Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-04-21 Agenda and Supporting Documentation Town Council Afternoon Meeting VAIL TO W N C O U N C IL R E G U L AR ME E T IN G Agenda Virtual 2:00 P M, April 21, 2020 Notes: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and c annot be relied upon to determine what time Council will consider an item. Public c omment on any agenda item may be solicited by the Town Council. 1.Town of Vail Council Meeting to be Held Virtually this W eek S tream the Meeting Live via https://www.highfivemedia.org/live-five. 1.1.Link to High Five 2.P resentation / Discussion 2.1.Public Health Crisis Federal Relief Programs 30 min. Presenter(s): J oe Neguse, U.S. House of Representative Action Requested of Counc il: I nformational only. Bac kground: Congressman Neguse represents Colorado’s 2nd D istrict in the U.S. House of Representatives and will address some of the federal relief programs offered to c ommunities in response to the public health crisis. 2.2.Public Health Crisis State Relief Programs 30 min. Presenter(s): Colorado State S enator Kerry Donovan and C olorado House of Representative Dylan Roberts Action Requested of Counc il: I nformational only. Bac kground: Colorado S tate Senator Donovan represents Senate Distric t 5, c urrently representing C haffee, Delta, Eagle, Gunnison, Hinsdale, Lake and Pitkin counties.Colorado Representative Roberts serves House D istrict 26 seat, Eagle and Routt Counties. State Senator Kerry D onovan and Representative Dylan Roberts will share information about state programming relief efforts offered to c ommunities. 2.3.Proposed Amendments to the C hamonix Vail Townhomes D eed Restric tion and Employee Housing Guidelines 30 min. Presenter(s): George Ruther, Housing Director and Krista Miller, HR/Risk Director Action Requested of Counc il: Provide direction on proposed amendments to deed restrictions and housing guidelines for Chamonix Vail Townhomes Bac kground: The purpose of this item is to propose an amendment the Chamonix Vail Townhomes deed restriction terms and E mployee Housing Guidelines. I f approved, an additional term will be added to the deed restric tion requiring a qualified resident to earn at least 75% of their annual inc ome from a business located within Eagle County and amend the Guidelines to grant employees of the Town of Vail a first option to purchase, subject to an internal lottery resale process. April 21, 2020 - Page 1 of 68 2.4.Gore Valley Trail Realignment Alternative Designs 15 min. Presenter(s): Todd Oppenheimer, C apital Project Manager/Landscape Architec t; Scott Belonger, Otak Action Requested of Counc il: D irec t staff regarding moving forward with next required steps. Bac kground: The Gore Valley Trail is managed by the Town and passes through Vail Corporation owned property in the Lionshead area. The existing route of the rec reation trail through the Lionshead ski base area creates c onflicts with other uses during the busy summer season, c reating c ongestion and safety c oncerns. I n November 2019 the council awarded a consulting contract with Otak to perform a feasibility analy sis to identify possible opportunities and c osts for the realignment of recreation path. Otak has completed the feasibility analysis and has prepared a series of alternate design solutions for review by the Council and Vail Corporation. Staff Rec ommendation: Direct staff regarding moving forward with next required steps. 2.5.Art in Public Places Board membership regarding number of board members and rec ommendation to reduce the board size 5 min. Presenter(s): Molly Eppard, Art in Public Plac es Coordinator Action Requested of Counc il: Provide direction to amend the Town code to reduc e the Art in Public Plac es Board to five members. Bac kground: After discussions with the A I P P Board at both the August and September 2019 meetings, as well as on April 6 it is recommended that the AI PP Board be reduced to five members, similar to the make-up of the Design Review Board. A reduction in Board size would allow a more dedic ated and focused board, the ability to formalize processes, review proposals, inc rease partic ipation, and emphasize the greater ac countability to meet attendance requirements of monthly meetings and y ear-round programs. Over the past several years, it has been a challenge to recruit new qualified candidates who meet the requirements to serve on the Board. Staff Rec ommendation: Authorize the Town Manager to have staff and the Town Attorney return with an Ordinance amending the Town C ode Sec tions 3-3-2 and 3-3-3 setting the membership of the Art in Public P laces Board to five members. 3.D R B / PEC Update (5 min.) 3.1.D RB / P E C Update Presenter(s): J onathan S penc e, Planning Manager 4.Information U pdate (5 min.) 4.1.VLHA Marc h 24, 2020 Meeting Results 5.Matters from Mayor, Council and Committee Reports (10 min.) 6.E xecutive Session 6.1.Executive Session, pursuant to: 1) C .R.S. §24-6-402(4)(b)(e) - to receive legal advic e on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, regarding: potential deed restricted employ ee housing sites 45 min. Presenter(s): Matt Mire, Town Attorney April 21, 2020 - Page 2 of 68 7.Recess 7.1.Rec ess 4:45 pm (estimate) Meeting agendas and materials c an be ac cessed prior to meeting day on the Town of Vail website www.vailgov.com. All town council meetings will be streamed live by High Five Ac cess Media and available for public viewing as the meeting is happening. The meeting videos are also posted to High Five Ac cess Media website the week following meeting day, www.highfivemedia.org. Please call 970-479-2136 for additional information. Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 48 hour notification dial 711. April 21, 2020 - Page 3 of 68 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C : L ink to High F ive April 21, 2020 - Page 4 of 68 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C : P ublic Health C risis F ederal R elief Programs P RE S E NT E R(S ): J oe Neguse, U.S. House of R epresentative AC T IO N RE Q UE S T E D O F C O UNC IL : I nf ormational only. B AC K G RO UND: C ongressman Neguse represents C olorado’s 2nd D istrict in the U.S . House of Representatives and will address some of the f ederal relief programs offered to communities in response to the public health crisis. April 21, 2020 - Page 5 of 68 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C : P ublic Health C risis State Relief P rograms P RE S E NT E R(S ): C olorado State Senator K erry D onovan and C olorado House of Representative D ylan Roberts AC T IO N RE Q UE S T E D O F C O UNC IL : I nf ormational only. B AC K G RO UND: C olorado State Senator Donovan represents S enate District 5, currently representing Chaffee, D elta, E agle, Gunnison, Hinsdale, L ake and P itkin counties.C olorado Representative R oberts serves House D istrict 26 seat, E agle and Routt C ounties. State Senator K erry D onovan and R epresentative Dylan R oberts will share information about state programming relief efforts offered to communities. April 21, 2020 - Page 6 of 68 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C : P roposed Amendments to the C hamonix Vail Townhomes D eed Restriction and E mployee Housing Guidelines P RE S E NT E R(S ): George Ruther, Housing Director and Krista Miller, HR/Risk D irector AC T IO N RE Q UE S T E D O F C O UNC IL : P rovide direction on proposed amendments to deed restrictions and housing guidelines for C hamonix Vail Townhomes B AC K G RO UND: T he purpose of this item is to propose an amendment the C hamonix Vail Townhomes deed restriction terms and E mployee Housing Guidelines. I f approved, an additional term will be added to the deed restriction requiring a qualified resident to earn at least 75% of their annual income from a business located within E agle C ounty and amend the Guidelines to grant employees of the Town of Vail a first option to purchase, subject to an internal lottery resale process. AT TAC H ME N TS : Description Chamonix Housing Proposed Amendments Memorandum April 21, 2020 - Page 7 of 68 To: Vail Town Council From: George Ruther, Housing Director Krista Miller, Human Resources/Risk Director Date: April 21, 2020 Subject: Chamonix Vail Townhomes Deed Restriction and Employee Housing Guidelines – Proposed Amendments 1. SUMMARY The purpose of this memorandum is to propose an amendment the Chamonix Vail Townhomes deed restriction terms and Employee Housing Guidelines. If approved, an additional term will be added to the deed restriction requiring a qualified resident to earn at least 75% of their annual income from a business located within Eagle County and amend the Guidelines to grant employees of the Town of Vail a first option to purchase a subject to an internal lottery resale process. A resolution has been drafted to amend these guidelines and has been included on the consent agenda for the evening meeting. 2. CHAMONIX VAIL TOWNHOMES MASTER DEED RESTRICTION AMENDMENT The Vail Town Council approved Resolution No. 9, Series of 2020, authorizing the purchase of Unit #6, Chamonix Vail Townhomes, located at 2373A Lower Traverse Way. The reason for the purchase is to facilitate an amendment to the recorded deed restriction terms, prior to placing the home back on the market for resale to a qualified buyer. The recommended amendment to the deed restriction states: “The applicant must demonstrate that at least seventy-five (75) percent of his/her income and earnings are earned by working at an Eagle County business and provide employment verification.” This amendment is recommended to ensure that the owners of the Chamonix Vail Townhomes earn a minimum of 75% of their annual income from a business located within Eagle County and prevent any further abuse of the intended occupancy of the Chamonix Vail Townhomes. 3. EMPLOYEE HOUSING GUIDELINES AMENDMENT April 21, 2020 - Page 8 of 68 Town of Vail Page 2 The current Chamonix Vail Townhomes Employee Housing Guidelines limit the ability for the Town of Vail to acquire homes for municipal employees or other direct sale decision the Town Council may desire. In addition, these Guidelines currently limit the Town’s ability to acquire the unit for other reasons, for example: interim housing for critical roles such as our prior discussion regarding Town Manager housing during construction or development. The process to amend guidelines would need to be done by resolution. Should the Town Council desire to update the housing guidelines to allow additional flexibility, the recommended language is as follows for section 6, Town Purchase: a. Eligibility. As provided in the Deed Restriction, the Town will always be a Qualified Buyer. b. Process. Upon receipt of a listing request for a Property, the Town may, in its sole discretion, elect to purchase the Property, in lieu of following the lottery process set forth in Section 5 hereof. Should the Town so elect, the Town will offer the selling Owner the Maximum Resale Price and thereafter purchase the Property. c. Sale. If the Town purchases a Property, the Town may thereafter sell the Property to a Qualified Buyer following the lottery process set forth in Section 5 hereof any Qualified Buyer. The Town may determine, in its sole discretion, whether to follow the lottery process in Section 5, or whether to sell the Property to a Qualified Buyer selected by the Town outside of the lottery process. This amended language would allow the Town Council to make priority determination for resale homes to municipal employees or acquire the home for operational purposes. If the resolution is approved, staff will establish an internal resale procedure to ensure an expedited and efficient process and timely resale for the seller. Amending the guidelines for some of the town’s deed restricted homes will allow the town additional flexibility in the resale process and provide additional housing tools for the town as an employer. 4. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that the Town Council provide administrative direction to amend the Chamonix Vail Master Deed Restriction with the recommended language for properties as they change ownership. It is anticipated that in most circumstances, the town can acquire the unit and resell at the same closing without impacting the timely resale. Staff additionally recommends the Town Council consider the town’s role as an employer and if there is a desire to provide future flexibility in decision making in use and resale of deed- restricted units. The Town Council may approve, approve with modifications or deny Resolution No. 10, Series of 2020 to amend the Chamonix Vail Housing Guidelines. April 21, 2020 - Page 9 of 68 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C : G ore Valley Trail Realignment Alternative D esigns P RE S E NT E R(S ): Todd Oppenheimer, C apital Project Manager/L andscape A rchitect; Scott B elonger, O tak AC T IO N RE Q UE S T E D O F C O UNC IL : D irect staf f regarding moving f orward with next required steps. B AC K G RO UND: T he Gore Valley Trail is managed by the Town and passes through Vail Corporation owned property in the L ionshead area. T he existing route of the recreation trail through the L ionshead ski base area creates conflicts with other uses during the busy summer season, creating congestion and safety concerns. I n November 2019 the council awarded a consulting contract with Otak to perform a f easibility analysis to identif y possible opportunities and costs for the realignment of recreation path. Otak has completed the f easibility analysis and has prepared a series of alternate design solutions for review by the Council and Vail C orporation. S TAF F RE C O M M E ND AT I O N: Direct staf f regarding moving forward with next required steps. AT TAC H ME N TS : Description Memo Presentation April 21, 2020 - Page 10 of 68 To: Vail Town Council From: Todd Oppenheimer Date: April 21, 2020 Subject: Gore Valley Trail - Lionshead Realignment Alternatives I. PURPOSE The purpose of this item is to: • Present alternative designs and cost estimates for the realignment of the Gore Valley Trail through the Lionshead ski base area. • Requesting the Council to review alternative designs and cost estimates and select a preferred alternative. • Request direction from the Council regarding the retention or removal of the existing pedestrian bridge across Gore Creek. • Request direction from the Council regarding moving forward with required approvals, permits, final design and construction documents including appropriation of $200K from the 2021 to the 2020 RETT Capital Budget for professional fees. II. BACKGROUND The Gore Valley Trail is the primary recreation trail through Vail from the connection with the Eagle Valley Trail near Highway 6/24 in the west and the Vail Pass trail in the east. The recreation trail is managed by the Town and passes through Vail Corporation owned property in the Lionshead area. The existing route of the recreation trail through the Lionshead ski base area creates conflicts with other uses during the busy summer season, creating congestion and safety concerns. It is important to note that, currently, the Gore Valley Trail through the Lionshead ski base area is a summer only recreational facility. The trail section is closed during the ski season between Tree Tops and the Antlers Lodge. In November 2019 the council awarded a consulting contract with Otak to perform a feasibility analysis to identify possible opportunities and costs for the realignment of recreation path. Otak has completed the feasibility analysis and has prepared a series of alternate design solutions for review by the Council and Vail Resorts . Vail Resorts acknowledges the significant benefit this project brings to the base area operations, guest experience and trail user safety. Vail Resorts has contributed $20,000 to the $86,000 consultant fee for preparation of the Feasibility Analysis and design alternatives and desires to remain a funding partner through the completion of the project. The Vail Resorts Board of Directors will be able to consider its ability to contribute to the April 21, 2020 - Page 11 of 68 Town of Vail Page 2 construction costs during their December 2020 capital budget process. Vail Resorts representatives have been involved in the preparation of alternatives throughout the process and have provided input for the Council’s consideration. Vail Resorts acknowledges is the responsibility of the Council to select the preferred alternative and timing for moving forward with the project. Following is the input provided by Vail Resorts: • Supports the project and sees it as a great benefit to base area summer operations • Plans to reconfigure or remove miniature golf course • Willing to adjust magic carpet location to improve the project • Interested in removing the existing pedestrian bridge • Prefers Alternate 2.3 – Curved Bridge for minimum site impacts and aesthetics • Supports Enhancement 1.2 to reduce trail grades east of Skiers’ Bridge • Alternate 1.3 (Stairs) is a must to maintain connectivity to Lionshead from west • Prefers Alternate 3.3 (Reconstruct east connection similar to existing) • Will consider participating in funding construction but can’t be considered by VR Board of Directors until December 2020 III. DESIGN ALTERNATIVES The project area has been broken into 3 segments with alternatives and options for each section that can be mixed and matched according to the Council preferences. Section1 is the portion of the Gore Valley Trail immediately west of the Lionshead ski base and running under the Skier Bridge. Section 2 is the area between the Skier Bridge and the Magic Carpet/Mini Golf area and runs beneath the Eagle Bahn Gondola and Born Free Express lift, Chair 8, cables. Because most of the project costs are in Section 2 this section is addressed first in the presentation. Section 3 is the area between the Magic Carpet and the connection to the remainder of the Gore Valley Trail running east toward the Vail Library. The alternatives for each section are described and evaluated in detail in the presentation. To summarize: Section 2 There are 4 alternatives presented for Section 2 which crosses beneath the Gondola and Chair 8 cables. These alternatives include 3 bridge configurations and an on-grade alternative which includes a fill wall above the creek. Following is a description of each Section 2 alternative. Alternative 2.1. Straight 3-Span Bridge This alternative consists of three 83’ long, prefabricated, steel bridge sections supported by 2 intermediate piers and 2 simple abutments on each end. The bridge sections are aligned in a straight line between the 2 end abutments. Beginning near the entrance to the magic carpet on the east and passing just outside and approximately 9’ below the Gondola safety net, the total length of the bridge is 240’. The width of the bridge is 12’ with a 54” high steel truss railing. The grade of the bridge is essentially flat. The total estimated project cost of Alternative 2.1, including minor trail reconstruction on the west and moderate trail reconstruction on the east, April 21, 2020 - Page 12 of 68 Town of Vail Page 3 is $1.67M. The downside of Alternative 2.1 is the straight alignment happens to cross directly through a large spruce tree in the riparian area below the magic carpet. Alternative 2.2. Articulated 3-Span Bridge This alternative consists of three prefabricated, steel bridge sections in lengths which vary between 49’ and 81’. The bridge sections are supported on 2 intermediate piers which serve as angle points between the sections and 2 simple abutments on each end. Beginning just west of the entrance to the magic carpet on the east and passing just outside and approximately 9’ below the Gondola safety net, the total length of the bridge is 208’. The width of the bridge is 12’ with a 54” high steel truss railing. The grade of the bridge is essentially flat. The total estimated project cost of Alternative 2.2, including minor trail reconstruction on the west and moderate trail reconstruction on the east, is $1.65M. The articulated alignment allows the bridge to by-pass the large spruce tree and adds visual interest to the alignment. Alternative 2.3. Curved 4-Span Bridge This alternative consists of four 60’ long, prefabricated, steel bridge sections supported on 3 intermediate piers and 2 simple abutments on each end. Curved bridge sections cannot be prefabricated in as long of length as straight bridge sections. The curve transfers the weight too far off center beyond a length of 60’. Beginning just west of the entrance to the magic carpet on the east and passing just outside and approximately 9’ below the Gondola safety net, the total length of the bridge is 240’. The width of the bridge is 12’ with a 54” high steel truss railing. The grade of the bridge is essentially flat. The total estimated project cost of Alternative 2.3, including minor trail reconstruction on the west and moderate trail reconstruction on the east, is $1.95M. The curved alignment allows the bridge to by-pass the large spruce tree and adds additional visual interest to the alignment. Alternative 2.4. Fill Wall This alternative consists of an on-grade trail constructed on approximately 290’ of modular block retaining wall with an exposed height that varies between 6’ and 9’ and an additional 40’ of modular block retaining wall above the trail directly beneath the Chair 8 cable. Beginning just west of the entrance to the magic carpet on the east the trail passes beneath the Gondola safety net with 8’ of clearance. The width of the trail is 12’ and will include a 54” high steel railing. The grade of the trail drops slightly from east to west. The total estimated project cost of Alternative 2.4, including minor trail reconstruction on the west and moderate trail reconstruction on the east, is $1.35M. The alignment of the trail and retaining wall parallels the contour of the slope rather than cutting across it so it by-passes the large spruce tree. This alternative creates considerably more temporary and permanent disruption to the streambank than the 3 bridge alternatives. Section 1 There are 3 alternatives for Section 1 which is the portion of the Gore Valley Trail west of Section 2 beneath the Skier Bridge. Two of the alternatives involve reconstructing varying lengths of existing trail to possibly reduce the existing 12% grade. The third alternative April 21, 2020 - Page 13 of 68 Town of Vail Page 4 includes reestablishing a pedestrian connection to the Lionshead Village at the Skier Bridge. Following is a description of each Section 1 alternative. Alternative 1.1. Reconnect Existing Trail This alternative includes removal of the existing trail between the Gondola lift house and the Skier Bridge and reconstructing approximately 26’ of trail to connect Section 2 with the Gore Valley Trail to the west. The estimated project cost of Alternative 1.1 is included in the estimated project cost for the Section 2 alternatives above. Alternative 1.2. Reduce Grade Existing Trail This alternative includes removal of approximately 200’ of existing trail with a maximum slope of 13% and construction of new trail at a maximum slope of 8%. Final design of this alternative will resolve possible minor utility and bridge footing conflicts. The estimated project cost for Alternative 1.2 increases the total estimated project cost by $105K and results in a significant improvement to user safety and experience. Alternative 1.3. Reconnect Trail with Stairs This alternative includes replacing the removed section of existing trail between the Gondola lift house and the Skier Bridge with a series of stairs to provide a direct pedestrian connection between the Gore Valley Trail and the Lionshead Village. The estimated project cost for Alternative 1.2 increases the total estimated project cost by $120K. Section 3 Four alternatives were considered by Staff and the design team for Section 3, which routes the trail around the magic carpet/mini-golf area and reconnects it to the Gore Valley Trail to the east. The alternatives considered were similar in scope and estimated project cost. Alternative 3.3 reconnects the trail in approximately the same location as the existing alignment and provides additional trail width and striping at conflict points. The estimated project cost of Alternative 3.3 is included in the estimated project cost for the Section 2 alternatives above. Discussion of Section 3 includes a question regarding what to do with the existing pedestrian bridge which access the Designated Open Space parcel on the south side of the creek. Staff is requesting direction from the Council whether to remove it or maintain it and incorporate it into the Section 3 design. The history and ownership of the bridge is unknown although it is located on Vail Resorts owned stream tract. The bridge and abutments, including a center pier in Gore Creek, are structurally sound although the wood railing is showing signs of deterioration. Vail Resorts has expressed a preference to remove the bridge as it creates access issues with operations and grooming around the Magic Carpet. IV. PROJECT BUDGET To date, the Town has expended $86K for the Feasibility Study and Alternatives presented here including a contribution of $20K from Vail Resorts. The 2021 RETT Capital Budget includes a placeholder amount of $600K for final design and construction of Gore Valley Trail Realignment improvements. April 21, 2020 - Page 14 of 68 Town of Vail Page 5 The estimated cost of final design and construction of the Gore Valley Trail Realignment improvements varies with the selection of alternatives presented. Estimated costs fall within the range of $1.3M to $2.2M. The estimated cost, including professional fees, for the staff- recommended selection of alternatives is $1.9M. Professional fees to prepare the Gore Valley Trail Realignment as a shovel-ready project are approximately $200K depending on the selection of alternatives. Vail Resorts, acknowledging the significant benefit to summer base area operations of realigning the trail, has expressed an intention to make a substantial contribution to the project. The Vail Resorts capital budget process for the 2021 fiscal year will be initiated in September and competed in December 2020. V. ACTION REQUESTED BY COUNCIL Staff is requesting action from the Council in the following 3 areas relating to the Gore Valley Trail Realignment Project. • Requesting the Council to review alternative designs and estimated project costs and select a preferred alternative. • Requesting direction from the Council regarding the retention or removal of the existing pedestrian bridge across Gore Creek. • Requesting direction from the Council regarding moving forward with required approvals, permits, final design and construction documents including appropriation of $200K from the 2021 to the 2020 RETT Capital Budget for professional fees. VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Staff recommends the Council consider the selection of the following alternatives for the 3 sections of the Gore Valley Trail Realignment. • Section 2, Alternative 2.2 (3 span articulated bridge, $1.6M) as a blend between cost and aesthetics. This recommendation includes Section 3, Alternative 3.3 as described. • Section 1, Alternative 1.2 (reduced grade of trail, $105K) for improved trail user safety; and Alternative 1.3 (stair connection, $120K) to maintain connection between the trail and Lionshead Village. Total estimated cost of staff-recommended selection of alternatives is $1.9M 2. Staff recommends the Council provide direction to evaluate the cost and impacts, as well as pros and cons of removing the existing pedestrian bridge to further protect or improve access to the Designated Open Space parcel. 3. Staff recommends funding approximately $200K for professional fees as a supplemental budget from the 2021 to the 2020 RETT Capital Budget to make the project shovel-ready in anticipation of the availability of funds in the RETT budget and Vail Resorts capital expenditure at a future date. April 21, 2020 - Page 15 of 68 PRESENTATION BY Otak Gore Valley Trail Lionshead Realignment April 21, 2020 - Page 16 of 68 INTRODUCTION Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com The purpose of this item is to: •Present alternative designs and cost estimates for the realignment of the Gore Valley Trail through the Lionshead ski base area. •Requesting the Council to review and select a preferred alternative. •Request direction from the Council regarding the existing pedestrian bridge across Gore Creek. •Request direction from the Council regarding moving forward including appropriation of $200K from the 2021 to the 2020 RETT Capital Budget. April 21, 2020 - Page 17 of 68 PROJECT BACKGROUND Purpose of the Project Improve safety and function of Gore Valley Trail at the Lionshead base area. •Reduce summer congestion. •Improve trail wayfinding and trail alignment radii. •Improve sight distance and reduce trail grades. Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com Important Facts •Gore Valley Trail is a Town facility located on Vail Resorts property. •Vail Resorts is Partner in this project. •No plans for winter maintenance but design could allow for future winter use. April 21, 2020 - Page 18 of 68 NEED FOR THE PROJECT –EXISTING CONDITIONS Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com April 21, 2020 - Page 19 of 68 EXISTING CONDITIONS Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com VEHICLE CONFLICT GONDOLA ACCESS CONFLICT MINI-GOLF CONFLICT POOR SIGHT DISTANCE STEEP GRADES April 21, 2020 - Page 20 of 68 PROJECT OVERVIEW Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com April 21, 2020 - Page 21 of 68 SEGMENT 2 –EXISTING CONDITIONS Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com Design Considerations: •Close proximity to creek/riparian buffer •Steep banks •Conflicts with gondola, chair 8 and magic carpet April 21, 2020 - Page 22 of 68 SEGMENT 2 –ALT 2.1 (STRAIGHT 3-SPAN BRIDGE) Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com BASIC COST = $1.67M April 21, 2020 - Page 23 of 68 PHOTO EXAMPLES –STRAIGHT MULTI-SPAN BRIDGES Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com April 21, 2020 - Page 24 of 68 SEGMENT 2 –ALT 2.2 (ARTICULATED 3-SPAN BRIDGE) Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com BASIC COST = $1.65M April 21, 2020 - Page 25 of 68 PHOTO EXAMPLES –ARTICULATED BRIDGES Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com April 21, 2020 - Page 26 of 68 SEGMENT 2 –ALT 2.3 (CURVED 4-SPAN BRIDGE) Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com BASIC COST = $1.95M April 21, 2020 - Page 27 of 68 PHOTO EXAMPLES –CURVED BRIDGES Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com April 21, 2020 - Page 28 of 68 SEGMENT 2 –ALT 2.4 (FILL WALL) Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com BASIC COST = $1.3MBASIC COST = $1.35M April 21, 2020 - Page 29 of 68 FILL WALL -PHOTO EXAMPLES Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com April 21, 2020 - Page 30 of 68 SEGMENT 1 –EXISTING CONDITIONS Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com Design Considerations: •Existing grade is up to 12% •Need to consider potential impacts to utilities and bridge foundation April 21, 2020 - Page 31 of 68 SEGMENT 1 –ENHANCEMENT OPTIONS Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com UTILITY CONFLICTS TO BE FURTHER EVALUATED April 21, 2020 - Page 32 of 68 SEGMENT 3 –EXISTING CONDITIONS Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com Design Considerations: •Eastern access into Lionshead •Confluence of vehicular and recreational traffic, maintenance/emergency vehicles •Improve wayfinding April 21, 2020 - Page 33 of 68 SEGMENT 3 –ALT 3.3 RECONSTRUCT SIMILAR TO EXISTING Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com +$48K April 21, 2020 - Page 34 of 68 SEGMENT 3 –EXISTING BRIDGE –KEEP OR REMOVE? Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com EXISTING BRIDGE April 21, 2020 - Page 35 of 68 SEGMENT 3 –EXISTING BRIDGE –KEEP OR REMOVE? Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com Considerations •Ownership unknown •Bridge in fair condition •Creates an additional user conflict point for trail Benefits of Removing It •Reduces future maintenance •Eliminates access to sensitive area •Eliminates conflict point on trail •No need to build access to trail Benefits of Keeping It •Avoids removal cost (to be resolved with VR)? •Avoids temporary impact in creek •Maintains existing access April 21, 2020 - Page 36 of 68 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS RECOMMENDATION Segment 2 •Proceed refinement of Alt 2.2 (Articulated Bridge) ($1.6M) Segment 1 •Include Enhancement 1.2 (Reduced Grade) (+$105K) •Include Enhancement 1.3 (Stairs/west access) (+$120K) Segment 3 •Pursue removal of existing bridge (+$?) –further discussion with VR required Total Project Cost Alt 2.2 + Recommended Enhancements = $1.95M Town of Vail | Gore Valley Trail -Lionshead Realignment | vailgov.com April 21, 2020 - Page 37 of 68 Thank you April 21, 2020 - Page 38 of 68 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C : Art in P ublic P laces B oard membership regarding number of board members and recommendation to reduce the board size P RE S E NT E R(S ): Molly E ppard, A rt in P ublic P laces Coordinator AC T IO N RE Q UE S T E D O F C O UNC IL : P rovide direction to amend the Town code to reduce the A rt in Public P laces B oard to f ive members. B AC K G RO UND: A f ter discussions with the A I P P Board at both the A ugust and S eptember 2019 meetings, as well as on A pril 6 it is recommended that the A I P P B oard be reduced to five members, similar to the make-up of the D esign R eview Board. A reduction in Board size would allow a more dedicated and focused board, the ability to formalize processes, review proposals, increase participation, and emphasize the greater accountability to meet attendance requirements of monthly meetings and year-round programs. Over the past several years, it has been a challenge to recruit new qualified candidates who meet the requirements to serve on the Board. S TAF F RE C O M M E ND AT I O N: Authorize the Town Manager to have staff and the Town A ttorney return with an Ordinance amending the Town C ode S ections 3-3-2 and 3-3-3 setting the membership of the A rt in Public Places B oard to f ive members. AT TAC H ME N TS : Description AIP P Memorandum April 21, 2020 - Page 39 of 68 To: Town Council From: Molly Eppard, AIPP Coordinator, Art in Public Places Board Date: 04/21/20 Subject: Art in Public Places Board Membership and Terms I. ITEM/TOPIC Art in Public Places Board (AIPP) membership regarding number of board members and recommendation to reduce the board size II. PURPOSE The purpose of this item is to: • Provide information on the AIPP Board membership and discuss changing the board membership size • Receive Town Council direction regarding AIPP Board membership; and, if directed return with an Ordinance amending of Vail Town Code Title 3 Chapter 3 Section 2 and 3 as it pertains to the AIPP Board Membership and Terms III. BACKGROUND The AIPP Board size has varied throughout the years with the last change in occurring in 2015. Since that time, operating with a seven-member board, there has been less participation from board members committed to attending year-round functions and programs outside of the regular monthly meetings. In addition, full attendance at the monthly meeting has been a challenge. Dedication to fulfilling the entire board terms and repeating a second term has become more problematic which in turn causes recruiting new members that much more challenging. After discussions with the AIPP Board at both the August and September 2019 meetings as well as on April 6, which included the newly appointed members, it is recommended that the AIPP Board be reduced to five members, similar to the make-up of the Design Review Board, from the present seven members town code requirement. A reduction in size would allow a more dedicated and focused board, the ability to formalize processes, review proposals, increase participation, and April 21, 2020 - Page 40 of 68 Town of Vail Page 2 emphasize greater accountability to meet the attendance requirements of the monthly meetings and programs throughout the year. A smaller AIPP Board size would not be detrimental to the Board’s continuing efforts to meet AIPP’s mission and it would help create efficiencies in some of the Board’s present functions. Over the past several years, it has been a challenge to recruit new qualified applicants who meet the requirements to server on the Board. As two members have recently stepped down mid-term, it would be an opportune time to amend the Code language to reflect a five-member Board. If the council recommends a reduction of the AIPP Board, an Ordinance would be prepared changing the following code sections. The information outlined below suggests the code section revisions for Council’s consideration. Current Vail Town Code 3-3-2: APPOINTMENT OF BOARD MEMBERS: Present Terms: The town council hereby appoints the Vail arts board composed of seven (7) members who shall act in accordance with the charter, this chapter, the direction of the town council, the ordinances of the town and shall be appointed and serve as provided in this chapter. (Ord. 3(2015) § 1) 3-3-3: MEMBERSHIP; TERMS: Present Terms: The arts board shall consist of seven (7) members appointed by the town council. In addition, the arts board may consist of honorary advisory members who shall not have the power to vote on issues which come before the board. The number and term of such advisory members shall be at the discretion of the town council. All members of the arts board shall be individuals who have demonstrated interest or expertise in architecture, art criticism, art education, art history, foreign arts, graphic arts, interior design, landscape architecture, town planning, or other art and design related fields, or who have demonstrated a strong interest in the visual arts and civic improvement. All members shall either be residents of the town, or own property within the town. The terms of the members of the arts board shall be two (2) years on an overlapping basis and shall expire on March 31 of the year of termination. (Ord. 3(2015) § 2) IV. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL Provide direction to amend the above code sections to reduce the Art in Public Places board to five members. The proposed amended terms would be as follows: . Vail Town Code 3-3-2: APPOINTMENT OF BOARD MEMBERS: April 21, 2020 - Page 41 of 68 Town of Vail Page 3 Amended Terms: The town council hereby appoints the Vail arts board composed of five (5) members who shall act in accordance with the charter, this chapter, the direction of the town council, the ordinances of the town and shall be appointed and serve as provided in this chapter. (Ord. 5(2012) § 1) 3-3-3: MEMBERSHIP; TERMS: Amended Terms: The arts board shall consist of five (5) members appointed by the town council. In addition, the arts board may consist of honorary advisory members who shall not have the power to vote on issues which come before the board. The number and term of such advisory members shall be at the discretion of the town council. All members of the arts board shall be individuals who have demonstrated interest or expertise in architecture, art criticism, art education, art history, foreign arts, graphic arts, interior design, landscape architecture, town planning, or other art and design related fields, or who have demonstrated a strong interest in the visual arts and civic improvement. All members shall either be residents of the town, or own property within the town. The terms of the members of the arts board shall be two (2) years on an overlapping basis and shall expire on March 31 of the year of termination. (Ord. 5(2012) § 2) If the council recommends a reduction of the board an Ordinance would be prepared changing the following code sections. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Authorize the Town Manager to have staff and the Town Attorney return with an Ordinance amending the Vail Town Code Sections 3-3-2 and 3-3-3 setting the membership of the Art in Public Places Board to five members. April 21, 2020 - Page 42 of 68 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C : D R B / P E C Update P RE S E NT E R(S ): J onathan Spence, P lanning Manager AT TAC H ME N TS : Description April 1, 2020 D R B Meeting R esults April 13, 2020 P E C Meeting Results April 21, 2020 - Page 43 of 68 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD April 1, 2020, 3:00 PM Town Council Chambers 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 1. Call to Order 1.1. Link to Virtual Meeting Password: 136664 Or Telephone: Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: 1 669 900 6833 Webinar ID: 144 292 608 Inte rnational numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/adm2bxlSUN 1.2. Attendance Present: Kit Austin, Doug Cahill (joined late), David Campbell, Peter Cope, John Rediker Absent: None 2. Main Agenda 2.1. DRB20-0021 - Phillips Residence Final review of an exterior alteration (stairs/roof) Address/Legal Description: 2696 Davos Trail/Lot 6, Block C, Vail Ridge Subdivision Applicant: Michael & Carol Kay Phillips Planner: Greg Roy Peter Cope moved to approve. David Campbell seconded the motion and it passed (4-0). Absent: (1) Cahill 2.2. DRB20-0034 - 2139 Vail LLC Residence Final review of new construction (Duplex) Address/Legal Description: 2139 Chamonix Lane / Lot 11, Vail Heights Filing 1 Applicant: 2139 Vail LLC, represented by Pure Design Studio Planner: Greg Roy John Rediker moved to table the item to the April 15th DRB Meeting. David Campbell seconded the motion and it passed (5-0). 2.3. DRB20-0036 - Vail Fairway Residence Final review of exterior alteration (swimming pool) Address/Legal Description: 925 Fairway Drive / Lot 1, Vail Village Filing 10 Applicant: Vail Fairway LLC, represented by Ceres Plus Planner: Greg Roy April 21, 2020 - Page 44 of 68 David Campbell moved to approve. Peter Cope seconded the motion and it passed (5-0). 2.4. DRB20-0054 - 484 Arrabelle Residence Final review of exterior alteration Address/Legal Description: 675 Lionshead Place Unit 484 / Lot 1 & 2, Lionshead Filing 6 Applicant: 484 Arrabelle LLC, represented by Ferguson and Shamamian Planner: Greg Roy David Campbell moved to approve. Peter Cope seconded the motion and it passed (5-0). 2.5. DRB20-0005 - Hurtt Residence Final review of new construction (single family) Address/Legal Description: 4978 Meadow Drive/Lot 18, Block 7, Bighorn Subdivision 5th Addition Applicant: George C. Hurtt Revocable Trust, represented by Pierce Austin Architects Planner: Erik Gates David Campbell moved to approve. John Rediker seconded the motion and it passed (4-0-1). Abstain: (1) Austin 2.6. DRB20-0026 - Biscayne Trust WGS LLP Final review of a change to approved plans (patio/pool) Address/Legal Description: 1109 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 7, Block 6, Vail Village Filing 7 Applicant: Biscayne Trust WGS LLP, represented by KH Webb Architects Planner: Erik Gates David Campbell moved to approve. Peter Cope seconded the motion and it passed (4-1-0). Nay: (1) Rediker 2.7. DRB20-0067 - 670 Forest Rd LLC Conceptual review of new construction Address/Legal Description: 670 Forest Road/Lot 7, Block 1, Vail Village Filing 6 Applicant: 670 Forest Rd LLC, represented by KH Webb Architects Planner: Erik Gates 2.8. DRB20-0055 - Smith Duplex Final review of new construction (new 1/2 duplex & renovate 1/2 duplex) April 21, 2020 - Page 45 of 68 Address/Legal Description: 895 Red Sandstone Circle/Lot 2, Vail Village Filing 9 Applicant: Peter Smith & WAPO Properties LLC, represented by Krueger Architecture Planner: Jonathan Spence 1. Prior to submitting a building permit application, the applicant shall amend the roof plan to extend the main gable on the rear of the east unit to be pulled out of the center portion of the structure, resulting in the appearance of separate roofs. David Campbell moved to approve with conditions. Kit Austin seconded the motion and it passed (5-0). 2.9. DRB20-0068 - Monnins Gift Trust Final review of an addition Address/Legal Description: 424 Forest Road/Lot 4, Block 1, Vail Village Filing 3 Applicant: Monnins Gift Trust, represented by Judge & Associates Inc. Planner: Jonathan Spence 1. Prior to submitting a building permit application, the applicant shall amend the plans to extend the rafter detail to the new facia line of the east addition. Peter Cope moved to approve with conditions. David Campbell seconded the motion and it passed (5-0). 2.10. DRB20-0048 - Town of Vail Final review of an exterior alteration (landscaping) Address/Legal Description: 241 East Meadow Drive/Tract B & C, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Jonathan Spence David Campbell moved to approve. John Rediker seconded the motion and it passed (5-0). 2.11. DRB20-0056 - Town of Vail Final review of an exterior alteration (shoring wall) Address/Legal Description: 1289 Elkhorn Drive/Unplatted - TOV Public Works Bus Barn Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Victor Mark Donaldson Architects Planner: Erik Gates John Rediker moved to table to April 15, 2020. David Campbell seconded the motion and it passed (5-0). April 21, 2020 - Page 46 of 68 2.12. DRB20-0057 - Town of Vail Conceptual review of new construction Address/Legal Description: 1289 Elkhorn Drive/Unplatted - TOV Public Works Bus Barn Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Victor Mark Donaldson Architects Planner: Erik Gates 3. Staff Approvals 3.1. DRB20-0028 - Tice Residence Final review of residential addition Address/Legal Description: 252 West Meadow Drive, unit B / Lot 8, Vail Village Filing 2 Applicant: Kevin & Josephine Tice, represented by KH Webb Architects Planner: Greg Roy 3.2. DRB20-0039 - Lion Square Condo Final review of exterior alteration Address/Legal Description: 660 Lionshead Place / Lot 1, Vail Lionshead Filing 1 First Addition Applicant: Lion Square Condo, represented by R & H Mechanical Planner: Jonathan Spence 3.3. DRB20-0061 - Kirby Residence Final review of an addition. Address/Legal Description: 217 Rockledge Road / Lot 13B, Block 7, Vail Village Filing 1 / Raether Minor Subdivision Applicant: Steven Kirby, represented by Pierce Austin Architects Planner: Greg Roy 3.4. DRB20-0072 - Chappel Residence Final review of a tree removal Address/Legal Description: 1797 Alpine Drive/Lot 40, Vail Village West Filing 1 Applicant: Donald Chappel, represented by Old Growth Tree Service Planner: Erik Gates 3.5. DRB20-0080 - Lyons Residence Final review of a change to approved plans (windows) Address/Legal Description: 4480 Glen Falls Lane/Lot 8, Forest Glen Subdivision Applicant: Catherine Vanessa Bentley Lyons, represented by Berglund Architects Planner: Erik Gates 3.6. DRB20-0081 - Wakat Residence Final review of a change to approved plans (windows/roof) Address/Legal Description: 2672 Kinnikinnick Court/Lot 6, Block 2, Vail Intermountain Development Subdivision Applicant: Marshall & Kristen Wakat, represented by Gillette LLC April 21, 2020 - Page 47 of 68 Planner: Erik Gates 3.7. DRB20-0086 - Pack Residence Final review of an exterior alteration (windows) Address/Legal Description: 400 Vail Valley Drive Unit 2/Tract B, Vail Village Filing 1 Applicant: Frederick H. Pack Revocable Trust, represented by Rob Halls Kitchens Plus Planner: Jonathan Spence 3.8. DRB20-0093 - SSVail B3 LLC Final review of an exterior alteration (windows) Address/Legal Description: 4470 Bighorn Road Unit 3B/Racquet Club Townhome Condos Applicant: SSVail B3 LLC, represented by ACDF Corporation Planner: Jonathan Spence 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 Town Council Chambers. Times and order of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time the Design Review Board will consider an item. Please call 970 -479 -2138 for additional information. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24-hour notification, dial 711. April 21, 2020 - Page 48 of 68 P L ANNI NG AND E NV I RO NM E NTAL C O M M I S S I O N April 13, 2020, 1:00 P M Virtual 75 S. F rontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 1.Call to Order 1.1.Link to Virtual Meeting: J oin from a P C, Mac, i Pad, i Phone or Android device: Please click this U R L to join. https://zoom.us/j/269691644 Password: 266421 Or join by phone: Dial: US: +1 346 248 7799 Webinar I D: 269 691 644 1.2.Attendance Present: Brian Gillette, Rollie Kjesbo, Ludwig Kurz (joined late), J ohn-Ryan Lockman, Karen Perez, Henry Pratt, Pete Seibert Absent: None 1.3.Swearing I n New Members Tammy Nagle, Town Clerk 2.Main Agenda 2.1.A request for the review of a variance from Section 14-3-1, Minimum Standards, Vail Town Code in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the maximum centerline driveway grade, located at 1801 Sunburst Drive Unit A/Lot 2, Vail Valley Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C20-0002) 20 min. Applicant:Hilliard W est L L C, represented by Pierce Austin Architects Planner:Erik Gates Planner Gates presented the application. Commissioners had no questions for the applicant. No public comments. Lockman: Straight forward and would improve safety. Rollie: I see the issue, and this is a better alternative. Gillette: I agree with commissioners and staff. April 21, 2020 - Page 49 of 68 Seibert: This is an improvement all around. Pratt: Site constraints warrant granting. Perez: This meets the requirements for a variance. Brian Gillette moved to approve. J ohn-Ryan Lockman seconded the motion and it passed (6-0). Absent:(1)Kurz 2.2.A request for the review of a variance from Section 11-6 Business and Building I dentification Signs, Vail Town Code, in accordance with the provisions of Section 11-10, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance to the number and size of hospital campus signs, located at 180 South Frontage Road W est/Lot E and F, Vail Village Filing 2, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C20-0006) 20 min. Applicant:Vail Health, represented by Braun Associates I nc. Planner:J onathan Spence Planner Spence presented the application. Lockman: Please provide some clarity on why staff does not want to have the name on the tower but allows the cross. Spence: The cross is needed to identify the building for safety, the name is not necessary for safety and does not meet the criteria. Pratt: Does this integrate with signs on the highway? Spence: These are for the campus; those other signs are separate from this application. Gillette: Are we allowing more signs and larger signs than we typically allow? Spence: The signs and size are more for wayfinding. Braun’s presentation will address this question more fully. Applicant Tom Braun presented. Lockman: W hat would be the alternative? I s the red cross alone ok? Braun: W e would take the cross at a minimum but would also like Vail Health up there even if lower. However, don’t want to do it too low so that a redevelopment of the Evergreen would block it in future. Gillette: W hat about the signs on the road? Braun: W e are working with Tom Kassmel on signs in the ROW . Kurz: Great looking signs to meet public needs. Concern of highest sign, which seems to be branding. I would like to see mock up of sign on tower for visual impact. Braun: Happy to do that if rest of commissioners agree. Perez: I would like to see how these compare to the current signs. April 21, 2020 - Page 50 of 68 Braun: Prior to construction, not a lot if signs on there. Spence: Agreed most of the signs were along Meadow Drive. Lockman: W hat about wayfinding for helicopter? I s there a need for aerial signs for helicopters? Spence: That would be handled by FA A. Braun: This is private pad without necessity for aerial signs. Lockman: Based on what we did for museum, we only allowed “museum” without added parts. Gillette: W hat is the international symbol for hospital? I s it the cross or the H? Braun: Unsure if it is H or the cross. Pratt: I s the cross backlit? Spence: Yes, it is halo lit. Staff has concerns that lettering up there will not be legible. Lockman: W ould the mock up be digital or physical. Braun: Physical. Kjesbo: Agree with staff, I support for the cross only. Gillette: I disagree. Better off with H path on roads than the red cross. Red cross ineffective and better done with road signs. Kurz: Total package effective and well done. I ssue with big sign high up. Would like to see a mock up. Seibert: Agree with staff that signs should be limited to 25 feet for these brand signs. Understand the comments on the red cross from everyone, but no problem with cross alone. Lockman: Agree on branding. Crucial that people are able to identify and get to the hospital. Think the cross or other indicator helpful on tower. W ould like to see mockups. Pratt: I don’t think anything needed on the tower. Agree with Gillette, that people will be looking for blue H. Think 28, 29 and 30 are overkill. Question the need for 28 for branding. Rest ok. Perez: We want to be consistent with “hospital” and “H” wherever possible. The branding is not necessary and inconsistent. W ant to see mockup and what the old signs are compared to what is now. Like a big H better than cross. Discussion of the existing signs included in this packet. All signs existing are included in packet, but most are new signs. April 21, 2020 - Page 51 of 68 Braun: Happy to regroup and come back with new plans in two weeks. W hat about the other signs in the packet? Gillette: Do wayfinding signs need to be so big? Lockman: W ould like to see other examples of hospitals with these signs. Brian Gillette moved to table to April 27, 2020. Karen Perez seconded the motion and it passed (7-0). 2.3.A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a prescribed regulation amendment pursuant to Section 12-3-7 Amendment, Vail Town Code to amend Section 12-10-6 Parking; Off Site and J oint Facilities, Vail Town Code, to refine standards to be used in the review of such proposals and to clarify the review process and other considerations, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C20-0007) 20 min. Applicant:Braun Associates, I nc. Planner:Greg Roy Planner Roy introduced the project by describing the code section in its existing form and describing the substantive changes proposed by this application. Major changes include increasing the maximum required distance to off-site parking, allow review of off-site parking to be handled by P E C, setting a percentage of off-site parking allowed, requiring an outline of off-site parking operation and maintenance, and a minimum lease of 10 years. Gillette: Asked a question about the 10-year lease. Asked when the last time this provision had been used. Planner Spence: No memory of this provision being used but knows it had been used by the Lift House over 40 years ago. Gillette: Asked about why only 10 years for the lease, indicated 50 or 100 may be more appropriate. Perez: Echoed Gillette’s statement, and also had a question about submittal requirements Roy: The 10-year lease would provide more flexibility to the town if the property changed uses over the years. The submittal material would be reviewed by P E C. Tom Braun: This provision provides more flexibility for developments. The proposal also closes a potential gap in the code in regard to what an applicant is to do once their parking lease expires. Public Comment Bill Pierce: Asked a question about the goal of this change. Wanted clarification on the 25% allowance and if this was new provision. Had a question about the last proposed provision for what happens when a 10-year lease ends. Also asked why the Town couldn’t expand fee in lieu areas. Some areas, like in Lionshead, would benefit from this. Braun: All of the properties along Meadow Drive are not in the fee-in-lieu area. However, these places do have road access into their on-site parking. April 21, 2020 - Page 52 of 68 I t was decided among the applicant and town staff that this method would bring less issues in the future than expanding the fee-in-lieu areas to areas with road access. Gillette: Expressed concern about potentially recommending a code change for the benefit for an applicant. Thinks that the fee-in-lieu structure should be reviewed. “Quarter mile” and “10-year lease” language feels arbitrary. Kjesbo: Also expressed concern about the 10year lease. W hat happens if after 10 years the lease is not agreed to be renewed? A potentially bigger parking problem would arise. Perez: A 10-year lease is not long-term control. Spence: I s it the responsibility of the town or the applicant to provide parking. I f we just collect fee-in-lieu the town will not be able to provide the needed parking to the market. Feels that many developments will opt for the fee. Gillette: Feels that we have a current parking issue due to allowing the market to handle parking. Spence: Feels that tourism is the biggest stressor on the town’s parking. W e have a lot of underutilized parking. Gillette: That underutilized parking is more the issue for town parking. Doesn’t feel that the proposed language would address this. Braun: W e have parking in the town parking structures and most developments have their own parking. There needs to be something to address additions to existing structures that will require additional parking. W ith fee-in-lieu a development is “in or out” with their parking. Gillette: Asked staff to look at the towns current parking provisions and the fee-in-lieu structure. Roy: Yes, staff can look into this. Spence: Addressing these issues will take multiple meetings Gillette: Feels that addressing these issues more comprehensively is appropriate. Lockman: W hat would a more comprehensive parking program look like? Spence: The town has hired a mobility planner to look at town parking requirements and approach. Moving forward we would likely need to include this employee. Braun: To put the quarter mile distance into perspective. The on-site parking for the hospital, for example, would have people walking up to 400 ft into the building. The quarter mile distance is also a common walkability measure. Perez: Need to adjust the lease length and look at this issue more globally rather than using specific project examples. Braun: Requested to table to April 27 th. April 21, 2020 - Page 53 of 68 Brian Gillette moved to table to April 27, 2020. Rollie Kjesbo seconded the motion and it passed (7-0). 2.4.A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council to adopt the Community W ildfire Protection Plan as an element of the Town of Vail Comprehensive Plan to reduce the risk of wildfire, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C20-0004) 30 min. Applicant:Town of Vail, represented by Paul Cada Planner:Greg Roy Planner Roy introduced the project and Paul Cada, W ildland Program Manager. Paul Cada: I ntroduced the concept of a Community W ildfire Protection Plan. This is a planning tool that helps communities identify and reduce wildfire risk. These plans are also used by federal land management agencies to help prioritize their efforts. A C W P P does not obligate the town to implement any specific recommendations or expend funds. There are however minimum standards for a C W P P. These standards are: defining the community’s wildland-urban interface (W UI ), identify adjacent land owners, conduct a community risk analysis, a discussion with the community about preparedness to respond to a wildland fire, recommendations to reduce structural ignitability. Cada then described the stakeholder involvement conducted for the C W P P. This started in early 2018. Cada went on to discuss the goals of the plan which include reducing wildland fire risk and community preparedness. Cada continued by discussing the town’s wildland fire risk, he provided maps to aid in this portion of the presentation. Next Cada discussed completed and ongoing measures within the town, these included things such as outreach and education, fuels reduction, the W UI Code amendments, and other operational programs. Cada then explained proposed preparedness strategies. Gillette: I s the C W P P a requirement for fire department funding. Cada: Yes, this plan would open up more grant funding for the mitigation projects desired by Fire. This plan can be updated to include completed projects and new identified projects. Kjesbo: Asked about the recommendation for clearing 100ft worth of fuels from structures. I s this going to be a requirement? Cada: This is just a recommendation, but it would be targeted towards specific at-risk properties. No public comment. Lockman: Thinks this is a good collaborative effort and plan for the community. Seibert: Asked about how this connects with the mitigation above Booth Heights. April 21, 2020 - Page 54 of 68 Cada: This recommendation would help the forest service to reduce and manage the wildlife hazard above booth heights. This would also help reduce other hazards. Pratt: Has concerns about applying these recommendations to properties not adjacent to forest land. Also had a question asking if people have been sued for implementing or not implementing these recommendations. Cada: I n his experience no, he has not seen this happen. Cada did not see this as opening up lawsuits for property owners. Perez, Gillette, and Kurz were in support of the proposal. Brian Gillette moved to recommend approval. Rollie Kjesbo seconded the motion and it passed (7-0). 2.5.A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a zone district boundary amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, to allow for the rezoning of 2211 North Frontage Road W est which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1 Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, from the Commercial Core 3 (C C3) District to the Public Accommodation-2 (PA-2) District and setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C19-0047) This item will be heard concurrently with P E C19-0046 and P E C19-0048. 90 min. Applicant:TNRE F I I I Bravo Vail L L C True North Management Group L L C, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner:Greg Roy Planner Greg Roy read into the record correspondence received after all other correspondence had been provided to the commission and the public. Planner Greg provided the commission with an overview of the proposal and the applicable criteria. Greg discussed the change in recommendation from the previous meeting. Staff also looked more closely at the criteria related to what has changed. Greg discussed the PA-2 zone district and its intent. Commissioner Lockman asked for additional clarification regarding the commercial uses. Greg spoke to staff considerations on this. Dominic Mauriello provided a presentation concerning all three applications. Dominic spoke to the resolution of long-standing nonconformities related to use, density and height. Dominic spoke to the reasoning for the S D D. Dominic summarized the ideas/issues that arose during the previous meeting(s). Dominic discussed the conditions of approval and the condition related to public art. The applicant does not agree with the proposed A I P P contribution proposed by staff. Dominic walked the commission through changes that were made to the plans, specifically the changes to the E HU building and the parking/sidewalk/snow storage configurations. April 21, 2020 - Page 55 of 68 Lockman asked for clarification on the “sharrow” through the parking lot. Dominic clarified that it is striping only at that the valet will be aware. Lockman spoke to the sidewalk alignment and what is intended for the public vs the occupants. Dominic clarified that the western sidewalk is intended for the public while the area through the site is intended for occupants. The easement on the east side was spoken to. P UB L I C C OMME NT Michael Spiers-Spoke to concerns/comments related to the E HU building, its location and height. Feels that it is out of scale with the neighborhood and that it should be reduced the three stories. Pat Lauer- Spoke to the need to hear staff’s view on the S D D criteria. Feels that staff has changed their direction concerning the rezoning. C OMMI S S I ONE R C OMME NTS Rollie- Supports the rezoning. Lockman- Supports the rezoning and removing the nonconformities. Siebert- Concurs with Lockman and Rollie. Gillette- A loss of the commercial uses cannot be overlooked. I nterested in more multiple used, need community commercial. This is a huge mistake and is short sighted. Perez- Supports the rezoning Pratt- Recognizes the change in the commission. Supports the rezoning. Kurz- Supports the rezoning. Rollie Kjesbo moved to recommend approval. J ohn-Ryan Lockman seconded the motion and it passed (6-1). Ayes:(6)Kjesbo, Kurz, Lockman, Perez, Pratt, Seibert Nays:(1)Gillette 2.6.A request for review of an Exterior Alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7J -12, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for construction of a hotel addition and an E HU apartment building, located at 2211 North Frontage Road West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C19-0046) This item will be heard concurrently with P E C19-0047 and P E C19-0048. Applicant:TNRE F I I I Bravo Vail L L C True North Management Group L L C, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner:Greg Roy 1. This approval is contingent upon the applicant receiving approval of the Special Development District application P E C19-0048 and the April 21, 2020 - Page 56 of 68 Zoning Code Amendment application P E C19-0047. Planner Roy continued his presentation, focusing on the S D D and Exterior Alteration. Roy walked through the changes that occurred since the previous hearing including the changes to the E HU building including massing and building entrances. Roy spoke to changes in the snow storage management plan and the inclusion of the grasscrete pavers. Many of the changes reduced the level of deviations necessary and has improved the functionality of the project. Roy spoke to the deviations requested, the benefits offered and the reason for the level of A I P P contribution requested. Roy spoke to the changes in building height. Dominic had no further comments but referenced the criteria in the staff report and applicant narrative. P UB L I C C OMME NT Tanya Boyd- Concerned with the sun shading of the E HU building and how snow storage and removal will occur. Tom Kassmel-Town Engineer-Spoke to the separated sidewalk allowing an adequate area for snow storage. Recognized that additional sun shading will require increased maintenance. Pat Lauer- Spoke to the mass of the building and the image shown and feels that it is excessive in size. W ould require removing the entire top floor. Not just chunks. Concerned about the shading creating unsafe conditions for pedestrians. Concerned with the public transit capacity and that Highline does not have the shuttle capacity. Feels that the E HU building is out of character with the neighborhood. Double standard with the developer being allowed things that are not otherwise permissible. Tanya Boyd- Concerned about large vehicles, buses and tractor trailers and a lack of parking for them. Concerned about parking for E HU building. Has witnessed a lot of parking on site during the winter months. Kathy Standage-President of the Tall Pines HOA on Chamonix. Major concerns with parking for the E HU building. Concerned with the aesthetics of the E HU building. Cheep façade that does not match hotel. People in West Vail are not happy about this. How can this be stopped from being pushed through? Mike Spiers- I s this the last opportunity to discuss the height of the E HU building? W hat would be the harm in reducing the E HU building to an acceptable height? Need a compromise here. Pat Lauer- W here do employees park at the Double Tree? Does anybody care about the mature trees that will be removed? Are there any penalties if the project takes too long? Steve Lindstrom- Speaking for Housing Authority- This proposal is absolutely what we should be doing. On the bus line, close to services with minimal infrastructure needed. April 21, 2020 - Page 57 of 68 Kathy Standish-No discussion on pollution, trees removal etc. E ND OF P UB LI C C OMME NT Brian Gillette- I ts public comment not negotiation between the public and the applicant. Great letters have been received that speak to how the application relate to the standards and guidelines. The public has done a great job. Kurz- Questions arose concerning employee parking and large buses. Planner Roy spoke to the parking study that was provided and that the parking provided exceeds that what demand is anticipated. Dominic spoke to required parking of the E HU building based on other similar developments. Dominic also spoke to tour buses and other large vehicles. C OMMI S S I ONE R C OMME NTS Rollie- Still concerned with the height of the E HU building. Need to remove a total floor. Asked to look at the elevations again as some of the mass is increased with the proposal. Ok with the parking being managed. Still have a problem with height being over 38’ on the E HU building. Support staff on public art. Lockman- Likes other commissioners’ comments. Looking at criteria and process, a good process. I nterior walkway through the parking lot is a good compromise but that easement on the east is important. Agrees with staff on A I P P contribution. Siebert- Good changes made to E HU building. W ill support. Gillette- A lot can be done to improve this development. Questions public benefit and deviations. Need to reduce deviation or add increased public benefit. Perez- Applicant has made good changes. Not perfect but a lot of the concerns are view based. Project good for community. Pratt- Very concerned about the height, bulk and mass of the E HU building. Concerned with criteria 1,2 and 6 in the staff report. Questions about loading and trash. (Planner ROY responded to question) Question for the applicant concerning placing the E HU building along the east side of the property (Dominic responded that it was looked at and did not work) Thinks north south is a better orientation. Kurz- Feels that the applicant has made significant changes. Has concerns with the height but does not want to lose units. Thinks there are more public benefits including tax revenue. Feels the sun/shading has been addressed. We should ask the applicant to table so more can be worked on. Feels that the public benefit outweighs deviation. Supports staff on A I P P contribution. Dominic: Ok with A I P P. Would like to move forward to the TC. J ohn-Ryan Lockman moved to approve with conditions. Pete Seibert seconded the motion and it passed (4-3). Ayes:(4)Kurz, Lockman, Perez, Seibert April 21, 2020 - Page 58 of 68 Nays:(3)Gillette, Kjesbo, Pratt 2.7.A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an application establishing Special Development District No. 42 (Highline Hotel Renovation 2019), pursuant to Section 12-9(A), Special Development Districts, Vail Town Code, to allow for the development of a hotel addition to add 79 accommodation units, convert 19 existing dwelling units to 19 limited service lodge units, create a 12 unit E HU dormitory, remove office space, add conference space and build 16 unit employee housing apartment building, and related uses and improvements, located at 2211 North Frontage Road West which is composed of Tract C, Lot 1, Lot 2, and Lot 3 Vail Das Schone Filing No. 1 and Lot 1, Vail Das Schone Filing 3, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C19-0048) This item will be heard concurrently with P E C19-0047 and P E C19-0046. Applicant:TNRE F I I I Bravo Vail L L C True North Management Group L L C, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner:Greg Roy 1. Applicant shall obtain approval for subdivision before a certificate of occupancy for the E HU building is granted. 2. The applicant shall obtain the certificate of occupancy for the E HU building before requesting a certificate of occupancy for the hotel addition. 3. Approval is contingent upon the applicant obtaining Town of Vail approval of an associated design review application. 4. The applicant shall obtain approval for a conditional use permit for the commercial space on the first floor before a building permit is issued. 5. Applicant shall obtain approval from Holy Cross to vacate the easement under the proposed hotel addition before a building permit is issued. 6. Applicant shall set aside two (2) three-bedroom units and two (2) one- bedroom units in the E HU building not to be included in the mitigation bank. 7. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall record deed restrictions with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder, in a format approved by the Town Attorney, for the Type I I I Employee Housing Units. 8. The applicant shall coordinate and resolve landscape conflicts with utilities and sight distance before a building permit is issued. 9. The applicant shall show the drainage outfall for Chamonix Lane swale in the building permit submittal. 10. The applicant shall provide a 2’ gravel shoulder along Chamonix Lane and side slopes of swale no steeper than 2:1. 11. Applicant shall increase A I P P contribution to $32,500 and the installation shall be completed before a certificate of occupancy for the hotel addition is granted. 12. Applicant shall correct plans to meet the comments from the Fire Department prior to the submittal for a building permit. April 21, 2020 - Page 59 of 68 13. Applicant shall update all plan pages to match the latest submission prior to the submittal for the Design Review Board application. (Please see commentary from previous item) J ohn-Ryan Lockman moved to approve with conditions. Pete Seibert seconded the motion and it passed (4-3). Ayes:(4)Kurz, Lockman, Perez, Seibert Nays:(3)Gillette, Kjesbo, Pratt 2.8.A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-7A-11: Parking and Loading, Vail Town Code in accordance with the provisions of Section 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a variance from the prohibition of parking located within the front setback and from the requirement that 75% of the required parking be located within the main building, located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C20-0003) The applicant has requested that this item be continued to the April 27, 2020 public hearing. 2 min. Applicant:Vailpoint L L C, represented by Sarah J Baker P C Planner:J onathan Spence Karen Perez moved to continue to April 27, 2020. Rollie Kjesbo seconded the motion and it passed (7-0). 2.9.A request for the review of a Major Exterior Alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7A-12, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the replacement of the existing structure with a seven (7) suite lodge with related site improvements, located at 366 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot 1, 366 Hanson Ranch Road Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C19-0008) The applicant has requested that this item be continued to the April 27, 2020 public hearing. 2 min. Applicant:Vailpoint L L C, represented by Sarah J Baker P C Planner:J onathan Spence Brian Gillette moved to continue to April 27, 2020. Karen Perez seconded the motion and it passed (7-0). 2.10.A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, Vail Town Code, for prescribed regulations amendments to Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to amend Section 12-6I -8: Parking and Loading, to revise the requirements related to mobility and onsite parking in the Housing (H) District, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (P E C20-0005) The applicant has requested this item be tabled to April 27, 2020. 2 min. Applicant:Town of Vail Planner:J onathan Spence Rollie Kjesbo moved to continue to April 27, 2020. Karen Perez seconded the motion and it passed (7-0). April 21, 2020 - Page 60 of 68 3.Approval of Minutes 3.1.March 9, 2020 P E C Results Brian Gillette moved to approve. Karen Perez seconded the motion and it passed (6-0). Abstain:(1)Pratt 4.Adjournment Rollie Kjesbo moved to adjourn. Karen Perez seconded the motion and it passed (7-0). The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspec tion during regular offic e 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 vis its that prec ede the public hearing in the Tow n of Vail Community Development Department. Times and order of items are approximate, subject to c hange, and c annot be relied upon to determine at w hat time the Planning and Environmental Commission w ill c onsider an item. Please c all (970) 479-2138 for additional information. Please call 711 for sign language interpretation 48 hour prior to meeting time. Community Development Department April 21, 2020 - Page 61 of 68 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C : V L HA March 24, 2020 Meeting Results AT TAC H ME N TS : Description V L H A March 24, 2020 Meeting Results April 21, 2020 - Page 62 of 68 Vail Local Housing Authority Meeting Results March 24, 2020 11:00 AM Zoom Virtual Meeting 75 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado, 81657 PRESENT ABSENT Steve Lindstrom Mary McDougall Molly Morales James Wilkins Staff: George Ruther Lynne Campbell 1. Call to Order 11:18 AM Lindstrom called the meeting to order as a quorum was present. Lindstrom, McDougall, and Morales, Ruther and Campbell from staff are present. Wilkins joined at 2. Citizen Participation 2.1. Citizen Participation No comments, no public present on Zoom meeting. 3. Approval of Minutes 3.1. VLHA February 25, 2020 Meeting Results MOTION: MORALES SECOND: WILKINS VOTE: 4-0 APPROVED 4. Main Agenda 4.1. Resolution No. 9, Series of 2020, a Resolution Approving the Purchase of a Deed Restriction Interest in Property (Type III Deed Restriction) in the Town of Vail Legally Described as Condominium Unit 12, Vail Heights No. III Condominiums, Eagle County, Colorado with a Physical Address of 2059 Chamonix Lane, Unit 12, Vail Colorado; and Setting Forth Details in Regard Thereto. Presenter: Lynne Campbell, Housing Coordinator April 21, 2020 - Page 63 of 68 MOTION: MCDOUGALL SECOND: WILKINS VOTE: 4-0 APPROVED 4.2. Resolution No. 10, Series of 2020, a Resolution Approving the Purchase of a Deed Restriction Interest in Property (Type III Deed Restriction) in the Town of Vail Legally Described as Condominium Unit 104, Snow Lion at Vail Condominium, According to the Condominium Map Thereof, Recorded December 29, 1970, Eagle County, Colorado with a Physical Address of 1040 Vail View Drive, Unit 104, Vail Colorado; and Setting Forth Details in Regard Thereto. Presenter: Lynne Campbell, Housing Coordinator MOTION: MORALES SECOND: WILKINS VOTE: 4-0 APPROVED 4.3. Alura Vail Formerly Park Meadows Lodge Discussion Tabled to a future meeting date to be determined. 4.4. Commercial Linkage and Inclusionary Zoning Updates Ruther discuss the goals and potential needs/options for Commercial Linkage and Inclusionary Zoning updates. Economic Planning Systems (EPS) is working with the Housing department and will present to the Authority at a later date. A kickoff is the first step. 4.5 Resolution No. 9, Series of 2020, a Resolution Approving the Release of Security Deposit for Middle Creek Village to Coughlin and Company, Inc. Ruther reviewed a Middle Creek / Coughlin & Company proposal to release a security deposit of $340K held by the Town of Vail. Coughlin’s intent is to assist with tenant emergency rent relief assistance due to COVID19, job loss or work hours reduction. The Town required a security deposit from Coughlin to secure the completion and operation of Middle Creek Village Apartments plus three (3) months of operating expenses to be held. Lease terms for Middle Creek allow the release to Coughlin of the security funds if not used by end of lease, 35 years. Coughlin & Company intends to use to funds to provide rental relief for existing tenants. They don’t see COVID-19 resolving in the next three (3) months and want to keep tenants in the units. For example, a studio rents for $750 per month, by using these funds Coughlin can reduce rent to $260 per month for next three (3) months. Middle Creek will hold back $600 of damage deposit/security from each unit. The Authority asked if the Town should hold off until the federal government rules on how it will assist during this crisis. Morales asked when the property is up for resale? Ruther questioned if she was speaking to the lease agreement which expires in 35 years. Morales was referencing the grant funds from CHFA (Colorado Housing Fund Association). April 21, 2020 - Page 64 of 68 Ruther addressed this agreement and noted he was not aware of what Morales mentioned. Lindstrom informed the Authority he served on the Authority when the Middle Creek agreement was created and has faith Coughlin & Company will act accordingly. Morales doesn’t want to approve a resolution if other funding is coming for relief to Middle Creek/Coughlin & Company. The Authority discussed Middle Creek’s agreement. Ruther noted Coughlin also asked for release of their monthly lease payment of $1500/month .5% of monthly Middle Creek revenue to VLHA. Ruther noted to Coughlin this most likely will not be included in the fund release. Coughlin agreed and he will continue paying the monthly lease payment. Per Ruther, Matt Mire, Town Attorney, prefers VLHA make a recommendation to Town Council to release the security deposit. A resolution will be available later during this meeting. Lindstrom requested the Authority move to executive session and review the resolution upon reconvening the regular meeting. Ruther noted if the Authority approves the resolution it will move to Council for approval. MOTION: WILKINS SECOND: MORALES VOTE: 4-0 APPROVED with 2 modifications 1. Title - Resolution No. 9, Series of 2020, a Resolution Approving RECOMMENDING the Release of Security Deposit for Middle Creek Village to Coughlin and Company, Inc. 2. Section 1. The VLHA hereby approves RECOMMENDS the release of the Middle Creek security deposit in the amount of $340,000 to Coughlin. 5. Matters from the Chairman and Authority Members 5.1. Matters from the Chairman and Authority Members Presenter: Steve Lindstrom, Chairman Discussion by the Authority was limited to Middle Creek Village’s rental relief request. 6. Executive Session 6.1. Executive Session per C.R.S. §24-6-402(4)(a)(e) - to discuss the purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer, or sale of property interests and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, regarding: submitted Vail InDEED applications and program details. Presenter: Lynne Campbell, Housing Coordinator Wilkins motioned to exit the regular meeting and enter executive session. MOTION: WILKINS SECOND: MORALES VOTE: 4-0 APPROVED April 21, 2020 - Page 65 of 68 Morales motioned to exit the executive session and rejoin the regular meeting. MOTION: MORALES SECOND: WILKINS VOTE: 4-0 APPROVED The Authority reentered the regular meeting at 12:55PM, members present Lindstrom, Wilkins, Morales, McDougall and Ruther and Campbell from staff. 7. Any Action as a Result of Executive Session 7.1. Action as a Result of Executive Session Morales motioned for staff to continue forward with the Vail InDEED applicants as discussed in executive session. MOTION: MORALES SECOND: WILKINS VOTE: 4-0 APPROVED Ruther provided updates. Council on April 7 having VLHA interviews. Lindstrom asked members to be flexible regarding possibility of short notice meetings. 8. Adjournment 8.1. Adjournment 1:06PM MOTION: WILKINS SECOND: MC DOUGALL VOTE: 4-0 APPROVED 9. Future Agenda Items 9.1. o Deed Restriction Compliance and Enforcement Policy Recommendation o Incentives for Long Term Rentals in the Town of Vail o Housing Sites Discussion o Land Banking (sale of GRFA) o Public Health Housing Incentive, Eagle County Health 10. Next Meeting Date 10.1. Next Meeting Date April 14, 2020 Meeting agendas and materials can be accessed prior to meeting day on the Town of Vail website www.vailgov.com. All housing authority meetings are open to the public. Times and order of agenda are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time the Vail Local Housing Authority will discuss an item. Please call (970) 479-2150 for additional information. Please call 711 for sign language interpretation 48 hours prior to meeting time. Housing Department April 21, 2020 - Page 66 of 68 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C : E xecutive S ession, pursuant to: 1) C .R .S. §24-6-402(4)(b)(e) - to receive legal advice on specific legal questions; and to determine positions, develop a strategy and instruct negotiators, regarding: potential deed restricted employee housing sites P RE S E NT E R(S ): Matt Mire, Town A ttorney April 21, 2020 - Page 67 of 68 VA I L TO W N C O UNC I L A G E ND A ME MO I T E M /T O P I C : Recess 4:45 pm (estimate) April 21, 2020 - Page 68 of 68