HomeMy WebLinkAboutKATSOS RANCH LOT 1 VAIL MEMORIAL PARK PART 1 LEGALn/nn'7#,rWr
Decign Review Board
ACTIO]I FORII
Depettment of Communlty Developm€nt
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
tel:970.479.2139 fe'j.970.479.2452
wsb: www.vailgov.comffirtwD6/ELg€r.t
Proiect Description:
Partcipants:
OWNER TOWN OF VAIL oelzolz00's
C/O FINANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAIL
co 81657
APPUCANT l-AM TREE SERVICE/CHIP DOMKE 0912012005 Phone: 476-3,100
PO BOX6444
VAIL
co 81657
PrcjectAddrees: LocaUon:
VAIL MEMORI,AL PARK
tegal Description: Lot: 1 Bloclc Subdivision: KATSOS MNCH MINOR SUBDI
Parcel Number: 2101-024-0200-1
Comments: SeeConditions
Protectname: [;[ Aerc,n^l ?*l-,
l.lotion By:
Second By:
Vote:
Condidons:
DRBNumber: DR8050500
FINAL APPROVALTO REMOVE DEAD AND BEETLE INFESTED TREES FROM THE VAIL MEMORIAL
PARK. APPRO)CMATELY 15 TREES.
BOARD/STAFF ACTION
AC:Iilon: STAFFAPR
Dab of Approval= 0912il2@5
Cond: 8
(PLAN): No changes to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of
Vail staff and/or the appropriate revient committee(s).
Cond: 0
(PLAN): DRB approval does not constitute a permit for building. Please consult with
Town of Vail Building personnel prior to construction activiUes.
Cond: 201
DRB approval shall not become valid for 20 da1a following the date of approval.
Cond:202
Approval of this project shall lapse and become void one (1) year following the date
of final approval, unless a building permit is issued and onstruction is commenced
and is diligently pursued toward completion.
Planner: WarrenCampbell DRB Fee Paid: $25O.OO
i Minor Exterior Alterations
Application for Design Review
Department of Community Development
75 South Fronbge Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
te| 970.479.2128 fax: 970.479.2452
web: www.vailgov.com
General Information:
All projects requiring design review must receive approval prior to submitting a building permit application. Please
refer to the submittal reguirements for the particular approval that is requested. An application for Design Review
cannot be accepted until all required information is received by the Community Development Department. The
project may also need to be reviewed by the Town Council and/or the Planning and Environmental Commission.
Design review approval lapses unless a building p€rmit is issued and construction commences within
one year of the approval.
Location of the Proposal: Lot:_Block:_ Subdivision:
TOI4'Nffi
d
r)Physical Address:
Parcel No.:(Contact Eagle Co. Assessor at 970-328-8640 for parcel no.)
oa0o{ -'--t)i-
iv1\ ru.<>(e >rY ,4+- L
Name(s) of Owner(s):
Mailing Address:
Owner(s) Signature(s):
Name of Applicant:
Mailing Address:
D Signs
E Conceptual Review
LAIA -il 9ru ra
(C.o
Phone:cllo
$50 Plus $1.00 per square foot of total sign area.
No Fee
retaining walls, etc.
$20 For revisions to plans
Design Review Board.
No Fee
already approved by Planning Staff or the
tr
D
,K
tr
tr
New Construction
Addition
Minor Alteration
(multFfamily/commercial)
Minor Alteration
(singlefamily/duplex)
Changes to Approved Plans
Separation Request
For construction of a new building or demo/rebuild.
For an addition where square footage is added to any residential or
commercial building (includes 250 additions & interior conversions).
For minor changes to buildings and site improvements, such as,
re-roofing, painting, window addfions, landscaping, fences and
retaining walls, etc.
For minor changes to buildings and site improvements, such as,
re-roofing, painting, window additions, landscaping, fences and
RECD SEP 19 2OO5
(q\ {V\ornonwl
15 s - irc>r'r
1.r1.ot
E-maif Address: ChQ Aornfte Q-- rax:@
Type of Review and Fee:
$5s0
$300
y{t
$20
For Office U,gqOnly:
FeePaidt=-/2=:-
/ o-t7-6{DRBNo: UZBAsoJltx)
TOI4N\IM
MINOR EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS
TO BUILDINGS AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS
SUBMITTAT REQUIREMENTS
General Information:
This application is required for proposals involving minor e><terior alterations and/or site improvements.
Proposals to add landscaping do not require DRB approval unless they involve the addition of patios,
water features, grading, or the addition of retaining walls.
I. SUBMITTALREOUIREMENTS**
o Stamped Topographic Survey*' o Site and Grading Plan*o Landscape Plan*o Architectural Elevations*tr Elterior color and material samples and specifications.tr Architectural Floor Plansxo Lighting Plan* and Cut-sheet(s) for proposed fixturestr Title report, including Schedules A & B to veriff ownership and easementsx
-o
Photos of the existing site and adjacent structures, where applicable.o Written approval from a condominium association, landlord, and joint owner, if applicableo Site-specific Geological Hazard Report, if applicable*o The Administrator and/or DRB may require the submission of additional plans, drawings,
specifications, samples and other materials (including a model) if deemed necessary to
determine whether a project will comply with Design Guidelines or if the intent of the
proposal is not clearly indicated.
Please sabmit three (3) copies of the materials noted with an asterisk (*),
**For interior conversions with no exterior chanoes, the submittal requirements include a complete set of
e><isting and proposed floor plans, a title repo@ and written approval from a condominium association,
landlord, and joint owner, if applicable.
I have read and underctand the above listed submittal requirements:
Proiect
Contractor
Date Signed \qsdf od
r-^*nlu-+f*
'(v{l.rltcaA \Nl
\q
Page 3 of L3106106105 h fe;r\4,riwA
Topographic suryeyir Wet stamp and signature of a licensed surveyor. Date of survey. North arrow and graphic bar scale. Scale of 1"=10'or l"=20). Legal description and physical addressr Lot size and buildable area (buildable area excludes red hazard avalanche, slopes greater than
4Oo/o, and floodplain)o .Ijes to eristing benchmark, either USGS landmark or sewer invert. This information must be
clearly stated on the suruey. PropertY boundaries to the nearest hundredth (.01) of a foot accuracy. Distances and bearings
and a basis of bearing must be shown. Show existing pins or monuments found and their
relationship to the established corner.o Show right of way and property lines; including bearings, distances and curve information.o Indicate all easements identified on the subdivision plat and recorded against the property as
indicated in the title report. List any easement restrictions.. Spot Elevations at the edge of asphalt, along the street frontage of the propefi at twenty-five
foot intervals (25'), and a minimum of one spot elevations on either side of the lot.. Topographic conditions at two foot contour intervals. Existing trees or groups of trees having trunls wlth diameters of 4" or more, as measured from a
point one foot above grade.r Rock outcroppings and other significant natural features (large boulders, intermittent streams,
etc.).o All existing improvements (including foundation walls, roof overhangs, building overhangs, etc.).r Environmental Hazards (ie. rockfall, debris flow, avalanche, wetlands, floodplain, soils)e Watercourse setbacks, if applicable (show centerline and edge of stream or creek in addition to
the required stream or creak setback)r Show all utility meter locations, including any pedestals on site or in the right-of-way adjacent to
the site. Exact location of existing utility sources and proposed service lines from their source to
the structure. Utilities to include:. Cable TV Sewer Gas. Telephone Water Electric. Size and type of drainage culverts, swales, etc,. Adjacent roadways labeled and edge of asphalt for both sides of the roadway shown for a
minimum of 250'in either direction from propefi.
o Site and Grading Plan:. Scale of I"=20'or larger. Property and setback lines. Existing and proposed easementsr Existing and proposed gradeso Existing and proposed layout of buildings and other structures including decks, patios, fences and
walls. Indicate the foundaUon with a dashed line and the roof edge with a solid line.. All proposed roof ridge lines with proposed ridge elevations. Indicate existing and proposed
grades shown underneath all roof lines. This will be used to calculate building height.r Proposed driveways, including percent slope and spot elevations at the property line, garage slab
and as necessary along the centerline ofthe driveway to accurately reflect grade.. A 4' wide unheated concrete pan at the edge of asphalt for driveways that exit the street in an
uphill direction.r Locations of all utilities including s\isting sources and proposed service lines from sources to the
structures.
Page 4 of t3lo6lo6l0s
rAt
,t
A\,
"t;x*
I
a ^/r ., .-t- c l-L,')
,J [.
.l
I
+#':
o
0712912003 Phone:
0712912(fr3 Phone:
0712912003 Phone:
I
I
I
i
I
/
75 S FRONTAGE RD
vAIl- co
81657
License: 463-8
Location:
Loh I Block: Subdivision: Katsos Ranch Minor Sub
210103401001
SEE CONDMONS
BOARD/STAFF ACTIOI{
CD
b
FlltFv,
ilouon By:
Second By:
Vote:
CondiHons:
DOUG CAHILL
GEORGE I.AMB
6-0
Action: APPROVED
Date of Apprcval: 09/08/2003
Cond: 8
(P|AN): No dtanges to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of
Vail staff and/or the appropriate review commiftee(s).
Cond: CON0006139
1. All future phases (24) of the Vail Memorial Park must be reviewed by the US Army
Corps of Engineers prior to construction as appropriate.
Cond: CON0006140
' r-#)
Prcject Name:
Project Description:
Participants:
Project Address:
Legal Description:
Parcel l{umber:
Comments:
OWNER TOWN OF VAIL
C/O RNANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
vArLco 81657
License:
APPUCANT TOWNOFVAIL
C/O FINANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
vArlco 81657
License:
CONTMCTOR TOWN OF VAIL
Planning and Environmental Commission
ACTION FORM
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Cnlorado 81657
tel: 970,479.2139 faxi 970.479.2452
web: www.ci.vail,@.us
MEMORIAL PARK PEC Number: PEC030038
CONDMONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE PORPOSED VAIL MEMORIAL PARK ON AN 11.13 ACRE
PORTION OF THE IGTSOS RANCH OPEN SPACE
jn-
O\OO0xga
.|, l!
€*
=.Yu)i
RS
2. The Eagle nitVut", una Sanitation District has taken responSlDttity for the
review of a raised boardwalk to span the 2G25 foot wide $rale into phase 1. The
proposed raised boardwalk will require review by the Army Corps of Engineers and the
Town of Vail Design review Board. A Design Review application shall be submitted by
Eagle River and Water and Sanilation District Vail Memorial Park FoundaUon for
review and approval of the Design Review Board prior to @nsbuction.
Cond: CON0006141
3. The applicant shall submit a Design Review application for review and approval by
the Design Review Board for all site disturbance and any future phases (phases 2-4)
prior to the construction of any future phases.
Cond: CON0006142
4. The applicant shall require all groups over 25 people to use a shuttle system to
the site. The applicant shall obtain the owners approval for the use of any remote
parking used for inumment seMces.
Cond: CON0006143
5. The applicant shall provide signage approved by Town staff during memorial events
to clearly indicate that a memorial service is in progress and that cyclists should
use caution. These signs should be located at the east trail head to l(atsos Fanch
and 50 feet to the west of the Vail Memorial Park entrance on the KaEos Ranch
recreationa I trail.
Cond: CON0006144
6, The applicant shall pay for additional no parking signs along the Frontage Road
at the Katsos Ranch Trailhead at specific locations approved by the Public Works
Depatment.
Cond: CON0006145
7. The applicant shall receive approval for a staging plan from the Town of Vail
prior to constuction being initiated on the Vail Memorial Pa*.
Cond: CON0006146
8. The applicant shall retum to the Planning and Environmental Commission in one
years time from the date of apprcval so that the Conditional Use Permit can be
reviewed to evaluate the impacts on cirqllaton along the Frontage Road and to the
us€ of the recreational trail.
Cond: CON0006147
9. The applicant shall submit frrture phases to the Planning and Environmenbl
Commission for review by the Crmmission to ensure that environmental impacts are
adequately addressed in future phases.
Cond: CON0006148
10,There shall be no maintenane, snow plowing, or inscriptions of memorial signs
in the Vail Memorial Park between December lst and May 1st.
Cond: CON0006149
ll.The operation and maintenance of the Vail Memorial Park shall not inhibit the
public use of Lot 1, Katsos Randr Minor Subdivsion for cunently o<isting passive
recreauonal uses.
Planner: RussellFonest PEC Fee Paid: $650.00
(r'rr#^
{V
Vail Memorial Park Foundation, represented by Sherry Dorward
Russell Forrest
SUMMARY
The Vail Memorial Park Foundation has submitted three applications to create a
memorial park on an 11.08 acre portion of the Katsos Ranch Park identified in the
proposed minor subdivision as Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision. This 156 acre
parcef was purchased as open space by the Town of Vail in 1977 and is located just
south of the East Vail exit from lnterstate 70. The applicant is requesting approval on a
minor subdivision, rezoning to Outdoor Recreation, and a conditional use permit for a
cemetery.
The purpose statement of the Vail Memorial Park is:
'The Vail Memorial Park will serue to celebrate. remember and honorthe lives of
the many people who have helped to define Vail through their experiences and
contributions. By paying tribute to fhese drverse individuals, we will strengthen
our sense of community, build upon our history and connect with others who
share a spiritual passion and love for Vail."
ff\
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmental Commission
Community Development Department
September 8, 2003
A request for a final review of a subdivision of the Katsos Ranch property
(unplatted), pursuant to Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, Vail Town Code; a
conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-88-3: Conditional Uses, Vail Town
Code, to allow for the construction of a cemetery; and a final recommendation to
the Vail Town Council of a proposed rezoning of the property from Natural Area
Preservation District to Outdoor Recreation District, located on an unplatted
parcel of land located on in the southeast quarter of Section 2, Township 5
South, Range 80 West of the 6th Principal Meridian (proposed as Lot 1, Katsos
Ranch Subdivision), and setting forth details in regards thereto. (A complete
metes and bounds description is on file at the Community Development
Department).
Applicant:
Planner:
I. ,:. . .... .
This.park involves the creation of a crusher fine walking path, rock memorial walls,
arbheb'entry g4te, merirorial rocks, and stone benches. No structures or lighting are
proposed as parttof th.is application.
Staff is recommending'approval of these three applications in that this application is
consistent with the criteria and findings identified in section lX of this memorandum. The
applicant has provided responses to the Planning and Environmental Commission's
issues identified at the August 25th meeting (Attachment F).
. .i.,a...
:II. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
The Vail Memorial Park Foundation is requesting the following:
1. Approval of a minor subdivision to plat and subdivide the unplatted 156 acre
Katsos Ranch property. This subdivision would result in an 11.08 acre property
for the Vail Memorial Park or Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision. lt would
also create Tract A. Katsos Ranch Subdivision which would total 145 acres
2. Recommendation of approval to the Town Council for a rezoning of Lot 1,
Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision (the 11.08 acre Vail Memorial Park) from
Natural Area Preservation to the Outdoor Recreation zone district
3. Approval of a conditional use permit for a cemetery which is a conditional use in
the Outdoor Recreation zone district.
The specific components of the proposal include:
. A double track access gravel path (approximately 400 feet long in phase
l) that connects the existing Katsos Ranch recreational trail to the
memorial park. This path would also provide access for the park and
Eagle River Water and Sanitation District maintenance vehicles.
. A 3 foot wide (250 feet long in phase 1) trail around Phase 1 (All paths
are a crusher fine trail).
. Six memorial boulder walls benched into the natural topography at the toe
of the slopes on the south side of the site for all 3 phases. Phase 1 will
include two 50 foot long walls. All walls are less than 4 feet tall.
. Natural stones for memorial engravings.
. Memorial trees (Lodgepole and Blue Spruce) if irrigation can be provided
to the site with the cooperation of the Eagle River Water and Sanitation
District.
o Arched entrance sign to the memorial off of the existing Katsos Ranch
Trail south of the pedestrian bridge.
o Burial and scattering of cremated human ashes. Casket burials will not
be allowed on this site.
ilt.
The memorial park is proposed to be constructed in four phases as shown on the
attached site plan (Attachment E). Phase 1 is intended to last for 10-20 years
depending on demand.
BACKGROUND
In 1993, an exhaustive study was done to identify a site for a cemetery in the Town of
Vail. Over 10 alternative sites were evaluated for land use, ownership, and
environmental considerations. After a detailed study of the alternatives, the upper bench
of Donovan Park was chosen as a preferred alternative. A design was developed and
approved by the Town of Vail which included casket burials. This project was taken to
the Vail voters in 1994 and was defeated. In 2001, a renewed effort in memorializing
deceased Vail locals again became an interest. A committee was established to identify
a prefened location and develop a plan for a memorial park. The committee
established three major criteria for site selection:
. Minimum 5 acres in size
. Pedestrian and vehicular access
. Not located directly adjacent to residential areas.
After screening for those criteria, the following alternative sites were further reviewed.
1. Katsos Ranch
2. Spraddle Creek Trail Head
3. Streamwalk between the Covered Bridge and Ford Park
Given the criteria mentioned above the preferred alternative was Katsos Ranch in that it
was the furthest location from any residential area, had the appropriate size, and had
good access. lt also was the quietest reflective space of the three alternatives.
The Vail Town Council has reviewed the proposed design for the park and has voted to
allow the Vail Memorial Park Foundation to apply for this use on Town land. On August
20,2003 the Design Review Board reviewed the project and voted 3-0 to direct staff to
"staff' approve the project after all applicable Planning and Environmental Commission
approvals have occurred.
Planninq and Environmental Commission DISCUSION ITEMS FROM THE AUGUST
25. 2OO3 MEET!NG
The following are discussion items for this topic:
A. Intensitv of Use: The Planning and Environmental Commission was concerned
about the intensity of use on the site. The primary concerns related to this issue
were conflicts on the recreational trail and parking. The Planning and
Environmental Commission was also concerned about the conflicts in the
Environmental lmpact Report (ElR) on phasing capacity and comments made by
J
IV.
the applicant on capacity. The EIR has been updated with the latest information
on phasing, wetlands, and floodplain information. The applicant has provided
responses to these issues in the attached letter (Attachment F).
B. Parkino: Parking for memorial services can be accommodated to a limited extent
at the trail-head parking area for the Katsos Ranch Trail. Eighteen parking spaces
are provided at this location. However, staff believes that there is inadequate
parking for groups larger than 30 people. Staff believes that the applicant should
require larger services to park at remote locations and to provide a shuttle service
to the site. The applicant is proposing to require a shuttle service for groups over
25 people. Furthermore, additional no parking signs may be needed along the
Frontage Road.
C. Recreation Path: Staff believes there could be some limited conflicts on the
recreation path when a large memorial service is occurring. To avoid conflicts with
bicycles on the path, staff would suggest that a temporary sign on the existing
recreation trail be placed to the west of the memorial park and at the bridge to
indicate when memorial service is occuning and for bicyclist to dismount during
memorial services. The sign would be placed on the trail during memorial events.
D. Wetlands: The Vail Memorial Foundation has been working with the Eagle River
Water and Sanitation District (ERWSD) to enhance the existing wetlands on the
site. Wetlands have been mapped and are identified in the wetlands study in the
Environmental lmpact Report (Attachment D). As part of its approved 1993 plan
to enlarge Black Lakes, ERWSD identified the Katsos Ranch property as a wetland
mitigation site and committed to restoring 6 acres of wetlands on the site of which
3.5 acres are within the proposed boundaries of the Memorial Park. Although
ERWSD has not yet been fully successful in re-establishing wetlands on the
property, the designated mitigation sites fall under Army Corps of Engineers
jurisdiction and Vail Memorial Park is obligated to avoid impacts in those areas as
well (or apply for a 404 permit).
Although the mitigation areas have not been surveyed and mapped, ERWSD
consultants have flagged the edges of the mitigation site adjacent to Vail Memorial
Park'sfirst phase. The only potential conflict isthe swale directly north of the
primary development areas in phases 1-4, which is included in the mitigation area.
The Army Corps of Engineers has informed the Town of Vail, the Vail Memorial
Park Foundation, and ERWSD that spanning this swale with bridges or boardwalks
would not impact the District's mitigation plan and would not require a permit.
(Attachment F) Development of paths in phases 2-4 may require wetland permits,
depending upon the long-term success of wetland restoration in the eastern portion
of the Vail Memorial Park site.
E. Floodplain: Staff acknowledged the need to verify the floodplain location at the last
Planning and Environmental Commission meeting. Since the Planning and
Environmental Commission reviewed the floodplain delineation on the site survey,
Town staff has investigated further and has found that the 1O0-year floodplain
covers a greater area than was previously identified (Attachment E). Section 12-
21-10 of the Town Code establishes relevant ouidelines:
V.
A.
A- No structure shall be built in any flood hazard zone or red avalanche
hazard area. No structure shall be built on a slope of forty percent (40%) or
greater except in Single-Family Residential, Two-Family Residential, or Two-
Family Primary/Secondary Residential Zone Disfnbls. The term "structure" as
used in fhr.s Secfion does not include recreational structures that are intended
for seasonal use, not including residential use.
E. The Administrator may require any applicant or person desiring to modify
the flood plain by fill, construction, channelization, grading, or other similar
changes, to submit for review an environmental impact statement in
accordance with Chapter 12 of this Title, fo estab/t'sh that the work will not
adversely affect adjacent propefties, or increase the quantity or velocity of
flood waters. (Ord. 16(1983) $ 7; Ord 12(1978) S 4)
After reviewing the floodplain maps, the proposed concept plan, and the above
mentioned regulations, an Engineer with Peak Land Surveying has concluded that
the proposed project complies with the Town's hazard regulations (see letter in
attachment F). No structures are proposed anywhere on the VMP site as part of
this application, and no grading is proposed that would increase the .quantity or
velocity of flood waters."
ROLES OF THE REVIEWING BOARDS
Minor Subdivision
As per section 13-4-2 C of the Town Code the Planning and Environmental Commission
is the final decision making body on a Minor Subdivision. Any final decision of the
Planning and Environmental Commission can be appealed to the Town Council.
Rezoninq
Town Council:
The Town Council is the final decision making authority for a rezoning or a text
amendment. Final actions of Design Review Board or Planning and Environmental
Commission maybe appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town
Council evaluates whether or not the Planning and Environmental Commission or
Design Review Board erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with
modifications, or overturn the board's decision. The Town council must utilize the
criteria and findings identified in section Vl of this memorandum.
Planninq and Environmental Commission:
The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for applying the criteria in
section Vl of this memorandum and making a recommendation to the Town Council on a
rezoning.
Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
Planning and Environmental Commission:
B.
c.
Action: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for final
approval/denial of CUP. The Planning and Environmental Commission will make
recommendations to the Town Council on rezoning land, text amendments, and
modification of hazard designations.
The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for evaluating a proposal
for:
1. Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of the Town.
2. Effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation
facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public
facilities and public facilities needs.
3. Effect upon traffic, with particular reference to congestion, automotive and
pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access,
maneuverability, and removal of snow from the streets and parking areas.
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located,
including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses.
5. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the
proposed use.
6. The environmental impact report concerning the proposed use, if an
environmental impact report is required by Chapter 12 of this Title.
Desion Review Board:
The Design Review Board has no review authority on a CUP, but must review any
accompanying Design Review Board application.
The Design Review Board is responsible for evaluating the Design Review Board
proposal for:
o Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings. Fitting buildings into landscape. Gonfiguration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography. Removal/Preservation of trees and native vegetationr Adequate provision for snow storage on-site. Acceptability of building materials and colors. Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms. Provision of landscape and drainageo Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures. Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distances. Location and design of satellite dishes. Provision of outdoor lighting. The design of parks
VI. APPPLICABLEPLANNINGDOCUMENTS
A. Town of Vail Zoninq Requlations
Section 12-8C Natural Preservation (NAP) District
The current zoning of the proposed Memorial Park site is Natural Area Preservation. The
purpose statement for the Natural Area Preservation District is:
Section 12-8C-1:
The Natural Area Preseryation District is designed to provide areas which, because
of their environmentally sensrllye nature or natural beauty, shall be protected from
encroachment by any building or other improvement, other than those listed in
Seclion 12-8C-2 of this Article. The Natural Area Preservation District is intended to
ensure that designated lands remain in their natural state, including reclaimed areas,
by protecting such areas from development and preserving open space. The Natural
Area Preservation District includes lands having valuable wildlife habitat, exceptional
aesthefrb or flood control value, wetlands, riparian areas and areas with significant
environmental constraints. Protecting senstfive natural areas is imporlant for
maintaining water quality and aquatic habitat, preserving wildlife habitat, flood
control, protecting view coridors, minimizing the isk from hazard areas, and
protecting the natural character of Vail which r's so vlfal to the Town's tourist
economy. The intent shall not preclude improvement of the natural environment by
the removal of noxious weeds, deadfall where necessary to protect public safety or
similar compatible improvements. (Ord. 21(1994) S 10)
Section 12-88 Outdoor Recreation (OR) District
The applicant is proposing to rezone Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision to Outdoor
Recreation. The purpose Statement for the Outdoor Recreation Zone District is:
Section 12-88-1:
"The outdoor recreation district is intended to preserve undeveloped or open space
lands from intensive development while permitting outdoor recreational activities that
provide opportunities for active and passive recreation areas, facilities and uses. (Ord.
21(1e94) S e)"
B. Town of Vail Gomprehensive Land Use Plan
The Comprehensive Land Use Plan designation for Katsos Ranch Park is Open Space.
This land use category is defined as:
"Passrye recreation areas such as greenbelts, stream conidors and drainage ways
are the types of areas rn this category. Hll/srdes which were c/assffied as
undevelopable due to high hazards and s/opes over 40To are also included within
this area. These hillside areas would still be allowed types of development permitted
by existing zoning such as one unit per 35 acres, for areas in agricultural zoning.
Also, permifted in this area would be institutional/public uses."
Specific goals in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan that relate to this use include:
1.2 The quality of the environment including air, water, and other natural
resources should be protected as the Town grows.2.7 The Town of Vail should improve the existing park and open space lands
while continuing to purchase open space.6.1 Services should keep pace with increased growth.
The plan also specifically discusses Katsos Ranch and states the following:
"This parcel of land has been the subject of much community -wide discusslons
srnce its purchase by the Town of Vail in 1977. The tract contains 1 46 acres (current
survey shows area at 156 acres) and lies immediately east of the Vail Golf Course
and south of Gore Creek. A Study was prepared in 1978 to examine the impacts of
altemative development scenanos for the property. The alternatives ranged from a
"do nothing" or "no development" scenario to the construction of an executive style
golf course. The study concluded that a moderate level of development is fhe rnosl
desirable for the site. This level of development would include a bike trail, running
trail, cross country skiing trails, and picnic areas. Many o these improvements have
been constructed and are used by area resrdenfs and tourists alike. Based on this
expresslon ff is assumed that passive open space is the acceptable and appropriate
use for the parcel. '
C. Town of Vail Comprehensive Open Lands Plan
The Comprehensive Open Lands Plan does identify Katsos Ranch Park as a sensitive
natural area as defined by the Natural Heritage Program. No specific actions or
management recommendations are made for this specific parcel other than the creation
of a south trail to the south of this parcel and on US Forest Service Land. After a US
Forest Service review of a specific trail alignment, the Forest Service concluded that
there would be significant challenges to approving this trail with Lynx habit in close
proximity to this proposed trail.
VII. ZONING ANALYSIS
Legal Description: Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision
Zoning: (current) Natural Area Preservation District
Zoning: (proposed) Outdoor Recreation District (OR)
Land Use Designation: Open Space
Lot Size: 11.08 acres
Development Standard (OR) Allowed Proposed
Parking: As per Chapter 10 18 Available
Lot Area: Not applicable
20' from all property lines 400'from nearest
8
Setbacks:
21' flat!Z4' sloped
Not applicable
5o/o
property line
No buildings
0olo (no buildings)
VIII. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING
Land Use Zoninq
l-70 ROW & Residential Right of Way & Primary Secondary
US Forest Service No Zoning
Height:
Density
Site Coverage
North:
South:
East:
West:
Residential
Golf Gourse
Primary Secondary
Outdoor Recreation
tx.
A.
REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Minor Subdivision
A basic premise of subdivision regulations is that the minimum standards for the creation
of new lots must be met. This subdivision will be reviewed under Title 13, Subdivision
Regulations, of the Town of Vail Gode.
1. The first set of criteria to be considered by the Planning and Environmental
Commission for a Minor Subdivision application is:
Lot Area: There is no minimum lot area for the Outdoor Recreation District. The
proposed lot size is 11.08 acres.
Frontage: There is no minimum frontage area for the Outdoor Recreation
District.
Dimension: There are no minimum dimensions for the Outdoor Recreation
District. The proposed lot size for the Memorial Park is 11.08 acres. The
remaining area identified as Tract A, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision is 145
acres.
2. The second set of review criteria to be considered with a minor subdivision
request is outlined in the Subdivision Regulations, 13-34, and is as follows:
"The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the
application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of this Chapter,
the Zoning Ordinance and other peftinent regulations that the Planning
and Environmental Commission deems applicable....The Planning and
Environmental Commission shall review the application and consider its
appropriateness in regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control,
densrtles proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other
applicable documents, environmental integrity and compatibility with the
surrounding /and uses and other applicable documents, effects on the
aesfhetics of the Town."
The purpose section of Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, is intended to insure that the
subdivision is promoting the health, safety and welfare of the community. The
subdivision purpose statements from 1 3-1-2 (C) are as follows;
1. "To inform each subdivider of the standards and criteria by which
development proposals will be evaluated and to provide information
as to the type and extent of improvements required."
Staff believes that this proposal meets the standards and criteria for a
minor subdisvision in the Town of Vail and that the plans provide clear
information on the extent of the development. Furthermore no new
commercial or residential development will result from this subdivision
and the proposed used is consistent with the natural setting of Katsos
Ranch.
"To provide for the subdivision of property in the future without
conflict with development on adjacent land."
No land use conflicts are anticipated. The proposed site design is
intended to blend into the natural landscape of Katsos Ranch Park and is
over 1000 feet from adjacent residential property. The eastern portion of
the site will be maintained and even enhanced as wetlands.
"To protect and conserve the value of land throughout the
Municipality and the value of buildings and improvements on the
land."
This proposal preserves the natural integrity of the land. No buildings are
proposed for this project. No significant environmental impacts are
anticipated. The applicant is working with the Eagle River and Water
District to enhance the wetlands area on the site. The first phase of the
Vail Memorial Park has no impacts on either existing wetlands or the
proposed creation of wetlands by the ERWSD (See Attachment A for
letter from ERWSD in applicant response to Planning and Environmental
Commission issues). Future phases may require Corps of Engineers
approval based on whether new wetlands are created on the site as
planned.
In evaluating the design of the Vail Memorial Park, no negative impacts
are anticipated in terms of the value of adjacent properties.
"To ensure that subdivision of property is in compliance with the
Town's zoning ordinances, to achieve a harmonious, convenient,
workable relationship among land uses, consistent with Town
development objectives."
Staff believes that this project is designed in harmony with the natural
setting of Katsos Ranch and does not create any environmental impacts
or impediments to the recreational uses of Katsos Ranch. The applicant
t0
2.
3.
4.
o
will need to provide notice on the recreational trail to trail users during
memorial events to avoid conflicts. However, staff believes that trail
conflicts can be mitigated with signage considering the anticipated
number of memorial events per year.
5. "To guide public and private policy and action in order to provide
adequate and efficient transportation, water, sewage, schools,
parks, playgrounds, recreation, and other public requirements and
facilities and generally to provide that public facilities will have
sufficient capacity to serve the proposed subdivision."
The creation of the Vail Memorial Park will be a critical community asset.
It will not have any significant impact on public infrastructure.
6. "To provide for accurate legal descriptions of newly subdivided land
and to establish reasonable and desirable construction design
standards and procedures."
A proposed plat has been provided with the application that is consistent
with the requirements identified in Title 13, Chapter 4 of the Vail Town
Code.
7. "To prevent the pollution of air, streams and ponds, to assure
adequacy of drainage facilities, to safeguard the water table and to
encourage the wise use and management of natural resources
throughout the Town in order to preserve the integrity, stability, and
beauty of the community and the value of the land."
An Environmental lmpact Report has been prepared for this project. No
significant impacts are anticipated. The major mitigation of impacts
involves the strict regulation of parking at the site for groups over 25
people. Working cooperatively with the ERWSD it is possible to expand
wetlands on the site beyond what currently exists. Phase 1 of the project
will not conflict with any proposed wetland creation on the site. Also
future phases should be reviewed by the Corps of Engineers to avoid
conflicts once the precise boundaries of new wetlands are delineated as
the result of this partnership.
B. Rezoninq
1) The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with all the
applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined
in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development
objectives of the Town.
The Comprehensive Land Use Plan identified Katsos Ranch as Open Space.
The Open Lands Plan also identifies Katsos Ranch as sensitive natural area.
The proposed rezoning to Outdoor Recreation with the proposed Vail Memorial
Park Plan is still consistent with the Town's comprehensive plans and
l1
2l
development objectives. The proposed plan protects the natural integrity of the
Katsos Ranch Park.
The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the
existing and potential land uses on the site and existing and potential
surrounding land uses as set out in the Town's adopted planning
documents.
The proposed land use will not impact adjacent property owners. The closest
home is over 1000 feet away from the Vail Memorial Park and is screened by
vegetation. The proposed design of the Vail Memorial Park compliments the
natural landscape and avoids impacts to existing wetlands. In fact, there is now
the opportunity to enhance the existing wetland area on Katsos Ranch through a
partnership with the ERWSD.
The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious,
convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with
municipal development objectives.
The proposed design is intended to blend into to the natural landscape. There
should be no significant interference to the existing recreational path on Katsos
Ranch given the number of times memorial events are anticipated within a
calendar year. Staff has provided recommended conditions of approval for the
Conditional Use Permit in section X of this memorandum to reduce conflicts on
the recreational path. Furthermore, staff would recommend that the conditional
use permit for the Vail Memorial Park be reviewed within 1 year of approval to
evaluate any unanticipated impacts.
The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of
an orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the
amendment seryes the best interests of the community as a whole.
A memorial park, as proposed, is an important component to the life cycle of a
community. The park is intended to celebrate and memorialize individuals that
have contributed to the Vail community. The proposed zoning of Outdoor
Recreation is one of the three Open Space Zone Districts. The Comprehensive
Land Use Plan identifies this site as Open Space and states that Katsos Ranch
is "appropriate for passive outdoor recreation." The uses in the OR zone District
are controlled through a conditional use permit.
The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or
beneficial impacts on the natural environment, including but not limited to
water quality, air quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and
other desirable natural features.
3)
4l
5)
t2
No building or structures are proposed as part of the Vail Memorial Park. No
significant site disturbance is anticipated other than the creation of paths to the
proposed memorial areas. The proposed park avoids impacting existing
wetlands. lnfact, there is the opportunity to expand wetland area on the eastern
portion of the site through a partnership with the ERWSD. An Environmental
lmpact Report has been prepared and no other significant impacts are
anticipated.
The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with the
purpose statement of the proposed zone district.
Cemeteries are a conditional use in the Outdoor Recreation Zone District. The
proposed natural design of the Vail Memorial Park is consistent with the purpose
statement within the Natural Area Preservation Zone District. The presence of a
memorial park on the site will help ensure the site remains as open space in
perpetuity.
The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how
conditions have changed since the zoning designation of the subject
property was adopted and is no longer appropriate.
The community has the need for a memorial park. This has been well
documented since the last effort in 1993. Conditions on Katsos Ranch have not
changed. lt is still a beautiful meadow bordered by lodgepole pine to the south
and Gore Creek on the North. The proposed design of the Vail Memorial Park is
intended to blend in with the natural environment of the site.
8) Such other factors and criteria as the Commission and/or Council deem
applicable to the proposed rezoning.
Conditional Use Permit
1. Relationship and impact of the use on the development objectives of the
Town.
The proposed design of the Vail Memorial Park is consistent with the natural setting
of Katsos Ranch. lt will maintain the environmental integrity of the site and
potentially even enhance the wetland areas with Katsos Ranch. The Town Council
has stated that the creation of a memorial park is a valid objective of the Town of
Vail. The proposed design achieves that objective in a way that compliments the
natural character of Katsos Ranch Park.
2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation
facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public
facilities needs.
6)
7l
c.
IJ
x.
A.
No buildings are proposed as part of this project which will impact light and air. A
memorial park is a needed community facility. The only detrimental impact is
potentially parking for large memorial services. Staff believes this impact can be
mitigated by requiring all memorial groups over 25 to utilize buses or shuttles to the
park from either from the Vail Chapel or the Town's parking structure (in the summer
and shoulder seasons). Staff recommends reviewing the conditional use permit after
1 year to ensure that circulation on Bighorn Road and the Katsos Ranch recreational
trail are not adversely impacted.
3. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive and
pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access,
maneuverability, and removal of snow from the street and parking areas.
Staff has analyzed the project intensity of use of the Vail Memorial Park. The 1993
Donovan Park cemetery study anticipated 24 memorial services (which included
casket burials) within a year. Staff contacted the County Coroner and Eagle County
on average has 60-70 deaths per year. Nationally approximately 50% of all deaths
result in cremation. With the proposed conditions of approval to prevent Frontage
Road parking and the Foundations interest in limiting large memorial services on the
site, staff does not believe there will be any significant circulation impacts. However,
it is difficult to anticipate the nature of impacts with this type of use and staff would
recommend that the conditional use permit be reviewed in 1 year's time.
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be
located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to
surrounding uses.
No buildings are proposed as part of this application.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Minor Subdivision
The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and
Environmental Commission approves a minor subdivision, pursuant to Chapter 4, Title
13, Subdivision Regulations, Vail Town Code, to allow for the platting of Katsos Ranch
Minor Subdivison, A part of Section 2 and 3, Township 5 South Range 80 West of the
Sixth Principal meridian into Tract A (Area of Katsos Ranch Park excluding the Vail
Memorial Park) and Lot 1 (Vail Memorial Park Site) Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision.
Staff's recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section Vlll
of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, subject to the following
findings:
"The Planning and Environmental Commission approves of the proposed minor
subdivision and finds that the minor subdivision application is appropriate in
regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control, densfties proposed,
regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other applicable documents,
environmental integrtty and compatibility with the sunounding land uses and
other applicable documents, effects on the aesthetics of the Town. Specifically,
the Commission finds that the minor subdivision resolves a//ows the proper
l4
\,,f"Wflll
identification and platting of the Town of Vails largest property and the ability to
delineate the Vail Memorial Park.
Amendment to the Official Zoninq Map of the Town of Vail
The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and
Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval of an amendment
to the Official Town of Vail Zoning Map, pursuant to Chapter 3, Title 12, Zoning
Regulations, Vail Town Code, to rezone Lot 'l of Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision from
the Natural Area Preservation District to the Outdoor Recreation District.
Staff's recommendations are based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section
Vlll of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, subject to the
following findings:
"Before recommending and/or granting an approval of an application for a zone
district boundary amendment the Planning & Environmental Commission and the
Town Council shall make the following findings with respect to the requested
amendment:
1. That the amendment is consrstent with the adopted goals, objectives and
policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and compatible with the
development objectives of the Town; and
2. That the amendment is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and
appropriate for the sunounding areas; and
3. That the amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and general
welfare of the Town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious
development of the Town in a manner that conserves and enhances its
natural environment and its established character as a resort and
residential community of the highest quality."
C. Conditional Use Permit (Conditions Revised by PEC in Bold from the September
FFPEc Me"ti"g)
The Community Development Department recommends approval for a conditional use
permit, pursuant to Section 12-98-3, Conditional Uses; Vail Town Code, to allow for a
Cemetery and memorial park on Lot 1, Kafsos Ranch Subdivision. Staffs
recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section lX of this
memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, subject to the following
findinos:
1. That the proposed location of the use is in accordance with the purposes of
the conditional use permit section of the zoning code and the purposes of the
Parking (P) District.
2. That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it will
be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
3. That the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of
the conditional use permit section of the zoning code.
IJ
B.
-v
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve or forward a
recommendation of approval of the applicant's to the Vail Town Council, staff
recommends that the Commission makes the following conditions a part of the approval:
1. All future phases (24) of the Vail Memodal Park must be reviewed by the US
Army Corps of Engineers prior to construction as appropriate.
2. The Eagle River Water and Sanitation District has taken responsibility for the
review of a raised boardwalk to span the 20-25 foot wide swale into phase 1.
The proposed raised boardwalk will require review by the Army Corps of
Engineers and the Town of Vail Design review Board. A Design Review
application shall be submitted by Eagle River and Water and Sanitatien Distriet
Vail Memorial Park Foundation for review and approval of the Design Review
Board prior to construction.
3. The applicant shall submit a Design Review application for review and approval
by the Design Review Board for all site disturbance and any future phases
(phases 24) prior to the construction of any future phases.
4. The applicant shall require all groups over 25 people to use a shuttle system to
the site. The applicant shall obtain the owners approval for the use of any
remote parking used for inurnment services.
5. The applicant shall provide signage approved by Town staff during memorial
events to clearly indicate that a memorial service is in progress and that cyclists
should use caution. These signs should be located at the east trail head to
Katsos Ranch and 50 feet to the west of the Vail Memorial Park entrance on the
Katsos Ranch recreational trail.
6. The applicant shall pay for additional no parking signs along the Frontage Road
at the Katsos Ranch Trailhead at specific locations approved by the Public
Works Deoartment.
7. The applicant shall receive approval for a staging plan from the Town of Vail prior
to construction being initiated on the Vail Memorial Park.
8. The applicant shall return to the Planning and Environmental Commission in one
years time from the date of approval so that the Conditional Use Permit can be
reviewed to evaluate the impacts on circulation along the Frontage Road and to
the use of the recreational trail.
9. The applicant shall submit future phases to the Planning and
Environmental Commission for review by the Commission to ensure that
environmental impacts are adequately addressed in future phases.
10. There shall be no maintenance, snow plowing, or inscriptions of memorial signs
in the Vail Memorial Park between December 1"t and Mav 1tt.
l6
o
11. The operation and maintenance of the Vail Memorial Park shall not inhibit the
public use of Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivsion for currently existing passive
recreational uses.
Xl. Attachments:
A. Public Notice
B. Mcinity Map
C. Application Letter
D. ElR
E. Design Plans
F. Letterfrom Applicant responding to comments from the August 25o meeting
17
orm
ptlon of the
Appllcation for Design Review
Dspertnent of Cqnmunity DeireloFnent
75 Sout| FmntegB Road, Va||, Cera& 81657
tef : 970.479.2139 lgr.: 97O.4792$2
web: www.d.vaflco.us
General I nformation:
Al pnolects roqtifttg d6lgn Fviorv mrsi rccahp apprord prbr to subnittittg a h{dltg permlt applcalion. Plce
r"dr t6 n" sdm1ft rcqrirun€nts for the partlorbr apprud that b rc+ree*ed. An apdlcaton for Dedgn fuld€ttt
cilmt be acc€pt€d unti d r€qdrcd trbrnraUar b rmhred by he Cormunlty D"ftrT*t DePattnont. TtF
p.lecl r"V ad, r,""0 to bo rei/*l*€d by the T9r4 Cdrd ard/or the ptarrtng and Envkmnbr al Csrmix*n.-OJgn rcif.r rpFovrl lapor unlcri a bulldlng p.rmlt b b.rrd trd cdt3lructlon cornmcnccl wlthln
mc year of lhr approval.
l-ocation of the Proporal: Lot:
-
Block:S.6division:
Addrrcs:
2 I O t -o7 I'e:3 G*rt,cr Eagre c.a.
llalllng Addtotc:
Owner(r) Signature(s):
llame of Applicant:
E-mail Addrcrc:
Type of Review and Fee:. slgns
. Cd|cephd REfuYv
y' t*wcaruruaitn. Addltbn
. ilho.Altdathn
(multi-famly/comrutitl)
. MhorAfi€Etbn
(sfrgbfflrfy/d{plex)
. Ctengs toApptorod Fks
. Separadon ne(lEst
$50 Ft rB $1 .m per squata fioot ot totd slgn ar€'
NoFo
$650 Ftr consfruc'thn d a now hd|dhg or detm/rebua&t.
1il0 Fd an addthn ttrh€tE sqlate footagp b ad&d lo arry r€ldardel or
cnrnerdd hrHftg (hdud6 250 addtbls & hterb conwnios)'
$250 For nfiot cfimges b bulldlTF and sftE kryroveflFnb' 6udl 6'
Ierodng, pahtlng, witttwv addtldE, hndsc+hg, forrcG d|d
r€oaHng rvals, €tc.
$20 For rdmr ctglg|€s to hildngF ard slts lrVovemnns, stdt s,
somrg, pahfttg, udn&w dilld|E, futdsc?hg, f€rrc6 td
r€taf*rg urals, dc.
$A For rcvldoc b ph,|s aft€ady +prur€d by Plan*tg Steff or iho
lhign Retiew B@td.
NoFe
llame(r) of Owner(s):
Plpne:
Phone:
ForOffrce lfre Onlyl
FaFdd:- Cf€d( l,lo.:
Ebte:
HfliEn
ra
I()I{N()TY,{I[7
l/ ws $1300. --lraiorStndddon $15mlr-uiiors.tdu*tbn $660. Esnption Plat $660. Mircr Amedment to an SDD $10(x). tlerv Spe<iat Oevetopment Dbflct $mm. lllaior Amildm€nt to an SDO $60m. Maior fun€ndnEnt to an SDO $1250
(no adei6 rtfdifrcaltots)
It oTdidonaluse Psmlt. FboQldn lt odification. Mhor B(terbr Alteration. Major Eded{r Alteration. Ib/€hprnentPEl. ftnerdms to a Oev*prnont Pkn. Zoning Code AnsxlrEnt. VaabrEe. SgnvdlalcE
?l
evrt4.
tb€g
Application for Revlew bY the
Planning and Environmental Commission
Depenment of Corrnunity Der/eloFrEnt
75 South FurtagB Rmd, Vdl, Odorao 81657
td: 970.479.21 3S laxj. 970.479262
ncb: www.d.vall,co.t-s
General Iniormation:
Al proi:cts recf*ing Phnnhg and Bndronrental Oomnbion rBvi€rv mtrt recrirre apponal prkr to sutrnitting a
bdldhg p€rfift applcation. Fl€€ r*r to tho sutmittal rcqulrsnents for the partidbr appoval t|at is requ€sted.
nn appfcamn for Han.ing srd Bwircnrgrtal Comnkion revbw smot be @ted untl aI requited Informatiott
b receh,rgd by the Oofimunity De\,elopm€nt Departnilt. The Foilct may abo n€€d to b revieu,Bd by the Towtt
OouEil ild/or the Dedgn Re\rigw Bdrd.
Type ofAppllcation and Fae:
$650
$400
$650
$800
$r500
$250
$13m
$500
$200
Deccription^of the
Location of the : Lot: _ Block:Subdivbion:
ddrecc:
(Gontac{ Eagle Co. Asscsor at 970-9&88f0 for parcel no.)
Name(e) of Owner(sf :
Mailing Address:na
Owner(e) Slgnature(s
llame of Appllcant:
llaillng Addrocc:
&oE-mall Addrrcc:|a+t.ce;
For0fllce llre Only:
FeF{d: - Cbdtl,lo.:
Page I of 44711U02
ro
TOI{N()TI/AIT'
Planning and Environmental Commission
ACTION FORM
Departnent of Cornmunfty Deirelopment
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, C-olorado 81657
rcli 9m,479.2L39 faxt 97 0.479.2452
web: www.ci.vail.@.us
Project Name: REZONING REPUTING AND COND PEC Number; PEC030036
Prcject llescription:
MINOR SIJBDIVISION OF LOT 1, KATSOS RANCH MINOR SUBDMSION
Padidpants:
OWNER TOWN OF VAIL 0712912003 Phonez
c/O RNANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
vArLco 81657
License:
APPLICANT TOWN OFVAIL 07129t2N3 Plro,nez
C/O FINANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
vArLco 81657
Liense:
CONTRACTOR TOWN OF VAIL 012912003 Phone:
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAIL CO
81657
License: 463-8
Project Address:Locatlon:
Legal DescripUon: lot: 1 Blodc Subdlvision: Katsos P€ndt Minor Sub
Parcel llumber: 210103401001
C.ommcnts:
BOARD/STAFF ACTION
llodon By: Doug Cahill Action: APPROVED
Second By: George Lamb
Vote: &0 Dateof Approval: 09/08/2ffi3
C;onditions:
Cond: 8
(PLAN): No dranges to these plans may be made withont the written consent of Tovvn of
Vall staff and/or the appropriate review committee(s).
Planner: Russell Fonest PEC Fee Paid: $1,300.00
rl
TOI4NI()T I/AIL}
Planning and Environmental Commission
ACTION FORM
Departnent of Communlty De\relopmert
75 South Fmntage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
tef : 9ru.479.2139 faxi 90.479.2452
web: www,cl.vall,@,us
Prcject llam€: REZONING REPTATING AND COND PEC llumber: PEC030036
Project Description:
MINOR SUBDMSION OF LOT 1, KATSOS RANCH MINOR SUBDMSION
Pafticipants:
OWNER TOWN OF VAIL 0il2912003 Phone:
C/O RNANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
vArLco 81657
License:
APPUCANT TOWN OF VAIL 0T2912N3 Phone:,
C/O FINANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAILCO 81657
Licnse:
CONTMCTOR TOWN OF VAIL OZ29l2003 Phone:
75 S FROI.ITAGE RD
VAIL, CO
81657
License: 463-8
ProjectMdrcss: Location:
Legal Descrifiion: LoE I Blodc Subdivision: l€tsos Randr Minor Sub
Parcel l{umber: 210103,O1001
Comments:
BOARD/STAFF ACTIOT{
l{odon By: Dorrg Cahill Action: APPROVED
Second By: George Lamb
Vob: S0 DateofApproval: @/08/2003
Conditions:
Cond: 8
(PLAN): No dranges to these plans may be made without the written consent of Toam of
Vail staff and/or the appropriaE rwiew commit@(s).
Planner: Russell Fonest PEC Fee Pald: $1,300.00
PrcJect ]Iam€: REZONING REPLATTING AND COND
Project DescripUon:
Participants:
OWNER TOWN OF VAIL
c/O RNANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
vArLco 81657
License:
APPUCANT TOWN OF VAIL
C/O RNANCE DEPI
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAILCO 815s7
Liense:
CONTMCTOR TOWN OF VAIL
75 S FRONIAGE RD
VAIL, CO
81657
Ucense:463-8
Project Address:
tegal Descripuon: loe l BIock Subdivision:
Parcel l{umber: 210103401001
Comments:
022912003 Phone:
0712912003 Phonel
0712912003 Phonet
Location:
Katsos Randr Minor Sub
Planning and Environmental Commission
ACTION FORM
DeparEnent of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
teE 970.479.2L39 taxi 970,479,2452
web: www,ci.vail.co. us
PEG llumber: PEC030036
MINOR SUBDMSION OF LOT 1, KATSOS RANCH MINOR SUBDMSION
BOARD/STAFFACrIOil
Modon By:
Second By:
Vob:
Condldons:
Doug Cahill
George Lamb
&0
Action: APPROVED
Date of Approval: 09/08/2003
Cond: 8
(PLAN): No dranges to these plans may be made without the written consent of Torrrn of
Vail staff and/or the appropriate rwiew committee(s),
Planner! Russell Fonest PEC Fee Paid: $1,300.00
Design Review Board
ACTION FORM
Deparunent of Communlty Development
75 Sorlth FrontagE Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
telt 970.479.2139 fayc 970,479.2452
web: www.ci.vail.co. us
Project l{ame: MEMORIAL PARK DRB Number: DR8030302
ProJect D€scription:
approval of the design of the proposed Vail Memorial Park
Pafticipants:
OWNER TOWN OF VAIL Oil2912003 Phone:
c/O RNANCE DEFT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAILCO 81657
License:
APPUCANT TOWN OF VAIL 0il2912003 Phone:
gO FINANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAILCO 81657
License:
CONTMCTORTOWNOFVAIL 0il29/2003 Phone:
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAII-, CO
81657
License: 463-B
Project Addrcss: Location:
Legal Descripuon: tot: 1 Block: Subdayislon: K.aLsos Ranch Minor Sub
Parcel ]lumber: 210103401001
Comments:
BOARD/STAFF ACTION
ilotion By: Woldrich Action: APPROVED
Second By: Viele
Vote: 3-0 DateofApprcval: 08/20/2003
Conditions:
Cond: I
(PLAN): No dranges to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of
Vail staff and/or the appropriate raniew committee(s).
Cond: 0
(PIAN): DRB approval does not constitute a permit for building, Please consuft with
Town of Vail Building personnel prior to construdion acfrviues.
Cond: CON0006138
Apprwed for Phase 1 only
Planner: nussett forrest O DR8 Fee Paid:
o
$0.o0
!l
Prcject Name: MEMORIAL PARK
Project DescripUon:
approval of the design of the proposed Vail Memorial Park
Paftlcipants!
OWNER TOWN OFVAIL 0il2912ffi3 Phone:
c/O FINANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAILCO 81657
License:
APPUCANT TOWNOFVAIL 012912003 Phone:
c/O RNANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
vArlco 81657
License:
CONTRACTORTOWNOFVAIL 07/2912003 Phone:
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAIL, CO
81657
License: 463-8
ProjectAddrcss: Locataon:
Legal tt€scripuon: lot: 1 Bloc*: Subdivision: lGtsos Randr Minor Sub
Parcel l{umber: 210103,{01001
C-mments:
Design Review Board
ACTION FORM
Department of Community De\relopment
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
tel: 970.479,2139 Jaxi 970,479,2452
web: wwwci.vail.@.us
DRB Number: DR8030302
BOARD/STAFF ACnOil
llotion By: Woldridr Action: APPROVED
Se@nd By: Viele
VoE: 3{ DateofApprcYal: 08/20/2003
CondiUons:
Cond: I
(PLAN): No dranges to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of
Vail staff and/or the appropriate review committee(s).
Cond: 0
(P|-AN): DRB approval does not constihrte a permit for building. Please consult with
Town of Vail Building personnel prior to @nstruction activities.
Cond: CON0006138
Approt ed for Phase 1 only
Planning and Environmental Commission
ACTION FORM
Departnent of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road, Vall, Colorado 81657
EE 9m,479,2L39 f axi 97 0.479.2452
web: www.ci,vail,co. us
Project Name: REZONING REPLAffiNG AND COND PEC Number: PEC030037
Project Description:
REZONING FROM NATUMLAREA PRESERVATION TO OUT DOOR RECREAT]ON OF LOT 1,
KATSOS RANCH MINOR SUBDMSION ON 11.13 ACRE PORTION OF THE KATSOS RANCH OPEN
SPACE
Participants:
OWNER TOWN OF VAIL O7l29l2OO3 Phone:
gO RNANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAILCO 81657
License:
APPUCANT TOWNOFVAIL 0712912003 Phone:
C/O RNANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAILCO 81657
License:
CONTMCTORTOWNOFVAIL Ol29l2OO3 Phonel
75 S FRONTAGE RD
vAIl. co
81657
License:463-8
ProjectAddre*s: Location:
Legal Descriptlon: LoU 1 Blodc Subdlvlsion: Katsos Randt Minor Sub
ParcelNumber: 210103,101001
Comments:
BOARD/STAFF ACTION
Motion By: ROLUE KIESEO Actlon: APPROVED
Second By: GEOGE I-AMB
Vote: 6-0 DateofApproval: 09/08/2003
Conditions:
Cond: 8
(P|-AN): No dranges to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of
Vail staff and/or the appropriate rwiew committee(s).
Planner: Russell Fonest PEC Fee Pald: $0.00
rt Planning and Environmental Commission
ACTION FORM
Deparbnent of Communlty Do/elopment
75 South ftontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
te|]. 97 0.479.2L39 f a* 97 0,479.2452
web: wwwcl.vail.co.us
Project l{ame: REZONING REPI-ATING AND COND PEC Number: PEC030036
Proj€ct Descrifiion:
REZONING REPLAMNG AND CONDMONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE PORPOSED VAIL MEMORIAL
PARK ON AN 11.13 ACRE PORTION OF THE KATSOS RANCH OPEN SPACE
Participants:
OWNER TOWN OF VAIL 0712912003 Phone:
c/O RNANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
vArLco 81657
Li@nse:
APPLICANT TOWN OF VAIL 07/2912003 Phone:
c/O FINANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAILCO 81657
License:
CONTRACTORTOWNOFVAIL 0712912003 Phonei
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAIL, CO
81657
Ucense: 463-8
ProjectAddress: Locatlon:
tegal Descriptlon: lot: l Blodc Subdivision: Katsos Randr Minor Sub
Parcel ilumber: 210103.1t)1001
Comments:
EOARD/STAFF ACTIOil
Mouon By: Doug Cahill Actlon: APPROVED
Seond By: George Lamb
Vote: ffi DateofApprcval: 09/08/2003
C,ondations:
Cond: 8
(PIAN): No dranges to these plans may be made without the written consent of Torrrn of
Vail staff and/or the appropriate review committee(s).
Planner: Russell Fonest PEC F€€ Paid: $1,300.00
r;
Planning and Environmental Commission
ACTION FORM
Deparunent of C.ommunity De\relopmert
75 South Frcntage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
te* 970.479.2L39 taxi 97 0.47 9.2452
web: www,ci,vail.co.us
Project ilame: REZONING REPLAffiNG AND COND PEC llumber: PEC030037
Project Descrlptlon:
REZONING FROM NATUMLAREA PRESERVATION TO OUT DOOR RECREATION OF LOT 1,
KATSOS RANCH MINOR SUBDMSION ON 11,13 ACRE PORTION OFTHE KATSOS RANCH OPEN
SPACE
Partacipants:
OWNER TOWN OF VAIL OT2912003 Ptpne:
C/O FINANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAILCO 81657
Ucense:
APPUCANTTOWNOFVAIL 0il2912(fr3 Phone:
c/O FINANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAILCO 81657
License:
C0I'ITRACTOR TOWN OF VAIL 0U2912003 Phonei
75 S FRONTAGE RD
vAIl- co
81657
License: 463-B
ProjectAddress: LocaUon:
Legal Description: loft 1 Block: Subdivision: Kabos P€ndt Minor Sub
Parcel umber: 210103,101@1
Comments:
BOARD/STAFF ACTION
Motion By: ROLUE KIESBO Action: APPROVED
Second By: GEOGE I-AMB
Vote: G0 Dateof ApprcYal: 09/08/2003
Conditions:
Cond: 8
(P|-AN): No changes to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of
Vail staff and/or the appmpriate roriew committee(s).
Planner: Russell Fonest PEC Fee Paid: $0.00
ro Planning and Environmental Commission
ACTION FORM
Departsnent of Communlty Der/elopment
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
tel: 970.479.21T Jaxt 97 0.47 9.2452
web: www.cl.vail.co. us
Project tame: REZONING REPLATnNG AND COND PEC llumber: PEC030036
Project Descrlption:
REZONING REPLAMNG AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE PORPOSED VAIL MEMORIAL
PARK ON AN 11.13 ACRE PORTION OF THE KATSOS RANCH OPEN SPACE
Pailidpants:
OWNER TOWN OF VAIL 0il2912003 Phone:
c/O RNANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAILCO 81657
License:
APPUCANT TOWNOFVAIL 0il29120f3 Phone:
C/O RNANCE DEff
75 S FRONTAGE RD
vArlco 81657
License:
@NTMCTORTOWN OF VAIL 0712912003 Phone:
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAIL, CO
81657
License: 453-8
Project Address:Location:
Legal DescripUon: lot I Blod<: Snbdivision: lGtsos Randr Minor Sub
Parcell{umber: 210103401001
Comments:
BOARD/STAFF ACTIOI{
ltlotion By: Doug Cahill Action: APPROVED
Seond By: George Lamb
Vote: 6-0 DateofApprcval: 09/08/2003
Conditions:
Cond: 8
(P|AN): No dnnges to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of
Vail staff and/or the appropriate rwiew committee(s).
Planner: Russell Fonest PEC Fee Paid: 91,300,00
ro Planning and Environmental Commission
ACTION FORM
Departsnent of Community Development
75 South Fronbge Road, Vail, Colondo 81557
tel | 970,479.2139 f a* 97 0.479.2452
web: www.cl.vail.co. us
Prciect llame: REZONING REPLATnNG AND COND PEC l{umber: PEC030036
Project DescripUon:
REZONING REPLATNNG AND CONDMONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE PORPOSED VAIL MEMORIAL
PARK ON AN 11.13 ACRE PORTION OF THE KATSOS RANCH OPEN 5PACE
Paillcipants:
OWNER TOWN OF VAIL 0il2912003 Phone:
c/o FINANCE DErr
75 S FRONTAGE RD
vArLco 81657
Liense:
APPUCANT TOWN OFVAIL 022912003 Phone:
c/O RNANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAILCO 816s7
License:
CONTMCIORTOWNOFVAIL 07129120O3 Phone:
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAIL, CO
81657
License:463-8
ProjectAddr€ss: Location:
fegal Descripuon: lot: 1 Block: Subdivision: Katsos Fandr Minor Sub
Parcel Number: 210103401001
Comments:
BOARD/sTAFF ACTIOI{
Motion By: Doug Cahill Action: APPROVED
Second By: George Lamb
Vote: G0 DateofApproval: 09/08/2003
Conditions:
Cond: 8
(PIAN): No changes to these plans may be made without the written consent of To^/n of
Vail staff and/or the appropriate rwiew commifree(s).
Planner: Russell Fonest PEC Fee Paid: 91,300.00
Planner: Russett fonest O
DRB Fee Paid:
o
$0.0o
.-
Project ilame:
Project Description:
Participants:
Project Addrcss:
Legal Descrlpdon:
Parcel ]{umber:
Comments:
OWNER TOWN OF VAIL
c/O RNANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAILCO 81657
License:
APPUCANT TOWN OF VAIL
c/o RNANCE DErr
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAILCO 81657
License:
CONTRACTOR TOWN OF VAIL
Planning and Environmental Commission
ACTION FORM
Deparunent of Ommunity Dweloprnert
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
tel': 970.479.2L39 fayJ. 97 0,479.2452
web: www.cl.vall.co.us
MEMORIAL PARK PEC Number: PEC030038
CONDMONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE PORPOSED VAIL MEMORIAL PARK ON AN 11.13 ACRE
PORTION OF THE KATSOS MNCH OPEN SPACE
022912003 Phone:
0il29120/J,3 Phone:
0712912003 Phone:
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAIL, CO
81657
License: 463-8
Location:
lot: 1 Blodr: Subdivision: Katsos Randr Minor Sub
210103401001
SEE CONDInONS
BOARD/STAFF ACTIOI{
ilotlon By:
Seond By:
Vote:
Conditlons:
DOUG CAHILL
GEORGE LAMB
6-0
Action: APPROVED
Date of Apprcval: 09/08/2003
Cond: 8
(P|-AN): No dranges to these plans may be made without the written consent of Tourn of
Vail sbff and/or the appropriate rwiew committee(s).
Cond: CON0006139
1. All ftrture phases (2-4) oftheVail Memorial Park must be reviewed bythe US Army
Corps of Engineers prior to consFuction as appropriate.
Cond: CON0006140
2. The Eagle Rivei Water and Sanitation District has taken responsibility for the
review of a raised boardwalk to span the 20-25 foot wide s1 /ale into phase 1. The
proposed raised boardwalk will require review by the Army Corps of Engineers and the
Town of Vail Design review Board. A Design Review application shall be submitted by
Eagle River and Water and Sanitation District Vail Memorial Park Foundation for
review and approval of the De$gn Review Board prior to construction,
Cond: CON0006141
3, The applicant shall submit a Design Review application for review and approval by
the Design Review Board for all site disturbance and any future phases (phases 2-4)
prior to the construction of any future phases,
Cond: CON0006142
4. The applicant shall require all groups over 25 people to use a shutfle system to
the site. The applicant shall obtain the owners approval for the use of any remote
parking used for inurnment services.
Cond: CON0006143
5. The applicant shall provide signage appro/ed by Town staff during memorial events
to clearly indicate that a memorial service is in progress and that cydists should
use G|ution. These signs should be located at the east trail head to Katsos Ranch
and 50 feet to the west of the Vail Memorial Park entrance on the l€Eos Ranch
recreationa I trail.
Cond: CON00061,14
6. The applicant shall pay for additional no pa*ing signs along the Frontage Road
at the Katsos Randt Trailhead at specific locations approved by the Public Works
Department.
Crnd: CON0006145
7. The applicant shall receive approval for a staging plan from the Town of Vail
prior to aonstruction being initiated on the Vail Memorial Park.
C,ond: CON0005146
8. The applicant shall retum to the Planning and Environmental Commission in one
years time from the date of approval so that the Condiuonal Use Permit can be
reviewed to evaluate the impads on circulation along the Fronbge Road and to the
use of the recreational trail.
Cond: CON0006147
9. The applicant shall submit future phases to the Planning and Environmental
Commission for review by the Commission to ensure that environmental impacts are
adequately addressed in future phases,
Cond: CON0006148
10.There shall be no maintenance, snow plowirp, or inscriptions of memorial signs
in the Vail Memorial Park between December 1st and May lst.
Cond: CON0006149
11.The operation and maintenance of the Vail Memorial Park shall not inhibit the
public use of Lot 1, Katsos Randr Minor Subdivsion for cunently existing passive
recreational uses.
Planner: Russell Fonest PEC Fee Pald: $650.00
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
PUBLIC MEETING
Monday, September 8, 2003
PROJECT ORIENTATION / - Community Development Dept PUBLIC WELCOME
MEMBERS PRESENT
Gary Hartmann
MEMBERS ABSENT
Chas Bernhardt
Doug Cahill
John Schofield
Erickson Shirley
George Lamb
Rollie Kjesbo
Site Visits :
1. Reske Residence 2319 Chamonix Rd
2. Vista Bahn Building 333 Hanson Ranch Road
3. Gerald R. Ford Park 580 South Frontage Road EasilFord Park
4. Gazioglu Residence 3120 Booth Falls CourU
Driver:MaftO KEH
NOTE: lf the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30
Public Hearino - Town Council Chambers 2:00 pm
1. A request for a variance from Section 12-6D-10, Landscaping and Site Development,
Vail Town Code, to allow for the construclion of a new primary/secondary residence,
located at2319 Chamonix Rd. / Lot 9, Block A, Vail Das Schone Filing 1.
Applicant: Brian ReskePlanner: Allison Ochs
Allison Ochs introduced the variance request per the memorandum.
Brian Reske, the applicant, passed around several pictures demonstrating home
designs with sideloading rear garages, which he intended to emulate on his own
property. He mentioned that his primary intention was to shield cars from the road and
provide front landscaping.
Gary Hartmann thought that the neighbor's driveway encroaching on this lot is
considered a physical hardship and a unique circumstance.
Doug Cahill agreed with the applicant's desire to keep landscaping close to the road.
Rollie Kjesbo had no additional comments.
l2:00 pm
2.
George Lamb had no additional comments.
Erickson Shirley had no additional comments.
John Schofield summarized the Commission's comments, saying that the neighbor's
driveway did indeed constitute a hardship.
Motion: Gary HartmannSecond: Rollie KjesboVote: 6-{t-0
Approved with conditions:
1. That prior to final Design Review Board approval, the applicant submits a tree
preservation plan, indicating that the existing landscaping along the eastern
property line of Lot 9 shall be maintained through construction. A landscaping
bond shall also be submitted to the Town of Vail prior to the issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy, guaranteeing the suruival or replacement of the trees
for a period of not less than two years.
2. That prior to submittal of a building permit application, the applicant shall
receive final Design Review Board approval of the proposal. This may mean
that slight modifications are required for the driveway which may increase the
amount of landscape area, but in no case shall the modifications decrease the
amount of landscape area.
A request for a variance from Section 12-6D-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, to allow for
the modification and enlargement of existing deck columns, located at 3120 Booth Falls
CourULot 7, Block 2, VailVillage 12th Filing.
Applicant Halide Gazioglu, represented by Sheppard ResourcesPlanner: Matt Gennett
Matt Gennett introduced the variance request per the staff memorandum.
Mr. Koll, from Sheppard Resources and the representative of Ms. Gazioglu, stated that
the owner's primary interest was to improve the appearance of the deck and to provide
better support for the existing deck.
No public input was given.
Rollie Kjesbo asked Mr. Koll if all of the problems were worked out with the neighbors.
Mr. Cole answered in the affirmative.
George Lamb mentioned that he was one of the neighbors and had already written a
letter in support of the variance. He suggested that landscaping needs should
eventually be discussed. He stated that he felt comfortable voting on the variance.
Erickson Shirley had no additional comment.
Gary Hartmann had no additional comment.
Doug Cahill suggested that perhaps a condition should be attached to the variance that
would provide landscaping.
George Lamb commented that that condition was instead the responsibility of the
Design Review Board.
Matt Gennett verified George Lamb's comment.
John Schofield mentioned that the hardship was pre-existing, and therefore justified the
variance, but asked if the ILC was necessary.
Matt Gennett answered that is standard procedure.
Motion: Rollie KjesboSecond: Doug GahillVote: 5-O-1 (Lamb abstained)
Approved with the condition as provided in the staff memorandum,
3. A request for review of a minor subdivision, re-subdividing a part of Lots L and K, Block
5E, Vail Village First Filing, to create Lots 1 and 2, Block 5E, Vail Village First Filing, 20
Vail Road. 62 East Meadow Drive. and 82 East Meadow Drive.
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, represented by Braun Associates lnc.Planner: Warren Campbell
Wanen Campbell introduced the project per the memorandum-
John Schofield asked Warren Campbell to address the issue of the new plat creating
non-conforming lots as the Swiss Chalet and Sonnenalp would be on separate lots.
Wanen Campbell stated that the lots were linked together for zoning purposes by a note
on the plat. Remaining development potential would apply to both as a whole project
regardless of the lot line.
Dominic Mauriello, the applicant's representative, stated that the primary purpose in re-
platting was to "clean up the lots'. Originally, there was an error in the Vail Village 1s'
Filing plat. lt is that error which resulted in portions of the Sonnenalp Hotel being
located on Town owned Tract l. He stated that it was neither a non-conforming nor
unusual situation as the surveying was incorrect.
Russell Forrest mentioned that the project was similar to Vail Village Inn in regards to
development potential for multiple buildings being shared on different lots.
John Schofield asked if it could be assumed that the declarations for the association on
the east lot would require sign off on improvements to the Sonnenalp and vise versa.
Dominic Mauriello answered that as long as the plans conform to zoning, a fee-simple
ownership applied to Lot 1. He mentioned that it was not analogous to a duplex
situation in that two owners was not the same as one hundred forty owners on one side
to one owner on the other side.
Doug Cahill wanted to verify that there was a note linking development rights.
Russell Forrest said that the plat note would link the lots together as a whole.
Gary Hartmann asked if joint applications would be required in the future then.
Dominic Mauriello asked if that applied across the street as well.
Russell Forrest stated that was the case with the Vail Village Inn.
Larry Eskwith, legal counsel for the Talisman Condominiums, mentioned that he would
be entering into a permanent easement with the Sonnenalp and wanted to make sure
that his development rights were going to be maintained.
Warren Campbell stated that no property lines were moving and that the Talsiman's
non-conforming status would remain in place.
Gary Hartmann was glad to see that the sight was being 'cleaned up'.
Doug Cahill had no further comment.
Rollie Kjesbo stated that it seemed that both lot owners should agree if development
was going to occur.
Russell Forrest answered that if redevelopment occurred, consent would be needed in
situations with possible conflict may arise such as changes in use or square footage
increases.
George Lamb was "comfortable" with the plat note and stated that to have all owners
sign off in a time-share situation would be tricky.
Erickson Shirley had no comments at that time.
John Schofield agreed with the need to re-plat. He asked if it would not be wise to
address the potential conflicts that might arise.
Dominic Mauriello said that a private document verifying consent and protection of and
for the owners would be drafted. He thought the note was adequate as it was currently
drafted.
Doug Cahill said that the Planning and Environmental Commission would not want to
hear about conflicts that arose. Any application for a change should be worked out by
the Swiss Chalet condominium association and the owner the of the Sonnenalp Hotel.
Erickson Shirley asked if anyone's rights were changing.
Russell Forrest said that if conflict between property owners arose, it would only be on
the premise of redevelopment. He said that the Town was reviewing the project as a
single site with the recent proposal for the Sonnenalp Hotel expansion and Swiss Chalet
redevelopment.
John Schofield asked if the Town attorney had reviewed the plat.
Wanen Campbell mentioned that the attorney had not reviewed the proposal.
Erickson Shirley wanted to clarify that no person's rights were being changed.
Wanen Campbell stated that all development rights remained in place; however, the
owners of Lots 1 and 2 would need to work out any proposal prior to bringing an
application to the Planning and Environmental Commission or Design Review Board.
o
4.
John Schofield mentioned that he was ready to proceed, provided the Town attorney's
input could be gained.
Motion: Doug CahillSecond: George LambVote: 6-0-0
Approved with the conditions as provided in the staff memorandum with an
additional condition that the Town Attorney approve of plat note number 11, prior
to Town Gouncil approval of the proposed easement agreements
A request for a final review of an exterior alteration or modification, pursuant to Section
12-78-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition to
the Lodge at Vail; a request for a variance from Section 12-21-10, Development
Restricted, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 17, Variances, Zoning Regulations, to
aflow for the construction of multiple-family dwelling units on slopes in excess of 40o/o;
and a request for the establishment of an approved development plan to facilitate the
construction of Vail's Front Door, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (A more
complete metes and bounds legal description is available at the Town of Vail Community
Development Department)
Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Jay Peterson
Planner: George Ruther
Wanen Campbell introduced the project, in George Ruther's absence, according to the
memorandum.
Jay Peterson, from Vail Resorts Development Company, detailed the changes that had
been made since the previous meeting and asked for public input.
John Schofield summarized the issues that were being addressed that day, such as the
40% slope, loading and delivery, etc.
Jim Lamont, Vail Village Homeowner's, mentioned that he had reviewed the list of
Planning and Environmental Commission requests from the last meeting.
John Schofield commented that the loading and delivery and similar issues were going
to be under the purview of the Town of Vail, not Vail Resorts, and would be determined
in the upcoming year. He mentioned that a final parking analysis would be forthcoming
and that a traffic analysis from the staff was also expected.
Jim Lamont stated that he was attempting to post the pertinent issues on his website.
Wanen Campbell reminded that Commission of their request to verify what impacts the
new development would have on the Town as a whole.
John Schofield commented that the Commission would like to finalize the plan in two
weeks.
Rollie Kjesbo asked the applicant how the title of the loading and delivery area was
going to work.
Jay Peterson stated that a perpetual easement for public use would be granted with Vail
Resorts retaining ownership. Vail Resorts would pay for lighting and ventilation, but
aspects such as the elevators, facility maintenance, repairs, etc. would be the Town's
responsibility.
Rollie Kjesbo asked if hours of operation would be implemented for aspects of the skier
services building.
Jack Hunn mentioned that certain areas of the building would be open later at night,
such as the skier drop-off area, so that skiers could get their skis back after eating in the
Village. The coffee shop would have hours as well. Window{inting for after-hours light
mitigation would also be an option, he said.
Rollie Kjesbo asked if sound amplification would be an issue.
Erickson Shirley asked how the sound issue would be addressed.
Jim Lamont mentioned that this same issue was currently at stake in regard to the Tap
Room. He wanted to make sure that some degree of a management plan be put in
place.
George Lamb asked about the square footage of the yard, as quoted in Exhibit A.
Tom Braun said that the yard had grown to 60,000 square feet.
George Lamb suggested a management plan for loading and delivery and asked about
trafflc routing. He thought that the Town should suggest to Vail Resorts what needs
should be met.
Jay Peterson mentioned that loading and delivery was only one aspect of the project.
He stated Vail Resorts' desire to work with other loading and delivery projects within the
Town.
George Lamb asked about the lighting in the alley and the police reports that were
requested in conjunction therewith. He stated that a second view corridor should be
adopted between 1 Vail Place and the building to the east.
Warren Campbell referenced the Commission to the attached police report.
Jay Peterson said that the building was, indeed, far back from the adopted view corridor
at the end of Bridge Street.
Erickson Shirley commented that the Wells Team had anived and asked when their
input would be heard. He asked Greg Hall how the Town was going to enforce aspects
of the project, especially regarding noise and loading/delivery.
Greg Hall stated that one of the topics focused on and presented to the Town Council
would focus on the improvements being made to the Village streets and the benefits of
the loading and delivery that contribute. Council would need to direct the police
department to strictly enforce the loading/delivery and noise ordinance.
Erickson Shirley asked about the traffic study.
Tom Braun answered that the traffic numbers reflected the 'peak of the peak' seasonal
counts.
Erickson Shirley asked how the clock tower was going to affect views of Pepi's face.
Jay Peterson replied that from the plaza, the line of sight was relatively unobstructed,
and that coming south on Bridge Street, there was no obstruction.
Erickson Shirley hoped that the Commission was not over-zealous in thinking that the
neighbors were going to be against any sort of drinking establishment whatsoever. He
continued that what the Town needs is a lively base such as other resorts had.
Gary Hartmann commended Vail Resorts on the progress of the project. From the
Town's perspective, what would the hours of operation of the loading/delivery facility be?
Jay Peterson mentioned that that information would be in the developer agreement
presented to the Town Council. The hours would need to be tweaked as problems or
better ideas arose in the operation of the loading and delivery structure.
Doug Cahill appreciated the diagrams of the view analysis. He agreed with the
implementation of a second view corridor and was glad to see the size of the ski yard
was going to be increased. Loading and delivery would require early morning and
evening lighting in the hallway between 1 Vail Road and the Lodge. He asked about the
traffic counts on Vail Valley Drive.
Curtis Rowe, the applicant's traffic consultant, verified that the traffic counts were based
on daily, not hourly volumes.
Doug Cahill asked about the enlargement of the restrooms. Where was that extra space
coming from?
Jay Peterson mentioned that the size of the restrooms had been doubled. The vestibule
entering the restroom was reduced to give the bathrooms more space.
Doug Cahill mentioned that the Lionshead redevelopment would push a lot of business
to the Front Door site and those impacts should be anticipated. As for the traffic
diagram, the red line on the diagram down Gore Creek Drive should be removed to
clarify that increased traffic in the Village would not result with the loading and delivery
facility.
Andy Littman, a representative of the Wells Team, gave a presentation addressing
several questions and issues that still remained surrounding the project. Should the
Town's main delivery center be at the activity center of the Town? Will the centralized
loading/delivery be a problem for the merchants and/or enforcement? He stated that a
very strong management plan, and perhaps restrictions, would be needed. Obvious
congestion and traffic issues should not be ignored, he said. He stressed the
importance of "doing things right" the first time and questioned the placement of the skier
services building. Why not put the building closer to Bridge Street? Many issues would
need to be clarified with the Town and as many groups as possible should agree to the
plan. He strongly felt the project should be critiqued by a qualified outside consultant.
Would funding be set aside for artwork or "signature improvements"? Pedestrian access
from the east and west should be obvious and visually appealing. The project should be
lasting and enduring.
Tom Boni, Knight Planning Services, apologized for his lateness and handed out a
memo summarizing the comments of other members of the Wells Team. He mentioned
that truck movements which encroached into oncoming traffic needed to be addressed,
as did pedestrian movement and snow storage, as it related to maneuverability. How
much cargo could be transported by each hand truck and how many hand trucks would
be needed for each delivery? More input from delivery companies and the businesses
receiving the delivery was desired, he said. Was the traffic count for Vail Road derived
from highway statistics or the situation of Vail Road as it currently existed?
Gwen Scapello asked about the data for Hanson Ranch Road. She mentioned that the
data seemed to have been based on the traffic of a four way highway.
Ron Byrne apologized for his lateness and expressed the importance of taking time to
critique the project thoroughly. He stated that the buibing seemed to be undersized lor
its function as a skier services building. He wanted the ski yard to expand. The new
building was a greatly improved solution, but the functionality of this piece of property
should be addressed. The tourist should be drawn to the property, regardless of the
season. He thought that ingress and egress for One Vail Road could occur above
ground, though the Lodge at Vail property; however, the Lodge would not want its
guests to cross over a path in order to go to the pool. Another issue would be fire
access. lf those two elements were resolved, the skier services building could move
significantly to the east without affecting One Vail Place and could probably increase in
size as well. He mentioned that other projects within the Town which would be
implemented soon should take some responsibility for some of the loading/delivery
issues in the future.
John Schofield announced that the Commission would take a ten minute break.
John Schofield suggested to Andy Liftman and Tom Boni that they re-read previous
reports, which would likely answer many/most of their questions regarding traffic
circulation and numbers.
Russell Forrest addressed loading and delivery by saying that the Town had already
improved the Sonnenalp/Swiss Chalet, Vail Village Inn, the Chateau, and perhaps
Crossroads' facilities.
Greg Hall further commented that not every development site is available for loading and
delivery. The sites that have been large enough, the Town has taken advantage of
already.
Russell Forrest reminded the Commission of their trip to Beaver Creek's successful
facility, comparing the impacts of the two projects. The Front Door project would not be
the only opportunity for loading and delivery facilities.
Doug Cahill requested that delivery persons be notified of the distance that the hand
carts would need to travel.
Erickson Shirley asked if the merchants had been notified of the distances and the
loading/delivery location and if any negative feedback had been obtained from that
meeting.
Russell Forrest stated that the merchants felt overall that the facility was positive
addition.
John Schofield asked that the turning movements anticipated by the trucks be
addressed.
Greg Hall stated that heavier trucks would be brought in on collector roadways. Three
types of turning movements were analyzed, he said. Less than two percent of the
vehicles coming into the facility would be oversized and subject to a special delivery
permit from the police department. Greg Hall re-stated that the cunent design would
adequately handle the loading and delivery traffic.
Russell Forrest mentioned that a transition in the loading and delivery process was
expected and the operation of the facility would be tweaked in order to function most
efficiently.
Erickson Shirley added that the hand truck traffic in Beaver Creek ended up working
better for the truck drivers.
Jay Peterson summed up the public comment by stating that delay was always
preferred, in the public's mind. He felt it was time to move on and stated that all the
questions had been answered. The skier services building has shrunk in size, a
consultant had already given input, and an outside design consultant was not needed
due to the qualified members of staff, Council, Commission, and Design Review Board
etc. The pedestrian and bike paths had already been detailed in the report. One million
dollars had been committed by Vail Resorts for artwork, more than any other project. He
agreed that the skier services building could be larger, but, due to public input (of the
entire neighborhood), the currently proposed size was the result. The building had
already been critiqued by the Design Review Board, who liked the building, aside from
several technical, design aspects.
Curtis Rowe, the traffic analyst, clarified that the capacity of a roadway was based on
headway behind vehicles. The capacity of a two land roadway, therefore, would be
38,000. A two land roadway in a town setting could be 20,000 vehicles. That was
reduced for winter conditions to 15,000. The V to C ratio was 670lo.
Rollie Kjesbo had no further comment.
George Lamb wished to reiterate that the hand truck traffic to the businesses farther
from the loading facility could be an issue.
Erickson Shirley asked about the number of bays needed for the Town and what the
Wells Team had an issue with.
Andy Littman suggested that the bays be built in a more logical place that does not
create congestions and "unsightliness'. His contention was not with the number of bays.
Erickson Shirley stated that the applicant had already offered the Town a tremendous
amount. To try to extract more from the applicant would be unreasonable. The Town
was getting a great deal of benefit from the applicant. The Town would manage the
loading and delivery and would adjust the plan according to the merchants' needs, etc.,
once the plan was in place.
Gary Hartmann had no additional comments.
5.
Doug Cahill liked the re-design of the skier services building. He continued to think that
the bike path should be moved off of the hard-scape patio in front of the building.
Delivery persons should be informed of the distance they will need to travel with their
handcarts.
Jim Lamont wanted to remind the group that this loading and delivery facility was
originally proposed in a 1992 trafflc plan. The site had been studied extensively for its
practicality and effectiveness. lt was the best site of seven others that were studied for
the same uses.
John Schofield summed up by encouraging the Wells Team to read all the information
that the Commission had read over the past nine months. He said that Jeff Winston's
input, a design professional, was included in that information. Regarding getting to a
final vote, the staff would need to provide resolution of the loading and delivery
operation, since Vail Resorts would not be operating that facility. Some type of licensing
agreement would need to be concluded specifying operation of the facility. A lighting
plan for the alley near One Vail Place would be subject to Design Review Board review.
ln that review, the Design Review Board should take into account the police report
submitted to the Commission. He thought that an additional view corridor, though good,
was not necessarily a proposal that should be submitted through this project; it could be
added later. Prior to a final vote, all studies and input should be available for the
Commission and public.
Jay Peterson stated that the radius for the loading and delivery in Beaver Creek was
1000 ft., which was the same as the area proposed for this facility. He commented that
Vail Resorts would be ready for a vote from the Commission on September 22.
John Schofield responded that the submittal of an operational management plan would
be a condition of approval.
Motion: Rollie KiesboSecond: George LambVote: 5-0-0
Tabfed untif September 22,2003
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a proposed amendment to
the FORD PARK MANAGEMENT PLAN - An Amendment to the Gerald R.
Ford/Donovan Park Master Plan, to allow for the construction of a public parking facility
and structure, a request for a variance from Title 14, Chapter 5, Parking Lot and Parking
Structure Design Standards for All Uses, to allow for a deviation from the minimum
landscape area requirement and to construct an unpaved, gravel parking surface, and a
request for a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a public parking facility
and structure atop the athletic fields at the Gerald R. Ford Park, located at 580 South
Frontage Road EasUFord Park
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Greg HallPlanner: Wanen Campbell
Warren Campbell gave a presentation per the memorandum.
Greg Hall elaborated in greater details on the operation of the parking facility.
Jonathan Stauffer mentioned that the length of time for which the "temporary solution'
would be laid out had never been mentioned. He stated that the parking task force had
only looked at parking, nothing else. Due to the bus system in Vail, the need for more
parking should be reduced. He suggested solutions from as far as Boulder to help
lessen our need for parking. The costs associated with this parking solution were
prohibitive as well, he commented. The money being spent on this proposal would be
far better off utilized to establish a permanent solution.
Helen Fritch, from Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, wanted to make sure that the gardens
would be protected and commented that people liked to take shortcuts. She suggestedthat some sort of fencing be put up to protect the gardens.
Joe Stauffer said that due to his and John Donovan's input, Ford Park was currently a
park, and not 1800 condominiums. He asked the Commission to think of the massive
number of development proposals that were presented to New York City in relation to
the Central Park site. He was upset that Vail Resorts wanted to use Town Of Vail open
space for their own profit through parking. He thought that the parking problem was the
responsibility of Vail Resorts and any solution should be constructed and paid for by Vail
Resorts.
Jim Lamont, Vail Village Homeowner's, mentioned that he was on the task force for the
Ford Park master plan. He was confused about the staffs interpretation of the goals.
John Schofield clarified that in 1997. the Town recommended to the Council that
structured parking be an allowed use. Eventually, that recommendation was removed
from the plan at its final adoption by Council.
Russell Forrest clarified that under the General Use district, 'public parking facilities and
structures" are a conditional use. Keeping the same wording is important, he said. lf the
proposed development plan were approved, that blueprint would be allowed, nothing
else.
Gwen Scapello was concerned about the proposal due to the number of tourist visits
that are generated during the summer for large sports events, which may be lessened
due to the restoration of the field from the winter parking needs.
Greg Hall commented that the Town had met with turf specialists to determine the best
way of re-sodding, etc. The Vail Recreation District had been consulted as well. A
meeting was going to be convened the following day to further discuss these issues.
Rollie Kjesbo mentioned that his comments were related to financial aspects of the plan.
The money gained from charging for parking was nowhere near the amount of money
that the Town was going to put out to implement the plan. He would not mind the plan
for one year, however.
George Lamb suggested that the parking lot be open seven days a week. Cars should
be kept off of the Frontage Road at all costs, he said, and mentioned that parking was a
Town issue as well, not just Vail Resorts.
Erickson Shirley mentioned that this was not a "world class solution" to the parking
problem. He knew that the task force had tried to solve the problem, and could not
understand why the Council had not been able to secure funding from Vail Resorts. He,
too, could agree with the plan for one year, but no more. He thought that Town property
should not be used to solve a non-Town problem.
Gary Hartmann mentioned that he hated to see Ford Park used as something that it was
never intended to be. As a temporary solution, it should be in place only one year, with
a long-term solution directly following-
Doug Cahill felt that the parking problem on the streets was a serious safety problem.
He was interested in seeing how the proposal would work for one year only. He thought
that Vail Resorts should pay for the cosUrestoration of the proposal.
Greg Hall said that on June 7, softball season starts and the field would need to be
playable on that date.
Doug Cahill wanted to make sure that the surface was safe, regardless.
John Schofield mentioned that if a private developer were applying for the same
proposal, he would unequivocally be denied. The hazard of delays on South Frontage
road due to a pay lot was also a safety issue, he said. He asked what thought had been
given to increased bus service in the morning and afternoon hours.
Greg Hall responded that the frequency of bus pick-ups has increased during those
hours in the past.
Rollie Kjesbo mentioned that the East Vail bus was usually full well before reaching the
mountain.
John Schofield reiterated that this proposal was a 'band-aid'. What planning had been
given to holiday operation?
Greg Hall responded that the West Day lot was going to be a public lot this year, open
seven days a week.
John Schofield commented that a variance was only awarded to exceptional conditions
that were applicable to the site. Regarding a conditional use permit, that would not help
in finding a permanent solution. The parking lot should be available any time the parking
structures became full.
Greg Hall said that the west day lot held 200 spaces. The intent would be for this lot to
be open during the week. The valet parking would be eliminated (-25 spaces).
Doug Cahill asked what the average number of cars was on the Frontage Road.
Greg Hall said that about 462 cars were parked on the road on 30-45 days a year
(estimations). Currently, between 400 and 500 spaces were calculated to be needed to
relieve that problem.
Russell Forest said that financial issues were being discussed regarding long-term
solutions.
Variance:Motion: Doug CahillSecond: George LambVote: 4-2-0 (Schofield and Shirley opposed)
Variance - Approved with the conditions as provided in the staff memorandum
George Lamb
was apparent
struggled with the timing of the conditional use permit. He
permanent solution in the works that it was likely that the
said that he
that with no
6.
Parking Task Force would request the same proposal next season.
Greg Hall responded that he was partially directed by the Council to get approval on a
year-to-year basis. Also, before investing $12-15 million, the right number of spaces
needed would have to be determined. This proposal gave the Town opportunity to
deliver a long-term solution, he said. lt would take at least two years for a structure to
be completed.
John Schofield asked Rollie Kjesbo to clarify the conditions.
Doug Cahill asked what other options were pursued.
Greg Hall answered that the bus system was critiqued but that the number of cars that
needed spaces was too many to solve any other way.
Erickson Shirley commented that he was surprised that no Commission members were
present on the task force.
John Schofield commented that the field parking should only be in place for one year.
He mentioned concerns over the amount of time that might elapse before a solution is
achieved if one year is allowed. He continued by stating that a conditional use permit to
extend the temporary facility past one year should not come before the Commission if no
action had been taken to develop a permanent solution.
Motion: Rollie KjesboSecond: George LambVote: 5-1-0 (Shirley opposed)
Conditional Use Permit - Approved with the conditions as provided in the staff
memorandum with the additional conditions that the public parking facility be
operated 7 days per week, as needed for overflow, and a minimum of a 10-car
stacking lane for vehicles entering the facility off of the Frontage Road be
provided.
A request for a final review of a subdivision of the Katsos Ranch property (unplafted),
pursuant to Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, Vail Town Code; a conditional use permit,
pursuant to Section 12-88-3: Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow for the
construction of a cemetery; and a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a
proposed rezoning of the property from Natural Area Preservation District to Outdoor
Recreation District, located on an unplatted parcel of land located in the southeast
quarter of Section 2, Township 5 South, Range 80 West of the 6h Principal Meridian,
and setting forth details in regards thereto. (A complete metes and bounds description
is on file at the Community Development Department).
Applicant: Vail Memorial Park, represented by Merv LapinPlanner: Russell Forrest
Russell Forrest introduced the three applications according to the memorandum.
Sherry Dorward, landscape architect, stated that the flood plain would not be affected by
the proposal. Regarding wetland mitigation, no impacts would occur. The
boardwalks/bridges that cross the swale for Phase I would not hold construction
vehicles. However, phases ll and lll would cross the swale via a bridge for construction
and regular use.
O Gary Hartmann asked about the permanence of the proposed signage.
O John Schofield asked if a wetland area currently existed.
Sherry responded that wetlands do no exist currently where the memorial park is
located. However, the Eagle River and Water District do want to create wetlands on the
site. The only conflict is in the swale that would need to be bridged with a boardwalk
into phase 1 of the p@ect. To create wetlands the Dsitrict will need to divert more water
onto the site. The topography would not change much, though the water augmentation
plan might be amended to get more water during the summer.
Doug Cahill asked if a permanent crossing could be established on non-wetlands.
Sherri responded that Corps of Engineers permission would have to be obtained for a
dry crossing. The water district was struggling to get enough wetlands square footage,
she added. She commented that the path would be placed in respect of the wetland
boundaries.
Regarding intensity-of-use, the average number of yearly deaths in the county is -60 or
70, many of whom are not Vail residents. Fewer than half are Vail residents, and fewer
than half of that number would choose to be buried here. She mentioned that, regarding
capacity, many educational materials would be provided to convey the message that the
site was for intimate services only. A paid director would be responsible for such
communication. She realized that safety on the bike path was an issue.
Sherry responded that signage had not been talked about in too much detail. However,
flags/bannerc would be placed at the time of the service for directional help.
Gary Hartmann suggested that all signage be temporary in nature in order to guarantee
the attention of regular cyclists and pedestrians.
Erickson Shirley asked if there was a limit as to the number of people allowed to attend
a service.
Sherry responded that no limit was currently in place since it was impossible to say how
many people might attend a ceremony.
Erickson Shirley said that it was going to be difficult to have large numbers of people on
the path without causing congestion with the bicyclists.
Russell Forrest mentioned that Staff was recommending that ceremonies of over 25
people could warrant a shuttle system in order to help alleviate the parking problem.
Erickson Shirley even suggested that the Town could widen the path to help alleviate
congestion.
Rick Sackbouer from the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District commended Sherri's
work in the field.
Gary Hartmann suggested a condition that allowed only for temporary signage.
I Doug Cahill added that perhaps a permanent structure with hinges could be an option
for signage. He thought that this had the potential to be a popular area. He wanted to
clarify whether or not the urns could be placed outside of the flood plain.
Sherry responded that the urns were biodegradable and that the entire site was in a
flood plain.
Rollie Kjesbo thought it was a great idea and commended the efforts of the applicants.
George Lamb seconded Rollie's comments. He added that some pathway congestion
and signage issues would need to be worked out, however.
Erickson Shirley hoped that a more direct route to the site could be thought out. The
trail system in Town was already lacking, and he hoped this could be an exception to the
rule. Parking issues would also need to be worked out, he said.
John Schofield reiterated general support of the plan, commenting that three different
motions would be needed for approval, however. He suggested approval of Phase I
only. Possible future needs for alternative access would need to be assessed. He
suggested approval of the site after a full season, not a full year.
Erickson asked if the phases were covered in the conditional use section.
Motion: Doug Gahill, to approve subdivisionSecond: George LambVote: 6-0-0
Approval of subdivision
Russell Forrest asked if the applicant for the DRB could be changed to the Vail Memorial
Foundation. He also asked if the condition of staff-approved, temporary signage should
be added, as well. Also, he suggested the PEC clarify which phases were being
approved.
Sherri was worried about approval in sections, as opposed to one Phase at a time.
Diana Donovan agreed, saying that people would not want to be 'buried next to a
duplex", in the event thatfuture phases were not approved.
Russell Forrest suggested that the PEC approve the site for a conditional use permit, but
that each Phase be reviewed for environmental impacts, etc.
Erickson Shirley added that the PEC should have the ability to remedy any problems,
should they arise along the way.
Doug Cahill wanted to clarify that all future developments should be reviewed by the
PEC.
Motion: Doug Cahill, to approve the conditional use permit per the
conditions listed by Russell Forrest
1. All future phases (2-4) of the Vail Memorial Park must be reviewed by the US
Army Corps of Engineers prior to construction as appropriate.
2. The Eagle River Water and Sanitation District has taken responsibility for the
review of a raised boardwalk to span the 20-25 foot wide swale into phase 1.
The proposed raised boardwalk will require review by the Army Corps of
Engineers and the Town of Vail Design review Board. A Design Review
application shall be submifted by Vail Memorial Park Foundation for review and
approval of the Design Review Board prior to construction.
3. The applicant shall submit a Design Review application for review and approval
by the Design Review Board for all site disturbance and any future phases
(phases 24) prior to the construction of any future phases.
4. The applicant shall require all groups over 25 people to use a shuttle system to
the site. The applicant shall obtain the owners approval for the use of any
remote parking used for inurnment services.
5. The applicant shall provide signage approved by Town staff during memorial
events to clearly indicate that a memorial service is in progress and that cyclists
should use caution. These signs should be located at the east trail head to
Katsos Ranch and 50 feet to the west of the Vail Memorial Park entrance on the
Katsos Ranch recreational trail.
6. The applicant shall pay for additional no parking signs along the Frontage Road
at the Katsos Ranch Trailhead at specific locations approved by the Public
Works Department.
7. The applicant shall receive approval for a staging plan from the Town of Vail prior
to construction being initiated on the Vail Memorial Park.
8. The applicant shall retum to the Planning and Environmental Commission in one
years time from the date of approval so that the Conditional Use Permit can be
reviewed to evaluate the impacts on circulation along the Frontage Road and to
the use of the recreational trail.
9. The applicant shall submit future phases to the Planning and Environmental
Commission for review by the Commission to ensure that environmental impacts
are adequately addressed in future phases.
10. There shall be no maintenance, snow plowing, or inscriptions of memorial signs
in the Vail Memorial Park between December 1$ and May 1"t.
11. The operation and maintenance of the Vail Memorial Park shall not inhibit the
public use of Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivsion for cunently existing passive
recreational uses.
Second: George LambVote: 6-0-0
Approval of conditional use
Motion: Rollie Kjesbo, to fonvard a recommendation to the Vail Town
Council to approve of the re-zoning of Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision to
Outdoor Recreation as per the criteria and findings in Section lX of the staff
7.
memorandum.
Second: Gary HartmannVote: 6-0-0
Approval of re-zoning
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of proposed text amendments
to Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to amend the Gross Residential Floor
Area (GRFA) regulations in the Hillside Residential (HR), Single-Family Residential
(SFR), Two-Family Residential (R), Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential (PS),
Residential Cluster (RC), Low Density Multiple-Family (LDMF), Medium Density
Multiple-Family (MDMF), High Density Multiple-Family (HDMF), and Housing (H)
districts, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant Vicki Pearson, et.al.Planner: Bill Gibson
Bill Gibson introduced the proposal per the staff memorandum.
Larry Eskwith described his concerns and his areas of support for the proposed
amendment. He thought that people would still abuse the system. He thought the
proposal would make it a better regulation. Larry liked that we were getting rid of the
arbitrary aspects of the current interior conversion and 250 GRFA policies.
John Schofield stated that the PEC reviewed volumetric controls and found that it could
not be effectively implemented.
Vicky Pearson commented on the proposed policy and said this is a huge step forward.
It still is more complicated that eliminating GRFA. She thought that a volumetric control
would be the best but may not be practical at this time.
There was no other public comment.
John Schofield closed public input and commented on the one year process that has
lead us to this point. He commented that the PEC has taken a considerable amount of
time to understand the implications of this policy. John thanked Bill Gibson for his hard
work.
Gary Hartmann asked Bill to describe the basement methodology.
Bill Gibson described the methodology for excluding basement space. He stated that it
is a similar methodology as used in Aspen.
Gary Hartmann commented on the parking and stated that Rollie had a good suggestion
that a simple standard be created for parking at larger homes. Gary generally liked the
final formulas and charts. and believed that with the work that has occurred on the
charts and data that homes should not get much bigger.
Doug Cahill thanked staff and commented that parking should be increased on larger
homes. He liked basement definition and the graphs that were used and that
demonstrated that home would not get bigger.
Rollie Kjesbo originally believed the Town should eliminate GRFA entirely, but is now
convinced we must keep some for of floor area regulation. He believes the proposed
text is simpler and easier to understand. He felt that home will not be bigger. He felt the
parking requirement should change so that homes over 5,500 square including
basements should be 5 parking spaces.
George Lamb believes we have come along way. He asked about how we would
account for duplexes and basements, and Bill Gibson answered his question.
Erickson Shirley hoped that in the future technology will be available to create a
volumetric control. He commented on the need to bring residents back to Vail. He felt
that not counting basements as GRFA will allow residents to make reasonable
improvements to their homes. He also felt that staff needed to add an amnesty clause.
Bill Gibson reviewed the non-conforming section of the Town Code.
Erickson Shirley asked about how staff can address the need to assure people that
homes will not get bigger.
Bill discussed the assumptions that were made in developing the new formulas.
Erickson Shirley again asked about what we would do in term of creating a
nonconforming clause.
John Schofield stated that we may need an amnesty clause that is clearer.
John Schofield had questions about attachment A concerning EHUs, vaulted spaces,
and basements for houses with steep lots. Bill Gibson clarified the proposed text.
John Schofield also asked additional questions about amnesty and whether the Town
should err on the side of not creating non-conforming structures or increasing the
formulas.
John Schofield thought the Town should not increase bulk and mass, and there should
be a transition by creating GRFA. John liked Rollie Kjesbo's idea on increasing parking
requirements. He also asked to change the vaulted space plate height from 14 feet to
15 feet. John also asked about rounding up the GRFA equations.
Bill Gibson explained the rational in the formulas.
John Schofield indicated that the difference between proposed and the existing have a
1olo difference.
John Schofield passed the chair to Erickson Shirley.
John Schofield recommended that that the PEC recommends approval for amending
GRFA in the zone districts outlined in the staff memo in accordance with the findings in
the staff memo with the specific changes. John asked that staff fax the changes to the
PEC prior to fonlrarding the recommendation to Council.
Motion:
Second:
Vote:
John Schofield
Rollie Kjesbo
6-04
8.
Recommending approval of the request, per the staff memorandum, with the
following modifi cations:
1) Page I of Attachment A should be amended such that the parking
standards are increased to 3.5 spaces for dwelling units with floor area
of over 4,000 and less than 5,500 sq. ft, and to 4.5 spaces for dwelling
units with more than 5,500 sq. ft.
2) Page 6 of Attachment A should be amended such that vaulted areas
with a ceiling plate height greater than 15 ft should counted on multiple
levels.
3) Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) regulations for the residential
zone districts shall be repealed and be replaced with Floor Area Ratio
(FAR) regulations.
4) An amnesty clause should be adopted in conjunction with the adoption
of the Floor Area Ration (FAR) regulations. The amnesty clause should
have no time limit, waive Town of Vail application fees, and prevent the
creation of non-conforming properties in regard to Floor Area Ratio
(FAR).
5) Any loss of development potential currently allowed by the existing
Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) regulations that is caused by the
adoption of the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) regulations shall be considered
justification for a variance from the Floor Area Ration (FAR) regulations.
A request for a variance from Section 12-14-17, Setback from Watercourse, Vail Town
Code. to allow for a residential addition in the Gore Creek setback. located at 4444
Streamside Circle / Lot 11, Bighorn 4th Addition.
Applicant: Thomas O'Dorisio, represented by John Pe*ins.Planner: Allison Ochs
TABLED TO SEPTEMBER 22, 2OO3
A request for a request for a variance from Section 12-78.-15, Site Coverage, Vail Town
Code, to allow for awnings over existing second floor deck, located at the Vista Bahn
Building, 333 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot C, Block 2, VailVillage 1st Filing.
Applicant: Remonov & Company, Inc., represented by Knight Planning ServicesPlanner: Matt Gennett
TABLED TO SEPTEMBER 22,2OO3
A requesi for a conditional use permit, to allow for an outdoor dining deck, in accordance
with Section 12-7B'4B., Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, located at the Vista Bahn
Building, 333 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village 1't Filing.
Applicant: Remonov & Company, Inc., represented by Knight Planning ServicesPlanner: Bill Gibson
WTHDRAWN
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of an amendment to the Town
of Vail Streetscape Master Plan, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
9.
10.
11.
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Greg HallPlanner: Warren Campbell
TABLED TO SEPTEMBER 22, 2OO3
12. Approvalof August 25,2003, meeting minutes
13. Information Update
Sign Code Ordinance
Outdoor Display Text Amendment
Rezoning of Lots 1 & 2, Mill Creek Subdivision and Lots P3 & J, Vail Village First Filing
Results of the Economic lmpact Study on Guest Accommodations
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during
regular offlce hours in the project planne/s office located at the Town of Vail Community
Devefopment Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479-2138 for information.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-
2356, Telephone for the Hearing lmpaired, for information.
Community Development Department
Published September 5, 2003, in the Vail Daily.
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA
Wednesday, August 20, 2003
3:00 P.M.
PUBLIC MEETING
PUBLIC WELCOME
PROJECT ORIENTATION / LUNCH - Community Development Departnent
- Proposed Sign Code Amendment Discussion
MEMBERS PRESENT
David Viele
Hans Woldrich
Bill Pierce
SITE VISITS
MEMBERS ABSENT
Margaret Rogers
12:00 pm
2:00 pm
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
7.
9.
10.
11.
Driver:
La Bottega - 100 E. Meadow Drive
Halaby residence - 252 West Meadow Drive
Paf residence -254Beaver Dam Road
Recreation Path Bridge at Pirate Ship Park - 333 Hanson Ranch Road
Vista Bahn Building - 333 Hanson Ranch Road
Scoft Building - 288 Bridge Street
Village Center - 124 Willow Bridge Road
Michonski residence - 442 South Frontage Road East
Vail Memorial Park - Katsos Ranch Park
Ruth residence - 8008 Potato Patch Drive
Eagle River Water and Sanitation Dishict - 890 S. Frontage Rd
George
PUBLIC HEARING -TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1. Recreation Path Bridge at Pirate Ship Park DRB03-0328
Everstone DRB03-0332
Conceptual review of alternative building material
Final review of proposed new bridge
Adjacent to 333 Hanson Ranch Road/Tract H, Vail Village 5h Filing
Applicant Town of Vail, represented by Gregg Barrie
APPROVED WITH 1 GONDITION:
1) The applicant shall match the stone to be placed on the abutments to the stone
on the Vista Bahn Building, which is believed to be moss rock,
MOTION: Viele SECOND:Woldrich VOTE:3-0
3:00 pm
Warren
2.Warren
Applicant Kate Carey and Steve Sandoval
CONGEPTUAL REVIEW NO VOTE
3. Vista Bahn BuiHing DRB 03-0073 Wanen
Conceptual review of proposed loggia
333 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village 1"'Filing
Applicant: Remonov & Company, Inc., represented by Knight Planning Services
CONCEPTUAL REVIEW NO VOTE
4. Michonski residence DRB03-0183 Bill
Final review of proposed addition
442 South Frontage Road East, Unit 30'1B Apollo ParUTract D, VailVillage 5h Filing
Applicant Dave Michonski, represented by Steven James Riden
CONSENT APPROVED WITH 3 CONDITIONS:
1) The proposal shall comply with all adopted building and fire codes.
2) The applicant shall remove and/or repair the existing trash and storage sheds to
comply with the Town of Vail development standards.
3) The proposal shall be a master plan for future improvements to buildings A and
G of the Apollo Park Condominiums.
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Woldrich VOTE:3-0
5. Halaby residence DRB03-03'|1 Bill
Final review of proposed change to approved landscape plan
252 West Meadow Drive/Lot 8, VailVillage 2no Filing
Applicant: Theodore Halaby, represented by Segerberg, Mayhew and Assoc.
MOTION TO APPROVE WITH GONDITIONS FAILED BY LACK OF MAJORITY THUS
APPLICATION DENIED
MOTION: Woldrich SECOND: Pierce VOTE: 1-1 (Viele recused)
6. Scott Building DRB03-0317 Allison
Conceptual review of a proposed addition
288 Bridge Street / Lots C and D, Block 5A, vail village First Filing
Applicant Otto Stork, represented by Micheal Sanner
CONCEPTUAL - NOVOTE
7. La Bottega DRB03-0310 Allison
Final review of a proposed exterior modification and lighting plan
100 E, Meadow Dr. / Lot M, Block 5D, VailVillage First Filing
Applicant Stephen Virion
O rABLEDT.SE'rEMBER3,2oo3
MOTION: Viele SECOND: Woldrich VOTE:3-0
8. Ruth Residence DRB03-0278 Elisabeth
Final review of landscape/exterior lighting plan
8008 Potato Patch Drive/Lot 7, Block 1, Vail Potato Patch
Applicant: KH Webb Architects
CONSENT APPROVED WITH NO CONDITIONS
MOTION:Viele SECOND: Woldrich VOTE: 3-0
9. Brandt residence DRB03-0343 Wanen
Final review of changes to approved plans
1701 E. Buffehr Creek Road/A part of Tract A, Lions Ridge 2no Filing
Applicant Scott and Claudine Brandt, represented by Cottle Graybeal Yaw
APPROVED WITH NO CONDITIONS
MOTION:Viele SECOND:Woldrich VOTE: 3-0
10. Pal residence DRB03-0098
Final review of proposed new entry
254 Beaver Dam Road lLot23, Block 7, Vail Village 1s'
Applicant Joe Pal, represented by Steven Riden Architect
APPROVED WITH 4 CONDITIONS
1) Thatthe driveway meets all public works requirement;
2) That the proposed parking/turnaround area in front be completely screened by
landscaping;
3) That the existing boiler outside be moved inside the house;
4) That a certified tree expert be consulted on saving the trees around the
proposed new driveway.
MOTION:Woldrich SECOND:Viele VOTE:3-0
11. Village Center DRB03-0323 Matt
Change to approved plans/Landscaping improvements
124 Willow Bridge Road / Lots C&K, 5E, VailVillage Filing 1
Applicant: Village Center Condominium Assoc., represented by KH Webb ArchitectsMOTION: SECOND: VOTE:
TABLED TO SEPTEMBER 3, 2OO3
MOTION:Viele SECOND: Woldrich VOTE:3-012. VailMemorialPark DRB03-0302 Russ
Conceptual review of proposed memorial park and cemetery
Katsos Ranch Park, Unplatted
Applicant Vail Memorial Park Foundation
APPROVED WITH 1 CONDITION
1) That staff approve of the Design Review Board application after all PEG and Town
Council approvals occur for this application.
MOTION:Woldrich SECOND:Viele VOTE:3-0
13. Eagle River Water and Sanitation District (old town shops) DRB03-0309 Matt
Demo of existing building and re-vegetation plan
890 S. Frontage Rd./Tract C, VailVillage Filing 2
Applicant: Ron Siebert, Eagle River Water and Sanitation District
APPROVED wlTH NO CONDITIONS
MOTION:Viele SECOND: Woldrich VOTE:3-0
Staff Aporovals
Spraddle Creek Construction Sign DRB03-0305 Allison
Temporary site development sign
1094 Riva Glen / Lot 4, Spraddle Creek Estates
Applicant: Michael English
Aguirre Residence DRB03-0252 Allison
Dormer and deck addition
600 Vail Valley Drive, Unit A-14 / Northwoods Condominiums
Applicant Segerberg Maayhew and Assoc.
Saphire Restaurant DRB03-0247 Allison
Menu board and business lD sign
223 E. Gore Creek Dr. / Creekside Condo
Applicant JoelFriE
Sunburst Re-roof DRB03-0290 Elisabeth
Same for same cedar shake
1855 SunbursWail Valley 3'd filing, Lot 64 and 68
Applicant Duncan Rowley, Plath Construction
Stephens Park lmprovement Elisabeth
Installation of Frisbee golf basket
2795 S. Frontage Road West
Applicant Eric Bain, Town of Vail Parks
Mason Residence DRB03-0315 Warren
Replace existing wood tie retaining wall with boulder wall
2602 Cortina Lane/Lot 2, Block B, Vail Ridge
Applicant: James Mason and Jennifer Frank
O Hyatt Residence DRB03-0319
Driveway modification and spa addition
1200 Ptarmigan Rd. / Lot 1, Block 8, Vail Village Filing 7
Applicant Eileen Hyatt
Gart Sports DRB03-0294 Allison
Removal of awning and relocation of existing sign
2171 N. Frontage Rd West / Lot 2-A, Vail das Schone Filing 3
Applicant ADCON signs
Houtsma Residence DRB03-0314 Allison
Change of windows
1468 VailValley Drive lLol17, Block 3, VailValley 1"'
Applicant: John and Bobbi Ann Houtsma
Battin Residence DRB03-0280 Allison
Window addition and change of stucco to siding
8028 Potato Patch Drive I Lot 4, Block 1 , Vail Potato Patch
Applicant Peter Baftin
Steinberg Residence DRB03-0318 Elisabeth
Re-roof, same for same cedar shakes on south side of residence
1022 Eagles Nest Circle/Lot 3, Block 6, Vail Village Filing 7
Applicant Horizon Roofing
Meister Residence DRB03-0316 Elisabeth
Re-roof, same for same cedar shakes on both duplex sides
1359 Greenhill CourULot 18, Glen Lyon Subdivision
Applicant: Master Sealers Inc.
Crossroads DRB03-0307 Allison
Staining of stair towers with clear fire retardant
143 E. Meadow Drive / Lot P, Block 5D, Vail Village 1"'Filing
Applicant Steve Stafford
Vail Das Schone DRBO3-0338 Warren
Change to approved re-roof plans
2121 North Frontage Road WesWail Das Schone Filing 3
Applicant: Vail Das Schone Condo Assn., represented by Scott Wirth
Shimon Residence DRB03-0289 Matt
Replacement of failing retaining wall
182E Alta Circle/Lot 42Yat Village West Fil. 1
Applicant: Green Valley Landscaping
Wolff Residence DRB03-0303
Deck improvements and landscaping
2730 Bald Mountain Road/Lot 28, Block 2, Vail Village Fil. 13
Applicant: Ryan Chessmore
Gorsuch Residence DRB03-0266
Window replacements, new spa, deck improvements
767 Potato Patch. #1
Lot 34, Block 1, Potato Patch
Applicant Jane Snyder, Resort Design
Maft
Matt
O Byers Residence DRB03-0284 Elisabeth
Re-roof from tar and gravel to asphalt shingle
4562 Streamside Circle EasULot 17, Bighorn Subdivision,4h addition
Applicant Tom Beck/TA Beck Roofing
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during
regular office hours in the project planneis office, located at the Town of Vail Community
Devefopment Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479-2138 for information.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-
2356,Telephone for the Hearing lmpaired, for information.
From Land Title Guarantee Fr'l 14 Mar 2003 05:38:3E Ptil MST Page 1of 9
Land fitle Guarantee Company
CUSTOMER DISTRIBUTION
Dste: 0$14-2lxr3
hoperty Address:
VAC\NT TOV IAND FOR MANTORIAL PARK
Our Order Nrmber: VGng3ts,6
TOWN OFVAIL
75 S, FRONTAGffi XD.
vAtr co u657
AE$ RUSS FOREIT
8g,: tl04l9-?4'52
scnt Vh Frr
DIANADONOVAN
CALLFON,PIffiUP
WNEN NEADY
Vtu:9lO4lG27El
ftnlElHr
From Land Tit'le Guarante€ Fri 14 Mar 2003 05:38:38 PM MST Page 2 of 9
LdTitleO.rdeehpmy
xrnG.Irrc[s Date: 03-1+2003
Our Order Nuuber: Vgr9336
Property Address:
VACANT TOV I,AND FOR M&IORIAL PANK
Buyer/Borrower:
TOBE DETF,RMINED
Seller/Owner!
TO\ilN OFVAtr4 A MLJMCXPAL CORFORATId!
If you have rny lnquir{€f or requlre firrther asslstancg please contect one of the nrnmbers below!
For Closlng Assistrnce:For fith Asglstance:
Vdl Tlde Depe
RogerAvlla
IOt S. ETONTAGS RD. W.
P.O. BOX 357
vAtr4 cI) 81657
Plsrrl 90-{16-XEL
Eg: 970416-4534
Etr\rldk nvtla@l$c.com
N€ed a msp or dlrecdons for your upcornlng closlng? Check out Land fitle's web site at wvw.lQc.comNsec a map or (
for dfuiectlons to offlce
EINMATEGIITIEE
AltB OrvrErs Folicy 10-17-92 fBD
T(TA s0.00
lo.a cdllgl THANK YOU TIOR YOUN, OnI}ENI
From Land Tlt]e Guarantee Frl 14 Mar 2003 05:38:38 PM MST Page 3 of 9
Odcago Tlde lrurore Cotrylry
ALTA COMMTTMENT
Schedule A
Property Addrtss:
VACANTTOV I,.AND FORMEMOnIAL PANK
Our Order No. VCdl9336
CusL Ref.!
1. Effectlve Da3e: Mrrch 05' 2003 rt 5:00 P.ll4.
2. Pollcy to be Issued, and ProPosed lngured:
"ALTA" Onrrt's Pollcy l0-tl-92
hopared Insusd:
TOBE DETF,RMII\ED
3. The €strte or lntercst ln the lrnd degcrlbed or reterred to ln thls Cornmlbnent and coYered hereln ls:
A X'ee SlSe
4. fitle to the estste or lnter€Et covercd hcrdn ls at the effccflYe date hereof vested ln:
TO1IAI OF VAtr4 A MTJMCXPAL CORFORATTON
5. The land referrcd to ln tlrls Comrdtnent ls descdbed rs follovs:
SE ATTACHE) PAGF{S) T1ORLEICAL DESCRIPTIO{
From Land T'ltle Guarantee Fri 14 Mar 2003 05:38:38 PM MST Page 4 of 9
OurOrderNo. VC279336
IEGALTE(FPn(N
PARCH. 1:
BEGII{NINGAT A FOINT ON TIIE SOUTII LINE OF SEIC 2, T. 5 $, R tO W., 6TII P.N['
SAID POINT BEING S E9 DEIGRMS '|4 MINUTES OO SECI)NDS W., A DISTANCE OF 1039.U'
FEET FROM TIIE SOUTIIEAST CORNER. OF SAID SEc: 2, SAID FOINT AISO BEING AT TIIE
FOINT OF INTERSECTION WIIII TIIE SOUTFIWESIMLY nIGHT OF WAY LINE OF TTIE EXJSTING
U.S. HIGIIWAY NO. 6 AI\D THE SOUTII UI\[E OF SAID SEC 2; TIIBI(D N 45 DEGREES 33
MINUTES m SECOI\DS W AIroNc SAID SoUTIIWESTERLY RIGITT oF WAY A DXS"IAI\CE oF 93.20
FmT T() TIm FOINT OF CURVATURE OF A CURVE T0 TIIE Lm'T, HAVING A RADIUS OF
2815.00 FMT AND A TOTAL CEI\TRAL ATTIGLE OF S DBGRMS Lz MINUTF^S OO SECONDS;
TIIE$ICE ATJONG TTIE ARC (X'SAID CURVE A DISTANCE C,iF NLN FMT TO TIIE FOINT OF
TAITIGHTICY; TIIH\ICE N 54 DEGREES 45 MINUTES OO SECONDS W A DXSTANG OF 209.93
[.ffiT; TTTENCE IN A SOUTIMESTERLY DInECTION Tt) A FOINT (n\ TIIE SOUTII IINE G'SAID
sEc 2, wHrcH FoINT XS S E9 DBGREES 44 MINUTES 00 SECONDS W A DtrSTANCts OF
1128.15 FROM TIm FOINT OF BEGINNING; AIrID TIIE'IICE N t9 DEGREES tl4 MINUTES 00
sEcoNDs E A DXSTANCE OF 1UZt.15 TO TIIE FOINT OF BEGII{NING, COUNTY OF EAGI,q
STATE OF COI.ORADO.
PARCTX,2:
BEGIIININGAT A FOINT ON TTIE SOUTIIWESTtsRLY RIGTIT oF' WAY OF TTIE EXISTING U.S.
IIIGHWAY NO. 6 IN SEc. 2, T. 5 $, R" t0 W., 6TH P.l[ (WHICH FOINT IS I]OCATED
BY STARIING AT A FOINT ON TIIE SOUTII LtrI{E OI'SAID SEC. 2, S t9 DEGREES '14
MTNUTES tn SECONDS W, A DXSTANCE OX'1039.ilr ImT, FROM TIIE SOUTIIEAST coRIYEn OF
SAID SEC. 2; TIIEITICE N 46 DEGRm^S 33 MINUTES 00 SEC{)NDS W AITONG SAID
SOUTFIWESTMLY RIGIIIT OF WAY A DXSTANG OF 93.20 F'EET TO TTIE FOINT OF CTJRVATURE
oF A CURVS TO TIfi Lff'T, HAVING A nADIUS OF 2t15.00 rmT AND A TOTAL m\nRAL
ANGLE OF I DEGnms U MINUTES lX) SECONDS; TIIE\ICE ALONG TIm ARC OF SAID CURVE A
DETANCE OF 4l)2.r, FffiT TO TIIE FOINT OF TAI\IGEhICY; THHTICE N 54 DBGRmS 45
MINUTES 00 SECONDS W A DXSTAI{ffi OF 209.93 ImT TO A POINT, WHICH FO{NT XS TIIE
FOINT OF BEGII\INING); TTIEITICE N 54 DEGRMS 45 MII\ruTF^S OO SECI)I{DS W A DXSTANCE OF
707.49 TffiT TO A POINT ON TIIE SOUTHWESTERLY RIGIff G'WAY LINE OF SAID HIGTIVrAY;
TIIET\ICE S OO DEGRBTS OO MINUTES OO SECONDS W A DFTANCE OF t54.06 FEET TO A
FOINT ON TIIE SOUTIILINB OF SAID SEC 2; AND TIIENICE IN A NORTIIEASTEnLY
DIRECTION TO TIIE POINT OI'BEGII{NING, COUNTY OF F,AGLE, STATE OF CI)LORADO.
PARCEL3:
A PARCE OF LAI\D LYING IN TIIE SOUTII IIALE OF SECTION 3, AI{D TIIE SOUTII HAII' OF
SFfTION 2, TOVyNSHIP 5 SOUTII, RANGE t0 WEST (X'TIIE SD(TII PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN'
coLlNTY OF EAGLF, STATE d'CI)II)RADO, AND LYING S(XTTTI OF VAIL VILL,Affi H,EVUiITII
f,.ILING AI\D SOTJTTI oE'INTRSTATE HIGIIYYAY NO. 70 RIGIIT (X'WAY, MORE PARTICIJLAXLY
DESCXIBED ASFOLII)WS:
BEGINNINGAT TI1E S(XJTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SElcTIOli 2; THB\(E AL.ONG TIIE S(XJTH
LII\E Or SAID SECTION 2, S t9 DEGRmS 52 MINUTES 42 SElCotIDS W A DISTAI\G OF
2L39.53 FmT TO TIIn TRUE FOINT OF BEGII\NING| TIIH'{CE N 00 DDGnms 26 MINUTES 20
SBCONDS W A DXSTAI\ICE OF 760.11 FMT TO A FOINT ChI TTIE SOUTII RIGIIT OF WAY OF
TNTERSTATE HIGIIWAY NO. 70; THB\@ ALONG SAID ruGHT OF WAY ON TIIE FOLI0WING SD(
c(xlRSES; (1) N 54 DEGnffis 07 MINUTES sE SECONDS WA DXSTANCE OF 35.40 rmT; (2)
From Land Tit'le Guarante€ Fri 14 Mar 2003 05:38:38 PM MST Page 5 of 9
Our Order No. VC2ir9336
LgLIEIFmo.l
N 24 DEGRES 52 MINUTES 19 SECoNDS W A DFTAME oF Ul0-00 FEtsT; (3) N 63
DEGRffiS 29 MINUTF^S 22 SECONDS WA DETANCE OF 57s.t0 ffiT; (a) A DISTAI\G OF
276.50 FEET AII)NG TIm AIIC OF A CURVE T() TIIE Ltr'T, SAID CtiRVE IIAYING A RADIUS
oF 1?60.00 tr'ffiT, A ffi\TRAL ANGT,E Otr' 09 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 02 SECONDS AND A
CHORD BEARINGN 74 DEGNMS 02 MINUTES 5E SECONDS WA DISTANffi OF TI6.2riEET;
(5) N s4 DEIGREES 36 MINUTES ilE SECONDS W A DXSTAFICE OF s75.t0 FmT; (6) N t7
DEGREES 33 MINIJTES 05 SFfONDS W A DXSTAI{CE OF tt4.OO FTET TO A FOINT (x\ TIIE
EAST BoT]NDARY OF SAID VAIL VILLAffi EX.EVS\TTI FILING; TTISICE AIJO\G TIIE EAST AND
SOUTTI BOT]NDARIES OF SAID ELE\rH\TTI FILING ON TTIE F()Ltr.()WING NIITTE COUNSES: (1) S
14 DEGIEES s6 MINUTES lt SEC{)NDS w A DISTANCE' OF 62.62 FET; (2) s 33 DEGREES
30 MINUTES 00 SETCONDS WA DxSTAI{CE OFzz0.00 FmT; (3) N t9 DEGRmS30 MINUTES
00 sECoNDs w A DISTANCE OF 270-00 XBT; (a) s 74 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 00 SECONDS
W A DXSTANCE OF 210.00 FEET; (s) S t9 DEGRffiS 5t MINUTES 30 SElc(Xt{DS W A
DXSTANCE OF 410.00 IBT; (6) S 64 DEGnEmS zl MINUTES 00 SECONDS W A DETAIICE
oF 180.00 FmT; (7) S 45 DEGnmS 2E MIMTES 00 sEcoNDs w A DxSTAIqCE OF 2t0.00
FEET; (s) N ilo DEIGREES 32 MINUTES 00 SECoNDS w A DISTAi\ffi oF ZAs.00 FEET; (9) N
62 DEGREES ffi MINUTES44 SECONDS W A DISTAI\CE OF 5A.72 FBT; TIIENCEN E9
DEGR$S 15 MINUTES 19 SECTNDS W A DXSTAIICE OI' 100.00 IEET; THm{CE S 6t DEGRffiS
44 MINUTES 41 SEC{)NDS W A DXSTAIYCA OF 2:20.00 FffiT; TIIH{G S 52 DEGnmS 44
MINUTES 41 SECOI\DS W A DISTANCE OF 190.00 tBT; TIIH\ICE S t9 DEGRmS '|4 MINUTES
41 SECOIIDS WADISTANCEoF2A0.00FreT; TIIENCEN t3 DEGRmS20 MINUTES l7
sDcoNDs w A DFTAI{CE OF 300.00 FffiT; THU\G N 67 DEGnEDS 20 MINUTES 17 SEC()r{DS
W A DISTANCE OF 300-00 FffiT; TIIENG S 70 DEGRmS 39 MINUTES /|:l SECOI\DS W A
DXSTANffi OF 230.00 FEET; TTIEX\Cts S 15 DEGnEES 10 MINUTES 13 SECONDS E A DXSTANCE
oF lJZ6.41 [ffiT; TIIilICE S 5t DEGREES 01 MINUTES 24 SECoI\IDS W A DISTAN(E OF
380.00 FffiT; TTIENffi S 1? DEGREES 01 MINUTES 24 SDCONDS W A DIS:IAI\G, OF 255.00
I'EET; TIIB{CE S 63 DEGREES 01 MINUTES 24 SECONDS W A DISTANS OF 665.00 FEET TO
A FOINT ON TIIE SOUTII LIITE OF SECTION 3; TIIBTICE ALONG SAID SOUTII Ln[E S t9
DECRMS 23 MINUTES 3E SECONDS E A DETANCE OF 1059.39 FEET T1O TIIE SOUTII ONE
QUARTER CI)RI{ER OF SAID SECTION 3; TIIH\CE CONTINUING AlI)llG SAID SOUTII Lil{E S t9
DEGRET'-S 23 MINUTES 3t SECONDS E A DFTANCE OF 261E.7E FEET TO TIIE S(XJTIIEAST
coRNm. oF SAID SECTIOI\ 3; AISO BEING THE SOUTIIWEST CI)RNm. OF SND SECTION 2;
THEhICE AIrOt{G TIIE SOLJTII LINE o['SAID SECTION 2, S t9 DEGRmS /$ MINUTES ils
SECONDS E A DXSTANCE OF 26Y2.5I FEET TO TIIE SOUTII OIIIE QUARTEN. CONNER, OF SAID
SEITION 2; TIIHICE C0NTINLJINGAIIX{G TIIE SAID SOUTII LINE OF SAID SECTION 2' N t9
MINUTES 52 MINUTES 42 SECOIIDS F- A DFTANG OF 509.4I FTET TO TIIE TRUE POINT
OFBEGINNINq CdJNTY OFEAGI,F,, STATE OF COI,ORADO.
NOIE! THE FINAL POLICY DOES NOT IN AI\Y WAY GUARANTEE oR INSURE TIIE DIMEX\SIoNS
oF TIIE ABOVE DESCRIBED IAND, TIIE LEGAL DESmIPTION F DFnWED FROM THE CHAIN (X'
TIILE AIID OrriLY AN ACCURATE SURVEY CAN DATERMIITE fiIE DIMEI'ISIONS.
From Land Tit]e Guarantee Fri L4 ilar 2003 05:38:38 PM MSTo Page 6 of 9
ALTA COMMITMENT
ScMileB - Secflon I
(ReErtrcments) Our Order No' VCny336
The following are the requlrements to be complled wlth:
Ibrn (a) pryrril to or for llr rccourt of tlE grmlorls or mdgagors of tlt trtl consldertdon for tlE csbte or
intrirst to be tu|red
Item (b) hoper lrstuan(s) cnadrg ttE est|te or trbnst to be lnsutd rmnt be exeorbd sd fuly fled for rccond'
b-wlb
Ifem (c) payrent of dl trx33, clurge or Gser$rsrb levied md assessed agdnst tln n{fect predres wldch orc &re
ud pryalie.
ItcNn ( ) Adddornl rtqrdrcranrts, lf uty dsclosed below:
THIS COMMITMH\T XS FORIIYFORMATIO\ OllLY, AllD NO FOLICY WILL BE XSSUED
PURSUANTHMETO.
**r****'r't't NOTICE (X'trTrc CHANGE, EFFECIWE SEFTEMBER 1, 2002 rr****r*t*
Rr$|allt to Colonrto Revlsed Stdile 30-10421, 'Tlt courty clerh ud ncorder shdl collect a nnlnrge of $1-00 for
eoch doc1aprtr rrcdved for recordrg or fllirg fui lds or ltr ofilce. The srmlurge shrtl be ln sddfion to rrry ollEr
fees penrdtted by shtlb- "
From Land Tit]e Guarantee - Fri 14 Mar 2003 05:38:38 Ptl MST
v
Page 7 of 9
ALTA COMMITMENT
Schdule B - Secdon 2
(Exceptlons)Onr Order No. Ve:r9336
The pollcy or policles to be issued witl contaln exccptlons to the followlng rmless the same are disposed
of to the srtlsfactlon ot the Compeny:
1. Rghb or cldrn of pardes in possesslon mt slnwn by tfr pblc records.
2. f,'qcemenb, or clsirB of esercnts, mt shown by tlE pulc rccords.
3. Dlscrcluries, corfllcb tr boudrry tlrEs, slmrbge ln areg arroachrnb, nd ary frcts wlddr t concct stwey ard
trspecfion of tlt prerdses wor{d dsclose ard wldch are mt slmwn by 0E F$lic rtcolds.
L Arry lien, or dght t0 a lieq for services, labor or rm0erid tlnrtfofort or lErtdbr finrdsH' ilQosed by hw erd
mt shown bY dr PUic recor{s.
S. Defecb, llens, ernmbrurces, odvense claims or otlrr rntbrs, if ngr, creat€4 flrst apearirq5 in tlE F blc recoris or
aftuHrlg suhequurt to tlE effecdve dale lnreof hrt prior to fire dale th ptoposed lnsured acqdrcs of ncord for
vatrr tlrc eshb or Intercst or rmilgage llrcreon covertd by tlds ComdnrenL
6. Taxes or qrclal asses$rnts whlch 8tE not shown r edstirg lleru by ur puHlc recor{s.
.Z^ Llerx for rnqdd waEr ad sewer clErges' lf f,V.r
Y hr adddon, fhe owrcds policy wlll be sdrJect b tlt rmqrye, lf ury, mtsd In Sec0on 1 of Sclrdlle B lrcnot
9. RIGIIT OF PROFRMTOR OF A VEIN ORINDE TO UTRACT AI{D REMOVE HXS ORE
TITEREFROM SIIOULD TIIE SAME BE FOUND TO PB{ETNATE OR INTERSECT TIIE PNEil'IISES
AS RESERVED IN UNITm STATES PATEX\T REC{)RDED APRIL 28, 1900, IN B(x)K 48 AT
PL@.4T1.
10. TERNIS, CONDITTONS AND PROVISTONS OF UNDERGROUND RTGTIT (X' WAY EASEMEI\IT
RECORDD SEPTEIVIBER 17, 1990 IN B@K 537 AT PAGE IZT.
1I. AI\YADVER.SE CX"AIMBASED UFON TIM ASSERTION TIIAT TTIEII)CATTON OF TTIE GORE
CRWKTIASMOVM.
D. I,ACIC OF ACTESS TO AI\ID FROIVT PUBLIC ROAD, HIGIIVYAY' OR STNMT.
From Land Title Guarantee Frt 14 Mar 2003 05:38:38 PM MST Page 8 of 9
LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY
DTSCLOSURE STATEMENTS
Not€! PrEunlt to CRS 10-11-UUt, mdce is lrreby $ven tlnt
A) The sulflect rcol PmFlty rmy be locabd In a special hdry dsdcL
B) A Certflcde of Thxes Drr llsdrg each drg ldsdcdon ruy be obtdEd fmm tl coEty
Tbasutt's Etthdzed ogent
C) The lilonmdon rtgrd4 special dirdcb ard tlt borndarle.s of $rch dstricb rry b obtrtrcd fiom
tn Bord of Cormty Cornrfsslornrs, dE Couty Oerh ard Recorder, or tlr Coutty Assessor-
Nob! Effectve September 1, 19yr, CRS 30-10-406 rcEdrts 0nt dl doorEnb recftYed for rcc:ordrg or ftlirg
in tln clerlr ard rccordef s ottrce slntl contdn a top rrargin of et least orc |rrh a.rd t ldq rlglf, utd botlom
rmrgln of at lert orE hrlt of an irrclr. Th clerk ard rccorder rmy reftrse to rccord or tlle sry documnt lhrt
does-mt corforrq except tlnt, tlt r€qdrrrEnt for tb top rnrgtr slnll mt ryfly to docrrrErt uslrg fonr
on wtdch sFce is pmylded for r€cordnrg or filtrg irtronmdon at tlE bp rmtgln of tlE docurent
Note: Colorndo Divlslon of Insu:urc Regulafiors 3-5-1, Pu4rqh C of Ardde Vtr rcEdrts tlnt 'EVerT
dde enfty stEll be nsporntHe for all rmtters wldch apear of rccord plor b dE frE of recotdrg
wpmvei 0rc dde endty cordf,b Or closirg ard ts rerpomige for ncordrg or fllfug of legal
docunnb rcsulthg from 0r hlnsacdon wldch was ctmed". Ptovtded 0ut Ir1d fide Gluar'othe
corryory condrcb t closlrry of ttr lrsurd ffisacdon d is rcsponsible for ncordrg tln
legal doolrnts from tl1 trarsacdorq excepdon rrrtrber 5 will mt ryen. on lfu Orvler's Ttde
Potlcy ard drc Lcnders Folicy when tssrrd.
Notr: Atfrnudve trclurdc's lion pmbcdon for tlr Owrrr rry be svatlable (ty$cdly by deledon
of kcepdon no. 4 of Scftefute B, Sec[on 2 of tlE Cormdtrmnt ftom Or Otrtds Follcy to b
issrrd) upon con$iurce wlth dE followlrg conddorn:
A) Tfr |{rd dcscrtb€d h Schedrle A of tlds cormitEnt nast be a slrgle fardly resldance wldch
funldes a cordondrdun or towdnuse udt
B) No labor or rnabrials have been firtfihed by rnclnrdcs or rmterial-rcn for pryoses of
constrrdon on tlr lard described in ScHule A of tlds Conndtrcnt wlddn tlr past 6 nror{lts.
Q Trr Corqoy nllst Eceive m Qropriol€ fidsvit fudemdftilB tlrc corryary qdnst uDtrled
rrechrdc's ard tnierid.rcn s llerr.
D) The Cor4oIy rnrst receive pyrrerf, of th ryopriate pudun
D n oH.e lrc been corshrrdoll, lnpmverEnb or rmJor rcpairs urderh*en on th FoPery b be FrelEed
witldn slx rmn0rs plor to tlE Dab of dte Cor|rldfunt' Or reqdrtrretlts b obhln coveqe
for urrecorded liers wlll inc|rde: dsclosurc of ceilNfoi corrtnrcdon lrdorrmdon; trmncial lrtronmflon
s to 0 seller, 0rc hdlder sd or llrc conh*bE poyrrnt ot ttr aproprtab prtndun ttlly
€xecubd lrdfrmlty Ag€e|Enb satlsfactory to tln cor4oy, ard, uty adddoml r€qdHrnb
as ru5r be necessary dler ur exndr.r'lon of tE dorcsald llfonEdon by 0r Cor4ory'
No covenge wlll be given uder qty clrttrrtanc€s tor lebor or rmlertal for which the lrrmed
hrs con[acbd for or sgrced to PY.
Note: Prmrnnt to CRS 10-lf'tl3, mdce ls lnrcby glveru
A) TlEt 0Ere ls recorded eviderrce tfint a rdpral eshte hrg been severed, lesed, or ofirllse
conveyed ftom tlr flnfre eshb ard ftst fur€ ls a subturflal llkelllnod fiat a tldtd porty
hol& som or ott lntertst ln oll, gos, oflrer rdrerrls, or geotrenul energr In the rlperty; ut
B) That srrh rdrnral esbb mry hclde tE rlght b enter sd use tlrc prupedy wl0nu tn
sEfre owttt's pendsston
Tlds mdce ryflles b owrrds pollcy corudlsrb contrlrdrg r rdlEral seYetrflrce inslrlrent
excepdoq or €xcepdorc tn Sdnfule 4 Secflon 2-
Notdrg herdn contahed wlll be deermd b oblgah 0re corryrry to pmvlde arry of the coverages
nfened to ltnln urless dr sbove conddor or€ ndly safsn€d.
t@ DlgIOgE OglOLlo|
From Land Tit'le Guarantee Fri 14 Mar 2003 05:38:38 Pl, MST Page 9 of 9
JOINT NOTICE OF PRTVACY POLICY
Ftdellty Nrdonel Flnonclal Group of Companies/Chlcago fitle Insurence Compo.ny and
Land Tltle Guarsntce CornPanY
JulY 1' 2001
We recosize ard rcsp3ct gre privary €xpectrflo6 of tDdry's conntrtEr ail 0E r€quirtrrcttb of lSicable lq-denl -djti,tr-ut-ficv-tr*".-iy6 befeie'0ut rin}iix vou rsart of liow we lse your mDprldlc peqorul totfoim{ol ('"erlsotd
Irtrorinqdoil'). sd to whom lt is disclosd wlll form dr basls for a rtlalionshiP oI hlst betwoen us !r[ uE Frdlc
tht we selYe. Tlds htv0cy ShlerEnt Hovides that cxplanrdon We rescwe UE dght to cltarye thils ttlYacy
ShHrnt fmm drn b drn conslstent-wlth apflicable prlvary lms.
In the coune of our blstresg we mry collect Personal Infonnadon rbout you from the followhrg sources:
* Xtrom amllcadons or otlEr lonE we rtcelVe fmm you or yorn au0mrized rcptsentrdve;* Ftom v'oin uansacdom wlllu or fmm tlr servlces belrg Frformed by, us, orr atfl[ans' or ollErs;* f,hom -orn lntcrrpt web sltes:I Ftom tr urbllc rccor{g rmintsirEd by govertlEnhl enddes tlut we ellbr obodn dirccdy fiom tlnee
enddes, oi fmm orr rfhtates or o0ritiandI F)om cbrsumr or othr rcportirg agerdes.
Ogr Policles Regardftrg the hotecdon of the Contldenttality and Securlty ol Your Personsl Informrtlon
We main0rin ohvslcd. ehch,ordc sd pocednlt sde$|rr& to fobct yoUr Penor4l lrtronmdon from unutmrized
ii3j$-oiirifffiori$e Fdtaccess ti Urc Rnornl lfformailoir ordy ti those ergoyees who rredsudr ecess ln
cornrccdon wlth povldrg pmdrts or sewlces to you or for otlrcr leglflrmt€ hEiIEss trtrToses.
Our Policies and Practlces Regarding the Shrrlng of Your Personal Infonnadon
We mav slurt votn: Fersonol lrtronmdon widr orr offillates, zuctr r inflrflice corryqdes' agents, ud olhr real
eshre sbdemerit servlce pmvlders. We also rqr dsclose your Fenonrl Inlonndon
I to eenb. hkers or rcresentalives b fovide you wlth servlces you lrave rcEEsted;* to frrd-I;|ry contrton or servlce pm?iders w-ho pmvide setrices or perfonn marltetttg or otlEr
finrcdort ori orr beMf; ard* to otlrcrs with whom wri enter hto Joint rnr*edrg agmermnb for pnodrcb or servlces that we believe you
tuy ftd of foibttsL
In addtion we wlll dsclose yorr Fersornl lrfonmlion wlEn you drcct or give us pendssloq wlEn we ate rsldltd
6ly lry to do so. or wftn we-susptct frordilent or cdnilml rllvlties. We rlso lry dlsclos! yotn ttrlolql
Iitronnlion wli:n otlnrwise DenitiEed by edlcable givara laws $Eh as, Ior exar$g when ([sclosrrc |s needed
fir ertrorce orr righb dsng Aut of srry dgdemeil, trracdon or rtladorrldp wltt you
Orr ot tlE trnorElt resDrEitat|des of sorE of orr filtaEd corryries ls b ttcord docuHtE h tlt ptbllc
dordn Such'docrrrent$ rqr conhin your Personal lrforrudon -
Rtght to Access Your Personal Informadon and Ablllty to Correct Emors Or Request Changes Or Deledon
Cerdn sbtrs dtror{ vou 0rc rlfht to access yonr Fersonal lrtromadon od, uder certdn drcurtrrres, to flrd out
o itnm vour Fersorirl ltrondtion lns bed dsclosed. Also, cerfitr sbtcs dloId you fiE rigl* b qeq+{t -
correctiori. srndrnt or delelion of your Fenonl lrfonnation We ttgele tlr rISht wlrr€ Frmltled by lrw' lo
clnrge a rirasorrble fee to cover tlt cixe lrnured In rcspoditg b $rh requests.
All rcq||e.eb $r!mj]t&d to BE Fldetlty Na[ornl Fhnlrial Grolry of C-otryades/Odcago Ttue In$rflre Cotqalty
shall E in wrldrg, sd delvertd to-0rc followlrg ddrress!
Ptlvacr Corullgte OIcer
f,Id€||& Nad6ml Flmrrclal. trc.
4050 Cdle nrol S\dte Zl0
S{trBorhrs' CA93110
Muldple Products or Serdces
tr we wvlde you wlth mrr llnn orE thrrld pmdrt or sewlce, you ntry rtcdve rrnre ftm orr p'lvacy mdce
tom us. We {nloglze for rry lrrcomederre llds rmy core yorl.
!6 ERrv.FC[..c8
$ rrrr"r
"il$i,r.=$J;3H-
nnoeQr
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of
Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 'l2-3-6 of the Vail Town Code on
August 25, 2003, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In consideration of:
t A request for a final review of a subdivision of the Katsos Ranch property (unplatted), pursuant
!|-lo Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, Vail Town Code; a conditional use permit, pursuant to,-Section 12-88-3: Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of a cemetery;! and a final recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a proposed rezoning of the property
lrom Natural Area Preservation District to Outdoor Recreation District, located on an unplatted
parcel o-f land located in the southeast quarter of Section 2, Township 5 South, Range 80 West
of the 6rn Principal Meridian, and setting forth details in regards thereto. (A complete metes and
bounds description is on file at the Community Development Department).
Applicant: Vail Memorial Park, represented by Merv LapinPlanner: Russell Forrest
A request lor a variance from Section 12-7A-15, Site Coverage, Vail Town Code, to allow for
awnings over existing second floor deck, located at the Vista Bahn Building, 333 Hanson Ranch
Road/Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village 1" Filing.
Applicant: Remonov & Company, represented by Knight Planning ServicesPlanner: Matt Gennett
A request for a recommendalion to the Vail Town Council of proposed text amendments to Title 14,
Section 10, Development Standards Handbook, Chapter 8, Architectural Design Guidelines,
Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, and Vail Village Design Considerations, Vail Village Urban
Design Guide Plan, to allow for the use ol temporary enclosures of outdoor dining decks, and setting
for details in regard lhereto.
Applicant: Town of VailPlanner: Matt Gennett
The applications and information about these proposals are available for public inspection during regular
business hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department office, 75 South Frontage Road. The
public is invited to attend the proiect orientation held in the Town of Vail Community Development Department
otfice and the site visits that precede the public hearing. Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional information.
Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call (970) 479-
2356, Telephone for the Hearing lmpaired, tor additional information.
This notice published in the Vail Daily on August 8, 2003.
Yr-- --
/rr,^ ]t'; {74
Bylaws
of
Vail Memorial Park Foundation
ARTICLE I
NAME AND LOCATION
1. The name of this organization is Vail Memorial Park Foundation.
2. Until othenntise fixed by the Board of Directors, the principal place of business of
the organization shall be
ARTICLE II
MISSION
The mission of the Vail Memorial Park Foundation is to provide a memorial park
to commemorate the lives and history of people who contributed to the befterment of
the VailValley.
ARTICLE III
OPERATION IN A COOPERATIVE MANNER
The organization shall be operated in a cooperative manner and upon principles
applicable to cooperative corporations, associations and organizations. In this regard,
goals of the organization shall include:
ARTICLE IV
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
1. Directors. The property, affairs and business of the organization shall be
managed by the Board of Directors. The Board shall consist of 7 Directors who are
diverse representatives from within the Town of Vail area and reflect the makeup of
the community served. The number of Directors may be increased or decreased at
any time by amendment of these Bylaws, except that no decrease in the number of
Directors shall have the effect of shortening the term of any incumbent director.
2. Election and Terms. The Directors named as the initial Board of
Directors shall serve until the first meeting of the Board of Directors in January.
Thereafter, Directors shall be elected at an annual meeting of the Board of Directors
after a public notice of vacancies and the advice of the Town of Vail Council for terms
of 4 years commencing at the January meeting of the Board of Directors following the
election of the Directors and thereafter until the election and qualification of their
succ€ssors, unless they previously resign or are removed as provided by Section 11 of
this Article. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Directors first elected shall be divided
by lot as equally as possible into two groups; the members of one of such groups shall
serve for a term of two years, and the members of the second such group shall serve
for a term of four years. No one shall serve more than 8 consecutive elected years as
a Director, with a one year break before being eligible to again serve as a Director.
3. Nominations. At least thirty (30) days prior to an annual meeting of the
Board of Directors, a regular or special meeting of the Nominating Committee shall be
held. The nominating committee shall designate nominees for the positions of
Directors to be voted on at the next annual meeting at least fifteen (15) days prior to
the date of the meeting and shall notify the secretary of the names of the nominees.
4. Annual Meetinqs. The Board of Directors shall hold an annual meeting
on the first Monday following January 1 of each year or on another date as established
by the Board of Directors. Notice of the annual meeting of the Board shall be provided
to all directors and such other persons as the Board may designate. Said notice shall
designate the time and place of the meeting and shall be provided by mail, fax or
personal delivery to all Directors not less than ten (10) days in advance of the date of
the meeting. The purpose of the annual meeting shall be the election of the officers
for the ensuing year in accordance with these Bylaws and to transact such other
business as may properly come before the meeting.
5. Reqular Meetinqs. Regular meetings of the Board of Directors shall be
held as necessary but at least quarterly at a time and place designated by the Board
by resolution or at its last previous meeting. The initial meeting shall be held at such
date, hour and place as the initial directors shall determine.
6. Soecial Meetinqs. Special meetings of the Board of Directors shall be
held at such time and place as shall be designated by the Executive Committee or any
two directors. Written notice of any special meeting shall be provided to each director
by mail, fax or personal delivery at least three days in advance of the meeting.
7. Quorum. A majority of the Board of Directors shall constitute a quorum
at any meeting.
8. Action of Board. Except as othenrvise provided in these Bylaws, all
actions of the Board of Directors shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of
Directors present.
9. Waiver of Notice. Any Director may waive notice of a meeting before, at
or after the meeting, orally, in writing, or by attendance. Attendance at a meeting is
deemed a waiver unless the Director objects at the beginning of the meeting to the
transaction of business because the meeting is not lawfully called or convened and the
Director does not participate in the meeting.
10. Vacancies. Any vacancy occurring on the Board of Directors between
elections and any vacancy to be filled by reason of an increase in the number of
Directors shall be filled by the affirmative vote of a majority of the remaining Directors.
11. Removal of Directors. Directors may be removed only in the manner
provided in this Section. At a meeting called expressly for that purpose, any individual
Director may be removed, with or without cause, by a vote of a majority of the
Directors present. Such action must be approved by a majority of the Town of Vail
Council. Such vacancy may be filled by the directors as provided herein above. Any
number of Directors may be removed at the same meeting called for such purpose so
long as a separate vote is taken on each such Director individually.
12. Request for Resiqnation. The Board of Directors may require the
resignation of any Director who shall be absent from any three consecutive meetings
or any three meetings during the course of any twelve months unless the Board of
Directors finds that for good cause it was not possible for the Director to attend the
meetings.
13. Matters for Board Consideration. lncluded within the duties of the Board
of Directors, the Board of Directors shall (a) establish the general policies for the
direction of the organization, (b) elect the officers of the organization, (c) prepare and
present the annual budgets of the organization (d) and make decisions and establish
policies with respect to the hiring and dismissal of staff.
14. Attendance at Board Meetinqs bv Members. Associate Members may
be encouraged to attend meetings of the Board of Directors but shall not be entitled to
speak at such meetings unless requested by the Directors and shall under no
circumstances by entitled to vote at such meetings.
15. Financial Contributions. Board members will be expected to support the
organization through monetary donations. Annually the Board will establish a
suggested minimum donation.
ARTICLE V
OFFICERS
'1. Officers. The officers of the organization shall be Chairperson, Vice
Chairperson, Treasurer, and Secretary. The Board of Directors may also appoint and
employ a Youth Services Coordinator, but the Youth Services Coordinator shall not be
an officer of the organization. All of the officers shall be Directors of this organization.
Unless earlier removed by the Board of Directors for cause, all of the officers of the
organization shall serve terms of two years from the annual meeting of the Board of
Directors until the election of officers at the annual meeting of the Board of Directors
two years later. None of the foregoing officers may serve more than two terms in the
same ofiice without a break of one year between terms.
2. Additional Offices. The Board of Directors may establish such other and
additional offices as it may see fit which offices may be filled by persons who are or
are not members of the Board of Directors and who shall serve at the pleasure of the
Board and whose duties shall be established by the Board. These persons shall be
Associate Members.
3. Vacancies. lf for any reason an elected officer cannot or does not
continue to serve in office or is removed from office, a special election will be held at
any regular or special meeting of the Board to elect a successor for the vacated office.
4. More than One Office. The same person may hold more than one office
at the same time, except the offices of Chairperson and Secretary.
ARTICLE VI
DUTIES OF OFFICERS
1. Ghairoerson and Vice-Chaimerson. The Chairperson shall be
responsible for liaison with the Youth Services Coordinator, shall serve as presiding
officer at Board Meetings and shall perform such other duties as may be assigned or
required by the Board of Directors. The Chairperson and Vice Chairperson shall share
responsibilities for their positions and in the absence of one the other may act.
2. Treasurer. The Treasurer shall be responsible for the financial affairs
of the organization, and shall be responsible for assisting the Board of Directors in
preparation of the organization's annual budget and such other duties as may be
assigned to him or her by either the Chairperson or the Board of Directors. The
Treasurer shall cause to be kept such financial records as are expected for prudent
fiscal management. He or she shall report on the financial affairs of the organization
as requested by the Board of Directors.
3. Secretary. The Secretary shall be responsible for minutes of all
meetings of the Board of Directors, and in general shall perform such acts as are
customarily associated with this office.
4. Executive Director. lf the Board of Directors appoints and employs an
Executive Director, the Executive Director shall coordinate the organization's projects
and activities and carry out such other duties as the Board shall direct. The Board
may delegate responsibilities with respect to the Executive Director to the
Chairperson. The Executive Director shall be responsible to the Board for the faithful
performance of all assigned duties. lf specifically authorized by the Board, the
execution of any instrument by the Executive Director on behalf of this organization
shall have the same force and effect as if it were executed on behalf of this
organization by the Chairperson. The Executive director shall attend all meetings of
the Board of Directors as an ex-ofiicio member except for the portion of any meeting
devoted to the review of the Executive Directofs performance.
ARTICLE VII
COMMITTEES
1. Core Committees. The organization shall have four Core Committees as
follows:
a. Executive Committee, which shall be responsible for oversight of
day to day operations of the organization.
b. Finance Commiftee, which shall be responsible for oversight of all
financial issues including fund development, final grant or other funding applications
and an annual review of the financial condition of the organization.
c. Community Relations Committee, which shall be responsible for
public relations, community outreach and specialevents.
d. Projects Commiftee, which shall be responsible for the
assessment, development and expansion of the organization's projects and activities.
2. Other Committees. The Board of Directors may authorize establishment
of other committees as deemed necessary which committees will continue in existence
until terminated by action of the Board.
3. Committee Membershio. The Board of Directors of the organization shall
elect the members of each committee and any Associate Members which may be
provided for a committee, which Associate Members shall have the full power and
authority of the committee members. The Youth Services Coordinator may attend all
meetings of committees on an ex-officio basis.
a 4. Committee Powers and Procedures. The duties and powers of
-committees shall be established by the Board of Directors, provided that the
committees shall be advisory only to the Board of Directors. All actions of any
committee shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the
committee present.
ARTICLE VIII
RECORDS
1. Records to be Kept at Reqistered Office. The organization shall at all
times keep at its registered office the following records:
(a) The original or copies of all proceedings of the Board of Directors,
its Bylaws and all amendments thereto;
(b) A statement of the names and mailing addresses of the principal
officers and Board of Directors; and
(c) Appropriate and complete books of account.
ART]CLE IX
INDEMNIFICATION
1. Indemnification Required. To the full extent permitted by any applicable
law, this organization shall indemnify any person who was or is a party or is threatened
to be made a party to any threatened, pending or completed action, suit or proceeding,
wherever brought, whether civil, criminal, administrative or investigative, other than an
action by or in the right of the organization, by reason of the fact that such a person is
or was a director, officer, employee, or member of a committee of this organization,
against expenses, including attorneys' fees, judgments, fines and amounts paid in
settlement actually and reasonably incurred by such a person in connection with such
action, suit or proceeding. lndemnification provided by this Bylaw shall be in addition
to and independent of and shall not be deemed exclusive or any other rights to
indemnification to which any person may be entitled by contract or otherwise under
law. Indemnification provided by this Bylaw shall continue as to a person who has
ceased to be a member of the Board of Directors, officer, employee or committee
member, shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors and administrators of such
person and shall apply whether or not the claim against such person arises out of
matters occurring before the adoption of this Bylaw. However, any indemnification
realized other than under this Bylaw shall apply as a credit against any indemnification
provided by this Bylaw.
2. Insurance. This organization may, to the full extent permitted by
applicable law from time to time in effect, purchase and maintain insurance on behalf
of any person who is or was a member of the Board of Directors, ofiicer or employee
of this organization or a member of a committee of this organization against any
liability asserted against such person and incurred by such person in any such
capacity.
ARTICLE X
AMENDMENTS
The Bylaws may be amended only after being officially introduced at any duly
convened meeting of the Board of Directors for which notice was given that an
amendment to the Bylaws was to be introduced.
ARTICLE XI
EXECUTION OR INSTRUMENTS
All agreements, indentures, mortgages, deeds, conveyances, transfers,
certificates, declarations, receipts, discharges, releases, satisfactions, settlements,
petitions, schedules, accounts, affidavits, bonds, undertakings, and other instruments
or documents may be signed, executed, acknowledged, verified, delivered or accepted
on behalf of this organization by either Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, the Secretary
or the Treasurer. Any such instruments may also be executed, acknowledged,
verified, delivered or accepted on behalf of this organization in such other manner and
by such other officers as the Board of Directors may from time to time direct. The
provisions of this section are supplementary to any other provisions of these Bylaws.
ARTICLE XII
FISCAL YEAR
Unless otherwise fixed by the Board of Directors, the fiscal year of the
organization shall be the calendar year.
ARTICLE XIII
ELECTRONIC COMMUNICAT]ONS
A director may participate in a meeting by any means of communication through
which such person, other persons so participating, and all persons physically present
at the meeting may simultaneously hear each other during the meeting. Participation
in a meeting by that means constitutes presenoe in person at the meeting. A
conference among directors, by any means of communication through which such
persons may simultaneously hear each other during the conference is a meeting of the
Board of DirectorS or committee, as the case may be, if the same notice is given of the
conference as would be required for a meeting, and if the number of persons
participating in the conference would be sufficient to constitute a quorum at a meeting.
Participation in a meeting by that means constitutes presence in person at the
meeting.
ARTICLE XIV
CONSENT WITHOUT MEETI NGS
Any action required to be taken at a meeting of the Directors of this organization
or any action which may be taken at a meeting may be taken in any other manner
permitted by law, including without a meeting if a consent in writing, setting forth the
action so taken, is signed by all of the Directors entitled to vote with respect to the
subject matter thereof .
ARTICLE XV
COMPENSATION
Directors shall receive no compensation for any goods or services
provided to the organization in any capacity.
Articles of Incorlnration
of
Vail Memorial Park Formdation
We, the undersigned natural persons of the age of trventy-one years or more, acting as
incorporators of a corporation under the Articles of Incorporation for such corporation.
Article I
The name of this corporation is Vail Memorial Park Foundation
Article II
The period of duration of the corporation shall be perpetual.
Article III
The corporation is organized for the following purposes:
l. Provide a memorial park to cornmemorate the lives and history of people who
contributed to the betterment of the Vail Valley.
2. To perform all other acts necessary or incidental to these purposes and to do
whatever is deemed necessary, useful, advisable or conducive, directly or
indirectly, to carry out any ofthe purposes ofthe Corporation, as set forth in these
Articles of Incorporation, including the exercise of all other purposes, powers and
authority enjoyed by corporations by virtue of the provisions of the Colorado
Nonprofit Corporation Act subject to the limitations of Section 501(cX3) of the
Internal Revenue Code.
Article IV
The corporation is organized and shall be operated exclusively for public, charitable, or
educational purposes. [n furtherance of such purposes, it may promote, establistr, conduct, and
maintain activities on its own behalf or it may contribute to or otherwise assist other
corporations, organizations, and institutions carrying on such activities or any part thereof; and
for such purposes, it may solicit and receive funds and other property, real, personal, and
mixed, and interests therein, by gift, transfer, devise, or bequest, and invest, re-invest, hold,
manage, administer, expend, and apply such funds ard property, subject to such conditions and
limitations, if any, as may be expressed in any instrument evidencing zuch gift, transfer, devise
or bequest.
No part of the income or principal of the corporation shall inure to the benefit of or be
distributed to any member, director, or officer of the corporation or any other private
individual, but reimbursement for expenditures or the payment of reasonable compensation for
services rendered shall not be deemed to be a distribution of income or principal.
Page l of5
Article V
If, for any reason, it becomes necessary to dissolve this corporation: (a) the assets held
by the corporation in trust for specified purposes shall be applied so far as is feasible in
accordance with the terms of the trust; (b) the remaining assets rot held in trust shall be
applied so far as feasible towards carrying out the purposes stated in these articles of
incorporation; (c) in the event and to the extent that, in the judgment of the directors, it is not
feasible to apply the assets as provided in the foregoing clauses (a) and O), the assets shall be
applied to and for the use of such corporation or foundation organized and operated exclusively
for charitable or educational purposes and qualified for tax exemption from Federal income tax
under Section 501(cX3) ofthe Internal Revenue Code.
Article YI
The Corporation shall have no capital stock.
Article VII
The members of this corporation shall be any individud, person, firm, corporation,
business, or association elected by the Board of Directors, or a committee acting thereunder, in
accordance with standards and qudifications for membership established by the Board of
Directors from time to time.
Article VIII
The address of the initial registered office and the principal ofEce of the corporation is
Town of Vail, 75 South Frontage Road West, Vail, Colorado 81657 and the name of the initial
registered agent at such address is Mervyn t apin.
Article IX
The management of this corporation shall be vested in the Board of Directors as now
constituted or as hereafter elected or appointed. Said Board of Directors strall have the power
to elect a Chairperson, one or more vice chairpersons, a secretary and a treasurer of the
corporation together with any assistants thereto deemed advisable or convenient to the
administration of the corporation's affairs; it shall be necessary that all persons elected for such
offrces be members of the Board of Directors. Directors and officers shall hold their respective
offices until their successors shall have been chosen and qualified in their stead.
Article X
The number and method of Election of the Directors of this corporation shall be
determined by the provisions set forth in the Bylaws of this corporation. The number of Directors
constituting the initial Board of Directors shall be seven (7), and the names and addresses of the
persons who qonstitute the initial Board of Directors until their successors are elected and
qualified are:
Page 2 of5
Name
Mervyn Lapin
Diana Donovan
Daphne Slevin
Joe Hanlon
Carl Walker
Robby Robinson
Russell Forest
Address
232 West Meadow Drive, Vail, Co. 81657
Article XI
Except as otherwise provided in C.R.S. Section 7-128402, a director shall not be liable
to the corporation or its members for monetar5r damages for breach of the director's fiduciary
duty. The corporation shall indemniff any director or officer or former director or officer of the
Corporation, or any person who may have served at its request as a director or officer of another
corporation, as set forth in the Bylaws. In no case, however, shall the Corporation indemnifo or
reimburse any person for any federal excise taxes imposed on such individual under Chapter 42
of the Intemal Revenue Code. Further, if at any time or times the Corporation is a private
foundation within the meaning of Section 509 of the Internal Revenue Code, then, during such
time or times, no payment shall be made under this Article if such payment would constitute an
act of self-dealing (as defined in Section 4941(d) of the Code), or a taxable expenditure (as
defined in Section 4945(d) ofthe Code).
Article Xtr
At all times, and notwithstanding any merger, consolidation, reorganization, termination,
dissolution, or winding up of the Corporation, voluntary or involuntary or by operation of law, or
any other provisions hereof:
l. The Corporation shall not possess or exercise any power or authority, whether
expressly, by interpretation, or by operation of law, that will or might prevent it at
any time from qualiffing and continuing to qualiff as a corporation described in
Section 501(c[3) of the Code, contributions to which are deductible for federal
income tax purposes; nor shall the Corporation engage directly or indirectly in any
activity that might cause the loss ofsuch qualification under Section 501(c)(3) ofthe
Code.
No part of the assets or net eamings of the Corporation shall ever be used, nor shall
the Corporation ever be organized or operated, for purposes that are not exclusively
charitable or educational within the meaning of Section 501(cX3) of the Code.
The Corporation shall never be operated for the primary purpose of carrying on a
trade or business for profit.
No substantial part, and, during such time or times that the Corporation is a private
foundation within the meaning of Section 509 of the Code, no part of the activities of
the Corporation shall consist of attempting to influence legislation (including act on
by Congresso any state legislature, any local council or similar goveming body, or the
J.
t+.
Page 3 of5
public in referendum, initiative, constitutional amendment, or similar procedure)
through propaganda or otherwise ("including contacting, or urging the public to
contact, members of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or
opposing legislation, or advocating tlre adoption or rejection of legislation). Nor
shall the Corporation, directly or indirectly, participate in or intervene in (including
the publishing or distributing of statements) any political campaign on behalf or in
opposition to any candidate for public office.
5. At no time shall the Corporation engage in any activities that are unlawful under the
laws of the United States, Colorado, or any other jurisdiction where its activities are
canied on.
6. No solicitation of conffibutions to the Corporation shall be made, and no gift,
bequest, or devise to the Corporation shall be accepted, upon any condition or
limitation that in the opinion of the Corporation may cause the Corporation to lose its
Federal income tax exemption.
7. Notwithstanding any other provision of these Articles, if at any time or times the
Corporation is a private Foundation within the meaning of Section 509(3)(c) of the
Code, then during such time or times:
(a) The Corporation shall distribute its income for each taxable year at such time
and in such manner as not to subject the Corporation to tax under Section
4942 ofthe Code;
(b) The Corporation shall not engage in any act of self-dealing, as defined in
Section 494 I (d) of the Code;
(c) The Corporation shall not retain any excess business holdings, as defined in
Section 4943(c) ofthe Code;
(d) The Corporation shall not make
Section 4045(d) ofthe Code; and
(e) The Corporation shall not make
Section 4045(d) ofthe Code.
any taxable expenditures as defined in
any taxable expenditures as defined in
The private property ofthe officers and directors ofthe Corporation shall not be subject
to payment of corporate debts to any extent whatever.
Article XIII
Amendments to these articles shall be made as provided for in the Bylaws of the
Corporation.
The name and address of the incorporator is Mervyn Lapin,232 West Meadow Drive,
Vail, Colorado 81657.
Page 4 of5
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigred incorporator has hereunto subscribed her
hand this_day of .2003.
Mervyn Lapin
STATEOFCOLORADO )
)ss
couNTYoF EAGLE )
I, the undersigned, a Notary Public, hereby certifr that on the _ day of
2003, the above-named Mervyn L,apin, incorporator of the Vail Memorial Park Foundation.
personally appeared before me and being by me first duly swom declared that he is the person
who signed the foregoing document as Incorporator and that the stat€ments therein contained are
true.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires
O (sEAL)
Notary Public
Page 5 of5
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Vail Town Council
Community Development Department
September 16, 2003
MEMORANDUM
y',fl,) 1.c
Ordinance 22, Series of 2003: A request to amend the official zoning map of the
Town of Vail for Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision, a part of Section 2 and
3, Township 5 South Range 80 West of the Sixth Principal meridian from Natural
Area Preservation District to the Outdoor Recreation District.
c^il* 11,,,^
Vail Memorial Park Foundation, represented by Sherry Donrard
Russell Forrest
Applicant:
Planner:
1. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
The Vail Memorial Park Foundation has submitted four applications to create a memorial
park on Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision which is an 1 1.08 acre parcel within the
156 acre Katsos Ranch Park. Katsos Ranch Parkwas purchased as open space bythe
Town of Vail in 1977 and is located just south of the East Vail exit from lnterstate 70 and
extends west to the Vail golf course. The applicant has submitted four applications to
the Town of Vail that include:
1. A minor subdivision to plat and subdivide the unplatted 156 acre Katsos
Ranch property. This subdivision would result in an 11.08 acre property
for the Vail Memorial Park or Lot 1. Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision. lt
would also create Tract A, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision which would
total 145 acres,
2. A request to rezone Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision (the 11.08
acre Vail Memorial Park) from Natural Area Preservation to the Outdoor
Recreation zone district,
3. A conditional use permit for a cemetery which is a conditional use in the
Outdoor Recreation zone district. and
4. A Design Review Board Application for Phase 1 of the memorial park.
2. BACKGROUND
The Vail Town Council has reviewed the proposed design for the park on June 3rd of
2003 and voted to allow the Vail Memorial Park Foundation to apply for this use on
Town land. On August 20,2OO3 the Design Review Board reviewed the project and
voted 3-0 to direct staff to "staff approve the project after all applicable Planning and
Environmental Commission approvals have occurred. On September 8th the Planning
and Environmental Commission voted to:
. Approve a minor subdivision for Katsos Ranch that creates Lot 1 and Tract A of
Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision.
r Recommend approval of an amendment to the Official Town of Vail Zoning Map,
pursuant to Chapter 3, Title 12,Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to rezone
Lot 1 of Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision from the Natural Area Preservation
District to the Outdoor Recreation District.
. Approve a conditional use permit for the Vail Memorial Park subject to the
conditions identified in the staff memorandum in Section X.
3. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL AND STAFF RECOMENDATION
The council is being requested to approve of Ordinance 22, Series of 2003 to rezone Lot
1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision on first reading. Staff is recommending that the
Town Council approve Ordinance 22, Series of 2003 subject to the criteria and findings
in section lX of the aftached staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental
Commission.
Attachments:
A. Ordinance 22
B. PEC Memorandum and Attachments
ORDINANCE NO 22
Series of 2003
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFIGIAL ZONING i'AP FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL IN
ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 12, ZONING REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 5, ZONING MAP;
REZONING LOT 1 KATSOS RANCH IIIIINOR SUBDIVISON, A PART OF SECTION 2 AND 3,
TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH RANGE 80 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN FROM THE
NATURAL AREA PRESERVATION (NAP) DISTRTCT TO THE OUTDOOR RECREATION (OR)
DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the amendment is consistent with the adopted
goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and compatible with the
development objectives of the Town; and
WHERAS, the Town Council finds that the amendment is compatible with and suitable to
adjacent uses and appropriate for the surrounding areas; and
WHEREAS, the amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and generalwelfare of the
Town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of the Town in a manner that
conseryes and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and
residential community of the highest quality; and
WHEREAS, on September 8,2003., the Planning and Environmental Commission of the
Town of Vail recommended approval of this zoning map amendment as stated in the title of this
ordinance in accordance with the approved criteria and findings for a rezoning as per Section
12-3-7 of the Vail Town Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
Ordinance No. 22 . Series of 2003
VAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. The Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail is hereby amended as
follows:
That Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision, a part of Section 2 and 3, Township 5
South Range 80 West of the Sixth Principal meridian from Natural Area Preservation
(NAP) District to the Outdoor Recreation (OR) District; as shown in attached map
Attachment A.
Section 2. lf any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have
passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof,
regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or
phrases be declared invalid.
Section 3. The Town Gouncil hereby finds, determines and declares that this
ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the
inhabitants thereof.
Section 4. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this
ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any dug imposed, any violation that
occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or
proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any
provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or
superseded unless expressly stated herein.
Section 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof,
Ordinanca No. 22 , Series of 2003
inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall
not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore
repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE lN FULL ON FIRST READING this 16th day of September, 2003 and a
public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 7th day of October, 2003, in the
Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
Ludwig Kurz, Mayor
Aftest:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 7th day of
October.2003.
Ludwig Kurz, Mayor
Attest:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
Ordinance No. 22 , Series of 2003
AttachmentA
Locatlon of Lot I, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivbion, A part of Section 2 and 3, Townshlp 5
South Range 80 West of the Slxth Principal meridian
Ordinance No. 22 , Serbs ol moB
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmental Commission
Community Development Department
September 8, 2003
A request for a final review of a subdivision of the Katsos Ranch property
(unplatted), pursuant to Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, Vail Town Code; a
conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-88-3: Conditional Uses, Vail Town
Code, to allow for the construction of a cemetery; and a final recommendation to
the Vail Town Council of a proposed rezoning of the property from Natural Area
Preservation District to Outdoor Recreation District, located on an unplatted
parcel of land located on in the southeast quarter of Section 2, Township 5
South, Range 80 West of the 6m Principal Meridian (proposed as Lot 1, Katsos
Ranch Subdivision), and setting forth details in regards thereto. (A complete
metes and bounds description is on file at the Community Development
Department).
Applicant:
Planner:
Vail Memorial Park Foundation, represented by Sherry Dorward
Russell Forrest
SUMMARY
The Vail Memorial Park Foundation has submitted three applications to create a
memorial park on an 11.08 acre portion of the Katsos Ranch Park identified in the
proposed minor subdivision as Lot 1 , Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision. This 156 acre
parcef was purchased as open space by the Town of Vail in 1977 and is located just
south of the East Vail exit from Interstate 70. The applicant is requesting approval on a
minor subdivision, rezoning to Outdoor Recreation, and a conditional use permit for a
cemetery.
The purpose statement of the Vail Memorial Park is:
'The Vail Memorial Park will serue to celebrate. remember and honor the lives of
the many people who have helped to define Vail through their experiences and
contributions. By paying tribute to these diverse individuals, we will strengthen
our sense of community, build upon our history and connect with others who
share a spiritual passion and love for Vail.'
il.
This park involves the creation of a crusher fine walking path, rock memorial walls,
arched entry gate, memorial rocks, and stone benches. No structures or lighting are
proposed as part of this application.
Staff is recommending approval of these three applications in that this application is
consistent with the criteria and findings identified in section lX of this memorandum. The
applicant has provided responses to the Planning and Environmental Commission's
issues identified at the August 25th meeting (Attachment F).
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
The Vail Memorial Park Foundation is requesting the following:
1. Approval of a minor subdivision to plat and subdivide the unplatted 156 acre
Katsos Ranch property. This subdivision would result in an 11.08 acre property
for the Vail Memorial Park or Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision. lt would
also create Tract A, Katsos Ranch Subdivision which would total 145 acres
2. Recommendation of approval to the Town Council for a rezoning of Lot 1,
Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision (the 11.08 acre Vail Memorial Park) from
Natural Area Preservation to the Outdoor Recreation zone district
3. Approval of a conditional use permit for a cemetery which is a conditional use in
the Outdoor Recreation zone district.
The specific components of the proposal include:
. A double track access gravel path (approximately 400 feet long in phase
l) that connects the existing Katsos Ranch recreational trail to the
memorial park. This path would also provide access for the park and
Eagle River Water and Sanitation District maintenance vehicles.
. A 3 foot wide (250 feet long in phase 1) trail around Phase 1 (All paths
are a crusher fine trail).
. Six memorial boulder walls benched into the natural topography at the toe
of the slopes on the south side of the site for all 3 phases. Phase 1 will
include two 50 foot long walls. All walls are less than 4 feet tall.
r Natural stones for memorial engravings.
. Memorial trees (Lodgepole and Blue Spruce) if inigation can be provided
to the site with the cooperation of the Eagle River Water and Sanitation
District.
r Arched entrance sign to the memorial off of the existing Katsos Ranch
Trail south of the pedestrian bridge.
o Burial and scattering of cremated human ashes. Casket burials will not
be allowed on this site.
ilt.
The memorial park is proposed to be constructed in four phases as shown on the
attached site plan (Attachment E). Phase 1 is intended to last for 10-20 years
depending on demand.
BACKGROUND
In 1993, an exhaustive study was done to identify a site for a cemetery in the Town of
Vail. Over 10 alternative sites were evaluated for land use, ownership, and
environmental considerations. After a detailed study of the alternatives, the upper bench
of Donovan Park was chosen as a prefened altemative. A design was developed and
approved by the Town of Vail which included casket burials. This project was taken to
the Vail voters in 1994 and was defeated. In 2001, a renewed effort in memorializing
deceased Vail locals again became an interest. A committee was established to identify
a prefened location and develop a plan for a memorial park. The committee
established three major criteria for site selection:
r Minimum 5 acres in size
r Pedestrian and vehicular access
r Not located directly adjacent to residential areas.
After screening for those criteria, the following alternative sites were further reviewed.
1. Katsos Ranch
2. Spraddle Creek Trail Head
3. Streamwalk between the Covered Bridge and Ford Park
Given the criteria mentioned above the preferred alternative was Katsos Ranch in that it
was the furthest location from any residential area, had the appropriate size, and had
good access. lt also was the quietest refleclive space of the three alternatives.
The Vail Town Council has reviewed the proposed design for the park and has voted to
allow the Vail Memorial Park Foundation to apply for this use on Town land. On August
20,2003 the Design Review Board reviewed the project and voted 3-0 to direct staff to
'staff approve the project after all applicable Planning and Environmental Commission
approvals have occurred.
Planninq and Environmental Commission DISGUSION ITEMS FROM THE AUGUST
25.2003 MEETING
The following are discussion items for this topic:
A. Intensitv of Use: The Planning and Environmental Commission was concerned
about the intensity of use on the site. The primary concerns related to this issue
were conflicts on the recreational trail and parking. The Planning and
Environmental Commission was also concerned about the conflicts in the
Environmental lmpact Report (ElR) on phasing capacity and comments made by
)
tv.
B.
the applicant on capacity. The EIR has been updated with the latest information
on phasing, wetlands, and floodplain information. The applicant has provided
responses to these issues in the attached letter (Attachment F).
Parkinq: Parking for memorial services can be accommodated to a limited extent
at the trail-head parking area for the Katsos Ranch Trail. Eighteen parking spaces
are provided at this location. However, staff believes that there is inadequate
parking for groups larger than 30 people. Staff believes that the applicant should
require larger services to park at remote locations and to provide a shuttle service
to the site. The applicant is proposing to require a shuttle service for groups over
25 people. Furthermore, additional no parking signs may be needed along the
Frontage Road.
Recreation Path: Staff believes there could be some limited conflicts on the
recreation path when a large memorial service is occurring. To avoid conflicts with
bicycles on the path, staff would suggest that a temporary sign on the existing
recreation trail be placed to the west of the memorial park and at the bridge to
indicate when memorial service is occurring and for bicyclist to dismount during
memorial services. The sign would be placed on the trail during memorial events.
Wetlands: The Vail Memorial Foundation has been working with the Eagle River
Water and Sanitation District (ERWSD) to enhance the existing wetlands on the
site. Wetlands have been mapped and are identified in the wetlands study in the
Environmental lmpact Report (Attachment D). As part of its approved 1993 plan
to enlarge Black Lakes, ERWSD identified the Katsos Ranch property as a wetland
mitigation site and committed to restoring 6 acres of wetlands on the site of which
3.5 acres are within the proposed boundaries of the Memorial Park. Although
ERWSD has not yet been fully successful in re-establishing wetlands on the
property, the designated mitigation sites fall under Army Corps of Engineers
jurisdiction and Vail Memorial Park is obligated to avoid impacts in those areas as
well (or apply for a 404 permit).
Although the mitigation areas have not been surveyed and mapped, ERWSD
consultants have flagged the edges of the mitigation site adjacent to Vail Memorial
Park's first phase. The only potential conflict is the swale directly north of the
primary development areas in phases 1-4, which is included in the mitigation area.
The Army Corps of Engineers has informed the Town of Vail, the Vail Memorial
Park Foundation, and ERWSD that spanning this swale with bridges or boardwalks
would not impact the District's mitigation plan and would not require a permit.
(Attachment F) Development of paths in phases 24 may require wetland permits,
depending upon the long-term success of wetland restoration in the eastern portion
of the Vail Memorial Park site.
Floodplain: Staff acknowledged the need to verify the floodplain location at the last
Planning and Environmental Commission meeting. Since the Planning and
Environmental Commission reviewed the floodplain delineation on the site survey,
Town staff has investigated further and has found that the 100-year floodplain
covers a greater area than was previously identified (Attachment E). Section 12-
21-10 of the Town Code establishes relevant guidelines:
c.
D.
E.
o
V.
A.
A. No structure shall be built in any flood hazard zone or red avalanche
hazard area. No structure shall be built on a slope of forty percent (40o/o) or
greater except in Single-Family Residential, Two-Family Residential, or Two-
Family Primary/Secondary Residential Zone Disticts. The term "structure" as
used in thrs Section does not include recreational structures that are intended
for seasonal use, not including residential use.
E. The Administrator may require any applicant or person desiing to modify
the flood plain by fill, construction, channelization, grading, or other similar
changes, to submit for review an environmental impact statement in
accordance with Chapter 12 of this Title, to establish that the work will not
adversely affect adjacent propefties, or increase the quantity or velocity of
flood waters. (Ord. 16(1983) S 1: Ord. 12(1978) S 4)
After reviewing the floodplain maps, the proposed concept plan, and the above
mentioned regulations, an Engineer with Peak Land Surveying has concluded that
the proposed project complies with the Town's hazard regulations (see letter in
attachment F). No structures are proposed anywhere on the VMP site as part of
this application, and no grading is proposed that would increase the "quantity or
velocity of flood waters."
ROLES OF THE REVIEWING BOARDS
Minor Subdivision
As per section 13-4-2 C of the Town Code the Planning and Environmental Commission
is the final decision making body on a Minor Subdivision. Any final decision of the
Planning and Environmental Commission can be appealed to the Town Council.
Rezoninq
Town Council:
The Town Council is the final decision making authority for a rezoning or a telit
amendment. Final actions of Design Review Board or Planning and Environmental
Commission maybe appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town
Council evaluates whether or not the Planning and Environmental Commission or
Design Review Board ened with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with
modifications. or overtum the board's decision. The Town council must utilize the
criteria and findings identified in section Vl of this memorandum.
Planninq and Environmental Commission:
The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for applying the criteria in
section Vl of this memorandum and making a recommendation to the Town Council on a
rezoning.
Conditional Use Permit (GUP)
Planninq and Environmental Commission:
c.
Action: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for final
approval/denial of CUP. The Planning and Environmental Commission will make
recommendations to the Town Council on rezoning land, text amendments, and
modification ol hazard designations.
The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for evaluating a proposal
for:
1. Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of the Town.
2. Effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation
facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public
facilities and public facilities needs.
3. Effect upon traffic, with particular reference to congestion, automotive and
pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, acoess,
maneuverability, and removal of snow from the streets and parking areas.
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located,
including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to sunounding uses.
5. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the
proposed use.
6. The environmental impact report concerning the proposed use, if an
environmental impact report is required by Chapter 12 of this Title.
Desion Review Board:
The Design Review Board has no review authority on a CUP, but must review any
accompanying Design Review Board application.
The Design Review Board is responsible for evaluating the Design Review Board
proposal for:
o Architectural compatibility with other struclures, the land and surroundings. Fitting buildings into landscape. Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topographyr Removal/Preservation of trees and native vegetation. Adequate provision for snow storage on-siteo Acceptability of building materials and colors. Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building formsr Provision of landscape and drainager Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structureso Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distanceso Location and design of satellite dishes. Provision of outdoor lighting. The design of parks
VI. APPPLICABLEPLANNINGDOCUMENTS
It A. Town of Vail Zoninq Requlations
Section 12-8C Natural Preseruation (NAP) District
The cunent zoning of the proposed Memorial Park site is Natural Area Preservation. The
purpose statement for the Natural Area Preservation District is:
Section 12-BC-1:
The Natural Area Preseruation District is designed to provide areas which, because
of their environmentally sensitive nature or natural beauty, shall be protected from
encroachment by any building or other improvement, other than those listed in
Secfibn 12-AC-2 of this Article. The Natural Area Preservation District is intended to
ensure that designated lands remain in their natural state, including reclaimed areas,
by protecting such areas from development and preseruing open space. The Natural
Area Preseruation District includes lands having valuable wildlife habitat, exceptional
aesthetic or flood control value, wetlands, riparian areas and areas with significant
environmental constraints. Protecting sensiffue natural areas is important for
maintaining water quality and aquatic habitat, preseruing wildlife habitat, flood
control, protecting view conidors, minimizing the isk from hazard areas, and
protecting the natural character of Vail which is so vital to the Town's tourist
economy. The intent shall not preclude improvement of the natural environment by
the removal of noxious weeds, deadfall where necessary to protect public safety or
similar compatible improvements. (Ord. 21(1994) S 10)
Section 12-88 Outdoor Recreation (OR) District
The applicant is proposing to rezone Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision to Outdoor
Recreation. The purpose Statement for the Outdoor Recreation Zone District is:
Section 12-88-1:
"The outdoor recreation district is intended to preserve undeveloped or open space
lands from intensive development while permitting outdoor recreational activities that
provide opportunities for active and passive recreation areas, facilities and uses. (Ord.
21(1ee4) S e)"
B. Town of Vail Comprehensive Land Use Plan
The Comprehensive Land Use Plai designation for Katsos Ranch Park is Open Space.
This land use category is defined as:
"Passfue recreation areas such as greenbelts, stream conidors and drainage ways
are the types of areas in this category. Hillsides which were c/assffied as
undevelopable due to high hazards and s/opes over 40% are also included within
this area. These hillside areas would still be allowed types of development permifted
by existing zoning such as one unit per 35 acres, for areas in agricultural zoning.
Also, permitted in this area would be institutional/public uses."
O Specific goals in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan that relate to this use include:
The quality of the environment including air, water, and other natural
resources should be protected as the Town grows.
The Town of Vail should improve the existing park and open space lands
while continuing to purchase open space.
Services should keep pace with increased growth.
The plan also specifically discusses Katsos Ranch and states the following:
'This parcel of land has been the subject of much community -wide dr.scussions
slnce its purchase by the Town of Vail in 1977. The tract contains 1 46 acres (current
survey shows area at 156 acres) and lies immediately east of the Vail Golf Course
and south of Gore Creek. A Study was prepared in 1978 to examine the impacts of
altemative development scenarios for the property. The altematives ranged from a
"do nothing" or "no development" scenario to the construction of an executive style
golf course. The study concluded that a moderate level of development is the most
desirable for the site. This level of development would include a bike trail, running
trail, cross country skiing trails, and picnic areas. Many o these improvements have
been constructed and are used by area resrdenfs and tourists alike. Based on this
expression r? is assumed that passive open space is the acceptable and appropriate
use for the parcel. "
Town of Vail Comprehensive Open Lands Plan
The Comprehensive Open Lands Plan does identify Katsos Ranch Park as a sensitive
natural area as defined by the Natural Heritage Program. No specific actions or
management recommendations are made for this specific parcel other than the creation
of a south trail to the south of this parcel and on US Forest Service Land. After a US
Forest Service review of a specific trail alignment, the Forest Service concluded that
there would be significant challenges to approving this trail with Lynx habit in close
proximity to this proposed trail.
ZONING ANALYSIS
1.2
2.7
6.1
G.
vil.
Legal Description:
Zoning: (current)
Zoning: (proposed)
Land Use Designation:
Lot Size:
Development Standard (OR)
Parking:
Lot Area:
Setbacks:
Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision
Natural Area Preservation District
Outdoor Recreation District (OR)
Open Space
11.08 acres
Allowed
As per Chapter 10
Not applicable
20'from all property lines
8
Proposed
18 Available
a 400'from nearest
21' flaV24' sloped
Not applicable
5o/o
property line
No buildings
0% (no buildings)
VIII. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING
Land Use Zoninq
l-70 ROW & Residential Right of Way & Primary Secondary
Height:
Density
Site Coverage
North:
South:
East:
West:
US Forest Service
Residential
Golf Course
No Zoning
Primary Secondary
Outdoor Recreation
tx.
A.
REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Minor Subdivision
A basic premise of subdivision regulations is that the minimum standards for the creation
of new lots must be met. This subdivision will be reviewed under Title 13. Subdivision
Regulations, of the Town of Vail Code.
1. The first set of criteria to be considered by the Planning and Environmental
Commission for a Minor Subdivision application is:
Lot Area: There is no minimum lot area for the Outdoor Recreation District. The
proposed lot size is 11.08 acres.
Frontaqe: There is no minimum frontage area for the Outdoor Recreation
District.
Dimension: There are no minimum dimensions for the Outdoor Recreation
District. The proposed lot size for the Memorial Park is 1 1.08 acres. The
remaining area identified as Tract A, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision is 145
acres.
2. The second set of review criteria to be considered with a minor subdivision
request is outlined in the Subdivision Regulations, 13-34, and is as follows:
"The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the
application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of this Chapter,
the Zoning Ordinance and other peftinent regulations that the Planning
and Environmental Commission deems applicable....The Planning and
Environmental Commission shall review the application and consider its
appropriateness in regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control,
densities proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other
applicable documents, environmental integrity and compatibility with the
sunounding /and uses and other applicable documents, effects on the
aesthetics of the Town."
The purpose section of Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, is intended to insure that the
subdivision is promoting the health, safety and welfare of the community. The
subdivision purpose statements lrom 13-1-2 (C) are as follows:
1. "To inform each subdivider of the standards and criteria by which
development proposals will be evaluated and to provide information
as to the type and extent of improvements required."
Staff believes that this proposal meets the standards and criteria for a
minor subdisvision in the Town of Vail and that the plans provide clear
information on the extent of the development. Furthermore no new
commercial or residential development will result from this subdivision
and the proposed used is consistent with the natural setting of Katsos
Ranch.
"To provide for the subdivision of property in the future without
conflict with development on adjacent land-"
No land use conflicts are anticipated. The proposed site design is
intended to blend into the natural landscape of Katsos Ranch Park and is
over 1000 feet from adjacent residential property. The eastern portion of
the site will be maintained and even enhanced as wetlands.
"To protect and conserve the value of land throughout the
Municipality and the value of buildings and improvements on the
land."
This proposal preserves the natural integrity of the land. No buildings are
proposed for this project. No significant environmental impacts are
anticipated. The applicant is working with the Eagle River and Water
District to enhance the wetlands area on the site. The first phase of the
Vail Memorial Park has no impacts on either existing wetlands or the
proposed creation of wetlands by the ERWSD (See Aftachment A for
letter from ERWSD in applicant response to Planning and Environmental
Commission issues). Future phases may require Corps of Engineers
approval based on whether new wetlands are created on the site as
planned.
In evaluating the design of the Vail Memorial Park, no negative impacts
are anticipated in terms of the value of adjacent properties.
"To ensure that subdivision of propefi is in compliance with the
Town's zoning ordinances, to achieve a harmonious, convenienl
workable relationship among land uses, consistentwith Town
development objectives."
Staff believes that this project is designed in harmony with the natural
setting of Katsos Ranch and does not create any environmental impacts
or impediments to the recreational uses of Katsos Ranch. The applicant
l0
2.
3.
4.
will need to provide notice on the recreational trail to trail users during
memorial events to avoid conflicts. However, staff believes that trail
conflicts can be mitigated with signage considering the anticipated
number of memorial events per year.
"To guide public and private policy and action in order to provide
adequate and efficient transportation, water, sewage, schools,
parks, playgrounds, recreation, and other public requirements and
facilities and generally to provide that public facilities will have
sufficient capacity to serve the proposed subdivision."
The creation of the Vail Memorial Park will be a critical community asset.
It will not have any significant impact on public infrastructure.
"To provide for accurate legal descriptions of newly subdivided land
and to establish reasonable and desirable construction design
standards and procedures."
A proposed plat has been provided with the application that is consistent
with the requirements identified in Title 13, Chapter 4 of the Vail Town
Code.
"To prevent the pollution of air, streams and ponds, to assure
adequacy of drainage facilities, to safeguard the water table and to
encourage the wise use and management of natural resources
throughout the Town in order to presenre the integrity, stability, and
beauty of the community and the value of the land."
An Environmental lmpact Report has been prepared for this project. No
significant impacts are anticipated. The major mitigation of impacts
involves the strict regulation of parking at the site for groups over 25
people. Working cooperatively with the ERWSD it is possible to expand
wetlands on the site beyond what currently exists. Phase 1 of the project
will not conflict with any proposed wetland creation on the site. Also
future phases should be reviewed by the Corps of Engineers to avoid
conflicts once the precise boundaries of new wetlands are delineated as
the result of this partnership.
Rezoninq
1) The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with all the
applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined
in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development
objectives of the Town.
The Comprehensive Land Use Plan identified Katsos Ranch as Open Space.
The Open Lands Plan also identifies Katsos Ranch as sensitive natural area.
The proposed rezoning to Outdoor Recreation with the proposed Vail Memorial
Park Plan is still consistent with the Town's comprehensive plans and
ll
7.
2l
development objectives. The proposed plan protects the natural integrity of the
Katsos Ranch Park.
The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the
existing and potential land uses on the site and existing and potential
surrounding land uses as set out in the Town's adopted planning
documents-
The proposed land use will not impact adjacent property owners. The closest
home is over 1000 feet away from the Vail Memorial Park and is screened by
vegetation. The proposed design of the Vail Memorial Park compliments the
natural landscape and avoids impacts to existing wetlands. In fact, there is now
the opportunity to enhance the existing wetland area on Katsos Ranch through a
partnership with the ERWSD.
The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious,
convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with
municipal development objectives.
The proposed design is intended to blend into to the natural landscape. There
should be no significant interference to the existing recreational path on Katsos
Ranch given the number of times memorial events are anticipated within a
calendar year. Staff has provided recommended conditions of approval for the
Conditional Use Permit in section X of this memorandum to reduce conflicts on
the recreational path. Furthermore, staff would recommend that the conditional
use permit for the Vail Memorial Park be reviewed within 1 year of approval to
evaluate any unanticipated impacts.
The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of
an orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the
amendment serves the best interests of the community as a whole.
A memorial park, as proposed, is an important component to the life cycle of a
community. The park is intended to celebrate and memorialize individuals that
have contributed to the Vail community. The proposed zoning of Outdoor
Recreation is one of the three Open Space Zone Districts. The Comprehensive
Land Use Plan identifies this site as Open Space and states that Katsos Ranch
is "appropriate for passive outdoor recreation.' The uses in the OR zone District
are controlled through a conditional use permit.
The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or
beneficial impacts on the natural environment, including but not limited to
water quality, air quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and
other desirable natural features.
3)
4)
5)
t2
No building or structures are proposed as part of the Vail Memorial Park. No
significant site disturbance is anticipated other than the creation of paths to the
proposed memorial areas. The proposed park avoids impacting existing
wetlands. Infact, there is the opportunity to expand wetland area on the eastern
portion of the site through a partnership with the ERWSD. An Environmental
lmpact Report has been prepared and no other significant impacts are
anticipated.
The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with the
purpose statement of the proposed zone district.
Cemeteries are a conditional use in the Outdoor Recreation Zone District. The
proposed natural design of the Vail Memorial Park is consistent with the purpose
statement within the Natural Area Preservation Zone District. The presence of a
memorial park on the site will help ensure the site remains as open space in
perpetuity.
The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how
conditions have changed since the zoning designation of the subject
property was adopted and is no longer appropriate.
The community has the need for a memorial park. This has been well
documented since the last effort in 1993. Conditions on Katsos Ranch have not
changed. lt is still a beautiful meadow bordered by lodgepole pine to the south
and Gore Creek on the North. The proposed design of the Vail Memorial Park is
intended to blend in with the natural environment of the site.
8) Such other factors and criteria as the Gommission and/or Gouncil deem
applicable to the proposed rezoning.
Conditional Use Permit
1. Relationship and impact of the use on the development objectives of the
Town.
The proposed design of the Vail Memorial Park is consistent with the natural sefting
of Katsos Ranch. lt will maintain the environmental integrity of the site and
potentially even enhance the wetland areas with Katsos Ranch. The Town Council
has stated that the creation of a memorial park is a valid objective of the Town of
Vail. The proposed design achieves that objective in a way that compliments the
natural charac{er of Katsos Ranch Park.
2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation
facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public
facilities needs.
6)
7l
c.
o l3
x.
A.
No buildings are proposed as part of this project which will impact light and air. A
memorial park is a needed community facility. The only detrimental impact is
potentially parking for large memorial services. Staff believes this impact can be
mitigated by requiring all memorial groups over 25 to utilize buses or shuttles to the
park from either from the Vail Chapel or the Town's parking structure (in the summer
and shoulder seasons). Staff recommends reviewing the conditional use permit after
1 year to ensure that circulation on Bighorn Road and the Katsos Ranch recreational
trail are not adversely impacted.
3. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive and
pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access,
maneuverability, and remoyal of snow from the street and parking areas.
Staff has analyzed the project intensity of use of the Vail Memorial Park. The 1993
Donovan Park cemetery study anticipated 24 memorial services (which included
casket burials) within a year. Staff contacted the County Coroner and Eagle County
on average has 60-70 deaths per year. Nationally approximately 50% of all deaths
result in cremation. With the proposed conditions of approval to prevent Frontage
Road parking and the Foundations interest in limiting large memorial services on the
site, staff does not believe there will be any significant circulation impacts. However,
it is difficult to anticipate the nature of impacts with this type of use and staff would
recommend that the conditional use permit be reviewed in 1 year's time.
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be
located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to
surrounding uses.
No buildings are proposed as part of this application.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Minor Subdivision
The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and
Environmental Commission approves a minor subdivision, pursuant to Chapter 4, Title
13, Subdivision Regulations, Vail Town Code, to allow for the platting of Katsos Ranch
Minor Subdivison, A part of Section 2 and 3, Township 5 South Range 80 West of the
Sixth Principal meridian into Tract A (Area of Katsos Ranch Park excluding the Vail
Memorial Park) and Lot 1 (Vail Memorial Park Site) Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision.
Staffs recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section Vlll
of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, subject to the following
findings:
'The Planning and Environmental Commission approves of the proposed minor
subdivision and finds that the minor subdivision application is appropiate in
regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control, denslties proposed,
regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other applicable documents,
environmental integrity and compatibility with the sunounding land uses and
other applicable documents, effects on the aesthetics of the Town. Specifically,
the Commission finds that the,minor subdivision reso/ves allows the proper
t{
\,f" d, \utUfltl
identification and plafting of the Town of Vails largest property and the ability to
delineate the Vail Memorial Park.
Amendment to the Official Zoninq Map of the Town of Vail
The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and
Environmental Commission fonvards a recommendation of approval of an amendment
to the Official Town of Vail Zoning Map, pursuant to Chapter 3, Title '12, Zoning
Regulations, Vail Town Code, to rezone Lot 1 of Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision from
the Natural Area Preservation District to the Outdoor Recreation District.
Staff's recommendations are based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section
Vlll of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, subject to the
following findings:
"Before recommending and/or granting an approval of an application for a zone
distict boundary amendment the Planning & Environmental Commission and the
Town Council shall make the following findings with respect to the requested
amendment:
1. That the amendment ls consrsfent with the adopted goals, objectives and
policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and compatible with the
development objectives of the Town; and
2. That the amendment is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and
appropriate for the sunounding areas; and
3. That the amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and general
welfare of the Town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious
development of the Town in a manner that conserues and enhances its
natural environment and its established character as a resort and
residential community of the highest qualtty."
Gonditional Use Permit (Conditions Revised by PEC in Bold from the September@
The Community Development Department recommends approval for a conditional use
permit, pursuant to Section 12-98-3, Conditional Uses; Vail Town Code, to allow for a
Cemetery and memorial park on Lot 1, Kafsos Ranch Subdivision. Staffls
recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section lX of this
memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, subject to the following
findings:
1. That the proposed location of the use is in accordance with the purposes of
the conditional use permit section of the zoning code and the purposes of the
Parking (P) District.
2. That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it will
be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
or weffare or mateially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
3. That the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of
the conditional use permit section of the zoning code.
l5
B.
c.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve or forward a
recommendation of approval of the applicant's to the Vail Town Council, staff
recommends that the Commission makes the following conditions a part of the approval:
1. All future phases (2-4) of the Vail Memorial Park must be reviewed by the US
Army Corps of Engineers prior to construction as appropriate.
2. The Eagle River Water and Sanitation District has taken responsibility for the
review of a raised boardwalk to span the 20-25 foot wide swale into phase 1.
The proposed raised boardwalk will require review by the Army Corps of
Engineers and the Town of Vail Design review Board. A Design Review
application shall be submitted by Eagle River and Water an
Vail Memorial Park Foundation for review and approval of the Design Review
Board prior to construction.
3. The applicant shall submit a Design Review application for review and approval
by the Design Review Board for all site disturbance and any future phases
(phases 2-4) prior to the construction of any future phases.
4. The applicant shall require all groups over 25 people to use a shuttle system to
the site. The applicant shall obtain the owners approval for the use of any
remote parking used for inurnment services.
5. The applicant shall provide signage approved by Town staff during memorial
events to cleady indicate that a memorial service is in progress and that cyclists
should use caution. These signs should be located at the east trail head to
Katsos Ranch and 50 feet to the west of the Vail Memorial Park entrance on the
Katsos Ranch recreational trail.
6. The applicant shall pay for additional no parking signs along the Frontage Road
at the Katsos Ranch Trailhead at specific locations approved by the Public
Works Department.
7. The applicant shall receive approval for a staging plan from the Town of Vail prior
to construction being initiated on the Vail Memorial Park.
8. The applicant shall retum to the Planning and Environmental Commission in one
years time from the date of approval so that the Conditional Use Permit can be
reviewed to evaluate the impacts on circulation along the Frontage Road and to
the use of the recreational trail.
9. The applicant shall submit future phases to the Planning and
Environmental Commission for review by the Gommission to ensure that
environmental impacts are adequately addressed in future phases.
10. There shall be no maintenance, snow plowing, or inscriptions of memorial signs
in the Vail Memorial Park between December 1't and May 1't.
l6
1 1. The operation and maintenance of the Vail Memorial Park shall not inhibit the
public use of Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivsion for cunently existing passive
recreational uses.
Xl. Attachments:
A. Public Notice
B. Vicinity Map
G. Application Lefter
D. EIR
E. Design Plans
F. Letter ftom Applicant responding to comments from the August 25h meeting
l7
Attachnent A.
Public Notice
THIS ITEM MAYAFFEC'I PUBLIC
'JJ33^
PROPERry
lflt11F.;**rilffi
.l:,.,F,ihu'[%f,
11il,:t"g:a':lknln*r,.rsJownorAususr 2s, zoog, at2:00'i."M. ilffiffi;"#,f,'r"ffiii,J"=iB;1,31#1,y1i13,3ffi il -
A request for a finar review of a.subdivision of tre Katsos-Ra3.ch pr.operty (unptatted), pursuantto Title 13' subdivision neguFy-ons;v;iTil c;";a conditionardse 6eimn, pursuanaosedion 12-88-3: condition-ar ur".,vaTrb-"n'c"i",,o
"tto,nr"iiri" *iri".iiucrion ota cemerery:and a finat recommendarion.to rle vaTiffib;.fu:f{ijg,HrlJJiirlgor ne propertytrom Naturar Area preservarlgl 9"i"i'ixilii# lnrqior Disrrisr, rocareo on an unpranedparcer of rand rocared in rh_e sourheasr dLnli:Ji,b"dio_1-2,
lory.nshrp s south, Range 80 wesrof the 6n principar Meridian, ?f *litidr"riilbJ,n,.:,,r_r:rards rhereio. (A comprere meres andDounds descriprion is on fire at ue-cJtir'uniii6ll",oprenr Deparrmenr).
gffli*,, XiiJ5?:ffi:i"rk, represenred by Merv Lapin
ir'.ru:"iJ$&,:ffi1g
rrom-sectlon 12-78-15, s*e g.9y"qge, va' rown code, ro arow rorR;ilffi c:bi#i i:r,:l,Til,:J""!,"ffff;ro"at"o ar the Vi,sta sEih iilrjing, gsC Fiin]oi.d;;
3l*'j,TJt' fi:T&H:-tompanv' represented bv Knisht plannins services
A request for a recommendatlon to the vail rown council of proposed telt amendments to Title 14.secrion 10, Deveroom".1'..s:"laqo'i riJ"iililr,pr,"pjdib,"niJiir'fr.,i"r Desisn Guiderines.
.i:l,il'S3r5#?Jfjff:iill
y*F p'in:;ililJ virragJrtesiilit-,iiiiill"1,qns, vairVi,ase Urbantor a6tairs in ied;il il;;f,:."r lhe use or temporary enclosur"i oioutl**iiinns decks, and setring
Applicant: Town of Vaitplanner: Matt Gennan
The appllcations and infom
i*il*ff*i#ff#',i*"#d"j'm"*r,,n;Ef'q*!;rit',rifi
"-ffimqi,:e,*,*1,*'ifJtjllg;iflilli1lfirli""?ffiix133ixi:ijl:ftiffiHgefl:liJ;otincation. p,ease ca,, (s70,) 47s-
This norice pubfished in the VailDaily on August g, 2009.
N-"frl
,-m
BA,LTZ FAMILY PARTNERS II
LLC,
11091 BRONCODR
llrER, co 80138
CAULKINS FAMILY PTNSHP
1600 BROADWAY 1400
DENVER, CO 80202
HINTZ, BERND JURGEN
NOVARHOUSE 24 QUEENS RD
WEYBRIDGE SURREY
LTNITED KINGDOM KTl 39UX
HIJZELLA, LISA WHEELER
C/O TMWENTERPRISES
2I2O AUSTIN AVE STE lOO
ROCHESTER HILLS. MI 48309
LEPRINO, NANCY
16365 W BAYAUD DR
GOLDEN. CO 80401
REIMERS, ARTHURJ.
445 ROUND HILL RD
GRENNWICH. CT 06831
VANHOOPS HOLDINGS LP
9022 JASON CT
BOULDER. CO 80303
BANNER, M. R.,III & ELAINE T.
MATTHEWR. BANNER III
REVOCABLE TRUST
I54O ROCKMONT CIR
BOULDER, CO 80303
ERICKSON, MABEL T.
IRREVOCABLE TRUST
BUTTS, RICHARD TRUSTEE
I115 SOUTFIPORT LOOP APT 4
BISMARCK. ND 58504-7085
HOVERSTEN, PHILIP E. &
LOUISE B. -JT
2990 BOOTH CREEK DR
VAIL, CO 8I657
JOSE ANTONIO O FARzuLL
QUALIFIED
PERSONAL RESIDENCE TRUST
CRATER 428 MEXICO OI9OO DF
MEXICO CITYMEXICO
MORAN, CHLOE HELD
I48O BOHNS POINT RD
WAYZATA, MN 55391
SNOWFLAKE TRUST
C/O MANTUCKET CAPITAL
LLC
525I DTC PARKWAY STE 995
ENGLEWOOD, CO 80I11
VOLLBRACHT, WILLIAM B. &
LESLIE
PO BOX 5440
DENVER. CO8O2I7
\tc^\ N- ,,*,^\-?-!
-&l\-.-'t Y-\'\
o.rJrrr-rS
(u*,*,r,
rt.fttval)
lr
AV
BARTLETT, JAMES R. &
SUSAN B.
77OO N 71ST ST
PARADISE VALLEY, AZ 85253
GINSBERG, STANLEYA. &
MARTHA -JT
17950 LAKE ESTATES DR
BOCA RATON,FL 33496
HUGHES. DIANE K. TRUSTEE -
BURNEY. KENDALL K. -
HUGHES, KING B.
4405 HIGHLAND DR
DALLAS, T)(75205
KAPLAN, GILDA L.
3O3O BOOTH CREEK DR
VAIL, CO 81657
PITTO J. RUSSELL
655 MONTGOMERY ST 1I9O
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111.
2630
TOWN OF VAIL
C/O FINANCE DEPT
75 S FRONTAGE RD
VAIL, CO 81657
WILHELMSEN, AXEL & JANIE
29IO BOOTH CR-EEKDR
VAIL, CO 81657
t f a:l"r
Attachment B.
Vicinity Map
dE:]Fa :t rr.x<tE a'i.,:u.ltrtr..Eur=-; U)':-' .,d<;_-> E:::'.-iJ
!6!
.a a:
i
,ri
'!:
t:
'ii..'.
]:
-::: ,,; :: ;l
:t i ::t,i :r
i: : ::i:.'. :
,r |, i : ::-.:. ,,- : I;: l.: !r'.: ':II .,..t:.-:'r ti i!.
t: l: :: : :::: :' '- i i ,:: li it' ,:':. rj j ,::-::,i::l '_: \',) ::1.:; i::: i:r r,i, )i:
i. ,i i;i a.:i ij:;i ,i r'l:i1: ;:Ij, ;: ii. j1:' .;;,
i:u
!i,;
'i.:;
.''.'.':..:
1,.::
..::.
i!r:; tr_:3 :l
iir:,i1i;
Ii
;
ti'B
F'
z
.;.::
d::
i .:,
i- i.,
i;
i-r
Attachment C.
Application Letter
/
1.
VAIL MEMORIAL PARK
APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BY PEC AND DRB
July 28, 2003
Description and Location of the Propefi:
The Vail Memorial Park site is an 11.13-acre portion of the Katsos Ranch purchased as
open space by the Town of Vail in 1977 and is located just south of the East Vail exit
from Interstate 70. There are no improvements on the site except for a sanitary sewer
line running across it from east to west. Portions of the site are included in a wetland
mitigation plan for the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District. A cross-country ski trail
uses the upland meadows on the site in winter, and a single-track hike/bike trail
traverses the site along the toe of the slopes.
Description of the Request for Review:
Approval of a Minor Subdivision
Approval of an application to rezone the memorial park to outdoor recreation. The
Outdoor Recreation District allows cemeteries as a conditional use. Also the
designated open space charter provision allows sites to be rezoned to one of the
three open space zone districts (i.e. Natural Area Preservation, Outdoor Recreation,
and Agriculture and Open Space).
Approval of a conditional use permit for the park and cemetery.
Approval of a design review permit for the park design and sign.
Description of the Development Proposal:
Although it has been forty years since the town's founding as a ski resort and although
the resort has since evolved into a year-round community of some 5,000 people (and
another 10,000 in the larger Eagle Valley), Vail still lacks - and desires - a place where
its citizens and those who love the valley can be memorialized. After years of study,
consideration of numerous sites, and an earlier cemetery master plan proposed for
Donovan Park but nanowly defeated in a bond issue election (1993), this site has been
selected by a citizen task force and is being proposed for use as a memorial park. Any
current or past resident of the Vail Valley or Eagle County and anyone who feels an
emotional connection with the region will be able to purchase a memorial inscription
and/or bury or scatter ashes in the memorial park. (No casket burial is anticipated.)
The areas to be developed for memorials will be concentrated in clearings at the toe of
the slopes along the southern boundary of the site, where they will not be visible from
off-site. The design motif is intended to adhere as much as possible to natural forms
and materials: low walls of dry-stacked native stone, flagstone and crushed stone paths,
and native boulders not exceeding 24' in height, sensitively placed in clusters. There
will be no headstones and no formal carved monuments.
The types of memorials proposed are intended to be non-intrusive and entirely
compatible with the character of the natural landscape:
o Engraved inscriptions on boulders in dry-stacked walls at the toe of the slopes;
2.
1.
2.
3.
4.
3.
. Engraved inscriptions on individual boulders and flush-set stone slabs placed in
clusters along the pathways;r Donated benches fashioned of natural boulders;o Memorial groves of trees dedicated to the memory of loved ones (proposed later
in phase one depending on availability of water).r Ashes can be scattered in designated areas or buried in biodegradable urns
behind the memorial walls or under memorial stones.
An accessible crushed stone pathway system will connect the memorial areas to the
existing Town of Vail recreation path and an existing parking area on Bighorn Road. No
vehicular access fo the site (otherthan for small maintenance vehicles) or other
improvements are proposed.
It is proposed that the memorial park be opened in phases as needed. The initial phase
would consist of two or three dry-stacked walls totaling about 100 linear feet (four feet
high), several hundred pre-set stone slabs and boulders for memorials, a space where
small memorial services could be held, and a short looping pathway connection. The
estimated capacity of this first phase would be approximately 500 memorials, which
could be sufficient tor a 10-20 year timeframe.
3. Operation of the Vail Memorial Park
Seven members of the existing task force will become the board of directors and will be
responsible for setting policies for the operation of the Memorial Park, setting the pricing
structure and residency requirements for price tiers, hiring staff, and approving the
annual budgets for maintenance and capital improvements. lt is anticipated that an
"executive director" will be hired who will report directly to the board and be responsible
for the following:
o Accounting and annual budgetingo Scheduling of committal and memorial services. Coordination of logistical, parking and transportation anangements, including golf
carts as appropriate, for services to be held in the Memorial Park, particularly
when larger groups are anticipated. Attendance at larger services and services where there may not be a minister or
funeral director in charge. Hiring of maintenance staff or outsourcing of landscape maintenance services. Sales, donations and fund raising. Arranging for memorial engravings and stone selections on site. Ananging for biodegradable urn burials and the scattering of ashes. Correspondenceo Compile documentation on residency and make recommendation to Board
regarding pricing tier eligibility of deceased. Board decisions are final.. Maintenance of permanent records including individual histories and GPS
location of memorials
Basic maintenance will be the responsibility of the executive director but it is anticipated
that it will be contracted out. The park is designed for minimal maintenance. Only
natural materials will be used and they will be used in a natural way. Only native
species will be planted to restore the site and to create memorial groves which will also
act as a buffer and enclosure. Assurance of adequate water will be necessary before
tree plantings are done. No plantings by the public will be allowed. Artificial flowers, etc
4.
will be removed. No grass will be mowed. lt will look like the rest of Katsos Park. An
endowment will be established for perpetual care of the Memorial Park.
Planning alternate arrangements for parking for groups over 30 will be the responsibility
of the executive director, in concert with the deceased's family or their funeral director.
The Director will make anangements for the use of various parking facilities, with MOU's
where possible, and have transportation available at an additional cost to the user. The
parking structures will be used when there is no conflict which would be reviewed in
each instance with the Town of Vail Parking Director. lt is anticipated that most cars will
usually remain at the chapel.
Review Criteria
Minor Subdivision
A basic premise of subdivision regulations is that the minimum standards for the creation
of new lots must be met. This subdivision will be reviewed under Title 13. Subdivision
Regulations, of the Town of Vail Code.
A. The first set of criteria to be considered by the Planning and Environmental
Commission for a Minor Subdivision application is:
Lot Area: There is no minimum lot area for the Outdoor Recreation or Natural
Area Preservation District. The proposed lot size is 11. 13 acres.
Frontaqe: There is no minimum frontage area for the Outdoor Recreation or
NaturalArea Preservation District.
Dimension: There is no minimum dimensions for the Outdoor Recreation or
Natural Area Preservation District. The proposed lot size is 1 1 . 13 acres.
B. The second set of review criteria to be considered with a minor subdivision
request is outlined in the Subdivision Regulations, 13-34, and is as follows:
"The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the
application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of this Chapter,
the Zoning Ordinance and other pertinent regulations that the Planning
and Environmental Commission deems applicable....The Planning and
Environmental Commission shall review the application and consider its
appropriateness in regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control,
densities proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other
applicable documents, environmental integrity and compatibility with the
sunounding land uses and other applicable documents, effects on the
aesfhefrbs of the Town."
The purpose section of Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, is intended to insure that the
subdivision is promoting the health, safety and welfare of the community. The
subdivision purpose statements trom 13-1-2 (G) are as follows:
1. 'To inform each subdivider of the standards and criteia by which
development proposals will be evaluated and to provide information as to
the type and extent of improvements required."
Response.'
The Foundations believes that the proposal is consistent with the intent
and purposes of the Zoning Ordinance.
2. "To provide for the subdivision of propefi in the future without conflict
with development on adjacent land."
Response.'
No land use conflicts are anticipated. The proposed sife desrgn r.s
intended to blend into the natural landscape of Katsos Ranch Park and is
over 1000 feet from adjacent residential property. The eastem poftion of
the site will be maintained and even enhanced as wetlands.
3. "To protect and conserue the value of land throughout the Municipality
and the value of buildings and improvements on the land."
Response.'
No buildings are proposed for this project. No environmental impacts are
anticipated. Infact, the Foundation is working with the Eagle River and
Water District to enhance the wetland area on the site.
4. "To ensure that subdivision of property is in compliance with the Town's
zoning ordinances, to achieve a harmonious, convenient, workable
relationship among land uses, conslsfe nt with Town development
objectives."
Response.'
The Foundation believes that this project is design in harmony with the
natural setting of Katsos Ranch and does not create any environmental
impact or impedes the recreational uses of Katsos Ranch.
5. "To guide public and private policy and action in order to provide
adequate and efficient transpoftation, water, sewage, schools, parks,
playgrounds, recreation, and other public requirements and facilities and
generally to provide that public facilities will have sufficient capacity to
serue the proposed subdivision."
Response:
The creation of a Memorial Park will be a critical community asset. lt will
not have any significant impact on public infrastructure.
6. "To provide for accurate legal desciptions of newly subdivided land and
to establish reasonable and desirable construction design standards and
procedures."
Response.'
A proposed plat has been provided with the application
7. "To prevent the pollution of air, streams and ponds, to assure adequacy
of drainage facilities, to safeguard the water table and to encourage the
wse use and management of naturalresources throughout the Town in
order to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the community and
the value of the land."
Response,'
An Environmental lmpact Report has been prepared for this project. No
signiflcant impacts are anticipated. The major mitigation of impacts
involves the strict regulation of parking at the site for groups over 30 in
size.
Rezoninq
1)The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with all the
applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the
Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of
the Town.
The Comprehensive Land Use Plan identified Katsos Ranch as Open Space.
The Open Lands PIan also identifies Kafsos Ranch as senslfive natural area.
The proposed rezoning to Outdoor Recreation with the proposed Memorial Park
Plan is still consistent with the Town's comprehensive plans and development
objectives.
The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the existing and
potential land uses on the site and existing and potential surrounding land uses
as set out in the Town's adopted planning documents.
The proposed land use will not impact adjacent property owners. Ihe c/oses
home is over 1000 feet away and screened by vegetation. The proposed design
of the Memorial Park compliments the natural landscape and avoids impacts to
wetlands. ln fact, there is now the opportunity to enhance the existing wetland
area on Kafsos Ranch through a partnership with the Eagle River Water Distict.
The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious,
convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal
development objectives.
The proposed deslgn r.s intended to blend into to the natural landscape. There
should be no interference to the existing recreational path on Katsos Ranch.
4) The extent to which the zone district amendment provides for the growth of an
orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the amendment
serves the best interests of the community as a whole.
2)
3)
A memoial pa*, as proposed, is an important component to the life cycle of a
community. The park is intended to celebrate and memoialize individuals that
have contributed to the Vail community. The proposed zoning of Outdoor
Recreation is one of the three Open Space Zone Drsfricts. The Comprehensive
Land Use Plan identifies thrs s/e as Open Space and sfates that Katsos Ranch
is'appropiate for passive outdoor recreation." The uses rn the OR zone Distict
are controlled through a conditional use permit.
The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or beneficial
impacts on the natural environment, including but not limited to water quality, air
quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corridors, hillsides and other desirable natural
features.
The proposed park avoids impacting wetlands. lnfact, there is the opporlunity to
expand wetland area on the eastern portion of the site through a partnership with
the Eagle River and Water District. An Environmental lmpact Repoft has been
prepared and no other significant impacts are anticipated.
The extent to which the zone district amendment is consistent with the purpose
statement of the proposed zone district.
Cemeteries are a conditional use in the Outdoor Recreation Zone District. The
proposed natural design of the Vail Memorial Park is consrsfenf with the purpose
statement within the Natural Area Preservation Zone District.
The extent to which the zone district amendment demonstrates how conditions
have changed since the zoning designation of the subject property was adopted
and is no longer appropriate.
The community has the need for a memorial park. This has been well
documented since the last effort in 1993. Conditions on Kafsos Ranch have not
changed. lt is still a beautiful meadow bordered by lodgepole pine to the south
and Gore Creek on the Nofth. The proposed design of the Vail Memorial Park is
intended to blend in with the natural environment of the site.
Such other factors and criteria as the Commission and/or Council deem
applicable to the proposed rezoning.
Conditional Use Permit
1. Relationship and impact of the use on the development objectives of the Town.
The proposed design of the Vail Memorial Park is congsfenf with the natural sefting
of Kafsos Ranch. lt will maintain the environmental integfty of the site and
potentially even enhance the wetland areas with Kafsos Ranch. The Town Council
has stated that the creation of a memorial park is a valid objective of the Town of
5)
6)
7)
8)
Vail. The proposed design achieves that objective in a way that compliments the
natural character of Katsos Ranch Pa*.
The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation
facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public
facilities needs.
A memorial park is a needed community facility. The only detrimental impact is
potentially parking for large memorial seryices. The Foundation believes this impact
can be mitigated by requiing all memoial groups over 30 to utilize buses or shuffles
to the park from either from the Vail Chapel or the Town's parking structure (in the
summer and shoulder seasons).
Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive and
pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access,
maneuverability, and removal of snow from the street and parking areas.
The Foundation does not believe there will by any impact to circulation or traffic flow
for 90% of the groups using the Memoial Park which are anticipated to be under 30
pafticipants. However, a shuftle sysfem will be required for groups over 30 in size.
Effect upon the character of the
located, including the scale and
surrounding uses.
area in which the proposed use is to be
bulk of the proposed use in relation to
No buildings are proposed as paft of this application.
Submitted Materials
1. Signed application
2. Written Project Description
3. Environmental lmpact Report (Final Wetland
4. Site Plan with wetland delineation
5. Phase 1 plan with limits of site disturbance
6. Stamped Topographic Survey
7. Draft Plan with Title Commitment
Report will be submitted on August 9th)
8. Photos & Drawings of the memorial walls and rocks
9. Elevation of wall to scale (will be fonrvarded to Town on August 1, 2003)
10. Operational Plan (will be submitted on August 1, 2003)
11. Examples of Materials to be proposed (Will be submitted on August th)
Attachment D.
EIR
oo
o
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE VAIL MEMORIAL PARK
July 23,2003
o PreparedJ:H::"T:::H::,::::"="F.rres,
o
t.
2.
4.
5.
5.
6.
Table of Gonbnts
Purpose
Proposed Project
Afiected Environment
Baclqground and Altematives Evaluated
Potential lmpac'ts and Mitigation
Summary dlmpacts
3
4
6
7I
12
Environmental lmpact Report for the
Vail Memorial Park
1.PURPOSE:
The purpose of the Environmental lmpact Report for either a public or private project is
to identify and evaluate environmental impacts associated with a proposed project so
that environmental considerations can be integrated into the decision making process.
The requirements for an Environmental lmpact Report are specfified in Title 12, Chapter
12 of the Vail Town Code. The submission and review of an environmental impact
report is required to achieve the following objectives:
1. Availability Of Information: To ensure that complete information on the
environmental effects of the proposed project is available to the Town Council,
the Planning and Environmental Commission, and the general public.
2. Environmental Protection A Criterion: To ensure that long-term protection of the
environment is a guiding criterion in project planning, and that land use and
development decisions, both public and private, take into account the relative
merits of possible alternative actions.
3. Review And Evaluation Procedure: To provide procedures for local review and
evaluation of the environmental effects of proposed projects prior to granting of
permits or other authorizations for commencement of development.
4. Review And Evaluation Procedure: To provide procedures for local review and
evaluation of the environmental effects of proposed projects prior to granting of
permits or other authorizations for commencement of development.
5. Avoid Geologic Hazard Areas: To ensure that buildings are not constructed in
geologic hazard areas, by way of illustration, flood plains, avalanche paths,
rocKall areas, where such hazard cannot practically be mitigated to the
satisfac{ion of the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Town
Council.
6. Protect Water Quality: To ensure that the quality of surface water and ground
water within the Town will be protected from adverse impacts and/or degradation
due to construction activities. (Ord. 37(1980) $ 10: Ord. 19(1976) $ 14: Ord.
8(1e73) S 16.100)
2.
2.1
PROPOSED ACTION
Description of Action
The Vail Memorial Park Foundation is proposing to create a memorial park on the
eastern 1 1 .1 3 acres of Katsos Ranch Park. The total land area of Katsos Ranch park is
156 acres and it is owned by the Town of Vail. The property is cunently zoned Natural
Area Preservation and is designated open spa@. The property is located at
approximately 8,400 feet elevation within the Gore Creek basin in East Vail. The ranch
is separated from Interstate 70 by Gore Creek. lt is also separated from the residential
development in East Vail by a dense community of willow shrubs.
The Vail Memorial Garden Foundation is proposing to lease Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor
Subdivsion from the Town of Vail (See attachment A). The Foundation would be
responsible for the construction and maintenance of the Park. Three phases are
proposed for the Vail Memorial Park. The Vail Memorial Park Foundation has identified
the following purpose statement for the park:
The Vail Memorial Park will serve to celebrate. remember and honor the lives of
the many people who have helped to define Vail through their experiences and
contributions. By paying tribute to these diverse individuals, we will strengthen
our sense of community, build upon our history and connect with others who
share a spiritual passion and love for Vail."
Proiect Components
The specific components of the proposal include:
. A double track access path (approximately 400 feet long in phase l) that
connects the existing Katsos Ranch recreational trail to the memorial
park. This path would also provide access for park and Eagle River
Water and Sanitation District maintenance vehicles.
. A 3 wide (250 feet long in phase 1) trail around Phase 1 (All paths are a
crusher fine trail).
Six memorial boulder walls benched into the natural topography at the toe
of the slopes on the south side of the site for all 3 phases. Phase 1 will
include two 50 foot long walls. All walls are less than 4 feet tall.
Natural stones for memorial engravings.
Memorial trees (Lodgepole and Blue Spruce) if inigation can be provided
to the site with the cooperation of the Eagle River Water and Sanitation
District.
Entrance sign to the memorial off of the existing Katsos Ranch Trail south
of the pedestrian bridge.
2.2
2.3
. Burial and scattering of cremated human ashes. Casket burials will not
be allowed on this site.
The memorial park is proposed to be constructed in four phases as shown on the
attached site plan. Phase 1 is intended to last for 10-20 years depending on demand.
No structures are proposed as part of this application. In addition, no lighting is
proposed with this application.
Intensitv of Use
There are currently 41,600 people in Eagle County and there has been a 3% increase in
retirement aged individuals in the County between 1990 and 2000. There are on
average approximately 60-70 deaths per year in Eagle County (Eagle County Coroner).
Based on a market study that was developed for a proposed cemetery at the Upper
Bench of Donovan Park in 1993 it was estimated that approximately 24 memorial events
would occur per year. The Interfaith Chapel cunently conducts approximately 3-12
memorials per year. Approximately 120 people may come to the memorial service and
then on average 15-20 people may come to a burial or inurnment of ashes. Memorial
services occur primarily in the week. Paster Walker of the Vail Interfaith Chapel, who
was interviewed on July 23,2003, stated that with the Vail Memorial Park and an aging
population it is possible to see the number of memorials increase to 50 per year over the
next 10 years. Also it would be possible to have more people choose to combine a
memorial and inurnment service at the Vail Memorial Park Site. Therefore, a
reasonable design target for an average inurnment service could be 20 people with a
maximum number of people at approximately 120 people (5-10 time/year). There could
be a total of 50 memorial events per year during the non winter months primarily during
week days. The average length of time for an inurnment service is approximately 20-30
minutes. lf the Inurnment Service was combined with a memorial service, then the time
could be increased to t hour per service. lt should be noted that the Vail Memorial Park
Foundation will actively discourage large memorial events from occurring on the site to
preserve the natural integrity of the site.
Phasinq Proposed on Site
The applicant is proposing four phases. The first phase is intended to last for 15 years.
The last phase could be implemented in 30-40 years. The applicant is asking that
phases 1 - 4 be approved through a conditional use permit. The applicant is only
pursuing Design Review Board approval for phase 1 at this time. The capacity of each
phase summarized below:
2.4.
I-ATER
Gaoaaal noLal tlsximurn capacity of ths M€mori€l Park i6 veriebL and dficult to es{imsb, s9 is tuturs ddnsnd. Pha6e6 would be bulll gul E3 n€€d6d,
It ia anticipst€d trst lh€ Memoaiel Paak will 8€av€ VEil's n€€d! for st l€a3i € csniury. drd poslibly mudr lono€a.
D€atB in E€Olo Co6ty cnrrr{ly avorqE 6G70 por ye€r, bul felvsr d|oo66 borisl in a local county c€m€16ry. Cr€mataoo aeprosents l66s then haf of
budab n€tionwd€. This suogests tl€l "nomaf'ennual cl€mend tor menoaiEl3 cguld be in the range of I$30, with €ecfi phalo ssaving 1G20 yearE or mor6.
This number could ir|clseso graqtly wilh ctFng 9€l€3 lo non-resid€nls and tamili$ of d€c€tg€d who arB buriod slsavh€r€ btJt want lo b€ rBm€mb€rad in Vail.
(By comparieoc t|€ 1993 Vail C€m€t€ry Mastor Pbn €stnnabd loore.r dqn8 d at 9O0 bur€l 3pes, includir€ tn{Dund ..d crypt csket btrial.)
Notaa:
1. The ont wells phnrEd al€ in phas€5 1, 2 End 3 at tl|€ too of tl|o slop6.lrrall6 in phe!6! 1 .nd 2 tctal.borJt 100 LF e6.h and abod 200 LF h phar.3.
Exaci leaEth will bs det€mined by slakrng h ths field; nunber of inscribtbla bould€rg will depend on typ€ and av6rag6 6ize ot stoalo gnl€cled.
2. Th€ rn€xinum numb€a of momorial boulda|! will dsp€nd orl hor many arB placad along paths in ihe cqffal uplard m€€do\r ar6a9 in let6r phas€s,
66 w6ll as ihc conru€int of svoiding wetland miti0ation erces in th€ €asidn portion of the rit€. Phases 2 and 3 ar6 lar€er in ar€a than phase I .
3. BenafFs will ba insialbd in pr€d€temin€d localions (apDrox. 5 each pt|6s€) when dorEted h 6o.n6ooo'3 momory.
4. C€pacity of pha$! afrea initi€l consfuc{on could b€ iicagas€d (or d€croracd), if d€mand ward{s and t}|e Foundatkrn Boa.d c|€3iros,
by adjusting the lengl|numbor of bould€r walla and the nurnba d bouldBr mark6s and fluah-s€t 6laba.
2.4 Actions Requested of the Town of Vail
The Vail Memorial Park Foundation is making the following requests:
1. Approval of a Minor Subdivision
2. Approval of an application to rezone the memorial park to outdoor recreation.
The Outdoor Recreation District allows cemeteries as a conditional use. Also the
designated open space charter provision allows sites to be rezoned to one of the
three open space zone districts (i.e. Natural Area Preservation, Outdoor
Recreation, and Agriculture and Open Space).
Approval of a conditional use permit for the park and cemetery.
Approval of a design review permit for the park design and sign.
3.
4.
INSCRIBED STONES IN DRY-STACKED BOULDER WALLS 2OO-250 2OO-250 35O4OO O
2 to 2.5 momor|al Inlcriptions p€r lineer foot of wBll - see note t ) (note 4)
€FADE BOULDER MARKERS WITH INSCRIPTIONS 50.60 7S.1OO 7$,1 OO .I5O.3OO
boufders cfustered near intemal wafking patha't (ooto 2)
FLUSH-SET STONE STABS WTH INSCRIPTIONS 100-125 75 50-75 150+
ebngside paliways. along th. brse of merngrial wsllg, gnd in the phase I mcmorlal gathedng space)
9rov6 ar. depend€nt go availability of inigarim water)
750-900
400-560
(note 4)
375425
(noto 1)
85+
4.
AFFEGTED ENVIRONMENT
The Vail Memorial Park site is part of the former Katsos Ranch property in East Vail
purchased as open space by the Town of Vail. lt is a relatively flat alluvial plain bounded
on the north by Gore Creek and the Interstate 70 right-of-way, on the south by US
Forest Service land, on the east by wetlands and a single-family subdivision beyond
them, and on the west by Town open space.
Five vegetation types generally characterize the site:
r A wetland/riparian strip along Gore Creek, consisting primariU of willows, Englemann
Spruce, and a few cottonwoods;. Wetland shrubs and forbs at the eastern end of the site and along portions of
natural swales within the property;. Rows of mature Lodgepole Pine and Cottonwood clustered in the same swales and
depressions but generally not classified as wetlands;. Upland meadows of sage and wildflowers over granular soils extending through the
central east-west axis of the site:o Forest of Lodgepole Pine and Aspen on the slopes to the south.
Although the site was likely cultivated and flood-inigated in the past, the natural
topography has not been altered in any major way. Relatively minor disturbances have
been caused by earthwork associated with the construction of the sanitary sewer line
across the site and the digging of small diversion ditches as part of the Eagle River
Water and Sanitation District's 1995 wetland mitigation plan. The disturbances are
evident where gravelly subsoils excavated from these activities have been disposed of
and have been slow to revegetate naturally. In some of these areas, invasive plant
species, such as Linnaia (Butter and Eggs), have taken root.
There is currently a recreational trail that runs from the Katsos Ranch Trailhead through
the park and connects to Sunburst Drive to the west. This is a heavily used recreational
trail. Approximately 18 parking spaces are available at the east end the Katsos Ranch
Trail which would be the proposed parking for the Vail Memorial Park.
BACKGROUND AND ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
In 1993 an exhaustive study was done to identify a site for a cemetery. Over 1 0
alternatives sites were evaluated for land use, ownership, and environmental
considerations. After a detailed study of the altematives, the upper bench of Donovan
Park was chosen as a prefened alternative. A design was developed and approved by
the Town of Vail which included casket burials. This project was taken to the Vail voters
in 1994 and was defeated. In 2001, a renewed effort in commemorating deceased Vail
locals again became an interest. A committee was established to identify a prefened
location and develop a plan for a memorial park. The committee established three
major criteria for site selection:
r Minimum 5 acres in size
. Access
. Not directly adjacent to residential areas.
O After screening for those criteria the following alternatives were further reviewed.
1. Katsos Ranch
2. Spraddle Creek Trail Head
3. Streamwalk between the Covered Bridge and Ford Park
Given the criteria mentioned above the prefened altematives was Katsos Ranch in that it was
the furthest location from any residential area, had the appropriate size, and had good access.
It also was the most quiet reflective space of the three alternatives. Other environmental
considerations are reviewed below:
Site Water
Resources
Air
Quality
Flora/Fauna Visual
Conditions
Circulation
Katsos Wetlands
exist on
site-no loss
of wetlands
anticipated.
Opportunity
to expand
wetland
area with
the Water
District
No impact Some
vegetation
loss would
occur on the
trail
No
significant
impact is
anticipated
Not visible from
adjancent
homes
18 parking places
are located at the
east of Katsos
Ranch. No impact
is anticipated to
residential areas.
Spraddle
Creek
Spraddle
creek runs
through site,
erosion
control
would be
required
No impact Some
vegetation
loss would
occur on the
trail
No
significant
impact is
anticipated
Site is visible
from mountain.
However, it is
heavily wooded
in the summer
(Aspens)
17 parking places
available at
trailhead.
Streamwalk
(east of
covered
bridge)
Use of
pavers with
names may
increase
velocity of
run-off
No impact No impact is
anticipated
Site would be
visible from
adjacent
properties
Parking would
occur at the
Village Parking
Structure or at
Ford Park, There
could be
pedestrian
conflicts with
memorialservices.
5.
5.1
Other considerations evaluated by the Vail Memorial Committee included noise from l-
70, zoning, impact to adjacent owners, grade, and cost. After reviewing all the
environmental, economic, land use factors the Town Council and the Vail Memorial
Committee choose Katsos Ranch as the preferred location.
POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
Water Resources
Gore Creek runs through the site for approximately 1000 feet. Phase 1 is approximately
230 feet from Gore Creek. Wetlands are located on the site. However, they will not be
impacted by the proposed trails or memorials.
Montane Environmental Solutions, Ltd. (Montane) was retained by Sherry Dorward
ASLA, (Client) to identify jurisdictional wetlands that may occur on a portion of the
Katsos Ranch Open Space parcel located in East Vail, Colorado. lt is located in the NE
% of NW % of Section 11, Township 5 South, Range 80 West, North 39o 38' 38" West
1060 18'37" The delineation was conducted on June 19 and 23.2003 in accordance
with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual.
The jurisdictional wetlands on the property are primarily associated with the alluvial
aquifer of Gore Creek. lt is located within the 100-year floodplain and is subject to
overbank flows in its eastern most section, as witnessed in 2003. In addition, seeps
along the south steep slope support mesic wetland vegetation (Salix monticola,
Meftensia ciliata, and Smilacina stellata). In some instances the plant community does
not meet the dominance criteria for a jurisdictional wetland, although it is a somewhat
moist habitat.
A low lying drainage runs along the base of the steep slopes. This drainage is the
recipient to both some of the seep hydrology and overbank flows of Gore Creek. As
such, it has sections of it that meet the criteria of a jurisdictional wetland. lt is
hypothesized that it is a former side channel to Gore Creek with a substrate of
unconsolidated alluvium and colluvium, which allows periodic draining of surface water
flow and hence the broken jurisdictional wetland boundary.
The remainders of the wetlands are along the bank of Gore Creek and in low lying
polygons within the study area. These wetlands are dominated by willow shrubs (S.
monticola and S. drummondiana) with an understory of dominant Canada reedgrass
(C al am ag rosti s canadensrc).
As part of its approved 1993 plan to enlarge Black Lakes, ERWS identified the Katsos
Ranch property as a wetland mitigation site and committed to restoring 6 acres of
wetlands on the site of which 3 Tz acres are within the proposed boundaries of the
Memorial Park. Although ERWS has not yet been fully successful in re-establishing
wetlands on the property, the designated mitigation sites fall under Army Corps of
Engineers jurisdiction, and VMP is obligated to avoid impacts in those areas as well (or
apply for a 404 permit).
5.2
Although the mitigation areas have not been surveyed and mapped, ERWS's consultant
has flagged the edges of the mitigation site adjacent to VMP's first phase. The only
potential conflict is the swale directly north of the primary development areas in phases
1-3, which is included in the mitigation area. The Army Corps of Engineers has informed
the Town of Vail, the Vail Memorial Park Foundation, and ERWS that spanning this
swale with bridges or boardwalks would not impact the District's mitigation plan and
would not require a permit. (See Attachment B.) Development of paths in phases 24
may require wetland permits, depending upon the long-term success of wetland
restoration in the eastem portion of the VMP site.
ERWS and the VMP Foundation are actively cooperating to ensure that wetland
mitigation and the Memorial Park are mutually compatible on the site. ERWS may apply
for an amendment to its water augmentation plan to increase seasonal water flows to
the site, which will be beneficial for VMP's desire to plant memorial groves of trees in
future years.
Environmental Contamination
Toxic materials are a concern from traditional cemeteries with casket burials. However,
cremated remains have similar characteristics as organic fertilizers. The following is a
list of the chemical components and their concentrations of a cremated remain. The
chemical composition of cremated remains is summarized below.
Chemical Gomponents of Gremated Remains
Phosphate
Calcium
Sulfate
Potassium
Sodium
Chloride
Silica
Aluminum Oxide
Magnesium
lron Oxide
Zinc
Titanium Oxide
Barium
Antimony
Chromium
Copper
Manganese
Lead
Tin
Vanadium
Beryllium
Mercury
47.5%
25.3o/o
11.OOo/o
3.69%
1.12o/o
1.00o/o
0.9o/o
O.72o/o
0.418o/o
0.118o/o
O.O342o/o
0.02600/o
0.0066%
0.0035%
0.0018%
0.0017o/o
0.0013o/o
0.0008%
0.0005%
0.0002o/o
<0.0001%
<0.00001%
l0
5.3.
There is some concem in the literature about cancer treatment and the impact on
cremated remains. However, there does not appear to be any human or environmental
risks that can be found with the burial of cremated remains.
The Vail Memorial Park Foundation is also proposing biodegradable urn which would be
buried either behind the memorial walls or underground beside memorial rock. No water
quality impacts or human health concems are anticipated from this proposed action.
Air Quality
No grading is proposed for the project. Therefore there should be no significant dust
generated from the project. Some dust may be generated as paths are created on the
site. There should be no air quality impacts as the result of the operation of the Vail
Memorial Park.
Biotic Conditions
The natural ecosystem of East Vail in this area is a montane environment with aspen
forests dominating the steep valley slopes, which have scattered seeps along their
length creating species rich habitats. ln the drier valley slopes, lodgepole pines and
spruce-fir trees dominate. The undeveloped floodplain of Gore Creek of which the
Katsos Ranch is part, is a mosaic of four dominant vegetative communities: 1)
sagebrush (Artemisia tridentatum) and rabbitbrush (Chrysofhamnus viscidiflorus) 2)
lodgepole (Pinus contorta) 3) Valerian (Valeriana edulrs) and 4) Mountain willow (Sa/ix
monticola).
On July 23,2003, Town staff contacted the Colorado Division of Wildlife to determine if
any threatened or endangered species occupied this area of Katsos Ranch. The
response from the Division was that if wetlands where not disturbed not threatened or
endangered species should be impacted. No threatened plant species have been
found on the site.
The design of the proposed Memorial Park is intended to take advantage of the innate
beauty of the site's natural landscape and to minimize further disturbances. The wetland
areas and forested slopes will be maintained in perpetuity as natural preserves, and all
mature trees will be retained. Most of the development of memorial spaces will be
concentrated in the small clearings at the toe of the forested slopes, where they will be
screened from view. The openness of the upland meadows will be maintained, and over
the long-term, land management strategies will be undertaken to return the vegetation of
the site to a more completely native, self-sustaining composition.
Natural Hazard
The Katsos Ranch area includes all of the Town hazard areas, i.e., snow avalanche,
debris flow, rock fall, and 100 year flood plain. Attachment C shows the various hazards
in the project area. No buildings are proposed in these hazard areas. No grading will
ll
5.4
5.4
5.5
5.5
occur that will increase the flood hazard in the project site. Memorial services will not
occur once snow has covered the site. Therefore. there should be no increase in hazard
to individuals as the result of the memorial site. lt is possible that a falling rock could
damage the path and the memorial walls. This risk will be mitigated by the creation of a
capital replacement fund. The proposed memorial walls will follow the grade of the
slope and should not be considered a structure as defined in section 12-2-2.
The 100 year flood plain does cover a significant portion of the site. Section 12-21-10 of
the Town Code establishes relevant guidelines:
A. No structure shall be built in any flood hazard zone or red avalanche hazard
area. No structure shall be built on a slope of forty percent (40%) or greater
except in Single-Family Residential, Two-Family Residential, or TweFamily
Primary/Secondary Residential Zone Disfnbfs. The term "structure" as used in
this Section does not include recreational structures that are intended for
seasona/ use, not including residential use.
E. The Administrator may require any applicant or person desiing to modify the
flood plain by fill, construction, channelization, grading, or other similar changes,
to submit for review an environmental impact statement in accordance with
Chapter 12 of this Title, to establish that the work will not adversely affect
adjacent properties, or increase the guantity or velocity of flood waters. (Ord.
16(1983) $ 1: ord 12(1978) S4)
After reviewing the floodplain maps, the proposed concept plan, and the above
mentioned regulations, the Foundation believes that the proposed project complies with
the Town's hazard regulations. No structures are proposed anywhere on the VMP site
as part of this application, and no grading is proposed that would increase the 'quantity
or velocity of flood waters."
Land Use Conditions
Adjacent uses include primary/secondary two family residential properties east of the
park and on the north side of the interstate. The closest residential property from the
site is over 1000 feet away. The Katsos ranch property is zoned Natural Area
Preservation and provide a natural park setting for Vail residents and guests. The only
major recreational use on Katsos Ranch is the recreational trail that runs east west on
the property. Access on this recreational trail can be gained from Sunburst Drive to the
west and from the south side of the East Vail Interchange. No adverse land use impacts
are anticipated as the result of this projecl.
Visual lmpact
One of the major design goals of this project is to blend the design of the park into the
natural environment so that there is little or no visual impact as the result of the
Memorial Park. Adjacent property owners will not see the improvements on the site.
Recreational trail users would see a new 5-8 foot path coming from the Katsos Ranch
Trail along with an entry feature. The rocks being proposed for the Park will not be cut
and smooth. Rather they will appear as natural rocks that may have fallen from the
hillside. The Foundation is also proposing that all flowers and religious icons be banned
ll
5.6
from the site to further ensure that the site appears as a natural meadow. The
Foundation would be responsible for informing memorial groups that flowers or other
objects shall not be left on the site. The Foundation would also be responsible for
maintaining the site to ensure landscaping and trails are maintained.
Circulation and transportation conditions
Eighteen parking spaces are cunently available at the Trail Head for Katz's Ranch. An
averaged sized memorial service of 15-20 people would generate 8-10 vehicle trips
which could be accommodated at the trailhead parking. However, a larger memorial
service, over 30 people, i.e. generating 15 or more vehicles, could not be
accommodated on the site.
Mitigation for larger groups to prevent parallel parking on Bighom Rd would be required.
The lnterfaith Chapel and the Vail Memorial Park Foundations proposes to require the
use of buses from the Chapel parking or Vail parking structure for events over 25 people
the Interfaith Chapel has agreed to provide parking with the 37 parking spaces at the
chapel. In addition, the parking structures in the summer could provide parking for large
memorial services in the non winter months. The Vail Mountain School has also stated
that would review requests to use their parking lot in the summer. The family or friends
organizing a memorial service would be required for groups over 30 individuals to
provide a shuttle service for memorial service participants.
Population Characteristics
This project will not contribute to an increase in population or should generate new
development around the project site.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
No significant impacts are anticipated as the result of this project. Wetlands may infact
be improved as the result of additional wetland creation through a partnership between
the Eagle River Water District and the Vail Memorial Park Foundation. The design of
the Memorial Park is intended to blend into the natural environment.
The only impact associated with the memorial park is potentially parking along Bighorn
Road. lt is recommended that a limit be placed on 30 memorial participants at once
utilizing the park. lf more participants are anticipated then the Foundation should then
require the use of shuftle buses from the Vail Chapel.
5.7
6.
Attachments:
A.
B.
c.
Site Plan
Wetland Study
Hazard Study and Floodplain
l3
&{ .i:c .:.'a '!.ts z;,,EqlEGliilHfrr,=a: ,$i,'
j
t\
; ,.:7. .-,.4l.l c ::';igli:riii'|:.az.:yr;:ti
.9
?t;?
i?
si
i
t*
a-6
r'i
i{
,,-.''''\
,i " . : .lir :ri: l ':.1.: -':i
.l a.
; ... : :j;rl:; ia: ti'!: i' ;r.,'
:'. :'.: | 1l::, "t ::. -. iii ,.4 ::l
i.r i.. ?... i -,: lla ::::::!:"': i::;l:-.: :.
;r i:'i i,ir ::=:; ::i i?li 6:r
:; i:!.;r' ::iY
i:;{ r: - !:.
:
a
'" a-
/i
::
;
qi;
l!;i:
rl
I
L!,
<7**:,fi::'.'":-",:l'-
(970) 476.7480 . FAX (970) 476-4089
o
September 5,2003
Russell W. Forrest
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
RE: Vail Memorial park Master plan
Dear Russ:
The Eagle River Water & Sanitation District has reviewed the most recent version of the
site plan for the proposed vail Memorial park to be located at the Katsos Ranch open
Space. The District has established a wetland mitigation site at Katsos Ranch, which was
authorized by the Vail rown council in January 1992 (Resolution No. 24, series ofl99l). We appreciate the efforts of Russ Forrest, Sherry Dorward and the Memorial park
Task Force to coordinate planning and design of the park with the District so that impacts
to the wetland mitigation areas can be avoided.
lhe sile plan dated July 28,2003 addresses olu concems related to the configuration of
Phase I of the Vail Memorial park Master plan. The access pathway from G bike path
to the Phase I area will not impact the wetland mitigation siti, if oriiges or elevated
boardwalks are installed to span the drainage swale located to the noih of the phase Iloop. For the main entrance path to phase I, a bridge span of at least 20 feet will be
needed to avoid impacts to the wetland mitigation are4 and for the secondary entrance
path, a span ofat least 25 feet will be needed. Bridge support pilings can be locatedwithil the drainage swale without adverse impacts to tljmitigatiorisite and without
applying for a permit from the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers.l
we believe that the use of bridges or boardwalks to span the drainage swale will
eliminate any potential conflict between Phase I of the Mernorial plt ana the District's
mitigation areas. The District will take fulI responsibility for coordination with the U.S.Army corps of Engineers regarding potential impacts to the wetland mitigation site.
With regard to Phases tr through IV of the Vail Memorial Park, additional work is needed
t9 more precisely define the extent of wetland mitigation areas, based upon water
distribution, topographic conditions and regulatory requirements of the'corps ofErgrneers. In addition, the District is inveitigating possible improvements to the water
distribution system including the installation bfaiversion structures and a pond. This
\WATER, WASTEwATeR, Opennrror.rs & Mnruceverur SERVTcES N
Russell W. Forest
September 05,2003
Page2
effort will be coordinated with the vail Mernorial park Foundation with the purpose of
T-antaining a successful wetlands mitigation site ttrat is nrly compatiute witrr trcMemorial Park.
we would appreciate the opportunity to review the design plans for the phase I bridges orboardwalks. If you have any questions or need any adailtional aetaits, prease feel free tocontact me,
Sincerely,
Eagle River Water & Sanitation District
Mark Gilfillan, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Robert M. Weaver, Hydrosphere Resouice Consultants, Inc.
Dennis Gelvin, General Manager
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
VAIL ME]VIORIAL GARDEN AT KATSOS RANCH
SECTION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NUMBER
I.INTRODUCNO
il. VICINITY AND CENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION
III. WETLAND DESCRIPTION
A VEGFTAT1ON
B..SOLS
C. HYDROLOGY
IV. METHODS USED
V. RESOURCES
APPENDICES
FICURES
FICURE I - SITE VICINTTY, VAIL EASI COLORADO 7.5 MINUTE QUAD
FIGURE 2_WETLAND BOUNDARY SURVEYED BY PEAK LAND SURVEYORS,
FRISCO, COLORADO
PHOTOCRAPHS
DATA FORMS
WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
VAIL MENIORIAL CARDEN AT KATSOS RANCH
INTRODUCTlON
Montane Environmental Solutions, Ltd. (Montane) was retained by Sherry Donward AS[.A,
(Client) to identifu jurisdictional wetlands that may occur on a portion of the Katsos Ranch Open
Space parcel located in East Vail, Colorado. It is located in the NE t/ of N'W 7+ of Section 11,
Township 5 South, Range 80 '!Uest, North 39" 38' 38" \fest 106' 18' 37" (FIGURE l). The
propery is accessed from Interstate 70 to Exit 180, to Bighorn Road, which is south of the
highway. The ranch is on the south side of Gore Creek. The study area was a proposed parcel of
the Katsos Ranch created by the Vail Memorial Garden Committee (FIGURE 2). The property is
approximately !3 Vz acres comprised of open dry meadow, riparian, and aspen/cottonwood and
lodgepole forests.
The delineation was conducted on June 19 and 23,2003 in accordance with the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (Corps) 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual.
II. VICINITY AND GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION
The property is located at approximately 8,400 feet elevation within the Gore Creek basin in East
Vail. The ranch is separated from Interstate 70 by Gore Creek. A dense community of willow
shrubs also separates it from the residential development in East Vail, which is east of the parcel.
The natural ecosystem of East Vail in this area is a montane environment with aspen forests
dominating the steep valley slopes, which have occasional seeps within them creating species rich
habitats. On the drier valley slopes, lodgepole pines and spruce-fir trees dominate. The
undeveloped floodplain of Gore Creek of which the Katsos Ranch is part, is a mosaic of four
dominant vegetative communities: 1) sagebrush (Senphidiurn vaseyanum) and rabbitbrush
(Chrysorhamnru viscidiflorus) 2) lodgepole (Pinus contorta) 3) Valerian (Valcnam eduiis) and 4)
Mountain willow (Salu monticola).
Precipitation in June 2003 was 148% of average. According to the Natural Resource Consewation
Service, the SNOTEL station at Vail Mountain registered 2.2 inches of rain. The average
precipitation for June is 1.8 inches. Snowpack was 28% of average at the time of the delineation
and while Gore Creek saw higher than normal flows during May and June, they have been
attributed to a quicker than normal snowmeltr.
Iil. WETLAND DESCRIPTION
The jurisdictional wetlands on the property are primarily associated with the alluvial aquifer of
Gore Creek. The majority of the site, primarily the open meadow is within the 100.year
I http,//www.*cc.nrcs.usda.gov/cgibin/precip.pl?state=colorado
Vetla'nd Delineanor VaiI Memoiql Card'en D. I
floodplainz. The boundary begins at the southeast corner of the proposed property and continues
in an equidistant corridor along Gore Creek. There is a slight topographical change from the
floodplain to an elevation at the toe of the steep slopes that demarcates the boundary.
The wetlands located on the property other than the riverine wetland along Gore Creek are low-
lying, within depressions or drainages and typicaily dominated by willow shrubs. The transition
from wetland to upland is obvious in these areas because the topography is abrupt and the
vegetation immediately changes from willows and a wetland understory to a sagebrush,/rabbitbrush
dryland.
Wetland C is a slope wetland that originates near the base of the steep slope in the southeast
region of the parcel. It, too, is dominated by willow but its transition is gradual into the species-
rich aspen forest higher on the slope. The wetlands along the banks of Gore Creek are less distinct
in that the transition from riverine wetland to upland is gradual and includes mesic species such as
Canada reedgrass (Calamogrostis conadensis), geranium (Geranium richardsonii), and bedsrraw (GaLium
septentriorwb).
The parcel is also the location of a mitigation site for the Upper Eagle Valley '!ilater and Sanitation
District Permit Number 9560 - Katsos Ranch. The mitigation plan required "construction of a
drop structure or series of drop strucnrres in Gore Creek to raise the level of the stream and the
water table and to allow a portion of the flow in Gore Creek to return to the abandoned oxbow."
The "oxbow" is referring to the drainage located at the base of the steep slope on the south side of
the parcel within the lodgepole gallery.
While the ditches have water periodically within them, they do not support a predominance of
wetland vegetation. The wetland consultant for the EV\7SD believes the ditches may be
maintaining some of the wetlands in the low-lying areas particularly !?etland L
The wetland boundary along the banks of Gore Creek is les distinct like that of l7etland C, in that
the transition from riverine wetland to upland is gradual and includes mesic species such as
Canada reedgrass (Cala.n'ngrostis canadensis), geranium (Geranium nchardsonii), and bedstraw
(C allium s e p tentn onale).
A. VEGETATION
Wetlands on rhe property are predominantly a mosaic of shrub wetlands dominated by
Salix drummondii and Salix m.onacola, both common willows of the montane zone and
dominant in Eagle County. Along Gore Creek trees such as alder (Alnru rcnuifolia) ard
Engelmann spruce (Picea engelrnannii) with occasional Colorado spruce (Picea pungeru) occur
within the mosaic.
In the dry open areas sagebrush (Senphidium tid.entatum spp. ruasetan rn) dominates,
transitioning into sloping meadows of valerian (Vabiana edr,riis) on the south perimeter.
2 http,,7-ww.hazardmaps.gov/atlas.php
'Wetlanl DeLircariot VaiL MemoriaL Gard,et
Transition from wetland to upland is abrupt with stony upland areas dominated by
pussyroes (Antenna,ria sp), buckwheat (Eriogonum umbelhtum), fleabane (Erigeron sp), and
disrurbed areas invaded by toadflax (Linaaa vulgaris) with houndstongue (Cynoglossrrn
officinaln).
The table below lists native species characteristic of wetlands on the property.
WETLAND VEGETATION COMMON NAME
Ac oni tum c olumb i onum FA CW Monkshood
Alnus tncatw tenuifolid OBL Thin leaf alder
Betula slandulosa OBL Boe birch
C alamasr o s ti s C arwdcnsi s O BL Canada reedgrass
C ar damine cor dif oli a O B L Bittercress
D i s ti se a iru) olucr at a F AC Twinberrv honevsuckle
Eduisetum anetue FAC+Field horsetail
G ahum s b e t entri orlale F ACU Northern bedstraw
C eranium rtchardsonii FAC Geranium
Heracbum lanatum FAC Cow-parsnip
Maianthcmutn stellntum F AC False Solomons seal
SaLa drummondii OBL Bluestem willow
Salix monticoLa OBL Mountain willow
HYDROLOGY
The majoriry of the wetlands on the property are supported by the alluvial aquifer of Gore
Creek. lts influence is caprured where the topography is low and the plants can reach the
water table. It appears that groundwater also nears the surface near'lVetland C from the
steep slopes of East Vail. The wetland boundary extends up the slope, which is likely due
to the groundwater nearing the surface where the steep slope begins to decrease.
At the time of the delineation, Gore Creek was receding from its flood stage. Some of the
mitigation ditches had water in their initial reaches. Montane made an assumption that at
that time, the water level may have been at ordinary high water and therefore the boundary
of standing water became the boundary of the wetland. A vegetation indicator could not
be used in these reaches because there were no plants gtowing in the ditches, and soil pits
could not be dug due to the large cobbles.
soil-s
There is no soil survey coverage for the East Vail area by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service. However it is possible that the soil identified is a transition of two
soil series because of its location at the valley bottom and within the floodplain of Gore
Creek. The soil found near the toe of the steep slope maybe the Almyseries. This is based
on its description in the soil survey which states that is it a reddish brown loam, dark
reddish brown when moist and formed in alluvium derived dominantly from calcareous
B.
C
'WetbnA Delitzatiotr VaiL Memvrial Gorden
tedbed sandstone and shale. The soil in Sample Point 1\il7et most resembled this soil rype.
The other soil type found in Sample Point 2\7et resembled that of a Mollisol in its soft
textured loam. However, its dark chroma and aquic moisture regime met the hydric
indicator.
N. METHODS USED
The wetland delineation methods used were in accordance with the U.S. Armv Corps of Ensineers
Wetlands Delineation Manual, January 1987. A routine on+ite inspection for'Areas Equal to or
L€ss than 5 Acres in Size'was performed.
The data for the sampling points included vegetation and hydrology indicators. Two soil pits were
dug to a depth of lGinches and were used to identifr the presence of reduced soil conditions;
depth to saturated soil, and depth to free water.
(obligate, facultative wet, and facultative), indicators ofwetland hydrology, the presence of hydric
' soils, and topography.
V. RESOURCES
o 1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1987),'Wetland Delineation Manual.
2. U.S. Fish and Vildlife Sewice (1988), National List of Plant Species that Occur in r0?etlands
(Region 8).
3. U.S. Narural Resource Conservation Service (1980), Soil Survey of Summit County Area
^tlt,oloraoo.
+. ltl"l"" \Xi.A. (1996), Colorado Flora,(Westem Slope), Colorado Associated University Press.
WetlznL Delircador VaiL Menmial Gar&n t 4
o
o
o
o
fi)/Zt
(RED CLIFF)
4763 rt S€
SCALE 1:24000
uscs 7.5 MlN. QUAD
VAIL EAST, COLORADO
FICURE I
SITE VICINTTY
VAIL ME 1ORIAL CARDEN
I
I
oRtPtIc sclll
t!!'E-Eltl!
rxrf!r.rtrAtrrr|reE.r.dtrr,t r^at- t ra -E l-rarF
lQt^
'<a-'o)4,ro
\ ",ro
\ 'rl{ir ),
.l\
._.etie
'\,.
i
.rsb 61 0r$ .o
srinr@tdiF r.r q- t/r tI .r i' 'r
A PARI bF SEC 2,
T5S.l R60!Y
*f!€'sftr
\
Bn'9!'*rDgr...E
Rro54'5J'E - 52.00'
'Ed-Blr.F'a..'Ei--E-EF-il|ffisn
'-*=:F"
O
PHOTOGRAPH I. AT BIKE PATH BRIDGE LOOKINC WEST.
PHOTOCRAPH 2 ATSOUTHERN FOOTPATH LOOKING EAST.
ca PBIC ltcll.l
t!+ti|.EfcE-
AIIILEEIE
:i,F,i-s#ri r €,$.f-li*:..FJ;,
-i'#.rtrra.c
caELnE!
fo
1*t"",\ '')o
tri*l--*riffiffiFwerr"
fi.?*ffiraazw=.*qanta".
r1r05. sJ'e - 3100
\--)>.:'\.
o
PHOTOCRAPH 3. FROM EAST END OF WM-ANID H LOOKING EAST IN LODCEPOLE GALLERY'
PHOTOCRAPH 4. WEILAND C. LQOKINC SOUTHEAST.
PHOTOCRAPH 5. FROM EAST END OF WEII.AND I LOOKING NORTH INTO UPLANIDS'
PHoTocRAPH6.uPLANDSIMMEDIATELYSoUTHoFGORECREEKRIVERINEWETLAND.
PHOTOCRAPH 7. MAN-MADE DITCH AS PART OF MITICATION FOR EVWSD"
PHoTOGRAPH8.uPLANDSoFPROPoSEDPARCELLooKINGNORTHEAST.SMooTHBROME
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
:
Applicant / Owner V
exist on the site?
ls the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
ls the area a potential Problem Area? (lf needed, explain on reverse) YES NO
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Soecies Stratum lndicator
1 A^{ r J. Monh co la ?S OBL-I
2 (/b.**rcrb.+ '0,^^d u 68.1-10
3 s,r,,tJo.it*-U-od41 H €ac 11
4 (fikltvvt.t 5Q H ku 12
5 -ilnalir*"r'r,*v1 ky.ale i H wV t-13
o 14
15
tt to
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-)
Remarks
..: ,:
HYDROLOGY
WETLANO HYDROLOGY INDICATORS
Primary Indicators:
I lnundated
n Saturated in Upper 12 lnches
n water Marks
I orift Lin""
! Sediment Deposits
I Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary lndicators (2 or more Required):
n Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12Inches
f] Water-stained Leaves
D tocat Soil Survey Data
I FAc-Neutral Test
n Otn.r (Explain in Remarks)
f] Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
n str."r, Lake, or Tide Gauge
! Aeriat Photographs
I otn",
! No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS
Deoth of Surface Water
Deoth to Free Water in Pit
Oeoth to Saturated Soil
DATA FORM
VEGETATION
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Applicant / Owner
Community lDDo Normal Circumstances exist on the site
ls the site signilicantly disturbed (Atypical Siiuation)?
ls the area a potential Problem Area? (lf needed, axplain on reverse) YES NO
Dominant Plant Species Stratum lndicator Dominant Plant Soecies Stratum lndicator
a /\ l' I - r '/| 54lry f!,r.flAnLola ,
a\O&1-9
2 ?uufupL..Ftc"rbnnpb S A<)'10
3 \/a\evtc"na gcl"lL:K F* c-11
a kr^\ivr ^ s€rt H LAl-LA 12
.13
o 14
7 15
I
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-)
Remarks
HYDROLOGY
WETI.AND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS
Primary Indicators:
n Inundated
;,ZI Saturateo in Upper 12 Inches
n water Marks
I Drift tin""
I Sediment Deposits
fl Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary lndicators (2 or more Required):
D Oxidlzeo Root Channels in Upper '12 Inches
! Water-stained Leaves
n tocat Soil Survey Data
E FAC-Neutral Test
n Otn"r (Explain in Remarks)
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
n Str."r, Lake, or Tide Gauge
n Aerial Photographs
n otn"t
D No Recorded Data Available
FIELD OBSERVATIONS
Depth of Surface Water
Deoth to Free Water in Pit
Depth to Saturated Soil
DATA FORM
VEGETATION
HYDROLOGY
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Lw\ \\u_(}-ghL\r-
E.j""vsi,"W oate Jftl.D\
County f,atf-4.
tt,Investlgator T\\ 4A-\i4 State 'J
#
Do Normal Circum$t4ndes exist on the site?w4 YES NO Community lD
ls the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situatiln)? V\ ,-) YES NO Transect lD
ls the area a potential Problem Area? (tf needed, explain on raverse) YES /y7 Plot lD 4r'-4 t-{
Dominant Plant SPecies
of Dominant Species that are OBL' FACW, or FAC (excluding FAC-)
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
I Str""., Lake, or Tide Gauge
I nerial Photographs
E otn"t
No Recorded Data Available
n
n
WETLAND HYDROLOGY INDICATORS
Primary Indicators:
I lnundated
I Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
fl water Marks
fl orift Lin".
E Sediment Deposits
fl Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more Required):
n Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
n Water-stained Leaves
I Local Soil Survey Data
fl FAC-Neutral Test
! otit"r (Explain in Remarks)
FIELO OBSERVATIONS
Deoth of Surface Water (in)
/
Depth to Free Water in Pit
I I (in)
F
Depth to Saturated Soil (in)
Potential Natural Hazards for the 2W 0 200 400 Feet
=. J/ail Memorial Park 1" = 300'
aoo
It
I
uSaa_-oE5$ieJqa
$"ffi L'&',;*#,w'rfi lr .Iw,gLif,rr "
0
qr-:;.--.--\
(-"
1 ,----.\<1'l
PANNAL TOFOGRAfHIC MAP I]{D
IMPROVEMENT LOCATION CERTIIlCATE
PAFT Ot SECTTON 2. T5S, R80t, 8th P.M.
TO'N OF VAII,
EACLE COUNTY, COII)RADO
IgF6'9iH51d l''t
KAISOS RANCH
€r 9 Pedestran Bidq.
('r.t.d ror r0,000 lb. lo.d3)
KEY
M'MOEIAI WAILs W/ INSCRIBFO BOIJTOFRS
\
IOV Recre.tlon PJth
W.tl.nd Mitlq.tlon Araa
t ntry reatsr. and sl9n
Pot.^lial x.w B'ids€
{Ft.. rhrr.l.
. CRUSHED STONE PATH 4 WIOE
ll rrsonrer aottt orns
.:. ASII5CATIERINGGARDFN
'!Fl MEMoRT^L GRovEs
\t-
- ^ EXISIING MAIURE TREES
llt rrlqTING wEltar{Ds
.gfa
tnv.6o.t4qa+4
4nr)D
ADA C,orhed Stone Pctn
R.ro(ted throrgh l.lcmorlal ar.ar
NOTES
lWr-
iVAIL MEMORIAL PARK
]MASTER PLAN
iKATSOS RANCH OPEN SPACE
VAIL, COLORADO
lJ -r y 28, 2o0l
ooo
5r.
-/\-
---3= 3\=
orrurnY FEATURE o
oN"/{.v+effi2(ffi.TqJ+ z-ffi>
,,J / LUT- 0 uT + r vd2v?T(aft@re#tJ@
vJe>I-lrm> [2b(e4+Ltt'ptD{44ff-Q-#,,AoA
HAtry_NZWreAlL_+q-(oq-r2 AUrg.X\/ef?
o
IAW?(aw6eqA?tJ/wwfial n'@f1fid
o
?LEUN0d
- l, _/lI r \\-
\---J
W{-afactraz H)urW+
tJrIrl va,4r2Ux> lt)offiKtot9
o
MEMORIAL BOULDER WALL
q^tuA,?
h>#Av
e+1tu MA/WA)A?\2N F+4u+
hla..uu o? Jt (7T /xw?-?w#1r{rz rT
oo
1/2" = l'- 0"
o
il
';- W2u,t rW+ !L,rz- 4' til DtAlAqe?,wffim>T)rEtrd %2uAt/To/a(*aevttrT+
qry.Vjftafau.{Wz= WJrefiT
10 (P<wl,'@ L A i 1gai66A7(x-3 Ctrted-t eP taAp?P rF<rdo
n1'-4.-ti ),
ffi|l612dvlfr+t4AVfr_-A)?tWeVJPeal-t(Ore47ffi;vw&te@t%>
MEMORIAL BOULDERS
1/2" = l'-0"
ooo
rl-hAtdav4+ft4ot1?
TFrp:(rAtc
l"t4(Ure- qTue tr4fuNcrr)1%re.w-ffv1G2=!zqpa7.2wlve4r0d?w*
o V4<ffiav IrAVt\b4T0drV=+
@#W,*WZ"-;
MEMORTAL GATHERTNG SPACE (PLAN)
v2t'6261Atffi)t&e )L,4AW-4'isVy :\
(€oreT,ffi)/2Lrewaald '
o 1/8" = l'-0"
Iffi(WfAt*UtA?WuvWrz=-
_?L'{-TO(@E\&>*1aaar1?((r-D,rL ce? 4'Aau+d>wc+- aFryrevpf( %c? E ^D(>? oe- alnlo(+F ftAH vielJ
SEATWALL @ MEMORIAL GATHERING SPACE
1/2" = l'- 0"
o o
rNVeAf+U+r-L
rAtvwvN
6
o
o,4o/" a€olJA
+-_ -_-:
1"1474t11--/-t vwV?zryP'1er-1ff?ryrd?fi?e*z-+ffi? 4c-r>awe{?.e.
+t,w @"efe
FV,e'. (N4 to rr* b?A Aa7ztet v1f4 aTAde^W? \t*fr{ht?a> ra( DW Ntdffi?HzvhAet ri;c-.
AA?\CIEDa)ffiAPZ
o
oo
l " = l'-
o
na4m\V 41a1€2+
.MfFf. td'*to'x4+e
. [vlp$(. 4/to x]b" x 4tl
o
o
a,q./. mwJr4
4- -----_>
-+Tflil4|tnlaery
,n**rt?e4+(e
4,,Wav$
^(fuaTa
yr?
revWr4?+'z
C0\4MA"qAffiA@
r:.;".;rll "Jiti1r.Yre-qr Y4rvnrAL4a4e<hv1 w t)(ae? @eL Te?Q)?!a>#CF2MATA+ Uft14"
MEM IAL ST NES ALON PATH ECTION
o
'ffi:;::
F-';-;l-;"-tini-t .i f ig ifiiiF
I" = l'-0"
o
o
o
;t4eyVatAt-4a1*4ef/Y -w+ftrxA-
' Q(arje4(o re@frf 6D)ryj'-2tr 4-bqh1#l'tuhd"w/ur+W:'-r
rrevre 4t7ttNV?@ MrX)
I-IAX,C2b(%AN::zed-..qA1%4,-,?n-v :j ' i "'E.vt/i?uitfuaFAir(?-
MEMORIAL STONES ALONG PATH
o 1" = l'- 0"o
PLAN
o
t?,w)e?42d?
ItrC+z-
Lfucl"" 4f4le-
T66a^
,tW@>?(FffiP
,47y57fulfA1ztq2@
.t ;
2'WA'7441tr?
4' @>r>Na,ca'ryMar)
aq%rcDAWaeYp-AA*evaueWorvf;e| NcWAa-?,Pa)eE'Tgcr-me 4.trTxa-ea3'@wA7aa
L ra-ta>L r71anlfajArlp v*|c&z
I
PEDESTRIAN/ MAINTENANCE PATH
ooo
t-iIrflrmD Ill|Gxet|l<rr.lI .o - -t*o- I
I Hr-.-- Ilrr,^--- |I ^--tii-n IIH|_-|
I-- II-ll-It-I
t-lt-Il-ll-l
t-l
$
$
rE
E$
H$r3F :
Til3
cre*raIt|
ar vrt
ooo
o
ATTAHCMENT F
RESPONSES TO THE PEC MEETING OF AUGUST 25,2003
TO: Plonning ond Environmentol Commission
FROM: VoilMemoriolPorkFoundolion
DATE: September 3, 2003
SUBJECT: Response to lssues Roised ol fhe August 25,2OO3 PEC Meeting
Thonk you for your input ond the issues you roised ot lhe August ZSth peC
meeting. In lhis memo, ihe Foundotion wishes to respond lo eoch of your issues.
We ore confidenf thol oll of them con be odequolely oddressed lhrough the
conditionol use process. Furthermore, we ore proposing to corefully lrock ond
review fhe progress of the Voil Memoriol Pork (VMP) during the first yeor of
operotion to ensure thol ony unforeseen conflicfs or problems ore identified ond
odditionol meosures devised lo mitigoie lhem.
A. Inlenslty of Use: The PEC wos concerned obout the intensity of use of the
Memoriol Pork ond the potentiol conflicts ii might creofe on the frontoge
rood qnd the exisiing recreolion pofh.
The studies prepored in 1993 for the cemetery proposed of Donovon Pork
estimoied that 24 memoriol evenis would occur in o yeor, but lhis
number included cosket buriols. Bosed on informolion from the Voil
Inferfoith Chopel, services typicolly lost I hour or less ond ore most oflen
scheduled during weekdoys. On overoge, 15-20 people - usuolly the
immediote fomily - ottend o groveside interment (cosket buriol) or
inurnment (urn buriol) service, wiih the memoriol service, iypicolly lorger,
occurring beforehond of the Chopel.
Anticipofing the possibility thol some fomilies moy wish to hold the enlire
memoriol service of the siie. the Foundolion will toke lhe following ociions
lo mitigoie potentiol conflicts ond protect the noturol environmenl of the
site:
l. Highly visible coutionory signoge ol eoch end of the Kotsos Ronch
recreotionol troil will be erected where people going to the memoriol
pork willjoin the recreolion polh. These signs will sfote thot thol cyclists
need lo dismount during memoriol services.
2. Friends of the fomily, congregolion members or funerol home stoff will
be stotioned on the recreolionol poth fo inform cyclisls thot o
memoriol service is occuning ond osk them to be coreful, slow down
or dismount when lhot memoriol services consists of more thon 25
people.
3. Informolion hondouts oboui occess, porking, ond sofefy on the
recreofion poth will be dislributed of the lime of sole of memoriol
stones ond of ihe time of o service, through funerol homes, poslors,
ond the VMP director.
4. Stringent monogemenl of construction use will occur lo prevent
conflicts on the troil. This will include the use of signs ond flogmon.
5. Memoriol services expected to be lorger thon 25 people will be
slrongly discouroged. In VMP's morketing moteriols, ihe sife will be
described os mosf oppropriole for inlimote fomily inurnment services.
5. After the first yeor, lhe Voil Memoriol Pork Foundotion will review usoge
lo identify ony operotionol issues. lf necessory, the Foundotion will
consider odditionol physicol improvements lo reduce lhe potentiol for
conflicts, such os widening the grovel shoulders on the recreofion polh
between the porking lol ond the VMP {where lopogrophy ollows)ond
using lemporory meons lo cordon off o pedestrion lone.
In oddifion, VMP will loke the following octions to reduce porking conflicls on lhe
fronloge rood:
l. The VMP Director will require oll memoriol services likely to be oliended
by more thon 25 people to ufilize ride-shore or shutfle vons from the
Chopel (or other memoriol service venue), io be orgonized by funerol
home, postor, or fomily in conjunction with VMP director.
2. lf ofler one yeor ihere ore comploints to lhe Town obout porking on
lhe fronloge rood, the Foundolion will pursue fhe creotion of
oddilionol porking ond/or more slringent requiremenls on the
moximum size of memoriol groups.
The Voil Memoriol Pork Foundotion will discouroge lorge memoriol
services {some os #5 obove).
The Voil Memoriol Pork Foundotion will poy for the plocement of
odditionol no porking signs olong Bighorn Rood of the Kotsos Ronch
troilheod.
Copocity: PEC olso hod queslions oboul ihe copocily of the project. The
EIR hos been revised io reflecl the Foundolion's cunenl esiimole of fhe
number of memoriols in eoch phose. lt should be noled thof fhe long-
term copocity ond the inlensity of use of ihe site ore two different lhings.
The increosed number of memoriol opportunities will simply increose ihe
life spon of eoch phose. Regordless of how mony memoriol inscriptions
ore ovoiloble on lhe sife, lhe County will still only experience on overoge
5G70 deoihs per yeor. Nofionolly, fewer thon 5O7o of deoths resull in
cremotion.
Wellond lssues: PEC ex pressed some concerns oboul poteniiol conflicis
with the Eogle River Woter ond Sonitolion District's (ERWS) wellond
mitigotion plon on the siie. Jurisdictionol wetlonds hove been mopped
ond ore idenfified in the ElR. The Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) hos
done o site inspection with Anno Higgins, lhe Foundotion's wetlond
4.
B.
c.
D.
consultont. ond Bob Weover. ERWS's wellond consultont. Conclusions
from this work include:
Proposed improvements in lhe Memoriol Pork do not impoct existing
jurisdicfionol wellonds.
As porl of its opproved 1993 plon to enlorge Block Lokes, ERWS ideniified
the Kotsos Ronch property os o wetlond miligotion sile ond committed to
restoring 5 ocres of wellonds on the site of which 3 % ocres ore within the
proposed boundories of the Memoriol Pork. Although ERWS hos not yet
been fully successful in re-esloblishing wellonds on the property, the
designoled mitigotion sites foll under Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiclion,
ond VMP is obligofed to ovoid impocts in those oreos os well (or opply for
o 404 permii).
Although the miiigotion oreos hove not been surveyed ond mopped,
ERWS's consullonf hos flogged ihe edges of the mitigotion site odjocenl
to VMP's first phose. The only polentiol conflict is the swole directly norlh
of the primory development oreos in phoses l-3, which is included in lhe
mitigotion oreo. The Army Corps of Engineers hos informed the Town of
Voil, the Voil Memoriol Pork Foundotion, ond ERWS thot sponning lhis
swole with bridges or boordwolks would not impoct the District's
mitigotion plon ond would not require o permit. (See Aitochment A.)
Development of poths in phoses 2-4 moy require wetlond permits,
depending upon the long-term success of wetlond restorqlion in the
eostern portion of the VMP site.
ERWS ond lhe VMP Foundotion ore oclively cooperoiing to ensure thot
wetlond miligotion ond the Memoriol Pork ore mutuolly compotible on
the site. ERWS moy opply for on omendment to its woter ougmentotion
olon to increose seosonol woter flows to the site, which will be beneficiol
for VMP's desire to plont memoriol groves of trees in fuiure yeors.
limils of Dislurbonce: The PEC indicoled thot the limils of dislurbonce
need to be identified on the opproved plons. Limils of disturbonce ore
ideniified for phose l, bui con only be opproximoted for fuiure phoses. The
Foundotion hos pursued DRB opprovol only for phose l; fulure phoses will
require DRB opprovol ond ot thot lime fhe Foundotion will identify the
limits of disturbonce precisely. In oll phoses, disiurbonces will be limited to
the morgins olong pothwoys. where wolls ond memoriol boulders will be
concentrofed in o slrip opproximotely I G20 feel wide. Beyond fhot
morgin, disturbonces to noturol vegeiolion will be minimol.
Floodploin: Since the PEC reviewed fhe floodploin delineolion on the site
survey, Town stoff hos invesfigoled furlher ond now indicofes lhot the I OG
yeor floodploin covers o greoter oreo lhon wos previously identified.
Section 12-21-1O of the Town Code esloblishes relevont guidelines:
E.
A. No structure sholl be built in ony flood hozord zone or red
ovolonche hozord oreo. No slrucfure sholl be built on o slope
of forty percent (407") or greoter excepl in Single-Fomily
Resrdentiol, Tw o-F o mily Resldentio/, or Tw o-F omily
Primory / Seco ndory Resrdenfiol Zone Districfs. Ihe ferm
'sfrucfure" os used in fhis Seclion does nof include
recreotiono/ sfrucfures thot ore intended forseosonol use, nof
including residenfiol use.
E. The Administrotor moy requie any oppliconf or person
desinng to modify the flood ploin by fill, construction,
chonnelizofion, groding, or other similor chonges fo submil
for review on environmenlol impocf sfolemenf in
occordonce with chopter t2 of fhls fitle, to esfoblish thof the
work will nof odverse Iy off ect adjocent properfres or increose
the quontity or velocity of flood wofers. (Ord. 16(1983/ $ l:
ord. t2(t97& I a)
After reviewing the floodploin mops, lhe proposed concept plon, ond the
obove mentioned regulolions, the Foundotion believes thol the proposed
project complies with the Town's hozord regulotions. No structures ore
proposed onywhere on the VMP site os port of this opplicotion, ond no
groding is proposed fhol would increose fhe "quontity or velocily of flood
woters."
F. Finol Plol: Peok Lond Surveying hos complefed o minor subdivision plol for
the Kotsos Ronch property fhot subdivides ii inlo two porcels: Lol l, Kofsos
Ronch Subdivision. the I I .l3 ocre Memoriol Pork site;to#9 is the
remoinder of Kqlsos Ronch Pork. fr.nf l+
The Foundolion is reody fo move forword wifh the Memoriol Pork ond believes
lhis project meets the criterio outlined in the stoff memo for o minor subdivision,
rezoning, ond condilionol use permif. We look forword lo meeting with you on
Seplember 8th ond coming lo closure on lhe obove mentioned issues.
Thonk you for your time ond considerolion.
Elele Rrven
rren & Snnmnoru Drsrnrcr
846 Forest Road . Vail, Colorado 81657
(970) 476-7480 . FAX (970) 476-4089
September 5, 2003
Russell W. Forrest
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
RE: Vail Memorial Park Master Plan
Dear Russ:
The Eagle River Water & Sanitation District has reviewed the most recent version of the
site plan for the proposed Vail Memorial Park to be located at the Katsos Ranch Open
Space. The District has established a wetland mitigation site at Katsos Ranch, which was
authorized by the Vail Town Council in January 1992 (Resolution No. 24, Series of
l99l). We appreciate the efforts of Russ Forrest, Sherry Dorward and the Memorial Park
Task Force to coordinate planning and desigr of the park with the District so that impacts
to the wetland mitigation areas can be avoided.
The site plan dated July 28, 2003 addresses our concerns related to the configuration of
Phase I of the Vail Memorial Park Master Plan. The access pathway from the bike path
to the Phase I area will not impact the wetland mitigation site, if bridges or elevated
boardwalks are installed to span the drainage swale located to the north of the Phase I
loop. For the main entrance path to Phase I, a bridge span of at least 20 feet will be
needed to avoid impacts to the wetland mitigation area, and for the secondary entrance
path, a span of at least 25 feet will be needed. Bridge support pilings can be located
within the drainage swale without adverse impacts to the mitigation site and without
applyrng for a permit from the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers..
We believe that the use of bridges or boardwalks to span the drainage swale will
eliminate any potential conflict between Phase I of the Memorial Park and the District's
mitigation areas. The District will take full responsibility for coordination with the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers regarding potential impacts to the wetland mitigation site.
With regard to Phases II through IV of the Vail Memorial Park, additional work is needed
to more precisely define the extent of wetland mitigation areas, based upon water
distribution, topographic conditions and regulatory requirements of the Corps of
Engineers. In addition, the District is investigating possible improvements to the water
O distribution system including the installation ofdiversion sffuctures and a pond. This
c</-
\WnreR. WnsrEwnreR. OpeRnrrolrs & MANAGEMENT SERVToES N
Russell W. Forest
September 05, 2003
Page2
effort will be coordinated with the Vail Memorial Park Foundation with the purpose of
maintaining a successful wetlands mitigation site that is fully compatible with the
Memorial Park.
We would appreciate the opportunity to review the design plans for the Phase I bridges or
boardwalks. Ifyou have any questions or need any additional details, please feel free to
contact me,
Sincerely,
Eagle River Water & Sanitation District
Mark Gilfillan, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Robert M. Weaver, Hydrosphere Resource Consultants, hc.
Dennis Gelvin, General Manager
PEAK I.AND CONSULTANTS, INC.
PEAK TAND SURVEYING, INC.
PEAK CIVIL ENGINEERING, INC.
, e70_726_3232.'KV"ii2n;:y'3iT"F:J:';J?,T?3l:il"'".';R?H'ni gilfil
September 4, 2003
Town of Vail
Department of Community Development
Attn: Mr. Russell W. Forresl AICP
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Re: Vail Memorial Park
Dear Mr. Forrest:
I have reviewed the Master Plan and Phase I site plan for the Vail Memorial Park, concerning the
I 00-year floodplain. Based on presently accepted Town of Vail floodplain information published
by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the proposed improvements on the site
should not adversely affect adjacent properties, or increase the quantity or velocity ofthe 100-year
flood waters generated on Gore Creek per the requirements of the Town of Vail Hazard Code.
Respectfully Yours, r
&r2 A
Eric G. Williams, PE
Peak Civil Engineering, Inc.
Ptl200- I 299\l 229\Docs\letter-fl oodolain-ff)-04-03.doc
.-\
Itf
I
Tr*i5itr
mndudr4oba
gE I S *SL!,ifr!ffi *
0
sdss
PAiTIII, IOPOCR'PHIC IAP TND
IXPROVI|IENT IOCATION CERTINCATI
PrBT OF SACIIoll 2. 15S, R80f,, orb P.L.
TOIN OT VAIL
ooo
FINAL PLAT
KASTOS RANCH MINOR SUBDIYISON
A PART OF SECTION 2 AND 3, TOI{NSHIP 5 SOUTH,
RANCE 80
'TEST
OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,
TOITN OF VAIL, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO
lor|i cq,lcr- cEilfrc tE
E-- ia--Fr€*
ss#c,ffiF
puNnNG $o cnlhd$r€nr^r corjsor{ c€rmcAlE
c€nlr|cAll d trc! trD
lae-tE-asa6l
q!i|( rxD nacodEi cfRllf|c It
CtPI|f|c lf 6 o€Uc DON Arl0 Ofl,aisllP
ooo
FINAL PUIT
KASTOS RANCH MINOR SUBDIYISON
A PART OF SECTION 2 AND 3, TO'{NSHIP 5 SOUTH,
RANCE 80 VEST OF THE SIXTII PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN,
TOWN OF VAIL, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO
INIERSTAIE
t-70
-11i.,,'-..., FtuN-cr
ffi
BI6HORN
suaDtvlsroN
l--rr- r;*"l!1
o o o
FINAL PLTT
IrjSTOS RANCIT AINOR SUBDIWSON
A PART OF SECTION 2 AND 3, TOVNSHIP 5 SOUTII,
RANCE 80 YEST OF THE SIXTH PNINCIPAL MERIDIAN,
TOTN OF YAIL, COUNTY OF EACLE, STATE OF COLORADO
I
+
I NIENSTAIE
t-70
n^cl A
ffiffi ,atB ot t I'JLC
8.LU,
o oo
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmental Commission
Community Development Department
September 8, 2003
A request for a final review of a subdivision of the Katsos Ranch property
(unplatted), pursuant to Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, Vail Town Code; a
conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-88-3: Conditional Uses, Vail Town
Code, to allow for the construction of a cemetery; and a final recommendation to
the Vail Town Council of a proposed rezoning of the property from Natural Area
Preservation District to Outdoor Recreation District, located on an unplatted
parcel of land located on in the southeast quarter of Section 2, Township 5
South, Range 80 West of the 6th Principal Meridian (proposed as Lot 1, Katsos
Ranch Subdivision), and setting forth details in regards thereto. (A complete
metes and bounds description is on file at the Community Development
Department).
Applicant:
Planner:
Vail Memorial Park Foundation, represented by Sherry Dorward
Russell Forrest
SUMMARY
The Vail Memorial Park Foundation has submitted three applications to creale a
memorial park on an 1 1.13 acre portion of the Katsos Ranch Park identified in the
proposed minor subdivision as Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision. This 156 acre
parcel was purchased as open space by the Town of Vail in 1977 and is located just
south of the East Vail exit from Interstate 70. The applicant is requesting approval on a
minor suMivision, rezoning to Outdoor Recrealion, and a conditional use permit for a
cemetery.
The purpose statement of the Vail Memorial Park is:
'The Vail Memoial Pak will serue to celebrate, remember and honor the lives of
the many people who have helped to define Vailthrough their experiences and
contributions. By paying tribute to these diverse individuals, we will strengthen
our sense of community, build upon our history and connect with others who
share a spiritual passion and love for Vail."
o
il.
This park involves the creation of a crusher fine walking path, rock memorial walls,
arched entry gate, memorial rocks, and stone benches. No slructures or lighting are
proposed as part of this application.
Staff is recommending approval of these three applications in that this application is
consislent with the crileria and findings identified in section lX of this memorandum. The
applicant has provided responses to the Planning and Environmental Commission's
issues identified at the August 25th meeting (Attachment F).
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST
The Vail Memorial Park Foundation is requesling the following:
1. Approval of a minor subdivision to plat and subdivide the unplatted 156 acre
Katsos Ranch property. This subdivision would result in an 1 1.13 acre property
for the Vail Memorial Park or Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision. lt would
also creale Tract A, Katsos Ranch Subdivision which would total 145.6 acres
2. Recommendation of approval to the Town Council for a rezoning of Lot 1,
Katsos Ranch Minor SuMivision (the 1 1.13 acre Vail Memorial Park) from
Natural Area Preservalion to the Outdoor Recreation zone district
3. Approval of a condilional use permit for a cemetery which is a conditional use in
the Outdoor Recreation zone district.
The specific components of the proposal include:
. A double track access gravel path (approximately 400 feet long in phase
l) that connects the existing Katsos Ranch recreational trail to the
memorial park. This path would also provide access for lhe park and
Eagle River Water and Sanitation District maintenance vehicles.
. A 3 foot wide (250 feet long in phase 1) trail around Phase 1 (All paths
are a crusher fine trail).
. Six memorial boulder walls benched into the natural topography at the toe
of the slopes on the soulh side of the site for all 3 phases. Phase 1 will
include two 50 foot long walls. All walls are less than 4 feet tall.
r Natural stones for memorial engravings.
. Memorialtrees (Lodgepole and Blue Spruce) if irrigation can be provided
to the site with the cooperalion of the Eagle River Water and Sanitation
Dislrict.
. Arched enlrance sign to the memorial off of the existing Katsos Ranch
Trail south of the pedeslrian bridge.
. Burial and scattering of cremated human ashes. Casket burials will not
be allowed on this site.
ilt.
The memorial park is proposed to be constructed in four phases as shown on the
attached sile plan (Attachment E). Phase 1 is intended to last for 10-20 years
depending on demand.
BACKGROUND
In 1993, an exhaustive study was done to identify a site for a cemetery in the Town of
Vail. Over 10 alternative siles were evaluated for land use, ownership, and
environmental consideralions. After a detailed study of lhe alternatives, the upper bench
of Donovan Park was chosen as a preferred alternative. A design was developed and
approved by lhe Town of Vail which included casket burials. This project was taken to
lhe Vail volers in 1994 and was defeated. In 2001 , a renewed effort in memorializing
deceased Vail locals again became an inlerest. A commitiee was established to identify
a preferred location and develop a plan for a memorial park. The committee
established three major criteria for site selection:
. Minimum 5 acres in size
. Pedestrian and vehicular access
. Not located directly adjacent to residential areas.
After screening for those criteria, the following alternalive sites were further reviewed.
1. Katsos Ranch
2. Spraddle Creek Trail Head
3. Streamwalk between the Covered Bridge and Ford Park
Given the criteria mentioned above the preferred alternative was Katsos Ranch in lhat it
was the furthest location from any residential area, had the appropriate size, and had
good access. lt also was the quietest reflective space of the three alternatives.
The Vail Town Council has reviewed the proposed design for the park and has voted to
allow the Vail Memorial Park Foundation to apply for this use on Town land. On August
20, 2003 the Design Review Board reviewed the project and voted 3-0 to direct staff to
"staff" approve the project after all applicable Planning and Environmental Commission
approvals have occurred.
Planninq and Environmental Commission DISCUSION ITEMS FROM THE AUGUST
25.2003 MEETING
The following are discussion items for this topic:
A. Intensitv of Use: The Planning and Environmental Commission was concerned
about the intensity ol use on the site. The primary concerns related to this issue
were conflicts on the recreational trail and parking. The Planning and
Environmenlal Commission was also concerned about the conflicts in the
Environmental lmpact Report (ElR) on phasing capacity and comments made by
J
lv.
B.
the applicant on capacity. The EIR has been updated with the latest information
on phasing, wetlands, and floodplain information. The applicant has provided
responses to these issues in the attached letter (Attachment F).
Parkino: Parking for memorial services can be accommodated to a limited extent
at lhe trail-head parking area for the Katsos Ranch Trail. Eighteen parking spaces
are provided at this location. However, statf believes that there is inadequate
parking for groups larger than 30 people. Staff believes that the applicant should
require larger services to park al remote locations and to provide a shuttle service
to the site. The applicant is proposing to require a shuttle service for groups over
25 people. Furthermore, additional no parking signs may be needed along the
Frontage Road.
Recreation Path: Staff believes there could be some limited conflicts on the
recrealion palh when a large memorial service is occurring. To avoid conflicts with
bicycles on the path, statf would suggest that a temporary sign on lhe existing
recrealion trail be placed to the west of the memorial park and at the bridge to
indicate when memorial service is occurring and for bicyclist to dismount during
memorial services. The sign would be placed on the trail during memorial events.
Wetlands: The Vail Memorial Foundation has been working with the Eagle River
Water and Sanitation Dislrict (ERWSD) to enhance the existing wetlands on the
site. Wetlands have been mapped and are identified in the wetlands study in the
Environmenlal lmpact Report (Attachment D). As part of its approved 1993 plan
to enlarge Black Lakes, ERWSD identified the Katsos Ranch property as a wetland
mitigation site and committed to restoring 6 acres of wetlands on the site of which
3.5 acres are within the proposed boundaries of the Memorial Park. Although
ERWSD has not yet been fully successful in re-establishing wetlands on the
property, the designated mitigation sites fall under Army Corps of Engineers
jurisdiction and Vail Memorial Park is obligated to avoid impacts in those areas as
well (or apply for a 404 permit).
Although the mitigation areas have not been surveyed and mapped, ERWSD
consultants have flagged the edges of the mitigation site adjacent to Vail Memorial
Park's first phase. The only potential conflict is the swale directly north of the
primary development areas in phases 1-4, which is included in the mitigation area.
The Army Corps of Engineers has informed the Town of Vail, the Vail Memorial
Park Foundation, and ERWSD that spanning this swale with bridges or boardwalks
would not impact the District's mitigation plan and would not require a permit.
(Attachment F) Development of paths in phases 2-4 may require wetland permits,
depending upon the long-term success of wetland restoration in the eastern portion
of the Vail Memorial Park site.
Floodolain: Staff acknowledged the need lo verify the floodplain location at the last
Planning and EnvironmentalCommission meeting. Since the Planning and
Environmental Gommission reviewed the floodplain delineation on the site survey,
Town statf has investigated further and has found that the 100-year floodplain
covers a greater area than was previously identified (Attachment E). Section 12-
21-10 ol the Town Code establishes relevant guidelines:
c.
D.
E.
v.
A.
A. No structure shall be built in any flood hazard zone or red avalanche
hazard area. No structure shall be buift on a slope of forty percent (40o/") or
greater except in Single-Family Residential, Two-Family Residential, or Two-
Family Primary/Secondary Residential Zone Districts. The term "structure" as
used in this Section does not include recreational structures that are intended
for seasonal use, not including residential use.
E. The Administrator may require any applicant or person desiring to modify
the flood plain by fill, construction, channelization, grading, or other similar
changes, to submit for review an environmental impact statement in
arcordance with Chapter 12 of this Title, to establish that the wok will not
adversely affect adjacent properties, or increase the quantity or velocity of
flood waters. (Ord. 16(1983) $ 1: Ord. 12(1978) S 4)
After reviewing the floodplain maps, the proposed concept plan, and the above
mentioned regulations, an Engineer with Peak Land Surveying has concluded that
the proposed project complies with the Town's hazard regulations (see letter in
attachment F). No slructures are proposed anywhere on the VMP site as part of
this application, and no grading is proposed that would increase the'quantity or
velocity of flood walers."
ROLES OFTHE REVIEWING BOARDS
Minor Subdivision
As per section 13-+2 C of the Town Code the Planning and Environmental Commission
is the final decision making body on a Minor Subdivision. Any final decision of the
Planning and Environmental Gommission can be appealed to the Town Council.
Rezonino
Town Council:
The Town Council is the final decision making authority for a rezoning or a lext
amendment. Final actions of Design Review Board or Planning and Environmental
Commission maybe appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town
Council evaluales whether or not the Planning and Environmental Gommission or
Design Review Board erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with
modifications, or overturn the board's decision. The Town council must utilize the
criteria and findings identitied in section Vl of this memorandum.
Plannino and Environmental Commission:
The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for applying the criteria in
seclion Vl of this memorandum and making a recommendation to the Town Council on a
rezoning.
Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
Plannino and Environmental Commission:
c.
Action: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for final
approval/denial of CUP. The Planning and Environmental Commission will make
recommendations to the Town Council on rezoning land, text amendments, and
modif ication of hazard designations.
The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for evaluating a proposal
for:
1. Relationship and impact of lhe use on development objectives of the Town.
2. Etfect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation
facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public
facilities and public facilities needs.
3. Effect upon traffic, with particular reference to congestion, automotive and
pedestrian salety and convenience, traffic flow and conlrol, access,
maneuverability, and removal of snow from the streets and parking areas.
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located,
including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses.
5. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the
proposed use.
6. The environmental impact reporl concerning the proposed use, il an
environmental impact report is required by Chapter 12 of this Title.
Desion Review Board:
The Design Review Board has no review authorily on a CUP, but must review any
accompanying Design Review Board application.
The Design Review Board is responsible for evaluating the Design Review Board
proposal for:
o Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings. Fitting buildings into landscape. Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography. Removal/Preservalion of trees and native vegetation. Adequate provision for snow storage on-siteo Acceptability of building materials and colors. Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms. Provision of landscape and drainage. Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory struclures. Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distanceso Location and design of satellite dishes. Provision of outdoor lighting. The design of parks
VI. APPPLICABLEPLANNINGDOCUMENTS
O A. Town of Vail Zoning Regulatlons
Section 12-8C Natural Preservation (NAP) District
The cunent zoning of the proposed Memorial Park site is Natural Area Preservation. The
purpose statemenl for the Natural Area Preservation District is:
Section 12-8C-1:
The Natural Area Preseruation District is designed to provide areas which, because
of their environmentally sensitive nature or natural beauty, shall be protected from
encroachment by any building or other improvement, other than those listed in
Section l2-8C-2 of this Article. The Natural Area Preseruation District is intended to
ensure that designated lands remain in their natural state, including reclaimed areas,
by protecting such areas from development and preserving open space. The Natural
Area Preseruation District includes lands having valuable wildlife habitat, exceptional
aesthetic or flood control value, wetlands, riparian areas and areas with significant
environmental rcnstraints. Prgtecting sensitive natural areas is important for
maintaining water quality and aquatic habitat, preseruing wildlife habitat, flood
control, protecting view nnidors, minimizing the risk from hazard areas, and
proteding the natural character of Vail which is so vital to the Town's tourist
economy. The intent shall not preclude improvement of the natural environment by
the removal of noxious weeds, deadfall where necessary to protect public safety or
similar compatible improvements. (Ord.21(1994) S 10)
Section 12-88 Outdoor Recreation (OR) District
The applicant is proposing to rezone Lol 1, Katsos Ranch Minor SuMivision to Outdoor
Recreation. The purpose Statement for the Outdoor Recreation Zone District is:
Section 12-88-1:
'The outdoor recreation district is intended to preserve undeveloped or open space
lands lrom intensive development while permitting outdoor recreational activities that
provide opportunities lor active and passive recreation areas, facilities and uses. (Ord.
21(1ee4) S e)"
B. Town of Vail Comprehenslve Land Use Plan
The Comprehensive Land Use Plan designation for Katsos Ranch Park is Open Space.
This land use category is defined as:
"Passive recreation areas such as greenbelts, stream nrridors and drainage ways
are the types of areas in this category. Hillsides which were classified as
undevelopable due to high hazards and slopes over 40%" are also included within
this area. These hillside areas would stillbe allowed types of development permitted
by existing zoning such as one unit per 35 acres, for areas in agricultural zoning.
Also, permifted in this area would be institutional/public uses."
O Specific goals in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan that relate to this use include:
The quality ol the environment including air, water, and other nalural
resources should be protected as the Town grows.
The Town of Vail should improve the existing park and open space lands
while conlinuing to purchase open space.
Services should keep pace with increased growth.
The plan also specifically discusses Katsos Ranch and states the following:
'This parcel of land has been the subject of much community+tide discussions
since its purchase by the Town of Vail in 1977. The tract contains 146 acres (current
survey shows area al 156 acres) and lies immediately east of the Vail Golf Course
and south of Gore Creek. A Study was prepared in 1978 to examine the impacts of
alternative development scenarios for the propefi. The alternatives ranged from a
"do nothing" or "no development" scenario to the construction of an executive style
golf course- The study concluded that a moderate level of development is the most
desirable for the site. This level of development would include a bike trail, running
trail, cross country skiing trails, and picnic areas. Many o these improvements have
been constructed and are used by area residents and tourists alike. Based on this
expression it is assumed that passive open space is the acceptable and appropriate
use for the parcel. "
Town of Vail Comprehensive Open Lands Plan
The Comprehensive Open Lands Plan does identify Katsos Ranch Park as a sensitive
natural area as defined by the Natural Heritage Program. No specific actions or
management recommendations are made for this specific parcel other than the creation
of a south trail to the south of this parcel and on US Forest Service Land. After a US
Forest Service review of a specific trail alignment, the Forest Service concluded that
there would be significanl challenges to approving this trail with Lynx habit in close
proximity to this proposed lrail.
ZONING ANALYSIS
1.2
2.7
6.1
c.
vil.
Legal Description:
Zoning: (current)
Zoning: (proposed)
Land Use Designation:
Lot Size:
Develooment Standard (OR)
Parking:
Lot Area:
Setbacks:
Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision
Natural Area Preservation District
Outdoor Recrealion District (OR)
Open Space
11.13 acres
Allowed
As per Chapter 10
Not applicable
20'from all property lines
8
Proposed
18 Available
400'from nearest
21' tlall24' sloped
Not applicable
5%
property line
No buildings
0% (no buildings)
VIII. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING
Land Use Zonino
l-70 ROW & Residential Right of Way & Primary Secondary
US Forest Service No Zoning
Height:
Density
Site Coverage
North:
South:
East:
West:
Residential
Golf Course
Primary Secondary
Outdoor Recreation
tx.
A.
REVIEW CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Minor Subdivislon
A basic premise of subdivision regulations is lhat the minimum standards for lhe creation
of new lots must be met. This suMivision will be reviewed under Title 13. SuMivision
Regulations, of the Town of Vail Code.
1. The first set of criteria to be considered by the Planning and Environmental
Commission for a Minor Subdivision application is:
Lot Area: There is no minimum lot area for the Outdoor Recreation District. The
proposed lot size is 11.13 acres.
Frontaoe: There is no minimum frontage area for the Outdoor Recreation
District.
Dimension: There are no minimum dimensions for the Outdoor Recreation
District. The proposed lot size for the Memorial Park is 11.13 acres. The
remaining area identified as Tract A, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision is 145.6
acres.
2. The second set of review criteria to be considered with a minor subdivision
request is outlined in the Subdivision Regulations, 13-3-4, and is as follows:
"The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the
application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of this Chapter,
the Zoning Ordinance and other pertinent regulations that the Planning
and Environmental Commission deems applicable....The Planning and
Environmental Commission shall review the application and consider its
appropriateness in regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control,
densities proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other
applicable documents, environmental integrity and compatibility with the
sunounding land uses and other applicable documents, effects on the
aesthetics of the Town."
The purpose section of Title 13, SuMivision Regulations, is intended lo insure that the
subdivision is promoting the health, safety and welfare of the community. The
subdivision purpose statements from 13-1-2 (C)are as follows:
1. "To inform each subdivider of the standards and crlteria by whlch
development proposals wlll be evaluated and lo provide Information
as to the type and extent of improvements required."
Staff believes that this proposal meets the standards and criteria for a
minor suMisvision in the Town of Vail and that the plans provide clear
information on the extent of the development. Furthermore no new
commercial or residenlial development will result from this suMivision
and the proposed used is consistent with the natural setting of Katsos
Ranch.
"To provlde for the subdivision of property in the future without
conflict with development on adjacent land."
No land use conflicts are anticipated. The proposed site design is
intended to blend into the natural landscape of Katsos Ranch Park and is
over 1000 feet from adjacent residential property. The eastern portion of
the site will be maintained and even enhanced as wetlands.
"To protect and conserve the value of land throughout the
Munlcipality and the value of buildings and improvements on the
land."
This proposal preserves the natural integrity of the land. No buildings are
proposed for this project. No significant environmental impacts are
anticipated. The applicant is working with the Eagle River and Water
District to enhance the wetlands area on the site. The first phase of the
Vail Memorial Park has no impacls on either existing wetlands or the
proposed crealion of wetlands by the ERWSD (See Attachment A for
letter from ERWSD in applicant response to Planning and Environmental
Commission issues). Future phases may require Corps of Engineers
approval based on whether new wellands are created on the site as
planned.
In evaluating the design of the Vail Memorial Park, no negative impacts
are anticipated in terms of the value of adjacent properties.
"To ensure that subdivision of property is in compliance wlth the
Town's zonlng ordinances, to achleve a harmonious, convenaent,
workable relationship among land uses, consistent with Town
development objectives."
Statf believes that this project is designed in harmony with the natural
setting of Katsos Ranch and does not create any environmental impacts
or impediments to the recreational uses of Katsos Ranch. The applicant
l0
3.
4.
will need to provide notice on the recreational trail to trail users during
memorial events to avoid conflicts. However, staff believes that trail
conflicts can be mitigated with signage considering the anticipated
number of memorial evenls per year.
"To gulde public and private policy and action In order to provide
adequate and efficient transponailon, water, sewage, schools,
parks, playgrounds, recreation, and other public requirements and
facilitles and generally to provide that public facilities will have
sufficient capacity to serve the proposed subdivision."
The creation of the Vail Memorial Park will be a critical community assel.
It will nol have any significant impact on public infrastrusture.
"To provlde for accurate legal descriptlons of newly subdivlded land
and to establish reasonable and desirable construction design
standards and procedures."
A proposed plat has been provided with the application that is consistent
with the requirements identified in Title 13, Chapter 4 of the VailTown
Code.
'To prevent the pollution of air, streams and ponds, to assure
adequacy of dralnage facillties, to safeguard the water table and to
encourage the wise use and management of natural resources
throughout the Town in order to preserye the Integrity, stability, and
beauty of the community and the value of the land-"
An Environmental lmpact Report has been prepared for this project. No
significant impacts are anticipated. The major mitigation of impacts
involves the strict regulation of parking at the site for groups over 25
people. Working cooperatively with lhe ERWSD it is possible to expand
wetlands on the site beyond what currently exists. Phase 1 of the project
willnot conflict with any proposed wetland creation on the site. Also
future phases should be reviewed by the Corps of Engineers to avoid
conflicts once the precise boundaries of new wetlands are delineated as
the result of this partnership.
Rezonino
1) The extent to which the zone district amendment ls consistent with all the
appllcable elements of the adopted goals, oblectives and policies outlined
in the Vail Gomprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development
objectives of the Town.
The Comprehensive Land Use Plan identified Katsos Ranch as Open Space.
The Open Lands Plan also identifies Katsos Ranch as sensitive natural area.
The proposed rezoning to Outdoor Recreation with the proposed Vail Memorial
Park Plan is still consistent with the Town's comprehensive plans and
7.
B.
ll
2'
development objectives. The proposed plan protects the nalural inlegrity of the
Katsos Ranch Park.
The extent to which the zone district amendment is suitable with the
existing and potentlal land uses on the slte and existing and potenlial
surrounding land uses as set out in the Town's adopted planning
documents.
The proposed land use will not impact adjacent property owners. The closest
home is over 1000 feet away from the Vail Memorial Park and is screened by
vegelation. The proposed design of the Vail Memorial Park compliments the
natural landscape and avoids impacts to existing wetlands. In facl, there is now
the opportunity to enhance the existing wetland area on Katsos Ranch through a
partnership with the ERWSD.
The extent to which the zone district amendment presents a harmonious,
convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with
municipal development objectives.
The proposed design is inlended to blend into to the natural landscape. There
should be no significant interference to the existing recreational path on Katsos
Ranch given the number of times memorial evenls are anticipated within a
calendar year. Statf has provided recommended conditions of approval for the
Conditional Use Permit in section X of this memorandum to reduce conflicts on
the recreational path. Furthermore, staff would recommend that the conditional
use permit for the Vail Memorial Park be reviewed within 1 year of approval to
evaluale any unanticipated impacts.
The extent to whlch the zone district amendment provides for the growth of
an orderly viable community and does not constitute spot zoning as the
amendment serves the best interests of the community as a whole.
A memorial park, as proposed, is an imporlant component to the life cycle of a
community. The park is intended to celebrate and memorialize individuals that
have contributed to the Vail community. The proposed zoning of Outdoor
Recreation is one of the three Open Space Zone Districts. The Comprehensive
Land Use Plan identifies this site as Open Space and states that Katsos Ranch
is "appropriate for passive outdoor recreation." The uses in the OR zone Districl
are controlled through a conditional use permit.
The extent to which the zone district amendment results in adverse or
beneficial impacts on the natural environment, including but not limited to
water quality, alr quality, noise, vegetation, riparian corrldors, hillsldes and
other desirable natural features.
3)
4)
s)
t2
No building or structures are proposed as part of the Vail Memorial Park. No
significanl site disturbance is anticipated other than the creation of paths to the
proposed memorial areas. The proposed park avoids impacting existing
wetlands. Infact, there is the opportunity to expand wetland area on the eastern
portion of lhe site through a partnership with the ERWSD. An Environmental
lmpact Report has been prepared and no other signilicant impacts are
anticipatd.
The extent to which the zone dlstrict amendment is consistent with the
purpose statement of the proposed zone distdct.
Cemeteries are a conditional use in the Outdoor Recreation Zone District. The
proposed natural design of the Vail Memorial Park is consislent with the purpose
statemenl within the Natural Area Preservation Zone District. The presence of a
memorial park on the site will help ensure the sile remains as open space in
perpetuity.
The extent to which the zone dlstrict amendment demonstrates how
conditions have changed since the zoning designation of the sublect
property was adopted and is no longer appropriate.
The community has the need for a memorial park. This has been well
documented since the last effort in 1993. Gonditions on Katsos Ranch have not
changed. lt is still a beautiful meadow bordered by lodgepole pine to the south
and Gore Creek on the North. The proposed design of the Vail Memorial Park is
intended to blend in with the natural environment of the site.
8) Such other factors and criterla as the Commisslon and/or Couneil deem
appllcable to the proposed rezoning.
ConditionalUse Permit
1. Relalionship and ampact of the use on the development oblectives ol the
Town.
The proposed design of the Vail Memorial Park is consistent with the natural setting
of Katsos Ranch. lt will maintain the environmental integrity of the site and
potentially even enhance the wetland areas with Katsos Ranch. The Town Council
has stated that the creation of a memorial park is a valid objeclive of the Town of
Vail. The proposed design achieves that objective in a way that compliments the
natural character of Katsos Ranch Park.
2. The effect of the use on light and air, dislrlbution of population, transportation
facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public
facllaties needs.
6)
7]'
c.
l3
No buildings are proposed as part of this project which will impact light and air. A
memorial park is a needed community facility. The only detrimental impact is
potentially parking for large memorial services. Statf believes this impact can be
mitigated by requiring all memorial groups over 25 to utilize buses or shuttles to the
park from either from the Vail Chapel or the Town's parking slructure (in the summer
and shoulder seasons). Statf recommends reviewing the conditional use permit after
1 year to ensure that circulation on Bighorn Road and the Katsos Ranch recreational
lrail are not adversely impacted.
Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive and
pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access,
maneuverability, and removal of snow lrom the street and parking areas.
Staff has analyzed the project intensity of use of the Vail Memorial Park. The 1993
Donovan Park cemetery study anticipated 24 memorial services (which included
casket burials) within a year. Staff contacted the County Coroner and Eagle County
on average has 60-70 deaths per year. Nationally approximalely 50% of all deaths
result in cremation. With the proposed conditions of approval to prevent Frontage
Road parking and the Foundations interest in limiling large memorial services on the
site, staff does not believe there will be any significant circulation impacts. However,
it is difficult to anticipate the nature of impacts with this type of use and staff would
recommend that the conditional use permit be reviewed in 1 year's time.
4. Effect upon the character of the
located, includlng the scale and
surrounding uses.
area In which the proposed use is to be
bulk of the proposed use In relation to
x.
A.
No buildings are proposed as part of this application.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Minor Subdivision
The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and
Environmental Commission approves a minor subdivision, pursuanl to Chapter 4, Tille
13, Subdivision Regulations, Vail Town Code, to allow for the platting of Katsos Ranch
Minor Subdivison, A part of Section 2 and 3, Township 5 South Range 80 West of the
Sixth Principal meridian into Tract A (Area of Katsos Ranch Park excluding the Vail
Memorial Park) and Lot 1 (Vail Memorial Park Site) Katsos Ranch Minor SuMivision.
Statf's recommendation is based upon the review of the crileria outlined in Section Vlll
of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, subject to the following
findings:
"The Planning and Environmental Commission approves of the proposed minor
suMivision and finds that the minor suMivision application is appropriate in
regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control, densities proposed,
regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other applicable documents,
environmental integrity and compatibility with the sunounding land uses and
other applicable documents, eflects on the aesthetics of the Town. Specifically,
the Commission finds that the minor subdivision resolves allows the proper
l4
B.
identification and platting of the Town of Vails largest property and the ability to
delineate the Vail Memoial Pak.
Amendment to the Oflicial Zoning Map of the Town of Vail
The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and
Environmental Commission fonrvards a recommendation of approval of an amendment
to the Official Town of Vail Zoning Map, pursuant to Chapter 3, Title 12, Zoning
Regulations, VailTown Code, to rezone Lot 1 of Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivision.
Staff's recommendations are based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section
Vlll of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presenled, subject to the
following findings:
"Before recommending and/or granting an approval of an application for a zone
district boundary amendment the Planning & Environmental Commission and the
Town Council shall make the following findings with respect to the requested
amendment:
1. That the amendment rb consrslent with the adopted goals, objectives and
policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and compatible with the
development objectives of the Town; and
2. That the amendment is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and
appropriate for the surrounding areas; and
3. That the amendment promotes the health, safety, morals, and general
welfare of the Town and promotes the nordinated and harmonious
development of the Town in a manner that conserues and enhances its
natural environment and its established character as a resort and
residential community of the highest quality."
ConditionalUse Permit
The Community Development Department recommends approval for a conditional use
permit, pursuant to Section 12-98-3, Conditional Uses; Vail Town Code, to allow for a
Cemetery and memorial park on Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Subdivision. Staff's
recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section lX of this
memorandum and the evidence and teslimony presenled, subject to the lollowing
findings:
1. That the proposed location of the use is in accordance with the purposes of
the conditional use permit section of the zoning code and the purposes of the
Parking (P) District.
2. That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it will
be operated or maintained will not be detrimentalto the public health, safety,
or welfare or materially injurious to propefties or improvements in the vicinity.
3. That the proposed use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of
the wnditional use permit section of the zoning code.
c.
l5
o $\ A"*1
Should the Planning and Environmenlal Commission choose to approve or fonrard a
recommendation of approval of the applicant's to the Vail Town Gouncil, staff
recommends that the Commission makes the following conditions a part of the approval:
l,'t
4.
5.
1. Afl future phases (2-41 ol the Vail Memorial Park must be reviewed by the US
Army Corps of Engineers prior to conslruction as appropriate.
2. The Eagle RiverWater and Sanitation District has taken responsibility forthe
review of a raised boardwalk to span the 20-25 foot wide swale into phase 1
The proposed raised boardwalk will require review by the Army Corps of
Engineers and the Town of Vail
application shall be submitted
review and approval of the Desig prior to
The applicant shall submit a Design Review application for review and approval
by the Design Review Board for all site disturlcance and any future phases
(phases 2-4) prior to the construction of any future phases.
The applicant shall require allgroups over 25 people to use a shuttle system to
the site. The applicant shall obtain the owners approval for the use of any
remote parking used for i "Tff:[t?tf', 4L,lf 'll'*
The applicant shall providd signage'during memorial events to clearly indicate
lhat a memorial service is in progress and that cyclists should use caulion.
These signs should be located at the east trail head to Katsos Ranch and 50 feet
to lhe west of the Vail Memorial Park entrance on the Katsos Ranch recreational
trail.
The applicant shall pay for additional no parking signs along the Fronlage Road
at the Katsos Ranch Trailhead at specific locations approved by the Public
Works Department.
The applicant shall receive approval for a staging plan from the Town of Vail prior
to construction being iniliated on the Vail Memorial Park.
The appficant shall return to the Planning and Environmental Commission h ^yyears lime from the date of approval so that the Conditional Use Permit can be
reviewed to evaluate the impacts on circulation along the Frontage Road and to
the use of the recreational trail.
The applicant shall notify the Planning and Environmental Commission of any
Design Review Board applicalion for fulure phases so that the Commission can
have the opporlunity to review the existing conditions of Conditional Use Permit
approval in light of a specific plan for a future phase.
10. There shall be no mainlenance, snow plowing, or inscriptions of memorial signs
in the Vail Memorial Park between December 1't and May 1't.
11. The operation and maintenance of the Vail Memorial Park shall not inhibit the
public use of Lot 1, Katsos Ranch Minor Subdivsion for currently existing passive
recreational uses.
l6
\
7.
8.
Xl. Atlachments:
A. Public Notlce
B. Vicfnity lvlap
C. Applicalion Letter
D. EIR
E. Des(p Plans
F. Lettei from Applicant responding lo comments lrom the Ar4ust 25h meeting
t7