HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-02-04 Support Documentation Town Council Evening Session
!lA9L TOWIV COU6VCBL
EVENING MEETING
Tl9ESDA1(, FEBRl3ARV 4, 1997
7:30 P.M. 1N TO!! COIJIVC9L CtiAfVIBERS
AGENDA
R10TE: Tumes off atems are approxisvaa4e, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to
determirae at what tame Councal wilB consider an atem.
1. CITIZEN PARTICIPATIOiV. (5 mins.)
2• COfVSEiVT AGENDA:
A. Approval of the IVlinutes for the meetings of January 7 and 21,
1997.
B. Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1997, second reading of an ordinance
requesting to amend Sections 18.27.030, 18.29.030, and
18.30.030 of the Zoning Code to allow van storage/transportation
related businesses in the Commercial Core 3, Arterial Business,
and Heavy Service Zone Districts as a conditional use and add
Sections 18.04.415 and 18.04.385 providing definitions for vehicle
storage yard and transportation business.
C. Ordinance fVo. 3, Series of 1997, second reading of an ordinance
repealing and reenacting the Investment Policy set forth in
Chapter 3.52 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail.
. D. Resolution IVo. 2, Series of 1997, a resolution designating
additional signers Patricia Corbitt and Gwen Thomas and
removing Russ Johnson and Walter Ingram on an imprest
checking account for Library deposit transactions for the Town of
Vail, permitted by the Charter of the Town, its Ordinances, and
the Statutes of the State of Colorado. (10 mins.)
3. Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1997, first reading of an ordinance creating
Dominic Mauriello Special Development District No. 34 in accordance with Chapter 18.40 of
the Touvn of Vail Municipal Code; and setting forth details in regard
thereto. Applicant: Jim and Ronna Flaum (30 mins.)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve/Deny/IViodify Ordinance
No. 2, Series of 1997 on first reading.
BACKGROUfVD RATIONALE: The applicant is proposing to establish a
SDD (with Residential Cluster as the underlying zoning) on the subject
property in order to allow a modification of the Eagle County-approved
Planned Unit Development (PUD). The site is proposed to be subdivided
into three single-family lots. The property is currently vacant and is
comprised of tvvo duplex lots.
The property is zoned Residential Cluster (RC). However, when the
property vvas annexed to the Town of Vail, that annexation recognized
the Eagle County approved development plan for the property (a Planned
Unit Development) per Ordinance Mo. 13, Series of 1981. The PUD for
Lots 3 and 4 is specific. The county approval allows a duplex on each lot
(a total of 4 units) and requires a parking structure for all of the parking
on-site. The approval allows each dwelling unit a maximum of 2,200 sq.
ft. of GRFA (8,800 sq. ft. total for both lots).
The PEC, at its January 13, 1997 meeting, recommended approval
(unanimously) subject to the 8 conditions contained in the PEC memo,
plus the additional condition that:
One Employee Housing Unit (EHU, Type II) is required for the entire
development which must be provided prior to, or in conjunction with, the
Building Permit for the third dwelling unit constructed on-site. Five
hundred (500) sq. ft. of additional GRFA shall be allowed for the
construction of an EHU on each lot.
All conditions of approval have been included in the proposed ordinance.
Please refer to the PEC memo and development plan for a complete
explanation of thP proposal.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of
Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1997 and SDD No. 34 on first reading.
4. Town of Vail/U.S. Forest Service Land Exchange. (45 mins.)
Russell Forrest
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Based on the approved appraisal,
determine what properties should be included in the exchange agreement
with the Forest Service.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE: Staff will provide at the evening meeting
several alternative configurations of what properties could be included in
the exchange based on the approved appraisal. Based on the final
appraisal, it appears that the Town of Vail will need to eliminate 2 or more
selected properties (i.e. properties that the Town would accept from the
Forest Service) to create a balanced exchange.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Eliminate properties that will help equalize
the values of the exchange.
5. Adjournment - 9:00 p.m.
NOTE UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW:
(ALL T1MES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE)
THE NEXT VAIL TOWM COUNCIL SPECIAL WORK SESSION
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 2/11/97, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
THE FOLLOWING VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 2/18/97, BEGVNNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 2/18/97, BEGINNING AT 7:30 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
I I I I I I I
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2332 voice
or 479-2356 TDD for information.
C:WGENDA.TC
r v
/
ORDINANCE NO. 2
Series of 1997 .
AN ORDINANCE CREATING SPECfAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 34 IN ACCORDANCE
WITH CHAPTER 18.40 OF THE TOWN OF VAIL MUNICIPAL CODE; AND SETTING FORTH
DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO.
WHEREAS, Lots 3 and 4 of The Valley, Phase V, were platted and approved as a
Planned Unit Development (PUD) by Eagle County on October 29, 1980; and
WHEREAS, the development plan for the Eagle County approved PUD allowed one duplex (2 dwelling units) to be constructed on each lot, with a maximum Gross Residential Floor
Area of 2,200 sq. ft. per dwelling unit (8,800 sq. ft; combined total of Lots 3 and 4); and
WHEREAS, Lots 3 and 4 of The Valley, Phase V, were annexed to the Town of Vail "
effective December 31, 1980; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1981, accepted and approved the Eagle County
approved PUD for the subject property; and WHEREAS, the Town of Vail has determined that the establishment of a Special
Development District is the appropriate process to amend the Eagle County approved PUD and
development plan; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code authorizes Special Development
Districts within the Town in order to encourage flexibility in the development of land; and
WHEREAS, the owners of the subject property, Jim and Ronna Flaum, or their
successors in interest, have submitted an application for the establishment of Special
Development District (SDD) No. 34, for a certain parcel of property within the Town, legally
described as Lots 3 and 4, The Valley, Phase V; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 18.66.140, the Planning and Environmental
Commission, on January 13, 1997, held a public hearing on the establishment of a SDD, and has
unanimously recommended approval to the Town Council; and WHEREAS, all notices as required by Section 18.66.080 have been sent to the
appropriate parties; and
, WHEREAS, the Town Council considers that it is reasonable, appropriate; and beneficial
to the To'wn and its citizens, inhabitants, and visitors to establish SDD No. 34; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has held a public hearing as required by Chapter 18.66 of
the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCfL OF THE TOWN OF
VAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1997 Page 1 of 6
,
SECTION 1
The Town Council finds that all the procedures set forth for Special Devefopment Districts
in Chapter 18.40 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail have been fully satisfied.
SECTION 2 .
Special Development District No. 34 is established to ensure comprehensive
development and use of an area in a manner that will be harmonious with the general character
of the Town, provide adequate open space, employee housing, and promote the objectives of the
Town's Zoning ordinance. The development is regarded as compiementary to the Town by the
Town Council and the Planning and Environmental Commission, and there are significant
aspects of the speciai development which cannot be satisfied through the imposition of standard
zoning on the area.
, SECTION 3
Special Development District No. 34 is established for the development on a parcei of
land comprising 1.81 acres (Lots 3 and 4, The Valley Phase V) and shall be referred to as "SDD
N o. 34".
SECTION 4
The Town Councii finds that the development pian for SDD. No. 34 meets each of the
standards set forth in Section 18.40.080 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vaii, except "I."
which is not applicabie. In accordance with Section 18.40.040, the development plan for SDD
No. 34 is approved.
SECTION 5
The zone district underlying SDD No. 34 is Residentia! Cluster (RC). The uses allowed in SDD
No. 34 shall be limited to those uses indicated on the development plan and those uses allowed
by right, and those uses allowed by conditional use, which are set forth in said zone district of the
--Town of Vail Zoning Code.
SECTION 6
In addition to the Approved Development Plan described herein in Section 7, the following
, development standards have been submitted to the Planning and Environmental Commission for
its consideration and recommendation and are hereby approved by the Town Council. The
- development standards for this SDD shall be those prescribed by the Residential Ciuster (RC)
zone district unless specificalfy addressed he,rein. The foNowing are the specific development
standards for SDD No. 34:
Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1997 Page 2 of 6
r,
,
. a
Base Information
Underlying Zoning: RC (Residential Cluster)
Lot area: 1.81 acres or 79,002 sq. ft. •
Development Standard NAaximum Allowance/Limitation
Number of tots: 3 single-family lots
Dwelling Units: 3 dwelling units
Density: 1.66 dwelling units/acre
Employee Housing Units (EHU): 1 Type II EHU per lot allowed. One Employee Housing Unit is required for the entire development which must be provided prior to, or in conjunction
with, the Building Permit for the third dwelling unit constructed on-site.
Buildable Area: Per approved development plan and building envelopes _
Site Coverage: 25% of lot area (per lot)
• GRFA: 2,933 sq. ft./dwelling unit
Type II EHU GRFA: 500 sq. ft. allowed per lot tor development of an EHU, per 7ype li EHU --requirements. Planning and Environmental Commission review is
required per conditional use requirements for Type II EHU.
Garage Area: 600 sq. (t. allowed per dwelling unit (exciusive of the EHUs)
EHU Garage Area: 1 enclosed parking space required per EHU per lot, which must be deed
restricted for use by EHU only,. Up to 300 sq. ft. garage credit allowed per
EHU per lot.
Setbacks: Per buiiding envelopes delineated on development pian. No GRFA is
permitted.within 20' of the front property line. Garage area is allowed
within 20' from the front property line within the established building
envelopes.
Parking: Per Chapter 18.52 Off-street Parking and Loading, Zoning Code
Exterior Lighting: Per Chapter 18.54 Design Review Guidelines, Zoning Code
Building Height: 30' for a flat roof, 33' for a sloping roof
SECT.ION 7
SDD No. 34 is subject to the following additional conditions: ~
1. The development plan shall be that plan entitled "Flaum Residence," prepared by
Pierce, Segerberg & Associates, Architects, dated 11/11/96, with the latest
revision on 1 /10/97.
2. Trash collection shall be typical residential curbside collection and dumpsters
shall not be permitted on these lots or in the adjacent right-of-way.
3. This site shall be limited to one curbcut for all three lots as depicted on the
development plan. The entire curbcut shall be devefoped upon initial construction
on any of these three lots. ,
Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1997 Page 3 of 6
I L , 4. The applicant shall submit a mitigation plan for the rockfall hazard whicfi shall be
reviewed and approved by the applicant's geologist prior to Design Review Board
approval for construction of homes on these lots.
5. This approval shall become void if the construction of at least one lot is not
commenced within three years of the final appcovai of the SDD. The developer
must meet the requirements of Section 18.40.120 of the Municipai Code of the
Town of Vail.
6. The recreational amenities tax for this development shall be assessed at the rate
required for the Residential Ciuster (RC) zone district, as provided for in Chapter
3.36 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code.
7. All retaining walls on-site shall conform to existing code requirements. No
retaining waii shall exceed 3' in the first 20' from the front property line on these
lots.
8. All development standards contained in this ordinance site shall be noted on the
development plan and the finai plat for this development. Those notes shall
~ include the following note regarding development within building envelopes:
"Ail future development will be restricted to the area within the platted building
envelopes. The only development permitted outside the platted building
envelopes shall be landscaping, driveways and retaining walls associated with
driveway construction. At-grade patios (those within 5' of existing or finished
grade) wili be permitted to project beyond the building envelopes not more than
ten feet (10') nor more than one-haif (112) the distance between the building
envelope and the property line, or may project not more than five feet (5) nor
more than one-fourth (1/4) the minimum required dimension between buildings."
9. One Employee Housing Unit (EHU, Type II) is required for the entire development
which must be provided prior to, or in conjunction with, the Building Permit for the
_ third dweiling unit constructed on-site. Five hundred (500) sq. ft. of additional
GRFA shall be aliowed for the construction of an EHU on each lot.
SECTION 8
. The owners, jointly and severally, agree with the foilowing requirement, which is a part of
the Town's approval of the SDD No. 34: All previous approvals and development plans,
including the County Approved PUD for the subject property, are hereby null and void.
Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1997 Pa9E 4 Of 6
SECTION 9
Amendments'to the approved development plan shall be reviewed pursuant ta Section
18.40.100 of the Vail Municipai Code.
SECTION 10 '
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 11
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 its inhabitants thereof. SECTION 12
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 repea{ed or
repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provisions or
any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless stated herein.
Ordinance No. 2, Senes of 1997 Page 5 of 6
r
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE
IN FULL, this 4th day of February, 1997. A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held at the
regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, on the 18th day of February,
1997, in the Municipal Building of the Town.
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
Holly McCutcheon, Town Clerk
INTRODUCED, READ, ADOPTED AND ENACTED ON SECOND READlNG AND ORDERED
' PUBLISHED (IN FULL) (BY TITLE ONLY) THIS DAY OF , 1997.
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
Hoily McCutcheon, Town Clerk
Page 6 of 6
1
Y
tl . - p
MEfiflORANDtYM
COPY
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: January 13, 1997
SUBJECT: A request for the establishment of Special Development District, No. 34, located
at 1521 and 1631 Buffehr Creek Road/Lots 3& 4, The Valley, Phase V.
Applicant: Jim and Ronna Flaum
Planner: Dominic Mauriello
1. DESCRIPTBON OF THE REQl9EST
The applicant is proposing to establish a SDD (with Residential Cluster as the underlying zoning)
on the subject property in order to allow a deviation from the Eagle County approved Planned
Unit Development (PUD). The site is proposed to be subdivided into three, single-family lots.
The property is currently comprised of two duplex lots.
The property is zoned Residential Cluster (RC), however, when the property was annexed to the
Town of Vail, that annexation recognized the Eagle County approved development plan for the
property (a Planned Unit Development) (per Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1981). The PUD for
Lots 3 and 4 is specific. The approval allows a duplex on each lot (a total of 4 units) and requires
a parking structure for all of the parking on-site. The approval allows each dwelling unit a
maximum of 2,200 sq. ft. of GRFA (8,800 sq. ft. total for both lots).
The applicant is requesting a deviation from the approved PUD in order to allow three single-
family houses to be constructed on the property. The applicant is proposing to retain the same
maximum GRFA for the site (as approved in the PUD) and dividing the GRFA equally between
the three proposed lots (2,933 sq. ft. per lot). For comparison purposes, the RC zoning on the
property allows a total of 5,300 sq. ft. of GRFA for the entire site. In the RC zone district, GRFA
is calculated based on buildable area (areas with slopes less than 40%). The site contains a
large amount of area with slopes in excess of 40%. In single-family and two-family zone districts
(SFR, P/S, and R), GRFA is based on total site area and structures may be built on slopes in
excess of 40%. ~
i
The RC zone district also requires a 20' front yard setback. The applicant is proposing less than
a 20' front setback on the lots in order to allow attached garages to be constructed in the front
setback and also to reduce site disturbance. Based on comments'from the PEC at the December 9, 1996 worksession on the proposal, the applicant is proposing that no GRFA be
allowed within 20' from the front property line. It appears that the PUD allowed the parking
garage to be located in the front setback. ~ .
Also, based 'on Commission comments at the December 9, 1996 worksession, the applicant is
~ proposing that a Type II, Employee Housing Unit be allowed on each lot. An additional 500 sq. ft.
of GRFA and a 300 sq. ft. garage credit is proposed to be allowed per each EHU constructed on-
; ,
1 .
site (one per lot). There was some discussion by PEC about requiring at least one EHU on-site,
however, there was no consensus on the issue. That applicant is not proposing to require an
EHU.
The applicant has also proposed a mitigation plan for large trees (6" caliper or greater) potentially
impacted by development on the lots. The proposal would provide 7 additional trees per lot (total
of 21 trees for the entire development) for the 40+ large trees potentially impacted by
development. Deciduous trees would be provided with a caliper of 3" or greater or confers wouid
be 8' in height minimum. Staff believes this is an adequate mitigation for this site based on the
large number of trees found on-site.
This land is located in a High Severity Rockfall Hazard according to the Town of Vail hazard
maps. The applicant's geologist identifies the area as a"moderate" hazard and has stated that
mitigation could be provided to protect potential structures and adjacent properties. The
applicant is proposing that the rear walls of the structures be reinforced to mitigate impacts from
falling rocks. The applicanYs geologist must review and approve any final mitigation design.
The development plan also shows 6' tall retaining walls in the front setback. The code requires
that retaining walls in the front setback be 3' or less in height. Staff believes that the retaining
walls on this site should meet this requirement.
11. ZONING ANALYSIS
Listed below is the zoning analysis for Lots 3& 4, The Valley, Phase V, based on the RC zone
designation and the County/fown approved PUD. Bold indicates a deviation from the
annexation plan and shading indicates a deviation from the RC zone district.
Zoning: RC (subject to Eagle County approved PUD)
Lot area: 1.81 acres or 79,002 sq. ft.
Standard Allowed (RC Zonina) Allowed (Annexation Plan) Proposed
Lot Size: 15,000 sq. ft. Lot 3: 38,768.4 sq. ft. Lot A: 20,726 sq. ft.
Lot 4: 40,075.2 sq. ft. Lot B: 26,284 sq. ft.
Lot C: 32,012 sq. ft.
Units: 10 units 4 units 3 units
Density: 6 units/acre 2.2 units/acre 1.66 units/acre
Buildable Area: 8,000 sq. ft. per lot N/~1 1$ 50Q sq ft toi31!.
(less than 8,000 sq h.llot)
GRFA: 5,300 sq. ft." 8,800 sq. ft. (2,200 sq. ft./unit) ,:8;6CJ0,::Sq#f:;(2,933 sq. ft./unit)
Building Ht.: 33' Approximately 3 stories 33'
Setbacks: Front: 20' 25' (excluding garage) 15' ~lof;BJ, 0' (Lot C7
Side: . 15' 15' 10' 16et4veert 6tiilditlg eitVetOpes
G)
' Rear: 15' 15' ` >15'
Site Coverage: 25% per lot 25% per lot 25% per lot '
2
I
Standard Allowed (RC Zoninq) Allowed (Annexation Plan) Proposed
Landscape Area: 60% min. Lot A: 13,095 sq. ft. (63%)
Lot B: 19,090 sq. h. (73%)
Lot C: 25,994 sq. ft. (81%)
Parking: Per code 10 spaces Per code
Enclosed parking: 1 space/unit N/A Per code
Retaining walls
in front setback: 3' in height max. N/A 61:irt kieighf
Noles: *Based on buildable area.
BIL DEVELOPflflENT STeANDA,RDS
The proposed development standards for this SDD shail be those prescribed herein:
Development Standard NAaximum Allowance/Limitation
Number of Lots: 3 single-family lots
Dwelling Units: 3 dwelling units
Density: 1.66 dwelling units/acre
Employee Housing Units (EHU): 1 Type II EHU per lot allowed
Buildable Area: Per approved development plan and building envelopes
Site Coverage: 25% of lot area (per lot)
GRFA: 2,933 sq. ft./dwelling unit (with no additional credits)
Type II EHU GRFA: 500 sq. ft. aliowed per lot for development of an EHU, per Type II EHU
requirements. Planning and Environmental Commission review is
required per conditional use requirements for Type II EHU.
Garage Area: 600 sq. ft. allowed per dwelling unit
EHU Garage Area: 1 enclosed parking space required per EHU per lot, which must be deed
restricted for use by EHU only. Up to 300 sq. ft. garage credit allowed per
EHIi per lot.
t
Setbacks: PeF building envelopes delineated on development plan. No GRFA is
permitted within 20' of the front property line. Garage area is allowed
within 20' from the front property line within the established building
envelopes. ' .
Parking: Per Chapter 18.52 pff-street Parking and Loading, Zoning Code
Exterior Lighting: Per Chapter 18.54 Design Review Guidefines, Zorling Code
Building Height` 30' for a flat roof, 33' for a sloping roof '
r
3
IV. REVIEW CRITERIA EOR THIS REGlUEST
Upon review of Section 18.40.080, Design Criteria, of the Town of Vail Municipal Code, the
Community Development Department recomrnends approval for the establishment of Special
Development District No. 34. The recommendation for approval is based on the foliowing
factors:
As stated in the zoning code, 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
new development within 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
deve{opment district, in conjunction with a property's underlying zone district, shall
establish the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included
in the special development district."
The following are the nine special developrnent district criteria to be utilized by the Planning and
Environmental Commission when evaluating SDD proposals:
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.
Staff believes that the proposed deviation from the Eagle County approved PUD for this
site provides more compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment. The
density of development is reduced from 4 units to 3 units and the deviation from the
required duplex development with a parking structure, to three single-family homes,
brings the design more into compliance with development trends of the 1990's rather than
those of the 1970's. The scale of development wilt be reduced thereby increasing the
visual integrity of the area.
B. Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable
relationship with surrounding uses and activity.
The proposed deviation from the PUD reduCes the density of the site and therefore
reduces potential impacts to adjicent uses. The proposed residential use of the property
is compatible with the surrounding residential uses. C. Compliance with the parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter
18.52.
The proposed plan complies with the parking and loading requirements of the Zoning
Code. ;
r
4
D. Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, T'ovvn
policies and Urban Design Plans.
This site is designated as Open Space (OS) in the Land Use Plan. This designation
allows development at densities of 1 unit per 35 acres. However, this land is zoned
Residential Cluster and has a development plan which was accepted by the Town of Vail
upon annexation. Therefore, the previous rights for development on this property have
been recognized by the Town and should be recognized by the Land Use Plan.
The following Land Use Plan goals directly address the subdivision of this land:
Gnal 9.6 Development proposals on the hillsides should be evaluated on a
case by case basis. Limited development may be permitted for some
lovv intensity uses in areas that are not visible from the valley floor.
New projects should be carefully controlled and developed wi4h
sensitivity to the environment.
Staff believes that since this is deviation from a previously approved PUD and since the
proposal reduces potential impacts to the area, that the proposal implements this goal.
Goal 1.7 New subdivisions should not be permitted in high geologic hazard
areas.
Goa15.1 Additional residential growth should continue Yo occur primarily in
existing, platted areas and as appropriate in new areas w?here high
hazards do not exist.
This site is already platted for two duplex lots. The proposal will make three single-family
lots from the existing duplex lots. A site specific analysis for this site indicates that the
area is a"moderate" hazard area. Staff believes this proposal implements the intent of
this goal.
Goal 5.3 Affordable employee housing should be made available through
private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the Tovvn
ofi Vail, with appropriate restrictions.
Goal 5.5 1'he existing empioyee housing base should be preserved and
upgraded. .4ddi~ional employee housing needs should be
accommoda4ed af varied sites throughout the community. .
The PEC recommended that each home be allowed 500 sq. ft. of additional GRFA for
EHUs on these lots. The applicant has incorporated this ability into the SDD. Staff .
believes the proposal implements this policy.
,
5
E. Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the
property on which the special development district is proposed.
The site is located in a High Severity Rockfall Hazard. The applicant has provided a site
specific analysis which indicates that the hazard is "moderate" hazard and that
appropriate mitigation can be provided to protect uses on-site as well as adjacent uses
and public facifities.
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.
Staff believes the proposal accomplishes this criterion by limiting development and
creating building envelopes on the site.
G. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing
on and off-site traffic circulation. The proposed development plan accommodates vehicular and pedestrian circulation
consistent with the scale of development proposed on-site.
H. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize
and preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions.
The site has extensive vegetation. The applicant is also proposing to mitigate the
impacts upon the vegetation. The proposed plan implements this criterion.
1. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workab{e, iunctional and
efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development
district.
No phasing plan is proposed.
V. STAFF RECOIIAMENDATION
Staff recommends that the PEC recommend approval to the Town Council of the
applicanYs request for the establishment of Special Development District No. 34 subject
to the following findings: i
1. That this Special Development District (SDD) is approved based on a deviation
from the Eagle County approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) for this site.
The deviation reduces the density of the site and lessens the impacts to the site
and the community. ,
, •
2. That the proposed SDD complies with the nine design criferia as stated herein.
' 3. That the proposed SDD will provide flexibility to allow creativity in the development
of this land in order to promote its most appropriate use and in order ta,improve
the design character and quality of the neighboriiood.
6
The recommendation of approval is also subject to the following conditions:
1. The development standards for this development shall be those described Section
III of this memo and shall be subject to the development plan entitled "Flaum
Residence," prepared by Pierce, Segerberg & Associates, Architects, dated
11 /11 /96, with the latest revision on 1/10/97.
2. Trash collection shall be typical residential curbside collection and dumpsters
shall not be permitted on these lots or in the adjacent right-of-way.
3. This site shall be limited to one curbcut for all three lots as depicted on ihe
development plan. The entire curbcut shall be developed upon construction of
any of these three lots.
4. The applicant shall submit a mitigation plan for the rockfall hazard which shall be
reviewed and approved by the applicant's geologist prior to Design Review Board
approval for construction of homes on these lots.
5. This approval shall become void if the construction of at least one lot is not
commenced within three years of the final approval of the SDD.
6. The recreational amenities tax for this development shall be assessed at the rate
required for the Residential Cluster (RC) zone district, as provided for in Chapter
3.36 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code.
7. All retaining walls on-site shall conform to existing code requirements. No
retaining wall shall exceed 3' in the first 20' from the front property line on these
lots.
8. All development standards contained in the final ordinance approved for this site
shall be noted on the development plan and the final plat for this development.
Those notes shall include the following note regarding development within building
envelopes:
"All future development will be restricted to the area within the platted building
envelopes. The only development permitted outside the platted building
envelopes shall be landscaping, driveways and retaining walls associated with
driveway construction. At=grade patios (those within 5' of existing or finished
grade) will be permitted t~ project beyond the building envelopes not more than
ten feet (10') nor more than one-half (1/2) the distance between the building
envelope and the property line, or may project not more than five feet (5') nor
more than one-fourth (1/4) the minimum required dimension between buildings." fAeveryone\pecUnemos\flaum.113
~
r
7
Pitrce, ;
$egerberR& P
^ l+'w IIIKmn~,pJ:p~
( 1 k
Fw; G+w Assotiates,
Ik~.w.e.. ww .a !Luami.115r•~e+dlL~vyns ~ ab..i M~e w~ ,v.~ a~ E~i~, a,
`~+h~~~nm.WG.~..~ Arthitetts
1 tin~4lu.ily be ~ o
C mlooqPC•AIA.
d sm,.n. n. ~wy
D S. GIIfA e pv~rt~N IM In.+ ~M('Nti!(ll kl
rn~~ t MJ~sllu~wnvnR pop" lw- CrYs~nJU.W.~mmVhwn rI.A\\I, f.
( I\IIPIONI
tAp"« tw.-' u..n (f.lfu) i f)n u enu a. b db.a. T~v"." i.. a-d
I &~lf.b4Ale hr (ddn< ~100 tv CTpv ILS: Ofl.~m.~ M~ry r~d le.try, "",I'°••p~"•~"•••
WP^• 4P^^+V~^dA.kr~m..bpe L-n' Ca&
~lo'f':. Kr"fNrJIJG W.LL} ~ ~CNm y ui
Ea.vl.tb'°l Po
~ ~
ay ~~'~A1ea.~ 9~ ii s+
a~
:.971 p II:J•~Ilin6 inn prt 4+ Ik.v~ pi.e
i f.n.r r.. wu
~tt!_.15c.D el~vux ( c..~.,i ~..a i [n
I1F.MIGkVA Y10µry.tlu.N4+hvy.'Fpn.miuiMklll.pn
. ~,n aernnJ~•G ~Jn~~~ ~ ~ . .v,..w~..~.i
iya n tnu
cuu~ayuuN ~f- °i'~~bWp~uvomui.:IddnuWOVn.illhp.•.1GS.. b~r~l.~i~}
:J'LL G+«..PO U,d 414~1. En.mn~ll.i.~m,u.,.
ue ,m.ws1 we p,. ~vl IL« ve.. wJi r.. . w..... W,rn .l w
e~a..e..dd....~re.arb
~ _ '71v num~ ar.6 1.s .ivy or v.en R.nop .~~i a~ ~oN,nii~n.e .~re
a co.~l.ml m mn u~.'
I &ufm"{ Fa.<bpr fMVit hvcbpMn a tle~ lu~ ~G~II f~ m~niN w iA. w
p-d e.i1M~ -kpn 1!n rtun.n Wll r~tr .II Y.1a. rmf ~a.~
~ Inn rt. 11e our h~.bpwa pnmmd Md~ Ih pYnd lrlW~ ~n.~\pn wll "
J.I~j!ml~?xC^CD~~ k~`~'o"K°O'47'4'~tr~~rn.r,drvawn~.~l~mwwad.~m.b~M~~ •
LINF !7 ~c ' uv~iA
.iBMirr.~N W
r~Srtv~~a corracr_
"OAT.T! L1~LL .L'-o•.
dG~vL ~4LL oN UVFHU. LOT A LCrT 0 r r'
yine Rs xock Pn~~ -:a~ee nc.aQe w
1 ~
l0i C rL,
."1749 nccae ~
l.0(,.
~zzzz.
'D
_ - " ' ~ `I ~ • ~ ~~~Q~~~ \ ~fl-'Y'uoy~ • e ~1
\ ~ ~-~a\ I _~1..~.( ` \ \ lad
-,x _ ~ .5~'-~` , Zy \ I r _ J ~ ` \ •
~ ~ ' • , FlAUM flESIDPIKE-~ ~ ~ ~ ~F - ~ ~ ~ _ • ,r ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ , ~ c~
1-r~w7~ . ~-cL ~L.S~ - ~ ~ i , . ~F~y'~ _ ~ ~ \ ~ ~ \ ~ I
f- _~.wERS _ _ \ - ~ ~ c
_ p,~\.~~ \~'•~`\I~~ ~ ~ ~ ,
5370
-
'N' T:
t~-ZS-aa
E'vece."
\ ~ ~ ~ \ \ \ 1. \ ~ t•.~-v.[o.~ue
P,4 ~
Q~ \
S15 r-o
: ~2.
i
: ~,t~ / GG / I ( q370 72 vi I \ ~ \ .
rJa ~e ~L ,b ~ ~ ~
L--ls
:rfa-r (is a-e":P.o
To 3L w~r~~ aY )
L?'-.> ~OG... f f~ W L IrNfR7 4S VNL %laa- 7E°Att-r,,,r jpT I ,
T.o.V Qna,qw-ir~ty 3L .
\
BUIIDING ENVELOYE 8Y "a.vn.L- PJxI~
fi T) -1Oe'~~ ~,••.z~re.JT
orJ Tu l.ot'i iREE SCHEDULE ~'i b o¢ C.a6i-r_c) ~gd ~ e •
>4eu."W-~5+ac.^•~+o-uem.a:ra,N Io EKe1*irl6- o er~eJ
e`7i~rou ~Na.i. uJCUCx e~ vy~, r~v .
~ _n"WCL. ~G f~+G cu.I D5K ~ocs~'lrlx x o~ e=e :o e: 4=-~nJ-~ ;
WJDicA+*~14.nTC..~.GaG Ps~TO~ ( ' ,Q~ .
~a~vb~.la-f9 aNv C~au~v~~ w.a~LS '1 i tI / 9s
'"nLti.~s^ED J/ ociJru,ya( CAVYf¢itap"J D+tc: li
) - .
C
~ . ~ projen, ro:
' SITE PLAIU iDrawn 0.
~
' cn«eca ey:
t
k S*" a
a ' Al
~ _ Qc~w
A P R Fi a~
d
5. A request for a new Special Development District, No. 34, located at 1521 and 1631
Buffehr Creek Road/Lots 3& 4, The Valley, Phase V.
Applicant: Jim and Ronna Flaum
Planner: Dominic Mauriello
Dominic Mauriello advised that this request should be SDD No. 34; that SDD No. 33 was Red
Sandstone. Dominic proceeded to give an overview of the request and stated that the applicant
did not want the EHU to be a requirement. Dominic said 43 large trees would be impacted and
that staff had proposed mitigation, since this was heavily forested, by asking for 7 additional trees
per site. He said that staff felt that this would not be onerous for the applicant. Dominic
proceeded to go over the deviations from the underlying zoning and he said that staff was
recommending approval with 8 conditions. He said that the only difference since the last meeting
was that staff included language from the Code for condition #8.
Jim Flaum expressed concern over the requirement of an EHU, as a condition of approval.
Greg Moffet asked for any public comment. There was none.
John Schofield said if there were no problems with the 8 conditions, he would support this
project. He stated that he didn't believe an EHU should be required.
Gene Uselton said he was enthusiastic about the EHU's and to let the market determine whether
or not the EHU's were built.
Greg Amsden stated that because this was an SDD situation, he wanted one EHU required. He
asked, regarding the slope of the site, what the chances of coming back for variances would be?
He also felt Lot C was too close to the road.
Dominic Mauriello said he expressed that to Bill Reslock earlier. Bill Reslock was comfortable
that they could provide the project within the building envelope. The building envelopes have
been increased in size to ensure coristruction within the envelopes.
Kurt Segerberg said that since this was a steep site, he felt they could cor7form, as they had
done this before. He also said that Lot C was a challenge.
Galen Aasland said an EHU should be required. Diane Golden supported the project, but also felt at least 1 EHU should be required, with the
, EHU allowance of 500 sq. ft. of GRFA. ,
Henry Pratt stated that since there was no bus service, he would not likb to encourage any more
car traffic. He would prefer to mandate an EHU where there was bus service and so would not
; require an EHU in ihis location.
Planning and Environmenlal Cotrvnissioh
Minutes .
January 13, 1997 7
Greg Moffet wanted to see at least 1 EHU in this subdivision.
Jim Flaum requested that the EHU not be a requirement.
Greg Moffet said because iYs an SDD, the next Board this request would go before wouid
probably require it and the EHU would be deed restricted.
Diane Golden, having lived in an SDD, responded to Henry's comments, by saying that when
more people moved into an area, a bus stop could be added.
Galen Aasland made a motion to recomrnend approval in accordance with the staff inemo,
including the 8 conditions and added the additional condition that one EHU be required for the
entire development which must be provided prior to, or in conjunction with, the Building Permit
for the third house constructed on-site. Five hundred (500) sq. ft. of additional GRFA shall be
allowed for the construction of an EHU on each lot.
Gene Uselton asked if the PEC was recommending approval to the Town Council?
John Schofield seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously by a vote of 7-0.
~
i
.
~
' Planning and Environmental Commission
Mioutes .
Jantiary 13, 1997 8
,
CPU b .
~
PL,ANiQED UNIT DEVELOP;IEiQT PLA11
FOR
THE VALLEI - P'r.ASE V .
VALLEY ASSOCIATES, LTD., a Colorado limited partnership
("Declarant"), is the record and beneficial oc,rner of a11 of
the real property within that certain subdivision denominated
Tne Va11ey - Phase V located in Eagle County, Colorado, the
final plat of which was reco:ded at Reception Num-ber
in Bool: at Page , in P4ao Case , Drawer or the
records in the C1erk and Recorder's oTice Lor Eaole County,
Colorado. _
Declarant does hereby make, publish and declare that
the followino terms, covenants, conditions, easenents,
restrictions, uses, reservations, limitations and obligations
shall be dee,<<ed to run with the 1and, shall be a burden and
a benefit to Declarant, its successors and assigns, and the
County of Eagle, by and throu~h its Board of County Co~issioners
(t:.e "Board"), and any person or entity acquiring or oomino
. an interest in the real property which is or becones subject
to this Instrument and improvements built thereon, their
grantees, successors, heirs, personal representatives,
devisees or assigns.
l. DEFINITIONS: As used herein, the following Words
and terms shall have the following meanings:
SUBDIVISION The Valley - Phase V.
LOT A lot within The Va11ey - Phase V.
D;•rT:LLIi1G UtdIT Is a term as defined in Section 2.02.06
of the Zoning Resolution of Eag1e County,
Colorado.
GROSS RESIDENTIAL Is a tern as defined in Section 2.02.35
FLOOR AREA of the Zoning P,esolution of Eaole Cour.ty,
( G.R.F.A. ) Colorado.
DUPLEY UNIT A Lot that can be used solely for
RESIDEIdTIAL LOT residential purposes and upon ;ahich not
more than one building containing not
more than two dwelling units, and one
building or a part thereof coZtainir.g
garage spaces,,nay be constructed. ,
OPEc; SPACE TR'1CT A tract withiit the Subdivision that shall
.
renain in its!.nattral and undisturbed '
state or may be landscaded with grasses and plant material incijenous to the ~
site. •
PIL°LIi•IIPdARY PI._0 Is a term as detined in Sect=on 3.11.04
of the Zoning Resolution pf Eag1e '
County, Colorado. .
RO!',D That portion of the County of Eagle road :
. know~n as Lion' s Ridge Loop,whicn is
`r located ~aithin Parce? A, Lion's Rid;2 ,
. Subdivision, rilin- No; 2, Ea-1e Cour.cy,
Colorado. ,
2. GEi;cRa.L Pli?Z.°OSrS: Tilese cover.ants and rescric,--ions
a:e nade for the purposes of creating and keeping the Sub-
division insofar as possible desirable, attractive, benefi-
cial and suitable in architectural design, materials and
appearance; and guarding against fires and unnecessary
interference wit:-1 the natural beauty of the Subdivision a11
for the nutual benefit and protection of the owners of any
land in the Subdivision, and for the benefit of the County
of Eag1e, througn ttie Board.
3. USES: A11 Lots and Tracts in the Subdivision
sha11 fa11 within and be restricted to the follocaing land
use definitions:
DEFIidITIOiJ LOT DESCRIPTIOv
Duplex Unit Lots 1 throuph 4, inclusive
Residential Lot • _
Open Space Tract Tract A
4. APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTIOtd PLaNS: (a) No building
or other structure sha11 be constructed, erected, or main-
tained on any Lot, nor shall any addition the=.eto or alter-
ation or change therein be made until complete plans and
specifications have been submitted to the County of Eag1.e
and by it approved in writing, as evidenced by issuance of
applicable County of Eag1e building permits.
(b) The following specific restrictions shall govern
construction on any Lot:
(i) SITE COVERAGE AND DENSITY: A building
situated on a Duple:: Unit P.esidential Lot and con-
taining a dwelling unit or dwelling units sha11 not
exceed 25% lot coverage, and each dwellin; unit within
such building sha11 not contain more than 2,200 square
feet of G.R.F.A.
(ii) SET BaCh REQUI:LGMENTS : Tlinimum setbacks for
the location oi structures with relations to property
lines sha11 be 25 feet fron the Road right of way and
15 feet from all other property lines, except as
specifically provided for parkino structures herein-
below.
(?ii) BUILDIiQG HEIGHT: No structure located within
the Subdivision sha11 exceed at any point on the structure, •
three stories or a maxinuri height that would e:•:ceed tRe
air space "ound tvichin a 30 degree dCL'C2 aa~ le ~•:it': the
base of the ar.gle being the plane of the :oad aad the
ape:ti of the zn~e1 being tne center line of the ?.oad as
shosm in the ?relininary P1an ror Phase.V approved by ,
tne Board oa Ap_il 30, 1980 (tne "P'_zn"), *.•,hiczever
is 1ess. ~ •
(iv) PARKIcIG REQUIPEr.ENTS : (aa) For Lots 1 ard Z
par?c_na snail oe provicea by construction of a parin-
St?'llCtUre lii SL'DSCaRL131lV the FOIi:t Oi Chat C2=ra;^ '
single parl.:ing structure aoproved for such Lots i-n
. the P1an.
,(bb) For Lots 3 2nd 4 parking sha11 be provided `
bv conscruccion o= a parlcing struccLre in 3L'DSC.1i1[:` ai1y
tne for:a or tnat- certain sin-le paricin,~ strucc-,:re
r aDprovec _or ;uch Lots in the'Plan.
. , ,
J (cc) No building oerniC 'or an-I Lot si1a11 be
issued until sucLz tine as a biiilding permit for the
related parking structure nas been issued or until
such parking structure nas been constructed.
(v) ACCESS VISIO;I RcOUIRE`ENTS: At the point of _
intersection oi the access roa s to Cne above referenced
parking structures and the paved porcion of tize Road,
tilere sna11 be an uninterrupted line of vision from
sucn intersection points for a distance of 150.0 feet
of the length of tne Foad in eir.her direction from sucil
intersection points.
(vi) LAi1DSCAPIidG: For eacn Lot, landscaping shall
be provided as approved in the F1an incLudino without
limitation each planting area containinb five 8 to 10 -
foot Aspen trees and three S to 8 root B1ue Spruce trees.
(vii) RETAINAGE AvD STO°AGE: For eacil Lot, retaina~e
walls, rocc-contour reCaina~e areas and snoca storabe areas
sha11 be provided as approved in the P1an.
5. ISSUAiVCE OF CERTIFICATE OP OCCUPa\CY: (a) ido temporary. ,
or final certiticate o occupany silall issue for a dwelling unit
on Lot 1 or Lot 2 until such time as a certificate of occupancy
has issued covering the entire parb:ing structure intended to
service both of said Lots and a11 retaina2e and snow storage -
for botil of said Lots must be conpleted prior to tne issuance
of a temoorary or final certificate of occunancy on either of
said Lous; provided, however, that a Cenporary certificate of
occupancy may issue conditional upon future conoletion of
landscapino and paving required on eitner of said Lots.
(b) iIo temporary or final certificate of occupancy shall
issue for a dwelling unit on Lot 3 or Lot 4 until such time as
a certizicate of occupancy has issued coverin~ tile entire parking
structure intendecl to service botil of said Lots and al1 retainaoe
and sno~a storage for bot[1 of said I.ots must be completed prior to
ti:e issuance of a temporary or final certificate of occupancy on
eitner of said Lots; provided, however, tnat a tenporary certifi-
cate of occuoancy may issue conditional upon future conpletion •
o-F 1andscapino and paving required on either of said Lots.
6. EFFECT P.VD DUP4TIOi1 OF INSTRiJ`Ei1T: Tile conditions,
restrictions, stipulations and covenants contained 'nerein
snall be for tne benefit of and bindino upon each and every
part of the Subdivision, and eacil o~•rner of property therein,
his heirs, personal reoresentztives, successors and assigns
and shz11 continue in fu11 force and eriecC unti1 January 1
in tne vear 2000 A.D., 2nd tnereaiter =or SLCC°SS1V2 periods
of 10 yea_s each; unless ac least 1 year prior to Januar•r l, ~
2000 ~^-..D. or at least 1 year priQr to tiie e~_Diration ofJ anv
suca 10-year period of esCended d{.:r::Eion, tilis Instru,-nenc is
term.inated as provided ilereinoelow, by recorded instrument •
di=ectir.~ teriP.1II2LlOi1. L10CC11ng cortained ilerein snaLi be '
, cc.^.scrued to li-i:iit t'n.e Eoard iro;.i exercisino its ri-:lcs,~
du:~.es and obligations as may be proviced b,,- 1aw. 7. A?=;DHENTS : The conditior.s, res tri'c: ions ; s tipu-
12tions, agreenents and covenants contained herein shall not •
be aoaadoned, terninated, or amended escepc (i) bv written ~
conseat of tile oc•mers ot 75% or the Lots incluced'within tne ,
boundaries ot tiie Subdivisivn ane by approval o= the Board, or
~ (1'_) 2ll Si1C11 pTOV1Si0I7S COriCHL'Rl:lg 3:1C re1.`'.C1R, CO ZOT?iil~
~
maCt2_S DJ iildPD2I1Qci1C 3Ct10i15 OL CYle bOaid 2.s ;~a~i be '
7E=iiCCE.'G 5V ld~•/. ~ ,
-3- -
' 8. EidcORCE "?;T Ii ar.y person shai1 vioiace o:
titreaten to violaCe any of tlle provisions of tilis Instrumenc,
it sna11 be la;aful for the Board, or any person or persons
ow-ning a real property interest in the Subdivision to institute
proceedings at law or in equity to enforce the provisions of
tliis Instrur.ient, to restrain the person violating or threatening
to violate them, and to recover•damages, actual and punitive, "
and costs together witli reasonable attorney's fees, for sucn
violations.
9. SEVE RABILITY: Invalidation of any one of the
provisions ot ti-iis Instrur.tent by court order or decree sna11
in no iaay affect any of the other provisions, which sha11
remain in fu11 force and effect.
E.l'ECUTED as of this ~2Y day of ~7~•~, 1930.
VALLEY ASSOCIATES, LTD., a
Colorado limited partnersiiip
P. 0. Box 915
- Vail, Colorado 01657
BY : !
[Ti1 iam k• Yo5 C, 0. Box
3149, Vail,'Colorado 81657,
as Attorney In Fact for
Valley Associates, Ltd., a
Colorado limited partnership
COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO
By and through it's .
BOARD OF COW TY C02MISSIONERS
BY . Ag. x
Dale F. Grant, Cilairman
BY:
ATTEST: heitn Tro:{e Commissioner '
. ~ . ' . BY:
Dan Williams, Coamissioner
erk o tiie oard ox
ounty Corunissi ners
STATE OF COLOARDO
) ss.
COUNTY OF EAGLE )
Tiie i0r2o01IIo inst=u:-nent wcS 3Cknowleeged bc2`OT2 L,e
tizis ,d2y or ~~;~,•n~~- , 1980, by William J. Post,
as ?.tcoraay In ract zor Va11ey Associates, Ltd., a Colorado
1imi;.ed partnership. ' I
I .
Witness my iiana and ofricial s~ea1. •
r•1- cor,-r-iission e:a:pires :
idotary Public ~ .
s '
r
-4- ~ '
r ~
``t`~. ~ `V ~rzJ - / ` ~
' , . ~
, , ' ..i~.~
ORDINANCE NO. 13
(Series of 1981) 75 s. frnr,t.~c road
vail, co;or<,co 6iC57
oiFcc ci to:rn cic,;c
AN ORDINANCE Ih(POSING ZONING DISTRICTS ON
CERTAIN DEVELOPIIENTS AND PARCELS OF PROPERTI IN
TIIE RECENTLY ANNEXED IVEST VAIL ARI:A; ACCEPTING
PRIOIZ APPROVALS OF TIIr EAGLE COUTITY COb1hfISSIONERS
C{ELATING TIIERETO; SPECII'YING AAIENDrIENT PROCEDURES;
SETTING I'ORTII CONDITIOIYS RLLATING TIIERETO; AAIENDING
TIIE OPI'ICIAL ZONING hIAP I'OR TI[E TOIYN OF VAIL: AND
SETTING FORTIi DETAILS IN RELATION TIIERETO.
IVHEREAS, the town of Vail, Colorado, recently annexed the 1Vest
Vail area, County oY Eagle, State of Colorado, effective on December
31, 1980; and
jYHEREAS, Chapter 18.68 of the tfunicipal Code of the Totvn of
Vail sets forth procedures for the imposition of zoning districts
on recently annexed areas; and
SYIIEREAS, Section 31-12-115 (s) C.R.S, 1973, as amended,
requires the Town to bring the newly annexed Plest Vail area under
its zoning ordinance within ninety (90) days after the effective
date of said annexation; and
IVIiEREAS, because of certain actions talcen by and approvals of
the Eagle County Commissioners relating to the within specified
properties tlie Toivn Council is of the opinion that the zoning
designation for these areas shoul.d recognize said approvals and
conditions; and
{YIIEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town
oi Vail has considered the zoning to be imposed on the newly annexed
PJest Vail area at a public hearing and has mad'e a recommendation
relating thereto, to the Town Councif; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council considers that it is in the interest
of the '
public health, safety and tivelfare to so zone said property;
:"f~:_;'~ • NOIY, TFIERErORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY TFIE TOjVN COUNCIL OF.TIIE. TONN
T • ,
,r'• OF VAIL, TIiAT: `
Section 1. Procedures Fulfilled.
. r
_ The procedures for the determinai:ion of the zoning districts to be
imposed on the newly annexed West, Vail area as set forth cin Cliapter -
18.68 of the Vail hiunicipal Code have been fulfilled.
. ; . . .
Section 2. Imposition of Zoning District on Certain Parcels •uicl
Portions of the newl_y Znnexed 1Vest Vail area.
Pursuant to Chapter 18.68 of the Vail nlunicipal Code, the properties
descriUed in subsections e, f, g, h & i below are a portion of the
lYest Vail area annexed to the Town through the enactmenL of Ordinance
No. 43, Series of 1950, oi the Town of Vail, Colorado, effective on
the ttiirty-first day of December, 1980, and hereby zoned as follows:
a. The developments and parcels of property specified below in
Subsections e, f, g, h& i shall be developed in accordance tvith the
prior agreement 2pprovals and actions of the I:agle County Commissioners
as the agreements, approvals and actions relate to each development or
parcel of property.
b. The documents and instruments relating to the prior coutity
approvals, actions and agreements are presently on file in ttle
Department or Community Development of the Tokvii of Vail and said
approvals, actions and agreements are hereby accepted and approved
Uy the Town oY Vail.
c. All buildings for which a bui.lding permit has not Ueen issued,
on tlie effective date of ttle annexation of IYest Vail shall comply with
Design Review Criteria of the Vail Atunicipal Code prior to the issuance
of a building permit.
d. The Community Development Department may issue staff approvals
for minor changes in site design or other minor aspects of the plan for
any of the specified developments oz• parcels. These proposed changes
may be approved as presented, approved with conditions or denied by the
Staff with an appeal within 10 days of the Staff decision to the Planning and Environmental Commissioift. For major changes, sucli as ~
v
a re-design of a major part of the site, changes as use, density
control, height or other development standards, a Planning and
Environmental Commission review should Ue requir'ed. The procedureu ~cLfor changes,shall be in accordance with Chapter 18.66 of the Va'L1
hlunicipal Code. '
~ •
r e. The followin develo ments and .
~ P parcels of property shall Ue
subject to the terms of this ordinance: '
(1) The Valley, Phases 1 through G. _
(2) Spruce Creelc Townhouses. . (3) hteadotv Creelc Condominiums.
-2-
(4) Vail Intermountain Swim and Tennis C1uU.
(5) IIriar Patch, Lots G-2, G-5 and G-6
Lionsridge Subdivision Filing No. 2.
(6) Casa Del Sol Condominiums.
For any zoning purpose Ueyond the Ea61e County Commissioners' approvals,
agreements or actions, the developments and parcels of property specified
in this subsection (e) shall be zoned Residential Cluster (RC).
f. Lionsridge Subdivision, I'iling No. 4, shall be subject to the _
terms of this ordinance. ror any zoning purpose beyond the Eagle County
Commissioners' approval, agreernent or action, this parcel of property
shall be zoned Single ramily Zone District (SI'R) with a speci.al pro-
vision that an employee unit (as defined and restricted in Section 18.13.08C
of the Vail Ttunicipal Code) will be subject to approvals as per Section
18.13.080. The secondary unit may not exceed one third of the total
Gross Residential I'loor Area (GRFA) allowed on the lot as per the
Single Fanily Zone District Density Control (Section 18.10.090 of the
Vail Afunicipal Code) and Greenbelt & Natural Open Space (GNOS).
g. Lot G-4, Lionsridge Subdivision, P'iling No. 2, has been the
subject of litigation in the District Court of Eagle County, and a Coult
order has been issued regarding the development oP this property. The
Town has furttier approved Resolution ;5 of 1981 in regard to a suUse-
quent agreement with tlie oivner. The Residential Cluster (RC) Zone
District will be the applicable zone on this property to guide the
future development of the p.arcel, working within the bounds set Uy
the Court Order and Resolution No. 5, Series of 1981.
h. Block 10, Vail Intermountain Subdividion and the E1liott'Ranch
I
Subdivision, shall be subject to thelterms of this ordinance, For Lany
zoning purpose beyond the Eagle County Commissioners' approval, agree-
ment or action, Block 10 and the Elliott Ranch, shall be zoned Primary/
Secondary District. Lots 8, 15 & 16 of Bloclc 10„ Vail Intermountain, shall be zoned Greenbelt & Natural Open Space (GNOS). .
i. Vai1.Commons, Vail Das Stione P'iling No. 4, shall be subject
i
tothe.terms of this ordinance. Por any zoning.purpose laeyond tlie Eagle County Commissioners' agreement, approval on aotion, Vail Commons
shall be zoned Commercial Core III (CCIII). ,
-3- '
1. ~
\
Section 3.
As provided in Section 18.08.030 of the Vail hiunicipal Code, the zoning
administrator is kiereUy directed to promptly modify and amend the Official
~
1 Zoning hiap to indicate the zoning spec:ified lierein.
~ Section 4.
If any part, section subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is for 1ny reason held to Ue inv.alid, such decision shall not
affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance, and
the Town Council hereby declares it wou1Q have passed this ordinance, ,
and each part, section, suU-section, sentence, clause or phrase tliereof,
regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections,
sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
.
Section 5.
The Council hereby states that this orclinance is necessary for the
protection of the puUlic health, safety and tvelfare.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST RLADING, APPROVED AND ORDERED PUF3LISHED ONCE IN I'ULL, this 3rd day of Dlarch, 1981, and a puUlic liearing on this
ordinance shall be held at the regular meeting of the Town Council of
the Town of Vail, Colorado, on the 17tta day of hiarch, 1981, at 7:30 p.m.
in the Tiunicipal Building of the Town of Vail.
riayor
ATTEST:
7~0
Town Clerlc
INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED ON SECOND READING,AND ORDERED PUBLISIIED
BY TITLE ONLY nfarch 17, 1981.
- t, ayor
ATTEST: `'"1/ ~ Town Clerk
-4-
\
ee
e4
TOWN OF VAIL
75 South Frontage Road Office of the Town Manager
Yail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2105/Fax 970-479-2157
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Robert W. McLaurin, Town Manager ~
DATE: January 30, 1997
SUBJECT: Request from Vai( Village Property Owners Association
Enclosed in the agenda packet for the. February 4, 1997, meeting is a memorandum from the newly
formed Vail Village Property Owner's Association. This memo makes several requests of the
Town. I wanted to take this opportunity to update you on where we are in attempting to address
these issues and concerns.
Seibert Circle Art Piece:
As indicated in the memorandum, the Association is requesting a statue commemorating the 10th
Mountain Division be placed in Seibert Circle. As you are aware, the Art In Public Places Board
is currently handling this project. They have solicited proposals and are in the process of selecting
an art piece for this space.
Heating Streets in the Vail Village:
As we have discussed previously, vve are currently working with a mechanical engineering firm to
determine the feasibility and cost of this proposal. Funds required for construction of this project
have not been appropriated and the project is currently unfunded. As 1 indicated to representatives
of the Association, if the Council wishes to move forward with this project, it would need to compete
with other currently funded capital projects (e.g., street projects).
Modifications to Parkinq Regulations:
As indicated in their memorandum, the Association would like the council to provide free parking
from 3:00 p.m until 7:00 a.m. daily. I indicated during our meeting with the representatives of the
Association that the current 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. free parking has been dramatically
underutilized., and under marketed. I also indicated the Town was particularly disappointed that
only a couple of the restaurants for which this program was implemented advertises free parking.
I did indicate to these gentlemen that we would, from a staff perspective, provide an analysis of
what the ioss of parking revenue would be, in order to give the Councif a better idea of how you
wish to proceed on this issue.
RECYCLED PAPER
I hope this gives you a brief update on this matter. It is my expectation that many of the Village
property owners will be in attendance at the meeting on Tuesday afternoon to discuss this with you.
RWM/aw
JAN.27.1997 2=18PM EAST WEST PARTNERS N0.043 P.2i3
.
I ° A~d
i ! TO: Mayor 13ab Armotu and Tovvn Coilncil Membeas
, Bob McLaurin, Town Mannger
j FROIlR: Vait Vi11age Commercial Pnonerty Owners Assocaation
I DATE: January 24, 1997
R]E: Vail'Viuage $asues
I Bt is requested by the members o:E tue newly foraaied Wai1 `Iillage Commercial Property
f owners Asaooiataon that tlae Town Council allow time in its wark session agend.a on
~ Pebnmry 4, 1997 to d'ascuss tluee items witll representatives of$he Association. The items
f to be disGUSSCd are as follovvs:
I
f I[~~aaea~a~~~ ~~aaa fte~s
)M=r Season Frea ~a~kin,g~~~; The implcmentatian by the Tovvm of Vail of a
progsam 4o provide free parlsiag in the eveuing and early morning hours in the'V'ail Vi11age
TramporPation Center ea.ch day from 3,00 PM in the afternaon until 7,40 AlV[ the
followiiag morning. It is desired tha.t the progam begin on February 5, 1997 and reffia.ian in
cffect unti1 fihc close of dd season.
Tle puspose of this request is to proanote Vail Viuage ms ala avening destination for quality
dining, shoppiUg and entereain.tnent. 17urt]ier, it is the inteut of the free parlcing program to
iaicrease use by cus4omers, vendors aud employees of the significaut amount of parlcing
spaces in the Vail Village parlcing structtwe thAt are presently undenutilized diiring the
evening and early morning hours. The desired result of tiI1a free parking program is to
imprOve the conditaons of conducting husiness in Vail ilillage. A,dditiona,lly, ftee parlcing
~ during the evening md early nlonuag hours will improve support services to Vail Viilage
fxom employeesy service persoauel aaid vendors,
Orrer pme, the increase in 4a1es tax revEnues to the Tovvn of Vail, with effective marketing
og the' fw parlcing Prograxxi .from both the Town, and Vail Village Uusinesses, s1iould offset
any posSible adverse effeats fo pfirkixlg siruchue revenues, debt Service or, operatiQn costs.
A,s well, ft reduction in eost to employccs and veudors to work in and service ilail
Vi11ne, includitag 4hose 9ervices provided by the To'uvn ofVai1, should iffiprowe txae overall
coinpetitivo position of the Vail Village commereial center. It iS the antmt of the membeas
of the A,ssociation, through their owta individi}al nlatIceting efforts, to cooperate vuith the
Town of 1Jai1 and '1ts promotion of tiae fiee parking prugraxp, 'I'ws will be eggenhal to
a99ure ntS siacCe5S.
~
i
I
~
~ JAN.27.1997 2=18PM EAST WEST PRRTNERS N0.043 P.3i3
I r .
I
~ Page z
I Mayor/Counci]/'%'ovn Manager
I DDsCu8t4gaim IteHIls
~ ~y~e,etqc~~_Im~rovcme~~s:
I
a, The raembers of the Association desire tha,t the Town of Vail comanences the
coastruction of a sfirreet improvement praject tbat vuill provide for heating and paving, with
decorative pavcment ffiateriaYs, the en4lre length of Bridge Street and the CCI poxtians of
Gore Croek Drive and Hansen Ranch gtoad. The steet heating azid paving project muSt
imclude adequate prowisions for traffic circuiation, deliveries, tataliti,es, street lightiag,
drainl .ge and other assuciated iffiprovements.
b. The men,bers of the Association desire that an iuspirational monument to tae
aspixations af Yhe Soldiers of the l Oth iVlountain pavision be placed in Seibert Circle. A,s
the monqmeut as to be an oux ileighbprhaod, it is the inteiit of neighborhood propert.y and
business ovv~aers to give thcir $ecommendations to the Town Cou,ncil as to the finai design
of the anonuzneat and the plaza. We feel a I Oth Mount$in Division moAUment has liistorical
bt and value; aaad meets the criteria of Art in PubIic Places.
. l
~
i
~
Memorandurn
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Community Development
DATE: February 4, 1997
SUBJECT: Town of Vail/U.S Forest Service Land Exchange -
Staff: Russ Forrest & Tom Moorhead
9. PURPOSE:
The purpose of this afternoons worksession on the land exchange is to review and approve or
disapprove the values in the final appraisal. If the values are approved, the appraisal would then
be public information that woutd be used in the February 4th evening meeting. The purpose of
the evening meeting is to determine what properties are going to be included in the exchange
based on the approved appraisal. Once the Council decides what properties will be included in
the exchange, a draft exchange agreement will be prepared for the Town Council's review on
February 11 th.
2. BENEFBTS/R9SIKS:
Staff has periodically reviewed the benefits and risks of the exchange. The following are the
major benefits of the exchange:
` Resolve private and public encroachments (e.g., roads, water tanks) on USFS lands.
• Obtain potential housing sites (Town Managers Lot, Red Sandstone site, area east of
Garmish), and we will obtain 4 acres north of the Public Works facility to help create needed
hazard mitigation for housing and public works facility improvements.
* Town of Vail acquires open space that the USFS wants to dispose of that could be subject
to a private land exchange.
" There is a otential cash return to the Town associated with the exchange from selling land
back to property owners on Ptarmigan and Rockledge roads that currently have
encroachments on USFS lands.
* Exchange would remove USFS lands from within the TOV boundary except for the area just
south of Chair 1. Thus alleviating what has been a difficult issue with zoning on USFS lands.
The primary risk associated with the exchange is that we would be conveying Trappers Run to
the Forest Service. The USFS cannot give us a written guarantee that the property will never be
subject to a private exchange. We will have a trail easement and conservation easement on the
stream running through Trappers Run. In addition, the Land Ownership Adjustment Agreement
makes it difficult to do a private exchange without the Town's support. The Forest Service's draft
1
:
decision memo to approve the exchange states that the land has significant value for the
American people because of its environmental and recreational value. A private exchange
would, nevertheless, still be possible. After evaluating all the factors, we believe the risk is very
low that the property would ever be used for anything but an open space or outdoor recreational
use. 3. APPRAISAL
Attached is a spreadsheet which summarizes the values from the final appraisal. While the
appraisal has been provided to the Forest Service, it has not been released to the public pending
Council consideration of the appraised values. The "S" properties in the first column indicate the
properties the Town of Vail could acquire and the "O" properties indicate the properties the Town
of Vail would convey to the Forest Service. Based on the final appraisal it appears that selected
properties (properties the Town would acquire) would have to be eliminated to create a balanced
exchange. Two basic alternatives have been provided below that are intended to reduce the
difference in values between the TOV and USFS lands.
Alternative 1- Keep Both West Vail Properties:
This alternative keeps both west Vail properties in ihe exchange (S13 & S14) by
eliminating Parcel H(S1) and two properties the USFS owns (S7 & S11) that are
completely in the I-70 right-of-way (includes the Frontage Road). In eliminating S7 and
S11 the Town would also be committing to de-annex these areas from the Town. The
total difference is $62,500 under this alternative with the Town of Vail land having a
greater value than the USFS lands.
Alternative 2 - Lowest Difference
Alternative 2 provides the lowest difference in the values of the Town of Vail and USFS
lands. This alternative eliminates the Garmish property (S13), Parcel H(S1), and S7 (I-
70 right-of-way property). The total difference in this alternative is $57,500 with the Town
of Vail land having a greater value than the USFS lands.
4. ROCKLEDGE AND PTARMIGAN
The potential revenue from this exchange comes from selling the land the Town would acquire on
Rockledge and Ptarmigan roads to property owners that currently have encroachments on U.S.
Forest Service land. The value for Rockledge Road (S5) did significantly increase from $800,000
in the draft appraisal to $2,400,000 in the final appraisal. The changes from the draft to the final
appraisal also included an increase in value on Trappers Run from $2,850,000 to $3,675,000.
Staff would like to acknowledge that there is no guarantee that the Town will recover the full
appraised value on Rockledge (S5). The residents have expressed strong interest in completing
the exchange but they are concerned about the value placed on Rockledge. If Rockledge were
removed from the exchange, it would provide an opportunity for the Town to keep the lower
portion of Trappers Run. Off course, the Town would not obtain any revenues from Rockledge in
as the result of the exchange and would still leave the residents and the Forest Service with the
same issue that they have been trying to resolve for the last 20 years.
2
,
a
The situation on Ptarmigan Road is different in that there is a 4.3 acre parcel on the south side of
Ptarmigan Rd. that residents are very interested in protecting as open space. The value of the
Ptarmigan property (S10) has not changed significantly since the draft exchange. Several
residents have expressed a commitment to compensate the Town for acquiring S10 and
protecting it as open space.
5. I~EXT STEPS
The exchange process was initiated in 1994 with the adoption of the Land Ownership
. Adjustment Agreement. Since November of 1995, the USFS and the Town have been working
on the completion of the 57-step process for a Federal land exchange. This process is nearing
the end, with the signing of the exchange agreement. This is a legally binding real estate
agreement that could potentially be signed within the month if both parties agree to the lands to
be included in the exchange and the values for those lands. The appraisal for the exchange is
valid through the month of February and it is critical to sign the exchange agreement before the
end of the month to avoid delaying the exchange. After that agreement is signed, it will take 1-2
additional months to complete the Federal reporting steps and have the lands conveyed. The
next steps in the exchange include the following Council meetings:
February 4th: Afternoon worksession to review and approve/disapprove of the final
appraisal by motion.
February 4th: Evening meeting to determine what properties should be included in the
exchange agreement.
February 11 th Afternoon worksession to review the draft exchange agreement.
February 18th Evening meeting to consider a resolution to direct the Town Manager to
sign the exchange agreement and to consider the first reading of an
ordinance that would convey the Town owned land in the exchange to the
. U.S. Forest Service.
March 4th Evening meeting to consider second reading of the ordinance.
Other actions thal will be required after the e.rchange include:
* Annexation/De-annexation hearings, and
* Zoning hearings.
3
Sheetl ~
'
Town of Vail/USFS Land Exchange
Summary of Final Appraisal
Febraury 4, 1997
~ Alt 1 Alt 2--
I Final i Keep West Vail I Lowest
Appraisal Properties i Diffemce
Property !Description_ _ IAcres IOriginal Value
-fi -T- -t-- -i - r--
; i ~ Eliminate S1 , Eliminate S1 .
~
S7. S11 ~ S7, & S 13
' I
- - - ! - I - ~
- '
- , r-
I Properties_TOV could Acquire
- - - ,
! Subdivision
-------I Bighom ' i I
S1 IParcelH i 39.9! $680.000 700,000 ~
-T--------r- --r
i East Vail Water r ; i I
g2 1 Tank Site ~ 3.065 i_ $30,000 30,000 I$ 30.000 $ 30.000
-
; 8ooth Fall Trailhead and
; Water Tanks
S3--_-----!--- ~ 8.211 $75,000 I$ _ 80.000 $ 80.000 i$ _ 80.000
i W ot Pitkin CreeW1-70 ROW
S4 1238;' $12,500 L$ ----12,500 $ 12,500 $ 12,500
- ~
i Rodcledge Rd j
S5 I 1.781 $700.000 2.500.000 $ 2.400.000 $ 2.400,000
i I-70 ROW east of 6ighom Ck. I I 1
S6 i 1.981 i --$20,000 20,000 I$ 20,000 20,000
- ~
i I-70 ROW west i I
S7 ------jofBighomCk. ~ 14.693j -°$145.000 1-$----- 145.000 ~'----------I -
i I-70 ROW N. of -T------;------ ~ ~
~ Racquet Club
S8-------- --~--4.191-1 --$40.000 1 $ 40.000 ~$-------40.000 $ 40.000
i Red Sandstone
S9- - - i site
_5.735 --$200,000-`$- 200.000 If $ 200,000 $ 200.000
. ~1--- -
I Ptarmigan -
S10 entire.see j 5.418 $1,070,000 1,200.000 I$ 1,200,000 I$ 1,200.000
--------r------~--------~-
Ptarmigan - ~
i
~ street only
S10
- ~ , '
i i
,
I-70 ROW N of Sundial Condos - -----------1 $ ---I $ $
S11 ; _'1_24_352;______ _$245,000 ' $ 245.000 $ 245.000
S12 ~ Public Wor-ks ' 3.638 ~ $ 35.000 1 $ 35,000 $ 35.000
---l------1--------..._..-~ -
S13 _ iGarmish i 3.981 i 240,000 1 $ 240,000
- '
S14 _ :Town Managers_Lot___ 2_66j__ i $ 240.000 240,000 $ 240,000
Total 82 602; $3,217,500 ~ $ 5,687,500-~~$ 4,497'500 4,502,500
- - - - - - - - -
i Properties TOV could Convey to the USFS I ~
-
Trappers Run j i
~ Lots 16819 (upper area only) I ~
Parcel 01 34.211 $2.000,000 2.500,000 $ 2,500,000 $ _ 2,500,000
I Emire Trappers j -
~
Parcel 02 i Run (16, is. 2i) ! 47711 $2=850,000 1 $ 3,675.000 1 $ 3,675,000 L-$ 3,675,000
-----4 !
Vail Das Shone ~
~ -
Parce104 I 5.41 $210,000 1 $ 210,000 1 $ 210,000 210,000
i Vad Heights
Parcel OS i ' 23.9 1__ _$675.000. .i $ 675,000 675.000 $ 675.000
Total t 77.01 i $3,735 000 t$ 4
4,560,00 $ ,560,000 49560,000
,u:a~cd...~s ~ ,-=a.y .`a.~ 'i
..e`+'" `i~s'hM~}-""r~~-
Difference in Exchange Value _$517,500_ ($1>127>500) 1 $62>500 $57,500
Positive Value = TOV land > USFS land values
Negative Values in Q= TOV lands < USFS land values
Page 1
i~
db
T0WN OF VAIL
75 Soutli Frontage Rond Departmetit of Cont»turiity Development
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-21381479-2139
FAX 970-479-2452
January 31, 1997 '
Byron Brown
P.O. Box 547
Vail, CO 81658
Dear Byron:
Thank you very much for participating in the Land Ownership Adjustment process that the Town
of Vail and the U.S. Forest Service have been working on for the last year. Your input has been
very valuable. For your information, the Council reviewed the input from the January 9th public
meeting at the West Vai1 Lodge at its January 21 st worksession. The next steps in the exchange
include the follwing Council meetings:
February 4th: Afternoon worksession to review and approve/disapprove of the
final appraisal by motion.
February 4th: Evening meeting to determine what properties should be included
in the exchange agreement.
February 11th: Afternoon worksession to review the draft exchange agreement.
February 18th: Evening meeting to consider a resoluiion to direct the Town
Manager to sign the exchange agreement and to consider the first
reading of an ordinance that would convey the Town owned land in
the exchange to the U.S. Forest Service.
March 4th: Evening rneeting to consider second reading of the ordinance.
Except for the February 4th meeting datES, the above mentioned dates are tentative and
subject to change. Please feel free to call me at 479-2146 to confirm these dates and times.
Thank you again for your involvement and input during this process.
Sincerely,
,
f
Russell Forrest '
Senior Environmental Policy Planner
RECYCLEDPAI'ER '
f3yron 13rrnvn Loycttc Goodcll .Icanninc f;richson
I'.O. f3ox 547 1967 Circlc Drivc 1987 C'irclc Drivc
V;.iil, C'Cl R16Sf; Vail, CO 81657 Vail Co 81657
Ncvin Nclson Paigc Sodcrbrcn Ernst Glatzlc
2498 Arotia Dr 2449 Arotia Dr 2317 Garmitich Dr
Vail CO 81657 Vail CO 81657 Vail Co 81657
Cathcrinc I;dborg Kayc Fcrry Vcrnon* Taylor, ,Ir
127 Rochlcdgc Rcl 2395 Bald Mtn Road 102 Rocklcdgc )td
Vail C:o 81657 Vail Co 81657 Vail Co 81657
Clint Joscy Karin Schcidcggcr Mary Jo Alicn
95 Rocklccigc Rcl 2436 CllilI110111X Lanc 13ox 861
Uill) Cn 8 16$7 Villl CO 91657 Uflll CO 91659
Mil:c an(I I..aVon liorn nrt A6pIallillp I-Icrbcrt Schorpp
2308 Carmitich Box 157 2633 Crnrtina Lanc
Vail Cc) f; 1657 Vail Co R I CS~ Vail Co 81657
13ob Armotu- Rikti Mouw Kathy Langcnwaltcr
2668-n Arotia T3ox 884 Box 1065
Vail Co 81657 V..til Co 81659 Vail Co 81658
Kcnt Rosc Davc Colc Jack Carnic
f3ox 219 PO Box 5555 2920 Mann's Ranch Rd
Vail CO S 1658 Vail CO 81658 Vail Co 91657
Konrad Obcrlohr F:\cvcryone\russ\loaa.lbl
2656 Davos Trail
Vail Co 81657
,
, , .
r r ,
IPublic Works Esnployee Housing ?)evelopment
1Pub9ac 1Process for Community Participation
Febwuary 4, 1997
The 1Problern/Opportunity Stateanent:
The opportunity exists to provide housing for scasonal employees on Town-owned land adjaccnt
to the Public Works facility in conjunction with a requirement for three units of housing imposed
by the Town's Planning and Environmental Commission. Thcre is little to no affordable scasonal
housing within the Town of Vail. Thc cominunity cxperienccs the result of this problem primarily
as it affects our status as a world-class resort. Our economic vitality is threatened as nccessary
jobs go unfillcd or are fillcd with unmotivated workers.
Competition for employees is no longer just betwecn ski areas or between regions, but has now
bccomc an issue within thc Vail Valley. Employecs who find housing down valley are li.kcly to
find jobs thcrc, too. This problem has dircctly impactcd thc Town of Vail in its cfforts to fill
cmployment positions. During last ycar's ski season, bus and traffic control services were
reduccd because driver and Community Safety Officer positions remaincd unfillcd.
Pe-ocess Gavens:
1. Seasonal housing will be built on the Public Works Sitc to fulfill a requiremcnt of thc
Town of Vail Planning and Environmcntal Commission. A building pcrmit must be issued
by July 31, 1997 to fulfill this requirement.
2 The projcct is intended to address the housing needs of first, Town of Vail seasonal wage
earners; second, other critical goyernmental employees; and third, possibly other
employers located within the Town of Vail municipal boundaries.
3. Given that employee housing is one of the top priorities of the community and that
availability of land is one of the most significapt constraints to the development of
affordable housing, this opportunity will be optimized. Actual density on the site will be
determined through the conditional use process, based on analysis of site constraints, the
~ recommendations of staff and th,e development team, and with input from the community.
r
1
4. Although thc cxisting bcrm along 1-70 scrcens much of thc Public Works day-to-day
opcrations, somc or all of thc housing may bc visiblc abovc thc cxisting bcrm aftcr
construction.
5. Use of manufactured liousing may be considered as a cost effective alternativc for this site.
All construction will be consistent with the Town's Municipal Code and the Uniform
Building Code.
6. The site is zoned General Use and the proposed housing must be approved as a
Conditional Use by the Planning and Environmental Commission. The Dcsign Revicw
Board must approve the design of the building(s) and the site plan.
The Process:
Contract executed between Town and Design Firm February 14, 1997
Conceptual Design dcvelopment February 1997
Community Open Housc to review conccptual design alternatives March 1997
Planning and Environmcntal Commission Conditional Use hcaring March 24, 1997
Design Review Board Meetings April 2 or 16, 1997
Generation of Construction Documents/Building Permit Review April 16- Junc 15, 1997
Construction July 16 - Nov. 30, 1997
Temporary Certificates of Occupancy Novembcr 30, 1997
Move In December l, 1997
f:cvcryo ncVlndy\y7_admi n\pw_pubp ro.120
~
ti
7 ,
2
~
. .
Results taken from 4 concerts: The Billy Taylor Trio, Jazz (7/13), Introduction to Chamber Music I(7/15),
Detroit Symphony Orchestra, "Music from the Movies" (7/24), .
Chamber Music Classics IV, "Closing Night" (8/6)
256 Responses Total
1. Is this the first Bravo! Colorado iVlusic Festival concert that you have attended?
69°./oN0 ; 31 %Y
ES
Z• Y)o you plan to attend more than one performance?
23%NO' 77°'oTr
.
:s:
3. Did you plan a special trip to the Vail Valley to attend a performance?
, ' 76%NO
; 24%YES
= 4• Will you be staying overnight locally?
920/c YES
` (I201,10 ME* 53HOTELJ *.home inc[udes owners, staying wrtfi. friends, 8rentals. '
5. How did you learn about the Bravo! Colorado 1Vlusic Festival?
45 Print. advertisement ' 16 Magazine articl
e.
12 _ Local rad?o
88 Family/Friend `
6 . , Denver.racllo `
39 _ BrochurelMa?ler::
34 Newspaper articte TV adverttsement
Qther:..Attend everyyeai,: Concierge, `Iail UalIey Tourism & Convenfion Bureau, Impact Fax,.:PerfQrming Atts
Samp[er Series; KCFR; Norwest Sponsor, Colorado Guide Book; Billboard cri Denver, Travel ADent, Bolshot:
Relati.ve, Walking.by, Lrve here,:Volunteerin~Christie Lodge, Awon Conclerge;;on the BcavBoardTV Aiiction:
6. Will you be patronizing a Vail Valley restaurant after the concert?
;
' 449/c N0;.
7. Other activities that you plan to do in the Vail Valley:
64 Golf 30 Horseback riding
,
T35 ' Hikina ' 3 79 $ikmg _
b 7 ' Fishing 46 Tennts '
1$. Camping . $8 ; Slghtseeing 45: Raftin
85 Otlier culturaf events 146 > Shopping
g
Other. . Ballet; Rolierblading, Swimming; Kayaking, eonferencelWork, Touring, ;Canoe, Ba,lloomrib, Dancing,
ice=skating
i I~
Age . 2% .10-2,0 : 9%..20-30 •113% 3:0-50 12% 40-50 39%.50-65 :25%:"55+ '
, .
,
Annuai hou
sehold::income: . .
1.5% <$1.0K . 2%. $1OK= $19K. 9% $20K-$34K 13% $35K - $49K 23% $50K $99K .
46% I OOK. ..5% Reticed'.
V6rhere do you reside?
27% Vail/East Vail/West Vail 0%.Denver
4% EaQle Vail . 5%0
Metro Denver
Beaver Creek/Avon 5% Elsewhere ir~ Colorado: Frisco, : Dil(on,:Colorado SPrmgs Conifer
. . _ , ~
12% Edwards Telluride; Steamboat, Boulder, Eagle,.Mintu.rn, ?,urora, Glenwood
30%o Other: AR, AZ, CA; CT, DC, FL, GA,.IL, IN, KS;.LA, MA,. MI; MN, MO; NM, NC;.NE, NJ, NV;;NY,:,OH, :
OK,:OR, PA;.SC,.TN, TX, UT, VA, WA; WI, WY,Australia, Ontario;,Canada; Germany,:IvleYico; United Kingdom:
~
~ iViINUTES ~
a VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING
January 7, 1997
7:30 P.M.
A regular meeting of the Vail Tov?rn Council was held on Tuesday, January 7, 1997, in the Council
Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:30 P.M.
MENIBERS PRESENT: Robert W. Armour, Mayor
Sybill Navas, Mayor Pro-tem
Kevin Foley
Rob Ford
. Paul Johnston (joined discussion following Agenda Item No. 3)
Ludwig Kurz
Michael Jewett
MEfViBERS ABSENT:
TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob fVicLaurin, Town iVlanager
Pam Brandmeyer, Acting Town Manager
Tom Moorhead, Touvn Attorney
Holly McCutcheon, Town Clerk
The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation, of which there was none.
Item number tvo on the agenda was the consent agenda which consisted of the following items:
A. Approval of the Minutes for the meetings of December 3 and 17, 1996.
B. Resolution No. 1, Series of 1997, a Resolution Designating a Public Place Within the Town of Vail
for the Posting of iVotice for Public IVieetings of the Vail Town Council, Planning and Environmental
Commission, Design Review Board, and Other Boards, Commissions, and Authorities of the Town
of Vail.
Mayor Armour read each item on the Consent Agenda in full, and requested the Consent Agenda items be
_considered separately. Sybill fVavas moved to approve the Minutes for the December 3 and 17 evening
meetings. Kevin Foley seconded the motion. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0.
Sybill then moved for approval of Resolution No. 1, Series of 1997, and Ludwig seconded the motion. A
vote was taken, which passed unanimously, 6-0.
Thard on the agenda was Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1996, first reading of an ordinance amending
Section 18.04, Definitions, to add "Fractional Fee Club" and "Fractional Fee Club UniY", amending Section
18.22.030, Conditional Uses, allowing Fractionaf Fee Club as a Conditional Use in the Public
Accommodation Zone District, amending Section 18.60.060 (A)(7) Conditional Use Permit Criteria-Findings.
Gordon Pierce was present, representing the applicant, Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., along with Johannes
Faessler, and Cynthia Thornberg.
Town of Vail Planner, George Ruther, presented the item and reviewed changes which were discussed at
an earlier worksession. The ordinance had been tabled at the December 17 evening meeting to allow staff
to work on more specific language. Staff recommendation was for approval of Ordinance No. 22 on first
reading. George informed those present that there was an informational packet on the Austria Haus project
available in the offices of Communify Development for public viewing. He said that staff was available fo
provide information and answer questions.
Mayor Armour then opened up the discussion to the public, and the following Vail residents voiced fheir
opposition to the ordinance:
Rod Slifer said that to allow time-sharing at the expense of losing lodging was one of the most important
issues faced by Council. He said that time-share projects were not allowed within the Village core and
Lionshead during his seven years of service as Nlayor, and that two lodges in the Core areas had atready
been lost to condominium conversions. He stated that Vail could not afford to lose another. Mr. Slifer
challenged the 90% occupancy rate boasted by the fractional fee unit owrnership, stating that Beaver Creek
timeshares had average occupancy rates of only 65%, approximately. He asked Council to preserve Vail's
bed base and said that the use of lock-off units, as proposed in the Sonnenalp project, could not be
guaranteed or enforced.
1
Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes January 7, 1997
,
i
Jo Stauffer said he was in favor of time-share as long as it didn't result in a net loss of hotel rooms. He ~
echoed Mr. Slifer's comments pertaining to the use of lock-off units and asked Council members to think ~
about future sales tax revenues as opposed to a one time transfer tax. He predicted that allowing fractional
fee clubs would have far reaching consequences for the Town.
Dick Cleveland was concerned about the loss of accommodation units. He said the Sonnenalp project was
already too big and that parking was also limited. He said the proposed project had made no
accommodations for traffic and employee housing. Mr. Cleveland then suggested that every developer be
required to pay $100,000 minimum to mitigate impacts to the Town. In 1981 Council made a decision to
disallow time-share, he said, and he asked Council members to uphold the decision of the former Council.
At that time, Town Manager Bob McLaurin responded, stating that the live bed issue was. a top priority to _
staff when the Sonnenalp proposal came forward and is still at the forefront when working on the project.
He said that redevelopment of the Village was a critical strategy.
Local business owner, Dan Telleen cautioned Council about the use of lock-offs and changing the character
of the Town.
Architect for the project, Gordon Pierce, apprnached the audience stating that most of the arguments had
been heard before, and that some individuals had not been present for responses made at prior meetings.
He said it was a fallacy to say hotel rooms were better as opposed to a time-share. The facts show
differently, he said.
Johannes Faesster said concerns voiced by residents did not apply to the Sonnenalp project. He said the
hotel industry was changing all over the world, and that economically, it was unrealistic that a new hotel
would be built or redeveloped in Vail without some sort of lodging mix, such as fractional fee clubs. He said
businesses must now come up with innovative ways to redevelop, while continuing to meet the expectations
of their customers if they are to survive. Mr. Faessler then pointed out that improvements had not been
made in the Village to keep up with those on the mountain and suggested that something must be done
so Vail is worth the high dollar customers pay for it.
,
Council members felt that allowing the fractional fee club approach would contribute to Vail's revitalization,
and that the Town could retain control over such proposals by reviewing them on a case by case basis.
Sybill then moved to approve Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1996, and Mike Jewett seconded the motion.
A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 6-0.
Paul then joined the meeting at approximately 8:55 p.m. He had previously recused himself from the
discussion due to a possible conflict of interest.
The fourth item on the agenda was Town Manager's Report. In addition to the report included in Council
packets, Bob McLaurin said the Town had engaged a mechanical engineer to explore the feasibility of
heating the streets in the Village core. DetailJ of the analysis would then be brought back and discussed
with Council, he said. Last year, Bob explained, approximately $175,000 was spent on snow removal in
the Village core. Environmental issues surrounding heated streets remain to be discussed and reviewed,
he stated, but that such a concept could help facilitate loading and delivery issues, as well as enhancing
pedestrian safety.
Bob said the cost of the anatysis was covered in the Public Works operating budget.
Council members then reviewed their calendars and agreed on January 22 to schedule dinner with the
Avon Town Council. The two Councils are to discuss issues of mutual concern.
There being no further business a motion was made by Rob for adjournment. Mike seconded the motion
and the meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
Holly McCutcheon, Town Clerk
2 Vail Town Counal Evening Meeting Minutes January 7, 1997
Minutes taken by Holly McCutcheon
u. (*Names of certain individuals who gave public input may be inaccurate.)
3
Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes January 7, 1997
iVi I RI UTES LL
VAIL TOWN COUMCIL fViEETING
January 21, 1997
7:30 P.M.
A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, January 21, 1997, in the Council Chambers of the
Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:30 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Robert W. Armour, fViayor
Sybill Navas, Mayor Pro-tem
Kevin Foley
Rob Ford
Ludwig Kurz
Michael Jewett
NiEMBERS ABSEiVT: Paul Johnston
TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager
Pam Brandmeyer, Acting Town Manager
Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney
Holly McCutcheon, Town Clerk
The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Carol Alleman, manager of Gallatan Lodge expressed concern
about snow removal operations along Vail Valley Drive. She said that due to increased pedestrian traffic associated
with the new Golden Peak redevelopment, sidewalks along the road should be maintained at all times.
Next, Mayor Armour welcomed Vail Mountain School senior, Tag Hopkins, who updated Council on the summer he
spent in Mt. Buller, Australia, as part of the Vail Valley exchange program. Hopkins said it was an honor to represent
Vail in the program and that he'd had a great experience. He then introduced Kathryn Harrison and Joel Olver,
exchange students from Mt. Buller, Australia, who spoke about their positive experiences in Vail.
Jim Lamont, representing the East Village Homeowners Association said he felt confident that the Town would
maintain the sidewalks on the west side of Vail Valley Drive. He said it would make sense to heat them as well.
Item number two on the agenda was an update by the Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority. Jim Shrum,
Director, and Mike Gallagher, Chairman of the Authority thanked the Town of Vail and its staff for assistance with
the start-up of the new system. He said sixteen busses had gone into service since IVovember with five more on the
way. Additions ta service for the winter season have included an additional route to Leadville, a skier express bus
on weekends from Gypsum, expansion to Dotsero on the commuter route, mid-day service between Gypsum and
Vail, and evening service to Minturn. Also, Jim said the Trails Committee had approved a$250,000 contribution
toward completion of the Dowd Junction bike path. Currently work is being done on an assessment that will help
the Authority determine immediate and long-term needs of the system, he said.
ThoPC9 on the agenda vvas Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1997, first reading of an ordinance repealing and reenacting
the Investment Policy set forth in Chapter 3.52 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail. Town of Vail Finance
Manager, Christine Anderson presented the item and explained that the purpose of the ordinance was to change
Town's Investment Policy to include language recommended by the Government Finance Officer's Association. Staff
recommendation was for approval of Ordinance 3 on first reading. Mayor Armour read the title in full, and Christine
reviewed the changes in detail. Rob Ford moved to approve Ordinance fVo. 3, Series of 1997, with a second from
Kevin Foley. Sybill Navas suggested language as to why the change was being made be included in the ordinance.
Rob amended his motion to include the change, and P(evin seconded the motion. A vote was then taken and passed
unanimously, 6-0.
Agenda item number ffour was Ordinance IVo. 1, Series of 1997, first reading of an ordinance requesting to amend
Sections 18.27.030, 18.29.030, and 18.30.030 of the Zoning Code to allow van storage/transportation related
businesses in the Commercial Core 3, Arterial Business, and Heavy Service Zone Districts as a conditional use and
add Sections 18.04.415 and 18.04.385 providing definitions for vehicle storage yard and transportation business.
MayorArmour read the title in full. Town of Vail Planner, Dominic IVlauriello presented the item and gave the follovving
background:
The proposed ordinance defines and allows transportation businesses, such as Colorado Nlountain Express and
similar shuttle services, and car rental establishments, to locate in the Commercial Core 3(West Vail), Heavy Service
(West Vail gas stations), and Arterial Business (Cascade Crossing and Amoco) zone districts subject to a conditional
use permit with specific review criteria. Currently the code does not specifically address those types of uses. The
amendment also proposes to establish a definition and review criteria for a vehicle storage yard which is currently
allowed in the Heavy Service zone district subject to a conditional use permit.
At a meeting on December 16, 1996, the PEC recommended approval (unanimously) of the proposed amendments
with minor modifications. Dominic explained the review criteria and stated that the ordinance would incorporate
conditional use standards under one chapter in the Town code. Staff recommendation was for approval of the
proposed amendments to the Zoning Code to allow "transportation businesses" as a conditional use in the CC3, ABD,
and HS zone districts.
Sybill made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1997, on first reading, and the motion was seconded by
1
Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes January 21, 1997
Kevin. Mayor Armour was opposed to the change, as he said West Vail was beginning to resemble a parking lot and
recommended a sunset clause be incorporated. Rob Ford suggested a process to gather public input be put into
place, and Sybill Navas felt it would be beneficial fior rental car companies to have locations in Vail. Council members
requested a change be made to address repair/servicing issues..
A vote was then taken and approved, 5-1, Mayor Armour voting in opposition.
Agenda item number five was Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1996, second reading of an ordinance amending Section 18.04, Definitions, to add "Frar,tional Fee Club" and "Fractional Fee Club Unit", amending Section
18.22.030, Conditional Uses, allowing Fractional Fee Club as a Conditional Use in the Public Accommodation Zone
District, amending Section 18.60.060 (A)(7) Conditional Use Permit Criteria-Findings. Town of Vail Planner, George
Ruther reviewed changes as suggested at an earlier work session. Staff recommendation was for approval of the
ordinance on second -reading. Architect, Gordon Pierce was present representing Sonnenalp Properties, Inc. Johannes Faessler and Cynthia
Thornberg were also present on behalf of the Applicant. Mayor Armour then welcomed comments from the public.
Jim Lamont, representing the East Village Homeowners Association and long-time resident Jo Staufer expressed
concerns regarding the mix between accommodation units and fractional fee units.
Rob Ford moved to approve Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1996, on second reading with a minor change referencing
GRFA, and Kevin Foley seconded the motion.
During the discussion, Mayor Armour stated that consideration should be given to lock-off units and lock-off unit
square footage when determining accommodation unit equivalency.
A vote was then taken and passed, 5-1, Mayor Armour voting in opposition.
Next on the agenda was a report from the Town Manager. Bob McLaurin stated he had nothing to add to his earlier
report which was discussed at the work session that day.
Mayor Armour reminded his fellow Council members of dinner which was scheduled the following evening (January
22) with members of the Avon Town Council to discuss issues of mutual concern.
There being no further business a motion was made by Kevin Foley for adjournment. Mike Jewett seconded the
motion and the meeting was adjourned at approximately 9:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
Holly McCutcheon, Town Clerk
Minutes taken by Holly McCutcheon
(*Names of certain individuals who gave public input may be inaccurate.)
2 Vail Town Coundl Evening Meeting Minutes January 21, 1997
;
u
oRDINANCE No. I
Ser6es of 1997
c4N ORDBNA?NCE R,MENDINC TBTLE 18 ZONING OF T9-IE TOVNfV OF VAIL N1UiJICIPAL CODE, SECTIOPVS 18.27.030, 98.29.030, AND 18.30.030 TO ALLOUV TRANSPORTATION
BUSINESSES AS ,4 CONDBTBONAL USE Bld THE COMAAERCBAL CORE 3(CC3), ARTER9i4L
Bl1SINESS (A?BD), AND HEAVV SERVICE (HS) ZONE DISTRICTS; CREATING
COIVDITIOIVAL USE CRITER&A FOR !/EHICLE STORAGE VARDS; AND ESTABLISFEINfs
SECTlOIVS 18.04.415 AND 98.04.385 TO PROVIDE DEFItVITIONS FOR VEHICLE STOR4GE
VARD R?ND TRANSPORTATeON BUSViVESS.
WHEREAS, transportation businesses provide a valuable service to the guests and
citizens in the Tovvn of Vail; and
WHEREAS, transportation businesses reduce traffic congestion and help relieve parking
constraints in the Town of Vail by transporting persons by shuttle van rather than each guest
arriving in a separate vehicle; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Code does not address uses such as transportation
businesses; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Code currently does not define a vehicle storage yard and does
not provide review criteria for such a use; and
WHEREAS, transportation businesses and vehicle storage yards can have deleterious
effects on neighborhoods and adjacent properties; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has
recommended approval of this amendment to the Vail Municipal Code at its December 16, 1996
meeting; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail made the
finding that adding this conditional use, with the additional reviev?r criteria, to those uses fisted in
the CC3, ABD, and HS zone districts, will continue to ensure compatibility with other uses in
those zone districts, while providing an additional service to the residents and guests of the
Tovvn; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council considers it in the interest of the public health, safety, and
welfare to amend said Sections of the IViunicipal Code.
IVOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUIVCIL OF THE TOWfV OF
VAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
[Note: Text which fis strie~ os being deieteci and text vvh6ch as shadecl is being added.]
Page 1 of 5
.
Section 1.
Chapter 18.04, Section 18.04.415, of the Vail Municipal Code is hereby added and reads as
follows:
18:04.41.5 vehjcDe storage yarci
- "Uetiiele storage yara" means an~area ewhere FVehicle5 are:tempararilya patked wh~fe awaitmg
~
repair arwdisposition IkVehicles storemin a ~etiicle stoageyarci„must~tie:hcensed~vei~icfes and
: . . . . . . .
no one tiicle may rernain in7such"~"a storageyyard foi=~rnore?than one hundredtwenty (1;20)
corisecutive or~nori-consecutt~e'days~in;a~one yeaEpenod ~ A_~ehicle~storagegyarc! cioes not
incWde the repa~r and servic~ng~of'~vehicles or,the removal and sale of~v'ehicleeparts`or other
. . .
accessories:~ '
Section 2.
Chapter 18.04, Section 18.04.385 of the Vail Municipal Code is hereby added and reads as
follows:
18:04.385 Transportatioffibusiness
• "TransportationHbusiness"~,meansoa business'whicFi provides trarisportat~on formpersons inxthe
form.of a~sliuttle "ser~vicef(e.g ,~va,n-;tranaportation),or~byFpro~iding automobiles~for customers
(e.g ,kcar;ren#al) ~Transportation`businpsses do no# inclutle`busmesses-~prouici~ng~~ehicles~for
. ,~W _ _ .
the,,transportati "o-n ofi gootls or products including, ,buf_;not hmited tojrwOpanel trucks, rnouing -vans
and~trucks; "and.,other.,sirriilar vehicles.
Section 3.
Chapter 18.27, Section 18.27.030, of the Vail Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as
follows:
[Commercial Core 3]
18:27 030 Conditional use"s
Q:- Transpoitationtbusinesse9;74.subject to the followmg:;conditions (in~addifion.~to those founci
in~:Section 18A60 "Conclitional U~e; Permits"):~
1': All vehicles;shall ,be'par.ketl upon approveci~payed"parkirig areas;=
2°.; All v' fiicles shall be ;atlequateiy~screened from,,public r?ghts of"way~and adjacenf
properties,'consistmg of landscaping~and berms, in cornbmation with walls and
Page 2 of 5
f,ences, where~deemed necessary~to retluce`#he deletenous~effects of~Vehicle
storage;~x
3. The number;;size and location~of~ueh~clesaperm,ittetl to be stared~shall~be
deter?nned by~#he~Planningand Environmental~Commission based on the
adeguacy of`the sife for ~ehicie~:storage Consid ,eration si~a0 be g!ven to the
. . . . _ . ~ m.adequacy oV'fanclscapmg~and other sc'reening rnethods to revent-~irnP ~acts _to
.r....R.b~
adjacent prapertjes, and th-1-1-1 antl/or residentiai uses;
4: Parking assoaafied with transportation,businesses shail not reduce or
compromisexthe,parkingcreqwred.for other uses on' site
Section 4.
Chapter 18.29, Section 18.29.030, of the Vail Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as
follows:
[Arterial Business]
18.29.030 Conditional Uses
A. Add the following:
Transportation.businesses, subject to.the #oNow?ngrconcJifions (in`radditionp-to those~found
in° Section 18.60 "Conditional Use Permits"):
1. All vehicles.,,sliall be-parked upon approved°pavedIparking~areas;
2. A!! vehicles shall 6e adequately screenetl from pub,lic rights of,waylancJ adjacent
properties, consisting of Jandscaping, and berms, m ,combination~with walls and
fences, whereAeemed necessa ..ry to reduce fhe deleterious effects of tiehicle
storage
,3. The numbee;.~,size,and location of, Vehicles permitted' #o1be~stored shall~be
d"eterroined',by the:Planning and,EnUironmental Commissiongbased§on;ttie
adequacy of the,`site #or vehicle..storage; ~Consideration shall be g~ven, to:the
adequacy of:landscaping-and~,ofher screening methods to~,preVent~irnpacts:9to
ad~aceii#~properties ,and other~~commercial and/or r~e"sidential uses;;
4:` Parking~associated vuith ztransportation .businesses~s`hali not r~duce or
compromise~theKpaekmg;required,.for otheruses on=site
Page 3 of 5
A
Section 5.
Chapter 18.30, Section 18.30.030, of the Vail Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as
follows:
[Heavy Service]
18:30:030 Cori`diteonal Uses
;
O;= TransPortation businesses~anda,uehicle's#orage yar.ds, sub~ecf to~t1"l16 wing,~onditioris
(in additian yto :th . .,w..,. _ose :found~~in Sectton 41~8 60; Cantlitional .Use"~Ferrnifis''~)
,w. ,.~y . .
1;;; Ai1 vehicles shall bye parked upon approveci payed parking areas;:
_
2: All uehicles shall be.adequately screened from pOblic rights of=way and adjacent
pr.operties, consistinghof landscaping;'and berms, in combmafion,with walls:and
fence"s;,whece deemed necessa "ryito reduce~the deleterious effecfs76f :vehicle
storage;;;
3. The"number, sizei°and"Ibcation of vehicles permjtteci to be~s#ared shaliabe
deterrnined;by the Plann,ing-and Environmental Commission based on the
. .
adequacy~,of theksifejor'dehicle storage Coiisiderafion~shall be giuen=to the
ad°equacy of"landscaping an~d ofher~screening mefhods:to prevent impacts to
"acent:p~roerties and r~ttier.cqrnmercjal and/or residential uses;
4°, ~arkirig associated°with~ttansportation b~usinesses~and~~ve,hicle~;storage yartls
.
shalll'not-reduce or coinpromise the,~parking'required f6r°other uses onsite:
Section 6.
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 7.
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.
~
Page 4 of 5
,
Section 8.
The amendment 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 fhat 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 amended. The amendment of any pravision
hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded
unless expressly stated herein.
Section 9.
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.
IfVTRODUCED, READ OIV FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
ONCE IiV FULL, this 21st day of January, 1997. A public hearing on this ordinance shall be
held at the regular meeting of the Town Council of the Todvn of Vail, Colorado, on the 4th day of
February, 1997, in the Municipal Building of the Town.
Robert W. Armour, iVlayor
ATTEST:
Holly McCutcheon, Todvn Clerk
INTRODUCED, READ, ADOPTED AND ENACTED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED (IN FULL) (BY TITLE ONLY) THIS 4th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1997.
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
Holly NlcCutcheon, Town Clerk
Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1997 Page 5 of 5
b
M
` 0RDBNANCE NO. 3
SERIES OF 9997
AN ORDINAiVCE REPEALpNG AND REENACTING 1'IiE INVESTMENT POLICY SET FORTH
9N CHAPTEFt 3.52 OF TFdE MUIV6CIPAL CODE OF TFiE TOWN OF VA@L
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council adopts the required investment policy for the Town of
Vail which represents the financial boundaries within which the Town's cash management process
will operate; and
WHEREAS, changes to investment policies have been recommended by the Government
Finance Officers Association and the Council feels the need to update the Town's internal policies
to comply with the recommended changes to maintain strong internal controls; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUIVCIL OF THE TOWN OF
VAIL, COLORADO THAT THE IfVVESTMENT POLICY SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 3.52 OF THE
MUiVICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF VAIL BE REPEALED AND REEIVACTED AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1
Chapter 3.52
BN!lESTflAEN7 POLICV
Sections:
3.52.010 Statement of Purpose
3.52.020 Scope
3.52.030 Objective
3.52.040 Standards of Care
3.52.050 Safekeeping and Custody
3.52.060 Suitable and Authorized Investments
3.52.070 Investment Parameters
3.52.080 Reporting
3.52.090 Policy
3.52.090 S4atement ofi Purpose
This Investment Policy of the Vail Town Council for the Town of Vail represents the financial
boundaries within which its cash management process will operate.
3.52.020 Scope
This investment policy applies to all financial funds of the Town of Vail (hereby referred to
as the "Tovvn"), except the Pension Trust Fund.
3.52.030 Objec$ove ~
The primary objectives, in priority of order, of investment activities shall be:
1. Safety.
1
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1997
a
,a
Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. Investments shail
be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio.
The objective will be to mitigate credit risk and interest rate risk.
A. Credit Risk.
Credit Risk is the risk of loss due to the failure of the security issuer or backer.
, Credit risk may be mitigated by:
* Limiting investments to the safest types of securities;
* Pre-qualifying the financial institutions, brokers/dealers, intermediaries, and
advisors with which the Town will do business; and
* Diversifying the investment portfofio so that potentiaf losses on individual
securities will be minimized.
B. Interest Rate Risk.
Interest rate risk is the risk that the market value of securities in the portfolio will fall
due to changes in general interest rates. Interest rate risk may be mitigated by:
Structuring the investment portfolio so that securities mature to meet cash
requirements for ongoing operations, thereby avoiding the need to sell
securities on the open market prior to maturity, and
* By investing operating funds primarily in shorter-term securities.
2. Liquidity.
The investment portfolio shall remain sufficiently liquid to meet all operating requirements
that may be reasonably anticipated. This is accomplished by structuring the portfolio so that
securities mature concurrent with cash needs to meet anticipated demands (static liquidity).
Furthermore, since all possible cash demands cannot be anticipated, the portfolio should consist
largely of securities with active secondary or resale markets (dynamic liquidity).
3. Yield.
The investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a market rate of
return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account the investment risk
constraints and liquidity needs. Return on investment is of least importance compared to the safety
and liquidity objectives described above. The core of investments are limited to relatively low risk
securities in anticipation of earning a fair return relative to the risk being assumed.
Speculative investments will not be allowed. Speculative investments are those attempting
to gain market premium appreciation thraugh short term market volatility resulting in increased risk
and loss exposure. The Town will not purchase a security which cannot be held to maturity. This
does not mean an investment cannot be sold prior to maturity.
2
Ordinancs No. 3, Series of 1997
° 3.52.040 Standards of CaPe
1. Prudence.
The standard of prudence to be used by investment officials shall be the "prudent person"
standard and shall be applied in the context of managing an overall portfolio. Investment officers
acting in accordance with written procedures and this investment policy and exercising due
diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security's credit risk or market
price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion and the
liquidity and the sale of securities are carried out in accordance with the terms of this policy.
Investments shall be made with judgement and care, under circumstances then prevailing,
which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence exercise in the management of their own
affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering the probable safety of their capital as
well as the probable income to be derived.
2. Ethics and Conflicts of.lnterest.
Officers and employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal
business activity that could conflict with the proper execution and management of the investment
program, or that could impair their ability to make impartial decisions. Employees and investment
officiafs shall disclose any materiaf interest in financial institutions with which they conduct
business. They shall further disclose any personal financial/investment positions that could be
related to the performance of the investment portfolio. Employees and officers shall refrain from
undertaking personal investments transactions with the same individual with whom business is
conducted on behalf of their entity.
3. Deiegation of Authority.
Management responsibility for the investment program is held by the Town Manager and
appointed designees. No employee may engage in an investment transaction except as provided
under the terms of this policy and any procedures which may be established by the Town Manager.
The Town Manager shall revievv the quarterly investment report (see Section 3.52.080).
There is hereby created an investment committee, consisting of the Town Manager,
Finance Director, and the Finance Controller. Members of the committee will meet at least
quarterly to determine general strategies and to monitor results. Minutes of the decisions made
by the investment committee shall be kept on file in the Town Clerk's office. The committee shall
include in its review and deliberations such topics as: potential risks, authorized depositories, rate
of return, maturity structure and investment transactions.
It shall be the duty of the Finance Controller or his/her appointed designee to manage the
day-to-day operations of the portfolio, and place actual purchase/sell orders with institutions. In
3
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1997
the absence of the controller, the Finance Director shall assume these duties. The Finance Controller shall establish a system of written internal controls, which shall be reviewed annually by
the independent auditor.
Management of a portion of the portfolio and placing of buy/sell orders for a portion of the
portfolio may be delegated to an independent investment manager designated by the Town
Council. The transactions of any selected independent investment manager will be subject to the
Town's investment policy and will be reviewed and verified by the Finance Department.
The authority for the investment philosophy and selection of investment managers for the
Town of Vail Employee Pension Plan and the Town of Vail Police and Fire Employees Pension
Plan shall be the responsibility of the Pension Plan Trustee as defined in the pension plan
document.
3.52.050 Safekeeping and Custody
1. Authorized Financial Dealer and Institution.
Qualified banks - can only be commercial banks and the Town's investment with the bank
may be in excess of one hundred thousand dollars. The Town's Finance Controller shall obtain and
review whatever documents are necessary to verify the bank's continued stability including the
monthly listing of securities pledged for collateralization to monitor the bank's collateralization of
Town deposits.
Non-qualified banks - can be either commercial banks or savings and loans or savings
banks and the Town's investment with the bank will not be in excess of one hundred thousand
dollars. The Finance Controller shall inquire with bank officials and/or review an independent bank
evaluation to determine the banks meets the standard selection criteria established by the
Investment Committee.
The Town shall select a primary bank, which bank the town uses to process daily deposits
and checks, at the discretion of the Investment Committee every three to five years. A formal
request for proposal should be used in fihe selection process.
Securities dealers not affiliated with a bank shall be required to be classified as reporting
dealers affiliated with the New York Federal Reserve Bank, as primary dealers. Broker/dealers
which are not primary dealers may be used if they have been approved by the investment
committee. The investment committee shall develop and document the methodology for qualifying
non-primary broker/dealers.
2. Internal Controls.
The Finance Controller and Finance Director are responsible for establishing and
maintaining an internal controt structure designed to ensure that the assets of the entity are
4
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1997
° protected from loss, theft, or misuse. The internal control structure shall be designed to provide
reasonable assurance that these objectives are met. The concept of reasonable assurance
recognizes that (1) the cost of a control should not exceed the benefits likely to be derived; and (2)
the valuation of costs and benefits requires estimates and judgments by management.
Accordingly, the Finance Controller shall establish a process for annual independent review
by an external auditor to assure compliance with policies and procedures. The internal controls
shall address the following points:
a. Control of collusion. Collusion is a situation where two or more employees are
working in conjunction to defraud their employer.
b. Seaaration of transaction authority from accounting and record keeping . By
separating the person vvho authorizes or performs the transaction from the people
who record or otherwise account for the transaction, a separation of duties is
achieved.
c. Custodial safekeepinq. Securities purchased from any bank or dealer shall be
placed with an independent third party designated as primary agent for custodial
safekeeping. The primary agent shall issue a safekeeping receipt to the Town
listing the specific instrument, rate, maturity, and other information. Securities may
be purchased from the primary agenYs brokerage department and safekept by the
same bank's trust department. d. Avoidance of physical delivery securities. Book entry securities are much easier to
transfer and account for since actual delivery of a document never takes place.
Delivered securities must be properly safeguarded against loss or destruction. The
potential for fraud and loss increases with physically delivered securities.
e. Clear desianation of authority to subordinate staff members. Subordinate staff
members must have a clear understanding of their authority and responsibilities to
avoid improper actions. Clear delegation of authority also preserves the internal
control structure that is contingent on the various staff positions and their respective
responsibilities.
f. Written confirmation or telephone transactions for investments and wire transfers.
Due to the potential for error and improprieties arising from telephone transactions,
all telephone transactions should be supported by written communications and
approved by the appropriate person. Written communications may be via fax if on
letterhead and the safekeeping institution has a list of authorized signatures.
5
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1997
3. Delivery vs. Payment '
All trades where applicable will be executed by delivery vs. payment (DVP). This ensures
that securities are deposited in the eligible financial institution prior to release of funds. Securities
will be held by a third party custodian as evidenced by safekeeping receipts.
3.52.060 Suitab6e and Authorized Investments
- 1. The town shall invest in the following accounts, or securities:
A. Fully collateralized or insured interest bearing checking accounts, savings
accounts, and certificates of deposit at commercial banks with amount not
to exceed one hundred thousand dollars if the bank is not designated as a
qualified institution by the investment committee.
A commercial bank may use any securities authorized by the Public Deposit
Protection Act a5 coNatera{.
B. Certificates of deposit at savings and loan associations insured by the FDIC
or other agency of the federal government with amount not to exceed
ninety-nine thousand dollars.
Deposits with savings banks insured by the FDIC with amount not to exceed
ninety-nine thousand dollars.
C. (1) Any security issued by, guaranteed by, or for which the credit of any
of the following is pledged for payment: The United States, a
Federal Farm Credit Bank, the Federal Land Bank, a Federal Home
Loan Bank, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, the
Federal National Mortgage Association, or the Government National
Mortgage Association;
(2) a. Any security issued by, guaranteed by, or for which the credit of the
following is pledged for payment: An entity or organization which is
not listed in paragraph (1) of this subsection C but which is created
by, or the creation of which is authorized by, legislation enacted by
the United States congress and which is subject to control by the
federal government which is at least as extensive as that which
governs an entity or organization listed in paragraph (1) of this
subsection (C).
b. No security may be purchased pursuant to this paragraph (2) unless,
at the time of purchase, the security is rated in its highest rating
6
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1997
' category by one or more nationally recognized organizations which
regularly rate such obligations.
D. Colorado Investment Pools. The town may participate in a Colorado Public
Investment Pool, the Colorado Local Government Liquid Asset Trust or
other similar local governrnent pools organized in conformity with Part 7 of
Article 75 of Title 24, CRS, which provides specific authority for pooling of
local government funds.
E. Any money market fund that is registered as an investment company under
the federal "Investment Company Act of 1940", as amended, if, at the time
the investing public entity invests in such fund:
(I) The investment policies of the fund include seeking to maintain a
constant share price;
(II) No sales or load fee is added fo the purchase price or deducted from
the redemption price of the investments in the fund.
F. IVo load mutual funds that invest in mortgage backed securities issued by
the Government fVational Mortgage Association ("GIVMA") or the Federal
iVational Mortgage Association ("FfVMA"), or the Federal Home Loan
Mortgage Corporation ("FHLMC").
G. Repurchase agreements - with either qualified commercial banks or a
primary securities dealer for which a properly executed master repurchase
agreement has been entered into by the town. Repurchase agreements
involving pooled collateral shall be avoided. The securities used as
collateral shall be safekept in accordance with Section 3.52.050
Safekeeping and Custody.
2. If a specific maturity date is required for cash flow purposes, bids will be requested
for instruments which meet the maturity requirement. If no specific maturity is required, a
market trend (yield curve) analysis will be conducted to determine which maturities would
be most advantageous. After selecting a type of instrument at least two bids should be
obtained from similar institutions. Two bids are not required if treasury bills or notes are
purchased at a treasury auction or for overnight or open-term repurchase transactions.
The Town may place an investment with a local institution that is not the highest
bidder, provided the bid is not more than twenty-five basis points below the highest bidder.
The rate of interest must be at least equivalent to the average rate of return
available in the market place.
7
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1997
.
It is the responsibility of the Finance Controller to demonstrate compliance with this section. A local institution is defined as a bank or savings and loan association doing
business inside the corporate limits of the Town of Vail and/or Eagle County.
3. Interest allocation method.
All investments will be in the name of the Town of Vail and in most cases it will be
, a general policy of the town to pool all available operating cash into a Treasury Cash
Management investment portfolio. However, a specific investment purchased by a specific
fund shall incur all earnings and expenses to that particular fund. Interest earnings from
pooled funds shall be allocated to all participating funds in the following order.
a. Payment of interp-st earnings shall be allocated to designated funds from its
specific investments.
b. Payment to the general fund of an amount equal to the total annual bank
service charges as incurred by the general fund for all operating funds as
included in the annual operating budget.
C. Payment to each fund of an amount based on the average monthly cash
balance included in the common portfolio for the earning period.
4. Funds borrowing from pooled cash fund.
All funds may borrow cash from the pooled cash fund in order to cover shortfalls in
their equity in pooled cash. The interest rate charged shall be equal to the interest rate
earned on the pool at the time the money is borrowed.
3.52.070 Investment Parameters
1. Portfolio diversification.
The town will diversify use of investment instruments to avoid incurring
unreasonable risks inherent in ouerinvesting in specific instruments, and individual financial
institutions.
Maximum Percent
of Portfolio
Diversification by Instrument:
Money Market and Interest Bearing
Checking Accounts with
Commercial Ban6cs 50°/a
Money Market Funds 50%
U.S. Treasury Obligations
(Bills, Notes and Bonds) 100%
U.S. Government Agency Securities
(per Section 3.52.060 1. C(1)) 100%
U.S. Government Agency Securities
(per Section 3.52.060 1. C(2) a) 25%
8
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1997
~
' Repurchase Agreements 75%
Certificate of Deposit
Commercial Banks or Savings Banks 100%
Certificate of Deposit
Savings and Loan Association 25%
Local Government Investment Pool 100%
Diversification by Financial Institution:
Repurchase Agreements
No more than fifty percent of the total investment portfolio shall be
secured in Repos with any one institution.
Certificates of Deposit - Commercial Banks
No more than twenty percent of the total investment portfolio shall
be secured in any one commercial bank's CDS.
If the amount of any of the above investments are in excess of the percentage allowed, it
is not considered a violation of this policy if the amount is corrected within thirty days.
2. Maturity scheduling.
Investment maturities for operating funds shall be scheduled to coincide with
' projected cash flow needs, taking into account large routine expenditures (payroll, bond
paymerits) as well as considering sizeable blocks of anticipated revenue (sales tax,
, property tax). The period from the date of purchase of a security to its maturity date will be
five years or less except for transactions initiated by an appointed independent investment
manager, or if authorized by the Town Council.
3.52.080 Reportiaug
1. Methods.
The Finance Controller will submit a quarterly investment report which discloses
investments on the last day of each month. This report will be distributed to the Town
Manager, Town Council members, and the Finance Director. The Finance Controller will
present at least annually the investment report to the town council.
2. Performance Standards.
The investment portfolio will be managed in accordance with the parameters
specified within this policy. The portfolio should obtain a market average rate of return
during a market/economic environment of stabfe interest rates. Portfolio perFormance
should be compared to appropriate benchmarks on a regular basis.
9
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1997
3. Marking to Market. '
A statement of the market value of investments having a remaining maturity
exceeding 2 years shall be issued at least quarterly. This will ensure that the minimal
amount of review has been performed on such long-term investments in terms of value and
subsequent price volatility.
4. Monitoring and adjusting the portfolio.
The Finance Controfler- will routinely monitor the contents of the portfolio, the
available markets and the relative values of competing instruments, and will adjust the
portfolio accordingly.
3.52.090 Policy
1. Exemption.
Any investment currently held that does not meet the guidelines of this policy shall
be exempted from the requirements of this policy. At maturity or liquidation, such monies
shall be reinvested only as provided by this policy.
2. Policy review.
The investment policy shall be reviewed annually by the investment committee. A
recommendation will be made annually to the Town Council for any proposed changes to
the investment policy.
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 repeaied and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any
provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein.
10
Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1997
, INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IIV FULL ON
FIRST READING this 21sfi day of January, 1997, and a public hearing shall be held on this
Ordinance on 4he 4th day of February, 1997, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail
fVlunicipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
Holly IVicCutcheon, Touvn Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READIIVG APVD ORDERED PUBLISHED
in full this 4th day ofi February, 1997.
,
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
Holly McCutcheon, Tovvn Clerk
C:\ORD97.3
11
Ordinance No. 3, Serlea W 1997
RESOLUTION N0. 2
Series of 1997
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING ADDITIONAL SIGNERS PATRICIA
CORBITT AND GWEN THOMAS AND REMOVING SIGNERS RUSS JOHNSON
AND WALTER INGR.AM ON AN IMPREST CHECKING ACCOUNT FOR
LIBRARY DEPOSIT TRANSACTIONS FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL,
PERMITTED BY THE CHARTER OF THE TOWN, ITS ORDINANCES, AND
- THE STATUTES OF THE STATE OF COLORADO.
WHEREA5, the Town has the power to designate banks or
financial institutions for funds of the Town; and
WHEREAS, the Town wishes to desiqnate Patricia Corbitt and
Gwen Thomas as signers on this aecount.
WHEREA5, the Town wishes to remove Russ Johnson and Walter
Ingram as signers on this account.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town
of Vail, Colorado, as follows:
1. Patricia Corbitt and Gwen Thomas are hereby designated as
signers for the existing imprest library checking account for the
funds of the Town of Vail.
2. Russ Johnson and walter Ingram are hereby removed as
signers for the existing imprest library checking account for the
funds.of the Town of Vail.
3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its
passage. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of
February 1997.
Robert Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
Holly McCutcheon, Town Clerk
RECEIVED JAN 2 9 190 '`o-: T~
GRAY-STON .
P.O. BOX 721 - MINTURN, CO 81645
CONSTRUCTI~~ ~~VELOPMENT, INC. 970/827-5231 970/827-5886 FAx a E-MAIL: G rayston@Colorado. Net
Town of Vail
75 S. Frontage Rd.
Vail, CO
January 28, 1997
Dear Bob,
After a hectic holiday season and some January settling in, I am belatedly writing to express our
great delight in working with the Department of Community Development in the disaster repair
of Dominos Pizza, in the Vail Run Building, after their flood.
Everyone that we worked with (including Dan, Chazlie, Lauren, and Russ) was aggressively
positive in helping us to get the store open by Christmas.
We built that store in 1988 for Arthur Cole (the owner), as well as a store in Glenwood and one
in Avon. Arthur Cole is an old friend and supporter and when he calls, we respond and serve his
needs. He called me on Christmas Eve to emphatically express his thanks, and even surprise at
our success. I reminded him that we had a measure of luck and the complete support of the town
in helping us to open up with nothing but green lights.
In closuig I'd like to say that whereas I've had my times of being unhappy and even perturbed
with Town of Vail policy or procedure, I didn't want to miss the opportunity to express my
gratitude for the friendly, positive, and professional assistance experienced at Community
Development.
Sincere ,
~ .
- -
;
,
i
///,44a C. ay
Presi ent
Gray-Stone Construction and Development, Inc.
cc: Susan Connelly
~
~
\ 1A
e4
TOWN OF ~AIL
75 South Frontage Road
Yail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2100
FAX 970-479-2157
flAED9A ADVISORlf
January 29, 1997 -
Contact: Suzanne Silverthorn, 479-2115
Community Information Office
ilABL TOWN COUNCIL BiIGFIL9GF9TS FOR JANIJARY 28
Work Sess6on Braefs
Council members present: Armour, Foley, Jewett, Johnston, Kurz, Navas
--PEC Review
During Council's review of the Jan. 27 meeting of the Planning and Environmental
Commission, Jim Lamont of the East Village Homeowners Association asked for
clarification of a letter he received from the Community Development Department. The
letter was an update to those who've participated in the town's review of the Gross
Residential Floor Area (GRFA) policy. In it, three alternatives were identified for
additional study based on input from the Town Council at its IVov. 26 work session.
One of the alternatives under review is to determine what would happen if GRFA were
eliminated. Lamont questioned if the Council really intended to keep the elimination
option on the review list. After thinking back about the iVov. 26 discussion, Council
members said they were comfortable keeping it on the list for further analysis. IVext
steps in the process include a work session with the PEC at 2 p.m. on Feb. 10, then a
Town Council briefing on Feb. 11 (a step which was added by Council at yesterday's
meeting), followed by a final meeting with PEC on Feb. 24. Then in late February, the
three alternatives and a recommendation would be presented for review by the Town
Council. For additional details, contact Russell Forrest in the Community Development
Department at 479-2146.
--West Vail Interchange Update
Larry Grafel, Public V1lorks/Transportation Director, and Joe Kracum of Centennial
Engineering, presented an overview of the proposed construction schedule for
roundabouts at the 11Vest Vail interchange. Ground could be broken yet this
construction season if the town secures funding for the project, Grafel said. West Vail
neighborhoods and businesses appear ready to handle the construction. A survey and
citizen roundtable meetings were used to gauge citizen preferences. Overall, there is a
high tolerance for maximizing construction beyond the traditional 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
Monday through Friday work schedule, according to Grafel. He said the flexibility will
be used to create alternate bids for the project based on efficiencies gained by the
flexible work schedule.
(more)
RECYCLEDPAPER
. . . TOV Council Highlights/Add 1
Also yesterday, a construction phasing scenario was presented. In April, the closure of
Chamonix Road would be necessary to lower the grade of the intersection's north side.
Other work would include installation of a temporary bridge over Gore Creek, utility
work on Chamonix, wall foundation work at the existing Gore Creek bridge and
creation of temporary ramps to access I-70 on the north side. In May, construction
would be maximized with grading and utility work on Chamonix Road, closure of the
underpass for sidewalk/bike path relocation and retaining wall work, installation of
temporary I-70 ramps on the south side, grading and utility work on the North Frontage
Road and work on the Gore Creek Bridge. During June, July and August, the work
would include retaining walls and ramps at I-70 eastbound, grading and utility work on
the North Frontage Road, Gore CrePk bridge work, ramps at I-70 westbound and
grading and utility work on the South Frontage Road. In September, there would be
curb and gutter work on the north and south sides of the intersection, removal of the
temporary bridge over Gore Creek and landscape walls constructed on the north and
south sides of the roundabouts. In October, curb and gutter work would continue on
the north and south sides, as well as paving. Landscaping would follow in the spring.
Grafel said the town is sensitive to the needs of the West Vail business community
regarding visibility and access issues. He said the town intends to work closely with
West Vail businesses and the residential neighborhood throughout the project. For
more information, contact Grafel at 479-2173.
--Negotiations for Public Works Seasonal Housing Development Team
The Council voted 6-0 to approve a staff recommendation to hire the team of Mark
Donaldson and Viele Construction to design an architectural plan for construction of
seasonal housing units at the Public Works site north of the Golf Course. The town is
required by the Planning and Environmental Commission to build a minimum of three
employee housing units on the site as part of the PEC's approval of the Public Works
shop expansion. Andy Knudtsen, senior housing policy planner, said six teams
responded to the town's request for qualifications which is consistent with the number
of responses typically received in past solicitations. After a contract is signed,
Knudtsen said the team's first step will include an analysis of the site to determine
options for density. Councilman Michael Jewett and several other council members
expressed an interest in maximizing the site's density. Knudtsen said the team will be
asked to determine the needs of the town's seasonal workers to help shape the type of
units to be designed. The development is intended to house Town of Vail seasonal
employees and other public employees with the units completed by December of this
year. Knudtsen will return to the Council at the Feb. 4 work session to review the
public process associated with the project. For more information, contact Knudtsen at
479-2440.
--Information Update
Council members were informed of a request by the Eagle County Commissioners to
hold a joint work session. The date was set for March 25 in Vail. Possible discussion
topics include tax revenue distribution and a permanent funding source for tourism
marketing.
(more)
O
\
TOV Council Highlights/Add 2
Town Attorney Tom Moorhead said a trial is scheduled in Eagle County District Court
this week to decide a lawsuit over the Lodge Tower expansion. The suite, Wells-Saltz
vs. Lodge Tower, Inc. and the Town of Vail, will be heard Jan. 30 and 31 vuith Judge
Jones presiding. The dispute is over the town's 1983 approval to build the
International Wing, which is presently under construction. The action was brought by
two adjacent property ovuners who object to the new building which will provide an
. expansion to the Lodge, including new hotel rooms and meeting and convention
facilities. The court has, to date, denied the plaintiffs request to halt construction. _
Town Manager Bob McLaurin reminded Councilmembers he will be attending the World
Alpine Ski Championships in Italy Jan. 31-Feb. 15. McLaurin chairs the Municipal
Services Committee for the 1999 championships. Vail Police Chief Greg Morrison and
Public WorkslTransportation Director Larry Grafel will accompany McLaurin on the trip.
Morrison will review security issues, while Grafel will analyze the event's transportation
systems--all in preparation for the 1999 championships in Vail.
--Council Reports
Sybill IVavas gave an update on the most recent meeting of the IVorthwest Colorado
Council of Governments in which a cut in job training services funding was discussed.
Also, during an annual retreat by the Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, Navas
said discussions included the possibility of a merger between the Chamber and the Vail
Valley Tourism and Convention Bureau to consolidate information valleywide.
Bob Armour reported on the Vail Council's dinner with the Avon Town Council and
planning meetings for the 1999 championships.
--Other
Paul Johnston said he wanted to be sure the Seibert Circle art piece selection process
includes provisions for emergency access through the area. He said the fire at the
Wall Street BuiJding last summer reinforced the need for such access. The Town
Council will have the final say on selection of the art piece. Five finalists have been
selected through a jury process under the auspices of the Art In Public Places (AIPP)
program. An open house is planned to review the finalists on March 20 with a
recommendation forvvarded to the Council by AIPP.
Niike Jewett inquired about the possibility of offering parking passes for patrons of the
hockey program at Dobson Arena. Public Works/Transportation Director Larry Grafel
said the Council has chosen not to have special parking programs for users of Dobson
Arena, the Library or other facilities beyond the parking programs currently in place.
Jewett also asked if the Town was allowing private contractors to use the town's snow
dump, referring to a comment he had heard that the town was hauling snow out of the
Vail Commons property. Public Works/Transportation Director Larry Grafel said no.
Kevin Foley distributed copies of the Vail Recreation District master plan and asked
Council members to fonward their comments by Feb. 4.
(more)
:
TOV Council Highlights/Add 3
--NEW BUSINESS
The Council reconvened following its executive session to discuss a requested
supplemental of $100,000 to fund the acquisition of a new computer system. Finance .
Director Steve Thompson said wheri funding had originally been allocated for a 1997
expenditure of $500,000, the figure was an estimate of the potential cost. Following a
year-long study, the final contract will allow for substantial revision of the financial and
public safety software, he said. The total cost for the project is esfimated to be
$610,000. Thompson also said the new acquisition could increase the overall
operating budget for the town by as much as $30,000 annually, half of which will likely
be absorbed by a staff reduction in the data processing division and half coming from
the general fund. The current computer system was purchased more than 10 years
ago and is outdated and inefficient, which promoted the search for an improved system.
Council agreed to approve the supplemental appropriation by ordinance later in the
year.
UPCOMING DISCUSSION TOPICS
February 4 Work Session
Site Visit and Discussion of Ordinance No. 2, Flaum SDD
Consideration of Requests from the Vail Village Commercial Property Owner's
Association re: Vail Village Issues
Discussion of Properties to be Included in Land Ownership Adjustment Agreement
Review and Approval of Public Process for Public Works Seasonal Housing Project
February 4 Evening Meeting
Ordinance No. 1, Second Reading Zoning Code to Allow Van Storage/Transportation
Related Businesses in Specified Zone Districts
Ordinance No. 3, Second Reading Investment Policy
Resolution Designating Additional Signers on Library Deposits
Ordinance No. 2, First Reading Flaum SDD
TOV/USFS Land Exchange Public Hearing -
Information Update on West Vail Interchange Project Development and Preliminary
Construction Schedule
February 11 Work Session
Georgie Manzanares, 10 Year Anniversary
PEC/DRB Review
GRFA Update
Review Draft Land Ownership Adjustment Agreement
Vail Village Club Construction Compliance Review
February 18 Work Session
Discussion of Ford Park Management Plan
February 18 Evening Meeting
Ordinance No. 2, Second Reading Flaum SDD
Resolution to Execute Land Ownership Adjustment Agreement
Presentation of Ford Park Management Plan
# # # #
JAN-21-1997 10:47 WARNER OFFICE 303 949 4364 P.02
x c : CBwu~-Q-
Mr, & Mrs. Ti.m Ruotolo
2092 Zermatt Lazie, Unit 1ci
Vail, CO 81657
Januaxy 17, 1997
Mr. Rich Setka
Warn.er Developments
Vai1 Catemons Supexiatendent
Dear Rich:
We are quite happy with all aspects of our new Vail Commons
home. The quality af the cvnstruction is partieularly
pleasing. We' x'e sure ma.ny hassles were encountered along
the vaay.
.
Tharaks also gor your pratnptly address3ng our ptuich list
aaeeds priar t4 the arrival of our houseguests this weekenc3.
Tkieir stay will be bettex for it.
This is in appreciatiion of your efforts. Thanks again.
Sincerellr,
/
Tim & Kim Ituotolo
. . x~.:r~
, . . . ~r~ ~ .
.
. ToWN'oFvAri. o ' 6 .
, . ~ .
• Input/Inquir7 Response Recrnrd .
The ateached comments cveze retentiy recegved by the °Tovvtt agyaig, yye encourage yail
. residents a,rid guests to give us such utpug and vve siaawe for timely responses. PLEASE
ADDRESS TC FESE CONCERNS WrrHN FrVE VYOFIaNG IaA1'S AND RETTMr1 THis
COMPLEI°ID FORM TO PAM BRANDNfEYEP,
,
DEPt~ IMM, TO HAiND LE INQLJIRX
. " IN7D ItIID UA L T0 HAiND LE IIVQLTIZY ~j .
J
~
{ ~ATE rov zzEcErVED ZTpur/INQtrazY
, .
~
PFiON'c CALL (indicate date) . LFI°I"E:Z (attac.hed)
~
RE:PONSE CARD (attached) . ~ .
. ~'E OF R ~Pntv~ ~c~ec~C onel: ' .
. LETTER (attach copy) _
. I'HQNE CALI. (iaidicate ciate) .
OF RF PON2 Oit 6 ZNcWEZ TO Tt`rnrrrJ~- • , , . . .
~ DA c OF RE:PONSE FOIZI~I IZE7JR.zV7ED BY HEFARTyE-~L T TO PAM BRr1NDiMEya.
' A copy oi thij inquiry snd Eorre4 wiii rernain oa BIe a4 tke TO V Comrzsurtity Relalions offim qs soon ay lhiy focaa is cetuned m p%m
. • 8mndcrteyer. this inquiry:viil be mnsidered dased.
• -
l:rf1,VC'CCUc{~RYf1t.",ITT,2'tvv~~.rlrn.-nl-~•.,.'.,.......
RECEI VEO J,Q N 2. 9._.~,~_
1997
Edelweiss Condominium Association
103 Willow Place • Vai1,.Colorado 81657
. .
January 22, 1997 -
Vail Town rouncil
75 South Frontage Road West Vail, CO 81657
Dear Town Council, As the proNerty manaGer for both the Edelweiss and
the Summers Lodge, I am writiny you regarding truck parking
in Vail Village. In fact, I have written a letter a year
for the past six years and the situation has only Cone fron
bad to worse. Basically, my Associations are in support of
a plan that would Nlace the responsibility of where trucks
should parlc on the buildings and businesses who employ those
trucks. Why should my Associationsli.nherit the problems
created by someone else?
In a related issuer I would also support a rlan tnat
would eliminate evening parkiny on Willow BridCe Road (to
the east of the Sunmers Lodge). Oftentimes the entry to
tYais groperty is blockecl which makes emergency access on.
this side of the buildinC impossible in the winter.. Why are
a se]ec.tfew allowed to park here when there is fr2e parkin.G
in the Narkinc structure and.you are try.ing.to_promote the
idea of apedestrian village? May I suygest that once truck delivery has been accomplished, this parking area should be- come a no parking zone until. 6 A.M. (or whenever tricks.are =
allawed to park ayain).. Whatever change you can make would -
be qreatly appreciated. Thanks for your consideration.
Sincerely, . . Rick Haltermann Managina Agent Managing Agent: Burke Management Works, Ltd.
(303) 926-2877 .
From; (1Q Conmitlee To: Totm o4lfail Date: 9/30197 Time: 96:55:53 Page 9 of 2
X C C~u~tc-+C~-Q.
The Northwest Colorado Council of Governments ~b
WATER QUALITY AND QUANfITY COMMITTEE 6
1UT'
QQ ~
L IEGff SILATff VE UPDATE
January 30, 1997
ALERT ON S 470 SB 47, "A Bill For An Act Concerning Regulatory Impairment of Property Rights", introduced by Senator
Tom Norton (R- Greeley) passed out of the Senate Local Government Committee on January 28. The vote
was a party line vote, with the two Democrats, Senators Reeves and Weddig, voting against the bill. The
bill now goes to the Senate Floor. SB 47 is a reintroduction of the takings bill SB 69 from the last
legislative session, a bill that Governor Romer vetoed. As introduced, SB 47 is the exact same bill that
ended up on Governor Romer's desk last year. QQ Staff again recommends a position of OPPOSIT'ION
to this bill. Your statement of opposition is very important this time around because CCI and CML have
both indicated that they will not oppose this bill if certain amendments are added.
Please call or fax (a fax is the best way to get a personal message to your senator) your senators and
express your opposition to this bill!
Senatmir Ken CMounber 866-4866 Gunaaason, Pntlcia
Senatoir S211y Hopper 866-4873 Sunmit
Senatoir Dave Watteniberg 866-4866 Eagle, Grr;and
~enatoir Tom Norkon 866-3342 Bi19 sponsor
The fax number for Senate Republicans (all of the above) is 866-2012
You may want to mention some of the following points when talking to your senator:
~ SB 47 is the wrong approach - it redefines existing legal standards and imposes unfunded procedural
mandates on local governments. It should be replaced with HB 1156, a bill introduced by Representafive
Hagedorn, which would speed up the process of judicial review in cases where local government land use
decisions are being challenged. HB 1156 is the best way to address the perceived "takings" problem, not
by changing standards as Senator Norton's bill would do.
13SB 47 would seriously limit local governmenYs powers and ability to regulate actions within its
jurisdiction, including actions to protect water quality such as streamside or septic system setbacks.
• Accepted conditions normally transfer with property and subseyuent owners would not have a right to
assert a takings after the fact. Under SB 47, when properiy is transferred, this established limitation
apparently dissolves. There would be no statue of limitations on asserting a takings claim for a routinely
imposed regulation.
° SB 47 is counter to the Smart Growth recommendations. Smart Growth spoke of the need to "encourage
better use of existing planning and growth management techniques." SB 47 is designed to have a chilling
affect on local government conditions upon develoQment.
° SB 47 fails to balance property rights with the equally prevalent court affirmations of government
responsibility and the appropriateness of government conditions upon the use of property.
From: fiQ Committee To: Town of Vail Da2e: 1/30187 Time: 16:56:56 Page 2 of 2
Some of the other biRs that QQ is keeping a careful eye on:
~ HB 1113 (Representative Bryan Sullivant) -A Biill For An Act Concerning Individual Sewage
Disposal Systems
Status: passed out of House State, Veterans and Military Affairs on 1/23/97. The bill now goes to the
House floor_ QQ Staff testified in favor of the bill in Committee.
Brief Analysis: The bill would, among other things, allow local health departments to collect fees for
ISDS permits that reflect the actual costs of the services. Provides for stricter penalties on ISDS systems
that are failing. We are opposed to certain amendments that came out of committee hearings which gave
the state a greater role in ISDS.
QQ Staff Recornmendation: Support as introduced.
V HB 1156 (Representatives Hagedorn and Schwarz) - A Bill For An Act Concerning Prceedures to
expedite Judicial Review of I.and Use Decisimns by Local Goveraunent Entities
Status: To be heard in House Local Government Committee on Monday, February 3, at 1:30 pm.
Brief Analysis: This bill is designed to speed the process of judicial review in cases where local
governments have made land use decisions through civil procedure rule 106 (a) (4). This bill is a response
to the argument that "takings" proponents use that land use decisions affecting them are often arbitrary or
beyond the scope of local governmenYs authority.
QQ Staff Recommendation: Support as introduced.
? HB 1211 (Representatives Schwaiz, K. Alexander, Hagedorn, Kreutz, Musgrave, Paschall, Salaz, and
Arrington) - A bill For An Act Concerniaeg the Prohibition of the Expenditure of Public M[oneys by
any Local Governmental Unit for Costs Relating to any Organization Whose Merrebership Consists
of Similar Local Goverrunental Units.
Status: Assigned to House State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee
Brief Analysis: This bill looks to be a direct attaclc on organizations such as DRCOG and NWCCOG and
other similar organizations set up by statute. Would take this issue to the voters as a referendum.
QQ Staff Recommendation: Oppose. Please call members of this committee ASAP: Mike Salaz, Mark
Paschall, Barry Arrington, Bob Bacon, Nolbert Chavez, Jeanne Faatz, Ken Gordon, Phil Pankey, Penn
Pfiffner, Todd Saliman, Bryan Sullivardt, and Ron Tupa. The number for the House is 866-2904.
V HCR 1001 (Representatives Anderson, Entz, Tool, and Lamborn) - a bill that would use lottery revenues
for school district capital construction and would ta,ke revenues away from conservation and recreation
programs.
Status: Assigned to Education Committee, passed to the House Floor
Brief Analysis: Under Amendment 8 Colorado voters authorized using lottery funds to preserve the beauty
of the state. HCR 1001 would put the question of'whether or not to take money away from parks and
recreation to the voters as a referendum. School infrastructure is a big problem, but the amount of money
this bill would give to school infrastructure is not going to solve the problem. This issue should be dealt
with in another way, not by taking away money that Colorado voters specifically designated for preserving
the beauty of our state.
QQ Staff ReconumendaNon: Oppose.
Also: Representative Steve Johnson (R- Ft. Collins) has reserved a bill title that would allow him to
introduce something similar to last year's SB 145 and 219 which allowed one governmental entity to claim
a takings on another governmental entity (read Colorado Springs vs. Eagle County). Jo Evans is keeping a
close watch on this possibility and will alert us immediately if it shows up.