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