Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-05-05 Agenda and Support Documentation Town Council Work Session VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION AGENDA *VAE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 75 S. Frontage Road W. Vail, CO 81657 9:00 A.M., MAY 5, 2009 NOTE: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item. Public comments on work session item may be solicited by the Town Council 1. ITEM /TOPIC: Vail Local Licensing Authority (VLLA) vacancy appointment approvals. (10 min.) PRESENTER(S): Lorelei Donaldson ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Interview two applicants for the vacancies on the VLLA board. BACKGROUND: All applicants to the VLLA must be citizens of the United States, qualified electors of the Town of Vail, and have resided in the Town of Vail for not less than two years preceding appointment, and shall have no direct financial interest in any license to sell alcoholic beverages or any location having any such license. Duties of the five - member board include review of all Town of Vail liquor license applications. There are currently three vacancies on the VLLA. The Town received two (2) applications for the vacancies. The Council needs to interview the applicants at the work session and then make the appointments to the VLLA at the evening meeting. The applicants are: Mark Conlin," Kevin (KJ) Williams," "Incumbent board members. Please note KJ was appointed the LLA at the March 17th town council meeting for a two (2) month period to replace the vacancy created by Connie Knight. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Interview two people for the VLLA board vacancies. The Town Clerk will re- publish to fill the one vacancy left on the board (Bryant Roth did not renew as he is moving out of town.) 2. ITEM /TOPIC: Interview and appoint one member to the Vail Local Housing Authority (VLHA) board. (20 min.) PRESENTER(S): Lorelei Donaldson ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Please interview the VLHA applicants at the work session and appoint one applicant to the VLHA (term expires May 31, 2014) at the evening meeting. BACKGROUND: Applicants must be full -time, year -round residents of EagleCounty who either are residents of the Town of Vail or work for a business holding a Town of Vail business license. Authority members must have a proven ability to be an effective advocate for a full range of housing projects and be able to promote a vision for local employee housing that has been approved by the majority of the Authority. The role of Authority members is to act as Board of Directors for the business of the Vail Local Housing Authority. The duties may include Budget Approval, Adopting Policies, Advocacy, Staff Oversight, Strategic and Long -Term Planning, Setting Development and Acquisition Parameters and potentially managing the existing Town of Vail deed - restricted housing inventories. Technical experience in one of the following areas is also desirable: Financing of Large Projects, Development, Construction /Construction Management, Planning, Design, or Legal. The Town received four (4) applications. The applicants are: Scott Ashburn, Jason Hartman, Ethan Moore" ("Incumbent board member) Pamela Hopkins. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Interview all applicants for the VLHA vacancy. 3. ITEM /TOPIC: Site Visit. 2657 Arosa Drive (commonly known as the A- Frame). (30 min.) PRESENTER(S): Nina Timm 4. ITEM /TOPIC: Site Visit. Discussion of the First Reading of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 adopting a major amendment to Special Development District No. 2, Northwoods, pursuant to Article 12 -9(A), Special Development District, Vail Town Code, to allow for a lobby addition and locker reconfiguration; located at 600 Vail Valley Drive (Pinos Del Norte, Building C) /Part of Tract B, Vail Village Filing 7, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090009) (20 min.) PRESENTER(S): Nicole Peterson ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 on First Reading. BACKGROUND: The proposed lobby addition and locker reconfiguration trigger a major amendment requirement under Section 12 -9A -2, Vail Town Code; because the proposed lobby addition expands the existing building footprint more than five feet, and the lockers were originally built under a major amendment (Ordinance No. 33, Series of 1991). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: On April 13, 2009 the the Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval, with conditions to the Vail Town Council of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009, by a vote of 4 -0 -1 (Kjesbo recused). 5. ITEM /TOPIC: Site Visit. Discussion of First reading of Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2009, an ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 41, the Vail Row Houses, pursuant to Article 12 -9A, Special Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080074) (30 min.) PRESENTER(S): Bill Gibson ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2009, on first reading. BACKGROUND: On April 13, 2009, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted 5 -0 -0 to forward a recommendation of approval to the Town Council for establishment the proposed special development district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Environmental Commission recommends that the Town Council approves, on first reading, Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2009, an ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 41, the Vail Row Houses, pursuant to Article 12 -9A, Special Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regard thereto. 6. ITEM /TOPIC: PEC /DRB Update. (15 min.) PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell 7. ITEM /TOPIC: Vail Transportation Master Plan approval and discussion regarding prioritization and implementation schedule. (45 min.) PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel /Greg Hall ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen and provide feedback on the presentation made by staff. BACKGROUND: On April 27, 2009, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission voted 6 -0 -0 to forward a recommendation of approval for the proposed amendments. Staff will discuss the changes that have been incorporated in the Master Plan since the draft was submitted to Council on 3/19 and discuss the adoption of the Master Plan by resolution. In addition, staff will present a proposed prelimininary implementation plan of the proposed Master Plan's improvements. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Listen and provide feedback on the presentation made by staff. 8. ITEM /TOPIC: Lunch Break 11:50 - 12:30 (45 min.) 9 • ITEM /TOPIC: A work session to discuss parking requirements in the Housing (H) District. (30 min.) PRESENTER(S): Nina Timm/ Nicole Peterson ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Direct Staff to either proceed with the proposed amendments, proceed with changes to the proposed amendments, or withdraw. BACKGROUND: At the direction of the Vail Town Council and the Vail Local Housing Authority the Community Development Department has prepared amendments to the parking requirements in the Housing (H) zone district. The purpose of the amendments is to create predictable, quantifiable and enforceable policies that replace discretionary review with a more predictable process that eliminates confusion and delays in the review process for the Town and the developer. On March 17, 2009, Town Council tabled Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2009, to the April 21, 2009, Town Council meeting and requested further information. Due to schedule conflicts the item was moved to the May 5, 2009, Town Council meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: On February 9, 2009, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a meeting to forward a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2009. No formal recommendation was forwarded, due to the motion to approve, resulting in a tie vote (3- 3- OProper, Kjesbo and Tjossem opposed). 10. ITEM /TOPIC: Plat Right of Way (ROW) through town owned lands for existing roads (20 min.) PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Direct staff to plat ROW for existing roads that cross through town owned lands. BACKGROUND: The Town of Vail owns, operates, and maintains public roads with no legal ROW across town owned land (tracts). These roads, therefore, do not have the same designation as other roads through town and do not legally provide the appropriate accommodation for the road, public users, and utilities. By designating ROW for these roads, there will be an undeniable road corridor that will provide the necessary accommodations for existing uses and provide boundaries for future road and utility construction. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff to plat ROW for existing roads that cross through town owned lands. 11. ITEM /TOPIC: Discussion of First reading of Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009, an ordinance to amend Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 11 -3 -3, Prescribed Regulations Amendment, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for temporary building banner signs within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (10 min.) PRESENTER(S): Rachel Friede ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Staff requests that the Vail Town Council approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009, upon first reading. BACKGROUND: The applicant, the Vail Valley Foundation, applied for a prescribed regulations amendment to Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, in order to facilitate the use of large banners on buildings under construction to advertise community events. On April 13, 2009, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission made a final recommendation of denial to the Vail Town Council (3 -2 vote, with Tjossem and Viele opposed, Pierce and Palladino absent). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based upon Staff's review of the criteria outlined in Section V of the Staff memorandum to the PEC dated April 13, 2009, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends denial of Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009. 12. ITEM /TOPIC: Discussion of the Second Reading of Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2009, an ordinance making supplemental appropriations to the Town of Vail General Fund, Capital Projects Fund , Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund, Dispatch Services Fund, Heavy Equipment Fund and Debt Service Fund of the 2009 Budget for the Town of Vail, Colorado; and authorizing the said adjustments as set forth herein; and setting forth details in regard thereto. (30 min.) PRESENTER(S): Kathleen Halloran ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Provide input regarding the 2nd supplemental of 2009, Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2009, in preparation for approving the second reading during the evening session. BACKGROUND: To be provided in a separate memo. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: : Staff recommends that the Town Council approves Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2009, upon second reading this evening. 13. ITEM /TOPIC: Discussion of Resolution No. 11, Series 2009, A Resolution Designating Bank Accounts for E- Commerce Transactions for the Town of Vail with Stan Zemler, Pam Brandmeyer, Judy Camp and Jacque Lovato, as the Designated Signers on that Account. Permitted by the Charter of the Town, Ordinances, and the Statutes of the State of Colorado; and Setting Forth Details in Regard Thereto. (5 min.) PRESENTER(S): Judy Camp / Ron Braden ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, amend or deny Resolution No. 11, Series of 2009. BACKGROUND: Town wishes to subscribe to an eCourier transaction system that allows electronic recordation of land records with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder. The eCourier company requires a bank account for automatic withdraws for the recording fee. The Town anticipates the need for additional designated bank accounts to support e- commerce. The Town has the power to designate banks or financial institutions for funds of the Town. The Town wishes to designate opening an additional bank accounts with Firstbank of Vail with Stan Zemler, Pam Brandmeyer, Judy Camp, and Jacque Lovato as signers on this account. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve, amend or deny Resolution No. 11, Series of 2009. 14. ITEM /TOPIC: Information Update. - -The Board of County Commissioners is extending a friendly competition to other municipalities in the county to solicit food donation (either cash or canned /dry goods) for the afternoon or early evening on Friday, May 29th, to buoy up the food reserves for the needy in Eagle County. Is the Council interested in participating? -- Council will recall the Community Picnics have been reduced this year from three to two. The following have been scheduled for this coming summer: Thursday, July 23 Bighorn Park, sponsored by Public Works, Fire, Administration. Thursday, August 20 Donovan Park, sponsored by Community Development, Police. - -H1 N1 (Swine Flu) Update. (15 min.) 15. ITEM /TOPIC: Matters from Mayor & Council. (15 min.) 16. ITEM /TOPIC: Executive Session, pursuant to: 1) C.R.S. §24- 6- 402(4)(a)(b) (e) - to discuss the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of property interests; to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, Re: Timber Ridge Redevelopment; 2) C.R.S. §24- 6- 402(4)(a)(b)(e) - to discuss the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of property interests; and to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, Re: Skier Drop -Off Easement Agreement for the North Day Lot. (40 min.) PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire 17. ITEM /TOPIC: Adjournment. (3:20 p.m.) NOTE UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW: (ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT OT CHANGE) THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BEGIN AT TBD, TUESDAY, MAY 19 IN THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS. TVk VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: May 5, 2009 ITEM /TOPIC: Vail Local Licensing Authority (VLLA) vacancy appointment approvals. PRESENTER(S): Lorelei Donaldson ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Interview two applicants for the vacancies on the VLLA board. BACKGROUND: All applicants to the VLLA must be citizens of the United States, qualified electors of the Town of Vail, and have resided in the Town of Vail for not less than two years preceding appointment, and shall have no direct financial interest in any license to sell alcoholic beverages or any location having any such license. Duties of the five - member board include review of all Town of Vail liquor license applications. There are currently three vacancies on the VLLA. The Town received two (2) applications for the vacancies. The Council needs to interview the applicants at the work session and then make the appointments to the VLLA at the evening meeting. The applicants are: Mark Conlin," Kevin (KJ) Williams," "Incumbent board members. Please note KJ was appointed the LLA at the March 17th town council meeting for a two (2) month period to replace the vacancy created by Connie Knight. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Interview two people for the VLLA board vacancies. The Town Clerk will re- publish to fill the one vacancy left on the board (Bryant Roth did not renew as he is moving out of town.) ATTACHMENTS: Mark Conlin VLLA Letter of Interest KJ Williams VLLA Letter of Interest Staff Memo for VLLA vacancies 050509 Vail Town Council - Attention - Lorelei Donaldson, Please consider this my letter of intent to serve as a member of the Vail Local Licensing Authority. Background /History I am a full time resident and property owner in Vail. I vacationed and lived here part time since 1999 and lived here full time since 2004. My work background consists of years of consulting in which I help my clients define problems and then design and implement software solutions to solve them. Since 2001 1 have been self employed as a consultant, the flexibility of my work situation has allowed me to pursue other interests with my time and energy. I look forward to a life here and would like to become a productive member of this community. I hope this position is the first of many ways I can contribute towards the economic and social well being of the town of Vail. I have no direct financial interest in any license to sell alcoholic beverages or any location having any such license. I have enjoyed my time on the board and would like to continue serving the town in this capacity. Education /Qualifications In 1999 1 received a bachelor's degree in Computer Science with an emphasis in Artificial Intelligence from Georgia Institute of Technology, while in undergraduate school I played Lacrosse for Georgia Tech and worked for Honeywell and MCI. My career continues with various consulting firms after graduation. In May of 2004 1 received an MBA from Georgia Institute of Technology, during that time I was awarded an assistantship to cover my tuition in exchange for doing research for Georgia Tech. I continued to work as a consultant during those two years as well as staying active with the social and academic clubs of the business school. In summary I believe I have the following to offer VLLA: • The desire to contribute in this community. • A flexible schedule and spare capacity that allows me to pursue this desire. • No conflicts of interest regarding alcoholic beverage licensing. Thank you, Mark Conlin April 14, 2009 Hi Lorelei, I am writing you to express interest in serving the Town of Vail on the liquor board. I have lived in Vail for 15 years and have worked in various capacities at restaurants throughout town. I am currently the bar manager at Sweet Basil. Prior to that I worked behind the bar at La Tour Restaurant for 3 years. Before that I worked at the Sonnenalp Resort for 7 years working in various outlets, but primarily bartending at the Bully Ranch and some management as well. Unfortunately, I am going to be out of the country from Apr29- May 15. That being said, if you are interested in me serving, I am interested. Please let me know what, if anything additional, that you need from me. Thank you for you time, KJ Williams 471 -1177 or Sweet Basil 476 -0125 1 -? -I MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Lorelei Donaldson DATE: May 5, 2009 SUBJECT: Appointment of Vail Local Licensing Authority (VLLA) Applicants There are currently three vacancies on the VLLA. The Town received two (2) applications for the vacancies. Both applicants are incumbent members of the LLA (noted by asterisks below). The Council needs to interview each applicant at the work session and then appoint two applicants to the LLA at the evening meeting. The terms will be from June, 2009 to June, 2011. The applicants are as follows: Mark Conlin* KJ Williams* (was appointed by Town Council on March 17 to complete the term vacated by Connie Knight) Staff is requesting that the Town Council appoint two members to the LLA for two year terms each. This will leave one vacancy on the VLHA. The Town Clerk will re- publish the vacancy notice to fill the one vacancy left on the VLLA. t -� -t *Vk' VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: May 5, 2009 ITEM /TOPIC: Interview and appoint one member to the Vail Local Housing Authority (VLHA) board. PRESENTER(S): Lorelei Donaldson ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Please interview the VLHA applicants at the work session and appoint one applicant to the VLHA (term expires May 31, 2014) at the evening meeting. BACKGROUND: Applicants must be full -time, year -round residents of EagleCounty who either are residents of the Town of Vail or work for a business holding a Town of Vail business license. Authority members must have a proven ability to be an effective advocate for a full range of housing projects and be able to promote a vision for local employee housing that has been approved by the majority of the Authority. The role of Authority members is to act as Board of Directors for the business of the Vail Local Housing Authority. The duties may include Budget Approval, Adopting Policies, Advocacy, Staff Oversight, Strategic and Long -Term Planning, Setting Development and Acquisition Parameters and potentially managing the existing Town of Vail deed - restricted housing inventories. Technical experience in one of the following areas is also desirable: Financing of Large Projects, Development, Construction /Construction Management, Planning, Design, or Legal. The Town received four (4) applications. The applicants are: Scott Ashburn, Jason Hartman, Ethan Moore" ("Incumbent board member) Pamela Hopkins. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Interview all applicants for the VLHA vacancy. ATTACHMENTS: Scott Ashburn VHLA Letter of Interest Scott Ashburn VLHA Letter of Interest 050509 Ehtan Moore Letter of Interest Jason Hartman Letter of Interest & Resume 050509 Pam Hopkins VLHA Letter of Interest 050509 Staff Memo for VHLA vacancy Oo50509 J.L. Viele Construction, Inc. Professional resume Scott Ashburn — Project Manager Education University of Denver BSBA Real Estate & Construction Management Daniels College of Business Denver, Colorado Experience 2005 - Present J. L. Viele Construction, Inc. Vail, Colorado Date Project Contract Amount 2007 — Present Single Family Residence, Mountain Star in Avon, Colorado $7,500,000 2007-2008 Eagle Ranch Addison Center $2,700,000 2007 Starbucks — Tenant Improvement $ 350,000 2007 Skin Deep Spa — Tenant Improvement $ 100,000 2007 Vail Integrated Medical Group — Tenant Improvement $ 150,000 2006-2007 Eagle Ranch Fitness Center $2,150,000 2006-2007 Eagle Ranch Live /Work Building $2,200,000 2005-2006 Eagle Ranch Fulford Building $1,200,000 2005-2006 Eagle Ranch 1160 Capitol Street Building $ 950,000 1999-2005 LENNAR FAMILY OF BUIDERS (US Home, Laureate, Genesee) Lone Tree, Colorado Senior Construction Manager • Oversee daily construction activities for up to 50 homes ranging from $300,000 to $900,000 at multiple sites. • Manage team of five superintendents and up to 150 trade contractors to efficiently accomplish building projects. • Enforce quality assurance on all assigned building projects. • Prepare building plans that are under budget, on schedule, and exceed customer expectations. • Solve problems with homebuyers, trade partners, and inspectors to ensure cohesiveness throughout the building process. • Coordinate the construction process including staffing, supply chain, scheduling, and cost control to maximize production. Industry Accreditation & Training • Qualified Inspection SWAMP • Construction Workforce Foundation SWAMP Training • Management Development Evaluation Program • Class B Supervisor License City of Aurora Colorado • Leadership Development, Lennar Family of Builders • Electrical Apprentice State of Colorado • OSHA Fall Protection • Leadership Training, Lennar Family of Builders • OSHA 10 Hour Training Course • Home Builders Association Quality Control Committee Community Involvement • Served as Project Director for the Professional Builders program with Habitat for Humanity in Edwards, Colorado. Structured the pilot program as well as coordinated construction of the 1000` home built. • Direct involvement with the University of Denver for three years in which the students design, build, and market a new home with the proceeds going to the Home Builders Foundation. J.L. Viele Construction 1000 S. Frontage Road West, Suite 202 Vail. Colorado 81657 Voice (970) 476 -3082 Fax (970) 476 -3423 info@vieleconstruction.com / www.vieleconstruction.com Proi idind clients iiith Projects of outstanding quality and rahie. 2 -1 -1 J.L. Viele Construction, Inc. Scott Ashburn - Project Manager Responsibilities Mr. Ashburn is responsible for all aspects of the construction process including pre - construction services consisting of budget estimates and value engineering; contract and sub - contract execution; project administration encompassing change orders, request for information, and moderating weekly Owner, Architect, and Contractor meetings; preparation of the month payment requests; project scheduling together with coordination of sub - contractors and materials; project completion comprising of punch -list execution and applicable inspections. Background (see Project Experience list) Mr. Ashburn has previous experience of 9 years in project management in new construction with a focus on single family residential and mixed use commercial building. The projects consisted of wood stud framing and structural steel. The interior finish of the structures has varied greatly based on the Owners specifications. Mr. Ashburn has been directly involved with construction of the majority of the mixed -use buildings in Eagle Ranch including the Eagle Ranch Fitness Center, 1160 Capitol Street with Starbucks, Live /Work with Skin Deep Spa, Fulford Building with Colorado Capitol Bank, and Vail Integrated Medical Group within the Fitness Center. The projects were completed for Wright & Company Developers. The Eagle Ranch Fitness Center was managed in conjunction with East West Partners and WECMRD. The Eagle Ranch Starbucks was coordinated with Starbuck's Corporate in Seattle. The single family residence in Mountain Star is a 10,000 square foot project comprising of complex architecture, intricate plumbing and mechanical systems, and exclusive finishes. Education Mr. Ashburn holds a BSBA of Real Estate & Construction Management granted by the Daniels College of Business at the University of Denver. Personal Mr. Ashburn is actively involved in the community and has served as the Project Director for the Professional Builders program with Habitat for Humanity in Edwards, Colorado. While serving as the Project Director, Mr. Ashburn was responsible for structuring the pilot program as well as coordinating the construction of the 1000 home built. Mr. Ashburn has also been involved with the University of Denver's program, which allows for students to design, build and market a new home with proceeds going to the Home Builders Foundation. Mr. Ashburn is an avid Denver Bronco's fan and endeavors to attend all home games. J.L. Viele Construction 1000 S. Frontage Road West, Suite 202 Vail, Colorado 81657 Voice (970) 476 -3082 Fax (970) 476 -3423 info @vieleconstruction.com / www.viefeconstruction.com Providing clients with projects of outstanding quality and value. 2 -1 -2 J.L. Viele Construction, Inc. Prior Experience - J.L. Viele Construction - (Project Manager) Mountain Star Single Family Residence - Avon, CO - (2007- Present) - $7.5MM Addison Center - Eagle Ranch, CO - (2007 -2008) - $2.7MM Starbucks - Tenant Improvement - (2007) - $350,000 Skin Deep Spa - Tenant Improvement - (2007) - $100,000 Vail Integrated Medical Group - Tenant Improvement - (2007) - $150,000 Eagle Ranch Fitness Center - Eagle Ranch, CO - (2006 -2007) - $2.15MM Live/ Work Building - Eagle Ranch, CO - (2006 -2007) - $2.2MM Fulford Building - Eagle Ranch CO - (2005 -2006) - $1.2MM 1160 Capitol Street Building - Eagle Ranch, CO - (2005 -2006) - $950,000 Prior Experience - Lennar - (Senior Construction Manager) Oversee daily construction activities for up to 50 homes ranging from $300,000 to $900,000 at multiple sites - Lone Tree, CO - 1999 - 2005 J.L. Viele Construction 1000 S. Frontage Road West, Suite 202 Vail, Colorado 81657 Voice (970) 476 -3082 Fax (970) 476 -3423 info @vieleconstruction.com / www.viefeconstruction.com Providing clients with projects of outstanding quality and value. 2 -1 -3 Scott Ashburn JL Viele Construction 1000 South Frontage Road West Suite 202 Vail, Co 81657 March 31, 2009 Lorelei Donaldson Town Clerk Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road. Vail, Co 81657 ldonaldson@vailgov. com Dear Lorelei Donaldson: I am writing in response to your notice in the March 23, 2009 Vail Daily for a position on the Vail Local Housing Authority Board. I am extremely interested in being considered for this position. I have lived in Eagle County for 5 years and currently reside in Edwards. I work for JL Viele Construction located in Vail where I am a Project Manger. During my tenure in the Vail Valley, I have been apart numerous building projects throughout Vail and Eagle County. My direct involvement with Eagle County Habitat for Humanity Builder Program has enriched my awareness of the local housing issues. Please find my resume for your review. I look forward to hearing from you. Best Regards, Scott Ashburn Enclosure 2 -2 -1 trl n it �Y %I mz���-- Ethan Moore, Pastor 970.9261759 (office) 970.3319657 (cell) ethan @vail.net www.trinityvail.com Tuesday, April 14 2009 To: Lorelei Donaldson, Town of Vail Town Council Re: Application for re- appointment of Ethan Moore to the Town of Vail Local Housing Authority. Lorelei, Vail Town Council members: With this letter I am respectfully requesting that I be considered for appointment to a second term on the Vail Local Housing Authority. It has been an honor to serve my first term on the board, and if re- appointed, I look forward to being able to continue serving my community in this capacity. Thank you! Sincerely, K - 4 ?� V� VV Ethan Moore P.O. Box 2676, Edwards CO 81632 t5- 970.9261759 (admin. office) t5- 970.9261754 (facsimile) t5- Page I of I 2 -3 -1 Jason Hartman 1280 North Frontage Rd. W Unit L -18 Vail, CO 81657 970.306.3212 jason.hartman60 @gmail.com 14 April 2009 Lorelei Donaldson Vail Town Council 75 South Frontage Rd. Vail, CO 81657 Idonaldson(Ovailgov.com Dear Ms. Donaldson, I am home. I have only been in Vail for a year and a half, but it has been long enough for me to know that this is where I belong. I want to do everything I can to improve and ensure this community continues to grow and flourish. This leads to my desire to apply for the vacant position on the Local Housing Authority Board. Vail residents are the town's largest assets and they are the main reason the Valley is such a wonderful place to live, work and visit (and the best skiing, hiking and biking in the world helps too I suppose). Unfortunately, housing prices have gone far beyond what most residents can afford and it is driving hard working people away. I want to help reverse this trend and keep our best people here, along with attracting those that have been previously turned away from the Valley's high cost of living. To sum up my past: I graduated with a degree in Architecture from the University of Kansas where I took on affordable housing issues in Kansas City, KS. In addition to creating theoretical projects designed to improve the housing crisis in the Boulevard Neighborhood, we actually built a structure in an adjacent neighborhood. My team and I designed and built a single family home using green technology and student labor, which helped create a buzz for improving this dilapidated neighborhood. In addition to my studies, I have seven years of work experience in customer service and four years in the building industry, with over five of those eleven years in a supervisory or management position. I am a natural leader with a professional attitude. I have excellent people skills, I learn new tasks quickly and I am a highly motivated, hard working individual who has 1280 North Frontage Rd West #L -18 Vail, CO P: 970.306.3212 E: jason.hartman60 @gmail.com 2 -4 -1 been an essential team member in all of my previous endeavors. I would like to bring this attitude to the people of Vail, and ensure that we are all living comfortably. I live in employee housing, so I know firsthand the struggles that most people who want to live here are facing. I also have the drive to take on these issues and create better opportunities for the people. I am ready to serve my community, and I feel that this is the best platform for me to do so. I am confident that I am the candidate you are looking for and if you were interested, I would appreciate the opportunity to meet with the Town Council to discuss this vacancy. Please look over my attached resume and feel free to call or email me at any time. Thank you very much for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Jason Hartman 1280 North Frontage Rd West #L -18 Vail, CO P: 970.306.3212 E: jason.hartman60 @gmail.com 2 -4 -2 Education University of Kansas: Bachelor of Architecture Studio 804 - Lawrence & Kansas City, KS ...a group of 20 students complete the design and construction of a new residence, experiencing every aspect of the project. Study Abroad - Siena, Italy & Barcelona, Spain ...instruction in the building customs of Medieval and Renaissance Italy, followed by studying the modern design practices of Spain. Work History Vail Resorts 1112007 -present Assistant Manager - Two Elk Lodge, Vail, CO - Assist General Manager in the operations of multiple on- mountain food venues, managing a staff of up to 60 people. - Contribute to a fast paced work environment that is safe, friendly and dedicated to providing outstanding customer service for internal and external guests. - Open and close multiple food venues and perform duties such as staff transport, snow removal, property maintenance, cash handling and financial reporting. - Create and maintain weekly staff schedules. Fru -Con Construction Construction Planner - Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Co. Kansas City Soap Plant - Created estimates and tracked costs, prepared schedules, and coordinated sub - contractors across all disciplines for multiple construction projects throughout the plant. - Participated in design development /definition with the engineering team, and generated constructability savings ideas for the owner. - Enforced strict safety practices due to the nature of the chemical plant. - Managed an average of 8 projects at a time ranging from $1M - $2MM in this constantly changing environment. Lockard Construction 0512003 - 0812003 General Laborer - St. Louis, MO - Assisted small residential construction company with multiple projects around the St. Louis area by performing various tasks of the building process, such as installing sheetrock, light framing, painting, concrete work, roofing, etc. - Projects completed were mostly basement finishes /remodels. McDonald's 0511996 - 0512002 Crew Trainer - Columbia, MO & Lawrence, KS - Supervised a small team of four to six people per shift in the food preparation and customer service areas of the fast -paced restaurant. - Trained new crew members the standard operating procedures of the restaurant in food safety, food production, and customer service. - Resolved customer complaints and conflicts before they became a problem. Project list on reverse. 1280 North Frontage Rd West #L -18 Vail, CO P: 970.306.3212 E: jason.hartman60 @gmail.com 2 -4 -3 Special Projects and Awards Fourth Floor Office Remodel o.512ooF- - Managed the construction and relocation of Procter & Gamble plant personnel and their Customer Business Center. - $2.5MM office remodeling and relocation project completed in just four months to avoid inflated rent offsite. - Installed new HVAC system and upgraded the communications system, in addition to new walls, ceiling, lighting, plumbing, flooring and finishes. M o d u l a r 3 0112006 - 061206 - Prefabricated in a Lawrence warehouse, this modern 2 bedroom home was shipped to its location at 534 Riverview Dr in Kansas City, KS. - Designed and built by 20 students from conception to completion in five months. - Primary responsibilities for this project were to provide structural design and construction management. - Modular 3 has accumulated multiple awards including "Home of the Year" from Architecture magazine. West Jr. High School Courtyard o2/2oo.5- o5l2oo5 - This courtyard was designed and built by a group of 18 students as a landscaping effort to improve this gathering space for students before and after school. - Added new sitting spaces, unorthodox ivy walls made from rebar, and improved paving and vegetation. - This project received the Monsters of Design Honorable Mention Award among practicing young architects in Kansas City. Relevant Skills - Completed OSHA 10 -Hour Training Course in Construction Safety and Health - Certified by American Heart Association to administer CPR - 8 years experience with AutoCad /Architectural Desktop (version R14 through 2006) - Proficient in Adobe Products (Photoshop, In Design, Dreamweaver) - Microsoft Office (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Access, Communicator) - Microsoft Project scheduling software 1280 North Frontage Rd West #L -18 Vail, CO P: 970.306.3212 E: jason.hartman60 @gmail.com 2 -4 -4 Snowdon • 1 Hop April 14, 2009 Lorelei Donaldson Vail Town Clerk 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 RE: Local Housing Authority Board Application Dear Lorelei, Please accept this letter as my application for a position on the Housing Authority Board. I am currently serving my second term on the Arts In Public Places Board. I have enjoyed working with the members of the board and seeing the progress we have made over the past five years. I served on the PEC from 1985 to 1989 during which time we started the Master Land Use Plan. I would like to become more involved with the community and the issues of housing and growth of Vail. I have worked as a Partner with Snowdon and Hopkins Architects, P.C. in the Vail Valley for the past thirty-two years and have included my resume with this letter. Our projects have included custom residences, multi - family developments, and public projects such as the Vail Public Library. I have been a resident of East Vail for thirty-two years. I know my experience as a residential architect in Vail will be useful if I were appointed to the Housing Board. Thank you for this opportunity to present my qualifications, - gafla_ Ga. Pamela W. Hopkins, AIA, LEED AP Snowdon and Hopkins Architects, P.C. PO Box 3340 • Vail, Colorado 81658 • Phone: 970- 476 -2201 • Fax: 970 - 476 -7491 2 - 1 Pamela W. Hopkins, AIA, LEED AP Registered Architect, State of Colorado (61165) LEED Accredited Professional Education Bachelor of Architecture, University of Colorado Professional Experience Partner in charge, Snowdon and Hopkins Architects, PC Renovation to the Vail Public Library Addition to the Gilpin County Public Library 1,000 sq.ft.; scheduled construction: June 2008 Addition to the Eagle Public Library 8,500 sq.ft.; scheduled construction: May 2008. On hold First Bank of Vail Exterior and landscaping upgrades Inn at Beaver Creek redevelopment 2006 plans 50,000 sq.ft. Ski Club Vail redevelopment, Vail, Colorado, 2000 35,000 sq.ft. at the base of Vail Mountain (to be built) Pinedale Public Library, Wyoming, 1998 (Consultant Architect) Consulted during design phase for Carney Architects Eagle Public Library, Eagle, Colorado, 1997 15,000 sq.ft. new library Avon Public Library, Avon, Colorado, 1995 15,000 sq.ft. new library Vail Mountain School Library Addition, Vail, Colorado, 1995 3,000 sq.ft. renovation and addition Vail Police Department and Municipal Complex, Vail, Colorado, 1994 (Consultant to Roth Sheppard Architects) Gilpin County Public Library, Colorado, 1995 5,000 sq.ft. new library Emerald Acres Office Complex, Avon, Colorado 45,000 sq.ft. eight building campus Garden of the Gods Hotel and Condominium, Vail, Colorado 30,000 sq.ft. renovation and addition Eugene Field Public Library, Denver, Colorado, 1993 (Consultant Architect) Consulted during design phase and interior layout for Roth Sheppard Architects Inn at Beaver Creek, Beaver Creek, Colorado 55,000 sq.ft. hotel at base of ski mountain Snowdon • Hopkins @ Architects. P.C. 2 -5 -2 Flagstaff Public Library, Flagstaff, Arizona, 1987 35,000 sq.ft. new library Vail Public Library, Vail, Colorado, 1983 15,000 sq.ft. new library 50+ Custom Residences Associations American Institute of Architects Member, Planning and Environmental Commission, Town of Vail (1985 -89) Board of Trustees, Vail Mountain School (1986 -2000) Member, Vail's Arts in Public Places Commission Member, Design Committee, Performance and Conference Center, Vail, CO Member, Town of Vail Environmental Strategic Plan Committee Jury and Awards 1987 Jury, Biennial AIA/ALA National Design Competition 1985 AIA/ALA Award of Excellence - Vail Library 1984 AIA Western Mountain Region Award of Merit - Vail Library Publications The Vail Library, Solar Age, September 1985 The Vail Library, Process: Architecture (98), Passive and Low Energy Architecture, September 1991 City of Flagstaff /Coconino County Public Library, Arizona Libraries, September, 1987 City of Flagstaff /Coconino County Public Library, Architecture, October, 1988 Public Libraries, Travel Treasures of the West, Martin B. Rabkin, North American Press, November 1993 Professional Development Harvard University Executive Program — Public Libraries — 1995 Harvard University Executive Program — Public Libraries — 2005 Papers authored. Sustainable Architecture and Green Design Snowdon and Hopkins 2 -> -3 MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Lorelei Donaldson DATE: May 5, 2009 SUBJECT: Appointment of Vail Local Housing Authority (VLHA) Applicants There is currently one vacancy on the VLHA. The Town received four (4) applications for the vacancy. There is one applicant who is an incumbent member of the VLHA (noted by asterisks below). The Council needs to interview each applicant at the work session and then appoint one applicant to the VLHA at the evening meeting. The term will be from June, 2009 to June, 2014. The applicants are as follows: Ethan Moore* Scott Ashburn Jason Hartman Pamela Hopkins Staff is requesting that the Town Council appoint one member to the VLHA for a five year term. 2 -6 -1 TVk VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: May 5, 2009 ITEM /TOPIC: Site Visit. 2657 Arosa Drive (commonly known as the A- Frame). PRESENTER(S): Nina Timm TVk VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: May 5, 2009 ITEM /TOPIC: Site Visit. Discussion of the First Reading of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 adopting a major amendment to Special Development District No. 2, Northwoods, pursuant to Article 12 -9(A), Special Development District, Vail Town Code, to allow for a lobby addition and locker reconfiguration; located at 600 Vail Valley Drive (Pinos Del Norte, Building C) /Part of Tract B, Vail Village Filing 7, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090009) PRESENTER(S): Nicole Peterson ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 on First Reading. BACKGROUND: The proposed lobby addition and locker reconfiguration trigger a major amendment requirement under Section 12 -9A -2, Vail Town Code; because the proposed lobby addition expands the existing building footprint more than five feet, and the lockers were originally built under a major amendment (Ordinance No. 33, Series of 1991). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: On April 13, 2009 the the Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval, with conditions to the Vail Town Council of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009, by a vote of 4 -0 -1 (Kjesbo recused). ATTACHMENTS: Town Council Memo Attachment A - PEC Memo Attachment B - Vicinity Map Attachment C - Plans Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: May 5, 2009 SUBJECT: First Reading of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 adopting a major amendment to Special Development District No. 2, Northwoods, pursuant to Article 12 -9(A), Special Development District, Vail Town Code, to allow for a lobby addition and locker reconfiguration; located at 600 Vail Valley Drive ( Pinos Del Norte, Building C) /Part of Tract B, Vail Village Filing 7, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090009) Applicant: Pinos Del Norte Homeowners Association, represented by Fritzlen Pierce Architects Planner: Nicole Peterson I. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST This is a proposed major amendment to SDD No. 2, Northwoods, which requires a recommendation by the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) and an ordinance review and approval by Town Council under Section 12 -9A, Special Development District, Vail Town Code. The applicant is proposing the following improvements to the Pinos Del Norte building and property, which comply with all zoning and land use requirements: Proposed Improvements • Common lobby addition (280 so • Reconfiguration and increase of existing outdoor storage lockers (16 to 20) • Boiler room remodel and addition (14 so • Heated pavers and reconfigured sidewalk and patio • Porte cochere (15' x 19' roof) • Exterior garage doors, facade and retaining walls • Landscaping improvements at garage entrance and lobby Staff has attached a copy of the Staff memorandum to the PEC dated April 13, 2009. Since the PEC April 13, 2009, public hearing, the applicant has met the PEC recommended condition #1, which requested a minimum 4.5 foot setback for the proposed lockers. Due to that change, please be aware that the attached PEC memorandum sections and information have changed as follows: PEC Memorandum Changes • Zoning and Land Use Section: • Existing/ Approved setback on the west side should read 4.5 feet, instead of 5 feet, which was clarified in a survey, presented to the PEC. • Proposed setback on the west side should read 4.5 feet, which complies with the existing approved development plan. • Review Criteria and Findings Section: o Design Criteria A, third (last) paragraph, no longer applies because the proposal now meets all zoning and land use requirements. 1 4 -1 -I • Attachments Section: • `Plans' attachment from the PEC memo is not included because the plans have been revised to reflect the 4.5 foot setback on the west side. • To reduce confusion, only the revised proposed plans are attached for the Council's review. II. BACKGROUND On April 13, 2009 the Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval, with conditions to the Vail Town Council of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009, by a vote of 4 -0 -1 (Kjesbo recused). The Commission recommended the following conditions: 1. Locker setback: The applicant shall submit revised development plans that illustrate the proposed ski storage lockers setback a minimum of 4.5 feet from the west property line, prior to the final review of the development plans by the Town of Vail Design Review Board. * Condition met Since the PEC hearing, the applicant has revised the proposed development plan to show the proposed ski storage lockers setback a minimum of 4.5 feet. 2. Utility Sign -off. The applicant shall receive final review and approval of the location of the proposed lockers within the utility easement along the west property line, by the utility companies, prior to the final review of the development plans by the Town of Vail Design Review Board. * Condition met Since the PEC hearing, the applicant has submitted the appropriate utility signatures. 3. Signs: The applicant shall receive final review and approval of a sign permit for any proposed sign, by the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to installation of any signs on the property. 4. DRB approval: The applicant shall receive final review and approval of the proposed development plan, by the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to application of a building permit. * On April 15, 2009, the DRB conceptually reviewed the proposed improvements and directed Staff to approve the proposal, pending Council's decision. 5. ERWS Encroachment: The applicant shall receive final review and approval of an encroachment agreement for the proposed lockers in the utility easement, by the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, prior to issuance of a building permit. 6. Fire Safety. The applicant shall receive final review and approval of a fire safety plan for any proposed changes or alterations to the fire alarm and fire sprinkler systems, by the Town of Vail Fire Department, prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. Revocable ROW. The applicant shall receive final review and approval of a revocable right -of -way permit for any landscaping or improvements in the right -of -way, by the Town of Vail Public Works Department, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. * Since the PEC hearing, the applicant has submitted a revocable right -of -way permit application. However, the permit will not be approved until the improvements are completed and inspected. 2 4 _I_, VI. PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval, with conditions to the Vail Town Council for the proposed amendment to Special Development District No. 2, Northwoods, pursuant to Article 12 -9A, Vail Town Code, through Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009. PEC's recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria found in Section V of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Vail Town Council choose to approve Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009, on first reading, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Vail Town Council pass the following motion: "The Vail Town Council approves, with conditions, on first reading, Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009, an ordinance to allow a major amendment to Special Development District No. 2, Northwoods, pursuant to Article 12 -9(A), Special Development District, Vail Town Code, to allow for a lobby addition and locker reconfiguration; located at 600 Vail Valley Drive (Pinos Del Norte, Building C) /Part of Tract B, Vail Village Filing 7, and setting forth details in regard thereto." Should the Vail Town Council choose to approve Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009, on first reading, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Vail Town Council approve with the following conditions: 1. Signs: The applicant shall receive final review and approval of a sign permit for any proposed sign, by the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to installation of any signs on the property. 2. DRB approval: The applicant shall receive final review and approval of the proposed development plan, by the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to application of a building permit. 3. ERWS Encroachment: The applicant shall receive final review and approval of an encroachment agreement for the proposed lockers in the utility easement, by the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, prior to issuance of a building permit. 4. Fire Safety. The applicant shall receive final review and approval of a fire safety plan for any proposed changes or alterations to the fire alarm and fire sprinkler systems, by the Town of Vail Fire Department, prior to issuance of a building permit. 5. Revocable ROW. The applicant shall receive final review and approval of a revocable right -of -way permit for any landscaping or improvements in the right -of- way, by the Town of Vail Public Works Department, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Should the Vail Town Council choose to approve Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009, on first reading, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Vail Town Council makes the following findings: 1. That the amendment complies with the design criteria, based upon the review outlined in Section V of the StalTs May 5, 2009, memorandum to the Vail Town Council; and 2. That the amendment is consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town, based upon the review outlined in Section V of the StalTs May 5, 2009, memorandum to the Vail Town 3 4 -1 -3 Council; and 3. That the amendment is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas, based upon the review outlined in Section V of the Staffs May 5, 2009, memorandum to the Vail Town Council; and 4. That the amendment does promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town, and does 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, based upon the review outlined in Section V of the Staff's May 5, 2009, memorandum to the Vail Town Council. VII. ATTACHMENTS A. PEC Memo, April 13, 2009 B. Vicinity Map C. Plans Dated April 24, 2009 D. Draft Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 4 4 -1 -4 Attachment B MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: April 13, 2009 SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on a proposed major amendment to Special Development District No. 2, Northwoods, pursuant to Article 12 -9(A), Special Development District, Vail Town Code, to allow for a lobby addition and locker reconfiguration; located at 600 Vail Valley Drive (Pinos Del Norte, Building C) /Part of Tract B, Vail Village Filing 7, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090009) Applicant: Pinos Del Norte Homeowners Association, represented by Fritzlen Pierce Architects Planner: Nicole Peterson I. SUMMARY The Applicant, Pinos Del Norte Homeowners Association, represented by Fritzlen Pierce Architects, has requested a major amendment to Special Development District (SDD) No. 2, Northwoods, to allow for a lobby addition and locker reconfiguration; located at 600 Vail Valley Drive (Pinos Del Norte). Staff is recommending approval, with conditions of the major amendment to SDD No. 2, Northwoods, based upon the criteria and findings found in Section VII of this memorandum. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST This is a major amendment to SDD No. 2, Northwoods, which requires a recommendation by the Planning and Environmental Commission and an ordinance review and approval by Town Council. The applicant is proposing the following improvements to the Pinos Del Norte building and property: • Common lobby addition (280 so • Reconfiguration and increase of existing outdoor storage lockers (16 to 20) • Boiler room remodel and addition (14 so • Heated pavers and reconfigured sidewalk and patio • Porte cochere (15' x19' roof) • Exterior garage doors, facade and retaining walls • Landscaping improvements at garage entrance and lobby The proposed lobby addition and locker reconfiguration trigger a major amendment requirement under Section 12 -9A -2, Vail Town Code; because the proposed lobby addition expands the existing building footprint more than five feet, and the lockers were originally built under a major amendment (Ordinance No. 33, Series of 1991). No 1 4 -2 -1 additional GRFA is proposed; as the additions are `common space' as referenced in Section 12- 15- 3(B)(1)(a) Common Spaces, Vail Town Code. III. BACKGROUND Special Development District (SDD) No. 2, Northwoods, was adopted by Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1974. The Pinos Del Norte (Building C) and property is part of SDD No. 2, however it is managed by a separate homeowner's association from the Northwoods Condominiums (Buildings A, B, D, E, and F). SDD No. 2 has been amended two times since its inception including the following: 1. Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1982, to allow major arcades as conditional uses and minor arcades as accessory uses. 2. Ordinance No. 33, Series of 1991, to allow the construction of a new lounge, storage lockers, boulder retaining wall, sidewalk and landscaping. IV. ROLES OF THE REVIEWING BOARDS Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) The PEC shall review the Major Amendment to a Special Development District pursuant to criteria set forth in Section 12 -9A -8: Design Criteria and Necessary Findings. The Planning and Environmental Commission may recommend approval of the amendment, may recommend approval with such conditions as it deems necessary to accomplish the purpose of this title, or may recommend denial of the amendment. Town Council The Town Council shall consider but shall not be bound by the recommendation of the Planning and Environmental Commission. The Town Council shall approve, approve with conditions or deny the proposed amendment by ordinance, pursuant to criteria set forth in Section 12 -9A -8: Design Criteria and Necessary Findings. V. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Section 12 -9A: Special Development (SDD) District 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. 12 -9A -2: DEFINITIONS (in part) Major Amendment Any proposal to change uses; increase gross residential floor area; change the number of dwelling or accommodation units; modify, enlarge or expand any approved special development district (other than `minor amendments' as defined in this section). Minor Amendment Modifications to building plans, site or landscape plans that do not alter the basic intent and character of the approved special development district, and are consistent with the design criteria of this article. Minor 2 4 -2 -2 amendments may include, but not be limited to, variations of not more than five feet (5) to approved setbacks and /or building footprints. VI. ZONING AND LAND USE Zoning: Special Development District No. 2 and underlying High Density Multiple Family (HDMF) District Land Use Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential Site Area (Pinos Del Norte): .8024 acres/ 34,952.54 square feet Total Site Area (SDD No. 2): 5.77 acres/ 251,507.54 square feet ( Northwoods 1999 survey & Pinos Del Norte 2005 survey) The following standards are for the entire SDD No. 2: Development Standard Allowed /Reg.* Exist/Approved Proposed Min. Setbacks * *: North: 10' 12' (Bldg C) No change South: 10' 23' (Bldg F) No change East: 10' 27' (Bldg F) No change West: 10' 5' (lockers) 2' Max. Building Height: 45 feet 2 -5 stories No change Max. Density: 139 DU * ** 92 DU No change Max. GRFA: 175,000 sf 154,638.8 sf No change Max. Site Coverage: 25% 24.4% (61,506 so 24.6% (61,869) (363 sf proposed) Min. Landscape Area: 60% 62.6% 62.4% (545 sf proposed) Min. Open Space: 38,659.7 * * ** 157,629 157,084 * The allowed or required development standards were gathered from Ordinance No. 33, Series of 1991 and are not proposed to change in the draft Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009. ** Setbacks are measured from property line to exterior walls at the closest point and are applied to the perimeter of SDD No. 2. Existing setback measurements were gathered from the 1999 topographic site survey of Northwoods and the 2005 topographic site survey of Pinos Del Norte. * ** The original approved development plan for SDD No. 2 included 139 dwelling units, however only 92 units were constructed (Additional units were planned for the F building site). * * ** The minimum open space required is set forth in Ordinance No. 33, Series of 1991, which states: 1 sq. ft. per 4 sq. ft. of GRFA (Existing = 154,638.8) or 125 sq. ft. per dwelling (Existing = 92). The greater of the two options is the GRFA calculation which resulted in 38,659.7 sq. ft. VII. REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS Section 12 -9A -8, below, outlines the design criteria for Special Development Districts. Staff has responded to each of the criteria as they relate to the proposed improvements at Pinos Del Norte. 3 4 -2 -3 12 -9A -8: DESIGN CRITERIA: The following design criteria shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating the merits of the proposed 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: 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 applicant is proposing to update and remodel the Pinos Del Norte building and site to improve the overall visual character and architectural design of the building and site. The proposed improvements include: • Common lobby addition (280 so • Reconfiguration and increase of existing outdoor storage lockers (16 to 20) • Boiler room remodel and addition (14 so • Heated pavers and reconfigured sidewalk and patio • Porte cochere (15' x19' roof) • Exterior garage doors, facade and retaining walls • Landscaping improvements at garage entrance and lobby Staff believes that the general design and character, of the proposed additions are compatible with the existing building and neighborhood and that the additions further the visual integrity of the development. The proposed lobby addition is in a location that is not visible from the public right -of -way, or surrounding properties and the improvements to the vehicle entry area enhances the aesthetics of the site from Vail Valley Drive. Staff is concerned, however with the lack of a `buffer zone,' as identified in this criterion, or setback along the west property line. The applicant is proposing to construct the reconfigured lockers closer to the west property line (2 -2.5 feet) than they exist today (5 feet). Therefore, Staff is recommending, through a draft condition, that the applicant revise development plans, prior to final design approval, that illustrate the lockers setback a minimum of 5 feet from the west property line. The reason for the minimum setback is to maintain a more appropriate distance or `buffer zone' from the adjacent property and not encroach further into the existing 10 foot utility easement, along the west property line. B. Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. Staff believes the proposed uses, activities and density continue to provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. The proposed improvements are meant to increase the usable function of the existing uses and activities and provide an enhanced arrival experience at the vehicular and pedestrian entrances to the site. No additional density (GRFA) is 4 4 -2 -4 proposed because the additions are `common space' as referenced in Section 12- 15-3(13)(1)(a) Common Spaces, Vail Town Code. With no additional GRFA, there is no Inclusionary Zoning (employee housing) mitigation requirement. C. Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 12 -10 of the Vail Town Code. The proposed improvements do not generate the need for additional parking spaces. The current site is in compliance with the requirements set forth in Chapter 12 -10, Vail Town Code. The proposed improvements including the new retaining walls, garage facade and porte cochere are meant to improve the aesthetics and efficiency of the vehicular entrance to the site. D. Conformity with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. Staff has reviewed the Town of Vail Land Use Plan and believes the Plan goals listed below are upheld by the proposed additions. 1.0 General Growth /Development 1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 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 proposed additions are not located in any geologically sensitive areas or within the 100 -year floodplain of Gore Creek or its tributaries. F. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. The proposed improvements do not further disturb any natural features or vegetation. The proposed improvements are sensitive to existing trees and landscaping and will improve the aesthetics of the building and site. G. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off -site traffic circulation. The applicant is proposing improved pedestrian circulation by proposing heated pavers and new sidewalk/ patio area at the pedestrian entrance. The applicant also plans to improve the vehicle entrance and circulation efficiency by installing a new porte cochere, reconfiguring the dumpster enclosure for improved efficiency 5 4 -2 -5 and generally updating and improving the facade of the garage entrance area. Staff believes the proposed remodel will improve the pedestrian and vehicle experience on -site and that the proposal has little to no effect on the off -site traffic circulation. H. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions. Landscaping along Vail Valley Drive is being substantially upgraded with the replacement of the existing gabion walls with stone veneer walls, the addition of wrought iron gates and the addition of numerous plants. Staff believes the landscaping plan will preserve and improve the natural appearance of the site. 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 improvements all at once; no phasing is proposed. VIII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval, with conditions of the proposed amendment to Special Development District No. 2, Northwoods, pursuant to Article 12 -9A, Vail Town Code, to the Vail Town Council. Staff's recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria found in Section VII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council of this proposed amendment, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: "The Planning and Environmental Commission recommends approval, with conditions, of a major amendment to Special Development District No. 2, Northwoods, pursuant to Article 12 -9(A), Special Development District, Vail Town Code, to allow for a lobby addition and locker reconfiguration; located at 600 Vail Valley Drive (Pinos Del Norte, Building C) /Part of Tract B, Vail Village Filing 7, and setting forth details in regard thereto." Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this amendment, the Community Development Department suggests the following conditions: Design Review: 1. The applicant shall submit revised development plans that illustrate the proposed ski storage lockers setback a minimum of 5 feet from the west property line, prior to the final review of the development plans by the Town of Vail Design Review Board. 2. The applicant shall receive final review and approval of the location of the proposed lockers within the utility easement along the west property line, by the 6 4 -2 -6 utility companies, prior to the final review of the development plans by the Town of Vail Design Review Board. 3. The applicant shall receive final review and approval of a sign permit for any proposed sign, by the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to installation of any signs on the property. 4. The applicant shall receive final review and approval of the proposed development plan, by the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to application of a building permit. Building Permit: 5. The applicant shall receive final review and approval of an encroachment agreement for the proposed lockers in the utility easement, by the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, prior to issuance of a building permit. 6. The applicant shall receive final review and approval of a fire safety plan for any proposed changes or alterations to the fire alarm and fire sprinkler systems, by the Town of Vail Fire Department, prior to issuance of a building permit. 7. The applicant shall receive final review and approval of a revocable right -of -way permit for any landscaping or improvements in the right -of -way, by the Town of Vail Public Works Department, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this amendment, the Community Development recommends the Commission makes the following findings: "The Planning and Environmental Commission finds: 1. That the amendment complies with the design criteria, based upon the review outlined in Section Vll of the Staffs April 13, 2009, memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission; and 2. That the amendment is consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town, based upon the review outlined in Section Vll of the Staffs April 13, 2009, memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission; and 3. That the amendment is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas, based upon the review outlined in Section Vll of the Staffs April 13, 2009, memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission; and 4. That the amendment does promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town, and does 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, based upon the review outlined in Section Vll of the Staffs April 13, 2009, memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission. IX. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Plans C. Draft Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 7 4 -2 -7 S6 a ii � I I r r ■ Or CX) - ) a ° m 0 00 0 W � M m o _ ,c o .. \ m 5 m m 0 z V, o Z D m O m m O z O Z Z F c r ;u 1 m mm m m N Om m (n N :(1 Z x 2 ;u C) O � n (� to \ m > O p m N D � A p r m m z z r O C D m '. • D D � p Z Zl o N z C: X � � A o z = v = z o < O O O m m O 3 c D c CO Z ZD ? D G7 m 2 W m O i D p p D X A r 0 n r c O � C � p Z p r r m z CO m 0 D p / N N N N i lP N rn i i -- c TOP /BACK CURB 8207.4 O ' 8 LIGHT POLE \C ON C�� SIGN (TYP) WALK 0 1.5 _ ASPHALT WALK �2 0.7 MARKED PROPOSED EASEMENT / WOOD ti FENCE 8217.4 ROCK WALL I 0.5 `� 1 '+'�'�,Ij•' X1.0 < LARGE `x.2.0_` cp N$ _ STONES (TYP) - to VAIL VILLAGE SEVENTH FILING 0-10.0 TRACT B 22 + 1.5 ASPHALT WALK I ` CP N N N N �. Doti � �n / — mT0 x / M cn T zU Z rn - d r T11 W7 rn r rn - - 0 NZ Z � rn dr M IE OD Ll dOl rn s • T d °D o rE =� ° 8 x M x p Z N 0 z Ol 0 c > p j en r 7 i N # > rn 0 0 p n = rn 0 r d D o � III N N FTI aD �� � �11111 " 11''11 " �� - 11111111 11 0 � 111 111 111 � � 111 � o z 111 111 V � = 111 111 111 111 111 111 1 111111111111111111 1 111 11 C = III —III III III II I cri D CA N D O � C� = w z ^ N /0 O ) X N O X CD N co x D I I� C/) c m D Z z F D fTl --- I m C) D D Z o 0 m ° r o rn m W D -7 � c /� ° I I (P n C,J S 00 F ;;a 0 -P V) r � w I m ORDINANCE NO. 10 SERIES OF 2009 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND RE- ENACTING ORDINANCE NO. 33, SERIES OF 1991, NORTHWOODS, AMENDING SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 2, NORTHWOODS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 12 -9A -10 AMENDMENT PROCEDURES, VAIL TOWN CODE, TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A LOBBY ADDITION, LOCKER RECONFIGURATION AND GENERAL IMPROVEMENTS, LOCATED AT 600 VAIL VALLEY DRIVE (PINOS DEL NORTE, BUILDING C)/ PART OF TRACT B, VAIL VILLAGE FILING 7; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, Special Development District No. 2 was established June 4, 1974; and WHEREAS, Section 12 -9A -10 of the Zoning Regulations permits major amendments to previously approved development plans for Special Development Districts; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this ordinance is to amend and re- establish Ordinance No. 33, Series of 1991, to amend the development plan for Special Development District No. 2, Northwoods, specifically the Pinos Del Norte Condominiums (Building C), to allow for the construction of the proposed lobby addition, locker reconfiguration and site improvements; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission, at their April 13, 2009 meeting recommended to Town Council by a vote of 4 -0 -1 (Kjesbo recused) to approve, with conditions the proposed amendment to Special Development District No. 2. WHEREAS, the proposed major amendment complies with the design criteria set forth in the Zoning Regulations for amendments to a Special Development District; and WHEREAS, the proposed major amendment is consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and 1 Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 4- 1 WHEREAS, the proposed major amendment is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the proposed major amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town, and promotes 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: *All additions are illustrated with bold italics and deletions are illustrated with strikethro gh SestMQn I Ghapter 18.42 of the MuniGipal Gode of the TOWn Of VA be repealed and re-en;;Qted as; follows' Section 1 18� - Purpose A special development district is established to assure comprehensive development and use of an area in a manner that will be harmonious with the general character of the town, provide adequate open space and recreational amenities, and promote the objectives of the zoning ordinance of the town. Ordinarily a special district will be created only when the development density will be lower than allowed by the existing zoning, an environmental impact report indicates that the special development will not have a substantial negative effect on the Town or its inhabitants, the development is regarded as complementary to the Town by the Town Council, Planning and Environmental Commission, and Design Review Board, and there are significant aspects of the special development which cannot be satisfied under the existing zoning. 2 Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 4 -5-2 Section 2 1 a - Established Special Development District No. 2, Northwoods was established under the provisions of the original Vail Zoning Code, specifically Chapters 18.02 and 18.6, Special Development District. The development standards for Special Development District No. 2 were established and adopted by the Town Council on June 4, 1974 through Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1974. Subsequent amendments have been adopted through the following ordinances: • Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1982, to allow major arcades as conditional uses and minor arcades as accessory uses. • Ordinance No. 33, Series of 1991, to allow the construction of a new lounge, storage lockers, boulder retaining wall, sidewalk and landscaping. • Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009, to allow for a lobby addition, locker reconfiguration and site improvements at Pinos Del Norte, Building C. to the PFEW of Ghapte.FS 18.0-2 -;;Rd 18.69f, rpedal develeprneRt dir,#irut _2 . e'Sta-blished Vail Village 2_e�.4e_.Pth FiIiRg, said PE)Ft.E)R tegetheF GE)RtaiRiRg 5.774 aGrer', to develeprn , th e 7 Shu -he refFred- 4oa6; "cnn Ne 2 (Ord C�� 3 Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 4 -5 -3 Section 3 1 Q�Q - Development Plan Adopted The following documents comprise the development plan for Special Development District No. 2, Northwoods: 1. The development plan of Vail Associates, Inc., for its Northwoods development. The development plan includes but is not limited to the following data: a. The environmental impact report, which was submitted to the zoning administrator in accordance with Chapter 18.56; b. Existing and proposed contours after grading and site development having contour intervals of not more than two feet where the average slope on the site is twenty -five percent or less, and contour intervals of not more than five feet where the average slope on the site is greater than twenty -five percent. Supplemental documentation of proposed contours shall be submitted to the zoning administrator with the plans # or each phase of the development; c. A site plan, at a scale of one inch equals thirty feet or larger, showing the locations and dimensions of all buildings and structures, uses therein, and ail principal site development features such as landscaped areas, recreational facilities, pedestrian plazas and walkways, service areas, driveways, and off - street parking and loading areas; d. A preliminary landscape plan, at a scale of one inch equals thirty feet or larger, showing existing landscape features to be retained or removed, and showing proposed landscaping and landscaped site development features such as outdoor 4 Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 4- 4 recreational facilities, bicycle paths, trails, pedestrian plazas and walkways, water features, and other elements; e. Preliminary building elevations, sections, and floor plans, at a scale of one - eighth inch equals one foot or larger, in sufficient detail to determine gross residential floor area, interior circulation, locations of uses within buildings, and the general scale and appearance of the proposed buildings shall be submitted on a phase basis; f. An architectural model of the site and the proposed ,development, photographs, at a scale of one inch equals thirty feet or larger, portraying the scale and relationship of the development to the site, and illustrating the form and mass of structures in the development; g. Since phased construction is contemplated, a program must be submitted indicating order and timing of construction phases, phasing of recreational amenities, and proposals for Interim development: 2. The amended Development Plan for Special Development District No. 2, Northwoods, specifically the Pinos Del Norte Condominiums (Building C), to allow for the construction of the proposed lobby addition, locker reconfiguration and site improvements, according to plans prepared by Fritzlen Pierce Architects, dated April 24, 2009. Section 4 12 .E — 2 050 - . Permitted Uses The following uses shall be permitted in the SDD No. 2 district: A. A maximum of one hundred thirty -nine dwelling units; 5 Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 4 -5 -5 B. A maximum of six dwelling units to house onsite management personnel. Section 5 12 .E — 2 060 - . Conditional Uses The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the SDD No. 2 district, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Section 12 -16, Conditional Use Permits, Vail Town Code. Chapter 1849: A. Private clubs and civic, cultural and fraternal organizations; B. Ski lifts and Tows; C. Public buildings, grounds and facilities; D. Public park and recreational facilities. E. Major arcade, so long as it does not have any exterior frontage on any public way, street, walkway, or mall area. Section 6 I S.^�0 - Accessory Uses The following accessory uses shall be permitted in the SDD No. 2 district: A. Private underground garages, swimming pools, patios, or recreational facilities customarily incidental to permitted residential uses; B. Meeting room and ancillary facilities not to exceed three thousand square feet of floor area; C. Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in accordance with the provisions of Section 12- 14 -12, Home Occupations, Vail Town Code 12 52 9; 6 Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 4 -5-6 D. Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional uses, and necessary far the operation thereof. F. Minor arcade. Section 7 128 �-0-2-0 -- Lot Area and Site Dimensions in 2on4inn IS 42 020 Site Area (Pinos Del Norte): .8024 acres/ 34,952.54 square feet (Pinos Del Norte 2005 survey) Site Area (Northwoods): 4.97 acres/ 216,388.65 square feet (Northwoods 1999 survey) Total Site Area (SDD No. 2): 5.77 acres/ 251,507.54 square feet Section 8 IS 42 90— Setbacks The required setbacks shall be as indicated in the development plan, orbe+ng a minimum of ten feet. Section 9 152 .4: 2 100 - Distance Between Buildings The minimum distances between all structures shall be as indicated in the development plan, being a minimum of thirty feet. Section 10 I S.^�0— Height The maximum height of buildings shall be forty -five feet. Section 11 12 4:2 Density 7 Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 4- 7 The combined gross residential floor area (GRFA) of all buildings constructed in special district 2 shall not exceed one hundred seventy -five thousand square feet. Section 1 2120 Building Bulk The maximum length of any wall of a building face shall be one hundred seventy -five feet with a minimum of seven and one -half feet for every eighty feet of wall length; and the maximum distance in the same plane between any two corners of a building shall be two hundred twenty -five feet. Section 1 3 2140 Site Coverage Not more than twenty -five percent of the total site area may becovered by buildings. Section 14 1 2 . Open Space A. Useable open space for dwelling units shall be required as indicated in the development plan, but in no case shall the useable open space requirements be less than as follows: 1. A minimum of one square foot of useable open space for each four feet of gross residential floor area; 2. Not less than one hundred fifty square feet of useable open space shall be provided for each dwelling unit. B. Useable open space may be common space accessible to more than one dwelling unit, or private space accessible to separate dwelling units, or a combination thereof. At least fifty percent of the 8 Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 4 -5 -8 required useable open space shall be provided at ground level, exclusive of required front setback areas. C. At least seventy -five percent of the required ground -level useable open space shall be common space. The minimum dimension of any area qualifying as ground level useable open space shall be ten feet. D. Not more than fifty percent of the useable open space requirement may be satisfied by balconies or roof decks. The minimum dimension of any area qualifying as non - ground -level useable open space shall be five feet, and any such area shall contain at least fifty square feet. Section 15 1 S2. ^ � � -: 160- Landscaping and Site Development A. At least sixty percent of the total site area shall be landscaped as provided in the development plan. B. Within any area exempted from onsite parking and /or loading requirements, property owners or applicants shall be required to contribute to the town parking fund, established by this section for the purpose of meeting the demand and requirements for vehicle parking. At such time as any property owner or other applicant proposes to develop or redevelop a parcel of property within an exempt area which would require parking and /or loading areas, the owner or applicant shall pay to the town the parking fee required in this section prior to the issuance of a building permit far said development or redevelopment. 1. The parking fund established in this section shall receive and disburse funds for file purpose of conducting parking studies or evaluations, construction of parking facilities, the maintenance of 9 Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 4 -5 -9 parking facilities, the payment of bonds or other indebtedness far parking facilities, and administrative services relating to parking. 2. The parking tee to be paid by any owner or applicant shall be determined by the town council; provided in the event shall it be less than one thousand dollars per space, and in addition, that owners or applicants similarly situated shall be treated equally in any payer's funds are not used by the town for one of the purposes specified in subdivision within five years from the date of payment, the unused portion of the funds shall be returned to the payer upon his application. 3. In accounting far the funds expended from the parking fund, the finance department shall use a first in /first out rule. 4. If any parking funds have been paid in accordance with this section and if subsequent thereto a special or general improvement district Is formed and assessments levied for the purpose of paying for parking improvements, the payer shall be credited against the assessment with the amount previously paid. Section 16 1 Q�Q- Parking and Loading A. The quantity of off - street parking and loading facilities shall be provided in accordance with Section 12 -10, Off Street Parking and Loading, Vail Town Code. Chap 1 8 . 52 L. At least eighty -five percent of the required parking shall be located within the main building or buildings, or beneath accessory decks, terraces, or plazas, and shall be completely enclosed and screened from view; and provided, further, that no required parking shall be exposed surface parking unless such is necessary and approval therefore is attained from the planning commission. G. No parking or loading area shall be located in any required front setback area, 10 Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 4 -5-10 Section 17 Conditions of Approval The following conditions shall apply to the approval of the proposed lobby addition, locker reconfiguration and site improvements, according to plans prepared by Fritzlen Pierce Architects, dated April 24, 2009, located at Pinos Del Norte, Building C: 1. Signs: The applicant shall receive final review and approval of a sign permit for any proposed sign, by the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to installation of any signs on the property. 2. DRB approval: The applicant shall receive final review and approval of the proposed development plan, by the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to application of a building permit. 3. ERWS Encroachment: The applicant shall receive final review and approval of an encroachment agreement for the proposed lockers in the utility easement, by the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, prior to issuance of a building permit. 4. Fire Safety: The applicant shall receive final review and approval of a fire safety plan for any proposed changes or alterations to the fire alarm and fire sprinkler systems, by the Town of Vail Fire Department, prior to issuance of a building permit. 5. Revocable ROW. The applicant shall receive final review and approval of a revocable right -of -way permit for any landscaping or improvements in the right -of -way, by the Town of Vail Public Works Department, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 11 Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 4 - -11 Section 18 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 19 The repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, or violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under of by virtue of the provision repeated or repealed and reenacted. The repeat of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repeated or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 20 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 la revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. 12 Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 4 -5-12 INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 5th day of May, 2009 and a public hearing for second reading of the Ordinance set for the 19 day of May 2009, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Richard Cleveland, Mayor Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk 13 Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2009 4 -5-13 *Vk' VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: May 5, 2009 ITEM /TOPIC: Site Visit. Discussion of First reading of Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2009, an ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 41, the Vail Row Houses, pursuant to Article 12 -9A, Special Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080074) PRESENTER(S): Bill Gibson ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2009, on first reading. BACKGROUND: On April 13, 2009, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted 5 -0 -0 to forward a recommendation of approval to the Town Council for establishment the proposed special development district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Environmental Commission recommends that the Town Council approves, on first reading, Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2009, an ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 41, the Vail Row Houses, pursuant to Article 12 -9A, Special Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regard thereto. ATTACHMENTS: Town Council memo Ordinance No. 12 Development Plan Applicant request PEC memo PEC attachments MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: May 5, 2009 SUBJECT: First reading of Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2009, an ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 41, the Vail Row Houses, pursuant to Article 12 -9A, Special Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080074) Applicant: Christopher Galvin, represented by K.H. Webb Architects and Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Bill Gibson I. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, Christopher Galvin, represented by K.H. Webb Architects and Mauriello Planning Group, is requesting a first reading of Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2009, an ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 41, the Vail Row Houses, pursuant to Article 12 -9A, Special Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regard thereto. The existing Vail Row Houses were originally developed under Eagle County jurisdiction as a townhouse development with individually subdivided lots. The subject properties were subsequently annexed by the Town of Vail and zoned High Density Multiple - Family (HDMF) District. The HDMF District is intended to regulate multi -unit condominium style developments with a single, common development site. The HDMF District was not intended to regulate townhouse style develop; and therefore, the existing Vail Row Houses are legally non - conforming in regard to many of the HDMF standards. The purpose of the proposed special development district is to create a "townhouse" style zoning for the Vail Row Houses and to facilitate future conforming redevelopment. The applicant is proposing the following deviations from the underlying High Density Multiple - Family (HDMF) District that increase the allowable development potential of the subject properties: • Reduce the minimum lot size requirement from 10,000 sq. ft. to the existing conditions (ranging from 2,265 to 4,835 sq. ft.). • Eliminate the side setbacks between units and decrease the side setback on the furthest east lot (Lot 13) from 20 feet to 12 feet to the existing property line (two feet from the proposed property line after a land dedication to the Town of Vail. • Increase the maximum allowable density from one dwelling unit on Lots 7, 8, 10, 11, and 12 to the existing conditions of two units per lot. • Increase the allowable gross residential floor area (GRFA) from a ratio of 0.76 to 1.50 per lot, with Lot 13 capped at a maximum GRFA of 6,770 sq. ft. • Reduce the required landscape area from 30% to 20% for all properties except Lots 11 and 12. Lots 11 and 12 will have no net loss of existing landscape area (12% and 7 %). 1 5 -1 -1 • Decrease the parking requirement of three spaces for Lots 7, 8, 10, 11, and 12 to the existing condition of two spaces for each property. In addition, the requirements for enclosed and screened parking will no longer be applicable and parking spaces will be allowed to encroachment in the adjacent street right -of- way per existing conditions. The applicant is proposing the following deviations from the underlying High Density Multiple - Family (HDMF) District to decrease the allowable development potential of the subject properties as follows: • The subject properties will no longer be eligible for additional GRFA through the "250 Ordinance" or "Interior Conversion" provisions of the Town Code. • The building eave height will be limited to a maximum of 45 feet along Gore Creek Drive. • The allowable above -grade site coverage will be reduced from 55% to 50% of the lot area (below grade site coverage limits will not change). The applicant is proposing supplemental design guidelines: • All parking areas will be constructed with concrete pavers and snowmelt heat with future renovations. The applicant is proposing the following public benefits to off -set any negative effects of the proposed deviations from the underlying High Density Multiple - Family (HDMF) District: • Dedication of 915 sq. ft. of Lot 13 to the Town of Vail as an addition to the adjacent Roger Staub Park. • Increasing the employee housing mitigation obligation by 5% over the rate established by Chapter 12 -24, Inclusionary Zoning, Vail Town Code. If fully developed, this would increase the employee housing mitigation from 1,147 sq.ft to 1,721 sq.ft. (574 sq.ft. increase). Since the Planning and Environmental Commission's April 13, 2009, public hearing, the applicant has amended the request to further address the existing non - conforming parking situation at the Vail Row Houses. The applicant is now proposing that the deviations from the parking standards be mitigated with one of the following methods at such time as the subject properties are redeveloped: a. Comply with number of spaces required, which may include reducing the number of dwelling units on -site; or b. Legally attach a dedicated parking space found within the Founders Parking Garage, located across Gore Creek Drive from The Vail Row Houses; or c. Pay -in -lieu for a parking space(s) or portion thereof as provided in Section 12 -10- 16: Exempt Areas; Parking Fund Established, Town Code. The current pay -in- lieu fee is $22,229.16. II. BACKGROUND The Planning and Environmental Commission held work sessions to discuss this request at its December 22, 2008, and March 9, 2009, public hearings. On April 13, 2009, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted 5 -0 -0 to forward a recommendation of 2 approval to the Town Council for the proposed special development district based upon the findings noted below in Section I I I of this memorandum and the additional finding: "That this application is consistent with the precedents set for redevelopment in the Vail Village by the Willows SDD. " III. PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Town Council for the establishment of the proposed special development district, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Should the Town Council choose to approve this request, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Town Council passes the following motion: "The Town Council approves, on first reading, Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2009, an ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 41, the Vail Row Houses, pursuant to Article 12 -9A, Special Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regard thereto." Should the Town Council choose to approve this request, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Town Council passes the following conditions: "Prior to the addition of GRFA to any dwelling unit within The Vail Row Houses, the owner of Lot 13 shall dedicate the 915 sq. ft. (10 -foot wide) strip of land as indicated on the Approved Development Plan located on the east side of Lot 13. This dedication shall be processed as part of a subdivision application for Lot 13. The 10 foot strip shall be restricted to passive park use and the owner of Lot 13 shall retain an easement for the right to temporary use of this 10 -foot strip for construction activities associated with the redevelopment of structures located on Lot 13." Should the Town Council choose to approve this request, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommends the Town Council makes the following findings: "Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section IV of Staff's April 27, 2009, memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Town Council finds: "1. That the SDD complies with the standards listed in subsection A of this section, and that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved; and 2. That the SDD is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the development objectives of the town; and 3. That the SDD is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and 3 5 -1 -3 4. That the SDD promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promotes 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. " IV. ATTACHMENTS A. Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2009 B. Applicant's revised request, dated May 5, 2009 C. Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission, date April 13, 2009 4 I -4 ORDINANCE NO. 12 Series of 2009 AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 THE VAIL ROW HOUSES, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 12 -9A, SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT (SDD) DISTRICT, VAIL TOWN CODE, AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, Article 12 -9A, Special Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, sets forth the procedures for establishing special development districts; and WHEREAS, The Vail Row Houses, have submitted an application to the Town of Vail to establish Special Development District No. 41, The Vail Row Houses, to facilitate the redevelopment of an existing residential development; and WHEREAS, The Vail Row Houses, was originally developed under the jurisdiction of Eagle County in 1963 and platted as "townhouses" and later zoned High Density Multiple Family Residential by the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the High Density Multiple Family Residential zone districtwas modified overthe years directed at larger parcel multiple family projects rendering the Vail Row Houses nonconforming with respect to numerous zoning standards; and WHEREAS, the proposed SDD will create "townhouse" style zoning on the property and allow it to be a conforming use and development; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail held a public hearing on April 13, 2009, on the application to establish Special Development District No. 41, The Vail Row Houses, in accordance with the provisions of the Vail Town Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has forwarded a recommendation of approval by a vote of 5 -0 -0 of this request to establish Special Development District No. 41, The Vail Row Houses, to the Vail Town Council; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds and determines that the request to establish Special Development District No. 41, The Vail Row Houses, complies with the design criteria prescribed in Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, and that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved. WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds and determines that the request to establish Special Development District No. 41, The Vail Row Houses, is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the development objectives of the town; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds and determines that the request to establish Special Development District No. 41, The Vail Row Houses, is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds and determines that the request to establish Special Development District No. 41, The Vail Row Houses, promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promotes 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. Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2009, first reading 1 5 -2 -1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. District Established Special Development District No. 41, The Vail Row Houses, is established for redevelopment on 7 parcels of land, legally described as Lots 7 though 13, a Resubdivision of Block 5 and a part of Gore Creek Drive, Vail Village First Filing, which comprises 7 lots and a total of 20,997 square feet (0.48 acres) in the Vail Village area of the Town of Vail plus the 915 sq. ft. portion of Lot 13 to be dedicated to the Town of Vail for park use as a condition of this approval. Said parcels may be referred to as "SDD No. 41 ". Special Development District No. 41 shall be reflected as such on the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail. The underlying zoning for Special Development District No. 41, The Vail Row Houses, shall be High Density Multiple Family (HDMF) District. Section 2. Special Development District No. 41, The Vail Row Houses, Approved Development Plan An approved development plan and this ordinance are the principal documents in guiding the development, uses and activities of a special development district. The Approved Development Plan for Special Development District No. 41, The Vail Row Houses, shall be comprised of materials submitted in accordance with Section 12 -9A -5 of the Vail Town Code including those plans prepared by KH Webb Architects, entitled Vail Rowhouses Site Plan A001, revisions dated 04.28.09. Section 3. Development Standards In conjunction with the Approved Development Plan described in Section 2 herein, the following development standards are hereby adopted by this ordinance. The development standards for Special Development District No. 41, The Vail Row Houses, are described below: The development standards as outlined below apply to the individual lots (Lots 7 through 13) of the Vail Row Houses, as modified for this SDD: A. Permitted, Conditional, and Accessory Uses: The permitted, conditional, and accessory uses allowed in Special Development District No. 41, The Vail Row Houses, shall be those uses listed in Title 12, Chapter 6, Article H, High Density Multiple Family zone district, Vail Town Code, as may be amended from time to time. B. Lot Area and Site Dimensions: The minimum size for each lot shall be as each lot exists today, as further described on the Approved Development Plan; however, allowing for minor changes to lot lines to correct any encroachments. The following minimum size for Lot 13 is based upon a 915 sq.ft. land dedication to the Town of Vail. Lot# Lot size 7 2,744 8 2,614 9 2,396 10 2,265 11 2,309 12 2,919 13 4,835 TOTALS 20,997 Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2009, first reading 2 5 -2 -2 The minimum site dimensions for each lot shall be as each lot exists today as further described on the Approved Development Plan; however, allowing for minor changes to lot lines to correct any encroachments. C. Setbacks: The minimum setbacks for Special Development District No. 41, The Vail Row Houses, shall be as indicated on the Approved Development Plan. The minimum front and rear setback shall be 20 ft. The minimum side setback shall be zero feet, except for Lot 13, which shall maintain a minimum setback of 2 ft. from the eastern property line (based on the new property line following the 10 ft. land dedication). The 50 ft. steam setback from Gore Creek shall be maintained. Balconies, decks, terraces, and other similar unroofed features may project into the required setback areas in accordance with Section 14 -10 -4, Architectural Projections, Decks, Balconies, Steps, Bay Windows, etc., Vail Town Code. All existing decks and patios may remain as exists today, as further described on the Approved Development Plan, and may be rebuilt as necessary in their existing configuration. D. Height: For a sloping roof, the height of buildings shall not exceed 48 ft. However, additional height restrictions apply to the front (southern facade) to maintain the appearance of a 2 -3 story building along Gore Creek Drive. The eave height is limited to 45 ft. to the initial eave of the front facade along Gore Creek Drive. Eave height is defined as the distance from finished grade to the top of the sheathing of the initial primary eave of the structure. E. Density Control: No more than 150 sq. ft. of GRFA shall be permitted for each 100 sq. ft. of total site area of each lot. Due to the increase in allowable GRFA, the Vail Row Houses is not eligible for the "Additional 250" or Interior Conversions as described in 12 -15 -5: ADDITIONAL GROSS RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA (250 ORDINANCE) and 12 -15 -04 INTERIOR CONVERSIONS. Lot 13 is further restricted to a total of 6,770 sq. ft. of GRFA. GRFA and Density for each lot shall not exceed the following: Lot # GRFA Density Lot 7 4,116 2 du Lot 8 3,921 2 du Lot 9 3,594 1 du Lot 10 3,397 2 du Lot 11 3,463 2 du Lot 12 4,378 2 du Lot 13 1 6,770 2 du In any case, the total number of units for Lots 7 through 13 shall not exceed 13 dwelling units. If any of the units are consolidated into fewer units on an individual lot, no amendment to this SDD shall be required. However, if any of the units are consolidated into fewer units, the number of consolidated units shall become the maximum allowable density for both the subject individual lot and the entire development site. Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2009, first reading 3 5 -2 -3 If any lots are consolidated, GRFA for the consolidated lot shall be a total of the allowable GRFA for each lot. F. Site Coverage: Site coverage shall not exceed 55% of the total site area of each lot, with the additional restriction that above -grade site coverage shall not exceed 50% of the total site area of each lot. Above grade shall mean from grade level or entry level and above at the south elevation of the buildings. G. Landscaping and Site Development: At least 20% of the total site area of each lot shall be landscaped, except for Lots 11 and 12. Lots 11 and 12 shall have no net loss of landscape area. The following is the existing landscape area of each lot. Landscape Landscape Lot # Sq. Ft. Percentage Lot 7 857 32% Lot 8 796 30% Lot 9 658 28% Lot 10 624 27% Lot 11 428 12% Lot 12 160 7% Lot 13 1 2,119 44% Because of the minimal opportunity for landscaping, when redevelopment of a lot occurs, the parking surface of the lot shall be converted to concrete unit pavers or other material (as approved by the Design Review Board) and a snowmelt system shall be installed. H. Parking and Loading: Parking requirements shall be based on the current number of parking spaces and dwelling units. Lot 7 2 du 2 parking spaces Lot 8 2 du 2 parking spaces Lot 9 1 du 2 parking spaces Lot 10 2 du 2 parking spaces Lot 11 2 du 2 parking spaces Lot 12 2 du 2 parking spaces Lot 13 2 du 1 4 parking spaces If any dwelling units are eliminated, there shall be no fewer than 2 parking spaces for each lot. Due to site constraints, there is no requirement for enclosed or screened parking. The parking is permitted to be located within the front setback, and partially within the Town of Vail right -of -way as it exists currently. A revocable right -of -way permit shall be obtained for improvements within the right -of -way. When a unit is redeveloped or the addition of GRFA occurs, the parking requirements as provided in Section 12- 10 -10A of the Town Code for the subject lot shall be satisfied as follows: Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2009, first reading 4 -=' -4 a. Comply with number of spaces required, which may include reducing the number of dwelling units on -site; or b. Legally attach a dedicated parking space found within the Founders Parking Garage, located across Gore Creek Drive from The Vail Row Houses; or c. Pay -in -lieu for a parking space(s) or portion thereof as provided in Section 12- 10 -16: Exempt Areas; Parking Fund Established, Town Code. The current pay -in -lieu fee is $22,229.16. I. Employee Housing: Employee Housing shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 24: Inclusionary Zoning. Due to site constraints, the inclusionary zoning requirement shall be met through the fee -in -lieu or the provision of off -site employee housing unit(s). The Vail Row Houses shall provide an additional 5% of mitigated floor area or equivalent pay in -lieu amount over the requirements of Chapter 24, Inclusionary Zoning, as may be adjusted from time to time. J. Expiration and Amendment: This SDD is established to set zoning standards for the future redevelopment of individual dwelling units within the SDD. Therefore, the SDD does not expire and will continue to provide the zoning standards into the future. Nothing herein prevents an amendment to the SDD by any owner within the SDD. If an amendment only affects the applicant's property, no written consent is required from other owners within the SDD. Section 4. Conditions of Approval The following condition of approval shall become part of the Town's approval of the establishment of Special Development District No. 41, The Vail Row Houses: Prior to the addition of GRFA to any dwelling unit within The Vail Row Houses, the owner of Lot 13 shall dedicate the 915 sq. ft. (10 -foot wide) strip of land as indicated on the Approved Development Plan located on the east side of Lot 13. This dedication shall be processed as part of a subdivision application for Lot 13. The 10 -foot strip shall be restricted to passive park use and the owner of Lot 13 shall retain an easement for the right to temporary use of this 10 foot strip for construction activities associated with the redevelopment of structures located on Lot 13. 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 Vail 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 Vail 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. The Council's finding, determination and declaration is based upon the review of the criteria prescribed by the Town Code of Vail and the evidence and testimony presented in consideration of this ordinance. Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2009, first reading 5 5 -2 -5 Section 7. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or 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. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 5 th day of May, 2009 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 19 day of May, 2009, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Richard D. Cleveland, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 12, Series of 2009, first reading 6 . 1.0X2 0.3 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: c -REFER TO ORDINANCE NO. 12, SERIES OF 2009 r * 0.3 � c i c I I LOT 6 LOT 7 Vail Row Houses Special Development District Town Council May 5, 2009 ;r w e r rr hr +�r r r 1 p c Mouriello Planning Group 710 WEST LIONSHEAD CIRCLE PAIL SPA CONDOMINIINS. UNIT A VAIL (OLORADO 8!657 _5 -4 -1 I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND The intent of this Special Development District (SDD) application is to correct a long standing problematic application of High Density Multiple Family Zoning to a town house project, known as the Vail Row Houses, within the Vail Village. The proposal will essentially create new "Town House Zoning" for the property within the vehicle of a Special Development District. r Lots 7 through 13 of the Vail Row Houses were originally -` platted as town house parcels in 1962 and the existing row houses were developed on the property in 1963. 4 . This was done under Eagle County jurisdiction before there was zoning in Eagle County and before the Town was incorporated in 1966. Zoning was not adopted in the Yi Town of Vail until 1969 (Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1969). Since 1969 the property has been zoned High Density Multiple Family (HDMF). Under the original zoning ordinance, the development on lots 7 through 13 was . f ` substantially more in compliance with the zoning , r requirements than it is today under current zoning � requirements. Under the 1969 zoning code, there was only a front setback requirement and no side setback requirements, there was no building height limitation and the GRFA limitation (then termed Floor Area Ratio - FAR) was 1.5 to 1, meaning that 150 sq. ft. of GRFA was allowed for each 100 sq. ft. of total land area instead of the 0.76 to 1 ratio that exists today. (The 1969 HDMF Zone District and the plat are attached). Now, 46 years later, the zoning on the property is more restrictive and does not appropriately recognize traditional town house development, which is described as a series of attached homes with zero lot lines between the units. Unlike a condominium development, town houses traditionally sit on fee simple parcels of land, as is the case with Vail Row Houses. The lots were platted unconventionally, and are legally defined as Lots 7 though 13, a Resubdivision of Block 5 and a part of Gore Creek Drive, Vail Village First Filing. Under the current HDMF zoning, the individual lots are not in compliance with the following provisions: Standard Allowed Existing Lot Size Min of 10,000 sq. ft. Range from 2,300 sq. ft. to 5,750 sq. ft. Frontage Min of 30 ft. Range from 20 ft. to 45 ft. Density (Dwelling Unit Per Acre) Range from 1.3 to 3.3 du per lot Range from 1 to 2 du per lot (depending on lot size) GRFA (ratio) .76 Range from .7 to 1.11 Side setbacks Min of 20 ft. 0 ft. Landscape Area 30% of site area Ranges from 7% to 53% Parking - number of parking 1.4 per unit Ranges from 1 to 2 per unit spaces Parking - requirement for 75% of required parking spaces must No enclosed parking enclosed parking be enclosed Parking - location of parking Parking must be within property Parking located within the front spaces boundaries and not within the front setback, with portions located within setback the right -of -way The nonconformities on the properties require the owners to seek variances with any application for redevelopment to the property which makes the approval process cumbersome and wasteful. At least 10 variances have been granted over the years but with each new application additional variances are always Vail Row Houses SDD 1 5 -4 -2 required. Under this proposal, the overall redevelopment framework will be established by the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council, so that in the future, owners can simply seek DRB approval for redevelopment of these older units. This has the effect of creating defined expectations for redevelopment, both from the Town's perspective and from the owners' perspective. The proposed benefits of the SDD are as follows: • Height limit reduced to 45' on south elevation of the buildings; • Site coverage above grade reduced to 50 %; • Design requirement that with any application for redevelopment, all parking surfaces to be converted to concrete unit pavers or other material as approved by the Design Review Board; • All parking to be heated with a snowmelt heat system, • Land dedication of 915 sq. ft. to increase the size of the park and the stream tract. • An increase in employee housing requirement to 5% more than the inclusionary requirement II. PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION REVIEWS When the application was originally submitted to the Town of Vail in late 2008, the proposal was to actually eliminate GRFA limits entirely, while establishing a Special Development District which would allow the existing nonconformities to remain and redevelopment to occur without the need for variances. However, at the December 22, 2008, hearing, the Planning and Environmental Commission questioned the elimination of GRFA, and requested further analysis of the development potential of each of the units. Over the next few months, the applicant worked with Town Staff to investigate alternative methods of analyzing square footage for the Vail Row Houses, even considering a new methodology of measuring square footage that diverged from the Town's GRFA measurement. However, after much consideration, it was decided that it would be more cumbersome to change the methodology of measuring square footage, and that it was more appropriate to use a consistent method. As a result, the applicant returned to the Planning and Environmental Commission on March 9, 2009, with a proposal to allow for a 1.5 GRFA ratio for the Vail Row Houses. The Planning and Environmental Commission was supportive of the revised proposal, but had concerns about the public benefits associated with the increase in development potential (primarily for Lot 13), along with some concern about the impact of a 10 ft. setback on the adjacent park. As a public benefit, the Vail Row Houses was proposing the provide pavers and heat the adjacent section of Gore Creek Drive. The Planning and Environmental Commission had concerns about this and asked for clarification as to whether the Public Works Department would consider this a worthwhile undertaking. Following the March 9, 2009, worksession review, the team worked with Town Staff to develop a proposal for the April 13, 2009, PEC hearing for a final review. In discussions with Public Works, it was indicated to the team that the heating of Gore Creek Drive would be more problematic than beneficial. In addition, based on the concerns about the impacts of Lot 13's 10 ft. setback on the adjacent park, the owner of Lot 13 agreed to donate a 10 ft. strip of land to the Town's park, and limit development to 2 ft. of the new property line. Also, due to the large lot size of Lot 13, GRFA for this property was capped. An additional public benefit was provided to increase the inclusionary requirement, providing an additional 5% of employee housing. On April 13, 2009, the Planning and Environmental Commission unanimously recommended approval of the proposed Special Development District for the Vail Row Houses, based on the changes made to the application. While the final motion did not carry any conditions, one commissioner recommended looking at the parking situation and including a provision for off -site parking or pay -in -lieu if the required parking cannot be met. This has been included in this application. Vail Row Houses SDD 2 5 -4 -3 III. INTENT OF APPLICATION The intent of this SDD application is to allow these town houses to exist in the format that they have for the past 46 years and allow them to be appropriately redeveloped in the future. The establishment of an SDD allows the following: 1. Quantifying and identifying how the Vail Row Houses, Lots 7 through 13, do not meet the requirements of the HDMF zone district and the Vail Town Code as a whole. 2. Establishing modified development regulations and requirements that eliminate the nonconforming status of the existing dwelling units. These modified development regulations and requirements then provide the framework for redevelopment of the property within acceptable parameters. 3. Simplifying the process for property owners to redevelop their property by eliminating the need for individual review of variances for each lot. Redevelopment would occur under the limitations established by the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Town Council, allowing the Design Review Board and Town Staff to review proposals for compliance with the SDD and other applicable regulations. In addition to the correction being sought to remedy the existing non - conformities, the owners are also seeking to modify the GRFA ratio so that there is an inducement to redevelopment, especially wholesale redevelopment of a dwelling. There are good reasons to allow an increase in the GRFA ratio on this property including but not limited to: 1. Encouraging investment and redevelopment of structures originally developed 46 years ago; 2. Bringing development standards on this site into check with changes made elsewhere in the Town. Lionshead zoning allows for a GRFA ratio of 2.5, Public Accommodation was amended to allow a ratio of 1.5, and the original HDMF zoning on this property allowed a ratio of 1.5; 3. Increasing the ratio does not mean allowing more building height or site coverage beyond zoning (48') but instead allowing owners to take advantage of filling the envelope they are currently permitted. Below is an historical analysis of the development potential of the Vail Row Houses, based on the actual square footage allowed by the Town Code from 1969 to this SDD proposal. This analysis is provided due to the changes in methodology over the years in the measurement of GRFA: Historical Analysis of Allowable Sq. Ft. Lot # 1969 1969 Pre -2004 Pre -2004 Current Current Proposed Proposed Actual Actual Actual Sq. Ft. Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Sq. Ft. Ratio Ratio Sq. Ft. Ratio Sq. Ft. Ratio Lot 7 5,172 1.89 2,146 .78 3,237 1.18 4,396 1.6 Lot 8 4,927 1.89 2,068 .80 3,586 1.37 4,188 1.6 Lot 9 4,516 1.89 1,688 .70 2,544 1.06 3,839 1.6 Lot 10 4,270 1.89 1,859 .71 3,272 1.44 3,629 1.6 Lot 11 4,352 1.89 1,885 .81 3,361 1.46 3,700 1.6 Lot12 5,502 1.89 2,251 .77 3,562 1.22 4,677 1.6 Lot 13 10,839 2.24 3,950 .69 5,721 1.00 7,256 1.5 Total 39,578 1.97 15,847 .79 25,283 1.25 31,685 1.57 Vail Row Houses SDD 3 5 -4 -4 The following table provides an analysis of GRFA potential today versus under this SDD proposal. Due to the confusion associated with changing the method of measuring square footage for this SDD, it was agreed that maintaining GRFA was more appropriate. Analysis of Allowable GRFA Allowable Allowable GRFA with Proposed Net Change o � Existing GRFA FA w Allowable (from proposed to Increase GRFA GRFA allowable with over Lot# 76 (based on TOV analysis) (1.5) 250s) Allowable 7 2,252 2,085 2,752 4,116 1,364 50% 8 2,713 1,986 3,213 3,921 708 22% 9 1,667 1,820 2,120 3,594 1,474 70% 10 2,477 1,721 2,977 3,398 421 14% 11 2,565 1,754 3,065 3,464 399 13% 12 2,566 2,218 3,066 4,379 1,313 43% 13 3,926 4,370 4,870 6,770 1,900 39% TOTALS 18,166 15,957 22,063 29,641 7,578 349 In response to the Planning and Environmental Commission's comments from the previous review, the GRFA potential of Lot 13 has been reduced to 6,770 sq. ft., a reduction of 1,855 sq. ft. from the 8,625 sq. ft. of the previous proposal. This has reduced the overall potential GRFA increase to 34 %, or a total site increase of only 7,578 sq. ft. It should be noted that under the current GRFA policy, if any unit were to demolish and rebuild, which given the age of these units would be more appropriate, they would lose the ability to add 250s. This is another reason that it is appropriate to set a new standard regulating GRFA. In addition to allowing the correction of these limiting nonconformities and creating an inducement to redevelopment, the owners are proposing to limit the overall bulk and mass of the project by agreeing to the following limitations: • Reduced maximum building height at the front (south) elevation of the project to 45'; • Reduced site coverage above grade to 50% (currently allowed at 55 %); IV. PUBLIC BENEFIT We believe that what is being proposed is in and of itself a public benefit in terms of fair treatment, ease of process, and local re- investment. However, the owners also recognize that the Town of Vail may feel that additional public benefit is needed with this project and have proposed the following: • Height limit reduced to 45' on south elevation of the buildings; • Site coverage above grade reduced to 50 %; • Design requirement that with any application for redevelopment, all parking surfaces to be converted to concrete unit pavers or other material as approved by the Design Review Board; • All parking to be heated with a snowmelt heat system; • Land dedication of 915 sq. ft. to increase the size of the park and the stream tract. • Increasing the employee housing requirement 5% over the inclusionary zoning requirements. Vail Row Houses SDD 4 5 -4 -5 Each owner will be responsible for providing either off -site employee housing or payment in -lieu of providing housing. The employee housing requirement will be fulfilled prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy for the individual addition or remodel (as is required by 12- 24 -10). Lot # EHU Fee impact at Sq. Ft. Impact at EHU Fee impact at Sq. Ft. Impact at 10% 10% 15% 15% 7 $ 74,308.36 186 $111,462.54 280 8 $ 48,156.92 121 $ 72,235.38 181 9 $ 76,819.86 193 $115,229.78 289 10 $ 36,695.73 92 $ 55,043.60 138 11 $ 35,818.70 90 $ 53,728.05 135 12 $ 72,255.31 181 $108,382.97 272 13 $ 113,376.06 284 $170,064.09 427 Total $ 457,430.94 1,147 $686,146.41 1,721 The Town Code, Section 12 -9A -9, states that deviations from the underlying zone district require the following determination: "... That such deviation provides benefits to the town that outweigh the adverse effects of such deviation." Public benefits are not intended to mitigate for private benefit received, but rather to mitigate the effects of the deviations being sought. Most of the deviations being sought are really correcting deficiencies with the zoning and have no relationship to the use already constructed. We believe that the proposed public benefits far outweigh the effects of the deviations requested. V. COMPARISON TO SDD #40: THE WILLOWS Generally, when dealing with Special Development Districts, the tendency is to think of large projects, like Solaris or the Four Seasons. However, there are actually a large number of much smaller Special Development Districts that are similar to the SDD proposed for the Vail Row Houses. The most recent new SDD shares a great deal of similarity with the Vail Row Houses. The Willows SDD was approved by Ordinance 30, Series of 2006. The Willows was an existing structure, constructed in 1971 and consisted of 28 small units. The site was zoned HDMF and the structure was non - conforming with regards to: setbacks, density, GRFA, site coverage, and landscape area. The primary difference between the Willows and the Vail Row Houses is that the Willows was constructed as a condominium building, whereas the Vail Row Houses were constructed as Townhomes, on individually platted, fee - simple lots. Though the entire structure was to be demolished, making the entire site a clean slate for development, the Willows proposed a redevelopment scenario as a Special Development District, maintaining the underlying zoning of HDMF. Ordinance 30, Series of 2006, approved the Willows SDD with the following deviations: Front, Side, and Rear Setbacks, Density, GRFA, and Site Coverage. The GRFA analysis for the Willows is strikingly similar to the GRFA analysis for the Vail Row Houses. The Willows was permitted only 16,069 sq. ft. of GRFA (76% of the lot area) but were approved at 32,240 sq. ft. of GRFA (152% of the lot area), more than doubling the amount of GRFA allowed by HDMF. In supporting this amount of GRFA, Town Staff stated the following: Though the amount of GRFA exceeds what is allowed, Staff believes that the proposed density (1.5 FAR) is relatively compatible to the density levels expected in the Urban Design Guide Plan within this area. Vail Row Houses SDD 5 _4_6 The same statement is true at the Vail Row Houses. Also similar to the Vail Row Houses, the SDD approval for the Willows allowed for deviations from setbacks. The HDMF requires 20 ft. setbacks from all property lines. The Willows was approved with above -grade improvements with a front setback of 11 ft., a side setback of 7.5 ft., and a rear setback of 6.2 ft. The following statement was provided by the Town Staff as support for the deviations from the setback requirements: Regarding compatibility, the proposed building is similar to its surroundings partially because it includes some encroachment into the setbacks, similar to that of each of its neighbors, and less of a buffer zone than the underlying zone district requires. Many of the surrounding buildings are located within mere feet of the property lines. However, the neighborhood has been able to maintain its intimate residential feel as a result. Buffer zones have instead been provided through mature landscaping and variation of the building facades. Staff believes that the proposed project is compatible with and sensitive to the immediate environment and neighborhood relative to design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation because of the similarity of the design and placement of the building on its site to the design and placement ofsurrounding buildings on theirsites. The public benefits associated with the project included $70,000 for public art, streetscape improvements to Willow Road including a paver sidewalk, 11 beds of employee housing, and a reduction in the number of dwelling units, which some may argue was not a benefit at all, and it should be noted that the number of dwelling units still exceeds that allowed by the underlying zoning. VI. CRITERIA FOR REVIEW OF A SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ESTABLISHMENT The following design criteria shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating the merits of the proposed 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: 1. Compatibility: 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. Applicant Response: The architectural design of the Vail Row Houses is governed by the Design Guidelines prescribed in Chapter 11, Design Review, of the Vail Town Code and by the recommendations Vail Village Master Plan. Due to the uniqueness of the way the Vail Row Houses have evolved overtime, each unit will come in individually to have the design reviewed by the Town of Vail Staff and Design Review Boards, based on the parameters prescribed by the proposed SDD. The scale, bulk, and building height of the Vail Row Houses are prescribed by the standards of the SDD. The main intent of redevelopment of the Vail Row Houses is to maintain the unique character of each home, while also maintaining common themes. Building height is the first tool used to limit the scale and bulk of the Vail Row Houses. HDMF zoning allows for a maximum building height of 48 ft. The SDD will limit the building height to 45 ft. along the front facade (along Gore Creek Drive). This limitation is more restrictive than the existing zoning, and will allow the Vail Row Houses to preserve its 2- to 3- story facade along Gore Creek Drive. The Vail Village Master Plan recommends building heights of 3 to 4 stories in this area, and therefore the proposed height is consistent with the Master Plan. Vail Row Houses SDD 6 5 -4 -7 Following building height, site coverage also controls scale and bulk of a structure. The site coverage allowed by HDMF is 55 %. The proposed site coverage for the Vail Row Houses is limited to 55% below - grade, but further restricted to 50% above - grade. This creates a smaller building footprint and reduces the scale and bulk beyond the requirements of the existing zoning. Buffer zones are the areas between adjacent structures and uses. Typically, setbacks mandate buffer zones. In the case of the Vail Row Houses, these setbacks have historically been interpreted as requiring 20 ft. from all property lines, rendering development on the site impossible without variances. The proposed SDD eliminates the requirement for the interior setbacks, and instead prescribes setbacks along the front, rear, and east sides only. The setbacks prescribed by HDMF for the front, rear, and stream setback will be maintained. The only deviation from what exists today requested is for the easternmost property line of Lot 13. Originally, the SDD proposal was to maintain a 10 ft. setback from this property line. However, there was concern about the impacts to the adjacent park. To alleviate those concerns, the proposal has been revised to maintain a 12 ft separation from the existing property line, and to maintain the integrity of the park, the applicant is willing to donate their private property to the public. Approximately 915 sq. ft. of Lot 13 will be donated to Roger Staub Park, enlarging the park by 10 ft. to the west. Lot 13 will then maintain a 2 ft. setback from the new property line. There is then approximately 110 ft. to the Vorlaufer, which sits on the other side of Roger Staub Park. The Vorlaufer has no setbacks and sits on the property line it shares with the park. Therefore, the Vail Row Houses is consistent with the other structures in the neighborhood. Identity, character, visual integrity and orientation will be maintained for the Vail Row Houses based on the existing development. Because each lot is relatively small and narrow, redevelopment of each lot is limited by the development surrounding it and the restrictions placed on it by the proposed SDD. The applicant believes that the proposed project is compatible with and sensitive to the immediate environment and neighborhood relative to design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation because of the similarity of the design and placement of the building on its site to the design and placement of surrounding buildings on their sites. 2. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. Applicant Response: The uses proposed are the same as the existing - residential dwelling units. No changes to the uses and activity are proposed. Density (dwelling units per acre) shall not be increased, but may be decreased without an amendment to the SDD. GRFA, another method of the Town to measure density, is proposed to increase from an allowable ratio of .76 to 1.5. However, this increase in GRFA is tempered with additional restrictions on site coverage and height, and is consistent with similar projects in the area (generally, all HDMF -zoned projects in the area exceed the allowable GRFA). The Town has also recently increased allowable GRFA for surrounding projects zoned PA, which has an allowable GRFA ratio of 1.5. Additionally, the original zoning applied to the property in 1969 allowed a GRFA ration of 1.5, so the proposed GRFA is consistent with the original ratio of the property before those rights were taken from the property. Furthermore, the challenges related to development within this area are evident by the number of Special Development Districts around the Vail Row Houses, including the following (and their deviations): #35 - Austria Haus - density, setbacks, site coverage, commercial area, common area. #32 - Cornice Building - single family residence in HDMF, setbacks, parking in front setback #19 - Garden of the Gods - setbacks, GRFA #37 - Tivoli Lodge - height, loading and delivery in front setback, landscape area #28 - Christiania - density, GRFA, common area, setbacks, parking Vail Row Houses SDD 7 5 -4 -8 Special Development Districts with an underlying zoning of HDMF are also common in the general area, including: #38 - Manor Vail - building height, dwelling units, GRFA #02 - Northwoods - density #40 - the Willows - setbacks, GRFA, site coverage, density #15 - Bishop Park - building height, setbacks, GRFA The unique developments that occurred in the early stages of Vail's growth lead to many challenges in redevelopment that can only be solved through Special Development Districts, which were created to deal with these types of challenges which could not be solved through the traditional zoning regulations. 3. Parking and Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in chapter 10 of this title. Applicant Response: The intention of the proposed SDD is to maintain the number of parking spaces that exist currently for each unit. Therefore, the parking requirement for this site is a no net loss of parking spaces. The one exception is for Lot 13, which currently exceeds its parking requirement. Should one of the dwelling units be eliminated on Lot 13, they would be allowed to reduce their total number of parking spaces to 2 spaces, which complies with Town Code. 4. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive plan, town policies and urban design plans. Applicant Response: The goals contained in several of the Town's comprehensive, guiding documents are applicable during the review process for the establishment of a Special Development District. The applicable plan sections below are identified as relevant to the review of this proposal. Vail Land Use Plan (in part) 1.0 General Growth /Development 1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 4.0 Village Corel Lionshead 4.2 Increased density in the Core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is preserved thorough implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan. 4.3 The ambiance of Vail Village is important to the identity of Vail and should be preserved. (scale, alpine character, small town feeling, mountains, natural setting, intimate size, cosmopolitan feeling, environmental quality.) Vail Row Houses SDD 8 5 -4 -9 5.0 Residential 5.1 Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. 5.3 Affordable employee housing should be made available through private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the Town of Vail with appropriate restrictions. 5.4 Residential growth should keep pace with the marketplace demands for a full range of housing types. 5.5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and upgraded. Additional employee housing needs should be accommodated at varied sites throughout the community. Vail Village Master Plan (in part) The Vail Row Houses is located within the "Vail Village Master Plan" land use category. The following stated goals of the Vail Village Master Plan are applicable to this application: Goal #1: Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving the unique architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity. Objective 1.2: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities. Objective 1.3: Enhance new development and redevelopment through public improvements done by private developers working in cooperation with the Town. Policy 1.3.1: Public improvements shall be developed with the working participation of the private sector working with the Town. Goal #3: To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking experience throughout the Village. EAST GORE CREEK SUB AREA ( #6) SAS- T-ME'Ab0W ... � rho . , , • • .�.. DRIVE _ .,\. ' • • . 5 9-2 •.� 5 -� V \ — 6`2 VILLAGE 7-6 EAST 7 - 1 EAST GORE CREEK 'A number of the earliest projects developed in Vail are located in the East Gore Creek Sub -Area. Development in this area is exclusively multi family condominium projects with a very limited Vail Row Houses SDD 9 5 -4 -10 amount of support commercial. Surface parking is found at each site, which creates a very dominant visual impression of the sub -area. While the level of development in East Gore Creek is generally greater than that allowed under existing zoning, this area has the potential to absorb density without compromising the character of the Village. This development could be accommodated by partial infill of existing parking areas balanced by greenspace additions or through increasing the height of existing buildings (generally one story over existing heights). In order to maintain the architectural continuity of projects, additional density should be considered only in conjunction with the comprehensive redevelopment of projects. Clearly, one of the main objectives to consider in the redevelopment of any property should be to improve existing parking facilities. This includes satisfying parking demands for existing and additional development, as well as design considerations relative to redevelopment proposals. The opportunity to introduce below grade structured parking will greatly improve pedestrian iza tion and landscape features in this area. This should be considered a goal of any redevelopment proposal in this sub -area. Development or redevelopment of this sub -area will attract additional traffic and population into this area and may have significant impacts upon portions of Sub -Areas 7 and 10." (This statement is largely directed at the Texas Townhomes and Vail Trails, which have large areas of surface parking). 5. Natural And /Or Geologic Hazard: Identification and mitigation of natural and /orgeologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is proposed. Applicant Response: According to the Official Town of Vail Geologic Hazard Maps, the Vail Row Houses are not located in any geologically sensitive areas. 6. Design Features: 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. Applicant Response: The design of the Vail Row Houses is governed by the Design Guidelines prescribed in Chapter 11, Design Review, of the Vail Town Code and by the recommendations Vail Village Master Plan. Due to the uniqueness of the way the Vail Row Houses have evolved overtime, each unit will come in individually to have the design reviewed by the Town of Vail Staff and Design Review Boards, based on the parameters prescribed by the proposed SDD. As proposed, the SDD for the Vail Row Houses meets this criteria. 7. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and offsite traffic circulation. Applicant Response: There will be no change to the existing circulation system. 8. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. Applicant Response: The majority of lots of the Vail Row Houses do not currently comply with the minimum landscape area requirements of the HDMF zone district. The proposed SDD would require a minimum of 20% of the site be landscape (HDMF currently requires 30 %). However, the 2 lots which are most deficient in landscaping currently will be required to have "no net loss of landscape area" which is a similar requirement to the properties within the commercial core and consistent with an Vail Row Houses SDD 10 5 -4 -11 urban village character. To mitigate for the lack of landscape area, as each lot is redeveloped, the proposed SDD mandates that the parking area by converted to heated pavers. In addition, the property is surrounded by an open space tract which includes the stream tract and Roger Staub Park. 9. Workable Plan: Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. Applicant Response: The phasing of redevelopment of individual lots is one of the primary reasons for this proposed Special Development District. Some of the units have already been redeveloped, and therefore a comprehensive redevelopment of the site is highly unlikely. Also, due to the nature of the Vail Row Houses (each lot is owned fee - simple, as if it were a single family lot) the intention would be to allow each row house to have a unique character to make them look as if they developed over time (as they have.) This "phasing" of development allows each owner to clearly understand the parameters of redevelopment, in addition to having a clear understanding of what the neighbors are able to do, unlike the current method of individual variances for each lot. Vail Row Houses SDD 11 5 -4 -12 VII. VRH SDD ZONING STANDARDS The proposal is to create a new Special Development District for the Vail Row Houses to treat the property as a town house development. The underlying zoning would remain HDMF. The permitted, conditional, and accessory uses as defined by the HDMF zone district would not be modified. The following outlines the current developments regulations of HDMF and notes which regulations will be deviated from (the deviations and /or modifications are indicated in bold and italic): ARTICLE H. HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE - FAMILY (HDMF) DISTRICT (The development standards as outlined below apply to the individual lots (Lots 7 through 13) of the Vail Row Houses, as modified for this SDD) 12 -6H -5: LOT AREA AND SITE DIMENSIONS: The minimum lot or site area shall be ten thousand (10,000) square feet of buildable area, and each site shall have a minimum frontage of thirty feet (30'). Each site shall be of a size and shape capable of enclosing a square area eighty feet (80') on each side within its boundaries. The minimum lot size shall be as the lots exist today, however allowing for minor changes to lot lines to correct any encroachments. Lot# Lot size 7 2, 744 8 2,614 9 2,396 10 2,265 11 2,309 12 2,919 13 4,835 TOTALS 20,997 12 -6H -6: SETBACKS: The minimum front setback shall be twenty feet (20'), the minimum side setback shall be twenty feet (20'), and the minimum rear setback shall be twenty feet (20'). The minimum front and rear setback shall be 20 ft. The minimum side setback shall be 0, except for Lot 13 ft., which shall maintain a minimum setback of 2 ft. from the eastern property line (based on the new property line following the 10 ft. land donation). The 50 ft. steam setback from Gore Creek shall be maintained unless a variance is granted in accordance with Chapter 17, Vail Town Code. Pursuant to Section 14 -10 -4, Porches, steps, decks or terraces or similar features located at ground level or within 5 ft. of ground level may project not more than 10 ft. nor more than one -half the minimum required dimension into a required setback area. Balconies, decks, terraces, and other similar unroofed features projecting from a structure at a height of more than 5 ft. above ground level may project not more than 5 ft. nor more than one -half the minimum required dimension into a required setback area. All existing decks and patios may remain as existing. 12 -6H -7: HEIGHT: For a flat roof or mansard roof, the height of buildings shall not exceed forty five feet (45'). For a sloping roof, the height of buildings shall not exceed forty eight feet (48'). Vail Row Houses SDD 12 5 -4 -13 For a sloping roof, the height of buildings shall not exceed 48 ft. However, additional height restrictions apply to the front (southern facade) to maintain the appearance of a 2 -3 story building along Gore Creek Drive. The eave height is limited to 45 ft. to the initial eave of the front facade along Gore Creek Drive. Eave height is defined as the distance from finished grade to the initial primary eave of the structure. 12 -61-1-8: DENSITY CONTROL: Not more than seventy six (76) square feet of gross residential floor area (GRFA) shall be permitted for each one hundred (100) square feet of buildable site area. Total density shall not exceed twenty five (25) dwelling units per acre of buildable site area. Each accommodation unit shall be counted as one -half (1/2) of a dwelling unit for purposes of calculating allowable units per acre. A dwelling unit in a multiple - family building may include one attached accommodation unit no larger than one -third (1/3) of the total floor area of the dwelling. No more than 150 sq. ft. of GRFA shall be permitted for each 100 sq. ft. of total site area of each lot. Due to the increase in allowable GRFA, the Vail Row Houses is not eligible for the "Additional 250" as described in 12 -15 -5: ADDITIONAL GROSS RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA (250 ORDINANCE) and 12 -15 -04 INTERIOR CONVERSIONS. Lot 13 is further restricted to a total of 6,770 sq. ft. of GRFA. GRFA and Density for each lot shall not exceed the following: Lot # GRFA Density Lot? 4,116 2du Lot 3,921 2du Lot 9 3,594 1 du Lot 10 3,397 2du Lot 11 3,463 2du Lot 12 4,378 2du Lot 13 1 6,770 2du In any case, the total number of units for Lots 7 through 13 shall not exceed 13 dwelling units. However, if any of the units are consolidated into fewer units on the site, no amendment to this SDD shall be required. If any lots are consolidated, GRFA for the consolidated lot shall be a total of the allowable GRFA for each lot. 12 -61-1-9: SITE COVERAGE: Site coverage shall not exceed fifty five percent (55 %) of the total site area. Site coverage shall not exceed 55% of the total site area of each lot, with the additional restriction that above -grade site coverage shall not exceed 50% of the total site area of each lot. Above grade shall mean from grade level or entry level and above at the south elevation of the buildings. 12- 61-1-10: LANDSCAPING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT: At least thirty percent (30 %) of the total site area shall be landscaped. The minimum width and length of any area qualifying as landscaping shall be fifteen feet (15') with a minimum area not less than three hundred (300) square feet. At least 20% of the total site area of each lot shall be landscaped, except for Lots 11 and 12. Lots 11 and 12 shall have no net loss of landscape area. The following is the existing landscape area of each lot. Vail Row Houses SDD 13 5 -4 -14 Landscape Landscape Lot # Sq. Ft. Percentage Lot 7 857 32% Lot 8 796 30% Lot 9 658 28% Lot 10 624 27% Lot 11 428 12% Lot 12 160 7% Lot 13 2,119 1 44% Because of the minimal opportunity for landscaping, when redevelopment of a lot occurs, the parking surface of the lot shall be converted to concrete unit pavers or other material (as approved by the Design Review Board) and a snowmelt system shall be installed. 12- 61-1-11: PARKING AND LOADING: Off street parking and loading shall be provided in accordance with chapter 10 of this title. At least seventy five percent (75 %) of the required parking shall be located within the main building or buildings and hidden from public view or shall be completely hidden from public view from adjoining properties within a landscaped berm. No parking shall be located in any required front setback area. Parking requirements shall be based on the current number of parking spaces and dwelling units. Lot 7 2 du 2 parking spaces Lot 8 2 du 2 parking spaces Lot 9 1 du 2 parking spaces Lot 10 2 du 2 parking spaces Lot 11 2 du 2 parking spaces Lot 12 2 du 2 parking spaces Lot 13 2 du 1 4 parking spaces If any dwelling units are eliminated, there shall be no fewer than 2 parking spaces for each lot. Due to site constraints, there is no requirement for enclosed or screened parking. The parking is permitted to be located within the front setback, and partially within the Town of Vail right -of -way as it exists currently. A revocable right -of -way permit shall be obtained for improvements within the right -of -way. When a unit is redeveloped or the addition of GRFA occurs, the parking requirements as provided in Section 12- 10 -10A of the Town Code for the subject lot shall be satisfied as follows: a. Comply with number of spaces on -site, which may include reducing the number of dwelling units on -site; or b. Legally attach a dedicated parking space found within the Founders Parking Garage, located across Gore Creek Drive from The Vail Row Houses; or c. Pay -in -lieu for a parking space(s) or portion thereof as provided in Section 12- 10 -16: Exempt Areas; Parking Fund Established, Town Code. Employee Housing: Employee Housing shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 24: Inclusionary Zoning. Due to site constraints, the Inclusionary zoning requirement shall be met through the fee -in -lieu or the provision of off -site employee housing unit(s). The Vail Row Houses shall provide an additional 5% of Vail Row Houses SDD 14 5 -4 -15 mitigated floor area or equivalent pay in -lieu amount over the requirements of Chapter 24, Inclusionary Zoning, as may be adjusted from time to time. Expiration and Amendment. This SDD is established to set zoning standards for the future redevelopment of individual dwelling units within the SDD. Therefore, the SDD does not expire and will continue to provide the zoning standards into the future. Nothing herein prevents an amendment to the SDD by any owner within the SDD. If an amendment only affects the applicant's property, no written consent is required from other owners within the SDD. Vail Row Houses SDD is 5 -4 -16 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: April 13, 2009 SUBJECT: A request fora final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for the establishment of a new special development district, pursuant to Article 12 -9A, Special Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, located at 303 Gore Creek Drive, Units 7 through 13 (Vail Rowhouses) /Lots 7 through 13, Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080074) Applicant: Christopher Galvin, represented by K.H. Webb Architects and Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Bill Gibson I. SUMMARY The applicant, Christopher Galvin, represented by K.H. Webb Architects and Mauriello Planning Group, is requesting a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council to establish Special Development District No. 41, Vail Rowhouses, located at 303 Gore Creek Drive /Lots 7 through 13, Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1. Based upon Staff's review of the criteria outlined in Section VIII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission forwards a recommendation of denial subject to the findings noted in Section IX of this memorandum. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, Christopher Galvin, represented by K.H. Webb Architects, is requesting a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for the establishment of Special Development District No. 41, Vail Rowhouses. Initially, the purpose of the proposed special development district was to streamline the review process for future renovations to the subject sites (i.e. eliminating the need for multiple variances) while maintaining the row house character of the subject property. The applicant's initial application proposed zero side setbacks, in place of 20 feet, between units; reducing the building height limit by three feet; allowing the existing number of dwelling units; allowing the existing number of parking spaces; eliminating GRFA (gross residential floor area) limits; and adopting facade design guidelines. The applicant has since amended their proposal to include the following deviations from the underlying High Density Multiple - Family (HDMF) District to increase the allowable development potential of the subject properties: 1 • GRFA increases from a ratio of 0.76 to 1.50 per lot, with Lot 13 capped at a maximum GRFA of 6,770 sq. ft. This proposed formula change results in a GRFA increase ranging from 39% to 74% for each subject lot. For a detailed analysis, refer to the attached Applicant's Request (Attachment B). As proposed, "250 Additions" and "Interior Conversions" can not be added to the applicant's proposed maximum GRFA limits. Staff has prepared an analysis of the previous, current, and proposed actual allowable floor area (not GRFA) to determine the true impact of the proposed GRFA amendments (Attachment A). Based upon this analysis, the proposed actual increase in development potential ranges from 9% to 28% per subject lot. • Reduce the required landscape area from 30% to 20% for all lots except 11 and 12. For Lots 11 and 12, the applicant is proposing no net loss of existing landscape area (i.e. Lot 11 = 12% and Lot 12 = 7 %). • Decrease the side setback on the east end lot (Lot 13) from 20 feet to 12 feet from the existing property line. This would result in a two foot setback should the Town accept the proposed 10 foot land dedication noted below. • Decrease the required parking from two spaces per lot with a single dwelling unit and three spaces per lot with a two dwelling units to a total of two spaces for Lots 7 through 12 and four spaces for Lot 13. This proposed reduction reflects the number of existing parking spaces on the subject lots. The applicant has amended their proposal to include the following deviations from the underlying High Density Multiple - Family (HDMF) District to decrease the allowable development potential of the subject properties as follows: • Restrict the building eave height limit to 45 feet along Gore Creek Drive (The current eave height limit is 48 feet for sloping roofs and 45 feet for flat roofs. The applicant is not proposed to change the maximum ridge height limits of 48 and 45 feet.). • Reduce the allowable above -grade site coverage from 55% to 50% of the lot area. Below grade site coverage is not changed. (The current maximum site coverage is 55% both above and below grade) The applicant has also amended their proposal to include the self- imposed design guideline: • All parking areas will be constructed with concrete pavers and snowmelt heat with future renovations. The applicant has amended their proposal to include the following public benefits to off -set the proposed deviations from the underlying High Density Multiple - Family (HDMF) District: • Dedication of the eastern 10 feet of Lot 13 to the Town of Vail. This 915 sq. ft. of land is to be used as an addition to the adjacent public Roger Staub Park. • Increasing the Inclusionary Zoning mitigation rate requirement from 10% of net new floor area to 15% of net new floor area. 2 5 -5 -2 III. BACKGROUND On December 22, 2008, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a work session to discuss the applicant's initial proposal to create a special development district with the purpose of streamlining the development review process without substantively altering the allowed development potential for Lots 7 -13 of the Vail Rowhouses. The Commission was generally supportive of the concept and request additional documentation /calculations demonstrating that the development potential was not being altered. On March 3, 2009, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a work session to discuss the applicant's amended proposal. Instead of solely attempting to streamline the development review process, the applicant amended their application to also increase the allowable GRFA (gross residential floor area) for all subject lots and to decrease the east side setback requirements for Lot 13. IV. ROLES OF REVIEWING BOARDS 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 on the final approval, approval with modifications, or denial of a special development district, pursuant to Article 12 -9A, Special Development Districts, Vail Town Code. Town Council: The Town Council responsible for final approval, approval with modifications, or denial of a special development district, pursuant to Article 12 -9A, Special Development Districts, Vail Town Code. Actions of PEC maybe appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town Council evaluates whether or not the PEC or DRB erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with modifications, or overturn the board's decision. V. ZONING ANALYSIS The proposed changes to the prescribed development standards adopted in conjunction with SDD No. 41, Vail Rownhouses are shown in bold text in the table below. Zoning: High Density Multiple - Family Land Use Plan Designation: Vail Village Master Plan Study Area Current Land Use: Residential Development Standard Allowed /Required Existing Conditions Proposed Allowed /Required Buildable Area (min): 10,000 sq.ft. 2,265 to 5,750 sq.ft. existing conditions Setbacks (min): Front: 20 ft. ?20 ft. no change Sides (Lots 7 -12): 20 ft. 0 ft. existing conditions Sides (Lot 13 west) 20 ft. 0 ft. existing conditions 3 5 -5 -3 Sides (Lot 13 east) 20 ft. 20 ft. 2 ft. (after land dedication) Rear: 20 ft. ?20 ft. no change Gore Creek 50 ft. ?50 ft. no change Building Height (max): 48 ft. sloped /45 ft. flat :548 ft/ :545 ft. Eaves max. 45 ft. on Gore Creek Drive No change to ridge height limits Density — DLI's (max): 0 All but Lot 9: 2 du's Existing conditions Lot 9: 1 du Density — GRFA (max): 0.76 of buildable area 0.76 of buildable area 1.5 of buildable area + interior conversions + interior conversions no interior conversions + 250 additions (x2) + 250 additions (x2) no 250 additions + nonconforming GRFA Site Coverage (max): no change all lots :555% 55% below grade /50% above grade Landscape Area (min): 30% 7% to 44% 20 % /no net loss Lots 11 & 12 Parking (min): all but Lot 9: 3 spaces all but Lot 13: 2 spaces existing conditions Lot 9: 2 spaces Lot 13: 4 spaces Parking location: 75% below grade existing on -grade parking existing conditions not in front setback existing within the setback existing conditions not in street ROW existing in street ROW existing conditions Inclusionary Zoning 10% mitigation rate none required to date 15% mitigation rate (Employee Housing) VI. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING Land Use Zoning North: Gore Creek Outdoor Recreation South: Residential and Parking Commercial Core 1 & Parking Districts East: Public Park Outdoor Recreation West: Residential High Density Multiple - Family VII. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS TITLE 12, ZONING REGULATIONS, VAIL TOWN CODE Chapter 12 -1, Title, Purpose and Applicability A. General: These regulations are enacted for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town, and to promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that will conserve and enhance its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of high quality. B. Specific: These regulations are intended to achieve the following more specific purposes: 1. To provide for adequate light, air, sanitation, drainage, and public facilities. 2. To secure safety from fire, panic, flood, avalanche, accumulation of snow, and other dangerous conditions. 4 -5 -4 3. To promote safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular traffic circulation and to lessen congestion in the streets. 4. To promote adequate and appropriately located off street parking and loading facilities. 5. To conserve and maintain established community qualities and economic values. 6. To encourage a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses, consistent with municipal development objectives. 7. To prevent excessive population densities and overcrowding of the land with structures. 8. To safeguard and enhance the appearance of the town. 9. To conserve and protect wildlife, streams, woods, hillsides, and other desirable natural features. 10. To assure adequate open space, recreation opportunities, and other amenities and facilities conducive to desired living quarters. 11. To otherwise provide for the growth of an orderly and viable community. Article 12 -6H: High Density Multiple Family District 12 -6H -1: PURPOSE: The high density multiple- family district is intended to provide sites for multiple - family dwellings at densities to a maximum of twenty five (25) dwelling units per acre, together with such public and semipublic facilities and lodges, private recreation facilities and related visitororiented uses as may appropriately be located in the same zone district. The high density multiple- family district is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space, and otheramenities commensurate with high density apartment, condominium and lodge uses, and to maintain the desirable residential and resort qualities of the zone district by establishing appropriate site development standards. Certain nonresidential uses are permitted as conditional uses, which relate to the nature of Vail as a winter and summer recreation and vacation community and, where permitted, are intended to blend harmoniously with the residential character of the zone district. Article 12 -9A: Special Development (SDD) District 12 -9A -1: PURPOSE AND APPLICABILITY. A. Purpose: The purpose of the special development district is to encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land in orderto promote its most appropriate use; to improve the design character and quality of the new development with the town; to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of streets and utilities; to preserve the natural and scenic features of open space areas; and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail comprehensive plan. An approved development plan for a special development district, in conjunction with the property's underlying zone district, shall establish the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included in the special development district. B. Applicability: Special development districts do notapplyto and are notavailable in the following zone districts: hillside residential, single- family residential, two- family residential and two- family primary/secondary residential. 5 5 -5 -5 12 -9A -8: DESIGN CRITERIA AND NECESSARY FINDINGS: A. Criteria: The following design criteria shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating the merits of the proposed 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: 1. Compatibility: 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. 2. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. 3. Parking and Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 10 of this title. 4. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive plan, town policies and urban design plans. 5. Natural and /or Geologic Hazard: Identification and mitigation of natural and /or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is proposed. 6. Design Features: 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. 7. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site traffic circulation. 8. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. 9. Workable Plan: Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. B. Necessary Findings: Before recommending and /or granting an approval of an application for a special development district, the planning and environmental commission and the town council shall make the following findings with respect to the proposed SDD: 1. That the SDD complies with the standards listed in subsection A of this section, unless the applicant can demonstrate that one or more of the standards is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved. 2. That the SDD is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the development objectives of the town; and 3. That the SDD is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and 4. That the SDD promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and 6 its established characteras a resort and residential community of the highest quality. 12 -9A -9: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Development standards including lot area, site dimensions, setbacks, height, density control, site coverage, landscaping and parking shall be determined by the town council as part of the approved development plan with consideration of the recommendations of the planning and environmental commission. Before the town council approves development standards that deviate from the underlying zone district, it should be determined that such deviation provides benefits to the town that outweigh the adverse effects of such deviation. This determination is to be made based on evaluation of the proposed special development district's compliance with the design criteria outlined in section 12 -9A -8 of this article. VAIL LAND USE PLAN Chapter 2: Land Use Goals and Policies 1. General Growth /Development 1.1. Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 1.2. The quality of the environment including air, water and other natural resources should be protected as the Town grows. 1.3. The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1.4. The original theme of the old Village Core should be carried into new development in the Village Core through continued implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan. 1.5. Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 1.6. Vail recognizes its stream tract as being a desirable land feature as well as its potential for public use. 2. Skier/Tourist Concerns 2.1. The Town of Vail should improve the existing park and open space lands while continuing to purchase open space. 4. Village Core/ Lionshead 4.1. Increased density in the Core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is preserved through implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan. 4.2. The ambiance of the Village is important to the identity of Vail and should be preserved. (Scale, alpine character, small town feeling, mountains, natural settings, intimate size, cosmopolitan feeling, environmental quality.) 7 7 5. Residential 5.1. Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. 5.2. Affordable employee housing should be made available through private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the Town of Vail, with appropriate restrictions. 5.3. Residential growth should keep pace with the market place demands for a full range of housing types. 5.4. The existing employee housing base should be preserved and upgraded. Additional employee housing needs should be accommodated at varied sites throughout the community. VAIL VILLAGE MASTER PLAN CHAPTER V. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ACTION STEPS GOAL #1 Encourage high quality, redevelopment while preserving unique architectural scale of the village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity. Objective 1.1: Implement a consistent development review process to reinforce the character of the Village. Policy 1.1.1: Development and improvement projects approved in the Village shall be consistent with the goals, objectives, policies and design considerations as outlined in the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban Design Guide Plan. Objective 1.2: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities. Policy 1.2.1: Additional development may be allowed as identified by the Action Plan and as is consistent with the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban Design Guide Plan. Policy 1.2.2: Development and improvement projects shall be coordinated to minimize the unintended negative consequences associated with construction activity in a pedestrianized, commercial area. For instance, the noise abatement, project completion guarantees, temporary parking, traffic control, etc. Objective 1.3: Enhance new development and redevelopment through public improvements done by private developers working in cooperation with the town. Policy 1.3.1: Public improvements shall be developed with the participation of the private sector working with the Town. 8 5 -s -8 Objective 1.4: Recognize the "historic" importance of the architecture, structures, landmarks, plazas and features in preserving the character of Vail Village. Policy 1.4.1: The historical importance of structures, landmarks, plazas and other similar features shall be taken into consideration in the development review process. Policy 1.4.2: The Town may grant flexibility in the interpretation and implementation of its regulations and design guidelines to help protect and maintain the existing character of Vail Village. Policy 1.4.3: Identification of "historic" importance shall not be used as the sole means of preventing or prohibiting development in Vail Village. GOAL #2 To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year - around economic health and viability for the village and for the community as a whole. Objective 2.6: Encourage the development of employee housing units in Vail Village through the efforts of the private sector. Policy 2.6.1: Employee housing units may be required as part of any new or redevelopment project requesting density over that allowed by existing zoning. Policy 2.6.3: The Town of Vail may facilitate in the development of affordable housing by providing appropriate assistance. Policy 2.6.4: Employee housing shall be developed in the Village when required by the Town's adopted Zoning Regulations. GOAL #3 To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking experience throughout the village. Objective 3.1: Physically improve the existing pedestrian ways by landscaping and other improvements. Policy 3.1.1: Private development projects shall incorporate streetscape improvements (such as paver treatments, landscaping, lighting and seating areas), along adjacent pedestrian ways. Policy 3.1.2: Public art and other similar landmark features shall be encouraged at appropriate locations throughout the Town. Policy 3.1.3: Flowers, trees, water features, and other landscaping shall be encouraged throughout the Town in locations adjacent to, or visible from, public areas. Objective 3.2 Minimize the amount of vehicular traffic in the Village to the greatest extent possible. 9 5 -5 -9 Policy 3.2.1: Vehicular traffic will be eliminated or reduced to absolutely minimal necessary levels in the pedestrianized areas of the Village. Objective 3.4: Develop additional sidewalks, pedestrian -only walkways and accessible green space areas, including pocket parks and stream access. Policy 3.4.1: Physical improvements to property adjacent to stream tracts shall not further restrict public access. Policy 3.4.2: Private development projects shall be required to incorporate new sidewalks along streets adjacent to the project as designated in the Vail Village Master Plan and /or Recreation Trails Master Plan. Policy 3.4.3: The "privatization" of the town -owned Gore Creek stream tract shall be strongly discouraged. Policy 3.4.4 Encroachment of private improvements on the town -owned Gore Creek stream tract shall be prohibited. Policy 3.4.5: The Town shall require the removal of existing improvements constructed without the Town's consent within the town -owned Gore Creek stream tract. GOAL #4 To preserve existing open space areas and expand greenspace opportunities. Objective 4.1: Improve existing open space areas and create new plazas with greenspace and pocket parks. Recognize the different roles of each type of open space in forming the overall fabric of the Village. Policy 4.1.1: Active recreation facilities shall be preserved (or relocated to accessible locations elsewhere in the Village) in any development or redevelopment of property in Vail Village. Policy 4.1.2: The development of new public plazas, and improvements to existing plazas (public art, landmarks, historic features, streetscape features, seating areas, etc.) shall be strongly encouraged to reinforce their roles as attractive people places. Policy 4.1.3: With the exception of ski base - related facilities, existing natural open space areas at the base of Vail Mountain and throughout Vail Village and existing greenspaces shall be preserved as open space. Policy 4.1.4: Open space improvements including the addition of accessible greenspace as described or graphically shown in the Vail Village Master Plan and /or Urban Design Guide Plan, will be required in conjunction with private infill or redevelopment projects. Objective 4.2: Improve and expand the opportunity for active and passive recreational activity throughout the Village. 10 5 -5 -10 GOAL #4 Action Steps: 2. Evaluate additional opportunities for the purchase of additional parcels for open space and /or public use. GOAL #5 Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency, and aesthetics of the transportation and circulation systems throughout the village. Objective 5.1 Meet parking demands with public and private parking facilities. Policy5.1.1: For new development that is located outside of the Commercial Core I Zone District, on -site parking shall be provided (ratherthan paying into the parking fund) to meet any additional parking demand as required by the zoning code. Policy 5.1.2: The expansion of the Vail Village parking structure shall maximize the number of additional parking spaces available for public parking. Policy 5.1.3: Seek locations for additional structured public and private parking. Policy 5.1.4: Continue to promote the lease parking program as a means for maximizing the utilization of private parking spaces. Policy 5.1.5: Redevelopment projects shall be strongly encouraged to provide underground or visually concealed parking. Policy 5.1.6: Development and redevelopment projects shall be strongly encouraged to provide ample temporary parking for construction workers for the duration of a construction project to minimize impacts on our guests and visitors resulting from the loss of public parking. GOAL #6 To ensure the continued improvement of the vital operational elements of the village. Objective 6.1: Provide service and delivery facilities for existing and new development. Policy 6.2.2 :Minorimprovements (landscaping, decorative paving, open dining decks, etc.), may be permitted on Town of Vail land or right -of- way (with review and approval by the Town Council and Planning and Environmental Commission when applicable) provided that Town operations such as snow removal, street maintenance and fire department access and operation are able to be maintained at current levels. Special design (i.e. heated pavement), maintenance fees, or other considerations may be required to offset impacts on Town services. 11 CHAPTER VI: ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN 3- a2M 4 - .. 3 . 4 3•4 ° .... _ ... - .. - - 23 3.4 23 3.4 �\ 4 34 � 2 , 3 _ _ a _ 2 -3 12 23 CONCEPTUAL BUILDING LEGEND HEIGHT PLAN 3.4 CHAPTER VII: Vail Village Sub -Areas East Gore Creek Sub -Area ( #6) A number of the earliest projects developed in Vail are located in the East Gore Creek Sub -Area. Development in this area is exclusively multi - family condominium projects with a very limited amount of support commercial. Surface parking is found at each site, which creates a very dominant visual impression of the sub -area. While the level of development in East Gore Creek is generally greater than that allowed under existing zoning, this area has the potential to absorb density without compromising the character of the Village. This development could be accommodated by partial infill of existing parking areas balanced by greenspace additions orthrough increasing the height of existing buildings (generally one story over existing heights). In order to maintain the architectural continuity of projects, additional density should be considered only in conjunction with the comprehensive redevelopment of projects. Clearly, one of the main objectives to considerin the redevelopment of any property should be to improve existing parking facilities. This includes satisfying parking demands for existing and additional development, as well as design considerations relative to redevelopment proposals. The opportunity to introduce below grade structured parking 12 5 -5 -12 will greatly improve pedestrianization and landscape features in this area. This should be considered a goal of any redevelopment proposal in this sub -area. Development orredevelopment of this sub -area will attract additional traffic and population into this area and may have significant impacts upon portions of Sub -Areas 7 and 10. A ROA 3 EAST MEAD6W [ DRIYE— 5-1 — 9 - 61 .a: EAST s � ; � • VILLAGE 7 -5 GCiE • ` CREEK VIII. REVIEW CRITERIA The following design criteria shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating the merits of the proposed special development district. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed development plan complywith 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: 1. Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. Staff does not believe the proposed special development district will negatively affect the architectural design, building height, identity, character, visual integrity or orientation in comparison to the existing conditions. Staff does not believe the applicant's proposal to prescribe a maximum ridge height of 45 feet along Gore Creek Drivie will have any real effect on the bulk and mass of the subject properties. The applicant is not proposing to reduce the maximum roof ridge height of the buildings, so a maximum eave height of 48 feet or 45 feet (which is the current maximum for a flat roof) will not change the four building stories which can be currently be constructed. The Vail Village Master Plan recommends maximum building heights of three to four stories for the subject properties. In Attachment A, Staff prepared an analysis of the previous, existing, and proposed development potential for the subject properties based upon an actual floor- area -ratio calculation rather than GRFA (gross residential floor area) since GRFA includes deductions and credits that can skew the area numbers. 13 5 -5 -13 • Based upon this analysis, the subject properties were allowed a floor area ratio of 1.5 in 1969. • Over the years the Town of Vail imposed a community wide down zoning by significantly reducing the allowable GRFA in many zone districts. Due to this down zoning, the floor area ratio allowed for the subject properties was reduced to 0.60. • In the mid- 1990's the Town of Vail adopted the "250 Addition" and "Interior Conversion" provisions to allow existing residences to expand beyond their allowed GRFA limits. This resulted in floor area ratios ranging from 0.69 to 0.81 for the subject properties. • In 2004, the Town of Vail again amended the GRFA regulations. The most significant amendment granted GRFA deductions for basements and re -set the allowance for new "250 Additions" and "Interior Conversions" for multiple - family residences. This increased the allowable floor area ratio of the subject properties to a range of 1.40 to 1.88. This resulted in 5 of the 7 subject properties now having development potential at or beyond their 1969 levels. Significant portions of these development potential increases are currently un- built. • The applicant is proposing to increase the allowable GRFA limits for the subject properties from 0.76 to 1.5, which will increase the actual floor area ratios for these properties to a range of 1.93 to 2.05. Staff does not believe the proposed increases in building scale /bulk beyond the un -built development potential currently available to each of the subject properties is appropriate for the neighborhood. The purpose and intent of the "250 Addition" and "Interior Conversion" credits currently available to the subject properties, which are predominately un- built, are to encourage the construction of upgrades to existing residences. The proposed increase in development potential will not facilitate the comprehensive redevelopment of an aged property. Lots 7 and 8 have already been redeveloped within the past five years, and the remaining lots will be redeveloped on an individual basis. While the dedication of park land within the Village is generally a positive proposal, Staff does not believe the proposed reductions in Lot 13's setbacks and buffer zones are sensitive to the adjacent Roger Staub Park. The dedication of 10 feet of Lot 13 to the adjacent park will increase the non - conformity of the Lots size (less than 10,000 sq. ft.) and will bring the existing conforming structure into non - compliance with the required 20 setback. The eastern 10 feet of Lot 13 is currently unbuildable. Therefore, the dedication of this property would likely only affect the ownership of the land, rather than affecting the public's perception of open space in the village. 2. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. The Vail Village Master Plan identifies the subject properties as a potential location for additional residential development. Of all the subject properties, only Lot 8 has been constructed to its full allowable height. Each of the other subject properties currently have the ability to construct an additional story on top of the existing residences. Additionally, each of the subject properties currently has the ability to construct additions to their existing residences beyond the allowable GRFA (Gross Residential Floor Area) limits through the "Interior Conversion" and "250 Addition" (two 250 additions are available for all but Lot 9) provisions of the Vail Town Code. Given the current un -built development potential available to each of the subject properties, Staff does not believe the applicant's proposed increases 14 5 -5 -14 to the allowable GRFA limits through the Special Development District process are necessary for conformance with the Vail Village Master Plan. 3. Parking and Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 10 of this title. Lots 7, 8, 10, 11, and 12 are currently deficient in their number of required parking spaces. Pursuant to Chapter 12 -10, Off Street Parking and Loading, Vail Town Code, each unit is required 1.4 parking spaces. With two units on each lot, a minimum of three parking spaces are required for these properties. Currently, there are only two spaces on each of these lots. Portions of the existing parking spaces for every subject property (Lots 7 -13) encroach into the Gore Creek Drive right -of -way contrary to the requirements of Chapter 14 -3, Residential and Commercial Access, Driveway, and Parking Standards, Vail Town Code. The proposed special development district would allow this non - conforming parking situation to continue in perpetuity. 4. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive plan, town policies and urban design plans. The Vail Village Master Plan recommends the existing on- street parking be removed from the Gore Creek Drive right -of -way. However, this proposal does not address this recommendation and would allow the existing non - conforming parking situation to continue in perpetuity. The Vail Village Master Plan identifies the subject properties as a potential location for additional residential development. Of all the subject properties, only Lot 8 has been constructed to its full allowable height. Each of the other subject properties currently have the ability to construct an additional story on top of the existing residences. Additionally, each of the subject properties currently has the ability to construct additions to their existing residences beyond the allowable GRFA (Gross Residential Floor Area) limits through the "Interior Conversion" and "250 Addition" (two 250 additions are available for all but Lot 9) provisions of the Vail Town Code. Given the current un -built development potential available to each of the subject properties, Staff does not believe the applicant's proposed increases to the allowable GRFA limits through the Special Development District process are necessary for conformance with the Vail Village Master Plan. 5. Natural and /or Geologic Hazard: Identification and mitigation of natural and /or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is proposed. Portions of the subject properties are located adjacent to the Gore Creek 100 -year Flood Plain; however, no improvements are proposed to be constructed in the flood plain. 6. Design Features: Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. The subject properties are located adjacent to Gore Creek; however, no improvements are proposed to be constructed within the flood plain or the 50 -foot creek setback. 15 5 -5 -15 The subject properties are located adjacent to the Roger Staub Park, and the owner of Lot 13 is proposing to dedicate the eastern 10 feet of their lot to the Town of Vail as an addition to the park. However, the applicant is also proposing to expand the existing Lot 13 residence nine feet to the east. The existing residence, with the existing lot configuration, conforms to the 20 foot side setback requirement. By dedicating land to the park, that setback is reduced to 11 feet; and by expanding the building to the east the applicant is proposing a final setback of only one foot. Staff does not believe a proposed building setback of only two feet is appropriate in this location. A two foot setback would create practical difficulties to the current and future owners of the lot in accessing and maintaining their property without encroaching into a public park. The dedication of 915 sq. ft. of Lot 13 to the Town of Vail for public park use would make this lot more non - conforming in regard to the current 10,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size requirement of the Town's zoning regulations. 7. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site traffic circulation. Portions of the existing parking spaces for each subject property encroach into the Gore Creek Drive right -of -way contrary to the requirements of Chapter 14 -3, Residential and Commercial Access, Driveway, and Parking Standards, Vail Town Code. The proposed special development district would allow this non - conforming parking situation to continue in perpetuity. 8. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. While Staff generally supports the concept of park land dedication; Staff does not believe the proposed reduction in setbacks and landscape area on Lot 13 optimizes or preserves the natural features of the adjacent Roger Staub Park. Lot 13 currently complies with the required 30% site coverage requirement; however, the proposed dedication of land will render Lot 13 non - conforming. Currently Lots 9 through 12 are deficient in meeting the minimum landscape area requirements, and the proposed special development district will perpetuate this situation into the future by reducing the required landscaping requirement to 12% for Lot 11, 7% for Lot 12, and 20% for the remaining lots. 9. Workable Plan: 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 not proposing a comprehensive redevelopment of the subject properties. Instead, future redevelopment could occur on a single unit by unit basis. 10. Public Benefit: The proposed deviations provide benefits to the town must outweigh the adverse effects of such deviations. This proposed Special Development District includes the following deviations from the Town's zoning regulations and development standards: 16 5 -5 -16 • Lot size and lot dimensions • Density — Dwelling Units per acre • Density — GRFA (gross residential floor area) • Setbacks • Landscape Area • Parking — Numbers • Parking — Location The applicant is proposing to mitigate the effects of these deviations with the follow: • Dedication of 915 from Lot 13 to the Town of Vail's Roger Staub park. • Reducing the building eave height limit along Gore Creek Drive to 45 feet. • Reducing the above grade site coverage limits to 50 %. • Increasing the Inclusionary Zoning employee housing mitigation rate from 10% to 15 %. • Imposing design guidelines requiring future driveway renovations to include concrete pavers and snowmelt heating. Since this proposal is not part of a comprehensive redevelopment of the subject properties, the dedication of land to Roger Staub Park is the only near term benefit proposed by the applicant. The proposed reduction in site coverage, eave height limits, and Inclusionary Zoning changes will only take effect when the individual lot owners choose to redevelop their properties (two of these properties have already been redeveloped in the past 5 years). While Staff generally supports the concept of park land dedication, in this situation such a dedication renders the existing Lot 13 more non - conforming in regards to lot size /dimension requirements and setback requirements. The non - conforming setback situation on Lot 13 would then be further exacerbated by the applicant's proposed to also expand the structure on Lot 13 and addition 8 feet to the east. From a practical perspective, the portion of Lot 13 being offered for dedication is currently unbuildable due to the setback requirements of the site. Therefore, while a portion of Lot 13 could come under the ownership of the Town; Staff does not believe the general public will perceive any physical changes to the existing Roger Staub Park. Staff does not believe the applicant's proposal to limit building roof eaves to 45 feet will have any benefit to the public. Staff does not believe this requirement will have any practical affect on reducing the bulk and mass of the subject properties, since 45 feet is the current eave limit for flat roofs and the applicant is not proposing to reduce the roof ridge height requirement for sloping roofs. The current building height limits already allow the subject properties to be four stories above street level as recommended by the Vail Village Master Plan, and the proposed eave limit will not alter this circumstance. All of the subject properties, with the exception of Lot 7, are only three stories in height today and already have the development rights to expand an additional story. The applicant is proposing to reduce the above grade site coverage limits for the subject properties from 55% to 50 %. Each of the subject properties already complies with this proposed standard. In part, today's conformance with this proposed site coverage reduction is dictated by the current setback requirements and the current landscape area requirements applied to the subject properties. Several of the subject properties are currently non- conforming in regard to today's landscape area requirements. The applicant is not proposing to reduce the existing landscape area non - conformities. Instead, the applicant is 17 5 -5 -17 proposing to perpetuate this situation through the special development district process without providing any public benefits to off -set the negative effects of these deficiencies. The proposed park land dedication will render the currently conforming Lot 13 non- conforming in regard to the minimum landscape area requirements. The subject properties are located adjacent to the Roger Staub Park and a public stream tract. Both properties are experiencing stream bank erosion along Gore Creek and Staff believes an opportunity exists for the applicant to assist the Town in preserving these critical adjacent public open spaces. The subject properties are non - conforming in regard to density in both allowable units per acre and GRFA (gross residential floor area). By formalizing the existing number of dwelling units through the special development district process, the applicant gains significantly in becoming "conforming" in regard to density. Currently, the subject properties can not demolish more than one -half the floor area of the building during a renovation or the project will be defined as a "demo /rebuild" by the Town's zoning regulations. Once a current building becomes a "demo /rebuild" project, the reconstruction must be fully in compliance with the Town's regulations and the property looses it's "legally non - conforming" (i.e. grandfathered) status. In the past five years Lots 7 and 8 have redeveloped, at additional expense to the owners, in such a manner as to maintain there grandfathered status by not demolishing more than one -half of the existing floor area. As proposed, future renovations to the subject properties will not be constrained by this "demo /rebuild" scenario. The applicant is proposing to increase the allowable GRFA for the subject properties beyond the current limits. Unlike in other special development district proposal, these subject properties have unbuilt development potential. Less than five years ago the Town of Vail amended the Town's GRFA regulations and significantly increased the GRFA available to the subject properties and reset the "250 Addition" and "Interior Conversion" opportunities. The Town's current regulations grant the majority of the subject properties more development potential than they were affording in 1969, years prior to the town wide down zoning. The applicant is proposing to mitigate the effects of this additional floor area by increasing their Inclusionary Zoning employee housing mitigation rates from 10% to 15 %. Should the Commission choose to support this element to the proposal, Staff recommends this provision be modified to require an additional 5% above the standard minimum Inclusionary Zoning employee housing mitigation rate. The current mitigation rate could be subject to future code amendments that could potentially increase the standard minimum rate and Staff believes the applicant's proposed increase should be proportional to any future standard rates. The subject properties, with the exception of Lot 13, are currently non - conforming in regard to parking space numbers. The applicant is not proposing any public benefit to mitigate the effects of the deviation. Staff believes several opportunities are currently available to the applicant to mitigate this deviation, including: • Constructing underground parking as recommended by the Vail Village Master Plan. • Converting the street level of the existing buildings into garages (the displaced GRFA can be relocated in the unbuilt fourth story of these buildings). • Parking spaces can be purchased in the adjacent Founder's Garage and tied to the deeds of these properties in accordance with the provisions of Section 12- 10 -6, Parking; Off Site and Joint Facilities, Vail Town Code. • Fees -in -lieu can be paid into the Town's core area parking fund (the current rate is $22, 229.16). 18 5 -5 -18 Please note, that the proposed dedication of a portion of Lot 13 to Roger Staub Park would eliminate the eastern most 7 feet of this lot's existing non - conforming parking area. The lot could no longer accommodate the parking space widths necessary for the four existing parking spaces on the lot without the removal, and paving, of an existing landscape planter on the western portion of the property (i.e. a further reduction in landscape area). While the applicant is proposing a guideline requiring driveways of the subject properties to be concrete pavers and snowmelt heated at the time of some future redevelopment (the Lot 7 and Lot 8 driveways have already been upgraded), Staff believes the above listed parking garage or off -site parking options are currently available to the subject properties to remedy the non - compliant parking spaces that are located within the front setbacks and encroach in the Gore Creek Drive street right -of -way. Staff does not believe the applicant has demonstrated that the negative effects of the deviations created by this special development district will be adequately mitigated or outweighed by the applicant's proposed public benefits. IX. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based upon review of the criteria outlined in Section VIII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of denial to the Vail Town Council of this request. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of denial of this request; Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: "The Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of denial to the Vail Town Council forthe establishment of a new special development district, pursuant to Article 12 -9A, Special Development (SDD) District, Vail Town Code, located at 303 Gore Creek Drive, Units 7 through 13 (Vail Rowhouses) /Lots 7 through 13, Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto." Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of denial to the Vail Town Council this request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: "Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section VI of StafYs March 23, 2009, memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds: "I. That the SDD does not comply with the standards listed in subsection A of this section, unless the applicant can demonstrate that one or more of the standards is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved. 2. That the SDD is not consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the development objectives of the town; and 19 5 -5 -19 3. That the SDD is not compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and 4. That the SDD does not promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promotes 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. " X. ATTACHMENTS A. Actual allowed floor area comparisons (i.e. not "GRFA ") B. Vicinity Map C. Applicant's revised request dated April 13, 2009 D. Public Comment letter dated April 9, 2009 20 5 -5 -20 Attachment A 1969 ALLOWED ACTUAL FLOOR AREA RATIO (NOT GRFA) Lot # Lot Size (sq.ft.) Allowed Floor Area (1.5) Allowed Floor Area Ratio (sq.ft.) 7 2,744 4,116 1.50 8 2,614 3,921 1.50 9 2,396 3,594 1.50 10 2,265 3,398 1.50 11 2,309 3,464 1.50 12 2,919 4,379 1.50 13 5,750 8,625 1.50 PRE -2004 ALLOWED ACTUAL FLOOR AREA RATIO (NOT GRFA) Lot Lot Size GRFA (0.60) "250" Interior Allowed Floor Allowed Floor # ( sq.ft.) (sq.ft.) Additions Conversions Area (sq.ft.) Area Ratio (sq.ft.) (sq.ft.) 7 2,744 1,646 500 unknown 2,146+ 0.78 8 2,614 1,568 500 unknown 2,068+ 0.80 9 2,396 1,438 250 unknown 1,688+ 0.70 10 2,265 1,359 500 unknown 1,859+ 0.71 11 2,309 1,385 500 unknown 1,885+ 0.81 12 2,919 1,751 500 unknown 2,251+ 0.77 13 5,750 3,450 500 unknown 3,950+ 0.69 CURRENT ALLOWED ACTUAL FLOOR AREA RATIO (NOT GRFA) Lot Lot Allowed Existing "250" Interior 2004 Allowed Allowed # Size GRFA Non- Additions Conversions Basement Floor Area Floor Area (sq.ft.) (0.76) conforming (sq.ft.) (sq.ft.) Deduction (sq.ft.) Ratio (sq.ft.) Additional (sq.ft.) GRFA (sq.ft.) 7 2,744 2,085 167 500 unknown 1,509 4,261+ 1.55 8 2,614 1,987 726 500 unknown 1,438 4,651+ 1.80 9 2,396 1,821 0 250 unknown 1,318 3,389+ 1.41 10 2,265 1,721 756 500 unknown 1,246 4,223+ 1.86 11 2,309 1,755 810 500 unknown 1,270 4,335+ 1.88 12 2,919 2,218 348 500 unknown 1,605 4,671+ 1.50 13 5,750 4,370 0 500 unknown 3,163 8,033+ 1.40 21 5 -5 -21 PROPOSED ACTUAL FLOOR AREA RATIO (NOT GRFA) Lot Lot Size Proposed Basement Actual Proposed Change from Change from # ( sq.ft.) Floor Deduction proposed Floor Area Current Floor Current Floor Area (1.5) (sq.ft.) floor area Ratio Area (sq.ft.) Area Ratio (sq.ft.) 7 2,744 4,116 1,509 5,625 2.05 1,364 32% 8 2,614 3,921 1,438 5,359 2.05 708 22% 9 2,396 3,594 1,318 4,912 2.05 1,523 45% 10 2,265 3,398 1,246 4,544 2.01 321 8% 11 2,309 3,464 1,270 4,734 2.05 399 9% 12 2,919 4,379 1,605 5,984 2.05 1,313 28% 13 5,750 8,625 w/ 3,163 9,933 1.73 1,900 24% without cap of land 6,770 dedication 13 4,835 6,675 2,659 9,334 1.93 1,301 16% with land w /cap of dedication 6,770 22 5 -5 -22 Attachment B _ fl pr z 51 e oot r# low Al 6 r 2 M s LL tZ CD W y� } 4D r 7 U ' + } A• r k.� � i I { Nk 4 r ' I lid '+��, r r • O y M ~� — �� " .'y' h 23 5 -5 -23 Attachment C V a i l Row Houses Special Development District Planning and Environmental Commission Final Recommendation April 13, 2009 f a 1+ ! h J 'R !� eP ! b f T b Mauriallo Planning Group No WISi Wi�MIAn (IMLE WA S1At LOWD4 MIItlUNS5. UNIT A VAIL COLORADO 91651 I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND The intent of this Special Development District (SDD) application is to correct a long standing problematic application of High Density Multiple Family Zoning to a town house project, known as the Vail Row Houses, within the Vail Village. The proposal will essentially create new "Town House Zoning" for the property within the vehicle of a Special Development District. Lots 7 through 13 of the Vail Row Houses were originally platted as town house parcels in 1962 and the existing - row houses were developed on the property in 1963. This r' was done under Eagle County jurisdiction before there was zoning in Eagle County and before the Town was i incorporated in 1966. Zoning was not adopted in the :J Town of Vail until 1969 (Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1969). Since 1969 the property has been zoned High Density Multiple Family (HDMF). Under the original zoning ordinance, the development on lots 7 through 13 was '- substantially more in compliance with the zoning requirements than it is today under current zoning t requirements. Under the 1969 zoning code, there was only a front setback requirement and no side setback requirements, there was no building height limitation and the GRFA limitation (then termed Floor Area Ratio - FAR) was 1 .5 to 1, meaning that 150 sq. ft. of GRFA was allowed for each 100 sq. ft. of total land area instead of the 0.76 to 1 ratio that exists today. (The 1969 HDMF Zone District and the plat are attached). Now, 46 years later, the zoning on the property is more restrictive and does not appropriately recognize traditional town house development, which is described as a series of attached homes with zero lot lines between the units. Unlike a condominium development, town houses traditionally sit on fee simple parcels of land, as is the case with Vail Row Houses. The lots were platted unconventionally, and are legally defined as Lots 7 though 13, a Resubdivision of Block 5 and a part of Gore Creek Drive, Vail Village First Filing. Under the current HDMF zoning, the individual lots are not in compliance with the following provisions: Standard Allowed Existin Lot Size Min of 10,000 sq. ft. Range from 2,300 sq. ft. to 5,750 sq. R. Frontage Min of 30 ft. Range from 20 ft. to 45 ft. Density (Dwelling Unit Per Acre) Range from 1 .3 to 3.3 du per lot Range from 1 to 2 du per lot (depending on lot size) GRFA (ratio) .76 Ran e from .7 to 1 . l 1 Side setbacks Min of 20 ft. 0 ft. Landscape Area 30% of site area Ranges from 7% to 53% Parking - number of parking 1 .4 per unit Ranges from 1 to 2 per unit spaces Parking - requirement for enclosed 75% of required parking spaces must No enclosed parking p arking be enclosed Parking - location of parking Parking must be within property Parking located within the front setback, spaces boundaries and not within the front with portions located within the right -of- setback wa Vail Row Houses SDD 1 The nonconformities on the properties require the owners to seek variances with any application for redevelopment to the property which makes the approval process cumbersome and wasteful. Numerous variances have been granted over the years but with each new application additional variances are always required. Under this proposal, the overall redevelopment framework will be established by the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council, so that in the future, owners can simply seek DRB approval for redevelopment of these older units. This has the effect of creating defined expectations for redevelopment, both from the Town's perspective and from the owners' perspective. This application was reviewed by the Planning and Environmental Commission on March 9, 2009. Based on the comments of the Commissioners and the public, the following changes have been made to this application: 1 . The GRFA proposed for Lot 13 has been substantially reduced. Rather than using a ratio for Lot 13, a cap of 6,770 sq. ft. of GRFA has been proposed for Lot 13, a reduction of 1,855 sq. ft. This is an increase of 39% over the allowable GRFA today (versus a 77% increase over allowable GRFA). 2. Lot 13 will donate a 10 ft, strip of land, totally approximately 915 sq. ft. along the western property line, and limit construction to 2 ft. from this new property line. As a result, this allows for construction no closer than 12 ft. from the existing property line. The land dedication allows the Town to increase the size of the park and gain land adjacent to the stream tract. Based on the recent sale of Lot 10, this value of this 915 sq. ft. of land is worth approximately $2 million. Development potential for Lot 13 (other than GRFA, which is further restricted) will be based on the new lot size (ie. site coverage and landscape area). The resulting relationship to the park is similar to that of the Vorlaufer on the east side of the park and many other town home properties in the Village area. 3. The original proposal included a public benefit of providing pavers and heat tubing for portions of Gore Creek Drive. The Planning and Environmental Commission requested direction from the Town Engineer regarding this as a public benefit. Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer, indicated that the Town does not see the benefit of pavers for Gore Creek Drive (higher maintenance) and does not believe that heating it is necessary. As a result, no improvements to Gore Creek Drive are proposed at this time. 4. To provide additional public benefit to off -set the increase in development potential, the Vail Row Houses will increase the inclusionary zoning requirement for employee housing from 10% to 15 %. The proposed benefits of the SDD are as follows: • Height limit reduced to 45' on south elevation of the buildings; • Site coverage above grade reduced to 50 %; • Design requirement that with any application for redevelopment, all parking surfaces to be converted to concrete unit pavers or other material as approved by the Design Review Board; • All parking to be heated with a snowmelt heat system; • Land dedication of 915 sq. ft. to increase the size of the park and the stream. tract. • Increase in employee housing requirement from 10% to 15% Vail Row Houses SDD 2 II. INTENT OF APPLICATION The intent of this SDD application is to allow these town houses to exist in the format [hat they have for the past 46 years and allow them to be appropriately redeveloped in the future. The establishment of an SDD allows the following: 1. Quantifying and identifying how the Vail Row Houses, Lots 7 through 13, do not meet the requirements of the HDMF zone district and the Vail Town Code as a whole. 2. Establishing modified development regulations and requirements that eliminate the nonconforming status of the existing dwelling units. These modified development regulations and requirements then provide the framework for redevelopment of the property within acceptable parameters. 3. Simplifying the process for property owners to redevelop their property by eliminating the need for individual review of variances for each lot. Redevelopment would occur under the limitations established by the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Town Council, allowing the Design Review Board and Town Staff to review proposals for compliance with the SDD and other applicable regulations. In addition to the correction being sought to remedy the existing non - conformities, the owners are also seeking to modify the GRFA ratio so that there is an inducement to redevelopment, especially wholesale redevelopment of a dwelling. There are good reasons to allow an increase in the GRFA ratio on this property including but not limited to: 1 . Encouraging investment and redevelopment of structures originally developed 46 years ago; 2. Bringing development standards on this site into check with changes made elsewhere in the Town. Lionshead zoning allows for a GRFA ratio of 2.5, Public Accommodation was amended to allow a ratio of 1 .5, and the original HDMF zoning on this property allowed a ratio of 1 .5; 3. Increasing the ratio does not mean allowing more building height or site coverage beyond zoning (48') but instead allowing owners to take advantage of filling the envelope they are currently permitted. Below is an analysis of the increased development potential of the Vail Row Houses, comparing the allowable GRFA under the existing zoning requirements to the proposed allowable GRFA: Vail Row Houses SDD 3 i i Allowable Allowable GRFA with Proposed Net Change % Increase I Existing GRFA Allowable GRFA (from proposed to over GRFA 250s allowable with � Lot# (.76) (based on TOV (1.5) 250s) Allowable analysis 7 2,252 2,085 2,752 4,116 1,364 50% p 8 2,713 1,986 3,213 3,921 708 22% �+ u 9 1,667 1,820 2,120 3,594 1,474 70% 10 2 1,721 2,977 3,398 421 14% 11 2,565 1,754 3,065 3,464 399 13% l 12 2,566 2,218 3,066 4,379 1,313 43% 13 3,926 4,370 4,870 6,770 1,900 39% TOTALS 18,166 15,957 22,063 29,641 7,578 34% In response to the Planning and Environmental Commission's comments from the previous review, the GRFA potential of Lot 13 has been reduced to 6,770 sq. ft., a reduction of 1,855 sq. ft. from the 8,625 sq. ft. of the previous proposal. This has reduced the overall potential GRFA increase to 34 %, or a total site increase of only 7,578 sq. ft. It should be noted that under the current GRFA policy, if any unit were to demolish and rebuild, which given the age of these units would be more appropriate, they would lose the ability to add 250s. This is another reason that it is appropriate to set a new standard regulating GRFA. In addition to allowing the correction of these limiting nonconformities and creating an inducement to redevelopment, the owners are proposing to limit the overall bulk and mass of the project by agreeing to the following limitations: 1. • Reduced maximum building height at the front (south) elevation of the project to 45'; • Reduced site coverage above grade to 50% (currently allowed at 55 %); I i R i 1 I Vail Row Houses SDD 4 III. P BENEFIT We believe that what is being proposed is in and of itself a public benefit in terms of fair treatment, ease of process, and local re- investment. However, the owners also recognize that the Town of Vail may feel that additional public benefit is needed with this project and have proposed the following: • Height limit reduced to 45' on south elevation of the buildings; • Site coverage above grade reduced to 50 %; • Design requirement that with any application for redevelopment, all parking surfaces to be converted to concrete unit pavers or other material as approved by the Design Review Board; • All parking to be heated with a snowmelt heat system; • Land dedication of 915 sq. ft. to increase the size of the park and the stream tract. • Increasing the employee housing requirement from 10% to 15% of net new GRFA. Each owner will be responsible for providing either off -site employee housing or payment in -lieu of providing housing. The employee housing requirement will be fulfilled prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy for the individual addition or remodel (as is required by 12- 24 -10). Lot # EHU Fee impact at Sq. Ft. Impact at 10% EHU Fee impact at Sq. Ft. Impact at 10% 15% 15% 7 $ 74,308.36 186 $1 1 1,462.54 280 8 $ 48,156.92 121 $ 72,235.38 181 9 $ 76,819.86 193 $1 15 289 10 $ 36,695.73 92 $ 55,04160 138 11 $ 35,818.70 90 $ 53,728.05 135 12 $ 72,255.31 181 $108,382.97 272 13 $ 113,376.06 284 $170,064.09 427 Total $ 457,430.94 1,147 $686,146.41 1,721 The Town Code, Section 1 2 -9A -9, states that deviations from the underlying zone district require the following determination: "..That such deviation provides benefits to the town that outweigh the adverse effects of such deviation. " Public benefits are not intended to mitigate for private benefit received, but rather to mitigate the effects of the deviations being sought. Most of the deviations being sought are really correcting deficiencies with the zoning and have no relationship to the use already constructed. We believe that the proposed public benefits far outweigh the effects of the deviations requested. Vail Row Houses SDD 5 IV. VRH COMPARISON TO SDD #40: THE WILLOWS Generally, when dealing with Special Development Districts, the tendency is to think of large projects, like Solaris or the Four Seasons. However, there are actually a large number of much smaller Special Development Districts that are similar to the SDD proposed for the Vail Row Houses. The most recent new SDD shares a great deal of similarity with the Vail Row Houses. The Willows SDD was approved by Ordinance 30, Series of 2006. The Willows was an existing structure, constructed in 1971 and consisted of 28 small units. The site was zoned HDMF and the structure was non - conforming with regards to: setbacks, density, GRFA, site coverage, and landscape area. The primary difference between the Willows and the Vail Row Houses is that the Willows was constructed as a condominium building, whereas the Vail Row Houses were constructed as Townhomes, on individually platted, fee - simple lots. Though the entire structure was to be demolished, making the entire site a clean slate for development, the Willows proposed a redevelopment scenario as a Special Development District, maintaining the underlying zoning of HDMF. Ordinance 30, Series of 2006, approved the Willows SDD with the following deviations: Front, Side, and Rear Setbacks, Density, GRFA, and Site Coverage. The GRFA analysis for the Willows is strikingly similar to the GRFA analysis for the Vail Row Houses. The Willows was permitted only 16,069 sq. ft. of GRFA (76% of the lot area) but were approved at 32,240 sq. ft. of GRFA (152% of the lot area), more than doubling the amount of GRFA allowed by HDMF. In supporting this amount of GRFA, Town Staff stated the following: Though the amount of GRFA exceeds what is allowed, Scoff believes that the proposed density (7.5 FAR) is relatively compatible to the density levels expected in the Urban Design Guide Plan within this area. The same statement is true at the Vail Row Houses. Also similar to the Vail Row Houses, the SDD approval for the Willows allowed for deviations from setbacks. The HDMF requires 20 ft. setbacks from all property lines. The Willows was approved with above -grade improvements with a front setback of 1 1 ft., a side setback of 7.5 ft., and a rear setback of 6.2 ft. The following statement was provided by the Town Staff as support for the deviations from the setback requirements: Regarding compatibility, the proposed building is similar to its surroundings partially because it includes some encroachment into the setbacks, similar to that of each of its neighbors, and less of a buffer zone than the underlying zone district requires. Many of the surrounding buildings are located within mere feet of the property lines. However, the neighborhood has been able to maintain its intimate residential feel os a result. Buffer zones have instead been provided through mature landscaping and variation of the building facades. Staff believes that the proposed project is compatible with and sensitive to the immediate environment and neighborhood relative to design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation because of the similarity of the design and placement of the building on its site to the design and placement of surrounding buildings on their sites. The public benefits associated with the project included $70,000 for public art, streetscape improvements to Willow Road including a paver sidewalk, 1 1 beds of employee housing, and a reduction in the number of dwelling units, which some may argue was not a benefit at all, and it should be noted that the number of dwelling units still exceeds that allowed by the underlying zoning. Vail Row Houses SDD 6 V. CRITERIA FOR REVIEW OF A SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ESTABLISHMENT I The following design criteria shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating the merits of the proposed 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: I, Compatibility 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. Applicant Response: The architectural design of the Vail Row Houses is governed by the Design Guidelines prescribed in Chapter 11, Design Review, of the Vail Town Code and by the recommendations Vail Village Master Plan. Due to the uniqueness of the way the Vail Row Houses have evolved overtime, each unit will come in individually to have the design reviewed by the Town of Vail Staff and Design Review Boards, based on the parameters prescribed by the proposed SDD. The scale, bulk, and building height of the Vail Row Houses are prescribed by the standards of the SDD. The main intent of redevelopment of the Vail Row Houses is to maintain the unique character of each home, while also maintaining common themes. Building height is the first tool used to limit the scale and bulk of the Vail Row Houses. HDMF zoning allows for a maximum building height of 48 ft. The SDD will limit the building height to 45 ft. along the front fa�acle (along Gore Creek Drive). This limitation is more restrictive than the existing zoning, and will allow the Vail Row Houses to preserve its 2- to 3- story facade along Gore Creek Drive. The Vail Village Master Plan recommends building heights of 3 to 4 stories in this area, and therefore the proposed height is consistent with the Master Plan. Following building height, site coverage also controls scale and bulk of a structure. The site coverage allowed by HDMF is 55 %. The proposed site coverage for the Vail Row Houses is limited to 55% below - grade, but further restricted to 50% above - grade. This creates a smaller building footprint and reduces the scale and bulk beyond the requirements of the existing zoning. Buffer zones are the areas between adjacent structures and uses. Typically, setbacks mandate buffer zones. In the case of the Vail Row Houses, these setbacks have historically been interpreted as requiring 20 ft. from all property lines, rendering development on the site impossible without variances. The proposed SDD eliminates the requirement for the interior setbacks, and instead prescribes setbacks along the front, rear, and east sides only. The setbacks prescribed by HDMF for the front, rear, and stream setback will be maintained. The only deviation from what exists today requested is for the easternmost property line of Lot 13. Originally, the SDD proposal was to maintain a 10 ft. setback from this property line. However, there was concern about the impacts to the adjacent park. To alleviate those concerns, the proposal has been revised to maintain a 12 ft. separation from the existing property line, and to maintain the integrity of the park, the applicant is willing to donate their private property to the public. Approximately 915 sq. ft. of Lot 13 will be donated to Roger Staub Park, enlarging the park by 10 ft. to the west. Lot 13 will then maintain a 2 ft. setback from the new property line. There is then approximately 110 ft. to the Vorlaufer, which sits on the other side of Roger Staub Pork. The Vorlaufer I Vail Row Houses SDD 7 I I has no setbacks and sits on the property line it shares with the pork. Therefore, the Vail Row Houses is consistent with the other structures in the neighborhood. Identity, character, visual integrity and orientation will be maintained for the Vail Row Houses based on the existing development. Because each lot is relatively small and narrow, redevelopment of each lot is limited by the development surrounding it and the restrictions placed on it by the proposed SDD. The applicant believes that the proposed project is compatible with and sensitive to the immediate environment and neighborhood relative to design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation because of the similarity of the design and placement of the building on its site to the design and placement of surrounding buildings on their sites. 2. Relationship: Uses, aclivily and density which provide a compatible, efflcienl and workohle relationship with surrounding uses and activily. Applicant Response: The uses proposed are the some as the existing — residential dwelling units. No changes to the uses and activity are proposed. Density (dwelling units per acre) shall not be increased, but may be decreased without an amendment to the SDD. GRFA, another method of the Town to measure density, is proposed to increase from an allowable ratio of .76 to 1 .5. However, this increase in GRFA is tempered with additional restrictions on site coverage and height, and is consistent with similar projects in the area (generally, all HDMF -zoned projects in the area exceed the allowable GRFA). The Town has also recently increased allowable GRFA for surrounding projects zoned PA, which has an allowable GRFA ratio of 1 .5. Additionally, the original zoning applied to the property in 1969 allowed a GRFA ration of 1 .5, so the proposed GRFA is consistent with the original ratio of the property before those rights were taken from the property. Furthermore, the challenges related to development within this area are evident by the number of Special Development Districts around the Vail Row Houses, including the following (and their deviations): #35 — Austria Haus — density, setbacks, site coverage, commercial area, common area. #32 — Cornice Building — single family residence in HDMF, setbacks, parking in front setback #19 — Garden of the Gods — setbacks, GRFA #37 — Tivoli Lodge — height, loading and delivery in front setback, landscape area #28 — Christiania — density, GRFA, common area, setbacks, parking Special Development Districts with an underlying zoning of HDMF are also common in the general area, including: #38 — Manor Vail — building height, dwelling units, GRFA #02 — Northwoods — density #40 — the Willows — setbacks, GRFA, site coverage, density #15 — Bishop Pork — building height, setbacks, GRFA The unique developments that occurred in the early stages of Vail's growth lead to many challenges in redevelopment that can only be solved through Special Development Districts, which were created to deal with these types of challenges which could not be solved through the traditional zoning regulations. Voil Row Houses SDD 8 3. Parking and Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in chapter 10 of this title. Applicant Response: The intention of the proposed SDD is to maintain the number of parking spaces that exist currently for each unit. Therefore, the parking requirement for this site is a no net loss of parking spaces. The one exception is for Lot 13, which currently exceeds its parking requirement. Should one of the dwelling units be eliminated on Lot 13, they would be allowed to reduce their total number of parking spaces to 2 spaces, which complies with Town Code. 4. Comprehensive Plana Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive plan, town policies and urban design plans. Applicant Response: The goals contained in several of the Town's comprehensive, guiding documents are applicable during the review process for the establishment of a Special Development District. The applicable plan sections below are identified as relevant to the review of this proposal. (/ail Land Use Plan (7n pad) 7.0 General Growth /Development 7.7 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 7.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 7. 72 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 4.0 Village Core/ Lionshead 4.2 Increased densily in the Core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is preserved thorough implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan. 4.3 The ambiance of tail tillage is impodant to the identity of Vail and should be preserved. (scale, alpine character, small town feeling, mountains, natural setting, intimate size, cosmopolitan feeling, environmental quality.) 5.0 Residential 5. 7 Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. 5.3 Affordable employee housing should be made available through private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the Town of Vail with appropriate restrictions. Vail Row Houses SDD 9 5.4 Residential growth should keep pace with 1he marketplace demands for a full range of housing Types. 5.5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and upgraded. Additional employee housing needs should be accommodated at varied sites lhroughoul the community. Vail Village Master Plan (in part) The Vail Row Houses is located within 1he 'Vail O /loge Masler Plan " land use category. The following slated goals of 1he Vail Village Masler Plan are applicable fo this application. Goal #7: Encourage high qualify redevelopment while preserving 1he unique architectural scale of 1he Vllage in order to sustain ils sense of community and idenfily. Objeclive 7.2: Encourage 1he upgrading and redevelopmenl of residential and commercial facilities. Objective 7.3. Enhance new development and redevelopmenl Through public improvements done by private developers working in cooperation with 1he Town. Policy 7.3 7: Public improvemenls shall be developed wilh 1he working participation of the private sector working with 1he Town. Goal #3. To recognize as o top priority the enhancement of the walking experience throughout the V /loge. EAST GORE CREEK SUB AREA ( #6) A r MA 60Y�Y r v A ,- . Rr9AEQ; v, t d \ : .� -7 - t . A _ T1 f rte. ._...: .... �Y.. ._ `,; 8-P •.�.v ?� r ,, �G. r 7- ' VILLAGE 7-5 EAST GOAE - CREAK A number of 1he earliest projects developed in Vail are located in 1he East Gore Creek Sub Area. Developmenl in This area is exclusively mull! family condominium projecls with a very limited amounl of support commercial. Surface parking rs found a1 each site, which creates a very dominanl visual impression of 1he sub -area. Vail Row Houses SDD 1 While the level of development in East Gore Creek is generally greater than that allowed under existing zoning, this area has the potential to absorb density wAout compromising the character of the Village. This development could be accommodated by partial infill of existing parking areas balanced by greenspoce additions or through increasing 1he height of existing buildings (generally one story over existing heighly In order to maintain the architectural continuity of projects, additional density should be considered only in conjunction with the comprehensive redevelopment of projects. Clearly, one of the main objectives to consider in the redevelopment of any property should be to improve existing parking facilities. This includes satisfying parking demands for existing and additional development, as well as design considerations relative to redevelopment proposals. The opportunity to introduce below grade structured parking will greatly improve pedestrianization and landscape features in this area. This should be considered a goal of any redevelopment proposal in this sub- area. Development or redevelopment of this sub -area will attract additional traffic and population info this area and may have significant impacts upon portions of Sub Areas 7 and 10. " (This statement is largely directed at the Texas Townhomes and Vail Trails, which have large areas of surface parking). 5 Natural And /Or Geologic Hazard. tdentification and mitigation of natural and /or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development oiisirld Is proposed. Applicant Rest. onse: According to the Official Town of Vail Geologic Hazard Maps, the Vail Row Houses are not located in any geologically sensitive areas. 6. Design Features: Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. The design of the Vail Row Houses is governed by the Design Guidelines prescribed in Chapter 11, Design Review, of the Vail Town Code and by the recommendations Vail Village Master Plan. Due to the uniqueness of the way the Vail Row Houses have evolved overtime, each unit will come in individually to have the design reviewed by the Town of Vail Staff and Design Review Boards, based on the parameters prescribed by the proposed SDD. As proposed, the SDD for the Vail Row Houses meets this criteria. 7 Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site traffic circulation. Applicant Response: There will be no change to the existing circulation system. 8. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. Applicant Response: The majority of lots of the Vail Row Houses do not currently comply with the minimum landscape area requirements of the HDMF zone district. The proposed SDD would require a minimum of 20% of the site be landscape (HDMF currently requires 30 %). However, the 2 lots which are most deficient in landscaping currently will be required to have "no net loss of landscape area" which is a similar requirement to the properties within the commercial core and consistent with an urban village Vail Row Houses SDD 11 character. To mitigate for the lack of landscape area, as each lot is redeveloped, the proposed SDD mandates [hat the parking area by converted to heated pavers. In addition, the property is surrounded by an open space tract which includes the siream tract and Roger Staub Park. 9. Workable Plan: Phasing plan ai subdivision plan Thal will maintain a wol &7cliona/and ef"cienl relationship lhroughoul the developmenl of the special developmenl disliicl. Applicant Response: The phasing of redevelopment of individual lots is one of the primary reasons for this proposed Special Development District. Some of the units have already been redeveloped, and therefore a comprehensive redevelopment of the site is highly unlikely. Also, due to the nature of the Vail Row Houses (each lot is owned fee - simple, as if it were a single family lot) the intention would be to allow each row house to have a unique character to make them look as if they developed over time (as they have.) This "phasing" of development allows each owner to clearly understand the parameters of redevelopment, in addition to having a clear understanding of what the neighbors are able to do, unlike the current method of individual variances for each lot. 'foil Row Houses SDD 12 VI. VRH SDD ZONING STANDARDS The proposal is to create a new Special Development District for the Vail Row Houses to treat the property as a town house development. The underlying zoning would remain HDMF. The permitted, conditional, and accessory uses as defined by the HDMF zone district would not be modified. The following outlines the current developments regulations of HDMF and notes which regulations will be deviated from (the deviations and /or modifications are indicated in bold andilalid: ARTICLE H. HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE- FAMILY (HDMF) DISTRICT (The development standards as outlined below apply to the individuallots (Lots 71hrough 73) of the VoIl Raw Houses, as modified for this SDD) 12 -6H -5: LOT AREA AND SITE DIMENSIONS: The minimum lot or site area shall be ten thousand (10,000) square feet of buildable area, and each site shall have a minimum frontage of thirty feet (30'). Each site shall be of a size and shape capable of enclosing a square area eighty feet (80') on each side within its boundaries. The minimum lot size shall be as the lots exist today, however allowing for minor changes to lot lines to correct any encroachments. 12 -6H -6: SETBACKS: The minimum front setback shall be twenty feet (20'), the minimum side setback shall be twenty feet (20'), and the minimum rear setback shall be twenty feet (20'). The minimum front and rear setback shall be 20 ft. The minimum side setback shall be 0, except for Lot 73 A, which shall maintain a minimum setback of 2 ft. from 1he eoslem property line (based on 1he new property line following the 70 ft. land donation). The 50 ft. steam setback from Gore Creek shall be maintained unless a variance is granted in accordance with Chapter 77, Vail Town Code. Pursuant to Section 74 -744, Porches, steps, decks or terraces or similar features located at ground level or within 5 h. of ground level may project not more than 70 ft. nor more than one-half the minimum required dimension into a required setback area. Balconies, decks, terraces, and other similar unroofed features projecting from a structure at a height of more than 5 ft. above ground level may project not more than 5 h. nor more than one-half the minimum required dimension into a required setback area. All existing decks and patios may remain as existing. 12 -6H -7: HEIGHT: For a flat roof or mansard roof, the height of buildings shall not exceed forty five feet (45'). For a sloping roof, the height of buildings shall not exceed forty eight feet (48'). For a sloping roof, the height of buildings shall not exceed 48 ft. However, additional height restrictions apply to 1he front (soulhem facade) to maintain the appearance of a 2 -3 story buildng along Gore Creek Drive. The eave height is limited to 45 ft. to the initial eave of the front facade along Gore Creek Drive. Eave height is def ned as the distance from finished grade to 1he initial primary eave of 1he structure. Vail Row Houses SDD 13 12 -6H -8: DENSITY CONTROL: Not more than seventy six (76) square feet of gross residential floor area (GRFA) shall be permitted for each one hundred (100) square feet of buildable site area. Total density shall not exceed twenty five (25) dwelling units per acre of buildable site area. Each accommodation unit shall be counted as one -half (1/2) of a dwelling unit for purposes of calculating allowable units per acre. A dwelling unit in a multiple - family building may include one attached accommodation unit no larger than one -third (1/3) of the total floor area of the dwelling. No more than 750 sq. ft. of GRFA shall be permitted for each 700 sq ft of total site area of each lot. Due to the increase in allowable GRFA, the Vail Row Houses is not eligible for the Addtional250' as described in 72- 75 -5. ADDITIONAL GROSS RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA (250 ORDINANCE). Lot 73 is further restricted to a total of 6,770 sq. ft. of GRFA. GRFA and Density for each lot shall not exceed the following. lot # GRFA Densily lot 7 4,116 2 du lot 8 3,921 2 du tot 9 3,594 7 du lot 70 3,397 2 du lot 77 3,463 2 du lot 72 4,378 2 du lot 73 6,770 2 du In any case, the total number of units for Loh 7 through 73 shall not exceed 73 dwelling units. However, if any of the units are consolidated into fewer unite on the site, no amendment to this SDD shall be required. 12 -6H -9: SITE COVERAGE: Site coverage shall not exceed fifty five percent (55 %) of the total site area. Site coverage shall not exceed 55% of the total site area of each lot, with the additional restriction that above -grade site coverage shall not exceed 50% of the total site area of each lot. 12- 6H -10: LANDSCAPING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT: At least thirty percent (30 %) of the total site area shall be landscaped. The minimum width and length of any area qualifying as landscaping shall be fifteen feet (15') with a minimum area not less than three hundred (300) square feet. At least 20% of the total site area of each lot shall be landscaped, except for Lots 7 7 and 72. Lots 7 7 and 72 shall have no net loss of landscape area. The following is the existing landscape area of each lot. Vail Row Houses SDD 14 Landscape Landscape Lot # S . Ft. Percentage lot 7 857 32% lot 8 796 30% Io/ 9 658 28% 10/ 70 624 27% lot 77 428 12% 7o/ 72 160 7% 7o/ 73 2,119 44% Because of the minimal opportunity for landscaping, when redevelopment of a lot occurs, the parking surface of the lot shall be converted to concrete unit pavers or other material has approved by the Design Review Board) and a snowmelt system shall be installed. 12 -6H -1 1: PARKING AND LOADING: Off street parking and loading shall be provided in accordance with chapter 10 of this title. At least seventy five percent (75 %) of the required parking shall be located within the main building or buildings and hidden from public view or shall be completely hidden from public view from adjoining properties within a landscaped berm. No parking shall be located in any required front setback area. Parking requirements shall be based on the current number of parking spaces and dwelling units. Lot 7 2 du 2 parking spaces Lot 8 2 du 2 parking spaces Lot 9 7 du 2 pof - king spaces 10/ 70 2 du 2 arkin spaces 10/77 2 du 2 parking spaces Lot 72 2 du 2 parking socces tot 73 2 du 1 4 parking spaces If any dwelling units are eliminated, there shall be no fewer than 2 parking spaces for each lot. Due to site constraints, there is no requirement for enclosed or screened parking. The parking is permitted to be located within the front setback, and partially within the Town of Vail ng&of- -way. Expiration and Amendment. - This SDD is established to set zoning standards for the future redevelopment of individual dwelling units within the SDD. Therefore, the SDD does not expire and will continue to provide the zoning standards into the future. Nothing herein prevents an amendment to the SDD by any owner within the SDD if an amendment only affects the applicant's property, no written consent is required from other owners within the SDD. `Jail Row Houses SDD 15 Attachment D Connie Kniot, President 385 Gore Creek Drive, Suite 201 ♦ Vail, CO 81657 Telephone 6r FAX: (970) 476 -3615 ♦ e -mail: cknight@vail.net April 9, 2009 To: PEC Re: Row Houses Special Development District Dear Commissioners: It seems there is very little benefit being offered to the town to justify a Special Development District for the Row Houses. Since all but one of the #7 -14 townhomes already have been remodeled, a variance as the others must have obtained, could be granted for #10, the sole remaining original unit. The advantage to the homeowners would be excess square footage pushing back toward Gore Creek. The view from the Streamwalk looking to the back of these row houses is quite attractive with their grassy lawns. Do we really need to infill all the grass in Vail? Certainly, taking away any open space from the park immediately adjacent to #14, would be a huge loss. Thank you for your consideration, Connie Knight *Vk' VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: May 5, 2009 ITEM /TOPIC: PEC /DRB Update. PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell ATTACHMENTS: DRB Meeting April 27, 2009 - PEC Results DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA PUBLIC MEETING TOWN OF Yi Council Chambers 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 There is no current DRB information to attach for Town Council. All DRB results have been previously submitted. The next regularly scheduled meeting is May 6, 2009. 6 -1 -I PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION April 27, 2009 �. 1:OOpm T�WHQFV� TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Scott Lindall David Viele Rollie Kjesbo Bill Pierce Susie Tjossem Sarah Paladino departed at 3:20 Michael Kurz Site Visits: None 20 minutes 1. A request for a final review of a variance from 12 -6H -6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12 -17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition within the side setback, located at 433 Gore Creek Drive, Units 15 and 16 (Vail Trails East) /Lot 15, Block 4, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto (PEC090013). Applicant: Mark and Noelle Mahoney, represented by Steven James Riden, Architects Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Approved with condition(s) MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Paladino VOTE: 6 -0 -0 CONDITION(S): 1. This variance approval only applies to the proposed dormer addition, and does not apply to the proposed deck expansion. 2. This approval is contingent upon the applicants obtain Town of Vail design review approval for this proposal. Bill Gibson gave a presentation per the staff memorandum. He explained the two elements of the request and the staff recommendation of support for the proposed dormer and the recommendation of denial for the deck expansion further into the side setback. Steven Riden, representing the applicant, provided some points of clarification regarding a 2004 approval which included the deck expansion that they are currently requesting. Commissioner Kurz had no questions or comments. Commissioner Paladino asked for clarification regarding the expansion to the deck. She further asked if the DRB would be reviewing the deck. Bill Gibson clarified the deck portion of the applicant and confirmed that the DRB would be reviewing the application. Steven Riden explained the expansion of the deck as proposed. Commissioner Tjossem asked for clarification about the expiration of the 2004 approvals. Bill Gibson clarified that the 2004 approvals had indeed expired due to a lack of pursuing construction. Page 1 6 -2 -1 Commissioners Lindall and Pierce agreed that the dormer was appropriate, but felt the deck expansion was increasing an existing nonconformity and could not support that variance. 30 minutes 2. A request for a final review of an amendment to an existing conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12- 16 -10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, and a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a major amendment to Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, pursuant to Section 12- 9A -10, Amendment Procedures, to allow for changes to the fractional fee club unit designations within the Vail Plaza Hotel and Club, located at 16 Vail Road (Vail Plaza Hotel)/ a portion of Lots M, N, and O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090011 and PEC090012) Applicant: Vail Plaza Development, LLC Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Tabled to May 11, 2009 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Kjesbo VOTE: 6 -0 -0 Bill Gibson gave a presentation per the staff memorandum recommending denial of the requested major amendment. Sarah Paladino stated for the record that Connie Dorsey was involved with Bravo, her employer, but she was unbiased and could hear this application without bias. Valdir Prado, owner of Vail Plaza Hotel and condo, gave some background on the hotel project and support of his belief that what was being requested was minor in the scope of the project. He clarified that he is personally living in one of the subject fractional fee units and his daughter is living in the other fractional fee unit. He explained that the current financial market turmoil is responsible for the hotel filing bankruptcy. He explained that his presence on site is critical to provide direction and leadership to the hotel operations and to resolve the bankruptcy issues. His daughter's presence on -site is also needed as she is also involved in the daily operation of the hotel. He confirmed that the subject penthouse dwelling unit is unfinished, and that it has been listed for sale for the past two years. He again stated that the hotel is the victim of economic turmoil, and to no fault of its own, there are numerous unsold fractional fee unit fractions and vacant hotel rooms. He noted that the parking increase created by this proposal accounted for only 1/3 of 1% of the total parking on -site. He added that there was surplus parking built into the project which should address the 0.7 increase in required parking. He continued by stating that they should not be responsible for the loading and delivery improvements proposed by Staff since they spent several months during the initial construction of the hotel negotiating with the other phases of the SDD to construct these improvements and those owners said "no ". He noted that economic turmoil and contractor liens on the property have prevented sales, which has caused them to file for bankruptcy. With bankruptcy, they have no available money or willing lenders to pay for the loading and delivery improvements. Commissioner Pierce asked if there was an ongoing effort to sell the existing fractional fee units. Valdir Prado stated that there was an on -site office staffed by two experienced real estate sales people, but the market has dried up. Commissioner Pierce asked what the typical number of bedrooms was for the fractional fee units currently for -sale. Valdir Prado stated that they were designed with flexibility. There were flats, one, two, three, and four bedrooms units. He noted that there are currently 720 unsold fractions in the hotel not Page 2 6 -2 -2 counting the subject units. He stated that in the long term, it is not in the best interest of the hotel to discount the sales prices of these unsold fractions. Jonathan Stauffer, representing Phases I through V, stated that Vail Plaza Hotel made promises to the other members of the SDD during the approval process for a subterranean loading and delivery connection. They are willing to cooperate, and want to see the loading and delivery connection completed. Commissioner Tjossem recommended the Commission consider granting an approval for a limited time period. Several Commissioners asked Staff to clarify the proposed condition regarding the completion of the loading and delivery system. Warren Campbell, Chief of Planning, explained some of the history surrounding the loading and delivery requirements of Vail Plaza Hotel and Phases I through V of SDD No. 6. Several Commissioners noted their concern about applying the burden of completing the loading and delivery to only one applicant in the SDD. Commissioner Lindall stated his support for the conversion of the units if the increased parking requirement is addressed. Commissioner Kjesbo would be more willing to offer a temporary conversion of the fractional fee units for some short time period like two or three years. Commissioner Tjossem stated her support for approval of a temporary conversion. Commissioner Paladino agreed with Tjossem and stated that she feels the current economic conditions warrant greater flexibility by the Town. Commissioner Kurz noted that their role is to enforce the Town Code and he is concerned a permanent conversion would be a grant of special privilege. He was more supportive of a temporary conversion for a limited time period. He also noted that the on -going loading and delivery issue needs to be resolved. Commissioner Pierce stated that he supports converting the two FFU's to DU's if construction of the penthouse is completed. He suggested a two year approval, and if the penthouse is not finished the approval would expire. Commissioner Tjossem recommended that Staff establish a cost for completing the loading and delivery, and then establish a proportional assessment to the various parties in the SDD. The Commissioners had questions for the Town Attorney regarding the legality of applying a condition to this application requiring that loading and delivery access be addressed solely by this applicant. Matt Mire, Town Attorney, addressed the Commissioners' questions. Commissioner Kjesbo supported applying a proportional fee for completing loading and delivery, rather than assigning the task to any one individual. Commissioner Paladino did not support imposing a fee to complete the loading and delivery. Page 3 6 -2 -3 Valdir Prado reiterated that he could not make any financial commitments due to their bankruptcy. He again described their previous negations with the other owners in the SDD, and noted that the hotel should not be financially responsible for completing the loading and delivery. The Commissioners suggested a site visit to and a tabling. 15 minutes 3. A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for the adoption of amendments to the Vail Transportation Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090005) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Kassmel Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Recommendation of approval MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Kurz VOTE: 6 -0 -0 Tom Kassmel gave a presentation per the staff memorandum elaborating the changes made to the draft document as requested by the Commission. Commissioner Pierce inquired as to how the Master Plan addresses parking for retail and restaurant patrons using the parking structures. Greg Hall, Director of Public Works, stated that the Parking Task Force wrestles with these issues on an annual basis and that shopper parking policies and methods are dynamic. Commissioner Pierce further asked about whether the Master Plan should speak to construction worker parking. Greg Hall identified the need to strengthen the Town's development standards to address construction parking with future building permits. Commissioner Kurz made several comments regarding the Master Plan including that it is a blend of science and art. He supported the phasing approach to the plan, and believes it will create a base for future decision making. 45 minutes 4. A request for a work session to discuss the adoption of the Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan, an element of the Vail Transportation Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090014) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Kassmel Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Tabled to May 11, 2009 MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Lindall VOTE: 5 -0 -0 Commissioner Paladino left the meeting. Tom Kassmel gave a presentation discussing the adoption of a Frontage Road Lighting Master Plan as an element of the Transportation Master Plan. Nancy Johnson, with Fabray Lighting, representing the Town, gave a power point presentation regarding many concepts and ideas with regard to lighting the North and South Frontage Roads. Commissioner Kurz asked about the inclusion of signage. Tom Kassmel stated that there will be another study to look at improving signage and way finding. Page 4 6 -2 -4 Commissioner Tjossem noted that the Town's current street signs are artistic; however, they are very difficult for motorists to read. Commissioner Kjesbo stated that the height of any new street lights will be a concern. 5 minutes 5. A request for a final review of a variance from 12 -6D -6, Setbacks and 12 -6D -9, Site Coverage, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12 -17, Variances, to allow for an addition within the front setback located at 1838 Sierra Trail /Lot 15, Vail Village West Filing 1. (PEC090008) Applicant: John Brennan, represented by LKSM Design, P.C. Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Table to May 11, 2009 MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Tjossem VOTE: 5 -0 -0 6. Approval of April 13, 2009 minutes MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Tjossem VOTE: 5 -0 -0 7. Information Update The Administrator has determined that public lockers may be installed on the exterior of the Lionshead ski yard public restroom building as a "skier services" use on the first floor in the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 District pursuant to Section 12 -71-1-3, Permitted and Conditional Uses, First Floor or Street Level, Vail Town Code; located at 600 Lionshead Mall /Lot 2, Lionshead Filing 6, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Commissioner Pierce asked about the size of the lockers and if they were intended for overnight storage. Dominic Mauriello stated the lockers were approximately 15 "X15 "X12" and were not intended for overnight storage. The Commissioners discussed Staff's Interpretations and findings and believed the conclusions reached were appropriate. Furthermore, the type of lockers being proposed were incidental to the operation of a ski resort and were not intend for commercial ski storage due to their size. Bill Gibson noted that this issue will be further clarified in the comprehensive zoning code updates scheduled for review by the Commission later this summer. 8. Adjournment MOTION: Kjesbo SECOND: Kurz VOTE: 5 -0 -0 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 April 24, 2009, in the Vail Daily. Page 5 6 _ -) _ *Vk' VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: May 5, 2009 ITEM /TOPIC: Vail Transportation Master Plan approval and discussion regarding prioritization and implementation schedule. PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel /Greg Hall ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Listen and provide feedback on the presentation made by staff. BACKGROUND: On April 27, 2009, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission voted 6 -0 -0 to forward a recommendation of approval for the proposed amendments. Staff will discuss the changes that have been incorporated in the Master Plan since the draft was submitted to Council on 3/19 and discuss the adoption of the Master Plan by resolution. In addition, staff will present a proposed prelimininary implementation plan of the proposed Master Plan's improvements. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Listen and provide feedback on the presentation made by staff. ATTACHMENTS: Memo Implementation PLan Master Plan Changes memo Master Plan Changes MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Tom Kassmel, Public Works Department DATE: May 5th, 2009 SUBJECT: A request for a work session to discuss the adoption of amendments to the Vail Transportation Master Plan and the prioritization and implementation of the proposed improvements. I. SUMMARY The Town of Vail, in conjunction with the Colorado Department of Transportation, is in the process of updating the Vail Transportation Master Plan in response to the on -going and projected increases in development activity, the results of past master planning processes, and pending redevelopment plans. On March 3 d , 2009, the Town Council held a work session to discuss the proposed master plan, and as a result requested additional information on the prioritization and implementation of the proposed improvements. Since that time the Planning and Environmental Commission has forwarded a recommendation of approval for the adoption of the Master Plan with some changes to the original draft Master Plan and staff has drafted a preliminary prioritization and implementation plan. Staff will present the changes to the draft Master Plan and a preliminary timeline and cost allocation and discuss next steps and the adoption of the Master Plan by resolution. II. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Listen to staff presentation and provide comments and direction III. ATTACHMENTS A. Transportation Master Plan Preliminary Prioritization and Implementation Plan B. Edits to the original draft Master Plan 7 -1 -1 Vail Transportation Master Plan Document Attached are the contextual changes that were made to the Vail Transportation Master Plan Document as a result of PEC's review and comments. In order to save on duplication and reproduction of the complete document, we have only reproduced these edited pages as amendments to the previous document submitted on March 19 The combination of the two provide the final document, and as mentioned previously, the appendices are available digitally on the Town's web site. ( http://www.vailgov.com/subpage.asp?page WJ93 Our intent will be to forward a final approval to Council and produce hardcopies of the document in its entirety, once it is adopted by Resolution, for PEC, Council, staff and the public. 7 -3 -1 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update PREFACE Purpose of the Master Plan The purpose of the Vail Transportation Master Plan is to consolidate and update the transportation planning and design efforts that have been on -going for the past 20 years. This most recent document, which is based on the existing conditions of Vail's transportation system, current trends and the anticipated growth, will guide the implementation of Vail's transportation system for the next 20 years. In order to keep the plan a viable document over this time period, continuous monitoring of the transportation system and periodic updates of the plan are needed, including periodic traffic counts and formal master plan updates. Previous transportation documents are referenced and summarized in the appendices of this document. These referenced documents remain relevant and provide additional insight and guidance for transportation planning and design purposes. The scope of each of these referenced documents focus on various transportation related topics with some overlapping subjects. The redundancy in this is deliberate to create a historical base and provide the necessary background information to predict accurate trends. It is implied that all overlapping, inconsistent information between documents shall be superseded by the most recent and relevant document. 0 MPlomon4o4inn This master plan is intended to provide direction for a period of time over the next 20 years. It does not convey approval for any one particular improvement, development, project, or facility. Assumptions made within this report (i.e. trip generation reductions, transit use, etc.) must be justified at the time of application for any one particular improvement /development and may or may not be supported by the town or applicable agency at time of application. Every improvement /development shall go through the town and other applicable agency review process prior to implementation. Adoption and Amendment of the Master Plan The Vail Transportation Master Plan was adopted by resolution No. _, Series of 2009, on , 2009, by the Vail Town Council following a recommendation to approve by the Planning and Environmental Commission. Future amendments to this master plan must be approved by resolution or motion by the Town Council following a formal recommendation by the Planning and Environmental Commission. Implementation activities and ordinances will be approved in accordance with the Town of Vail Municipal Code. P4 -9 FELSBURG r HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 7 -4 -1 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update The interchanges, West and Main Vail, are locations of significant traffic concentration because they serve as the access to /from 1 -70 and they are the only means of crossing 1 -70. As roundabout intersections, the ramp terminal intersections also serve through movements along the Frontage Roads which further contributes to the traffic concentration that takes place at these points. Along the Frontage Road, the other notable heavier - traveled cross - streets during peak times including: ► Lionshead Parking Structure Access — Heavier demand is due to this being a major parking facility within Town. ► Village Parking Structure Access — Heavier demand is due to this being a major parking facility within Town. ► Vail Valley Drive — Heavy demand can be attributed to activity associated with the Golden Peak lift area and associated programs that based there. ► West Vail Commercial — Numerous driveways serve the shopping area in West Vail. Individually, the traffic levels served by each driveway is less than the three heavy cross - streets stated just above, but collectively they represent a major generating center within town. Numerous other cross - streets intersect with the Frontage Roads, but many of these serve localized areas and do not carry significant levels of traffic. The Frontage Roads serve as Vail's arterial system serving the vast majority of the vehicle -miles traveled within the Town. The traffic data shown in Figure 2 approximately represent the 15 busiest day of the ski season. From past transportation planning efforts conducted in Vail, the 15 highest day represents a "low" of the peak days. Subsequent days of magnitude (16 17 etc.) are not dramatically lower than the 15th day as demands levels in order tend to flatten out. Preceding days of magnitude (14 13 etc.) are not as flat, and transportation demands for these days are noticeably higher. When plotted on a graph, the 15 highest day is approximately the "turning point" between peak days and average days. Typical transportation planning will attempt to accommodate the 30 highest hour of a year, and the 15 highest day is a bit more conservative than this in attempt to maintain a quality guest experience. The finding from previous efforts and the notion of maintaining the guest experience has led the Town to adopt the 15 highest day as the appropriate design level for transportation considerations, and all subsequent analyses presented in this report approximately represent that level of demand. 2. Intersection Levels of Service (LOS) Intersection Levels of Service (LOS) were calculated for numerous intersections including the roundabouts at the interchanges and many of the cross - street intersections and access points along the North and South Frontage Road. For nearly every case, the PM peak hour traffic was the focus of the LOS analyses. The exceptions include the Main Vail interchange and West Vail interchange intersections where the AM peak hour was also analyzed. LOS is a traffic qualitative measure described by a letter designation ranging from A to F. LOS A represents minimal or no delay while LOS F represents excessive delay. The calculations are geared toward estimating the delays for traffic movements and then converting the results to a LOS FELSBURG r � HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 6 7 -4 -2 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update demand by virtue of the need to accommodate these visitors who only want to shop and the employees needed to operate the commercial activity. Other parking areas are also provided throughout town, but most are relatively small providing up to 15 spaces. Other locations such as Ford Park and the Soccer Fields (located east of Golden Peak) can accommodate more vehicles, but these are restricted to permitted vehicles only. The Town of Vail has continued to explore means of adding public parking to the supply within the central areas of Lionshead and Vail Village. A current need of at least 400 additional spaces has been identified by the Town in attempt to reduce the number of days that the Frontage Road is pressed into service to accommodate overflow parking. The 400 spaces are needed to maintain a supply accommodating 90 percent of the demand days, a Town parking objective. This is based on many seasons of collected Frontage Road parking data. However, 1,000 additional spaces would accommodate 99 percent of the current demand days. Over the long- term (20 years), the 1,000 spaces are estimated to accommodate 90 percent of the future demand days. More detail with respect to further parking needs is described later in this report, but the Town's ultimate goal is to add 1,000 spaces for general public use to meet their 90 percent objective. C. Transit The Town of Vail operates a free bus service for residents and guests. The service is among the busiest in the state serving approximately three million riders per year. It is estimated that approximately 14 percent of Vail's residences use the transit system as a means to commute to work, based on 2000 census data, which ranks higher than most major metropolitan areas. The heaviest used route is the In -Town shuttle which continuously travels between Lionshead and Vail Village; this route makes up 60 to 70 percent of the Towns bus service ridership, and it typically serves with five to seven buses; peak times can see 8 to 10 buses traveling along this route depending on time of day with headways ranging from 5 to 7 minutes. Outlying bus routes each serve a different area of Vail. The East Vail and West Vail bus routes experience the most ridership outside the In -Town Shuttle. West Vail, having a frontage road along the north and south side of 1 -70, is served by opposing loop services in which one West Vail route runs clockwise along the South and North Frontage Road and the other runs counter- clockwise. While these two routes have offset start times from the Transportation Center, buses along these two opposing routes cross in the Meadow Creek /Intermountain area, and this area receives relatively infrequent service (because two opposing buses drive by at the same time). Most outlying areas are provided service every 15 to 20 minutes; the Meadow Creek /Intermountain area, in which the opposing West Vail bus routes cross, experiences service every 30 minutes, albeit with two buses. This quirk in the service is the result, in part, of limited I -70 crossings and the need to serve both sides of I -70 with transit. FELSBURG r � HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 16 7 -4 -3 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update A cursory -level evaluation of existing retail trips was conducted by reviewing the level of traffic turning into the structures today. During the PM peak hour, the outbound traffic contains a significant amount of skier trips, so it is not appropriate to include these outbound traffic with respect to gauging trip generation rates. Inbound PM peak hour traffic contains trips associated with retail and some other uses, so while it is not 100 percent retail traffic, it does serve as an upper limit. At the Lionshead Parking Structure, 150 inbound PM peak hour trips exist current; the Lionshead Village contains approximately 150,000 square feet of retail - related use. At the Village Structure, 310 vehicles entered during the PM peak hour; that village contains approximately 300,000 square feet of retail /commercial. These traffic numbers represent a 45 to 50 percent reduction in ITE shopping center trip rates if they were all retail - related, but they are not. Other trip types that are part of the inbound movements to the structures include: ► Library trips (which is open until 6:00 PM on weekends, later on weekdays) ► Dobson Ice Arena trips (which typically has a full schedule including hockey events, figure skating, lessons, and public skating) ► Adventure Center trips. The Adventure Center provides other recreation including tubing, ski biking, snowmobiling, snowshoeing, and a trampoline, and it is remains open until 9:00 PM on weekend nights. ► Residential uses. Several residential complexes within the villages are not able to adequately park their own overnight guests, so the parking structures are used instead. At Lionshead, staff estimates that approximately 100 vehicles are parked overnight at peak times related to selected residential uses. At the Village Structure, between 200 and 300 vehicles are parked overnight related to some of the residential uses there. ► Special events. Both villages routinely host evening events such as concerts, festivals, exhibits, and other attractions. All of these attract trips beyond the retail /commercial attraction. As such, the true retail trip rate is even less that the 45 to 50 reduction quoted above. As such, using rates that equate to a 65 to 70 percent reduction for the new retail development is not inconsistent with current trip - making trends in Vail. However, using these reductions in traffic impact studies for an individual development should be used with caution and only be done in coordination with Town staff and CDOT. Again, Appendix E shows the trip estimates for each of the development areas. In total, all of the considered development could generate an additional 2,800 trips per hour during the PM peak hour. The following summarize some of the bigger trip generators (4,350 trips per hour if "pure" ITE trip generation rates were used). ► West Vail — the net increase in square footage and residential units could generate a total of 470 additional trips during the PM peak hour. This would be above and beyond the estimated 800 to 1000 trips per hour generated by the West Vail development today. ► Timber Ridge is estimated to generate an additional 180 trips per hour during the PM peak hour. ► West Lionshead (Ever Vail) has the potential of generating an additional 580 trips per hour during the PM peak hour. FELSBURG r � HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 26 7 -4 -4 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► Lionshead Parking Structure redevelopment is estimated to generate 275 trips during the PM peak hour. ► The Lionshead Village area (excluding the Lionshead parking structure) is projected to generate an additional 490 PM peak hour trips given the collective development. The Vail Village area redevelopment is projected to generate an additional 260 PM peak hour trips given the collective development potentials. Table 3. Trip Generation Rates Trip Generation Rates (per DU for Res, per 1000 SF otherwise) Use ITE Vail- Remote Vail -Close In Daily peak Daily peak Daily Peak Residential — New 5.86 0.54 5 0.5 4 0.4 Residential — Replace NA NA 0.75 0.08 0.6 0.06 Commercial - Office 11.01 1.49 11 1.49 11 1.49 Commercial — Retail 42.94 3.75 42.94 3.75 15 1.3 Hospital 17.6 1.18 17.6 1.1 NA NA Figure 7 shows the 2025 total PM peak hour traffic projections at the Town's roundabout intersections and many of the Frontage Road cross - streets. In general, future PM peak hour traffic flows along the frontage roads are projected to increase an estimated 40-40 to 40-50 percent over existing traffic flow levels at peak times. The interchanges will experience a greater concentration in traffic with the additional trips. Major cross - streets will still include Vail Valley Drive, both parking structure access points, and West Vail accesses (if access modifications are not constructed). Moderately traveled cross - streets include all of the Lionshead Circles, Village Drive, and Forest Road (given Ever Vail redevelopment and if left intact). B. Traffic Operations Similar to the existing conditions LOS analysis, the roundabout intersections were analyzed for ideal conditions as well as for snow conditions using the same factors and adjustments mentioned before. Figure 8 shows the results of the PM peak hour analyses. Noticeable capacity deficiency highlights include: ► Main Vail Interchange — The north roundabout is projected to operate at a LOS F during the PM peak hour. The south roundabout is projected to function at LOS D, but several approaches are expected to operate at LOS E or LOS F. ► West Vail Interchange — Both roundabouts are projected to operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour. FELSBURG r � HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 27 7 -4 -5 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 5. Main Vail Interchange North Roundabout - Alternatives Assessment Main Vail Interchange, North Roundabout LOS F projected along WB off -ramp and Spraddle Creek Approach Primary Issue(s): (Snowy and Ideal Conditions) Major traffic conflict is between NB left turn movement (to WB I -70 and Frontage Road) and WB left turn movement from WB I -70 off -ramp. Expand to a full two lane roundabout; add northbound approach lane Realistic Capacity Improvement(s): from under I -70 (possibly reversible lane); add bypass lane from Frontage Road to WB I -70. Supplemental Traffic Reduction Still Still need to reduce PM peak hour forecasts by 50 to 100 vehicles per Needed for LOS D on otherwise poor hour, or 2 to 4 percent. operating approaches(Snowy): 2025 Traffic Composition: 30% is from proposed development. Potential Measure Traffic Flow Effect Relative Cost (as Isolated Measure)* 1. Add Simba Run underpass. Total traffic reduced by 150 to 200 High, but measure would provide vph (6 to 8% other benefits as well. 2. Encourage use of East Vail Estimated ramp traffic removed is Low; would require VMS along (- Interchange between 100 and 150 vph (4 to 70 and along Bighorn Road. 6 %). Estimated traffic removed is Low; would impact parking 3.Parking Management Measures between 100 and 150 vph (3 to policy. 5 %). 4. Express Bus Service linking West Estimated traffic removed is Vail, Lionshead, and Vail Village between 50 and 100 vph (2 to Medium. 4 %). 5. Extended Skiing Hours Estimated traffic removed is o Low. between 25 and 50 vph (1 to 2%). 6. Metering of Outbound Structure Estimated traffic removed is o Low; toll booths already in place. Traffic (toll booths) between 50 and 75 vph (2 to 3% 7. Expand Regional Transit Service Estimated traffic reduction of (e.g. Summit County Front Range) 1 per every three to four peak Medium to High hour bus trips. Other Considerations Could reduce intersection's PM Mixed Use Trip Gen Reduction (WV) ** peak hour traffic by another 25 vph (1 %) Employee housing auto disincentive Could reduce intersection's PM (Timber Ridge) peak hour traffic by another 25 to 50 vph (1 to 2 %) * Combining measures will reduce the effect of certain measures as some mitigation measures target the same traffic "group ". * This consideration entails redeveloping the West Vail area to better balance uses and incite internal trip- making. ** *Potentially, improvements in parking control equipment over time may allow for a more rapid exit flow rate. While this will be advantageous to those attempting to exit, it will contribute to the peak traffic concentration along Town roads. Metering this outbound flow would provide a little benefit to traffic operations. FELSBURG r � HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 34 7 -4 -6 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 6. Main Vail Interchange South Roundabout - Alternatives Assessment Main Vail Interchange, South Roundabout LOS F projected along WB Frontage Road Approach and along Vail Road approach (snowy). Primary Issue(s): Major movement is WB right turn to under 1 -70 (much of which is oriented to WB 1 -70). Largest conflict with this movement includes the combination of movements onto the EB on -ramp. Realistic Capacity Improvement(s): Incorporate second northbound lane under 1 -70 and re- designate WB Frontage Road lanes to utilize it (right, through /right, and left /through). Still need to reduce PM peak hour forecasts by 50 to 100 vehicles per Supplemental Traffic Reduction Still hour, or 1 to 2 percent. Additional reduction may be desirable to provide Needed for LOS D (Snowy): excess capacity for U -turns from /to the west (due to right -in /right -out access restrictions nearby). 2025 Traffic Composition: 25% is from proposed development. Potential Measure Traffic Flow Effect Relative Cost (as Isolated Measure)* Total traffic reduced by 150 to 200 vph (3 High, but measure would 1. Add Simba Run underpass. to 4 %). provide other benefits as well. Estimated ramp traffic removed is between Low; would require VMS 2. Encourage use of East Vail 50 and 100 vph (1 to 2 %). This measure along 1 -70 and along Interchange would also create some "shifts" in traffic Bighorn Road. entering the roundabout. 3. Parking Management Measures Estimated traffic removed is between 125 Low; would impact parking and 200 vph (2 to 4 %). policy. 4. Express Bus Service linking West Estimated traffic removed is Medium. Vail, Lionshead, and Vail Village between 50 and 100 vph (1 to 2 %). 5. Extended Skiing Hours Estimated traffic removed is between 25 Low. and 50 vph (1 /o). 6. Metering of Outbound Structure Estimated traffic removed is between 100 Low; toll booths already in Traffic (toll booths) * ** and 150 vph (2 to 3 %). place. 7. Expand Regional Transit Service Estimated traffic reduction of 1% per Medium to High (e.g. Summit County Front Range) every three to four peak hour bus trips. Other Considerations Mixed Use Trip Gen Reduction (WV) ** Could reduce intersection's PM peak hour traffic by 25 ( <1 %). Employee housing auto disincentive Could reduce intersection's PM peak hour (Timber Ridge) traffic by another 25 to 50 vph (1 %) Hospital Access onto Fr. Road * Combining measures will reduce the effect of certain measures as some mitigation measures target the same traffic "group ". ** This consideration entails redeveloping the West Vail area to better balance uses and incite internal trip- making. ** *Potentially, improvements in parking control equipment over time may allow for a more rapid exit flow rate. While this will be advantageous to those attempting to exit, it will contribute to the peak traffic concentration along Town roads. Metering this outbound flow would provide a little benefit to traffic operations. FELSBURG r � HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 35 7 -4 -7 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table 7. West Vail Interchange North Roundabout - Alternatives Assessment West Vail Interchange, North Roundabout LOS F projected along WB Frontage Road Approach and LOS E along SB Chamonix Drive approach (snowy). Primary Issue(s): Major movement is WB left turn to under 1 -70, to WB 1 -70, and NB approach to EB Frontage Road and onto WB 1 -70. Largest conflict involves NB left turn onto WB 1 -70 with the left turns from WB Frontage Road. Realistic Capacity Improvement(s): Add northbound approach lane from under 1 -70. Should also add SB Chamonix approach lane. Supplemental Traffic Reduction Still Still need to reduce PM peak hour forecasts by 200 to 250 vehicles Needed for LOS D (Snowy): per hour, or 6 to 8 percent. 2025 Traffic Composition: 21 % is from proposed development. Potential Measure Traffic Flow Effect Relative Cost (as Isolated Measure)* 1. Add Simba Run underpass. Total traffic reduced by 400 to 450 High, but measure would provide vph (10 to 12 %). other benefits as well. Estimated traffic removed is 2. Parking Management Measures between 25 to 50 vph (less Low; would impact parking policy. than 1%) 3. Express Bus Service linking West Estimated traffic removed is Vail, Lionshead, and Vail Village between 75 and 100 vph (2 to Medium. 3 %). 4. Extended Skiing Hours Estimated traffic removed is less Low. than 25 vph ( <1 /o). 5. Metering of Outbound Structure Low; toll booths already in place. Traffic (Village and LH toll Estimated traffic removed is o Metering outbound West Vail booths) * ** between 25 and 50 vph (1 to 2%). commercial traffic may be beneficial. 6. Expand Regional Transit Service Estimated traffic reduction of (e.g. Summit County Front 1% per every three to four peak Medium to High Range) hour bus trips. Other Considerations Mixed Use Trip Gen Reduction Could reduce intersection's PM (WV) ** peak hour traffic by 25 to 50 vph (1% Employee housing auto disincentive Could reduce intersection's PM (Timber Ridge) peak hour traffic by less than 25 vph ( <1 %) Could reduce intersection's PM Less West Vail Development peak hour traffic by 25 vph per 10,000 SF reduction in retail. * Combining measures will reduce the effect of certain measures as some mitigation measures target the same traffic "group ". * This consideration entails redeveloping the West Vail area to better balance uses and incite internal trip- making. — Potentially, improvements in parking control equipment over time may allow for a more rapid exit flow rate. While this will be advantageous to those attempting to exit, it will contribute to the peak traffic concentration along Town roads. Metering this outbound flow would provide a little benefit to traffic operations. FELSBURG r � HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 38 7 -4 -8 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update Table S. West Vail Interchange South Roundabout - Alternatives Assessment West Vail Interchange, South Roundabout LOS F projected along EB Frontage Road Approach (relative minor) Primary Issue(s): and along EB Off -ramp (snowy). Major movement is WB right turn to under 1 -70. This movement's largest conflict includes the eastbound off -ramp left turn to under 1 -70. Realistic Capacity Improvement(s): Add northbound approach lane from under 1 -70 (extended back to the south roundabout) Supplemental Traffic Reduction Still Still need to reduce PM peak hour forecasts by 100 to 150 vehicles Needed for LOS D (Snowy): per hour, or 3 to 5 percent. 2025 Traffic Composition: 21 % is from proposed development. Potential Measure Traffic Flow Effect Relative Cost (as Isolated Measure)* 1. Add Simba Run underpass. Total traffic reduced by 400 to 450 High, but measure would provide vph (14 to 16 %). other benefits as well. 2. Parking Management Measures Estimated traffic removed is Low; would impact parking policy. between 25 and 50 vph (1 to 2 %). 3. Express Bus Service linking West Estimated traffic removed is Vail, Lionshead, and Vail Village between 75 and 100 vph (3 to Medium. 4 %). 4. Extended Skiing Hours Estimated traffic removed is less Low. than 25 vph ( <1 %). 5. Metering of Outbound Structure Estimated traffic removed is o Low; toll booths already in place. Traffic (toll booths) between 25 and 50 vph (1 to 2%). 6. Expand Regional Transit Service Estimated traffic reduction of (e.g. Summit County Front 1% per every three to four peak Medium to High Range) hour bus trips. Other Considerations Mixed Use Trip Gen Reduction Could reduce intersection's PM (WV) ** peak hour traffic by 25 to 50 vph (1 to 2 %) Employee housing auto disincentive Could reduce intersection's PM (Timber Ridge) peak hour traffic by less than 25 vph ( <1 %) Could reduce intersection's PM Less West Vail Development peak hour traffic by 25 vph per 10,000 SF reduction in retail. * Combining measures will reduce the effect of certain measures as some mitigation measures target the same traffic "group ". This consideration entails redeveloping the West Vail area to better balance uses and incite internal trip- making. *"Potentially, improvements in parking control equipment over time may allow for a more rapid exit flow rate. While this will be advantageous to those attempting to exit, it will contribute to the peak traffic concentration along Town roads. Metering this outbound flow would provide a little benefit to traffic operations. FELSBURG r � HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 39 7 -4 -9 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update H. Transit fer quests ar„. rocide —At& Growth within Vail, Eagle County, the "Front Range ", and Colorado as a whole will require transit enhancements to maintain the existing percentage of transit ridership and to encourage additional transit usage in the future. This study assumes transit usage will generally maintain its existing levels of approximately 14 percent for the Town of Vail and 10 percent for Eagle County. This is reflected in the reduction taken in the number of future trips generated. The total number of future trip projected is 2800 per hour, this takes into account multi -use trips as well as multi -modal uses. This is an overall 36% reduction from the standard ITE projection of the approximately 4350 trips. Transit enhancements can be generally be categorized as follows; ► Local Transit Enhancements • Bus Capacity — Increase number of buses and service routes • Bus Service — Increase bus service, by reducing headways • Shuttle services ► Regional Transit Enhancements • "Front Range" bus service • Charter buses • Eagle (ECO), Summit and Lake County bus service ► Other Transit Mode Enhancements • Railways (Light, High- Speed) ► Transit Incentives • Making transit • Easier • Faster • Cheaper The Town is currently coordinating with the 1 -70 PEIS, the RMRA Study, the 1 -70 Coalition and the Eagle County Collaborative to consider Regional Transit Enhancements and Railways. The Town will need to continue collaboration with these groups and provide input to process and study. The enhancement to Vail's local transit can be directly implemented by the Town to increase service levels for guests and residents. FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 47 7 -4 -10 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update The Eagle County bus system (ECO) would also make use of the Lionshead Transportation Center. It is anticipated that demand served by ECO will grow in the future given the strong potential for growth Down Valley within Eagle County. Potential routing of this service within Vail could also be enhanced with a Simba Run underpass. I. Parking Currently, the town -owned Village Structure and the Lionshead Structure provide 2500 total spaces of public parking. Ford Park offers parking for an additional 250 vehicles during ski season supplemented with transit service to the Village; this parking is restricted to permitted vehicles only. As previously mentioned, the Town has set a goal to establish 400 additional public parking spaces for the near -term planning horizon and a total of 1000 additional public parking spaces for the long -term. These objectives are based on parking demand projections completed in 2001 that include a reduction of 44 to 48 percent for transit usage and on winter season parking data relative to the frequency of using the Frontage Road to serve overflow parking demands, and the additional parking is intended to reduce how often the Town's supply is exceeded. Frontage Road parking statistics are collected nearly every time the Frontage Road is pressed into service. The Town has established an objective to accommodate the 90 percentile design day, which is approximately equal to the 15 busiest day during winter ski season; the 400 and 1000 space increase would meet this goal for the short -term and long- term time - frames, respectively. Location options to place the increased parking supply include the following: ► West Lionshead (Ever Vail) as part of that area's redevelopment. Between 300 and 500 additional public parking spaces are being considered as part of the West Lionshead plan (beyond parking to be dedicated to development uses). In association with this and the new lift planned for West Lionshead is the potential for a roundabout intersection onto the Frontage Road and transit facilities. ► Lionshead Structure as part of its possible redevelopment. The redevelopment of the Lionshead Structure could incorporate an additional 200 to 300 public spaces for public use (beyond the parking needed to support the proposed uses). ► Ford Park - Preliminary study conducted by the Town has yielded the possibility of adding 300 to 600 spaces at Ford Park, likely below the playing fields. The potential of constructing a roundabout at Ford Park would support the additional of parking in this area relative to access onto the Frontage Road, and transit service providing connectivity to the Village would be necessary to support this concept. Besides serving parking demands during ski season, the provision of parking at Ford Park would support event activity during the summer. The future location of the parking supply within the Main Vail area (Lionshead and Vail Village) may remain a bit out of alignment with the parking demand generators. If the development and redevelopment of Vail comes to fruition as described in this report, there will be a bit of a mismatch with respect to the placement of the parking versus the demand for the parking. Figure 10 illustrates the imbalance. FELSBURG r � HOLT & ULLEVIG Page50 7 -4 -11 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update VI. FRONTAGE ROAD ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN As the Town's Transportation Plan was being developed through this process, CDOT and the Town agreed to develop an Access Management Plan (AMP) for the North and the South Frontage Road. The AMP will serve as a planning tool for CDOT and for the Town in that it defines allowable access from which proposed development can plan. The AMP is a document that CDOT and Town staff agree to in principal; it is not subject to a formal IGA and agency adoption. The plan is intended to show the long -term access onto the Frontage Roads. It is NOT the intent to use the plan as a means of closing access to an existing thriving use. Rather, the plan is used as a framework for new development and redevelopment of properties or possibly when a frontage road construction project (like widening takes place). If development or redevelopment does not occur, then access will continue as it exists today, barring a safety issue. Further, the access locations are not meant to be precise. The plan shows potential access locations that are plus /minus 50 feet or so, and shifts larger than this might be possible as well. Besides showing access onto the roadway, the plan also shows each parcel's access if it is not onto the Frontage Road. Examples of this include a parcel accessing a cross - street (rather than the frontage road) or gaining access through an adjacent parcel. Further, the AMP is based on the assumption that individual parcels will remain under individual ownership. In the event that a development plan incorporates numerous individual parcels as part of a common proposal, then the access scheme needs to be carefully evaluated and could be different than what the AMP shows. The AMP is shown in Appendix G and it recognizes the elements of the plan that have been described to this point. Many of the existing access points are recognized in the plan. The most notable intersection /access change is the Simba Run underpass of 1 -70. This will create two major intersections onto the frontage road system. Other areas of anticipated change include the following: ► A new access to serve the Vail Valley Medical Center is shown along the South Frontage Road approximately 900 feet west of Vail Road. Additional coordinating with the Medical Center may be needed as their plans continue to evolve. Potential access consolidation should be pursued. mill olcn SeFVe orrocc nooi-IS fnr this rordP11elnPmonf ► The West Lionshead Redevelopment Plan, otherwise known as Ever Vail, entails relocating the South Frontage Road to adjacent to 1 -70 in the proximity to Forest Road. This along with the development planned in that area will introduce five access points onto the Frontage Road (including the Forest Road roundabout), but it will eliminate 10 accesses serving current uses. FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 53 7 -4 -12 Vail Transportation Master Plan Update ► West Vail commercial uses are potential candidates for redevelopment at the future time. However, a master plan has not been finalized and there are numerous land owners in this area that still need to coordinate. However, the AMP is showing a roundabout access and additional partial movement accesses. This would eliminate other access points along the North Frontage Road. ► Timber Ridge is a planned affordable housing project located along the North Frontage Road approximately equidistant between Lions Ridge Loop and Buffehr Creek Road. Its potential access scheme includes two accesses onto the Frontage Road. It should further be noted that the Ever Vail development proposal is being proposed by the Town. Located in Lionshead at Forest Road, the Ever Vail development includes relocating the South Frontage Road up against 1 -70. This will require a modification to the AMP. FELSBURG r � HOLT & ULLEVIG Page 54 7 -4 -13 IAU e.5.of U4..k Vail Transportation Master Plan May 5,2009 • Recommendation of Approval by PEC • Changes since DRAFTwas submitted (3/19/09) • Implementation, Prioritization, &Funding • Next Steps Transportation Master Plan Preliminary Prioritization and Implementation Plan Capital Road System Improvements Potentail uni in Mechanism Millwm S Total otal Ba-a Implementation Benefits Imentation Timeline d TOV Capital RETT TIFF Traffic Impact Development CDOT(3) Funding Cost Time Frame 3A 6-10 10. Budget Fees(1) Required Years Years Improvement 2 Section I Widened shoulder for safety and N. Frontate-Arosa to Roundabout S 0.70 S 0.10 $ 0.80 5 0.80 S As funding is available bicycle lanes $ 010 S ection 11 Major West Vail Commercial Capacity, access roundabout, . WV Roundabout to 2ermad Ln $ 4.30 $ 4.30 S 4.30 S Redeveb em medians,d le lanes S 4.30 Section III Completion ofthe Roost and Timber Ridge N. Fron •2ermatt Ln in Simba 5 1.00 $ 0.50 S 1.65 S 0.15 S 3.30 S 3.30 5 Dev. Turn lanes and bicycle lanes $ 3.30 Section IV Capacity, transit improvement. Feasibility Simba Run und ss $ 4.50 $ 5.00 S 5.00 $ 5.00 S 19.50 $ 19.50 S Completion of EverVa�mber Ridge eonneaivi study S 19.50 Section V S. Frontage Rd. -OJ Patln to Roundabout S 4.80 $ 0.50 S 5,30 S 5.30 S As funding is available Bi cle lanes and recreational path S 5.30 Section VI Widened shoulder for safety and S. WV Roundabout! to Simba $ 2.00 S 0.80 S 2.80 S 2.80 S As fund"in g is available bicycle tan. S 11A0 I $ 140 Section VII Capaely, Nm lanes, bicycle lanes, S. Frontage Rd. -Simba w Strata $ 4.50 S 450 S 450 S Completion of Ever Vail Infrastructure medians, arldn lane S 4.50 Section VIII N. Prormagil b MVRoundabout 3 0.80 $ 1.50 $ 0.50 $ 2.80 S 2.80 5 As funding is available Turn lanes and bicycle lanes S 2.80 Section IX Feasibility MV ROrr ..1 rovements S 1.00 $ 2.60 S 3.60 S 3.50 S Com letion of Ever Vail/ Timber Ride Capacity Study S 3080 Section X Capacity, turn lanes, bicycle lanes, S. Frontage RdSbatn to E. LH Circle S 0.50 S 2.40 S 2.90 S 2.90 $ Completion of EverVal Infrastructure medians, wr n lane $ 2.90 Section %I Compietion fo LH Transit Ctr, Parking Capacity, tum lanes, bicycle lanes, S. Fron E LH Circle w MVRoundbaout S 2.00 S 2.00 S 4.30 $ 8.30 S 8.30 S Redev.. Eve reen, Fo Seasons medians, arlin lane $ 1.00 f 7.30 Section X6 S. Frontagie Rd•MV Rounsbabout to W0 S 0.40 $ 0.40 S 2.00 S 2.80 $ 230.S Completion of Solans Medians $ 280 Section XIII Safety, medians roundabout at Feasibility S Fron Rd: WD to Ford Park $ 2.90 S 2.90 S 2.90 S Cam letion of Ford Park Parkin Structure west end of Ford Park Study S 190 Section IV mn Rd.-Ford Park to East Vail S 1.50 S 4.70 S 6.20 S 620 S Construction of Bike Lanes to East Val Turn lanes and bicycle lanes S 3.10 f 3.10 Totals f 3.30 S 14.80 S 0.00 $ 12.40 S 24.85 S 7.05 S 70.00 $ 70.00 $ f 1A30 $ 35.2(1 S 9.50 S 11.00 Parking & Transit System Improvements Is mail Funding Mechanism Millions 5 Total Total Balance Implementation Benefits Implementation Timeline TOV Budget RETT TIFF TraRc Impact Development Grant Funding Cost Time Frame 0 -3 3.6 6.10 10. Fees Required Funding Years Years Years Years Ion rovement Parking • Ever Vail 00 S aces S 2000 . $ 2000 . S 20.00 S Completion of Ever Vail Parkin Structure Provides additional skier parking S 20.00 Parking • Lionshead 00 S $ 15.00 $ 15.00 S 15.00 S Completion of LH parking Redev. Provides additional skier parking S 15.00 Parking - Ford Park Estimate based on 300 spaces Parting for Cultural and Rec. Feasibility #ofs es -TBD based on feasibilifty study 5.00 S 5.70 S 4.30 S 15.00 S 1500 S Comletion of Ford Park Study facility and skier parking Stud S 15,00 ionshead Transit Center Provide better bus service and E. LH Ckcle Concert Nall S 7.50 $ 2.50 5 10.00 $ 10.00 S Completion of Transit Center Stu loves WTRC S 10.00 own of Vail Bus Expansion Compietlon of Simba Run Underpass. Provide better service, inducting -0 Buses N /Articuleted) S 2.66 S 1.34 S 4.00 5 400 $ Ever Vail. Timber Ride line Haul' mute VW to W Enhanced ECO Bus Service Raquies county vote to increase S S ECO funt4n Increase down valley service T otals $ 7.88 S 5.70 S 7.50 $ S 39.30 S 3.84 S 64.00 f 84.00 f S 10.00 S 35.00 S 15.00 S Potentail Funding Mechanism 'Owns I Total Total Balance Implementation Timeline TOV Budget RETT TIFF Traffic Impact Deveopm:m CDOTi Funding Cost 0 -3 3.6 6.10 10s Fees Required Grant Years Years Years Years Improvement Fundin Grand Totals S 10.90 1 S 20.30 S 15.50 1 $ 12.40 $ 63.95 S 10.89 5 134.00 $ 134.00 3 f 24,30 S 70.20 1 S 24.50 1 $ 11.00 PARKING b TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT MEASURE! NEXT STEPS: NOTES: 1. Complete Nexus study for Traffic Impact Fee and codify 1. Requires updating and codifying the Town's Traffic Impact Fees 1. Encourage use of East Vail interchange at 2. Simba Run d Main Vail Roundabout Feasibility Studies 2. Improvements required by a development to mitigate site traffic over and above Traffic Impact Fees . peak times with VMS and COOT coordination 3. Lionshead Transit Center Design Study 3. COOT and Federal transportation funding is unreliable at this time due to significant reductions revenues, 2. Ski pass management at peak times, coordinate with VR 4, Ford Park Parking Feasibility Study causing little to no reduction in project needs as more are added than completed. 3. Real time information disbursement throughout town 5. Install permanent traffic counters to monitor trip trends 4. The preliminary timeline provided is relavent to the pace of development 4. Paking fee management with incentives and disincentives S. Implement parking and traffic management measures 5. All costs estimates are in 2007 construciton dollars. 5. Ride-share incentives 7. Continue to participate in the RMRA study S. Continue to coordinate transportation planning with ECO and Eagle County 9. Expand the Urban Renewal boundaries as appropriate 10. Lobby for funding and have 'shovel ready' projects Next Steps • Adopt by Resolution • Complete Traffic Impact Fee Nexus Study & Codify • RFP for Main Vail Roundabout & Simba Feasibility Study • Complete LH Transit &Ford Park Parking Studies • Permanent Counters • Implement Traffic and Parking Manangement Measures as needed Vail Frontage Road Improvements West Vail Cost $ 3.3 Million Cost $0.8 Million Cost $4.3 Million Development West Vail Dev. /Roost /Timber Development n/a Development West Vail Dev. / Holiday Inn Funding $$$ Ridge Funding $$$ Funding $$$ Improvement Turn Lanes/ Safety / Rec. Path Improvement Capacity / Roundabout Improvement Safety /Rec. Path Timing Completion of Roost &Timber Min Stds Access/ Medians / Safety Ridge Timing CDOT Overlay Timing Completion of West Vail Dev. a P Sandstone Pedestrian overpass West Vail Red North Q Q C Vail Exit No 173 - (West Entrance) 1 "'�' ' O n Fra„ge Pd o nta9 eRa Cascade Village Lionshead Gore Creek & West Vail Cost $4.5 Million Green South Development West LH / Ritz Funding $$$ intermountain Cost $19.5 Million Improvement Capacity / Medians SECTION V & VI Development Indirectly through traffic impact Timing Completion of West Cost $5.3 / i 2.8 Million Funding $$$ fees and /or TIF Lionshead and the Ritz Development n/a Improvement Underpass / Capacity Funding $$$ Timing Completion of 2 of the following: Improvement Safety / Rec. Path West Lionshead, Lionshead Parking Structure, Timber Ridge, Timing CDOT Overlay West Vail Dev. Vail Frontage Road Improvements Main Vail Cost $2.8 Million Development n/a Funding $$$ Cost $ 6.2 Million Cost $3.6 Million Improvements Safety / turn Lanes Development Indirectly through / Development n/a Rec. path Funding $$$ Funding $$$ traffic impact fees and Timing CDOT Overlay or TIF Improvements Safety / Turn Lanes / Rec. Path / Sandstone Improvemetns Capacity at Main Vail Interchange Improvements Pedestran Roundabout Timing 2009 CDOT Overlay ' /Overpass Timing Traffic Trip Threshold Vail Exit ° a Nort/,F�on�a eRu. (EaststEntrancee) Vail Exit ° No. 476 art Q (Main Entrance) SouthF��fa9eyU ANOM BighomRd. .. ad 1J South Frontag Ad' Golf Course Q EasfVail Ford Park Vail Village va SECTION XI1 Vk SECTION X ° Golden Cost $ 2,8 Million y ` Golf Course Cost $2.90Million Peak Development VPH / Solaris / VTRC Development Antlers / LSL / N. Funding $$$ Funding $$$ Day / Landmark / SECTION XI Concert Hall / LH Inn Cost $ 8.3 Million Improvements Safety / Roundabout access / Medians Improvements Capacity / Safety Development LH Parking / Vail International Timing VPH /Solaris ( -2009) Funding $$$ / Evergreen / Four Seasons / Timing LH Parking Structure Municipal Bldg. Improvements Capacity / Safety Round about access Cost $2.9 Million Timing LH Parking Structure Development East Village / Ford Paris Funding $$$ Improvments Roundabout / Capacity / Medians Timing Completion of Ford Park Parking Structure *Vk' VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: May 5, 2009 ITEM /TOPIC: Lunch Break 11:50 - 12:30 *Vk' VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: May 5, 2009 ITEM /TOPIC: A work session to discuss parking requirements in the Housing (H) District. PRESENTER(S): Nina Timm/ Nicole Peterson ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Direct Staff to either proceed with the proposed amendments, proceed with changes to the proposed amendments, or withdraw. BACKGROUND: At the direction of the Vail Town Council and the Vail Local Housing Authority the Community Development Department has prepared amendments to the parking requirements in the Housing (H) zone district. The purpose of the amendments is to create predictable, quantifiable and enforceable policies that replace discretionary review with a more predictable process that eliminates confusion and delays in the review process for the Town and the developer. On March 17, 2009, Town Council tabled Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2009, to the April 21, 2009, Town Council meeting and requested further information. Due to schedule conflicts the item was moved to the May 5, 2009, Town Council meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: On February 9, 2009, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a meeting to forward a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2009. No formal recommendation was forwarded, due to the motion to approve, resulting in a tie vote (3- 3- OProper, Kjesbo and Tjossem opposed). ATTACHMENTS: Staff Memorandum MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: May 5, 2009 SUBJECT: Proposed amendments to the Housing (H) District Parking Regulations Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Nina Timm /Nicole Peterson I. INTRODUCTION On March 17, 2009, the Vail Town Council voted (6 -0 -0) to table Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2009, to the April 21, 2009, Town Council meeting. The tabling was based upon Council's request for Staff to evaluate the applicability of requiring parking in the Housing (H) District on a per employee to be housed basis rather than on a per unit basis. The purpose of the amendments is to create: ➢ Predictable; ➢ Quantifiable; ➢ Enforceable policies; and ➢ Replace discretionary review. This will eliminate confusion and delays in the review process for the Town and the developer. II. ACTION REQUESTED Provide Staff with answers to the following questions: Q1: Does the purpose of the parking requirements identified in the Vail Town Code currently meet the objectives of the Town? (Adopted Town policy) Information: 12 -10 -1: PURPOSE: In order to alleviate progressively or to prevent traffic congestion and shortage of on street parking areas, off street parking and loading facilities shall be provided incidental to new structures, enlargements of existing structures or a conversion to a new use which requires additional parking under this chapter. The number of parking spaces and loading berths prescribed in this chapter shall be in proportion to the need for such facilities created by the particular type of use. Off street parking and loading areas are to be designed, maintained and operated in a manner that will ensure their usefulness, protect the public safety, and, where appropriate, insulate surrounding land uses from their impact. In certain districts, all or a portion of the parking spaces prescribed by this chapter are required to be within the main building in order to avoid or to minimize the adverse visual impact of large concentrations or exposed parking and of separate garage or carport structures. 1 9 -1 -I Q2: Would Town Council like to amend the parking reduction requirements in the Housing (H) District? Information: At the direction of the Vail Town Council and the Vail Local Housing Authority the Community Development Department has prepared amendments to the parking requirements in the Housing (H) zone district. The purpose of the amendments is to create predictable, quantifiable and enforceable policies that replace discretionary review with a more predictable process that eliminates confusion and delays in the review process for the Town and the developer and reduces the cost of the design review process. On March 17, 2009, Town Council tabled Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2009, to the April 21, 2009, Town Council meeting. The Ordinance proposed parking reduction language for the Housing District to allow for a 25% parking reduction for deed restricted EHU's in the Housing District. The proposed criteria for the 25% parking reduction are, in summary: ✓ The development shall have density equaling 20 units or more per acre; ✓ The development shall be located within 880 feet (0.16 mile) of public transportation; ✓ The development shall be located within 2,500 feet (0.47 mile) of a Commercial Job Core (Vail Village, Lionshead or West Vail); ✓ Secure bicycle parking shall be provided on site; and ✓ A statement shall be provided in the recorded employee housing unit deed restriction(s) that acknowledges the approval of the parking reduction. Q3: Should the Town continue to ensure both the transportation and the ap rking needs of residents in the H District are met by private development? Information: Currently, the Town Code allows for a parking reduction in the H District if a developer can demonstrate the transportation needs of residents can be met by a method other than a personal automobile. 12 -61 -8: PARKING AND LOADING: (in part) ... A demonstrated need for a reduction in the required parking could include: A. Proximity or availability of alternative modes of transportation including, but not limited to, public transit or shuttle services. B. A limitation placed in the deed restrictions limiting the number of cars for each unit. C. A demonstrated permanent program including, but not limited to, rideshare programs, carshare programs, shuttle service, or staggered work shifts. Criteria A, B, and C are all managed solutions for a parking reduction and are difficult, if not impossible, to enforce. 2 9 -1 -2 Q4: How could the parking requirements be calculated on a per employee to be housed basis rather than on a per unit basis? Information: In order to establish a number of parking spaces per employees housed (or beds) Staff utilized existing Town standards (Table 23 -2, Commercial Linkage). It is important to note, to date, none of the approved development or anticipated development in the H District is fulfilling regulatory obligations under Commercial Linkage. The chart below illustrates the following findings: ✓ A 25% reduction in Schedule B is nearly identical to the required parking in Schedule A (Properties in Vail Village and Lionshead). The parking requirement in Schedule A is less, based on proximity to services, jobs and public transportation. ✓ Calculating parking spaces per employee according to Table 23 -2, results in a decreased parking requirement, as compared to the existing per unit requirement. ✓ However, using the average spaces per employee as a base number to calculate parking spaces required, per table 23 -2 Employees Housed, per employee would result in an increased minimum parking requirement. • Studio = 1.25 emps housed x.86 (avg spaces/ emp) = 1.08 spaces required • 1 -bed = 1.75 emps housed x.86 (avg spaces/ emp) = 1.50 spaces required • 2 -bed = 2.25 emps housed x.86 (avg spaces/ emp) = 1.94 spaces required • 3 -bed = 3.50 emps housed x.86 (avg spaces/ emp) = 3.01 spaces required • 4 -bed = 4.00 emps housed x.86 (avg spaces/ emp) = 3.44 spaces required Schedule B Schedule B Schedule A Schedule A Table 23 -2 Table 23 -2 Required Required Required Required Per Employee Table 23 -2 Min. Sq. Employees Spaces per Spaces Per Spaces per Spaces Per % Change Unit Type Ft. (GRFA) Housed Unit""" Employee" Unit"""" Employee" from B to A ** Studio Unit 438 1.25 1.5 1.2 1.4 1.12 6.7% One - Bedroom Unit 613 1.75 2 1.14 1.4 0.80 30.0% Two - Bedroom Unit 788 2.25 2 0.89 1.4 0.62 30.0% Three- Bedroom Unit + 1,225 3.5 2 0.57 1.4 0.40 30.0% Dormitory Unit 1,000 4 2 0.5 1.4 0.35 30.0% Average 0.86 Average 0.66 25.3% *Spaces per employee is based upon Schedule B and Schedule A Required Spaces divided by the minimum square footage per employee requirements in TABLE 23 -2 SIZE OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNITS. It is important to note, to date, none of the approved development or anticipated development in the H District is fulfilling regulatory obligations under Commercial Linkage. * *The per employee percent change means the percent reduction in parking spaces required from Schedule B to Schedule A. ** *Schedule B is the required parking schedule for all four properties currently zoned Housing District. Schedule B is included above in Question 2. * ** *Schedule A is the required parking schedule for properties within Vail Village and Lionshead only. Schedule A is included above in Question 2. 3 9 -1 -3 TVk VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: May 5, 2009 ITEM /TOPIC: Plat Right of Way (ROW) through town owned lands for existing roads PRESENTER(S): Tom Kassmel ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Direct staff to plat ROW for existing roads that cross through town owned lands. BACKGROUND: The Town of Vail owns, operates, and maintains public roads with no legal ROW across town owned land (tracts). These roads, therefore, do not have the same designation as other roads through town and do not legally provide the appropriate accommodation for the road, public users, and utilities. By designating ROW for these roads, there will be an undeniable road corridor that will provide the necessary accommodations for existing uses and provide boundaries for future road and utility construction. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff to plat ROW for existing roads that cross through town owned lands. ATTACHMENTS: Memo Existing roads with no ROW MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Tom Kassmel, Public Works Department DATE: May 5th, 2009 SUBJECT: A request for a work session to discuss the platting of Right of Way for existing roads within Town owned tracts. I. SUMMARY The Town of Vail owns, operates, and maintains public roads with no legal Right of Way (ROW) across town own lands (tracts). These roads therefore do not have the same designation as other roads thru town and do not legally provide the appropriate accommodation for the road, the public users, and utilities. By designating ROW for these roads there will be an undeniable road corridor that will provide the necessary accommodations for existing uses and provide boundaries for future road and utility construction. II. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Listen to staff presentation and provide comments and direct staff to plat ROW for existing roads that cross thru town owned lands. III. ATTACHMENTS A. Area exhibits of existing roads within Town owned tracts that have no designated ROW 10 -I -I Town of Vail t -76 Exit # 176 Exit # 180 121 West J 4 - East Vail Vail Vail Village ao Lionshead Ezit # 173 O Stephens r Park ap ©� ( -------- -- -- AM y Last Modified'. Apn130, 1111 This map was created by the T— of Vail GIS Team. Use of this map should be for general purposes only. The Town of Vail does nolwarrahllhe accurac *Vk' VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: May 5, 2009 ITEM /TOPIC: Discussion of First reading of Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009, an ordinance to amend Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 11 -3 -3, Prescribed Regulations Amendment, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for temporary building banner signs within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto. PRESENTER(S): Rachel Friede ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Staff requests that the Vail Town Council approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009, upon first reading. BACKGROUND: The applicant, the Vail Valley Foundation, applied for a prescribed regulations amendment to Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, in order to facilitate the use of large banners on buildings under construction to advertise community events. On April 13, 2009, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission made a final recommendation of denial to the Vail Town Council (3 -2 vote, with Tjossem and Viele opposed, Pierce and Palladino absent). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Based upon Staff's review of the criteria outlined in Section V of the Staff memorandum to the PEC dated April 13, 2009, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends denial of Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009. ATTACHMENTS: Ord 11 Series of 2009 TC Memo 050509 MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: May 5, 2009 SUBJECT: First reading of Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009, an ordinance amending Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 11 -3 -3, Prescribed Regulations Amendment, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for temporary building banner signs within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090006) Applicant: Vail Valley Foundation Planner: Rachel Friede I. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, the Vail Valley Foundation, is requesting a first reading of Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009, an ordinance amending Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 11 -3 -3, Prescribed Regulations Amendment, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for temporary building banner signs within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Staff requests that the Vail Town Council approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009, upon first reading. Attached to this memorandum are the following documents for review: Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009 (Attachment A), April 13, 2009, Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission (Attachment B), and updated renderings of signage provided by the applicant (Attachment C). II. BACKGROUND The applicant, the Vail Valley Foundation, applied for a prescribed regulations amendment to Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, in order to facilitate the use of large banners on buildings under construction to advertise community events. On April 13, 2009, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission made a final recommendation of denial to the Vail Town Council (3 -2 vote, Tjossem and Viele opposed, Pierce and Palladino absent). III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based upon Staff's review of the criteria outlined in Section V of the Staff memorandum to the PEC dated April 13, 2009, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends denial of Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009. Should the Town Council choose to deny Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009, the Community Development Department recommends the Town Council pass the following motion: 1 11 -1 -1 'Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section V of Staff's April 13, 2009 memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Town council denies Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009, an ordinance amending Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 11 -3 -3, Prescribed Regulations Amendment, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for temporary building banner signs within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto, with the following findings: 1. That the amendment is not consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is not compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and 2. That the amendment does not further the general and specific purposes of the Sign Regulations outlined in Section 11 -1 -2, Purpose, Vail Town Code; and 3. That the amendment does not promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town and does not 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." Should the Town Council choose to approve these amendments, the Community Development Department recommends the Town Council pass the following motion: 'Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section V of Staff's April 13, 2009, memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Town Council approves, on first reading, Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009, an ordinance amending Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 11 -3 -3, Prescribed Regulations Amendment, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for temporary building banner signs within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto, with the following findings: 1. That the amendments are consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and 2. That the amendments further the general and specific purposes of the Development Standards outlined in Section 11 -1 -1, Purpose and Intent, Vail Town Code; and 3. That the amendments promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town and promotes 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. IV. ATTACHMENTS A. Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009 B. April 13, 2009, Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission C. Updated renderings of temporary building banner signs 2 11 -1 -2 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 11 SERIES OF 2009 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 11, SIGN REGULATIONS, VAIL TOWN CODE, PURSUANT TO SECTION 11 -3 -3, PRESCRIBED REGULATIONS AMENDMENT, VAIL TOWN CODE, TO ESTABLISH REGULATIONS FOR TEMPORARY BUILDING BANNER SIGNS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the applicant, the Vail Valley Foundation, requests that the Vail Town Council amend Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for temporary building banner signs within the Town of Vail in order to promote community events; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail held a public hearing on April 13, 2009 and reviewed and forwarded a recommendation of denial to the Vail Town Council for the proposed text amendments to the Sign Regulations in accordance with the procedures and criteria and findings outlined in Section 11 -3 -3 of the Vail Town Code; and, WHEREAS, the Town Council finds and determines that the amendments are consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town, based upon Section V of the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated April 13, 2009, and the evidence and testimony presented; and, WHEREAS, the Town Council finds and determines that the amendments further the general and specific purposes of the Sign Regulations, based upon Section V of the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated April 13, 2009, and the evidence and testimony presented; and, WHEREAS, the Town Council finds and determines 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, based upon Section V of the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated April 13, 2009, and the evidence and testimony presented. 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 amend Title 11, Sign Regulations in order to establish regulations for temporary building banner signs. Section 2. Section 11 -2 -1, Definitions, Vail Town Code is hereby amended as follows (Text that is to be deleted is s +rte Text that is to be added is bold. Sections of text that are not amended may be omitted.) Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009, first reading Sign, Temporary Building Banner: A "banner- type" display attached to a building under construction that is composed of graphics and text elements to advertise community events Section 3 . Section 11 -7 -15, Temporary Building Banner Signs, is hereby established as follows (text to be deleted is in "tri eth qg 4g4 text that is to be added is bold): Section 11 -7 -15, Temporary Building Banner Signs A. Purpose: The purpose of this section is to provide regulations for temporary building banner signs, which may be erected on buildings under construction to provide advertisement for community events that have a Town of Vail Special Events Permit and /or receive sponsorship from the Town of Vail Special Events Committee B. Applicability: Temporary building banner signs may be allowed on buildings with a valid building permit for new construction or a demo /rebuild in commercial and business districts, as listed in Section 12 -7, Vail Town Code, to advertise community events that have a Town of Vail Special Events Permit and /or receive sponsorship from the Town of Vail Special Events Committee. C. Number. No more than two (2) temporary building banner signs shall be permitted per development site. D. Size: The total combined size of the temporary building banner signs shall not exceed 1500 square feet per development site. The maximum size of graphics and text associated with the building on which the sign is erected shall not exceed the allowable size of the building identification sign, as outlined in 11 -6 -4. The combined area of text associated with the community event and graphics and text associated with sponsors of the community event shall not exceed 30% of the area of each sign. E. Content: The temporary building banner sign may only include the following: 1. Graphics and text associated with community event, including one (1) website address and one (1) contact phone number 2. Graphics and text associated with sponsors of the community event 3. Graphics and text associated with the building in which the sign is affixed, which shall not include any phone number or website F. Location: Temporary building banner signs shall be affixed parallel to the building fagade and attached to scaffolding, an exterior weatherization barrier, or to the exterior of the building. Temporary building banner signs shall not extend above the eave line of the building. G. Duration: The signs may be erected only while the building has an active building permit for new construction or a demo /rebuild, as defined by Section 2 Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009, first reading 11 -1 -4 12 -2 -2. Temporary building banner signs shall be removed within 14 calendar days of the completion of the advertised community event. H. Material: The temporary building banner sign shall be fire retardant material. I. Lighting: No lighting shall be allowed. Construction lighting shall not be directed to illuminate the temporary building banner signs. Section 4 . 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 5 . The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 6 . The 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 7 . All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 5th day of May, 2009 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 19 day of May, 2009, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Richard D. Cleveland, Mayor Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk 3 Ordinance No. 11, Series of 2009, first reading 11 -1 -5 Attachment B MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: April 13, 2009 SUBJECT: A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for prescribed regulations amendments to Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 11 -3 -3, Prescribed Regulations Amendment, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for building wrap signs within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090006) Applicant: Vail Valley Foundation Planner: Rachel Friede I. SUMMARY The applicant, the Vail Valley Foundation, is requesting a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for prescribed regulations amendments to Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 11 -3 -3, Prescribed Regulations Amendment, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for temporary building banner signs within the Town of Vail. Based upon Staff's review of the criteria outlined in Section V of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission forwards a recommendation of denial, subject to the criteria and findings noted in Section V of this memorandum. A rendering of a temporary building banner sign that complies with the proposed regulations (Attachment A) and a rendering of a potential sign design for the Vail Dance Festival at the Four Seasons (Attachment B) are attached for reference. II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The applicant is requesting permission to erect a temporary building banner sign on the exterior of the Four Seasons, which is currently under construction, in order to advertise community events, specifically the Vail Dance Festival. Currently, the Vail Town Code lacks any regulations on temporary building banner signs, which by default, deems them prohibited. In order to facilitate this request, the applicant is proposing prescribed regulations amendments to Title 11, Vail Town Code that will allow temporary building banner signs within the Town. The proposed regulation amendments are as follows (text to be deleted is in text that is to be added is in bold italics): 11 -2 -1: Definitions: Sign, Temporary Building Banner: A "banner- type" display attached to a building under construction that is composed of graphics and text elements to advertise community events 1 11 -1 -6 Section 11 -7 -15, Temporary Building Banner Signs A. Purpose: The purpose of this section is to provide regulations for temporary building banner signs, which may be erected on buildings under construction to provide advertisement for community events that have a Town of Vail Special Events Permit and /or receive sponsorship from the Town of Vail Special Events Committee B. Applicability: Temporary building banner signs may be allowed on buildings with a valid building permit for new construction or a demo /rebuild in commercial and business districts, as listed in Section 12 -7, Vail Town Code, to advertise community events that have a Town of Vail Special Events Permit and /or receive sponsorship from the Town of Vail Special Events Committee. C. Number. Two (2) temporary building banner signs per development site. D. Size: The total combined size of the temporary building banner signs shall not exceed 1500 square feet per development site. The maximum size of graphics and text associated with the building on which the sign is erected shall not exceed the allowable size of the building identification sign, as outlined in 11 -6 -4. The combined area of text associated with the community event and graphics and text associated with sponsors of the community event shall not exceed 30% of the area of each sign. E. Content: The temporary building banner sign may only include the following: 1. Graphics and text associated with community event, including one (1) website address and one (1) contact phone number 2. Graphics and text associated with sponsors of the community event 3. Graphics and text associated with the building in which the sign is affixed, which shall not include any phone number or website F. Location: Temporary building banner signs shall be affixed parallel to the building fagade and attached to scaffolding, an exterior weatherization barrier, or to the exterior of the building. Temporary building banner signs shall not extend above the eave line of the building. G. Duration: The signs may be erected only while the building has an active building permit for new construction or a demo /rebuild, as defined by Section 12 -2 -2. Temporary building banner signs shall be removed within 14 business days of the completion of the advertised community event. H. Material: The temporary building banner sign shall be fire retardant material. I. Lighting: No lighting shall be allowed. Construction lighting shall not be directed to illuminate the temporary building banner signs. 2 11 - 1 - 7 III. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS TITLE 11: SIGN REGULATIONS (in part) 11 -1 -2: PURPOSE: A. General Purpose: These regulations are enacted for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town of Vail and to promote the coordinated and harmonious design and placement of signs in the town in a manner that will conserve and enhance its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. B. Specific Purpose: These regulations are intended to achieve the following specific purposes: 1. To describe and enable the fair and consistent enforcement of signs in the town of Vail. 2. To encourage the establishment of well designed, creative signs that enhance the unique character of Vail's village atmosphere. 3. To preserve a successful and high quality business environment that is aided by signs that identify, direct, and inform. 4. To aid in providing for the growth of an orderly, safe, beautiful, and viable community. 11 -5 -2: DESIGN GUIDELINES: Any sign erected within the town of Vail should: A. Be consistent with the scale and architecture already present in the town: Sign location, configuration, design, and size should be aesthetically harmonious with the mountain setting and the alpine village atmosphere of the town. B. Be compatible with the placement of surrounding signs: Similar signs should not be placed within close proximity of each other, but should instead incorporate variety and visual interest within the "view corridor" that they are placed. The staff shall review all proposed signs in the context of adjacent signage to verify that the sign is appropriately placed. 11 -5 -3: DESIGN STANDARDS: Any sign erected within the town of Vail shall conform to the following standards: A. Compatibility: Signs shall be visually compatible with the size of surrounding structures and other signage and shall not visually dominate the structure or business to which they belong. The staff shall review all proposed signs in the context of adjacent signage to verify that the sign is appropriately sized. 11 -9 -2: PROHIBITED SIGNS: The following signs are prohibited within the town of Vail: H. Any sign or structure that obstructs ingress to or egress from a required exitway, that obstructs the view of vehicular traffic entering or exiting a public roadway, or that creates an unsafe distraction for motor vehicle operators; J. Any off premises sign that is not otherwise regulated by this title; K. All billboards; L. Pennants, banners, and bunting that are not associated with a special event permit; 3 11 -I -8 V. REVIEW CRITERIA 1. The extent to which the text amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the Sign Regulations; and Staff believes that the text amendments do not further the general and specific purposes of the Sign Regulations because the temporary building banner signage is vastly larger than any other currently allowed signage. Temporary building banner signs will foster a feeling of an urban environment, which is contrary to the general purpose to "promote the coordinated and harmonious design and placement of signs in the town in a manner that will conserve and enhance its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality." This proposed shift in Vail's character also does not further the specific purpose noted in Section 11 -1 -2B, of encouraging "the establishment of well designed, creative signs that enhance the unique character of Vail's village atmosphere." Staff does believe that the specific purpose, noted in Section 11 -1 -2B, of "preserving a successful and high quality business environment that is aided by signs that identify, direct, and form" is furthered by the text amendments because the temporary building banner signs will promote community events that will provide economic stimulus to the Town. 2. The extent to which the text amendment would better implement and better achieve the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives, and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and Because of the size and character of the proposed temporary building banner signs, Staff believes these proposed amendments will not better implement and achieve the adopted goals, objectives and policies of the Town's Development Standards and Comprehensive Plan. The Vail Village Master Plan Goal #1 is to "encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving unique architectural scale of the village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity." Similarly, the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan states that "Lionshead can and should be renewed and redeveloped to become a warmer, more vibrant environment for guests and residents. Lionshead needs an appealing and coherent identity, a sense of place, a personality, a purpose, and an improved aesthetic character." The temporary building banner signs do further the economic development and vitality goals within the portions of the Comprehensive Plan, including Goal #2 of the Vail Village Master Plan, "To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year -round economic health and viability for the village and for the community as a whole." However, there are other methods for promoting economic health that do not conflict with other goals. 3. The extent to which the text amendment demonstrates how conditions have substantially changed since the adoption of the subject regulation and how the existing regulation is no longer appropriate or is inapplicable; and 4 11 -1 -9 Because of the shift in economic conditions, the Vail Valley Foundation is looking for a new way to market their events to the community. While this may be one change in condition that could help justify a shift in acceptable signage within the Town of Vail, the community has continued to support the protection of the unique character of Vail. Staff believes that conditions have not changed to warrant such a shift in sign policy. 4. The extent to which the text amendment provides a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with municipal development objectives. There are numerous regulations in Title 11 that conflict with the concept of temporary building banner signs. Because the temporary building banner signs are large and will hang much higher as compared to currently allowed signage within the Town, the proposed regulations conflict with Section 11 -5 -2, Design Guidelines, which recommends that signs within the Town "be consistent with the scale and architecture already present in the town" and "be compatible with the placement of surrounding signs." Allowing temporary building banner signs of 1500 sq ft on the exterior of a building is also in conflict with Section 11 -5 -3, Design Standards, which requires that all signs in the Town "shall not visually dominate the structure or business to which they belong." Temporary building banner signs by nature will serve as temporary billboards to promote an event from an off -site location. These large signs will be visible from I- 70, and may become a distraction for drivers. For these reasons, the proposed text amendments are in conflict with Section 11 -9 -2, Prohibited Signs, which outlines the prohibition of off -site advertising and billboards, and bans any sign that "creates an unsafe distraction for motor vehicle operators." This is why billboards are prohibited, per Section 11 -9 -2K. 5. Such other factors and criteria the Commission and /or Council deem applicable to the proposed text amendment. VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of denial to the Vail Town Council for prescribed regulations amendments, pursuant to Section 11 -3 -3, Prescribed Regulation Amendment, Vail Town Code, to amend Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for temporary building banner signs within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of denial of this request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: 'Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section V of Staff's April 13, 2009 memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of denial to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to Section 11-3-IC, Amendments, Vail Town Code, to 5 11 -1 -10 amend Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for temporary building banner signs within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto, with the following findings: 1. That the amendment is not consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is not compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and 2. That the amendment does not further the general and specific purposes of the Sign Regulations outlined in Section 11 -1 -2, Purpose, Vail Town Code; and 3. That the amendment does not promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town and does not 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." Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for the proposed text amendment, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following motion: "Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section V of Staff's April 13, 2009 memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to Section 11-3-IC, Amendments, Vail Town Code, to amend Title 11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, to establish regulations for temporary building banner signs within the Town of Vail, and setting forth details in regard thereto, with the following findings: 1. That the amendment is consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and 2. That the amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the Sign Regulations outlined in Section 11 -1 -2, Purpose, Vail Town Code; and 3. That the amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town and promotes 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." VII. ATTACHMENTS A. Rendering of Temporary building banner Sign on The Four Seasons B. Rendering of Vail Dance Festival Sign 6 11 -1 -11 Attachment A - � r a� J r L J � �., M .9 -. -.. Lam' C- i i tl n i 0 I E I 1 L � El 1 i i 11 -1 -12 Attachment B �r + . t car c Attachment C . y h 9L a - g _ : • - 1 . - �� '� Iii "�•. - � �� � _ : � F- r, e { r p o d wP— - 1 i IL Sol- qmw AP I 6 will AW P x k t ° y f � t s r • i f M. I I ro 6 YI ' F jl ,.1 Fl )I It S E k S4 )N'S ai r � i � w f Q p a� f rFno bANK, �� t �-°.. Y 1 aO st • I'« .: .� s is a s � • 4 w • w s s r t i,. v ^rte ✓- 5 t Amb wl 11 ,�� ' • � � 4 l A Ai Z w l *Vk' VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: May 5, 2009 ITEM /TOPIC: Discussion of the Second Reading of Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2009, an ordinance making supplemental appropriations to the Town of Vail General Fund, Capital Projects Fund , Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund, Dispatch Services Fund, Heavy Equipment Fund and Debt Service Fund of the 2009 Budget for the Town of Vail, Colorado; and authorizing the said adjustments as set forth herein; and setting forth details in regard thereto. PRESENTER(S): Kathleen Halloran ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Provide input regarding the 2nd supplemental of 2009, Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2009, in preparation for approving the second reading during the evening session. BACKGROUND: To be provided in a separate memo. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: : Staff recommends that the Town Council approves Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2009, upon second reading this evening. ATTACHMENTS: Supplemental 2 of 2009 NIEMORAI DUM To: Town Council From: Stan Zemler Judy Camp Kathleen Halloran Date: April 30, 2009 Subject: 2009 Supplemental Appropriation — Second Reading This evening you will be asked to approve Ordinance Number 8 on second reading making a supplemental appropriation to the 2009 budget. We are attaching the following documents for your review: • Second Budget Adjustment / Supplemental Appropriation Request of 2009 • Summary of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances — 2008 Actual Compared with Amended Budget and 2009 including Second Supplemental Appropriation • Ordinance No. 8 Based on Council's request during the April 21 meeting, staff has re- analyzed the supplemental requests for capital projects. In addition to the $5.6 million of capital project delays implemented during the 2009 Budget process, staff recommends another $3.0 million of capital projects be placed on hold until the full budget review in June, as reflected in the charts below. Staff is recommending funding for projects that are in progress or time- sensitive, and to re- evaluate all other funding requests in June. The requests have broken out into four categories: I. Re- appropriations for projects currently underway and under contractual obligation. These items are identified in blue on pages 4 - 8. 11. Other projects that may be underway as previously approved by Council, but due to a change of scope require additional funds are identified in yellow on pages 4 - 8. An example is the $100,000 requested to continue consulting and legal work for the Timber Ridge redevelopment project. III. Items placed "on hold" are identified in green on pages 4 — 8. These items were budgeted and some work has been done, however, completion of the project can be delayed until a re- evaluation in June. An example is the 1 -70 Noise project where some design work has been completed for a berm at East Vail, but the construction can be delayed. IV. New requests are identified in orange on pages 4 — 8. The following projects totaling $3.0 million are now reflected as being placed on hold in the revised Ordinance I o. 8. Additional funding for these projects will not be requested until June (or delayed to another year) when revised revenue projections are available. Capital Projects Fund (pages 4 -6) Project I ame Original Revised Request Request Parking Structures $ 282,618 $ 120,000 West Vail Fire Station $ 322,329 $ 300,000 Document Imaging $ 48,000 $ 0 Village Streetscape $1,092,706 $ 400,000 Neighborhood Road Reconstruction $ 150,000 $ 0 Neighborhood Bridge Reconstruction $ 75,000 $ 0 1 -70 Noise $1,051,639 $ 300,000 Total: $3,022,292 $ 1,120,000 Total appropriations on hold: $1,902,292 Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) Fund (pages 7 -8) Project I ame Original Request Revised Request Rec. Path Capital Maintenance $ 51,000 $ 40,000 Street Furniture $ 11,965 $ 5,983 Katsos Ranch Bike Path $ 10,000 $ 7,000 Rec. Master Planning $ 0 $ 6,415 Greenhouse $ 250,000 $ 0 Frontage Rd Bike Lanes /Trails $ 150,000 $ 50,000 Ford Park Master Plan $ 550,000 $ 300,000 Red Sandstone Park $ 464,832 $ 25,000 Ford Park Tennis Center $ 62,000 $ 0 Total: $1,549,797 $ 434,398 Total appropriations on hold: $ 1,115,399 There are a few new items which remain in this supplemental request due to time sensitivity or based on Council's request. Please see the attached memos for details on these funding requests. -2- TOWN OF VAIL 2009 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE GENERALFUND 2009 2008 2008 Variance 2009 1st 2009 2nd Proposed Amended Actual Fav / (Unfav) Budget Supplemental Amended Supplemental Amended Revenue Local Taxes: Sales Tax Split b/t Gen'I Fund & Capital Fund 60/40 59/41 61/39 59/41 59/41 Sales Tax $ 11,640,000 $ 11,640,000 $ - $ 11,860,000 $ (1,000,000) $ 10,860,000 $ 10,860,000 Property and Ownership 4,293,500 4,309,622 16,122 4,293,500 4,293,500 4,293,500 Ski Lift Tax 3,123,852 3,277,703 153,851 3,190,000 3,190,000 3,190,000 Franchise Fees, Penalties, and Other Taxes 926,110 1,075,209 149,099 899,935 899,935 899,935 Licenses & Permits 3,501,950 3,903,026 401,076 1,755,200 1,755,200 1,755,200 Intergovernmental Revenue 1,705,060 1,706,197 1,137 1,308,719 1,308,719 1,308,719 Transportation Centers 5,111,880 4,816,505 (295,375) 5,680,744 5,680,744 5,680,744 Charges for Services 824,362 1,000,733 176,371 798,838 798,838 798,838 Fines & Forfeitures 259,000 396,707 137,707 260,000 260,000 260,000 Earnings on Investments 585,000 571,073 (13,927) 495,000 495,000 495,000 Rental Revenue 797,400 949,961 152,561 795,300 795,300 795,300 $50K Volvo spy Miscellaneous and Project Reimbursements 156 163,025 6,218 59,000 59,000 70,734 129,734 legal /consultinc 'Pay as you Th Total Revenue 32,924 33,809,761 884,840 31,396,236 (1,000,000) 30,396,236 70,734 30,466,970 Expenditures Salaries 13,371,331 13,319,994 51,337 14,119,592 (275,905) 13,843,687 13,843,687 Benefits 4,519,262 4,404,800 114,462 4,795,382 (130,095) 4,665,287 4,665,287 Subtotal Compensation and Benefits 17,890,593 17,724,794 165,799 18,914,974 (406,000) 18,508,974 18,508,974 Contributions and Special Events 1,399,706 1,366,668 33,038 1,315,675 (43,550) 1,272,125 1,272,125 $25K Transit to All Other Operating Expenses 7,500,595 7,038,794 461,801 7,383,434 (221,950) 7,161,484 22,734 7,184,218 legal /consultinc Housing Strate expense forun Heavy Equipment Operating Charges 2,247,650 2,351,269 (103,619) 2,147,637 (117,000) 2,030,637 2,030,637 Heavy Equipment Replacement Charges 631,026 635,903 (4,877) 678,881 678,881 678,881 Dispatch Services 535,657 533,164 2,493 543,072 543,072 543,072 Total Expenditures 30,205,227 29,650,592 554,635 30,983,673 (788,500) 30,195,173 22,734 30,217,907 Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures 2,719,694 4,159,169 1,439,475 412,563 (211,500) 201,063 48,000 249,063 Transfer to Capital Projects Fund (441,000) (441,000) - Winter Economic Marketing Campaign (550,000) (550,000) - Employee Home Ownership Program (375,000) 125,000 (250,000) (250,000) Total Expenditures 31,196,227 30,641,592 554,635 31,358,673 (913,500) 30,445,173 22,734 30,467,907 Surplus Net of Transfers & New Programs 1,728,694 3,168,169 1,439,475 37,563 (86,500) (48,937) 48,000 (937) Beginning Fund Balance 19,834,717 19,834,717 21,563,411 21,563,411 1,439,475 23,002,886 Ending Fund Balance $ 21,563,411 $ 23,002,886 $ 21,600,974 $ 21,514,474 $ 23,001,949 Percent to Annual Revenue 65% 68% 69% 71% 75% 12 -1 -3 3 TOWN OF VAIL 2009 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Blue = Re- appror Yellow = Projects Green = Re -apprc June or future ye 2009 Orange = New ite 2008 2008 Variance 2009 1st 2009 2nd Proposed Amended Actual Fav /(Unfav) Budget Supplemental Amended Supplemental Amended Revenue Sales Tax $ 7,760,000 $ 8,171,920 $ 411,920 $ 7,540,000 $ 7,540,000 $ 7,540,000 Use Tax 582,000 608,483 26,483 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 Federal Grant Revenue 815,577 815,577 - 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 $1.4M in '09 and $ Eagle County Grant Revenue 317,000 50,000 (267,000) - - - Lease Revenue 187,800 188,160 360 188,550 188,550 188,550 Employee Housing Fee -In -Lieu 503,000 529,481 26,481 48,000 48,000 48,000 Project Reimbursement 565,000 982,360 417,360 - - 190,000 190,000 Holy Cross utility E transportation stuc Repayment of Loans - 30,000 30,000 - - - Children's Garden Earnings on Investments and Other 546,553 557,368 10,815 18,750 18,750 18,750 Based on earning! Total Revenue 11,276,930 11,933,349 656,419 10,195,300 10,195,300 190,000 10,385,300 Expenditures Land / Property Purchases Altair Unit 178,066 178,180 (114) - - - Gore Range Condo Units 2E & 3W 599,452 599,961 (509) - - - Capital Maintenance Expenditures Bus Shelters 79,354 25,566 53,788 30,000 30,000 30,000 $120K Elevator re Parking Structures 1,163,216 759.,598 403,618 480,000 480,000 120,000 600,000 engineering on LF roof and windows Facilities 568,817 532,918 35,899 755,000 755,000 755,000 2009 repair PW sI re -roof the Library Building Remodels - - - 55,000 55,000 55,000 On -going minor re Creekside Housing Improvements - - - 60,000 60,000 60,000 Need to gut plumb Donovan Park Pavilion 13,000 12,908 92 - _ 2010: $50K furnitL noise Street Light Improvements 75,000 72,724 2,276 75,000 75,000 75,000 Add new street lig Capital Street Maintenance 1,702,280 1,696,772 5,508 1,505,000 (19,413) 1,485,587 1,485,587 On -going mainten patching and repa Flammable storage / Mag Chloride containment 24,000 5,600 18,400 - - 18,400 18,400 Secondary contair containment requi West Vail Fire Station - Planning / Design 329,229 6,900 322,329 - - 300,000 300,000 Continue planning Replace AM530 radio system 50,000 45,365 4,635 - - - Audio Visual (Council video,Security, Police car video) 32,000 31,846 154 61,150 61,150 61,150 09 Council chamb Document Imaging 350,000 243,301 106,699 - - 106,699 106,699 Re- appropriate $1 Upgrade Microsoft Software Licensing 8,500 - 8,500 68,200 68,200 68,200 upgrades, AS400. schedule Hardware Purchases 64,838 65,999 (1,161) 84,380 84,380 84,380 Scheduled rotatioi Data Center (Computer Rooms) 35,500 - 35,500 12,000 12,000 35,500 47,500 Fire suppression i systems for 3 roor Website and e- commerce 30,000 13,050 16,950 28,500 28,500 28,500 Internet security & Comm Dev ArcGIS System - - - 52,000 52,000 52,000 Web access to tov product) Fiber Optics in Buildings 30,000 24,179 5,821 15,000 15,000 15,000 Cabling / Network Network upgrades 43,478 39,427 4,051 18,300 18,300 18,300 Computer network Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) / RMS Project 58,640 58,959 (319) 51,650 51,650 51,650 County -wide "Con -4- 12-1-4 TOWN OF VAIL 2009 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Blue = Re- appror Yellow = Projects Green = Re -apps June or future ye 2009 Orange = New ite 2008 2008 Variance 2009 1st 2009 2nd Proposed Amended Actual FavI(Unfav) Budget Supplemental Amended Supplemental Amended Comm Dev Interactive Permit software - - - 25,000 25,000 25,000 Upgrade of Permit current system Vehicle Expansion 61,411 44,681 16,730 18,000 18,000 16,730 34,730 2009 continued se E Vail Radio Tower 5,000 5,000 Maintenance Paid for by Capital Fund 4,724,263 3,679,793 1,044,470 3,394,180 (19,413) 3,374,767 597,329 3,972,096 Capital Replacement Expenditures West Meadow Drive 1,720,000 1,119,317 600,683 - - 600,683 600,683 Completion of proj Village Streetscape 1,128,761 36,055 1,092,706 - - 400,000 400,000 Future work may ii Bridge, VVD walk, Neighborhood Road Reconstruction 150,000 - 150,000 50,000 50,000 - 50,000 Overhaul resident valley drive); On Neighborhood Bridge Reconstruction 75,000 - 75,000 75,000 75,000 - 75,000 Overhaul resident Construction in 20 Fire Breathing Apparatus - - - 180,000 180,000 - 180,000 Replacement of al used not effective Parking Entry System/ Equipment 52,985 54,750 (1,765) - - 145,000 145,000 Metered lots, equi sensitive for instal Radio Equipment replacement (pub. works, pub. safety) 545,500 543,280 2,220 227,000 (227,000) - - - Replacement of 1S Office Equipment $5,000 14,635 7,970 6,665 9 9,000 9,000 09 GIS Equip Heavy Equipment new capital 3,400 - 3,400 - - - Generator- Municipal Building / Dispatch 250,000 229,876 20,124 - - 20,124 20,124 2009: workfinishe Replace Buses 3,840,297 3,688,836 151,461 143,400 143,400 30,000 173,400 2009 for spare pai downtime when bL Replacement Paid for by Capital Fund 7,780,578 5,680,084 2,100,494 684,400 (227,000) 457,400 1,195,807 1,653,207 Property Tax Increment - Reserved 441,000 - 441,000 441,000 441,000 Reserve for unidei Other Improvements Buy -down Program - - 500,000 500,000 - 500,000 Increased to $500 Pitkin Creek Unit 7,350 6,054 1,296 - - - - Variable Message Signs/ Way- Finding Improvements 36,416 25,443 10,973 180,000 180,000 10,973 190,973 09 Vail Village wa about & Four Seas For'09, design on I -70 Noise 1,079,282 27,643 1,051,639 300,000 300,000 drainage work per Construction of be will re- evaluate in I -70 Fiber Optics 909,128 740,347 168,781 - - 168,781 168,781 2009: project near I -70 corridor for irr Transfer of utility I Underground Utility improvements 212,783 153,296 59,487 - - 156,000 156,000 $156K revenue at awaiting final billir Manor Vail Street Plan 100,000 16,200 83,800 - - 83,800 83,800 Expenditure relate funds in bugdet dL Chamonix Area Planning 149,871 149,762 109 30,000 30,000 F 30,000 Continued work or West Vail Area Planning 3,406 - 3,406 - - - TOV Strategic Planning - - - - - - Land use zone & I Housing Strategic Plan 25,341 12,067 13,274 - - - - LH Parking Structure Redevelopment 64,857 55,009 9 - - - Fire Impact Fee Nexus study - - - - - 15,000 15,000 Nexus study to de Potential revenue -5- 12-1-5 TOWN OF VAIL 2009 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND Blue = Re- appror Yellow = Projects Green = Re -appr( June or future ye 2009 Orange = New ite 2008 2008 Variance 2009 1st 2009 2nd Proposed Amended Actual FavI(Unfav) Budget Supplemental Amended Supplemental Amended Traffic Impact Fee study 30,000 30,000 Study to determin( identified as a nex Re- appropriation ( Timber Ridge Legal /Zoning 63,927 44,520 19,407 - - 100,000 100,000 phase of negotiati a higher number c Ridge Affordable I Timber Ridge Debt Service Guarantee 925,000 - 925,000 - - 925,000 925,000 Annual debt servi( This is offset by c( LionsHead Improvements 32,242 48,579 (16,337) - - 34,000 34,000 completion of the I consultant's revie\ Currently research Bio -Mass Study 50,000 - 50,000 - - 50,000 50,000 May to fund afeas critical for grant el Total Other Improvements 3,659,603 1,278,920 2,380,683 710,000 - 710,000 1,873,554 2,583,554 Total Capital before Financing 17,382,962 11,416,938 5,966,024 4,788,580 (246,413) 4,542,167 4,107,690 8,649,857 Debt Service and Financing Debt Service on Outstanding Bonds 2,321,825 2,204,670 117,155 2,266,775 2,266,775 31,346 2,298,121 Adjust debt service Transfer to Vail Reinvestment Authority - - - 1,400,000 1,400,000 1,400,000 Transfer from Dispatch Fund (75,000) (75,000) - - - - Transfer from General Fund (441,000) (441,000) Total Debt Service and Financing: 1,805,825 1,688,670 117,155 3,666,775 - 3,666,775 31,346 3,698,121 Total Expenditures 19,188,787 13,105,608 6,083,179 8,455,355 (246,413) 8,208,942 4,139,036 12,347,978 Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (7,911,857) (1,172,259) 6,739,598 1,739,945 246,413 1,986,358 (3,949,036) (1,962,678) Beginning Fund Balance 10,154,128 10,154,128 2,242,271 2,242,271 6,739,598 8,981,869 Ending Fund Balance 2,242,271 8,981,869 6,739,598 3,982,216 4,228,629 2,790,562 7,019,191 Unfunded Capital Projects West Vail Fire Station 2,760,000 2,760,000 2,760,000 East LionsHead Portal East LionsHead Circle Total Unfunded Projects - 2,760,000 2,760,000 - 2,760,000 Ending Fund Balance Incl. Unfunded list 2,242,271 8,981,869 6,739,598 1,222,216 1,468,629 2,790,562 4,259,191 -6- 12-1-6 TOWN OF VAIL 2009 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX Blue = Re- appropriation of 2008 funds for ongo Yellow = Projects underway needing approprial Green = Re- appropriate a portion of funds; rem. 2009 Orange = New items or an increase in budget 2008 2008 Variance 2009 2nd Proposed Amended Actual Fav / (Unfav) Budget Supplemental Amended REVENUE Real Estate Transfer Tax $ 7,230,000 $ 9,091,917 $ 1,861,917 $ 6,241,000 $ 6,241,000 Federal Grants 2,400 2,400 - - 149,458 149,458 Federal grant forthe Timber Ridge/ Buffehr Creek I Golf Course Lease 126,708 122,010 (4,698) 120,000 - 120,000 Annual lease payment from Vail Recreation District VRD repayment for promissory note - - - 352,325 352,325 Note based on $1.6 M loan at 3.5% over 5 years Intergovenmental Revenue 20,000 24,514 4,514 20,000 - 20,000 Lottery proceeds Project Reimbursements 6,000 4,102 (1,898) - 2,500 2,500 1st Bank sponsorship of shopping bags Recreation Amenity Fees 55,000 54,822 (178) 25,000 - 25,000 Annual estimate Earnings on Investments and Other 388,956 489,913 100,957 162,500 - 162,500 Total Revenue 7,829,064 9,789,678 1,960,614 6,920,825 151,958 7,072,783 Capital Maintenance Expenditures Annual Park and Landscape Maintenance 1,311,066 1,143,289 167,777 1,365,882 - 1,365,882 Ongoing path, park and open space maintenance, Management Fee to General Fund (5%) 361,500 435,055 (73,555) 312,050 - 312,050 5% of RETT Collections -fee remitted to the Gener Rec. Path Capital Maint 384,262 325,114 59,148 153,540 40,000 193,540 Capital maintenance of the town's recreation path s Tree Maintenance 115,931 65,986 49,945 60,000 49,954 109,954 Regular maintenance for tree health within the town spraying on town -owned property at approx. $120 I Forest Health Management 531,808 259,607 272,201 265,000 - 265,000 Pine beetle mitigation in conjunction w/ forest servic Street Furniture Replacement 26,143 14,178 11,965 20,000 5,983 25,983 Additions and replacement of street furniture, '09 re per bike rack) Park/ Playground Capital Maintenance 125,229 124,368 861 110,000 - 110,000 To maintain playgrounds, restrooms, etc. Donovan Park Building 29,634 - 29,634 - Alpine Garden Support 90,000 90,000 - 55,620 - 55,620 Annual support at 3% increase per year Black Gore Creek Sand Mitigation 184,000 93,431 90,569 90,000 90,569 180,569 Annual support of water protection programs, '09 re sand retention Total Capital Maintenance 3,159,573 2,551,028 608,545 2,432,092 186,506 2,618,598 Other Improvements Meadow Drive Streetscape 1,050,000 638,212 411,788 - 411,788 411,788 09 for West Meadow Drive (Library to Vail Road), c Katsos Ranch Bike Path 346 223,020 123 7,000 7,000 09 for wetland re- vegetation -the last task in resun Cascade Bike Path 6,977 - 6,977 F - Widen recreation path from W. Haven to tennis cod Path from TimberRidge to Roost, offset by Federal Timber Ridge - Buffehr Creek Rd separation 504 504 504,242 504,242 comply with federal funding requirements and origir June 2nd meeting. Timber Ridge - Buffehr Creek Rd separation 149,458 149,458 Path from TimberRidge to Roost, offset by Federal $46K additional funds necessary to comply with fed Timber Ridge - Buffehr Creek Rd separation 46,300 46,300 was done in 2003, assuming construction in 2007. federal grant ($149K) was pushed to 2009. Lionshead to Meadow Dr - - 202,500 202,500 Improvements to existing bike path along the strear Trailhead Development/ Improvement 33,250 19,149 14,101 23,200 23,200 Improve trailheads; Continued need through 2012 ( Shared costs with VRD - ADA access at recreation ADA Compliance w/ VRD 100 24,968 75 10,000 75,881 8501 course hole #13; LH auxilliary bldg ADA improvemE is already completed, will go to bid soon. Recreation Master Planning 79,543 73,128 6,415 6,415 6,415 Concept and design of recreation asset improveme StreamwaIk ADA & Safety improvements 225,000 10,014 214,986 1,033 1,033 To cover a remaining engineering bill Greenhouse 100,000 - 100,000 - - Project never started, $100K originally budgeted an evaluate in June Construct widened 6' shoulders along all frontage rc Frontage Road Bike Lanes /Trails 1,275,000 1,275,000 50,000 50,000 Mtn School to E. Vail exit, 2009 for design ($50K) a 2010 Ford Park Master Plan 1,581,340 1,581,340 300,000 300,000 Re- appropriation from 2008 for master planning an( 27, remainder on hold until June review -7- 12-1-7 TOWN OF VAIL 2009 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX Blue = Re- appropriation of 2008 funds for ongo Yellow = Projects underway needing approprial Green = Re- appropriate a portion of funds; rem. 2009 Orange = New items or an increase in budget 2008 2008 Variance 2009 2nd Proposed Amended Actual Fav / (Unfav) Budget Supplemental Amended Ford Park Improvements 200,000 200,000 Ford Park pathwork, restrooms and other improvers Seibert Circle 323,230 85,534 237,696 237,696 237,696 Re- appropriation from 2008 for completion of the pr Seibert Circle 100,000 100,000 Additional $100K to finish bill payments on work coi additional $2,700 contributed by Vail citizens in 200 Raw Water / Irrigation Control 9,927 4,175 5,752 5,752 5,752 09 to cover a remaining bill from Eagle River Water Kayak Take -out 10,000 - 10,000 10,000 10,000 Kayak take -out area along stream (part of One Will, separately) Stream Tract Encroachment Survey 64,881 - 64,881 64,881 64,881 Survey along Gore Creek Red Sandstone Park - Per Safety plan 465,037 205 464,832 25,000 25,000 Reconstruction of playground per safety plan, 20 ye a plan to deal with parking and ADA requirements; Lionshead park 1,067,000 720 1,066,280 - New park- location not determined, delay project f, Donovan Park 15,409 466 14,943 - - Xeric garden , construct additional picnic shelter White Water Park 48,325 27,948 20,377 5,000 5,000 3rd hole / bladder system at Whitewater Park - last Skate Park 65,000 48,924 16,076 Per councils request 10/19/04 - temporary skate pa Bear Proof Containers 2,578 - 2,578 - - - In TOV parks & trailheads bring our cans into comr Art in Public Places - Programs/ Art 264,516 131,537 132,979 75,000 140,156 215,156 To purchase sculptures, artwork, art programs and enough funds, $7K additional from net profit of 2001 Public Art - Meadow Drive Entry 85,000 - 85,000 - 85,000 85,000 Transferred in '08 from streetscape project to cover Public Art - Operating 65,275 78,457 (13,182) 84,359 - 84,359 AIPP salary and operating expenses related to REl Landscape Medians 570,000 16,502 553,498 300,000 300,000 Frontage road medians alongside redevelopment p and Four Seasons, remainderto 2010 Public Restrooms 78,659 58,075 20,584 - - 09 Tear down and rebuild (and enlarge) Ford Park i 10/21 Mtg, pushed from'09 to '10 Environmental Sustainability 312,711 221,542 91,169 255,000 60,000 315,000 Re- appropriate for future projects such as energy e Open Space Land Acquisition 551,019 - 551,019 - - Capital Paid for by RETT Funds: 9,301,655 1,662,576 7,639,079 650,059 2,785,602 3,435,661 VRD- Managed Facility Projects Recreation Enhancement Account - - 120,000 - 120,000 Reserve account for golf course improvements - fur Golf Course Irrigation - VRD's portion - 1,607,522 1,607,522 Finance VRD's portion of irrigation system replacer Golf Course Irrigation 1,607,522 1,607522 Based on estimates from Borne Engineering, split 5 Golf Course Clubhouse, Starter Shack, etc. 602,175 602,175 Improvements to maintenance building and main ch Golf Course - Other Improvements - - 634,737 634,737 ADA access to clubhouse; bridge and retaining wall Dobson Ice Arena 98,906 38,943 59,963 1,085,993 1,085,993 09 Roof and central air repair, outer years lighting a Ford Park / Tennis Center Improvements 78,800 16,800 62,000 115,986 115,986 $62K to be re- evaluated in June for'09 re- appror walkways & restroom roof per lease agreement, dE Athletic Fields - - 20,280 20,280 09 irrigation system, '12 asphalt overlay of parking I Youth Services - - 164,983 164,983 09 ADA access and furnaces Gymnastics Center 29,611 1,338 1 28,273 30,621 30,621 09 retaining walls, '10 mechanical improvements Total VRD- Managed Facility Projects 207,317 57,081 150,236 5,989,819 5,989,819 Total Expenditures 12,668,545 4,270,685 8,397,860 9,071,970 2,972,108 12,044,078 Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (4,839,481) 5,518,993 10,358,474 (2,151,145) (2,820,150) (4,971,295) Beginning Fund Balance 11,769,273 11,769,273 6,929,791 10,358,474 17,288,266 Ending Fund Balance $ 6,929,792 $ 17,288,266 $ 10,358,474 $ 4,778,646 $ 7,538,324 $ 12,316,971 12-1-8 TOWN OF VAIL 2009 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE DISPATCH SERVICES FUND 2009 2008 2008 Variance 2009 2nd Proposed Amended Actual Fav I (Unfav) Budget Supplemental Amended Revenue E911 Board Revenue $ 607,183 $ 607,183 $ $ 657,015 $ 657,015 Interagency Charges 1,050,439 1,050,439 1,157,497 1,157,497 Town of Vail Interagency Charge 535,657 533,164 (2,493) 543,072 543,072 Earnings on Investments 12,000 18,763 6,763 12,142 12,142 Re- bandinc Other - 7,500 7,500 - 69,750 69,750 across Coi Total Revenue 2,205,279 2,217,049 11,770 2,369,726 69,750 2,439,476 Expenditures Salaries & Benefits 1,606,676 1 18,493 1,732,699 1,732,699 Operating, Maintenance & Contracts 478,511 459,767 18,744 499,535 499,535 Re- bandinc Capital Outlay 142,000 50,121 91,879 135,000 69,750 204,750 across COL Total Expenditures 2,227,187 2,098,071 129,116 2,367,234 69,750 2,436,984 Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (21,908) 118,978 140,886 2,492 2,492 Transfer to Capital Projects Fund (75,000) (75,000) - - Beginning Fund Balance 918,366 918,366 821,458 140,886 962,344 Ending Fund Balance $ 821,458 $ 962,344 $ 140,886 $ 823,950 $ 140,886 $ 964,836 -9- 12-1-9 TOWN OF VAIL 2009 BUDGET SUMMARY OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE DEBT SERVICE FUND 2009 2008 2008 Variance 2009 2nd Proposed Amended Actual Fav / (Unfav) Budget Supplemental Amended Revenue Adjust for d Transfer from Capital Projects Fund $ 2,321,825 $ 2,204,670 $ (117,155) $ 2,266,775 31,346 $ 2,298,121 Projects Fu Earnings on Investments 50,830 50,830 - Total Revenue 2,321,825 2,255,500 (66,325) 2,266,775 31,346 2,298,121 Expenditures Remove 1£ Principal 1,890,000 1,890,000 2,000,000 (20,000) 1,980,000 budget (refi Remove 1£ Interest Expense 432,396 432,395 1 266,775 29,520 296,295 budget (refi Additional f Fiscal Agent Fees 2,500 2,500 2,500 4,450 6,950 1998A Bon Refunding Bonds Issuance Costs 115,760 115,741 19 - - Total Expenditures 2,440,656 2,440,636 20 2,269,275 13,970 2,283,245 Revenue Over (Under) Expenditures (118,831) (185,136) (66,305) (2,500) 17,376 14,876 Other Financing Sources (Uses) Proceeds of Refunding Bonds 6,503,221 6,503,221 Payments to Refunded Bonds Escrow (6,396,461) (6,396,461) - Total Other Financing sources (Uses) 106,760 106,760 - Beginning Fund Balance 252,710 252,710 240,639 (66,305) 174,334 Ending Fund Balance 240,639 174,334 (66,305) 238,139 (48,929) 189,210 -10- 12-1-10 ORDINANCE NO. 8 SERIES OF 2009 AN ORDINANCE MAKING BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS TO THE TOWN OF VAIL GENERAL FUND, CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND, REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX FUND, DISPATCH SERVICES FUND, AND DEBT SERVICE FUND OF THE 2009 BUDGET FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO; AND AUTHORIZING THE SAID ADJUSTMENTS AS SET FORTH HEREIN; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, contingencies have arisen during the fiscal year 2009 which could not have been reasonably foreseen or anticipated by the Town Council at the time it enacted Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2008, adopting the 2009 Budget and Financial Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado; and, WHEREAS, the Town Manager has certified to the Town Council that sufficient funds are available to discharge the appropriations referred to herein, not otherwise reflected in the Budget, in accordance with Section 9.10(a) of the Charter of the Town of Vail; and, WHEREAS, in order to accomplish the foregoing, the Town Council finds that it should make certain budget adjustments as set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO that: 1. Pursuant to Section 9.10(a) of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado, the Town Council hereby makes the following budget adjustments for the 2009 Budget and Financial Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado, and authorizes the following budget adjustments: Revised for2 reading General Fund $ 22,734 $ 22,734 Capital Projects Fund 6 ,04 1 , 3 ' 4,139,036 Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund 4 (T 2,972,108 Dispatch Services Fund 69,750 69,750 Debt Service Fund 13.970 13,970 Total $10,235,289 $ 7,217,598 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2009 3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. 4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 21 st day of April, 2009, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the 5th day of May, 2009, at the regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, in the Municipal Building of the town. Dick Cleveland, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED IN FULL this 5th day of May, 2009. Dick Cleveland, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2009 Vail Fire and Emergency Services Memo To: Town of Vail Town Council From: Mark Miller, Fire Chief Date: April 30, 2009 Re: Impact Fee study Over the past several years the matter of imposing a Fire Department Impact Fee has been discussed to varying degrees relative to the advantages vs. disadvantages. The following is a brief summary relative to the Fire Impact Fee study as proposed in the supplemental budget request, which outlines the basic approach, objectives and associated fees. The Impact Fee study methodology, to be completed by BBC Research and Consulting, is fully consistent with the relevant Colorado State Statues. As a mater if interest, Vail is the only town in Eagle County that does not impose Fire Impact Fees. It is important to note that the impact fees collected can only be used for growth related capital projects for the Fire Department, i.e. new fire stations, new fire apparatus, etc. The approach would include: • Analysis of current infrastructure service standards and identification of the growth related portion of the infrastructure plan; • Evaluation and update of a Capital Improvements Plan (CIP); • Forecast of residential and commercial growth; • Analysis of cash flow stemming from impact fees and other infrastructure financing sources (i.e., bonded indebtedness, general fund contributions, special districts); • Implementation recommendations including impact fee credits, how fee revenues should be accounted for, and how the fees should be updated over time. The study would take approximately six weeks to complete. BBC's fee is $15,000, which includes the full scope of services, attendance at all meetings of the "study committee" to facilitate project management, as well as a comprehensive presentation to Town Council. If you need additional details, a BBC consultant could be available to make a presentation at the next council meeting on May 19 BBC has worked extensively in Colorado, and has completed similar studies throughout Eagle County. 1 MEMORANDUM To: Vail Town Council From: Department of Public Works Date: May 5, 2009 Subject: 2009 Supplemental appropriation back up There are four projects we are providing additional backup and justification regarding the supplemental appropriation. These include Traffic Impact Fee, and Parking Equipment, in the capital budget and Seibert Circle and Timber Ridge - Buffehr Creek Bike path in the Real Estate Transfer Tax budget, each is discussed below. Traffic impact Fee - Pending adoption of the Master Transportation Plan, the next step is to complete a traffic impact fee study. This study would provide the necessary documentation for codification of the Town's traffic impact fee based on the newly adopted transportation plan. Initial work on this study was completed in 2007 and was put on hold while the transportation study worked its way through review, revision and updates based on changing conditions and response to concerns and comments of both the Town and Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT). The $30,000 in additional fees is required to finish the study. Parking Equipment - The current parking meter equipment has reached its useful life. This equipment is no longer on a software /hardware platform the manufacture will support and is in need of replacement. The equipment was installed in 2002. There are currently 9 pay stations. We are requesting $145,000. The estimate at this time is for a complete replacement and installation of the system as it currently exists. Staff will work with the parking task force to determine if any operational efficiency options exist on how the metered lots function. Based on this input, we will solicit proposals to have the equipment in place prior to the 2009 ski season. Seibert Circle - The approved project budget was not re- adjusted for the final increases in the fund raising commitments that were received in 2008. This included $25,000 from Vail Resorts and $2,700 from the other private donors. At this time with the revenue adjustments, the project is over budget by less than $3000. This includes all the work to date, all approved change orders and all payments per the contract documents. This project as you are all aware did not go smoothly. There were five major areas of additional work that happened after the staff was before the council in August of 2007. These include interpreted code compliance and special inspectors, the railing installation, trouble shooting and start up, concrete basin leak and water and utility connections. All of these issues have contributed to the extra year in completion time. No payments were made to the construction team in all of 2008. There were no requests for additional payment from the design team. The town has three requests for additional payment from the subcontractors working on the project totaling $119,188 that are not resolved. One deals with the reworking of the plumbing and trouble shooting the fountain in the final start up so the features operate as intended. This is for $ 27,216. The other two relate to the leak of the concrete basin last year. One is for $ 65,522 and the other is for $ 26,450. The staff has reviewed the additional work requests, but have not resolved the issues with the contractor. We are requesting $ 60,000 for a budget number at this time for the three requests to finalize the project. We have included $ 9,300 as well of ongoing maintenance and miscellaneous repairs for this spring and summer. Summary of costs is as follows: Revenue catch up $ 27,700 Current project overage $ 3,000 Unresolved Construction Requests $ 60,000 Spring and Summer Maintenance 9,300 Total Seibert Request $100,000 Timber Ridge to Buffehr Creek Bike path - This project was placed in the RETT budget in 2003 with anticipated construction in 2007. The estimate in 2003 for this project to be completed in 2007 was $ 675,000 for design and construction. The public works department typically uses a 5% per year escalation for cost estimating. In 2006, the town solicited federal transportation enhancement funds from Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) for this project and was awarded $149,458 for payment in 2008. The introduction of federal funds into the project adds some additional costs. In addition, the project was delayed in obtaining final CDOT right of way clearance due to a conflict between state statues and transportation commission policy directives concerning bike paths /sidewalks in CDOT and Federal Highway Administration right of way. This has finally been resolved and the project is in final review with complete clearance anticipated any day. This project should go to bid at this time, the current climate is competitive, and the town may see savings, however, based on prices in the past, the majority of materials for this project (concrete) not being as price inflated in 2008 and has had a slight increase in 2009 and the federal requirements, we are estimating that we will need an additional $ 46,300 to match our current estimates. If anyone would like any additional detail on these projects please contact Greg Hall at 479 -2160 or ghall @vailgov.com. *Vk' VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: May 5, 2009 ITEM /TOPIC: Discussion of Resolution No. 11, Series 2009, A Resolution Designating Bank Accounts for E- Commerce Transactions for the Town of Vail with Stan Zemler, Pam Brandmeyer, Judy Camp and Jacque Lovato, as the Designated Signers on that Account. Permitted by the Charter of the Town, Ordinances, and the Statutes of the State of Colorado; and Setting Forth Details in Regard Thereto. PRESENTER(S): Judy Camp / Ron Braden ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, amend or deny Resolution No. 11, Series of 2009. BACKGROUND: Town wishes to subscribe to an eCourier transaction system that allows electronic recordation of land records with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder. The eCourier company requires a bank account for automatic withdraws for the recording fee. The Town anticipates the need for additional designated bank accounts to support e- commerce. The Town has the power to designate banks or financial institutions for funds of the Town. The Town wishes to designate opening an additional bank accounts with Firstbank of Vail with Stan Zemler, Pam Brandmeyer, Judy Camp, and Jacque Lovato as signers on this account. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve, amend or deny Resolution No. 11, Series of 2009. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 11, Series of 2009 RESOLUTION NO. 11 Series of 2009 A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING BANK ACCOUNTS FOR E- COMMERCE TRANSACTIONS FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL WITH STAN ZEMLER, PAM BRANDMEYER, JUDY CAMP AND JACQUE LOVATO, AS THE DESIGNATED SIGNERS ON THOSE ACCOUNTS, PERMITTED BY THE CHARTER OF THE TOWN, ITS ORDINANCES, AND THE STATUTES OF THE STATE OF COLORADO; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town of Vail (the "Town "), in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado is a home rule municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Colorado and the Town Charter (the "Charter"); and WHEREAS, the members of the Town Council of the Town (the "Council') have been duly elected and qualified; and WHEREAS, The Town has the power to designate banks or financial institutions for funds of the Town; and WHEREAS, the Town wishes to subscribe to an eCourier transaction system that allows electronic recordation of land records with the Eagle County. The eCourier company requires a bank account for automatic withdraws for the recording fee. WHEREAS, the Town anticipates the need for additional designated bank accounts to support e- commerce. WHEREAS, the Town wishes to designate opening additional checking accounts with Firstbank of Vail with Stan Zemler, Pam Brandmeyer, Judy Camp, and Jacque Lovato as signers on these accounts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO: Section 1. Stan Zemler, Pam Brandmeyer, Judy Camp, and Jacque Lovato, are herby designated as signers for the banking accounts for the funds of the Town of Vail. Section 2. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 5 th day of May, 2009. Richard D. Cleveland, Mayor, Town of Vail Resolution No. 11, Series 2009 ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Resolution No. 11, Series 2009 13 -1 -2 *Vk' VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: May 5, 2009 ITEM /TOPIC: Information Update. - -The Board of County Commissioners is extending a friendly competition to other municipalities in the county to solicit food donation (either cash or canned /dry goods) for the afternoon or early evening on Friday, May 29th, to buoy up the food reserves for the needy in Eagle County. Is the Council interested in participating? -- Council will recall the Community Picnics have been reduced this year from three to two. The following have been scheduled for this coming summer: Thursday, July 23 Bighorn Park, sponsored by Public Works, Fire, Administration. Thursday, August 20 Donovan Park, sponsored by Community Development, Police. - -H1 N1 (Swine Flu) Update. ATTACHMENTS: Annexation 101 Segway MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: May 5, 2009 SUBJECT: Annexation 101 I. WHAT IS AN ANNEXATION? Annexation is a process by which the boundaries of a city are extended to encompass more land. Residents of a newly annexed area become citizens of the Town and share in the benefits and responsibilities which accompany that citizenship. II. WHO IS ELIGIBLE FOR ANNEXATION? The Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS) provide the authority for municipal annexation in Colorado (CRS 31 -12 Annexation, Consolidation, Disconnection). An area is eligible for annexation if the governing body, at a hearing finds and determines the following (CRS 31 -12 -104 Eligibility for annexation): 1. At least 1 /6 of the perimeter of the area proposed to be annexed is contiguous with the annexing municipality. Said contiguous area cannot be an area which was previously annexed to the annexing municipality. However case law has permitted series/ simultaneous flagpole annexations if there is some private land associated with the first annexation in the series. Furthermore, annexations cannot extend more than three miles beyond the existing city limits in any one year. 2. More than 50% of the adult residents of the area proposed to be annexed make use of part or all of the following types of facilities of the annexing municipality: Recreational, civic, social, religious, industrial, or commercial. 3. More than 25% of adult residents are employed in the annexing municipality. 4. Less than 50% of the land in the area proposed to be annexed is agricultural, and intended to remain agricultural for at least 5 years. 5. It is practical to extend urban services, to the area to be annexed, that are not currently available, on the same terms and conditions as such services are made available to existing citizens. III. WHAT IS THE PROCESS FOR ANNEXING? 1. Initiation: Annexation procedures are generally initiated by one of the following three methods: A. Initiation by the Annexing Municipality The Town of Vail may only initiate the annexation of `enclaves' (Lands completely surrounded by the Town) and Town owned lands. B. Petition for Annexation A petition by landowners that own more than 50% of the area to be annexed, excluding public streets. C. Petition for an Annexation Election At least 75 qualified electors or more than 10% of qualified electors, whichever is less, in the area to be annexed may petition 1 of 3 14 -1 -I the Town of Vail to commence proceedings for the holding of an annexation election in the area proposed to be annexed. 2. Petition: The person or group pursuing the annexation must file the annexation petition with the Vail Town Clerk. The annexation petition must include: A. The signatures of the qualified electors or land owners in compliance with CRS 31- 12 -107, Petitions for annexation and for annexation elections. B. Map of the area to be annexed containing a legal description of said area. C. A statement including plans for extending municipal services, plans to finance the extension of municipal services, identification of existing districts (i.e. special, metro etc.) within the annexed area and the effect of annexation upon local public school district systems. 3. Resolution: The annexation petition is sent to the Town Council to be `accepted.' This is done by the adoption of a `resolution of intent to annex' which includes a public hearing schedule for the annexation. In order to adopt the resolution, the Town Council must make the following findings: A. The area is eligible for annexation; and B. If no election is requested, the Council must find that an election is not required under CRS 31 -12 -104 and 105; and C. No additional terms or conditions are applied to the annexation. Note: an election must be held if additional terms and conditions are placed upon the annexation (CRS 31- 12- 101[1][g] and pg 12, CO Municipal League). 4. A. Ordinance: If the resolution is adopted and no election is required than Town Staff drafts a proposed annexation ordinance for the Council's consideration and adoption. CRS also requires the Town to prepare an `annexation impact report' for areas greater than 10 acres. B. Election: If the Town Council determines that an annexation election is required or that additional terms and conditions should be imposed upon the area proposed to be annexed, an election shall be called in the following manner: 1. Town of Vail shall petition the district court to hold an annexation election. 2. The district court will appoint election commissioners to conduct an election. 3. If a majority of the votes cast are against annexation or the vote is tied, the court shall order that all annexation proceedings to date are void and the Town of Vail shall proceed no further. 4. If a majority of the votes cast are in favor of the annexation, than the process continues with the drafting of an annexation ordinance as stated in step 4.A above. 5. Public Hearing: Town Council conducts a public hearing to act on the proposed annexation ordinance, in compliance with State Statutes which require the following: A. Notice of the annexation public hearing published once each week for four weeks prior to the hearing. First publication must occur at least 30 days prior to the hearing date. B. All affected counties, school districts, and special districts must receive a copy of the published hearing notice, the petition, annexation impact report and the ordinance at least 25 days prior to the hearing. 6. Filing: The Town sends certified copies of the approved annexation ordinance to the County and State Department of Local Affairs in compliance with CRS 31 -12 -113, Effective date of annexation - required filings. 2of3 14 -I 7. Zoning: Town of Vail Zone Districts are imposed in compliance with 12 -20, Annexed Areas, Vail Town Code. IV. WHAT ARE THE PRO'S AND CON'S OF ANNEXATION? PRO's: Property annexed to the Town of Vail can expect to gain several benefits. Primary benefits are: • More representative local government. There are seven Town Council members elected to serve approximately 4,750 citizens (US census 2007) and 4.6 square miles. • Major policy decisions (e.g. zoning, budget, capital improvements) are made by the Council and its advisory boards, members of which are residents of the community. • Higher per capita level of government services such as police, library, and streets. • Land and residents annexed to the Town are, also, subject to the Town's laws such as zoning and building codes. Residential areas can benefit from the City's active code enforcement programs. CON's: • Time frame: The annexation process from beginning to end, could take years. The amount of time is dependant on many factors included but not limited to, the collection of property owner signatures, election process, public hearing process, dedicated resources, such as available staff and funds, etc. • Costs: Annexation can be very costly. Costs associated with annexation include, but are not limited to, staff time, technical studies, capital costs, utility costs, acceptance of streets, increased staffing levels for fire, police, and community services, etc. V. WHAT HAPPENS TO TAXES? Newly annexed property owners can expect changes to property tax, sales tax and use tax. Property tax will change because several "special district" services are absorbed by the City. The district taxes are eliminated and the City's mill levy is added to the next property tax notice. Special districts are "eliminated" because the services provided become the City's responsibility. The tax levied for these services is included in the City mill levy. This change takes place on January 1st of the year following the year in which the annexation was effective. 3 of 3 14 -I -3, MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Town Staff (Community Development, Public Works, Police, Fire) DATE: May 5, 2009 SUBJECT: Segway® (Balancing Scooter) on Bike and Pedestrian Paths I. SUMMARY The purpose of this memorandum is to share information regarding Segways®. This memorandum is for information purposes only, therefore no Staff recommendation is included. The Town Council received an inquiry from William Glass, in January 2009, regarding the use of Town of Vail bike paths for Segway® tours. Herein after `Segway®' will be referred to as the generic term `balancing scooter.' BALANCING SCOOTER: • Battery operated • Approximate maximum speed of 12 mph • Approximately 2 feet wide • Approximately 100 pounds In summary, the following findings and issues are discussed in this memo: • Balancing scooters are currently prohibited on bike and pedestrian paths in Vail, but are allowed on public streets in Vail. An ordinance amendment would be required to allow them on bike and pedestrian paths. • Most Colorado jurisdictions prohibit balancing scooters on bike and pedestrian paths. • Balancing scooters may improve bike and pedestrian path accessibility for the elderly and/ or injured. • Balancing scooters promote tourist activity. • Balancing scooters may increase congestion on streets and bike and pedestrian paths. • Concern regarding `trickle effect' - other personal vehicles (i.e. golf carts, 3 and 4 wheel cycles etc.) and their allowance or prohibition on bike and pedestrian paths. • Several concerns regarding the proposed balancing scooter tour operation details. II. EXISTING REGULATIONS Balancing scooters are currently prohibited on bike and pedestrian paths in Vail, because they are considered to be a `motor- driven cycle' defined below: Section 7 -4 -1, Definitions, Vail Town Code MOTOR - DRIVEN CYCLE: Every motorcycle, including every motorscooter, bicycle with motor attached, trail bikes, minibikes, go- carts, golf carts and similar vehicles. Section 7 -4 -2: USE OF PATHS DESIGNATED, Vail Town Code B. Vehicles Prohibited: It is unlawful for any person to operate a "motor vehicle" "motorcycle" "motor- driven cycle ", or "people- powered vehicle ", as defined in Section 7 -4 -1 of this Article, upon or across any bicycle and pedestrian path in the Town. 1 14 -2 -1 III. OTHER JURISTICTIONS 1. Denver Balancing scooters are allowed on bike and pedestrian paths. Balancing scooter tours utilize sidewalks on the 16th Street Mall and bike paths along the Platte River. 2. Aspen: Balancing scooters are prohibited on recreational paths. 3. Boulder: Balancing scooters are prohibited on recreational paths. 4. Telluride Balancing scooters are allowed on streets, but are prohibited on sidewalks, trails and in the Bear Creek open space preserve. 5. Estes Park Balancing scooters are allowed on streets and town -owned bike routes, but are prohibited in the downtown area and on open space trails operated by the Recreation District. 6. Eagle County Balancing scooters are prohibited on ECO Trails. No `motorized vehicles' with the exception of maintenance vehicles and motorized wheelchairs. 7. Roaring Fork Transportation Authority Balancing scooters are prohibited on trails. No `motorized devices' with the exception of maintenance vehicles and motorized wheelchairs. 8. State of Colorado Has not yet enacted legislation affirmatively permitting balancing scooter use on public ways. 9. Other States 43 states and the District of Columbia have enacted legislation to allow balancing scooters on sidewalks and bicycle paths. However, each municipality has the right to prohibit them. IV. ISSUES 1. Accessibility/ Tourism • Balancing scooters may allow better access for the elderly and /or injured, on bike and pedestrian paths in Vail. • Other destination resort communities and cities allow balancing scooter tours that may promote tourist activity (i.e. Disneyworld, Disneyland, City of San Francisco, City of Chicago etc.). 2. Pedestrian Areas • If balancing scooters are allowed on bike paths, would they be allowed on sidewalks? • Section 17 -18, Riding on sidewalks, Model Traffic Code, states that when signs are erected giving notice thereof, no person shall ride a bicycle upon a sidewalk, and that when any person is riding a bicycle upon a sidewalk, such person shall yield the right -of -way to any pedestrian. • Currently, bikes are allowed in pedestrian malls, however, in construction zones, bikers must dismount. • Currently, pedestrians do not have the right -of -way on bike paths in Vail. However, pedestrians have the right -of -way on streets. 2 14 -2 -2 • If balancing scooters area allowed, careful consideration should be given to the definition, regulation and enforcement of right -of -way on bike and pedestrian paths. 3. Street Access • Currently, balancing scooters are allowed on public streets in Vail under Section 7- 4 -1, Definitions, Vail Town Code stated below. • The potential volume of balancing scooters on the public streets is a concern. If balancing scooters were allowed on bike and pedestrian paths, then the volume of balancing scooters would likely increase and may congest the areas of public streets that connect the designated bike and pedestrian paths. • 7 -4 -1 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PATHS: That portion of the public domain specifically dedicated and designed for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians and so described on the official bicycle and pedestrian path map on file with the Town Clerk, and excluding therefrom all portions of the bicycle and pedestrian paths which may otherwise be dedicated as public streets. 4. Trail Congestion • Allowing balancing scooters would increase congestion on bike and pedestrian paths and streets in Vail. • Congestion will increase conflicts between bikes, pedestrians, balancing scooters, and other vehicles that are considered in Number 5, below. • Congestion on the trails may deter bikers from using the bike trail, which would defeat one of the goals of the trails, which is to remove bike and pedestrian traffic from the streets. 5. Other Similar Vehicles • Below are some examples of other similar vehicles that are currently prohibited on trails and sidewalks in Vail, under Section 7 -4 -2, Vail Town Code, Use of Paths Designated, Vail Town Code, stated below. SKATEBOARD SCOOTER: MOBILITY SCOOTER: - Gas or electric powered / - Gas or electric powered - Max speed of 20 mph ✓ - Max speed of 4 -10 mph - Approx 100 pounds - Approx 20 -40 inches wide - Approx 100 pounds GOLF CART: SCOOTER: - Gas or electric powered - Gas or electric powered - Max speed of 15 mph - Max speed of 40 -70 mph - Approx 50 inches wide - Approx 200 -500 pounds - Approx 600 pounds 3 -WHEEL CYCLE: �,��,� 4 -WHEEL CYCLE: - Human powered — - Human powered - Approx 35 inches wide - Approx 35 inches wide Y 3 3. 3 14 2- Section 7 -4 -2: USE OF PATHS DESIGNATED B. Vehicles Prohibited: It is unlawful for any person to operate a "motor vehicle ", "motorcycle ", "motor- driven cycle ", or "people- powered vehicle ", as defined in Section 7 -4 -1 of this Article, upon or across any bicycle and pedestrian path in the Town. TOWN CODE DEFINITIONS (7 -4 -1) BICYCLE: Every device, propelled by human power and upon which any person may ride, having two (2) wheels in tandem. MOTOR - DRIVEN CYCLE: Every motorcycle, including every motorscooter, bicycle with motor attached, trail bikes, minibikes, go- carts, golf carts and similar vehicles. MOTOR VEHICLE: Any self - propelled vehicle which is designed primarily for travel on the public streets and highways and which is generally and commonly used to transport persons and property over the public streets and highways. PEOPLE - POWERED VEHICLE: Every vehicle propelled by human power, having a body, three (3) or more wheels, and a seat or seats for two (2) or more persons. 6. Balancing Scooter Tour Operation Details The following questions and concerns are in regard to the proposed private balancing scooter tour business in Vail: • What happens if a balancing scooter breaks down on the bike path? Is the operator going to pick it up and carry it out? • Are they going to be required to ride single file? • What is the maximum tour group size? • Would more than one balancing scooter tour company use the same section of trail? • The unloading and loading of balancing scooters is a concern in East Vail, because they would have to cross Bighorn Road to get to the trail. • Can the balancing scooter climb the steep slopes in Vail? • Is there an age limit? Helmet use? Some states have minimum age requirements for operators or mandate helmet use for certain ages. One state (New Jersey) requires helmet use for all ages. No states require the operator of a balancing scooter to be licensed. Balancing scooters are exempted from registration requirements. • Where would the balancing scooters park? Bike racks? Section 17 -17, Parking, Model Traffic Code, states that bikes shall be parked on racks, curbs and to afford the least obstruction to pedestrian traffic. V. NEXT STEPS Town Council may choose to direct Staff to pursue amendments to the Town Code to allow for balancing scooters on bike and pedestrian paths, return with additional information, or take no action. 4 14 -2 -4 *Vk' VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: May 5, 2009 ITEM /TOPIC: Matters from Mayor & Council. *Vk' VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: May 5, 2009 ITEM /TOPIC: Executive Session, pursuant to: 1) C.R.S. §24- 6- 402(4)(a)(b)(e) - to discuss the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of property interests; to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, Re: Timber Ridge Redevelopment; 2) C.R.S. §24- 6- 402(4)(a)(b)(e) - to discuss the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of property interests; and to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, Re: Skier Drop -Off Easement Agreement for the North Day Lot. PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire