Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989 Vail Town Council Minutes~` MINUTES UAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 3, 1989 7:30 P.M. ~~. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, January 3, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahr1ich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: None Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk `_The first item was a ten year anniversary award to Alex Gordon. Ron Phillips gave ~~brief background information on Alex, who is a Golf Course Specialist with the Vail Metropolitan Recreation District. Pat Dodson said a few words of praise, and Mayor Rose thanked him for his hard work and years of service. The next order of business was the approval of the minutes from the December 6 and 20, 1988 meetings. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the minutes, with Tam Steinberg seconding. There was no discussion by Council or the public. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The third order of business was Ordinance No. 39, Series of 1988, second reading, regarding daily special boards. Mayor Rose read the full title of the ordinance. Peter Patten noted there were no changes made since first reading, with the exception of a typographical error at the bottom of page 1. There was no other discussion by Council or the public. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal moved for approval of Ordinance No. 39, and Eric Affeldt seconded. At this time, Mike Cacioppo requested the ordinance be tabled until the next Evening Meeting so that he could bring back from Las Vegas brochures on backlit boards and their attractiveness. Larry Eskwith suggested to proceed with the vote, and that the ordinance could be amended at any time. Afterwards, there was some discussion on chalk boards vs'. white plastic boards, and their attractiveness. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-2, with John Slevin and Mike Cacioppo opposing. ~~ 1988 second readin The next topic discussed was Ordnance No. 40, Series of g, repealing and reenacting Chapter 18.46, Special Development District No. 4, Cascade Village. The full title was read by Mayor Rose. Kristen Pritz explained the three changes made to the ordinance since first reading: 1. The requirement that the developer record the conditions of approval for areas A and D was added in Section 18.46.210 C4 and 18.46.210 D7. 2. The fireplace number shall be controlled by 8.28.030 of the Town of Vail Code. The requirement is in Section 18.46.200 C of the ordinance. 3. The employee housing shall be restricted far 20 years plus the life of Tiffany Christine Lowenthal instead of fifteen years. This change is in Section 18.46.220. After a short discussion by Council, Eric Affeldt made a motion to approve the ordinance on second reading, which Tom Steinberg seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-1, with Mike Cacioppo opposing. _.~.The fifth order of business was Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1989, first reading, mooning the property commonly known as the Ulbrich property to Flillside Residential. Mayor Rose read the fu11 title of the ordinance. Rick Pylman gave background • • information on the property and Hillside Residential zoning. He stated the applicant had applied for this type of zoning, and the staff recommended approval. He then reviewed the criteria used in evaluating the request: ~. Suitability of existing zoning. 2. The amendment would present a convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal objectives. 3. The rezoning proposal would provide for growth of an orderly and viable community. After a short discussion among Council and Jay Peterson, Merv lapin made a motion to approve the ordinance, which was seconded by John Slevin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. At this time, there was discussion on the areas of the Town which were still not reannexed. There was no Citizen Participation. Mayor Rose remarked there had been an Executive Session at the Mork Session that afternoon relating to }.989 compensation for the Council's employees. He stated the Council would like to continue that Executive Session with Ron Phillips and tarry Eskwith. --,r-:,, :There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, 1 ~ ICent'R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: ~ ~a~ • ~~rQ.tit-c~fu+.r.~.~u~.~ ;Pamela A. 8randmeyer, Town Clerk Miriiates takert~ by Brenda Chesman _ ~ „ -2- -, ~~~ti •i •• MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 7:30 P.M. • A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, January 17, 1989, at 7:30 p.m, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Prn Tem Eric Affeldt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1989, second reading, zoning the property commonly known as the Ulbrich property to Hillside Residential. Mayor Rose read the full title of the ordinance. Rick Py1man stated the only change was a clarification of the legal description. There was no other discussion. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the ordinance on second reading, and Eric Rffeldt seconded. A vote was taken and the ordinance passed unanimously 5-0. The next item was Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1989, first reading, relating to bed and breakfast operations. The foil title of the ordinance was read by Mayor Rose. Peter Patten commented this ordinance would amend the zoning code to allow bed and breakfast operations in town. He reviewed the ordinance and what it would change in the zoning code and the regulations proposed. Ile then stated he wanted to add two more requirements, nos. 4 and 5, to those shown on page 2, Section 4B: 4. A maximum of one residential nameplate sign shall be allowed according to Section 16.20.130 of the sign code for each bed and breakfast. 5. If the lot or site of the proposed bed and breakfast operation contains two dwelling units, the written approval of the bed and breakfast proposal by the owner of the other dwelling unit on the site shall be submitted with the application fora conditional use permit.' He then reviewed the conditional use criteria used in examining and developing the ordinance. Peter stated staff's recommendation was far approval and explained why. He also noted the Planning and Environmental Commission voted unanimously 6-0 to approve the changes. There was then some discussion by Council regarding problems with the bed and breakfast operations and conditional use zoning. Kathy Eagan of Reservation Services in Vail asked a question regarding her being the only permanent resident in her condominiums and why wouldn't she be able to operate a bed and breakfast, to which Peter and Council responded parking problems, close living quarters with other residents. Peter commented that he had found in his research other areas distinguished a difference between short-term rentals and bed and breakfast operations. Larry Eskwith noted that right now bed and breakfast operations were being operated in a vacuum, and this ordinance would make them legal. Council asked Larry to look into abandonment clause to see if the approvals would expire periodically every three or five years. There was then much discussion regarding abandonment would occur if the operations were not used for twelve consecutive months and if everyone in the condominium units should sign off on the approvals or by a 75 percent vote. It was also discussed the condominium declarations would dictate this decision. Chuck Crist commented he felt approval by the Town could be given if the applicant brought in a letter from the condominium association indicating their approval and that sufficient parking would be available. Mike Cacioppo requested "or his agent" be added to Section 4.A., line 3, __ after °proprietor". At this time Mike Cacioppo made a motion to approve the ordinance with the following amendments: -~ ~ 1~' k . i ~ • • 1. Add language that a conditional use permit should be issued for non- conforming use. 2. Amend the ordinance to include multi-family dwellings, and to require a vote of the condominium association to allow the operations. 3. Change language in Section 4.A. to "proprietor or his agent lives ..." 4. Add items 4. and 5. to Section 4.B. Merv Lapin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the vote failed 3-2, with Eric Affeldt, Mayor Rose, and John Slevin opposing. Eric Affeldt then made a motion to approve the ordinance with the following amendments: 1. Add items 4. and 5. to Section 4.8. 2. Change language in Section 4.A. to "proprietor or his agent lives ..." He also directed staff to come prepared at second reading to further discuss abandonment and multi-family dwelling issues. John Slevin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-O. The third item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1989, first reading, relating to increasing the charges for impounding dogs. Mayor Rose read the full title of the ordinance. Larry Eskwith stated the leash law applies to all of Town of Vail. Also, Council had requested earlier to raise the fees, which is what this ordinance does. Dick Duran then answered questions from Council. Merv Lapin made a -.~ motion to approve the ordinance, which was seconded by Mike Cacioppo. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-0. The next order of business was Ordinance No. 4, Series of 1989, first reading, designating signs on hat air balloons for special events be exempt from the Vail sign code. The full title was read by Mayor Rose. Larry Eskwith stated the ordinance would allow signs on balloons, but the ordinance would apply restrictions, and he then reviewed them. After some discussion by Council, Mike Cacioppo requested the first sentence of Section 1.4. be deleted requiring the balloons be tethered to the ground. Tom Davies agreed with Mike and explained why. Dick Duran felt it was unsafe to attach them to buildings, to which Mike and Tom disagreed. There was then more discussion on the length of time a balloon would be up. Tom asked if Payne Weber held a convention in town next March, would it be allowed, to which members of Council replied, balloons could be allowed only for special events and it would require approval by the organizing body. At this time there was some discussion regarding hot air balloons being used for private advertising or for special events only. It was agreed that no one wanted free flying signs hanging under the balloons. A motion to approve the ordinance with the deletion of the first sentence of Section 1.4., and adding "with the exceptions of the LionsHead Parking Structure and the Vail Village Parking Structure" to the second sentence of Section 1.4., was made by Eric Affeldt. There was some discussion on insurance coverage and liability, to which Tom Davies stated it should read "aircraft liability insurance" and not "public liability insurance", and in an amount of not less than five hundred thousand and not more than one million dollars. Mike Cacioppo seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-0. The fifth item was Resolution No. 1, Series of 1989, setting the Town of Vail deck space rental rate. Larry Eskwith stated this puts in resolution form the fee charged by the Town of Vail. John Slevin made a motion to approve the resolution, which Eric Affeldt seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-A. Merv Lapin asked Larry to check into if turning public property into commercial use should be included on the tax rolls. The next item for discussion was Resolution No. 2, Series of 1989, temporarily extending the terms of the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Design Review Board members for two weeks. There was no discussion by Council or the public on this item. A motion to approve the resolution was made by Merv Lapin and seconded by Jahn Slevin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-O. Action on the Colorado Ski Museum lease agreement was the next item. After a short discussion, Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the agreement as presented, which John Slevin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-0. There was no Citizen Participation. -2- .~ -"tk i • i • At this time, Mayor Rose noted that for the work the Town of Vail employees had done during the holiday rush and the extra effort done and still required for the World Championships, Council wanted to award employees far their extra effort by purchasing 275 tickets for employees to attend the Beach Boys concert. The cost would approximately be in the neighborhood of six thousand dollars. Merv Lapin commented he wanted to give spouses tickets, too. Ron phillips suggested if Council did that, to give single employees an extra ticket each also, which would make the total 55Q tickets at a cost of approximately eleven thousand dollars. Merv felt it was the least Gouncil could do to thank the employees. Mike Cacioppo made a motion to approve the expenditure, and Merv Lapin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-0. Ron stated for those who were required to work that night, something equivalent would be given. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kent Rose, Mayor ATTEST: . • ~?ame1~ A. $randmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman • -3- ~ ~ MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 7, 1989 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, February 7, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal 8ui1ding. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: None TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1989, second reading, relating to bed and breakfast operations. The full title of the ordinance was read by Mayor Rose. Mayor Rose stated he wanted to clarify that this ordinance would legalize bed and breakfasts; that it was not disallowing them. Peter Patten commented he had been asked at first reading to further investigate the discontinuance of bed and breakfasts upon lapse of operation and that Section 6 had been added to address Council's concerns over existing multi-family bed and breakfasts. Ne noted another of Council's concerns was bed and breakfasts in multi-family dwellings. He asked Council to look at a memorandum he had given them regarding research in various resort areas; several did not allow them in multi- family developments, but a couple did allow them in higher density areas. Peter went on to explain another issue at first reading had been about existing bed and breakfasts. He proposed a new Section 7 to the ordinance which would grandfather existing bed and breakfasts in multi-family dwellings granting approval as of the date of approval of the ordinance. He then stated existing operations would have to get a conditional use permit, and if they were located in a condominium, they would have to get the condominium association approval and prove they have been in operation, and apply by May 15, 1989. He then noted a typographical error on Section 4 where old wording had not been crossed out. Peter stated staff recommended approval with the changes noted. Joan Norris remarked she was concerned over bed and breakfasts getting too commercial. Susie Bird questioned short-term rental and bed and breakfast operation differences, to which Peter explained in detail. Larry Eskwith addressed some legal technicalities brought up by the Council. Jack Rush, speaking as a representative of a condominium association, asked for clarification of two sections of the ordinance. There was some discussion by Council and Ron Phillips as to what the ordinance would do. Joan Norris questioned the parking requirements in the ordinance. Mike Cacioppo asked if the ordinance could be redrafted to be mare general in nature. Jim Lamont reviewed bed and breakfast zoning history up to this point, his perception of the ordinance and its shortcomings, and gave recommendations on what he felt Council should do. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal responded why this language was brought up by Council in the first place. There was much discussion by Council and Larry Eskwith over the language of the ordinance and if the Town really needed it. Mike Cacioppo made a motion to deny the ordinance as it was too restrictive and unenforceable. John Slevin seconded. Peter Patten explained why he felt the ordinance was good and should be approved. Mike Cacioppo withdrew his original motion and made another motion to table the ordinance for one month. Kathy Fagan remarked she was not there as a negative force. Mike then clarified his motion to table the ordinance for four weeks with direction to staff to restudy and address the multi- family dwelling issue, the appellate process, the parking issue, and the business license issue. John Slevin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-O. At this time, Peter asked for more clarification on the multi-family dwelling issue, to allow bed and breakfasts; short term rental regulations compared to the bed and breakfast regulations and can they be combined to a degree; work on parking issue, i.e., change wording in ordinance to be more ~ « i • general, like provide the necessary number of spaces totally or proposed for intended use; check into business license ordinance to reflect short-term rental rates, which are currently the lowest figure in the schedule. Mike Cacioppo a1 so asked that home occupation Zone 1 and Zone 2 figures be looked at, and the multi- family use be by right, conditional use, or by permit. John Slevin asked that no nameplate signs be allowed, that they should be handled like short-term rentals. Joan Norris stated she was against making bed and breakfasts competitive and big business. Paul Rondho gave a few suggestions on how he felt it should be handled. The next item was a consent agenda of the following items: A. Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1989, second reading, relating to increasing the charges for impounding dogs. B. Ordinance No. 4, Series of 1989, second reading, designating signs on hot air balloons for special events be exempt from the Vail sign code. Mayor Rose read the full title of each ordinance. Tom Steinberg questioned the cap on the liability insurance for hot air balloons, to which Mike Cacioppo explained Council was told that was the maximum anyone could get. Tom requested it be taken out of the ordinance as times and costs change in the future. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve both ordinances with the change on Ordinance No. 4, which Gail ~Jahrlich-Lowenthal seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. _ Mayor Rose requested that items 3 and 4 on the agenda be switched to accommodate • the citizens present to discuss item 4. Gouncil agreed. The next item for discussion was the Vail Valley Medical Center request regarding frontage road improvements. Peter Patten explained that during the process of the Medical Center's proposed addition a major issue was of access on the frontage road from the northeast corner of the Medical Center and the Doubletree Hotel. Because the land belongs to the Doubletree, they made an agreement with the Medical Center. A7 so, the Vail National Bank was desirous of amending their parking situation, too, so they also joined in the agreement. He stated the Colorado Department of Highways (CDOH) could deny the request, but would approve the access permit if a fourth lane was made on the frontage road for access. This would affect the accesses to the east and west of the ll.S. Post Office. Ray McMahan, representing the Vail Valley Medical Center, felt they would be successful with an appeal for three lanes an the frontage road; the parking structure would work; they have an agreement with the Doubletree Hotel; and they are financing this. He stated they were working on access to the frontage road from the parking structure and were asking Council to direct the Planning Commission and Community Development to join the Doubletree Hotel, Vail National Bank, and the Medical Center in the appeal process. Ray then introduced Paul Powers, one of the new owners of the Vail National Bank. Paul commented they fully supported the Medical Center's attempt, and their new plan for the bank was to make the east access one way, parking places in the front would be angled, and they would join the Medical Center in front of the parking garage as the only access. He then reviewed the three suggestions the CDOH had given them when the request was denied. They were: 1) the Town of Vail abandon the two west accesses to the road from the Post Office; 2) the Doubletree, Vail National Bank, and Medical Center parking garage have one main road to the frontage road so there is one access point; and 3) removal of the super elevation of the banking of the frontage road westerly on the north side of the frontage road. Powers felt their plan fitted the plan codes of the CDOH and wanted the Town to support their appeal. He then answered questions of Council and showed them a map of the proposed plans. There was some discussion of what exactly CDOH wanted in order to approve the plan. Paul made the Medical Center's position clear, and that they were opposed to the fourth lane on the south side. Mayor Rose remarked to Ray McMahan that he was opposed to the appeal process, that he would rather work something out with the CDOH Grand Junction office. He complimented the property owners on arriving on a placement of the parking structure, but the frontage road issue was a part of a bigger problem than just this issue. He stated the Town had 32 people directing traffic one day during the holiday rush, and it was a community issue to redesign the frontage road from Cascade Village to Ford Park. Mayor Rose went on to suggest the Medical Center go to CDOH with this solution so they would work with the Medical Center in the Grand Junction office, and the Town would work with the CDOH on a total redesign of the frontage road from Cascade Village to Ford • Park; he felt the issue needed to be addressed soon. Ray asked about the time frame this would take, to which Mayor Rose replied the CDOH could commit to study -2- • the redesign and in the meantime allow you to do this without changing the frontage road until the study was done. Tom Steinberg agreed with Mayor Rose and requested the Me~ica~ Center ~o put money in escrow to pay for their portion of the frontage road changes. Ray McMahan felt this was getting off the subject and explained. ~~ Paul Johnston explained what Mayor Rose and Tom Steinberg had been saying. John Slevin asked the Medical Center to commit to a special district or some form of improvement of the frontage road. Ray felt he still wanted to go through the appeal process with CDOH and wanted the Town to join them. Ron Phillips clarified the Town's position. Ray clarified the Medical Center, Vail National Bank, and Doubletree Hotel's position, and if the Town was not with them, then what was their position. Eric Affeldt read a draft resolution he wrote regarding the Town Council's stand, which basically stated the Town would agree to help the other property owners with a long-term solution if the property owners would help the Town with long-term solution with their fair share of financing the road changes. Ray stated he was being prompted by some Board members to say yes. There was much discussion regarding plans far financial commitment from all parties. Peter Jamar, representing the Doubletree Hotel, felt everything was more confusing than it needed to be and explained his feelings on the project. There was then more discussion by all parties regarding planning and financial commitment. Eric read his resolution again. Ray stated the resolution was fine with him, and he would talk to Ron Phillips and staff later regarding steps to take with CDOH. Eric then made a motion to adopt the resolution, and Merv Lapin seconded. There was some discussion by Mike Caciappo and Erie Affeldt regarding the resolution and Mike's concerns over the financial commitment by the other parties. Merv requested the resolution be approved with instructions to staff that when the project goes before the Planning and Environmental Commission for approval of a conditional use permit, . that it be brought back before Council to define a dollar amount to put in escrow. Eric revised his motion to approve the resolution be approved with instructions to staff that when the project goes before the Planning and Environmental Commission for approval of a conditional use permit, that escrowing funds for future improvements be discussed. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Paul Johnston then complimented the Town staff for their work on the World Championships. Mayor Rose thanked Ray, Paul, and Peter for the work done, and the Town would try to keep it on track. The next item was action on the Vail Village Parking Structure expansion preliminary engineering contract. Stan Berryman stated the Town had negotiated a contract with Michael Barber Architecture Associates, and they were asking the Council to review and make changes they wanted to the contract so it can be signed and the project go forward. Stan reviewed the contract with the Council and answered questions. Tom Steinberg thought the architects would investigate all options, not just for approximately 400 cars. John Slevin requested a representative of Michael Barber come up to discuss the services and plans, to which Stan agreed. Eric Affeldt agreed with Tom and John, and they needed clarification on some planning and services. John wanted to know what the Town was getting for its money; designs and recommendations. Mike Cacioppo agreed the Town needed more parking, but wanted to address the issue of controlling the growth of the town; he did not like Vail Associates expanding, and felt it was not in the best interests of the residents. Gail Wahrlich--Lowenthal agreed that day skiers may not be in nur best interests, and that Council needed to talk to Vail Associates regarding their plans, our plans, and try to curtail their efforts. Merv Lapin agreed, but did not want to let things deteriorate with Vail Associates like what happened in Aspen. He requested Council meet with Vail Associates soon before signing the agreement. Ron Phillips stated he would take care of setting it up. There was no Citizen Participation. Tom Steinberg asked what was happening regarding some complaints on the snow plowing. Ron Phillips replied that Public Works was taking care of it. Ron stated the father of Yolanda Martinez, who attends battle Mountain High School, requested Council help sponsor Yolanda to attend CLOSE-~7P, a week long government studies program for high school students, which would take place in Washington, DC. He stated he had informed Mr. Martinez Council usually did not provide those kinds of sponsorships and asked if Council agreed, which they did. Ron then noted there was a 16.3 percent sales tax increase in December, 1988 over December, 1987. Also, the Town ended the year with a 9.3 percent increase over the 1987 sales tax and 6.3 percent over what was budgeted for 1988. The real estate transfer tax for January, -3- k ~ '~ 1989 was $331,Oa0; the Town had budgeted approximately one million dollars for the year and took in 1/3 of the year`s budget in January. At this time, Gail Wahrlich- Lowenthal wanted to second what Paui Johnston had said earlier; that for the World Championships, she wanted to thank the community as a whole, Town employees, and personally Ron Phillips and Kent Rose for their involvement. Kent Rose commented he could not say enough about Ron's total involvement with the Werld Championships and still taking care of his normal duties. Ron remarked he was proud to be an employee of the Town and noted what an excellent job everyone was doing, especially bus drivers, and fleet maintenance working until midnight. Stan Berryman stated there had been an exceptional amount of intercooperation between the Town, Colorado State Patrol, the Vail Valley Foundation, the volunteers, and everyone else; things were very positive. Eric Affeldt requested a resolution which would recognize the efforts of all entities be written up, signed by all Council members, and put in the paper next week. Merv Lapin announced there would be a television translator election later this year, and he wanted to get together with the lodging community to discuss plans. Mike Cacioppo announced there would be a TV Translator Committee meeting next Thursday, 12:00 p.m., at the Town of Avon. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~ ~~ ~ C~~ • Kent R'. Rose, Mayol^ ~ ATTEST: ~. ~~~ iV . ~+vw(lJY1 t~ c,lt~J Pamela A~. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk N~in~ut~s -'~~~?en by Brenda Chesman • -4- r ..• ~•.. M.- ~ fw 4 .._.... MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 21, 1989 7:30 P.M. • • i A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, February 21, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John S7evin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg None Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was approval of the minutes for the January 3 and 17, . 1989 meetings. There was no discussion by Council or the public. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve bath minutes, which was seconded by Eric Affeldt. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The next item was Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1989, first reading, requesting to rezone a 0.32 acre parcel of land at 2998 South Frontage Road West from the current Residential Cluster zone district to the Primary/Secondary Residential zone district. Mayor Rose read the full title of the ordinance. Mike Mol1ica gave background information on the request, explained the criteria used in evaluating the requested zone change, and why staff recommended approval. He also noted the Planning and Environmental Commission voted unanimously to approve the zone change conditional on the Council granting the change. Mike and Peter Patten then answered questions of Council. After some discussion, Tom Steinberg made a motion to approve the ordinance on first reading. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The third item on the agenda was appointments to the Design Review Board and the Planning and Environmental Commission. Council voted Ned Gwathmey and Jamie McCluskie fnr two year terms and Patricia Herrington for a one year term on the Design Review Board. Council then voted Sidney Schultz, Kathy Warren, and Charles Crist for two year terms on the Planning and Environmental Commission. • The next order of business was action on a vacation of utility easement for the U.S. Post Office. Larry Eskwith explained background information regarding the vacation. Peter Patten than answered questions of Council regarding the vacation. Peter stated the new Post Office bus stop had not yet been approved by the State or the U.S. Postal Service; staff had just recently submitted their third proposal and had not received a response yet. After same discussion by Council, Larry Eskwith agreed that Council could table the easement vacation until more is known of the Postal Service position on the bus stop and the retail facility. Larry noted he had requested a representative from the Postal Service to be present but evidently they had chosen not to show. After more discussion by Council, Tom Steinberg made a motion to table the item until a representative from the U.S. postal Service could be present to answer questions. Eric Affeldt seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. There was no Citizen Participation. At this time, Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal asked if there had been any interest by the Postal Service yet regarding retail space in town, to which Ron Phillips responded only that they said they would look into it. There was more discussion by Council, Ron, and Peter Patten on private enterprise doing the jab. C, J s. There being na further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, • Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: ~. ~vtcJd~vR.P,~.r~ amela A. 8randmeyer', Town Cleric Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman • • -2- .~._ ~ • ~~ DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (Please select 3) 1i ~ _ Anne Fitz ~~ ~ Ned Gwathmey ~~~ Patricia Herrington Joseph Matyk Jamie McCluskie Fitzhugh Scott PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL GONfMISSION (Please select 3} Charles Crist Susan Fritz Chris Neuswanger Sidney Schultz Fitzhugh Scott Kathy Warren ~- ~ • DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (Please select 3} Anne Fitz n U Ned Gwathmey ~~~ Patricia f~errington Joseph Matyk Jamie McCluskie Fitzhugh Scott PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION {please select 3) Charles Crist Susan Fritz Ghris Neuswanger Sidney Schultz Fitzhugh 5catt Kathy Warren ~~ i i ~~ DESIGN REVIEW BOARD {Please select 3) • j~ Anne Fitz Ned Gwathmey ~1~~~ Patricia f~errington Joseph Matyk Jamie McCluskie Fitzhugh Scott PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSIdN (P1 ease select 3) Charles Crist Susan Fritz Chris Neuswanger Sidney Schultz Fitzhugh Scott Kathy Warren ~, ,~ w~ . r DESIGN REVIEW 80ARD (Please select 3) • Anne Fitz Ned Gwathmey Patricia Herrington Joseph Matyk Jamie McCluskie Fitzhugh Scott ~i PLRNNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION (Please select 3) 1 ~ ~ ~ Charles Cri st Susan Fritz Chris Neuswanger ~p .(,~~ > Sidney Schultz 1~~~ Fitzhugh Scott ~~ Kathy Warren ~ !~ } DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (Please select 3} s Anne Fitz Ned Gwathmey Patricia i~erringtan Joseph Matyk Jamie McCluskie Fitzhugh Scott -------------------------------------------w_-~___-_~-___~_----_...._.._w...._..__....__..__--__ PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION {Please select 3} 1~~ ~l~f ,~ Charles Crist Susan Fritz Chris Neuswanger Sidney Schultz ~« Fitzhugh Scott Kathy Warren 'F ~~ • MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING 1~ARCFf 7, 1889 7:30 P.M. i A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, March 7, 1,989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: None Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was ten year employment anniversary awards to Cathie i Jarnot, Brian Terrett, and Cyrus "Buck" Allen. Ron gave brief background information on Cathie Jarnot, Personnel Assistant for the Administrative Services Department, and presented her with a Vaii pendant. Charlie Wick commented Cathie was the right hand person to the Department Heads for personnel issues and commended her on her years of hard work. Ron then stated information on Brian Terrett, Community Relations and Public Education Officer for the Police Department. Chief Ken Hughey remarked that Brian's level of creativity was unique and Ken was glad to have him. Mayor Rose added that Brian worked with the children at area schools and presented a good image for them. Ron then gave information on Buck Allen, Municipal Judge. Mayor Rose thanked all three for their hard work. At this time, Bob Krohn of the Vail Valley Foundation, stated he and Bob Knous were very happy about what the Town of Vail did to make the World Rlpine Ski Championships a success. He then read a statement thanking the Town employees for their hard work and going the extra distance to make the Championships a success. He then noted Town employees critical to the success - Kristen Pritz, Pete Burnett, Stan Berryman, Ron Phillips, and Ken Wughey. The second item on the agenda was the approval of minutes of the February 7 and 21, 1989 meetings. There was no discussion by Council or the-public." Eric Affeldt made a motion to approve the minutes, and John Slevin seconded. A vote was taken • and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The next item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1989, second reading, regarding bed and breakfast operations. Mayor Rose read the full title of the ordinance. Mayor Rose stated this item and also item 8 on the agenda, the request for variances to allow far the construction of a primary/secondary residence at 342 Mill Creek Circle, would be tabled this evening. There was no discussion by the public or Council. A motion to approve the tabling of these two items was made by Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal and seconded by Mike Cacioppo. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The fourth order of business was the Eagle County Commissioners' presentation regarding the bond election to be held March 2i, 1989. Dick Gustafson presented a basic outline of what the band election would cover and the Commissioners would answer questions regarding the new Administration building, Justice Center expansion, and the Fairgrounds Indoor Event Center. Jim Morter of Morter Architects, hired by the Council, reviewed the Administration building plans. Jim Fritz and Judge Hart explained the reasoning for the Administration building and Justice Center expansion and gave a slide presentation. Dick Gustafson then reviewed the plans for the Fairgrounds Indoor Event Center. Stan Bernstein discussed the financial aspects of the general obligation bands, and Don Welch explained the plans to pay off the debt. Bud Gates discussed where the funds would come from and then reviewed the voter eligibility requirements. The Commissioners ~` ~ ~ then answered questions of the Council and public. Dick Gustafson invited the Council to attend one of their meetings and would appreciate a petition of support from the Council on their plans. The next item for discussion was Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1989, second reading, • requesting to rezone a parcel of land at 2998 South Frontage Road West from the current residential cluster zone district to the primary/secondary residential zone district. Mayor Rose read the full title of the ordinance. At this time, Mike Cacioppo left the room. Mike Mollica gave brief background information on the rezoning request. He noted the Planning and Environmental Commission unanimously recommended approval, that no changes had been made since first reading, and staff recommended approval. There was no discussion by the public or Council. Eric Affeidt made a motion to approve the ordinance, which was seconded by John Slevin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. Mike Cacioppo returned. Mayor Rose doted that items 6 and 7 would be reversed since the majority of the audience was present for item 7. The next item was an appeal of the Planning and Environmental Commission decision to approve a request for a conditional use permit for an addition to the Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC) and parking structure. Kristan Pritz introduced the item. Dan Feeney gave background information of the VVMC expansion and how it came about, reviewed drawings of the proposed expansion, explained how the operations would be improved, and answered questions of Council. Kristan discussed changes to . the Frontage Road proposal. David Leahy reviewed the drawings showing the Frontage Road as it is today and gave background information. He explained the problems with the road today, then discussed the proposed changes and how they would correct the problems. He stated they would be sending the proposal in to the Colorado Department of Highways soon and were told there would be a decision within two weeks. David commented he expected approval from the State. He then answered questions of Council. Peter Jamar, representing Uail Holdings, owners of the Doubletree Hotel, gave background information on their expansion and relayed their concerns. He remarked they worked through the details and came up with the mast acceptable plan which the Doubletree supported, and requested the Council to approve the plan so they could move forward. Sydney Schultz, representing the Vail National Bank, then answered questions of Council. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal commented she had a problem with the parking situation at the Vail National Bank and asked that the Bank look at incorporating their parking in the Hospital structure. Kristan began discussing the conditional use permit request and staff's position, referring to staff's memo to Council dated March 7, 1989, page 6. She reviewed the Zoning Analysis statistics, reviewed the criteria used in evaluating the proposed changes, then remarked on staff`s recommendation with six conditions. She noted the Planning and Environmental Commission moved for approval with these and an additional five conditions, which was passed 4-2 with one abstention. Peter Patten and Kristan then answered questions of Council. Ben Bartell remarked about i his concerns over the traffic flow on West Meadow Drive, to which Peter Patten responded. Blondie Uucich, representing the local Humane Society, stated their concerns aver a possible animal testing research lab in the VVMC expansion. They were requesting Council to find out if there would be a lab or not and hopefully have Council take a stand. Ray McMahan responded the VVMC would be dealing with Dr. Steadman as a tenant; he was not sure about a lab, but any conditions the VVMC must meet for Council approval would be fine with them, Dan Feeney commented on nos concerns, ou-c noLea Gne Uvl~ll. vuar~u rrau mac. car i ,cr aria uy~ ~~u ~~ conditions. Mayor Rose stated he was prepared to approve the request, but would like the ambulance garage moved as soon as possible over the next couple of years. There was much discussion by Council, Peter, Kristen, and Ron Phillips regarding parking on the west side of the VUMC and the traffic flow on West Meadow Drive. Peggy Osterfass requested the VUMC da traffic counts on West Meadow Drive after the expansion was completed; Ray McMahan responded they would comply with this request. There was more discussion by the public. Diana Donovan discussed her concerns aver the expansion. Merv Lapin made a motion to uphold the Planning and Environmental Commission decision with all of staff's and the PEC's conditions, along with the conditions of 1} any usage of live animals for research in the facility must go through the conditional use permit process; 2) the VVMC would conduct parking utilization and traffic surveys with advice from the Community Development Department an how to conduct the analysis. The study is to be completed within one year after the expansion was finished to determine use patterns of the Hospital's parking and to indicate any impacts on West Meadow Drive traffic; and 3} -2- ,.~ i ~ _. there would be no remonstrations against a spacial development district for improvements on the South Frontage Road or West Meadow Drive. Mike Cacioppo seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-~. The seventh order of business was Ordinance Na. 7, Series of 1989, first reading, • regarding the Special Development District No. 14 for the Doubletree Hotel. The full title of the ordinance was read by Mayor Rose. Rick Pylman gave background information on the SDD request and answered questions of Council. He reviewed the 1986 5DD which had lapsed, the proposed SDD and modifications from the 1986 SDD. He then reviewed the considerations in evaluating the proposal and staff recommendation was for approval with several conditions as noted in Section 10 of the ordinance. Rick then answered questions of Council. After snme discussion by Council, staff, and Peter Samar, Eric Affe1dt made a motion to approve the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Mike Cacioppo. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-2, with Merv ~.apin and Tom Steinberg opposing. The next item was Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1989, first reading, amending the Town of Vail investment policy. Mayor Rose read the full title of the ordinance. There was minimal discussion by Council. A motion to approve the ordinance was made by Eric Affeldt and seconded by John Slevin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. There was no Citizen Participation. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 12:50 a.m. . Respectfully submitted, -f/4~ Kent R. Rose, Mayor ' ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman -3- .., ~- ~.F --. • MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 21, 1989 7:30 P.M. i A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, March 21, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rase, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tam Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: None Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1989, second reading, . regarding bed and breakfast operations. Mayor Rose read the full title of the ordinance. Peter Patten stated that February 21st the ordinance was tabled for revisions according to the Council's direction. He then reviewed the changes made and noted new Sections 4-16. Some of the revisions were that the parking was revised so there were no requirements over and above than required as normal; signs would not be allowed (stated in Section 17 8.4.); and written approval would have to be given by jointly owned property driveways/parking spaces so the joint owner has some say so over how the property would be used. There was some discussion by Council over the latter issue. Peter noted Section 20 was added stating a Planning and Environmental Commission conditional use permit decision could be appealed to the Town Council. There was more discussion by Council. Peggy Osterfoss, of the PEG, explained the reasoning behind the PEC's decisions, their concerns, and their perspective of potential problems from the planning point of view. There was much discussion by Council regarding the parking issue. Kathy Fagan stated she realized there is a potential problem, but not everyone used a car. Larry Eskwith stated he had been instructed to change the wording of B.S. A motion to send the ordinance back to the PEC was made by Tom Steinberg and seconded by Merv Lapin. Eric Affeldt commented he did not see the need to send the ordinance back to the PEC and asked Peggy if the major problem the PEC had was with the multi-family parking; she agreed. Merv Lapin remarked the Council had changed the ar~dinance drastically since the PEC last saw the document and thought it should go back to the PEC for their • input. Peggy Osterfoss thought it would be a good idea, that the PEC was not so political and could look at things mare from a planning aspect instead of from a political paint of view. Jim Lamont commented on his concerns regarding the differences between short-term rentals and bed and breakfasts, but that he appreciated the efforts and time everyone had put into this item. Trevor Bradway stated he was concerned over owners not being present at their bed and breakfasts, that most were run by agencies; he was also concerned with potential regulation problems and wanted agencies licensed as required by state law. At this time, Tom Steinberg amended his motion to deny the ordinance and send it back to the PEC to review. Merv Lapin then seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6--1, with Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal opposing. Mike Cacioppo commented that short-term units and bed and breakfasts require less parking than do long-term rental units. Peter Patten then asked for clarification by Council on what the PEC would be asked to look at. Merv Lapin replied the parking spaces needed and was there actually a higher use than short-term rentals. Larry remarked bed and breakfasts were included in the business license fee ordinance amendment, and asked the Council to agree that a fee should or should not be paid. He then answered questions of Council. Peter asked what zone areas did the Council have questions about in regards to parking issues; Tom Steinberg replied Commercial Core I and i1 and multi-family. Me felt bed and breakfasts should be kept to lower density areas. r~ ~ x_ The next item was Ordinance lVo. 7, Series of 1989, second reading, regarding Special Development District ~Vo. 14 for the Doubletree Hotel. Mayor Rose read the full title of the ordinance. Rick Pylman noted the copy of the ordinance the Council received had two typographical errors, but the correct version was published in the paper after first reading. He reviewed the corrections and why they were made. . There was much discussion by Council and staff about gross residential floor area (GRE'A) and zone densities. Jay Peterson, representing Vail Holdings, Ltd., owners of the Doubletree, gave an explanation of the requested SDD density and referred to the Master P1 an. He then gave detailed background information on the area and why SDD's were good planning. Staff then answered questions of Council. Much discussion ensued regarding hotel rooms converted to condominiums and the possible attractiveness of the limited kitchens in the hotel rooms. Jahn Slevin asked that Council look at the conversion process at an upcoming Work Session. Eric Affeldt then made a motion to approve the ordinance on second reading, which Jahn Slevin seconded. Gail Wahrlich--Lowenthal questioned the twenty year limitation, to which Peter Patten replied that Council had decided that figure and he did not know exactly why 20 years was chosen. John Slevin asked that Eric amend his motion to add language regarding the conversion. Eric Affeldt amended his motion to include language so hotel rooms would not ever be converted to condominiums at all. Jahn Slevin then seconded the motion. Eric then remarked he was not excited about seeing applicants come in with no present intention to actually do a development they are requesting and that improvement does not automatically equal increased density. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-2, with Merv Lapin and Tom Steinberg opposing. The third item an the agenda was Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1989, second reading, • amending the Town of Vail investment policy. The full title was read by Mayor Rose. Charlie Wick gave brief background information on the ordinance. Eric Affeldt suggested a Councilman sit on the Investment Policy Committee so Council would be a little more comfortable. John Slevin stated his concerns over that suggestion, and Eric withdrew his suggestion. At this time, a motion to approve the ordinance on second reading was made by Eric Affeldt and seconded by Tom Steinberg. There was a short discussion regarding certificates of deposit. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The next order of business was Ordinance fro. 8, Series of 1989, first reading, amending the business license ordinance. Mayor Rose read the full title of the ordinance. Danielle Hild remarked there were only administrative changes made to the ordinance; some items defined more clearly and correcting a few errors. It was then discussed that Section 1 of the ordinance dealing with bed and breakfasts be deleted. Merv Lapin left the room at this time. John Slevin had questions regarding the real estate business licensing fees. Eric Affeldt made a motion to approve the ordinance with the deletion of Section 1. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. Merv Lapin returned. The fifth item was the Gunn variance requests. Mayor Rase explained the applicant had requested the item be tabled for another week. There was some discussion by Council and the time frame was corrected to two weeks until the next Evening Meeting April 4. John Slevin made a motion to table the item, which was seconded by Eric Affeldt. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The next item was the McCue variance appeal. Kristen Pritz explained there were actually two requests for variance: 1) a side setback variance to add a deck, and 2) a side setback variance to construct a second floor addition. She gave detailed background information on bath requests. The expansion utilized the 250 square foot ordinance. She reviewed the criteria used, the finding, and why staff recommended denial. Kristen noted the Planning and Environmental Commission voted 3-3, which results in a denial. Robert McCue explained what he was trying to da at his home and why the variances were needed. He felt a precedent had been set by other neighbors. He then distributed photographs of his residence and explained exactly what they showed. Bill Pierce spoke on zoning issues regarding this subdivision and reviewed the reasoning of the PEC members who voted yes for the variances. Mr. McCue reviewed the findings and explained why he felt he was within the guidelines and should be granted the variances. Both Mr. McCue and Mr. Pierce then responded to questions and remarks by Council. After much discussion by Council, staff, and the applicant, Merv Lapin made a motion to uphold the PEC decision of denial because • of the finding the variance would be granting the applicant a special privilege. -2- i • Mike Cacioppo seconded the motion. A rote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Mr. McCue thanked the Council for hearing him out. There was no Citizen Participation. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kent R. Rase, Mayor ATTEST: ,Gv~ ~~i,triu.~'iY1t,Gt,{c.cu.~ Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman • ~~ ,, ~J -3- • MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 4, 1989 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, April 4, 19$9, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rase, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: None Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was the approval of minutes of the March 7 and 21, . 1989 meetings. Eric Affeldt asked that clarification be given to a statement he made concerning the special development district at the top of page 2, the March 21 minutes. The sentence was changed to read: Eric then remarked he was not excited about seeing applicants come in with no present intention to actually da a development they are requesting and that improvement does not automatically equal increased density. Mike Cacioppo added he would like clarification on a comment he made, also. This change was at the bottom of page 1, regarding bed and breakfasts, on the March 21 minutes. The sentence was changed to read: Mike Cacioppo commented that short-term units and bed and breakfasts require less parking than do long-term rental units. There was no other discussion by Council or the public. Eric Affeldt made a motion to approve the minutes as amended, and Tom Steinberg seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The next order of business was a committee presentation for the proposed Television Translator and Mosquito Control District. Mike Metcalfe, Assistant Chairman of the Eagle Valley Television Translator Committee, gave an initial outline presentation and introductions of the committee members. John Dunn presented the financial and legal aspects of the district and answered questions. He stated the committee would go before the Commissioners for a public hearing on April 1O, 1989. He explained what the district would provide and reviewed the cost for the district; he described the particular three stage procedure i;he group would go through far • their master plan; and requested the Council to give an official position tonight so they could plan the financial aspects accordingly. John Dunn, Jerry Davis, and Larry Eskwith answered questions of Council. Jay Peterson, representing Heritage Cablevision, and as a Vail citizen, explained if all of Vail or other areas were not included, then of course others would have to cover all the costs; he recommended everyone going to the Gounty Commissioners and telling them what we want; he felt an existing government office could do it cheaper. Tom Steinberg felt the proposal was not equitable to Vail. Mike Cacioppo commented why he felt the district was a good idea and why he was for it; he felt if the Council did oat let it go to a vote it would be a mistake. Rob Levine agreed. John Slevin responded why he felt it would be a bad idea to go to election; that Vail should ask to be excluded and have a town election, then if the citizens agreed, proceed to join the district. Tom Steinberg agreed. Jerry Davis explained if the Town pulled out, then the district is dead and the issue would not come up again. He felt this was a county issue, not just Vail, and it was such a small amount of money he did not see what the problem was. There was then some discussion by Council over the pros and cons of being included in the district when not all of the Town would be able to receive the signals until later. Don Hagan, a resident of East Vail, remarked he was glad the Town was concerned about its citizens, the the Town should send a letter to the Commissioners because he felt the district was a bad idea; also, he felt the Council was well representing its citizens from what . he had seen tonight. Mike Robinson felt it was time to do things valleywide, that it was healthy, and he hoped the Council would vote far the district. Jay Peterson ~r ~ i stated, in regards to a mill levy increase, that small amounts of money added up to large amounts. Rob Levine commented that at three lodge meetings a vote had been taken and all three times there was a unanimous vote for the district, and they would like valleywide cooperation. Alan Best asked if the committee looked at any other funding besides tax, to which John Dunn responded yes, and explained. It was also asked if the Commissioners would not approve the district if Vail was not included, to which John responded he did not know. John then made remarks that the lower valley voters did not intend to beat up on Vail. Tom Steinberg felt there were too many unanswered questions, too many loose ends, and that he was not comfortable with the fact that there would be disproportionate taxes for Vail. He asked Council to either block it or slow the process down until the Town of Vail voters could vote. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal stated she was not thrilled with layering on another special district, but recognized the committee had done all it could do to this point. She felt the healthiest portion of the entire project was the valleywide cooperation. She hoped they could delay the process because a major portion of Vail would not enjoy the benefits, so she agreed with Tom. Gail also did not understand Berry Creek Board's decision against involvement in the district. Merv Lapin commented he was far it and the major reason was to let the democratic process work. He did not disagree with Gail and Tam, but thought Heritage Cablevision could use the competition. He was not happy with Heritage and felt Vail extends to Red Cliff and Edwards. Mayor Rose explained he hoped if Uail voted no, then the issue would be dead. He would not be supporting its citizens if he voted for the district; Uail does not need another district; this item belongs at the County level and felt everyone should go and tell the Commissioners; therefore, he would oppose the formation of one tonight. John Slevin stated it was unfortunate the County had decided to pass the buck, and that the hotels were trying for bargaining position with Heritage far more reasonable fees. He felt the issue needed to go back to the County, or he would support it if the Tawn could have its awn local election and if the Town was guaranteed complete coverage. He would vote no tonight. Mike Cacioppo felt the Council had no vision, and he would vote yes so as to allow the citizens to vote on this issue. Eric Affeldt remarked there were too many special districts now, but would agree to vote yes, that he preferred to see it go to a public vote. He was opposed to the issue, but had no problem with it going to a public vote. Mike Robinson stated there were no additional funds, so if the Town did go to a vote, he hoped the Council would agree to fund the rewriting of the service plan. Jerry Davis also commented he hoped the Council would be willing to extend the cast if things were put on hold. Gail responded she felt this was a fair request. Larry Eskwith stated a Town election could be held as soon as May 9, 1989, but Council agreed they did not want an election held in May. Mayor Rose asked one be held at a later date, which all of Council agreed. Mike Cacioppo made a motion to support the efforts of the Committee with its efforts to proceed with the district, which Merv Lapin seconded. Eric Affeldt commented he wanted the motion to only allow the process to continue, not that the Council was in support of the district. There was soma discussion by Council regarding the Town's options. Mike Cacioppo then amended his motion to include the committee would agree to delay the District Court hearing until the Town of Vail had had an opportunity to hold a vote of its residents, with Merv • Lapin amending his second. Eric Affeldt stated he was supporting the issue to allow it to go to a vote only, he was not supporting or opposing it. Mike Cacioppo amended his motion to state the Council was voting to support it to go to a district wide election, and the Council would withdraw its opposition at the County Commissioner level and would call an election of the Tawn of Vail citizens within the next 60-90 days. Tom Steinberg seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-1, with Mayor Rose opposing. The third item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1989, second reading, amending the business license ordinance. Mayor Rose read the full title of the ordinance. Larry Eskwith explained the only change made since first reading with the exclusion of the bed and breakfast section. There was no discussion by Council or the public. Tom Steinberg made a motion to approve the ordinance, which John Slevin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-O. The fourth order of business was Resolution No. 5, Series of 1989, supporting Denver for the 1998 Olympic Winter Games. Larry Eskwith stated the resolution was self-explanatory in that Vail would be supportive of Denver holding the 1998 Winter Games. Merv Lapin stated his concerns about Vail being a part of the Olympics, and that the reality of being involved in one left a lot to be desired; he was also concerned about crowds. Ron Phillips commented the Olympics Environmental Committee would be holding a hearing here Monday, April 10, 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, so the committee could receive input from citizens regarding any -2- ~" • • environmental concerns. There was then some discussion of the similarity of venues of the World Championships and the Olympics. A motion to approve the resolution was made by Eric Affeldt and seconded by Mike Cacioppo. Eric felt it was a good move for the Town of Vail to support the Olympic Games. A vote was then taken and the motion passed 6-1, with Merv Lapin opposing. There was no Citizen Participation. At this time, Eric Affeldt stated he had received a call from Sylvia Blount of the Vail Resort Association regarding whose 800 number to use on promotional material, their's or the Beaver Creek Marketing Company's. She had requested Council to vote whose number to use, that they only want one number. Eric felt he wanted VRA's number at least on the material, to which the rest of Council agreed. Charlie Wick commented the Marketing Board wanted the best call-to-action number to bring business to the Vail Valley, and he would pass this information on to the Marketing Board. Mayor Rose remarked he had heard complaints regarding the VRA 800 number, to which Rob Levine responded he was aware of the problem and they were in the process of taking care of it. Mike Cacioppo stated since it was time to review the Heritage franchise agreement, he wanted copies of other franchise agreements to compare to our proposed agreement, to which Larry Eskwith responded he had used many franchise agreements to come up with our proposed agreement, and he had also used franchise attorneys. There was same discussion of Council's avenues. It was decided the item would be discussed first at a Work Session, then presented at a public Evening Meeting sometime in June. • Mayor Rose announced the Eagle County Board of Commissioners would be holding a public hearing in Vail Tuesday evening, April 11, 7:30-9:00 p,m. in the Council Chambers for anyone interested. Charlie Wick announced the Recreation Task Force would like to meet with Council April 24 at 7:30 p.m., and with the Marketing Board at 5:00 p.m. He stated April 17 was a better day for the Commissioners, and that he would try to work out the details. Ron Phillips commented Wednesday, April 12, he and Department Heads would be holding a pancake breakfast for the Town employees in appreciation of their hard work this winter. It would be held at the Golf Course Restaurant 7:00-9:30 a.m. He asked Council members to attend and mingle with the employees. Ron then noted Peter Patten would be having back surgery this coming Friday, that Peter had been in a lot of pain. Peter would be in the hospital for 4-5 days and then home for 2-3 weeks total if things go well. He would be at St. Luke`s Hospital in Denver for the surgery. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kent R: Rose, Mayor ATTEST: ~~~ ~. w~ Panela A". Brat~dmeyer, own Clerk Mi nut~~3 "i:ak~rt by Brenda Chesman -3- ~ ~ ~~ • • MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 18, 1989 7~3Q P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, April 18, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Uail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlieh-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg None TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was a ten year employment anniversary award for Joanne • Mattio. Ron gave background information on Joanne and presented her with a Vail pendant. Pat godson said a few words regarding the hard work she has done over the years and how much he appreciated her; Mayor Rose also expressed the Council's appreciation. The next item was a discussion with representatives from the Eagle Valley Television Translator Committee, Mike Robinson, representing the Committee, reviewed the background of the last meeting with Council and later Committee Board meetings. Fie then reviewed amendments to the service plan the Cnmmittee had made and asked if Council would consider changing their agreement with the Committee and not require an election of Town of Vail citizens so the district plans could go forward to the District Court as quickly as possible. Eric Affeldt questioned the legality of the drop out clause discussed at the Commissioners public hearing last week, to which Larry Eskwith replied the legality of it was questionable and explained why. Eric asked why the rush, to which Mike Robinson stated the Committee wanted to get it set up so some can receive the signals this year and he had not seen any movement by the Town toward holding an election. Mike Cacioppo agreed, and believed with the two amendments to the service plan the questions of Council had been answered and therefore there was no need for a local election. There was. some. discussion on the wording of the motion, if the district would be a non-profit or profit organization, and problems with the exclusion period. Tam Steinberg commented he thought the . Council had decided to wait until the County Commissioners voted, then Vail would set an election date, and expressed concern over how citizens would be notified of the exclusion period and problems with the application process. Mike Robinson agreed that was what the Council had agreed to at the last meeting. Mike Cacioppo said he was very comfortable since Vail would probably hold 50-60% of the vote to let it go to a district election only. John Slevin agreed with Tom's remark regarding exclusion period problems. There was more discussion regarding this problem. Jay Peterson aired his feelings opposing the district formation and the problems he saw with it. Mike Cacioppo responded to Jay's concerns. There was much discussion by Council regarding the legality issues. Lew Meskiman remarked why he was against this district and why he felt mast citizens would be against it. Mike Cacioppo responded he was for it because the people would ultimately decide, and then addressed same of Eric's concerns. Merv Lapin noted that starting with today's Work Session, Council would be discussing Heritage's franchise agreement, and Council will try for some leverage with Heritage. Mike Cacioppo asked for an informal vote, to which Eric responded he would vote no and Tom responded he would vote no, only after the County Commissioners had approved the plan. Mike Cacioppo did not pursue the issue, and agreed to continue to let Vail citizens hold a local election after the County Commissioners had voted. There was then discussion on when the election wnuld take place. There was a question if there was a deadline to hold the election; Mike Cacioppo was sure he had included a 60-90 day deadline in • his motion and asked to listen to the tape of the last Evening Meeting. Pam Brandmeyer left the meeting to bring in the tapes. ~,_ '~- ~ i ~ Council decided to proceed with the following items on the agenda until Pam returned. The next item was the Fritzlen and Commission decision to deny a side Council to please table the item ui applicants were not present for an table the item, which was seconded motion passed unanimously 7-0. Pierce ; setback ~til the unknown by Mike appeal of the Planning and Environmental variance request. Mike Mollica asked applicants could be present as the reason. Eric Affeldt made a motion to Cacioppo. A vote was taken and the Under Citizen Participation, Lew Meskiman asked if the Village Core closure of 11:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m. could possibly be not effective until mid-May. Mayor Rose replied that staff would look into it. Merv Lapin questioned where staff stood in regards to the paint of sale tax. Ran Phillips explained they were waiting for legislation to take p1 ace which might affect catalog sales. Eric Affeldt commented the Supreme Court was also supposed to look at the issue sometime this spring. Merv remarked he would like to go ahead and proceed without catalog sales. Council then recessed to listen to the last Evening Meeting's tapes. The meeting then proceeded. The tapes reflected Mike Cacioppo did include a time frame of 60-90 days from that April 4 to hold a local election. Possible dates were then discussed to hold the election. There was then discussion regarding changing the time frame and the problems with it. Council had much discussion on possible • election dates, working with Heritage negotiations, and the County Commissioners' vote. Eric Affeldt made a motion to rescind the motion made by Mike Cacioppo at the April 4, 1989 Evening Meeting regarding the TV translator issue. John 5levin seconded the motion. Larry Eskwith explained that a 2/3 majority vote was necessary to rescind action at a previous meeting without the item an the agenda according to Roberts Rules of Order. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal commented she would vote no because she felt they were playing the two ends against the middle. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-2, with Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal and Mike Cacioppo opposing. Eric Affeldt then made a motion to inform the County Commissioners that flail would not file a formal opposition at this time, and Council intends to call a vote of Vail resident voters with a date yet to be determined. Tom Steinberg seconded. Mike Cacioppo thought some people might feel this was a delay tactic. He felt the delay was in the best interest of Heritage, but he would vote for this if a date deadline was set. Tom Steinberg commented he wanted to wait until the County Commissioners were forced to make a decision before Vail holds an election. Mike Cacioppo commented he was against this because it would stop the district tonight, to which Tom reiterated his previous comment. After mare discussion by Council, a vote was taken and the motion passed 4-3, with Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal, Mike Cacioppo, and Mayor Rase opposing. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. • Respectfully submitted, Kent R. Rose, Mayor ` ATTEST: ~_, ~J Pamela A. Brandmeyer, own Clerk Minutes,taken by Brenda Chesman -2- 'lam ~ 1 • • MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCTL MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 2, 1989 7:30 P.M. A re ular meetin of the Vail Town Council .was held on Tuesda Ma 2 1989 at 7:30 g g Y~ y > P.M., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. Members Present: Members Absent: Town Officials Present: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Michael Cacioppa Merv Lapin Tom Steinberg Ron Phillips, Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was approval of the minutes from the April 4th and 18th, 1989, meetings. Eric Affeldt moved to approve these minutes. John Slevin seconded that motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-~0. The second order of business was Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1989, a first reading, an ordinance requesting a rezoning from High Density Multiple Family Zone District to Commercial Service Center, with a special development district, to allow for additional parking, loading, and an expansion of the Vail National Bank Building. Mayor Rose read the title in full. Rick Py1man explained the reason for this zoning request stating that the existing Vail National Bank Building consists of a three-story office building, with two levels of underground parking. The first floor of the building is occupied by the Vail National Bank, with the two upper floors leased to various professional offices. The site upon which the building sits is in the High Density Multiple Family Zone District, and at the time this project was built in 1976, the office space was approved as a conditional use. Later, office use was removed entirely as a use from the High density Multiple Family Zone District. As a result, any additional office space would not be allowed today. For this reason, the owners of this building wish to rezone the property to Special Development District, with limited underlying uses listed in the Commercial Service Center Zone District. The applicant is requesting to restrict the permitted uses to the following: 1) Professional offices, business offices and studios 2) Banks and financial institutions 3) Business and office services 4) Travel and ticket agencies • 5) Additional offices, businesses or services determined to be similar to permitted uses Criteria to be used in evaluating this proposal were those for a request for zone change as well as the nine development standards, as set forth in the Special Development District Chapter of the Zoning Code. First to be considered was evaluation of a zone change request from High Density Multiple Family Zone District to Special Development District, with underlying commercial service center zoning. 1} Suitability of existing zoning. 2} Is the amendment presenting a convenient, workable relationship within land uses consistent with municipal objectives? 3) goes the rezoning provide for the growth of an orderly, viable community? 4} Criteria relating to the land use plan, i.e., the land use plan designates this area as resort accommodations and services, but the land use plan does not specifically designate this site as an office area. Staff believes that the office use does make sense due to the following: A. The property's proximity to the South Frontage Road and I-70; and B. Other adjacent offices and public uses such as the hospital and Municipal Building; and C. The fact that the office use already exists. The second grouping of criteria relates to design standards or criteria in evaluating SDD proposals. ,~t 1) Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood, and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity, and orientation. 2} Uses, activity, and density that provide a compatible, efficient, and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. 3} Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Section 18.52. 4} Conformity with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town policies, and Urban Design plans. 5} Identification and mitigation of natural and or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the Special Development District is proposed. 6} Site plan, building design and location, and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. 7) A circulation system designed for bath vehicles and pedestrians on and off site traffic circulation. Rick noted at this paint that this area specifically was of Planning Commission concern in regard to a pedestrian walkway between the bank and the hospital. 8) Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views, and function. 9) Phasing Plan or Subdivision Plan that will maintain a workable, functional, and efficient relationship throughout the development of this special development district. The Staff recommendation was for approval of this rezoning and Special Development _ District, with the following conditions: • 1) The owners receive a CDOH approval for their access permit request before a building permit is released for the proposed bank expansion. 2) That the uses allowed under the Special Development District with the underlying Commercial Service Center Zoning shall be limited to the following: a. Professional offices, business offices and studios b. Banks and financial institutions c. Business and office services d. Travel agencies e. Additional offices, business or services determined to be similar to permitted uses. Retail uses are specifically not allowed on this property. 3) Any landscaping that dies within one year of the transplanting shall be replaced with a similar size and type material by the owners of the bank. In respect to the cottonwoods, if they die, three new trees having each a diameter of 8" to 12" shall replace the existing trees. The height of the new trees shall be a minimum of 25 feet. This later was amended by Planning Commission to include the wording that. any 1_andscaping that dies. within a two year period of transplanting shall` be replaced with a similar size and type material by the owners of the bank. 4) If the loading zone is relocated in the future, the new location shall be approved by the PEC using the major amendment to an SDD review process. Mr. Pylman summarized by saying that the staff felt it was appropriate to rezone this property to a district that allowed for office use. He also stated that staff believed the special development district zoning allows for flexibility and the thorough review of any future development on this particular site. He finalized his comments by commending the owners of the bank and the hospital for working together to address both staff and PEC concerns. At this point, several individuals from the audience spoke on behalf of the applicant. Sid Shultz, acting as architect, spoke to the pedestrian access and landscaping; Paul Powers, working with the Vail National Bank Building, addressed on-site parking; and Jay Peterson, an attorney representing the bank building, addressed parking as it relates to the travel agency that has been included in this revised ordinance. Eric Affeldt then moved to approve Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1989, on first reading, with a second from Mike Cacioppo. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal stated she would vote against this ordinance due to her belief that parking was inadequate. She also requested that the staff should really evaluate what is going on with this particular building as it relates to the rest of the community and potential renovations and requests of this sort that the staff and Council will be seeing in the future. Eric Affeldt, in regard to his motion, also strongly suggested that DRB work with the Vail Valley Medical Center for the pedestrian bridge between the two properties, those properties being the medical center and the --2w ,~,. • bank building. Dike Cacioppo also stated strong feelings regarding the potential of the loading zone in its present location and the difficulty that this would create. John Slevin requested that staff revise its policy on office building parking, and with this, a vote was taken and the motion passed, 4-1, with Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal voting against that motion. • Item 3 on the agenda was action on a proposed contract to vacate 66 square feet of Forest Road right-of-way in exchange for $30,000.00 (Ran Byrne, Charles Biederman). Kent Rose supplied background in regard to this proposed contract stating that a new proposition was to be presented to the Council. He described this new proposition as follows: That the $30,000.00 would be assessed for use or purchase of an easement and that this easement would remain encumbered until such time that the property was renovated or torn down. Jay Peterson, attorney for the applicant, further stated that this should be viewed as a perpetual easement, subject to the terms Kent had just described. Clarifications were then made in regard to Resolution No. 17, and pertaining to this easement. Those changes were as follows: 1) Resolution No. 17 changed to Number 22; and 2) The easement should be between the Town of Vail and Forest Road Associates, rather than Charles Biederman; and 3) Anew survey, including the garage overhang, be completed and attached to the easement. To coincide with current Town of Vail Building Code, it was discussed that as far as the garage being destroyed, this means more than 50% of that garage structure being destroyed. With these changes, John Slevin moved to approve Resolution No. 22, Series of 1989, and Kent Rose seconded this motion. Gordon Britton spoke at this time to state as a citizen of the Town he felt the only equitable way for the Council to handle this matter was to require the garage to be torn down. John Slevin then amended his motion to include the changes previously discussed, as well as, changing the term "residential" on page 2 of the Resolution to "garage". A vote was taken and the resolution passed 4-1, with Eric Affeldt voting against this resolution. Backtracking to Item 3, Action on Proposed Contract to Vacate 56 Square Feet of Forest Road Right-of-Way in exchange for $30,000 (Ron Byrne and Charles Biederman), no action was taken. In regard to Item 4, Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance vacating that .portion of the platted Forest Road right-of-way, Vail Village, first filing, and setting forth details related thereto, John Slevin made a motion to deny the ordinance, and this was seconded by Kent Rose. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-0. The next items of business were Resolution Nos. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21, Series of 1989, designating the following as • depositories for the funds of the Town of Vail as permitted by the Charter of the Town, its Ordinances and the statutes of the State of Colorado. They are as follows: Resolution Na. 6 Resolution No. 7 Resolution No. 8 Resolution No. 9 Resolution No. 10 Resolution No. 11 Resolution No. 12 Resolution No. 13 Resolution No. 14 Resolution Na. 15 Resolution No. 16 Resolution No. 17 Resolution No. 18 Resolution No. 19 Resolution No. 20 Resolution No. 21 Firststate Financial, Orlando, Florida Sterling Bank, Burbank, California Security Bank of Kansas City, Kansas City, Kansas Farmers State Bank, aenton, Montana Coral Coast Savings Bank, Boynton Beach, Florida Bank of Horton, Horton, Kansas First Federal of the Carolinas, High Point, North Carolina San Antonio federal Savings dank, San Antonio, Texas Sterling Savings & Loan, Irvine, California First Savings & Loan, Beverly Hi11s, California Franklin Bank, San Mateo, California Security Savings & Loan, Chicago, Illinois Hawthorne Savings & Loan, Hawthorne California Midstate Savings & Loan Association, Baltimore, Maryland Exeter Bank, Exeter, New Hampshire First National Bank of Glens Fa11s, Glens Falls, New York -3- ~ , . `, Gail ~lahrlich-Lowenthal moved to approve these resolutions, with a second from John Slevin. A vote was taken and the resolution passed 4-1, with Mike Caciappo voting against these resolutions because he was unfamiliar with Security bank of Kansas City. Item 6 an the Agenda was Proclamation No. 1 declaring June, 1989, as Colorado • Recycling Month. Eric Affeldt moved to approve this proclamation with Mike Caciappo seconding that motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-0. The next item of business was action to grant permission to the Vail Metropolitan Recreation District far the construction of Volleyball Courts at the east end of the Athletic Field on Vail Valley Drive. After a brief discussion regarding the positioning of these fields and some introductory remarks by Pat Dodson, John Slevin moved to grant permission to the VMRD for this construction with the provision that if parking problems occur, the VMRD Board address and correct them. Eric Affeldt seconded that motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-0. fJnder Citizen Participation, there was none. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:50 P.M. Respectfully submitted, ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Pamela A. Brandmeyer U Kent I2~. Rose, Mayor -4- ~!" "~' r• ~ ~ MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MAY 16, 1989 7:30 P.M. C7 • A regular meeting of the Vail Tawn Council was held on Tuesday, May 16, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Uail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg Eric Affeldt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Tawn Clerk The first order of business was Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1989, second reading, an ordinance requesting a rezoning from High Density Multiple Family Zone District to Commercial Service Center, with a special development district, to allow for additional parking, loading, and an expansion of the Vail National Bank Building. The full title was read by Mayor Rase. Rick Pylman reviewed the changes made since first reading: 1. VNB Parcel, used in the title and in the third paragraph of the ordinance was changed to VNB Building. 2. Under Section 4, 2., the landscape plan drawn by Dennis Anderson Associates, Inc., was revised May 12, 1989. 3. The entire paragraph under Section 8 was deleted and replaced with "Amendments to the approved development plan may be granted pursuant to Section 18.40.100 of the Vail Municipal Code." Rick then discussed the revised landscape plan. Sidney Schultz, representing the Vail National Bank, explained the request and the problems which would be incurred if the Council denied the ordinance. Mayor Rase gave additional information far Tom Steinberg, who was absent at first reading. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal noted she voted against the ordinance at first reading and explained why, but she respected the situation tonight and did not want to stop the project. She felt the project inherited the problem and did not create it, so she would vote for the ordinance. There was then some discussion on alternatives. John Slevin made a motion to • approve the ordinance on second reading with the changes noted, and Gail Wahrlich- Lowenthal seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 4-0. The second item was Resolution No. 23, Series of 1989, creating the Town of Vail Transportation and Parking Advisory Committee. Stan Berryman stated the staff was bringing this resolution to Council at Council's request. He gave brief background information on the Task Force's activities since 1984, and commented the resolution would formally create an Advisory Committee. He then listed some of the names of those presently on the Task Force {other than the Mayor and Town employees): Two Gouncil members -- Merv Lapin, John Slevin Two Planning and Environmental Commission members - Sidney Schultz, Diana Donovan One person from Vail Associates, Inc. - Joe Macy One person from the Forest Service - Bill Wood One person from the Department of Highways -- Rich Perske One person from Eagle County - Jim Fritze Five citizens from the Town of Vail - George Knox, Dave Gorsuch, Rob Levine, Lee Hollis, Dave Rimel He then asked that they be ratified as the Advisory Committee members. There was some discussion regarding the citizens, and it was decided to delete the words "from the Town of Vail" far any future changes in members. A motion to approve the '~~`~ 'z' resolution with the wording change in H. was made by Tam Steinberg and seconded by Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 4-0. The next agenda item was the Robert Gunn request for a front setback variance and modification of the 100-year Mill Creek floodplain (342 Mill Creek Circle). Mike Mollica explained the applicant's two requests, then reviewed the criteria used in these requests. He stated staff recommended approval of the variance request because it would create a hardship on the applicant if it was not granted. As far as the floodplain modification, staff recommended approval with three conditions: 1. That a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers, either and Individual or a Nationwide Permit, be obtained prior to the issuance of any building permit for the property. 2. That approval from the Federal Emergency Management Agency be secured prior to the issuance of any building permit for the property. 3. That a groundwater analysis be completed, as an addendum to the EIR, prior to the issuance of any building permit for the property. Said analysis shall conclude that there will be no adverse affect on adjacent properties regarding the issue of groundwater. He then noted the Planning and Environmental Commission recommended unanimous approval of the stream modification and the front setback variance. Mike then stated the 250 square foot request was tabled until the next PEC meeting at the applicant's request. The PEC was opposed to the applicant's 250 request and was about to motion for denial of the 250 request when the applicant requested tabling; the PEC voted unanimously for tabling. He then read a letter from Mr. Higbie opposing the stream modification and noted he had received letters earlier from two others in favor of the stream modification. Mayor Rose commented the Council called this issue up to discuss and understand it more. Jim Morter of Morter Architects, representing the applicant, felt the 250 square foot request could be put to rest because nothing could be done until the applicant went through the Design Review Board. He stated the applicant would be within the allowed GRFA without requesting the additional 250 square feet, but they did want the ability to go through the DRB. Council had some discussion on the 250 GRFA. Tom Steinberg stated he would only agree to approval if the applicant agreed not to apply for the additional 250 square feet before the five year limit. Jim Morter stated the applicant did not need the 250 square feet and was within the GRFA allowed. Larry Eskwith explained what the 250 ordinance would allow; there was more discussion. Jim Morter reviewed the problems of building on the lot and how it came about. He remarked why it was a hardship and showed how they would change the stream flow; he then reviewed the relocated creek and how it would be improved. Bill Ruzzo discussed the technical aspects of moving the creek. He stated they had turned in the report and analysis to Mike Mo1lica this evening for the first and third conditions required by staff. Regarding the second condition, FEMA approval, they were in the process of making application at this time. They had met with the Region Director in Denver and had submitted the required forms. Technically, the applicant was not encroaching into the 100-year floodplain, but they will proceed for the map line revision due to the creek relocation. He asked Council to change the condition so as not to depend on approval for a building permit. Mike Mollica agreed; they would change to an occupancy permit instead of a building permit. There was some discussion of a sediment problem during construction, to which Mike Ruzzo responded. Jim Morter commented Mrs. Gunn wanted it in the record that any trees damaged for a period of up to three years after the construction (as a result of the construction) will be replaced. A motion was made by Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal to approve the request fnr a front setback variance and modification of the 100-year floodplain because of staff's findings that this will oat grant a special privilege and will not injure the public`s health; also, the variance is warranted because the strict interpretation of the guidelines would produce a hardship far the applicant; also, that approval be granted in accordance with the staff recommendations in their memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated April 24, 1989, except to modify condition no. 2 to change the wording from a building permit to an occupancy permit. The motion was seconded by John Slevin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 4-0. Tom Steinberg asked staff to bring back the 250 ordinance for evaluation. After some discussion, it was decided to review general GRFA items at the next Council Work Session. Gail suggested Gauncil needed to do site visits to identify what's right and wrong, and do it when all seven Council members were here. Staff agreed this would be addressed sometime in June. • The fourth order of business was the Fritzlen and Pierce appeal of the Planning and Environmental Commission decision to deny a side setback variance request (2998 -2- ajfl~~ +~ •ti•. ' `" • South Frontage Road West). Mike Mollica reviewed the chronological events up to now: 1. A variance request was approved by the PEC on January 23, 1989, to allow this property to be considered for rezoning by the Town Council. The approved variance was for a 6,620 square foot shortage in the minimum lot size of the Primary/Secondary Residential zone district. 2. The Town Council approved a rezoning request,, from RC to P/S on March 7', 1,989. This rezoning has allowed for the addition of a secondary, rental unit on the lot. 3. The PEC, on March 27, 1989, unanimously voted (7-0} to deny the applicant's side setback variance request. The PEC found that the request would be a grant of special privilege and that the applicant's stated hardship was self-imposed. Mike then reviewed the criteria and findings staff used in consideration of this request. Staff and the PEC had a problem determining the physical hardship and felt approving the request would be a grant of special privilege. Staff recommended denial, and the PEC voted unanimously 7-0 for denial. He then presented photographs of the residence to Council. William Pierce, the owner and applicant, explained exactly where the stair would be located and its uses; he also discussed why the other alternatives would not be as acceptable. There was some discussion on the alternatives and why staff felt there was no physical hardship. John Slevin felt this was a special situation not normally shared with others and therefore could be . approved on this basis. After some discussion, Mike Mollica stated no other areas were really affected, but the PEC very clearly felt there were other options. He discussed what options the PEC felt were available, but the Council generally did not agree with the PEC's decision. John Slevin made a motion to overturn the PEC's denial decision regarding the side setback variance request with findings in Section 4 of the Community Development report, and more specifically, the exceptions/special conditions that apply to this applicant. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 4-0. The next item was a Landmark Condominium sign variance request. Betsy Roso1ack remarked the Landmark was requesting a third sign {two are permitted) for a total of 24 square feet of signage (20 square feet are permitted). She stated they wanted the third sign for the east side; they have two already, and this third sign would result in a total of four extra square feet. She reviewed the criteria and findings used by staff in studying this request, and noted staff supported the request for the third sign and the 4.3 addition square feet. Betsy also commented the Design Review Board recommended unanimous approval 5-0 for the variance request. After a short discussion by Council, Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal made a motion to approve the sign variance request in accordance with the findings of the staff memorandum dated May 16, 1989. John Slevin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 4-0. There was no Citizen Participation. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kent R. Rose, Mayor' ATTEST: c.l~~ Pamela A.,Brandmeyer,~Town Clerk M i nute~5~ taken by Brenda Chesman -3- MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 6, 1989 7:30 P.M. • • A regular meeting of the Vail Tawn Council was held on Tuesday, June 6, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Eric Affeldt, Acting Mayor Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahr1ich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg Kent Rase, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pra Tem Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal was not present at the time the meeting began. The first item on the agenda was the approval of minutes of the May 2 and 16, 1989 meetings. There was no discussion by Council or the public. Tom Steinberg made a motion to apprave the minutes, and Mike Cacioppo seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 4-0. The next order of business was Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance adding recreational amenities tax rates far new zone districts which have been added since the original ordinance was written. Acting Mayor Affeldt read the title in full. Larry Eskwith explained the reasoning for the ordinance. Mika Mollica noted the first five zone districts shown on the ordinance were the new additions. He then answered questions of Council. Tom Steinberg made a motion to apprave the ordinance, and Merv Lapin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 4-0. The third item was Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance No. 40, Series of 1988, to provide changes to Area D (Glen Lyon Office Property} requirements that concern the condition of undergrounding utilities; a new location for the bus stop; a deceleration lane on the South Frontage Road; a minor subdivision; and stairwell addition. The full title was read by Acting Mayor Affeldt. Kristan Pritz explained details of the minor subdivision. She stated staff recommended approval with five conditions: • 1. The development of parcels A, B, C, and D shall be limited to the SDD 4 Development Plan and governed by the SDD 4 Ordinance as approved by the Town of Uail and on file with the Department of Community Development or as amended and approved by the Community Development Department, Planning and Environmental Commission, and/or the Vail Town Council. 2. The minor subdivision plat shall include a statement that development of the four parcels shall be governed by the approved SDD 4 Development Plan for Area D and Ordinance 40. 3. The Community Development Department and Town of Vail Attorney shall have the right to review and require changes in any "Agreements of tenants in common", "conveyance of Easement and Party Wall Agreements", and any other easement or ownership agreements related to the development of parcels A, B, C, and D to ensure that the four parcels are developed per the approved development plan and SDD 4 Ordinance. 4. Any modification or amendments to the minor subdivision conditions of approval agreement shall be reviewed as a major amendment under the procedures outlined in Section 18.40 of the Town of Vail zoning code. rte- ~ : ~, • i 5. The applicant shall be responsible far preparing the wording of these agreements for review by the Planning staff and Town Attorney. The specific legal wording must be submitted before the minor subdivision is recorded with the County. The Town of Vail shall record the minor subdivision plat, however, it will be the responsibility of the developer to cover any fees for recording the plat. Kristan stated the PEC approved the plan by a vote of 4-1, with Jim Viele abstaining. She then reviewed the five SDD amendments. She commented the undergrounding of the utilities seemed to have been worked out; Holy Crass reviewed the plans again and decided it was possible to underground from the east end of Cascade Village to the east end of the Glen Lyon property. Ted Huskey of Haly Cross confirmed her remarks. Kristan next discussed the bus stop. The plans had changed so it would be located in front of the brewery instead of being farther west. Public Works was looking into the design and plans, and Andy Norris would be taking responsibility for snow removal, as well as overall maintenance of the bus lane. She then briefly reviewed the deceleration lane and stairwell. Kristan discussed the 5DD design review criteria used. Kristan and Andy Norris answered questions of Council. Afterward, Kristan noted the staff recommendation was for approval of the SDD amendments with one condition: The developer shall agree to construct the bus lane per Town of Vail standards in the area of the Porte cochere. The specific design for the bus lane shall be mutually agreed to by the Area D owner and/or the developer, Colorado Division of Highways, and Town of Vail. The bus lane shall be constructed subsequent to the issuance of the building permit and prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy far either the brewery addition, office expansion, east office building, or parking structure. She added the following wording to Section 18.46.210 D13: The developer and/or owner(s) of Area D shall be responsible for maintaining the new bus lane, including snow removal. If the bus lane is not maintained properly or snow removal is not adequate, the Town will not provide bus service to the site. Kristan next reviewed the ordinance and noted where the changes had been made in it, and answered questions of Council. She stated she and Andy Norris would work on the wording in the ordinance regarding the undergrounding of utilities; they would go to the five property owners affected by the undergrounding, ask for their participation, informing them of the cast; also, she would find out the cost of undergrounding Donovan Park for Council's information. Tom Steinberg made a motion to approve the ordinance with the minor changes to be made by second reading; Mike Caciappa seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 4-0. The next order of business was Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance establishing the Booth Falls Local Improvement District. Acting Mayor Affeldt read the full title of the ordinance. Larry Eskwith called Stan Berryman, Director of Public Works/Transportation as his first witness. Stan was sworn in by Pam Brandmeyer. Stan testified the ordinance was for the formation of a Special Improvement District for Booth Falls, and showed Council a map of the area identifying the 26 property owners. He testified the district was being formed to install a rockfall mitigation device in the Booth Falls nei'ghborhoad, and that all properties on the map were located in a high hazard zone area. He testified • notices of the public hearing had been mailed out May 23, 1989 to all of the property owners. Stan then reviewed the map and plans with the Council. He testified the total cost of the District would be $335,000 for the property owners, and the Town of Vail would be donating $20,000 toward engineering costs. He then reviewed the formula used to assess each property owner's share. Larry had his next witness, Ron Phillips, Town Manager, sworn. Ron testified he had received four written protests and two letters in favor of the District. Larry's final witness, Gerald Williams, a registered civil engineer, was sworn. Gerald testified he had been hired to study the rockfa11 mitigation and draw up plans so the hazard would be reduced. Art Kleimer stated he was representing the four owners of his lot who had filed a protest, and explained why they were against the district. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal arrived at this time. Jeannine Hallenbeck reviewed the chronological events over the last two years. She stated she was trying to address Art's concerns and explained why she just wanted to get the job done. Mr, Pat Baker commented the process had been ongoing for a long time; he awns property on bath streets and wanted both places protected; the area's been shown as being hazardous, and he wants to mitigate it. Carol Acuff noted Jack Acuff could not attend, but he had written a letter to Ran Phillips (which had been copied and distributed to Council). She explained it was untrue • that one area was mare hazardous than the other, and asked Nick Lampiris to address comments made by Art Kleimer. She then referred to the letter in support of the -2- • district, and the two major considerations were 1) life/safety, and 2) removal of the properties from the current hazard designation. Ned Gwathmey remarked he was in favor of the district formation, but objected to the apportionment methods. Stan Berryman responded it was difficult to arrive at a formula that was fair to everyone. Nick Lampiris addressed the risk factor, and that he could not assign varying risks; the risk factor was fairly equal. Joe Tonnahill agreed the mitigation needed to be done, but did not feel his property was in danger, though he would have to pay. Ray Story then addressed the Gouncil. He stated all the properties were in a high hazard area; the map Art Kleimer referred to earlier was a preliminary map only and not a finished one. Since then engineering studies and final maps had been done. The engineer told them mitigation for the Booth Falls Court street would be higher than far Katsos Ranch Road because the Booth Falls Court area would require fill. He suggested they all do it together because the risk was unknown; he might benefit from a neighbor taking the brunt of the risk, but he would help economically because the neighbor benefits him. He stated Council agreed to only get involved for two things - if it was a life/safety issue, and not a money issue; and if the engineer would certify the rockfall hazard mitigation so the area could be taken out of the high hazard zone. He did not want to wait for an injury; he wanted to proceed. Byron Rase, a member of the Board of Directors of the Mountain School, stated they were very much in favor of the district. Art Kleimer asked that the Town cover the open space areas, to which Acting Mayor Affeldt responded the Town had designated $20,000. Larry Eskwith gave a legal opinion regarding the district formation. Ella Knox supported the district. Jeannine Hallenbeck felt since only four out of 26 were negative about the assessment, the Council should ga forward with the ordinance. Carol Acuff remarked she had been appointed secretary for the mailings to the owners, and notices of all meetings went to all 26 property owners. Joe Tannahil1 felt he was being assessed twice, but would withdraw his protest if the assessment was refigured. After same discussion by Council, Mike Cacioppo made a motion to approve the ordinance, and Tom Steinberg seconded. Acting Mayor Affeldt felt since there were so few protests and Nick Lampiris stated all were at equal risk, he felt comfortable approving the district. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-0. The fifth order of business was Resolution No. 24, Series of 1989, a resolution creating a temporary Town of Vail Marketing Advisory Board. tarry Eskwith briefly explained why the resolution was drawn up, and Hated a correction on 3.A., changing the wording to read "three members appointed by the Vail Tawn Council". Mike Cacioppo commented the composition of the committee was unfair to only have three appointees from the Town of Vail because of the amount of money Vail is providing. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal remarked she did not disagree with Mike, but supported the spirit of cooperation that was so important to this marketing effort and it was healthier. Merv Lapin also stated the Vail Associates members probably live in Vail, and if problems did arise, Vail could withdraw some support in the future. Mike disagreed and still felt it was unfair. Tom Steinberg did not feel it was inequitable because Vail would receive the most f'rom~the°marketing efforts. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal made a motion to approve the resolution, and Tam Steinberg • seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-1, with Mike Cacioppo opposing. The next item was Resolution No. 25, Series of 1989, a resolution setting the date for a special election to submit the question of the Town's participation in the Eagle County Television Translator District. Larry Eskwith said this resolution was drawn up just in case the Council wanted to set a date for the election. Acting Mayor Affeldt explained he was now comfortable bringing the issue to a vote of Town residents. After some discussion, Tom Steinberg commented he wanted to wait to set a date until after Council's meeting with Heritage next Tuesday. After more discussion by Council, Mike Cacioppo made a motion to approve the resolution. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal seconded the motion. Acting Mayor Affeldt agreed with Tom that the Council could wait, but felt it was not the large issue some thought, and therefore was comfortable with letting it go to a vote. Mike Cacioppo added he wanted the community to have the opportunity to decide. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-1, with Tom Steinberg opposing. Ttem seven on the agenda was an appeal of the Planning and Environmental Commission decision on new tennis courts and tennis pro shop. Mike Mallica stated Council called this issue up for review due to concerns over the sidewalk on the north side of the courts, the proposed Town of Vail bus stop layout, and the paving of the parking lot. He then reviewed the plans, and the PEC conditions for approval: -3- ~..,q~ ; . 6 1. That spotlights be installed on the eaves of the proposed building. 2, That the existing path south of the tennis courts be extended to the parking lob, and be paved. 3. That conduit necessary for permanent lighting be installed at the time of construction. 4. That the parking lot be paved per previous approval. 5. That a sidewalk be provided on the north side of the tennis courts. We noted the reason the VMR~ was not proceeding with all four tennis courts was the prohibitive cost at this point in time. He stated staff recommended approval to the PEC because they felt the plans were in conformance with the Master P1 an and zoning on the property. There was some discussion regarding the sidewalk on the north side of the tennis courts. Tom Steinberg suggested eliminating the paved section and the sidewalk for at least a year. Ron Phillips also noted that as long as this area was being used as a snow dump, it would be better if it remained unpaved. Tom Steinberg made a motion approving the project with a hold on the requirement of providing the sidewalk on the north side of the courts and paving of the parking lot until a final decision has been made on the construction of the last two tennis courts. Merv Lapin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5~0. There was no Citizen Participation. • At this time, Ron Phillips asked Council to address the issue of the July 4th Work Session and Evening Meeting scheduled. Since that Tuesday would be a legal holiday, he suggested they cancel the Work Session and postpone the Evening Meeting until the next day or the following Tuesday, July 11. Tom Steinberg made a motion to hold the Evening Meeting the following Tuesday, July 11, which Merv Lapin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-0. Acting Mayor Affeldt noted that at the Work Session that afternoon Council approved a supplemental appropriation to the road construction funds. He stated a friend from out of town had commented to him how surprised he was to find how well things worked here and how well things were taken care of. Eric felt this was refreshing point of view; somebody notices. Tom Steinberg asked why there was only a Colorado flag and no U,S. flag on the Information Booth flagpole, to which Stan Berryman responded they were waiting on a larger flag and lights before putting it up. Mike Cacioppo remarked he was opposed to increasing the street funds because he felt the business tax should be repealed and sales tax revenue used for marketing instead of adding to the street funds. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~~ Eric 6.~ ffel t, Acting Mayor ATTEST: ~~~~ ~ Pamela A, Brandmeyer~own Clerk • NEinWi~~s: ~ak~n by Brenda Chesman -4- .~ { ~ y • y ~! ' MINUTES VRIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING .111~lE 20, 1989 7:3Q P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Tnwn Council was held nn Tuesday, June 20, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: None Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was an update by the Colorado Department of Health an the Eagle Mine Clean-up. Dick Parchini, the on-site field officer of the Department of Health overseeing the construction on the mine, discussed the health and environmental monitoring issues of the clean-up. After same discussion with Council, it was decided he would give another update at the July 11 Evening Meeting. The next item was a consent agenda of the following items: 1. Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1989, second reading, an ordinance adding recreational amenities tax rates for new zone districts which have been formed since the original ordinance was written. 2. Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1989, second reading, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance No. 40, Series of 1988, to provide changes to Rrea D (Glen Lyon Office Property) requirements that concern the condition of undergrounding utilities; a new location for the bus step; a deceleration lane on the South Frontage Road; a minor subdivision; and stairwell addition; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Rose read the full titles of the ordinances. Kristan~•Pri`tz°stated Holy Cross Electric was still working on a letter regarding undergrounding the utilities, and . once it was received, she would discuss it with Council at a Work Session. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the consent agenda items, and Tom Steinberg seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The third item was Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1989, second reading, an ordinance establishing the Booth Falls Local Improvement District. The full title was read by Mayor Rose. Larry Eskwith stated there was a problem, as there was a new engineer at Banner Associates, and he gave a different and higher estimate on the cost. Stan Berryman commented the item was going before the Design Review Board tomorrow, and depending on their requirements, the project could cost up to $50,000 more. Stan stated the problems with the district were: 1) the Booth Falls Tawnhome Rssociation representatives were present and wanted to be included in the district; this would require the work to go 500 more feet and would involve Forest Service requirements, and 2) that portion would have to be engineered and a' cost estimate made. Mayor Rase said he would rather table the item, staff could put it out to bid, see if the price would be acceptable to the property owners, and go forward from there. Jack Acuff commented he was disappointed to have come so far and the engineers make so large a mistake; he wants to ga forward with the original amount quoted. Larry remarked the Town used the engineer recommended by the neighborhood, and what Jack wants would take longer unless the Town was willing to pick up the slack. There was some discussion by Council about why it had to go to the Design Review Board, and . when the item would came back for the public hearing and second reading. Jerry Gravin of the Booth Falls Townhomes gave an explanation why the 18 tawnhome units r wanted to be included in the mitigation. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal asked why they were not here earlier, and can the project be phased? Stan replied a second district could be formed. Susan Fritch gave some background information on what had happened up to this point and haw they were very interested in forming a district. Stan responded. Jack Acuff stated he would like the Booth Falls Townhomes to be included. Larry felt it would be best to table this item until the July 18 Evening Meeting. Merv Lapin made a motion to table the ordinance until July 18, 1989, which John Slevin seconded. At this time, Eric Affeldt commented that at the July 18 meeting, the Townhomes would not be included, and he encouraged the group to start their own process. Larry remarked he would help all he could. Ron Phillips stated yes, but the Town would take over the administration of the special development districts and notification of all property owners, so to take the burden off the property owners. Jeannine tial1enbeck initiated some discussion with Council over the upcoming process. It was clarified that staff would use the new cost estimate, put it out to bid, and notify the property owners; also, they would work with the engineer on substantiating the cast. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The next order of business was Ordinance No. 17, Series of 1989, first reading, concerning the issuance of local improvement bonds far the Booth Creek Local Improvement District. Mayor Rose read the full title. A motion tv approve the ordinance and schedule second reading for the July 18 Evening Meeting was made by Merv Lapin, and seconded by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Eric Affeldt commented he would support the motion, but was uncomfortable with approving blank figures. The next agenda item was Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1989, first reacting, an ordinance making supplemental appropriations from the Town of Vail general fund, capital projects fund, real estate transfer tax fund, and Uail marketing fund of the 1989 budget and financial plan, and authorizing the expenditures of such appropriations. The full title was read by Mayor Rose. Steve Barwick stated the ordinance had been reviewed at the Work Session that afternoon, and that most were roll forwards for projects from 1988, $200,000 in the general fund was for the parking structure, and that this money was not to be spent, but by law had to be shown as an expenditure. He noted $150,000 was for the streamwalk, and $414,000 was for street improvements. There was much discussion by Council regarding street improvements, costs, and the parking structure. Mike Cacioppo made a motion to approve the ordinance with amendments to eliminate $150,000 for the streamwalk, and eliminate $1,500 for an acoustic wall in the Library. There was no second, and the motion failed. Eric Affeldt made a motion to approve the ordinance with the exclusion of $150,000 for the streamwalk, so the total would be $3,083,881. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal seconded. Ron Phillips stated he would like some of the $150,000 to stay in for design costs. There was much discussion by Council, Ron, and Peter Patten regarding the streamwalk money. Tom Steinberg opposed the removal of the $150,000 for the streamwalk. At this time, Eric modified his motion to leave an amount not to exceed $10,000 for preliminary studies of the streamwalk, which Gail seconded. Mike Cacioppo stated he did not feel it was necessary to proceed with the study and spend the $10,000. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-2, with Mike Cacioppo and Tom Steinberg apposing. The sixth item was Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance vacating a portion of a cul-de-sac in Intermountain, adjacent to Lot 1, Block 1, Intermountain Subdivision. Mayor Rose read the full title of the ordinance. Rick Pylman reviewed the drawings of the cul-de-sac and property lines. He then reviewed the plans and reasons why staff recommended approval. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the ordinance, which was seconded by John Slevin. There was then some discussion by Council regarding the cost. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The next order of business was an appeal of the Design Review Board decision to approve changes to design details far the Chester residence located an Lot 19, Block 1, Vail Village First Filing. The appeal was made by W. Grant Williams (adjacent property owner). Mayor Rose noted the process was to discuss precisely what was presented to the Design Review Board and nothing more. Item four of the Stutz, Dyer & Miller letter was the only item to be discussed. Larry Eskwith agreed, stating Stutz was dealing with the three other issues in District Court. Kristan Pritz and Jay Peterson reviewed the plan approved by the DRB and compared them to the new plans. Greg Stutz remarked the problem was with the design change of the roof, and gave details. There was much discussion by Jay and Greg regarding problems with the roof line. There was then some discussion by Council and staff regarding the -2- r Planning and Environmental Commission's and Design Review Board's charges. A motionta uphold the DRB decision regarding changes on the Chester residence was made by Marv Lapin and seconded by Jahn Slevin. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-1, with Mike Cacioppo opposing. The next item was certification of election judges for the July 11, 1989 special election. Pam Brandmeyer remarked Kay Chaney, Lee Bennett, and Joan Norris were the proposed election judges. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the appointment of these election judges, which John Slevin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-~0. Under Citizen Participation, Gordon Pierce stated over the last 30 years, he never worked on a project that did not have changes. He wanted to apologize; things used to be "loose" and the staff has been working hard to tighten things up. He feels things are back in the right direction now. He stated he was not trying to get away with anything, and will work hard with staff so things like this do not happen. John Cogswell discussed the subject of public art, and encouraged Council to support public art. Kristen Pritz noted she was working on an ordinance now. Merv Lapin questioned where things stood on point of sale sales tax. Ron Phillips responded he would check en it. Tom Steinberg questioned how the Donovan Park reseeding project was going. Kristen Pritz replied the Vail Valley Foundation was supposed to get back to her regarding this; she was just waiting on their call. Tom also had a question regarding the snow dump land. Mike Cacioppo stated he remarked at the 4~ork Session today the Town had $550,000 additional sales tax revenues. He asked business owners to go before the Council and ask for the business license fee ordinance to be rescinded. There was some discussion by Council regarding the pros and cons of this. John Cogswell noted he was glad to see the marketing going on, but was concerned about Front Range marketing. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kent R. Rose, Mayor . ATTEST: ~~,~~' ~~ Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Iii nutes.._t~ak.er~ by Brenda Chesman -3- *-~'. ~, MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING JULY 11, 1989 7:30 P.M. • A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, July 11, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg None Ran Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was an update by the Colorado Department of Health on • the Eagle Mine Clean-up. Dick Parchini, the on-site field officer of the Department of Health overseeing the construction on the mine, gave a brief summary of what had transpired to date. He stated he expected to receive the June air monitoring data by the next week, and noted they would put up two additional TSP monitors outside the Middle School, one inside the school (probably in the gymnasium), and one across from the Battle Mountain Trading Post. He commented he hoped to have better turnaround time by sending information to Denver instead of Oregon. He reviewed a few other highlights of the project, and then answered questions of Gouncil. Tom Steinberg reported what the Advisory Board to the School Board was doing. Mike Cacioppo thanked Dick for the report; CDOH was addressing the prnb1ems, and he appreciated it. Dick stated he would make another update next month. At this time, Mayor Rose announced he had just received the final vote tally of the special election - 307 in favor of town participation in the television translator district, and 210 against. The second item on the agenda was a consent agenda of the following items: A. Approval of minutes of the June 6 and 20, 1989 meetings. B. Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1989, second reading, regarding supplemental • appropriations C. Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1989, second reading, concerning vacating a portion of a cul-de-sac in Intermountain Mayor Rose read the full titles of the ordinances. Item B was pull off the consent agenda. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve Items A and C, which John Slevin seconded. Mike Cacioppo was concerned aver the statement, in the June 20 minutes, "Mike Cacioppo stated his concerns over this.", and wanted more specific information. He asked Brenda Chesman to go back and listen to the tape and make the wording specific. Eric Affeldt noted a typographical error on page 1 of the June 6 minutes. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1989, second reading, was discussed. Steve Barwick stated that at first reading, $140,000 for the construction of the streamwalk had been taken out, with $10,000 left for design work. John Slevin did not feel the Council should spend the $10,000. Mayor Rose explained why he felt it should be left in the budget. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal stated her concerns over notification of the adjacent homeowners. There was some discussion by Council. Hermann Staufer stated he was disappointed to hear there was no need to spend the $10,000 for the study, and explained why he felt the money should be left in the budget. Tom Steinberg commented he totally agreed with Hermann. Joe Macy, representing Vail ~"~~ ' • a Associates, stated Vail Associates agreed with Hermann, Tom and Kent. He remarked the streamwalk should be done, if there are no negative environmental impacts. Milo Cacioppo felt the ~ounci] must find a way to compromise in the best interest of the community. There was some discussion regarding the complexity of the design issue and environmental concerns. Peter Patten then explained what the $10,000 would be spent on. There was more discussion on the pros and cons and the feasibility of the project. Tam Steinberg made a motion to approve the ordinance as presented, and Gail Wahr1ich-Lowenthal seconded. Gail noted she would support the ordinance and design study so to have it placed on the Vail Village Master Plan for any future possibility years from now. Eric Affeldt remarked the supplemental appropriations were far approximately $3 million, and not just $10,000. He then reviewed what the whole amount would cover. Mike Cacioppo agreed that 98 percent should be approved, but did not want to approve wasteful spending until it is made right. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-3, with Mike Cacioppo, Merv Lapin, and John Slevin apposing. The third item was Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance allowing employee units in Lionsridge Filing No. 4. Mayor Rose read the full title of the ordinance. Peter Patten briefly explained what the ordinance was for; basically a housekeeping ordinance to rectify an unintentional omission. Peter than answered questions of Council. A motion to approve the ordinance was made by Tom Steinberg, and seconded by Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7--0. The next order of business was an appeal of the Design Review Board decision granting final approval of the Cascade Crossing project. Mike Mollica reviewed the application and gave brief background information on the project. He noted the Cascade Crossing is a proposed single story retail center consisting of 10,270 square feet of leasable retail space. The property is located at 1031 South Frontage Road West, which is immediately west of the Vail Professional Building. The one acre site is zoned arterial business district. Merv Lapin had called the item up for informational purposes only; it was a large project and he wanted to know more about it. Mike responded to questions of Tom Steinberg regarding the undergrounding of utilities. After some discussion, Mike showed Council plans and drawings of the project. Bill Hine, architect for the project, reviewed the project and answered questions of Council. Merv Lapin made a motion to uphold the Design Review Board's decision regarding the Cascade Crossing project. John Slevin seconded the motion. There was more discussion regarding sharing of the cost of undergrounding utilities. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The fifth item was an appeal of the Design Review Board decision granting final approval of the Ledges project. Mike Mollica reviewed the application and drawings of the proposed project. He noted this project, as approved by the DRB, consisted of six single family homes on approximately one acre. The site is zoned lnw density multi-family and has an allowable density of eight dwelling un-its. Randy Hodges, architect and partial owner of the project, stated it did meet the zoning requirements. Peter Patten gave some additional background information on the neighborhood and site zoning. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal made a motion to uphold the DRB decision of the Ledges project, which Eric Affeldt seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-D. Tom Steinberg commented the Town had looked at this property earlier and let it slip through our hands; we should look at all available properties to purchase with real estate transfer tax money. Merv Lapin stated he had not had a problem with either of the two projects, but would like more communication with staff; he needed more information. He suggested a short description of each item on the Design Review Board agendas might help. The sixth item of business was a presentation of the 1988 audited financial report. Jerry McMahan, of McMahan and Armstrong, reviewed briefly the audited financial report. Jerry, Steve Thompson, and Ran Phillips then answered questions of Council. Jerry noted there had been a vast improvement in the Town's procedures and record keeping over the last few years, and the Town staff should be commended. Tom Steinberg made a motion to accept the audit as presented, which Eric Affeldt seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7~0. There was no Citizen Participation. Mayor Rose mentioned the Governor's "Dome on the Range" future visit. He stated the Governor would be in our area July 27; in Avan, June 27, 2:00 p.m., and in Red Cliff, June 27, 3:00-4:00 p.m. Red Cliff will be holding a town meeting then, and the Town of Vail will participate in that. -2- ~ , ~ ~ The last item on the agenda was discussion of the television translator vote results and direction to the staff as to any future action. Mayor Rose noted again the Vote was 307 for, 2i0 against. Mike Cacioppo directed staff to write a letter to the pistrict Court and County Commissioners indicating the Town of Uail would like to participate in the proposed Eagle Valley Television translator district. A imotion was made by Mike Cacioppo, and seconded by Gail ~lahrlich-Lowenthal. There was some discussion of the process now to pistrict Court. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~ v C ~~ Kent R. Rose, Mayor ` ATTEST: ' ~ ,~• ,~,N.er,~ . Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk -~ Minutes taken by Brenda Ghesman n U -3- i ~ 3 ~' ~, • o n o Q 0 ~~ ~~ o ~ • ~ -~ ~ o ~ ~ ~Q~o~~o-~7 ~ ~. o ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~g ~ ~'ao ~ ~ S, ~ ~ m x ~cny~~Q~o ~~ ~ c~~g ~ m y ~ ~~-~ ~ ~. ~ ~ z (p o3~~~a~•cQQ m p c2 Q C ~ b~(DC?~~fDn~ ~ ~ A ~ ~ ~ ~°8~~~~0~0 p m p W o~~ a0g-`cp~~Q.~ ~ Q f~LL~~ ~,~ ~•O m 'p O ~ 0 m ~ Q `~~~n~.~N~< 1.0 -. ~ ~ ~. ~ n o Q•. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~6 oa~~~oQ~~ o ~ m ~ ~ a~ '~m~ (p ~ ~ ~ '^:rn~ m~ c~D y ~ -ry y ~ O ~Q ~ Q ~]`1,F' 3 ~ ~ Q- ~ ~ ~0~~~ m(4 ~ a ~ o ~ 3 ~~ Q~ ~~ n y ~ ~ ~ m ~{~ g.c~~~ 7 p ~ ~~A~~~~O3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Q~~~ Q ~~~ _... -..~, - S '~ ~: . ., ~~'" ' . ~ ~' ~ ~i' a .. ~~~ _ z n O cD a ~,- ~.; ~: -. O O O n O m T ~D Z • . -.~ 'VJ • MINUTEs VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING Jl1~Y 18, 1989 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, July 18, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affel dt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: None Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney The first order of business was a ten year employment anniversary award to Matt Lindvall, Police Investigator. Ron Phillips briefly reviewed Matt's employment background with the Town, and presented him with a Town of Vail belt buckle. Ken Hughey, Chief of Police, thanked Matt for his hard work over the years. Mayor Rose commented he really appreciated what Matt does, and congratulated him on his length of service. The next item was Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1989, second reading, an ordinance establishing the Booth Creek Local Improvement District. Mayor Rose read the full title of the ordinance. Larry Eskwith stated this was a second public hearing, and he would take testimony a second time because the Town was required to change some figures in the ordinance. He noted the figures are now final. Larry called Stan Berryman, Director of Public Works/Transportation as a witness, and Stan was sworn in by Ron Phillips. Stan explained what had transpired since the previous public hearing June 20, 1989. He testified he had contacted the engineers, looked at the redesign and slight increase in the project cost, sent out a notice June 30, 1989 to the property owners to be assessed, published a public notice in the July 7, 1989 issue of the Vail Trail. Ron Phillips noted the Town had received one protest by Art Kieimer and the three other owners of one piece of property. Stan stated the shape of the berm had been changed and it was smaller, all the assessed property owners were abutting or would be benefitted by the improvements. He reviewed the. formula used to assess each property owner's share, and test~if~ied they total cost of the project would be $386,766 minus the Town of Vail's contribution of $20,000, for a total of $366,766 to be assessed to the District. There was a short discussion regarding the protests from the first assessment versus the second assessment. Stan stated there had been five bidders for the job, with L & N Enterprises of Berthoud, Colorado as low bidder. Jack Acuff asked how the Town would handle the County's contribution of $20,000, to which Mayor Rose and Ron responded. There was a short discussion concerning the construction schedule. Stan stated the project could not be awarded, or a contract signed, for 30 days, which would be August 18, 1989. He stated the construction work would begin that day, and it looked like a two month project. Tom Steinberg asked about the timing of taking the area out of the high hazard designation. Mayor Rose commented the engineers would have to submit the revised drawings. Larry Eskwith remarked the ordinance provided for it, too. The engineer and geologist have committed to take the area out of the hazardous designation if the project was built to their specifications. Pat Baker stated he lived on Booth Falls Court and was in favor of the project. Merv Lapin commented the Town would be responsible of maintaining the berm area in the future, and all costs would be handled by the Town. There was then some discussion regarding insurance coverage for a project like this. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal made a motion to approve the ordinance, which Mike Cacinppo seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The third item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1989, first reading, concerning the issuance of local improvement bonds for the Booth Creek Local Improvement District. The full title was read by Mayor Rose. Larry Eskwith stated i • this was a first reading, rather than second reading of Ordinance No. 17, and would repeal the Ordinance No. 17. The ordinance had been redrafted with correct figures and second reading would take place in two weeks. Stan Berryman noted he had scheduled a meeting with bond counsel, Dee Weiser, and another attorney to answer questions for those interested in forming a new district for the Booth Fall . Townhomes; the meeting was scheduled for Friday, August 4, 1989, 3:00 p.m., at the Public Works offices. There was same discussion concerning clarification of the scheduled meeting, and Mr. Weiser's involvement in living in the district. It was noted that Mr. Weiser did not live in the district, his parents in-law live in the next proposed district. Mike Cacioppo made a motion to approve the ordinance, and Tom Steinberg seconded. Merv Lapin questioned if the bonds had been set up and who was planning to buy them, to which Ron Phillips and Larry Eskwith responded yes and explained. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The following order of business was Ordinance Na. 18, Series of 1989, first reading, concerning cable television communications. Mayor Rose read the full title. Larry Eskwith stated he had drafted the ordinance and reviewed it with outside counsel and Heritage, and felt it was a goad ordinance. 8i11 Perkins commented he had become aware of the varied community activities Heritage had been involved in over the years, and their good faith in business practices with local businesses. Mike Cacioppo remarked he agreed with Bill, Weritage had done a fine job, and he was comfortable with the ordinance and contract. Don Hagan reviewed concerns he had regarding no automatic renewal, annexed or selected areas, non-controllable issues, Heritage's liability, gross revenues, late fee interest percentage rats, digital signals received over telephone lines, and monitoring. He also Hated typographical errors through the ordinance. After much discussion of these items, Eric Affeldt made a motion to approve the ordinance with the typographical corrections, and Tom Steinberg seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The next agenda item was Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1989, first reading, granting a five year cable television franchise to Heritage Cablevision. The full title was read by Mayor Rose. Larry Eskwith stated this ordinance would approve the actual franchise agreement with Heritage; the agreement was for five years; and it had been reviewed by Council as well as outside legal counsel. Kevin Rice, Senior Vice President of Heritage, stated he believed Heritage had exceeded all their commitments and requirements of the Town of Vail agreement in 1981; they had made the system more dependable; Heritage was a good corporate citizen because they believed in it; they also believed the new agreement was fair, but not for a long enough term - they would be required to start negotiations in 25 months for the next time. He also thanked Larry and Ron for their long hours of work on the agreement, and thanked the Council for their friendly negotiations. Merv Lapin questioned why Heritage was interested in this agreement, to which Kevin responded he felt the agreement was necessary so both sides would know what to expect, and he did not feel Heritage could do business in the Town and use our rights-of-way without it. Larry agreed. There was some discussion by Council and Kevin regarding rates and repercussions of conflict. A motion to approve the ordinance wa's~made by Mike Cacioppo and seconded by Tam Steinberg. Peter Patten, a resident of Vail, requested certain channels and stated a petition had been sent to Kevin regarding this. Kevin responded he had not seen a petition yet, but they would take it under review. He stated if there would be a dramatic cost increase, they would have to look at it; they would not rule it out, but would not give encouragement that a change would take place before the end of the year. There was then some discussion about making the special request a pay channel, to which Kevin responded they were not allowed that option. Merv Lapin asked Kevin to look into it before second reading, if possible. Mike Cacioppo noted the audio level was not the same on all channels, to which Kevin replied as far as he knew they had not received a complaint, but they could correct it. Don Hagan commented he was happy with what Heritage had done over the years, and that Heritage had been a good corporate resident. He questioned how much did the five percent franchise fee amount to, to which Kevin replied in 1988, Heritage had paid $79,553. There was then a brief discussion concerning the operating cost of the public access channel. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Ran Phillips remarked that Larry had done a remarkable job on a complex subject. The sixth item was Resolution No. 26, Series of 1989, concerning the Arts in Public Places Program. Kristan Pritz noted the memo Council had been given listed the changes in the document, and that one Planning and Environmental Commission member, one Council member, one Design Review Board member, and one Community Development . staff person had been added to the committee. Gail Wahr1ich-Lowenthal felt the committee should be increased from 7 members to 9, and asked Kristan what the -2- y . , .~. 8 expectations were of the committee members, since it was written members could not miss three meetings in a row. Kristan responded she expected the committee to meet about once a month. Mayor Rose remarked he felt 3 community members and 4 Town of Vail members was too many from the Town, and either change the numbers to 5 community members and 2 from the Town, or increase the number to 9. Kristan replied . she had not problem increasing the number. Mike questioned where it had been stated this would be a temporary board, which Kristan responded in the resolution; through the resolution Council was making it temporary. Mike commented he was concerned the community members would be gallery owners. It was decided that gallery owners did not always agree, so it would be alright. Kristan then reviewed the other major changes made in the document, then requested approval for the temporary board far two years, and addressed Mike's concern over casts. She stated there would be one planner staff time, and secretary time,. plus if the Town needed to place the art or build a base, they may come before Council asking for funds. Mike stated he appreciated knowing up front of any potential costs. Kristan then briefly reviewed the members' roles. Eric Affeldt recommended Kristan pick up Insight magazine and show it to the board; it had good information in it. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal had a question regarding public safety, to which Kristan responded. Peter Patten commented this was anticlimactic; this was very positive and no public was present; he also felt the potential for Vail was immense and exactly what the Town needed to make it a more attractive place for locals and guests. He also remarked Kristan needed the mast credit; she had done an outstanding jab on this. He also felt the Task Force deserved a letter from the Council thanking them for the work done over the last two years. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the resolution, which Tam Steinberg seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. • The next order of business was Resolution Nos. 28 - 53, Series of 1989, designating the financial institutions as depositories for Town of Vail funds. After a brief discussion by Council and Steve Thompson, Merv Lapin made a motion to approve all of the resolutions. John Slevin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. There was no Citizen Participation. Merv Lapin suggested staff evaluate the purchase of tinny Mae`s, and encouraged staff to stay away from them. Steve Thompson agreed. There was then some discussion regarding zero coupons. Steve noted he would have the semi-annual investment report for the next Council meeting. Mike Cacioppo remarked this was the first time in the history of this Council that all of Council had agreed to all items on the agenda 7-0, and he thanked the other Council members for coming around to his way of thinking. Mayor Rose remarked there had been an executive session regarding lawsuits started at the Work Session that afternoon which Council had to interrupt. He asked that Council continue the executive session now. . Tom Steinberg announced for those who felt the performing arts would not sell in Vail, 650 paid sit down seats had been sold last week at the Amphitheater. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: ~~ ~~. ~~~~ ~ Par~ela A: ~r.andmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman -3- • ~iy". ;~ MINUTES VAIL TOWN AUGUST 1, 7:30 P.M. COUNCIL MEETING 1989 ~ i A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, Rugust 1, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Michael Gacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg None Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk _ The first order of business was a ten year employment anniversary award to Glenn . Moore, a Fire Technician at the Fire Department. Ron Phillips gave background information on Glenn, and presented him with a Town of Vail belt buckle. Dick Duran, Fire Chief, said a few words regarding the hard work Glenn has done over the years and how much he appreciated him. The next item was a consent agenda for the following items: A. Approval of the minutes of the July 11 and 18, 1989 meetings. 8. Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1989, second reading, an ordinance allowing employee units in Lionsridge Filing #4. G. Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1989, second reading, concerning cable television communications. D. Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1989, second reading, granting a five year cable television franchise to Heritage Ca6levision. E. Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1989, second reading,.. concerning, the.issu.ance of local improvement bands for the Booth Creek Local Impro~vement~District, and reflecting the interest rates presented and accepted, purchase price of the bonds, • and purchaser name inserted in the ordinance. Mayor Rose read the full titles of all the ordinances. Larry Eskwith noted one change on page 6 of the franchise agreement. Eric Affeldt commented on one paragraph of the July 18 minutes. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve all items in the consent agenda, which was seconded by John Slevin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The third subject was an appeal of a Planning and Environmental Commission decision to approve a setback variance on Lot 6, Vail Village 10th Filing (950 Fairway Drive). Betsy Rosolack gave background information regarding the variance request, noting the PEC vote was 5-1-1, with Diana Donovan opposing, and Jim Viele abstaining. She then explained why staff recommended approval and upholding the PEC decision. Eugene McGuire, who filed the appeal, explained he would prefer to hold this item over for two weeks until he could talk to Mr. Katz and the neighbors. Tom Briner remarked he would not be available on August 15, and also, they wanted construction to proceed; Mr. Katz was planning to go to the Design Review Board tomorrow. Mr. McGuire reviewed the series of events leading up to this point. He stated he was asking that the variance be denied (overturn the PEG decision), or have Council send the item back to the PEC for review again, and gave reasons why he felt the variance was unnecessary. Vern Anderson, an adjacent property owner, reasoned the front of the new house should be in line with the front of the other houses; it was not consistent with the architecture appearance of other properties on the block. There was same discussion regarding variances ~ ~-.~: ~ k , for neighbors in relation to the Katz residence, and studies done in 1975 versus later specific information. Mary Lou Walters, an adjacent property owner, felt Mr. Katz should try to make the neighborhood consistent and not build in front of his neighbor. Helga Mesenbau, a potential buyer of Mary Lou Walters' residence, gave a bit of background information regarding a 1977 study. Dr. Mesenbau stated he had .looked at the proposed drawings, noted the items of importance to him, and that he would be in agreement with the other neighbors. There was some discussion by Mr. Katz as to changes already made to appease the neighbors' concerns, and why he felt the PEC decision should be upheld. All parties agreed to postpone this item for a few minutes to see if the property owners could work out the problems by themselves and find common ground. The fourth order of business was an appeal of the Planning and Environmental Commission decision to approve an exterior alteration, height variance, and density variance for the Enzian Lodge, at 705 West Lianshead Circle, Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead 3rd Filing. Kristan Pritz gave background information regarding the two variance requests made by the Enzian. She reviewed the criteria used in looking at the variances, and explained why staff recommended approval of both variances, with two conditions; 1. An employee housing unit shall be provided within the building. The employee housing unit shall have a minimum square footage of ~40D square feet. The owner shall be responsible for submitting an employee housing agreement to the Community Development Department before a building permit will be released for the portion of the remodel. The employee dwelling unit shall be restricted per Section 18.13.080 B. 10 a-d. This written agreement shall be submitted to the Community Development Department and Town Attorney and approved by the staff before a building permit is issued for the project. 2. The three new accommodation units will have gas fireplaces per Town of Vail ordinances governing fireplaces. Kristan noted the Planning Commission had removed the employee housing requirement. Jay Peterson, representing Alma Equities Corporation, the applicant, explained why the employee unit was not acceptable, and briefly discussed parking. There was some discussion regarding Commercial Core XI zoning, and Council`s need to look at changing the zoning. Council directed staff to bring the zoning problem back to Council in the near future for changes. There was then some discussion regarding parking needed for the restaurant and hotel, and landscaping. Mike Cacioppo questioned the lowering of square footage of the meeting rooms, and was disturbed by the plans to take away some of the parking. Kristan reviewed the employee housing condition, and stated the PEC did not agree it was a fair request; that was why they pulled the condition. Merv Lapin made a motion to uphold the PEC decision based on staff recommendation, with the following conditions: the uses will be residential only; employee housing would be provided in the building,; a charge of $5,000 per parking space would be applied for each space taken away;- plus the two conditions recommended by staff (shown above). After some discussion, Merv . included the size of the employee unit would be no less than the size of one hotel room. Eric Affeldt seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Tom Steinberg requested staff to review the zoning and bring the issue back to Council. The fifth agenda item was an appeal of the Design Review Board decision granting final approval of the Rose residence (2880 Booth Creek Drive). Mayor Rose stated the reason this item was brought before Council was because of the 2-0-2 vote by the DRB; this was just for review. Mike Mollica reviewed the plans of the residence and noted the removal of two trees, while saving three. Duane Piper, project architect, then reviewed the landscape plans. A motion to approve the Rose residence as presented was made by Merv Lapin and seconded by Mike Cacioppo. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. At this time, Council returned to item three regarding the Katz residence setback variance. Mary Lou Walters commented they had been unable to come to a compromise. After much discussion by Mr. Katz and his neighbors, Tom Briner reviewed the plans for the home and what the requested changes would involve. Mr. Katz remarked the house did not request any variances other than the four foot setback all the other property owners in the neighborhood had. He stated he did not expect any problems, and did not understand the complaints of the appeal. He said he needed to go to . the Design Review Board tomorrow so he could start construction September 15. After same discussion regarding the PEC guidelines, Merv Lapin made a motion to uphold the PEC decision based on the findings of the PEC that 1) this was not a -2- ~' . ±'~ .~ ~ • i grant of special privilege; 2) this was not detrimental to the public health, welfare, and safety; and 3) this variance was warranted because of the strict interpretation of the guidelines. Jahn Slevin seconded. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal commented she would oppose the request due to the fact that now we have mare information than in 1975, when the original variances were granted. Mike Cacioppo . agreed, adding he did not feel there was a hardship involved. Mayor Rase felt he would rather err on the side of safety, and roekfall and avalanche hazard studies are unscientific. He would rather look at moving the building forward far safety rather than assume it would be alright; therefore, he would vote for it, A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-2, with Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal and Mike Cacioppo apposing. There was no Citizen Participation. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, -~ ~ v ~~ Kent R. Rose, Mayor • ATTEST: Pamel-a- A; : B~~andmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman -3- ~. ~~ .W MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 15, 1959 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, August 15, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor Jahn 5levin, Mayor Pro Tem Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: Eric Affeldt TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Charles Wick, Assistant Tawn Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was Resolution Nos. 54, 55, and 56, Series of 1989, designating the following financial institutions as depositories for the funds of the Town as permitted by the Charter of the Town, its ordinances, and the statutes of the State of Colorado: Na. 54 - Westside Savings & Loan, 2010 Wellshire Blvd., Santa Monica, California 90403 No. 55 - Homestead Savings Association, P. 0. Box 390, Middletown, Pennsylvania 17057 No. 56 - Lyndonville Savings Bank and Trust, P. 0. Box 125, Lyndonvil1e, Vermont 05851 There was no discussion by Council or the public. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the resolutions, and Tom Steinberg seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. Under Citizen Participation, Al Weiss, representing the Fresh Air Committee, distributed information materials to the Council. He noted he was filling in far Reggie O'Brien, since she could not be present. He explained why the committee was appealing to the Council for an ordinance banning smoking in restaurants. Mayor Rose noted if the Council wanted to seriously address the.is.sue, it. would he put on a series of work session agendas for discussion. Mike C'aciapp~o agreed it-should be put on a work session agenda to listen to the public and pay close attention to the . information received. Pepi Langegger commented he was not sure a law was really needed, not that many smoke anymore. He felt businesses would be self-policing to compete, also, small groups, like the Mexicans, should not be disregarded. A woman in the audience remarked she would not mind if the bar area was made a smokers' area; they were not trying to ban smoking everywhere. Pepi replied he agreed with that, plus seating smokers in a separate room from the non-smokers. Mayor Rose took a consensus of Council far the item to be placed on future work sessions. Council all agreed. Eric Shickler, a resident of East Vail, expressed his concerns about non-smokers and his support of the committee. Tom Steinberg requested staff to check various places in Colorado asking about the success, compliance, and problems they have had, so we could write the best ordinance possible. He reported the Middle School had been tested, and a child would be safer there than a child in a restaurant where smoking was allowed. Jan Livergood read a letter from the Manager of the Chart House Restaurant in support of anon-smoking ordinance. John Slevin suggested the committee members and restauranteurs get together before the scheduled work sessions to discuss the issue. There was much more discussion by the public regarding the pros and cons of such an ordinance. David Paul expressed his concerns over cigarette smoke. ~ •, 4 I' There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:2a p.m. Respectfully submitted, \ lJ / L~' / v v L l Kent 'R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pame~d I3.' $~andmeyer, To rn Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman C~ -2- J 1 MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 5, 1959 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, September 5, 1989, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Tom Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was a Ten Year Employment Anniversary Award to Peter Patten. Ron Phillips gave a brief description of Peter's work background with the Tvwn of Vail, and this was followed by comments from Peter Patten, as well as Joe Macy of Vail Associates. The second item of business on the agenda was the approval of the minutes of the August 1 and 15, 1989, meetings. Tom Steinberg moved to accept the minutes as presented, with a second from John Slevin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. The third item was a public hearing on the proposed Village Parking Structure expansion and renovation. Stan Berryman provided an overview of the process involved in setting forth this proposal and offered justifications for this expansion. He stated this is a portion of the parking solution problem, and also pointed out that the Parking Advisory Committee had been influential in helping along this process. Berryman stated a report from the Vail Transportation and Parking Advisory Committee would be presented to Council at their September 19, 1989, work session. Stan introduced Michael Barber from Michael Barber Architecture, who proceeded with a presentation of the proposed concept design for the Village Parking Structure (VTRC) expansion and renovation. The Vail Transportation and Parking Advisory Committee had unanimously recommended, and the Town Council at a work session had agreed to proceed with "Scheme Two." Mr. Barber presented conceptual designs and a global view for this project. Through a parking matrix, he described incremental steps that could be taken to fit into this overall • picture. Through "Scheme Two," the expansion of the parking supply would be the number one priority, with the addition of 400 parking spaces and would require the structure being converted wholly to a one-way system. It would deal with immediate maintenance problems, improving the ventilation, and myriad other parking structure renovation needs. "Scheme Two" would enhance the pedestrian access to the parking structure as well as along side the exterior; would reconfigure traffic patterns both on the top of and around the parking structure; and would deal with recommended improvements to the interior. The cost of this project is estimated at $8 million. Don Monahan was introduced to discuss the current condition and the ongoing maintenance issues. Charlie Wick discussed the financing scenario that will be finalized within a two-week period of time and presented to Council. Currently, the Council is looking at putting $2.5 million in cash toward the parking structure, and then utilizing either G.O. or Revenue Bonds along with existing revenues, i.e., sales tax revenues, for a term of 10 to 13 years. Questions from the audience were raised by Johannes Faessler, Will Miller, Robert Schiller, Michael Chapman, and Larry Lichliter. Following discussion, all were willing to support this structure. The construction plan calls for complete closedown of the VTRC starting in mid-April of 1990 far one month to renovate, the the new addition being completed by the 1990-91 ski season. The improvements, as well as the new addition, will require continued high-grade maintenance. A motion . was made to approve "Scheme Two" by Merv Lapin, with a second coming from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken, and the motion passed 5-1, with Mike Cacioppo voting ~. +- ~• • against this motion because he felt Vail Associates was not paying their fair share. The staff was directed to study the following concerns: 1. Financing consideration for an expansion of the Tourist Information Center, as well as VRA and the Vail Chamber of Commerce, on the top of the parking structure or at another location, this totalling approximately 2,000 square feet. 2. Size of expansion. Is this parking structure large enough? Should we be adding the two extra floors now, and/or studying carefully any steps so that they are to be considered incremental steps, and additions can be made at a later time. 3. Developers within the Town of Vail must no longer have spaces sold to them, or if spaces are sold, we must ask an approximate amount of what the spaces are casting the Town of Vail to construct. Mike Cacioppo stated that hotels are required to provide parking when they expand, or to pay into a parking fund, and he felt Vail Associates should also be required to do that with their mountain expansion. Mike Cacioppo stated Vail Associates was not paying its fair share toward this parking structure, and this was responded to by Larry Lichliter, stating that Vail Associates is the largest taxpayer in the Valley, with all people in the Valley receiving the benefit thereof. Vail Associates was asked to consider an eventual request from the Town of Vail to condominiumize these spaces or to pay for the 535 additional spaces. 4. The specific requirements of what it will take, both with financing and construction, to add the additional 535 spaces and the two floors now. Item four was Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance vacating a portion of Meadow Road (also known as Grouse Lane), a public roadway within the Town of Vail (5122 Grouse Lane), adjacent to Lot 7, Block 1, Gore Creek Subdivision. Mayor Rose read the title in full. Merv Lapin moved to approve the ordinance on first reading. Tom Steinberg seconded his motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. Item five was Resolution No. 57, Series of 1989, updating the Town of Vail personnel rules and regulations. Mayor Rose read the full title. Merv Lapin requested that Charlie Wick present brief information regarding the content of these personnel changes. Merv then moved to approve this resolution, and was seconded by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. Note: At this point in the meeting {9:10 p.m.), Kent Rose excused himself to attend a function of the 10th Mountain Division as a representative for the Town of Vail. Item six was Resolution No. 58, Series of 1989, supporting local regulation of cable television. Mayor Pro Tem Slevin read the title in full. Larry Eskwith stated the National League of Cities had recommended this strongly-worded resolution be sent to Congress. Eric Affeldt had numerous objections to the subjective language used, specifically as it would affect Heritage Cablevision and our franchise. Fallowing discussion, it was decided that Larry Eskwith will return to the Council at their evening meeting on the 19th of September with a revised resolution. Larry will concentrate on the paragraph that relates to the Town of Vail not currently being able to receive over-the-air signals, and will attempt to expand on the uniqueness of the Town of Vail`s situation. Item seven was an appeal of the Design Review Board's decision denying a requested color change by the Camelot Townhouse Association (2801 Bassingdale Blvd.). Mike Mollica stated that on August 2, 1989, the Design Review Board, by a vote of 3-1-1, had denied the Camelot Townhouse Association's request for a color change. The DRB made the following findings in their motion for denial: "That the proposed colors would not be compatible with the neighborhood and that the proposed colors would attract undue attention to the building." Mike Chapman, who serves as Manager/ President of this Association, stated his case before the Council. He asked how aesthetically this color could be detrimental to the community? Additionally, he pointed out in the DRS Guidelines (18,54.050) that although earth tones are called for, in fact, there are numerous examples of homes, condominiums, etc., within the Vail Valley that are not in compliance with this requirement. Eric Affeldt suggested to the staff that they, along with the DRB, look at this language in paragraph 3, on page 154C of the Vail Municipal Code. Mike Cacioppo made a motion to overturn the-DRB decision. This motion was seconded by Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-1, with Tom Steinberg voting in opposition. Item eight was the appeal of the Design Review Board's approval of the Katz residence on Lot 6, Vail Village 10th Filing {950 Fairway Drive). Kristan Pritz -2- M i • provided the following background rationale. The DRB had approved this project 3-2. Jay Peterson, representing Mr. Katz, the applicant, stated that this was a DRE question only, and presented background. Gene Dwyer, an attorney representing Mrs_ Walters, stated he had called within the 10-day time frame to state he would be calling up the matter on her behalf, but was told the Town Council had already done so. He also suggested the single reason the structure was built so high on the hillside was to get superlative views, and that it was up to the architect to use the freedom to design within the guidelines that are presented in the Design Guideline section of the Municipal Code. Mike Cacioppo questioned the use in Section 18.54.050 of the Design Guidelines regarding primary/secondary structures. It was stated this was inapplicable, based on the fact this is a single-family dwelling with garage and is not a duplex ar primary/secondary development. The following neighbors spoke against the DRB recommendation: Dr. Messenbaugh, John Mueller, Vern Anderson, !Nancy Rondo on behalf of herself and her husband Paul Rondo, Bill and Alice Cartwright. Robert Schilling supported the "neighborhood" comments. Ned Gwathmey, a member of the DRB, stated that at the time this was presented to DRB, three items were to be considered: 1. The variance allowing the location of the house on the hill had already been granted. Therefore, as a PEC decision that had been appealed to the Town Council and upheld by the Tawn Council, that matter was settled. 2. The avalanche question had been left to expert opinion, i.e., Art Mears, and this had been resolved. 3. A review of the design as presented was the only item to be considered by the DRB. Gwathmey felt the DRB had made the correct decision, and this home was indeed highly compatible with the neighborhood. Mike Cacioppo moved to overturn the DRB decision, and Eric Affeldt seconded that motion. Cacioppo based this motion on 18.54.050, Section A, paragraph 1, that construction should be compatible and an objective of the design guidelines is to fit buildings to the site. A vote was taken and the motion failed 2-3. Those in opposition were Merv Lapin, John Slevin, and Tom Steinberg. Tom Steinberg then made a motion to uphold the DRB decision, with a second from Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and this motion passed 3-2, with Mike Cacioppo and Eric Affeldt voting in opposition. Following this vote, Tom Steinberg requested staff and Larry Eskwith to work out wording to disallow the call up procedure far PEC and DRB decisions to be allowed without consensus. Also, the staff was instructed to look at the question of a clarification for separated structures and to focus on this issue of single- family, duplex, and primary/secondary homes in respect to Section 18.54.050. The issue is whether or not 18.54.050 was intended to be applicable to lots zoned primary/secondary, or just primary/secondary construction. Item nine was the Finishing Touch sign variance request. This has been tabled to the September 19, 1989, evening meeting. There was no Citizen Participation. • There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: l.W ~•-~~it~1CL[~~ P~m~la-A-.~Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Pam Brandmeyer • -3- -,. ', MINUTES VAIL TOWN SEPTEMBER 7:30 P.M. COUNCIL MEETING 19, 1989 A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, September 19, 1989, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg None Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was a consent agenda of the following items: . A. Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1989, second reading, vacating a portion of Meadow Road {also known as Grouse Lane}, a public roadway within the Town of Vail (5122 Grouse Lane}; adjacent to Lot 7, Block 1, Gare Creek Subdivision. B. Resolution No. 58, Series of 1989, a resolution urging the Congress of the United States to revise the Cable Communication Policy Act of 1984, and expressing general concern about the need for greater local government regulatory authority. Mayor Rose read the full titles of the ordinance and the resolution. There was no discussion by Council or the public. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the consent agenda, which Tom Steinberg seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The second item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1989, first reading, an ordinance amending the investment policy of the Town of Vail. The full title was read by Mayor Rose. Steve Thompson briefly explained the ordinance, noting the policy changes had been discussed with Council at an earlier work session, and answered questions of Council. A motion to approve the ordinance was made by Merv Lapin, and seconded by Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal. Mike Cacioppo stated he was opposed to Section IV which would allow the Town Manager to rev iew but not approve the investment report; he felt the Town Manager should be able to approve the report. A • vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-O. The third item was the Finishing Touch sign variance request. Rick Pylman gave background details ofi the request, and explained why staff recommended approval. He remarked the Design Review Board had also approved the variance request by a 5-0 vote. John Dunn, representing the applicant, asked to withdraw the application, and continued with the reasoning for it. There was some discussion by Council regarding the process of withdrawal, resubmittal of the request, and what .would happen to the existing sign/awning until a solution had been arrived at. Larry Eskwith gave his legal opinion concerning the Council's position and options. There was then some discussion by Council regarding their feelings on the current signage that was up. Mike Cacioppo commented why he would like to approve the current signage and leave it up. Don Hagan explained why he felt the sign should come down because of the regulations of the Town. Tom Steinberg made a motion to accept the withdrawal of the sign by the applicant, and for staff to proceed with the removal of the current sign by any legal means necessary. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-2, with Mike Cacioppo and John Slevin opposing. John Slevin stated he was opposed because he felt it was not necessary to take down the current sign until the Design Review Board made a decision on the initial request, and felt it would produce undue hardship on the applicant. Mike Cacioppo agreed with John's comments. John Dunn remarked the applicant could not • voluntarily take down the sign due to legal problems with the sign contractor, and also, it would harm the applicant's business. n.+ Y ~ r. i • The next item was the Chester residence revised landscape plan. Kristan Pritz stated the Council had called up this item to review in more detail changes to the wall an the landscape plan for the Chester residence. She showed the Council plan drawings and explained the changes made. She noted the Design Review Board had approved the changes by a vote of 3-0-1, with Jamie McCluskie abstaining due to involvement in the project. Kristan stated the Design Review Board had approved the . amended plans with the fallowing conditions: 1. The height of the fence shall not exceed 6 feet. In the 20 foot front setback, the height of the fence shall not exceed 3 feet. The height limit includes the column fior the fence. Gate columns may exceed the 3 foot height limit in the front setback, but may not exceed 6 feet in height. 2. The metal support stakes for the aspen on the east side of the property shall be located with Vail Associates approval so that skiers are not endangered by the stakes. Jay Peterson, representing Mr. Chester, further explained some areas of the revised plan. Kristan and Jay then answered questions of Council. John Slevin made a motion to uphold the DRB decision to approve the plans, with Mike Cacioppo seconding. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-1, with Tom Steinberg apposing. There was no Citizen Participation. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kent f1`. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: ~ , ..~. Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Tawn Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman -2- ~, . MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 3, 1989 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, October 3, 1989, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor Eric Affeldt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney The first order of business were Ten Year Employment Anniversary Awards to Larry Eskwith and Donald Gallegos. Ron Phillips gave background information on Donald, a Heavy Equipment Operator II with the Town of Vail, and this was followed by comments from Pete Burnett. Kent Rose gave a brief description of Larry's work background • with the Town of Vaii, and presented an award to Larry. The second item of business on the agenda was the approval of the minutes of the September 5 and 19, 1989, meetings. Merv Lapin moved to accept the minutes as presented, with a second from Tom Steinberg. Mike Cacioppo asked for more specific wording in two paragraphs of the September 5 minutes. Merv included the additional language in the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-O. The third item was Resolution No. 59, Series of 1989, approving the 1989-90 proposed parking policies. Eric Affeldt commented that due to the phone calls he had received from business people in the community {and thanks for the input}, the goad fortune of excess revenue over the budget this year, the housing shortage, the public's feeling, etc., he was making a motion to deny the resolution and leave all rates at their current status. Merv Lapin seconded the motion. Merv Lapin and Eric Affeldt asked Stan Berryman about parking coupon utilization, to which Stan responded that 37 percent of parking overall in both structures was free parking, and 12 to 13 percent was coupons. He stated 36 percent of parking in the Village structure was free parking by locals, and 40 percent in the Lionshead structure. The majority of the free parking fell within one to one and a half hours. Mike Cacioppo remarked he was originally the only one against the increases. Colleen McCarthy added that losing the rental car storage parking would help, that she did not see this as a political issue, and thanked the Council for their decision. Tom Steinberg asked the audience how many would use the Ford Park free parking, to which there was a small showing of hands. There was then some discussion by the public and Council regarding the possibilities at Ford and Donovan Parks and bus service expansion. Eric Affeldt noted the list of the Parking and Transportation Task Force members attached to the resolution, and suggested people call them and tell them their concerns, as they are the ones advising the Council on these issues. Mayor Rose and Stan Berryman talked about the next Parking and Transportation Task Farce meeting, which would be held within the next two weeks in the afternoon. Stan would take names of interested people and get phone numbers, so he could notify them when the meeting would be held. Mike Cacioppo announced to the audience that a School Board issue would coming up next. There was then discussion regarding lighting from Apollo Park to Ford Park for safety reasons. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. Item four was a consent agenda for the following items: A. Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1989, second reading, an ordinance amending the investment policy of the Town of Vail. B. Appointment of Betty Neal as a Local Liquor Authority Board Member. • There was no discussion by Council or the public. A motion to approve the consent agenda was made by Mike Cacioppo and seconded by Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. r • i At this time, Pete Burnett thanked the Council for allowing him the opportunity to go to Russia and see how their municipal public works crews worked. He appreciated it very much, and would be leaving Saturday. The next order of business was Resolution No. 60, Series of 1989, supporting the School District bond election. Patricia Conran, the Eagle County School District Supervisor, explained what the bond issue would cover, gave the reasoning behind it, and gave additional background information. She also urged residents to register to vote; the deadline was October 13, 1989. She noted there would be a presentation Wednesday, October 18, at this end of the valley at Battle Mountain High School, at 7:30 p.m. She then answered questions of Council. Dan Corcoran requested Council's active support and to pass the resolution, and gave a little more background information. After some discussion by Council, Mike Cacioppo commented he felt the Task Force had not considered the dangers, because of the superfund clean up across the street, at Minturn Middle School. He read from recent reports by the State Health Department, and remarked the School Board had not made very good decisions regarding safety, and felt the first building to go up should be the Avon Middle School and then decide priorities of other needs. Dan Corcoran responded the School Board was not ignoring the problems at Minturn Middle School, and felt the community needed more schools in the area. Ron Phillips added he has two children in Minturn Middle School, and he and Tam Steinberg gave additional information on the health issues at the school. Patricia Conran stated the reports were correct, that the trigger levels were due to slope work, and they were continuing to monitor. The School Board was spending 57 thousand dollars to study the SVH system, their attorney was filing demands, and the EPA would reimburse them for all monies spent. She also noted that body monitors had been turned into a science project on three teachers and three students. The superfund clean up was scheduled for two years; . the School Board added a third year just in case. The new school could not be built and opened before that. Eric Affeldt stated these were not issues the Council could dictate to the School Board, and felt the Council should focus on the improvements set in the resolution. Eric Affeldt made a motion to approve the resolution, which was seconded by Tom Steinberg. Jay Peterson commented he felt it best to separate the resolution issues from the Minturn Middle School health issues. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-1, with Mike Cacioppo opposing. Dan Corcoran thanked the Council for passing the resolution. Under Citizen Participation, Robert Peters remarked he felt the public should say no to Vail Associates to expand the mountain facilities until the Town of Vail and Town of Avon, and the surrounding communities have a handle on parking, housing, and other employee problems. He stated he would speak to everyone on the Vail Metropolitan Recreation District Board and the Parking and Transportation Task Force far alternatives for the parking problems and parking at Donovan Park. He then discussed bike paths problems. There was same discussion by Council regarding the Vail Transportation Center renovation and the closing off of the west end of the structure by Crossroads. Ron Phillips explained the plans, and stated he planned to answer all the letters the Town had received regarding the expansion. • There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~ J rr.~~ Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: ~U.~~ ~ . L~YYLI,rfil [.lc._J Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Towh Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman C _2_ • MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 17, 1.989 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, October 17, 1989, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail WahrlichWLowenthal Tom Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Eri c Affel dt Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was Ordinance No. 23, Series ofi 1989, first reading, adopting a 1990 budget and financial p1 an. Mayor Rose read the full title. Steve Barwick noted the changes Council had made at the work session that day; then . briefly explained what the new budget would include, gave background information on fund balances, and what the figures would cover. Mayor Rose stated the budget was the result of a series of budget work sessions over the last couple of months. There were no comments from the public. Mike Cacioppo remarked he would vote against the ordinance because he did not believe the Community Development Department needed an increase in staff (it should be getting smaller, not larger), he was disappointed there was na West Vail fire station or television translators included in the budget, did not agree with a five percent increase for the Town Manager's position, did not agree with the large increase for the Marketing Board budget, or. the $35,000 funding to Bravo! Colorado. Merv Lapin had some questions regard the actual projected and the proposed budgets, to which Steve Barwick responded. Merv Lapin stated he was not happy regarding the insurance coverage premium, but that everything was a compromise situation with a $20 million budget. Tom Steinberg commented the number of employees had remained relatively static the last four years while services had been expanded and upgraded. Me believed the Town should hire more employees and take care of them, or the Town would pay. Ron Phillips gave additional information on insurance costs. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the ordinance as amended, with Tom Steinberg seconding. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-1, with Mike Cacioppo opposing. John Slevin thanked the staff for their time and effort on this major project. . The second item was Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1989, first reading, amending Special Development District No. 6. The full title of the ordinance was read by Mayor Rose. Peter Patten reviewed the staff memo to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated September 26, 1989, and explained the request. He gave background information and reviewed the SDD design criteria. Peter then stated the staff recommended approval with two conditions: 1. That 5DD No. 6 be amended by adding a total of 3,927 square feet to the existing allowance of }20,600 square feet. The 3,927 square foot figure is the existing square footage of condominium unit #30. The staff feels that the existing square footage is sufficient for a successful conversion from retail to residential and that the request for an additional 1,787 square feet which may be added to unit #30 in the future, is extraneous and above and beyond what is required for this conversion. 2. That this unit be use restricted, according to Section 17.26.075 of the Town of Vail Subdivision Regulations. Peter stated the PEC denied the request by a 4-3 vote, so the ordinance was coming to the Council without a PEC recommendation. He also had additional language he requested be added. Merv Lapin questioned the logic behind the recommendation, to • which Peter responded. Peggy Osterfoss, of the PEC, gave further information regarding the request and the PEC`s evolvement to the denial decision. After some discussion by Council, Peter Jamar, representing the applicant, BSC of Vail, Colorado, Inc., explained why the applicant was making the request and why they were asking the Council for approval of the ordinance. There was then some discussion by Council regarding parking spaces for the condominium, and total build-out for the Vail Village Plaza. It was decided that if the space was converted, it would not change any requirements for the Vail Village Plaza. Merv Lapin stated he was against increased GRFA over the limit; there was much discussion by Council regarding GRFA. Peter Jamar requested the item be tabled for a few weeks so he and Peter Patten could do some more research, the Council could go on a site visit to the area, and they could discuss at a work session. Councilmembers then explained questions and problems they had with the request. Mike Cacioppo made a motion to table the ordinance for three weeks to the next evening meeting, and John Slevin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. The next item was Resolution No. 61, Series of 1989, endorsing and supporting My Choice ... Drug Free Colorado red ribbon campaign. Marko Moser thanked the Council for the support they had provided already. She then briefly reviewed the planned events for the next week, October 22-29, 1989. A motion to approve the resolution was made by Merv Lapin and seconded by John Slevin. Merv Lapin and Mayor Rose then thanked Marko for taking this project as far as she had. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. The fourth order of business was the appeal of a Design Review Board decision denying a sign for Nick's, 228 Bridge Street. Kristan pritz stated that on September 16, 1989, the DRB had a tie vote on this item, which results in recommending denial. She passed around a photograph of the proposed location, then reviewed a summary of the DR8's comments. There was discussion by Council regarding no prohibition of neon signs, and others located in town. Peggy Osterfoss commented . if Council did not want neon in the Village, they need to instruct staff to head that way; she was empathetic, but the decision was up to the Council. Michael Stoughton, the applicant, gave additional information regarding the proposed sign. After mare discussion by Council, Michael gave further reasons why he felt they should approve the sign, why it was appropriate, and should be granted. Jo Brown questioned haw the Town had kept most neon out of the Village up to now, to which Councilmembers responded, "design guidelines." Michael Stoughton requested the item be tabled until the next evening meeting, sa he could bring more pictures and information to Council. The Council asked that Michael present information on neon at a work session before the sign was reviewed for approval. Jahn Slevin then made a motion to table the item until the next evening meeting, and Gail Wahrlich- Lowenthal seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0-1, with Tom Steinberg abstaining. The next item was the appointment of five regular municipal election judges for the November 21, 1989 election. There was no discussion by Council or the public. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the five proposed judges, which Tom Steinberg seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. There was no Citizen Participation. . Mike Cacioppo announced the results of an October 11, 1989 Health Department memorandum air monitor results at the Minturn Middle School. He remarked the report scared him. Larry Eskwith gave a brief attorney's report to Council. He stated he had received notice the Tenth Court of Appeals supported the Town of Vail in the Defalco vs. Town of Vail case. He noted this case had been handled by the Town's insurance attorneys. He then gave background information on the Williams vs. the Town and Chester and Chester vs. the Town lawsuits, and chronologically reviewed what had happened to date. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~ ~ _~ ~ Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer,'Town Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman -2- ~- ~ou~v of v~rL ,South Frontage Road ~Gf~ Colorado 81657 303-479 2136 FAX 303-479-2157 CERTIFxCATTON STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY OF EAGLE ss. Office of the Town Clerk The foregoing is a full, true, and correct transcription of Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1989, first reading, amending Specia3. Deve3.opment District No, 6, which is included in the final minutes of the Vail Town Council Meeting held on Tuesday, October 17, 1989. Date: Se.~~Gwt.,fae~, $. lgga- Time: td.= 10 P. M, ~.. ~. ~~ Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk of the Town of Vail STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF EAGLE ) Subscribed and sworn to before me appeared Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk of the Town of Vail,_Coiorada, this ~~h. day of .~ bc1- , 19 'tZ . My commission expires: Al,~v. r1^, I~l~3 ~~i~L~(;'I.-F:! r: It J_.rcr d ~'i nz ~~a~i Notary' `~ :~ ~.:y . LPL'.?! TRANSCRIPT OF THE RECORDED PROCEEDINGS OF THE REGULAR EVENING MEETING OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIN, COLORADO AGENDA ITEM #2: ORDINANCE NO. 24, SERIES OF 1989 COUNCIL CHAMBERS VAIL MUNICIPAL BUILDING 75 SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD VAIL, COLORADO (303) 479-21 d0 TUESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1989 COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: KENT ROSE, MAYOR .JOHN SLEVIN, MAYOR PRO TEM MICHAEL CACIOPPO MERV LAPIN GAiL WAHRLICH-LOWENTHAL TOM STEINBERG RON PHILLIPS, TOWN MANAGER LARRY ESKWITH, TOWN ATTORNEY PAM BRANDMEYER, TOWN CLERK `~ i CITIZENS PARTICIPATING: PEGGY OSTERFOSS, PEC PETER JAMAR, REPRESENTING APPLICANT •- _~ Transcription of tare recordinn of Town Council mee~na~ agenda item #2: October 17, 1989 Aoglicant's Rearesentative PJ - Peter Jamar PEC Member PO -Peggy Osterfass Town Attomev LE -Larry Eskwith Councii Members ML -Merv Lapin TS -Tom Steinberg KR -Kent Rose GW -Gail Wahriich JS -Jahn Slevin MC -Michael Cacloppo Town Staff RP -Rick Pylman PP • Peter Patten KP - Kristen Pritr KR - Next item on the agenda is Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1989. an orcinance amending Section 8 of Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1987, to provide far the amendment of density of the approved development plan for Special Development District No. 6. This is also first reading. Peter Patten .. . PP - It is. Mr. Mayor and members of the council, what I'm going #o do is go through . the memorandum that the planning staff wrote #o the Planning Commission as the. presentation of the item. Then !'m going to talk about what happened at Planning Commission and then I'll talk about the ordinance at the end. The request to amend Special Development District 6, which is the Vail Village Inn Special Development District, to amend the to#al GRFA, the total residential floor area for the SDD to incxease 4,900 sq. ft. That's the way the ordinance reads. The original request was for more than that amount and the planning staff recommended for less than that amount. The proposal basically is to convert the goods retail space to a condominium, to residential use. Basically, what we're looking at is ~a conversion of use from commercial to residential, where the current "Goods" clothing store is located. So the applicant originally requested an additjona15,714 sq. ft. Now that • takes that space that's up there and It adds some loft space and it infills other area. There is currently approximately 3,900 sq. ft. of floor area in that space. The applicant has identified 1 _• the reason for the application as the location being an unviable, not a viable, retell space. He ~~ has received approval from the other condominium owners to proceed with the application for the conversion to residential. Currently, the total allowed square footage in the Special • Deveiopment District for the remaining phases is 920,600 sq. it. and that's of course attached to the major hots! redevelopment that we a!I hope someday we see in that site. Sa, this would increase that in the ordinance form to 925,500 sq. ft. In looking at the criteria then for a special development district, the first one has to do with design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, the neighborhood and the adjacent properties relative to the design scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, and sa on. Really. there aren't very many design issues related to this. It's taking an existing space and converting It from commercial to residential, We would anticipate if the project Is approved and it gees forward, that the owner probably would want to make some minor design changes to the space itself, but at this time that is net being proposed and those changes would be dealt with by the Design Review Board. The existing display window down an the street level would remain and be used by Village Inn Sports, The second criteria than has to deal with the uses, activity and densities which provide compatible, efficient and workable relationships with the surrounding uses and activities. I #hink we're all aware that the Vail Village Inn Special Deveiopment District is a mixed-use project and has a variety of land uses In it now, as well as when it's redeveloped to its fullest extent. And, of course, those uses include commercial and residential in various locations, as wail as restaurants and short-#erm accommodation units, lodge rooms. Dne of our goals in the master land use plan, as well as the Vail Village Master Plan, is to maintain the mix of uses. We feel that's important to Commercial Core 9 and its surrounding area, which, of course, this is immediately adjacent to the core area. This is not affecting that mix of use. it's 2 ~~ changing from ane to the other, but ail of the uses are found in the immediate area, as wail as ` the surrounding area. We do feel that we need to protect the short-term bed base. We feel that we have established a policy, as the Planning Commission and the Town Council have in • ebQU# #h@ IaS# thrBB Ol' dour years, where additional residential units have been required to be available to the tourist market, and we do that through the restric~ons contained in the subdivision regulatjans which requires an owner only to occupy a unit during the high season for a restricted number of weeks and it also requires the owner to list the unit on the short- term rental market when it's not in Use. And we feel that those are appropriate in. this instance, and we'It talk about those in the recommendations section. Next we deal with the parking and loading Issues. Phases I and II of the VVI contain basically little to no parking. I wasn't around when those happened originally. I would imagine that there probably was some surface parking that may have been eaten up by future phases, but this is in the original phases of the VVI and what has been occurring is each phase is developed. Phase 111 and than the latest phase, well the latest phase really didn't add any parking, but especially in Phase III, we caught up a little bit on the deficit. I think there was over a 1aD space deficit when Phase III was built. They buil# the underground parking garage at that time. ~ They caught up and they are somewhere around 50 spaces short. When the mast recent building was built, there was no additional parking provided for on site. The parking was to be provided in the underground parking structure. With this particular proposal then, there are no parking spaces that kind of are designated that go along with this space..loe Staufer has arrangements with some of his tenants in his spaces that he will lease them spaces in the parking structure itself. Currently, we do not have a solid • parking proposal for this particular conversion #o residential. We feel that that's important and will require that to be documented and done before we issue a building permit. The space requirement would be 2-i/2 spaces rounded up to 3. So there would be a parking ' w requirement of 3 spaces. Confom~ing with the BppllCable elements of the Vall Comprehensive Plan, f thing there is probably one in particular, that is policy 4.2 in the Master Land Use Plan, which talks about Increased density in the core areas as acceptable sa long as the existing character of each area is preserved through the implementation of the Urban Design Quide Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan. And I mink that that policy Is not in conNtct with the proposal. There are some other criteria here that are really not too important or not applicable,l should say, in chat our reoommendaiion for this, and i'll speak to #he.3,927 sq. ft. which is existing out there, the way this went through the Planning Commission as we were recommending approval for the conversion of the existing square footage, 3,927, #o residential use, with the provision that the unit be use-restricted, in other wards that h be available according to our restrictions in the Subdivision Regulations available to the tourist market in general. We feel that the existing square footage is sufficient for the successful conversion from retail to residential and that the extra originally 1,7$7 sq. ft. is really extraneous and not required, and not really a necessary, if you will, part of the proposal. The Planning Commission, so that's what went #o Planning Commission, our recommendation. There was a long discussion at Planning Commission about this item and I was not present, so bear with me. Peter was present and he can correct me if I'm wrong. The bottom line is the Planning Commission denied the proposal 4 to 3, so the ordinance that comes to you tonight is not one that the Planning Commission has voted for. The Cauncil sees all amendments to special development districts, so this would have come to you no matter whether they had approved it or denied it. There originally was a motion to approve the proposal with the condition that only 5Q% of the unit be restricted. The Planning Commission's concern an this item is that they fel# that this was too large a unit to be a viable rental unit and they were trying to ~~ . -~ comprcF }:~ with the applicant to come to a comfort level that this was going to be a unit that would akay to create, but only if it was going to be a viable rental unit, and they talked about restricting only part of the unit or actually dividing the unit into two units. Those were not acceptable to the applicant, is my understanding, and in the end the Planning Commission voted 4 to 3 to deny the request. However, before they did that, they agreed on a compromise square footage of 5,000 sq. ft. is that correct? PJ - Yes. PP - Okay. So the Planning Commission and DRB ...excuse me, the Planning Commission and the applicant have Dome #o an agreement that the size of the unit would be S,pOD sq. ft. maximum, which allows them to add about 1,14D sq. ft. of loft area and in-fill space. But the Planning Commission obviously still was not comfortable with the overall proposal, although it was a close vote. The ordinance then Is in the format for you to approve. it adds, this ordinance would add 4,900 sq. ft. Is that your understanding of it, Rick, • was there a 100 sq. ft. difference in here? RP - 4,900 PP - Okay. So the #otal amount allowed in SDD on the second page of your ordinance at the very top. What you'd be voting to do if you pass this ordinance would be to allow a total of 125,500 sq. ft. of GRFA in the Vail Village Inn Special Development District. Tha.: an increase of 4,900 sq. ft and again this is what the Planning Commission compromised down to from a larger figure that the applicant had requested. Now, l would like -- and this does not change the other provisions of that SDD, which require a certain amount of accommodation units to be built and a certain amount of square feet devoted to lodge • rooms. As some of you may recall, when we passed that ordinance, we required actually a minimum number amount of square footage devoted to lodge rooms only so that they couldn't 5 ' .r build all condos. At the end of that paragraph I would like to add a sentence that would say `4,9flfl sq. ft. of QRFA shall be allocated to Unlt SO of the Vall Village Plaza Condominiums only." And the reason for that fs that we don't want to just add 4,900 sq. ft. and then have the applicant go ahead and put a retell store back In there anyway and elf of the sudden we have just increased the size of the SDD. So, the 4,900 sq. ft. increase, if you approve it, would be just for that space only and not just a carte blanche Increase far whoever ends up developing, you know, the ultimate hotel on site. JS - So the number of units for Phase !V and V -- is this In Phase III? PP - This is in Phase I. JS - So the number of units stilt stays the same. Joe can still do 128 units. PP - That's right. That approval is completely unaffected, really, by this whole thing. So that is the one thing I would like tv add to the ordinance and we can, Larry and I can work on specific language toward that end between first and ascend reading. And with that, we will turn it over to Peter who !s representing the applicant or questions, Merv. ML - 1 don't understand the logic of why you would allow greater density on a project over and above what's been approved that doesn't have parking, that !s a conflict, I think it's going to Increase the conflict that you have between residential and commercial, I mean, I don't understand. what's the logic of having zoning with the maximum !f someone can come In and get 49flD more square feet? PP - The logic is that the space is there - ML - Weil, why not 50,040 Square feet? PP - I can't argue the staff are not experts in retail feasibility one way or the other, . the uses are all on the site, there Is residential uses on the site and the surrounding area, we have adopted policies in the land use plan which encourage the mix of uses, !n one sense !t is . ~ an Increase in density but in another, it's an increase in density that has absolutely no effect Y of mass and bulk on the village. We have had ML - 50, in other words, the house Pp - Let me say one more thing. We have had a history in Commerdai Core i area especially. These types of changes and uses. The Village started out to have employee units on street level at the Lodge. They were converted to retail. There were slot of second floor apartments, residential units, in the core that got converted to commercial space in the late 70's and early 80's. Some of those spaces have been even converted back. in an area where you have the type of mixed use zoning that we have in not only the Commercial Core but in the surrounding areas and especially this is a mixed use project, you are constantly going to have changes of use between residential and commercial and even other uses on varying levels of all mixed use projects. And t guess, I'm not here to tell you this is the . greatest thing in the world, not at all, I don't think that we're strongly recommending approval, but what I'm here to tell you is that I think that the appl~cat~on itself~is something that E don't feet is going to create any negative impacts, I don't see anything that's going to be harmed, I don't see the Vail Village inn project will be ham~ed by this, on the worst end scenario, the project would be harmed by empty retail space If it is indeed not a viable space for retai[ or commercial of some sort. 1 don't buy that argument. I think there probably could be somebody that goes in there that makes a viable operation, but I'm reacting to an application that's come in to our department and we have to get on one side of the fence or the other and t think that this proposal is not going to create negative impacts and we wilt require the parking to be located in that underground parking structure and I think with that we're looking . at something that just isn't going to be a negative impact. ML - Okay, you've answered the use question, but what you're doing is giving 7 someone the incentive to build a big volume budding then come back later and fiU it in by "~ allowing this. Everyone that's got a building that can go with (nfiil, whether it's a house or a commercial building can some back now under your logic and get greater density. KR - I don't think ft's an inflll though, is it? ML - Weil, yea, he's adding 4900 square feet. You're nat adding to the shell. You're saying that there`s no addition to the outside of the buflding. They're lnfiiting the floors on the inside. JS - Yes. Up in the IofL So what's the big problem wlth that? ML - Weil, what's going to stop, everyone that has something that is more than 2 stories high, whether it's the glass house or whether it's the house on, the Chester house that's got a volume to it, coming back and saying, well let's Infill the volume naw? JS - Wetl, 1 don't think we do GRFA the same way. He's comparing it to a residen#ia1 zone district. ~ . ML - But, look, it's a residential use. JS - No, it's a SDD. PP - Yea, it's a special development district, it's not the same zoning as you know, what you're talking about and ML - But the Sl]D has a limit put on it of 12D,DDD square feet, now you're saying add 44D0 square feet. PP - Merv, all praper~es in Vail have a limit on it,through zoning. One way or another, you come to a number -that's the maximum. The fact is that for the last 1 D years we haven't been afraid of that maximum number to increase tt and we have in probably 15 to 20 different instances over the fast 10 years in this specific area and throughout the whole commercial core and the whole Vaii Village area. We've done it, I don't need to go through .~ .~ the names of the projects, but we have done it in many instances, changed that residential density allowed. ML - Yea, but when we originally set in a special development district the applicant was always for as much square footage as he oould get and that was a quid pro quo, "You give us this - we give you that", Now they're coming in and they`ve got a certain volume. In this case I guess 2 stories, that they're infilling in order #o get greater density. And greater density does have an effect, !mean, someone's going to be in the 4900 square feet, it's not going to be left empty. You're going to have more people using it. PP - I don't disagree with those statements. JS - Could we gd through the thought process with one unit as opposed #o two units? PP - I can't. Maybe Peggy can. • KR - Peggy has a comment. {...inaudible} PO - I think first of all, the Planning Commission felt that it was unfortunate that in this SDD there was not afirst-come, first-serve for additional square footage. In other words, this individual wishes to add space to his condominium would not be taking, any of the square footage away from the rest of the development. We felt a more desirable situation would have been if the rest of the development... the amount of square footage of this unit. But on the other hand, felt that is was unfair to this particular applicant that the SDD had not in fact been set up that way In the first place. {...) i think subsequently we endeavored to focus on the outcome and we were reluctant to give up retail space but fait the second story space as retail .... Then the question became given our direction in the master plan, which would be that we would try to encourage retail space or short term rental space. but not space that is residential ~+' and not rented In the core area. We #e1t that we needed assurance that if in fact this unit was converted from a retail to restden~ai it would be rented. And t think many of us, myself Included, were conoemed with the fact that 5001, square foot rental unit was not viable. !n other words, it's Etna to say that It's on the rental market, but no one rented it and then the fact is that we have tort retail and we have not replaced it with short term rental. And that was why we spent quite a bit of time and effort trying to reach some sort cf compromises we felt would make this a (:...} unit. l think Merv's concerned with square footage tnfill ML - Then how do you, granted, when different SDD's, SI]D B is different than let's say, we went up and looked at the glass house which is a three s#ory thing, KR - Weii, residen~al. ML - Which is residential. Haw do you say you can do this residential, but you can't do that residential because there's toss effect up on that hail adding square footage because they've got the parking or, you know, in otherwords, they're not creating any more traffic, all they're doing is adding another couple of bedrooms. How do you add it at the Vail Village Inn and not allow someone to allow someone to add tt in their other property? PO - One thing, Merv, t think we felt there would be Tess parking needed far the residentiai unit than for the commercial use that has been in place. ML - Unless it's short term units. JS - Men-, there is one school of thought that disagrees with our GRFA ordinance for our residential that says If in fact you do have atwo-story house and you want #o stick a basement underneath it, and you exceed GRFA rotes, you're really not adding anything to it, you might Just be adding a family roam but technically you can't do it, so there is a school of #hought out there that would love to change GRFA provisions for residential also, because .~ ", that's a bulk and mass thing that is going to be talked about probably over the next year or SO. . PJ - We Should probably hear from Peter here, he's representing the applicant. JS - I've got a question slang this one unit vs. a bunch of units and maybe Peter, wail, I'll ask it now while its on my mind, If you do a one 5000 square foot unit, do you mind if they do one eight bedroom unit? Have you thought about eight lockoffs and you have a bed and breakfast small motel. or, I mean you could do that with 5000 square feet. PP - Well, actually you can only have one lodcaff. JS - You can only do one? PP _ Right. J5 - Okay. So If you can only do one, then again ft goes back #o her comment that you end up with a huge living room and some bedrooms and only ane, so you can rent it two different ways then, that's what you're saying. PP - If trey want to go, you could just do one iockoff maximum in amulti-family dwelling unit. JS - So who wanted to do mare than one unit, was that the Planing Commission or you? Who is recommending that they do more than one? PP - Planning Commission. JS - Planning Commission? Okay, go ahead Peter. PJ - Perhaps l can help shed a little light on this and some of the rationale for hey, why are we in asking for this and I am representing BSC of Vail which owns the unit. • ML - Who is BSC of Vail? PJ - lt's a partnership. 1~ ML - Composed of? ~ PJ - One of the gentlemen !s Frank Cicero,l don't know the other partners. ML - And they're the owners of the space? The reason I'm asking this is because it just wen# through foreclosure. The building did, is this part that is #hrough foreclosure or is this separate? PJ - No, this is a separate condominium. ML - This is a separate condominium that wasn't involved, okay. PJ - Let me hit a couple of the high points. I think that the reason we got a little bit off track at the Planning Commission was because of the diversity of opinion as to how Is this unit going to be short term rented and I and the applicant created some of that confusion because of the fact that that was sort of a last minute staff recommendation that they had been supporting this but then a day or two before the Planning Commission had sold, but you'll have to go with these restrictions. So I needed to run that by my client, the owner of the unit, in a very short time period and not being knowledgeable of what that meant or how and also being an attorney, his initial reaction was no, we don't want to live with that kind of restriction, sa i then proceeded to the Planning Commission, not agreeing with that condition. We have since had the time to s1t down and discuss it with the staff and explain it to the owner and that's haw we've now arrived at the Issue as to, wall, he's willing to go along with the restrictions, is this 5008 square foot unit a viable short #erm rental unit or not? I have contacted the Vail Resort Association. Their recommendation to me was that, heck, yes, a 5000 square foot unit in the Village core Is probably one of the most desirable short term rental units In Vail. We have very few of those -those are the first units to rent and I would be . happy to, if it comes dawn to that question and I'd be happy to table this item until we can ail go ask the VRA ourselves whether that in fact is #rue. I'm convinced that it's tnre, the owner 'i 2 _ ~ is convinced that it's true, given the numbers of families and groups of people that like #o Y came to Vail and all stay together and be in close proximity and walking distance to the core where you do not need a vehicle. Even though we feel that the rental of that unit will not generate the need for the parWng spaces, we are willing to go along with the condition that says that given the conversion of this unit over residential. we're willing to provide the 3 parking spaces that are necessary and there are spaces available through Joe Stau#er at the Vail Village Inn for that purpose. Again, I think everyone, the Planning Commission, staff and myself agree that the parking requirement acthally reduces#rom 1fi spaces to 3 so that that's a net improvement. The owner's initial intent here is that they would love to keep the space commercial. They would be very happy and I think those involved with economics of real estate would agree that it's in their best interest that that's viable commercial space to keep it commercial and over the long term that is a much better business decision. l think it's important to stress that it is second and third #ioor space, and I think the Planning Commission on their site visit sort of understood that the poor utilization of that space as commercial, we were willing to come to a compromise of adding half of the square footage that we had initially intended to add so that the PEC got fairly confused but we had the opportunity since there was some time between meetings to go back and get a clan#ication of some of those issues. So I guess, the bottom line is we're now willing to restrict the use, we feel that a 5000 square foot unit which would probably be 5 bedrooms is a very highly desirable unit on the short term rental market. They still prefer to be able to try to use that space as commercial but they would like to have the fall back to be able to utilize this space as residential i# it continues to look like it's not a viable commercial space. The use is not in question. The zoning allows the use as residential. What's in question is that the SDD is defined so tightly that it does not allow the flexibility to add any square footage in any unit~anywhere. 13 x ML - What is the reason why it was dettned that tightly? ~~ Y PJ - i can't explain that, Merv. Mt_ - It was part of negotia~ons that had to do with waist the Wl was giving to the • Town. Doesn't that have to do with part of the park, doesn't that have to do with part of the condominium that, the space below which is now the skI museum? PJ - I don't agree with that concept of SDDs, that I don't think they were ever set up KR - There was a big Issue, I mean, It had to do with the underlying zoning that was on #hat entire parcel and what Increases there were from that underlying zaning, if any, through the SDD process and park, that Merv talked about and the whose works. And it was tight because it was a long, Involved, tough process. flail and I remember that and some other people probably. PJ - I guess what I'm saying is that they would Just like to see some flexibility in • being able to use that use as the uses are defined within the SDD and again, I guess I would have to say l don't think there's any pasi~ve impact, I can't come up here and really sell to you that, hey, this is the greates# thing in the world that ever happened. I can't foresee any negative impacts given that they're willing to actually Improve the parking situation. They do have approval of 1 p0% of the condominium owners which awn all the adjacent units. They have gone ahead and received that approval and revised the condominium declaration in order to use the unit as residential. They agree with all the conditions including keeping the exterior appearance an the first floor as retail use. So I think it makes same sense to grant that flexibility. I do believe that the Planning Commission was pretty much split 50 - 50 as to whether this was appropriate or not and the confusion really came in terms of the size of the • unit. I think Jim Viele, the Chairman of the Planning Commission, put it best. that it's one of 14 -R - ` } those continual fine tuning of an SDD that I guess whether we like it or not, It's a fact of life - that these types of amendments and the flexibility has to be there in order to end up with land use situations that work. I think that Vail is not in terms of the density, a finely tuned machine. • I think we see give and take, additions, deletions of different types of uses and it really is a constant process. I don`t think there is one set top number that we have a system that we Vansfer development rights. I mean, we have gas stations that evolved into mixed use retail and commercial and residential uses and individual members may agree or not agree with that, but that's a fact of the way land use decisions evolve and I think, you know, the intent here is not necessarily to do anything positive or negative as far as alot of these issues that could conceivably set a precedent are. they're to try to continue to make #hat a viable, livable space and I think we're meeting some of the goals of the Town in terms of we are adding a unit that will be on the short term rental market during high seasons that according to the VISA • is very desirable and we need more of, so I #hink there are some positive things here. 1'd be happy to answer any questions. TS - What happens to the 13 parking spaces that are assigned to this unit which allegedly they don't need any more? PP - They don't exist. ML - Yea, they're 50 short now. PP - They didn't build parking for the first couple of phases. There is not 13 spaces you can go point to in any where on the site for this particular spaoe. TS - Would #hey be required in the future far tha# whole Vail Village complex #hen? PP - Yes. You mean the next phase that's unbuilt? • TS - Next phase, or whatever phase there PP - Yes, the next phase will ready make up the whole parking deficit. 15 TS - So the non-condominium owner is going to benefit to the tune of 13 long #arm - ` built out spaces by the fact that he doesn't have to supply this 13 for this condo unit in the total buiidout now. The long tarn buiidout he is required to meet the parking requirements. Now, if we allow this conversion, he needs 13 lass spaces. Now the condo owner, is he selling those spaces flack to .ice Staufer so he doesn't have tv build them, or is he giving them back to him and Joe !s going to make $130,000. because he doesn'# have to put them In. What's happening here? JS - Waw does this affect the rest of the purchase. PP _ You have #o understand this is not the developer, the entire SDD or the holder of that pool of CRi=A or parking so that this owner is not required to at any point put in those 13 spaces. TS - No, l understand that, but Vall Village inn, inc. or whoever is doing it is ultimately required to build those 13 spaces if we leave it the way it is. PP - That's not really not at all the way the whole thing worked out at all, We did not... My recollection, Tom, is that the ultimata buiidout of the site wil! not contain 100°/p of what the parking requirement would be for everything on the site. I can't go back and tell you what percentage of the overall, parking requirement will be built, you knew, under the approved SDD, but it just wasn't that dean a connection. l think that there was a certain amount of kind of what's there now is there now and let's plan the hotel, the eventual hotel that's not built, and get the parking that's going to be adequate for the commercial and residential that's going to be built and live.with the existing situation. JS - Peter, where does 13 parking spaces come from? PP - The i 3 parking spaces comes #rom if they propose to build this big a retal! space you divide the total square footage by 300 and you'd get 13. 16 k -~ JS - Peter, the point is, if they're allowed ta, that does not affect the number of parking spaces that Joe has to deal with his hotel does it? PP - No. JS - !t shouldn't affect the SDD requirement for Joe's parking. PP - No, I don't think it would. PJ - 1 think you could make a statement in the ordinance that it doesn't. JS - Yea, we want to make sure it doesn't because we know he's going to be Short anyway. I remember from Chase days that there realky isn't an overabundance of spaces and we were valet parking and all sorts of things to get TS - Well. either that or he doesn't get to build as much. Which Is where we should be coming from. JS - Right, but 1 think the point needs to be brought out that if they get to convert, that does not change any requirements for Joe's parking. • KR - Peggy, another comment? PO - 1 just wanted to make a couple of other comments, one concern expressed {....) was that 10 parking spaces are in fact non-existent when people renting the unit need to be taking things like groceries to it and they will probably expect a parking spot and presumedly they were allowed to drive to that restricted area (...}. Another item that I think we included as a condition on #his approval {...) that if in fact this conversion occurs we thought that the double doors that are facing to the south should be closed and fumed into a display and then the access should be from the west, there's also a doorway coming from the west so that i# you were walking along Meadow Drive you would see a display window rather than a door. JS - A display window for another retail space or something like that, is tha# what you're saying? I mean for the one next door maybe? 17 PO - Yes. k (...) y PJ - And we're In agreement with that. JS - i3ut you're not sure you're going to change the space, Is that what you're saying? PJ - No, I think they'd Ilke to have the flexibiAty to keep It, their desire i$ to keep it as commercial if that's viable. The sense is that It's not viable. They have no #enants running forward to get into that space, it's historically bean a problem. I think at least half the Planning Commission agreed that the changeover in that space has been s(gnificant overtime and that they would rather see some viable use of that space rather than boarded up. And whether that space is ever going to be boarded up or not is purely speculation. ML - Are they the original owners of the space? PJ - I don't know, Merv, how long they've owned the space. ML - Okay, I think the answer to that is no, sa they bought the space knowing what . they were getting. I mean, they got a prise on it based on the knowledge that they now have that it doesn't work as comma:c(al. PJ - Weil, but the use of this space Is allowed as commercial ar residential. ML - I don't have a problem because there's already residential there. 1 think in general because of my experience at Crossroads, doing one building mixed and one building not, that the mixed building doesn't work and It creates problems. The least of which (s not the fact of what happens when you want, when the building gets too old and you gat to rip it down. There's a real problem between commercial and residential. The problem I've got is adding the square footage. If #hey want to change from commercial to residential I don't have a problem with it. Adding t square foot more of space to that building I don't agree with and will vote against because the negotiations that went on when we did this for 120,fl00 we got 18 - ~ several things out of the developer and now to go back and come in and want to add 5000 square feet to me is nat a reasai7able request. Besides the problems of parking. KR - Peter, I need to ask a question ar two. The or'~ginal request was for 5700 square feet and now the final reques# is for 3900 square feet? PP - The original was for 570x, the staff recommended the conversion of 3900 which was the existing square footage and then the Punning Commission compromised with the 5000 square toot figure which actually comes down to 4900. KR - Okay, so tonight then we are at an addition of 4900 square feet of GRFA. PP - Correct. KR - Out of the 4900 square feet, haw much of that is new space? How much of it was retail space, how much of it is new space? PP - All of it. All of it. No, t'm sorry, na, that's 3900 hundred and some. . PJ - The 3927 is existing. KR - 3927 square feet is existing. 4900 square feat of additional GRFA then really means an additional 1000 square feet to the building. 1000 square feet is the infill. PJ - And they really only want #o add 900, I think it was just rounded off to a 1000 so that we didn't get Into a KR - AIi right, I'm square on that. Now, when SDD 6 was originally approved and revised and everything else, I seem to remember that there were limits an GRFA, there were limits on commercial space and there limits on the total square footage of the en#ire project. Why then, if we want to allow this #o happen, why then are we not reducing what's allowed through the 5 phases in the entire project by the same amount that we're increasing this. In other wards, if we're increasing GRFA by a certain number of feet, why aren't we taking a certain number of square footage out of their total GRFA that they're allowed or the total retai[ 19 that they're allowed? PP - Gaod question, and the basic answer to that Is that the owners of that unbuilt square footage wouldn't agree to reduce their number for this application. PJ - That's never been a point of discussion and there is no where in the SDD that commercial space 1s set as a tap Iimit. PP - No, then I didn't understand your question. I thought your question was was why aren`t we leaving It at 120,fi00 and reducing it by 50x0. KR - I thought we had a max an what could be built through the 5 phases, period. PP - GRFA. KR - No commerdal? PP - Okay, then I did misunderstand the question. KR - Well, I know we had a limit on GRFA. Did we have a limit on commercial space? PP - Yes, there was a limit on the commercial space for the unbuilt portions of whatever they proposed. We accepted the development plan, counted up the square footage and said that's the commerdal that will be allowed and the number is about $16,000 additional. As far as the total that's out there existing, I don't believe there Is a total commercial maximum that's out there In the SDD 6. JS - I`ve got one additional quick question. If they were to come In for additional commercial square footage because they wanted to add some lolls to this space, what would we tell them? Are they allowed to come in artd add commercial? PP - I think they would have to come through the same process. I believe they would have to come through the same process. JS - But you're not sure what that SDD says regarding ~~ ,~ r ~~ ,~ i~ LJ PP _ You guys are asking some tough questions) SDD fi is not the leanest, simplest ordinance that we have in our zoning code. In facts it took on a creative approach in about 1973 and we've been trying to deaf with it ever since. !t's just not that clean. It's not written sa that you know because you've done SDDs how you get a proposals you get comfortable with It at one point or another and you adopt the development plan. And that's got x amount of square footage for residential and commercaal and locations and uses and this and that. This 5DD is not that clean. There Is not an overall one maximum number of commercial that can be built ors the entire site. JS - Do we have any SDDs that we've increased GRFA or commercial square footage space? PP - Oh, all sorts of them. JS - We have? JS - Like the Westin we did, we increased It on that, didn't we? MC - Haw did Gorton's Saloon get transferred into condominiums -.under what PP - Sure. process? PP - They redeveloped the building and condominiumized it -each space. MC - There's nothing similar here to that? PJ - Could I make a suggestion here Kent. i think there's a fair amount of confusion that I'd like to request that we table this for a few weeks and try to understand all the -- I'd like to before we do that just get some kind of a reading of what maybe the questions or additional information are but I'm in total disagreement that there's a cap of commercial on the SDD and so I'm not meaning to save that argument, I think Peter and I need to sit dawn and go through the ordinance 29 JS - I think my question regarding Kent have we added on aRFA In commercial space to other SDDs I think is, I'm sitting here wondering ten years from now, fifteen years from now whoever owns that whole building is going to come to you and say we need to do a redo -anew SDD -totally redo the building and in order to do it and we've seen this rec~ntiy with a number of buildings in the Village where It may have to pop out some dormers and come out with the commercial out to the street and make it a better fill in and on and on, And that wi11 probably be proved at same paint in time. ML - And we'll probably pay you as much as $3000 for that $10,000 parking space. JS - I'm not talking about parking. I'm talking about redevelopment in town and people taking a bad space and making it good and I think that's what this fellow's trying to do. I don't know. I mean, it's up to him if he thinks residential is better commercial. Sounds like he hasn't even decided yet. ML - Well, he's got something to sell. He's got an infiil and all of a sudden he got a 5000 sq~rare foot unit that you can sell as a residential unit versus something you probably can't sell too easily as a commerdal unit. JS - Sa da you penalize him or do you squeeze him for what ML - No, what's best for the Town PJ - But Merv, how does that relate back to ... ML - It's a give and take situation. He's asking for something. !t's a negotlatian. PJ - Yea, but haw does that relate back to the health, safety and welfare of the community? Whether a guy can sell his unit or not? ML - It will be a healthier town and a safer town if we got the money to pay for those fees. PJ - Well, i would like to table this. R n~ R 1 Y ~~ 22 .1c ~~ • , GW - 4r:e thing that I would be Interested is, is the viability of the leasing of thB 5008 square fast sa when you come back JS My only Comment is gotnfl to be and somebody recently held a open house for brokers above the River House Condominiums, there's a penthouse up there that the fellow owns and he was short term renting it and I can tali you #here are only a handful of penthouses in a[I of Val! Village and that's the only one that I know, maybe there might be one other, that will short term rent. GW - How large was that? JS - It was 4000 square feet. Vail Athletic Club might have one, but you have a few others. If you can think of ail of the buildings in town and which might have a penthouse on it, most are owner-occupied. Well. it's a penthouse in the sense that it's a top floor 5000 square foot .. • ML - With a good view of the Sonnenalp redevelopment. PJ - I do think that's a valid question and we can do some mare research on that and the staff can do some more research on that. JS - I #hink you're right. I think the VRA reservationists were at that unit for that open house and that was the reason for the open house and they were exerted about having a big unit available. ML - You answered his question different that I read this document. In SDD 5 what Is the total number of square feet in that building now? Both residential and commercial. What's the total number of square feet? PP - No idea. • ML - But, I mean, is like 120,000 plus the commercial? Let's say 100,000. PP - You're talking about this one building? 23 ML - "this SDD 6. The next question is, under his proposal, how many square feet will it, square feet - i don't Care GRFA, 1 don't care commercial, how many square feet, will tiwe square feet not Increase by how much? PP - Say that again? , ML - What will be the difference in the number of square feet before and after this proposal? PP - ~ 000. ML - 1787? PP - No, 1000 and it could be 900. ML - But the original request was for 5714. PP - Yes, it has been knocked down. Mi. - And now it's been knocked down to 1000. Additional square feet. PP - 3900 exists today. They want another i 000 to infill lofts and add 1000 square feet. PJ - l guess our reasoning there fs that we don't want to take a bad commercial unit and make it a bad residential unit and we need to do a site visit and get into the space and look at it so that everybody understands what we're talking about, but the whole Idea in adding the space is I think when you walk in there you'll see that if you are to go along with the idea that it could be utilized as a residential knit, there be no, I don't think, logical reason to restrict not at least adding enough square footage to make it a good unit of some kind and make it a good residential unit. JS - Peter, what happens when the owners of the rest of the tap floor, cammercaa! in the building's common site, we have the same problem. We want to buftd residential. Pp - I hope they don't! Y C~ 24 .~ s ML - Why do you hope they don't? TS - What does your study of commercial uses show. We did a study what 3 or 4 years ago. What do we say, in tha# study that should be done? Are we going counter to that study? PP - To which one? TS - The one we did on needs of new commercial spaces ire the villages? We did a study several years ago. PP - I don't think it's necessarily so, that that study did show that we could handle more commercial space but it didn't get into the specifies of what's viable commercial space and what isn't in terms of specifically where it's located. t don't think that this is really going against the retail market analysis, the one we're referring to. PJ - Well, and to answer the land use plan shows that we have a deficit of 70,040 square feet of retail which !know some people tend to disagree with. i agree with. I'll be the last one to be in favor of reducing the amount of commercial square feet in town where it's viable space, where it's ground level space or it's in a good location, but I think there's a real concern here for second and third floor space, that is difficult to get people into that are into ski boots or whatever. TS - Now is there presently third floor in #his space or is there only a third Soor if we allow the extra i 400 square feet? PJ - There's presently a third floor. ML - it's a loft retail space. This is where the old Polo Shop used to be. PJ - So again, I guess, is there any consensus, is there any direction if we table this to TS - My consensus is I will vote no. 25 Y PJ - Okay, Gail? ~ x GW - The biggest problem I think is the Increase in the GRFA and I guess the quesfion is, if you switch k #rom 3940 commercial to 3900 residential, would you be getting all this static. And then the second quesl9on for that, and that's why its viability Is, is this 5040 square foot residential unit hugely better as tt relates to the rental market which cxeates life and vitality within the core, because we want ta, we need better hotel rooms. Sa that's , 1 guess, what !'m struggling with. PJ - I knew where you're coming from. ML - To ge# one more square inch in that building which was negotiated, you'd have to give ma something to make it worthwhile and i would suggest the $7500 a year of the ski museum's condominium fees. KR - I don't know how viable it is in the first place, Merv, I mean after you buy i# and remade) it far that kind of a use, you know, a lot of dollars in it, that's not our c:ancem however. I guess what confuses me about this issue is we have granted some additions to SDDs before but I don't know if we've done it an a piecemeal basis. I guess the last one we looked at was the Westin, or whatever name tha# SDD is, and we looked at parking, we looked at commerdal re#aU, we looked at the spaces that haven't been built, both in the area of the ruins down there ft's called and the infill space where the tent is on the lawn and where the rockpile is and we understood that whole thing. What !don't have tonight is a full understanding of this SDD. We're piecemealing it and I don't know what's to keep the next. guy from coming in nex# week and biting off another piece and that's the part of the process that I don't like, so for that reason I would be reluctant to vote for it tonight. If I understood more about the ramifications of the entire SDD I'd be more willing to look at it favorably. • JS - One of the problems is that you have this condominlumized SDD now. Your 2G ~' ~~ '* owner has to get everybody else's approval before he can change his part of the SDD and M haw do you change an SDD when you're just one of many condominium owners. !guess we're saying tonight we could. I don'# see, quite frankly, why he needs more than 3900 square feet to make one unit. 1 mean, that would be probably one of the five largest units in Vail Village. There are very few that are over 3000 square feet so to go above 3900 to do one unit - it will be a 5 bedroom unit with the biggest living room in Vail Village and still have room leftover. ML - He's going to sell it to an Fran prince. JS - If we were saying he's going to do 5 units and you want them to be 900 square feet each or something like that, but when you do that then you add more parking. Then obviously you have a lot more parking requirements everytime you add another unit, there's supposedly another family to be there. I think 3900 square #eet is plenty big. .Mir - You can probably get Kent's approval by saying that they'd take it with a dog. MC - I just stepped out for a minute, are you asking haw I wouid vote tonight, is that what your question is? PJ - I have requested that we #able it and I was just going to try to get a general.. MC - I don't think I could support ft tonight. PJ - a consensus as to where we're headed, and I think I have a pretty good idea. Naw it does bring up a good question as to who owns the square footage within a zone district and the rights to use it, because, and a far instance. For instance, t live at Coldstream. That project has a total of 65,000 square feet of GRFA. That is a pool of GRFA out there which the project was maybe built to 60,000, so there are 5000 additional. So as people want to add on they can Dome in. And they don't go to the developer of Cascade Village or Coldstream to purchase that square footage. 27 M1.. - It's probably called common area. PJ - No, there's excess GRFA, And aq I'm saying is that I think he didn't have any problem with us going to Joe Staufer and saying, sell us some of the GRFA, so it's kind of in#eresting in the different SDDs ,that square footage is actually owned by individuals and not available #o the entire property. And in some Instances it's not, !t's an interesting point that ought to be considered, 1 think, In future SDDs because I think you do need to build in at least enough flexibility. !mean, 1 pity the guy who has to come In here that does own a residential unit in Vail Village Inn Phase 1 and wants to add a 2500 foot loft and to have to go through this, that he would have to go through this process. So I #hink we have to tie careful about pinning SDDs down to the exact square footage without leaving some sort of a bit of a flexible amount far fine tuning. You know, l see this as a fine tuning and I guess I'm In the minority and that's okay. But, I think it's been a good discussion. TS - It emphasizes the point that we likely shouidn't have SDDs In the first place. We're getting into a bag of worms here that's going to ge# worse as these buildings get older and you have to redo them, they're almost Impossible. J5 - Peter , if you have a duplex iot and there°s a duplex on !t, and there's 100D square feet of ex#ra GRFA availabie #o that iot and one of the sides comes to you and says l want to take the TODD, do you say you have to get the permission of the other side or what do you do? PP - Go for it. JS KP KR JS - You just let them take the 1000? - We don't require the approval of the other side. - First come, first serve. - Really?? f ~~-- ~~ L 28 ~• ._ s ' ' ~ MC _ It s a race for the footage. ML - We should talk about that. JS - That's a problem that somebody can do that and take all of the lot's GRFA. ML - Maybe we shouid have GRFA die after a certain number of years. PJ - Kent, I'd like #o request anyway that we table this I guess indefinitely. PP - Yea, Pd like to table it to a specific date though. PJ - Yea, let's table it to November 13. MC - Sa moved. PP - Whatever you're comfortable with. KR - Is there a second? JS - Second. KR - Moved by Mike Cacioppo and second by John Slevin to table Ordinance #24 on • first reading for two weeks. Is there any discussion? It's actually 3 weeks, next regular meeting. KR - A11 in favor of the motion signify by saying yes". ALL - "Yes" KR - Opposed? (pause) KR - Mayor votes yes. Passes unanimously. 29 ~ ~ MINUTEs VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 7, 1989 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Tawn Council was held on Tuesday, November 7, 1989, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: None Ron Phillips, Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was a Ten Year Employment Anniversary Award to Mike Rose. Ran Phillips gave background information on Mike, the Superintendent of Parking with the Town of Vail, and this was followed by comments from Stan Berryman. Mike thanked everyone, and Kent Rose stated the Council appreciated Mike's hard work over the years. The second item of business on the agenda was a consent agenda of the following items: A. Approval of the October 3 and 17, 1989 Meeting Minutes B. Appointment of Steve Simonett as a Local Licensing Authority Board Member After a brief discussion regarding the minutes, Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the consent agenda, which John Slevin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The next item was Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1989, second reading, adopting a 1990 budget and financial plan. Mayor Rose read the full title. Steve Barwick noted the changes made for second reading. Tom Steinberg questioned the surveyor position and the possibility of a better way to handle it; Mayor Rose agreed he also had questions regarding that and felt it should be put on a future Work Session agenda for discussion. Eric Affeldt commended staff on their reporting and information gathering far Council. He felt the Town was in the best financial position ever, . but was disappointed the public was not that interested. He noted he was not in favor of as large an increase in the marketing budget as what was approved at first reading. Mike Cacioppo agreed with Eric regarding the marketing budget, and that was one reason why he voted against the ordinance at first reading. John Slevin briefly explained why he thought it was increased to the final amount. After some discussion, Mayor Rose stated the amount should be left as it was at this point, to be determined later, depending on Town of Avon, Eagle Gounty, and Vail Associates' contributions. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the ordinance on second reading with a reduction in the marketing fund to $117,000 instead of the $163,000, and Eric Affeldt seconded. Rob Levine commented why he felt the $163,000 should be left in. A vote was taken and the motion failed 3-4, with Tom Steinberg, Kent Rose, John Slevin, and Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal opposing. Eric Affeldt then made a motion to approve the ordinance on second reading with the marketing fund amount of $163,000. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. Mike Cacioppo remarked he would vote against the ordinance because he did not believe the Community Development Department needed an increase in staff (it should be getting smaller, not larger), he was disappointed there was no West Vail fire station included in the budget, did not agree with a five percent increase for the Town Manager's position, did not agree with the large increase for the Marketing Board budget, or the $35,000 funding to Brava! Colorado. Mayor Rose remarked there was a five percent increase in the budget, but no actual increase had been approved yet, so the money was not guaranteed to be spent. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-1, with Mike Cacioppo opposing. The fourth order of business was Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1989, first reading, regarding sales tax revenue bonds for the parking structure expansion and renovation. The full title was read by Mayor Rose. Charlie Wick introduced Steve Jeffers, of Kirchner Moore, and Dee Wisor, of Sherman & Howard. Steve distributed revised copies of the ordinance with changes made earlier today. He reviewed the changes and explained the reasoning for them. Steve then answered questions of Council. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the ordinance, and Tom Steinberg seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The next issue was Ordinance No. 30, Series of 1989, first reading, establishing a program of investments to provide for the payment of the Town's outstanding bonds. Mayor Rase read the full title. Steve Jeffers noted two minor changes in the ordinance, and explained what the ordinance would do. He and Dee Wisor then answered questions of Council. After some discussion by Council, Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Mike Cacioppo. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Next was Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1989, first reading, amending Special Development District No. 5 converting condominium unit na. 30 from commercial to residential. The full title of the ordinance was read by Mayor Rose. Peter Patten commented this item had been tabled at the last Evening Meeting, and the request was to convert the Goods retail condominium unit in the Vail Village Inn into residential space. He noted there had been same revisions to the proposal since the last meeting; he explained what the changes were. Peter then gave background information regarding Phases I and II of the condominiums in the Vail Village Inn, and added staff continued their recommendation far approval of the conversion. There was then same discussion between Council, Peter Jamar, and Peggy Osterfoss . regarding the Planning and Environmental Commission`s decision and reasoning for denying the request by a vote of 4-3. A motion to approve the ordinance was then made by Merv Lapin and seconded by Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal. After mare discussion between Council and Peter Jamar, a vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously ~-a. Ordinance Na. 25, Series of 1989, first reading, amending Title 17 to provide a definition for single family subdivisions was next an the agenda. Mayor Rose read the full title. Mike Mollica briefly explained the ordinance, and then answered questions of Council. After a short discussion, Eric Affeldt made a motion to approve the ordinance, which Mike Cacioppo seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-1, with Merv Lapin opposing. The eighth order of business was Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1989, first reading, amending Section 18.24.020 by adding "Commercial Ski Storage." The full title was read by Mayor Rose. There was no discussion by Council or the public. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the ordinance, and John Slevin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The next item was Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1989, first reading, amending Chapter 2.20 by adding an application fee for temporary liquor licenses. Mayor Rose read • the complete title. Pam Brandmeyer explained the reasoning for the ordinance, and answered questions of Council. A motion to approve the ordinance on first reading was made by Merv Lapin and seconded by John Slevin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The tenth item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1989, first reading, amending Chapter 15.22 regulating signs in the Arterial Business District and Commercial Core III zone district. Mayor Rose read the title. Mike Mollica gave background information on the ordinance, and commented the Planning and Environmental Commission unanimously recommended approval. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve, with John Slevin seconding. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The last item on the agenda was a Gart Brothers sign variance request. Kristan Pritz reviewed the requests for variances of size, height, and number of signs, and reviewed criteria used for the requests. She then explained why staff recommended approval. Kristan commented the Design Review Board had approved the requests by a 5-0 vote for the variance, and a 4-1 vote for the design; one did not like the black and white striped barber pole. After some discussion by Council, Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal made a motion to approve the three variance requests in accordance with the findings in the staff memorandum dated October 18, 1989. John Slevin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-3, with Tom Steinberg, Eric Affeldt, and Merv Lapin opposing. Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal and John Slevin explained to staff that Council should be informed of something like this -2- r design affecting a large area. Something like the flags, pole, and scale of the sign should be emphasized to Council in the Design Review Board report. Peter Patten and Kristan emphasized that the pole and flags had been previously approved by the DRB before the sign variance was considered. They also stated it would be inappropriate for the staff to decide which proposals have negative impacts and which proposals da not. It was also pointed out that three planners handle DRB requests. It is impossible for the planner who makes the DRB report to know about all the details of each proposal, particularly when a project is approved unanimously by the DRB. After some discussion, Kristan stated staff would try to be more sensitive to issues like this. Mike Cacioppo then asked for a reconsideration vote. Ron Phillips looked up the correct procedure in Roberts` Rules of Order, and to have the vote reconsidered would take a two-thirds vote. Mike Cacioppo then made a motion that the previous question be reconsidered, which Merv Lapin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion failed 4-3, with John Slevin, Kent Rose, and Oail Wahrlich-Lowenthal opposing. The motion failed due to lack of a two-thirds vote for reconsideration. Under Citizen Participation, Ken ~lilson thanked the Council, Ron Phillips, and the Town staff for the construction of the road by his house. He felt the Town did a great job, and the road was much better now. James Johnson requested that Evening Meeting minutes, transcripts, or tapes be available at the Public Library for review. Mayor Rose replied that copies of the minutes would be made available at the Library. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m. • ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman L` Respectfully submitted, `t0~~ Kent-R. Rose, Mayor -3- MINUTEs VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING NOVEMBER 21, 1989 7:30 P.M. A re u1ar meetin of the Vail Town Council was held an Tuesday, November 21, 1989, g g at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor John Slevin, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Affeldt Michael Cacioppo Merv Lapin Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Tom Steinberg MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: None Rnn Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Mike Cacioppo was not present at the time the meeting began. The first order of business was Resolution No. 62, Series of 1989, recognizing and congratulating Red Sandstone Elementary School for winning the 1989 State Champion physical fitness award. Ann Sanders and Firooz Zadeh accepted the resolution on behalf of the children, and thanked the Council for recognizing the students. Mike Cacioppo arrived. A motion was made by Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal to approve the resolution. The motion was seconded by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7--0. The next item was Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1989, second reading, regarding sales tax revenue bonds for the parking structure expansion and renovation. The full title was read by Mayor Rose. Joe Barrows (representing Steve Jeffers), of Kirchner Moore, and Dee Wisor, of Sherman & Howard, remarked on a few changes made in the ordinance since first reading, and why. They distributed revised copies of the ordinance with the noted changes. They also commented on the band ratings and a rate change, and then answered questions of Council. Eric Affeldt made a motion to approve the ordinance with the changes presented by Dee Wisor. John Slevin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-O. Item three was Ordinance No. 30, Series of 1989, second reading, establishing a program of investments to provide for the payment of the Town's outstanding bonds. Mayor Rose read the full title. Dee Wisor distributed updated copies of the ordinance with the exact amounts filled in. Joe Barrows and Dee then answered questions of Council. After some discussion, Eric Affeldt made a motion to approve the ordinance with the changes as presented by Dee Wisor. The motion was seconded by Merv Lapin. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The next order of business was a Consent Agenda of the following items: A. Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1989, second reading, amending Special Development District No. 6 converting condominium unit no. 30 from commercial to residential. B. Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1989, second reading, amending Title 17 to provide a definition for single family subdivisions. C. Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1989, second reading, amending Section 18.24.020 by adding "Commercial Ski Storage." D. Ordinance Na. 27, Series of 1989, second reading, amending Chapter 2.20 by adding an application fee for temporary liquor licenses. E, Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1989, second reading, amending Chapter 15.22 regulating signs in the Arterial Business District and Commercial Core TII zone district. Mayor Rose read the full title of each. Joe Macy, of flail Associates, Inc., stated he had a problem with Ordinance No. 28, and asked Council to have this item withdrawn from the Consent Agenda and tabled to a later date. Merv Lapin had a question regarding Ordinance No. 25, and asked to have it withdrawn from the Consent Agenda, also. Merv Lapin then made a motion to approve Ordinances 24, 26, and 27 on the Consent Agenda. The motion was seconded by Jahn Slevin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1989, second reading, was then discussed. Merv Lapin asked to have the ordinance clarified. Peter Patten tried to clarify the subdivision issue and explained just what the ordinance would do. Mayor Rose interrupted the meeting at this point to announce the outcome of the municipal election. He stated that Peggy Osterfoss, Rob Levine, and Jim Gibson were elected for four year terms, and Lynn Fritzlen was elected for a two year term. A ten minute break followed. Discussion regarding Ordinance No. 25 continued. Larry Eskwith gave further clarification. Merv Lapin then made a motion to approve the ordinance on second reading, and Tom Steinberg seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1989, second reading, was next. Joe Macy read the paragraph he objected to - page 3, Section 4. He gave a hypothetical case of a potential problem as he saw it. He felt it was unfair that a new business technically would not be allowed a sign if the building did not have an approved sign program. Larry Eskwith explained the same language was used as was used for signage in the Commercial Core III sign code, Bruce Allen remarked the problem Joe was talking about was not hypothetical, but a real problem which existed currently. Kristan pritz explained the reasoning for the paragraph's inclusion in the ordinance. She stated that sign programs were required in CC3 to try and develop a comprehensive approach to signage for the large "shopping mall" type buildings in West Vail. Merv Lapin discussed tabling the ordinance for two weeks so the staff could work on rewording. There was some discussion regarding the problems. Eric Affeldt made a motion to table the ordinance until the next Evening Meeting December 5, which Mike Cacioppo seconded. Eric commented he agreed with Merv, that if something was in the Cade we did not enforce, either enforce it or get rid of it; there was no reason to leave something on the books if we were not going to enforce it. Bruce was told to contact Kristan with his concerns. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The fourth item on the agenda was the sign variance request for the Finishing Touch Furniture Showroom located in the Tnn at Vail (Applicant: Jim Wilson}. Larry Eskwith gave chronological background information up to the current date. He stated that the applicant had never appealed the Design Review Board decision on the design of the awning, so there was no basis for the applicant to be before the Council tonight. Mayor Rose asked how things got to this point, to which Larry replied he had just looked at the staff memorandum for the first time today. Peter Patten added that they had found the error today at 5:00 p.m. Peter then reviewed the Design Review Board's actions up to this point. After some discussion regarding problems and options, Tom Steinberg made a motion to table the item until the project was reviewed by the DRB and the applicant appeals the DRB decision on the design of the signage. Eric Affeldt seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Under Citizen Participation, Mike Cacioppo requested to continue receiving check registers. He stated he would pay for the copies, and submit a check on a monthly basis. Tom Steinberg asked if the problem regarding the villa Cortina was being addressed. Ron Phillips stated it would be. Peter Patten remarked it was an old problem. Mayor Rose asked that if all business was concluded, he would like the Council to move into an Executive Session at this time to discuss a continuing land negotiation. -2- 9 ~ i There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:~5 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~ 7°i~c'~~ ~~~ ~. Kent Rose, May r ATTEST: ~1.~: ~~a.G~nLCd,~C.~,rtiJ Pame~j a ,4. Brandmeyer, 'Town Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman • -3- MINUTES UAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING pECEMBER 5, 1989 7:30 P.M. • A regular meeting of the Uail Town Council was held on Tuesday, December 5, 1989, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Uail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor Tom Steinberg, Mayor Pro Tem Lynn Fritzien Jim Gibson Merv Lapin Robert Levine Peggy Osterfoss MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: None Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Larry Eskwith was not present at the time the meeting began. The first order of business was a Ten Year Employment Anniversary Award to Charlie Davis. Ron Phillips gave background information on Charlie, a Meavy Equipment Operator iT with the Town of Uail, and this was followed by comments from Pete Burnett. Charlie thanked everyone, and Kent Rose remarked the Council appreciated Charlie's hard work over the years. The second item of business on the agenda was approval of the November 7 and 21, 1989 meetings minutes. There was no discussion by Council or the public. Tom Steinberg made a motion to approve the minutes as presented, which Merv Lapin seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. The next item was Ordinance Na. 28, Series of 1989, second reading, amending Chapter 16.22 regulating signs in the Arterial Business District and Commercial Core III zone district. Mayor Rose read the full title of the ordinance. Mike Mollica Hated the wording in Section 4 had changed since first reading and explained the reasoning. Joe Macy agreed the new wording was fine. Mike then answered questions of Council. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the ordinance, and Rob Levine seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Mayor Rose commented that Larry Eskwith was Hat present yet, and since his input was needed on a couple of agenda items, the agenda items would be moved around until he does arrive. The fourth item was Ordinance Na. 32, Series of 1989, first reading, regarding a supplemental appropriation to the Town budget. The full title was read by Mayor Rase. Steve Barwick explained the supplemental appropriation was for $5,77,923, and reviewed what funds were affected and why. He then answered questions from Council. A motion to approve the ordinance on first reading was made by Merv Lapin, and seconded by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7--a. Council then proceeded with the appointment of two members to the Planning and Environmental Commission. Mike Cacioppo stated his opposition to the secret ballot vote, and read some paragraphs from the Charter. Mayor Rose responded with his interpretation. Connie Knight and Jim Shearer were chosen as the new PEC members. There was then some discussion regarding the proper procedure by Council to appointments for boards and commissions. Robert Levine made a motion to appoint Connie and Jim to the PEC, which was seconded by Tom Steinberg. After more discussion, a vote was taken and the motion passed 5-2, with Merv Lapin and Lynn Fritzlen opposed. Merv and Lynn wanted to wait for a legal opinion from Larry Eskwith. . Ordinance No. 31, Series of 1989, first reading, creating regulations far bed and breakfasts in the Town of Vail, was the next item to be discussed. The full title of the ordinance was read by the Mayor. Peter Patten gave chronological background information and reasoning for the ordinance; afterwards, he answered questions. • At this time, Larry Eskwith arrived. Peggy Osterfoss commented "designated" parking spaces should be included somewhere in the ordinance. Peggy and Jim Gibson suggested adding the word "designated" to 17.8.1, "Off Street Parking." Discussion returned to Section 20, ending with tarry • Eskwith's remark that staff would work an the language for second reading. Robert Levine questioned the date in Section 18, June 12, 1989; Peter Patten stated it was a typographical error, it should be 1990. Mike Cacioppo commented why he was opposed to the ordinance which he felt was overregulation. Peggy Osterfoss remarked the ordinance is the result of two years of work by the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Council, and with much compromise. She though the ordinance was good, with the minor changes in Sections 17 and 18. Jim Lamont agreed it was the result of a lot of hard work, the Council should move forward with it, and gave his thoughts on the ordinance and the progress made to date. He did request Council to ask staff to keep records aver the next two years to build a statistical base for bed and breakfasts. He then made comments on areas he had suggestions for. Kathy Fagan questioned the business license fee for bed and breakfasts, which Robert Levine, Jim Gibson, and Larry Eskwith answered. After much discussion by Council, staff was directed to begin the amendment process for the business license fee ordinance to include bed and breakfasts as home occupancy businesses, once the ordinance has passed. Larry Eskwith then stated it was all-right to delete Section 20 for second reading; it was not needed. Tom Steinberg made a motion at this time to approve the ordinance with Sections 17 and 18 amended and Section 20 deleted. Peggy Osterfoss seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-D. A sign variance request and an appeal of a Design Review Board decision for the • Finishing Touch Furniture Showroom, located in the Inn at Vail, was the next item. Mike Mo11ica gave background information regarding the sign variance request for ten feet above the allowable height. He reviewed the findings and staff responses, and explained why staff recommended denial. Mike noted the Design Review Board, on November 29, 1989, voted 4-0 for denial of the design of the proposed awning and associated signage. It was clarified the Council was to decide on 1) the height variance of the sign, and 2) the awning and design of the sign. John Dunn, representing Jim Wilson of the Finishing Touch, gave some additional background information on the signage and awning design.. He then proceeded with reasons why he felt the variance and appeal should both be approved. After some discussion by Council, Jim Wilson spoke on his own behalf requesting Council approval. Peggy Osterfoss made a motion to uphold the Design Review Board's recommendation, and to deny the height variance request based on the finding of no physical hardship, and incorporating the findings as noted in the staff memorandum dated November 21, 1989. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Peggy Osterfoss then made a motion to uphold the Design Review Board decision with regard to the design of the awning and sign, that it called undue attention to itself, as noted in the staff memorandum dated November 21, 1989. The motion was seconded by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-1, with Jim Gibson opposing. John Dunn asked that the photographs and drawings he had presented to Council be made a part of the hearing, and they were • marked as Exhibits 1 - 9. There was no Citizen Participation. Mayor Rose informed Larry Eskwith of the Planning and Environmental Commission appointments, and explained the questions raised concerning the secret ballot. Larry stated he believed the Council had acted correctly; as long as the decision is made by motion, it was legal, and the Council had acted pursuant to the Charter. James Johnson stated he appreciated copies Library, and now was proposing the agendas suggested Cauncilmembers adopt a local for to let the public get to know them. There suggestion. It was noted the Transportati inviting locals to its meetings. of the minutes being available at the go out earlier to the paper. He also a day, and go through the day with them, was a short discussion regarding the ~n and Parking Advisory Committee was Lynn Fritzlen commented there were a lot of Council meetings held during regular working hours, and maybe this should be discussed in the future. Merv Lapin added maybe Council should look at raising Councilmembers' pay to help out. Robert Levine encouraged Council to look into some of the things James Johnson had recommended. Jim Gibson remarked he would like to hold Town meetings so the public could speak out on Town issues. Mike Cacioppo stated his irritation over agenda documents not being available before Council meetings. After much discussion by Council, it was decided no changes in the agenda distribution process would be made. -2- ~ .. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, • -P ~,~ J c~77~-- Kent R. Rose, Mayor ` ATTEST: ~~/!?at ,tG l Jff . Pamela A. Brandmeyer~ T~ Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman -3- ~ r' MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 19, 1989 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, December 19, 1989, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor Tom Steinberg, Mayor Pro Tem Lynn Fritzlen Jim Gibson Merv Lapin Peggy Osterfoss Robert Levine Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first order of business was Ordinance No. 31, Series of 1989, second reading, an ordinance amending sections of Chapter 18 of the Vail Municipal Code and repealing and re-enacting Section 18.58.310, Short Term Rental Accommodation Unit of the • Municipal Code to provide for bed and breakfast operations under certain provisions and circumstances and to define bed and breakfast and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Rose read the title in full. Peter Patten noted changes requested at first reading had been made and recommended approval of the ordinance with those changes. Kay Chaney asked questions of the Town staff regarding the distinction between short term rentals and bed and breakfasts and business license fees charged for each. She was referred to staff for discussion of this issue following passage of this ordinance in that her question related to business license fees, not the ordinance in question. Peggy Osterfoss moved to approve Ordinance No. 31 on second reading. Merv Lapin seconded that motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. The second order of business was Ordinance No. 32, Series of 1989, second reading, an ordinance making supplemental appropriations from the Town of Vail general fund, Booth Creek local improvement district fund, Communities for Drug-Free Eagle Valley fund, special parking assessment fund, Vail marketing fund, Linnshead Mall assessment district fund, and the real estate transfer tax fund, of the 1989 budget and the financial plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado; and authorizing the expenditures of said appropriations as set forth herein. Mayor Rose read the title in full. Questions were asked by Merv Lapin in regard to~the increase in the Vail marketing fund to $37,707, and also in the amount designated for the Communities for . Drug-Free Eagle Valley fund to $11,500. Charlie Wick responded. Following this, Merv Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 32 on second reading, with the changes as noted by Charlie Wick, and Tom Steinberg seconded that motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. Item number three on the agenda was Resolution No. 63, Series of 1989, a resolution appointing a Municipal Court Judge for a term of two years. Merv Lapin moved to approve Resolution No. 63, Series of 1989, appointing Buck Allen as the Town of Vail Municipal Judge for a two year term, and Tom Steinberg seconded that motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. Item four on the agenda was Resolution No. 64, Series of 1989, a resolution approving a contract for the purchase of Lot 1, Block 6, Vail Intermountain subdivision; and setting forth details in regard thereto. It was noted by Larry Eskwith and Ron Phillips that currently soil samples are being taken to determine whether chlorine will be found in the soil, and additionally, an inspection of the roof insulation was completed and it was found to be cellulose. However, Larry noted that a contract would not be signed until the outcome of the chlorine research was completed. At this point, Lynn Fritzlen moved to approve Resolution No. 64, and Merv Lapin seconded that motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. • The fifth item for consideration was Resolution No. G5, Series of 1989, a resolution approving an assignment of a purchase contract for the purchase of Berry Creek 5th Filing; and setting forth details in regard thereto. After discussion, it was decided to call a special meeting according to Charter provisions to allow for the special meeting on Tuesday, December 25, 19$9, ai: 3:00 p.m., this meeting to be held in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. In the notice to the public, the only items to be considered will have to do with the Berry Creek 5th Filing and the Miller Ranch. Larry was instructed to prepare a summary of the • purchase contract in layman's terms and to have this available for the special meeting. Tom Steinberg moved to continue Resolution No. 65 to that special meeting on December 26, and Merv Lapin seconded this oration. R vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. Item ~fn. 6 on the agenda, action on a Vail Metropolitan Recreation District tennis court ground lease, was withdrawn to be heard at the first meeting in January, January 2, 1990. Under Citizen Participation, Ran Phillips mentioned that Sheika Gramshammer had requested he speak to the Council an her behalf in support of a gala dinner that she will be sponsoring for Betty Ford. At the dinner, a Betty Ford award wi11 be given and all proceeds from this dinner wi11 go to the Betty Ford Center. A gold table, which is the table she is hoping the Town Council will sponsor, will cost $7,500. The Council requested that Sheika appear at one of their first meetings in January to discuss this event in detail. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~~~ Kent Rose, Mayor ` ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Pamela Brandmeyer • -2- MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING DECEMBER 25, 1989 3:00 P.M. A special meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, December 26, 1989, at 3:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor Tom Steinberg, Mayor Pro Tem Jim Gibson Merv Lapin MEMBERS ABSENT: TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Lynn Fritzlen Robert Levine Peggy gsterfoss Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Before items on the agenda were discussed, Ron Phillips reviewed the history of the project for land far recreational and employee housing plans. He gave chronological background information up to date. He then gave a summation of the negotiations over the last several months up to now. At this time, Larry Eskwith asked for a few minutes to speak to Nola Dyal of Vail Associates, Inc. Merv Lapin commented he appreciated the sign that was put up stating the Village parking structure was full, but still felt there should be a sign directing people to Lianshead parking structure. Ron Phillips stated it would be taken care of. There was then some discussion regarding the number of bus drivers and the possibility of extended hours of service. It was learned it would not be possible at this time, as the bus department was down several drivers. Council recessed for a few minutes. When the meeting reconvened, Larry Eskwith introduced Jim Kurtz-Phelan, of Berenbaum and Weinshienk, who was helping the Town with the due diligence for the purchase of the Berry Creek bth Filing property. Larry then noted some conditions included in the assignment which Uail Associates wanted removed, but they agreed the contract would not be signed until the conditions were met. Larry reviewed the conditions, their ramifications, and potential risks to the Town. There: was some discussion by Council, and Larry answered questions. Larry stated the C'oun~il could not approve . financing at this paint, as there was na final draft of the promissory note done. He stated there would have to be another special meeting and recommended Friday, December 29, 1989. He then went over the conditions that needed to be met. After some discussion and questions by Council, Larry then reviewed the conditions the Town would be required to do after the purchase. There was some discussion regarding rezoning the property for employee housing. Jim Kurtz-Phelan answered questions of Council regarding the due diligence and development costs. Larry commented the intergovernmental agreement between the Town of Avon, Eagle County, and the Town of Vail was being worked on, but was not completed yet. There was some discussion by Council regarding a special meeting for Friday and the possibility of no quorum; Merv Lapin was the only one who would have a problem attending. Mayor Rase stated he understood the risks the Council should be aware of, but saw no problem going forward. Larry stated there was no risk putting off the items on the agenda for vote until Friday; the Council would have to wait to vote on the financing until Friday anyway. There was then some discussion regarding the Miller property, and the five acres of the June Creek property (Parcel B) which will, supposedly, be given to the Town of Vail because of access problems. At this time, Ron Phillips suggested the Council act on the assignment without the three conditions - 1) the boundary dispute, 2} the Eagle Association deed of trust, and 3) the right of first refusal. He suggested they approve the assignment with these things: Items C, D, and F on page 2 of the assignment be deleted, and add the condition that we obtain a satisfactory opinion from our special water counsel, Dave • Robbins, that there is sufficient irrigation rights to develop the property as we intend to do. Larry Eskwith stated the conditions would have to be satisfied before the Council could executed the assignment, and he would tell Council Friday if the ,. conditions had been satisfied. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the assignment of the contract between George Gillett and the Town of Vail, without conditions G, D, and F on page 2 of the assignment, but add the condition that approval was subject to obtaining satisfactory opinion from our water attorney, Dave Robbins, that there are sufficient irrigation rights to develop the property as we intend to do, and that the conditions deleted must be met, but would not be a part of the contract, before the contract is signed. Jim Gibson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 4-0. Mayor Rose announced there would be a special meeting of Council Friday, December 29, 1989, 3:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, considering the resolutions and financing ordinance for the purchase of Berry Creek 5th Filing: At this time, Jim Gibson remarked the people involved in this should be commended - Jim Stovall, Jerry Davis, John Slevin, Ron Phillips, Larry Eskwith, Don Welch, and Jim Fritze -for their outstanding effort. Larry added that John Slevin had done an incredible effort in the negotiations. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, '~ ~G'7.-~_ r Kent fit. Rase, Mayor ` i ATTEST: ~, ~'~ttf~N~.s~f.u.~`-J Pamela A,.Srandmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman • -2- ~. tawo 75 south frpntage road gall, Colorado 81 B57 {303) 479-2138 PUBLIC NOTICE To be published in THE VAIL TRAIL Friday, December 22, 1989. PUBLIC NOTICE TS HEREBY GIVEN that the Town Council of the Town of Vaii will hold a Special Meeting to be held on Tuesday, December 26, 1989, at 3:QQ P.M., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, 75 South Frontage Road West, Vail, Colorado. To be considered at this Special Meeting are the following items: 1. Resolution No. 65, Series aE 1989, a resolution approving an assignment of a purchase contract for the purchase of Berry Creek 5th Filing; and setting forth details in regard thereto. 2. Ordinance No. 33, Series of 1989, an ordinance approving financing for the purchase of Berry Creek 5th Filing and the Miller Ranch Parcel; and setting forth details in regard thereto. 3. Resolution No. 66, Series of 7.989, a resolution approving financing for the purchase of Berry Creek 5th Filing and the Miller Ranch Parcel; and setting forth details in regard thereto. 4. Resolution No. 67, Series of 1989, a resolution approving the Agreement for the Miller Ranch Purchase Contract; and setting forth details in regard thereto. 5. Resolution No. 68, Series of 3.989., a resolution approving an Intergovernmental. Agreement between the Town of Avon, Eagle County,. and the Town of Vail, outlining issues such as future public use and financing contingencies for the Berry Creek 5th Filing and the Miller Ranch; and setting Earth details in regard thereto. All members of the public are invited to attend and be heard. TOWN OF VATL Pamela A. Brandmeyer Town Clerk ~ ~ m ~ X30 oy_. b ~ ci Q. _ o t~ x ~~~ cp~~~o ~. ~6 ma'~~a:~~mm m _~ B ~ a ~` ~ ~,. oy~ _ oo ~' ~ Q y 7 ~ ~ ~~ ~ -n 7 cD w . ~ Ll C Q ~~ ~ p' H 0 @ ~ ~ p ~ Q~~p?~~~~ -+n~__D o ~ ~ ~ -~' ~i °Q~ ~oo~r Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ g ~~o a~4 N o ~ ~' c~ ~~ ~ ~~'~~ \ ~. ~ o ~ Q ~ ~~o~oo~o~ Q~ ~ ~ n ~ ro ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~ ~~ ? -~« cu - ^ y (tx~~ /~~~~104 ~ l ~O fO~ Q Q ~ ~ ~ o~ j~~~ Q~ ~~ , 3' ~ ., .~ 1.. _ ~~ ~'. .~ r O O O r ~ O f7l r Z , ,fin 3C 0 m Q "'~1 Z MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING DECEMBER 29, 1989 3:00 P.M. A special meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Friday, December 29, 1989, at 3:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor Lynn Fritzlen Jim Gibson Merv Lapin Peggy Osterfoss MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom Steinberg, Mayor Pro Tem Robert Levine TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Merv Lapin was not present at the time the meeting began. Mayor Rose asked that before discussing the resolutions and ordinance on the agenda, he would like general discussion with Ron Phillips and Larry Eskwith concerning the . land purchase. Ron Phillips stated there had been same question of the inclusion of Parcel B, and the question of right of first refusal conveyed to the Town of Vail at the time of closing; the Town would give an access easement to June Creek Ranch if they would give the others. Steve Barwick spoke about the general terms of the note from First6ank of Vail for two million dollars. He then discussed short-term financing. Larry Eskwith commented he felt things were in reasonably good shape. He then went through the key issues that still existed: 1} the potential dispute over the overlapping boundaries with the Miller Ranch, and 2) the problems with the Parcel 3 deed of trust, because there was no promissory note. There was some discussion by Council regarding the possible dispute on both items. Larry then reviewed the water rights, stating they were not terrific, only adequate, because they were junior water rights only. At this time, Merv Lapin arrived. Larry reviewed the acre feet of water available and needed. He stated it may be necessary, if the Council decided to go forward, that they would have to purchase additional water rights, for the possible cost of $100,000, to insure we would have all the water we needed. There was some discussion of then. .worst an.d.mos likely case scenarios, and more discussion regarding the water issue:--Larry°~t~ated the . environmental hazard assessment, done by Woodward-Clyde, was resolved to his satisfaction. He also noted there were numerous easements on the property, all utilities easements. He stated they had such old, bad legal descriptions that a surveyor could not locate them. Larry added this could cause problems, but mast likely, not. He then stated the Town had received a letter of commitment from FirstBank for $2 million. Larry stated at this time he would like to go into Executive Session with Council to review passible litigation problems regarding the property. After he answered questions of Council, it was moved to enter into Executive Session for a few minutes. When the meeting reconvened, Larry discussed the revised assignment Council had just received today, and explained the changes from the original assignment document. He then reviewed the restrictions to the Town under the assignment. Larry also noted the intergovernmental agreement had not been executed yet by all the parties. He then explained both resolutions and the ordinance, what they were for and what they would do. The first item on the agenda was Resolution No. 65, Series of 1989, approving an assignment of a purchase contract for the purchase of Berry Creek 5th Filing. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the resolution, which Jim Gibson seconded. Peggy Osterfoss noted the Council was acting on this because it was important to have a large piece of property secured for use for employee housing. Larry requested Merv ~~ add to the motion: On the condition a clause be added to the assignment, if George Gillett fails to exercise his right within six months, the Town of Vail can sell to anyone. Merv amended his motion, and Jim amended the second. Diana Donovan felt there was some land in the Town appropriate for the Town of Vail, and felt the County should be doing this, not the Town. Jahn Slevin noted there were no real estate transfer tax funds used to buy this property, so those are still available for use. Hermann Staufer felt the Council should be concerned with Vail, not the county and down valley. He felt the Council was gambling with the Town's funds; he would be willing to buy one or two employee housing units as he felt others would, too, but not to share with the county; the Council was not a bank or savings and loan; he felt we could solve our problem internally. Don Welch stated if the county election fails, the Town could sell to George Gillett or someone else, there was no risk. There was some discussion by Council regarding these concerns. Dal tan Williams questioned what would happen if the vote failed and George Gillett did not buy the property back; what was the worst case scenario, to which Merv Lapin responded. Al Weiss commented the publicity for this public hearing had been poor and should have been held at night. He also felt the land was too far away for the Town's use, and the lack of enough water was important. He felt the purchase of the Berry Creek property was not a vital issue. Lynn Fritzlen, Merv Lapin, and Mayor Rose responded to Al's concerns. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-O. The second item was Ordinance No. 33, Series of 1989, emergency reading, an emergency ordinance approving short-term financing for the purchase of Berry Creek 5th Filing. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the emergency ordinance, which Jim Gibson seconded. Larry Eskwith asked that a condition be included in the motion, is to not sign the commitment letter until the assignment is executed. Merv amended his motion, and Jim amended the second. Al Weiss stated he felt the proposed ordinance was illegal and in violation of the Charter, as it did not fall under an emergency. Larry responded this was not an appropriation, but was for borrowing • money, and it was impossible to do two readings before the closing January 5, 1990. After some discussion by Council, a vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-0. Since the intergovernmental agreement had not yet been signed by all parties, Resolution No. 6$, Series of 1989, was postponed. The last item was Resolution No. 69, Series of 1989, establishing a tax anticipation note fund ("TAN fund") of the Town. Larry Eskwith stated this would establish a tax anticipation note fund required to make the tax anticipation note proper. Steve Barwick answered questions of Council and explained what the fund would do. A motion to approve the resolution was made by Merv Lapin and seconded by Jim Gibson. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-0. At this time, Larry Eskwith requested the Council make a general motion waiving any defects in the public notice given to the public. Merv Lapin made a motion to waive any defects given in the public notice presented to the public and ratify as presented. Jim Gibson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-O. - There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~ \1C~~ Kent Rose, Mayor " ATTEST: ~---- ~~~• ~~ €~amela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman y -~- lowo of nail 75 south frontage road vail, oolorado 81657 (303) 479-2105 office of town manager P~.~BLIC NOTICE PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Town Council of the Town of Vail will hold a Special Meeting to be held on Friday, Qecember 29, 7.989, at 3:00 P.M., in the Council Chambers of the hail Municipal Building, 75 South Frontage Raad West, Vail, Colorado. To be considered at this Special Meeting are the following items: 1. Resolution No. 65, Series of 1989, a resolution approving an assignment of a purchase contract for the purchase of Berry Creek 5th Filing; and setting forth details in regard thereto. 2. Ordinance No. 33, Series of 1989, an emergency ordinance approving financing for the purchase of Berry Creek 5th Filing; and setting forth details in regard thereto. 3. Resolution No. 68, Series of 1.989, a resolution approving an Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Avon, Eagle County, and the Town of Vail, outlining issues such as future public use and financing contingencies for the .Berry Creek 5th Filing and the Miller Ranch; and setting forth details in regard thereto. All members of the public are invited to attend and be heard. TOWN OF VAIL Pamela A. Brandmeyer 'town Clerk