced the allowable density on the site. The total number of dwelling units was reduced from six to four, and the overall GRFA (for the combined area of the three lots) was reduced from 10,026 square feet, down to 8,400 square feet. The staff recommendation on this SDD establishment was for denial, due to the applicanYs proposal to reduce the project's density by eliminating two employee housing units. The PEC unanimously (4-0-1) recommended approval of the request and the Town Council also unanimously (6-0) approved the establishment of the SDD. , 2. SDD #22 - Dauqhinais Moselev Subdivision (Grand Traverse). The underlying zone district for the Dauphinais Moseley Subdivision was Primary/Secondary Residential. This zoning allowed for a total of nineteen primary/secondary lots, containing thirty-eight dwelling units, with a total allowed GRFA of 84,905 square feet. In 1988, the Town of Vail approved an SDD for this property. The approved SDD created twenty-four lots, with twenty-four dwelling units and a total GRFA of 68,204 square feet. Additionally, each lot has the ability to have one deed restricted employee housing unit. The developer was required to construct a minimum of- six employee dwelling units within the subdivision. The staff recommendation on this SDD establishment was for approval. The PEC unanimously (7-0) recommended approval of the request and the Town Council also unanimously approved the establishment of the SDD (by a vote of 5-0-1). 3. SDD #26 - Shapiro Special Development District. Although this SDD request was denied by the Town Councit in 1991, the request involved the establishment of an SDD on an unplatted parcel of ground consisting of approximately 6.8 acres. The property is located north of Sandstone Drive and west of Potato Patch Drive. The underlying zone district on this unplatted parcel was Agricultural and Open Space. This SDD's deviations from the underlying zone district included GRFA (an additional 2,625 square feet), density (one additional dwe9ling unit), wall height (wall heights up to 9.5 feet), and slopes (1.25:1 slopes). The staff recommendation on this SDD establishment was for denial, and the PEC also unanimously recommended denial. Ultimately, the Town Council also voted for denial of the SDD. 2 P O a 4. SDD #266 - V1/arner SDD (Sunburst Drive). This SDD consisted of Lots 3, 4 and 5, Vail Valley 3rd Filing, all three of which have an underlying zone district of Primary/Secondary Residential. The purpose of this SDD request was to allow GRFA on one of the three lots (Lot 4) to exceed that which wras permitted under the Primary/Secondary zoning. In addition, site coverage on this same lot was also allowed to exceed what would normally be permitted under the Primary/Secondary zoning. The staff recommendation on this request for the establishment of an SDD was for denial. To quote from the staff memorandum, "this SDD is proposed solely to satisfy the needs of the applicant, with little to no benefit to the community. In essence, the SDD process is being utilized to achieve a density variance." The Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) agreed with the staff's recommendation, and submitted a unanimous (7-0) recommendation of denial to the Town Council. Tfie Town Council approved Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1990, on second reading, establishing the Special Development District by a vote of 4-2 (Steinberg and Lapin opposed). It should be noted that at the Towrn Council's review of this SDD, the applicant proposed to deed restrict three employee units as a part of the project. The meeting minutes indicate that the Council was very concerned with providing additional affordable housing for the community, and felt that with the employee housing it wras appropriate to approve this SDD. Overall, the planning staff agrees with the Town Council writh their finding that special development districts are not appropriate in low density, residential zone districts. However, we do believe that the Dauphinais Special Development District has been an exception to this general philosophy. We feel that the Dauphinais Subdivision has been successful and that the SDD process for this large-scale project enabled the developer to maintain the same level of density (no additional GRFA) and yet reduce the overall lot sizes so as not to disturb the steep slopes fronting on I-70. In addition, 6 employee housing units were required. With regard to low density residential development, staff believes that the variance process is the appropriate vehicle to utilize for requests involving modifications to the Town's adopted development standards. We believe that the SDD approach should not be used as a means to circumvent the variance process, or to achieve density increases for these types of dwrelling units (i.e single-family, primary/secondary or duplex). Due to the limited development allowed in the Agricultural and Open Space zone district (a maximum of one dwelling unit with up to 2,000 square feet of GRFA), the staff believes that the above philosophy applies to this zone district as well. Additionally, because there is essentially no development allowed in the Greenbelt and Natural Open Space zone district, the staff believes it is also not appropriate to allow for the special development district overlay in this zone district. 1Nith regard to the Parking zone district and the Public Use zone district, essentially all of the development standards are set by the PEC during their review of a conditional use permit. It is because of this fact that the planning staff believes there is no benefit in allowing a special development district overlay in these zone districts. The flexibility afforded through the conditional use permit review by the PEC already provides for this. 3 S 0 The staff also believes that any existing Special Development District, regardless of its underlying zone district, should be "grandfathered" and that the property owner of said Special Development District should be allowed to proceed through the minor or major SDD review process. III. PROPOSED CODE CHANGES The following is the proposed language that the staff would recommend be added to the Zoning Code. The specific text amendments are indicated by the shading. . Chapter 18.40.010 - Purpose The purpose of the special development district is to encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land in order to promote its most appropriate use; to improve the design character and quality of the new development with the town; to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of streets and utilities; to preserve the natural and scenic features of open space areas; and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail Comprehensive Plan. An approved development plan for a special development district, in conjunction with the property's underlying zone district, shall establish the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included in the special development district. The:;spectat developme;r?t distr~ct daes noi apply: to; and ~s no# avarlable in the fal(owin, g zane distric#s Hillsitie Residentiaf;;&ngle; fam~ly Res~dent:ial, Two Family.ResJdential, Prirnary/Seco~dary Res~denti~l, A~ricultur~l and Open Space, Green ;BeEt and Na#ural Oper~ SDace, Parking; D~stcict and: Public Use Districf': Chapter 18.40.020(D) - Definitions "Underlying zone district" shall mean the zone district existing on the properry, or imposed on the property at the time the special development district is approved. The fallowmg;zone disfricts are ;prohibited fro m special tleveloprnent di.~tricts being usetl; ; Hillside R'esider~t~al, ;Single Family; Duplex, PrimarylSecondary Residential, RgficultuCall antl Opeci Space, Greenbelt and'1Vatural Open;Space, Parl~mg ~istrict and Putalic U.se D istrict. Chapter 18.40.140 - Existinq special development districts Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to limit, replace or diminish the requirements, responsibilities, and specifications of special development districts No.'s 2 through 21. The Town Council specifically finds that said special development districts No.'s 2 through 21 shall remain in full force and effect, and the terms, conditions, and agreements contained therein shall continue to be binding upon the applicants thereof and the Town of Vail. These districts, if not commenced at the present time, shall comply with Section 18.40.120, time requirements. (Ord. 21(1988) § 1.) 4 P i 1 2': tUothing; i m thi& chap#er shait be construed to Iirnit, place; or dimrnish'the requireir~ertts;; respansibjlitles and s~cificaijons aUspec~al, develapmenY d~stricts. N0 y through 32, regardiess o# the p~qperiies uncierfymg: zc~r~eti~stric#: Saiai specral de~etopmer~t dis~t~cts shall ba alinwec~ to ~ar.oceed ;thraUg#~ eitt~er the . . , rnino.r ar major special deVelopment cfistrict review pr4ce5s. OV. STAFF RECOMMENDATaON The staff is recommending approval of the proposed modifications to the existing SDD ordinance. By eliminating the possibility of SDD's being requested in certain zone districts, the staff believes that the SDD chapter would be more in keeping with the original intent of the SDD ordinance. The specific wording for the ordinance will be refined by the Town Attorney. A comprehensive overhaul of the SDD Chapter will be initiated by the staff in the next 6-12 months. At that time, the staff will explore the possibility of regulating SDD's according to a minimum lot size. Because this proposed change involves a code amendment, a recommendation from the Planning and Environmental Commission will be fonnrarded to the Town Council during their review of the final ordinance. c:\peclmemoslsdd.613 5 J ORDIOCIR9AWNsE NO. 9 . SERIES OF 9994 AN ORD6NANC~ ~~EN~ING CHAPTER 98.40, SPECIAL DE!lELOPMENT DISTR9CTS. VVHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to eliminate the application of special development districts from certain zone districts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAIIVED BY THE TOUVIV COUIVCIL OF THE TOV1/fV OF' VAIL, COLORADO THAT THE FOLLOVI/IiVG AMENDMEfVTS SHALL BE MADE TO CHAPTER 18.40: Section 1 Chapter 18.40.010 - Pumose The purpose of the special development district is to encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land in order to promote its most appropriate use; to improve the design character and quality of the new development with the town; to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of streets and utilities; to preserve the natural and scenic features of open space areas; and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail Comprehensive Plan. An approved development plan for a- special development district, in conjunction with the property's underlying zone district, shall establish the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included in the special development district. The' special;developrrnent iiistnet does.not apply to ani~ is nat available an the followin!g zone; districts;; Mipside :Residential; Single Farnily'. ResidentEal; Two ::FamE1y Residentral, Primary/Secondary Residential; Agricultural and'Open Space; Green Belt and Natural Open;.Space;'!Parking Drstrict ' and :!Publ~c;;Use ;District: Section 2 Chapter 18.40.020D - Definitions "Underlying zone districY" shall mean the zone district existing on the property, or imposed on the property at the time the special development district is approved. The!:.folfowmg zone: d~stricts are prohFb?~ed from special development ;d~st~icts berng! used Hallside Residen#ial, 5ing1'e; FaI'T11lV Di7DlGX, .Pi'1f1'laK:1//SeCOhale7f'V :ReStdPftttai' : Al]riCrilttiml : anri (.:<npr? :qnarP :C;rAwnhwlf ,anr1 . _ . - Natural Open Space, Par4c?ng:<Dis#rici and!!Public;Use DistrEC.t. Section 3 fVothing in this chapter shall be construed to limit, replace or diminish the requirements, responsibilities, and specifications of special development districts fVo.'s 2 through 21. The Town Council specifically finds that said special development districts 1 Ordinance No. 9, Series ot 1994 .44- No.'s 2 through 21 shall remain in full force and effect, and the terms, conditions, and agreements contained therein shall continue to be binding upon the applicants thereof and the Town of Vail. These districts, if not commenced at the present time, shall comply with . Section 18.40.120, time requirements. (Ord. 21(1988) § 1.) 2: Nothinql ~Jn mis ctiapter ;shall' !be construetl tQ ,I1(.replace; or dimmish; the recau~remants, ;respons~b~lities an'd specifi cat!ons of sppc!al dewelopment districcs !No 1: through ` 32, regardle~s of the propert:underlymg ; zon'e dEstrict S~~d special; cieveiopment districfs! sha11<be allowed to!,procsed #l~rough eitherthe minor or major special development distnct !rev,ew process.; Section 4 Chapter 18.40.140 - Existinq special development districts 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 5 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 6 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 dury 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. Section 7 All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bytaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. 2 Ordinance No. 9, Series ot 1994 i 0 IiVTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED OIVCE IN FULL OiV FIRST READIfVG this day of , 1994, and a public hearing shail be held on this Ordinance on the _ day of ,.1994, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED OiV SECOIVD READIIVG AIVD ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of , 1994. Margaret A. Ostertoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk C:\ORD94.9 3 Ordinance No. 9. Series of 1994 a,0RD@NANCE IVO. 91 SEF3VES OF 1994 AN ORD@NANCE MAIC9NG SUPPLEAflENTAL APPROPRI/4T@ON$ FRON1A THE TOWPI OF !/A9L GE9~~RA1L F4Ji6lDy 'bod'91'ITMb PV'1OWECdS F4.tlNDy THE REP91L EST6i1TE C R6'4NSFEQ"9 tl 6'Sdi F4JAlD, YiEVD Bo1tlD Ir'0"1oV~~DS F4.YNDy OF TWG 1394 BUDGET PoND A E-AE FIOtlP1AVVl9'ilt P6.F99CI FOR THE tl OvYN OF VClILy COLORMDO; AND AUTHOR0Z0~~ THE EXPENDITURES OF SAlD APPR0PR0ATIONS AS a3EA FOGL 6 R3 HEA"1GIIItly AND SE4~IN3, FORTH DETAILS IF9 F3EGARD THEFtETO. WHEREAS, contingencies have arisen during the fiscal year 1994 w?hich could not have been reasonably foreseen or anticipated by the Town Council at the time it enacted Ordinance iVo. 26, Series of 1993, adopting the 1994 Budget and Financial Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado; and, WHEREAS, the Tovun has received certain revenues not budgeted for previously; and, WHEREAS, the Town Manager has certified to the Town Council that sufficient funds are available to discharge the appropriations referred to herein, not otherwrise reflected in the Budget, in accordance with Section 9.10(a) of the Charter of the Town of Vail; and, WHEREAS, in order to accomplish the foregoing, the Town Council finds that it should make certain supplemental appropriations as set forth herein. iVOUV, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAIfVED, BY THE TOUVIV COUNCIL OF THE TOWiV OF VAIL, COLORADO that: 1. Pursuant to Section 9.10(a) of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado, the Town Council hereby makes the following supplemental appropriations for the 1994 Budget and Financial Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado, and authorizes the expenditure of said appropriations as follows: FUND AMOUNT General Fund $ 147,930 Capital Projects Fund 2,422,050 Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund 753,121 Bond Proceeds Fund 2,631,765 - 5,954,866 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 Towrn 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. 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. 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 1 Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1994 , . revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extend only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. IfVTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED OfVCE IiV FULL OfV FIRST READIiVG this day of , 1994, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the day of , 1994, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. fVicCuthceon, Town Clerk READ AfVD APPROVED OfV SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED in full this day of , 1994. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk C:10RD94.11 2 Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1994 r Y RESOLUTB0N NO. 17 SERIES OF 1994 A RESOLUT0ON ESTe4BL9SHING COND9TIONAL SUPPORT I~Y THE VA9L TOVI/N COUNCSL FOR THE PBNEY !lALLElf RANCH TRUS~ LABVD EXCBiANGE. WHEREAS, the proponents of the Piney Valley Ranch Trust Land Exchange which has also been referred to as the Lindholm Land Exchange have requested the support of the Vail Town Council; and WHEREAS, the proposed land exchange woutd increase the amount of publicly owned space to the wrest of Vail and ensure that any future development would not be visible from the Town of Vail; and VVHEREAS, by giving the eastern most part of the iVottingham parcel to the Forest Service in exchange for other Forest Service property adjacent to the site, the Elliot stream basin vuould be made accessible to the public throughout its length which stream basin has value for wildlife . and for allowing the continuation of a recreational trail in the Vail Valley; and WHEREAS, this exchange wrould not be inconsistent writh the Land Ownership Adjustment Plan between the Town of Vail and the U.S. Forest Service which is intended is to discourage private development through exchanges and encourage public use around the Town boundary; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council believes that the Nottingham portion of the Piney Valley Ranch Trust Land Exchange benefits the Town of Vail. fVOUV, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1. Tovun Council, based upon available information, expresses its intention, desire, and expectation that the Town of Vail will support the 335 acre exchange at what is known as the fVottingham parcel. 2. That said support is conditioned upon the following quatifications regarding development and the other exchange parcels in the Lindholm proposal: (a) In as much as the Piney Valley Trust does not have any formal development proposal and no planning or environmental 'analysis on the IVottingham parcel has been completed, the Town of Vail can not express its support for the development of the site; (b) In as much as the Town of Vail has not had an opportunity to evaluate the other proposed exchanges in Costilla County, Sweetwater Lake, Piney Valley, and on the Eagle River, the Town can not express its support for these exchanges; Resolution No. 17, Series oi 1994 ~ (c) In as much as the Towrn of Avon is adjacent to the iVottingham parcel and no formal opinion has yet been issued by the Town of Avon, the Town of Vail will respect the opinion of the Town of Avon on the exchange. (d) In as much as the fVottingham parcel is located within Eagle County and no formal opinion has yet been issued by the County Commissioners, the Town of Vail will respect the opinion of Eagle County on the exchange. 3. That the Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this resolution is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. 4. That this resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. IiVTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AIVD ADOPTED this 21st day of June, 1994. , Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk C:\RESOL1.194.17 Resolution No. 17, Series of 1994 I N1[E14~ORANDUM 7['O: Vail Town Council IFR: Bob McLaurin, Town Nlanager ~ RE: FY 1995 Budget DT: June 16, 1994 Introduction The purpose of the memorandum is to outline schedule far the preparing, reviewing and adopting the 1995 budget. Given the fact that this is the first budget I have prepared at the Town of Vail, I wanted to also discuss my philosophical perspective on municipal budgets. Finally, I have articulated the fundamental assumptions on which the FY 95 budget will be based. Budget Schedule The scbedule for preparing, reviewing and adopting the budget is as follows. Obviously, the dates set for the Council review can be adjusted to accom.modate the Council's schedule. The Town Charter (Article IX) requires the budget be adopted prior to the end of this fiscal year. It also mandates that a public hearing on the budget be held by the Council no later than thirty (30) days prior to the close of the fiscal year. This list of budget activities include all tasks required to complete the budget. The items directly involving the Council action are highlighted bold print. Activi Date Meet wet9n Coaanca? ~o duscauss bandget process & parkung ffees 06/28 Complete Revenue Forecasts 07/01 Staff prioritize Capital Projects 07/08 Finish salary spreadsheet 07/08 FY 95 Goals & Performance Measures due 07/15 Report on FY 94 performance measures due 07/15 Departmental Statement of Function due 07/ 15 Revuew saau-vey resaa?ts 07/Il9 Determine Spending Limits 07/22 Coanuacn? revnevv beadlget po?ucfies 07/26 CoOAIIDClll Q'eV9ei"p' (CapE$afl IPQ'llOQ'HgEeS 07/26 Statement of Issues due 07/29 Budget packet to departments 07/29 Finance Director corrections complete 08/19 Departmental Budgets complete 09/09 Departmental meetings w/ McLaurin & Thompson 09/12 - 09/21 Manager's budget complete 09/28 De?uver Bandget go cCoauaucu? Il0/01