The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2012-1126 PECAd Name: 8616467A PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Customer: TOWN OF VAIL/PLAN DEPT/COMM November 26, 20,2 1:00pm TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS Your account number is- 1 OP2P 33 /PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 Vail Dafly **Order and times of agenda items are subject to - change** 25 minutes 1.A request for the review of a variance from Sec - PROOF OF PUBLICATION tion 12-76-12, Height, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of an addition in excess of the prescribed building height; and a request for the review of an exterior alteration or modification pursuant Section 12-713-7, Exterior Alterations STATE OF COLORADO } and Modifications, Vaill Town Town Code, to the allow for the construction of an addition, located at 193 Gore j �`�` Creek Drive (Gore Creek Plaza Building)/Lot A, I Block 513, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth } PEC1210043)regard thereto. (PEC120042, COUNTY OF EAGLE Applicant: Rodney and Elizabeth Slifer, represent- ed by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Bill Gibson es I, Don Rogers, do solemn) swear that I am a qualified 5miental g y q 2.A report to the Planning and Environmental Commission of an administrative action approving representative ofthe Vail Daily. That the same Daily newspaper a request for an amendment to an existing condi- tional use permit, pursuant to Sections 12-9C-3, printed in whole or in part and published in the County Conditional Uses, and de, toallow for changes to 1Q Amendment Pro- , cedures, Vail Town Code, to the approved plans for the new east restroom of Eagle, State of Colorado, and has a general circulation building at the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, locat- ed at 540 South Frontage Road East (Ford therein; that said newspaper has been published continuous) thereto ( ptatted, and setting forth details in regard p y thereto (PEC120044). Applicant: Vail Valley Foundation, represented by and uninterruptedly in said County of Eagle for a period of Hunn Consulting Group Planner: Bill Gibson more than fifty-two consecutive weeks next pni or to the first 90 minutes Y 3.A request for the review of amendments to a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section publication of the annexed legal notice or advertisement and 12-16-1Q Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of the Vail that said newspaper has published the requested legal notice Golf Course Club House (i.e. accessory buildings, permanent and temporary, and uses customarily and advertisement as requested. incidental and accessory to permitted or condition - q al outdoor recreational uses, and necessary for the operation thereof, including restrooms, drinking fountains, bleachers, concessions, storage build- ings, and similar uses), located at 1775 Sunburst The Vail Daily is an accepted legal advertising medium Dns ( Lot 3, lete met fling 3 and Unplatted Par- � cels a complete metes and bounds descripption is available at the Community Development Depart - only for jurisdictions operating under Colorado's Home ment Office), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120036) Rule rovision. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Greg Hall p Planner: Bill Gibson 4.A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-6G-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town g Code, to allow for the construction of a garage within the setbacks, located at 4192 Columbine published in the regular and entire issue of every Way/Lots 25 & 26, Bighorn Terrace, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120027) number of said dailynewspaper for the period of 1 Applicant: Anne Upton, represented by Pierce Architects consecutive insertions; and that the first publication of said ACTION: Table to December 10, 2012 notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated 11/23/2012 and 5.A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for amendments to the Ford Park that the last ublication of said notice was dated 11/23/2012 in Management Plan, to allow for the inclusion of a p helipad for emergency and/or community use at Ford Park located at 530, 540, and 580 South the issue of said newspaper. Frontage Road East/Un fatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120045) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Triumph Development In witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand this day, ACTION: Withd awnmpbell 11/30/2012• 6.A request for the review of amendments to a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-16-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of a helipad for emergency and/or community use at Ford Park ^ _ located at 530, 540, and 580 South Frontage Road East/Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120046) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Triumph Development General Man ager/Publisher/Editor Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Withdrawn Vail Daily TA request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on prescribed regulation amendments to Subscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public in and for Section 12-13-5, Employee Housing Unit Deed Restriction Exchange Program, Vail Town Code, the County of Eagle, State of Colorado this da 11/30/2012. pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town `J g Y Code, to allow for amendments to the employee housing unit deed restriction exchange program review process, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120017) Applicant: Town Vail Planner: Bill Gibson n ACTION: Withdrawn 8.Approval of November12, 2012 minutes 9.Information Update Pamela J. Schultz, Notary Public 10.Adjournment My Commission expires: November 1, 2015 The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. 0 RY AUeI Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional ' information. PAMELAJ. Sign language interpretation is available upon SCHULTZ request with 24-hour notification. Please call (970) 479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for y P� information. Community Development Department My Commiss on Expires 1110112015 Published November 23, 2012, in the Vail Daily. 8616467) rowx of va PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION November 26, 2012 1:OOpm TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 **Order and times of agenda items are subject to change** 25 minutes A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-713-12, Height, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of an addition in excess of the prescribed building height; and a request for the review of an exterior alteration or modification pursuant to Section 12-713-7, Exterior Alterations and Modifications, Vail Town Code, to the allow for the construction of an addition, located at 193 Gore Creek Drive (Gore Creek Plaza Building)/Lot A, Block 5B, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120042, PEC120043) Applicant: Rodney and Elizabeth Slifer, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Bill Gibson 5 minutes 2. A report to the Planning and Environmental Commission of an administrative action approving a request for an amendment to an existing conditional use permit, pursuant to Sections 12-9C-3, Conditional Uses, and 12-16-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for changes to the approved plans for the new east restroom building at the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, located at 540 South Frontage Road East (Ford Park)/Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto (PEC120044). Applicant: Vail Valley Foundation, represented by Hunn Consulting Group Planner: Bill Gibson 90 minutes 3. A request for the review of amendments to a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-16- 10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of the Vail Golf Course Club House (i.e. accessory buildings, permanent and temporary, and uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional outdoor recreational uses, and necessary for the operation thereof, including restrooms, drinking fountains, bleachers, concessions, storage buildings, and similar uses), located at 1775 Sunburst Drive/Lot 3, Sunburst Filing 3 and Unplatted Parcels (a complete metes and bounds description is available at the Community Development Department Office), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120036) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Greg Hall Planner: Bill Gibson 4. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-6G-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of a garage within the setbacks, located at 4192 Columbine Way/Lots 25 & 26, Bighorn Terrace, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120027) Applicant: Anne Upton, represented by Pierce Architects Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Table to December 10, 2012 5. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for amendments to the Ford Park Management Plan, to allow for the inclusion of a helipad for emergency and/or community use at Page 1 Ford Park located at 530, 540, and 580 South Frontage Road East/Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120045) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Triumph Development Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Withdrawn 6. A request for the review of amendments to a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-16- 10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of a helipad for emergency and/or community use at Ford Park located at 530, 540, and 580 South Frontage Road East/Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120046) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Triumph Development Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Withdrawn 7. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on prescribed regulation amendments to Section 12-13-5, Employee Housing Unit Deed Restriction Exchange Program, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for amendments to the employee housing unit deed restriction exchange program review process, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120017) Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Withdrawn 8. Approval of November12, 2012 minutes 9. Information Update 10. Adjournment The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional information. Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call (970) 479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Community Development Department Published November 23, 2012, in the Vail Daily. Page 2 TOWN OF VA PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION November 12, 2012 1:OOpm TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 **Order and times of agenda items are subject to change** SITE VISITS None 20 minutes A request for review of a conditional use permit for "public buildings, grounds and facilities," pursuant to Section 12-7A-3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow for a temporary fire station, located at 100 East Meadow Drive, Unit 2 (Village Inn Plaza Phase V)/ Lot M, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120040) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Mike McGee Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Approved with conditions(s) MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 6-0-1 (Pierce recused) CONDITION(S): 1. The applicant, Town of Vail, and its tenants shall not use East Meadow Drive for any loading, delivery, or parking associated with the uses in this commercial condominium unit of Vail Village Inn Phase V. All loading and delivery shall occur through the Sebastian hotel joint loading and delivery facility and parking shall occur in designated areas. 2. This approval shall expire and all equipment and personnel shall be removed from the commercial unit, seven days after the approval of a building final at the renovated Fire Station No.2. Bill Pierce recused himself due to a conflict of interest as he is the project architect for the ongoing remodel of Fire Station No. 2. Warren Campbell gave a presentation per the staff memorandum. Commissioner Pratt noted concerns about staging the fire truck across the street at the fire station construction site. Warren Campbell and Greg Hall explained the accommodations have been made for the truck in that location. Jim Lamont, Vail Homeowners Association, asked for clarification about the notice and whether the proposed use was only offices or also for dwelling units. Warren Campbell responded that firemen would be using the space as for sleeping quarters, food preparation, and offices for the on duty crew. 30 minutes Page 1 2. A request for a review of an exterior alteration or modification, pursuant to Section 12-7J-12, Vail Town Code, to allow for a limited service lodge, located at 1783 North Frontage Road West (The Roost Lodge)/ Lots 10, 11, 12, Buffehr Creek Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto (PEC120041). Applicant: Timberline Roost Lodge, LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Approved with condition(s) MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 6-1-0 (Rediker opposed) CONDITION(S): 1. This exterior alteration or modification approval is contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of Vail approval of the associated design review application. 2. This exterior alteration or modification approval is contingent upon the applicant mitigating the impacts on employee housing generated by this redevelopment in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 12-23, Commercial Linkage, Vail Town Code, as may be amended. 3. Prior to the submittal of building permit applications, the applicant must obtain Town of Vail Public Works Department approval of final civil drawings, in compliance with all standards of the Vail Town Code. 4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall revise the Traffic Study to address the 54 surplus parking spaces. 5. As presented, the Traffic Study indicates the net new peak hour trips as 54. This is based on 112 proposed peak hour trips, less the 52 existing trips, less a 10% reduction for multi -modal. Therefore, prior to the issuance of a building permit the applicant shall pay a traffic mitigation fee for system wide transportation improvements of $351,000 (54 x $6500). This amount shall be revised based on the updates to the Traffic Study noted above. Portions of this fee may be offset by offsite traffic/transportation improvements. th-at .are not req sired by the development; spe6ifinally, ZGmdpwalk FMe FA the west nreneFty I'ne fe Q--FFehr Creek Ce.�/'I rrrvrnr�til, vraxcRarmrvnrcrra�cvc�ary}scra�i� r�cv�crrcnrvrccr�cvcra. 6. The developer recognizes that based on the Traffic Study, the SBL 2035 turning movement has a Level of Service of F if the Simba Run Underpass is constructed. The developer agrees that if this movement becomes a safety issue in the future this development will be required to provide improvements to resolve or restrict this movement. 7. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall resolve all construction staging issues shall be resolved prior to construction including staging, phasing, access, schedules, traffic control, emergency access, parking, loading and delivery, etc. 8. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant must obtain Town of Vail Public Works Department approval and Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) approval of Right -of -Way and Utility for all construction within the street/highway right-of-way. 9. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant must obtain general Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) approval of all improvements within the street/highway right-of-way including road improvements and landscaping, and obtain CDOT approval of an Access Permit. Page 2 10. Prior to the issuance of a building permit or grading/excavation permit, the applicant must obtain Town of Vail Public Works Department approval of a shoring and excavation plan which shall include; excavation phasing, engineered shoring plans, profile and cross sections. Cross Sections and plans shall include all existing conflicts (i.e. utilities). The applicant must obtain Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) approval for any shoring within the street/highway right-of- way. The applicant must also obtain Public Works Department approval and a License Agreement approval for any shoring within the street/highway right-of-way. 11. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant must obtain Town of Vail Public Works Department approval of an engineered stamped final drainage report, pavement design report, and geotechnical report. 12. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall revise the proposed plans to include all Frontage Road improvements including any necessary lighting, irrigation, and signage. 13. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide the Town of Vail an easement, in a form acceptable to the Town Attorney, in the northwest corner of the property for existing encroachments of the roadway asphalt and shoulder area, drainage and a 5 foot buffer to accommodate snow storage and a guardrail. 14. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall provide the Town of Vail a public access easement, in a form acceptable to the Town Attorney, for the pedestrian connection between the bus stop and Meadow Ridge Road. The applicant may dedication this public access easement in conjunction with the proposed drainage easement in that area; however, the 10 foot proposed drainage easement must be widened to accommodate the walkway plus a 2 foot buffer and also be named as a general utility, drainage, pedestrian access easement. 15. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant must obtain Town of Vail Public Works Department approval of a snowmelt heat and streetscape maintenance agreement for those portions of heated walk located within the pedestrian easement along the western property line. 16. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall construct the concrete pedestrian walk from the proposed bus stop to Buffehr Creek Road; the walk shall be a minimum of 10 feet wide. 17. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall coordinate all Art in Public Places (AIPP) contributions with the Town of Vail Public Works Department AIPP Coordinator. 18. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall construct a 2.0 inch asphalt overlay for the extent of all constructed Frontage Road improvements. Bill Gibson gave a presentation per the staff memorandum. Dominic Mauriello, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the request. He highlighted that there was no change to the approved bulk and mass, but a conversion of the 28 dwelling units in the project to lodge units. He spoke to the removal of a small architectural element on the west elevation of the building. He added that the project is compliant with the Page 3 current Town Code with regard to employee housing mitigation. He added that a process was underway in which the Town staff was evaluating the employee housing generation rates for limited service hotels of this caliber. He concluded by highlighting the projects benefits and a change request to the Public Works Department's recommended traffic mitigation condition. Gregory Bemis, resident of the neighborhood, asked about the number of stories in the structure Dominic Mauriello, responded that the number of floors was the same as approved in 2006. There was no change to approved plans with regard to building height. Gregory Bemis asked about fire egress on the rear of the building, the retaining wall along the rear, and requested that exterior lighting be subdued on the rear side of the structure. He added that the neighborhood understands the need for the project, but expressed concern over the shadow that might be cast on the street behind. Jim Lamont, Vail Homeowners Association, asked what the average size of the hotel rooms would be. Dominic Mauriello brought up a slide depicting the breakdown of the room types of units. Jim Lamont asked how fire department access was being provided for the project. Dominic Mauriello explained that fire department access will be from the frontage road and the street behind. Jim Lamont inquired about the landscaping along the north property line. Dominic Mauriello explained the retaining walls and landscaping. Jim Lamont inquired as to the ability to reduce the width of pavement in front the structure to achieve greater landscaping. Dominic Mauriello explained the area necessary to accommodate a delivery truck turning radius. Commissioner Pierce asked Tom Kassmel to speak to the applicant's request for the traffic impact fee to be off -set by their construction of street improvements. Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer, spoke to the change in policy in 2009 with regard to allowing for traffic impact fees to be off -set. Tom pointed out that this is the first large scale project, other than Solaris, which would need to comply with this revised policy. Commissioner Kurz inquired as to the cost of installing the Simba Run underpass and the traffic impacts generated. Tom Kassmel answered Commissioner Kurz's question. Commissioner Pratt asked about recommended condition number 18 which would require an overlay of the street and turn lanes. Tom Kassmel explained the recommended overlay requirement. Page 4 Dominic Mauriello made an argument that the existing approval would be allowed to off -set its traffic impact fees by constructing improvements and this new policy is a disincentive for the applicant to convert the approved condominiums to hotel rooms. Commissioner Kurz stated that it appeared capricious to no longer allow this project, which has an existing approval, to offset the fees with improvements. Commissioner Rediker inquired as to the accuracy of the submitted sun/shade analysis. Dominic Mauriello stated that the analysis was based on final version of the previously approved building design. Commissioner Rediker stated that it might be unfortunate for this applicant, but the new traffic impact fee policy should be assessed. He added that with the design of the roof structure creates a building with a five stories appearance. Commissioner Bird how the hotel would transport guests to the ski mountain. Dominic Mauriello explained how guest could access the nearby bus routes. Commissioner Bird recommended the applicant consider providing shuttle services for their guests. She asked if guest could rent rooms for more than 30 days. Dominic Mauriello clarified that this isn't an extended stay hotel, but nothing would prohibit a guest willing to pay the daily rate to stay for long periods. Commissioner Pratt inquired as to any precedent of a property having two approved development plans. Bill Gibson noted that staff was not aware of any similar circumstances. Commissioner Pratt stated that as the crux of the issue was the conversion of dwelling units to accommodation units with no changes to the building bulk and mass which he believes is a benefit to the community. He would be in support of allowing the traffic impact fees to be off -set. He does not support on-site employee housing units because they are not compatible with hotel uses in the same building. Commissioner Cartin asked how the sidewalk along the front of the project will tie in with the existing sidewalk along the frontage road. Tom Kasmel explained that this is the "last piece" in bike path system in this neighborhood.. Commissioner Hopkins asked about the service of guest with a bus stop heading west and adding time to get to the mountain. She also recommended the applicant consider providing guests with a shuttle service. Commissioner Kurz inquired about the traffic impact fee associated with the previous approval. Tom Kassmel clarified how the previous fees could be off -set. Commissioner Kurz noted his support for allowing the traffic impact fees to be off -set for this proposal and made a motion for approval with conditions. Page 5 Dominic Mauriello clarified that the motion would allow the traffic impact fees to be off -set by the construction of transportation improvements. 60 minutes 3. A request for the review of amendments to a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-16- 10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of the Vail Golf Course Club House (i.e. accessory buildings, permanent and temporary, and uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional outdoor recreational uses, and necessary for the operation thereof, including restrooms, drinking fountains, bleachers, concessions, storage buildings, and similar uses), located at 1775 Sunburst Drive/Lot 3, Sunburst Filing 3 and Unplatted Parcels (a complete metes and bounds description is available at the Community Development Department Office), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120036) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Greg Hall Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Continued to November 26, 2012 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 5-0-2 (Pierce and Hopkins recused) Commissioner Pierce recused himself due to a conflict of interest as he is the project architect on the temporary golf course buildings and a member of the Fallridge home owners association. He departed the meeting. Commissioner Hopkins recused herself due to conflicts of interest as her architecture firm has submitted an alternative design for the golf course clubhouse project. She also departed the meeting. Bill Gibson gave a presentation per the staff memorandum. He covered the three applications and how together they would permit the reconstruction of the Vail Golf Course. Commissioner Cartin asked that packets of this size be provide as much in advance as possible. Commissioner Kurz inquired about the community liaison concept in the proposed operation plan. Tom Braun, the applicant's representative, answered that the operation plan would provide for a single point of contact for the neighborhood if they have questions or concerns. Tom Braun gave a presentation highlighting questions asked previously by the Commissioners about the design and program. He covered the clubhouse banquet/event room occupancy, traffic trip analysis, Design Review conceptual review comments, the proposed rezoning, the building height text amendments, and the amended conditional use permit application. Commissioner Pratt asked if architectural projections would be allowed above the proposed height limit. Bill Gibson described how an architectural projection is allowed to be taller than the height limit in all zone districts in Vail. Tom Braun then presented each element of the proposed operations plan. Commissioner Kurz stated that the neighborhood should have a similar liaison that interacts with the VRD and the Town, and there needs to be accountability on both sides. Page 6 Commissioner Bird asked if there was air conditioning planned for the banquet room? She asked if the bar/grill would also be available for rent by groups. Greg Hall explained that the bar/grill during the summer would be made solely available to golfers, but it was a possibility that it could be used by other groups in the winter. Tom Braun described the proposed parking management plan. He covered statistic collected at the Donovan Pavilion that may predict the types of events expected and the typical event start times. He noted that the VRD operates the entire facility, so they would also manage the parking. Commissioner Bird inquired as to the enforceability of requiring a shuttle service for certain events at certain times of day and asked what course of action would be used to prevent parking on Sunburst Drive. Tom Braun described how shuttles, parking, and other issues would be part of the contract and deposit for reserving the banquet room. Commissioner Kurz stated that parking on Sunburst Drive is a Code Enforcement (Police) issue and will would to be addressed in that manner. Commissioner Cartin inquired as to how the switch from general parking to valet parking would occur and how will it be insured that non -valet cars aren't blocked in. Tom Braun explained the anticipated management process. Commissioner Cartin asked about deliveries. Pedros Campos explained how and where the loading and delivery will occur. Dale Bugby, an avid golfer who spends a lot of time on the course, stated that the parking lot is typically full. If this were any other applicant there would be a new parking structure with a park on top. The proposed parking plan is flawed since it doesn't address banquet staff parking. There is not enough parking for golfing and an event since some rounds of golf go until 8:00 PM. He covered a letter that he wrote and submitted through Art Abplanalp. An event center is not compatible with the neighborhood. The property was purchased with open space tax money and the PEC's approval of this application will jeopardize the future collection of that tax. This proposal conflicts with the Pulis covenants. The golf community is opposed to this plan. He suggested a survey of season golf pass holders to ascertain the feelings on this application. The Town Council and the VRD Board have made a back -door -deal that neither group will go back on now. The Town will pay to fix the clubhouse, but only if they get an event center. Neighbors will be impacts by noise since weddings don't occur without someone opening the door to go outside for a smoke. The applicant states that there is minimal change, but the destruction of the 18th green and the baffle nets have negative impacts. The existing clubhouse is a dump, but the proposed building is out of scale with the neighborhood. The conditional use permit allows new uses, not the expansion of existing uses. The event size description and parking proposal does not take into account the total capacity of people in the banquet room, at the grill, on the patio, and on the lawn area. The applicant is not proposing to prohibit tents. The proposed grill and too small and won't be a profitable business. The Commission needs to vote no on the project. Art Abplanalp, attorney representing several property owners, asked if the members had received his letter. His response was challenged because the Town was late publishing the packet. He provide a packet of papers which he believed reflected what the Commissioner had Page 7 already received, but he wanted to ensure were a part of the record. He noted their support for the proposed rezoning of the parking lot. He spoke to the height amendment and that architectural projections should not be allowed over 33 feet. He spoke to the definition of what is included as an accessory use to a golf course. A public golf course does not typically have this type of a facility and it's not within the Commissioner purview to approve this application. He stated that a wedding chapel is not necessary for a golf course. Other golf courses have event facilities separated from the clubhouse. Facilities for events are not typically found at public golf courses. The proposed building design looks like the wedding chapel at the Air Force Academy and doesn't look like a golf course clubhouse. This is a wedding chapel and restaurant with a clubhouse attached. He stated that the only goal of this project is build a cash -cow for revenues that will come at the neighbors' expense. He compared the sizes of the existing and proposed banquet rooms, patio, etc. He stated that the proposed chapel and restaurant are not necessary for a golf course. He noted that the neighbors and golfers are opposed to the project. He objected to the public notice not acknowledging the conversion of the 18th green. The notice only refers to the clubhouse and does not speak to the changes on the golf course and the banquet facility. He asked about bleachers and other items listed in the public notice. Bill Gibson clarified that term bleachers and the other listed items in the notice is the verbatim land use language from the Vail Town Code and are not the description of the applicant's request. Art Abplanalp continued that he does not believe the Commission has been made aware of what the applicant is actually asking for. The proposed conditional use permit is a blank -check. Nothing being presented by the applicant is for sure, there is no certainty. The proposed management and operation plan is worthless since the term "may" is used and it doesn't address the concerns of the neighbors. If the Commission is going to provide the type of hearing that the constituents expect, the Commission needs to consider everything before them. He believes staff will need to be on-site 24-7 to ensure compliance. People are furious about this proposal but worn down by the review process, so that is why there are so few people in the audience. Art stated that Warren Pulis himself is opposed to this project. He further noted that during past Town Council hearings former Mayor Dick Cleveland and current Mayor Andy Daley said the clubhouse remodel would occur within the footprint of the existing building. He noted than the neighbors had submitted an alternative design to the Town Council, but have not yet received a response. He requested that the Commission put an end to the VRD and Town Council's arrogance. Gretchen Bussey a resident of the neighborhood, spoke to her concerns about parking. She raised concerns about tents„ the process for approving the tents, will the tents have music, and other questions. She asked who is the proposed neighborhood liaison and who will monitor the parking lot. She is concerned that the proposed events center is a large size. Lue Maslak, resident of Sunburst Drive representing herself and her husband, spoke about the time she and her husband put into finding the perfect property to build their house and retire. She is opposed to the proposed co-opting of the clubhouse and noted that the building is 1/3 for golf and 2/3 for events. She noted that the bride's room appears to be larger than the men's locker room. This is a residential neighborhood with bicycles and children and the proposal is not compatible. She urged the Commission to denying the project. Jim Lamont, Vail Homeowners Association, thanked those Commissioners who recognized that they had a conflict of interest and stepped down. He added that in projects such as this with Page 8 many cross -currents that other conflicts should be made know. The Town should consider adopting a code of ethics rather than simply relying on the conflict of interest rules. He was confused if the neighbor's alternative plan (referenced by Art Abplanalp) that was prepared by Snowdon/Hopkins Architects had been submitted to the Commission. He asked the attorney representing the neighbors if it has been submitted as a part of the record. Art Abplanalp stated that it had been submitted prior to the last Commission hearing. Jim Lamont asked if the VRD was a lessee of the Town and if any term of that agreement can be overturned by the Town Council. There is confusion over the rolls and that the Town and VRD are one and the same. They are separate entities and the Town can at its discretion modify the agreement. Therefore, what is approved by this Council can be changed by a future Council. Te is amused at the operation plan and finds it inadequate when compared to the Golden Peak operation/management plan. In the Golden Peak Management plan there is a requirement for all parties (including the neighbors) to be consulted on amendments and changes. The proposed management plan submitted is dictatorial and not collaborative. He stated that the current problems at the clubhouse will not go away with the approval of this project and the management plan doesn't solve any problems. He clarified that the Vail Homeowners are not a neighborhood association and there only obligation is to communicate. He suggested that the proposed building height text should have a separate clubhouse section in the code. He believes there needs to be a paragraph for all parcels and then specifics for the clubhouse. He noted concern that property owner adjacent to other Outdoor Recreation District properties have not been specifically notified about proposed height change and would not support a height increase for all buildings. The lack of landscaping along the south end of the parking lot is symptomatic of this whole process. The Commission, even in their limited role, needs to send the message that the applicant is not being a good neighbor. Commissioner Kurz inquired of Matt Mire, Town Attorney, if approval of this project would jeopardizing the collection of real estate transfer tax (as asserted by Dale Bugby). Matt Mire answered no. Commissioner Rediker inquired about the property covenant and any current or potential violations. Mire Mire said he has issued a legal opinion that he can share with the Commission in executive session, but due to the ongoing litigation he will not disclose that opinion in the hearing. He clarified that private covenants are outside the scope of the Commission scope of review. Commissioner Rediker stated that as he reads the Outdoor Recreation District and he does not read anything about a banquet facility, etc. He asked for clarification. Bill Gibson read from the district stating that the golf course is a permitted use and the clubhouse and related uses are accessory and subject to the review of a conditional use permit. Commissioner Rediker inquired further about what is considered accessory. He does see how someone could object to a pro shop, locker rooms, etc.; but was unclear whether or not a banquet facility would be objectionable or not permitted. Tom Braun, stated that the Town Code is not clear on the specific uses within the club house, but many golf courses include a banquet facility. Page 9 Bill Gibson gave an example of City Market which is a grocery store. However, within that grocery store there may be various types of the activities such as a pharmacy, photo development, movie rentals, a deli, etc. Commissioner Rediker noted that some concerns from the neighbors are being overblown and some of their rhetoric is weird. He stated that this proposal is not a wedding chapel. Art Abplanalp state that the covenant language and the Code include very similar language. Dale Bugby added that everyone should read the Pulis deed as it states "only what is required". Bill Gibson clarified that the covenants are beyond the scope of the Commission's review. Commissioner Kurz stated his concerns about formalizing a liaison and his concerns about the proposed building height language. Addressing Jim Lamont's comments, Commissioner Kurz disclosed that he serves on the Vail Economic Advisory Committee (VEAC) and he is married to the Town of Vail Economic Development Manager; but this has no influence over him in reviewing this project. Commissioner Bird suggested that the bride room be relabeled on the plans to be a meeting room. She agrees that height needs to be more clearly defined and she is not sold on the parking plan. Commissioner Cartin asked the applicant to clearly identify the proposed conditional use permit area. Commissioner Pratt asked how tents are allowed Bill Gibson explained that there are two processes. There is a conditional use permit review process for seasonal uses and structures, and there is a special event process through the Committee on Special Events. Commissioner Cartin agreed Jim Lamont's recommendation to separate the code language regarding building height for clubhouses. He clarified that the Commission is a judicial review body, and does not make a decisions about the configuration of the holes at the golf course. Bill Gibson clarified that the height architectural projections is not unlimited. The Town Code limits there height to be 25% more than the height listed in every zone district. He gave an example of an existing architectural projection in the neighborhood and described how the observatory tower at the Maslak was approved to exceed the height limit of the Two -Family Primary/Secondary District. Commissioner Kurz suggested that the Commission take action on the proposed rezoning and text amendment. Commissioner Pratt noted his concern that the parking study shows enough parking, but anecdotal evidence from the neighbors suggests otherwise. The retaining wall on the south end of the lot should be looked at and reworked to achieve an improved buffer. He recommended that the lawn area included in the conditional use permit area or that tents should not be erected. The management plan seems to be reactive verses proactive. He wonders how all the elements of the management plan are addressed real time during an event. He pointed out that the drainage report speaks to surface drainage to an open ditch. He recommended that the Page 10 applicant install a sand and oil separator. He would like to see some sort of trigger for the management plan to return to the Commission for review should a certain number of complaints be received or maybe after one year of operation. Motions were made on the rezoning and text amendments. Tom Braun asked for clarification on the issues of concern. The Commission summarized their concerns about parking and the day of management of events. Commissioner Kurz noted that he does not remember seeing an alternative plan proposal. Commissioner Pratt stated that any alternative plan needs to be presented to the applicant and not to the Commission. Tom Braun noted that they would look into Commissioner Pratt suggestion of a trigger to re- review any approvals. Art Abplanalp noted that the exhibit in the document he submitted earlier in the hearing includes the neighbor's alterative plan and stated that the Commission should not approve what the applicant is proposing. Commissioner Pratt again stated that the decision of what to propose is up to the applicant, not the Commission. 20 minutes 4. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for a rezoning of the Vail Golf Course parking lot from the General Use District to the Outdoor Recreation District, located at 1775 Sunburst Drive/Lot 3, Sunburst Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120037) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Greg Hall Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Recommendation of approval MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Rediker VOTE: 5-0-2 (Pierce and Hopkins recused) 20 minutes 5. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on prescribed regulation amendments, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for amendments to Section 12-813-7, Height, Vail Town Code, to increase the allowable building height within the Outdoor Recreation District, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120039) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Greg Hall Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Recommendation of approval MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 5-0-2 (Pierce and Hopkins recused) 6. A request for the review of conditional use permits, pursuant to Section 12-9C-3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, for a healthcare facility and a public building and grounds, to allow for the redevelopment of the Town of Vail municipal site with a medical research, rehabilitation, and office building and a municipal office building located at 75 and 111 South Frontage Road West/ Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120012) Page 11 Applicant: Vail MOB, LLC, represented by Triumph Development and Town of Vail, represented by Consilium Partners, Vail Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Withdrawn 7. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-6G-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of a garage within the setbacks, located at 4192 Columbine Way/Lots 25 & 26, Bighorn Terrace, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120027) Applicant: Anne Upton, represented by Pierce Architects Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Table to December 10, 2012 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 7-0-0 8. Approval of October 22, 2012 minutes MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 7-0-0 9. Information Update 10. Adjournment MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Bird VOTE: 5-0-0 The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional information. Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call (970) 479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Community Development Department Published November 9, 2012, in the Vail Daily. Page 12 TOWN OFVA PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION November 26, 2012 1:OOpm TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 **Order and times of agenda items are subject to change** MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Susan Bird Luke Cartin Pam Hopkins Michael Kurz Bill Pierce Henry Pratt John Rediker 25 minutes A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-713-12, Height, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of an addition in excess of the prescribed building height; and a request for the review of an exterior alteration or modification pursuant to Section 12-713-7, Exterior Alterations and Modifications, Vail Town Code, to the allow for the construction of an addition, located at 193 Gore Creek Drive (Gore Creek Plaza Building)/Lot A, Block 5B, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120042, PEC120043) Applicant: Rodney and Elizabeth Slifer, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Bill Gibson VARIANCE: ACTION: Approved MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 5-2-0 (Pierce and Rediker opposed) MAJOR EXTERIOR ALTERATION OR MODIFICATION: ACTION: Approved with condition(s) MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 5-2-0 (Pierce and Rediker opposed) CONDITION(S): 1. This exterior alteration or modification approval is contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of Vail approval of the associated design review application. 2. The applicant shall mitigate the impact on employee housing caused by this residential development/redevelopment in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 12-24, Inclusionary Zoning, Vail Town Code. Bill Gibson gave a presentation per the staff memorandum. The Commissioners discussed whether or not a site visit was necessary. It was determined that the photographs in the materials and the familiarity of the Commissioner with the building did not warrant a site visit. Commissioner Kurz inquired as to the employee housing mitigation requirement for this project. Page 1 Bill Gibson explained the Inclusionary Zoning requirements Dominic Mauriello, representing the applicant, gave a PowerPoint presentation detailing the requests. He highlighted the 250 addition, height variance, and major exterior alteration requests which would allow for the enclosure of an existing deck on the top floor. Commissioners Bird and Pratt inquired into the applicant's sun/shade analysis. Dominic Mauriello clarified what was being shown on the plans and which document was from the 1989 project and which document was for the current proposal. Commissioner Rediker inquired about the zoning analysis on page 9 of the staff memorandum and how the 250 and Interior Conversion related to the allowable GRFA. Bill Gibson clarified the relationship of the GRFA policies. Commissioner Bird stated that additional detail on the architectural drawings would be helpful in understanding the proposal. Dominic Mauriello stated that plans with a higher level of detail will be submitted with the associated design review application; but if necessary he would bring more detailed drawings to the Commission's next hearing. He spent some time explaining the design intent of the proposal. Commissioner Kurz asked if the proposed addition will match the exterior of the existing building Dominic Mauriello confirmed that the proposed addition will match the existing building exterior materials. Commissioner Pierce stated that in terms of bulk and mass and consistency with the master plan, the existing building looks terrible and has for some time. He believes the proposed addition will not enhance the building and will not benefit the town. He further stated that the proposed addition does not create the desired roof forms and the proposed deck columns are not appropriate. There was no public comment. Commissioner Pratt agreed with Commissioner Pierce's concerns that the proposed addition is not an improvement to the existing building, but he supports allowing the project to move forward to the design review process. 5 minutes 2. A report to the Planning and Environmental Commission of an administrative action approving a request for an amendment to an existing conditional use permit, pursuant to Sections 12-9C-3, Conditional Uses, and 12-16-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for changes to the approved plans for the new east restroom building at the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, located at 540 South Frontage Road East (Ford Park)/Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto (PEC120044). Applicant: Vail Valley Foundation, represented by Hunn Consulting Group Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Called up for discussion at the December 10, 2012 public hearing MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Pratt VOTE: 6-1-0 (Rediker opposed) Page 2 Bill Gibson gave a presentation on the approved changes and noted that the Design Review Board has approved the associated design application. He stated that the Town has not received any comments from the adjacent property owners who were notified of the change. The Commissioners discussed the need to see before and after images to fully understand the proposed changes. Jim Lamont, Vail Homeowners Association, asked if the change to the restroom location negatively affected East Betty Ford Way, the road adjacent to the restroom change. Bill Gibson answered that the restroom change does not change the new alignment of East Betty Ford Way. He clarified that the proposed change creates additional queuing space between the new restroom and the east concession stand. The Commission called up this administrative action and asked to see a more comprehensive site plan that shows the before and after conditions. 3. A request for the review of amendments to a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-16- 10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of the Vail Golf Course Club House (i.e. accessory buildings, permanent and temporary, and uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional outdoor recreational uses, and necessary for the operation thereof, including restrooms, drinking fountains, bleachers, concessions, storage buildings, and similar uses), located at 1775 Sunburst Drive/Lot 3, Sunburst Filing 3 and Unplatted Parcels (a complete metes and bounds description is available at the Community Development Department Office), and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120036) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Greg Hall Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Tabled to December 10, 2012 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 7-0-0 4. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-6G-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of a garage within the setbacks, located at 4192 Columbine Way/Lots 25 & 26, Bighorn Terrace, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120027) Applicant: Anne Upton, represented by Pierce Architects Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Tabled to December 10, 2012 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 7-0-0 5. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for amendments to the Ford Park Management Plan, to allow for the inclusion of a helipad for emergency and/or community use at Ford Park located at 530, 540, and 580 South Frontage Road East/Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120045) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Triumph Development Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Withdrawn 6. A request for the review of amendments to a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-16- 10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of a helipad for emergency and/or community use at Ford Park located at 530, 540, and 580 South Frontage Road East/Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120046) Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Triumph Development Page 3 Planner: Warren Campbell ACTION: Withdrawn 7. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on prescribed regulation amendments to Section 12-13-5, Employee Housing Unit Deed Restriction Exchange Program, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for amendments to the employee housing unit deed restriction exchange program review process, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120017) Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Withdrawn 8. Approval of November12, 2012 minutes ACTION: Approval with a modification MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 7-0-0 Commissioner Kurz identified a clarification to one of his statements in the minutes. 9. Information Update 10. Adjournment MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 7-0-0 The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional information. Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call (970) 479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Community Development Department Published November 23, 2012, in the Vail Daily. Page 4 rowN aFvain ") Memorandum TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: November 26, 2012 SUBJECT: A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-7B-12, Height, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of an addition in excess of the prescribed building height; and a request for the review of an exterior alteration or modification pursuant to Section 12-7B-7, Exterior Alterations and Modifications, Vail Town Code, to the allow for the construction of an addition, located at 193 Gore Creek Drive (Gore Creek Plaza Building)/Lot A, Block 5B, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC120042, PEC120043) Applicant: Rodney and Elizabeth Slifer, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Bill Gibson SUMMARY The applicants, Rodney and Elizabeth Slifer, represented by the Mauriello Planning Group, are requesting the review of a variance from Section 12-7B-12, Height, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, and the review of an exterior alteration or modification pursuant to Section 12-7B-7, Exterior Alterations and Modifications, Vail Town Code, to the facilitate the construction of a residential addition at 193 Gore Creek Drive (Gore Creek Plaza Building). Based upon Staff's review of the criteria outlined in Section VII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends approval of the proposed height variance and approval, with conditions, of the proposed exterior alteration or modification subject to the findings noted in Section VIII of this memorandum. II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The applicants, Rodney and Elizabeth Slifer, represented by the Mauriello Planning Group, are proposing to construct a top -floor living room addition on the north side of their residence in the Gore Creek Plaza Building. The proposed addition will enclose an existing top -floor balcony area by constructing 250 sq.ft. of the "250 Addition" allowed by Section 12-15-5, Additional Gross Residential Floor Area (250 Ordinance), Vail Town Code. The proposed addition involves the extension of the existing, north/south oriented gable roof form located on the western portion of the building by approximately 153/4 feet to the north. The existing gable roof form exceeds the allowable height limits prescribed by the Commercial Core I District and the Vail Village Master Plan with the Planning and Environmental Commission's July 24, 1989, approval of a building height variance. The height limits prescribed by the Commercial Core I District and the Vail Village Master Plan allow up to 60% of the building to be built to a height of 33 ft. or less, and 40% of the building to be built to a height of 33 ft. to 43 ft. The existing building and the proposed addition exceed both the 43 ft. maximum height and the prescribed 60%/40% height ratios. The applicants must obtain approval of a new variance to extend the existing roof form north to facilitate the proposed living room addition pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code. The applicants are proposing no change to the existing 50 ft. maximum height of the Gore Creek Plaza Building; however, the applicants are proposing to alter the building height ratios as follows: Allowed Height Existing Proposed 60% less than 33 ft. 17% 17% 40% from 33 ft. to 43 ft. 11% 5% 0% over 43 ft. 72% 78% The proposed living room addition will be constructed directly above an existing third floor element of the building and will result in no change to the existing lot area and site dimensions, setbacks, density control (units per acre), site coverage, landscaping and site development, or parking and loading. Since the proposed living room addition involves "the alteration of an existing building which adds or removes any floor area", the addition is also subject to the Planning and Environmental Commission's review of an exterior alteration or modification application pursuant to Section 12-7B-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code. The applicant is proposing to construct the proposed addition with exterior materials and colors to match the existing building. The proposed living room addition is also subject to Town of Vail design review to ensure conformance with the Town's adopted design guidelines. A vicinity map (Attachment A), the applicant's request (Attachments B), the proposed architectural plans (Attachment C), and public comment (Attachment D) are attached for review. III. BACKGROUND The subject property was a part of the original Town of Vail which became effective by the election of August 23, 1966, and the court order of August 26, 1966. Town of Vail Page 2 The existing Gore Creek Plaza Building was constructed in 1971. The property was subsequently zone Commercial Core I District and in 1980 became subject to the building height limits prescribed by the Vail Village Design Considerations of the Vail Village Master Plan which rendered the structure legally non -conforming in regard to building height. On July 24, 1989, the Planning and Environmental Commission granted approval of a building height variance to facilitate the construction on an addition to the subject dwelling unit that included the construction of the now existing, north/south oriented gable roof form located on the western portion of the building. IV. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Staff believes that the following provisions of the Vail Town Code are relevant to the review of this proposal: TITLE 12: ZONING REGULATIONS Chapter 12-1: Title, Purpose, Applicability (in part) 12-1-2: Purpose.- A. urpose:A. General: These regulations are enacted for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town, and to promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that will conserve and enhance its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of high quality. B. Specific: These regulations are intended to achieve the following more specific purposes.- 1. urposes: 1. To provide for adequate light, air, sanitation, drainage, and public facilities. 2. To secure safety from fire, panic, flood, avalanche, accumulation of snow, and other dangerous conditions. 3. To promote safe and efficient pedestrian and vehicular traffic circulation and to lessen congestion in the streets. 4. To promote adequate and appropriately located off street parking and loading facilities. 5. To conserve and maintain established community qualities and economic values. 6. To encourage a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses, consistent with municipal development objectives. Town of Vail Page 3 7. To prevent excessive population densities and overcrowding of the land with structures. 8. To safeguard and enhance the appearance of the town. 9. To conserve and protect wildlife, streams, woods, hillsides, and other desirable natural features. 10. To assure adequate open space, recreation opportunities, and other amenities and facilities conducive to desired living quarters. 11. To otherwise provide for the growth of an orderly and viable community. Article 12-713 Commercial Core 1 (CC1) District (in part) 12-7B-1: PURPOSE: The Commercial Core 1 District is intended to provide sites and to maintain the unique character of the Vail Village commercial area, with its mixture of lodges and commercial establishments in a predominantly pedestrian environment. The Commercial Core 1 District is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of buildings and uses. The District regulations in accordance with the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations prescribe site development standards that are intended to ensure the maintenance and preservation of the tightly clustered arrangements of buildings fronting on pedestrianways and public greenways, and to ensure continuation of the building scale and architectural qualities that distinguish the Village. 12-7B-12: HEIGHT. Height shall be as regulated in the Vail Village urban design guide plan and design considerations 12-7B-7: EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS OR MODIFICATIONS.- A. ODIFICATIONS:A. Subject To Review: The construction of a new building, the alteration of an existing building which adds or removes any enclosed floor area, the alteration of an existing building which modifies exterior rooflines, the replacement of an existing building, the addition of a new outdoor dining deck or the modification of an existing outdoor dining deck shall be subject to review by the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC). 12-7B-20: VAIL VILLAGE URBAN DESIGN PLAN.- A. LAN: A. Adoption: The Vail village urban design guide plan and design considerations are adopted for the purposes of maintaining and preserving the character and vitality of the Vail village (CCI) and to guide the future alteration, change and improvement in CCI district. Copies of the Vail village design guide plan and design considerations shall be on file in the department of community development. Town of Vail Page 4 Chapter 12-15, Gross Residential Floor Area (in part) 12-15-5: Additional Gross Residential Floor Area (250 Ordinance): A. Purpose: The purpose of this section is to provide an inducement for the upgrading of existing dwelling units which have been in existence within the town for a period of at least five (5) years by permitting the addition of up to two hundred fifty (250) square feet of gross residential floor area (GRFA) to such dwelling units, provided the criteria set forth in this section are met. This section does not assure each single-family or two-family dwelling unit located within the town an additional two hundred fifty (250) square feet, and proposals for any additions hereunder shall be reviewed closely with respect to site planning, impact on adjacent properties, and applicable town development standards. The two hundred fifty (250) square feet of additional gross residential floor area may be granted to existing single-family dwellings, existing two-family and existing multi -family dwelling units only once, but may be requested and granted in more than one increment of less than two hundred fifty (250) square feet. Upgrading of an existing dwelling unit under this section shall include additions thereto or renovations thereof, but a demo/rebuild shall not be included as being eligible for additional gross residential floor area. Chapter 12-17, Variances (in part) 12-17-1: Purpose.- A. urpose:A. Reasons for Seeking Variance: In order to prevent or to lessen such practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the objectives of this title as would result from strict or literal interpretation and enforcement, variances from certain regulations may be granted. A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship may result from the size, shape, or dimensions of a site or the location of existing structures thereon, from topographic or physical conditions on the site or in the immediate vicinity; or from other physical limitations, street locations or conditions in the immediate vicinity. Cost or inconvenience to the applicant of strict or literal compliance with a regulation shall not be a reason for granting a variance. VAIL LAND USE PLAN CHAPTER 11— LAND USE PLAN GOALS/ POLICIES.- The OLICIES: The goals articulated here reflect the desires of the citizenry as expressed through the series of public meetings that were held throughout the project. A set of initial goals were developed which were then substantially revised after different types of opinions were brought out in the second meeting. The goal statements were developed to reflect a general consensus once the public had had the opportunity to reflect on the concepts and ideas initially presented. The goal statements were then revised through the review process with the Task Force, the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council and now represent policy guidelines in the review process for new development proposals. These goal statements should be used in conjunction with the adopted Land Use Plan map, in the evaluation of any development proposal. Town of Vail Page 5 The goal statements which are reflected in the design of the proposed Plan are as follows: 1. General Growth/ Development 1.1. Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 1.3. The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1.4. The original theme of the old Village Core should be carried into new development in the Village Core through continued implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan. 1.12. Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 4. Village Core/ Lionshead 4.2. Increased density in the Core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is preserved through implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan. 4.3. The ambiance of the Village is important to the identity of Vail and should be preserved. (Scale, alpine character, small town feeling, mountains, natural settings, intimate size, cosmopolitan feeling, environmental quality.) 5. Residential 5.1. Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. 5.4. Residential growth should keep pace with the market place demands for a full range of housing types. VAIL VILLAGE MASTER PLAN IV. PURPOSE OF THE PLAN.- This LAN:This Plan is based on the premise that the Village can be planned and designed as a whole. It is intended to guide the Town in developing land use laws and policies for coordinating development by the public and private sectors in Vail Village and in implementing community goals for public improvements. It is intended to result in ordinances and policies that will preserve and improve the unified and attractive appearance of Vail Village. This Plan emphasizes the critical need to balance and Town of Vail Page 6 coordinate parking and transportation systems with future improvements to Vail Mountain that will increase the "in and out of Valley" lift capacity. Most importantly, this Master Plan shall serve as a guide to the staff, review boards, and Town Council in analyzing future proposals for development in Vail Village and in legislating effective ordinances to deal with such development. Furthermore, the Master Plan provides valuable information for a wide variety of people and interests. For the citizens and guests of Vail, the Master Plan provides a clearly stated set of goals and objectives outlining how the Village will grow in the future. V. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, POLICIES AND ACTION STEPS.- Goals TEPS:Goals for Vail Village are summarized in six major goal statements. While there is a certain amount of overlap between these six goals, each focuses on a particular aspect of the Village and the community as a whole. The goal statements are designed to establish a framework, or direction, for the future growth of the Village. A series of objectives outline specific steps that can be taken toward achieving each stated goal. Policy statements have been developed to guide the Town's decision-making in achieving each of the stated objectives, whether it be through the review of private sector development proposals or in implementing capital improvement projects. Finally, action steps are suggested as immediate follow-up actions necessary to implement the goals of this Plan. The Vail Village Master Plan's objectives and policy statements address key issues relative to growth and development. These statements establish much of the context within which future development proposals are evaluated. In implementing the Plan, the objectives and policies are used in conjunction with a number of graphic planning elements that together comprise this Plan. While the objectives and policies establish a general framework, the graphic plans provide more specific direction regarding public improvements or development potential on a particular piece of property. GOAL #1: ENCOURAGE HIGH QUALITY, REDEVELOPMENT WHILE PRESERVING UNIQUE ARCHITECTURAL SCALE OF THE VILLAGE IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN ITS SENSE OF COMMUNITYAND IDENTITY. Objective 1.2: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities. Objective 1.4: Recognize the "historic" importance of the architecture, structures, landmarks, plazas and features in preserving the character of Vail Village. Policy 1.4.1: The historical importance of structures, landmarks, plazas and other similar features shall be taken into consideration in the development review process. Policy 1.4.2: The Town may grant flexibility in the interpretation and implementation of its regulations and design guidelines to help protect and maintain the existing character of Vail Village. Town of Vail Page 7 Policy 1.4.3: Identification of "historic" importance shall not be used as the sole means of preventing or prohibiting development in Vail Village. GOAL #2: TO FOSTER A STRONG TOURIST INDUSTRYAND PROMOTE YEAR - AROUND ECONOMIC HEALTH AND VIABILITY FOR THE VILLAGE AND FOR THE COMMUNITYAS A WHOLE. Objective 2.2: Recognize the importance of Vail Village as a mixed use center of activities for our guests, visitors and residents. Policy 2.2.1: The design criteria in the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan shall be the primary guiding document to preserve the existing architectural scale and character of the core area of Vail Village. VAIL VILLAGE DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS F. BUILDING HEIGHT Basically, the Village Core is perceived as a mix of two and three story facades, although there are also four and five story buildings. The mix of building heights gives variety to the street --which is desirable. The height criteria are intended to encourage height and massing variety and to discourage uniform building heights along the street. The definition of height shall be as it is in the Vail Municipal Code. Building height restrictions in Commercial Core I shall be as follows.- 1. ollows: 1. Up to 60% of the building (building coverage area) may be built to a height of 33 feel or less. 2. No more than 40% of the building (building coverage area) may be higher than 33 feet, but not higher than 43 feet. 3. Towers, spires, cupolas, chimneys, flagpoles, and similar architectural features not useable as Gross Residential Floor Area may extend above the height limit a distance of not more than twenty-five percent of the height limit nor more than fifteen feet. 4. The above heights are based on an assumed 3 feet in 12 feet or 4 feet in 12 feet roof pitches. To accommodate and encourage steeper roof pitches (up to 6 feet in 12 feet), slight, proportionate height increases could be granted so long as the height of building side walls is not increased (see diagram following). V. SITE ANALYSIS Address: Legal Description: Zoning: Land Use Plan Designation Town of Vail 193 Gore Creek Drive (Gore Creek Plaza Building) Lot A, Block 5B, Vail Village Filing 1 Commercial Core I Village Master Plan Page 8 VI. Current Land Use: Lot Size: Geological Hazards: Standard Mixed Use 7,553 sq.ft. (0.17 acres) None Allowed/Required Existing Height Maximum 43 ft. 50 ft 60% less than 33 ft. 17% 40% from 33 ft. to 43 ft. 11% 0% over 43 ft. 72% Density (GRFA) 6,028 sq.ft. (250 Ordinance & Interior Conversion) Proposed no change 17% 5% 78% 6,267 sq.ft. 250 sq.ft. of 250 Addition There are no proposed changes to the existing lot area and site dimensions, setbacks, density control (units per acre), site coverage, landscaping and site development, or parking and loading. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING VII. REVIEW CRITERIA HEIGHT VARIANCE Zoning Outdoor Recreation District Commercial Core I Commercial Core I Commercial Core I The review criteria for a variance request of this nature are prescribed by Chapter 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, as follows: 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. The existing Gore Creek Plaza Building, although non -conforming with regard to building height, is surrounded by other legally non -conforming buildings that are as large or larger in scale. The Planning and Environmental Commission granted a similar height variance for a past addition to the subject dwelling unit in 1998. Additionally, the Planning and Environmental Commission has also granted height variances for other buildings in the vicinity including the Sitmark Lodge, Pepi's, and Lodge Tower. Therefore, Staff finds that the proposed height variance will not be detrimental to the existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. Town of Vail Page 9 Land Use North: Stream Tract (Gore Creek) South: Mixed Use (Lodge at Vail) East: Mixed Use (Bell Tower) West: Mixed Use (Sitzmark) VII. REVIEW CRITERIA HEIGHT VARIANCE Zoning Outdoor Recreation District Commercial Core I Commercial Core I Commercial Core I The review criteria for a variance request of this nature are prescribed by Chapter 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, as follows: 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. The existing Gore Creek Plaza Building, although non -conforming with regard to building height, is surrounded by other legally non -conforming buildings that are as large or larger in scale. The Planning and Environmental Commission granted a similar height variance for a past addition to the subject dwelling unit in 1998. Additionally, the Planning and Environmental Commission has also granted height variances for other buildings in the vicinity including the Sitmark Lodge, Pepi's, and Lodge Tower. Therefore, Staff finds that the proposed height variance will not be detrimental to the existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. Town of Vail Page 9 2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the objectives of this title without a grant of special privilege. The applicants' proposed living room addition involves the extension of the existing, north/south oriented gable roof form located on the western portion of the building by approximately 153/4 feet to the north. The existing gable roof form exceeds the allowable height limits prescribed by the Commercial Core I District and the Vail Village Master Plan with the Planning and Environmental Commission's July 24, 1989, approval of a building height variance. The Planning and Environmental Commission found that the previous 756 sq.ft. addition and the accompanying height variance complied with this criterion; and Staff believes this proposed 250 sq.ft. living room addition involving the 153/4 ft. extension of the same roof gable also complies with this criterion. Staff finds that most any addition to the applicants' top -floor dwelling unit would require the approval of a building height variance. Staff finds that the proposed height variance will facilitate the construction of a 250 Addition similar to those allowed for other properties in the same zone district. The proposed addition extends an existing roof form to enclose an existing balcony area located directly above an existing lower level building element. Therefore, Staff finds that this proposal will provide the minimum relief from the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of the building height regulations necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity among sites in the vicinity and within the Commercial Core 1 District. The Planning and Environmental Commission has consistently held that construction of a structure prior to the adoption of the current zoning regulations may be a basis for granting a variance from the Town's current zoning regulations. Therefore, Staff finds that the proposed variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege. The Planning and Environmental Commission has granted similar height variances to adjacent properties including Pepi's on January 26, 1998 and to the Sitzmark Lodge on July 10, 2000, September 13, 2004, and February 28, 2005. Therefore, Staff finds that the proposed variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege. Staff finds that approval of this height variance will grant flexibility in the interpretation and implementation of the Town's regulations and design guidelines to help protect and maintain the existing character of Vail Village, consistent with the stated purpose of the Vail Village Master Plan. 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. The sun/shade analysis submitted by the applicants (Attachment B) demonstrates that the proposed living room addition will have no impact to light on adjacent properties. Staff also finds that the proposed height variance to have no significant negative effect Town of Vail Page 10 on air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic utilities, public facilities and utilities, or public safety in comparison to existing conditions. 4. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the proposed variance. Adjacent property owner, Bob Fritch, Sitmark Lodge, contacted Town Staff to voice his support for the applicants' proposal. Mr. Fritch has also submitted the attached letter of support (Attachment D). EXTERIOR ALTERATION OR MODIFICATION The review criteria for an exterior alteration or modification request of this nature are prescribed by Section 12-713-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, as follows: 1. The proposed exterior alteration is in compliance with the purposes of the CC1 district as specified in Section 12-7113-1, Vail Town Code; and, Staff finds the proposed exterior alteration to be in compliance with the general and specific purposes of the zoning regulations as outlined in Section IV of this memorandum. Additionally, Staff finds that this proposal is also in compliance with the purposes of the Commercial Core I District since it will "maintain the unique character of the Vail Village Commercial Area", will provide "adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of buildings and uses'; continues the ,'maintenance and preservation of the tightly clustered arrangements of buildings fronting on pedestrianways and public greenways" and continues the "building scale and architectural qualities that distinguish the Village." 2. The proposal is consistent with applicable elements of the Vail Village Master Plan, Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan, Vail Village Design Considerations, Streetscape Master Plan, and the Vail Comprehensive Plan. Staff finds that the application is consistent with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, including the Vail Village Master Plan, Urban Design Guide Plan, Design Considerations and the Vail Land Use Plan, as further outlined in Section IV of this memorandum. Specifically, Staff finds that the proposed exterior alteration or modification: • Facilitates a high quality, redevelopment that preserves the unique architectural scale of the village and sustains its sense of community and identity. • Upgrades and redevelopments an existing residential facility. • Recognizes the "historic" importance of the architecture of the Gore Creek Plaza Building and preserves the character of Vail Village • Recognizes the importance of Vail Village as a mixed use center of activities for our guests, visitors and residents. Town of Vail Page 11 Therefore, Staff finds the proposed exterior alteration or modification to be consistent with this criterion. 3. The proposal does not otherwise negatively alter the character of the neighborhood; and, Staff finds that the proposed top -floor living room addition is consistent with the existing bulk/mass and architectural style of the Gore Creek Plaza Building. Therefore, Staff finds that the proposal does not otherwise negatively alter the character of the existing character of the neighborhood. VIII. RECOMMENDATION HEIGHT VARIANCE The Community Development Department recommends approval of this request for a variance from Section 12-7B-12, Height, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of an addition in excess of the prescribed building height, located at 193 Gore Creek Drive (Gore Creek Plaza Building)/Lot A, Block 5B, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Staff's recommendation is based upon the criteria outlined in Section VII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: "The Planning and Environmental Commission approves the applicant's request for a variance from Section 12-7B-12, Height, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of an addition in excess of the prescribed building height, located at 193 Gore Creek Drive (Gore Creek Plaza Building)/Lot A, Block 5B, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC 120042)" Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: 'Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section Vll of the Staff memorandums to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated November 267 2012, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds.- 1. inds: 1. The granting of this variance will not constitute a granting of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the Commercial Core 1 District. Town of Vail Page 12 2. The granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. This variance is warranted for the following reasons: a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code. b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that does not apply generally to other properties in the Commercial Core 1 District. c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the Commercial Core 1 District." EXTERIOR ALTERATION OR MODIFICATION The Community Development Department recommends approval, with conditions, of this request for an exterior alteration or modification pursuant to Section 12-7B-7, Exterior Alterations and Modifications, Vail Town Code, to the allow for the construction of an addition, located at 193 Gore Creek Drive (Gore Creek Plaza Building)/Lot A, Block 5B, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Staff's recommendation is based upon the criteria outlined in Section VII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this exterior alteration or modification request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: "The Planning and Environmental Commission approves the applicant's request for an exterior alteration or modification pursuant to Section 12-7B-7, Exterior Alterations and Modifications, Vail Town Code, to the allow for the construction of an addition, located at 193 Gore Creek Drive (Gore Creek Plaza Building)/Lot A, Block 5B, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC 120043)" Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this exterior alteration or modification request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission imposes the following conditions- "I. onditions: "1. This exterior alteration or modification approval is contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of Vail approval of the associated design review application. Town of Vail Page 13 2. The applicant shall mitigate the impact on employee housing caused by this residential development/redevelopment in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 12-24, Inclusionary Zoning, Vail Town Code." Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the exterior alteration request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: 'Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section Vll of the Staff memorandums to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated November 267 2012, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds.- 1. inds: 1. That the proposed exterior alteration is in compliance with the purposes of the CCI district as specified in section 12-7B-1 of the Zoning Regulations, and 2. That the proposal is consistent with applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, and 3. That the proposal does not otherwise negatively alter the character of the neighborhood. " IX. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Applicant's Request C. Proposed Architectural Plans D. Public Comment Town of Vail Page 14 I I m lzd. 1A-:-�- '. V� U,r7 .we I-- ;;V -t 1%, Major Exterior Alteration & Height Variance for 250 Addition For the Slifer Residence located at 193 Gore Creek Drive, Gore Creek Plaza Condominiums Owners: Rod and Beth Slifer k. h. w e b b VM Mauriello Planning Group Introduction Rod and Beth Slifer, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, are requesting the addition of 250 sq. ftto their condominium, located at 193 Gore Creek Drive at the Gore Creek Plaza Condominiums. Because of the location of the unit, the 250 Addition requires a Height Variance and a Major Exterior Alteration in the Commercial Core 1 Zone District. The Gore Creek Plaza Building was originally constructed in 1971 according to the Eagle County Assessor, and over the years has been granted numerous variances, conditional uses, along with various remodels and additions due to the change in Town codes after its original zuiz pnoro or me yore %.reeK Plaza Condominiums. construction. The building height limitations of the Commercial Core 1 Zone District are provided in the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan, which was adopted in 1980, approximately 11 years after the building was constructed. The height limitations are 33 ft. to 43 ft. up to 40% for the building footprint and 33 ft. or less to 60% of the building footprint. The Gore Creek Plaza Condominiums do not currently meet these height limitations and, in fact, were rendered nonconforming when these height limitations were adopted. Based on the how restrictive the 1980 Urban Design Plan is, nearly any modifications to upper stories to most buildings built in the area require a variance. A similar height variance was granted in 1989. The Town staff memo recommending approval of the 1989 variance request is attached. _ Currently, 17% of the building is 33 ft. or less, 11 % of the building is 33 ft. to 43 ft., and 72% of the building exceeds 43 ft. The highest peak is currently developed at 50 ft. As proposed, the addition will only slightly increase the area of the building which exceeds the height limitation, with 17% will be 33 ft. or less, 5% of the building at 33 ft. to 43 ft., and 78% will exceed 43 ft. The highest roof peak remains unchanged at 50 ft. Location of addition At this time, the owners are requesting a variance from the height limitations to allow for an addition which will exceed the 43 ft. height limitation yet still lower than the ridge height of the building. While a gabled peak roof would provide more volume within the interior of the space, a shed roof form was used to minimize the overall height of the roof being requested. The applicant is also requesting a major exterior alteration in the CCI zone district, which is required for any alteration of an existing building which adds or any enclosed floor area and the alteration of an existing building which modifies exterior rooflines. Description of the Project The Slifers are requesting the 250 addition to reconfigure and increase the size of their kitchen and dining area. The addition will occur by partially enclosing an existing deck located adjacent to this space. Because this area is located above existing GRFA, there is no increase to site coverage or change to existing setbacks. Floor plans have been provided below, while a full-sized set of plans have been submitted with this application. Deck at level below ............... ---------i---i Existing deck I I o Existing New deck to match deck below New floor area I� i _J Prop used C __1 Jr-, di u�ld � bll�uLJIC� :MOVE 4RAL STAIR ) THIRD BOOR DECK Zoning Analysis Zoning: Commercial Core 1 Land Use Plan Designation: Village Master Plan Current Land Use: Residential/Commercial Development Standard Allowed/Required Existing Proposed % of Roof Sq. Ft. of % of Roof Lot Area: 5,000 sq. ft. 7,553 sq. ft. No Change Setbacks: Front: Sides: Rear: Building Height: None Required None Required None Required 33' or less 60% 33'-43' up to 40% Site Coverage: 6,043 sq. ft. (80%) Density: 6,043 sq. ft. (80%) Parking: 6 spaces (residential) *GRFA for allowed through the "250 Addition" Chanqe in Roof Heiqhts with Proposal: 14'-20' 0.5'-10' 0.5'-3' 33' or less: 17% 33'-43': 11 % > than 43': 72% No Change No Change No Change 33' or less: 17% 33'-43': 5% > than 43': 78% 6,084 sq. ft. (80.6%) No Change 6,043 sq. ft. (80%) 6,293 sq. ft. (83%)* 5 spaces No Change (residential) Sq. Ft. of % of Roof Sq. Ft. of Roof % of Roof Sq. Ft. of % of Roof Roof Below Below 33 ft. Above 33 ft. Above 33 ft. & Roof Above above 43 ft. 33 ft. & Below 43 ft. Below 43 ft. 43 ft. & Existing 911 17% 595 11% 3,896 72% Proposed 911 17% 255 5% 4,246 78% Criteria for Review - Variance Section 12-17-6: CRITERIA AND FINDINGS, Vail Town Code provides the review criteria for a variance. These, along with an analysis of the proposal, are provided below: 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. Applicant Analysis: The heights of buildings in this vicinity vary greatly, but generally, few meet the height limitations set forth in the Urban Design Guide Plan. Buildings along the Gore Creek promenade are generally nonconforming with regard to height, primarily due to the significant change in grade from Gore Creek Drive down to the " Gore Creek promenade. The subject property (Gore Creek Plaza Building) has an existing maximum height of 50 ft. The Sitzmark Building, located directly adjacent to the west, is approximately 50 ft. at the highest point. Creekside Condominiums is approximately 52 ft. at its highest point. Both the Sitzmark Building and Creekside - t Condominiums highest points are on the north elevations. The height of the Bell Tower Building, Grade change from Gore Creek located directly to the east, is 50 ft. on its north side. Drive to the Gore Creek Promenade Village Center, which is located across Gore Creek is 77 ft. in height at its south elevation. While Village Center is located in a different zone district, it also is in excess of its height limitation of 48 ft. North elevation of the Sitzmark Building - 50 ft. East elevation of the Bell Tower Building - 50 ft. South elevation of theVillage Center Building - 77 ft. In comparison to the heights of the buildings in the vicinity, the Gore Creek Plaza Building is in keeping with the other structures in the vicinity. 2. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege. Applicant Analysis: The proposed addition has been designed to minimize the variance to the extent possible. It has been designed with a flat roof form, matching the addition that was done in 1989, and a deck has been added to maintain the visual interest of this elevation. This, along with the comparison of this building height to the surrounding building heights, none of which comply with the height limitations, makes this variance request not a grant of special privilege. Existing Elevation ; Proposed Elevation 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. Applicant Analysis: A sun shade analysis has been provided with this submittal, particularly focusing on the possible effects on light and air on the Gore Creek X- 31 M• Existing Sunl Shade Affect J.- 21 vroposea Sun/ Shade Affect 7 promenade. As indicated in this analysis, the effects of this addition are minimal and will have no substantial additional impacts on the promenade than what exists today. The proposed variance has no effect on the distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. 4. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to the proposed variance. Applicant Analysis: An analysis of the Major Exterior Alteration, which includes an extensive review of the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban Design Guide Plan, is provided in the section following. Criteria for Review - Major Exterior Alteration According to Section 12-713-7: EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS OR MODIFICATIONS, Vail Town Code, the following are subject to review The construction of a new building, the alteration of an existing building which adds or removes any enclosed floor area, the alteration of an existing building which modifies exterior rooflines, the replacement of an existing building, the addition of a new outdoor dining deck or the modification of an existing outdoor dining deck shall be subject to review by the planning and environmental commission (PEC) as follows: Section 12-713-7 also provides the criteria for review of a Major Exterior Alteration in the Commercial Core 1 zone district, as indicated below: 6. Compliance With Comprehensive Applicable Plans: It shall be the burden of the applicant to prove by a preponderance of the evidence before the planning and environmental commission that the proposed exterior alteration is in compliance with the purposes of the CCI district as specified in section 12-78-1 of this article; that the proposal is consistent with applicable elements of the Vail Village master plan, the town of Vail streetscape master plan, and the Vail comprehensive plan; and that the proposal does not otherwise negatively alter the character of the neighborhood. Further, that the proposal substantially complies with the Vail Village urban design guide plan and the Vail Village design considerations, to include, but not be limited to, the following urban design considerations: pedestrianization, vehicular penetration, streetscape framework, street enclosure, street edge, building height, views, service/delivery and sun/shade analysis; and that the proposal substantially complies with all other elements of the Vail comprehensive plan. A review of this criteria listed in this section criteria is broken down and an analysis provided below: 1. That the proposed exterior alteration is in compliance with the purposes of the CC1 district as specified in section 12-78-1 of this article; Applicant Analysis: The purpose of the CCI zone district is: 12-7B-1: PURPOSE: The commercial core 1 district is intended to provide sites and to maintain the unique character of the Vail Village commercial area, with its mixture of lodges and commercial establishments in a predominantly pedestrian environment. The commercial core 1 district is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of buildings and uses. The zoning regulations in accordance with the Vail Village urban design guide plan and design considerations prescribe site development standards that are intended to ensure the maintenance and preservation of the tightly clustered arrangements of buildings fronting on pedestrianways and public greenways, and to ensure continuation of the building scale and architectural qualities that distinguish the village. The proposed addition will match the exterior material and architectural character of the existing building. As one of the older buildings in Vail Village, the unique character of this building will be preserved, adding interest to the architectural qualities that distinguish the Village. The proposal is in compliance with the purpose of the CC1 zone district. 2. That the proposal is consistent with applicable elements of the Vail Village master plan, the town of Vail streetscape master plan, and the Vail comprehensive plan; Applicant Analysis: The Vail Village Master Plan provides the following goals, objectives and policies which are applicable to this proposal: GOAL #1 ENCOURAGE HIGH QUALITY, REDEVELOPMENT WHILE PRESERVING UNIQUE ARCHITECTURAL SCALE OF THE VILLAGE IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN ITS SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND IDENTITY. Objective 1.1: Implement a consistent development review process to reinforce the character of the Village. Policy 1.1.1: Development and improvement projects approved in the Village shall be consistent with the goals, objectives, policies and design considerations as outlined in the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban Design Guide Plan. Objective 1.2: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities. Policy 1.2.1: Additional development may be allowed as identified by the Action Plan and as is consistent with the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban Design Guide Plan. Policy 1.2.2: Development and improvement projects shall be coordinated to minimize the unintended negative consequences associated with construction activity in a pedestrianized, commercial area. For instance, the noise abatement, project completion guarantees, temporary parking, traffic control, etc. Objective 1.4: Recognize the "historic" importance of the architecture, structures, landmarks, plazas and features in preserving the character of Vail Village. Policy 1.4.1: The historical importance of structures, landmarks, plazas and other similar features shall be taken into consideration in the development review process. Policy 1.4.2: The Town may grant flexibility in the interpretation and implementation of its regulations and design guidelines to help protect and maintain the existing character of Vail Village. 11K Policy 1.4.3: Identification of "historic" importance shall not be used as the sole means of preventing or prohibiting development in Vail Village. The proposal, as an upgrade of existing residential project, is consistent with these goals and policies. As a small addition to an existing older property, the historic architecture will be preserved. The Gore Creek Plaza Condominiums is located in the Commercial Core 1 Sub -Area (#3), as identified on the map below: COMMERCIAL CORE 1 SUB -AREA f#31 WN This sub -area is described as follows: This pedestrianized area of the Village represents the traditional image of Vail. A mixture of residential and commercial uses, limited vehicular access, and inter- connected pedestrian ways are some of the characteristics that distinguish this area from other portions of the Village. With the exception of embellishing pedestrian walkways, developing plazas with greenspace, and adding a number of infill developments, it is a goal of the community to preserve the character of the Village as it is today. While no other specific recommendations for the Gore Creek Plaza Condominiums are provided in the Vail Village Master Plan, it is clearly intended that the goal is largely to preserve the character of the Village. The proposed addition will match the existing architecture and materials of the building, thereby maintaining the character of the building. The proposal is in compliance with all of the applicable sections of Vail's master plans. 3. And that the proposal does not otherwise negatively alter the character of the neighborhood. Applicant Analysis: An analysis of the character of the neighborhood is provided in the review criteria for the height variance. As indicated in that section, there is no negative impact on the character of the neighborhood. 4. Further, that the proposal substantially complies with the Vail Village urban design guide plan and the Vail Village design considerations, to include, but not be limited to, the following urban design considerations: pedestrianization, vehicular penetration, streetscape framework, street enclosure, street edge, building height, views, service/delivery and sun/shade analysis; Applicant Analysis: Most of the items listed above do not apply to an application of this nature. The two items which are applicable are building height and sun/shade analysis. Height - the Urban Design Guide Plan indicates that the Village Core is: ...perceived as a mix of two and three story facades, although there are also four and five story buildings. The mix of building heights gives variety to the street - which is desirable. The height criteria are intended to encourage height and massing variety and to discourage uniform building heights across the street. The proposed height, while in excess of the height limitations, furthers the desire for a variety of height and massing. Sun/Shade - The Urban Design Guide plan states that: All new or expanded buildings should not substantially increase the spring and fall shadow patter (March 21 through September 23) on adjacent properties or the public R.O.W. In all building construction, shade shall be considered in massing and overall height consideration. Notwithstanding, sun/shade considerations are not intended to restrict building height allowances, but rather to influence the massing of buildings. The proposal substantially complies with the Urban Design Guide Plan. 5. And that the proposal substantially complies with all other elements of the Vail comprehensive plan. Applicant Analysis: As indicated in this analysis, the proposal is in compliance with all applicable sections of Vail's master planning documents. ADJACENTS SITZMARK AT VAIL INC 183 GORE CREEK DR VAIL, CO 81657 CHRIS LACROIX C/O GARFIELD & HECHT, P.C. 601 EAST HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN, CO 81611 VILLAGE CENTER ASSOC 124 WILLOW BRIDGE RD VAIL, CO 81657 TOWN OF VAIL FINANCE DEPT 75 S FRONTAGE RD VAIL, CO 81657 BELL TOWER CONDOMINIUMS CHARLES R NASH PO BOX 9878 DENVER, CO 80209 BELL TOWER CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION STEVE MACDONALD C/O VAIL MANGEMENT COMPANY PO BOX 6130 AVON, CO 81620 THE LODGE APARTMENT CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. JAMES S. BAILEY 1660 LINCOLN ST STE 3175 DENVER, CO 80264 GORE CREEK PLAZA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION STEPHEN L STAFFORD PO BOX 2264 EDWARDS, CO 81632 CREEKSIDE COMMERCIAL BUILDING LLC - ETAL 7060 E STONE CANYON DR TUCSON, AZ 85750-1386 VANDE GARDE FAMILY TRUST, LARRY DUANE & LINDA KAY VANDE GARDE TRUSTEES - ETAL 3,461 SW MACVICAR AVE TOPEKA, KS 66611-1839 SWITZER FAMILY LP 12970 E CAPE HORN DR TUCSON, AZ 85749 POTTER, JOHN PO BOX 500 MERMAID BEACH QLD 4218 AUSTRALIA TODDERUD FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 11,405 FOREST KNOLL CIR FISHERS, IN 46037 CREEKSIDE COMMERCIAL BUILDING LLC LINDA R. MALABY 363 FAAS RANCH ROAD, NEWCASTLE, CO 81647 LODGE APT CONDO ASSOC. CHARLEY VIOLA 174 EAST GORE CREEK DRIVE VAI L, CO 81657 LODGE PROPERTIES, INC. 174 E. GORE CREEK DR. VAI L, CO, 81657 LODGE PROPERTIES INC FIXED ASSETS DEPT 390 INTERLOCKEN CRESCENT STE 1000 BROOMFIELD, CO 80021 GORE CREEK PLAZA LLC 7060 E STONE CANYON DR TUCSON, AZ 85750 • TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: July 24, 1989 SUBJECT: A request for a height variance in order to construct an addition to the Gore Creek Plaza Building. Applicants: Rod and Beth Slifer I. DESCRIPTION OF VARIANCE REQUESTED The applicants are requesting a height variance in order to construct an addition to the penthouse unit at the Gore Creek Plaza Building. The request would result in an addition of approximately 756 square feet of gross residential floor area. The portion of the roof being raised consists of a gable placed in the north -south direction of the west side of the building, plus the enclosure of a deck with an extension on the northeast corner. The existing height of the ridge is 48 feet, making this building height legal, nonconforming. The existing building slopes down to 37 feet on the north side, . and the portion on the northeast corner where the addition will be varies from 40 feet to 43 feet. The gable addition on the west will match the 48 feet of the existing ridge and will not be higher than the existing ridge. The proposed addition on the northeast corner will vary from 44 feet to 49-1/2 feet. The variations in height on the northeast corner are partially caused by a change of grade between Gore Creek Drive and the Gore Creek Promenade. II. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS The main criteria for the variance are compliance with the Urban Design Considerations relating to height, along with the standard variance criteria. A. Compliance With the Urban Design Considerations for Building Height in Vail Village Building_Height The Urban Design Considerations state: "Basically, the Village Core is perceived as a mix of two and three story facades, although there are also four and five story buildings. The mix of building heights gives variety to the street --which is desirable. • The height criteria are intended to encourage height and massing variety and to discourage uniform building heights along the street. The definition of height shall be as it is in the Vail Municipal Code. Building height restrictions in Commercial Core I shall be as follows: 1. Up to 60% of the building (building coverage area) may be built to a height of 33 feet or less. 2. No more than 40% of the building (building coverage area) may be higher than 33 feet, but not higher than 43 feet.... 4. The above heights are based on an assumed 3 feet in 12 feet or 4 feet in 12 feet roof pitches. To accommodate and encourage steeper roof pitches (up to 6 feet in 12 feet), slight, proportionate height increases could be granted so long as the height of the building side walls is not increased." The percentage of the building over 43 feet is proposed to be increased as follows: 0 Change in Roof Heights With Proposal % of roof below 33 ft % of roof above 33 ft & below 43 feet % of roof above 43 ft Existing 17% 32% 51% Proposed 17% 11% 72% Although the roof does not match the proportions for roof height stated in the building height consideration, staff believes that the proposed roof plan meets the intent of the consideration. The proposed west roof has a 6 feet in 12 feet pitch which the consideration encourages. Despite the fact that the northeast roof pitch is 1/4" in 12 feet, the roof will not appear to be flat due to its location on the building. The end result is that there is variety in building height and massing which the consideration strongly supports. B. Consideration of Variance Factors: • Upon review of Criteria and Findings, Section 18.62.060 of the municipal code, the Department of Community Development recommends approval of the requested variance based upon the following factors: • U • 1. exisrinq or vicinity. Applicant's Response: of the var tial uses and structures in the The relationship of building height variance to other structures in the vicinity implies that the Gore Creek Plaza building may become a break in the continuous repetition and will increase interest in articulated roof forms, add variety and visual impact to the street and pedestrian travel. Staff's Response: The height of the Sitzmark Building to the west is 50 feet from the highest point, 43 feet on the east and south sides, sloping to a small portion on the west side that is 25 feet high. The height of the Bell Tower Building is 43 feet on its south, east and west sides and 50 feet on its north side. When one considers the heights of the adjacent buildings, it is clear that the Gore Creek Plaza Building is in keeping with its neighbors. 2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of_a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity „or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege. Applicant's Response: The degree of requested relief from the existing building height can be seen in the roof plan height percentages. The proposed roof area does not exceed the present overall height and only exceeds the roof area above 43 feet by 21%. Staff Response: 3. The fact that the adjacent buildings are also higher than the Urban Design Guide Plan recommendation of 43 feet, makes the request for a height variance not one of special privilege. The effect of the requested variance on 1 air, distribution of population, transpor traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities,_ and public safety. tion and Ll 11 C] Applicant's Response: The effect of the requested variance on light can be seen in the shade and shadow study. The effect on air, population, transportation, utilities and public safety is negligible. Staff Response: The factor to be considered here is the effect on light and public facilities. The proposal will add 161 square feet of shadow to the Gore Creek Promenade, while adding approximately 160 square feet of pavers further west. Please see accompanying memo. III. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to the proposed variance. IV. FINDINGS The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings before granting a variance: That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: The strict or literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff recommends approval of the requested variance because it brings the roof more into compliance with the Urban Design Considerations and conforms to the variance criteria. The fact that the adjacent properties are also higher than the height recommended in the Urban Design Guide Plan negates the issue of special privilege. C7 • • r-2Ci-s-T1 p _ f 1 0, u 1 hox (kca') s7SJGTt4.1E� , (-{Z.4� ^��+ �r�r nom, gn,•�c�k„r�er»�t I L__j CREEK PLAZA BUILDING I li "AV CREEK.. D Fr-';r,---'&��77 B U I L DI N".. - OGV8010) '11VA 0596!'!!6'0 L6 066 Z L6'OL6 3AM0 AM) 3809 — L5910 07 1111 1 31105 317113 MOW LS3M 01L e _ 9NIO11N8 tlMd M338) 3809 3) N 3 4 1 S 3 g q a M X33115 doo o a 3 I I I\/I I/\I I I I/ \ I El ------J L----- I i i i ❑ I a e Ery z � rcm i I I a x Ili I I I (i)S96i1Ib'Of6 OddZ'LLb'Of6 00tlN010..... 1s5I8 m1, ]IVoi6'tl 67la 11D016 a uaieseo0 uiM oll 3NU0 ➢3383 3tl09 — 9N101108 VMd 8338] 3809 — d 31N341S38 m o g q a M, q, �I a3�11s eoe s (J)s9er11e016 0662 lit Ob OOtl8010)'11VA o 15918 0) 111A v 811NS' 1S8M avoll BVINOU N100S Oil 9NI01108 Gild 1119) ROD 'd s„N, 1 y .° I) N I G I S I q q a M a3i11S www �_ M LU _ U-)_ LLUMM �M wM J m m =�* LL J m LL LL Z U) LL ILL= U) U) Z CO LL Z U) OQO O ,� Oar Oa O=IL O�Lr) 0 r 02� OCA t a=N OCHE OC�� Town of Vail Sitzmark Lodge Subject Addition to the Slifer Apartment on the forth side of the Gore Creek Plaza Building I have reviewed the plans for the Slifer addition and have no problem with it. Robert F. Fritch President The Sitzmark at Vail, Inc. Year Around Resort Lodging October 4, 2012 183 Gore Creek Drive • Vail, Colorado 81657 • (970) 476-5041 • FAX (970) 476-8702 TOWN OF VA Department of Community Development 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 PH: 970-479-2138 FAX 970-479-2452 www.vailgov.com November 9, 2012 A report to the Planning and Environmental Commission of an administrative action approving a request for an amendment to an existing conditional use permit, pursuant to Sections 12-9C-3, Conditional Uses, and 12-16-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for changes to the approved plans for the new east restroom building at the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, located at 540 South Frontage Road East (Ford Park)/Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto (PEC120044). Applicant: Vail Valley Foundation, represented by Hunn Consulting Group Planner: Bill Gibson Dear Planning and Environmental Commission members and adjacent property owners: The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the Town of Vail Staff has administratively approved an amendment to the approved conditional use permit for the Ford Park improvement project to allow for changes to the new east restroom building at the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater. The restroom building was administratively approved to be relocated 9-'/2 feet to the east of its originally approved location to create additional space between the new restroom building and the existing east concessions area. The review was completed pursuant to the development review procedures outlined in Section 12-16-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code. This administrative approval of the conditional use permit amendment will be forwarded to the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission at its public hearing on Monday, November 26, 2012 at 1:00 p.m. in the Vail Town Council Chambers, located at 75 South Frontage Road West. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me directly at 970-479- 2173, bgibson(a-)vailgov.com or attend the Planning and Environmental Commission meeting on November 26, 2012. Sincerely, Bill Gibson, AICP Town Planner Attachment: project description and architectural plans oesar�enes My GfttrocntG Tuna CW30VNM OLSY'NL9[6 l 6 flit . �Nf83NON�33 OQVSO1OJ+11VA t a a#a i9f ..1 Q O g n� W tl3MI�N31N� L 3SVHd :3'dIV3HllHdWV [ G Iiil G ae:�# f! a H Z °�a� tO2fi� Q = al�E9E �rdasa�9E EE,o,srd FF�Ea,o,N lolE6 e!wWlleJ'e^9R9 ewS Fg�p 9�"+gwJ'u^^tl-9GEl m9"O"d >�SoP!Ped �wJ wi FF2 EM ! P49Y�J+�9vei B6 � M 3aru�iuu�av 3d nsarvn saoroawi-ouiuuvw-3aw3uuJav -7 \' -7 u w G'� 41103 .11 GIVN3J I U g '':)NI+S31VIDOSSVaNV N 3 O HA Z G t ; M a I U g G E? Q° ® o ;I 7 C. Elm I I I C G G Q: 'OO O El Q S i a Q A � - ;o G o ~ J _ OiSiEECO[fi �/ EfLCEK'GLfi T3MiN ONV3001NOW OEEAblGLf E[EC9Ei0[f �NO®NOP1� 33N4�N -'°�"�^.,�*"'rn�•,y,; �n.�o..��v-'we,•� O(IVIIOIO:) 'IIdA0 ..S �I r Q 'a Lm ioAr7K�W alma w� l3S�dHd 3211H3HlIHdWb' 4 leea 4 aea�l va Q _ w f o o eo�ecefcsoe�xva aeercef �sae� xsf�o�w a� ossf mew xvr- p,16.,-71 E.� � - H— _M3Wl-'J3aNJ3NHAV3d NINNV3atlJS— -7 -7 a210J '21 a1H213J N\' 'DNI �S3IVIDOSSV aNV N 3 H 3 Z \J �I 1MEWEll I 1 3 � 3 c va I �I 1MEWEll 0 3 � oesar�enes My GfttrocntG Tuna CW30VNM OLSY'NL9[6 l 6 flit . �Nf83NON�33 OQVSO1OJ+11VA t a a#a i9f ..1 Q O g n� W tl3MI�N31N� L 3SVHd :3'dIV3HllHdWV [ G Iiil G ae:�# f! a H Z °�a� tO2fi� Q = al�E9E �rdasa�9E EE,o,srd FF�Ea,o,N lolE6 e!wWlleJ'e^9R9 ewS Fg�p 9�"+gwJ'u^^tl-9GEl m9"O"d >�SoP!Ped �wJ wi FF2 EM ! P49Y�J+�9vei B6 � M 3aru�iuu�av 3d nsarvn saoroawi-ouiuuvw-3aw3uuJav -7 \' -7 u w G'� 41103 .11 GIVN3J I U g '':)NI+S31VIDOSSVaNV N 3 O HA Z G t ; M a I U g G E? Q° ® o ;I 7 C. Elm I I I C G G Q: 'OO O El Q S i a Q A � - ;o G o ~ J _ OiSiEECO[fi �/ EfLCEK'GLfi T3MiN ONV3001NOW OEEAblGLf E[EC9Ei0[f �NO®NOP1� 33N4�N -'°�"�^.,�*"'rn�•,y,; �n.�o..��v-'we,•� O(IVIIOIO:) 'IIdA0 ..S �I r Q 'a Lm ioAr7K�W alma w� l3S�dHd 3211H3HlIHdWb' 4 leea 4 aea�l va Q _ w f o o eo�ecefcsoe�xva aeercef �sae� xsf�o�w a� ossf mew xvr- p,16.,-71 E.� � - H— _M3Wl-'J3aNJ3NHAV3d NINNV3atlJS— -7 -7 a210J '21 a1H213J N\' 'DNI �S3IVIDOSSV aNV N 3 H 3 Z \J �I 1MEWEll I 1 3 � 3 c va I �I 1MEWEll 0 3 �