Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974 Board of Zoning, Appeals and Examiners�[ BOARD OF ZONING, APPEALS AND EXAMINERS. F. MINUTES OF MEETING E January.' 11, 1.973 i -... Vaii. l l.. The meeting was called to order at. 9: 20.a:m. in the Town of Municipal Building. t _ I Il. The - following members were present: Messrs. Nottingham, Hoyt and Viele. Also present: Jerry Aldrich,.Bui,lding Official. John Eden and Rodney Seawright The following guests were present:. of Engelke Architects, representing - Kaiser Morcus. blew Business - Villa Cortina (Kaiser Morcus) A. Case Z -1 -73 - Request for 7' setback on southwest corner in . ieu of 101 as required. Mr. 'Seawright presented his variance request to the Board as follows:. The odd shape of the lot. pleasing has created a hardship in building an aesthetically building. T:he.proposed building would encroach and economical on the setback only in an area 3' x 3,' on th e. southwest. corner. The balance of the building meets al-l; setback. requirements. A motion was made by Mr. - Hoyt,..for approval of the variance'.. The motion was seconded by Mr..Nottin.gham and - approved unani - 8, mously by the Board. i3 -1 -73 - Request for.use of Glu -Lam beam at entryway jn a type 1I building where combustible materials are not allowed. Mr. Seawright explained that the. height of the entry makes it The difficult to use any other type of member such as metal. a 1 umi num was p roh l - -b i t�i.ve.. He:` further ex- cost for glass and cost that this is a nonbearing wa11,. Mr. Aldrich pointed out to the Board that a laminated beam would have approximately . ` a two hour fire res i st1 ve rati.ng and since it is a nonbearing wall he can see no reason why the Glu- l_am.beam shouldn't be by Mr. Hoyt and seconded by Mr. iottingham used. R motion was made for approval of the variance.' The motion .was `approvetl unanimously. ,C. B_2 -73 - Request. to use 49% wood on the exterior of,t:he third "by 6. Mr.. Seawright floor where only 40% is allowed Ordinance.N.o. wall area the 'third floor is 6.,330 explained that the gross of feet and they are proposing to have 3,093 square feet of. square wood veneer. The Architectural Control Board has requested that blend with they use.at. least this.muc.h .wood to make'fhe building Mr. Seawri g.ht f.urtlier exp.1 al ned existing structures i n the area. the walls and roof are concrete and he feels this would not be a fire hazard. Mr. Aldrich pointed out to the .Board that_` - our Ordinance is already a large departure from the Building Code which allows no wood above 15'. The question of using A,Idrich fire retardant treated wood.was..then discussed. Mr. feels that this would be an unnecessary expense and feel s`it were applied directly to the walls. would be safe if the veneer if it is furred out, it. should be f i reb l o,cked every l 01 . or Shareholders Condominiums had asked for a c.larifioat.ion of Ordinance d be No. 6 and an interpretation was made that the building coul considered in total rather. than by floor and .wall. Rfter.a great deal of discussion' pertaining to in <terpretation,, a motion was made by Mr. Hoyt that the variance be granted to allow • the extra 9% wood in this parti.oular case.as there is no fire hazard. Mr. Hoyt also suggested that each case of this ., type be considered on an individual basis rather 'than changing The the ordinance,or "making a general interpretation. motion.. • • U BOARD OF ZONING, APPEALS AND EXAMINERS MINUTES OF MEETING. FEBRUARY 8, 1973 I. Meeting Called to Order A. The meeting was called to order at 9:10 a.m, in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. B. The following members were present: Messrs. Nottingham, Young, Viele, and Aldrich (Ex- Officio). C. The following guests were present: Messrs. Gordon Pierce, David Sage, and J i m Pierce. II. Old Business - None 111. New Business A. Case B -3 -73 - Mr. .lames W. Pierce representing Shareholders Recreation Programs - Request to allow 51% wood veneer on exterior. of proposed Montaneros Phase 11 in lieu of 40% allowed. Mr. Viele pointed out that the mall area on the east side of tract C is approximately 201 wide. Mr. Aldrich then explained that a fire resistive wall is not required for Type V, one hour construction and therefore the variance is necessary only for the east wall since it is closer than the 31 allowed from the property line. A motion was made by Mr. Young that the variance be granted subject to verifi- cation that Tract C is {ub'ii`c:. Land. The motion was seconded by Mr. Viele and approved unanimously. B. Case B -4 -73 - HSW Associates (Snowbird Lodge) - Request to allow openings (windows, doors, etc.) at property line in lieu of 31 as required by Uninform Building Code, Section 1903(b). Mr. Aldrich pointed out that the Board of Appeals does not have the power to grant variances from the Code, but may only make reasonable interpretations or suggest alternate methods or materials. Mr. Veile then pointed out that Tract C is reserved by covenant for pedestrian access and that it should be considered as a public way by interpretation. He furth6.r- stated that Vail Associates will offer Tract C to the Town for dedication at a future date. After much discussion, a motion was made by Mr. Young to approve the variance subject to verification of the covenants which apply to Tract C. The motion was seconded by Mr. Nottingham and approved unanimously. Mr. Aldrich again stated his objection to the variance. IV Other Business A. Case Z-3 -73 - Mr. W. Alan MacRossi's case will not be heard un- til a plot plan is submitted for examination. B. The following Contractors Licenses were approved: [.,Aspen Construction 2. Paul Keller 3. Burnett Plumbing and Heating Electrical 4. James Craig 5. Palan Masonry 6. Hoe & Grow, Inc. (Jim Kemp) 7. Glenwood Masonry S. Cunningham Construction & Development 9. Hibberd Construction 10. Hoyt Construction 11. B & B Excavating (Thomas Bourke) Continued CONTRACTORS LICENSE - cont. • 12. Reinecke, James Jr. 13. A. to Z Home Repair Service 14. Rocky & Carl Becerra 15. Holy Cross Electric 16. Pat's Constr. Co, 17. Maxwell Heating 18. Amco Electric 19. Louis Cook Plumbing and Heating 20. Robt T. Lazier 21. W.& W Excavators 22. Airway, Inc. 23. Vail Associates, Inc. 24. Lavendar Drywall 25. Boydson Constr, Co. 26. Vail Plumbing & Snowmass Heating 27. 1 & J Electric 28, G. R. Spencer Constr. 29. Shaver Refrigeration & Appliance Svc. 30. C.R. Stanley Plumbing & Heating 31. Rose Drywall 32. Howard Electric Co. 33. Dover Elevator Co. 34. Quality Plastering 35. Eagle Valley Roofing 36. Gulf Automatic Sprinkler Co. • 37. Athey- Beaman Co., Inc. 38. Garfield Roofing Co. 39. Ace Roofing:'Oo. 40. Thompson, Chas W. 41. Delta Drywall, Inc. 42 Prestressed Concrete of Co., Inc. 43. Tiago Constr. Co. 44. Porto-Mix Concrete, Inc. 45. Dudley Holmes - Packard Enterprises 46. Brent Service 47. Garfield Stucco & Plaster 48. Master Pools 49. Erich Windisch 50. Newman, Robt L. 51. P PG Industries 52. Lawson's Electric, Inc. 53. Colo, Tent & Awning 54. Nobel, Inc. 55, Thomas Sachs Constr. Co. 56. Baker, Sidney M. 57. The Plumbers, Inc. 58.­ W'estern Slope Gas 59. Mountain Constr. 60. C & C Concrete 0 continued • CONTRACTORS LICENSE - cont. 61. ABC,Plumbing & Heating 62. Crowder, J.A., Inc. 63. Acme Fire Protection 64. Kiese Electric 65. Surratt, Elmer:A. 66. Concrete Coring Co. 67. Pinkard Constr. Co. 68. Battle Mountain Constr, Co. 69. Grayson, Inc. 70. The Tin Shop 71. Otis Elevator Co. 72. Consolidated Electric 73. Bush Constr. Co. 74. John Evans Plumbing & Heating 75. Sturgeon Electric 76. Hansen & Jordan Constr. Co. 77. Engineered Fire Protection 78. Swim Centers, Inc. 79. J.R. beck Fabrications 80. Basalt Electric 81. Richard L. Benes Constr. Co. 82. Cipra, Inca 83. J & S Plumbing 84. Fire Protection Sales & Service V. Adjourment.I A. As there was no other business, the meeting adjourned at . 10:45 a.m. Respectfully submitted, TOWC�OF VA 1 L Jerry L. Aldrich J (Ex- Officio) tm 0 • • z 0 E U a qW ra F� O �I O O a • H a O O Ey N W a w O z a O U I a a H b M h� 2m R O A O U r0 F a {d W ° O LV � d T. H �I .a 0 H O y r. o U w a { ] V7 °e 1 �r d 0 O U ,� � p O �' a F x. •� a � � a � a �4wy�a o"d d Q. itl F.1 Vi 4.� c V IOD ° r��o a i �, s �I z E u a cn S'i bA F °-1 An d OOW77 V1 s�i17. ^ t7� b C N... a, �.'' � y 7w y C1 �tl � V ; ryy7, •u ' U y `d 903 a c �4��o.��W, •d I' w a" o a .�. V y 0 p a O to s CL h� 2m R O A O U r0 F a {d W ° O LV � d T. H �I .a 0 H O y r. o U w a { ] V7 °e 1 �r d 0 O U E. f BOARD OF ZONING,. APPEALS AND EXAMINERS MINUTES OF MEETING j APRIL 12, 1973 . Meeting Called to Order E A. The meeting was called to order at 9.1.0 a.m. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building: B. The following members were present:. Messrs. Knox, Viele and Nottingham. Also prese.nt were: Jerry Aldrich, Building Official; Diana Toughil (,.Zoning Administrator -; Mr. Allan MacRossi; Mr. Gordon Pierce representing Slifer addition and € Red. Lion Addition; John Eden representing Lionshlead Lodge E addition. Old Business A. Case Z -3 -73 - W. Allan MacRossi request for setback va..riance on east, west and south sides of structure to allow 410 ". roof' F overhang. Mrs. Toughill explained that this structure is not now in the Town of Vail (Ilth.Filing), but wil.I be annexed in E the near future and Mr. MacRossi would Iike for the structure to be conforming at the time it is annexed. Larry Robinson, Town Attorney, was of the opinion that the 'variance could be l granted and become valid upon annexation, Mr. MacRossl further po.i.nted out that the structure was partlatly complete when the nonconformity came to the attention of the Town "of Vail. A motion was made by Mr. Knox to approve the variance. The motion was seconded by Mr. Viele and approved unanimously by ` I the Board. III.; New Business E - A. Case Z -4 -73 - Rodney Slifer representing Slifer .R Company - '. Request for 0' setback in lieu of 1010" at front: and north side of proposed addition located Lot B, Block 5, Vail Village ` First Filing, It was explained to.the Board that the proposed Zoning Ordinance contemplates 01 setback ;in the core area of the Village and that the continuity of -the building would be disturbed. Mr. Slifer feels there i.s a hardship in`.that he cannot add to the building without the:variance. A.motion was E. made by Mr. Knox that the variance be granted. The motion was l seconded by Mr. Viele and approved unanimously by the Board. B. Case Z -5 -73 - Mr. Lawrence Burdick and Gordon Pierce represent- ` Ing the Red Lion - Request for.31.0" setback variance in lieu of 1010" at front of proposed addition. It was pointed out to the Board that.the present patio.alrea.dy comes within -3t. of the property line and they request the variance only to use a glass enclosure for a: portion o.f the.pat1o.. The same in for-. E motion as presented in Case Z -4 -73 was again pointed out to the Board. A motion was made by Mr. Viele that the variance be granted and seconded by Mr. Knox, The motion was unanimously approved. C. Case Z -2 -73 - Engelke Architects representing Mr. C.. C. Martin of Lionshead Lodge - Request for 5' setback in Lieu of 10t on east side of proposed building. The east side of this , ' project is bordered by Vail Associates Tract land and will never be built on. Th.e building must be oriented in thI.s manner so that the two structures may be connected together. Apr'i 1 12, 1973 Page E A motion was made by Mr. Viele that the setback variance E.. be granted. The motion "was seconded by Mr. Knox and. approved unanimously by the Board. I IV.= Other Business - None V.i. Adjournment - As there was no other business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:10 a.m. E Respectfully submitted, TOWN OF VAIL Jerry L. Aldrich (Ex- officio) dt c • • O U r7 W w O O w • F Q W O W) a W �I z 0 Q� O O ar R 1� O —W y A • 1 d � p .O `g aai U] - a aka � O + C �✓ c �1 Q N � al ro � •� C O d O ,� O c`� .pp v�r• [ O �i y 3 0 3 c o'n m o v rCAI o �, co C' V 3 O. O viiV. 93 E- a s �' � A g o�O - dOm3.dw 3 m CD CD A C O O O E y N a� 3 C q� a> d', cn BOARD OF ZONING, APPEALS, - AND ..EXAMINE`RS MINUTES OF MEETING I MAY .10,. 1973 E t I . Meeting Called to Order A. The meeting was called to order at 9:15 a,m. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. B. The following members were present: Messrs. Hoyt, Knox, and Nottingham. Also present: Jerry Aldrich and Diana Toughill II.. Old Business - None ` 111. New Business - Mr. Dana Rickli representing.Gerai_.d Lewis Request for 51 setback in lieu of I0t as required on north side of proposed k residence addition (Case Z- 6 -73). Mr. Lewis is requesting the variance on lot 3, block 2, Vail Village first Filing so that the proposed addition can be symmetrical with the present structure The Board determined that there is no hardship in this case as the house can be moved so as not to, require the variance. A motion was made by Mr. Nottingham.to deny the variance request. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hoyt and den °Ved unanimously by the Board. IV. Other Business - The following Contractors licenses were. approved: Vail Associates, Inc. Isadoro Quintana Concrete Pumping, Inc. Gri n n e I I Corp. Castle -Peak Construction Mountain Movers, Inc. Ajax Construction Corporation I Elliott Plumbing & Heating Rolland Fischer E Mountain General Contractors, Inc. Beck and Associates Kvamme Construction Company l: Carr Plumbing and Heating I Maintenance Service Company V. Adjournment - As there was no other business, the meeting was E adjourned at 10:15 a.m. Respectfully submitted TOWN OF VA I L F Jerry L. Aldrich {Ex - Officio) BOARD OF ZONING, APPEALS AND EXAMINERS MINUTES OF MEETING Juno 14, 197.3 l 1. The meeting was called to order at 9:20 a.m. in the Town of Vail Municipal Bui,dIn9- 11. The following members were present: Messrs. Hoyt, Nottingham, Viele, and Knox. Also Present: Jerry Aldrich, Building Official. The.follow.ing guest's were also present: Messrs. Paul Bailey and Gary vanAuken, representing. Holiday House; Messrs. Dan Callahan and Rigomar Thurmer, representing Vail International. III. New Business - None. IV. Old Business - None. l.. V. Other Business HOLIDAY HOUSE: Paul Bailey and Gary vanAuken requested that the Board -of Appeals review an interpretation made by Jerry Aldrich of an amendment to the 'Uniform. Building ' Code. The former Building Official, Ed Struble; approved €: the use of wood veneer on the.exterior wall surfaces of Holiday House as shown on the building plans. According to Mr. Aldrichts interpretation, there is, too much wood planned for this exterior surface. Mr. Bailey fe.eis"that the continuity and aesthetic value of the building will ' be ruined if stucco is required 'in the quantity that M.r. F Aldrich deems necessary. Possible hazards were discussed and determined riot to be a factor in this case, but rather the interpretation of the ruling.. M.r.: Bailey . requested that they be allowed to proceed with the work since approval was already given by Mr. Struble. Mr. Viele gave his opinion that the wood surface be completed as. req.ues- ted. Strublo_Ts definition of a wall surface was upheld in this instance, but it was agreed that a .definition . of the word 'wall' is needed for future interpretation purposes. VAIL INTERNATIONAL: Jerry Aldrich.explaine'd that Frasier and Gingery did not find. the violation of 40 %.surfa.ce. wood- veneer regulation in their plan check of ,'the new.Vail International complex. In this case,.as in that.of Holiday' House, the question is one of the interpretation of a wall surface. It appears. that Frasier and Gingery interpreted the ordinance as the Board does. It was stated that the E E materials to be used are none- combustible. Mr. Th.urmer said _•' /2 G. I.. -.a :. i ,. .. ._ ..... .. .r .. .... .. .s .._.. .. .. ..__ ,. F. >... .. ., . ... .... .. x. .. ., >r ... ._, s. uxrt5e I Board of Zoning, Appeals and Examiners l Minutes of Meeting June 14, 1973 Page 2 that the LionsHead Architectural Control Committee recommended the 'use of woodt. Mr. Nottingham asked for a definition of 'wall' for the purpose of apply - ing veneer. Mr, Aldrich stated that the reasons for the restriction are fire hazard and different'i'al movement. He has determined.that the'building is safe and that non- combustible wood is not required for the surface in question. It was the opinion of the Board that this wall surface would not constitute.a pub.l'ic hazard.Approval was given for Vail International to proceed as per their proposed plans. Discussion followed pertaining to the amount of wood that should be allowed according to Va`II's Amendment to the Building Code, keeping fire and.differential . movement hazards in mind, The Board members felt that aesthetics should be considered along with safety. Mr. Aldrich felt that his ,Job was concerned with safety only. He was asked to write to the lnternationa'l Con- ference of Building Officials (ICBO) to ask..about foreseeable problems if there were to be a change in E the ruling on wood surface application. Mr. Viele feels .: that the new Zoning Ordinance will make quite a difference . in the regulations discussed here in regard to aesthetic . standards. Mr. Aldrich's proposal to change 1705(0)2 was discussed and Mr. Viele was of the opinion that it Is inadequate and would not cover every possibility. Various ways of handling the problem were discussed - including determination of percentage of wall surface by perimeters, elevations., wall surfaces as defined by Mr. Aldrich. He is strongly opposed to the massing of wood due to the hazard of differential movement. He agreed to write to ICBO to determine the possible hazards of massing wood, with the geographical . location of our community in mind. George Knox, Jr. suggested that if there is a need for the separation of wood surfaces, perhaps.a brace.or metal support could be used to eliminate the hazard. The following contractor's licenses were approved for I 1973: Mountain Roofing Forklift Rental Service Lane & Company H.S.M. Corporation Triangle Electric Associated Roofing, Inc. .:/3 w E E Board of Zoning, Appeals and Examiners Minutes of Meeting June 14, 1973 i Page 3 Eugene C. Laven Cole Construction Jim's Drywall Hughes Plumbing & Heating Maintenance Service -Co. E ,john Thomas Interiors Mustang Electric, Inc. R. E. Gordon, General Contractor Kendall Electric Company A. B. C. Plumbing, Inc. Carr Plumbing & Heating DeMartin Excavating John Kleinwachter Construction Eddie Miller Construction Rolland Fischer VI. Adjournment - As there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10 :45. Respectfully submitted, Jerry L. A.l dri ch (Ex- Officio) rj BOARD OF ZONING, APPEALS AND EXAMINERS MINUTES OF MEETING 18 JULY .1 973 I. The meeting was called to order at 9.20 am : in the Town of Vail Municipal Building.: 11. The following members were present: Messrs.' Hoyt, Nottingham, Knox and'Viele. Also Present: Jerry Aldrich, B:ui Iding 0fficial The. following guest was 'present: John Eden, Engelke Architects,. 'representing Kaiser Morcus on the Villa Cortina project. € 111. New Business - Mr. John Eden, Engelke Architects, requested a variance for V i I. I:a Cortina to a l l ow a four foot (41) setback on the south property line, In lieu of ten foot ( 101 ) as required. Mr. Eden presented the.following facts: The plot plan was incorrectly. drawn .due to a.m.is -. ` interpretation of the original survey. Contractors excavated and set forms relying on f` the incorrect plot plan. (CASE Z- 7 -73 ). E It was determined there was no.fire:.hazard and that it did not disturb.. green belt. Mr. Knox moved that the`p`ropo.sed variance be granted, The motion was seconded.and: approved. - IV. Old Business - None. { V. Other Business The following contractor's licenses were:approved for 1973; ABC Distributing I, Edelweiss Construction Elmer Glass Company J, A. Hyder Construction Ha ro I d Kane Lane & Company Hein! Larese & J. Oherlohr Concrete F. R. Orr, Assoc., Inc. Rocky Mountain Drywall, Inc. E. VI.. Adjournment - As there was no further business:, the meeting was adjourned at 10:15 am. Respectfully submitted, Jerry L. Aldrich E. (Ex -off i ci.o) rj BOARD OF ZONING & APPEALS MEMBERS & LENGTH OF TERM NAME DATE APPOINTED EXPIRATION OF TERM REMARKS Rl- T /0 6 &d' �jiM -r • • z O F U W a O W O O • O O a ro V O IA W W C� rW F� O E-+ z r. m G y O 0 ,a P�O� J.., V � dx uGti9m. .�aE Qoo ° LiI N •a g S 3 Jy auk Ha. T °M Vie! �A.,,r � - fir. �C• ON o O , O P.,- '5 T (D ct cq$ —0 � Rte, O 04 0 ° a O EP s. ° O cu ,� .0 � U N Cs .� ✓i c� �' .� � •� 'LY 'O C G 0 EZ3 w w (.1, 7 1�1 W 0 orn cad c� w a w `14 ° w o b d aU a 0 C w a c� b C l� q a � m m 0 H �1` 3 � aka 0 W a, b N O N W t w 0 0 1° ,o a� 0 CD o 0 � O b o w •� O cn cn �y p a m rl J Q1 ° ° U � G1 ° � w c •a 3 � �� �I G 'o Id d � O t A � � Co q� ?i y ca p E-� ai u O tl w a c� b C l� q a � m m 0 H �1` 3 � aka 0 W a, b N O N W t w 0 0 1° ,o a� 0 CD o 0 � O b o w •� O cn cn �y p a m rl J Q1 ° ° U fl 16 s� taro In accordance with the provisions of Section 8,5 of the Nome Rule Charter for the Town of Vail, notice is hereby given that a vacancy exists on the Board of Appeals an Fxaminers for the Town of -a—M.- i The.term of office will extend to June, 1974. Applications should be submitted to the Town Clerk, Municipal Building, Vail, by is any interested parties on or before the 17th day of July, 1973, Dated this fifteenth day of June, 1973. TOWN OF VAIL By Linda R. Nall Town Clerk RoaringFARank CARBONDALE,COLORAOO 81623 - - - [3031963 -3040 - June 12, 1973 Mr, John Dobson, Mayor Town of Vail Box 100 Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear John: Due to the continuing press of business and other time commit- ments, it is with much regret that I tender my resignation as a member of the Vail Board of Zoning, Appeals and Examiners. I have thoroughly enjoyed my association with this Board and wish you and the Town of Vail oontinued success and prosperity in the future. Sincerely yours, J. Robert Young President JRY/my cc: Mr. Terry Minger is • MINUTES OF RECULAR MEETING TOWN OF VAIL PLANNING COMMISSION August 9, 1973 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to orddr at 2:00 p.m. on August 9, 1973. The following members were present: Dave Sage Jen Wright Hans We i be I Bill Hanlon Gordon Pierce Also present were: Fred Otto Peter Seibert Don Almond Diana Toughill Gordon Pierce made a presentation of the proposed snow- making equipment building adjacent to West Forest Road. A Conditional Use Permit is required for this type of use in an area zoned agricultural. The proposed building has been changed sub- stantially since the first presentation to the Town Council. The proposed building is now approximately 60 per cent below finished grade and the roof is covered with sod; the site is heavily landscaped. The Planning Commission will recommend approval of the Conditionai Use Permit with the following recommendations for consideration by the Town Council. I. All landscaping must be completed by July 15, 1974. The Planning Commission agreed to accept a copy of the contractual ae,reement being prepared for several neighboring property owners in lieu of a performance bond. 2. If feasible, the building should be rotated slightly clockwise. 3. Dirt for berms and roof should be in place this fall so it can settle over the winter and sod can be done early in the Spring of 1974. 4. Vail Associates has agreed to paint skier bridge as part of the agreement with property owners. V. A. has asked the Planning Commission to suggest a paint color, and the proposed aspen green. 5. Proposed trees are aspen and spruce. A more complete landscaping plan must be submitted for approval by the Design Review Board. 6. If the building is expanded in the future, the wall toward Forest Road should be faced with stone. 7. The Planning Commission feels that a gravel driveway is more appropriate than asphalt on the proposed site. 0 0 MA NUTES OF REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMM i SS I C'N Y August 9, !1973 Page 2 . • • 8. No portion of the bicycle path should be used as access to the proposed building, The second item on the agenda was a review of the Vail West Ridge Subdivision sketch plan located on the Elliot property in West Vail. The Planning Commission voted to make a very strong statement recommending disapproval to the Eagle County Commissioners and the County Planning Commission.. The following items were listed as specific reasons for disapproval: I. All new subdivisions should be held until Eagle County can pass their master plan and zoning. 2. An environmental impact report should be required for this extensive a subdivision. 3. Density is much too high for the area and the site. It exceeds I:1. 4. Water and sewer facilities for this many people should be given careful consideration. 5. Only one access road is proposed for the entire site, and it is in excess of 8� grade in some places, 6. Approximately 1200 parking spaces would be required for the 750 units proposed and the steepness of the .site would preclude parking on much of the site without extensive cut and fill, Parking lots would cover approximately 122' acres of land. The final item on the agenda was a preliminary presentation by Levis Pennock for a conditional use Permit to allow a coin -- operated laundry in Commercial Core 2 in the Vail 21 Building. The Planning Commission found no particular problem with the location and it presents no parking problem. Odor and lint from the dryers are vented to the roof. Signed: Secretary to the Planning iommissior r r n August lOr 1973 MEMORANDUM TO: TOWN COUNCIL FROM: PLANNING COMMISSION RE: VAIL ASSOCIATES PUMP MOUSE In a meeting Thursday, August 9th, the Planning Commission reviewed a revised plan from Vail Associates for the Pump House to be located down at LionsHead. Based on that plan and with a few observations noted below, the Commission recommends to the Council that a Condi- tional Use Permit be issued for the building. Following are a list of points discussed with Vail Associates which should be made a part of the Permit: 1. A wooden gate and fence should be placed across the drive to screen the compressors located just outside the west portion of the building. 2. The deadline for absolute completion of the building, including all landscaping was set at July 15, 1974. In connection with this, the Commission recommends that the Town be provided with a detailed landscape plan for the project as soon as possible. 3. The requirement of a Performance Bond for landscaping was waived in view of the contractual agreements which Vail Associates will enter into with various neighboring homeowners, represented by Douglas McLaughlin, which stipulates that if Vail Associates does not complete.a satisfactory landscaping plan, the homeowners may come in and redo it -- with the cost to be borne by Vail Associates. 4. If suitable to the clockwise basis -- enhance the hidden 5. Vail Associates in, be extended to the the building. The the then west wall site, the building may be rotated slightly on a it was the feeling that this would actually aspects of the west elevation. iicated that the west wall of the building may west at some future time to slightly enlarge Commission recommends that if this takes place, be faced with stone. 6. The Commission recommends that the outside air tank also be screened. This would be accomplished by point #1 for the immediate future; however, if the building is extended and the wooden gate taken down, then the air tank would require some additional screening. • �J There is a bit of a problem concerning the entrance road to the building and the bike path which appears to run through.it. The commission recommends that the entrance road be put to the side of the bike path and be gravelled as shown on the plan this will eliminate any confusion about the bike path being actually part of the driveway. u P;', "RvIl-t 1.• , 1973 5�2:Vlic,-�% I`c, J cy _I; .,Iv A- V� c%n "ll(w M, fj C-: IN CC Io 5�2:Vlic,-�% I`c, J cy _I; .,Iv A- V� c%n -I'- . , .,../ ps, 4 I KV Ad &j Wo two " W4 i �Ihjoiwv! W!".) rlAa 0•t is LAWN cant n ON&) yont tin Mel up 1411 vw'� Si=wsdy, MY Ago 7-3 I a it . 0 0 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING TOWN OF VA I L F'L_ANN I NC COMMISSION August 2.3, 1913 1 he regular meel i ng of the Planning Commission was called to order at 2:00 p.m. on August 23, 1973: The fo I l ow i ng member: were present: Dave Sage Gordon Pierce Mery Lap i n B i I I Han Ion Hens Ode i be I Jen Wright Also present were: Steve Meyer David Collins Mr. Steve Meyer came bofore the commission with a request for the approval of his proposed house in Booih Creek. The planning Commission agreed to sit as the oes i qn Review Board on this matter since dclayinc until the lormalion of that board September 18 would have crealo.d a hardship on Mr. Meyer. The house shown was of log cabin character and the following decision was rude Heyor is to present the Planning Commission with a copy of the approval from the Vail Asscciates Archilectural Control CommiTtee. With that approval in hand, the Planning Commission, acting as the Design Review Board, will give approval to the house. There being no further- business, the meeting was ad_iou•rned. w Ir MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION August 30, 1973 • .../2 The regular meeting of the Planning Comm.ission was called to order at 2:00 p.m, in the Conference Room of the Town of Vail Municipal Building, The following members were present: Dave Sage, Chairman Jack F•r i tz l en Gordon Pierce .- Jen Wright Bill Hanlon Hans Weibel ' Mery Lapin .. s Others present: Tom. Korchowsky�' Louie Pintkowski Ron Riley Diana Tough! It Jim Lamont: . The first items on the agenda, were_ review of Eagle County sub - di'vislon requests. Th'e owner of Lot 19, Block 9, Vail Inter- i.. mountain Ceveloprnent Subdiv €sion. has asked for an $xempt'ion from.the subdivision.requIremen.ts in order to subdivide a r:es.i- dential'lot into two .pieces.. The_.Vai'l Planning Commission rec -: `ommended'to -the: County that a1.1 divisions. of property be required . to.go' through the normal subdivision procedure rather than be regulations.—The exempted from the regulations: The Planning Commission "f -eels - 'that exempt '!ons wh w-ouId, aIl'ow lots smaller than required` - would set a bad precedent-, for ' future development as; th i+s i n . f effect increases .dens i t i es -- - The second subdivision reviewed was another exemption s_1ml.lar to . _.• Lot .,19. Mr. Shapiro who ownsotl4,- Bighorn Subdivision-, Second - Addition has-requested an exemption from the subdr.vE�ti -on iregu:la- ' Lions 16 order to subdivide a du _'pf e X I &t T hie same recommendations :iw,ere made by the Pl.ann.ing C:ommission as'on.Lo't' 1 9. The P- lanning Commission did not review "the Cedar. Point Townhouses in the Heather Vail Subdivision 'as 1 t - -was resubmitted wi-th.a new name, previously disapproved by the County. It was recommended to Eagle County that the subdivision be again disapproved on.the basis before. -- same as The final subdivision reviewed was the proposed Lions View project. The Planning Commission recommended that the subdivision not be approved.as submitted for the following reasons: The density is far too great -- 33 units per acre or a F.A.R. of approximately 1..85:1..0.. ...:Recreational amenities -have not -been provided for the project which contains 54.units which are all divisible into two units. The park shown on the plat is not on the subject property, but belongs to someone else. The Planning Commission feels that the architecture is not suitable for the mountain area because of the flat roof with ventilating fans and .the portholes which would allow access for blowing snow. The building is too urban for -the mountain setting. The biggest e .../2 " Minutes of Regular Meeting August 30, 1973 Page 2, .1973 objection to'the subdivision was the access to the parking which requires a bridge across Red Sandstone Creek. This is the only greenbelt area in this section of West Vail and shouldn't be used for roads and bridges. Technical problems noted by !Cent Rose were also included in the letter to Eagle County. (copy attached). The Planning Commission then convened as the'Design Review Board The first project reviewed was the remodeling of VaH —Hi .Books and Things into a restaurant and bar to be a part of the Slope. Ron Riley,.Louie Pentowski and Tom Korchcwsky presented their plans to the Planning Commission. The following are suggestions made by Planning Commission for possible improvement of the proposed change. A letter of agreement.on the parking must be signed by,Ron Riley committing The Slope . to purchase the necessary spaces in the Transportation Center. It was requested that the stain color and awning design and color be submitted for appr.o.val. i The lights on posts are not in scale with others ir€ the.area and it was suggested that they be attached to the wall on the front elevation. The awning should be carried around the corner to protect the stairway from weather. This-treatment wo uld allow j a sloping roof over the stairway which would be more aesthetically .• pleasing. Revised drawings'reflecting the above changes must be submitted before approval can be given. The Planning Commission, acting as the Deslgh'Review.Boardy then reviewed the following signs. The temporary site development sign for Landmark ai L.ionsHea'd was unanimously approved as - submitted. 11.was suggested -f.hat wood be. used along the bottom of.- - - the. - icdh i:n: t h.e same manner as the top The hang! ng sign, .for Li E I y Langtree, was ,app roved_un;an i mous l y as presented. ;.'S -he hanging sign'fo.r• the'Harvest.-:Ta -ble was disapproved because the P.lanni.ng Commiss ion_ fie'.-t, tha.t.'. the. .colors...w.ere.. too 'bright _ -and .: not :natural, particularly the-purple - not It was auggeste_d. that.the sign should be brown and yel -low. The Vail, Factory was required to resubmi t the. sigh ref lecti ng the above suaQesti ons. ,- r The sign for Diversions was approved. with the . fo I ! owing "changes . },. It must be a hanging sign rather than painted. on the wall. and the word "needlepoint" must be incorporated in th.e main sign or removed entirely. The scrollwork adjacent to the Lodge entry may be retained. F The proposed sign for Knits Unlimited was approved as submitted. i As there was no other _b.us_i . n_ess,- the -- meeting. adjourned at 3:35 pm. Secretary to the Planning Commission 0 •WAIF 460h 0 t A S' 30 August 1973 Mr. Rod'Slifer, Chairman Eagle County Planning Commission Eagle, Colorado Dear Mr. Slifer, The Vail Planning Commission would like to comment on the application for exemption to the County Planning Commission concprninq tho resubdIvision of Lot 19# Block 9, Vail Intermountain Development Subdivision. The purpose of exemptions such as this serves to potentially multiply don,31-1-les within areas originally intended for resi dent iQl O�GOpancy. The overall corteorn of the Vail Planning Commission and, as we understand it, the County Planning Commission Is to try to Il.mit densities in the Upper Eagle Valley at this point in time. Consequently, the Vail Planning Commission would urge the County Commission in the strongest possible terms not to consider an exemption from Subdivision Regulations in the above case. Granting exemptions such as these can only encourage others •to try for similar exemptions; requiring full compliance with subdivision regulations may serve as a useful deterrent In the continuing problem of multiplying densities. -sincerely, VAIL PLANN NG COMMISSION ba,01:1 'Sage " 1 tpito I I" i 1. EC SEP - 41 1973 • • • is . E. 30 August 1973 Mr. Rod Slifer, Chairman Eagle County Planning Commission Eagle, Colorado Dear Mr. Slifer, The Vail Planning Commission would like to, comment on tho application for exemption to the County Planning Commission concerning the resubdivision of Lot 14, Bighorn Subdivision, Second Addition. The purpose of exemptions such as this serves to potentially multiply densities within areas originally Intended For residential occupancy. The overall concern of the Vail Planning Commission and, as we understand it, the County Planning Commission Is to try to 11mit densities In the Upper Eagle Valley at this point in time. Consequently, the Vail Planning Commission would urge the County Commission in the strongest possible terms not to consider an exemption from Subdivision Regulations in the above case. r Granting exemptions such as these can only encourage others to try for similar exemptions; requiring full compliance with subdivision regulations may serve as a usoful deterrent in the continuing problem of multiplying densities, Sincerely, VAIL PLANNING COMMISSION ` j�j D a v I dt� S aZJ ----- L...il. 0.. �.4..JL � - 0 1 iJ U r 1 1 . k i i � 1. i i l) % J ti !' n i r, r, r, ' CEIVLo SEP ' 1973 * OIL � of �lait�znin �¢ {?nxrN: 3 • • I• • i F#�aYuk:v _ -:- 4 �wwoO, Ud /NA l box 100 • v a i I Colorado 81657 • 303. 476.5613 30 August 1973 Mr. Rod blifer, Chairman .41 Eagle County Planning Commission Eagle, Colorado RE: Cedar Point Townhouses Heather Vail Dear Mr. Slifer, The Vail. Planning Commission feels that this. project is coming back for review with a different name but in substantially the same form which has been turned down by the County previously. Without delving into all arguments formerly submitted, the Vail Planning Commission recommends to the County Planning Commission that approval for the Cedar Point Townhouses not be granted. Sincerely, VAiL PLANNING COMMISSION; David Sage PO SEP - 4 1973 . Npt. Of Planning & �:a} CbU$'iY, Colo. 4Eii At iiilbox 100 • vail, Colorado. 8.1657 • 303.476.5613 30 August 1973 Mr. Rod Slifer, Chairman , Eagle County Planning Commission -Eagle, Colorado .� RE: Lion's View Condominlum ; Dear Mr. Slifer, The Vail Planning Commission reviewed the above plans in a meeting August 30, 1973. A number of issues were raised in regard to this project; however, the most significant points centered on density, amenities, and design. First, the densities projected appear to number 33.7 living units per acre. This is substantially more than any project will be allowed within the Town of Vail from now on. Second, the project does not show recreational amenities of any kind for its inhabitants. The site plan shows a recrea- tional park just across the stream -- this park is not a part of the subject property, it Is available for residents o'f the whole area. Fifty -four living units require some close consideration on the part of the developer to supporting amenities. Third, the character, size', and design are certainly not in keeping with architecture In Vail Village or in Gore Valley. No attempt has been made to create rustic effects of any kind with the building. It Is truly an urban building and not one for a mountain location. Fourth, the building requires an automobile bridge across ` Sandstone Creek In an area which provides the only green belt for the whole Sandstone and Lion's Ridge complex. The Vail Planning Commission feels that the placement of an automobile bridge in this area would be ruinous to recreational purposes for which that stream tract should be designated. The developer has chosen to come across the stream for automobile access, and we feel this approach should not be allowed. RECEIVED:. . S E P -4 1973 Dept. Of Planning & Devel. faglo County, Cola. i i • �i 101, i. Mr. Rod S 1 i fe r 30 August 1973 Page 2 Following our series of more technical points related to the project: I. The-protective covenants for Lions Ridge Subdivision specify a building maximum of six stories. The.sub- ject building is in fact seven stories. 2. The underground parking is goad. The eighty -nine spaces are correct for condominium units. The lay- ._ out of the spaces on the southwestern portion of the garage is illegal by Vail regulations. Further, 'every condominium is divisible into two rental units. Under Vail regulations, such design would require in: excess,of 100 parking spaces.. flat roofs with exhaust fans is 3. The prac #i Cal ity of questionable in this climate. 4.,. There appears to be no indication in supporting ; letters that water supply and storage is adequate for fire protection, etc. 5. There appears to be a typographical error in the 'letter from Upper Eagle Valley Sanitation District concerning sewer service. That district is in fact ,presently 'unablel,to serve the building. After ex-- pansion.' "next summer, it will be able to serve. We , ,.suggest the project not be allowed until after expansion. 6.: A sloped wall w i t,h holes i s 'not a good design for r ' snow country. 7: There is no indication of ramp grade." Is it heated? 8. South setback of five feet is minimal indeed. In summary, the Vail Planning o�,�s �, ion's eVfleweCondominium ; County Planning Commission that project ndt be approved as presented. We feel there are suf- ficient Issues of design, density, automobile access, amenities ,. and technical details to warrant a redesign of the building,, Sincerely, VAIL PLANNING COMMISSION David sage _. i r • • • MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION September 6, 1973 • The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 2:00 p.m. in the Conference Room of the Town of Vail Municipal Building. The following members were present: Dave Sage, Chairman Jack Fritzlen Gordon Pierce Jen Wright Bill Hanlon Hans Weibel Mery Lapin Others present: Lee Caroselli Keith Caroselli Skip Ross Diana Toughill Larry Robinson Acting as the Design Review Board, the Planning Commission reviewed the following signs: I. Lift House - The sign was unanimously approved as submitted if it is hung on the first balcony instead of the second balcony as proposed. 2. Children's Corner_- Approved if the pink balloon is changed to yellow and the colors have an antiqued appearance. Color should be resubmitted for approval. 3. Canadas of Vail - Two signs and locations were approved as submitted with the provision that the existing sign be removed. 4. Harvest Table - The Vail Factory resubmitted the pro- posed sign and explained to the Planning Commission that the sign must be green to match existing trim on building, decor and national advertising, but that they would be willing to change the accent color to yellow. The Planning Commis- sion approved the sign as changed but requested that a color chip of the green be submitted for approval. The Planning Commission, acting as the Design Review Board, then reviewed the following proposed additions: I. Pension Isabel (Ski Skeilar) Addition - Skip Ross of Ski Skellar presented preliminary elevations of the proposed ad- dition. The first question raised pertained to the agreement to purchase parking in the Transportation Center. The Plan- ning Commission feels that the present agreement is not de- tailed nor binding enough. This will be discussed at a later time and recommendations made to the Town Council. Mr. Hanlon feels that it is very important that the details of the addition match the existing structure. The Planning Commission also wants to visit the site to determine the visual impact of the addition. The general concensus of the group is that plans in more sufficient detail must be submitted before any action can be taken, Minutes of Regular Teeting September 6, 1973 Page 2 2. Betty Seibert Addition -- Gordon Pierce presented preliminary plans for this proposed addition. It was pointed out that these plans have not yet been checked for zoning compliance. Preliminary approval was given subject to the zoning check. The final item on the agenda was a discussion of the parking pur- chase agreement. Larry Robinson was asked for his opinion. He commenced by explaining how the whole situation came about. Mery Lapin suggested the following guidelines to strengthen the contract, which guidelines were approved by the balance of the Planning Commission: (1) A 25% down payment be required prior to the issuance of a building permit with the balance recorded as a lien or similar legal document; (2) The balance payable over a period of eight years at 8% interest; (3) Parking spaces purchased would not entitle purchaser to reserved spaces; (4) Monies collected from purchasers should go directly to reduce the indebted- ness on the structure; (5) Purchaser should have the full right of prepayment without penalty; (6) Cost of a parking space should not exceed $3,500.00; (7) In the event the parking structure is not built the monies shall be collected and go to the General Fund. The Planning Commission voted to recommend the above guidelines to the Town Council and instructed Larry Robinson to research the issues and draft a preliminary contract for approval. As there was no other business, the meeting adjourned at 3:40 p.m. t Secretary +o the Planni Commission • • MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION September 10, 1973 A special meeting of the Planning Commission, acting as the Design Review Board, was called to review the proposed Ski Skeilar addition in Pension Isabel again. The following members were present: Dave Sage, Chairman Bill Hanlon Mery Lapin Gordon Pierce Others present: Skip Ross Diana Toughill Dave Sage first asked the Planning Commission if they wanted to consider the addition considering their position regarding the parking purchase agreement. They felt this should be considered separately from the Design Review Board: Skip Ross presented revised elevations of the proposed addition. Since no landscaping, either existing or proposed, was shown on the elevations, the Planning Commission wanted to know if existing landscaping would be disturbed or if new landscaping would be added. Mr. Ross replied that no existing landscaping will be disturbed and they would be Oilling to add more land- scaping if it were requested. Gordon Pierce suggested a series of planters along the balcony rail to help tie the addition to the existing building. The Planning Commission then asked how drainage from the deck would be handled. He replied that it would be divested toward the rear and across the sidewalk. Mr. Ross was then informed that this would not be allowed and that an adequate drainage plan must be submitted. Gordon Pierce pointed out that the stairway and balcony doesn't look finished and they appear very much like a fire escape. The Planning Commission requested more detailed plans on the balcony and stairs. Mery Lapin feels that the proposed addition adds nothing to the aesthetics of the structure and objects to the addition on the basis that constructFon will be a never - ending thing in the core area. He pointed out that addition was not allowed under the old zoning ordinance but is under the new regulations. He philosophically feels this is not in the spirit of the intent of the new ordinance to slow down growth. Wall--to -wall buildings are not very palatable to him. Bill Hanlon thinks it would be very difficult to make the addition match the existing structure without repainting all of Pension Isabel. He also questions whether the addition will be harmonious with the proposed plaza and master plan. Dave Sage is opposed to the addition at this point of the building • and feels that the rear elevation doesn't blend with other elevations and heights in the area. He likes the aesthetic effect of the building as it is to its being changed. The present building could stand a general cleanup of the deck area. 1* • • Minutes of Special •eting September 10, 1973 Page 2 The Planning Commission was then asked for a vote of the quorum present. The addition as proposed was disapproved on the design guideline that the addition is not harmonious with the existing structure and that it throws the building out of scale. The Planning Commission also felt that plans were not in sufficient detail to make a reasonable decision. If the project is resub- mitted with revisions, the following details will be required: 1. A site plan showing existing building, proposed addition, existing landscaping and.proposed landscaping; 2. A drainage plan; 3. A detailed landscaping plan; 4.. Detailed elevations of existing structure and and addition, as well as surrounding buildings; 5. Proposed materials to be used for addition; 6. Photographs of Pension Isabel and surrounding areas. As there was no further business, the meeting adjourned at 3:10 p.m. MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION September 14, 1973 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 2:05 p.m. in the Conference Room of the.Municipal Building. The following members were present: Dave Sage, Chairman Bill Hanlon Mery Lapin Gordon Pierce Hans Weibel Jen Wright Others present: Keith Caroselli- Jim Slevin Lee Caroselli Daphne Slevin Dudley Abbott Irene Westby John Eden Diana Toughill . Dave Sage reviewed the Pension Isabel addition for the Planning Commission members who were not present at the special meeting on September 10. The Planning Commission questioned whether or not the proposed addition had been reviewed and approved by the Vail Associates Architectural Control Committee. Manfred Schober has been informed that he must get their approval. The main concern is whether it would be to the advantage of Pension Isabel to go to the expense of hiring an architect to do more detailed drawings if the Planning Commission is opposed to any addition per se. The members of the Planning Commission who were absent at the special meeting were polled and John Eden was instructed to go ahead with more drawings. Gordon Pierce presented the working drawings for the Red Lion addition which had previously been approved by the Town Council. These drawings were presented by Mr. Pierce to the Planning Commission, acting as the Design Review Board, as a courtesy since the addition does not yet have a building permit. Mery Lapin wanted to know if the Planning Commission could require Larry Burdick to sign away his rights to the street as a con- dition for approval. It was felt that this is a question for the Town Attorney and the Town Council and not a matter for the Design Review Board. The design of the project was reviewed and Mr. Pierce was asked why he chose the curved line for the north- west side of the addition. He replied he felt it followed the line of Seibert Circle and also provided a better view on Bridge Street by not using a square corner. Th-e Town -Staff was requested to check on the legal aspects of the owners' rights to the street. The Planning Commission, acting as the Design Review Board, approved the design for the Red Lion Addition with Gordon Pierce abstaining. Dave Sage then read a letter from Mr. Shapiro regarding the Planning Commission review of his request for exemption from-the Eagle County Subdivision Regulations. The Planning Commission voted to compose a letter to Mr. Shapiro stating that our reply to the County would have been different if the Planning Commission had the proposed covenants along with the request for exemption. As the Vail Associates Architectural Control Board has given their approval, the Steve Meyer residence was given final design review approval and the building permit can be issued. • 0 • • Minutes of Regular *ing • September 14, 1973 Page 2 The Planning Commission, acting as the Design Review Board, then reviewed the following signs: 1. Wine and Liquor Shop - it was recommended that the black portion of the sign be a very dark brown such as the trim color at Crossroads. The location on the east side of the door was approved. The sign was approved with the color change, which color must be submitted for approval. 2. Life and Title -- the sign was approved as submitted. 3. My Favorite Things - the Planning Commission disapproved the red and white sign submitted to match the sign program. They like the sign that is already there better. Ted Kindel will be contacted for his feelings about the signs for Crossroads. The Planning Commission also would rather see the sign against the wall instead of hanging. 4. Mill Creek Court Directory - it was recommended that,._, the bracket to hold the sign conform to the one next to it on the building. The sign was approved as submitted with the bracket change. S. Harvest Table - the sign was resubmitted with a darker green with the trim yellow. The sign was approved as resubmitted. 6. Childrens' Corner.- The Vail Factory proposed to make the sign six square feet instead of the allowable size of three square feet. They demonstrated to the Planning Com- mission how the small sign is dwar ed in the very large windows in the front of the building. The Planning Commission approved the sign as resubmitted with the larger size and the yellow balloon. 7. Sunburst Site Development Sign -- approved as submitted. Dudley Abbott then presented a preliminary annexation plat to the Planning Commission for property located west and north of Sandstone. He wanted a feeling about the densities and type of development the Planning Commission would like to see on the property. Mr. Abbott is proposing 18 units, two -story with parking beneath on .69 acres and is also proposing a swimming pool. HDMF zoning would be required to accommodate this number of units. The Planning Commission re- quested a summary of the HDMF and also MDMF zoning on this preliminary plat. As there was no .further business,,the meeting adjourned at 3:40 p.m. Secretary to the Planning Comm�ssaon 0 optember 197,3- Abe. 'L, Shapira P 0. B©x 1547 Colorado s16 Vail 57 , ; Dear Mr. . shapiro Many thinks for your note apt.. ' _ €�n rn n iur e�emptinnroi the.- 0cunty letter to the .County abeut . Your , aubdivisiOn Fegul4tions .: Your supporting .leftar to Robert dart aa�tainl hal�ged.'t€� reg rd. 4 Lc t : 'phis Plan. in clarify the s�:tuatton .n Co ►miasi ©n d0a.e feel tha -t if the. s�xppqrting �:i�tte ' hsd du been available. ;harp the agpl�€at'r , was rv�a�d `h t the 0ommJ;eein 'n, . August, $0, it would va b+ ei m oil, however thAt''.it� p�e�t��a� ,�n.re�;�rd �a such also o + xsmpt ons':remains i�asic�a�:1� �n� � ��tC�u�ty��npt aal p�s3.t3.an'whi�h way expr � Ph,. let ter of '.August 0 n the future,. �tatcld 1ketosee� ei3sethtci�up p with, psi ep.snatic no 0 Pr. _ I ba;,it re4eptLVe. Sineer4y VA1L' PLO .COI°9MISS(i Dave . sage ChBirmgri • September 12th, . 1.973 Mr/ Robert 11. Barr, Pl nnnisng Assistant Eagle County Planning Commission � Courthouse, P. C. Box 789 dagle, Colorado 81631 Ref-,.Your File #'St' 33 -73 Exemption from Sub- Division Regulations , Applicant: AbraWm L, Shapiro box,1547, Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Mr, Barr: In preparation for the meet:igg of September 19, 1973, of the Planning Cogrgrnissi.on, please maake this letter and information a part of this file ,grad please circulate copies of same to all Plrannixng Commission members. Enclosed please find as copy of ECDWs letter dated May 14, 1973, Be advised that we have built according to till plans approved and that all items therein have been complied with, 'Further, that the reasons for the requested exennptioll are; 1) this division of lands is not within the purposos for which the scab- division regulations were adopted. 2) that no violation of said covenants will occur by sa oubdivision of the subject Lot: into two (2) separate parcels. ` 3) that not more than one (1) private dwelling will result on each lot so that the orriginanl intent has not been changed to do with the original duplex lot. Further, that T am agreeable to file ra final plot i=ediatel.y when permitted to do so showing among other things, each lot with the one (1) dwelling on same. , punier, that the original and permitted density of two (2) individual dwellings on lot 14 will not be exceeded, in that we shall convey each lot: with its one (l) dw*lling i.snproveasaent, on same, with covenants re- stricting each lot to its OnO (1) dwelling improvement, This will also satisfy the objection of the Vail Planning Commission as i under'stua Ad it, 0 vurt:her, our covenants of conveyance Of eaach lotT Will restrict all present and future owners to, ,no aaniaaaalss, livestock, horse$ or poultry of nnykind shall be kept, raised or brand and except that dogs, cats, end household aali.msls may be kept only as pets. And that clogs will not be per - witted to roam at large but must: be kept confined onto property in a reasonable manner. Reference to the ,august: 21, 1973 letter of K. E. Richards, Eug. folr the District, please be advised that we followed fir. Richard's rerc molendations and connected ra independent~ sewer, water, gas Brad electric line to each dwelling. the independent sewer lines to each dwelling were coaarected and gpprrovad by Upper Eagle Valley Sanitaatioa District visa the roferred to easement in Mr. Richard's letberaand acre operable. Reference 2nd paragraph of Mr. Richard's letter, these plans of two separate buildings were &pproved by kCDC for this subdivision due to a creek running through the middle *f the property for the entire length of the property. • 1.0 • September 12, 1973 Paso 2. Mr. Robert H. Baer, Planning assistant Ref; Your File PSE 33 -73 Exemption from Sub- Division Regulations Applicant; Abraham L.Shapiro Colorado 82657 .F,®, Box 1547, Vail, Based on the aforementioned information, I believe the Planning Corwaission will realize that this &pP"Cst'on for exemption does not intend to take advAntage Of anY of the existing intentions of the .County Subdivision Regul atiOns nor of the existing rest "etivo covanant sa I therefore respectivclY request: that the Piamning Co:rmission approve this request: at its earliest convenience - Y urs v ''r truly Abraham L. Shapiro albs /BS enc. a s 0 t /D' �' � MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 18, 1973 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 2: 00 P.M. in the Conference Room of the Municipal. Building. The following members were present: David Sage, Chairman Mack Fritzlen Bill Hanlon Mery Lapin Hans keibel There were no items scheduled on the agenda. David Sage requested than the planning Commission discuss the problem of Bighorn zoning. The Planning Commission felt they should prepare a tentative zoning map and a recreational amenities map ,o be submitted to the planners for review. However, after discussion, no decision was reached as to the final position of the Planning Commission, and it was a --reed to schedule a meeting, as a work session on Bighorn zoning, for Wednesday, October 24, 1973, at 2:00 P.M. It was requested that Kent Rose attend the work session. Also discussed was the problem of parking variances for change of use in Commercial Core I. No decision was made; however, a meeting was scheduled for Friday, October 19, 19 ?3, at 2:00 to discuss what recommendations the Planning Commission would make to the Counci3 re parkir_g variances. As there was no further business to come before the meeting, the meeting adjourned at 3.00 P.M. /nmm 0 Secretary 0 NUTES SPECIAL JOINT MEETING VAIL PLANNING COMMISSION/TOWN COUNCIL OCTOBLR 23, 173 A special joint meeting of the Vail Planning Commission and the Town Council_ to consider the parking variances of the Patio_ Restaurant and The.Slope, and a setback variance from tliz Town of Vail art and craft center, was duly called and held at 2:00 P.M., Tuesday, October 23, 1 0,73, in the Conference Room of the Town of Vail Municipal, Building. The following Councilmen were present: Mayor John A. Dobson Richard Bailey John Donovan Josef Staufer The following members of the planning Commission weve present: David Sage, Chairman Jack Fritzlen Bill Hanlon Mery Lapin Also present Mere: • Terrell J. hiinger, Town Manager Jim Lamont, Administrative Assistant Bill Pierce, Town Staff Cindy Lamont, Vail Trail The Planning Commission considered an application of the Town of Vail for a variance in accordance with Article 19, Section 19.200 of Ordinance S (Series of 1973) in order to permit the construction of an addition for a public art and craft center with zero (0) feet setback in lieu of 13.5' as required. The Planning Commission stated that they would recommend that the variance be granted. Upon motion duly trade by Mery Lapin and seconded by Jack Fritzlen, it was unanimously voted to recommend to the Town Council that the setback variance be granted. The Council then considered the variance application and the recommendation of the Planning Commission. U-oon motion duly made by John Donovan and seconded by Richard Bailey, it was unanimously voted to approve the variance. The Planning Commission and the Town Council then reviewed the Commission's memorandum of October 19, 1973 (attached hereto and made a part of these minutes) regarding parking variances and change of use in the Commercial. Core I (especially changes from residential to commercial). There was discussic -i of the 90 -day interim period, during which time no variances for change of use would be considered for Commercial Core 1. Upon motion duly made by 'dery Lapin and seconded by Jack Fritzlen, it was unanimously vo_-ed to recommend to the Town Council that a ninety (90) day period, effective immediately, be set during which no variances of any kind be entertained by the Planning Commission or :own Council for Commercial Core I zone. The Council was in agreement with such procedure; however, no Vote was taken. The Council will take formal action at their next regularly scheduled meeting. 1�1 u 0 0 In accordance with the memorandum of October 19, there was discussion of the purchase of parking spaces in the specific cases of Burdick, Riley, Schober and Slifer. There was general agreement that the consideration received for the additional spaces required should be contributed to a trans- portation system, or possibly an escrow account, rather than the actual selling of parking spaces, per se. There was discussion of the price which should be set for the additional parking spaces required under the ordinance. It was pointed out that $3,500 was a reasonable figure to either purchase a space or to build one independently. However, after further discussion, it was agreed that the price should be set at $3,000. Upon motion duly made by Mr. Lapin and seconded by Mr. Fri.tzlen, it was unanimously voted to recommend to the Town Council that the incremental parking requirements be met and that the terms of the purchase be set at $3,000 per additional space required, to be paid either in cash, or by a ten -year note carrying interest at the rate of 8% per annum, with a minimum payment of $1,000 per year, secured by a subordinated Deed of Trust on the property in question, issued to the Town of Vail. The Planning Commission considered an application by Mr. Ron Riley, representing The Slope, for a parking variance in accordance with Sections 24.200, 8.510 and 19.200 of Ordinance 8, Series of 1973, in order to allow the expansion of the subject restaurant into the present Vali -Hi Books and Things premises. The Change of Use requires four additional parking spaces which the site will not accommodate. The Planning Commission advised Mr. Riley of their recommendations made to the Town Council. Mr. Riley stated he was not pleased with their proposal for the purchase of spaces and questionedthe reasoning used for calculating additional spaces for changing use from shop to restaurant, inasmuch as it is a change from commercial to commercial. He also stated that he assumed he was going to get a variance, as it was implied at his liquor license hearing that parking would be reviewed at a later time. He understood that the parking was going to be resolved with no economic impact and it would be reasonable and equitable. Mr. Lapin made a motion, seconded by Jack Fritzlen, and it was unanimously voted to recommend to the Town Council that Mr. Riley's application, representing The Slope, dated October 3, 2973, be approved subject to the condition that the incremental parking requirements be met and hat the terms of the purchase be set at $3,000 per additional space required, to be paid either in cash, or by a ten -year note carrying interest at the rate of 8% per annum, with a minimum payment of $1,000 per year, secured by a subordinated Deed of Trust on the property in question, issued to the Town of Vail. The Town Council considered Mr. Riley's application and the Planning Commission's recommendation. After reviewing the same, Richard Bailey made a motion, seconded by John Donovan, and it was unanimously voted that the application for a variance be approved, in accordance with the recommendation made by the Planning Commission, as stated above. -2- 0 0 The Planning Commission considered an application of Michael M. Salloway, Frederick L. Angeloh and Ralph T. Sloan, repre- senting the Patio Restaurant, for a parking variance in accordance with Sections 14.200, 8.610 and 19.200 of Ordinance 8 (seri.es of 1973) in order to allow the expansion of the subject restaurant into the area above the Gondola Ski Shop. The change of use requires two additional parking spaces which the site will. not accommodate. Jay Peterson and Doug McLaughlin were also present at this portion of the meeting. it was stated by them that the space is presently a four - bedroom residence, with possibly 4 to S cars parked at the premises. The restaurant will. be a breakfast - lunch type restaurant, open 7 A.M. to 3 or 4 P.M. It was noted that parking could not be furnished on the site without a variance. They also noted that with the present apartment, there are approximately 4 cars coming through the Town and with a restaurant, no cars would come into the core area, since they would probably be parking in the main parking lot. The Planning Commission felt that this application should not be acted upon until after the 90 -day interim period, inasmuch as it had not been reviewed by them, nor the Design Review Board, until this time. However, it was pointed out by the Mayor that the variance requests of both The Slope and the Patio Restaurant were made on the same date and, therefore, should be considered at this time. Mr. Lapin made a motion, seconded by Jack Fritzlen, and it was unanimously voted to recommend to the Town Council that the application of the Patio Restaurant, dated October 3, 1973, be approved subject to the condition that the incremental parking requirements be met and that the terms of the purchase be set at $3,000 • per additional space required, to be paid either in cash, or by a ten -year note carrying interest at the rate of g% per annum, with a minimum payment of $1,000 per year, secured by a subordinated Deed of 'i'rust on the property in question. issued to the Town of Vail. The Town Council then considered the Patio Restaurant's application and the Planning Commission's recommendation. John Donovan expressed his opinion that it was not in the best interest of the Town to allow such a change. However, a motion was made by Josef Staufer, seconded by Richard Bailey, and it was unanimously voted that the application for a variance be approved, in accordance with the recommenda- tion made by the Planning Commission, as stated above. As there was no further business to come before the meeting, it was voted to adjourn. /nmm • -3- retary r F__1 � J • i d •1 • • MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION OCTOBER 25, 1973 The regular meeting of the planning Commission was called to ordor at 2:00 P.M. in the Conference Room of the Town of Vail Municipal Building. The following members were present: David Sage, Chairman Jack I'ritzlen Mery Lapin Gordon Pierce Hans Weibel Jen Wright Also present was Jim Lamont, Administrative Assistant. Mr. Sage reviewed what happened at the meeting on Tuesday, October 23, 1973. He stated that there was fundamental agreement of the Town Council. with the recommendations made by the Planning Commission regarding pending parking variances for Commercial Core I (in accordance with memo of October 19). He stated that the variance requests of both the Patio Restaurant and The Slope were made simultaneously and, therefore, were treated in (,he same manner and granted variances, subject to certain conditions (as stated in the minutes of October 23, 1973). Mr. Sage also advised that the Council would make a statement re the 90 -day interim period at their meeting on November 6th. The Commission then considered an application for a parking variance by Lionsquare Ltd. Partnership, in accordance with Sections 14.200 and 19.200 of Ordinance 8 (Series of 1973) in order to allow construction of a conference and meeting facility in place of twelve (12) existing parking spaces in underground parking structure. Representing Lionsquare were Jim Cunningham, warren Klug and John Eden. Supporting documents were presented by Lionsquare, copies of which are attached hereto and made a part of these minutes. It was pointed out that the reason for this variance request is that there is a conflict between Vail Associates and Lionsquare as to a commitment regarding the use of VA's meeting space. The VA meeting space has not been available. It was felt by Mr. Cunningham that they would not need to provide additional parking, because of the bus transporta- tion use in LionsHead, along with the tremendous amount of parking already provided in the area. Mr. Lapin asked if the conference center would be available to other people on a rental basis; it would be available on a short -term basis to the community if it did not conflict with a group reserva- tion. It was also pointed out that there is no other develop- able land owned by them on which a convention center could be constructed. The parking spaces can not be relocated on adjacent projects. If a variance were granted, it would make a nonconforming building even more nonconforming. It was generally agreed by the members that the eliminated parking spaces should be made up, especially in view of the fact that LionsHead may need the spaces in the future. It was also pointed out that the convention center could be built under- ground, but the developers felt it was economically not feasible. Mr. Sage advised that the Commission would take the request of Lionsquare Ltd, under consideration until their next meeting, -- November 1, 1973, -- at which time recommendations would be made to the Town Council for the Council meeting on November G, 1973. It was decided to schedule a meeting to discuss the zoning of Bighorn on Tuesday, October 30, 1973, at 2 :00 P.M. Mr. Bans Weibel advised the Commission of his resignation, effective in-two weeks. As there was no further business to come before the meeting, the meeting adjourned at 3:15. /nmm • • ecr.etary 0 0 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 1, 1973 The regular meeting of the planning Commission was called to order at 2:00 P.M. in the Conference Room of the Town of Vail Municipal Building. The following members were present: David Sage, Chairman Jack Fritzlen Bill Hanlon Mery Lapin Gordon Pierce Bans Weibel Jen Wright The Commission then discussed the variance request of Lionsquare Ltd., continued from last week's meeting. The Zoning Administrator advised that they are eliminating required parking spaces and creating another parking require- ment for the conference area. The change, however, does not alter the appearance of the building. There is no place where they could add to the building, because of height; length and diagonal requirements. Mr. Jim Lamont suggested that possibly a variance could be granted, with the condition that an assessment be made for parking fee to cover the deficit parking. Mr. Weibel noted that he was opposed to granting a variance in this instance and felt it would be a bad precedent to do so. Jen Wright disagreed with Mr. Weibel and felt the Lionsliead area needed a convention center. • Also present were: James F. Lamont, Administrative Assistant Lou Parker Mr. Sage presented the Commission members with a draft of the Bighorn zoning recommendations for their review. A few corrections were made and the final will be retyped by Nadine on Town stationery. Mr. Sage advised the Commission that Ski Club Vail desired to construct a temporary waxing shack, near the existing race shack, at Golden Peak. The structure had been viewed by the Zoning Administrator, to be presented to the planning Commission as a temporary- structure. It was agreed that the shack should be removed immediately after ski season and that it should be stained in the same color as the existing race shack. A vote was taken, with Mr. Lapin and Mr. Sage abstaining; unanimous approval, subject to receipt of a letter from Mr. Dave Garton of Ski Club Vail stating responsibility for removal of the shack by no later than May 15, 1974, and that the building will be stained in the same color as the existing race shack; if the building is not removed by May 15, it will be removed by the Town of Vail at the expense of Ski Club Vail. The Commission then discussed the variance request of Lionsquare Ltd., continued from last week's meeting. The Zoning Administrator advised that they are eliminating required parking spaces and creating another parking require- ment for the conference area. The change, however, does not alter the appearance of the building. There is no place where they could add to the building, because of height; length and diagonal requirements. Mr. Jim Lamont suggested that possibly a variance could be granted, with the condition that an assessment be made for parking fee to cover the deficit parking. Mr. Weibel noted that he was opposed to granting a variance in this instance and felt it would be a bad precedent to do so. Jen Wright disagreed with Mr. Weibel and felt the Lionsliead area needed a convention center. • Aar. Gordon Pierce also felt this type of convention- meeting facility was necessary- and it was unfair to have a parking requirement for a convention center. After further discussion, a motion was made and it was unanimously voted to recommend to the Town Council that the request for a variance be denied. The vote was as follows: Gordcn Pierce - yes; Jack Fritzlen - no; Jen Wright - yes; Hans Weibel - no; Mery Lapin - no; Bill Hanlon - no; David Sa e - no. Mr. Sage stated he would write a letter to the Town Council recommending that, while sympa- thetic to the need for a conference room in Li_onsHead to handle up to 250 people, the request for a variance be denied. The next item discussed wLs the converting of two rooms in Pension Isabel to a dentist office (Dr. Peter Wells). No building permit had been obtained; , stop work order had been issued. Dr. Wells came to the meeting to request a variance. Air. Sage advised the Commission_ that nothing had been decided by council about stopping the variance request. Mr. Sage stated the Commission would write a letter to Council recom- mending that this matter fall ti�ithin the 90 -day interim period until a decision is made regarding change of use. As there was no further business to come before the meeting, the meeting adjourned at 3:00 P.M. / nmin L • ecretary i MINUTES) 11E,' ULAIi IMEE "El -NG PLANNING CO,MMI,lSION NOVL'Mjfl;It 8, 197 of the P"l_annin -g C;omrEa:i, > =, i.on was cal_l.(: to o:r°dei* zat 2 00 l:'.',i. in the Conferenc.e Room of the Town of VuLi l_ }Iun i.clpal Building. The fo_l..lcnvin€ rnenrbers were present.: David Sage, Chai_rrnan 13:i_1.1 ila.nl_on Mery Lapin Gordon Pierce Also present were: Jinn Lamont, Administrative Assistant . Kent lose, Tov.r� Engineer interested citizens 1Sr. Sar;'e opened the rnee t_i.ng by suggesting 'that the Design Review Board, not the Planning Commission, should review buildings. Mr. Lapin suggested that possibly both groups could meet together; agreed. On the agenda for the meeting were four preliminary sketch plans for recotiimendati.ons to the Eagle County Planning Coanmiss:i.on: - -- (1) Snow Lion II; (2) llonje stare ILT; (3). Arrowhead at Vail; and (4) Benchmark at Beaver Creek. 1. Sn(m,,, Lion II -- Mr. James Darby of the Snow Lion Condcmj_n'iuimi was present to state opposition to this projecf:: ,,Ir. Darby stated there are serious problems, in particular, with regard t oparking, siting and snow stacking. It was pointed out that street s"otbacks are OK. The distance between the two buildings is 15 feet; 7 feel; from tl,e southwest corner; 22 units and 32,379 square feet-, elevations - 3.1 stories; parking area infringes on swimming pool area; short on parking spaces; no provision for refuse containers,' everythin -- included, over 65'10 coverage of land. The C.c7mrna.ssi.on requested that Mr. Darby write a letter st�rti-ng all points of opposition; he agreed to do so, and a copy of his letter is attached hereto and ma.de a part of these rl.inutes. Mr. Sa „e stated that the Planning Commission would decide on the points of recommendation at their next meeting, and a G letter will he « °ritter� to the l a.gle County Planning Commission. 2. home <s1:: -Llce_ IIl - Mr. Lapin stated he had a conflict; Of intca c :7i; wi th this project, beclitr se of a relationship with developer . Soilic, of the points discussed' -- existing buildings are 6 stories; proposed buildings -- 3 stories; encroachment on Lti;.a.,l.a-ty easements; setback is OK; lack of amenities; some undr,t €;roE nd parking„ bl.rt most is surfac > parking; density 1 ' it in >ie; of re rage For underground parking, site coyer `age, rind atacnities. It w�r.s felt. that there were insufficient: drawings pr esr. n i i?d to m rl.e are occur ate judgement at this time; however, Iicrri nose \vi.l.l furtlr.er review the project. A letter of recom- mend',t(Aon NsTli.l.l be written to the Eagle County Planning Commission • nCex1. W(,`ek . • 3. Arrowboad t Va it -.. 'phis subdivision does not have to he rc_ v i c trc c1 untie .r �c n �. l.e Bill 3 5; however, the Eagle County y l'lanni.ng Commission wants the Vat] Planning; Commission to review the whol o Avon area. The; Counl:y has reviewed the sketch plan brie f Ly and will he reviewed by them again in Ducambor. The plan for the area is to keep the meadow open and build let Lhc units up against thu mc3unt,a :i n . There will be 2350 condominium units, 75 single family dupli±;es, 200 lodge units, 180,000 square feet of commercial space ( 350 acres, 8 or 9 unUs per ncro); eventually, will be a transportation system; 55 ski lj,Vts in the area, Will Carry approximately 2500 skiers, ali ski_ lifts on private land, no association with Beaver Creek; probably wilt need Forest: Service permit to ,ski both nr•errs; skiable terrain - 600 -700 acres. There was some question as to the number, of beds per dwelling gni.t. Gordon Pierce suggested that more material is necessary to make recommendations on this project. It was pointed out that they County has more detailed information, which will be provided to the Vail Planning Commission. 4. Bench_ nark at Beaver Creek -- This is a preliminary sub-- • dJ_v_is_Lorr P4aII, to be reviewed by Eagle County Planning Com- mission in December. Mr. Leroy Tobler was present representing, Benchmark. He stated there is a land trade with the Fish & Game Department; the rest of property will be used for the bulk of development. Property is to be developed with 20 units per acre; 75 acres.of open space presented to the County for their use. Open space is above county regulations. They can supply only 50% employee housing. Vail Associates transporta- tion system will limit vehicular traffic to the site. There has been. a joint plabning effort submitted to Nottingham,' Vail Beaver Creek and Arrowhead as an attempt to obtain school. sites. There are no geographical. problems. Mr. Tobler stated they are close the zoning ordinance of Vail; the only difference might be 1 covered parking stall per unit (1910 units). Com- let:i.on of total!- units should be by 1990. It was also pointed out that the County does not require asphalt paging unless under :11,000 square feet. They will sup] ?ly the Vail Planning Commission with a comparison breakdown of the project as to the Vail zoning ordinance and the Eagle County land planning. As there was no further business to come before the.meeting, the meeting was adjourned at 3:00 P.M. I,J /nmm • -2- Secretary • !LJ • MINUTES R[GULAR MEETING PLANNING COINMISSION NOVEMBER 15, 1974; The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was convened at 2:00 P.M. in the Conference Room of the Town of Vail Municipal Building. The following members were present: David Sage, Chairman Bill Hanlon Gordon Pierce Jen Wright Also present were: Jim Lamont, Administrative Assistant Diana Toughill, Zoning Administrator Bill Heimbach, Vail Villager Jim Darby, representing Snow Lion Condominiums Jen Wright briefly reviewed projects of Vail Associates which will be conning before the Planning Commission in the near future; to.-wit, preliminary plat for potato Patch area at Sandstone, and development plans for Tracts A and B. An Environmental Impact Report is being prepared for both projects, and the Town has requested that Eldon Beck be retained -to review the plans in relation to the Vail Master Plane Mr. Beck has been given a brief overview on both projects. The Commission then discussed the Snow Lion II project. Mr. Darby had prepared a letter stating points of apposition to the project; Chairman,Dav'id Sage stated he would write the letter of recommendation to the Eagle County Planning Coafmission endorsing Mr. Darby's letter. With regard to the Homestake III project, it was felt that additional information was necessary; in particular, from Kent Rose, Town Engineer, before a recommendation could be made to the Eagle County Planning Commission. The Commission then discussed the proposed zoning of Bighorn, and in particular, the commercial and recreational zoning. The Commission revietiged points in favor and points against zoning for No Commercial Activity, Limited Commercial - Neighborhood Shopping Center, and Major Commercial Center. (See memorandum to Eldon Beck dated November 16, 1973). As there was no further business to come before the meeting, the meeting adjourned at 3:00 P.M. APPROVED: David Saye, Chairman Nadine M. Monaco, Secretary i i r t i I l' • PLA 1'° "i COMMISSION NOY I PER 29, 1973 The regular meting of the Planning Commission was convened at 1:30 P.t�0 .� in the Conference Room of the Town 6F Vail Municipal Building. The following members. were present: David Sage, Chairman Jack Fri t.zl en Bill Hanlon Mery Lapin Gordon Pierce Jen Wright Also present were: Jim Lamont, Administrative Assistant Diana Toughill, :toning Administrator The meeting was called to order at 1:30 to allow for discussion of the Change of Use situation in the Core area and the fact: that Town Council had not yet acted upon same. Points of discussion were the increase in traffic, violation of zoning ordinance, passage by citizens of Vail of a bond issue for parking structure, and the fact: that the people of Vail would probably not want the structure for change of use to allow offices downtown, etc. By granting these variances, it was felt that people changing use were being provided with _ something they could not 'provide themselves, i.e., parking spaces. It wah pointed out that more public input was necessary to better understand the situa- tion. Under the present ordinance, conceivably, everything on the.first floor (Core area) could become capmercial, second floor, offices, and possibly, the third Moor also. The impact would be a character change in the Core. It was also pointed out that there may not he too much left in the Core which could be changed and, therefgre, concern at this time was unnecessary. The Zoning Administrator will compile a report re change in the Core area for the next regularly scheduled greeting. Jim La mont will also request that Eldon Beck attend the next Planning Commission meeting. It was generally agreed that the stop work order issued for Pension Isabel should be enforced; Nr. Fritzlen wished to disqualify himself in this discussion because of personal friendship. -The Commission then considered an application by Dr. Peter Alan dells for a parking variance in accordance with Sections 14.200, and 14.800, of Ordinance 8 (Series of 1973) in order to allow a change of use from two lodge rooms to a dental office in units 7 and 8 of Pension Isabel. The change of use requires one additional parking space. it was stated by the 7oning Administrator that Council advised her to go ahead with pub - lication for a parking variance. She also stated that Dr. Wells is willing to purchase a parking space and that a dentist's office is a permitted use under the zoning ordinance. Jay Peterson, attorney for Dr. Wells, appeared for the hearing. He stated they were applying for either a variance or an exemption. He would like to have the parking variance, which would allow the change of use without providing any additional parking space. It was their position that there is an absolute right to change the use, as proposed, and that Dr. Wells' situation is the same as The Slope. Mr. Peterson • stated that the determinations mane in the past regarding variances should be applied in this instance. if the variance is denied, he stated they were willing to sign an agreement to purchase the space. Mr. Petersen advised that from a legal standpoint, there was no choice in the ya.tter but to commence legal proceedings in the event the request, for variance or exr option is denied, He also advised that the reason for the change is that it was not economically feasible for Manfred Schober to have hotel rooms during summer! therefore, the change to officer space. Mr. Lapin asked if the applicant for the change was Dr. Wells, and if the person responsible, for purchasing the space was Mr. Schober. Mr. Peterson replied that that was not necessarily so. Mr. Peterson again stated he felt no parking should be required for Dr. Hells and that the Council has the ultimate approval. Mr. Fritzlen stated that if the legalities turned out as Mr. Peterson advised, then what: occurred at Planning Commission meeting was academic. He also stated that he felt the Planning Con mi ssi on was concerned with keeping the duality of the core, in particular, by way of traffic, appearance, etc., and not concerned with the legalities. He asked Mr. Peterson if he had a recommendation for the Planning Connission to accomplish their goal. Mr. Peterson replied that the zoning ordinance must be changed in order to legally stop change of use. Mr. Peterson advised that if the variance and /or- exemption were denied, he would advise Dr. Wells to go ahead with his plans and the ToAn coup seek an injunction. Mr. Peterson stated they were trying to work with the Town; Mr. Lapin objected to that statement. Mr. Pierce suggested that the Planning Commission remain consistent in any action taken. Chairman David Sage react from the zoning ordinance, Section 19.600 Criteria and Findings, before acting on a variance application. The Board felt that the type of use requested would call for increased traffic and parking requirements which could not be satisfied in the existing structure and concern for general public health and safety because Hof increased traffic. Mr. Sage called for a vote to be taken, based on granting a variance with no parking requirement. Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously voted to deny the request for a- variance. Chairman David Sage read from the zoning ordinance, Section 14.800 - Exemptions, regarding determinations to be made prior to granting a parking exemption. An exemption would be based upon allaying purchase of parking spaces in accordance with previous agreements with other parties. Before taking a vote, Mr. Fritzlen stated he would like to recommend to Town Council that the Planning Commission cease considering • these matters unless the Planning Commission's recommendations are weighed more heavily. Mr. Lapin stated he would like to go on record as agreeing with Mr. Fritzlen's comment. Mr. Sage agreed. Mr. Hanlon also stated he agreed. Mr. Sage called for a vote to be taken based on granting an exemption. Upon motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to deny the request for an exemption, as follows: --- Jen Wright - yes; Gordon Pierce - yes; Mery Lapin - no; Bill Hanlon - no; Jack Fritzlen - no; Dave Sege - no. The exemption was denied because it was generally felt that the exemption is not in the interests of the area to he exempted and in the interests of the Town at large in accordance with Section 14.800 - Exemptions. Mr. Fritzlen asked both Jen Wright and Gordon Pierce why they had voted yes to granting the exemption, in view of the Planning Commission's prior agreement to request a 9onday moratorium on requests ,for changes of use. Mr. Wright replied that he had never voted for the moratorium because he was not present at that meeting, and he would have opposed it. Mr. Fierce RIII replied ghat he had been in favor of the moratorium; however, the Planning Commission was being forced into making a decision now and he wanted to remain consistent with the prior agreements. -2- . • it Wag then pointed out that the Town Council, rather than the Planning Ctnmi ssion, was the correct body to vote on granting an exemption. In 010 evCK, Chairman David Sage stated he would write a momorandum to Town f'r+rsnAl Statina their recommendations based an the above action. Preliminary plans for TRACTS A AND it were then presented to the Planning commission for preliminary review. Present from Vail Associates were Diem, Peterson and Don McInduffer. Also present for this portion of the meeting were Terrell Minger, Town Manager, and Mayor John Dobson. Chairman f3i11 Ruoff of the Design Review Board was also present. The plans were presented to receive the maximum amount of input from the Planning Com- mission and Design Review Board, befork Council approval. Jen Wright gave some background information of Tracts A and 5. The land is south of the Antholz property and east of the present Gold Peak building. Vail Associates will develop.the property themselves, thereby instituting better controls and quality, etc. Mr. Gordon Pierce was retained as Architect for the project. Two meetings had been held with Eldon Beck to discuss procedure. There are 10 acres of land, with a massing of buildings concept for the project, with heavy density to low residential. Plans call for 130 condominium units (460 -500 beds) and 5 single - family lots. Preliminary plans call for another ski lift running parallel to the Gold Peak lift. A curve in the present road is being planned to slow down traffic and accommodate the intersection. There are proposed ski --home trails, touring trails, 2 ski lifts, 4 private tennis courts, swimming pool and small playground. A massing model was presented .(dated Nov. 6, 1973), showing buildings in front slightly larger than residential, placed close up against the mountain. The number of roads coming into the project: will be limited, with one road into underground parking - 85% of all cars underground, some above- ground parking near tennis courts. With the exception.of some: minor items which can be corrected, project is in- compliance with zoning ordinance ---- 10.4 acres, 38`/ gross residential floor area. Ordinance allows 6OZ for lll)HF. The single - family lot owners will each have their own lot - subdivision ownership. The tennis courts and common area will be owned as undivided interest among the condominium owners. No retail commercial space is planned. Mr. lapin commented that he felt basically the platys were excellent, lout expressed concern regarding access to the property without going. through Town and a potential parking problem in relation to the proposed new ski lift. It was agreed this may need -further study. The Planning Commission stated concern that an additional ski lift would make Gold Peak a higher uphill capacity, with no provision for. additional parking. It was pointed out that a valid transportation system is a key factor. It was generall,yfOlt by the members of the Commission that the concept was good, but that further study is necessary regarding the transportation • system, parking, and circulation on the mountain. It was requested that David Sara prepare a memorandum to the Town Council stating comments of the Planning Commission regarding this matter. It was also noted that Mr. John Ryan will be preparing an Environmental Impact Report at the next preliminary approval point. As there was no further business to come before the meeting, the meeting adjourned at 4:00 P.M. y .. APPROVED: Chia Secretary 1192 AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION i NOVEMBER 29,'1973 1. preliminary plans for Tracts A &B 2. parking variance.of Dr. Peter Wells (Pension Isabel) 1-0 19 ME,MORMMUM TO: TOWN COUNCIL FROM: VAIL PLANNING COQ 11ISSION RE: CHANGE OF USE ISSUE DATE: DECEMBER 3, 1973 Requests for parking variances and exemptions appear to be increasing from businesses in the Core area, highlighting the change of use problem, which the Commission outlined in its memorandum to the Council October 19, 1973. The Commission would like to urge the Council to act on. the 90 -day holding period, so that both Commission, Council and Town Planners can try to cone to some conclusions about this matter. DSjnmm v4 { i q,.'R�i�UFt` rFili t AI AIt3 %C1 it+ll i 1 bi?I I Al turd , 0.0066A Iran,, a�atl i y ,�,, d~ ► r t!► s '� ` lb, s C as .,t I de g fih +' h� I s i n it t czi ant : I sir ± obey `ya# `� d+ 'acid; tray ; tad ct g b' I ttb si 1 s,lt that ;fit tsfer _d�- alal thy`' p+stl9 of fit Mul IRA Ow SPIN R A ArN l t ► f �{e� ;l h p t�� l`st��� + + tt�!� fafi 9t � 5 A`AIM v OY "r6?brt` b� s.i ass t..' !� s_i�fi . As t tta�a:atb '� !,1 hey 1 tls;st as irra, r t►ri s lstt".ts�' i ttis ,�►tti� t _ rt Mast ti►� < rra i',# aac:s !: apt.: _ Ott mra tf '. rows fsr'l�fitra#d+ ' #ha.: y ;utea�"ay i i hr�s`i p i# sfiera! t! i d -a+:. Vol t l Y• l� a ra a a y's( ` ys : �( 61VT@ A $:casai�R -I il�,�.iY, i• <. �M iFk_ i Y 5 7y!8'' - 'Pt �t$sst irK,tQ1dW p1"ti oo tia t t of t ph MY i _i pry v ties •gays# i' h �s+ p+pr z . • i� U MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 191 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 1:00 PX in the Conference Room of the Town of Vail Municipal Building The following members were present: David Saye, Chairman Jack Fritzlen Gordon Pierce Jen Wright: Also present was: Jim Lamont, Administrative Assistant Diana Toughill, Zoning Administrator The Commission reviewed preliminary plans for THE MARK, second phase. Mr. Kaiser Morcus made the presentation. • Planning Commission felt it was basically a good project; the biggest problem being the distance between buildings. planning Commission felt it would be better to encroach on green areas than to have a variance for the inadequate distance between buildings. It was suggested that the buildings be rearranged to allow more space between them. The Planning.CoirlAlssion requested massing model to be submitted at the next review stage. It was also noted that a parking variance may be necessary if underground parking cannot be located underneath the proposed tennis courts (because of utility easements). The Commission then reviewed the preliminary plat for POTATO PATCH presented by Mr. Jim Uiele.of Vail Associates. Mr. Viele present,d to the Planning Comi3ission overlays of slope analysis, vegetation, drainage, geology, existing zoning and proposed zoning, land use summary, road design, etc. Comments from the mewhers were that additional space was necessary in the road for a turn- around; V.A. will consider. It was questioned whether the HDMF zone was concealed with trees; the answer was yes, with spruce and aspen. It was noted that an environmental impact report was to be completed within 30 days. A small portion of -the land is owned by Mr. Josef Staufer, and it was questioned whether said portion of land had been annexed to the Town. It was noted that the Staufer land was not zoned. The Planning Commission felt Mr. Staufer should be blade aware of Vail Associate's plansZ It was also noted that some of the southern portion of the land would be used for light professional uses; V.A. does not anticipate tap - zoning of property in that area. The Planning Cammission felt the project was generally good - no overall increase in zoning and a good plan for what they have to work with. Secretary APPROVED: • MINUTIS REGULAR HFi TINE Pl_ANNIING C01-11ISSI0N DECHIJI L'R 13, 197 The regular mpet-ing of the Planning Commission was called to order at 2:00 P.M. in the Conference Roorrr of the Town of hail Municipal Building. The following members were present: David Sage, Chairwan Bill Hanlon Mery La pi n Gordon Pierce Jen Wright Also present were: Jim Lamiont, Administrative Assistant • Diana Toughill, Zoning Administrator Bill Heinibach, Vail Villager The Planning.Commission considered an application for a fonditional Use Permit by VAIL ASSOCIATES, INC., in accordance with Article 18, Section 18.400 of Ordinance 8 (Series of 1973) in order to permit a counter weight lift: cover to be constructed on lift #8 in an Agricultural zone. Mr. Fred Otto of Vail Associates presented plans and photographs. It was stated that the lift cover was necessary because .of danger to an operator -in order to shovel out snow. There presently exist similar lift covers on lifts ##7 and #r10. The Planning Commission determined that the application was in accord with Section 18.600 -- Criteria and Findings, of Ordinance 8 (Series of 1973), and, in particular, the use is ill accord with the purposes of said ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; that the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which -it would be operated or maintained is not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious 'to propr�r_ties or improvements in the vicinity; and the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of said ordinance. Therefore, upon motion duly made by Gordon Pierce to approve the Conditional Use Permit, seconded by Bill Hanlon, -it was unanimously voted to approve the Condi- tional Use Permit. Jen Wright abstained from the vote due to his posi- tion with Vail Associates. The Planning Corrnission considered an application for a Conditional Use Permit by DR. TI101"iAS DUNCAN, in accordance with Article 18, Section 18.400 of Ordinance 8 (Series of 1973),-in order to permit a Chiropractic office in a Medium Density Multiple Family Zone, located on a portion of Tract A (Sandstone Staff House): The Zoning Administrator advised the CorT'Aission that there were no technical problems; however, if Dr. Duncan tries to utilize the entire building at some future time, there may be a parking problem }. The parking requirement of the ordinance requires one additional spa e,, .r��h.i ti G:can��. provided. It was, determined that the Sandstone Staff _;_ _ douse is not a part of the condomin' associa�tic�n .for Sandsi Yie t was also noted that there had been no public opposition voicbd as of the present time. The Planning Commission then determined that the application • U was in accord with Section 18.600 - Criteria and Findings (Series of 1973), and, in particular, the use is in accord with the purposes of said ordinance and thy purposes of the district in which the site is located; that the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious try properties or improvements in the vicinity; and the proposed use wii•1 comply with each of the applicable provisions of said ordinance. Therefore, upon motion duly made by Jen Wright to approve the Conditional Use Permit, seconded by Gordon Pierce, it was unanimously voted to approve the Conditional Use Permit. The Planning Commission considered an application for a Conditional Use Permit by UEG, INC., in accordance with Article 18, Section 13.400 of Ordinance 8 (Series of 1973) in order to permit a family entertainment center in a Commercial Come 2 zone in the frail 21 Building. The Zoning Administrator advised they Planning Commission that this center was pre- viously approved in error,.and in order to make it legal, a conditional use permit would be necessary. The Zoning Administrator also advised that there were no technical problems. The Planning Commission then determined that the application was in accord with Section 13.600 - Criteria and Findings of Ordinance 3 (Series of 1973), and, in par- ticular, the use is in accord with the purposes of said ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; that the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained is not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties ar improve ments in the vicinity; and the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of said ordinance. Therefore, upon motion duly made by ,fen Wright to approve the Conditional Use Permit, seconded by Gordon P-ierce,.it was unanimously voted to approve the Conditional Use permit; Mery Lapin abstained from the vote because of- a possible .conflict of interest. The Planning Commission then considered a request for a parking variance by LIONSCUARE LTD. PARTNERSHIP in accordance with Sections 14.200 and 19.200 of Ordinance 8 (Series of 1973) in order to allow construction of a conference and meeting facility in place of twelve (12) existing parking spaces in underground parking °structure. This request had previously been reviewed by Planning Commission and the variance request denied, and then continued by Council. Lionsquare came up with an alternative plan to provide the additional required parking spaces by eliminating landscaping. There has been a recom- mendation by Council and Town Staff that Lionsquare be allowed a variance, leave the landscaping as is, and commit Jim Cunningham to provide the parking spaces whenever the Council or Planning Commission deems it necessary. Mr. Lapin questioned the fact that the agreement would, in fact, actually be enforced. Mr. Hanlon felt it was a good solution if the landscaping were preserved, It was generally felt that the agreement and follow -up were very important. Mr. Warren Klug made the presentation and stated that by eliminating green space, narrowing the aisles and rearranging the parking spaces, 12 spaces could be added. The Zoning Administrator advised that this plan does meet the landscaping requirements, as it has the minimum borders and minimum interior landscaping within the lot. Mr. Hanlon asked if I_iotsgEar -?� d an alternative plan for providing -the parking spaces when they initially applied for the variance; MY. Klug stated that at that time no alternative plan had been satisfactorl.1yarranged. MA A motion was made by Mery Lapin, seconded by Gordon Pierce, to approve the variance for the L.ionsquare parking, subject to the fol- lowing conditions: (1) that it be reviewed on an annual basis by the Zoning Administrator, who will report to the To-,rn Council and Planning Commission; (2)-that if it is decided by the Town Council that the additional 11 spaces are required, Lionsquare would imiediately provide those 11 spaces, as shown on the Exhibit presented to the Manning Com- mission on Docember 13, 1913, marked Exhibit A; (3) that the conference room is available to people in the L i onsilead area. A vote was taken and it was voted to approve the variance, with Mr. Lapin the only dis- senting vote. Mr. Lapin is opposed to granting a variance due to the fact that he feels the parking is necessary. Mr. David Sage commented although he voted to approve the variance, he feels the credibility of the enforcement, by Town Council of the change of the parking, if necessary, is questionable in his mind. It was noted that there is a second vacancy on the Commission due to the resignation of Jack Fritzlen. A memorandum will be forwarded to Town Council formally notifying them of the vacancy. APPROVED: Cha�is�mari �. �.w • • 3.. ecretary As there was no further business to come before the meeting, the • meeting was adjourned at 3:00 P.M. APPROVED: Cha�is�mari �. �.w • • 3.. ecretary