Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-0722 PEC• ""T1 8...It C PUBLIC IC: � gg HEREBY at the YowPn of Veil w1d hold a public hearing In accordance with Section 12.3 -6 of the Municipal Coda of the Town of Val) on July 22, 2002, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vac k%Oicipal Building. In consideration at A request far a final review 01 a conditional use ppeermit, fo allow for time sham units on the first ilr ar of a bullding or above, located at the Antlers Condominiums, West Llonshead Place/Lot 3,. Block 1, Lionshead 3rd Filing. Applicant; Antlers Condominium Association, represented by Rob Levine Planner: George Rulher./Warren Carripbell A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to of an amendment to Section 12 -7A -7 (He hty. Vaii Town Code, to increase the maw - r�m allowable twllding height In the Public Accommodation Zone Dist ict, Applicant: Bob Lazier, represented by Jay Peterson Planner: George Ruthe€ A request for a final review and recommanda8oha- of the following applications related to the Proposed redevelopment of the Vail Mountain Schcok 1) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Torun Councif to rezone 3010 Booth Falls RoadlLol 11, 6bck 2, Vela Village 12th Filing from Two- Family Rsadsntlai to General Use; Z+-A request for a recommendation to the VaU Town Council to rezone Tract C. Block 1. Vail -Vi- lags 1281 Filing from Two - Family Residential to General Use; 3) A request for a recommendation to amend the *1*191 Town M Vail Land Use Map for Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing from Low Density Residential to Publid/Seml- Public; 4) A request for an amendment to the previously approved development plan and a new conditional use permit for a private educational instltutton avid an active outdoor recreation area on 3010 Booth Falls Road/Lot 11, Black 2, Vail Village 121h Fling ar 63180 N. Frontage Road Fastla part of Lot 12, Blook 2, Vail Village 12th Filing; 5) A request for a cwndltl nal use permit to allow for the constructlan of sight Type III EHUe located on Tract C, Block 1, Vaii Village 12th Filing; 8) A request for a conditions) use permit to allow for a private educational institution and active out- door recreation area located at 3160 N. Frontage Rd. Eastla part of Lot 12, Block 2 Vail Village 12th Flung; 764 request foT. a for a conditional use permit to al- low for temporary modular classroom structures io- dated at 3160 N. Frontage Rd. East/ a part of Lot 12, Black 2, Vail Vllage 121h Fiiing 6) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to modify the official Town of Vail Roridall Hazard Map to indicate approved mikga- lion for 3160 N. Frontage RoadrLot 12, Block 2, Veil Village 12th Filling; 9) A request for a recommendatlon to the Vail Town Council for a text amendment to Section 12- 8A-8 (Density), Vail Town Code, to, emend the GRFA regWramente in the Ag and Open Space 7'pne DletrkL M) A request for a variance from Section to 12 -BA- 5 (Lot Area and Site Dimensions) to allow for a subdivision creating a lot which is less than 35 , acres, located p Lpt, 12,iQlocll 2 .VAU,1Ihtage l llh, , R ng col a a onnts ur 1iJ A request for a major aubdivtelon in accord- ance with Tif" 13 Chapter 3, Wit Town Code, and aetting fdrttl dete�€s in r9gaids thereto, located at Lola ti ark 12, Btaok 2, Vail Village 1281 Filing and Tract C, Block 4. Veil Village 12th Filing. Applicant: Vail Mountain School, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: Rues Forrest The appiloslidns and I*rmatlon about the propos- als are available for public tnepecWn during regu- 1 ar office hours in the protect planner's office, lacat- ad at the Town of a)V I Community Development Department. 75 South Frontage Road. The pubiic Is invited to attend project orientation and the site Mails that precede the ppublic hearing in the Town of Vail Cornmunlly Dervelopmenf Department. Please ced 479 -2138 for information,. Sign lanuage Interpretation avalable upon re- Quasi with 24 -hour notification. Please call 479- 2356, Trlephone tar the Hearing Impaired, for in. formation. Community Development Department Published in the VAR DailyJurf 5, 2002 ORDINANCLE NO.11 SERIES OF 2002 AN ORDINANCE MAKING SUPPLEMENTAL AP- PROPRIATIONS TO THE TOWN OF VA1L GEN- ERAL .FUND, CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND, HEAVY EQUIPMENT FUND, REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX FUND, AND THE DISPATCH SERVICES FUND OF THE 20D2 BUDGET FOR THE TOWN OF VArL, COLORADO; AND AU- THORIZING THE EXPENDITURES OF SAID AP- PROPRIATIONS AS SET FORTH HEREIN; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERE• TO, Ludwig Kurz, Mayor ATTEST:' Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED INs 2nd day of Judy ,2002. Published In the Vail Daily July 5, 2002. ORDINANCE NO.3 SERIES 2002 AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO SALES TAX REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 200213; PROVIDING THE FORM, TERMS AND CONDI- TIONS OF THE 2002B BONDS, THE MANNER AND TERMS OF ISSUANCE, THE MANNER OF EXECUTION, THE METHOD OF PAYMENT AND THE SECURITY THEREFOR; PLEDGING SALES TAX REVENUES OF THE TOWN FOR THE PAY- MENT OF THE 2002E BONDS; PROVIDING CERTAIN CONVENANTS AND OTHER DETAILS AND MAKING OTHER PROVISIONS. CONCERN. ING THE 200213 BONDS, THE SALES TAX REV- ENUES AND THE REFUNDING PROJECT; RATF FYING ACTION PREVIOUSLY TAKEN AND AP- PERTAINING THERETO; REPEALIN© ALL ORDI- NANCES IN CONFLICT HEREW171H. Ordlnarx ere No. 3 Series of 2002, was approved on first reading on JafI 15, 2002, and published in lull oil Janus 20 3002 Copies. at Ordinance No, 3t ,fief!¢,@ 01 ��;y ea ya�r�led; harp aval� , S i�or. THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY ' PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town ofe' 49 Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 12 -3 -6 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail on July 22, 2002. at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In consideration of: A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, to allow for time share units on the first floor of a building or above, located at the Antlers Condominiums, 680 West Lionshead Place /Lot 3, Block 1, Lionshead 3" Filing. Applicant: Antlers Condominium Association, represented by Rob Levine Planner: George RutherNV@rren Campbell A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to of an amendment to Section 12 -7A -7 (Height), Vail Town Code, to increase the maximum allowable building height in the Public Accommodation Zone District. Applicant: Bob Lazier, represented by Jay Peterson Planner: George Ruther A request for a final review and recommendations of the following applications related to the proposed redevelopment of the Vail Mountain School: 1) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to rezone 3010 Booth Falls Road /Lot 11, Block 2, Vail Village 12`h Filing from Two - Family Residential to General Use; 2) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to rezone Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing from Two - Family Residential to General Use: 3) A request for a recommendation to amend the official Town of Vail Land Use Map for Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing from Low Density Residential to Public/Semi- Public; 4) A request for an amendment to the previously approved development plan and a new conditional use permit for a private educational institution and an active outdoor recreation area on 3010 Booth Falls Road /Lot 11, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing and 3160 N. Frontage Road East /a part of Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing; 5) A request for a conditional use permit to allow for the construction of eight Type III E=HUs located on Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing; 6) A request for a conditional use permit to allow for a private educational institution and active outdoor recreation area located at 3160 N. Frontage Rd. East/a part of Lot 12, Block 21 Vail Village 12th Filing; 7) A request for a for a conditional use permit to allow for temporary modular classroom structures located at 3160 N. Frontage Rd. East/ a part of Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing; 8) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to modify the official Town of Vail Rockfall Hazard Map to indicate approved mitigation for 3160 N. Frontage Road /Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 121' Filling; 9) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a text amendment to Section 12 -SA -8 (Density), Vail Town Code, to amend the GRFA requirements in the Ag and Open Space Zone District; 10) A request for a variance from Section to 12 -8A -5 (Lot Area and Site Dimensions) to allow for a subdivision creating a lot which is less than 35 acres, located at Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12t" Filing (Booth Falls Tennis Courts); 11) A request for a major subdivision in accordance with Title 13, Chapter 3, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regards thereto, located at Lots 11 and 12, Block 2, Vail Village 1211' Filing and Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing. Applicant: Vail Mountain School, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: Russ Forrest The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office, located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. 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 July 5, 2002 in the Vail Daily. 2 • is PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULE Monday, July 22, 2002 pUB��SHFO PROJECT ORIENTATION 1- Community Development Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Site Visits : 1. Vail Mountain School — 3160 N. Frontage Rd. East 2. Antlers — 680 W. Lionshead Place 3. Donovan Park — 1600 S. Frontage Rd. West Driver: George 12:00 pm 1:00 pm NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6.00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 Public Hearing - Town Council Chambers 2 :00 pm 1. A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, to allow for time share units on the first floor of a building or above, located at the Antlers Condominiums, 680 West Lionshead Place /Lot 3, Block 1, Lionshead TO Filing_ Applicant: Antlers Condominium Association, represented by Rob Levine Planner: George Ruther/ Warren Campbell 2. A request for a final review and recommendations of the following applications related to the proposed redevelopment of the Vail Mountain School: 1) p, request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to rezone 3010 Booth Fa-11F Rn- irlfl n+ 11 l�ir� k._ l /ail l /ilianP I91h Filinn from Turn- Fnmil_�r Rr�cir1j=ntial to Gen(?r?�,I._�_l, 2) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to Zone Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing to General Use, The northern portion of this lot is zoned Agriculture Open Space; 3) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to rezone Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing from Two - Family Residential to General Use; 4) A request for a recommendation to amend the official Town of Vail Land Use Map for Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing from Low Density Residential to Public /Semi- Public; 5) A request for an amendment to the previously approved development plan and a new conditional use permit for a private educational institution and an active outdoor recreation area on 3010 Booth Falls Road /Lot 11, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing and 3160 N. Frontage Road East/ Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing; 6) A request for a conditional use permit to allow for the construction of eight Type III EHUs located on Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing; 7) A request for a for a conditional use permit to allow for temporary modular classroom structures located at 3160 N. Frontage Rd. East/ a part of Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing; t TOI iV Off' VAIL � 8) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to modify the official Town of Vail Rackfall Hazard Map to indicate approved mitigation for 3160 N. Frontage Road /Lot 12, Block 2, and Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12' Filling; 9) A request for a major subdivision in accordance with Title 13, Chapter 3, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regards thereto, located at Lots 11 and 12, Block 2, Vail Viliage 12th Filing and Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 121h Filing. Applicant: Vail Mountain School, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: Russ Forrest 3. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to amend Donovan Park Master Plan and a request for a final review of an amendment for the previously approved development plan, to allow for the construction of the Donovan Park Pavilion, located at 1600 S. Frontage Rd. WestfUnplatted Donovan Park. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by VAg, Inc. Planner: George Ruther 4. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an amendment to Section 12 -7A -7 (Height), Vail Town Code, to increase the maximum allowable building height in the Public Accommodation Zone District. Applicant: Bob Lazier, represented by Jay Peterson Planner: George Ruther TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 12, 2002 5. A request for a variance from Sections 12 -14 -7 (Setback from Watercourse) and 12- 15 -5C5 (Guideline Compliance), Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition within the 50 ft. Gore Creek setback and to allow for the continuance of a non - conforming driveway, located at 5175 Black Gore Drive, Unit 13- 1fCedar Point Townhomes Filing 2. Applicant: John Welaj, represented by Mike Suman Planner; Allison Ochs WITHDRAWN _ _ b _­ tApp" OVal of jaiy 61 2602 minuie5 7. Information Update The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 478 -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 July 19, 2002 in the Vail Daily. '? is • PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING RESULTS Monday, July 22, 2002 PROJECT ORIENTATION I - Community Development Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME MEMBERS PRESENT John Schofield Erickson Shirley Chas Bernhardt Doug Cahill George Lamb Rollie Kjesbo Gary Hartman MEMBERS ABSENT Site Visits 1. Vail Motjntsin Sr.hool — 3100 N. Frontage Rd. East 2. Antlers — 680 W. Lionshead Place V 3. Donovan Park -- 1600 S. Frontage Rd. West Driver: George 12:00 pm 1:00 pm �o NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 6:00 - 6 :30 Public Hearing - Town Council Chambers 2 :00 pm A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, to allow for time share units on the first floor of a building or above, located at the Antlers Condominiums, 680 West Lionshead Place /Lot 3, Block 1, Lionshead 3`d Filing. Applicant: Antlers Condominium Association, represented by Rob Levine Planner: George RutherANarren Campbell MOTION: Doug Cahill SECOND: Rollie Kjesbo VOTE: 6 -1 (Lamb opposed) APPROVED WITH THREE CONDITIONS that Units 318, 321, 417, 418, 420 & 520 as quarter -share time -share units, with any unit sold as a whole unit revoking the conditional use status for that respective unit. 1. That the Antlers Condominium Association meets the "Time -share Units Disclosure Requirements" outlined in Chapter 4, Section 4, Article A, of the Vail Town Code, prior to the marketing of the time -share units. 2. That the Antlers Condominium Association provides the Town of Vail Community Development Department with copies of deeds for the units sold as time -share units within 10 days of the real estate transaction for each respective time -share unit. 3. That the Antlers Condominium Association continues to manage the project with an on- site front desk operating twenty -four (24) hours a day; seven (7) days a week, providing reservation and registration capabilities, so long as time - share units exist in the building. �Y TOWNOFfA LL � 2. A request for a final review and recommendations of the following applications related to the proposed redevelopment of the Vail Mountain School: 1) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to rezone 3010 Booth Falls 0 Road /Lot 11, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing from Two - Family Residential to General Use;. 2) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to Zone Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing to General Use, The northern portion of this lot is zoned Agriculture Open Space; 3) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to rezone Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing from Two - Family Residential to General Use; 4) A request for a recommendation to amend the official Town of Vail Land Use Map for Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing from Low Density Residential to Public /Semi- Public; 5) A request for an amendment to the previously approved development plan and a new conditional use permit for a private educational institution and an active outdoor recreation area on 3010 Booth Falls Road /Lot 11, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing and 3160 N. Frontage Road East/ Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 121h Filing; 6) A request for a conditional use permit to allow for the construction of eight Type ill EHUs located on Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing; 7) A request for a for a conditional use permit to allow for temoorary modular classroom_ -structures located at 3160 N. Frontage Rd. East/ a part of Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12 "' Filing; 8) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to modify the official Town of Vail Rockfall Hazard Map to indicate approved mitigation for 3160 N. Frontage Road /Lot 12, Block 2, and Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filling, 9) A request for a major subdivision in accordance with Title 13, Chapter 3, Vail Town Code, . and setting forth details in regards thereto, located at Lots 11 and 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing and Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 121h Filing. Applicant: Vail Mountain School, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Pianner; Russ Forrest WORKSESSION — NO VOTE 3. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to amend Donovan Park Master Plan and a request for a final review of an amendment for the previously approved development plan, to allow for the construction of the Donovan Park Pavilion, located at 1600 S. Frontage Rd. West/Unplatted Donovan Park. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by VAg, Inc. Planner: George Ruther MOTION: Chas Bernhardt SECOND: George Lamb VOTE: 5 -2 (Schofield and Shirley opposed) APPROVED WITH 1 CONDITION: That the applicant submits a complete Design Review Board application to the Town of Vail Community Department for review and approval by the Town. of Vail Design Review Board, prior to making application for a building permit for the community park pavilion. 4- A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an amendment to Section 12 -7A -7 (Height), Vail Town Code, to increase the maximum allowable building height in the Public Accommodation Zone District. Applicant: Bob Lazier, represented by Jay Peterson Planner: George Ruther TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 12, 2002 • • 5. A request for a variance from Sections 12 -14 -7 (Setback from Watercourse) and 12- 15 -5C5 (Guideline Compliance), Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition within the 50 ft. Gore Creek setback and to allow for the continuance of a non- conforming driveway, located at 5175 Black Gore Drive, Unit B -1 /Cedar Point Townhomes Filing 2. Applicant: John Welaj, represented by Mike Suman Planner: Allison Ochs WITHDRAWN 6. Approval of July 8, 2002 minutes 7. Information Update The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner' "s office located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479 -2138 for information. C�nrt,l?fn[ri ?rrm: intRrnr ati! n 9%1ai1,ah1a i lnon. rPni io -c# with ?4 hnijr nnfifira ±.inn _ Plo'aca rall 47cl- 4 2356, TeiPphonP for the Hearing Impaired: for information. v- Community Development Department .7 C7 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: July 22, 2002 SUBJECT: A request for a conditional use permit to allow for time share units on the first floor of a building or above per Section 12- 7H -3C, located at the Antlers Condominiums, located at 680 West Lionshead Place /Lot 3, Black 1, Lionshead 3rd Filing. Applicant Planner: I. SUMMARY Antlers Condominium Association, represented by Rob Levine George Huther /Warren Vampoeil The Antlers Condominiums are located in the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 Zone District. The Antlers Condominium Association is requesting a conditional use permit to allow time share units on the first floor and above per Section 12 -7H -3C of the Vail Town Code. Staff is recommending approval of the request as it furthers the goals of the Town's development objectives, has no measurable negative affect on traffic flow, parking, Town services, or on the public health and safety as outlined in Section VIII of this memorandum. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The Antlers Condominium Association is requesting a conditional use permit to allow for six time -share units on the first floor or above levels of the building (units 318, 321, 417, 418, 420, and 520). The Antlers Condominiums are located at 680 West Lionshead Place /Lot 3, Block 1, Lionshead 3`d filing. This request is the result of the desire to market six of the new units constructed as quarter share time -share units. Purchasers would be entitled to 13 weeks of usage and would be encouraged to make their condominium available for short-term rental during periods of non - usage. Short -term rental of the units would be managed through the Association's existing reservations program. The Antler's Condominium Association has recently completed the Antler's 2000 redevelopment project. The redevelopment project undertaken by the association included, among other things, the construction of 22 new residential condominium units. The 22 new condominiums units are in addition to the 70 units previously existing on the property. The association is currently in the process of selling the new condominiums. To date, 16 of the new condominiums have been sold and six of the new condominiums remain available for purchase. The association has recently inquired and received a determination from the Town of Vail Community Development Department about their ability to sell each of the remaining condominium units in 1!4 divided shares. The Association with this request is asking to sell the remaining six condominiums units to up to four owners each. Of the six units two are located on the first floor, three on the second, and one on the third floor. The total GRFA of the six units is 8,166 square feet. 0 Ill. BACKGROUND On June 24, 2002 the Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed and approved a request by the Antlers Condominium Association to permit the sale of quarter share time shares. On June 14, 1999 the Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed and approved a major exterior alteration and the addition of several condo units and EH Us. IV. ROLES OF THE REVIEWING BOARDS Planning and Environmental Commission: The Planning and Environmental r' mr» n. ., r.-• rr,rnr- �nci��n f..r '31/. V,,.� +: r,-�. �h;.. ., _.,..J; +;.,.. .,.1 , _ .-.-. �+ .ii�•n ±�,�!'T. {�,,. 1. Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of the Town. 2. Effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public facilities and public facilities needs. 3. Effect upon traffic, with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the streets and parking areas. 4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses. 5. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the proposed use. 6. The environmental impact report concerning the proposed use, if an environmental impact report is required by Chapter 12 of the Vail Town Code. 7. Conformance with development standards of zone district. Design Review Beard: The Design Review Board is responsible for evaluating the Design Review application for: 1. Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings. 2. Fitting buildings into landscape. 3. Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography. 4. Removal /Preservation of trees and native vegetation. 5. Adequate provision for snow storage on -site. 6. Acceptability of building materials and colors. 7. Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms. 8. Provision of landscape and drainage. 9. provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures. 10. Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distances. 11. Location and design of satellite dishes. 12. Provision of outdoor lighting. 13. The design of parks. V. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS 0 2 The review criteria for a request of this nature are established by the Vail Town Code. The Antlers Condominium Association is requesting a conditional use permit under the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 Zone District Section 12 -7H -3C of the Vail Town Code. Therefore, this proposal is subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Title 12, Chapter 16, Vail Town Code. For the Planning and Environmental Commission's reference, Section 12 -16 -1, of the Vail Town Code, identifies the purpose for a conditional use permit as follows: In order to provide the flexibility necessary to achieve the objectives of this title, specified uses are permitted in certain districts subject to the granting of a conditional use permit. Because of their unusual or special characteristics, conditional uses require review so that they may be located properly with respect to the purposes of this title and with respect to their effects on surrounding properties. The review process prescribed in this chapter is intended to assure compatibility and harmonious development between conditional uses and surrounding properties in the Town at large. Uses listed as conditional uses in the various districts may be permitted subject to such conditions and limitations as the Town may prescribe to insure that the location and operation of the conditional uses will be in accordance with the development objectives of the Town and will not be detrimental to other uses or properties. Where conditions cannot be devised, to achieve these objectives, applications for conditional use permits shall be denied. This request is also governed by the provisions of Article H, Section 12 -7H -1, Lionshead i Mixed Use 1 Zone District. The request for a conditional use permit to allow for time- ! shares on the first floor and above deals specifically with Section 12 -7H -3C which provides for "Lodges and accommodation units" on the first floor as a conditional use. ARTICLE H. LIOIVSHEAD MIXED USE i (LMU -1 ) DISTRICT 12 -7H -1: PURPOSE. The Lionshead Mixed Use 1 District is intended to provide sites for a mixture of multiple - family dwellings, lodges, hotels, fractional fee clubs, time shares, lodge dwelling units, restaurants, offices, skier services, and commercial establishments in a clustered, unified development. Lionshead Mixed Use 1 District, in accordance with the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of buildings and uses and to maintain the desirable qualities of the District by establishing appropriate site development standards. This District is meant to encourage and provide incentives for redevelopment in accordance with the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. This Zone District was specifically developed to provide incentives for properties to redevelop. The ultimate goal of these incentives is to create an economically vibrant lodging, housing, and commercial core area. The incentives in this Zone District include increases in allowable gross residential floor area, building height, and density over the previously established zoning in the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan study area. The primary goal of the incentives is to create economic conditions favorable to Inducing private redevelopment consistent with the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. Additionally, the incentives are created to help finance public off -site improvements adjacent to redevelopment projects. With any development/redevelopment proposal taking advantage of the incentives created herein, the following amenities will be evaluated: streetscape improvements, pedestrian /bicycle access, public plaza 0 redevelopment, public art, roadway improvements, and similar improvements. (Ord. 3(1999) § 1) 12 -7H -2: PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES; BASEMENT OR GARDEN LEVEL: A. Definition: The "basement " or "garden level" shall be defined as that door of a building that is entirely or substantially below grade. B. Permitted Uses: The following uses shall be permitted in basement or garden levels within a structure: Banks and financial institutions. Commercial ski storage. Eating and drinking establishments. f v1 JL:t ILA//:+�JL: 1 Vv/.+.: lf. rai,Yl '..rr.liiaT Jr .L'�..�'+..^. ,.[ /� cfI lsoicnal off id=, r�JLlsina�.. s vffilios a,-, CtMdid-c. Public or private lockers and storage. Recreation facilities. Retail establishments. Skier ticketing, ski school, skier services, and daycare. Travel agencies. Additional uses determined to be similar to permitted uses described in this subsection, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12 -3 -4 of this Title. C. Conditional Uses: The following uses shall be permitted in basement or garden levels within a structure, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of this Title: Conference facilities and meeting rooms. Liquor stores. Lodges and accommodation units. Major arcade. Multiple - family residential dwelling units, time -share units, fractional fee clubs, lodge dwelling units, and employee housing units (Type 111 (EHU) as provided in Chapter 13 of this Title). Radio, TV stores, and repair shops. Theaters. Additional uses determined to be similar to conditional uses described in this subsection, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12 -3 -4 of this Title. (Ord. 8(2000) § 2: Ord. 3(1999) § 1) 12 -7H -3: PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES; FIRST FLOOR OR STREET LEVEL: A. Definition: The "first floor" or "street level" shall be defined as that floor of the building that is located at grade or street level along a pedestrianway. B. Permitted Uses: The following uses shall be permitted on the first floor or street level within a structure: Banks, with walk -up teller facilities. Eating and drinking establishme; its. Recreation facilities. 4 Retail stores and establishments. Skier ticketing, ski school, skier services, and daycare. Travel agencies. Additional uses determined to be similar to permitted uses described in this subsection, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12 -3 -4 of this Title. C. Conditional Uses: The following uses shall be permitted on the first floor or street level floor within a structure, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of this Title: Barbershops, beauty shops and beauty parlors. Conference facilities and meeting rooms. Financial institutions, other than banks. Liquor stores. Lodges and accommodation units. Multiple - family residential dwelling units, time -share units, fractional fee clubs, loarge dwelling units, and employee housin_q units (Type M (EHU) as provided in Chapter 13 of this Title): - Radio, TV stores, and repair shops. Additional uses determined to be similar to conditional uses described in this subsection, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12 -3 -4 of this Title. (Ord. 6(2000) § 2: Ord. 3(1999) § 1) 12 -7H -4: PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES; SECOND FLOOR AND ABOVE: A. Permitted Uses; Exception: The following uses shall be permitted on those floors above the first floor within a structure: Lodges and accommodation units. Multiple - family residential dwelling units, time -share units, fractional fee clubs, lodge dwelling units, and employee housing units (Type Ill (EHU) as provided in Chapter 13 of this Title). Additional uses determined to be similar to permitted uses described in this subsection, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12 -3 -4 of this Title. B. Conditional Uses: The following uses shall be permitted on second floors and higher above grade, subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of this Title: Banks and financial institutions. Conference facilities and meeting rooms. Eating and drinking establishments. Liquor stores. Personal services and repair shops. Professional offices, business offices and studios. Radio, TV stores, and repair shops. Recreation facilities. Retail establishments. Skier ticketing, ski school, skier services, and daycare. Theaters. Time -share units and fractional fee clubs. Additional uses determined to be similar to conditional uses described in this subsection, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12 -3 -4 of this Title. (Ord. 6(20010) § 2: Ord. 3(1999) § 1) 5 12 -7H -5: CONDITIONAL USES; GENERALLY (ON ALL LEVELS OF A BUILDING OR OUTSIDE OFA BUILDING): The following conditional uses shall be permitted, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 16 of this Title: Bed and breakfast as further regulated by Section 12 -14 -18 of this Title. Bre w pubs. Coin- operated laundries. Commercial storage. Private outdoor recreation facilities, as a primary use. Public buildings, grounds, and facilities. Public or private parking lots. Public park and recreation facilities. Public utility and public service uses. Additional uses determined to be similar to conditional uses described in this subsection, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12 -3 -4 of this Title. (Ord. 3(1999) § 1) 12 -7H -6: ACCESSORY USES: The following accessory uses shall be permitted in the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 District: Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in accordance with the provisions of Section 12 -14 -12 of this Title. Loading and delivery and parking facilities customarily incidental and accessory to permitted and conditional uses. Minor arcade. Offices, lobbies, laundry, and other facilities customarily incidental and accessory to hotels, lodges, and multiple- family uses. Outdoor dining areas operated in conjunction with permitted eating and drinking establishments. Swimming pools, tennis courts, patios or other recreation facilities customarily incidental to permitted residential or lodge uses. Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional uses, and necessary for the operation thereof. (Ord. 3(19,99) § 1) The Wail Town Code defines several words which aid in the interpretation of the request. Several definitions of importance to this request are: FRACTIONAL FEE. A tenancy in common interest in improved real property, including condominiums, created or held by person, partnerships, corporations, or joint ventures or similar entities, wherein the tenants in common have formerly arranged by oral or written agreement or understanding, either recorded or unrecorded, allowing for the use and occupancy of the property by one or more cotenants to the exclusion of one or more cotenants during any period, whether annually reoccurring or not which is binding upon any assignee or future owner of a fractional fee interest or if such agreement con' ; ues to be in any way binding or effec;liva opon any cotenant for the sale in ti;e Py'uperty. [Z FRACTIONAL FEE CLUB: A fractional fee project in which each condominium unit, pursuant to recorded project documentation as approved by the Town of Vail, has no fewer than six (6) and no more than twelve (12) owners per unit and whose use is established by a reservation system. Each of the fractional fee club units are made available for short -term rental in a managed program when not in use by the club members. The project is managed on -site with a front desk operating twenty four (24) hours a day, seven (7) days a week providing reservation and registration capabilities. The project shall include or be proximate to transportation, retail shops, eating and drinking establishments, and recreation facilities. FRACTIONAL FEE CLUB UNiT: A condominium unit in a fractional fee club described as such in the project documentation and not an accommodation unit within the fractional fee club. TIME -SHARE ES TA TE: A time -share estate shall be defined in accordance with Coloraao'kevised 6tafu'tcs section 38 -33 -110. - TIME -SHARE LICENSE: A contractual right to exclusive occupancy of specified premises; provided, that the occupancy of the premises is divided into five (5) or more separate time periods extending over a term of more than two (2) years. The premises may consist of one parcel, unit or dwelling or any of several parcels, units or dwellings identified at the time the license is created to be identified later. No time share is a time -share license if it meets the definition of interval estate, time -share or time -span estate. USE: The purpose for which a site or structure or portion thereof is arranged, designed, intended, erected, moved, altered, or enlarged, or for which either a site or structure or portion thereof is or may be occupied or maintained. VI. ZONING ANALYSIS Lot size: 1.19 acres -or 51,836 sq. ft. Zoning: Lionshead Mixed Use 1 (LMU -1) Land Use Plan Designation: Ski Portal Current Land Use: Residential Development Standard Allowed by LMU -1_ Existina Lot Area: min. 0.23 acres or 1.19 acres or 10,000 sq. ft. 51,836 sq. ft. Height: ave. 71', max. 82.5' 36' to 74' (< 71' ave.) Setbacks: 10' on all sides min 10', except for decks, etc Site Coverage: 70% or 36,285 sq. ft. 41 % or 20,983 sq. ft. Landscapdng: 2 or 1 0,367 sq. ft. 22`;'' Dr . 1,13") sq. ft. ii iciuding Tract A to east 7 Parking: 148 spaces 114 spaces (grandfathered) 0 GRFA: 250% GRFA per buildable Site area or 129,590 sq. ft. Density: 33% increase or 93.1 units EHU'S = 0 density Loading /Delivery: 1 berth required 87,590 sq. ft. 92 units 7 units 1 berth (provided) Chapter Seven of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, along with the Lionshead Mixed Use —1 zone district, prescribe the development standards for the property. Staff believes the proposed plan complies with the applicable development standards prescribed for the property with the exception of parking. In the case of the parking requirement there is a deficient of 34 spaces. The applicant is requesting a parking ii-'.. Y,,...,­_1 Sc ctQvn V111 of 4, h.; s ;^o,ndur -. . VII. Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning VIII. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS A. Consideration of Factors: Zoning Lionshead Mixed Use -1 District Agricultural and Open Space District Lionshead Mixed Use -1 District Lionshead Mixed Use -1 District 1. Relationship and impact of the use on the development objectives of the Town. A major development objective of the Town is the redevelopment and improvement of the Lionshead Village. The Antlers Redevelopment proposal approved in 1999 helped to achieve this through the new addition of 22 new dwelling units, the facelift of the existing building, and improvements to the streetscape, bike -ped path and landscaping_ In the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 Zone District accommodation units are not a requirement as it is in other zone districts. The addition of time -share units in this development increases the likelihood that there will be higher occupancy rates throughout the year which is directly connected to the number of visitors in Town during any given tirhe period. This is likely as a family who only owns 13 weeks of occupancy a year will tend to visit Town more often. A plausible effect may also be that the time -share owners will be more likely to open there units to short -term rental as they are accustomed to sharing their unit with multiple families. A whole unit owner can be hesitant to open there unit to the use of others. This will Delp to boost the occupLi� icy rate potentially. Staff t',;; impacts of the addition of a iimiled number of time -share units to be positive in providing for higher occupancy rates, and in turn a greater number of • is Land Use North: Mixed Use South: Open Space East: Mixed Use West: Mixed Use VIII. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS A. Consideration of Factors: Zoning Lionshead Mixed Use -1 District Agricultural and Open Space District Lionshead Mixed Use -1 District Lionshead Mixed Use -1 District 1. Relationship and impact of the use on the development objectives of the Town. A major development objective of the Town is the redevelopment and improvement of the Lionshead Village. The Antlers Redevelopment proposal approved in 1999 helped to achieve this through the new addition of 22 new dwelling units, the facelift of the existing building, and improvements to the streetscape, bike -ped path and landscaping_ In the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 Zone District accommodation units are not a requirement as it is in other zone districts. The addition of time -share units in this development increases the likelihood that there will be higher occupancy rates throughout the year which is directly connected to the number of visitors in Town during any given tirhe period. This is likely as a family who only owns 13 weeks of occupancy a year will tend to visit Town more often. A plausible effect may also be that the time -share owners will be more likely to open there units to short -term rental as they are accustomed to sharing their unit with multiple families. A whole unit owner can be hesitant to open there unit to the use of others. This will Delp to boost the occupLi� icy rate potentially. Staff t',;; impacts of the addition of a iimiled number of time -share units to be positive in providing for higher occupancy rates, and in turn a greater number of • is visitors to the Town. Staff would suggest that 20% or 18 units of the total 92 units be granted a conditional use permit under this application. This would be approximately 17,518 square feet (87,590 x .2) of GRFA on the site. The Association would be responsible for determining which of the remaining units could be allowed to converted to time -share units. 2. Effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public facilities and public facilities needs. The proposed use should not have any significant negative effect on these factors. The mass and design of the proposal have been reviewed by the Design Review Board and does not change with this request. The proposal should draw more users to the Lionshead Village Area. Vehicular access has been reviewed by the Public Works Department; and the applicant has contributed to the off -site roadway improvements tund. Utilities and schools should not be heavily impacted. 3. Effect upon traffic, with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the streets and parking areas. The proposal has been reviewed for its effect on transportation by the Public Works Department. The Public Works Department had requested numerous changes which have been incorporated into the built product. The number of parking spaces required for time share /dwelling units is 1.7 spaces per unit. 4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses. The applicant met several times with the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Design Review Board during the planning process and had made many changes to the proposal based upon their comments. The finished product conforms with the purpose of the Land Use Designation as Ski Portal and with the goals and purpose of the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 Zone District, Details of the goals and purposes are found in Section V of this memorandum. The addition of the time- share units will have no noticeable negative affect on the surrounding properties. The surrounding properties offer lodging to owners and visitors in a similar manner as the Antlers Condominiums does currently and is proposing to offer. 5. If the proposal for a fractional fee club is a redevelopment of an existing facility, the fractional fee club shall maintain an equivalency -f accommodation units as are presently existing. Equivalency be maintained either by an equal number of units or by square footage. If the proposal is a new development, it shall provide at least as much accommodation unit gross residential floor area 9 (GRFA) as fractional fee club unit gross residential floor area (GRFA). 0 Not Applicable 6. Lock off units and lock off unit square footage shall not be included in the calculation when determining the equivalency of existing square footage. Not Applicable 7. The ability of the proposed project to create and maintain a high level of occupancy. The addition of the proposed quarter -share time -share units will allow the - lave- higher uvc:.:Na�.,r'�y -1va.Gr round. A quarter -share time-share unit differs from a one - fiftieth time -share in that each owner gets 13 weeks which are divided up over the four seasons. This form of division provides for each owner to have access during both peak and shoulder seasons creating less likelihood that an owner would cease payment of their dues therefore forcing the property management to foreclose on the property. In a market such as the Town of Vail's a quarter - share time- share allows all owners to experience both the height and shoulder seasons. 8. Employee housing units may be required as part of any new or redeveloped fractional fee club project requesting density over that allowed by zoning. The number of employee housing units required will be consistent with employee impacts that are expected as a result of the project. Nat Applicable 9. The applicant shall submit to the town a list of all owners of existing units within the project or building; and written statements from one hundred percent (100 %) of the owners of existing units indicating their approval, without condition, of the proposed fractional fee club. No written approval shall be valid if it was signed by the owner more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of filing the application for a conditional use. Not Applicable 10. Each of the fractional fee club units shall be made available for short term rental in a managed program when not in use by the club members. The project shall include or be proximate to transportation, retail shops, eating and drinking establishments, and recreation facilities. Not Applicable 10 0 B. Findings The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings before granting a conditional use permit: That the proposed location of the use is in accord with the purposes of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located_ 2. That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 15. 1 hat the proposed use would comply with each of the applscable provisions of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code. IX. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends approval of the conditional use permit request to allow for up to 18 time -share units on the first floor of a building or above, located at 680 West Lionshead Place /Lot 3, Block 1, Lionshead 3rd Filing. Staff's recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria listed in Section VIII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, subject to the following findings: That the proposed location of the use is in accordance with the purposes of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code and the purposes of the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 Zone District. 2. That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it will be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the conditional use permit to allow for time share units on the first floor of a building or above, located at 680 West Lionshead Place /Lot 3, Block, Lionshead 3�a Filing, staff recommends the following condition: That the applicant meets the "Time -share Units Disclosure Requirements" outlined in Chapter 4 Section 4 Article A of the Vail Town Code prior to the marketing of the time - share units. • X. ATTACHMENTS A. Affidavit of Publication S. Publication Notice C. Letter from Applicant D. Site Plan E. Floor Plans F. Unit Layouts G. Chapter 4 Section 4 Article A "Time -share Units Disclosure Requirements" of the Town Vail Cade H. Minutes of June 24, 2002 Planning and Environmental Commission 12 • • I �s,ft IW7U111Y "14 Ft& n ao PROPi~fiTyr arms ours; it} A request for a Major subdivision in accord. ;PL SUO l±iQTICE Moo with Title 13t' in Vtu1 Tawit"tl,Code, and $anti forth dot in 're "rds Ihersto: focated at Filing Late i1 and S2, Brock 2VWl, Vg�a$qi N, I8 HEREBY GIVEN thattha P7annlsigg ernd ErMronmenlI Commission of the TO W Velf w1f1 .121h end Tract C, 81 tic 1, Vall V�Ilaga 1 IlIng, hold s vbIlc hearing In acoordsnoo w"h Section 12 -3.6 of the Munlolpat Code at the Team at Vat Applicant: Vail Mounts) n School, represented by Braun Assoclates, Inc. vn July 22, 2002, at 2'00 RM, in the Town of VaA V60dpal Building. Inconsideration of: Planner; Rues Forrest A - request for a final review of a eondllona1 use pe ppaemnit to allow for tma shahs units err the "fiat The applications and inlormaton about the propos- ads are a°+ellwble for public Inspection tltrring regu- tar office hours in the r of a Ballow or above, located al the Antlers Crmdofa uma, 680 Wait Uonshead Ptoos/Lot 3, project Plerhrters office, Tacar- ad at the Town of Vail Community Development B[aclr !. Llonefneed 3rd F drug Department, 75 South Frontage Read The public is Invited 10 attend project Orientation and the site Applicant: Antlers Condominium Aa;toclaton, visits �s precede the pubic hearing In the Town p1 Vail Comnrt t3cvafopment ppparbnans represented Rob Lavine Ara by :U Pledge can A7g -2139 tnr intonneltort. - . . —. - - A request far It mtnmmn Mlehlr In ttJq lfe1l TtgNr!.' Sign tanquage Interpretation available upon re- quest ,`it:- W ", �.� "' ct„ w.allc,-. Couridl to of an amendment to Section 12 -7A -7 (Hal t , Vail Town Cade, to Increase the mast• oryab4l bulldfrt�he M Ill the Publid , ,rrr,A „wg, 7- ,- fig' Telephone for ilia Hearing Impaired, for In- AccommodntfonZono Dls of F Comntynity4i9vaioPtnenl �'`�nb Department Pulogsi: �.$1'thaVait'DaIIy.July 5, 2002 APPit4arM Loner, ropreaonted _by Jay Patorawt Planner orge Ruther o�DINANCE NO: 11 A request [or a float review and rilcommantfaHohs of the (onowlrr��gg appYeatons related to the &EjaIL OF 2flC12 proposed redevelopment of Una Vail •Mountain AN ORDAACE.MAcai' fIN3 SUPPLEMENTAL AP- PROPRIATIONS TO THE TOWN OF VAIL GEtw 1) A request 4or a recommend®ton to the Vail Town Council to rezone 3010 Booth Falls Read/1-01 11. Block 2, Vail VWago 12th Filing from Two- GRAL -FUND, 'CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND, HEAVY EOUiPMENT FIND, REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX FUND, AND THE DISPATCH FarNty Residential to General Use; SERVICES FUND OF THE 2002 BUDGET FOR 2 A request for a recommenwation to the h1aR --y Town ,Council to rezone Tract C, Block 1, Vail -Vn- THE TOWN OF VAIL COLORADO: AND AU- THORIZrNG THE € %P NDITURES OF ,SAID A11% lags 12th Filing from Two-Famly Realdentlal is General Use; PROPRIAMONS AS SET FORTH HEREIN; AND SETTING FCRTH DETAILS IN REciAHD THERE. M3) A reyuosi tot a recommendation to amend the of Town of Land Use Map for Trait C; TO. Ludwig Kurz, Maydr .Veil Block 1, Vail M16 121h Fillnqq lrom Low Density 19"dontial to PubrNemi- Public; ATTEST.* Lorelei Donaldson, Towo Ciarlr' , 4) A request for an amondi"Ill to the previously approved development plan and a now conditional READ AND APPROVE] ON-SE. C4NC1 READING ' AND ORDERED PUBLISHED use permit for a private sduoatlonai #nstftullon and this 2nd da of J 2002 y aiY an active outdoor recreation area on 3010 Booth Falls Roacillof ti, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing Publlshad In the Veil Daily Jul 5, 2002. y ae�3150 N. Frontage Road Eastra part of Lot 12, Block 2, Van Milage 12th Fling; _ 5) A gis9qu�ees➢tt for a card" net use parrrNt tq allow for thdr u'OnalraiCt or of t01C hl iypii III IEHUS located Ok1DIAfANCE IItO, $ (in Tract, Slock 1, Vail Village 12th Fling; SERIES 2002 . ' -/ A r, dwa. i'�PI 4 LJil f1llUW kit UJ 6 parllut 'W 41LJVr - Por a pti�rato educational Institution .ISSUANCE end aclhra Out- Z4 racteatlon Free located at 3180 N. Fronage AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE OF TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO SALES TAX Rd. East/a pen of Lot 12, 311x;1( 2, Vail Vitage 121h REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS, SERIES 20028; FWng: PROVIDWO THE FORM, TERMS AND CONDI- 7" request fora for a conditional use permit to of -. law tar temporary modular classroom structures Id- TIONS OF THE 20028 BONDS, THE MANNER AND TEAMS. OF ISSUANCE, T14E MANNER OF cited 61 3100 IJ. Frontage Rd. Easy a part of Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Fling; request for EXECUTION, THE METHOD OF PAYMENT AND ' THE SECIQRITY THEREFOR; PLEDOM SALES vA a recommendation 10 the Valf wn Caunrdl to modify the official Town of Vall TAX REVENUES OF THE TOWN FOR THE ,PAY - MENT OF ' Rockfall Hakard Map to Indicate approved Wigs- THE 20028 BONDS; PROVIDING CERTAIN CONVENANTS AND OTHER DETAILS Itch for 316D N. Frontage RoscilLal 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filling; AND MAKING OTHER PROVISIONS CONCERN - ING THE 20028 BONDS. THE SALES TAX REV- ' 9) A request for a recommendation to the Vail ENUES AND THE REFUNDING PROJECT} RATI• ' ' Town Council rot a text amendment 10 Section 12- FY1NG ACTION PREVIOUSLY TAKEN AND AP- OA-8 (Density), Vail Tewr Code, to amend the G FA requirements In the Ag and Open Space PERTAINING THERETO; REPEALING ALL ORDI. NANCES IN CONFLICT %boa District; HEREWITH, M) A mgtxiat for a variants Iron Section 10 12•aA- 5 tLot Area and Site Dimensions) to allow tot a Ordnance No. 3 Series of 2002, was approved on first reading on .January 15, 2002, and published In euGolmsion creating a Ier which 1e less than a5, full on January 20, 2DO2. Copies. ai• Ordinance No. scree. iocaied At l,pt, 12 amok Rr Ve",Vlrlago _jM 3d, 6rat6r "�- a4Tlda fed s age • Attachment: A 19* " :V AT NIL v.antlersvail.com Nest Lionshead Place ul, Colorado 81657 /`�Rro;Ts 2 C. t� 'LESS AT ' NIL www.antlersvail.com 680 West Lionshead Place I Vail, Colorado 81657 I V"' r t C' .. r 19* S AT VNL itlersvail.com Lionshead Place olorado 81657 Q J/4� n. is 34 Attachment: 8 I THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of is Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 12 -3 -6 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail on July 22, 2002, at 2 :00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In consideration of: A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, to allow for time share units on the first floor of a building or above, located at the Antlers Condominiums, 680 West Lionshead Place /Lot 3, Block 1, Lionshead 3`d Filing. Applicant: Antlers Condominium Association, represented by Rob Levine Planner- . George Ruther/Warren Campbell A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to of an amendment to Section 12 -7A -7 (Height), Vail Town Code, to increase the maximum allowable building height in the Public Accommodation Zone District. Ai-* -ant• R-ih I a7if-r renrp,entF.r! hif .laNf PafiPr.nrl _- Planner: George Ruther A request for a final review and recommendations of the following applications related to the proposed redevelopment of the Vail Mountain School: 1) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to rezone 3010 Booth Falls Road /Lot 11, Block 2, Vail Village 120 Filing from Two- Family Residential to General Use; 2) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to rezone Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing from Two - Family Residential to General Use; 3) A request for a recommendation to amend the official Town of Vail Land Use Map for Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12" Filing from Low Density Residential to Public/Semi- Public; 4) A request for an amendment to the previously approved development plan and a new conditional use permit for a private educational institution and an active outdoor recreation area on 3010 Booth Falls Road /Lot 11, Block 2, Vail Village 12'" Filing and 3160 N. Frontage Road East/a part of Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing; 5) A request for a.conditional use permit to allow for the construction of eight Type Ill EHUs located on Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing; 6) A -request for a conditional vise permit to allow for a'ptivate educational ilnstnution end active outdoor recreation area located at 3160 N. Frontage Rd. East/a part of Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing; 7) A request for a for a conditional use permit to allow for temporary modular classroom structures located at 3160 N. Frontage Rd. East/ a part of Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing; 8) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to modify the official Town of Vail Rockfall Hazard Map to indicate approved mitigation for 3160 N. Frontage Road /Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filling; 9) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a text amendment to Section 12 -8A -8 (Density), Vail Town Code, to amend the GRFA requirements in the Ag and Open Space Zone District; 10) A request for a variance from Section to 12 -8A -5 (Lot Area and Site Dimensions) to allow for a subdivision creating a lot which is less than 35 acres, located at Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12`h Filing (Booth Falls Tennis Courts); 11) A request for a major subdivision in accordance with Title 13, Chapter 3, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regards thereto, located at Lots 11 and 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing and Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 121h Filing. Attachment. B s _" lbz 4 ANTLER� AT �WL .anti ersv ail. co MEMORANDUM To: Town of Vail, Community Development From: Robert. Levine, General Manager Date: JL!r!.0 22, -2nr)2 _ ..P Subject: Fractional Fee Conditional Use for Antlers Redevelopment Please be advised that the Antlers Condominium Association wholeheartedly supports and approves the sale and use of fractional fee units for the remainder of the new condominiums, built as part of the Antlers redevelopment. r: 49 In accordance with the prescribed amendment procedures, the Association has recently adopted a supplement to the Condominium Declaration and an amendment to t-he Bylaws which accommodates the sale and use of such _. fractional fee units. Please call me if there are any questions. • Attachment: C 680 West Lionshead Place Vail, Colorado 81657 (970) 476 -2471 FAx (970) 476 -4146 info@ antlersvail.com ANTLER5 AT �klL www.antlersvail.com A. The Antlers Condominium Association, as developer and seller of the property's new condominiums, wishes to market some or all of the remaining condominiums as fractional fee units, specifically quarter shares. Each of the quarter share owners will have the right to use their specific unit 13 weeks out of the year, and will be encouraged to make their condominium available for short term rentals when they're not using it, just like all of the "whole" owners. B. There is a tendency for "high -end" purchasers to rent out their units less, or r4 yea,. -Since Li ie Lo n depends of -1 ackt'Ca Lax revcliueS LU 03V34' i 71JC1h Cy its expenses, these empty units or "cold beds" do nothing to support the town's economy. The owners of fractional fee units are already sharing their property with others, and they will be much more likely to rent the unit out when they're not using it themselves. Although the incidence of owner usage will probably go up as well (since there are more owners), whether it's them or a paying guest who stays there, each will eat in the restaurants, shop in the shops and ski on the mountain. The town's sales tax revenues will clearly improve with the higher year -round occupancy. In terms of the physical development objectives of the Town, this conditional use causes no difference whatsoever. This is evidenced by the fact that the building was already built with whole ownership in mind. The change to tractional fee units has little or no imoaci on the physical plant. C, D, & E. There will be no change whatsoever from the development as it was approved in the spring of 2000. The impact of the Antlers on the surrounding environment and infrastructure will be no different whether the condominiums are owned by a single party or four separate parties ... other than the propensity to be rented out more, as mentioned above. Since the original redevelopment was approved with the clear hope and expectation that the units would be rented and constitute "warm beds ", this change to fractional ownership does nothing other than further that objective. Unlike some fractional fee clubs, which allow the owners to use the facilities (parking, etc.) even when it's not "their" time, the Antlers will not encourage that. The capacity and use of the property, and hence the impact on traffic, etc. will be no different than when it is currently in full occupancy. Attachment: C 680 West Lionshead Place Vail, Colorado 81657 (970) 476 -2471 FAx (970) 476 -4146 info@ antlersvail.com :>juawy�e y ZJGZ 8 t in f ail 4 - 1 IC ATOR `� n o � ��IPdI tllli IIIIIf11111 � I' .1. 1' ii 11 : =ix eu.7.i'r:i 696.0 ME- MR i. �' �`i3 = •t' _ ;;! !1 °= ; :i Hill. :ri "!! 2 � �: i� lryrylr tLEI !I as: = sn . i IM —_ : �►�iL►>�f ll 177 t« ;�, �� :: Itltx'!,1 1 :�� . j. •11: � � ls.�l1::� il::��:tt i��r I � I ate` st• "�:s a•"'t !e s•r� r s * # 1� ME 1:311 �i �'k�� ��e ! =•�II�. � ;Iii st = F��� �li�jw: li ! �.• tt :s� l 'PA OEM :F° MR MilI ' ! • Yf= lxs.."'+,� ;Sy�=l:= x.• :::::Ililllll!lllllglii114.��?� V��z��III� x F a o oa �� r ! OWE E— a w Q � U IIn e U N v7 :>juawy�e y ZJGZ 8 t in f ail 4 - 1 IC ATOR `� n o � ��IPdI tllli IIIIIf11111 � I' .1. 1' ii 11 : =ix eu.7.i'r:i 696.0 ME- MR i. �' �`i3 = •t' _ ;;! !1 °= ; :i Hill. :ri "!! 2 � �: i� lryrylr tLEI !I as: = sn . i IM —_ : �►�iL►>�f ll 177 t« ;�, �� :: Itltx'!,1 1 :�� . j. •11: � � ls.�l1::� il::��:tt i��r I � I ate` st• "�:s a•"'t !e s•r� r s * # 1� ME 1:311 �i �'k�� ��e ! =•�II�. � ;Iii st = F��� �li�jw: li ! �.• tt :s� l 'PA OEM :F° MR MilI ' ! • Yf= lxs.."'+,� ;Sy�=l:= x.• :::::Ililllll!lllllglii114.��?� V��z��III� rl, MIN uea \lw 'W'sh" 3 :lu@wgoellV 1 f rv=!© _ cQ 4 _ /Tm- i v 4a� � �J O °Z 0 zm v� •r w'xwaoa sa J r 3 :lu@wgoellV 1 f rv=!© _ cQ 4 _ /Tm- i v 4a� � :Iuawq3ellv 0 � � 0 00 LO �lw OWN �Ifffflll m • IN q5" ' JAIIU 61AR lit, Wei I rig 10, .4 3 :lUaWL10,211V Xx 0 irk . F I I I ", IN 0 E- O 7- Z I C%2 n COD FT-1 a 4, IN q5" ' JAIIU 61AR lit, Wei I rig 10, .4 3 :lUaWL10,211V Xx 0 irk . F I I I ", IN F r 3 :}u9wg3eTlV O � C.w x I y Lo b ' 11�N• ;,. ;:. . LIE 4 - k S -4 :juaLUg3Bjjd . r r GGYv Jo-loo •.iliNnoo Yii ova 'jivA �O I;NMOI ,k NOUNIQV Swl1INIwoaxoo SHT -llNV T• i i S � r• 'f r� u �� •�: ���! ..� ate..:• Q a it r� C7� i# 4 M Q' z 0 Q i • 0 _q :Iuew4ou}lb Is oOV'i?Jo-10 NOIJJCI(IV SPMNIROGNOD ` 4?�I�'I�I v' N �] ± }r cv a 4 -4A -1 SECTION: 4 -4A- 1: 4 -4A- 2: 4 -4A- 3 3: 4 -4A- 4 4: 4 -4A -11 CHAPTER 4 TIME -SHARE UNITS ARTICLE A. DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS Applicability; Exemptions Public Offering Statement; General Provisions Conversion Property Time -Share Securities Documents i o I.ransferee x _ Right -To Rescind + Resale Of Time Shares Deposits Placed In Escrow Labeling Promotional Material Developer's Obligation To Complete Improvements Remedies For Violations 4 -4A -1: APPLICABILITY; EXEMP- TIONS: A. This Article applies to all time -share units, which shall include "time -share estates ", "fractional fees ", and "time - share license ",_ as defined in-Title 13, Chapter 2 of this Code reiatinq to subdivisions, except as provided in subsection B of this Section. B. A public offering statement need not be prepared or delivered in the case of: 1. A gratuitous transfer of a time share. 2. A disposition pursuant to court order. 4 -4A -2 3. A disposition by government or governmental agencies. 4. A disposition by foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure. 5. A transfer to which Section 4 -4A -7 ot'this Article relating to resales ap- plies -. (Ord: "27(1980) § 1) 4 -4A -2: PUBLIC OFFERING STATE- MENT; GENERAL PROVI- SIGNS: A. Content: A public offering statement must contain or fully and accurately disclose: Town of Vail Attachment: G 1. The name of the developer and the principal address of the developer and the unit or units offered in the state- ment; • 2. A general description of the time- share units, including, without limita- tion, the developer's schedule of com- - - - mencement and completion of all buildings, units, and amenities; 3. As to all units offered by the devel- oper in the same project: a. The types and number of units, b. Identification of units that are time -share units, I� LJ • 4 -4A -2 c. The maximum number of the developer's units that may become time -share units, d_ A statement of the maximum number of time shares that may be created, or that there is no maximum, and e. The number or proportion of time shares the developer intends to mar- ket in blocks to investors; 4. Copies and a brief narrative de- scription of the significant features of .- ..0 -,- - n rn rn in Cf r-J nt qJ?r? ,qn%i �f63ra.lrnent,; rafarrPfj to thPrPin (pthf?r than any plats and plans), copies of any contracts or leases to be signed by purchasers at closing, and a brief, narrative description of any contracts or leases that will or may be subject to cancellation by the time -share own- ers; 5. Any current balance sheet and a projected budget for the time -share units either within or as an exhibit to the public offering statement, for one year after the date of transfer to a purchaser, and thereafter the current budget, a statement of who prepared the budget, and a statement of the budget's assumptions concerning occupancy and inflation factors. 'The budget must include, without limita- tion: a. A statement of the amount, or a statement that there is no amount, included in the budget as a reserve for repairs and replacement, b. A statement of any other re- serves, Town. of Vail Attachment: G 4 -4A -2 c, The projected common expense liability by category of expenditures for the time -share units, and d. The projected common expense liability for each time share; 6. Any services not reflected in the budget that the developer provides, or expenses that the developer pays and that he/she expects may become at any subsequent time a common ex- r' pense of the time shares and the projected common expense liability attributable to each of those services !lr P.XrlRr1SAc for o.Rr -h #irTen ch�:!rc° 7. Any initial or special fee due from the purchaser at closing, together with a description of the purpose and method of calculating the fee; 8. A description of any liens, defects, or encumbrances on or affecting the title to the time -share units; 9. A description of any financing of- fered by the developer; 10. The terms and significant limita- tions of any warranties provided by the developer, including statutory warranties and limitations on the en- forcement thereof or on damages; M1 11. A statement of any judgments against the developer and any assock ation or manager, the status of any pending suits to which the developer and any association or manager is a party, and the status of any pending suits material to the time -share units of which a developer has actual knowledge; 4 -4A -2 12. A statement that any deposit made in connection with the purchase of a time -share will be held in an es- crow account until closing of the transaction; 13, Any restraints on alienation of any portion of any time share; 14. A description of the insurance coverage provided for the benefit of time -share owners; 15. Any current or expected fees or charges to be paid by time -share owners Tor the use of driy racinves -- related to the properly;' 16. The extent to which a time -share unit may become subject to a tax or other lien arising out of claims against other time -share owners of the same time -share unit and 4 -4A -2 2. Whether membership or participa- tion in the program, or both, are vol- untary or mandatory. 3. The costs or ranges of costs of membership and participation in the program as of a specified date not more than one year before the public offering statement is delivered to the purchaser, and whether those costs are payable to the developer, the persons operating the program, or the time -share owners with whom ex- changes are made. -4.- VVrIeLiTUI _'dilu 1iuw' filly Ul Life GUSLS* specified In subsection bd of this Section may be altered and, for any such costs which are to be fixed on a case -by -case basis, the manner in which those costs are to be fixed in each case. Town of Vail Attachment: G 5. The number of time shares and 17. All unusual and material circum- time -share parcels involved in mem- stances, features, and characteristics bership or otherwise participating in of the property. the program, and the number of each that may be withdrawn from the pro - B, Disclosure Of Exchange Program, If gram, as of a specified date not more Any: If the time -share owners are to than one year before the public offer - be permitted or required to become ing statement is delivered to the pur- members of or to participate in any chaser. program for the exchange of occupan- cy rights among themselves or with C. Current Information Regarding State- - " -- the time -share owners ot` other time- ment Exchange Hrogram: A oeveoper share parcels or both, the public offer- promptly shall amend the public offer- ing statement or a supplement deliv- ing statement to report any material ered therewith must contain or fully change in the information required by and accurately disclose: subsection A of this Section and the public offering statement, or any sup - 1. The manner in which the program is plement thereto, to report any material operated, the identity of the persons change known to such developer in operating it, and any affiliation be- the information required by subsection tween the program and the developer. B of this Section. (Ord. 27(1980) § 1) Town of Vail Attachment: G 0 0 4-4A -3 4 -4A -3: CONVERSION PROPERTY: A. Additional Statement Content: The public offering statement for the time- share units in a conversion property must contain, in addition to the infor- mation required by Section 4 -4A -2 of this Article: 1. A statement by the developer, based on a report prepared by an independent architect or engineer, describing the present condition of all structural components and mechanical and electrical installations material to nr...A - -inti ±mqn# nf thin ,time_ Ohara .I_initG• _ y - . 2. A statement by the developer of the expected useful fife of each item re- ported on in subsection Al above or a statement that no representations are made in that regard; and 3. A list of any outstanding notices of uncured violations of the Building Code or other Municipal regulations, together with the estimated cost of curing those violations. B. Applicability: This Section applies only to units in which residential use is permissible. (Ord. 27(1980) § 1) 4 -4A -4: TIME -SHARE SECURITIES: If a time -share unit is currently regis- tered with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the United States, a devel- oper satisfies all requirements relating to the preparation of a public offering state- ment of this Article if the developer delivers to the purchaser and files with the Town a copy of the public offering statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commis- sion. (Ord. 27(1980) § 1) 4 -4A -7 4 -4A -5: DOCUMENTS TO TRANSFER- EE: Before transfer of a time share and no later than the date of execu- tion of any contract of sale, the developer shall provide the intended transferee with: a) a copy of the public offering statement and any amendments and supplements thereto, and b) the disclosures required in the case of resales by Section 4 -4A -7 of this Article. (Ord. 27(1980) § 1) 4 -4A -6: RIGHT TO RESCIND: The transferee of any time -share unit shall have the right to rescind the transac- tinn !!ntil twelya n'rinrrk (19.0111 mielninh± n.f tha ..third husiness day following the ron- summation 'or closing of the transaction, or delivery of the disclosures required by this Article, whichever is later, by notifying the developer of his/her intention to do so. The developer shall clearly and conspicuously notify the transferee, in writing, of the rights of the transferee under this Section. The developer shall also provide an adequate opportunity to the transferee to exercise his or her right of rescission. Within ten (10) days after receipt of a notice of rescission, the developer shall return to the transferee, any earnest money, or down payment given by the transferee to the developer. (Ord. 27(1980) § 1) 4 -4A -7: ..RESALE OF TIME SHARES: A. Disclosure Certificate: In the event of a resale of a time share by a time- share owner other than a developer, the seller shall furnish to the purchas- er before execution of any contract for the sale, or otherwise before the transfer, a copy of the governing in- strument (other than the plats and plans) and a certificate containing: Town of Vail Attachment: G 4 -4A -7 1 . A statement disclosing the effect on the proposed disposition of any right of first refusal or other restraint on alienation of the time share; 2. A statement setting forth the amount of the common expense liabil- ity and any unpaid common expense assessment or other sums currently due and payable from the seller; 3. A statement of any other fees pay- able by time -share owners; and 4. A statement of any judgments or other matters which are or may "be- come liens against the time share or the time -share unit and the status of any pending suits which may result in such liens. B. Contents Of Certificate: If the seller owns or offers for sale more than an aggregate of twelve (12) time shares in more than one time -share unit in the same project and the managing entity of those time -share units is an association or manager, the seller shall include in the certificate fur- nished pursuant to subsection A of this Section: 1. A statement of any capital expendi- tures proposed by the managing entity for the current and the next succeed- ing fiscal year; C. 2. A statement of the amount of any reserves for capital expenditures and of any portions of those reserves D designated by the managing entity for any specified projects; 3. The most recent regularly prepared balance sheet and income and ex- pense statement, if any, for the prop- erty; 1. See Title 10 of this Code for Building Codes. Town of Vail Attachment: G 4 -4A -7 4. The current operating budget for the property; 5. A statement describing any insur- ance coverage provided for the benefit of time -share owners; 6. A statement as to whether the man- aging entity has knowledge that any alterations or improvements to the time -share unit violate any provision of the governing instrument; 7. A statement as to whether the man- aging entity has knowledge of any violations or me rieaitn or bLiNclintg C; ©des' With respect to the time- share unit, or any other portion of the prop- erty; and 8. A statement of the remaining term of any leasehold estate affecting the property and the provisions governing any extension or renewal thereof. Certificate Provided Upon Request: Any association or manager, within ten (10) days after a request by a time -share owner, shall furnish a cer- tificate containing the information necessary to enable the time -share owner to comply with this Section. A time -share owner providing a certifi- cate pursuant to subsection A of this Section is not liable to the purchaser for any erroneous information provid- ed by the association or manager and included in the certificate. Certificate Information Prevails: A purchaser is not liable for any unpaid common expense liability or fee great- er than the amount set forth in a cer- tificate prepared by an association or manager. A time -share owner is not liable to a purchaser for the failure or delay of an association or manager to 0 L� • 4 -4A -7 4-4A-10 • Town of Lail Attachment: G provide the certificate in a timely man - 4- 4A -11: REMEDIES FOR VIOLATIONS:. ner. (Ord. 27(1980) § 1) In addition to all remedies pro- vided by law, the Town shall be authorized to enforce these time -share regulations as 4 -4A -8: DEPOSITS PLACED IN ES- follows: CROW: Any deposit made in connection with the purchase or reservation A. Available Remedies: The Town, in of a time share from a developer must be addition to other remedies provided, placed in escrow and held in an account may institute an injunction, manda- designated solely for that purpose by a title mus, abatement, or other appropriate insurance company licensed in this State, action or proceeding to prevent, en- an institution whose accounts are insured join, abate, remove an unlawful con - by a governmental agency or instrumentals- struction, use, occupancy or convey - ty until: ance or to enjoin any developer from selling, agreeing to sell, or offering to A r• -. - - �, - a i - .+ }i nvyi . re,Il nr nfhnrwicn rnncnnki hnfnrn f611 ration of the time .fnr rescissior or complianc,P with .the nrnvisions, of -this such later time as may be specified in Article. any contract of sale; B. Building Permit Withheld: No building B. Delivered to the developer because of permit shall be issued for any lot or purchaser's default under a contract parceled land which has been trans - to purchase the time share; or ferred, conveyed, sold, or acquired in violation of this Article. Any transferee C. Refunded to the purchaser. (Ord. who acquires a time -share unit in 27(1980) § 1) violation of this Article without knowl- edge of such violation, or any subse- quent transferee, shall have the right 4 -4A -9: LABELING PROMOTIONAL to rescind and /or receive damages MATERIAL: If any improvement from any transferor who violates the to the property is not required to be built, provisions of this Article. no promotional material may be displayed or delivered to prospective purchasers C. Approval Withdrawn. The Planning which describes or depicts that improve- and Environmental Commission may meat unless the description or depiction of withdraw any approval of a plan or the improvement is conspicuously labeled plat or require certain corrective mea- or identified as "need not be built". (Ord. sures to be taken following the deter - 27(1980) § 1) mination that information provided by the developer, or by anyone on his /her behalf, upon which a decision was 4- 4A -10: DEVELOPER'S OBLIGATION based, is false or inaccurate. The TO COMPLETE IMPROVE- Planning and Environmental Commis - MENTS: The developer shall complete all sion shall cause written notice to be promised improvements described in the served on the developer, or his /her governing instrument and promotional ma- assignees, setting out a clear and terials. (Ord. 27(1980) § 1) concise statement of the alleged false • Town of Lail Attachment: G 4 -4A -10 or inaccurate information provided by the developer, or by agents on his or her behalf, and directing the developer to appear at a time certain for a hear- ing before the Planning and Environ- mental Commission not less than ten (10) days nor more than thirty (30) days after the date of service of no- tice. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall determine at the hearing the nature and extent of the alleged false or inaccurate information and shall have power, on good cause being shown, to withdraw any approv- al or require certain corrective mea- sures to tie taken. r1owever, wrtharaw- al of approval or imposition of correc- tive requirements shall not be an ex- clusive remedy on findings by the Commission that false or inaccurate information has been received, and any and all remedies provided by law may be exercised. (Ord. 27(1980) § 1) Town of Vail Attachment: G 4 -4A -10 • • �J 0 �1- -- con of doin business in Tow\ Ro 'e Kjesbo had no . ditional commen Mr. Sh ley stated that if re businesses as ed for similar si Town. Doug Cah had no comment_ Chas Bernha t agreed with N1r. mb. it would c Rollie Kjesbo ma a motion to den he variance with a findings on page D g Cahill seconde the motion. Unani ous disapproval A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, of a text amendment to Title 12, Section 2 -2, to amend the definition of "Fraction Fee Club" and to amend Title 12, Section 16 -7A -8, to amend the Use Specific Criteria & Standards, and setting forth details in regard Approved 718142 Applicant: Rob Levine Planner: George Ruther Mr. Ruther made a presentation per the memo. Mr. Levine stated that if the Board agreed with the staff recommendation, he would be returning with a conditional use application. Mr. Shirley asked if Mr. Levine had spoken to the other unit owners about this change to ownership of some remaining units. Mr. Ruther clarified that the Antlers Condo Association owns the units, as it is before the sisT cot Board with this request. i` �?.i Doug Cahill asked for some clarification from a previous meeting regarding the number of units which could be quarter share units. MI'. MULner stateb ttiai the nurnbat ur units is not reguiated by the Code. Mr. Schofield suggested that what was being proposed did not fit any of the definitions for time -share type ownership. Mr. Lamb asked if the homeowner association was aware how economic shifts can affect these types of arrangements in ownerships. Mr. Levine stated that risk exists whether there is one or four owners. Mr. Schofield asked Mr. Ruther if he agreed that the intention was to regulate use, not operation. Mr. Ruther agreed. Mr. Schofield asked what was being requested of the Board. Mr. Ruther stated that staff was looked for a statement regarding interpretation and implementation. He added that he would like to hear comments on the criteria for the 7 Attachment: H Approved 7/8102 conditional use of time -share type units and fractional fee ownership. Mr. Shirley asked if staff would be bringing changes to the Code back to the Board. Mr. Ruther stated, yes. Mr. Schofield stated for the record, that there was no public present. Doug. Cahill stated to fix it. He stated that he would be seeing Rob again at a later date for the conditional use permit and would like to see the wording fixed. George Lamb had nothing to add. Rollie Kjesbo had nothing to add, except to simplify it. Erickson Shirley said George did a great job clarifying the issue and to continue with the changes as recommended by staff_ ..... _ _ ..,.,�u:,:•�?- t�- ;�::'�r rUl��'!t. s;,aulr,i' a:.r�,:ls�.Zs��..r.�, l�![, aL?T +�1i��dlti[Z_o.[- .t- �1.±5._df i?"1.P..1�,41st9±la. H�lI5... I"'Ie,SIc�.1Ptti1 That he peiieved Lhai the uses should be separated. He stated that he wanted to turtner explore the distinction and at what point the Town should be out of these issues. He stated that if we are going to go through with this, we should explore it in other zone districts. He stated that the issue was clear in his mind in that we need clearer distinctions between each type of ownership. He stated that he wasn't sure if we should have specific numbers regarding ownership intervals. He sees an overlap in the definitions. He can't emphasize enough that when they originally looked at FFU, there was a definite intent to keep a distinction between FFU and TSU. He said we should thinking about it as it relates to an SDD. Likewise, if there are state statutes and we should be looking at those for direction, assuming that we do not have a need to do something dramatically different. He supports George's recommendation, and wants to see the specific language. He then stepped down as chair, making Erickson Shirley chair so John could make the motion. John Schofield made a motion with the findings on pages 7 and 8 of the staff memorandum and an affirmation of the staffs interpretation. Doug Cahill seconded the motion. i he mu— ijur'i passed oy a vole of b -U. 7. A request fora ecommendation the Vail Town uincil for the ado ion of two view \pr within L' nshead and to a end Section 122-X, -4 {Adoption of iew Corridors), it de to incl de View Corridor 1 and 2 in Title as identified wi in the Lionshead pment Ma er Plan. View C ridor 1 is locate pproximately at a main n exit lookin southwest towar s the Gondola li ine. View Corrid 2 is located ately from the edestrian plaza the east end of a Liftho use Lodg looking he Gondola lift ine_ A mare spe 'fic legal descripti of the two view orridors is he Community velopment Depa ment. Applicant: %Allison wn of Vail Planner: Ochs Allison Ochanted an overvie of the staff taco mendation. . _ -.r \Ms,.chs ofield asks if the maps Ms. hs was pointing o were to scale. stated that t y were not to sc e, but that she c Id have a map de building lines s wn. 8 Attachment: H (0 0 T • El MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: July 22, 2002 SUBJECT: Amendment to the Vail Mountain School Development Plan and associated rezoning, conditional use permit, and hazard area amendment requests. Annlirnnt• Vail Mmintain ,Srhnol, represented bv.Braun and Associates Planner: Russ Forrest I. PURPOSE Since the July 8m meeting with the Planning and Environmental Commission the Vail Mountain School has further revised its development plan and the application it has submitted. The applicant has again requested that the July 22nd PEC meeting be a worksession and that a final decision be tabled to August 12th. Both staff and the applicant (attachment A) have identified issues on which they are requesting input from the PEC. Changes have been made to the overall development plan and reductions of those plans are provided in attachment B. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST This project involves the following properties: Parcel Current Zoning Proposed Zoning and Use Acreage Owner 1) Lot 12 S, Block 2, Vail General Use General Use 6.1 acres Vail Mountain Village 12th (Current (GU) Zoning/ School School Site) School & soccer field & 92 parking spaces 2) Lot 12 (applicant has Agriculture General Use 1.28 Vail Mountain referred to property as Open Space Zoning/ acres School 12N), Block 2 Vail Village (AOS) 12 parking (Previously 12th (Tennis Court Site) spaces, owned by the This site was not properly relocated Booth Falls subdivided and is actually cabin Homeowners part of Lot 12. Associations) 3) Lot 11, Block 2, Vail Two Family General Use/ .408 Vail Mountain Village 12`h (lot directly Residential Soccer Field acres School west of current soccer field 4) Tract C, Block 1, Vail Two Family General Use/ 1.28 Vail Resorts Village 12 "' Residential 8 EHUs & 16 acres parking spaces required for EHUs The following is a summary of the applications for this project: Applications that the PEC will make a.recommendation on: 'I) A request ror a recommendation to the Vail Town Council io rezone 3010 Booth Falls Road /Lot 11, Block 2, Vail Village 12h Filing from Two - Family Residential to General Use; 2) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to rezone Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing to General Use, The northern portion of this lot is zoned Agriculture Open Space; 3) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to rezone Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12t`' Filing from Two - Family Residential to General Use; 4) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to modify the official Town of Vail Rockfall Hazard Map to indicate approved mitigation for 3160 N. Frontage Road /Lot 12, Block 2, and Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12`h Filling; Applications that the PEC will make a decision on: 5) A request for an amendment to the previously approved development plan and a new conditional use permit for a private educational institution and an active outdoor recreation area on 3010 Booth Falls Road /Lot 11, Block 2, Vail Village 12`h Filing and 3160 N. Frontage Road East/ Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12`h Filing; 6) A request for a conditional use permit to allow for the construction of eight Type III EHUs located on Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12" Filing; 7) A request for a for a conditional use permit to continue to allow for the existing temporary modular classroom structures located at 3160 N. Frontage Road East/ a part of Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12`h Filing; 8) A request for a major subdivision in accordance with Title 13, Chapter 3, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regards thereto, located at Lots 11 and 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing and Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing. • 9) A request for a recommendation to amend the official Town of Vail Land Use Map for Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12" Filing from Low Density Residential to Public /Semi- Public; III. SUMMARY OF PEC INPUT June 10th Meeting • The PEC asked that a sensitive lighting plan be developed. • Make the parking in Tract C more consolidated. • There was some interest in moving the Headmasters House onto Tract C. • The PEC wanted to see a management plan for the EHUs to show how the units would be used by employees of the school, _ _ _ . _. _ _ Th srn . .-.a a.. _ ii- •ar.nn 1�l re...,..1 f: rFl -.rnr !n }�^� '�".. �.} a.. .. }ry sn - _ spwce for the school, • There was a comment to subdivide the headmaster's house from the rest of the school and recreational field. • There was a need for additional information on retaining walls and grade changes. • Create enclosed parking for EHUs on Tract C • There was concern expressed about the van parking on Tract C. • There was agreement with DRB that the height of the gymnasium could be reduced. • There was general support that EHUs on Tract C were appropriate. • There was some concern about the overall mass of the school. • Some members did not support an amendment to add the 425 credit to the Agriculture Open Space Zone District. July 8th Meeting • The PEC asked the applicant to rezone the tennis court area to either General Use or Single Family Residential. There was agreement that a more appropriate zoning should be used for the headmaster's house and the soccer field. • The majority of PEC indicated that they would not support a text amendment for the Agriculture Open Space zone district to accommodate a 425 GRFA credit. • The PEC did not approve of parking on the Frontage Rd for overflow parking. • There was some interest from the PEC in pursuing event parking at the Booth Falls trailhead. • The PEC wanted to see a sensitive lighting plan for the project. • The PEC stated that the fence beside the soccer field must be moved at least 10 feet from the edge of asphalt of Booth Falls Road. • Several members of the PEC commented that the school was addressing their concerns and moving in the right direction. Also the new plan was similar to the plan approved in 2000 in that the school would be accommodating the same number of students and would have the same number of staff. • PEC heard testimony from adjacent neighbors that the school was still too big and that the height should be further reduced to minimize the visual impact of the school. There was testimony regarding the need to remove parking from Tract C. Also lighting was a critical issue neighbors were concerned about. There were also comments that the school needed to improve trash removal and clean- up of the grounds. A letter from Winston Associates was provided to the PEC by several Katsos Ranch neighbors that outlined their position on the project and recommendations for Tract C. IV. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD INPUT FROM JUNE 5TH MEETING • The Design Review Board (DRB) was very supportive of the architectural form of the building. Specifically they liked the horizontal and vertical variation in the design. • The DRB liked the contrast in the use of materials and that several roof materials would be considered. rr . -^.^"^. ..._ _ —... _!. ., !_ .s x!_ ._ ..._ _!'__tt 1_.I_ _4 :el.:___ ;i� v.%Li +vl.j i. i.:.:+•G..1 iiid� i.i i -w. aYr�.Jiiviii +C .Vl�11 Gi•.7ii +i1111� Lam; the height of this ele+iient to address ccnccrns from adjacc et property bwncrs. • The DRB expressed concern regarding any impact to the aspen stand on Tract C. • The DRB asked to see a very sensitive lighting plan. The Board asked that low level ballard lighting be used. • The DRB asked the applicant to consider structured parking underneath the soccer field which could enable the parking to be reduced on Tract C. • The DRB wanted to make sure that the applicant would have adequate landscaping. They were concerned that much of the landscaping was on CDOT right -of -way and wanted to make sure that they could plant that material. • DRB asked that a gate be considered for Tract C to prevent non school related traffic from parking in that lot. DRB asked whether a porte- cochere was needed for the entrance to the school. • The Board inquired whether there was adequate space for loading and delivery. V. CHANGES IN THE PLAN SINCE JULY 8TH The applicant has made the following changes in the submitted applications and development plan: The applicant is proposing to replat Lot 12 as one lot and have the entire lot zoned General Use. The applicant has withdrawn their variance and text amendment request for the Agricultural Open Space zoned area (Tennis Courts) since this land is proposed to be General Use. The applicant is proposing 12 parking spaces and relocating the cabin to the tennis court area of the site. The applicant is proposing 8 employee housing units (EHU) on Tract C but has eliminated the off -site parking for the school. There were 31 parking spaces on Tract C in the previous plan, of which 16 were for the EHUs. The current plan proposes 16 spaces that are required for the EHUs on this site. The enclosed parking for the school buses was also eliminated from Tract C. 0 Parking Breakdown Main Parking Area 92 Tract C EHU parking 16 North Parking Area 12 Total 120 Event Parking Additional 20 spaces in main parking lot • The event parking plan has been changed to accommodate an additional 20 valet parking spaces. All 20 of these spaces are located in the main parking area. Total parking provided for special events is 140 spaces. No parking is proposed on the Frontage Road. Vt DISrUSION ITEMS 1. Circulation and Event Parking: Staff believes adequate parking is provided for normal school operations. With regard to event parking, it is positive that no parking is proposed on the Frontage Road However, it is unclear whether adequate parking is provided for special events. The traffic and circulation analysis in the EIS should further evaluate the amount of event parking that is needed. The previous proposal included 60 event parking spaces. The current plan depends heavily on managed parking and may result in overflow parking on Katsos Ranch Road or Booth Creek Rd unless adequate shuttle service is to another available parking structure if possible. Also, additional spaces may be accommodated in the parking lot if it is entirely valet parked. 2. Tract C Site Disturbance The applicant has further reduced site disturbance on Tract C by removing 15 parking spaces from Tract C. The only parking provided on the site is the required parking for the EHUs. Does PEC feel that the level of site disturbance is appropriate for the subject property? Also Attachment C summarizes the development potential for Tract C given the current zoning of Two Family Residential. 3. Overall Mass, Site Coverage of the Project This issue should be evaluated at the August 12 PEC meeting. The development statistics for the original proposal are included in Attachment C. 4. New Site Plan for Tennis Court Area Is PEC comfortable with the location of 12 parking spaces and the historical cabin on the tennis court area of Lot 12? Is PEC comfortable with the layout of the soccer field? There is now a 10 foot separation from the fence of the field and to the edge of Booth Creek Road 5. Conditional Use Kermit Is the PEC comfortable with the continued use of temporary classrooms while the school is being redeveloped, if the development plan is approved? 6. Pedestrian Access Staff believes pedestrian access is needed from the new north parking area and cabin to the school. Attachments: A. Letter from applicant B. Revised Plans C. Original development statistics D_ Input from Katsos Ranch Residents 0 0 • Attachment A Applicant's response to PEC input BAIABIRAUN ASSO A 1ES, INC. PLANNING and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT July 18, 2002 Planning and Environmental Commission And Russell. Forrest, AICP w - -. - "�iiv i`vY'4k �La. aaiauiu �.� °sl �.r•.r:*..iY�aii..ai2 - iowWi of Vail -. 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 BEST COSY AVAIL4BLE Re: Response to Comments on Vail Mountain School Project, Vail, Colorado 0 Dear Planning Commission Members: Thank you for your insightful comments on the Vail Mountain School project. We appreciated the opportunity to provide answers to your questions and to hear your encouraging comments on this project. We intend to give the PEC an update of the Vail Mountain School project on July 22 and conduct a final review of the project on August 12. We have made several significant changes to the plans to address issues raised by the PEC, neighbors, and the Town staff. Below is list of changes that we have made to the plans and our applications. These changes will be reflected in more detail at the August 12 PEC hearing. Parking and Development on Tract C We have eliminated all of the staff parking and the bus enclosure from Tract C. This modification is in response to the comments we heard from the neighbors. Additionally, we are creating landscape berms and areas to help buffer the faculty housing from the surrounding residential uses. The proposed development complies with all of the development standards of the existing Two - Family Residential zoning including site coverage, landscape area, setbacks, and building height. • Rezoning of "Booth Falls" Parcel (northern part of Lot 12) In response to concerns and direction expressed by the PEC at the June 22 PEC hearing, we have amended our application to now request a rezoning of this parcel to General Use. Edwards Village Center, Suite C-209 Ph. - 970.926.7575 0105 Edwards Village Bouievard Fax - 970.926.7576 Post Office Box 2658 www.braunassociates.com Edwards, Colorado 81632 Additionally, our proposed plat now reflects the consolidation of three parcels to one larger parcel (Lot 11, Lot 12, and the Booth Falls parcel). Development of Booth Falls Parcel The future head of school residence has been removed from the plans. VMS will seek other opportunities to provide a residence for future heads of school. The existing school cabin is now proposed to be relocated to this parcel, north of the proposed soccer field. Additionally, in order to accommodate the parking removed from Tract C, we are proposing a parking area adjacent to the cabin to accommodate 12 vehicles. This area will provide parking for small meetings and gatherings that may occur at the cabin. Additionally, in the summer months this parking area can help alleviate parking on Booth Falls Road by trail users. • Soccer Field :The PEC raised a concern about the proximity of the soccer meld to Booth Pat Is -Road. in response the soccer field has been shifted slightly in order to provide adequate buffer to Boothfalls Road. We believe there is adequate space on both ends of the field to provide landscaping and buffering to surrounding uses. We believe this change addresses the safety concerns raised by the PEC. Parking Management Plan for Special Events The PEC expressed concern about the use of the Frontage Road for special event parking. As you are aware special events occur at the school on rare occasions and the parking management plan is intended to provide direction when planning such an event. In response to this concern we have modified the parking management plan to eliminate the use of the Frontage Road for event parking. Further we have modified the language of the plan to specifically identify the trial head as a remote parking opportunity. We hope that the PEC agrees with our specific responses to concerns raised by the PEC and neighbors. We believe the proposed changes represent reasonable compromise to the concerns we heard. Thank you again for your help on this project. Q F. Mauriello, A1CP • 0 Vail Mountain School S�ccial Every Parking Management Plan • � NTAiN S July 22, 2002 • Vail Mountain School Special Event Parking Management Plan July 22, 2002 I. Purpose The purpose of this Special Event Farking Management Plan (here after, "Plan ") 15 to regulate how parking is controlled during special events at the Vail Mountain School (VMS) campus. The school will utilize this Flan when List %ht Scrioul't) fac:i4iey. This flan -is a guIuc. nUi CAI tioiial parking 5olution5 may be developed by the school working in concert with the Town of Vail. li. Speciallvents The proposed school facilities have been designed to address the typical programmatic needs of the Vail Mountain School. The parking provided on the site will meet the day -to -day needs of the school. Additionally, the 116 parking 5pace5 provided on -site exceed the Town's parking requirement for a 400 -5eat auditorium. The Town'5 parking requirement of I parking per 120 sq. ft. of seating floor area generates a need for 30 parking spaces (3,500 sq. ft. seating area). however, VMS understands that certain rare events may exceed the Town's parking calculation and the number of standard spaces provided on -site. VM5 will from time -to -time have events in the auditorium or within the athletic facilities that may generate parking demand beyond the normal capacity of the designated parking areas. In these rare circumstances alternative parking 5cenar105 and modes of transportation will need to be utilized. VMS, on a case -by -case basis, may allow other community groups to utilize its facilities. These community events may require special provisions for parking depending on the number of participants and the type of event planned. Parking Alternatives During special events VMS may employ (or require of others utilizing the school faciliti(--s) the following parking management techniques in order to reduce parking impacts to the neighborhood and the Town's street network. One or a combination of the following techniques may be. utilized. A parking plan is attached to this plan. 2 • 0 • • Encourage users to utilize the Town of Vail bus system. The Town's bus stop is located on the property and 15 proximate to the school's facilities. VM5 will use notices, letters, or flyers to indicate that the Town's bus system is available and encourage participants to take the bus to and from the campus. • Require /encourage the use of private shuttles to deliver users to the property from other remote public parking areas. These public parking areas may include the CDOT parking area located at the east Vail interchange, Booth Falls Trailhead parking area, ford Park parking areas, the Vail Village parking structure, and the Lion5head Parking structure. Any use of the Town's parking facilities will require r.nnr1.1inat1On Mirth the Town of Vail. • Employ the services of a parking valet to use the on -site parking areas as efficiently as possible. With valet service approximately 20 additional cars that can be accommodated within the designated parking areas. • Encourage carpooling by users and participants. The school will notify guest and users that parking is limited on the property for special events and will encourage them to ride together. IV. Parking Restrictions Parking on booth fa115 Road, Kat5o5 Ranch Road, and the North Frontage Road will not be endorsed or encouraged by VMS. VMS, through notices to parents, participants, and users, shall indicate that parking is prohibited on Booth falls Road, Katsos Ranch Road, and the North frontage Road. VM5 will work with the Town of Vail and code enforcement to ensure that users of the school facilities do not park on these neighborhood streets. 3 c; 0 Aib� 1'= MF LYEM PAPox RAN r k� ;'_ $ • 0 • < C) E- k :1 0-4 Lj !I, f Ji io!l FAY B _41,11 36 W hllrl"� -1 nP!. hi, Von 1. jn-q Ui nr t. C11 }` s aii Ai it < C) E- k :1 m fill" N2, wli: 0-4 Lj !I, f FAY B m fill" N2, wli: I F -RI I !I, f _41,11 36 W hllrl"� -1 nP!. hi, Ai it I F -RI I o 4 'o :G t�7 V7 Ip dC C 9 I c tr z � n r�r �dC a a n Z 0 • ��va xsr.lYr. uur I 1 + g I I A I �S ¢ i • NO 9) 1 1 , I f k H Q I f,' __`4* lam• _ �.. �Rg� a � I + PE:g. I 1 - i� g p I• r'� 1 Ife� la lx 7 - _ S —r o 4 'o :G t�7 V7 Ip dC C 9 I c tr z � n r�r �dC a a n Z 0 • ��va xsr.lYr. uur I 1 + g I I A I �S ¢ i • Vail Mountain School Reduced Site and Landscape 'Plans • 0 • • �� F1555 CW�i CM 4 _n Q Q I a � I I E LATCH LINE SFF SHEET C1.02_ Sa I Iar rC- r - f m gm ` a VA 1 a� s f. gs ` R. 10 W-1 • I/ J &� it �R .•� �� . or s h R'I fag. 1 Vii. •.\ \ J. ja_2� a e � , �a�.. � �� ��. 7 � � .: � �- ( �� \ � � - � ■ � / �� , ..� ■■ : .e .� �a \ / {� § ��`� � . � , y - � � \�/ \ k Z2. -� -- `�� . . � . \ ON N 17"YM IyiR F �r� I71rh���.T IZ 7 l sz d 6 I i a I I y i Vi of 'i a ff wid Ih x it Vail Mountain School 5©ccer Field West Lnd Detail • 49 r l,YA# # +AfA Syr � '� � � /� �iL��tr +►i/�/R �r �1,�.r_�x •.mil -- �r •r i 1p IL On MEMO No, Ru- RM, AC ..ACadftheetslLAl-DO.dgn 07117102 12:56:12 PFIAA BAI /BRAUN ASSOCIATES, tlNC. PLANNING and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT July 17, 2002 Bob Perletz, Winston Associates Kenny Lubin Katsos Ranch Road Neighbors 47G -391 2 (303) 449 -G91 I Dear Kenny, Bob, and Neighbors: This letter is Intended to demonstrate the Vail Mountain School 's commitments to the Katsos Ranch Road residents. We heard your comments and concerns expressed in person at the Planning Commission hearing and through your written correspondence. FoUowing the Planning Commission hearing we have spent some time re- examining alternatives for the campus layout. We understand that the thrust of your concerns revolves around the location of the bus enclosure, the additional faculty parking on Tract C, and the overall maintenance of the landscaping on the VMS campus. We have included a revised site plan /landscape plan that we believe addresses your concerns in this regard. We are now proposing elimination of the bus enclosure, relocation of the faculty parking spaces to the west portion of the campus (near Booth Falls Road), and development of a suitable landscape plan for Tract C. Additionally we understand that the neighbors are looking for some commitments from the school with respect to construction Impacts and longer -term maintenance. With your support of the project, VMS is making the following commitments to the neighbors: 0 The development of Tract C will be limited to faculty housing, parking for the faculty housing, and landscape improvements. Edwards Village Center, Suite C -209 Ph. - 970.926.7575 0105 FdwardsVillage Boulevard Fax - 970.926.7576 Post Office Box 2658 www.hraunassoci >ates.com Edwards, Colorado 81 632 • The landscape plan for Tract C will include substantial landscaping in the form of berms, ground cover, and trees. The materials and detailed landscape plan will be as proposed on the attached landscape plan and materials list. Further, Aspen trees to be preserved on the lot wifl be identified on the property and any of those trees that do not survive the construction process will be replaced. The Design Review Board has final review authority on the landscape plan. • The landscaping on the property will be supported with an irrigation system and will be maintained by the Vail Mountain School in a healthy manner. Any vegetation that does not survive will be replaced in the appropriate cgrowmg period. • VMS is proposing high quality architecture and materials for the faculty housing. A sample of the proposed elevations and mterial5 is attached. The cgraphic represents the general application of these materials. The Design Review Board will have ultimate control over the materials used and the extent of their application. • Vehicular and pedestrian access for residents during the Katsos Ranch Road relocation and construction process will be maintained at all times. There may be a need to control traffic during critical periods in the relocation of the road and residents will be informed of these times by the contractor. Dust will be controlled during the construction process by watering and other technicfues. Additionally, Kat505 Ranch Road will be swept periodically to Prevent dust. • VM5 will provide neighbors with a contractor's representative phone number during construction. This contact person will be available to meet with neighbors to resolve construction related issues. We hope that you agree with our revised plans for Tract C and can lend your support of our application based on our commitments to you. r cr l , Dominic F. Mauriello, AICF 2 18 17, I I t I I C .I _l I .I i I I 1 I I C 0 � s ►+►iw *iaa *,4vJl /r��� � 1 L►^„� �% tai�s� Ci�i►.a►si sip+ � rs ♦ w s a► «i�A�. i►s ► ` ►a��' * ♦+ ►ice ; +ii +i ►i 1 o !.'.i jfi► iii + +ii ►i. . ii► _ .fir �� "r�•� ►.• ♦ ..� O ►► *�►- L � sii► ,� � i , A E + 1� W . $ i., p4i 1 c\ j + l /Mc. tiL s ►+►iw *iaa *,4vJl /r��� � 1 L►^„� �% tai�s� Ci�i►.a►si sip+ � rs ♦ w s a► «i�A�. i►s ► ` ►a��' * ♦+ ►ice ; +ii +i ►i 1 o !.'.i jfi► iii + +ii ►i. . ii► _ .fir �� "r�•� ►.• ♦ ..� O ►► *�►- L � sii► ,� � i , A E + 1� W . $ i., p4i 1 c\ j + wme % fit Mal impr 0 13nmr &-AZAR :k "IT low rk Ml "0 fiffal i. 411 9 �+r WIN _ 111 i oil ! ' FACULTY HOUSING- NORTH ELEV. ALT 2 m6g, 0 FACULTY HOUSING- SOUTH DR. ALT 2 FACULTY HOUSING= WEST ELEV. ALT, 2 FACULTY HOE K- LAST ELIV. ALT 2 JULY 17, 2002 ru EB PRELIMINW ELEVATIONS VAIL MOUNTAIN SCHOOL Vail, Worado 4 •a'a.�n�ta. � Site Coverage: 22,027 sf (8.26 %) (14.1%) Attachment C Floor Area: Development Statistics from original proposal Note These statistics have not been updated to reflect the most current submittal) Zoning Analysis _Note: All Numbers for the proposed school are approximate and need to be further verified. Lot 12 S and Lot 11 (Assuming Lot 11 is rezoned to General Use) Zoning: General Use 43 All development standards in the GU zone district are prescribed by 48 the PEC Lot Size: 6.122 acres (Lot 12 S) or 266,674 square feet + .408 acres or 17,772 square - -2&4, 4446 54Liai C iCt-,i Lot 12S & Lot 11 Existing 2000 2002 Proposed Density: n/a n/a n/a Setbacks: Front/Katsos: 90' 24' 24' Frontage Rd: 76' 76' 25' Side: Booth Creek 358' 358' 340' Rear: 23' 20' 20' Height: 27' 36' 42 (approx) Parking: 85 116 84 lot 12/115 total (includes 2 bus spaces) Site Coverage: 22,027 sf (8.26 %) (14.1%) 20.9% Floor Area: 20,488 sf 55,390 75,900 Students 261 330 320 Faculty 43 48 48 9 • Lot 12N Zoning: Lot Size: Agriculture Open Space 1.28 acres or 55,756 square feet Existing 2002 Proposed Density: n/a 1 Setbacks: North Lot Line: n/a 20' Booth Falls Rd: n/a 20' East Lot Line: n/a 85' - r Height: n/a 31' (Need to verify) Parking:- 0 Need 2.5 Site Coverage: n/a 4.8 % /5% allowed Floor Area: n/a 2,42.5 (proposed) 12000 allowed Tract C Zoning: Two Family Residential / Proposed zoning is General Use Lot Size: 1.28 acres or 55,756 square feet Existing (allowed) 2002 Proposed Density: 2 /site Not counted towards density (potential for 3 lots) 6.25 /acre (8 EHUs) Setbacks: Katsos Ranch west: 20 ft 120' N. Frontage 15 25' North (Katsos) 15 18 Height: 33' 24 approximately Parking: 2.5 /unit 115 total /29 on Tract C Site Coverage: 20% 6.5% Floor Area: 7385 sq ft on 1 lot 5,660 (EHUs excluded from GRFA) or 3 cats of 15,000 for 12,535 of total GRFA. 10 a Summary of Entire Proiect 0 Existing _ 2000 Approval Proposed Plan__ Density: n1a 8 EHU's = 4 d.u.'s 8 EHU's = 4 d.u.'s 1 Dwelling Unit (headmaster) Setbacks: Parcel Main School Building % of Lot Front/Katsos: 90' Side /Frontage Rd: 76' Side: 358' Rear: 23' Fdcuity Housii7ij. Front/Katsos: Side: Rear /Frontage Road: Height: Parking: Loading: Site Coverage: GRFA: 27' 85 spaces 181 22,027 sf (8.26 %) n1a 24' 76' 358' 20' 36' 116 spaces 0 37,469 sf (14.1 %) 4,800 square feet 20' 25' 350'+ 20'— 40' 20' 130' 85' 36' - 42' 115 + 4 for headmaster res + 15 drop -off spaces 1 loading space 65,800 sf (16.7 %)* 5,040 sq. ft. (EHUs) 2,425 sf (headmaster) Total school 31,990 sf 55,390 sf 75,900 sf Floor Area: *Site Coverage Detail Use Parcel Site Cover % of Lot Residence Boothfalls Parcel (Portion of Lot 12) 2,700 sf 4.8 %0 Cabin Lot 11 950 sf 5.3% School Lot 12 58,500 sf 22 %Q Faculty Housing and Bus Enclosure Tract C 3.650 sf 6.5% Overall Plan All Parcels 65,800 sf 16.7% 11 • I • • Attachment D Input from Adjacent Residents 12 JI,L. 15. 2002 12:06PM July 8, 2002 BEVERLY MCKINNEY Eric ] Speck 3150 East Booth Falls Court Vail, CO 81657 Tel 970 477 7498 Planning and Environmental Commission Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 Dear Commissioners xr�4e+nnl_'C,Rc!niii-c f_fn►r Pynansion AnorovaI NO. 2962 P. 2 My name is Eric Speck, and I regret that my pre - existing business commitments caused me to have to depart Vail yesterday aftemoon. I wish that I could attend today's meeting in person, and 1 thank you for the opportunity to allow my representative to submit this statement- By way of introduction, l achieved a life -long dream about a year ago when I purchased a home in Vail, located at 3150 Booth Falls Court. While I am a new homeowner in the community, I am a long -6me patron of Vail, having spent as much time as possible in the Valley since my first visit over 30 years ago. After graduating from the University of Denver in 1978, 1 set a goal of returning to Vail on a permanent basis. I am a significant step closer with my new home. 1 never thought I would find myself writing in opposition to any project that has the goal of improving the quality of education. Personally, I place a high priority on improvements in education because it is so important to our communities, our youth and our ability to compete on a global basis. It is for this reason that I serve as a trustee for a nation -wide endowment for continuing education and certification in the travel industry. I, therefore, feel embarrassed writing to you to express concern about the Vail Mountain School's proposed expansion plans- I am writing to formally express my opposition to the manner in which the School proposes to achieve its long -term goals. While I understand that expansion of its facilities is desirable and necessary, the proposed solution places undue harm on me and many other members of the Booth Falls community. My home is located at the end of the cul- de-sac on Booth Fails Court, just above the School- I am pleased that earlier proposals, that would have affected more residents in Booth Falls, have been shelved. My home, however, is likely one of the most negatively affected homes under the current proposal. My major concern is that the proposed expansion will completely block my views of Gore Creek and the beaver refuge. Today, my primary living room window. which is on the highest ...12 • • LJ JUL.15.2002 12:08PM BEVERLY MCKINNEY Page 2 Planning and Environmental Commission July 8, 2002 • NO. 2962 P. 3 floor of the home, frames a beautiful vista to the beaver pond. Tomorrow, if approved, the view will be of roof -tops. 1 understand that modifications are being made to the plans in order to address some, but not all, of these concerns. Dominic at Braun Associates is currently preparing a view analysis which will confirm the degree of impact to my highest floor views_ Certainly plans- could be additionally modified to either excavate further or lower the roof. I hope that the School will reconsider its position that the south expansion must also include such a high, multi -story roof. A compromise here could ootentialiv result in a workable solution for all involved. Today, the Vail Mountain School is situated in harmony with the smaii community of Booth Falls homes and our beautiful, natural surroundings. If approved, the School's expansion will place our community in the shadows of the building's imposing structure. I hope that these public hearings will result in a compromise that suits the key objections, and objectives, of all parties. In the interest of compromise, I am resigned to the fact that my lower floor will be walled in, that noise from the school will increase, and the open green -lands beside my home will disappear. I hope, however, that plans may be modified so that the views from my upper floors will be preserved.. Thank you again for the opportunity to address your meeting today. I appreciate your on -going interest in this issue. Respectfully Eric J Speck i • 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: July 22, 2002 SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to amend the Donovan Park Master Plan and a request for a final review of an amendment to the previously approved development plan, to allow for the construction of the Donovan Park Pavilion and associated improvements, located at 1600 S. Frontage Rd. West/Unplatted. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by VAg, Inc. rianner. ueorge rcuu►er I, SUMMARY The Town of Vail has requested approval of an application to amend the previously approved development plan for Donovan Park. Staff is recommending approval of the applicant's request as we believe that the proposal is in compliance with the criteria of such a proposal. Staff's analysis of the criteria can be found in Section V of this memorandum. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, the Town of Vail, represented by VAg, Inc., is requesting that the Planning and Environmental Commission makes a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to amend the Donovan Park Master Plan and considers a request for a final review of an amendment to the previously approved development plan for Donovan Park, to allow for the construction of the redesigned Donovan Park Pavilion and associated improvements. Donovan Park is located at 1600 South Frontage Road Weston an unplatted portion of land. The following paragraphs outline the changes that are proposed. Donavan Park Master Plan Amendment Upon initial discussions with the applicant, and prior to receiving a formal application and final documents, staff had believed that the proposed revisions to the pavilion may require an amendment to the Donovan Park Master Plan. Staff, however, upon receiving a formal application and having reviewed the contents and guidelines of the Donovan Park Master Plan, adopted October 3, 2000, has determined that an amendment to the master plan is not required to construct the revisions proposed. Therefore, the request for an amendment to the Donovan Park Master Plan has been withdrawn from consideration. A copy of the master plan has been attached for reference. Amendment to the Approved Development Plan • The applicant is requesting approval of the following proposed changes to the previously approved development plan for Donovan Park: • The relocation of a portion of the recreation path connecting the park to the existing bike path; • An increase in the size of the outdoor patio area around the pavilion to accommodate a greater number of people and a 20'x 40' temporary tent; • The relocation of the trash dumpster from the service area adjacent to the building to a new location near the east end of the existing parking area; • The removal of a screening landscape berm adjacent to the service area; • The reorientation of the pavilion has changed slightly due to the clockwise rotation of the building by approximately 30 degrees; and • The architectural design changes to the pavilion. III. BACKGROUND In 1980, the Town of Vail acquired a 51 acre parcel of land in the Matterhorn area of West Vail. The parcel was described as having three distinct areas; the upper bench, middle bench, and lower bench. The lower bench is approximately 12 acres in size and would be later determined to be the best opportunity for a community park development due to its easy access and prime creekside location. 0 In 1985, the Vail Town Council adopted the Gerald R. Ford Park and Donovan Park Master Plan. The purpose of this plan is to provide a framework for decision - making around the development of these two valuable park land sites. The plan prescribes standards and design guidelines for implementation to ensure that these two open space parcels meet the recreation needs of the residents and visitors to the Vail area. In 1999, the Vail Town Council initiated a study of the potential community facilities for the Town of Vail. This study included multiple sites around town and among them was the lower bench of Donovan Park. The results of the study concluded that the lower bench of Donovan Park was the most appropriate location for a new community park and a new community park pavilion. In 2000, the Vail Town Council adopted the Donovan Park Master Plan Amendment. This plan is an amendment to the originally adopted Gerald R. Ford and Donovan Park Master Plan. The expressed purpose of the plan is to provide an updated reflection of community needs, concerns, and priorities as they relate to the lower bench of Donovan Park. While seeking to preserve the overall site values and design guidelines of the 1985 Donovan Park Master Plan, this amendment expands and clarifies anticipated and desired community uses of the property. In 2001, the Vail Town Council directed the Donovan Park Design Team to move forward with the preparation of design /development drawings for Phase I improvements to the new park. Later that year, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission approved a request for a conditional use permit and • approved development to allow for the construction of the park and community park pavilion. Actual park construction was started shortly thereafter and has been progressing towards completion. In 2002, in response to construction cost considerations, the Vail Town Council initiated a redesign process of the community park pavilion and associated improvements. The redesign process has since been completed and the applicant, the Town of Vail, is now requesting final review and approval of an amendment to a previously approved development plan. According to the Vail Land Use Plan and the Official Town of Vail Zoning Map, the lower bench of Donovan Park has a land use designation as "Park" and is located within the General Use Zone District. IV. ZONING ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing th6 toliowang development standards as provided on the proposed Approved Development Plan: Development Standards Approved Proposed Lot Areal 539,011 sq. ft. 539,011 sq. ft. Site Dimension: 12.374 acres/ 12.374 acres/ Setbacks: As shown on As shown on the Approved the Approved Development Development Playa Plan Building Height: 38.6 ft. 32.9 ft. Density Control: N/A N/A Site Coverage: 9,449 sq. ft. 6,080 sq. ft. (1.8 %) (1. 1 %) Parking /Loading: 145 spaces 145 spaces min. min. Outdoor Terrace Area: 2,900 sq. ft. 3,750 sq. ft. Pavilion Area: Approx. 6,200 sq. ft. 5,350 sq. ft. 3 V. AMENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN i According to the Official Town of Vail Zoning Map, the lower bench of Donovan Park is located with in the General Use Zone District. Pursuant to Section 12- 90-1 of the Vail Town Code, "The General Use District is intended to provide sites for public and quasi - public uses which, because of their special characteristics, cannot be appropriately regulated by the development standards prescribed for other zoning districts, and for which development standards especially prescribed for each particular development proposal or project are necessary to achieve the purposes prescribed in Section 12 -1 -2 of this Title and to provide for the public welfare. The General Use District is intended to ensure that public buildings and grounds and certain types of quasi- public uses permitted in the District are appropriately located and - J.�ni•r....!J }n r.+r.n! ±l-n n••n. -1.+ r.F r'.n �nfn��+ #n .,�n� llinif!lYn fr* ►1afl in !�'��rmnni7!+ inrith c�rrn�rnrlin� . CeC3 ar,ri, in the case of build ngs and [tither 3tru tvrec to ensure adequate light, air, open spaces, and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of uses." Furthermore, development standards for development within the General Use Zone District shall be proposed by the applicant and prescribed by the Planning and Environmental Commission. The approved development standards shall be as indicated on the approved development plan. An approved development plan shall be used as the principal guide for all development in the General Use Zone District. Approved development plans may be amended. Amendments to an approved development plan shall be considered in accordance with the provisions outlined in the Vail Town Code. Additionally, an approved development plan and any subsequent amendments thereto shall' require the approval of the design review board in accordance with the applicable provisions of Chapter 11 (Design Review) of the Vail Town Code prior to the commencement of site preparation. The following criteria shall be used as the principal means for evaluating a proposed development plan. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that the proposed development plan complies with all applicable design criteria: A. Building design with respect to architecture, character, scale, massing and orientation is compatible with the site, adjacent properties and the surrounding neighborhood. The applicant has proposed revisions to the design of the pavilion with respect to architecture, character, scale, massing, and orientation. The original pavilion design was more contemporary in nature with a significantly different overall look. The scale of the original pavilion was larger by approximately 15 % and had a maximum allowable building height of 38.5 feet. The revised proposal suggests a pavilion of approximately 5,350 square feet of interior space and a maximum building height not to exceed 33 feet. While both design oriented the views of the south side of the pavilion towards the creek, the new design has been rotated on a clockwise axis to improve views out of the pavilion. Both designs, however, have the pavilion located within the same building envelope area. It is because of these reasons that staff believes that the amended design proposal complies with the building design criteria. B. Buildings, improvements, uses and activities are designed and located to produce a functional development plan responsive to the site, the surrounding neighborhood and uses, and the community as a whole. The proposed amendment to the approved development plan does not request changes to the use of the buildings, improvements, uses, or activities on the site. While the applicant is proposing to substantially increase the size of the outdoor terrace area, largely in part to accommodate a 20'x 40' temporary tent, staff believes it had been the intent to use the outdoor terrace area for functions occurring within the pavilion 'Z>tatf beneves inaCinis criteria nas peen mer anu mat few, ,r any, negative impacts will result from an approval or this amended approved development plan request. C. Open space and landscaping are both functional and aesthetic, are designed to preserve and enhance the natural features of the site, maximize opportunities for access and use by the public, provide 40 adequate buffering between the proposed uses and surrounding properties, and when possible, are integrated with existing open space and recreation areas. With the minor exception of indirect changes to the development plan to accommodate the redesigned pavilion and associated improvements, the applicant is not proposing any changes that staff believes will negatively impact open space and landscaping on the site. In staff's opinion, the proposed development plan continues to preserve and enhance the natural features of the site, maximize opportunities for access and use by the public, provides substantial buffering between uses and surrounding properties and is well integrated with the existing open space in the vicinity. D. A pedestrian and vehicular circulation system designed to provide safe, efficient and aesthetically pleasing circulation to the site and throughout the development. The applicant is proposing to relocate a portion of recreation path on the site. The relocated path will continue to connect to pavilion and other park areas to the existing bike path along the stream. The new path location is proposed to go around the northerly perimeter of the "preserve area ". According to the Donovan Park Master Plan Amendment, "This area (preserve area) should be preserved in its existing condition, with only a recreation path running along the toe of the existing slope on its north edge. " and, "Development should be limited to a possible recreation path along the area's perimeter. " E. Environmental impacts resulting from the proposal have been identified in the project's environmental impact report, if not waived, and all necessary mitigating measures are implemented as a part of the proposed development plan. The requirement for an environmental impact report was waived for this project, thus making this criterion not applicable. F. Compliance with the Vail Comprehensive Plan and other applicable plans. The Planning and Environmental Commission had determined that the ' n.r�m r�1n,1An yA /I #h }hC1 1!911 r.!'11'!'inw i'+.PC1 PI�t? Li the Tovm of Hail flnpn I .nn& Plan, anH the Donovan Park-Master Plan Amendment. Staff rbelieves that given the rather minor changes to the approved development plan to accommodate the redesigned pavilion architecture, the amendment to the approved development plan continues to comply with the goals and objectives of the Vail Comprehensive Plan and other applicable plans. VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends approval of the request for final review of an amendment to the previously approved development plan for Donovan Park. Staff's recommendation for approval is based upon the review of the proposal as outlined in Section V of this memorandum and the testimony and evidence presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the request, staff recommends that the following findings be made: "That upon review of the proposed amendment to the previously approved development plan for Donovan Park, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds that the amended approved development plan, as proposed, complies with the six criteria outlined in Section V of this memorandum and that the amended approved development plan will ensure the unified development, the protection of the natural environment, the compatibility of the use with surrounding and adjacent land uses and meets the intent and purpose of the General Use Zone District. The Commission's determination of findings is based upon review of the criteria and the testimony and evidence presented on this application. " Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the request for an amendment to the previously approved development plan for Donovan Park staff would recommend the following condition(s) of approval: 1. That the applicant submits a complete design review board application to the Town of Vail Community Department for review and approval by the Town of Vail Design Review Board, prior to making application for a building permit for the community park pavilion. • • • C4-4 0 v1l _ 6 9 C 0 CJ p 1 I 3�, p 1 4 P t3� F q8�dd 4y My i9A P� P � � � ��•FCI} i ���i F` !fie¢ f t3 �8 }qF Eiji � r #� y s d 3 LU ! +— LJ !l EE t; 1 !i 3E4g� ifig �} ; �ile�! W a i uj i�aP •�.g� 11 'Jill CL tgg `i �x$ is ! fit t ai a.; it V i # Jj a3 z W 0. J 4S i = t I to . 0 E. ' p 5 t. I r E � 8 o met a Q ra g iay` g e'��Ft�� f6 rs't7p a !3i l 4li6el lfif ifit 1.1 1i1 tilEiiii3[ :i €a #8 t83ii9 ar[i�tCiiittYi i% rGtltll�Fh! .9�9ii7iFEl :�St��S! YY�F *!$4F�F!!E t�3 .Sii} .iQl91Z - rF -7 � id� (Y ii � 1 �i7iii9ilf3i! ,1111$31!91 lHaili 1$eii��3ii��� ti���: ! is! }r����� {��! � ➢�i€ 3$ �� i�Pi� 8�3Ituied9 .t lr l9 ti]ti9i�l�l: {�� S3fa3a3$Bs3i�td[c9g. •d63 �d .:;i�F9'�.l:i }L PYalI�[((C� .211,4511: tl11n $191}11; Ails 45 :I HO 141, MH i i .y �ii t qpqwolmL NA jilijim m� TOA 4v g"I hi V7 4 m - — — -------- .......................... Of � iii f , lb V-4 J4 7:T, Zp 4 I 140 i7' Orr it lop Rol y� r .``•� •I fir. � } r _ "� ' a."� .., \ ry � � hull IN �.""" �" 'r'.�:f< s/! rrl�t*"7" �'y'',r7;t•� 1 t 1A y}t ' ✓' ice: ff- ,^,�L]�� 1y��,7yr !.- � : + �} � �� •`, 'j '3x •`fiv � � `l. s C ti-b 1� �j����� t ""'•.�„r ; f ��T— A� � i i'-y I f • 117( ...,. I '•:� � ��''! �+*. { pprM , / r 4N 0 f f fit i t;t INo rr e- : y �A. Si 3$ f • 1 � °gam.` c "t \ � �� � �•t� "�.'��` � g'"� � � i�i�F� � .� � '� U � Nt OP • �m �r 0 i i [1 �i • 4 i W] • .r-.qWAAL 4(�� • • • lit 1 � p - �r 1 �1 a ■ 1 i i V. V- - .$ y 4 '{j ■ I 0 y ro> U • U*AOV T"I 3 Q nw AMU ow o wm 0-0 an jw min A W-W mm zzI �j i I 1, 0 VAiAL j k 0 is i • • Lot *I 1 0 s� C, El: �muoim�� aoa� �u 0 4 VAg, Inc. A1cLituy & PLwux a 4 ;:+ tilt R"i 00. Fe M4 wa m 11�37N (970) 949,7034 fax: (970) 949.8134 A—co JIM Ixb RS VERTICAL CEDAR SIDING W/ 3 /8" BEADED EDGES DOUBLE 2x12 RS CEDAR BASE TRIM BELOW 4x12 RS GEDAR GORNER TRIM MITERED CORNER W/ BACKER ROD d SEALANT PRO7P.LT NAME PROJWT NO: = -00 Pavilion at Donovan Park Town of VO DRAWING 1TT1a Plan at Typical Outside Wall Comer $GULP; I -L'2' = 1'-0" Q 7001 w A MUM DATE 07115M PHA.sa DD SHEM : D2.01 RE bsw "D" 0 • # ..'. Ir L -------------------------- P I -- ._._.._---------- -- -- --- -- I i I l ! I I F� I 2 CLl/`t`D j I RECYCLE I TRASH 1 P DUMPSTER i I BINS I Ln I - I I I � - - - - -� TYP 1 rYP I I I P I - ---- .— `.--------- - - - - -- —� I I C3, , PROTECT NAME: PRO= NO: 2=.00 Pavilion at Donavan Park Town of Vail DRAWING T=, Plan and Elevation at Trash Enclosure SCALE; 1!l " =1' -0' 0 7001 v A 9 Inc a,oHLectb d plannxm LSSUEDA'i'E; OdnWI 2x6 R5 CEDAR FASCIA 2xI0 RAFTERS -(oxIO RS FIR BEAM Sx8 RS FIR POST W1 I" TOP CHAMFER Ix6 R5 CEDAR PAVILION SIDING HINGES 2x60 R5 CEDAR TRIM STEEL MTri COLLAR GATE WHEELS PHASE: DD 3H=.* (� D3.01 RE: Z16ue'D` •. VAg, Inc. .�, . . a AzcWtwts A Pt..,..... amo.I x lT A (974) 949.7034 fax; (970) 949.9134 ,:r ..,„rbh� wm ms.►.n4 K-13 e m A—CO elm PROTECT NAME: PRO= NO: 2=.00 Pavilion at Donavan Park Town of Vail DRAWING T=, Plan and Elevation at Trash Enclosure SCALE; 1!l " =1' -0' 0 7001 v A 9 Inc a,oHLectb d plannxm LSSUEDA'i'E; OdnWI 2x6 R5 CEDAR FASCIA 2xI0 RAFTERS -(oxIO RS FIR BEAM Sx8 RS FIR POST W1 I" TOP CHAMFER Ix6 R5 CEDAR PAVILION SIDING HINGES 2x60 R5 CEDAR TRIM STEEL MTri COLLAR GATE WHEELS PHASE: DD 3H=.* (� D3.01 RE: Z16ue'D` ------------ I i I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I COPPER ROOF OVER VYGOR "ICE AND WATER5HIELD" METAL FLASHING W/ DRIP EDGE !x RS Tlll PRQIECC NAME: PROM= NQ 752$.00 PHAS& Pavilion at Donovan Park DD Town of Vail spa: DRAWWG T=- D3.02 Section at Trash Enclosure SCAM I!l' r V -0' @ 7001 v A 9 lac a,ChlteCt• < pla-6 ISSUE DATP' 04nWI RE.. Tawe'D' r1 • F-1 LJ VAg, Inc. ,ho w s, Architmu & Pfanaleis (970) 949.7034 fax: (970) 949.8 IM Uw S.X1 A m RIM COPPER ROOF OVER VYGOR "ICE AND WATER5HIELD" METAL FLASHING W/ DRIP EDGE !x RS Tlll PRQIECC NAME: PROM= NQ 752$.00 PHAS& Pavilion at Donovan Park DD Town of Vail spa: DRAWWG T=- D3.02 Section at Trash Enclosure SCAM I!l' r V -0' @ 7001 v A 9 lac a,ChlteCt• < pla-6 ISSUE DATP' 04nWI RE.. Tawe'D' r1 • F-1 LJ r1 L. Q ouo © Du o a� Oa0 oc�b c oc� o- o v I-I "`III l I I., 11111 I I I I I Ipl 11 =! I I — I —I ! i= I I MI 1 I-1 I Ed 11 = +a 1711 I -1 I I =1 11 1T- ' =1 11=1 11---1 I ICI I —! � I =111 =III I �'� II 1 1111111 !� ,III; V Ag, Inc. AxcWtecta & PhmD= i omo MU CO ,t0mum (970) 949.7034 fax: (970) 949.8 134 Ix6 RS VERTICAL CEDAIR 51DIGN W/ 3/8" BEADED EDGES 3x3 RS CEDAR TRIM METAL FLASHING W/ DRIP EDGE 4x CORNER TRIM BEYOND RUN METAL FLASHING 6" UP WALL, TYP T/O STONE GAP METAL FLASHING r Wl DRIP EDGE r r r rr ° RU5TICATED ASHLAR PATTERN STONE r r ' F � r r r - r r' T/O GONG EL +100'-0" i r OVERLAP INFILTRATION r r BARRIER ONTO r r r WATERPROOF MEMBRANE GRADE, REF: CIVIL 1=I I !.— 11 �- =1 I I =11� 1 I I I I i =f 11 =111 =1 I �- I -1 11=1 I =1 1Mil I - 111® -111 =1 6TEEL SUPPORT ANGLE, I REF: STRUT 11l1l111��IIIII; „IIRI1= PROTECT NAME: PROTECT NO: 22x3.00 Pavilion at Donovan Park Town of Vail DRAWING TITLE Typical Wall Section at Grade SCALE- 1-1/2'= F-0" �7i Ioei v A g Inc amnitec:. t p'n.rere ISSUE DATE. 07115M2 PHASEL DD SHEET: D4.a1 RE. 13sm 'D' Ix WOOD TRIM W/ 3 /5" NOTCH AND QUARTER ROUND 5✓8" GWB WRAP VAPOR BARRIER AROUND ROUGH OPENING, TYP WOOD TRIM BEYOND gp -.- ., V � A RL�h R V P VAg, Inc, A]Cwtw" & 1L161Y1f (970) 949.7034 fax: (970) 949.8134 A-m �IIDO WINDOW A5 SCHEDULED WOOD COLUMN BEYOND 8x18 RS CEDAR TRIM EXTEND INFILTRATION BARRIER AROUND ROUGH OPENING, TYP LAG BOLT AND PLUG W/ 2" DIA RS CEDAR, TYPICAL. STEEL FRAME, REF: STRUCT BACKER ROD d SEALANT,TYP INSULATE SHIM SPACE,TYP . . PROnCC NAMIEL PROIECf NO: 2228.00 Pavilion at Donovan Park Town of Vail DRAWING 7Tr F- Window Head, Jamb, and Sill at Window Wall SCALE: 1-1/2'= 1'-0' Q 7221 v A g 1i e,cnitecu A plj. § ISSUE DATE 97115/02 PHASE- DD Slum; D6.01 RE Imm "D' �1 �J 0 • VAg, Inc. A=bltrcu 4 Planners ? wom.. b. Y.9 m rlearrN (970)'949.7034 fax: (970) 949.8134 905.6—t� A..., m 11420 FIBERGLASS LOOSE - FILL INSULATION 2" STANDING SEAM COPPER ROOF RAFTER, REF: STRUCT ROOF SHEATHING, REF: STRUCT vYCOR "iCE s WATERSHIELD" WATERPROOF MEMBRANE RUN FLASHING 6" UP ROOF, TYP METAL FLASHING W/ DRIP EDGE 2x WD BLOCKING 2x8 R5 CEDAR FASCIA 2xI2 RS CEDAR FASCIA Ix6 RS FIR T4G v- GROOVE SOFFIT 12x14 RS FIR RAFTER W/ 6" CHAMFERED EDGE AT RAKE ONLY PROIECP NAME- PRCLIECT NQ 2228.00 Pavilion at Donovan Park Town of Vail DRAWING TrrLE: Typical Eave Detail SCALE 1 -1/2' =1' -0' tD 2001 v A 9 1n AICHLOCL& t planers ISSUE DATE: MOM PHASE: DD SHEET: D7.01 RE: Issue 'D' _AM VYCOR RSHIELD" MEMBRANE dG UJ! FASCIA LOCKING r -A rtiti._ BEAM . MFER =FIT .ET PLUG wi �R, TYP COLUMN PHASE DD srt�r: D7.04 R8: •I • VAg, Inc. Amhi,uar gyp, a NAML PR0)E NO: ms.w Pavilion at Donovan park Town of Vaal VAca ueanm (970) 949.7034 DRAWING TrnJ? fox; 0M) 949.9134 ��• Typical Rake and Bracket Detail �.�crs um $CAL.[ =' 112"= 1' 4' ®7®@I Y A 9 inc ar�},itxS. a pia-we ISSlIH BATE: 04i1&A71 FASCIA LOCKING r -A rtiti._ BEAM . MFER =FIT .ET PLUG wi �R, TYP COLUMN PHASE DD srt�r: D7.04 R8: •I • • "A" FIXTURE Louis Poulsen "Bysted" Series Pole Light 0 per Existing and Previously Approved ALP t T(" j T 3 { 4 a � � f 0 a% �W i -. tise4 (;t t ft 'fi • Colors: Natural Untreated Corten Steel Installation: On a concrete foundation with anchor bolts. Care must be taken to install the Bysted in concrete installations within a drainage pit or in gross. Electrical: Provided standard with "F" Can Style Ballasts for 120/277 V for Metal Halide or High Pressure Sodium. Refer to technical data sheets for hlrther details, Lamps: Max: 1/ 100 W /Inc. Max: 1/100 W /MH /HPS For lump specifications see section 12.01 Lompholder: Medium Base Pulse Rated Labels: cUL, Wet Locations. Dio• Overall Moximum Cataiog meter Height Wattoge Number 45" 1110OW/A21 SY5.002 45' 1 /100W /Mil BY5 -918 45' 1 /IOOW /HP5 BYS-905 8, U5 IVordhorn� Germany Bysted. Designer: Peter Bysted. A cylindrical shaped bollard with flared louver reflector shades fabricated from untreated heavy gauge "Corten Steel " which contains copper and cast iron with graphite. The inner surface of the louver Ill shades are painted white for reflectivity. After weathering a thin layer of uniform rust, red oxidation self- protects the underlying steel. =,f This layer of "rust ", in contrast to normal steel, 45" provides a protective function considerably reducing the rate of corrosion, thus eliminating the need for maintaining the surface perma- 12.0" nently. The process of oxidation causes the surface to bleed. Due to its rugged construction it is perfect in areas with highly corrosive atmospheres and in locations with high vandalism. Page 1 of 1 Hi Izz file://CADocuments and Settings\ john. JLV1ELE \DesktoplWC- 001S.JPG 0 5/28/2002 • • C� 9 - D�,j 1111 Shaper Lighting tJ PO�T6 682 Wedge Down fight ■ Classic design that is timeless. ■ Solid bronze construction that endures. ■ Companion uplight version available. r ' -'�' .: .. .., i'ks� P11 ;r'wF <.. _ "'_ -'.. -- i2- 5GCGti. �II"�Y` - s DOWNLIGHT M= 'i LAMPS / BALLASTS Incandescent: 1 - 75W max (A -19). Fluorescent: 1 or 2 compocl 26W [F26DTT), For H.1.D- refer to Spec. No. 682-11 in this section. Specify voltage. Incandescent available 120V only. Standard Ballasts ore Electronic (SSB). 4 -pin lamps required. See "Ballasts" and "Lamps" in Section G. Lamps not included. See "User Guide" for information on starting temperatures of fluorescent fixtures. Sl /a (22 -) iv MATERIALS / FIXTURE LOCATION U.L. listed For wet or damp exterior locations- Aluminum base metal is used for pointed Finishes. Solid Bronze is used for all other Finishes. FINISHES Diffuser: White Acrylic. Hood: NBZ - Natural Finish Solid Bronze (weathers to a dark bronze paling.) 5GB - Semi -Gloss Block .,, SGW - • - - _. _} _ -_ ,.. .. _ . _ . _ Semi_ Gloss White n CC- - Custom Color, Semi -Gloss VG - Verdi -Gris SZ - Saiin Zinc MOUNTING Standard - 4'J-Box or stucco ring. For rear conduit mounting, specify suffix C. 1" 7th» 11/2' With Photocell Option OPTIONS .--a. a, •. it.± ra,_ rt}•, e-. g' sf.-? y.: f•_. tz,. yti .:.�x'i:.L�?*?R."3'.'S'^ki' =J`5 V For uptight version for wet location, sec Spec. No. 687 -WP in Section D. For bollard versions, see 982AL /W and 982 -U in Section E, For walking hazard locations, Add suffix BN for Blunt Nose. Photocell option Irequires 1'/s' deep bock) specify suffix PH. >A For surface -- mounted conduit power feeds, coil Rep or factory.. • For additional solid metal finishes, including stainless steel, call Rep or factory. . • For photometric data, see Section H. U FOUNDATION FOR DESIGN INTEGRITY - -SPEC- GUIDE C @/IBEW LABELLED OPTIONS PH - Photocell FINISH BN - Blunt Nose C - Rear Conduit Mounting SPEC NO, I INo Suffix -i -Box Flush Mounted) 682- CF2 /26- 120- N8Z -BN -C LAiNPING TVOLTAGE _ INC 120SSB/277SSB - Electronic Bollosis CF 1/26 IOnIy ballasts available) CF 2/26 UShaper Lighting 1141 Marina Way South, Richmond, CA 94504 -3742 (530) 234 -2370 Fax (514) 234 -2371 Copyright 0 1998 �1 • _- Id At —„9 cg „ Z -I.4 J12 b L 19M v13. ' uNV 11 „91 :Lfol Dafola 1D 6t,/0111 H • F-- . - - :7 • Delta Star7"t gives the lighting designer two choices of deep cutoff options. When the design requires the highest degree of brightness control of the MR1 6 lamp, Delta Star is the answer. Its precision, machined aluminum construction and deep cutoff design combine to make Delta Stara very economical low- brightness, low - voltage lighting instrument. _ r ynh h'n!7 np.4rnn ?7V . At'F ? 5 /ieri l.Pfannprr CATALOG NUMBER LOGIC Example: DS-8-13 Series Black i BLP BLW White loss .amp Type Ai mire m i API — 0 - By others 16 - EYS (42W), 25, N. Flood 1 - ESX(20W), 12' Spot 17 - EYP(42W), 40' Flood 2 - BAB(20W), 40° Flood 6 - EXT(50W), 13' Spot 3 - FRB(35W), 12' Spot 7 - EXZ(50W), 26° N. Flood 4 - FRA(35W), 23° N- Flood 8 - EXN(50W), 40' Flood 5 - FMW(35W), 40° Flood 9 - FNV(50W), 60° W. Flood 15 - EYR(42W), 12° Spot Finish Powder Coat Color I Satin i Wrinkle Bronze I BZP I BzW Black i BLP BLW White loss wHP W W Ai mire m i API — Verde I VER 'YF. 9 -Clear (Standard), 10-Spread, 13-Rectilinear 11 - Honeycomb Baffle oF „.r.� A -45', B -90° B -K LIGHTING Delta"S =_a.= Features • Tamper proof design. Completely sealed optical compartment. Enclosed wireway mounting knuckle. • Clear, tempered glass lens, factory sealed. • Machined aluminum construction with stainless steel hardware. • .'0' & sPx Listed with MR 16 lamps to 50 watts. • For use with remote transformers, see pages 74, 76 and 79. 9 ��1 br brn f -1 GarCP, E3� N b � Acfi R`5 f 6R± ReftCMED A-NQ A514 LA R PAftL9 N C • 0 PDA)OVAN PAK46u�,Mlif& �RP.2 '5vbr-niq4- af—*tr--F,lDK WALVWAY-5" -t'�P-RA(-E "�'thMPEC) �DNOkL�E FA-f fMN • ENtply tON(lR-L=I-tt-: I,-EX+(JKL "fRy Mb -tEiZ RAcF- ifazp, i 41 F r r • 9 • JL f JL yti S 1 R . 1 ^�'�. t k ,�^ r 'r*_ � � � 7� �'�' y,, r `•'may � •"-+!` • YR,_J} 1 .Lj NX LZ IP Ut .. a .- •. 2 ."!' � . �,� ,,. 1'. +� � �� 7.;' • �r ��a 44 ti•�r. y� - _. + ... ��r. � - �' +�: ''�,, � -. � i'•`' ;'�,�►� ���� :°,rte" �s�iS, r r.mot . �� .` `C a i Y � ''�fy`' i/ id �'�"' .�-P• . � �,•.� a� -t'•_ r.y��1�I�y�i #� #,,r'�� -":-_'mraa.a.:.rr. ���� ..�r� `.7 ���� ,ik �.�� f �A -��• �.S' A Y J �r�l. +sue s1i • �,�• � {. J •h ♦ K �N f1 Jeo -174 +, 4 r - •1 - r r • -f 1 r ; _ r � •��. e, �;.r�L�„�� � 6'� +.t .� � r '', _ . , ri ri .� 1 #~- +,i�'�'• ¢ a - "��..,�.- y .. t.. .,�'�.i _ 'c- ��`T 'E; ' R ♦ {� ' (,t ate: =r���, S* °- , !` �� .. ♦ ,!i ' { mil :� �' r °� - - it IrAr ✓ � - f '_'*It �� ry w ` � a•�l r'''S'�4 -f • tiRl,, ' 9 F�. 4 r� +� ,. ti • v �� �� i� St jr. iA ^17 1 i IS I '�lf 7, 1 7 -V - I A 4N� - NL &4 • • 0 t i T f KKK 0 DONOVAN PARK Master Plan Amendment J • Prepared For: Town of Vail Community Development Department Vail Recreation District Prepared By: Design Workshop, Inc. Odell Architects, P.C. Sasaki Associates, Inc. October 3, 2000 DONOVAN PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT I. Introduction 0 This document is an amendment to the August 6, 1985, Donovan Park Master Plan Development Final Report. This document updates any portions of the 1985 document that deal with the lower bench of Donovan Park. A. Purpose of the Master Plan Amendment The purpose of this master plan amendment is to provide an updated reflection of community needs, concerns, and priorities as they relate to the lower bench of Donovan Park. While seeking to preserve the overall site values and design guidelines of the 1985 Tlnn arax _P rk T clfr .ar.d rlarif P ar,tiri.nntf-d1 ind _._. _. come— aunity umses_afthe:property4_ B. Master Plan Amendment Process In December 1999, the Vail Town Council initiated a study of potential community facilities for the Town of Vail. This study included multiple sites, among them the 12- acre lower bench of Donovan Park. The Donovan Park master planning process, a joint venture between the Town of Vail and the Vail Recreation District, has been based on the input of the following: 1. Public Input Process. During the late winter and early spring of 2000, a series of public input meetings was held to ascertain the public's opinion on overall site values, critical issues, perceived opportunities and constraints, and the potential uses and facilities to be developed on Donovan Park. 2. Vail Tomorrow Process. The citizen initiated Vail Tomorrow visioning process, which predated this most recent Donovan Park master planning process, resulted in consensus on a number of site development objectives and program priorities for the lower bench site. 3. Vail Town Council. Since the beginning of the master plan process, the Vail Town Council has articulated what it sees as the most important community facilities that could potentially be located on the lower bench site. In addition, the Council has provided direction on overall development issues such as site preservation, site access and infrastructure, and the timing and financing of recreational development. 4. Vail Recreation District. As a partner in the Donovan Park master plan process, the Vail Recreation District has provided programming input documenting recreational needs and priorities in the district. Page 2 of 17 DONOVAN PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT 5. Donovan Park Master Plan Team. The master plan team consists of representatives from the Town of Vail Community Development and Public Works departments, the Vail Recreation District, and the planning /design consultant team of Odell Architects (Evergreen, CO), Sasaki Associates (San Francisco, CA), and Design Workshop (Vail, CO). This team was responsible for facilitating the public input process and conducting the subsequent site analysis and site planning studies that have resulted in the recommendations of this document. C. Community Purpose of Donovan Park The analysis and recommendations made in this master plan amendment are based on the fundamental purpose of creating a community amenity on the lower bench of Donovan Park that serves the recreational, educational, and cultural needs of the residents and i11C wtiunutiiiy atijeatiiicb;p[uvideu oil' Ulis siie �huuiu - compatible with a "park like setting's and consistent with Donovan Parlc's'inherent physical and visual characteristics. Based upon this purpose, the general program of facilities to be located on Donovan Park could include the following: 1. Neighborhood park, including a playground, open turf areas, and support facilities (parking, restrooms, etc.). i2. Recreation field. • I Multi- purpose center, able to support existing and future community recreation programs. 4. Community activity center, able to provide for existing children's programs and future community uses. 5. Community pavilion, providing space for community meetings, programs, and cultural events. Page 3 of 17 DONOVAN PARK MASTED PLAN AmENDmENT II. Site Values and Program Goals A. Site Values and Suitability Assessment During the public input process and subsequent site analysis by the master plan team, the following site values were established. These site values represent inherent site characteristics (see figure A) that should be considered prior to any development: 1. The Gore Creek Riparian Corridor. The Gore Creek corridor is an essential asset to Donovan Park and the surrounding neighborhood. occur within this corridor. 2. The "Preserve" Area. This area is located on the eastern end of the site between the Gore Creek corridor on the south and a steep hillside on the north. It is characterized by rock outcroppings, large spruce and pine trees, and native grasses. No development should occur in this area. Gore Creek Riparian Corridor The Preserve Area Page 4 of 17 0 • DoN ®VAN PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT 3. The "Kettle ". This natural depression contains a stand of specimen spruce trees and a larger grouping of aspen trees. The area immediately surrounding the spruce trees should not be disturbed, preserving as much of the "kettle" area as possible. 4. Tower Terrace. This area is relatively flat and consists of historically disturbed and compacted soils. It is the best location for higher intensity recreational fields, which require larger, level surfaces. 5. Middle Terrace and Slopes. This area is composed of native grasses, some aspen and spruce trees, and steeper hillsides. Any future development in this area will need to respond to the natural topography of the site, and any regrading must minimize steep cut banks through the use of stepped retaining walls and slopes no steeper than 3:1. Page 5 of 17 The Kettle Lower and Middle Terraces DONOVAN PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT 6. Upper Terrace. This upper portion of the site forms the visual foreground for vehicles approaching from the east on the South Frontage Road. Composed primarily of native grasses, this visual foreground should be preserved in its natural state to the greatest extent possible. 7. South Frontage Road. The South Frontage Road is an east -west arterial that forms 1 ' the northern boundary of the RA site. It is critical that any - access points into the site;' from the frontage road take into account the road = M 4 gradients approaching six ,.. �it:l V�:iil lil illla al.�,aliiria�� Z7lLt _. .. road's design speed (43 iriph), and the present and projected volume of traffic. Of y particular concern is the westbound left from the frontage road to Matterhorn Circle. As with an access South Frontage ,Road point into Donovan park, this intersection should provide for left-hand turn lanes so that the westbound traffic flow is not impeded by vehicles slowing down or stopping to make a left hand turn. B. Conceptual Land Use Framework One of the initial tasks undertaken by the master plan team was to analyze the site for basic land use (program) suitability, in response to the site values described above and the following basic anticipated programmatic land uses: • Site access • Active recreation fields and open park space • Building program • Parking • Preserved site areas This effort resulted in the following recommended land use framework (see figure B), on which potential site development scenarios were based. 1. Gore Creek Riparian Corridor. Development limited to needed repairs or realignment of the existing recreation path. Page 6 of 17 0 • DONOVAN PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT 40 2. Recreation Fields. Given its level topography, size, and general proportions, this area is recommended for potential higher intensity recreational uses and field sports. 3. Building Program. An area in the central portion of the site is recommended for any buildings that may be constructed on the property, such as a community building, gymnasium, youth facilities, and recreational support facilities (restrooms, lockers, offices). This area is the optimal place for buildings not only because of its central location, but also its proximity to the recreational site components and the potential to step buildings into the hillside, reducing their visual height and presence. 4. Parking. The best area for parking is located on the northeast (uphill) side of the architectural facility zone (discussed above), giving direct vehicular access to potential facilities while also providing a buffer between buildings and the South Frontage Road. The linear nature of this parking area allows for maximum 1fP, R W1[i, nr nint?1P(f1Vl .e � h - - .parking. Locating the. parking zone. on this steeper nortinn.oftb,:--jte will allow construction of two stacked parking levels that are not visible to vehicles approaching from the east on the South Frontage Road. 5. Preserve Area. Development should be limited to a possible recreation path along this area's perimeter. 19 6. Site Access Point. This central point is the only place that provides the necessary length for both eastbound and westbound acceleration, deceleration and turn lanes. It is also where the elevation on the frontage road most closely matches the elevation of the middle terrace. 7. Matterhorn Circle Intersection. It is not anticipated that any of the proposed developments on the lower bench of Donovan Park will impact the traffic volume entering or exiting Matterhorn Circle. However, this intersection is dangerous, particularly the westbound left -hand turn from the South Frontage Road in icy road conditions. With the potential construction of the Donovan Park entrance, it is highly recommended that the Matterhorn Circle intersection be improved. 8. The Kettle. Development in this area must preserve and protect the stand of specimen spruce trees. 9. Views Into Site. The west end of the site is the most visible portion of the property from the South Frontage Road. The site plan should preserve the quality of this area as the visual foreground to the rest of the park. 10. Parking Connection to Buildings. There should be a strong point of connection linking the larger parking area to the buildings. Likely functioning as the primary 40 arrival and drop -off point for vehicular traffic, this area will act as the gateway into Page 7 of 17 DONOVAN PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT the architectural facilities. In addition, the parking lot should provide parking for linkage to the outdoor recreational components of the park area. 11. Connection Between Buildings and Recreation Fields. An important functional relationship exists between the buildings and the adjacent outdoor recreation areas. This relationship requires a strong pedestrian linkage between these two site components. 12. Connection Between Buildings and the Gore Creek Riparian Corridor. Visual connection to the Gore Creek riparian corridor is a significant design goal of the buildings, particularly those that function as community meeting space. Page 8 of 17 • 0 • DONOVAN PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT is III. Donovan Park Master Plan 0 The site master plan for the lower bench of Donovan Park was developed by the master plan team during the spring and summer of 2000. This plan represents the general program of uses based on the input and direction from all the stakeholders described earlier in this document. A. Conceptual Plan All the points of the following narrative reference the Donovan Community Park Conceptual Master Plan, shown in figure C. 1. Gore Creek Riparian Corridor. The only proposed impact in this area of the site is a minor realignment of the existing recreation path on the western end of the property. This realignment will allow for a stepped retainage system along the steep and semi- eroded fill slope on the north side of the existing recreation path. No trees should be impacteaby this adjustment. 2. Preserve Area. This area should be preserved in its existing condition, with only a recreation path running along the toe of the existing slope on its north edge. 3. The Kettle. The existing Aspen stand in this area will likely be reduced in size by the park development, but the existing stand of mature spruce trees should not be disturbed. 4. Open Turf Area. This area on the western end of the site is to function as a passive recreation area of open turf, walking paths, picnic equipment, and landscaped areas. 5. Playground. This area is reserved for a tot -lot playground similar in size and activity to other playgrounds in existing Town of Vail community parks. To provide safety and convenience for parents and children visiting the park, the playground is located adjacent to the multi- purpose center and community activity center (which will include public restrooms), the recreation field, the outdoor basketball court area, and the parking lot. 6. Outdoor Basketball Court Area. This area contains a regulation size high school basketball court, adjacent plaza and turf area. It is located immediately west of the building that will house community youth programs. This location provides an adjacent outdoor recreation area for the children and is close to the indoor public restrooms and the playground. 7. Recreation Field. With a regulation surface of 150' by 300', this field will support regulation play for youth league soccer, a need strongly articulated by the Vail Recreation District. The field, located on the most level portion of the site, also contains sideline setbacks consistent with accepted national youth soccer standards. Page 9 of 17 DONOVAN PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT Multi - Purpose Center. The multi- purpose center will have a 25' clear ceiling height and provide a state-of-the-art facility for youth gymnastics, along with lockers and office spaces. A common lobby space connects both the multi- purpose center and community activity center. This facility will be approximately 15,000 gross square feet. 9. Community Activity Center. The community activity center will be used by children ages 2 -15 years for a large variety of programs on a year round basis for youth activities. The heaviest use will occur during summer when Youth Services operates Camp Vail, Pre -Kamp Vail and Planet Fun. It will also provide several multi- purpose / multi - generational activity rooms that could be used by the community in the evening with planned courses such as aerobics, marital arts, dance class, photography courses and art. This facility will be approximately 13,000 gross square feet. 1 rev.- CcLmr_�u.nity.Pavilion. The commwiity-pavi lion Js a one -story . building with a small entrance tower. It will be a world -class beacon for the community both architecturally and functionally. The pavilion will provide a public gathering space for multi - purpose community oriented activities. The large multi- purpose space can be transformed into a theatre space with retractable seating for up to 200 people. When weather permits the building can open to the Gore Creek riparian corridor and use the hard- surface terraces as additional outdoor program area. This facility will be approximately 7,800 gross square feet. 11. Parking. The proposed parking configuration takes advantage of the topography of the site to allow for a two -level parking structure on the east end of the site, where it can be visually screened by the north hillside. When a final development plan for Donovan Park is submitted, the total number of parking spaces should be based on an analysis of parking at comparable facilities, the potential program of activities that could occur at the park, and the following principles: a. Efficiency. All parking on the site should be laid out in a manner which provides maximum flexibility and convenience of use for park visitors, while remaining spatially efficient in layout. b. Operational management. Parking lot capacity should reflect normal park usage, and provide for the largest event anticipated at the community pavilion. It is anticipated that the community pavilion will be the largest single parking generator. It will be the responsibility of the park management to schedule events so as to avoid severe parking problems. c. Transit. It is not anticipated that a large number of park users will arrive via the Town of Vail transit system, and an internal bus -stop at Donovan Park is not recommended (see section III.B.8). However, transit ridership should be encouraged as a means of accessing the park, reducing the need for parking. d. Pedestrian and Bicycle Access. Strong connections must be provided between the park elements and the existing recreation path, enabling the local community to access the park easily and safely via this recreation path. Page 10 of 1 DONOVAN PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT The conceptual parking layout shown in figure C provides the following parking areas: • Uncovered on -grade parking • On- structure parking • Below- structure parking • Short term parking • Curbside drop -off parking 12. Garden Wall. An important visual element of the conceptual master plan is the wall that forms the northern edge of the parking lot and structure. This wall is slightly higher than the top of existing grade, providing a consistent visual line and screen between the parking lot and the South Frontage Road. All the points wf thy. following narrative referer, ee the conceptual site �i-mstca circulle&n -1 plan, shown in figure D. 1. Site Access Point. The designated site access point allows for the construction of full eastbound and westbound acceleration, deceleration, and turn lanes. The intersection design should provide for the unobstructed passage of through- traffic. is 2. Internal Vehicular Circulation. Internal vehicular circulation will be restricted to the parking areas and facilities arrival point. The vehicular circulation layout should emphasize pedestrian safety, logic of circulation, and aesthetic quality. • 3. Emergency Vehicle Access. The vehicular circulation plan must permit emergency vehicles to access all buildings and the recreation fields. 4. Service and Delivery Access. Service vehicle access (which includes trash removal) is provided on the east end of the community pavilion and on the west end of the recreation building. Dual service points are recommended due to the physical separation of these buildings and the possibility that the recreation building and youth center may not be constructed in the initial project phase. 5. Existing Recreation Path. It is likely that the western portion of this trail will be slightly realigned to allow space for retaining walls on the north side of the path. Other than this potential adjustment, no changes to the path are recommended. 6. Internal Pedestrian Circulation. Walkways are to connect all elements of the park, Important elements of the pedestrian circulation system are connections to the existing recreation path at both east and west ends of the park to form a continuous loop trail. Page 11 of f 17 DONOVAN PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT 7. Pedestrian Bridge. A pedestrian bridge over Gore Creek is provided to connect the park and existing recreation path to Matterhorn Circle. The purpose of this pedestrian bridge is: a. To provide a safe pedestrian and bicycle crossing for the residents of the adjacent neighborhoods to the existing recreation path on the south side of Gore Creek. The current crossing is on the Matterhorn Circle bridge, which is narrow and considered unsafe by neighborhood residents. b. To provide a direct and safe connection between Donovan Park and the Town of Vail transit stop on Gore Creek Drive. c. To provide a utility crossing structure connecting the park to Matterhorn Circle. S. Town of Vail Transit Access. The issue of whether or not to locate a transit stop within Donovan Park was closely studied during the master planning process. The tinal decision was not to iocaie a new transit stop wittim the paric, out ratner to provide a quality connection to the existing transit stop on (Tore L'reek drive. This decision was based primarily on the following: a. A transit bus turnaround is at least 120' in diameter, including the adjacent walkways and shelter requirements. This would have a significant negative impact on the quality of adjacent spaces in the park, and would consume too much space. 0 b. Adding a transit stop would bring a significant number of buses into the park, but with a low ridership into Donovan Park. c. The gradient of the South Frontage Road at the site access point is in excess of five percent, making it extremely difficult for the large transit buses to make a safe and undelayed right -hand turn into the eastbound traffic lane of the South Frontage Road. The only way to make a bus lane viable would be to create a one - way loop that enters the park at the main access point and exits the park at its west end, south of the Matterhorn Circle/ South Frontage Road intersection. This would significantly increase the amount of paving in the park, reduce the amount of open park space on the west end of the property, and cause traffic congestion at the intersection. d. A safe, well signed access route from the Gore Creek Drive transit stop into the park will adequately meet the transit access needs of Donovan Park. C. Phasing Near the conclusion of the planning process, the master plan team was directed to demonstrate how the proposed development plan could be phased over time. • Page 12 of 17 • DON ©VAN PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT If at all possible, construction phasing should avoid a scenario where the initially constructed components are damaged or shut down during latter construction phases. However, it is likely that at least some portion of the recreation field, if constructed in the initial project phase, will be required for construction staging during subsequent construction phases. As it is likely that the entire park program will not be constructed at the same time, the following two phases are recommended based on direction from the Vail Town Council. Please one 1. Site Infrastructure. In order to maximize project efficiency and minimize disruptions, it is strongly recommended that all site utilities and infrastructure be completed during the initial construction phase. �,. Par —king. lfpossih1e ,kvithi -p t}7e prefect bt,-dget, all site parking should be r_nnstnsr.te-d during the initial construction phase. 3. Parr and Playground. Throughout the master planning process, it was clear that all stakeholders want the park and playground elements to be part of the initial construction phase. 4. Recreation Fields. The recreation field emerged as a high community priority and is recommended to be in the initial construction phase. Community Pavilion. The Vail Town Council has directed that the community pavilion be part of the initial construction phase. Phase Two If financing considerations require the park to built in phases, it is recommended that the multi- purpose center and community activity center be delayed to phase two. These facilities will likely be in a single structure and thus will need to be constructed at the same time. Page 13 of 17 DQNOVAN PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT Master Plan Amendment- Appendix The following paragraphs, dealing with the property history and park design guidelines, are taken from the 1985 Donovan Park Master Plan. In February of 1980, a 51 acre parcel of land in the Matterhorn area of West Vail was acquired for $3,875,000 and designated by Council resolution as John F. Donovan Park, "Whereas, John F. Donovan has served on the Town Council for fourteen years; has long been a supporter of a strong recreation program for residents and visitors; the Town Council hereby commends John F. Donovan for his leadership and dedication to insuring the future of the Town of Vail, and designates the recently acquired public park in the Matterhorn area John F. Donovan Park. " f he landscape ot' Donovian Park includes native plant communities typical of the valley, such as sagebrush, yucca, mountain, common juniper, creeping mahonia -and stands-of quaking aspen. The Gore Creek, which winds through the park from East to West, is lined with Colorado spruce and subalpine fir. Donovan Park is actually two separate parcels of open space separated by residential land uses to the southeast of the Gore Creek. The two parcels are commonly referred to as the upper bench and lower bench. The lower bench is comprised of approximately 12 acres. Gore Creek located to the south is most predominant as a landscape feature with its natural barrier of spruce and fir. The adjoining land uses to the east and west are residential in character with very little natural buffering. Matterhorn Circle and a residential area lie to the south of the site and is separated and buffered by Gore Creek. Once again, to the north and adjacent to the park site is the Frontage Road and eastbound lanes of Interstate 70. The lower bench of Donovan Park is a 12 acre parcel of land. Two terraces step down the site towards Gore Creek, of which the small upper terrace affords a grand view of the entire site and Creek bottom. Access to the lower portion is limited to the northwestern corner of the site where Matterhorn Circle and the Frontage Road connect. There is no development currently existing on Donovan Park. Plant associations and communities are similar to those found in Vail's Ford Park, however, the patterns of vegetation on the lower portion of Donovan Park are more interesting and complex, suggesting that many factors have played a role in shaping them. Recent history of this area reveals that human actions related to adjacent development have destroyed some plant communities and introduced others. This is evident when one visually inspects the site from west to east. The lower bench of Donovan park has the best opportunities for development affording easy access and protection to its developed recreational facilities. Like Ford Park, it also provides Vail residents and visitors with a beautiful backdrop of the Gore Creek, a natural amenity to be enjoyed by all. 0 Page 14 of 17 DONOVAN PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT PARK DEVELOPMENT AND LANDSCAPE CHARACTER The planning of Donovan Park should carefully consider the preservation and retention of the Gore Creek and its natural character, in contrast to the creation and maintenance of a totally manicured landscape. A careful blend of maintained active recreational areas and natural passive areas should be achieved to accommodate the diverse pleasures and interests of the mountain community. Park visitors should notice that care has been taken to conserve natural areas, plant communities, slopes and creek edges. Where new construction of trails, buildings, roads and play facilities will disturb natural areas, the creative blending of grades, and the use of trees, shrubs and ground - cover native to this area should be used to revegetate the disturbed areas. Dense planting buffers should be designed to insure privacy and protection within park developments by screening adjacent public road -ways and non - compatible land uses. Planting b—d ters should be used to protect and separate adjacent use areas within the parxs where potentiaTconflicfs arnpresent. Existiing slopes and changes in grade should-be integrated into the master plan to enhance separations between activity areas, minimize the verticality of proposed structures, define spaces, and to provide new viewsheds into the park and surrounding mountains. DESIGN CRITERIA Considerations of conservation, maintenance, and park development led to the design criteria discussed in the following paragraphs: Site Preservation. The quality of the existing site in regard to Gore Creek and existing plant communities can be reinforced through the removal of creek debris, undesirable man-made elements, scrub undergrowth, diseased and damaged plan specimens. Extending these preservation programs into projected development helps to keep future maintenance costs low by preventing undesirable growth and park user practices. Revegetation. Natural areas that are cleared or disturbed during construction, and are not subsequently developed, should be replanted to encourage plant associations that develop naturally under these specific site conditions. Activity Transition. Screen plantings soften the edge between developed park areas, natural sectors, and conflicting adjacent land uses. Such plantings unify developed and natural areas as well as providing a protective buffer where the adjacent land uses conflict with recreational activities. Definition of Activity Spaces. Spaces for different recreational activities should be defined by landforms, structures, or plantings. By defining these spaces and creating mass and contrast, visual landmarks are formed to assist visitors in movement on the site. View. Plantings and landform manipulation direct views by framing interesting and attractive features such as distant mountain ranges, ponds, or the Gore Creek corridor. Visual screens of Page 15 of 17 DONOVAN PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT plant materials serve to close off undesired views to interstate, frontage roads or neighboring development. 0 Energy Conservation. Due to the unique wind and sun patterns within the valley, open spaces, play areas, and buildings should be oriented to take advantage of warm winter exposures and buffering from wind. Vegetation can be implemented as an energy conservation measure, providing recreational spaces with a protective wind buffer and shade in the summer. Snow accumulation by wind drifts can be directed through the use of wind channels formed by planting masses active as a snowfence. Accent. In areas of special interest or activity, and in pedestrian areas, plantings provide color, texture, form and scent to highlight and emphasize the special character of these places. Vertical architectural elements such as shade structures and play apparatus should be colored to blend harmoniously with the surrounding landscape. Horizontal groundplane textures such as native chn,�h or{�+ir:�rn���rC_;l'n't�,r.F?!? txae�P?-� and cm�nth 1?r'dei ?Marc a ?crt na„ h€� �rnA;rl fn r^.s�rn*+ ?irn� „t t?�a A lronment. Major architectural structures should be designed_ and accent:d to- attract visitors without becoming a distracting visual element to the valley. Accessibility. Areas with difficult access routes should be improved through the addition of well planned systems of bike paths, bridge crossings, and pedestrian trails. Parking areas should be sensitively planned to provide needed parking without impacting natural or recreational use areas, and should be visually screened. Vehicles should be prohibited from park areas except for periodic maintenance and service visits. Separation/ Integration. Landforms and massed plantings can be used to separate conflicting recreational/ cultural activities. Noise generating and active play areas should be integrated together and placed away from passive or natural areas. Needed service facilities, such as restrooms, drinking fountains, etc., should be located in or adjacent to activities with a high use demand. SITE GUIDELINES Alternative building materials and construction techniques which would be used to achieve a park -like mountain theme should be investigated. The resulting vocabulary of designed elements should be considered a "family” of materials and details which are in harmony with the environment. During construction phases, materials should be chosen and construction methods used which adhere to the following general guidelines: Appropriateness. Materials and detailing fit into the Park's environment and are both inviting and functional. Compatibility. Construction materials should be expressive of natural and native material, not contrasting. Flexibility. Materials and tecluiiques should be able to adapt to future expansion needs and programs. 0 Page 16 of 17 D ©N ®VAN PARK MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT 40 Continuity. Common materials should have interrelated forms and colors. Maintenance. Maintenance should be reasonable but realistic in cost with ease of accomplishment, and consideration of long -term maintenance expenditures. :7 Page 17 of! 7 • li 4i Q � Q ^� b a i� o� Z mF- `� a P z CL •: -- �� gyp• ��./` r r t 1 I•s LU rW V w Ul C Q w t r a a 01 �■ 1 � I` II v m LU rW V w Ul C Q w t r a a 01 �■ 1 � 0 I I z � W LLJ J n°i ■ ■ s' � V tom% 'Cy ..s^t�a:::l V. d 103 -0 - �d I ! . L a c u m m N I i • 7,-,- - ---*---- • • z Q J a. T4 W IAO ujX� \ 4 � _ � �1 �, � t. ,� `� �'�1 /T'L��`s- `*• -ice` h ��.,'p'� ..°�4._;•i '��� 5l -�� Z W C) J All � .\ � dry, • '`+� • ��• -- '� � 1, -1 eC ` f m T © o �' e m m n 3 •m a e u .s X c os x T � C 0 0 r d W U a Y E q y c m n to m eu � �` (,�} 0 a � c ra' a N � a 0. a D. 4C a C7 17-1 0 • 0 ►W 0 d L v 3P Lu +,d c7 0 0 U) W M W F- U) .L) m LL a. a E E 0 U c� 0 0 d W C7 LL PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES Monday, July 8, 2002 PROJECT ORIENTATION I - Community Development Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME 12=00 prn MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT All Present Site Visits : 1 :00 prn 1. Vail Mountain School — 3160 N_ Frontage Rd. East 2. Middle Creek 160 N. Frontage Rd. 3. Donovan Park — 1600 S. Frontage Rd. West Driver: George ow NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6 :00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 Public Hearing - Town Council Chambers 2:00 pm A request for a final review and recommendations of the following applications related to the proposed redevelopment of the Vail Mountain School: 1) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to rezone 3010 Booth Falls Road /Lot 11, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing from Two - Family Residential to General Use; 2) A request fora recommendation to the Vail Town Council to rezone Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12`h Filing from Two - Family Residential to General Use; 3) A request for a recommendation to amend the official Town of Vail Land Use Map for Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing from Low Density Residential to Public /Semi- Public; 4) A request for an amendment to the previously approved development plan and a new conditional use permit for a private: educational institution and an active outdoor recreation area on 3010 Booth Falls Road /Lot 11, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing and 3160 N. Frontage Road East /a part of Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing; 5) A request for a conditional use permit to allow for the construction of eight Type III EHUs located on Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing; 6) A request for a conditional use permit to allow for a private educational institution and active outdoor recreation area located at 3160 N. Frontage Rd. East/a part of Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing; 7) A request for a for a conditional use permit to allow for temporary modular classroom structures located at 3160 N. Frontage Rd. East/ a part of Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 121H Filing. 8) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to modify the official Town of Vail Rockfall Hazard Map to indicate approved mitigation for 3160 N. Frontage Road /Lot 12, Biock 2, Vaii Village 121h Filing; 9) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a text amendment to Section 12 -BA -8 (Density), Vail Town Code, to amend the GRFA requirements in the Ag and Open Space Zone District TOfY "h' OF V41L '� Applicant: Vail Mountain School, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: Russ Forrest Mr. Schofield stated that this is a work session and that no vote will be taken today. He added that his wife was on the board of trustees, but that he felt that he had no conflict of interest. Mr. Forrest gave a presentation per the staff report Dominic Mauriello, representing VMS, reiterated that the school has been in a planning process for approximately a year and has been working with the neighbors. He said that since the last meeting, the plan has been reworked according to the comments given by the neighbors and commission. He said height was an issue, as well as massing and to address it, the gymnasium and the overall footprint has shrunk approximately 1000 feet. He said the gym was lowered two feet and the remaining building has been lowered on average by one foot and also the entrance has been moved from the west to the front elevation in the center. He said the kindergarten was moved from the east side to the west side and the culmination of these changes has created larger setbacks and more green space. He said a view analysis is in the works for one of the homes backing up to the school to illustrate the impact of the construction of the home and landscaping has been added to help buffer the homes. He said the ' employee housing area has been redesigned primarily in the use of the�entryidriveway and again said that the new plan provides more greenspace. He said that enclosed parking has also been added and will be one enclosed space per unit and that the aspen groove in the eastern corner of the EHU area has been preserved_ Erickson Shirley asked what the height was of the EHU units and is it higher than on the surrounding homes with the new plan. Dominic Mauriello stated that the elevation of the EHU units did not increase from the previous plan. John Schofield asked if it would be fair to say that the EHU units would have lower roofs than the existing home on that side of the street. Dominic Mauriello stated that he felt that was a fair statement. He added that is why they pushed the units so far into the hillside. He said neighbors have made several comments regarding the architecture of the EHU units and they have worked hard to create different scales and a duplex look and the elevations will be developed more fully through the DRB process. He said lighting was another issue which was raised and stated that they currently have a plan for eight poles with cut -off fixtures in the parking lot and that there would be only residential scale lighting in the EHU area. He continued to state that another major issue was parking for major events and that currently there are four events which create a need for overflow needs. He presented a plan which shows approximately 60 valet parking spaces along the frontage, but they predict the need for only 20 spaces. Erickson Shirley asked what type of signage would be utilized on the frontage. Dominic Mauriello responded that he did not see a need for any permanent signage along the frontage road. He said newsletters to parents would be utilized and possibly temporary signage for special events. John Schofield asked what was currently going on Booth Falls Road in regards to overflow parking. He stated that he knew that the school lot was offered by the school for additional parking. Russ Forrest stated that the school has offered their parking lot and he said improvements to the Booth Falls lot have occured. 0 Erickson Shirley asked if the school was proposing new signage along the frontage road. He asked if they would be asking public works for a parking waiver along the frontage road every time they needed overflow parking and he added that there had been verbal direction to attempt to eliminate the frontage road parking throughout town Dominic Mauriello stated that no permanent signage would be proposed unless the Town felt it was necessary. In addition, he added that there was a plan for shuttle parking as well for large events. John Schofield requested that with the final submittal it should include the full parking plan for the school. Erickson Shirley asked about the corner of the soccer field as to pedestrian safety? Dominic Mauriello stated they can rotate things and get the necessary space requested by planning. John Schofield agreed with Erickson and requested that a small scale plan of that be provided with the final submittal, so that the details could be seen. Dominic Mauriello stated that the neighbors asked that they not rezone the site, or pursue a rezoning. Erickson Shirley asked if the specific plans had been presented to the residents regarding the rezoning Np ..iv. ".vv fY. IJ i t.. .a..ru...l ..a •vuu v�l..ruv,.. r.. C _�L��a... iti `. in _.- 1�... ..._... -. Dominic Mauriello responded no, but that he felt the residents would oppose the scenarios presented by staff in the report. He added that there would be a need to revise the covenants of two of the parcels proposed to be utilized by this project and the homeowners would need to sign off on the idea prior to proceeding. Russ Forrest stated that this is a difficult situation, due to the history of the site. He added that he hoped the residents would be open to the scenarios presented by staff in the memo. He stated that staff appreciated the communication between the applicant and neighbors. Dominic Mauriello raised the issue of a square footage credit regarding wood storage, vestibules, etc. He said in the past, the AG zone was down zoned in regards to not getting the 425 credit. John Schofield asked if there was any further input from the applicant and since there was none, resident input was opened. Alan Danson lives on the west side of Booth Falls Road across from the corner of the soccer field and stated that he was responsible for getting the neighbors involved and was happy with the dialogue that was occurring. He said the neighborhood is in agreement with the plan. He added that the neighbors were not present and through a process of education, the neighbors may come to the conclusion that the zoning change is the correct way to go. He continued that he thought the school was a low impact neighbor and we would not want to push them down valley because they could not develop the site to their needs. He believed comprise on both sides could occur. Chas Bernhardt asked Russ what other sites were zoned AG and had residential development on them. Russ Forrest stated that the Public works site had Type III housing. Chas Bernhardt asked Alan Denson to go to the residents and explain that Dominic's hands were tied with regard to zoning and to show them the benefits. Alan Danson said he would be willing to relay that message if the PEC said thatwas the only way to go. Erickson Shirley pointed out that there was an option which included single- family, general recreation, and general use. Chas Bernhardt stated that he understood Dominic's position and that a rezoning would initially muddy the water, but that he thought in the long run, a rezoning was the proper way to go. Ken Hovey lives behind the proposed EHU units. He stated that he believed there were better options for the site. Mr. Hovey stated that he felt the site was zoned open space. Russ Forrest corrected him that it was zoned two- family. Bill at 3235 Katsos Ranch Road, asked the PEC to read a letter from Winston Associates. And pointed out that there was a problem with the sprinkling system for the modular unit, with water running down the road and that weeds occupied the space. He said there also was a lot of trash on the site. Francine stated that she felt that more consideration should be given to the neighbors on Katsos Ranch Road, Mrs. Scott stated that she spoke at an earlier meeting and she still had some of the same concerns. She stated that the two foot drop was insignificant and she wished to see it drop six feet. She added that the mass of the building would wall her in and continued with the fact_ that there is a parking problem. She said she was concerned with lighting and said that no lighting was there currently and she would like it to stay that way. Mark Cadmus said he was here to present a letter by Mr. Speck (Russ passed out a letter). Mr. Cadmus read the letter. Brandi McLaughlin was concerned over future growth of the school, wants the lighting to remain low impact and was concerned with rockfall mitigation. She said the EHU site would be benefiting from the mitigation paid for by the current neighbors and pointed out that parking on the frontage road would be dangerous in the winter. Ken Hovey suggested that students not drive to school, to save on parking. Bill Current pointed out a covenant on tract C, which states it should remain open space. 10 minute break John Schofield ended the public input phase. George Lamb started by stating that he had a child at the school and lived in the neighborhood and felt he would be better in the discussion as a neighbor. He added that it is apparent that there needs to be more communication. Rollie Kjesbo stated he had two kids in the school. He added that he wanted Dominic to rezone the property. He asked Dominic about the size of the soccer field and the impact on existing trees and continued by saying that more work was needed regarding parking in the EHU area. Dominic Mauriello said the field was going to meet high school standards and that the trees would be impacted and replaced. Erickson Shirley suggested that the applicant meet with Russ to talk about rezoning and continued saying that parking along the Frontage Road was a problem for him. He suggested shuttles and parking at the top of Booth Falls. Gary Hartman thanked the applicant for addressing previous concerns and the neighbors and for coming in to the meeting. He suggested that the neighbors get together with one voice, He said he would personally like to see the site rezoned single- family, open space, and general use and would not like to see the Frontage Road used for overflow parking. He said he felt that they were trying to do too 4 much on the site and to create a walkway from the headmaster site to the school. Chas Bernhardt agrees with most of the previous comments. He believes that the homeowners have rights to the light and space which reach their properties and felt that Tract C should not be developed beyond what is currently permitted by Code. John Schofield stated that he was the only board member here two years ago when the previous plan was approved. He added that the proposed plan is similar to what was approved including employee housing. He continued that there were no protected viewsheds in the area and encouraged the residents to review the rezoning proposal, as it is a better solution. He pointed out the downfalls of AG zoning and preferred to see the whole school site zoned general use. He said to explore the Type 1V EHU unit which the headmaster home could be zoned. He pointed out that better access from the bus stop to the school and soccer field was needed and wanted landscaping explored around the soccer field. He wanted to see what CDOT had to say about the landscaping in the right -of -way. He agrees with Erickson in not wanting parking on the Frontage Road and said to use Booth Falls parking lot and others in the area. Dominic Mau riello thanked the board for their comments. He added that they would visit the rezoning Chas Bernhardt made a motion to table this until July 22, 2002. Erickson Shirley seconded the motion. The vote was unanimous. 2. A request for a final review of a major subdivision; a request for a worksession to discuss a conditional use permit to allow for a private educational institution and development plan approval to construct employee housing; and setting forth details in regards thereto, located at the site known as "Mountain Bell " /an unplatted piece of property, located at 160 N. Frontage Rd. /to be platted as Lot 1, Middle Creek subdivision. Applicant: Vail Local Housing Authority, represented by Odell Architects Planner: Allison Ochs Allison Ochs gave a presentation per the staff report Mike Coughlin stated that they had recently had a successful meeting with the DRB and stated that the project had received several grants and the project will need to move ahead to obtain those grants. Otis Odell gave a presentation. He pointed out a memo from Odel to Allison with a unit and parking breakdown. He said there are 246 parking spaces and a majority are covered and 28 percent are compact spaces. He pointed out that the current roadway layout meets grade and radii requirements for public works and fire and pointed out that all the buildings except for a portion of the school meet the 20 foot required setback. Lee Mason gave a presentation on the inspiration for the unit design and the stepping up the hillside and showed a board of pictures illustrating Italian hill towns stepping up the hillside as he talked about the simple forms being the strength of the architecture. John Schofield asked if the height of the Mountain Bell tower was determined and how tall was the 6 story portion of the proposed building. Lee Mason stated that the tower was 120 feet tall and the building was approximately 80 feet tall. He discussed the hardscape common courtyard area and that there would be large pots with landscaping in there. He said they were creating an atypical fagade that is of the Italian styling by starting to get some variation, without getting too crazy. Mr. Odell stated that they still have a bus stop and the administration end of the building relates directly to the bus stop, as that is where the office is so applicants can get in easily. He said trash enclosures 40 will be like little stone, stout buildings to achieve bear - proofing. Mr. Schofield asked about the access and that he was concerned about turnarounds and the necessity to back -out. Mr. Odell stated he will look at angles and see what else could be done. He said the mail should be kept in highly visible /accessible areas. He said with this current site plan, all this existing vegetation remains as a significant screen. Mr. Schofield asked about the grade change next to Mountain Bell, Mr. Odell answered that it is there mainly for debris flow purposes. Mr. Schofield wondered if there was anv wav to break-un.the parkinn on the western side so as it-is not so visible due to that 300' line of visible space. Mr. Odell said that the cottonwoods there are big and numerous, but since that would be for three months, they would look at that issue as well. He said the traction elevators will be big enough to ride your mountain bike into and that each storage locker will be large enough for people to store the many large sporting items that people tend to have up here. Mr. Shirley inquired whether or not bocce ball courts could be accommodated. There was no public comment 0 Gary Hartman talked about how the mass was breaking down and the roof lines are well articulated. He suggested periodic landscaping along the six foot tall retaining walls. Chas Bernhardt asked if the DRB requested the balcony be placed on the rear of the building. Mr. Coughlin responded that the DRB did request a rear balcony. Chas Bernhardt stated that he preferred the balconies on the front. George Lamb was iffy at first, but the way the plan has come together was great. Rollie Kjesbo had no additional comments and liked the project. Erickson Shirley thought this project was a superb project. He then brought up a discussion regarding bike path coordination along the Frontage Road. John Schofield wanted them to do whatever they could do to break up the 300 feet of parking area and suggested going to talk to the folks in Spraddle Creek. George Lamb made a motion to table this to an agreeable date. Rollie Kjesbo seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 6 -0. 3. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to amend Donovan Park Master Plan and a request for a final review of an amendment for the previously approved development plan, to allow for the construction of the Donovan Park Pavilion, located at 1600 S. Frontage Rd, West/Unplatted Donovan Park. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by VAg, Inc. Planner: George Ruther Chas Bernhardt made a motion to table this item to the next meeting. Gary Hartman seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 6 -0. TABLED UNTIL JULY 22, 2002 4. A request for a variance from Sections 12 -14 -7 (Setback from Watercourse) and 12- 15 -5C5 (Guideline Compliance), Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition within the 50 ft. Gore Creek JiaFJCrL1 \1.ii liU "ltd aa1w YY 1Vl klmL. 1rV111119u Q111rGr Vr q IIVI I -1..V1 i1WIMIi 1i uiiV%a �rxY, rv�.cic -u CAI � r r.r ul:.0., Gore Drive, Unit 13- 1 /Codar Point To 4nhornles Filling 2. Applicant: John Welaj, represented by Mike Suman Planner: Allison Ochs MOTION: Chas SECOND: Rollie VOTE: 6 -0 TABLED UNTIL JULY 22, 2002 5. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for the adoption of two view corridors within Lionshead and to amend Section 12 -22-4 (Adoption of View Corridors), Vail Town Code to include View Corridors 1 and 2 in Title 12, as identified within the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. View Corridor 1 is located approximately at the main pedestrian exit looking southwest towards the Gondola lift line. View Corridor 2 is located approximately from the pedestrian plaza at the east end of the Lifthouse Lodge looking south up the Gondola lift line. A more specific legal description of the two view corridors is on file at the Community Development Department. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Allison Ochs Allison Ochs gave a presentation per the staff report. Ethan Moore representing Vail Resorts, stated the desire to assess the potential impact of the view corridor on their property. He said he had been given great information from staff and stated that an accurate map was necessary to be done by a surveyor to assess true impact. He stated that tomorrow there would be a surveyor crew shooting the area. Russ Forrest stated that Council wanted to see this project at their next meeting and that the PEC should frame the motion with that in mind. George Lamb stated that it is difficult to move ahead without fully understanding the view corridor. Rollie Kjesbo agreed. Erickson Shirley stated that the view corridor will affect property rights and to let Council make that decision. Gary Hartman had no comment. 7 A Chas Bernhardt had no comment. John Schofield said he was comfortable making a motion which does not adopt the provided plan and that Council will need to examine all the extraneous items associated with the view corridor. 0 Erickson Shirley took the chair. John Schofield made a motion to recommend the concept of view corridors one and two, with the criteria and conditions in the staff memo. George Lamb seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 4 -2. Chas Bernhardt was in support of the corridors; however he thinks it is inappropriate that the Town should get a special privilege by not having all of the information that they requested previously. ;Rollie K.iesbo acgreed. 6. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to of an amendment to Section 12- 7A-7 (Height), Vail Town Code, to increase the maximum allowable building height in the Public Accommodation Zone District. Applicant: Bob Lazier, represented by Jay Peterson Planner: George Ruther Chas Bernhardt made a motion to table this item to the next meeting. George Lamb seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 6 -0. TABLED UNTIL JULY 22, 2002 7. Approval of June 10, 2002 and June 24, 2002 minutes Chas Bernhardt made a motion to approve the June 10th minutes. George Lamb seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 5 -0. George Lamb made a motion to approve the June 24th minutes. Rollie Kjesbo seconded the motion. The vote passed by a vote of 5 -0. (Gary Hartman was not there). 8. Information Update • 8 • 110 Planning and Environmental Commission ACTION FORM x�,•'iT F�. t 0.� Y �M Department of Community Development TOWN OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657 tel: 970.479.2139 fax: 970.479.2452 web: www.ci.vail.co.us Project Name: Antler's Lodge Time- shares PEC Number: PECO20035 Project Description: Conditional Use Permit for quarter shares for fractional fee sales for remaining seven condominiums. Participants: OWNER ANTLERS CONDO ASSOC 680 LIONSHEAD PL VAIL, CO 81657 License :. APPLICANT Robert Levine, GM Antlers 680 W. Lionshead Place Vail, CO 81657 License: Project Address: 680 LIONSHEAD PL VAIL 06/24/2002 Phone: 945 -5366 06/24/2002 Phone: 476 -2471 Location: Legal Description: Lot: 3 Block: 1 Subdivision: Vail Lionshead 3rd Parcel Number: 210107206000 Comments: See Conditions BOARD /STAFF ACTION Motion By: Doug Cahill Action: APPROVED Second By: Rollie Kjesbo Vote: 6 -1 Date of Approval: 07/22/2002 Conditions: Cond: 8 (PLAN): No changes to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of Vail staff and/or the appropriate review committee(s). Cond: CON0005444 That the Antlers Condominium Association meets the "Time -share Units Disclosure Requirements" outlined in Chapter 4, Section 4, Article A, of the Vail Town Code, prior to the marketing of the time -share units. Cond: CON0005445 That the Antlers Condominium Association provides the Town of Vail Community Development Department with copies of deeds for the units sold as time -share units within 10 days of the real estate transaction for each respective time -share unit. Cond: CON0005446 That the Antlers Condominium Association continues to manage the project with an • • on -site front desk operating twenty-four (24) hours a day, semen (7) days a week, providing reservation and registration capabilities, so long as time -share units exist in the building. Entry: 07/22/2002 By: PEC Action: COND Planner: W (hI< <f- I(\ CCA Ol P 6 I ) PEC Fee Paid: $650.00 Approved 8126102 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION 18 PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES Monday, July 22, 2002 PROJECT ORIENTATION 1- Community Development Dept, PUBLIC WELCOME MEMBERS PRESENT John Schofield Erickson Shirley Chas Bernhardt Doug Cahill George Lamb Rollie Kjesbo Gary Hartman Site Visits : MEMBERS ABSENT 1. Vail Mountain School — 3160 N. Frontage Rd. East 2. Antlers — 680 W. Lionshead Place 3. Donovan Park — 1600 S. Frontage Rd. West Driver: George 12 :00 pm 1 :00 pm NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6 :00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 Public Hearin -Town Council Chambers 2:00 pm A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, to allow for time share units on the first floor of a building or above, located at the Antlers Condominiums, 680 West Lionshead Place /Lot 3, Block 1, Lionshead 3 I Filing. Applicant: Antlers Condominium Association, represented by Rob Levine Planner: George Ruther/Warren Campbell Warren Campbell reviewed the staff memo with the PEC. Rob Levine questioned the review of additional units rather than only the six units requested in the application. Erickson Shirley recommended that the PEC should only review the application as presented. Rob Levine commented that based upon previous discussions, staff was not trying to increase the number of units being approved, but to address a technicality of the application. John Schofield verified that the application is only requesting review of the six remaining unsold units in the project. 0 Rob Levine clarified the location of the six units. TOI�',V' OF 1'AILk Approved 8126102 George Lamb expressed his general concerns about the management of fractional fee units, however, he feels that the management of this project, the unique circumstances of this project, and the small number of units involved will address these concerns. He doesn't feel that this will detrimentally affect the neighbors or individuals who have already purchased into the project. Rollie Kjesbo noted his concerns about the applicant applying for fractional fee at such a late date in the development of this project. Erickson Shirley recommended that staff prepare a new set of rules to address this specific situation, while not allowing similar requests that may not be as appropriate. He noted that he would be in favor of the request if it is limited to only six units. Gary Hartman had no additional comments. Doug Cahill has no additional comments. Chas Bernhardt has no additional comments. John Schofield agreed with Erickson Shirley's comments. George Ruther commented that past discussions focused on how the Town's regulations are designed to protect accommodation units, but never focused on fractional fee projects that function more as short -term rentals than primary residences that may be vacant for major portions of the year. Mr. Ruther noted that Staff is currently working with real estate attorneys to modify the Town Code to address the issues related to fractional fee_ John Schofield recognized that the Antlers has historically operated as a short -term rental that fits the character of the neighborhood, He also expressed that this approval will not set a precedence related to this issue, and that there are numerous related issues that still need to be resolved. Erickson Shirley questioned the location of these units Rob Levine noted that they are all within the same building, but in different areas of the building. He noted that they will be selling these units on an individual basis. Erickson Shirley noted his concerns about some units in this project being given an unfair advantage over other units. George Ruther noted staffs concern for approving only one or two units, rather than the addressing the overall issue of more fractional fee units. Erickson Shirley noted his concern that approving more fractional fee units than are currently being requested. He commented that the owners may not want any additional fractional fee units Doug Cahill made a motion for approval, per the staff memorandum. Rollie Kjesbo seconded the motion. Erickson Shirley recommended amending the motion to read that any units sold to individuals that the conditional use for that unit will be void. George Ruther questioned how to enforce the conditional use permit condition. He recommended that the PEC finds and conditions that the Antlers operates uniquely compared to other projects (i.e. 40 fractional fee club definition). Approved 8/26102 John Schofield made the findings that the Antlers has a front desk, is primarily rental, does not have any units used as a primary residence, and that the buildings governing body approved the project. The motion passed by a vote of 6 -1, with George Lamb opposed that Units 318, 321, 417, 418, 420 820 remain as quarter -share time -share units, with any unit sold as a whole unit revoking the conditional use status for that respective unit with the following 3 conditions: 1. That the Antlers Condominium Association meets the "Time -share Units Disclosure Requirements" outlined in Chapter 4, Section 4, Article A, of the Vail Town Code, prior to the marketing of the time -share units. 2. That the Antlers Condominium Association provides the Town of Vail Community Development Department with copies of deeds for the units sold as time -share units within 10 days of the real estate transaction for each respective timeshare unit. 3. That the Antlers Condominium Association continues to manage the project with an on- site front desk operating twenty -four (24) hours a day, seven (7) days a week, providing reservation and registration capabilities, so long as time -share units exist in the building. 2. A request for a final review and recommendations of the following applications related to the proposed redeveiopment of the Vail Mountain School:. 1) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to rezone 3010 Booth Falls Road /Lot 11, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing from Two - Family Residential to General Use; 2) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to Zone Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing to General Use, The northern portion of this lot is zoned Agriculture Open Space; 3) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to rezone Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing from Two - Family Residential to Gene4 Use; 4) A request for a recommendation to amend the official Town of Vail Land Use Map for Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12'h Filing from Low Density Residential to Public /Semi - Public; 5) A request for an amendment to the previously approved development plan and a new conditional use permit for a private educational institution and an active outdoor recreation area on 3010 Booth Fails Road /Lot 11, Block 2, Vail Village 12'h Filing and 3160 N. Frontage Road East/ Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12`t' Filing; 6) A request for a conditional use permit to allow for the construction of eight Type III EHUs located on Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 121h Filing; 7) A request for a for a conditional use permit to allow for temporary modular classroom structures located at 3160 N. Frontage Rd. East/ a part of Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing; 8) A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to modify the official Town of Vail Rockfall Hazard Map to indicate approved mitigation for 3160 N. Frontage Road /Lot 12, Block 2, and Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filling; 9) A request for a major subdivision in accordance with Title 13, Chapter 3, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regards thereto, located at Lots 11 and 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12th Filing and Tract C, Block 1, Vail Village 12th Filing. Applicant: Vail Mountain School, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: Russ Forrest Russ Forrest gave a presentation per the staff memorandum Dominic Maurielio stated that he and his clients were here to get comments from the PEC prior to submitting a final development plan in August. He felt they had addressed many of the concerns of the PEC and public from the previous meeting. He said that the headmaster home was removed and parking replaced it in an effort to compensate for the parking removal on Tract C. He said the remaining parking on Tract C will serve the employee housing solely and explained that the proposed plan was well within the limitations of the existing zoning on Tract C. He stated that there was Approved 8126102 approximately 35 feet between the corner of the soccer field and Booth Falls Road. He then showed a lighting plan with some initial fixtures shown and pointed out that they would need to go through DRB to be reviewed. He continued talking about special event parking on the site and that parking has been eliminated on the Frontage Road. He described the valet parking and double parking in the proposed 40 parking lot and stated that parking had increased to 116 spaces from 112. Mr. Schofield opened up the hearing to public comment and moved on to Commissioner questions Mr. Hartman asked for clarification regarding parking and circulation and stated he would like to see more pedestrian access between the parking and soccer field. Dominic Mauriello showed where a pedestrian path could be located. Mr. Cahill asked about Master Plan conformance and the now unnecessary text amendment and also about the berm having a more logical placement to contain soccer balls. Mr. Shirley asked about the containment of soccer balls and the avoidance of balls rolling into the road at the point of the blind curve. He said he would like to retain as much distance between the road and the soccer field. Mr. Schofield again asked if there was any public comment. Tom Talbert asked about the bus stop and the yielding of traffic to get kids to and from the taus stop. He also asked what would prevent the backing up of cars on the road. Dominic Mauriello answered that their traffic engineers are working on it, Brandy McLaughlin asked about the maintenance of pathways and stated that progress is being made and it looks good. Cindy Steimle said the Booth Falls Court homeowners were concerned about parking at the trailhead and fallout during construction. Dominic Mauriello stated that the school will continue to provide overflow parking for trailhead. Mr. Schofield opened it up to PEC comments. Mr. Lamb recused himself. Mr. Kjesbo stated that the work done has been substantial and parking still needs to be studied. Mr. Shirley commented on the terms of the covenants and that they're not enforced by the PEC. Mr. Cahill commented that Track C is great and "Thank you for that." He then asked about the cabin and construction parking and where is the staging going to happen? Dominic Mauriello stated that they just hired a contractor and will be sorting through phasing issues. Mr. Bernhardt commented on the height of the gym. Mr. Schofield commented that they went a long way by not asking for the variance and amendment. He said, regarding Booth Falls Road, that the parking management plan is a step in the right direction and specifically, that the parking plan would be wise to address the CDOT parking lot across the way for additional parking. He said they went too far with Lot C, that two garages for the vans would be appropriate. He said the height of gym is fine, but he is still concerned about the access from the parking lot to the bus stop. He said to do everything you can to keep kids from 4 Approved 8/26/02 walking down the center of the parking lot. He said the applicant has done everything necessary in accomplishing what the PEC asked. He said that staging would be an issue for Staff during the building permit review. 3. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to amend Donovan Park Master Plan and a request for a final review of an amendment for the previously approved development plan, to allow for the construction of the Donovan Park Pavilion, located at 1600 S. Frontage Rd. West/Unplatted Donovan Park. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by VAg, Inc. Planner: George Ruther George Ruther summarized the request from the applicant regarding the proposed changes to the plans as submitted. (He said to recommend Council to amend the submitted plans, that staff no longer believes that the Master Plan needs to be amended). He further elaborated on the materials in the packet and the requested changes. He said regarding the parking modifications, that the loss of 5 spaces, maximum, is not unreasonable in this case. He said the criteria for making a recommendation of approval was outlined and a condition that DRB does ensure that the necessary permits are obtained was referenced. Christy D'Agostino from VAg, Inc. has noting to add. Mr. Schofield opened it up to public comment (none) and then PEC comments 1 questions. Mr. Lamb stated he had nothing to suggest except perhaps, some berming on the north side. Mr. Kjesbo deferred to the PEC members present for the previous decisions. Mr. Shirley asked about the trash enclosure and the proper screening of all the necessary elements of the project. George Ruther illustrated the suggestions of the DRB and what staff would support to better accommodate parking and space in general. Mr. Shirley asked the applicant what they thought of these comments. Christy D'Agostino stated they are studying the options. She said there were problems with grading at the entrance of the building making the containment of trash difficult and an effort is being made to keep some space open for operational ease and the facilitation of maintenance. Mr. Shirley asked if the PEC was making a final decision today. George Ruther responded that indeed they were. Mr. Hartman concurred with the DRB's comments regarding landscaping and asked if that was being looked at. Christy D'Agostino said they were trying to reduce hardscape in general. Mr. Hartman asked about studies regarding parking generation from events and maximization. 40 George Ruther said they cannot have simultaneous events at the pavilion and soccer field. Mr. Cahill stated that the entrance does not need to be hardscaped and that it could be done very nicely. He said the trash enclosure would be optimally located right next to the building and he likes the entrance where it is. He said he was ok with the 140 parking spaces if that would improve the 5 Approved 5126102 amenities. Mr. Bernhardt said he would like to see a finalized plan before the PEC gives carte blanche approval. 0 Mr. Schofield said you've come a long way. He said the dumpster being 80' away from the building is totally unacceptable and that the parking is entirely inadequate. He said the soccer field that is existent now is not what the PEC approved and that the Town of Vail should be made to follow its own rules. Mr. Cahill asked about the attached structural facility proposed for parking at the outset_ George Ruther said it was financially infeasible. He said parking is inadequate for simultaneous events, but that's what the Commission approved. Mr. Shirley said that obviously, the PEC feels they were not heeded in their approval of the project and what is needed today is for the applicant to move forward. George Ruther outlined what is needed in order to proceed. Mr. Schofield said, for the consideration of the PEC, that at least three of the Commissioners feel the soccer field was not built of plan, but that a motion can be made to move forward on the building. A straw poll was taken on the parking, reconfiguration of the front entrance of the building, and relocating the enclosure for the dumpster. The poll was 5 -2, and 4 -3, respectively. Chas Bernhardt made a motion for approval, based upon the conditions & findings on page 6 of the memo. George Lamb seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 5 -2, with Schofield and Shirley opposed. A motion to withdraw the master plan was moved, seconded and passed unanimously. 4. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an amendment to Section 12 -7A -7 (Height), Vail Town Code, to increase the maximum allowable building height in the Public Accommodation Zone District. Applicant: Bob Lazier, represented by Jay Peterson Planner: George Ruther MOTION: Chas Bernhardt SECOND: Rollie Kjesbo VOTE: 7 -0 TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 12, 2002 5. A request for a variance from Sections 12 -14 -7 (Setback from Watercourse) and 12- 15 -5C5 (Guideline Compliance), Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition within the 50 ft. Gore Creek setback and to allow for the continuance of a non - conforming driveway, located at 5175 Black Gore Drive, Unit B -1 /Cedar Point Townhomes Filing 2. Applicant: John Welaj, represented by Mike Suman Planner: Allison Ochs 6 Approved 8/26102 WITHDRAWN 0 6. Approval of July 8, 2002 minutes MOTION: Chas Bernhardt SECOND: Rollie Kjesbo VOTE: 7 -0 • • APPROVED 7. Information Update The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479 -2138 for information. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479- 2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Community Development Department 7