Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDAUPHINAIS MOSELEY FILING 1 SDD 22 AMENDMENTl,!?,'!., 4+tl1'0)nq I 6Urftz.bt /-2(t E*lbooi -rnotrLT 'b'h ,lnen/nenf ta 56A-ae G,u^r/ Ttaatcp t <- l, a Planning and Environmental Commission p-ph,:ru;s/Vl!# ACTION FORM DeparEnent of Community Devdopment 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657 tel: 970.479.2L39 faxt 970.479.2452 web: www.ci.vail.co.us Project Name: AMENDMENTTO SDD #22 PEC Number: PE@50056 Prcject Description: AMENDMEIIT TO SDD#22 TO ALLOW FOR GRFA CALCS AND TO RESUBDMDE LOT 5 Participants: owNER JOHNSON,SANKEYA.&CAROLYN0ilOL|Z00' 2310 HUNTINGTON POINT RD W WAYZATA MN 55391 APPUCANTDAUPHINAITPAT OilOtlz0f5Phone:970-476-8055 GRAND TMVERSE H.O.A, P.O. BOX 1515 VAIL, CO 81658 Project Addrcss: 1410 MOMINE DR VAIL Location: 1410 MORAINE DRIVE LegalDescription: LoU 5 Block: Subdivlsion: DAUPHINAIS-MOSELEY FIL 1 Parcel Number: 2103-122-0903-1 Comments: See Conditions BOARD/STAFF ACTION Motion By: Jewitt Action: APPROVED Second By: Lamb Vote: 4-0-0 Dateof Apprcvalt 0912612Q05 Conditions: Cond:8 (PIAN): No changes to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of Vail staff and/or the appropriate review committee(s). Cond: CON0007784 That the applicant not record the proposed plat Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5, Amended Final PlaH Dauphinais-Moseley SuMivision Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6, 7 , 8, 9, and 10, until both readings of an ordinance to amend SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, without GRFA limitations has be adopted by Town Council. If an ordinance to adopt SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, without GRFA limitations is not approved by Town Council that a GRFA limitation on the ne$J Lot 5 and 7 will be 3,157 square feet for each lot and the SDD will be amended and adopted according to Town of Vail Code. Cond: CON0007785 That the applicant revise the tiUe of the plat to state Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5, Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moseley SuMivision Filing 1: to submitting the mylar copies for recording. Planner: Warren Campbell PEC F€e Paid: $1,250.00 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM VailTown Council Community Development Department January 3, 2006 Second reading of Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2005, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance 9, Series of 1998 amending Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Planner: Pat Dauphinais, President of the Grand Traverse H.O.A. Wanen Campbell ll. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, Pat Dauphinais, President of the Grand Traverse H.O.A., is requesting a second reading of Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2005, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance 9, Series of 1998 amending Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, and setting forth delails in regard thereto. The purpose of Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2005, is to remove Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) limitations from the SDD and rely on the remaining development and architectural controls incorporated into the existing SDD and increase the number of lots within the SDD from 22 to 23 lots. The staff and applicant are requesting that the Town Council listen to a presentation on the proposed ordinance and approve Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2005, upon second reading. BACKGROUND On September 26,2005, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on a request to amend Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse. The purpose of the amendment to the Special Development District is to eliminate the Gross Residential Floor Area limitations within the Grand Traverse residential development and an increase in the number of lots from 22 to 23 lots. Upon review of the request, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted 4-0- 0 to fonnard a recommendation of approvral of the request to amend Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, to the Vail Town Council. A copy of the staff memorandum to the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission, dated September 26, 2005, has been attached for reference. On October 18,2005, the Town Council held a work session regarding the applicant's proposal. Discussion of the applicant's proposal centered on how Ordinance 14, Series of 2004, the ordinance amending GRFA affected the lots located within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse. Several members of Council expressed concern over the elimination of GRFA, but agreed with the applicant and the homeowners present at the meeting that some amendment should be enacted in order for Ordinance 14, Series ot 2004, to better apply to lots within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse. Other members of Council were comfortable with the proposal. Staff was directed to compile additional information and the application was tabled to November 15,2005. On November 15, 2005, the Town Council tabled the application without discussion to the December 6, 2005, meeting. On December 6, 2005, the Town Council approved the first reading of Ordinance 25, Series of 2005, by a vote of 5-2-0 (Hitt and Foley opposed). On December 20, 2005, the Town Council tabled the application without discussion to the January 3, 2006, meeting. III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends that the Vail Town Council approves Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2005, on second reading. IV. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Draft of Ordinance 25, Series of 2005 C. Copy of the plat approved by PEC resubdividing Lot 5 within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse D. Table of statistics for SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, prepared by staff N*,on, 6nllr+{# ?,4, An k G* U o-f. : '-)-0 sEgq;d ii$ ! o: ?E9 : F5 :ec ?: !! gF i!E' 3€ :t !: a a- a E c! ll E E Attachment: A ORDINANCE NO.25 Series of 2005 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REENACTING ORDINANCE NO.9, SERIES OF 1998, PROVIDING FOR CHANGES TO SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO.22, GRAND TRAVERSE, THAT CONCERN THE ELIMINATION OF GROSS RESIDENTTAL FLOOR AREA (GRFA) WtTHtN THE D|STR|CT AND THE NUMBER OF LOTS; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO WHEREAS, Chapter 9 of the Vail Town Code authorizes Special Development Districts within the Town; and WHEREAS, The Town Council approved Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1998 Special Development District No.22, Grand Traverse; and WHEREAS, The president of the Grand Traverse H.O.A. has requested to amend the existing Special Development District No. 22; and WHEREAS, Section 12-9A-10 of the Vail Town Code provides procedures for major amendments to existing Special Development Districts; and WHEREAS, The applicant has complied with the requirements outlined in Section 12-9A-10 of the Vail Town Code; and WHEREAS, The Special Development District provides for creativity and flexibility to allow for the development of land within the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, On September 26, 2005, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on the major amendment proposal and has recommended that certain changes be made to Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse; and WHEREAS, The Town Council considers that it is reasonable, appropriate, and beneficial to the Town and its citizens, inhabitants, and visitors to repeal and re-enact Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1998 to provide for certain changes in Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse. Aftachment: B o NOW, THEREFORE: BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1998 is hereby repealed and re-enacted to read as follows: Text to be deleted is shown as stdlte{hreugh and text to be added is shown in bold. Section 1. Amendment Procedures Fulfilled. Plannino Commission Report The approval procedure prescribed in Title 12, Chapter 9, Section 10(B) of the Vail Town Code have been fulfilled, and the Vail Town Council has received the report of the Planning and Environmental Commission recommending approval, of the proposed development plan for Special Development District No. 22. Section 2. Soecial Develooment District No. 22 Special Development District No. 22 (SDD 221and the development plan therefore, are hereby approved for the development of Lots 1 through 19, Block 2, Lionsridge SubdiMsion Filing 3 within the Town of Vail consisting of 10.69 acres. Section 3. Puroose Special Development District No. 22 is established to ensure mmprehensive development and use of an area that will be harmonious with the general character of the Town of Vail. The development is regarded as complementary to the Town by the Town Council and meets each of the design standards and criteria as set forth in Section 12-9A-8 of the Vail Town Code. There are significant aspects of Special Development District No. 22 that are difficult to satisfy through the imposition of the standards of the underlying Primary/Secondary Residential Zone District. Special Development District No. 22 allows for greater flexibility in the development of the land than would be possible under the current zoning of the property. The smaller single.family lots provide the opportunity for a common open space for the subdivision as well as the means to preserve the southerly ridge line of the property. Special Development District No. 22 provides an appropriate development plan to preserve the visual quality of the site from within the subdivision as well as adjacent properties in the community in general. Section 4. Develooment Plan The development plan for SDD 22 is approved and shall constitute the plan for development within the Special Development District. The development plan is comprised of those plans submitted by Dauphinais-Moseley Construction and consists bf the following documents: 1. Site development plan, Lionsridge Resubdivision of Lots 1-19, Vail, Colorado, Intermountain Engineering, dated July 7, 1998. 2. Conceptual landscape plan, Intermountain Engineering, dated July 7, 1998. 3. Final Plat of Lionsridge Subdivision Filing No. 5, A Resubdivision of Lots 1- 19, Block 2, Lionsridge Subdivision Filing No. 3, Town of Vail, County of Eagle, State of Colorado, sheets 'l and 2,lntermountain Engineering Limited, dated April 19, 1989, Amended Final Plat of Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision Filing No. 1, A Resubdivision of Lots 5,6,7,8,9710, Town of Vail, County of Eagle, State of Colorado, Intermountain Engineering, dated July 21, 1998, and Amended Final Plat A Resubdivision of Lot 5, Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, Town of Vail, Countyr of Eagle, State of Colorado, Intermountain Engineering, dated _, 2005. 4. Construction, grading and drainage drawings for a resubdivision of Lots 1- 19, Block 2, and Lionsridge Lane, Lionsridge Subdivision Filing No. 3, Town of Vail, Eagle County, Colorado, Intermountain Engineering Limited, sheets 1-8, dated March 9, 1989. 5. Soils and Foundation lnvestigation for Lots 1-24, Lionsridge Sth Filing. 6. Lionsridge Color Palette, Arnold/Gwathmey/Pratt Architects, March 1990. o 7. The subdivision plat for Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision recorded August 23, 1990, July 21 , 1998, and _, 2005. B. The development standards shall be as follows: 1. Acreaoe: The total acreage of this site is 10.69 acres or 465,650 square feet. 2. Permitted Uses: The permitted uses for SDD 22 shall be: a. Single family residential dwellings b. Open space c. Public roads d. Employee dwelling units as defined in Section 5, paragraph G of this ordinance. 3. ConditionalUses: a. Public utility and public servic,e uses b. Public buildings, grounds and facilities c. Public or private schools d. Public park and recreation facilities 4. Accessorv Uses: a. Privategreenhouses,toolsheds,playhouses, garages or carports, swimming pools, patios, or recreation facilities customarily incidental to single-family uses. b. Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-14-12 of the Vail Town Code. c. Other uses customarily incidental and acces.sory to permitted or conditional uses, and necessary for the operation thereof. W 1 1 1 ;761 2;293 ^;718 10 1t;429 +e70 1;496 16 glgl TW 2t71e 19 19;062 g;171 3;696 ,|9 9;1'18 2;293 2;7€ €9S5H€J02 stsf€ge paFagrapM+€+swr M 1, Garage spaees ef up te three hundred (300) square feet per garage the tep side ef the struetu'el mernbers ef the fleer ts the underside ef the thi*Vinenes+Be+ square feet in area; with five feet er leee ef eeiling height' as meaeured frem the surfaee ef the earth te the underside ef struetural fleer feature/spaee with ne mere than three exterier-walls and a minimum epeni epening is eentigueus and fully epen frem fleer te eeiling' with an GRFA shall be ealeulated by measuring the tekl Euare feetage ef a building as set fod ieipat Cede Exeluded areas as set ferth in paragraph Ashall ther be dedueted frem tetalequ€f€J€elege iat rleer area (€RFA) shall be permitted fer eaeh allewable dwelling unit net te inelude any @ 65. Setbacks: Minimum setbacks shall be as indicated on the approved site development plan by lntermountain Engineering, dated July 7, 1998. A 4-foot roof overhang shall.be allowed in the front setback for Lots 15-19, provided the rear setback is increased by 4 feet. A 4-foot roof overhang shall be allowed in the rear setback of Lots 2O-24, provided the front setback is increased by 4 feet. Roof overhangs shall be allowed to encroach up to 2'feet into the required side setback of 10 feet for each lot. An unenclosed, unroofed, deck or patio within 5 feet of finished grade may encroach into the rear setback by 5 feet for Lots 1-1 4 and Lots 20-24. No other setback encroachments shall be allowed. 76. Densitv: Approval of this development plan shall permit a total of 23 23 single- family dwelling units on the entire property. A minimum of 6 employee dwelling units shall be required. A maximum ot *23 employee dwelling units shall be permitted on the entire property. 87 . Buildino Heioht Fer a fiat reef er mansard reef; the height ef the buildi+rg shall-net exeeed4$beb For a sloping roof, the height of the building shall not exceed 33 feet. The height calculation shall be made by measuring from the existing grade as indicated on the lntermountain Engineering Topographical Survey dated March 13, 1990 or finished grade. Height shall be calculated per Section 12-2-2 of the VailTown Code. 98. Site Coveraqe: Not more than 25 percent of the total site area on each lot shall be covered by buildings. with the exeeBtien ef tet 6, en tet 6; net mere than 20 ing "Site coverage" shall mean the ratio of the total building area on a site to the total area of a site, expressed as a percentage. For the purpose of calculating site coverage, "building area" shall mean the total horizontal area of any building as measured from the exterior face of perimeter buibing walls or supporting columns above grade or at ground level, whichever is the greater area. Building area shall include all buildings, carports, porte cocheres, arerdes, and covered or roofed walkways. In addition to the above, building area shall also include any portion of roof overhang, eave, or covered stair, covered deck, covered porch, covered terrace or covered patio that extends more than four feet from the exterior face of perimeter building walls or supporting columns. *99. Parkino: Parking shall be as required in Title 1 2, Chapter 10 of the Vail Town Code. Each employee dwelling unit shall be required to have at least one enclosed garage parking space. f*10. Desion Guidelines: The development of each lot shall be guided by the architectural and landscape design guidelines as approved as part of the Special Development District No. 22. The guidelines are as follows: a. Architectural. The architectural design of the buildings upon the site shall be such that buildings relate harmoniously to each other. This is not to imply that each building must look exactly similar to those around it, but that compatibility be achieved through the use of scale, materials and colors, and building shape and form. The overriding concern is that, upon completion, the Special Development District, because of the clustered nature of the small single family lots situated around common open b. space, should appear to be an integrated development possessing a common architectural quality, character, and appearance. To this end the following general design criteria shall be followed by the developer and individual lot owners: A palette of colors shall be as set forth in the Lionsridge Color Palette from Arnold/Gwathmey/Pratt dated March 1990. Colors are indicated for the use on different types of building materials and elements such as stucco colors, siding colors, metal flashing, windows, accent colors, etc. The palette of colors indicate a ranqe of acceptable colors in order to encourage similarity on one hand, but also diversity within the acceptable ranqe. The following building stiandards and materials shall be adhered to: Roof. The roof pitch shall be a minimum 8t12 anda maximum of 12112. A gable, clipped gable or hipped roof shall be mandatory. Dormers shall be allowed and reviewed by the Design Review Board. The roofing material shall be cedar shake shingles with staggered butts. Chimnevs. The chimneys shall be stucco with chimney caps of weathered copper. Flues. Allflues shall be galvanized or painted sheet metal, painted to match the roof. Main Fascia. The main fascia shall be a solid color stain, with brown, taupe, or gray. Secondarv Fascia and Metal Railinos above the First Floor. The secondary fascia and metal railings above the first floor shall be a muted accent trim color to be reviewed by the DRB. Walls. Walls shall be of stucco and horizontal or vertical wood siding. c. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Stucco colors shall be gray, beige or off-white. Wood siding colors shall be gray, brown or taupe. (7) Stone. Residences will have a minimum of a two foot high stone wainscot in rainbow mix with a sandstone cap around the perimeter of the structure except under deeks decks where substantially concealed by landscaping. (8) Windows. Windows located within stucco areas shall be-reeessed have a minimum of two inches of relief from the outside wall plane and have a sandstone sill. Trim shall be whiter taupe er brewn' (9) Outdoor Liohtino, Outdoor lighting shall be indirect with a concealed source except for an entry chandelier, two caniage lights and one pilaster light which may be exposed globes with a fixture of black or weathered copper look metal. The maximum number of outdoor lights permitted on each lot shall be 15 regardless of lot size. Outdoor lights which conform with Ordinance #22, Series of 1997, shall be exempt. All exterior lighting shall be reviewed by the DRB. (10) Garaqes. No garage doors shall directly face the street, except on Lot 24 and Lot 14. (11) A residential address/nameplate if desired by the owner shall be located on the side of the garage facing the access point to the lot. (12) When the individual landscape plans are designed for individual lots, special care shall be taken in the design of side yard landscaping in order to provide adequate screening between structures. 421 1. Recreational Amenities Tax: The recreation amenities tax shall be assessed at the rate for a single-family residential zone district. 10 Section 5. Conditions of Aporoval A. The major amendment to Special Development District No. 22, Gr'and Traverse, shall not be effective until the major subdivision is recorded by the Town of Vail at the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's Office. B. The major subdivision shall be recorded at the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's Office prior to a building permit being released for any construction on Lots 2, 5, 7,9 or 10, C. The development of Special Development District No. 22 will have impacts on the available employee housing within the Upper Eagle Valley Area. In order to help meet this additional employee housing neeO, tfre developer of Special Development District No. 22 shall provide employee housing on site. The following restrictions shall apply to all employee dwelling units within SDD No. 22: 1. The developer shall build a minimum of six employee dwelling . units within the subdivision. Each employee dwelling unit shall have a minimum square footage of 400 square feet not to exceed 800 square feet and is allowed to have a kitchen. The square footage of an employee housing unit shall be measured from the inside face of the walls creating the unit (i.e., not including furring, Sheetrock, plaster, and other similar wall finishes). The €RFA€nd number of employee units shall not be counted toward allowable density €{€RFA for Special Development District No. 22. The developer may choose to transfer up to 300 sq. ft. etGRFAfrom the primary unit to the employee unit. The developer may 11 2. provide up to 15 23 employee dwelling units including the 6 required dwelling units if so desired. The employee dwelling units may be located on any of the lots within the subdivision providing all the development standards are met for each lot. Only one employee dwelling unit shall be allowed per lot with a maximum of 46 23 units allowed. An employee dwelling shall be incorporated into the structure of the primary residence and shall not be allowed to be separated from the primary unit. Each employee dwelling unit shall have at least one enclosed garage parking space. This parking space shall not be detached from the single-family garage or structure. Each phase of construction shall include a minimum of one employee dwelling unit until six employee dwelling units are constructed and available for rental. The Employee Housing Unit shall be leased to tenants who are full-time employees who work in Eagle County. An EHU shall not be leased for a period less than thirty consecutive days. For the purposes of this section, a full-time employee is one who works an average of thirly hours each week. An EHU may not be sold, transfened, or conveyed separately from any trve-family single-family dwelling it may be a part of. The EHU shall not be divided into any form of timeshares, interval ownership, or fractional fee ownership as those terms are defined in the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail. No later than February 1 of each year, the owner of each employee housing unit within the town which is constructed 3. 4. 5. 6. L2 7. 8. following the effective date of this chapter shall submit two copies of a report on a form to be obtained from the Community Development Department, to the Community Development Department of the Town of Vail and Chairman of the Town of Vail Housing Authority sefting forth evidence establishing that the employee housing unit has been rented throughout the year, the rental rate, the employer, and that each tenant who resides within the employee housing unit is a full-time employee in Eagle Coun$. The owner of each EHU shall rent the unit at a monthly rental rate consistent with or lower than those market rates prevalent for similar properties in the Town of Vail. The Town of Vail Housing Authority will determine the market rate based on the study of other units of mmparable size, location, quality and amenities hroughout the Town. The market rate shall be based on an average of a minimum of five rental rates of comparable units. lf the unit is not rented and is not available at the market rate it shall be determined to be in noncompliance. ln addition to any other penalties and restrictions provided herein, a unit found to be in noncompliance shall be subject to publication as determined by the Housing Authority.' The provisions of these restrictive covenants may be enforced by the Orner and the Town. The conditions, restrictions, stipulations, and agreements contained herein shall not be waived, abandoned, terminated, or amended except by the written consent gf both the Town of Vail 9. 10. 13 and the Owner of the property. D. The architectural and landscape design guidelines shall be incorporated into the subdivision covenants before the final plat is recorded at the Eagle County Clerk and Recorde/s Office. The Town Of Vail shall be party to these agreements. Section 6. Amendments Amendments to Special Development District No. 22 shall follow the procedures contained in Section 18.40.100 of the VailMunicipalCode. Section 7. Expiration The applicant must begin construction of the Special Development District within 3 years from the time of its final approval, and continue diligently toward completion of the project. lf the applicant does not begin and diligently work toward the completion of the Special Development District or any stage of the Special Development District within the time limits imposed by the preceding subsection, the Planning and Environmental Commission shall review the Special Development District. They shall recommend to the Town Council that either the approval of the Special Development District be extended, that the approval of the Special Development District be revoked, or that the Special Development District be amended. Fection 8. lf any part, section, subsection, sentence, glause or phrase of. this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, t4 regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases by declared invalid. Section 9. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is necessary and proper fgr the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and inhabitants thereof. Section 10. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provisions of Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occuned prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as oommenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. 15 Section 11. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereol inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, heretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLTSHED ONCE lN FULL ON FIRST READING this 6th day of December, 2005 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 3' day of January, 2006, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Rodney E. Slifer, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ, ADOPTED AND ENACTED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED lN FULL this 3d day of January, 2006. Rodney E. Slifer, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk 16 lrlltl Hi Ta iir tl tlftrl $iit Fili llii lllti: I I iltihtllitl ilili $ilii I !'II t1 il il$ffi $ i5 -$tdi I i;; f. f!ii|l|il f li I t ill,hl itiiif I I rii iiil Ii t Iti til I rl tl ;l r-;, t i$ 1..- tO !- *. OQ il b ilsrg" *5sili $ Es;i $=F[Hi [*s $F: *$u sux\ I 1tl Itlllt I |jl' Fll ilii l!lirl i!r!:ritttatr I H" o Itll hi ,[iil ! I li tr'il\t il tlll-rlr!! ?!Ir !ir! It:l{ i!l !r; !ii ili, iti! liti ill; hir ili\+ S5 v 'l!,ll.! I dt Attachment: C (|) CDo q, oo9o:= u) qoi o E o E 6 o o .r F Cr{ v) O st @.O N N c| rn oD }- tf (r) (') lr:) t- O O) (\l I\ F-E tO (o F- t F- u) 3 t O O * @ @ (a N N - € l.) lD l() O lt);; (D O (o C', <D (', O aO (O F (\r t\ F. F F r ll) $r tt rO (9 (\l (O ; ci f o't o,i oi c.i <"t c't ai c,i d ..t Ai oi oi c,i oi c\i c,i c.i oi a,i c.i ([;o (\l9> 9o<.9 S ]=o- o o o o c{ (<, rf !c o o co * Go <o (g o a o €o * ! * S; = O (\l () @ al' - (D O, F O (D t- F (g !f t.D F O F O F. F Fr-, € ('r_ F_ r\_ oq Ol_ o)_ .g_ Ol_ ol_ {_ * lO rt Ol C{ Ol O lO o) F l.- rr). (o- j: e * "t.o- dd dd t..Jt.J tJ d d }.:'rt ++ +d d.+ d + + rrl .t =sLboao .',(.)tOFFlr)C!C.,,1 Ot F O{ C{ .',O)(n 6 F @ F @ F F u) aO Crt O' (o F tD (O C{ Fe - c.)- ro- l(). \ (o_ F-- o. O- I \t_ - t_.o- q o_ q(t) (') N c\r ol (\ c{ N c..t ot N c{ c.,l ot F NE $.9- g (\t $l E- $l E r.|.E H (uz o 'e e(u s-{E€EEFE gg' raCse:HE3o ;(u..E €-0, |! H#.--e €E=-s F HgEc--Ete H Er=bgEE $ai EE SE'E9 L=LOri ,E 8.E bq fiE*FE EauE € EfifiEs :Egg€ =5E9.€ e::4€ E E;;EqF !EEEH' $iE aaE 3 TE:€€EE €E-.EEEE F9 d.frfrE F SfnfiEea ".i )o,^Uro-6E F Fo N o o, o .o r c., .,) ,., .', o rs dr F N cr, - o o o o o 3z - ll @ (oF (o (\l (D ro rf ood)61 drN oooto oo)(\todrc);: qr -Q @ N F- Q Ot @ - O, O.o (O F <) ll) (, rl' N (o -- olot- (o- !t- rjP E (9 dri rtdddt.,: ddddFi 6+{{ d{rr, dtr.<t rrt <o;i9r 5 l|'lleEo,O aL (, ot o (D o (t ? (t, c) to (t o t- @ F- F. d) 6 @ o @ € o tAr - @ <t ls (O (\t (D ra) $ aO O aO ot c) (\t O O otO O c', N O (.) rt)il c-,t_ q -- q (r_ (\_ |r) (') at (D F |o o cD (D o, (o c{ |(,_ <o- (.)_ ol 6. F d & 'rt.o- d d d '.t.d d d + d.d d <.t.'t dt rf, t' f f f {s -N9 o-6X-E ES+E b-<88 o, = < Ec.'| - (O <D F O Od) m(', d)O)(D d) F F F 6)F Or(DF Ot F5r- -7 (! !, * (o (., + o) o (D (o (o (', (Y) (o a4.rf rt l' (o t (o (.) $ (v) \t 6ld' - E (J co o (D.o (") ('t o o o g) d) o) d) (o 6 co 6).o olol-€-qo_iah H F .E d Fi d d d d Fi lr rr d d d d d d { d + d .rJ'+ d + i; .A vv lr# R E6x 6* G.tro o€9 82.- .i b q E o 'cl (g 6 rs F u) r{) u) (o (o (o (g @ @ @ (o co <o ro co <o co AF E3F589Epp8889PCP555PS99S9Ed fi ? .gE "t 'rt {at tlt st 'rt d 'rt dd t'.rr st <"t <.t { dtr { <'td<.tS - tiEo, t4g oE o !s6 U'F; €sgs:bhSEEEEEEPPgE=ESPEPSF s N * lo F- - F ri t sl rI) tI) rl: (t t\ F l- v) i- ro u:l r\ u) N -. |6 J (\t $ (') C{ (.) (.) t * t (.) .7) (r) C) (\r (\t (\r d) (\r c) <i) C{ (9 $l Fi:<OE-(96l(\ !1 r.cr co o - rI) d)o 3 R I 5 E E* * x $ E. F ^ - (DCj 6 8-N-8-R-E-$-$ ." r .o s, - - rx !1 * o:8R-S= E-z E =E j= =: p S:3 S g=;-;-;-E;';9.i;;e cl|.r6 i-or<.rsr'oF@-3=S::PP:PPReNRN Attachment: D o MEMORANDUM VailTown Council Community Development Department December 6, 2005 First reading of Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2005, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance 9, Series of 1998 amending Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, and setting forth details in regard thereto. o Applicant: Planner: Pat Dauphinais, President of the Grand Traverse H.O.A. Wanen Campbell TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: lr. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, Pat Dauphinais, President of the Grand Traverse H.O.A., is requesting a first reading of Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2005, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance 9, Series of 1998 amending Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, and setting forth details in regard thereto. The purpose of Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2005, is to remove Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) limitations from the SDD and rely on the remaining development and architectural controls incorporated into the existing SDD and increase the number of lots within the SDD from 22 to 23 lots. The staff and applicant are requesting that the Town Council listen to a presentation on the proposed ordinance and approve Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2005, upon first reading. BAGKGROUND On September 26, 2005, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on a request to amend Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse. The purpose of the amendment to the Special Development District is to eliminate the Gross Residential Floor Area limitations within the Grand Traverse residential development and an increase in the number of lots ftom 22 to 23 lots. Upon review of the request, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted 4-0- 0 to fonvard a recommendation of-approval of the request to amend Special Development District No. 22, Granflraverse, to the Vail Town Council. A copy of the staff memorandum to the Town of Vail Planning and EnMronmental Commission, dated September 26, 2005, has been attached for reference. On October 18, 2005, the Town Council held a work session regarding the applicant's proposal. Discussion of the applicant's proposal centered on how Ordinance 14, Series of 2004, the ordinance amending GRFA affected the lots located within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse. Several members of Council expressed concern over the elimination of GRFA, but agreed with the applicant and the homeowners present at the meeting that some amendment should be enacted in order for Ordinance 14, Series o12004, to better apply to lots within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse. Other members of Council were comfortable with the proposal. Staff was directed to compile additional information and the application was tabled to November 15, 2005. On November 15, 2005, the Town Council tabled the application without discussion to the December 6, 2005, meeting. III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends that the Vail Town Council approves Ordinance No. 25, Series of 2005. IV. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Draft of Ordinance 25, Series of 2005 C. Copy of the plat approved by PEC resubdiMding Lot 5 within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse D. Table of statistics for SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, prepared by staff E. Memorandum to Planning and Environmental Commission dated September 26,2005 ORDINANGE NO.25 Series of 2005 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REENACTING ORDINANCE NO.9, SERIES OF I99S'PROVIDING FOR CHANGES TO SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO.22, GRAND TRAVERSE, THAT CONCERN THE ELIMINATION OF GROSS RESTDENTTAL FLOOR AREA (GRFA) WTHTN THE DISTR|CT AND THE NUMBER OF LOTS; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO WHEREAS, Chapter 9 of the Vail Municipal Code authorizes Special Development Districts within the Town; and WHEREAS, The Town Council approved Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1998 Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse; and WHEREAS, The president of the Grand Traverse H.O.A. has requested to amend the existing Special Development District No. 22; and WHEREAS, Section 12-9A-10 of the Vail Municipal Code provides procedures for major amendments to existing Special Development Districts; and WHEREAS, The applicant has complied with the requirements outlined in Section 12-9A-10 of the Vail Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, The Special Development District provides for creatiMty and flexibility to allow for the development of land within the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, There is an identified need for quality affordable housing in the community; and WHEREAS, On September 26, 2005, the Planning and Environmentral Commission held a public hearing on the major amendment proposal and has recommended that certain changes be made to Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse; and WHEREAS, The Town Council considers that it is reasonable, appropriate, and beneficial to the Town and its citizens, inhabitants, and visitors to repeal and re-enact Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1998 to provide for certain changes in Special Attachment: B Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1998 is hereby repealed and re-enacted to read as follows: Text to be deleted is shown as strke{hreugh and text to be added is shown in bold. Section 1. Amendment Procedures Fulfilled. Plannino Commission Reoort The approval procedure prescribed in Title 12, Chapter 9, Section 10(B) of the Vail Municipal Code have been fulfilled, and the Vail Town Council has received the report of the Planning and Environmental Commission recommending approval, of the proposed development plan for Special Development District No. 22. Section 2. Special Development District No. 22 Special Development District No. 22 (SDD 22) and the development plan therefore, are hereby approved for the development of Lots 1 through 19, Block 2, Lionsridge Subdivision Filing 3 within the Town of Vail consisting of 10.69 acres. Section 3. Pumose Special Development District No. 22 is established to ensure comprehensive development and use of an area that will be harmonious with the general character of the Town of Vail. The development is regarded as complementary to the Town by the Town Council and meets each of the design standards and criteria as set forth in Section 12-9A-8 of the Vail Municipal Code. There are significant aspects of Special Development District No. 22 that are difficult to satisfy through the imposition of the standards of the underlying Primary/Secondary Residential Zone District. Special Development District No. 22 allows for greater flexibility in the development of the land than would be possible under the current zoning of the property. The smaller single-family lots provide the opportunity for a common A. open space for the subdivision as well as the means to preserve the southerly ridge line of the property. Special Development District No. 22 provides an appropriate development plan to preserve the visual quality of the site from within the subdivision as well as adjacent properties in the community in.general. Section 4. Develooment Plan The development plan for SDD 22 is approved and shall constitute the plan for development within the Special Development District. The development plan is comprised of those plans submitted by Dauphinais-Moseley Construction and consists of the following documents: 1. Site development plan, Lionsridge Resubdivision of Lots 1-19, Vail, Colorado, Intermountain Engineering, dated July 7, 1998. Conceptual landscape plan, Intermountain Engineering, dated July 7, 1998. Final Plat of Lionsridge Subdivision Filing No. 5, A Resubdivision of Lots 1- 19, Block 2, Lionsridge Subdivision Filing No. 3, Town of Vail, County of Eagle, State of Colorado, sheets 1 and 2, Intermountain Engineering Limited, dated April 19, 1989, Amended Final Plat of Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision Filing No. 1, A Resubdivision of Lots 5,6,7,8,9710, Town bf Vail, County of Eagle, State of Colorado, Intermountain Engineering, dated July 21 , 1998, and AmendEd Final Plat A Resubdivision of Lot 5, Anended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, Town of Vail, CounQl of Eagle, State of Colorado, Intermountain Engineering, dated _,2005. Construction, grading and drainage drawings for a resubdivision of Lots 1- 19, Block 2, and Lionsridge Lane, Lionsridge Subdivision Filing No. 3, Town of Vail, Eagle County, Colorado, lntermountain Engineering Limited, sheels 1-8, dated March 9, 1989. 5. Soils and Foundation Investigation for Lots 1-24, Lionsridge Sth Filing. 6. Lionsridge Color Palette, Amold/Gwathmey/PrattArchitects, March 1990. 7. The subdivision plat for Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision recorded August 23, 1990, July 21, 1998, and -, -, 2005. 2. 3. 4. B. The development standards shall be as follows: 1. Acreaqe: The total acreage of this site is 10.69 acres or 465,650 square feet. 2. Permitted Uses: The permitted uses for SDD 22 shall be: a. Single family residential dwellings b. Open space c. Public roads d. Employee dwelling units as defined in Section 5, paragraph G of this ordinance. 3. Conditional Uses: a. Public utility and public service uses b. Public buildings, grounds and facilities c. Public or private schools d. Public park and recreation facilities 4. Accessorv Uses: a. Privategreenhouses, toolsheds, playhouses, garages or carports, swimming pools, patios, or recreation facilities customarily incidental to single-family uses. b. Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-1+12 of the Vail Municipal Code. c. Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional uses, and necessary for the operation thereof. W I 14688 +g7e 11195 1e 14429 4;070 .l;496 11 1q809 qt7l e;69€ 12 12;991 4171 3;696 16 8;491 2;393 ^;718 6SB5H+.{€2 GRFA shall rnean the btal square feetage ef all level+ef a building; as measured stefage areas, Atties; erawl sBaees and reefed er eevered deeks; perehes; brraees er paragrap#ele* n, Witnin Uuitding ffi 1" Garage epa€€s er up ts three hundred (300) square feet per ga'age Cwelling unit and ene twe Bpac€s fer eaeh eenetrueted emPleyee unit, the tep eide ef th+etrueturel members ef the fleer b th€ snderside ef the eenstruetien ef a reef withtruss type members will be exeluded frem tni*yinenes-apa+ 3, €rawl speees aeeessible threugh an ePening net great€F+han twelve equarefeefin area' witn n frerr the surfaee ef the earth te the underside ef struetural fleer 'l' Reefed er eevered deeks; perehes; terraees; paties er eimilar feature/spaee withne rnere than three exterier walls and a minimum epening ef net less than2S% ef the lineal perimeter ef the area ef said deek; pereh; tenaee; patie; er similar featur€/spae€ previCed the ep€ni l eguare feetage efa Exeluded areas as set ferth in paragraph A shall then bededueted frern tetat+qger€-feo{eg+ ln additien te the abeve; feur hundred twenty five equare feet ef gre€s residential fleer @ 65. Setbacks: Minimum setbacks shall be as indicated on the approved site development plan by Intermountain Engineering, dated July 7, 1998. A 4-foot roof overhang shall be allowed in the front setback for Lots 1$19, provided the rear setback is increased by 4 feet. A 4-foot roof overhang shall be allowed in the rear setback of Lots 20-24, proided the front setback is increased by 4 feet. Roof overhangs shall be allowed to encroach up to 2'feet into the required side setback of 10 feet for each lot. An unenclosed, unroofed, deck or patio within 5 feet of finished grade may encroach into the rear setback by 5 feet for Lots 1-14 and Lots 20-24. No other setback encroachmenb shall be allowed. 76. Densitv: Approval of this development plan shall permit a total of 32 23 single- family dwelling units on the entire property. A minimum of 6 employee dwelling units shall be required. A maximum of *23 employee dwelling units shall be permitted on the entire prqperty. 87. Buildinq Heiqht Fer a flat+eef er mansard reef; the height ef the building shall net exeeed€€-fee{. For a sloping rool the height of the building shall not exceed 33 feet. The height calculation shall be made by measuring from the existing grade as indicated on the lntermountain Engineering Topographical Survey dated March 13, 1 990 or finished grade. Height shall be calculated per Section 12-2-2 of the Vail MunicipalCode. 98. Site Coveraqe: Not more than 25 percent of the total site area on each lot shall be covered by buildings. @a snattge eevereg gy in* "Site coverage" shall mean the ratio of the total building area on a site to the total area of a site, expressed as a percentage. For the purpose of calculating site coverage, 'buibing area" shall mean the total horizontal area of any building as measured from the exterior face of perimeter building walls or supporting columns above grade or at ground level, whichever is the greater area. Building area shall include all buildings, carports, porte cocheres, arcades, and covered or roofed walkways. In addition to the above, building area shall also include any portion of roof overhang, eave, or covered stair, covered deck, covered porch, covered terrace or covered patio that extends more than four feet from the exterior face of perimeter building walls or supporting columns. 4e9. Parkinq: Parking shall be as required in Title 12, Chapter 10 of the Vail Municipal Code. Each employee dwelling unit shall be required to have at least one enclosed garage parking space. *110. Desiqn Guidelines: The development of each lot shall be guided by the architectural and landscape design guidelines as approved as part of the Special Development District No. 22. The guidelines are as follows: a. Architectural. The architectural design of the buildings upon the site shall be such that buildings relate harmoniously to each other. This is not to imply that each building must look exactly similar to those around it, but that compatibility be achieved through the use of scale, materials and colors, and building shape and form. The overriding concern is that, upon completion, the Special Development District, because of the clustered nature of the small single family lots situated around common open space, should appear to be an integrated development possessing a common architectural quality, character, and appearance. To this Ond the following general design criteria shall be followed by the developer and individual lot owners: b. A palette of colors shall be as set forth in the Lionsridge Color Palette from Amold/Gwathmey/Pratt dated March 1990. Colors are indicated for the use on different types of building materials and elements such as stucco colors, siding colors, metal flashing, windows, accenl colors, etc. The palette of colors indicate a ranoe of acceptable colors in order to encourage similarity on one hand, but also diversity within the acceptable ranoe. c. The following building standards and materials shall be adhered to: (1) Roof. The roof pitch shall be a minimum 8112 and a maximum ot 12t12. A gable, clipped gable or hipped roof shall be mandatory. Dormers shall be allowed and reviewed by the Design Review Board. The roofing material shall be cedar shake shingles with staggered butts. (2) Chimnevs. The chimneys shall be stucco with chimney caps of weathered copper. (3) Flues. Allflues shall be galvanized or painted sheet metal, painted to match the roof. (4) Main Fascia. The main fascia shall be a solid color stiain, with brown, taupe, orgray (5) Secondarv Fascia and Metal Railinqs above the First Floor. The secondary fascia and metal railings above the first floor shall be a muted accent trim color to be reviewed by the DRB. (6) Walls. Walls shall be of stucco and horizontal or vertical wood siding. Stucco colors shall be gray, beige or off-white. Wood siding colors shall be gray, brown or taupe. (7) Stone. Residences will have a minimum of a two foot high stone wainscot in rainbow mix with a sandstone cap around the perimeter of the structure except under deeks decks where substantially concealed by landscaping. (8) Windows. Windows located within stucco areas shallbereeessed have a minimum of two inches of relief from the outside wall plane and have a sandstone sill. Trim shall be whibptauBe er brewn, (9) Outdoor Liohtinq, Outdoor lighting shall be indirect with a concealed souroe except for an entry chandelier, two carriage lights and one pilaster light which may be exposed globes with a fixture of black or weathered copper look metal. The maximum number of outdoor lights permitted on each lot shall be 15 regardless of lot size. Outdoor lights which conform with Ordinance #22, Series of 1997, shall be exempt. All exterior lighting shall be reviewed by the DRB. (10) Garaoes. No garage doors shall directly face the street, except on Lot 24 and Lot 14. (1 1) A residential address/nameplate if desired by the owner shall be located on the side of the garage facing the access point to the lot. (12\ When the individual landscape plans are designed for individual lots, special care shall be taken in the design of side yard landscaping in order to provide adequate screening between structures. {21 1. Recreational Amenities Tax: The recreation amenities tax shall be assessed at the rate for a single-family residential zone district. 10 Section 5. Conditions of Approval A. The major amendment to Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, shall not be effective until the major subdivision is recorded by the Town of Vail at the Eagle County Clerk and Recorde/s Office. B. The major subdivision shall be recorded at the Eagle County Clerk and Recorde/s Office prior to a building permit being released for any construction on Lots 2, 5, 7 , 9 or 10. C. The developmenl of Special Development District No. 22 will have impacts on the available employee housing within the Upper Eagle Valley Area. ln order to help meet this additional employee housing need, the developer of Special Development District No. 22 shall provide employee housing on site. The following restrictions shall apply to all employee dwelling units within SDD No. 22: 1. The developer shall build a minimum of six employee dwelling units within the subdivision. Each employee dwelling unit shall have a minimum square footage of 400 square feet not to exceed 800 square feet and is allowed to have a kitchen. The square footage of an employee housing unit shall be measured from the inside face of the walls creating the unit (i.e., not including furring, Sheetrock, plaster, and other similar wall finishes). The GRFFand number of employee units shall not be counted toward allowable density oTGRFA for Special Development District No. 22. The developer may choose to transfer up to 300 sq. ft. €f€RFA from the primary unit to the employee unit. The GRF\ transfened will be deduetedfrem the The developer may 11 3. provide up to {€ 23 employee dwelling units including the 6 required dwelling units if so desired. The employee dwelling units may be located on any of the lots within the subdivision providing all the development standards are met for each lot. Only one employee dwelling unit shall be affowed per lot with a maximum of 4523 units allowed. An employee dwelling shall be incorporated into the structure of the primary residence and shall not be allowed to be separated from the primary unit. Each employee dwelling unit shall have at least one enclosed garage parking space. This parking space shall not be detached from the single-family garage or structure. Each phase of construction shall include a minimum of one employee dwelling unit until six employee dwelling units are constructed and available for rental. The Employee Housing Unit shall be leased to tenants who are full-time employees who work in Eagle County. An EHU shall not be leased for a period less than thirty consecutive days. For the purposes of this section, a full-time employee is one who works an average of thirty hours each week. An EHU may not be sold, transfened, or conveyed separately from any trve-family single-family dwelling it may be a part of. The EHU shall not be divided into any form of timeshares, interval ownership, or fractional fee ownership as those terms are defined in the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail. No later than February 1 of each year, the owner of each employee housing unit within the town which is constructed 4. 5. 6. L2 7. 8. following the effective date of this chapter shall submit two copies of a report on a form to be obtained from the Community Development Department, to the Community Development Department of the Town of Vail and Chairman of the Town of Vail Housing Authority setting forth evidence establishing that the employee housing unit has been rented throughout the year, the rental rate, the employer, and that.each tenant who resides within the employee housing unit is a full-time employee in Eagle County. The owner of each EHU shall rent the unit at a monthly rental rate consistent with or lower than those market rates prevalent for similar properties in the Town of Vail. The Town of Vail Housing Authority will determine the market rate based on the study of other units of comparable size, location, quality and amenities throughout the Town. The market rate shall be based on an avemge of a minimum of five rental rates of comparable units. lf the unit is not rented and is not available at the market rate it shall be determined to be in noncompliance. ln addition to any other penalties and restrictions provided herein, a unit found to be in noncompliance shall be subject to publication as determined by the Housing Authority. The provisions of these restrictive covenants may be enforced by the Owner and the Town. The conditions, restrictions, stipulations, and agreements contained herein shall not be waived, abandoned, terminated, or amended except by the written consent of both the Town of Vail 9. 10. 13 and the Owner of the property. D. The architectural and landscape design guidelines shall be incorporated into the subdivision covenants before the final plat is recorded at the Eagle County Clerk and Recorde/s Office. The Town Of Vail shall be party to these agreements. Section 6. Amendments Amendments to Special Development District No. 22 shallfollow the procedures contained in Section 18.40.100 of the Vail MunicipalCode. Section 7. Exoiration The applicant must begin construction of the Special Development District within 3 years from the time of its final approval, and continue diligently toward completion of the project. lf the applicant does not begin and diligently work toward the completion of the Special Development District or any stage of the Special Development District within the time limits imposed by the preceding subsection, the Planning and Environmental Commission shall review the Special Development District. They shall recommend to the Town Council that either the approval of the Special Development District be extended, that the "pprouat of the Special Development District be revoked, or that the Special Development District be amended. Section 8. lf any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of. this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases by declared invalid. Section 9. t4 The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and inhabitants thereof. Section 10. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provisions of Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occuned prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 11. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereot inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, heretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE lN FULL ON FIRST READING this 15h day of November, 2005 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 6h day of December, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Rod Slifer, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk 15 lrtf tl [i ln T iilii iiiiii riiiii r,l,I lrlilc{r!I. tfarl.i gtil I Fitil $iii 1YNU {: Ir iii' I li{ ilti tliili;tli *ilii il$milt :ngrt iilr titl ll llIr lllr l. !liii lrilltr :l Ilti ll l .!;ir ,[iiiilit r! iii!i tfia r! F al tl r1 ii { llrl:ll[lttlri Itt I i]il{ I I rii riil I I I I ,ir lt: iiil It l.\tot-EscJ i t ilssR x ! Six: $ Hs;i $=$sqi lss $$: $sF S** {\ \ i {-\{t !r-lrit lr dl! !it I I :ilr 'i t. il.;il : i!!I t:;I slE ;!:i iiti iiti ;tEi ! ra" t !i: :, t il i hi; iil \', -'t. "+ ,v t-g t! aa lti t;; vAttachment:C ii'l fi$ 4t. Ei\. !E .!qA)\'r-/' // ( \\.\V' 6 I$ II \4r- r ao oo$5eF;-Ji9".,89$ o !-F. lo c\,1 $lot Fo{ No'o,€ F l- l{) aO $l c', (o F l.l) C) (\l FF- @" t\- O- O- a .f_ t r+_ .o- C{_ Co- (r)- C-l C! (\l Ol N (\l N Ol Ol C-,1 NFN rq (r) E.'- m ootob^- c$ o:u- c! oq d\e 'T l- -Eo (.)o ir3-ES-P_EE Rot ol c{ P gt -\9ft= <.) \tO-(ou) (") c.i :E E 8 fie.(9 H q) |! b "9g q,z^6_|/|(Jr+F€OEE.E'6, I8g'EF0r4;v,.8 E =e E-tr o 'olE ;9< ==tL 6-E6eg 5 s+E F PE E i:'re E - x Elt:E€EE g:=E g EE'E8 L=LO*6*E figEF EEeEF98xu33s sIEssEEg, .='e e EEEsB89iEE.EFiEEEH E EPEe EEEEE 3EH6H *,F FE H' n6Ece E cioU) (u o E =o Ctrlo eE o sa<c! dct(9r1 .E=lt:956< lEd F,OFrEtn:NdF (D 6o*C);, F (\l L, O { (o aO N F O lO Ot t- * (9 aq rt) F- O Ct) (\l l\ t\ SIg lO (O F- tf F |r) rt l? O O tt € O C) Ol $l F co ln |(t |.c) (O ln;; O, O .o O) Ct, (D cO (O lO N $l F. F F F - rD (r,l l' |4) (f) (\l (O a ; on -r. cn c,i c.i c,t.'t..t.'t c,t <'t d c,i c,t c,i cC o,i c,i crt cn c.i oi cn dEoQ;loi3< -f{.a !T9>i;! - .EY19 x .-t<'e .ioi H ='exBBesEB :8BPx B gs gsB:BxrR h .re € o)- -: l.-_ O- <D_ O)- @_ Gl al_ !t- t l(). |.)- q C.l- (\! O- rr- g)_ !-. N_ rr)- (')_ ;i \ X \ O = 'I) cO r'l) rO r() |r) F t- I\ 1l,(r)t- rI) ? tt rt rI) !t \t |,l) !t <t rO (r, \ | =q,=P '!bdao c.= .! !, o -ai t' ii F F. o. o o o .', F (o c) ro (ooi-.o N F-..).o oo co o oPE- * i: @ (o N (o C\l o, u) t o o c) a\t (.) N o o ct o o o, st o (t co,F:s 61 (! (o (\r t-.o or.o e o€o l.) c) F.o c) ro ()ol€ F Gl o)@ rt _-x & € O "t F: d d d dr..: @ d d d Fjd dd + d{'rtd d + d;r}l6 5.b s a' aoo-- <o <.r o (D o (o F r"t <', rn (o o F ao t\ rs <'t .o .o o .o € (D F-- @ (o F <0 6l o) rJ) t ao o ('t N <r) $r o o N o o o) ot o d) ro,'l (\l (o - C{ c) N Il) c) N CD F l.) O CD CD CD (g Ol L) @ (O. Ot CO. Fj&'rt d d d d'rtd d d + d d d c"t d c't d $ d d.r- { t ; o 'I +. -= olI ol< 3 K - o o) F O O c) (9 .,1 (D Ot (D or F F F qt F cD qt F ctt F I, ll| .e rt (o c) { CD d) (Ct (o <, F) c) (") (.) S S I (.) S (') (.) S a', { c{ii c 0 co o o 6 d, (o o o o o o (D ot o o € o) co o o o.o-€o_J'p F s? +Fj'rt{d'rt'.- riFidddd{t'+'.t+'rtd+ro fc.r;;i.g gEd U' o,E 6ig8 gFESShbESEEEEEPPPE:SEPEsH C (l) So d) o F d) F F- O O O ..) aD <") F a.) e r a9 F (9 '-.? PF "t'ri{..tcl c"tdddt'++rf ctr' d{d+{rtdr'tE<Ec,LL !I E^ =u o o €=SEPhhBBEEEEEPPPBPSSPBPSs F r+ ro F F - { <f t u., ro u) ro F F F ra) F ro |{} t\ l{) t- -- ? c,i $- c.t ci <" ct{{<rrntatatc' c,i c,i oi <'t $i ri <'t cn <'t c,i R ]LE(9 !l ro o o F |r) (')(4.o o (9- (D - * * - N - -N aa d) .;; 8-N I B E- s- g_ 3_ $_ 8.8_ P. P_fr e + t-= I e. s F E E =s: j j jgSSp s I j;-;-;-s a6': <i-o': rOoo(\ (o c{ oll Eo ELoo .2o 3c G ED .EcoN ott o E T'c G o N(\ ctzoo ID Attachment: D! -oro *r,F6 o3:lP:99= PPReN&N o MtsstoN o PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COM ,A\ PUBLIG MEETING N7.| September26,2005 TWIIEYILV PROJECT ORIENTATION - Community llevelopment Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME 12:00 pm 1, Staff memorandums were discussed with Commission members; no direction given. MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERSABSENT Doug Cahill David Viele Anne Fehlner-Gunion Rollie Kjesbo Bill Jewitt Chas Bernhardt George Lamb Site Visits: No site visits Public Hearing - Town Council Chambers 2:00 pm '1. A request for a final review of a flood plain modification, pursuant to Chapter 14-6, Grading Standards, Vail Town Code, to allow for grading within the floodplain for a new water intake facility, located at 530 South Frontage Road, Ford ParUunplafted, (a more complete metes and bounds description is available at the Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard. Applicant: Town of Vail and Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Approved with conditions MOTION: Jewitt SECOND: Lamb VOTE:4-0-0 GONDTTTON(S): 1. The applicant shall submit a stamped lmprovement Location Certificate and topographic survey, verifying the "as-built" conditions of the subjec{ site to the Town of Vail Gommunity Development Department for review and approval, prior to Town of Vail fi nal construction inspection. 2. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of all applicable local, state, and federal permits and approvals. 3. The applicant shall coordinate the construction schedule for this proposal with the State of Golorado Division of Wildlife. Bill Gibson gave a presentation per the staff memorandum. Dominic Mauriello further explained the extent of the project, and stated that there would be no significant impact to the floodplain. Linn Schorr, Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, verified that the entire construction period would last no longer than six weeks. George Lamb asked about the status of Army Corps approval, which was stated to be in pro@ss. Page 1 Doug Cahill asked about the size of the above grade structures, which was verified lo be 42 inches tall and 90 inches wide. There was no public comment. 2. A request for a final review of a flood plain modification, pursuant to Chapter 14-6, Grading Standards, Vail Town Code, to allow for grading within the floodplain for a new water intake facility, located at 1600 South Frontage Road, Donovan Park lower bench/ unplatted (a more complete meles and bounds description is available at the Community Development Department), and setting forth details in regard. Applicant: Town of Vail and Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Bill Gibson AGTION: Approved with conditions MOTION: Jewitt SEGOND: Lamb VOTE:4-0-0 1. The applicant shall submit a stamped lmprovement Location Gertificate and topographic surveyr verifying the "as-built" conditions of the subject site to the Town of Vail Gommunigr Development Department for review and approval, prior to Town of Vail fi nal construction inspection. 2. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of all applicable local, state, and federal permits and approvals. 3. The applicant shall coordinate the construction schedule for this proposal with the State of Golorado Division of Wildlife. This item was reviewed concurrently with agenda item #1 . 3. A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-71-5, Vail Town Code, to allow for a public utility and public service use, located at 862 South Frontage Road (Vail Resorts Maintenance Site/unplatted, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Xcel Energy, represented by Al Morganfield Planner: Matt Gennett AGTION: Approved MOTION: Jewift SECOND: Lamb VOTE: &0-0 Elisabeth Eckel presented the project according to the staff memorandum. Al Morganfield, Excel Energy, presented an overview of the proposal. Commissioner Lamb noted the similarities of this proposal to the gas regulation shed on the golf course. Commissioner Cahill asked Mr. Morganfield to describe how the structure would be protected from vehicles. There was no public comment. 4. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to Section 12-94-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for a major amendment to Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, modifying the GRFA calculations for the District; Page 2 increasing the number of lots for the District; and a final review of a minor subdivision, pursuant to Section 13-+2, Procedure, Vail Town Code, to modify the size of Lot 5, Amended Final Plat, Dauphinais/Mosely Subdivision Filing 1, a resubdivision of Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant Grand Traverse Homeowner's Association, represented by Pat Dauphinais Planner: WanenCampbell Amendment to SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse AGTION: Recommendation of approval MOTION: Jewitt SECOND: Lamb VOTE:4-0-0 Minor Subdivision AGTION: Approved with condition(s) MOTIONT Jewitt SEGOND: Lamb VOTE:4-0-0 coNDrTroN(s): 1. That the appficant not record the proposed plat, of Lot 5. Amended Final PIat: Dauohinais-Moselev Subdivision Filins 1: A R*ubdivision of Lots 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. and 10, until both readings of an ordinance to amend SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, without GRFA limitations has be adopted by Town Council, lf an ordinance to adopt SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, without GRFA limitations is not approved by Town Council that a GRFA limitation on the new Lot 5 and 7 will be 3,157 square feet for each lot and the SDD will be amended and adopted according to Town of Vail Gode. 2. That the applicant revise the title of the plat to stale Amendd Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amendd Final PIat: Dauphinais-Moselev Subdivision Filino 1: A Resubdivision of Lo|s 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. and 10 and replace the Town Council signature block with the correct Planning and Environmental Commission signature block prior to submitting the mylar copies for recording. Warren Campbell presented the project according to the memorandum. Pat Dauphinais, the applicant, reiterated the request and expressed that the Staff memorandum was very detailed and thorough. Chuck Baker, a homeowner, expressed the desire to be able to do with his home (within the Grand Traverse) what others have been able to do within his subdivision. He commented that the changes that had been made to the GRFA regulations were not applicable to homeowners within the Grand Traverse subdivision. The Commissioners voiced support for both applications. They felt that the SDD had sufficient regulations (building height, setbacks, site coverage, garage orientation, and architectural controls) contained within the document to conlrol the bulk, mass, height, and character of the structures which remained to be built and any additions to existing structures. Several members expressed concern that if GRFA was eliminated for the Town as a whole, more control would need to be given to the Design Review Board to advise homeowners and architects regarding design (bulk and mass, box-like structures). George Lamb specifically commented that he has alwap been an advocate of simplifying GRFA regulations. The goveming aspects of home size should be setbacks and site coverage (perhaps a variable measurement, based on lot size), making this issue an ideal scenario for determining how effective those governors would need to be in the event that GRFA was eliminated for the Town as a whole in the future. Page 3 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Planning and Environmental Commission Department of Community Development September 26,2005 A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for a major amendment to Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, modifying the GRFA calculations for the District; increasing the number of lots for the District and a final review of a minor subdivision, pursuant to Section 13-4-2, Procedure, Vail Town Code, to modify the size of Lot 5, Amended Final Plat, Dauphinais/Moseley Subdivision Filing 1, A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6, 7, 8,9, and 10, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant Pat Dauphinais, President of Grand Traverse H.O.A.Planner: Wanen Campbell il. SUMMARY The applicant, Pat Dauphinais, President of the Grand Traverse H.O.A., is requesting a recommendation from the Planning and Environmental Commisqion to the Town Council regarding a request to amend Special Development District (SDD) No. 22, Grand Traverse, to eliminate the maximum allowable Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) for each lot within SDD No. 22 and increase the number of lots within the SDD by one. ln addition, the applicant is requesting approval of a minor subdivision to subdivide Lot 5 of the Amended Final PIat: Dauphinais-Moselev Subdivision Filino 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5,6.7.8,9. and 10 and create Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moselev Subdivision Filina 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. and 10. Staff is recommending that the Planning and Environmental Commission fonrards a recommendation of approval to the Town Council regarding the request to eliminate GRFA restriction in SDD No. 22 and increase the number of lots by one and approval with conditions of the minor subdivision subject to the findings and conditions outlined in Section lX of this memorandum. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, Pat Dauphinais, President of the Grand Traverse H.O.A., is requesting a recommendation from the Planning and Environmental Commission to the Town Council regarding a request to amend Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, to eliminate the maximum allowable Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) for each lot within SDD No. 22 and increase the number of lots within the SDD. In addition, the applicant is requesting approval of a minor subdivision to subdivide Lot 5 of lhe Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moselev Attachment: E ilt. Subdivision Filino 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5.6.7.8.9. and 10 and create two new lots, Lots 5 and 7, by recording the proposed Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moselev Subdivision Filinq 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6.7. 8. 9. and 10. The applicant's request to remove the GRFA restrictions for the lots located within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, has arisen as the homes within the SDD are not eligible for the new GRFA methodology adopted by Ordinance 14, series of 2004, as the lots are restricted in terms of maximum allowable GRFA in all cases far below that which would be permitted under the underlying Primary/Secondary zone district in regards to lot size. In addition, the homes within the SDD are no longer eligible for a 250 addition or an interior conversion per the new GRFA regulations. The applicant is proposing that site coverage, setbacks, height, and the architectural requirements within SDD No. 22 would control development on the lots. A vicinity map has been aftached for reference (Attachment A). In addition, the applicant is requesting approval of a minor subdivision to subdivide Lot 5 of the Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moselev Subdivision Filinq 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6.7. 8.9. and 10 and create two new lots, Lots 5 and 7, by recording the proposed Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moselev Subdivision Filinq 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6. 7. 8. 9, and 10. A reduced copy of the proposed plat, Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais- Moselev Subdivision Filino 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. and 10. has been attached for reference (Attachment B). The existing Lot 5 which is proposed to be subdivided was created by combining two of the original plafted lots within Dauphinais-Moselev Subdivision Filinq 1. The applicant is proposing to resubdivide Lot 5, measuring 23,722 square feet, back into two smaller lots with the areas as follows, Lot 5 measuring 11,817 square feet and Lot 7 measuring 11,891 square feet. BACKGROUND o The area included within SDD No. 22 was annexed into the Town of Vail by Ordinance 29, Series of 1979 which became effective on August 15, 1979. o SDD No. 22 was created from 10.69 acres of land with an underlying zoning of Primary/Secondary zone district by Ordinance 23, Series of 1988. lt incfuded the creation of the Dauphinais-Moselev Subdivision Filinq 1 recorded in 1990 consisting of 24 lots and 3.741 acres of open space. . On May 7, 1991, the Vail Town Council introduced, read and approved on second reading Ordinance #10, Series of 1991, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance #13, Series of 1990, to provide changes to Special Development District #22 that concerned lot size, corresponding GRFA, maximum number of allowable employee dwelling units, and architectural guidelines. Ordinance #13, Series of 1990 was the original ordinance establishing SDD #22. On September 22, 1997, the Community Development Department approved, and the Planning and Environmental Commission upheld, a minor amendment to SDD #22. The minor amendment allowed for changes to the architectural guidelines outlined in Section 11 of Ordinance #10, Series of 1991. The changes included: . architectural guideline requiring that all the residences in the SDD have copper gutters and downspouts, and o the ability for the residence constructed on Lot 14 to have the garage doors of the residence facing the road. On June 8, 1998 the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a Major Amendment to SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse. The following items were approved as a part of the Major Amendment of the applicant's request on June 8, 1998: . an increase in the allowable GRFA for all existing and proposed employee housing units from 500 square feet maximum to 800 square feet maximum, . a change in the allowable enclosed parking area (garage) square footage credit from 600 square feet to 1,200 square to permit adequate enclosed parking for constructed employee housing units (600 square feet for the primary dwelling unit and 600 square feet for the EHU if constructed), . a replat of Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, I & 10 into Lots 5, 8, I & 10, thus eliminating two lots within the Grand Traverse development area, r an increase to the maximum number of outdoor lights allowed on each residential lot to 15 per lot total, . a modification to the required setbacks on Lots 5, 8, I & 10, . a reapportioning of GRFA within the Grand Traverse development area, and r o reapportioning of the 600 square foot garage credit. f n October of 2004, Ordinance 14, series of 2004, was adopted which amended the GRFA regulations regulating the entire Town of Vail. The properties located within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, were effected to a greater extent than other Primary/Secondary zoned properties because under the SDD GRFA is restricted below that which the base zone district would allow. In addition, the properties lost ability of homes within the SDD to request 250 additions and interior conversions. Finally, the SDD does not allow the properties to utilize the basement deduction provisions of Ordinance 14, Series ol2004. tv. o On July 25, 2005, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a work session in order to hear the applicant's request. In general, the Commissioners were in support of the proposed subdivision of Lot 5. In addition, the Commissioners generally supported the proposal to remove the GRFA restrictions within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, as there are additional architectural requirements within the SDD which would provide a level of comfort that the homes which have not been built will fit the character of the neighborhood which has already been established. Commission members expressed that the elimination of GRFA for the entire Town would be more difflcult as SDD No. 22 is different from a majority of Town in that it contains very small lots and additional architectural controls. ROLES OF THE REVIEWING BOARDS Special Developmqnt District and Maior Amendment Order of Review: Generally, applications will be reviewed firsi. by the PEC for impacts of use/development, then by the DRB for compliance of proposed buildings and site planning, and frnal approval by the Town Council. Plannino and Environmental Commission: The PEC shall review the proposal for and make a recommendation to the Town Council based on the Criteria and Findings listed in Section lX of this memorandum. Desion Review Board: The DRB has NO review authority on a SDD proposal, but must review any accompanying DRB application. The DRB review of an SDD prior to Town Council approval is purely advisory in nature. Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines. Staff provides a staff memo containing background on the property and provides a staff evaluation of the project with respect to the reguired criteria and findings, and a recommendation on approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Staff also facilitates the review process. Town Council: Action: The Town Council is responsible for final approval/denial of an SDD. The Town Council shall review the proposal using the Criteria and Findings listed in Section lX of this memorandum. Minor Subdivision Review Planning and Environmental Commission: Action: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for final approval, approve with modifications, or disapprove the plat- Specifically the code states in Section 13-12-3C, Review and Action on Plat: The planning and environmental commission shall review the plat and associafed materials and shall approve, approve with modifications or disapprove the plat within twenty one (21) days of the first public hearing on the exemption plat application or the exemption plat application will be deemed approved. A longer time peiod for rendering a decision may be granted subject to mutual agreement betvveen the planning and environmental commission and the applicant. The criteria for reviewing the plat shall be as contained in section 13-3-4 of this title. Design Review Board: Action: The Design Review Board has NO review authority on an exemption plat, but must review any accompanying Design Review Board application. Town Council: The Town Council is the appeals authority for an exemption plat review procedure in accordance with Section 13-3-5C, Vail Town Code, which reads as follows: Within ten (10) days the decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission on the final plat shall be transmifted to the Council by the staff. The Council may appeal the decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission within seventeen (17) days of the Planning and Environmental Commission's action. lf Council appeals the Planning and Environmental Commisslon's decislon, the Council shall hear substantially the same presentation by the applicant as was heard at the Planning and Environmental Commission hearing(s). The Council shall have thirty (30) days to affirm, reverse, or affirm with modifications the Planning and Environmental Commission decision, and the Council shall conduct the appeal at a regularly scheduled Council meeting. Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines. Staff provides a staff memo containing background on the property and provides a staff evaluation of the project with respect to the required criteria and findings, and a recommendation on approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Staff also facilitates the review process. V. o APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Town Of Vail Zoninq Code Article 12-9A: Special Development (SDD) District (in part) 12-94-1: PURPOSE: The purpose of the special development district is to encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land in order to promote ds most appropriate use; to improve the design character and quality of the new development with the town; to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of sfreefs and utilities; to preserue the natural and scenic features of open space areas,. and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail comprehensive plan Town of Vail Subdivision ReEulations 13-1-2: PURPOSE: C. Specific Purposes.' These regulations are fufther intended lo serve the fo I low i ng spe cifi c p urposes: 1. To inform each subdivider of the standards and criteria by which development proposals will be evaluated, and to provide information as to the type and extent of improvements required. 2. To provide for the subdivision of property in the future without conflict with development on adjacent land. 3. To protect and conserue the value of land throughout the Municipality and the value of buildings and improvements on the land. 4. To ensure that subdivision of property is in compliance with the Town's zoning ordinances, to achieve a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses, consisfenf with Town development objectives. 5. To guide public and private policy and action in order to provide adequate and effrcient tansportation, water, sewage, schoo/g parkg playgrounds, recreation, and other public reguirements and facilities and generally to provide that puHic facilities will have sufficient capacity to serve the proposed subdivision. 6. To provide for accurate legal descriptions of newly subdivided land and fo establsh reasonable and desirable construction desgn sfandards and procedures. 7. To prevent the pollution of air, streams and ponds, fo assure adequacy of drainage facilities, to safeguard the water table and to encourage the wise use and management of natural resources throughout the Town in order to preseve the integrity, stability and beauty of the community and the value of the land. 13-3-4: COMMTSSTON REVIEW OF APPLICATION; CRITERIA: The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of this Chapter, the Zoning Ordinance and other pertinent regulations that the Planning and Environmental Commission u. deerns applicable. Due consideration shall be given to the recommendations made by public agencies, utility companies and other agencies consulted under subsecfion 13-3-3C above. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall review the application and consider its appropriafeness in regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control, dens/les proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other applicable documents, environmental integrity and compatibility with the surrounding land uses and other applicable documents, effects on the aesthetics of the Town, SITE ANALYSIS Legal Description:Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filinq 1 and Amended Final Plat: Dauohinais-Moselev Subdivision Filinq 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6. 7.8.9. and 10 1450-1850 Lions ridge Loop and 1402-1428 Moraine Drive 10.69 acres (2165,656 sq ft) Special Development District No. 22 (Primary/Secondary zone district underlying zoning) Land Use Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential Current Land Use: Residential Lot 5, Amended Final PIat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moselev Subdivision Filinq 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5.6.7. 8. 9. and 10 Zoning:Special Development District No. 22 (Primary/Secondary (P/S) zone district underlying zoning) Land Use Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential Current Land Use: Vacant Develooment Slandard Reouired bv P/S Prooosed Lot Area: 1 5,000 sq. ft. 1 1 ,817 sq. ft. Address: Lot Size: Zoning: Dimension: Buildable Area: Frontage: GRFA: Access: 80'X80'min. 15,000 sq. ft. 30 feet min. 65 feet X 65 feet 1 1 ,817 sq. ft. 67 feet Proposed to be no limitation except that which can be constructed within the limitations of SDD No. 22. Access to the site is via Moraine Drive, a public road which is currently constructed. Lot7, Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amendd Final ptat: Dauphinais-Moselev Subdivision Filinq 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5.6.7. 8. 9. and 10 Zoning: Special Development District No. 22 (PrimaryiSecondary zone district underlying zoning) Land Use Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential Current Land Use: Vacant Develooment Standard Required bv P/S Proposed Lot Area: 15,000 sq. ft. 11,891 sq. ft. VII. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING 61 feet X 61 feet 1 1,891 sq. ft. 60 feet Zoninq PrimaryiSecondary zone district Public Accommodation zone district Low Density Multiple-Family zone district Primary/Secondary zone district Dimension: Buildable Area: Frontage: GRFA: Access: North: South: East: West: 80'X80'min. 15,000 sq. ft. 30 feet min. Proposed to be no limitation except that which can be constructed within the limitations of SDD No. 22. Access to the site is via Moraine Drive, a public road which is cunently constructed. Land Use Residential Hotel/Lodge Residential Residential VIII. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS Special Development District Maior Amendment Chapter 12-9 of the Town Code provides for the amendment of an existing special development districts in the Town of Vail. According to Section 12-9A-1, the purpose of a special development district is, "To encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land, in order to promote ifs mosf appropriate use,' fo improve the design character and qualtty of the new development within the Town; to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of streefs and utilities; to preserue the natural and scenic features of open space areas,' and to further the overall goals of the community as dated in the Vail Comprehensive Plan. An approved development plan for a Special Development District, in conjunction with the property's underlying zone district, sia// esfab/r'sfi the reguirements for guiding development and uses of propefty included in the Special Deve I opme nt D istri ct. " The Town Code provides nine design criteria which shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating the merits of the amendment to an existing special development district. lt shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interesl has been achieved. The following is a staff analysis of the project's compliance with the nine SDD review criteria: A. Consideration of Factors Reqardino Special Development Districts: A. Design compatibility and sensitivitlr to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. The requested proposal is to eliminate the maximum allowable Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) for each lot within SDD No. 22 under Section 4-B-5 of Ordinance 9, Series of 1998, the adopting ordinance, and an increase in the number of lots within the SDD by one by resubdividing Lot 5, an increase from 22 to 23 lots. Ordinance 9, Series of 1998 is attached for reference with text that would be deleted shown as strit<e-+nrecgh and added text is shown in bold(Attachment C). The proposal to remove the GRFA restrictions for the lots located within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, has arisen as the homes within the SDD are not eligible for the new GRFA methodology adopted by Ordinance 14, series of 2004, as the lots are restricted in terms of maximum allowable GRFA in all cases far below that which would be permitted under the underlying Primary/Secondary zone district in regards to lot size. ln addition, the homes within the SDD are no longer eligible for a 250 addition or an interior conversion per the new GRFA regulations. Staff would like to point out that the proposal to gain the ability for additions and interior conversions to existing homes within SDD No. 22 can. be accomplished by revising the GRFA limitations found within Section 4 of the SDD. Currently, the GRFA limitations are below that which Primary/Secondary zoning would allow by 612 to 2,568 square feet depending on the lot. The intent of the initial approval of SDD No. 22 was to create smaller lots in order to protect open space. Out of the total site area included within SDD No. 22, 10.69 acres, there was 3.741 acres set aside and protected as open space. When SDD No. 22was adopted the 24 lots within the SDD ranged from 8,494 square feet to 16,248 square feet with a majority of the lots measuring approximately 1 1,000 square feet in size. Staff believes that as it was the original intent to have smaller lots and a more clustered residential development in order to protect open space. Staff believes that the subdivision of the existing Lot 5, which measures 23,722 square feet into two smaller lots measuring 11,891 square feet and 11,817 square feet is in keeping with the intent of the SDD. Development within the SDD is regulated by Section 4 of Ordinance 9, Series of 1998. The adopting ordinance establishes the GRFA, setbacks, height, architectural design and materials, and orientation. The SDD deviates from the underlying zoning of Primary/Secondary zone district by allowing reduce front and side setbacks from 15 feet to 10 feet on many of the lots and increasing the rear setback on the lots located on the southern portion of the SDD from 15 feet to setbacks ranging from 35 to g7 feet with a majority being 40 to S0 feet. GRFA within the SDD is limited by the Tabte tocated in Section zt-B-S of the adopting ordinance. The GRFA limitations identified in the Table are substantially lower than that which would be permitted by Primary/Secondary zone district regulations. On average the maximum allowable GRFA under the SDD is 1,640 square feet less than that permitted under Primary/Secondary zoning. Staff has included an attachment which shows each lot, the size of the lot, the amount of GRFA allowed under the SDD, the amount of GRFA allowed under the Primary/Secondary zone district with the changes enacted by Ordinance 14, Series of 2004, the potential square footages of homes without GRFA limitations, allowable site coverage, and constructed site coverage (Attachment D). Staff believes that the elimination of GRFA limitations within SDD No. 22, will have no negative effect on the above criterion as the SDD adopting ordinance contains all the elements to control the bulk, mass, and height of the homes within the SDD within Section 4 of the adopting ordinance. The proposal to eliminate GRFA within SDD No. 22 could be a way to conduct a controlled study on the effects on bulk and mass of structures if GRFA was eliminated. Staff believes that the existing restrictions placed upon development in SDD No. 22 will result in new and redeveloped houses within the SDD being of similar character to those existing today. In addition, many of the homes within the SDD which are currently constructed have maximized site coverage and built to the extent of the designated setbacks or have very little left which insures that the existing structures would change minimally above grade. There are cunently 5 undeveloped lots within the SDD which would potentially be constructed under regulations in the SDD if GRFA was stricken from the adopting ordinance. Attachment C has sldke{h+eugh text depicting the existing language which must be stricken from Ordinance 9, Series of 1998 to eliminate GRFA requirements. Staff believes that the request to eliminate GRFA within the SDD complies with this criterion. B. Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. The proposed elimination of GRFA within SDD No. 22 and the increase in the number of lots within the SDD from 22 to 23 will not have a negative impact on the items identified in this criterion. The 10 initial approval of SDD No. 22 included 24 lots which was subsequently replatted to include 22 lots. This proposal would take the SDD up to 23 lots. The proposed elimination of GRFA would also have no negative impact on this criterion as there are several other factors contained within SDD No. 22 G. Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Ghapter 12-10 of the Vail Town Code. The proposed amendments to the SDD do not have any negative effect on this criterion. All lots developed within the SDD will comply with the parking standards. D. Conformity with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town policies and Urban Design Plan. The proposed amendment to increase the number of lots in the SDD from 22 to 23 complies with the Vail Comprehensive Plan. However, the request to eliminate GRFA within SDD No. 22 would be different in policy to how the remainder of the community is regarded to size of structures. Staff believes for several reasons as outlined in Staffs response to Criterion A of this Section that the size of homes within the SDD on the vacanl lots or any future redeveloped lot would be fundamentally similar to those which are constructed within the SDD cunently. Of the homes currently constructed many have already maximized site coverage so any addition to be made if GRFA was eliminated from the SDD would be below grade or in a vaulted area of the home. The combination of requirements contained within the SDD which include, setbacks which are more restrictive in areas, site coverage limited to 25%, heights of 33 feet, garage door orientation, and architectural minimums, will sufficiently control the bulk, mass, and height of the str,uctures which remain to be constructed or for future additions. In addition, the fact the lots within the SDD were allowed to be smaller than that required by the base zoning in order to preserve open space and sensitive areas limits the size of the structures dramatically as there is limited areas to construct a structure upon each site. E. ldentification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is proposed. According to the Official Town of Vail Geologic Hazard Maps, the SDD No. 22, Grand traverse, development site is not located in any geologically sensitive areas. Staff believes that the application complies with this criterion. F. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. 1l_ o As was stated in staffs response to Criterion A the initial adoption of SDD No. 22 was designed to preserve open space and sensitive areas. The cunent proposal would not alter that initial approval. G. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. The circulation system for this SDD was approved in the initial adoption of SDD No. 22 and is currently in place and functioning. This proposal does not alter that circulation system. H. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions. As was stated in staffs response to Criterion A the initial adoption of SDD No. 22 was designed to preserve open space and sensitive areas. The cunent proposal would not alter that initial approval. l. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that wil! maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. The applicant is proposing to construct the homes on the proposed and existing lots as the owners desire to construct upon them. Findings: The following findings are used for a Major Amendment to an SDD: 1. That the proposed major amendment to Special Development District No. 22 complies with the nine design criteria outlined in Section 12-9A-8 of the Vail Town Code. Furthermore, the applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Commission, based upon the testimony and evidence presented during the public hearing, that any adverse effects of the requested deviations from the development standards of the underlying zoning are outweighed by the public benefits provided. Lastly, the Commission finds that the request is consistent with the development goals and objectives of the Town. 2. With regards to the proposed elimination of GRFA, that: a. Proposed development controls, such as setbacks, site coverage, height, orientation, and architectural design, exist within the text of SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, to adequately control bulk, mass, and height of structures, and will maintain the character of new structures to those which exist; b. Proposed development controls comply with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations.c. Proposed development controls will provide adequate availability of L2 light, air and open space. d. Proposed development controls within the SDD will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. e. Proposed development controls will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by conformance with prescribed GRFA standards. 3. With regards to the proposed increase in the number of lots trom 22 to 23, that: a. Proposed increase in lots provides necessary separation between buibings and riparian areas, geologically sensitive areas and other environmentally sensitive areas. b. Proposed increase in lots comply with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations. c. Proposed increase in lots will provide adequate availability of light, air and open space. d. Proposed increase in lots will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. e. Proposed increase in lots will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not othenruise be achieved by conformance with prescribed setback standards. 4. That the proposed development controls within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse are in conformance with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations. 5. That the development is in compliance with the purposes of the Primary/Secondary zone district, that the proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of the neighborhood, and that the proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. Minor Subdivision A basic premise of subdivision regulations is that the minimum standards for the creation of new lots must be met. This subdivision will be reviewed under Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, of the Town of Vail Code. 1. The first set of criteria to be considered by the Planning and Environmental Commission for a Minor Subdivision application is: Lot Area: The minimum lot area for the Primary/Secondary zone district is 15,000 square feet. The proposed area of Lot 5 would be 11,817 square feet. The proposed area of Lot 7 would be 11,891 square feet. The two proposed resulting lots do not meet this requirement for the Primary/Secondary zone district. However, the intent of the approval of SDD No. 22 was to create smaller lots in order to protect open space. Out of the total site area included within SDD No. 22, '10.69 acres, there was 3.741 acres set aside and protect as open space. When SDD No. 22 L5 was adopted lots within the SDD ranged from 8,494 square feet to 16,248 square feet with a majority of the lots measuring approximately 11,000 square feet in size. Staff believes that as it was the original intent to have smaller lots and a more clustered residential development in order to protect open space and the lot which is proposed to be subdivided was previously two smaller lots prior to the recording of the Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moselev Subdivision Filino 1: A Resubdivision of Lots S. 6. 7. 8.9. and 10. Buildable Area: The minimum buildable area for the Primary/Secondary zone district is 15,000 square feet. The two proposed lots do not meet this requirement. However, for the same reasons identified above small lots which do not meet this requirement conform to the intent of SDD No. 22. Frontaoe: The Primary/Secondary zone district identifies a minimum frontage requirement of 30 feet. The two proposed lots meet this requirement. Dimension: The Primary/Secondary zone district requires lots to be able to enclose a square with a minimum dimension of 80 feet by 80 feet. The two proposed lots do not meet this requirement. However, for the same reasons identified above small lots which do not meet this requirement conform to the intent of SDD No. 22. 2. The second set of reMew criteria to be considered with a minor subdivision request is outlined in the Subdivision Regulations, 13-3-4, and is as follows: 'The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of this Chapter, the Zoning Ordinance and other peftinent regulations that the Planning and Environmental Commission deems applicable....The Planning and Environmental Commission shall review the application and consider its appropriateness in regardto Town policies relating to subdivision control, densffies proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other applicable documents, environmental integrity and compatibility with the sunounding /and uses and other applicable documents, effecfs on the aedhetics of the Town." The purpose section of Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, is intended to ensure that the subdivision is promoting the health, safety and welfare of the community. The subdivision purpose statement from 13-1-2 (C) are as follows: 1. To inform each subdivider of the sfandards and criteria by which development proposa/s will be evaluated and to provide information as fo fhe type and extent of improvements required." Staff Response: The applicant was informed as to the standards and criteria by which the proposed plat and future development would be t4 evaluated. One purpose of subdivision regulations, and any development control, is to establish basic ground rules which the staff, the PEC, the applicant and the community can follow in the public review process. Development on these two lots is governed by the SDD No. 22 adopting ordinance. With this proposed subdivision several portions of the SDD must be amend which where changes when the Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moselev Subdivision Filinq 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6. 7, 8. 9. and 10 was filed to combine two lots resulting in a larger Lot 5. The changes that are necessary to make to the text of SDD No. 22 can be found within Attachment C. Although this request does not involve the creation of a new subdivision it does include the resubdivision of an existing parcel of land, the minor subdivision process is the appropriate process to take one lot and subdivide it into two smaller lots. As a part of the overall application the applicant is requesting to eliminate the GRFA limitations identified within SDD No. 22. lf that portion of the application is approved by the Town Council the two newly created lots would be limited in development potential by site coverage, setbacks, height, architecture, and orientation. However, if this portion of the application is not approved staff would suggest that Section 4 of SDD No. 22 be revised to limit the two newly created lots to 3,157 square feet of GRFA a piece which is a split of the GRFA permitted on the larger Lot 5 as it exists currently. 2. To provide for the subdivision of property in the tuture without conflict with development on adjacent land.' Staff Response: This proposed minor subdivision take a large lot and subdivides it into two smaller lots which existed prior to being combined and will not adversely affect adjacent land. The proposed minor subdivision does not make either property undevelopable or non- conforming with regard to zoning requirements found within SDD No. 22. 3. To protect and conserue the value of land throughout the Municipality and the value of buildings and improvements on the land. Staff Response: The proposed minor subdivision will have no detrimental affect on the value of land within the Town. 4. To ensure that subdivision of property is in compliance with the Town's zoning ordinances, to achieve a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses, consr'sfenl with Town d ev el o p m e nt o bj e ctiv es. Staff Response: Staff believes the proposed minor amendment will not preclude a harmonious, convenient and workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development objectives. The proposed minor subdivision does not make either property undevelopable or non- conforming with regard to zoning requirements found within SDD No. 22. 5. To guide public and private policy and action in order to provide I5 adeguate and efficient transportation, water, sewage, schoo/g parks, playgrounds, recreation, and other public requlrements and facilities and generally to provide that public facilities wilt have sufficient capacity to serve the proposed subdivision. Staff Response: The subdivision regulations are intended primarily to address impacts of large'scale subdivisions of property, as opposed to this particular proposal to amend this plat. Staff does not believe this proposal will have any negative impacts on any of the above-listed public facilities. 6. To provide for accurate legal descriptions of newly subdivided land and fo estab/ish reasonable and desirable construction design standards and procedures. Staff Response: The proposed minor subdivision will provide for accurate legal descriptions for the two newly configured properties. 7. To prevent the pollution of air, dreams and ponds, fo assure adequacy of drainage facilities, to safeguard the water table and to encourage the wise use and management of natural resources throughout the Town in order to preserue the integrity, stability, and beauty of the community and the value of the land. Staff Response: The proposed minor subdivision will have no negative affect on the criteria listed above. Findings: The following findings are used for a Minor Subdivision: 1. That the application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of the Minor Subdivision Chapter, the Zoning Ordinance and other pertinent regulations that the Planning and Environmental Commission deems applicable. 2. That the application is appropriate in regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control, densities proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other applicable documents, environmental integrity and compatibility with the sunounding land uses and other applicable documents, and effects on the aesthetics of the Town. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council to allow for a major amendment to Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, modifying the GRFA calculations for the District and increasing the number of lots for the District with the findings listed below. Staffs recommendation is based upon a review of the criteria and findings as outlined in this memorandum and from the evidence and testimony presented, 15 Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of approval of the applicant's requesl, staff recommends that the following findings be made as part of the motion: 1. That the proposed major amendment to Special Development District No. 22 complies with the nine design criteria outlined in Section 12-94-8 of the Vail Town Code. Furthermore, the applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Commission, based upon the testimony and evidence presented during the public hearing, that any adverse effects of the requested deviations from the development standards of the underlying zoning are outweighed by the public benefits provided. Lastly, the Commission finds that the request is consistent with the development goals and objectives of the Town. 2. With regards to the proposed elimination of GRFA, that: a. Proposed development controls, such as setbacks, site coverage, height, orientation, and architectural design, exist within the text of SDD No. 22, Grand Travers, to adequately control bulk, mass, and height of structures, and will maintain the character of new structures to those which exist; b. Proposed development controls comply with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations. c. Proposed development controls will provide adequate availability of light, air and open space. d. Proposed development controls within the SDD will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. e. 'Proposed development controls will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not othenrise be achieved by conformance with prescribed GRFA standards. With regards to the proposed increase in the number of lots from 22 to 23, that: a. Proposed increase in lots provides necessary separation between buildings and riparian areas, geologically sensitive areas and other environmentally sensitive areas. b. Proposed increase in lots complies with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations. c. Proposed increase in lots will provide adequate availability of light, air and open space. d. Proposed increase in lots will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. e. Proposed increase in lots will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by conformance with prescribed setback standards. That the proposed development controls within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, are in conformance with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban Design 3. 4. L7 Guide Plan and Design Considerations. 5. That the development is in compliance with the purposes of the Primary/Secondary zone district, that the proposal does not othenrvise have a significant negative effect on the character of the neighborhood, and that the proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and Environmentaf Commission approves with conditions the Amended Final Plat: pursuant to Chapter 13-4, Minor Subdivisions, Vail Town Code, to create Lots 5 and 7, located at based upon the criteria evaluated in this memorandum. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the minor subdivision request staff recommends that the following conditions be made as a part of that motion: 1. That the appficant not record the proposed plat, Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moselev Subdivision Filina 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6. 7. 8, 9. and 10, until both readings of an ordinance to amend SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, without GRFA limitations has be adopted by Town Council. lf an ordinance to adopt SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, without GRFA limitations is not approved by Town Council that a GRFA limitation on the new Lot 5 and 7 will be 3,157 square feet for each lot and the SDD will be amended and adopted according to Town of Vail Code. 2. That the appficant revise the title of the plat to state Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moselev Subdivision Filinq 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5.6.7. 8.9. and 10 and replace the Town Council signature block with the correct Planning and Environmental Commission signature block prior to submitting the mylar copies for recording. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the minor subdivision request staff recommends that the following findings be made as a part of the motion. 1. That the application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of the Minor Subdivision Chapter, the Zoning Ordinance and other pertinent regulations that the Planning and Environmental Commission deems applicable. 2. That the application is appropriate in regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control, densities proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other applicable documents, environmental integrity and compatibility with the sunounding land uses and other applicable documents, and effects on the aesthetics of the Town. 18 TO: FROM: DATE: .SUBJECT: o MEMORANDUM Planning and Environmental Commission Department of Community Development September 26, 2005 A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to Section '12-94-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for a major amendment to Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, modifying the GRFA calculations for the District; increasing the number of lots for the District; and a final review of a minor subdivision, pursuant to Section 134-2, Procedure, Vail Town Code, to modify the size of Lot 5, Amended Final Plat, Dauphinais/Mosely Subdivision Filing 1, A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Pat Dauphinais, President of Grand Traverse H.O.A.Planner: Wanen Campbell t.SUMMARY The applicant, Pat Dauphinais, President of the Grand Traverse H.O.A., is requesting a recommendation from the Planning and Environmental Commission to the Town Council regarding a request to amend Special Development District (SDD) No. 22, Grand Traverse, to eliminate the maximum allowable Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) for each lot within SDD No. 22 and increase the number of lots within the SDD by one. In addition, the applicant is requesting approval of a minor subdivision to subdivide Lot 5 of the Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filino 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. and 10 and create Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filinq 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. and 10. Staff is recommending that the Planning and Environmental Commission fonrards a recommendation of approval to the Town Council regarding the request to eliminate GRFA restriction in SDD No. 22 and increase the number of lots by one and approval with conditions of the minor subdivision subject to the findings and conditions outlined in Section lX of this memorandum. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, Pat Dauphinais, President of the Grand Traverse H.O.A., is requesting a recommendation from the Planning and Environmental Commission'to the Town Council regarding a request to amend Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, to eliminate the maximum allowable Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) for each lot within SDD No. 22 and increase the number of lots within the SDD. In addition, the applicant is requesting approval of a minor subdivision to subdivide Lot 5 of lhe Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais'Moslev ll. Iil. Subdivision Filino 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. and l0 and create two new lots, Lots 5 and 7, by recording the proposed Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filinq 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. and 10 The applicant's request to remove the GRFA resfictions for the lots located within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, has arisen as the homes within the SDD are not eligible for the new GRFA methodology adopted by Ordinance 14, series of 2004, as the lots are restricted in terms of maximum allowable GRFA in all cases far below that which would be permitted under the underlying Primary/Secondary zone district in regards to lot size. In addition, the homes within the SDD are no longer eligible for a 25O addition or an interior conversion per the new GRFA regulations. The applicant is proposing that site coverage, setbacks, height, and the architectural requirements within SDD No. 22 would control development on the lots. A vicinity map has been attached for reference (Attachment A). ln addition, the applicant is reguesting approval of a minor subdivision to subdivide Lot 5 of the Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filino 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. and 10 and create two new lots, Lots 5 and 7, by recording the proposed Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filinq 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6.7. 8.9. and 10. A reduced copy of the proposed plat, Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filinq 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. and 10. has been attached for reference (Attachment B). The existing Lot 5 which is proposed to be subdivided was created by combining two of the original platted lots within Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filino 1. The applicant is proposing to resubdivide Lot 5, measuing 23,722 square feet, back into two smaller lots with the areas as follows, Lot 5 measuring 11,817 square feet and Lot 7 measuring 1 1,891 square feet. BACKGROUND r The area included within SDD No. 22 was annexed into the Town of Vail by Ordinance 29, Series of 1979 which became effective on August 15, 1979, . SDD No. 22 was created from 10.69 acres of land with an underlying zoning of Primary/Secondary zone district by Ordinance 23, Series of 1988. lt included th€ creation oi the Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filina I recorded in 1990 consisting of 24 lots and 3.741 acres of open'. space. .. On May 7, 1991 , the Vail Town Council introduced, read and approved on second reading Ordinance #10, Series of 1991, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance #13, Series of 1990, to provide changes to Special Development District #22 lhat concerned lot size, conesponding GRFA, maximum number of allowable employee dwelling units, and architectural guidelines. Ordinance #13, Series of 1990 was the original ordinance establishing SDD #22. On September 22, 1997, the Community Development Department approved, and the Planning and Environmental Commission upheld, a minor amendment to SDD #22. The minor amendment allowed for changes to the architectural guidelines outlined in Section 11 of Ordinance #10, Series of 1991 . The changes included: r architectural guideline requiring that all the residences in the SDD have copper gutters and downspouts, and o the ability for the residence constructed on Lot 14 to have the garage doors of the residence facing the road. On June 8, 1998 the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a Major Amendment to SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse. The following items were approved as a. part of the Major Amendment of the applicant's request on June 8, 1998: r an increase in the allowable GRFA for all existing and proposed employee housing units from 500 square feet maximum to 800 square feet maximum . a change in the allowable enclosed parking area (garage) square footage credit from 600 square feet to 1,200 square to permit adequate enclosed parking for constructed employee housing units (600 square feet for the primary dwelling unit and 600 square feet for the EHU if constructed), . a replat of Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, I & 10 into Lots 5, 8, 9 & 10, thus eliminating two lots within the Grand Traverse development arca, o an increase to the maximum number of outdoor lights allowed on each residential lot to 15 per lot total, r a modification to the required setbacks on Lots 5, 8, 9 & 10, . a reapportioning of GRFA within the Grand Traverse development area, and r a reapportioning of the 600 square foot garage credit. . fn October of 2004, Ordinance 14, series of 2004, was adopted which amended the GRFA regulations regulating the entire Town of Vail. The properties located within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, were effected to a greater extent than other Primary/Secondary zoned properties because under the SDD GRFA is restricted below that which the base zone district would allow. ln addition, the properties lost ability of homes within the SDD to request 250 additions and interior conversions. Finally, the SDD does not allow the properties to utilize the basement deduction provisions of Ordinance 14, Series of 2004. tv. . On July 25, 2005, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a work session in order to hear the applicant's request. In general, the Commissioners were in support of the proposed subdivision of Lot 5. ln addition, the Commissioners generally supported the proposal to remove the GRFA restrictions within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, as there are additional architectural requirements within the SDD which would provide a level of comfort that the homes which have not been built will fit the character of the neighborhood which has already been established. Commission members expressed that the elimination of GRFA for the entire Town would be more difficult as SDD No. 22 is different from a majority of Town in that it contains very small lots and additional architectural controls. ROLES OF THE REVIEWING BOARDS Special Development Distric't and Maior Amendment Order of Review: Generally, applications will be reviewed firg- by the PEC for impacts of use/development, then by the DRB fw compliance of proposed buildings and site planning, and final approval by the Town Council. Planninq and Environmental Commission: The PEC shall review the proposal for and make a recommendation to the Town Council based on the Criteria and Findings listed in Section lX of this memorandum. Desion Review Board: The DRB has NO review authority on a SDD proposal, but must review any accompanying DRB application. The DRB review of an SDD prior to Town Council approval is purely advisory in nature. Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines. Stafi provides a staff memo containing background on the property and provides a staff evaluation of the project with respect to the required criteria and findings, and a recommendation on approwl, approval with conditions, or denial. Staff also facilitates the reMew process. Town Council: Action: The Town Council is responsible for final approval/denial of an SDD. The Town Council shall review the proposal using the Criteria and Findings listed in Section lX of this memorandum. Minor Subdivision Review Planning and Environmental Gommission: Action: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for final approval, approve with modifications, or disapprove the plat. Specifically the code states in Section 13-12-3C, ReMew and Action on Plat: The planning and environmental commission shall review the plat and assocrafed materials and shall approve, approve with modifications or disapprove the plat within twenty one (21) days of the first public hearing on the exemption plat application or the exemption plat application will be deemed approved. A longer time period for rendering a decision may be granted subject to mutual agreement between the planning and environmental commission and the applicant. The criteria for reviewing the plat shall be as contained in section 13-3-4 of this title. Design Review Board: Action: The Design ReMew Board has NO review authority on an exemption ,plat, but must review any accompanying Design Review Board application. Town Gouncil: The Town Council is the appeals authority for an exemption plat review procedure in accordance with Section 13-3-5C, Vail Town Code, which reads as follows: Within ten (10) days the decision of the Planning and Environmentat Commission on the final plat shall be transmifted to the Council by the staff. The Council ma:i appeal the decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission within seventeen (17) days of the Planning and Environmental Commission's action. If Council appeals the Planning and Environmental Commission's decision, the Council shall hear subsfantially the same presentation by the applicant as was heard at the Planning and Environmental Commission hearing(s). The Council shall have thirty (30) days to affirm, reverse, or affirm with modifications the Planning and Environmental Commission.decision, and the Council shall conduct the appeal at a regjularly scheduled Council meeting. Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines. Staff provides a staff memo containing background on the property and provides a staff evaluation of the project with respect to the required criteria and findings, and a recommendation on approval, approval with mnditions, or denial. Staff also facilitates the review process. V. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Town Of VailZonino Code Article 12-9A: Special Development (SDD) Distric,t (in part) 12-9A-1: PURPOSE: The purpose of the special development district is to encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land in order to promote its mosl. appropriafe use,. to improve the design character and quality of the new development with the town; to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of sfreefs and utilities; to preserue the natural and scenic features of open space areas,' and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail comprehensive plan Town of Vail Subdivision Requlations 13-1-2: PURPOSE: C. Speciftc Purposes: These regulations are fol low i ng speciftc p urpose s: 1. To inform each subdivider of the standards and criteria by which development proposls will be evaluated, and to provide information as to the type and extent of improvements required. 2. To provide for the subdivision of propefiy in the future without conflict with development on adjacent land. 3. To protect and conseve the value of land throughout the Municipality and the value of buildings and improvements on the land. 4. To ensure that suMivision of property is in compliance with the Town's zoning ordinances, to achieve a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among /and uses, consisfenf with Town development objectives. 5. To guide public and private policy and action in order to provide , adequate and efficient tansportation, water, sewage, schoolg parks, playgrounds, recreation, and other public requirements and facilities and generally to provide that public facilities will have sufficient capacity to serve the proposed subdivisron. 6. To provide for accurate legal descriptions of newly subdivided land and fo estab/r'sh reasonable and desirable construction deslgtn standards and procedures. 7. To prevent the pollution of air, streams and ponds, fo assure adequacy of drainage facilities, to safeguard the water table and to encourage the wise use and management of natural resources throughout the Town in order to preserue the integrity, stability and beauty of the communfiy and the value of the land. 1 3-34: COMMTSSTO N REv I EW O F AP P Ll CAT| O N ; C R I TERI A: The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant lo sltow that the application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of this Chapter, the Zoning Ordinance further intended to serue the vt. and other pertinent regulations that the Planning and Environmental Commission deems applicable. Due consideration shall be given to the recommendations made by public agencies, utility companies and other agencies consulted under subsecftbn 13-3-3C above. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall review the application and consider its appropriafeness in regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control, densrtles proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other applicable documents, environmental integrity and compatibility with the sunounding /and uses and other applicable documents, effects on the aesthetics of the Town. SITE ANALYSIS Legal Description:Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filinq 1 and Amended Final PIat: Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filinq 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6. 7, 8. 9. and 10 1450-1850 Lions ridge Loop and 1402-1428 Moraine Drive 10.69 acres (465,656 sq ft) Special Development District No. 22 (Primary/Secondary zone district underlying zoning) Land Use Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential Current Land Use: Residential Lot 5, Amended Final PIat: A R*ubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filino 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6.7. 8. 9. and 1O Zpning:Special Development District No. 22 (Primary/Secondary (P/S) zone district underlying zoning) Land Use Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential Cunent Land Use: Vacant Develooment Standard Reouired bv P/S Proposed Lot Area: 15,000 sq. ft. 1 1 ,817 sq. ft. Address: Lot Size: Zoning: Dimension: Buibabb Area: Frontage: GRFA: Access: 80'X80'min. 15,000 sq. ft. 30 feet min. 65 feet X 65 feet 1 1,817 sq. ft. 67 feet Proposed to be no limitation except that which can be constructed within the limitations of SDD No. 22. Access to the site is via Moraine Drive, a public road which is currently constructed. Lot7, Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filinq 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6.7. 8. 9. and 10 Zoning:Special Development District No. 22 (Primary/Secondary zone district underlying zoning) Land Use Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential Current Land Use: Vacant Development Standard Reouired bv P/S Lot Area: 15,000 sq. ft. Proposed 11,891 sq. ft. 61 feet X 61 feet 11,891 sq. ft. 60 feet Zonino Primary/Secondary zone district Public Accommodation zone district Low Density Multiple-Family zone district Primary/Secondary zone district Dimension: Buildable Area: Frontiage: GRFA: Abcess: North: South: East: V{est: 80'X80'min. 15,000 sq, ft. 30 feet min. Proposed to be no limitation except that which can be constructed within the limitations of SDD No. 22. Access to the site is via Moraine Drive, a public road which is currently constructed. VII. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING Land Use Residential Hotel/Lodge Residential Residential VIII. CRITERIAANDFINDINGS Special Develooment District Maior Amendment Chapter 12-9 of the Town Code provides for the amendment of an existing special development districts in the Town of Vail. According to Section 12-9A-1, the purpose of a special development district is, 'To encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land, in order: to promote its mosf appropriate use,' fo improve the design character and quality of the new development within the Town; to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of sfreets dnd utilities; to preserue the natural and scenic features of open space areas,' and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail Comprehensive Plan. An approved development plan for a Special Development District, in conjunction with the propefty's underlying zone district, sha// estab/ish the requirements for guiding development and uses of propefi included in the Special Developme nt D istrict. " The Town Code provides nine design criteria which shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating the merits of the amendment to an existing special development district. lt shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved. The following is a staff analysis of the project's compliance with the nine SDD review criteria: A. Consideration of Factors Reoardinq Soecial Develooment Districts: A. Design compatibility and sensitivity to thE immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. The requested proposal is to eliminate the maximum allowable Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) for each lot within SDD No. 22 under Section z1-B-5 of Ordinance 9, Series of 1998, the adopting ordinance, and an increase in the number of lots within the SDD by one by resubdividing Lot 5, an increase lrom 22 to 23 lots. Ordinance 9, Series of 1998 is attached for reference with text that would be . deleted shown as strike--threugrh and added text is shown in bold(Aftachment C). The proposal to remove the GRFA restrictions for the lots located within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, has arisen as the homes within the SDD are not eligible for the new GRFA methodology adopted by Ordinance 14, series of 2004, as the lots are restricted in terms of maximum allowable GRFA in all cases far below that which would be permitted under the underlying Primary/Secondary zone district in regards to lot size. In addition, the homes within the SDD are no longer eligible for a 250 addition or an inlerior conversion per the new GRFA regulations. Staff would like to point out that the proposal to gain the ability for additions and interior conversions to existing homes within SDD No. 22 can be accomplished by reMsing the GRFA limitations found within Section 4 of the SDD. Cunently, the GRFA limitations are below that which Primary/Secondary zoning would allow by 612 to 2,568 square feet depending on the lot. The intent of the initial approval of SDD No. 22 was to create smaller lots in order to protect open space. Out of the total site area included within SDD No. 22, 10.69 acres, there was 3.741 acres set aside and protected as open space. When SDD No. 22was adopted the 24 lots within the SDD ranged from 8,494 square feet to 16,248 square feet with a majority of the lots measuring approximately 1 1,000 square feet in size. Staff believes that as it was the original intent to have smaller lots and a more clustered residential development in order to protect open space. Staff believes that the subdivision of the existing Lot 5, which measurcs 23,722 square feet into two smaller lots measuring 11,891 square feet and 11,8'17 square feet is in keeping with the intent of the SDD. Developmeni within the SDD is regulated by Section 4 of Ordinance 9, Series of 1998. The adopting ordinance establishes the GRFA, setbacks, height, architectural design and materials, and orientation. The SDD deviates from the underlying zoning of Primary/Secondary zone district by allowing reduce front and side setbacks from 15 feet to 10 feet on many of the lots and increasing the rear setback on the lots located on the southem portion of the SDD from 15 feet to setbacks ranging from 35 to 97 feet with a majority being 40 to 50 feet. GRFA within the SDD is limited by the Table located in Section 4-B-5 of the adopting ordinance. The GRFA limitations identifled in the Table are substantially lower than that which would be permitted by Primary/Secondary zone district regulations. On average the maximum allowable GRFA under the SDD is 1,640 square feet less than that permitted under Primary/Secondary zoning. Staff has included an attachment which shows each lot, the size of the lot, the amount of GRFA allowed under the SDD, the amount of GRFA allowed under the Primary/Secondary zone dishict with the changes enacted by Ordinance 14, Series of 2004, the potential square footages of homes without GRFA limitations, allowable site coverage, and constructed site coverage (Attachment D). Staff believes that the elimination of GRFA limitations within SDD No., 22, will have no negative effect on the above criterion as the SDD adopting ordinance contains all the elements to control the bulk, mass, and height of the homes within the SDD within Section 4 of the adopting ordinance. The proposal to eliminate GRFA within SDD No. 22 wuld be a way to conduct a controlled study on the effects on bulk and mass of structures ]f GRFA was eliminated. Staff believes that the existing restrictions placed upon development in SDD No. 22 will result in new and redeveloped houses within the SDD being of similar character to those existing today. ln addition, many of the homes within the SDD which are currently constructed have maximized site coverage and built to the extent of the designated setbacks or have very little left which insures that the existing structures would change minimally above grade. There are cunently 5 undeveloped lots within the SDD which would potentially be constructed under regulations in the SDD if GRFA was stricken from the adopting ordinance. Attachment C has €*ike+hresgh text depicting the existing language which must be stricken from Ordinance 9, Series of 1998 to eliminate GRFA requirements. Staff believes that the reguest to eliminate GRFA within the SDD complies with this criterion. B. Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and ac{ivity. The proposed elimination of GRFA within SDD No. 22 and the increase in the number of lots within the SDD from 22 to 23 will not 10 c. D. have a negative impact on the items identified in this criterion. The initial approval of SDD No. 22 included 24 lots which was subsequently replatted to include 22 lols. This proposal would take the SDD up to 23 lots. The proposed elimination of GRFA would also have no negative impact on this criterion as there are several other factors contained within SDD No. 22 Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 12-10 of the Vail Town Code. The proposed amendments to the SDD do not have any negative effect on this criterion. All lots developed within the SDD will comply with the parking standards. Gonformity with the applicable elements of the Vail Gomprehensive Plan, Town policies and Urban Design Plan. The proposed amendment to increase the number of lots in the SDD lrom 22 to 23 complies with the Vail Comprehensive Plan. However, the request to eliminate GRFA within SDD No. 22 would be different in policy to how the remainder of the community is regarded to size of structures. Staff believes for several reasons as outlined in Staffs response to Criterion A of this Section that the size of homes within the SDD on the vacant lots or any future redeveloped lot would be fundamentally similar to those which are constructed within the SDD cunently. Of the homes curently constructed many have already maximized site coverage so any addition to be made if GRFA was eliminated from the SDD would be below grade or in a vaulted area of the home. The combination of requirements contained within the SDD which include, setbacks which are more restrictive in areas, site coverage limited to 25%, heights of 33 feet, garuge door orientation, and architectural minimums, will sufficiently control the bulk, mass, and height of the structures which remain to be constructed or for future additions. In addition, the fact the lots within the SDD were allowed to be smaller than that required by the base zoning in order to preserve open space and sensitive areas limits the size of the structures dramatically as there is limited areas to construct a structure upon each site. ldentification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the propefi on which the special development district is proposed. According to the Official Town of Vail Geologic Hazard Maps, the Crossroads development site is not located in any geologically sensitive areas. Staff believes that the application complies with this criterion. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and E. F. 1L o overall aesthetic quality of the community. As was stated in staffs response to Criterion A the initial adoption of SDD No. 22 was designed to preserve open space and sensitive areas. The cunent proposal would not alter that initial approval. G. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. The circulation system for this SDD was approved in the initial adoption of SDD No. 22 and is cunently in place and functioning. This proposal does not alter that circulation system. H. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in orderto optimize and preserve natural fsatures, recneation, views and functions. As was stated in staffls response to Criterion A the initial adoption of SDD No. 22 was designed to preserve open spaoe and sensitive areas. The cunent proposal would not alter that initial approval. L Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. The applicant is proposing to construct the homes on the proposed and existing lots as the own€rs desire to construct upon them. Findings: The following findings are used for a Major Amendment to an SDD: 1. That the proposed major amendment to Special Development District No. 22 complies with the nine design criteria outlined in Section 12-94€ of the Vail Town Code. Furthermore, the applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Commission, based upon the testimony and evidence presented during the public hearing, that any adverse effects of the requested deviations from the development standards of the underlying zoning are outweighed by the public benefits provided. Lastly, the Commission finds that the request is consistent with the development goals and objectives of the Town. 2. With regards to the proposed elimination of GRFA, that: a. Proposed development controls, such as setbacks, site coverage, height, orientation, and architectural design, exist within the text of SDD No. 22, Grand Travers, to adequately control bulk, mass, and height of structures, and will maintain the character of new structures to those which exist; b. Proposed development controls comply with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations. L2 c. Proposed development controls will provide adequate availability of light, air and open space. d. Proposed development controls within the SDD will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. e. Proposed development controls will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not othenrrise be achieved by conformance with prescribed GRFA standards. 3. With regards to the proposed increase in the number of lots from 22lo 23, that a. Proposed increase in lots provides necessary separation between buibings and riparian areas, geologically sensitive areas and other environmentally sensitive areas. b. Proposed increase in lots comply with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations. c. Proposed increase in lots will provide adequate availability of light, air and open space. d. Proposed increase in lots will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. e. Proposed increase in lots will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not othenruise be achieved by conformance with prescribed setback standards. 4. That the proposed development controls within SDD No, 22, Grand Traverse are in conformance with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations. 5, That the development is in compliance with the purposes of the Primary/Secondary zone district, that the proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of the neighborhood, and that the proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. Minor Subdivision A basic premise of subdivision regulations is that the minimum standards for the creation of new lots must be met. This subdivision will be reviewed under Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, of the Town of Vail Code. 1. The first set of criteria to be considered by the Planning and Environmental Commission for a Minor Subdivision application is: E!-Area: The minimum lot area for the Primary/Secondary zone district is 15,000 square feet. The proposed area of Lot 5 would be 11,817 square feet. The proposed area of Lot 7 would be 11,891 square feet. The two proposed resulting lots do not meet this requirement for the Primary/Secondary zone district. However, the intent of the approval of SDD No. 22 was to create smaller lots in order to protect open space. Out of the total site area included within SDD No. 22, 10.69 acres, there 13 o was 3.741 acres set aside and protect as open space. When SDD No. 22 was adopted lots within the SDD ranged from 8,494 square feet to 16,248 square feet with a majority of the lots measuring approximately 11,000 square feet in size. Staff believes that as it was the original intent to have smaller lots and a more clustered residential development in order to protect open space and the lot which is proposed to be subdivided was previously two smaller lots prior to the recording of the Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filinq 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6. 7. 8.9. and 10 Buildable Area: The minimum buildable area for the Primary/Secohdary zone district is 15,000 square feet. The two proposed lots do not meet this requirement. However, for the same reasons identified above small lots which do not meet this requirement conform to the intent of SDD No. 22. @tare: The Primary/Secondary zone district identifies a minimum frontage requirement of 30 feet. The two proposed lots meet this requirement. Dimension: The Primary/Secondary zone district requires lots to be able to enclose a square with a minimum dimension of 80 feet by 80 feet. The two proposed lots do not meet this requirement. However, for the same reasons identified above small lots which do not meet this requirement conform to the intent of SDD No. 22. 2. The second set of review criteria to be considered with a minor subdivision request is outlined in the Subdivision Regulations, 13-3-4, and is as follows: 'The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of this Chapter, the Zoning Ordinance and other pertinent regulations that the Planning and Environmental Commission deems applicable....The Planning and Environmental Commission shall review the application and consider its appropriateness ln regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control, densrUes proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other applicable documents, environmental integrity and compatibility with the sunounding /and uses and other applicable documents, et7ecfs on the aesthetics of the Town.' The purpose section of Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, is intended to ensure that the subdivision is promoting the health, safety and welfare of the community. The subdivision purpose statementftom 1&1-2 (C) are as follows: 1. To inform each subdivider of the standards and criteria by which development proposa/s will be evaluated and to provide information as fo the fype and ertent of improvements required.' Staff Response: The applicant was informed as to the standards and L4 criteria by which the proposed plat and future development would be evaluated. One purpose of subdivision regulations, and any development control, is to establish basic ground rules which the staff, the PEC, the applicant and the community can follow in the public review process. Development on these two lots is governed by the SDD No. 22 adopting ordinance. With this proposed subdivision several portions of the SDD must be amend which where changes when the Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filino 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. and 10 was filed to combine two lots resulting in a larger Lot 5. The changes that are necessary to make to the text of SDD No. 22 can be found within Attachment C. Although this request does not involve the creation of a new subdivision it does include the resubdivision of an existing parcel of land, the minor subdivision process is the appropriate process to take one lot and subdivide it into two smaller lots. As a part of the overall application the applicant is requesting to eliminate the GRFA limitations identified within SDD No. 22. lf that portion of the application is approved by the Town Council the two newly created lots would be limited in development potential by site coverage, setbacks, height, architecture, and orientation. However, if this portion of the application is not approved staff would suggest that Section 4 of SDD No. 22 be revised to limit the two newly created lots to 3,157 square feet of GRFA a piece which is a split of the GRFA permitted on the larger Lot 5 as it exists currently. 2. To provide fq the subdivision of property in the future without conflictwith development on adjacent land." Staff Response: This proposed minor subdivision take a large lot and subdivides it into two smaller lots which existed prior to being combined and will not adversely affect adjacent land. The proposed minor subdivision does not make either property undevelopable or non- conforming with regard to zoning requirements found within SDD No. 22. 3. To protect and conserue the value of land throughout the Municipality and the value of buildings and improvements on the land. Staff Response: The proposed minor subdivision will have no detrimental affect on the value of land within the Town. 4. To ensure that subdivision of property is in compliance with the Town's zoning ordinances, fo achieve a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses, consisfenf with Town d evel op m e nt objectives. Staff Response: Staff believes the proposed minor amendment will not preclude a harmonious, convenient and workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development objectives. The proposed minor subdivision does not make either property undevelopable or non- conforming with regard to zoning requirements found within SDD No. 22. 15 5. To guide public and private policy and action in order to provide adequate and efficient transportation, water, sewage, schoo/s, parks, playgrounds, recreation, and other public requirements and facilities and generally to provide that public facilities will have sufficient capactty to serue the proposed subdfuisrbn. Staff Response: The subdivision regulations are intended primarily to address impacb of large-scale subdivisions of property, as opposed to this particular proposal to amend this plat. Staff does not believe this proposal will have any negative impacts on any of the above-listed public facilities. 6. To provide for accurate legal descriptions of newly subdivided land and fo estab/ish reasonable and desirable construction design standards and procedures. Staff Response: The proposed minor subdivision will provide for accurate legal desoiptions for the two newly configured properties. 7. To prevent the pollution of air, streams and ponds, to assure adequacy of drainage facilities, to safeguard the water table and to encourage the wise use and management of natural resources throughout the Town in order to preserue the integrity, stability, and beauty of the community and the value of the land. Staff Response: The proposed minor subdivision will have no negative affect on the cdteria listed above. Findings: The following findings are used for a Minor Subdivision: 1. That the application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of the Minor Subdivision Chapter, the Zoning Ordinance and other pertinent regulations that the Planning and Environmental Commission deems applicable. 2. That the application is appropriate in regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control, densities proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other applicable documents, environmental integrity and .compatibility with the sunounding land uses and other applicable documents, and effects on the aesthetics of the Town. STAFF RECOMMENDANON The Community Development Department re@mmends that the Planning and Environmental Commission fonvards a rocommendation of approval to the Vail Town Council to allow for a major amendment to Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, modifying the GRFA calculations for the District and inpreasing the number of lots for the District with the findings listed below. StafFs L6 recommendation is based upon a review of the criteria and findings as outlined in this memorandum and from the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommendation of approval of the applicant's request, staff recommends that the following findings be made as part of the motion: 1. That the proposed major amendment to $pecial Development District No. 22 complies with the nine design criteria outlined in Section 12-9A-8 of the Vail Town Code. Furthermore, the applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Commission, based upon the testimony and evidence presented during the public hearing, that any adverse effects of the requested deviations from' the development standards of the underlying zoning are outweighed by the public benefits provided. Lastly, the Commission finds that the request is consistent with the development goals and objectives of the Town. With regardsto the proposed elimination of GRFA, that: a. Proposed development controls, such as setbacks, site coverage, height, orientation, and architectural design, exist within the text of SDD No. 22, Grand Travers, to adequately control bulk, mass, and height of structures, and will maintain the character of new structures to those which exist: b. Proposed development controls comply with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations. c. Proposed development controls will provide adequate availability of light, air and open space. d. Proposed development controls within the SDD will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. e- Proposed development controls will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by conformance with prescribed GRFA standards. With regards to the proposed increase in the number of lots trom 22 to 23, that: a. Proposed increase in lots provides necessary separation between buildings and riparian areas, geologically sensitive areas and other environmentrally sensitive areas. b. Proposed increase in lots complies with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations. c. Proposed increase in lots will provide adequate availability of light' air and open space. d. Proposed increase in lots will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. e. Proposed increase in lots will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by conformance with prescribed setback standards. 3. t7 4. That the proposed development controls within SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse are in conformance with applicable elements of the Vail Mllage Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations. 5. That the development is in compliance with the purposes of the Primary/Secondary zone district, that the proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of the neighborhood, and that the proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and Environmentaf Commission approves with conditions the Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filino 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. and 10, pursuant to Chapter 13-4, Minor Subdivisions, Vail Town Code, to create Lots 5 and 7, located at based upon the criteria evaluated in this rnemorandum. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the minor subdivision request staff recommends that the following conditions be made as a part of that motion: 1. That the appficant not record the proposed plat, Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filinq 1: A ResuMivision of Lots 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. and 10, until both readings of an ordinance to amend SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, without GRFA limitations has be adopted by Town Council. lf an ordinance to adopt SDD No. 22,' Grand Traverse, without GRFA limitations is not approved by Town Council that a GRFA limitation on the new Lot 5 and 7 will be 3,157 square feet for each lot and the SDD will be amended and adopted according to Town of Vail Code. 2. That the applicant revise the title of the plat to state Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moslev SuMivision Filino 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5.6.7. 8.9. and 10 and replace the Town Council signature block with the conect Planning and Environmental Commission signature block prior to submitting the mylar copies for . recording. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the minor suMivision request staff recommends that the following findings be made as a part of the motion. 1. That the application is in compliance with the intent and purposes of the Minor Subdivision Chapter, the Zoning Ordinance and other pertinent regulations that the Planning and Environmental Commission deems applicable. 2; That the application is appropriate in regard to Town policies relating to subdivision control, densities proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other applicable documents, enMronmental integrity and compatibility with the sunounding land uses and other applicable documents, 18 and effects on the aesthetics of the Town. X. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Reduced Copies of the pfats ol lhe Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filina 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6.7. 8. L and 10 and the proposed Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivision of Lot 5. Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Moslev Subdivision Filinq 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6,7. 8. 9, and 10 C. Copy of SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse D. Table of statistics for SDD No. 22, Grand Travers, prepared by stitff 19 fosNsof r{ltolra aNV t!l|,rvs tf. Iiti;llrl iIt rf I Frlll I fi'ill iiili ll llI I il llltilll i]lr bEiliil ii:riktlt 'illii Iilll! lr ii ll ll ll lillll la il ll l! ll, llil rlili ' rii! EffiII Irlt. It{lHIti Irl l. ll;l tl tlii Iirli t rii I I I I .li hr.fl !iii II I il; FsiR *i$:Is $=il[H -q :'"J .i lss SF: *$ni\ ^qJSt<x\\l I'llllll Fi EI lrlllriill .uilli ,l,lliliii 0- Ir F; is II\t !i a;l s!! :: !l ;t l- il r lii I ti:, tl! ;|ii iiti I ;;l E tul fi!g! ii 1l l,i:,_fi ti;il ff:i$iir tiiHt{: t: ll sl;!i:til\:' './5_/1,/ 't -:\ A.- ---Ir-...--..-- =\A\F\- rt trt ,l2'g. Attachment B /t'/tn/ ( \\ \\.-\V,,rrt'/, /"/ ( *-ov, I d t F I F/ R!8t I o ORDINANCE NO.9 Series of 1998 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REENACTING ORDINANCE NO. 10, SERIES OF 1991, PROVIDING FOR CHANGES TO SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO.22, GRAND TRAVERSE, THAT CONCERN THE LOT SIZES, THE NUMBER OF LOTS, THE CORRESPONDING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO WHEREAS, Chapter 9 of the Vail Municipal Code authorizes Special Development Districts within the Town; and WHEREAS, The Town Councilapproved Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1991 Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse; and WHEREAS, Dauphinais-Moseley Construction has requested to amend the existing Special Development District No. 22; and WHEREAS, Section 12-9A-10 of the Vail Municipal Code provides procedures for major amendments to existing Special Development Districts; and . WHEREAS, The applicant has complied with the requirements outlined in Section 12-9A-10 of the Vail Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, The Special Development District provides for creativity and flexibility to allow for the development of land within the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, There is an identified need for quality affordable housing in the community; and WHEREAS, On June 8, 1998, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on the major amendment proposal and has recommended that certain changes be made to Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse; and WHEREAS, The Town Council considers that it is reasonable, appropriate, and beneficial to the Town and its citizens, inhabitants, and visitors to repeal and re-enact Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1991 to provide for certain changes in 20 Attachment: c Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1991 is hereby repealed and re-enacted to read as follows: Text to be deleted is shown as strike{hreugh and text to be added is shown in bold. Section 1. Amendment Procedures Fulfilled. Planninq Commission Reoort The approral procedure prescribed in Title 12, Chapter 9, Section 1 0(B) of the Vail Municipal Code have been fulfilled, and the Vail Town Council has received the report of the Planning and Environmental Commission recommending approval, of the proposed development plan for Special Development District No. 22. Section 2. Soecial Develooment District No. 22 Speciaf Development District No. 22 (SDD 22) and the development plan therefore, are hereby approved for the development of Lots 1 through 19, Block 2, Lionsridge Subdivision Filing 3 within the Town of Vail consisting of 10.69 acres. Section 3. Purpose Special Development District No. 22 is established to ensure comprehensive development and use of an area that will be harmonious with the general character of the Town of Vail. The development is regarded as complementary to the Town by the Town Council and meets each of the design standards and criteria as set forth in Section 12-9A-8 of the Vail Municipal Code. There are significant aspects of Special Development District No. 22 that are difficult to satisfy through the imposition of the standards of the underlying PrimaryiSecondary Residential Zone District. Special Development District No. 22 allows for greater flexibility in the deVelopment of the land than would be possible under the cunent zoning of the property. The smaller single-famif lots provide the opportunity for a common 2t open space for the subdivision as well as the means to preserve the southerly ridge line of the property. Special Development District No. 22 proMdes an appropriate development plan to preserve the visual quality of the site from within the subdivision as well as adjacent properties in fte communig in general. Section 4. Develooment Plan The development plan for SDD 22 is approved and shall.constitute the plan for development within the Special Derrelopment District. The development plan is comprised of those plans submitted by Dauphinais-Moseley Construction and consists of the following documents: 1 . Site development plan, Lionsridge Resubdivision of Lots 1-19, Vail, Colorado, Intermountrain Engineering, dated July 7, 1998. 2. Conceptual landscape plan, lntermountain Engineering, dated July 7, 1998. 3. Final Plat of Lionsridge Subdivision Filing No. 5, A Resubdivision of Lots 1- 19, Block 2, Lionsridge Subdivision Filing No. 3, Town of Vail, County of Eagle, Strate of Colorado, sheets 1 and 2, Intermountrain Engineering Limited, dated April 19, 1989, Amended Final Plat of Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision Fifing No. 1, A ResubdiMsion of Lots 5,6,7,8,9V 10, Town of Vail, County of Eagle, State of Colorado, Intermountain Engineering, dated July 21 , 1998, and Amended Final Plat: A Resubdivlsion of Lot 5, Amended Final Plat: Dauphinais-Mosley Subdivlslon Filing 1: A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, Town of Vail, County of Eagle, State of Golorado, Intermountain Engineering, dated .2005. 4. Construction, grading and drainage drawings for a resubdivision of Lots 1- 19, Block 2, and Lionsridge Lane, Lionsridge Subdivision Filing No. 3, Town of Vail, Eagle County, Colorado, Intermountain Engineering Limited, sheets 1-8, dated March 9, 1989. 5. Soils and Foundation Investigation for Lots 1-24, Lionsridge 5th Filing. 6. Lionsridge Color Palette, Arnold/Gwathmey/Pratt Architects, March 1990. 7. The subdivision plat for Dauphinais-Moseley Subdivision recorded August 23, 1990, July21, 1998, and .2005. 22 B. The development standards shall be as follows: 1. Acrease: The total acreage of this site is 10.69 acres or 465,650 square feet. 2. Permitted Uses: The permitted uses for SDD 22 shall be: a. Single family residential dwellings b. Open space c. Public roads d. Employee dwelling units as defined in Section 5, paragraph G of this ordinance. 3. ConditionalUses: . ' a. Public utility and public seMce uses b. Public buildings, grounds and facilities c. Public or private schools d. Public park and recreation facilities 4. Accessory Uses: a. Privategreenhouses,toolsheds, playhouses, garages or carports, swimming pools, patios, or recreation facilities customarily incidental to single-family uses. b. Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in accordance with the provisions of Section 12-1+12 of the Vail MunicipalCode. c. Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or mnditional uses, and necessary for the operation thereof. ffi 23 24 o stef€ge areas, Atties; erawl spaees and reefed er cevered deeks; perehes; t€naees er Palagr€P*bel€* M 1, Garage spaees ef up t+th'ee hundred (300) squar+feet Ber g€rage spaee nelexeeeding a maximum ef twe spaees fer eaeh allowable dwelling unit and ene twe epaeesfer eaeh eenstrHeted empleyee unit, eenstruetien ef a reef with truee type members will-be exeludeC frem ' thirtyjnehes "U"rt- ?, Crawl spaees aeeessible thieugh an epening net greater than twelve square feet in area; with five feet er less ef €€iling height; as measured frem the surfaee efthe eartFFb the cnderside efstrueturel fleer , '1, Reefed epeevered deeks; Berehes; tenaees; paties er similar feature/efaee with ne mere than three exterier walls and a miniTum eBeni epening is eer*igueus anC fully eBe+frem fleer te eeiling; with an 25 o GRFA shall be ealeulated by meaeuring the tetal square feetage ef a building as set ferth in Seetien 12 2 2 ef the Vail Munieipal Ged+ t*at+$*ar+feetag€, tr aAeitien te tne a @ 65. Setbacks: Minimum setbacks shall be as indicated on the approved site development plan by lntermountiain Engineering, dated July 7, 1998. A 4-foot roof overhang shall be allowed in the front setback for Lots 15-19, provided the rear setback is increased by 4 feet. A 4-foot roof overhang shall be allowed in the rear setback of Lots 20-24, provided the front setback is increased by 4 feet. Roof overhangs shall be allowed to encroach up to 2'feet into the required side setback of 10 feet for each lot. An unenclosed, unroofed, deck or patio within 5 feet of finished grade may encroach into the rear setback by 5 feet for Lots 1-1 4 and Lots 20-24. No other setback encroachments shall be allowed. +6. Densitv: Approval of this development plan shall permit a total of 22 23 singl+. family dwelling units on the entire property. A minimum of 6 employee dwelling units shall be required. A maximum of *23 employee dwelling units shall be permitted on the entire property. 87. Buildinq Heioht For a flat roof or mansard roof, the height of the building shall not exceed 30 feet. For a sloping roof, the height of the building shall not exceed 33 feei. tne height calculation shall be made by measuring from the existing grade as indicated on the lntermountain Engineering Topographical Survey dated March 1 3, 1990 or finished grade. Height shall be calculated per Section 12-2-2 ol the Vail MunicipalCode. 26 98. Site Coveraoe: Not more than 25 percent of the total site area on each lot shall be covered by buildings. with the exeeBtien ef tet 6, en tet 5i net mere than 20 "Site coverage" shall mean the ratio of the total buibing area on a site to the total area of a site, expressed as a percentage. For the purpose of calculating site coverage, "building area" shall mean the total horizontal area of any building as measured from the exterior face of perimeter building walls or supporting columns above grade or at ground level, whichever is the greater area. Building area shall include all buildings, carports, porte cocheres, arcades, and covered or roofed walkways. In addition to the above, building area shall also include any portion of roof overhang, eave, or covered stair, covered deck, covered porch, covered terrace or covered patio that extends more than four feet from the exterior face of perimeter building walls or supporting columns. {€9. Paikinq: Parking shall be as required in Title 12, Chapter 10 of the Vail Municipal Code. Each employee dwelling unit shall be required to have at least one enclosed garage parking space. {410. Desiqn Guidelines: The development of each lot shall be guided by the architectural and landscape design guidelines as approved as part of the Special Development District No. 22. The guidelines are as follows: a. Architectural. The architectural design of the buildings upon the site shall be such that buildings relate harmoniously to each other. This is not to imply that each buiding must look exactly similar to those around it, but that compatibility be achieved through the use of scale, materials and colors, and building shape and form. The oveniding concem is that, upon completion, the Special Development District, because of the clustered nature of the small single family lots situated around common open 27 b. o space, should appear to be an integrated development possessing a common architectural quality, character, and appearance. To this end the following general design criteria shall be followed by the developer and individual lot owners: A palette of colors shall be as set forth in the Lionsridge Color Palette from Amold/Gwathmey/Praft dated March 1990. Colors are indicated for the use on different types of building materials and elements such as stucco colors, siding mlors, metal flashing, windows, accent colors, etc. The palette of colors indicate a ra,nqe of acceptable colors in order to encourage similarity on one hand, but also diversity within the acceptable ranoe. The following building standards and materials shall be adhered to: Roof. The roof pitch shall be a minimum 8112and a maximum o'f 12112. A gable, clipped gable or hipped roof shall be mandatory. Dormers shall be allowed and reviewed by the Design Review Board. The roofing material shall be cedar shake shingles with staggered butts. Chimnerrs. The chimneys shall be stucco with chimney caps of weathered copper. Flues. All flues shall be galvanized or painted sheet metal, painted to match the roof. Main Fascia. The main fascia shall be a solid color stain, with brown, taupe, or gray. Secondarv Fascia and Metal Railinos above the First Floor. The secondarv fascia and metal railings above the first floor shall be a muted accent trim color to be reviewed by the DRB. c. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) 28 o (6) (7) Walls. Walls shall be of stucco and horizontal or vertical wood siding. Stucco colors shall be gray, beige or off-white. Wood siding colors shall be gray, brown or taupe. Stone. Residences will have a minimum of a two foot high stone wainscot in rainbow mix with a sandstone cap around the perimeter of the structure except under docks where substantially concealed by landscaping. Wndows. Windows shall be recessed a minimum of two inches from the outside wall plane and have a sandstone sill. Trim shall be whiter taupe or brown. Outdoor Liohtino, Outdoor lighting shall be indirect with a concealed souroe except for an entry chandelier, two caniage lights and one pilaster light which may be exposed globes with a fixture of black or weathered cppper look metal. The maximum number of outdoor lights permitted on each lot shall be 15 regardless of lot size. Outdoor lights which conform with Ordinance #22, Series of 1997, shall be exempt. Allexterior lighting shall be reviewed by the DRB. Garaqes. No garage doors shall directly face the street, except on Lot 24 and Lot 14. A residential address/nameplate if desired by the owner shall be located on the side of the garage facing the access point to the lot. When the individual landscape plans are designed for individual lots, special care shall be taken in the design of side yard landscaping in order to provide adequate screening between structures. (e) (8) (10) (11) (12) {211. Recreational Amenities Tax The recreation amenities tax shall be assessed at the rate for a single.family residential zone district. 29 Section 5. Conditions of Aooroval A. The major amendment to Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, shall not be effective until the major subdivision is recorded by the Town of Vail at the Eagle County Clerk and Recorde/s ffice. B. The major subdiMsion shall be recorded at the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's Office prior to a building permit being released for any construction on Lots 2, 5, 7 ,9 or 1 0. C. The development of Special Development District No. 22 will have impacts on the available employee housing within the Upper Eagle Valley Area. In order to help meet this additional employee housing need, the developer of Special Development District No. 22 shall proMde employee housing on site. The following restrictions shall apply to all employee dwelling units within SDD No. 22: 1. The developer shall build a minimum of six employee dwelling units within the subdivision. Each employee dwelling unit shall have a minimum square footage of 400 square feet not to exceed 800 square feet and is allowed to have a kitchen. The €RFr'€nd number of employee units shall not be counted toward allowable density €r€RFA for Special Development District No. 22. The developer may choose to transfer up to 300 sq. ft. eF€RFA from the primary unit to the employee unit. The €RFA transfened will The developer may provide up to 15 employee dwelling units including the 6 required dwelling units if so desired. 2. The employee dwelling units may be located on any of the lots within the subdivision providing all the development standards are 30 3. met for each lot. Only one employee dwelling unit shall be allowed per lot with a maximum of 15 units allowed. An employee dwelling shall be incorporated into the structure of the primary residence and shall not be allowed to be separated from the primary unit. Each employee dwelling unit shall at least one enclosed garage parking space. This parking space shall not be detached from the single-family garage or structure. Each phase of construction shall include a minimum of one employee dwelling unit until six employee dwelling units are constructed and avaihbb for rental. The Employee Housing Unit shall be leased to tenants who are full-time employees who work in Eagle County. An EHU shall not be leased for a period less than thifi consecutive days. For the purposes of this section, a full-time employee is one who works an average of thirty hours each week. An EHU may not be sold, transfened, or conveyed separately from any two family dwelling it may be a part of. The EHU shall not be divided into any form of timeshares, interval ownership, or fractional fee ownership as those terms are defined in the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail. No laterthan February 1 ofeach year, the owner ofeach employee housing unit within the town which is constructed following the effective date of this chapter shall submit two copies of a report on a form to be obtained from the Community Development Departnent, to the Community Development Department of the Town of Vail and Chairman of the Town of Vail 4. 5. 6. 31 Housing Authority setting forth evidence establishing that the employee housing unit has been rented throughout the year, the rental rate, the employer, and that each tenant who resides within the employee housing unit is a full-time employee in Eagle County. 7. The owner of each EHU shall rent the unit at a monthly rental rate consistent with or lower than those market rates prevalent for similar properties in the Town of Vail. 8. The Town of Vail Housing Authoritywilldetermine the market rate based on the study of other units of comparable size, location, qualig and amenities throughout the Town. The market rate shall be based on an average of a minimum of five rental rates of mparable units. lf the unit is not rented and is not available at the market rate it shallbe determined to be in noncompliance. In addition to any other penalties and restrictions provided herein, a unit found to be in noncompliance shall be subject to publication as determined by the Housing Authority. 9. The provisions of these restrictive covenants may be enforced by the O,rrner and the Town. 10. The conditions, restrictions, stipulations, and agreements contained herein shall not be waived, abandoned, terminated, or amended except by the written consent of both the Town of Vail and the orrrner of the property. D. , The architectural and landscape design guidelines shall be incorporated into the subdivision covenants before the final plat is recorded at the Eagle County Clerk and Recorde/s ffice. The Town Of Vail shall be 32 party to these agreements. Section 6. Amendments Amendments to Special Development District No. 22 shall follow the procedures contained in Section 18.rrc.100 of the Vail Municioal Code. Section 7" Exoiration The applicant must begin construction of the Special Development District within 3 years from the time of its final approval, and continue diligently toward completion of the project. lf the applicant does not begin and diligently work toward the completion of the Special Development District or any stage of the Special Development District within the time limits imposed by the preceding subsection, the Planning and Environmental Commission shall review the Special Development Diskict. They shall recommend to the Town Council that either the approval of the Special Development District be extended, that the approval of the Special Development District be revoked, or that the Special Development District be amended. Section Q. lf any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of. this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases by declared invalid. Section 9. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and inhabitants thereof. 33 The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provisions of Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occuned prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 11. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereol inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, heretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED ON FIRST READING THIS _ day of _, 2005, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the _ day of _, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the Vail Municipal BuiHing, Vail, Colorado Ordered published in full this _ day of . 2005. Rod Slifer, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk 34 INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED By Tifle Only this day of -, 2005. ATTEST: LorelEi Donaldson, Town Olerk t 35 {,ot(u o oo 9a (', a cir (', I o r r- lo ot ot o) F o t (\t o o E 3- E S- 9_ E E E 5_ E 6. R. b- F. 8. 8. S. g. 9. 5. S. & $_ 5.qN N(rl c) (t Gl Gl N N N (rt Ol.N (rl (rl Ol ar,l F c.'lq) C': o o C) G)g)(! o o C)ar - (\l n) O tf @ (D F N O t.) O) N t (r) (9 rD t\ O cD St t\ N.i9 lO (O F $ 1\ lO t t O O t cO O c) (\l (\ - € lO rf) !O 6 r{);; O) O 6 O) O) Ot O (c) (g N (\l F F F - F U) $l t l.) c'1t (\l (O ; "f + c\i <ri c.i 6i a't c't a.t c.i d c't oi oi o,i c.i o.i o,i c,t c,i c.i <ri oi E(o 3o: lJ-t @o <.,t * o o o $r @ $ s o o @ s @ @ c, o { o o tr r s crt -r O (\l rl) O S - O Ot - O O) N l\ (g $ S c) N O F O r\ F FY O- q rs- @- cD- o)_ (D- Gr_ of s- s. lo_ r()- s{ o! N. o_ !o- o- a \ t(,. (',- J3 lo cO rO rO lO |.ct N N N lO @ N lt) t rt t lo $ $ rO \t st rO c) { at) !, cti- <o or o o o cl F ct cl rn ct o t\ co F t\ (t co o o.o co o ;- Ct (O N (O (\l O) |t) $ (o O c) C.I ci, (\l O O (\l O O O) (\l O Ct C)g cO (\l l\ @ O) € i O) Q r{) c) F @ lD 1|) 1O (\l co aotor_@_$- Jg dr.jd'rtdrtli@ dddf dtlsd+ddro 'o rr.r lo doIIo oo0) E(oo o =<,o () o€o o =g atoo(o anoEJ C!c E@O (o N o cD o (o F c) (o lo c) o t\ @ ]\ I\ (r) @ @ o @ @ o, -1 @ @ F (o Gt o' ro t @ o cD N c) Gl o o N o o or 6t o c) ro i{ {r{ @_ -_ tr{ t'l- of to- cr- Gl o)- \ tI)- O- Ol- O- o)- (g- trl to- @- tr)_ Al- @..N' C- r, (o rt) l4l lO r() @ (D (ct t lO @ lO c) (O Ct tt !t + t t t si -o ooo € pe H 3EF $ € €H HH H FF :$ F gHFHr S- ? o.i + c., c.t at c', r $' + c't d ('t t't cf o.i c0 <'t c,i at dt c.i o c\i Pfi E,o !l ro o o e ro e: <'> @ o, r') F ot,F.A t * N ^., -# B. & F. R. s. $. s_ 3. $. g. H. $. 5. m $ $ g. 3 E R g 3 $. = J d r J J J d d * e S g j"t d,n g or A E,i; ol- gj-- u)ooN cd(\ Loo Eo CLoo .!2o Ec ct o) .E oN o o. |ELFtttro (9 efN ctzooo Attachment D 3 -. d) -f'J, F @ d, 3 = S I : P I : 3 P R F N R * tr D tr tr tr tr tr, B Conditional Use Permit $650tr Floodplain Modification $400Cl Minor Exterior Alterauon $650O Major Exterior Alteration $800tr Development Plan $1500tr Amendment to a Development Plan $250tr Zoning Code Amendment $1300D Variance $500tr Sign Variance $200 ?- To Location of the Proposal: Lot:_Block:_ Parcer No.: 2103 ILL 6q631 (Contact Eagle Co. Assessor at 970-328-8640 for parcel no.) Name(s) of Owner(s):P to^) Mailing Address: Owner(s) Signature(s): Name of Applicant: (t'fi6€ iL,* I ocil Application for Review by the Planning and Environmental Commission Department of Community Development 75 South Fronbge Road, Vail, Colorado 81657 tel: 970.479.2139 fax: 970.479.2452 web: www.ci.vail.co.us General Information: All projects requiring Planning and Environmental Commission review must receive approral prior to submitting a building permit application. Please refer to the submittal requirements for the particular approval that is requested. An application for Planning and Environmental Commission review @nnot be accepted until all required information is received by the Community Development Depatment. The project may also need to be reviewed by the To/'rn Council and/or the Design Review Board. Type of ApplicaUon and Fee: Rezoning $1300 Major Subdivision 91500 Minor Subdivision $650 Exemption Plat $650 Minor Amendment to an SDD $1000 New Special Development District $6000 Major Amendment to an SDD $6000 Major Amendment to an SDD $1250 (no exteior modifiations) physicaf Address: i4to ftotlntleT:t , (, rc rCO 916S? nThte(6e For Office Use Onlv:# r'j,'Ji7iFf"'t' cn*x no.:3 52{ av: Page I of2-01/l ffi6TJUN2e Zo0b Jun 29 O5 lO: lEia p.ls4scto74s -fsallEffi.ffi Apflication for Review by the ETEEIEA 'tEffi Planning and Environmental Gommisslon Tnlrnrn-trTmfEryf f rrrury, I t,- yA.rr',' oePAtttt€nt Of Coatrmrnitt De!€lqnentr!''rtrr vr |t,*Lw Tssora' rrcntag. no"a,'vatr:., corooio sresz td:. 9-to.479,2139 taxt 970.a79.2152 neb: wnnr.si.vailcots Gsro|al Inlbnnation: All Fojeds rcqutilg nanning ard & rlrumertal Coombskn retdew nui reciw apprwal prb. b g|HflitdoE a building parrrft appliso. ncasc rcflr to iie sJb{rtf'ltll ruquldn€I|ts tbr the panhdar approvrl Orat b rlque*ed. Al apflic.tbn fur PhnnirE and'Em/imnnrcntrl CflimBSon r6/i€tiy canBd be acoeded unul all rcquked inbfn*ton is r€an cd by ttE grmmudty Derdopment Dcpntnint Tte prqied nty also need b bc levteHld bt lle Tc.,Yt CouEil and/or the Dedgln Raicv Board. TyTc of Apy'icatim aDd Fee tr R@niE il:mOtr t{aJgr Subdlvtsion 11500tr Mircr Subdividon f650tr D{.ilt*idt Plat . t65otr MlDr Amcndrnnt to aa Sm $f0@tr l{err Spcchl Oevdognrnt Disbid $6m0B l.,l.tor Anendrnort b an sDD $flnoO .Major AmE dment b en sDD f 1250 (,b extedw t rdilb{tora) Location of thc pmpot l: Lob-8lodc- SuMvidm; tr oo tr'tr.o.B tr tr Condftuna! U* Perfldt Floo@h Hodlffio.l Mlror Eccrbr Alt€ratbn Mrjor Sftefh Altetalton Da,t oqncrt Plan nrnendnent o a D6|dopmst Phn Zdlitrg Co.F Amendtnett lladdn€ SignVbtuic t650 $4m $650 t80o frs00 lz5{, l13oo +sro . i200 prrydcatAddress, i*la AorlAtteDf- t 04u-t(a 9|t'f ? Percel ilo.!(Contad Eagh Ca. ,tsessor at 97f328€6{0 Gor patcd no.) Zoning: Oh,nc{s) Slgnabrc(s): Name of Applacantl Hatling Address: E-maif^,ith.ssr -, llse Only: Fee Pald: Ailrcdgr D!ts-Chcck No.:- By: Plge I of2-01/l8/{n Ir{eiling Addrese: 'Printable Details Account Number: Parcel Number: Tax Area: iilll tevy: Owner Name/Addrest: Legal Descriptlon: Physlcal Address: Acrec: Page I of I R049241 210312209031 sc103 47.7190 JOHNSON, SANKEY A. & CAROLYN L. 2310 HUNTINGTON POINT RD W WAYZATA, MN 55391 SUB:DAUPHINAIS.MOSELEY FIL 1 LOT:S R703685 MAP 07128/99 OO141O MOMINE DR VAIL 0.55 Propertlt Tax Valuation Informatlon Aclual Value Assessed Value Value Land 680000 197200 lmprov€menta Total 680000 157200 Sale Hlstory lmprovement Informatlon ResidentialBuildings: 0 CommercialBuildings: 0 Heated Areas Building Charac{erietlcs (Flret lmprovment In Account) Tax Hlstory TaxYearTransactionTypo Amount 2004 TaxAmount 7245.66 2004 Tax Payment: Whole -7245.66 2003 Tax Amount 7070.58 2003 Tax Payment First Hatf -3535.29 2003 Tax Payment Second Half -3535.29 2002 TaxAmount 6655.56 2OO2 Tax Payment: First Half -3327.78 2002 Tax Payment: Second Half -3327.78 2OO1 TaxAmount 5340.76 2001 Tax Payment: First Half -2670.38 2001 Tax Paym€ni: Second Half -2670.38 2000 Tax Amount 5992J12 2000 Tax Payment First Half -2996.06 2000 Tax Paymenh Second Half -2996.06 http ://www. eaglecounty.uVpatie/printable_detail s. cfrn 07/01t2005 +a"t******+t+********+**f'il*a*+a*+ta*t***+**+t+*ft*f+*++++*+**+++++*+t**++**r.rrrr*r.+r****rr.*r.+ TOWN OF VAIL, COIORADO Statem€nt*l*******+t't't+********{r{t'tl*l*+****++**at+**+***+++a*****************t*************'}****'t't*+* Sta.tement Number: R050000992 Anount: $1,250.00 07/OL/2OOSL1 :11 Alr Paltment. Method: Check Init: IJC Notation: #3 525/DAUPINAIS-MOSEI.,EY CONSTRUCTION Permit lilo: P8C050056 fyl)e: PEC -MaJ SDD No Exts Chg Parcel No: 2103-122-0903-1 Site Address: 1410 IUORAINE DR \fAILLocation: 1410 IIIORAIIIE DRfVE Total Feeg: $1,250.00Thie Payment: $1,250.00 Total ALIJ PmtE: $1,250.00Balance: S0.00 ACCOUNT ITEM LIST: Account Code Deecript,lon PV OO1OOOO31125OO PEC APPI.,ICATION FEES Current PrntE 1, 250 . 00 7l e*'x- pRo$ oe *ooa€**j ?be Ar-r- eiadao lofr AUP \ -- l|t-.- owNeRe vJ;+14;^/ *he' =DD. -/ LION'S RIDGE FILING 3 (h*pV rfo, STATE 70 (rN T.O.v.l TRACT A 41b'goLz- UNPLATTED PHASE III sg\ Building EA( POI 15 i,AT- Ho;Bri.. HILL 1543 ABC PARK DONOVAN PAR UNPLATTED l*'l'_d/ r548-/ ABc 35 1970 37\ 2000 u,l E s UJzgJ VAL POST OFFICE I r3oo E DONOVAN PARK UNPLATTED 2077 . 'Parcel Multiple Search Resultsl Assessor,/Treasu rer Property County Officials I Counfy Services I Community I Videos Gtai^d0cA- Eagle Cou nty Assessor/Treasurer Page I of3 Advanced Search I Calendar I I Assessor Sales Search Search Results Search I Assessor Subset Query Address Search nt Number 210312204030 1814 GI.ACIER CT VAIL 282o rS*cL^:e Sr,l Hs"tsqiU€- l\""{$ille.AL356o.S 2ro3t2204029 GOLDBERG, BARRY S. & KAREN 1814 GLACIER 'i{ti"^".qhE\. +lgrloa *e,qus"9 StooLAeH, Cf 06 8oV OT:21-A R044012 210312204033 3[ ("t,i l-b.c 'pA.f'to"ffiI NS olovt { }, R044013 270312204034 1824 GLA.IERcril.'ur*^i-t 0" . ) Tt,. 6osl.e^, s1 o6as€ Ita,tt4tS 210312204036 1834 GLACIER CT'rs,ffill as3 il.(p/QP I eYol butt;" Rd.. Plq",o, TX ? illV ,k.lL {e.'lol '6:i5v;- 2ll5 qA The f lowing parcels were selected. The records are sorted by Address. de I information for a selected parcel, click on the respective Account Owner Name THOMPSON, MARGARE -_. SUB:LIONS RIDGE FIL 3 LOT:zl-B . \- {O. !F BK-0579 pc-0998 MAp 11-03-95 C.\^lt* - BK-0579 PG-0999 DEC 11-03-95 FLO n4€ SUB:LJONS RIDGE FI 07-29-96 BK.O679 PG-0998 MAP BK-0679 PG-0999 DEC 11-03-95 H]RSH. CHARLES E. & NORMA B. SUB:LIONS RIDGE FIL 3 BLK:2 LOT:20-B BK-0700 PG-0979 MAP 07-29-96 BK-0700 PG-0980 DEC "-+esJ+a X2.'a.th? 07 -29-96 F6soL u/a"/tf t6oo L g6i --a 3,/ot al8 4 BORGHESI, I"IARIA&ALLANR.-' ,- I suB:LIoNS RIDGE FrL : ".*r-T]---f . R^I^d LOT:2o-A BK-0700 pG-0979 Nnp Flo*'- iLUI:zU-A uK.U./UU PIJ.U9/9 MAP I 4 .e\ 07-29-96 BK-o7oo pG-0980 DEc 'trr ---r- ?>6Lr SUB:LIONS RIDGE FIL 3 BLK:2 LOT:238 BK-0741 PG-0328 MAP 10-23-97 | | BK-o74r pc-032e DEc 1o-23-e7 tt / t/19 BK-074r PG-0924 DEC 10-30-c7 R73822swD o8-2s-oo - q 6ao K MURPHREE INVESTMENTS LTD 7t15t2004http://www.eagle-county.com/goodtums/assessorlParcelMultipleResults.asp :. Parcel vlultiole Search Resultsl; 4\'f F : 2o6l 6 z=- 305e * alss f, - alls 4 2t92tr a a9 6l 210312204035 Page 2 of3 JAMES J, BIGOS FAMILYTRUST SUB:LIONS RIDGE FIL 3 BLK:2 LOT:23A R774760 WD 11-06-01 M.L. HARRIS FAMILY PTNSHP LL( KENNETH DAVID & IRMAK AYSE DALE & JANEL -JT SUB:LIONS RIDGE FIL 3 BLK:2 LOT:258 R736886 MAP 08-16-00 R737451 DEC 08-23-00 R798301 QCD 06-03-02 SUB:LIONS RIDGE FIL 3 BLK;2 LOT:248 ,a )athl R718192 MAP 12-17-99 R718193 DEC _ rz-r7-ss R72o2ss ocD 01_10_00 p665L 3'']il:::ffi:xli ii.ll.;l nlu f t) BK-0741 p;-0s24 DEc 1o-30-e7 9466. ?cs - SUB:LIONS RIDGE FIL 3 BLK:2 LOT:24A ^ , R718192 MAp 12-17-99 R718193 DEc T I t/oo g E6s ?oo - ts/z/o3 sT?oL n\q6 + 4 3x12' F SUB;LIoNS RIDGE FIL 3 BLK:2 LoT:25A rr /f y/qo R736886 MAP 08-15-00 R7374s1 DEc E gq q. h" -08-23-00 SCHMID, TERRY J. & JUDiTH C, -. MARILYN P. KEISCH, MARTIN & VICKI -JT SUB:LIONS RIDGE FIL 3 BLK:2 , I Lor:26-B R64eB3s MAp 03-17-e8 +l t | 1K R649836 DEC 03-17-98 R719141 oCD Lz-l7-ss R7zz67s ecD r2-27-ss - JTs/ ,3ao - R776036 QCD 11-26-01 STELZER, SHELLY R. - F BRAD. L 14 Record(s) Displayed. 1834 GLACTER CT VArL Tor. A,*,1_ gocj 6.rsB'1.S,, $3ttc/'gs tr+t A 6tccle^ C+ Uc.iq , Qo. (16.57 R050026 210312204040 1844oGLtc+ER cr 'AIL lg3o9 He{",e" Pc,^€ Dn. 9a,3s9 91 o'ilio(.iiCi+n 9# sres 2ro312204039 1844 GLACIER CT VAIL 9oo5-fo.yga 69tS g. Qt" t''.opl 6ce e.r.,rooe $;ll R051119 2t031220404t 1854 GLACIER CT VAIL \2oof,Jo.j4r' \ iaHo E\O'eo{e C+. E a,i,i-.h. \ Eoe'rt*"^-, coto..Jst R0511 18 2to3t2204042 3GA.r Sc-L^ id AtoB Dunt"^Rd. 96,,,-, i* .C\ o s d .l'\N . 56301'-? 1854 GLACIER CT VAIL ]roo! l€.14q,or3, 55b.1"1" 210312204038 1864 GLACIER CT VAIL Z-so3'Tbxe, 4eest.e8 t86\BGlqcte.^. C* U*'Q- Kll"s+ 2r03t2204037 1864 GLACIER CT VAIL \ Ct"ttV Nr ''Jsor LN' 3 2,t8i.3o / t\'-a'^ifu^.L. FLrsrqt 2to3L2204032"l;il;'i;;*' i F;1x"-6..ta6sT.i(e, ' r- ' 7 --;: ,, ^ 21031220403 r 1874 GLACIER cr 'AIL \ t g a4 A e lo.cier.. (*.}o-3-f-oxea If a.+as.{ | Ua:Q'co I tasa SUB:LIONS RIDGE FIL 3 BLK'? , ' Lor:26-A R64e83s ,oo or-ri-ru I I l'l hS R649836 DEC 03-17-98 t Eqo k- WARREN J. & GUERIN F SUB:LIONS RIDGE FIL 3 BLK:2 LOT:22-B BK-0694 PG-0687 MAP 05-16-96 BK-0694 PG-0688 DEC 05-16-96 SUB:LJONS RIDGE FIL 3 BLK:2 LOT:22-A BK-0694 PG-0687 MAP 05-16-96 BK-o694 PG-0688 DEC 05-16-96 n) rc ltt Y 5--ook_ rcfufo7 r g35k- httn://www.eagle-cottntv com/ooodfirmq/asqessnr/parnell\/rrltinlePaerrlts asn ?/1 ( /,)Aflzl , trintable Search Results reporto Page l ofl Acaount # Pacel # R033321 R083322 R083323 R083324 RGr3326 210312203003 ill"r:fl Mairins Addr€ss WARD, 21o31ng3ooi wAyNEA. E oo14ooA1-"ffiil:;,T* 2103't203002 M|CHAEL & l(AFtEN JT uoNs RTDGE ^.^.'.*^.^^^-cffiilf oo14ooA3 PO BOX 2933 PO BOX 86s PO BOX 424 City VAIL VAIL VAIL Y { Y)r V co co co Ap 81658 81b58 81658 8165/ 81658 GAE!3EE[- LIONS RIDGE zrosr22osooa--!Ew|s, STEVE 0014O0i4 ^_- -- --*:-$ffii'- LIoNSRTDGE 21o31;aosoos *l,t?g$-. ffJifffi", REPUN, Rtct-tARD - 001400A6R0333T/ 2103'12203ffs srErN. ELrssALroNS RIDGE JT l400PuoNsRtDGEvAtL POBOX3012 VAIL 490 FMNKUN ST DENVER 8o2184oos Y +4v Ktz fV,-\) .' ,/ R*r+ kskr l)*p"[,r,^ ?.o. Bo* Llttl3 {r,rro, Co Wtll http ://www. eaglecounty. uVpatie/printable_results.cfin 71612005 . 'Printable SearchResultsrenortq) t3aa S f\oyo-r^+b" n-"r#age I of2 tt- Account # Parcel # .\ noooooo 21o3122ogoo1 fi, noooooz 21o3122ogooz t9 A R006668 210312209003\? 1fi nooooos 21o3122osoo4\i/ /ii\ Roo667s 21o3122oso11\f (9 R00667e 21o31220s012 f.l'rnar Physical Address ALLEGHENY OO14O2 ASSOC LLC MORAINE DAUPHINAIS. PATRICK G.. SR MORAINE & SUZANNE E. MARGARET ANN HIGUERA OO1406 REVOCABLE MORAINE LIVING ;ril;;: ;i.,,.,^001408:ll:ll'" t'u""oMoRArNE I t\lJo I TRAVERS, RICHARD D. & 001422DEBORAH MORAINE FERRIS \A/ISLFGANG C. DORNER REVOCABLE TRUST HEADLEY REVOCABLE TRUST BAKER. MOMINE LTD GISH, AMY BECHER RESNICK, JEFFREY & HELEN.JT STITGEN, JEFFREY R. & GAIL. BROOKS F. BOCK QPR TRUST - BOCK, NISONOFF, LAURENCE & URSULA Y. -JT FORST, TRACY J. & STEPHANIE G..JT ACKERMAN, DON E. TRUSTEE Mailing Address PO BOX 1844 .JT PO BOX 1515 City State FORT COLLINS CO VAIL CO zip 805'2x 81658 ttu*-tuoo/ 001424 MORAINE 001426 MORAINE 001428 MORAINE 001850 LtoNS RIDGE 001800 LroNS RIDGE 001750 LtoNS RIDGE 001650 MORAINE MORAINE 001550 MORAINE DR .JT 1422 VA|L MOMINE DR PO BOX 655 HARTLAND 9820 E THOMPSON PEAK PK\AA/ 732 1428 MORAINE DR 1850 LTONS RIDGE LOOP SCOTTSDALE PO BOX 868 DENVER STITGEN, HAROLD V. & N:t MTDDLEToN HIGHLANDS RANCH 5302e-0655 Y 85255 81657 81657 80201 u1g 81657 81657 81657 I|.%tJ*,llr ALGooD rN 2708 S PENINSULA DAYTONA BEACH FL 32118 )d W co 81657 X (g ) ^oouurl zio3122osois Y\(t!) ^oouulz 2103122oso14 fi\.. R006683 21 031220901 5 V ,^o*o'4 21031220s016 Y 4)R006686 210312209017 ev fA, Roo6687 21os122oso18ev co co wl 53562 VAIL VAIL oanz \ 80126X aotzt \ co co ). V Y X WOODLAND TR BROOKS F. 001700 LtoNs 57&RIDGE BLooMFTELD WBLOOMFIELD GLENS 101't E MICHENER v1f/ (+[ /^*uut't 2103122os021 210312209022 2't0312209023 210312209024 2'.t0312209025 2'10312209020 3X*o"*=**"urrlEroN c/o 1500 LtoNs RIDGE LOOP "A'L lrojflo,rr DR vArL lrt8o'*r DR vArL J,flo,*. DR vArL CHANDELLE VENTURESINC BONITA SPRINGS FL 24311 WALDEN CENTER DR STIBER, ROBERT G. & JUDITH S, GOOtSBEE, CHARLES T. & CAROL B. GOLDEN, PAUL J. & DIANE D. DAUPHINAIS- MOSELEY coNsT rNc DAUPHINAIS. MORAINE 001450 LtoNS RIDGE 001403 MORAINE MORAINE co erosz.,\.- k )( http://www.easlecountv.us/natie/nrintahle resrrhs cfm D"^$-t=-;N'*0"")? . 'Printable Search Results renortf R006698 210312209027 R006699 2103't2209028 R041953 210312209030 - R049241 210312209031 * ROf9242 210312209032 R049243 210312209033 \ R049244 210312209034 1404 MOMINE DR 't404 MORAINE DR LP 1320 N 33fi5+rt[. MoRATNE DAUPHINAIS-MOSELEY MORAINE coNsT rNc FOX, STEPHEN R. & JUDY A. . SIEGFRIED 1 JOHNSON, 3i[[iV$i_i il'",jfrni*e Ri9f$ll$l'; 001416 Fircici?- dn MoRATNE DAUPHINAIS.MOSELEY 001418 CONSTRUCTIONMORAINE tNc. .:?i:',J.',,^, " 001420 ;[ffi#;:-:, MoRATNE VAIL VAIL VAIL Page 2 of2 81657 81657 co co MNo @ MORAINE DR 2310 HUNTINGTON WAYZATA POINT RD W -tT ici aox 1515 vAlL PO BOX 15,15 VAIL iu19** cHEVY cHASE 81657k 55391 81658 81658 Y MD ,or',u x http://www.eaglecountv.us/oatie/orintable results.cfm lKt)On\ ' Printable Search Results report O R032881 210312207033 R032882 2'.1031220703/. R032883 210312207035 R032884 2103',12207036 R033025 2',t03122020c6 DEVELOPMENT 001881 388 6035E LLC LIONS RIDGEPRENTICE PL V"|"il{i*.iiJft 'J*','J",llti8XiE ,.,vEBB, JoHN - IIJRUJB%'|f.S ttttt- vArL PorNr nn,rA^l !io^B+*"|-ro\ ^HoME iicjil!'nroceTo's'ir.rrn re Page 13 of20 801 11 38120 GREENWOOD VILLAGE MEMPHIS DENVER DENVER VAIL \ /ESTERN BLOOMINGTON BOULDER CENTENNIAL BOULDER BLOOMINGTON so2oe >- 80223 co co co IL co co NY co co co MI MN co co co MN IL HART, RICHARD OO14O1 1401 LTONS H. & JANE Y. LIONS RIDGERIDGE LOOP 001023 111 4393 000993 332 8332 NORMAN LIONS RIDGECREEK TRAIL 000993 333 7241 SIENA LIONS RIDGEWAY 000993 342 8261 SOUTH LIONS RIDGEMONACO CT 000993 343 7241 SIENA LIONS RIDGEWAY 000993 345 8332 NORMAN LIONS RIDGECREEK TRL 81657 Y 80112 801'10 94019 81658 81620 60558 81620 81658 81657-5365 11209 81657 81658 81657 49083 8011 1 55437 80301 80112 80301 55437 60657 cto Llz .LARKE, JAMES 001023 122 SCHUTTEMEIER R033131 210301407004 urn^'ttr' JArvrEo w rvzr r,'n'nc 14883 E CENTENNIAL cor. LloNs RlDcEiiNi-onr_e nve -- - tIIGHUM, JANAR033137 210312202009'A JOHNSTON, R033147 210301407009 RONALD E. & WANDA AUSTIN PLACER033154 210301407044',i_c llJllt*,oo=oeis s vrNE ENGLEWooD 001023221 106 DOLPHINE LroNs RToGEAVE HALF MooN BAY ooos63 522 9/,-o^?friidilJniibe!3?B?,rnu vArL ff3fltt#"=to Box se4o AVoN co R033196 R033206 R033220 R033227 R033261 R033262 R033263 R033264 R033266 R033267 R033269 R033271 R033272 R033273 R033274 210301407043 210301407001 2't0301407059 210301407012 210301407011 210301407021 210301407022 210301407024 210301407025 210301407026 BREAKAWAY WEST ASSOC AVGERIS, GAIL E. BREAKAWAY \ ,EST ASSOC KAEMMERLEN, WENDY LEIGH PREZIOSO, JOANNE B. POBRISLO, JAMES S., JR & LISA L. .JT HARRINGTON, GARY P. BURGHARDT, LARS K. SONDAD ENT BURGHAROT, HETGA HARRINGTON, GARY P. CATHY S. ROZEN REVOCABLE R033268 210301407020 FELSEN, DIANE - 210301407013 SoKoL, JOEL L. - IT JOHNSON, 2103o1407014 DIANE L. & LEE GREGORY.JT BRADWAY. 210301407016 CELESTE F. & TREVOR T. -JT 2'to3o14o7o17 !+iffit-l CLARK, JAMES 210301407019 L. & SUSAN C. - JT LIONS RIDGE PROSPECT AVESPRINGS Lo3i3t*,oo-to Box se4o AVoN fliJfl'r'ffi.to Box 3s2s vArL 1023 LIONS YYIY#i*'^-ntDGELooP vAlLLI\JI\D r{IL,TJtr,231 flfsfllt^itlrrs - 76rH sr BRooKLYN oo? 99^o9e-3-3.11- iidrusnroce vArLL|UNU KTU('ELOOP 314 ff3fl'rtf,ilnrto Box 2583 vArL 993 YYIY,1"^",'^1- t-toNSRTDGE vAtLLrur\- KruutrLOOP 322 000993 325 1975WGULL LroNS RTDGELAKE DR RICHLAND OOO993 331 4970 S FULTON GREENWOOD LIONS RIDGEST VILLAGE R033276 210301407027 ii3i"'Jio1=[i"l$H =*"' "'''ono httn.//rvww eaolecorrntv us/natie/nrintahle resrrlts.cfm 71612005 . Printable Search Results renort I R033315 210301407008 R033321 210312203001 R033322 210312203002 R033323 210312203003 R033324 210312203004 R033326 210312203005 R033327 210312203006 HAWTHORNE,001023212 1023 \/arlMIKE LIONS RIDGELIONSHEAD CIR'"'- WARD,WAYNE OO14OOA1 A. & MARY L, LIONS RIDGEPO BOX 2933 VAIL I Erl'1| lE l\tE | | H_?S,=jf iiciilt"ii'ooEpo Box 865 vArL SCAHILL, OO14OOA3GARRETT LIONS RIDGEPO BOX 424 VAIL LEWrs, srEVE. llJf,go$3""1frRr*,0n, vArLtt LooP PLANTE, JASON OO14OOA5 & ELTzABETH -JTLroNs RroGEPo Box 3012 vAlL REPLIN,RICHARD. OO14OO A6 490 FRANKLIN STEIN, ELISSA. LIONS RIDGEST UtrI\VETt JT co co co at to9 / Page 15 of20 81657 81658 81658 81658 81657 81658 80218'4009 R033355 210301407006 c/o PRUDENTIAL 991 93'1.1'^- 335''SSE uo'.-LroNS RrDGE;6i/N ''"-- FRONTAGE RO V\EST, STE D ffJflf*'fr'o.ro Box 4ooo vArL iiJfl3tf,ilnr.14 JAsMTNE DENVER lfJfforoJ,on.to Box 4ooo vArL llJffio*loorro Box 4ooo vArL llJffJ*1oo=ro Box 4ooo vArL llJflSo$oo=to Box 4ooo vArL llJfto.t*loorro Box 4ooo vArL llJfflo*6,oo=ro Box 4ooo vArL llJRSoJ,on.ro Box 4ooo vArL 001000 8 1000 LtoNS LIONS RIDGERIDGE LOOP R033360 R033370 R033392 R033393 R033394 R033396 R033397 R033398 R033399 210301407010 210301407007 2',t0312104001 210312104002 210312104003 210312104004 2103't2104005 210312104006 210312104007 TO\AN, M, ANGELA FLEISCHER, WILLIAM I. BERNARD, ANN R, FLEISCHER, WLLIAM I. FLEISCHER, WLLIAM I. FLEISCHER, WLLIAM I. FLEISCHER, WLLIAM I. FLEISCHER, WLLIAM I. FLEISCHER, WLLIAM I. FLEISCHER, WILLIAM I. VAIL RUN RESORT COMMUNITY ASSOC INC VAIL RUN RESORT COMMUNITY ASSOC FLEISCHER, WLLIAM I. FLEISCHER, WLLIAM I. PATRICIA A. RICKMAN REVOCABLE TRUST VAIL RUN RESORT COMMUNITY VAIL RUN RESORT COMMUNIry VAIL RUN RESORT COMMUNITY co co co co co co co 81658 80220 81658 81658 81658 81658 81658 81658 81658 81657 81657 81658 81658 R033400 210312104008 R033401 210312104009 R033402 21031210/,010 R033403 2103't2104011 R033435 210312202008 R033437 210312104012 R033438 210312104013 R033439 2',t0312104014 001000 9 1000 LtoNS LIONS RIDGERIDGE LOOP lfJflSu,$n=ro Box 4ooo llJfiSo*t,f o= ro Box 4ooo 001495 PATRICIAA. RICKMAN VAIL VAIL VAIL WCHITA VAIL VAIL VAIL "lx 81657 81657 81657 co KS LtJ LIONS RIDGETRUSTEE 7936 DUBLIN CT 001000 200 1000 LtoNs LIONS RIDGERIDGE LOOP 001000 201 1000 LtoNs LIONS RIDGERIDGE LOOP 001000202 1000LroNS LIONS RIDGERIDGE LOOP httn'//www easl ecor rnfv r rs/nalie/nrintahle results cfm co 7t6/2005 .'Printable Search Results renof R009446 2103't2202022 R009447 210312202023 R009448 2103't2202011 R009449 2103,12202012 R009451 210312202013 R009452 210312202014 R009454 2103.t2202016 WHITE, KENNETH L. & KATHRYN M, VVEBB, JOHN R. ELLIMAN, DONALD M., JR & MARY SYLVESTER, MICHAEL S. & SARAH NASH PITCHER, THOMAS W & KAY V. KUMAGAI. STEVEN C. & SARAH J. -JT ALEXANDRA MASTRIANA. SOLAL REVOCABLE RD LtoNS RTDGE #4 % sMowDEN HoMEo\ NERS LtoNs RtDGEi$TlspEN vAtLAssoc GRovE LN 9JITA.^," oo'r881 r 22674ANAsMl 14,tJd[i -rr" LIoNS RTDGEWAY 9.JLUEN IotlXto,^-^ ooo1881 z ?7?7 :T:"-:T':n u'& ltoub nroceiiSbor-nruo RD EVANSToN TAtVtELti r- HtrrrnEoq^,tr -JT ;;-ft"#;''' 001881 3 8383 #X,LL.i." r-LorusnroceF-oriDERosA PARKER DR wss, JAMES * llJf,!*1oo.R1oj.l,r, ou= $,ltj[I ",tr. 3AY:19'" oo1BB121 8iifiSJ,$, iicjfi3'^ibc= [ur'u, vALMoNr B.,LDER BAUERS, L. RoBERT - oo1BB1 22 ERlc A' HANsEN, cARoLLToNS RID^-8305 PARKER s. & "'SUNBURSTTRL BUXTON. ELLEN.JTliiioii-i'r es 001881 23 H:;i"^b=^t lor'rb nr-ocelf5l N 87rH LoNGMoNT MYRICK, JANET 001881 24J. L|OUS ntOCEpo Box 691425 SAN ANTONTO DIVERSIFIED RADIOLOGY 001881 25 938 BANNOCK TNVESTMENTS LtoNS RTDGEST srE 3oo L'ENVE'( tNc FREEMYER, 001881 26 HELEN H. LTONS RtOCeT PARKVVAY DR ENGLEWOOD !9fSI;-- " ooi8a127 ?ilIT,'Y' l;" l,o** *,oo.itou8rHsroE DR ArsNrA rJULlt\l\ L. -J I lflJf,lt*,oo=ooo s sTEELE 1 DENVER llJilu*,oo, fu .KTNGBTRD ENGLEW..D fl,oJfi3u*,oo=rno PARKAVE NEWvoRK Ny llJiSu*,onrro Box 2051 vArL co loJfilu*,oo.u327 IMBER TREDTNA MN Page l0 of20 001883 RD 1833 LTONS LIONS RIDGERIDGE LOOP 001675 TRUST 1500 N LIONS RIDGEFEDERAL HWY 201 C/O FINANCE VAIL FORT LAUDERDALEFL 81657-4e37 lX ?4'-' Iso2oejV- *,'f X 10021 81658 55439 33304 81657 81657 80401 60201 80138 80111 80301 80134 80503 78269-1425 80204 80113 30237 48329 34110 co co co R009911 R009912 R009913 R009918 R009919 2103't2207001 210312207002 2103't2207003 210312207004 2't0312207005 co co co IL co co co co TX co co GA MI FL R009929 R009931 R009921 210312207006 R009928 210312207007 210312207008 210312207009 R009932 210312207010 R009969 210312207011 R009979 210312207012 R009981 210312207013 RICHARD P. LIONS RIDGEGROVE U|ANE S. SMTTH ^^,^^, ^^ 1053 REVocABt r YY-'99rt" ^-BARcnRMtLiRUSi'*-- LtoNSRtocEw;n,".'.,,. Ro094so 210312202017 ro\ N oF vAlL Lrorus nrooeluE3trnorrnceuo,L R009492 210301415010 KOZOLE,00'1210 2826 ORANGE WATERFORD NAPLES http://www.eaglecounty.us/patie/printable results.cfm lt<non< . Printable Search Results reRor! R006359 210g12113087 PROPERTIES R006362 210312113089 R006363 210312113090 R006364 210312113091 R006365 2103121't3092 R006374 R006375 R006683 R006684 R006686 LIONS RIDGECIR ullJ(T*.too=14 colr RD Page 9 of20 80121 30097-6403 43221-1544 48038 81658 33062 76022 27511 80303 07901 81657 80201 53562 SUMMIT VAIL DENVER W BLOOMFIELD VAIL DENVER RICHLAND VAIL GREENWOOD VILLAGE DENVER BOULDER VAIL o '\u-t( ? "t\r43U* \ oo,'roo rvuBo 'uJon . GREENW..D LIONS RIDGEFRANKLIN CIR VILLAGE Roo636i2ios12113oB851%t-1i"J-.llJi,g.*iBof rii:f...:".J'..SUMMIT DULUTH CARY BOULDER GA MI co FL TX NC 0011002506 1470 LONDON LtoNs R|DGEDR UPPER ARLTNGTON OH 001 100 2511 1001 oVERH|LL LroNs RlDGEsr trtrururlu MARLING, CARL R006366 2103't2113093 K. & SAUNDRA H. TRUSTEES LYTHGOE, R006367 210312't13094 GRAHAM & KATHRYN fEttCt_tSu,210312202028/3lYi:y -) foeurruc, \ 2',t0312202029 ,| FREDERTCK V!\ --- Lt-yNNen. _-/ 21o3122oso1s $lt&#" RESNICK, 210312209016 JEFFREY& HELEN -JT STITGEN, 210312209017 JEFFREY R. & GAIL. R006687 210312209018 BROOKS F. BOCK QPR TRUST - BOCK, \'UiJLNE trtr, CHARLES T. & CAROL B. VAIL POINT TOI NHOME ASSOC DOMMERT, DOUGLAS H.. CLARK, JAMES L.& BRADWAY, TREVOR T. POBRISLO, JAMES S.. JR & LISA L..JT MADDEN, JOHN w., ill BURGHARDT, I.ARS & HELGA TOW\ OF VAIL R006693 210312209023 R006807 210312207021 R008251 210301407018 CURTIS, RICHARD A. & LYNN STIEF,MARY OO11OO2507 17157MANOR CLINTONJOAN LIONS RIDGEDR TO\VNISHIP GorrLrEB, nr,lrr ffjfl$offiEpo Box s1e6 vArL C/O ROBERT):11:1 o BONHAM FnhlxEnsx r p Pfl l,lt"Tt& ir, JJ[;. D R poM pAN o BEAcHLLP srE 117 001100 2303 207 E JULES LIONS RIDGEVERNE WAY 001475 W 1184 P|NTA|L + X N V Y X 001850 1850 LTONS co NJ co W LIONS RIDGERIDGE LOOP llJfiS*,oo.ro Box 868 001450 STITGEN. nn.r 76n HAROLD V. & ircir,r! nrooeSlY MIDDLEToN WOODLAND TR BROOKS F.001700 5764 LIONS RIDGEBLOOMFIELD GLENS 1450 MORAINE LIONS RIDGEDR C/O DARYL001881 BRADY LIONS RIDGETO SANTA FE DR SUSAN C.. WESTON. 000993 324 WLLTAM F. & LIONS RIDGEJUDY A. 9708 W GULL LAKE DR nnnaA? iidilinrocrPo Box 36s 000993 4970 S FULTON LIONS RIDGEST 001638 41017TH ST LIONS RIDGESTE 530001536 7241 STENA LIONS RIDGEWAY C/O FINANCE LIONS RIDGEDEPT 75 S FRONTAGE co MI 80223 4a322 )r 81657 Y R008253 R008358 R008761 R008762 R008767 210301407058 210301407055 210312205002 210312205003 210312205001 MI co co 49083 81658 801 |1 80202 80301 81657 hftn. //t*ntr." ao dlana"-+.,,,- /-^+i^ /--l-+^Ll ^ -^ -.. 1r^ ^c- ?Ierae- pRarl;oe AooQ€**= {og Ar-r- Liadao lo'rz AUD !*r-.- aWNeRe V/;+hi^J +he sDE?. \ {h*rrV ,Jou,'f.'o,,-i g I.-<-*" -/ IRACT A41b'goLL "wLroN's R,DGE FruNG s >/ tvv)"_ UNPLATTEOI t99t a\ 'ts37 t{oBEll HlLL l5ia EC l"'l g-! ^ ':5{ aec VILL if\ p00 36.. 1laz r'^ lrandcrr Bulldingan .l 66.t 30 17E6 t!a ar iSl'iE- rToe I E l_lZ9!;"-;JEl F*"Do!!.ofllP/ 90-90- | nl VAIL POST OFFICE I 1300 h I VAL POIIIT PH.ESE I 'I rRAcrA irvj r,"vsY OONOVAN PARK UNPLATTED ffi\rYx iEf.1fzzttWllD 0r8-t t00/t00 d t8t-I zlrza&08 lN3ldo]l^lo /Jl|'.lnffio3 llY,\ J0 ll{ol-uorl urEzg:01 THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERW PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with section 12-3-6, Vail Town Code, on , July 25, 2005, at 2:00 pm in the Town of Vail Municipal Building, in consideration of: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of proposed text amendments to 11-2-1, Definitions, Sign Regulations;12-2-2, Definitions, 12-3-6C, Notice, Hearings, Administration and Enforcement, 12-7A-3, Conditional Uses, PA District, 12'7C-4, Conditional Uses, Generally, Commercial Core 2 District, 12-7D-2, Conditional Uses, Commercial Core 3 District, 12-7E-4, Conditional Uses, CSC District, 12-7H-5, Conditional Uses; Generally (On all Levels of a Building or Outside of a Building), Lionshead Mixes Use 1 District, 12-71-5, Conditional Uses; Generally (On all Levels of a Buifding or Outside of a Building), Lionshead Mixed Use 2 District, 12'8D-2, Perrnitted Uses, Ski Base/Recreation 1 District, 12-8D-3, Conditional Uses, Ski Base/Recreation 1 District, '12-gA-2, Definitions, Special Development District, 12-9A-16, Private Parking Space Leasing, Conditional Use Permit, Special Development District, 12-9C-3, Conditionaf Uses, GU District, 12-'10-178-1, Leasing of Parking Spaces, 12-'15'5E-3' Additional Gross Residential Floor Area (250 Ordinance) Procedure,12-17-GB-3, Criteria and Findings, Variances, 12-21-2, Definitions, Hazard Regulations, and 12-22-2' Definitions, View Corridors, of Title 12, Zoning Regulations; 13-2-2, Definitions, 13-68- 18, Plat Approval Procedure, Gondominium and Townhouse Plats, 13-7'2, Definitions, Condominium and Condominium Conversions 13-1 1-2, Certificate of Dedication and Ownership, Sample Certificates, 13-1 1-3, Certificate of Dedication for Mortgage Holder or Deed of Trust Holder, Sample Certificates, 13-11-4, Surveyor's Certificate, Sample Certificates, 13-11-5, Title Certificate, Sample Certificates, 13-11-6, Clerk and Recorder Certificate, Sample Certificates, 13-'11-7, Town Council Certificate, Sample Certificates, 13-11-8, Planning and Environmental Certificate, Sample Certificates' 13-11-9' Administrator Certificate, Sample Certificates, 13-1 1-10, Certificate of Taxes Paid, Sample Certificate, and 13-11-11, Certificate of Ownership, Sample Certificate, of Title 13, Subdivision Regulations; and 1ut-2 Definitions and 14-10-1, Accessory Structures; Utilities; Service Areas, Design Review Standards and Guidelines of Title 14, Development Standards Handbook, Vail Town Code, for proposed corections and/or clarifications to the Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant Town of VailPlanner: Rachel Friede A request for a final review of a variance, from Section 12'78,-12, Height, Vail Town Code, and Section 12-7P,-15, Site Coverage, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code; and a request for a major exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-78-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for additions and exterior renovations to the Lodge Tower, located at 200 Vail Road/Lot 2, Lodge Subdivision, Vail Village First Filing, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Appiicant: Lodge South Condominium Association, Inc., represented by Mauriello Planning Group Planner: Bill Gibson A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for a major amendment to Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, modifying the GRFA calculations for the district; and a final review of a minor subdiMsion, pursuant to Section 13-4-2, Procedure, Vail Town Code, to modify the sizes of Lots 4 & 5, Dauphinais-Mosely Subdivision Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant Town of VailPlanner: George Ruther The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during office hours-at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Please call 97 0-47 9-2 1 38 for additional information. Sign language interpretation is available upon request, with 24-hour notification. Please call97O-479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing lmpaired, for information. Published July 8, 2005, in the Vail Daily. , THIS ITEM MAYAFFECTYOUR PROPERTY PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with section 12-3-6, Vail Town Code, on August 22, 2005, at 2:00 pm in the Town of Vail Municipal Building, in consideration of: A request for a worksession to discuss a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for proposed text amendments to Title 11, Sign Regulations; Title 12, Zoning Regulations; Title 13, Subdivision Regulations; Title 14, Development Standards Handbook, Vail Town Code, for proposed corrections and clarifications to the Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regard thereto Applicant: Town of VailPlanner: Rachel Friede/BillGibson A request for a final review of a major exterior alteration, pursuant to Sections 12-7H-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications, Vail Town Code, and a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-7H-2, Permitted and Conditional Uses; Basement or Garden Level, and 12-7H-3, Permitted and Conditional Uses; First Floor on Street Level, Vail Town Code, to allow for the development of 106 multi-family residential dwelling units, located at 728 West Lionshead Gircle/Lot 2, West Day Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant Vail Corp., represented by Tom BraunPlanner: Wanen Campbell A request for a final review of an amended final plat, pursuant to Chapter 13-4, Minor Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for a resubdivision of Lot 1, Cliffside Subdivision and Lot 51, Ridge at Vail Subdivision, located at 1452 Buffehr Creek Road, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant Mike YoungPlanner: Wanen Gampbell A request for a final review of a variance from Section 12-6D.9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Yanances, Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of a new fireplace and chimney, located at 175 Forest Road/Lot 26, Block 7, VailMllage Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Jack and Karen Ryan, represented by Michael Suman Planner: Elisabeth Eckel A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Amendment Procedures, Vail Town Code, to allow for a major amendment to Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, modifying the GRFA calculations for the District; increasing the number of lots for the District; and a final review of a minor subdivision, pursuant,to Section 13-+2, Procedure, Vail Town Code, to modify the size of Lot 5, Amended Final Plat, Dauphinais/Mosely Subdivision Filing 1, A Resubdivision of Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant Grand Traverse Homeowner's Association, represented by Pat Dauphinais Planner: Warren Campbell {N3 '. \ The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 Soutfr Frontage Road. The public is invited to aftend project orientation and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Please call 970-47$2138 for additional information. Sign language interpretation is available upon request, with 24-hour notification. Please e.all970-479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing lmpaired, for information. Published August 5, 2005, in the Vail Daily. ,} t To: From: Date: Subject: LegatFite MEM.RANDUM Community Development Staff December 16,2005 Adjacent Property Owner Notification for the amendment to SDD No. 22, Grand Traverse, to eliminated GRFA regulations During the review procedure for the proposed amendment to Special Development District (SDD) No. 22, Grand Traverse, to eliminate Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA), a question was raised as to whether the owners of the Roost Lodge were notified of the amendment. Staff looked at the adjacent property notification list and found that the owner of the property at the time of notification, August 5, 2005, was Lester Warpecha, P.O. Box M73, Frisco, CO 80443, per the information on the Eagle County Assessor's website. Attached is an email conespondence from Mary Kessler of the Eagle County, ffice of the Assessor, detailing when the new ownership information was input into the Eagle County database. According to her conespondence the actual sale date of the property was Jufy 25,2OO5, prior to notification on August 5, 2005. However, the data was not avaihble for use by the public to find ownership information on the webpage until September 29, 2005, when it was input by the assessor, after the notification was mailed. Page I of2 Warren Campbell - RE: EC website From: To: Date: Subject: CC: "Mary Kessler" <Mary.Kessler@eaglecounty.us> "Sean Koenig' <SKoenig@vailgov.com> 12/09/2005 4:58 PM RE: EC website "Warren Campbell" <WCampbell@vailgov.com> Sean, The website is running on "real time," As soon as we hit update in our office, you see the new information on the website. Parcel Number 210312302001, Account Number R013742, transferred from WARPECHA, LESTER W., EVA A., ZBIGNIEW, & ROSEANN to TIMBERLINE ROOST LODGE LLC in the Assessor's Office database on September 29, 2005. The actual sale date was July 25,2005. There are a few reasons why there is lag time between a sale date, recording date and update in the Assessor's ffice database. 1 - While ownership transfer is ongoing, the Assessor's ffice follows the State Assessment Calendar - which means that cerhin tasks take priority over other tasks. This year was a reappraisal year and beginning on May 1 most of our adminisbative manpower was used to process the three levels of appeals (Assessor, County Board of Equalization, and Upper Level - Arbitration, District Court and Board of Assessment Appeals). 2 - We receive deeds in the Assessor's ffice after processing occus in the Clerk & Recorde/s Office. For example, today is December 9 - however we currently have access to deeds recorded on November 18 - and, we are currently working on inputting November 7ut deeds. 3 - There is one other "catch" to using the website - - there is a state law protecting law enforcement personnel from having personal information available on the internet. When requested by the law enforcement personnel, their property is not listed on the website. I'm not sure what the correct answer is - - however, at any time - there could be a deed being recorded that the Assessor's Office may not see for anywhere from 3 weeks to tvyo months. Let me know if I can be of any further information or help! Mary Kessler, Administrative Manager Eagle County, Office of the Assessor (970) 328-8640 mary.kessler@eaglecounty. us From: Sean Koenig [mailto;SKoenig@vailgov.com] Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 2:43 PM To: Mary Kessler Cc: Warren Campbell Subject: EC website Mary, I have a question that I'm hoping pu and/or your staff can help us with... file://C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator\Local Settings\Temp\GW)00001.HTM 12/16/2005 Page2 of2 C:n you tell me at what date the most recent ownemhip information was updated for parcel #: 210312302001? And can you also clarfi how soon after the Assessor office records are updated that the info becomes reflected via the E.C, website? Here's my reason for asking... According to a planner in our office (Warren Campbell), an applicant proposing to do some work in west Vail earlier this year had to send out an adjacent ownership list for their proposed development. During the process there was a change in ownership for one of the adjacent properties and the notice went to the "wrong" person, Now there is some "controversy" (surprised?!) over the project and we are trying to identiry the point at which the ownership informaUon that the applicant had available was updated for the aforementioned parcel. It won't matter one way or another as far as you and I are concemed, but the answer you provide may or may not clear up some confusion and avoid a potenual lawsuit between the two parties. Based on the latest Assessor CD you provided to me (Sept./05) I show the previous owner (Lester Warpecha) for that parcel which leads me to believe that the ownership information might have been updated after Sept. But I would appreciate if you clariff and, if possiblg also let us know when that information was updated for public access, Warren Campbell will likely follow up with you on the matter if there are further quetions after we hear from you. In the mean time, please call me with questions. Thankyou in advance for any info you can provide regarding the matter! Regards, Sean file://C:\Documents and Settings\Adminishator\Local Settings\Temp\GW)00001.HTM 12116/2005 a lown 75 routh fronlrge road Y!ll, colorado 81657 (@)479213E (303) 4792139 April 18, 1990 Thank you for yourfeel free to callthis project. Sincerely, Mrs. ilill S. DowdP.O. Box 3128VaiI, CO 81658-3129 RE: Lots 2, 3,4,5, Filing 3 and Lot 1, Filing 2, LionsridgeSubdivision. Dear Mrs. Dowd: on April 17, 1990 the Town council accepted the georogic hazardstudy by R.J. rrish on the above referenced lots and iirected thestaff to anend the official rockfall nap accordingly. Therockfall nap will be nodified to indicate that these five lotsare now classified in the rnoderate severity rockfalr zone. rnaddition,.the Irish report and a copy of tiis tetter will beincluded in the pennan-nt files for-each of these five lots. offlce of communlty developmenl patience during this review process. please ne with any questions you may have regarding ,<- c) 1 \Dt'"JgAS.lr-- Tom Braun Town Planner TB/PP Office of Community Development Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81557 March 12,1990 Subject: GEOLOGIC HAZARD CLASSIFICATION for Lots 2, 3, 4, 5. Block 3 Filing No. 3, and Lot I Filing No. 2, Lionrs Ridge subdivision, Vail, Colorado. Director of Community Development: On behalf of myself, Jill S. Dowd, owner of lots 2, 4,5, in filing No. 3 and Mr. Bruce Canton, owner of lot 3 filing No. 3 and lot I in filing No. 2, I would request a hearing before the Town of Vail council to review the classification of our lots in the Geologic Sensitive Area Map. We would desire that our lots be reclassified to a Moderate Risk Rock Fall Area from its present High Risk Classification. I am submitting a site specific Aeologic report from Mr. Robert James lrish which supports our request for the re-classification. My address is; Jill S. Dowd, P. O. Box 3128, Vail, CO 81658-3128 and Mr. Cantons address is; 1853 Lionrs Ridge Loop, Vail, CO 81657. Please feel free to contact dre if there are any questions concerning our request. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely Bruce O. Canton 7101 l bst Yale A\€nue. No 501 Denver, Colorado 80227 303-985-6658 R. J. lrish Consulting Engineering Geologist, Inc. October 2, 1989 Canton Congtructlon Company 1853 Llons Ridge Loopvall, co 81657 Attn:Mr. Bruce 0. Canton RE: Geologlc Hazards Study, Lots 2, 3, ll & 5, Block 3' Ftling No. 3, and Lot 1, Flltng No. 2 Lions Rldge Subclivlsion, Vall, Colorado Job No. 190(126) Gentlemen: As requesied by your Hr. Bruce ganLon, the underslgned conducted an engtneerlng geologic reconnalssance of the flve subJect loLs, xhlch occupy a gector of the iouth-faclng slope of the Gore Creek Valley lomedlately northeast of the Buffehr Creek Valley at the easLern end of the Uest Vall area. The four lots are located ln the SWl/ll , NWI/ll , Sec. 12, T.53., R.81W., Ea8le County, Colorado (Flgure 1). Ouc obJectlve Has to 8enenally outllne geologtc condltlons across the study area and to assess shelher any of those condlttons constltute geologlc hazardg sufflclenLly severe to restraln or preclude development Of the property as planned. t{e understand slngle fanlly and/or duplex residences aPe to be ccnstructed on these four lots. From Llons Rlclge Loop, at about E}ev. 81 20 teeE to 81 30 fee!, the lots exlend northward up the slope of a 1ong, narrou' uest-trendlng rlclge spur of the valley slope to about Elev. 8250 feef- The rlctge crests ab about EIev.8ll40 feet to EIev. 8450 feet. The slope dlstance from Llons Bldge Loop to the top of the rldge ls on the order of 600 to ?OO feel . From lhe rldge crest dol'n to about EIev. 8220 feef (about the center of the lots) the Eround slopes at about 1'75:1 ' rhereae beloH that elevallgn !o Llons Rldge Loop the Sround slopes at about 3.6:1. t|e underst-and the homegjqqld-b.e.const.ructed adJacent to Llons Rldge Loop on tn" flatieF-1o#f'Ec'^rrs-oitne lot. The steeper' upper part of the rldge slope ls dlsrupted by 2 main rock bl.uffs ranglng from lO fee! to as much as 50 feet htgh. A few trees are scattered across ihe study area, but for the nost part, vegelatlon 13 ltmlted to brush and natural grasses' Sedineniary rock strata of the Pennsylvanlan-age (290 to 330 ntlllon years a8o) Mlnturn Format,ion consUltute bedrock across the stucly area. These strata lnclucle oralnly sandsLones, a few shales and a feu thlck llmeslone unlts. These dlp northlrard lnto the hlllside at 30o to ll0o. Consultant to Desrgners, Conltaclors. Planners R. J. lrish Consulting Engineering Geologist, Inc. Canton ConslrucElon Cigmpsny October 2, 1989 Page 2 The bedrock, however, ls blankeged (except for the rock bluffs) by slopevash and talus solls down Lo about Llons Rldge Road. Below Ltons Rldge Road a Hest- southHest trendlng rldge spur of glaclal noralne ls plasLered agalnsi the foot of the slope (Flgure 2). The sandstones typleal.Iy are flne-gralned and flne to coarse-gralned. They are 1ocally conglomeratle, thln to trasslve bedded, seak to strong, and the Jolrrts are tlldely spaced. The llmestone 1s flne-gralned to mlcrocrysLalllne, strong to very strong, thlck-bedded and wlth Jolnts wldely spaced. The unconflned compresslve strengths of the sandstones probably range from 10,000 psl to 15,000 psi, rrhereas those of the llmesLone range probably to 30,000 psi. The shale unlts typlcally range from seams wlthln the sandsfones lo thln-bedded unlts up to a foot on so thlck. Thoee thlcker unlts, however, are rare. The uneonflned compresslve gtrengths of the shales probably range betueen 2,000 psi and 6,000 psl. The slopewash and talus soi19 are unstratlfled, gandy, Sravelly' eobbley clay r{tth scattered boulders, Thls ls malnly sandstone debrle. The solls form an apron developed below the sandsbone bluffs down to Llons Rldge Loop, thus range from a wedge-edge upslope to probably as nuch as 10 to 20 feet thlek adJacen! to the road. These 9o:ils have been deposlted prlnarlly by lheet rash' thus are expected !o range from loose to medlum dense, and probably are gubJecE to dlfferenuial setLl.emeni when retEed. South of Llons Rldge Loop, the glaclal roralne sotls are prlnctpally a hetero- geneous mlxiure cf sand, gravel, cobbles and boulders ln a sllt to clay natrlx. The solls include both sandstone and granllic rock debrls. Except for a pobentlal. rock fall hazard, xe found no evldence of potentlal geologlc hazards Hithin the study area. So long as dHelllnRs are-construeted wlthtn these lots withqut slgnlf lcantly cllgjglr'g_ !h9_exlsf !n8-Sround_,c_ondl_!lons, thus the stablittt;f-Jh-e-OT1S-and/o'i- rock L,lthln the bulldlnd- ilu6i and vlclnlLy, slope stabillty should not be lmpalre<!. Cuts and fllls on the lots should be r<.-EFt--16tr-Tf ..e. ;--6n-trs-oroer of- 3 feEu'- on less) ' 9lj!9-ulr1-.uegeotechnlcally deslgned. No unusual or gCvere geology-relatecl DulIdInEmTi;,:Jff':""''" streels, rightg-of-nay, easemenlg, utllltles or facllttles- The outcrops of rock, princlpally sandstone but lncludlng some layers of llnestones as well, Jut out of the r1d8e slope as lon8, narroH bluffs as much as 50 feer high (Flgure 2). Col_eelvably rqct<--bloc$_9nd_Eg!-esjqu*I-d _t--oPple fnom these bluffs to rol.1 and bounce doHn the slope. These theoretlcally could constltute a hazard Co buildlngs constructed on the 31ope E-C-fdu.-TheI'iock falt Tibi, te bel-Teve, nEeds to--Slconslcler frrFms of both the pro_ballllty of an event and the severltl of the event (the slze of a parLlcular block that could toppl e ) The rock formlng the lower bluff from about Elev. 8340 feet to EIev. 8380 feet and exiendlng eastward along the slope above and easL of the eastern half of Lot No.5 appears to be slgntflcanLly oore blocky (F18ure 2). -Thoie'-blocks from place to place sppear to be Eore prone to loppllng than elsevhere wlthln the gtudy area. Thls ls evldenced by a fan of old rock blocks that are scatLered below the blurf ebove Lot I and eastward ror about 230 feet' Consequengry' ue have Juctgecl the rock hatClE-l-!-g! for mosL of Lot 1 and a small pant.-gf Lot q t" ue neirui. Thrs ttng the rock bl&[s-that can be removed by crosbalrtnS. Addlblonal]y' trrg larger bl'ocks denoted by X's numbered 1 anct 2 on the geoioSlc nap (Flgure 2)@'5e remi-ved by llEht brastlng. Afiernatlvely, those rock blocks coul-d_.b1 p]Lp_ned wlth- rock 5oftS. Removal aDpears to us to be a preferable answer, ho1ever. Scallng of Iobse slabs an<l blocks could be extended to the rock outcrops to the uest also. Thls yould be nerely an lnsunance neagure ihat Hould reduce the already loH risk of rock falls by only a small lncrement. 'lt'.(,* R. J. lrish Consulting Engineering Geologist, Inc. Canton Constructlon Conpany October 2, 1989 Page 3 tJe betleve the rock faII r-lsk, ln terme of probabtlity, f.l_lqt{ -lfor LoLs 2, { and most of 5, buL ls 3uogea-CJbe medium across most of Lob'-l and a srnall area at the southeasLern corner of Lot 5]Ftgure 2). The bluffs ibove Lots 2, J, ll and eost of 5 are relatively nari.bT and are fonted of sandstone ihat appears bo be relatlvely oasslve. Although He found evldence of looseness of a few thln plabeg and smal.] blocks of rock, for the nost part the rock across the ledge ln the vlclnity of Elev. 8330 feet to Elev. 8345 feet and the nore proolnent bluff ln the vlclnlty of 81ev.8380 feet to Elev. 81120 feel appears to be relatlvely lntact. The Jolnts tha! are open tend to be perpendlcular to the slope rather than parallel to 1t.' Moreover, the strata dlp lnLo the slope rather than out' thus rock blocks are nuch less llkely to topple rlbh those planes aE their basal separatlons. 0ver geologlc tlme, blocks have separated from those two bluffs, but mosL of those appear to be qulte old. Many are partly burled ln the gloperrash and Lalus' and the fresh rock gurfaces orlglnally exposed by the breakup of those rock Dasges as they fell are now ueather-coated. This evldences conslderable anttqulty. l{ith rare €xceptlon, these blocks have scatbered only sbout 150 to 200 feet downslope from the bluffs frorr nhlch they are derlved. The resldences to be consLructed yould be placed more than twice that disLance away from the bluffs. Hosl of lhe rock blocks have broken up when they toppled lnlo smaller platy masses that have noL Lravell.ed far from lhe oulcrop. They are trapped by the vegeLatlon and other rock blocks sLrenn across the upper part of the 81ope. l{e cannot completely dlspe1 the posslbillty that, ln some fuLure Llme large rock blocks toppling from these two outcrops may lnvade trgt.s 2, -3; -4-and 5, but Lhe SeoIOglc eyidence ln(llCates thaL those eventE are rare and the risk forr. Consu lting Englneering Geologist, Inc. F. J. lrish Canton Constructlon CooganY October 2, 1989 Pege { tfe hope the ebovc cooocnts ulll be of pcopcrtlsc. It you have any qucttlont our Hork, pleacs feel fraa to aall. Englneerlng G€oloSltt RJI:ct tou ar you dovilop there!o dtaougs Jry atpeot! of loDc !€rvloc to or voulrl ltkc ---:---=P-z--': -9&rr.---P_/-!-l i=s' I I il-N- I Io looo 2d00 4000 - SCALE IN FEET R. J. IRISH coNsuLTlNG ENGIIIEERING GEOII)GIST, lilc. PROPERTY LOCATION MAP DATE , 9,/3Ol89 JOg NO.: 190 (t26) FIG, I |?] l:l FE!3 Er:t =tila';! ;Fi::llz Fq E tll iE;rtll:i :t ;g '-l lz :e!r !r ifflrE !EliiiI:E!F tlErE :;ii i ?:3: i liiEj .-f ;€r :;tEt .-t \ IE ii ii II!' !a Ft !*ii i; ;: Fi ii :i: 3:t rti rii i!r i,! :.:; iFiF n F FIt I iE s\/.-- 2 2 2ir d9 o o-8 AEzn"8F; rsfi! EHHI?" :E