Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-0124 PECTHIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY PUBLIC NC7TICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission ofi the Town of Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 1 ~-3-6 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail on January 24, 2000, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In consideration of: A request for a variance in the setback, to allow #or a residential addition over an existing garage, located at 1816 West Gore Creek DrivelLot 35, Vail Village Filing 1. Applicant: Fred A. iseller Planner: Ann Kjerulf A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for the construction of an addition to the existing raw water intake structure and pump station, located on Black Core DrivelLot 8, Heather of Vail. Applicant; Eagle River Water and Sanitation District Planner: Brent Wilson A request for a variance from Sections 12-6D-6 and 12-1 D-8 of the Town of Vail Cade, to allow for a garage to be constructed within the front setback and within Town Right-of-Way, located at 285 Forest Rd.lLot 20, Block 7, Vail Village 1yt Filing. Applicant: Steve Waterhouse Planner: George Ruttier The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office located at the Tawn of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479-2138 for information. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479- 2356, Telephone for the 'Hearing Impaired, for information. Community Development Department Published January 7, 2000 in the Vail Trail. y~''C ~. .~ TO ~~1~ OF PAIL ~ 1 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION • PUBLlC MEETING SCHEDULE Monday, January 24, 20fJ0 AGENDA Proiect t3rientation I r~~ PEC LUNCH - Community Develoament D~~rtment i:30 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Site Visits : 1:34 p.m. 1. Feller residence -1818 West Gore Creek Drive Driver: Allison ~~ NDTE: if the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board will break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 p.m. Public Hearinq -Town Council Chambers 2:OU p.m. 1. A request for a setback variance, to allow for a residential addition over an existing first floor garage, located at 1816 West Gvre Creek Drivell_ot 35, Vail Village West Filing 1. Applicant: Fred A. Feller Planner: Ann Kjerulf 2. A request for a variance from Sections 12-6D-6 and 12-10-8 of the Town of Vail Code, to allow for a garage to be constructed within the front setback and within Town Right-of- Way, located at 285 Forest Rd.1L.ot 2A, Black 7, Vaii Village 1~ Filing_ Applicant: Steve Waterhouse _ Planner: Allison Ochs TABLED UNTIL FEBRUARY 14, ~[t00 3. A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for the construction of an addition to the existing raw water intake structure and pump station, located on Black Gore Drivell.vt 8, Heather of Vail. Applicant: Eagle River Water and Sanitation District Planner: Brent Wilson W'ITHDRAUVN ;~ .e ~. TOP{:ti' f1F Y.AIL 1 4. Information Update 5. Approval of January 10, 2400 minutes. The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office located at the Town of Uail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. please call 479-2138 for information. Sign language interpretation available open request with 24 hour notification. Please calf 479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Community Development ©epartment Published January 21, 2000 in the Val! Trail • • Z PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL CaMMISSIQN PUBLJC MEETING SCHEDULE Monday, January 2~, 2000 AGENDA Proiec# Orientation I ~(~ PEG LUNCH - Cammunitrr Develoament ©eoartment MEMBERS PRESENT John Schofield Galen Aasland Diane Golden Brian Doyon Tam Weber Chas Bernhardt ©oug Cahill Site Visits 1. Feller residence-1816 West Gare Creek Qrive Driver: Allison ~, NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:Odl p.m., the board will break for dinner from. 6.0©- 6.30 p.m, 1:30 p.m. 1:30 p.m. Public Hearing -Town Council Chambers 2:00 p.m. 1. A request for a setback variance, to aNow for a residen#ial addition over an existing first floor garage„ located at 1816 West Gore Creek Drive/Lot 35, Vail Village West Filing 1. Applicant: Fred A. Feller Planner: Anr7 Kjerulf MOTEON: Doug Cahill SECOND; Chas Bernhardt VOTE: 7-0 APPROVED 2. A request far a variance from Sections 12-6D-6 and 12-10-$ of the Town of Vaii Cade, to allow for a garage to be constructed within the front setback and within Tawn Right-of- Way, located at 285 Forest Rd.ILot 20, Block 7, Vail Vlliage 1~ Filing. Applicant: Steve Waterhouse Planner: Allison C7chs WITHQRAWN ~. a~wx o~ Yarn ~' 1 MEMBERS ABSENT 3. A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for the construction of an addition to the existing raw water intake structure and pump station, located on Black Gore Drivell_ot 8, Heather of Vai!_ Applicant: Eagle River Water and Sanitation District Planner: Brent Wilson WITHDRAWN 4. Information Update 5. Approval of January 10, 2000 minutes. Tne applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planners office located at the Town of Vail ~Commurtity Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please cal! 479-2138 for information. Sign language interpre#ation available upon repuest with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2358, Telephone far the Hearing Impaired, for informakion. commaunity ~evebprnent department • • C: MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environments! Cammissian FROM: Community Development Department DATE: January 24, 2Q~0 SUBJECT: A request far a side setback variance from Section 12-6D-6, Town of Vail Code, to allow for a residential addition aver an existing first floor garage, located at 1816 West Gore Creek Drive 1 Lot 35, Vail Village West Filing 1. Applicant: Fred Feller Planner: Ann F(jerulf DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applican# is requesting a setback variance to allow far the addition of living space {GRFA} on• the second scary of an existing single-family residence. The Feller residence was constructed prior to 1968 under the jurisdiction of Eagle County, The property came under the jurisdiction of the Town of Vail in 1986 when the area commonly known as Matterhorn was annexed from the County (Ordinance 18, 1986}. The property is non-canfarming with respect to the Town's setback and minimum !at size requirements for the Twa-Family PrimarylSecondary Residen#ial District. This proposal would allow for the addition of a 19' x 23' dining room (437 sq.ft. of additional GRFA} adjacent to an existing kitchen. The addition would be located directly above the garage and entirely within the existing building footprint. Due to the fact that the garage encroaches into multiple setbacks, the addition requires a variance prior to design review and construction. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends approval of the requested setback variance subject to the fallowing findings: That the granting of the setback variances does not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential District. 2. That the strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the setback regulations results in a practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the develaprnent objectives of the Municipal Cade for the Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential District. ~., ,^ 1 "~~~ ~. ,A~ rtrt ,i ~~~r~ ~~ ~tYfL ~ 3. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the applicant's property that do not apply generally to other properties in the Two-1=amity PrimaryfSecondary Residential District. 111. REVIEV1lING BOARD ROLES Planning and Enviranmer,tal Commission: The PEC is responsible far evaluating a proposal in regard to: The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. 2. The degree to which rekief from the s#rict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this Titie without grant of special privilege. 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. 4. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the proposed variance. design Review Board: Action: The DRB has NQ review authority on a variance, but mu$t review any accompanying ©RB' application. The DRB is responsible for evaluating a proposal in regard ta: / Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings / i"itting buildings into landscape / Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography / Removal/Preservation of trees and native vegetation / Adequate provisian for snow storage on-site / Acceptability of building materials and colors / Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms / provisian of landscape and drainage / Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures / Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distances / Location and design of sateClite dishes / Provision of outdoor lighting z • f IV. ZONING STATISTICS Lot Size: 11,100 sq. ft. Zoning: Two-Family I'rimaryfSecondary Residential Development standard AllowedlRequired Proposed GRFA: --3,450 sq. ft. 2.842 sq. ft. Setbacks: Fronts 20° 20' Sides*: 15` 1 15' / 15' 15' f 11' 115' 'Rear: 15' 9.5' Site Coverage: 20% Or 11 % or 2,220 sq. ft. 1,800 sq. ft. (approx.) Parking: 3 ~ Landscaping: 60°I° or 65 % or 6,660 sq. ft. 7,240 sq. ft. (approx-) *one side setback and the rear setback are encroached upon by the existing garage which is a legal non-conforming structure V. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS A. Consideration of Factors Regarding the Setback Variances: 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other exis#ir~g or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. Many of the lots in Vail Viilage West 1s° Filing are non-canfarrr~ing with respect to iot size. There are also instances where either a garage and / or living space encroaches upon a required setback or multiple setbacks; these irregularities generally existed prior to the IVlatterhorn area coming under the jurisdiction of the Town of Vail. The proposed addition to the Feiler residence would be located entirely within the existing building footprint and would not increase the degree of encroachment upon required setbacks. Staff believes that this request is consistent with. existing and potential uses and structures in the vicinity. 2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or #o attain the objectives of this title without a grant of special privilege. There are no particular physical restraints on the lot which impede the addition of • GRFA within the required setbacks. in fact, there is sufficient site coverage for the addition of 4.37 sq.ft. However, Mr. Feller's proposal is to add a dining room and this would be more conveniently added in closer proximity to the kitchen on the second floor. Qnly 68 sq.ft. or 15 °lo of the addition would encroach into setback areas. Furthermore, the proposed addition would be located entirely within the building fog#print thus minimizing site disturbance and impacts upon adjacent land owners. As mentioned previously, many of the lots located within Vail Village West 1~' Filing have constructed living area within required side and front setbacks. Staff does not believe the granting of this request would constitute a grant of special privilege. 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transporta#ion and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. Staff does not believe that there will be any negative impacts associated with this proposal on the above-listed criteria. B. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following frndinas before granting a variance: That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with fhe limitations on o#her properties classified in the same district. 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, ar materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the variance is warranted far one or snore of the following reasons: a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title. b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable #o the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. c, The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. • ,~- ___~__ _ ~-~ ~ p-- i ~~ ~,,,.. .~--~~~ ~ ~ ~ r ; ~ -'k~ ~-= _ C~ C9 ,r,,, ~' ~-- ''~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~; I~ _ _ _-,--- ~~ - --- ~ ` ~ ~~'~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~.rj ~ ~ ~', C~ ~~`, C~ ~ ~~`, ``~ ~, ~ _ ,. GC7 M ~ s.~'3 ° r~S~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ` ~ ~ ~ '~- ~ ~ ~y ~ ~ ti ~ f ~O Y ~ '~ ~ ~ f ~ + ~ t i 1 ~3" ~ ~ ~ ~.,,, ~- ~ ~-- ~~ ,~ N p ~ `\ ~~~ ~, f ~ J ~--- ________,__-- ~ ~' ~ ,.` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r tt9 j ff r- C~] N ~ ~ ~ ~/ ~ ... ~ i ~ ~- ~ j...., f f~ ~ '~" ~ %~~ "R,~ i~ --~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ f 1~ _------~.w.1 ~ ~ ~ fy r .~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~` ~ywf W _ ~,, ,~ ~ ~ R~ ~1 Or ~ ~~~ ;~ ,~ ~- ~` k ~~. ~4 ,4 ~1 Lei ' ''. ~~- {~~; ~ . •I ''v, .,`* ~,~ ~ j .~ ~ ~~.. 4~-° - ----- _ ~.~PYY n~~~~f'~Y..~f I ``~~ ~~~ •~'r. ' .4 . ~ -~; .~_ `~ ~,~ E > ~"IACL~I' ~3~ ~~ r ~~r~-~ ~~r ~~ fi ~'iNGs.~G~c~'}lea --• --- ~ ~ ~~ ~~ `•. ,' ~- ~.. `~. ~~ t 9~ w 3 ' .~ r. ~ x'°.1/4 Jam; y , ~- ~~ ~ ~ r. ! .~- ~ ~§ ~ ~~ ~ ~,~ .,W._ _ .~. _~, ~ ~?~ ~~, a = ~`~ ,~ _ ~ ~~~ ~~~`f~~~~~r ~, ` J ~'-~~y i ! -~ r~ '^----'F' . ~j. {,r~ ~ ! .r ~ "~..r .e~'r I~f «~- .~+.~ 'i~ { y ~ o-~:r {"-.,~F+l"ti :+!'° ~~~.. l~ ~.s ~ ~`:..- ~^ j ~? ~, ~ ~,;ti... 4;~~~^'~"~-~ :;s f' ~' F~ ~f'd~~„ `•,f z- .,.~..~., .._...~ s ~ ,r ~r s ~. ~. .~~ % ~a dl d,~,.?` `~~.. d~f `.~ ~ ~r~ !~ ` .(j~ j/ 7 I ~ • r /~ ,f 'W' ~ ,l --~ J ~ ~--_ .- ~ y---`~ l _ ~._..~ - ~--- -" 3.~f ~ ' ~ ~1 ,~f I ,f o __-; `~°fi ~- ~- ~: CZ -, r. p~ Z .~j~ AL1~'.~.1 r , Y"' ~ ~~ !{{ v ~ ' ~~ ~~-- ~_ ~~^j t\lf ~ ~-~ ~~ E ~i ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ 1~ _~ ~ ~~ ~-~ ;` i 3 ,~ qi , , c, ~- . a v~ ~~ ~ ° -: x '. ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~; , ~ ti~~ t S ~} i. ~~1 ~~ t ~~ t. III. ~~~ . 4`, l l~ `~ ~~ z ~, ,, ~ °~ ~~ ~- 4 ~ =~ ,'~ k ,~ I i __-- ---- • C r""' ~' A f 11 :~ 1 ~~ ,65 s v ~, S °t- _~ ~~ `i a ~..._~ s _. r ~~ e- i~ '~ ~ -' -~ ~ r ~~~ ~dl 113 ~ ~ • ~~~~ ,o ;;~~~~ ~~, `~. ~, i ~ ~.~., ~' ~~ ,.~ , , 1° { ~ ~~. ,j. It ~ ~ F, F ~,'1,i+•+ ~ 1 '~i ~." 1 t .~l~ ~ ~~ ~ r ~ i.~, t ~ ~~, , ]14~''. ~~ ~'~ ,• ~} :~.~T~ ~ 1~~ i ~ , is a i~ ~~~~ t iii ~ ~'" ~~ ~ ~',.~i~ y ., 7~} L '`. l A ~~ a} +', ~ ;', ~ ,.;,~,,~ ~~ .~ 1 ~~ ~11 . ~ 1 ,~ ~~ ',~~i ~ ~ i ~ ,i 1~~ ~ ~ ~~~. ~ 4 . ~~:;~ ~~.;~~, '•:4'r1~ :~,1 . ,~`~ "~ :~j ~ ~,. ;`''•i ~' ~; .F 1' t 1`"; i •' ; ,. ;`, ~,} ',V -o- - ',~ .-,..•-~ ~ !, j ` , , Ir1t' sue` i! ~ . ~ ' 7~~:~ ~~ . , ,~ s=-- it ~;.. .. _~,, ~„~1 ! ~~ ~„y ~'i i ..4 ~ a ,. ,~ ~~ ;~ ~:, ~ ~, ~~ ; _.-_- - .,~- G __.~:. i A C ~l':'~' ,t` ~ ~ ., 1~ 1 ~, 'f ~~ ~' 1 1 1 4 .i 4 1 1 i ,, 1' { r _.~ ~~a~c o~E ~~~o suRVE~ ca. ~~c. ..,~, ~ ~ ~ ~~°~ / / ~` r ~ ~ ~~~ ~~` ~ - ~ X48 ~ -~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~_ h ~ ~ ~ ~p a~ ~~~4~ \~ ~ ~~ ~ to F R CSCQ , CCU ~C7. scA~~ i' sa' . ~~~~ ~~ ~V`~~, 5 i!'CILITY EASEM~~t"C~~~ jj~ 1 ~~ i f' rr ~~ ~ , i !~ ~~ ~ ~ ~.~ 1 cq `~ ~ ~,~ ,~ ~!'~~„ 44.18. ~~~ ~~~'~ `~'-~ .~ r~©: ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ '~ 1 ~. l c~.xr~~'zc~~.er~ FE'S. GL~ y ~gUiJ Z , +vz[.LS~,M F,, ART~iFIF~Ln, FLING A RF1~IS~~:R"r'.D LAApD SU[tVr'YG[~ I[a `.~~iE S I'ATF; C1F CCLfIRADC~, DG HEF~EF~I CER'T'IFY THAT ~~ '~E AF.3C~VE DATE A SUHV~.Y WA5 ~AD~ BY ~ ~`~: AND UNDER MY S[~PEftVT.SICIIa 4F I.GT ~~~, VAIL VILLAGE WEST, FILING NCB , l P EAGLE CG[:;I `!`Y, C{}I,C`[~ADC} , THE ~~f~ 5'i'flRi~ FRAME A3~?~ BRICK ~LiILDI?dG 'niAS Ft~I~ND TO F~ LC~CA'I'FD £.'_v~'IR~LY 'Idi'1~.'IIa I`F?E E~;[3~iDARIFS tJF TI;E AFQVE D~1r,C'rtI['F;D F[it~YF.[iI"~ A.5 SHC~Ia . G,~ '1"'I-;IS FLAP, AirD T~-i~ LCtCA TI01d ,~T~D Dlyt!:T7SZGhS QF ALL T~UILDIP:GS, _ 3A51-r`~C:Y~1~~.F~~`?+S, ia.S~.MLt~[I'~ ~Y f1~ C1 N' T~'.[~ kfi~'~`zSFS A~tE ACG[i~{~"t`~X ~HJ~wliv , T"#-~IS 5~,`R`'~TFY 'JAS MADr F`Q:-3 '1'hE J,£~f", t'E t't1.'~1'C75~',~ 03a3~Y. 2i C2 ~~~np~r~TY cc~~~a~RS ~•r~a~~ sLT a_r.~a ~~~ r~,~r~:~~ ~~,~~~~, Lc;cn',~,~. . - :,'~- . • l~pdate on Community Development department Projects February 1, 20Q4 Taoic Pace Purpose 2 Planning Projects 2 Development Review Process 6 Housing Programs 7 Enviranmental Programs ~ Q Update on Community Development Department projects 1. PURPOSE: The purpose of this report is to summarize the current status of Community Development Department projects that have received Council`s attention in anticipation of the Council Worksession on Febraury 1, 2aQ©. In addition, we have included alist of potential future projects for your consideration. Staff would very much appreciate the Council's input on these projects. E~rajects that have been identified as part of the critical strategcy discusion will have a astrik beside it. It has been helpful in the past to review critical actions with Council in a warksession to ensure staff is achieving the Council's goals. It is very important to staff that we are focusing our available resources on the actions Council feels are most critical to the community. 2. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PURPOSE AND MISSION STATEMENT The purpose of the Community Development Department is: To ensure that we are bath the premier mountain community 8 international resort. The mission of the Department i5~ To provide effective and progressive community development services to our customers so that the Towrn of Vail is recognized among resort communities as a livable, sustainable community, and resort of the highest quality. The Community Development Department provides critical services to: ensure high quality development and redevelopment; provide planning services to ensure the long- term social, economic and environmental. sustainability; protect public health and safety; and facilitate the creation of affordable housing in the Town of Vail. Four teams exist within the Community Development Department (See attached organizational chart): Building Team:. This teams primary function is to ensure that all applicable building codes are adhered to and that construction in the Town of Vail meets the highest standard for safety. Environmental Health and Planning: Environmental Health implements programs to protect environmental quality and public health in Vail. This division implements a contract with the State of Colorado (which the Town is reimbursed) 2 to do food service inspections. This divisian also provides programs in air, water, waste management, and deals with a variety of nuisance related issues.ousing: The primary function of this division is to facilitate the creation of affordable housing within the Town of Vail. The Council has set a goal of having fit% of Vail employees living and working in the Tawn of Vail. The housing division will facilitate the development of affordable housing, develop policies to create housing an private land, and regulate existing deed restricted units in the Town of Vail. Planning: The planning division is responsible for current and long range planning, The major focus of the planning divisian is to review development applications to ensure conformance to the Towns zoning regulations. master plans, and other development review regulations. The Planning Division also works on long range projects and on continuously improving the zoning code to meet community needs. 3. PLANNING RELATED PROJECTS 3.1 Implementation of the Lionshead Master Plan Implementation of the Lionshead Master Plan is critical to continuing to improve the built environment in Vail. The Town has approved new zoning for the Lionshead area. Vail Resorts is reporting continued progress and success in developing a deal with a major hotel chain. The development of a hotel at the Gondola Building will trigger public improvements outlined in the Lionshead Master Plan. It is planned that these improvements, which could run from $50- $75 million, would be paid by tax increment financing (TIF). TIF is a mechanism that leverages the additional incremental tax revenue that is created by the rise in property values resul#ing from improvements in the property or surrounding public infrastruc#ure after a certain date. Far example a property that produces $1,000 in tax revenue today might produce $1,200 in tax revenue tomorrow after improvements in the building. The Town, County, School District would continue to collect the $1,000 but the additional $200 would go to public improvements in the TIF District.. Next steps in the Lionshead implementation include: + Decide on whether to implement a Urban Renewal Authority (URA} ar a Dawn Tawn Development Authority (DDA) to create the taxing district for TIF. AURA is easier to set up and requires only one public vote of registered vo#ers versus the two votes (involving all property owners) to set up a DDA. A difficult public relations issue with TIF is making a finding of "blight" which can be legally done in Vail based on State code stating that poor transportation and lot line configuration can justify this finding. • Determining the tax district boundary • Communication with School District and Eagle County. (Their support will be very helpful) • Refine cast estimates for public improvements (underway.) • Implement campaign for a November 2000 bond election. 3 • Create View corridors ldenfified in Plan (this is not funded in 20[10} • Survey View Corridors ^ Adapt the View Corridors 3.2 Community Facilities: Staff is aggressively moving forward with community facility planning. The Town Council has approved the 1999 and 2000 budget to accommodate the next steps. There are three sites staff is focusing on: Nub Site: This includes the Library, Dobson, Charter Bus-Lot, and south side of the parking structure. Next steps on this site include: 1) completing a market analysis (2-3 months); 2) Immediately initiating a design process on the library to determine physical opportunities with a second floor; 3) After the market analysis is complete, initiate the design process for the entire hub site; and 4) Facilitate the develapmen# of a fund raising campaign (separate from the Town of Vail) far the facilities. Vail Resorts has indicated that they could support a campaign manager to assist with this effort. Donovan Park: The lower bench of donovan Park is 9.2 acres. A design team is being engaged to develop a site design for the following uses: 1} Park with play field and tot-lot. 2) Community meeting room that could also accommodate community events such as children's theatre 3) Gymnastic Facility for VRD, 4) Youth program area for VRD, 5) Space for Learning Tree and ABC if ivtt. Be[I is determined to be an appropriate site far housing; 6) community swimming pool; 7} pausing for employees generated by the park and recreational uses. The next step on this site includes initiating the site design process and determine whether these uses will work on the site. A planning process wi11 be developed for the public to provide input on the alternative design concepts as they are developed. Note: Check points will be created in the Hub Site and Donavan Park processes to allow coordination between the two related actions and to allow the community to evaluate new opportunities for the uses that may present themselves. City Market/Bright Horizons Space: Approximately 3200 square feet of space could be made available to the Town of Vail fora $lfyear lease. An architect is currently looking at this space to determine interior designs far a library meeting room, class morn space far groups, senior services for NWCCC7G, and possibly a space far arts and crafts. 3.3 Planning Related Actions to Consider in the Future StrategiclEconomic Plan,: The resort industry is changing and so is our community. Staff believes a strong vision statement is critical and will be helpfu! in making decisions in the future. A vision statement could be very helpful in making decisions when economic/resort interests are competing against resident interests. A vision statement can also acknowledge how our resort and 4 community are interrelated and interdependent. The Town has a vision statement ("To be the premier mountain community and international resort") and council may choose to simply reaffirm that vision statement. Staff believes there are five critical areas to continue to work on to improve our competitive edge as a resort: 1. Lodging quality and value 2. Guest amenities (Things for people to do when they are not skiing) 3. Retail diversity (We have a lot of T-shirt shops and art galleries but not a lot of product in the middle of the market} 4. Service quality (maintaining high quality employees that take care of the guest) 5. Infrastructure (streetscape, landscaping, maintaining a clean appearance) We are making progress with all five areas but there is not a comprehensive strategic plan that talks to our economic fiuture or provides a cohesive plan for addressing the above mentioned issues. Staff does not feel that a significant study is needed. However, a brief public process possibly as an extension. of Vail Tomorrow may be helpful in gaining strong public support on economic priorities and buy-in to a vision statement. Another benefit of having a public discussion on this issue is that it certainly would generate some other specific ideas that have not been considered to help our economy. Village Master Pfau and Vaii Land Use Plan: The Village Master Plan has not been updated since 1990 and the Vail Land Use Plan has not been updated since 19$~i. Staff believes that an update to these plans is needed to address changes that have occurred over time. For instance there is no underlying planning that has occurred for the Holiday Inn site. Loading and delivery along with housing were not critical issues as they are now. A key gap in current master planning is the area between the Village and Lionshead where the Chateau at Vail and the Medical Center may redevelop in the future. In addition, improving the design guidelines far Vail Village was identified as a next step in the Lionshead Master Plan. Staff does not feel that this involves a rewrite of the Vail Land Use Plan and Village Master plan but involves an update to these plans. This process could take as little as six to eight months to complete if the scope of the project remains as an update- Parking Regulafions and Parking Pav-in-Lieu: Staff has received a final repar# from our parking consultant with recommended changes to the calculation of parking for private development in Lionshead and the Vail Village. Staff has also prepared an analysis of properties currently eligible for parking pay-in-lieu. Staff plans to return to the Tawn Council in the upcoming weeks to present and discuss the final recommendations. Upon Council direction, the next step is to amend the regulations accordingly. Now that the research has been completed, staff can move forward as quickly as Council would like. Design Guidelines: We have budgeted for several years to rewrite the averap design guidelines for the Tawn. A next step in the Lionshead Master Plan, as mentioned above, is to apply what we leaned about Lionshead design guidelines to the rest of the community. New guidelines would help reduce the subjectivity 5 in the design review process and further enhance the architectural character of the community. Based on the work that has already occurred on design guidelines from the I_ionshead Master plan, this project could be completed within a 6 month time frame. GRF~.4 Reac~Iations: There have been numerous discussions aver the marl#s of the GRFA system in the Town. Staff, architects, and builders spend an inordinate amount of time keeping track of GRFA on properties throughout the Town. A previous analysis of GRFA policy showed a disconnect, in mast situations, between bulk and mass of structures and GRFA. That study showed that design guidelines, building height and site coverage were the actual regulations affecting bulk and mass. The study did recommend that site coverage should be decreased far lots aver 20,pQ0 square feet and that design guidelines should be improved if GRFA was eliminated. Staff believes the department and the Town could run more efficiently without the regulation while maintaining architectural quality and building scale. If Council was interested in reexamining this policy question, much of the research has already been completed and staff could prepared with two week notice to present the finding from this research. Sran Code Revisrans: This is another project that has been on the list of projects to be completed, but has not been considered a priority in the past by the Town Council. Recently, the Vail Village merchants have expressed an interest in revising the regulations to make them easier to understand and enforce. The merchants expressed a desire to make the regulations more equitable from business to business. Staff believes that making changes to this code could help improve the appearance of Vail as well as improve customer service by making the code more understandable. IVofice and Hearincs Revisions: Staff and members of the council have expressed an interest modifying and consolidating the notice and hearing requirements for various planning applications. The regulations are currently inconsistent and may not provide far adequate notice to the community. Staff believes this is an important issue that should be addressed. Clarification of PEC and DRB Roles/SDD process chances: This issue was discussed with the Town Council on November 23. Staff believes that in order to be fair to applicants and to reduce redundancy in the development review process that it is important that the roles of the different boards are clarified and modified to reduce overlap. Additionally, staff believes we should move forward an modifications to the SDD process in order to set council parameters upfront in the review process (i.e., conceptuallsketch plan approval process). NOrTE: Community Development can comfortably accommodate 1-2 major projects (Vail Tomorrow, Community Facilities} at a time that require intense public involvement. We have two senior planners that can each accommodate 1- 2major policy actions at one time and still maintain a caseload of development review projects. Depending on the nature of the project, our more junior planners could also be a very effective resource to get the job done an policy initiatives. Further discussion with council on expectation for public involvement and project completion would be very helpful. 6 4. DEVELQPMEMT' REVIEW PIRt)CESS 4.1 Current Maior Develonrnent Proiects Var! Plaza lnn: The Vail Plaza Hotel project is a proposal to redevelop Phase IV of the Vail Village Inn. The redevelopment proposal includes 97 accommodation units, 47 fractional fee club units, and a mix of retail, restaurant, spa and conferencelmeeting space facilities. The proposal is currently proceeding through the standard development review process for a major amendment to an existing special development district. Staff anticipates a Council site visit and applicant presentation on the proposal to the Council on December 7'h. Pending the outcome of several upcoming Planning & Env'rranmental Commission and Design Review Board meetings, the applicant will be before the Vail Town Council for review and consideration of an amending ordinance in early 2000. Antlers: The Town of Vail Planning & Environmental Commission approved a major exterior alteration request for the Antlers Condominiums in Lionshead. The approved development plans include the addition of Z4 new residential condominiums, an upgrade and improvements to the existing building and 13 new "beds" for employee housing. Ten of the 13 new "beds" are to be provided on-site in Lionshead. Marrlo~~ The Town Council recently approved a major amendment to Special Development District #7, Marriott, to allow for a significant redevelopment of the hotel site. The approved development plans included 63 new fractional fee club units in a new building atop the existing parking structure, located to the west of the hotel. In addition to the new building, the approved development plan requires substantial exterior improvements and material upgrades to the existing hotel. As a condition of approval, the applicant is required to contribute financially to the reconfiguration and improvement of the two West Lionshead Circle/South Frontage Road intersections. 4.2 Potential Development Proiects Lionshead Gondola site: Vail Associates continues to make progress in term of coming to agreement with a hotel operator. Best case for ground breaking on this site is 2001. Var! Afhletrc Club: The VAC is under sale and it is anticipated that the new owner will pursue plans to remodel or redevelop this site. Development potential exists on this site from a previous SDD approval granted in 1998. West Va!! Lodge: This property has been for sale for 1-2 years. The Lodge has had very poor occupancy rates and has not been economically successful. The property owner has communicated to the Tawn that they may be interested in converting this property into an affordable housing project. Ruins/Cascade V!1lage: This property received SDD major amendment approval in 1998. This approval has lapsed due to the owner not posting a bond to removing the existing concrete structures on the site. The Town has been 7 contacted about listing this property for sale. This property has also been discussed as a potential housing site. Lodge/Exchange Site: Vai! Associates controls two acres of (anti directly south of The Lodge. Staff has seen some preliminary concepts far development of this site. However, no forma! development application has ,been made to the T©wn. Staff anticipates an application for development within the next year Chateau at Vail: The Chateau at Vail has also been for sale. This hotel property has significant redevelopment potential. fn addition, the site would support conference facilities that could influence plans for an event facility on the Charter Bus lot. 4,3 Improving the Develooment Review Process The Community Development Department has continued to look at how to improve the developrrment review process and. make it more efficient. To this end the Development Review team has committed to time frames for completing staff reviews, we implemented a service counter where the public can receive 24 hour approvals for planning and building applications that are simple and straight forward. The Building Team has dust completed a rigorous analysis of their services and identified sped#ic ways to improve service. Anew area the Building Team is working on is to provide educational opportunities for contractors and developers to help developers expedite the development review process by improving the overall quality of plans and actual construction. The Town of Vail is also working hard to improve effciency through technology with: improved mapping, electronic filing system, permit tracking, and providing information over the internet. Customer service will be improved by continuing to enhance technology that provides timely, accurate information. Other actions to consider in the future for improving the process are outlined in a November 23, 1999 memorandum to the Town Council. On November 23`x, Council did express interest in creating a conceptual review process far SDDs and clarifying roles. 5. H(3USiNG Potential actions can be broken dawn into three different categories. 1. Rental Housing Opportunities 2. For-Sale Housing Opportunities 3. Policy Initiatives Potential rental opportunities include the Mountain Bell site, the south side of the Lionshead Parking Structure, the Holy Cross siteNail Resorts service yard, Timber Ridge, potentially both the West Vail Lodge and the '°Ruins" site. 8 3.1 Rental Housing Opportunities Mountain Bell Site In 1992 the Housing Authority created a plan that would have created 44 two- bedroam rental units on the Mountain Bell site. In 1959 Bill Pierce did some preliminary site analysis and was able to fit from 198 to 288 beds on the Mountain Bell site using the footprint and floor plans from the River's Edge building. Historically there has also been discussion of for-sale housing on this site. Lionshead Parkins Structure There is potential for two or three levels of housing to be placed on the south side of the parking structure. The Lionshead Master Plan states that this site could hold employee housing potentially on tap of a level of retail space, It will be very important in the design to create a quality relationship to the street and the pedestrian environment. As part of the community facilities planning further design work can be done for housing on this site. Hoiv CrossNail Resorts Service Yard i The site is the mostly likely to replace the employee housing that will be lost due to the Sunbird rebuild. The Lionshead Master Plan states that this site offers a unique opportunity to achieve significant density for employee housing. Timber Ridge Staff is currently working with the property owner to come up wi#h a solution to maintain employee-housing units on this site. The current deed restriction expires in November 20D1, Also, staff has looked at potential redevelopment of this site, which could generate between 756 to 1294 total beds. Old Town Shoos This site has been considered for housing in the past.. There is a potential for some housing, but it may not be the mast appropriate site. Eagle River Water and Sanitation district has expressed an interest in expanding its water treatment facility at this site. The Lionshead Master Plan lists this as a potential housing site, but it also raises questions about the compatibility of uses vn this site. West Varl Lodge The West Vail Lodge has been for sale, The owners have discussed with staff the idea of redeveloping the site as rental housing. Staff is currently researching what the zoning and the current Special Development District would allow. The potential proposal would create 48 new EHUs wi#h a~potential second phase of an additional 28 units. 9 The Ruins The property may became far sale at a greatly reduced price. The property does have liens against it far nonpayment of services by the current owner. This site was approved for 21 EHUs. 5.2 For-Sale Hauling f~pportunities Buv Down Program The "Buy Dawn'" program was a recommended action in all of the alternatives discussed in the Common Ground process. The subsidy that was given was $13,333 per bedroom. The goal ranged from 50 bedrooms to 100 bedrooms. Currently, the Town has $100,000 budgeted this year for the "buy down" program and that is to target 5 units. in 1999 the Town purchased 3 units under this program. Two units have been resold to qualified purchasers while the Town has retained ownership of one of the units to rent to Town employees. Arosa/Garmisch and the A-Frame Site Plans far the ArasalGarmisch and A-Frame site have been approved through the Tawn design review process. Construction documents have been submitted and reviewed by the Town far the Arosa/Garmisch site. The A-Frame plans are going through the final engineering process. After delays in 1999 it was decided to hold off breaking ground until April 2000. In the meantime issues have arisen with the selected developer. At this point in time Community Development and Publuc Works staff anticipate sending gut an RFP for a new builder for both the park and the housing. Berry Creek 5th Filing On November 3r°, 1999 the Town of Vail and Eagle County entered into an intergovernmental Agreement to develop housing on 16 acres of the Berry Creek 5th Filing. This will be a 50!50 partnership, with the County taking the lead. The goal is to create approximately 200 units with a mix of far-sale and rental homes. Staff met with the County staff on January 13th and revisions to the draft Request For Proposals (RFP) were discussed. The new draft was included in the Council Packet far January 18th as well as sent to Eagle County staff and the Eagle County Commissioners. After comment from both Vail Town Council and the Board of County Commissioners staff from the County and the Town will work to create a final version of the RI=P far distribution to potential developers. Booth Creek Townhomes To raise money in order to create a rack fall barrier the homeowners would like to sail the 1.2 acres tennis court site they own. Vail Resorts has a deed restriction on the property that it remains as open space. They may be willing to lift that deed restriction if it were for a public purpose. 10 • • 5.3 Policy Initiatives Commercial Linkage / Emolovee Generation Program In October of 1999 the Tawn of Vail held preliminary focus groups with the business community to discuss a Commercial Linkage Program within the Tawn of Vail. Fallow up focus groups as well as a presentation to Council was held in December. The consultant hired has lane same further research of other resork communities to determine haw many units are actually created as part of a Commercial Linkage Program. The following example shows a new non-residential development of 50,000 square feet in AspenlPitkin County. Aspen/Pitkin County Example Use Sq. Footage 1. Hotel 20,000 2. Retail 10,000 3. Rest/Bar 10,000 4. Office 10.000 Tata! 5q 000 Mitigation Level fiD% Unit Conversion Studio One Bedroom Two Bedroom Three Bedroom Dormitory -one per 150 sq. ft. empl1,D00 Number of new Emps. 3.5 70 2,3 23 4 40 3 _ 30 1B3 New Employees 163 to be paused 98 Residents 1,25 1.75 2.25 3 1 Mitigation Units 78 56 43 33 98 Next steps have been outlined if Council chooses to move forward with a Tawn of Vail Commercial Linkage Program. Staff would recommend that the Town Council discuss this policy initiative with the County Commissioners to determine if they are also interested in pursuing a Commercial Linkage program. Currently through the Special Development District process, the Public Accommodation Zane District, and the Lionshead Master Plan the Town off Vail has required developers to mitigate approximately 30% of their new employee housing needs. Hausinp Zone District The Town Council in September of 1999 considered the creation of a housing zone district. This was recommended for approval by the PEC. The purpose of this zone district was to create a zoning district that would accommodate for sale or rental deed- restricted housing. This zone district could be applied to Timber Ridge to help ensure the development stays as affordable housing or to Mountain Bell to accommodate a housing development on that site. 11 In September Council did not express a strong interest in moving forward with the zone district as it was proposed.. They wanted to see the development standards more defined for this zone district. Staff is prepared to discuss this issue as well as alternative ways to keep Timber Ridge as affordable rental housing. Timber Ridge is currently in a Special Development District and the deed restriction will expire in 2001. EHU Cade Amendments Tire purpose of this policy initiative is to improve the incentives and eliminate the disincentives for creating EHUs. The PEC and the Town staff have recommended some changes to the EHU codes in order fo improve enforcement and create new opportunities far the private production of EHUs. The Town Council has reviewed these proposals and directed staff to move forward Staff plans to bring these proposals back to the Council for review in fhe upcoming weeks. Enforcement of Current EHUs Staff is currently working on enforcement of current EHUs. Letters with sworn affidavits to be returned were sent out to all EHU owners in December of 1999, The inclusion of sworn affidavits is new to the enforcement of the EHUs. It is thought that by requiring the responses to be sworn affidav'r#s it would intent people to provide mare accurate information. The results of these efforts are listed below. There are currently 4 types of deed restricted units within the Town of Vail, A} There are 35 units deed restricted prior to 1992. These owners are not required to rent their units, nor are they required to respond to annual verification. • 27 of the 35 owners responded • 34 employees are housed in the 27 units accounted for B} There are 24 units that were deed restricted between 1992 and 1994. These owners are not required to rent their units, but they are required to respond to annual verification * 13 of 24 owners responded * 13 employees are housed in the 13 units accounted for C) There are 58 units that were deed restricted since 1994. These units are required to rent their units and they are also required to respond to annual verifcation. • 49 of 58 owners responded • 62 employees are housed in the 49 units accounted far D} There are 53 Vail Commons deed restricted units. These units are required to be owner-occupied and respond to annual verification. • 52 of 53 owners responded • 83 employees are housed in the b2 units accounted for 12 Staff is currently working on ways to require people to upgrade their old restrictions as they apply for permits to change their houses. The largest question to be answered is what types of changes trigger the requirement for deed restriction upgrade. 4. ENVfRO~NMENTAL PROGRAMS The Environmental Health Officer along with the Director of Community Development work on the implementation of environmental programs. Many of these programs came directly from the Town of Val! Environmental Strategic Plan of 1094. 4.1 Oven Space: Within the month of November, staff anticipates receiving 3 parcels of land from Vail Resorts to be used only as open space in the future. Two of these parcels are adjacent to Red Sandstone Road and another parcel is a large wet6and tract across from the Born Free lift in Lionshead. Staff would recommend reconvening the Dedicated Open Space Committee to evaluate whether these lands should become "designated open space" as per the Town Charter. At the last Open Space Committee meeting, residents asked the committee to look at additional designations for stream tract lands. 4.2 Water Quality: The Town of Vail along with the Eagle River Water District, Vail Resorts, and the U.S. Geological Survey have been working in a partnership for the last 3 years. This partnership has been focused on evaluating the health of Gore Creek and identifying actions to protect Gore Creek. Conclusions from this partnership include: • the four mile gold medal fishery of Gore Creek is one of the most productive fisheries in the Upper Colorado Basin; • Sediment is impacting Black Gore Creek and could threaten the fishery • Magnesium Chloride • Riparian habitat along Gore creek is critical to aquatic habitat. • Nutrient loading has increased over time Next Steps in the area of water quality include: 1}Improving water quality and stream setback standards using model language from NWCCOG, 2} Completing a final report on the quality of Gore Creek, 3} Completing work on a $80,00© grant the town received from the EPA . 4.3 State of the Environment: For a more comprehensive overview of environmental programs see the attached summary of environmental programs prepared for the 1999 Championships. 13 Organizational Chart Town Manager Bob McLaurin Director of Community Development Russ Forrest Chief Building h Official Chief of Planning Senior easing i ~ Environmental Office Manger ~ I I Gary Goodel I ~ Dominic Maurielia i Policy Planner Nina Timm Health Specialist t. nn Camtjell Pa6rick Hamel y Senior Planner Building C3eorge Rather ~ Contract Assitants Planning Secretary Inspector - ~ Judy Rodriguez Cammercia Chris. Friel Charlie Davis Planner I Reception/Building Anne Kjerulf Secretary Building ~ Joan Nolan Inspector - I Planner I Residential ~ JR ~ Allison Ochs Mondragen Planner II Building Brent Wilson Tech- Counter GIS Position Kathy I Technichan Warren PasitiaR eliminated F:IEVE RYC}NEICOUNC ELIMEM©S1991update.d®c • • • 15 r Approved 2/14/00 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIG+IV • January 24, 2aa0 Minutes MEMBERS PRESENT John Schofield Galen Aasland Diane Golden Brian Doyon Tom Weber Chas Bernhardt Doug Cahill Public Hearing MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF PRESENT; Russ Forrest Ann Kjerul# Judy Rodriguez John Schofield called the meeting to order at 2:a0 p.m. 2:00 p,m. 1. A request for a setback variance, to allow for a residential addition aver an existing first floor garage, located at 116 West Gore Creek Drive/Lot 35, Vai! Village West Filing 1. 6 ~~ Applicant: f=red A. Feller Planner: Ann Kjerulf Ann Kjerulf gave an overview of the staff memo.. John Schofield asked if the applicant had anything to add. Ike did not have anything to add, but was very satisfied with the very complete staff memo, John then asked if there was any public comment. There was no public comment. Tom Weber had no comments. Galen Aasland said there was a hardship and asked if the applicant would do an ILO. Ann Kjerulf said, yes. Brian Dvyon had no comments. Doug Cahill had na comments. Chas Bernhardt had no comments. Diane Golden complimented Ann on her presentation, but had no further comments. John Schofield said the findings were consistent with previous approvals. Doug Cahill made a motion for approval, in accordance with the staff memo. Chas Bernhardt seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 7-0. Planning and Environmental Commission Minutes January 24, 2©00 1 Approved 2114/00 '` 2. A request for a variance from Sections 12-6D-6 and 12-10-$ of the Town of !pail Gode, to allow for a garage to be constructed within the front setback and within Town Right~of- Way, located at 285 Forest Rd.lLot 2~D, Block 7, Vail Village 1St Filing. Applicant: Steve Waterhouse Planner: Allison Ochs WITHDRAWN 3. A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for the construction of an addition to the existing raw water intake structure and pump station, located on Black Gore Drive/Lot 8, Heather of Vail. Applicant: Eagle River Water and Sanitation District Planner: Brent Wilson WITHDRAWN 4. Information Update Russ Forrest advised the PEG that next Tuesday there would be a Com Dev workplan session with the Gouncil and asked for any PEC input. He then summarized the different projects that would be be discussed with Town Council. He also went aver the Lionshead Master Plan implementation. John Schofield asked what the legal format was for updating the Village and Lionshead Master Plans. Russ Forrest said the usual adoption route was by Resolution, but the Lionshead Master Plan was adopted by Ordinance. He then summarized the change that might happen with the notification of property owners. John Schofield suggested just being consistent. Tom Weber suggested posting the notice directly on the property of the applicant. Russ Forrest gave an overview of the employee housing. Tom Weber asked if the ban would ever be lifted for property owners to buy into employee housing. Russ Forrest said the way the lottery was set up, it was intended far the first-time homebuyer or the new person in Town and not for the long time local who owns property. Torn Weber said he would testify in front of Council, stating he was in favor of lifting this ban. John Schofield said he was in favor of an educational process far DDA {tax increment financing). He said from the Town's standpoint, it was critical since the Town was way behind on that. He explained tax increment financing. He said that taxes would not increase. However, as property values increase, the additional incremental tax generated would go into Lionshead versus the County, school district, etc.. Dominic Mauriello explained that getting the DDA would require having the same finding of blight, but without having to use the word. Planning and Environmental Commission 2 Minutes January 24, 2000 Approved 2'114100 Doug Cahill and Diane Gulden agreed that the Community Facilities and the Economic Plan were priorities. Chas Bernhardt said he would prioritize GRFA. Galen Aasland said he did not want to change the character of the Town, by prioritizing GRFA. Tvm Weber said the first priority was the Vision Statement and that ecanvmic viability needed to iae in that statement. He said the Vision Statement needed to specific enough, so people didn't read what they wanted into it. Galen Aasland said the Town should not require employee housing with redevelopment, otherwise businesses move down valley. Tom Weber mentioned the Town could fund incubator businesses. He said he was concerned about surface drainage into our waterways and said that we needed something in our Code addressing this. Russ Forrest said if an applicant comes in, we have nothing to show him regarding erosion control and storm water management. Galen Aasland said that we told the Community we would have a Riparian study and we needed to get going an that.. Brian Doyon said we needed to get some environmental issues on the priority list. Russ Forrest said he had been working on a water study with VA and the District and they were getting a handle an the sanding issue using the chemical Mag-Choloride. 5. Approval of January 10, 2000 minutes. Galen Aasland had changes. Diane Gviden made a motion for approval, as amended. Brian Doyon seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 6-(], with John Schofield abstaining. Doug Cahill made a motion tv adjaum. Diane Golden seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 7-g. The meeting adjourned at 2;5Q pm. • Planning and Environmental Commission 3 Minutes January 24, X000