HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-08-16 Town Council Minutes6
0
I
MINUTES
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 16, 1994
7:30 P.M.
A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, August 16, 1994, in the Council
Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT:
Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor
Mery Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem
Paul Johnston
Sybill Navas
Jim Shearer
Tom Steinberg
Jan Strauch
Bob McLaurin, Town Manager
Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney
Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager
Holly McCutcheon, Town Clerk
The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Thea Rumford, who resides at 675 Forest
Road, expressed her concern about noisy snowcats using Forest Road to access Vail Mountain. Ms.
Rumford referenced a proposed bridge which was slated for the 95-96 ski season as an alternate route
for snowcats, and stated Forest Road residents did not want to be forgotten. Tom Steinberg said he
had toured the site with Vail Associates personnel and discussions were taking place regarding plans
to remedy the situation. Paul Johnston questioned land ownership of the proposed bridge site, Mery
Lapin thought the land was owned by the Town. Mayor Osterfoss stated the issue of land ownership
would be addressed.
Second on the agenda was Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1994, 2nd Reading - Supplemental
Appropriation to Purchase Trapper's Run. Steve Thompson explained the details of the ordinance,
stating the land would be purchased from two funds: the general fund $706,000; and the capital
projects fund, $1.87 million. Mery Lapin moved to approve Ordinance 16, with a second by Tom
Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0.
Item No. 3 was Ordinance No. 17, Series of 1994, 1st Reading, an Ordinance amending Section
18.04.130, Floor Area Gross Residential (GRFA), allowing area within multi -family buildings to be
used for employee housing, Andy Knudtsen referenced a memorandum dated July 25, 1994 to the
PEC, detailing the request from Jay Peterson to amend section 19.57 of the Town Code. Andy
explained the proposed ordinance would amend the definition of GRFA to allow common area to
be converted to Type III and Type IV employee housing units, as conditional uses. Andy and Mike
Moltica continued answering questions pertaining to the details of the ordinance and stated the. PEC
had recommended approval of the ordinance. Jay Peterson explained he felt the ordinance would be
beneficial not only to his project, but to others as well. Council members discussed their positions
with regard to the ordinance, and requested the last line in section B.2,(h) be changed to state that
in cases where housing would be converted back to common area, the Town would require the
employee housing units be replaced within the town of Vail. A motion was made by Sybill Navas
to pass Ordinance No. 17 with changes, Paul Johnston seconded the motion. Tom feared the
ordinance would create the potential to convert convention/meeting space, as well as athletic club
facilities into employee housing units. Mery expressed concern about increased density. A vote was
taken and passed, 5-2, Tom Steinberg and Mery Lapin opposed.
Item No. 4 was Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1994, first reading, an ordinance vacating the utility and
drainage easement on Lot 6, Bighorn Estates, Town of Vail, Colorado. Greg Hall explained the details
of the ordinance and answered questions from Council members. Paul suggested submitting a plat
with first reading. Mery Lapin made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 18 on first reading, and
directed staff to produce an illustration by second reading. Jan Strauch seconded the motion. A vote
was taken and approved unanimously, 7-0.
Item No. 5 was Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1994, first reading, an Ordinance vacating a right of way
and sewer easement, and creating pedestrian and right of way easement, water line easement, public
access, drainage and utility easement by plat. Greg informed Council of the location of the easement
on a plat map and explained the ordinance was in accordance with an SDD for the Lifthouse project.
Paul Johnston moved to approve Ordinance No. 19, with a second from Torn Steinberg. After brief
discussion, a vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0, Mery directed staff to inform Council by
second reading if GRFA would be increased.
Item No. 6 was Ordinance No, 20, Series of 1994, first reading, an Ordinance creating a utility
easement for the Covered Bridge Building. Greg explained the details of the ordinance, and stated
Exhibit A was not included, but would be available for second reading. Jan Strauch moved to
Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minute. OW16/84
approve Ordinance 20, with a second from Paul Johnston. Tom Moorhead pointed out the word
"nonexclusive" in the second paragraph should be changed to "exclusive". A vote was taken and
passed unanimously, 7-0.
Item No. 7 was Resolution No, 19, Series of 1994, a Resolution authorizing the Town Manager to
negotiate a contract to refurbish/reconstruct the Covered Bridge. Greg Hall explained work would
be expected to begin September 19, with a completion date of November 1,1994. Jim Shearer moved
to approve Resolution No. 19, with Jan Strauch seconding the motion. Discussion continued
pertaining to bidding the project vs. negotiating. Bob McLaurin said the town intends to negotiate
a fee for the work through an advertising process rather than bid the project in an effort to produce
a competitive fee. A vote was taken and passed unanimously, 7-0.
Item No. 8 was a DRB Appeal/Gustafson. The applicant, Mr. Dick Gustafson, was appealing the
paved parking condition of approval placed upon his proposed residential exterior alteration and
interior remodel by the Design Review Board (DRB) at the August 3, 1994 meeting. Mr. Gustafson
was represented at the meeting by his architect, Mr. Ken Wentworth. George Ruther, planner on the
project, passed pictures illustrating the property currently, and explained the proposed residential
addition. Kent Wentworth explained his client's situation in detail. Mike Mollica informed Council
that Mr. Gustafson was contesting a staff policy, which was part of the zoning code. Mike suggested
the proper process would be for Mr. Gustafson to ask the PEC for a paving variance or request an
appeal of the staff policy. Paul Johnston suggested the appeal be withdrawn and directed Mr.
Gustafson to proceed with the proper process. Mr. Wentworth agreed, and requested his appeal be
withdrawn, stating he would apply to the PEC to appeal the staff policy. Jim Shearer moved to
approve the withdrawal, with a second by Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and passed, 7-0.
• Item No. 9 was an Information Update. Issues discussed included: color of the stucco on the police
building (Mike Mollica will raise the issue informally with DRB); dismount zone in the Village (will
be discussed at next worksession); Vail Recreation District interested in keeping the library space for
another five years; request from the Vail Valley Foundation to temporarily affix a Mountain Bike
Championship sign over the 89 World Championship sign at main Vail interchange. Mery moved
to staff approve the sign for the Foundation with the condition that it have a nice border. Paul
seconded the motion. A vote was taken and passed, 4-3, Peggy, Sybill, and Tom Steinberg opposed.
Pam informed Council of a request from the organizers of the Crystal Ball for a blue parking pass
this December. Council members agreed to be consistent with deadlines, which have already passed
for 94 funding requests. Other issues discussed included: public use of police building conference and
training rooms and possible public parking in the new lot; encouraging employee carpooling; helipad
status; updated fire study this yeor; Paul asked that notes from the Vail Commons meeting be
amended to reflect a clarification comment made by Bill Wilto. Wilto had stated residents were
promised a West Vail fire station during consolidation of fire districts not during annexation as some
residents had stated at the meeting; conversions of hotel rooms to condos - Bob McLaurin was asked
to follow up.
There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed
unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
ATTEST:
Holt L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk
Na¢m ieken by ftb L McCui h-
IV
Mery La n, Mayor Pro-Tem
Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 08/16/94
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: July 25, 1994
SUBJECT: A request for an amendment to Section 18.57 of the Town of Vail Municipal
Code, Employee Housing, to allow for common area to be used for employee
housing.
Applicant: Jay Peterson
Planner: Andy Knudtsen
.i' .\, ♦,k'"�;.
.Ala. i�, j.,�. ?�.:.
...`h.
BACKGROUND ON THE REQUEST
Jay Peterson, the developer of 44 Willow Place, is proposing changes to the Zoning Code
regarding employee housing units. When his project was originally designed, he included
three employee housing units. He had used all of the GRFA in the project for the three
dwelling units and had proposed using common area for the employee housing units. At the
• time, the Code did not allow this to be done.
The options Jay presented to the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) at the time
of approval included:
1. Delete the employee housing units and turn the area into common storage;
2. Propose an SDD to allow the employee housing units; or,
3. Propose a Code change to allow a certain percentage of allowed common area
in a multi -family building to be used for employee housing units.
The applicant and the PEC agreed that the third option was the best. At this time, Jay has
pursued the third option and is proposing the language listed below.
If. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED CODE CHANGES.
The proposed code changes are shown below in shade and 8verstFike.
18,04.130 Floor area, gross residential (GRFA)'
Gross residential floor area (GRFA) means the total square footage of all levels of a
building, as measured at the inside face of the exterior walls (i.e. not including furring,
sheetrock, plaster and other similar wall finishes). GRFA shall include, but not be limited to,
elevator shafts and stairwells at each level, lofts, fireplaces bay:windovus, mechanical chases,
vents, and storage areas. Attics, crawl spaces and roofed or covered decks, porches,
terraces or patios shall also be included in GRFA, unless they meet the provisions of
subsections A. or B. below.
A. Within buildings containing two or fewer dwelling units, the following areas shall be
excluded from calculation as GRFA:
1. Enclosed garages of up to three hundred square feet per vehicle space not
exceeding a maximum of two spaces for each allowable dwelling unit permitted O
by the zoning code.
2. Attic space with a ceiling height of five feet or less, as measured from the top
side of the structural members of the floor to the underside of the structural
members of the roof directly above. Attic area created by construction of a roof
with truss -type members will be excluded from calculation as GRFA provided
the trusses are spaced no greater than thirty inches apart.
3. Crawl spaces accessible through an opening not greater than twelve square
feet in area, with five feet or less of ceiling height, as measured from the
surface of the earth to the underside of structural floor members of the
floor/ceiling assembly above.
4. Roofed or covered deck, porches, terraces, patios or similar features or spaces
with no more than three exterior.walls and a minimum opening of not less than
twenty-five percent of the lineal perimeter of the area of said deck, porch,
terrace, patio, or similar feature or space provided the opening is contiguous
and fully open from floor to ceiling with an allowance for a railing -of up to three
feet in. height. •
GRFA shall be calculated by measuring the total square footage of a building set forth
in Section 18.104.130 above. Excluded areas as set forth in subsection A, shall then be
deducted from total square footage.
B. Within buildings containing more than two allowable dwellings or accommodation units,
the following additional areas shall be excluded from calculation as GRFA:
Enclosed garages to accommodate on -site parking requirements.
2. All or part of the following spaces, provided such spaces are common spaces
and that the total square footage of all the following spaces shall not exceed
thirty-five percent of the allowable GRFA permitted on the lot.
a. Common hallways, stairways, elevator shafts and airlocks;
b. Common lobby areas;
C. Common enclosed recreation facilities;
d. Common heating, cooling or ventilation systems, solar rock storage
areas, or other mechanical systems. Square footage excluded from
calculation as GRFA shall be the minimum square footage required to
allow for the maintenance and operation of such mechanical systems;
e. Common closet and storage areas, providing access to such areas is
from common hallways only;
f. Meeting and convention facilities;
• g. Office space, provided such space is used exclusively for the
management and operation of on -site facilities.
h. Floor area to be: loyeEe Housing Un t
(EHU) as;defined:and restricted hy,:Chapter 1857,; provided said EHU
floor area ehall not exceed: '6Q°k of the 35`/� common area: allowance
defined by.:Section 1M 4 1:30b.2. above. Any square footage for the.
Type IN orType IV;EHU'S which exceeds the 6f3°!a'm�cimum of ellowed
common area shalt be included rn.the calcUfatiotf of GRFA>:
Any square footage which exceeds the thirty-five percent maximum stiall. be
included in the calculation of GRFA.
3. All or part of an airlock within an accommodation or dwelling unit not exceeding
a maximum of twenty-five square feet, providing such unit has direct access to
the outdoors.
4. Overlapping stairways within an accommodation unit or dwelling unit shall only
be counted at the lowest level.
5. Attic space with a ceiling height of five feet or less, as measured from the top
side of the structural members of the floor to the underside of the structural
members of the roof directly above. Attic areas created by construction of a
roof with truss -type members will be excluded from calculation as GRFA
provided the trusses are spaced no greater than thirty inches apart.
6. Crawl spaces accessible through an opening not greater than twelve square
feet in area, with five feet or less of ceiling height, as measured from the
surface of the earth to the underside of structural floor members of the
floor/ceiling assembly above.
7. Roofed or covered decks, porches, terraces, patios or similar features or
spaces with no more than three exterior walls and a minimum opening of not
less than twenty-five percent of the lineal perimeter of the area of said deck,
porch, terrace, patio, or similar feature or space provided the opening is
contiguous and fully open from floor to ceiling, with an allowance for a railing of
up to three feet in height.
GRFA shall be calculated by measuring the total square footage of a building as set
forth in Section 18.04.130 above. Excluded areas as set forth in subsection B. shall then be
deducted from the total square footage.
(Ord. 15 (1991) §1: Ord. 37 (1990) §1: Ord. 41 (1982) § 1A: Ord. 37(1980) § 1(part).)
"EDITOR'S NOTE: The provisions of this section shall not be effective for any application
for development which has been submitted to the department of
community development, and accepted by the same, on or before July
1, 1991, unless agreed to by the applicant submitting the application •
before July 1, 1991.
III. STAFF ANALYSIS
Staff believes that the proposed changes will be beneficial for providing employee housing.
We believe that there are enough checks and balances within the Zoning Code that this
section will not be used to generate excess mass and bulk or excess units on any particular
site. The common area square footage is already allowed by the Code. This amendment
adds one additional way in which common area may be used. The important points to
understand include the following:
1. The common area can only be used for Type III or Type IV employee housing
units.
2. Type III and Type IV employee housing units are allowed only as conditional
uses. They are allowed in the following zone districts: Residential Cluster, Low
Density Multi -Family, Medium Density Multi -Family, High Density Multi -Family,
Public Accommodation, Commercial Core I, Commercial Core II, Commercial
Core III, Commercial Service Center, Arterial Business District, Public Parking •
District, Public Use District and Ski Base Recreation District.
3. There is no net increase in floor area. The amendment allows for allowed
common area to be used not only for standard common area uses (hallways,
stairways, lobbies, etc.) but also broadens the use to include Type III and Type
IV units. The total allowed common area remains the same.
4. Though the ordinance will allow the use of common area as GRFA, it does not
allow any additional density for dwelling units on -site beyond what is allowed
under the property's zoning.
5. All other zoning standards will be in effect. Standards for height, site coverage,
setbacks, parking, etc. could not be amended without a variance. More
importantly, the applicant will have to provide all parking required for the units
on -site.
6. The concept of the proposed changes is one that staff believes is consistent
with the Town's Employee Housing Ordinance, Land Use Plan, and with the
Town's effort to add to the employee housing supply. Specifically, the following
goals of the Land Use Plan call for the additional supply of Employee Housing:
"5.3 Affordable employee housing should be made available through
private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the
Town of Vail, with appropriate restrictions.
4
5.5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and
upgraded, Additional employee housing needs should be
accommodated at varied sites throughout the community."
Determining the appropriate amount of common area that can be allocated for
employee housing has been difficult for staff to calculate. At this time, staff is
recommending 60%. At the end of this memo, there is a chart showing what
percentage of floor area has been allocated to common area and what area
could be used for employee housing units for a variety of projects in the Town
Staff has shown each project under three different scenarios of common area.
We calculated the allowable square footage of common area for employee
housing units at 60%, 50%, and 30%. Staff believes that the 60% works the
best. We believe that it is important to retain some common area for typical
common area uses, such as lobbies, hallways and front offices. However, we
do not want to limit the amount of employee housing that could be located on -
site as we are trying to encourage units and disperse employee housing
throughout the community. Though the research staff has done does not
clearly indicate that a certain percentage is better than others, we believe that
60% of allowed common area is a reasonable standard as it will allow flexibility,
yet reserve some of the allocated common area for traditional common area
purposes, Please see the chart at the end of the memo.
• Because the numbers can get confusing, staff has provided an example below
to show how the proposed changes could be used in a hypothetical situation.
Lot Size:
1/2 acre or 21,780 square feet
Zone District:
Public Accommodation
GRFA Allowed:
(21,780)(.80) = 17,424 square feet
Units Allowed:
(.5 acre)(25 dwelling units/acre) = 12.5
dwelling units
Common Area Allowed:
(.35)(17,424) = 6,098.4 square feet
Maximum Area Allowed
to be used for EHU's:
(6,098.4)(.60) = 3,659 square feet
Maximum Area Allowed
to be used for standard
Common Area Uses:
6,098.4 - 3,659 = 2,439 square feet
V. CHANGE TO GRFA DEFINITION
One of the other changes that staff is proposing at this time that is unrelated to housing is to
include the phrase "bay windows" in our definition of GRFA. We have counted all bay
windows as GRFA since our definition was changed in 1990. We would like to clarify the
Code so that it references bay windows in the definition. We believe that it will help architects
and developers as they prepare site plans to have the definition be more complete. There will
be no change in the way staff has been enforcing the Code.
A. CONCLUSION
Staff believes that the proposed changes add flexibility to the Zoning Code that will help
provide additional employee housing. We believe that it is a reasonable amount of flexibility
as all other zoning standards will still be in effect and any proposal for a Type III or Type IV •
unit will be reviewed by the PEC as a conditional use. During the staff and PEC review of the
Type III or Type IV unit, staff recommends that applicants be required to explain their current
and future common area needs so that future common area variances are discouraged.
Based on the proposed language and its compliance with Town of Vail planning documents,
staff recommends approval of the requested code changes.
c:', p e c4 m am ma h uj ay.7 25
•
0
Zoning
Allowed
Existing
Allowed GRFA
Allowed Common
Dwelling
Dwelling
(35%)
Units
Units
Sonnenalp
PA
50
90 au
70,532.4 sq. ft.
24,686.3 sq. ft.
Bavaria
or 35%
House
Manor Vail
HDMF
136
123 du
131,938.2 sq. ft.
46,178.4 sq. It.
or 35%
Garden of
SDD
12
15 au
17,594 sq. ft.
6,157.9 sq. ft.
the Gods
6 du
or 35%
The
HDMF
7
28 du
6,258 sq. ft.
2,890.3 sq. ft,
Willows
or 35%
Tivoli
PA
10
46 au
14,165.7 sq. ft.
4,958 sq. I'L
1 du
or 35%
44 Willow
HDMF
7
3 du plus
7,553 sq, ft.
2,643 sq, ft.
Place
3 EHU's
or 35%
CHART A
Existing Difference 60%of Allowed 50%of Allowed
Common common Common
50.523.1 sq. ft. (25,836.8 sq. ft.) 14,811.6 sq. it. 12,343.15 sq. ft.
38,821.9 sq. ft.
7,356.5 sq. ft.
27.707 sq. ft.
23,089.2 sq. ft
5,772 sq. ft.
385.9 sq. ft.
3,694.7 sq. ft.
3,078.9 sq. ft.
1,81E sq. ft.
1,072.3 sq. ft.
1,734 sq. ft.
1,445 sq, ft.
3,052.8 sq. ft.
1,905.2 sq. ft.
2,974.8 sq. ft.
3,924 sq, ft.
1,919 sq. ft. under 724 sq. ft. 1,585 sq. ft. 1,321 sq. ft.
construction.
Includes 474 sq. ft.
of common
mechanical and
proposed £HU's.
7
30%of Allowed Proposed
Common floor area
for EHU's
7,405.9. sq. ft.
13,853.5 sq. ft.
1,847.4 sq. ft.
867.1 sq. ft.
2.354.5 sq. ft.
793 sq. ft. 1,445 sq. ft.
54.6% of
common
area
I • so