HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-1212 PECTOWN OF VA10
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
December 12, 2016, 1:00 PM
Vail Town Council Chambers
75 S. Frontage Road -Vail, Colorado, 81657
1. Call to Order
Members Present: Brian Gillette, Kirk Hansen, Ludwig Kurz, John Ryan Lockman,
Henry Pratt, John Rediker, and Brian Stockmar
2. A request for a variance from Section 12-6F-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to
Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for construction of a deck with a five
(5) foot side setback where ten (10) feet is required, located at 4352 Spruce Way, Unit 5
(HBM Townhouses)/Lot 9, Block 3, Bighorn Subdivision, 3rd Addition and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0037)
Applicant: Jason and Jacqui Baggaley, represented by MPP Design Shop
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Action: Approve with One Condition
Motion: Hansen Second: Kurz Vote: 7-0-0
Condition:
1. Approval of this variance is contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of
Vail design review approval for this proposal.
Jonathan Spence introduced the project. The site is located within a subdivision that
was approved by Eagle County prior to being annexed into the Town. At its
construction, the home was placed right along the minimum 10 foot setback and the
existing deck was allowed to encroach five feet (5') into the setback. When the property
was annexed, the new setback established was 20 feet. Due to the regulation change,
the deck would not be able to be rebuilt without a variance.
Pratt — What is the Town's view on encroachments into utility easements?
Spence — OK with utility's approval.
Gillette — If the deck was rebuilt to the same size, would it still require a variance?
Spence— Yes
Gillette —Were neighbors notified?
Spence— Yes
Stockmar — Is this lot substantially sloping?
Spence — The area where the deck is located is relatively flat.
Rediker — Asked for a review of the regulations in place at the time of the construction
of the home and how they compare to today's standards.
Lockman — Asked for clarification as to how the deck encroachment is measured.
The applicant declined to present additional information, but remained available to
answer questions.
Public Comment — There was no public in the audience to comment.
Lockman — Agrees with staff's recommendation.
Hansen — Agrees with staff's recommendation.
Kurz — Also in favor of approving the variance.
Pratt — Agrees that there are grounds for granting a variance. He is somewhat
concerned that the neighbor has not responded to the notification.
Gillette — Expressed concern that mailing a notification to a neighbor is not enough
notice.
Stockmar —Agrees with staff's recommendation.
Rediker — Cited the review criteria in the staff memorandum and agreed with staff's
recommendation. He does not find that the variance is a grant of special privilege.
Rediker reopened public comment.
Karl Forstner, 4325 Spruce Way - Asked for clarification as to where the new deck
would be located. He expressed that he does not have a concern about the project.
3. A request for a variance from Section 14-6-7, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 14-
1-5, Variances, Vail Town Code, and in accordance with Section 12-17, Variances, Vail
Town Code, to allow for retaining walls with an exposed face height greater than three
feet (3') in the front setback, located at 1255 Westhaven Circle/Lot 45, Glen Lyon
Subdivision and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0036)
Applicant: Westhaven LLC and Jamie Lipnick, represented by KH Webb Architects
Planner: Matt Panfil
Action: Table to January 9, 2017
Motion: Kurz Second: Stockmar Vote: 7-0-0
4. 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)
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Action: Table to January 9, 2017
Motion: Kurz Second: Stockmar Vote: 7-0-0
5. Approval of Minutes
November 28, 2016 PEC Meeting Results
Action: Approve
Motion: Kurz Second: Hansen Vote: 7-0-0
6. Informational Update
Chris Neubecker prompted the Commission for training topics and other Informational
Updates that they would like to learn about in future informational updates. Requested
topics included:
• Site visits to non -conforming properties in West Vail
• Legislative Training on Quasi- Judicial Issues
• Water Quality and the Restore the Gore Action Plan
• Update on Local Judge Overturning a Water Quality Case
Chris Neubecker thanked the Commissioners for their service to the Town of Vail and
the community over the past year.
7. Adjournment
Action: Adjourn
Motion: Kurz Second: Stockmar Vote: 7-0-0
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection
during regular office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75
South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project orientation and the site visits
that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department.
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: December 12, 2016
ITEM/TOPIC: A request for a variance from Section 12-6F-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code,
pursuant to Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for construction of a deck with a
five (5) foot side setback where ten (10) feet is required, located at 4352 Spruce Way, Unit 5
(HBM Townhouses)/Lot 9, Block 3, Bighorn Subdivision, 31d Addition and setting forth details in
regard thereto. (PEC16-0037)
ATTACHMENTS:
File Name Description
PEC16-0037_Staff Memo.pdf Staff Memorandum
Bighorn _Subdivision_3rd_Addition_Block_3_Lot_9_- Vicinity Map
_HBM Townhouses Vicinity_Map.pdf
PEC16-0037_Narrative.pdf Applicant Narrative
PEC16-0037_Plan_Set.pdf Architectural Plans
VAIL }
Memorandum
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: December 12, 2016
SUBJECT: A request for a variance from Section 12-6F-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code,
pursuant to Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for
construction of a deck with a five foot (5') side setback where ten feet (10') is
required, located at 4352 Spruce Way, Unit 5 (HBM Townhouses)/Lot 9, Block
3, Bighorn Subdivision, 3rd Addition and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC16-0037)
Applicant: Jason and Jacqui Baggaley, represented by MPP Design Shop
Planner: Jonathan Spence
SUMMARY
The applicant, Jason and Jacqui Baggaley, represented by MPP Design Shop, is
requesting a variance from Section 12-6F-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to
Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for construction of a deck with a five
foot (5') side setback where ten feet (10') is required, located at 4352 Spruce Way.
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 a condition, of this application, subject to the findings noted
in Section VIII of this memorandum. A vicinity map (Attachment A), the applicants'
narrative (Attachment B), and proposed architectural plans (Attachment C) are attached
for review.
II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
The applicant, Jason and Jacqui Baggaley, represented by MPP Design Shop, is
requesting a variance from Section 12-6F-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to
Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for the reconstruction of a deck with a
five foot (5') side setback where ten feet (10') is required, located at 4352 Spruce Way.
The subject property, located in the Low Density Multiple -Family Zone District, is a two-
story townhome originally built in 1978. The applicant is proposing to replace the existing
deck with a new deck in the same location. Although the new deck does not encroach
further into the required setback than the existing deck, the area of the deck within the
setback increases. Please see sheet Al. 1 of the included plan set (Attachment C) dated
10-28-2016.
III. BACKGROUND
The Bighorn Subdivision 3rd Addition was approved by the Eagle County
Commissioners and recorded in 1963. The property was annexed into the Town of Vail
in 1974. The residence was approved by the Town of Vail and constructed in 1978 as a
part of a five unit townhome project knows as the HBM Townhomes. At that time, the
required side setback was ten feet (10') in the Low Density Multiple -Family (LDMF)
District and the home was constructed with a deck encroaching five feet (5') into the
setback, as permitted. Per Chapter 14-10-4 of the Vail Town Code, decks located at
ground level or within five feet (5') of ground level may project not more than ten feet (10')
nor more than one-half (1/2) the minimum required dimension into a required setback
area. In this circumstance, this allowed the deck in question to encroach five feet (5') into
the ten foot (10') side setback. Subsequent to the construction of the home, Ordinance
No. 50, Series 1978, increased the required side setback in the Low Density Multiple -
Family (LDMF) District to twenty feet (20'), resulting in the required setback for a ground
level deck being increased from five (5) to ten feet.(10'). This ordinance increased
setback requirements in all residential zone districts existing at that time.
IV. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS
Staff believes that following provisions of the Vail Land Use Plan and the Vail Town Code
are relevant to the review of this proposal: Vail Land Use Plan (in part)
CHAPTER ll: LAND USE PLAN GOALS /POLICIES (in part)
The goals articulated here reflect the desires of the citizenry as expressed through the
series of public meetings that were held throughout the project. A set of initial goals were
developed which were then substantially revised after different types of opinions were
brought out in the second meeting. The goal statements were developed to reflect a
general consensus once the public had had the opportunity to reflect on the concepts and
ideas initially presented. The goal statements were then revised through the review
process with the Task Force, the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town
Council and now represent policy guidelines in the review process for new development
proposals. These goal statements should be used in conjunction with the adopted Land
Use Plan map, in the evaluation of any development proposal.
The goal statements which are reflected in the design of the proposed Plan are as
follows:
General Growth /Development
1.1. Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance
between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the
permanent resident.
1.3. The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever
possible.
1.12. Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing
developed areas (infill areas).
5. Residential
5.1. Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing,
platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist.
5.4. Residential growth should keep pace with the market place demands for a full
range of housing types.
Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code (in part)
ARTICLE 12-6F: LOW DENSITY MULTIPLE -FAMILY (LDMF) DISTRICT (in part)
12-6F-1: The low density multiple -family district is intended to provide sites for single-
family, two-family and multiple -family dwellings at a density not exceeding nine (9)
dwelling units per acre, together with such public facilities as may appropriately be
located in the same zone district. The low density multiple -family district is intended to
ensure adequate light, air, privacy and open space for each dwelling, commensurate with
low density occupancy, and to maintain the desirable residential qualities of the zone
district by establishing appropriate site development standards
12-6F-6: Setbacks: In the LDMF district, the minimum front setback shall be twenty feet
(20), the minimum side setback shall be twenty feet (20), and the minimum rear setback
shall be twenty feet (20).
CHAPTER 12-17: VARIANCES (in part)
12-17-1: Purpose: A. Reasons for Seeking Variance: In order to prevent or to lessen
such practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the
objectives of this title as would result from strict or literal interpretation and enforcement,
variances from certain regulations may be granted. A practical difficulty or unnecessary
physical hardship may result from the size, shape, or dimensions of a site or the location
of existing structures thereon, from topographic or physical conditions on the site or in the
immediate vicinity; or from other physical limitations, street locations or conditions in the
immediate vicinity. Cost or inconvenience to the applicant of strict or literal compliance
with a regulation shall not be a reason for granting a variance.
CHAPTER 14-10-4: ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTIONS, DECKS, BALCONIES, STEPS,
BAY WINDOWS, ETC (in part)
14-10-4 C. Balconies, decks, terraces, and other similar unroofed features projecting from
a structure at a height of more than five feet (5) above ground level may project not more
than five feet (5) nor more than one-half (1/2) the minimum required dimension into a
required setback area, or may project not more than five feet (5) nor more than one-
fourth (1/4) the minimum required dimension into a required distance between buildings. A
balcony or deck projecting from a higher elevation may extend over a lower balcony or
deck but in such case shall not be deemed a roof for the lower balcony or deck.
V. SITE ANALYSIS
Address: 4352 Spruce Way
Legal Description: Lot 9, Block 3, Bighorn Subdivision, 3rd Addition
Zoning: Low Density Multiple -Family (LDMF) District
Land Use Plan Designation: High Density Residential
Current Land Use: Multi -Family Residential
Geological Hazards: None
Standard
Allowed/Reauired
Existina
Proposed
Density: (max GRFA) 2,728 sq. ft.
1,537 sq. ft.
TBD*
Building Height:
35 ft.
25 ft.
25 ft.
Site Coverage:
11,061 sq. ft.
4,708 sq. ft.
TBD
Landscape
12,641 sq. ft.
15,969 sq. ft.
TBD
Parking
>_2,000 GRFA, 2 spaces
2 spaces
2 spaces
Setbacks:
South:
20 ft. (side)
5 ft.
No change**
West:
20 ft. (front)
27 ft.
26ft
East:
20 ft. (rear)
100 ft.
No change
North:
20ft. (side)
73 ft.
No change
* The property is also proposing an addition and remodel that does not require PEC review.
**Although the project does not result in a change in the existing setbacks, it does result in
development within the required 20' side setback.
VI. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING
VII. REVIEW CRITERIA
Zoning District
None
Low Density Multiple -Family (LDMF)
Low Density Multiple -Family (LDMF)
Low Density Multiple -Family (LDMF)
The review criteria for a variance request are prescribed in Chapter 12-17, Variances,
Vail Town Code.
1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and
structures in the vicinity.
The proposed reconstruction of the existing deck affords the applicant the same
opportunities as the other units in the HBM Townhomes complex that were constructed
a greater distance from the property line. Although the new deck with be slightly larger
than the existing deck, the historic setback of five feet (5') will be maintained. The
proposed deck replacement will have no effect on other existing or potential uses and
structures.
Therefore, Staff believes this proposal will not negatively affect the other existing or
potential uses and structures in the vicinity in comparison to existing conditions.
2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and
enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and
uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the objectives of this
title without a grant of special privilege.
The original home was constructed within the Town of Vail in early 1978 under the Low
Density Multiple -Family (LDMF) District regulations. The setback regulations at that time
required a 10 foot side setback that the building design and construction complied with,
including a deck that extended to within five feet (5') of the side property line. The home
subsequently became legal nonconforming in January of 1979 when the side setback
was increased in the Low Density Multiple -Family (LDMF) District to twenty feet (20').
Property owners in the vicinity whose original homes were built prior to 1978, but met the
revised twenty foot (20') setback regulation, are able to pursue deck
replacements/modifications without the need for a variance. Unlike other properties in the
vicinity, a variance is necessary to pursue similar building activities on the subject
property. In contrast to demo/rebuild where compliance with today's standards are
required and expected, the circumstances related to this property, namely the existing
Existing Use
North:
1-70 ROW
South:
Multi -family Residential
East:
Multi -family Residential
West:
Multi -family Residential
VII. REVIEW CRITERIA
Zoning District
None
Low Density Multiple -Family (LDMF)
Low Density Multiple -Family (LDMF)
Low Density Multiple -Family (LDMF)
The review criteria for a variance request are prescribed in Chapter 12-17, Variances,
Vail Town Code.
1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and
structures in the vicinity.
The proposed reconstruction of the existing deck affords the applicant the same
opportunities as the other units in the HBM Townhomes complex that were constructed
a greater distance from the property line. Although the new deck with be slightly larger
than the existing deck, the historic setback of five feet (5') will be maintained. The
proposed deck replacement will have no effect on other existing or potential uses and
structures.
Therefore, Staff believes this proposal will not negatively affect the other existing or
potential uses and structures in the vicinity in comparison to existing conditions.
2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and
enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and
uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the objectives of this
title without a grant of special privilege.
The original home was constructed within the Town of Vail in early 1978 under the Low
Density Multiple -Family (LDMF) District regulations. The setback regulations at that time
required a 10 foot side setback that the building design and construction complied with,
including a deck that extended to within five feet (5') of the side property line. The home
subsequently became legal nonconforming in January of 1979 when the side setback
was increased in the Low Density Multiple -Family (LDMF) District to twenty feet (20').
Property owners in the vicinity whose original homes were built prior to 1978, but met the
revised twenty foot (20') setback regulation, are able to pursue deck
replacements/modifications without the need for a variance. Unlike other properties in the
vicinity, a variance is necessary to pursue similar building activities on the subject
property. In contrast to demo/rebuild where compliance with today's standards are
required and expected, the circumstances related to this property, namely the existing
construction in tandem with the change in the regulation, warrant relief.
The proposed deck replacement will improve the functionality and value of the home, an
upgrade supported by Land Use Plan Goal 1.3. Staff believes the proposed variance is
consistent with the goals of the Town of Vail Land Use Plan and purposes of the Low
Density Multiple -Family (LDMF) District as identified in Section IV of this memorandum.
Therefore, Staff believes the proposed relief from the setback regulations is necessary to
achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity and to attain
the objectives of this title without a grant of special privilege.
3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population,
transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety.
The proposed variance will facilitate the reconstruction of a deck within the side setback
that will not alter population; will not increase the required number of parking spaces; will
not affect any existing transportation or traffic facilities, public facilities, or utilities; and will
not affect public safety in comparison to existing conditions. Therefore, Staff believes the
proposed variance conforms to this criterion.
4. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to the
proposed variance.
VIII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends approval, with a condition, for
a variance from Section 12-6F-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 12-17,
Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for construction of a deck with a five (5) foot side
setback where ten (10) feet is required, located at 4352 Spruce Way, Unit 5 (HBM
Townhouses)/Lot 9, Block 3, Bighorn Subdivision, 3rd Addition and setting forth details in
regard thereto.. This recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria outlined in
Section VII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance
request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass
the following motion:
"The Planning and Environmental Commission approves the applicants' request for a
variance from Section 12-6F-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 12-17,
Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for construction of a deck with a five (5) foot side
setback where ten (10) feet is required, located at 4352 Spruce Way, Unit 5 (HBM
Townhouses)/Lot 9, Block 3, Bighorn Subdivision, 3rd Addition and setting forth details in
regard thereto. "
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance
request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission applies
the following condition:
1. Approval of this variance is contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of
Vail design review approval for this proposal.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance
request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes
the following findings:
"Based upon a review of Section VII of the December 12, 2016 staff memorandum to the
Planning and Environmental Commission, and the evidence and testimony presented, the
Planning and Environmental Commission finds:
1. The granting of this variance will not constitute a granting of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the Low
Density Multiple -Family (LDMF) District.
2. The granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
3. This variance is warranted for the following reasons:
a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation
will result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship
inconsistent with the objectives of Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail
Town Code.
b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally
to other properties in the Low Density Multiple -Family (LDMF) District.
c. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified
regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the
owners of other properties in the Low Density Multiple -Family (LDMF)
District.
IX. ATTACHMENTS
A. Vicinity Map
B. Applicant's Narrative
C. Architectural Plans
11
November 08, 2016
Town of Vail Community Development
Attention: Jonathan Spence
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Tel - (970) 479-2321
Fax - (970) 479-2452
ispence@vailgov.com
Regarding: Baggaley Residence Variance Request
Location:
4352 Spruce Way, #5
Vail, CO 81657
HBM Townhouses Parcel 5
Parcel No: 2101-122-20-005
mpp design shop
PO Box 288
Gypsum, CO 81637
(970) 390-4931
michael@mrprpdesianshop.com
The Variance Request is to replace an existing deck that encroaches into the side yard setback
and drainage & utility easement. The new deck is proposed to encroach into the setback and
easement not more than the existing deck currently does. The extent of the deck will be
increased to the east and west, parallel to the easement, to create a larger, more useable
deck.
The drainage and utility easement is 8'-0". The original side yard setback was 10'-0". There have
been changes in the zoning code since the structure was originally built and is now 20'-0".
The request is to allow the original setback to be used in consideration of the encroachment of
the new deck. Original and current zoning codes both allow for an on -grade deck to encroach
into the side yard setback not more than one-half (1 /2) the distance of the setback. The original
deck conformed to the zoning code and did not encroach more than 5'-0" into the 10'-0"
setback.
The new deck is proposed to encroach, to the face of framing, into the easement 2'-6" and into
the original setback 4'-6", or 14'-6" into the current setback. With the application of finish
materials and railings the deck will not encroach more than 3'-0" into the easement and 5'-0"
into the original setback, or 15'-0" into the current setback. The foundation piers supporting the
deck will be located outside of the easement and the portion of the deck that encroaches into
the easement will be cantilevered above ground.
When the building was originally constructed it conformed to the then current zoning code. The
existing building footprint does not encroach into the original setback or easement. Since the
setback changes in the zoning code, the existing building footprint is encroaching into the
setback. There is also a proposed addition to the existing building, which also does not encroach
into any setbacks or easements.
PEC 16-0037 Narrative Page 1 of 4
PF
or
S� h
. . . . . . . ...... ......
Ali
UAL
2i.
PF
or
S� h
. . . . . . . ...... ......
Ali
UAL
mpp design shop
PO Box 288
Gypsum, CO 81637
(970) 390-4931
michael@mppdesianshop.com
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully,
SIGNED: Michael P Pukas
PEC 16-0037 Narrative Page 4 of 4
I
u
FA
/
N
a�
0
N
I
N
J
O
`\
ai
U
W
II
CD
Q
U' o
FA
/
■
10 - 'gL l
1.0 -ZL 1 .0-,zs
LL m
z
CL
L Q
W,
11
LL Cm L Q t) cn
IL m LU Q
z
LU
�0
W
Z V t) �
N W�
LU IL ®
Ov
%l\
N
W
m
W
1L
'd:3 ,5'L @ Sovaau 8 SZI:3SIZI 0:3 b
.O -.SL
LU
z
LL Cm L Q t) cn
IL m LU Q
z
LU
�0
W
Z V t) �
N W�
LU IL ®
Ov
%l\
ZAOL -I CAOL -A
IL m LU Q
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
(kDb
L �
TOWN OF VA110
VAI LTOWN PLANNINGAND ENVI RONMENTAL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: December 12, 2016
ITEM/TOPIC:
A request for a variance from Section 14-6-7, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 14-1-5,
Variances, Vail Town Code, and in accordance with Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to
allow for retaining walls with an exposed face height greater than three feet (3') in the front
setback, located at 1255 Westhaven Circle/Lot 45, Glen Lyon Subdivision and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0036)
Table to January 9, 2017
ATTACHMENTS:
File Name Description
PEC16-0036_Variance Memo_121216 (Table).pdf Staff Memo to PEC
0) TOWN OF VAIL
Memorandum
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: December 12, 2016
SUBJECT: A request for a variance from Section 14-6-7, Vail Town Code, pursuant to
Section 14-1-5, Variances, Vail Town Code, and in accordance with
Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for retaining walls with
an exposed face height greater than three feet (3') in the front setback,
located at 1255 Westhaven Circle/Lot 45, Glen Lyon Subdivision and
setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC16-0036)
Applicant: Westhaven LLC and Janie Lipnick, represented by KH Webb
Architects
Planner: Matt Panfil
The applicant, Westhaven LLC and Janie Lipnick, represented by KH Webb Architects,
has requested that this item be continued to the January 9, 2017 Planning and
Environmental Commission (PEC) meeting.
TOWN OF VA10
VAI LTOWN PLANNINGAND ENVI RONMENTAL AGENDA MEMO
MEETING DATE: December 12, 2016
ITEM/TOPIC: November 28, 2016 PEC Meeting Results
ATTACHMENTS:
File Name
pec results 112816.pdf
Description
November 28, 2016 PEC Meeting Results
TOWN OF VA10
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
November28, 2016, 1:00 PM
Vail Town Council Chambers
75S. Frontage Road -Vail, Colorado, 81657
Call to Order
Members Present: Brian Gillette, Kirk Hansen, Ludwig Kurz, Henry Pratt, John
Rediker, John Ryan Lockman and Brian Stockmar
Absent: None
Site Visits - 30 min.
1. Marriott Residence Inn - 1783 North Frontage Road West
3. A request for recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an application to
establish Special Development District No. 41 (Marriott Residence Inn),
pursuant to Section 12-9(A), Special Development Districts, Vail Town Code,
to allow for the development of a limited service lodge and deed restricted
employee housing units and a conditional use permit for public or commercial
parking facilities or structures, located at 1783 North Frontage Road West/Lot
9, Buffehr Creek Resubdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC16-0030).
Applicant: Vail Hotel Owner ESHV, LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group
Planner: Matt Panfil
Chairman Rediker opened the item
Matt Panfil, Planner, introduced the project. Matt ran through a list of terms that are used
both in the staff report and staff's presentation. He discussed the objective of Special
Development Districts and how they are reviewed. Matt added emphasis that at times
there may be competing public interests.
Panfil summarized the application, including its components and the relationship of these
components to the town code. He presented the changes to the plans that have occurred
over the three meetings and plan sets.
Commissioner Hansen asked about the color coding shown for parking.
Commissioner Gillette asked about the parking requirement and allowable deductions for
multi—use facilities.
Panfil provided answers to these two questions. Matt stated that staff has concerns
about the multi -use parking credit but the code does not provide further clarification
regarding the parking reduction.
Commissioner Stockmar asked about parking requirements and the possibility that the
demand will be lower.
Panfil discussed the possibility of more spaces being available for public parking if future
demand from the residential uses does not meet the spaces provided. He closed out his
presentation with a discussion of the proposed deviations from the underlying zone
district.
Chairman Rediker requested that staff discuss the proposed conditions of approval.
Panfil provided the Commission with the proposed conditions of approval.
Chairman Rediker opened up for Commissioner's question.
Chairman Rediker asked about the acceptability of the conditions to the applicant and a
greater explanation of the LEED condition.
Chairman Rediker asked about the location of the retaining walls and the need to move
them 2' from the property line.
Commissioner Hansen asked about the needed easement for Meadow Ridge Road.
Commissioner Hansen asked about the shading of the road and if a plan for this was
needed.
Panfil provided greater details on what was being requested and indicated that no
mitigation for the shading is proposed.
Commissioner Kurz asked for clarification related to building height and how the building
height was able to be reduced by more than 12 feet without removing any floors to the
building.
Panfil discussed the changes in the building height.
Chairman Rediker asked about the height allowances over the limit.
Panfil discussed architectural projections and their allowance.
Commissioner Lockman asked about site coverage and how it is calculated.
Commissioner Lockman also asked about the availability of water service.
Panfil discussed these items and how the water service comment was meant as an
advisory alert to the applicant.
Commissioner Lockman asked about the applicability of an Environmental Impact Report
for this project.
Panfil stated that it had been discussed but had not been requested for previous projects.
Commissioner Hansen expressed concern with the traffic flow on the frontage road
Commissioner Kurz asked if any of the technical aspects will result in a return to either
the PEC or Town Council.
Panfil stated that with the exception of CDOT technical issues, other items have been
addressed or are conditioned to do so.
Applicant presentation.
Dominic Mauriello made a PowerPoint presentation on behalf of the applicant.
Chairman Rediker asked the Commission if they have questions for the applicant.
Chairman Rediker asked about the step between the apartment units and the lodging
units.
Mauriello responded that it is partially due to a change in grade and also in response to
comments received that height is more acceptable along the eastern end.
Panfil and Mauriello reviewed some building sections that help to illustrate the proposed
height.
Chairman Rediker asked for clarification regarding the landscape plan at the rear of the
building (north side).
Mauriello responded that is was principally evergreen trees with some aspens.
Chairman Rediker asked if there was sufficient sunlight for the landscaping proposed
Mauriello responded that the plan has been prepared by a landscape architect and
reviewed by the Town's landscape architect.
Public Comment
Randy Guerriero — Stated that the third plan is an improvement. Expressed concern with
the evergreens along the north side. He asked about improvements to the frontage road
such as deceleration or turn lanes. He asked a question about the deed restrictions. He
expressed concern with snow storage.
Ted Steers — Supportive of the proposed underground component. Rooftop landscaping
will require attention for detail. He expressed concern that Marriott would co-opt all of the
employee housing units for its own employee use. He is also concerned with the size of
the building and wondered why it is not broken into two or three buildings.
Molly Murphy — Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) fully supports the project. No public
money subsidy is being requested. In her experience, the rent would be ok. The lodge
units help serve a demand that is not being met. VVMC currently send people to
Hawthorne Suites in Eagle.
Chris Burns — He believes the revised plan is much better. He is concerned with possible
effects on the sanitary sewer system, the removal of existing old growth trees, the
proposed zero setback construction and the effects of the zero setback construction on
existing buildings. He is also concerned with the rooftop proposal and potential noise
affecting nearby properties. He expressed concern with the level of public amenities, and
that a bus shelter is not public art. He concluded by stating that the project is just too big
for the neighborhood and 150 units per acre is inconsistent with the area.
Steve Lindstrom — Vail Local Housing Authority (VLHA) supports the project. Vail is
landlocked and does not have room to sprawl in order to grow. Vail has to look inward at
what we have to solve our problems. Density is the solution, not the problem. The
1970's and 80's way of solving problems will not work. Lion's Ridge is a missed
opportunity. This project is a project that works towards a solution. There is not a better
site or a better project. We need private sector help to solve our housing problems.
Jason Cowles — Eagle River Water and Sanitation District (ERWSD) is working with the
applicant and looking at capacity issues. No answers at this time but the existing water
and sewer infrastructure will need to be upsized and loop up to Buffehr Creek Road.
Mike Brumbaugh — He is strongly in favor of this. Project addresses three important
issues in community: housing, lodging and parking. He is unable to expand business
opportunities because of employee housing issues. Vail Valley Partnership is also
supportive of the proposal. This project is part of the solution.
Jill Klosterman, Eagle County Housing — Addressed the county needs assessment and
how the need is growing. She spoke to the limited supply of land and how this may be
part of the solution.
Mary McDougall, VLHA — She supports the project as a board member and as a citizen.
The project is a great compromise between staff and developer.
Lori Johnson — Spoke to change in Vail, and Vail will continue to change. People who
are opposed are concerned about views. The Town needs to look at the sustainability
and growth of the community. Families with children are moving down valley. If we don't
figure out these community issues we won't have a community. We need to think about
solutions.
Greg Bemis — Stated that it is a massive, very tall building; twice the size of Vail Run.
Employee housing may be supportive but what about the effects on the character of West
Vail. Zoning is there for a reason. There are a lot of places to put this type of housing
that will have fewer effects on the character of the area. As a resident of West Vail, this
may not be what we are looking for. Asked where is the West Vail plan? Asked the PEC
to consider the massiveness of this building. Questioned the project's sense of scale.
Commissioner Comments
Commissioner Stockmar — Stated that this is a challenging decision. This is a proposal
that solves a lot of problems, but it is not perfect. He is concerned about the loss of mid-
level lodging in town. There are downsides but there are upsides to solving our needs.
We need to use the land we have well. Overall, with the conditions and constraints
placed, he is supportive.
Commissioner Gillette — Stated his support. This is a massive building but the
architectural treatment breaking it into different fagades helps. He feels that this project is
on the right track. He is concerned the project will run into budget constraints, and there
is an expectation that the level of architectural detail will not be compromised. He is
concerned that some of the conditions placed may affect the architectural details.
Commissioner Pratt — Supports the overall project, but feels that this proposal is 13
pounds in a 10 pound bag and is just too much for the site.
Commissioner Kurz — Supports the project. Our needs speak to our previous successes
and our future success is dependent upon employees. He feels the project meets the
criteria for SDD approval, but recognizes that this is 12 pounds in the 10 pound bag. He
is not concerned with height. He feels the technical aspects will be taken care of and the
building will be a positive mark on the neighborhood. The benefits outweigh the
negatives.
Commissioner Hansen — Supports the project. It is time for larger steps. He has never
seen a presentation that so well covered all the bases. This is a private sector project
with significant public benefits.
Commissioner Lockman — Concurs with the quality of the presentation by staff and the
applicant, and thankful for the public comment. In thinking about competing interests he
feels the benefits outweigh the possible negatives. He still struggles with the proposed
density of use and he still questions why an EIS was not required.
Chairman Rediker — Asked about the impact on groundwater drainage with the proposed
lot line to lot line development.
Mauriello — Prior to building permit application, a groundwater study will be necessary.
Chairman Rediker — Asked if the applicant will be required to install drainage.
Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer — A drainage study will be required and an analysis will be
needed. Water flows to the southwest corner of site. A de -watering system will be
needed.
Chairman Rediker — Echoed Commissioner Pratt's comments. This was a well prepared
application and presentation. He is thankful for the public comment. This is a very
difficult decision if not the hardest decision with his time on the PEC. He is supportive of
the hot beds and the affordable housing, which are big pluses for the project. He stated
that unfortunately he does not feel the criteria are met, specifically concerning
compatibility, relationship and design features. The lack of a master plan needs to be
looked at.
Commissioner Gillette — This project meets one-tenth of the Town's housing goal. If the
frontage road location does not work, the housing plan will not work.
Closed commissioner comments
Special Development District Motion
Action: Approve with Conditions on page 23-24 of packet, and Findings on
page 24
Conditions:
1. Approval of Special Development District No. 41, Marriott Residence Inn, is
contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of Vail approval of an associated
design review application;
2. The applicant shall obtain Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
certification for the structure within one (1) year of issuance of the first Certificate
of Occupancy. Failure to obtain the certification within the identified time -frame
will necessitate a return to the Planning and Environmental Commission and/or
Town Council for an evaluation of a suitable, replacement public benefit,
3. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall identify the
six (6) unrestricted, rental dwelling units and provide documentation that the units
shall have the right -of -use to the lodge's service and facilities under the same
rules and regulations as the lodge guests.;
4. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall submit
revised plans relocating the proposed retaining walls at least two feet (2) from
adjacent property lines;
5. Should the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) not approve the
proposed landscaping in the North Frontage Road right-of-way, the applicant shall
submit a revised landscape plan, for review and approval, prior to submitting any
building permit application, subject to Design Review,
6. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall submit
revised plans that clearly illustrate signage and striping of the fire staging area;
7. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall submit
revised plans that illustrate the continuation of the proposed sidewalk to the
intersection with Buffehr Creek Road,
8. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall submit
approval from CDOT related to all proposed work within the CDOT right -of way,
9. The applicant shall mitigate system wide pedestrian and traffic impacts through
the payment of a Transportation Impact Fee that shall not be offset by the project
level improvements. This payment shall be made prior to requesting any
Certificate of Occupancy for the project. The fee shall be determined through the
ongoing update and codification to the Impact Fee as approved by the Town
Council. In the event that the updated fee is not adopted by the Town Council
prior to July 1, 2017, the applicant shall provide a payment, prior to requesting any
Certificate of Occupancy, based upon net new PM Peak Hour vehicle trips
generated by the development. The amount per trip shall be assessed at the
established rate as of July 1, 2017, and
10. Prior to submitting any building permit application, the applicant shall provide
roadway and snow storage easements for the portion of Meadow Ridge Road that
encroaches onto the subject property in a format acceptable to the Town's
Attorney.
Findings:
Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section Vlll of the Staff
memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated November
28, 2016, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and
Environmental Commission finds:
1. The SDD complies with the standards listed in Section Vlll of this
memorandum, or the applicant has demonstrated that one or more of the
standards is not applicable;
2. The SDD is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and policies
outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the
development objectives of the town;
3. The SDD is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and appropriate
for the surrounding areas; and
4. The SDD promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the
town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the
town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and
its established character as a resort and residential community of the
highest quality.
Motion: Stockmar Second: Hansen Vote: 5-2-0 (Pratt
and Rediker opposed)
Conditional Use Permit Motion
Action: Approve with Condition as listed on page 25 of packet
Motion: Stockmar Second: Kurz Vote: 6-1-0
(Rediker opposed)
Condition
1. The conditional use permit for a commercial parking facility 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.
Findings
Based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section IX of the Staff
memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated November 28,
2016, and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental
Commission finds:
1. The proposed location of the use is in accordance with the purposes of this title
and the purposes of the Public Accommodation -2 (PA -2) zone district,
2. 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, and
welfare, or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity,
and
3. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of this title.
4. A report to the Planning and Environmental Commission of an administrative
action approving a request for a minor amendment to Special Development
District No. 6 (Vail Village Inn), pursuant to section 12-9A-10, Amendment
Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of an approximately
sixty (60) square foot addition (glass display case) located at 100 East
Meadow Drive, Units 7A, 8, 21 and 22 (Vail Village Plaza Condos)/Lot O,
Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC16-0035)
Applicant: AJW Properties II, LLC, represented by Current Architects
Planner: Matt Panfil
Matt Panfil stated that the applicant is proposing to build a glass display case underneath
a building overhang at the southeast corner of the structure that will help bring attention
to the structure from pedestrians on Meadow Drive. The glass display case counts as
commercial floor area and therefore requires a minor amendment to the Special
Development District (SDD).
Commissioner Gillette asked about the purpose of the display case.
Michael Current of Current Architects, representing the applicant, stated that the display
case is part of other improvements that will help connect the structure to the plaza area
and bring attention to an unidentified future business.
There were no other questions or comments from the Commissioners
Action: None
5. A request for a variance from Section 14-6-7, Vail Town Code, pursuant to
Section 14-1-5, Variances, Vail Town Code, and in accordance with Section
12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for retaining walls with an exposed
face height greater than three feet (3') in the front setback, located at 1255
Westhaven Circle/Lot 45, Glen Lyon Subdivision and setting forth details in
regard thereto. (PEC16-0036)
Table to December 12, 2016
Applicant: Westhaven LLC and Jamie Lipnick, represented by KH Webb Architects
Planner: Matt Panfil
Action: Table to December 12, 2016
Motion: Hansen Second: Kurz Vote: 7-0-0
6. 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)
Table to December 12, 2016
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Action: Table to December 12, 2016
Motion: Hansen Second: Kurz Vote: 7-0-0
Approval of Minutes
November 14, 2016 PEC Meeting Results
Action: Approve
Motion: Kurz Second: Stockmar Vote: 7-0-0
Informational Update
Environmental Sustainability- Storm Water Education
To be heard at a later date.
Adjournment
Action: Adjourn
Motion: Stockmar Second: Kurz Vote: 6-0-0
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public
inspection during regular office hours at the Town of Vail Community
Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to
attend the project orientation and the site visits that precede the public
hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Times and
order of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon
to determine at what time the Planning and Environmental Commission will
consider an item. Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional information. Sign
language interpretation is available upon request with 48-hour notification.
Please call (970) 479-2356, Telecommunication Device for the Deaf (TDD), for
information.
Community Development Department
Ad Name: 12512109A
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, Mark Wurzer, 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 11/26/2016 and
that the last publication of said notice was dated 11/26/2016 in
the issue of said newspaper.
In witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand this day,
11/28/2016.
General Manager/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 11/28/2016.
( �L-& 9. -V-�
Pamela J. Schultz, Notary Public
My Commission expires: November 1, 2019
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 December 12, 2016 at
1 :00 pm in the Town of Vail Municipal Building, 75
S. Frontage Road, Vail, CO 81657.
Chamonix Employee Housing Development -
2310 Chamonix Road
A request for final review of a Development Plan,
pursuant to Section 12-6I-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)
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Jonathan Spence
Baggaley Residence Variance - 4352 Spruce
Way, Unit 5
A request for a variance from Section 12-6F-6,
Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section
12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for
construction of a deck with a five (5) foot side set-
back where ten (10) feet is required, located at
4352 Spruce Way, Unit 5 (HBM Townhouses)/Lot
9, Block 3, Bighorn Subdivision, 3rd Addition and
setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC16-0037)
Applicant: Jason and Jacqui Baggaley, represent-
ed by MPP Design Shop
Planner: Jonathan Spence
The applications and information about the propos-
als are available for public inspection during office
hours at the Town of Vail Community Develop-
ment Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The
public is invited to attend the public hearing and
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 November 26, 2016 in the Vail Daily.
(12512109)
Ad Name: 12537551 A
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
COMMISSION
Customer: TOWN OF VAIL/PLAN DEPT/COMM
December 12, 2016, 1:00 PM Vail Town Council
Chambers
Your account number is- 1OP2P 33
75S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657
Vail Daily
1.Call to Order
2 A request for a variance from Section 12-6F-6,
Setbacks, Vail Town Code, to Section
pursuant
12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
construction of a deck with a five (5) foot side set -
back where ten (10) feet is required, located at
4352 Spruce Way, Unit 5 (HBM Townhouses)/Lot
9, Block 3, Bighorn Subdivision, 3rd Addition and
STATE OF COLORADO }
setting forth details in regard thereto.
(PEC 16-0037) - 20 min.
Applicant:Jason and Jacqui Baggaley, represented
SS.
by MPP Design Shop
Planner: Jonathan Spence
COUNTY OF EAGLE }
3.A request for a variance from Seciton 14-6-7, Vail
Town Code, pursuant to Section 14-1-5, Variances,
Vail Town Code, and in accordance with Section
I, Mark Wurzer, do solemnly swear that I am a qualified
12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for re -
taining walls with an exposed face height greater
representative ofthe Vail Daily. That the same Daily newspaper
than three feet (3) in the front setback, located at
1255 Westhaven Circle/Lot 45, Glen Lyon Subdivi-
sion and setting forth details in regard thereto.
printed in whole or in part and published in the County
(PEC16-0036)- 20 min.
of Eagle, State of Colorado, and has a general circulation
g g
Applicant: Westhaven LLC and Jamie Lipnick, rep -
resented by KH Webb Architects
Planner: Matt Panfil
therein; that said newspaper has been published continuously
4.A request for final review of a Development Plan,
and uninterruptedly in said County of Eagle for a period of
pursuant to Section 12-61-11, Vail Town Code, to
allow for the future development of Employee
more than fifty-two consecutive weeks next prior to the first
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
Ppublication of the annexed legal notice or advertisement and
g
details in regard thereto. (PEC150019) - 5 min.
that said newspaper has published the requested legal notice
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Jonathan Spence
and advertisement as requested.
Table to January 9, 2017
5.Approval of Minutes
November 28, 2016 PEC Meeting Results
The Vail Daily is an accepted legal advertising medium,
6. Informational Update
only for jurisdictions operating under Colorado's Home
7.Adjournment
Rule1SlOn.
The applications and information about the propos-
e rOV
als are available for public inspection during regu-
laroffice hours at the Town of Vail Community De-
velopment Department, 75 South Frontage Road.
That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was
The public is invited to attend the project orienta-
tion and the site visits that precede the public
published m the regular and entire 1SSUe Of every
hearing in the Town of Vail Community Develop -
ment Department. Times and order of items are
approximate, subject to change, and cannot be re-
number of said daily newspaper for the period of 1
Tied upon to determine at what time the Planning
consecutive insertions; and that the first ublication of said
p
and Environmental Commission will consider an
item. Please call (970) for additional in -
formation. Sign language inter is
notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated 12/10/2016 and
re available
e nterpretation
upon request with 48-hour notification. Please call
(970) 479-2356, Telecommunication Device for the
that the last publication Of said notice was dated 12/10/2016
Deaf (TDD), for information.
Community Development Department
in the issue of said newspaper.
Published in the Vail Daily December 10, 2016
(12537551)
In witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand this day,
01/31/2017.
General Manager/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 01/31/2017.
( �L-& 9. -V-�
Pamela J. Schultz, Notary Public
My Commission expires: November 1, 2019
r