HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973-11-21 Town Council Minutes0
0
a
MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
TOWN COUNCIL FOR THE TOWN OF VAI L
NOVEMBER 21, 1973
A special meeting of the newly -elected members of the Town Council
for the Town of Vail was convened at 7:40 P.M„ November 21, 1973,
in the Council Room of the Vail Municipal Building.
The following councilmembers were present:
John Dobson
John Donovan
Kathleen Klug
Joseph Langmaid
Josef Staufer
Thomas Steinberg
Gerry White
A lso present were:
Terrell J. Minger, Town Manager
Larry B. Robinson, Town Attorney
The first order of business was the swearing in of the new Town Council
by Mr. Robinson. Councilman Donovan moved that Mr. Dobson be
appointed Mayor and Mr. White be, appointed Mayor Pro-Tem. Council-
man Langmaid seconded; Councilmembers Steinberg, Staufer, Donovan,
Langmaid and Klug voted in favor; there were no votes against; the
motion carried and the appointments were approved.
The Council then convened as the Local Liquor Licensing Authority and
the following licenses were reviewed; Bridgewater Inn, Inc.; K & R
Casino, Inc.; Clock Tower Inn; Cokan Enterprises, Inc.; Holiday Inn
of Vail, Holly Vail, Inc.; La Pinata, Inc.; Left Bank Restaurant; Lodge
at Vail; Manor Vail Condominium Association; Nelson -Fick, Inc.;
Pistachio's; Purcell's; Red Lion Inn, Inc.; Riley Vail Corporation;
St. Moritz Tavern LTD.; Vail Metropolitan Recreation District; Vail
Valley Enterprises, Inc.; Golden Peak Restaurant; Lionshead Terminal
Restaurants; Harvest Table; High Country, Inc; and Toph's Downstairs.
The Town Clerk verified that all Liquor License applications were in
order. Mayor Dobson asked for questions or comments. A list of
violations during 1973 was given to the councilmembers. `Mr:
Langmaid moved to approve all license renewals; Mr. Donovan
seconded; Messrs. Dobson, White, Steinberg, Donovan, Staufer,
Langmaid and Ms. Klug voted in favor; there were no votes against;
the motion carried and the 1974 license renewals were approved.
As there was no further business, the liquor licensing authority
adjourned at 8:05 PM.
The Mayor then expressed his sense of honor and appreciation for
being re -appointed Mayor for the Town of Vail. He then introduced
Mr. Eldon Beck to the audience. Mr. Minger explained that this meeting
would be a continuation of previous meetings on the subject of Bighorn
annexation with the purpose of discussing environmental impact and
restrictions in planning for the area, Mr. Beck then explained the
topographic maps and diagrams which are to be used in the formation of
a land use plan. INSTAAR had supplied Mr. Beck's firm with avalanche
data as a reference for planning buildable land areas. He commented
November 21, 1973
Page 3
Some parts along the roadway are too steep for building. The next step
for planners would be in this area. He suggested small group meetings
in December to discuss this and to continue community dialogue and then
proceed with a Land use diagram. A member of the audience asked how
close .to the covenants Beck would be Likely to stay. Mr. Shapiro asked
Mr. Robinson what the legal view would be if there were a conflict between
the Town of Vail zoning regulations and the ECDC covenants. Mr.
Robinson replied that restrictive covenants would be enforced by civil
action. if zoning were more restrictive than the covenants, then the
covenants could not override. Past violation of restrictive covenants would
not allow License in the future. Undeveloped land outweighs developed land.
Mr. Donovan noted that at some point in the near future a vote will have to
be taken to determine annexation desirability. Mr. Welch, president of
the Vail East Property Owners' Association, urged that the question of
annexation be determined as soon as possible. He commented that the lack
of turnout at this meeting was ;thelack of interest of the property owners
of the area. Messrs. Riley and Shapiro expressed the desirability of
forming small interest groups. A discussion ensued concerning the best
method of getting the•smalt groups together. Mr. Welch commented that
continued dialogue between the Town and the developers would provide many
answers to the questions now,,being asked. A member of the audience stated
that the present covenants should be followed closely so that the home owners
would be reasonably assured of having the land remain in its intended use.
Jay litter requested that those who do not agree with his use plan as a
developer of the land make themselves known to him so that a dialogue
might ensue. The key to the process is knowing the intentions of the de-
velopers, with the crux of the issue revolving around density in certain
areas. A member of the audience commented that since neither the developer
nor the resident is a planner, they could not solve the problems alone since
some areas in Bighorn are not even covered under the protective covenants.
Ms. Carmody asked at what stage the meetings between the Town and the
Bighorn developers were; Mayor Dobson noted that preliminary meetings
had taken place and that Mr. Beck was consulted as a first step. He re-
quested that Mr. Welch set up meetings with home owners and Mr. Riley
set up meetings with developers,
Mr. Beck asked for the Bighorn meetings to be set up in two weeks from
this date over a two-day period. He would request better information from
INSTAAR by that time in order to provide further accuracy in the matter
and the determination of logical land use planning on a -tentative basis. Mr.
Welch expressed his concern over the quality of building development and
materials used. Mr. Beck asked for documented intent of the developers in
relation to the four major categories of land use. When thd," ecessary
information is assembled, meetings can be set up. This information was
requested by November 28, 1973. December 6, 7, 8 or 7 and 8 are tentative
dates for these meetings.
The, Mayor announced that a public hearing would take place on Monday,
November, 26, for the purpose of presenting the L974 Budget for the Town
of Vail to the public.
Since there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
F2 osa he Jeffrey
Town Clerk
November 21, 1973
Page 2
on the interdependence of the entire valley and expressed the opinion ;
that Bighorn represents a unique living experience. Regarding the
legal aspect of the development, he noted that questions would fall into
four categories: (1) density; (2) the role of commercial development;
(3) the retention of open space; O trail systems and transit systems.
The I-,70 will affect the area in sound as well as sight. With regard to
the four, categories, Mr. Beck made the following comments:
(1) Low density would be more favorable than high density,
with the answer to the density question falling between the
two extremes.
(2) A range of minor commercial businesses would be helpful
to the community, There would be no economic feasibility for
a highly commercial enterprise. Physical characteristics
must be considered.
(3) Mr. Beck questioned the desirability of a broad range of
recreational facilities and re-emphasized the fragile character
of the area. The audience was then requested to comment on
the subject. Mr. Ron Riley asked about the validity of the
documentation in the INSTAAR study. Mr. Beck replied that
he has only received notes on the final report, and must await
Further information. Mr. Riley then queried the relationship
between theory and reality in this situation. Mr. Beck was of
the opinion that we must rely on INSTAAR's ability to determine
potential hazards. Mr. Minger commented that these findings
are preliminary and the INSTAAR group would be available to
explain their findings in detail. Hazard potential must be determined
in relation to building in the area. Mr. Minger felt that the
avalanche areas must be viewed to exist as a potentia t hazard and
then evaluated with other characteristics of the area. Mr. Abe
Shapiro asked whether property that is known to be avalanche area
would be allowed to be built on. He inquired as to the provisions
made for property owners who might not be allowed to build.
Mayor Dobson stated that these are all considerations to be dealt
with but that we cannot get answers immediately. A member of
the audience commented that continued wrong usage of land makes
a problem even greater^ and potentially hazardous land should not
be built upon. Mr. Riley asked what kind of living units Mr. Beck
would like to see in Bighorn.. Mr.. Beck replied that the impact
would be bad on a low density area if other parcels of land were
allowed to be high density. A 'final decision can be made by taking
certain areas that show a. dominant pattern'and determine the
particular logic. Definite values must be assigned to various
areas to determine the logic in land use planning. Mr. Welch
stated that an I--70 interchange is planned for Pitkin. He asked
what the planned use would be for the adjacent land. Mr. Beck
stated that the value of the land must be protected in an area such
as this.
The audience was again asked what they would like to see done in Bighorn.
Councilman Steinberg commented that the developers must get together to
use the land for recreational purposes. Mr. Welch Felt that the areas
around the interchange should be kept clear so that the visual impact would
be minimal, and that the geographical location should be assessed so that
any commercial services would service the residents rather than travelers
on the freeway. More than the 50% of the residents of that area are
'absentee' owners. Mr. Beck was asked where he would recommend
40 putting a commercial center, and he replied that from the Interstate east
would be the place to consider but not all the way to the east end.