Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2014-0623 PEC
TOWN OF VAIt f PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION June 23, 2014 at 1:00pm TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT 45 minutes A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on a major amendment to Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, pursuant to Section 12- 9A -10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to amend the condominium use requirements and restrictions for Phase V (structure at the northeast corner of the intersection of Vail Road and East Meadow Drive), located at 100 East Meadow Drive /Parts of Lots M and O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140014) Applicant: The Village Inn Plaza -Phase V Condominium Owners Association, represented by Steve Cady, Vice President Planner: Jonathan Spence ACTION: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 45 minutes 2. A request for the review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to 12 -9C -3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, for a public and quasi - public indoor community facilities (education center), to allow for the construction of the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Education Center, located 530 South Frontage Road /Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140005) Applicant: Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, represented by Jack Hunn Planner: Jonathan Spence ACTION: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 3. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the adoption of the Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan, to establish a comprehensive redevelopment plan for the Vail Valley Medical Center, Lot 10 (Town of Vail parking lot), and US Bank Building, located at 181 and 281 West Meadow Drive and 108 South Frontage Road West/ Lots E, F, and 10 Vail Village Filing 2, and Lot D -2, A Resubdivision of Lot D Vail Village Filing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140011) Applicant: Vail Valley Medical Center, represented by Braun and Associates Planner: George Ruther ACTION: Tabled to July 14, 2014 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 4. Approval of June 9, 2014 minutes MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 5. Information Update 6. Adjournment MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: Page 1 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. Times and order of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time the Planning and Environmental Commission will consider an item. 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 June 20, 2014 in the Vail Daily. Page 2 TOWN OF 9VAt PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION June 23, 2014 at 1:OOpm TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 MEMBERS PRESENT Henry Pratt Michael Kurz Luke Cartin John Rediker Webb Martin MEMBERS ABSENT Dick Cleveland Pam Hopkins 1. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on a major amendment to Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, pursuant to Section 12- 9A -10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to amend the condominium use requirements and restrictions for Phase V (structure at the northeast corner of the intersection of Vail Road and East Meadow Drive), located at 100 East Meadow Drive /Parts of Lots M and O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140014) Applicant: The Village Inn Plaza -Phase V Condominium Owners Association, represented by Steve Cady, Vice President Planner: Jonathan Spence ACTION: Tabled to July 14, 2014 MOTION: Cartin SECOND: Rediker VOTE: 5 -0 -0 45 minutes 2. A request for the review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to 12 -9C -3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, for a public and quasi - public indoor community facilities (education center), to allow for the construction of the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Education Center, located 530 South Frontage Road /Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140005) Applicant: Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, represented by Jack Hunn Planner: Jonathan Spence ACTION: Tabled to July 14, 2014 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Redker VOTE: 5 -0 -0 Jonathan Spence gave a presentation per the staff memorandum. Jack Hunn, representing Betty Ford Alpine Garden, introduced several members of the audience. He focused on the staff memorandum and the items staff identified as needing additional information. He spoke to the cause of the differences in plans as being the result of the addition of a restroom and the loss of the second office. He continued by discussing the need to nail down some elements around the use of the facility for weddings and other meetings. Commissioner Cartin spoke to a concern about the facility becoming more of a meeting and wedding venue at the cost of the educational focus of the Garden. Jack Hunn spoke to how evens would not be held except after normal business hours of the Education Center. Commissioner Rediker spoke to a need to have some sort of link to the Education Center with any event that is scheduled. He suggested fundraisers would be appropriate. He felt that Page 1 outside groups (private entities) renting the facility was going outside the boundaries of the use of the park as a public park. Commissioner Kurz spoke to the size of the facility and a maximum number of 53 participants as provided by Jack Hunn. Commissioner Cartin inquired as to any requirements placed upon the amphitheater social court yard. Commissioner Pratt spoke to the building occupancy requirements limiting the number of participants. His point was when events are introduced, loading and delivery become discussion points again. Including ADA accessibility access. Jack Hunn spoke to ADA accessibility and the efforts being made to comply and meet a desire to have the ability for golf carts move materials to the upper portion of the gardens. He believes they are approaching a solution. There was no Commissioner response. Jack Hunn spoke to safety and softballs and the fact that a shade structure was possibly going to cause an increase in the required number of bathroom facilities. He stated that there may be an outcome where the rooftop patio is not included or not covered as to not trigger additional bathrooms. He stated that a solution might be to not hold events on the upper deck when softball is being played. Several Commissioners provided input as to the upper deck and safety. Commissioner Rediker stated that it may be appropriate to require the applicant to carry insurance against injury. Jonathan Spence stated he would speak to the Town Attorney about the appropriateness of this request. Jack Hunn then spoke to the proposed parking solution to use the Vail Village parking structure. There would be no parking at the maintenance facility. He then moved on to the required mitigation of employees (Linkage Requirement) Commissioner Rediker inquired as to process for requesting a variance from employee mitigation. Jonathan Spence explained the process. Commissioner Cartin spoke to the need to show a hardship and not a special privilege for a non profit. Jack Hunn spoke to the requirement for a water loop in the park and the recent understanding that the funding for the loop project was being requested in the current budget and the improvement would be constructed at the same time the Education Center was under construction. The Commission spoke to a need to have the loop completed prior to occupancy Page 2 Jack Hunn spoke to the inclusion of an additional toilet in the women's restroom. This results in a single toilet and sink for men and two toilets and a sink for women. There was conversation between the Commission, applicant, and staff regarding the difference in the minimum requirement of the Building Code and the actual demand for restrooms during an event. Jack Hunn spoke to loading and delivery and the fact that packages will be delivered to the Village. There was conversation regarding the need for catering drop off and pick up. 3. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the adoption of the Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan, to establish a comprehensive redevelopment plan for the Vail Valley Medical Center, Lot 10 (Town of Vail parking lot), and US Bank Building, located at 181 and 281 West Meadow Drive and 108 South Frontage Road West/ Lots E, F, and 10 Vail Village Filing 2, and Lot D -2, A Resubdivision of Lot D Vail Village Filing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140011) Applicant: Vail Valley Medical Center, represented by Braun and Associates Planner: George Ruther ACTION: Tabled to July 14, 2014 MOTION: Kurz SECOND: Cartin VOTE: 5 -0 -0 4. Approval of June 9, 2014 minutes MOTION: Cartin SECOND: Kurz 5. Information Update 6. Adjournment MOTION: Cartin SECOND: Kurz VOTE: 4- 0- 1(Pratt recused) 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. Times and order of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time the Planning and Environmental Commission will consider an item. 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 June 20, 2014 in the Vail Daily. Page 3 rawN OF vain Memorandum TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 23, 2014 SUBJECT: A request for a worksession to present the conceptual plans for review of the proposed Betty Ford Alpine Garden Education Center, located at 530 South Frontage Road East /Unplatted. (PEC14005) Applicant: Betty Ford Alpine Garden Foundation, represented by Zehren & Associates, Inc. Planner: Jonathan Spence DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The Betty Ford Alpine Garden Foundation, represented by Zehren & Associates, Inc., is requesting a worksession with the Town of Vail Planning & Environmental Commission to discuss their responses to questions and issues arising out of the previous worksession for the proposed Betty Ford Alpine Garden Education Center, (BFAGEC), to be located within Ford Park. As this is only a worksession, the Commission is not being asked to take any formal action on the application at this time. Instead, town staff requests the Commission review the responses received and staff's analysis of those responses as they relate to applicable governing documents and provide direction to the applicant as they prepare for a requested public hearing before the Planning and Environmental Commission on July 14, 2014. It is important that any remaining issues and concerns be clearly relayed to the applicant at this time. II. BACKGROUND The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan, as approved, recommends that an education center be constructed in Ford Park and operated in conjunction with the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens. For instance, Goal #2, Objective #2.3 and Policy Statement #3 each make specific reference to the role the Ford Park location can play in providing educational opportunities for guests and residents of the Town. Specifically, the Master Plan recommends, Action Step #2.3.2, "work with the Betty Ford Alpine Garden Foundation on their proposal to create an educational and visitor center within the Park." To ensure the education center contributes favorably to the park and the experience of park users, a series of goals, objectives, and policy statements were developed. These goals, objectives, and policy statements are to be used by the applicant, staff, and decision - makers when considering future improvements within the Park. The more a proposed application achieves the stated goals and objectives and adheres to the policy statements identified, the more likely it is that the application will be approved. Conversely, if it is determined that the proposed application fails to further the goals, objectives and policies of the Plan, the application shall be denied. The proposed location of the education center along West Betty Ford Way within Ford Park garnered significant attention throughout the master planning process. As such, at least seven possible sites were evaluated before a preferred location was selected. To that end, once a preferred site was identified, an even more in depth study of the site was commissioned by the Town to ensure that the site was in fact feasible for the construction of a new building. The study revealed that, with but a few minor modifications, the site was suitable. Staff has included the adopted 2013 Gerald R. Ford Master Plan for easy references as Attachment C. According to the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail, Gerald R. Ford Park is located within the General Use Zone District (GU District). As such, the development and operation of the proposed education center is regulated by the provisions of the GU District. Pursuant to the provisions of the GU District, the development and operation of the education center requires the approval and issuance of a Conditional Use Permit and the adoption of an approved Development Plan. III. REVIEW CRITERIA The proposed development plan has not been fully analyzed at this time against the criteria for approval of a Conditional Use Permit; however, it is prudent to keep these criteria in mind during this worksession review. These criteria are as follows: Sec. 12 -16 -6. Criteria, Findings A. Factors Enumerated. Before acting on a conditional use permit application, the planning and environmental commission shall consider the following factors with respect to the proposed use. 1. Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of the town. 2. Effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public facilities and public facilities needs. 3. Effect upon traffic, with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the streets and parking areas. Town of Vail Page 2 4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses. 5. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to the proposed use. 6. The environmental impact report concerning the proposed use, if an environmental impact report is required by chapter 12 of this title. B. Necessary Findings. The planning and environmental commission shall make the following findings before granting a conditional use permit. 1. That the proposed location of the use is in accordance with the purposes of this title and the purposes of the zone district in which the site is located. 2. That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of this title. IV. DISCUSSION ITEMS Town staff requested and received an updated narrative on Monday, June 16, 2014 outlining the applicant's position on many of the key components of the siting and operation of the future education center. It was the intent that this narrative would serve as the proposal to be presented before the PEC in a public hearing for final action. Staff identified a number of concerns with the narrative, more specifically the lack of a concrete plan on many of the key issues. The applicant, in response to these concerns relayed on June 17th, has provided clarification to the narrative. What follows is the provided narrative, staff's response (Italics), the applicant's clarification (Red) and a brief analysis by staff on the status of the item (Italics). BETTY FORD ALPINE GARDENS PROPOSED EDUCATION CENTER PROPOSED USE / PROGRAM OF SPACE The Education Center will become the heart of Betty Ford Alpine Gardens. Its primary use is as an education facility or interpretive center where periodically changing displays will educate the public about the importance of plants. It will also serve as a place for adult and children's workshops. The alpine house is intended to be a `glasshouse' that will display plants on a year- round basis in a miniature mountain landscape. The rear or underground section of the building comprises the main working area and access to the botanical resources of the Gardens. There will be a herbarium (collection of dried plants on herbarium sheets), a resource library, volunteer and public workshop space, small workstations, one semi private work area and one small office /meeting space. The building is a modestly -sized facility, with an efficient building program. A small entry from West Betty Ford Way allows public access into the building, and leads to a small Town of Vail Page 3 reception/ greeting desk. This area in turn is open to the Display/ Multi- Purpose Room — the primary educational space — which is comprised of three bays, one of which can be closed off to act as a Board Room. The entry also leads to the Alpine House, which is a glass - enclosed educational space for public viewing of alpine flora. The "buried" portion of the building houses an open area for BFAG employees and volunteers. This area is also open to the public as a resource for information, pressed flower catalogues, alpine foliage publications, and the like. A small kitchenette serves as both a break room for employees, and a catering kitchen for events within the Display Space. Back of house spaces include a mechanical closet, alpine garden workshop, and storage shed. Exterior spaces include a pre- convene terrace at the main level, an upper level roof terrace, and an outdoor work area for staff. (Staff) It remains unclear how much of the program will be devoted to office and similar support type operations. In order to determine compliance with the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Master Plan, it is necessary for the floor plans and building program to accurately illustrate the proposed uses. With no changes to these submitted, and the provided narrative only speaking in generalities, this issue has not been adequately addressed. We have provided a rendered floor plan to delineate the proposed uses within the facility. (Staff) The provided Schematic Building Program, page 5 of the plan set, does not correlate to the provided floor plans, pages 9 and 10. The schematic indicates two offices while the floor plans show only one. A further clarification of the floor plan is necessary in order to determine compliance with the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Master Plan. Additional refinements to address this issue are necessary. WEDDING EVENTS / RENTAL OF THE FACILITY TO THIRD PARTIES Concern was expressed at our last PEC work session regarding the possibility of weddings taking place at the proposed Education Center. As a point of clarification, we want to make it clear that the proposed Education Center is not intended to host wedding events. Historically, weddings have occurred within the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens and we would intend to continue to host small, outdoor wedding events in the future. In prior discussions, we have suggested that the partially covered rooftop deck could provide temporary shelter from the rain to patrons of the park and of the gardens, including those who might be gathered in the gardens for a wedding event. Concern was expressed at our last PEC work session regarding the possibility that the proposed Education might be rented out to third parties. As a point of clarification, we want to make it clear that the `business plan' for the proposed Education Center does not rely on or contemplate revenue to be derived from third party rentals. However, we would prefer to leave the door open to the possibility that an appropriately affiliated group might host a small event in the facility at times that would not conflict with the operation of the gardens. (Staff) Although the provided narrative states that the center is not intended for Town of Vail Page 4 wedding events and that the business plan does not rely on third party revenue, the application requests that the possibility of "an appropriately affiliated group might host a small event" It is not staff's opinion that this is on its face problematic but rather with no parameters provided as to proposed hours and occupancy, an adequate review cannot occur. This issue has not been adequately addressed. By `appropriately affiliated group' we mean other non - profits, major donors to the BFAG, possibly corporate groups seeking a unique location to host a small gathering. These alternative uses would only occur after the normal business hours of the Education Center. The number of occupants would be modest and in keeping with the occupant load prescribed by applicable building codes. We are not opposed to putting some reasonable parameters on the size of the groups. (Staff) The appropriate time to establish the parameters of special events occurring at the new facility is prior to the public hearing before the PEC. Based on the feedback provided by the Chief Building Official related to occupancy, please propose reasonable parameters for activities, including special events, which may occur at the facility. Typical considerations include hours of operation, occupancy, the use of amplified sound, lighting etc. Additional refinements to address this issue are necessary. BUILDING MATERIALS (SUSTAINABILITY) The building materials for the Education Center are complementary to those used within Ford Park and to the recently- constructed facilities there, and have been selected for durability and their sustainable characteristics. The materials include Colorado stone veneer to make the building appear as if it has "grown" out of its hillside site, and boulders engaged into the stone veneer and the concrete retaining walls to reinforce this notion. Exposed glu -lam beams and columns (considered sustainable lumber) express the primary structure for the building, and help support two "living" roofs — one over the Display Area, and another over the work shed at the roof terrace. The front and side of the building are primarily high- efficiency glass, since those elevations house the Display Space and the Alpine House, where expanses of glass are desirable and appropriate. There is a limited amount of wood siding on the building, which is proposed to be beetle -kill pine, another sustainable material. The soffits for the roofs will also be wood, mostly likely pine. The roof terrace will be colored pavers over the waterproofed deck. The species and products proposed for exterior materials are summarized on the Exterior Elevation Sheets provided to Staff. (Staff) Thank you for the further clarification. A thorough review of materials will occur during the Design Review Board review. This issue requires no further action at this time. EXTERIOR LIGHTING /REFLECTIVE MATERIALS The revised submittal from Zehren and Associates includes cut sheets of the proposed Town of Vail Page 5 exterior light fixtures, which will meet the `dark sky' requirements of the TOV. Information about the possible `light tube' elements has also been provided. We do not anticipate any glare will be generated from the light tubes. Glazing on the `Alpine House' will be tinted and will be designed to minimize the possibility of glare, as viewed from any off -site location. The proposed hours of operation generally coincide with daytime conditions both winter and summer. Minimal overnight lighting within and around the facility may be desirable for security reasons, however under no circumstances would the overnight lighting of the proposed facility be brighter than the recently installed light fixtures along Betty Ford Way. (Staff) Thank you for the further clarification. A thorough review of the proposed lighting will occur during the Design Review Board review. This issue requires no further action at this time. GENERAL ACCESS /ADA ACCESSIBILITY /SITE PLAN There are multiple access routes through Ford Park to the proposed site of the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Education Center. The Ford Park 2013 Master Plan contemplates that the primary source of parking for Ford Park will be in the Village Parking Structure. A limited number of parking spaces are generally available at the northeast corner of the Park as well as across Vail Valley Drive, just east of Northwoods Condominiums. Patrons are also encouraged to arrive by bus, either from Golden Peak or from the bus stop near the east parking lot. Pedestrians can flow into the park from the south along Vail Valley Drive and across the Nature Center Bridge, from the west across the Manor Vail Bridge, from the northwest along the walkway from the parking structure and down West Betty Ford Way, from the northeast either down East Betty Ford Way or through the Tennis / Recreation Center area along existing paved pathways. Additionally, there are pathways through the existing Betty Ford Alpine Gardens and along Gore Creek from the west. Federal law does not require that every available route be accessible, but that an accessible route is made available from accessible parking facilities. A Ford Park Accessible Route Map was prepared by Logan Simpson Design for the Town of Vail in conjunction with the Ford Park Improvements (Phase 1). The map is included with this submittal package. As indicated, Ford Park does not currently have a single, continuous, accessible route between the upper bench and lower bench that meets ADA guidelines. We understand that the Town is working to improve this condition, but it will not be in the scope of the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Education Center to resolve accessibility issues outside the proposed building envelope limits. Per Town of Vail staff, accessible parking is available at Golden Peak and Manor Vail to the west of Ford Park and from the soccer field parking lot south of Ford Park. From those locations, accessible routes are provided along Vail Valley Drive, across the Nature Center Bridge south of the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, and via the Manor Vail Bridge to Betty Ford Way to the proposed site of the Education Center. Town of Vail Page 6 The proposed Education Center is anticipated to include two floors (the main level and the rooftop deck) but without an internal elevator. Therefore, the accessible route between floors will be accomplished by reconstructing the existing concrete path from Betty Ford Way, past the playground restrooms, around the west end of the basketball court, and match into the existing walk north of the basketball court. A connection will be provided from the second floor to the reconstructed concrete walk. In summary, the proposed Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Education Center is on an existing accessible route from marked, accessible parking. Additionally, an accessible route will be provided between the first and second floors. (Staff) On latest proposed site plan, (No. D, 06113114), the proposed realignment of the eastern path for accessibility may impact the use and operation of the basketball court. Until this plan has been fully reviewed and its impacts either to the existing or proposed redesigned playground fully understood, it is premature to go before the PEC. We have been working closely with Todd Oppenheimer on the re- design of the ADA path and believe that we have a mutually agreeable solution. We are attaching a site plan indicating the proposed solution, which disturbs the `hopscotch' area but not the `basketball court'. (Staff) The proposed site plan provided illustrates a curving path on the eastern side of the proposed building, providing an accessible route to the roof top terrace. The alignment, as proposed, results in the placement of a retaining wall at the edge of the basketball court. The current design may be problematic as ADA regulations do not permit the level of path curvature proposed and the location may negatively impact other uses within Ford Park, namely the basketball court. An email received on Thursday, June 16th from Todd Oppenheimer with Public Works, indicates that a resolution on the access has not been reached but additional work is ongoing with the applicant. Additional refinements to address this issue are necessary. SAFETY Safety within Ford Park is the responsibility of the TOV and the VRD. The potential risk of injury due to an errant softball getting beyond the perimeter fence along the western edge of the recreation fields has been considered by the TOV and VRD. As such, the height of the perimeter fence has been increased from 12' to 20' in an effort to mitigate the concern and to enhance safety in this vicinity of the park. We have discussed the situation with Dave Tanner of Tanner Consulting Group. He has shared some valuable information regarding ball flight characteristics. Our conclusion is that, while it is conceivable that a soft ball could be hit over the 20' high perimeter fence and it is physically possible that a ball could land on the proposed site of the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Education Center, it is unlikely. Town of Vail Page 7 The PEC has expressed concern for the safety of patrons of the Education Center who might be situated on the proposed `rooftop deck', which is proximate to the perimeter fence of the recreation fields. We are proposing to cover the majority of the rooftop deck with fabric on a light frame or trellis to provide shade, protection from rain and to further mitigate the risk of an errant soft ball injuring someone on the proposed deck. (Staff) The provided narrative returns to the previous position that safety within Ford Park is the responsibility of the TO and the VRD, not the applicant. As safety is the responsibility of all leaseholders within Ford Park, and the Town of Vail, this position is unacceptable. The distinction that we are trying to make is that the TOV and VRD have increased the length of the softball field and have increased the height of the perimeter fence to mitigate a perceived hazard. The BFAG will design its Education Center to protect patrons who may congregate on the rooftop deck by covering the area with fabric stretched over a trellis. We may also curtail the use of the rooftop deck at times when softball games are being played. (Staff) The clarification in regard to safety is appreciated. Staff would like to take this opportunity to remind the applicant that the proposal to cover the trellis for protection from the sun, inclement weather or for safety concerns does have an impact on occupancy and the required number of bathroom fixtures. This issue requires no further action at this time. PARKING (GENERATION AND PLAN) The Betty Ford Alpine Gardens has historically drawn many visitors to the lower bench of Ford Park for decades. The proposed Education Center will not necessarily increase the number of visitors to the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, but will certainly enhance the experience for visitors to Ford Park and to the gardens. The Ford Park 2013 Master Plan contemplates that the primary source of parking for Ford Park will be in the Village Parking Structure. A limited number of parking spaces are generally available for the public at the northeast corner of the Park as well as across Vail Valley Drive, just east of Northwoods Condominiums. Patrons are also encouraged to arrive by bus, either from Golden Peak or from the bus stop near the east parking lot. The staff of the gardens will not necessarily increase as a result of the development of the Education Center. Many of the current staff members already spend a portion of their day at the gardens between the months of May - October even though the administrative offices for the organization are presently located in Vail Village. These same staff members will spend more time in Ford Park once the Education Center has been completed and will have a year -round presence at the facility. The Gardens currently enjoys the year -round use of two (2) reserved spaces in the parking Town of Vail Page 8 lot on the east end of the upper bench of Ford Park. We have requested that up to four additional spaces in the east lot be allocated for BFAG staff to use. Alternatively, we have proposed that BFAG staff be allowed to park in the vicinity of the new Maintenance Building on the west side of the upper bench of the park during the winter months, which would free up two spaces for revenue generation for the TOV. The proximity of these spaces to the proposed Education Center would be most convenient for the staff of the gardens during the winter months. The expense of removing the snow from the area proposed for staff parking can be isolated and reimbursed to the TOV. (Staff) It remains unclear what the employee parking demand for the project is. The narrative presents, in general terms, ideas about parking but not a specific proposal. Has the proposal to park in the vicinity of the Maintenance Building been vetted by Public Works at this time? It is not appropriate to go before the PEC without a clearer understanding of the practicality of what is being proposed. Because we want to move forward with our application immediately, we are now proposing that the BFAG staff will continue to park as they have always done. Specifically, two year -round spaces are provided in the east lot and the BFAG purchases 3 — 4 additional passes for the east lot each winter season. There are several alternative solutions for staff parking that we would prefer. These alternative solutions are being discussed with Todd Oppenheimer and Greg Hall, but no agreement has been reached. In the event that we can come to some agreement with Public Works for a different parking solution, I suggest that we deal with it at that time. (Staff) The desire to move forward in an expeditious fashion should not result in undesirable plans from the applicant's perspective, if alternatives are available. That being said, staff is cognizant of the challenges parking poses in relation to Ford Park. The parking, as proposed is may be acceptable upon further review but staff (Comm Dev and Public Works) will continue to explore parking options that may be more favorable to the applicant. Additional refinements to address this issue may be necessary. EMPLOYEE HOUSING MITIGATION: Nina Timm has determined that the Education Center will generate a total of four (4) employees; however these are not new employees. The net effect of the development of the Education Center is the relocation of the headquarters of the BFAG organization from Vail village to Ford Park. (Staff) The most recent narrative is confusing in this respect. Is the applicant taking a position that mitigation is not necessary and a fee in lieu to meet this obligation is not being proposed? Clarification is necessary. By applying the EHU mitigation formula, the TOV has indicated that four new employees will be generated by the construction of the Education Center and that a Town of Vail Page 9 payment of approximately $58,000 will be required to mitigate the impact of the construction of the new facility. We are simply pointing out that there will not be any new employees as a result of this project and that the existing employees will relocate from their current accommodations in Vail Village. If the TOV chooses to impose the EHU mitigation fee under these circumstances the BFAG will be obligated to pay the fee. (Staff) As provided in the previous worksession memo, the anticipated EHU mitigation is as shown below. New Net Floor Area Proposed -BFAG Family Education Center Education 2,204.3 feet of net new floor area 2,204.3 feet x 1.2 employees /1,000 feet x 20% mitigation rate =0.53 new employees Professional Office 1,032.7 feet of new net floor area 1,032.7 feet x 3.2 employees /1,000 feet x 20% mitigation rate + 0.66 new employees Total employees to be provided employee housing= 1.19 employees Fee in Lieu of $74,481.00 per employee (2013 number *) $88,632.39 *The actual fee in lieu will be determined at the time of building permit review and is subject to change. As conveyed to the applicant, the EHU requirement is placed on new construction with the understanding that the net effect in the Town of Vail from new development will be an increase in employees. The requirement is assessed on all new development, regardless of nonprofit or for profit status. Examples of nonprofits subject to the requirement in recent times include the VVMC and VVF. If the applicant wishes to pursue a variance from this requirement, Section 12 -23 -11 indicates variances may be granted pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Chapter 17, Variances. Staff would encourage the applicant to make application for a variance if compliance with the Variance criteria for approval is believed to be met. This issue requires no further action at this time. FIRE FLOW (AVAILABILITY / DEMAND) Per Zehren and Associates, the proposed Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Education Center is anticipated to be Construction Type V -B with an estimated 3,100 square feet of internal floor space. Per Appendix B of the International Fire Code, this warrants a fire flow demand of 1,500 gallons per minute (GPM) at 20 pounds per square inch (psi) of residual pressure. There are presently two fire hydrants on the lower bench of Ford Park — both at the end of the existing dead -end water mains. The fire hydrant south of the Amphitheater was last observed to provide 1,915 GPM at 120 psi residual pressure. The fire hydrant south of the playground restrooms was last observed to provide 1,840 GPM at 120 psi residual Town of Vail Page 10 pressure. The TOV has previously proposed to complete the water main loop within West Betty Ford Way, but chose to defer the project last year. As a condition for permitting a connection to the 8 -inch public water main, the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District (ERWSD) is intending to require the completion of water main loop within West Betty Ford Way. The loop should increase the flow rate on -site above what was observed at the two existing fire hydrants. Therefore, once the loop is completed, the required fire flow volumes and pressures should be available for the Education Center. (Staff) If the looping of the water main is necessary for adequate fire flow during both the construction and future operation of the center, how is this proposed to be accomplished? Is the applicant requesting that the TOV complete the waterline within a certain period of time? It is not staff's approach that the looping is a requirement of the project, necessarily, but rather the timing must be understood. Clarification is necessary. The Water District wants the water system to be looped through the park for a variety of reasons. The TOV had previously committed to loop the water, but then deferred the work. The Water District has indicated that they will not permit another tap to the current system unless the water loop is completed through the park. Our civil engineer, Justin with Martin /Martin, has confirmed that the current `dead end' water main can provide adequate fire flow for our proposed facility without modification. If our building were connected, the year -round water use at the end of the dead end line would actually be beneficial to the district. Regardless, it appears that the water line will need to be looped in conjunction with the construction of the Education Center. To that end, we have authorized Martin /Martin to complete the engineering of the water loop project. We plan to bid the water loop work as an alternate to our project to isolate the cost of making this improvement. We intend to approach the TOV Council to request that they pay for the water loop portion of the project. (Staff) The provided fire flow demand and availability numbers are greatly appreciated. Mike Vaughan with the Fire Department has reviewed the information required and requests that the testing dates for the two hydrants in the vicinity be provided. The testing must have occurred within 60 days to be acceptable. It would appear that adequate flow for fire suppression is available, allowing the potential deferment of the looping requirement to prior to occupancy. Staff is encouraged by the applicant's proposal to bid the work as an alternative. Additional refinements to address this issue are necessary. ON -SITE RESTROOMS FOR ON -SITE ACTIVITIES The building occupancy has been calculated using the 2012 International Building Code. According to the building occupancy and the plumbing fixture calculations required by the Code, the building requires one restroom each for men and women. To be prudent, we Town of Vail Page 11 have calculated the Display Area using a "worst case" scenario as an assembly space, rather than the less restrictive education space it actually is — and this still yields two restrooms total. The exterior spaces of the building have not been counted as part of this calculation, since these spaces are used as pre- convene areas, and the same population of guests using these areas will also use the interior spaces (shared occupancy). We have proposed the required number of fixtures and in the required configuration. We see no justification to incur the additional expense to accommodate an arbitrary increase in the number of plumbing fixtures beyond what is required per these adopted building codes. (Staff) With no clear understanding of the parameters of events that may occur, how has it been determined that the proposed restrooms are adequate? A reliance on park restrooms to meet the needs of the center is not appropriate. Further clarification is necessary. We do not intend to rely on any restrooms outside of our facility to meet the needs of the occupants of our facility. The parameters regarding the capacity of events at the proposed Education Center are prescribed by the building code. The building code provides guidance as to how many toilet and lavatory fixtures are required, based on the size of the building and the proposed uses within the building. The Chief Building Official for the TOV has determined that, if we add one additional toilet to the women's restroom, we would be in compliance with all applicable codes. Therefore, we will amend our proposal to include this one additional toilet. (Staff)Per conversations with the Chief Building Official and a review of correspondence between the Paul Roberts of Zehren and Associates and Martin, additional refinements to the bathrooms may be necessary to accommodate the proposed occupancy related to the roof terrace and its covering. Additional refinements to address this issue are necessary. DELIVERIES FedEx and UPS Deliveries to the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens will be Infrequent. We would like to explore the possibility that UPS and FedEx would agree to deliver to a `drop box' to be located either at the new Maintenance Center on the west end of the Park or to the vicinity of the Tennis Center. As an alternative, we would propose to make arrangements with the Vail Valley Foundation to receive UPS and FedEx deliveries during the months of June — September at the Amphitheater so that no new vehicle trips through the lower bench of the Park will be generated during these months. Regarding the delivery strategy for US Mail and to avoid the introduction of new vehicle trips into the lower bench of the Park, the VRD have agreed to receive US Mail (but not parcels), at the Tennis Center. The US Postal Service has also agreed to drop mail for the BFAG at a new drop box to be located at either the Maintenance Building on the west side of the Park or in the vicinity of the Tennis Center in the east end of Ford Park. Town of Vail Page 12 (Staff) Staff is encouraged by the ideas presented in the most recent narrative but the issue remains unresolved. The narrative states that the applicant is going to "explore the possibility" and "propose to make arrangements" concerning alternatives to delivery vehicles visiting the new center. This is not a concrete proposal but rather a summation of ideas. A clear proposal, with approval from other affected parties (VRD, UPS, FEDEX, USPS etc.) is necessary. Further, the narrative is unclear in referencing only the months of June - September. Further clarification and the submission of a workable plan are necessary. After conducting additional research, we are now aware that UPS and FedEx will not deliver packages to a drop box. We will amend our proposal as follows: US mail will be delivered to a drop box to be located in the vicinity of the Tennis Center. UPS and FedEx will continue to deliver to the BFAG gift shop in Vail Village. Mail and other packages will be transported to the Education Center as necessary by BFAG staff. As a result, there will be no additional traffic generated in the lower bench of Ford Park as a result of the proposed Education Center. (Staff) The proposal, as now defined, appears to be compatible with the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan. Staff would encourage the applicant to continue to pursue other options that may be more convenient than that being proposed. Staff is available to discuss and investigate other options as they are presented. This issue requires no further action at this time. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends the Planning & Environmental Commission and members of the public engage in a dialogue with the representatives of the Betty Ford Alpine Garden Foundation about the proposed project. As this is only a worksession, the Commission is not being asked to take any formal action on the application at this time. Staff requests the this item be tabled to the July 14, 2014 Planning and Environmental Commission hearing. VI. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Applicants Submittal of 6 -19 -2014, including Photographs C. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Master Plan, without appendices. Town of Vail Page 13 ~ � Z J � Y Z cn £ $ o W Z C= PE IL Z (/� cn •Nr-�z _- WF o 0 oz� =0 'o I � tj dJ fD � c2 d? C y ff - u W k 4 4 y ICI i � Iii I � r = LEI og:'o 3� 9�3 s xr�•x*� \�. - x x xmMx x x Zx \ xx � i x a x i I -- 6w — i xti x ( fi _z1_ \ict- Xh]-Pf 1x `x .�Xl s\ xx x x } x xxx i 0 Z 4 1 / it n x LS x ♦ / � �a1 1 x� ♦♦ s� / / P Y ( r _ i e , 1 l e of i °x y a ry c a P a m1 \ g V 1 air i l/ iK� Lin wz y / a / LL �;i °m j V /< ♦ ° o 3 / 1o' Ile g° ;�� M O R- W(OL6) DW 99LL- 666(OL6) 113WN V 3O11NOW '�r2 se�vvossq�ue.eHaZ R46ZOZ ®�HB!�J Y �� IVZ)IN1D313 lHnjonM OZS94L(OL6) 79V 0 NNVINNI -MW OUV-"O:)'IFVA j 3 C IY INVHJ3W 1W] V _ mwi m w,l awvcsc(m a9alswaLq"A LsmI mem was ""1n'dwRe macs ozsu a1.+op�'uow-9a(me'oe -wre SN3(]NVD 3NWIV db03 kLIN ld k 9 k 1 Z? U oaw r, wl EOE.^S vZ=I 9w W _ A11N3D NoiivD (13 3 H 21 s g s JNI 'S31dIJOSSd dNd N321H3Z <m o N U d = LEI og:'o 3� 9�3 s xr�•x*� \�. - x x xmMx x x Zx \ xx � i x a x i I -- 6w — i xti x ( fi _z1_ \ict- Xh]-Pf 1x `x .�Xl s\ xx x x } x xxx i 0 Z 4 1 / it n x LS x ♦ / � �a1 1 x� ♦♦ s� / / P Y ( r _ i e , 1 l e of i °x y a ry c a P a m1 \ g V 1 air i l/ iK� Lin wz y / a / LL �;i °m j V /< ♦ ° o 3 / 1o' Ile g° ;�� M Nz w - - - r O Z 1 y� ■ 1 I / x" ^J / 1-0 i �z W O R- W(OL6) DW 99LL- 666(OL6) 113WN V 30NNOW '�r2 selvvossq�ue.eHaZ R46ZOZ ®�HB!�J IVZ)IN1D313 lHLnjonM OZS9-94L(OL6) 79V L009-9Z6(OL6) 'JNI'NIINVW/NUMM A. O�IOO IIVA 3 � Y �� IYINVHMW 1W] SN3(]NVJ 3NIdlV db03 1.1138 1V a mwi me m awvcsc(" am(swamxve LsmlmwQ o wus nw9nin'dwRenes w a*+op�'�w- 9a(me'oe k 9 k F U �d rn w( M"nS"wu+pn+� M 7 _ AIIN3D NoiivD (13 3Hl 'JNI 'S3IVIJOSSVONV N3NH3Z a j 1_ , <m o Nz w - - - r O Z 1 y� ■ 1 I / x" ^J / 1-0 i �z W w N�o= wow WWY II � I - ' I I � I - I I I s II I I i I - II i a I 0 �w< j I I e i II I i I a i I I i I I I I I I I � < a < 1 7\u/ i I / \ � wow I � � 1 W 1 I 4 f °u i My, E' a m zx MR 07Sa-8w(OL6) J3V 99LL- 666(OL6) 113M3N'830NNOW "2'� °O °ss9��a�kaZ R46ZOZ ®FHB! J IVJINJ D313 i"nj.DnM OZS"tL(OL6) Dw 0 NNMNI Oav-dOIOO I, IVA 3 E g W 1W] I�Y INdfi H HIM 1 -W � ma9m"A w(" L( WQW3 S W Q WIb n MW PMo>•V "PIB>W]-9+�L61B>bwa'3OM 'd SN3(]NVJ 3NIdlV dbOJ <U139 1V I LL O M U : ^ WML m[etl�6 ARN3D NOIIVDn(13 3Hl W a f _ ONI 'S3IVIJOSSVONV N3NH3Z 3 ca 1_ w N�o= wow WWY II � I - ' I I � I - I I I s II I I i I - II i a I 0 �w< j I I e i II I i I a i I I i I I I I I I I � < a < 1 7\u/ i I / \ � wow I � � 1 W 1 I 4 f °u i My, E' a m zx MR BETTY FORD ALPINE GARDENS FAMILY EDUCATION CENTER Schematic Building Program June 19, 2014 Room Width Depth Room Name (ft) (ft) Area SCHEMATIC MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN Entry Area 5.5 x 6.5 = 35.8 sf Reception 6.0 6.6 = 39.6 sf Kitchen 7.0 x 10.0 = 70.0 sf Display/ Multi- Purpose 37.0 x 22.0 = 814.0 sf Mens' Restroom 5.5 x 8.4 = 46.2 sf Warrens' Restroom 9.1 x 14.3 = 130.1 sf Comments canopy roof form visible from West Betty Ford Way front desk serves as break room and catering kitchen can be subdivided into two rooms ADA accessible ADA accessible "Alpine House" 15.6 x 36.0 = 561.6 sf southern exposure, all glass walls and roof, vented roof Director's Office 13.2 x 13.9 = 183.5 sf with views into offices and "Alpine House" Office 10.5 x 11.0 115.5 sf secondary office Meth Closet 5.0 x 8.5 = 42.5 sf mechanical closet Volunteer Space 26.5 x 26.5 = 702.3 sf open offices, high glass through display area Circulation 4.0 x 25.9 = 103.6 sf primary corridor NET SUBTOTAL: 2,845 sf (net square footage) NET TO GROSS MULTIPLIER (14%): 415 sf (for exterior and interior walls, etc.) (GROSS SUBTOTAL:) 3,260 sf SCHEMATIC ROOF LEVEL FLOOR PLAN Storage Shed 10.0 x 7.3 = 73.0 sf general storage for roof terrace NET SUBTOTAL: 73 sf (net square footage) NET TO GROSS MULTIPLIER (20%): 15 sf (for exterior and interior walls, etc.) (GROSS SUBTOTAL:) 88 sf NET GRAND TOTAL: 2,918 sf 140619 Education Ctr Program - PEC Work Session 2.x1s 6/19/2014 1 oft S rVIO W Cam^ J Z w Q W U Q — ?o 6 Z V w I` a O Z o o� N W R JI O I. cr� Z Q O V z W gig Q V �a J W 2 W ®� N LL. V w W F— k -L� � W w aSPMtIOC6) ]BV Y9LL'616 p[6) 6Y33NtlN31BM3l1.30YLOW "'�'� ^ "' "'n,,'°"t^m r.�rioz5iux ": ^'J LU z L otstan BOtbl maws pttl ]N1'H1tlYVbM1YVW OOVI10IOJ'IIVh z Q a °� € s�` SN3a21V7 3NIdIV 42103 kU38 lb' w m- a,ESSn �° d g d O an 1o1 mewle wo+��e rc.3 es 3anll3il1uav 3avxaNrl 2131N3J NoiivD I(]3 3Hl 0 1111 K F -_ gg Sa 1_1-'JNINNtlId-3anll3LNJNV ':)NI �S3IVIJOSSV aNV N 321 H 3 Z LU LL - - - z °Qw° LU w z w m- O - - w -_ gg LU LL - - - z °Qw° z -- LLJ ;-r ~ J 4 -_ V a a LLI o � fl m m a w - - LU �s Q U z U- - �® O = Z - Fr g rr rrr rrr� rrrrrrr-» m� oM __ u ovn v$� — ��_��� aaooa>ooa zaasaaaazaaaaaaaaasa oo x>��w vv 6ouwm �s -��� uo oou �uou aaa iaaagasaaapaa'd'za ao �o ��� K K Z Z A. w v w _ --- w as >LLw \ w ww ..............c...... . .. .. .. . .. .. .. ..wwwuew u�,�w wu xxxx f/1 U �� Q U Q LU F- w �z w W z z w =�z LLyys� m LL OH Z v w 2: Z w w 2 w Q - - w 0 U w w w L wo 0 �m � �~ 4a� 3 9P`� .u�, ��.�, u��,� 000w000c000 wwwwwwwwwwwwwww a �w 'Y3 - Q Q d' Q ¢¢r¢¢¢r¢¢¢r¢¢ m�mmmm'mmmmmmmmm 3�s_uuuu uuu � LL v m m � � _ Q w O U O LL W H LL O W w LL O a O H 0 O LL F O UJ W_ W H N LL O a O 0 O LL H N Q W S H 6D O UJ W_ W H U1 O a O 0 O LL H UJ Q W W w O U Q H O w S H O Z W aSPMt pC61 Y°[P6/6 p[6) 6YB11TLI1BMi1 "' � '� ^,.,•.:�y,,�wt^�r.�rioz5iux ": ^'� L 1� owan aw maws aro �ni •ru � OOV210103'IIVh i � 7 �, YI '° °6i 0 s 3 01PE9fi150w , E96�� a�a,ma, s�a�o,s w�ca awvon .�.s �s ossa`ia����v -sem meoa SN3a21V73NldlVONOJkU39IV U �„ g aia �o� me � vve wo��e�s> saoia3wi- mnNNVia 3af13ll311HJNV � 2131N3J NoiivD I(]3 3Hl O ')NI 'S3IVIJOSSVaNV N 3 21 H I Z Q w O U O LL W H LL O W w LL O a O H 0 O LL F O UJ W_ W H N LL O a O 0 O LL H N Q W S H 6D O UJ W_ W H U1 O a O 0 O LL H UJ Q W W w O U Q H O w S H O Z W 4f 1 EH - sum °o wo 1 l r a K \ J Y w a w 0 0 ° ° z O G > o w u s —(OC6) 99[t606WO — NIDN3ll3M3NR3DMNOW s9ertmts7 s3v movvis (9t6) Drvi•rvi.wvwMUmN ir�irvv,u3w iwo ,,, „ gy „v I ... -m n- O(IVNOIO:)'IIVA SNIONVO INIdIV GNOA A1119IV i � 1 �, .6 g bg ,9,9 . ��n�� �� �a M���•�9- 9�6,.�9 oa Drv,rvrvv,a- 3any3iirv�av me X999 3NIN —HJatl 3aYJ54NVl ONI 'Sa1VIDOSSV aNV N 3 i i 3 Z a p 5S. ° � § § � � ry s ry zSaoia3irvi- NIINID NOIIVDnC]3 3Hl Z OO LL <m o 4f 1 EH - sum °o wo 1 l r a K \ J Y w a w 0 0 ° ° z O G > o w u 0 dY 0o LAI Foy wo =o _ m a � s a °LSPML pC61 ]BV NL[ti%p[61 9fHNtlN31BMi1 R30YLOW " ��' �n'.'•.:�y,,'°"t^�r.�rioz5iux ": ^'� L °LSYMtBOtb) m°v9L6 pt61 xai'ralwwAnww OaVNOIOJ'IIVA 1PYNW�W iREf 01PE9fi150w , E96�� a�a,N ,Ls�a�o,N i1bB Z vzrc r; SN3(]NV73NldlV ONOJ kU39 IV � �y w�ca Rw%IIeJ .�.s �s oss�a �W^I�J�v -sem meoa � 3NfLJ31 3aVJ a � `11111 YItl6i g 3 � 2131N3J NoiivD I(]3 3Hl a Z O -y SNOIN3INI -'JNINNVId-3NfIll311HJNV 3m ':)NI 'S3IVIJOSSV aNV N 3 21 H 3 Z LL 1€ 1 <' 0 dY 0o LAI Foy wo =o _ m a � s a W 0 � I -- - -- - -- - 1 fi TIF — �I ��. , \ i V 1 \ 5 °0 °LSPML pC61 ]BV NL[ti%p[6) 9®NtlN31BMi1 R30YLOW " ��' �n'.'•.:y,,'°"t^�r.�rioz5iux ": ^'� L °ufirt Wt6) m°°9L6 pc0 ]N!'NLL°YVNII°NW OaVNOIOJ'IIVA a a�€ 01PE9fi150� , E96��! �!s�!a,maa[s�s�o,� SNWINV73NIdIV(ISOAkU39IV wwe Awy!,n.�.ea�s ozs!a w���.v- ves!meoa Y � a,a !o! me w,e wo+a•�e rcn es saoia3w!- oN�NNVia 3af13ll311HJNV � S3lN3J NoiivD I(]3 3Hl � 1111 ? g g € Q ':)NI 'S3IVIJOSSVaNV N 321 H 3 Z <.� 1 ry W 0 � I -- - -- - -- - 1 fi TIF — �I ��. , \ i V 1 \ 5 °0 � / El d � � A G � s �s -u- . � �_, i! :e S 3 O3NI ]d ¥ O AkU3 1 IN, ° � |g� q§ \ 73\ 113 N]D NOL¥anO]]HI P 1111 » (! ; , i s G% N I A H I z b!! 1 ; ; 2 � / El d � � A G � s �s -u- Ey--- k OLSPML pC61 ]BV NL[ti%p[6) 9®NtlN31BMi1 R30YLOW H W O " ��' �n'.'•.:y,,'°"t^�r.�rioz5iux ": ^'� Z J A L otsvan aiw m0YK6 p[6) ]NI'N1wWAalww OaVMOIOJ'IIVA 5 01PE9fi150� , E96�� s� a,Na , [s�s� o,N ' ° Z SNWINV7 3NIdIV (ISOA kU39 IV o C14 3anll3 -v 3avxarm COf ! RM9 wD+��e rc986 01111 e�eIs g 3€ 2131N3J NOIlHJfI(]3 3Hl�J O Q saoia3wi- 'JNINNVIa- 3anll3inuav ':)NI 'S3IVIJOSSV N 321 H 3 Z aNV Ey--- k - H W O - Z J A OLSPML pC61 ]BV NL[ti%p[61 9®NtlN31BMi1 R30YLOW ����'in+.�..:v.,�wtm�rl rloZSiux.:n� L OL59ML W[O [GOFfL6 p[61 ]NI'NIWIWMWVW OaVI1010J'IIVA gg a ,� °s ° s a SNWINVO 3NIdIV (ISOA kU381b' Nib ww 3drxaNrl a `�itEi g 2131N3J NOIlHJfI(]3 3Hl Z Z 0 DNINN11NJav SNOIN3INI -'JNINNVId-3NfIll311HJNV ':)NI �S3IVIJOSSV N 3 2I H 3 Z V p aNV w W Y Z W U w w IL U D Z J 0 �9 z� 3a Z Q a a U w. � v Z" Q� AQ s "s 3 5 n E "ms ��a E"mc�msgo "m5�'g5 sin geAT 1 , 1'teh�geaH" w-Ig U -N deg��HHH" �� H a as Fa _ a � OzsmzoOL9 ]3V 99"- 6/6(0[61 mvaNR3oaNO1V 1 1V87D3nw 'map sa�oioosrp sua.ula�,vr alJZrn vex, i,�;m� W 0zsmz 00"6) 33V "0099Efi10"W ']NI't4UN LLNVW �IRRI'�W l O4VNOIOJ TVA I I Q SN3Q11VO 3NIdlV Oi103 AMB IV i U V) a u o IO10-E96 (500)XVd O6BYE96 (500) 0001-6661OL6)XVd L5L0-6WOLO LOLE6 O010 op--- V-9L61> G'O'd d13101 EOE a1!�5 "MI6J�09e306 r y —vivo c 31d,3Nf13ll-315HJ SUN3D NouvDn(13 3HI E a 4 f i i z¢ ¢ b 590M3JNI-3- V 'JNI 'SIIVIJOSSV I7NV N RI H Z 4 JC� s o o �= .. � e w W Y Z W U w w IL U D Z J 0 �9 z� 3a Z Q a a U w. � v Z" Q� AQ s "s 3 5 n E "ms ��a E"mc�msgo "m5�'g5 sin geAT 1 , 1'teh�geaH" w-Ig U -N deg��HHH" �� H a as Fa _ a � Oj /� s�� i 1 rwm mom 2 M J Q 1 ? C n = 7 H F N Q w LL x Q w H 0 J Q 0 O H z 3 a w O U w�. ti y AQ OzsmzoOL9 33V 99"- 6/6(0[61 mvaNR30MNO1V 'map sa�oioosrp sua.ula�,vr alJZrn vex, i,�;m� 0zsmz 00"6) 33V "0099Ema '3NI 14 �IRRI'�W � OdVMOIOJ TVA j 39 w V SN3Q11VO 3NIdlV Oi103 AMS 1V 715 i � g � ce a o IOL6-E96(509)M 0699- E96(509) OBOI-6661010XV3 L5L0-666(OLO LOLE6 eluloJle]'el =9re9 �K O019 Op¢�o1�J— V-9L61> 0'0'd "MIeNJ�99e396 LJ..I y a 8 4 f i A i OM�d 13 LOL EOE a1!�5 3NOLJ3 1- 3dVJ5(INVI 2131N3D NoiivDn(13 3Hl MM- 1-ONIN --3 of UIHJNV 'JNI'S3IVIJOSSVl7NV 321H3Z N O soy _..�� b 7A u Oj /� s�� i 1 rwm mom 2 M J Q 1 ? C n = 7 H F N Q w LL x Q w H 0 J Q 0 O H z 3 a w O U w�. ti y AQ 51 - 106111.08 -6 -Dt" OQ V doloD 1iNn OD II✓ V H Zp V flog ITVA dO K/"Ol :m'BuiAanans 2Id. NaD fqOIdljl -lQd - NgcTlIvD gKTd -1v Q2IOd Ali gs aBuea ajog JVW JIHdV'dgOdOl / / r I PI 1 1 1 1 1 I � a 1 1 ( i a - o� - " " i i /gC r 1 jw i oN eor —90 die- z�b- eoON�N ° JS Js SIOZ /9 /S " �S Ae n�mvaa a - o� - " " i i /gC r 1 jw i 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan An Element of the Vail Comprehensive Plan A" .,_..1 .1 . ....... . . Oiw November, 2013 lly^k Resolution No. 14, Series 2013 wbhm.- -4; WWI RESOLUTION NO. 14 Series of 2013 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2013 GERALD R. FORD PARK MASTER PLAN, AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, on April 16, 2013, the Vail Town Council instructed Town Staff to prepare a new master plan for Gerald R. Ford Park; WHEREAS, the new master plan was to be a compilation of previous planning efforts for the Park and the articulation of recommendations for new improvements with the Park; WHEREAS, the new master plan is intended to be an element of the Vail Comprehensive Plan; WHEREAS, the new master plan is intended to have a ten year life span with periodic updates and amendments when needed; WHEREAS, the primary purposes of the new master plan are to protect the Park from over development, to define expectations for the use of the Park, and to assist in decision - making regarding capital improvements and other changes proposed in the Park; WHEREAS, the new master plan was prepared in collaboration with the Vail Recreation District, Vail Valley Foundation, Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, Vail Economic Advisory Council, Art in Public Places Board, Planning & Environmental Commission and many other interested citizens from the Vail community; WHEREAS, on July 22, August 12, and August 26, and September 9, 2013, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission held public hearings on an application to adopt a new master plan for Ford Park; WHEREAS, on October 28, 2013, the Town of Vail Planning & Environmental Commission forwarded a recommendation of approval, with modifications, of the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan amendments to the Vail Town Council; WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds and determines that the new master plan recommendations are consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the town; and, WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds and determines that the new master plan promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that conserves Resolution No. 14, Series of 2013 and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT: SECTION 1. The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan is hereby adopted as depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto. INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Vail Town Council of the Town of Vail held this 19th day of November, 2013 ATTEST: Andrew P. D yo CA-, Tamm N el, Actin wn Clerk Q"a ©F'V•. �ol_oR� Resolution No. 14, Series of 2013 2 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Prepared for: The Town of Vail Prepared by: Town of Vail Department of Community Development ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: Vail Town Council Andy Daly, Mayor Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Pro -tem Jenn Bruno Dale Bugby Dave Chapin Greg Moffet Margaret Rogers Former Vail Town Council Kerry Donovan Kevin Foley Susie Tjossem Vail Recreation District Vail Valley Foundation Art in Public Places Betty Ford Alpine Gardens and Braun Associates, Inc. Vail Planning and Environmental Commission Bill Pierce, Chair Henry Pratt, Co -Chair Susan Bird Luke Cartin Pam Hopkins Michael Kurz John Rediker TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 1 2. Site Assess ment/Existing Conditions 6 3. History of the Park and Previous Planning Efforts 10 4. Goals, Objectives, Policies and Action Steps 19 5. Ford Park Sub -Areas 36 6. Illustrative Plan 54 7. Park Management 62 8. Appendix 64 Due to the volume of material, the information listed below is provided in a separate document, the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan Supplemental Appendix. • Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1973, authorizing the purchase (by condemnation) of the property known as the Antholz Ranch. • The Vail Plan, 1974 • Resolution No. 1, Series of 1977, naming the property commonly known as the Antholz Ranch to Gerald R. Ford Park. • The Gerald R. Ford Park and Donovan Park Master Plan Development Final Report, 1985 • Resolution No. 27, Series of 1987, designating the seven acres around the Nature Center as an area to be preserved as an example of the Gore Valley's natural history. • Resolution No. 44, Series of 1988, amending the 1985 Master Plan to add four tennis courts and to change the location of the aquatics center. • Ford Park Management Plan, 1997 • Ford Park Management Plan Update, 2012 • BFAG Building — Site Evaluation Matrix, 2013 • Betty Ford Alpine Gardens — WBFW Site Evaluation, Martin /Martin, August 15, 2013 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan November 2013 "Whereas, President Gerald R. Ford has brought to the Town of Vail his interest and encouragement; has shown through his private life and public life a commitment to recreation, the environment and places set aside therefor; and believes that a statement of the community's appreciation and respect for Gerald R. Ford is appropriate and called for; that the property commonly referred to as the Antholz Ranch is hereby named the Gerald R. Ford Park." Resolution approved by Vail Town Council, January 18, 1977 Chapter 1 - INTRODUCTION The Town of Vail acquired the 38 acre Anholtz Ranch in 1973 for the stated purpose of "creating a major recreation facility for the total town" (The Vail Plan, 1974). Since that time the property has increased in size to more than 47 acres and has evolved into one of Vail's most widely used and highly cherished assets. The evolution of the Antholz Ranch to what has become Ford Park was originally contemplated by one of Vail's earliest planning efforts: "The intended use program is a comprehensive one and eventually the park will include an impressive number of facilities in addition to extensive open tun` space and the delight of the natural earth forms and mature tree growth adjacent to Gore Creek." The Vail Plan, 1974 The goal of the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan (the Plan) is to maintain the essence of what Ford Park (the Park) is today and what was envisioned for the Park in 1974 — a combination of natural open space along the Gore Creek corridor coupled with recreational, social and cultural uses and facilities to serve the needs of residents and guests of Vail. The primary purposes of this Plan are to protect the Park from over development, to define expectations for the use of the Park, and to assist the Town in decision - making regarding capital improvements and other changes proposed to the Park. Only those changes deemed to be in compliance with applicable elements of this Plan will obtain approvals from the Town. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 1 The Town has completed four planning efforts for the Park. These plans have directly influenced the development of Ford Park and each has contributed to the role the Park plays in the community. These previous planning efforts were: 1974 Vail Plan — While the primary purpose of this plan was to address Vail's growth and development, it did include a chapter on recreation and defined at a very broad level the role Ford Park could play in providing recreational, cultural and community- oriented uses. 1985 Gerald R. Ford Park /Donovan Park Master Plan Development Final Report — At the time this plan was prepared; ballfields, tennis courts, and parking had already been developed and construction of an amphitheater had commenced. The purpose of this plan was to "guide the future development of the park and establish guidelines for the implementation of improvements" (1985 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan). 1997 Ford Park Management Plan — This plan was initiated in response to several development proposals for the Park. The plan was a product of extensive focus group and public input sessions and in essence served as an amendment to the 1985 plan. 2012 Update to the Ford Park Management Plan — This plan was done to acknowledge improvements proposed for the Park that were initiated when Vail voters approved re- allocating a portion of the Convention Center Funds to Ford Park. Summaries of these previous plans are found in Chapter 3. While the impetus for these planning efforts varied, each involved extensive community input, debate, and at times, controversy. These planning processes revealed the community's intense passion for the Park as town staff, elected officials and the public worked to find the appropriate levels of development and activity for the Park. The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan presents a compilation of these previous planning efforts along with new direction and ideas that have evolved from this latest planning effort. The primary objectives of this Plan are to: • Incorporate key elements of previously completed plans for Ford Park into one document, specifically those guiding principles that have successfully shaped the development of the Park from its inception, 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 2 • Establish clear expectations for the future use, development and management of the Park, • Protect the Park from over -use and over - development; • Define effective tools for decision - making regarding the future of the Park, and • Provide a single, comprehensive document to serve as the master plan for the Park. With the adoption of this Plan, previous plans for Ford Park will be archived and no longer used as guides for future decision - making or planning for the Park. The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan will serve as the Town's sole planning document for the Park. The development of Ford Park has evolved over a number of decades. While the majority of the Park is developed, and notwithstanding the most recent phase of improvements to the Park, there is no reason to think that the Park will not continue to evolve in the future. This Plan was prepared with the expectation that it will provide the community with a document to guide the use and development of the Park for the next ten years. That said, it is likely that during this time new ideas or issues not addressed by this Plan will arise, be they proposals for enhancements to existing facilities, the development of new facilities, or new uses for the Park. This is to be expected as the needs of the community will change over time and as they do changes to the Park may be appropriate. As dialogue and debate occur regarding any changes to the Park, it is critical that decisions made by the Town maintain the essence of what Ford Park is, why it was established, and how it provides environmental, recreational, educational, cultural or social benefits to the community. The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan was adopted by Resolution No. 14, Series 2013 by the Vail Town Council following recommendation from the Vail Planning and Environmental Commission. Future amendments to this Plan may be initiated by the Vail Town Council, the Planning and Environmental Commission, or members of the community. Any such amendment proposal shall be reviewed by the Vail Town Council following recommendation from the Vail Planning and Environmental Commission. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 3 Elements of this Plan This Plan includes the following chapters: 1. Introduction The section provides an introduction to the plan, the purpose of this planning effort and outlines the major elements of the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan. 2. Site Assessment and Existing Conditions This section explains how site and surrounding conditions influenced the initial planning and design of the Park. 3. History of the Park and Previous Planning Efforts The 1997 Plan has provided the basis for this history and background of the Park and the summaries of the four previous planning efforts that have taken place. Site plans of the Park produced during these planning efforts are to provide a history and context for how the Park has evolved over the years. 4. Goals, Objectives, Policies and Action Steps While the 1997 Plan provided a framework for this section, the goals, objectives, policies and actions steps have been refined to better express the current vision for the Park. 5. Ford Park Sub -Areas Seven sub -areas are used to describe specific areas of the Park, their unique features, the role they play in the Park, how they will be managed and provide recommendations for improvements that could occur in the future. 6. Illustrative Plan The 2013 Illustrative Plan is a refinement of the 2012 Illustrative Plan; it depicts existing improvements and at a general level describes improvements that may occur in the future. 7. Park Management This chapter provides a brief summary of the various management and operational aspects of the Park that are managed by the Town of Vail. 8. Appendix 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 4 Documents relative to the history of the Park and previous park planning efforts are provided in a separate document, the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan Supplemental Appendix. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 5 Chapter 2 - SITE ASSESSMENT /EXISTING CONDITIONS Located immediately east of Vail Village, the proximity of Ford Park to Vail Village and the convenient access it affords residents and guests is one of the Park's most significant attributes. This is no coincidence as the 1974 Vail Plan documented how the location of Ford Park was a key factor in it being purchased for a community park and in defining the initial vision for the Park to be a major center of cultural and recreational activity for the community. "all properties of significant size within the Town limits were researched and the recommendation made that the Anholtz property, adjacent to development at the east end of the Village, was the only site satisfying the recreational uses anticipated. Selection criteria included such factors as ease of walking distance from the Village, adequate space within a single parcel for large, meadow -like tun` areas, proximity to the Frontage Road for simple and direct access by autos or buses, natural beauty such as the Gore Creek provides, and directness of connection to major bicycle and pedestrian trails. " The Vail Plan, 1974 When purchased, the original Anholtz property was +/ -38 acres. Today, Ford Park is approximately 47.1 acres. The four areas of the Park and their acreages are depicted below: Main Park +1- 2W,$ Acres Sore Creekl7Vakure Canker +f- S&.^ Acres ` Snrw Field_ +A -.5.5 Auer Ford Park, 2013 In January of 1977, Resolution No. 1, Series of 1977, was passed re- naming the Anholtz Ranch to the Gerald R. Ford Park. A copy of this resolution is included in the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan Supplemental Appendix. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 6 Existing Conditions In the past forty years many improvements have been made to Ford Park. Foremost among these are athletic fields, the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, a children's playground, the Vail Nature Center, the Vail Tennis Center and parking and transit facilities. Infrastructure necessary to serve the Park is largely in place and vehicle and pedestrian access to and within the Park has been established. With the exception of the Gore Creek Corridor, the majority of the Park has been improved with buildings, facilities or other related site improvements. Access and circulation is a key factor in how the Park functions. On -site parking is provided, but in keeping with the original concept for the Park the amount of parking is limited to +/ -200 spaces along the Frontage Road and +/ -65 spaces at the Soccer Field. Parking for major Park events is provided in the Town's parking structures. Access from these structures to the Park is provided by pedestrian corridors and the Town's transit system. Pedestrian access is provided via the Gore Creek Trail, a sidewalk along the South Frontage Road and by two bridges in the Golden Peak neighborhood. The Park's main transit stop is located on the South Frontage Road with additional stops on Vail Valley Drive. These stops are served by the in -town shuttle and by dedicated express bus service during special events. Site Characteristics and Park Desian Physical characteristics of the land and the relationship of the Park to surrounding uses and facilities influenced the earliest design concepts for the Park. Significant influences in the early design of the Park include the South Frontage Road (that establishes the north boundary of the Park), Gore Creek and adjoining wetland and riparian habitat (that run the entire length of the Park), site topography, vegetation and views. Topography of the main portion of the park between the Frontage Road and Gore Creek includes a prominent and well- defined grade change that creates an "upper bench" and "lower bench ". Over time this grade change, created in large part by grading from the construction of Interstate 70, became a point of demarcation for the predominantly active recreation uses on the Upper Bench and the cultural and passive recreation uses on the Lower Bench. Much of Ford Park was initially developed without the benefit of a detailed design or development plan. The 1974 Vail Plan did, however, set the stage for the future of the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 7 Park by defining a number of basic design parameters for how the Park could be developed. There are many examples of how these basic design parameters and existing site characteristics directly influenced the design and development of the Park. Parkina and Transit These facilities were located on flat terrain immediately adjacent to the South Frontage Road and on the perimeter of the Park. This location minimizes the impacts of vehicles on other areas of the Park. Athletic Fields Fields along the Frontage Road were located on what at that time was the Park's broadest expanse of relatively flat terrain. Not only did the fields "fit" on this portion of the Park, the flat terrain minimized the need for site grading and associated site disturbance. The fields also provide a buffer between highway noise and other quieter areas of the Park. The Amphitheater The Amphitheater essentially straddles the grade transition between the Upper and Lower Bench. This location allowed the Amphitheater to utilize sloping terrain to create terraced seating areas within the Amphitheater. This location also affords stunning views to the Gore Range. Nature Center The Nature Center is located within the relatively undeveloped Gore Creek Corridor. The natural character of the creek corridor provides a fitting location for the environmental education programs offered by the Nature Center. The 1985 Ford Park Master Plan spoke eloquently about the philosophy of good park design and the role site conditions and characteristics should play in the design process. "Compatibility of the park development within the environment is the most significant aspect of the master plan. The existing landscape is an integral part of each plan and not merely a backdrop against which the plans are staged. This is essentially necessary with parklands, for there we expect the landscape to be stable, pleasant and above all, functional. Accordingly, the planning and design process was founded on a sound understanding of the features and dynamics of the park site environment. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 8 Just as a tapestry is woven from many threads of different colors, textures and strengths, so the landscape is composed of a variety of components such as slopes, soils, plant communities and aquatic features. Each of these must be identified and described, but more than that, the role of each must be understood as a dynamic entity so that limitations and opportunities can be properly understood. This involves the translation of forms, such as slopes and soil type, into processes, such as runoff and soil leeching, and the definition of critical inter- relationships among them." 1985 Ford Park Master Plan Integrating improvements with the landscape in order to create a pleasant and functional park should be the goal of any park design. While developed without the benefit of a comprehensive, detailed design plan, the major elements of the Park have been located and designed in a manner that is very responsive to site conditions and other influences. Ford Park today reflects many elements of the original vision for the Park as outlined in the 1974 Vail Plan and as further defined by the 1985 Ford Park Master Plan. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 9 Chapter 3 - HISTORY OF FORD PARK and PREVIOUS PLANNING EFFORTS During the past forty years the Town of Vail has completed four major planning efforts for Ford Park. This chapter summarizes the purpose, process and outcome for each of these planning efforts and provides information on the history and development of Ford Park. Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1973 (a copy of which is included in the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan Supplemental Appendix), authorized the purchase (by condemnation) of the property known as the Antholz Ranch. At that time the 38 -acre park site represented the last remaining parcel of undeveloped land central to use by all residents and visitors of the Vail community. The ordinance listed a variety of possible uses for the property including the following: • for park and greenbelt purposes, • to preserve the natural and physical character of the area to be condemned, • for bicycle, equestrian and hiking trails, • for children's playground, • for performing arts and civic center, • for a ski lift and related facilities, • for picnic areas, • for recreational facilities such as tennis courts, swimming pools, gymnasium, ice skating rink, • for theater and assembly halls, convention center, public schools, • for possible exchange or trade of condemned land, or a portion thereof, with other property which may exactly meet the needs of the town, and • to construct and maintain water works, transportation systems, and other public utilities relating to public health, safety, and welfare. The four major planning efforts for Ford Park include: The Vail Plan, 1974 The Vail Plan was completed in August of 1973 and adopted in 1974 (a copy of this plan is found in the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan Supplemental Appendix). In the early `70's Vail pressures from growth and development were radically changing the character of Vail and the primary purpose of the Vail Plan was to help the town respond to growth pressures with the goal of "creating a recreationally -based community of individuality, beauty and pleasure that can be unique in the United States" (The Vail Plan, 1974). The plan included a chapter on the Town's recreation system. The Antholz Ranch 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 10 property was mentioned as "the only site capable of satisfying the anticipated recreational needs of the community" (The Vail Plan, 1974). The Vail Plan's vision for the Antholz Ranch was to create a "major community park - cultural center." A wide range of potential uses for the park were identified: • a place for showing and creating art, crafts, etc., • an indoor theater and an 800 seat outdoor amphitheater, • meeting rooms and community workshops, • wide outdoor terraces and natural landscapes • indoor ice arena, • tennis and handball courts • children's play facilities and space for family activities, • headquarters for the Annual Vail Symposium and local television, • a possible location for an ecologium (nature center), and • a grammar school. As a balance to this extensive program of uses and facilities for the Park, the Vail Plan contemplated the preservation of the Gore Creek corridor as a passive, quiet place to enjoy the natural beauty of the site. The plan called for 200 surface parking spaces to meet the daily parking needs of the park. Parking for major events was planned to be provided in the Vail Transportation Center with town transit and various trails and bikeways providing alternative means to access the Park. The Vail Plan also depicted a potential road connection at the east end of the park that would link the Frontage Road with Vail Valley Drive. While the Vail Plan did not include a detailed design plan for the Park, the conceptual site plan provided a vision for how the Park could be developed. A number of existing park improvements reflect some of the basic concepts from the 1974 Plan. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 11 F, Conceptual Plan for Ford Park, Vail Plan, 1974 �r9 t Sic A MMICT s ' . - 41 fl�( Gerald R. Ford Park and Donovan Park Master Plan, 1985 In August of 1985 the Gerald R. Ford Park and Donovan Park Master Plan Development Final Report was adopted by the Vail Town Council (a copy of this plan and Resolution No. 19, Series of 1985 is found in the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan Supplemental Appendix). When the 1985 planning process was initiated, improvements in the Park were limited to athletic fields, tennis courts and parking. A foundation for an amphitheater was in place but this project was not yet completed. At that time the very eastern end of the Park along the Frontage Road was utilized as a snow -dump. The purpose of the 1985 plan was to prepare a more detailed plan for the future development of the park and to establish guidelines for the implementation of park improvements. The master planning process included a Recreation Needs Analysis Survey and extensive community input via workshops and community meetings. The outcome of these efforts was an indication of the type and extent of improvements the community wanted to see in the Park. Alternative site plans were considered and a final, preferred plan was selected. This final plan included a swimming pool complex, "neighborhood park improvements" (on the Lower Bench), a pond /skating rink (on the Lower Bench), and the realignment of the eastern softball field. Development of the neighborhood park improvements on the lower bench were completed in 1988 and 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 12 included restrooms, playground area, open turf area, picnic facilities, and the west access road. The first major structure to be constructed in the Park, the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, was completed in July of 1987 and shortly thereafter a Parking and Transit Study for the Amphitheater was completed. This study made five recommendations: 1. the Village Structure should be considered the major parking facility for Ford Park (with improvements to the signs, sidewalks, and bus service being necessary); 2. extend shuttle bus service to the soccer field; 3. disallow Frontage Road parking; 4. construct a vehicle turn - around and passenger unloading area at Ford Park; and 5. do not schedule concurrent events in the Park. These recommendations validated many of the recommendations for parking and transit outlined in the 1974 Vail Plan. _ v `ff. r W f F ti..s f MATER PT-4 —N V; 4 I]} '6TF ,01'IVLENT ]MASTER PLAN Ford Park Master Plan, 1985 The 1985 Plan identified a location for an alpine garden and in 1989 the first phase of the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens was completed. Since that time a number of expansions to the Gardens have been completed, including the Perennial Garden, the Meditation Garden, and the Alpine Rock Garden. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 13 Following approval of the 1985 Master Plan the following steps were taken regarding the planning of Ford Park: Resolution No. 27, Series of 1987, was passed on November 3, 1987. This resolution designated the seven acres around the Nature Center as an area to be preserved as an example of the Gore Valley's natural history. Vehicular traffic was to be restricted and certain policies and procedures for preservation and maintenance of the grounds and facilities were established by the resolution. (a copy of resolution No. 27, Series of 1987, is included in the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan Supplemental Appendix). In December of 1988, the Vail Metropolitan Recreation District (Now the Vail Recreation District) and the Town of Vail, requested an amendment to the 1985 Ford Park Master Plan. The two phase amendment was adopted by Council as Resolution No. 44, Series of 1988. A copy of the resolution is included in the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan Supplemental Appendix. Phase one of the amendment was to allow the construction of four additional tennis courts. Phase two of the amendment changed the proposed location of an aquatic facility to the eastern softball field. Funding of the aquatic facility was rejected by voters in a special election on February 6, 1989. Vail Town Council was presented with a petition to delete all reference to an aquatics center from the Ford Park Master Plan in April of 1990. No record of Council action on the petition was found. While the tennis center building is not mentioned in the Master plan amendment, the VRD did receive a Conditional Use Permit for the project on May 8, 1990. The Vail Village Master Plan, adopted in 1990, addresses Ford Park as a specific study area. This plan acknowledged the use of the Park to accommodate overflow skier and local parking needs. It recommended that the Park be studied further as a site for additional skier parking to serve expansion of the eastern side of Vail Mountain. Action Step #5 under Goal #5 states: Study the feasibility of an underground (recreation fields would remain) parking structure in Ford Park. The Parking and Circulation Plan (an element of the Vail Village Master Plan), identified the western portion of the upper bench for potential parking beneath the Park, and called for separated bike /pedestrian ways along the South Frontage Road and Vail Valley Drive. The Vail Transportation Master Plan, completed in 1993, states that the existing Ford Park Parking area (at the east end of the Park) should be considered for a possible 2 -level parking facility with the second level below existing grade. Ford 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 14 Park and the athletic field parking area are also listed as two possible sites for over -sized vehicles if the lot east of the Lionshead Structure becomes developed. Ford Park Management Plan, 1997 The planning process that resulted in the 1997 Ford Park Management Plan process was initiated in June of 1995 in response to several development proposals which had been formally and informally discussed for the Park. These development proposals included an Educational Center for the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, a cultural /performing arts center, expansion of the tennis facility, athletic field fencing, and a community parking structure. This planning process was also seen as a means for addressing park management issues such as parking deficiencies, Frontage Road access, pedestrian access and circulation, access for the elderly and mobility impaired, utilization of the lower bench, conflicts between uses within the Park, conflicts with adjacent property owners, and the delineation of financial responsibilities. At the time the project was authorized the Vail Town Council expressed concern that a new master plan for Ford Park could result in an excessive amount of new development. In response, staff noted the intention of the project was to create a management plan as a means to adequately and consistently evaluate development proposals, with the goal of limiting development and protecting the character of the Park. Park leaseholders, two neighborhood representatives and town staff served as the Stakeholder Group for the planning process and a third party facilitator was retained to coordinate this effort. The Stakeholder Group developed alternative design solutions addressing parking, vehicular access, Frontage Road improvements, additional sports facilities and management policies. These plans were presented to the public in an open house at the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater in June of 1996. The open house presentation was a turning point in the process of developing the Management Plan. Several residents were alarmed by the alternatives included in the presentation and initiated a grass -roots movement to place a referendum on any future expansion /development within the Park. This strong public reaction, combined with a lack of closure within the Stakeholders Group, prompted the Vail Town Council to revise the process to include more community involvement. Three Focus Group meetings and public input sessions were held throughout the fall of 1996. The results of the focus groups and public input sessions and a preliminary master plan framework were presented to the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Vail Town Council in late 1996. Following these meetings staff was directed to proceed with 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 15 drafting the management plan as an amendment to the 1985 Ford Park Master Plan based on the input received and presented. The management plan was adopted in April of 1997. Major elements of the plan were six goal statements along with objectives, policies and actions steps intended to define the future direction for the Park. The 1997 Plan also included an Illustrative Plan that identified a number of future improvements. Foremost among these was identifying a site next to the Soccer Field parking lot for an Educational Center for the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens. Following approval of the 1997 Management Plan the following related actions were taken regarding the planning of Ford Park: Goal #4 of the Vail Village Plan Master Plan (as amended in 1998) addressed the preservation of "existing open space areas and expansion of green space opportunities." An action step associated with this goal is to "explore the feasibility of expanding Ford Park to the west to Vail Valley Drive and /or Slifer Plaza along the Gore Creek stream tract to provide improved pedestrian and handicapped access to the Park." The 2009 Vail Transportation Master Plan identified a wide range of roadway improvements designed to accommodate traffic levels anticipated to meet 2025 demands. One of these improvements contemplates a roundabout at the west end of Ford Park to "serve as a means of "u- turning" (eastbound to westbound) and to potentially serve a future parking structure." 2012 Management Plan Update In 2012 the 1997 Ford Park Management Plan was updated to reflect numerous improvements proposed for the Park. Plans to improve the Park were initiated when Vail voters approved re- allocating a portion of the +/- $9,000,000 Convention Center Funds to Ford Park. The other stakeholders in the Park also participated in the funding of these improvements. The 2012 Update maintained the general direction for the Park as established by the 1997 Management Plan. With only a few exceptions, the 2012 Update suggested no significant changes to the uses, facilities and activities that currently take place in the Park. One exception was the 2012 Update included the development of an Education Center for the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens along Gore Creek adjacent to the main entry to the Gardens. All of the existing major uses in the Park — athletic fields, passive recreation, the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, the Alpine Gardens and Tennis Center were to remain in place. The Update did not change any of the six major goal 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 16 statements (or related objectives, policy statements and action steps) in the 1997 Management Plan. 011 m ice: 'zz:: r ' ..e f m.. M „ _ N. i11"Notwe pion 2012 Ford Park Management Plan Update sal. - - -- .a_coM o> z The most significant changes in the 2012 Update are found in the Illustrative Plan chapter of the Plan. The Illustrative Plan provided conceptual site plan diagrams and narrative explanations of improvements suggested for the Park. Many of these improvements were first identified in the 1997 Plan, others evolved out of discussions with the Vail Town Council, stakeholders and the community during the winter of 2012. Many of these improvements were initiated in 2012 and 2013. Foremost among them were the major re- modeling of the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater, re- construction of East Betty Ford Way, improvements to the parking and transit area, expansion and re- configuration of the athletic fields and new concession and storage buildings associated with the fields. A copy of the 2012 Management Plan Update is found in the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan Supplemental Appendix. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 17 Time Line of Ford Park Activities: April 1973 Condemnation of Anholtz Ranch, Ordinance 6, 1973 August 1973 Completion of Vail Plan January 1977 Anholtz Ranch named Gerald R. Ford Park, Resolution 1, 1977 August 1985 Completion of Ford /Donovan Park Master Plan, July 1987 Amphitheater construction completed August 1987 Alpine Demonstration Garden completed November 1987 Preservation of Nature Center, Resolution 27, 1987 December 1987 Vail Valley Foundation lease signed November 1988 Lower Bench improvements completed December 1988 Ford Park Master Plan amendment by VRD, Resolution 44, 1988 December 1988 Service agreement with VRD, Resolution 46, 1988 May 1989 Tennis Center receives Conditional Use Permit July 1989 Alpine Perennial Garden completed January 1990 Completion of Vail Village Master Plan February 1990 Aquatic Center rejected by voters in special election April 1990 Council petitioned to delete Aquatic Center from Master Plan May 1990 Tennis Center construction completed June 1991 Alpine Meditation Garden completed April 1993 Completion of Vail Transportation Master Plan December 1993 Vail Recreation District agreement renewed June 1994 Vail Alpine Garden Foundation license agreement signed. June 1995 Town begins Ford Park Management Plan October 1996 Council allows Betty Ford Alpine Gardens to proceed through process with Educational Center plans at Soccer Field parking lot April 1997 Ford Park Management Plan adopted 1999 Lease with Vail Valley Foundation renewed 2008 Lease with Vail Recreation District renewed 2009 Vail Transportation Plan Update completed November 2011 Voters approve use of Conference Center Funding for Ford Park Improvements May 2012 Completion of 2012 Update to Ford Park Management Plan 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 18 Chapter 4 - GOALS, OBJECTIVES, POLICIES AND ACTION STEPS This plan includes five statements that convey the community's goals for Ford Park. These goal statements provide broad direction on the preservation of the Park, how the Park should be used, vehicles, pedestrian circulation, coordination between park users and financial considerations relative to operations and capital improvements. Each goal statement includes a series of objectives, policies and action steps. Collectively these statements reflect input from the Vail Town Council, the community and leaseholders during the 2013 master plan update process. These statements will be used to provide guidance in decision - making on the management and use of the Park. The goals, objectives and policies of this Plan will be considered during the review process for any new development, changes or improvements proposed for the Park. Only those proposals deemed to be in compliance with these statements (and other applicable elements of this Plan) will gain approvals. Project proposals deemed to not comply with these statements and other applicable elements of this Plan will be denied. This chapter includes thirty -six action steps. In some cases action steps involve a single, defined task intended to implement an objective or policy statement. An example of this would be initiating refinements to the park design guidelines specific to Ford Park. Other action steps involve on -going tasks. An example would be the coordination and management of events in the Park. The Community Development Department, with participation from the Public Works Department, will prioritize action steps and present recommendations annually to the Planning and Environmental Commission regarding that year's work program for implementing action steps. The Planning and Environmental Commission will provide a recommendation on the work program that will be forwarded to the Vail Town Council who will make final decisions on the work program along with any necessary budget expenditures. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 19 Goal #1: Protect the natural environment along the Gore Creek corridor and ensure that any new use or building within the Park does not adversely affect the character and quality of the Park or the overall experience of park users. Objective 1.1: Limit uses and future development to that which is consistent with these goals, objectives and policies and is consistent with the Ford Park Sub -Areas and Illustrative Plan. Policy Statement 1: Maintain the variety of uses and facilities currently located within the Park. Policy Statement 2: Proposals for new (or changes to existing) facilities or uses that would displace existing public uses will not be permitted unless there is either a compelling public interest or adequate alternative facilities can be provided. Policy Statement 3: Uses other than those listed as "allowed uses" (below under Action Step 1.1.1) may be proposed, provided that such uses are not specifically listed as a "prohibited use ". Objective 1.1 Action Steps: Action Step 1.1.1: Draft a new ordinance to exclude those uses listed in Ordinance No.6, Series of 1973, now considered to be inappropriate, and to redefine the allowable uses within Ford Park. The following uses that are allowed and prohibited for Ford Park shall take precedence over Section 12 -9C -2 of the Vail Town Code concerning the General Use Zone District: Allowed Uses Park and greenbelt Bicycle and hiking trails Children's playground Active recreation Passive recreation Outdoor amphitheater Botanical gardens Educational centers Historical center 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 20 Picnic areas Recreation and athletic facilities Public utility easements Parking (surface parking /structured parking) Administrative offices for the operation of uses occurring within the Park Public Art Display Concerts and Special Events Venues Prohibited uses Ski lift and related facilities Civic center, convention /conference center, public schools, gymnasium, and assembly hall Equestrian trails Residential Dwelling Units Action Step 1.1.2: Town of Vail will review legal descriptions of existing lease areas in consultation with the Vail Recreation District, the Vail Valley Foundation and the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens and modify, as deemed necessary, so legal descriptions correspond with existing and proposed improvements and uses. Objective 1.2: Maintain all facilities and improvements in the Park at a high level of quality. Policy Statement 1: Any proposed development or change to Park facilities or uses shall conform to the 2013 Ford Park Master Plan, including but not limited to: • Goals, Objectives and Policy Statements, • Sub -Area Plans, and • Illustrative Plan. Policy Statement 2: Any new development or change to existing Park facilities shall be reviewed for compliance with Section 12 -11 -6 Park Design Guidelines of the Town of Vail Municipal Code, as well as other applicable Town regulations. Policy Statement 3: Any proposed development or change to Park facilities or uses shall provide a needed environmental, recreational, educational, cultural or social benefit to the community. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 21 Policy Statement 4: Maintain and operate existing facilities, uses and functions within the Park at a high standard of quality reflective of the Vail Brand. Policy Statement 5: Park leaseholders shall demonstrate the financial capability necessary to adequately operate and maintain any buildings and facilities located within the Park. Objective 1.2 Action Steps: Action Step 1.2.1: With participation of all Park stakeholders, Town staff to prepare standards which outline expectations regarding the appearance, maintenance, and operation of facilities within the Park. Action Step 1.2.2: Evaluate the park design guidelines in Section 12 -11 -6 of the Vail Town Code and modify as necessary to address design considerations specific to Ford Park. Action Step 1.2.3: In conjunction with the review of any new building or improvement, or in conjunction with any new lease or the renewal of an existing lease, Town staff will evaluate the adequacy of leaseholders financial capability to adequately maintain and operate facilities and buildings. Objective 1.3: Preserve and protect the environmentally sensitive areas along the Gore Creek Corridor. Policy Statement 1: Uses and improvements within the Gore Creek Corridor shall be limited to only those prescribed in the Gore Creek Preservation Sub- area. Policy Statement 2: No new buildings should be permitted within the Gore Creek Preservation Sub -area. Policy Statement 3: Any new improvements within the Gore Creek Corridor shall consider the 100 -year floodplain and minimize impacts to wetland or riparian habitats. Objective 1.3 Action Steps: Action Step 1.3.1: Evaluate the merits of strengthening preservation controls within the Gore Creek Preservation Sub -area via a conservation 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 22 easement or the Natural Area Preservation Zone District "Open Space" designation. Action Step 1.3.2: Inventory existing conditions of the creek bank and vegetation within the Gore Creek corridor, initiate programs to stabilize or restore these areas as may be necessary. Objective 1.4: Utilize Ford Park as a showcase for environmental sensitivity and sustainability. Policy Statement 1: Encourage all lease holders and events at the Park to implement comprehensive recycling programs. Policy Statement 2: Sustainable design and environmentally "friendly" materials and construction methods should be utilized on all new development within the Park. Policy Statement 3: Maintain, protect and enhance the environmental character of natural open space areas. Policy Statement 4: New improvements within the Park and the ongoing management of the Park should be done using sound environmentally sensitive practices. Objective 1.5: Limit the number and scale of buildings and structures within the Park to no more than necessary to meet the needs of park operations and to provide appropriate services and facilities to park users. Policy Statement 1: As an alternative to new buildings, encourage shared or joint -use buildings and /or facilities among Park lease- holders. Policy Statement 2: The design of new buildings or structures shall be integrated with the land with a subtle, understated, low- profile in appearance so as to not dominate the Park's landscape. Policy Statement 3: Park stakeholders may have administrative office space within the Park, provided that such space is limited in size to no more than what 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 23 is necessary only for the management and operation of facilities and uses located within the Park. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 24 Goal #2: Provide open space, facilities, and programs within Ford Park to meet the passive and active recreational, educational, social and cultural needs of residents and guests of Vail. Objective 2.1: Provide open space areas within the Park for the passive enjoyment of nature and to reinforce the Park's connection to the natural environment. Policy Statement 1: Preserve the "delight of the natural earth forms and mature tree growth adjacent to Gore Creek" (The Vail Plan, 1974) found within Gore Creek Preservation Sub -area and limit uses and activities within this area. Policy Statement 2: The primary use of the open turf area within the Commons Sub -Area should be to provide a place for un- programed and informal passive recreation. The use of this area for special events should be limited in frequency and scope in order to minimize impacts on the primary use of this area. Objective 2.1 Action Steps: Action Step 2.1.1: Establish management and operational policies for special events within the open turf area of the Commons Sub -area. Action Step 2.1.2: Identify key viewsheds from strategic locations within the Park and as may be necessary, establish designated view corridors to ensure the protection of these viewsheds. Objective 2.2: Utilize Ford Park to meet the community's needs for active recreation and formal team sport activities. Policy Statement 1: The Active Recreation and Soccer Field Sub -Areas shall be managed first and foremost to provide facilities for active recreation and team sports. Policy Statement 2: Landscape berms and buffers around active recreation areas should be maintained and enhanced to mitigate potential impacts of noise and activity on other sub -areas of the Park. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 25 Objective 2.3: Maintain, and enhance where appropriate, the role of the Park in providing facilities for the enjoyment and exploration of the arts, music, dance, education and other cultural pursuits. Policy Statement 1: Maintain the Ford Amphitheater as a principal summer -time performing arts facility in the Town of Vail. Policy Statement 2: Support the Art in Public Places Board in its efforts to continue public art programs (i.e. interactive events, projects, art installations, educational activities, etc.) within the Creekside area of the Commons Sub -area (and other areas of the Park as may be deemed appropriate). Policy Statement 3: Support the educational programs provided at the Nature Center and the programs provided by the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens. Objective 2.3 Action Steps: Action Step 2.3.1: Work with the Vail Valley Foundation on their efforts to create a new "public plaza" at the entry to the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater. Action Step 2.3.2: Work with the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens on their proposal to create an educational and visitor center within the Park. Action Step 2.3.3: Promote and support the use of the Nature Center and surrounding area as a center for environmental education programs. Objective 2.4: Enhance the use of the Historic School House and preserve the historic character of the building. Policy Statement 1: Maintain public access to the School House and continue the utilization of the building in accordance with the terms of the lease with the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens. Objective 2.4 Action Steps: Action Step 2.4.1: Evaluate alternative uses for the School House that will maintain public access and potentially involve the display of historic photos and artifacts or other activities in keeping with the historic nature of the building. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 26 Action Step 2.4.2: Complete an architectural assessment of the School House and establish a plan to protect and enhance the historic character of the building. Objective 2.5: Enhance and restore the Nature Center building and the landscape surrounding the building. Policy Statement 1: Limit vehicular access to only those vehicles necessary for the operation of the building and educational programs. Policy Statement 2: Uses proximate to the Nature Center should be limited and shall be consistent with the Gore Creek Preservation Sub -Area. Policy Statement 3: Restore the architectural and historical character of the Nature Center building. Objective 2.5 Action Steps: Action Step 2.5.1: Work with the Vail Recreation District to implement measures for controlling vehicular access to the Nature Center building. Action Step 2.5.2: Complete an architectural inventory of the Nature Center building to define steps that could be taken to restore the historic character of the building. Action Step 2.5.3: Eliminate the parking areas around the Nature Center building and reclaim these areas to a natural landscape condition. Action Step 2.5.4: Prepare a master plan and an operations /management plan for the Nature Center facilitv and surroundina area. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 27 Goal #3: Reduce vehicular intrusions into the interior of the Park and minimize to the greatest extent feasible the impact of vehicular activity on users of the Park, particularly on the passive use areas of the Lower Bench and along pedestrian walkways. Objective 3.1: Reduce the presence and frequency of vehicular trips into the Lower Bench (the Lower Commons, Gardens, Amphitheater and the Gore Creek Preservation Sub - Areas) of the Park. Policy Statement 1: Proposals for any new facility or use or the expansion of any existing facility or use in the Lower Bench shall not generate an unnecessary or appreciable increase in vehicular activity in the Lower Bench area of the Park. Policy Statement 2: Uses in the Lower Bench shall operate in a manner that limits vehicular traffic to the greatest extent possible. Vehicular access to the Lower Bench of the Park should be limited to: maintenance; delivery of goods or materials too large or too heavy to be carried by non - motorized means; use of golf carts or similar means to provide access for people with limited mobility; and emergency services. Policy Statement 3: Require all delivery vehicles to utilize East Betty Ford Way to enter and exit the Lower Bench. Due to difficulties in maneuvering, large trucks (semi's) shall access the Lower Bench via East Betty Ford Way and may exit via West Betty Ford Way. Policy Statement 4: Passenger vehicle access to the Alpine Gardens, the Amphitheater, AIPP programs or other uses in the Lower Bench shall not be permitted other than vehicles used to provide access for people with limited mobility or to deliver goods or materials too heavy to be carried by non - motorized means. Objective 3.1 Action Steps: Action Step 3.1.1: Establish a system (i.e. signage, control gates, electronic controls) for managing truck movements proximate to the Amphitheater loading dock and for coordinating truck use of East Betty Ford Way. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 28 Action Step 3.1.2: Coordinate delivery schedules to reduce the frequency of delivery and service vehicles into the Lower Bench during peak use time periods. Action Step 3.1.3: Require stakeholders to utilize on -site storage facilities to reduce and control the frequency of delivery and service vehicles into the Park. Action Step 3.1.4: Improve traffic gate operations and restrictions on both the east and west ends of Betty Ford Way to eliminate unnecessary and unauthorized vehicular intrusions into the Park. Consider closing the western access point of Betty Ford Way to all vehicles except trucks too large to utilize East Betty Ford Way (for exiting the Park). Objective 3.2: Utilize the Parking /Transit Sub -area as the primary means for satisfying the Park's parking and transit needs. Policy Statement 1: All stakeholders are required to adhere to the Parking and Transit Management Plan. Policy Statement 2: There shall be a "no -net loss" of the +/ -200 parking spaces within the Parking /Transit Sub -Area and the +/ -65 spaces at the Soccer Field Sub -area. Any net loss of parking spaces shall only be considered when off -set by a demonstrated improvement or enhancement of public transit use or alternate means of transportation to the Park. Policy Statement 3: Provide parking for daily park -use within the Parking /Transit Sub -Area and utilize the Vail Village Parking Structure to satisfy peak parking demands of the Park. Policy Statement 4: Maintain a central trash /dumpster /recycling facility within the Parking /Transit Sub -area and mandate all Park leaseholders use the central facility. Objective 3.2 Action Steps: Action Step 3.2.1: Town Staff, with coordination from Park stakeholders, shall prepare a Parking and Transit Management Plan, to include, but not be limited to the use and access of parking lots, fee structures, transit operations, etc. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 29 Action Step 3.2.2: As demand warrants, continue operation of the In -Town bus route beyond Golden Peak to provide service along Vail Valley Drive. Action Step 3.2.3: Implement an improved wayfinding sign program directing pedestrians from the Village Parking Structure and Slifer Square in Vail Village. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 30 Goal #4: Provide a safe, enjoyable and efficient pedestrian circulation system within Ford Park and between Ford Park and Vail Village. Objective 4.1: Provide clear and effective directional and informational signs to and within Ford Park. Objective 4.1 Action Steps: Action Step 4.1.1: Develop a comprehensive sign plan to direct Ford Park visitors from Vail Village and from each level of the Village Parking Structure to destinations within Ford Park. Objective 4.2: Encourage and promote park users to access the Park via pedestrian routes from Vail Village and the Vail Transportation Center. Policy Statement 1: The five existing pedestrian access points to the Park from Vail Village and Golden Peak should be maintained and enhanced to maximize their effectiveness in providing access to the Park. Policy Statement 1: Encourage leaseholders in Ford Park to utilize their marketing efforts to promote walking, biking and the use of Town buses as an alternative to driving to the Park. Objective 4.2 Action Steps: Action Step 4.2.1: Implement enhancements to the Gore Creek Trail that will improve safety, grading, surfacing, and lighting. Action Step 4.2.2: Evaluate opportunities for additional seating areas, public art and other features to enhance the walking experience along the Vail Village Connector (within the Gore Creek Sub -area) and where appropriate provide rest /sitting areas along all pedestrian routes to the Park. Action Step 4.2.3: Establish gateways or portals (signage, monuments, landscape elements, etc.) at the main entries to the Park (Frontage Road, Gore Creek Trail, Manor Vail, Slifer Plaza, Vail Valley Drive and the Parking /Transit Sub - area). 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 31 Objective 4.3: Improve internal pedestrian circulation within Ford Park. Policy Statement 1: New developments or other improvements in the Park shall not diminish the quality of the pedestrian circulation system and when appropriate shall include provisions to improve pedestrian circulation. Policy Statement 2: Existing ADA routes should be enhanced and where feasible new ADA access within the Park should be established. Objective 4.3 Action Steps: Action Step 4.3.1: Upgrade the portion of Betty Ford Way within the Commons Sub -area to create a high quality pedestrian corridor with improved surface materials, lighting, seating and landscaping. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 32 Goal #5: Maintain compatible relationships between all venues and all uses within Ford Park. Objective 5.1: Manage the carrying capacity of the Park by scheduling events to prevent overlapping or simultaneous events that exceed the availability of community parking or other park infrastructure. Policy Statement 1: The Town of Vail through its designee shall coordinate with leaseholders an annual schedule for events and uses at all Ford Park venues. Policy Statement 2: No one event or type of use will be allowed to dominate the usage of the Park. Policy Statement 3: The Park is a Town of Vail community facility and in the case of conflicting uses, functions that best serve the interests of the community will have the highest priority. In all cases, final decisions regarding the use of the Park shall rest with the Town of Vail. Policy Statement 4: The day -to -day management and coordination of activities in the Park will be assigned to the Town of Vail. The Town of Vail, through its designee, will coordinate as necessary with representation from the Vail Valley Foundation, the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens and the Vail Recreation District. Objective 5.1 Action Steps: Action Step 5.1.1: Expand the master schedule kept by the Town Clerk to include all venues within the Park. Action Step 5.1.2: Hold preseason event /activity coordination meetings with all affected stakeholders. Action Step 5.1.3: Hold semiannual (or as deemed necessary) coordination and input meetings with the Town of Vail, leaseholder representatives, and neighborhood and adjacent property owner representatives. Objective 5.2: Provide sufficient separation, berms and landscape buffers between facilities and uses. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 33 Policy Statement 1: The adequacy of berms and landscape buffers between different facilities and uses shall be considered when evaluating proposed changes to the Park. The type and extent of buffers to be provided shall be determined based on the nature of the use, the site design of the proposed facilities or uses, and the design parameters outlined in the Ford Park Sub -Areas and the Illustrative Plan. Policy Statement 2: Maintain and where necessary improve existing berms and landscaping between facilities and uses. Objective 5.2 Action Steps: Action Step 5.2.1: Enhance existing landscape buffers between tennis courts adjacent to the Active Recreation Sub -area and the Parking /Transit Sub -area and evaluate the need to enhance landscape buffers between other uses throughout the Park. Objective 5.3: Foster a spirit of cooperation between all leaseholders within the Park regarding their use of the Park and how to collectively use and manage the Park for the benefit of all. Policy Statement 1: Encourage the shared use of buildings and facilities. Policy Statement 2: Decisions regarding proposals for new buildings or improvements are to be made in the best interest of the Park and the Vail community, not just in the interest of the leaseholder. Objective 5.4: Establish a capital improvement plan for the Park and equitably share the costs of park management and operations with Park lease- holders. Policy Statement 1: All Ford Park leaseholders shall participate in cost sharing with the Town of Vail for common operating costs at a level proportionate to the leaseholders benefit from or relationship to said operation or management cost. (or as may be outlined in current lease or license agreement). Management and operations cost may include but are not limited to, electrical for pedestrian path and parking lot lighting, trash removal, and parking lot and pedestrian path maintenance costs. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 34 Objective 5.4 Action Steps: Action Step 5.4.1: Town staff to complete an inventory of existing park operations and associated costs, and in conjunction with park leaseholders, quantify the level of benefit realized by each leaseholder from such operations. Action Step 5.4.2: Research current lease, license and use agreements to determine existing financial responsibilities of each lease holder. Action Step 5.4.3: With input from the Vail Town Council, work with leaseholders to modify existing leases to correct any inequities in utility billing procedures and distribution systems, current utility use, and cost sharing relationships. Action Step 5.4.4: Create and maintain a five -year capital improvements program for Ford Park. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 35 Chapter 5 - FORD PARK SUB -AREAS "The basic structure of Ford Park is comprised of two broad terraces, or benches as locally referred to, which step down the north side of the Gore Creek and is typical of mountain, valley and stream physiography." 1985 Ford Park Master Plan Ford Park topography 11985 Early plans for Ford Park (the Vail Plan) anticipated recreation - oriented uses (and a number of buildings) on the Upper Bench with passive open space areas and an amphitheater on the Lower Bench. Initial development of the Park included athletic fields, tennis courts and parking facilities on the Upper Bench. Decisions on locating these uses on the Upper Bench were made based on the terrain (availability of flat land) and accessibility to the Frontage Road. Passive open space and the development of an amphitheater were initiated on the Lower Bench. These plans and the early development of the Park reinforced this Upper Bench /Lower Bench distinction. Over time the Upper Bench came to be regarded as recreation - oriented while the Lower Bench was regarded as being more oriented to cultural uses and passive open space. The characterization of athletic use on the Upper Bench and passive and cultural uses on the Lower Bench remains valid today, and the terms Upper Bench and Lower Bench provide a good, albeit generalized description of the Park. However, to discuss the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 36 future of Ford Park in terms of just the Upper and Lower Bench does not acknowledge the many subtleties and distinctions throughout the Park that need to be considered in this master planning process. It is for this reason that sub -areas are used to more clearly articulate the goals and objectives for specific areas of the Park. Sub -areas are intended to provide a forum for defining the unique areas of the Park, where improvements or changes may be acceptable and where improvements and changes may not be acceptable. The seven sub -areas described below were defined based primarily on the existing uses and site characteristics within the Park. In some cases, sub -areas define one single use. Examples of these include the Amphitheater and Alpine Gardens Sub - areas. In other cases sub -areas include a number of related uses. Examples of these are the Gore Creek Preservation and the Commons Sub - areas. In many cases the pedestrian corridors that link the sub -areas and facilitate the movement of people throughout the Park are used as boundaries between sub - areas. The sub -area boundaries were defined based on a variety of considerations. They should not be considered hard, inflexible parcel lines. It is reasonable to anticipate that when considering future improvements for the Park some latitude with the location of a sub -area boundary may be appropriate. Any consideration to modify a sub -area boundary shall be made in the context of the goals for the Park and for that particular sub -area. The use of sub -areas to better understand how the Park functions and to express how the Park may change in the future is not an attempt to divide the Park into parts. Rather, the sub -areas provide an effective means for discussing the unique areas of the Park in the context of the goals and objectives for the entire Park. With Ford Park the adage "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts" clearly applies. The diagram below depicts the seven sub -areas defined for the Park. The narrative that follows addresses the following considerations for each sub -area: • Existing uses and facilities, • The role the sub -area plays in the overall context of the Park, • The relationship of the sub -area to adjoining sub - areas, • Improvements or changes that may be appropriate at some point in the future, • Any parameters or other limitations relevant to the future uses and activities within the sub -area, and • Any other considerations. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 37 Sub -area discussions address the Park at a fairly broad, master planning level. More specific discussion of potential future improvements that may be appropriate for the Park is found in the Illustrative Plan Chapter of this Plan. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 38 3 � / \ � � \ \[� j&� J, / �ƒ � � � � /� EE ~� / /�� 57 3 R 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 39 \ \[� ~� J, � � \ R 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 39 Parking /Transit Sub -area The Parking /Transit Sub -area provides on -site parking for the Park and includes a transit stop, a passenger car drop -off area and a central trash /storage facility. Strategically located along the South Frontage Road and on the periphery of other park facilities and uses, this sub -area plays a vital role in how the Park functions by separating parking and vehicles from other areas of the Park. The transit facility is a key component of the Park by facilitating direct bus service to the Town's parking structures (which provide parking for peak demand days). This parking /transit concept had its origins in the original planning of the Park. "This major community park- cultural center will contain parking for more than 200 cars and will also be served directly by the Town bus system. Major parking will be accommodated in the transportation center." Vail Plan, 1974 Since the mid -70's the parking plan for Ford Park has been to provide daily use parking at the Park with parking for special events provided at the Town's parking structures. This parking plan was validated by a parking and transportation study for the amphitheater completed in 1979. This parking plan remains valid today. Functional transit facilities along with pleasant, safe pedestrian corridors between the Park and the Village Parking Structure are key elements to ensure the on -going effectiveness of this parking plan. Prior to making improvements to the athletic fields in 2013 (to be completed in 2014) the Park had approximately 200 on -site parking spaces. The athletic field expansion displaced approximately 50 parking spaces at the west end of the parking lot. These 50 spaces were re- established by re- designing other portions of the parking lot, maintaining the approximately 200 on -site parking spaces. A "no net loss of parking" policy is in effect for the +/ -200 on -site parking in this sub- area. Any proposed reduction to existing on -site parking spaces will only be considered in conjunction with concurrent improvements to alternative means of transportation to the Park. An example of this would be reducing the number of parking spaces in order to improve transit facilities. The parking lot was designed such that it can continue to be used for concerts and other special events. The parking lot also serves as a turn - around area used to manage local traffic when eastbound 1 -70 is closed. It is anticipated that both of these uses will continue. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 40 :,r Future Improvements With parking lot and transit improvements scheduled to be completed in the fall of 2013 and spring of 2014, it is anticipated that the Parking /Transit Sub -area will adequately address the needs of the Park for the foreseeable future. Improvements that may be considered in the future include: • Design and installation of park entry features at the two pedestrian portals from the parking lot into the Park. • Installation of traffic control devices (gates or other means) at the east and west ends of Betty Ford Way. The potential improvements listed above are also described in the Illustrative Plan section of this Plan. The idea of constructing structured parking below the existing surface parking lot has been discussed in the past. This could accomplish two objectives — increase the supply of on -site parking (parking that could also address other town needs) and allow for some alternative use on top of the structured parking. On a related note is the idea of developing parking below the tennis center and re- constructing the tennis center on the surface of the structure. While structured parking in either of these locations could create opportunities for new uses on these areas of the Park, costs would be significant. Based on studies completed in 2009 -2010, the Town Council at that time determined structured parking to not be financially feasible. If or when this idea is discussed in the future, an initial step would be to evaluate implications on the goals for the Park and if necessary initiate amendments to this Plan. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 41 Active Recreation Sub -area This sub -area is the focal point of active recreation, team sports, tournaments and other special events. The location of these uses is consistent with some of the earliest design direction established for the Park. It is expected that these uses will continue in order to meet the community's needs for active recreation facilities. Significant plantings have created a landscape buffer between these active recreation uses and other surrounding uses. These buffers should be maintained and continually enhanced where necessary. Specific attention should be given to enhancing landscaping between the Frontage Road and the athletic fields. This improvement would provide a buffer between the Park and the road and also provide shade for spectators. Noise and other compatibility issues with use of the athletic fields and adjacent uses will need to continually be managed (refer to Goal 4 in Chapter 4 of this Plan). Future Improvements Improvements to the Active Recreation Sub -area initiated in 2012 (expected to be completed in 2014) were extensive and included expansion and re- organization of the athletic fields and construction of a new restroom /storage building and a new concession /restroom building. It is anticipated that these improvements will address the active recreation needs of the community for the foreseeable future. Potential improvements contemplated for this sub -area are: • Design and installation of park entry features at the west end of the Park along the Frontage Road and the two pedestrian portals from the parking lot. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 42 • Ongoing enhancement of the landscape buffer around the perimeter of the Sub- area. • The 2009 Town of Vail Transportation Plan contemplates a roundabout at the west end of Ford Park to "serve as a means of "u- turning" (eastbound to westbound) and to potentially provide access to a future below grade parking structure. No detailed design work on this improvement has been done, but conceptually this roundabout could be located just west of the athletic fields. The existing Tennis Center is located between the Parking /Transit Sub -area and other portions of the Park. East Betty Ford Way provides convenient and pleasant pedestrian access to the Lower Bench of the Park along the southern end of the Tennis Center. However, the tennis center presents constraints to establishing a convenient and graceful pedestrian entry between the parking /transit area and the rest of the Park. If or when the relocation of one or more tennis courts is considered, study should be given to how improved pedestrian flow and new uses could be established in this area. The Tennis Center building has been in existence for over 25 years and the design of the building is inconsistent with the architectural character of buildings recently constructed in the Park. If or when this building is to be re- developed, consideration should be given to a design more consistent with the design objectives for the Park. In addition to the design of the building, consideration should also be given to the use of the building and the potential for shared use to accommodate other Park users. The possibility of locating an education center for the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens within Ford Park is discussed in the Alpine Gardens Sub -area. The preferred location for this building is along West Betty Ford Way. If the West Betty Ford Way site is subsequently determined to not be a viable location, the Tennis Center site is a suitable alternative. The potential site for this building is proximate to or integrated with the Tennis Center building. Coordination and cooperation from the VRD will be necessary if this site is to be pursued. Commons Sub -area The Commons Sub -area plays an important role in the Park by providing structure, or organization to the overall design of the Park. The area provides a transition zone between other uses in the Park and Betty Ford Way, which runs through the sub -area, and provides a delightful arrival experience for pedestrians entering the Park from the West. The Commons Sub -area also provides some of the Park's most important and popular facilities that collectively address a number of goals and objectives for the Park. Specifically, the Commons Area provides places for recreational use, public art, the 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 43 passive use and the quiet enjoyment of the Park. The sub -area also provides buffers between Park uses, a transition to the Gore Creek corridor and creates an important sense of openness within the Lower Bench. This sub -area should continue to be managed to provide the uses and park features listed above. There are no major changes contemplated to the three distinct, yet related uses that occur in this sub -area. These three uses are: Children's Playground The playground is an immensely popular area of the Park. This use should continue. While refinements and /or upgrading of play structures and facilities within the playground may be made in the future, the basic size or "footprint" of the playground should remain unchanged. The restrooms at the playground provide facilities for the entire Lower Bench and there is a need to upgrade these facilities in the near future in order to meet the demands of park users. No other buildings are contemplated in the playground area. Open Turf Area Aside from natural open space areas along Gore Creek, the open turf area is the only area of the Park that is not programmed with organized uses and activities. It is important that this area remains open and available for informal use by patrons of the Park in the future. The area provides space for picnics, rest, informal games and other passive recreation use. The open turf area also provides an important buffer, or transition from the more actively developed areas of the Park and the Gore Creek Corridor. Given this areas adjacency to Betty Ford Way, it is critical to limit vehicles in this area of the Park in order to prevent conflicts between park users and vehicles. The open turf area should not be reduced in size and no buildings or structures should be permitted in this area. If Betty Ford Way is improved, all streetscape improvements (lighting, landscaping, seating, etc.) should be located on the south side of the walkway so as to not reduce the size of the open turf area. In the past the southern end of the open turf area has been used for events (weddings, parties, etc.) that have involved the placement of temporary tents and other features within the open turf area. While these events may continue, the number and extent of such events should be limited and events that would monopolize the open turf area and prevent its use by other users of the Park should not be permitted. Any events in the open turf area should be managed in accordance with Park procedures, specifically to minimize the time temporary facilities are in place, minimize the number and extent of vehicles necessary to service the event, etc. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 44 Creekside Area ORM X1111 ■1 The Creekside area is a narrow strip of land south of Betty Ford Way and north of Gore Creek. A few small structures (i.e. the "art shack, an open air picnic shelter) are located in this area. Arts in Public Places (AIPP) may pursue remodeling or enhancing the art shack at some point in the future. AIPP has placed permanent art installations in this area and also runs summer art programs in this part of the Park. Art programs may include activities such as interactive events, educational and participatory activities, and temporary art installations. The passive use and the limited number of permanent improvements within this area make it an excellent transition to the more natural, undisturbed Gore Creek Preservation Sub -area. The use and character of this area should remain unchanged. No new buildings should be permitted. New art installations may be appropriate, but if pursued, they should be done in a way that minimizes impacts to other surrounding uses and facilities and is sensitive to the natural landscape. Future Improvements Improvements contemplated for this Sub -area include: • Upgrading restroom facilities at the children's playground. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 45 • Further enhance the buffer between the athletic fields and the children's playground. • Additional art installations within the Gore Creek Corridor. • Upgrade to Betty Ford Way to include, decorative pavers, seating areas, lighting and other streetscape improvements. The restroom and Betty Ford Way improvements are described in greater detail in the Illustrative Plan chapter. Amphitheater Sub -area An outdoor amphitheater was contemplated in original plans for Ford Park dating back to 1974. Completed in 1987, the Gerald R. Ford Amphitheater has evolved into Vail's most prominent venue for music, dance and other cultural events. The facility is managed by the Vail Valley Foundation and is host to approximately 60 events each summer. The amphitheater is considered one of the community's most important cultural assets. In 2013 the Foundation completed an initial phase of improvements to the amphitheater. Improvements included re- contouring the lawn seating, new restrooms, expansion of concession areas, and other improvements. While not a project of the Foundation, the Town of Vail recently made major improvements (decorative pavers, widening, and reduction to grade of walkway) to East Betty Ford Way. The Foundation has plans for a second phase of improvements to the Amphitheater that would create a new "public plaza" at the entry to the Amphitheater. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 46 The relationship between the Amphitheater and the neighboring athletic fields will need to be continually monitored to ensure compatibility between these (and all) park users is maintained. It is important to protect and enhance areas of existing vegetation in and around the Amphitheater and where appropriate improve the physical buffers between these uses. The implementation of noise mitigation at the north end of the amphitheater to minimizing noise impacts from the athletic fields and Interstate 70 has also been discussed. The Foundation has completed acoustic studies of the amphitheater and concluded that mitigating noise impacts from the fields and Interstate 70 would have the unintended consequence of impacting sound quality within the amphitheater. As such, noise mitigation is not being pursued. The Amphitheater is a significant generator of people and also generates a significant amount of vehicular traffic into the Lower Bench. Vehicular traffic into the Lower Bench conflicts with a number of goals and objectives for the Park. It is important for the Town and the Vail Valley Foundation to continue to work together to minimize vehicular traffic to the Amphitheater. No new uses or expansion of existing uses at the Amphitheater that would generate appreciably more vehicular traffic into this area of the Park should be permitted. Managing and limiting vehicle traffic that may result from the proposed public plaza will be an important consideration in establishing operational standards for this new facility. Future Improvements Potential improvements contemplated for the Amphitheater Sub -area include: • Development of a "public plaza" at the entry to the Amphitheater. • Restoration of the stream bank adjacent to the Amphitheater south of Betty Ford Way and east of the pedestrian bridge. • Upgrading of the fence /screening of the utility installation along Gore Creek west of the pedestrian bridge. There are a number of important parameters to be considered in the design and development of the public plaza. These parameters are described in greater detail in the Illustrative Plan chapter of this Plan. Alpine Gardens Sub -area What began with completion of a demonstration garden in 1987 has evolved into a +/- 1.5 acre network of perennials, rock gardens and waterfalls hosting an array of high 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 47 alpine plants. The Betty Ford Alpine Gardens (BFAG) provides an important educational and experiential element of the Park. The gardens and the mission of the organization are in keeping with one of the original goals for Ford Park to provide environmental and educational facilities for the community. The Alpine Gardens have become one of Vail's most popular summer attractions. The Alpine Gardens has pursued the development of an "alpine education center" in the Park for a number of years. The 1997 Ford Park Management Plan identified the location for this facility to be within the Soccer Field Sub -area. During the 2012 Ford Park Management Plan Update the BFAG proposed a location adjacent to Gore Creek for the education building and the 2012 Plan recommended this site for a new building. The Vail Town Council subsequently reconsidered this recommendation from the 2012 Update, and while expressing support for the BFAG to develop an educational building within the Park, initiated a new evaluation of site alternatives for the building. The Vail Town Council's primary criterion for selecting a site for the educational center building was that it not be located on the Lower Bench. Seven sites were evaluated, three of which were determined to be viable sites for the building. The BFAG Building Site Evaluation Matrix outlines the factors considered in this evaluation. A copy is found in the Supplemental Appendix. For a variety of reasons the preferred location for this building was determined to be adjacent to West Betty Ford Way just west of the Children's Playground. Located directly on the grade transition between the upper and lower bench, the Vail Town Council determined that this location conforms to their site selection criteria that the building not be located on the lower bench. The other two sites that were considered viable alternatives are at the Soccer Field and within the Tennis Center. These sites could still be considered if following further study it is determined that the Betty Ford Way site is not viable. The primary purpose of the building is to provide educational programs for the community and accordingly the uses within the building are expected to include rooms for interpretive displays, meeting /class rooms, a greenhouse and a limited amount of administrative space necessary to support on -site operations of the Gardens. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 48 Future Improvements Potential future improvements within the Alpine Gardens Sub -area include: • Development of an alpine gardens educational center. • Extension of gardens along the northeast entry in order to create a buffer from the adjoining athletic fields and improve pedestrian arrival to the Gardens. There are a number of important parameters to be considered in the design, development and operation of the educational center. These parameters are described in greater detail in the Illustrative Plan chapter of this Plan. Gore Creek Preservation Sub -area The Gore Creek Preservation Sub -area includes the entire length of the Gore Creek Corridor that passes through the Park. The sub -area is more than 21 acres in size and is generally defined by the park boundary on the south and the 100 -year flood plain, the 50 -foot Gore Creek setback and /or topographic features on the north. Gore Creek, 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 49 associated wetland and riparian habitat and stands of specimen trees are the primary features of the creek corridor. Existing improvements within this sub -area are limited to bridges, trails, utility improvements and the Nature Center. The Gore Creek corridor is the Park's most significant natural feature and provides the Park with delightful open space for the quiet enjoyment of nature. The corridor also provides a critical pedestrian link to Vail Village. The designation of this corridor as a preservation zone is in direct response to a number of goals and objectives from previous park planning efforts. The preservation of and enhancement to this area is also suggested by Goal #1 of this Plan. It is essential that adjacent uses respect the natural environment of this sub -area and that effective buffers be maintained between other more intensive uses within the Park. It is intended that existing uses and improvements within the Gore Creek Preservation Sub -Area be maintained and in keeping with the goals of preserving this area no new buildings are to be constructed within the sub -area. Any other new uses or improvements should be limited to those that will complement the natural character of the creek corridor and will minimize impacts to this sensitive environment. Resolution No. 27 of 1987 designated the seven acres around the Nature Center as an area "to be preserved as an example of the Gore Valley's natural history." The resolution stipulated that "vehicular traffic is to be restricted and certain policies and procedures for preservation and maintenance of the grounds and facilities" should be enacted. It is acknowledged that the Nature Center will bring a certain level of activity to this sub -area. Nature Center activity should be concentrated on the "upland" portions of the Nature Center in order to minimize impacts to the creek corridor. Improvements within the sub -area should be limited to low- impact improvements such as soft surface walking paths, creek enhancements to improve fish habitat, fishing access, re- vegetation and creek /stream bank restoration projects. In all cases such improvements should be designed and constructed in a manner that minimizes environmental impacts (i.e. avoid wetland habitat and wetland, maintain existing natural vegetation, use of "best management practices ", etc.). The underlying goal of any new trail development and /or bridge crossing should be to improve access in order to enhance awareness of this important natural environment. Utility improvements should not be located within this sub -area unless no other practical alternative is available. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 50 The Gore Creek corridor between the main portion of Ford Park and Slifer Square provides important pedestrian access to and from the Park and Vail Village (and the Vail Village Parking Structure). This corridor is heavily travelled and provides access to the Park for many park users. Enhancing the walking experience along the corridor will ensure its effectiveness as an alternative means of accessing the Park. rdervcalion i � • Fishing access to Gore Creek, while currently not an issue (i.e. excessive use from foot traffic resulting in damage to riparian areas and vegetation), could become an issue in the future. A creek access point was considered at the east end of the Nature Center (using the bus turnaround on Vail Valley Drive as an unloading area) was discussed during the 1997 Planning effort but was rejected as being contradictory to the intended use of the Nature Center. An Action Step suggested for this area (refer to Chapter 4 of this Plan) is to evaluate the benefits of establishing a conservation easement for this area or to apply the "Open Space" designation via the Natural Area Preservation Zone District. The protection afforded by either of these steps would define more permanent limitations on the use of this area and in doing so establish a degree of permanence in preserving this creek corridor. The existing condition of the Nature Center Building and the surrounding area has been a point of discussion. Potential improvements to the Nature Center are further discussion in Chapter 6 — Ford Park Illustrative Plan. Future Improvements Future improvements contemplated for this Sub -area include: • Enhancement and restoration of vegetation along the creek corridor, creek bank stabilization and fishing habitat enhancements. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 51 • Enhancements to the walkway between Vail Village and the Park to include improvements such as seating, art installations, etc. • Design and installation of park entry features at the three pedestrian portals to the Park along the Gore Creek Corridor. • Initiate steps to improve the physical condition of the Nature Center. These improvements are discussed in greater detail in the Illustrative Plan chapter. Soccer Field Sub -area The Soccer Field Sub -area, while often overlooked as an element of Ford Park, provides a valuable community asset. The full -sized athletic field serves the soccer and lacrosse communities, the sand volleyball courts are heavily used and the 65 -space parking lot is used year- around. A cul -de -sac at the east end of the sub -area allows in- town buses to turn around when providing express service to Ford Park. These uses should continue as they directly address the broad goals for the Park of "providing the recreational needs of the community" (1985 Plan) and is consistent with the objective of locating active recreation areas "away from the meadow and creek" (1985 Plan). Separated from the rest of Ford Park by Vail Valley Drive and physically removed from the more developed portions of the Park, the Soccer Field Sub -area does not have compatibility or relationship issues with surrounding uses or facilities. No major changes are contemplated to the existing recreational facilities in this sub -area. While no major improvements are anticipated in the near future, the Soccer Field sub- area is unique from the rest of the Park. For example, the uses and activities in this sub -area do not impact other areas of the Park, the sub -area has direct vehicular access that does not impact other park users, and the sub -area has no direct impact on the Gore Creek Corridor. For these reasons this sub -area could be a suitable location for new park uses or buildings to meet the future needs of the Park. If or when new uses may be proposed for this sub -area, consideration should be given to applicable elements of this Plan, how the proposed use could affect surrounding uses, private covenants and other considerations. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 52 Soccer / Field Future Improvements Potential future improvements within the Soccer Field Sub -Area include: • Expansion of the existing sand volleyball courts. • Expansion of landscape buffers. The possibility of locating an education center for the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens within Ford Park is discussed in the Alpine Gardens Sub -area. The preferred location for this building is along West Betty Ford Way. If the West Betty Ford Way site is subsequently determined to not be a viable location, the Soccer Field site has been determined to be a viable alternative. The potential location for this building is at the northwest corner of the sub -area. Private covenant issues (with the neighboring Northwoods Condominiums and with the Vail Village Seventh Filing) will need to be addressed prior to constructing an education center on the soccer field site. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 53 Chapter 6 - FORD PARK ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN The Ford Park Illustrative Plan provides a general description of future improvements contemplated for Ford Park. The Plan indicates the general location of the improvements, a summary of the proposed improvements and parameters or criteria to be considered in the design, development and operation of the improvement. The design parameters and criteria are of particular importance as they establish specific expectations for the proposed improvement. Conformance with these parameters and criteria is a requisite to the Town approving any improvements in the Park. The 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan discusses a wide range of potential improvements for the Park. The design and development of some improvements are in progress. Other these improvements are only general ideas and will need further study and design, an example being the installation of art along the Gore Creek Corridor connection to Vail Village to enhance the walking experience. Other improvements are not viable in the near -term but could be viable at some point in the future, examples being structured parking under the athletic fields or a Frontage Road roundabout at the west end of the Park. It is not the intention of this Plan that only those improvements depicted on the Illustrative Plan may be proposed for the Park. Improvements not depicted on the Illustrative Plan may be proposed and will be reviewed relative to their conformance with the goals, objectives and policies for the Park and the applicable Ford Park Sub- areas. It should also be noted that improvements being depicted on the Illustrative Plan does not ensure if or when they will be implemented. Any improvement proposed for the Park is subject to approval by the Vail Town Council and further review by the Town's review boards prior to being implemented. This review may involve the Planning and Environmental Commission (Conditional Use Permit, Development Plan review) and the Design Review Board prior to being implemented. On the following page is the Ford Park Illustrative Plan and descriptions of future improvements that may be made to the Park. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 54 o �1 L �. G b r � 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 55 Improvement #1 — Gore Creek Corridor Restoration There are a number of areas within the Gore Creek corridor where erosion, over -use or other factors have disturbed or otherwise adversely impacted existing vegetation. A restoration program should be implemented to improve vegetation along the creek corridor. Restoration will improve the visual quality of this area and improve water quality by preventing erosion. A detailed assessment of the creek corridor is necessary in order to determine precisely where and to what extent restoration is needed. Following completion of this assessment, a detailed landscape plan for the restoration of the corridor should be prepared and implemented. A parallel effort should be to evaluate the condition of the creek bank in order to identify the potential need for stream bank stabilization to protect the bank from erosion. Another opportunity to consider for Gore Creek is how pools or other features could be created in the creek to improve the quality of fishing or potentially improve the creek for other uses. A detailed assessment of the creek corridor is necessary in order to determine precisely where and to what extent these improvements may be feasible. Following completion of this assessment a detailed improvement plan for the creek corridor could be prepared. Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #1, Objective 1.3, Action Step 1.3.2. Improvements #2 — Gore Creek Village Connector The Gore Creek corridor between the west end of Ford Park and Slifer Square provides important pedestrian access to and from the Park and Vail Village (and the Vail Village Parking Structure). Enhancing the walking experience along this connection will improve its effectiveness as an alternative means of accessing the Park. The installation of seating areas, creek overlooks and public art are examples of improvements that could be made to animate this walkway. Any future improvements shall be outside of wetland areas, the 100 -year flood plain or other environmentally sensitive areas. An inventory of the creek corridor to identify such areas should be completed prior to initiating any improvements. Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #4, Objective 4.2, Action Step 4.2.2. Improvement #3 — Entry Monuments at Park's pedestrian entries Pedestrians arrive to Ford Park from one of seven existing entries as identified on the Illustrative Plan. Currently there is inadequate signage or other features identifying 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 56 these locations as entry points to the Park. The goal of this improvement is to formally identify these portals and announce them as gateways, or arrival points to Ford Park. Landscape features, signage, bollards, monuments, archways or other design features, or some combination thereof, could be used to identify these locations. Landscape enhancements to areas proximate to these entries may also be appropriate. A design process is necessary to determine design solutions for these improvements. While specific solutions for these park entry improvements could vary between locations, all should share a common design vocabulary. It will also be important to locate these improvements in a way that compliments the adjacent pedestrian corridor and does not compromise pedestrian circulation. Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #4, Objective 4.2, Action Step 4.2.3. Improvement #4 — Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Education Center The education center is envisioned to include multi -use space for year- around educational programs and other activities, a greenhouse and limited administrative space. Below are design, development and operational parameters and /or criteria to be considered in the detailed design of this facility. • Building and site improvements provide adequate clearances from existing utility lines and drainage improvements and when necessary such lines or improvements are relocated to provide adequate clearances. • A building of approximately 3,500 square feet of gross floor area. • Building designed with a low -scale appearance that does not visually dominate the surrounding area and does not loom over West Betty Ford Way. • Provide appropriate horizontal separation from West Betty Ford Way and from the children's playground in order to not diminish the quality of these spaces. • Ability to construct the project in a manner that does not adversely impact other facilities or uses in the Park. • A viable access management plan designed to minimize to the greatest extent feasible the number and frequency of vehicles accessing the education center. It is acknowledged that a service vehicle or delivery vehicle may occasionally need to drive to the center. However, daily or frequent vehicle access by staff or patrons of the center will not be permitted 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 57 • Acceptable emergency vehicle access to the building and identification of any site improvements necessary to accommodate such access. • Identify the anticipated parking demand from the building and how it will be addressed. No parking shall be provided at the building. • Adequate storage space to meet the operational needs of the building and to minimize the need for vehicle trips to the building. • Coordination with the Vail Recreation District on the need to expand fencing at the athletic fields to protect the building from errant balls. • Evaluate the feasibility of providing public restrooms within the center (see Improvement #7 in Illustrative Plan — Children's Playground Restrooms) Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #2, Objective 2.3, Action Step 2.3.2. The site plan and cross - section are conceptual studies for how a building could be designed on this site. While provided by the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, these sketches do not represent a development or design proposal. They are merely depictions of how the building could be designed and there is no implied approval of the concepts depicted below. gore creek "living roof" roof ca no mi w/ line of "observation exposed wood existing deck" in foreground � 5truc, w e '0< D -race to race athletic fields r display/ entry - multi- —. volunteers purpose west betty family education ford way center CONCEPT SECTION SCALE: V = 10'-0" 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 58 r- � existfltQ eklseMg athle retaldiiq4 walls dc x fields �....,pwnred servinparea We pit _- outdoor seating plarNtng boulder wall ■1 � r vanF rnp. terrace egress path — � (� \ oof x •! r �' � _ perrema _AA 'XI wed Work houkier .'{ planting searing �• 9- poo',eis luncaian plaza - -�k r....__; existing playground OL e g Iellns F 6orllder - � T -"" — existing pedestrian sealing, '• . ly ding sand gwrd aihj [h c 1 perennial gardens Improvement #5 — Nature Center Over the years a number of additions and modifications have been made to the nature center building. Many of these changes have altered the historic character of this building. An assessment of the building should be completed in order to understand steps that could be taken to restore the architectural integrity of this building and the surrounding area. A current deficiency of the Nature Center is the lack of restroom facilities. If the building is to be renovated consideration should be given to how restrooms could be incorporated into the building. Other improvements to the Nature Center include, re- claiming the informal parking areas proximate to the building and taking steps to limit vehicular access to the site. These site improvements would most efficiently be designed in conjunction with the evaluation of the building. Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #2, Objective 2.5, Action Step 2.5.1 -2.4.3 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 59 Improvement #6 — Ford Amphitheater Entry Upgrade /Public Plaza The Vail Valley Foundation has proposed plans for transforming the existing Amphitheater entry into a re- designed and re- purposed Public Plaza. The plaza is intended to provide a more gracious and more functional entry to the amphitheater. The design intent and objective of this improvement is to create a multi -use outdoor space that serves as the primary arrival for the Amphitheater as well as a pre- convene and post- function space during scheduled events. The Public Plaza would also provide a venue for smaller gatherings hosted by other park leaseholders and also be open for public use when not being used for scheduled events. Other elements of the Public Plaza include a tensile roof covering, a tribute to the Ford Family, a small stage within the courtyard, a new donor wall, enhancements to the concession building and ticket windows, and new entry gates to the Amphitheater. Parameters and criteria to be considered: • Plaza design should be done to facilitate /not encumber truck turning movements necessary to provide loading /delivery to the Amphitheater. • Plaza design should be sensitive to and integrated with immediately adjacent improvements at the Alpine Gardens. • Trees removed to accommodate the Public Plaza should be re- located within the Park and to the extent feasible be relocated proximate to the amphitheater. • The space should be available for use by the public when not being used for private functions. • The space should be available for gatherings that support other Park stakeholders (TOV, VRD, BFAG and AIPP). • Any structures /roof elements associated with the public plaza should harmonize with the Amphitheater, not dominate the surrounding area, and conform to the Town's park design guidelines. • Any fencing that may be required to define the courtyard space or for liquor license or other purposes should be subtle and visually unobtrusive. Landscape materials should be used to soften the appearance of the fence. • A viable management plan for minimizing vehicular access to the social courtyard (employees, service vehicles, deliveries, etc.), and for servicing the facility in a manner that minimizes impacts on pedestrian use of Betty Ford Way. Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #2, Objective 2.3, Action Step 2.3.1. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 60 Improvement #7 — Children's Playground Restrooms The playground restrooms provide facilities for the entire Lower Bench. These facilities are under -sized and in need of upgrade and expansion to meet current demand. When designed, the new bathroom building should be one level and be sized no larger than necessary to meet the needs of park users. The location currently considered for the new restrooms is west of the existing facility where play apparatus are currently located. New play apparatus will be provided with the removal of the existing restroom building. The building should not encroach on the adjacent open turf area. The adjoining Alpine Gardens Sub -area identifies a site along West Betty Ford Way and next to the playground for the development of an alpine gardens education center. The potential to incorporate restrooms for playground users within the alpine garden education center should be evaluated. The goal of this approach is to minimize the number of buildings in the Park. Coordination between the Town and the Alpine Gardens will be necessary in order to evaluate the feasibility of this idea Improvement #8 — Betty Ford Way Traffic Control While it is acknowledged that the Alpine Gardens, the Amphitheater and other uses in the Lower Bench require vehicular access, an underlying goal for the Park is to minimize vehicular traffic in this area. Betty Ford Way provides car and truck access to this area. As a means for better regulating traffic into the Lower Bench, the installation of gates, bollards or other improvements will be necessary at either end of Betty Ford Way. In addition to improvements designed to limit car and truck access to the lower bench, a system for managing large truck use on East Betty Ford Way should also be explored. This section of Betty Ford Way is essentially a one -lane road. The purpose of this effort is to prevent two trucks from utilizing East Betty Ford Way at the same time. Refer to Chapter 4, Goal #3, Objective 3.2, Action Step 3.2.3. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 61 Chapter 7- PARK MANAGEMENT Four organizations play a role in the management and operation of Gerald R. Ford Park. The Town of Vail is the owner of the Park and manages the community park on the Lower Bench, the stream tract, parking lot areas and pedestrian corridors. In addition, the Town provides park management and coordination with the Park's three leaseholders. The leaseholders manage and operate their respective facilities: The Vail Recreation District lease includes the Tennis Center, athletic fields and land that includes the Nature Center. The Tennis Center Building is on land owned by the Town but was developed and funded by the VRD. VRD offers environmental education and research opportunities at the Nature Center. The Vail Valley Foundation manages and maintains the Ford Amphitheater and immediate surrounding grounds. The amphitheater seats up to 2,500 people and is scheduled an average of 60 days during the summer months. Betty Ford Alpine Gardens manages the Gardens. The Gardens have developed in four phases that began in 1987. In its role as the overall park manager, the Town addresses a variety of management and operational considerations. Often times this requires the involvement of different town departments and town commissions and boards. Ultimately the Vail Town Council is asked to review and approve management practices. The Town involves one or more of the Park leaseholders when addressing these management topics and in some cases the lease agreements with the Recreation District, the Vail Valley Foundation and the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens address these topics. Below is a list of park management topics the Town is responsible for: • Parking — Management of parking spaces, allocation of spaces to leaseholders, rates at times pay - parking is implemented, etc. • Special events on parking lot, athletic fields and open turf area — coordination with promoters of events, scheduling, pre and post -event operations, etc. • Park Calendar — While not responsible for scheduling events within leaseholder facilities, the Town coordinates (with leaseholders) a comprehensive events schedule for the Park. • Transportation — management of transit operations between the Park and the Vail Transportation Center, including periodic implementation of a Golden Peak bus route. • AIPP projects — The review of art programs and installations in the Park. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 62 • Proposals for new uses, new building or changes to the Park — The review of any proposed change to the Park will involve the Vail Town Council and may also involve the Planning and Environmental Commission, the Design Review Board, AIPP and the Commission on Special Events. 2013 Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan Page 63 TOWN OF Memorandum To: Planning and Environmental Commission From: Community Development Department Date: June 23, 2014 Subject: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on a major amendment to Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, pursuant to Section 12- 9A-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to amend the condominium use requirements and restrictions for Phase V (structure at the northeast corner of the intersection of Vail Road and East Meadow Drive), located at 100 East Meadow Drive /Parts of Lots M and O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140014) Applicant: The Village Inn Plaza -Phase V Condominium Owners Association, represented by Steve Cady, Vice President Planner: Jonathan Spence I. SUMMARY The applicant, Village Inn Plaza -Phase V Condominium Owners Association, represented by Steve Cady, Vice President, is requesting a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on a major amendment to a Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, pursuant to Section 12- 9A -10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to amend the condominium use requirements and restrictions for Phase V (structure at the northeast corner of the intersection of Vail Road and East Meadow Drive), located at 100 East Meadow Drive. Based upon Staff's review of the criteria outlined in Section VI of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of denial, of the major amendment to Special Development District (SDD) No. 6, Vail Village Inn, subject to the findings noted in Section VIII of this memorandum. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant is requesting that Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1987, be amended to delete Section 11, paragraph 6 related to residential occupancy restrictions. Specifically, paragraph 6 reads: Restrictions on any units in Phases IV or V which would be condominiumized shall be outlined in Section 17.26.075 of the Vail Municipal Code and any amendments thereto. An ordinance, generally containing the following, will be provided to the Town Council for first reading: Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1987, is hereby amended to delete Section 11, paragraph 6 related to residential occupancy restrictions, as illustrated: Referenced Code Section The code section referenced in the ordinance, Section 17.26.075 Condominium Conversions, (now known as Section 13 -7 -8. Restriction on Units Converted Prior to February 7, 1995) read as follows: 17.26.075 Condominium Conversion. There shall not be permitted any conversion of a lodge or accommodation unit within the Town to a condominium. Any accommodation unit within the Town which has been converted to a condominium or has received approval for a conversion prior to the effective date hereof shall comply with the require -ments of this Section. The requirements contained in this Section shall not apply to structures or building which contain two (2) units or less. A. The requirements and restrictions herein contained shall be included in the condominium declaration for the project, and filed of record with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder. The condominium units created shall remain in the short term rental market to be used as temporary accommodations available to the general public. An owner's personal use of his unit shall be restrict -ed to twenty eight (28) days during the seasonal periods of December 24 through January 1 and Feb -ruary 1 through March 20. This seasonal period is hereinafter referred to as "high season ". "Owner's personal use" shall be defined as owner occupancy of a unit or nonpaying guest of the owner or taking the unit off the rental market during the seasonal periods referred to herein for any reason other than necessary repairs which cannot be postponed or which make the unit unrentable. Occupancy of a unit by a lodge manager or staff Town of Vail Page 2 employed by the lodge, however, shall not be restricted by this Section. 2. A violation of the owner's use restriction by a unit owner shall subject the owner to a daily assessment rate by the condominium association of three (3) times a rate considered to be a reasonable daily rental rate for the unit at the time of the violation, which assessment when paid shall be common ele -ments of the condominiums. All sums assessed against the owner for violation of the owner's per -sonal use restriction and unpaid shall constitute a lien for the benefit of the condominium association on that owner's unit, which lien shall be evidenced by written notice placed of record in the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Eagle County, Colorado, and which may be collected by foreclosure on an owner's condominium unit by the association in like manner as a mortgage or deed of trust on real prop -erty. The condominium association's failure to en- force the owner's personal use restriction shall give the Town the right to enforce the restriction by the assessment and the lien provided for hereunder. If the Town enforces the restriction, the Town shall receive the funds collected as a result of such en- forcement. In the event litigation results from the enforcement of the restriction, as part of its reward to the prevailing party, the court shall award such party its court costs together with reasonable attorney's fee incurred. 3. The Town shall have the right to require from the condominium association an annual report of owner's personal use during the high seasons for all converted condominium units. 4. The converted lodge units shall not be used as per- manent residences. For the purposes of this Section, a person shall be presumed to be a permanent resi -dent if such person has resided in the unit for six (6) consecutive months notwithstanding from time to time during such six (6) month period the person may briefly dwell in other places. B. Any lodge located within the Town which has converted accommodation units to condominiums shall continue to provide customary lodge facilities and services including a customary marketing program. C. The converted condominium units shall remain available to the general tourist market. If unsold thirty (30) days after recording of the condominium map, the unsold converted condominiums shall be Town of Vail Page 3 required to be furnished and made available to the general tourist market within ninety (90) days after the date of recording of the condo - minium map. This requirement may be met by inclusion of the units of the condominium project at comparable rates, in any local reservation system for the rental of lodge or condominium units in the Town. D. The common areas of any lodge with converted units shall remain common areas and be maintained in a man -ner consistent with its previous character. Any changes, alterations or renovations made to common areas shall not diminish the size or quality of the E. Any accommodation units that were utilized to provide housing for employees at any time during the three (3) years previous to the date of the application shall remain as employee units for such duration as may be required by the Planning and Environmental Commission or the Town Council. F. Applicability: All conditions set forth within this Section shall be made binding on the applicant, the applicant's successors, heirs, personal representatives and assigns and shall govern the property which is the subject of the application for the life of the survivor of the present Town Council plus twenty one (21) years. Conversion of accommodation units located within a lodge pursuant to this Section, shall be modified only by the written agree -ment of the Town Council and the owner or owners of the units which have been converted into condominiums. The documents creating and governing any accommodation unit which has been converted into a condominium shall be modified by the owners of such units only with the prior written approval of the Town Council. (Ord. 15 (1995) § 1: Ord. 1(1995) § 4. Ord. 21(1987) §§ 1 -3. Ord. 2(1983) § 1) The applicant has provided a written description of their request, with attachments, dated April 4, 2014 and included as Attachment A. III. BACKGROUND General History of Special Development District No. 6 throuah 1988 In 1976, the Vail Town Council adopted Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1976, establishing Special Development District No.6, Vail Village Inn. The purpose of SDD No.6 is to Town of Vail Page 4 assure the comprehensive development and use of an area of land in a manner that would be harmonious with the general character of the town, provide adequate open space and recreation amenities, and promote the objectives of the zoning ordinance of the town. Ordinarily, a special development district will be created only when the development is regarded as complementary to the Town by the Town Council, Planning and Environmental Commission, and Design Review Board, and there are significant aspects of the development which cannot be satisfied under the existing zoning. The following is a summary of the existing phases and development for the Vail Village Inn Special Development District (SDD No. 6): Phase I- This phase consists of the buildings located at the southeast corner of the District. Phase I includes one residential dwelling unit approximately 3,927 square feet in size and nine commercial /retail spaces. The original development plan for Phase I called for 16,128 square feet of commercial space, and no GRFA. The Alpenrose Restaurant is part of Phase 1. Phase 11- This phase consists of three residential dwelling units totaling approximately 3,492 square feet in size and three commercial /retail spaces. Phase II is generally located in the center of the District and includes the Claggett -Rey Gallery. Phase III- This Phase consists of twenty -nine residential dwelling units totaling approximately 44,830 square feet in size and six commercial /retail spaces. Phase III is located at the northeast corner of the District. Phase IV- This is the original, oldest and most recently redeveloped Phase in the District. This Phase (The Sebastian) consists of two residential dwelling units totaling approximately 6,827 square feet in size, one hundred accommodation units and forty -nine fractional fee units comprising approximately 97,788 square feet of floor area. Phase IV is generally located in the northwest corner of the District. Phase V- This Phase, completed in 1988, consists of eleven residential dwelling units and eight commercial /retail spaces. Phase V is located in the southwest corner of the District at the intersection of Vail Road and East Meadow Drive. This phase includes the La Botega restaurant. Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1985 (March, 1985) granted 120,600 square feet of GRFA to SDD No. 6. This ordinance also required a minimum of 175 accommodation units (AUs) and 72,400 square feet of GRFA, devoted entirely to AUs in Phase IV. Town of Vail Page 5 Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1987 (May, 1987), amended Phase IV of SDD No. 6. The amendment allowed Phase IV to be broken into two distinct and separate phases, which were called Phase IV and Phase V. This ordinance also set the maximum GRFA for the SDD at 120,600 square feet. Further, the ordinance required a minimum of 148 AUs and 67,367 square feet of GRFA devoted to AUs in Phases IV and V. Specific Background Related to Request Final approval for what was known at the time as known at that time as Phase IV of Vail Village Inn, was granted by the Town Council in February of 1985. An 18 -month extension of this approval was granted in January, 1987 for the plan with no changes to the development plan. In general terms, the approval of Phase IV involved the demolition of the existing hotel, Pancake House, and Food and Deli and to be constructed in its place were 175 accommodation units, approximately 16,000 square feet of retail space, and 324 underground parking spaces. The construction of this final phase was to have completed all development potential, as established by ordinance, for this property. In the spring of 1987, an application to amend the previous approval was made. Proposed amendments included: 1. The further division of this Phase into what is now referred to as Phase IV and Phase V. 2. Minor design changes to the proposed architecture. 3. Minor changes in site layout. 4. Revision to the approved parking plan. 5. Revisions related to the Colorado Ski Museum site /funding 6. Revisions to the number and GRFA of accommodation units (AU's) in Phase IV 7. Revisions to the approved development plan to allow dwelling units (DU's) On April 20, 1987, the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) recommended approval of the proposed revisions, with conditions, to the Vail Town Council. These revisions included a reduction in the number of required AU's in this Phase from 175 to 148, a corresponding reduction in GRFA devoted to AU's from 74,400 square feet to 67,367 square feet and the allowance of 14 DU's on the upper floors of the structure to be located at the northeast corner of Meadow and Drive and Vail Road. One of the conditions recommended was that the use of the units be restricted to non - primary residence and be part of a rental pool. On May 5, 1987, the Vail Town Council approved, on second reading, Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1987 that amended SDD No. 6. This Ordinance included the revisions to the project, as recommended by the PEC and also a restriction on the residential use of the DU's to mitigate the effects of reducing AU's and allowing DU's, a use previously not permitted within Phase IV. This restriction borrowed language from the Town Code, specifically Section 17.26.075. Town of Vail Page 6 Although this section of the code applies to the conversion of existing AU's to condominiums, the Council chose to utilize this language, in a different context, to maintain consistency with regard to residential occupancy restrictions within the Town. As required by the Town Code, the occupancy restrictions were written into the condominium declarations for the project and filed with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder. All DU owners have been subject to this restriction since the building's development. Included for reference as Attachments B through F are the following: B. Ordinance No. 14, Series 1987, Amendments to SDD #6, the ordinance that included the condition related to occupancy C. PEC Memo from 4 -20 -1987 D. PEC Minutes from 4 -20 -1987 E. TC Minutes from 5 -05 -1987 First Reading of Ordinance No. 14, Series 1987 F. TC Minutes from 5 -19 -2013 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 14, Series 1987 IV. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS A. Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code CHAPTER 12 -1, TITLE, PURPOSE AND APPLICABILITY (in part) Section 12 -1 -2. Purpose. 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. 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. Town of Vail Page 7 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. 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 -9A, SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (in part) 12 -9A -1: Purpose and Applicability: A. Purpose. The purpose of the special development district is to encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land in order to promote its most appropriate use, to improve the design character and quality of the new development with the town, to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of streets and utilities, to preserve the natural and scenic features of open space areas, and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail comprehensive plan. An approved development plan for a special development district, in conjunction with the property's underlying zone district, shall establish the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included in the special development district. B. Applicability: Special development districts do not apply to and are not available in the following zone districts. hillside residential, single- family residential, two - family residential and two - family primary /secondary residential. 12- 9A -10: AMENDMENT PROCEDURES. B. Major Amendments. 1. Requests for major amendments to an approved special development district shall be reviewed in accordance with the procedures described in section 12- 9A-4 of this article. Town of Vail Page 8 V 2. Owners of all property requesting the amendment, or their agents or authorized representatives, shall sign the application. Notification of the proposed amendment shall be made to owners of all property adjacent to the property requesting the proposed amendment, owners of all property adjacent to the special development district, and owners of all property within the special development district that may be affected by the proposed amendment (as determined by the department of community development). Notification procedures shall be as outlined in subsection 12 -3 -6C of this title. SURROUNDING LAND USES VI. SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT REVIEW CRITERIA Before acting on a major amendment to a special development district amendment application, the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council shall consider the following factors with respect to the proposal: 1. Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. No physical changes to the structure are proposed as part of this application Staff finds the proposal does comply with this criterion. 2. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. The proposed amendments will result in a change in the allowable uses for the property through the removal of the residential occupancy restrictions. The removal of the occupancy restrictions may result in a decrease in the overall level of occupancy in the building and a corresponding negative effect on levels of activity previously attributed to it. Although the amendment may have negative impacts, it is not anticipated that the proposed changes will result in a degradation of the compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activities. Staff finds the proposal complies with this criterion. Town of Vail Page 9 Land Uses Zoning North: Mixed Use SDD #21 (Gateway) South: Mixed Use Public Accommodation (Sonnenalp) East: Mixed Use SDD #6 West: Residential Public Accommodation VI. SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT REVIEW CRITERIA Before acting on a major amendment to a special development district amendment application, the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council shall consider the following factors with respect to the proposal: 1. Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. No physical changes to the structure are proposed as part of this application Staff finds the proposal does comply with this criterion. 2. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. The proposed amendments will result in a change in the allowable uses for the property through the removal of the residential occupancy restrictions. The removal of the occupancy restrictions may result in a decrease in the overall level of occupancy in the building and a corresponding negative effect on levels of activity previously attributed to it. Although the amendment may have negative impacts, it is not anticipated that the proposed changes will result in a degradation of the compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activities. Staff finds the proposal complies with this criterion. Town of Vail Page 9 3. Parking and Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in chapter 10 of this title. No changes to the project's parking and loading requirements are proposed with this amendment. Staff finds the proposal complies with this criterion. 4. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive plan, town policies and urban design plans. Staff has reviewed the Vail comprehensive plan and found the following documents and associated goals, objectives, statements applicable to this proposal. Vail Land Use Plan (in part) 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. 3. Commercial 3.3. Hotels are important to the continued success of the Town of Vail, therefore conversion to condominiums should be discouraged. 4. Village Core/ Lionshead 4.1. Future commercial development should continue to occur primarily in existing commercial areas. Future commercial development in the Core areas needs to be carefully controlled to facilitate access and delivery. 4.2. 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. Quality time share units should be accommodated to help keep occupancy rates up. Town of Vail Page 10 Vail Village Master Plan (in part) V. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, POLICIES AND ACTION STEPS GOAL #1 ENCOURAGE HIGH QUALITY, REDEVELOPMENT WHILE PRESERVING UNIQUE ARCHITECTURAL SCALE OF THE VILLAGE IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN ITS SENSE OF COMMUNITYAND IDENTITY. Obiective 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. GOAL #2 TO FOSTER A STRONG TOURIST INDUSTRY AND PROMOTE YEAR - AROUND ECONOMIC HEALTH AND VIABILITY FOR THE VILLAGE AND FOR THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE. Objective 2.3_ Increase the number of residential units available for short term overnight accommodations. Policy 2.3.1: The development of short term accommodation units is strongly encouraged. Residential units that are developed above existing density levels are required to be designed or managed in a manner that makes them available for short term overnight rental. VII. VAIL VILLAGE SUB -AREAS A major goal of this Plan is to address the Village as a whole and at the same time be sensitive to the opportunities and constraints that may exist on a site specific basis. To facilitate long range planning unique to each area of the Village, ten different sub -areas are delineated in this Plan. Sub -areas were determined based on a number of different considerations. Foremost among these were: • Design and site characteristics • Geographic or physical boundaries • Land uses and ownership patterns Each of the ten sub -areas have been evaluated relative to the overall goals, objectives, and policies outlined for Vail Village. The potential improvement projects, referred to as sub -area concepts, which have emerged from this evaluation are graphically represented on the Action Plan. These sub -area Town of Vail Page 11 concepts are physical improvements intended to reinforce the desired physical form of the Village as outlined in the various elements of the Master Plan. The 10 sub -areas (which follow), provide detailed descriptions of each sub -area concept and express the relationship between the specific sub -area concepts and the overall Plan. The applicable goals and objectives are cited for each of the sub area concepts at the end of each description under "special emphasis. " The sub -area concepts described in this Section are meant to serve as advisory guidelines for future land use decisions by the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Town Council. Compliance with the sub -area concepts does not assure development approval by the Town. It is important to note that the likelihood of project approval will be greatest for those proposals that can fully comply with the Vail Village Master Plan. The Urban Design Guide Plan includes additional design detail that is to be used in conjunction with the Vail Village Master Plan sub -area concepts. MIXED USE SUB -AREA ( #1) �- _ ii0fif P6gKIHi -r IL IRr .�•�II I�' ` �— f -_IJ .r CAO50M0 1 er..`�nyrxriq�j'p • 1• i1 ! mil —. — + yy�� Stay. Y l•. Ptl�.. Al } • • s 4 i 4 [ i # 9 . 1.12' G , � Levee [ � LO— AT PAIL (r The Mixed -Use sub -area is a prominent activity center for Vail Village. It is distinguished from the Village core by the larger scale buildings and by the limited auto traffic along East Meadow Drive. Comprised of five major development Town of Vail Page 12 projects, this sub -area is characterized by a mixture of residential /lodging and commercial activity. The Vail Comprehensive Plan elements that speak to this site include the Vail Land Use Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan. Staff believes the proposed changes to occupancy restrictions are not supported by these adopted plans. Specifically, Objective 2.3 and Policy 2.3.1 under Goal #2 do not support the proposed removal of the occupancy restriction that could have the effect of decreasing short term housing options within the central core of Vail Village. Staff finds the proposal does not comply with this criterion. 5. Natural and /or Geologic Hazard: Identification and mitigation of natural and /or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is proposed. Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, is not located within any identified geologic hazard. Staff finds the proposal complies with this criterion. 6. Design Features: Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. No changes to the project's design features are proposed as part of this amendment. Staff finds the proposal complies with this criterion. 7. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site traffic circulation. The proposal does not include any changes to the pedestrian or vehicular circulation on or off site. Staff finds the proposal complies with this criterion. 8. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. The proposal does not include any changes to the landscaping or open space on the site as identified on the approved development plan. Staff finds the proposal complies with this criterion. Town of Vail Page 13 9. Workable Plan: Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. The development of this Phase has been completed. Staff finds the proposal complies with this criterion. 10. Public Benefit: The proposed deviations provide benefits to the town must outweigh the adverse effects of such deviations. In consideration for the allowance of DU's in a phase of the development which, at that time, only allowed AU's, a restriction on occupancy was recommended by the PEC and ultimately included by the Town Council in the approval of Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1987. This occupancy restriction was intended as mitigation to offset the negative impacts associated with the development of DU's in contrast to the development of AU's. The decision makers at that time recognized the importance of short term housing to the strength and vitality of the Town of Vail. This importance has been carried through to the present and remains a consideration for the PEC and Town Council. Although many additional residential development have been approved and built since that time, the Town remains cognizant of the importance of encouraging, maintaining and requiring, (through zoning), short term housing options. In its proposal to remove the mitigation required for the development of the DU's and not proposing any measures in its place, the applicant is relying, in part, on the development that has occurred in the intervening years as a rationale. Although many AU's (and DU's) have been developed in the years since 1987, the importance of short term housing and indeed the policy of maintaining short term housing has not changed. Short term housing options and their corresponding level of occupancy provide the necessary economic driver to support many of the other uses found today within the Town of Vail and specifically within Vail Village. The policy of supporting short term housing or live beds is evident throughout the Town of Vail's planning and regulatory framework. Examples include: • The Lionshead Master Plan which states: "Applications for new development or redevelopment which maintain, preserve and enhance the live bed base in Lionshead have a significantly greater chance of approval in the development review process than those which do not." • The requirement of a Conditional Use Permit for the Timeshare or a fractional fee club with a requirement that if it is in the context of a redevelopment of an Town of Vail Page 14 existing facility, an equivalency of existing accommodation units must be met; and The lack of regulations pertaining to vacation home rentals, thereby encouraging the use of private homes for short term rentals. Staff has identified no compelling reasons, based on the application and the adopted plans and policies of the Town, to support the proposal that could have the effect of decreasing short term housing options within the central core of Vail Village. Staff has identified no benefits to the town that outweigh the adverse effects of the proposed modification to the terms of the SDD. Staff finds the proposal does not comply with this criterion. VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of denial, to the Town Council on a major amendment to a Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, pursuant to Section 12- 9A -10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to amend the condominium use requirements and restrictions for Phase V (structure at the northeast corner of the intersection of Vail Road and East Meadow Drive), located at 100 East Meadow Drive (Vail Village Inn Phase V.) /Lot M and O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140014) Staff's recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria described in Section VI of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of denial, for this request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: "The Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of denial to the Town Council for a major amendment to Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, pursuant to Section 12- 9A -10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to amend the condominium use requirements and restrictions for Phase V (structure at the northeast corner of the intersection of Vail Road and East Meadow Drive), located at 100 East Meadow Drive (Vail Village Inn Phase V.) /Lot M and O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140014) " Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of denial, for this request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: Town of Vail Page 15 "Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section Vll this Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated June 23, 2014, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds. 1. That the special development district amendment does not comply with the standards listed Article 12 -9A, Special Development District, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has not been achieved. 2. That the special development district amendment is not consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and is not compatible with the development objectives of the town, and 3. That the special development district amendment is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas, and 4. That the special development district amendment does not promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and does not promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. " VIII. ATTACHMENTS A. Applicant's Written Statement with Attachments B. Ordinance No. 14, Series 1987, Amendments to SDD #6, the ordinance that included the condition related to occupancy C. PEC Memo from 4 -20 -1987 D. PEC Minutes from 4 -20 -1987 E. TC Minutes from 5 -05 -1987 First Reading of Ordinance No. 14, Series 1987 F. TC Minutes from 5 -19 -2013 Second Reading of Ordinance No. 14, Series 1987 G. Email of support for application, Samuel S. Griffin, 111 06-18-2014 H. Email of support for application, Monika Oberlorh, 06 -18 -2014 I. Email of support for application, Steve Cady, 06 -17 -2014 J. Email of support for application, Richard Liebhaber, 06 -17 -2014 K. Email of support for application, David Bruckmann , 06 -16 -2014 L. Vicinity Map Town of Vail Page 16 lAttachmen.L APPLICANT'S WRITTEN STATEMENT The Village Inn Plaza -Phase V Condominium Owners Association (Association) submits this Statement in support of its Application for Special Development Review by the Planning and Environmental Commission (Application) to amend Vail Ordinance 14, Series 1987 (1987 Ordinance). This Statement describes the requested amendment as simply removing certain language, provides historical information and context supporting the Application and explains how the Application complies with Vail Ordinance Section 12 -9A -8. SUMMARY OF REQUESTED AMENDMENT The Association requests that the 1987 Ordinance be amended to delete Section 11, paragraph 6 therefrom. Section 11, paragraph 6 refers to Vail Ordinance Section 17.26.075 (now known as Section 13 -7 -8) (hereafter "Section 17.26.075 ") governing the requirements of converting existing lodge and accommodation units to condominiums. Removal of Section 11, paragraph 6 is appropriate to: • Resolve uncertainty for the Town of Vail, the Association and unit owners as to whether Section 17.27.075 applies to Phase V of the Village Inn Plaza complex; • Avoid conflict with Colorado law; and, • Preserve property values without sacrificing the policy behind Section 17.26.075 HISTORICAL INFORMATION AND CONTEXT OF APPLICATION The Town of Vail created Special Development District 6 (SDD 6) on March 16, 1976 in the core of Vail Village' at the northeast corner of the intersection of Vail Road and East Meadow Drive. SDD 6 permitted development of what is now known as Village Inn Plaza in four phases. Phases I, II and III were built within a few years following adoption of SDD 62. The Town amended SDD 6 by Ordinance 1, Series of 1985 in February 1985, permitting changes to Phase IV in contemplation of the demolition of Vail Village Inn and the construction of a new hotel. Vail Village Inn was later demolished in 2005 and replaced with a new and substantially larger structure now known as The Sebastian Hotel. The Town amended SDD 6 a second time on May 19, 1987 by the 1987 Ordinance. This amendment divided Phase IV into two parcels forming a new Phase V. The amendment provided that the Town of Vail receive a 3,986 square foot condominium unit. Included in this amendment is Section 11, paragraph 6, stating: "Restrictions on any units in Phases IV or V ' Lot M and parts of Lots N, O and P, Block 5 -D, Vail Village, First Filing, Town of Vail 2 Phase IV was already improved with the Vail Village Inn hotel when SDD 6 was adopted. which would be condominiumized shall be as outlined in Section 17.26.0 75 of the Vail Municipal Code and any amendments thereto. " Emphasis added. Section 17.26.075 was intended to preserve the available number of seasonal rental units against loss due to conversion of lodge and accommodation units to condominiums and their sale into private ownership. Thus, Section 17.26.075 requires that existing lodge and accommodation units converted to condominiums participate in seasonal rental pools or face severe penalties3. Phase V was constructed in 1987 and 1988 as a new condominium building. No lodge or accommodation units were converted to condominium units nor was the existing pool of rentals depleted. The Phase V is a 19 unit, mixed -use condominium. Eight units are designated for commercial uses and the remaining eleven units are designated for residential uses. The Phase V Condominium Declaration included a section entitled "Town of Vail Restrictions on Use" (hereafter "Restrictions on Use "). The Restrictions on Use are stated to be "pursuant to" Section 17.26.075 and include verbatim portions of this ordinance. The Restrictions on Use, specifically derived from Section 17.26.075, are vague and ambiguous because Phase V was not a "condominium conversion" as defined by Section 17.26.075 and as that term is commonly understood. Joseph Staufer executed the Declaration for the developer, Vail Village Inn, Inc. (VVI). Mr. Staufer created the Association and served as a Board member and officer through 2009. Mr. Staufer also managed the Phase V property from its construction through September 2011. As the owner of VVI and Staufer Commercial, LLC, Mr. Staufer owned and controlled all of the commercial units except unit 2 owned by the Town of Vail. For 25 years, Mr. Staufer (as well as the other Board members and owners including the Town of Vail) disregarded the Restrictions on Use and Section 17.26.075. However, in April 2013, Mr. Staufer unexpectedly insisted the Town of Vail investigate and enforce the Restrictions on Use pursuant to the SDD 6 ordinances against certain residential owners who opposed a lawsuit brought by his tenant. That demand led to this Application. The fact that Phase V is not a condominium conversion, taken together with actions and statements attributed to Mr. Staufer, a written opinion expressed by a Town of Vail official and 25 years of total disregard of the Restrictions on Use and Section 17.26.075, led residential unit owners to purchase and use their units in the reasonable and justifiable assumption that the Restrictions on Use and Section 17.26.075 did not apply to Phase V or were not enforceable. The threat of enforcement precipitated by Mr. Staufer's demand now creates a cloud on each residential owner's title diminishing the value of their respective units. 3 Three rimes the daily market rental rate, liens and foreclosure. 4 Opinion from Bill Gibson, AlCP, Town Planner, Town of Vail dated September 16, 2010 Since the creation of Phase V, Colorado's condominium laws have changed with the adoption of the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act in 1992 ( CCIOA) to establish a "clear, comprehensive and uniform law for common interest communities. "5 No penalties of the type contained in the Restrictions on Use and Section 17.26.075 are permitted under CCIOA. And only an "association" can assess a fine under conditions and subject to due process requirements established by CCIOA. The penalty provisions of the Restrictions on Use and Section 17.26.075 directly conflict with CCIOA and are likely invalid. In the past 26 years, the Vail community has experienced a significant growth in the number of available accommodation units because of the construction or expansion of projects such as: Manor Vail (renovated and expanded, vertically) Golden Peak (new construction) Tivoli Lodge (renovated) Mountain Chalets (new construction) Solaris (tear down, new construction and expanded) One Willow (tear -down, new construction and expanded) The Willows (tear -down, new construction) Bishop Park (new construction) Sonnenalp Hotel (tear down, new construction and expanded) The Sebastian (tear down, new construction and expanded) Gateway (new construction) Four Seasons (tear down, new construction and expanded Arabelle (tear down, new construction and expanded) Landmark (renovated) Ritz Carlton (new construction) EverVail (general concept approved) The need for accommodation units that existed in 1987 has clearly changed in favor of the availability of many more such units. Although the increase in accommodation units may not eliminate the policy underlying Section 17.26.075, the policy is not served by the enforcement of Section 17.26.075 against a project that was never a condominium conversion in the first instance. The Association seeks to remove the cloud now on the title of the Phase V residential owners' units because of the potential for enforcement of Section 17.26.075 by the Town of Vail under the 1987 Ordinance notwithstanding the fact that Phase V is not a condominium conversion and notwithstanding the fact that the policy underlying Section 17.26.075 was never subverted. The approval of the Application will avoid a continuing controversy and uncertainly and the potential for legal action to protect property rights and values. 5 Section 38- 33.3- 102(1)(a), C .R.S. ORDINANCE 12 -9A -8 CRITERIA Vail Ordinance Section 12 -9A -8 establishes the criteria for an amendment to a special development district. It is the responsibility of the Association to demonstrate that submittal material comply with each of the design standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved. The Association addresses each criteria as follow: Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. RESPONSE: The Application does not seek a physical change to the architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation, size, location, density, set back or appearance of any structure or improvement within SDD 6. The Application is compatible with the established immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. RESPONSE: The Application will benefit the continued compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activities since the Application (i) does not seek any change in uses, activities and density of SDD 6 or surrounding properties and (ii) will resolve ambiguities in the application and enforcement of the condominium conversion ordinance to residential units within Phase V. Parking and Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in chapter 10 of this title. RESPONSE: Parking and loading are provided for in the SDD 6 development plans and ordinances. The Application does not seek any change to existing parking or loading requirements or uses. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive plan, town policies and urban design plans. RESPONSE: To the extent that accommodations units are addressed in the comprehensive plan, the Association submits that the amendment to the 1987 Ordinance sought by the Application will have little or no impact to available accommodation units because of the significant expansion of available accommodation units since construction of Phase V and the very small number of residential units in Phase V. The amendment to the 1987 Ordinance sought by the Application only makes it optional for a residential unit owner to place his or her unit in the rental pool. Natural and /or Geologic Hazard: Identification and mitigation of natural and /or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is proposed. RESPONSE: There are no natural or geologic hazards involved in the Application. Design Features: Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. RESPONSE: As noted above, the Application does not seek any change to any design feature, or site plan, building design or location or open space provisions of any aspect of SDD 6 or surrounding properties. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site traffic circulation. RESPONSE: There are no proposed or intended changes to existing circulation system for vehicles or pedestrians in Phase V, SDD 6 or surrounding properties. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. RESPONSE: There are no proposed or intended changes to existing landscape features or open space areas in Phase V, SDD 6 or surrounding properties. Workable Plan: Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. RESPONSE: Phase V, SDD 6 and the surrounding properties are all developed and established projects. There is no need or plan for phasing the amendment to the 1987 Ordinance requested by the Application. APPENDICES The Application includes Appendices regarding adjoining property and a sample title insurance policy reflecting typical title information that would apply to each unit in Phase V with the exception of variation in the owner name, unit description and the owner financing. CONCLUSIONS Section 12 -9A -8 standards are primarily addressed to physical changes or changes to the use of property in order to establish or to modify a special development district. The Application is addressed, however, to changes to the 1987 Ordinance that do not involve physical changes to SDD 6, Phase V or surrounding properties or changes in the physical uses thereof. The Application is therefore compatible with existing, established adjacent uses and has no adverse impact to the owners and occupants of SDD 6, Phase V or the surrounding properties. In addition, the Application has the benefit of resolving present uncertainty and controversy over the applicability and enforceability of Section 17.26.075 to Phase V and would therefore promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. LEGAL QUALIFICATION The submission of the Application and this Statement including the information contained therein is not intended and should not be construed as an admission by or limitation on the Association or any owner in Phase V to contest, oppose or seek a judicial determination as to the application or enforceability of Section 17.26.075, the 1987 Ordinance or the Restrictions on Use to any unit in Phase V. The Association reserves the right to amend, supplement, terminate or withdraw this Application at any time. -4 N, Olt Ak• I aN N -;4- 17.26.075 Condominium Conversion i Any applicant seeking to convert any accoce�iodation unit within the town shall comply with the requirements of this section. The requirements contained in this section shall not apply to structures or buildings which contain two units or less. r�, 'i i4 7Y •tlUil'•I!:i'ntt :: �:•; v otit ri.c t i''tl:: it i';•i +i :1 Cf111 l.:l: n+•, i `:lt:t 11 br. iur.ludcd in Uhl: conclut:lirliuw declaration ror the project., and Ti.lcd ur rrtcsurd with Lhe Eagle: County clerk and recorder. The conciomi.niurn units crc;ttcd :411:411 rcmai;1 in the short Lerm rental market to be Lantltoral'y acco[ ;;-'; +dations avai.];►ble to the I;aneral public. 1. An owner's personal u:;e of his unit shall be restricted to fourteen days d1tring the seasonal periods of December 15th through April 15th and fourteen days during ,June 15th through Septcrrnbcr 15th. Tlii:; seasonal period is hereinafter referred to as "high Season." "Owner's personal use" shall be defined as owner oc.cttpallcy of .1 unit or nonpaying guc:-:t of the owner or tul:irti; the unit uff the rental mari:e:t during the seasonal periods rc:forrod to hcrcin for any reason other than necessary repairs which cannot be postponed or n ;hick ;;tale the tutu unrent ablc. Occul,:utcy of a unit by a :I.odl;e rnanal;er or sL :tff cnntpl.oyad by the lodge, hctteovctr, shall not be rostricted by this; c:cttie :�. 2. A violation of the ov.- ner'sr use restrici.i.on by Unit :;ub;jc:rt f.lie owner to it el.mily es sill(, talc by t:he condominium as�:oc: :ttion of three time:; it raLe r,r-,ti.1,Jidvrecl i:o Ilea a rcasanahlc; cixi.ly rojil:al. rata ;'o,• I lie unit ;Lt the t iurci c,.t Lhr. vi.o.l ;tLion, whicth tchc:n paid ::ha'l'l be deP(.::itc:cl i.;t I;lle : :c•ncral 11tnc1:; of the c uridcan i n i 11m a:'s:c >i;; aliou 161• u::e in u, : ;u: ni; :ctrl rop:1i.rJill" Lliv cotillion olc vients of L)tc• cc+ nclorni It'i r; :u :. Al 7 a:u:ns: 0 a M-35- i tilt: e+;ener for'vi.o:l.ation of file owner';, lac•;rsunal use ac:;tri.ci.:ion mid unpaid sha].] constitul:c a .lien i,or the baiie- fit Of the 'con dami.11 i IIII, a:: >sociaLi on on i:h:.t otvnr_r';; unit, which ]irn shall tic cN•i.cirnc,ci lay ivrittu„ not :ice p]accd of record in tl.te office o1' 1`110. and recorder of Eagle County, Colorado, :aid which may be cell ] coed by fol•c�c] r,sure, on an owncl•'s c nado- inilltl31r1 unit by the a:;:;uci.o.tion in like manner " a Inortgal a or dc:rd oi t.rust. Un real property. nin condominiuin association's fai:lurr; to c!n.roree tire: owner's pe r;nnal a ;c� ra„trict.ion steal] (.Savo t.l,c: town the right to enrorc'e t.hc: r,:e;tri.ct :lent laV i:he a:;r;ers::n,ei,t. :aul iho ]ic•n Provided 'Col' l;croundcr. If the town utuacc:: t.lie rr:r,t.riet.ion, t.ha t.ouit :ar,l,l te:ci:ivu the: •fluid:; c:u.I.ICCLed a rV. ltit 0 ,;WtA1 e:ufort-cnrcui•• in tile.: cv, nL lit.ig:t.L•ic7n vraul.t:c, :[rom I.hu r:rd.orcrn,rnt ul the rastr:i,. :Ci,on, as part of .iLs reward to Lho provailing parLy, the: court; Shu11 award such party i.Ls ctaurL costs Lclm.,eher with reatioatabIc attorney's tees incurred. 3. The Town shall have the r.i�;ht: to require froth the cut:cio- minium,assoc iaLion All :LnuuaI. report of o liar's per:;onal use duri.Ilg Me high season.-; t•oa• a11 cunvorl.,:d eondomini.um units. 13. Any beige .I.ocat:ed within Lhc To;tl, which ha;s c.on:'urtcd acc:otno- daLion units to uondomi.n:iums :411:111 eclnLinue to prUVidp c:uslouilry ]edl;e r:LCi.].i.ti.es and ::;c:rvi.ccs inca.uili, ;� cu:;t.omat•�; e :rkeCin;, progrt,an. a a . w _36_ C. 'file. converLed cortdotainium unite sha,.11 remain available Lo Ll1E (;annratl i :ouli�,t nrtrkoC. This condition MAY be met l,y :inc.lur:ion of the) units of Hie, condominium Project, at comparable rates, in any lur:.tl ro :;ervation sySt.t:nl for the rental oz lodge; or condominium units in Lhe Town. U. 1'ho ccotnmon are.. -: Of ;rny lodge with converted units shard .remain colnnton areas and he n)a:int.ained ill a. manner consistent with its Previous; chau•acter. And' changes, alterations or renovations made to com ou areas shall not. diminish Lhe: Size or quality of the common areas. E. Any accorntnoclaCiou units Lhat were ut.-ilized to Provide housing Tor emp.lt,yatrs ,r.t :u,y t.iute duri.rti; tllc! Chl•eC yc(u.'s preivi -olis to the da>•.e of the appJ icaLi.o11 shn11 rcmetLn as c,uhl.uye�: ut,it::a for such duration as 111KY be required by I:ho Planning auti. Environmental Commission or the 'Town Counni.l.. F. APplic :Ability: All conditions :;al. forth VALIAll Ll,i.s section shrt].i be mado l)inditl(; on the a.hpl.ica»t, the ;LPp11c;LaL' :- tatccessors, lus:iru, Personal rc :prise :ul :ativc,; alctl r s a;:u ;1n0'1 : "ovurn 1.11a: l,i'olx;.t'LV which i:.s Lhu : <ub,j(:ct of Litt! ;Lj)PU(;aLi(,ll 1'v: l.hc life of OL.: Survivor of the 1'vessout. '1'A'111 CDt.1Tlr.J.l Alley I.t.t,nl.y -ants years. Sion of :cc :cornmudat.iutt uui.1. :; 10r:tL06 ii.l.hin a icxl;;c; i)ur:= ;u;tnt to r.lti.a 'A'clAun, shall be Iluxti ri.c :d c•,nl,,• I,p L.ht, 1'r'r'.i CWn a.;.;rvcarcnt (.)f this Cull nC;i.l t_nd the onnt,t• or owners o.r Lhcs tLit .iI wbiclt l,a%'c (,ter :n convar[cti into condomi.nium� ;. Tiln der.umr�nt.s: c :rt :aP. :in1; and govt-ruing any acr.outm,:)- elation uJill; trhi.cat tuts•; been convcrLird i.ul.o a aanclotni.'rli.um : :haLl I,ti tnodi.fi.rrl by up(, `Lilt, owners c,l' s:uch 1111 i Lti n»]Y ei LI: I.hC; wri.LLon [ov -I or uic.. Town ctrttlle :i..1 0 a 0-37- PAI G. I'VOCIiCIUJ'l: The conversion of an acc:nnaodaLi.on unit in an ex.isting lodl;e :;lua.l.l be ac:cocnpli.s:!:ed purSuanL to the subdivision r:•ovic:v I,rocoss. Tho applicant, sha.11 provicke the fo:L1owing- docw3u- ul'ation to the Town at: the time of the: appJ C Ltion to convert accoeunodation uni.ts located Ln a :tool; to condomi.nituu uni.Ls: 1. Proof of u,:ncrship; 2. si.Lc inventory i•Mr the property indicating in detail Uct:u;tl locat.i -on of any anreniti.es ::erring the .1 oilge ; a. A:ff:iclavit of s0rvir.cs prot•idcad is called for in sub — parngro-tph $ ' above, d. Dus.i, nation anu dof�:c?•iption oC e ;:plcy ce snits, ;,. Plan c, f iu:prot :ruMn LS to be made: t o thc• propert y along with c:; +.:ica i.c'ci usr t.hc rcf.ai . (Ord 28. 1982) 11.26.080 Action on preliminary map A. At the hearing on the preliminary :rap, the planning commission shall consider whether the proposed conversion is consistent with the following housing goais of the town: 1. To encourage continuation of social and economic diversity in the town through a variety of housing types; 2. To expand the supply of decent housing for low and moderate income families, 3. To achieve greater economic balance for the town by increasing the nuuber of jobs and the supply of housing for people who will hold them. 13 -7 -8: RESTRICTIONS ON UNITS CONVERTED PRIOR TO FEBRUARY 7,1995: 1. A. Compliance: Any accommodation unit within the town which has been converted to a condominium or has received approval for a conversion prior to the effective date of February 7, 1995, shall comply with the requirements of this section. The requirements contained in this section shall not apply to structures or buildings which contain two (2) units or less. B. Use By Owner /Renter: The requirements and restrictions herein contained shall be included in the condominium declaration for the project, and filed of record with the Eagle County clerk and recorder. The condominium units created shall remain in the short term rental market to be used as temporary accommodations available to the general public. 1. An owner's personal use of his or her unit shall be restricted to twenty eight (28) days during the seasonal periods of December 24 through January 1 and February 1 through March 20. This seasonal period is hereinafter referred to as "high season ". "Owner's personal use" shall be defined as owner occupancy of a unit or nonpaying guest of the owner or taking the unit off the rental market during the seasonal periods referred to herein for any reason other than necessary repairs which cannot be postponed or which make the unit unrentable. Occupancy of a unit by a lodge manager or staff employed by the lodge, however, shall not be restricted by this section. 2. A violation of the owner's use restriction by a unit owner shall subject the owner to a daily assessment rate by the condominium association of three (3) times a rate considered to be a reasonable daily rental rate for the unit at the time of the violation, which assessment when paid shall be common elements of the condominiums. All sums assessed against the owner for violation of the owner's personal use restriction and unpaid shall constitute a lien for the benefit of the condominium association on that owner's unit, which lien shall be evidenced by written notice placed of record in the office of the clerk and recorder of Eagle County, and which may be collected by foreclosure on an owner's condominium unit by the association in like manner as a mortgage or deed of trust on real property. The condominium association's failure to enforce the owner's personal use restriction shall give the town the right to enforce the restriction by the assessment and the lien provided for hereunder. If the town enforces the restriction, the town shall receive the funds collected as a result of such enforcement. In the event litigation results from the enforcement of the restriction, as part of its reward to the prevailing party, the court shall award such party its court costs together with reasonable attorney fees incurred. 3. The town shall have the right to require from the condominium association an annual report of owner's personal use during the high seasons for all converted condominium units. 4. The converted lodge units shall not be used as permanent residences. For the purposes of this section, a person shall be presumed to be a permanent resident if such person has resided in the unit for six (6) consecutive months notwithstanding from time to time during such six (6) month period the person may briefly dwell in other places. C. Converted Lodge Retains Customary Facilities: Any lodge located within the town which has converted accommodation units to condominiums shall continue to provide customary lodge facilities and services including a customary marketing program. D. Unsold Condominiums Rented: The converted condominium units shall remain available to the general tourist market. If unsold thirty (30) days after recording of the condominium map, the unsold converted condominiums shall be required to be furnished and made available to the general tourist market within ninety (90) days after the date of recording of the condominium map. This requirement may be met by inclusion of the units of the condominium project at comparable rates in any local reservation system for the rental of lodge or condominium units in the town. E. Common Areas Remain: The common areas of any lodge with converted units shall remain common areas and be maintained in a manner consistent with its previous character. Any changes, alterations or renovations made to common areas shall not diminish the size or quality of the common areas. F. Employee Housing: Any accommodation units that were utilized to provide housing for employees at any time during the three (3) years previous to the date of the application shall remain as employee units for such duration as may be required by the planning and environmental commission or the town council. G. Applicability: All conditions set forth within this section shall be made binding on n the applicant, the applicant's successors, heirs, personal representatives and assigns and shall govern the property which is the subject of the application for the life of the survivor of the present town council plus twenty one (21) years. Conversion of accommodation units located within a lodge pursuant to this section, shall be modified only by the written agreement of the town council and the owner or owners of the units which have been converted into condominiums. The documents creating and governing any accommodation unit which has been converted into a condominium shall be modified by the owners of such units only with the prior written approval of the town council. (Ord. 29(2005) $ 62: Ord. 5(2000) $ 1: Ord. 15(1995) $ 1: Ord. 1(1995) $ 4: Ord. 21(1987) $$ 1 3: Ord. 2(1983) $ 1) Amanda Bradley From: Bill Gibson Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 8 :18 PM To: 'DPKB' Subject: RE: Village Inn Plaza Phase V Condominiums Hey David, The language in your HOA documents appear to reference regulations found in Section 13 -7 -8; Restrictions on Units Converted Prior to February 7, 1995; Vail Town Code. These provisions of the Town Code address previous accommodation units (i.e. hotel rooms) that were converted into condominium units. There is historical documentation in the Town's archives of a previous redevelopment proposal for "phase v" at the Vail Village Inn. This unbuilt "phase v" redevelopment was not the existing Village Inn Plaza Phase V Condominiums. Instead, this historic phase v proposal involved the redevelopment of the former hotel on the existing Sebastian Hotel (formerly Vail Plaza Hotel) site. The construction of the existing Village Inn Plaza Phase V Condominiums did not involve the conversion of accommodation units to condominium units. Therefore, the provisions of Section 13 -7 -8, Vail Town Code, do not apply to the existing Village Inn Plaza Phase V Condominiums properties. Sincerely, From: DPKB [maiito:dpkb @msn.com] Sent: Thursday, September 02, 2010 3:06 AM To: Bill Gibson Subject: Fw: Village Inn Plaza Phase V Condominiums Bill, This issue seemed to get shelved by me and I am not sure but perhaps you as well , but I was wondering if it would be possible for us to get to the bottom of this issue as I told our Association I would look into it. I know I had a chat with you over the phone in which you were agreeing with me to some level and I was hoping you could send me an email to clarify the towns position on this issue so we can determine our next step to remove this restriction from our declaration which we feel is restricting our right to enjoy our property . Many thanks for your help with this and I trust you have had a nice summer. David Bruckmann From: D. Bruckmann Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2010 3:51 PM To: Bill Gibson Subject: Fw: Village Inn Plaza Phase V Condominiums Dear Bill, Just want to make sure you got my email over the busy holidays. Could you please be good enough to confirm that you received the below email and that you are looking into the issues raised. Many thanks, David Bruckmann From: D. Bruckmann Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2009 5:39 PM To: Bill Gibson Subject: Re: Village Inn Plaza Phase V Condominiums Dear Bill, I trust you had a nice Christmas. I have now obtained a copy of the original Code §17.26.075 and have the Code §13 -7 -8 that you referenced for me. Having studied both, I am still of the opinion that the restriction on personal use is not enforceable against owners of condos in Phase V for the following two reasons: First, both sections 17.26.075 and 13 -7 -8 relate to accommodation units and lodging units that have been converted to condominiums. As Phase V was built on vacant land as a condominium development, I think it would be hard to argue that it was a conversion of anything and therefore this code section has no relevance to Phase V and is not enforceable against owners of Phase V condominiums. Second, even if the provisions are applicable, I am convinced that sec 13 -7 -8 of the Town of Vail code would not be considered by a court of law as a reasonable restriction that could be enforced against an owner of a condominium. After searching both Colorado and Federal judicial decisions I have been unable to find any court rulings that would support the ability of the Town to enforce any personal use restriction against an owner of a condominium. One can find many rulings that support the ability to limit owners from renting or leasing their units but none that support the ability of anyone restricting the personal use of one's own condominium. My findings are in accordance with a conversation I had with the town attorney in 1999. At that time, I was told that the town of Vail would not seek to enforce §13 -7 -8 as it would likely be ruled invalid. Perhaps you would be kind enough to enquire with Mr. Mire as to whether the town's position remains the same and whether my findings are accurate. For example, has the town ever successfully enforced Code §13 -7 -8, and if so, in what court were they held enforceable? Thank you very much for your further attention to this matter and I look forward to your reply. Best regards, David Bruckmann From: Bill Gibson Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 8:09 AM To: DPKB Subject: Re; Village Inn Plaza Phase V Condominiums Hey David, The language that matches your declaration is found in Section 13 -7 -8, not 6. Sorry about that. Bill Bill Gibson, AICP Town Planner Town of Vail p: 970 - 479 -2173 f; 970- 479 -2452 balbson(a vailgov.com >>> "DPKB° <dpkb@msn.com> 12/10/2009 3 :24 AM >>> Bill, I checked the code you referenced and the title of it is : "13 -7 -6: ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS TO EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNITS:" Perhaps the section number or something is wrong as I am not sure what this Section has to do with my question? In your reply to the above could you please attach a copy of the original code Section 17.26,075 so that I could read it. Thank you, David Bruckmann From: Bill Gibson Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 9;40 PM To• DPKB Subject: Re: Village Inn Plaza Phase V Condominiums Hey David, Several years ago the Vail Town Code was re- formatted and the title, chapter, and section numbers of the code changed. The provisions of Section 17.26.075 referenced in your declarations are now found in Section 13 -7 -6 of the Vail Town Code. Since these regulations still exist in the Town Code, it does not appear that the restrictions in your declarations have automatically expired. http:// www. sterlincicodifiers .com /codebook /index.php ?book id -560 Sincerely, Bill Bill Gibson, AICP Town Planner Town of Vail p; 970 -479 -2173 f: 970 -479 -2452 b4ibson@yailgoy.com >>> "DPKB" <dpkb @msn.com> 12/1/2009 9;24 AM >>> Bill, Just checking to see how you are coming on the answer to my question. It would seem to me that as the ordinance no longer exists the restriction would automatically drop as it says in the Declaration. Look forward to your reply. David Bruckmarm From: Bill Gibson Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 5:18 PM To: DPKB Subject: Re: Village Inn Plaza Phase V Condominiums Dear Mr. Bruckmann, We have received your voicemail and email. We will research our files to determine if this deed restriction can be repealed; and if it can, determine what process is necessary to do so. Which specific unit in Phase V do you own? Sincerely, Bill Bill Gibson, AICP Town Planner Town of Vail p; 970 - 479 -2173 f; 970 - 479 -2452 bgibsonPvailoov.com >>> "DPKB" <dpkb@msn.com> 11/12/2009 9;37 AM >>> Dear Mr. Gibson, I have left you a message to call but to give you a heads up this is my question. Our condominium has a restriction of use in it's Dclaration which you can see in paragraph 21 (i) page 24 of the attached Declaration, on two occasions, the first was when I bought my condo in 1999 I spoke with the Town attorney who told me that the Town would not enforce the restriction. The second time was less than a year ago when I spoke to a lady in your department who told me that the ordinance cited in the Declaration no longer existed and that we should remove that restriction from the Declaration at our next Association meeting , Paragraph 21(i) (vi) seems to give this right . Would you please confirm that this is the case and let me know if there is anything that our Association needs to do as far as modifying the old Declaration that is filed with the Town. I look forward to hearing from you on this matter. David Bruckmann 44- 1883712945 § 38- 33.3 -102. Legislative declaration, CO ST § 38- 33.3 -102 C.R.S.A. § 38- 33.3 -102 § 38- 33.3 -102. Legislative declaration Currentness (1) The general assembly hereby finds, determines, and declares, as follows: (a) That it is in the best interests of the state and its citizens to establish a clear, comprehensive, and uniform framework for the creation and operation of common interest communities; (b) That the continuation of the economic prosperity of Colorado is dependent upon the strengthening of homeowner associations in common interest communities financially through the setting of budget guidelines, the creation of statutory assessment liens, the granting of six months' lien priority, the facilitation of borrowing, and more certain powers in the association to sue on behalf of the owners and through enhancing the financial stability of associations by increasing the association's powers to collect delinquent assessments, late charges, fines, and enforcement costs; (c) That it is the policy of this state to give developers flexible development rights with specific obligations within a uniform structure of development of a common interest community that extends through the transition to owner control; (d) That it is the policy of this state to promote effective and efficient property management through defined operational requirements that preserve flexibility for such homeowner associations; (e) That it is the policy of this state to promote the availability of funds for financing the development of such homeowner associations by enabling lenders to extend the financial services to a greater market on a safer, more predictable basis because of standardized practices and prudent insurance and risk management obligations. Credits Added by Laws 1991, H.B.91- 1292, § 1, eff. July 1, 1992. WestlawNext O 2014 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. § 38- 33.3 -102. Legislative declaration, CO ST § 38- 33.3 -102 Notes of Decisions containing your search terms (0) View all 2 C. R. S. A. § 38- 33.3 -102, CO ST § 38- 33.3 -102 Current through laws effective May 17, 2014, see scope for further details End of Document © 2014 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. WestlawNext © 2014 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 2 § 38- 33.3 -106. Applicability of local ordinances, regulations,..., CO ST § 38- 33.3 -106 C.R.S.A. § 38- 33.3 -io6 § 38- 33.3 -1o6. Applicability of local ordinances, regulations, and building codes Currentness (1) A building code may not impose any requirement upon any structure in a common interest community which it would not impose upon a physically identical development under a different form of ownership; except that a minimum one hour fire wall may be required between units. (2) In condominiums and cooperatives, no zoning, subdivision, or other real estate use law, ordinance, or regulation may prohibit the condominium or cooperative form of ownership or impose any requirement upon a condominium or cooperative which it would not impose upon a physically identical development under a different form of ownership. Credits Added by Laws 1991, H.B.91- 1292, § 1, eff. July 1, 1992. C. R. S. A. § 38- 33.3 -106, CO ST § 38- 33.3 -106 Current through laws effective May 17, 2014, see scope for further details End of Document © 2014 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. WestlawNext O 2014 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 12 -9A -8: DESIGN CRITERIA AND NECESSARY FINDINGS: 1. A. Criteria: The following g design criteria shall be used as the Principal criteria in evaluating the merits of the proposed special development district. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved: 1. Compatibili .: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. 2. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. 3. Parking And Loading. Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in chapter 10 of this title. 4. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail comprehensive plan, town policies and urban design plans. 5. Natural And /Or Geologic Hazard: Identification and mitigation of natural and /or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is proposed. 6. Design Features: Site plan, building g design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. 7. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site traffic circulation. 8. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscapin _ and nd open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. 9. Workable Plan: Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. B. Necessary Findings: Before recommending and /or rg anting an approval of an application for a special development district, the planning and environmental commission and the town council shall make the followiniz findings with respect to the DroDosed SDD: 1. That the SDD complies with the standards listed in subsection A of this section, unless the applicant can demonstrate that one or more of the standards is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the Dublic interest has been achieved. 2. That the SDD is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive Dlan and compatible with the development obiectives of the town_ and 3. That the SDD is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate for the surroundiniz areas_ and 4. That the SDD promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. (Ord. 29(2005) $ 26: Ord. 21(1988) $ 1) s a i ORDINANCE NO. 14 Series of 1987 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1, SERIES OF 1985 TO PROVIDE FOR THE AMENDMENT OF THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6; ADOPTING AN AMENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6, ELIMINATING CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO THE DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6; CHANGING THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6; CHANGING THE ALLOWABLE DENSITY AND MODIFYING THE BUILDING BULK STANDARDS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6; PROVIDING DIFFERENT PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS FOR PHASE IV AND V OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL of the Town of Vail as follows: Section 1, Legislative Intent is hereby repealed and reenacted with amendments to read as follows: Section 1. Legislative Intent A. In 1976, the Town Council of the Town of Vail passed Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1976, establishing Special Development District No. 6 to insure the unified and coordinated development of a critical site as a whole and in a manner suitable for the area in which it was situated. B. Special Development District No.6 provided in Section 14 that the Town Council reserved the right to abrogate or modify Special Development District No. 6 for good cause through the enactment of an ordinance in conformity with the zoning code of the Town of Vail. C. In 1985, the Town Council of the Town of Vail passed Ordinance #1, Series of 1985, providing certain amendments to the development plan for SDD N0, 6. D. Application has been made to the Town of Vail to modify and amend certain sections of Special Development District No. 6 which relate to Phase IV and which make certain changes in the development plan for Special Development District No. 6 as they relate to Phase IV. E. The Planning and Environmental Commission of` the Town of Vail has reviewed the changes submitted by the applicant and has recoirrnended that Special Development District No. 6 be so amended. F. The Town Council considers that the amendments provide an even more unified and more aesthetically pleasing development of a critical site within the Town and that such amendments are of benefit to the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the Town of Vail. T , r Section 2. Section 18.50.020 Purpose is hereby amended to read as follows: A Special Development District is established to assure comprehensive development and use of an area in a manner that would be harmonious with the general character of the Town, provide adequate open space and recreation amenities, and promote the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town. Ordinarily, a special development district will be created only when the development is regarded as complementary to the Town by the Town Council, Planning Commission and Design Review Board, and there are significant aspects of the special development which cannot be satisfied under the existing zoning. Section 18.50.040 Development Plan -- Contents is hereby amended to read as follows; The proposed development plan shall include, but is not limited to, the following data as supplemented by exhibits provided by consultants Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1976 for Phases I, I1, I11, and as supplemented by the exhibits of the development plan and the environmental impact report as prepared by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect, (plans dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 22, 1987), and as given final approval through passage of second reading of this ordinance by the Town Council on May 19, 1987 for Phase IV and Phase V. This approval recognizes that Phase IV may be constructed in two phases with the first phase to be referred to as Phase IV and the final phase to be referred to as Phase V. Section 3. Section 18.50.040 E is hereby amended to read as follows: E. For Phases I, II, and III, a volumetric model as amended by consultants Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1976 of the site and proposed development documented by photographs at a scale of 1 inch equals 16 feet or larger, portraying the scale and relationship of those phases of the development to the site and illustrating the form and mass of structures in said phases of the development. For Phases IV and V, a volumetric model as amended by Gordon Pierce, Architect, of the site and the proposed development at a scale of 1 inch equals 20 feet, portraying the scale and relationship of the development on Phases IV and V, to the site and illustrating the form of mass of structures in said phase. Section 4. Section 18.50.050 Permitted Uses in Special Development No. 6 is hereby repealed and re- enacted with amendments to read as follows: 18.50.050 Permitted Uses The permitted uses in Phases I, I1, III, IV and V of Special Development District 6 shall be in accordance with the approved development plans on file in 1 1 the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Section 5. Section 18.50.OGO Conditional Uses 'in Special Development District No. 6 is hereby repealed and re- enacted with amendments to read as follows: 18.50.060 Conditional Uses Conditional Ekes for Phases I, II, III, IV and V of Special Development District No. 6 shall be as found in Section 18.22.030 of the Vail Zoning Code and as below: A. A popcorn outside vending wagon that conforms in appearance with those existing in Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II. Except, no office uses, except those clearly accessory to a principal use will be allowed on the Plaza level of Phases IV and V. Section 6. Section 18.50.110 Distance Between Buildings is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.50.110 Distance Between Buildings For Phases I, II and III the minimum distance between buildings on adjacent sites shall be as indicated in the development plan, but in no case shall be less than 50 feet. For Phase IV AND V, the minimum distance between buildings on adjacent sites shall be as indicated in the development plan as submitted by Gordon Pierce, Architect, (dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 17, 1987). Section 7. Section 18.50.120 Height is hereby amended to read as follows: A. For Phases I, II, and III the allowable heights shall be as found on the development plan, specifically the site plan and height plan dated 3/12/76. B. For Phases IV and V, the maximum building height shall be as set forth in the approved development plan by Gordon Pierce, Architect (dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 17, 1987). Section 8. Section 18.50.130 Density is hereby amended to read as follows: The Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) of all districts in the Special Development District shall not exceed 120,600 square feet. There shall be a minimum of 148 accommodation units and 67,367 square feet of GRFA devoted to accommodation units in Phase IV and V of Special Develoment District 6. Section 9. Section 18.50.130 Building Bulk is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.50.130 Building Bulk Building bulk, maximum wall lengths, maximum dimensions for building elements, requirements for wall offsets and vertical stepping of roof lines for Phases I, II and III shall be indicated on the development plan submitted by consultants 0 Royston, lianamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1975. For Phases IV and V, building bulk, maximum wall lengths, maximum dimensions for building elements, requirements for wall offsets and vertical stepping of roof lines shall be as indicated as per the approved development plans submitted by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect (dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 22, 1987). Section 10. Section 18.50.180 Parking and Loading is hereby repealed and reenacted with amendments as follows: 18,50.180 Parking and Loading Following the completion of Phases IV and V, there shall be not less than 12 surface parking spaces, 324 underground parking spaces, and 37 underground valet parking spaces as are existing and as provided on the development plan submitted by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect (dated February 19, 1987). The proposed site plan dated February 19, 1987 reflects the interim parking plans between the development of Phases IV and V. Section 11 is hereby repealed and reenacted with amendments to read as follows: Section 11. Conditions of approval for the development plan of Phases IV and V of SDD6 as submitted by Gordon Pierce (dated February 9, 1985, revised April 14 and April 22, 1987), shall be as follows: 1. That the developers and /or owners of Phases IV and V participate in and do not remonstrate against an improvement district for improvements to the intersection of Vail Road and Meadow Drive if and when one is formed. 2. That the developers and /or owners of Phases IV and V participate in and do not remonstrate against establishing a pedestrian linkage from Phases IV and V to a future commercial expansion at the Sonnenalp Lodge site if and when it is developed. 3. The developer receive approval from the State Highway Department for reconfiguration of the pull -off area from the Frontage Road to the entrance to the hotel prior to the issuance of a building permit for Phase V. 4. The developers and /or owners of Phase IV agree to transfer by general warranty deed to the Town of Vail free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, such condominium unit of approximately 3,986 sq. ft. in size and to be located as indicated on the plans and specifications submitted with the application. There shall be no provisions placed on the condominium unit restricting the Town of Vail's use of the unit or the subsequent subdivision and /or sale of the unit. -4- 0 5. No grading permit, building permit or demolition permit relating to Phases IV or V of Special Development District No. 6 shall be issued until such time that reasonable evidence is provided the Town of Vail staff that construction financing for the improvements to be constructed as part of Phases IV or V has been obtained. 6. Restrictions on any units in Phases IV or V which would be condominiumized shall be as outlined in Section 17.26.075 of the Vail Municipal Code and any amendments thereto. 7. Upon the issuance of a building permit for the construction of any phase of SDDii6 subsequent to Phase IV, the developer and/or owner of said phase shall reimburse the Town of Vail for expenses incurred in facilitating the relocation of the ski museum (into Phase IV) of an amount not to exceed $75,000. S. Any remodel or redevelopment of the remaining portion of SDD6 commonly referred to as Phase V shall include parking as required by Ordinance 1, Series of 1985. Section 12. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason head to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the valildity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. The repeal or the repeal and reenaction of any provisions of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. INTRODUCED, REND AND PASSED ON FIRST READING THIS 5th day of May, 1987 , and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the 19th day of May 1987 at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Order d;p i'she -i.n ,u]1 this 8th day of May _, 1987. �- 7 �. _ Paul R. Jo. ton, Mayor ATT1-ST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED in full this 19th day of May 1987. Paul R. &ston, Mayor Al -T ST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk J < . r Public Note - 1001SINAUCL, W*W SabI .119117 PROOF OF PUBLICATION O OISFANC` BETWEEN gBUR01N1�OS FOR PHASE N DF .sr[a l: 0"1, 0 FOR SfATE OF COLORADO - - D13TRTCT NO. 8: CHANGING. OE HEIGHT. DETFHCT O. 6FORPHASEIV OFSPECIAL 55. C DISTRICT NO. 8; COUNTY OF EAGLE M MODI11NOTHEAI.yGVBUIL D ALLEN KNOK P . OEV ELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6; }f1e ,lib 1i.sTler _ o(TFIE VA I. 1f2NL; that the same is a weekly newspaper D V -OF SPECIAL 'DEVELOPMENT pP sled, In while or In part and pULrllshed In It1e CUUllly ai Fag [e, $1st@ Of COIOSada. D REQARD THERETO. al'td has a enomf CIrCLIIUIIOlq Ihnfaln, ihol sold news )a Or hat talon ubllslled N NO'W, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED RV COIL }IIl0003y arid Llnlr1101lllptOdty ill Sad C.011nty Of Eagle for a pr'iiOd Of more f COLORADO AS FOLLOWS- -two consecutive w v Il oassedd 0,41 ants No. ] states maRsas second class matter undertho pyov"slons of fhe Act of Match 3, 1879, m ]Il9erle, o era ame�Tdments thereof, and that sold newspaper is a weekly newspaper duty d deyal�pmem ate m sal Ina aeewno°le,^dine quali T elh,eiea'elmNa I That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was published in file regular and , ,P,wided b 1 t De ab d entire Issue of every number of sold weekly newspaper for the period of 1 tnra „h ih enanmem 8 consecutive Insertions; and that }ha first pubAeaflon of sold ncIf ice was In Iho issue of V Vei l. (:. In sees, mp To Wo cqundt o+ene Town m xx 11 ��II pp y V Veil Peeead Ordlnance N0. 1, cerise 011985, sold nuwspaper dated _. __._ —_ _— _____ —A.U. 19— _ a a e as eeD. Apmem ICIr waa 1. 6-It an publication of sold notice was in the Issue of sold newspaper dated apnalnl Sal IOp to Phee W end wm hl _ _.A.D. 119 the d —l” no. yyb ___..__.. D11—t No.aas fm E. Commiatlon olf In In witness whereof I have hereunto sot my hand Ihis_ day of m. ahen9easuhmih y re[ommenaed br be F. The Town Ci a endmente Id c Ilnat °altei1�Mhln enOndmanla ere M d wellere of Ibe waa. SECTIIba a. Se Subscribed and sworn to t>gforB me, a data fy of Eci le. '1a Hereby ampnaad 4 ry pubi In an a Coun B �„wse�om °v�elhe e a4 statrd n( Colorado, this __ya5 ` day of AD. t9 _ u—ni- wnh to Town, Provlae ad PMlnn -R TbenBV. OrOl�wrhlly. BuBI ES Do yen a'Jeld kiaed ea lultllgwlc'ng '.. SBVBII Pmal111 iebagr -. _._... _... 1e.60.13n 8u11dln TBulk. : Ih, Tpwn by the Pudding b,N, a Imam NI IsnBlha, Cemmkllan antl C i I rl.] . •J (1 Imum dimanakorre for DullUlns lamanls, : Then el9 11ko <<ff �] L] I IMrYnenla la NI Beele end° verlicel My commission expires FIVpPlnp�olro0llrnee 'orAM1esml,FlsnOIlleM1ell j h elnlfl�pxo�nlrkq„ an In,llnemd Pn ,P IPVeIIFm�a ^I 0'n^ '9ectbn 10Sq°84 bmltted by auaan[e R,yetan, Henemolo, ' CantanbitheraWI Bock o d Ado n 'i"n' r 12, 1475. For ba ppr paead Phe'. IV antl \�, bulldinggnbulX, madmum� -11 �InOlude. LUt la twill elemanls ^raqukamesde fprl well 'or n efe and ! ae aup�lememad 11cn1 atop, lop of fool rinoa eholl bq ea utt M f p!j bdI..Ie va per the np,F, etl development A Februl+y!1 p + bmlllnd by. 1907 vino Apil1haaet l Sod iT Bup n (da�ed FebruaN 19. 1907, •evRatl AOril Hand 1 Oovelgpnanl' plan PPAI 2z, 1BeJl. Imel' I orta Pre WAblleet plan) 'I - SECTION ID, 9ecllOn 11.60.180 rer4ing I . rsrlBetl AprplAiid end Loadingg l:xml repaTed,nd uanailed I; hbal approrel' 1hI _4 a.I.P in Ma es lot Iowa: �' rseding of !hie edl, 18.50.IBoperkin9 and Loedinp on Mey19.196Tfor Follg inglhq o.an,1Il,nof Pho blV end V, ,I :'a P"—, gnlae - Ides shgn hP nm bsg ldenpplx surbcn Mrklnp nru. in WP drt cne3grouatlefekl nd�klnCCkln9 ePacer and I to ba Irratlto asl The e.e1.n, end ae pravedee °on Il,e Eevelopm" to be a"'- to as p an dubmltled by 111 h Pleroa, A�chl be Se an. Ipdaened Fed UFe eruerl /9811. 7' 1. Ua the 1 A E. F Phaeeatll.71 PN, ImpNkln9dan °b°Iw9eeenlhadavalopmbA "'0a amanded'by of Phases IV d'. " H— on't0, Bcck e BECTION ti. Cortlltlol a al aparwal II 11TB=11t, t. Taal the develc a m of Pheeea rV one V pmllpipelee bona do nol a+rela kgalnslen Improvement d alrictfar e nd`Me" Dreo or WebH ens W „en e If termed. 2 Tbel IN devebpele end /or .-or, of rrlmonatrete s9d.1 ealleMleNn9 epedntrlan In _h,W Apaneio Inthe S....nW,p Lodge ens I and when 11 k devabvad. Stale I�ignW°e1y peperlmeM laiieconlllaaf0I.'he Von Inaenlieunloe to lha hotel Frlar[o ihaiee enceol e buW h. p fI tar Ph.. V. an Cauncll eta V. This Vidbithati V mey ba' nret pllaae flnalphna;: Mdc model -.' Royston, ,bruery lz. bpmenl kl pia le[ela , nnrFel,vhan ' - development. For Phase W and ” podN l nug a e erasa al t nchVMa 7 ua�le bf O21, Ietl y m0l M and In N1i,a10 L ecek and rMOtlonth4 of be hu. rail', IM�to ollV." .1 armatures, 1. said pre. ..,.,: , Uawe1, SNOW DamlopmeM No B Is here`b°tly rapeelad no reaneaed wpm Amelldmente b ,� f6.89.050 PernlCed lkse -: -' '- ��. SWI.ImlvNo,aeb D[MftiNp6a IVAndV •. a18pa[lal MValopmanlDNnkf No.6a9tllbeln merely 3.888 T. fl. in she antl to be -' ULN In apPrdey DewanpmeM �IMdet Na -B he bel'atve on the plans and haraby r paeletl =and and Elpd with !Iona auhmlltod wllb Ina epp'ICetbn, • rdmente 10 reed as Mg..,, ; ., Hall h' no ProvlNOna placed on Ih „' 16.80.060 C-M io U Ihl umllm In. rxuilwarNen tulMlrblon ,I el BpnlaI be opmddt tlleVlq Iblahea ba tale be unlLl asst.,. ...... .., M1leundbBeMLen 18,2E.OS0aHheVae Z¢mrg Ie plrUCtlon llnencl1 . l.1 V pin 11— 1" , be p n ..led part of Phan rV orV he. beerf¢cb[..le wlei�clRi owlonb be eondoellnlumleed ehea hreo I1:Nd Fn secllon 11.26.015 M the V.II Munl[Ipel Dad¢. 7. UPW nia "...Pool a buildlnapp malor the cOnth"tbn of any pheae pf u00 No. 0 aWeoquent m pneee 1V. Ise developer Intl/,, of Vail kra.xpamee Inc NUrrea nieviniVlrTgl ;he of Van M the ekl muwum IInlo Pneee lyj el n emOVni hot to ekceetl pspod. a SECTION tg. II any Dert, e¢ lion. sub<aellon, eaManco, dlpuae or Dhreae of Ihla "I'lln- M Ior any reeaan Hale la be bvNlq ...h ti.bban shell Pal allect Iha vNltllly O! the melNnp pent —or thlr ord1n n..; endthe Tarn Covndl nareby tlecleree le would hvs ae etl Ible,Mlnencel end each part, enlbM1 u In ton, eanlunce. devae orph,eN eAerael, re9s,Uleee of the feel tht any a m aerie, ee¢tlonq ti ud'.. 1, 1 tancee, Isutoe or phrup e declared IIU SECTION 13 T rapael thekp Ibnd Nero, 11Dt1 di y Pr¢ 1.1 ! !ba- VP M Iclpel Cn rp A pr lava in 7dlnmce h11 nm .,. y Iant Wn h has ...... d pWye tlu1011 Ip pd ny tldli1on Ihe1 n ,Imd ,l r IRS 6Ibdtl,, Cale heraha, any 111 Pmulion cemmawed. nor anyolhP a r"' prp[eetling s Do 9, ev uncle- by virtue 011na D—Is ore eeled arm W dead n em,d. Th, rcp,,l,i° y p —IsIon hereby all nnl I"', any prow tan DY any ordnance exfl Ing pnlad r eweramm unlpaa y elated narehT. INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED ON FIRST READING AND OADEREOPUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL 11,4611, dayof h%y1911]anda Poor. neadlq mall be NA On Inle Oldlna : Cathe 19th dey,f May. 11191 a1 7:30 p.m.In me 11 Ctmol n_ / IN Vee 221Pe1 BuYdin9, Van. C,IOn I TUM VOF VAL Paul R. Mayo, ATTEST: Pamela A. Srendmeyer " Tgam Clerk Publ4Ni In The Veb Tnd' on May C 1967 ao eetory beprincrpel rue wli be elbwed env. -Cw Plum LovN of Phatn IV altd V.. �y B Bwncyli s; 4L atw Start— tBEO.i IU Diererwe''� ae l0!lowa: - W eresnd,atl to reW 18.60.110 OieleMe llatween =SuNdln e. for Phssea I,fl end I0 the mlelPhan hlen<e betWean bu.14M a atlJap4ntellNNallb- Indicaba In the dwebpp aid Dien, nut kkyy ¢Wall DB leniran 501ae1. FarPneee K1ann "dl,,, minimum "' Ia°heh reenbu8dinpe¢n nl ellea shell b. n Ina I, In the .' avelapmenl plan ee eubminktl by Gordon PI2M Arcnitact, Itlebtl Februe ,steed APNI S4 end APHI 17,,1961'; I 'her SOyTH tletl 7. to le . 10,1!0.110 Hogg be A. F1tbAh1 sea 1, 11 end III the allowable balynts ettall be a° found On Me dseelapmant plsrt, rII1.0V Ina Hee Fish and hI.. PIN dated 8/l'L18. B.FOr Pneee Nend V, bemasknum3wlydl��++@g NMghl sn111 bP at a°I WIb in bq albhnv'aa yelppm 1Plen by I P =Ph,Arehn t Idaled Far b U ry 18.1961; b<d ApFN 11nrq prll BEOTION a SW10A 1850 t30 Density It hereby em ended b rod As, 111 a ThaS Reattl !1I Fldd, Aea(DRFBTitFA1 1 { el CliTifcTiMiFdSpe �nT�a<glopfn dp{ P( Niel! Po! a CP d 190.6W an Ja[(IJeal "Fh 7 abd4 be m101 IbM 148 ace m de 1 Z1.11 0.,d 1099 r� Idyl I99FA devoletl mmd'li0h Ille.ln�fel1ve Vp i Special DA bp- nl'Di l t No 6 SECTION 9. Sedan 1S.6e.i30r BUaein, , Bulk 1� hereby amandad t0 repd as taliowa: 10ri013U Suedlnp sk bulldl bulk, s Ila m all hnulle awdlmenal,na , for bulldhq, elamenlN raqu 5, n[e tor' ema affeet, and nnlcal pp +ng[oafl� 111 naa thg hdsrevNl and III Sian euhm+irndtlall0 tryy� °eulNMS Royston, Hsnem0lq Be¢a e d Apgy Fehruvy 12, 1976. Far Ph... npha,IV .. lmnpprbp0ll m of nuhwahl 1. .'..an Is,l`requlremenre ref Wal! ,Boats antl "'I' l elepping A r 1 Ilnee shell he ee Intlloebtl ee per Ih< epproveJ dewelopment idate0 Fe uary 1/0. 1�i nrml ad Wpm blend ar •�1 ?] rah" t. Taal the develc a m of Pheeea rV one V pmllpipelee bona do nol a+rela kgalnslen Improvement d alrictfar e nd`Me" Dreo or WebH ens W „en e If termed. 2 Tbel IN devebpele end /or .-or, of rrlmonatrete s9d.1 ealleMleNn9 epedntrlan In _h,W Apaneio Inthe S....nW,p Lodge ens I and when 11 k devabvad. Stale I�ignW°e1y peperlmeM laiieconlllaaf0I.'he Von Inaenlieunloe to lha hotel Frlar[o ihaiee enceol e buW h. p fI tar Ph.. V. an Cauncll eta V. This Vidbithati V mey ba' nret pllaae flnalphna;: Mdc model -.' Royston, ,bruery lz. bpmenl kl pia le[ela , nnrFel,vhan ' - development. For Phase W and ” podN l nug a e erasa al t nchVMa 7 ua�le bf O21, Ietl y m0l M and In N1i,a10 L ecek and rMOtlonth4 of be hu. rail', IM�to ollV." .1 armatures, 1. said pre. ..,.,: , Uawe1, SNOW DamlopmeM No B Is here`b°tly rapeelad no reaneaed wpm Amelldmente b ,� f6.89.050 PernlCed lkse -: -' '- ��. SWI.ImlvNo,aeb D[MftiNp6a IVAndV •. a18pa[lal MValopmanlDNnkf No.6a9tllbeln merely 3.888 T. fl. in she antl to be -' ULN In apPrdey DewanpmeM �IMdet Na -B he bel'atve on the plans and haraby r paeletl =and and Elpd with !Iona auhmlltod wllb Ina epp'ICetbn, • rdmente 10 reed as Mg..,, ; ., Hall h' no ProvlNOna placed on Ih „' 16.80.060 C-M io U Ihl umllm In. rxuilwarNen tulMlrblon ,I el BpnlaI be opmddt tlleVlq Iblahea ba tale be unlLl asst.,. ...... .., M1leundbBeMLen 18,2E.OS0aHheVae Z¢mrg Ie plrUCtlon llnencl1 . l.1 V pin 11— 1" , be p n ..led part of Phan rV orV he. beerf¢cb[..le wlei�clRi owlonb be eondoellnlumleed ehea hreo I1:Nd Fn secllon 11.26.015 M the V.II Munl[Ipel Dad¢. 7. UPW nia "...Pool a buildlnapp malor the cOnth"tbn of any pheae pf u00 No. 0 aWeoquent m pneee 1V. Ise developer Intl/,, of Vail kra.xpamee Inc NUrrea nieviniVlrTgl ;he of Van M the ekl muwum IInlo Pneee lyj el n emOVni hot to ekceetl pspod. a SECTION tg. II any Dert, e¢ lion. sub<aellon, eaManco, dlpuae or Dhreae of Ihla "I'lln- M Ior any reeaan Hale la be bvNlq ...h ti.bban shell Pal allect Iha vNltllly O! the melNnp pent —or thlr ord1n n..; endthe Tarn Covndl nareby tlecleree le would hvs ae etl Ible,Mlnencel end each part, enlbM1 u In ton, eanlunce. devae orph,eN eAerael, re9s,Uleee of the feel tht any a m aerie, ee¢tlonq ti ud'.. 1, 1 tancee, Isutoe or phrup e declared IIU SECTION 13 T rapael thekp Ibnd Nero, 11Dt1 di y Pr¢ 1.1 ! !ba- VP M Iclpel Cn rp A pr lava in 7dlnmce h11 nm .,. y Iant Wn h has ...... d pWye tlu1011 Ip pd ny tldli1on Ihe1 n ,Imd ,l r IRS 6Ibdtl,, Cale heraha, any 111 Pmulion cemmawed. nor anyolhP a r"' prp[eetling s Do 9, ev uncle- by virtue 011na D—Is ore eeled arm W dead n em,d. Th, rcp,,l,i° y p —IsIon hereby all nnl I"', any prow tan DY any ordnance exfl Ing pnlad r eweramm unlpaa y elated narehT. INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED ON FIRST READING AND OADEREOPUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL 11,4611, dayof h%y1911]anda Poor. neadlq mall be NA On Inle Oldlna : Cathe 19th dey,f May. 11191 a1 7:30 p.m.In me 11 Ctmol n_ / IN Vee 221Pe1 BuYdin9, Van. C,IOn I TUM VOF VAL Paul R. Mayo, ATTEST: Pamela A. Srendmeyer " Tgam Clerk Publ4Ni In The Veb Tnd' on May C 1967 ao eetory beprincrpel rue wli be elbwed env. -Cw Plum LovN of Phatn IV altd V.. �y B Bwncyli s; 4L atw Start— tBEO.i IU Diererwe''� ae l0!lowa: - W eresnd,atl to reW 18.60.110 OieleMe llatween =SuNdln e. for Phssea I,fl end I0 the mlelPhan hlen<e betWean bu.14M a atlJap4ntellNNallb- Indicaba In the dwebpp aid Dien, nut kkyy ¢Wall DB leniran 501ae1. FarPneee K1ann "dl,,, minimum "' Ia°heh reenbu8dinpe¢n nl ellea shell b. n Ina I, In the .' avelapmenl plan ee eubminktl by Gordon PI2M Arcnitact, Itlebtl Februe ,steed APNI S4 end APHI 17,,1961'; I 'her SOyTH tletl 7. to le . 10,1!0.110 Hogg be A. F1tbAh1 sea 1, 11 end III the allowable balynts ettall be a° found On Me dseelapmant plsrt, rII1.0V Ina Hee Fish and hI.. PIN dated 8/l'L18. B.FOr Pneee Nend V, bemasknum3wlydl��++@g NMghl sn111 bP at a°I WIb in bq albhnv'aa yelppm 1Plen by I P =Ph,Arehn t Idaled Far b U ry 18.1961; b<d ApFN 11nrq prll BEOTION a SW10A 1850 t30 Density It hereby em ended b rod As, 111 a ThaS Reattl !1I Fldd, Aea(DRFBTitFA1 1 { el CliTifcTiMiFdSpe �nT�a<glopfn dp{ P( Niel! Po! a CP d 190.6W an Ja[(IJeal "Fh 7 abd4 be m101 IbM 148 ace m de 1 Z1.11 0.,d 1099 r� Idyl I99FA devoletl mmd'li0h Ille.ln�fel1ve Vp i Special DA bp- nl'Di l t No 6 SECTION 9. Sedan 1S.6e.i30r BUaein, , Bulk 1� hereby amandad t0 repd as taliowa: 10ri013U Suedlnp sk bulldl bulk, s Ila m all hnulle awdlmenal,na , for bulldhq, elamenlN raqu 5, n[e tor' ema affeet, and nnlcal pp +ng[oafl� 111 naa thg hdsrevNl and III Sian euhm+irndtlall0 tryy� °eulNMS Royston, Hsnem0lq Be¢a e d Apgy Fehruvy 12, 1976. Far Ph... npha,IV .. lmnpprbp0ll m of nuhwahl 1. .'..an Is,l`requlremenre ref Wal! ,Boats antl "'I' l elepping A r 1 Ilnee shell he ee Intlloebtl ee per Ih< epproveJ dewelopment idate0 Fe uary 1/0. 1�i nrml ad Wpm blend ar •�1 ?] rah" 4 v a oNoo��a@ c µ �p. 3pocn° O Jam m° @ p�NU� n 3 @ O 7 xQcm�QjO O ��c v ❑_ m a mfr (3 yc.amm � U U — O ❑ O S,- rNOm�7�O H t�' m C7 7 a 0 7 3° TDC°�o mm °� z ° o o'°oN�x�� l, S J O 8'a❑ �� O , a °N:EOa�aa r.. a sF o Taro M ((D j (D (U sag� m _ m (), -7 (o �o0.mX37C) ()(u a Uo f❑ (D: -0 @ ° @ m' o a o a @ c qn.- ° a9m 3 a-� oo >�roow�nmmomo�vv>ov>z> mx= y- m,zDymygY rn�iym g,izmmi Oz ono nnvn�mzvZm�nNacn y��ig.'o V ��<z'or�„�rv�'"z =y rnognc �1 +7LOal�a,0 cnm cZrov :Ezm z OpL) U`G1romZ aL 0��m x7 ❑ y�T mm -zi�O, (Zi,9 ➢O1R I1�1WI�'�OC]��c�m:nm DSO e>�➢ \� am ?mO g 2D Q> nrnz m �r �rmnnm Z �3 o, Cl Z- m SOrZL— j'WS �'Uq 10 my nti �'u rovrn CmattiZ D�-�D rm Zmm �2 �2 OA p-, <O LnG OO ��G gFzz qZO aD 047 v� G 0, Zma z- 1�Z�- 1gmnG.,z 00 p n n oz °111z�0�z�z ��om °Zam'oz p „n OmW <Ommy ag yOP n> I!► a���z�y�zo??zoz a^ mm \V 9 `Y7 0 m Z 1 • 1 4 SECTION 1. Legislative Intent is nereby repealed and reenecled wllh amendments to a5 follow,: rION 1. Lsggfsr inc- Irtlenl. 11976, [he Town Ccuncllc, the Town of ,•a,sed Ordinance No, 7. Series of 1976. ahingS ecial Development Distrlcl NO.6 .,a e. Ilia unllied and coordinated 0- Jopmenl of s critical ,Its as a whole end ro a mean., suitable for the area in which it was 81 fueled. B. Special Develop eat District No. 6 provided in Section 14 that the Town Council ed the rl9hl to ah,ogale or modify Spacial Davolopmenl Disidcl No. r3 fur good cause through the ni,motment of an end lnance In conformity with the zoning code Of the Town of Veil. C. in 1905, the Tawn Connell of the Town of Veil pe,sad Ordinance No, 1, Series of 1985, providing carteln amendments to the tlevelopment plan for SDD No. 6. D. Application has been made ro the Town of V,II to mod +ly and amend eerlaln secllone of Speclal DevolopMMI D,atrict No. 8 witch related to Phase W and which make certain chan99ea In Ibe development plan Im Special Develo mein Dfslrlc, No. IF as they relate to Pheee PV. E. The Planning and Environmonlal Commsaicn of the Town of Vail has reviewed the changes aubrnitled blithe the appllcent and has recommended that Spaclel Development District No. 6 ba so a mended. F. The Town Council considers that the amendments provide , n even more unified AM more eeelhatie.1 ly plan sing development 01 a critical site within the Town and that such amendments are of benefit tothe health. safely and welfare of the Inhabitants of the Town of Vail. SECTION P. Section ill 50.020 Purpose Is hereby emended to read as lollowa: A. 6pac let Development Di.tric1 Is - established to aeeu re camp,. in -111. development and use of An area In a manner - that would be harmonicas fill the general character of the Tawn, provide adequate open space and re- filloo flmenitlos, and promote the objectives .1 'he Zoning Ordinance of the Town Ordinarily, a epecml davetapmant dielricl will ba created only when the develbpmem 6 recorded its Com Dlementafv to mere are sign ricanl aspects at the special development which cannot be satisfied under the exfadng zor000in9 Section 10.40 Development Plan - Conlenls is horoby amended to reatl as FC41OWS: The proposed davolopmenl plan short Include, but is not h tilled to. Iha1n11owingdata es wppplemanted by xhlblte pr.vlded ity oonsultell nc,sFcn, Hanamoto, Bock and Abey an February 12, 1976 for Phases 1, 11, III and its supplemented by the exhibits of the development plan and the nnvironmentat Impact repot' es preparnd by Gordon R. Pierce, Archilam, Iplons tlatatl Fehr nary 19. 1987' revised April 14 antl April 22,19871, end as given final approval thror:9h passafla of second reading of this ordinance by the Town Counoll an May 19, 1987 for Phase IV and Phase V. This approval recognizes that Phase IV may as re, shucted in Iwo phases wilt, !he it, phase to he referred to as phase IV and Iha lI n0I phas0 to bo mimeo to es Phase V. SECTION M Socllon 18.10 1340 E 13 hereby Araendod to read a6 follows: E. For Phases I. IT and III, A- lumetric model as """ded by eonaullants n,,,lon, Han -mole. Beck and Abey on February 12, 1976 of the site and Proff+ruseit devalppmanl documented hypholographs alaacel.or 1 inch equal• 16 feet or larger, portraying the scale and relationship of thew phase, of the development to theere and 18eslreling the form and mass of structures In sold phases of the tlevelopment Far PhAsos 1V and V, a volumetric m m modal as gendod by Gordon Pierce, Architect, of Ina sit. and the proposed development at a scale of 1 Inch equals 20 feet, p.Amying the scale and relationship of Iha deverapmert on Phases IV and V, to the on le and illustrating the farm of maes of atruclures in said phase. SECTION 4. Section 16.50. 050 Permitted U,ns In Special Development District No 0 Is hereby tope,letl and reenacted with amendments to reatl as lollowe: 19.50.050 permllled Uses. The permitted uses in Phases I, h II I, IV antl V Of Specie' Development District No.6 shall be In ac.c,dri ca with the approved devalopmenl dlane on file In the Town al 4x11 Community evelopment DepertmsaL SECTION B. Section 18,50.060 Conditional Uses In Spacial Development District N. a a hereby repealed end reenacted with -end-1. to read a' 101101C 18,50.060 Conditional Uses. Conditinnal Uses far Phases I. 11, Ili, IV and V at Speclal Development District No 6 shall be .s lqund In Sect on 18.22.030 of the Veil Zoning Cade and as below: A. A popcorn outside vending wagon that conform, Pn fi pearence CIli thee. exlslinq In CommercraI Core 1 and ommercial Core 11. Except, no office uses, .xce t those clearly accessary to a principal ilea wip be allowed on the Plaza Level of Phase IV and V. BROTION IS 8e011on 16.60.110 Distance Between Building. fa hereby emended to read ae lollowe: is so $to Onoance Between Bufltlinaa. For Pheee. I, II and 111 the minimum Alel.nCe belween buildings on adjacent .11166 $halt be as Indlceled in the developp ant plan, but In no cage ahall be loss than 60 feet, For Pheee IV and V. the minimum distance belween building. on adlaCerll 61108 shall be as Indlceled In the deveopmenl plan ae eubmitted by Gordon planes, Architect Ioa,ed February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 17, 1987j. SECTION 7. Section 18.60.120 Height Is hereby amended to read as follows: A. For Mess I, II ad 111 the allowable hakghis shall be as found on the developmenl plan, 19,81"1,1 ically the site plan and helght plan dated 276. B For Phases IV and V, the moxknum building height ,hall be as set loflh Ill the. approved it, 'I element plan by Gordon Pierce, Archl[ocI Idatad February 19, 1987, revleed April 14 And April 17, f98T). SECTION B. Section 18.50.130 Density Is herehy emended to read as follows: The Grose Raetdenlmi Floor Are, IGRFAl of II! tlislrlcls In the Sppectat Development Q'air,. shall ❑., exceed 120,860 square lea'. There shall be a minimum or 148 aCaommodalion unit, and 67.367 square feet of GRFA devoted m to pecamadatfon units in Phase IV and V of Spatial Development District No. 6. SECTION 6. Sectlon 1650.130 Building Bulk is hereby amended to read ee Mll0wa: wm dlmenefons for building a Fall anl., ements or wall Wisely and vertical ng of ram lines for Whales I, I! and III shall 1lcated on Ins development plan as Iled byy consuhanls Royston, Hanamoto, and Abey en February 12. 1975. For s IV end V, building bulk, maximum wall s, maximum dimensions Inn building ts, requlr.menls for wall oll,ets and I stepping of raol Ilnes shall be as ad as per Iha approved development mbrnllI- by Gordan R. Pierce, Architect Fehruery 19, i987, revised April 14 end SECTION 10. Section 18.60.180 #larking and Loading is hereby repealed and reenecled wllh amend Monte as follows: 18.50.I110 pmtmg antl "'ding FoIlawl ng the completlon of Phases IV end V. Chore shell be not lase than 12 surface parking spaces. 324 underground parking spaces, and 37 underground valet parking spaces as are axBOng and as providetl an Iha devetopmon! plan aubmitred by Gordon R. 'Pierce Arehimcl (doled February 19. 1987). The proposed Its PIan dated February 19, 1987 reflects !ha fI,'m perking plans belween the development Of PhA8A9 IV and V. BECTON 11. Conditions of approval for the tlevAlopmenl plan or Phases IV and V of SDt78 es a.bmrhod by Gordon Pleree {dated February 9, 1985, mvisetl Apl'il 14 and April 22, 1987) shall he as fellOwe: 11 Thal the developers and /or Owners of Phases IV end V partl.lpe[e In end do of re damn rate agamsl an im provenlent dl strlcl for Improvoments to the In israec.[fon of Veil Head find Meadow Drive if and when nne if formed. 2. Thal the developer. and /or Owners 'of Ph.,. IV and V participate In and do not remonstrate apfiinsl ast,bl lshingg A pedesfnen linkage Itont Phases IV and V to a Iulul, Commercial expansion a[ the Sonnenalle Lodge site it end when it Is developed. 3. The developper receive approval from the Stale Hlghwag Oeparlmeol for reconIngration of the pull-of F area from the Frontage Road to the entrance to the hotel prior to the lasuance of a builtling parmlt for phase V. 4. Ti developers and /or owners of Kii agree to transfer by general watmnty dee4t the Town of Val, free antl clear cl ell Ilona ar, . encumbrances, such condominium unit of aproxln ieley 3,866 square foothill size and to hap loeatad . di..led on Iha plans and specifications submitted wllh Ihe'app'cation, There shell be no provlsiona placetl on 'he condominium unit realrlcling the Town of V.11's Use 01 the unit or the subsequent aubdivlaion andior "to of the unit. 5. No grading permkl, bullding permit or demolition permit belallog to Phases IV ur V of Spacial Development District No. 6 shall be Issued until suchtime thatreasonableevidonce Is provided the Town of Vall staff 1401 conshuthon Ilnancing for the Improvements proveents to be constructed as par, of Phases IV nr V has been obtained. 0. Raslrletlons on any onils In Phases IV or V wiles would be candominlimiznd shall t,a as oull•nod In Section 1726.075 of the Vail Municipal Code end any Amendments thereto. 7. Upon the issuance of a bulking permit for the conatructiun el any phase o/ 9T6' subsequent to Phase IV, the developer and /or owner of sold phase shall reimburse the Town 01 Vell for expenses Incurred in 1- ilftatln99 lh. relocotied of The ski museum t[nto Phase IV) of an amount not to exceed $7ti 8. Any remodel or redevelopment of the remaining porllon of SODfi commonly referred to as Phaso V shell Include parking es required by Ordinance NO. 1, Series of 49B5. SECTION 14. It any pen, eacllon, subsection, sentence, clAu9e or phrase oil this ordinance Is for any reason held le be Invalid, suCn daclsion shell not allect the validity of the ramakning portions of this ordinance; end the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed [his ordinance and each pert, section, subsection, sentence, clause orphmse th"22,1, regardless of the fact that any one or mom parts, aeclIons, subsecl ions, sentences, clauses or phrase8 be declared Invalid. SECTION 18. The repeal or the to sal and reenactment of any provision of Phe Vail Munlclpal Cade as provided In this orellnanco shall not affect any right watch he. accrued, any duly 1% sod. Any vlolallon that occurred prior to the a6ncilve date hereof, any prosecution commenced, our any Other ectlan of moceodinn as commenced under nr by vlrloe of the pTo"$ oar P.nl.cl firreppealed antl asnaclald the repeat of any provieken hereby shall not revive any provrelon or say ordinance previously ,.Pa. led Or superseded unless expressly al led hereon. INTRODUCED, RFAD AND PASSFD ON FIRST READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL this 51h day o1 May, 1087 and e public he shell be on Inie ordinance on the 19th day of May. 1987 01730 p.m. In the Council Chambers of ,Ire Vail to Building, Veil, Cataract.. TOWN OF VAIL Paul R. Johnston Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer Town Clark INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL this 191h day of May, 1987. TOWN OF VAIL Paul R. Johnston Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Blandmeyet Town Clerk Published in The Vail Troll on May 22, 1987 Porterfield & AssociateS LLC. 01-MEWIM George Ruther Director of Community Development Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Re: Village Inn Plaza-Phase V Condominiums Dear Mr. Ruther: 101 Eagle Road, Bldg. 8 Eagle-Vail, CO 81620 of Counsel: Frederick S. Otto fso@opa-Iaw.com We represent Staufer Commercial, LLC. ("Staufer Commercial") and Vail Village Inn, Inc. ("VVF'), who are the owners of commercial condominiums in Village Inn Plaza-Phase V Condominiums (the "Project"). The Project was created by the recording of a condominium declaration on February 4, 1988, in Book 478 at Page 378 (the "Declaration"). VVI was the declarant in the Declaration. Article 21(i) of the Declaration contained a restriction on use of residential units 8 through 18. A copy of the restriction is attached. We understand that the restriction may have been required to be placed in the Declaration by virtue of the terms of SDD 6, Town of Vail Ordinance No: 7, Series of 1976. The restriction references Section 17.26.075 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, which we believe has been renumbered. The association has recently adopted a rule that it will not enforce the restriction and we are advised that one or more of the residential unit owners routinely violate the restriction. We request that the Town investigate the restriction to determine if it is still enforceable, and if it is, whether it is being violated by one or more residential unit owners. If additional information is requested, please let me know. Very trul"ours, Wendell B. Porterfield, Jr. VATIMMo cc: Stan Zemler, Town Manager Town Council Attorneys at Law Wendell B. Porterfield, Jr. wporterfieldgopa-law.coni P.O. Box 3149 Vail, Colorado 81658-3149 Tel: (970) 949-5380 Gerald W. Oliver Fax: (970) 845-9135 joliver@ol2a-law.com 01-MEWIM George Ruther Director of Community Development Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Re: Village Inn Plaza-Phase V Condominiums Dear Mr. Ruther: 101 Eagle Road, Bldg. 8 Eagle-Vail, CO 81620 of Counsel: Frederick S. Otto fso@opa-Iaw.com We represent Staufer Commercial, LLC. ("Staufer Commercial") and Vail Village Inn, Inc. ("VVF'), who are the owners of commercial condominiums in Village Inn Plaza-Phase V Condominiums (the "Project"). The Project was created by the recording of a condominium declaration on February 4, 1988, in Book 478 at Page 378 (the "Declaration"). VVI was the declarant in the Declaration. Article 21(i) of the Declaration contained a restriction on use of residential units 8 through 18. A copy of the restriction is attached. We understand that the restriction may have been required to be placed in the Declaration by virtue of the terms of SDD 6, Town of Vail Ordinance No: 7, Series of 1976. The restriction references Section 17.26.075 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, which we believe has been renumbered. The association has recently adopted a rule that it will not enforce the restriction and we are advised that one or more of the residential unit owners routinely violate the restriction. We request that the Town investigate the restriction to determine if it is still enforceable, and if it is, whether it is being violated by one or more residential unit owners. If additional information is requested, please let me know. Very trul"ours, Wendell B. Porterfield, Jr. VATIMMo cc: Stan Zemler, Town Manager Town Council w (t) Town of Vail Restrictions on l.tal. pursuant to Section 17.26,075 of the Riih icx pal Code of the T dwn of Vail, they use of units 8 through 18, inclusive, is hereby restricted and made subject to the followings M Art owner's personal use of his or her condominium shall be restricted to 28 days during the seasonal period of December 24th to January 1st and February l,st to March 20th. This seasonal period is hereinafter referred to as "high season ". 'Owner's personal use" shall be defined as owner's occupancy of a condominium unit or nonpaying uest of the owner or taking the condominium unit oft of the rental market during the seasonal. 4riods referred to herein for any reason other than for necessary repairs which cannot be postponed or which may make the condominium unit unrentable'. Qccupancy of a condominium unit by an Association manager or staff empployed by the Aseociation, however, shall not be restricted by this subparagraph. (ii) A violation of the owner's use restriction by an owner shall subject the owner to a daily assessment rate by the Association of three times a rate considered to be a reasonable daily rental rate for-the condominium unit at the time of the violation, which assessment when paid shall be a special assessment belonging to the Association. All sums assessed against the owner for violation of the owner 'a personal use restriction and unpaid shall constitute a lien for the benefit of the Association on that owner#& condominium unit, which lien shall be evidenced by written notice placed.ol record in the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of Cagle County, Colorado, and which may be collected by foreclosure, on an owner's condominium unit by the Association in like manner as a mortgage or deed of trust on real. property. The Association's failure to enforce the owner's personal, use restriction shall give the Town of Vail the right to enforce the restriction by the assessment and the lien provided for hereunder. If the Town of Vail enforces the restriction, the Town of Mail shall receive the funds collected as a result of such enforcement. In the event liti ation results from the enforcement of the restriction, as part of its reward to the prevailing party, the court shall award such party its court costs together with reasonable attorney's fees incurred. N (iii) The Town of Vail shall have the right to require from the Association an annual report of OW Owners t personal, use during the high seasons for all condominium units. (iv) The condominium units shall not be used as permanent residences. ror the purposes of this subparagraph, a person shell be presumed to be a permanent resident if such person has resided in the condominium unit for six consecutive months notwithstanding from time to time during such six month period the person may briefly dw4ll in other places. (v) The condominium units shall retrain available to the general tourist market, If unsold by Declarant 30 days after recording of the Map, ttze unsold condominium units shall be required to be furnished and made available to the, general tourist market within 90 days after the date of recording of the Map. This requirement may be met by inclusion of the units, at comparable rates, in any local reservation system for the rental of lodge or condominium units in the Town of Vail. (vi) The restrictions in this subparagraph 21(1) shall be modified or terminated, to bw of no further .force and +effect, at such time as the ordinances of the Town of Vail that require the inclusion of such •restrictions in this Declaration have expired, been repealed, finally determined to by invalid by a court of competent Jurisdiction or amended in such a manner as to permit removal or modification of-such restrictions. Declarant reserves to itself and `grants to the Associations the right to modify or terminate the restrictions in this subparagraph 21(1) when permitted to do so under the circumstances described in the preceding sentence, and hereby a reel to so modify or terminate then restrict one in this subparagraph 21(c) when permitted to do so by the Toren of Vail. Determination with xespect to whether or not a particular activity or occurrence shall constitute a violation of this paragraph 21 shall be made by the board and shall be finals provided, however, that a decision whether or not a ppartioular activity or occurrestce occurring on, in or around Mta 1 through 7, inclusive, or on, in or around unit 19 shall constitute a violation of this Paragraph 21, shall be made only upois a reasonable determination based upon the requirements limiting action of the Board as set forth in subparagraph 6(b) herein. 6 POW11(1M7 NT 1TM T1F.( T.ARATTf)N oc�n -•- FOR IH11(i'TTE I'll IL.LIr l 'VILLAGE INN PLAZA -PHASE V CONDOMINIUMS I.!::. T'f. ItLCC'It('r 54 PIM X63 RECITALS VAIL VILLAGE INN, JNC., a Colorado corporation ( "Declarant "), is the owner of the real property interests situate } in the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. Declarant desires to establish a condominium project under the Condominium Ownership Act of Colorado ( "the Act ") and to define the character, duration, rights, obligations and limitations of condominium ownership. A building and related improvements have been constructed on the real property interest described in Exhibit A, which building and improvements shall consist of separately designated condominium units, A condominium map shall be tiled showing the location of said building and improvements on the real property interests, which is hereby made subject to this Declaration. Declarant does hereby establish a plan for the ownership of real property estates in fee simple consisting of the air space contained in each of the units in the building and the co- ownership, by the individual and separate owners thereof, as tenants in common, of all of the remaining real property interests. DECLARATION Declarant does hereby subject the real property interests described in Exhibit A to this Declaration and publish and declare that the following terms, covenants, conditions, easements, restrictions, uses, reservations, limitations and obligations shall be deemed to run with such land, shall be a burden and a benefit to Declarant, its successors and assigns and any person acquiring or owning an interest in the real property interests which are or become subject to this Declaration and improvements built thereon, their grantees, successors, heirs, personal representatives, devisees or assigns. 1. Definitions. As used in this Declaration, unless otherwise expressly provided; (a) "Unit" means an individual air space unit contained within the perimeter walls, floors, ceilings, windows and doors of a unit in a building constructed on real property "/ ///r*i LAB00026 (g) Parking Areas. No vehicle of any type may be parked on the general common eEements except in parking spaces designated on the Map, No commercial, type of vehicle and no recreational vehicles shall be stared or parked on the general common elements except in areas designated on the Map. A recreational vehicle shall include for purposes of this Declaration, motor homes, motor coaches, buses, pickup trucks with camper tops or similar accessories, boats, camping trailers or trailers of any type. Parking spaces shall be used only for parking automobiles and motorcycles and not for any other storage purposes. Motorcycles shall not be stored on patios, balconies or porches. (h) No Violation of Rules, No owner and no owner's family, guests, emp ogees, icensees, lessees, agents or invitees shall violate the rules and regulations adopted from time to time by the Association, whether relating to the use of units, the use of general common elements, or otherwise. (i) Town of Vail Restrictions on Use. Pursuant to Section 17.26,075 of tie-Municipal Code o t e Town of Vail, the use of units 8 through 18, inclusive, is hereby restricted and made subject to the following: (i) An owner's personal use of his or her condominium shall be restricted to 28 days during the seasonal period of December 24th to January 1st and February 1st to March 20th. This seasonal exiod is hereinafter referred to as "high season ". 'Owner's personal use" shall be defined as owner's occupancy of a condominium unit or nor- paying guest of the owner or taking the condominium unit off of the rental market during the seasonal periods referred to herein for any reason other than for necessary repairs which cannot be postponed or which may make the condominium unit unrentable. Qccupancy of a condominium unit by an Association manager or staff employed by the Association, however, shall not be restricted by this subparagraph, (ii) A violation of the owner's use restriction by an owner shall subject the owner to a daily assessment rate by the Association of three times a rate considered to be a reasonable daily rental rate for the condominium unit at the time of the violation, which assessment when paid shall be a special assessment belonging to the Association. All sums assessed against the owner for violation of the owner's personal use restriction and unpaid shall constitute a lien for the benefit of the 24 LAB00050 "1 N W11 Association on that owner's condominium unit, which lien shall be evidenced by written notice placed of record in the Office of the Clerk and Recorder of Eagle County, Colorado, and which may be collected by foreclosure, on an Owner's condominium unit by the Association in like manner as a mortgage or deed of trust on real property. The Association's failure to enforce the owner's personal use restriction shall give the Town of Vail the right to enforce the restriction by the assessment and the lien provided for hereunder. If the Town of Vail enforces the restriction, the Town of Vail shall receive the funds collected as a result of such enforcement. In the event litigation results from the enforcement of the restriction, as part of its reward to the prevailing party, the court shall award such party its court costs together with reasonable attorney's fees incurred. (iii) The Town of Vail shall have the right to require from the Association an annual report of owners' personal, use during the high seasons for all condominium units. (iv) The condominium units shall not be used as permanent residences. For the purposes of this subparagraph, a person shall be presumed to be a permanent resident if such person has resided in the condominium unit for six consecutive months notwithstanding from time to time during such six month period the person may briefly dwell in other places. (V) The condominium units shall remain available to the general tourist market, if unsold by Declarant 30 days after recording of the Map, the unsold condominium units shall be required to be furnished and made available to the general tourist market within 90 days after the date of recording of the Map. This requirement may be met by inclusion of the units, at comparable rates, in any local reservation system for the rental of lodge or condominium units in the Town of Vail.. (vi) The restrictions in this subparagraph 21(i) shall be modified or terminated, to be of no further force and effect, at such time as the ordinances of the Town of Vail that require the inclusion of such restrictions in this Declaration have expired, been repealed, finally determined to be invalid by a Count of competent jurisdiction or 25 LAB00051 al►iended in such a manner as to permit removal or modification of such restrictions. Declarant reserves to itself and grants to the Association the right to modify or terminate the restrictions in this subparagraph 21(i) when permitted to do so under the circumstances described in the preceding sentence, and hereby agrees ,to so modify or terminate the restrictions in this subparagraph 21(c) when permitted to do so by the Town of Vail. Determination with respect to whether or not a Particular activity or Occurrence shall constitute a violation of this paragraph 21 shall be made by the Board and shall be final; provided, however, that a decision whether or not a particular activity or occurrence occurring on, in or around units 1 through 7, inclusive, or on, in or around unit 19 shall constitute a V violation of this Paragraph 21, shall be made only upon a reasonable determination based upon the requirements limiting action of the Board as set forth in subparagraph b(b) herein. K 22.;ffect of Provisions of Declaration. Each provision of this ec aratzon, an agreement, promise, covenant and undertaking to comply with each provision of this Declaration, and any necessary exception or reservation or grant of title, estate, right or interest to effectuate any provision of this Declaration; U) shall be deemed incorporated in each deed or other instrument by which any right, title or interest in any condominium unit is graneed, devised or conveyed, whether or not set forth or referred to in such deed or other instrument; (ii) shall., by virtue of acceptance of any right;, title or interest in any condominium unit by an owner, be deemed accepted, ratified, adopted and declared as a.personal covenant of such owner and, as a personal covenant, shall be binding on such owner and his heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns; and, shall be deemed a personal covenant to, with and for the benefit of the Association and of each owner of any condominium unit; and, (iii) shall'be deemed a real covenant by Declarant, for itself, its successors and assigns, and Also an equitable servitude, running, in each case, as a burden with and upon the title to each and every condominium unit. 23, Enforcement and Remedies. Each provision of this Declaration shall be en ofcea le y the Association or by any owner by a proceeding for a prohibitive or mandatory injunction and /or by a suit or action to recover damages. If court proceedings are instiCuted in connection with the rights of enforcement and remedies provided in this Declaration, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its costs and expenses in connection therewith, including reasonable attorneys' fees. Failure by the Association or by any owner to enforce any 26 LAB00052 IN Declaration WITNE$s WHEREOF, Declarant has duly executed this this 2nd day of February, 1988, 7 STATi".bi COLORADO COUNTY OF EAGLE VAIL VILLAGE INN, INC., Colorado F OF P 4 ir jaio n .0 j 0 S -a r • res ent The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 2nd day of February, 1988, by Josef Staufer, as President of Vail --7 �X' '% age Inn, Inc., a Colorado corporation. Witness my hand and official seal. "MY commission expires; Notary Pub l' Ic MY Commission expires August 24, 1988 P, 0, Box 743, Vail, CO 81658 The undersigned holder of certain deeds cif trust upon the property covered by this Declaration, recorded in Book 463 at Page 49h6azid at Book 463 at Page 882 of the records in the Office of the Eagle County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder, hereby consents to the foregoing Declaration and subordinates its interest in the property described therein to the rights and obligations created thereby. Notwithstanding such consent and subordination, all the rights of Declarant in and to such property shall remain encumbered by such deeds of trust, FIRSTBANK OF VAIL SEAL). BY: Ke*in F. McDonald, Vice President 28 LAB00054 ORDINANCE NO. 1 (Series of 1985) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 28, SERIES OF 1976 TO PROVIDE FOR THE AMENDMENT OF THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6; AMENDING THE PURPOSE SECTION OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 6; ADOPTING AN AMENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 6; ELIMINATING CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO THE DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 6; CHANGING THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS AND ALLOWABLE USES FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 6; INCREASING THE ALLOWABLE DENSITY AND MODIFYING THE BUILDING BULK STANDARDS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 6; PROVIDING DIFFERENT PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 6; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL of the Town of Vail as follows: Section 1. Legislative Intent. A. In 1976, the Town Council of the Town of Vail passed Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1976, establishing Special Development District No. 6 to insure the unified and coordinated development of a critical site as a whole and in a manner suitable for the area in which it was situated. B. Special Development District No. 6 providea in Section 14 that Town Council reserved the right to abrogate or modify Special Development District No. 6 for good cause through the enactment of an ordinance in confornity with the .1 Wing Code of the Town of Vail. C. Application has been made to the Town of Vail to modify and.amend certain sections of Special Development District No. 6 which relate to Phase TV and which make certain changes in the development plan for Special Development District No. 6 as they relate to Phase IV. D.. The Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has reviewed the changes submitted by the applicant and has unanimously recommended that Special Development District No. 6 be so amended. E. The Town Council considers that the amendments provide an even more unified arid more aesthetically pleasing development of a critical sii:e within the Town and that such amendments are of benefit to the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the Town of Vail. Section 2. Section 18.50.020 Purpose is hereby amended to read as follows: A Special Development District is established to assure comprehensive development and use of an area in a manner that would be harmonious with the general character of the town, provide adequate open space and recreation ! 1 1 amenities, and promote the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town. Ordinarily, a Special Development District will be created only when the development is regarded as complementary to the Town by the Town Council, Planning Commission and Design Review Board, and there are significant aspects of the special development which cannot be satisfied under the existing zonirg. Section 18.50.040 Development Plan --- Contents is hereby amended to read as follows: The proposed development plan shall include, but is not limited to, the following data as supplemented by exhibits provided by consultants Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1976 for Phases I, II and III, and as supplemented by the exhibits of the development plan and the enviromental impact report as prepared by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect, and as given final approval through passage of second reading of this ordinance by the Town Council on February 19, 1985 for Phase IV. Section 3. Section 18.50.040 E is hereby amended to read as follows: E. For Phases I, II, and 1II, a volumetric model as amended by consultants Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1976 of the site and proposed development: documented by photographs at a scale of I inch equals 16 fec% larger, portraying the scale and relationship of those phases of the develorment to the site and illustrating the form and mass of structures in said phases of the development. For Phase IV, a volumetric module as amended by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect of the site and the proposed development at a scale of 1 inch equals 20 feet, portraying the scale and relationship of the development on Phase IV to the site and illustrating the form of mass of structures in said phase. Section 4. Section 18.50.050 Permitted Uses in SDD6 is hereby repealed and re- enacted with amendments to read as fol- l -ows -: 18.50.050 Permitted Uses. The Permitted Uses in Phases I, II, III and IV of Special Development District 6 shall be in accordance with the approved development plans on file in the Town of Vail Community Develoomen.t, n(�nartment. Section 5. Section 18.50.060 Conditional Uses in SDD6 is hereby repealed and re- enacted with amendments to read as follows: 18.50.060 Conditional Uses Conditional uses for Phases I, IT, III and IV of SDD6 shall be as found in Section 18.22.030 of the Vail Zoning Code and as below: t • • A. A popcorn outside vending wagon that conforms in appearance with those existing in Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II. Except, no office uses, except those clearly accessory to a principal use will be allowed on the Plaza Level of Phase IV. Section 6. Section 18.50.110 Distance Between Buildings is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.50.100 Distance Between Buildings For Phases I, 1I, and III the minimum distance between buildings on adjacent sites shall be as indicated in the development plan but in no case shall be less that 50 feet. For Phase IV, the minimum distance between buildings on adjacent sites shall be as indicated in the development plan as submitted Oy Gordon R. Pierce, Architect. Section 7. Section 18.50.120 Height is hereby amended to read as follows: A. For Phases I, II, and III the allowable heights shall be as found on the development plan, specifically the site plan and height plan dated 3/12/76. B. For Phase IV, the maximum building height shall be as set forth i :'.e approved development plan by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect. Section 8. Section 18.50.130 Density is hereby amended to read as follows: The Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) of all districts in the Special Development District shall not exceed 120,600 square feet. There shall be a minimum of 175 accommodation unites and 72,400 square feet of GRFA devoted to accommodation units in Phase IV of Special Development District 6. Section 9. Section 18.50.130 Building Bulk is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.50.130 Building Bulk Building bulk, maximum wall lenghts, maximum dimensions for building elements, requirements for wall offsets and vertical stepping of roof lines for Phases I, II and III shall be indicated on the development plan submitted by consultants Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1975. For Phase IV, building bulk, maximum wall lenghts, maximum dimensions for building elements, requirements for wall offsets and vertical stepping of roof lines shall be as indicated as per the approved development plans submitted by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect. t -s • Section 10. Section 18.50.180 Parking and Loading is hereby repealed and re- enacted with amendments to read as follows: 18.50.180 Parking and Loading There shall be no less than 12 surface parking spaces, 324 underground parking spaces, and 37 underground valet parking spaces as are existing and as provided on the development plan submitted by Gordon R, Pierce, Architect. Section 11. Conditions of approval for the development plan of Phase IV of SDD6 as submitted by Gordon R. Pierce, shall be as follows: 1. That the developers and /or owners of Phase IV participate in and do not remonstrate against an improvement district for improvements to the inter- section of Vail Road and Meadow Drive if and when one is formed. 2. That the developers and /or owners of Phase IV participate in and do not remonstrate against establishing a pedestrian linkage from Phase IV to a future commercial expansion at the Kiandra Lodge site if and when it is developed. 3. The developer receive approval from the State Highway Department for re- configuration of the pull -off area from the frontage road to the entrance to the hotel. 4. The board of directors of the Colorado Ski Museum and the developers come to agreement on terms for the relocation of the museum in Phase IV of the Vail Village Inn prior to the issuance of a building permit. In the event that the Ski Museum would vacate its space in Phase IV of the Vail Village Inn, the Town of Vail shall be given exclusive rights to assure the Ski Museum's lease of this space. It shall be understood that in the event Lhe Town of Vail does assume the use of this space, all uses in the some be public purpose in nature. 5. The developer fund the demolition and landscaping of the museum site through one of two options: a) deposit to the Town a check for $15,000 to be used by the Town to complete the work, or b) the developer submit a landscape plan to the Town for approval to be completed as an element of the overall plan for Phase IV. • s s 6. No grading permit, building permit or demolition permit relating to Phase IV of SDD 6 shall be issued until such time that reasonable evidence is provided the Town of Vail staff that construction financing for the improvements to be constructed as a part of Phase IV has been obtained. Section 12_. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall Y affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 13. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section-1-4.. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provisions of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision .repealed cr re- pealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless ex- pressly stated herein. INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED ON FIRST READING THIS 5th day of February, 1985, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the 19th day of February, 1985, at 7:30 p. m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this 5th day of February, 1985. Ken R. Rose, Mayor Pro Tem t s s ATTEST: Pamela A. Clrandmeyer, Town Cl k INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED IN FULL Fhis 19th day of Febraury, 1985. Paul R. Joh o Mayor ' AT* ST : Pamela A. irandmeyer, Ton Clerk S n O CD 7 C3 1 1 I� IA Vly f.� h I� 1 mOaL)O ;v(nmmm mop O rnCOm {�'_ �v_ �mQ<mmc�O(mo ma..imro F cn mzm R mi {mDVCmS `o Drob2ymD�mH SOVOmie =.pm Om2romrozy zOwff yyabDg gym {mn Olen .nyjmQm 10 ❑r�yy2 r: ?- mpZyn�m_m -Dm ltyi o' CCU -ly m� {Lao ? i �OZmlpUN�O 0=�aa ^o= m�ZZA.°°,imd z(n I(nK� mmm�oN. I°QvmnCmCR>, -,jjw °�ocn�7 °m 'ro mL)Y L1w2 p'^m oo� G7 On_. Zv�rmy3 <owLg m LcCN n$�'k O =m�:°fZ ;x= (Cm'OP rm (nx(-USN (nIND'L ;XOZ�n1ry mmwzmm-xv mcnnu �DO2; Nah �9r rnmCC 0 x x X vO�F)m�m {ya z� i PmAyy00 v ?': <v P)rw m O � n U O � a Q O N (i 0 (T nE�(D 3 o 1 r� 7 z .D y S (7XRV � m_ O s a D m �0 m a , a a n P •0 0 IjeOo ^ a V! :D O n Cr o_ n 7 a n m pO P P ED 4 CD m o D Q Q � F o 7 -o a a � o } (� O p °.3 . v^�Fnt o a�tmo $. W33 ? $?z �a.�D = eO Dr0 =m ygz � y m 0mv m20ozwb rV mC m y °m�y n 0m n 'cmA �O vm IR6 m:fo avCnmrxm2 am 0 O �0 3 mzm m � O°r xmrom <mOo c m ro m AWI pZpro10 a z n : y y- 0- UC -VOiNa -=giFa �3 - -,f m3v�T m m3 _�, {��m' "-n. - OOZm YxG1 Dnmm 3N<m�yGamm3 v_29z PO5�N0-SZ n')a arm mzz__,z..pmmmo z�ZmU-z D ro`y m m. vaz< o m S °Y.� -o �Kr- i= ,�w�v°om mO 3D ='o ^ ^APZ?7�'°�T 5�•�0 �� o ^m _.mo o�"p Om�gma3�U U'O �ym"n�omo?mo ^� m3 X $ma F-21 d m3,�_ zpm° j y� <i •-m N3� m w ,$ zb a��'�rOOrn"Dxuigu+rmm- 2} z >j.•Qp- p E Yom y�mlfr0m0Dm Dro rorNNm W b �O ?m O �_..it _. Sp�319 yV n2mmpZmOymA� r03 Wi -.20' iTT -m nm n�D n... o n =�.� �m ❑wa »y =�- ' o mnn 'A ° -3 m°�o�� 0 °f m�zmm �zn ?_2m2- i(j�OA�nZ :O ym� imzoD U mn�rZyO-i yo m °m w'vy3 °mm 5v�a 7o° N `m °o:o n'_= a =u.�om Pzi?n m°p°p mm x 'y � mimmvmmyFmmv Om mmmCz ZnZVmyo �v ci iDm roOp Om 6 -1 LO 5rom� _G COO n. O ?oo o�nfn0 wan °o �m mFn�'n - -iv xrowO9rozzvznivZ arom �� mz- n -rn <r m nr �Ew col ^& 3 E6 8em =z zv n Dy aai c"z yyi mono n n .5rmo'm`8 ??zmnm da' ,m w'°, m'a °o Om -zy°'z ZmzmSaO2DZOAyZDm0n - . °$ aEi mm w < va^ <va?�i Glmy my yy m zym zr G)r O xm C 0 /0 `I 0 a m lawny w W xmm �9��nmk°- i�000yCmn tODYq//l omImicyu°.n roy= n7f OmA CC mO�DYomznmSW 'ao 90(.(Zynmx Gl aDOapi zOr^'mo m`°�y Dym�- WZn ➢O <om� mZm Up OSm _.(� _x L1y -y tmym^ 9m2- _,I- m- yDIy 220y$�a^ O(nvDxm ��rr �S t �L1 Am <((?? O n- ZO O U vzm(_ mPFmO �'Z rm.cm amaOymyzO�mZ �"E m`z��mZ �Nm�m =a?(mm3v60 n�aA ava0 T-?3 m_ CG)2 rQm nV my - i�a�umij �� 0>00 w^fO O »H tll O� »OW - ➢y C)Qu Vm n D w m 0 O D ,� aA mm m� o�" .m M> m m20 Ozm °O nmU m G1moN ]1 y02ma (� �- A O�n (]0 rcz) rogso �3't{�. m dy0 °'(m F'�wm �l �Cm R�ti fnOwm zo W, >�p Zm �r(Xy�Z Dm°��COo�m .] ..?� °m(n Oimm'mnom�HOm °� o(nNSo' i2LIC ➢�d�oo`ym2 `2N Z2(0ir rr -- mmi22O Im °.3y%-!,K� °m m _OOa2 y�xZ fl rG DyN. -�i D v 3m5gpmrn n]oZ0O�wOm�o yaQOZromCW'%o 'ti en¢°_o' oma��mokmnrr ?vx 2s��mz Q�mm�In�G� yrr° ^�auu'�roninn ➢�'�m_W "n O' Dim °x❑ .cm KA 2aOD ao a z❑ m, $ ,yvin o D rw -.A6- CCmn'O (� Dom_ H—z .o m ➢- �mcm °�� n =m 30 pmy0 z6 . mm y(n° �n'n'� O-'y �ZCoS(nroAgm�mm;c,d. mm (7OD <nq $ °_ C myy _ �iQ f]OI,N bOrom Dwy FAO. w �K 0 GmiSp_a'c a 2- Y3ax15',y Zw }�i 55 O D o ym m1O m5- y i Im➢ �_ 0� °im_ .G) ,g ro�u y5m= I �Z?rJln m > >m °v a =iDm NON mm m y.. O n C �'7` -'am �� -z2roO OmD m a� y ZAP roC)�y U yD'..- 0v 200 �JqO 2L m2....3v °2 'L n'D�.n room �ipm �o�oc 0y mqC T >ZI y Zrotl rg.3 m n2 0^ a3m w Z—A x <mNm n�vmi3 am ro rOZ z -- ° RAE �� = =mZm22m<OR amn��On mny MG) nz= $°E' c.. �ymKwm3mm =��'_ .c 'g° ( Om msn m 0 w: o � °m'`" ' ° �a v 8 msa s �v � mD® y4"3.m °=.3ytr. ^ °mm m m 0 b O ogam m-+ ADmm+mCbzp.m y t°-ng m m -_nA i9 2 S-( 0 . ZG ��min' m9amm$'e °n °o° 'Z _, na�o =�:. °a- �°.7.m -7roZ for x00 S N3o �ffi^ � °_ m° @. Z �� w ° - -�m " OmCC 2 4 -?.w '�7 ?mh- .• »mm °ow ^n°�a ry -.� p'" ro C mZZOZoaronF nx-mmnm 74 mj gd:mUoo m3 n3� °�oAma$ ;�q� °° m�''" - «n ^_o �.��°•'c 4°� mn€ °m95a »n��nn 'oo i"�nH°x OC =nm m rzD., Oa�im °� m_a °m� ^.�°� ; � yw°+ax rnm im qp ° n p3m5 5�P'3.:o �n °m', "n 7m'95=°•� - na L E! o ro rov 'c sz_ mi5ro� 76�' m3 na �"m(io n °o 'n <o mCw F?c ➢a a'om(" ' <° megw »m�m�mag53o_.8o�co-- v`i. °z:p�mo w °a =F �'%ro°J9 m'3 °. °3 �a�w3.�a .°e <- m� g ° % ��pr gEE^ p= Rm.<n mnm�mm n�8eR amc n ew o m= g�x o w y m y mn s ma'R�P- 6mcA° Cmr 0Omo�a - 1 - 3 � o T �, �� aVwioC)mm o 0a�ro0�pL •. ° a� cu ro m-z 9 NO - 8 1°go A ' ro a ?iz0 -mpWjR '21',2n =a n Z�ma 5 rpo Mum � a rDV oonto yo2 E mom @mom U (-Z - mu A Qw. m s ... 1 ion - Em��mb °� °�� _O fZ 0 Rai m�Rn r ogn [rnSiP=O >ti ID _ 00 -- p�� Q : (d (Cp QaD00 C N Oa 7. Q (D c a °(Dmamo_ (p --C a5 m m n�= Qo 7Ql n D c (} on:TamES � 3 o vn mD Q � - (y4pNTN o (' o� 3a��o.QO ro pZ, mQ7 R.= o o �a fl��am c o � �: � 6--o --m a < 00 -n ID o no(Iu�oaT(D < (D Qa-s 7U C� D 3 < � ID Oo ro m mmoro,�om� r 07� any � fl IS: � �sNcCJ -6 N (D 0 (0 a o o `Qq.7p.�m(D o Z ID 4 MD (D (D m °a- �ms�QaID F CD O ('D Q (sT�� nm [1 a p m 0 C p z T G (i1 j ( - a- (6 cr N Q O � a —�-. a a :7 Q N'C 'O a 0 a 0 2, p °.3 . v^�Fnt o a�tmo $. W33 ? $?z �a.�D = eO Dr0 =m ygz � y m 0mv m20ozwb rV mC m y °m�y n 0m n 'cmA �O vm IR6 m:fo avCnmrxm2 am 0 O �0 3 mzm m � O°r xmrom <mOo c m ro m AWI pZpro10 a z n : y y- 0- UC -VOiNa -=giFa �3 - -,f m3v�T m m3 _�, {��m' "-n. - OOZm YxG1 Dnmm 3N<m�yGamm3 v_29z PO5�N0-SZ n')a arm mzz__,z..pmmmo z�ZmU-z D ro`y m m. vaz< o m S °Y.� -o �Kr- i= ,�w�v°om mO 3D ='o ^ ^APZ?7�'°�T 5�•�0 �� o ^m _.mo o�"p Om�gma3�U U'O �ym"n�omo?mo ^� m3 X $ma F-21 d m3,�_ zpm° j y� <i •-m N3� m w ,$ zb a��'�rOOrn"Dxuigu+rmm- 2} z >j.•Qp- p E Yom y�mlfr0m0Dm Dro rorNNm W b �O ?m O �_..it _. Sp�319 yV n2mmpZmOymA� r03 Wi -.20' iTT -m nm n�D n... o n =�.� �m ❑wa »y =�- ' o mnn 'A ° -3 m°�o�� 0 °f m�zmm �zn ?_2m2- i(j�OA�nZ :O ym� imzoD U mn�rZyO-i yo m °m w'vy3 °mm 5v�a 7o° N `m °o:o n'_= a =u.�om Pzi?n m°p°p mm x 'y � mimmvmmyFmmv Om mmmCz ZnZVmyo �v ci iDm roOp Om 6 -1 LO 5rom� _G COO n. O ?oo o�nfn0 wan °o �m mFn�'n - -iv xrowO9rozzvznivZ arom �� mz- n -rn <r m nr �Ew col ^& 3 E6 8em =z zv n Dy aai c"z yyi mono n n .5rmo'm`8 ??zmnm da' ,m w'°, m'a °o Om -zy°'z ZmzmSaO2DZOAyZDm0n - . °$ aEi mm w < va^ <va?�i Glmy my yy m zym zr G)r O xm C 0 /0 `I 0 a m lawny w W xmm �9��nmk°- i�000yCmn tODYq//l omImicyu°.n roy= n7f OmA CC mO�DYomznmSW 'ao 90(.(Zynmx Gl aDOapi zOr^'mo m`°�y Dym�- WZn ➢O <om� mZm Up OSm _.(� _x L1y -y tmym^ 9m2- _,I- m- yDIy 220y$�a^ O(nvDxm ��rr �S t �L1 Am <((?? O n- ZO O U vzm(_ mPFmO �'Z rm.cm amaOymyzO�mZ �"E m`z��mZ �Nm�m =a?(mm3v60 n�aA ava0 T-?3 m_ CG)2 rQm nV my - i�a�umij �� 0>00 w^fO O »H tll O� »OW - ➢y C)Qu Vm n D w m 0 O D ,� aA mm m� o�" .m M> m m20 Ozm °O nmU m G1moN ]1 y02ma (� �- A O�n (]0 rcz) rogso �3't{�. m dy0 °'(m F'�wm �l �Cm R�ti fnOwm zo W, >�p Zm �r(Xy�Z Dm°��COo�m .] ..?� °m(n Oimm'mnom�HOm °� o(nNSo' i2LIC ➢�d�oo`ym2 `2N Z2(0ir rr -- mmi22O Im °.3y%-!,K� °m m _OOa2 y�xZ fl rG DyN. -�i D v 3m5gpmrn n]oZ0O�wOm�o yaQOZromCW'%o 'ti en¢°_o' oma��mokmnrr ?vx 2s��mz Q�mm�In�G� yrr° ^�auu'�roninn ➢�'�m_W "n O' Dim °x❑ .cm KA 2aOD ao a z❑ m, $ ,yvin o D rw -.A6- CCmn'O (� Dom_ H—z .o m ➢- �mcm °�� n =m 30 pmy0 z6 . mm y(n° �n'n'� O-'y �ZCoS(nroAgm�mm;c,d. mm (7OD <nq $ °_ C myy _ �iQ f]OI,N bOrom Dwy FAO. w �K 0 GmiSp_a'c a 2- Y3ax15',y Zw }�i 55 O D o ym m1O m5- y i Im➢ �_ 0� °im_ .G) ,g ro�u y5m= I �Z?rJln m > >m °v a =iDm NON mm m y.. O n C �'7` -'am �� -z2roO OmD m a� y ZAP roC)�y U yD'..- 0v 200 �JqO 2L m2....3v °2 'L n'D�.n room �ipm �o�oc 0y mqC T >ZI y Zrotl rg.3 m n2 0^ a3m w Z—A x <mNm n�vmi3 am ro rOZ z -- ° RAE �� = =mZm22m<OR amn��On mny MG) nz= $°E' c.. �ymKwm3mm =��'_ .c 'g° ( Om msn m 0 w: o � °m'`" ' ° �a v 8 msa s �v � mD® y4"3.m °=.3ytr. ^ °mm m m 0 b O ogam m-+ ADmm+mCbzp.m y t°-ng m m -_nA i9 2 S-( 0 . ZG ��min' m9amm$'e °n °o° 'Z _, na�o =�:. °a- �°.7.m -7roZ for x00 S N3o �ffi^ � °_ m° @. Z �� w ° - -�m " OmCC 2 4 -?.w '�7 ?mh- .• »mm °ow ^n°�a ry -.� p'" ro C mZZOZoaronF nx-mmnm 74 mj gd:mUoo m3 n3� °�oAma$ ;�q� °° m�''" - «n ^_o �.��°•'c 4°� mn€ °m95a »n��nn 'oo i"�nH°x OC =nm m rzD., Oa�im °� m_a °m� ^.�°� ; � yw°+ax rnm im qp ° n p3m5 5�P'3.:o �n °m', "n 7m'95=°•� - na L E! o ro rov 'c sz_ mi5ro� 76�' m3 na �"m(io n °o 'n <o mCw F?c ➢a a'om(" ' <° megw »m�m�mag53o_.8o�co-- v`i. °z:p�mo w °a =F �'%ro°J9 m'3 °. °3 �a�w3.�a .°e <- m� g ° % ��pr gEE^ p= Rm.<n mnm�mm n�8eR amc n ew o m= g�x o w y m y mn s ma'R�P- 6mcA° Cmr 0Omo�a - 1 - 3 � o T �, �� aVwioC)mm o 0a�ro0�pL •. ° a� cu ro m-z 9 NO - 8 1°go A ' ro a ?iz0 -mpWjR '21',2n =a n Z�ma 5 rpo Mum � a rDV oonto yo2 E mom @mom U (-Z - mu A Qw. m s ... 1 ion - Em��mb °� °�� _O fZ 0 Rai m�Rn r ogn [rnSiP=O L ❑ 3 n o � L F 3 a CL CD C y o o p U � 4� I ° p D @ Ica @ Q n 3 � g N Q Q o 00 Q. m OGQ7 m � CDOm - °nom °� m piID CD It a°�rto��'4'QO C D Ota 3p" 3 om @°' @mom$ @, o �.o100QN o"Qo �Q-3a= D 446 Q f oly an__ C] gE @�N9U,c O� °�. ?(OD N@Ci cq�� Q �p -O C N @ T7 Z'- � f�D -0 GL ° 3mS�flQTm O p(xD 0�0@`L 3 � 3C V@ ❑(p <d fa.�Fw °y�N m,a�= '�3m�w�� ono ryi�'Eoip ^° a.�m4ae�y D1 m ➢p jo io op. aa ^c�m m c"q o�m OC_miPOgq � m_fOs ll o0 J4° 1E P . `DjWpmcm N � �F 3 •° E o..`�w m3� g y zx iy '^ate❑ `'�� °v°m.°> ym °a3z.`...0 m SIr 9zo n3.$�,v �n� P$ "�'v.o p2='.. �m omm mi'o y� ° „_m�- �.nQ TmN ^mm N °j brim o4�f,66 3 m . O�Pm .�.'d•� OmR' ym 1� oow�o vdm�a oz °a ^gym' _,ism mqa mi ILL" _ " ooz8 y�Y'S m a- i4Wji3�O .� pyp wj Ll C7Z S 6I1�1 OTz ]1'. "agog ou worn ^° r< Z.°.'' O D c r-, 7 O O n O C. D N S ^�r1 R 0 Z 9omnaybpyzn m- L�mmmmxp2 am< c <m .T camZ� mm �O a0_�pC003 O r i<a39iV mZ /c Z �OOZNZmomz y7a mfm iz;v+C7 p3mO�m�TyOa �> m ZO m?�y�Dpmm +Z bDr my OyZ O �m -1� ?mzz,, tiyz is x O zz° n �omOp 41 L7C 'a p°1L a ow OymzZmzm�p.7 /�/��J -'nmmn O9h�frz \V. Job "roJCrCmanw'F�3W CENCaI �ysy O L arZa. - imT�amc] <-7u4m 81"A RS c� x m n° 4 z_m ' >" amx G cn oEa z' _E_yc� m�m- .c - xoo�:Ly�ooxa ° °B�.wao' �iy7v; Op mz�m 3° L7�A0 wTd SS` m'rZ6 v19 A��_��S WAfSo.Bq <m�mmxpp�m�gOP°'�In n'w n�ymzQN NStivyDmLL9���m3p °w mo', @mgC gn�° .�`" >3 n; mJ »�ti 8mb ❑im�T'<<1 rm^ _ !oifz _ S z� g °S —1- zY'�Sn gam° �dd x09 n 3 3 O rE. C',ri�go n9.N a°° c4.40 oomo� =d6 �0 av'x p�ym °ma30,yim�l�� ^ "mg �00r <z �zOZ ➢DOOC ' 4�o�Rm v�.. pm Ti��Zn_m 3 m��sC9a- mm O �n N 2 1U Tr 1 ZZ m ri 44 ti_D -ir"'m ° m m ➢-f��pn Tn� m°<412m�m�'&V �ya'��idA Vls �m >m nppmym�NOZO °w''Q am�fp3�m000 ..NmayOm mp pyO=On'°G DN ! ..mO�R ^ °- Sam �ZpZim N4oW t�pym romp Nsm S W�Omy�a_ '°• in ➢y3 ;�i00 m$c rzpmmm vl���3 oA� 0D Gm Aro pOm°Nn ,am ayau �mw Ram zmc yi]'° ipp r T mijF 2 maLlm D ;Ty.. �.m� 2 I5'm Gr m(]iNZAro C-. O' ^N Zm 'fj C7 n • -1�y _SOW° �n:3 C ,f O ¢- m^ ZZ1 DZ�N m 8..ppmmyTZp im ±�$ a g33i^o - zm' Zmmbz = = °mO =d _�R zzcc x 20' mc9-o O omt- 3y. o ^QR W oo� ��emm_�n °ng =o? ��11o.3."ga iyaz $o_ a1W -,d�, poz„ -3Zm ^, F <mnzxo "�W2om'$ 111a'°w �° !iii 9 KOZZ°p 2��3 aW>>�j �° io© ova' =°at �nDD U�„a� g 6"ymn"NC ir��yWm �w °° cci "monboN im rzm aoi<�,;x= ul2 'D�O'd n'z z :q"oc �y�_°. * po- 2 -0 mmmc g- ° ^O "°m'�' nNZ o z'N9ac �d mm_p. ='ob3 Nam qt pmm ➢�$sC= mm[lm myw >�� mcmm -m �,f5 zD0nso < m'nc� d$•-� °u� cOOam- �>ropstivg�_ °.,d yyy c_cmn °W;bW v I <zrjA agS'9T a'-.76- mai> sa. "_ - OOOmm a£i2`"om8 ivay rr, �<n9 ip2pm]0�r6m -_ _'°w C1aOp{ t11�... p 1r. r, D- _� 'm0� m4 mp mrom9. •m bNE�° `4 - o .1.9myr012N2w mo°m °v,^�d m 9� tll - chmm.thm_.� m �A „r¶N; m - �Z'.z' ^qn3' 9m`" ;�n< rnm Nan O�mx u° NZS Vnd mm °f -W Wpm 1 -5 f m'�m �m <y ^2m�� �C p �T .� �ox o_ -' m N~ 'w ° ;q mT2 -cm �o '�0 -j �m 2Lly �OmOm W�mm °omoc m m��nsy ymD n 'O 4 t N. m -n z9 ro0c spi; n ^' -y�" °� �= I >b. az�' m- sm m_Ts"v�m,- W_ °��� �m7n 10rZOZ_d� ^v O'i, �^-� o mac s�Z2 m2 m(m m0 4z o- ° _. �< mg'L Imi� =im p °.• -w�3 °n m W9r. 2. ��_!'!^ rd O u�i. ,°.- 4e' K7i� ,Om !d•'. -cm Wm9S3f, -3 n Fm la'mo L72= R. ,<»�m ,�� am<r, ym <DT3 m'm z�! °g •<°' r� :oma Z) n za�i�,iroxo�m iAm n�n' mog oamd°� L7-IaCCy a �mii) v m�3 E� A'i 3 a O.� 9 p va $ $ gg° m 9m>O � ma4d7 8 z o $r R83� w n , Rp 4mpmnroD�3Xi P -m m5 4T> C m m�� 3 c>mi j -$e,°o °� U. u 'o� 2C L1 >m;m g33'_ g 3 n,a w -.8-69 - 9"c' it 3� °'n$ °N?3. am pDOmm� p 4 3m'�d�s�,' > > >. gape93. RN° m°m �< yB^�H ���, °a >;} vmZnosrra- 2.Q«om3am yp D-°xm 1 pd'. hON$om o wb�m'�om E�om m`�n -rm °QW :n Q��w�n� OF m¢�$�.i rgnR R a �ma. Ym� g8 �m� °� =goo emm�D°Wrs °mom 9= ?Bg°ac o-. 4 o¢m'gmpv'"g�'pa'pp ° °u•- [miabxYa '=4 i 00. SCZ = ?m m. °'gym: odago ?X »°_' mm. °tom a6°r p1 1067mpmQ r < f2Sp ip9p�.o °a''go mmmzy -_ $$ �GOZ::: �'�'�n$3.�'"$2g m.n gWm9�'� mOmaw 4�. F'70 ORDINANCE NO. 7 Series of 1976 AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 6 AND AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP. WHEREAS, Article 1, Section 1.201, of the Zoning Ordinance, Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1973, of the Town of Vail, Colorado, as amended, established thirteen zoning districts for the municipality, one of which is the Special Development District; WHEREAS, Vail Village Inn, Inc., a Colorado Corporation, submitted an application requesting that the Town establish Special Development District 6, hereinafter referred to as "06 ", for the development on its parcel of land comprising 3.455 acres in the Vail Village area, County of Eagle, State of Colorado, more completely described on attached Exhibit "A ". WHEREAS, the establishment of the requested SR6, will ensure unified and coordinated development and use of a critical site as a whole and in a manner suitable for the area in which it is situated. WHEREAS, the Town Council considers that it is reasonable, appropriate, and beneficial to the Town and its citizens, inhabitants, and visitors to establish said SD6. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section T. Title This ordinance shall be known as the "Ordinance Establishing Special Development District 6 ". Section 2. Amendment procedures Fulfilled; Planning Commission Report. The amendment procedures prescribed in Section 21.500 of the Zoning Ordinance have been fulfilled, with the report of the Planning Commission re- commending the enactment of this ordinance. Section 3. Special Development District 6 Established; Amendments to Zoning Ordinance and Official Zoning Map. Pursuant to the provisions of Articles 1, 13, and 21 of the Zoning Ordinance, Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1973, of the Town of Vail, Colorado, as I L - Town Glqrk :r. r X amended, Special Development District 6 (SD6), a special development zoning district, is hereby established for the development on a certain parcel of land comprising 3.455 acres in the Vail Village area of the Town of Vail, and the Zoning Ordinance and the Official Zoning Map are hereby amended by the addition of the following provisions which shall become the seventh Chapter of Article 13, the caption of which shall be "Special Development District 6" and a map which shall become an addition to the Official Zoning flap. Section 4. Purpose of Special Development District. A special development district is established to assure comprehensive development and use of an area in a manner that will be harmonious with the general character of the Town of Vail, Colorado, provide adequate open space and recreational amenities, and promote the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town; ordinarily a special district will be created only when the development density will be lower than allowed by the existing zoning, and the development is regarded as complementary to the Town by the Town Council, Planning Commission, and Design Review Board, and there are significant aspects of the special development which cannot be satisfied under the existing zoning. Section 5. Approval of Development Plan. A. The Development Plan for the Vail Village Inn which is part of its said application shall be incorporated by reference, and made a part of Special Development District 6 and constitutes a general plan and guide for development within the Special District. B. Amendments to the Approved Development Plan which do not change its substance and which are fully recommended in a report of the Planning Commission may be approved by the Town Council by resolution. C. The Environmental Impact Report and a supplemental report for each phase of construction which shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator in accordance with Article 16 hereof, prior to the commencement of site preparation, building construction, or other improvements of open space. (1) Each phase of the development shall require review and recom- mendations of the Planning Commission and approval by the Town Council. D. Each phase of the development shall require the prior approval of the Design Review Board in accordance with the applicable provisions of Article 15 hereof. Each phase shall be reviewed by an outside consultant at the Town rk - 2 - expense of the developer, who shall give their recommendations to the Design Review Board. (1) The Development Plan shall be amended to reflect Architectural detail of each phase. Section 6. Content of Proposed Development Plan. The proposed development plan shall include but is not limited to the following data as amended by Exhibits provided by consultants, Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey, on February 12, 1976. A. Existing and proposed contours after grading and site development having contour intervals of not more than 2 feet and preliminary drainage plan. Supplemental documentation of proposed contours and drainage shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator with the plans for each phase of the development. B. A site plan, at a scale of 1 inch equals 40 feet or larger, showing the locations and dimensions of all buildings and structures, uses therein, and all principal site development features such as landscaped areas, recreational facilities, pedestrian plazas and walkways, service areas, driveways, and off - street parking and loading areas. C. A preliminary landscape plan, at a scale of 1 inch equals 40 feet or larger, showing existing landscape features to be retained or removed, and showing proposed landscaping and landscaped site development features such as outdoor recreational facilities, bicycle paths, trails, pedestrian plazas and walkways, water features, and other elements. D. Schematic building elevations, sections and floor plans, at appropriate scales, in sufficient detail to determine floor area, general circulation and use location, and general scale and bulk of the proposed development. Specific detail for these items and the appearance shall be submitted on a phase basis, E. A volumetric model as amended by Consultants, Royston, Hanamoto, Beck, and Abey on February 12, 1976, of the site and the proposed development documented by photographs, at a scale of 1 inch equals 16 feet or larger, portraying the scale and relationship of the development to the site, and il- lustrating the form and mass of structures in development. Supplementary volumetric models shall be submitted prior to construction of each phase to reflect existing and proposed development. Town Cl kd -3- F. A phasing plan of the proposed development indicating order and general timing of construction phases, amenities, and proposed interim develop- ment. Section 7. Permitted Uses in the Special Districts. A. All permitted uses as defined in the Public Accommodation District, Section 7.200 of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 8. Conditional Uses in the Special District. A. All conditional uses as defined in the Public Accommodation District, Section 7.300 of the Zoning Ordinance, and subject to the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit in accord with the provisions of Article 18 of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 9. Accessory Uses in the Special Districts. A. All accessory uses as defined in the Public Accommodation District, Section 7.400 of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 10. Development Standards. The following development standards are minimum development standards in the Special District: A. Lot area and site dimensions. The Special District shall consist of an area totalling 3.455 acres as specified in Section 3 hereof. B. Setbacks. The required setbacks shall vary as indicated in the Development Plan, providing space for planting and an acceptable relationship to adjacent properties. Portions of the commercial space may abut the south property line. C. Distances between buildings. The minimum distance between buildings on adjacent sites shall be as indicated in the Development Plan but in no case shall be less than 50 feet. D. Height. (Story shall be as defined by the Uniform Building Code.) Of the allowable site coverage for the development, the following are allowable heights in stories for the structure as outlined on the Development Plan. Maximum height Area A - 5 stories: (Maximum elevation range of 155 feet Cto 158 feet from a base elevation of 95 feet); maximum height Area B - 3 stories, Town Elerk -4- (maximum elevation range of 135 feet to 140 feet from a base elevation of 95 feet); maximum height Area C - 4 stories (maximum elevation range of 139 feet to 144 feet from a base elevation of 95 feet); maximum height Area R - stepdown areas shall be lower than the areas which they adjoin and descending in height to the end of the building mass in an acceptable relationship to the remainder of the site and shall not exceed the following maximum: west step -down area - 3 stories to 2 stories with maximum elevation range of 117 feet to 126 feet from a base elevation of 86 feet; north step - down area - 3 stories with maximum elevation range of 135 feet to 140 feet from base elevation of 95 feet; east step -down area - 4 stories down to one story with maximum elevation range of 100 feet to 140 feet from a base elevation of 86 feet; end line of east step -down area not to exceed Crossroads at Vail setback. In no event shall the total average height of the project exceed 45 feet; maximum height for Area E - (commercial space) the dominant height shall be 2 stories allowing accent elements to form an acceptable relation- ship to the project. The intent of the height limits and ranges is that the building complex should be as low as possible. At this level of detail it is not realistic to tie down a precise maximum elevation. Final designs with regard to elevation will depend upon further detail study and pro- jection of the building -mass onto photos of the actual site conditions. The massing respects the spirit of what is desired and final heights will be established based on final decision. The shopping intent is to maintain the village quality and to maintain the two story elevations as the pre- dominant height. This height can vary upward or downward by half a level. Town Cllerk -4a- l E. Density Control. The gross residential floor area (GRFA) of all buildings constructed in the Special District shall not exceed 100,000.00 square feet. The gross residential floor area devoted to accommodation units shall exceed the gross residential floor area devoted to dwelling units. If total gross residential floor area is devoted to accommodation units the number of accommodation units i shall not exceed 300. F. Building Bulk Control, Building Bulk, maximum wall lengths, maximum dimensions for building elements, requriements for wall offsets and vertical stepping of roof lines shall be indicated on the Bulk Diagram of the approved Development Plan. G. Site Coverage. The site area to be covered by buildings shall be as generally indicated on the Development Plan, but in no case shall exceed 551 of the total site area. H. Useable Open Space. Useable open space shall be provided as required in the Public Accommodation District, Section 7.508 of the Zoning Ordinance. I. Landscaping and Site Development. At least 30 %of the total site area shall be landscape and plaza area. Landscaping and other site development shall observe the landscaping concept as indicated in the approved Development Plan. J. Parking and Loading. (1) Parking and loading shall be provided as required in the Public Accommodation District, Section 7.510 and consistent with the provisions of Article 14 of the Zoning Ordinance. All required parking shall be within the main building or buildings or beneath accessory decks, plaza and patios except the minimum necessary for registration and temporary loading and unloading. (2) Parking shall.be provided for Charter Buses.. (3) Loading, delivery, and garbage facilities shall be off - street and within the structure as indicated on the Development Plant. Section 11. Limitation on Fireplaces. Fireplaces shall not be permitted in individual accommodation units. Section 12. Conservation Controls. A. Developer shall include in the building construction energy and water conservation controls as general technology exists at the time of construction. Town C1 k - 5 - Section 13. Recreational Amenities Tax. The recreational amenities tax due for the development within SD6 under Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1974 of the Town of Vail, Colorado, shall be assessed at a rate not to exceed $0,75 per square foot of floor area and shall be paid in conjunction with construction phases and prior to the issuance of a building permit. ° Section 14. Limitation on Existence of Special Development District 6 Prior to the adoption of the Approved Development Plan, the Town Council reserves to the Town the right to abrogate or modify Special Development District 6 for good cause through the enactment of an ordinance; provided, however, that in the event the Town Council finds it to be appropriate to consider whether to abrogate or modify SD6, the procedures shall be in accord with Article 21 hereof. Section 15. Amenities. A. Developer shall provide in its approved Development Plan a bus shelter of a design and location mutually agreeable to developer and Town Council. Said shelter to serve the area generally. B. Swimming pool of adequate size to reasonably serve the needs of the development. l Section 16. Effective Date This ordinance shall take effect five days after publication following the final passage hereof. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL, this 2nd day of March, 1976, and a public hearing on this ordinance shall be held at the regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado on the 16th day of March, 1976, at 7:30 P.M. in the Municipal Building of the Town of Vail. TOWN OF VAIL BY: Chn A. Dobson, Mayor ATTEST: Town C erk Towh C erk -6- ■ ti f� t• "EXHIBIT A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION - VAIL VILLAGE INN All of Lot M and Parts of Lots N, 0, and P, Block 5 -D, Vail Village First Filing, Town of Vail, Eagle County, Colorado, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Northwesterly corner of Lot N, said Block 5 -D; thence S79046'00 "E and along the Northerly line of said Lots N and 0, 175.00 feet to the true point of beginning; thence continuing along the aforesaid course 327.61 feet to the Northwesterly corner of said Lot P; thence continuing along the aforesaid course and along the Northerly line of said Lot P 44,90 feet; thence 308017'43 "W, 65.12 feet; thence S50011'32 °W, 44.41 feet to a point of intersection with the Westerly line of said Lot P; thence S00023'00 "C and along said Westerly line 216.28 feet to the Southwesterly corner of said Lot P; thence N82035'00 "W and along the Southerly line of said Lot 0 and said Lot M and along a curve to the left having a radius of 545.87 feet, and a central angle of 21032'00 ", an arc distance of 205.15 feet to a point of tangent; thence along the Southerly line of said Lot M and along said tangent S75053'00 "W 77.39 feet to a point of curve; thence along said Southerly line and along a curve to the right having a radius of 20.00 feet, a central angle of 103044'00 ", an arc distance of 36.20 feet to a point of tangent; thence along said tangent and along the Westerly line of said Lots M and N, N00023'00 "W, 243.21 feet; thence S79046'00 "E 147.36 feet; thence N10014'00 "E 147.43 feet to the true point of beginning, containing 3.455 acres, more or less, together will all improvements located thereon and subject to a 10 foot utility easement along the Northerly boundary thereof. h , Town Cl rk J . . ..� � INTRODUCED, READ, ADOPTED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY Titla this 16th day of March, 1075. ATTEST' ` Yu TUWN'CLBRu, > ' TOWN OF VAIL 'A" 6b�on, Mayor s a i Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 14 Series of 1987 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1, SERIES OF 1985 TO PROVIDE FOR THE AMENDMENT OF THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6; ADOPTING AN AMENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6, ELIMINATING CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO THE DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6; CHANGING THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6; CHANGING THE ALLOWABLE DENSITY AND MODIFYING THE BUILDING BULK STANDARDS FOR PHASE IV OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6; PROVIDING DIFFERENT PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS FOR PHASE IV AND V OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 6; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL of the Town of Vail as follows: Section 1, Legislative Intent is hereby repealed and reenacted with amendments to read as follows: Section 1. Legislative Intent A. In 1976, the Town Council of the Town of Vail passed Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1976, establishing Special Development District No. 6 to insure the unified and coordinated development of a critical site as a whole and in a manner suitable for the area in which it was situated. B. Special Development District No.6 provided in Section 14 that the Town Council reserved the right to abrogate or modify Special Development District No. 6 for good cause through the enactment of an ordinance in conformity with the zoning code of the Town of Vail. C. In 1985, the Town Council of the Town of Vail passed Ordinance #1, Series of 1985, providing certain amendments to the development plan for SDD N0, 6. D. Application has been made to the Town of Vail to modify and amend certain sections of Special Development District No. 6 which relate to Phase IV and which make certain changes in the development plan for Special Development District No. 6 as they relate to Phase IV. E. The Planning and Environmental Commission of` the Town of Vail has reviewed the changes submitted by the applicant and has recoirrnended that Special Development District No. 6 be so amended. F. The Town Council considers that the amendments provide an even more unified and more aesthetically pleasing development of a critical site within the Town and that such amendments are of benefit to the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the Town of Vail. T , r Section 2. Section 18.50.020 Purpose is hereby amended to read as follows: A Special Development District is established to assure comprehensive development and use of an area in a manner that would be harmonious with the general character of the Town, provide adequate open space and recreation amenities, and promote the objectives of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town. Ordinarily, a special development district will be created only when the development is regarded as complementary to the Town by the Town Council, Planning Commission and Design Review Board, and there are significant aspects of the special development which cannot be satisfied under the existing zoning. Section 18.50.040 Development Plan -- Contents is hereby amended to read as follows; The proposed development plan shall include, but is not limited to, the following data as supplemented by exhibits provided by consultants Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1976 for Phases I, I1, I11, and as supplemented by the exhibits of the development plan and the environmental impact report as prepared by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect, (plans dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 22, 1987), and as given final approval through passage of second reading of this ordinance by the Town Council on May 19, 1987 for Phase IV and Phase V. This approval recognizes that Phase IV may be constructed in two phases with the first phase to be referred to as Phase IV and the final phase to be referred to as Phase V. Section 3. Section 18.50.040 E is hereby amended to read as follows: E. For Phases I, II, and III, a volumetric model as amended by consultants Royston, Hanamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1976 of the site and proposed development documented by photographs at a scale of 1 inch equals 16 feet or larger, portraying the scale and relationship of those phases of the development to the site and illustrating the form and mass of structures in said phases of the development. For Phases IV and V, a volumetric model as amended by Gordon Pierce, Architect, of the site and the proposed development at a scale of 1 inch equals 20 feet, portraying the scale and relationship of the development on Phases IV and V, to the site and illustrating the form of mass of structures in said phase. Section 4. Section 18.50.050 Permitted Uses in Special Development No. 6 is hereby repealed and re- enacted with amendments to read as follows: 18.50.050 Permitted Uses The permitted uses in Phases I, I1, III, IV and V of Special Development District 6 shall be in accordance with the approved development plans on file in 1 1 the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Section 5. Section 18.50.OGO Conditional Uses 'in Special Development District No. 6 is hereby repealed and re- enacted with amendments to read as follows: 18.50.060 Conditional Uses Conditional Ekes for Phases I, II, III, IV and V of Special Development District No. 6 shall be as found in Section 18.22.030 of the Vail Zoning Code and as below: A. A popcorn outside vending wagon that conforms in appearance with those existing in Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II. Except, no office uses, except those clearly accessory to a principal use will be allowed on the Plaza level of Phases IV and V. Section 6. Section 18.50.110 Distance Between Buildings is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.50.110 Distance Between Buildings For Phases I, II and III the minimum distance between buildings on adjacent sites shall be as indicated in the development plan, but in no case shall be less than 50 feet. For Phase IV AND V, the minimum distance between buildings on adjacent sites shall be as indicated in the development plan as submitted by Gordon Pierce, Architect, (dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 17, 1987). Section 7. Section 18.50.120 Height is hereby amended to read as follows: A. For Phases I, II, and III the allowable heights shall be as found on the development plan, specifically the site plan and height plan dated 3/12/76. B. For Phases IV and V, the maximum building height shall be as set forth in the approved development plan by Gordon Pierce, Architect (dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 17, 1987). Section 8. Section 18.50.130 Density is hereby amended to read as follows: The Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) of all districts in the Special Development District shall not exceed 120,600 square feet. There shall be a minimum of 148 accommodation units and 67,367 square feet of GRFA devoted to accommodation units in Phase IV and V of Special Develoment District 6. Section 9. Section 18.50.130 Building Bulk is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.50.130 Building Bulk Building bulk, maximum wall lengths, maximum dimensions for building elements, requirements for wall offsets and vertical stepping of roof lines for Phases I, II and III shall be indicated on the development plan submitted by consultants 0 Royston, lianamoto, Beck and Abey on February 12, 1975. For Phases IV and V, building bulk, maximum wall lengths, maximum dimensions for building elements, requirements for wall offsets and vertical stepping of roof lines shall be as indicated as per the approved development plans submitted by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect (dated February 19, 1987, revised April 14 and April 22, 1987). Section 10. Section 18.50.180 Parking and Loading is hereby repealed and reenacted with amendments as follows: 18,50.180 Parking and Loading Following the completion of Phases IV and V, there shall be not less than 12 surface parking spaces, 324 underground parking spaces, and 37 underground valet parking spaces as are existing and as provided on the development plan submitted by Gordon R. Pierce, Architect (dated February 19, 1987). The proposed site plan dated February 19, 1987 reflects the interim parking plans between the development of Phases IV and V. Section 11 is hereby repealed and reenacted with amendments to read as follows: Section 11. Conditions of approval for the development plan of Phases IV and V of SDD6 as submitted by Gordon Pierce (dated February 9, 1985, revised April 14 and April 22, 1987), shall be as follows: 1. That the developers and /or owners of Phases IV and V participate in and do not remonstrate against an improvement district for improvements to the intersection of Vail Road and Meadow Drive if and when one is formed. 2. That the developers and /or owners of Phases IV and V participate in and do not remonstrate against establishing a pedestrian linkage from Phases IV and V to a future commercial expansion at the Sonnenalp Lodge site if and when it is developed. 3. The developer receive approval from the State Highway Department for reconfiguration of the pull -off area from the Frontage Road to the entrance to the hotel prior to the issuance of a building permit for Phase V. 4. The developers and /or owners of Phase IV agree to transfer by general warranty deed to the Town of Vail free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, such condominium unit of approximately 3,986 sq. ft. in size and to be located as indicated on the plans and specifications submitted with the application. There shall be no provisions placed on the condominium unit restricting the Town of Vail's use of the unit or the subsequent subdivision and /or sale of the unit. -4- 0 5. No grading permit, building permit or demolition permit relating to Phases IV or V of Special Development District No. 6 shall be issued until such time that reasonable evidence is provided the Town of Vail staff that construction financing for the improvements to be constructed as part of Phases IV or V has been obtained. 6. Restrictions on any units in Phases IV or V which would be condominiumized shall be as outlined in Section 17.26.075 of the Vail Municipal Code and any amendments thereto. 7. Upon the issuance of a building permit for the construction of any phase of SDDii6 subsequent to Phase IV, the developer and/or owner of said phase shall reimburse the Town of Vail for expenses incurred in facilitating the relocation of the ski museum (into Phase IV) of an amount not to exceed $75,000. S. Any remodel or redevelopment of the remaining portion of SDD6 commonly referred to as Phase V shall include parking as required by Ordinance 1, Series of 1985. Section 12. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason head to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the valildity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. The repeal or the repeal and reenaction of any provisions of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. INTRODUCED, REND AND PASSED ON FIRST READING THIS 5th day of May, 1987 , and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the 19th day of May 1987 at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Order d;p i'she -i.n ,u]1 this 8th day of May _, 1987. �- 7 �. _ Paul R. Jo. ton, Mayor ATT1-ST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED in full this 19th day of May 1987. Paul R. &ston, Mayor Al -T ST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk lAttachment TO: Planning and Environmental commission FROM.* Community Development Department DATE: April 20,1987 SUBJECT: A request to amend Special Development District 6, Vail Village Inn, Phase 4. Applicant: Mr. Josef Staufer Final approval for the last phase of Vail Village Inn (Phase 4 of SDD6) was granted by the Town Council in February of 1985. An 18 month extension of this approval was granted in January, 1987 for the exact plan that was previously'approved. In general terms, the approval of Phase 4 involved the demolition of the existing hotel, Pancake House, and Food and Deli. To be constructed were 175 accommodation units, approximately 16,000 square feet of retail space, and 324 underground parking spaces. The construction of this final phase was to have completed all development potential as established by ordinance, for this property. Application has been made for a number of amendments to the existing ordinance governing the development of this property, as well as approval for the phased development of the project. Planning Commission action on this request involves making recommendations to be passed on to the Town Council for their final review. The following memo outlines the issues related to these requests for both the proposed amendments and the proposal to phase the development of the project. The existing approval be constructed in one is his desire to comp phases as oppposed to provided for only one contemplated. for Phase 4 was presented and approved to phase. The applicant has stated that it Lete this final phase in three separate one. However, at this time information is of the three phases that are being The first phase proposed involves the construction of a building located at the corner of Vail Road and East Meadow Drive. This structure would be connected to the existing Food and Deli portion of V with a second and third floor skyway. The building closely resembles the previous approval in terms of design and how it would be connected to the main portion of the hotel. There are a number of issues that will need to be addressed relative to this phasing plan. They include the following: 11 De�s�n A great deal of time and effort went into reviewing the massing and siting of this structure during the previous approval in 1985. The goal of these efforts was to ensure a design that was consistent with the original development plan adopted for this site in 1976. Generally, it was the intention of this plan for the property to be developed with greater densities and mass along the Frontage Road and a gradual "stepping down" of structures toward Meadow Drive. While this structure along Meadow Drive has been modified from the original approval, staff feels these design changes are minor and still in keeping with the intent of the original plan for SDD6. 2. Interim Chances to the site in the area of the proposed Meadow Drive structure include a slight relocation of the access off of Vail Road, the introduction of a loading zone, and the removal of approximately 1,000 square feet of landscaped area to provide additional surface parking. The proposed location for the loading zone is directly adjacent to Vail Road. From a design standpoint, this location is unacceptable to the staff. Concerns over this location center around the high visibility of the loading zone in relation to vehicular and pedestrian ways. There is also a strong concern over the removal of landscaped area to provide for surface parking. The introduction of additional surface parking is inconsistent with the desired goals for Vail Village as well as the previously approved plan for this project. The significance of this additional parking is magnified by the fact that mature evergreen trees would be removed to accommodate it. 3. Parking The staff has a number of concerns with the parking solution as proposed with this phasing plan. These concerns center around the project's overall deficiency in providing parking on site, the utilization of a tremendous number of valet spaces during the interim plan, and the notion of adding additional development to this project with no appreciable gain in on-site parking. To date, this project has developed in three phases and over the course of this development has fallen short of its required on-site parking. Phases 1 and 2 (predominantly the commercial areas along Meadow Drive) were developed without on-site parking. The N 17J development of Phase 3 involved a total of 1 06 structured spaces. These 106 spaces were over and above what was required for Phase 3 development (condominiums along the Frontage Road). it was intended that the development of the additional spaces would go toward making up some of the short fall that existed from Phases 1 and 2. As the Planning Commission is probably aware, existing restrictions on access to this structure has limited the utilization of these spaces and, as a result, done little to make up for the existing short fall on the site. We are now asked to review additional development on the property, again with little actual new parking being provided. The following table outlines in greater detail the parking situation for the Vail Village Inn. EXISTING CONDITIONS (PARKING) Phase Use Sq Ft Spaces Rec, Spaces Exist. 1 Comm. 16,128 53 0 2 Comm. 6,473 21 0 Resid. 4 condos 8 0 3 Comm. 10,600 34 106 (structure) Resid. 29 condos. 47 VVI Hotel, Deli, etc. Comjrest 5,610 23 65 (surface) Hotel 52 units 37 223 171 lst phase of Phase 4 Comm. 4,765 Resi. 14 units (multi -use credit) 16 0 28 44 0 267 171 - 13 254 The information for this table was derived from data compiled during the last review of Phase 4. The number of spaces provided do not reflect the valet spaces as proposed with this application. The following table outlines in greater detail the proposed valet parking. The parking section of the zoning code requires clear and unobsructed access to on-site parking provided within a development. An exception to this can be granted when valet service is provided. There are no other standards related to the utilization of valet parking outlined in the code. As an interim solution to parking, the applicant has proposed the introduction of valet parking throughout the project. When considekinq these valet spaces, the following charYges are'made to the parking provided on site: Phase Total Clear Access Valet % # Spaces Spaces Spaces Valet 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 135 51 84 62% Surface 60 40 20 33% Spaces 195 91 104 53% E As demonstrated by this table, over one half of the parking spaces provided on site will require valet service to be utilized. This percentage is unacceptable to the staff. While a portion of valet parking for a lodge is acceptable, it is infeasible to think that valet parking is workable or appropriate for meeting the demands for commercial space for this development. The realities of the existing situation on this property are that a maximum of 64 surface spaces are accessible for all the commercial uses on the site. This is assuming that the 106 spaces within Phase 3 are unaccessible to the general public. In addition, of the 64 surface spaces on site, a good percentage of those are restricted to specific tenants. For all practical purposes, there is no additional parking being provided for these commercial uses. Another aspect of the valet parking proposed on the surface lot is the amount of trip generation that will occur between the properties. Assuming that the valet service will be based out of the front desk of the hotel, the utilization of valet spaces adjacent to the Food and Deli would require a doubling of necessary trips through the 4-way stop. This trip generation is serving to congest an intersection that is already at capacity many times of the year. 0 REQUESTED AMENDMENTS TO THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN A number of amendments have been requested to Ordinance #1, 1985. This ordinance established the development plan, statistics, and conditions of approval relative to the initial review of this project. While many of these amendments are minor, a number of them have implications relative to the development of Phase 4. The original ordinance and a copy of the applicant's amendments requested have been attached to this memorandum. The following is the staff's response to each of these amendments. Amendments 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 are merely housekeeping amendments to recognize the amended plans as submitted for this first phase of the competion of the project. In many cases the ordinance -makes reference to the approved plans as previously submitted. These references address issues such as distances between buildings, proposed locations and design of structures, parking provisions, etc. The staff feels there are no pertinent issues relative to the above amendments. Amendment 4. This amendment refers to the density permitted within Phase 4 of the Vail Village inn project. The existing ordinance reads as follows: The gross residence floor area (GRFA) of all districts in the Special Development District shall not exceed 120,600 square feet. There shall be a minimum of 175 accommodation units and 72,400 square feet devoted to accommodation units in Phase 4 of SDD6. With respect to this particular section of the ordinance, the GRFA numbers were previously established with the 72,400 square feet available in Phase 4 being the difference between what is existing in other phases and the overall allowable. A minimum of 175 accommodation units were specified in the ordinance to insure that accomodation units be provided in the development of Phase 4. The amendment requested by the applicant would allow for the development of dwelling units in this phase of Phase 4. As proposed, the second, third and fourth floors of this structure would accommodate 14 units, each with at least one lock-off unit. staff concern with this approach centers around the utilization and ownership of these units. As per the written application we have received, the units could be condominiumized with no restrictions on owners' use or any requirements to manage these units in some type of short 6 term rental pool. While it is true that accommodation 0 units could be condominiumized, the condo conversion ordinance establishes restrictions on owners' use as well as requiring the units to participate in a rental pool. As proposed, there are no assurances that these units would not be developed, sold to individual owners, and not participate in a rental pool. Under this scenario, this proposal is a dramatic departure from the intent of ordinance #1, 1985 as it is presently written. Amendment #7 This amendment addresses the seven conditions of approval that were established during the last review of this proposal. of concern to the staff are amendments proposed to conditions No. 5 and 6. These conditions address the relocation of the ski museum as part of the development of Phase 4. The existing conditions are worded as follows; 4. "The board of directors of the Colorado Ski Museum and the developers come to an agreement on terms for the relocation of the Museum in Phase 4 of the Vail Village Inn prior to the issuance of a building permit. In the event that the ski museum would vacate its space in Phase 4 of the Vail Village Inn, the Town of Vail shall be given exclusive rights to assume the Ski Museum's lease of the space. It shall be understood that in the event the Town of Vail does assume the use of this space, all uses in this space shall be of public purpose in nature." 5. The developer fund the demolition and landscaping of the museum site through one of two options: a. Deposit to the Town a check for $15,000 to be used by the Town to complete the work, or, b. The developer submit a landscape plan to the Town for approval as an element of the overall plan for Phase 4. The relocation of the Ski Museum became an essential element of the redevelopment plan during the last review of this proposal. This was the result of trying to find a balance between the needs of the developer and the original design plat for this property. Generally speaking, the design plan adopted for this site emphasized the massing of structures to step down from the Frontage Road to East Meadow Drive resulting in a pedestrian scale of buildings along the Meadow Drive pedestrian corridor. In addition, this plan called for a substantial amount of landscaped open space at the southwest corner of the property. The developer's program for the building necessitated placing a structure in this portion of this property and the solution 0 proposed was to relocate the Ski Museum to free up that site to be developed as a park. After much discussion, this was agreed to as a reasonable compromise maintaining the integrity of the design plan as well as meeting the needs of the developers. The two conditions of approval were designed to ensure that the Ski Museum would be relocated and that the site be landscaped in conjunction with the development of this project. These assurances came in the form of requiring the Ski Museum to agree to the move before construction was initiated and through the funding of improvements to the Ski Museum site. The commitment by the developer to provide these-conditions was seen as a trade off for the opportunity to develop what was intended to be a landscape portion of the site. The applicant has proposed the following amendment to these conditions: "The developers and/or owners of Phase 4 agree to transfer by general warranty deed to the Town of Vail free and clear of all liens and encumbrances. Such condominium unit shall be approximately 3986 square feet in size and shall be located as indicated on the plans and specifications submitted with the application." The applicant has also requested that Condition #5 (that the developer fund or provide the landscaping of the Ski Museum site) be completely deleted. While the developer is still proposing to provide the space for the Ski Museum, the Town has lost all assurances that the Ski Museum will in fact occupy that space and vacate its existing building. In addition, the burden of removing the existing Ski Museum structure and landscaping the site has now fallen on the shoulders of the Town or some other entity. Both of these conditions were established to accommodate the desires of the developer to construct Phase 4 in locations that were designated as open space. Two years ago during the final review of this project, it was agreed upon by all parties that the relocation of the Museum become the developer's responsibility. These conditions will effectively absolve the developer of that responsibility. STAFF RECOMMENDATION During the last review of this project in 1985, the staff strongly supported the approval of the project. That proposal involved predominantly structured parking to accommodate all phases of Vail Village Inn, a commitment to develop accommodation units, and strong assurances that the relocation of the Ski Museum woubd be provided in conjunction with this VA development. The phasing proposal submitted at this time falls short on each of these considerations. While it may be feasible to mitigate the issue over the units by instituting use restrictions, and the Ski Museum may be resolved through further negotiation between the developer and the Ski Museum, staff feels strongly that the issue of parking is not being solved through the implementation of valet service. We are bound to view this proposal as what possibly could be built out of the project. As a whole, the project has been deficient in parking for a number of years. To allow additional development on the site without additional parking would be nothing short of irresponsible. For years the parking that is not provided on this site has been made up somewhere within.the Town. one can assume that adjacent properties and the Town parking structure have absorbed this burden. With the ever increasing utilization of the Town structure, it is simply infeasible that any additional burden be placed on this facility by allowing private development to proceed without carrying its fair share of'the parking requirements. Although the staff remains positive regarding the quality of the overall previously approved project and we recognize that our concerns could be mitigated in the future by immediate follow- through with the next phase, it is our responsibiity to fairly evaluate this proposal as if this is the final product. With this in mind and to be consistent with our position on similar proposals, we cannot support the present proposal. Staff recommendation for this phasing program and the proposed amendments is denial. E .� e r AME i MEN ' E A ELOP i ! The following changes need to be made to Ordinance No. 1 Series of 1985 in order to proceed with the proposed structure to be located on Meadow Drive, 1. In Section 2 additional reference should be made to the current set of plans as submitted for the proposed structure located on Meadow Drive. I would assume that this could be called the new Phase IV and the remaining portion of the project would be referred to as Phase V. 2. In Section 6 the paragraph makes reference to Phase IV regarding the minimum distance between building, the only thing that should be added should be possibly a date of the current plans as submitted. 3. In Section 7 Subparagraph B, once again Phase IV would be the current Phase IV with the plans dated accordingly. 4. In Section 8 the 120,600 sq.ft. of GRFA should remain the same, 175 accommodation units should also remain the same, however, the 72,400 sq.ft. should be reduced by the sum of 5,378 sq.ft. which represents one -half of the total square footage of GRFA in the current Phase IV. This amount of square footage has been devoted to units with a kitchen. The 72,400 sq.ft. should therefore be amended to read 67,022 sq.ft. 5. In Section 9 the language pertaining to Phase IV should once again make reference to the glans submitted by Gordon R. Pierce with the current date on such plans. 6. Section 10 should be amended to reflect the current parking plan on the set of plans submitted with our application. 7. In Section 11 regarding conditions of approval the following changes should be made: a. Once again Phase IV should be reflected by the current set of plans submitted by Gordon R. Pierce. b. Subparagraph C. Subparagraph d. Subparagraph are not in need of suc; approval would only be next phase. one should remain the same. two should remain the same. three remains the same, however, we h approval during this phase and that necessary upon the development of the El J" +r e. Subparagraph four should be deleted. The following language should replace the existing Subparagraph four, The developers and/or owners of Phase IV agree to transfer by General Warranty Deed to the Town of Vail free and clear of all liens and encumbrances. Such Condominium unit shall be approximately 31986 sq.ft. in size and shall be located as indicated on the plans and specifications submitted with the application. There would be no restriction on the .Deed for the use by the Ski Museum, however/ the space should be used for some public purpose by the Town of Vail. f. Subparagraph five would be deleted. g. Subparagraph six can stay the same. Attachment D 0 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION April 20, 1987 1 :30 P.M. SITE VISITS 3:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING 1. Approval of minutes of March 9 and March 23. 2. a. A request to adopt rules of procedure for home occupancy revocation hearings. b. Consideration of a request for a stay of execution of the order of the zoning administrator revoking Vail East Rentals, Inc. home occupation permit and establishment of a date to hear the appeal of the revocation of the East Vail Rentals, Inc. home occupation permit. 3. A request for a conditional use permit in order to construct a parking lot on top of the west half of the Upper Eagle Valley Water and Sanitation water plant located at 846 Forest Road. Applicant: Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated San Dist. 4. A request for a side setback variance in order to construct a residence on Parcel B, a resubdivision of Lots 14 and 17, Block 7, Vail Village lst Filing Applicant: Mr. and Mrs. Michael Tennebaum 5. A request for front, side, rear and stream setback variances, a site coverage variance, a gross residential floor area variance and a variance from required landscaping in order to construct additions on Parcels A and B, Lot 3, Block 1, Vail Village lst Filing. Applicant: Jerome A. Lewis, Downing Street Foundation 6. A request to amend Special Development District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, located at 100 East Meadow Drive. Applicant: Josef Stauffer 7. A request for setback variances in order to construct additions to the property at Lot 2, Block 1, Vail Village lst Filing. Applicant: Howard, Judy and Steven Berkowitz 8. A request for a side setback variance in order to construct a garage at 325 Forest Road. Applicant: Tim Drisko 9. A request to amend the zoning code in order to add a new zone district to be entitled "Hillside Residential ". Applicant: Town of Vail • PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION April 20, 1987 PRESENT J.J. Collins Diana Donovan Pam Hopkins Peggy Osterfoss Sid Schultz Jim Viele ABSENT Bryan Hobbs STAFF PRESENT Peter Patten Tom Braun Rick Pylman Kristan Pritz Betsy Rosolack The meeting was called to order by the chairman, Jim Viele. 1. Approval of minutes of March 9 and March 23. Diana Donovan moved and J.J. Collins seconded to approve the minutes of the meeting of March 9. The vote was 6 -0 in favor. Diana Donovan moved and Peggy Osterfoss seconded to approve the meeting of March 23. The vote was 6 -0 in favor. 2. a. A request to adopt rules of procedure for home occupancy revocation hearings. Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney, explained that for the first time, a home occupancy permit revocation was being appealed. He explained that this would be a quasi - judicial hearing and the PEC would act like a judge and would decide whether or not to uphold or overturn the revocation of the license. Larry gave the Planning Commission a list of rules of procedure. Diana Donovan moved to adopt the "Commission Regulations Setting Forth Procedures Applicable to Appeals of the Revocation of Home Occupancy Permits by the Zoning Administrator." The motion was seconded by Pam Hopkins and the vote to adopt was 6 -0 in favor. 2. b. Consideration of a request for a stay of execution of the order of the zoning administrator revoking Vail East Rentals, Inc. home occupation permit and establishment of a date to hear the appeal of the revocation of the East Vail Rentals, Inc. home occupation permit. Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney, explained that he felt there was no harm done by granting a stay of execution, since there would probably not be very much business until June. Diana Donovan moved and Pam Hopkins seconded to hold the hearing of this license on May 27 at 3:00 PM. The vote was 6- 0 in favor of this date. • . 3. A request for a conditional use permit In order to construct a arkin lot on top of the west half of the Upper Eagle Valley Water and Sanitation water plant located at 846 Forest Road. Applicant: Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation T)i stri c-t Peter Patten explained that this building was located in the PUD zone district and the Planning Commission sets the standards for this zone district as applicable. UEVCSD wished to relocate their parking facility from Town of Vail land and Vail Associates property to their own property. He showed site plans and explained that the staff was concerned that there be some type of screening to the west as well as to the north. Dave Mott, applicant, stated that he had no problem with landscaping to buffer the view to the north, but it was difficult to do now until the width of the road is known. He felt that UEVCSD should not be asked to submit a bond to the Town of Vail since he felt this was inappropriate between two government entities, but was willing to submit a letter of credit. He added that he would be willing to raise to 42" the rail on the parapet wall to the west, but felt that no amount of screening would be adequate to hide the parking from the building to the west. . Peter stated that but that a letter buffer to the west adjacent property. Town Council, and • a bond was standard procedure with everybody, of credit would be fine. He added that some was important for future development on the Peter presented the parking proposal to the they had no problems with the proposal. Pam Hopkins was concerned about having enough landscaping to the north and having it done well. She felt that with the new road so close to the existing road, enough landscaping was very important. Sid Schultz and Diana Donovan agreed. Peggy Osterfoss stated that she did not feel comfortable approving the request until she had more information on the final design of the new ramp and whether or not there would be enough room to landscape the area for adequate screening. J.J. Collins' main concern was with making certain that there would be enough landscaping provided when the Highway Department's design was completed. He felt that there really was no way to plan the landscaping without State Highway Department input. J.J.'s second concern was with screening the lot to the west. He felt that with the present conditions, the proposed parapet wall was adequate, but was concerned that future use of the property to the west would change the • required screening. Peter's concern was that in the future the Town could not go back and ask for more or different screening. J.J. moved to approved the request for the conditional use permit conditional upon Design Review Board review and in light of requirements for landscaping on the north property line, especially as it would be related to the new exit. Also required would be a letter of credit from the applicant. The motion was seconded by Pam Hopkins and the vote for approval was 5 -0. 4. A request for a side setback variance in order to construct a residence on Parcel B, a resubdivision of Lots 14 and 17, Block 7, Vail Village First Filing. Applicants: Mr. and Mrs. Michael Tennenbaum Rick Pylman showed site plans and explained that the applicant was requesting a 10 foot variance from the 15 foot side setback requirement for a lot which had recently been created by the applicant. Rick stated that the applicants also owned the property to the east (Parcel A) and were willing to restrict development on Parcel A to a distance of 25 feet from the property line by use of a deed restriction or covenants. Rick explained that the staff requested that this area be left as . undisturbed open space, but the applicants declined to leave this buffer undisturbed. Rick also stated that the side setback area requested for encroachment contained several fairly significant natural features, including two large spruce trees. The staff recommendation was for denial of the side setback variance because they felt there was no physical hardship driving the side setback encroachment and felt it would be a grant of special privilege. Jay Peterson, representing the applicants, stated that the applicants could have achieved the requested setbacks if they had requested a special development district, but had preferred to go through a subdivision process instead. They felt that any problems could be achieved through the variance procedure. He felt the integrity of the setbacks was being maintained. J.J. Collins stated that he did not see why a building could not be designed in such a way that it remained within the setbacks and did not destroy large trees. Jay replied that this was the area in which to place the house to take advantage of the views. J.J. pointed out that the applicant had a clear lot on which to build and plenty of room. Jay replied that when the trade -offs became too great, they decided to ask for a variance. He added . that hundreds of hours were spent on various schemes on all three sites. Peggy asked if there was any interest in protecting the two evergreen trees that would be lost. Jay replied that they were already spending a lot of money on landscaping. Peggy said J.J. did a good job of expressing her views. She felt that she would work with the proposal if the lost landscaping would be replaced. Jay stated that a landscaped buffer could be a condition of approval. Kurt Cegerberg stated that they were trying to bring landscaping into the building area and attention would be paid to bring landscaping into the buffer area. Diana felt it was too bad that the applicant first created the lot and then could not design a house to fit the lot. Jay replied that he could have asked for a special development distict and gotten rid of the property line and kept within the interity of the zone code and received approval. He added that he would rather use the variance procedure as long as he could keep the integrity of the zone code. Sid shared a lot of the feelings the other members stated. He wished it hadn't gotten to this state, but felt if there was a 30' buffer between the houses, it would preserve the distance factor. He added that he did not feel driven to preserve the . rock outcropping. Pam felt that there was no hardship on which to base the granting of a variance. Jay replied that any time the PEC is given a variance, they look at it on a site by site basis, that each project stands alone. Jim Viele agreed with Jay with respect to the proces. He added that if there is no objective judgement involved, there would be no variance procedure. He stated that in the overall view, the purpose of the setbacks is to maintain the distance of separation between dwellings. He wondered if the project would be a better one if it conformed to the setback regulations and added that he would rather see the house where is was proposed to be rather than take out additional trees. J.J. asked why the house was sited where it was on Parcel A to the west, and Kurt replied that they were trying to pick up views of Gore Range and down valley and that the dwelling was broken up to help to reduce the massiveness of the project. J.J. stated that on Parcel B he saw plenty of room within the required setbacks. 0 Curt said he could not argue with the fact that one can fit something on the lot, but the trees were a major concern. Jay added that on any given site one can build without going into setback areas, but it may make an uninteresting town. J.J. pointed out that each time he had seen the PEC challenge an architect, the architect had been able to come up with a plan within the setbacks. He repeated the fact that the architect in this case had a clean piece of property. Jay answered that they had voluntarily torn down the existing structure and should be given latitude to build, that they were being penalized for making a clean site. Viele spoke in favor of the proposal as long as the buffer would remain. Jay answered that there would be a deed restriction that only the Town of Vail could remove the buffer. Pam Hopkins pointed out that another owner could hire Jay to ask to remove the buffer. She added that the PEC was going through this process because Parcel A had to be a minimum site. Jay said the purpose of the subdivision was to stop from having two old homes being added onto. He added that they knew they might have to ask for variances when they planned the subdivision. Peter Patten felt that the natural features should be preserved within the 15 foot setback area and added that this was a self created hardship. Jim Viele moved to approve the variance with the findings that 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 the zone code. He specified that particular attention be paid by the DRB of landscaping planned to be in the 30 foot buffer. Sid seconded the motion and the vote was 4 in favor and 2 (JJ and Pam) against. - ~ 5. A request for front, side, rear and stream setback variances, a site coverage variance, a gross residential floor area variance and a variance from required landscaping in order to construct additions on Parcels A and B, Lot 3, Block 1, Vail Village First Filing Applicant: Jerome A. Lewis, Downing Street Foundation Betsy Rosolack presented the proposal, stating that the applicants wanted to build two 2 -car garages and additional square footage allowed under Ordinance 4 of 1985. The staff recommendation was for denial as it was felt the additions could be constructed within the setback areas. Tom Briner, one of the architects on the project, spoke in favor of the project and Dan Rickli, another architect, explained that there seemed to be a discrepancy in the amount • of square footage that they were adding. Jerry Lewis and John Kennerly, applicants, also spoke in favor of the project. Rickli felt that garages should not be counted as site coverage if they were not counted as GRFA. He also proposed eliminating 4 parking spaces and decreasing the curb cuts from 4 to 3. Jim Viele asked Betsy if the staff had had time to review the new proposal, and she replied that they had not. Craig Snowdon, architect representing the adjacent neighbors to the west, Steve Berkowitz, read a letter from Berkowitz objecting to the encroachments, stating that views would be negatively impacted. J.J. felt it was difficult to consider the proposal with a discrepancy in statistics. Peggy Osterfoss agreed and also felt concern for Berkowitz's views. Rickli disagreed that the additions would impact the views from the Berkowitz property. Peggy added that the burying of the garage was a step in the right direction, but she stated that she would like to see fewer than 3 road cuts with more landscaping instead of asphalt. Diana agreed and added that her main concern was the stream setback. Sid's biggest concern was site coverage. He also felt there was too much asphalt. Briner mentioned that this was a DRB issue. Pam Hopkins abstained from comment because her firm was . working on the Berkowitz proposal. Jim Viele stated that when a proposal contains so many variance requests, it is a good indication that too much is being placed on the site. Jerry Lewis asked if he could table and Peter answered that the item could be tabled until 4/27 if the applicant could get revised figures and drawings into the Community Development Departmant by Wednesday morning, the 22nd. Lewis requested to table to 4/27. Diana moved and Sid seconded to table the request until April 27. The vote was 5 -0 -1 (Pam abstained from voting.) 6. A request to amend special Development District No. 6, Vail Village inn. Tom Braun presented the amendment request and stated the staff recommended denial, citing the need for additional parking, assurances the Ski Museum would be relocated, and the need for accommodation units. Jay Peterson, representing the applicant, reminded the board that twice the Vail Village Inn complex had submitted phased projects, but the potential developers could not fund the . projects. Now Joe Staufer will develop the new phases himself. Jay explained the valet parking and stated that it was a temporary measure until the next phase could be constructed. He stated that it was not economically feasible for Mr. Staufer to construct additional parking with this phase. • Jay stated that the applicant was willing to restrict the dwelling units per the staff recommendation. Regarding the Ski Museum, Jay stated that 4,000 square feet of building could be given to the Town to use free of charge for any use the Town would want. Pam asked if valet parking was planned for the commercial area, and Jay replied that it was not. Joe Staufer stated that he had 30 - 50 parking spaces that are always empty. He added that the Sonnenalp, Plaza, and Bell Tower had all expanded and none had added any parking. Jay then pointed out that there were no large projects being constructed at this time which were not phased. Pam agreed with the parking, and felt that perhaps more locals would be using this parking lot. Sid also did not have any problem with the parking and felt that to receive the 4,000 square feet of space in the building was better for the Town than for the Town to receive $15,000 to relocate the Ski Museum. He did feel that the new residential units should be controlled for public use. Diana felt the units needed to be available for rental. She felt that the Museum relocation must be worked out and must be a part of this amendment. Joe Staufer felt that the Town did not gain anything by "kicking the owner out" especially if the owner wanted to be in Vail for two months in the summer. Mr. Staufer suggested that the unit be available for rental and not be the primary residence of the owner. Diana stated that she did not patronize many of the stores in the Vail Village Inn complex because she did not have any place to park. Diana asked for a commitment to finish the building as proposed. However, she still felt that there would be a parking problem. Jay said that for the parking to work, all the phases must be done. Peggy Osterfoss felt that the proposal should include assurance that the developer will relocate the Ski Museum and relandscape because a landscaped area was being removed in the proposal. Jay replied that with the new proposal, the Town of Vail would end up with a large chunk of real estate. He added that the applicant was willing to participate in redoing the intersection. Peggy stated that she did not want to see the landscaping issue lost in the shuffle, and felt the responsibility rested with the developer. More discussion followed concerning parking. Peter pointed out that parking spaces under the condos were controlled by a gate and were under utilized. Tom felt that it was the responsibil- ity of the developer to provide parking on the site. J.J. referred to the memo which indicated a shortfall of 100 spaces. He was told 18% of the spaces were required to be valet and he wondered how the decision was made to have 18% of the spaces be valet. Tom replied that it varied with use. He added that phases I and II contained 22,000 square feet and phase III contained 10,000 square feet with no parking provided. He added that he felt it was the repsponsibility of the developer to provide parking on the site. Joe Stauffer said he would like to be able to pay into the parking fund as did businesses in commercial Core I and II. J.J. suggested that perhaps Staufer could pay the Town for parking at building permit time and the Town could repay Staufer when his parking was complete. The Ski Museum was discussed. Tom stated that at present the amended SDD did not address the needs of the Ski Museum. Jay pointed out that the space offered to the Town was worth $1 Million. J.J. said it seemed like an opportunity for the Town, the space could be sold for a substantial amount of cash. Tom pointed out that one condition was that it be used for the public. Jay stated that they were willing to remove that stipulation. J.J. felt the key issue of the owner /rental question was occu- pancy and this issue was discussed. Also discussed was the deletion of landscaping for parking. Saundra Smith stated that they were willing to remove two parking spaces and place landscaping in place of the spaces. Peter felt to approve the proposed shortfall of parking would be inconsistent. He pointed out that the Westin was not able to do any more construction until the parking structure was finished. He stated that the Plaza and Bell Tower were different, in that they were in a pedestrian area and paid into the parking fund. He pointed out that the proposal under construction was adjacent to the 4 -way stop with vehicle access and must have on -site parking. J.J. discussed the parking figures. Joe Staufer proposed to make the dwelling units be available for rental when they were unoccupied. Sid Schultz moved and J.J. Collins seconded to approve the amendments to SDD 6 as submitted with the following conditioins: 1. The use of the units be restricted to non - primary residence and be part of a rental pool. 2. The applicant shall participate in and not remonstrate against a special improvement district for the intersection of Vail Road and Meadow Drive. . 3. The vote was 5 -1 in favor. Attachment E MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MAY 5, 1987 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, May 5, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Paul Johnston, Mayor Kent Rose, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Gail Wahrlich - Lowenthal Gordon Pierce John Sievin Hermann Staufer TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was a consent agenda for the following items: A. Approval of April 7 and 21, 1987 meetings minutes B. Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1987, second reading, establishing a Town of Vail health insurance trust fund. C. Resolution No. 19, Series of 1987, authorizing the filing of applications with the Dept. of Transportation for financial assistance. Mayor Johnston listed the items in the consent agenda, including reading of the full title of the ordinance. There was no discussion by Council or the public. Hermann Staufer made a motion to approve the items, which was seconded by Kent Rose. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7 -0. The second item was Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1987, first reading, authorizing the issuance of Town of Vail, West Vail Local Improvement District No. 1, special assessment bonds. The full title was read by Mayor Johnston. Charlie Wick gave brief background information on the issue. Mayor Johnston stated that there had been a discussion that afternoon at the Work Session with a representative from Kirchner - Moore regarding the state of the market. There was no discussion by the public or Council. A motion to approve the ordinance on first reading was made by Gordon Pierce and seconded by Kent Rose. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7 -0. Gordon Pierce had to leave the meeting at this time. The third item for discussion was Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1987, first reading, amending SOD No. 6 (Vail Village Inn) and requesting approval to phase the construction of the remaining phases of the project. Mayor Johnston read the full title. Tom Braun explained the history of SOD No. 6, what was requested of the Council that evening, and reasons why the staff recommended denial. Jay Peterson, representing the applicant, Vail Village Inn, addressed the issues in question and gave reasons why the ordinance should be approved. After some discussion by Council, Ron Phillips made comments on some of Jay's remarks, to which Jay responded. Jim Viele, Rod Slifer and Pepi Gramshammer stated they were in favor of the project and explained why. After more discussion by Council, Gail Wahrlich - Lowenthal made a motion to approve the ordinance with the following conditions: 1. Include language to the effect the Town be able to subdivide the 4,000 square feet portion of this phase given to the Town. 2. Joe Staufer reimburse the Town of Vail for improvements /move of the Ski Museum, up to $75,000 with the completion of Phase V. 3. Change required number of units from 175 to 148 after this phase. 4. In the event there is any future renovation or building, Joe Staufer would have to provide on -site parking compatible with the Town of Vail code requirements. r •' 5. The use restrictions of any condominium units would be as per the restrictions in effect at the time. Lric Affeldt seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6 -0. Next on the agenda was an appeal of the Planning and Environmental Commission's decision to approve a side setback variance for the Tennenbaum residence. Kent Rose had questions concerning the appeal, which Rick Pylman answered. Rick gave background information on the issue, discussed the criteria used to review the variance request and why the staff recommended denial. There was some discussion by Council, and Kurt Segerberg answered questions. After more discussion, Kent Rose made a motion to uphold the PEC decision to approve the variance request, and John Slevin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6 -0. The fifth item was the Vail Transportation and Parking Task Force interim report. Ron Phillips stated the report had been discussed in detail at the afternoon Work Session and briefly explained what the report covered. Kent Rose then made a motion to support the recommendations of the Task Force as stated in the April 28, 1987 memorandum, which Hermann Staufer seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6 -0. Under Citizen Participation, Rod Slifer asked that the construction fences in the Village be moved back as soon as possible. Ron Phillips stated he had only one item for the Town Manager's report. He noted .there was an article in the magazine Bus Ride which was very positive about the Town transportation system. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman 0 i -2- Attachment F MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MAY 19, 1987 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, May 19, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Paul Johnston, Mayor Kent Rose, Mayor Pro Tem Gail Wahrlich - Lowenthal Gordon Pierce John Slevin Hermann Staufer MEMBERS ABSENT: Eric Affeldt TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1987, first reading, .adopting the 1987 Edition of the Uniform Electric Code by reference. The entire title of the ordinance was read by Mayor Johnston. Gary Murrain explained the regulatory changes involved through this ordinance, and Larry Eskwith explained that second reading on this ordinance would occur June 16, 1987, in order to comply with publication notice of a public hearing and timely notice to the public. Gail Wahrlich- Lowenthal made a motion to approve the ordinance, and Gordon Pierce seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6 -0. The next item Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1987, second reading, an ordinance authorizing the issuance of Town of Vail, Colorado, West Vail Local Improvement District No. 1, special assessments bonds, dated June 1, 1987, in the aggregate principal amount of $525,000, for the purpose of paying a portion of the cost of constructing and installing improvements therein; prescribing the form of the bonds; providing for the payment of the bonds and the interest thereon; and making provision for other matters relating thereto. Mayor Johnston read the full title of the ordinance. Charlie Wick pointed out that the Per Annum Interest Rates and the Maximum Net Effective Interest Rate, of 8.25% had been set, as well as a re- numbering of numerical sections throughout the ordinance. Kent Rose made a motion to approve this ordinance, and John Slevin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6 -0. The third item was Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1987, second reading, an ordinance isamending Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1985, to provide for the amendment of the approved development plan for a Special Development District No. 6; adopting an amended development plan for Phase IV of Special Development District No. 6; eliminating certain requirements relating to the distance between buildings for Phase IV of Special District No. 6; changing height requirement for Phase IV of Special District No. 6; changing the allowable density and modifying the building bulk standards for Phase IV of Special District No. 6; and setting forth details in regard thereto. The full title of the ordinance was read by Mayor Johnston. Jay Peterson represented the applicant, and along with Peter Patten, explained changes from the first reading of this ordinance. John Slevin made a motion to approve the ordinance, with the outlined changes, and this motion was seconded by Kent Rose. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5 -0, with Gordon Pierce abstaining from the vote. The next item of business, an appeal of variances for the Jerome Lewis residence, was withdrawn. There was no Citizen Participation. Ron Phillips included the following information in the Town Manager's report: Economic Research Associates have been appointed to conduct the Congress Hall Study; B &B Excavating had been awarded the West Vail Improvement District street contract; the sign lights at the four -way will be replaced through Jim Morter at no additional Attachment G From: Samuel S Griffin III To: Jonathan Spence Subject: For Inclusion in PEC Application PEC140014 Date: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 4:26:01 PM To Whom It May Concern, My name is Samuel S. Griffin, III. My wife Judy and I purchased our unit in Village Inn Plaza Phase V in 2013. Since that time we have become familiar with the issues before the Town Council related to PEC140014 submitted by the Village Inn Plaza Phase V Condominium Association. We are strongly in favor and respectfully ask that the ordinance be amended as requested. Specifically, amending the ordinance will add clarity where there is none; obviate issues of wrongful enforcement; and, eliminate the possible cloud on title resulting in lower values. Based on historical review of the policy behind the ordinance, presupposing the ordinance's applicability to Phase V (redevelopment) in the first place, there is no longer the need for the ten (10) hotel accommodations Phase V could provide. The ordinance is obsolete. In light of the above, it is our hope the Town Council recognizes the efficacy in approving the amendment as requested, allowing all of us to avoid the cost of further disagreement. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you should have any questions or comments as to our position. Thank you for your consideration Best regards, Sam Griffin Samuel S. Griffin 111 Griffin & Matthews 1155 Dairy Ashford, Suite 300 Houston, Texas 77019 281 - 810 -1124 —phone 281-810-1641—fox sariffin (a)arifmatlaw.com Please take a moment to visit our website at www.erifmatlaw.com To comply with IRS regulations, we advise you that any discussion of Federal tax issues in this e -mail was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used by you (i) to avoid penalties imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) to promote, market or recommend to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. This communication may be protected by the attorney /client privilege and may contain confidential information intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Griffin & Matthews. Any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this e -mail without consent of the originator is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e -mail in error, please notify Melissa Niles by telephone at 281.810.1124. If you are not one of the addressees on this e -mail, the information contained in this e -mail is not intended for you, and please delete this e -mail immediately. Attachment H From: Monika Oberlohr To: Jonathan Spence Subject: PEC 140014 Date: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 8:26:04 AM Dear Mr. Spence: We are writing to endorse the application (docket number PEC140014) submitted by the Village Inn Plaza Phase V Condominium Association and are strongly in favor of amending the Ordinance. As the current owners of unit 308/309 at the Vail Village Inn Phase V, we would like to express our concern regarding the enforcement of any occupancy restriction on our property. In addition to the limitations this will impose on our personal use of this unit, we strongly urge you to consider the potential widespread implications this action could have on Vail's general real estate market. We want to convey our most urgent consent to and support for the letters written by Messrs. Bruckmann, Liebhaber and Cady on behalf of the above application. We hope that the Town will amend the ordinance as requested. Thank you, Monika and Konrad Oberlohr Attachment I From: Steve Cady To: Jonathan Spence Cc: Sara Cady Subject: SDD -6 Supporting Documents Date: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 10:31:46 PM Jonathan- Please find the following information for your and the PEC staff's review with regards to docket number (PEC140014). We are writing in support of the application to remove the code 17.26.075 13 -7 -8 ) language from the SDD6 Ordinance relating to Vail Village Inn Phase V. My wife, and I own unit number 305, held under an LLC by the name of Potamus Bean. We have owned our unit since May 2, 2011 and we had a seven (7) month escrow to allow us to do due diligence in regards to the property, the people, and the Rules /Declarations. There were a few points in regards to the Declarations (one mainly was the Residential Occupancy Restriction) that we had questions on so we raised them with the HOA (our discussions specifically with Richard Liebhaber and Jonathan Stauffer). We were told by Jonathan that "we've never enforced it " .... and "we have no intention of doing so ". We own certain real estate investments as "investments" and prefer to enjoy them during periods that accommodate our family (such as summervacation, spring break, and Christmas /New Year's time). We would never have bought our unit had we not been insured by Jonathan Stauffer that this restriction would never be enforced. Furthermore, during a recent Annual Meeting for the building in December 2012, Stauffer voted in favor of removing the Residential Occupancy Restriction. Over the course of time, and in meeting more owners in the building, we came to find out that perhaps the "Occupancy Restriction" only applied to units (in buildings) that were converted from hotel unit (or accommodation or lodge unit) to condominiums. In fact, approximately one week after closing on our unit, we were served with a lawsuit from a tenant in the building (La Bottega) and the Town of Vail was actually joined as a party to that case (although they chose not to participate and agreed to be bound by the outcome). The Town did not raise any question about compliance with the "Residential Restriction" despite allegations in the complaint that a numbers of owners were not in compliance. Since we have been owners, and since we have had a number of issues arise with regards to our ownership rights, we have engaged counsel to assist us with matters that have arisen, and may arise in the future. They have mentioned to us that the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act was adopted in 1992 as a comprehensive framework for common interest communities. Due to the breadth and specificity of this act, we have been advised that it arguably preempts Vail Ordinances imposing penalties for any violation of the "condominium conversion ordinance" as only the HOA may impose fines and then only upon compliance with due process rules adopted by the Association. There has been some discussion that this "Occupancy Restriction" really doesn't affect ownership of real estate property. In fact, this restriction is a definite cloud on our title, affecting value and the ability to sell should we be so inclined. In addition, from the time that this "restriction" was put into place, the need to have this building's units in a rental pool, to accommodate visitors to Vail, has become inconsequential with the addition of the wealth of hotel rooms provided by the Ritz Carlton, the Four Seasons, and the Sebastian to name a few. I hope that you, the PEC, and the TOV will consider amending SDD -6 to eliminate the Residential Occupancy Restriction so that we can free our title, own our units in a fee simple fashion, and make moot a point of contention within the building. Thank you, Sara & Steve Cady Attachment J From: Richard Liebhaber To: Jonathan Spence Subject: For Inclusion in PEC Application PEC140014 Date: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 9:06:05 AM To Whom It May Concern, I am writing in support of application PEC140014 submitted by the Village Inn Plaza Phase V Condominium Association and in support of amending the Ordinance as requested. My name is Richard Liebhaber, and I am the current owner of Unit 11 at Village Inn Plaza Phase V. I have owned it since 2003, but my family originally purchased it in 1989 from Josef Staufer, the developer. My family and I are the first and only owners of the unit. In 1989, when my family determined that we were interested in the unit, before purchasing we were provided with an unexecuted, draft version of the Declarations by Mr. Staufer, wherein we learned of the so- called "occupancy restriction ". My Father then met with Staufer, telling him that the unit was of interest to us, but my family would not purchase it if the restrictions were valid or enforceable. Staufer told us they were not, that they were just something the town forced him to include in the Declarations, and not to worry about them. Based on those representations and assurances by Staufer, my family purchased the unit and has used it according to that understanding. Now, after 25 years have passed (and after having never required the administration or enforcement despite itself being an owner), the Town threatens enforcement of an Ordinance (notably, neither the Declarations nor the Code) against the owners, prompted by a complaint filed by Staufer's attorney. Staufer's (as well as the Town's) actions are more so confusing because both voted, as owners (the Town owns Unit 2 in Phase V), to remove the occupancy restrictions from the Declarations at the Association's 2012 Annual Meeting. >From its' creation in 1988 to 2011 (with an exclusion of a short gap after he sold the Village Inn Plaza to Waldir Prado), Staufer Commercial continuously served as the Association's property manager and had full knowledge of how the Units were being used during that period without raising a complaint. In addition, for almost the entire 25 years of the Association's existence, a Staufer has served as a Director of the Association. When a Staufer Commercial member was not on the Board, a Town representative was. However, until 2012 (which was after Staufer's tenant sued the Association and the residential owners and many of us defended ourselves) no one even once ever mentioned a violation of the occupancy restrictions, let alone made complaints to the Association that any owners were in violation. To make this even more convoluted, the Town itself provided a letter in 2010 indicating the Code section referred to in the Declarations (17 -26 -075, now re- codified as 13 -7 -8) does not apply to Phase V, because Phase V is not a condominium conversion. In the recent litigation, the matter of the occupancy restrictions was raised by Staufer's tenant, and the Town, with full knowledge, opted out of the litigation, agreeing to be bound by the results. Both the Association and the residential owners argued that the occupancy restrictions were not valid, enforceable or even legal. Therefore, the matter was considered settled when the Town remained silent and agreed to be bound. After much legal research has been conducted on this subject by Association and personal counsel (during the litigation and since), it is also evident to me that the Town's Ordinance is in conflict with the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (CCIOA), an over - arching, uniform legislation that supersedes local Ordinances. In this instance, the Town's penalty not only does not follow the required due process for fines orfining structure, but the Ordinance itself is also discriminatory on its face. It is also likely that this Ordinance is in violation of Federal anti - discrimination laws, and, now that the Town has clouded the titles of all our properties (arguably calling into question the permissible use of Staufer's and the Town's units, too), it has become necessary to seek the removal of that cloud. Hence, the Association has submitted an Ordinance amendment application to amicably achieve that goal. In addition, given the number of residential units (10 in total) at Phase V, the history of no enforcement and the changed circumstances within the Town, it is in the best interests of (and the easiest course for) the Town to amend the Ordinance. Based on the history and periodic re- writing of the Ordinance itself, there is a track record of altering the requirements imposed within the SDD, and it is not unwarranted to once again change them now at the Association's request. And, due to the increased number of units now in the marketplace as a result of construction within the Town's borders over the past 25 years, the purpose of and need for the Ordinance is entirely obviated and mooted. It is, therefore, time for the Town to do away with this anachronistic Ordinance altogether. I am hopeful that the Town will resolve this matter now, before it must go any further. Sincerely, Richard Liebhaber Attachment K From: DPKB To: Jonathan Spence Subject: PEC 140014 Date: Monday, June 16, 2014 3:16:19 PM Dear Mr Spence , I am writing in support of the above application to remove the code 17.26.075 ( 13 -7 -8 ) language from the SDD6 Ordinance relating to Phase V of the Development. In 1999 after many years of renting property in Vail, I decided to purchase a property in Vail. I began the purchase process of a condominium in the Village Inn Plaza Phase V. I came across the 17.26.075 code wording included in the Declaration for the condominium association. These restrictions worried me as they put many restrictions on my personal use of the property. Because of this worry I contacted the Town Attorney, Tom Morehead, and was told by him over the phone that I did not need to worry about this code as the Town had never enforced this code and would not do so for fear that it might be ruled invalid if it was put before a court of law. Minutes after hanging up I called him back to ask if he would mind putting that information in writing and he said he could not do that, but he assured me that I would not need to worry about that code being enforced against me. For ten years I relied on the verbal reply from the Town Attorney and did not hear anything about the use restriction contained in our Declaration. In 2009 I asked our Association to enforce the midnight closing rule, contained in our Declaration, against La Bottega who had become a very popular late night spot which created disturbances in the early morning . The then Landlord of La Bottega and Property Manager of our building, Joe Staufer, told me that if I was going to ask that the midnight closing rule be followed then all the owners would have to follow the other rules in the Declaration including the use restriction . As one might expect, this caused me concern as I had nothing in writing from my conversations with Mr Morehead. I began a lengthy correspondence relating to the enforceability of this code in relation to our building. After much research by Bill Gibson of the Town, he wrote to me and gave me the history of why this code was included in our Declaration. Basically he said that in 1987 or so Joe Staufer made an application to the planning department to develop Phase V which at that time included some of Phase IV. As Phase IV was the Village Inn Plaza Hotel it contained hotel units and therefore it was required to include code 17.26.075 in the Declaration of such a development. In the end Mr Staufer decided to develop Phase V and not include any of Phase IV with this development. Having done this it removed the requirement of the Town for this code to be included in the Declaration. All of this information was conveyed to me by an email from Bill Gibson with his statement that this code did not apply to our building. Having received this information from the Town I felt that it was not an issue once again. For 21 years Joe Staufer had told owners, both as an Association Board Member and Property Manager, that the use restriction would not be enforced and there was no need to worry about it. A law suit against the Association and owners was started by Joe Staufer's tenant in 2010 and went on until 2014. Four years after his 2009 threat, in April of 2013, Joe Staufer had his attorney write to the Town and ask them to enforce code 17.26.075 against those in violation in Phase V. At the time it was said around town that Joe Staufer had made this complaint in an effort to have the Association and owners come to a settlement on the law suit his tenant had filed. Months later the court ruling came out in favour of the Association . Unfortunately now there is a cloud over the title of all owners in Phase V , including the Town's unit ,which needs to be resolved one way or the other due to the Towns change of position on the use restriction. Shortly after Joe Staufer's attorney wrote the letter to the Town I was informed by the Town that all the information I received from the Town previously was incorrect and that the use restrictions applied to our building . I have been told that the Town of Vail has never enforced this use restriction against any owner in the Town before. Although not all of my information from the Town was in writing I relied on the information to purchase my units and make use of them. It seems very unjust to me, now after 15 years, for the Town to attempt to restrict my personal use of my property after giving me their word and assurances on several occasions that I could use my property as I wished to do so without personal use restrictions. In the 1980s with the emergence of condominiums many municipalities in the state of Colorado became nervous about what this emergence might do to the character of their towns and in an effort to prevent their towns form changing they introduced laws specific to condominiums . In 1992 the State of Colorado stepped in and made state wide laws in an attempt to protect condominiums from laws that were specific to condominiums and were discriminatory. Within these laws one finds rules that state the following: "In condominiums and cooperatives, no zoning, subdivision, or other real estate use law, ordinance, or regulation may prohibit the condominium or cooperative form of ownership or impose any requirement upon a condominium or cooperative which it would not impose upon a physically identical development under a different form of ownership." I am sorry that the above is so lengthy but to give you a full picture of the events I feel it was necessary. I would kindly ask you to pass this amendment as it would remove much uncertainty about the code 17.26.075 restrictions which have been said to pertain to Phase V within SDD6 and not all similar buildings within SDD6 or similar buildings within the Town of Vail . I am sure at the time of development the Town was right to be concerned about condominiums changing the character of the Town but as time has shown the use restrictions are not necessary as the inventory of accommodation units has increased in the Town and is adequate for the Town's requirement without the inclusion of the small number of units in the Village Inn Plaza Phase V . Thank you very much for your time and I hope you find it appropriate to amend this ordinance to remove the code 17.26.075 or (13 -7 -8) use restrictions. David Bruckmann for Meadow Drive Ventures ( units 17 & 18) Village Inn Plaza Phase V Ad Name: 10297236A Customer: TOWN OF VAIL /PLAN DEPT /COMM Your account number is- 1 OP2P 33 Vail Daily PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF COLORADO } }SS. COUNTY OF EAGLE } I, Don Rogers, do solemnly swear that I am a qualified representative ofthe Vail Daily. That the same Daily newspaper printed, in whole or in part and published in the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, and has a general circulation therein; that said newspaper has been published continuously and uninterruptedly in said County of Eagle for a period of more than fifty -two consecutive weeks next prior to the first publication of the annexed legal notice or advertisement and that said newspaper has published the requested legal notice and advertisement as requested. The Vail Daily is an accepted legal advertising medium, only for jurisdictions operating under Colorado's Home Rule provision. That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was published in the regular and entire issue of every number of said daily newspaper for the period of 1 consecutive insertions; and that the first publication of said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated 6/20/2014 and that the last publication of said notice was dated 6/20/2014 in the issue of said newspaper. In witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand this day, 06/30/2014. General Man ager/Publisher/Editor Vail Daily Subscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public in and for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado this day 06/30/2014. � 2m.&& 9. -V-� Pamela J. Schultz, Notary Public My Commission expires: November 1, 2015 �pRY PUe/ ' PAMELA J. SCHULTZ 9�� COt -ARP$ My Commismn Expires 11/0112015 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION June 23, 2014 at 1:00pm TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS / PUBLIC WELCOME 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT 45 minutes 1.A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on a major amendment to Special Devel- opment District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, pursuant to Section 12- 9A -10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to amend the condominium use re- quirements and restrictions for Phase V (structure at the northeast corner of the intersection of Vail Road and East Meadow Drive), located at 100 East Meadow Drive /Parts of Lots M and O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in re- gard thereto. (PEC140014) Applicant: The Village Inn Plaza -Phase V Condo- minium Owners Association, represented by Steve Cady, Vice President Planner: Jonathan Spence ACTION: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 45 minutes 2.A request for the review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to 12 -9C -3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, for a public and quasi - public indoor community facilities (education center), to allow for the construction of the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens Education Center, located 530 South Frontage Road /Unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140005) Applicant: Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, represented by Jack Hunn Planner: Jonathan Spence ACTION: MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 3.A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on the adoption of the Vail Valley Medical Center Master Plan, to establish a comprehensive redevelopment plan for the Vail Valley Medical Center, Lot 10 (Town of Vail parking lot), and US Bank Building, located at 181 and 281 West Mead- ow Drive and 108 South Frontage Road West/ Lots E, F, and 10 Vail Village Filing 2, and Lot D -2, A Resubdivision of Lot D Vail Village Filing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC140011) Applicant: Vail Valley Medical Center, represented by Braun and Associates Planner: George Ruther ACTION: Tabled to July 14, 2014 MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 4.Approval of June 9, 2014 minutes MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: 5.Information Update 6.Adjournment MOTION: SECOND: VOTE: The applications and information about the propos- als are available for public inspection during regu- lar office hours at the Town of Vail Community De- velopment Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project orienta- tion and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Develop- ment Department. Times and order of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be re- lied upon to determine at what time the Planning and Environmental Commission will consider an item. Please call (970) 479 -2138 for additional in- formation. Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24 -hour notification. Please call (970) 479 -2356, Telephone for the Hearing Im- paired, for information. Community Development Department Published June 20, 2014 in the Vail Daily. (10297236) Ad Name: 10255161 A Customer: TOWN OF VAIL /PLAN DEPT /COMM Your account number is- 1 OP2P 33 Vail Daily PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF COLORADO } }SS. COUNTY OF EAGLE } I, Don Rogers, do solemnly swear that I am a qualified representative ofthe Vail Daily. That the same Daily newspaper printed, in whole or in part and published in the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, and has a general circulation therein; that said newspaper has been published continuously and uninterruptedly in said County of Eagle for a period of more than fifty -two consecutive weeks next prior to the first publication of the annexed legal notice or advertisement and that said newspaper has published the requested legal notice and advertisement as requested. The Vail Daily is an accepted legal advertising medium, only for jurisdictions operating under Colorado's Home Rule provision. That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was published in the regular and entire issue of every number of said daily newspaper for the period of 1 consecutive insertions; and that the first publication of said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated 6/6/2014 and that the last publication of said notice was dated 6/6/2014 in the issue of said newspaper. In witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand this day, 06/06/2014. General Man ager/Publisher/Editor Vail Daily Subscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public in and for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado this day 06/06/2014. � 2m.&& 9. -V-� Pamela J. Schultz, Notary Public My Commission expires: November 1, 2015 �pRY PUe/ ' PAMELA J. SCHULTZ 9�� COt -ARP$ My Commismn Expires 11/0112015 THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with section 12 -3 -6, Vail Town Code, on June 23, 2014 at 1:00 pm in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. A work session to discuss the creation of a set of policy options and implementation strategies for the Town Council's consideration on the topic of retail marijuana sales in the Town of Vail. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on a major amendment to Special Devel- opment District No. 6, Vail Village Inn, pursuant to Section 12- 9A -10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to amend the condominium use re- quirements and restrictions for Phase V (structure at the northeast corner of the intersection of Vail Road and East Meadow Drive), located at 100 East Meadow Drive /Parts of Lots M and O, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in re- gard thereto. (PEC140014) Applicant: The Village Inn Plaza -Phase V Condo- minium Owners Association, represented by Steve Cady, Vice President Planner: Jonathan Spence The applications and information about the propos- als are available for public inspection during office hours at the Town of Vail Community Develop- ment Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend site visits. Please call 970 - 479 -2138 for additional information. Sign language interpretation is available upon re- quest, with 24 -hour notification. Please call 970 - 479 -2356, Telephone for the Hearing Im- paired, for information. Published June 6, 2014 in the Vail Daily. (10255161)