The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1978-10-03 Town Council MinutesVAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION 3 OCTOBER 1978 -, Item 13: Discussion of conversion of shop space to real estate offices in CCI and CCII. GERSTENBERGER: What happened - the Planning Commission heard a conditional use request in Lionshead to put in a real estate office down there, and it was denied by the Plan- ning Commission by a whopping 2 to 2 vote. We will be hearing another one for the one in the Village - Brandess Real Estate. We messed up. They understand that we screwed up; they have to go through the procedure. If they're turned down, they have to get out. SLIFER: There're going to be others coming - the Alaska Shop... DONOVAN: How about Vail Associates and how about Canada's? Did they go through the process? GERSTENBERGER: Yeah, they did. HOPMAN: After the fact. GERSTENBERGER: Yeah. Well, VA didn't. Canada's did. HOPMAN: Canada's did because when they came to us they were in the shop - when they came before us on the Planning Commission. SLIFER: And was it approved? HOPMAN: It was approved. I remember that particular one. Even . the Lionshead people were so pleased to see that happen because the space was so badly taken care of. They didn't really care what went in there - just to improve the visual impact. I think essentially though there are some definite implications. SLIFER: I think it might be appropriate if the Council has strong feelings one way or another that we tell Allen, and then he can pass our feelings on to the Planning Commission. HOPMAN: Don't we have control of that by conditional use permits? GERSTENBERGER: Yeah, right. They can't.be on the first floor. They have to come in and be considered on a case -by -case basis. Page 2, Town Council work session, 3 October 1978 w SLIFER: But all I'm saying is that if that's a real strong issue with us, and I think everybody agrees, if I understand • you right...I don't want to put words in your mouths... I think you all feel very strongly (and I'm in the business)... DONOVAN: You're a little bit suspect... (laughing). SLIFER: But aren't you all concerned about these two offices...? DONOVAN: Yes, but I'm also concerned about equal treatment. When does one more real estate office, when does a 300 square foot real estate office for Benchmark vs. what VA did vs. what Canada's did... I'm just talking from the Bench- mark side (when the guy rings my ear out). He was told by the Planning Commission members Mills and White who • voted against him that if he was up in the Core they'd have no problem. Well, goddammit, I'd have a problem. I have a problem with the two that are there already, Slifer and Brandess. JAY PETERSON: That's not what they said. DONOVAN: Well, maybe that's not what they said. What did they say? PETERSON: Well, they had a problem with it. DONOVAN: They didn't say anything about Commercial Core I? PETERSON; No, as a matter of fact, I think they said the opposite of that. I think they had a problem with it going into Commercial Core I. HOPMAN: Commercial Core I - where they didn't in Lionshead. DONOVAN: They denied it in Lionshead. PETERSON: They denied both of them, didn't they? PALMATEER: No, they haven't seen the other one. GERSTENBERGER: I don't remember their comment about they had no problem in the Core. They did say - the people who voted against it said we don't think that it's in keep- ing with generating more traffic, and that's what Lions - head needs. And so, therefore, we vote against it. On • Vail Associates, they got it, I think, mainly because they were really a first floor level -- they were ground Page 3 level on one place, and they moved up to be ground level on another. That one I can see. Canada's probably was . bad because they were upstairs then expanded down, and they were granted -under the theory that they expanded. WILTO: They were on the first floor as well? GERSTENBERGER: The theory was that they had expanded so therefore it wasn't as bad as a new use. PALMATEER: The problem is that you don't have a half a dozen different businesses that you can choose from and say, well, I'd like to see this kind of shop there. In the case of Lionshead, I'm not saying the Village - we are using conditional use in the Village, right? But that hasn't been approved for Lionshead, correct? GERSTENBERGER: No, horizontal zoning, PALMATEER: Horizontal zoning, yes. But that space is such a disaster. I'd like to see something else there. But, if that real estate office isn't going to be there, then there aren't five other businesses that want to go in there. HOPMAN: I think you'll win out though, because I don't honestly believe that any space in any principal area in this town is going to set vacant for that long. PALMATEER: That has set there for two years, Scotty... HOPMAN: Yes, but not because of the real estate thing; it's because of the owner of the property. PALMATEER: Yeah, but why isn't there somebody else interested in that space? Why was it a real estate company that came along? PETERSON: Paula, maybe I can clear it up. Number one, it was not storage; it was part of the ski shop. It's been rented by Gondola Ski Shop - they sold the.business to Charlie's Gondola ski Shop. They've taken the space. The landlord now said I'll break off 600 sq. ft., or 400 sq. ft. - used to be 6 - and rent it out. He's had 0 a tremendous interest in the space. I tried to rent it for somebody for an ice cream shop. Page 4 DONOVAN: Who's the landlord? PETERSON: It's Oscar Tang (?) now. 19 HOPMAN: Which is Salloway? PETERSON: No, Salloway's out. SLIFER: I know the issue... DONOVAN: The issue is we don't want real estate... SLIFER: No, no, no. Let's just say offices because there can be other offices. Do we want the conversion of retail space to offices in CCI and CCII? GENERAL: No. SLIFER: That, to me, is where the discussion ought to stop. PALMATEER: But there already is space there. HOPMAN: Well, then let's just say we stop it. SLIFER: Okay, but you say right now do you want more? That's all I'm asking you. Do you want to go backwards? You can't. You've got to go forwards. HOPMAN: I say, from this point forward, my opinion is no. SLIFER: If you want to consider each one, then we'll tell them that. Or if you want to say I don't care about conver- sion, or you want to talk about each conversion, we can tell them that. WILTO: I think our general policy should be that we are not in favor of it. It's that simple. We've always had a few - we've always had Bryon Brown and your office. DONOVAN: Maybe they should be like signs and be phased out too. SLIFER: Maybe they should at some point. DONOVAN: The only people who can afford to pay the rent anymore are the real estate people. SLIFER: Maybe not next year. DONOVAN: That's right, and that's when they become empty again. Discussion turned to Eagle County Planning Commission and having a staff member attend meetings on a regular basis. No further discussion regarding conversion of retail space to office space. /sjm TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 3, 1978 MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Rod Slifer John Donovan Scott Hopman Paula Palmateer Bob Ruder Bill Wilto Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1978, second reading. John Donovan was disturbed that out of the $90,000 budget for cloud seeding for`the State of Colorado', Vail had to put up $16,000 ($8,000 - Vail Associates; $8,000 Town of Vail). Scott Hopman made a motion for approval; seconded by.: Wilto. A 5-1 vote was recorded in favor. Donovan was the opposing vote. Ordinance No. 30, Series of 1978, first readin Allan Gerstenberger gave a description of the proposed ordinance and noted that the Planning Commission had reviewed the ordinance and felt that it was in keeping with the intent of the zoning ordinance. Bill Wilto made a motion for approval; seconded by Bob Ruder. A unanimous vote was recorded. Ordinance No. 31, Series of 1978, first reading. Allan Gerstenberger explained that this was requested by the Coldstream project who wished to amend their Special Development District in order to allow a 65' tower and to permit one parking space in Development District B. According to Gerstenberger, the Planning Commission had reviewed the request and approved it unanimously. Andy Norris, developer, outlined the objectives of the Coldstream project including its amenity package and how these amendments would enhance the project. Jim Morter, architect, gave a brief description of the design details of the project. It was noted that there would be no signage on the proposed tower nor lights. As there was no further discussion, John Donovan made a motion to approve the request with the provision that the "foot -pad" for the tower not exceed 16' square; seconded by Hopman. A unanimous vote was recorded. Resolution No. 24, Series of 1978, expressing appreciation to and dissolving the Housing Task Force. Bill Wilto made a motion for approval; seconded by Hopman. A unanimous vote was recorded. Eagle County Trash Billing System. Slifer noted that the PUC was asked to attend this meeting.. They were unable to send a representative but that there were representatives from the Eagle County Trash. Del Owens, shop owner in Lionshead, read a petition opposing the trash company's billing system. Larry Ast, associate Eagle County Trash, responded to the petition and outlined their costs and needs.after which there was lenghty participation from the audience. No action was taken. Villa Cortina. Allan Gerstenberger explained that the 1st Bank applied for a conditional use permit to add 2,800 square feet to their building which would require that 7.5% of their parking be covered and they have requested a variance from this in order to make their parking exterior. The Planning Commission unanimously recommends approval of the conditional use permit and the parking variance as does the staff. Jay Peterson, representing the 1st Bank, gave a presentation of phe,proposed expansion and stated the 1st Bank's position. Terry Quin, representing the Villa Cortina, explained the Villa's opposition to the variance and proposed expansion which centered around obstruction of view corridors. E Town Council October 3, 1978 Page Two Villa Cortina, Cont. Comments were then entertained from various owners within the Villa Cortina building. It was also noted that in addition to the blocking of view corridors, there were some legal questions to be answered in relation to the joint -ownership and use by the 1st -Bank and Villa Cortina of a small strip of land and the Villa Cortina has since filed a partition action regarding this land. Larry Rider pointed out that there were three questions the Council had to decide on:. 1) conditional use; 2) covered parking variance; and 3) approval of the joint -parking agreement between the Vail Chapel and the Bank. Bill Wilto made a motion to table the issue. This failed due to lack of a second. Bob Ruder made a motion to uphold the Planning Commission's approval of the conditional use permit; seconded by Hopman. A 4-0 vote was recorded. Donovan abstained. Ruder made a motion to uphold the Planning Commission's approval of the parking variance; seconded by Hopman. A 4-0 vote was recorded. Donovan abstained. Ruder. made a motion to approve the joint - parking agreement as outlined by the Planning Commission; seconded by Hopman. The Design Review Board is to submit the 1st Bank's landscaping plans to the Council. A 4-0 vote was recorded. Donovan abstained. Sunbird Lodge. A letter was sent. by the applicant requesting that this matter be tabled until the October 17th. A motion to table was made by Scott Hopman; seconded by Wilto. A unanimous vote was recorded. As there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned. ATTEST: T�r�O�f`�''' Olt��w % a PETITION WHEREAS, Eagle County Trash Removal has changed the basis on which it charges its customers for its service and is currently charging based on an estimate of the cubic volume of trash removed, and WHEREAS, this new basis for computation of charges has resulted in a substantial increase in the total amount charged each customer, and WHEREAS, there does not appear to be any increase in costs which would be sufficient to justify these increased charges, and WHEREAS, the undersigned persons are concerned and affected by the described change, but are without recourse and powerless as individuals to effectively confront this situation, THEREFORE, EACH OF THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY PETITIONS THE TOWN OF VAIL TOWN COUNCIL to investigate and examine the situation involving the services performed by Eagle County Trash Removal and to respond to the situation in whatever ways the Council determines to be for the good and in the best interests of the Town of Vail and its. citizens, business persons and guests. Aug - JUNE SIGNATURE BUSINESS & ADDRESS B'C t BILL WW" A0, z V QIYt CQ K.' 1 C� i 50g, HOA e� i �l a,0a \�,` .�o r PETITION WHEREAS, Eagle County Trash Removal has changed.the basis on which it charges its customers for its service and is currently charging based on an estimate of the cubic volume of trash removed, and WHEREAS, this new basis for computation of charges has resulted in a substantial increase in the total amount charged each customer, and WHEREAS, there does not appear to be any increase in costs which would be sufficient to justify these increased charges, and WHEREAS, the'undersigned persons are concerned and affected by the described change, but are without recourse and powerless as individuals to effectively confront this situation, THEREFORE, EACH OF THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY PETITIONS THE TOWN OF VAIL TOWN COUNCIL to investigate and examine the situation involving the services performed -by Eagle County Trash Removal and to respond to the situation in whatever ways the Council determines to be for the good and in the best interests of the Town of Vail and its citizens, business persons and guests. A4- JUNE SOFT: SIGNATURE BUSINESS & ADDRESS TIE"L BILL Lea 0 PETITION WHEREAS, Eagle County Trash Removal has changed the basis on which it charges its customers for I its service and is currently charging based on an estimate of the cubic volume of trash removed, and WHEREAS, this new basis for computation of charges has resulted in a substantial increase in the total amount charged each customer, and WHEREAS, there does not appear to be any increase in costs which would be sufficient to justify these increased charges, and WHEREAS, the undersigned persons are concerned and affected by the described change, but are without recourse and powerless as individuals to effectively confront this situation, THEREFORE, EACH OF THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY PETITIONS THE TOWN OF VAIL TOWN COUNCIL to investigate and examine the situation involving the services performed by Eagle County Trash Removal and to respond to the situation in whatever ways the Council determines to be for the good and in the best interests of the Town of Vail and its citizens, business persons and guests. JUNE SOPT. SIGNATURE BUSINESS & ADDRESS B—Iff BILL- wq aL (Lo opa R-1. 133) znz U ,A 60,% s i.` PETITION WHEREAS, Eagle County Trash Removal has changed the basis on which it charges its customers for its service and is currently charging based on an estimate of the cubic volume of trash removed, and WHEREAS, this new basis for computation of charges has resulted in a substantial increase in the total amount charged each customer, and WHEREAS, there does not appear to be any increase in costs which would be sufficient to justify these increased charges, and WHEREAS, the undersigned persons are concerned and affected by the described change, but are without recourse and powerless as individuals to effectively confront this situation, THEREFORE, EACH OF THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY PETITIONS THE TOWN OF VAIL TOWN COUNCIL to investigate and examine the situation involving the services performed by Eagle County Trash Removal and to respond to the situation in whatever ways the Council determines to be for the good and in the best interests of.the Town of Vail and its citizens, business persons and guests. JUNE Ste. SIGNATURE BUSINESS & ADDRESS I y BILL no �b.00 ziz.z� U /l J�•--�_� L('c�S mac/ � � � Q // 0 0 WHEREAS, Eagle County Trash Removal has changed the basis on which it charges its customers for its service and is currently charging based on an estimate of the cubic volume of trash removed, and WHEREAS, this new basis for computation of charges has resulted in a substantial increase in the total amount charged each customer, and WHEREAS, there does not appear to be any increase in costs which would be sufficient to justify these increased charges, and WHEREAS, the undersigned persons are concerned and affected by the described change, but are without recourse and powerless as individuals to effectively confront this situation, THEREFORE, EACH OF THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY PETITIONS THE TOWN OF VAIL TOWN COUNCIL to investigate and examine the situation involving the services performed by Eagle County Trash Removal and to respond to the situation in whatever ways the Council determines to be for the good and in the best interests of the Town of Vail and its citizens, business persons and guests. JUNE . BUSINESS & ADDRESS $T�.F BILL 1UI�u,V-��„�ePv� 8 .q0 ✓aiL-/ lia_ M PETITION WHEREAS, Eagle County Trash Removal has changed the basis on which it charges its customers for its service. and is currently charging based on an estimate of the cubic volume of trash removed, and WHEREAS, this new basis for computation of charges has resulted in a substantial increase in the total amount charged each customer, and WHEREAS, there does not appear to be any increase in costs which would be sufficient to justify these increased 4f charges, and WHEREAS, the undersigned persons,are concerned and affected by the described change, but are without.recourse and powerless as individuals to effectively confront this situation, THEREFORE, EACH OF THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY PETITIONS THE TOWN OF VAIL TOWN COUNCIL to investigate and examine the situation involving the services performed by Eagle County Trash Removal and to respond to the situation in whatever ways the Council determines to be for the good and in the best interests of the Town of Vail and its citizens, business persons and guests. A--i JUNE Sf SIGNATURE BUSINESS & ADDRESS B=L $ILL l v Fit, n�515-2� �1 PETITION WHEREAS, Eagle County Trash Removal has changed the basis on which it charges its customers for its service and is currently charging based on an estimate of the cubic volume of trash removed, and WHEREAS, this new basis for computation of charges has resulted in a substantial increase in the total amount charged each customer, and WHEREAS, there does not appear to be any increase in costs which would be sufficient to justify these increased charges, and WHEREAS, the undersigned persons are concerned and affected by the described change, but are without recourse and powerless as individuals to effectively confront this situation, THEREFORE, EACH OF THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY PETITIONS THE TOWN OF VATL TOWN COUNCIL to investigate and examine the situation involving the services performed by Eagle County Trash Removal and to respond to the situation in whatever ways the Council determines to be for the good and in the best interests of the Town of Vail and its citizens, business persons and guests. �w- JUNE . APT . . SIGNATURE BUSINESS & ADDRESS TIME BILL' •''A91t,Jc�tid 2n lax /�,3 Co o2'%ln • 91J /" CA 0 PETITION 1p WHEREAS, Eagle County Trash Removal has changed the basis on which it charges its customers for its service and is currently charging based on an estimate of the cubic volume of trash removed, and WHEREAS, this new basis for computation of charges has resulted in a substantial increase in the total amount charged each customer, and WHEREAS, there does not appear to be any increase in costs which would be sufficient to justify these increased charges, and WHEREAS, the undersigned persons are concerned and affected by the described change, but are without recourse and powerless as individuals to effectively confront this situation, THEREFORE, EACH OF THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY PETITIONS THE TOWN OF VAIL TOWN COUNCIL to investigate and examine the situation involving the services performed by Eagle County Trash Removal and to respond to the situation in whatever ways the Council determines to be for the good and in the best interests of the Town of Vail and its citizens, business persons and guests. JUNE SgFke. SIGNATURE BUSINESS & ADDRESS H I-rL- BILL .is- e2"r� A� � PETITION WHEREAS, Eagle County Trash Removal has changed the basis on which it charges its customers for its service and is currently charging based on an estimate of the cubic volume of trash removed, and WHEREAS, this new basis for computation of charges has resulted in a substantial increase in the total amount charged each customer, and WHEREAS, there does not appear to be any increase in costs which would be sufficient to justify these increased charges, and WHEREAS, the undersigned persons are concerned and affected by the described change, but are without recourse and powerless as individuals to effectively confront this situation, THEREFORE, EACH OF THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY PETITIONS THE TOWN OF VAIL TOWN COUNCIL to investigate and examine the situation involving the services performed by Eagle County Trash Removal and to respond to the situation in whatever ways the Council determines to be for the good and in the best interests of the Town of Vail and its citizens, business persons and guests. SIGNATURE 94jaw-bga 0 BUSINESS & ADDRESS JUNE ! . BITT BILL L1RoOKTRGF /ors? tious7's 4112aax Mj `2yw AGENDA VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING 3 OCTOBER 1978 1 7:30 P.M. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS 1. Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1978, second reading, making a supplemental appropriation from the General Fund for Ski Club Vail, cloud seeding, Lionshead malls, and Bighorn/ Sandstone bus system. 2. Ordinance No. 30, Series of 1978, first reading, amending Title 18 of the Vail Municipal Code with regard to notifi- cation of adjacent property owners. 3. Ordinance No. 31, Series of 1978, first reading, amending Title 18 of the Vail Municipal Code relating to Special Development District 4, Coldstream. 4. Resolution No. 24, Series of 1978, expressing appreciation to and dissolving the Housing Task Force. PRESENTATIONS 5. Discussion regarding Eagle County Trash billing system. 6. Villa Cortina - appeal of Planning Commission approval of conditional use permit and parking variance for First Bank of Vail. 7. Sunbird Lodge appeal of Planning Commission denial of request for variances from allowable units per acre and parking provisions. TOWN MANAGER REPORTS TOWN ATTORNEY REPORTS __9 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION i 10WH of box 100 office of the town manager vail, cotovado 81657 (303) 476-5613 INVOICE TO: • MR. MARK CADMUS BRANDESS-CADMUS REAL ESTATE P.O. BOX 2328 VAIL, COLORADO 81657 Transcribing of work session comments by the Vail Town Council from meeting of October 17, 1978...... 4 hours @ $6.00 per hour ............ $24.00 Please make check payable to: • Sammye Meadows P.O. Box 1465 Vail, Co 81657 Thank you