HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-10-18 Support Documentation Town Council Work SessionTOWN COUNCIL
WORK SESSION AGENDA
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
75 S. Frontage Road W.
Vail, CO 81657
1:00 P.M., TUESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2005
NOTE: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and
cannot be relied upon to determine at what time Council
will consider an item.
1. George Ruher ITEM/'1'OPIC: PEC/DRB Update (30 min.)
2. Peter Runyon ITEM/7'OPIC: Home Rule Presentation. (20 min.)
3. Matt Mire ITEM/TOPIC: Discussion of First reading of Ordinance No. 24, Series
George Ruther of 2005, an ordinance deleting Title 4, Chapter 4, Articles A and B,
Vail Town Code as they relate to time share disclosure and
registration requirements; amending Title 12, Zoning Regulations, to
clarify the time share regulations, and setting forth details in regard
thereto. (30 min.)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with
modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 on first
reading.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On September 12, 2005, the Town of
Vail Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing
on the proposed amendments. Upon review of the amendments, the
Planning and Environmental Commission voted 7-0-0 to forward a
recommendation of approval of the request to the Vail Town Council.
Please refer to the staff memorandum to the Vail Town Council dated
October 18, 2005, for further details.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development
Department recommends that the Vail Town Council approves
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005.
4. Warren Campbell ITEM/TOPIC: A work session to discuss Ordinance No. 25, Series of
2005, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance #9, Series of
1998 amending Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse,
and setting forth details in regard thereto. (60 min.)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen to a presentation by
Staff and the applicant and engage in a discussion regarding the
proposed amendments to Special Development District No. 22, Grand
Traverse.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On September 26, 2005, the Town of
Vail Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing
on a request to amend Special Development District No. 22, Grand
Traverse. The purpose of the amendment to the Special
Development District is to eliminate the Gross residential Floor Area
limitations within the Grand Traverse residential development and
increase the number of lots from 22 to 23 lots. Upon review of the
request, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted 4-0-0 to
forward a recommendation of approval ~of the request to amend
Special Development District No. 22, Grand traverse, to the Vail Town
Council. Please refer to the staff memorandum to the Vail Town
Council dated October 18, 2005, for further details (attached).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community .Development
Department recommends that the Vail Town Council tables the public
hearing on Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2005, until November 1, 2005.
5• ITEMlTOPIC: Information Update. (10 min.)
West Vail Planning Update
• Development Update
6• ITEM/TOPIC: Matters from Mayor & Council (30 min.)
7. Matt Mire ITEMlTOPIC: Executive Session.
Pursuant to C.R.S Section 24-6-402(4)(b), Conference with Town
Attorney for the purpose of receiving legal advice on specific legal
questions; and C.R.S. Section 24-6-402(4)(a)(e), to determine a
position, develop a strategy, or to instruct negotiators regarding
the purchase or acquisition of real property. (25 min.)
ITENUTOPIC: Adjournment. (3:55 p.m.)
NOTE UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW:
(ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE)
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION
WILL BEGIN AT 12 NOON, TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2005 IN THE VAIL TOWN
COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please
call 479-2106 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information.
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
PUBLIC MEETING
October 10, 2005
TON~+IQFVAb ,
PROJECT ORIENTATION -Community Development Dept: PUBLIC WELCOME
MEMBERS PRESENT
Chas Bernhardt
Doug Cahill
Anne Gunion _
Bill Jewitt
Rollie Kjesbo
George Lamb
David Viele
Site Visits:
MEMBERS ABSENT
1. Webb Office - 710 Lionshead Circle
2. Hassett Residence -1895 Gore Creek Drive
3. Taggart Residence - 4110 Spruce Way
Driver: George
Public Hearing -Town Council Chambers
12:00 pm
2:00 pm
1. A request for a worksession to discuss a recommendation to the Vail-Town Council for proposed
text amendments to Title 11, Sign Regulations; Title 12, Zoning Regulations; Title 13,
Subdivision Regulations; Title 14, Development Standards Handbook; Vail Town Code, (a more
complete description of the request is available for review at the Community Development
Department) for proposed corrections and clarifications to the Vail Town Code, and setting forth
details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Rachel Friede
ACTION: Tabled to October 24, 2005 ,
MOTION: Lamb SECOND: VOTE: 7-0-0
Rachel Friede presented the memorandum, detailing the changes that Staff had made since
subsequent meetings.
Some discussion ensued regarding the difference between "substantial improvement" as is
included in the Hazard Regulations, and "demo/rebuild".
Bill Jewitt commented that he disagreed with certain aspects of public parking/convention center
parking, as each was listed in the Code.
2. A request for a final review of a variance from Section
Parking, pursuant to Chapter. 12-17, Variances, Vail
addition, located at 4110 Spruce Way/Lot 24, Block
details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Michael and Elizabeth Taggart
Planner: Matt Gennett
ACTION: Approved
12-6F-8, Density, and Section 12-6F-11,
Town Code, to allow for a residential
3, Bighorn Addition 3, and setting forth
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Lamb
Page 1
VOTE: 7-0-0
Matt Gennett presented the project according to the memorandum.
No Commissioner comment was added. The applicants were unable to attend the meeting,
therefore no comment was added.
No public comment was added.
Mr. Cahill asked Staff if the applicant had complied with Staff's requests and concerns regarding
the design, which Matt answered affirmatively.
3. A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-7H-4, Permitted
and Conditional Uses, Second Floor and Above, Vail Town Code, to allow for a professional
office located on the second floor, located at 710 Lionshead Circle, Units .A and B (Vail Spa)/Lot
1, Block 2~, Vail Lionshead Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Kyle and Lorraine Webb
Planner: Matt Gennett
ACTION: Approved
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Viele VOTE: 7-0-0
Matt Gennett presented the project according to the memorandum.
Doug Cahill asked if any permanent second floor office spaces existed currently. Matt
commented that he wasn't aware of any such long-term uses.
Rollie Kjesbo asked if clarification on the kitchen would be necessary. Doug Cahill confirmed
that if Staff could approve that request when it was submitted, that would be fine. He stated that
the upcoming request was essentially already reviewed positively by the Commission members.
4. A request for a final review of a variance, from Chapter 14-3, Residential Access, Driveway and
Parking Standards, and Section 12-6D=6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-
17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of a garage within the front setback
and the construction of two curb cuts, located at 1895 Gore Creek Drive/Lot 26, Vail Village
West Filing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Nancy Hassett, represented by Fritzlen Pierce Architects
Planner: Elisabeth Eckel
Front Setback Variance request
ACTION: Approved with conditions
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Lamb VOTE: 6-1 (Gunion
opposed)
Residential Parking Standards Variance request
ACTION: Approved with conditions
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Bernhardt VOTE: 5-2-0 (Gunion
and Cahill opposed)
1. This approval shall be contingent upon the applicant receiving Design Review Board
approvalof the design review application associated with this variance request.
2. Prior to final design review approval, the applicant shall submit a topographic survey
which reflects the data from the most recently revised 100 year flood plain survey.
3. The applicant shall ensure that the Design Review Board submittal reflect no more
than a total of twenty four feet (24') of pavement for both curb cuts.
Page 2
~ Elisabeth Eckel gave a presentation based upon the"contents of the staff memorandum.
Lynn Fritzlen spoke on behalf of the applicant and addressed the variance request for the
allowance of a second curb cut. She stated it would be advantageous for the applicant to be
able to pull out facing forward rather-than backing out.
Chas Bernhardt asked how they came up with 24' for the total space required for the curb cut.
Lynn Fritzlen responded it is a standard for this type of driveway.
Pat Dauphinais spoke on behalf of himself and an adjacent property owner, Nicholas Emigholz,
and stated they are both in favor of both of the variance requests.
Doug Cahill asked the applicant's representative how large the landscape island is between the
two proposed curb cuts.
Lynn Fritzlen responded it is 8' wide by 36' long.
Bill Jewitt asked how much paved area there would be with ahammer-head instead of the two
curb cuts.
Lynn Fritzlen replied that it would be about the same.
Bill Jewitt said he does not like the idea of two curb cuts, but if it results in more landscaping then
it would be preferable.
Rollie Kjesbo asked why PW is not in favor of two curb cuts.
Elisabeth Eckel responded it is more the Planning Department than PW that is not in favor of the
two curb cuts.
Rollie Kjesbo stated he is in favor of two curb cuts for safety reasons.
George Lamb concurred.
Anne Gunion stated she disagrees with the other commissioners on the double curb.. cut and is
not in favor of granting either variance.
David Viele articulated his support for both variance requests based upon the criteria and
findings for a variance.
Chas Bernhardt stated he is also in favor of both variance requests based upon similar variances
having been granted in the past for neighboring properties, and for safety reasons.
Doug Cahill stated he is in favor.of the variance request for the garage located in the front
setback, but is in opposition of the variance. for two curb cuts.
5. A request for a final review of a major exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7H-7, Exterior
Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, and a final review of a conditional use permit,
pursuant to Section 12-7H-2, Permitted and Conditional Uses; Basement or Garden Level, and
. 12-7H-3, Permitted and Conditional Uses; First Floor on Street Level, Vail Town Code; and final
review of architectural deviations, pursuant to Section 8.3.3.A, Review Criteria for Deviations to
the Architectural Design Guidelines for New Development, Lionshead Redevelopment Master
Page 3
Plan, to allow for the development of 107 multi-family residential dwelling units, located at 728
West Lionshead Circle/Lot 2, West Day Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Vail Corp., represented by Braun Associates, Inc.
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: Tabled to October 24, 2005
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Jewitt .VOTE: 7-0-0
Warren Campbell gave a presentation per the staff memorandum, highlighting the changes that
had occurred to the plan since the previous meeting.
Jay Peterson; and Tom Braun gave a presentation outlining the changes that had been made to
the height of the building since the last meeting.. The solution for screening the mechanicals on
the roof, the height of the landmark tower, and the flat areas were described in detail. They also
discussed the architectural changes made to the southeast corner of the structure and the
addition of several roof-top terraces. Finally, the pedestrian connection between the Ritz Carlton
Residences and the Marriott for the use of Vail Spa was discussed.
Jim Lamont stated he was comfortable with the physical model but it will be useful to have a
digital model of the proposed structure when performing a master planning process in West
Lionshead.
Several members of the Commission expressed concerns about the height deviations being
requested for the mechanical screening solution and the landmark tower. Several members felt
that the height deviations requested did not meet the criteria provided in Resolution 18, Series of
2004. Other members expressed thoughts .that the mechanical screening solution was
appropriate. In general, the Commission was comfortable with the amount of flat roof on the
structure, but directed staff to look deeper into the.thought behind the 500 square foot limit found
in the Master Plan. The Commission felt that the landmark feature should be something other
than another clock tower as several currently exist within Town. It was suggested that public art
should be incorporated into the project and that the Art in Public Places Board should be
consulted. A concern was raised that the eaves of the roof around the structure be broken up
with some extending further than others. In response to the need for a digital model several
members felf that a project of this size should have a digital model, however, other felt that the
physical model was adequate. The general consensus was that a computer model should be
started with the ultimate goal of using the model in the study of the master planning for the new
properties acquired by Vail Resorts in West Lionshead, not for the final review and approval of
the proposed Ritz-Carlton Residences.. In the future digital models should be mandatory for
larger projects with a physical model being secondary and constructed only if needed to make a
more informed decision.
6. A request for final review of a final plat, pursuant to Chapter 13-4, Minor Subdivisions, Vail Town
Code, to allow for the subdivision of the Conference Center development site; final review of a
conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-9C-3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow
for a public convention facility and public parking facilities and structures; and final review of
architectural deviations, pursuant to Section 8.3.3.A, Review Criteria for Deviations to the
Architectural Design Guidelines for New Development, Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan,
to allow for a public convention facility and public parking facilities and structures, located at 395
East Lionshead Circle/ Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead Filing 1, Lot 3 and 5, Block 1, Vail
Lionshead Filing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Pylman & Associates, Inc.
Planner: Bill Gibson
ACTION: Tabled to October 24, 2005
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Jewitt VOTE: 7-0-0
Page 4
7. A request for a correction to the Vail Land Use Plan to designate the Lionshead Redevelopment
Master Plan Area, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Bill Gibson
ACTION: Tabled to October 24, 2005
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Dewitt VOTE: 7-0-0 '
8. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a rezoning of Lots 1-3, Vail das
Schone Filing 1', Lot 1 and Vail das Schone Filing 3 from Commercial Core 3 (CC3) fo Public
Accommodation (PA), located at 2211 North Frontage Road/Lots 1-3, Vail das Schone fling 1
and 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Vanquish Vail I LLC, represented by Bharat Bhakta
Planner: Matt Gennett
ACTION: Tabled to November 14, 2005
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Dewitt . VOTE: 7-0-0
9. A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to~Section 12-7B-5, Permitted
and Conditional Uses; Above Second Floor, Vail Town Code, to allow for the operation of a
private club, located at 333 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting
forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Remonov & Company, Inc., represented by Knight Planning Services, Inc.
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: Withdrawn
10. A request for a final review of a text amendment to Section 12-7A-7, Height, Vail Town Code,
pursuant to Chapter 12-3, Amendments, to increase the height limitation for a sloping roof from
48' to 56' in the Public Accommodation zone district, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Mauriello Planning Group, LLC
Planner: George Ruther
ACTION: Wijthdrawn
11. A request for a final review of a major exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7H-7, Exterior
Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, and a final review of .a conditional use permit,
pursuant to Section 12-7H-2, Permitted and Conditional Uses; Basement or Garden Level, and
12-7H-3, Permitted and Conditional Uses; First Floor on Street Level, Vail Town Code, to allow
for the development of 106 multi-family residential dwelling units, located at 728 West Lionshead
Circle/Lot 2, West Day Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Vail Corp., represented by Braun Associates, Inc.
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: Withdrawn
12. Approval of September 12, 2005 minutes
.MOTION: Viele SECOND: Dewitt VOTE: 7-0-0
13. Approval of September 26, 2005 minutes
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Dewitt VOTE: 4-0-3
14. Information Update
15. Adjournment
MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Viele VOTE: 7-0-0
Page 5
~<
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular
office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The
public is invited to attend the project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the
Town of Vail Community Development Department. Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional
information.
Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call (970)
479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information.
Community Development Department
Published October 7, 2005, in the Vail Daily.
Page 6
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA
October 12, 2005
~~F~~ ~ 3:00 P:M.
PUBLIC MEETING
PUBLIC WELCOME
PROJECT'ORIENTATION /LUNCH -Community Development Department
MEMBERS PRESENT
Sherry Dorward
Pete Dunning
Lynne Friztlen
Joe Hanlon
Margaret Rogers
MEMBERS ABSENT
SITE VISITS
1. D.E.I., LLP -1763 Alpine Drive
2. Ritz Carlton Residences - 728 West Lionshead Circle
3. Four Seasons Hotel -13 Vail Road
4. Bridget Properties - 292 East Meadow Drive
5. White Rock Properties East Vail LLC - 4057 Lupine Drive
6. Racquet Club Owner's Association - 4695 Vail Racquet Club Drive
Driver: Bill
12:OOpm
2:OOpm
PUBLIC HEARING -TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Flussenheim Townhomes DRB05-0456
Final review of a minor alteration (re-roof)
3000-3008 South Frontage Road West/Lot 1, Block 5, Vail Intermountain Subdivision
Applicant: Flussenheim Townhomes, represented by Brenda Parks
ACTION: Denied
MOTION: Dunning SECOND: Hanlon VOTE: 5-0-0
3:OOpm
George
Bill
MOTION: Hanlon SECOND: Dorward VOTE: 4-0-1 (Fritrlen recused)
2. White Rock Properties East Vail LLC DRB05-0262
Final review of new construction (new two-family residence)
4057 Lupine Drive/Lot 4, Bighorn Subdivision
Applicant: White Rock Properties East Vail LLC, represented by William Restock
ACTION: Tabled to October 19, 2005
3. D.E.L, LLP DRB05-0482 George
Final review of a minor alteration (exterior changes -new siding)
1763 Alpine Drive/Lot 33, Vail Village West Filing 1
Applicant: Don Gury
ACTION: Tabled to October 19, 2005
MOTION: Hanlon SECOND: Fritrlen VOTE: 5-0-0
Page 1
4. Vail Conference Center DRB05-0010 Bill
Conceptual review of new construction (new conference center)
395 South Frontage Road/Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead Filing 1, Lots 3 and 5, Block 1,
Vail Lionshead Filing 2
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Pylman ~ Associates Inc.
ACTION: Conceptual - No Vote (Dorward recused)
5. Montauk Seafood Grill Deck DRB05-0411 George
Final review of a minor alteration (landscaping)
549 East Lionshead Circle/Lot 3, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 1
Applicant: Bob and Diane Lazier, represented by Tom Ludwig
ACTION: Approved
MOTION: Hanlon SECOND: Dunning VOTE: 5-0-0
6. Racquet Club Owners' Association DRB05-Q519 Matt
Final review of a minor alteration (landscaping)
4695 Vail Racquet Club DriveNail Racquet Club Condominiums, unplatted
Applicant: Racquet Club Owners' Association, represented by Matt Ivy
ACTION: Approved
MOTION: Hanlon SECOND: Dunning VOTE: 5-0-0
7. Vail. Village Urban Design Guide Plan DRB05-0329 Warren
Final review of.an amendment to the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan, to allow for changes to the
Architectural/Landscape Considerations for building colors, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Vail Chamber Business Association, represented by Kaye Ferry
ACTION: Tabled to October 19, 2005
MOTION: Hanlon SECOND: Dunning VOTE: 5-0-0
8. Vail Development, LLC DRB05-0544 Matt .
Final reviewof aminor alteration (landscaping Four Seasons Hotel)
13 Vail Road sand 28 South Frontage Road/Lots A, C, Vail Village Filing 2
Applicant: Vail Development, LLC, represented by T.J. Brink
ACTION: Approved
MOTION: Fritzlen SECOND: Hanlon VOTE: 5-0-0
Staff Approvals
Padnick Residence DRB05-0480 Elisabeth
Final review of a minor alteration (windows, deck)
1616 Buffehr Creek Road, Unit B17Nalley Condominium Subdivision
Applicant: Danny Padnick
Scolnick Residence DRB05-0502 Warren
Final review of change to approved plans (foundation)
2935 Basingdale Boulevard/Lot 19, Block 6, Vail Intermountain Subdivision
Applicant: Jay Scolnick, represented by Lawrence Architecture, Inc.
Tyrolean Chalet, LLC DR605-0469 Matt
Final review of change to approved plans (revised landscape plan)
400 East Meadow Drive, Unit 9/Lot 5D, Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1
Applicant: Tyrolean Chalet, LLC, represented by Michael Suman Architect LLC
Page 2
OML Investments DRB05-0509
Final review of a minor alteration (deck)
996 Ptarmigan Drive/Lot 2, Block 4, Vail Village Filing 7
Applicant: OML Investments, represented by Scott Ziegler
Joe
Bell Residence DRB05-0511 Joe
Final review of a minor alteration (re-roof)
2427 Chamonix Lane, Unit 2/Lot 22, Block A, Vail das Schone Filing 1
Applicant: Brendan Bell
Slinkman Residence DRB05-0510 Joe
Final review of a minor alteration (re-roof)
2627 Arosa Drive/Lot 9, Block C, Vail Ridge Subdivision
Applicant: Kendall and Jean Slinkman, represented by TCC Roofing Contractors, Inc.
Valley Condominiums DRB05-0501
Final review of a minor alteration (re-roof)
1516 Buffehr Creek Road/Valley Condominiums
Applicant: Valley Condominiums, represented by Chip Domke
Joe
Fischer Residence DR605-0455 Bill
Final review of change to approved plans (driveway)
4315 Bighorn Road/Lot 6, Block 3, Bighorn Subdivision
Applicant: Steve;Fischer, represented by John G. Martin, Architect, LLC
Town of Vail/Eagle River Water and Sanitation District DRB05-0463 Bill
Final review of a minor alteration (revegetation plan and structure associated with raw water intake)
530 South Frontage Road/Ford Park, unplatted
Applicant: Town of Vail and Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, represented by Mauriello Planning
Group
Town of Vail/Eagle River Water and Sanitation District DRB05-0464 Bill
Final review of a minor alteration (revegetation plan and structure associated with raw water intake)
1600 South Frontage Road/lower bench Donovan Park, unplatted Matterhorn
Applicant: Townof Vail and Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, represented by Mauriello Planning
Group '
Town of Vail -Memorial Park DRB05-0500 Warren
Final review of a minor alteration (landscaping)
Katsos Ranch Road
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by LAM Tree Service
Raiola Residence DRB05-0496 (deck railing design) Elisabeth
Final review of change to approved plans
1807 Alpine Drive/Lot 44, Vail Village West
Applicant: Jay R~iola
Coldstream Condominium Association DRB05-0513 Elisabeth
Final review of a residential addition (deck enclosure)
1476 Westhaven Drive/Glen Lyon Subdivision
Applicant: Coldstream Condominium Association, represented by Fritzlen Pierce Architects
Page 3
Johnson Residence DRB05-0495
Final review of a minor alteration (landscaping)
1195 Hornsilver Circle/Lot 14, Block 6, Vail Village Filing 7
Applicant: Susan Johnson, represented by Colorado's Landscaping Company
Powderhound Central, LLC DR605-0514
Final review of a minor alteration (deck)
3850 Fall Line Drive/Lot 1, Pitkin Creek Townhomes
Applicant: Powderhound Central, LLC, represented by Marcia Santaga
McGlynn/Soden Residence DRB05-0507
Final review of change to approved plans (roof design)
5128 and 5130 Grouse Lane/Lot8, Block 1, Gore Creek Subdivision
Applicant: Ethel McGlynn and Catherine Soden
Kort Residence DRB05-0499
Final review of a ;minor alteration (deck)
1467 Greenhill Court/Lot 10, Glen Lyon Subdivision
Applicant: Hiltow and Phillippa Kort, represented by Landscape Technology Group
Scotch on the Rockies DRB05-0486
Final review of a sign
143 East Meadow Drive/Lot E1, Vail Village Filing 1
Applicant: Kenneth Harding, represented by Susan Swimm
Countrywide Home Loans DRB05-0405
Final review of a sign
288 Bridge Street, #225/Lot D, Block 5A, Vail Village Filing 1
Applicant: ,Countrywide Home Loans, represented by Phyllis Daino
Baker Residence DR605-0503
Final review of a residential addition (deck enclosure)
141 West Meadow Drive/Lot D2, Vail Village Filing 2 .
Applicant: Alfred and Mary Baker, represented by RAL Architects
Lot 4, Forest Place DR605-0504 •
Final review of change to approved plans (deck, window)
615 Forest Place~Lot 4, Forest Place Subdivision
Applicant: Glendore Development, represented by Larry Deckard
Warren
Warren
Warren
Elisabeth
Matt
Elisabeth
Elisabeth
Bill
Spruce Creek Townhome Association DR605-0525 Warren
Final review of change to approved plans (balcony rail design)
1750 South Frontage Road/Spruce Creek Townhomes, Unplatted
Applicant: Spruce Creek Townhomes @ Vail Condominium Association, represented by TRD Architects
Stolzer Residence DR605-0523 Warren
Final review of a minor alteration (landscaping)
338 Rockledge Road/Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Village Filing 3
Applicant: L.W. Stolzer
Page 4
'~
Stephanoff Residence DRB05-0526 Warren
Final review of a minor alteration (window)
1480 Buffehr Creek Road, #1A/Phase III, Tract B, Lion's Ridge Filing 2 .
Applicant: Robert Stephanoff
Creekside Condominiums DRB05-0528
Final review of change to approved plans (exterior changes)
223 East Gore Creek Drive/Lot A, Block 56, Vail Village Filing 1
Applicant: Switzer Family LP, represented by Mike Hallenback
Warren
Eagle River Water and Sanitation District DR605-0545 Joe
Final review of a minor alteration (drain repair)
1600 South Frontage Road/West Vail Well site No. 7/Unplatted Donovan Park, lower bench
Applicant: Eagle River Water and Sanitation District
Baltz Residence DRB05-0535
Final review of changes to approved plans (parking spaces)
3786 Lupine Drive/Lot 6, Bighorn Subdivision 2"d Addition
Applicant: Steve and Marty Baltz, represented by.D.H. Ruggles
Warren
Bridget Properties DR605-0505 Bill
Final review of a minor alteration (windows)
292 East Meadow Drive, Unit 108 (Mountain Haus)/Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1
Applicant: Bridget Properties, Inc.
Himmes Residence DRB05-0524 Bill
Final review of a minor alteration (deck)
2456 Chamonix Lane, Unit B4/Lot 5, Chamonix Chalets
Applicant: James and Elizabeth Himmes
Forstner/Moosburger Residence DRB05-0521 Bill
Final review of a minor alteration (stairs)
4325 Spruce Way/Lot 5, Block 3, Bighorn 3`d Addition
Applicant: Karl Forstner and Cecilia Moosburger •
Vail Corp. DRB05-0339 Matt
Final review of ngw construction (prefabricated steel building)
862 South Frontage Road/Tract B, South Frontage Road Subdivision
Applicant: Vail Corporation, represented by Public Service Company of Colo.
Forstl Residence DR605-0522 Bill
Final review of change to approved plans (windows)
2714 Larkspur Lane/Lot 4, Block 3, Vail Intermountain Subdivision
Applicant: Andrew Forstl
Cassidy Residence DRB05-0531 Warren
Final review of a minor alteration (landscaping)
4207 Columbine Drive/Lot 19B, Bighorn Subdivision
Applicant: Patrick Cassidy, represented by Chip Domke
Page 5
Hovey Residence DR605-0481
Final review of a minor alteration (landscaping)
1339 Westhaven Circle/Lot 23, Glen Lyon Subdivision
Applicant: Nancy; Hovey
George
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office
hours in the project planner's office, located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75
South Frontage Road. Please call 479-2138 for information.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2356,
Telephone for the Hearing .Impaired, for information.
Page 6
ORDINANCE NO. 24
Series of 2005
AN ORDINANCE DELETING TITLE 4, CHAPTER 4, ARTICLES A AND B, VAIL TOWN CODE
AS THEY RELATE TO TIME SHARE DISCLORE AND REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS;
AMENDING TITLE 12, ZONING REGULATIONS, SECTION 12-2-2, DEFINITIONS, SECTION
12-6H-3, CONDITIONAL USES, HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE-FAMILY ZONE DISTRICT;
SECTION 12-7H-4, PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES, SECOND FLOOR AND ABOVE,
LIONSHEAD MIXED USE 1 ZONE DISTRICT; SECTION 12-10-10, PARKING
REQUIREMENTS SCHEDULES; TITLE 13, SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, SECTION 13-2-2
DEFINITIONS, FOR PROPOSED AMENDMENTS; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN
REGARD THERETO.
WHEREAS, The Town of Vail time-share disclosure and registration regulations were
adopted in 1980, 'and are outdated; and
WHEREAS, since 1980, the State of Colorado has adopted revised consumer protection
laws relating to time-share disclosure and registration requirements which superseded the
Town's regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has held
public hearings on the proposed amendments in accordance with the provisions of the Town
Code of the Town of Vail; and
WHEREAS, on September 12, 2005, the Planning and Environmental Commission held
a public hearing and found that the proposed amendments further the development objectives of
the Town of Vail; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has
recommended approval of this text amendment at its September 12, 2005, meeting, and has
submitted its recommendation to the Town Council; and
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that the amendments are consistent with the
applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail
Ordinance No: 24, Series of 2005
Comprehensive Plan and are compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that the amendments further the general and
specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that the amendments promote the health,
safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town and promote the coordinated and harmonious
development of the Town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and
its established character as a. resort and residential community of the highest quality
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
VAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. The purpose of this Ordinance is to delete Title 4, Chapter 4, Articles A
and B, Vail Town Code as they relate to time share disclosure and registration
requirements and to amend Title 12, Zoning Regulations, to implement the prescribed
time share regulations
Section 2. Title 4, Chapter 4, Articles A and B, Vail Town Code shall be deleted in its
entirety. Deletions are shown in st~ile~.
A_AA_1• ADDI I~`ARII ITV• CYC~ADTIrIAIC•
~~nie• ArFinle .+nnlioe• fn nll ~irno_ch~rc ~ ~ni}n ..~T,~.~11 iamr~rwivvc-tnm ~'-'--r`z,
n n n n n
, j ~ ~
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 2
Q-11r"rz~'-FZi'~NS 6~~~~IN~ ~T~~PiT. r~~ni~oei ~on~ncinnic
r,-~~-
~ mi+n nffe rorl in }hn n}.,+emon+• '
v v~iv~vV ~~~ a~lV~gtiy~'r
1 1 1
1
~
~s~-a~i~~i#s-e~eF
he ..me nr
-G~
P
~~
dP
IB
°
~ i f
n•cn+• 1 1
-
7~ 1~
~tFi
.
.
.
Pc
~7
Ft-L
'- The fiinoe. ..nrl n~ ~m
.7 f+v
~I~~~i#isa~isfl-ef dni#~ her of ~ ~ni+e~
~
-fha+ ^re +~,..
invoc~+n re.•
T7'f~1VTS .
- .
t
~ ~ t
1
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005
~7~ .~ rec~enie fn- re nr~irc~ r+nrl ronlr.nemen+
~~a aw...i u ~aevvi~v~vr-rv ~
~~c ^±~+emcn+ of ~nv V+hor re c~onien
1-It~
~~#e-~re}es~sss~e*pe~se~sbi~~;~ ea^h +~n^
"es~et^uises~enses~er ea^~ +~~„~;
• ,
+imo_c~~+~+ro ~ ~ni+e~~
17T7 ~
.~ rlc~iclnncr h.~e ~nfi ~~I Ln^udor~lno•
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005
e~AFFleFS;
• ,
B ~~ ire f1f~cTnM.~nn c,Dr~nrr+m If An~i• If tl~o 4ime n~h~.+r~rt rV'VC
'~~ s
~ r
i ~
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005
A ~A ~:I'lrlr`II~ACAITC T/'1TCAAI000~G
r~r~ ^f roe•.+Ice• by L'on+i~n A AN 7 F+{•~' Ah' I
F
rrr°.fH:S~flF-E~'} e'F-FeS~Fa~Trr9fltti~~^ &cF9F1 vfrirrc+siFl~arc°;
~~'Y~ ~~tr'~~}t-tFY'~-Vt11 ~Y~t~°S~u~Qp~~~ime r•h..re r.~~mern• nrl
t
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005
n~ ~rren# ~nrl the nev4 e•i ~nneerlinn fie•n.el ve.e r•
t
c~~4crr~c n• if ~n~i fr~r 4he nrr,nerfir
t f f
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 ~ $
FRTG~ ~G'rZT~°~i~~i .~tFGfT{.~F
irlen4i~or1 ~~neerl n~4 he L.~.~14~~
ra ci izi iTCCro~--rrc
A_~A_~I1• I'1CVC1 r1DC~~C ~1Q1 ~rATI/'1A1 T/'1 /'~/'111A1'11 rTr 111AD~nVC~ACAITC
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005
ine~fr~ ~menf .~nrl r+r~rv+n~i~n..l m.+}e ri.+le~
4 ~e~~o€ n~T~c ono vin~n~,~e~.
ft-7t7~'i~a~~CP ~P/tliG~. TL~o T~~ein in ~r~rli4inn ~r~ ~4L~er r
~rrcTVtrrr~rruvvrcrvmv-vcrTCrr emerli~n r. ..~rl.~. rl m..~i
~
~ r
~ ~ ~ > >
> > i ~
Q~ ~i lrlinn Dormi4 \A/i4F~F~olr1~ Aln h~ ~ilrlinn no rmi~ c+F~.~ll ho i~~~ ~crl fnr .env In4 ~+r
B cn~rm~-~~rrnT c n~-rrc-~rrcrrrvc-r~av~v'rvrurry~mvr
> > ~
~ ~
r1~m~i+oe~ fr~ty~ .erni +~-~ncfornr uih~ vi~l~~oc~ Oho n
rn~iic inn
s ~f +hie Arii nle
Ar~r~r~~i~l \A/i4hr~r.~~~in~ Tho Dl~nni nn ~nr) ~~iir~~~n
m m
~~~~y`
~
rt
i
o f
t
i
~ i
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 ~ ~
L~E•RI'tP~rT1Vt£t'~"F ~ ftC.~-~~^G~T~TTi~TCT~~~e~ mennc+ il~e nen.+r4mnn~ of (~nmm~~nifi
n n n n n
n' .
d._dR ~Q• ADDI If`ATI/'lAl DC/'11 IIDC11/ICAITQ•
~4-~B~n~~ien: Fef the-p~~e~~~,;;~ ~esiin~,.,~a~ nn+•., ~p/-~~ _rto n~ I
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 11
•,
rlen.~rfmcn}• .
4 D verifier! a}.~fnmenf chn.~i nn 11 nne~fe~ 'n..nlvoi} 'n nmm~lefinn fho n nnerh.
... ......., v-~icn~rrcnrvnmr~ir~y-~irrw~-irrvvrvcu-rrr-vvmprccrrrgznc-.p~vpcr~T
7 A ..e rifler} nn}i rv~r~fe of }he }ime nmm~le}inn of nnn fri .n}inn of }he nrn ner}..
~ If fhe n..rnh~cer4. 'fi ~nrlr• .ere }n he ..filiverl fnr }he nnnefr..n}inn of 4he nrenerfi. .ten
.~..fhnri~erl }n rln h. a~+inec~c u.ifhin }he C}~}o .~.hinh nrn..irlec fh~}•
n rlie. h..rc~emenf of n..rnh~c~ero~ f..nr}c mrw he mnrle frnm }ime }n fime }n nrw fnr
r ~ i ~
fw }he Ie.~r}er of nnnn}run}inn f. mrln nr }he ec~nrnu. r+nen}•
r ~
s
~ ~
i
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 ~ 2
ftiic• ArFinle ~nrl 4F,e 11c n.+r}men4~c. n le
A_AR ~• VIr11 ATI/lAl• n~onorne~r.~r w^TI/lAl•
~ r~ v . v nat~ rri~si v , v Cr`rtr~ci-tyr~raF H Fb~-rvr~
~
'
~ .
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 13
• ,
imn~irinn rin4~fn r.f n~ •rnl•»norn .+f 4F~c n'.rnel•
i
n rrlor rolr~4inn fn +~,.~4 n~rnel• nr
> >
A Drmm~tc ~lk+icn•ivcc•~ TF~e Plnn.~rFmcn+ m~~i r~rlnn4 .~mcnrl ~nrl rcner~l n doe r~nrl
• r
,B• Cile C~ •i~• If ii .+nno~+rn ~~~+~ ~+nv nere•nn I•~nn enn.~nerl i~ enn ~ninn nr i~+ ~hn• ~i in
.,,... •~ •. ,.rr...,~......., .,...~ r.,..,.,.. •...., ....~_~.,.., ... _..~_~...~,
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 ~ 4
Section 3. Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code is hereby amended as
follows: (additions are shown in bold/deletions are shown in s#~+igf~)
Section 12-2-2, Definitions
TIME-SHARE UNIT; A dwelling unit which includes a fractional fee, time-share estate, or
time-share license as approved by the Town of Vail. No offer of a fractional fee, time-
share estate, or time-share license in a time-share unit shall be made except pursuant to
an Application for Registration and Certification as a Subdivision Developer of a time-
share program or an exemption from registration approved by the State of Colorado Real
Estate Commission pursuant to C.R.S. 12-61-401 et seq. and the Rules and Regulations
promulgated pursuant thereto. Within ten (10) days after receipt of a written request, the
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 15
developer of atime-share unit shall provide to the staff of the Department of Community
Development a copy of the Application or request for exemption filed with the State of
Colorado Real Estate Commission and/or evidence of approval of the Application or
request for exemption.
12-6H-3: CONDITIONAL USES:
The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the HDMF district, subject to issuance of a
conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of chapter 16 of this title:
Bed and breakfast as further regulated by section 12-14-18 of this title.
Churches.
Dog kennel.
Funiculars, and other similar conveyances.
Home child daycare facility as further regulated by section 12-14-12 of this title.
Private clubs and civic, cultural and fraternal organizations.
Public buildings, grounds and facilities..
Public or commercial parking facilities or structures.
Public or private schools.
Public park and recreation facilities.
Public transportation terminals..
Public utility and public service uses.
Ski lifts and tows.
Time-share units.
Type III employee housing units (EHU) as provided in chapter 13 of this title.
12-7H-4: PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES; SECOND FLOOR AND ABOVE:
A. Permitted Uses; Exception: The following uses shall be permitted on those floors above
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 16
the first floor within a structure:
Lodges and accommodation units.
Multiple-family residential dwelling units, timeshare units, fractional fee clubs, lodge
dwelling units, and employee housing units (type III (EHU) as provided in chapter 13 of
this ti#le).
Additional uses determined to be similar to permitted uses described in this subsection,
in accordance with the provisions of section 12-3-4 of this title.
B. Conditional Uses: The following uses shall be permitted on second floors and
higher above grade, subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance
with the provisions of chapter 16 of this title:
Banks and financial institutions.
Conference facilities and meeting rooms.
Eating and drinking establishments.
Fractional Fee Clubs.
Liquor stores.
Persdnal services and repair shops.
Professional offices, business offices and studios.
Radio, TV stores, and repair shops.
Recreation facilities.
Retail establishments.
Skier; ticketing, ski school, skier services, and daycare.
Theaters.
Time-share units.
T~w,e,n+,., '+ .J f +' 1 F 1 L.
Additional uses determined to be similar to conditional uses described in this subsection,
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 17
in accordance with the provisions of section 12-3-4 of this title.
Section 12-10-10: PARKING REQUIREMENTS SCHEDULES:
Off street parking requirements shall be determined in accordance with the following schedules:
A. Schedule A applies to properties within Vail's "Commercial Core Areas" (as
defined on the town of Vail core area parking maps I and II, incorporated by reference
and available for inspection in the office of the town clerk):
Use Parking Requirements
Dwelling unit 1.4 spaces per dwelling unit
Accommodation unit ~~^^'~ ~~'°° +;.,,e_
a °,~-a„i~, #fa~etier~al~ee-~its~
Banks and financial institutions
Eating and drinking establishments
Fractional fee club unit
0.7 spaces per accommodation unit
Hotels with conference facilities or
meeting rooms 0.7 spaces per
accommodation unit, plus 1.0 space
per 330 square feet of seating floor
area devoted to conference facilities
or meeting rooms
3.7 spaces per 1,000 square feet of
net floor area
1.0 space per 250 square feet of
seating floor area; minimum of 2
spaces
0.7 spaces per fractional fee club
unit. Hotels with conference
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005
facilities or meeting rooms 0.7
spaces per fractional fee club unit,
plus 1.0 space per 330 square feet
of seating floor area devoted to
conference facilities or meeting
Medical and dental offices
Other professional and business offices
Recreational facilities, public or private
Retail stores, personal services and
repair shops
Theaters, meeting rooms, conference
facilities
Time-share units
rooms
2.7 spaces per 1,000 square feet of
net floor area
2.7 spaces per 1,000 square feet of
net floor area
Parking requirements to be
determined by the planning and
environmental commission
2.3 spaces per 1,000 square feet of
net floor area
1.0 space per 165 square feet of
seating floor area
0.7 spaces per time-share unit.
Hotels with conference facilities
or meeting rooms 0.7 spaces per
time-share unit, plus 1.0 space per
330 square feet of seating floor
area devoted to conference
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 ~ 9
Any use not listed
facilities or meeting rooms
Parking requirements to be
determined by the planning and
environmental commission
B. Schedule B applies to all properties outside Vail's "commercial core areas" (as
defined on the town of Vail core area parking maps I and II, incorporated by reference
and available for inspection in the office of the town clerk):
Use Parking Requirements
Accommodation unit (includes time=
share units, f.^^+~^^^' {°° ~ ^°~~, and
Banks and financial institutions
Eating and drinking establishments
Fractional fee club unit
0.4 space per accommodation unit,
plus 0.1 space per each 100 square
feet of gross residential floor area,
with a maximum of 1.0 space per
unit
1 space per 200 square feet of net
floor .area
1 space per 120 square feet of s
eating floor area
0.7 spaces per fractional fee club
unit. Hotels with conference
facilities or meeting rooms 0.7
spaces perfractional fee club unit,
plus 1.0 space per 330 square feet
of seating floor area devoted to
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 20
conference facilities or meeting
Hospitals
Medical and dental offices
Multiple-family dwellings
Other professional and business offices
Quick service food/convenience stores
Recreational facilities; public or private
rooms
1 space per patient bed, plus 1.0
space per 150 square feet of net
floor area
1 space per 200 square feet of net
floor area
If a dwelling unit's gross. residential
floor area is 500 square feet or less:
1.5 spaces. If a dwelling unit's gross .
residential floor area is more than
500 square feet, but less than 2,000
square feet: 2 spaces. If a dwelling
unit's gross residential floor area is
2,000 square feet or more: 2.5
spaces
1 space per 250 square feet of net
floor area
1.0 space per each 200 square feet
of net floor area for the first 1,000
square feet of net floor area: 1.0
space per 300 square feet for net
floor area above 1,000 square feet
Parking requirements to be
determined by the planning and
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 2
environmental commission
Retail stores, personal services and
repair shops
Single-family and two-family
dwellings
Theaters, meeting rooms, convention
facilities
Time-share units
1 space per each 300 square feet of
net floor area
If a dwelling unit's gross residential
floor area is less than 2,000 square
feet: 2 spaces
If a dwelling unit's gross residential
floor area is 2,000 square feet or
more, but less than 4,000 square
feet: 3 spaces
If a dwelling unit's gross residential
floor area is 4,000 square feet or
more, but less than 5,500 square
feet: 4 spaces
If a dwelling unit's gross residential
floor area is 5,500 square feet or
more: 5 spaces
1 space per 120 square feet of
seating floor area
0.7 spaces per time-share unit.
Hotels with conference facilities
or meeting rooms 0.7 spaces per
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 22
time-share unit, plus 1.0 space per
330 square feet of seating floor
area devoted to conference
facilities or meeting rooms
Any use not listed Parking requirements to be
determined by the planning and
environmental commission
Section 4. Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, Vail Town Code, is hereby amended as follows:
(additions are shown in bold/deletions are shown iri °°+~'~g#)
13-2-2 Definitions
SUBDIVISION OR SUBDIVIDED LAND:
A. Meaning:
1. A tract of land which is divided into two (2) or more lots, tracts, parcels, sites, separate
interests (including leasehold interests), interests in common, or other division for the
purpose, whether immediate or future, of transfer of ownership, or for building or other
development, or for street use by reference to such subdivision or recorded plat thereof;
or
2. A tract of land including land to be used for condominiums, +~~^ ~"^-^ ^~+^+^..
{'^^"^"'^' {^^ ' ~` +' " '' or time-share units; or
3. A house, condominium, apartment or other dwelling unit which is divided into two (2) or
more separate interests through division of the fee or title thereto, whether by
conveyance, license, lease, contract for sale or any other method of disposition.
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 23
Section 5. 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 6. 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 7. The amendment of any provision of the Town 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 amended. The amendment of any
provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or
superseded unless expressly stated herein.
Section 8. 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.
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 24
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 18'h day of October, 2005, and a public
hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 2"d day of November, 2005, in the
Council Chambers of the Vail. Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
Rodney E. Slifer, Mayor
Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2005 25
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: October 18, 2005
SUBJECT: A work session to discuss Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2005, an ordinance
repealing and reenacting Ordinance 9, Series of 1998 amending Special
Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, and setting forth, details in
regard thereto. ~ ~ .
Applicant: Pat Dauphinais, President of the Grand Traverse H.O.A.
Planner: Warren Campbell
1. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The applicant, Pat Dauphinais, President of the Grand Traverse H.O.A., is
requesting a work session to discuss Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2005, an
ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance 9, Series of 1998 amending Special
Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, and setting forth details in regard
thereto. The purpose of Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2005, is to remove Gross
residential Floor Area (GRFA) limitations from the SDD and rely on the remaining
development and architectural controls incorporated into the existing SDD and
increase the number of lots within the SDD from 22 to 23 lots.
The staff and applicant are requesting that the Town Council listens to a presentation
by Staff and the applicant and engage in a discussion regarding the proposed
amendments to Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse. The next step
in the development review process for Ordinance 25, Series of 2005, is a public
hearing on November 1, 2005.
II. BACKGROUND
On September 26, 2005, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission
held. a public hearing on a request to amend Special Development District No. 22,
Grand Traverse. The purpose of the amendment to the Special .Development District
is to eliminate the Gross residential Floor Area limitations within the~Grand Traverse
residential development and an increase in the number of lots from 22 to 23 lots.
Upon review of the request, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted 4-0-
0 to forward a recommendation of approval of the request to amend Special
Development District No. 22, Grand traverse, to the Vail Town Council.
A copy of the staff memorandum to the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental
Commission, dated September 26, 2005, has been attached for reference.
r
111. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
' The Community Development Department recommends that the Vail Town .Council
- tables the public hearing oii Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2005, .until November 1,
2005.
IV. ATTACHMENTS
A. Vicinity Map
B. Draft of Ordinance 25, Series of 2005
C. Copy of the plat approved by PEC resubdividing Lot 5 within SDD No. 22,
Grand Traverse
D. Table of statistics for SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse; prepared by staff
E. Memorandum to Planning and Environmental Commission dated September
26, 2005
t
2
,.... ..
. _...
r: ~ ~.
Ma~or.Amendment to SDD i~o. 22, ~ ,, ~~
,. ,
_ .
:Grand Traverse _and ~ubdiv~s~,on of Lot 5 Dauph~na~s-Moseley Subdwis,~on Filing ~1, ~ x~ ~`
A I~esubdw~sion of Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10
Planning and: Environmental Commission -September 26, 2005 - '~
. ~. ~ ..
.. ~ ..
t-'/!'-g~~~ ii a±#S ~ -`V. Y~ +d..~ rif. ..•\+S ,z ~~•,:~,.;~ ~, ~ r ,f"Y:"!.ffi'"°'°~4 T. t~^'~m^^ -^-.--r:
~';'o"'Ct1t t .:-~w. '..~ ~/. '~~ ~' Y`,'~Yi; 'If'~°.r'. ~,4 ~. 9A ~Y~~t,q.`'}+'°'f ~Y ~,~.~ w?~~ ""~6' x~~ ~ `~K, .~P^ -.~.
~ - ~+:1 r•~~f c"~,;~:'.cv~`kb` ~.'..j~..'!h yyf •~IZY~~~:.1 ,.iF~ ~-f~~~:C~.ra. _ 's''~ ~ ~t fs.-7~„~~~ ~~~~~~. • ~.a.
~.~~ ,'r I ~. tr ~~:`R1. `.'~~l,F',. r, 'j7 I. .~.~ .o,:~r 4'-~a. ~1'. ,.~• .~,. ~'4C .s ~' ;a~ •, '•rj i~~.,~
4 1 f..~. ~y w~c~':.. r ~ ~ ~ ;^r ~, -~,~,!r,~r ~;. ~ ~,i::~t ~~$r1,~ 4 ya~~g'.~~.r~7 _ ~.'y' S~ .tS. ~ ;}'K i Ct'~ ..
S__ S '.,'f .~`~• ~hr 1s` 1 ~'.L r.. .P~ .. ~,.. v. ...f.~..~r. ,r'~ "r'::. ~4 ..,`t:'~ ~ T~~+_'~iw~t_ _..I~P:-~~ .~~/r`~+Y-T'n3a ~~.,:~'X11~~J \`~F *~ - ~~ t~ t:i_
'l --_ /~ y x~lr !I'~cr .~4' ~ ~~+"r7y,!~r, ~~ ,~j it}` ~,;ti~`
-lt .y- ~ c`~ '~ Y [ yf '` ~`f f' 1 t '~ y ~ t~ r, 7 ~ • V / f'f~ .v r ~ ~
.- ry M1 ci ~~~~F~i~ n F sl' ~ ~ ~„~~ 3Y ~~ i .i .J~ ~! Jim
Yf - rr_ 1J ~.
~ ~' ~~- ~`~k"y' ~~"~F' ,r.~,~' Affil r~~{_r~:. '~z''~'fi~ ' " ,PI~'~`~~ r `~v''~ 4:~:
•r.! ~ y~Yy..~ y'f 4y ;1}'„ ~t'Sf e ~~rt s ` r 1~ ~ ~ R ~ z t
Y %.
~ /` rat
rF ,,.1 v . Tom{' 1 r ~,_~ ti !!` +f~
D ~ -lrr 4 ~~ _ ~ ~ ~ f ~~ ' a > , ~•+~' .'!fit'
~, ~ ~ ~ '~ t~ n~~,.~' t J ~~•``.r~M
~; ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~. ./d~,! tic'' .
`'~ '~ ~ ~
~~~ ~ ~" {
~~ 1l ,~~~: ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ try _
t, ~ ",
7 .F'.
!ay, rs. k...;~ ~' ~~ ;5,
rr+t`~~~E~y~~Ty~-; ~`~f ~ ,~• Y..rS'~j~~~ <<~~ ~r~ ~#r ~ ~i ,y~~'4\~~ ~~ .r
_: - ,: ,, ;
® 100 0 100 Feet ~ 11 ~ ~OOI This map was created M'the Town of Vail GIS Departmem, Use of Mis map sMufd he for General purposes only:
The Town of Vail does rot warrant the accuracy of the information contained herein.
(parcel line work is approximate)
ORDINANCE N0.25
Series of 2005
AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REENACTING ORDINANCE NO. 9,
SERIES OF 1998, PROVIDING FOR CHANGES TO SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT NO. 22, GRAND TRAVERSE, THAT CONCERN THE ELIMINATION OF
GROSS RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA (GRFA) WITHIN THE DISTRICT AND THE
NUMBER OF LOTS; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO
WHEREAS, Chapter 9 of the Vail Municipal Code authorizes Special
Development Districts within the Town; and
WHEREAS, The Town Council approved Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1998
Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse; and
WHEREAS, The president of the Grand Traverse H.O.A. has requested to
amend the existing Special Development District No. 22; and
WHEREAS, Section 12-9A-10 of the Vail Municipal Code provides
procedures for major amendments to existing Special Development Districts; and
WHEREAS, The applicant has complied with the requirements. outlined in
Section 12-9A-10 of the Vail Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, The Special Development District provides for creativity and
flexibility to allow for the development of land within the Town of Vail; and
WHEREAS, There is an identified need for quality affordable housing in the
community; and
WHEREAS, On September 26, 2005, the Planning and Environmental
Commission held a public hearing on the major amendment proposal and has
recommended that certain changes be made to Special Development District No.
22, Grand Traverse; and
WHEREAS, The Town Council considers that it is reasonable, appropriate,
and beneficial to the Town and its citizens, inhabitants, and visitors to repeal and
re-enact Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1998 .to provide for certain changes in Special
1
Attachment: B
Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1998 is hereby
repealed and re-enacted to read as follows:
Text to be deleted is shown as s#fil~# and text to be added is shown in
bold.
Section 1. Amendment Procedures Fulfilled Planning Commission Report
The approval procedure prescribed in Title 12, Chapter 9, Section 10(B) of the Vail
Municipal Code have been fulfilled, and the Vail Town Council has received the
report of the Planning and Environmental Commission recommending approval, of
the proposed development plan for Special Development District No. 22.
Section 2. Special Development District No. 22
Special Development District No. 22 (SDD 22) and the development plan
therefore, are hereby approved for the development of Lots 1 through 19, Block 2,
Lionsridge Subdivision Filing 3 within the Town of Vail consisting of 10.69 acres.
Section 3. Purpose
Special Development District No. 22 is established to ensure comprehensive
development and use of an area that will be harmonious with the general character
of the Town of Vail. The development is regarded as complementary to the Town
by the Town Council and meets each of the design standards and criteria as set
forth in Section 12-9A-8 of the Vail Municipal Code. There are significant aspects
of Special Development District No. 22 that are difficult to satisfy through the
imposition of the standards of the underlying Primary/Secondary Residential Zone
District. Special Development District No. 22 allows for greater flexibility in the
development of the land than would be.possible under the current zoning of the
property. The smaller single-family lots provide the opportunity for a common
2
.•
open space for the subdivision as well as the means to preserve the southerly
ridge line of the property. Special Development District No. 22 provides an
appropriate development plan to preserve the visual quality of the site from within
the subdivision as well as adjacent properties in the community in general.
Section 4: Development Plan
A: The development plan for SDD 22 is approved and shall constitute the plan for
development within the Special Development District. The development plan is
comprised of those plans submitted by Dauphinais-Moseley Construction and
consists of the following documents: ,
1. Site development plan, Lionsridge Resubdivision of Lots 1-19, Vail, Colorado,
Intermountain Engineering, dated July_7, 1998.
2. Conceptual landscape plan, Intermountain Engineering, dated July 7, 1998.
3. Final Plat of Lionsridge Subdivision Filing No. 5, A Resubdivision of Lots 1-
19, Block 2, Lionsridge Subdivision Filing No. 3, Town of Vail, County of
Eagle, State of Colorado, sheets 1 and 2, Intermountain Engineering Limited,
dated April 19, 1989, Amended Final.Plat of Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision
Filing No. 1, A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 7 10, Town of Vail, County
of Eagle, State of Colorado,.lntermountain Engineering, dated July 21, 1998,
and Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5, Amended Final Plat:
Dauphinais-Mosley Subdivision Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6, 7,
8, 9, and 10, Town of Vail, County of Eagle, State of Colorado,
Intermountain Engineering, dated , _, 2005.
4. Construction, grading and drainage drawings for a resubdivision of Lots 1-
19, Block 2, and Lionsridge Lane, Lionsridge Subdivision Filing No. 3, Town
of Vail, Eagle County, Colorado, Intermountain Engineering Limited, sheets
1-8, dated March 9, 1989.
5. Soils and Foundation Investigation for Lots 1-24, Lionsridge 5th Filing.
6. Lionsridge Color Palette, Arnold/Gwathmey/Pratt Architects, March 1990.
7. The subdivision plat for Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision recorded August
23, 199.0, July 21, 1998, and , _, 2005.
3
B. The development standards shall be as follows:
1. Acreage: The total acreage of this site is 10.69 acres
or 465,650 square feet.
2. Permitted Uses: The permitted uses for SDD 22 shall
be:
a. Single family residential dwellings
b. Open space-
c. Public roads
d. Employee dwelling units as defined in Section 5, paragraph G of this
ordinance.
3. Conditional Uses: ~
a. Public utility and public service uses
b. Public buildings, grounds and facilities
c. Public or private schools
d. Public park and recreation facilities
4. Accessory Uses:
a. Private greenhouses, toolsheds, playhouses,
garages or carports, swimming pools, patios, or recreation .facilities
customarily incidental to single-family uses.
b. Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in
accordance with the provisions of Section 12-14-12 of the Vail
Municipal Code.
c. Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or
conditional uses, and necessary for the operation thereof.
4
.++~+hn nir+n f.+ ref +h ~, ew+~ri~r .u~+lln /i n nr~+ innl~ ~rlinn f~ ~rrinn rh.,.,+r.,..L r~1~+n+n
• i
~~~ . r..v,71.,. ~..~II fi.,inhp ~ rl7Cm~~a~ h~ ~+ ., n+ h., li.ti,i+~.d +.. „Ir,~i-~+i,r
""~ "~ ~ ~
S#et'~e
,.
~~~~ nr nn~ier
c cn c~v v cr
fe~fi pro/cn~no ~~i erl rlnn
ca-a crn
i}h nn Lc~ nnrn
cv~vrv
mnrn }h~+ hee~ }nrr•+nn~ n.+}in
rtc ~~cn~vc~o-~crv
n }hrnn nv}orinr ui~+l nr ~+imil
~vrrn-rrtrAt
l rl .+
i
onnninn of nn} In
es }he
n 7L'.0% of
}ho linn~l nnrimo}n
r of }ho ~+rn of irJ
s r ~ ~
'±Ilni~i~±nne fnr ~
r~ilinn
of ~ ~n }n }
hrco fnn} in hoinh} e
~addafie-~e-t#~e-a~sve;~e~r-f~n~fed-meet~i~e~a~rti-fee~~es~-,~~~;+;^,.~~
65. Setbacks: Minimum setbacks shall be as indicated on the approved site
development plan by Intermountain Engineering, dated July 7, 1998. A 4-foot
roof overhang shall be allowed in the front setback for Lots 15-19, provided the
rear setback is increased by 4 feet. A 4-foot roof overhang shall be allowed in
the rear setback of Lots 20-24, provided the front setback is increased by 4 feet. .
Roof overhangs shall be allowed to encroach up to 2' feet into the required side
setback of 10 feet for each lot: An unenclosed, unroofed, deck or patio within 5
feet of finished grade may encroach into the rear setback by 5 feet for Lots 1-14
and Lots 20-24. No other setback encroachments shall be allowed.
~6. Density: Approval of this development plan shall permit a total of ~ 23 single-
family dwelling units on the entire property. A minimum of 6 employee dwelling
units shall be required. A maximum of ~ 23 employee dwelling .units shall be
permitted on the entire property.
~7: Building Height: ,
°~^^^~' ~^ f^^+., For a sloping roof, the height of the building shall. not exceed 33
feet. The height calculation shall be made by measuring from the existing grade
as indicated on the Intermountain Engineering Topographical Survey dated March
13, 1990 or finished grade. Height shall be calculated per Section 12-2-2 of the
Vail Municipal Code.
7
S8. Site Coveraae: Not more than 25 percent of the total site area on each lot shall be
covered by buildings. ~~-~+h +he o,,,.o.,+;,,., „f ~ „+ ~ ~., ~ „+ ~ .,,.+ .... ,..~.... ~~
"Site coverage" shall
mean the ratio of the total building area on a site to the total area of a site,
expressed as a percentage. For the purpose of calculating site coverage,
"building area" shall mean the total horizontal area of any building as measured
from the exterior face of perimeter building walls or supporting columns above
grade or at ground level, whichever is the greater area. Building area shall include
all buildings; carports, porte cocheres, arcades, and covered or roofed walkways.
In addition to the above, building area shall also include any portion of roof
overhang, eave, or covered stair, covered deck, covered porch, covered terrace or
.covered patio that extends more than four feet from the exterior face of perimeter
building walls or supporting columns.
-a-99. Parking: Parking shall be as required in Title 12, Chapter 10 of the Vail Municipal
Code. Each employee dwelling unit shall be required to have at least one
enclosed garage parking space.
X10. Design Guidelines: The development of each lot shall be guided by the
architectural and landscape design guidelines as approved as part of the Special
Development District No. 22. The guidelines are as follows:
a. Architectural. The architectural design of the buildings upon the site shall
be such that buildings relate harmoniously to each other. This is not to
imply that each building must look exactly similar to those around it, but
that compatibility be achieved through the use of scale, materials and
colors, and building shape and form. The overriding concern is that, upon
completion, the Special Development District, because of the clustered
nature of the small single family lots situated around common open
s
space, should appear to be an integrated development possessing a
common architectural quality, character, and appearance. To this end the
following general design criteria shall be followed by the developer and
individual lot owners:
b. A palette of colors shall be as set forth in the Lionsridge Color Palette
from Arnold/Gwathmey/Pratt dated March 1990. Colors are indicated for
the use on different types of building materials and elements such as
stucco colors, siding colors, metal flashing, windows, accent colors, etc.
The palette of colors indicate a range of acceptable colors in order to
encourage similarity on one hand, but also diversity within the acceptable
range
c. The following building standards and materials shall be adhered to:
(1) Roof. The roof pitch shall. be a minimum 8/12 and a maximum of 12/12:
A gable, clipped gable or hipped roof shall be mandatory. Dormers shall
be allowed and reviewed by the Design Review Board. The roofing
material shall be cedar shake shingles with staggered butts.
(2) Chimneys. The chimneys shall. be stucco with chimney caps of
weathered copper.
' (3) Flues. All flues shall be galvanized or painted sheet metal, painted to
match the roof.
(4) Main Fascia. The main fascia shall be a solid color stain, with brown, .
taupe, or gray.
(5) Secondary Fascia and Metal Railings above the First Floor. The
secondary fascia and metal railings above the first floor shall be a muted
accent trim color to be reviewed by the DRB.
(6) Walls. Walls shall be of stucco and horizontal or vertical wood siding.
9
Stucco colors shall be gray, beige or off-white. Wood siding colors shall
be gray, brown or taupe.
(7) Stone. Residences will have a minimum of a two foot high stone
wainscot in rainbow mix with a sandstone cap around the perimeter of the
structure except under decks decks where substantially concealed by
landscaping.
(8) Windows. Windows located within stucco areas shall "~
have a minimum of two inches of relief from the outside wall plane and
.have a sandstone sill. T.;.,., " ~~ "^~~~",+^~+^,,.,^ ^. hr^,.,.,
Tl li i i JI lq
(9) Outdoor LiQhting, Outdoor lighting shall be indirect with a concealed
source except for an entry chandelier, two carriage lights and one pilaster
light which may be exposed globes with a fixture of black or weathered
copper look metal. The maximum number of outdoor lights. permitted on
each lot shall be 15 regardless of lot size. Outdoor lights which conform
with Ordinance #22, Series of 1997, shall be exempt. All exterior lighting
shall be reviewed by the DRB:
(10) Garages. No garage doors shall directly face the street, except on Lot 24
and Lot 14.
(11) A residential address/nameplate if desired by the owner shall be located
on the side of the garage facing the access point to the lot.
(12) When the individual landscape plans are designed for individual lots,
special care shall be taken in the design of side yard landscaping in order
to provide adequate screening between structures.
X11. Recreational Amenities Tax: The recreation amenities tax shall be assessed at the
rate for asingle-family residential zone district.
10
Section 5. Conditions of Approval
A. The major amendment to Special Development District No. 22, Grand
Traverse, shall not be effective until the major subdivision is recorded by
the Town of Vail at the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's Office.
B. The major subdivision shall be recorded at the Eagle County Clerk and
Recorder's Office prior to a building permit being released for any
construction on Lots 2, 5, 7, 9 or 10.
C. The development of Special Development District No. 22 will have
impacts on the available employee housing within the Upper Eagle Valley
Area. In order to help meet this additional employee housing need, the
developer of Special Development District No. 22 shall provide employee
housing on site. The following restrictions shall. apply to all employee
dwelling units within SDD No. 22:
1. The developer shall build a minimum of six employee dwelling
units within the subdivision.- Each employee dwelling unit shall
have a minimum square footage of 400 square feet not to exceed
800 square feet and is allowed to have a kitchen. The square
footage of an employee housing unit shall be measured from
the inside face of the drywall walls creating the unit. The .
6R~~d number of employee units shall not be counted toward
allowable density for Special Development District. No.
22. The developer may choose to transfer up to 300 sq. ft. e#
6Rfi,4 from the primary unit to the employee unit. T"~~
~+~- The developer may provide up to a-5 23 employee
dwelling units including the 6 required dwelling units if so desired.
11
2. The employee dwelling units may be located on any of the lots
within the subdivision providing all the development standards are
met for each lot. Only one employee dwelling unit shall be
allowed per lot with a maximum of ~-5 23 units allowed. An
employee dwelling shall be incorporated into the structure of the
primary residence and shall not be.allowed to be separated from
the primary unit. Each employee dwelling unit shall have at least
one enclosed garage parking space. This parking space shall not ,
be detached from the single-family garage or structure. Each
phase of construction shall include a minimum of one employee
dwelling unit until six employee dwelling units are constructed and
available for rental.
3. The Employee Housing Unit shall be leased to tenants who are
full-time employees who work in Eagle County. An EHU shall not
be leased for a period less than thirty consecutive days. For the
purposes of this section, afull-time employee is one who works an
average of thirty hours each week.
4.. An EHU may not be sold, transferred, or conveyed separately
from any fly single-family dwelling it may be a part of.
'5. The EHU shall not be divided into any form of timeshares, interval
ownership, or fractional fee ownership as .those terms are defined
in the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail.
6. No later than February 1 of each year, the owner of each
employee housing unit within the town which is constructed
following the effective date of this chapter shall submit two copies
of a report on a form to be obtained from the Community
12
Development Department, to the Community Development
Department of the Town of Vail and Chairman of the Town of Vail
Housing Authority setting forth evidence establishing that the
employee housing unit has been rented throughout the year, the
rental rate, the employer, and that each tenant who resides within
the employee housing unit is a full-time employee in Eagle
County.
7. The owner of each EHU shall rent the unit at a monthly rental rate
consistent with or lower than those market rates prevalent for
similar properties in the Town of Vail.
8. The Town of Vail Housing Authority will determine the market rate
based on the study of other units of comparable size, location,
quality and amenities throughout the Town: The market rate shall
be based on an average of a minimum of five rental rates of
comparable units. If the unit is not rented and is not available at
the market rate it shall be determined to be in noncompliance.' In
addition to any other penalties and restrictions provided herein, a
unit found to be in noncompliance shall be subject to publication
' as determined by the Housing Authority.
9. The provisions of these restrictive covenants may be enforced by
the Owner and the Town.
10. The conditions, restrictions, stipulations, and agreements
contained herein shall not be waived, abandoned, terminated, or
amended except by the written consent of both the Town of Vail
and the Owner of the property.
D. The architectural and landscape design guidelines shall be incorporated
13
into the subdivision covenants before the final plat is recorded at the
Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's Office. The Town Of Vail shall be
party to these agreements.
Section 6. Amendments
Amendments to Special Development District No. 22 shall follow the procedures
contained in Section 18.40.100 of the Vail Municipal Code.
Section 7. Expiration
The applicant must begin construction of the Special Development District within 3 years
from the time of its final approval, and continue diligently toward completion of the
project. If the applicant does not begin and diligently work toward the completion of the
Special Development District or any stage of the Special Development District within the
time limits imposed by the preceding subsection, the Planning and Environmental
Commission shall review the Special Development District.. They shall recommend to
the Town Council that either the approval of the Special Development District be
extended, that the approval of the Special Development District be revoked, or that the
Special Development District be amended.
Section 8.
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 by declared invalid.
Section 9.
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
14
inhabitants thereof.
Section 10.
The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provisions of Vail Municipal Code as
provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty
imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution
commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the ,
,provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall
not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless ,
expressly stated herein.
Section 11.
All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith
are hereby 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, heretofore
repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED ON FIRST READING THIS _ day of
2005, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the _ day of ,
2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
Ordered published in full this _ day of , 2005.
Rod Slifer, Mayor
ATTEST:
15
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Glerk
INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED By Title Only this _ day of , 2005.
ATTEST:.
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
16
Cyol
o~~~
~O~P~a~ RJ ~J.5~
CB 56078Y3
CH=7.257'
amro s,~6-ReaAR rv~Pt.ts GP 7PE
~! P.LS NQ T6uT6J (/~/.
n
72 44 .d
562 B„,.ID`` ~\ a
~'.
d=157I 5B' </ y
L=59.70' ~ ~ d. ~ trs~s~
CB=S51V102~W 4/~ \ \
CH=59.51 ~ ' ~GtN~ ~ °\ ~a
D • ~'°/ ` ~ ~°+§, ~r COT 5 ` ~\
rt ~~ < ~ ~ °4yb ~\ IcnaaiWA~s rr \/
\ ~ ~ 1410
e ~
/ ~~ '~-
i
3 ; b. ,4, ,, ,,
~` \ ~ ~~~ "LOl f/NE C71EA7L'D
' \ LOT 7 OY IHlS PUT
rF .p
}~ 11,613 SCOARC fiFE
~ 0.111 ACRES
~d~°-
?~,
(OT 8 '~~' s'l"
a
~ ~4
GRAPHIC SCALE ~ \~,p5~
~ `'`~
,ate, i~
H07EIl 5 m s~aatVi Im 6 nrto rire sruert Tors °a pc-arwus/ iPr ues .
O z) .-otwn~s Iou1m a/n' xtnu °/rus e.s, e.t: r n.t,s alts (Trot
0 3/ -octwtrs ra,a cn• xtaul .R•.A4 w. Ls ,o. Iz
• q -oomtas ~ a/r uurn w/IVa. ew. .e. • su tweym.)
s/ twm o/e- x6.n .m wlw.w .w ~t..a u
nE e,wn~uiisc. lor'u~s ryn¢aan o.- wr a tw . Iwlm sir °nw .w Alulwu ~ r"i
..a t, .T na :amran ww.a~ a c°, s ~ .o..~,to.
n ~ sPV~ tom
~t n t.,nTU Swm .oanta
. _T r , `~ wen via[ I.u0.r taz wA~ESwK
LOT 4
N/7'US CAP (LS
/ / .
rwtf ~,,,, ~ ~a
FINAL PLA T
A RESUBD/VISION OF LOT 5
AMENDED FINAL PLA T
DAUPH/NA/S-MOSELEY SUBD/l~/S/ON - F/L/NG NO.~-7
A RESUBD/ Ills/ON OF LOTS 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, AND 10
TOWN OF VA/L, EAGLE COUNTY COLORADO
ffROflG7E Ol OmKARON AMO ONkERS4/R
10.S1@Rvlf NuL r-,pA st+rm °.s n.olM c
.bnwu adp w. o.nr w rn .cyr.. w w uu1.w Ps+b ru°xe w w '
.., . tec f=s. ew.ex ee.m r°s.. w .v;..~
-
' w a ..~.~aa one fat c A
~ ~ 4 / 4 t w M In.~W w% fM~G !saws.
<wfP~ r~'~h~v f;~ pw~ Int > aSIJ mu siev a Iu~
~rf n.., r.... s as°Ai1.i `.:: i,: ,,,.evnr wl. w
twz~%rrm
mnrsAt EU aw.vnsvars.xaxur
'.~°r~°~~'Ixdtl'i• lA "
1
`W"
•
N
~
3.aawm .a vw
a 4
uaf nwv
aOO
..s..t
1 r
. R
iri
w
~
`
`
~I
.
m
.wsm
> a,...~vx.1;.....
..1
n
n re
"
a.
~
~~
.s~~~t,.a..
_~
_~ .~ ~e,.r~A~~.a.
.v
~,
fvnt4d M++wi ae men n ~: P+~~ Mr ~ytl b :~~h+ mN mah~°°nevwy
n
a.
r
a
ur
~
oa a-
.
=
..~
.
.~
EM °
.
r*wr ~. e,ae rs .nen a
' C6.Or'O! b j/M~ /uhr W-OTEC [wlwM~n Ar,~
~b~~eh ~ 3TD1 ~aa w,eslc 1~41ffm~i r Rrs al
~-
=
-
as .~,
~~
v.
,IA al:aa 1 >:
mwlr v acv
ro6N awxax cr:Rmmw ~ .~
m.M t'8 =
°
':u xmaw
;":~
nr ww waoa..e.f a.... .1 wa
c~w~ler, pao ° a.r a. Ii ro. w~f ww
o/fwd, ee.~ei nms~O°.a r w '"'
o
ta ar
lv
~.
. e
r
.
we a o.a owm
•~ ~v o., ,.a
,..
.
. a.
..
~. ~tr °°,wa am~.rn~~rp .gym
~
tx. er~ow ~
r.u+.a~ r~
.~..a°`
.,~ r w m
.
F.
a
u
r
e
~QO..°°
°-
~
~
i
M
~
~
u
~
ca,.Ar
o iw
o
a
°.C ear mwTF
i ~Ini momma W
+~
~
1
~~
~
a1~M.imq l~IArq•Nw rwai.a n.~.Ar iM '
'
~.mn°~w~r n.1 m .y.°.. FrAw
m...Ae.mury w m.
w~ ~ w~ ».v w suN r tuoaA6o
/
'
~ J
' mwntrtuu
J S
A.a,fi
n~ ~
+a csa ro w , ~„Ia pd
:,. ~ ~_~
N~ ,v w
w
' zra o-aaauoo /
.~ .
~ ~
"- 6° ro-w=+w wwmHe .o, --.ewxww e.ro. m. ua -a=r RrsE EERIlFlG Ie .
. Aa wos ., _
I1rw~ ~V~ w erl~tl a~a _ aa, ,..a ~n w
~•~Nd ~r M w.brt! nv IbI ux uw eJlr ro 1
" r DH~I4v-MW A0.1m5
SiM ~S CERIMGIE~ GFR> ~7F LY
TAA'ES PA/O:
< /~%ro~: m e.af n.~ tAx awr<PI%
w ~ xww wr In. b.~ d u.'a~. d cm.m ~
< e.+~ Jna IwrDr rmar un e,. um.
•~wnr tl
..f m.®..,.~e e~..~s pt~
~1°~
~pwe. w1 a A ,...~s,+a.~ .i N/
~ ~.t._ ~ r.~.as w ~ yn ~a..v~,u
Ar-e ~st~1. ~ Via:.: a::.~%1.'aa e.~:ie «s~w,.~ w
...1.•°, ..i
'°`nf
aa
:~
a:
ie
`
n a
°M
.=..~ary.-rm.1
~
.
m
.
.w
o..
.
.~a
a
~`~`~• ~vwae ..u
- w~pd~ .~Atrop.°eenp q~ ~attn~rva
oif aw sa w ea. aw r
ea n QEIPX
ANO REGYIPOERY CF]P1VKA~ .
.
" - ~ ~ ~
µtew eta A.-,.r°v w aw
a a ~~ Aa rmti"r .tea v. :.p m a' .
. a.. m, 6.~,..
4 aeMf
w.at.I..e ~ 3.+r.v..
l9C/N/TY MAP .
"SCALE 1' ~ 300'
a
a~
3
c~
v
SDD No. 22, Grand Travers, Zoning analysis September 26, 2005
Lot Lot Size GRFA Under SDD GRFA P/S GRFA P/S* S.F. W/O GRFA Allowable Site Coverage Constructed Site Coverage
1 11,805 2,718 5,286 5,886 5;902 2,951 2,350
2 16,248 4,495 6,662 7,262 ~~ 8,124 4,062 na
3 11,500 3,596 5,170 5,770 5,750 .2,875 2,453
4 11,761 2,718 5,269 5,869 5,880 2,940 2,160
5 11,895 3,157 5,320 5,920 5,948 2,974 na
7 11,823 3,157 5,293 5,893 5,912 2,956 na
8 15,393 4,495 6,551 7,151 7,696 3,848 na
9 14,588 4,495 6,343 6,943 7,294_ 3,647 3,313.
10 .14,429 4,495 6,283 6,883 7,214 3,607 3,583
11 10,803 3,596 4,905 _
5,505 5,400 2,700 2,514
12 12,981 3,596 5,733 6,333 6,490 3,245 2,780
13 15,159 3,596 6,520 7,120 7,578. 3,789 2,671
14 11,151 3,596 ~-5,037 5,637 5,574 2,787 2,777
15 8,538 2,718 3,928. 4,528 4,268 2,134 2,055
16 8,494 2,718 3,907 4,507 4,246 2,123 2,082
17 8,494 2,718 3,907 4,507 4,246 2,123 2,122
18 10,062 3,596 4,623 5,223 5,030 2,515 2,499
19 9,148 2,718 4,208 4,808 4,574 2,287 2,161
20 9,801 3,596 4,508 5,108 4,900 2,450 2,410
21 10,237 3,596 4,690 5,290 5,118 2,559 2,554
22 9,409 2,718 4,328 4,928 4,704 2,352 2,232
23 9,148 3,596 4,208 4,808 4,574. 2,287 1,829
24 10,629 2,718 4,839 5,439 5.,314 2,657 2,319
78,402 117,518 131,318 131,736
'`Includes 600 square foot credit for garages
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Department of Community Development
DATE: September 26, 2005
SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to
Section 12-9A-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for
a major amendment to Special Development District No: 22, Grand
Traverse, modifying the GRFA calculations for the District; increasing the
number of lots for the District; and a final review of a minor, subdivision,
pursuant to Section 13-4-2, Procedure, Vail Town Code, to modify the
size of Lot 5, Amended Final Plat, Dauphinais%Moseley Subdivision Filing
1, A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, and setting forth details in
regard thereto.
Applicant: Pat Dauphinais, President of Grand Traverse H.O.A.
Planner: Warren Campbell
I. SUMMARY
The applicant, Pat Dauphinais, President of the Grand Traverse H.O.A., is
requesting a recommendation from the Planning and Environmental-Commission
to the Town Council regarding a request to amend Special Development District
(SDD) No. 22, Grand Traverse, to eliminate the maximum allowable Gross
Residential Floor Area (GRFA) for each. lot within SDD No. 22 and increase the
number of lots within the SDD by one. In addition, `the applicant is requesting
approval of a minor subdivision to subdivide. Lot 5 of the Amended Final Plat:
Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots: 5, 6; 7, 8. 9,
and 10 and create Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5, Amended Final
Plat: Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6, 7, 8,
9, and 10.
Staff is recommending that the Planning and Environmental Commission
forwards a recommendation of approval to the Town Council regarding the
request to eliminate GRFA restriction in SDD No. 22' and increase the number of
lots by one and approval with conditions of the minor subdivision subject to the
findings and conditions outlined in Section IX of this memorandum.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The applicant, Pat Dauphinais, President of the Grand Traverse H.O.A., is
requesting a recommendation from the Planning and Environmental Commission
to the Town ,Council regarding a request to amend Special Development District
No. 22, Grand Traverse, to eliminate the ,maximum allowable Gross Residential
Floor Area (GRFA) for each lot within SDD No. 22 and increase the number of
lots within the SDD. In addition, the applicant is requesting approval of a minor
subdivision to subdivide Lot 5 of the Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moseley
1 Attachment: E
Subdivision Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5 6 7 8 9 and 10 and create two
new lots, Lots 5 and 7, by recording the proposed Amended Final Plat: A
Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision
Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5 6 7 8 9 and 10.
The applicant's request to remove the GRFA restrictions 'for the' lots located
within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, has arisen as the homes within. the SDD are
not eligible for the new GRFA methodology adopted by Ordinance 14, series of
2004, as the lots are restricted in terms of maximum allowable GRFA in all cases
far below that which would be. permitted under the underlying Primary/Secondary
zone district in regards to lot size. In addition, the homes within the SDD are no
longer eligible fora 250 addition or an interior conversion per the new. GRFA
regulations. The applicant is proposing that site coverage, setbacks, height, and
the architectural requirements within SDD No. 22 would control development on
the lots. A vicinity map has been attached for reference (Attachment A).
In addition, the applicant is requesting approval of a minor subdivision to
subdivide Lot 5 of the Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision
Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6 7 8 9 and 10 and create two new lots,
..Lots 5 and 7, by recording the proposed Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of
Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision Filing 1 • A
Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6, 7, 8 9, and 10. A reduced copy of the proposed plat,
Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-
Moselev Subdivision Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5 6 7 8 9 and 10 has
been attached for reference (Attachment B). The existing Lot 5 which is
proposed to be subdivided was created by combining two of the original platted
lots within Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision Filing 1. The applicant is proposing
to resubdivide Lot 5, measuring 23,722 square feet, back into two smaller lots
with the areas as follows, Lot 5 measuring 11,817 square feet and Lot 7
measuring 11,891 square feet.
III. BACKGROUND
The area included within SDD' No. 22 was annexed into the Town of Vail
by Ordinance 29, Series of 1979 which became effective on August 15,
1979.
• SDD No. 22 was created from 10.69 acres of land with an underlying
zoning of Primary/Secondary zone district by Ordinance 23, Series of
1988. It included the creation of the Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision
Filing 1 recorded in 1990 consisting of 24 lots and 3.741 acres of open
space.
• On May 7, 1991, the Vail Town Council introduced, read and approved on
second reading Ordinance #10, Series of 1991, an ordinance repealing
and reenacting Ordinance #13, Series of 1990, to provide changes to
Special Development District #22 that concerned lot size, corresponding
GRFA, maximum number of allowable employee dwelling units, and
architectural guidelines. Ordinance #13, Series of 1990 was the original
ordinance establishing SDD #22.
2
On September 22, 1997, the Community Development Department
approved, and the Planning and Environmental Commission upheld, a
minor amendment to SDD #22. The minor amendment allowed for
changes to the architectural guidelines outlined in Section 11 of
Ordinance #10, Series of 1991. The changes included:
• architectural guideline requiring that all the residences in the
SDD have.copper gutters and downspouts, and
• the ability for the residence constructed on Lot 14 to have the
garage doors of the residence facing the road.
On June 8, 1998 the Planning and Environmental Commission approved
a Major Amendment to SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse. The following items
were approved as a part of the Major Amendment of the applicant's
request on June 8, 1998:
• an increase in the allowable GRFA for all existing and
proposed employee housing units from 500 square feet
maximum to 800 square feet maximum,
• a change in the allowable enclosed parking area (garage)
square footage credit from 600 square feet to 1,200 square fo
permit adequate enclosed parking for constructed employee
housing units (600 square feet for the primary dwelling unit
and 600 square feet for the EHU if constructed),
• a replat of Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 & 10 into Lots 5, 8, 9 & 10, thus
eliminating two lots within the Grand Traverse development
area,
• an increase to the maximum number of outdoor lights allowed
on each residential lot to 15 per lot total,
• a modification to the required setbacks on Lots 5, 8, 9 & 10,
• a reapportioning of GRFA within the Grand .Traverse
development area, and
• a reapportioning of the 600 square foot garage credit.
In October of 2004, Ordinance 14, series of 2004, was adopted which
amended the GRFA regulations regulating the entire Town of Vail. The
properties located within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, were effected to a
greater extent than other Primary/Secondary zoned properties because
under the SDD GRFA is restricted below that which the base zone district
would allow.. In addition, the properties lost ability of homes within the
SDD to request 250 additions and interior conversions. Finally, the SDD
does not allow the properties to utilize the basement deduction provisions
of Ordinance 14, Series of 2004.
3
• On July 25, 2005, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a
work session in order to hear the applicant's request. In general, the
Commissioners were in support of the proposed subdivision of Lot 5. In
addition; the Commissioners generally supported the proposal to remove
the GRFA restrictions within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, as there are
additional architectural requirements within the SDD which would provide
a level of comfort that the homes, which have not been built will fit the
character of the neighborhood which has already been established.
Commission members expressed that the elimination of GRFA for the
entire Town would be more difficult as SDD No. 22 is different from a
majority of Town in that it contains very small lots and additional
architectural controls.
IV. ROLES OF THE REVIEWING BOARDS
Special Development District and Maior Amendment
Order of Review: Generally, applications will be reviewed first by the PEC for
impacts of use/development, then by the DRB for compliance of proposed
buildings and site planning, and final approval by the Town Council.
Planning and Environmental Commission:
The PEC shall review the proposal for and make a recommendation to the
Town Council based on the Criteria and Findings listed in Section .IX of this
memorandum.
Design Review Board:
The DRB has NO review authority on a SDD proposal, but must review any
accompanying DRB application. The DRB review of an SDD prior to Town
Council approval is purely advisory in nature.
Staff:
The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided
and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The
staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines.
Staff provides a staff memo containing background on the property and provides
a staff evaluation of the project with respect to the required criteria and findings,
and a recommendation on approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Staff
also facilitates the review process.
Town Council:
Action: The Town Council is responsible for final approval/denial of an SDD.
The Town Council shall review the proposal using the Criteria and Findings listed
in Section IX of this memorandum.
4
Minor Subdivision Review
Planning and Environmental Commission:
Action: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for final
approval, approve with modifications, or disapprove the plat. Specifically
the code states in Section 13-12-3C, Review and Action on Plat: '
The planning an, d environmental commission shall review the plat and
associated materials and shall approve, approve with modifications or
disapprove the plat within twenty one (21) days of the first public hearing
on the exemption plat application or the exemption plat application will be
deemed approved. A longer time period for rendering a decision may be
granted subject to mutual agreement between the planning and
environmental commission and the applicant. The criteria for reviewing
the plat shall be as contained in section 13-3-4 of this title.
Design Review Board:
Action: The Design Review Board has NO review authority on an exemption
plat, but must review any accompanying Design Review Board application.
Town Council:
The Town Council is the appeals authority for an exemption plat review
procedure in accordance with Section 13-3-5C, Vail Town Code, which reads as
follows:
Within ten (10) days the decision of the Planning and Environmental
Commission on the final plat shall be .transmitted to the Council by the
staff. The Council .may appeal the decision .of the Planning and
Environmental Commission within seventeen (17) .days of the Planning
and Environmental Commission's action. !f Council appeals the
Planning and Environmental Commission's decision, the Council shall
hear substantially the same presentation by the applicant as was heard
at the Planning and Environmental Commission hearing(s). The Council
shall have thirty (30) days to affirm, reverse, or affirm with modifications
the Planning and Environmental Commission decision, and the Council
shall conduct the appeal at a regularly scheduled Council meeting.
Staff:
The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided
and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The
staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines.
Staff provides a staff memo containing background on the property and provides
a staff evaluation of -the project with respect to the required criteria and findings,
and a recommendation on approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Staff
also facilitates the review process.
5
V. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS
Town Of Vail Zoning Code
Article 12-9A: Special Development (SDD) District (in part)
12-9A-1: PURPOSE:
The purpose of the special development district is to encourage flexibility and
creativity in the development of land in order to promote its most appropriate use;
to improve the design character and quality of the new development with the
town; to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of streets and utilities;
to preserve the natural and scenic features of open space areas; and to further .
the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail comprehensive plan
Town of Vail Subdivision Regulations
13-1-2: PURPOSE:
C. Specific Purposes: These regulations are further intended to serve the
following specific purposes: .
1. To inform each subdivider of the standards and criteria by which
development proposals will be evaluated, and to provide information as
to the type and extent of improvements required.
2. To provide for the subdivision of property in .the future without conflict
with development on adjacent land.
3. To protect and conserve the value of land throughout the Municipality
and the value of buildings and improvements on the land.
4. To ensure that subdivision of property is in compliance with the Town's
zoning ordinances, to achieve a harmonious, cohvenient, workable
relationship among land uses, consistent with Town development
objectives. ,
5. To guide public and private policy and action in order to provide
adequate and efficient transportation, water, sewage, schools, parks,
playgrounds, recreation, and. other public requirements and facilities
and generally to provide that public facilities will. have sufficient
capacity to serve the proposed subdivision.
6. To provide for accurate legal descriptions of newly subdivided land and
to establish reasonable .and desirable construction design standards
and procedures.
7. To prevent the pollution of air, streams and ponds, to assure adequacy
of drainage facilities, to safeguard the water table and to encourage
the wise use and management of natural resources throughout the
Town in order to preserve the integrity, stability and beauty of the
community and the value of the land.
13-3-4: COMMISSION REVIEW OF APPLICATION; CRITERIA:
The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the application is in
compliance with the intent and purposes of this Chapter, the Zoning Ordinance
and other pertinent regulations that the Planning and Environmental Commission
6
deems applicable. Due consideration shall be given to the recommendations
made by public agencies, utility companies and other agencies consulted under
subsection 13-3-3C above. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall
review the application and consider its appropriateness in regard to .Town.
policies relating to subdivision control, densities proposed, regulations,
ordinances and resolutions and other applicable documents, environmental
integrity and compatibility with the surrounding land uses and other applicable
documents, effects on the aesthetics of the Town.
VI.
SITE ANALYSIS
Legal Description: Dauphinais-Mosley .Subdivision Filing 1 and
Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moseley
Subdivision Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6,
7, 8, 9, and 10
Address: 1450-1850 Lions ridge, Loop and 1402-1428
Moraine Drive
Lot Size: 10.69 acres (465,656 sq ft)
Zoning: Special Development District No. 22
(Primary/Secondary zone district underlying zoning)
Land Use Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential
Current Land Use: Residential
Lot 5, Amended Final Plat: AResubdivision of Lot 5, Amended Final Plat:
Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6; 7, 8,
9, and 10
Zoning: Special Development District No. 22
(Primary/Secondary (P/S) zone district underlying
zoning)
Land Use Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential
Current Land Use: Vacant
Development Standard Required by P/S Proposed
Lot Area: 15,000 sq. ft. 11,817 sq. ft.
Dimension: 80'X80' min. 65 feet X 65 feet
Buildable Area: 15,000 sq. ft. 11,817 sq. ft.
Frontage: 30 feet min. 67 feet
GRFA: Proposed to be no limitation except that which can
be constructed within the limitations of SDD No. 22.
Access: Access to the site is via Moraine Drive, a public
road which is currently constructed.
7
Lot 7, Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat:
Dauphinais-Mose/ev Subdivision Filing 7: A Resubdivision of Lots 5 6 7 8
9, and 70
VII.
VIII.
Zoning: Special Development District No. 22
(Primary/Secondary zone district underlying zoning)
Land Use Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential
Current Land Use: Vacant
Development Standard
Lot Area:
Dimension:
Buildable Area:
Frontage:
G RFA:
Required by P/S
15,000 sq. ft.
80'X80' min.
15,000 sq. ft.
30 feet min.
Proposed
11,891 sq. ft.
61 feet X 61 feet
11,891 sq. ft.
60 feet
Access:
Proposed to be no limitation except that which can
be constructed within the limitations of SDD No. 22.
Access to the site is via Moraine Drive, a public
road which is currently constructed.
SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING
Land Use Zoning
North: Residential Primary/Secondary zone district
South: Hotel/Lodge Public Accommodation zone district
.East: Residential Low Density Multiple-Family zone
district
West: Residential Primary/Secondary zone district
CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Special Development District Maior Amendment
Chapter 12-9 of the Town Code provides for the amendment of an existing
special development districts in the Town of Vail. According to Section 12-9A-1,
the purpose of a special development district is,
"To encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land, in order
to promote its most appropriate use; to improve the design character and
quality of the new development 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 Development District, in conjunction wifh
the property's underlying zone district, shall establish the requirements for
guiding development and uses of property included in the Special
Development District."
8
The Town Code provides nine design criteria which shall be used as the principal
criteria in evaluating the merits of the amendment to an existing special
development district. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that
submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the
following standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or
that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved.
The following is a staff analysis of the project's compliance with the nine SDD
review criteria:
A. Consideration of Factors ReQardinp Special Development Districts:
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.
The requested. proposal is to eliminate the maximum allowable Gross
Residential Floor Area (GRFA) for each lot within SDD No. 22 under
Section 4-B-5 of Ordinance 9, Series of 1998, the adopting ordinance,
and an increase in the number .of lots within the SDD by one by
resubdividing Lot 5, an increase from 22 to 23 lots. Ordinance 9,
Series of 1998 is attached for reference with text that would be
deleted shown as st~+lg# and added text is shown in
bold(Attachment C).
The proposal to remove the GRFA restrictions for the lots located
within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, has arisen as the homes within
the SDD are not eligible for the new GRFA methodology adopted by
Ordinance 14, series of 2004, as the lots are restricted in terms of
maximum allowable GRFA in all cases far below that which would be
permitted under the underlying Primary/Secondary ,zone district in
regards to lot size. In addition, the homes within the SDD are no
longer eligible fora 250 addition or an interior conversion per the new
GRFA regulations. Staff would like to point out that the proposal to
gain the ability for additions and interior conversions to existing homes
within SDD No. 22 can be accomplished by revising the GRFA
limitations found within Section 4 of the SDD. Currently, the GRFA
limitations are below that which Primary/Secondary zoning would
allow by 612 to 2,568 square feet depending on the lot.
The intent of the initial approval of SDD No. 22 was to create smaller
lots in order to protect open space. Out of the total site area included
within SDD No. 22, 10.69 acres, there was 3.741 acres set aside and
protected as open space. When SDD No. 22 was adopted the 24 lots
within the SDD ranged from 8,494 square feet to 16,248 square feet
with a majority of the lots measuring approximately 11,000 square feet
in size. Staff believes that as it was the original intent to have smaller
lots and a more clustered residential, development in order to protect
open space. Staff believes that the subdivision of the existing Lot 5,
which measures 23,722 square feet into two smaller lots measuring
9
11,891 square feet and 11,817 square feet is in keeping with the
intent of the SDD.
Development within the SDD is regulated by Section 4 of Ordinance
9, Series of 1998. The adopting ordinance establishes the GRFA,
setbacks, height, architectural design and materials, and orientation.
The SDD deviates from the underlying zoning of Primary/Secondary
zone district by allowing reduce front and side setbacks from 15 feet
to 10 feet on many of the lots and increasing the rear setback on the
lots located on the southern portion of the SDD from 15 feet to
setbacks ranging from 35 to 97 feet with a majority being 40 to 50
feet. GRFA within the SDD is limited by the Table located in Section
4-B-5 of the adopting ordinance. The GRFA limitations identified in
the Table are substantially lower than that which would be permitted
by .Primary/Secondary zone district regulations. On average the
maximum allowable GRFA under the SDD is 1,640 square feet less
than that permitted under Primary/Secondary zoning. Staff has
included an attachment which shows each lot, the size of the lot, the
amount of GRFA allowed under the SDD, the amount of GRFA
allowed under the Primary/Secondary zone district with the changes
enacted by Ordinance 14, Series of 2004, the potential square
footages of homes without GRFA limitations, allowable site coverage,
and constructed site coverage. (Attachment D).
Staff believes that the elimination of GRFA limitations within SDD No.
22, will have no negative effect on the above criterion as the SDD
adopting ordinance contains all the elements to control the. bulk,
mass, and height of the homes within the SDD within Section 4 of the
adopting ordinance. The proposal to eliminate GRFA within SDD No.
22 could be a way to conduct a controlled study on the effects on bulk
. and mass of structures if GRFA was eliminated. Staff believes that
the existing restrictions placed upon development in SDD No. 22 will
result in new and redeveloped houses within the SDD being of similar
character to those existing today. in addition, many of the homes
within the SDD which are currently constructed have maximized site
coverage and built to the extent of the designated setbacks or have
very little left which insures that the existing structures would change
minimally above grade. There are currently 5 undeveloped lots within
the SDD which would potentially be constructed under regulations in
the SDD if GRFA was stricken from the adopting ordinance.
Attachment C has str+l~fi text depicting the existing language
which must be stricken from Ordinance 9, Series of 1998 to eliminate
GRFA requirements. Staff believes that the request to eliminate
GRFA within the SDD complies with this criterion.
B. Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient
and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity.
The proposed elimination of GRFA within SDD No. 22 and the
increase in tfie number of lots within the SDD from 22 to 23 will not
have a negative impact on the items identified in this criterion. The
10
initial approval of SDD No. 22 included 24 lots which was
subsequently replatted to include 22 lots. This proposal would take
the SDD up to 23 lots. The .proposed elimination of GRFA would also
have no negative impact on this criterion as there are several other
factors contained within SDD No. 22
C. Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in
Chapter 12-10 of the Vail Town Code.
The proposed amendments to the SDD do not have. any negative
effect on this criterion. All lots developed within the SDD will comply
with the parking standards.
D. Conformity with the applicable elements of the Vail
Comprehensive Plan, Town policies and Urban Design Plan.
The proposed amendment to increase the number of lots in the SDD
from 22 to 23 complies with the Vail Comprehensive Plan. However,
the request to eliminate GRFA within SDD No. 22 would be different
in policy to how the remainder of the community is regarded to size of
structures. Staff believes for several reasons as outlined in Staff's
response to Criterion A of this Section that the size of homes within
the SDD on the vacant lots or any future redeveloped lot would be
fundamentally similar to those which are constructed within the SDD
currently. Of the homes currently constructed many have already
maximized site coverage so any addition to be made if GRFA was
eliminated from'the SDD would be below grade or in a vaultedarea of
the home. The combination of requirements contained within the
SDD which include, setbacks which are more restrictive in areas, site
coverage limited to 25%, heights of 33 feet, garage door orientation,
and architectural minimums, will sufficiently control the bulk, mass,
and height of the structures which remain to be constructed or for
future additions. In addition, the fact the .lots within the SDD were
allowed to be smaller than that required by the base zoning in. order to
preserve open space and sensitive areas limits the size of the
structures dramatically as there is limited areas to construct a
structure upon each site.
E. Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards
that affect the property on which the special development district
is proposed.
According to the Official Town of Vail Geologic Hazard Maps, the
SDD No. 22, Grand traverse, development site is not located in any
geologically sensitive areas. Staff believes that the application
complies with this criterion.
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.
11
As was stated in staffs response to Criterion A the initial adoption of
SDD No. 22 was designed to preserve open. space and sensitive
areas. The current proposal would not alter that initial approval.
G. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians
,addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. '
The circulation system for this SDD was approved in the initial
adoption of SDD No. 22 and is currently in place and functioning.
This proposal does not alter that circulation system.
H. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to
optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, ~ views and
functions.
As was stated in staff's response to Criterion A the initial adoption of
SDD No. 22 was designed to preserve open space and sensitive
areas. The current proposal would not alter that initial approval.
I. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable,
functional and efficient relationship throughout the development
of the special development district.
The applicant is proposing to construct the homes on the proposed
and existing lots as the owners desire to construct upon them.
Findings:
The following findings are used for a Major Amendment to an SDD:
1. That the proposed major amendment to Special Development District No. 22
complies with the nine design criteria outlined in Section 12-9A-8 of the Vail
Town Code. Furthermore, the applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction
of the Commission, based upon the testimony and evidence presented during
the public hearing, that any adverse effects of the requested deviations from
the development standards of the underlying zoning are outweighed by the
public benefits provided. Lastly, the Commission finds that the request is
consistent with the development goals and objectives of the Town.
2. With regards to the proposed elimination of GRFA, that:
a. Proposed development controls, such as setbacks, site coverage,
height, orientation, and architectural design, exist within the text of
SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, to adequately control bulk, mass, and
height of structures, and will maintain the character of new structures
to those which exist;
b. Proposed development controls comply with applicable elements of
the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations.
c. Proposed development controls will provide adequate availability of
12
light, air and open space.
d. Proposed development controls within the SDD will provide a
compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent
. properties. -
e. Proposed development controls will result in creative design solutions
or other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by
conformance with prescribed GRFA standards.
3. .With regards to the, proposed increase in the number of lots from 22 to 23,
that: •
a. Proposed increase in lots provides necessary separation between
buildings and riparian areas, geologically sensitive areas and other .
environmentally sensitive areas.
b. Proposed increase in lots comply with applicable elements of the Vail
Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations.
c. Proposed increase in lots will provide adequate availability of light, air
and open space.
d. Proposed increase in lots will provide a compatible relationship with
buildings and uses on adjacent properties.
e. Proposed increase in lots will result in creative design solutions or
other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved, by
conformance with prescribed setback standards.
4. That the proposed development controls within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse
are in conformance with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban Design
Guide Plan and Design Considerations.
5. That the development is in compliance with the purposes of the
Primary/Secondary zone district, that the proposal does not otherwise have a
significant negative effect on the character of the' neighborhood, and that the
proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail
Comprehensive Plan.
Minor Subdivision
A basic. premise of subdivision regulations is that the minimum standards for the
creation of new lots must be met. This subdivision will be reviewed under Title
13, Subdivision Regulations, of the Town of Vail Code.
The first set of criteria to be considered by the Planning and
Environmental Commission for a Minor Subdivision application is:
Lot Area: The minimum lot area for the Primary/Secondary zone district
is 15,000 square feet. The proposed area of Lot 5 would be 11.,817
square feet. The proposed area of Lot 7 would be 11,891 square feet.
The two proposed resulting lots do not meet this requirement for the
Primary/Secondary zone district. However, the intent of the approval of
SDD No. 22 was to create smaller Pots in order to protect open space.
Out of the total site area included within SDD No. 22, 10.69 acres, there .
was 3.741 acres set aside and protect as open space. When SDD No. 22
13
was adopted lots within the SDD ranged from 8,494 square feet to 16,248
square feet with a majority of the lots measuring approximately 11,000
square feet in size. Staff believes that as it was the original intent to have
smaller lots and a more clustered residential development in order to
protect open space and the lot which is proposed to be subdivided was
previously two smaller lots prior to the recording of the Amended Final
Plat: Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5
6. 7. 8, 9, and 10.
Buildable Area: The minimum buildable area for the Primary/Secondary
zone district is 15,000 square feet. The two proposed lots do not meet
this requirement. However, for the same reasons identified above small
lots which do not meet this requirement conform to the intent of SDD No.
22.
Frontage: The Primary/Secondary zone district. identifies a minimum
frontage requirement of 30 feet. The two proposed lots meet this
requirement.
Dimension: The Primary/Secondary zone district requires lots to be able
to enclose a square with a minimum dimension of 80 feet by 80 feet. The
two proposed lots do not meet this requirement. However, for the same
reasons identified above small lots which do not meet this requirement
conform to the intent of SDD No. 22.
2. The second set of review criteria to be considered with a minor
subdivision request is outlined in the Subdivision. Regulations, 13-3-4, and
is as follows:
"The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the
application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of this
Chapter, the Zoning Ordinance and other pertinent regulations
that the Planning and Environmental Commission deems
applicable....The .Planning and Environmental Commission shall
review the application and consider its appropriateness in regard
to Town policies relating to subdivision control, densities
proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other
applicable documents, environmental integrity and compatibility
with the surrounding land uses and other applicable documents,
effects on the aesthetics of the Town. "
The purpose section of Title 13, Subdivision. Regulations, is intended to ensure
that the subdivision is promoting the health, safety and welfare of the community.
The subdivision purpose statement from 13-1-2 (C) are as follows:
1. To inform each subdivider of the standards and criteria by which
development proposals will be evaluated and to provide
information as to the type and extent of improvements required. "
Staff Response: The applicant was informed as to the standards and
criteria by which the proposed plat and future development would be
14
evaluated. One purpose of subdivision regulations, and any development
control, is to establish basic ground rules which the staff, the PEC, the
applicant and the community can follow in the public review process..;
Development on these two lots is governed by the SDD No. 22 adopting
ordinance. With this proposed subdivision several portions of the SDD
must be amend which where changes when the Amended Final Plat:
Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5 6 7
8, 9, and 10 was filed to combine two lots resulting in a larger Lot 5. The
changes that are necessary to make to the text of SDD No. 22 can be
found within Attachment C. Although this request does not involve the
creation of a new subdivision it does include the resubdivision of an
existing parcel of land, the minor subdivision process is the appropriate
process'to take one lot and subdivide it into two smaller lots. As a part of
the overall application the applicant is requesting to eliminate the GRFA
limitations identified within SDD No. 22. If that portion of the application is
approved by the Town Council the two newly created lots would be
limited in development potential by site coverage, setbacks, height, '
architecture, and orientation. However, if this portion of the application is
not approved staff would suggest that Section 4 of SDD No. 22 be revised
to limit the two newly created lots to 3,157 square feet of GRFA a piece
which is a split of the GRFA permitted on the larger Lot 5 as it exists
currently.
2. To provide for the subdivision of property in the future without
conflict with development on adjacent land. "
Staff Response: This proposed minor subdivision take a large lot and
subdivides it into two smaller lots which existed prior to being ,combined
and will not adversely. affect adjacent land. The proposed minor
subdivision does not make either property undevelopable or non-
conforming with regard to zoning requirements found within SDD.No. 22.
3. To protect and conserve the value of land throughout the
Municipality and the value of buildings and improvements on the
land.
Staff Response: The proposed minor subdivision will .have no
detrimental affect on the value of land within the Town.
4. To ensure that subdivision of property is in compliance with the
Town's zoning ordinances, to achieve a harmonious, convenient,
workable relationship among land uses, consistent with Town
development objectives.
Staff Response: Staff believes the proposed minor amendment will not
preclude a harmonious, convenient and workable relationship among land
uses consistent with municipal development •objectives. The proposed
minor subdivision does not make either property undevelopable or non-
conforming with regard to zoning requirements found within SDD No. 22.
5. To guide public and private policy and action in order to provide
15
adequate and efficient transportation, water, sewage, schools,
parks, playgrounds, recreation, and other public requirements and
facilities and generally to provide that public facilities will have
sufficient capacity to serve the proposed subdivision.
Staff Response: The subdivision regulations are intended primarily to
address impacts of large-scale subdivisions of property, as opposed to
this particular proposal to amend this plat. Staff does not believe this
proposal will have any negative impacts on any of the above-listed public
facilities.
6. To provide for accurate legal descriptions of newly subdivided
land and to establish reasonable and desirable construction
design standards and procedures.
Staff Response: The proposed minor subdivision will provide for
accurate legal descriptions for the two newly configured properties.
7. To prevent the pollution of air, streams and ponds, to assure
adequacy of drainage facilities, to safeguard the water table and
to encourage the wise use and management of natural resources
throughout the Town in order to preserve the integrity, stability,
and beauty of the community and the value of the land.
Staff Response: The proposed minor subdivision will have no negative
affect on the criteria listed above.
IX.
Findings:
The following findings are used for a Minor Subdivision:
That the application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of the
Minor Subdivision .Chapter, the Zoning Ordinance and other pertinent
regulations that the Planning. and Environmental Commission deems
applicable.
2. That the application is appropriate in regard to Town policies relating to
subdivision control, densities proposed, regulations, ordinances and.
resolutions and other applicable documents, environmental integrity and
compatibility with the surrounding land uses and other applicable documents,
and effects on the aesthetics of the Town.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and
Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Vail
Town Council to allow for a major amendment to Special Development District
No. 22, Grand Traverse, modifying the GRFA calculations for the District and
increasing the number of lots for the District with the findings listed below. Staff's
recommendation is based upon a review of the criteria and.findings as outlined in
this memorandum and from the evidence and testimony presented.
16
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose fo forward a
recommendation of approval of the applicant's request, staff recommends that
the following findings be made as~part.of the motion:
That the proposed major amendment to Special Development District No: 22
complies with the nine design criteria outlined in Section 12-9A-8 of the Vail
Town Code. Furthermore, the applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction
of the Commission, based upon the testimony and evidence presented during
the public hearing, that any adverse effects of the requested deviations from
the development standards of the underlying zoning are outweighed by the
public benefits provided. Lastly, the Commission finds that the request is
consistent with the development goals and objectives of the Town.
2. With regards to the proposed elimination of GRFA, that:
a. Proposed development controls, such as setbacks, site coverage,
height, orientation, and architectural design, exist within the text of
SDD No. 22, Grand Travers, to adequately control bulk, mass, and
height of structures, and will maintain the character of new structures
to those which exist;
b. Proposed development controls comply with applicable elements of
the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations.
c. Proposed development controls will provide adequate. availability of
light, air and open space.
d. Proposed development controls within the .SDD will provide a
compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent
properties.
e. Proposed development controls will result in creative design solutions
or other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by
conformance with prescribed GRFA standards.
3. With regards to the proposed increase in the number of lots from 22 to' 23,
that:
a. Proposed increase in lots provides necessary separation between
buildings and riparian areas, geologically sensitive areas and other
environmentally sensitive areas.
b. Proposed increase in lots complies with applicable elements of the
Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations.
c. Proposed increase in lots will provide adequate availability of light, air
and open space.
d. Proposed increase in.lots will provide a compatible relationship with
buildings and uses on adjacent properties.
e. Proposed increase in lots will result in creative design solutions or
other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by
conformance with prescribed setback standards.
4. That the proposed development controls within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse,
are in conformance with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban Design
17
Guide Plan and Design Considerations.
5. That the development is in compliance .with the purposes of the
Primary/Secondary zone district, that the proposal does not otherwise have a
significant negative effect on the character of the neighborhood, and that.the
proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail
Comprehensive Plan.
The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and
Environmental Commission approves with conditions the Amended Final Plat:
A_ Resubdivision of Lot 5, Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moselev Subdivision
Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, pursuant to Chapter 13-4,
Minor Subdivisions, Vail Town Code, to create Lots 5 and 7, located at based
upon the criteria evaluated in this memorandum.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the
minor subdivision request staff recommends that the following conditions be
made as a part of that motion:
That .the applicant not record the proposed plat, Amended Final Plat: A
Resubdivision of Lot 5, Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moselev Subdivision
Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, until both readings of an
ordinance to amend SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, without GRFA limitations
has be adopted by Town Council. If an ordinance to adopt SDD No. 22,
Grand Traverse, without GRFA limitations is .not approved by Town Council
that a GRFA limitation on the new Lot 5 and 7 will be 3,157 square feet for
each lot and the SDD will be amended and adopted according to Town of Vail
Code.
2. That the applicant revise the title of the plat to state Amended Final Plat: A
Resubdivision of Lot 5, Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moselev Subdivision
Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 and replace the Town
Council signature block with the correct Planning and Environmental
Commission signature block prior to submitting 'the mylar copies for
recording.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the
minor subdivision request staff recommends that the following findings be made
as a part of the motion.
1. That the application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of the
Minor Subdivision Chapter, the Zoning Ordinance and other pertinent
regulations that the Planning and Environmental Commission deems
applicable.
2. That the application is appropriate in regard to Town policies relating to
subdivision control, densities proposed, regulations, ordinances and
resolutions and other applicable documents, environmental integrity and
compatibility with the surrounding land uses and other applicable documents,
and effects on the aesthetics of the Town.
18