HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-0711 PECTOWN OF VAIL'
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
July 11, 2016, 1:00 PM
Vail Town Council Chambers
75 S. Frontage Road -Vail, Colorado, 81657
Call to Order
Members Present: Chairman Rediker, Brian Gillette, John Ryan Lockman, Henry
Pratt, Ludwig Kurz and Brian Stockmar
Absent: Kirk Hansen
A request for final review of a Development Plan, pursuant to Section 12-61-11, Vail
Town Code, to allow for the future development of Employee Housing Units on the
Chamonix parcel located at 2310 Chamonix Road, Parcel B, Resubdivision of Tract
D, Vail Das Schone Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC150019) - 5 Min.
Applicant: Town of Vail Community Development Department
Planner: George Ruther
Action: Continue to Sept 12, 2016
Motion: Gillette Second: Kurz Vote: 6-0-0
A request for the review of a Conditional Use Permit for the Chabad Jewish Center,
pursuant to Section 12-7H-4, Conditional Uses; Second Floor and Above, in
accordance with the provisions of Section 12-16-4, Hearing, Vail Town Code, to
allow for a religious institution, located at 450 East Lionshead Circle (Treetops)/Lot
6, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC16-0026) — 45 Min.
Applicant: Chabad Jewish Center, represented by Michael Hazard, AIA
Planner: Matt Panfil
Action: Approve, with Conditions
Motion: Kurz Second: Lockman Vote: 6-0-0
Conditions:
1. This Conditional Use Permit shall lapse and become void if a building
permit is not obtained and diligently pursued toward completion or the
approved use has not commenced within two (2) years from the date of
approval. Any conditional use which is discontinued for a period of two (2)
years, regardless of any intent to resume operation, shall not be resumed
thereafter; any future use of the site or structures thereon shall conform to
the provisions of Title 12, Vail Town Code.
2. The applicant shall instruct all of its employees to inform delivery drivers,
caterers, and other people making deliveries to the Chabad Jewish Center
to use the on-site loading dock or the designated courier delivery zone on
the north side of East Lionshead Circle, near the east end of the Lionshead
parking structure and not to use the Lionshead Circle transit stops or other
unauthorized locations. The applicant shall be responsible for ensuring
that people making deliveries to the Chabad Jewish Center adhere to these
requirements and the adopted Lionshead Loading and Delivery Plan
(Attachment D), and as updated on the Town of Vail website.
3. Failure of the applicant to adhere to these conditions of approval may
require review of this Conditional Use Permit, including a public hearing by
the Planning and Environmental Commission, and may result in revocation
of this permit.
Matt Panfil presented the project details and acknowledged a letter received for
public record.
Gillette — Asked for clarification on parking requirements and history of parking at
the structure.
Pratt — Asked if the HOA has signed off for the use proposed.
Panfil — Yes.
Kurz — Asked the present location of the Vail Centre.
Panfil — Avon.
Kurz — Asked what deliveries to the proposed use are expected.
Panfil — Will let the applicant address that in their presentation, but anticipates small
deliveries for office supplies, etc.
Lockman — Asked for clarification regarding the previous fee in lieu paid for parking.
Michael Hazard presented on behalf of the applicant.
Stockmar — Asked to clarify whether there are anticipated modifications to the
exterior.
Hazard — No exterior modifications are proposed at this time. If there are at a later
date they would seek appropriate Town approvals.
Rediker — Is there a congregation associated with the use and what are the logistics
of the operation?
Rabbi Mintz - Clarified delivery and use logistics and anticipated hours of operation.
Rediker opened public comment. No public comment.
Stockmar — In favor of the application as presented.
Gillette — Concurs with staff analysis.
Pratt — Not in complete agreement with the parking analysis. He feels that there
may be more parking demand than anticipated by the applicant, but he is OK with
the application.
Kurz — Concurs with Commissioner Pratt.
Lockman — Concurs with staff analysis.
Rediker — Concurs with staff analysis.
Kurz incorporated the findings as set forth in the staff memo into his motion for
approval.
4. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a Prescribed
Regulations Amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town
Code, to amend Section 12-15-3, Definition, Calculations, and Exclusions, Vail
Town Code, concerning the definition of Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) and
setting forth details in regard thereto (PEC16-0024). 60 Min.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Chris Neubecker
Action: Continue to July 25, 2016
Motion: Stockmar Second: Kurz Vote: 6-0-0
Approval of Minutes
June 27, 2016 PEC Meeting Results
Action: Table to July 25, 2016
Motion: Kurz Second: Lockman Vote: 5-0-1 (Rediker
Abstained)
Informational Update — Nonconformities
Jonathan Spence presented an informational presentation pertaining to legal
nonconforming uses and structures.
Discussion among the Planning and Environmental Commission and staff included
topics such as, nonconforming density and the effect of previously approved annexations
and down zonings, time limitations for the Town to enforce nonconforming situations, at
which scale solutions to nonconformity issues should be applied, conflicts between the
Comprehensive Plan and zoning classifications, the inability of a property to access
available GRFA when there are nonconforming densities or uses, the potential to allow
multi -family residential as a conditional use within the Primary Secondary (P/S) zoning
district, and grandfathering densities that were existing prior to annexation.
7. Adjournment
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public
inspection during regular office hours at the Town of Vail Community
Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to
attend the project orientation and the site visits that precede the public
hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. 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 48-hour notification.
Please call (970) 479-2356, Telecommunication Device for the Deaf (TDD), for
information.
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
TOWN Of VAIO July 11, 2016, 1:00 PM
Vail Town Council Chambers
75 S. Frontage Road -Vail, Colorado, 81657
Call to Order
2. A request for final review of a Development Plan, pursuant to Section 12-61-11, Vail 5 Min.
Town Code, to allow for the future development of Employee Housing Units on the
Chamonix parcel located at 2310 Chamonix Road, Parcel B, Resubdivision of Tract D,
Vail Das Schone Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC150019)
Applicant Town of Vail
Planner: George Ruther
3. A request for the review of a Conditional Use Permit for the Chabad Jewish Center, 30 Min.
pursuant to Section 12-7H-4, Conditional Uses; Second Floor and Above, in
accordance with the provisions of Section 12-16-4, Hearing, Vail Town Code, to allow
for a religious institution, located at 450 East Lionshead Circle (Treetops)/Lot 6, Block
1, Vail Lionshead Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0026)
ApplicantChabad Jewish Center, represented by Michael Hazard, AIA
Planner: Matt Panfil
4. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a Prescribed Regulations 5 Min.
Amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to amend
Section 12-15-3, Definition, Calculations, and Exclusions, Vail Town Code concerning
the definition of Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) and setting forth details in regard
thereto (PEC16-0024).
Applicant Town of Vail
Planner: Chris Neubecker
5. Approval of Minutes
May 9, 2016 PEC Meeting Results
6. Informational Update
PEC Training - Non -Conforming Structures - Jonathan Spence 40 Min.
7. Adjournment
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office
hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited
to attend the project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail
Community Development Department. Times and order of items are appro)amate, 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 48-hour notification. Please call (970) 479-2356, Telecommunication Device for the Deaf (TDD),
for information.
Community Development Department
TOWN OF VA110
VAI LTOWN PLANNINGAND ENVI RONMENTAL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: July 11, 2016
ITEM/TOPIC: A request for final review of a Development Plan, pursuant to Section 12-61-11,
Vail Town Code, to allow for the future development of Employee Housing Units on the Chamonix
parcel located at 2310 Chamonix Road, Parcel B, Resubdivision of Tract D, Vail Das Schone
Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC150019)
ATTACHMENTS:
File Name Description
PEC150019_Chamonix Memo CONTINUED.pdf PEC150019 Chamonix Staff Memo
0
TOWN OF VAIL �
Memorandum
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: July 11, 2016
SUBJECT: A request for final review of a Development Plan, pursuant to Section
12-61-11, Vail Town Code, to allow for the future development of
Employee Housing Units on the Chamonix parcel located at 2310
Chamonix Road, Parcel B, Resubdivision of Tract D, Vail Das Schone
Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC150019) - 5
min.
Applicant: Town of Vail Community Development Department
Planner: George Ruther
I. SUMMARY
This item is not ready for presentation to the Planning and Environmental
Commission.
11. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department requests that this item be continued to
the Planning and Environmental Commission meeting of September 12, 2016.
TOWN OF VA10
VAI LTOWN PLANNINGAND ENVI RONMENTAL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: July 11, 2016
ITEM/TOPIC: A request for the review of a Conditional Use Permit for the Chabad Jewish
Center, pursuant to Section 12-7H-4, Conditional Uses; Second Floor and Above, in accordance
with the provisions of Section 12-16-4, Hearing, Vail Town Code, to allow for a religious institution,
located at 450 East Lionshead Circle (Treetops)/Lot 6, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 1, and
setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0026)
ATTACHMENTS:
File Name
Description
PEC16-0026_Chabad_JeWsh_Center
CUP Memo.pdf
Staff Memo to
PEC
PEC16-0026_Chabad_JeWsh_Center
CUP Vicinity_Map_(Exhibit A).pdf
Vicinity Map
PEC16-0026_Chabad_JeWsh_Center
CUP Plans and_Narrative (Exhibit B).pdf
Floor Plans and
Narrative
PEC16-0026_Chabad_JeWsh_Center
Draft CUP (Exhibit C).pdf
Draft CUP
PEC16-
Lionshead
0026_Chabad_JeWsh_Center
CUP Lionshead_Loading_and_Delivery_Plan_(Exhibit D).pdf
Loading and
Delivery Plan
0) TOWN OF VAIL
Memorandum
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: July 11, 2016
SUBJECT: A request for the review of a Conditional Use Permit for the Chabad
Jewish Center, pursuant to Section 12-7H-4, Conditional Uses; Second
Floor and Above, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-16-4,
Hearing, Vail Town Code, to allow for a religious institution, located at 450
East Lionshead Circle (Treetops) / Lot 6, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 1,
and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0026)
Applicant: Chabad Jewish Center, represented by Michael Hazard, AIA
Planner: Matt Panfil
I. SUMMARY
The applicant, Chabad Jewish Center, represented by Michael Hazard, AIA, is
requesting the review of a Conditional Use Permit for a religious institution,
pursuant to Section 12-7H-4, Conditional Uses; Second Floor and Above, Vail
Town Code, located at 450 East Lionshead Circle.
Based upon Staff's review of the criteria outlined in Section VII of this
memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community
Development Department recommends approval, with conditions, of this
application subject to the findings noted in Section VIII of this memorandum.
II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
The applicant, Chabad Jewish Center, represented by Michael Hazard, AIA, is
requesting review of a Conditional Use Permit application to allow for a religious
institution located at 450 East Lionshead Circle. The applicant is proposing to
locate within the 2,888 square foot second floor (mezzanine) of the Treetops Plaza
building. The space is proposed to include a conference room, library, lounge,
multi-purpose room, office, and children's play area. There are no changes
proposed to the exterior of the building at this time.
The Chabad Jewish Center is operated by two (2) full-time employees and offers
educational programs for adults and children and religious services on a weekly
basis. During a typical weekday the applicant anticipates between two (2) to ten
(10) guests. Saturday morning services, approximately two and one-half (2'/)
hours in length, are currently attended by approximately fifteen (15) people, but the
attendance may grow to as large as thirty (30) people during holidays.
Other events are proposed to include children's programs eight (8) to ten (10)
times a year consisting of approximately five (5) to twelve (12) children. Evening
classes, approximately two (2) hours long, with an average of approximately
twelve (12) people, including employees, are held approximately six (6) times per
year.
There are no parking spaces designate for the Treetops Plaza building. Originally
constructed in 1984, parking was addressed through the adoption of a Special
Parking Assessment impact fee paid by the applicant at that time. Religious
institutions are not specifically listed within Section 12-10-10-A, Parking
Requirements Schedules, Commercial Core Areas, Vail Town Code; therefore,
parking requirements are to be determined by the Planning and Environmental
Commission.
While the applicant has stated that due to their faith, people arrive by foot for the
weekly worship services on Saturday, they calculated an anticipated total demand
of five (5) parking spaces; three (3) parking spaces based on the 2.7 spaces per
1,000 square foot requirement for "Other professional and business offices" and
two (2) spaces per 165 square feet of seating floor area for "theaters, meeting
rooms, conference facilities."
A vicinity map (Attachment A), a project narrative with floor plans (Attachment B),
and a draft Conditional Use Permit (Attachment C) are attached for review.
III. BACKGROUND
In August 1983 the property was rezoned from High Density Multi -Family (HDMF)
to Commercial Core 2 (CC2) zone district. This change was requested in order to
construct the commercial building on top of the residential parking structure on the
Treetops property. In 1984 the Treetops Association requested an exterior
alteration in order to add the retail expansion above the existing parking structure.
In 1999 the property was rezoned to Lionshead Mixed Use 1 District in order to
implement the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. In the Lionshead Mixed
Use 1 District, religious institutions on the second floor and above are conditional
uses.
Town of Vail Page 2
In 2007, a Conditional Use Permit (PEC070031) was issued for use of the building
as a temporary business office for use by Vail Resorts. Most recently, in March
2016, a Conditional Use Permit (PEC16-0006) was approved to allow for the
change of use of an existing building to conference facilities and meeting rooms,
and professional offices. Specific conditions regarding parking and loading were
part of the conditions for approval of the Conditional Use Permit. These conditions
included:
2. Applicant shall include the following statement on its website and within all
conference registration materials:
"The Vail Centre embraces sustainability both in terms of the many programs
it offers and in its behavior as a partner in limiting impacts to the environment.
We have made our home in the pedestrian fabric of Lionshead village and
have partnered with lodging establishments nearby. We encourage you to
enjoy our setting by walking or using Vail's free transit network to join in our
programs. Our Centre has no on-site guest parking, but parking may be
available in the Lionshead Parking Structure directly across the street from
our building. Private passenger drop off is available in the lower level (west
end) of the Lionshead Parking Structure. Please be aware that passenger
drop-off is not available on the facility site nor allowed in the transit area next
to the site. "
Applicant shall submit any proposed revision of this language to the Town of
Vail Community Development Department for review and approval, which
may require an amendment of this Conditional Use Permit.
3. The applicant shall instruct all of its tenants and employees to inform delivery
drivers, caterers, and other people making deliveries to the Vail Centre to use
the on-site loading dock or the designated courier delivery zone on the north
side of East Lionshead Circle, near the east end of the Lionshead parking
structure and not to use the Lionshead Circle transit stops. The applicant shall
be responsible for ensuring that people making deliveries to The Vail Centre
adhere to these requirements and the adopted Lionshead Loading and
Delivery plan (Attachment D), and as updated on the Town of Vail website.
4. Applicant shall install signage at the entrance to the on-site parking structure
informing conference attendees and retail customers of the exclusive use of
the on-site parking by Treetops residents. The sign shall be installed prior to
occupancy of the Vail Centre building, and the applicant shall obtain a
separate sign permit from the Town of Vail prior to the installation of any
signs. The applicant shall be responsible for ensuring that employees,
Town of Vail Page 3
conference attendees and customers of The Vail Centre adhere to these
requirements.
The approval of PEC16-0006 also includes offices as a conditional use on the
second floor. However, the applicant in PEC16-0006, the Vail Centre, has opted
not to utilize the second floor space. Due to the change in occupation of the
second floor, the parking demand is one (1) space less than what was previously
approved under PEC16-0006 (based on the applicant's classification of the
Chabad Jewish Center as both office and meeting rooms).
IV. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS
Staff finds that the following provisions of the Vail Town Code are relevant to the
review of this proposal:
Title 12 — Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code
Chapter 2, Definitions (in part)
RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION: A building or portion of a building used primarily for
public worship by any number of congregations, along with those incidental and
secondary uses such as a dwelling unit for members of the clergy or other
spiritual leaders, office space, meeting rooms, and classrooms for religious
education and community meeting space, but excluding buildings used
exclusively for residential, educational, recreational or other uses not associated
with public worship. Includes churches, chapels, cathedrals, temples, and similar
designations.
Chapter 7, Article E, Lionshead Mixed Use 1 (LMU-1) District (in part)
12-7H-1: PURPOSE.-
The
URPOSE:
The Lionshead mixed use 1 district is intended to provide sites for a mixture of
multiple -family dwellings, lodges, hotels, fractional fee clubs, timeshares, lodge
dwelling units, restaurants, offices, skier services, and commercial
establishments in a clustered, unified development. Lionshead mixed use 1
district, in accordance with the Lionshead redevelopment master plan, is
intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space and other amenities
appropriate to the permitted types of buildings and uses and to maintain the
desirable qualities of the zone district by establishing appropriate site
development standards. This zone district is meant to encourage and provide
incentives for redevelopment in accordance with the Lionshead redevelopment
master plan.
This zone district was specifically developed to provide incentives for properties
Town of Vail Page 4
to redevelop. The ultimate goal of these incentives is to create an economically
vibrant lodging, housing, and commercial core area. The incentives in this zone
district include increases in allowable gross residential floor area, building height,
and density over the previously established zoning in the Lionshead
redevelopment master plan study area. The primary goal of the incentives is to
create economic conditions favorable to inducing private redevelopment
consistent with the Lionshead redevelopment master plan. Additionally, the
incentives are created to help finance public off site improvements adjacent to
redevelopment projects. With any development/redevelopment proposal taking
advantage of the incentives created herein, the following amenities will be
evaluated: streetscape improvements, pedestrian/bicycle access, public plaza
redevelopment, public art, roadway improvements, and similar improvements.
12-7H-4: PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES, SECOND FLOOR AND
ABOVE.-
Religious
BOVE:
Religious institutions.
12-7H-16: PARKING AND LOADING.-
Off
OADING:
Off street parking and loading shall be provided in accordance with chapter 10 of
this title. At least one-half (%) of the required parking shall be located within the
main building or buildings.
Chapter 10, Off Street Parking and Loading (in part)
12-10-10: PARKING REQUIREMENTS SCHEDULES.-
A.
CHEDULES:
A. Schedule A applies to properties within Vail's "commercial core areas" (as
defined on the town of Vail core area parking maps I and 11, incorporated
by reference and available for inspection in the office of the town clerk):
Any use not listed: Parking requirements to be determined by the
planning and environmental commission
12-10-20: SPECIAL REVIEW PROVISIONS.-
Notwithstanding
ROVISIONS:
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 12-10-18 of this chapter, the planning
and environmental commission may approve a reduction to the number of
required spaces specified in section 12-10-10 of this chapter, provided a report
documenting the presence of unique parking characteristics is provided by a
qualified consultant and the following findings are made by the planning and
environmental commission.-
A.
ommission:A. The parking demand will be less than the requirements identified in
section 12-10-10 of this chapter; and
Town of Vail Page 5
B. The probable long term use of the building or structure, based on its
design, will not generate additional parking demand; and
C. The use or activity is part of a demonstrated permanent program
(including, but not limited to, "rideshare "programs, shuttle service, or
staggered work shifts) intended to reduce parking demand that has been
incorporated into the project's final approved development plan, and
D. Proximity or availability of alternative modes of transportation (including,
but not limited to, public transit or shuttle services) is significant and
integral to the nature of the use or business activity.
In reaching a decision, the planning and environmental commission shall
consider survey data submitted by a qualified transportation planning or
engineering consultant. Projects under "special review" are subject to additional
scrutiny by the planning and environmental commission after development plan
approval if it is deemed necessary to verify continued compliance with the above
listed criteria. The maximum allowable reduction in the number of required
spaces shall not exceed twenty five percent (25%) of the total number required
under section 12-10-10 of this chapter.
Chapter 16, Conditional Use Permits (in part)
12-16-1: PURPOSE,-LIMITATIONS.-
In
URPOSE;LIMITATIONS:
In order to provide the flexibility necessary to achieve the objectives of this title,
specified uses are permitted in certain districts subject to the granting of a
conditional use permit. Because of their unusual or special characteristics,
conditional uses require review and evaluation so that they may be located
properly with respect to the purposes of this title and with respect to their effects
on surrounding properties. The review process prescribed in this chapter is
intended to assure compatibility and harmonious development between
conditional uses and surrounding properties and the town at large. Uses listed as
conditional uses in the various districts may be permitted subject to such
conditions and limitations as the town may prescribe to ensure that the location
and operation of the conditional uses will be in accordance with development
objectives of the town and will not be detrimental to other uses or properties.
Where conditions cannot be devised to achieve these objectives, applications for
conditional use permits shall be denied.
12-16-6: CRITERIA, FINDINGS.-
Town
INDINGS:
Town of Vail Page 6
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.-
Relationship
se:
Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of
the town.
2. Effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population,
transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation
facilities, and other public facilities and public facilities needs.
3. Effect upon traffic, with particular reference to congestion,
automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and
control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the
streets and parking areas.
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is
to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in
relation to surrounding uses.
5. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable
to the proposed use.
6. The environmental impact report concerning the proposed use, if
an environmental impact report is required by chapter 12 of 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.
Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan (in part)
1.3 Recommended Actions
Town of Vail Page 7
1.3.1 Development / Redevelopment
• Encourage, facilitate, and provide incentives for the redevelopment
and renovation of existing structures in Lionshead.
1. 3.4 Vehicular Circulation
Restrict the vehicular traffic on East Lionshead Circle to Town of Vail
"in -town" transit, emergency vehicles, and adjacent local property
owners.
2.3 Policy Objectives
2.3.1 Renewal and Redevelopment
• Lionshead can and should be renewed and redeveloped to become a
warmer, more vibrant environment for guests and residents. Lionshead
needs an appealing and coherent identity, a sense of place, a
personality, a purpose, and an improved aesthetic character.
2.3.4 Improved Access and Circulation
• The flow of pedestrian, vehicular, bicycle and mass transit traffic must
be improved within and through Lionshead.
3.9 Parking
3.9.1.2 Parking Demand Generated by Retail/ Commercial Space
The retail base in Lionshead, with a few exceptions, utilizes the Town of
Vail public parking facilities. Through the Town's parking pay -in -lieu
system, retail businesses pay a one-time assessment on a square footage
basis for the parking demand they generate. The pay -in -lieu formula does
not fully adjust for the probability that the parking for many retail
customers is already accommodated in their lodgings.
4.6 Vehicular and Pedestrian Circulation
4.6.3 Modification to East Lionshead Circle
• The overriding goal for East Lionshead Circle is to de-emphasize
vehicular traffic and create a quality, safe, and vibrant pedestrian
corridor.
4.6.3.2 West (Current) Entrance
Town of Vail Page 8
As the eastern connection appears unfeasible, it is recommended
that other measures be undertaken to de-emphasize the current
(west) entrance to East Lionshead Circle as a vehicular portal into
Lionshead. The only traffic entering East Lionshead Circle at this
point should be service vehicles, buses, and local residents.
Signage, road width, and other roadway design modifications
should be utilized to discourage traffic from entering at this point.
These measures are important to reduce conflicts between vehicles
and pedestrians at the crossing from the parking structure and to
reduce the outgoing traffic that competes with the buses for the left -
turn movement onto the South Frontage Road.
4.6.3.3 Main Lionshead Pedestrian Portal
This congested and confused pedestrian portal is the area most in
need of corrective action. It is recommended that vehicular traffic
through this crossing be removed or greatly reduced and that skier
drop-off, local and regional shuttle vans, and service and delivery
vehicles be removed from this location. The area would then be
dedicated to two primary uses: a pedestrian connection between
the parking structure and Lionshead and a transit stop for the Town
of Vail in -town shuttle.
4.7 Loading and Delivery
4.7.1 Properties with Direct Service Access
As a general rule, properties that can provide for their own service and
delivery needs should comply with the following guidelines.-
a.
uidelines:
a. Loading and delivery facilities should be located deep enough into
the property that the estimated peak volume of service vehicles
does not back up into or block the access road or pedestrian areas.
b. Service drives and loading docks must be screened with
landscaping, fencing, retaining walls or other appropriate design
techniques.
c. All reasonable measures shall be taken to prevent noise and
exhaust impacts on adjacent properties.
d. In no case shall a property utilize the public roadway or pedestrian
area to stage service and delivery vehicles.
Town of Vail Page 9
4.8 Parking
Parking is a critical component in a mixed-use resort environment such
as Lionshead, and any efforts to enhance this component should
adhere to the following goals and guidelines:
a. Parking must be sufficient to meet demand. Correctly assessing
parking demand in an environment such as Lionshead is difficult
but extremely important. Overestimating parking demand can be as
damaging as underestimating demand due to the extreme expense
of parking space (especially if structured) in a real estate
environment such as the Vail Valley. Likewise, parking is a large
consumer of ground and should be designed to occupy as little real
estate as possible. In tight margin developments such as mid-range
hotels and locals/employee housing, the expense of parking can be
the deciding factor as to the economic viability of the project. Due to
these attributes of parking, it is important that true demand, or
desired demand, be distinguished from actual usage. For example,
the `free after three" program currently in place for the Town of Vail
parking structures has undoubtedly increased the usage of these
structures during the evening hours (the Lionshead structure filled
in the evening for the first time in 1998). However, there has not
been a corresponding increase in sales tax revenue, which was the
original intent of "free after three" (Note- concrete studies regarding
the utilization of the "free after three" program have not been
conducted and it is strongly recommended that this occur if the
program is to continue). It is hypothesized that a significant portion
of people utilizing the free parking program are in fact employees or
people that would have used transit or other means of access if the
parking were not as readily available. In other words, parking usage
often will rise to fill the available space, but the profile of the user
may not be who the parking was intended for. To be concise, the
parking supply in Lionshead and the Town of Vail needs to not only
meet the demand, it needs to meet the desired demand and should
be structured or programmed in such as way to do so. Parking is
important, but too expensive and land consuming to be provided
without solid reasoning.
c. Parking is only one part of an overall access strategy. Public
parking is very important in bringing guests to Lionshead, but
structured parking is expensive. The cost of structured parking
today ranges from 20, 000 to 30, 000 dollars per space, so other
means of access should be carefully considered first. Possible
alternatives include an enhanced transit system, more convenient
drop-off facilities, a reduction in required parking ratios for certain
Town of Vail Page 10
uses (such as employee and locals housing), off-site and remote
parking, and parking disincentives that discourage driving.
e. Parking requirements should not constitute an unnecessary
disincentive to redevelopment. A thorough review of the current
parking pay -in -lieu code and parking ratio requirements is
recommended. Given the above discussions it is important that
parking requirements accurately meet the true parking demand of
new development and redevelopment. For example, a stated goal
of the master plan is to encourage, facilitate, and provide incentives
for the expansion of ground level retail in Lionshead. While this
expanded retail will likely represent some level of incremental
increase to public parking demand in Lionshead, this demand
needs to be accurately understood so the parking pay -in -lieu fee
does not make the retail expansion economically unfeasible.
9.3 Financing
9.3.1.1 Parking Pay -in -Lieu Relief
The parking regulations require a parking pay -in -lieu fee for parking
that cannot be provided on site. This fee, currently in excess of
$17,000 per required parking space, is a major obstacle to the
redevelopment of buildings in Lionshead. Reduction of the parking
requirement, as well as the fee, should be considered in the
implementation of the master plan. This proposal is particularly
relevant to projects that can demonstrate a negligible impact on
parking generation.
9.3.1.2 Parking Requirement Reduction
The current parking regulations do not take into account the high
volume of pedestrian traffic and use of public transit that occur in Vail.
The regulations are derived from suburban models, not resort
communities, where parking supply is shared by multiple uses. By
increasing the cost of development, high parking requirements for
individual uses in Lionshead may be a disincentive for redevelopment.
V. SITE ANALYSIS
Address:
Legal Description:
Existing Zoning:
Existing Land Use Designation
Mapped Geological Hazards:
450 East Lionshead Circle
Vail Lionshead Filing 1, Block 1, Lot 6
Lionshead Mixed Use 1 (LMU-1) District
Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan
None
Town of Vail Page 11
Standard
Allowed / Required
Existing
Proposed
Site Area
Min. 10,000 sq ft
38,958 sq ft
No Change
Site Coverage
Max. 70%
46%
No Change
Front: 12'
Setbacks
Min. 10'
Side: 19'
No Changes
Side: 12'
Rear: 103'
Creek Setback*
Min. 50'
110'
No Change
Height
71' Average
74' (Residential
No Change
82.5 Max.
Building)
GRFA
N/A
N/A
No Change
Density
43.2 units per acre
32.4 units per acre
No Change
(Existing + 33%)
(29 units)
Landscaping
Min. 20%
42%
No Change
Parking**
19 spaces for
Fee -in -lieu paid;
1 less than PEC 16 -
Treetops 1St and 2nd
No on-site parking
0006 (20 spaces
Floors. (5 specific to
were required)
the second floor)
* Gore Creek is to the south of this lot, within the adjacent Town owned Stream Tract.
All existing and proposed developments on this site are well beyond the required 50'
stream setback.
** Parking demand is based on the applicant's comparison of the proposed religious
institution to a combination of office and conference / meeting room uses. As indicated
in Section III, the Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for
determining parking requirements for any use not listed in Section 12-10-10-A.
VI. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING
Existing Land Use Zoning District
North: Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan General Use
East: Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan Lionshead Mixed Use 1
South: Open Space Natural Area Preservation
West: Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan Lionshead Mixed Use 1
VII. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW CRITERIA
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 the development objectives of the
Town.
Among many of the sections within the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan,
the proposed religious institution is consistent with Section 1.3.1 which states
Town of Vail Page 12
the Town should, "encourage, facilitate, and provide incentives for the
redevelopment and renovation of existing structures in Lionshead." The
proposed religious institution will occupy and bring vitality to a space that has
been vacant for several years.
Due to the arrival of most of the Saturday morning service guests on foot, the
proposed religious institution should also be more pedestrian -oriented than
previously approved uses within the same building, therefore it is consistent
with Section 4.6.3 of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan which states
that, "the overriding goal for East Lionshead Circle is to de-emphasize vehicular
traffic and create a quality, safe, and vibrant pedestrian corridor."
The Community Development Department finds this criterion to be met.
2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population,
transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities,
and other public facilities needs.
The proposed religious institution will have minimal impacts on light and air,
distribution of population, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and
other public facilities needs. This is an existing developed building that has
been vacant for several years since it was last used by Vail Resorts as a
temporary office.
There will likely be some minor impacts from the proposed uses on
transportation facilities, including the demand for parking, guest drop-off, and
transit and deliveries to the building. Although the applicant has indicated that
guests will arrive on foot for Saturday services, it is anticipated that some
people attending classes or weekday guests will drive. For those that drive, the
Lionshead Parking Structure is directly across the street, approximately 300
feet away. On days when the parking structure is at full capacity, this may
result in additional parking on the South Frontage Road or increased use of
public transportation.
Per Section 4.8 of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, "it is important
that true demand, or desired demand, be distinguished from actual usage" and
"parking is important, but too expensive and land consuming to be provided
without solid reasoning." In actual usage, it is anticipated that some guests will
be residing in nearby lodging and be able to access the site as pedestrians or
through public transportation. Based on the applicants anticipated guests
throughout the week, and the pedestrian -oriented Saturday morning services,
the impacts on parking and transit are anticipated to be minimal.
Town of Vail Page 13
No additional parking is proposed with this application. A fee in lieu of parking
was paid for this commercial space when the building was originally
constructed in 1984. The payment of a fee in lieu is consistent with Section 4.8
of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan which states, "public parking is
very important in bringing guests to Lionshead, but structured parking is
expensive."
The Community Development Department finds this criterion to be met.
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 street and parking areas.
According to the applicant, the proposed religious institution anticipates two (2)
to ten (10) visitors on weekdays and between fifteen (15) to thirty (30) visitors
for Saturday morning services. The small amount of weekday visitors and the
applicant's statement that a majority of visitors for Saturday morning services
do not drive to the location should have a minimal effect upon traffic with
reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience,
traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the
street and parking areas.
The proposed conditional use is consistent with Section 4.8 of the Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan which states, "other means of access should be
carefully considered first. Possible alternatives include an enhanced transit
system, more convenient drop-off facilities, a reduction in required parking
ratios for certain uses, off-site and remote parking, and parking disincentives
that discourage driving."
The Community Development Department finds this criterion to be met.
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be
located, including the sale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to
surrounding uses.
The proposed religious institution will have no significant negative impact on the
character of the surrounding area. The proposed use is to be located within an
existing building and will occupy an otherwise underutilized space. No changes
are proposed to the exterior of the building at this time.
The Community Development Department finds this criterion to be met.
5. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to
the proposed use.
Town of Vail Page 14
The applicant's parking calculations (Sheets A2.2 and A2.3) which demonstrate
the minimal difference between the amounts of parking required by the
previously approved Conditional Use Permit for office use compared to the
proposed religious institution on the mezzanine level.
6. The environmental impact report concerning the proposed use, if an
environmental impact report is required by Chapter 12 of this title.
An environmental impact report is not required by Chapter 12.
VIII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section VII of this memorandum
and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development
Department recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission, approve,
with conditions, the Conditional Use Permit, for a religious institution, the Chabad
Jewish Center, PEC 16-0026.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this
Conditional Use Permit request, the Community Development Department
recommends the Planning and Environmental Commission passes the following
motion:
"The Planning and Environmental Commission approves, with conditions, this
request for review of a Conditional Use Permit, pursuant to Section 12-7H-4,
Conditional Uses, Second Floor and Above, Vail Town Code, to allow for a
religious institution, the Chabad Jewish Center, located at 450 East
Lionshead Circle (Treetops) / Lot 6, Block 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 1, and
setting forth details in regard thereto."
Conditions.-
This
onditions:
This Conditional Use Permit shall lapse and become void if a building
permit is not obtained and diligently pursued toward completion or the
approved use has not commenced within two (2) years from the date of
approval. Any conditional use which is discontinued for a period of two (2)
years, regardless of any intent to resume operation, shall not be resumed
thereafter; any future use of the site or structures thereon shall conform to
the provisions of Title 12, Vail Town Code.
2. The applicant shall instruct all of its employees to inform delivery drivers,
caterers, and other people making deliveries to the Chabad Jewish Center
to use the on-site loading dock or the designated courier delivery zone on
the north side of East Lionshead Circle, near the east end of the
Lionshead parking structure and not to use the Lionshead Circle transit
Town of Vail Page 15
stops or other unauthorized locations. The applicant shall be responsible
for ensuring that people making deliveries to the Chabad Jewish Center
adhere to these requirements and the adopted Lionshead Loading and
Delivery Plan (Attachment D), and as updated on the Town of Vail
website.
3. Failure of the applicant to adhere to these conditions of approval may
require review of this Conditional Use Permit, including a public hearing by
the Planning and Environmental Commission, and may result in
revocation of this permit.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this Conditional
Use Permit request, the Community Development Department recommends the
Commission makes the following findings:
"Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section Vll of the Staff
memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated July 11,
2016 and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and
Environmental Commission finds.-
1.
inds:
1. The proposed Conditional Use Permit is in accordance with the purposes
of the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 District;
2. The proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it will be
operated or maintained are not detrimental to the public health, safety, or
welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity;
and
3. The proposed Conditional Use Permit complies with each of the applicable
provisions of Chapter 12-16, Conditional Use Permit, Vail Town Code."
IX. ATTACHMENTS
A. Vicinity Map
B. Project Narrative with Floor Plans
C. Draft Conditional Use Permit
D. Lionshead Loading and Delivery Plan, dated May 11, 2012
Town of Vail Page 16
MICHAEL
HAZARD
ASSOCIATES
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING
The Chabad Vail Center is a small religious institution offering weekly services,
INTERIORS
educational programs and a variety of support services for the adults and
children of the valley's Jewish community as well as tourists.
They are seeking to acquire the 2,888 square foot upper level of the Treetops
Commercial Plaza in the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 (LMU-1) Zone District for use as
a religious institution as allowed as a conditional use (12-71-1-313).
Anticipated Uses and Occupancy:
• The Center will be staffed by Rabbi Mintz and his wife: the only projected
full time occupants of the space.
• As a community resource center they anticipate 2 to 10 unscheduled
visitors on a typical day.
• Weekly worship services, lasting approximately two and a half hours, are
held on Saturday morning averaging roughly 15 people and topping out
at 30 during busier holiday times. In observance of their religious norms the
local community's members will arrive by foot. Similarly, out-of-town guests
attending services will also arrive by foot, bolstered by the likelihood that
many will be staying in nearby lodging.
• Children's educational and social functions with an attendance of 5 to 12,
are typically held down -valley with the exception of 8 to 10 times a year
when these programs will be held at the Center.
• Evening classes, lasting two hours with an average of 12 people, including
employees, will occur approximately 6 times a year.
Space Usage:
As the accompanying plans will illustrate, the space will be divided into
several rooms with the following projected specifics:
• Library/Child's Play (432 SF) area will serve as a research/resource/reading
room for the local community and visitors. As described, the children's
programs are typically slated for down -valley locations. The use is for social
and educational programs. This space is not programmed to be use as a
day -long, child care facility. It will primarily function as a library.
• Office (285 SF) - this will serve as Rabbi Mintz and his wife's base of
operations with desk and file storage in addition to a small table for
informal meetings.
• Conference Room (129 SF - Net seating area/371 SF net floor area) - for
larger meetings, this space will be furnished with a typical conference
table with a likely capacity of 16-20 people.
• Lounge (323 SF net floor area) - this space will double as a reception/
seating area as well as a pre -post function space used by the
P.O. BOX 1068
congregation in conjunctions with services and other functions.
• Multifunction Space (192 SF - net seating area/552 net floor area) - this
VAIL, COLORADO
space will house weekly services and the other planned educational and
81658
social gatherings.
970.949.4958 P
970.376.0066 C
MHA@ VAI L. N ET
Parking:
The existing Treetops Plaza building was constructed in 1984 as an addition to
an existing on -grade parking area. The original building consisted of 2 levels of
parking dedicated to the existing Treetops Condominiums topped with:
Retail 5,545 S.F. 2.3 spaces/1,000 N. S. F. 12.75 spaces
Mezz. Retail level 2,476 S.F. 2.3 spaces/ 1,000 N. S. F. 5.70 spaces
18.45 spaces
The original 1984 approval addressed offsite parking requirements through
adoption of a Special Parking Assessment impact fee totaling $98,962 (see
attached Memo from The Finance Department).
The Chabad Vail Center will be occupying the upper level while The Vail
Center, under its recently approved Conditional Use Permit 160006, will be
occupying the lower level with reception, meeting, conference facilities in
addition to a small bookstore and cafe as outlined below. Under a conditional
use permit, it is the PEC that is tasked with determining appropriate parking
capacities. As a matter of reference to similar parking requirements as set
out by the Town Code, the following table uses parking standards set out in
Art. 12-10-10A counting the Library/Child's Play Area, Office and Lounge as
"Professional Office" Functions (2.7 spaces/1,000 net SF) and the remaining 2
spaces (Conference Rm. & Multi -functional Space) as "Theaters/Conference/
Meeting Facility" (1 space/] 65 SF net seating area):
The Vail Centre:
Retail Bookstore
Cafe
Conference
Meeting Rms.
Chabad Vail Center:
Professional Offices
Conference/Meet'g
1,062 S.F.
2.3 spaces/ 1,000 N. S. F.
2.44 spaces
163 S.F.
1/250 N.S.F. seating; 2 min.
2.00 spaces
1,075 S.F.
1/165 N.S.F. seating; 2 min.
6.52 spaces
537 S.F.
1/165 N.S.F. seating; 2 min.
3.25 spaces
14.21 spaces
1,040 S.F.
2.7 spaces/ 1,000 N. S. F.
2.81 spaces
321 S.F.
1/165 N.S.F. seating; 2 mn
1.95 spaces
4.76 spaces
Total required parking:
18.97 spaces
Using this comparison, the resulting parking impact is actually 1/2 space less
than that calculated for The Vail Centre's anticipated uses.
MICHAEL
HAZARD
ASSOCIATES
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING
INTERIORS
Although The Center's weekly religious services will occur on Saturday
mornings, they are unlikely to interfere with Vail Center's functions save for the
cafe so it is fair to assume a lessened parking impact as a result. P.O. BOX 1068
VAIL, COLORADO
81658
970.949.4958 P
970.376.0066 C
MHA@ VAI L. N ET
MICHAEL
HAZARD
ASSOCIATES
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING
When referencing Art 12-16-6 (Criteria; Findings) of Chapter 16 Conditional Use INTERIORS
Permits the following representations are offered:
1. Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of the
town.
• The Cha bad Vail Center will help invigorate a much underused core
structure with a vital religious, social and educational resource for the
Vail community and visiting tourists.
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.
• Parking impact are expected to be minimal as religious observances
will limit use of vehicles as well as expected pedestrian access by out of
town guests residing in nearby lodging.
• Convenience of abundant public transit and shuttles will further lessen
reliance upon parking facilities.
3. Effect upon traffic, with particular reference to congestion, automotive
and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access,
maneuverability, and removal of snow from the streets and parking areas.
• The Center's Lionshead core location will avail its guests to pedestrian
access and public transportation resulting in greatly lessened impact to
The Town's traffic concerns.
• Proximity to ample public parking will offer solutions to occasional park-
ing demands.
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. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems
applicable to the proposed use.
• As no changes to the building's exterior are anticipated with this appli-
cation, no impact to character is anticipated.
5. The environmental impact report concerning the proposed use, if an envi-
ronmental impact report is required by chapter 12 of this title.
• Not applicable.
Conditional Use Application Inclusions:
• Application Form
• CUP narrative
• Adjacent Property Address List
• Title Documents
• Finance Department Memo Re.: 1984 Parking Assessmnent
• Chabad Vail Proposed Drawings - Shts.: A2.0 -A2.3
• Reference Drawings:
• Existing ILC
• Existing Civil Engineering Site Plan P.O. Box 1068
• Existing Elevations VAIL, COLORADO
81658
970.949.4958 P
970.376.0066 C
MHA@ VAI L. N ET
w tt
dur
m a
w tt
pa J r
m a
? w
a o
O
_ W
Q
J
O
Q
J
W
ox
F
�- -
-
, , } /\\\
�- -
�- -
�- -
$\�(
LD
�- -
�- -
�- -
_
Q
w tt
Ll
Q
oZZ0UJ/�r
-
J Z°
W z
F
/�
\-
------------------ - -
p a u
W N
U) Z
7
F
Ll
v o
oZZ0UJ/�r
J M@
0 a J
l
o~
I
❑OOOOOO❑
-
-
- -
- -
❑O❑
❑OO
❑OOL
❑O❑
------------------ - -
p a u
W N
U) Z
7
F
0
v o
oZZ0UJ/�r
J M@
0 a J
-N-
I
k
n
0
W m
I
Y
N
22«
- Mo
J m
ti
C 9
a o
P
V
C
2• FgF,
am
\\\\Q\\ \\\\\
e. .
j �
n
0
W m
I
Y
N
22«
J
P
e. .
ti ?
r
70
a)
m
U)
U)
ca
cu
O
Q
Q
CU
0
U)
c
O
00O
U
70
a)
a)
L
a)
d
a)
U
D
ca
c
O
O
U
ca
O
ca
0
Q
Q
CU
LL
O
Vii:
a)
cu
U
cn O
L a)
N
O
O
O
U
LU
d
U
a)
Z)
z
E
a)
a
a)
L
U
ca
a)
0
J
-r-
cu
W
O
LO
U
a)
'o
Q
O
cn
N
El
U
O
m
0)
LL
a)
0)
ca
cu
a)
cn
c
O
J
1
12
Iff
cu
O
Q
Q
a
O
U
c
O
70
c
O
a)
�
ca (1)
0 Z) ami ai ami LLJ Q)) o
Z) o cn U p 0
U E a) C: a) a
0 co
0-0
a)
� � +�..
cB p U O
v,Q�>
CU U) N
>o U a
70 0 - p o v,
o.
70 X04- a) o�
(1) ,�- N O -S--N a)
� 0 0 U
CU (1)0o a>�anz
nz
Oa) p p vi
(1)) Q a)
cn
00-0o v
a) L 0 � via M co
C:>,>,o
^� a.0)U:
—_ N (B O
pp p V �' N v a
cu cu 3: cn cB a)
oma- ocu
i
� o �a
Ea)L� �amonz
0c oa,z
E a) o 0
� C: o^U
c L) O a)
p
0 U 0--
+�. y
U c� O O CO
Qcn� a)
(B cu p N "0 0-0
p 0
CU 0-
>i a) 0 a
cn
Co
cn (B
�' (B
cam -� co -S--
co
oUcu
U
0O 7 a)
QU N m co •U.
cn EN a) (B Cr
O
N
M
c
O
U)
a�
Q
O
I
O
c
O
N
ca
N
O
U
cu
Q
�U
cu
O
O
H
N
L
O
O
O
cB
O
a)
0
0
ca
O
Q
Q
CU
O
O
c
O
O
U
W .
O�
cu
N O
L
O `—
c O
O C
O
cu
O_
�_
>�
L
OL
Z 0
O
Iff
. �
Y
w
w
C
Y
O
Ln
>
O
o�
R n y U
as(u=�
a
L S Q C w N
>
'O t 01
O C N E 3 t
O
y N N
cn
o O°
L N ° w N
w
�
R O
O w
d N
41
V
°
wow n
° C
o
(�
ayi `m O
°
7 .� w t 0 i
(6
J
L
M M O
.N U MCO
_
D as as w ,' T O
E E
rn
2 C I N U
O
w m.o m v o m
a) �
co m
Oa QQvao
ZJ
w w E
0.
r
O
1
'a 01 w Ul Ul °°
M
O
Or
OJ
Ow��>.gn0E�
L) 0v
�?
�.�
�avUiC
J
°°-aUia°i �EwUm
Oar
�.9
oy:°xac°�rn
O
w
w m n n s n
Y w D .�..,
_ o
J O
O
R J
w O
U
O
N
L
L
C Z
O
u U�LL
O
J m
N
N l0
o N W >65
N
Er ° _ U
v Y
Z T o �_°� o vU m o0
c 2m0 r -oo Y Kin v m o�
m o m o m y -o Un o m m m m O v v¢ v o
m m v o o O v m c- Y U
a urin ��aY ooO TYY m� Uo's o F�inm
m U v v
O Y _ _ >> v
l0 lL 0 O€ N ) o m m> U O Y w E O D N Y O U
c LL O U o3 03 03 - E U [Y Un Un Un F
���z OOaaa`aO ioioioio �n UnioW `p°»»»>
c
o
0 Q, S S LL Y o W m- S Nm 0 0 0 0� 0 LL O 0 S O Q Q Y LL J�
O W
J
N �
0
0
JN
O - Nrl
N o
v O v m U c
E or >. `m �U LL i -
m s o o L° "o m -vo Un
Z N Ya Un `N N _
[Y E L o S m m
C O 6 U LY .- O. N N- O U LL
-0 O O - D
J 2� Of\ . N l0 Un O "O "O � U 1/1 O L� N E
m 0 V L O U E C o, N U J °� N 0 0 0 0
Unv m a f E00 W `m v
v�� in vc E E� ._m K oCD
o m > o > m- o 0 0 0 m d m 0 v m m m
in m m v v v v v a m u Y Y `° - L L L D
E_ 2 0 ,.. o o ---------
E
a D u v m m 10 0 0 0 0
QQQ Qmm mm mmU UUU 000 W W lLL li (D S J
Y
O yv
O _ Q
N m
E o E 3 v
o E-
_ v o 0 v 3
63 N - o o -
yk O N U L 0 O. L
p JO v
L T o x o
p ¢> s v v p .0
m v u i 0
N U - v
o v o
O O
m Ot N O O
> @ N s N
`1 m`N
o-
s @ O _@
o
V v O m c
v
c F o>
uo
w3� mos
0
41 mu - c N sm. j� 3 Q T N o O s
cN � Nw cc m
o
ll v o N s N - O u ++
NO v-- - 0 E ¢ ¢ !] N v
= mo 3 @ o,.,�~ o w m@ 3
0
mvv�mvv o vo
L w Q u i o s m O -¢ N
O�s� @� N m N o a —
¢ m 3
o v vo o Lv o
w v- o c o 3 o e N
mss "o v o o
O c N._ V N _ v 0 No
" N
c 3 o� 3 `v o aEi N v.- c, 3
m c E o_- m.w= o rnm .� -- E � c m
1 N c N > c m o T0--.w--
o-
'o
3 0
o �p w O= N w s N O v v= W c - c N-
Oyk o �95 EyvN _ d0 >`10 SON N @
-t 0 0 = v@ o p O
> v s E o L v o v o o rn o N N N rn o'>
a - ¢
N> O N N v N V N C Q> @ o T p m w m O' -
Nc bN`v rnvN Nw `�"Q. rnvvao_ 9E,
- o N m o> m m .m^ - N N U i @ m
¢` t v c o> v m `v > m O
w@ av v c o L "O a m oo v o - c '��° Jo > m j v c o C,
$L FQYc�NmE y3.10NO N�ufm OZ m�
' v v U U v w 0.¢ 3 o N N N c N Y- O
Nzi
U O N@ J0 v m 0 O U o.Q Q v v, d 0
O v I v o
D Q Q UIQ N ti N Q u> Z F O
O N M V Lfl kO
N M V �fl 6 n m (P
TOWN OF VA110
VAI LTOWN PLANNINGAND ENVI RONMENTAL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: July 11, 2016
ITEM/TOPIC: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a Prescribed
Regulations Amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to amend
Section 12-15-3, Definition, Calculations, and Exclusions, Vail Town Code concerning the
definition of Gross Residential FloorArea (GRFA) and setting forth details in regard thereto
(PEC16-0024).
ATTACHMENTS:
File Name Description
PEC16-0024_GRFA_Memo_CONTINUED.pdf PEC 16-0024 GRFA Staff Memo
0
TOWN OF VAIL �
Memorandum
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: July 11, 2016
SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a Prescribed
Regulations Amendment pursuant to Section 12-3-3, Amendment; Prescribed
Regulations Amendment, Vail Town Code to amend Section 12-15-3 Definition,
Calculation, and Exclusions, relating to how gross residential floor area (GRFA)
is calculated in relation to basements in the Hillside Residential (HR), Single -
Family Residential (SFR), Two -Family Residential (R), and Two -Family Primary
Secondary Residential (PS) Districts, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC16-0024).
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Chris Neubecker
I. SUMMARY
This item is not ready for presentation to the Planning and Environmental
Commission. The Community Development Department requests additional time
to study the issues and impacts related to this topic.
II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department requests that this item be continued to
the next Planning and Environmental Commission meeting of July 25, 2016.
TOWN OF VAIP
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
June27, 2016, 1:00 PM
Vail Town Council Chambers
75 S. Frontage Road -Vail, Colorado, 81657
Call to Order
Members Present: Brian Gillette, Kirk Hansen, John Ryan Lockman, Henry Pratt, and
Brian Stockmar
Absent: Ludwig Kurz and Chairman John Rediker
A request for comment regarding a proposed regulation amendment, pursuant to
Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to amend Titles 5 and 14, Chapters 5-
11 Abatement of Mountain Pine Beetle and Wildfire Fuels Reduction, and Section 14-
10 Design Review Standards and Guidelines, to include other forest insects and
diseases in addition to the mountain pine beetle, to expand the definition of wildfire
fuels and to relocate standards related to roofing material specifications from the Vail
Town Code to the Building Code. 45 Min.
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Paul Cada
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Spence — The PEC does not have recommending authority over Titles 5 and 14,
but the Fire Department is presenting the proposed updates to the PEC for
comment. Due to recent revisions by the Fire Department, staff has no specific
concerns with the proposed changes.
Mark Novak, Fire Chief — Changes are based on direction from Town Council
more than one year ago. Primarily, the changes are intended to broaden
regulations from beyond just mountain pine beetle concerns, on which the
original ordinance was mostly focused.
Pratt opened for public comment.
Jim Lamont, Vail Homeowners Association — Asked if the changes are oriented
towards removing defective landscaping and does it require the removal of
healthy landscaping? He is also concerned with giving regulatory power to an
administrative division with no appeal process.
Pratt closed public comment.
Lockman — Why is there a switch from the term non-combustible to the term
ignition resistant?
Cada — Non-combustible limits items to rocks. Ignition resistant term comes
from model codes.
Lockman —Why removal of some of the technical language?
Cada — It has been moved to the building code.
Lockman — Proposed changes make sense.
Hansen — No distinction between commercial and residential property owner?
Spence — No.
Hansen — Has the town gone through the process of court ordered abatement?
Novak — Not to his knowledge.
Hansen — Asked about xeriscaping.
Novak — Cada has been working on developing landscape guidelines.
Gillette — Concerned about review process. Definition of wildfire fuel is vague
and there is no citizen board or town council review.
Novak — It has been discussed and they will give the idea further consideration
Gillette — Reemphasized the need for an ability to appeal.
Spence — The intent of the abatement program is for imminent threats to life and
property.
Gillette — The definition is too broad to lack the ability to appeal. Either tighten
the definition or incorporate an appeal process.
Stockmar — Concurs that there needs to be an appeal process, but it should be
an expedited process. He is in favor of mechanisms to find a fair and
reasonable approach to assisting landowners in removing vegetation.
Pratt — Agrees with most of the proposed changes, but also believes there
should be an appeal process. Regarding roofs, he expressed concern about
duplex owners not agreeing to change their roof at the same time.
Spence — The roof replacement process for both sides of the duplex is the same
as it has been in the recent past.
Pratt — Is concerned about forced situations where an adjacent owner is unable
to immediately change their roof.
Stockmar — Leaving the term "may" instead of "shall" makes the requirement
appealable but still gives some review authority.
A request for the review of an amendment to a Conditional Use Permit, pursuant
to Section 12-9C-3, Conditional Uses; Public buildings and grounds, Vail Town
Code, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-16-10, Amendment
Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for a picnic shelter located at 1600 South
Frontage Road West (Donovan Park)/Unplatted, and setting forth details in
regard thereto. (PEC16-0023) 5 Min.
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Gregg Barrie
Planner: Brian Garner
Action: N/A
Motion: Second: Vote:
Garner — This item has been staff approved, but is on the agenda for
informational purposes. Commission is not required to take action, but may call
up this item, if needed. The master plan for Donovan Park includes the
proposed shelter.
Stockmar — It makes sense, but has there been a history of objection?
Garner — Based on past community surveys, a shelter was listed as a top
priority.
Hansen — Asked about the architectural style.
Garner — The architecture and materials will match the existing structures on
site.
4. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a Prescribed
Regulations Amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town
Code, to amend Section 12-15-3, Definition, Calculations, and Exclusions, Vail
Town Code, concerning the definition of Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA)
and setting forth details in regard thereto (PEC16-0024). 60 Min.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Chris Neubecker
Action: Continued
Motion: Gillette Second: Hansen Vote: 5-0
Neubecker — Summarized the previous meetings at which GRFA was
discussed, including an appeal of staff interpretation on May 23, 2016. The
intent is to make the code clear based upon the PEC's decision to overturn the
administrative decision on the appeal. That change states that in a duplex, each
dwelling unit is its own structure, and each is entitled to one (1) lowest level
GRFA deduction. Also, the party wall is determined by the existing grade.
Referenced graphics and outlined that calculating the grade of the party wall is a
new difficulty associated with the changes. Demonstrated how the grade of the
party wall will be determined for future calculations.
Gillette — Believes that stating there is only one (1) lowest level is incorrect and
the term lowest level needs to be redefined. Expressed his belief that staff is
wrong.
Neubecker — Potential consequences include issues with existing structures
becoming nonconforming by this new measurement, due to dramatic grades
with a significant difference between the dwelling units.
Gillette — Are you eliminating the 6' level separation regulation?
Neubecker —The code does not stipulate a 6' level separation regulation. Our
goal is to codify the decision of the PEC, not to change or establish new policy.
Gillette — Staff is not focusing on all of the reasons why the PEC upheld the
previous appeal.
Neubecker — Focusing on the decision of whether a duplex should count as one
structure or two. Additional review of GRFA policy could occur later.
Gillette — We should take the time to get GRFA right; we are not addressing the
whole problem. Reemphasized his belief lowest level needs to be redefined.
Neubecker — Referenced the new proposed language on page 4 of the staff
report and stated that staff finds the proposal meets the necessary criteria for a
code amendment and therefore recommends approval. Staff has received
feedback from local architects supporting the changes.
Pratt opened public comment.
Ron Byrne — Confused as to the intent of the changes. Is it essentially applying
the single-family rules to each duplex unit? Also, the walls are often not on the
same plane.
Rollie Kjesbo — Was part of the commission that developed the GRFA
regulations. Was not aware that staff was not giving each unit credit for a lowest
level, which was the intent of the commission. Disagreed with Gillette and
stated that it was not the intent to allow for multiple lowest levels. Stated that a
small "step" for a level was intended to be allowed, but they never discussed a
specific height that constituted a new level. Is unsure how the party wall
measurement will work.
Hansen — Asked Kjesbo if he supports the proposed changes
Kjesbo — Yes.
Gillette — Asked if Kjesbo if he would recommend codifying the 6' level
separation regulation.
Kjesbo — Yes, but based on the lowest level only
Stockmar — GRFA concept is confusing and only grows more confusing over
time. It is time to really look at GRFA and how it should be defined and used.
The proposed changes are a reasonable solution for the short term, but a long
term solution is needed.
Kjesbo — We intended to do that at one point, but at the time the Town Council
was not supportive of completely reevaluating GRFA.
Gillette — Suggested testing any recommended changes to the language.
Reemphasized his belief that the term "lowest level" needs to be redefined. We
are on the wrong track.
Hansen — Agrees that each duplex unit should have its own lowest level. Would
support a 6'-8' range in level separation to allow for structures to step up or
down a hill. Agrees with measuring the party wall at existing grade.
Lockman — Understanding the intent and history of the GRFA regulations is
difficult. Agrees that each unit should have its own lowest level. Is concerned
that the changes will make more non-compliant properties and is not sure the
proposed language truly achieves what needs to be achieved.
Pratt — We are here to codify and make existing policy more clear; the
interpretation based on the decision to uphold the previous appeal. Does not
think the intent was to exclude all subterranean floor area. Concern about ability
to interpret original grade based on lack of information or surveys. Does not
agree with calculating percentage based on the existing grade of the party wall.
Recommends the calculation be based on the entire perimeter, but each side
gets to apply the percent below grade.
Gillette — Reemphasized that the term lowest level needs to be redefined to
state that the level at which there is no other level below it. This will achieve
good site planning and does not affect bulk or mass. Expressed his confidence
that the proposed changes will not work.
Lockman — Asked for clarification between original and existing grade and which
would apply.
Ruther — Clearly there is more work to be done, but for the purposes of codifying
the decision to uphold the appeal, the changes proposed are to address the
PEC's interpretation that each individual duplex unit have its own lowest level.
Gillette — That is false. I voted to uphold the appeal because staff was
incorrectly interpreting the code.
Ruther — We need the consensus of the commission as to how to address the
problem. It is our understanding that the appeal was upheld based on PEC's
interpretation that each unit of a duplex has its own lowest level. To propose an
alternative is not what the appellant was requesting.
Hansen — The intent was that each unit be addressed individually, not
collectively.
Gillette — The motion that passed stated staff misinterpreted the code, but did
not specify which part of code was being misinterpreted.
Hansen —We spent a substantial amount of time stating that each duplex unit
should be calculated individually.
Ruther — If the decision was based on something else, staff needs to know.
Gillette — At this point, he is not sure there is unified opinion among the
commissioners.
Stockmar — Suggested a compromise be found
Gillette — If you used my definition of lowest level you would not need to define a
duplex as two separate structures.
Pratt — I am now more comfortable with measuring at the existing grade of the
party wall.
Hansen — Supports the changes as well. Is not comfortable with unlimited
steps. Can we see a couple of examples?
Ruther — Reiterated the purpose of the agenda item is to codify the PEC's
decision that for GRFA purposes, each dwelling unit of a duplex has its own
lowest level.
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a Prescribed
Regulations Amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town
Code, to amend Section 12-13-5, Employee Housing, Employee Housing Unit
Deed Restriction Exchange Program; Section 12-23-6, Commercial Linkage,
Methods of Mitigation; and Section 12-24-6, Inclusionary Zoning, Methods of
Mitigation; Vail Town Code, concerning the payment of Fees in Lieu of providing
Employee Housing and setting forth details in regard thereto (PEC16-0025). 45
Min.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Alan Nazzaro
Action: N/A
Motion: Second: Vote:
Nazzaro — Town Council suggested that staff work with the Vail Local Housing Authority
(VLHA) to recommend changes to the fee in lieu regulations. He discussed some of the
possibilities for changing the EHU Fee in lieu program.
Since this memo was written, Council adopted an interim fee, based on 80% AMI,
which raised the fee considerably. Previous fee was based on 120% AMI. Council also
adopted a moratorium on payment of fees in lieu for whole units, but allowed payments
of the fee for fractions of units remaining or required. Fee is based on 10% of new
GRFA, or for commercial based on 20% of new employee generation. Original intent
was for the fee in lieu to apply only to fractions of units. Council wanted to keep pace
with inflation by raising the Administrative Fees. Council did not want to average back
three years. The interim fee does not average the fees. Fees will be from the last year's
County Assessor sales data. Fee is based on affordability gap for payments of
mortgage, taxes, and HOA fees.
Staff memo identifies some questions on what the goals for this program should be.
Currently, Council has no discretion to say no to accepting a fee in lieu, rather than
requiring a new EHU. Fee in lieu should be the option of last resort. Fee should be
allowed for a specific purpose, but not just to eliminate an on-site unit.
VLHA has had multiple discussions on these options. We are now looking for feedback
from the PEC.
Pratt — At the last meeting, there was a discussion of purchasing a deed restriction,
rather than purchasing the real estate.
Ruther — Town's objective is to get the deed restriction in place, regardless of if the real
estate is purchased, or just the deed restriction is purchased.
Stockmar — How is the fee in lieu used by the Town?
Nazzaro — So far, it has not been used. There is about $2.83 million in the fund.
Gillette — Town should advertise its willingness to buy deed restrictions from existing
unit owners. If fee is higher, it will force people to provide units, and only use the fee for
meeting the fraction remaining.
Nazzaro —We believe Council should have discretion to say "no" to the payment of the
fee in lieu.
Ruther — Need to ask, what is the intent of the fee in lieu? Is it to raise revenue in order
to build units? Or is intent to encourage developers to build units? Council would need
certain criteria in order to deny the fee. Options 6, 7 and 8 should be the focus of the
PEC today. Options 1-5 is more of a discussion for Council. Purpose of the fee is to fill
the gap between what people can afford vs the market rate, not to provide enough
money to build new units. On Option 8, we would like feedback on the criteria to
determine feasibility. What options would need to be exhausted in order to accept a
fee, if it's the option of last resort.
Comments —
Lockman — If we can build housing, we should do that. Council should have the
discretion to determine when the fee is collected.
Nazzaro — Large employers have more resources to address their employee generation
impacts. We would like to determine criteria on when Council can accept the fee.
Lockman — Large employers have such an impact on the community. It's hard to
determine the criteria for accepting a fee as a last resort. Can't think of the criteria right
now. There are already criteria in code, such as "better fit for the community for paying
the fee".
Hansen — Fee has not kept pace with market demands. Yes, Council should have
discretion,
Gillette — Keep it simple. You could create a market for deed restrictions. Town could
create a program to sell deed restrictions. It could be set up like eBay, with an auction.
That would create a market for deed restrictions. I have never understood why we are
building EHUs in the most expensive sections of Town. Fee in lieu is a great program.
You will get more units than you would at $3,000 per sq. ft.
Stockmar — Bottom line, we need more housing. With only $2.4 million in the EHU fee
in lieu fund, it shows that the program is not working well. We need the fee for the very
small situations where only a fraction remains. When appropriate, we should require
getting deed restrictions or getting new units building.
Pratt — In favor of a fee in lieu, up to a point. But the fee takes the responsibility away
from the developer and puts it on the Town. There needs to be some criteria for Council
to consider. Council changes over time, so we need clear criteria. With only $2.4 million
in the fund, shows that the program is not working. Fee should be based on the cost of
construction. A marketplace could be developed for buying and selling deed
restrictions. Hospital paid a fee in lieu, and they have resources to provide housing.
They should not be allowed to just write a check. Requiring a fee for remodels can be
overbearing, so scope of program should be limited. Fee in lieu should be option of last
resort, for less than one unit. We are not charging enough for the fee, that's why we are
not seeing units get built.
Gillette — Will the $2.4 million be used to pay for the Chamonix project?
Ruther - Yes
Approval of Minutes
June 13, 2016 PEC Meeting Results 5 Min.
Action: Approve
Motion: Lockman Second: Stockmar Vote: 5-0
Informational Updates - Fleet Fuels and Water Usage 15 Min. - Mark Hoblitzell
34% reduction in electricity
Water Use declined 34%
Unleaded fuel use dropped 24%
Diesel fuel use up by 7%
Fleet fuel — Since 2006, 2% increase in GHG emissions due to fleet fuel use. Snow
melting in village did not have a big impact on reducing fleet fuels.
5% total decline in CO2 use. Goal is 20%. Natural gas consumption is driving
demands for CO2.
Options include expanded renewable energy production; purchase renewable
energy credits; Local offset programs
Stockmar — Are their options for improving efficiency in snowmelt systems? Over
time, we should see improvements in efficiency as boilers are replaced.
Bertuglia — Efficiency is not the main issue; boilers require some idling to be ready.
Pratt — Any options for heat recovery systems? See steam coming out of parking
structure.
Mark — Natural gas use has been fairly stable
Project Re -Wild; Pete Wadden introduced the program and ideas to encourage
private property owners to reintroduce stream bank stabilization and naturalization
of vegetation. Public — private cost share is proposed. Money would come from the
Restore the Gore Action Plan program. Limit 50% match, max $5,000. Discussed
project goals, preventing erosion, restore native riparian vegetation, rehabilitate or
create wetlands, incorporate best management practices, improve stream habitat,
focus on high impact areas.
Gillette — Home owners that would be willing to do this can probably afford to fix
their property.
Bertuglia — We are trying to encourage home owners to participate, even if they
can afford to do work without the incentive.
Pratt - $5,000 won't be enough to make some people jump. We should identify
problem areas and request that owners fix it. Some owners may think about it, for
some owners it may help. Others won't care. Need better examples than log wall
cribbing.
Stockmar — Town needs substantial education campaign, and needs to address its
own property, too.
Gillette — Identify the hot spots and get them fixed.
- Transportation Plan Update 10 Min. —Tom Kassmel
Town contracted with Felsberg, Holt and Ullevig to update Transportation Plan.
Look at accident areas, safety at transit stops, and what recommended
transportation improvements could be made. Transit Charrette on July 11 to work
with transit operators, plus open house in the evening. Ideas from the charrette will
be presented to Town Council. We don't expect to see major changes in traffic
numbers. Mostly focus on transit and parking.
- Complete Streets Update 20 Min. — Brian Garner
Presentation on complete streets and forthcoming pedestrian improvements
proposed for the Vail frontage roads.
Lockman — Will new intersection crossings address the needs of visually impaired
with audible warnings?
Garner — That may be considered.
Pratt — Would like to know how many people are hit by vehicles in Vail. Concerned
that flashing lights won't work. There is already too much for the drivers to pay
attention to. Streets are already too wide in places.
Garner — Acknowledged.
Stockmar — Town was designed to be a very limited access, limited car village. We
need to look at ways to reduce the amount of vehicular traffic, and get back to the
original design intent.
Garner — Acknowledged.
Adjournment
Action: Adjourn
Motion: Gillette Second: Stockmar Vote: 5-0
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 48-hour notification.
Please call (970) 479-2356, Telecommunication Device for the Deaf (TDD), for
information.
Community Development Department
TOWN OF VA10
VAI LTOWN PLANNINGAND ENVI RONMENTAL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE:
ITEM/TOPIC: PEC Training - Non -Conforming Structures - Jonathan Spence
ATTACHMENTS:
File Name
Description
Nonconforming_Uses_Sites_and_Structures_PEC_Memorandum 07- Staff Memorandum
11-2016. pdf
Nonconforming_PP_for PEC_07-11-2016.pdf
PDF of Power Point Presentation on
Nonconformities
TOWS! OF
Memorandum
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: July 11, 2016
SUBJECT: Nonconforming Sites, Uses, Structures, and Site Improvements
PURPOSE
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide an introduction to the subject of
nonconforming sites, uses, structures, and site improvements.
This report covers the following topics:
• Underlying premise related to nonconformities
• Types of nonconformities
• Current regulations and restrictions related to nonconformities
• Unintended consequences of current regulations and restrictions
• Alternative ideas moving forward
The Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) is not requested to take any action
on this item other than provide direction to staff. If, based upon the information shared it
this introduction, there are issues of question or concern to the PEC, staff is requesting
the Commission shares those questions or concerns so that the staff can be prepared
to respond at a future workshop or public hearing.
II. BACKGROUND
Nonconforming sites, uses, structures, and site improvements are existing lawfully
established circumstances that do not comply with current standards and regulations of
the Vail Town Code (Code). This noncompliance has resulted in most cases from either
annexations or through revisions to the Code. In the annexation scenario, sites and their
accompanying improvements and uses were in existence prior to being annexed into
the Town of Vail. Upon annexation and subsequent zoning, the site itself, improvements
constructed and/or the use(s) became out of compliance with the Code.
In the Code revision scenario, changes to the Code related to dimensional standards or
use may result in previously allowable uses, structures, site improvements or the site
itself no longer being in compliance with the Code. These changes to the Code occur as
a result of changes in community sentiment or in recognition of an error in the existing
regulations. Whether through annexations or revisions to the Code, the Town of Vail
does not differentiate in its approach to nonconformities based on the genesis of the
nonconformity.
III. UNDERLYING PREMISE RELATED TO NONCONFORMITIES
As stated in the purpose clause of Chapter 18: NONCONFORMING SITES, USES,
STRUCTURES AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS
12-18-1: PURPOSE:
This chapter is intended to limit the number and extent of nonconforming uses
and structures by prohibiting or limiting their enlargement, their reestablishment
after abandonment and their restoration after substantial destruction. While
permitting nonconforming uses, structures, and improvements to continue, this
chapter is intended to limit enlargement, alteration, restoration, or replacement
which would increase the discrepancy between existing conditions and the
development standards prescribed by this title.
The underlying premise of the nonconforming chapter is that by limiting the number and
extent of nonconformities and by prohibiting or limiting their enlargement, in time the
nonconformities will decrease in number and at some point no longer exist. As will be
pointed to in later portions of this memo, while this may be the case for some types of
nonconformities such as those related to dimensional standards that often are
eliminated through redevelopment, it has proven not to be true when pertaining to
nonconforming uses.
IV. TYPES OF NONCONFORMITIES
The Code separates nonconformities into three categories. These are:
Sites- Nonconforming Sites are those properties whose site characteristics do
not conform to the minimum lot area or dimensional requirements of the zone
district in which they are located. An example would be a lot previously platted in
Eagle County prior to annexation that does not meet the minimum requirements
of its new (Vail) zone district designation. This category only pertains to the site
itself and not any improvements constructed upon the lot or any uses that may
occu r.
Uses -Nonconforming Uses are those that were legally established at some time
in the past that no longer conform to the use regulations prescribed for the zone
district where the use occurring is located. As stated previously, this can be the
result of annexation as is the case of the Holiday Inn where the use, Lodge, is
not permitted in the Commercial Core 3 (CC3) District or the result of a change in
the Code. Another example of this type of use nonconformity is real estate offices
located on the first floor or street level in the Commercial Core 1 (CC1) District
Town of Vail Page 2
(Vail Village). The use, Real Estate Office, was changed to no longer be
permitted on the first floor or street level in the CC1 District in the early 1990s.
• Structure and Site Improvements- Nonconforming structures and site
improvements relate to the following four categories:
1. Lot and Structure Requirements: These types of nonconformities
pertain to buildings or other structures that are not in compliance
with the dimensional standards of the zone district for which they
are located. Examples of these types of nonconformities include
building setbacks, building height or site coverage.
2. Density Control: Structures which do not conform to density
controls, including dwelling units per acre or GRFA maximums, are
considered nonconforming. Many multi -family properties including
Villa Valhalla in Vail Village and Eiger Chalets located on
Sandstone Drive are nonconforming as their density, calculated in
number of dwelling units per buildable acre, exceeds that which is
permitted in their respective zone districts.
3. Open Space and Landscaping: This classification of
nonconformities relates to required quantities of landscaping or
open space on a given property. This is the least common type of
nonconformity in Vail.
4. Off Street Parking and Loading: This classification relates to
properties that do not meet the requirements related to parking and
loading. An example of this type of nonconformity is parking in the
right-of-way as can be seen at the Alphorn development on
Meadow Drive.
V. CURRENT REGULATIONS/RESTRICTIONS RELATED TO NONCONFORMITIES
The Code permits nonconforming structures, uses and improvements to continue while
intending to limit the enlargement, alteration, restoration, or replacement which would
increase the discrepancy between existing conditions and the related development or
use standard. The underlying premise, again, is that by limiting actions that may extend
the longevity of a nonconformity, the nonconformity will, in time, no longer exist.
Generally, improvements to nonconforming properties are permitted as long as the
nonconformity is not increased (in size, area, number, etc.) and the proposed
improvements meet current requirements. This gets more complicated when the
existing nonconformance relates to Use or to Density Control on residential properties.
As can be shown below, the Town of Vail has treated different types of nonconformities
differently, resulting in unequal treatment for properties owners in similar situations.
Eligibility to add GRFA
Currently, properties that comply with use requirements of a particular zone district but
exceed the allowable number of units on a per acre basis, similar to the Villa Valhalla or
Eiger Chalet properties, are not permitted to utilize any remaining GRFA that may
Town of Vail Page 3
otherwise exist on the property. Instead, these properties are permitted an increase in
their allowable GRFA on a per unit basis of 250 square feet. This additional GRFA
allotment, known as the 250 Ordinance, can be used over time and does not need to be
used for a single project. Although this allotment of 250 square feet is uniform, its
effects are not as it is neither proportional to the unit size nor does it take into account
existing GRFA that may be available due to the nonconforming status of the property.
In contrast, residential properties that are nonconforming due to use have fewer
opportunities. Many multifamily properties (30+) in West Vail are currently zoned Two -
Family Primary/Secondary (P/S), a zone district that does not allow Multiple -family
residential dwellings as a permitted or conditional use. These properties, including the
Garmisch Townhomes, the Chamonix Chalets and the Northridge Condominiums,
among many others, are unable to utilize any available GRFA that may be remaining on
the property nor are they eligible for the 250 Ordinance because of their nonconforming
use status.
Eligibility to rebuild
Properties that are nonconforming due to use or density on a units per acre basis are
not eligible to rebuild the existing number of residential units. In order to redevelop, in
the case of properties such as Eiger Chalets that are nonconforming to density but not
to use, the unit count would need to decrease to 6 units per acre, or less, (the allowable
density in the Residential Cluster (RC) Zoning District), or, in this case, a reduction from
14 units to 5 units.
Similarly, multifamily properties currently zoned Primary/Secondary (P/S) would have to
reduce the number of units on a given property in order to facilitate redevelopment. For
a property such as the Pine Ridge Townhouses located at 2199 Chamonix Lane, this
would equate to a reduction from 31 multifamily units to 8 units constructed in a duplex
fashion.
Factors that have worked against the elimination of nonconformities
The longevity of existing nonconformities and the lack of their removal and replacement
with conforming uses and/or structures are for many reasons. Two principal reasons are
the allowance of improvements and the allowance of the separation of ownership. As
stated previously, some nonconforming properties are currently allowed to utilize the
250 Ordinance to add GRFA. This addition of GRFA (reinvestment in the property)
extends the longevity of the nonconforming structure, thereby working against the
underlying Code premise. The allowance of the separation of ownership for
nonconforming properties furthers their permanence by working against redevelopment.
As stated previously, the existing regulations would require a dramatic reduction of the
number of units for a property to be redeveloped. This reduction in unit count coupled
with separate ownership makes the likelihood of redevelopment and any accompanying
decrease in the number of nonconforming properties improbable.
Town of Vail Page 4
VI. UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
Many of the nonconformities currently existing, especially those that relate to use or
density, were the result of annexation and subsequent zoning in the 1980s. Although it
may be easy to second guess the decisions made at that time, a valid assumption can
be made that those decisions were made with the best intentions of the Vail community
in mind. That lack of a reduction in the number of existing nonconformities over the last
30 years signals a need to re-examine this issue and the unintended consequences that
have resulted. Examples of these unintended consequences include:
Scarcity -Changes to the Code that affect allowable uses can have the potential
to create a situation of scarcity, thereby elevating the value of a nonconforming
use. An example of this is with the use Real Estate Office. Changes to the code
in the early 1990s that no longer permitted Real Estate Offices on the first floor in
some zone districts have increased the market value and desirability of existing
real estate offices in these areas.
Property Deterioration- Because of nonconforming status and the
inability/uncertainty regarding redevelopment opportunities, properties have not
received the level of upkeep/maintenance/rehabilitation compatible with other
conforming properties within the community. This lack of reinvestment affects
properties aesthetically, has environmental implications due to a lack of energy
efficiency and has ramifications for safety due to not meeting current building
code requirements.
• Community Character -Negative affects on community character are being
realized as a result of property deterioration and the continued prevalence of
nonconforming aspects of some properties related to parking, refuse
management and other issues.
Substandard Housing -The lack of reinvestment and redevelopment in many
multifamily properties has led to housing conditions that are inconsistent with the
Vail brand and that have a negative effect on neighborhood character. Although
a lack of reinvestment may have had a positive effect on affordability, it has had
a negative effect on members of the community's workforce that utilize these
properties for rental housing. It should be noted that the redevelopment of
existing nonconforming multi -family properties under current zoning would result
in a significant decrease in the availability of housing opportunities due to a
decrease in density and overall unit count.
VII. ALTERNATIVES MOVING FORWARD
The Community Development Department has formulated the following ideas whose
further discussions may lead to additional alternatives. These ideas are generally
centered on the multifamily properties that are nonconforming. It appears that a
comprehensive approach, including one or more of the following ideas, may be most
Town of Vail Page 5
pragmatic in addressing the variety of issues presented by different types of
nonconformities.
Zone District Boundary Amendment -Through rezoning of one or more properties to a
zoning district that is more compatible with existing conditions, nonconforming
properties may be able to come into greater conformance with current regulations,
thereby permitting the possibility of GRFA additions or property redevelopment.
Challenges presented by this option include matching up existing conditions with the
Town's existing zone districts in such a away as to address nonconformities while not
allowing development or redevelopment that is contrary to the existing neighborhood
character. It should be noted that two Zone District Boundary Amendment applications
have been proposed for existing multifamily properties in West Vail in the last two years.
Neither of these amendments were presented to the Town Council due to
recommendation of denial from the Planning and Environmental Commission. Reasons
for the recommendation included lack of a West Vail specific area plan and concerns for
neighborhood character.
Zoning Overlay- Through the application of a zoning overlay, potential allowances for
GRFA additions or property redevelopment could be more tailored to existing conditions
both in terms of unit count and GRFA. Under this scenario, properties subject to the
overlay would no longer be considered nonconforming in terms of use or density while
GRFA additions and redevelopment standards would be crafted based on existing
conditions with or without any allowances for increases in allowable unit count, GRFA,
height or other development standards.
Revisions to the Nonconforming Chapter of the Code- Currently, the Nonconforming
Chapter of the Code, Chapter 18 of Title 12, professes as its purpose, the limitation,
non -expansion and removal of nonconformities. In reality, the Code permits a number of
activities that work against this purpose. Revisions to this section of the Code will work
with other changes to more clearly and explicitly reinforce the purpose while improving
its readability.
VIII. NEXT STEPS
It is the intention of the Community Development Department to pursue possible means
of addressing the issue of nonconformities, especially as it relates to density and the
prevalence of multi -family developments located within the Two -Family
Primary/Secondary Residential Zone District. This will involve working with the
community to bring forth ideas to the Planning and Environmental Commission for
discussion and eventual recommendations to the Town Council.
IX. ATTACHMENTS
A. PDF of PowerPoint Presentation for 07-11-2016 PEC Meeting
Town of Vail Page 6
v
CL
N
N
0)
d-
0
0)
N
U
..
u
N
LO
r -I
O
N
r -I
r -I
O
c
N
E
CL
0
a)
0
E
0
U
c
I
7Er7
E
O
V
m
LO
0
4�
c
a�
E
CL
0
0
E
0
U
UO
C
O
O
O
_0
O•i
a"'
U
( 6
L
-0N
4 -J
O
O
�U
aA
a
N
_
•�
o
C:
0
>
p
,_
O
Ln
�
o
LU
o
N
;
r.�
tuo
.C:
E
O
O
O
z
w
E
O
Q
E
G
LO
O
CL
0
0
E
0
U
U.
ren
-j
C,
Ln
LO
0
4�
c
a�
CL
0
0
E
0
U
U.
C:
O
�
w
a--+
cn
O
O
O—
E
ca
a)
US
ro
•
(1)c
aA
V
N
• 0
�
4-J
ate--+
C
• —
a--+
Ln
oE
•�
cc
'x
O
>
O
E
LnO
C:0-
•—
C
O
a�
O
E
—
a)
•�
Lnw
O
O
Ln
—
>
C:
c:
},
+-+
C:C:
IL
O
C:
ca
ca
cn
ca
0-0
Ln
4J
4-J
•
ca
O
(�
v
L)
0
+-+
O
O
�
�
V
C:a,
O
O
*�
Ca
�
4-J
c
O
.—
_0O
O
E
�
x
Q)c
CL
O
E
V
X
a)—
,_
X
O
C:
c�
a)
ca
u
U
O
C-
O
C-
Z
co
A
A
Ln
LO
0
4�
c
a�
CL
0
0
E
0
U
U.
K 1
C6
W
..Z
CW
W M
�W
�O
Za
oc —
oW
LL
z cn
00
UZ
ZQ
O�
Zw
00
L
LL
U to
R
Wo)
V o
0
r�
WA
■O
LO
0
4�
c
CL
O
N
0
E
O
U
U.
U)
= w
0
r�
WA
■O
LO
0
4�
c
CL
O
N
0
E
O
U
U.
rfr
i
O
F—
10
U.
r—
LO
0
CL
0
0
E
0
U
U.
0
m
U
0
a�
cn
0
a)
E
0
U
>
o
z�
aa)
°'
a)
L
0
:3
0}'
U
a)
a
L
A
A
A
LO
0
CL
0
0
E
0
U
U.
ren
vel
O N
E
0
C:
O
U
+-+
C
O }'
_0
LN
U
a--+ –0
N
N C:
}'O
U N
C6 �
L
C6
U
a) LnO
Ln +-+
N �
O E
� N
N
N
N �
Q
O O
Q Ln
C:
N Ln
C:
O E
4-0
O
Ln
cn +�
� O
E
.E =3
0 E
CC:
N
o 'E },
C
O
Z a✓ N
WX
LO
0
c
a�
CL
0
0
4
c
E
O
U
U.
.CD
E
JA
cn
N
aA
�
.�
4-j
O
=
o
�
•�
O
aA
_0
4-jru
U
C:
�
�.,
aA
i
N•NN
4-jO
CL
C6
O
N
i
O
Q
4-.,
O
Q
Q
Q
a_+
.N
O
U
C:i
O
i
O
O
�
�
O
• a -j
O
c:O
>
•
�
N
4-j
UOO
0O
ca
Ca
t).A
Q)
i
+-+
O
•—
Ln
i
Z
•�
4-j0
i
}'
Ln
O
O
i6
N
O
Ov
i
O
ca
O
Q
cn
N
O
`~
O
Q
Ca
—
aN-+
N
U
0
C6
ru
N
U
N
Q
U
N
U
C6
E
a -j
4-
E
Ln
N
aA
>
�'
CL
E-
O
E_
cn
Ln
Q
°
OU
-0•X
U
Q
N
Q
C6
C6
Ln
Q
c%f
O
v
E
�
O
•�
++
r-
,�
+'+
0
N
Q
' —
}'
o
C6
b
U
•—
N
_0
EN
i,
Ln
V'
•_
N
aQ-+
ca
O
V
J
f6
cnCa
•�
U
N
f�
cn
},
ami
E
U
U
O
ate--+
C6
J
Ln
fa
E
U
GJ
(/)
N
4A
o
•
N
V
U
Ln
i
�
aA
i
i
U
a
N
Vf
Ln
+
0
m
07
V1
N
O
r
0
+•,
•�
�
•�
+,
-
O
_
N
4J
N
O
0"0
GJ
Q
0
O
o
0
0
V4
w
O
w
+j
0
ko
0
CL
0
0
E
0
U
U.
N
O
ca
EO
O
�
N
uO
40-
O
vi
4—
V
Q
•O
v
a
�
4 14
N
r -I
LO
0
CL
0
0
E
O
U
O
I
txo
m
L•-
>
C:
'EC:�O
r
O
O
�
E
C:
O
m
Q
•O
L
O
a--+
a--+
a--+
_0E
m
�+
C
E
>
C6�O
O
O
E
>
•�
_0
C:
U
Ln'�
U
C:C6
C6
C6
• —
m
E
U
o
.—
..
C:
i
Q
ro..
—
�ro
i
4-
U
C6
Q
°
•0
U
C6
C6
Q
cua
a--+
o
C:
U
=
4-J
rO
-0
}'
ro
ro
0
.
W
�
U
�--�
.
4 -0C:
^�^
-
U
Ca
W d a j 4 in G n m
w 1tl
t
'� �y' � rwrt� �a�n ,^,rr rmio rrtw rtrtrtrrrtrtwwr"J' rrn "�
s ��a¢c sxxxxxxxxxxiuuo
E5555�5�55�����
' a
� � r
A a
-b-a
� V
� l
r. VF
Y
ca
4
LL
g o
W n Ln
ell
LL7 ci
F O
Y.
` RP6 L 1
L LLL •'i
I� L �r1�•
`y y Ly L A
7 L 7 d�L L L Li�
1 7� L y l L ti4 L 15 L
S
I�-
jit
p �j
1
1
Iir
� II�t
I
1 I I �' ��1�� •hf S yeas
L
} L L
y ti 4
�� �I '�j L �LL • 4
h qdL} i I
I ti L
ti � Ly
I*
l
w II Ly y
lz
h I —
NLf n
1
C
!
L
a
I�
LU a:
r
LO
LO
O
E
CL
0
0
E
O
U
UO
a)
O
U
O
Q
�
�
tv
U
E
w
_0
C:
C:.
w
E
O
Q
�
i
O
ca
C:
_0
O
C:
z
co
v
_ro
O
},
._0
C:
0
too
W
.C:
.O
.(A
O
O
N
N
DC
LO
LO
O
E
CL
0
0
E
O
U
UO
A.—O
L
O
L
42
ry
r -
LO
0
4�
c
a�
CL
O
a�
a�
0
c
E
O
U
U.
{
'L -p. nr
-i
Ad Name: 12233822A
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
COMMISSION
Customer: TOWN OF VAIL/PLAN DEPT/COMM
July 11,2016,Ch PM
Vail Town Council Chamber
Your account number is- 1OP2P 33
75S.FrontageRoad - Vail, Colorado, 81657
Vail Daily
1.Call to Order
2.A request for final review of a Development Plan,
to Section 12-61-11, Vail Town Code, to
pursuant
allow for the future development of Employee
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
Housing Units on the Chamonix parcel located at
2310 Chamonix Road, Parcel B, Resubdivision of
Tract D, Vail Das Schone Filing 1, and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (PEC150019) - 5 Min.
STATE OF COLORADO }
Applicant:Town of Vail Community Development
Department
Planner:George Ruther
}SS•
COUNTY OF EAGLE }
3.A request for the review of a Conditional Use
Permit for the Chabad Jewish Center, pursuant to
Section 12-7H-4, Conditional Uses; Second Floor
and Above, in accordance with the provisions of
Section 12-16-4, Hearing, Vail Town Code, to al-
1, Don Rogers, do solemnly swear that I am a qualified
low for a religious institution, located at 450 East
Lionshead Circle (Treetops)/Lot 6, Block 1, Vail Li-
representative ofthe Vail Daily. That the same Daily newspaper
onshead Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard
thereto. (PEC16-0026) - 45 Min.
Applicant: Chabad Jewish Center, represented by
printed in whole or in part and published in the County
Michael Hazard, AIA
Planner: Matt Panfil
of Eagle, State of Colorado, and has a general circulation
4.A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town
therein; that said newspaper has been published continuous)
p y
Council for a Prescribed Regulations Amendment,
pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town
and uninterruptedly in said County of Eagle for a period of
Code, to amend Section 12-15-3, Definition, Cal -
culations, and Exclusions, Vail Town Code, con-
more than fifty-two consecutive weeks next prior to the first
cerning the definition of Gross Residential Floor
Area (GRFA) and setting forth details in regard
thereto (PEC16-0024). 60 Min.
Ppublication of the annexed legal notice or advertisement and
g
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Chris Neubecker
that said newspaper has published the requested legal notice
5.Approval of Minutes
and advertisement as requested.
June 27, 2016 PEC Meeting Results
6. Informational Update - Nonconformities
7.Adjournment
The Vail Daily is an accepted legal advertising medium,
The applications and information about the propos-
als are available for public inspection during regu-
only for jurisdictions operating under Colorado's Home
lar office hours at the Town of Vail Community De-
Rule
velopment Department, 75 South Frontage Road.
The public is invited to attend the project orienta-
p rOV1SlOn.
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
That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was
approximate, subject to change, and cannot be re -
lied upon to determine at what time the Planning
published in the regular and entire issue of every
and Environmental Commission will consider an
item. Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional in-
formation. Sign language interpretation is available
number of said dailynewspaper for the period of 1
l�
upon request with 48-hour notification. Please call
consecutive insertions; and that the first publication of said
(970) 479-2356, Telecommunication Device for the
Deaf (TDD), for information.
notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated 7/8/2016 and
Community Development Department
Published in the Vail Daily July 8, 2016 (12233822)
that the last publication of said notice was dated 7/8/2016 in
the issue of said newspaper.
In witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand this day,
07/13/2016.
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 07/13/2016.
( �L-& 9. -V-�
Pamela J. Schultz, Notary Public
My Commission expires: November 1, 2019
r
Ad Name: 12199423A
Customer: TOWN OF VAIL/PLAN DEPT/COMM
Your account number is- 1 OP2P 33
MW nay
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 6/24/2016 and
that the last publication of said notice was dated 6/24/2016 in
the issue of said newspaper.
In witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand this day,
06/27/2016.
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 06/27/2016.
( �L-& 9. -V-�
Pamela J. Schultz, Notary Public
My Commission expires: November 1, 2019
Nx �
r
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 July 11, 2016 at 1:00
pm in the Town of Vail Municipal Building.
A request for the review of a Conditional Use Per-
mit for the Chabad Jewish Center, pursuant to
Section 12-7H-4, Conditional Uses; Second Floor
and Above, in accordance with the provisions of
Section 12-16-4, Hearing, Vail Town Code, to al-
low for a religious institution, located at 450 East
Lionshead Circle (Treetops)/Lot 6, Block 1, Vail Li-
onshead Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard
thereto. (PEC16-0026)
Applicant: Chabad Jewish Center, represented by
Michael Hazard, AIA
Planner: Matt Panfil
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 24, 2016 in the Vail Daily.
(12199423)