Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-02-07 Town Council Minutes• Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 7, 2006 6:00 P.M. Vail Town Council Chambers The regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was called to order at approximately 6:00 P.M. by Mayor Rod Slifer. Members present: Rod Slifer, Mayor Farrow Hitt, Mayor Pro-Tem Kent Logan Greg Moffet Kim Ruotolo Mark Gordon Kevin Foley Staff Members: Stan Zemler, Town Manager Matt Mire, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Asst. Town Manager The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Rob Levine, general manager of • the Antlers Lodge, spoke in support of utilizing the conference center proceeds to maintain year-round economic viability. Mark Gordon introduced a moment of silence in remembrance of Coretta Scott King. The second item on the agenda was the Introduction of Mt. Buller Guests. Vail Valley Exchange Board Member Rick Sackbauer thanked the town for its financial support of the program and introduced visiting skiers from Mt. Buller, Australia, one of Vail's sister cities. Instructor/chaperone Geoff Walker introduced the visiting secondary students and thanked all involved with the Vail Valley Exchange for their generosity. The third item on the agenda was the Consent Agenda. a. Approval of 01.03.06 & 01.17.06 Minutes. b. Sculpture for Bighorn Park. ❖ Vote to approve $35,000 AIPP expenditure for the "Community Stone" sculpture. Moffet moved to approve the consent agenda with Ruotolo seconding. Foley stated he would be casting a no vote as he did not agree with funding any park improvements until a public park was developed in the LionsHead area. The motion passed 6-1, Foley opposed. The fourth item on the agenda was an appeal of the Town of Vail Design Review • Board's (DRB) approval of a separation request application pursuant to Section. 12-3-3, Appeals, Vail Town Code, of the Town of Vail DRB's approval of a separation request 14 • application, pursuant to Chapter 14-10, Design Review Standards and Guidelines, Vail Town Code, to allow for the physical separation of a primary and secondary residence, located at 95 Forest Road/Lot 32, Block 7, Vail Village Filing 1. Planner Bill Gibson reported that on December 21, 2005, the DRB approved a separation request application, pursuant to Chapter 14-10, Design Review Standards and Guidelines, Vail Town Code, to allow for the physical separation of a primary and secondary residence, located at 95 Forest Road/Lot 32, Block 7, Vail Village Filing 1. The Vail Town Council "called -up" this DRB action. Additionally, H.R. and Margaret B. Perot, Susan R. Frampton, and Forest International, LLC had also filed an appeal of the DRB action. Representing the appellants, Jim Wear argued a separated duplex represented two separate primary residences as opposed to one single family residence and a small caretaker unit. Harry Frampton questioned setting the precedent of allowing two separate houses to be built on a single family lot. Attorney Rob Sperberg argued the proposed homes would maintain the character of the neighborhood and would not be an "eyesore" to adjacent property owners. Project architect Mike Suman argued a split development was the most environmentally sensitive way to redevelop the property. DRB Chairman Margaret Rogers clarified the DRB's position, explaining its decision was based on physical impediments to development on the parcel. Estaquio Cortina spoke in support of the appellants. Moffet stated he believed the DRB made the right decision as the site is constrained. Moffet moved to uphold the DRB determination with Ruotolo seconding. Gordon clarified separations are rarely approved. Logan and Foley stated they did not believe a separation met the spirit and intent of primary/secondary residential zoning. Slifer verbally recognized he could be fair and impartial in a decision on the appeal, and thus he had no conflict of interest as to voting. Town Attorney Matt Mire asked Slifer to make this statement for the record as he was a business partner • with Harry Frampton, one of the appellants. The motion passed 4-3, with Slifer, Logan and Foley opposed. The fifth item on the agenda was a review of recommendations for minor modifications of the Parking Task Force for the remainder of the 2005-2006 season. In introducing the item, Public Works Director Greg Hall said the Parking Task Force was established to provide direction to Council regarding parking operation policies. In addition to other meetings during the summer, the task force meets annually after the Martin Luther King holiday to evaluate the results of operational changes implemented, review trends and determine if any significant changes need to be addressed and to recommend tweaks to the operating policies if needed. As a result of the meeting, the Parking Task Force recommended the following changes to the parking policies for the remainder of the 2005-2006 season. a. The number of shopper parking spaces be reduced in the Village from 60 to 40 and the number of shopper spaces in LionsHead be reduced from 30 to 20. The pricing structure implemented for the shopper parking created greater turnover of the spaces and decreased the number of spaces required to meet the demand. b. That vehicles over 19'-0 be restricted from the Village value lot. The value lot was designed with less than adequate dimensions when it was built in 1990. Limiting the size to 19' will accommodate almost 98% of all personal vehicles. The vehicles which exceed this dimension are the largest of the 15 passenger vans and the oversized pickup trucks with crew cabs and full beds. • Hitt moved to approve the modifications with Moffet seconding. The motion passed 4. • unanimously, 7-0. The sixth item on the agenda was a discussion and direction from Council on pursuing a joint Vail Recreation District (VRD) and Town of Vail (TOV) Comprehensive Recreation Master Plan. On January 10, the VRD approved an expenditure of up to $30,000 to jointly fund with the TOV a comprehensive recreation master plan. If Council wished to move in this direction, a supplemental appropriation from RETT of $30,000 was suggested by staff. Zemler stated he believed it was a good time for collaboration to set a path for recreational opportunities over the next ten to 15 years. Logan and Gordon said they did not believe the opportunity could have happened at a better time. Logan moved to approve with Gordon seconding. The motion passed unanimously, 7-0. The seventh item on the agenda was a discussion of framework for the process involving disbursement of Conference Center tax collections. Stan Zemler asked Council to discuss initial review criteria and provide ideas for a citizen outreach process to be used to create community consensus regarding the various options available. In November 2005, Vail's electorate defeated an increase in the lodging tax to supplement taxes approved in 2002 to build and operate a conference center. The ballot question also contained a provision to rescind the 2002 taxes if the issue failed. Therefore, on December 20, 2005, Council approved second reading of Ordinance No. 27, Series of 2005, which rescinded the 2002 taxes, a half -cent sales tax and 1.5 percent lodging tax, effective January 1, 2006. The remaining action required to bring closure to the issue is to determine a refund methodology for disbursement of the remaining $7.7 million in conference center funds or prepare a ballot question to determine how such revenues shall be used. Hitt and Ruotolo questioned utilizing the funds for recreational amenities, • as the tax was intended to provide year-round economic vitality. Moffet moved to direct staff to not pursue determining how to refund the tax collections with Ruotolo seconding. The motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Moffet then moved to direct staff to pursue methods to increase hotel occupancy with Ruotolo seconding. The motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Bill Jewitt said he believed the individuals who paid the tax should be refunded. He then encouraged Council to not pursue using the fund for additional marketing efforts. The eighth item on the agenda was the first reading of Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2006. Text amendment (Commercial Service Center/CSC Zone District) for Crossroads. Senior Planner Warren Campbell introduced First Reading of Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2006, an ordinance amending Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to amend the Commercial Service Center (CSC) District to add "bowling alley" as a conditional use to the District and to add a definition of a "bowling alley" to the Vail Town Code. On January 23, 2006, the PEC* voted 7-0-0 to forward a recommendation of approval for a proposed text amendment to the Commercial Service Center (CSC) District to add "bowling alley" as a conditional use and to add a definition for a "bowling alley" to the Vail Town Code. The Community Development Department recommended Council approve Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2006, on first reading. Moffet moved to approve the ordinance on first reading with Hitt seconding. The motion passed unanimously, 7-0. The ninth item on the agenda was the First Reading of Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2006, an ordinance establishing Special Development District (SDD) No. 39, Crossroads. Campbell reported that on January 23, 2006, the PEC held a public hearing on a request isto establish SDD No. 39, Crossroads. The purpose of the new SDD is to facilitate the redevelopment of Crossroads, located at 141 and 143 Meadow Drive. Upon review of u the request, the PEC voted 5-2-0 (Viele and Lamb opposed) to forward a Srecommendation of approval of the request to establish SDD No. 39, Crossroads, to Council. The Community Development Department recommended Council approve Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2006, on first reading. George Knox, Robert Aikens, Kel Purcell, Paul Ferzacca, Kaye Ferry, Ron Byrne, Kay Graybill, Peter Cook, Stan Cope, Johannes Faessler, Gina Gnsafi, John Reimers and Nathan Nottingham spoke in support of the project. Gwen Scalpello, Judy Gold, Anne Reilly Bishop (representing the Village Plaza Homeowner's Association), Mery Lapin, Cathie Douglas, Bill Rey, Ernie Sheller, Jonathon Staufer and Wendy LoSasso spoke against the project. Gwen Scalpello encouraged Council to pay detailed attention to traffic issues if the project were to be approved. Representing the Vail Village Homeowners Association, Jim Lamont stated his board had not taken a formal position, although several questions remained in need of answers. Rick Scalpello encouraged Council to view the past regular election results as a litmus test for community approval of the project. Moffet moved to approve the ordinance but stipulated the second reading should not occur until an acceptable Developer Improvement Agreement (DIA) was reached, with Gordon seconding. Hitt encouraged on -site employee housing and questioned the availability and operational details of the on -site parking as he believed a need exists for more public parking in town. Moffet asked that parking guidelines be included in the DIA. Developer representative Dominic Mauriello explained the parking spaces would be leased and the applicant would encourage public accessibility. Foley questioned increased floor plates (taller ceilings) and the employee housing requirement for the project. Ruotolo encouraged the employee housing be placed on -site. Gordon spoke in support of the project, although expressed concern over the loss of 8150, "Vail's only true live music venue." Logan stated the project utterly disregards the underlying zoning. He then Scongratulated project developer Peter Knobel for putting himself in such an advantageous negotiating position. "This community is not getting quid -pro -quo for the value of the upzoning." Slifer asked that a true visual representation of the project be provided to demonstrate how high the building would be. "If he doesn't want to build one, it may mean he is thinking the same thing." Mire clarified the Developer Improvement Agreement is separate from the ordinance. The motion passed 4-3, Slifer, Logan and Foley opposed. The tenth item on the agenda was the Second reading of Ordinance No. 1, Series of 2006 — an ordinance vacating a certain part of the system of Public Ways of the Town of Vail, Colorado, i.e., a parcel of land located within chute road right-of-way, Lot P-3, Vail Village Fifth Filing, Town of Vail, County of Eagle, State of Colorado as recorded March 17, 2004, at Reception Number 871030 at the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder. Mire explained the town received this portion of right-of-way with the creation of the Founders Garage plat from Vail Resorts. The western portion was then to be deeded to the Mill Creek condominium association. The streetscape design for the Mill Creek Court property has been finished and the cost sharing agreement is completed. It is now known how much of the western portion of the property can be vacated. Moffet moved to approve with Ruotolo seconding. The motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Hitt was not present. The eleventh item on the agenda was the Second reading of Ordinance No. 2, Series of 2006, an ordinance amending Chapter 4, Districts Established, Section 12-4-1, Designated, Vail Town Code, to allow for the establishment of the Public • Accommodation — 2 (PA-2) District. Chief Planner George Ruther reported on January 9, 2006, the Town of Vail PEC voted 6-0-0 (Gunion absent) to forward a 4 • recommendation of approval for a proposed text amendment to the Vail Town Code. On January 17, 2006, Council approved Ordinance No. 2, Series of 2006 upon first reading. The only requested change to the ordinance is a typographical error. The Community Development Department recommended Council approve Ordinance No. 2, Series of 2006, on second reading. Wendy Erb expressed concern approval of the ordinance would allow development to overwhelm the surrounding neighborhood. Moffet moved with Logan seconding. Ruotolo clarified use by right allowed for a building 48 feet tall on the property. Kaye Ferry expressed concern that the introduction of kitchens on the property would encourage long term use of a public accommodation unit. Representing the Vail Village Homeowners Association, Jim Lamont stated the town needed to look more closely at its development standards. Anne Reilly Bishop asked Council deny the ordinance and revisit the rezoning rules as the project may affect the quaintness of her neighborhood. "I am fearful we are changing the quality of life here." Greg Beamis questioned the size of the project. "The size and scale of this is out of proportion for our neighborhood." Mary Nevar said Council should use more discretion before approving the ordinance. Phyllis Nixon stated the scale of the project was too large. Gwen Scalpello said the proposed zoning should also contemplate potential parking shortages it may cause. Diana Donovan stated Council should better inform concerned citizens about town processes. She also said she believed height measurements have been modified by the town without the public's knowledge. "It is making a huge difference on heights in town." Property developer Kevin Deighan stated adequate notice was provided to surrounding neighborhoods. The motion passed 5-2, Foley and Logan opposed. • The twelfth item on the agenda was the Second reading of Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2006, an ordinance amending the official zoning map for the Town of Vail in accordance with Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Chapter 5, Zoning Map, Rezoning Lots 9-12, Buff her Creek Re -subdivision, from Public Accommodation (PA) district to Public Accommodation- 2 (PA-2) district. On January 9, 2006, the PEC held a public hearing on the request to amend the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail. Upon consideration of the request, the Commission unanimously approved a motion recommending approval of the rezoning request to Council. On January 17, 2006, Council approved Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2006 on first reading. No revisions have been made to the ordinance since first reading. The Community Development Department recommended Council approve Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2006, on second reading. Moffet moved with Ruotolo seconding a motion to approve. During the public comment period, Wendy Erb asked council to reject the ordinance because it would grant the applicant increased size and density opportunities. The motion passed 5-2, Foley and Logan opposed. The thirteenth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. ❖ Peer Resort/Community Trips Update. Staff asked Council to provide further direction on arranging a peer resort trip. ❖ Update on Vail Recreation District (VRD) Repayment of 50% Cost share for 2001 Dobson Door Expansion. Assistant Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer reported on September of 2001, the town's • Chief Building Official notified both the Vail Recreation District (VRD) and the Town of Vail (TOV) that the previous occupancy load for the Dobson at 3,000 had been calculated incorrectly. This mitigation was to cost approximately $100,000 and would provide occupancy up to 1,500. Both boards agreed to this improvement and to jointly fund the improvements, with the town paying the up -front costs and billing the VRD back for its co -share. The total cost came to about $106,000. A balance of $53,068 was first billed to the VRD in February 2002 but no payments were made. Staff met with VRD's new director and finance consultant during the spring of '05 and an agreement was made to proceed with the payment of this balance in a ten year, no interest note (identical to the gymnastics arrangement). The '05 payment has been received. Through additional access improvements, Dobson capacity is now again at 3,000. The fourteenth item on the agenda was Adjournment. Moffet moved with Hitt seconding a motion to adjourn at approximately 10:45 p.m. The motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Rodney E. Slifer, Mayor