Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-06-10 PEC0 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION TOW?J OF ffl June 10, 2019, 1:00 PM Town Council Chambers 75 S. Frontage Road -Vail, Colorado, 81657 Call to Order Present: Pam Hopkins, Karen Perez, Brian Stockmar, Brian Gillette, Rollie Kjesbo, John Ryan Lockman Absent: Ludwig Kurz 1.1. Executive Session pursuant to C.R.S. 24-6-402(4)(b) to receive legal advice 30 min. on specific legal questions, regarding quasi-judicial decision making. Brian Gillette moved to convene in Executive Session. Pam Hopkins seconded the motion and it passed (6-0). Absent: (1) Kurz Karen Perez moved to adjourn Executive Session. Brian Gillette seconded the motion and it passed (6-0). Absent: (1) Kurz 1.2. Actions resulting from Executive Session 5 min. 2. Site Visits 2.1. 2699 Davos Trail - Mexamer Davos LLC 3. Main Agenda 3.1. An appeal, pursuant to Section 12-3-3, Appeals, Vail Town Code, of an 45 min. interpretation by the Administrator of the Community Development Department concerning Section 12-10-4: Additions or Changes, Vail Town Code, regarding parking requirements for a redevelopment project, located at 616 West Lionshead Circle/Lot 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 4 (Concert Hall Plaza), and setting forth details in regards thereto. (TC19-0003) Applicant: Hughes Land Holding Trust, represented by Pierce Architects Planner: Chris Neubecker Mr. Neubecker reviewed the appeal application and provided the commission with staff's interpretation of the Town Code. There was a discussion regarding the difference between an addition and new construction and the role each plays in triggering parking requirements. Mr. Neubecker stated that parking would not be required for the portion of the building to remain, but would be required for the addition or new construction. Chairman Stockmar stated that a demo/rebuild is an addition by scraping a substantial portion of a building and creating new construction in place of the structure that was demolished. Mr. Stockmar clarified that the foundation will remain. Mr. Neubecker affirmed Mr. Stockmar's characterization and reiterated that parking will only be required for the portion of new construction. Mr. Lockman confirmed that under their review was staff's interpretation of the code and not a specific project. Upon inquiry from Mr. Lockman, Mr. Neubecker confirmed this understanding, but that their decision may impact future applications. Mr. William Pierce on behalf of the Hughes Land Trust, provided a presentation. Mr. Pierce read from Mr. Neubecker's memo. Mr. Pierce stated that they intend to construct new residential units and plan to provide parking for those units. Mr. Pierce argued that they are decreasing the demand for parking. Mr. Pierce stated this discussion precipitated from their desire to lower the pedestrian walkway level to be at the same elevation as the bus drop off. He stated that they would like to eliminate the grade change from the bus drop off to pedestrian walk-through level of the building. Mr. Pierce stated the existing foundation is in good shape and would like to utilize it. Upon inquiry from Ms. Hopkins, Mr. Pierce described the grade of the site and how they would like to lower the grade to remove the steps to allow for pedestrian flow. Mr. Pierce stated that an entire set of steps on the east side could be removed as a result of lowering the grade. Mr. Pierce stated that they are proposing to use mechanized parking on the site. Utilizing sheet A0.00.2 showing cubic volume of the building, Mr. Pierce described the volume being removed and being maintained. Mr. Pierce showed an image of 288 Bridge Street and stated that it was an example of a demolition project. He stated at the time it was not considered a demo/rebuild. He then reviewed the parking requirements and payment - in -lieu for 288 Bridge Street. Mr. Pierce then discussed Golden Peak renovation and stated it is similar to the Concert Hall Plaza. Mr. Pierce then reviewed the plans for the Landmark and stated that parking was never provided. He then reviewed the Lionshead Master Plan and stated they plan to provide all required parking for new uses. Commissioner Stockmar called for public comments. There were no public comments. Mr. Neubecker stated that the code does not refer to volume of a building, it refers to floor area. He noted that they are essentially removing the building and then infilling into the existing foundation area. Upon inquiry from Commissioner Gillette, Mr. Neubecker stated all the floor area will be removed There was a discussion regarding other options available to meet the parking requirement. Mr. Pierce stated that they are reducing the number of parking spaces and for that reason they are reducing the parking demand. Mr. Lockman stated the key point is that while the foundation is remaining the space above is being removed. Mr. Pierce stated that Mr. Neubecker's memo refers to redevelopment. Mr. Lockman stated that Section 12-10-4, Addition or Changes, was interpreted correctly by town staff. He noted that while the foundation remains, this is a rebuild and parking needs to be provided. Ms. Hopkins concurred with Mr. Lockman. Ms. Perez concurred and stated that this is a new build even though the foundation remains intact. She advised the applicant to explore one of the other remedies available in the code to address parking. Mr. Gillette stated it comes down to whether or not this is a new building or an existing building and it is not quantified. Mr. Pierce confirmed there is no existing GRFA, however, there is floor area. Mr. Neubecker read Section 12-10-4 into the record. Mr. Gillette stated the PEC must decide if this is an existing building or not. Mr. Gillette stated there was a purpose the code was written this way. Mr. Kjesbo stated that it is an existing building, with a change in use and destroying the retail that is existing. He stated he is inclined to agree that this is an addition or enlargement of an existing building and stated the code's intent is for parking to be provided for the new area. He noted that floor area or GRFA is not included in the section. Mr. Spence stated that the applicant could propose a text amendment to clarify the current code. Mr. Stockmar stated that the existing code is insufficient to make a determination on its face. Mr. Stockmar noted the constraints the board operates under, the board is unable to expand the code or create a new category. He concurred with the majority of commissioners. Mr. Stockmar stated that the board does not have the flexibility or power to create new language. He noted that his vote would be to uphold the staff determination. Rollie Kjesbo moved to uphold the Administrator's Determination. John -Ryan Lockman seconded the motion and it passed (5-1). Ayes: (5) Hopkins, Kjesbo, Lockman, Perez, Stockmar Nays: (1) Gillette Absent: (1) Kurz 3.2. A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-6D-6, Setbacks, Vail 45 min. Town Code, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17-1, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the front setback of 20 feet for a new Two -Family residential building, located at 2699 Davos Trail/Lot 16, Block B, Vail Ridge Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC 19-0015) Applicant: Mexamer Davos LLC, represented by Scott S. Turnipseed AIA Planner: Chris Neubecker Mr. Neubecker presented the application. He noted that the code has provisions for garages on steep lot, with grades of 30% or greater. He stated that moving the structure around on the property has implications for site disturbance. He further stated that evidence has not been provided to demonstrate the lot as undevelopable. He noted that a previous subdivision and lot line adjustment is creating constraints on the lot. Mr. Stockmar asked if the garage has minimal setback and that the code does not allow for an extension of that plane above the garage to include any GRFA above. Mr. Neubecker confirmed that GRFA or living space is not allowed above the garage in the setback. Mr. Glenn Harakal, architect with Scott Turnipseed Architecture, presented the request for the variance. He noted the edge of the existing access easement for the existing garage. Using a site plan, Mr. Harakal demonstrated where the garage is sited. Mr. Harakal stated that they are asking for variance because the last DRB meeting where the DRB liked the structure with one negative comment being that it appeared that the building as artificially pushed back into the hillside. Mr. Harakal stated that the building will be 30' into the ground if they went to a 20' front setback. He described the parking and stairs at the property across the street and noted they dealt with a similar condition. Chairman Stockmar called for public comment. Randy Fisher, owner of lot 17, stated the he re -subdivided the property in 1998 and the existing house he added on to was not needed. He subdivided the property to show that a house could be built in compliance on Lot 16. He noted that there is another way to develop the property and argued that it can be done and has developed other properties in compliance. He noted that he has investigated what it would take to develop the house and described how. He stated he is concerned because it impacts the value of his property. He noted there are other issues involved but if you're going to allow variances at the end of subdivision, then some thought should be given to creating an access the spur. He stated it's a dangerous situation because large trucks are forced to back out. Mr. Fisher stated that the existing dangerous condition would be exacerbated by a structure in the setback. He asked the board to consider the ramifications of bringing a building closer to the street. He stated he was not notified of the meeting and would like to have time to prepare and would like more opportunity. Jay Nobrega, representing the developers, stated a concept was presented to the DRB that did not required a variance but moving it forward offers a superior design and argued that there has been reasonable allowances made. Mr. Harakal stated he looked up all the adjacent properties and provided the town with stamped envelopes for public notice. Mr. Neubecker stated that a comment was made that the building would look better, which is not a variance criteria. He further noted that other properties may have been granted variances, however, each application must stand on its own. Mr. Neubecker noted that the code does not limit the length of retaining walls. He noted that he did not know the impact to the site if they split and moved the upper portion back, which may increase site coverage. He stated site coverage would be a separate issue. Upon inquiry from Mr. Gillette, Mr. Neubecker stated that the DRB may approve a garage in the front setback on a steep slope. Mr. Kjesbo stated that the applicant stated the house can be built without variances and noted that with new construction the design must be to the lot and not require variances to make it work. The garage could be in the setback and noted that he would not support a variance for GRFA in the front setback. He further noted that this may be too much house for the lot and a single-family structure may be more appropriate. He noted for those reasons he cannot support the variance request. Mr. Gillette concurred with Mr. Kjesbo and noted that the orientation of the house is contrived and when compared with the lot, it does not make sense. Ms. Perez stated that the role of the PEC is to see if it meets the criteria. She noted that its unique in the steepness, the code provides relief with respect for the garage and retaining walls at the DRB level. She noted the grant of a variance would be a special privilege. Ms. Hopkins concurred and noted that the site coverage may be difficult to reach may be that the structure is too big for the lot. Mr. Lockman concurred with Mr. Kjesbo and did not feel the criteria had been met. Mr. Stockmar echoed the comments from the other commissioners. He noted page 8 of the staff memo, that essentially the relationship of the requested variance that the proposed location of the home would have negative impacts on other structures in the vicinity. He noted that a variance grant would be a grant of special privilege, particularly because the applicant has stated that there are alternative options that would meet the requirements of the code. Rollie Kjesbo moved to deny. Karen Perez seconded the motion and it passed (6-0). Absent: (1) Kurz 3.3. A worksession to discuss a zoning code text amendment, pursuant to 45 min. Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, for prescribed regulations amendments to Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to update definitions, including the removal of redundant definitions, the consolidation of definitions defined multiple times, relocation of 20% hardscaping standard to Title 14 and amendment to the landscaping regulation to allow up to 20% permeable hardscaped space, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0017) Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Ashley Clark Ms. Clark introduced the proposed text amendments. There are areas of the code that can be cleaned up. Issues are arranged in the memo in order of easiest to most complicated issues. No formal action is being requested today. We will take these proposed changes to the DRB before returning to the PEC on June 24. We are looking for feedback from the PEC on the ideas proposed so far. Also, Pete Wadden, Watershed Education Coordinator, is present to answer questions about landscaping. Stockmar — Let's make this a back and forth discussion. Gillette — Please point out when you get to the issues raised by Dominic Mauriello in his email to the PEC. Clark — Discussed elements of the code that are duplicated or the same in both Title 12 and Title 14. These are Category 1 changes. Category 2 changes — These are duplicated, but with different language Stockmar- Should we consider creating one section of the code with definitions? Clark — In some cases, the terms are very technical, and are specific to design related issues. Perez —Add a reference to state that any definitions not found in this section, please refer to another code section. Clark — I n a few sections of the code, there are regulations in the definitions. She reviewed definitions of dwelling unit, and employee housing units. Also, we can not regulate satellite dishes, and so this should be removed from the code. Site Coverage has two methods for measuring; we recommend removing the definition in Title 14, and keeping it in Title 12. Stockmar — I have seen properties underground that were allowed to be built to the property line. Clark — Discussed definitions of slope, difference between Title 12 and Title 14. The Commission wanted to ensure that any place there is not a definition in one Title, that a reference be added to guide people to other Title where definitions sit. Clark — Reviewed Category 3 definitions, including Administrator and Vail Comprehensive Plan. Gillette — We have a lot of master plans that make up the Comprehensive Plans. Should we just refer to this as the Town Master Plan? Clark reviewed Category 4 definitions — Definition of Landscaping and Landscape area, needs to be fixed. Language on 20% of the core development areas needs to be addressed. Stockmar — Does the code differentiate between natural, untouched areas, and landscaped areas? We have some regulations on riparian areas. Pete Wadden discussed the goals of improving Gore Creek water quality, which includes reducing impervious areas. Gillette — Concerned about existing hardscape that was counted as landscaping, as mentioned by Mauriello in his email. We should have an exception for existing impervious hardscape that was previously counted as landscaping. Gillette — Is a drip though deck pervious, or impervious? What about gravel drives? How do people demonstrate that something is pervious? The cost of pervious pavers and patios is cost prohibitive. Clark showed examples of projects that were able to meet their landscaping without needing to use any hardscape to meet the code. None of the projects she has worked on since arriving at the Town needed to use hardscaping to meet their required landscaping. Stockmar — The Town's goal is to get water to percolate through the ground before running to the creeks, to improve water quality. Wadden — The Gore Creek Action Plan directs staff to work to reduce impervious surfaces. Gillette — I think the smaller lots and need for hardscape is more prevalent than you are indicating today. Clark — I will do some more research on smaller lots, and some of the lots Mr. Gillette has worked on. 4. Approval of Minutes 4.1. PEC Results May 13, 2019 Karen Perez moved to approve. Rollie Kjesbo seconded the motion and it passed (5-0). Abstain: (1) Lockman Absent: (1) Kurz 5. Adjournment Rollie Kjesbo moved to adjourn. Karen Perez seconded the motion and it passed (6-0). Absent: (1) Kurz 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. Please call 711 for sign language interpretation 48 hour prior to meeting time. Community Development Department City of Vail, Colorado Logo VAIL TOWN PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: June 10, 2019 ITEM/TOPIC: An appeal, pursuant to Section 12-3-3, Appeals, Vail Town Code, of an interpretation by the Administrator of the Community Development Department concerning Section 12-10-4: Additions or Changes, Vail Town Code, regarding parking requirements for a redevelopment project, located at 616 West Lionshead Circle/Lot 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 4 (Concert Hall Plaza), and setting forth details in regards thereto. (TC19-0003) ATTACHMENTS: File Name Description TC19-0003 Appeal - Staff Memo.pdf TC19-0003 - Appeal - Staff Memo Attachment A - Administrators Interpretation Letter April 11 2019.pdf Attachment A - Administrator's Interpretation Attachment B - Written Notice of Appeal April 29 2019.pdf Attachment B - Written Notice of Appeal Attachment C - PEC proof of notice 061019.pdf Attachment C - Proof of Public Notice Attachment D - Concert Hall Plaza - Applicants Exhibits and Plans.pdf Attachment D -Applicants Exhibits and Plans TOWN OF Memorandum TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 10, 2019 SUBJECT: An appeal, pursuant to Section 12-3-3, Appeals, Vail Town Code, of an interpretation by the Administrator of the Community Development Department concerning Section 12-10-4: Additions or Changes, Vail Town Code, regarding parking requirements for a redevelopment project located at 616 West Lionshead Circle/Lot 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 4 (Concert Hall Plaza), and setting forth details in regards thereto. (TC19-0003) Appellant: Hughes Land Holding Trust, represented by Pierce Architects Planner: Chris Neubecker SUBJECT PROPERTY The subject property is Concert Hall Plaza, located at 616 W. Lionshead Circle, Lot 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 4. II. VAIL TOWN COUNCIL JURISDICTION Pursuant to Section 12-3-3 B, Appeal of Administrative Actions: Authority, the Planning and Environmental Commission shall have the authority to hear and decide appeals from any decision, determination or interpretation by any town administrative official with respect to the provisions of Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code. III. PROCEDURAL CRITERIA FOR APPEALS Pursuant to Section 12-3-3 131, Appeal of Administrative Actions, Initiation and Procedures, and Section 12-3-3 132, Procedures, Vail Town Code, there are three basic procedural criteria for an appeal: IV. V. A. Standing of the Appellants Pursuant to Section 12-3-3, Appeals, Vail Town Code, the appellant, Hughes Land Holding Trust, has standing as an aggrieved or adversely affected party to appeal the Administrator's decision of April 11, 2019. The appellant is a property owner with the property that is the subject of the decision and appeal. . B. Adequacy of the Notice of the Appeal A copy of the Public Notice of the Vail Planning and Environmental Commission hearing was sent to the local newspaper on May 22, 2019 and published on May 24, 2019, pursuant to Section 12-3-3 B3, Procedures, Vail Town Code. (Attachment C) C. Timeliness of the Notice of Appeal Section 12-3-3 B-3, Procedures, Vail Town Code, requires a written notice of appeals to be filed with the Administrator within twenty (20) calendar days of the Administrator's decision. On April 29, 2019, the appellant filed an appeal of the Administrator's April 11, 2019 decision. (Attachment B). SUMMARY The question to be answered by the Vail Town Council regarding this appeal is: Were the requirements of the Vail Town Code, specifically Section 12-14-10, Additions or Changes, properly applied by the Administrator in the decision to require parking to be provided for the portion of a building which is removed and redeveloped, as well as for any new commercial floor area or residential units, and further that the provision of parking will not be exempt for any removal and redevelopment of commercial space? Pursuant to Section 12-3-3, Appeals, Commission shall uphold, uphold with decision of April 11, 2019. BACKGROUND Vail Town Code, the Planning and Environmental modifications, or overturn the Administrator's On April 11, 2019, the Community Development Department staff met with Bill Pierce and Kit Austin of Pierce Architects to discuss a possible redevelopment of Concert Hall Plaza. During that meeting, Mr. Pierce explained that the developer would like to remove most of the existing building but maintain the lower level and the existing foundation of the building. A new development would then be constructed above the existing foundation and lower level. Town of Vail Page 2 At the same meeting, Community Development Department staff indicated that parking for any new construction would be required to be provided per the requirements of Title 12, Chapter 10, Parking, Vail Town Code. Staff indicated that Section 12-10-4, Additions of Changes, would not exempt the portion of the building that is removed and rebuilt, but would only apply to the portion of the building that remains. Following is the section of the Vail Town Code in question: 12-10-4: ADDITIONS OR CHANGES.- For HANGES: For additions or enlargements of any existing building or change of use that would increase the total number of parking spaces required, the additional parking shall be required only for such addition, enlargement or change and not for the entire building or use. On April 11, 2019, Chris Neubecker, Planning Manager, provided a written interpretation of the Town Code to Pierce Architects concerning parking for additions or changes. On April 29, 2019, Kim Hughes of Hughes Land Holding Trust provided a written appeal of the staff decision on Section 12-10-4. VI. APPLICABLE 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 12-2-2: DEFINITIONS OF WORDS AND TERMS: DEMO/REBUILD: The destruction, demolition, or removal of fifty percent (50%) or more of the gross residential floor area of an existing dwelling unit or structure. The determination of the fifty percent (50%) shall be calculated upon "gross residential floor area" as defined in this section. Chapter 10, Off Street Parking and Loading 12-10-1: PURPOSE.- In URPOSE: In order to alleviate progressively or to prevent traffic congestion and shortage of on street parking areas, off street parking and loading facilities shall be provided incidental to new structures, enlargements of existing structures or a conversion to a new use which requires additional parking under this chapter. The number of parking spaces and Town of Vail Page 3 loading berths prescribed in this chapter shall be in proportion to the need for such facilities created by the particular type of use. Off street parking and loading areas are to be designed, maintained and operated in a manner that will ensure their usefulness, protect the public safety, and, where appropriate, insulate surrounding land uses from their impact. In certain districts, all or a portion of the parking spaces prescribed by this chapter are required to be within the main building in order to avoid or to minimize the adverse visual impact of large concentrations or exposed parking and of separate garage or carport structures. (Ord. 26(1982) § 1: Ord. 19(19 76) § 12: Ord. 8(19 73) § 14.100) 12-10-2: APPLICABILITY: Off street parking and loading space shall be provided for any new building, for any addition or enlargement of an existing building or for any conversion of uses which requires additional parking under this chapter. (Ord. 26(1982) § 2: Ord. 19(19 76) § 12.- Ord. 2:Ord. 8(1973) § 14.200) 12-10-3: EXISTING FACILITIES.- Off ACILITIES: Off street parking and loading facilities used for off street parking and loading on the effective date hereof shall not be reduced in capacity to less than the number of spaces prescribed in this chapter, or reduced in area or number to less than the minimum standards prescribed in this chapter. (Ord. 26(1982) § 3: Ord. 19(1976) § 12: Ord. 8(1973) § 14.201) 12-10-4: ADDITIONS OR CHANGES.- For HANGES: For additions or enlargements of any existing building or change of use that would increase the total number of parking spaces required, the additional parking shall be required only for such addition, enlargement or change and not for the entire building or use. (Ord. 19(1976) § 12: Ord. 8(1973) § 14.202) 12-10-5: CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE.- All AINTENANCE: All off street parking and loading facilities required by this chapter shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the minimum standards for such facilities prescribed by this chapter, and shall be maintained free of accumulated snow or other materials preventing full use and occupancy of the facilities in accordance with the intent of this chapter, except for temporary periods of short duration in event of heavy or unusual snowfall. (Ord. 8(1973) § 14.300) 12-10-6: PARKING, OFF SITE AND JOINT FACILITIES: All parking and loading facilities required by this chapter shall be located on the same site as the use for which they are required, provided that the town council may permit off site or jointly used parking facilities if located within three hundred feet (300) of the use Town of Vail Page 4 served. Authority to permit off site or joint parking facilities shall not extend to parking spaces required by this title to be located within the main building on a site, but may extend to parking spaces permitted to be unenclosed. Prior to permitting off site or joint parking facilities, the council shall determine that the proposed location of the parking facilities and the prospective operation and maintenance of the facilities will fulfill the purposes of this chapter, will be as usable and convenient as parking facilities located on the site of the use, and will not cause traffic congestion or an unsightly concentration of parked cars. The council may require such legal instruments as it deems necessary to ensure unified operation and control of joint parking facilities or to ensure the continuation of such facilities, including evidence of ownership, long term lease, or easement. (Ord. 29(2005) § 29: Ord. 8(1973) § 14.400) 12-10-7: STANDARDS, AUTHORITY TO ADJUST. Parking standards shall be those provided in title 14 of this code. The standards set out in title 14 of this code shall govern the design and construction of all off street parking and loading facilities, whether required by this chapter or provided in addition to the requirements of this chapter. Minor adjustments of the dimensions prescribed in this chapter may be authorized by the administrator if consistent with generally recognized design standards for off street parking and loading facilities. (Ord. 29(2005) § 29: Ord. 22(1999) § 3: Ord. 8(1973) § 14.500) 12-10-8: PARKING STANDARDS.- (Rep. TANDARDS: (Rep. by Ord. 22(1999) § 4) 12-10-9: LOADING STANDARDS.- Standards TANDARDS: Standards for off street loading shall be as follows.- A. ollows: A. Location: All off street loading berths shall be located on the same lot as the use served, but not in the required front setback. Off street loading berths shall be provided in addition to required off street parking and shall not be located within accessways. B. Size: Each required loading berth shall be not less than twelve feet (12) wide, thirty five feet (35) long, and if enclosed and/or covered, fourteen feet (14) high. Adequate turning and maneuvering space shall be provided within the lot lines. At the planning and environmental commission's discretion, variations to the minimum loading berth dimension standards outlined above may be approved or required, subject to the planning and environmental commission finding that such variation is necessary to prevent negative impacts to the public right of way. C. Access: Accessways not less than ten feet (10) or more than twenty feet (20) in width shall connect all loading berths to a street or alley. Such accessways may coincide with accessways to parking facilities. (Ord. 29(2005) § 29: Ord. 11(2003) § I.- Ord. :Ord. 26(1982) § 5: Ord. 8(1973) § 14.502) Town of Vail Page 5 12-10-10: PARKING REQUIREMENTS SCHEDULES.- Off CHEDULES: Off street parking requirements shall be determined in accordance with the following 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).- Use lerk): Use Parking Requirements Accommodation unit 0.7 space per accommodation unit. Hotels with conference facilities or meeting rooms 0.7 space per accommodation unit, plus 1.0 space per 330 square feet of seating floor area devoted to conference facilities or meeting rooms Banks and financial institutions 3.7 spaces per 1,000 square feet of net floor area Dwelling unit 1.4 spaces per dwelling unit Dwelling unit with 1 attached 1.4 spaces per dwelling unit accommodation unit Dwelling unit with more than 1 attached 1.4 spaces per dwelling unit plus 0.7 space for each accommodation unit additional attached accommodation unit Eating and drinking establishments 1.0 space per 250 square feet of seating floor area; minimum of 2 spaces Fractional fee club unit 0.7 space per fractional fee club unit. Hotels with conference facilities or meeting rooms 0.7 space per fractional fee club unit, plus 1.0 space per 330 square feet of seating floor area devoted to conference facilities or meeting rooms Medical and dental offices 2.7 spaces per 1,000 square feet of net floor area Other professional and business offices 2.7 spaces per 1,000 square feet of net floor area Recreational facilities, public or private Parking requirements to be determined by the planning and environmental commission Retail stores, personal services and 2.3 spaces per 1,000 square feet of net floor area repair shops Theaters, meeting rooms, conference 1.0 space per 165 square feet of seating floor area facilities Timeshare units 0.7 space per timeshare unit. Hotels with conference facilities or meeting rooms 0.7 space per timeshare unit, plus 1.0 space per 330 square feet of seating floor area devoted to conference facilities or meeting rooms Any use not listed Parking requirements to be determined by the planning and environmental commission Town of Vail Page 6 B. Schedule 8 applies to all properties outside Vail's "commercial core areas" (as defined on the town of Vail core area parking maps 1 and 11, incorporated by reference and available for inspection in the office of the town clerk).- Use lerk): Use Parking Requirements Accommodation unit 0.4 space per accommodation unit, plus 0.1 space per each 100 square feet of gross residential floor area, with a maximum of 1.0 space per unit Banks and financial institutions 1 space per 200 square feet of net floor area Eating and drinking establishments 1 space per 120 square feet of seating floor area Fractional fee club unit 0.7 space per fractional fee club unit. Hotels with conference facilities or meeting rooms 0.7 space per fractional fee club unit, plus 1.0 space per 330 square feet of seating floor area devoted to conference facilities or meeting rooms Hospitals 1 space per patient bed, plus 1.0 space per 150 square feet of net floor area Limited service lodge unit 0.7 space per limited service lodge unit Medical and dental offices 1 space per 200 square feet of net floor area Multiple -family dwellings If a dwelling unit's gross residential floor area is 500 square feet or less: 1.5 spaces If a dwelling unit's gross residential floor area is more than 500 square feet, but less than 2,000 square feet: 2 spaces If a dwelling unit's gross residential floor area is 2,000 square feet or more: 2.5 spaces Other professional and business offices 1 space per 250 square feet of net floor area Quick service food/convenience stores 1.0 space per each 200 square feet of net floor area for the first 1,000 square feet of net floor area: 1.0 space per 300 square feet for net floor area above 1,000 square feet Recreational facilities, public or private Parking requirements to be determined by the planning and environmental commission Retail stores, personal services and 1 space per each 300 square feet of net floor area repair shops Single-family and two-family dwellings If a dwelling unit's gross residential floor area is less than 2,000 square feet: 2 spaces If a dwelling unit's gross residential floor area is 2,000 square feet or more, but less than 4,000 square feet: 3 spaces If a dwelling unit's gross residential floor area is 4,000 square feet or more, but less than 5,500 square feet: 4 spaces Town of Vail Page 7 12-10-11: PARKING SCHEDULE APPLICABILITY: Where fractional requirements result from application of the schedule, the fraction shall be raised to the next whole number. (Ord. 50(1978) § 10) 12-10-12: CREDIT FOR MULTIPLE USE PARKING FACILITIES: Where a single parking facility serves more than one use, the total parking requirement for all uses may be reduced in accordance with the following schedule.- Total chedule: Total Requirement Determined Per Section 12-10-10 1 to 100 spaces 101 to 200 spaces 201 to 300 spaces 301 to 400 spaces Permitted Reduction To Determine Multiple Use Parking Requirement No reduction 2.5 percent F5.0 percent F7.5 percent 401 to 500 spaces If a dwelling unit's gross residential floor area is 5,500 501 to 600 spaces square feet or more: 5 spaces Theaters, meeting rooms, convention 1 space per 120 square feet of seating floor area facilities 17.5 percent Timeshare units 0.7 space per timeshare unit. Hotels with conference 901 to 1,000 spaces facilities or meeting rooms 0.7 space per timeshare unit, plus Over 1,000 spaces 1.0 space per 330 square feet of seating floor area devoted to conference facilities or meeting rooms Any use not listed Parking requirements to be determined by the planning and environmental commission 12-10-11: PARKING SCHEDULE APPLICABILITY: Where fractional requirements result from application of the schedule, the fraction shall be raised to the next whole number. (Ord. 50(1978) § 10) 12-10-12: CREDIT FOR MULTIPLE USE PARKING FACILITIES: Where a single parking facility serves more than one use, the total parking requirement for all uses may be reduced in accordance with the following schedule.- Total chedule: Total Requirement Determined Per Section 12-10-10 1 to 100 spaces 101 to 200 spaces 201 to 300 spaces 301 to 400 spaces Permitted Reduction To Determine Multiple Use Parking Requirement No reduction 2.5 percent F5.0 percent F7.5 percent 401 to 500 spaces 110.0 percent 501 to 600 spaces 112.5 percent 601 to 700 spaces 115.0 percent 701 to 800 spaces 17.5 percent 801 to 900 spaces 20.0 percent 901 to 1,000 spaces 122.5 percent Over 1,000 spaces 125.0 percent (Ord. 8(1973) § 14.603) 12-10-13: LOADING REQUIREMENTS SCHEDULE.- Town CHEDULE: Town of Vail Page 8 Off street loading requirements shall be determined in accordance with the following schedule.- Use chedule: Use Loadinq Requirement Lodges with over 10,000 1 loading berth for uses up to 75,000 square feet total square feet total floor area, floor area, plus 1 additional berth for each 25,000 square including accessory uses feet total floor area in excess of 75, 000 square feet within the lodge Multiple -family dwellings 1 loading berth for uses up to 100, 000 square feet gross with over 20, 000 square residential floor area, plus 1 additional berth for each feet gross residential floor 50, 000 square feet gross residential floor area in excess area of 100,000 square feet Professional and business 1 loading berth offices, banks, and financial institutions with over 10,000 square feet total floor area Retail stores, personal 1 loading berth for uses up to 10, 000 square feet total services, repair shops, floor area, plus 1 additional berth for each 5, 000 square eating and drinking feet total floor area in excess of 10, 000 square feet establishments and all other commercial or service uses with over 2, 000 square feet total floor area Any use listed as a Loading facilities requirement to be determined by the conditional use planning and environmental commission as a condition of the conditional use permit, but not less than the comparable requirement prescribed above Any use not listed, if such 1 loading berth, plus additional berths prescribed by the use required the recurring town council upon determination of need receipt or distribution of goods or equipment by truck (Ord. 29(2005) § 29: Ord. 8(1973) § 14.701) 12-10-14: LOADING SCHEDULE APPLICABILITY: Where fractional requirements result from application of the schedule, the fraction shall be raised to the next whole number. (Ord. 50(1978) § 10) 12-10-15: CREDIT FOR MULTIPLE USE LOADING FACILITIES.- Town ACILITIES: Town of Vail Page 9 Where a single off street loading facility serves more than one use, the number of off street loading berths may be reduced in accordance with the following schedule.- Total chedule: Total Requirement Reduced Determined Per Requirement With Section 12-10-13 Multiple Use 1 berth 1 berth 2 berths 1 berth 3 berths F-2 berths 4 berths —2berths 5 berths 3 berths 6 berths F 3 berths 7 berths I 4 berths 8 berths I rths 9 or more berths :L5berth:s:::J (Ord. 8(1973) § 14.703) 12-10-16: EXEMPT AREAS, PARKING FUND ESTABLISHED.- A. STABLISHED: A. Criteria: The Town Council by resolution may exempt certain areas from the off street parking and loading requirements of this chapter if alternative means will meet the off street parking and loading needs of all uses in the area. Prior to exempting any area from the off street parking and loading requirements, the Council shall determine the following.- 1. ollowing: 1. That the exemption is in the interests of the area to be exempted and in the interests of the Town at large. 2. That the exemption will not confer any special privilege or benefit upon properties or improvements in the area to be exempted, which privilege or benefit is not conferred on similarly situated properties elsewhere in the Town. 3. That the exemption will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or improvements in the vicinity of the area to be exempted. 4. That suitable and adequate means will exist for provision of public, community, group or common parking facilities, for provision of adequate loading facilities and for a system for distribution and pick up of goods, and for financing, operating and maintaining such facilities; and that such parking, loading and distribution facilities shall be fully adequate to meet the existing and projected needs generated by all uses in the area to be exempted. Town of Vail Page 10 B. Parking Fund: For projects located within the Town's "Parking Pay -In -Lieu" Zones (as identified on the Town's official "Parking Pay -In -Lieu Zone" maps, incorporated by reference) property owners or applicants shall be required to contribute to the Town Parking Fund, hereby established for the purpose of meeting the demand and requirements for vehicle parking to the extent outlined in applicable master plan documents and the zoning regulations. At such time as any property owner or other applicant proposes to develop or redevelop a parcel of property within an exempt area which would require parking and/or loading areas, the owner or applicant shall pay to the Town the parking fee hereinafter required.- 1. equired: 1. The Parking Fund established in this section shall receive and disburse funds for the purpose of conducting parking studies or evaluations, construction of parking facilities, the maintenance of parking facilities, the payment of bonds or other indebtedness for parking facilities, and administrative services relating to parking. 2. The parking fee to be paid by any owner or applicant shall be determined by the Town Council. 3. If any parking funds have been paid in accordance with this section and if subsequent thereto a special or general improvement district is formed and assessments levied for the purpose of paying for parking improvements, the payer shall be credited against the assessment with the amount previously paid. 4. The parking fee to be paid by any owner or applicant is hereby determined to be eighteen thousand five hundred ninety seven dollars eighty cents ($18,597.80) per space for residential uses (including, but not limited to, accommodation units, timeshares and fractional fee units). There is no pay in lieu fee for commercial uses. This fee shall be automatically adjusted annually by the percentage the consumer price index of the City of Denver has increased or decreased over each successive year. 5. For additions or enlargements of any existing building or change of use that would increase the total number of parking spaces required, an additional parking fee will be required only for such addition, enlargement or change and not for the entire building or use. No refunds will be paid by the Town to the applicant or owner. 6. The owner or applicant has the option of paying the total parking fee at the time of building permit or paying over a five (5) year period. If the latter course is taken, the first payment shall be paid on or before the date the building permit is issued. Four (4) more annual payments will be due to the town on the anniversary of the building permit. Interest of ten percent (10%) per annum shall be paid by the applicant on the unpaid balance. If the owner or applicant does choose to pay the fee over a period of time, he or she shall be required to sign a promissory note which describes the total fee due, the schedule of payments, and the interest due. Promissory note forms are available at the offices of the Department of Community Development. Town of Vail Page 11 7. When a fractional number of spaces results from the application of the requirements schedule (section 12-10-10 of this chapter) the parking fee will be calculated using that fraction. This applies only to the calculation of the parking fee and not for on site requirements. (Ord. 29(2005) § 29: Ord. 4(200 1) § 2: Ord. 3(1999) § 11: Ord. 10(l 994) § 1: Ord. 6(1991) § 1: Ord. 30(1982) § 1: Ord. 47(1979) § 1: Ord. 8(1973) § 14.800) 12-10-17: LEASING OF PARKING SPACES: A. General: Except as expressly provided in this section, no person shall lease, rent, convey or restrict the use of any parking space to any person other than a tenant, occupant or user of the building for which the space is required. B. Eligibility: A parking space may be leased in accordance with the following.- 1. ollowing: 1. Zone Districts: Any person who owns or manages private parking spaces located in the following zone districts may lease parking spaces in accordance with this section: Commercial Core 1; Commercial Core 2; Commercial Core 3, High Density Multiple - Family; Vail Village Townhouse, Public Accommodation, Public Accommodation 2,- General ,General Use, Commercial Service Center; Arterial Business; Ski Base Recreation, Ski Base Recreation 2, Lionshead Mixed Use 1; Lionshead Mixed Use 2, Parking, any Special Development District in which one of the foregoing zone districts is the underlying zone district, and Special Development District with no underlying zone district, in compliance with any parking restrictions otherwise imposed by the Special Development District. 2. Prohibited Areas: The leasing of parking spaces is prohibited in any area where vehicle access to said parking spaces is over or through an established pedestrian mall. 3. Common Areas: The leasing of parking spaces on commonly owned property, including without limitation common areas within a common interest community, requires the written approval of the applicable homeowners' or condominium association, a copy of which shall be provided to the Town prior to leasing any parking spaces. 4. Duration: Leasing is permitted for short term parking only, and long-term storage of vehicles is prohibited. 5. Rental Agencies: Vehicle rental agencies may lease parking spaces only in the Commercial Core 3 Zone District, with a maximum of one lease and a maximum of fifteen (15) parking spaces per site. C. Required Parking: Parking required by this title for any use may not be satisfied by the leasing of parking spaces under this section. D. Signage: Any person leasing parking spaces under this section shall post adequate signage on the premises to ensure that the leased parking spaces are used and Town of Vail Page 12 occupied in accordance with the applicable lease agreement. At least one on-site sign shall include the name and telephone number of the person to contact concerning parking disputes. E. Contact Information: Any person who accepts electronic reservations for the leasing of parking spaces pursuant to this section shall include on the reservation page a contact name and telephone number in case of any problems with the leased parking spaces. (Ord. 15(2018) § 1) 12-10-18: VARIANCES.- Variances ARIANCES: Variances from the provisions of this chapter shall follow the procedures set forth in chapter 17 of this title. (Ord. 9(2000) § 3: Ord. 50(19 78) § 11) 12-10-19: CORE AREAS IDENTIFIED.- Tables DENTIFIED: Tables 1 and 2 (core area parking maps I and 11, respectively, attached to the ordinance codified herein, and available for inspection in the Office of the Town Clerk) shall be used to identify properties within Vail's commercial core areas for parking purposes. (Ord. 15(2000) § 1: Ord. 9(2000) § 4) 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 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. Town of Vail Page 13 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. (Ord. 29(2005) § 29: Ord. 9(2000) § 5) 12-10-21: PARKING PAY IN LIEU ZONES ESTABLISHED.- The STABLISHED: The "Parking Pay In Lieu Zone" maps (attached to the ordinance codified herein, and available for inspection in the Office of the Town Clerk) shall be used to identify properties within the Parking Pay In Lieu Zones referenced in section 12-10-16 of this chapter. Properties will be required to comply with the amended program upon demolition/rebuild. Properties not included in the Pay In Lieu Zones may apply to the Planning and Environmental Commission for review if the provision of on site parking on the property would circumvent relevant objectives of applicable comprehensive plan documents including, but not limited to, parking, pedestrianization, and vehicle penetration elements. (Ord. 29(2005) § 29: Ord. 4(2001) § 3) VII. DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. The appellant is claiming in their appeal letter that Section 12-10-4: Additions of Changes, Vail Town Code applies to their property, which is proposed for a major redevelopment. The Community Development Department believes that this code section applies only to a small part of the existing structure to be preserved. As understood by the Community Development Department, the appellant is proposing to demolish the upper levels of Concert Hall Plaza, and preserve the lowest part of the building, with an addition above. Based on this understanding, staff indicated in our code interpretation that parking must be provided for all of the new construction, but not for the portion of the existing building that will be preserved. In this case, parking will need to be provided for the new construction, including any portion of the existing structure that is demolished and rebuilt; parking would not need to be provided retroactively for the portion of the existing building that will remain. 2. Additions or Changes — The Community Development Department considers an addition to be that portion of a project that is newly constructed onto or attached to an existing building. When a structure (or portion of a structure) is demolished and removed, there is a requirement to provide parking for the new construction; in essence, the portion removed and rebuilt becomes part of the addition, for which parking is required. This regulation is designed to address the parking demands created by the new construction, but to relieve the developer from curing an existing deficiency for an existing structure. Town of Vail Page 14 A redevelopment is not and has never been considered as an addition. Redevelopment has significant impacts that are required to be mitigated in the design and which the applicant is attempting to avoid. Taken to its extreme, under the appellant's claim (not staff's interpretation), an existing building with no parking could be fully demolished and rebuilt in the same size, location and use, but provide no parking. As we know, buildings in Vail are frequently demolished and new buildings constructed, and parking is always required to be provided for the new construction. 3. Other Options: As part of the discussion with Pierce Architects on the proposed development, staff provided several alternatives to providing on-site parking that are available to the appellant through the existing code. These options include: A. Meet the requirement not met on-site with off-site parking, through Section 12-10-6, Off -Site or Joint Facilities. B. Request relief from parking requirements through the variance process as allowed by Section 12-10-18, Variances. C. Request a reduction in the required number of parking spaces through Section 12-10- 20: Special Review Provisions. D. Request to participate in Parking Fee -in -Lieu program as provided for in Section 12- 10-21: Parking Pay In Lieu Zones Established. VIII. REQUIRED ACTION Pursuant to Section 12-3-3, Appeals, Vail Town Code, the Planning and Environmental Commission shall uphold, uphold with modifications, or overturn the Administrator's decision of April 11, 2019. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission uphold the determination of the Administrator, the following statement is recommended: "The Planning and Environmental Commission upholds the April 11, 2019 interpretation by the Administrator of the Community Development Department concerning Section 12-10-4: Additions or Changes, Vail Town Code, regarding parking requirements for a redevelopment project located at 616 West Lionshead Circle/Lot 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 4." With the following findings: "The Vail Town Code was properly applied in regard to the April 11, 2019 interpretation by the Administrator of the Community Development Department concerning Section 12-10-4: Additions or Changes, Vail Town Code, regarding parking requirements for a redevelopment project located at 616 West Lionshead Circle/Lot 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 4 Town of Vail Page 15 Should the Planning and Environmental Commission overturn the determination of the Administrator of the Community Development Department, the following statement is recommended: "The Planning and Environmental Commission finds as follows.- The ollows: The Vail Town Code was not properly applied in regard to the April 11, 2019 interpretation by the Administrator of the Community Development Department concerning Section 12-10-4: Additions or Changes, Vail Town Code, regarding parking requirements for a redevelopment project located at 616 West Lionshead Circle/Lot 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 4 The Planning and Environmental Commission hereby overturns the decision of the interpretation by the Administrator of the Community Development Department concerning Section 12-10-4: Additions or Changes, Vail Town Code, regarding parking requirements for a redevelopment project located at 616 West Lionshead Circle/Lot 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 4." IX. ATTACHMENTS A. Administrator's Interpretation Letter, dated April 11, 2019 B. Written Notice of Appeal — Kim Hughes, dated April 29, 2019 C. Copy of Public Notice, Proof of Publication D. Applicant's Exhibit / Plans Town of Vail Page 16 TOWN OF 75 South Frontage Road West Vail, Colorado 81657 vailgov.com April 11, 2019 Mr. Bill Pierce Pierce Architects 1650 Fallridge Road, Suite C-1 Vail, CO 81657 Community Development Department 970.479.2138 Re: Administrator's Interpretation of Section 12-10-4: Additions or Changes, Vail Town Code Dear Bill, The purpose of this letter is to inform you of the Administrator's interpretation of Section 12-10- 4: Additions or Changes, Vail Town Code. For any redevelopment project where a portion of a building is removed, parking will be required to be provided for the portion of the building which is removed and redeveloped, as well as any new commercial floor area or residential units. The removal and redevelopment of commercial space will not be exempt from the provision of parking. If you would like to appeal this determination, please provide written notice of appeal to the Community Development Department within twenty (20) days of the date of this letter, as required by Section 12-3-3 Appeals, Vail Town Code. Please feel free to contact me at the number below, or at cneubecker(a-).vailgov.com. Sincerely, n Chris Neubecker Planning Manager Community Development Department 970.479-2148 April 29, 2019 Mr. Chris Neubecker 75 South Frontage Road West Vail, Colorado 81657 RE: Administrator's Interpretation of Section 12-10-4: Additions or Changes, Vail Town Code Mr. Neubecker, As an aggrieved property owner, I am formally appealing your interpretation dated April 11th 2019 of Section 12-10-4: Additions or Changes, Vail Town Code in accordance with Section 12-3-3. I believe the provisions of Section 12-10-4 stated below do apply to my property at 616 West Lionshead Circle. Section 12-10-4: Additions or Changes, Vail Town Code For additions or enlargements of any existing building or change of use that would increase the total number of parking spaces required, the additional parking shall be required only for such addition, enlargement or change and not for the entire building or use. (Ord. 19(1976) § 12: Ord. 8(1973) § 14.202) Sincerely, Kim Hughes Hughes Land Holding Trust 28 Anacapa St STE D Santa Barbara, CA 93101-1881 Ad #: 0000427944-01 THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY Customer: TOWN OF VAI L/PLAN DEPT/COMM DEVLM PUBLIC NOTICE Your account number is: 1023233 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and holdapubnch ar g nr=daroo hhsecfiou" 2 3-8, Vail Town Code, ,^dune 10, 2019 st 100 cis PROOF OF PUBLICATION n the Town of Vail Municipal Building. VAIL DAILY A reqq st for the review of a variance from Section 12 -6D -i l Town Code, in accordance Setbacks, Vavisions o1 Section 12-17-1, Variances wig the provisions STATE OF COLORADO Vail Town Coda, to allow for a variance to the to guiired front setback of 2D feet for anew Two -Pointy idenfial building, located at 2699 Davos TraiOLo COUNTY OF EAGLE 16, Block B, Vtil Ritlge subdivision, and setting rah Appli'cantfeg exams, am .D—a EC 1IC, 1re)presenta! b1 Scot S. Tu rnipseed AIA Architecture and Construe I, Mark Wurzer, do solemnly swear that I am Publisher of tion, Inc. Planner: Chris Neubecker the VAIL DAILY, that the same daily newspaper printed, in An appeal, pursuant to Section 12-3-3, App-,. n by the Adistrate Town Ca e, olan imerpretatiomin at the Community Development Department c whole or in art and published in the County of Eagle, p p g ingg,Section 12-104: Additions or Changes, Vai Town C de, for ) State of Colorado, and has a general circulation therein; regarding parking requiremonh a re development prgect located at 616 West Lionsheac CirdsoLot 1, Vail Lion head Fillhead4 (Concert Hall that said newspaper has been published continuously and Plaza), and setting iMh det.Its regards thereto ITC19-0003) uninterruptedly in said County of Eagle for a of AAppellant: Hughhes Land Holding Trust, represent ad!byPierceAr�Chris period Neube ker more than fifty-two consecutive weeks next prior to the The approa,inna and intormatio about he prop, - first publication of the annexed legal notice or hours ata the' To— of Vail)Cmununity Development Department, 75 South Frontage Roel. The publlc advertisement and that said newspaper has published the Chad 10 are ntl site visas. Please call 970-479- 2138 or visit www'.vellaov. mount nina for addition - requested legal notice and advertisement as requested. alirdormatio". SI language interpretation available upon request wig 24-hour notification, dial 711. Published May 24, 2019 in the Vail Dell, The VAIL DAILY is an accepted legal advertising medium, 0000427944 only forjurisdictions 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 insertion; and that the first publication of said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated 5/24/2019 and that the last publication of said notice was dated 5/24/2019 in the issue of said newspaper. In witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand this day, 5/24/2019. Mark Wurzer. Publisher Subscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public in and for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado this day 5/24/2019. Jerilynn Medina, Notary Public My Commission Expires: August 3, 2020 .1Er�E �YM!J MEp!Rd�S r rnI, eu!ru. FiATI: Ci -0111-11 NOTMZY lil2ir�079ifIA u`/vCfi%¢CGON:Xi'IRI:GAk3Gil57et.26x' U) LU < ae Q d 06 00„o LLL y O l0 l0 a ° C o R LL 0 w IT Q o CfO L N m J J C J J [ Q C F- LU W J o Q O o � j= W LL O J c u O L H NC/)o a> w r Aoa Z0 Q LIP I - — a xa Q wW C 00 O r� MMX-Ia9wnN 104ad L99L800 11VA 3�OHIO GV3HSNM M 9 L9 VZdld IIVH iHDONOO J LL -^ X Q --------- - w W vJ J WE z� a oN O>Q Q U) LU < ae Q d 06 00„o LLL y O l0 l0 a ° C o R LL 0 w IT Q o CfO L N m J J C J J [ Q C F- LU W J o Q O o � j= W LL O J c u O L H NC/)o a> w r Aoa Z0 Q LIP I - — a xa Q wW C 00 O r� ��W/� VJ J LL -^ X Q --------- - w W vJ J WE z� a oN O>Q Q LL CC o° U cr oN �� W nI w C W IL CC N W OWE c C O GC w a a U p LLI cc U Na a 0 M N w Z U N r cc 0 N Y cc (Q w CC Oo z a X 0 fncc J z W Q W W yCca US W rr O cc cc X w OLL n o i y = 4 N O rr LL a 8(DQ rnWa W U)F- �OCW W� �cn57<Q DWw ZWW O�z VW Z a rr oC 0 m Z ^ 0 t �Y LL W [0 oa N n Q J Q , d J I C C (/�01 v ) W U U) LU < ae Q d 06 00„o LLL y O l0 l0 a ° C o R LL 0 w IT Q o CfO L N m J J C J J [ Q C F- LU W J o Q O o � j= W LL O J c u O L H NC/)o a> w r Aoa Z0 Q LIP I - — a xa Q Q 73 co 0 Q O LUO J w W J In E Z a J a F Z W 4 W 0] (n Q co x> - W W 0= J W w J J J Q W 4 NI Z a J 0_ z Z W Ll W to M I n co � Q Wz�-- —_ r� -^ X Q --------- - Q w w W C O g w NJ O>Q Uma, �0) ri WI jIW ygW w I J OWE Q a Q R5W Z � a app osya�cuj co O � w On 0 � ”" "I W Z W WYz Q z Jaz OC Q y F-_ ui Ir yCca US W w Lu w � QOC LU o i y = 4 N z Z �?� a 8(DQ rnWa U)F- �OCW �cn57<Q DWw ZWW O�z ' I a Q 73 co 0 Q O LUO J w W J In E Z a J a F Z W 4 W 0] (n Q co x> - W W 0= J W w J J J Q W 4 NI Z a J 0_ z Z W Ll W to M I n co Q w aaQ O OOO LL LL LL HHC7H WWZz ZZ�� ooWzzo LL LL N J fAfALLOJ O OLL CD ooNp CC L W W N W aaCCa W wwaw IL IL NNaN nc?0 N N r r UOWC�J QOQCL a N NCC Z W J Q W U- H N N LL W W W O cc cc cc z 3 N� o O o J W 8s y MMX-Ia9wnN 104wd /99L800 11VA 3�02i10 GV3HSNW M 9 L9 VZdld IIVH iHDONOO > ANN wo> LU 7 O W Q g� xs W LL w N H Q w aaQ O OOO LL LL LL HHC7H WWZz ZZ�� ooWzzo LL LL N J fAfALLOJ O OLL CD ooNp CC L W W N W aaCCa W wwaw IL IL NNaN nc?0 N N r r UOWC�J QOQCL a N NCC Z W J Q W U- H N N LL W W W O cc cc cc O cc Z 0 N pwp WNw cc - p 5<> O �0a W N � J OOZ QUw NH•cc z ZCCU cc z IL cc cc QUY 7U -a Y CQ G p Z a J a z O In W cc 5 O W cc c� Z Y cc Q Aaa �r r LIP I oc O ¢w Q z 3 N� o O o J W 8s y W > ANN wo> LU 7 O W Q g� xs W LL w N H Ig�I I LL w u Q a v a Z Z u a 1^ 3 LL O LL N H w LL O O W 'i *uia n IL O w O cJ cJ cJ w w w w w CJ Q N l0 c -I l0 M V) U Q 00 W w N LL r4 00 N V M N Q co ti m lOo LL O �a LL cl N a_ O u LL LL N LL LL ° wN � H Z i=rn 0 0^o H z Z coo 0 cc LU > LL O N cl N o N J O �J L a Q Q u LU Q 2 N w W O 'a Cl) Z Z J Q tz o O Q W ? w DQ Ln 0 N J D z Z Q Q U z ^ ZZtT -- LU ° O c LU O N Q �p v Z Z Q W O LL O i= u O O cc Z 0 N pwp WNw cc - p 5<> O �0a W N � J OOZ QUw NH•cc z ZCCU cc z IL cc cc QUY 7U -a Y CQ G p Z a J a z O In W cc 5 O W cc c� Z Y cc Q Aaa �r r LIP I oc O ¢w Q z 3 N� o d o J W 8s y W > ANN wo> LU 7 O W Q g� xs W LL w O cc Z 0 N pwp WNw cc - p 5<> O �0a W N � J OOZ QUw NH•cc z ZCCU cc z IL cc cc QUY 7U -a Y CQ G p Z a J a z O In W cc 5 O W cc c� Z Y cc Q Aaa �r r LIP I oc O ¢w Q 9L~a% 4 I I I I I I � a T2 z Q J o d o J W 8s y W > J LU 7 O W Q > W LL w ;8 I�=11 I H Ig�I I LL w Q a v a Z Z u a 1^ 3 LL O N H w LL O W 'i *uia n IL O w cJ cJ w w > w ° w w CJ Q N l0 c -I l0 M a p U Q 00 W N LL r4 00 N V M N N N LL M N ^ M O i O LLz O ° H Z H Z cc Q H z Z cc LU > LL > 00� Qo o ^ J O �J L Q Q u Q 2 N w W O 'a Cl) z Z U tz o O ZQ r o ? DQ Ln 0 Cl)00 D 2 Cl) cc LL z ^ ZZtT -- YLL ° O c _jp w Q O N �p Z Z Q av O LL Y LL a s O LU a a a O LL1LU LL LL F. -O p a LL LL H Z c 9L~a% 4 I I I I I I � a T2 z Q J d o J W 8s y W n LA J LU 7 O I� I ;8 I�=11 I Ig�I I 9L~a% 4 I I I I I I � a T2 Aa° Qz T LIP I ¢w Q � C --- ---- ---------- MMX-Ia9wnN 104wd /99L8 00 1 Itln 3�OHIO GV3HSNM M 9 L9 VZdld IIVH iHDONOO Aa° Qz T LIP I ¢w Q � C --- ---- ---------- z- _� Y Q D z U) W 7--—cn z x —c) Q a -- J - W � —� t J z W_. _ ti W —0�'.. _0 �Y W - Qf;" CE J < cr M d W; O SOI Z. - Aa° Qz T LIP I ¢w Q v 3 r yam Z c v w Q ID z O Q i Lu ZO > W w ; � LU O -JX LL, OC W O> WI O� Q Q >w w I I 0 W O J LL m O J O m Q OLU 0 MMX-Ia9wnN 104wd L99L8001Itln 3�OHIO Otl3HSNO1 M 9 L9 dZdld IIdH lI IDONOO (n W oC O O LL z x W U) OO a O d LLL O z z ~ t CN }, C m O O CV N t� .� cm O mm, M m O O ♦r T m co C) d) E O Z•L- � tm � 0 � N_ v O cm � � O ti N � O aC) i O N O LL O 0 0cn y Mi O O a O L CrIE 10 O cn r _O C) O t 'a'a C O M M :Z: %b— L- O i O U- Q C I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I O Z cn W J LL LL, ID z O Q i Lu ZO > W w ; � LU O -JX LL, OC W O> WI O� Q Q >w w I I 0 W O J LL m O J O m Q OLU 0 J (n W oC O O LL z x W U) OO a O d LLL O z z ~ X w W x c� 0 a �a J a wccQ Z� OU J Z 00 0 W N J W W J a LU W �z W W Ir J LLLLW C) Lu m z J U O Q 0 ZW n t' x L i� J OZ � J XwC) Cl) W3: N 't W c2 r LLLLZ 0 Z W LU LLLL Ir W U C) W CO J Z C) 0— O Z W �:: Ir LO Ln �X W -ILI I i r � I I wa I C7 z w z 0 > LU ~ Q J X > WJ W W 0 W W 0 z LU Ir J OJ 0 0 LULU 0 Q J M W (n W U) CD oc d z OIr U) LL d X W N Baa rC O O wC Q z 0 2LU LL C) Z� Fn LLJ 0 r° ��z LZzW co MMX-Ia9wnN 104wd L99L800 1Itln 3�Odlo GV3HSNM M 9 L9 VZd-Id -I-ldH iHDONOO 0 C) II > Ir OE 57< d W LU W co Fn U O 157<, LO LL J W W J a LU W �z W W Ir J LLLLW C) Lu m z J U O Q 0 ZW n t' x L i� J OZ � J XwC) Cl) W3: N 't W c2 r LLLLZ 0 Z W LU LLLL Ir W U C) W CO J Z C) 0— O Z W �:: Ir LO Ln �X W -ILI I i r � I I wa I C7 z w z 0 > LU ~ Q J X > WJ W W 0 W W 0 z LU Ir J OJ 0 0 LULU 0 Q J M W (n W U) CD oc d z OIr U) LL d X W N Baa rC O O wC Q z 0 2LU LL C) Z� Fn LLJ 0 r° ��z LZzW co W J Q OOH 0 C) II > Ir OE 57< d W LU W co Fn U O 157<, LO LL O z C) Q m� 0° Z Ln Q1 5 WOO LL CO r o LL C) co r LJ L W LL LL LL 157<, 0 O O N rorn 4 M L6 W 0 W U) 0W Ir �— a0 .60 W z H Q U_ W > W W 0 LU J W J J J U W J Ov 0 O J U CDLU > LU m J U � � C) X W Cl) W' N � ^ v 3 co �a- Zp O C- r O = _ ao 0 Q W J MMX-Ia9wnN 104wd LS9L800��Itln 3�Od Otl3HSNW M 9 L9 t/Zt/�d IIVH iHDONOO = Q W Q � JLU W 75 �C) OCQLU LOL, Za HLU J Q U)�� 0 OLU � j Q W X W L~LIIr EDOW<n �m>G Ir wd J = D TOLLO zCO 0 wQ�m C)O� z� X LU ' I I z LLI Y p p� O Q a I cc a a �¢ LU m N M 30:111 w LU ^NN OU li �0 i 1Z O WJ ' ccw OU ZO > W� U Z W i� N O i it it -----'- J �O z CO z z W Q Q ZQ O � J LU W> C7 W d W J 0 W Z >0 QZ w YwU p Lu > O moC J Q J Jz C7Q p awl z0 Q W Z> J DOo m W W U)LJLI 0 (nJQ Q MCO X w 00 � Cn 0_ Z W d=HO Z U)LU U)dX> U) Ir W LU W d J W H W z LU 0W 0 Q 0 LL J P, _N(_)O>LU T Wj LLO / v0� 1 t� sy;�gr � 1 �I Iii O { W J = Q W Q � JLU W OD U Q Z W J CO Z Q J W oC p DQ w H � Q C� O W W= 0 c~i)~ WZ WW Z= o>W W Z ZmH W =m NOS 4�O chw� (n LOX d� W Qw U)C) r W LL Q X w w iQ LU Z I � d cca LLI ll.l ® = NCC J Z> w� '2 ` I ~ m NM m - - - I lL J Qa 'WJ YCC r a �o ----� `�N oZ O LU � ZLU I OV 00 W N J LLI W I I I I I z J w > W , LL, (n U) LU J Z J J J ZJ w J Q W w Z j 0 Q Z ZO W jO Lu LU Ir O zea O z �Q > oC0 0 OQ �� z> Y O LULLJJ SCO ZQ �� =JQ �W aj�'', Q U) LU OC W 0= Q z d d j U) 00 xLUd H WLU z W 2 O Q N N W J OI i co LO �. C�O� O JN ° ryrJlrrttY City of Vail, Colorado Logo VAIL TOWN PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: June 10, 2019 ITEM/TOPIC: A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-6D-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17-1, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the front setback of 20 feet for a new Two -Family residential building, located at 2699 Davos Trail/Lot 16, Block B, Vail Ridge Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC 19-0015) OTTOCHMFNTS- File Name Variance Staff Memo (Edit).pdf Attachment A - Vicinity Map - 2699 Davos Trail.pdf Attachment B - Applicant Narrative.pdf Attachment C - Plan Set (1 of 2) - 2699 Davos Trail.pdf Attachment C - Plan Set (2 of 2) - 2699 Davos Trail.pdf Attachment D - Existing Conditions - Plat and Survey.pdf Description Staff Memorandum Attachment A - Vicinity Map Attachment B - Applicant Narrative Attachment C - Plan Set (1 of 2) Attachment C - Plan Set (2 of 2) Attachment D - Existing Conditions - Plat and Survey TOWN OF Memorandum TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 10, 2019 SUBJECT: A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-6D-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17-1, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the required front setback of 20 feet for a new Two -Family residential building, located at 2699 Davos Trail/Lot 16, Block B, Vail Ridge Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC 19-0015) Applicant: Mexamer Davos LLC, represented by Scott S. Turnipseed AIA Architecture and Construction, Inc. Planner: Chris Neubecker SUMMARY Mexamer Davos LLC, represented by Scott S. Turnipseed AIA Architecture and Construction, Inc. is requesting the review of a variance from Section 12-6D-6 Setbacks, Vail Town Code, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17-1, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow a variance to the front setback of 20 feet to facilitate the construction of a new two-family dwelling, located at 2699 Davos Trail, Lot 16, Block B, Vail Ridge Subdivision. 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 denial of this application, subject to the findings noticed in Section VIII of this memorandum. II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The applicant is requesting the review of a variance from Section 12-6D-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17-1, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the required front setback of 20 feet for a new Two -Family residential building, located at 2699 Davos Trail/Lot 16, Block B, Vail Ridge Subdivision. The applicant is proposing to construct a new two-family dwelling with a front setback of 10', where 20' is required by code. The variances requested are summarized below: 2010 iWriance Request Summary* East Unit - Primary Unit front yard setback 0' (Steep lots) 14.5' 2n Level - GRFA Dimensional Criteria Minimum Required Proposed 1 s' Level- Garage front yard setback 0' (Steep lots) 10' 2" Level GRFA front yard setback 20' 10' 2n Level -deck front yard setback 15' 5' 3rcl Level GRFA front yard setback 20' 15.5' West Unit - Secondary Unit 1" Level — Garage front yard setback 0' (Steep lots) 14.5' 2n Level - GRFA front yard setback 20' 14.5' 2n Level - deck front yard setback 15' 5' 3r Level - GRFA front vard setback 20' 17.5' A Vicinity Map (Attachment A), Applicant's Narrative (Attachment B), Plan Set (Attachment C), and Existing Conditions Survey/Plat (Attachment D) are attached for review. III. BACKGROUND The lot at 2699 Davos Trail was annexed into the Town of Vail in 1986, via Ordinance 26, Series of 1986. On December 14, 1998, a previous owner of Lots 16 and 17 obtained approval from the Town of Vail to modify the lot line between Lot 16 and Lot 17. The plat modified the common lot line by up to 24.8', narrowing the width and reducing the size of Lot 16 by 1,230 square feet. The same plat also created an access easement near the existing two -car garage.. In 1999, the owner of Lot 17 obtained approval to construct a new single family residence. Records on file with the Town of Vail indicate a garage in the southeast corner of Lot 16 existed at the time. The garage is accessed by a driveway through Lot 17, and is used by the owners of Lot 17. (The existing garage will be demolished before construction of the proposed two-family dwelling.) On April 17, 2019 the Design Review Board reviewed a conceptual design for Lot 16. The design proposed at the time showed a setback of 20'. At that meeting, there was discussion of the steep slopes and the impacts on the design. At that meeting, the idea of a possible variance was discussed, as well as other design changes that might be possible. Town of Vail Page 2 2699 Davos Trail is located near the end of Davos Trail, within the Primary/Secondary Residential (PS) Zone District. The underlying land -use for this neighborhood is Low - Density Residential. Many of the lots in this vicinity contain steep slopes. The following map shows area in pink with slopes over 30%, and areas in red with slopes over 40%. The average slope of Lot 16 below the proposed home and driveway is 43.7%. r� 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 6, Article D, Two -Family Primary/Secondary Residential (PS) District (in part) 12-6D-1: PURPOSE.- The URPOSE: The two-family primary/secondary residential district is intended to provide sites for single-family residential uses or two-family residential uses in which one unit is a larger primary residence and the second unit is a smaller caretaker apartment, together with such public facilities as may appropriately be located in the same zone district. The two- family primary/secondary residential district is intended to ensure adequate light, air, privacy and open space for each dwelling, commensurate with single-family and two- family occupancy, and to maintain the desirable residential qualities of such sites by Town of Vail Page 3 establishing appropriate site development standards. (Ord. 29(2005) § 23: Ord. 30(1977) § 2) 12-6D-6: SETBACKS.- In ETBACKS: In the primary/secondary residential district, the minimum front setback shall be twenty feet (20), the minimum side setback shall be fifteen feet (15), and the minimum rear setback shall be fifteen feet (15). (Ord. 50(1978) § 2) 12-6D-9: SITE COVERAGE: Site coverage shall not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the total site area. (Ord. 41(1990) § 5: Ord. 30(1977) § 2) 12-6D-10: LANDSCAPING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT: At least sixty percent (60%) of each site shall be landscaped. The minimum of any area qualifying as landscaping shall be ten feet (10) (width and length) with a minimum area not less than three hundred (300) square feet. (Ord. 30(1978) § 2) 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. B. Development Standards Excepted: Variances may be granted only with respect to the development standards prescribed for each zone district, including lot area and site dimensions, setbacks, distances between buildings, height, density control, building bulk control, site coverage, usable open space, landscaping and site development, and parking and loading requirements; or with respect to the provisions of chapter 11 of this title, governing physical development on a site. C. Use Regulations Not Affected: The power to grant variances does not extend to the use regulations prescribed for each zone district because the flexibility necessary to avoid results inconsistent with the objectives of this title is provided by chapter 16, "Conditional Use Permits", and by section 12-3-7, "Amendment", of this title. Town of Vail Page 4 12-17-5: PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION ACTION.- Within CTION: Within twenty (20) days of the closing of a public hearing on a variance application, the planning and environmental commission shall act on the application. The commission may approve the application as submitted or may approve the application subject to such modifications or conditions as it deems necessary to accomplish the purposes of this title, or the commission may deny the application. A variance may be revocable, may be granted for a limited time period, or may be granted subject to such other conditions as the commission may prescribe. 12-17-6: CRITERIA AND FINDINGS.- A. INDINGS: A. Factors Enumerated: Before acting on a variance application, the planning and environmental commission shall consider the following factors with respect to the requested variance.- The ariance: The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. 2. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege. 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. 4. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to the proposed variance. B. Necessary Findings: The planning and environmental commission shall make the following findings before granting a variance.- That ariance: That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone district. 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons.- a. easons: a. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title. Town of Vail Page 5 b. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not generally apply to other properties in the same zone 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 same zone district. 12-21-12: RESTRICTIONS IN SPECIFIC ZONES ON EXCESSIVE SLOPES.- "Slope" LOPES: "Slope" is the gradient or configuration of the undisturbed land surface prior to site improvement of a lot, site, or parcel which shall be established by measuring the maximum number of feet in elevation gained or lost over each ten feet (10) or fraction thereof measured horizontally in any direction between opposing lot lines, the relationship of elevation or vertical measure as divided by the horizontal measurement shall be expressed as a percentile as a means of quantifying the term "slope". In determination of "slope" as defined herein, for use in establishing buildable area requirements and maximum floor area ratio limitations on existing and proposed lots, a grid system based on ten foot (10) modules shall be superimposed on a topographic map of the subject property and the lot slope determination established by the defined method for each one hundred (100) square foot grid portion of the tract, lot or portion thereof. The following additional special restrictions or requirements shall apply to development on any lot in a hillside residential, single-family residential, two-family residential or two- family primary/secondary residential district where the average slope of the site beneath the existing or proposed structure and parking area is in excess of thirty percent (30%).- A. 30%): A. A soil and foundation investigation, prepared by and bearing the seal of a registered professional engineer shall be required. B. Foundations must be designated and bear the seal of a registered professional engineer. C. A topographic survey prepared by a registered surveyor, with contour intervals of not more than two feet (2), shall be required. D. Structures must be designed by a licensed architect. E. Site coverage as it pertains to this chapter, as permitted by sections 12-6A-9, 12- 68-9, 12-6C-9 and 12-6D-9 of this title, is amended as follows.- 1. ollows:1. Not more than ten percent (10%) of the total site area may be covered by driveways and surface parking. 2. In order to protect the natural landform and vegetation on steep slopes, not more than sixty percent (60%) of the total site area may be disturbed from present Town of Vail Page 6 UI conditions by construction activities. The design review board (DRB) may approve site disturbance in excess of the sixty percent (60%) maximum if specific design criteria warrant the extent of the requested deviation. F. A site grading and drainage plan shall be required. G. A detailed plan of retaining walls or cuts and fills in excess of five feet (5) shall be required. H. A detailed revegetation plan must be submitted. 1. The administrator may require an environmental impact report as provided in section 12-12-2 of this title. J. A minimum of one covered parking space shall be provided for each dwelling unit. K. Setbacks, as they apply to this chapter, as required by sections 12-6A-6, 12-6B-6, 12-6C-6 and 12-6D-6 of this title, are amended as follows: There shall be no required front setback for garages, except as may be required by the design review board. Garages located in the front setback, as provided for in this section, shall be limited to one story in height (not to exceed 10 feet) with the addition of a pitched or flat roof and subject to review and approval by the design review board. L. Retaining walls up to six feet (6) in height may be permitted in the setback by the design review board when associated with a permitted garage as referenced in subsection K of this section. (Ord. 28(2007) § 8: Ord. 17(2006) § 1: Ord. 29(2005) § 45: Ord. 5(2001) § 3: Ord. 2(1995) § 1: Ord. 13(1994) § 1) ZONING AND SITE ANALYSIS Address: 2699 Davos Trail Legal Description: Vail Ridge Subdivision, Block B, Lot 16 Zoning: Two -Family Primary/Secondary Residential Land Use Plan Designation: Low Density Residential Current Land Use: Vacant Geological Hazards: Steep Slopes Town of Vail Page 7 Propose Site Area Min. 14,000 sq. ft. 17,032 No Change Front — 20' Front — 10' Setbacks Side — 15' N/A Side — 15' (North) Rear — 15' Side — 15'6" (South) Rear — 59' Height Flat or Mansard Roof — 30' N/A 33' Sloping Roof — 33' Density 2 DUs N/A 2 DUs Town of Vail Page 7 *Unless related to access to a structure constructed on excessive slopes (in excess of 30 percent). **Retaining walls up to six feet (6') in height may be permitted in the setback by the Design Review Board when associated with a permitted garage within the front setback, per Section 12-21-12 K. VI. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING Max 6,764 sf Zoning District: 5,881 sf GRFA 4,058 sf (primary) N/A 3,533 sf (primary) Two -Family Primary/Secondary Residential 2,706 sf (secondary) Residential 2,348 sf (secondary) Site Coverage 20%/3,406 sf 6.6%/3,866 sf (Garage) 19.98%, 3,404 sf :52,000 GRFA=2 spaces Existing 2 -car Parking 2,0002_4,000 GRFA=3 spaces garage be 3 (primary) 3 (primary) demolished) d) 3 (secondary) 3 (secondary) Landscaping Min. 60% of site area (10,219 sf) N/A 10,219 sf Height — Max. 6' Height — 6' Height — Front Setback* — Max. 3' Height — Front Setback** — 6' Retaining Walls Setback to Private Property — 2' N/A Setback to Private Property — 2' 5" Setback to Public Street — 10' Setback to Public Street — 10' *Unless related to access to a structure constructed on excessive slopes (in excess of 30 percent). **Retaining walls up to six feet (6') in height may be permitted in the setback by the Design Review Board when associated with a permitted garage within the front setback, per Section 12-21-12 K. VI. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING VII. REVIEW CRITERIA The review criteria for a variance request are prescribed in Title 12, Chapter 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 location of the home may have negative impacts on other existing or potential structures in the vicinity through the imposition of building mass within the required front setback. While views from adjacent properties may not be impacted, do to the location of the homes on these properties, the construction of three floors of building within the front setback will result in a looming structure incompatible with the existing and potential uses in the neighborhood. Therefore, staff finds that the proposed variance does not conform to this criterion. Town of Vail Page 8 Existing Land Use: Zoning District: North: Residential Two -Family Primary/Secondary Residential South: Residential Two -Family Primary/Secondary Residential East: Residential Two -Family Primary/Secondary Residential West: Residential Two -Family Primary/Secondary Residential VII. REVIEW CRITERIA The review criteria for a variance request are prescribed in Title 12, Chapter 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 location of the home may have negative impacts on other existing or potential structures in the vicinity through the imposition of building mass within the required front setback. While views from adjacent properties may not be impacted, do to the location of the homes on these properties, the construction of three floors of building within the front setback will result in a looming structure incompatible with the existing and potential uses in the neighborhood. Therefore, staff finds that the proposed variance does not conform to this criterion. Town of Vail Page 8 2. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege. The applicant has provided no evidence to indicate that the proposed variance is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege. While staff recognizes that the subject lot is steep, this is not a unique situation and there is no evidence that a home could be built on this lot within the existing codes. The Vail Town Code provides relief for development on steep slopes without a variance, by allowing a garages and associated retaining walls to be located within the front setback, per Section 12-21-12 K, Vail Town Code. This relief is not available for lots with average grades beneath the proposed homes and driveways that is less than 30%. Section 12-21-12 K, Setbacks, Vail Town Code requires no front setback for garages on lots where the average slope of the site beneath the existing or proposed structure and parking area is in excess of thirty percent (30%). The average slope of Lot 16 is 43.7%. However, this code section does not allow for GRFA above the garage within the front setback. The proposed design includes GRFA above both garages. While staff recognizes the challenges of designing a home on this lot, the applicant has not demonstrated that the variance is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege. Other design options are available without requiring a variance. Staff finds the proposed variance does not conform to this criterion. 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 not have a negative effect on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, or public safety. Lot 16 is at the end of a pubic road, with very little traffic. The required parking spaces for the two homes are located within enclosed garages with sufficient space in front of the garages for additional parking without impacting the public road. Therefore, staff finds the proposed variance conforms to this criterion. Town of Vail Page 9 4. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to the proposed variance. 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 deny a variance from Section 12-6D-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17-1, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the required front setback of 20 feet for a new Two -Family residential building, located at 2699 Davos Trail/Lot 16, Block B, Vail Ridge Subdivision. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to deny this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: "The Planning and Environmental Commission denies a variance from Section 12-6D-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17-1, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the required front setback of 20 feet for a new Two -Family residential building, located at 2699 Davos Trail/Lot 16, Block B, Vail Ridge Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to deny this variance, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission make 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 June 10, 2019 and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds.- 1. inds: 1. The granting of this variance will constitute a granting of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the surrounding Primary/Secondary Residential (PS) District.,- 2. istrict., 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; and 3. This variance is not warranted for the following reasons.- Town easons: Town of Vail Page 10 a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation will not result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code,- b. ode, b. There are not exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the Primary/Secondary Residential (PS) District.'; and c. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the Primary/Secondary Residential (PS) District. " IX. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Applicant's Narrative C. Plan Set May 13, 2019 D. Existing Conditions — Survey and Plat Town of Vail Page 11 N d ^ _G. 0--o w 41 U) d`i4s' N jot �6 CD Nj %L� /., PI ZX pr At P r�n �.n x � a1 � �. , Nd ; � � •. � : `l�:K' •fir. � ,r . iRr - r> !. CD ,. !r .41 /Q ,• �i� •�\yq-.,_•...— ck � .�. ` \!� t � _ .V tom.: %v, IV 010 _ '.Y� - � � � N ' �� • _ice � • ~ �4 °� . Y k,: ;•E:; L+fir.: ti. lr hi Va .F'. , iii ;'"• � > M1. L C N � 0 E CL a 0) U cu -� -LO El E] Glenn J. Harakal, Architect Scott S. Turnipseed, AIA Architecture and Construction Inc. 1143 Capitol Street, Suite 211 PO Box 3388 Eagle, CO 81631 May 13, 2019 Planning and Environmental Commission Town of Vail RE: 2699 Davos Trail Parcel 210314203038 Variance Request Dear PEC Board Members: We are in the planning stages for the design of a new primary/secondary residence at 2699 Davos Trail. The current property has a garage that sits within the 20 -foot front setback approximately 10' from the front property line. The existing garage will be demolished as part of the new construction work. The average grade of our lot is 43.7% while portions of the site along the road exceed 150% grade (see attached site photo and site survey). Per title 12, chapter 17, paragraph A of the town code: "A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship may result from the size, shape, or dimensions of a site... from topographic or physical conditions on the site... or from physical limitations..." Per paragraph B: "Variances may be granted only with respect to the development standards prescribed for each zone district, including lot area and site dimensions, setbacks... height... site coverage..." Due to the severity of grade and shape of this lot we request a variance that the front setback be modified from 20 feet to 10 feet for the following reasons: Due to the narrowness of the site each unit must be accessed frontally. The narrowness precludes alternate means of driveway access to each residence. Allowed driveway grades limit the elevation of garages to a few feet above Davos Trail edge of pavement. The longer the driveway, the more cut into the hillside. If the building is set back 20 feet, even with a three story building, the upper floor will still be cut into the hillside, and the roof will be below existing grade at the rear of the building. By pulling the building forward, we pull the building out of the ground. With a 20 foot setback, our retaining walls will exceed 24' in overall height. Again, due to the narrowness of the site we cannot physically fit retaining walls stepped in 6' increments with 4' of terracing between each wall to reach a height of 24'. Our proposed site plan with the building set at 10' from the front property line results in a building under GRFA, but pushing site coverage limitations. If our garages were moved into the front setback with all of the liveable area behind the front setback line, we would exceed our allowed site coverage. We ask that the PEC also consider the following factors with repect of this variance request per 12-17-6 of the town code: Criteria and Findings: A. Factors Enumerated: Before acting on a variance application, the planning and environmental commission shall consider the following factors with respect to the requested variance: 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. The variance will have no impact on adjacent properties because they are a mix of non -conforming site developments (see attached photos) and contrary to the town code with respect to setbacks and retaining wall heights. 2686 Davos Trail appears to be parking in the right-of-way, 2696 Davos Trail is set approximately ten feet from the edge of pavement or at their property line. 2701 Davos Trail has a 12' retaining wall and stair access right at the edge of pavement in what appears to be the road right-of- way. With a 10' front setback and approximately 24' from the edge of pavement our property will be more conforming with the town code than our neighbors. 2. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege. Relief from the setback regulations is necessary so that we are treated the same as other lots in the vicinity due to the steepness of the embankments each side of Davos Trail. When Davos Trail was cut in on the uphill side and filled on the downhill side the resultant embankments were steeper than the already naturally steep grade. If we consider the setbacks as further leveling of the road way, site grading cannot be maintained without excessive walls. The further back from the edge of pavement, the worse the situation becomes. A ten foot setback is reasonable compared to building right to our property line (as it appears was done at 2696 Davos Trail) or having to detach and bury the garages and placing the residences up the hill with access by funicular only (as was done at 2701 Davos Trail). 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. 2699 Davos Trail is off the beaten path on a south -facing hillside in west Vail. The lot is located near the end of the road. The project will not block light to the north as the uphill site is steep and will not create objectionable shadows throughout the year. The project will have gas appliances with clean air emissions. Distribution of population is per PS zoning district. Street traffic will be light and our 24' deep driveway will allow cars to temporarily stop before opening garage doors, creating less of a safety issue compared with adjacent sites. Public utilities have signed off on our plans. 4. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to the proposed variance. Unique elements of this site beyond road cuts and grades were created by the previous owner whom also resides next door at 2695 Davos Trail: The garage to be demolished previously served 2695 Davos Trail, and has been replaced by a garage addition to 2695's residence. Our site was reconfigured by the previous owner to allow for 15' side yard setbacks from 2695's garage addition. Our site is pinched in the middle because of this modification and atypical in configuration. In addition an easement was added to our lot to allow 2695 to back out of their new garage, further restricting the developability of our site. B. Necessary Findings: The planning and environmental commission shall make the following findings before granting a variance: 1. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone district. We are not seeking special privilege: There is some sense in how the lots in the vicinity were developed because of the steep roadside grades, although some of the solutions were taken to the extreme. We are still wishing to maintain a setback from our front property line. If we must maintain a 20' setback we are denied privileges enjoyed by other home owners in the vicinity. 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. There will be no detrimental impact to the public due to a granting of this variance because of its location on Davos Trail. Beyond our lot there are only three more lots before Davos Trail terminates. There should be very little traffic and the property will be visible to very few people. Our proposed project should enhance the neighborhood with its mountain modern architecture, which is similar to two other projects recently developed on the street and should lend to the revitilization of Davos Trail. 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: a. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title. b. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone 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 same zone district. (Ord. 29(2005) § 39: Ord. 8(1973) § 19.600) A lack of a granting of this variance will leave the owner with a lot that cannot be developed to its full potential within its two-family primary/secondary residential (PS) zone district. This site is extremely steep, even when compared to other lots in the same zone district. This is one of the reason the site has not been developed to date. Other properties in the same zone district were able to build two-family primary/secondary residences and have either been granted variances or were constructed in the past under a less restrictive town code. A 10' front setback is the minimal requirement we need to develop this site and is the least variance from the town code that will allow this project to work. A granting of this variance will allow the owner to realize the full potential of this site within the two-family primary/secondary (PS) zone district and add new vitality to the neighborhood. We are asking the PEC Board to appreciate the reasons set forth in this request and grant a variance to modify our front setback to ten feet. Thank you for your assistance. Glenn J. Harakal Scott S. Turnipseed, AIA Architecture and Construction, Inc. Attachments: ILC Recorded plat Site survey Trees and rock outcropping .RAO MIS, 1 ".1 wa ft Ms�, - � '`may$ to ��.' ,�y�` fi e 7 C. � y - Row,h K OWN! Yl _ �.;� W NIN a Am - pp Ii�17 Am 2686 Davos Trail 2701 Davos Trail —funicular 2701 Davos Trail — garage buried into hillside with minimal driveway; 12' high retaining wall comes down almost to edge of pavement; stairs come right down to pavement of Davos Trail. I 2701 Davos Trail — steepness of lot similar to our property 2699 Davos Trail LMa , Y {j IL ate- k i r Ow 2655 Davos Trail — building appears to have a similar setback to what we are proposing 0 wl AR,nu wl s asp 6s a Aew lessor a as 3m aae Ha Mai 0 \ OOVdOiOO'imn aOOla TWO r0018'9� iOi �\ I S = I � M Q - -- T o s \ IIV2li SOAVO 6692 UV \ m LL ., Mai 0 \ (A O w �\ I S \ m n\ I � M Q \ UV \ m LL ., e�. o w \[\79-\b 292§2 3m 2K7 §22 o -//TWO .i � s Ae2 IIO \ s asp 6s a Aew lessor a as 3m aae Ha ------- -------- ---------------- o��ovo-o- - - o - 000 e - ------- - ---- - ---------- ---a- - - - ---- -- -- --------------- ................ ---------------- PoPoPoPo_PoPoPoPo������Po 0000v00000000000 PoPoPoPo_PoPoPoPoPoPoPoPoPoPoPo eI, — Q owaoioo'imn 3901d TWO rooia `9 � ioi lIV2li SOAVO 6692 = - -- CO Q o w w w mN¢ ------- -------- ---------------- o��ovo-o- - - o - 000 e - ------- - ---- - ---------- ---a- - - - ---- -- -- --------------- ................ ---------------- PoPoPoPo_PoPoPoPo������Po 0000v00000000000 PoPoPoPo_PoPoPoPoPoPoPoPoPoPoPo eI, — Q s asp 6s a Aew lessor a as 3m aae Ha 1 I 1 — 1 I I 1 l _ 1 -- 1 MJbB13S 11 el ��nua3,oa �3h owaoioo'imn 3901d TWO A0018 `9 � ioi IIV2li SOAVO 6692 1 = — �qu I I l - -- ° m a�� 1 &y I Mn,,,m 1 I 1 — 1 I I 1 l _ 1 -- 1 MJbB13S 11 el ��nua3,oa �3h 1 — �qu I I l I m a�� 1 &y I 1 I 1 — 1 I I 1 l _ 1 -- 1 MJbB13S 11 el ��nua3,oa 1 I I l I 1 I 1 I 1 — 1 I I 1 l _ 1 -- 1 MJbB13S 11 el ��nua3,oa s asp 6s a Aew lessor a as 3m aae Ha Q owaoioo'imn 3901d TWO rooia `9 � ioi IIV2li SOAVO 6692 = _ -- LO z w m Q N w w w oao mN¢ s Q s asp 6s a Aew lessor a as 3m aae Ha o= s °o QQ Qo Q Q - Q owaoioo'imn = (� 3901d TWO rooia `9 � ioi IIV2li SOAVO 6692 w w w mN¢ Q o= s °o QQ Qo Q Q - Q o w \[\79-\b 292§2 3m 2K7 §22 � Z�� -//TWO .i IIV�l Is AOe2 _ ~ \\�du § -� � Z�� ~ \\�du ° � Z�� Si 3901d TWO A0018'9� iOl 10 IT -T Si 10 IT -T Si s asp 6s a Aew lessor a as 3m aae Ha Q - OOVdOlOO'IIVA 3001d TWO N0018'9l 101 0 IIV2li SOAVO 6692 w w w mN¢ Q ga Q s asp 6s a Aew lessor a as 3m aae Ha Q - 00vaoio0'imn 3001?J lNA'8 NOO18'9l 101 = co � 0 IIV2li SOAVO 6692 Q s asp 6s a Aew lessor a as 3m aae Ha owaoioo'imn 3901d TWO A0018'9� ioi IIV2li SOAVO 6692 - _ - - -- o w Q z w w w w mN¢ & s asp 6s a Aew lessor a as 3m aae Ha owaoioo'imn 3901d TWO rooia `9 � ioi IIV2li SOAVO 6692 - - -- o w s asp 6s a Aew lessor a as 3m aae Ha owaoioo'imn = - CO � 3901d TWO A0018'9� ioi - -- lIV2li SOAVO 6692 s asp 6s a Aew lessor a as 3m aae Ha owaoioo'imn 3901d TWO A0018'9� ioi lIV2li SOAVO 6692 - -- Q w w w mN¢ s asp 6s a Aew lessor a as 3m aae Ha Q oovaoioo'imn aoaia TWO r0018'9� ioi = IIV2li SOAVO 6692 w w w mN¢ Q mN Q s asp 6s a Aew lessor a as 3m aae Ha -71IR Q oovaoioo'imn aoaia TWO r0018'9� ioi IIV2li SOAVO 6692 w w w mN¢ Q mN -71IR Q s asp 6s a Aew lessor a as 3m aae Ha --AIR Q 0waoioo'imn 3901a TWO r0018'9� ioi - _ (7 IIV2li SOAVO 6692 w w w mN¢ Q mN --AIR Q s asp 6s a Aew lessor a as 3m aae Ha 8 owaoioo'imn 3901d TWO A0018'9� ioi - _ o - -- lo lIV2li SOAVO 6692 w w w .0 mN¢ J o 8 o lo .0 Ill oo\s 0�' ro ,pg 'OV) -s J m44 , s � e a°j E of see A yy� �sw sem R i ys� e n � o t n� in � 6 u �J� - —� rrc� e. hc.eo a wj oax �axzm�H�w�aesMan��a - mono — - ds:' awl Egli 06 - - _ - o�opo imp_ a Aq Zvi moo as a sFs J Sh65y�I O \ ID h H �o. t O �O Sa \ U / - / M 11 0uvau l00 ` 11Nf100 330V3 'TVA 30 NMOL - �" 30012j TVA `0 >0010 `L l+ 9 l 103 30N3aIS3a d3HOS13 3 o NV3d 311S c - ;p� o �rL0����� -- --- 0908 --- ----------- ----------- \ -- _ --------------------------- _ ------------ �i :. � .� --- - _ -- �- ------OgOg-------- - --- --- -------7/ -----� ---- - ----------- -- ----------- -° -- -----------------0602 r --- _ e—--------- -------- -------- O--------------------- ----- -------- - ------ --------- -___-_____-__-______- O \� <\--------------- 00 Ij` iI `00 _L---__ / x,0 ---- -----1.------------ w w� O 0 City of Vail, Colorado Logo VAIL TOWN PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: June 10, 2019 ITEM/TOPIC: A worksession to discuss a zoning code text amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, for prescribed regulations amendments to Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to update definitions, including the removal of redundant definitions, the consolidation of definitions defined multiple times, relocation of 20% hardscaping standard to Title 14 and amendment to the landscaping regulation to allow up to 20% permeable hardscaped space, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19- 0017) ATTACHMENTS: File Name memo pec 6 10.pdf definitions DRB discussion.pdf Additional Sheet.pdf Description Staff memo Spreadsheet of Definitions Supplemental Sheet A, )rowN of vain Memorandum TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 10, 2019 SUBJECT: Work session on Title 12 and Title 14 code clean-up to update definitions, including the removal of redundant definitions, the consolidation of definitions defined multiple times, relocation of 20% hardscaping standard to Title 14 and amendment to the landscaping regulation to allow up to 20% permeable hardscaped space, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0017) Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Ashley Clark The attached spreadsheet indicates the four categories on code updates proposed: (a) category one represents where definitions are repeated in Title 12 and Title 14 are repeated and are the same; (b) category two represents where definitions are repeated but differ in language; (c) category three represents words that are not repeated however require attention; and (d) category four represents a change to landscaping standards and relocation of regulations that exist within the definition to the development standards in Title 14. The proposed amendments are in the last column on the attached sheet. The goal of the work session is to discuss the proposed changes. Pete Wadden, Water Quality Education Coordinator, from the Department of Environmental Sustainability will attend to discuss the proposed changes to the landscaping requirements. A full code analysis will be provided for the hearing on June 24, 2019. 3 3 E - E Y u E 3 - E w m E E - - a E Y o a E - - E - _ E - - - - E 2- c E o 3 3 = ~ a E o E c E E 3 w 3 c- z - 0 o a o 0 0 o E g E E a E \ \ \ \ \ \\ \\\ fi fi fi fi is fi fi E\fi £ E|));§!\! §{\fi RE fi fi -3z fi fi fi fi fi EL \\ \\\\ }U \\\\ \j\\�\}\} \ \ \\\�\\\\\ \\\\ ){[{ §! §(!! ;!#!i7{{»))[i { ;2\{ Additional Sheet — Landscaping IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: any surface that cannot effectively absorb or infiltrate rainfall; for example, sidewalks, rooftops, roads, and parking lots. LANDSCAPING: Natural or significant rock outcroppings, native vegetation, planted areas and plant materials, including trees, shrubs, lawns, flowerbeds and ground cover. Impervious surfaces are not counted as landscaped areas. shall "e '"1QwQP:1iQ-P1 , 0 IaRGIGGapepl Area PERVIOUS SURFACE: A pervious surface is a surface that allows the percolation of water into the underlying soil. Pervious surfaces include grass, mulched groundcover, planted areas, permeable paving as well as porches and decks erected on pier foundations that maintain the covered lot surface's water permeability. Pervious surfaces do not include any structure or building, any porch or deck that limits the covered lot surface from absorbing water, or any outdoor stairs, on -grade surface sports court, swimming pool, artificial turf, sidewalk or patio constructed of concrete, asphalt, brick, compacted gravel or other material that impedes the infiltration of water directly into the subsurface of the lot. 14-10-8: LANDSCAPING, DRAINAGE, AND EROSION CONTROL: A. Various natural vegetation zones exist within the Gore Valley as a result of the form and aspects of the land itself. The north facing slopes within the valley are typically heavily wooded with spruce, pine and aspen and generally receive less direct sunlight than the drier south facing slopes which typically consist of sage, aspen and other vegetation tolerant of drier conditions. The valley floor which is adjacent to Gore Creek consists of a wide variety of trees and shrubs adapted to the relatively fertile soil and natural availability of water. L. Pervious core development such as walks, decks, patios, terraces, and like features not occupying more than twenty percent (20%) of the landscaped area may be utilized to meet the landscape requirement. City of Vail, Colorado Logo VAIL TOWN PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL AGENDA MEMO MEETING DATE: June 10, 2019 ITEM/TOPIC: PEC Results May 13, 2019 ATTACHMENTS: File Name Description Pec results 051319.pdf PEC Results May 13, 2019 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION TOWN Of VA10 May 13, 2019, 1:00 PM Town Council Chambers 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 Call to Order Present: Pam Hopkins, Karen Perez, Brian Stockmar, Ludwig Kurz, Brian Gillette, Rollie Kjesbo Absent: John -Ryan Lockman Site Visits 2.1. 366 Hanson Ranch Road - Vailpoint LLC 2.2. 2698 Cortina Lane - Scheidegger Residence 3. Main Agenda 3.1. A worksession to discuss a Major Exterior Alteration, pursuant to Section 60 min. 12-7A-12, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the replacement of the existing structure with a seven (7) suite private lodge and staff apartment with related site improvements, located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot D, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0008) Applicant: Vailpoint LLC, represented by Sarah J Baker, PC Planner: Jonathan Spence Planner Spence introduced the project and noted that the public accommodation zone district has language that allows either staff or an applicant to request a work session with the PEC, or any town body. He noted that this work session has been initiated by the applicant, not by staff. Mr. Spence referred to the staff memo submitted and noted that there will be no action requested of the PEC today. Mr. Spence further noted that there has only been an initial analysis done on the proposal Ms. Baker, on behalf of the applicant, introduced the team. Mr. Mueller, owner of Cuvee, George Sollidge, Owner of Vail Point LLC, Jens Warner, from REcom Global, Rick Pylman, Land planning and Emilia Kraft and Hans Berglund from Berglund Architects. Ms. Baker stated they requested a work session due to town procedure and enumerated the three items they are seeking feedback on today. Ms. Baker stated that there are a few options and would like feedback; however, no formal action is requested. Ms. Baker stated that the proposed building siting has a couple of options. Setbacks in the PA district may be modified based on criteria. The variation is not a variance. Upon inquiry from Chairman Stockmar, Mr. Spence agreed with Ms. Baker's interpretation of the PA zone district setbacks. Ms. Baker noted that the building footprint that does meet setbacks has implications for the pedestrian experience in the area. Mr. Baker stated there is also a desire to address the fact that there are two zoning designations for the single lot. She noted that there was a previous attempt to reconcile that issue, however, was not achieved on a PEC vote. Mr. Larry Mueller, founder and CEO of Cuvee, then provided an overview of how the building will be operated. Mr. Mueller described the private lodge and the clientele it serves. He noted that there is a large demand for high end lodges that allow people to travel as extended families or as friends and have a private lodge experience with access to high-end amenities. Mr. Mueller noted that the property has private space for families as well as common space. He stated that you can only rent the structure as an entire unit, and individual rooms are not individually leased out. Hans Berglund and Emilia Kraft presented to the Board design images of the proposed building. He noted that setbacks can be modified without a variance as long as five criteria are met. He then presented why this proposal meets each of those criteria. Mr. Berglund stated that the proposal maintains open space and creates a more welcoming pedestrian element. Additionally, he noted that the proposal will maintain adequate light and air. Mr. Berglund stated that they reviewed the I BC to ensure they will meet building code requirements for building setback requirements. He noted that the proposed building setback has the massing stepped back between 10'-16' to create more space. Mr. Berglund then discussed the proposed tower which would comply with the 60' standard for architectural projections and stated that the tower is essentially the same height as the Tivoli building next door. He noted that towers are prominent features and is consistent and will add to the visual overall landscape from a distance as well as a pedestrian. Mr. Berglund then described the proposed materials, a stone base around the house as the main architectural element and the other materials include two colors of copper siding, one as a very dark bronze tone and a lighter copper color, heavy timber construction. He noted that the theme is mountain architecture and speaks to the early days of Vail. He noted that while they are before the board to talk about setbacks, he feels that the building design will contribute to the community. Mr. Kurz inquired about the function of the tower besides the architectural design. Mr. Berglund stated that it is mainly architectural, there is not space in it, with the exception of stairs and a small landing with balconies that wrap around. Upon inquiry from Ms. Hopkins, Mr. Berglund stated that the tower could be lower, however, in order to achieve the effect of a tower, the height is needed. Ms. Hopkins inquired about the throughway from Mill Creek Circle to Golden Peak. Mr. Berglund stated that the new building will be more attractive. Mr. Berglund stated that there have been discussions with Vail Resorts about updating the landscaping. He stated that trees are to be removed within the property. The board then reviewed the shadow study. Mr. Stockmar noted a concern that the shadow is extensive and puts all of Hanson Ranch Road in shadow, which is icy and has implications for safety. The existing pavers are snow melted but not the asphalt road. Upon inquiry from Ms. Perez, Mr. Berglund noted that the alternative footprint would be similar in terms of shadow impact. Ms. Baker stated that at the next meeting they will provide the current condition as well as proposed. Ms. Baker noted that the cumulative impact will be helpful in a future discussion. Mr. Kurz inquired about proposed parking. Mr. Rick Pylman, stated that the lodge parking requirements is 0.7 parking spaces per room, 7 parking spaces total would be required. 1 '/2 spaces are attributed to the small caretaker unit. He noted there are 3 spaces in the garage and 4 spaces outside of the garage. All parking spaces are on the property. Mr. Kjesbo noted that Tivoli was required to have 15-minute parking and cars currently block the sidewalk, which pushes people into the icy road. Mr. Pylman stated that since the entire property is to be rented out and not as individual units, they do not foresee parking being an issue. Mr. Kjesbo noted that the use can change which would impact the operation. Mr. Stockmar noted that the ownership and use can change at any time. Mr. Stockmar noted that the PEC must consider future impact as well as proposed operations. Mr. Pylman stated they will take the PEC's comments into consideration into the design. Mr. Kjesbo stated that the Tivoli was approved with a variance for the height and noted that he has an issue with something extending up 56' on the corner and that it looks out of place and unbalances the building. He does not like that much bulk right at the street. Upon inquiry from Mr. Kjesbo, Mr. Spence noted that the Town Council never opined on the zoning change. Mr. Stockmar stated that the meeting when this property was addressed in June of 2018, the minutes reflect some of his concerns are allayed by the design. Mr. Stockmar stated that it was an odd circumstance due to how the property was obtained. Mr. Stockmar inquired if the applicant would take out the fence across the back yard? Ms. Baker stated that they have not contemplated removing the fence, however, will consider it through the design process. Ms. Baker stated that the message has been received and will focus on it moving forward. Mr. Stockmar stated that there may be implications for the fence, existing trees, and hot tub. Upon inquiry from Ms. Perez, Mr. Spence stated that the same standards for variances do not apply for a setback variation. He noted that a variance is a different thing from a variation, which is subject to the five -criteria Mr. Berglund enumerated. Chairman Stockmar opened the hearing up to public comment. No public comment was provided. Mr. Gillette discussed the zoning of the property. The commission discussed open space and zoning with the applicant and Planner Spence. Ms. Perez stated regarding the zoning it was meant to be space available to the public and stated the applicant has created this issue. She noted that it feels like the open space is part of the community. Ms. Perez stated that she disagrees with Mr. Berglund's analysis of the proposal meeting the required five criteria. Ms. Baker clarified that the space has never been publicly open space and has always been a private lot. There was a discussion regarding what development can occur in open space zone districts. There was a discussion over how the space be preserved to open air and light in the future. Ms. Perez pointed out where existing trees will be removed from the street to accommodate the proposed tower. Ms. Perez stated this will deteriorate open space, air and light. There was a discussion over where existing trees will be removed. Tower would go to corner of where the existing fence is, 60' high. Mr. Gillette inquired if the building could be built without the rezoning. Mr. Spence stated no, it could not. Mr. Stockmar stated they are concerned about massing, height, and the fence along the south side of the property. 3.2. A request for the review of variances from Section 14-3-1: Minimum 20 min. Standards, Table 1 Driveway/Feeder Road Standards, Entry Angle Minimum Deflection, Vail Town Code, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17-1, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the entry angle minimum deflection for first 30 feet of driveway length to facilitate the development of a single-family structure, located at 2698 Cortina Lane/Lot 11, Block B, Vail Ridge Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-00013) Applicant: Benno Scheidegger, represented by Berglund Architects Planner: Ashley Clark Planner Clark introduced the variance request. She noted that the property is unique in that is shares a steep driveway with two other parcels. Ms. Clark noted that Public Works Department is supportive of bringing the grade up to code and changing the angle to meet code. Mr. Berglund reiterated staff's comments. Chairman Stockmar opened the hearing for public comment. There were no comments from the public. Mr. Kurz moved to approve the variance request. Ms. Perez seconded. The commission unanimously voted to approve the variance request. Ludwig Kurz moved to approve. Karen Perez seconded the motion and it passed (6-0). Absent: (1) Lockman 3.3. A Report to the Planning and Environmental Commission of an 5 min. administrative action regarding a request for a minor amendment to Special Development District (SDD) No. 36, Four Seasons, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for modifications to the approved development plan in order to permit a non- residential addition totaling 980 square feet to accommodate a glass enclosed seating area located at 1 Vail Road/Lot A — C, Vail Village Filing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-0014) Applicant: Ex Vail LLC Extell Development, represented by OZ Architecture Planner: Erik Gates Planner Gates introduced the project. The glass enclosure is proposed on the south deck to the restaurant. No action is required by the PEC. Public Comment — None 3.4. A request for the review of variances from Section 12-6D-9-6 Setbacks, 20 min. Vail Town Code, in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17-1, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for variances to the front setback of 20 feet to facilitate the redevelopment of both east and west units, located at 706 Forest Road Units A & B/Lot 9, Vail Village Filing 6, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC19-00010) Applicant: Paul & Danita Ostling, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Ashley Clark Planner Clark introduced the application, which was tabled from a past meeting. The variance on the west side is no longer in the application. Staff recommendation from the previous meeting stands, which is to recommend denial. Allison Kent, Mauriello Planning Group — She read a statement from the owner's representative, who could not attend the meeting. She described the property location at 706 Forest Road, and presented images of the property. The application required several public hearings when it was originally built. Ms. Kent described the history of the lot and construction, including being built with a 10' setback. Variances were obtained for the original construction. All variances on the west side unit have been eliminated with the application. Ms. Kent described the variances on the east side. The front entry was relocated to the second level. Also, a roof pitch change is proposed. She described the revised plans, and showed a comparison to the previous application. She showed how the existing home currently sits over the front setback. Adam Harrison — Existing front setback is about 3 feet on east side. Ms. Kent — Stair is proposed 3.9 feet from property line. We are also removing GRFA from the setback area (70 square feet). She showed a comparison of the existing GRFA within the setback, and as proposed with this application. Ms. Kent — Presented written letters of support from neighboring property owners. She then reviewed the criteria for a variance in the existing Town Code. She focused on criteria #2, "to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment". She reviewed other elements of the site that make this property unique. She reviewed other sites in the Primary/Secondary zone district with steep slopes. Ms. Kent showed a map analysis of lots in the Primary/Secondary zone district with the steep slopes layer on. Ms. Kent argued that this lot was one of the only lots in the district that had steep slopes extending all the way to the front of the property line. She further illustrated that the steep slopes layer for an overwhelming majority of the lots remains at the rear of the lot and does not extend to the front. Ms. Clark — Explained why staff focused on the uniqueness of the site, and that the applicant needs to be treated differently to be treated the same. Ms. Clark noted that the map analysis was helpful in demonstrating the uniqueness of this lot. Ms. Perez — Why is it necessary to have the entrance on the second floor? Ms. Kent — The site is so steep we are trying to get people into the living level without going through the garage. Ms. Perez- Please explain again which side is being demolished, and which is remodeled. Also please explain the overhang variance. Ms. Kent — Showed examples of other homes built with front setback variances. Public Comment — None Mr. Kjesbo — In favor of the variance. They have done a good job reducing and eliminating variances. They are eliminating square footage on the east unit. I will support Mr. Gillett — I support the variance. It's a very steep lot and deserves a variance. Mr. Kurz —Agree with Kjesbo. Within reason, the applicant had come close to not meeting a variance, but with changes in favor of the variance. Ms. Perez — Pleased with reducing the number of variances. You have also minimized the degree of the variance. Site is a steep lot. Previous concerns were with the other side of the lot. I'm normally not in favor of variances, but in favor of this due to the changes. Ms. Hopkins — In your favor is that the road is so far. Those lots were built in the 70s and 80s, and for cost reasons were built this way. Mr. Stockmar — Agree with other Commissioners and issues raised. Laud the applicant for making a substantial effort to revise plans. The slide showing the steepness of lots in the area helped to convince me. This is a very steep lot. Karen Perez moved to approve. Brian Gillette seconded the motion and it passed (6-0). Absent: (1) Lockman 4. Approval of Minutes 4.1. April 22, 2019 PEC Results Brian Gillette moved to approve. Rollie Kjesbo seconded the motion and it passed (5-0). Abstain: (1) Hopkins Absent: (1) Lockman 5. Adjournment Ludwig Kurz moved to adjourn. Brian Gillette seconded the motion and it passed (6-0). Absent: (1) Lockman 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. Please call 711 for sign language interpretation 48 hour prior to meeting time. Community Development Department Ad #: 0000435571-01 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMIS- Customer: TOWN OF VAIL/PLAN DEPT/COMM DEVLM SION J...10, 2019,1:00 PM Town Council Chambers Rule provision. Ts S. Fro.age Road - van, .—re., 8165] Your account number is: 1023233 1.Callto Order PROOF OF PUBLICATION 1.1. Executive Session p am to C.R.S. 24-8 402(4)(b) io re we legal advi n specific legal That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was questions, regarding quasi-judicial decision making. VAIL DAILY 39 mm. of said daily newspaper for the period of 1 insertion; and 1.2. Actions resulting from Executive Session 5 min. STATE OF COLORADO 2. Site Vista COUNTY OF EAGLE .1. 2899 Tail e Ame 2Davos Mr Dav« ILL. publication of said notice was dated 6/7/2019 in the issue 3. Main Agenda I, Mark Wurzer, do solemnly swear that I am Publisher of 3.1. An appeal, Section 12.3.3, the VAIL DAILY, that the same daily newspaper printed, in ,ureuunitc Appeals, Vell Town Cotle, of an Inferpmtetion by ih Adminiahamr o ne Community De slop De- whole or in part and published in the County of Eagle, panmenl Ione ring section 12-10-4: Adonlons m q�iremets for a fore eke, regarding ode; a 6/13/2019. 61 R west L—r— Cl—vt 1, Vail Lmrehead FII. State of Colorado, and has a general circulation therein,ng 4 (Concert Hall Plaza). and setting forth details AWL hi In regards thereto. (TGI9-0003) 45 min. that said newspaper has been published continuously and Applicant: Hughes LarM Holding Trust, presents, Pierce Architects uninterruptedly in said County of Eagle fora period of 3anner: CC ne Neeuubecker for rev ewo averance more than fifty-two consecutive weeks next prior to the nm serine , p -en -R, sn+nnnk:, veil Town code, i. cordance with he provisions of Section 12-17-1 first publication of the annexed legal notice or Vanances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance t ,he hoot setback of 20 feet for a new T—Famil, advertisement and that said newspaperhas published the p residential building, located at 2699 Davos TraIVLd 16,BIockB,VailRitlgeSubdivisio,antlsettingfoR Pamela J. Schultz, Notary Public dacha m rvoi thereto. (PEC 19-0015) d5 min. ApplMan,r. G1wv l l f.. represen,ed hf requested legal notice and advertisement as requested. Amms sw s. TgrniQsead AlA The VAIL DAILY is an accepted legal advertising medium, Y 9 9 m°"; amendments to Tile 12, 2°nmg Hati,leach, Prate defmMnnsr nnludind he I f only for jurisdictions operating under Colorado's Home dundant datimb.ns, the consolidation of definitions defined malh times. relocation of zov Rule provision. hardscaping standard to T"'14 and amendment tc Ore unsfaoaping regulation to allow, up to 20% par- meable hartlsoaped spa and setting form details in eeggard thereto. (PEC 19-001]) 45 min. A plieanh Town of Vail That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was Penner: Hanley Clark published in the regular and entire issue of every number 4.Appmvel of Minutes of said daily newspaper for the period of 1 insertion; and 4.1. PEC Results May 13, 2019 5. Adjgumment that the first publication of said notice was in the issue of Tha applirations and information about the propos said newspaper dated 6/7/2019 and that the last Is are available for public inspection during regular ofi eM1ours at ha Town of Vail Commun publication of said notice was dated 6/7/2019 in the issue ,Develop m t Department, ]5 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attentl the projectorenfationand of said newspaper. ,he att9 visits that precede the public hearing in the Town Community ate bject pment soaM order of s0are approximate, s change, and cannot be relied upon to determine In witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand this day, et w at twill,the -I Com - mission...idea ao iittem.Peend Enase call (9170) 479. 6/13/2019. 2138 for additional Information. Please call 711 to sign language interpretation 46 hour poor to meet- ing time. Commun Development Department Published in opmeenB AWL hi the Vailail Daily Junep PublieM1etl in the Vail Drily June ], 2019 Mark Wurzer, Publisher Subscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public in and for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado this day 6/13/2019. Pamela J. Schultz, Notary Public My Commission Expires: November 1, 2019 PAMELA J. 3CHl1LTi NOTARY TDL" 5TA.TE. DF c=RAOO -' N OTARY ID g10994D309]5 k4y Co.mmisslcn Em,res Nave .0.20'19 Ad #: 0000427944-01 THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY Customer: TOWN OF VAI L/PLAN DEPT/COMM DEVLM PUBLIC NOTICE Your account number is: 1023233 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and holdapubnch ar g nr=daroo hhsecfiou" 2 3-8, Vail Town Code, ,^dune 10, 2019 st 100 cis PROOF OF PUBLICATION n the Town of Vail Municipal Building. VAIL DAILY A reqq st for the review of a variance from Section 12 -6D -i l Town Code, in accordance Setbacks, Vavisions o1 Section 12-17-1, Variances wig the provisions STATE OF COLORADO Vail Town Coda, to allow for a variance to the to guiired front setback of 2D feet for anew Two -Pointy idenfial building, located at 2699 Davos TraiOLo COUNTY OF EAGLE 16, Block B, Vtil Ritlge subdivision, and setting rah Appli'cantfeg exams, am .D—a EC 1IC, 1re)presenta! b1 Scot S. Tu rnipseed AIA Architecture and Construe I, Mark Wurzer, do solemnly swear that I am Publisher of tion, Inc. Planner: Chris Neubecker the VAIL DAILY, that the same daily newspaper printed, in An appeal, pursuant to Section 12-3-3, App-,. n by the Adistrate Town Ca e, olan imerpretatiomin at the Community Development Department c whole or in art and published in the County of Eagle, p p g ingg,Section 12-104: Additions or Changes, Vai Town C de, for ) State of Colorado, and has a general circulation therein; regarding parking requiremonh a re development prgect located at 616 West Lionsheac CirdsoLot 1, Vail Lion head Fillhead4 (Concert Hall that said newspaper has been published continuously and Plaza), and setting iMh det.Its regards thereto ITC19-0003) uninterruptedly in said County of Eagle for a of AAppellant: Hughhes Land Holding Trust, represent ad!byPierceAr�Chris period Neube ker more than fifty-two consecutive weeks next prior to the The approa,inna and intormatio about he prop, - first publication of the annexed legal notice or hours ata the' To— of Vail)Cmununity Development Department, 75 South Frontage Roel. The publlc advertisement and that said newspaper has published the Chad 10 are ntl site visas. Please call 970-479- 2138 or visit www'.vellaov. mount nina for addition - requested legal notice and advertisement as requested. alirdormatio". SI language interpretation available upon request wig 24-hour notification, dial 711. Published May 24, 2019 in the Vail Dell, The VAIL DAILY is an accepted legal advertising medium, 0000427944 only forjurisdictions 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 insertion; and that the first publication of said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated 5/24/2019 and that the last publication of said notice was dated 5/24/2019 in the issue of said newspaper. In witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand this day, 5/24/2019. Mark Wurzer. Publisher Subscribed and sworn to before me, a notary public in and for the County of Eagle, State of Colorado this day 5/24/2019. Jerilynn Medina, Notary Public My Commission Expires: August 3, 2020 .1Er�E �YM!J MEp!Rd�S r rnI, eu!ru. FiATI: Ci -0111-11 NOTMZY lil2ir�079ifIA u`/vCfi%¢CGON:Xi'IRI:GAk3Gil57et.26x'