Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974 Planning Commission Minutes• MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 3, 1974 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 Merv Lapin Gordon Pierce • • Also present were: Jim Lamont, Administrative Assistant Bill Heimbach, Vail Villager The Commission discussed possible changes in the zoning ordinance, in particular, with regard to Commercial Care I, change of use, altera- tions, square footage allowable, and especially, parking requirements. the Chairmanship of the Planning Commission, and the rotation of members on the Design Review Board. It was agreed to continue any action until the next meeting. The Commission then discussed the two vacancies on the Commission, Mr. Jim Martin, representing LIONSHEAD LODGE II, presented a request for parking variance in accordance with Sections 14.200 and 14.800 of Ordinance 8 (Series of 1973) in order to allow a change in the interior configuration of the building now under construction, requiring four (4) additional spaces. Mr. Martin requested a variance because he wanted to maintain the present landscaping and because certain areas in his building will be unuseable if the variance is denied. Because of property lines and setback areas, the parking spaces could not be pro- vided on his property. The Commission requested Mr. Martin to submit a plan that would fit the spaces onto the site and determine haw much landscaping would be eliminated, Therefore, the request for variance was continued until the next meeting, subject to submission of additional plans. Secretary APPROVED: Chairman C MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION JANURRY 10, 1974 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was cancelled because of lack of quorum. Secretary APPROVED: Chairman ~J MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 17, 1974 T1~e regular meeting of the Planning Commission was cancelled because of 1 acEc of quorum. Secretary r r~ APPROVED: Chairman • i MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 24, 1974 The regular meeting of the Panning Commission was called to order at 2:00 P.M. in the Conference Room of the Town of Vai] 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 Bi11 Heimbach, Vail Villager Cindy Lamont, Vail Trail Mr. Jim Martin, representing LIONSHEAD LODGE iI, presented a plan for supplying the required parking spaces. Mr. Martin had previously requested a variance on January 3, 1.974, and the matter was continued because the Planning Commission requested that a plan be submitted showing how the additional spaces could be fit onto his site. As shown on the plan, the spaces were in a setback area, and under the new zoning ordinance, a variance would be required for parking in a setback area. However, it was felt that a parking variance should be granted in accordance with previous recommendations. Therefore, upon motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously voted to grant a variance, subject to the following conditions: --.(I) that the parking be reviewed on an annual basis by the Zoning Administrator, who will report to the Town Council and Planning Commission; and (2) that if it is decided by the Town Council that the additional spaces are required, LionsHead Lodge would immediately provide those spaces, as shown on the plan presented to the Planning Commission. Mr. Jim Viele presented plans and drawings for the prel~m~nary plat of POTATO PATCH, along with rezoning plans. Mr. Jim Lamont presented a memorandum from staff regarding review of Potato Patch, dated January 24, 1974. Mr. Viele stated the only change was the addition of a turn- around in the road which eliminated one lot in the northeast corner. He also stated that the environmental study was nearly completed. The rezoning substantially down-zones the whole area from its original design. The upzoning of one area (2a acre site - Lot 1, Block 2, pref. plat) was questioned by the Planning Commission. The upzoning related to technical problems of the zoning ordinance as it pertains to density and cluster of units, etc. The up-zoning allows for more units than are actually planned by Vail Associates. It was felt by the Planning Commission that there should be an agreement between Vail Associates and the Town which would restrict the actual gross residential floor area on Lot 1, Block 2, to that permitted by MDMF, and allow the up~-zoning to HDMF'. Chairman David Sage called fora vote on the preliminary plat of Potato Patch: -- upon motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously voted to approve the preliminary plat, based upon compliance with subdivision regulations. The Planning Commission also approved the technical points raised in the Staff Review of Potato Patch Preliminary (dated January 24, 1974), as discussed between Mr. Jim Viele and Mr. Kent Rose, Town Engineer. called for a vote on the rezonin re uest of Potato Chairman Dav1d Sage g q Patch: -- upon motion duly made and seconded, it was unanimously voted to approve the rezoning, as presented, contingent upon Vail Associates signing an agreement between itself and the Town of Vail to restrict the gross residential floor area of Lot 1, Bock 2 of the Potato Patch Preliminary Plat, to that permitted by MDMF zone, Mr. Jim Viele presented the preliminary plat and resubdivision of TRACT A, 14th EYEING, (originally presented on November 5, 1973 for preliminary review). There was discussion of the "gooseneck" in the road and the fact that utility lines would have to be added in order to permit the curve. The original intent of the "gooseneck" was that it provided an extension from the Antholz property and would slow traffic. It was felt that further study of traffic flow was necessary, along with an agreement on who should finance the change in the road, if necessary. Mr. Viele suggested that there be a recommendation from Eldon Beck and the Staff. The Planning Commission officially accepted the plat and resubdivision for review and decision in 45 days. There was discussion of the vacancies on the Commission and the rotation of Design Review Board members. It was generally agreed that the Planning Commission should not be involved in making recommendations regarding the appointment of new members. Secretary APPRQVED: Chairman • • -2- °~ MTNUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSTON JANUARY 31, I974 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 Bill Hanlon Merv Lapin Gordon Pierce Jen Wright • ;.----~ ~- ., `, Also present were: Jim Lamont, Administrative Assistant Diana ToughiTl, Zoning Administrator Bill Heimbach, Vail Villager Cindy Lamont, Vail Trail Mr. Dudley Abbott attended the first portion of the meeting to read a letter he had written to the Vail Trail regarding his application for position on the planning Commission and in response to an article in the Vail Trail regarding conflict of interest. Mr, Sage advised Mr. Abbott that the Commission was uncertain as to the position they should take regarding making recommendations to the Town Council for appointments on the Commission. In view of prior discussions, the members generally agreed that the Town Council should make the decision to appoint new members to fill the two vacancies on the Commission. A vote was taken, and it was unanimously voted that the Planning Commission take no formal action on the matter. It was also agreed that the rotation of members on the Design Review Board should be continued until the vacancies on the Commission are filled. The Commission then discussed the Change of Use Issue in Commercial Core I. Diana had compiled land use data in the core area, and maps of the area were distributed to each of the members. The Commission reviewed some of the proposed changes and the range of problems which might result from the changes. Jen Wright suggested that the change from residential to commercial should be allowed and that the Resign Review process was sufficient to control the aestYetics of any change. Mr. Hanlon stated that he felt the mixture between residential and commercial has been successful in the past and that the most important factor is the effect changes have an parking requirements. No decision was reached; however, there was further discussion of parking requirements for buildings presently not commercial, and the requirement if there was a change to commercial. As there was no further business to came before the meeting, the meeting was adjourned at 3:00 P,M. APPROVED: Secretary Chairman ~~ MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 6, 1974 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order a t 2:00 P.M. in the Conference Room of the Town of Vail Municipa] Building The following members were present: David Sage, Chairman Bill Heimbach Merv Lapin Jen Wright -~~ • ~~\ r~. ~`'. Also present were: Jim Lamont, Administrative Assistant Diana Toughil7, Zoning Administrator Cindy Lamont, Vail Trail It was noted that the Town Council appointed two members to fill the vacancies on the Commission: -- Bill Heimbach and Dudley Abbott. Diana Toughill presented a proposal being made by Jim Cunningham for Montaneros II to provide parking separate from the building to reduce the height of the building. The proposal was submitted to the Planning Commission to receive an initial reaction to the plan. There is a technical problem because the zoning ordinance states that 50% of the parking must be provided within the structure. The proposed plan calls for excavation of the ground between the two Montaneros buildings, and then covering with sod. One side of the parking would be open and it was felt by the members that it would resemble a carport and would take away landscaping from the site. The reaction was generally unfavorable, and it was suggested that they should keep as much green space as possible. However, the Commission was sympathetic to the wording of "within the structure" contained in the zoning ordinance, and approval of such a parking plan would depend very much on the aesthetics and relationship to the area around the Montaneras site, in the event more detailed plans are submitted for review. The Commission then discussed the rotation of the Chairmanship. A motion was made by Jen Wright and seconded by Bill Hanlon, to nominate Merv Lapin as Chairman, to commence May 1, 1974; a vote was taken and unanimously passed; Mr. Lapin accepted. The Commission then discussed the rotation of members of the Design Review Board. A motion was made by Jen Wright and seconded by Merv Lapin, to appoint three members of the Commission to serve on the Design Review Board: -- Dudley Abbott, Bill Heimbach, and Bill Hanlon; a vote was taken and unanimously passed. The Commission then discussed the Change of Use Issue. The first option discussed to control change of use was building size -- creating an historical zone -- allow minor changes, keep existing zoning criteria and develop architectural guidelines to keep the buildings essentially the same. Another option discussed was horizontal zoning by use -- first floor -retail; second floor -retail, office residential; third floor-residential. It was suggested that the horizontal zoning should also be used in LionsHead. The members agreed that horizontal zoning was a good plan. It was also suggested that it might be appropriate for colors, etc. to be written into Design Review Board guidelines for architectural control. As there was no further business to come before the meeting, the meeting adjourned at 3:00 P.Ni. Secretary APPROVED: ~" ~ i ~. Chairman \. ~2- ~~ MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 14, 1974 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 2:00 P.M. in the Conference Rvom of the Town of Vail Municipal Building. The following members were present: David Sage, Chairman Dudley Abbott Bill Hanlon Merv Lapin Gordon Pierce ,~~ Jen Wright Also present were: Jim Lamont, Administrative Assistant Diana Toughi7l, Zoning Administrator Cindy Lamont, Vail Trail The Commission further discussed the parking proposal for MONTANEROS II, brought up at last week's meeting. Chairman David Sage asked far comments regarding the plan. Mr. Wright stated that if the parking is technically not within the structure but is partially covered, it is an economic situa- tion. Mr. Lapin stated he was impressed with the original plans, which provided a plaza and underground parking, rather than having the parking between the buildings. Mr. Hanlon felt it was important to see more of the surrounding area. Mr. Abbott expressed concern about an easement through the property --- people walking from east to west -- and felt an easement should not be established. It was the general agreement of the members that Mr. Cunningham be requested to present an alternative plan showing 50% of the parking within the structure and a plan showing the pedestrian flow through the property. "~~. The Commission then discussed problem areas in the zoning ordinance for passible changes: --- with regard to offsets, it was felt that offsets should be a design judgment rather than a set figure. There is a problem because the zoning ordinance states that offsets shall be 10 feet and parking spaces shall be 9 feet, which relates to the size of an underground parking structure. Another problem is employee housing, which is required to be counted into the overall density; felt that there should be a floor area credit for employee housing. A conditional use permit should be added to be permitted in an "R" zone, and a new zone district added for residential cluster. The 10% interior landscaping for parking lot has created snow plowing problems and makes the lot larger. Parking require- ments should be reviewed, especially for employees, felt there is too much parking for the guest and not enough for the employee. It was also felt that in the Design Review section, a procedure for preliminary conceptual step should be incorporated. The covered parking requirements for MDF and LDMF needs architectural input. As there was no further business to come before the meeting, the meeting adjourned at 3:00 P.M. • APPROVED: Secretary Chairman • MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 21, 7,974 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 1:30 P.M. in the Conference Room of the Town of Vail Municipal Building. The following members were present: David Sage, Chairman Dudley Abbott Bill Hanlon Bill Heimbach Merv Lapin Gordon Pierce Jen Wright Also present were: Diana Toughill, Zoning Administrator Kent Rose, Town Engineer Bill Pierce The Commission reviewed the Final Plat of POTATO PATCH, presented by Jim Viele of Vail Associates. One change between the preliminary and final plat was the removal of one residential lot along the northern boundary (4 lots instead of 5, almost 1 acre each). Aturn-around in the road had been inserted on the flattened portion of the land, and the turning radius on the major curve in the road as one drives into the property has been increased to 45 feet.. The Zoning Administrator advised that the Plat meets the Subdivision Regulations. Chairman Sage called for a vote on the approval of the Final Plat. Upon motion duly made by Merv Lapin and seconded by Bill Heimbach, it was unanimously voted to approve the Final Plat of Potato Patch, as presented. The Chairman and Town Clerk signed the Final Plat. The Commission reviewed the Preliminary Plat for TRACT A, 14th FILING -- the eastern portion of Tracts A and B. This property contains 5 resi- dential lots, plus tennis courts which will be part of the condominium project on Tract B. There is also a portion of open space between the residential lots and the golf course to be dedicated to the Town of Vail. Originally, there had been a suggestion to curve Vaii Valley Drive through Tract A. The Town Planner recommended that this curve was not necessary and it was, therefore, eliminated from the plans. Chairman Sage called for a vote on the approval of the Preliminary Plat. Upon motion duly made by Merv Lapin and seconded by Gordon Pierce, it was unanimously voted to approve the Preliminary Plat for Tract A, 14th Filing, as presented. The Commission considered a request by VAIL METROPOLITAN RECREATION DISTRICT for a Conditional Use Permit in accordance with Article 18, Section 18.400 of Ordinance $ (Series of 1.973) in order to permit an addition to the GOLF CLUB HOUSE in an Agricultural Zone. Bill Pierce presented plans, a model and elevation plans. Plans are to enclose the existing terrace for a restaurant and addition of area far golf cart storage, and a paved service yard. Mr. Lapin brought up a point that a position has been taken in the past against building in an Agricultural Zone, but that this structure was extremely unusual. Jen Wright felt that Mr. Lapin was confusing this with an open space area and felt you can build in an A zone. The Zoning Administrator advised that all technical requirements of the zoning ordinance have been met. 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 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 or improvements in the vicinity; and the proposed use will comply with each of the appli- cable provisions of said ordinance. Chairman Sage called for a vote to grant a Conditional Use Permit. Upon motion duly made by Bill Heimbacli and seconded by Jen Wright, it was unanimously voted to grant a Conditional Use Permit. The Commission considered an application by T. Charles Ogilby representing APOLLO PARK for a Conditional Use Permit in accordance with Article 18, Section 18.400 of Ordinance 8 (Series of 1973) in order to permit four office spaces in Building D of Apollo Park located on Tract D, Vail Village First Filing in an HDMF zone. It was pointed out that this complex was originally planned for employee housing. The Zoning Administrator advised that the Variance Board took away the restriction that the basement be used for recreation rooms. A 6-inch concrete floor had been poured, which solved their building problem. In view of the employee housing, the question was raised as to why offices should be permitted. Jen Wright stated that it might be a violation of the contract with Vail Associates. The Zoning Administrator stated that an alternative proposal was to-have two large dorm-type rooms if the conditional use permit was denied. Chair- man Sage asked for comments from the members. Merv Lapin felt this complex is the wrong place to have offices. Bill Heimbach felt that since Apollo land was sold at a low price for employee housing, and Vail is badly in need of housing, office space should not be permitted. Gordon Pierce stated that if the rooms could be turned into more units, that would be a good alternative. Jen Wright felt the recreation rooms were not a cost of operating employee housing and that they could be regulated in order to avoid vandalism; therefore, he felt the change to office space was possibly a profit motive. Mr. Hanlon stated he had signed a petition for Apollo Park to be employee housing and felt that to turn it into commercial would be a financial gain being imposed upon the Town; he felt that was insufficient :mason to grant a conditional use permit. Gordon Pierce felt the change~to commercial was inconsistent with good planning; Apollo is a place to live, not to have commercial space. Merv Lapin questioned whether the offices would be rented out or if they were for Apollo Park office space; the offices would be rented out. Jen Wright suggested that the matter be continued until the next meeting, and he will check with Vail Associates re their position and the contract. However, he stated the contract between Vail Associates and Apollo Park is not a concern of the Planning Commission. Na action was taken and the application was continued until the next meeting; Mr. Ogilby was advised. The Commission then considered an application by Mr. Mervyn Lapin repre- senting CROSSROADS OF VAIL far building bulk control and setback variances in accordance with Sections 10.602 and 10.606 and 19.200 of Ordinance 8 {Series of 1,973) in order to allow an additional building in nonconformance with Sections 10.602 and 10.606 on Lot P, Block 5-D, Vail Village First Filing. Merv Lapin and Gordon Pierce left the meeting in order to avoid conflict of interest. Mr. Bob Hunt was present, representing Crossroads. He stated that the setbacks were at the east part and south part of the site. He also stated that it was impossible to come up with an efficient arrangement to meet the maximum size requirements for the parking garage • -2- • • • r~ ~J The building could not be moved to the west because they have to allow semi truck access to Village Market (have minimum turning radius). At the south side of the building, setback is necessary because they are bringing shops in the front closer to the pedestrian movement. Because of the radius of the property and shape of the site, if they were to stay within the setback, could come up with only a small percentage of the total building proposed. In investigation at: the County, Town and Vail Associates, they could not determine who owns the land in front (south side). Jen Wright stated, it is part of Tract B, Vail Associates land. If there is not a street right-of-way, remains V.A. land. It was pointed out that at the east and south setbacks, location of the road on the drawing is the actual location, and the Town of Vail control gate is a proposed location only. Mr. Hunt stated that at the east set- back, northeast corner, building is only the height of a parapet wall; at entrance to building, approximately 15 feet high. With regard to parking requirements, Mr. Hunt stated they have provided 16 cars more than what is required for shop space (90 requirement; provided 106}. Jen Wright stated he would rather grant a variance on parking rather than grant a setback variance on the east side; more sensitive to setbacks between buildings and off roads than to the amount of parking required by the zoning ordinance. site as a whole; variances he Zoning they would aced they d the site 75%). Jen separate sites, stated no, stated he would rking issue on cks, considering n of whether to mbach stated ject, short 4 parking spaces. not been subdivided, he would aces were eliminated on the east arking spaces. Dudley Abbott would consider it as a sole hat the original plans were effect on the variances in the original plans, building u con ro essary. It was also questioned whether or not the condominium association will give rights of ingress and egress to the property; Mr. Lapin can answer the question. It was questioned whether required if the property Administrator stated that be even more nonconformin would have too much site has a total of 35,000 squ Wright asked if there wer whether or not there woul however, cannot make a bu like time to clarify the both sites, the violatio the sites together and i determine the parking fo the total parking requir he would consider the project as a sole pro Bill Hanlon stated that since the land has consider it as a sole project; and if 20 sp portion of the property, would be short 4 p felt since it was not a phased project, he project. The Zoning Administrator stated t nonconforming; Eldon Beck did not have much required for the changed plans, since even b lk t 1 and setback variances were nec Jen Wright requested that staff consider t and determine the nonconformity between th site. He also requested that staff give setback rather than parking variance. The discussed at all. No action was taken, co 20 days to make decision. he project as two separate sites e two, as compared to an individual their opinions on granting a bulk control variance was not ntinued until the next meeting; As there was no further business to come before the meeting, the meeting adjourned at 3:00 P.M. APPROVED: C ha i rma n there would be setback and bulk were considered as two sites. T even if considered as two sites g; Bob Hunt disagreed. Diana st coverage, etc., and Mr. Hunt sal are feet (actual site coverage - e a property line drawn and two d be a deficit of parking; Diana ilding more nonconforming. Jen issue, and in particular, the pa ns of the new building, and setba ndividually. There was a questio r two sites, or to consider the ement has been made up. Bill Hei Secretary -3- i MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 28, 1974 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 Dudley Abbott Bi11 Hanlon Bill Heimbach Merv Lapin Jen Wright • • t Also present were; Jim Lamont, Administrative Assistant Diana Toughill, Zoning Administrator Cindy Lamont, Vail Trail The Commission considered the application for a Conditional Use Permit by APOLLO PARK (continued from last week}. Mr. Charles Ogilby was present. Jen Wright advised that he did not think the Uail Associates contract with Apollo Park would allow office space,. even if the condi- tional use permit were granted by the Town. Mr. Ogilby gave some back- ground information: -- arginally, he wanted to convert all the .basement area into apartments and applied far a variance. The variance was denied; however, he was allowed to make the basement area recreation rooms. At the present, a 6 inch concrete floor had been poured, and he felt, code-wise, the area could be considered as a completely separate building. He stated he wants to keep the pool tables in the D building and have the flexibility of going to dorm space ar office space with the outer three bays. As concerns the dorm space, he feels there is a problem there because of the limited plumbing forte bathroom). He stated there is a demand for an architectural studio, picture frame office and other small operations. He also stated that-when Apollo originally worked out their ground lease, 4 owners apartments were included in the lease for any use they desired; he felt that under-that particular clause, those 4 bays would qualify for office space. He is requesting permission for use of 2 out of the 4 bays as either recreation roam or some kind of office- related facility, as opposed to dorm or apartment. Basically, he wants to have flexibility to have office space if necessary. The Zoning Administrator advised that there is no issue on the dorm rooms - permitted use under the zoning ordinance; limited professional offices or retail shops - permitted as a conditional use -- zoned HDMF. It was also noted that Building Cade requirements have been met because of the concrete floor and the venti1iation and exiting problems have been worked out. Diana stated that all other technical paints have been cotnpiied with, including the parking requirements. Chairman Sage asked for comments from the members. Bill Hanlon stated he had no particular comments, but that he was opposed to change of use. Jen Wright wondered whether there was justification for change of use because. of removal of a room out of a recreation area, and whether or not that would have an effect on the character of the particular area. He stated that presently there are employee residential units and the change would provide a more commercial base. He does not have a problem with dorm roams, as he feels there is a need for dorm space in the Town; however, he stated he was opposed to allowing .any commercial or office ,space in the :Apollo Park area or the project itself. He felt the change would have an adverse impact on the `present character of the area. Dud1e Abbott felt that perhaps Uail Associates' authority should have y been granted prior to appearing before the Planning Commission, as he would not want to grant a conditional use permit and then transfer the problem to Vail Associates. He also stated, since the use is not defined specifically in the application, he has observed that after variances have been obtained, there are sometimes overnight changes in context. He also questioned the effect the change would have on parking. Bill Heimbach asked; if the conditional use permit were allowed, what recreational amenities would remain. Mr. Ogilby replied there would still be a-pool . room, possibly in the far east bay. He stated they have had many vandalism problems in the past and cannot afford to supervise the room properly. derv Lapin felt the vandalism was a "police .problem" and~not a problem of the Planning Commission. Mr. Lapin felt the change was a wrong use in a wrong pi ace, and changing to commercial would create more traffic and increase the parking problem. He did not feel Apollo Park is the proper location for any change from residential. Chairman Sage called for a vote, acid read ..from the zoning ordinance, Section 18.600, Criteria and Findings before acting on a Conditional. Use Permit application. The Commission found that the proposed location of the use is not in accord with the purposes of this ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the Site 15 located; and that the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it will be operated or maintained will be°detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. R motion was made by Bill Heimbach, seconded by Jen Wright, to deny the application fora c'onditiorial use permit,"and it was unanimously voted to deny the application as presented. Mr. Abbott advised Mr. OgiTby that he might have considered the application differently if he had obtained permission from Vail Associates prior to coming before Planning Commission. Mr. Ogilby stated he felt no need to pursue the matter any further and would withdraw the application; therefore, no action on the part of Town Council is necessary.' • The Commission then considered the parking proposal of MONTANEROS II, presented by Mr. Jim Cunningham (previously discussed in meetings on February 6 and February 1d). It was Hated that Design Review had granted aesthetic approval of the plan, as presented to them in a meeting on February.21, 1974}. The project has 27 units. Mr. Cunningham stated that to provide underground (beneath the building}.parking, the building would have to be raised 2Z to 5 feet; Shareholders Corporation does not want to-have the building raised, Therefore, Mr. Cunningham is presenting a plan for partially covered parking (as stated in the prior meetings), which is technically not within the structure, as required by the zoning ordinance. Mr. Cunningham presented .alternative plans showing a connection of the building (which would comply with the zoning ordinance),.hy creating a sauna and deck area; however, he would not recommend the use of these plans. There was some discussion of the pedestrian flow through the property, and Merv Lapin stated he felt the original Montaneros II plans were good because of the patio and mall area and the way the project fit together. Mr. Cunningham stated that even in those original plans, there was no provision for pedestrian traffic through the property. He advised that in the Design Review meeting there .had been considerable discussion of the pedestrian traffic through the property and he felt that through landscaping the situation could be worked out. Chairman Sage asked for comments from the members. Bill Heimbach stated that, after seeing a17 the plans and reviewing it in Design Review, he liked the concept and felt it was a creative plan, especially since the only people who will see the cars are the people living there. Dudley Abbott agreed with Bill, and further stated he felt it~was a creatively designed and hidden parking area, with berms and planting. Jen Wright stated that if. Design Review felt it were an aesthetically-worthwhile plan, he had no opposition to this approach. Sill Hanlon stated he was against separated parking, and felt parking should be within the building and could be done nicely. -2- M erv Lapin expressed concern about settyng a precedent, and there was discussion as to how the matter should be handled. there are two possibilities -- either application far a variance from the wording "within the structure", as stated in the zoning ordinance, or an inter- pretation of the wording by the Zoning Administrator, It was agreed that an application for a variance was the best procedure, as a variance could be treated individually and an interpretation would seta precedent. Mr. Gunning ham agreed and wi11 file an application for a variance. Jim Lamont distributed to the members the Environmental Impact Report for Potato Patch far review. As there was no further business to come before the meeting, the meeting adjourned at 3:00 P.M. Secretary APPROVED.: Chairman • • _3_ V ~ S 4 ~~ ~~ ~ f draft - 3/28/74 PRESENT: D. Sage, Jen Wright, Gordon Pierce, Dudley Abbott, Bill Hanlon, 8111 Heimbach Also: Jim Lamont, Cindy Lamont, Diana Toughill 1. V.A. Special Development District - Tract B - Northwoods - Jen Wright. incorporate whole project into special dev. district. (reviewed document prepared by Jen} and the amendments by staff, HDMF 2 setback variances were necessary (5 ft)(10-15 ft), under the special development district it is not necessary to obtain variances. offsets - Building A (a) legal provision (b) phase br phase design review; {c} strike words "proposed" locations and "proposed" uses, -- requesting approval for next Thursday. COMMENTS: -- Bill Hanlon asked how many acres of the total site wi11 be included in the special district (7,7 ?} -,- the 5 single family lots wi11 not be included in the special district:- still zoned HD, will downzone. E.I.R. - proposed to have duplex zoning - there has been some opposition to size of buildigns, etc< {.3.i acres ??) Dudley Abbott felt a preceden was being set by establishing special development district,. and felt there should be a minimum acreage under which you can apply for a special district to be created -- there is a minimum of 5 acres. VARIANCE ON BUILDING A - offset requirement .- 10 ft offset every 70 feet required -- see attached document - Bulk Control Comparison - Northwoods Project -Mar, 28, 1974. COMMENTS; -- Heimbach - OK; P~erv - OK; Hanlon - OK; Abbott -feels they should present visual rendering, problem with its relationship far Council. D.Sage reviewed criteria and Findings: --- based on criteria #2 and Findings 1, 2, 3(a}. Motion by Merv Lapin, seconded by Heimbach, to approve variance application as submitted, for building bulk control - offset variance. DOTE: Sage abstained, Jen abstained, Gordon-abstained, remaining 4 unanimous approva]. 2. Montaneros ii - Cunningham, underground parking - within the building - variance requested. and wall length variance requested. Staff: if it is aesthetically .compatible with area, perfectly acceptable; Bill Hanlon -feels there is a "cost" factor in applying for variance in this particular situation. Gor,don,- feels cost is minimal - Heimbach agrees. - parking variance wa11 length - 5 feet over (180 feet ~ allowed 175 ft.} diagonal - OK offsets - OK COMMENTS: all in favor^ Merv Lapin commented -- questioned if any parking were visible from road? diagonal view yes; however, berry ing is provided. NEerv - go on record as stating this is a special situation and in no way to be construed as an endorsement of parking separated from the building. 184 FOOT WALL LENGTH -VARIANCE reviewed criteria and findings - landscaping plan not submitted, based on criteria #2, findings 1, 2, 3(a}: motion to approve variance application as submitted, Pierce moved, Lapin seconded, unanimous approval. PARKIPdG NOT WITHIN STRUCTURE - VARIANCE criteria #2, findings 1, 2, 3{a) Motion to approve variance application as submitted, P~erv moved, Gordan Piece seconded, unap}r~a~s approval; Bi11 Hanlon voted against. add: however, {1) special situation because they are not building to maximum capacity; {2} by lowering the building, they are creating a mare aesthetic situation on this particular piece of land; {3) parking is hidden from view of passersby; {4} back of cars face their other building and not street; (5) provides more green space; (6) building itself looks better because they are,not exposing the parking underneath the building. 3. THE MARK - 72 ft, wall lengths, 8 ft. offsets (instead of 70'&10'} related to parking underneath. setback variance - (too close to property line - green belt and road to sewer plant); 15 foot setback variance - 10 feet (should be 25 feet from property line). Design Review requested that there be mare space between the buildings; Gardon felt that the amount of feet was minimal since variances requested are an open space and along road. Merv - concerned about the setback n the road ~ no problem with variance on a.pen space. offsets:-- each of the three buildings {no comments ~ except Dudley Abbott, asked if the offset problem, related to underground parking, is going to be a continuing problem,-- yes, zoning ordinance needs to be revised. VOTES: Setbacks -- criteria #2, findings 1,2,3(a) -- Mr. Lapin moved to approve setback variance as submitted, 15 ft. along road and open space; unanimous approval; Offsets: ~~ same, approved variance, M. Lapin moved, Wright seconded. MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 2.5, 1974 _, The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 3:00 P.M. in the Conference Roam of the Town of Vail Municipal Building. The following members were present: Merv Lapin, Chairman Dudley Abbott Bill Hanlon Bi 11 Heimbach Jen Wright A1sa present were: Jim Lamont, Administrative Assistant Diana Tovghill, Zoning Administrator Cindy Lamont, Vail Trail The Commission considered a request by Mr. Nathaniel B. Harris, representing RADI0 1lAIL, INC., in order to permit a public service use (radio broadcasting studio) in a GC2 zone ~-- Lot 1, Vail Lionshead First Filing {Lionsquare Lodge). Mr. Lapin read the Criteria and Findings of the Zoning Ordinance, and the Commission found, in accordance with section 18.600: (1) That the proposed location of the use is in accord with the purposes of the ordinance and the purposes of the district i.n which the site is located. {2~ That the proposed location of the use and the conditions undbr which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, yr materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. {3) That the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions. Upon motion duly made by Bi11 Heimbach to approve the conditional use permit, seconded by Dudley Abbott, it was unanimously voted to approve the request as submitted subject to the antenna disc being approved by Design Review Board. The Commission then considered a request by Mr. William Ruoff, repre~ senting RALPH ~. DAVIS, fora setback variance, for an addition of a carport to the Davis residence., located on Lot 3~ Block 7, Vail Village 1th Filing -- Ptarmigan Road, at the Ga]f Course. The variance request was for 7 feet, in lieu of 20 feet,alonq Ptarmigan Road, The Commission had na objections to the request.. Mr. Lapin read the Criteria and Findings of the Zoning Ordinance, and the Commission found, i~n accordance with Section 19,600: i • (1) That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. (2} That the granting of mental to the public materially injurious in the vicinity. the variance will not be detri- health, safety? or welfare, or to properties or improvements {3) That the variance is warranted because: (a} The strict or literal interpretation and enforce- ment of the specified. regulation would result in practical d ifficulty or unnecessary physical. hard- ship inconsistent with the objectives of this ordinance, (b) The strict or literal interpretation and enforce, ment of the specified regu lotion would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. Dpon motion duly made by Dudley Abbott to approve the variance, seconded by Sill Hanlon, it was unanimously voted to approve the variance request as proposed. Both of the above items are on the agenda far Council review August 6, 1914 A full transcript of the Planning Commission meeting has been recorded. ~s there was no further business to come before the meeting, the meeting "adjourned at 4;OQ P.M, Secretary • APPROVED; Chairman ~~~ MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANPdING CaMP9ISSI0N AUGUST 2, 1974 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 3:00 P,M. in the Conference Room of the Town of Vail Municipal building. The following members were present; Merv Lapin, Chairman Dudley Abbott Bi11 Hanlon Bi 11 Heimbach Gordon Pierce David Sage Also present were: Jim Lamont, DirectorF Community Development Diana Toughill, honing Administrator Cindy Lamont, Vail Trail The Commission considered a request by Mr, Rodney E. Slifer, representing JOHN McBRIDE, for a parking variance or exemption to allow an apartment unit to be converted to commercial space for COUNTRY: FLAIR, located in the McBride Building an Gore Creek Drive {Gorsuch}. The space is approximately 628 square feet, on the second floor, presently an apartment being used far storage space. Bath Rene and Dave Gorsuch, along with Mr. Slifer were present at the meeting. The Commission considered the request under Section 14.800(2) of the zoning ordinance, as an exemption far parking, Several members of the Commission felt that a change oi: residential space to commercial space on~the second floor is not desirable, The ~~ Garsuches argued that the space has°~been used as storage for at least a year and there is really not a change from residential to commercial, Staff recommended approval of the exemption, based on the fact that the space is being used for storage and it is not in conflict with the new concept of controls. Upon motion duly made by Bill Heimbach to approve an exemption far one parking space, subject to signing of a parking agreement; seconded by Gordon Pierce, it was voted to deny the exemption request, Vote as foliaws: for: Pierce, Heimbach; against: Abbott, Hanlon, Lapin; abstaining: Sage -- conflict of interest {because Slifer representing). Mr. Dave Gorsuch stated he felt Bi11 Hanlon should abstain also, because of competition. The Commission then considered a request by Mr, Robert Ruder, representing LODGE PROPERTIES, for building bu~1k control variance in order to allow the addition of a trash and storage building to an already nonconforming structre. Mrs Ruder eras present at the meeting. The building wds proposed to be added to the south side • ., ,, `~ of the original. wing_and exceeds diagonal lengths. The structure is is~to be located on Forest Service property; permits have been obtained. Staff had no abjection to the proposal. Mr. Lapin read the Criteria and Findings of the zoning ordinance, and the Commission found, in accordance with Section 16.500; (1) That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district (.2} That the granting of the variance will not be detri- mental to the public health, safety., or welfare, ar materially injurious tb properties or improvements in the vicinity, (3} That the variance is warranted because; (a} The strict or litera] interpretation and enforc e meet of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hard- ship inconsistent with. the objectives of this ordinance, (b) There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. (c) The strict or literal. interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would-deprive the appli- cant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district, ' Upon motion duly made by David Sage ~o approve the variance,. secanded by Biil Heimbach, it was unanimously voted to approve the request as proposed; Chairman Lapin abstaining (in the trash business}. The Commission then considered an addendum to an existing parking and building building bulk control variance for THE COVERED BRIDGE STORE. Mayor Dobson had just received his remodeling plans from the architect; therefore, a zoning check had not been completed. Therefore, upon motion duly made by David Sage; seconded by Dudley Abbott? it was unanimously voted to continue the matter until the plans had received a zoning check. A special meeting was called for Monday, August 5, 1974 to hear the matter, so that it could be placed on the Council agenda for August 6. A71 of. the above items are on the ;agenda for Council review August 6, 1974, A foil transcript of the above meeting has been recorded „ As there was no further business to-come before the meeting, the meeting adjourned at 5,00 P,M. Secretary APPROVED; Chairman i MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION 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 coming 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 Plan. 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 opposition to the project; Chairman David Sage stated he would write the letter of recommendation to the Eagle County Planning Commission 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 reviewed 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. Nadine M. Monaco, Secretary APPROVED; ~~~ David Sage, Chairman • MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 1974 ' The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 1:00 P.M. in the Conference Room of the Town of Vail Municipal Building. The following members were present: David Sage, Chairman Jack Fritzlen Gordon Pierce Jen Wright Also present was: Jim Lamont, Administrative Assistant Diana Toughi3l, Zoning Administrator The Commission reviewed preliminary plans for TIE 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 Commission 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 Viele of Vail Rssociates. Mr. Viele presented to the Planning Commission overlays of slope analysis, vegetation, drainage, geology, existing zoning and proposed zoning, land use summary, road design, etc. Comments from the .members were that additional space was necessary in the road for a turn-around; V.A. will consider. It was questioned whether the }iDMF 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 made aware of Vail Associate's plans. It was also noted that some of the southern portion of the land would be used far light professional uses; V.A. does not anticipate up-zoning of property in that area. The Planning Commission felt the project was generally good - no overall ,increase in zoning and a good plan for what they have to work with. Secretary APPROVED: Chairman v. draft .. ~ .. ..~ Planning Commission - December 3, 1973 special meeting to discuss Crossroads addition. 3• P.M. present: Dave Sage Merv Lapin, Jack,Fritzlen, Gordon Pierce also Bob Hunt Garden Fierce stated: - we have started to design a project as addition to Crossroads. In the process, have talked to Eldon Beck and Lamont and discovered that what we were doing was in conflict with some of pedestrian ideas (a week ago). solution that would solve the master plan - hardship on the client - need a variance for parking. Merv - initially we came to DRB with two alternatives. (1) x~~ndx~x~n~xx around front - no variance (Z) jagged design _ variance on setback, 6 ft variance at one cornex. (3} strip of land which no one owns. (4) over 70 foot wall length for parking structure. variance requested. Eldon Beck saw design and came up with some ideas, however, under his ideas, access near proposed TOV control gate. by doing access (as per Beck) losing a row of parking. D.S. - I think it is impractical access {one-way access) utility easement along. So. Fx.ontage Road.- suggested - ask .7oe Staufer ~ct~,,s ~~~~-:~r•~a~g~3.~-.- ~~a~g thru his property. traffic shou~lc'C~~e~~ ci~~"`~ti~r~Ac~a:ns~ide.r,~.b1y;._.(.~..~.~~~si~n-g._tc~- ma•s~~~~'ls•lar~}~ parking requixement for existing Crossroads, based on gross occupancy - ~f ;~:f<z r~.a.~,.~.~.Q.~•.~o~me,, ~.~~~.es~.~,.-i:n.~ ~.~~~.,~: Village Center 1-3 would supply one parking space per unit which means 60 parking spaces,- instead of 90, which new ordinance requires in exchange for parkland at righthand corner. buildings 3F~4 (last phase) would conform to zoning ordinance. Hibberd maintains that the Town agreed to allow access on west end of property. Girfin attended meeting. Eldon talked to Girvin and Girvin says that access was to be straight into underground parking. Beck says access should ~ be made onto the site at corner on road on his own site. Trade-off - if we get green space, and lost pedestrianization. not.-.good trade-o£f. New zoning ordinance requires 16 spaces to serve commercial building 4, would have to go into green space anyway to have parking. grant variance or exemption to a?low those commercial parking spaces in the municipal parking structure and in turn dedicate land to Town, possibility of moving powex and utility lines. need clarification on Village Center before a decision can be made. .approval. if V.C. can be straightened out within 15 days, then we should go with the ~ master plan. T4V should contact ~x~~~ Fred Hibber~d and enforce master plan D.S. - wait 15 dais, propse that recommendation be made to Town Council and to Town staff. We X11 not approve any x~~~~~~ variances which would enable this structure to be built unless the Hibbered access is resolved. parking exemption/variance on setback, 10 ft. on side property line (~ foot setback), 6 ft. variance., 70ft wall variance, setback variance, corner next office structure. plank #2, if master plan approved, assumes street pedestrian and into sho building will be moved 4 ft east, approximately as. the ship building in plan 1 -, . . .. .. :a. .: _. t MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 13, 1974 ' 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 Bill Hanlon Merv Lapin Gordon Pierce Jen Wright Also present were: S Jim Lamont, Administrative Assistant Diana Toughill, Zoning Administrator Bill Heimbach, Vail Villager The Planning Commission considered an application for a Conditional 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 Uail 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 #10. 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 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 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 CondiT tional Use Permit. Jen Wright abstained from the vote due to his posi- tion with Vail Associates. The Planning Commission considered an application for a Conditional Use Permit by DR. THOMAS 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 Commission 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 space, which can be provided. It was determined that the Sandstone Staff House is not a part of the condominium association for Sandstone. It was also noted that there had been no public opposition voiced as of the present time. The Planning Commission then determined that the application • - of 1973 was in accord with 5ect7on 18.600 Cr7ter~a and Findings (Series ), and, in particular, 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 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 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 fora Conditional Use Permit by UFG, INC., in accordance with Article 18, Section 18.400 of Ordinance 8 (Series of 1973} in order to permit a family entertainment center in a Commercial Care 2 zone in the Vail 21 Building. The Zoning Administrator advised the 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 18.fi00 - Criteria and Findings of Ordinance 8 (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 or 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 6y Jen Wright to approve the Conditional Use Permit> seconded by Gordon Pierce, it was unanimously voted to approve the Conditional Use Permit. Merv Lapin abstained from the vote because of a possible conflict of interest. The Planning Commission then considered a request for a parking variance by LIONSQUARF 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 Lionsquare had an alternative plan for providing the parking spaces when they initially applied for the variance; Mr. Klug stated that at that time na alternative plan had been satisfactorily arranged. • -2- • A motion was made by Merv Lapin, seconded by Gordon Pierce, to approve the variance for the Lionsquare 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 Town Council and Planning Commission; (2) that if it is decided by the Town Council that the additional 11 spaces are required, Lionsquare would immediately provide those 11 spaces, as shown on the Exhibit presented to the Planning Com- mission on December 13, 1973, marked Exhibit A; (3) that the conference room is available to people in the LionsHead 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 .lack Fritzlen. A memorandum will be forwarded to Town Council formally notifying them of the vacancy. As there was no further business to come before the meeting, the meeting was adjourned at 3:00 P.M. Secretary • • APPROVED: Chairman -3- MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION QECEMBER 20, X974 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was convened at 2:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers oi= the Town of Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was held in the Council Chambers to discuss Bighorn zoning with planners; it was decided no minutes were necessary, as it was general discussion only. Secretary . APPROVED: Chairman i • ~_\ MINUTES REGULAR MEETING PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 27, 1974 " The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was cancelled because of lack of quorum -- Christmas holiday. Secretary APPROVED: r-~. Chairman "~. '-~ ~,