HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-03-01 Agenda and Support Documentation Town Council Work Session VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
WORK SESSION AGENDA "fi TOW
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
75 S. Frontage Road W.
Vail, CO 81657
10:00 A.M., MARCH 1, 2011
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: Executive Session, pursuant to: 1) C. R. S. §24- 6- 402(4)(b)(e)
- to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine
positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, Regarding: Ever Vail
application process. (45 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire
2. ITEM /TOPIC: An overview of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan;
Lionshead Mixed Use 2 Zone District; the development review process and
the five development review applications intend to facilitate the Ever Vail
Project.
Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan (Resolution No. 6, Series of 2011
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for an
amendment to the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, pursuant to
Section 2.8, Adoption and Amendment of the Master Plan, Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan, to amend the detailed plan recommendations
for West Lionshead (Ever Vail), and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC 110002)
Major Subdivision:
A request for a review of a preliminary plan for a major subdivision,
pursuant to Chapter 13 -3, Major Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for
the creation of two lots for the redevelopment of the properties known as
Ever Vail (West Lionshead), located at 862, 923 934 953 1000 and 1031
South Frontage Road West, and the South Frontage Road West right -of-
way/unplatted (a complete legal description is available for inspection at the
Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (PEC080062)
Rezoning (Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2011
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district
boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town
Code, to allow for a establish Lionshead Mixed Use 2 District zoning on
3/1/2011
Parcels 1 and 2 of the Ever Vail Subdivision located generally at 862, 923,
934, 953, 1000, and 1031 South Frontage Road, and the South Frontage
Road rig ht-of-way/u np latted (a complete legal description is available for
inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and
setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080061)
Special Development District Amendment (Ordinance No. 8, Series of
2011):
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a major
amendment to Special Development District No. 4, Cascade Village,
pursuant to Section 12- 9A -10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to
allow for the removal of Development Area D (Glen Lyon Office Building)
from Special Development District No. 4, Cascade Village, and for a zone
district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail
Town Code, to include the subject property in the Lionshead Mixed Use 2
District, located at 1000 South Frontage Road West /Lot 54, Glen Lyon
Subdivison, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090036)
Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, Amendment ( Ordinance No.
9, Series of 2011):
A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for
prescribed regulation amendments, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7,
Amendment, Vail Town Code, to amend Section 12- 10 -19, Core Areas
Identified, Vail Town Code, to amend the core area parking maps to include
"Ever Vail" (West Lionshead) within the "Commercial Core" designation,
and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080065) (90 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The Community Development Department
requests the Vail Town Council table the Major Subdivison, Ordinance No. 7, 8,
and 9, Series of 2011, and Resolution No. 6, Series of 2011 to the March 15, 2011
public hearing.
BACKGROUND:
Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan:
On January 24, 2011, the Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a
recommendation of approval, with conditions, for proposed amendments tot he
Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, by a vote of 3 -1 -2 (Rediker opposed,
Viele and Cartin recused).
Major Subdivision:
On January 10, 2011, the Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a
recommendation of approval, with conditions, on the preliminary plan for the major
subdivision to establish Parcels 1 and 2 of the Ever Vail Subdivision, by a vote of
5 -0 -2 ( Viele and Cartin recused).
Rezoning:
On January 10, 2011, the Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a
recommendation of approval, with conditions, for a zone district boundary
amendment to establish Lionshead Mixed Use 2 District zoning on Parcels 1 and 2
of the Ever Vail Subdivision, by a vote of 5 -0 -2 ( Viele and Cartin recused).
3/1/2011
Special Development District Amendment:
On January 24, 2011, the Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a
recommendation of approval, with conditions, for a major amendment to Special
Development District (SDD) No. 4, Cascade Village, to remove the Glen Lyon
Office Building from the SDD in order for it to be incorporated into the Ever Vail
Subdivision, by a vote of 4 -0 -2 (Viele and Cartin recused).
Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, Amendment:
On January 11, 2010, the Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a
recommendation of approval, with conditions, for a prescribed regulations
amendment to Section 12- 10 -19, Core Areas Identified, Vail Town Code, by a vote
of 4 -0 -2 (Viele and Cartin recused).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department
recommends the Vail Town Council continue the public hearing on the request
for the Major Amendment, Ordinance No. 7, 8, and 9, Series of 2011, and
Resolution No. 6, Series of 2011 to the March 15, 2011 public hearing.
3. ITEM /TOPIC: Council Lunch and Group Photos (60 min.)
4. ITEM /TOPIC: DRB /PEC Update (15 min)
PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell
5. ITEM /TOPIC: Eagle County Economic Development Planning (30 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Chris Romer (Vail Valley Partnership) and Don Cohen
(Economic Council of Eagle County)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Staff requests that Council listen to the
presentation and provide feedback
BACKGROUND: Eagle County has been charged with development of an
Economic Development Plan as part of Governor Hickenlooper's "Bottom -Up
Economic Development Planning ". The Vail Valley Partnership and Economic
Council of Eagle County are working with each town and municipality in Eagle
County to help develop this plan to ensure all voices are heard.
6. ITEM /TOPIC: Work session on Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2011, an
ordinance to create Chapter 12 -26, Exactions and Dedications, Vail Town
Code, to allow for the creation of regulations and procedures for mitigation
of development impacts, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (30
min.)
PRESENTER(S): Rachel Dimond, George Ruther, Matt Mire
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Staff requests that the Vail Town Council
provide policy direction on the proposed ordinance to the Planning and
Environmental Commission.
BACKGROUND: On January 10, 2011, the PEC held a hearing on the proposed
regulations amendments. The Commissioners were concerned about a chapter on
mitigation of development impacts that would increase the amount of exactions
and dedications required by developers. They also expressed concern over the
3/1/2011
legal issues regarding the proposed amendments. The PEC tabled the item, which
was heard again as a work session on February 14, 2011. At the work session,
Staff introduced additional background materials for the PEC on legal issues and
the implications of such an ordinance. The PEC again tabled this item to their next
hearing in order to discuss the item further.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Because this is a work session, Staff does not
have a formal recommendation at this time.
7. ITEM /TOPIC: Work session on Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2011, an
ordinance amending Section 14 -10 -5, Building Materials and Design, Vail
Town Code, pursuant to Section 14 -1 -3, Administration of Standards, for
changes to the solar energy device regulations, and setting forth details in
regard thereto. (15 min.)
PRESENTER(S): Kristen Bertuglia, Rachel Dimond
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Staff requests that the Vail Town Council
provide responses to the following questions:
Do the proposed amendments achieve the policy goals articulated by the
Town Council?
Are there any regulations that should be omitted or added to the
proposed amendments?
Does the Town Council want to provide incentives, such as decreased
permit fees, for solar energy
device installation?
BACKGROUND: On May 4, 2010, the Vail Town Council passed Ordinance No.
3, Series of 2010 which amended the design regulations for solar energy devices.
In September, 2010, numerous solar energy company representatives made
requests to the Vail Town Council for amendments to the new regulations in order
to help facilitate the installation of solar energy devices. The Vail Town Council
instructed Staff to work with solar energy representatives to propose amendments
to the existing regulations, which occurred through three meetings with 6
representatives from solar energy companies. On January 10, 2011, the Planning
and Environmental Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval for
amendments to Section 14 -10 -5, with modifications.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Because this is a work session, Staff does
not recommend any formal action at this time.
8. ITEM /TOPIC: Information Update and Attachments (15 min.)
9. ITEM /TOPIC: Matters from Mayor and Council (15 min.)
10. ITEM /TOPIC: Executive Session, pursuant to: 1) C. R. S. §24- 6- 402(4)(b) -
to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; Regarding: Council roles
and responsibilities, Conference Center funds and Vacation Clubs; 2)
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, Regarding: Discussion concerning negotiations regarding
Timber Ridge Redevelopment. (45 min.)
3/1/2011
PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire
11. ITEM /TOPIC: Adjournment: (4:00 p.m.)
NOTE: UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW
(ALL ARE APPROXIMATE DATES AND TIMES AND SUBJECT TO
CHANGE)
--------------- - - - - --
THE NEXT REGULAR VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK
SESSION WILL BEGIN AT APPROXIMATELY 12:30 P.M. (or TBD),
TUESDAY, MARCH 15, 2011 IN THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
Work Session for March 15, 2011:
AIPP /DRB /PEC and BFCAB interviews - Pam - 60 min.
Ever Vail /EPS Joint Session with PEC discussion - George - 30 min.
Flood Assessments - Tom K. - 45 min.
Chamonix Commons - George - 30 min.
Building Permit Fee Discussion - George - 30 min.
50th Anniversary Update - KeIIi /Adam Sutner - 30 min.
Attachment: VEAC 3/8/11 meeting minutes - KeIIi
CSE /VLMDAC Update - Stan - 30 min.
Update current Council Goals /2011 Strategic Plan - Stan - 30 min.
LMU 1, LMU 2 and SDD discussion - 3 hours
Council Lunch Break - 30 min.
Conference Center Fund Update - Stan - 45 min.
Evening Meeting for March 15, 2011:
Vail Village TH Ord No. 15 2010 - Bill G - 30 min.
Res. No. 23, 2010 - Bill G. - 30 min.
Supplemental Appropriation Ord #6, 2011, 2nd reading - Kathleen - 15 min.
AIPP /DRB /PEC and BFCAB appointments - Pam - 20 min.
Lionshead Welcome Center Bids - Greg Hall - 15 min.
Frontage Road Bike Lane Bid - Greg - 15 min.
Ford Park 2011 Managed Parking Rate Change discussion - Pam /Greg - 15
m in.
RETT Appeal - Matt M. - 15 min.
Other Dates TBD:
Cirsa Training - Tami Tanoue /Matt - 60 min. - WS - 4/5/11
Energy Audit Update - Kristin B /Greg H - 30 min. - ES
Newspaper Boxes - Todd O /Matt - 30 min. -ES
Use of Loading Bays by Service Vehicles - 30 min. - WS
Red Sandstone Playground Update - Greg - 15 min. - WS - April 5
Local Purchasing Preferences - Judy - 30 min. - WS
Electronic Signs Policy Discussion - George - TBD - ES
Resolution on Parking - TOV summer/VRI winter -TBD - Greg - 30 min -
WS /ES
Century Tel WiFi Discussion - TBD - Ron /Matt - 30 min. - ES
Recognition of Howard and Cathy Stone/Vail Jazz Foundation - TBD - Dick
Cleveland
Historic /Landmark Preservation Discussion - July 2011/TBD - George - 30
min - WS
Recognition of Nancy Ricci /Eagle County - Stan - TBD
3/1/2011
3/1/2011
ITL1 Oil
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: March 1, 2011
ITEM /TOPIC: Executive Session, pursuant to: 1) C.R.S. §24- 6- 402(4)(b)(e) - to receive legal
advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct
negotiators, Regarding: Ever Vail application process.
PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire
3/1/2011
ITL1 Oil
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: March 1, 2011
ITEM /TOPIC: An overview of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan; Lionshead Mixed
Use 2 Zone District; the development review process and the five development review
applications intend to facilitate the Ever Vail Project.
Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan (Resolution No. 6, Series of 2011
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for an amendment to the Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan, pursuant to Section 2.8, Adoption and Amendment of the Master
Plan, Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, to amend the detailed plan recommendations
for West Lionshead (Ever Vail), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC 110002)
Major Subdivision:
A request for a review of a preliminary plan for a major subdivision, pursuant to Chapter 13 -3,
Major Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the creation of two lots for the redevelopment
of the properties known as Ever Vail (West Lionshead), located at 862, 923, 934, 953, 1000
and 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South Frontage Road West right -of-
way/unplatted (a complete legal description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail
Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC080062)
Rezoning (Ordinance No. 7, Series of 2011y
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary
amendment, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for a establish
Lionshead Mixed Use 2 District zoning on Parcels 1 and 2 of the Ever Vail Subdivision located
generally at 862, 923, 934, 953, 1000, and 1031 South Frontage Road, and the South
Frontage Road right -of- way /unplatted (a complete legal description is available for inspection
at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard
thereto. (PEC080061)
Special Development District Amendment (Ordinance No. 8, Series of l y.
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a major amendment to Special
Development District No. 4, Cascade Village, pursuant to Section 12- 9A -10, Amendment
Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the removal of Development Area D (Glen Lyon
Office Building) from Special Development District No. 4, Cascade Village, and for a zone
district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to
include the subject property in the Lionshead Mixed Use 2 District, located at 1000 South
Frontage Road West /Lot 54, Glen Lyon Subdivison, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC090036)
Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, Amendment ( Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2011Y
A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for prescribed regulation
amendments, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to amend Section 12-
10-19, Core Areas Identified, Vail Town Code, to amend the core area parking maps to include
"Ever Vail" (West Lionshead) within the "Commercial Core" designation, and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (PEC080065)
3/1/2011
PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: The Community Development Department
requests the Vail Town Council table the Major Subdivison, Ordinance No. 7, 8, and 9, Series
of 2011, and Resolution No. 6, Series of 2011 to the March 15, 2011 public hearing.
BACKGROUND:
Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan:
On January 24, 2011, the Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a
recommendation of approval, with conditions, for proposed amendments tot he Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan, by a vote of 3 -1 -2 (Rediker opposed, Viele and Cartin recused).
Major Subdivision:
On January 10, 2011, the Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a
recommendation of approval, with conditions, on the preliminary plan for the major subdivision
to establish Parcels 1 and 2 of the Ever Vail Subdivision, by a vote of 5 -0 -2 ( Viele and Cartin
recused).
Rezoning:
On January 10, 2011, the Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a
recommendation of approval, with conditions, for a zone district boundary amendment to
establish Lionshead Mixed Use 2 District zoning on Parcels 1 and 2 of the Ever Vail
Subdivision, by a vote of 5 -0 -2 ( Viele and Cartin recused).
Special Development District Amendment:
On January 24, 2011, the Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a
recommendation of approval, with conditions, for a major amendment to Special Development
District (SDD) No. 4, Cascade Village, to remove the Glen Lyon Office Building from the SDD
in order for it to be incorporated into the Ever Vail Subdivision, by a vote of 4 -0 -2 ( Viele and
Cartin recused).
Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, Amendment:
On January 11, 2010, the Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a
recommendation of approval, with conditions, for a prescribed regulations amendment to
Section 12- 10 -19, Core Areas Identified, Vail Town Code, by a vote of 4 -0 -2 ( Viele and
Cartin recused).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department recommends the
Vail Town Council continue the public hearing on the request for the Major Amendment,
Ordinance No. 7, 8, and 9, Series of 2011, and Resolution No. 6, Series of 2011 to the March
15, 2011 public hearing.
ATTACHMENTS:
Power Point Presentation
3/1/2011
Vail Council
March 1, 2011 Community Development Department
3/1/2011
2 -1 -1
Two Distinct Steps. 0 0
Overview Development Review
Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan Amendment
Master Plan Major Subdivision
Lionshead Mixed Use -2
District
Rezoning
Development Review
SDD Amendment
Process Commercial Core Parking
Amendment
NOW LATER
3 1'201 1
_I_2
PURPOSE ...
Master Plan
Zoning Regulations
Development Review
Actions to Date MEL! -INS
IN CL
Next Steps PROC,kESS
0
L) u
;i1 2011
2 -1 -i
What is a Master Plan. ME?
"A master plan is a
guide, a flexible
framework for future
LIONSHEAD action. It articulates a
REDEVELOPMENT comm uni ty "s
MASTER PLAN fundamental land use
policies, principles and -
goals in a broad and ; wo
0
Submitted to the Vail Town Couueil
general way. It plans for
Decetnber15.199S the future physical
Updated January 20.200b development of an area •
Updated Febmwy 6, 2007 of the community,
including its functional
and circulation systems
and public facilities."
3/11201 1
2 -1 -4
What's the Problem ...?
Lionshead lacks the charm,
character, appeal and
vibrancy expected of a world
class resort. It lacks a sense o
arrival and sense orn ace. LIONSHEAD
Pedestrian flow rnroucin Me
mail can be con usin an REDEVELOPMENT
isconnec e o en is
y,
ospi a i retail and MASTER PLAN
recreational uses, and ;
community amenities are -
unmet or unrealized. It =
would be short -si hted to
"
ignore these conftions and Submitted ` °''" ' T ° "" ` ° " "`"
do nothing. The opportunity December 15. 1998
exists for the public and UpdatedJa uaiyM2006 •
private sectors to act
collaboratively to renew and
IIpdatedFebmaty6.2ooT
revitalize this important
component of our community.
Vail Town Council, November 4,
1996
;i1 2011
2 -1 -5
What is the Plan's Role in the
Development Review Process ME?
°'..a proposal's
adherence to the
ti +
;,
policies contained in�..K ? w
the adopted Master
Plan will be one of the
a 7.
factors analyzed by
staff, the DRB, the PEC,
and the Town Council" -
3 1'201 1
-i -6
Who Implements the Plan...?
Applicants
Staff
DRB
PEC
• Town Council
Purpose of the Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan ... Chapterl
...outlines the Town's objectives and goals for the
enhancement of Lionshead
...proposes economic incentives and
requirements for public and private properties
...comprehensive guide for property owners and
town officials responsible for planning public
improvements
...recommends specific public improvement
projects that are strategically important to the
future success of Lionshead
3
1 '201 1
Six Policy Objectives ...Chapter 2
Renewal and Redevelopment ...become warmer, more
vibrant
Vitality and Amenities conference facilities, ice rink, parks
Stronger Economic Base Through Increased Live
Beds ... increase the bed base
Improved Access and Circulation pedestrian, bicycle,
vehicle and public transit flow
Improved Infrastructure ... public and private services
improved to meet guest and resident expectations
Creative Financing for Enhanced Private Profits and Public
Revenues fiscally realistic strategies and adequate capital
1'201 I
-1 -9
Existing Conditions ...Chapter 3
3/1/2011
2 -1 -10
Existing Conditions ...Chapter 3
3/1/2011
2 -1 -11
Existing Conditions ...Chapter 3
3/1/2011
2 -1 -12
Existing Conditions ...Chapter 3
r 'F. •7 F
l Ti
3/1
11
2 -1 -13
Existing Conditions ...Chapter 3
w _
3/1/2011
2- 1 - 14
Existing Conditions ...Chapter 3
w- r
3/1/2011
2 -1 -15
Overall Master Plan
Recommendations - Chapter 4
Maintain Visual Connections with View Corridors
and North /South Orientation of buildings
Provide Physical Connections to Gore Creek &
Red Sandstone Creek
Create Public View Corridors
Provide Public Transportation to West Lionshead
and Public Transit Improvements
3/12011
2 -1 -16
Overall Master Plan
Recommendations - Chapter 4
Improve Vehicular & Pedestrian Circulation
with Frontage Road Realignment
Complete Frontage Road Improvements to
Handle Increased Traffic Volume
Provide a Pedestrian /Bicycle Path Along
the South Frontage Road
Encourage the Future Creation of the
Simba Run Underpass
3 1'201 1
- - n
Overall Master Plan
Recommendations - Chapter 4
Construct Dispersed Loading & Delivery
Facilities
Provide Public Parking Improvements with
Strong and Convenient Relationships to
the Primary Destination
Public Parking Must Be Created to Meet
the Desired Demand
3
1 '201 1
Overall Master Plan
Recommendations - Chapter 4
West Lionshead is a Potential New Site for
Public Parking (400 spaces)
West Lionshead is a Identified as a
Location for Significant Employee Housing
Provide Public Art in Pedestrian Areas
Create Opportunities of Youth Recreation
(ie, Pearl Street Mall)
Maintain, Preserve and Enhance Live Beds
Master Plan Recommendations -
Chapter 5
Examines individual
parcels or groups of
parcels
Identify important
;4' •� `'`,,, - �.;h' functional
relationships
#, Describe potential
L��
�.. -
development scenarios
All proposals
consistent with the
L ,,,,,,,, , plan should be
- considered
20)
;i1 i2011
? -1 -20
Site Design
Guidelines ... Chap ter 6
Describes the _
I i
details that create -
f ONO
«place"
Creates character'
and quality
Focuses on the ``
fabric of the public
spaces
21)
3/1/2011
2 -1 -21
Site Desi
Guidelines ... Ch
70h Pf
1 •.i. �i- � � s �' _ -n -- � ,
` 5 `i 'w — � i iuiiiiius� II• /��
- �ll�� j uii'iiiri :' %�irif" In .:• �I�I�U��II��II��1 Il
Development StandaChap
0
D N
GRFA
Site Coverage
cI
t
U
f0
1e
••L y yv �._ E E
S 7
L a n d sc ap e 1
Adopted LMU -1 & 2 Zoae
Districts in 1999
Buildin Hei
(23)
Architectural Design Guidelines... Chapter 8
Vision Statement...
Designing in response to -
our regional heritage,
adhering to a consistent
architectural order, and
enhancing the public°
experience will enable :. h' , ,,,, SIT
Lionshead to define its
own identity... making it =,,+
a distinct and special
place full of vitality and "saw, - r
interest.
3/1/2011
2 -1 -24
Architectural Design Guidelines... Chapter 8
� 4
t�
The pedestrian
u
,A[11 qe
experience is the most
important...
.careful design of the
architecture that defines
_ the public spaces.
...avoid monotonous
streetscape framed by
monolithic concrete
slabs of building.
riknr '—
�.,
...use of ornament,
a
artwork, detail, and color
rX
A reflects individuality and
establishes variety
3/1/2011
2 -1 -25
A rchi t ec t ural De si g n Gui
New vs. •
Should & Shall
Prioritization
Criteria 111 I �o
R a
•
Deviations
- > v
o
s
3
7 � 17 .'
1:
11 ✓. Q
Q u a ntit a tive D esign rc
Crit
Y 1
(26)
Architectural Design Guidelines... Chapter 8
Portals
Edge Definers
Public Space Definers
Landmarks
, y Pedestrian Streets : -
��� Architecture
,
- •
Form and Massing
Building Height
3/1/2011
' -1 -27
Architectural Design Guidelines... Chapter 8
Exterior Walls
Doors and
:. .y
Windows ,-
Roofs
Dormers` \,, y>
Gutter and
Downspouts
r� Setback 34' Width Setback '-°
Snow Guards a0' Width Setback
Chimneys Fig 8-9 l L'ratto t2 high wallsj. Fig 8.10: l: l R2 ratio r: high i allst. 28) 1'2011
2 -1 -zs
Master Plan Amendments. ..
!�
ORTH DAY LOT
TRANSIT CENTER '
ORTH MALL o a
PEDESTRIAN PORTAL r
i
How have conditions changed since the Plan was adopted?
• How is the Plan in error?
• How would an addition, deletion, or change to the Plan be in
concert with the Plan in general?
3/1/2011
2 -1 -29
Lionshead Mixed Use -2
...provide sites for a mixture of multiple - family
dwellings, lodges, hotels, fractional fee clubs,
timeshares, lodge dwelling units, restaurants,
offices, skier services, light industrial activities.
...ensure adequate light, air, open space.
...maintain the desirable qualities by establishing
appropriate site development standards. •
...encourage incentives for redevelopment per
the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan.
;i1 i2011
? -1 -30
LMU -2; Not Like the Others...
...specifically developed to provide economic
incentives for redevelopment.
...incentives include increases in allowable gross
residential floor area, building height, and
density.
...create economic conditions favorable to
inducing private redevelopment. •
...help finance public, off site improvements.
...created to eliminate SDD's
;i1 i2011
? -1 -31
Major Exterior Alteration ... LMU-2
Town
Council
Call Up
•
DRB Review -
Town Council
Call Up
PEC Review
Town Staff Review
Application Submittal
3;12011
z -1 -32
Criteria for Review &
Findings . 0 0
That the proposal is consistent with the
Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan.
That the proposal does not otherwise have
a significant negative effect on the
character of the neighborhood.
The proposal is in compliance with the
purposes of the Lionshead Mixed Use -2
District.
The proposal is in substantial compliance
with the Vail Comprehensive Plan
3 1'201 1
_ - - 3
Findings . 0 0
""The burden of proof shall rest solely with the
applicant to demonstrate that the proposed
applications are in compliance with the
prescribed criteria for review."
3/1/2011
2 -1 -34
ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES...
Town Council
Establish Policy Direction -
Final Decision
Developer Improvement Agreement (IGA)
Major Subdivision
Master Plan Amendment
Zoning Code Amendments
Rezoning
SDD Amendment
Call -Up /Appeal
3 1'201 1
_ -1 -i5
ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES...
Planning & Environmental Commission
Implement Policy Direction .
Final decision
Major exterior alteration
Conditional use permits
Advisory to Town Council
Major Subdivision
Master Plan
Zoning Code Amendments •
Rezoning
SDD Amendment
3 1'201 1
- - 36
ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES...
Design Review Board
Final Decision
Chapter 11, Design Guidelines, Vail Town Code
Chapter 8, Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan
3 1'201 1
? -I -i7
ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES...
Town Staff
Technical review -
Facilitate the development review process
3
1 '201 1
Actions to Date...
Master Plan
Amendment LIONSHEAD
REDEVELOPMENT
Recommendation of MASTER PLAN
approval, wit h
conditions, on the Submitted to the Vail Town Council
De 15. 1998
amendments to Updated hawaty 20 . =�
Ch apters 4 and 5 Updated Fclxwz 2007
3/1/2011
2 -1 -39
Actions to Date...
Major Subdivision
Recommendation
NVER !'NfLIH/NARY PLAY
of a Y Y It h T { n; / �YN / LION O SUYOIYIIION ANO A PoFT/ON OY ' SI
j 4/` T Sft Y, A PART Y/ THE NI f� OT SFRIYN ), /
H/P 0 SO< /Tp, MNC1 YO 11- 01 THE "N P N ANN A / l
sfR /t TORNNMIP 0 .YOUTH
MNGf A/ If.YT. O/ TNf 1TH P.Y. TOfN U/ YA /L. ltl/)NTY � / -
conditions, on — ►9 R -
the preliminary
plan
1
3/U2011
2 -1 -40
Actions to Date...
Rezoning
Recommendation
of approval, with fTf1VER VO.1T Nc
i a,'NN N VAIL
I A Pl1'!'PDIYl.1'fb.N OF SO_ /NO.N}AOP POAD
ttf.1' LYON .� P I 01 S D/ N .�•
conditions, O n J % 1flTI0Y PPPT DP ION .NN 1.0/ SfPIIO.Y > j
�f.Y.1N/P 0 101 TN. IW" PO lf 'D A
.YT 0/ ME f M PM A �
l -Rrr.N O: TNf .of fII O/ .1'f(TIO.Y Il, TOI,Y1'MlP S .1l.1TH / / I i
f 11 11'T. / rPl lTN — TO f.N O/ YIlL. YO !YTT
OI lAGlf, .1'TITf OP 1'OLOPIDO /
the proposed
zoning
71 w ow- �=
t �
3 12011
? -1 -41
Actions to Date...
Ever Va il
Major Amendment to SOD No. 4,
SDD Amendment Cascade Village. to Remove saMe:w
Development Area 'D"
L�< Ever Vail Site
1 Development Area 'D' • � �
Recommendation (A.KA. Glen Lyon Office Bulltling SMe) / /��'
of approval, with
conditions, on the ;
proposed majorj�'�
sdd amendment
SDD No.4
/
,;122 1
-i -42
Actions to Date...
Commercial Core
Text Amendment
0
rq
Core Area Parking Map
Recommendation
of approval, with -
conditions , on the
r
incorporation of
the project in the 0 •
commercial core
parking area C C..A-
RapmoO Cwnn•cd CaNmlFwtbil
designation °�•R
;i1 i201 I
-1 -as
Next Steps. 0 0
Information Developer
Gathering Improvement
Agreement
Town Council
Action
Review of Development
Development Application
Applications Presentation
Staff
Presentation 44)
3/1/2011
2 -1 -44
ITL1 Oil
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: March 1, 2011
ITEM /TOPIC: Council Lunch and Group Photos
3/1/2011
ITL1 oil
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: March 1, 2011
ITEM /TOPIC: DRB /PEC Update
PRESENTER(S): Warren Campbell
ATTACHMENTS:
February 16, 2011 DRB Meeting Results
February 28, 2011 PEC Meeting Results
3/1/2011
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA
PUBLIC MEETING
OY�Al' February 16, 2011
tfwlSlkT Council Chambers
!�f'f 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
PROJECT ORIENTATION 2:15pm
Legal Training — Matt Mire / rescheduled to March 2, 2011
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Brian Gillette
Tom DuBois
Pete Dunning
Libby Plante
Rollie Kjesbo
SITE VISITS:
1. Ore House — 232 Bridge Street
2. Duffy DG — 3944 Bighorn Road
PUBLIC HEARING — TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3:OOpm
1. Duffy DG DRB100634 / 15 minutes Rachel
Final review of minor exterior alteration (deck)
3944 Bighorn Road, West Unit /Lot 7, Gore Creek Park
Applicant: Duffy DG, represented by Laura Christman
ACTION: Tabled to March 2, 2011
MOTION: DuBois SECOND: Kjesbo VOTE: 5 -0 -0
2. Ore House DRB110024 / 15 minutes Rachel
Final review of a minor exterior alteration (awning)
232 Bridge Street /Lots C -E, Block 5, Vail Village Filing 1
Applicant: Ore House, represented by Shephen Shelman
ACTION: Approved with condition(s)
MOTION: DuBois SECOND: Gillette VOTE: 5 -0 -0
CONDITION(S):
1. The applicant shall repair and paint the stucco damaged by the removal of the awning to
match the existing stucco texture and color prior to requesting final planning inspections on
the required building permit.
STAFF APPROVALS
Gordon Residence DRB110001 Rachel
Final review of minor exterior alteration (hot tub)
483 Gore Creek Drive, Unit 2A (Texas Townhomes) /Lot 2, Vail Village Filing 4
Applicant: Lorie Gordon, represented by Nancy Sanford
Halpert Residence DRB110010 Bill
Final review of an addition (garage, storage)
1054 Homestake Circle /Lot 6, Block 1, Vail Village Filing 8
Applicant: Michael Halpert, represented by Craig Snowdon
3/1/2011 Page 1
4 -1 -I
Arrabelle at Vail Square DR13110012 George
Final review of sign application (public parking on private property)
675 Lionshead Place /Lots 1, 2, 3, Lionshead Filing 6
Applicant: Arrabelle at Vail Square, represented by Jeff Babb
Sinner America DRB110018 Rachel
Final review of sign application (business identification)
616 W Lionshead Circle, Unit 200 (Concert Hall Plaza) /Vail Lionshead 4th
Applicant: Jon Franklin, represented by Sam Saslow
994 Ptarmigan Road DRB110023 Bill
Final review of changes to approved plans (chimney, railing)
994 Ptarmigan Road /Lot 3, Block 4, Vail Village Filing 7
Applicant: International Milling Limited, represented by Hans Berglund
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office
hours in the project planner's office, located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75
South Frontage Road. Please call 479 -2138 for information.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479 -2356,
Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information.
3/1/2011 Page 2
4 -1 -2
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
February 28, 2011
�. 1:OOpm
TRW OF VAII.
TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME
75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Luke Cartin None
Michael Kurz
Bill Pierce
Henry Pratt
John Rediker
Tyler Schneidman
David Viele
Site Visits:
1. Coldstream Condominiums — 1476 Westhaven Drive
2. Ellis Residence — 302 Hanson Ranch Road
3. Black Stallion Holdings Residence — 400 East Meadow Drive
25 minutes
1. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12 -6H -6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code,
pursuant to Chapter 12 -17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition within the
setback, located at 400 East Meadow Drive, Unit 7 (Tyrolean Inn) /Part of Tract B, Block 5, Vail
Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC110011)
Applicant: Black Stallion Holdings, represented by Pierce Architects
Planner Bill Gibson /Warren Campbell
ACTION: Approved with conditions
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Rediker VOTE: 6 -0 -1 (Pierce recused)
CONDITIONS:
1. Approval of this variance is contingent upon the applicants obtaining Town of Vail
design review approval for this proposal.
2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall mitigate the impacts on
employee housing resulting from the construction of 250 square feet of new gross
residential floor area in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 12 -24, Inclusionary
Zoning.
Bill Pierce recused himself from this item because his architecture firm is representing the
applicant.
Warren Campbell made a presentation per the Staff memorandum.
Tyson Dearduff made a brief presentation and asked if the Commissioners had any questions.
There was no public comment.
Commissioner Kurz inquired as to Town Council's upcoming review of the employee housing
mitigation fee.
Warren Campbell stated that the hearing with Town Council will establish the annual pay -in -lieu
fee through analysis of the previous year's housing sales in the Town of Vail.
Pa g e 1
3/1/20`1 l
4 -2 -1
Commissioner Kurz asked if the applicant knew that an employee housing mitigation is required.
Tyson Dearduff responded in the affirmative.
20 minutes
2. A request for the review of a exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12 -7B -7, Exterior Alterations
or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the addition of enclosed floor area, located at 302
Hanson Ranch Road, Unit 301 (Mill Creek Court Building)/ Lot I, Block 5A, Vail Village Filing 5,
and setting details in regards thereto. (PEC110012)
Applicant: Gail Ellis, represented by Craig Snowdon
Planner: Rachel Dimond
ACTION: Approved with conditions
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 7 -0 -0
CONDITIONS:
1. Approval of this application is contingent upon the applicants obtaining Town of Vail
design review approval for this proposal.
2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall mitigate the impacts on
employee housing resulting from the construction of 49 square feet of new gross
residential floor area in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 12 -24, Inclusionary
Zoning.
Rachel Dimond made a presentation per the Staff memorandum.
Craig Snowdon, representing the applicant, had no additional comments and was available for
questions.
There was no public comment.
Commissioner Pierce asked that the Design Review Board observe the exterior installation of
conduit and work to have as much removed as possible.
60 minutes
3. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on a proposed major amendment to
Special Development District No. 4, Cascade Village, pursuant to Article 12 -9A, Special
Development District, Vail Town Code, to allow for an increase in gross residential floor area and
site coverage, and a reduction of the side setback, located at 1476 Westhaven Drive /Lot 53,
Glen Lyon Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC110014)
Applicant: Coldstream Homeowners Condominiums, represented by Tom Braun
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: Tabled to April 11, 2011
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 6- 0- 1(Pratt recused)
Bill Pierce disclosed that his firm represents the HOA on other matters, and as he will not gain
financially from this application nor felt any bias, he did not recuse himself.
Henry Pratt recused himself because his architecture firm is representing the applicant.
Warren Campbell made a presentation per the Staff memorandum.
Tom Braun, representative of the applicant, made a presentation on the application. He
provided a brief history of the project and reviewed the following topics: SDD amendments, site
planning, design, criteria and public benefits.
Paqe 2
3/1/2011
4 -2 -2
Sid Schultz, of Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz and Lindall, made a presentation on the design of the
buildings and the site. He described the landscaping on site, which would be a green roof. The
proposal includes 5 free market units and 2 employee housing units.
Tom Braun continued his presentation to including a discussion regarding the SDD
amendments, criteria and public benefits being proposed. He provided examples of other SDD
amendments within the Town of Vail. He stated that the HOA needs an economic engine to
upkeep the entire project and ensure the future of the development.
Commissioner Kurz stated that the benefit of employee housing is significant and that the project
was in a physical location which did not lend itself to multiple public benefit options. He asked
for further detail on the entry improvements that could be made.
Tom Braun responded with details on how the entry could be redesigned to clean up asphalt and
make the property more navigable.
Commissioner Kurz added that the massing of the proposal and the "channelized" effect should
be mitigated through additional landscaping. He stated variation in fagade depth, materials, etc
would help to break up the massing of the project. He concluded that the removal of the carports
is positive.
Commissioner Pierce stated he felt that the partial exposed parking structure would be a
negative impact to the adjacent property owners. He encouraged the applicant to look into
stepping the garage to avoid the results at the Vail Mountain View Residences. He added there
needs to be something to offset the straight building lines through the proposal on the north
elevation and the ability to plant vertical landscaping between the new structures and on top of
the structure.
Commissioner Cartin asked about the process for amending a Special Development District.
Warren Campbell responded by explaining the SDD amendment process.
Commissioner Cartin stated that the landscaping along Westhaven Drive is a good example of
how the landscaping should be preserved and incorporated in to the proposal. He stated that
the roof should support large shrubs or trees to create a break between properties and mitigate
the bulk and mass.
Commissioner Cartin asked what the height is of the garage entrance.
Sid Schultz responded that the garage entry door would be nine feet tall. He added that this
would be enough head height for an SUV with a box on the roof.
Commissioner Rediker asked about the timeframe of construction.
Tom Braun responded that early 2012 would be the soonest that construction could occur, but
that no time frames had been discussed thus far.
Commissioner Rediker asked about the side setback. He inquired as to the ability for the
proposed development to shift north and narrow the drive lane and pull the structure away from
the property line.
Sid Schultz stated that the concern was that the existing parking on the north of the driveway
would be removed if the driveway was shifted. Tom Braun added that they would evaluate
Paqe 3
3/1/2011
4 -2 -3
additional options at a later hearing. He stated that any development is limited due to the
physical space available.
Commissioner Rediker added that he would like to see more landscaping on the south side of
the proposed development. Rediker asked Warren Campbell to clarify the thinking in the Staff
comment regarding sidewalk extension and streambank improvements.
Warren Campbell responded that these could be potential public benefits for the SDD
amendment.
Commissioner Rediker asked if there are any encroachments into Gore Creek.
Warren Campbell responded that there are no known encroachments.
Tom Braun recapped the Commissioners' comments, including the need for more landscaping,
breaking up of building massing and public benefits.
5 minutes
4. A report to the Planning and Environmental Commission on the administrator's approval of an
amendment to an existing conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12- 16 -10, Amendment
Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for an increase in the floor area on the lowest level of the
structure, located at 395 South Frontage Road West (Lionshead Auxiliary Building) /Lot 1, Block
2, Vail Lionshead Filing 1, Lot 3, A Resubdivision of Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 2, and
East Lionshead Circle rights -of -way, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC110015)
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Tom Kassmel
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: No action taken
Warren Campbell gave a presentation on Staff's action and the actions the Commission could
take.
There was no public comment.
The Commissioners expressed their support for Staff's administrative approval.
5 minutes
5. A request for an amendment to an Approved Development Plan, pursuant to Section 12- 61 -11,
Development Plan Required, Housing Zone District, Vail Town Code, to allow for revisions to the
required landscape plan and geologic hazard mitigation plan for the redevelopment of the
easternmost 5.24 acres of the Timber Ridge Village Apartments; and a request for the review of
a variance, from Section 14 -5 -1, Minimum Standards, Parking Lot and Parking Structure Design
Standards for All Uses, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12 -17, Variances, Vail Town Code,
to allow for a crossover drive aisle width of less than thirty -feet (30') within the required parking
structure, located at 1280 North Frontage Road /Lots 1 -5, Block C, Lions Ridge Subdivision Filing
1,and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100018 /PEC100019)
Applicant: Vail Timber Ridge L.L.C.
Planner: George Ruther
ACTION: Table to March 14, 2011
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Kurz VOTE: 7 -0 -0
5 minutes
6. A request for final review of conditional use permits, pursuant to Section 12 -71 -5, Conditional
Uses: Generally (On All Levels Of A Building Or Outside Of A Building), Vail Town Code, to allow
for the development of a public or private parking lot (parking structure); a vehicle maintenance,
service, repair, storage, and fueling facility; a ski lift and tow (gondola), within "Ever Vail" (West
Paqe 4
3/1/2011
4 -2 -4
Lionshead), located at 862, 923, 934, 953, and 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South
Frontage Road West rig ht-of - way /Unplatted (a complete legal description is available for
inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting forth details in
regard thereto. (PEC080063)
Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: Table to July 11, 2011
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Kurz VOTE: 7 -0 -0
5 minutes
7. A request for a work session on a major exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12 -71 -7, Exterior
Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of the area known
as "Ever Vail" (West Lionshead), with multiple mixed -use structures including but not limited to,
multiple - family dwelling units, fractional fee units, accommodation units, employee housing units,
office, and commercial /retail uses, located at 862, 923, 934, 953, and 1031 South Frontage
Road West, and the South Frontage Road West rig ht-of - way /Unplatted (a complete legal
description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department),
and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080064)
Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: Table to July 11, 2011
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Kurz VOTE: 7 -0 -0
5 minutes
8. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7,
Amendment, Vail Town Code, for a prescribed regulations amendment to create Chapter 12 -26,
Exactions and Dedications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the creation of regulations for mitigation
of development impacts, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100050)
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: George Ruther / Rachel Dimond
ACTION: Table to March 14, 2011
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Kurz VOTE: 7 -0 -0
9. Approval of February 14, 2011 minutes
ACTION: Approved with modifications
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Viele VOTE: 7-0-0
MODIFICATIONS:
1. On the top of page 2, add "Rediker suggested that other jurisdictions' language be reviewed
for examples."
2. On the bottom of page 4, add "Rediker asked about location alternatives in addition to design
alternatives."
Commissioner Rediker requested changes that are reflected in the above modifications to the
meeting minutes.
10. Information Update
11. Adjournment
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 7 -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.
Paqe 5
3/1/2011
4 -2 -5
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 February 25, 2011 in the Vail Daily.
Paqe 6
3/1/2011
4 -2 -6
ITL1 Oil
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: March 1, 2011
ITEM /TOPIC: Eagle County Economic Development Planning
PRESENTER(S): Chris Romer (Vail Valley Partnership) and Don Cohen (Economic Council
of Eagle County)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Staff requests that Council listen to the presentation
and provide feedback
BACKGROUND: Eagle County has been charged with development of an Economic
Development Plan as part of Governor Hickenlooper's "Bottom -Up Economic Development
Planning ". The Vail Valley Partnership and Economic Council of Eagle County are working
with each town and municipality in Eagle County to help develop this plan to ensure all voices
are heard.
ATTACHMENTS:
Economic Development Meeting Agenda
Eco- Development Handout
3/1/2011
A,O
vale. val.1e1
rPRRTrIERsHiP -
The Chamber & Tourism Bureau.
MEMO
To:
Eagle County municipalities
From:
Vail Valley Partnership & Economic Council of Eagle County
Re: Eagle County Economic Development Planning
Thank you for allowing us to present to your group. Eagle County has been charged with
development of an Economic Development Plan as part of Governor Hickenlooper's `Bottom -
Up Economic Development Planning ". The Vail Valley Partnership & Economic Council of
Eagle County are working with each town & municipality in Eagle County to help develop this
plan to ensure all voices are heard.
Meeting agenda:
I. Overview — Don Cohen
a. Timeline
b. Participants
c. Economic Indicators
II. Community outreach — Chris Romer
a. Review local meetings, outreach & community involvement
III. Initiatives — Chris Romer
a. What initiatives do you want to see in the Eagle County plan?
IV. Next Steps — Don Cohen
V. Q &A — Chris Romer & Don Cohen
PO Box 1130, Vail, CO 81658
www. visitvailvalley. com
3/1/2011
5 -1 -1
The Eagle County Economic Development Plan: Decade 2
In January, Governor John Hickenlooper began a fast -track process that calls for each county in Colorado to submit on
economic development plan by May which will be incorporated into a statewide plan.
With the loss of over 6,000 jobs in Eagle County (20 9 1 6) in the past two years all our communities have been affected. As
a collaborative project of between our governments, business associations, companies and citizens we're spanning the
county looking for good ideas and opportunities to rebuild our local and countywide economy to make it stronger and
more diverse.
Why do you choose to do business in Eagle County? (choose only your top three reasons)
• Skilled workforce f, Education system
• Access to multiple recreational opportunities ❑ Transportation system
• Geographic location f, Overall quality of life
C3 Health care system C3 Other, please specify
What are the three major challenges you think business faces in Eagle County?
• Regulatory environment (Federal, state, local) f, Cost of land and buildings (or rent)
• Access to capital ❑ Local permitting process
C3 Property tax burden C3 Lack of customers
C3 Lack of infrastructure C3 Knowledge about and access to business tools
C3 Lack of skilled employees f, Other, please specify
What do you see as some major opportunities for job creation and business growth in Eagle County?
Assist existing businesses to expand ❑ Attract and expand educational organizations
and businesses
C3 Increase tourism advertising and add new f, Attract and expand health and wellness
programs, events and choices organizations and businesses
0 Actively recruit new businesses to area through C3 Other, please specify
marketing and incentives
What ONE thing would you want to see done to help existing businesses in Eagle County?
3/1/2011
5 -2 -1
How should the State support job creation and the growth of Eagle County businesses?
❑ Provide incentives for job growth ❑ Offer more worker training programs
0 Offer tax credits for job growth 0 Access to market research
❑ Streamline regulations ❑ Development assistance for expanding
businesses
0 Provide tax relief 0 Loan fund
0 More entrepreneurial programs p Other, please specify
How should the towns and county support job creation and the growth of Eagle County businesses?
❑ Provide incentives for job growth ❑ Offer more worker training programs
• Offer tax credits for job growth 0 Access to market research
• Streamline regulations ❑ Development assistance for expanding
businesses
• Provide tax relief f, Loan fund
• More entrepreneurial programs ❑ Other, please specify
When it comes to future economic growth which sectors of the local economy do you see as having the best
potential for growth and job creation? (choose two)
Retail ❑ Education
0 Skiing C3 Health and wellness
C3 Golf 0 Arts
0 Other recreation (biking, fishing, hunting, etc.) f, Other, please specify
0 Professional services
My TOP 3 Best Ideas for My Town My TOP 3 Best Ideas for Eagle County
1 1
2 2
3 3
3/1/2011
5 -2 -2
ITL1 Oil
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: March 1, 2011
ITEM /TOPIC: Work session on Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2011, an ordinance to create
Chapter 12 -26, Exactions and Dedications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the creation of
regulations and procedures for mitigation of development impacts, and setting forth details in
regard thereto.
PRESENTER(S): Rachel Dimond, George Ruther, Matt Mire
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Staff requests that the Vail Town Council provide
policy direction on the proposed ordinance to the Planning and Environmental Commission.
BACKGROUND: On January 10, 2011, the PEC held a hearing on the proposed regulations
amendments. The Commissioners were concerned about a chapter on mitigation of
development impacts that would increase the amount of exactions and dedications required by
developers. They also expressed concern over the legal issues regarding the proposed
amendments. The PEC tabled the item, which was heard again as a work session on February
14, 2011. At the work session, Staff introduced additional background materials for the PEC
on legal issues and the implications of such an ordinance. The PEC again tabled this item to
their next hearing in order to discuss the item further.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Because this is a work session, Staff does not have a formal
recommendation at this time.
ATTACHMENTS:
Town Council Memorandum
Draft Ordinance No. 4, Series 2011
Staff memo to PEC 011011
January 10, 2011 PEC results
Staff memo to PEC 021411
February 14, 2011 PEC results
3/1/2011
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: March 1, 2011
SUBJECT: Work session on Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2011, an ordinance to establish Chapter
12 -26, Exactions and Dedications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the creation of
regulations and procedures for mitigation of development impacts, and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (PEC100050)
I. SUMMARY
The applicant, the Town of Vail, is requesting a work session to discuss proposed regulation
amendments to establish Chapter 12 -26, Exactions and Dedications, Vail Town Code, to allow
for the creation of regulations and procedures for mitigation of development impacts.
Because this is a work session, Staff requests that the Vail Town Council listen to the Staff
presentation, ask any pertinent questions, and provide policy direction on the proposed
ordinance to the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC).
Attached to this memorandum is a draft copy of Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2011 (Attachment
A), Staff memorandum to the PEC dated January 10, 2011 (Attachment B), the minutes from
the PEC hearing on January 10, 2011 (Attachment C), Staff memorandum to the PEC dated
February 14, 2011 (Attachment D), and the minutes from the PEC hearing on February 14,
2011 (Attachment E).
H. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The applicant, the Town of Vail, is requesting a work session to discuss a proposed new
chapter to Title 12, Zoning Regulations, titled " Chapter 12 -26, Exactions and Dedications
Staff is proposing this new chapter in order to provide a mechanism to quantify exactions and
dedications in a manner that is roughly proportional to the impact of the proposed use or
development on the Town's existing or potential facilities, infrastructure or services. Presently,
the Vail Town Code does not provide a consistent or predictable process for determining and
addressing impacts on town facilities, infrastructure or services directly attributed to
development applications. The proposed regulations will legally strengthen the Town's
requirements for exactions and dedications.
The purpose of this chapter is to:
• Clarify existing regulations and policies on exactions and dedications;
• Establish expectations regarding the need to mitigate development impacts at the
beginning of the development review process;
• Ensure a review process that is consistent, predictable and equitable;
• Clarify the review criteria and findings necessary for requiring exactions and dedications;
• Establish the procedure for determining the impacts of a development that must be
mitigated, as quantified and applied to development projects through rational nexus
studies;
3/1/2011
6 -1 -1
• Identify exactions and dedications that are necessary for achieving the development
objectives of the Town;
• Protect the health, safety and welfare and to ensure the orderly and viable growth of the
community;
• Provide a mechanism to ensure adequate public facilities, open space, recreational
opportunities and other amenities and facilities conducive to a desirable community;
• Promote safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular traffic circulation and to lessen
congestion in the streets; and
• Conserve and maintain established community qualities and economic values.
The proposed Chapter 12 -26, Vail Town Code, includes the following components:
• Policy statements on the requirement of exactions or dedications;
• Definitions of terms applicable to the implementation of the new chapter;
• Outline of the legal authority for the requirement of dedications and exactions;
• Criteria for reviewing exactions and dedications, whether they are fees, dedication of land,
or provision of infrastructure or services;
• Findings to be made by the reviewing authority (Planning and Environmental Commission
or Town Council) when approving development applications; and
• An appeals process for mitigation requirements.
III. BACKGROUND
On January 10, 2011, the PEC held a hearing on the proposed regulations amendments. The
Commissioners were concerned about a chapter on mitigation of development impacts that
would increase the amount of exactions and dedications required for developers. They also
expressed concern over the legal issues regarding the proposed amendments. The
Commission tabled the item, which was heard again as a work session on February 14, 2011.
At the work session, Staff introduced additional background materials for the Commission on
legal issues and the implications of such an ordinance. The Commission again tabled this
item to their next hearing in order to discuss the item further.
IV. ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COUNCIL
Staff requests that the Vail Town Council provide policy direction on the proposed ordinance to
the Planning and Environmental Commission.
V. ATTACHMENTS
A. Draft Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2011
B. Staff memorandum to the PEC dated January 10, 2011
C. Minutes from January 10, 2011 PEC hearing
D. Staff memorandum to the PEC dated February 14, 2011
E. Minutes from February 14, 2011 PEC hearing
3/1/2011
6 -1 -2
ORDINANCE NO. 4
SERIES 2011
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 12, ZONING REGULATIONS, VAIL
TOWN CODE, BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW CHAPTER 26, ENTITLED
"EXACTIONS AND DEDICATIONS"
WHEREAS, to ensure the provision of adequate public services and facilities
within the Town, the Town Council wishes to condition land use approvals on certain
exaction and dedication requirements;
WHEREAS, it is widely recognized that municipalities may impose dedications
and exactions on the granting of land use approvals, provided that there is an essential
nexus between the exaction or dedication and a legitimate local government interest,
and provided that the dedication or exaction is roughly proportional, both in nature and
extent, to the impact of the proposed use or development, pursuant to Nollan v.
California Coastal Comm'n, 483 U.S. 825 (1987), Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374
(1994); C.R.S. § 29 -20 -203 and related case law; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds and determines that the public health, safety,
and welfare will be served by adopting regulations delineating the Town's procedure for
imposing exactions and dedications.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1 . Title 12 of the Vail Town Code is hereby amended by the addition
of a new Chapter 26, which shall read as follows:
CHAPTER 26
EXACTIONS AND DEDICATIONS
12 -26 -1: PURPOSE:
A. It is the policy of the Town that exactions and dedications
shall be required in those instances where, the Town Council or Planning
and Environmental Commission determines that a proposed use or
development will:
1. Create the need for new infrastructure facilities or
services; or
2. Result in increased use of existing infrastructure
facilities or services, thereby requiring the expansion or eventual
replacement of such existing infrastructure facilities or services.
B. The purpose of this Chapter to provide a mechanism to
quantify exactions and dedications in a manner that is roughly proportional
Ordinance No. 4, 2011 1
3/1/2011
6 -2 -1
both in nature and extent to the impact of the proposed use or
development.
12 -26 -2: DEFINITIONS:
For purposes of this Chapter, the following terms shall have the
following meanings:
EXACTION OR DEDICATION: A real property dedication to
the Town, a monetary payment in -lieu of a real property dedication,
or the provision of some other service to the Town to mitigate the
impact of a proposed use or development.
LAND USE APPLICATION: Any application for a major
exterior alteration, new or amended special development district,
rezoning, or major subdivision.
12 -26 -3: AUTHORITY TO IMPOSE DEDICATION OR EXACTION
REQUIREMENTS:
A. The Town Council or Planning and Environmental
Commission may impose exactions or dedications in conjunction with any
land use application filed with the Town, pursuant to the procedures set
forth in this Chapter.
B. The Town Council may, as a part of its legislative function,
establish fee schedules for monetary exactions in those instances where
real property dedications are not required or appropriate.
12 -26 -4: FINDINGS:
Prior to imposing an exaction or dedication as a condition of a land
use application, the Town Council or Planning and Environmental shall
find that:
1. A legitimate, identifiable public purpose is served by
requiring the dedication or exaction;
2. There is an essential nexus between the required
dedication or exaction and the Town's interest in providing the
impacted public infrastructure facility or service;
3. The Town is acting within its power to provide the
infrastructure facility or service for which the exaction or dedication
is required, either directly or through the dedication or exaction
process;
Ordinance No. 4, 2011 2
3/1/2011
6 -2 -2
4. But for the proposed use or development, the Town
would not be considering either the provision or expansion of the
service or infrastructure facility in question;
5. The proposed use or development is a contributing
cause to the need for the new or expanded infrastructure facility or
service; and
6. The Town would be legally justified in denying the
proposed use or development unless the dedication or exaction is
imposed, because of the burden the proposed use or development
would place on the Town's infrastructure facilities or services.
12 -26 -5: DETERMINATION:
A. An exaction or dedication imposed by the Town Council or
Planning and Environmental Commission shall be roughly proportional,
both in nature and extent, to the impact of the proposed use or
development.
B. To determine rough proportionality, Town staff shall conduct
an exaction and dedication study regarding the proposed use or
development. The applicant shall pay for any costs associated with said
study prior to a final review of the land use application. Such study shall
consider the following:
1. Whether the infrastructure facility or service provided
for by the exaction or dedication would be required but for the
proposed use or development;
2. The extent to which the proposed use or development
will impact the existing services or infrastructure facilities;
3. The extent to which visitors to other developments or
Town residents will use the public infrastructure facility or
improvements provided by the exaction or dedication;
4. Whether existing public infrastructure facilities or
services can adequately serve the proposed use or development
without the additional expense to construct, expand or improve the
required infrastructure facilities or services; and
5. The extent to which the Town's existing infrastructure
facilities and services would need to be expanded or improved to
maintain the status quo.
C. The applicant, at its sole cost, may prepare and submit a
second exaction and dedication study to the Town. Any such study shall
Ordinance No. 4, 2011 3
3/1/2011
6 -2 -3
contain the information described in Subsection B hereof. Town staff shall
review the applicant's study and shall provide comment thereon to the
Planning and Environmental Commission or Town Council. In its sole
discretion, the Planning and Environmental Commission or Town Council
may, but is not obligated to, rely on any portion of the applicant's study.
D. If the Planning and Environmental Commission is the final
decision maker, after a public hearing, consideration of the exaction and
dedication study or studies, and consideration of the criteria listed in
Section 12 -26 -4, the Planning and Environmental Commission shall make
a determination on the appropriate exaction or dedication for the proposed
use or development.
E. If the Town Council is the final decision maker, the Planning
and Environmental Commission shall first hold a public hearing to
consider the exaction and dedication study or studies and the criteria
listed in Section 12 -26 -4, and shall make a recommendation to the Town
Council concerning the appropriate exaction or dedication for the
proposed use or development. The Town Council shall then hold a public
hearing to consider the dedication or exaction study or studies, the
recommendation of the Planning and Environmental Commission, and the
criteria listed in Section 12 -26 -4, and the Town Council shall determine the
appropriate exaction or dedication for the proposed use or development.
F. A decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission
may be appealed to the Town Council, pursuant to this Title. A decision of
the Town Council shall be final, subject only to judicial review.
Section 2 . If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity
of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it
would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause
or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections,
subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
Section 3 . The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this
ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail
and the inhabitants thereof.
Section 4 . The 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.
Ordinance No. 4, 2011 4
3/1/2011
6 -2 -4
Section 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 ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this day of , 2011 and
a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the day of
2011, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
Richard Cleveland, Mayor
Attest:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
Ordinance No. 4, 20115
3/1/2011
6 -2 -5
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: January 10, 2011
SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7,
Amendment, Vail Town Code, for a prescribed regulations amendment to create
Chapter 12 -26, Exactions and Dedications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the creation of
regulations and procedures for mitigation of development impacts, and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (PEC100050)
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Rachel Dimond/ George Ruther
I. SUMMARY
The applicant, the Town of Vail, is requesting a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a
text amendment to Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to create Chapter 12 -26,
Exactions and Dedications. The purpose of this new chapter is to provide the legal framework
for mitigation of development impacts.
Upon review of the applicable elements of the Town's planning documents and adopted
criteria for review, the Community Development Department recommends the Planning and
Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval of the amendment to the
Vail Town Council. A draft copy of Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2011, is attached for review
(Attachment A).
II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
The proposed text amendments add a new chapter to Title 12, Zoning Regulations, titled
" Chapter 12 -26, Exactions and Dedications The purpose of this chapter is to provide a
mechanism to quantify exactions and dedications in a manner that is roughly proportional to
the impact of the proposed use or development on the Town's existing or potential facilities,
infrastructure or services. Presently, the Vail Town Code does not provide a consistent or
predictable process for determining and addressing impacts on town facilities, infrastructure or
services directly attributed to development applications.
The creation of this new chapter is necessary to effectively implement the development
objectives of the Town. As proposed, the amendments provide applicants with reasonable
expectations of the need to mitigate development impacts at the beginning of the development
review process through a consistent review process that is both predictable and equitable.
Chapter 12 -26 establishes the procedure for determining the impacts of a development and
outlines the criteria and findings for requiring the mitigation of development impacts in the
approval process. As proposed, the regulations prescribed within the new chapter shall apply
to land use applications for a major exterior alteration, new or amended special development
district, rezoning, or major subdivision.
1
3/1/2011
6 -3 -1
The new chapter includes the following components:
• A policy for the requirement of exactions or dedications.
• Definitions of terms applicable to the implementation of the new chapter.
• Outline of the legal authority for the requirement of dedications and exactions.
• Criteria for reviewing exactions and dedications, whether they are fees, dedication
of land, or provision of infrastructure or services.
• Findings to be made by the reviewing authority (i.e. Planning and Environmental
Commission or Town Council) when approving development applications.
• A predictable and consistent process for determining an exaction or dedication.
• A process for accepting dedications.
Chapter 12 -26, Exactions and Dedications, is attached within Ordinance No. X, Series of
2011.
III. BACKGROUND
The Town of Vail may require dedications and impose exactions on the granting of land -use
approvals, provided that there is an essential nexus between the exaction or dedication and a
legitimate local government interest, and provided that the dedication or exaction is roughly
proportional, both in nature and extent, to the impact of the proposed use or development.
This recognition generally stems from two major land use law cases, Nollan v. California
Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987) and Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994),
as well as Colorado Revised Statutes § 29 -20 -203 and related case law.
In 2003, the Town of Vail amended the Vail Town Code to require mitigation of development
impacts in certain zone districts. The purpose of this requirement is to ensure the provision of
adequate public services and facilities within the Town. Currently, mitigation of development
impacts may be required for projects in the following zone districts: Public Accommodations 1,
Public Accommodations 2, Lionshead Mixed Use 1, Lionshead Mixed Use 2, Ski Base/
Recreation 2 and Special Development Districts. The ability to require mitigation of
development impacts is outlined in each of the above districts with the inclusion of the
following regulations within each zone district chapter:
Property owners /developers shall also be responsible for mitigating direct
impacts of their development on public infrastructure and in all cases mitigation
shall bear a reasonable relation to the development impacts. Impacts may be
determined based on reports prepared by qualified consultants. The extent of
mitigation and public amenity improvements shall be balanced with the goals of
redevelopment and will be determined by the planning and environmental
commission in review of development projects and conditional use permits.
Substantial off site impacts may include, but are not limited to, the following:
deed restricted employee housing, roadway improvements, pedestrian walkway
improvements, loading /delivery, streetscape improvements, stream tract/bank
improvements, public art improvements, parking, and similar improvements. The
intent of this section is to only require mitigation for large scale
redevelopment /development projects which produce substantial off site impacts.
Special Development Districts (SDDs) may be required to mitigate development impacts
based on the deviation of development standards from underlying zoning. However, mitigation
of development impacts typically occurs under the guise of providing public benefits to offset
the additional development rights granted as part of the SDD approval. The language, shown
below, states that the benefits should arise out of the deviation in development standards:
2
3/1/2011
6 -3 -2
"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."
In 2008, the Vail Town Council enacted inclusionary zoning and commercial linkage
requirements that require development projects to provide employee housing for net new
employees generated by a project. These requirements are applicable in the following zone
districts:
High Density Multiple - Family, Public Accommodation, Public Accommodation 2,
Commercial Core 1, Commercial Core 2, Commercial Core 3, Commercial
Service Center, Arterial Business, General Use, Heavy Service, Lionshead Mixed
Use 1, Lionshead Mixed Use 2, Ski Base /Recreation, Ski Base /Recreation 2,
Parking and Special Development Districts.
IV. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS
Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code
12 -1 -2: PURPOSE:
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.
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.
3
3/1/2011
6 -3 -3
Colorado Revised Statutes
29 -20 -203. Conditions on land -use approvals.
(1) In imposing conditions upon the granting of land -use approvals, no local government shall
require an owner of private property to dedicate real property to the public, or pay money or
provide services to a public entity in an amount that is determined on an individual and
discretionary basis, unless there is an essential nexus between the dedication or payment and
a legitimate local government interest, and the dedication or payment is roughly proportional
both in nature and extent to the impact of the proposed use or development of such property.
This section shall not apply to any legislatively formulated assessment, fee, or charge that is
imposed on a broad class of property owners by a local government.
(2) No local government shall impose any discretionary condition upon a land -use approval
unless the condition is based upon duly adopted standards that are sufficiently specific to
ensure that the condition is imposed in a rational and consistent manner.
V. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
The Vail Town Code prescribes the process, criteria, and findings for reviewing a proposed
prescribed regulations amendment. In reviewing an application of this type, the Planning and
Environmental Commission and Vail Town Council shall consider the following factors with
respect to the requested text amendment:
(1) The extent to which the text amendment furthers the general and specific purposes
of the zoning regulations; and
Staff finds the proposed text amendments further the general purpose of the zoning
regulations because by requiring mitigation of development impacts, the text amendment
furthers the
"general welfare of the town" and promotes "the coordinated and harmonious
development of the town... that will conserve and enhance ... its established
character as a resort and residential community of high quality."
Staff finds the proposed text amendments further the specific purposes of the zoning
regulations by providing the catalyst that could fulfill a number of the specific purposes.
This includes potential for requiring mitigation in the form of road improvements, transit
improvements, new public facilities, rehabilitation and /or preservation of natural areas and
other amenities, for example. Staff believes these examples of mitigation further the
specific purposes of the zoning regulations, including
providing public facilities, securing safety, promoting "safe and efficient
pedestrian and vehicular traffic circulation," conservation of "wildlife, streams,
woods, hillsides, and other desirable natural features," assurance of "adequate
open space, recreation opportunities, and other amenities and facilities
conducive to desired living quarters" and "to otherwise provide for the growth of
an orderly and viable community."
4
3/1/2011
6 -3 -4
(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
Staff finds the proposed text amendment is compatible with the development objective of
the Town to be a "world class mountain resort community." Within that objective lies a
general belief that the Town of Vail should have first rate infrastructure, services and
facilities. Requiring development projects to mitigate the direct impacts to that
infrastructure helps to further this objective. Another development objective of the Town of
Vail is to have sustainable fiscal responsibility. Staff finds that the proposed amendments
further this goal by placing the financial burden of providing infrastructure and services
upgrades on the development projects that necessitate such improvements and associated
costs.
Staff also finds that the proposed text amendment better implements the adopted goals,
objectives, and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, the
mitigation of development impacts furthers the policy objectives of the Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan, which calls for improved
vitality and amenities, improved access and circulation, improved infrastructure and
creative financing for enhanced private profits and public revenues. The amendments also
further the implementation of Objective 1.3 of the Vail Village Master Plan, stating that the
Town should
"enhance new development and redevelopment through public improvements
done by private developers working in cooperation with the town."
The amendments further the goals of the Vail Land Use Plan, most specifically that
"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."
Careful consideration is needed when determining and imposing dedications or
exactions on land use applications. In the absence of careful and thoughtful
consideration, unintended consequences could negatively impact the otherwise
intended objectives of the regulation or the Town. For example, a dedication or
exaction maybe properly determined and imposed yet be so financially onerous that
the a proposed project is no longer practical. In this case, the Town may need to
evaluate the need for the dedication or exaction against other public benefits derived
from the project. This is, and will be, an ongoing challenge and consideration the
Town needs to carefully and thoughtfully consider.
(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
Staff finds that the text amendments show a change in conditions where the Town Attorney
has advised Staff that the proposed language is necessary to provide legal framework for
mitigation of development impacts. The existing process and regulations may not be
adequate enough to require mitigation or to provide the legal justification for such
5
3/1/2011
6 -3 -5
mitigation. Should the Town be faced with a lawsuit, the proposed text amendments would
allow for a stronger legal framework to justify exactions and dedications.
Additionally, staff finds that the financial sustainability and viability of the Town is critical to
the continued success of the community. The proposed amendments place the financial
burden of providing infrastructure and services upgrades on the development projects that
necessitate such improvements and associated costs. They do this in a way that the
dedication or exaction required is roughly proportional both in nature and extent to the
impact of the proposed use or development of such property on the community.
(4) The extent to which the text amendment provides a harmonious, convenient,
workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with municipal
development objectives; and
As previously stated, the mission statement of the Town of Vail is to be a "world class
mountain resort community." In order to achieve that mission, the Town needs to have
infrastructure, facilities and services that match the level of development that is and will
occur in Vail. Further, over the course of the recent redevelopment in Vail, the Town has
come to fully understand that redevelopment needs to pay for more services in order to
maintain the high levels of service that are a part of the Town's municipal development
objectives. In the absence of a predicable and equitable exaction and dedication
requirement, it can be reasonably assumed that the Town shall bear the financial burdens
resulting from new development thus jeopardizing the likelihood that the Town can
continue to grow in a viable, orderly, harmonious and convenient manner.
(5) Such other factors and criteria the planning and environmental commission and /or
council deem applicable to the proposed text amendment.
VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and Environmental
Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for prescribed
regulation amendments, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, for a
prescribed regulations amendment to create Chapter 12 -26, Exactions and Dedications, Vail
Town Code, to allow for the creation of regulations for mitigation of development impacts, and
setting forth details in regard thereto.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of
approval, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission passes
following motion:
"Tthe Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a
recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council prescribed
regulation amendments, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town
Code, for a prescribed regulations amendment to create Chapter 12 -26,
Exactions and Dedications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the creation of
regulations for mitigation of development impacts, and setting forth details
in regard thereto."
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of
approval, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the
following findings:
6
3/1/2011
6 -3 -6
Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section V of this memorandum,
the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission finds,
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
zoning regulations; 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. Draft Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2011
7
3/1/2011
6 -3 -7
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
January 10, 2011 at 1:00pm
MD , NOFja ' TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME
75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Luke Cartin
Michael Kurz
Bill Pierce
Henry Pratt
John Rediker
Tyler Schneidman
David Viele
Site Visits:
1. Lapin Residence — 212 and 232 West Meadow Drive
30 minutes
1. A request for the review of a final plat, pursuant to Section 13 -12 -3, Plat Procedures and Criteria
for Review, Vail Town Code, to allow for the resubdivision of Lots 6 and 7, Vail Village Filing 2,
located at 212 and 232 West Meadow Drive, and setting details in regards thereto. (PEC100054)
Applicant: Mery Lapin, represented by Hans Berglund, Berglund Architects
Planner: Rachel Dimond
ACTION: Approved with conditions
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Viele VOTE: 7 -0 -0
CONDITIONS:
1. Prior to recording the subject final plat for Lot 6 and Lot 7, Vail Village
Filing 2, the applicant shall either relocate the existing Lot 6 driveway
entirely within the new Lot 6 property boundaries or the applicant shall
grant Lot 6 an access easement across Lot 7 for the existing Lot 6
driveway. Should the applicant choose to relocate the existing Lot 6
driveway, the applicant must obtain Town of Vail design review approval
prior to construction.
2. Prior to recording the subject final plat for Lot 6 and Lot 7, Vail Village
Filing 2, the applicant shall remove all existing Lot 7 deck
encroachments from the Gore Creek stream setback area and the
adjacent Town of Vail owned Gore Creek stream tract.
Rachel Dimond made a presentation per the Staff memorandum.
Commissioner Cartin inquired about the legal issues previously discussed with the PEC and
overturned by the Town Council. He asked Staff to provide additional information on what
happened.
Commissioner Kurz stated that the proposal fits in with the character of the neighborhood.
Commissioner Rediker asked about the drainage easement and stream tract encroachments.
Rachel Dimond responded that the 5 -foot drainage easement would parallel the property line
and be paired with a 5 -foot easement on the adjacent property to provide a 10 -foot drainage
easement. The easement could contain a surface swale, subterranean pipes, and water quality
measures such as oil and sand separators.
Pagqe 1
3/1/20`11
6 -4 -1
30 minutes
2. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a major amendment to Special
Development District No. 4, Cascade Village, pursuant to Section 12- 9A -10, Amendment
Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the removal of Development Area D (Glen Lyon Office
Building) from Special Development District No. 4, Cascade Village, and for a zone district
boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to include the
subject property in the Lionshead Mixed Use 2 District, located at 1000 S. Frontage Road
West /Lot 54, Glen Lyon Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090036)
Applicant: Ever Vail, LLC, represented by the Mauriello Planning Group, LLC
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: Tabled to January 24, 2011
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Rediker VOTE: 5 -0 -0
Commissioners Kurz and Rediker stated that they were concerned about making a final
determination or recommendation for such a complex project without adequate time for review.
Commissioner Cartin recused himself as his employer was the applicant and Commissioner
Viele recused himself as he had a financial interest in the Glen Lyon Office Building which is to
be a part of the project if approved. This applied to agenda items 2, 3, and 4.
Warren Campbell requested that the Chairman read into the record the descriptions for items 3
and 4 on the agenda as the three Ever Vail applications to be heard and the Staff presentation
would cover all three as they are interconnected with regard to their review.
George Ruther made a brief presentation on the process for the review of the Ever Vail project.
Warren Campbell made a presentation per the Staff memorandum. He requested that the
Commission table the SDD amendment as a need to notify additional individuals was necessary.
The Commission tabled this item.
30 minutes
3. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary
amendment, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for a rezoning of
properties from Arterial Business District to Lionshead Mixed Use 2 District, located at 953 (Vail
Professional Building) and 1031 (Cascade Crossing) South Frontage Road West / Unplatted and
a zoning of portions of South Frontage Road West street right -of -way to Lionshead Mixed Use 2
District, located at South Frontage Road West right -of -way (a complete legal description is
available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting
forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080061)
Applicant: Ever Vail LLC, represented by the Mauriello Planning Group, LLC
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: Recommendation of approval with conditions
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 5-0-0
CONDITIONS:
1. Approval of this zone district boundary amendment is contingent upon the applicant
obtaining Town of Vail approval of the associated major amendment to a special
development district to allow for the removal of Development Area D (Glen Lyon Office
Building) from Special Development District No. 4, Cascade Village.
2. Approval of this zone district boundary amendment shall only become effective upon
recording of the associated Ever Vail Subdivision Final Plat as approved by the
Planning and Environmental Commission and the Vail Town Council in accordance
with Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, Vail Town Code."
Paqe 2
3/1/2011
6 -4 -2
Tom Miller, representing Vail Resorts Development Company, introduced the project team.
Dominic Mauriello presented a recap of the review that has taken place thus far and the process
moving forward. He then went into detail regarding the preliminary plan, rezoning, and the SDD
amendment. Specifically, he went over changes to the project since the last presentation.
Jim Lamont, Vail Homeowners Association, asked about locations for skier drop off.
Dominic Mauriello responded by showing skier drop off in the transit center on site. There are 4
bus bays and 13 skier drop off spaces. He added that there was a DEVO drop off 50 plus short
term spaces in the west phase of the project. On a non - Saturday, there will be an abundance of
skier drop off.
Commissioner Pratt asked if a recommendation could be made if the SDD amendment were to
be tabled.
Warren Campbell responded yes.
30 minutes
4. A request for a review of a preliminary plan for a major subdivision, pursuant to Chapter 13 -3,
Major Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the creation of two lots for the redevelopment of
the properties known as Ever Vail (West Lionshead), located at 862, 923, 934, 953, 1000 and
1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South Frontage Road West rig ht-of-way/U n platted (a
complete legal description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community
Development Department), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080062)
Applicant: Ever Vail LLC, represented by the Mauriello Planning Group, LLC
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: Recommendation of approval with conditions
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Schneidman VOTE: 5 -0 -0
CONDITIONS:
1. The applicant shall be required to enter into a subdivider's agreement with the Town
of Vail, which shall detail all elements negotiated between the applicant and the Town
prior to the approval of the preliminary plan by the Town Council.
2. This approval for a preliminary plan is contingent upon approval of the associated
special development district major amendment application and the adoption of the
proposed Lionshead Mixed Use 2 District zoning for the property.
3. The applicant shall submit the final plat for review and approval by January 10, 2012,
per Section 13 -3 -6, Final Plat, Vail Town Code."
30 minutes
5. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a prescribed regulation
amendment, pursuant to Section 14 -1 -3, Administration of Standards, Vail Town Code, to amend
Section 14- 10 -5H, Building Materials and Design, Vail Town Code, to amend regulations for
solar panels, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100055)
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Rachel Dimond
ACTION: Recommendation of approval with conditions
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Viele VOTE: 6 -1 -0 (Cartin opposed)
CONDITIONS:
1. Staff shall provide in the ordinance presented to Town Council, additional language
addressing maintenance and continued operation.
Page 3
3/1/2011
6 -4 -3
2. Staff shall provide in the ordinance presented to Town Council, additional language
containing an intent section detailing the goals and objectives of the regulations to
minimize visual impacts.
3. Staff shall provide in the ordinance presented to Town Council, additional language
addressing the calculation of site coverage for ground mounted panels.
4. Staff shall amend in the ordinance presented to Town Council, a revised definition of
solar energy devices which matches the State's definition.
5. Staff shall amend the in the ordinance presented to Town Council, the language to
substitute "up to 50" for "40 to 50."
Rachel Dimond made a presentation per the Staff memorandum.
Commissioner Kurz voiced his concern about maintenance. He wants to make sure panels are
not aesthetically objectionable and maintained over time.
Commissioner Cartin stated that the proposed regulation may be in violation of State law. He
also stated the proposed regulations do not address new technologies in solar collection.
Rachel Dimond responded that legal counsel believes the Town regulations are not in violation
of State law.
Commissioner Pratt asked if homeowners have to follow any regulations based on State law.
Rachel Dimond responded that homeowners must follow Town regulations.
George Ruther briefly touched upon the process and the background of the proposed
regulations.
Commissioner Rediker asked if any aesthetic requirements would violate State law.
Commissioner Kurz stated that the PEC needs to decide whether to move forward to the Town
Council to let them decide on compliance with State law.
Rediker stated the proposed regulations should say "up to 50" instead of "40 -50."
Commissioner Pierce stated that we are trying to adapt to new technologies and the ne4ed for
solar panels.
Commissioner Rediker asked whether the definition of solar panels matches the State's
definition. He suggested Staff expand the definition to include future technologies and includes
appurtenant equipment. He suggested more clarity on how to calculate site coverage.
Commissioner Pierce asked whether is it better to put panels on the ground for reduction to
visual impacts.
Commissioner Pratt suggested a statement of intent be added that includes reducing visual
impact.
Commissioner Cartin added that he is concerned about the stringent regulations and their lack of
ability to adjust to new technologies.
Commissioner Viele asked if the debate on State law should occur at PEC or Town Council.
45 minutes
Paqe 4
3/1/2011
6 -4 -4
6. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7,
Amendment, Vail Town Code, for a prescribed regulations amendment to create Chapter 12 -26,
Exactions and Dedications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the creation of regulations for mitigation
of development impacts, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100050)
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: George Ruther/ Rachel Dimond
ACTION: Tabled to February 14, 2011
MOTION: Pratt SECOND: Viele VOTE: 7-0-0
George Ruther made a presentation per the Staff memorandum.
Commissioner Kurz asked what the process is for appealing a required exaction or mitigation?
George Ruther responded that the appeals process would be PEC, Town Council and then Civil
Court.
Commissioner Viele asked what authority Staff has to apply for amendments to the adopted
regulations.
George Ruther clarified that the Town Council, PEC, members of the public or Staff can apply for
regulations amendments.
Commissioner Pratt suggested that mitigation only be required when projects exceed that which
is permitted under the current zoning.
George Ruther responded that studies show that development which comply with zoning still
have impacts to facilities and services that needs to be financially addressed.
Commissioner Kurz voiced concern over the open ended nature of "infrastructure facilities and
services." He suggested listing types of impacts and mitigation requirements. He further inquired
as to who pays for studies to determine impacts.
George Ruther responded that applicants would pay for the studies. He added that the
ordinance is trying to address the economic sustainability of the Town.
Commissioner Viele suggested that this type of ordinance should go to voters, as it seems like a
tax.
George Ruther responded that this is not a tax and does not have to go to voters.
Commissioner Viele stated that the timing for this ordinance is misplaced givent he county's
economic situation and there needs to be regulations on eliminating the negotiations process.
Commissioner Kurz stated his concern about the loss of the negotiation process which to his
knowledge has worked well thus far.
Commissioner Pratt asked if this ordinance would apply to Ever Vail.
George Ruther responded that he did not believe it would apply to any applications that have
already been submitted. Legal counsel would need to answer this question.
Commissioner Pierce suggested there needs to be a distinction between upzoning, SDD
deviations and projects that comply with existing zoning.
Paqe 5
3/1/2011
6 -4 -5
Commissioner Pratt stated that allowable zoning should reflect impacts that the Town could
absorb, not require the applicant to pay for.
George Ruther responded that when West Vail was rezoned in the 1970's and 80's, that the
Town would have had to build 5 lane roads and other supporting infrastructure instead of
improving infrastructure as needed over time.
Commissioner Viele stated that the tax base should pay for changes to infrastructure.
Commissioner Pierce stated that the exactions should be more predictable.
5 minutes
7. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a prescribed regulation
amendment, pursuant to Section 11 -3 -3, Prescribed Regulations Amendment, Vail Town Code,
to amend Section 11 -7 -15, Public Parking and Loading Signs for Private Property, to allow signs
for public parking on private property, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100056)
Applicant: Solaris Property Owner, represented by Michael Suman
Planner: Bill Gibson
ACTION: Tabled to January 24, 2010
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 7-0-0
5 minutes
8. A request for final review of conditional use permits, pursuant to Section 12 -71 -5, Conditional
Uses: Generally (On All Levels Of A Building Or Outside Of A Building), Vail Town Code, to allow
for the development of a public or private parking lot (parking structure); a vehicle maintenance,
service, repair, storage, and fueling facility; a ski lift and tow (gondola), within "Ever Vail" (West
Lionshead), located at 862, 923, 934, 953, and 1031 South Frontage Road West, and the South
Frontage Road West rig ht-of - way /Unplatted (a complete legal description is available for
inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting forth details in
regard thereto. (PEC080063)
Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: Tabled to January 24, 2010
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 7-0-0
5 minutes
9. A request for a final review of a variance from 12- 71 -14, Site Coverage, Vail Town Code,
pursuant to Chapter 12 -17, Variances, to allow for additional site coverage below grade, within
"Ever Vail" (West Lionshead), located at 934 (BP Site), 953 (Vail Professional Building), 1031
(Cascade Crossing) S. Frontage Road / Unplatted; 862 (VR Maintenance Shop) and 923 (Holy
Cross Lot) S. Frontage Road / Tracts A and B, S. Frontage Road Subdivision; 1000 (Glen Lyon
Office Building) S. Frontage Road / Lot 54, Glen Lyon Subdivision (a complete legal description
is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department), and setting
forth details in regard thereto. (PEC090035)
Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: Tabled to January 24, 2010
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 7-0-0
5 minutes
10. A request for a work session on a major exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12 -71 -7, Exterior
Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of the area known
as "Ever Vail" (West Lionshead), with multiple mixed -use structures including but not limited to,
multiple - family dwelling units, fractional fee units, accommodation units, employee housing units,
office, and commercial /retail uses, located at 862, 923, 934, 953, and 1031 South Frontage
Road West, and the South Frontage Road West right -of- way /Unplatted (a complete legal
Paqe 6
3/1/2011
6 -4 -6
description is available for inspection at the Town of Vail Community Development Department),
and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC080064)
Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC
Planner: Warren Campbell
ACTION: Tabled to January 24, 2010
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 7-0-0
5 minutes
11. A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for prescribed regulations
amendments to Title 12, Zoning Regulations and Title 14, Development Standards, Vail Town
Code, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to provide regulations that will
implement sustainable building and planning standards, and setting forth details in regard
thereto. (PEC090028)
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Rachel Friede
ACTION: Tabled to February 14, 2011
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 7-0-0
5 minutes
12. A request for review of a variance, pursuant to Chapter 14 -1 -5, Variances, Vail Town Code, from
Section 14 -10 -5, Building Materials and Design, Vail Town Code, to allow for the installation of
solar panels within two feet of a roof ridge and eave and extending higher than the ridgeline,
located at 4918 Meadow Drive, Unit A/Lot 16, Block 7, Bighorn Subdivision Fifth Addition, and
setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100046)
Applicant: Laurent Meillon
Planner: Rachel Dimond
ACTION: Tabled to January 24, 2011
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 7-0-0
13. Approval of December 15, 2010 minutes
ACTION: Tabled to January 24, 2011
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 7-0-0
14. Information Update
15. Adjournment
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 7-0-0
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 January 7, 2011, in the Vail Daily.
Paqe 7
3/1/2011
6 -4 -7
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: February 14, 2011
SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7,
Amendment, Vail Town Code, for a prescribed regulations amendment to create
Chapter 12 -26, Exactions and Dedications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the creation of
regulations and procedures for mitigation of development impacts, and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (PEC100050)
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: George Ruther/ Rachel Dimond
I. SUMMARY
The applicant, the Town of Vail, is requesting a work session on a text amendment to Title 12,
Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to establish Chapter 12 -26, Exactions and Dedications.
The purpose of this new chapter is to provide the legal framework for administering the Town's
mitigation of development impacts requirements.
After the work session discussion of this item, the Community Development Department
recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission tables this item to the February
28, 2011 hearing. A draft copy of Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2011, is attached for review
(Attachment A).
II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
The proposed amendments will establish a new chapter to Title 12, Zoning Regulations,
entitled " Chapter 12 -26, Exactions and Dedications
The purpose of this chapter is to:
• Clarify existing regulations and policies on exactions and dedications;
• Establish expectations regarding the need to mitigate development impacts at the
beginning of the development review process;
• Ensure a review process that is consistent, predictable and equitable;
• Clarify the review criteria and findings necessary for requiring exactions and dedications;
• Establish the procedure for determining the impacts of a development that must be
mitigated, as quantified and applied to development projects through rational nexus
studies;
• Identify exactions and dedications that are necessary for achieving the development
objectives of the Town;
• Protect the health, safety and welfare and to ensure the orderly and viable growth of the
community;
• Provide a mechanism to ensure adequate public facilities, open space, recreational
opportunities and other amenities and facilities conducive to a desirable community;
1
3/1/2011
6 -5 -1
• Promote safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular traffic circulation and to lessen
congestion in the streets; and
• Conserve and maintain established community qualities and economic values.
The proposed Chapter 12 -26 includes the following components:
• Policy statements on the requirement of exactions or dedications;
• Definitions of terms applicable to the implementation of the new chapter;
• Outline of the legal authority for the requirement of dedications and exactions;
• Criteria for reviewing exactions and dedications, whether they are fees, dedication of land,
or provision of infrastructure or services;
• Findings to be made by the reviewing authority (Planning and Environmental Commission
or Town Council) when approving development applications; and
• A process for accepting dedications.
III. DISCUSSION ITEMS
What are the impacts of development to local governments?
Impacts of development vary widely among projects. Generally, development may affect
population concentration, traffic patterns, use of public facilities (e.g., schools, parks), need for
public services, utility use and infrastructure needs.
Whv do local governments require the mitigation of development impacts?
• Providing all infrastructure, facilities and services that become necessary due to new
development may be cost prohibitive for a municipality, due to a variety of financial and
political factors.
• Anticipating new development by providing infrastructure can be a misuse of limited
resources.
• Special Development Districts limit the ability to foresee future development as each
project creates its own unique development standards.
• State and federal funding for infrastructure and capital projects has been limited by budget
cuts, placing more financial burden on local municipalities.
• Existing residents may not want to share costs for new development, and typically oppose
tax increase ballot initiatives to pay for infrastructure associated with such development.
What is the legal framework that allows local governments to require the mitigation of
development impacts?
• Communities may require dedications and impose exactions on the granting of land -use
approvals, provided that there is an essential nexus between the exaction or dedication
and a legitimate local government interest, and provided that the dedication or exaction is
roughly proportional, both in nature and extent, to the impact of the proposed use or
development.
• Case law and regulations that permit mitigation requirements include two historic land use
law cases, Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987) and Dolan v. City
of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994), as well as Colorado Revised Statutes § 29 -20 -203:
Conditions on Land Use Approval, and related case law.
2
3/1/2011
6 -5 -2
What types of mitigation may be required?
The following is a general list of exactions and dedications that may be required with the
approval of a development project:
• Parking (new spaces, parking structures, fee -in -lieu payments, etc.)
• Housing (new employee housing, deed restrictions on existing properties, etc.)
• Streets (new median, additional lanes, land dedication, streetscape improvements, etc.)
• Transit (bus stop, private shuttle services, etc.)
• Fire (impact fees to pay for increased services and equipment, etc.)
• Recreation /Parks (impact fees to offset increased services, land dedication, new park,
public facilities, etc.)
• Public Art (on -site art installations, impact fees to pay for public programs, etc.)
• Police (impact fees to offset increased services, etc.)
• Schools (land dedication, fee -in -lieu payment, etc.)
How do local governments require the mitigation of development impacts?
The process of mitigating the impacts of development varies among different communities with
different development objectives and goals. On one end of the spectrum, communities may
pay for impacts of development through taxes and federal funding. On the other end,
developers may pay for all incremental impacts to the community. The policy decision on who
pays for impacts can affect future levels of service for infrastructure, facilities and services.
The chart below identifies the types of dedications and exactions that may be required by
municipalities near Vail:
Municipality Parking Housing Streets Transit Fire Parks/ Public Police Schools
Rec Art
Within Eagle County:
Eagle County x x x x x x
Vail x x x x x x x x
Avon x x x x x x
Minturn x x x x
Eagle x x x x x x
Within Summit County:
Summit County x x x x x x x x
Frisco x x x x
Dillon x x x x x
Silverthorne x x x x x x x
Breckenridge x x x
Other Resorts:
Aspen x x x x x
Steamboat x x x x x
Springs
Are dedications and exactions for the mitigation of development impacts a tax?
No. A tax is monies required for real and personal property or an act, event or occurrence that
provides revenue in order to defray the general expenses of government as distinguished from
the expense of a specific function or service. Dedications and exactions are considered a type
of fee, not a tax. Unlike a tax, a fee is not designed to raise revenue to defray the general
expenses of government, but rather is a charge imposed upon persons or property for the
purpose of defraying the cost of a particular governmental service, in this case being
construction of infrastructure, facilities and services.
3
3/1/2011
6 -5 -3
What is the existing Town fo Vail policy on mitigation of development impacts?
The existing policy is to require mitigation of development impacts when there is a rational
nexus between cause and effect, as required by state law. Development in Vail is required to
pay for the incremental impacts on the community.
How does the Town of Vail regulate the mitigation of development impacts?
• Yes, the Town of Vail requires varying levels of mitigation of development impacts,
depending upon the zoning of the development site.
• Currently, mitigation of development impacts is required in Public Accommodations 1,
Public Accommodations 2, Lionshead Mixed Use 1, Lionshead Mixed Use 2, Ski Base/
Recreation 2 and Special Development Districts.
• Mitigation may include deed restricted employee housing, roadway improvements,
pedestrian walkway improvements, streetscape improvements, stream tract /bank
restoration, loading /delivery, public art improvements, and similar improvements.
• Employee housing may be required, in accordance with commercial linkage and
inclusionary zoning standards, in the High Density Multiple - Family, Public Accommodation,
Public Accommodation 2, Commercial Core 1, Commercial Core 2, Commercial Core 3,
Commercial Service Center, Arterial Business, General Use, Heavy Service, Lionshead
Mixed Use 1, Lionshead Mixed Use 2, Ski Base/ Recreation, Ski Base /Recreation 2,
Parking and Special Development Districts.
Which development projects in Vail are required to mitigate their impacts?
• Mitigation of development impacts may be required for "large scale
redevelopment /development projects which produce substantial off site impacts. "
• Employee housing is required for any project in the applicable zone districts that has a net
increase in commercial or residential floor area.
Which development projects in Vail are not required to mitigate their impacts?
• Single- family homes.
• Projects in low density zone districts.
• Projects that do not generate net new employees in commercial space.
Will the proposed amendments change the Town of Vail's development policies?
No. The proposed regulations will not change existing policy.
Will the proposed amendments change the Town of Vail's development review procedures?
Yes. The proposed regulations will change current procedural practice with the establishment
of criteria and findings when determining that mitigation of development impacts is required.
The changes to review procedures will clarify expectations that development pays for some
impacts to infrastructure, facilities and services and creates an equitable, predictable and
consistent process for determining an exaction or dedication. However, the outcome of
requirements will remain the same.
4
3/1/2011
6 -5 -4
Will the proposed amendments change the Town of Vail's development impact standards?
No. Requirements for development to pay for impacts to infrastructure, facilities and services
will remain the same. The following chart details how the proposed regulations would affect
mitigation of development impacts for a project in Vail, using Strata as an example:
Exactions and Dedications Existing Regulations Proposed Regulations
Public Art $70,000 $70,000
Transit $273,000 $273,000
Employee housing 12,665 sq ft of EHUs 12,665 sq ft of EHUs
How are development affected bV development impact mitigation requirements?
According to "Development Fees and Employment," a study conducted by the University of
Oklahoma and Florida State University, clear expectations of exactions and dedications allow
developers to anticipate costs. The expectation of exactions and dedications has also been
proven to expedite review of projects, as municipalities are less apprehensive to approve
development when its impacts are mitigated. While exactions and dedications increase the
cost of development, they provide certainty that is shown to increase likelihood of the
implementation of projects.
How is the Town of Vail affected by development impact mitigation requirements?
The same study referenced above notes that exactions and dedications lead to increased jobs
in a municipality due to new construction, new employment sectors and funding for schools,
parks, fire, and other services. Further, the mitigation of development impacts allows the
Town of Vail to defer costs of improving infrastructure, facilities and services to the developer
instead of the taxpayer. The Town of Vail also charges a construction use tax that provides
funding for capital projects. In 2011, the Town of Vail has over $3 million in maintenance costs
and $17 million in capital improvement needs. Funding sources include but are not limited to
construction use tax (estimated $500K), TIF funding from Lionshead ($8.5M), and traffic
impacts fees ($390K balance). However, this does not include an extensive list of unfunded
projects that were cut to balance the budget, including over $18 million in high priority projects.
The Town continues to pay for extensive capital improvements, with a small amount of funding
coming from development.
IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
After the work session discussion of this item, the Community Development Department
recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission tables this item to the
February 28, 2011 hearing.
V. ATTACHMENTS
A. Draft Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2011
5
3/1/2011
6 -5 -5
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
February 14, 2011
O 1:OOpm TOWN
TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME
75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
Members Present Members Absent
Bill Pierce Tyler Schneidman
Henry Pratt
Luke Cartin
David Viele
John Rediker
Michael Kurz
1. Legal Training - Matt Mire 30 minutes
Matt Mire, Town Attorney, gave a presentation regarding his office hours and availability to
address questions the Commission might have. He stated that he appreciated receiving any
questions ahead of time verse trying to provide advice in a public hearing off the cuff. He
covered the ability to enter into executive session if necessary to hear legal advice, but this has
been rarely done with the Commission. This presentation is to satisfy the CIRSA, Town's
insurance carrier, requirements for coverage under the Town's protection. A conflict of interest
only exists if you have a direct and substantial financial interest in the matter under
consideration. Must disclose the conflict on the record and then avoid influencing the
Commission by leaving the room. It is not a legal requirement to leave the room, however, if you
stay in the room avoid body language and seating yourself in a manner that may be seen as an
attempt to influence a review. He discussed the difference between acting in legislative and
quasi - judicial roles in the hearing. He then covered the making of a record and providing
findings for a decision based in the adopted criteria.
Commissioner Kurz inquired into concerns with ex parte conversations on site visits.
Matt Mire explained that decisions can not be made when traveling to and from a site or on the
site. Lobbying on site by the applicant or their representatives must be avoided.
Commissioner Pratt inquired as to the differentiation between certain actions the Commission
takes and whether they were legislative or quasi - judicial.
Matt Mire stated that actions that are broad sweeping tend to be legislative and actions for a
specific property or group of properties tend to be quasi - judicial.
Commissioner Rediker inquired as to the specifics of three or more members getting together.
Matt Mire clarified the difference between social gatherings and those where topics under
consideration may be discussed. Staff needs to notice and provide minutes of any gatherings
where items under consideration are being discussed.
Matt Mire inquired as to the Commission having any comments on the mitigation chapter that
was to be discussed latter in the agenda.
Paqqe 1
3/1/20`11
6 -6 -1
Commissioner Rediker inquired as to the jurisdictions that were reviewed to create this mitigation
chapter. He stated that he felt the proposed legislation was potentially too boiler plate and
unspecific. He questioned if Greenwood Village's legislation had be legally challenged.
Matt Mire stated that Greenwood Village was the specific example; however, others were
reviewed as well. He would look into making the proposed legislation more specific and to see if
the Greenwood Village legislation.
2. Water Quality Update — Eagle River Water Shed Council 30 minutes
Bill Carlson, Environmental Health Officer, gave a presentation on the ongoing efforts with
regards to stream health of the Gore Creek and its tributaries. He highlighted efforts to keep
Gore Creek off of the State 303(d) list for impaired waters. The strategy is to convince the State
to not list Gore Creek as there are multiple local stakeholders with a strategy to identify the
cause of the degradation and mitigate that source. He concluded by stating that he would return
with updates in the future.
Commissioner Kurz inquired as to the tributaries water quality and the degree of degradation that
is actually occurring along Gore Creek.
Bill Carlson explained that the tributaries are at the specified attainment levels for the state.
Commissioner Rediker inquired as to the locations of the sampling points.
Bill Carlson stated that a study was currently under way to locate potentially eight locations.
Commissioner Cartin suggest that extending the sampling process occur year round verse only
in the spring. It may help to determine if it was snow melt products or lawn care products.
There was no public comment.
10 minutes
3. A request for a variance from Section 12 -6E -6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter
12 -17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition within the side setback area, located
at 1350 Sandstone Drive, Unit 6 (Eiger Chalets) /Part of Lot G3, Lion's Ridge Filing 2, and setting
forth details in regard thereto. (PEC110010)
Applicant: Joel & Jane Gros, represented by Michael Hazard
Planner: Bill Gibson
ACTION: Approved with condition(s)
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Kurz VOTE: 6 -0 -0
CONDITION(S):
1. Approval of this variance is contingent upon the applicants obtaining Town of Vail
design review approval for this proposal.
Bill Gibson gave a presentation per the Staff memorandum.
Michael Hazard, architect representing the applicant, made himself available for questions..
There was no public comment.
Commissioner Pratt inquired as to the setback of the existing building.
Bill Gibson stated that the existing and proposed side setback was approximately 8 feet.
Paqe 2
3/1/2011
6 -6 -2
The Commissioners agreed that the requested variance met the review criteria.
30 minutes
4. A request for the review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12 -8B -3, Conditional
Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow for public parks and active public outdoor recreation areas and
uses, excluding buildings and accessory buildings (permanent and temporary) and uses
customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional outdoor recreational uses, and
necessary for the operation thereof, including restrooms, drinking fountains, bleachers,
concessions, storage buildings, and similar uses, to facilitate a community garden located at
2490 South Frontage Road/ Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100043)
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Rachel Dimond
ACTION: Approved with condition(s)
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Viele VOTE: 5 -0 -1 ( Cartin recused)
CONDITION(S):
1. The West Vail Community Garden shall receive design review approval prior to any
construction.
2. The West Vail Community Garden shall only operate between 7am and 7pm from April
through October.
3. All occupants and members of the West Vail Community Garden shall comply with the
Town of Vail noise regulations.
4. Site lighting shall not be permitted at the West Vail Community Garden site.
5. The West Vail Community Garden shall be maintained and kept in an orderly fashion
or the required conditional use permits may be revoked.
6. The West Vail Community Garden Committee shall enter into an operational
agreement with the Vail Town Council prior to commencement of the community
garden.
Commissioner Cartin recused himself due to a conflict of interest.
Rachel Dimond gave a presentation per the Staff memorandum.
Commissioner Pierce asked what surface material was proposed for the driveway and parking.
Rachel Dimond clarified that the driveway will be asphalt millings.
Commissioner Pratt asked about the environmental impacts of using millings.
George Ruther, Community Development Department Director, noted other locations where the
Town has used this paving material.
Commissioner Pierce noted that an email was received from Staff containing a letter expressing
several concerns from Chas and Charmayne Bernhardt, adjacent property owners.
Marian Carton was available on behalf of the community garden committee.
Commissioner Pratt asked about the management of sheds, trellises, and other privately
installed structures.
Marian Carton responded that the committee would not permit such structures to be installed.
Paqe 3
3/1/2011
6 -6 -3
Commissioner Kurz noted his concern about interactions with wildlife, more specifically smaller
animals like raccoons and gophers. He asked about potential liability and impacts to neighbor's
properties.
Commissioners Pratt and Viele agreed with the Bernhardt's letter identifying a concern about
planting fruit trees which could attract bears.
Commissioner Rediker asked who from the Town would monitor the operation of the garden.
Rachel Dimond identified the variance Community Development Department and Public Works
Department staff members involved with this proposal. She also
Kristen Bertuglia, Town of Vail Sustainability Coordinator, noted that their will be a formal lease
agreement between the committee and the Town Council.
Commissioner Kurz recommended a formal, written report be provide on a regular basis from the
garden committee.
Commissioner Pierce recommended a modification to the conditions of approval.
Commissioner Pratt recommended a two -year approval limit.
George Ruther identified the Council's goal of facilitating the garden, but no managing the day -
to -day operation of the facility. He recommended more details be incorporated into the
operational agreement between the Council and the garden committee.
Commissioner Pratt asked about who would enforce specific sections of the proposed
management plan.
George Ruther recommended that this could also be addressed in the operational agreement
between the Council and the garden committee.
Kristen Bertuglia identified the garden committee's role in enforcing the rules of garden.
Commissioner Pierce stated that the garden is a great idea, but the management agreement will
be the most important tool to ensuring
Commissioner Rediker identified a potential risk to pets from certain organic garden fertilizers.
His other concern is creating an asphalt driveway and parking area.
Rachel Dimond noted that the alternative driveway locations would require approval from the
Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT). She identified the provisions of the Town Code
requiring an improved parking surface.
Commissioner Rediker asked about the ramifications of not paving the parking area or not
creating a parking area.
George Ruther identified run -off, mud, dusk, and tracking material onto the adjacent road as
concerns. He noted that parking will likely occur on the frontage road if it is not provided on -site.
Commissioner Rediker asked about parking lot design alternatives.
Rachel Dimond identified the issues that would be regulated by CDOT.
Paqe 4
3/1/2011
6 -6 -4
Kristen Bertuglia noted that there are only five parking spaces and the area is currently a
compacted road base material.
The recommendation is contingent upon the successful negotiation of a mangagement
agreement between the Town Council and the garden committee.
George Ruther asked if the Commissioner were interested in exploring options for minimizing the
parking area if possible.
Commissioners Rediker and Viele agreed.
Commissioners Pierce and Pratt were concerned about any backing into the street.
Commissioner Kurz did not amend his motion.
60 minutes
5. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7,
Amendment, Vail Town Code, for a prescribed regulations amendment to create Chapter 12 -26,
Exactions and Dedications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the creation of regulations for mitigation
of development impacts, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100050)
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: George Ruther / Rachel Dimond
ACTION: Tabled to February 28, 2011
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Kurz VOTE: 6 -0 -0
Rachel Dimond gave a presentation per the Staff memorandum.
Commissioner Kurz understands why the Town would like to implement this policy, however, 12-
26-3(B) caused him concern regarding the statement that fee schedules may be established.
Appears adhoc and may occur without study.
Rachel Dimond stated that a cause and effect nexus is necessary for your community to
establish the impact.
Commissioner Kurz, felt that the proposed language was stating that a nexus for a fee schedule
was necessary and not a nexus for the actual impact fee. He also felt the severability Section of
the proposed regulation was permitting the Council a variance out for Council.
George Ruther replied the that Section 2 of the proposed ordinance is not intend to amend the
way the ordinance is being implemented, but serve as a form of protection should a court
determination result in the nullifying of any portion of the adopted regulation.
Commissioner Viele inquired as to any provision in the Code which prohibited the collection of
fees? Was this proposal to legalize the ability to charge these fees? Are the fees being
collected currently inappropriate?
George Ruther responded by stating that the attorney's office has requested this proposed
regulation to strengthen the defense of mitigation fees and improvements which are collected.
Commissioner Cartin inquired as to how fees are determined by the Town and Council?
Paqe 5
3/1/2011
6 -6 -5
Rachel Dimond responded that a need would be identified that would benefit from mitigation and
a subsequent study would be performed to determine the appropriate mitigation of an impact.
George Ruther highlighted the parking pay -in -lieu fee which is currently at $32,000 per parking
space which is no where close to the estimated cost of approximately $110,000 to actually
construct a structured space.
Commissioner Rediker asked Staff to consider a definition of infrastructure facilities and services
as identified in the proposed language. He highlighted the list of impacts which could be
mitigated found on page 3 of the Staff memorandum. He continued by highlighted the proposed
12- 26 -4(2) might be best changed to discuss the Town's need for an improvement and not an
"interest" in an improvement. He suggest that the phrase "But for" as it occurs in the proposed
language is a high legal standard which could be difficult to determine. He felt that 12- 26 -5(D)
and 12- 26 -5(E) were redundant and was unsure of why both paragraphs were needed.
George Ruther clarified that due to the review processes within the Town of Vail that the two
paragraphs clarified the differing roles of the Commission and the Council.
Commissioner Rediker suggested that the Town's legal counsel review 12- 26 -4(6) and the
appropriateness of the language.
Commissioner Pratt stated for the record that he did not feel that a project developing within full
compliance with the Code should not be required to perform an impact study. He continued, by
stating that the proposed language did not provide the clarity that the Staff memorandum was
suggesting would be an outcome. Developers must invest significant sums to design and submit
prior to know the mitigation impacts. The proposed language does not clearly identify the fees
for the various impacts.
George Ruther stated that the reality is that in some case you need to know a great deal about
the project before knowing the actual impact costs, however, the exact fees would be determined
through the review, but there should be no surprise that fees and improvements will be
requested.
Commissioner Pratt suggested that the proposed ordinance language was vague and should
include a list of the impacts that will need to be mitigated as found in the memorandum.
George Ruther stated that the Town could choose a fee that is below that of the actual identified
impact and subsidize certain elements and improvements.
Jim Lamont, representing the Vail Homeowners Association, asked that the list of exactions and
impacts found on page 3 of the Staff memorandum needs to be reconciled with the list contained
within the proposed ordinance language. He added that mitigation of development impacts
originally started under the Special Development District process solely unless you asked for
more than what zoning permitted. He stated that the Town should be looking at the budgetary
process such as staff salaries and benefits is to solve some of the needs of the community as
development is likely not going to be rebounding in the near term. He highlighted the studies
done for Ever Vail showing the fiscal impact of a project like Ever Vail and should those
revenues be dealt with differently to allow those to mitigate development impacts. He spoke to
several studies that state the struggle that real estate will have moving forward as the
homeownership fees for metro districts and homeowners associations will deter many from
purchasing products in resorts like ours.
Paqe 6
3/1/2011
6 -6 -6
George Ruther highlighted the difference between policy and implementation. Some
communities have exactions requirements, but may wave them entirely by accepting various
improvements or other elements. This proposed ordinance only speaks to the impacts created
by development and only the incremental impacts of that development. This ordinance cannot
be used to go back and correct the sins of the past.
Jim Lamont suggested that policy needs to follow industry trends. He suggested that a list of all
the fees that are charged to a square footage of development in the Town of Vail and how they
cumulatively impact development and sale of product in the Town of Vail. This will be vital to the
reinvention of ourselves as we come out of the current economic climate
5 minutes
6. A request for a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council for prescribed regulations
amendments to Title 12, Zoning Regulations and Title 14, Development Standards, Vail Town
Code, pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to provide regulations that will
implement sustainable building and planning standards, and setting forth details in regard
thereto. (PEC090028)
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Rachel Friede
ACTION: Tabled to March 28, 2011
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Kurz VOTE: 6 -0 -0
5 minutes
7. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a prescribed regulation
amendment, pursuant to Section 11 -3 -3, Prescribed Regulations Amendment, Vail Town Code,
to amend Section 11 -7 -15, Public Parking and Loading Signs for Private Property, to allow signs
for public parking on private property, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100056)
Applicant: Solaris Property Owner, represented by Michael Suman
Planner: Bill Gibson
ACTION: Tabled to March 28, 2011
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Kurz VOTE: 6 -0 -0
5 minutes
8. A request for review of a variance, pursuant to Chapter 14 -1 -5, Variances, Vail Town Code, from
Section 14 -10 -5, Building Materials and Design, Vail Town Code, to allow for the installation of
solar panels within two feet of a roof ridge and eave and extending higher than the ridgeline,
located at 4918 Meadow Drive, Unit A/Lot 16, Block 7, Bighorn Subdivision Fifth Addition, and
setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100046)
Applicant: Laurent Meillon
Planner: Rachel Dimond
ACTION: Tabled to March 14, 2011
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Viele VOTE: 6 -0 -0
9. Approval of January 24, 2010
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 6 -0 -0
10. Information Update
A reminder to those Commissioners whose terms are expiring on March 31, 2011, was provided
and a description of the process was given to request reappointment.
11. Adjournment
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Viele VOTE: 6 -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
Paqe 7
3/1/2011
6 -6 -7
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 February 11, 2011, in the Vail Daily
Paqe 8
3/1/20 - 11
6 -6 -8
ITL1 Oil
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: March 1, 2011
ITEM /TOPIC: Work session on Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2011, an ordinance amending
Section 14 -10 -5, Building Materials and Design, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 14 -1 -3,
Administration of Standards, for changes to the solar energy device regulations, and setting
forth details in regard thereto.
PRESENTER(S): Kristen Bertuglia, Rachel Dimond
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Staff requests that the Vail Town Council provide
responses to the following questions:
Do the proposed amendments achieve the policy goals articulated by the Town
Council?
Are there any regulations that should be omitted or added to the
proposed amendments?
Does the Town Council want to provide incentives, such as decreased permit fees, for
solar energy
device installation?
BACKGROUND: On May 4, 2010, the Vail Town Council passed Ordinance No. 3, Series of
2010 which amended the design regulations for solar energy devices. In September, 2010,
numerous solar energy company representatives made requests to the Vail Town Council for
amendments to the new regulations in order to help facilitate the installation of solar energy
devices. The Vail Town Council instructed Staff to work with solar energy representatives to
propose amendments to the existing regulations, which occurred through three meetings with
6 representatives from solar energy companies. On January 10, 2011, the Planning and
Environmental Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval for amendments to
Section 14 -10 -5, with modifications.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Because this is a work session, Staff does
not recommend any formal action at this time.
ATTACHMENTS:
Memo - Ordinance No. 5. Series of 2011 solar energy device regulations
Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2011 solar energy devices
Staff memo to PEC 011011
PEC minutes 011011
Comment letters
3/1/2011
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: March 1, 2011
SUBJECT: Work session on Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2011, an ordinance amending
Section 14 -10 -5, Building Materials and Design, Vail Town Code, pursuant to
Section 14 -1 -3, Administration of Standards, for changes to the solar energy
device regulations, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100055)
I. SUMMARY
The applicant, the Town of Vail, is requesting a work session to discuss proposed
regulation amendments to Section 14 -10 -5, Building Materials and Design, Vail Town
Code. The proposed amendments are summarized as follows:
• The proposed regulations would add language to require panels only to project the
minimal distance, up to 8 feet, necessary to achieve optimal panel angle. The
current regulations allow panels to project up to 8 feet from the attached roof plane
with no additional limitations.
• Flexibility is provided in architectural integration for installations on existing buildings.
• Guidelines are added for screening of panels.
• The proposed regulations allow panels to project up to one foot above roof ridges,
while current regulations require that panels not project above roof ridges.
• The proposed regulations allow panels to extend to roof eaves, amending the current
requirement of a 2 foot buffer from roof eaves.
• The proposed regulations allow roof and fagade mounted panels to project up to four
feet into required setbacks.
• The proposed regulations address ground mounted solar panels, allowing them only
when the Design Review Board determines there is no practical ability to install on a
structure on the property.
Attached to this memorandum are the following documents for review: draft copy of
Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2011 (Attachment A), Staff memorandum on amendments to
Title 14 to the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) dated January 10, 2011
(Attachment B), the minutes from the Planning and Environmental Commission hearing
on this application (Attachment C), and comment letters from members of the public
(Attachment D).
II. BACKGROUND
• On May 4, 2010, the Vail Town Council passed Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2010
which amended the design regulations for solar energy devices.
• In September, 2010, numerous solar energy company representatives made
requests to the Vail Town Council for amendments to the new regulations in order to
Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2011 3/1/20111
7 -1 -1
help facilitate the installation of solar energy devices. The Vail Town Council
instructed Staff to work with solar energy representatives to propose amendments to
the existing regulations, which occurred through three meetings with 6
representatives from solar energy companies. The goals for this process were as
follows:
• Meet the concerns of local and state solar industry professionals with respect to
the current solar panel regulations, while advancing the policy direction of the
Vail Town Council:
• Encourage energy efficiency and renewable energy in the Town of Vail in
accordance with the Environmental Sustainability Strategic Plan
• Architecturally integrate panels with building
• Minimize view of panels from street
• Avoid new perceived building heights
• Avoid increased bulk and mass of buildings
• Maintain character of buildings
• Achieve regulations that fall in the middle 50 %, meaning the regulations are
neither too lenient, where any system goes, nor too stringent, which prohibits
most systems from being installed. (see figure 1 below)
stringent
• On January 10, 2011, the Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a
recommendation of approval for amendments to Section 14 -10 -5, with the following
modifications:
1. Additional language addressing maintenance and continued operation of
solar energy devices.
2. Additional language containing an intent section detailing the goals and
objectives of the regulations to minimize visual impacts.
3. Additional language clarifying the calculation of site coverage for ground
mounted solar energy devices.
4. A revised definition of solar energy devices which matches the State's
definition.
5. An amendment to the language describing the ideal solar energy device
angle substituting "up to 50" for "40 to 50" degrees.
III. PROS AND CONS
The following are pros and cons for adopting the proposed amendments:
PROS:
• The amendments would allow panels to extend to the edge of a roof eave and up to
the ridge, allowing for more panels to be installed on smaller roof areas.
• The amendments provide more detailed guidelines for applicants.
Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2011 3/1/201 2
7 -1 -2
• The amendments allow for staff approvals for installations that clearly meet all
guidelines and requirements, and provides a mechanism for design review board
review for projects that meet all requirements but questionably meet guidelines.
CONS:
• The amendments would allow solar energy devices to be visible above a roof ridge,
which may impact visibility, bulk and mass.
• The amendments do not address commercial applications such as solar utility
installations in the form of solar fields.
• The amendments create additional regulations that may be viewed by applicants as
requiring further regulation.
IV. ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COUNCIL
Staff requests that the Vail Town Council provide responses to the following questions:
• Do the proposed amendments achieve the policy goals articulated by the Town
Council?
• Are there any regulations that should be omitted or added to the proposed
amendments?
• Does the Town Council want to provide incentives, such as decreased permit fees,
for solar energy device installation?
V. ATTACHMENTS
A. Draft Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2011
B. Staff memorandum to the PEC dated January 10, 2011
C. Minutes from PEC hearing
D. Comment letters
Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2011 3/1/20113
7 -1 -3
ORDINANCE NO. 5
SERIES OF 2011
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 14 -10 -5, BUILDING MATERIALS AND DESIGN, VAIL
TOWN CODE, PURSUANT TO SECTION 14 -1 -3, ADMINISTRATION OF STANDARDS, FOR
CHANGES TO THE SOLAR ENERGY DEVICE REGULATIONS, AND SETTING FORTH
DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO.
WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has held
public hearings on the proposed amendments in accordance with the provisions of the Vail
Town Code of the Town of Vail;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has
recommended approval with modification of these amendments at its January 10, 2011
meeting, and has submitted its recommendation to the Vail Town Council;
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that the proposed amendments are consistent
with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail
Comprehensive Plan and are compatible with the development objectives of the Town;
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that the proposed amendments further the
general purpose of Title 14, Development Standards, Vail Town Code;
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that the proposed 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;
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that the proposed amendments are consistent
with the Town of Vail Environmental Sustainability Strategic Plan adopted goal of promoting
energy conservation and a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by supporting renewable
energy projects; and
WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that these amendments further the policy
direction of the Vail Town Council for solar energy devices and will provide more appropriate,
improved regulations for solar energy devices consistent with the architectural and aesthetic
Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2011 1
3/1/2011
7 -2 -1
character of the Town of Vail.
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 Section 14 -10 -5, Building
Materials and Design, in order to amend regulations for solar energy devices.
Section 2. Section 14 -2 -1 is hereby amended as follows (Text that is to be deleted is
+rte Text that is to be added is bold. Sections of text that are not amended may be
omitted.):
Solar energy device: A solar collector or similar device or a structural design feature of a
structure, such as a roof shingle with integrated photovoltaic cells, which collects
sunlight and Gep��4 comprises part of a system for the conversion of the sun's
radiant energy into thermal, chemical, mechanical, or electrical energy
Section 3. Section 14 -10 -51-1 is hereby amended as follows (Text that is to be
deleted is StFi . Text that is to be added is bold. Sections of text that are not amended may
be omitted.):
H. Solar Energy Devices:
1. The intent of these regulations is to facilitate the installation of alternative
energy sources in Vail while minimizing visual impacts.
2. Solar energy devices should be installed on building facades and roof planes
and oriented for energy production, except as permitted by
Section 14- 10 -5H -11 of this Code. In Vail, optimal solar energy device
orientation for maximized energy production and adequate snow shed is
typically achieved by up to a 50 degree orientation.
3. Solar energy devices shall be designed and placed in a manner compatible and
architecturally integrated into the overall design of the building and site, with
some flexibility granted for existing structures.
4. Solar energy devices may be screened to minimize visual impact with a
false fagade, roof plane or parapet walls integrated into the overall design
of the building.
5. Solar energy devices may project not more than four (4) feet into a required
setback area. P4ay h e installer/ vrithip the "
i F�il = ed se e �tin
�p
st�tt
vtfl . trnstryGtuFe sr- Ir eg a lhi nennenfbFi ing er permitted to ennreonh inte
the eti ek
6. Solar energy devices shall not be included in calculation of building height.
7. Solar energy devices should follow the slope direction of the roof plane
upon which it is mounted.
Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2011 2
3/1/2011
7 -2 -2
8. Solar energy devices shall project no further from the building fagade or
roof plane than the minimum distance necessary to achieve up to a 50
degree orientation. No portion of any solar energy device shall project more
than eight feet (8) from the building fagade or roof plane eF feeade to which the
solar energy device del is attached.
9. When mounted to a roof plane with a pitch of three in twelve feet (3:12) or
steeper, solar energy device shall extend no higher than one (1) foot above
the ridgeline.
adjacent gelgel;ne en reefs M o;tnhes of three to tw - eh (3 -47) er gFeater
10. When mounted to a roof plane, solar energy devices shall not extend beyond
the roof eave. he ; 4s+alled ,. M4 Ave f (29 of a of 4 dge „ of „ OR
reefs w4 o;tnhes loss than throe to twe4e /3471 , the desg shall
reWeW h eaFd sha
mole a deter t�� M at Me panels or in stollen to m;n;mi4e evnessnie
murcc - crzrc m. i �varrcr..rur� maccnTCa rv rrnrnrrnzz c�cv�.r.�roz
v4sH s+
11. Solar energy device framing, brackets and associated equipment shall be
paipted black or a color that matches adjacent building surfaces at the disnretien
of the des gp re„iew hoard No advertising shall be permitted on any solar
energy device, framing, brackets and associated equipment.
12. Solar energy devices, framing, brackets and associated equipment shall be
maintained and kept in good repair, including repainting when appropriate
and other actions that contribute to attractive building aesthetics.
13. Solar energy devices may be ground mounted only when the Design
Review Board determines that the design or site planning of an existing
structure creates practical difficulties in mounting a solar energy device to
a building fagade or roof plane to achieve energy production. Cost or
inconvenience to the applicant of strict or literal compliance with this
regulation shall not create a practical difficulty. Ground mounted solar
energy devices shall not be permitted in the required setback area. Ground
mounted solar energy devices shall count as site coverage. Site coverage
is calculated by measuring the footprint created by vertical projection from
the energy devices and associated hardware to the ground. Should ground
mounted solar energy devices be adjustable, site coverage shall be
calculated for the position that creates the greatest site coverage. Ground
mounted solar energy devices shall not exceed eight (8) feet in height
above grade. Ground mounted solar energy devices shall be located and
screened to minimize visual impact.
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 No. 5, Series of 2011 3
3/1/2011
7 -2 -3
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 9. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof,
inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall
not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore
repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 15` day of March, 2011 and a public
hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 5 1 day of April, 2011, 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. 5, Series of 2011 4
3/1/2011
7 -2 -4
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: January 10, 2011
SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a prescribed regulation
amendment, pursuant to Section 14 -1 -3, Administration of Standards, Vail Town Code,
to amend Section 14- 10 -5H, Building Materials and Design, Vail Town Code, to amend
regulations for solar panels, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100055)
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Rachel Dimond/ Kristen Bertuglia
I. SUMMARY
The applicant, the Town of Vail, is requesting a final recommendation to the Vail Town
Council, pursuant to Section 14 -1 -3, Administration of Standards, Vail Town Code, for
amendments to Section 14 -10 -5, Building Materials and Design, Vail Town Code, to allow for
changes to the solar energy device regulations.
Staff initiated the proposed amendments after requests from homeowners and solar installers
when the existing regulations proved to be too restrictive. As a result, Staff is proposing
amendments to the existing solar energy device regulations that allow solar panels to extend
onto eaves and extend up to one foot above roof ridges. The proposed regulations also
provide guidelines for ground mounted panels.
Based on the criteria and findings in Section V of this memorandum, and the testimony
presented at the public hearing, Staff recommends that the Planning and Environmental
Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council for this
application.
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The following issues have been identified regarding the existing solar energy device
regulations:
• The 2 -foot setback rule limits many solar installations due to economic feasibility and
limited, complicated, appropriate roof space for solar gain. The rule may also not
achieve any aesthetic gain, as in some cases, a flush mounted solar system that
extends to the edge of a roof eave may be more architecturally integrated than one that
is setback from the eaves ( "a square within a square ").
• The current regulations are prescriptive, and do not allow for a performance -based
process.
• The current regulations allow for panels to no higher than the roof ridgeline, limiting
solar access and installations on many roofs in Vail, particularly with a low sloping roof.
• Visibility vs. Performance — installations need to be placed at certain angles on south -
facing roofs for optimal performance, which does not always allow them to be hidden
from view. In addition, if the solar system does not achieve a minimum performance
level, it is not eligible for certain state rebates, making it uneconomical.
1
3/1/2011
7 -3 -I
• Painting hardware associated with solar systems will void a warranty. Ordering the
hardware in black, or simply spray - painting the ends of a flush- mounted system should
be appropriate.
The proposed amendments are summarized as follows:
• The current regulations allow panels to project up to 8 feet from the attached roof
plane. The proposed regulations would add language to require panels only to project
the minimal distance, up to 8 feet, necessary to achieve optimal panel angle (40 to 50
degrees).
• Flexibility is provided in architectural integration for installations on existing buildings.
• Guidelines are added for screening of panels.
• The proposed regulations allow panels to project up to one foot above roof ridges,
while current regulations require that panels not project above roof ridges.
• The proposed regulations allow panels to extend to roof eaves, amending the current
requirement of a 2 foot buffer from roof eaves.
• The proposed regulations allow roof and fagade mounted panels to project up to four
feet into required setbacks.
• The proposed regulations address ground mounted solar panels, allowing them only
when the Design Review Board determines there is no practical ability to install on a
structure on the property.
The proposed regulation amendments to Title 14, Development Standards, Vail Town Code,
are as follows (text to be deleted is in 4 4ke t4e � 4g 4 , text that is to be added is bold):
14- 10 -5H, Building Materials and Design (in part):
14 -10 -5: BUILDING MATERIALS AND DESIGN:
H. Solar Energy Devices:
1. Solar energy devices should be installed on building facades and roof planes �:epf
^"` fa P--;; and oriented for energy production, except as permitted by Section 14-
10-5H-11 of this Code. In Vail, optimal solar energy device orientation for
maximized energy production and adequate snow shed is typically achieved
through a 40 to 50 degree orientation.
2. Solar energy devices shall be designed and placed in a manner compatible and
architecturally integrated into the overall design of the building and site, with some
flexibility granted for existing structures.
3. Solar energy devices may be screened to minimize visual impact with a false
fagade, roof plane or parapet walls integrated into the overall design of the
building.
4. Solar energy devices may project not more than four (4) feet into a required
setback area. may be ; s* wi th;„ the r * e 1 9etha - Ls „ ; 9t - „ 9 ;f
the mot,- ,G r , s e 11„ ,f Y., Y, YpeY ., ;*teel bg ! . h ;
to the ; setback -.
5. Solar energy devices shall not be included in calculation of building height.
6. Solar energy devices should follow the slope direction of the roof plane upon
which it is mounted.
7. Solar energy devices shall project no further from the building fagade or roof
plane than the minimum distance necessary to achieve a 40 to 50 degree
orientation. No portion of any solar energy device shall project more than eight feet
(8) from the building fagade or roof plane e to which the solar energy
device pai4e4 is attached.
8. When mounted to a roof plane with a pitch of three in twelve feet (3:12) or
steeper, solar energy device shall extend no higher than one (1) foot above the
3/1/2011
7 -3 -2
ridgeline. c °I or °n°rrni .-I °Iii^° Sha Pet e4ep -I h gh°r fhon the °vi ofini oG- ac °nf
ri °n r°°fo Inlifh nit^h °o °f thr°° f° finI°lI i° °r gFeater
9. When mounted to a roof plane, solar energy devices shall not extend beyond the
roof eave. "° inoto 11 °i-1 Inlifl-in tlni° feet (2) °f o r° °f ru-Ige °r r° °f °oIi° (ln r° °fo Inlifh
P tr^-- he;3 —Ie -P- thou fh I tt- fini° — the Gle r °Iii°Ini h °orr-I oll a,
10. Solar energy device framing, brackets and associated equipment shall be n
black or a color that matches adjacent building surfaces at the ref the P
No advertising shall be permitted on any solar energy device,
framing, brackets and associated equipment.
11. Solar energy devices may be ground mounted only when the Design Review
Board determines that the design or site planning of an existing structure
creates practical difficulties in mounting a solar energy device to a building
fagade or roof plane to achieve energy production. Cost or inconvenience to the
applicant of strict or literal compliance with this regulation shall not create a
practical difficulty. Ground mounted solar energy devices shall not be permitted
in the required setback area. Ground mounted solar energy devices shall count
as site coverage and shall not exceed eight (8) feet in height above grade.
Ground mounted solar energy devices shall be located and screened to minimize
visual impact.
See Al l e ; E `� `� o a 4 ° H�tl� ��h�^fi° ��ol °vnlonofi°n °f r °rvlllo -rte
vt� ngci 1 rc a� —� �o- i- rr f m --r-vr
The following are pros and cons for adopting the proposed amendments:
PROS:
• The amendments would allow panels to extend to the edge of a roof eave and up to the
ridge, allowing for more panels to be installed on smaller roof areas.
• The amendments provide more detailed guidelines for applicants.
• The amendments allow for staff approvals for installations that clearly meet all guidelines
and requirements, and provides a mechanism for design review board review for projects
that meet all requirements but questionably meet guidelines.
CONS:
• The amendments would allow solar energy devices to be visible above a roof ridge, which
may impact visibility, bulk and mass.
• The amendments do not address commercial applications such as solar utility installations
in the form of solar fields.
• The amendments create additional regulations that may be viewed by applicants as
requiring further regulation.
III. BACKGROUND
On May 4, 2010 the Vail Town Council approved on second reading Ordinance No. 3, Series
2010 amending Section 14 -10 -5, Building Materials and Design, Vail Town Code, pursuant to
Section 14 -1 -3, Administration of Standards, for changes to the solar panel regulations and
setting forth details in regard thereto. Amendments were made in keeping with the Town of
Vail's commitment to environmental sustainability and reducing carbon emissions by, along
with other programs, promoting renewable energy. This update in solar regulations was
intended to allow for optimal efficiency and more flexibility in solar installations. Solar energy
has become a popular source of on -site alternative energy since the Vail area with its cold
climate and abundance of sun is one of the most optimal geographic regions for panel
function. Prior to Ordinance No. 3, Town regulations required that solar panels lie flat on
3/1/2011
7 -3 -3
pitched roofs to ensure that the panels do not detract from the landscape, views, or the
character of the buildings in the community. However, in Vail, the recommended angle for
solar photovoltaic and thermal panels is 40 -50 degrees on a flat roof to allow for snow
shedding and proper solar collection. A flush- mounted installation may not always optimize
the efficiency of the solar panels, depending on roof slope. Updates to the regulations were
intended to ensure that any proposed panels are installed at an efficient angle while
maintaining the character of the existing building through architectural integration in design.
However, several months into the regulation local solar installers and homeowners brought to
the attention of the Town Council and staff specific requirements in the ordinance that
prohibited several projects from moving forward as designed. Council instructed Staff to work
with the affected parties to resolve these issues and arrive at an updated version of the
ordinance that fulfills the goals of the Town while allowing for more flexibility in solar
installations.
Town Staff then convened solar installers from the Vail area, the Front Range and the
Colorado Solar Energy Industries Association (COSEIA) in order to gain input on the existing
regulations.
The goals for this process were as follows:
• Meet the concerns of local and state solar industry professionals with respect to the current
solar panel regulations, while advancing the policy direction of the Vail Town Council:
• Encourage energy efficiency and renewable energy in the Town of Vail in
accordance with the Environmental Sustainability Strategic Plan
• Architecturally integrate panels with building
• Minimize view of panels from street
• Avoid new perceived building heights
• Avoid increased bulk and mass of buildings
• Maintain character of buildings
• Achieve regulations that fall in the middle 50 %, meaning the regulations are neither too
lenient, where any system goes, or too stringent, which prohibits most systems from being
installed. (Figure 1 below)
IV. APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS
Staff believes the following documents are relevant to the review of this proposal:
TITLE 14: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
14 -1 -1: PURPOSE AND INTENT. It is the purpose of these rules, regulations, and standards
to ensure the general health, safety, and welfare of the community. These rules, regulations,
and standards are intended to ensure safe and efficient development within the town of Vail for
pedestrians, vehicular traffic, emergency response traffic, and the community at large. The
4
3/1/2011
7 -3 -4
development standards will help protect property values, ensure the aesthetic quality of the
community and ensure adequate development of property within the town of Vail.
14- 10 -5H, Building Materials and Design (in part):
Solar energy devices should be installed on building roofs and facades and oriented for energy
production. Solar energy devices shall be designed and placed in a manner compatible and
architecturally integrated into the overall design of the building. Solar energy devices may be
installed within the required setbacks on existing structures if the structure is legally
nonconforming or permitted to encroach into the setback. Solar energy devices shall not be
included in calculation of building height. No portion of any solar energy device shall project
more than eight (8) feet from the roof plane or fagade to which the panel is attached. Solar
energy devices shall not be installed within two (2) feet of a roof ridge or roof eave. Solar
energy devices shall not extend higher than the existing adjacent ridgeline on roofs with
pitches of 3:12 or greater. On roofs with pitches less than 3:12, the Design Review Board
shall make a determination that the solar panels are installed to minimize excessive visual
impact. Solar energy device framing, brackets and associated equipment shall be painted
black or a color that matches adjacent building surfaces at the discretion of the Design Review
Board.
VAIL ENVIRONMENTAL STRATEGIC PLAN
Goal #2: Energy Efficiency: Reduce the Town of Vail municipal and community energy use by
20% below 2006 levels by 2020, in order to effectively reduce the Town's contribution to
greenhouse gas emissions and impact on global climate change.
Objectives:
5. Implement community energy efficiency and renewable energy program.
Goal #4 : Sustainable Economic and Social Development: Lead programmatic efforts to
promote sustainable and profitable business practices within the Town of Vail and the Vail
community. Implement employee sustainability programs to maintain high quality of life.
VAIL 20120 STRATEGIC PLAN:
Vail Values:
Natural Environment: Vail values the environment as a source of health, beauty, recreation
and economic strength that makes Vail a special place to live, work and play. As stewards of
the environment, Vail is committed to promoting sustainable environmental practices in every
aspect of the community.
V. REVIEW CRITERIA
1. The extent to which the text amendment furthers the purpose of the Development
Standards; and
Staff finds the proposed text amendments further the purpose of the Development
Standards, identified in Section 14 -1 -1, Purpose and Intent, Vail Town Code. Specifically,
the purpose "to ensure the... welfare of the community" is met by improving the design
standards for solar energy devices. The proposed regulations also reduce barriers to
installation of solar energy devices, which will have positive environmental impacts that
benefit the community as a whole. Another purpose of the Development Standards is to
"help protect property values, ensure the aesthetic quality of the community and ensure
5
3/1/2011
7 -3 -5
adequate development of property within the town of Vail." Solar panels can increase
property values, and Staff believes the proposed amendments help further homeowners'
ability to install the panels. Because the proposed regulations include additional detailed
requirements, it will help to streamline the development review process. Therefore, Staff
believes the proposed amendments are consistent with the purposes of the Town's
Development Standards as outlined in Section IV above.
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
The Environmental Sustainability Strategic Plan and the Vail 20120 Strategic Plan call for
improved regulations for alternative energy, a partnership with the community and the
need for reduced energy usage. The proposed amendments would further the goals,
objectives and policies outlined in these plans, including the addition to Subsection 1 that
outlines optimal angles for panels furthers Environmental Sustainability Strategic Plan Goal
2, aimed at reducing the Town's total energy consumption as well as carbon emissions.
Staff believes the proposed amendments further the adopted Town Council goals, listed in
the background section. The proposed regulations also further the Town Council goal of
architectural integration and maintenance of character. The proposed regulation that
allows panels to project one foot above roof ridges on steeper roofs is in line with the
regulation that allows one foot over height maximums for cold roofs. While panels would
be permitted to extend above roof ridges, Staff believes the proposed amendments still
meet the Town Council goal of maintaining character and avoiding new perceived building
heights. Allowing panels to extend to the edge of roof eaves will further the goal of
architectural integration, as it may allow panels to blend into roof forms to a better degree.
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
The text amendments are a response to concerns raised with the recently adopted
regulations. The solar panel installation community has voiced concern that the currently
adopted regulations may be too prohibitive and requested that Staff propose amendments
to the regulations to address design flaws. For example, the minimum two foot distance
from roof eaves proved to be prohibitive on multiple structures within the Town. The text
amendment addresses the problems found with the existing regulations when applied in
the field, which demonstrates that the existing regulations are no longer appropriate.
4. The extent to which the text amendment provides a harmonious, convenient,
workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with municipal
development objectives.
The proposed regulation amendments are intended to ensure safety, help protect property
values, and ensure the aesthetic quality of the community. The proposed amendments
continue to ensure that solar panels are integrated into the design of the structure to meet
the aesthetic goals of the town, which include development that is compatible with its
surroundings. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed text amendments will facilitate and
provide a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations
consistent with the Town of Vail master plans and development objectives.
5. Such other factors and criteria the Commission and /or Council deem applicable to
6
3/1/2011
7 -3 -6
the proposed text amendment.
VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental
Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to
Section 14 -1 -3, Administration of Standards, Vail Town Code, to amend Section 14 -10 -5,
Building Materials and Design, Vail Town Code, for changes to the solar panel regulations,
and setting forth details in regard thereto. This recommendation is based upon the review of
the criteria outlined in Section V of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony
presented.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation
of approval for this request, the Community Development Department recommends the
Commission pass the following motion:
"The Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval
to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to Section 14 -1 -3, Administration of Standards, Vail
Town Code, to amend Section 14 -10 -5, Building Materials and Design, Vail Town
Code, for changes to the solar panel regulations, and setting forth details in regard
thereto."
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of
approval for this request, the Community Development Department recommends the
Commission makes the following findings based upon a review of Section V of this
memorandum, and the evidence and testimony presented:
"The Planning and Environmental Commission finds:
1. 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. The amendment furthers the general and specific purposes of the Development
Standards outlined in Section 14 -1 -1, Purpose and Intent, Vail Town Code; and
3. 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.
4. The amendment promotes the policy set by the Vail Town Council, as outlined in
Section III of this memorandum."
7
3/1/2011
7 -3 -7
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION (IN PART)
January 10, 2011 at 1:00pm
Tpr ofyIL ' TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME
75 S. Frontage Road -Vail, Colorado, 81657
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Luke Cartin
Michael Kurz
Bill Pierce
Henry Pratt
John Rediker
Tyler Schneidman
David Viele
30 minutes
5. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a prescribed regulation
amendment, pursuant to Section 14 -1 -3, Administration of Standards, Vail Town Code, to amend
Section 14- 10 -5H, Building Materials and Design, Vail Town Code, to amend regulations for
solar panels, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC100055)
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Rachel Dimond
ACTION: Recommendation of approval with conditions
MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Viele VOTE: 6 -1 -0 (Cartin opposed)
CONDITIONS:
1. Staff shall provide in the ordinance presented to Town Council, additional language
addressing maintenance and continued operation.
2. Staff shall provide in the ordinance presented to Town Council, additional language
containing an intent section detailing the goals and objectives of the regulations to
minimize visual impacts.
3. Staff shall provide in the ordinance presented to Town Council, additional language
addressing the calculation of site coverage for ground mounted panels.
4. Staff shall amend in the ordinance presented to Town Council, a revised definition of
solar energy devices which matches the State's definition.
5. Staff shall amend the in the ordinance presented to Town Council, the language to
substitute "up to 50" for "40 to 50."
Rachel Dimond made a presentation per the Staff memorandum.
Commissioner Kurz voiced his concern about maintenance. He wants to make sure panels are
not aesthetically objectionable and maintained over time.
Commissioner Cartin stated that the proposed regulation may be in violation of State law. He
also stated the proposed regulations do not address new technologies in solar collection.
Rachel Dimond responded that legal counsel believes the Town regulations are not in violation
of State law.
Commissioner Pratt asked if homeowners have to follow any regulations based on State law.
Rachel Dimond responded that homeowners must follow Town regulations.
George Ruther briefly touched upon the process and the background of the proposed
regulations.
Paqqe 1
3/1/2011
7 -4 -1
Commissioner Rediker asked if any aesthetic requirements would violate State law.
Commissioner Kurz stated that the PEC needs to decide whether to move forward to the Town
Council to let them decide on compliance with State law.
Rediker stated the proposed regulations should say "up to 50" instead of "40 -50."
Commissioner Pierce stated that we are trying to adapt to new technologies and the ne4ed for
solar panels.
Commissioner Rediker asked whether the definition of solar panels matches the State's
definition. He suggested Staff expand the definition to include future technologies and includes
appurtenant equipment. He suggested more clarity on how to calculate site coverage.
Commissioner Pierce asked whether is it better to put panels on the ground for reduction to
visual impacts.
Commissioner Pratt suggested a statement of intent be added that includes reducing visual
impact.
Commissioner Cartin added that he is concerned about the stringent regulations and their lack of
ability to adjust to new technologies.
Commissioner Viele asked if the debate on State law should occur at PEC or Town Council.
Paqe 2
3/1/2(111
7 -4 -2
ATTENTION: VAIL CITY COUNCIL
CC: COSEIA, CRES, GEO, local solar installers and customers
RE: PROPOSED SOLAR ORDINANCE REVISION / WORKGROUP AND READING
MEETINGS OF MARCH 1 2011
Thank you for revising Vail's solar ordinance. This new version is a great improvement from the
previous version. In particular, it removes the "2- foot - from -all- edges" rule, which prevented most
solar system possibilities.
The new ordinance still has one key hurdle which will prevent a great number of systems from
the onset: it sets a maximum panel height above the roof's Apex to 1'. In many case (roofs
facing East or West, south facing roofs that are short, roofs with partial shade due to the
southern mountains & forests which many Vail homes face, solar space heating systems which
direly need winter sun access and steeper angles), panels must be higher than 1' above the
roof's apex. This is the case on existing solar systems in Vail, starting with the two obvious solar
heating systems which one sees south of the highway when driving into town. It is also the case
with a system for which we have been trying to obtain a permit for a year, for a long -time Vail
resident - this permit would be the first solar thermal system for which Vail grants a permit in
over 20 years.
At a previous Council meeting, we were told that a variance process was available. We went
down this path, and staff recommended against the variance request because we could not
prove exceptional hardship. We were explained that hardship cannot be established when
a similar situation applies to a significant amount of Vail's residents, and that the Town's caution
came from lost court cases over this very point. Also, the variance application was $520, which
exceeds the maximum allowed by law (the Fair Permit Act stipulates that the cost of a solar
permit cannot exceed $500 in aggregate, and the variance charge already exceeds that $500,
before the actual permit is charged for).
Therefore, we ask that the new ordinance include one of two possibilities:
1) enable panels to exceed 1' of height. This is consistent with language already in the new
ordinance, that shows how systems need more angle fro efficiency, and how angle also helps
snow slide off the panels. This is our first choice, as it removes thousands of dollars of "soft
costs" in time and documentation of variance processes, and it will enable the town to obey the
Fair Permit Act more easily, by limiting its own staff costs in reviewing solar systems.
2) if #1 is denied, enable some zoning staff approval of variations without the formal variance &
associated impossible proof of hardship.
While reviewing the topic of Vail's solar ordinance, I kindly request that you keep the following
aspects in your heart and mind:
State law dating back to 1978 clearly states that aesthetic restrictions on solar devices are void
and unenforceable. Although Vail's legal council feels this law applies to HOAs only, I can tell
you that limitation was not the heart -felt intent of this Act, nor how it is interpreted by most AHJs.
The Fair Permit Act is being re- presented to the CO legislature during this session, with
strengthened language and two Republican sponsors which practical guaranty its passage.
Governor Hickenlooper stated in his inaugural address that Colorado is the country's epicenter
for renewable energy, and made one of three executive order to cut red tape, simplify licenses
and regulations, work cooperatively with AHJ to enable innovation and show the business
3/1/2011
7 -5 -1
community that Colorado is open for business. Our previous Governor Bill Ritter just took a
position at CSU to spearhead a consortium on renewable energy. Our president has made
repeated clear statements about the economic, ecological and geo- political implications of
renewable energy and energy independence. The town of Vail has already established
sustainability as a strategic priority for the community, as posted in the very Council room, and
embodied by the function of the sustainability coordinator. The Director of the Office of
Economic Development & International Trade of Colorado states publicly that the new energy
economy has created 5300 jobs in Colorado, while the coal industry shows on its web site it
currently employs less than 2500 folks in our state. 53 pieces of renewable energy legislation
have been passed in Colorado in the last four years, including a key solar amendment voted by
the people. The recent oil spill in the gulf is, to say the least, a more consequential aesthetic
disaster than panels a few feet above a roof's apex, while nasty chimney flues and electric poles
already tower above roof apexes and potential solar panels. These new solar objects need your
support so they may be installed with somewhat logical returns on investments for home
owners, and progressively become part of our usual urban landscape, disappearing in the
background.
The solar industry is fragile, and needs your support! According to the Department of Energy,
the oil & gas industry receives $557 billion dollars per year in subsidies and tax breaks. We
drastically need a fair playing field, and simple permits are a big step in this direction. Governor
Hickenlooper caries a vision for Colorado to attract both business and tourism to Colorado with
its natural beauty and renewable energy landscape. Vail, with its obvious beauty, tourism, and
ability for leadership, is a natural partner for this vision.
On behalf of the many stakeholders waiting for your deliberation, I thank you for your
willingness to revisit this topic and involve solar professionals in this second round. I also want
to express my gratitude for the time invested by George Ruther and his staff in this matter.
Laurent Meillon, Director, Capitol Solar Energy, LLC, Harvesting Sunlight for 29 years
Board Member and Treasurer of the Colorado Solar Energy Industries Association
Policy Committee Member of the Colorado Renewable Energy Society
Tel (303) 623 2542
www.car)itolsolarenergy.com
"We run the risk of being the first generation in history to leave the next generation a problem for
which there is no solution. We must have a sense of urgency to seize the low- hanging fruit that
saves taxpayer money, preserves the environment and creates economic opportunity."
Governor Hickenlooper
3/1/2011
7 -5 -2
Elizabeth W. Dean
4918 Meadow Drive
Vail, CO 81657
719- 332 -1251
warrenhdean @yahoo.com
February 17, 2011
Town Council
Town of Vail
Vail, CO
Dear Council Members,
own a recently built property in East Vail and have been trying to
install a solar system to heat occupied space and water.
For personal, social and political reasons I am committed to
maintaining a sustainable lifestyle through curtailed energy
consumption am ready to commit to a system. However,
unfortunately I have run into conflicts with Vail's restrictive solar
ordinance and have had significant problems with obtaining a permit
to install a system on my roof.
Essentially, the system would sit on the roof, collect heat from
exposure to the sun, and store that heat. Due to property location
and proximity to the adjacent forest and mountains, physical
limitations exist on the placement of the panels, which need to face
south and be set at a specific angle to make the system work. I fully
realize that systems need to be aesthetically pleasing and not be an
eyesore to neighbors. But, as I will detail below, though the proposed
new solar ordinance has effectively addressed some of the
restrictions on the system designs it still needs to address a couple
of critical items for operable systems, such as mine to be built.
3/1/2011
7 -5 -3
know that many within the solar industry have been working with the
Town of Vail staff to address many issues and that a new, revised
ordinance is before you now. The meetings with the City Manager,
Rachel at Plan Review and Kirsten, the sustainability manager, have
been positive and as a result you are now considering a revised solar
ordinance. I appreciate everyone's efforts and want to thank
everyone for taking the time to work on the ordinance details.
One of the important results of that work is that the existing restriction
prohibiting systems from being located within two feet of the edge of
a roof area is removed in the proposed ordinance. This modification
greatly improves the ability to design and install systems with the
proper orientation and slope.
However, the current and new ordinances still have a restriction on
system heights and prohibits components from sticking up above a
building's roof apex. The reality is that some designs, due to the
proximity to forests, and the mountains, need to stick up a small
amount so they can "see" the sun. My property is a good example in
that it is at the east edge of East Vail close to the mountains and the
south side faces the National Forest. For the system to work, parts of
it need to be about three feet above the roof apex. In this instance,
there are no neighbors to the south (due to the forest) and thus no
one can see them from that direction. A couple of neighbors to the
east can see parts of the system from the side and their view would
be the same whether the panels stuck up above the apex or not. One
of them is next -door but screened by many mature evergreen trees
and the other is about 150 yards away. Finally, a neighbor across the
street to the north, from whom you may have received input, can only
see a small part of the system because it would be located on the
south side of the roof. Again, I would agree that the visual impact
should be considered in system design and approval, but in this case,
there is no real impact. Unfortunately, the current and revised
ordinances do not provide for a way to consider unique designs,
which do not comply the letter of the law, but which also, do not have
3/1/2011
7 -5 -4
a negative visual impact. Thus, I request a way to allow specific
designs to be considered in a way, which does not require a full
complex variance review with impossible proof of hardship
Finally, I also request that the Town consider the State of Colorado's
solar permitting law, which clearly states that the total cost of
residential solar permits not exceed $500. In our case, the costs of
the variance and zoning application already exceed this and at this
point, this total does not even include the costs of the construction
permit. I therefore also request that the revised ordinance be
changed to limit the fees that the Town of Vail's various offices
charge to $500. These would include zoning, permitting, and any
other fees that the town might collect in the process and approval of
solar and alternative energy systems.
appreciate your consideration of these points and the revised solar
ordinance. Please call or e -mail me if you have any questions or need
any clarification of any points in this e -mail.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth W. Dean
3/1/2011
7 -5 -5
ITL1 Oil
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: March 1, 2011
ITEM /TOPIC: Information Update and Attachments
3/1/2011
ITL1 Oil
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: March 1, 2011
ITEM /TOPIC: Matters from Mayor and Council
3/1/2011
ITL1 Oil
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: March 1, 2011
ITEM /TOPIC: Executive Session, pursuant to: 1) C.R.S. §24- 6- 402(4)(b) - to receive legal
advice on specific legal questions; Regarding: Council roles and responsibilities, Conference
Center funds and Vacation Clubs; 2) 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,
Regarding: Discussion concerning negotiations regarding Timber Ridge Redevelopment.
PRESENTER(S): Matt Mire
3/1/2011