HomeMy WebLinkAboutFRONT DOOR THREE DIMENSIONAL SUBDIVISION TRACT B CHALETS AT THE LODGE AT VAIL LANDSCAPINGDesign Review Eoard
ACTION FORilI
Department of Community Oevelspment
75 South Frontage Road, Vail. Colarado 81657
tel: 970.479.2139 fax,i970.479.2452
web: www.vailgov.com
Project Name:
Project Description:
DRB Number: DR8050583
FINAL APPROVALTO REMOVE 12 TREES WITH BEETLE KILL-PINES
Participants:
owNER LODGE PROPERIES rNC 1012612005
PO BOX 7
VAIL
co 816s8
APPUCANT VAIL RESORTS (VAILCORP) L0l26l2OO5 Phone: 970-845-2354
RICK CAUDEL
P,O. BOX 959
AVON
co 81620
License: 115-A
Project Address: 145 VAIL RD VAIL Location: 145 VAIL ROAD
Legal Description: Lot: 1 Block: Subdivision: MILL CREEK SUB
Parcel Numben 2101-082-7800-1
Comments: SEE CONDmONS
MoUon By:
Second By:
Vote:
Gonditionsr
BOARD/STAFF ACTIOT{
Action: SI-AFFAPR
Date of Approval:. tol 2612005
Cond: 8
(P|-AN): 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:0
(PLAN): DRB approval does not constitute a permit for building. Please consult with
Town of Vail Building personnel prior to construction activities.
Cond: 201
DRB approval shall not become valid for 20 days following the date of approval.
Cond: 202
Approval of this project shall lapse and become void one (1) year following the date
of final approval, unless a building permit is issued and construction is commenced
and is diligently pursued toward completion.
Joe Suther DRB Fee Paid: $25O.OOPlanner:
Minor Exterior Alterations
Application for Design Review
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colondo 81657
tel: 97O.479.2L28 tax: 970'479.2452
web: www'vailgov.com
General InformaUon:
All projects requiring design review mu* receive approval prior to submitting a building permit application' Please
refdr t6 ttre submi$t requirements for the particulai approval that is requested. An application for Design Review
."nnot U" accepted untii all required information is reeived by the Community Development Departmenl The
pr;l;e ;;t;16 need to be revieweA by the Town Council and/or the Planning and Environmental Commission.
i$ign ;ii.* approvat lapses unhs! a buildlng permit is issued and construction commences within
one year of the approval.
Physical Address:
o
Ft(I,ohoI--f
ftl\I'
w
parcef No.: L I O t O6'DlbO t (Contact Eagle Co. Assessor at 970-328-8640 for parcel no.)
Zoning:
Name(s) of Owner(s):
rXtc-(o 6o/6I 1Mailing Address:
Owner(s) Signature(s):
Name of Applicant:CL 9usMailing Address:
E-mail Address:
Type of Review and Fee:
tr Signs
tr Conceptual Revie$/
tr New Constructiontr AddiUon
tr/Minor Alteration
(multi-family/commercial)
tr Minor Alteration
(single-family/duPlex)
tr Changes to Approved Plans
tr Separation Request
$50 Plus $1.00 per square foot of total sign area'
No Fee
$6s0
$300
Pf
For construction of a new building or demo/rebuild.
For an addition where square footage is added to any residential or
commercial building (includes 250 additions & interior conversions)'
For minor changes to buildings and site improvements, such as,
re-roofing, painting, window additions, landscaping, fences and
retaining walls, etc.
For mln6r dranges to buildings and site improvements, such as,
re-roofing, paiiting, window additions, landscaping, fences and$20
retaining walls, etc.
$20 for rev-isions to plans already approved by Planning Staff or the
Design Revierv Board.
No Fee
locaEon of the PrcPosal:
For Offtce Use OnlYl P-..d 4..r*p"iii-- - -- CheckNo.: /
/ iu
tI!It
n,il' ,i !'
lttfi,fi
\ l'iru?,t
=--J--;e --r.--Jl-.--=:-!*t*i,'
;t .,
t6
'ffi
iiI+N
{,W,I;W
,ii1\\
(ilil
\\ l
"
r
l\\"1'
j'/ /ii;,';::::,"/ /,i,i,,.,,./ /.i,,,,:/tV1:,i;i,,
'/,i,'ti;iiiiffitltiilrffi
, fry{ffi|,ii;'
{ li\
!\1I\, lt)
i ,_. l.'
,9il
#-i
-t -at
'nl,{
all,'..i'G>' 9Y
1vY- -Xil< ,.- .t f/
' "'/:tk{ffiY,:'l't
it;
iltli\\il\'\
\*+
\' '":tl
I i.
| 'r
'---___vLt:'.::"a!:,-.Ail xt
),
N
- - ,-iRi
'#u$
, - c.,
I *te t^t"
'rrr7:fi,
!|,9;:s;9
=;>'
t,
s*ilct I
' ,'' " ." ,' '/ ,>1/
," ," -," ,r" .," ,"' ,\
"
"'
'"'
"''
'"t '"'
"t
'"
{,'" ,'i/ ,'i' 7",/"r'",';';"r'
'
/' ,'"' ''" ,"/ ;'/
"/
;'" ,"'/,'","'
.,/ ,," ,/' ,l' i i' f' ,/' .r/' ,,'ffil ;'/',"';"'','rii'l,' li ,il',i
ffi. i',;";",;",,'
l_ L,i ;/',;",,",,'iif;^i^Au^;i;" -," /i i l' t
di ^l( i t ,'v t'.u'/\/'7\-7- i ! r
g
P
6
c
2
I
\c/
I
zz
66
E9
E?9q
tltlL1 |
t-ttel
IT3l;T
2
6
z
I
6
l/
It,tii,
li
"lt!:,'t'
til't i, ittlt'-
I
lt't/ltl
LiI
lltl
I
I
t-( i ," ,i ,,'i ," ,' .i 1' / i\-',
'ii',i ,"i r!' ,"' ,t' ,," ," ," /' ;' ;i ,i I
li t ,l ,, ,,,' ;/ i" ,i ,,,' ,;; ;," ,,,/' ,;i' ;,i'o/ v
{, }'ti u,," i'' ,,",,,'i.i',,',,,,','i.::i' ir
'( rl ,,,'" ,'" .,," i'i;'771
' /' F'',',1"**;,',' i, ;!+' li
kFS " i' i',' i',','' i,i,'','' j,l
u{/iit,7,,i,'i,
i,,r ,,i i i if ,z
s
6d
|,{
go
z
i
T
=
t
z
i
?
I
2
z
.a
a;i
i:
pr
rT>;
wg*6
d i"' l' i"itt''',''/"'"''7''i"' l' ,/i//,\) I ,""U i j 7rnL.',,,",,r'r/' i l r) // i I I I-ffi:VY,,",/,'i lJ /'x ( t I Ib i i i i i ;,/',,",/ I I //){ i I I i( / iliiii') / ,,!jit ti ,/ ir',i // (i i i t I,/,,ii.tttii .+-'l//r'^! ! t i I,f'l//(! iii I
6
:
c
E
6
=
I
I
3
i
e
I
tl
t9
Va
<E
zo
:;*
i9:60.pulaY,i
==75T;
Pt Ittt.iailT+ |dlSrllt;lrt5
;i;l-tl
an>ld(,tqr{!
eg.
s
I,'/t r""///l//t/</ f / /'l////)
i,,i ,,'',',"ri,,'' i i
/t////tt/
'#',iru',
TRANSMITTAL LETTER
VAIL RDSORTS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY _ DESIGN ATID CONSTRUCTION
(970) 845-2382 Telephone
(9711479-3016 Far #
Vril's Front Door
TO: Town of Vail Corrunlty Development
ATTN: Joe Surther
Qto.nt.ztza
FORYOUR:
(r) APPROVAL
( ) RI EW&COMMENT
(r) UsE
THEFOLLOWING:
O DRAWINGS
( ) SPECIFICATIONS
O CIIANGE ORDER
REFSRENCENO: N/A
DATE: October 26, 2fi)5
IT'ENCI,OSIJRBS ARE NOT AS NOTED,
PLEASE INFORM US IMMEDIATELY.
IF CHECKED BEL,OW, PLEASE:
( r ) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF ENCLOSURES
0 RETURN BNCLOSTJRDS TO US.
WE TRANSMIT:
(x) IIEREWITH ( ) IN ACCORDAI\CE WITH YouR REQUEST
0 UNDD,RSEPARATf,, COVERVIA
O DISTRIBUTION TO PARTIES
(x) RECORDS
()
(r) INTORMATION
() SHOP DRAWINGPRINTS O PRODUCT INT'O
O SHOP DRAWING REPRODUCTIONS O SAMPLES
(r) Pbotos
COPIES DATE REV.NO.DESCRIPTION ACTION CODX,
I set 1025/{15 N/A Nine (9) Photor of b€€tle HII tr€si
ACTION: A ACTION INDICATED ON ITEM(S) TRANSIIIITTED
B. NO ACTION REQTJIRX,D
C. FOR SIGNATTJRE AND RETTJRN TO THIS OFFICE
D. FOR SIGNATURE AND FORWARDING (as noted below, under'Remarks')
E. SEE "RI,MARXS" BELOW
REMARKS: At requested photos of the beetle kill to be cut down on the Vail's Front Door.
COPIES TO:WITH ENCLOS{,RE(S)
(x)()
BY:
Marter File
Rick Caudel, Pnoject Mrnrger
Vail Resorts Development Company
Derign and Construction
RECEII'ED
ocT252m
VRDC CONSTBUCIION
RECEIVED
ocT 2 5 2005
VRDC CONSTRUCTION
RECEIVE['
ocT 2 5 2t05
VHDC CONSTRUCTION
BECEIVED
ocl 2 s 2005
VRDC CONSTRUCTION
.d
RECEIVED
t]cT 2 5 2005
VRDC CONSTRUCTION
,4
741
i/
nil.t
YJFA
RECEIVED
ocT 2 5 2m5
VRDC CONSTRUCTION
I
'I
RECEIVED
OcT 2 5 2005
VRDC CONSTBUCTION
HECEIVEET
ocT 2 5 2005
VRDC CONSTRUCTION
BECEIVED
0c1 z i ?oo5
VRDC CC)NSIRUC1\ON
Lot? , M,ll Cr."L SJJ,,',;'^Ffl.t c0PrFromi
To:
Date:
Subject:
CC:
To all,
Warren Campbell
Annette Dopplick; Bill Gibson; Moses Gonzales; Nicole Peterson;
021LL12008 3:36 PM
Temporary directional signage and Mountain Plaza (Front Door)
Warren Campbell
Rach...
I wanted to inform. you that Vail Resorts, in an effort to get some cohesive directional signage in the new Mountain Plaza,
will be utilizing some temporary signage until such time as the permanent signage can be installed. The temporary signage
will be approximately 2 feet by 3 feet with a black background and tan letering. The signs will be framed in cedar and
placed in plantels where possible. These signs will be removed no later than 48 hours after the mountain closes for the ski
season. There will be 7 to 9 of these signs in the plaza.
I would ask that Code Enforcement Officers, who might be enforcing the sign code, be made aware of ttis agreement. If
there are any questions please feel free to see rne.
Thanks
Wanen Campbell
479-2148
Frcm: Warren CampbellTo: Jeff BabbDate: OZILLIZO0S 3:37 PM
Subject: Re: Mt Plaza temp signs
I blind copied you on the email I sent to everyone about the signage. I have printed off your email to me as confirmation
to agreement with the condition.
Thanks
Warren
>>> "Jeff Babb" <JeffB@vailresorts.com> O211U200812:58 PM >>>
Warren,
Thank you very much. Your removal condition is no problem what so ever. I hope to have them in place by the weekend.
Jeff
--- Original Message ---
From: Warren Campbell <WCampbell@vailoov.com>
To: leff Babb
Cc: George Ruther <GRuther(Ovailqov.com>
Sent: Mon Feb 11 11:23:06 2008
Subject: Re: Mt Plaza temp signs
Jeff,
I have spoken to George and we will approve your temporary signage
package at the Mountain Plaza facility without the need for a formal
application. The only condition of the agreement is that the signs are
removed within 48 hours of the mountain cloGing for the winter.
I will let PD- Code Enforcement and Zonino Code Enforcement know about
the agreement.
Regards,
Warren Campbell
>>> "Jeff Babb" <JeffB@vailresorts.com> 02/08/2008 8:30 AM >>>
Good morning Warren,
I just wanted to make sure you received the packet I dropped off for
you
yesterday morning. It contained information regarding temporary
signage
for the Mt Plaza area. Rease call me with questions or concerns,
331-5959. Thanks.
Jeff
From:
To:
Dab:
Subject:
Wanen Campbell
Jetr Babb
021t11200811:23 AM
Rel Mt Plaza temp signs
Georye RutherCC:
Jfr'
I have spoken to Georye and we will approve )/our temporary signagE package at tt€ Mountaln Plaza facility wlthout the
need for a fornnl appllcation, The only condition of the agreement ls that the signs are rerwed within ,18 hours of the
mountain dosing fur the winter.
I wlll let PD- Code Enforcement and Zoning Code Enforcement knov', about the agreerEnt.
Regards,
Wanen Campbell
>>> 'Teff Babb" <JefB@vailr€solts.com> 02/082008 8:30 AM >>>
Good moming wanen,
I Just wanted to make sure you received the packet I dropped ofr for you
yesterday rnoming. It contained Infomatlon regErding ternporary shnagE
for the Mt Plaza ar€a. Pleas call rn wlth questiolls or concems,
331-5959. Thanks.
Jefr
a'
I
February 6s,2008
Re: Mountain Plaza temporary signage plan
Warren,
Enclosed please find a map and description of our temporary signage plan for the
Mountain Plaza facility.
Each sign will measure 2 ft wide x 3 ft high, the sub-straight material will be black metal
and all vinyl lettering will be tan in color. Each sign will be placed on a cedar a-frame
structure and placed in planters where possible. This will standardize the directional
signage look for the area and improve the overall wayfinding for our guests.
Please contact me with d'ny questions or concems. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
s&,^u?'{{U_-
Jeffrev Bab0
Resort Operations Director
Vail Resorts, Inc.
(970) 331-5959
TOVI'N OF VAIL, DESIGN RS/IEIN'/ starr APPRovAt-
it.Af i:
.o8
EMPLOYEES ONLY
BEYOND THIS POINT
PUBLIC RESTROOMS
LOCATED AROUND
THE BUILDING
TO YOUR LEFT
Sign Position A
Sign Position B
WELCOME TO
MOUNTAIN PLAZA
.(_ Lift Tickets(- Snowsports Sales
(Ski School)
{- Public Restrooms{- Basket Storage{- Ski Storage
Sign Position G
WELCOME TO
MOUNTAIN PLAZA
Lift Tickets
Snowsports Sales
(SkiSchool)
Public Restrooms
Basket Storage
Ski Storage
-----)
-----|
--'*j
I0tfyN f)F ri3fr
SfPFI#."Efffi
rJrt | tr:
S'ie.FF:
Ll cs
Sign Position D - side 1
WELCOME TO
MOUNTAIN PLAZA
Ski & Board Rentals {
Public Restrooms 4
Basket Storage I
Ski Storage +
Sign Position D - side 2
WELCOME TO
MOUNTAIN PLAZA
{- Lift Tickets<- Snowsports Sales
(Ski School)<|_- Wall Street
Bridge Street 4
Sign Position E - side 1
WELCOME TO
MOUNTAIN PLAZA
Public Restrooms -+
Ski & Board Rental --+
BasketStorage -+Beverages --->
+ Ski Storage
TPWil8 OF VAtr
DESIGN REI/!E\,I/
STAFFAPPROVnI',
Sign Position E - side 2
WELCOME TO
MOUNTAIN PLAZA
+-- Public Restrooms<-- Ski & Board Rentals<_- BasketStorage
Beverages
Sign Position F
WELCOME TO
MOUNTAIN PLAZA
Public Restrooms ---->
Ski & Board Rentals ---'
Basket Storage -->Beverages ---->
<_ ski storage
Sign Position G
WELCOME TO
MOUNTAIN PLAZA
\ Public Restrooms
Lift Tickets ,
Snowsports Sales ,
(Ski School)
DESIGN RB/IEW
STAFF APPROVAI-
DATE:
6IAFF. I
:JJVIg
o.
c
oz
ei9t
hE't9.
srd-e2E! . z i9qe e 3 7,3 < E 3qE E i = E ; ; F ; E.*5FEsiiSsE; E eEdsSl l l l | | ^ .fr.-^n! o o il|ll [Wq1q#Dj-'r'., u'" U *ul! i rf d-
.- --,-.--( '/^'' '' ''
\.--t G
>;
a;9 t€
u e 5=.3 E r- Eft€P ? l EEiE : I =;PX B 6 EE 5tltl< e e€O
)---r-r
6
a:i
*
I
E=E'
r==
E=H1
E=E
E=E
9
3
;
E
o2U('
ulJ
/l\l-4,
IEr=
H=
ye 1
tat'
<tt
\l
\
Irllo
,-1-\ <
F6) J
iE"edrEE I
uJz
o
t
EUf_Ir
It?
t=
)
J
)
)
)
)
)
EE
E=u=
ET
t
F
=!
E
(Fr
Tli
EF
J
i
ti
io
Euuloa
ECJ
.'....\\
r.. i ..'.
't
"'. t-t '
\\-!
Ico;lro
__,./ _-/ _/ -'
/^
.;'.:b
RJCIPROCAL EASEMENT AND COVENANTS AGREEMENT
- (Including Right Of First Refusal)
THISRECIPRoCALEASEMENTANDcovENANTSAGREEMENT
(tncluding Right Of First Retusal) ("Agreement") is made as of the JllaW of January, 1999.
by and between LODGE PROPERTIES INC., a Colorado corporation (the "Lod-ee O"vner"). and
JAMES B. SHERWOOD (the "Penthouse Owner"). The Lodge Owner and the Penthouse
Owner are sometimes refened to hereinafter collectively and in the singular as the "Orvner(s)"'
RECITALS
A. The Lodge Owner owns certain real property in the Town of Vail' County
of Eagle, State of Colorado, rvhlich is commonly known as "The Lodge at Vail" and consists of a
hotel/lodge conrplex containing 88 hotel rooms (more or less), together with certain lestaulants'
lounge aieas, reception areas, and meeting and ancillary facilities and other itnprovenrents
(collictively, the "Lodge"). The Lodge includes a new wing that has been recently completed as
an addition to the hotel/lodge complex, which wing contains 28 hotel rooms (more or leqs) plus a
top-floor penthouse (the "Penthouse") and is commonly referred to (and is hereinafter referred
toj as the;'lnternational Wing." The Lodge complex pre-dating the Intemational Wing (and any
subsequent additions or impiovements thereto other than the lnternational Wing) is sometimes
refened to herein as the "Original Lodge." The improvements comprising the Lodge and the
Intemational Wing, togeth". *ittt att uiitity and other operating systems and facilities therein
(inctuding all "Common Facilities" hereinafter defined), are sometimes refened to hereinafter
collective-iy as the "Lodge Improvements," and the Lodge Improvements and the land on which
they are situated, and the appurtenances thereto, are sometimes refened to hereinafter
coliectively as the "Lodge Property." The term "lntemational Wing" as used herein shall mean
those Lodge Improvenrents that conrprise the Intemational Wing or any portion thereof' A legal
description of the Lodge Property is attached hereto as EXbj-bilAand incorporated herein by this
reference.
B. The air space comprising the interior of the Penthouse has been defined
and legally established, pursuant to a subdivision approved and adopted by the Tor'rlr of Vail (the
"Town"). as a severed and independent property interest in the form of an "estate above the
surface" (as authorized pulsuant to C.R.S. S 38-32-101 et seo.), sepalate and distinct from the
balance of the Intemational Wing and Lodge Property (the "Penthouse Unit")' The Penthouse
Unit is legally described on ExhibitB-l attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference. and may be subject to modification hereafter as set forth in subparagraph 2(f) below'
The term "Lodge Properry" as used herein shall not include the Penthouse Unit. The Lodge
property and Penthouse Unit are sometimes each referred to hereinafter in the singular as a
"Property", and together as the "Properties".
C. As of the date hereof, and pursuant to a "Residential Qontract to Buy and
III
I:.
== lo:-c(,
-31
r.< a
-Ld
:al
-a
ar lul!!=.t orcol
r5o
I=
-&o:G'GI
rQGlIs, _Eo-
-ot
6t:ot 6l
--{dIO rt
-t{N----j.\
=sElfeF
-8P-+\|of
i Setl neat Estate," with Addendum, dated as of October 7, 1997, as amended, and made between
i the Lodge Owner, as the "Seller", and the Penthouse Owner, as the "Buyer" ("Sales Contract"),
i ,t
"
p.n,"noure Owner has acquired title ro and the ownership of the Penthouse Unit. The Owners
have mutually determined to make this Agreement in order to establish certain easements
benefiting and burdening the Penthouse Unit and/or Lodge Property in certain respects, to.
provide an allocation beirveen the parties of certain functions and costs associated with the
ounership, maintenance, operation. use and enjoyment of the Penthouse Unit and Lodge
Property, and to otherwise regulate the use and enjoyment of the Penthouse Unit and Lodge
lroperty in certain respects, to the extent expressly set forth in and subject to the provisions of
this Agreement.
D. Initially capitalized terms used in this Agreement, if not defined when first
set forth herein, shall be defined under subsequent provisions contained in this Agreement. For
ease of reference, an index of defined terms is attached to this Agreement and incorporated
herein bv this reference
ffigD AUG 1 tA-13
ffti$b.
L/\f .i:ritE
r! .{rf.RcFfsHorar/ee2:J6pl\t
\,|-X, j5jlr"
NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to and in furtherance of the foregoing premises'
and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements set forth herein, the Owners
covenant and agree as follows:
l. PenthouseEasements.
(a)TheLodgeownerherebygrantsandconveystothePenthouse
Owner, without warranty of title except as set forth in subparagraph 14(a) below' the
following easements and interests, which shall be non-exclusive (except as otherwise
expressly set forth below), and which shall serve solely as appurtenances to the Penthouse
unit, and may not be conveyed, encumbered or transfened independently of the
Penthouse Unit (collectively, the "Penthouse Easements"):
(i)Aneasementandrightofuseandaccesstoandfi.omthe
Penthouse (A) through, on or in the common corridors, stairs ar.rd stair*'ays,
entrances and service entrances, elevators and lobbies of the Intemational Wing
and Lodge Property, and common sidewalks, driveways and pedestrian ways
within thi Lodge Property (which common means of access shall specifically
exclude the interior of any hotel room or other accommodation units or dil'elling
units, any patios, balconies, tenaces or other areas which are in the nature of
limited common elements and do not provide common benefit in general to all
occupants ofthe Lodge Property. and any means ofaccess which are nol generally
available to hotel guests of the Lodge Property), and (B) via the operation of the
elevator between the Penthouse and the floor in the International Wing rvhich is
. immediately below the Penthouse (elevator access to the Penthouse fronr the floor
below will not be available to other hotel guests); these easements and rights of
access may be enjoyed by the Penthouse Orvner. his guests. licensees, invitees,
employees, contractors, subcontractors and other agents, as well as his family
members, in accordance with and subject to the terms of this Agreement;
(ii)Aneasementfortheuseandenjoymentofutilitylinesand
related equipment (including but not limited to plumbing, electrical, telephone,
water, heating, ventilating, air cooling, gas, steam, communication, mail, radio,
' television, security, exhaust, refuse and all other pertinent pipes, wiring, ducts,
lines, shafts and conduits) whiclr are located in or on the Lodge Property and
which are necessary for the continuance and maintenance of utility services,
plumbing services, sanitary and storm sewer services' water supply and other
services to the Penthouse tlrat are generally supplied to the Lodge Property from
time to time and are customarily or ordinarily fumished for the residential use of
units similar to the Pentlrouse;
(iii)Aneasementforthesupportanduseandenjoymentoftlre
exterior walls and roof and other structural facilities, members, lbotings,
foundations and components of the International Wing as necessary to fumish
adequate structural enclosure and support of the Penthouse Unit. and an1' facility
wittr respect to which the Penthouse Owner is expressly granted an easen'lent for
the use and enjoyment thereof under the provisions of this paragraph I ;
(iv) An easement permitting the resulting encroachments if any
part of the Penthouse Unit, as presently constituted and existing or initially
constructed, encroaches upon any part of the remainder of the International Wing,
or ifany such encro4chment shall occur hereaftet as a result ofsettling or shifting
of the International Wing improvements, or as a result of any leconstruction or
restoration of the International Wing or any part thereof following any casualty or
condemnation affecting the same;
(v) An inevocable license to use one (1) parking space for the
benefit of the Penthouse occupant while the Penthouse is occupied, whiclt space
shall be at any location within the courtyard ofthe Lodge Property as designated
by the Lodge Owner from time to time (this license shall constitute the sole right
attendant to the Penthouse to use and enjoy the Comrnon Facilities for the parking
--,
-:.
-io:.Es
-a
^.-ti--.3-
trutE;elEq:
-Eo7-'z
-Fo
-dt6'
=8:-86
-ot6l-<|o--o
rfFtlor
-agEle:o
=ErZ6ol
ata
-lia
-5
-.
-il7zE
-;o-{.q
=5:-ko
-dt6,
=8:-Bo
-ot6l-{.o=RF
-ae,-oo
-aott-o)=fir:46(o
of motor vehicles). For any period where the Penthouse Owner has reserved
occupancy with the Lodge bwner and is otherwise in actual residence of the
P.nthour., but does not physically occupy the Penthouse for a short duration
within such period becauie of sojourns which are ancillary or incidental to the
Penthouse Owner's stay in the Penthouse, the Penthouse Owner shall, for
purposes of this parking license, be regarded as in occupancy.throughout the
resirvea occupancy period so long as the Penthouse Owner will be returning to
physically re-occupythe Penthouse following any such sojourn (in any case this
parking ii..nr. shall not allow the Penthouse Owner long-term parking storage
when the Penthouse Owner is not in residence in the Penthouse);
(vi) The license set' forth in subparagraph 2(c) below to
construct the Terrace Improvements;
(vii) An inevocabie license and privilege to use and enjoy the
common Amenities, but only to the extent those common Amenities are also
made available from time to time for the use and enjoyment of the nrembers of the
Lodge Association and/or the South Association (sometimes l.rereinafter together
the'?ssociations"), and further provided that from time to tine this license and
privilege may be exercised and enjoyed only by the following parties, and only
when they are staying overnight in the Penthouse in the ordinary course of tlie
residential occupancy thereof: the Penthouse Owner. his family members' any
other social guests so occupying the Penthouse pursuant to the Penthouse Owner's
invitation, and any tenants and licensees paying to occupy the Penthouse pursuallt
to occupancy agreements made under the Rental Agreement. Furthermore, the
exercise of this license and privilege shall be subject to such rules and regulations
as the Lodge Owner may generally impose on the use and enjoyment of the
Common Amenities, and any applicable restrictionS under any agreements with
the Association; and
(viii)Anirrevocableeasementfortheuseandenjoymentoftlre
terraces which adjoin, are on the same floor level as, and are accessible from the
interior ofthe Penthouse (collectively, the "Penthouse Tenaces")' The Penthouse
Terraces are depicted and described on Exhibit B-2 attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference. Notwithstanding the statement 10 the
contrary under the prefatorl, provisions of this subparagraph (a). this easement
shall be exclusive, subject to the express rights granted to the Lodge Owner under
this Agreement with respect to the Penthouse Terraces. The use and enjoyment of
this easement shall extend fo and include wall and overhang surfaces that border
and face into the Penthouse Terraces.
References herein to the "Penthouse Unit" shall encompass and include the Penthouse
Easements, as appurtenances thereto, .unless such inclusiol is inappropriate in the
particular context.
(b) The Penthouse Easements shall be for passive use and enjoyment
only and shall not extend to or allow repair, maintenance or alteration ofany property or
facilities which are encumbered thereby or the subject thereofl provided, however, that
the Penthouse Owner shall have rights of repair and maintenance oi the Penthouse
Terraces, so long as any exercise of the same does not, would not and could not affect any
utility or operating systems or structural components of the Lodge Property or Common
Facilities within the Lodge Property; and provided further, that the Penthouse Owner
shall be permitted to alter non-structural partitioning walls within the Penthouse and
otherwise make modifications to the interior of the Penthouse so long as the same do not,
would not and could not affect any such utility or operating systems, structural
components or Common Facilities. To the extent any walls or other improvements or
contents within the Penthouse constitute part ofor affect any such structural components,
utility or operating systems or Common Facilities, the Penthouse Owner shall not modify
or alter the same in any respect, or conduct maintenance or repairs for the same; instead'
such maintenance and repairs, ifand when necessary, shall be undertaken by the Lodge
-!-
--L
-oo
:^C1)atI!< a
:IL?7c.--
-
lurlEd o
-;e!-50
-^-rrRo:dto
-dlGlEoo
-Eo:orGl
-{o;
-ol(l-N
(\a
:.18
-49-.g:OD:GaC:I'o:3*
Owner, and the costs thereof shall be included in Common Expenses or Direct Expenses
as appropriate. For purposes ofthe foregoing, "structural components" shall nrean those
that are load-bearing. Without limitation on the generality of the foregoing, the
Penthouse Owner specifically acknowledges and agrees that the electrical panel located
on the interior of the Penthouse wall that abuts the adjacent elevator (which elevator is
not part of the Penthouse Unit) is interrelated with electrical systems affecting other areas
within the International Wing, and consequently the operation of that electrical panel and
maintenance and repairs therefor shall be left to the Lodge Owner' Funhermore' in the
specific case ofthe Fenthouse Terraces, the Penthouse Owner shall not have any rights to
make alterations, modifications or improvements thereto (except as specifically provided
in paragraph 2 below, and further except for non-structural, aesthetic changes which are
not visible from outside the Intemational Wing).
(c)Notwithstandingtheprovisionsofsubparagraphl(b)above.the
Penthouse Owner shail be permitted to undertake maintenance or repairs pertaining to the
enjoyment of the Penthouse Easements, and also interior modifications to the Penthouse.
even though the same would or could affect any utility or operating systems or structural
componenis of the Lodge Property or Common Facilities, if the given maintenance.
,.pui6 or interior modifications are given the prior written approval of the Lodge Owner,
which shall not be unreasonably withheld. In any event the Lodge Owner may withhold
such consent if it determines that the resulting effect could be materially adverse to the
Lodge Property or any portion thereof. However, such prior consent shall not be required
in uny
"uta
of emergency circumstances where the Penthouse is subjected to an imminent
threat of material damage (provided that in such case the Penthouse Owner shall exercise
reasonable efforts, given the prevailing circumstances, to notify the Lodge Owner and
give the Lodge Owner first opportunity to remedy the emergency cilcumstances). If the
penthouse Owner undertakes any maintenance, repairs or modifications in accordance
r.r.ith this subparagraph l(c). and the undertaking of the same causes any damage or loss
to the Lodge Improvements, then the Lodge owner may make such repairs or
replacements aS may be necessary or appropriate to remedy such damage or loss. and the
Penthouse Owner shall be solely responsible for all costs incuned by the Lodge Owner in
connectiou therewith (and specifically i1 the case of tl.ris subparagraph i (c)' the waivers
under subparagraph 8(e) below shall not apply hereto). Such costs shall be paid in
accordance with the reimbursement provisions applicable to the Penthouse Owner under
subparagraph 7(c) below and shall constitute part ofPenthouse Reimbursements'
(d) The use and enjoyment of the Penthouse Easemeuts shall be in
accordance with and subject to all the other provisions hereof governing and limiting the
satne. Without limitation on the generality of the foregoing, the use, enjoyment,
occupancy and maintenance ofthe Penthouse and Penthouse Easements shall only be for
residential usage of the same in nraterial conformity with the Use Standards (subject to
the rights hereunder to undertake the Terrace Improvements), and in accordance with the
Permitted Exceptions (hereinafter defined), applicable laws, and rules and regulations of
general applicability that the Lodge Owner may adopt from time to time with respect to
La in ttre orainary course of Lodge Property operations (provided that any sucll rule or
regulation shall be binding upon the Penthouse Owner only so long as the Lodge Owner
exercises good faith efforts to enforce the same uniformly). Without limitation on the
foregoing, the Penthouse may not be empioyed for any use or purpose which would
constitute an unusual fire hazard, would result in jeopardizing any insurance maintained
on any part of the Lodge Property. or would result in any increase in the premiums for
such inzurance, or which would constitute a public or private nuisance or give rise to any
noxious noises or odors that on an ongoing basis nraterially interfere with the ordinary
use and enjoyment of the Lodge Property in accordance with the Use Standards'
Furthermore, no apparatus, equipment, fixtures or'other property of any nature may be
located within the Penthouse if the same, singularly or in the aggregate, would violate the
maximum loads that the structural flooring in the Penthouse is designed to support.
2. Tenace Improvements. Subject to all of the provisions of this
paragraph 2. the Penthouse Owner shall be permitted, at Penlhouse Owner's election, to improve
and enclose the Penthouse Terrace situated at the northwest corner of the Penthouse (the
,,Northwest Terrace", which is specifically depicted on Exhibit B-2 hereto), to the end that the air
space enclosed by those improvements shall constitute an additional bedroom or sitting room
within the Penthouse unii which additional room will also benefit from the Penthouse
Easements as appurtenances thereto (the improvements creating that enclosure being referred to
hereinafter as the "Terrace Improvements'), If the Penthouse Owner exercises this election' the
Terrace lmprovements will be undertaken in conformity with the following provisions:
(a) The Penthouse Owner's plans and specifications for the Tenace
Improvements, and any contractors proposed to be engaged for constructing tl.re Tenace
Improvements (the "Tenace Contraclors"), will be subject to the prior uritten consent of
the Lodge owner, which shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. without limiting
the other grounds upon which the Lodge Owner may withhold its consent, the Penthouse
Owner specifically acknowledges that the Lodge Owner may withhold its consent if the
Lodge Owner reasonably determines that the proposed Terrace lmprovements are not
materially consistent in all respects with the configuration and aesthetic character of the
International Wing. Without limitation on the generality of the foregoing, the Penthouse
Owner specificall-y acknowledges that the lines of the Terrace Improvements must be-
architecturally compatible with the corresponding lines of the roof and exterior walls of
the lnternationat Wing which presently enclose the Penthouse Unit, and may not be
configured so as to .r."t. *y sort of irregular protrusion' Furtlermore, the Lodge Owner
shall not be required to uppiou" any Terrace Improvements if the resulting allocation of
building density thereto would require that the Lodge Owner curtail any existing use of
the Lodge Property or any portion thereof, or preclude the Lodge owner from
implementing any plans of the Lodge Owner then pending before the Town (or any
ug"n.y or departmint thereof) or other pertinent govemmental authority which would
establish additional uses or improvements within the Lodge Property that contport with
the Use Standards. If the Lodge Owner withholds its approval on this basis' the Lodge
Orvner must reasonably substantiate that such a curtailment or preclusion of uses will
arise. and the Lodge Orvner shall be entitled to reasonable ofportunity to conduct due
diligence for this pirpot. (and as a condition to any approval by the Lodge Owner of atry
Terrace Improuements, the Penthouse Owner shall be rqquired to furnish the Lodge
Ou,ner with any documents or information in the Penthouse Owner's possession or
available or known to the Penthouse Owner which indicates that such a cunaillnent or
preclusion of uses will so arise). The Penthouse Owner will reimburse the Lodge Owner
for all costs and expenses. including attorneys' fees, incurred by the Lodge Owner in the
review and approval process under this subparagraph 2(a)'
(b) In all respects all costs, expenses and liabilities associated with the
undertaking of any Terrace Improvements, and all risks associated with the same, shall be
borne solely by the Penthouse Owner.
--
-L-:EJOlll.r a:L?Zt.a-
-
Lur
-3o=oqrlo
-2rrf o:G'GD
rq!Gtt- (r
-=eI
-oo-{";=RF
-c.
G
-o-drg:ot,
=Er
-
lo lll
(i) Without limitation on the generality of the foregoing' the
Penthouse Owner acknowledges and agrees that any zoning, subdivision, building
permit and other land use authorizations, permits and approvals, whether
applicable to the Town or any other authority, public or private, which are
reiuisite to undertaking or using the Tenace Improvements must be obtained by
the Penthouse Owner at the Penthouse Owner's sole risk and expense. and the
Lodge owner shall not have any obligation to secure the same. As a condition to
-y
-.o-a.ncement of Terrace Improvements, the Penthouse Owner will be
responsible to furnish documentary evidence reasonably satisfactory to the Lodge
Owner that such authorizations, permits and approvals have been secured.
(ii) The Lodge Owner's rights to approve plans and
specifications pursuant to subparagraph 2(a) above, and rights to require evidence
oi authority under the foregoing provisions, shall be for the Lodge Owner's own
benefit solely, shall not be construed to impose any obligations upon the Lodge
Owner, and shall not limit or alter the allocation of risks and liabilities under this
subparagraph (b) or the Penthouse Owner's indemnity under subparagraph 2(c)
below; the Penthouse owner shall be solely obligated, both to the Lodge owner
and any other party in interest, to cause any Terrace Improvements to be
--,
-LlI JCt:.c4)I'rI-.4
-L?-ifrE3o
=;q-:o-^z-Fo:arto
=s:-Bo:dt 6,E{o
={F:aaEEle
:OD
=fir
-io
to
completed in a good and workmanlike manner and in conformity with all
applicable laws, rules and regulations and any applicable private restrictions- as
*ill ut the plans and specifications approved by the Lodge Owner. During the
course of construction. the Penthouse Owner shall exercise all reasonable and
prudent efforts to avoid the incurrence of any damage to other Lodge
Improvements that may result from the construction of the Terrace lnrprovenretrts
(provided that the foregoing shall not be construed to limit the scope of the
Penthouse Owner's indemnity under subparagraph 2(d) below). In the course of
construction, the Penthouse Owner shall cause the Terrace Contraclors to
maintain all areas affected by the construction rvork in a reasonably good and
sightly condition, including the containment and control of dust to the extent
feasible in accordance with industry practices, and the prompt and diligent
removal from time to time of debris and other waste resulting fron.r the
construction Process.
(c)ThePenthouseownershal|havealicenseforaccessandentry
through the Lodge Property and International Wing as necessary to undertake the
construction of the Terrace Improvements and its obligations hereunder which are
attendant to such construction, which license may be enjoyed by the Penthouse Owner'
his architect, interior designer and other agents, and the approved Terrace Contractors,
and shall be inevocable so long as the Terrace Improvements are in the process of being
constructed in accordance with the provisions hereof. This license shail terminate
automatically when the Terrace Improvements are completed. The Penthouse Owner's
use and enjoyment of this license shall be subject to compliance with any procedures.
rules or regulations for the construction that the Lodge Owner may reasonably establish
tin order to regulate and control the effect of the construction on the Lodge Propertl' and
its operations. Without limitation on the generality of the foregoing, those rules and
regulations may reasonably prohibit or limit areas of access to the Terrace Contraclors
and other parties within the Lodge Property, and may also impose reasonable limitations
on the gross amount and concentrations of weight and similar burdens that may be placed
at locations within the Lodge Properry in the course of constructiotl. Construction
acrivities shall be limited to the time period outside of Vail's annual ski season (which ski
season generally runs from approximately mid-November to mid-April. and as the same
may be extended). The Lodge Owner may also require that all exterior construction
activities (e.g., construction of the exterior walls for the Terrace Improvements) be
confined to the periods in any given year between the end of the Vail ski season and
June l, and between September 30 and the beginning of Vail ski season. Furthermore,
the Lodge Owner may require, prior to the commencement of construction, that the
Penthouse Owner prepare and submit to the Lodge Owner a construction staging plarr and
schedule for the Tenace Improvements made in reasonirble detail (which plan and
schedule shall include, without limitation, locations for the storage of construction
materials and construction l'acilities, and means of construction access). As a condit.ion to
' the commencement of construction. tltis construction staging plan and schedule will be
subject to the prior written approval of the Lodge Owner (which rvill not be unreasonably
withheld), and the Penthouse Owner shall proceed with construction in material
conformity with the approved plan and schedule.
(d) (i) The Penthouse Owner shall defend and indemnify
the Lodge Owner and the Lodge Affiliates from and against any liability, loss,
cost or expense, including attorneys' fees, that the Lodge Owner may incur in
. connection with any breach of the Penthouse Owner's express obligations
hereunder respecting the Terrace Improvements, or otherwise in connection with
any undertaking of the Terrace Improvements. This indemnity shall extend to and
include, without limitation, (A) any resulting physical damage to the Lodge
Improvements which arises during construction, or which arises subsequent to
construction from design or construction defetts or inadequacies, and (B) any
third party claims or legal proceedings of any nature which are brought in relation
to or in connection with the construction of the Terrace Improvements, whether
public or private in nature, which are against or include the Lodge Owner or any
Lodge Affiliates as a party, and which entail either claims for damages against the
I!=
--.
-
ac):3<tt
-t-.r
a
:IL?
-aa
I LgI
-te!!c'i
-Fo-^=IRo:l|o
-!!clI{J -
-8o:olG,
-{";ro tf
-GIN:dG
-o_-oE:al:-aar:no:o
-@F
Lodge Owner or any Lodge Affiliates or claims for any form of equitable or
declaratory relief which wouid affect any of the Lodge Owner's interests in the
Lodge Property.
(ii) In case any legal proceedings are commenced which fall
within the foregoing indemnity, the Lodge Owner (or any Lodge Affiliate) at its
sole election may also appear in and defend the same, by counsel seiected by the
Lodge owner (or applicable Lodge Affiliate), and may also enter into any
settlements of any such proceedings that the Lodge Owner (or applicable Lodge
Affiliate) may deem appropriate. All sums and expenses paid or incurred by the
Lodge owner (or any Lodge Affiliate) in conn€ction with responding to,
appearing in or defending any such legal proceedings or third-party claims, and
any sums paid or incurred by the Lodge owner (or any Lodge Affiliate) in
settlement thereof (including reasonable attomeys' fees), shall be included within
the scope of the Penthouse Owner's indemnity hereunder. However. settletnents
of claims for damages will be subject to the Penthouse Ownel's prior written
approval, not to be unreasonably wiihheld, and to the extent the Lodge Owner (or
appticaUte Lodge Affiliate) n1akes any settlement of a ciaim for damages when the
Penthouse Owner's approval is reasonably withheld, the settlenrent amount will
not be included within the Penthouse Owner's indemnity. In atry case where a
claim for damages is not settled because the Penthouse Owner withholds his
consent thereto, the indemnity under this paragraph 2(d) shall remain fully
applicable to the claim. Mechanic's lien claims shall not be regarded as claims
for damages under the foregoing provisions.
(iii) The Penthouse Owner's indemnity obligations under the
foregoing provisions shall not extend to any claims or liabilities which result from
any actions or omissions of the Lodge Owner constituting negligence or willful
misconduct (provided that in the case of omissions, the Penthouse Owner shall be
so excused from liability only to tfie extent the Penthouse Owner gives the Lodge
Owner notice of the omission. and the Lodge Owner then fails to cure the
omission promptly if the same is curable). In any case, the Lodge Owner's
approval of any Terrace Improvements or plans and specifications therefor shall
not be regarded as any negligence or malfeasance by the Lodge Owner, those
rights of approval being solely for the Lodge Owner's benefit; the Penthouse
Orvner shall undertake sole responsibility and Iiabiiity for determining the legal
sufficiency and technical adequacy and safety of any Terrace Improvements and
such plans and specifications. and the Penthouse Owner's indemnity shall be fully
applicable thereto. The indemnity under this subparagraph 2(d) shall not be
subject to or limited by the waivers in subparagraph 8(e) below. and all sums
owing under this indemnity shall constitute Penthouse Reimbursements to the
extent the obligation to pa)/ any such sums is reduced to any judgment in favor of
the Lodge Owner or stipulated in writing by the Penthouse Owner.
(iv) The named Penthouse Owner herein, James B' Sherwood'
shall have and retain at all times primary liability for the indemnity obligations
under this subparagraph 2(d), notwithstanding any subsequent sale or conveyance
of the Penthouse Unit. The term "Lodge Affiliates" shall mean any entity which,
by virtue ofdirect or indirect ownership or voting interests, controls, is controlled
by, or is under common control with the Lodge Owner or Vail Associates, Inc.,
along with the stockholders, directors, officers, employees and agents of any of
them (and all Lodge Affiliates shall be third party beneficiaries of the foregoing
indemnity).
(e) The indemnity of the Penthouse Owner under subparagraph 2(d)
above shall specifically encompass and include, without limitation, any and all
mechanic's lien claims that may arise in connection with the undertaking of any Terrace
Inrprovements, any sums incurred by the Lodge Owner in satisfying such claims, and all
related costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees. Prior to commencing
any Terace lmprovements, the Penthouse Owner shall post or furnish notices, in
I
-I:(rlErt
-<0-
lr. .'{
--oI C lrf
-a
!!!!!= ul Gl
-."qr=o
I2,rfto
:fr6,
r!! oE" 31r8o
:oDGt
-(";IOrrf
-NN-)gr6,rdrg
:oD
-3o
-@o
conformity with Colorado law, which are sufficient to preclude any such mechanic's lien
claims from aftaching to the ownership interests of the Lodge Owner in the International
Wing or Lodge Property, and shall furnish evidence reasonably acceptable to the Lodge
Owner of the satisfaction of this requirement. In the event any mechanic's lien claims
arise from the undertaking of the Tenace Improvements, the Penthouse Owner, as tlle
"Responsible Owner", shall be obligated to secure the iecord release of the same in
conformity with paragraph i 0 below.
(0 The Penthouse ou'ner shall not have any right to modify or altel
the structule enclosing the Penthouse Unit, or any other Lodge Improvements' except as
expressly permitted under this palagraph 2. The Tenace Improvements which enclose
the Northwest Terrace shall beconre part of the Lodge Improvements and the property of
the Lodge Owner, and as such shall be treated in accordance r,'u'ith the otller provisions
hereof which govern the respective rights and obligations of the parties in connection
with the Lodgelmprovements. If and when the Terrace Improvements are undertaken:
(i)TlreexistingexteriorwallnexttotlreNorthwestTermce
shall thereby become an interior wall within the Penthouse (and any further
alteration, maintenance or repairs of that wall will be and remain subject to the
limitations pertaining to the Penthouse interior which are set forth in subparagraph
l(b) hereof and elsewhere in this Agreement).
(ii)TlreairspaceenclosedbytheTerracelmprovementsshall
become an increment to and/or otherwise be treated as part of the Pentlrouse Unit
for all purposes under this Agreement, and upon being furnished a legal
description and survey for that air space duly verified ald certified by a qualified
,u.l',"),or, the Lodge Owner shall quit claim the same to the Penthouse Ou'ner by
an appropriate fee or easement conveyance, as the Penthouse Owner may request'
The Lodge Owner will also reasonably cooperate in connection with and join in
any further resubdivision of the Penthouse Unit which is undertaken to
incorporate such air space. provided such cooperation and joinder is at no expense
or liability to the Lodge Ourrer (and the Pentlrouse Owner shall reirnburse the
Lodge Owner for any liabilit;.'. cost or expense. including reasouable attorllevs'
fees. incurred in connection therewith).
3. Non-Exclusivitv of Penthouse Easements.
(a) As set forth in paragraph I above, the Penthouse Easentents shall
be non-exclusive, and the Lodge Owner shall retain arld reserve all rights to use, occupy,
maintain, repair, operate and enjoy the Lodge Property as the Lodge Owner may eiect,
excluding the non-structural interior of the Penthouse (except as provided belor'r' in this
subparagraph 3(a)); provided. however, that the foregoing is subject to (and only to) the
exclusive Penthouse Easement for the Penthouse Terraces, the provisions of
subparagraph 3(b) below, and the proviso that the exercise of such rigilts shall not
maierially interfere with the Penthouse Easements and shall be materially consistent with
the Use Standards. The Lodge Owner's reserved rights in this regard specifically include,
without limitation, the following rights and interests, which shall benefit the Lodge
Owner, any tenants or occupants ofthe Lodge Property claiming by, through or under the
Lodge Owner, and the concessionaires, agents, employees, customers, contractors'
licensees and invitees of any of them (and all such rights and interests shall act as
appurtenances to the ownership ofthe Lodge Property):
(i) The right of access to and from any part of the Lodge
Improvements (excluding the non-structural interior of the Penthouse except as set
forth below);
(ii) The right for the use, enjoyment, maintenance, repair,
replacement, improvement and preservation of utility lines and systems and other
operating systems and Common Facilities of any nature (including all petinent
pipes, wiring, ducts and conduits, and all pertinent equipment, machinery and
apparatus) which are located in or on the Intemational Wing or Lodge Property,
If
I
I
II
II
-I
I
I
II
I
-II
II
II
LOC'!()o{a||.-uaaL|llaU' G'oll.FO
=o-$t Gtqtq
G' C'G'ato,ot 6to, 6t
\@
aE rtN(\.
r.a cGIo(.l rtot
ttoo@o)
and all structural and other portions and elements of the Lodge Improvements
(excluding the non-structural interior ofthe Penthouse except as set forth below);
(iii) The restriction and negative easement that the Penthouse
Owner shall have no right to modify or alter the Lodge Improvements. except as
expressly permitted and provided for under subparagraph l(b) and paragraph2
above; and
(iv) Easements for encroachments if any part of the Lodge
Improvements, as presently constructed and existing or as initialll' constructed.
encroach upon or within any portion of the Penthouse Unit. or if any such
encroachment shall occur hereafter as a result of settling or shifting of the
Intemational Wing or other Lodge Improvements, or as a result of any
reconstruction or restoration of the International Wing or any portion thereof
following a casualty or condemnation affecting the same.
As stated above, these reserved rights ald interests in favor of the Lodge Owner do not
extend to the non-structural interior of the Penthouse or the Penthouse Terraces;
provided, however, that the Lodge Owner shall have and retain an irrevocable license to
access the interior of the Penthouse and. the Penthouse Tenaces as necessiuy or
appropriate in order to operate and perform maintenance, repairs, improvements,
replacements and restorations for the Intemational Wing, and specifically including,
without limitation, any such entry as necessary to prevent damage or injury to the
lnternational Wing or any portion thereof. This irrevocable license for entry shall be
subject to the conditions and limitations in subparagraph 7(b) below and an1' other
express limitations contained elsewhere in this Agreement. This inevocable license for
entry shall inure to the benefit of the Lodge Owner and its employees. agents. contractors
and invitees as aforesaid, and shall run rvith the land as an,appurtenance benefiting the
owuership of the Lodge Property. The Penthouse Owner hereby grants to the Lodge
Owper and adopts and confirms this irrevocable license for entry in favor of the Lodge
Owner. and the other rights, interests and easements reserved or established in favor of
the Lodge Owner under this Agreenrent. The Penthouse Owner's rights of occupancy to
the non-structural Penthouse interior and the Penthouse Terraces shall be exclusive as
against the Lodge Owner and anyone claiming by, through, or under the Lodge Owner,
subject only to the foregoing irrevocable license and the express limitations on the
Penthouse Owner's rights set forth elseu'here in this Agreenrent.
(b) The Lodge Owner at its election may make any alterations,
modifications or improvements to the lntemational Wing or Lodge Property that the
Lodge Owner may deem appropriate; provided, however, that (i) such alterations,
modifications or improvements shall not materially impair the benefits which the
Penthouse Owner derives from the ordinary use and enjoyment of the Penthouse
Easenrents (including, witlrout limitation. the support of the Penthouse floor and other
structural elements enclosing the Penthouse Unit) and shall be materially consistent with
the Use Standards; (ii) the Lodge Owner shall not construct any additional floors on top
of the Penthouse or the roof thereof; and (iii) the Lodge Owner shall not locate additional
HVAC or other mechanical equipment in close proximity to the Penthouse if such
equipment produces substantial noise or vibrations which r,"ould materially disrupt or
materially interfere with the ordinary occupancy, use or enjoyment of the Penthouse or
the Penthouse Terraces. In any case, the Lodge Owner shall not remove and shall
maintain the existence, in material conformity with their present configuration and
condition, of the planters and other exterior improvements which sene as a physical
separation and buffer between the westerly Penthouse Terrace and certain other adjoining
tenaces. (The westerly Penthouse Tenace is labeled as the "Southwest Tenace" on
Exhibit B-2 artached hereto.) The Lodge Owner shall otherwise retain free use of all roof
areas, including the roof above the Penthouse, the patio/tenace areas adjacent to the
Penthouse (but specifically excluding the Penthouse Terraces), and other components of
and areas within the Lodge Property (exclusive of the non-structural interior of the
Penthouse), provided the Lodge Owner complies with the foregoing provisions of this
subparagraph 3(b). Furthermore, the Lodge Owner shall be entitled to and may enjoy the
II
-I
--
Ir
I
--I
II
I
I
I
-rI
I
-
LO3(,E,a
|lll aa lrtLal9U' G'
lf6'Fa. z.
o- G,o|GI!t.xo
G'oct
ot 6to6to..r ao\cot olol\crl.9o)ttdtobG.oI!oo
lO Fr
ordinary use and operation ofequipment and facilities as presently configured and located
(and replacements thereof), and may complete any remaining work for the lnternational
Wing in substantial conformity with the "International Wing Contract Documents" as
defined in the Sales Contract (and such use, operation and completion will not be a
violation of the foregoing limitations). However, from time to time the Lodge Oivner
shall maintain any such equipment and facilities in order to minimize noise and vibration.
but only in accordance with ordinary industry practices and only as necessary to avoid
any undue material interference with the enjoyment of the Penthouse resulting from the
operation thereof.
4. Common Exnenses.
(a) For purposes of this Agreement, the following terms shail have the
following definitions:
(i) "Common Amenities": Swimming pools, hot tubs, saunas,
exercise rooms and facilities and similar amenities of a common nature within the
Lodge Improvements.
(ii) "Common Areas": Halls, corridors, lobbies. stairs and
stairways, and entrances and exits within the Lodge Inrprovements; sidewalks,
driveways, pedestrian ways, landscaped areas, flower beds' other open space, and
parking lots and areas within the Lodge Property; other areas within the Lodge
Improvements or Lodge Propert)' which are generally accessible by the public or
made available generally to occupants of the Lodge Property; and the faqade and
other exterior improvements r.r'hich furnish or affect the public appearance of the
Lodge Property.
(iii) "Common Facilities": The land legally dcscribed on
Exhibit A hereto: the foundations, columns, girders, beams, supports, walls. roofs,
flues, standpipes, and structural and other conpbnents of the Lodge
lmprovements; basement areas and storage spaces located within the Lodge
Property; j anitor and maid rooms, service rooms, equipment storage roolns'
maintenance shopS and rooms. wash rooms and other service, storage and utility
areas within the Lodge Improvements: the Common Amenities; the Common
Areas: elevators and escalators; machinery, apparatus and other faciiities
furnishing central and other services within the Lodge Property for electrical
power. lighting, gas, hot and cold water, heating, refrigeration, waste removal,
ventilation and air conditioning. communications and security, and other services
pertaining to its operation (including all pipes, ducts, flues, rvires. cables and
conduits used in connection therewith, fireplaces and plumbing and other fixtures.
wherever located): tanks. pumps. nlotors, fans, compressors, ducts. dunrbwaiters
and boilers; and in general all equipment. machinery, apparatus, facilities and
systems within the Lodge Property that provide common benefit'
(iv) "Common Expenses": The combination of the Common
General Shared Expenses and the intemational Wing Expenses. However,
Common Expenses (and also consequently Common General Shared Expenses
and lntemational Wing Expenses) shall be subject to the following limitations and
qualifications:
, (A) Common Expenses shall not include any sums
which are incuned on a combined basis for the common benefit of both
the Lodge Property and any other assets owned by the Lodge Owner or
any Lodge Affiliate. However, the Common Expenses may include
payments or consideration fumished by the Lodge Owner to other Lodge
Affiliates for marketing subscriptions and services or other goods or
services provided or rendered by those Lodge Affiliates to the extent
related to Lodge operations (provided that the charges therefor may not
materially exceed those that would be paid in an arm's-length transaction).
In any event, salaries included within Common Expenses shall exclude
l0
I.I
IEraEfnI.<-<
-|!C
:a
-
a ttl
-L=;8-.t orl-
I
-&s:c, .
E8o:=oro
-o)
Gr:ot .
-{$!IO' N
-(\a_\GEdi oIaqtf
:oD..-
-forU-
-.!l
Fr
those for any executives, officers or employees ofthe Lodge Owner or any
Lodge Affiliates that are senior in the organizational structure to the
general manager of rhe Lodge (however the position of gerleral manager
may be denominated from time to time).
(B) The Common Expenses shall generally include all
those described as part of common General shared Expenses and
International Wing Expenses, as set forth herein, whether variable or
fixed, and whether ordinary or capital in nature' However, Common
Expenses shall exclude the cost ofany alterations, modifications, additions
or improvements to the Lodge Improvements (or subsequent replacements
therefor) of an elective nature which are not reasonably necessary to
maintain the Lodge Property in conformity with the Use Standards, and
any costs associated with new additions of floor area to the Lodge
Improvements hereafter made by the Lodge Owner whicl.r u'ould
materially increase the total amount of Common Expenses. Common
Expenses shall also exclude "Direct Expenses" as hereinafter defined.
(C) Those provisions of Exhibit C u'ltich limit the
inclusion of certain items to specified percentages thereof shall not
preclude the Lodge O*ner from recouping the remaining percentages
through housekeeping charges and other forms ofexpense reimbursenrents
that are employed from time to tit'llc in the ordinary course of rental or
management practices in the Lodge.
(v) "Contmon General Shared Expenses": Those costs,
expenses and sums incurred or paid by the Lodge Owner in connection with the
Lodge Property which are set lbrth on Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated
herein by this reference. In accounting for and determining the amount of
Common General Shared Expenses. the Lodge Owner may, to the exteut
applicable, refer to historical practices employed from time to time for purposes
oi determining and accounting for the "Common General Shared Expenses"
which have been shared ih and bome by the Lodge Association (and its members)
pursuant to the Lodge Association's managenent aS,reement with the Lodge
Owner, and the Common General Shared Expenses shall otherwise be determined
in accordance with the Lodge Owner's accounting practices established in the
ordinary course of business.
. (vi) "lnternational Wing Expensesr': Those costs, expenses and
sums incurred or paid by the Lodge Owtrer in connection with or attributable to
the International Wing which are set forth on Exhibit D attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference, International Wing Expenses nray be
subsumed within or constitute a lesser part of a greater charge which is also
allocable in part to the Original Lodge and/or the Lodge Apartment
Condominiums. To the extent any International Wing Expense is so incurred as a
lesser part of a greater charge. then such larger charge shall initially be allocated
between or among the Intemational Wing, the Lodge Apartment Condonriniums,
and/or the Original Lodge, as applicable, in proportion to the total square footage
of floor area in each of the applicable facilities, or any equitable alternative
method of allocating any particular common charge of that nature which is
adopted by the Lodge Owner from time to time as an ordinary business practice.
The portion of the larger charge so allocated to the International Wing shall be the
applicable "International Wing Expense". In accouriting for and determining the
zrmount of Intemational Wing Expenses, the Lodge Owner may, to the extent
applicable, refer to historical practices employed from time to time for purposes
of determining and accounting for the corresponding items of "Direct Common
Expenses" bome by the Lodge Association and its members pursuant to the
Lodge Association's management agreement with the Lodge owner, and the
International Wing Expenses shall otherwise be determined in accordance with
1l
the Lodge owner's accounting pracrices established in the ordinary course of
business.
(vii) The "Penthouse Proportion": The proportion that the
square footage of floor area within the Penthouse from time to time bears to the
total square footage of floor area within the International Wing from time to tinre,
exclusive of lobby and similar conunon areas, but specifically including
banqueting and conference rooms and any ballrooms. The parties acknowledge
that those square footages are currently in the amounts of 3,3 l3 and 26.648 square
feet, respectively. These existing square footages may be subject to verification
and recalculation from time to time by either party, provided that any
recalculation must be reasonably substantiated, may not materially deviate fronr
the historical method of measurement. and may only be applied prospectively.
The parties specifically acknowledge that the square footage in the Penthouse will
be increased by any undertaking of the Terrace Improvements.
' (viii) The "Lodge Apartment Condominiunts": That certain
condominiurn complex ad.iaceut to and abutting the Lodge Ploperty (including
condominium units within tirat complex situated on top of the Lodge
Improvements), commonly known as the "Lodge Apartment condominiums," and
established pursuant to the condominiunr map and condominium declaration
recorded in the real property records for Eagle County, Colorado (the "Records"),
on May 5, 1970, in Book 217 alPage 531 .
(ix) "Lodge Association": The incorporated owners'
association governing the ownership of the Lodge Apartment Condominiums,
namely The Lodge Apartment Condominium Association, Inc.
(b) The Penthouse Owner shall bear and pay the Common Expenses
that are incurred during or attributable to the term of this Agreement as set forth below:
to Intemational Wing Expenses. the
pay the Penthouse Proportion of suclt
(i) With respect
Penthouse Owner shall bear and
lntenlational Wing Expenses.
--,Eit
-ro-ii:c3
E.is
-cc;2l-Ets
-qldE8'
-88:o.
-(3r-9!(\l
-l(\l
--\E=:e:oD...
-G.
O
-gN._to-l
(ii) For Common General Shared Expenses, the same shall
initially be allocated between the Original Lodge and the Intemational Wing in
proportion to the total square footage of floor area in each facility from time to
time; provided. however. that to the extent that any such Comnron General Shared
Expenses benefit the Lodge Apartment Condominiums as well as the Original
Lodge and the Intemational Wing, and to the extent that the Lodge Association or
its members are also obligated to share in those particular expenses' then the
' initial allocation of those particular expenses shall further be adjusted to inciude
the'Lodge Apartment Condominiums, such that the pertinent expenses are first
allocated among the Lodge Apartment Condominiums, the Original Lodge and
the International Wing in proportion to the total square footage of floor area in
each facility from time to time. The Penthouse Owner shall bear and pay the
Penthouse Proportion of the portion of the Common General Shared Expenses so
allocated to the Intemationai Wing.
The parties mutually acknou,ledge that the total square footage of floor area
within each of the Lodge Apartment Condominiums, the Original Lodge and the Intemational
Wing are cunently in the amounts of 80.196 square feet, 48,186 square feet and 31.748 square
feet, respectively. These existing square footages may be subject to verification and
recalculation by either party, provided that any recalculation must be reasonably substantiated,
may not materially deviate from the historical method of measurement, and may only be applied
prospectively. The Penthouse Owner's obligations hereuirder to bear and pay Common
Expenses are sometimes refened to herein collectively as "Penthouse Reimbursements" (which
term shall also include all other payment obligations of the Penthouse Owner which under the
provisions hereof are expressly made part of Penthouse Reimbursements).
t2
I
-
-=iaI.| O
-<--LU3 rdiEl.
-to-cc;:=F =I
-&8-qlc,'E8o
:6tGl
-o!
Gl:ot .-{s
-ODN
IN
-\E-ool-.a
a
:OD..-:+a O:II:oa'
(c) Penthouse Reimbursements owing pursuant to subparagraph a@)
shall be owing and accounted for on a calendar-year basis or fiscal-year basis' as the
Lodge Owner may elect from time to time (and specifically including. u'ithout limitation,
any fractional year commencing as of the date of this Agreement, or expiring as of any
termination of this Agreement), wirh periodic installments against the yearly obligation
being due and payable either monthly or quarterly in advance, again as determined by the
Lodge Owner from time to time (which installments shall be due and payable on the first
day of each calendar month or calendar or fiscal quarter, as the case may be). Those
p.tiodi. installments will be subject to year-end reconciliations as set forth below' Prior
io adopting the calendar year or any fiscal year for this purpose, the Lodge Owner shall
give the Penthouse Owner u'ritten notice thereof; initially, the Pentirouse
Reimbursements under subparagraph 4(b) shall be based on a fiscal year from August I
to July 3l (the calendar year or any fiscal year, whichever is in effect from time to time
for purposes of this subparagraph 4(c), is sometimes refened to hereinafter as an
"assessment year"). The assessment and payment of and accounting for those Penthouse
Reimbursements shall otherwise be governed by the following provisions:
(i) The periodic installments in advance shall be based upon
the Lodge Owner's estimate of the Common Expenses to be incuned in the
ensuing assessment year, which estimates shall be established under the Lodge
Owner's operating budget for the Lodge Property for that same assessment year
(if that budget for a given assessment year is not established prior to the due date
of the first periodic installment for that assessment year, the current installments
shall be based on the prior year's budget until the new budget is adopted). Within
the course of any assessment year, the Lodge Owner may further adjust the
periodic installments pursuant to revisions ofthe operating budget, or pursuant to
projected differences betu'een those periodic installments when annualized and
ih.'.orr.tponding annual obligation for Penthouse Reitnbursements based on the
projection of actual Common Expenses (as determined by the Lodge O*'ner i1 the
o1dinary course of business). Any changes in the periodic installnrents under the
foregoing provisions shall take effect when the Lodge Owner gives the Penthouse
O*'ner written notice thereof.
(ii) Within sixty (60) days after the end of each year, the Lodge
orvner shall prepare and submit to the Penthouse owner an accounting of the
actual Common Expenses incuned for the assessment year just ended, together
with a reconciliation of those actual Common Expenses (and the resulting annual
obligation of the Penthouse Owner for Penthouse Reimbursements) with the
aggregate of the periodic installments of estimated Penthouse Reimbursements
paid by the Penthouse Owner for that satne assessmenl year. Ifthe sum ofthose
periodic installments so paid by the Penthouse Owner ploves to be less than the
hnal annual obligation for Penthouse Reimbursements (as determined on the basis
of the actual Common Expenses as aforesaid), then the Penthouse Owner shall
pay such deficiency ro rhe Lodge owner within thirty (30) days after the Lodge
Owner delivers its annual accounting and reconciliation statement; conversely, if
the sum of those periodic installment payments is greater than the final annual
obligation for Penthouse Reimbursements, the Lodge Owner s|all either
reimburse the excess to the Penthouse Owner contemporaneously with the Lodge
Owner's submission of its annual reconciliation statement, or give the Penthouse
Owner a credit, equal to the amount of the excess, against the periodic
installments of Penthouse Reimbursements next due and owing until the credit is
exhausted. However, if the credit will not be exhausted by the next two (2)
periodic installments of Penthouse Reimbursements, then the Lodge Owner will
reimburse the excess as set forth above.
(iii) Any failure or delay of the Lodge Owner in establishing or
updating the periodic installments of estimated Penthouse Reimbursements for
any assessment year shall not be deemed a waiver, modification, or release of the
right to so establish or update those installments, or of the obligation of the
Penthouse Owner to pay installments of Penthouse Reimbursements prospectively
IJ
--E.o
-!errl
-...,r-lr
o:afi
lE !o
-.,o!=.f 6;!!!5:zr
-&8:qld
E8.":oro
-oD
6t:ot .
-{$!
-olN
IN_\G
-oo-arrtf:Olr..
-=oEdc
-lO
t{
or to make the year-end reconciliation. At its election, the Lodge Owner from
' time to time may also make specific levies of Penthouse Reimbursements in
iurears for the actual amount of Common Expenses already incuned (e.g.' in a
case where the Lodge Owner incurs a Common Expense that is unusual or
otherra,ise non-reoccurring). An1' Penthouse Reirnbursemetrt which is thus
specially levied shall be due and payable within thirty (30) da-v-s al'ter the Lodge
Owner gives the Penthouse Owner written notice thereof.
(iv) The Penthouse Owner, in the Lodge Owner's offices and at
the Penthouse Owner's sole cost and expense, shall have a right to audit the
Lodge Owner's books and records for the purpose Of verifying actual Common
Expenses, provided the Penthouse Owner gives the Lodge Owner reasonable prior
notice thereof (and in any case not less than two (2) weeks in advance)' and
further provided that such audit may be undertaken only during ordinary business
hours and wiil be subject to such limitations and procedures as the Lodge Owner
may reasonabiy impose in order to avoid any material interference with Lodge
operations. Moreover, this right of audit may be exercised no more frequently
than once in any calendar Year.
(d) If, for any particular-Penthouse Reimbursement or other payment
obligation owing to the Lodge Owner from the Penthouse Owner hereunder, this
Agreement fails to establish an express due date therefor,'tiren the sanre shall be due and
pqvablc within thirry (30) days after the Lodge Owner makes written demarrd therefor. If
apy payment of Penthouse Reimbursements is not made within fifteen (15) days after the
sanre becornes due and payable, then such payment obligation shall tirereupon beconre
delinquent. The Penthouse Owner shall be obligated to pay a monthly late fee equal to
l% of the delinquent amount. which late fees shall accrue initially as of the occuneuce of
the delinquency. and thereafter on the tlrst day of each ensuing calendar rnonth until the
delinquency is cured. If any late fees collected by the Lodge Owner prove to be in excess
of the amount permissible under applicable law, then the excess' at the Lodge Owner's
election, shall either be refunded to the Penihouse Owner or applied as a credit against
obligations for other Penthouse Reimbursements accruing under this Agreement.
(e) The Lodge Owner shall have, and is hereby granted by the
Penthouse Owner, a lien against the Penthouse Unit to secure the timely payment of each
Penthouse Reimbursement owing front the Penthouse Owner from time to time (the
"Reintbursement Lien"). Upon the occulrence of any delinquency in the paynient of any
Penthouse Reimbursement. the Lodge Owner may proceed to enforce its lien rights to
recover the delinquency by a foreclosure of the Reimbursemenl Lien. The
Reimbursement Lien shall be enforceable against the Penthouse Unit only by jrrdicial
foreclosure in the same manner as a real property mortgage is foreclosed under the
prevailing laws of the State of Colorado. In addition to securing payment of the
delinquency, the Reimbursenlent Lien shall also sectrre the late fees established under the
foregoing provisions, and all costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees. incuned by
the Lodge Owner in confirming. exercising or foreclosing upon the Reimbursement Lien
or in otherwise attempting to enforce the delinquent payment obligation, and all such
enforcement and collection costs shall be due and owing from the Penthouse Ou'ner upon
demand. The Reimbursement Lien shall secure each and every obligation hereafter
arising to pay Penthouse Reimbursements, and shall survive and shall not be extinguished
by any foreclosure, cure or redemption in connection with any one payment delinqttency.
Any further Penthouse Reimbursements (and any late fees and collection and
enforcement costs attributable thereto) which become delinquent after tl.re commencement
and prior to the completion of any foreclosure of the Reimbursement Lien (and the
expiration of any redemption period in favor of the Penthouse Owner) shall become part
of the payment delinquency foreclosed upon and added to the indebtedness necessary to
redeem. The Lodge Owner may be the purchaser at any foreclosure., and for bidding '
purposes shalt be entitled to a credit in the amount of the obligations secured from time to
time by the Reimbursement Lien.
l4
-!!=
=.orO(J
I'OI...-
-tt
o: a
-
alrIL
-
acl
-to=!{. dr!-
I
-&8:q:d
-Ct-oaEss:oD .-{eIO' Nrto:
-ool-lt-dt
:oD b::: r. o:I':6 fl
-(t
G.
(0 In order to evidence and confirm the Reimbursement Lien upon the
occurrence of a delinquency in the Penthouse Reimbursements, the Lodge Ou'ner ma1'.
but shall not be required to, prepare a r.l.ritten notice setting forth the amount of the
pertinent delinquency (including any accrual of late fees and collection and enforcement
costs incurred in connection thereu'ith), the name of the Penthouse Owner. the legal
description of the Penthouse Unit, and such other infornration concerning the
Reimbursement Lien and the delinquency as the Lodge Owner may consider appropriate,
which notice may then be recorded in the Records. Regardless of whether such notice is
recorded, the Reimbursement Lien shall attach, be perfected and have a priority as of the
recordation of this Agreement, and shall be superior to all other liens and encumbrances
or any other interests acquired in the Penthouse Unit which arise after such recordation
(except for the lien of any first-priority mortgage or deed of trust encumbering the
Penthouse Unit at any time, and the lien of taxes and assessments). However, the lien of
any first-priority mortgage or deed of trust will be subordinate to the Reimbursement
Lien to the extent of any Penthouse Reimbursements secured thereby that accrue or
become payable (i) before the mortgage or deed of trust is recorded or (ii) afler any
foreclosure sale of the mortgage or deed of trust.
G) The Lodge Owner's rights to exercise and enforce the
Reimbursement Lien shall be a non-exclusive remedy, and the Penthouse
Reimbursements outstanding from time to time shall also be a personal obligation and
liability of the liability of the individual(s) or entity(ies) that shall be the Peutl-rouse
Orvner at the time the relevant Penthouse Reimbursement is imposed; the Lodge Owner
may maintain a suit to recover any delinquencies in Penthouse Reimbursenlents, togetller
with the related late fees and enforcement and collection costs, without first foreclosing
upon rhe Reimbursement Lien. The underraking of any such collection action shall not
constitute any election of remedies or waiver by the Lodge Owner which bars
enforcement of the Reimbursement Lien, and the Lodge O,wner shall retain all rights to
enforce the Reimbursement Lien for the same or other delinquencies in Penthouse
Reimbursements.
5. Direct Exnenses. The Penthouse Owner shali be solely responsible and
obligared ro bear all costs. and expenses which are attributable solely to the ownership,
nrainrenance. use and enjoyment of the Penthouse Unit ("Direct Expenses"). The Direct
Expenses shall encompass and include the following:
(a) Premiums for all liability insurance coverages that the Penthouse
Oruner is obligated to maintain under the terms of this Agreement, and all property.
casualty. liability and other fbrms of insurarrce coverages that the Penthouse Owner
actually maintains fronr time to tinte in connection with the Penthouse and its contents'
The foregoing shall not be construed to impose any obligations on the Penthouse Or.vner
to maintain any specific insurance coverages which are beyond the express requiretnents
contained in the other provisions of this Agreement.
(b) All real and personal property taxes and assessments (and any
sinrilar impositions) which are levied and assessed against the Penthouse Unit or the
fumishings and other contents of the Penthouse interior.
(c) Telephone equipment charges and acquisition and maintenance
costs that pertain solely to telephone service to the Penthouse Unit, including costs of
telephone calls placed from the Penthouse (which costs shall include tire standard mark-
up levied by the Lodge Owner from time to time for use of the Lodge telephone system),
and the cost of providing any dedicated telephone, fax or similar lines serving only the
Penthouse.
(d) All costs of any repairs, maintenance or replacements within or
benefiting solely the Penthouse, including, without limitation, the provision or
replacement of any fumiture, fumishings, fixtures, appliances located within the interior
of the Penthouse or on the Penthouse Terraces, and the maintenance, repair or
replacement of recessed and other interior lighting, doors, windows or structural items
that are not load-bearing. Such maintenance and repair costs shall include, without
l5
--Ir r- (t
=.:(,-ra-..-
-lL
O
-
alrlElo:tro!=.rdEF:zI
-&8-9dE8o
-s8: ar! .
-{g!IOI(\|
-N
-\EEEo
-dtc:oDb
-;1
0!!!Uo
limitation, all maintenance, repairs or replacements for the Penthouse Terraces in
accordance with the provisions iereof, exciuding only those for load-bearing structural
items. Direct Expenies shall not include maintenance, repairs or replacements fo.r load-
bearing structural items, which instead shall be included within the International Wing
Expenies (provided that the foregoing shall not be construed to limit the Penthouse
Owner's liability, as appticable, undeisubparagraph ?(c) below)' Maintenance' repairs
and replacements by t#penthouse Owner will be subject to subparagraphs l(b) and l(c)
above.
(e) Any advances made on behalf of the Penthouse Owner for freight
charges or other expenses.
(|)Tlrecostofanyhousemaidserviceor|inenservicefortlre
Penthouse Unit which is specifically requested by or on behalf of the Penthouse ou'ner'
(g) All other direct charges for services rendered specifically and
solely for the Penthouse. if requested or authorized by or on behalf of the Penthouse
Ouner.
(h) Any utility charges for the Penthouse' to the extent the same are
separately sub-metered to the Penthouse. Any utility costs so sub-metered separately to
the Penthouse will be excluded from Common Expenses' If sub-meterir.rg is requested by
either party, the costs of instituting such sub-metering shall be shared equally by the
Parties.
To the extent any services or undertakings giving rise to Direct Expenses are rendered by the
Lodge Ou,ner (in which case the same shall .onrtitut. part of Penthouse Reimbursements)' tlre
Penthouse Owner shall pay the same to the Lodge Owner with thirty (30) days after written
demand therefor. The foregoing provisions shall not be construed to impose any obligations
upon the Lodge Owner which are not otherwise provided for herein'
6. Use Standards.
(a) Subject to the following provisions of this paragraph 6' the Lodge
Orvner shall be obligated to operate the lnternational Wing as a hotel/lodge operation ill
material conformity with hisiorical practices for the Original Lodge, or otlrerwise in
n.raterial conformity with the stalldards prevailing from time to tin're for operating any
recognized first-class hotel facility (and including, without limitation' the operations of
un1,-of Ritz Carlton, Four Seasons, Mandarin, Peninsula, Pan Pacific' Loew's' Ciga'
orient-Express, Shangri-La. Rosewood, or any "Preferred Hotel" or any one of the
..Leading ilotels of the Worid"1. For purposes of the foregoing, the historical operations
of the Oiiginal Lodge shall be d"t..nlin.i by reference to the ownership period wherr the
stock of L-odge Properties Inc. was owned and held by Orient-Express Hotels, Inc' (those
ownership interests currently being held by vail Associates, Inc., which acquired the
same from Orient-Express Hotels, lnc.)'
(b)Inconnectionwiththerequisitestandards.oflnternatiorralWing
operations, the Lodge owner shall be permitted to allocate or develop areas within or
additions to the International Wing for any ancillary or incidental uses, including, without
iirrliO,ion, skiers' service facilitie!, offices, conference and convention areas' restaurants'
retail sales and service operations. and nightclub and otlrer entertainment operations and
facilities; provided, however, that any such incidental or ancillary uses or operations
below or bn the ground-floor level of the International wing shall not constitl'lte an
ongoing legal nuisance to the ordinary use or enjoyment of the Penthouse; and provided
furtirer, tnat any such incidental or ancillary uses or operations above the ground-floor
level of the Internationat Wing shall not give rise to any noxious noises or odors which
on an ongoing basis muterially interfere with the ordinary use or enjoyment of the
Penthouse. Furthermore, the Lldge Owner at its election may convert the International
wing or any portion thereof from hotel/lodge operations to a condominium or similar
ownirship ,Lgi*. with individuatly owned dwelling or accommodation units (together
with ancillary or incidental facilitils as otherwise described above, provided that such
l6
II
r
I
I
-T
-I
--r
-r
I
-II
--II
lctalo3to
ILl'aatuLaGlrn G,
r?oFa=
o- G,(i|Otr, ."odtoal
or G,oGtot.GrO\rtotNN\G
ootltdto)bdo
toOF
lO Gr
conversion in and of itself shall not be regarded as an ancillary or incidental use)' To the
extent any such condominium or similar ownership regime is ever instituted, the
Penthouse Owner shall be given commensurate rights and opportunity' along with other
units within the International Wing sinrilarly situated, to participate therein.
(c). The permitted uses and operations of the International Wing as
described in this paragraph 6 are sometimes referred to herein as the "Use Standards"'
This Agreement shall not be construed or applied to limit the Lodge Owner's operation,
use and enjoyment of the Lodge Property, except for the foregoing requirements to
comply with the Use Standards, and otherwise subject only to the other express
provisions of this Agreement.
7. Maintenance and Renairs
(a)TheLodgeorvnersha|lhaveSolecontro|overconductingany
maintenance, repairs or replacements rvithin the Intemational Wing and the rest of the
Lodge Propertl,; provided, that the Lodge Owner shall act diligently to cornplete the sanre
from tinre to time as reasonably necessary to preserve tfie use and cnjoyment of the
Penthouse and Penthouse Easements, and to undertake the same in a manner rvhich
avoids or minimizes any undue interference with the Penthouse Ownet's ordinary use and
enjoyment of the Penthouse and Penthouse Easements. The Lodge Owner's obligations
in this regard shall specifically include the repair of any roof or other structural water
leaks that affect the Penthouse interior. However' in any case the Penthouse Owner shall
be solely responsible for undertaking maintenance, repairs and replacements for the
interior of the Penthouse and its contents and any facilities located therein, and also
non-structural maintenance and repair of the Penthouse Teraces' all as necessary to
maintain tbe same in a good and clean condition and repair, and the Lodge Owner shall
Irave no liability therefor (except that the Lodge Owner shall furnish anv replacenlents or
l€pairs of a structural nature for the Penthouse Terraces. and further subject to the
provisions of subparagraphs l(b) and 1(c) above). For purposes of the foregoing, the
Penthouse interior shall be deerned to extend to anri include llon-structural surlaces and
materials (including wood finishes and drywall) of the Penthouse ceiling and floor.
interior partitioning walls, windovvs and doors. recessed and other interior lighting, and
the interior of exterior walls (including such elements of apy Tenace In'rprovements), but
excluding any structural elements or utility or other systems or facilities behind, above or
underlying such surfaces or materials. Notwithstanding that any wallboard, plasterboard
or other materials which form part of any fire-separation assembly may be defined under
rhe foregoing provisions as part of the Penthouse intefior, or may constitute part of the
Penthouie Unit pursgant to lts subdivision, the Penthouse Owner shall not remove the
same or otherwise penetrate, alter or do anything to the same that impairs the
fire-separation capability of such materials or assemblies, or that causes any violation of
building code or legal requirements. Any maintenance, replacements oI repairs by either
party in connectionwith this Agreement shall be undertaken in a good and workmaniike
manner. Maintenance, repairs and alterations are also specifically subject to the
following provisions of this paragraph 7.
(b) To the extent the Lodge Owner exercises its right and license for
entry into the Penthouse (as set forth in subparagraph 3(a) above) in order to effectuate
any maintenance, repairs, replacements or improvements for the International Wing, such
exercise shall be only during business hours and on reasonable prior notice whiie the
Penthouse is occupied (except where immediate entry is necessitated by emergency
circumstances, as determined in the Lodge Owner's ordinary business judgment
exercised in good faith), and the Lodge Owner will also (i) exercise reasonable efforts to
minimize any resulting undue interference with the use and enjoyment of the Penthouse,
and (ii) repair and restore any damage to the interior of the Penthouse or its contents
which may result therefrom. In the event any such entry by the Lodge Owner renders all
or any part of the Penthouse uninhabitable for any period of time, then during the
pendency of the uninhabitability, the Penthouse Owner shall receive an appropriate pro
rata reduction of the Penthouse Reimbursements. The Lodge Owner shall not have any
liability to the Penthouse Owner for any exercise ofsuch right ofentry except as set forth
t7
-I
I
I
-I
rI
-I
I
-
--I
I
II
II
I
-
c(fa(,,Eto
l!oaa lrlLaGtsto
rf 6tF€2,
CG'G|G'dt.--oct
Gr at
or Glgroot.cr lo\ttotN({\c
oorfC'Ol r..c.oI'o@
lO Gr
in the foregoing provisions, and except for the Lodge Owner's negligence or willful
misconduct. The Lodge Owner will not have any obligation to the Penthouse Owner to
maintain or make repairs to the International Wing or the Lodge Property. other than as
necessary to preserve the use and enjoyment of the Penthouse and Penthouse Easements
in accordance with subparagraph 7(a) above, and to maintain material compliance u'ith
the Use Sundards.
(c) In the event any need for any maintenance, repairs or replacements
within the Intemational Wing or elsewhere in the Lodge Property is caused by any
negligence oI other misconduct of the Penthouse O'*ryler or the Penthouse Owner's
contractors, agents or invitees (including any breach of the Penthouse Ouner's
obligations under this Agreement), tiren the Penthouse O*'ner shall be responsible for the
entire cost incuned by the Lodge Orvner in undertaking the pertinent maintenance. repairs
or replacements, which entire cost shall constitute a Penthouse Reimbursement and shall
be due and owing from time to time within thirty (30) days after demand, accompanied
by invoices ot puia receipts for work, materials or services covered by such denrand,
und/ol. un a"counting Uy itre Lodge Owner of any portion of such cost that it or Lodge
Affiliates incur intemally. Conversely, if the need for any such maintenance' repairs or
reptacements is caused by any negligence or other misconduct of the Lodge Owner, or its
agents or contractols or invitees (including any breach of the Lodge Owner's obligations
under this Agreement), then the Lodge Owner shall be solely responsible therefor, and
the resulting costs shall not be included within the Penthouse Reimbursements' As a
qualification on the foregoing, however, to the extent any such damage is caused by the
negligence of any third-party tenant of the Penthouse Unit under the Rental Agreentent.
ttr. tosses arising therefrom shall be allocated in accordance with the terms of the Rental
Agreenent. The foregoing is also subject to the mutual waiver of rights under
subparagraph 8(e) below. to the extent applicable.
8. Insurance:Casualtv:Condemnation'
(a) Each Orvner shall at all times maintain in full force and effect, with
good and solvent insurance companies authorized to do business in the State of Colorado
fand in any case with a rating of not less than A+ as established by Best and Company)'
general comprehensive public liability insurance against all claims for personal injury,
death or property damage occuning upon, in or about the Penthouse unit or Lodge
property.
-
ln-accordance with the parties' mutual intent, each Owner's coverage sliall be
primary with respect to any liability or loss incuned in connection with any use or
enjoyment of the Lodge Property or any other actions or course of conduct which arise
Uf. r-tuougtr or under that Owner (including, without limitation, any breacl.r by that Owner
oi its obligations under this Agreement). For all occupants of the Penthouse from time to
time. their occupancy, actions and omissions shall be regarded as arising by, through or
under the Penthouse Owner; provided. however. that the foregoing is subject to the terms
of the Rental Agreement which expressly allow the Penthouse Owner to exclude' from
tl.re scope of hisiiability coverage. certain liabilities caused by Rental Pool tenants during
the term of the Rental Agreement, and expressly make the Manager's liability coverage
primary with respect to those liabilities (in any case this proviso shall apply only so long
as the Rental Agreement remains in effect). Each such policy shall be underwritten on an
.'occurrence" basis; shall name the other Owner as an additional insured as its interests
may appear; and shall have a single occunence limit of coverage of not less than
$2,000,000 (provided that this minimum from time to time may be increased by the
Lodge Owner giving the Penthouse Or.r.ner written notice thereof so long as such increase
is not materially inconsistent with prevailing market practices for similar properties' as
reasonably determined by the Lodge Owner). Each ofthese coverages shall also include
a contractual liability endorsement for any breach or default of the insuring Orvner's
obligations under this Agreement. shall provide that the same may not be cancelled or
materially modified without at least thirty (30) days' prior written notice to the other
Owner. and shall otherwise contain terms which are reasonably satisfactory to the Lodge
Owner as determined in the ordinary course of business. Without lirnitation on the
generality of the foregoing, the Penthouse Owner's coverage shall specifically apply to
and cover all risks of liability and loss arising fiom any construction of Tenace
l8
--
--b8It aI<r
-lL
ll: a
-
a lrtIL
-ao-gt
o!=c6;!!!!FzI
-&s
--.oE8o
-Bg: ort .-{eIOININ
-\GEootrnrcf
:oDb-:d o:tt:aool
Improvements pursuant to paragraph 2 above. The Penthouse Owner may fumish this
"ou.rug.
pursu;nt to a blanket policy, provided the blanket polic-v expressly makes a
."p*uf, allocation to the Properties of the requisite coverage amounts established
pursuant to the foregoing provisions'
(b)TlreLodgeownerwillbeobligatedtocarryfireandextended
coverage insurance (or the relative equivalent thereof available from tin're to time in the
marketllace) on the International Wing improvements, excluding the non-structural
interioi of the Penthouse and its contents (which contents for all puryoses under this
Agreement will be deemed to include items that the Penthouse Owner locates on the
Penthouse Tenaces). This coverage shall be in an amount equal to the Intemational
Wing's full replacement cost or fair market value from time to time, whichever is greater'
In accordance with paragraph 4 above, the Penthouse Owner shall share in the cost of
such insurance that is attributable to the Intemational Wing as a Common Expense'
(c)Witlrinten(I0)daysafterthenrakingofthisAgreement'each
Owner shall furnish to the other a copy of its insurance binder(s) and an insurance
certificate or certificates reasonably evidencing its procurement ar1d maintcnance of the
insurance coverages required under the foregoing provisions of this paragraph 8. and
prior to any expiration ofthe given coverage, a new certif,icate or certificates and a copy
of a new binder or binders (ifapplicable) reasonably evidencing the renewal thereof' If
either Owner fails for any reason to obtain and maintain its required insurance
coverage(s) under the foregoing provisions, then the Owner so failing to insure shall
indenrnify the other Owner against any liability, loss, cost or expense' including
attorneys' fees, that the other Owner may incur as a result of the failure of the applicable
insurance coverage. st
(d)Inthecaseofanyfireorothercasualtyoranycondemnation
affecting the International Wing, tlre following provisions shall govern:
(i) In the event of a fire or other casualty' the Lodge Owner
shatl be responsible for repairing and restoring the International Wing by the
exercise of good faith. Provided the Lodge Owner so proceeds with restoration in
good faith. the Lodge owner will not have any obligation or liability to the
Fenthouse Owner in connection with tfie casualty or subsequent restolation
process. So long as the Lodge Owner restores the Penthouse exterior to
substantially the same configuration and dimensions as existed prior to the
casualty, and also otherwise restores the International Wing so that there is no
material diminishment of the benefits derived from the Penthouse Easements (as
the same existed prior to the casualty). l|e Penthouse Owner shall have 1o rights
ofapproval over restoration plans (ifthe Penthouse Owner's approval is required,
it shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed). Any and all property insttrance
proceeds resulting fronr ghe casualty shall be paid over to and controlled by the
Lodge Owner for this pufrose.
(ii) The foregoing provisions of subparagraph (i) shall not
apply to any requisite restorations or replacements of non-structural finishings or
other contents within the interior of the Penthouse (which contents again will be
deemed to include items that the Penthouse Owner locates on the Penthouse
Tenaces), or any insurance proceeds therefor which are derived from policies
maintained by the Penthouse Owner, and the Penthouse Owner shall be solely
responsible for restorations of the same and shall be solely entitled to the
Penthouse Owner's insurance proceeds lelated thereto. In this regard, the Lodge
Owner's restoration obligations under subsection (i) above shall extend to the
installation of drywall with taping and structural flooring as necessary to allow the
Penthouse Owner to commence the restoration of interior finishes within the
Penthouse. In connection with any interior restoration of the Penthouse, the
Penthouse Owner shall exercise reasonable efforts to avoid any material
interference with restorations being undertaken by or tluough the Lodge Owner in
connection with the rest of the Lodge Property' and shall comply with such
10
--
-:LOE;<r
-aa
I...d
-l!
o
-.liiE! to
-r'oE.t ci!E5:z
--ft8:*c|'
E8o
-8S:6D .
-(g:
-o|
oaIN
-\E-Gtol-ort:oD..-:cr O
-Be
-t!
Gl
construction procedures, limitations and requirements as the Lodge Owner may
. reasonably impose. Any such procedures, limitations or requirements shall not
materially delay or increase the cost of the interior restoration of the Penthouse by
the Penthouse Owner, unless such burdens are reasonably necessaly to facilitate
the Lodge Owner's completion of its restorations. Costs of restorations and
replacements under the foregoing provisions of this, subparagraph 8(d) will be
allocated in accordance with the provisions of subparagraph 7(c) above' to the
extent applicable (but subject to subparagraph 8(e) below as applicable)'
(iii) If there arises any condemnation or exercise of enlinent
domain for taking any portion of or interest in the International Wing or any
Common Facilities rvithin the Lodge Property which serve the Penthouse, the
Lodge Owner shall be obligated to undertake any necessaryr restorations resulting
therefroni. to the extent such restorations are feasible and do not constitute
nraterial economic waste (as reasonably determined by the Lodgc Orvrrer)' Each
party shall bear an equitable share of the Lodge Owner's costs in undertaking any
sucl.r restorations, and the parries shall otherwise be left to make their owtl
independent claims for an5, proceeds or awards that may be derived fronl any
condemnation or eminent don.rain proceedings affecting the Lodge Property
and/or P6nthouse Unit; provided, however, that the Penthouse Ou'ner may elect
not to participate in the Lodge Owner's restoration costs, which election may be
exercised by giving lhe Lodge Owner written notice thereof within thirty (30)
days after ttri Lodge Owner gives notice of the pending or threatened
condemnation or eminent domain proceeding. lf the Penthouse Owncr tnakes this
. election, the Penthouse Owner shall assign and transfer to the Lodge Owner all
right, title and interest of the Penthouse Owner in all resulting condemnation
proceeds and awards, which assignment and transfer shall be b1' such documents
as the Lodge Owner may reasonably require. Furthermore, if any permanent
taking occurs which includes tlte entirety of the Penthouse Unit, or rvhich
otherwise renders the Penthouse unusable or uninhabitable, this Agreement and
the Penthouse Easements shall terminite and be of no further fot'ce or effect (and
the Penthouse Owner shall make and deliver such documentation as tlre Lodge
Owner n]ay reasonably require in order to effectuate and confirm such
temination). In the case of such a termination. the Penthouse Owner and the
Lodge Owner shall each remain entitled to make their respective independent
clainrs for condemnation proceeds or awards as set fbrth in the foregoing
provisions.
(e)TheLodgeorvnerherebywaivesanyanda|lriglrtsandclaimsto
recover against the Penthouse Owner for any property damage suffered by the Lodge
Improvements, and any of the Lodge Owner's other property located therein, to the extent
,u.h prop.tty damage arises from any fire or other casualty which is insurable under
customary frre and extended coverage insurance (or the relative equivalent thereof
available from time to time in the marketplace), or is actually insured by any fomrs of
insurance coverage actually maintained by the Lodge Owner' Conversely, the Penthouse
Owner hereby waives any and all rights and claims to recover against the Lodge Owner
for any property damage suffered by the interior of the Penthouse or the Inclusions (as
hereinafter defined) or other Penthouse contents, to the extent such ploperty damage
arises from any frre or other casualty which is insurable under customary fire and'
extended coverage insurance (or the relative equivalent thereof available from tinre to
time in the marketplace), or is actually insured by any forms of insurance coverage
actually maintained by the Penthouse Owner. This mutual waiver shall inure to the
benefit of the parties hereto and their respective employees, agents. colltractors,
customers. invitees and business visitors. The foregoing provisions are intended to and
shall act as a mutual waiver of any subrogation rights that eaclr party's respective
insurer(s) may otherwise have against the other party for any insured loss suffered by the
insured party. The parties from time to time will cause their respective insurer(s) to issue
appropriate waiver of subrogation rights endorsements for such insurance policies
(provided that their failure to do so shall not in any way limit or impair the effect of the
firegoing waiver of subrogation rights). The foregoing provisions of this
.LU
I
-
-: Lo)I aol
rra
-'r-
-lL
o: a
-
aulElo
-to-cc;rl=
I
-&8:Td
E8o
-E8: all .
-{91roc{rto:
:oo
-Gra:oDs
-=oE6."
-to
t\|
subparagraph 8(e) shall be controlling over ary other provisions of this Agreement that
imply to the contrary (excepting only those provisions hereof which expressly state that
this subparagraph 8(e) is inapplicable thereto).
g. Abandonment. Notrvithstanding any provisions under paragraph 8 above
that may indicate to the contrary, if in conjunction with any casualty, condemnation or
obsolescence affecting the Intemational Wing, the Lodge Owner determines to forgo any
restorations and repairs and to raze or otherwise abandon the Intemational Wing, then the
penthouse Owner shali be bound by the Lodge Owner's determination in that regard. and the
Penthouse may be razed or abandoned along with the rest of the lnternational Wing' The Lodge
Owner shall promptly give the Penthouse Owner notice of this determination when made' In any
such case where the International Wing is so razed or otherwise abandoned, the Lodge Owner
shall be required to purchase the Penthouse Owner's interests in the Penthouse Unit for an
amount equal to 150% of tire fair market value of the Penthouse Unit irnmediately prior to
casualty, condemnation or obsolescence, as the case may be. Tlte determination of that purclrase
price, and the other terms of closing, shali be governed by the following provisions:
(a) If the parties are unable to agree in writing upon the fair market
value of the Penthouse Unit which governs its purchase price, then such fair market value
shall be govemed by the "Appraisal Procedures" as defined and set forth in paragraplt l3
below (and for purposes of this paragraph 9, the "Appraisal commencement Date"
referenced in paragraph 13 shall be the date on which either party gives the other uritten
notice that the parties are unable to so agree).
(b) closing shall be hcld thirty (30) days after the purchase price has
been determined, and either party has confirmed the amount of the purchase price by
giving the other party rvritten notice thereof. The Penthouse Unit and the lnclusions shall
b. l."-.onu.y.d to the Lodge Orvner by a bargain and sale deed and by a special walTant)'
bill of sale, respectively, *ith titl. being subject to no title exceptions or nlatters arising
b1,, through or under the Penthouse Owner named herein or any subsequent Penthottse
o$,ner (excepting only the "Permitted Exceptions" set forth on B.!L!-bjl-E hereto, and
excluding from permissible matters in any case the standard litle insurance exception for
mechanic's liens and other standard exceptions). At the Penthouse Owner's expense' the
Lodge Orvner shall be furnished with an ALTA orvner's title insurance policy' issued in
the amount of the gross purchase price and with an effective date and time subsequent to
closing, rvhich insures title in conformity with the foregoing provisions. If the Penthouse
ou,ner is unable to deliver title in conformity with the foregoing requirements, the
Penthouse Owner may extend closing in order to secure the cure and rernoval of the
additional title matters causing such non-conformity ("Title Defects")' provided that the
Penthouse Owner must pursue such cure and removal by the exercise of all due diligence,
and in any event such extension may not exceed thirty (30) days. However, ifthe Lodge
Owner does not give notice objecting to any Title Defect within ten (10) days after the
Penthouse Owner gives the Lodge Owner notice specifically disclosing the Title Defect,
then the same shall be deemed waived by the Lodge Owner and become part of the
Permitted Exceptions. The parties shall adjust proration items and closing costs and
otherwise conduct closing in accordance with the provisions of subparagraphs l2(a)(iii),
(iv) and (vi) below (which provisions are hereby made specifically applicable to any
reconveyance under this paragraph 9). The term "lnclusions" shall mean personal
property, furniture, furnishings and attached fixtures which, at the Lodge Owner's
.*p.nr., have been located within or included as part of the Penthouse in connection with
thi completion of the International Wing, and any subsequent replacements, substitutions
or additions therefor. In conjunction with closing, the Lodge Owner shall receive credit
and/or an assignment (made in confomrity with subparagraph 8(d)(iii) above) of any and
all condemnation or insurance proceeds otherwise inuring to the Penthouse Owner which
are attributable to any of the property interests being acquired by the Lodge Owner,
whether such proceeds have been received or remain uncollected. At such time as the
Lodge Owner gives its notice of determination to forgo restorations (as set forth
previously in this paragraph 9), the Penthouse Owner shall not make any settlements of
tlaims for applicable condemnation or insurance proceeds without the Lodge Owner's
prior written consent, and the Lodge Owner shall have the right and authority to
2l
prosecuteandsettlesuchclaims(andthePenthouseownershalljointhereinandior
fumish such other cooperation as the Lodge o*n., may reasonably require in connection
with any such prosecutorial or settlement efforts) '
(c) The Loclge Owner's purchase obligations
'under
this paragraph 9
shall not apply in the case of any condemnatjon rvhich actually takes the Penthouse Unit'
or rvhich is so material that. notwithstanding any restorations.which mal'be undertaken'
the International wing is rendered uniJiuituut* or unusable thereby for hotel and
residential PurPoses'
10. Mechanic's Liens' Il by virtue of any work of construction' repair or
improvement u.rd.nuk"n1l]il1[il'1r und_er either ownei (the "Responsible owner")' any
mechanic,s lien claim is recorded against *," n.opertf of the other Owner (the "Liened Owner")'
then the Responsible o*ner strall c-ause sucll lien claim to be released and discharged of record
(bypaymer,rt,bondingo,o.h",availableprocess)withinninety(90)daysafterrecordalionofthe
claim,providedthatin"ny.u,.suchreleaseanddischargemustbesecuredpriortoany
foreclosure ofsuch lien or other disposition ofthe encumbered Property pursuant to such lien' If
such release and discharge is not timely se.ured, then tlre Liened owner' at its eiection and
without obligation to Ooio, n'uy secure the ,.t.ur. and discharge of the lien claim through its
own efforts, whether by payment, bonding or oth;;;;' and thJiened owner shall be entitled
to recover from the R.rponriut. owner all costs und .*p"n"', including.attorneys' fees' that the
Liened O,uvner n,,uy in.* it.onnection therewith (rvilh these reimbursable costs and expenses to
beduerjrrdowingwithintwenty(20)daysafterdemund,wlrichdemandshallbeaccompaniedby
paid invoices or other ao.ufn.ntotion reasonably ."iat"ti"g the sums incuned)' Furthermore' if
the Responsible Owner fails to discharge tf,e-pertinenilien^claim in co.formity with the
foregoiug provisions, t5. R.rponrible Owie*1,uf iuito indemnify' defend and hold ha.nless tlre
Liened owner from and against any liability, loss, damage, cost or expense' including attornevs'
fees. incurred or arising o,i-u..ouniof or in relation to the pertinent lien claim'
ll.DevelopmentRightsandRestrictionq.ThePenthouseownerwillhaveno
rights to appiffi ony ,oillngr, ..-O.u.topn.t*t o, faditional development' additional or
modified improvements, or alternative uses or of.,ution' that the Lodge Owner nray elect to
pursue or enrplov ro, tr'."r^n*-uiionar wine' tni-t1lt'^::::::ti:Jltllt;3''$i;:f,e]
tfiiii [::J'HJ i'J ilnil;r hereto 1*hich pu; is commonrv known as the "Exchanse
Parce!'). *a,ht psntr'offi*nt''rturilot'oujili* ot gtjteplte'P-Is:lg4s'g1ffi?:J;f;I
ffit; l' whether through
anl'legal process o, o,nr fi:Tffj;:'i":lill',i:i,ffi::?;i,.#;;fi;1il;ii;nsto the rnternationar wing and the Lodge Propertv
ulliclraresetforthinsubparagraph3(b)auove,theLodgeowner'sobligationsunder
paragraph 6 above with' ffi' ; il d'; :"llllll.,:li-f:,3'::'Tfi" H:l:11'J'il:iil::::il l''",:;#; lii"?;;;; P'"i - Wryu-r or-$e
,'\--.-^- -L^u nnr r.,,.," ,Je: oEG or implied easements' equltagle
sEiliilaEil-iFlrants olJighls fo.r.ungbstJ.ttcJ9o_,J'Je$'s orltutsc """'.."""" "-'-------" ' ' - ^
Propertv or.Clgnange r t
subparagraph j(p) apoYc;d to the "Elevation E;m6;;;--established under the follovving
ior"foins. the Penthouse Owner shall not have any ex
provisions:
(a)
Exhibit G which
but c
Cffi;;h*.in as "Restricted Parcel A" an4 Gd Parcel B" (somctimes herein
::::n::'.ffi ;;::; :" ilil;,'# o' i o * in p*r'i ur t s *.d
"'L'- :::,. f ".:':::: ]:',ii:'Jff
'llff :;.;ilru&;f;;""'1;;nt."tting'*i-a''up.:'^'-1'^1:"Yi:lti::',0'il:ffiH"H;";i;,l.;Ji;il *iri [' yui1.t to reitrictions which rimit the
"onrtru.tion
ofbuilding structures thereon as follows:
(r) The height of any building structure .,developed
on
Restricted pur*f e In"v "of ..i..ed the fltor-level elevation of the story within
the Intemationat Wing which is immediately underneath the Penthouse'
[u+il'ljil$#o[t$#'F['y}uilr}*'rr
22
(ii) The height of any building structure developed on
Restricted parcrg may not exc-eed the floor-level elevation of the Penthouse.
(iii) The height of anv building siructure wlricf i1 t:::t]1t111
on the Resrric,#i*..it rrt"libe determined by reference to the highest point of
;;.;:iil'd:;;ili;;;; mechanical o' oth" structures praced on t'X::::
ffi 'il;;il ;;d"dt"c .ii'n'v structures)' 1"-^:,1".1-,t:":io:"-:lT:llr."tffir "ttl"t ir,", -i .himnei;s. developed * Y::']":td T'::l i ::l"l"T
"ffffi: "i"""r""'*ririction
under subparagraph (ii) above for Restricted
ffii ;:" t*;;t*rr,
-'r'i^i,"i"ns
establisheJ bv this subsection (iii) and
.- -^-^+:--- -^q^-^A tn herein as the "Elevation
,uur."tion, (i) and (iii above are sometimes referred to herein as the "Elevatton
Restrictions".
e) Notwithstanding any implications to the contrary under
subparagraphll(a),intheeventtheLodgeownereverwishestodeveloporconstruct
improve-ments on either R.rt.i.t.J Parcel which would violate the applicable Elevation
Restriction,theLodgeowner*irru.permittedtodoso.butsubjecttotlrefollowing
provisions. whenever ,t. Lojg;-o*ne, Rt*r such construction or development' the
Lodge owner shall fumisn tnelenttrouse owner with r,vritten notice thereof' together
withanygeneraldesignor,'t,.-uti.plansthereforthatareavailableor,ifnone,a
descriptionoftlreproposedconstructionordevelopment'againtotheextentavailable.
ThePenthouseownershallbestrictlyobligatedtopreserveallinfornrationregarding
such proposed construction o, J"u.ropn',.nt- o, confiidential' and shatl not disclose or
disseminate any such information to arry other party' within thirty (30) days tl,ereafter'
the penthouse owner, at his election and ai his sole remedy, may elect either to
(A)conveythePenthouseUnitbacktotheLodgeownerforagrosspurchasepriceequal
to i50% of the then-prevailing fair market value of the Penthouse unit' or (B) recover
front the Lodge Ownet u p"rniut equal to 5}o/o of-su1h fair:tl:t :1)" :l:
PenthouseownershallexercisethiselectionbygivingtheLodgeownerwrittennotlce
thereof on or before the last aul oitu.tt thirty (3-o) day period; if the.Penthouse outer
fails to give this notice in a timiy manner, the Plnthouse owner shall be deetned to have
exercised the election in "tuur"iej uuoul. Furthermore, if the Lodge,owner violates
either Elevation Restriction *iir't""t'gi"i"g prior noticeas aforesaid' and does not cure the
violation diligently after notice ih.r".of fiom the Penthouse Owner' the' the Penthouse
orvner.againashissoteremedy.mayelectto.proceedeitlrerunderclause(A)or(B)
above (in this case the electionil'u,.-rua. by giving the Lodge owrer written notice of
the election within thirty (30)'i;;-"ft* ttr. ioage ot"ner gives notice that it will not
cure rhe violation. and again unf ioitur. to give tl're,otice of election in a timely manner
shall be deemed an olection ro, .t"ur" (A) above). The purchase price and tl're closing for
thereconveyanceshallbeestablishedandheldinconfornritywithtlrefollowing
provisions:
(i) Ifthe parties are unable' within fifteen (15) days after the
making of the ffirhouse owner's election. to agree in writing upon the applicable
fair market value of it.,. p.ntt,orre Unir, thJn the same shall be determined
pursuanttotheAppraisalProcedures(andsuchl5thdayshallbethe..Appraisal
commencement Date" as referenced under paragraph 13 below)' .
If applicable'
closing of the reconv.V*tt tflaf be held thirty-(3O)-days.after the' lair market
valuehasbeensoo"t".min"o,andeitherpartyhasconfirmedtheresultingamount
ofthepurchasepricebygivingtheotherpartywrittennoticethereof'However'if
the penthous. o*r,.i t'o, ,iua. the clause (B) election under the foregoing
provisions, then in rieu of crosing, the Lodge owner shall pay the applicable
oremium to the Penthouse Owner on such thirtieth (30th) day after the
ietermination of the fair market value'
(ii) If a reconveyance arises pursuant to a clause (A) election'
then the penth6us-e unit and the inclusions stratt ue re-conveyed in conformity
witlrtheconveyancingandtitleinsurancerequirementsandthe,proration,
adjustment una .torini f'oultiont under subparagraph 9(b) above (whicl.r are
hereby made applicable to any reconveyance under this paragraph I I )'
tuut|ll,r.rJlulltl.llutHtllllllltllll|lllllll
-
23
ii-ii-ri-h-iie.oo o o.ob N 6.00 Eeelr c0
i.
(i'r'":"T:.:.':"J,,il':l jt":t"'::i"r"fi :,:HLffi :"J'"""'X:
election' and conEmporaneousl;'
Dremium, as the case 1ay be' the Parties shall
payment of the purchase price "i.l;i;;;; of the Elevation Restrictions in lorm
make and record a full and' comP'l
ttu'ot'uUiy 'utitfuctory
to the Lodge Owner'
ro the extent the Penthouse o*'",'*-?:1d",".t;,,'i'[:T-:itfi::'iy':5Tffi:'1"J'"'ftii'
::ll*,",:lT:ili"'ffi ll{:ii:'l::Tt5t:','.;ffi i";m,';:,:#Tlll'::*:
i;: lii nruffi :U'ITi?ilT' fl J#ft-'."d L v t u*
12' Rieht of First Refusal'
(a),.n" :::.,1:::: :ffiiiTfJf:ilji[{i;;1$;i,$ffiiilil
first refusal to acquire the Penthouse "';."til;;;t- U"l'):,'ll,
At any rime that tne
Th. p"nthoure owner may not to"tit;;;il
the.rerms lri,l.l"o convey the penthouse
oi nrrt refusal is satished t" it:",::it;;rJ ie 6ting to sell and .?"-t:ltl:,:::t:il::
i.n,hou" Ou'ner determines thal he v
uniton*r,.Ti,l',..*;:;:::t:J-:l[".iltT';.':X"lli.HtLltt:H:
of the same' which in any case
'snalli.**,rrnJJ,"',,#"ii'J::::,";i,i::i;;*'q;:grgi[,J[$i'*:i*t
*:*Xt'i'Til1ilffi l""tllJffi i"-i"*'r""".*IiJ'i;;i.'p.n,i'ou"owner's
the same ""
"tiltt;i; t"lihta by the Sale Terms set lorm
notice thereol;:
(i) During the "Exclusivt l:tt':l'^O"nned
below' the'Lodge
owner sha* have the right," ;;.r,;;;;o."'o :l1::lt firvsicar :""9t:i11*
*.0'J"*",.tn,"ilaJ,yilIy,,.3: jim;n::",:**ii"",lt":'+iJ*
onlv be during ordina? b::::':: ;:::#;&; against anv losses"damages
r-ooe'"oiin"'sharl iniemn8 ff.Ti'ff:i:':Xf i:ffi i'n"'ou" Unit' rhat
or cluims' including ul} nlt'
tJ;i,l i; the iodge owner' s inspectrons'
(ii) Ar ctosing, the Penthouse:":::,'i'1":ili'];J;,'# il:
:;:T:ril**::J::,i,:1ff titT"HT^[:::5*il;;il:,:T:trffi:
n.'ll "' # ""'
:"0::o:: l:.l'3*::,': ":il: 1 ":ill"",.' 9
*""1 I ;.";'. :" T #i
Exceptions). rhe p enrhous",i","' ir,nitn *:,r, -",p;,:r:T:ril:rl" li"?. *o.*p.ntr, wiil arso or "orl:;';;, t-tr. p.nthour..Lnorrn.
gross purchase prlce to
:,H':;ll'J1il::t^[:il?:ir"'J. ,'^*. un':u:l-u,
or any riens, easements,
o ;
r
o"r i "
[,
-,i,e
Lod Be _ow
nili"T!
i!ir: :T:*n:t*;:'; .'.:*ru l:l
r"strictions, covenants. :"";iil;;.luding.in -1i ,n" penthouse owne.s deed
to the permined Exceprron";;;;J;_."01,:*:_i:l
The penthouse owner shail
*Tlf;:fi J"'*:*t':.i;tffi u"'"ui'i tn""'l]'oo"'ment protections
!
as are
also furnish the Lodge owner with the :T,TH;.;I, o"riiv delivered under
oi*,rn.ii" th. p"nthour" owner pursuant '"
t"t "JJ;', iil;f;, .'" b.e aliocated
trre Sares contract it tt''n i*'i'i'il*"n |n"'|""#'H':tl:Tl::ll lfi#"a "'
between the selling party and acquiring party rn T#; p.rt"""r orooerty items
theclosingunderthe,n*.i""i""i1.-iotheext"ntanypersonalpropeny
are incorporated within il"-JJ1"''"' ":::'*ff'; ;1;gffiJifi
i.,"*l u[ tenthouse ^owner
shall convev 1l:#;.;;r mauers;ffecting title
#il *urr*tv bili of sale' subjelt to.no tn:l?:;;;u *, vet due and pavable'
#;;;;o.,sonal property taxes for the year oI c
--^ h d r, v, *" I "']nu ::,:H::i,'i:" il:"" iiil:,i.'';;x};if :i"Hil:iti:t*ilJ'Jffi"G'"u"''"'.' and expenses a
-Ilu..lul'l|$$''}$[,|{ii}l]"1"'lJ'l}
o * 24
Agreement, any owners' association fees or dues (if the Penthouse unit is ever
inlorporated into a condominium or other owners' association), and other
. customary proration items. The Town's transfer tax (which is presently in the
amount of one percent (l%) of the purchase price) shall be shared equally
between the parties if appficable. Each party shall bear its own attomeys' fees in
closing the transaction.- Any other closing costs or expenses not addressed under
the foregoing provisions shall be allocated between the parties in accordance with
prevailing real estate practices in the area of Vail, Colorado'
(iv)PossessionofthePenthouseshalibedeliveredtotheLodge
owner at closing, subject to no leases, tenancies or other possessory interests in
favor ofthird parties, excepting only those lease arrangements arising pursuant to
the Rental Agreement.
(v)lf,betweenthetimeoftheLodgeOwner'sexerciseofthe
rightoffirstrefusalandclosing,therearisesanyfireorothercasualtyolany
condemnation or threat thereof rvhich materially affects the Penthouse, then the
Lodge owner at its election may terminate and rescind its exercise of the right of
first refusal, and the parties will have no further obligation to proceed rvith the
sale and purchase transaction pursuant thereto' If the Lodge Owner does not
exercise this election, then the parties shall proceed with closing, subject to the
effect of the casualty or condemnation, and the Lodge owner shall receive an
assignment of and/oi credit for any and all insurance or condemnation proceeds
thatmayariseinconnectiontherewith,exceptthatanyproceedsinexcessofthe
purchase price shall be paid to the Penthouse Owner'
(vi) Closing shall be held thirty (30) days after the Lodge
ou,ner gives its notice exercising the right of first refusal. closing shall be
conducted through the title company fumishing the Lodge Owner's title
insurance, which title company shall act as an escrow and disbursement agent
(and rvith disbursentent to o..u, rvhen the title company inevocably conlmits 1o
insure title as required above). The parties mutually agree that they slrall make
such closing sratements and other closing documents as the title company may
require pursuant to customary real estate practice in vail, colorado, provided the
sanle are materially cotlsistent with the other rights and interests of the parties set
forth herein and in the Sale Terms.
(vii) Time shall be of the essence for the parties' respective
obligations in closing the right of first refusal. In the event either party shall
breach its obligationi in connection with closing, then the other party may
exercise any and all rights and remedies available at law or equity therefor,
including an action for specific performance and the recovery of damages.
(b) Upon the giving of the notice of the Sale Terms' the Lodge Owner
shall have an exclusive period of thirty (30) days thereafter (the "Exclusive Period") in
which to exercise its right of first refusal and acquire the Penthouse Unit pursuant to the
Sale Terms and the foregoing provisions by giving the Penthouse owner notice thereof.
ln the event the Lodge Ownei does not give such notice within the Exclusive Period, then
the Penthouse owner may proceed to make a sales contract with any third-party
purchaser upon tfie Sale Terms. or any modified terms that (i) are not economically or
hnancially more favorable to the purchaser in any material respect, and (ii) are not
otherwise more favorable to the pu..hut.t in any other material respect when compared
with the provisions of the Sale Terms presented to the Lodge Owner; provided, however,
that the Lodge Owner shall have the ongoing right to accept the Sale Temrs and acquire
the Penthouse Unit pursuant thereto at any time before the Penthouse Owner actually
makes any such third party contract. In the event that the Penthouse O*'ner fails to make
and close a third party contract in accordance with the foregoing provisions within six (6)
months after the expiration of the Exclusive Period, then the Lodge Owner's right of first
refusal shall be re-invoked by such failure and continue in force and effect' and the
Penthouse Owner may not sell or convey the Penthouse Unit to any third party unless and
illlilt ilil ililil ]||l ilt lilr il|||l ilr llillll ll llll
885193 Oll29/L999 03r32P 174 Srre Flshr
25 of 49 R 246.00 D 0.00 l{ 0.00 Ergle C0
z)
unt'theproceduresTl*#"ilT:":il::'-:lf ',f"T:4.iiiii"':.t'#Tl"i1:
il:,aJ'uia uguin ':u:l':d l"^::".".'0.1:,'rJ:;;*iii-"it'i'J partv,within that 6-
'"J,"*'*n-i
i' lt *.: :,'.:'ff$;?S::ff:'"i?;";.;'; :h'rl'"i',' to be o r anv rorce
month Period, then the L
"'"ir""(exceptll*"iililj:ffi ffi :T;*xy$":::"'*':"[:f ::"::'ffi ;
shall turnish-: *ttlt: -";:;;oir. O*n.r' t third-party saie'
required to effectuate the f enutuu>' ,' ,-,^-- rlr,r ,,''-',av indicate to the
(c),N otwirhsta nd'
"F :n: T:{,'.]i",tlTiilili,, }..":i**TI"?, $:
c o n,rary, :. : ;, :: s;:T;! sl'g",iijl:flI frlfr J,*".'X :U i, J r y i n. r,,a i n g,
|,1'illtil'iffiil:'8il,*;o' o'i'nt- r*p'll
"nt
o r rhe penrhouse, *il"unaio"u't'
il"i ""f i*',"d :, :T:."3*j;'ff l "f;J
l?i,lffi ; o*o,*i on, o,:,l,:illl:ffi :,nT
:lil:|"",,ffi :il:TH;,i,.b*".'"'ai: j"'Hl#::lilJffi Iil;;;u;',pursuant
:;;;,n""'. r.rririater'), or
S:,J"Titr#'liTJ;;Xr, or anv trrird-parrv purchaser at
;;;;;fiJe rorecrosure:'"-:i""'-v^:"": llJj$";;t ih" 'ongug'e
ir the mortsasee
*!l':t"tHl11+tr*ii,;i$:?,il::t*n;939",:;"i1p"g:{ili1
"Mortgagee Partles")'
p.*ir""i. Affiiiate, or any Mortgagee Party' "lJC f"rl, tf'tt titt T*"tllffitt*',ffiil;;"t ?n:rl:. than a bona fide' arm s't','u'"
*Jtr,uil flntilln,r.r,rrore. in any
:iff i"''JTt',;:1ffilili"ll"J":ii:'f iril":t*:ti""f i,';;-'ung'o,
i*[*itrt---*'F'gl-t:,rffi tri"ffi jlii'**unit (except person
::u*": ::*il: ",:''::,1'T'""i":ffiil"fi;"n' o'i the' P e n tho
p. nt*'o u,' o wner
"'ln
-t *"'" *1 :1"''o{t::; H,niikt;: rutmffi *:t;1a."i.. *ttitn is intended to or would ltlt l:
(and the loag. o*i"i,, ,rgr,, of rust refusal shall survive *t,,ri.r,"
.onu.y t1",.
However' to trre "xtJni"trtt
pi-ntr'ou" owner' under the Sale Terms' ou''"'"
tr" Penthouse
penthouse unit to,i. i"i*. oyner as part or;*t 5'1Xff'lllii"l;;;;", ,t " t-ooe"
b;;., wu arso ":f$':,*'Jlil:t'iLJtfi ;:';;";" -1f ::ffi::,JtfiffifiJnOwner' at no expens"-"' -il::::'l.t-'^", to close and convey the ren
i*.tt"ty to allow the Penthouse owler to
I
a qualified lnt"'-"ffi i; ;td"t to effectuate such exchange'
(d) ro the extent (and onlv to the extent)itt-l'"t:*-i,',!:t,|;ffi"jffi
H''il''i,,;,,::i[*rtlf -*t#';"',wi;H}1i:t'tr'ii'jffi
T,""T-[:,'"il#:1.'X'il:l,tfrpri::l'r#i;'ll;';;;*'P::'::
de s c e nde n t s o, iii" o' ", i;;; "l T1ff ,#Sy.'" il*;lf ,"i,$ *:ffiH b r :'""'J:'
tigf* "iitt" "iutut'
this subparagraph (o)
. les for a determination
r 3 Appraisql prpced.qrqr:,y;:::ll',1ififfi,:#
TI.",-',ffi *n:X:
of the fair marklt vllye of the Penthouse "tt oHili;'ftft;' (15)d1].tororisions
hereor;, the:ilii ;;;;;l (the "Aporaisal Procedures")'
""]..',n"-"in..';"nin:.X;dified Appraiser" (as
ft !i{l,it :*q *t "','ru #ri*il;$ t**';'t:ffi *n*r ffi :*
defined below)' t n"lt ;; ;;;;" third iluaiified Appraiser, Yh" I-l1l: then procced ro renoer
:lllffi iili'fffi-''#il;;;*:l*:?"*f ;:,i"*J:"""i'dlhi*#l*;t:f U:
fu ,;*l r!n* :il'GfiiiT;?l'#^Jr'" uppri'aur"'r'
p enthouse u nit sha' ;:' d*il;'o*l i\,:":'i*.T;l*;mtt;'*"*"-:ltJffi:":'?:i::
which are clo sest to one- 19-o.t!11,,11
tt"113, "
t t'
rp51trililull$.ttllltl,ftttltttt'tUtttttt 26
?i,liii:ili:',!i,.{*.ll:lj*ffi
'.,*tiltJffi
'f,'#:f,t#dti;r:'';ffidualified APPraiser tn a
;H;i"-c;';",r: 9,"^l"lio"lj;i:T'.n|,HT[',ffi:"-a -['uurir'.a erpraiser" sharl mean an
iioll?r,' prior notic-e is,l", *. *,"r:"1,*.:Ti:lj:;ill5i ll"*fftiX'll?llfl"l11f'.
)ii:i:*:1T'1,J,t"ll'lil;"i'llh "Tl'.'i-'xo*n of Va*, eugr. cou'rv;, coro,uao
,.ul propt'ty sales ano appraisal practices in tne I
n .^^r-. Dprsnnil Privile',es'
I 4 ffi "::"::*,;"#1ff:,:T ;,'T,'T.:-; J"":li
p rope rty wh ic i- such _ownei,."#;,i', ::lJ:T:l ilr ;;-;r 9l *,l: Tl':fli.' i* ii:
*o'tg"!" or other monelni,
e,gr".*.nt, subject o"t-y io the effect' if any'
established pursuant to I
-^-+- 6^r vet 4ue and payable.established pursuail lo ulrr '\E'r--'^'-- yet du. and payable.
real property taxes and assessments nol yet (ru!; q'e r-J.--
(b) fs of ,he
-d]:,:T:,"11ff ,li|:1.:i1ij3;*'jjjJ:fi','il.$i
Rental Agreement made of even t"tr:'il;;;y'it. t.ntt'*.11.,
.oit.",iuel1, furnrshesp.ntt,our" owner and the Lodge owne" *iriii irr. ,og_*" o,Toof,).
ln all respecrs rne
o""i "i rt"ttf. and residential units tT H;;JG "*I1^l*"r,
and the inclusron of
i*ring and certain related nranag:ttt;:;;," irr.'n**r 1911. Rental Agr.eemenr and
"*"."ttip
of the Penthouse Unit'ts suio"trr*i
*"r..,o1 uld^l
encumbrance agarnsr rne
hi::lm: y;"l'lili'Hi!1: ,in:ii # ffi
'lhe
rand r-'u;; ;e pen'lrrouse ]rni'l
ownership "''il;.J;use
u*i1'!11th all successors in lntets>.
i,n.ur e.,'."ment, the
being subject;;;.and bound the-reby)' ln connection wttn
parties 'o*tii"iit *i"iunt uno agree as follows:
(i) rhe reiative rights and obrl.cl.":li["ltffili:'J]il"ffii1
penthouseo*i'J,*T:lll..l'lf '*l-T",:l#il::,-$'*,ill".l]',::l:nT:',[?
addition to' and non-exclusr\\' .*,.", r.*iurr: thr-p.1rr,1., one anorher, grvrng the
under this Agreement. r" ,:;";*;';nd
consistentiu
u.,,, Agreement;however,shall be consuued to be. conrp-"^n.n*i
e,gr..,n."::.,rr.,
between the provrsrons
fullest effect possible t" o"l't il;;iuir" Jonni"t Il. n.ntut Agreenrenr snarl be
in the event anv direct' :T;i: il;;ovisions of th
thereof and the provisionsi@'O*".*tnt is outstanding'
controlling so long as the Ke
( i i ) r tr e prov i s i o ns o r the
":l,t::.ffJ,".T' ::' ff '
: l'-'r'.t"J::i1
herein by rhis reierence::*11,J'fJ:ff';TJ#il;;;; the extent such
shall be deened to lncluc
Ji;';*;;;;upp'op'iate in anv given conte/'t'
(c) rhe conimitment of the t:"h:"T"'l;':i:,litfJJ:l'::l:i:ll
i:T#:[:,lTifrl':'ffi il1s]J"T:ii:i::-lii"'ffi:rf [p6':x
,uu," qu*li-uio'"0'*1 ttre
1t3, ;L at
Tr:" ffi;l ilJ ?ffi ;' u"rno *i"a g.'
- -tL1'
tn"
*[*il:f*i;"T:T;tr"---'Ji't"'T''*'"i"ii;:*1":*ru;'t'i;::fl :;::T:
hereofis a material and-essential part'ofthe consideratton t
unA "onulyunte
ofthe Penthouse Unit'
(d) ro the extentthe Penthouse ui:,"ilJTffl'ltH'i#fffJl
county, colorado' as a separate tax parcei inaene'nd'fljtffi'"^iiv u"*a ::.:::ottut'
r,op.,ty,",iJJodge owner .li i"il'iii::f#fi:ffi;;;;;;;" to so estabrish the
*ith one another and diligenttY
ptntf''ou" Uni'-u' u "pututt
tax parcel'
(e) So rong as the l"n'ho,y11,iy1."iffi:J"1ll,l, '"1T,""1t;
Sherwood' niJ"ioo"tl- ttott-tner referred to heretn
qp'q.t1t'ltll$;1$+*ttF!tJ.ttt
tN tt tttt z7
"sherwood Affiliate" (as hereinafter defined) own the Penthouse Unit, the Shenvoods
(but not their family members nor any other parties) will receive a 50Yo discount on
"hurg",
for food und b.u.rug. consumption at any restaurant within the Lodge (including
cnarles for wine and other alcoholic beverages), and complimentar)', non-transferable ski
passls for the use ofski facilities in Vail and Beaver Creek. These privileges shall cease
and be of no further force or effect at such time as the Penthouse Unit is no longer o*'ned
by James B. Sherwood, his spouse and/or a Sherwood Affiliate. As used herein' the term
"3herwood Affiliate" means any corporation, partnership or other applicable entity in
which the named Penthouse Owner herein (James B. Sherwood) is the Majority Owner
(as that term is defined in the Rental Agreement), The privileges afforded under this
subparagraph (e) shall be binding upon the Lodge Owner and its successors in interest
andshail run with the land as a burden encumbering the Lodge Property. However, and
notwithstanding the provisions of subparagraph l8(a) below indicating to the contrary.
the privilege for ski passes as set forth above shall only be a personal obligation of the
Lodle Owner named herein, and shall not run with the land, but shall survive and renrain
the obligation ofthe Lodge Owner named herein upon any subsequent conveyance ofthe
Lodge Property by such Lodge Owner'
15, No Common Interest Corrmunit:v.
(a) The parties hereby acknowledge and establish their rnutual intent
and agreement that the cieation of the Penthouse Unit, and its conveyance to the
Penthouse Owner as a property interest separate and distinct from the Lodge Propefly,
does and shall fall *ittr;n itre "small community" exemption established under C'R'S'
s 38-33.3-116 of the colorado common Interest ownership Act ("ccloA," c.R.s.
s :s-::.:-tot et lsg.), and that in all respects the parties' respective orvnership interests
in the Lodge Property and the Penthouse Unit shall not be bound by or subject to the
provisions of CCiOn. Without limitation on the generality of the foregoing. the parties
mutually acknowledge and agree that the Penthouse Unit constitutes an estate above tire
surface within the meaning oiC.R.S. S 38-32-l0l et Sg., and not a condominium within
the nreaning of CCIO{;- the Penthouse Easements do and shall constitute the sole
property inierests in the Lodge Property that are held by the Penthouse Owner as
appurtenances to the Penthouse Unit. and there are not and shall not be any "common
.i.n,"ntr" or other portions of the Lodge Property in which the Penthouse Owner holds
any undivided or other ownership interest (subject only to tfie proviso that cotl]mon
otvnership interests may be established if the Lodge Owner, at its sole election only'
determines to establish a condominium ownership structure pursuant to
subparagraph 6(b) above). In furtherance of the foregoing, the parties also mutually
acknowiedge that the subdivision establishing the Penthouse Unit is facially entitled as a
. ..condominium map" only in order to satisfy procedural subdivision requirements of the
Town of vail, and not because the Penthouse Unit or Lodge Property is or should be
regarded as a condominium within the meaning of CCIOA'
(b) The parties further mutually acknowledge and agree that the
Penthouse Unit does not comprise part of and is not included within the Lodge
Association or the Lodge South condominium Association, Inc. (the "South
Association"). The South Association governs the ownership of certain condominiums
that (i) are situated within a multi-story building located upon the Lodge Property, (ii) are
owned and held pursuant to a "Master Lease" made with the Lodge Owner for the portion
of the land area within the Lodge Property on which such tower is situated (the Mastel
Lease having been recorded in the Records on Octoberz3, 1973, in Book23l at
Page 6l t;, and (iii) have been legally established pursuant to a condominium map and a
condominium dectaration recorded October 23, 1973 in Book 23 l. at Page 612)' The
Penthouse Owner specifically acknowledges and agrees that he has no voting rights or
other interests whatsoever in or associated with either the Lodge Association or the South
Association, and the relative rights and obligations of those two Associations and their
respective members shall not be construed or implied to modify the rights and obligations
I Iilil lllil lllllll lilll lll lllll llllill lll lllllll ll llll
6E5193 9112911999 03:32P 174 Serr Flshr
28 of 49 R 2{6.00 D O.OO ll 0.00 Eeglc C0
ofthe Penthouse Owner hereunder.
28
16. Remedies.
(a) Upon the occurrence ofany default hereunder by either Owner, the
non-defaulting party shill have such remedies as may be available at law or equity for
such default, with all such remedies being cumulative with and non-exclusive of one
another, and any and all such remedies may be pursued by the non-defaulting palty' either
successively or conQurrently, as the non-defaulting party may determine, and the exercise
of an1.' one remedy shall not be construed as or constitute a bar to the exercise of any
other remedy, Such remedies shall include, without limitation and where appropriate.
injunctive oi other equitable relief. either prohibitive or mandatory, to prevent the
pertin.nt default hereunder or to enforce the performance or observance of the terms of
this Agreement, and the right to pursue an action for damages suffered by the non-
defaulting party because ofany such default by the other party hereunder. In the case ofa
default by the Penthouse Owner, such remedies as may be afforded by law or equity are
specifically cumulative with, and non-exclusive of, the Lodge owner's rights under the
oih., prouirions hereof to exercise the Reimbursement Lien and recovet Penthouse
Reimbursements and related sums'
(b)Withoutlimitationontllegeneralityoftheforegoitrg,tlreparties
specifically acknowledge and agree, in connection with any conveyance ofthe Penthouse
Unit pursuant to purugiuptrS, lt or l2 hereof, that each party shall be entitled to all
,.nl.di"r available at law or equity, including rights to terminate the conveyance or to
seek specific performance to the extent provided by law, for any breach by the other pany
of its obligations hereunder that are applicable to such conveyance' and again those
remedies shall be cumulative u,ith and in addition to, and nonexclusive of, one alrother
and any other express remedies provided for herein (except that tl.re remedies for
paragraph 12 may be modified by the Sale Terms)' However' the parties also
u.t.norut.dge theii mutual intent and agree that such remedies shall be applied, in
accordance witlr well-established doctrine of comnron law'. in such a manner that neitl]er
part),receives a nraterial and unwarranted windfall or suffers a nraterial and un$'ananted
forfeiture as a result thereof (subject. however, to tl.re provisions of the Sale Terms in
connection with a conveyance under paragraph 12)'
17. Attornevs' Fees. In the event any litigation or legal proceeding arises out
of this Agreement or ttr. R*tut Rgreement and is prosecuted to final judgment, the prevailing
partl'slrall be entitled to recover from the otlrer all ofthe prevailing party's costs and expenses
incuned in co*ection therewith, including reasonable attorneys' fees.
-I
-
eGt: oatEfr
I.l .{
-|!O
: a
-
arlrC
-;8!=edrl=
I
-&8:ct .
E8o
-Eg:: ot .-{sIOINTN
-\cEdorct I
:oD ..-
-=ordor
-C'
GI
18. Run'r-yith the Land.
(a)Exceptasotherwiseexpresslyprovidedherein,thisAgreernentand
all the provisioni hereof shall rrn with the land and the ownership of the Properties, and
the Penthouse Easements, the right of first refusal in favor of the Lodge Owner, and other
provisions hereofshall act as an appurtenant benefit and burden for each Property u'hich
is intended to be benefited and/or burdened thereby and the Owner of that respective
property. References herein to each Owner shall include the initial Owner named herein
andits successors in interest in the ownership of its Property. If either Owner conveys its
interest in its Property by an instrument recorded in the Records, then the transferee shall
autonratically be deemed to have assumed and agreed to be bound by this Agreement and
shall have personal liability for all obligations hereunder accruing from and after the
transfer, und the transferor shall thereupon be released and discharged from any and all
obligations under this Agreement appiicable to the pertinent Property which accrue after
the date of transfer; ptouid.d, however, that the foregoing shall not be construed to limit
or impair the applicability or enforceability of the Reimbursement Lien (as set forth in
paragiaph 4 above) for Penthouse Reimbursements that are delinquent or owing at the
iime-ofltransfer, and the transferee shall acquire subject to all such Reimbursement Lien
rights (whether or not any specific evidence thereof has been recorded). Except as
other*ise expressly provided herein (and subject specifically, without limitation, to the
personal nature ofthe privileges granted under subparagraph 14(e) above), any easement
or right of entry or use granted herein to any Owner shall be for the benefit not only of
29
such Owner but also for the benefit ofany tenants, licensees, employees, guests. lnvltees'
agents and contractors of such Owner whom such Owner shall permit to use such
easement or right of entry or use (provided that the foregoing shall not be construed in
any way to expand the scope of any such easement, Iight of entry or use as expressly set
forth herein, or to vitiate any limitations or qualifications on the same as otherwise
expressly set forth herein).
(b) In the event the Intemalional wing or any portion thereof is ever
converted to a condominium or similar ownership regime, as set forth in
subparagraph 6(b) above, the rights and obligations ofthe Lodge Owner hereunder shall
not inure to or bind the individual owners of the resulting dwelling or accommodation
units. Instead, those rights and obligations shall either remain in the party that is the
Lodge Owner at the time of the conversion, or else be assigned and delegated of record to
another entity which has ownership or management interests in relation to the
Intemational Wing (for example, the party succeeding to those rights and obligations may
be a homeowners' association with authoilty over the drvelling or accommodation units)'
The party that is the Lodge Owner at the time of the conversion shall remain liable for its
obligations hereunder unless and ultil the same are delegated to and assumed by such
partt (as set forth in subparagraph l8(a) above). The foregoing is not intended to vitiate
ihe establishment of the Penthouse Easements, and the portions of the Lodge Property
thatareencumberedtherebywi|lremainencumberedtherebyuponanysuchconversion
to multiple ownerships.
(c) The rights, privileges' easements and rights ofentry and use herein
granted or allowed to each Owner (including, without lirnitation, any right to make any
election, to exercise an1, option or discretion, and to give any notice) may be encumbered
in favor of any holder of a first mortgage or deed of trust encumbering such Owner's
Property, and shall inure to the benefit of such holder (and its foreclosure purchaser or
designee following foreclosure, if applicable) at such time as such pany succeeds to the
owpership of rhe applicable Property, or at such time as such holder gains the right to the
use and enjoynrent thereof pursuant to a receivership established in accordance with
Colorado law pending foreclosure. provided such holder correspondingly satisfies the
obligations of its mortgagor Owner thereafter accruing under this Agreernent. Any such
holder of a mortgage or deed of trust, or its foreclosure purchaser or designee, which
succeeds to the title to either Owner's Property shall be treated in accordance with the
succession and transfer provisions set forth in subparagraph l8(a) above'
19. Estoppels and Confirmations'
(a)Eachowner,rvithintwenty(20)daysafterreceivinganotice
requesting the same from the other Owner, shall deliver a written estoppel certificate
setting forth that, to the knorvledge of the responding Owner, the requesting Owner is not
in default in the performance of any of its obligations under this Agreenrent. or, if in
default, setting forth the nature of such default. and setting forth the status of suclt other
matters related to this Agreelnent as the requesting Owner may reasonably specify for
disclosure. Any incorrect statement in a certilicate which is tendered in response shall
only preclude the corresponding claim or defense by the responding Owner, as
approfriate, and the responding Owner shall not otherwise have any liability therefor. If
the responding Owner fails to deliver the requested estoppel cenificate within the
requisite time period, then it shall be conclusively deemed that the requesting Owner is
not then in default of any obligations under this Agreement, and that any other matters
requested for disclosure are in the status most favorable to the requesting Owner, as
determined by the requesting Owner. If either Owner shall request and receive from the
other Owner more than two sets of estoppel certificates during any period of 12
successive months, then the requesting Ounrer shall reimburse the other Owner upon
demand for the reasonable out-of-pocket costs and expenses (including attorneys' fees)
incurred by the responding Owner in connection with each additional certificate requested
by the requesting Owner during that same l2-month period.
ffiltilIilllililIilil lililL il||ltlill]tilil illi83193 01/29/1999 03r32P 174 Sara Flrhcrl0 cf 49 R 246.00 D O,OO ll 0.00 Ee3h C0
JU
(b) The parties mutually acknowledge and reconfirm tl.rat the
penthouse Ulit and the Loige Property constitute separate. divisible and distinct real
property interests; either Ouner maY convey, encumber or oth€rwise alienate its Property
as it sees fit, independently of the other Property, but subject to the tenns of this
Agreenrent. If requested by either party in the course of convef ing, mortgaging or
otherwise encumbeiing title to such party's Property, the other party, promptly upon
request, shall make -y futth.t documents as may be reasonably necessaly or appropriate
to confirm the separateness of those real property interests. However, in doing so, the
cooperating party shall not be required to incur any obligation or liability to a third party,
and any such confirmation shall not alter or modify the relative rights, interests and
obligations of the parties hereunder in any material respect. The requesting party shall
reimburse the cooperating party for any reasonable out-of-pocket expenses' including
attomeys' fees, that Inuy b.in.uted by the cooperating party in the course of reviewing,
preparing and making any such confirming documentation'
20.Term:Amendment'ThetermofthisAgreement,andthePenthouse
Easenents and other b.n"l,t, und burdens under the provisions hereof, shall be perpetual (except
as otherwise expressly provided herein. and subject to any subsequent mutual deternrination b1'
the parties to teiminaie ihi, Agr....nt in connection with any obsolescence of the Properties or
for any other reason). Any amendment or modification of this Agreenlent (including any
termination as referenced above) may be effectuated only by the parties' mutual execution of a
rvritten instrutnent recorded in the Records (which instrument must include a consent thereto
executed by the holder of any first-priority mortgage or deed of trust then encumbering either
Propertl,). Any provision hereof ma1' be waived only to the extent set forth in a written
instrument executed by the party against whom enforcement of the claimed waiver is sought'
2l.BusinessDavs:Notices,Ifanydateortheexpirationofanyperiod
referenced in thi, Agr..r*rrt full, on u day which is not a United States business day (i'e',
Saturdal,. Sunday or legal holiday for which U.S. mail service is not provided), then the pertinent
date or period shall be deemed extended to the next succeeding business day thereafter' Any
notice hlreunder shall be in writing and shall be regarded as received by the Lodge Owner or
pent6ouse Orvner, as the case rnuy L., when the same is delivered to the address of the intended
recipient as set forth below, by whatever means, or when received on the intended recipient's
facsimile facilities (as confirmed on the facsimile facilities of the delivering party) at the
facsinrile number as set forth below. The time of the giving of any notice shall be dete rmined by
relercnce to local time in Vail, Colorado. Either party may change its address or facsimile
nunrber fbr notice purposes by giving notice thereof to the other party in accordance with the
tbregoing. and legal counsel for either party n"lay give notice on such party's behalf. For notice
purpot*r. the address and facsimile information for each party is initially as follows:
lf to Lodqe Owner:
Lodge Properties. lnc.
174 E. Gore Creek Drive
Vail, Colorado 81657
Attn: Gerreral Manager
The Lodge at Vail
Fax: 970-476-7425
With a copv to:
For mailins
Lodge Properties lnc.
c/o Vail Associates, I nc.
P.O. Box 959
Vail, Colorado 81658
For courier or hand deliverv
Lodge Properties I nc.
c/o Vail Associates, Inc.
137 Benchmark Road
Avon. Colorado 81620
Attn: General Counsel
Fax 970-845-2912
I rilil ilil[]]il r]ril ilr illr Llllll lll llll lllll lill
685193 0t/29/t999
31 of 49 R 246.00
03r32P 174 Sere Flrhr
D O.OO ll 0.00 Ergh C0
JI
I
-
-I LO)
-
oc)Ef.
-rr 3.J arr|Elo
-to!=c dlEIzI
-&8-TdE8o
-88:ol .
-{gro(\|.N
-\
oa
-oo-d|
rt
:oD..-:ra O
!!'qi or
-lo
dt
With further copv to:
Otten, Johnson, Robinson, Neff & Ragonetti' P.C.
950 l7d Street
suite 1600
Denver, Colorado 80202
Attn: Robert C. Fisher, Jr., Esq.
Fax: 303-825-6525
If to Penthouse Owner:James B. Sherwood
Sea Containers Services, Ltd.
Sea Containers House
20 Upper Ground
London, SEI 9PF
England
Tel:01| 44 l7l 805 5000
Fax:0ll 44 l7l 805 5900
Carter, Ledyard & Milburn
2 Wall Street
With a copv to:
Neu' York' Ner'r' York I0005
ill' r ff-tr"rl -Y,
R i gg s' E sq'
22. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement as applied to any
particular circumstance shall be adjudicated as or otherwise become illegal and unenforceable'
such illegality shall not affect the enforceability of any other provision of this Agreement, or the
offending provision as applied to circumstances for r,,'hich it is enforceable, it being intended that
a1 proviiions of this Agreement be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent legally permissible'
23. Cantions: Gender. The captions and headings ofthe various provisions of
this Agreement are for con.renience and identification only, and shall not be deemed to limit or
define the operative provisions of this Agreement. References herein to the singular shall
include the jlural, and the plural the singular, and references herein to any one gender shall be
deemed to include all genders.
24. No public Dedication. Nothing herein contained shall be deented to be a
grant or dedication of ut1ryo.ti* of the Lodge Property to or for the general public or for any
public purposes whatsoevei, lt U.ing the intention of the parties hereto that this Agreement be
strictll"liniited ro the purposes herein expressed. Furthermore. the Lodge Owner may limit or
preclude vehicular or pedestrian access ovel the Lodge Property to the extent reasonably
il...rrory to prevent or defend against any third party claim of an implied public dedication or of
the ocquisition of prescriptive easement or ownership rights impacting the Lodge Property
(notwit'hstanding the otheiprovisions of this Agreement which would indicate or require to the
contrary).
25. Governine Law: Jurisdiction and Venue.
(a) This Agreement and all the provisions hereof shall be govemed by
and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado'
(b) The parties hereto submit to personal jurisdiction of tlre courts of
the State of Colorado for any litigation or proceeding related to this Agreement, waive
any and all rights to object to suchjurisdiction for the purposes ofany litigation related to
this Agreemeirt, and stipulate and agree that such jurisdiction shall be lodged exclusively
in the courts of the State of Colorado. The parties further hereby consent and stipulate to
venue in the Eagle County District Court, which shalt be the exclusive venue for any
action, suit or proceeding thaf either of them may at any time wish to commence or file in
connection with this Agreement or any provision hereunder. The parties hereby agree
that any action, suit or proceeding related to this Agreement must and shall be brought in
accordance with the foregoing provisions, and hereby waive any objection which either of
them may have to the laying of jurisdiction and venue in accordance with the foregoing
provisions. These stipulations of jurisdiction and venue are irrevocable and
unconditional. and each party specifically and inevocably waives dnd agrees not to plead
or claim that the appropriate court constitutes an inconvenient forum for any litigation or
proceeding govemed by this paragraph 25. The parties mutually acknowledge that they
are waiving important rights and are doing so only after opportunity to consult with
counsel of their choice. The foregoing shall not preclude either party from filing any
pertinent action, suit or proceeding in another appropriate forum if the Eagle County
District Court and other appropriate courts of the State of Colorado decline venue or
jurisdiction for any reason.
(c) The Penthouse Owner hereby inevocably designates, appoints and
empowers its legal counsel, Carter, Ledyard & Milburn (identified in tlre notice
provisions under paragraph 2l hereofl. as the Penthouse Owner's designee, appointee and
ug.nt to receive. accept and acknowled-ee for and on behalf of the Penthouse Owner. and
in respect of the Penthouse Unit and Penthouse Owner's other property, service of an1'
and aLl legal process, summons. notices and documents which may be served in an1' such
action or proceeding. From time to time, the Penthouse Owner. by notice to the Lodge
Owner, may designate other legal counsel to act as the Penthouse Owner's agent for
service of proc.r, in conformity with the foregoing provisions, provided that the nervly
designated counsel is licensed for and maintains an active legal practice and offices
within the continental United States (excluding Alaska and Hawaii)' Any designation of
new counsel to serve as such agent must include both a mailing and (if different) a street
address, as well as facsimile delivery information.
26. lntegration. This Agreement and the Rental Agreement shall constitute
the entire understanding and agreement between the parties with respect to the subject mattel
hereof. and any prior or extri;ic understandings or agreements concerning the same subject
matter (including, without limitation, the Sales Contract) are superceded hereby and shall be of
no force or effect. However, this Agreement and the Rental Agreement shall not supercede any
provisions of the Sales Contract which are set forth or referenced in any amendment to the Sales
Contract made between the parties and specifically excepted from such supercession. and those
prot.isions shall remain binding between the Lodge Owner and Penthouse Owner nanred herein
as set forth in the amendment.
27. counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of
qhic6 shall constitute an original. and which when taken together shall constitute one and the
sarne agreenlent. The signaiure page of any counterpart may be detached therefrom without
impairiig the legal effect ofthe signature(s) thereon. provided such signature page is re-attached
ro onother counGrpart identical thereto (except for having additionat signature pages executed by
other parties to this Agreement attached thereto)'
[Balance of Page Intentionally Left Blank]
| []il lllll lllllll llll lll lllll llllll lll llll lll llll
665193 S1/zgll9Eg O3z32P 174 Serr Flrhr
33 of 49 R 246.00 D O.OO N 0.00 Eegh C0
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Lodge Owner and the Penthouse Owner have
made this Agreement as of the day, month and year first above written'
LODGE PROPERTIES INC.' a Colorado
corporation
By:
N*{"' f,a-^". f . Donoh'"
rtte: S r, Llice Prcs i/*nf
STATEOFCOLORADO )
LODGE PROPERTIES INC., a Colorado corporatron.
' Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
[Signature blocks continued on next page]
coLrNrY o, to^Lo ltt' . ^ {L
oing instrurqentrvas acknowledged b-efore. me thisn J3 'day of
January. 1999,by {i ^-r. [1 Donoh,.,'e as Sf ' U;ce l"res ' of
tttl|ull,|lL',|u,lqlulllHltlllulllrrlrrrrrrii-ii-lg-n zta,oo D o,oo N o.oo Ergn c0
-<Ji- ^ r, , -\l\d. o,\11 APr)\
{gtY)-.:' - - ".' : !.r grr'
' ,i'$0I44r"3::i"'j
Sl...Pcratrc ..'1q.,$Prri#
34
JA l"^*r\
James B. Sherwood
) ss.
).
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 1998, by James B. Sherwood.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
Notary Public
''!'1{+iltl*,l$# tlj[#'tl#+$ lllu
| ilr I I rr
35
J4 l,^J\
James B. Sherwood
) ss.
Co*rn at r {r '-)
The foregoing instrument *as acknorvledged before me this g'fL ciay of
fe.br.n.l99f, bY James B. Sherwood'
/,t witness mt hand and ofhcial seal.
L/,,
ttora'r Fd.i;1i,Si!ih* vo*i?ii,,l,!ili3il"*
giX,n'"c''.nn! Vot'cHlff
l/
35
EXHIBIT A
Legal Description
of
The Lodge Properry
A PART OF LOTS A, B, AllD C, BLOCK 5-C, VAIL'VILLAGE, FIRST
FILING, COI'NIY OF EAGIJE, STATE OF COLORADO, MORE PARTICI'I'ARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOTLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOIITHI,IEST CORNER OF LOT A, BLOCK 5-C, VAIL
VILLAGE, FIRST FILING; TIIENCE NORTII 24 DEGREES L1 MINUTES 00
SECOIIDS EAST A DISTAI{CE OF 119.67 FEET; THENCE NORTH L5
DEGREES 17 MINUTES OO SECObIDS EAST A DISTAIICE OF 143.00 FEET TO
A POIITT OF CURVE; TI{ENCE AIJONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT llAvING A
RADIUS OF 96.00 I'EET, A CENTRAIJ AI.IGLE OF 64 DEGREES 00 MINUrES
OO SECO}IDS, A}ID AII ARC DISTAI{CE OF 107.23 FEET TO A POIMT OF
TAI{GENT; TIIENCE ALONG SAID TAI|GENI NORTII 79 DEGPAES 17 MINIITES
OO SECOITDS EAST A DISTAI{CE OF 245. 42 FEET TO A POINT OF
CURI/E; TIIENCE AJ,ONG A CURVE TO THE RIGIIT HAVING A RADIUS OF
582.79 FEET, A CENTRAIJ ANGTE oF 2 DEGREES 03 MIN{ITES 54 sEcollDsAllD All ARc L,ENGTII oF 21.00 FEET To A PorNT; TIIENCE sourl{ 10
DEGREES 30 MINUTES 16 SECONDS EAST A DTSTAT,ICE OF 359.21 FEET TOTIIE SOUTII LINE OF SAID LOT A; THENCE SOU$I 99 DEGREES 44MINUTES OO SECOIIDS WEST AIVD AIONG SAID SOTITH LI}IE A DISTA}ICE OF490.53 FEET TO THE POTNT OF BEGINNING;
EXCEPT
ALIJ oF TIIE toDcE APARTIVIENT coNDoMrNrIJM, AccoRDrNG At{D puRsuAlIr
To rHE collDoMrNrIJM MAP Ar\rD coNDoMrNruM DECT,ARA'TrON TIIEREFOR,RECORDED IN BOOK 2L7 AT PAGE 531, COI'IIIY OF EAGLE, STATE OFCOLORADO.
Ar'ID ExcEPT AIL oF TI{E LoDcE sou:ru colIDoMrNrUM, AccoRDrNG A}IDPURSUANT'TO T:IE CObIDOMTNIIJM MAP A}ID CODIDOMINII'M DECI.AR.ATTONTHEREOF, RECORDED IN BOOK 231 AT PAGE 612, COI'NI':T OF EAGLE,STATE OF COLORADO.
I |lllil ililt ilLilt lltil ilt lllll lllllll lll lllll llll llll
585193 Ot/29/7999 03:32P 174 Serr Flrhr
36 of 49 R 24e.OO D O.OO N 0.00 Ergle C0
EXHIBITB-1
Legal Description
of
Penthouse Unit
INTERNATIONAL WING PENTHOUSE, an estate-above the surface according to the map
thereofrecordedon Ja*.aoq 2Q, lggg,atReceptionNo. GBS\Q3,County
of Eagle, State of Colorad.
I ||lill lllll lllllll lllll lll llll lllllll ll lllll llll llll-abst5e oil2Olicag 03:32P 174 serr Flrhcr
3? of 49 i 246.00 D O,OO N 0.00 Errlr C0
ETSIBIT B-2
PENTUOT'SE ISRRACBS
See also actached legal descriptions and maps,
ExhlbiE B-2, for each of the Southwest Terrace,
SoutheasE Terrace.
r |||il lllll lllllll lllll lll lllll lllllll lll lllll llll llll
6Elt93 0ll29l1999 03:32P t?4 Sene Flrher
38 of 49 R 246.00 D 0.00 tl 0.00 Eeglr G0
included as part of this
Northvrest Terrace and
t-t
r-to
|1
o
o!,ort
HDd
oo
Honn
o
B-2-1
SOUTHEAST TERRACE
EffiIBIT B-2 (contrd)
2..f
8.U4
P. O. B.
SOUTHEAST CORNTR LOT A
l1) N10'30'16"W 19.45 FEET
12) N79'29'44'8, 11.06 FEET
(5) NrO.5O'16'w, 2.0s FEET
(4) N79'29'44'E, 1.64 FEET
(5) S1030'16"E, 2.13 FEET
(6) 51951'15'W, 22.42 FEEr
(7) 57929'44"W 1.58 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
ine aaolt DEscRIBED pARcEL LIES AT B2oo.3 FEET lN ELEVATIoN ANo coNTAlNs
A PARCEL LOCA1ED IN LOT A, BLOCK 5-C, VAIL VILLAGE FIRST FILING, TOWII OF VAIL'
EAGLE COUNTY COLORADO, MORE PARTICULARLY OESCRIBED AS FOLLOIVS;
couutxcruc AT THE potNT oN 1xE exrenroa oF THE INTERNATIoNAL wNG oF THE LODGE AT vAlL'
wHENcE rHE souTHEAST coRNER oF Lor A BEARS s1o'41'13'€, 5J.70 FEET (LoryzolT.AL-oISTANCE);
THE-NCa Nrorro,rs'u s.7o-iEEf To rHE polNT oF BEGTNNTNG; THENcE ALoNG THE WALL oR EDGE
OF THE TERRACE 'IHE FOLLOWING SE\EN COURSES:
. ^, rCF
'" v{tNG PENTHU""-
-. r tloNlre -...4-.rr{FRNF "- , a7 \-1J---Ir. . - _-,1N * -\Q-rt-=-'--rr^Fl, tr.r. ' ,'},J
\ur-
Ilril \t-v)
i
-P\
ol
c!-
| illll llill lllllll lllll lll lllll lllllll llllll llll lllt
bdbids otT26ztggg og:szp 174 sere Flshrr
39 of a9 R 24A,OO D O.O0 N 0.00 Eelle C0
'lt
$
SOUIHEASI
TERRACE
,o
lur
ldr-\;
FLOOR ELEV=820O.3'
0.0OJ sr
.OO3 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
B-2-2
SCAI-E:1"='
SOUTHWEST TERRACE
ETIIIBIT B-2 (conttd)
A PARCEL LOCATED IN LOT A, BLOCK 5-C, VAIL VILLAGE FIRST FIUNG, TOWN OF VAIL EAGLE
COUNTY, COLORADO, MORE PARTICUI-ARLY DESCRIBED AS FOIIOIIIS:
BEGINNING AT A CORNER OF A TERRACE. W{ENCE II{E SOUIHIIEST CORNER OF 'II{E INIERNATIONAL
wNG PENIHOUSE BEARS N5525'30'E, 0.95' (ACROSS A w LL); THENCE ALONG IHE W LL OR EDGE
OF THE TERRACE 'IHE FOIIOWING SE\EN COURSES:r) N7929'44'E. 9.60 F€ET
2) S1O3O'16'E 260 FEET
3) N7929'44'8. 11.00 FEET
.+) Nro.30'16'w 260 FEET
5) N7929',44'8, 8.70 FEET
6) sroro'r6'L r5.ro FEET
7) S7929'4,['w. Z.lO FEE1 THENCE 15.17 FEET ALONG lHE ARC 0F A CUR\€ oF 13.32' RADIUS,
THE CHORD OF wHlChl BEARS S79?9'44'w. 14.55 FEETI THENCE CONIINUING ALON.IG TtlE EDGE OF THE
IERRACE THE FoLLOWNG Tlilo COURSES: (1)5792944'W, 16.00 rEET; (2) Nr0'30'16'lV,
16.18 FEET: THENCE 20.50 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CUR\E OF 33.53'RADIUS, THE CHORD OF tttllCH
BEARS N07'45'08'U 19.99 FEfi: THENCE CONTINUING ALONG IHE EDG€ OR Y,ALL OF THE 1ERRACE
IHE FOLLOIIING SEIEN COURSES;(r) Ntoso'16'w, 3.90 FEET
(2) N7929'44'8. 7.4O FEET
(3) Stoso'16'E, 6.15 FEET
(4) S79"9'4,r'W. 1.75 FEET
(5) S1O3O'16'E 7.30 FEET
(6) N7929'4i+'E, 2.20 FEET(7) SIO3O'I6'L 11.50 FEET TO IHE POINT OF BEGINNING.
THE A8O\E DESCRIBED PARCEL UES AT 82OO.J FEET IN ELEVATION AND CONTAINS O.OI7
ACRES MORE OR LESS.
tttllul'JltJllu,{l|Il[.[lHt|llllr+ltttllrrtrrrro-ii-qg R 216.00 D o.o0 N 0.00 Errlr c0 il
I
SGALE: 1'-l
INTERNATIONAL WNG PENTHOUSE
R ECEP I o N # -k_s5-93----
zlol\r rl
d tol
93.
cD.
2
,*ffi:F'"{ilre__' d: . ig!.sl'ElJt O.
Or Otl, s!
!(fl
gl -^^c7^ _...r<1 1ERRACEr' soulHt€'t '"" E
B-2-3
NORTHWEST TERRACE
ExHIBIT B-2 (contrd)
fi+.st
-- I\
I
i
1
i
^ri-^- frRRAvL i
*'^RTHVIL> t '- il\v' -
\
I
0.007 ocrca 1
t
i
FLOOR ELEV=8200.5'\
\
i
o.sP
P\x\
LOT A, BLOCK 5-C LOT C. BLOCK 5_C
i-.18
T.tt'
!
I.-..\
i-.-'-i
t
P(J|
pot
ola
1@-
s5619'00"E
0.98'
INTERNATIONAL WING PENTHOUSE
RECEPTTON # _hE?)93----
A PARCEL LOCATED IN LOT A AND LOT C, BLOCK 5-C, VAIL MLLAGE FIRST FILING, TOWN OF VAII-
EAGLE COUNTY. COLORADO, MORE PARTICULARLY OESCRIBED AS FOLLOIVS:
BEGINNTNG AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF lHE TERRACE. WHENCE A NORAYYESTERLY ANGLE POINT
OF THE INTERNATIONAL WNG PENTHOUSE BEARS S56'19'00"E. 0.98'; IHENCE ALONG IHE TERRACE WALL
OR EDGE 'IHE FOLLOWING ELE\€N COURSES:
s79'29'44"U 4.00 FEET
Nl030'16'W, 2.60 FEET
s79'29'44"W, r.05 FEET
sl0'30'16"E, 0.20 FEET
s79'29'44"W, 9.20 FEET
Nr030'16"W. 0.20 FEET
s7929'44"W. 0.90 FEET
sl0'30'16"8, 2.60 FEET
s7929'44'[ 4.15 FEET
) N10'30'r6"U 15.70 FEET
11) N79'29'44'E, 2.20 FEET
THENCE 15.42,ALONG THE ARC OF A CURIE OF 14.5I'RADIUS, IHE CHORD OF WHICH
BEARS N79'29'44'E, 14.7O FEETI THENCE CONTINUTNG ALONG lHE EDGE 0F THE TERRACE
N7929'44"E. 2.40 FEET; 1HENCE ALONG THE WALL S1O3O'16'E. 15.70 FEET TO IHE
POINT OF BEGINNING.
TI{E ABO\€ DESCRIBED PARCEL LIES AT 8200.3 FEET IN ELEVATION AND CONTAINS
.OO7 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
1
z
5
4
5
6
7
8
a
10
| illil ililr ililil lffi lil l]l illl|r il il]l ill llll
685t93 Oll29ll999 03r32P 174 Srnr Flrhr4l of 49 R 246.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 Ergh C0
I
I
I
SCALE: 1"=5'
R-2-4
1.
EXHIBIT C
Common General Shared Exoenses
Marketing, advertising and prbmotional costs and expenses incuned for hotel and other
Lodge Property operations (provided that related salaries and benefits shall be limited as
hereinafter provided).
Costs and expenses of telephone department operations within the Lodge after crediting
revenue derived from local and long-distance phone calls'
The following employee costs pertaining to Lodge management and operations:
(a) 30% of the salaries. taxes and benefits for the general manager and coltroller of
the Lodge;
(b) 50% of the salaries, taxes and benefits for sales representatives and other
advertising, marketing and promotional personnel;
(c) 96.7s%of the salaries, taxes and benefits for front office/reservations personnel;
(d) 70% of the salaries, taxes and benefits for administrative and general employees'
The cost of providing firewood for the lobby fireplace within the Original Lodge and/or
stored within the common area wood pile.
25o/o ofthecosts and expenses ofautonrotive operations'
Sums and charges paid under third party contracts for the provision of goods or services
in connection with ordinary non-capital Lodge operations.
All costs and expenses (including charges under applicable maintenance and service
contracts) of the cleaning, repair. maintenalce, replacement, addition, renovation and
improvenrent of Common Amenities. toget|er with all Conrmon Areas located witlrin the
Original Lodge (or grounds associated therewith). and any utility or operating systems
rvhich are reasonably' necessary for the ordinary use and enjoymenl of suclt Common
Areas. The foregoing shall speiifically include, without limitation. ice and snow removal
for the parking iot and parking areas within the Lodge Property and all exterior stairs,
sidewalks, walkways uni d.iu.*uys. and the maintenance of flowerbeds and landscaping'
All costs and expenses of prinring, stationery, postage and shipping, and ollice supplies
and equipment ('including, without limitation, all computer services, hardware, software
and software support items, and technological services and systems) which are related to
Lodge' Property operations.
Costs and €xpenses of security and security services for the Lodge Property'
Costs and expenses of on-site property management services, including any property
management employee allocated to fumishing services to the Penthouse Unit.
The costs of providing and maintaining uniforms for Lodge Property operations.
The costs of providing off-site storage facilities related to the operation, use and
enjoyment ofthe Lodge ProPertY.
2.
4.
5.
6.
1
8.
9.
10.
I l.
12.
13. Bad debts incurred in connection with operations of the Lodge Property and the Lodge
Apartment Condominiums (exciuding, however, bad debts which under the Lodge
Owner's accounting practices are treated as individual debits against the pertinent Rental
Pool participants).
LLtlultqt rll,lu,lllll. ![.Tt[!lul!T l|l'll
lll llll
llii-qg-h-zli.ss o-o.oo N 0'00 Eegla G0
l.
EXHIBITD
Intemational Wing Expenses
Costs and expenses of trash collection and removal for the lnternational Wing.
Costs and expenses ofproviding lighting, electrical power, gas service and fuels, heating'
ventilating. air conditioning, water, sewer, refrigerator, utility and other similar sen'ices
to the Intimational Wing or grounds associated therewit| (excluding any utilit)' services
separately sub-metered to the Penthouse Unit).
All costs and expenses associated with the cleaning. maintenance. repair. replacement'
addition and improvement of Common Facilities located within or constituting part of the
International Wing (or the grounds associated therewith), and utility or operating systems
Iocated within the Originallodge, if any, that are necessary to furnish any serl'ices to the
International Wing.
2.
,
5.
All insurance premiums for
Lodge Owner in connection
or ooeration.
insurance coverages maintained from time to time by the
with the Intemational Wing or its occupancy. use, enjoyment
6.
Costs and expenses of accounting and legal services incuned in relation to the
lnternational Wing o, the Ownership, trse, enjoyment, maintenance or operation thereof
(bur excluding independent professional audits done for the benefit ofthe Lodge Owner)'
Sundry miscellaneous operating expenses incuned by the Lodge Orvner in connectiorr
u.ith the Lodge Property (the same u'ill be specifically subject. as applicable. to the
allocation pr*irion, in the definitiol of "lnternational Wing Expenses" set tbrth in
subparagraph 4(aXvi) of the Agru'ement).
I llllll lllll lllllll lllll lll llllltl[lll ulllll tll tlll
b5ii5dAiTZsrrdsg os,azp 1?4 Sere Frth'F
ii-ii-r5'h-Ilel-.ss o-s'os N 0'00 Eeglr c0
EXHIBIT E
Permitted ExcePtions
l. Real and personal property taxes for the year ofconveyance and subsequent years u'hich
are not yet due and PaYable.
2. Any covenants or restrictions mutually made by the Penthouse Owner and the Lodge
Owner after the making of this Agreement.
3. Any matters arising by, through or under the Lodge Owner (for purposes of this
Agreement, ,nan..s=*iiing by, tfuough or under the Lodge Owner shall specifically
"*"lud.
any matters arising by, through or under the Penthouse Owner)'
4. Any utility easements granted by the Penthouse Owner which are specifically given the
written approval of the Lodge Owner before the same are granted'
5. The inclusion of the Penthouse Unit in any special taxing district (but only if the Lodge
Owner specifically gives its prior written consent to such inclusion, or pelnits or suffers
the inclusion of the Lodge Property in the sarne district)'
6. Any tenancies, licenses or sinilar occupancy agreements which are permitted under the
Rental Agreement.
7. Building and zoning laws and regulations of general applicabitity. Penthouse Owner
shall noi seek any rnodifications ofor variances from those laws and regulations without
the Lodge Owner's prior written consent.
8. Easement Agreement between Lodge Properties Inc. and The Lodge Apartment
Condonrinium Association, Inc., and recorded November 20, 1998 at Reception
No.677041.
g. Right of proprietor of a vein or lode to extract and remove his ore therefrom should the
same be found to penetrate or intersect the premises as reserved in United States Patent
recorded July 12, 1899, in Book 48 atPage 475-
10. Right of way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States as
reserved in United States Patent recorded July 12, 1899, in Book 48 atPage 475'
I l. Restrictive covenants, which do not contain a forfeiture or reverted clause, but omitting
restrictions, if any, based on race. color. religion or national origin, as contained in
instrument recordld August 10, 1962, in Book 174 atPage 179 and as amended in
instrument recorded August 30, 1971, in Book 221 atPage 492'
lZ. Those provisions, covenants and conditions, easements and restrictions, as contained in
instrument recorded May 5, 1970, in Book 217 at Page 531 and in instrument recorded
October 23, 1973 in Book 23 I at Page 612.
13. Reservations and restrictions as shown on the recorded plat of Vail Village, First Filing
and the Lodge Apartment Condominium and Parking and Entrance Easement as shown
on the recorded Condominium Map of the Lodge South Condominium'
14. Terms, conditions and provisions of release and termination of existing easement and
grant ofnew easement recorded March 3, 1979 in Book 284 atPage924'
15. Terms, conditions and provisions of Master Lease recorded October 23, 1973 in
Book 231 at Page 6l I and any and all subleases thereto.
16. Terms, agreements, provisions, conditions and obligations as contained in agreement
between iodge Properties Inc., a Colorado corporation and HKC Partnership, a Colorado '
limited partnership, recorded June 19, 1 986 in Book 443 at Page 706'
!!{$.1'dt'14'ilu#l!lt$H'Ftrt!!tr+ltt'}ilt''r
'I7. Resolution of Board of Managers of Lodge Tower Condominiums Associates. Inc.. and
Notice of Exercise of Option recorded February 16. 1988 in tsook 479 at Page 51.
. 18. Terms, conditions and provisions of grant of utility easement in Quit Claim Deed
recorded July 21', 1997 in Book 732 atPage 443.
19. The following items are disclosed by ALTA/ASCM Land Title survey prepared June 5,
1997 by Johnson, Kunkle & Associates, Inc., Job No.97182:.
The Lodge South Condominium improvements built on the Lodge Property.
Utility lines traversing Lodge property.
Retaining wall and rock walls built onto Gore Creek Drive.
20. The effect of complaint pursuant to Rules 57 and 106, C.R.C.P. hled in the District
Court, County of Eagle, State of Colorado, by Luanne Wells, plaintiff, vs. Lodge
Properties Inc.; Town of Vail, a municipal corporation; and Town of Vail Planning and
Environmental Commission, defendants, case no. 97CA636.
LH|!l;{1,!!l',rLl|l [ ! LU Hr ulf Lr T lilll ilil ill
f5 of 49 R 246.00 O O.OO l{ 0.OO Erstr G0
E-2
EXHIBIT F
EXCHANGE PARCEL
LOT 2, SECNON 8, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 80 WEST OF THE SIXTH
PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, AS
SHOWN ON DEPENDENT RESURVEY AND SURVEY DATED DECEMBER 30,
1988, L]NITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF LAND
MANAGEMENT AS RECORDED ruLY 30. 1997 IN BOOK 733 AT PAGE 317.
t$1$|!{l!!ru;il;!l!,?'$rur |lrilrf ilr ffi l
EXIIIBIT G
THE LOOGE AT VAIL
HOTEL
-^(o.
oPrs
"o\4"2
q9
a
ot't
{
sEricEed
ParceI A
Restric!ed
Parcel B
ANCL€ PI.
,2. LOr 2.
s€cno{ 8.J.2s' atM
SRASS CAP
SCALT: 1'= 3O'
24325
lond locoted in Lot 2, Section 8, Townsnip 5 South, Ronge B0 West ot the Sixth p.incipor
ot Voil, Eogle County, Colorooo, being more porticutorty described os lo ows:
point from which orgte ooint f2 of Lot 2 beors N 7O.Jl'5J, W. 26l.Og teet: thence
68.11 feet: thence N 79'J9,:S, E. J6.20 feei: thence N t0.?0,45, W. 1S.00 feel: thence
53.0O leet; thence S OO'13,03, :, 75.00 feet: thence S 79'39,15, W. 75.19 teel to the point
Yo''fr
Twc Dorceis of
Meridion, Town
eo.cel A
3eoinnin 9 ot o
N 10'20'45. W.
N 89'44',00. E.
af Eeginning.
eorcel I
lsoinning ot o point lrom whicn ongte ooint #2 of Lot 2 beors N 7031,5J, W. 261.0g ,eet: tnerlce
S l0'20'45' E. 78.17 feet: tnence N 89.41,01, E. 60.2g teet: thence N OO.1J,oJ, w. 90.07 feet: thence
S 79'39'15' W 75.19 ieet lo the point of geoinnino.
a -r- =/t!-. F E
o'.'J.,''|odrd.'d.'.'a @.ror aiar.b |'.rr t(itN i..Jtrt .At (.rot rt}r'o
r mlt lllll lllllll lllll lll lllll llllll lll lllll lll llll
s83i$ 0rzzsl1999 03:32P 1?4 srre Flrhr
4? of 49 R 246,00 D O.O0 ll 0.00 Eegle 00
l L]il lllll lllllll lllll lll lllll llllill ll llllll lll llll
eesigg olt29ll999 03:32P 174 Srrr Flrhf
4E of 49 R 246.00 D O,Og t{ 0.00 Erglc C0
| ilIil llllr llllll lllll lll lllll lllllll lll llllll lll lill
685193 OL/2911999 O3z32P 174 Serr Flrhrr
49 of 49 n 246.00 D O.OO N 0.00 Eeglc C0
a
Vnrl RESoRTS DEVELoPMENT CoMPANY
November 1,2000
Alison Ochs. Planner
Town of Vail
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Alison,
Enclosed with this letter you will find two mylar copies of the Mill Creek Road Subdivision plat,
approved by the Town of Vail's Pianning and Environmental Commission (PEC) on October 9,
2000. To my knowledge, all appropriate and required modifications to this plat were made by
Peak Land Consultants. As per the PEC and your direction, we have worked out an agreement
with Tom Moorehead and Greg Hall to provide for a bicycle and pedestrian easement through the
property using a separate documentation instrument, to be completed at a later date.
We have provided for the appropriate signatures for Vail Resorts, Inc., Peak Land Consultants,
Land Title, and the Eagle County Treasurer. If the appropriate Town of Vail signatures cannot be
obtained before the time necessary for Lorelei Donaldson to submit the plat for recording on
November 1, 2000, I would request that Land Title be allowed to record the plat in Eagle
County's records. As you know, our goal is to record this plat on or before November 7 ,2000.
Vail Resorts, Inc. has a prepaid account with the Recorder of Eagle County. The Eagle Counry
Recorders office has been contacted and is aware that this account will be used to pav for the
recorder fees for this plat.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance with this project. I look forward to working with
you on other prqects in the future.
Regards,
.4ffi"u,At*-\J l-/
Jonathan W. Greene
Development Director
cc: Lorelei Donaldson, Town of Vail
Jackie Vasquez. Land Title
JWG
November I , 2000
H:\Tmde Parcel\Memo\plat submitral.doc ;iT;];
\hil Resorts Development Company. 137 Benchmark Road . Post Office Box 959. Avon. Colorado 81620-0959 , (970) 845-2535.lax (9?0) 845-2555' rvww.snol!.t:rlm
a
Vail ' Breckenridge' Keystonee . Beaver Creek@. Bachelor Gulcho .Arror.rhead' Red Sky Ranch'''
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
MEETING RESULTS
Monday, October 9, 2000
PROJECT ORIENTATION-No Lunchl Community Development Dept. PUBLTC WELCOME 1:00 pm
MEMBERS PRESENT
Galen Aasland
Chas Bernhardt
Diane Golden
John Schofield
Brian Doyon
Tom Weber
MEMBERS ABSENT
Doug Cahill
lu// fu4 5,L
1:30 pm
nr,
Site Msits :
1. Mill Creek Road Parcel - South of 174 Gore Creek Drive
1.
NOTE: lf the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 p.m.
Public Hearino - Town Council Chambers 2:00 pm
A request for a minor subdivision of Lot 2, Section 8, Township 5 South, Range 80 West of lhe
Sixth Principal Meridian, informally known as the Lodge at Vail Exchange Parcel, to allow for the
creation of Lot 1 & Lot 2, Mill Creek Subdivision, generally located South of 174 Gore Creek
Drive.
Applicant: The Vail CorporationPlanner: Allison Ochs
MOTION: John Schofield SECOND: Brian Doyon VOTE:6-0
APPROVED WITH 1 CONDITION:
1. That the applicant provide a bicycle and pedestrian easement either prior to recording of the plat
or at the time of development on the property, based on negotiations with the Department of
Public Works.
A request for a final review for a minor subdivision to allow for the reconfiguration and replatiing
of two existing lots located at 3886/3896 Lupine Drive/Lots 15 & 16, Bighom 2no Addition.
Applicant: Wilson Family Trust, represented by Jay Tschimer, First Land Development, LLCPlanner: George Ruther
WORKSESSION. NO VOTE
2.
Driven Brent
3 A request for a minor subdivision of the property formerly known as the Tennis Court site and' Lionshead Skier Run-Out, now proposed to be called the Forest Road Parcel. located at 615' Forest Road/Unplatted.
Applicant: The Vail CorporationPlanner Brent Wilson
TABLED UNTIL OCTOBER 23, 2OOO
4. A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, to allow for the conslruction of phase I of
Donovan Park improvements, generally located southeast of the intersection of Matterhom Circle
and the Soulh Frontage Road.
Applicant: Town of Vail
. Planner: George Ruther
TABLED UNTIL OCTOBER 23, 2OOO
5. A request for a minor amendmenl to an approved development plan (SDD #35), to allow for a
reduction in the number of parking spaces (and the conversion of these spaces into common
s_to.r?Se) .?t the Austria Haus parking garage, located al242 East Meadoni Drive/A part of Tract
C, Vail Village 1"'Filing.
Applicant: Austria Haus Condo AssociationPlanner: George Ruther
TABLED UNTIL NOVEMBER 13, 2OOO
6. A request for a minor subdivision, to allow for the creation of a new parcel located at 1778 Vail
Valley Drive f3_alrrenrly unplatted tract of land within Seetion 9, Township 5 South, Range 80
West of the 6'n P.M. directly north of Lot 3, Sunburst Filing 3 within the Vdit Oof Coirrse. -
Applicant: Vail Junior Hockey Association, Vail Recreation District, Town of VailPlanner: Brent Wilson
TABLED UNTIL NOVEMBER 13, 2OOO
7. A requesi for a minor subdivision, to allow for the vacation of lot lines, located at Lots 1-4. Block
H, Vail das Schone Filing 2.
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Nina TimmPlanner: Allison Ochs
TABLED UNTIL NOVEMBER 13,2OOO
L Approval of September 25,2000 minutes
9. Information Update
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular
office hours in the project planner's office located at the Town of Vail Community Developmenl
Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479-2138 forinformation.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2356, Telephone
for the Hearing lmpahed, for information.
Community Development Department
o/
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmenlal Commission
Communily Developmenl Department
October 9, 2000
A request for a minor subdivision of Lot 2, Section 8, Township 5 South,
Range 80 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, informally known as the
Lodge at Vail Exchange Parcel, to allow for the creation of Lot 1 & Lot 2, Mill
Creek Subdivision, generally located at South of 174 Gore Creek Drive.
Applicant: The Vail CorporationPlanner: Allison Ochs
DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND OFTHE REQUEST
Lodge Properties acquired a purchase option for 385 acres of privately held land located
within the Eagles Nest Wilderness area. Lodge Properties exercised this option, then
exchanged the wilderness land for 2.068 acres of federal land located within the Town of
Vail. These 2.068 acres of land are known as the Lodge at Vail Exchange Parcel, hereafter
referred to as the "lodge parcel". First proposed in 1983, following a series of appeals, the
exchange was approved in the early 1990s.
The owners, Lodge Properties, have requested a minor subdivision lo allow for lhe
subdivision of the lodge parcel into two lots. The lodge parcel is currently zoned Natural
Area Preservation District. The purpose of the Natural Area Preservation Zone District is
as follows:
The Natural Area Preseruation District is designed to provide areas which, because
of their environmentally sensitive nature or natural beauty, shall be protected from
encroachment by any building or other improvement, other than those listed in
Section 12-8C-2 of this Article. The Natural Area Preservation District is intended to
ensure that designated lands remain in their natural state, including reclaimed areas,
by protecting such areas from development and preseruing open space. The Natural
Area Preseruation District includes lands having valuable wildlife habitat, exceptional
aesthetic or flood control value, wetlands, riparian areas and areas with significant
environmental constraints. Protecting sensitive natural areas is important for
maintaining water quality and aquatic habitat, preserving wildlife habitat, flood
control, protecting view nnidors, minimizing the risk from hazard areas, and
protecting the natural character of Vail which is so vital to the Town's tourist
economy. The intent shall not preclude improvement of the natural environment by
the removal of noxious weeds, deadfall where necessary to protect public safety or
si milar compatible i mprove m ents.
The subdivision is proposed to subdivide the lodge parcel into Lot 1 (.417 acres) and Lol 2
(1 .65'l acres), Mill Creek Subdivision. No zoning changes nor developmenl are currently
proposed.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends approval of the request to
subdivide Lot 2, Section 8, Township 5 South, Range 80 West of the Sixth Principal
Meridian, informally known as lhe Lodge at Vail Exchange Parcel, into Lots 1 and 2, Mill
Creek SUbdivision. Staff's recommendation for approval is based upon the review of the
criteria outlined in Section V of lhis memorandum. Specifically, staff's recommendation of
approval is subject to the following finding:
That the proposed minor subdivision plat complies with the review criteria and
requirements of Chapter 13 of the Town Code and development standards as
outlined in 12-8C (Natural Area Preservation Zone District) of the Town Code.
Should the Planning & Environmental Commission choose to approve the minor subdivision
request, staff recommends that the following condilions:
't . That the applicant provide a bicycle and pedestrian easemenl either prior to recording
of the plat or at the time of development on the property, based on negotiations with the
Department of Public Works.
III. ZONING ANALYSIS
The purpose of the Zoning Analysis is to provide a written comparison of the existing
development rights of the lodge parcel in comparison to the proposed development rights
of Lot 1 and Lot 2. Mill Creek Subdivision.
Minor Subdivision of Lodge Parcet anto Lots 1 and 2, Mill Creek Subdivision
Zoning:
Hazards:
Lot Size:
Permitted Uses:
Development nla
Standards:
EXISTING
Natural Area Preservalion District
No mapped hazards exist
2.068 acres /
90,082.08 sq. tt.
nature preserves
PROPOSED
Natural Area Preservation District
No mapped hazards exist
Lot 1 : .41 7 acres / 18,1 64.52 sq. ft.
Lot 2: 1 .651 acres i 71,917.56 sq. ft.
nature preserves
nla
V.MINOR SUBDIVISION CRITERIA
A basic premise of subdivision regulations is that the minimum standards for the creation
of a new lot(s) must be met. This subdivision will be reviewed under Title 13, Subdivision
Regulations, of the Town of Vail Code.
A. The first set of criteria to be considered by the Planning and Environmenlal
Commission for a Minor Subdivision application is:
Lot Area: There are no minimum lot size requirements in the Natural Area
Preservation Zone District.
@!glp: There is no minimum frontage requirement in the Natural Area
Preservation Zone District.
@!g: There are no minimum dimension requirements in the Natural Area
Preservation Zone District.
Staff Response.' Staff believes that lhe proposed subdivision meels the minimum
lot slandards as specilied by the Natural Area Preservation Zone District.
B. The second set of criteria to be considered with a Minor Subdivision application, as
outlined in the subdivision regulations, is:
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. Due consideration shall be
given to the recommendations made by public agencies, utility companies
and other agencies consulted under subsection l3-3-3C. The Planning and
Environmental Commission shall review the application and consider its
appropriateness 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
surrounding land uses and other applicable documents, effects on the
aesthetics of the Town.
The Specific Purpose ol the Subdivision Regulations is as follows:
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 extenl
of improvements required.
Staff Response; Staff has reviewed the minor subdivision for compliance with the
applicable evaluation criteria. Upon the completion of our review the staff finds that the
proposed subdivision complies with the subdivision criteria.
2. To provide for the subdivision of propefiy in the future without contlict with
development on adjacent land.
Staff Besponse.' Adjacent uses include ski {ase related facilities, residenlial, and
commercial uses. The property is adjacent lo Forest Service land. Adjacent zoning includes
CCl, P/S, and HDMF. The Vail Land Use Plan identifies this property as Ski Base, which
is described as: "Skitrails and facilities related to a ski base." ln addilion, Lot 2 is indicaled
to be partially governed by the Vail Village Master Plan, and is described as "mixed use."
As no development is currently proposed, staff does not believe that this subdivision will
conflict with development on adjacent land. In 1997, an application was made to the
Community Development Department regarding amendments to the Vail Village Master Plan
which would have involved placing the entire parcel within the purview of the Vail Village
Master Plan. However, no action was taken on this proposal, and the application was
subsequently withdrawn.
ln addition, the Vail Transportation Master plan identifies this area (east end of Lot 2) as a
potential centralized loading and delivery site. Staff does not believe that this proposed
subdivision will conflict with the Vail Transportation Masler Plan, as no development is
currently proposed.
3. To protect and conserve the value of land throughout the Municipality and the
value of buildings and improvements on the land.
Staft Response; Stalf does not believe that the proposed subdivision will have any negative
impacls on lhe value of land in the Town of Vail. No changes are currently proposed on the
site. Current uses of the lots include a dirt and gravel forest service access road, an
asphalt-paved lot, and a dirt and gravel parking area.
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, consislent with Town development obieclives.
Staff Response.'As previously discussed, staff has completed an analysis of the minor
suMivision proposal and finds that the application complies with the Town's ordinances. The
current zoning designation insures that a harmonious, convenient and workable relationship
among existing and potential land uses will be achieved. Should the owner propose
development inconsistenl with lhe Natural Area Preservation Zone Dislrict, a re-zoning
would be required. Design Workshop has reviewed the environmental impacts of the
proposed subdivision, which is attached for reference. The requirement for an
environmenlal impact report has been waived. As part of any proposed rezoning and
development for these lots, a full Environmental lmpact Report will be a required submittal
item. In addition, any development proposal would be reviewed in consideration of all Town
ordinances, including, but not limited to, the Vail Village Master Plan, Vail Land Use Plan,
Vail Transportation Master Plan, Comprehensive Open Lands Plan, and the Zoning
Regulations.
The Town of Vail Comprehensive Open Lands Plan identifies this site as a portion of "Parcel
27". As part ol the Exchange Agreement, adopted by Resolulion No. 3, Series of 1 997, the
Town of Vail acquired all but the lodge parcel portion of Parcel 27. In 1998, the northwest
portion was then sold to adjacent property owners and resubdivided (Rockledge
SuMivision). The southern portion was then deannexed in 1999. The lodge parcel, which
is the northern portion of Parcel 27 remained in the Town of Vail. The acquisilion and
subsequent annexalions and resubdivisions successfully fulfilled the Action Plan of Parcel
27 of the Town of Vail Comprehensive Open Lands Plan.
5. To guide public and private policy and action in order to provide adequate and
efficient transportation, water, sewage, schools, parks, playgrounds, recreation,
and other public requirements and lacilities and generally to provide that public
facilities will have sufficient capacity to serve the proposed subdivision.
Statf Response.'As no development is proposed in conjunction with this subdivision, stafl
does not believe that the subdivision will have any effect on the provision of public services.
The property is currently served by sanitary sewer, water, electric, and gas.
6. To provide lor accurate legal descriptions of newly subdivided land and to
establish reasonable and desirable construction design standards and
procedures.
Staft Response.'The proposed minor subdivision plat has been prepared in accordance
with the standards prescribed in the Town of Vail SuMivision Regulations. Staff finds that
the applicant has complied with the above-described criteria.
7. To prevent the pollution of air, streams and ponds, to assure adequacy of
drainage fiacilities, to sateguard the water table and to encourage the wise use and
management of natural resources throughout the Town in order to presente the
integrity, stability and beauty of the community and the value of the land.
Statf Response; Staff believes the minor subdivision request complies with the above-
described criteria.
Dcsigrr \lirrkshr4r^ | rx:
[,andscalx. Archirr(.1 urr
Lanrl l)la nning
I rltarr l)r:,rigrr
'Iirttrisrrr l)lrrrrrring
August 31, 2000
Jonathan W. Greene
Assistant Developmr:nt Manager
Vail Resorts Development Co.
PO Box 959
Avon. CO 81620-0959
Re: Potential environmental impacts of proposed minor subdivision plan for the Mill Creek
Road Parcel
Dear Jonathan:
This letter is in regard to the proposed minor subdivision of the Mill Creek Road parccl,
located due south of the existing Lodge at Vail parcel in Vail, Colorado.
Our analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the proposcd minor
subdivisron submittal is as follows:
General assessment
Due to the fact that this minor subdivision submittal does not consist of any specific
development application, and does not seek any specific zoning change or development
approval, there are no anticipated environmental impacts resulting lrom the proposed
submittal.
In addition, given that this minor subdivision submittal does not consist of any specific
development application, and does not seek any specific zoning change or development
approvals, there are no anticipated additional burdens on any public infrastructure, such as,
but not limited to, sanitary sewer, water, storm drainage, electricity, roadways, etc.
Specific assessment
Given the above generalized assessment, the following is a detailed breakdown of potential
environmental impact issues that could result from any given project, and the anticipated
impacts that could result from this minor subdivision proposal.
1. 100 year Floodplain. No anticipated impacts. No part of this site falls within a 100
year floodplain or floodway.
2. Wetland impacts. No anticipated impacts. The proposed submittal does not seek any
development of any kind within wetland areas.
DESIGNWORKSHOP
3.
4.
5.
Avalanche hazard. No anticipated impacts. The proposed submittal does not seek any
deve'lopment of any kind within avalanche hazard areas.
Rockfall hzzard. No anticipated impacts. The curent Town of Vail hazard mapping
indicates a potential medium severity rocklall zone above the property in question.
l{owever, the proposed submittal does not include any development that would creatc,
or increase. any rockfall hazard to any adjacent property.
Erosion. No anticipated impacts. While this property does contain some existing
slopes in exccss of 30 and 40 percent. this submittal does not lnclude any proposed
development that would result in any unstable or erodable slopes.
6. Air pollution. No anticipated impacts. 'fhe proposed submittal does not include any
developrnent that would create air pollution of any kind.
Noise pollution. No anticipated impacts. The proposed submittal does not include any
development that would create noise pollution of any kind.
Light pollution. No anticrpated impacts. The proposed submittal does not include any
dcvelopment that would create light pollution of any kind.
Parking impacts. No anticipated impacts. The proposed submittal does not include
any development that would create any parking, or add to any existing parking.
Visual impacts. No anticipated impacts. The proposed submittal does not include any
proposed above or below grade development, and therefore will have no visual impacts
on surrounding properties.
11. Traffic impacts. No anticipated impacts. The proposed subnittal does not include
any development that would create any additional traffic volume on adjacent
roadways.
12. Site access. No anticipated impacts. The proposed submittal does not include any
development that would increase the existing number of site access points onto the
property.
Drainage impacts. No anticipated impacts. The proposed submittal does not include
any development that would increase surface drainage off of the property.
Infrastructure impacts. No anticipated impacts. The proposed submittal does not
include any development that would increase the burden on any public infrastructure,
such as, but not limited to, sanitary sewer, water, storm drainage, eiectricity, roadways,
etc. Furthermore, the property in question is currently served by existing sanitary
sewer, water, electrical, and gas infrastructure.
7.
8.
9.
10.
13.
14.
o
l)r.sigrr \\irr[.h,4r, I rrr'
Gonclusion
Given the above findings, there are no anticipated environmental impacts of any kind
associated with the potential approval of the proposed minor subdivision plan.
When and if, at any point in the future, this property is considered for an actual
development submittal, these environmental factors will need to be re-evaluated and
mitigated in light of that proposed development.
Please do not hesitate to contact us ifyou have any questions regarding the above findings.
Sincerely, IglaA^*\/'l*
K. Ethan Moore
Associate
I
iE
ilti
ii
ri
i:
il
iii:
i:
Ed
itl
;:l
I
I
sl
t:
gl
EIit
,.,e
gE
:r li=!.
i; !:: *iii ii!;:
-.:i ;i'!iil a:Eii_'
itii!ii;:; i?l;c
':. i?tZa i!i; ii!ti i
iiiili.i, iil!*rl;r" I
ii;::,:!; i ! g
:i:iliii:irl
iiii!iiiil!
i!
i.i
!
;i i
i; ti
:t r I
!? i.
l! i:
:J r itt:l ili:i i:s i:l r:
: i;: i;i ii i:i: to itt
1r.la
,t,'
!, l3Ii "
t rg i
: ig l:
3lr l:
i il; iz
- , i!
^ { l:er: l- | i I3 si ' r I
b ;r ll r
= ! ic!
e t: It
tti;
I.
TcrEt'fl-.-' ;t !r!? tEr.F 1*!"iE'i:-ro Bl
ts
!
;
!:
l:l i
t !l i
I i,, i;
i
j
i
ib
!a
i5
3iii
:r
ti
t
i i[
i ir. I
i la--
5 i!;
"t+li,i i;;: l
. t:! :-!? !i.E :i
! ::;i i;' llr I rs-
: i.i : i:E ii 3., r.i l!,i l!
ii
il lpj
Fii t!
tir :i; ii 5"E
4 *! rtla
a -i
lil tr
i It i :
?;i, i.i9 -'; l!-I;ii! [;
i.
r ! ; E::il ! r ;r !;l.t:i
ii:i-'; il :ii:!i:,j:irti: ;i i*:i::;
!:iili:i:iii:iiii
;;qiilir ii ::ililsi:!; l!!;9:.r"ia-F.r'9ii:iiri ili!;Eiii:;
iiii:i;iiiiiii'i;ii
l!ii!;ii$iiits;iii
;i:i:!ti iiiiilii;'d
f-
atrJ
F
('x13s.A
F .',rz i^z?o H36n 6 AslF bfiia a>E
^ z.r--"IE Ff 3JD F69:"t.dEd
ES 5i6*H gEE
U E !.j p
'i IFU
-,1 ;\F a
=
TEI
ZAj-i
=gx
i- )'
4)
F]
,a
iJ!rUl!
h:s:BiI
;i::t!:!
:!Er
::r!
!:iI
!Ii3llil
i;:l!*i
;iA;
l: i: ,i i6i:
fi,iiriiii;i
liiiii;iiiii
I
Ii
!t
:ti
7si
Itt-
ta
!t
!t
4t.Elr
*i
;Tt!
!i
F#l
Ltrc
-..--t.-r*ild.'-.--..-
l.!t
a
t
tlt
./ t' I
lllt3t!6;,i i -" i.i ; Ittit;i /,
J \I/ l', ti .P{i -r'/,t .t' t
fli l,i
Furcnn g BrNsoN rrp
2j00 Rrpusrrc Pt-*ztr, 3zo SBwr,rrErNrH STREET
Derwrn, Coroneoo gozo2-40o4
TEEPHONE 303-592-9000
FTACSIMM 303-82O'0600
CnAxrEs D. CALVN
ccalvin@facgrc.com
303iE204577
October 3, 2000
Community Development Department
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road West
Vail. CO 81657
BY OVERNIGIIT DELIVERY
Re:Lodse at Vail Exchanee Parcel
Ladies and Gentlemen:
We represent Joe and Ann Smead and Jared and Irene Drescher. who own
condominium units l, 2 and 3 at One Vail Place and rvho received notice of the hearing
before the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail on October 9,2000.
in connection with the propeny referred to above. One or more of these owners expects to
attend and speak at the hearing in person. Whether or not that is possible, the Dreschers and
the Smeads want to be sure their concems and objections are noted and considered.
As we understand Vail Resorts' ptans. they include not only the subdivision of the
Exchange Parcel in preparation for development of a condominium./timeshare project, but
also the construction of an underground parking facility and extensive grade changes in the
area immediately south of The Lodge at Vail and the Lodge South Condominium. or Lodge
Tower. Both aspects of Vail Resorts' pian will have significant adverse impacts on One Vail
Place.
The One Vail Place unit owners presently enjoy an unobstructed view of an aspen-
forested hillside to the south-southwest. The proposed new project would replace this with a
vertical urban streetscape. More sigrrificantly. the proposed development would eliminate
the public access road that provides the One Vail Place owners with the exclrcive means of
vehicular access to their homes.
To replace the existing access, Vail Resorts has suggested measures such as an
underground n-rnnel leading hundreds of feet to the One Vail Place parking ilreq or a
serpentine route through the proposed new underground parking structure. The developer
has promised to try to devise other alternatives. but unless and until Vail Resorts has
demonstrated an acceptable alternative method of providing secure, reliable and convenient
access to One Vail Place, the Smeads and the Dreschers necessarily regard the proposed
project as incompatible with their property rights and their interests in enjoying the use of
Denuer Mitneaoolis D* Moines Lotdott Frothiurt
. egmmunity Development Department' October 3, 2000
Page2
their homes. They therefore oppose any municipal approvals that would permit this project
to go forward in its present form.
Moreover, given the extensive scope of this project and the number of people affected
by it, we do not believe the public interest is served by considering small portions of the
development in isolation from the rest. Rather, action on all approvals should be deferred
until the developer has provided the Commission with a complete description of its proposed
actions and their consequences.
Thank you for your consideration.
CDC:calcd
cc: Joe and Arur Smead /
Jared and lrene Drescher
Porter Wharton III
DNVRI:60142646.02
10/3/00 l:0t PM
Very truly yours,
Charles D. Calvin
Page I of I
Allison,
thanks for the info...essentially the site can be described in the following manner:
l) A heed hillside, (mostly pine trees that are under attack by pine beetles) to the south, with some
lowJying brush and bedrock outcroppings;
2) The hillside is bordered to the North by a dirt and gravel forest service access road; this road
traverses diagonally from the Northwest side to the Southeast side of the lot; the road is also lined with
pine trees; the road is typically used as a parking area by Vail Village employees; in addition, the
residents of One Vail Place access their underground garage via this road.
3) To the north still further is an asphalt paved lot adjacent to southem side of the Lodge at Vail and
Lodge Tower buildings; this portion of the site is also used for back of house Lodge functions, staging
delivery vehicles, and parking;
4) The eastem portion ofthe site is a dirt and gravel parking area that abuts the ski yard (Federal
Leasehold).
JG
Jonathan W. Greene
Assi stant Development Manager
Vail Resorts Development Co.
PO Box 959
Avon, CO 81620-0959
(970) 84s-2629
file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\GW l 00002.HTM l0/05/2000
'uii: I
l: t:,' ii
t
bd
eil
:::tr i
!l!
;aF
;,i;:
: r>
:8!
a iB
i ii
"- ra :
l{ i
i in ii^. I
!,:
I r3 i .
i i? : iI i:n*. n
t : il I i ?i 3 r,f I r:,i s i." i i:
-q F i t:ti d ir ri
ij
ti
gl
5 ! ;t
v, ii i l;
! i r i J;
* !' jlis
E rl
i i;i ir | .
r :i i i
?:!, i,;r Fii li-
i: i: ,i i6il
;! ;! $; i;{i
iirii;;iiiir
iiiifi;i#iih
!
t
It
tt!-
:i
:;
:!
lr
T6
iE
F
*o
\3EA
b-u;36
'aABrAFlF
= trI <az'.Z,J-:F(si
F(J;."'Ed
7X,Asl-)-E a. )r
EE2a g,j;f
.{ !lx
i^ t- axx!h-tZx
s2
p
tri
5paxtP-q
EHrr tq&U
Fl
!
': t1:9 l-,;' ic
r! ii
t,: r.:i- l,l
7 - .'
ir .r
i'i :
i3 i ti
,ii i:!
l9n t!z
!, li-i,t-: .;:;i
lri :;iii
jl ;!:lIl. : j5?r:
i; lti!lF
ti !ii:i?:t :i!!rr; illt'
.:i.::r.:'
iri egli3
i'ri;;; i ixfi,i:E"irr
i; !3'!u:
; ii;:::3; $; ."':tL.it::;;i:i;;: .:i
I irn.l;! !. iu-
F ! 5;:: t; -!! :jE
i iii;:l!il i:
..?
{i
5at
tii
ii.i jii ijkiii
ii;;lri *iiiiiiri
:: i i!;t il il;i;iii;i* iit! il lli:!l::
iiiili* ii,fii;iili
i i,i' !iili ;!!if!;ii:t
iii i:iii i;iiiiiliii
:iii!;i' *:*:$liri
;;;;litl ifiifiiiili
Fa
F
II
t
!t
t
I
.t.r!t
8r
a
Er5filf
Ul tl9o;!:
t-41
,62.
!Ph!n:t!
li!t
i;:i
lfur
Friir:tltltj
t:Fi
t!,t
erEl
tl, '-,ffi
-."-ldrfk
il,
Hi
\
Aa
$3
a'-
{
F
.l
li
,I
f\
i
!
l
)tr-t"t t 'i-r fll
"ii .? \/li i"--t--\ L I
1"..ii\1 tr.
i r'ii ...'- !'t,t/t" !
| |
".!t'!ii 9r.t tti iit'
'a
o
o
-o
Co
a
mm unity Development Plan Routing Form
Approved Denied (cite detailcd reasons) Approved with conditions
Routed To:Tom Kassmel or Leonard Sandoval. Public Works
Retum To:Allison Ochs
Date Routed:9/r8/00
Return By:ASAP
Project Name:
Project Address:
Project Legal:
Proj ect Description:
Mill Creek Rcl Parcel
Minor Subdir ision of Mill Creek Rd. Parcel (The Exchange Parcel)
' '' :;,i',..
l) -?rv,.lin,, t, ',.to.-c 1.,I I.--i | ;,.,4ha'aI .t d-oce/',.) tit.,ti
V '.,i tt.-tLt (
I
', trt,4
Date received:
F:\EVERYONE\DRIP\ROUTING\98ROUTNG\PIlBLlCwo\l MAsrF.R FR lv
'I
Land Title Euaranlee Company
-9US -ljoM[R 0lsrBlsurloil
Iht : 08-f62(n0
llop.rtt Aibtss;
rrHcnNumbcr: vC25E510.1
((k (oo.t /ot('<JFORESTSBRVICBIRADBPARCEL /li :,t (r
"1, il \
: 'l
?t^f,, unrD caNguurAl\tnl
Ar|!: EEIT EOOII
moG
'7!}a7c&L4Frll: 9?D,t?Gl6l6
llcrr Yn Crrrisr:r
>
I
I
I'rrrsNns d[r*r cyg.I gr0n9zt0l8 rv.{ Lgiil aoaz/rf/Bo
Lrnd Title Gualantao Gompany
Ylllil c0rrTAcTS
I
DJe 0&162m
PropatyAd&rsr:
FOREI'T SSRYICB IRADB PARCBL
OrffiNnrbs: VC258510.1
nryermorrcq:
I.()DGB PROPtsRTIES INC., A EOII)RADO CORPORATION
I
Sd!r/Orr:
IJDGE PROPERTIES INC., A COLORADO CORPORATION
>:
If yOu berC rry bqdd6 Or rqlntt fr[Uet' n i-trrce, plezae corded om o[ the uumDerS bdow:
FrClOg Arett tt
1(BS. FROiTTAGE nD. W- f203
f-o uo(357
VAII. CO Er65'
Phor:Fu 911416,4732
BMr* r$fl@lrtc.c(|rn
FmTi{eArsidrrc
VaiI Titlc Dcpt
| 10ES. FRONTACERD.V.fiICBi P.O. BOX357
i VAIL, co 81657r Phore:$lo4lGHl1l
i Fu: 9lO4764534
TSIIIIATE Of TITIE FEES
AlbocffiPolict lolT-YL s0.00
>
IOIAL $0-00
TEANK YOU1 FON YOI'R ORDBT
I
I
I
Icoftr 'InsN0J (Nv'I wsd Olgs0lt0rs wd L9'.9I 0002/10/80
cticego fclc Itrsurec ComPmY
ALTA COMMITMENT
Sciedulc A
I
IPlopatyAd&rs:
iFOR,ESTSERVICETIADEPAREEL I
i
Il. Xffcdvellate Auguil 26, 1997 u 5:00 P.M.
Orrr Order No- VC25t510.1
Cus. Rd.:
2. ?o[st to bG Iwrd' and hopoed hsrrcd:
'ALTA'ormcr'rhicylUlT-rZ >
Plqoeed Insue&
t0-00
IIDGE PN.OPERTIES INC-. A COLORADO COR}ORANON
I
3. Thc !rld! or ldrrrr* ln thc lrril aLscdbcd or refqrtd to in rhis Comilitmett and covrnd hcrtin is:
A Fec Sinple ->
4. ffh b &s ettllc or iderct corcrd lstin is at the ficdive &tc hrreof vtsted in:
I
I.ODGE PROPERTIES INC., A COLONADO CORPORAIION
5. The hnd refcrrcd to ia lbb Conmitaat ir dcsqibed ar follorr:
I
LOT 2, SBCIION S, TOWN${IP 5 SOUIII, RANGE 80 WPST OF TIIE SD(III PRINCIPAL
MBRIDIAN, COUNTY OF EAGII, STATE OF COLORADO. AS SHOWN ON DEPENDENT RESI.'RVEY
AND SURV T DATED DECBMBER 30, I98E, I'MTED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
8T'REAU OF I.AI{D MANAGEMBNT AS RBCORDED JULY 30, 1997 IN BOOK 733 AT PAGE 317.
i
i
I'rllsNoJ trNrI wadbnl gTs89Z'01,8 XVJ Lg:Vr ;OO7./10/s0
IALTA CIOMMITMENT
l
schedhhB-Sccrioal
I
nJ"f..--r"l OurOrdcrNo. vC25E510.1
I
Ih fo[orlry en thr nqilrcm to br cnqrli:d rlth:>i
IEm (a) Pttncrt O or fur Oc rcount of tbc gruiors or nonqrgors of rhe fuIl mnsirlention for the estatc or
i!ilcrE t !o bc insued-
|
IIh (b) Propcr instnmcn(D canting thc csret oi inrcrcst to bc ilsrrcd nrst be exenrrcd and dnly fited for rcsord
bwic
rrcrrr (c) Papcnt of rll trxes. c.trrge! 0rr o.stsn"dnrc kTid d msessed ageinst tbe srbject prcnises shich arc &e
rnrlplyrblc. i
I
IEr (d) Additional rcqutuEmlotq if uy fiC+sed1 betoe:
I
I
TEIS COMMITMENT IS FOR.INIORMATIONIONLY. AND NO POUCY WILL BE ISSTJED
PURSUAITTT HERBTO.
I
I
I
>
I.INSNNS dNY'I YY5IJ Drgeol D0l8 rvll Lsitr oooz/lo/80
>
ALTA COMMITMENT
B - Scrlion 2
OurfrtrNo. vC"585l0.l@qq*iom)
ffre poIcf or policies b be fusu.d rilt contrio rrceptions to lh foltoring urrlcss the sane are dlspcert
of !o fh srtrEdlm of lhe Conpaly: i
{
l. Rigtr u "l.irnr of prties in mion not stcwin Uy rhe public rcords.
2- F^ecmenrf or rlrrms cf casocoB, not shorr by itbE pblic records.
7, Dircgncics, coollico il borndrry r"cs. $ortaic ia atu' crsoar.hlnc!$. rnd anft ftcts thici a correct swey rd
iDspccti.s of tlc prcuisa wuld rlisclosc rd vt$fi arc mt $orn by ttc Fblic r6ords-
I4. fuy tifl, or dg!3 to t lico, fur scrviccc, lrbor or pecrirl tbcrcroforc 0r hc&aicr fumisheq inposed by law ad
trtftrsirtt ftcpublic ccords
i
5. Deftcts, licns connbnrcs. rdvcrsc claims or oahcr firttcrs, if ary. crcrred, firsr apfraring in rhe public records or
rrarhirg nlhE{rtrd to tlc cftcfitl alab bcrenf tut prim b the datr thr proposed insurul acquircs of rccord br
rrtrE fu csioe ar i[lErEst or Eodgqge tt l!t: cq|rcrcd by this Conrnitmcn.
6. Ttcs or 4rcirl ascssdcoa trhic!, rc not $owJ as cri*ing liEtrs by thc pnblic rccorG.
I
7. r ;-ts foc uryrid wrtar Nld $srr Clergca. if tuy. ,
it. In nllitio4 thr owcr's gilicy will be subjccr o ihc rnongage, if any, ruted il Section 1 of Schalulc B ktof.
:
9. RIGIIT OF W'AY FOR DITCIIES OR CAITAI.S |CONSTRUCTED BY TIIE AUTIIORITY OF TTIE
I'NIIBD STAItsII ^&S RIIStsRVE.D IN UNTIE,DISTATES PAIX,NT RECORDED JI]IITE 26, I9I9,
IN BOOK 506 AT PAGE 596- I
I
IIO. ALL OIL AND GAS IN TIIE IAND SO PATEI{ItsD. AND TO IT. OR PERSONS AUTHORIZED
BY IT, Ttt8 R.IGTTT TO PROSPEICT FO& MIN,E, AITD REMOVE SUCH DEPOSTTS FROM TI{B
SAI{E T'NDBRAPruCTBLB I.AW, INCLUD+{G TTIB AT OF FEERUARY ZE, I9Z5 (16
u-s.c. 4E6) A.S RBSERVED IN LINITID STATES PATENT RECORDED JL,NE 26, l9E9 IN
8@|(506 AT PAGf.59s-
II. A PER}ETUAL ENBMENT FON. PT,BUC ACCESS ON TI{E HOSTING MILL CREEK ROAD
(FOREST DBVEIJOPME!{T ROAD NO. 710) AS RESERYED BY T}IE IJNITED STATES IN
PATBNT RECOR.DED JLNE 25, l9t9 IN+OOF s08 AT PAGE 595.
NOTE: SAD EASEMENT PN.OVTDES TITAT IIODGE PR,OPERTIES INC-, TT SUCCESSORS AND
AS$GNS, SHAII IIAYE THB RIGHT TO RE .I.OCATE SAID ACCESS ENEMENT AT TTS SOLE
EI(FBNSB, PROVIDED THAT SUCH RSLOCAT1ON DOF^S NOT UNRE,C.IONABLY TNTERFERE
UTIIII ACCESS TO THE NATIONAL FORESTSYSTEM BY TIIE 1INTTED STATES OR TI{E
PI]BLIC, i
I
I'rnsNnl alt$v1 ltwr.I QTOOO/,tOl,R vv,t lq:laf ^.'^? tr(\./a^oo lA
ALTA COMMITMENT
Schcdrlc Bl- Scction2
OrOrderNo. VC25E5I0.l
I
Tb potcf or politia to bc id xil arnein rc?tlors to the fonosirrg unless lhc srnc arc dispood
ottottrffrfuof tbCompury: i
12. APBRPTTUAL EASEMENT FOR, P{'BLIC VETIICLE AND FOOT ACCESS ON TTIE ESIITING
R.OAD FROM FOREST DEVEIOPMENT ROAD NO. 7IO TO SKI AREA FACILMES AT ONE
VAIL PIACE AS RESERVED IN TJNITED STATES PATEIII RECORDED JUNE 26. 1989 IN
B(x)x's08AT PAGB595.>
NOIB: SAID IIAIFMBNT PROVIDES TI{AT LODGE PROPERTIES INC., m SUccESSoRS A}ID
ASSIG:NS, SHALL HAVE Tt{E RIGIII TO REIJOCATB SAID ACCESS E/LSEMENT AT ITS SOLE
EXPENSE, PIOVIDED SUCIIREIICANON DOES NOT T'NRAASONABLY INTERFERE WITH
ACCBSS TO TIIB .SKT ANBA FACILXTIES AT ONE VAIL PIACE BY THE UNITED STATES
ORTIIB PTJBLIC
!
13. Tffi FOIJI)WINO TTEMS AS DTSCLOSED S]'i ALTAJACSM I^AND TNLE SIIRVEY PREPARED
Jt NB 5. 19? BY tOltNSON, f,UNX3L & ASSpflATES, rNC., JOB NO- 9l8Jl:
i
POWENLINE 1SAYERIIING SI'B'ECT PROPERTY
>
'>l
TnsNoc {NrI xvildL0a sTs8ozt0ls rYd L9t?l 0002/Iv/ao
I
IGUARANTEELAND TITLE C OMPANY
>
I'$CII)S'I]RE STAIf,MENT
Roqdred iby c.lus, lG11-12
i
A) Ib subjcct real ltmpcrtt ort bc lmarid in a spccid tiring districl
B) A Ccrtifrc of Tucs Duc lisune crcd uilng;urisdictioo tuy bc obuirrl ftorn irr Countv
Ttrrsrar's rulorird*pot-
i
O Tle ilfurtion ngrrding ryccial disdics aod thc boudadcs of such disaics mav
tc obaild ft@ tlc Boerd of Coruty Conunissionen, fte CouDry Clerk and Rrcorder' or
fu Cotuty Asrcssor.
l
Eftcrivc Sacolcr l, lg r, CR'S 3tr1(},t06 cquires rhrr all ilocume s received br recordilg 6; filing rn fte
ck* ild rEcfldEr'l offce shnlt conrin r pp mrgin of at lcas! orE irh end a lcft, dsft ed bottom margitr of
u &ue one half of aa iryt, Tlc clcrl alrl rccordcr may $fusr b Ecord or lilc rny tlocumcnr thet dcs tlot
cmforn, crcet tril, tbc nquinmcu for lbe top nargil *t"n Dt 4pply lo documcs 'r.ing fums on cthich
Vace is porirled fc reccdiry or filfug ititornatiot ar 6c rcD nargh of thc docttmcnt-
Nolc! Colondo Divisiotr of lD3[rrrc Rcglilalio$ 3-5-f , Patagrdpb C of Articte VII rcquires thet 'fvgry
ttllc colitt $all bc rcryosiblc fur attaattcrs vtich appeer of lccord pnor t9 tbe rime of recordilg
rhcrerer the dile cditjr crrrrftrs rhe clocihg and is responsiblc for rccordiag or filiog of legal
docurreab rtsultirg from ttc nusrrioa *hicn was closcd'. Provided tbat land Tltle Gnuradee
Cqnry codrcts fu cJ6iqg of ltG insllrd tratrsmion ad is rcslnnsible for recording ttre
lca|l &ootdb ftrm ttc ke'rsa"rioq crccption rnrnt'er 5 wilt aot agpcar on thc O*lcr's Tidc
hlict d fr. Iadeo Polict srncn is$ucd
NoE: Afrmative mebaic'r lier goraila for 6c Osacr gley bc availabHrypically by dclction
of Brcegtiotr tro. 4 of &bcdrlc B. Scction A of lhc Commiuncnt ftom thF Oqmcr's Policy to bc
icoc$ rpm coopli&e *ith tDc ftllrlwitrt conditiors:
A- Tb !d dCg:bdt iA Sc$cdnlc A of rhis grrnmirrnerrr nnst be e Single fAmily residce whicl
irrtnds e coutninium Or OrtahmSC Unit-
B- No labor orr r'.qr. ialt tavc tccq frrnisbbrt by mcc,haoics or nrmirl-ocn for pruposcs of
c@sucd@m 6chaddcsctibql inseh!tubA oIftii Cmnimem mtbulhe pasr 6 Eodbs-
C. Ib Cmfury mut rccaive en q4nopriate afrdavit ideodfting the Conpary rgainst un'6led
mechaaic's rnd motcdal-ora's lios,
D. The CoogrtrI mu* nccivc pay'ncm o46e apFoFrtalE FrEniun-
B. If thsE hrs bc.:n c@:Eudion. iryronerncns or najor r@irs udcrnkcn on dc propaty m
be puala$ed within sir nOnbA Eior toithr Datl of tb! frrmmitmenr, $c lEtluiroc[ts to obt'in
crlvcnge frr mrccrrded lienr will irctuilc: disclorurc of ccnain cotsmctioo infonordotg
f,rnqid ia1foa$o[ |r !r O! Flkr, 6a builds rnd c Oe cffiactot; paymcnt of tbc
,ppmpdatc pftoilD fly creored rn l"'nnity Agf€eoclfs satidactory lo the coEPery, etrA
rey rddirion'l req[L','il'ltrt u may bc aeccssary after al cxaminstion of thc aforcsaid
i"fr-lrtiontylbcoryuy. - 1>
i
No covengs will bc givcn rr"C., r any circu$$eoccs for lebor or maarial for which ttc irrlltcd
hrs contn*d fc 6 rgEsl to pay-
|
No6ing hcrEitrcontai&dwill E dccmcd n obfurts tbc company to prwiilc auy of lhr
cotlt8g?s rc&(tcd lo Ic(Ei[ llrl6E tbr ebove conditions are fully satisfied.
I
noftr 'IllsNo3 qNf'I xv'da gT0s0l?0/.s wd Lg:vl 0002/10/80
questiO Calt the Ptanning Sraff at 47g-2I38
Employee Housing Unit Oype: _)
Major or tr Minor Exterior Alteration
(Vail Village)
Major or Minor Exterior Alteration (Lionshead)
Variance
Zoning Code Amendment
Amendment to an Approved Development Plan
APPLICATION FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
COMMISSION APPROVAL
GENEML INFORMATION
This application is for any project requiring approval by the Planning and Environmental Commission. For specific
information, see the submittal requirements for the particular approval that is requested. The application can not
be accepted until all required information is submitted. The poect may also need to be reviewed by the Town
Council and/or the Design Review Board.
A, TYPE OF APPLICATION:
Tr}I{N
tr Bed and BreaKastO ConditionaLpse PermitD Major or EtMinor Subdivisiontr Rezoningtl Sign Variancetr Special Development Districtn Major or tr Minor Amendment to SDD
D
u
tr
n
tr
tr
B.DESCRIp1ONOFTHEREOTJEST: ltinor subdivision of the property formerly known asthe VaiI Trade Parce the
l,till Creek Road Parcel.
L.
D.
E.
F.
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LOT:_ BLOCK:_ FIUNG:
PHYSICAL ADDp655. le n<vo tt
'1 looa-t ut So c.f h
pARCEL #. 2I0I-082-00-004 (Conbct Eagle Co. Roororr/##u otl ctsa r!( p rrv.
970-328-8640 for parcel #)
ZONING: Natural Area Preservation District
NAMEOFOWNER(S)+odge Properties Inc.
MAILINGADDRESS:
PO BO,. 7' VAiI' COIOTAdO 81658
tr.
H.
oWNER(s) SIGNATURE(s):_:2
NAMEoFAPPLICANT: JONAIhAN W.Greene,tant Deve lopment Iqanagier
+4,
R€H^)
MAIUNGADDRESS: Vail Resorts Inc.PO Box 959
Avon, Colorado 81620 pHoNE. (970) 845-2629
FEE: see submittal requirements for appropriate fee
PTEASE SUBMIT THIS APPUCATION, ALL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
AND THE FEE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT,
75 SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD, VAIL, COLORADO 81557.
Riva Ridge Chalets South Lodge South Condominiums One Vail Place
C/o Barbara Feeney, Manager C7o San Cope, Manager Condtiminium Association
74 Willow Rd 200 Vail Rd. go Teak Simonton, Manager
Vail, CO 81657 Vail, CO 81657 244 Wall Sreet
Vail, CO 81657
One Vail Place Lodge Apar[nent Lodge Apartrnent
Condominium Association Condominium Association Condominium Association
C/o Mountain Adventure Center Bert Klett, President C/o Charles Viola, Manager
Teak Simonton, Manager I 12 York Rd. 174 E. Gore Creek Drive
254 Bridge Street Jenkintown, PA 19046 Vail, CO 81657
Vail, CO 81657
Town of Vail United States Forest Service Ronald, J. Byme
75 S Frontage Rd. W Holy Cross Ranger District 16 Forest Rd.
Vail, CO 81657 P.O. Box 190 Vail, CO 81657
Mintum, CO 81645.
Lodge Properties Inc.
C/o The Lodge at Vail
174 E Gore Creek Dr.
Vail. CO 81657
^I Or,. rrEM MAY AFFE.T
"ou*
,*ot*
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 of the Municipal Code of the
Town of Vail on October 9, 2000, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municioal Buildino. ln
consideration of:
A request for a minor subdivision of the property formerly known as the Tennis Court site and
Lionshead Skier Run-Out, now proposed to be called the Forest Road Parcel, located at 615
Forest Road/Unplatted.
Applicant: The Vail CorporationPlanner: Brent Wilson
A request for a minor subdivision of Lot 2, Section 8, Township 5 South, Range 80 West of the
Sixth Principal Meridian, informally known as the Lodge at Vail Exchange Parcel, to allow for the
creation of Lot 1 & Lot 2, Mill Creek Road Parcel, generally located at South of 174 Gore Creek
Drive.
Applicant: The Vail CorporationPlanner: Allison Ochs
A requesl for a minor subdivision, to allow for the vacation of lot lines, located at Lots 1-4, Block
H, Vail das Schone Filing 2.
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Nina TimmPlanner: Allison Ochs
A request for a final review of a condilional use permit, to allow for lhe construction of Phase I of
Donovan Park improvements, generally located soulheast of the intersection of Matterhom
Circle and the South frontage Road.
Applicant: Town of VailPlanner: George Ruther
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular
office hours in the project planner's office, located 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 479-2138 for informalion.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-
2356, Telephone for the Hearing lmpaired, for information.
Communily Development Deparlment
Published October 22.2OOO in the Vail Trail.
1. l\
ar\ l./.0- I : {--r ..1, L' A
J)t ^'
,.; L
Ll r loc-l
"t,
{\/
TOr,NOFliNL
MEMORANDTJM
TO: TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FROM: GERRYARNOLD,VAILRESORTS
RE: MINOR SUBDTVISION-MILL CREEKROAD PARCEL
Attached are a list of adjacent property ownsrs and stamped addressed mailing envelopes
for the Mill Creek Road Parcel.
o*n.r. N"m]dres,
TOWN OF VAIL
75 S FRONTAGE RD W
vAtL co 816s7tY6;;-|DEFia--
I rooolscror
Parcel Number
210107100003
I
I
I
L, Protest (T)
[] state eso
[] controt
L_j PPCertLtr
X CAMA(A)
l-] Personal (P
ln ttame
X Situs
, _r- titooite
,X Tract
[] Condo
i.-]- Block
I lvtisc(
Pre/Suc
Remarks
Tar Sale
Mines
Sibling
Elags Q Name C Mobile
Mine O Sales
Twn Q Parcel
O Blldlot O street
United States Forest ServiceHoIy Cross Ranger DistrictP.O. Box 190Minturn, CO 81645 827 -5tIs
i-a3;6<F:
=;66iatr!n
Ui E ;
E € ' 13
'EE s i # 5 gt
T T tr N N trI
F--.o.g.;i3-<re-x--<Fx:.8;3FdriFti-56tr!tt]nntr!!
F
z
o
o
g
o
0Io
o
W
.9
CL
()o
o
(u
o
t6t
IlHil
ll:Yi:.1
litr:iil
liE:r.il
lffi
=at,
C
2oao
2i
o;tol
:Jo;lol!lslrl
C:trl
.tt Itl
o
;t
.'l:lo;tol
:l
C
MEt flffi
@
oo=Eijg;s
fr ir n t-_t {r []
.=o
o
EIz
o
'-o
o
oF
o(,
co
o
€
€o
o
o
A
.E
uj
oa
o
.9c
o
oz
oo
.a
ao
!oo
o
o
(J
o
.9
A
ql
a
oz
o
!
f
-)
se aUPhi
,,1 cEx> o-.rY ll=Fo(@r)
iE=l ,' + I ownerrafadress
,LOoGEFRoPERTTES rNc -
C/O THE LOOGE AT VAIL
174 E GORE CREEK DR
AtL CO 81657
! sttus
Mobllo
Tract
Condo
Block
Sales
Misc (
I erelSuc
[] Remarks
fl Taxsalo
Mlnes
Sibling
Elags
Protesl (I)
State Asd
Control
History
PPCertLtr
Name C Mobllo
Mine Q Sales
Q twn Q Parcel
BIk/Lot O Stroet
/
ol)r'rigrr \\r'rkslr,'p. lrrc
l,rnrlsr:alx',\rr:hiter.lrrrc
l.rtnrl l)lanrrrrrg
I rlran l)r'sigrr
'lirrrnsrrr l)ll r rrr irrg
August 31, 2000
Jonathan W. Grcene
Assistant Development Manager
Vail Resorts Development Co.
PO Box 959
Avon. CO 81620-0959
Re: Potential environmental impacts of proposed minor subdivision plan fbr the Mill Creek
Road Parcel
Dear Jonathan:
This letter is in regard to the pr-oposed mir.ror subdivision of the Mill Creek Road parccl,
located due south of the existing Lodge at Vail parcel in Vail, Colorado.
Our analysis of poter-rtial environmental impacts associated with the proposed minor
subdivision submittal is as follows:
General assessment
Due to the fact that this minor subdivision submittal does not consist of any specific
development application, and does not seek any specific zoning change or development
approval, there are no anticipated environmental impacts resulting from the proposed
submittal.
In addition, given that rhis minor subdivision submittal does not consist of any specific
development application, and does not seek any specific zoning change or development
approvals, there are no anticipated additional burdens on any public infrastructure, such as,
but not limited to, sanitary se&,er, water, storm drainage, electricity, roadways, etc.
Specific assessment
Given the above generalized assessment, the following is a detailed breakdown of potential
environmental impact issues that could result from any given project, and the anticipated
impacts that could result from this minor subdivision proposal.
1. 100 year Floodplain. No anticipated impacts. No part of this site falls within a 100
year floodplain or floodway.
2. Wetland impacts. No anticipated impacts. The proposed submittal does not seek any
development of anv kind within wetland areas.
DESIGNWORKSHOP
A
3. Avalanche hzzard. No anticipated impacts. The proposed submittal does not seek any
develoomcnt ofanv kind within avalanche hazard areas.
5.
()-
7.
8.
9.
11.
Rockfall hazard. No anticipated impacts. The current Town of Vail hazard mapprng
indicates a potential medium severity rockfall zone above the property in question.
Horvever. the proposed submittal does not include any development that w.ould create.
or increase, any rockfall hazard to any adjacent property.
Erosion. No anticipated impacts. While this property does contain some cxisting
slopes in excess of 30 and 40 percent, this submittal does not include any proposcd
development that would result in any unstable or erodable slopes.
Air pollution. No anticipated irnpacts. The proposed submittal does not include any
developrrent that rvould create air pollution of any kind.
Noise pollution. No anticipated impacts. The proposed submittal does not include any
development that rvould create noise pollution of any kind.
Light pollution. No anticipated impacts. The proposed submittal does not include any
development that rvould create light pollution of any kind.
Parking impacts. No anticipated impacts. The proposed submittal does not include
any development thal would create any parking, or add to any existing parking.
Visual impacts. No anticipated impacts. The proposed submittal does not include any
proposed above or below grade development, and therefore will have no visual impacts
on surrounding properties.
Traffic impacts, No anticipated impacts. The proposed submittal does not include
any development that would create any additional traffic volume on adjacent
roadways.
Site access. No anticipated impacts. The proposed submitlal does not include any
development that would increase the existing number of site access points onto the
property.
Drainage impacts. No anticipated impacts. The proposed submittal does not include
any development that would increase surface drainage off of the property.
lnfrastructure impacts. No anticipated impacts. The proposed submittal does not
include any development that would increase the burden on any public infrastructure,
such as, but not limited to, sanitary sewer, water, storm drainage, electricity, roadways,
etc. Furthermore, the property in question is currently served by existing sanitary
sewer, water. electrical. and sas infrastructure.
10.
12.
lJ.
t4.
I 1,,.ig,, \\;,r1..1,,fi .
Conclusion
Given the above findings, there are no anticipated environmental impacts of any kind
associated with the potential approval of the proposed minor subdivision plan.
When and if, at any point in the future, this property is considered for an actual
development submittal, these environmental factors will need to be re-evaluated and
mitigated in light of that proposed development.
Please do not hesitate to contact us ifyou have any questions regarding the above findings.
Sincerely, Ig14A^*,lil*
K. Ethan Moore
Associate
Vail Resorts lfevelopnent Company
Vail " Breckenridge . Keystone . Beaver Creeko . Bachelor Gulcho r Arrowhead
August 31,2000
Town of Vail Community Development Department
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Dear Sir of Madam.
With this letter I am submitting to you an application for a minor subdivision to the Mill
Creek Road Parcel, formerly known as the Lodge at Vail Exchange Parcel or the Lodge
at Vail Trade Parcel.
Enclosed with the application materials is a letter from Ethan Moore of Design
Workshop, Inc., who has reviewed the environmental impacts of this site, as per Town of
Vail code. According to Mr. Moore, there are no anticipated environmental impacts of
any kind associated with the potential approval of the proposed minor subdivision plan.
Therefore, I am requesting that the Town of Vail waive the requirement to perform an
environmental impact report as it pertains to this application.
Ifyou have any questions please contact me directly at(970)845-2629. Thank you for
vour consideration in this matter.
\ ,a)
'"*^
w. Greene l/
t Development Manager
t,137 Benchmark Road . PO Box 959 r Avon, Colorado r 81620-0959 . phone 970.845 2535 . fax970.845 2555
u\l-l,L r|.Jf\r
8,
CERTIFICATE T]F I}EDICATIT]N AND OVNERSHIP
Lodge Propentles Inc,, o Cotorqdo Conponotlon
beln! sote of,nen In fee slr'rple, r'rontgqgee or tlenhotder of ott thqt reol property
sttuited In the Town of Valt, fqgtc County, Cotorodo descrlb(d os foltowsl
Lot 2, Sectlon 8, Torhsittil 5 South, Ronge 80 Vest, of the Slxt-h Prlnclpot Menldlon''
os S[brn on depehdeht resurvey ond s,Jr.rrey doted Decenber 30, 1988,
Unlted Stotes Deportrrent 0f The Interlor Bureou 0f Lqnd Monogement.
os necorded Juty'30, tggZ In Book 733 qt Poge 317 In the of flce of the Clerk qnd
Recorder, County of Eogte, Stqte of Cotorqdo,
contolnlno 2,068 o,cres non€ on [ess, hove by these presents tqld out, ptotted ond
;bifriJ;t tfii -ior"e tnto [of,s ond b(odks qs shorn on this flnot ptot under thE
nor{e ond styte of 'Mli[ Cneek Roqd Porcet'q subdlvislon- In the Town of Valt, County of Eogtet qnd does heneqy occept. the nespor
f;-Til lo"pfetron of nequlned lrrprovenientsl qid does hereby dedlcqte and set
oto"i'off -oi-ttrb-pubtlc noads qnd other pubLic lrrpnoven'rents ond ploces os shown
oh trre occonDqnvino plat to the use of the pubtlc Foreverl ond does hereby . ,
dedlcote thos'e pb"Ttons of sold neot pnopenty which one Indlcqted qs eosenentst on
if.!-oqior-ponyfnf-ptot qs eosements for'the purpose shown hereinl ond does hereby...
groni-ihe-rtght-t5-lnsfott-onO rotntotn necesdory_stnuctunes to the entity responsibl
Fon provtdtnf tfre servlceg For whlch the eqsenehts one estobtlshed,
EXECUTED this doy of -----i--------, A,D', 20
OVNER' Lodge Propertles Inc,
o Colorodo Conporqtlon
BYr ------
ADDRESSI
TITLE,
^ f .ct-l; | -^^ |
STATE OF
'Inc,, o
Lodge Properties, lnc. proposed land use amendments summary
APPLICANT'S REOUESTS
Amendment to the overall Land Use Plan
Existing:
- 45hot site is listed as Village Master Plan
- 55% of site is listed as Ski Base
- Ski base is defined as ski trails and facilities related to a ski base
Proposed:
- 100% of land to be included in the Village Master Plan
Amendment to the Village Master Plan (VMP)'Master Plan Terms
Existing:
- 80% ot site is within the VailVillage Master Plan Area
- 4Oo/o ot site is listed as being locaied within the area covered by the Urban Design Guide
Plan
- 40/"of site is listed as Commercial Core 1
- 40/" ol the site is listed as Periphery/Surrounding Area
- zOY"is outside the VMP area
Proposed:
- 100% of site in VMP
- l0,}a/o of site within Urban Design Guidelines
- None of the site as CCl
- 100% of site as Periphery/Surrounding Area
Amendment to the Village Master Plan (VMP) - Land Use Plan
Existing:
- 30% of site listed as Mixed Use
- 70/" at site listed as Ski BaseiRecreation
Proposed:
- 100% Mixed Use
Amendment to the Village Master Plan (VMP) - Open Space Plan
Existing:
- 50% of site is listed as Greenbelt Natural Open Space
Proposed:
- None of the site as Open Space
Amendment to the Village Master Plan (VMP) - Parking and Circulation Plan
Existing:
- shows controlled vehicular access through the site
- shows bike and pedestrian access through the site
Proposed:
- controlled vehicular access through the site (unchanged)
- bike and pedestrian access through the site (unchanged)
- show the entire area as a "study Area" (not defined in plan) with the possibility of a
"Delivery/Loading Zone"
- also indicated as "existing public parking"
Amendment to the Village Master Plan (VMP) - Building Height Plan
Existing:
- 10% of site indicated as 3-4 stories
Proposed:
- 100% ol the site as 2-3 stories
Amendment to the Village Master Plan (VMP)'Action Plan
Existing:
- not treated in the action plan
Proposed:
- add language to sub-area plan
- indicate as "residential/lodging infill" on the entire site
- indicate as "commercial inlill" on a small portion ol the site
- indicate as "public facility/parking" on a portion ol site
- indicate as public plaza on a portion ol the site
CHAPTER II - LAND USE PLAN GOALS/POLICIES
The goals articulated here reflect the desires ofthe citizenry as expressed through the series of
public meetings that were held throughout the project. A set of initial goals were developed
which were then substantially revised after different types of opinions were brought out in the
sccond meeting. The goal statements were developed to reflect a general consensus, once the
public had had the opportunity to reflect on the concepts and ideas initially presented. The goal
statements wcre then revised through the review process with the Task Force, the Planning and
Environmental Commission and Town Council and now reprcsant a policy guideline for the Land
Usc Plan. These goals are to be used as adopted policy guidelines in the review process for new
devclopment proposals. These goals statements should be used in conjunction with the adopted
Land Use Plan map, in the evaluation of any development proposal.
The goal statements which are reflected in the design of the proposed Plan are as follows:
1. GeneralGrowtM)evelopment
l.l Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between
residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent
resident.
1.2 The quality of the environment including air, water and other natural resources should be
protected as the Town grows.
l 3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible.
1.4 The original theme of the old Village Core should be carried into new development in the
Village Core through continued implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan'
1.5 Commercial strip development of the Valley should be avoided.
1.6 Development proposals on the hillsides should be evaluated on a case by case basis.
Limited development may be permitted for some low intensity uses in areas that are not
highly visible from the Valley floor. New projects should be carefully contolled and
developed with sensitivity to the environment.
|.7 New subdivisions should not be permitted in high geologic hazardareas'
I .8 Recreational and public facility development on National Forest lands may be permitted
where no high hazards exist if:
a) Community objectives are met as articulated in the Comprehensive Plan.
b) The parcel is adjacent to the Town boundaries, with good access'
c) The affected neighborhood can be involved in the decision-making process.
f:\everyone\dom\codesect\landuse. l 28
Department of Community D eve lopment
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2/,38
FAX 970-479-2452
TOWN OFVAIL
Yiv'.
January 28, 1998
Jay Peterson
108 S. Frontage Road West
Vail, Colorado 81657
RE: Lodge Properties (Trade Parcel) - Amendments to Vail Land Use Plan and Vail Village
Master Plan
Dear Jay:
On December 13, 1996, an application was submitted by Lodge Properties, Inc. to amend the Vail
Iand Use Plan and the Vail Village Master PIan with regard to the "trade parcel" acquired by
Lodge Properties, Inc. The last conespondence on this proposal was on January 7,1997 . Due to
the inactivity on this proposal, staff is considering this proposal withdrawn.
If in the future you wish to proceed with such an application, you will need to file a new
application and revised materials.
Ifthe representatives ofthis project have changed, please forward this letter to the appropriate
parties.
If you have any questions, please call me at 479-2148.
rcL!,!-"!fu
Dominic F. Mauriello, AICP
Senior Planner
c: Mike Mollica, Assistant Directorof Community Development
Tim Losa, Zehren and Associates, Inc.
tp"n"uo"o
o
I
FILE COPY
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2 I 3 V479-21 39
FAX 970-479-24s2
Fcbruarv 12. 1997
Departrnent of Conrmunity Development
Jay Pctcrson
l0ll S, Frontagc Road Wcst
Vail, Colorado 816-57
RE: Lodgc Plopcrtics (Tradc Parccl) - Amcndrncnts to Vail Land Usc Plan and Vail Villagc
Mastcr Plan
Dcar Jay:
Thc Comrnunity Dcvcloprncnt Dcpaftrncnt has rcvicwcd thc "survcy" you subrnittcd for lhc abovc
rcfcrcnccd propclty. StafT llnds tlrc survcy to bc unacccptablc. Thc standards uscd lbr trcc
survcys by thcTown rcquircsall trccs o f 4 " cirlipcr or grcatcr to bc survcyctl. Thc "survcy" you
havcsubrnittcdshowsabout20trccsof l'incalipcran<l grcrtcr. Staffbclicvcsthatthissubmittal
scvcrcly distorts thc vcgctatcd conclition of tlris sitc. 'lhcrc arc substantial numbcrs of trccs ovcr
4" in calipcr'. Statl, thc Planning antl Environrncntal (lonrrnission, and thc Town Council must
Iravc rn accut'ltc undcrstantling ol'tlrc vcgctatiorr on-sitc bcfbrc rcndcring a dccision rcgarding
potcntial land uscs for thc propctty.
Alsq. thc survcy must contain tlrc ccrtification oFa profcssional land sunr'cyor, a titlc, a lcgcnd, a
complctc lcgal dcscription, and an indication of trcc typcs. Thc itcm subrnittcd docs not qualify as
a survcy.
Plcasc providc an accuratc survcy,
lf you fravc any qucstions, plcasc call mc at 479-2148.
Town Planncr
{S *""ouoruo
COPYFIL E
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-213V479-2139
FAX 970-479-2452
January 1,1997
Department of Community Deve lopment
Jay Petcrson
108 S. Frontage Road West
Vail, Colorado 81657
RE: Lodge Propcrties (Trade Parcel) - Amendmcnts to Vail Land Use Plan and Vail Villagc
Mastcr Plan
Dcar Jay:
Staff is in thc proccss of rcvicwing your proposals to amcnd various mastcr plan documcnts as
thcy rclatc to thc "tradc parccl." The information that has bccn submittcd is insufficicnt to
propcrly rcvicw thc proposals. Spccifically, thc following itcms nccd to bc providcd for staffand
Planning and Environmcntal Commission to rcvicw thc proposal:
A boundary, topographic, and trcc survcy of the propcrty showing all cxisting
improvcmcnts, cascmcnts, acreagc, and othcr significant site featurcs must bc
providcd. Thc trec survcy must idcntify alI trccs with a calipcr of 4" or grcater.
Thc proposcd amendmcnts will allow zoning and density that could havc impacts
on thc cnvironment. Thc sitc has arcas which arc heavily vegctatcd and has
cxtremc slopcs which may not be appropriatc for ccrtain typcs of land uscs. This
information is necded to adcquately evaluatc thc densities and potential land uscs
proposed. Also, the survey is necded to accurately identifr thc location ofthc
property.
A legal description of the property must be provided.
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required in order to review tire impacts
ofthc potential density and land uses being proposed on the property. The EIR
should evaluate the site for suitability for development based on potential density
and proposcd land uses. The rcport contents should contain those elements as
listcd in Section 18.56.050 of the Zoning Code (enclosed) as thcy apply to the
Page I of2
l.
2.
3,
{,7 r'n"uo'uo
t;
bu'-4
:'*JspcCific amendment proposals, Although no specific development proposal is
being proposed at this time, the report should address the potential development
and densities on the site. A more detailed development specific EIR may also be
required at the time when a specific development proposal is submitted for the site.
lfyou have specific questions regarding the contents ofthe EIR contact Russell
Forest at 479-2146.
A list of the mailing addresses of all adjacent property owners and
addressed/stamped envelopes are needed in order to notifr such property owners.
A preliminary title report with schedules A and B must be provided in order to
verifo ownership and list all easements affecting the property.
This information must be provided prior to any review by the Planning and Environmental
Commission. Once this information has been provided, staffwill schedule a worksession with the
PEC.
Ifyou have any questions, please call me at 479-2148.
Sjtqercly,
A-g//t/-e-
Dominic F. Mauriello. AICP
Town Planner
Page2 of2
fcerveo ,ru l* n,
Kenneth D. Hill
12601 Brisr
Leawootl, Kansas 66209
February 6,1997
Mr. Robert Mclaurin
Town Manager
75 S. Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Dear Mr. Mclaurin:
It has come to my attention that a zoning change issue is going to come up before the
Vail Town Council, which would deal with a land exchange site which is located to the south of
Lodge Tower. It is also my understanding that the zoning change would permit the Lodge at
Vail to build condominiums and townhouses on this property. I realize that the Town Council
may have interest in passing this change because it would increase the sales tax base and revenue
for the town of Vail. I strongly urge you to vote 'no' on the zoning change which would permit
the land exchange site to be developed.
I have been a owner of a unit in The Willows Condominiums since 1971 and I do not
wish to see development encroaching the ski area. I also feel that this development will lessen
the value of my property in The Willows.
Again, please vote 'no' on this issue.
Sincerely,
JAMES R. !7E R
RrcnARD D. TR VERS
\fleat I Travers
A PRor.EssroNAL CoRPoMTToN
A'r'roRNIYs AT L$s
TrrE CLEN LYoN BurLDrNC, SurrE 200
1000 Sourrr FRoNr,\oE Ro^.D \fEsr
V^rL, Cor.oMDo 81657
February 1-2, 1-997C,^.Ror. E. D,^.vrs
BETII A. Ross
RDT/ktm
\morieIlo. 1t
TELEPTToNT (970) 476-7646
FAcsrMflrl-t (970) 476-7 | 18
Town of Vail
Community Development Department
l-l-1 S. Frontage Road WestVai1, Colorado 81557Attentlon: Dominic Moriello
RE : I-,odqe Properties, Inc. Application
Dear Dominic:
Thanks for Lhe telephone message related to the above-
referenced application. As you know, this 1aw firm represents
I-,odge Apartments Condominium Association (Ehe "Association"), a
condominium project located within The l-,odge at Vail complex. The
Association is particularly interested in developments related tothe pending application of Lodge Properties, fnc. to amend the Town
ComprehensJ-ve Plan, Village Master PIan and other plans and
documents as dj-scussed in such application. You mentioned duringour previous telephone call that, the Association, as an adjacentproperty owner, would be receiwj-ng notice of any meetings relatingto the proposed amendment. Unfortunately, it has come to myattention that these notj-ces are typj-ca11y forwarded to The l-,odgeat Vail as managing agent on behalf of the Association, which
notices may or may not be forwarded on to the Association'sattention. Accordingly, I have been instructed by the Association
to request that all required notices to the Association be sentdirectly to me as agent for the Association aE the address noted onthis letter above.
If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesiEat.e
to call me/ or you may call the president of the Association, Jorge
Bosch at (305) 373-0553. Thank you for your cooperation in this
matter.
truly yours,
:./-/-r#--raverst(]-cnaro u. r'
&
Jncobs
Cknse
Fnick
Kleinkopf
Ke[[ey
LLC
Arronneys lr Llw
lndeprndrnce Pl,lzn
I OIO | 7rh Sr.
Suhr I IOO
Drnven, CO 8O265
,or.68148(m
rex l0l'681'486i
Ann B. Fnick
892.4422
May 7,1997
Vail Zoning Administrator
75 S. Frontage Rd.
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Zoning Administrator:
This letter is submitted on behalf of Luanne Wells, an owner of property
adjacent to the Lodge at Vail. On Ms. Well's behalf, we request that you send us
notice of all public meetings, hearings, actions and developments of the Lodge at
Vail properties, including the Lodge South Tower, the International Wing, and the
Exchange Site. These notices should be sent as follows:
Luanne Wells
c/oAnn B. Frick
Jacobs Chase Frick Kleinkopf & Kelley
1050 lTth St., Suite 1500
Denver, CO 80265
withacopyto: ' :',
Paul C. Heeschen
Heeschen & Associates
450 Ncwporl. Ceiiier D., Suiis 450
Newport Beach, C492660
We appreciate your cooperation in ensuring that Ms.Wells is given timely
notice ofall actions concerning these properties.
Very truly yours,
frr* fP'"c-L
c: Paul Heeschen
Ann B. Frick
ll . |,'.::
+ +&*; -.;" ..,cft'j1':::i,1.i-, ,.: r- ,. l ':;:l:rr':?lfj' -r: i : ,-:i:5
"- I,L- ' l'i I .,{: .ltj I
:'i+,ii$' , # ,
,. 1,':.r-.i;Sffir ". j
. ,.-, .::i ? .iFi!..t1tu;;:. :-il- {': .:.r.::.. ' 'il-.i:..;!=. rt, . . .; r':..' ':'-.:. -l;:t : i- !i
1 i,,... : ;
: : .ll
.'......',
|:i]
[-J-- j :ir
fri':' ' ' ',.1
Ar::\:'r ' :
li:ir,- '
t?'*,:;j ir,. "-.
*.1' i i't':|.
ti: ' 1I'-
i1l
:i':.,..' : .
fi':' ,,., ::: '
FILE CUPY
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2 t 3 8/479-2 I 39
FAX 970-479-2452
May 13, 1997
Ann B. Frick
Jacobs, Chasc, Frick, Klcinkopf & Kcllcy, Ll,C
1050 lTth Strcet. Suitc 1500
Dcnvcr. CO 80265
De partment of Community Development
Rc:Rcqucst for noticc
Dcar Ms. Frick:
Thc Community Dcvclopmcnt Dcpartrncnt has rcccivcd your rcqucst for notification on
dcvclopmcnts rcgarding Lodgc at Vail, Lodgc South Towcq Intcmational Wing, and thc
cxchangc sitc. Thc only projcct currcntly in thc rcvicw proccss is thc cxchangc sitc. I will includc
your namc on thc mailing list for thc cxchangc sitc as a courtcsy (as it is not rcquircd by law).
Thc Public (Opcn) Rccords scction of thc Colorado Rcviscd Statutc is locatcd at24-72-l0l ct
scq. Thc rccords of thc 'l'own of Vail Community Dcvclopmcnt Dcpartmcnt arc opcn rccords and
availablc for your inspcction, subjcct to rcasonablc rcgulations.
Thc Town of Vail ordinanccs providc rcquircmcnts for notification o[adjaccnt propcrty owncrs,
as wcll as public noticc in particular circurstanccs. Thc Town staff is vigilant in assuring that
ad.jaccnt propcrty owncrs and thc public rcccivc thc noticc rcquircd by law. We cannot,
however, commit to providing notice that is not legally required.
lf and when an application is submittcd, it will bc assigncd to a staff mcmbcr of the Community
Dcvclopment Departmcnt and that individual rvould thcn bc thc appropriatc pcrson to contact.
Prior to an application bcing submittcd, the Community Dcvelopment Departmcnt has a staff
mcmbcr availablc on a daily basis (Dirk Mason, (970) 479-2128) whom you can contact
pcriodically to dctcrmine if anything has becn frled.
Sinccrcly,
e#
Town Planner
{g *r"r""uo r*",
aue$O Call the Planning Staff
:l\rljt'i 0Ec I 3
"i" '.iiN'ili, r,i /
GEMRAL INFORMATION
t6t.pptl."tlon is for any project requiring ap,proval by the Plarning and Environmental Commission. For specific
information, see the submitAl .equirements foi the particular approval that is rtque$ed" The application can not be
accepted until all required information is submined The project may also need to be rcviewed by the Town Council
and/or the Desip Rwiew Bord-
APPLICATION FOR PLANNING AND EI
COMMISSION APPROVAL, i i
)l'!- 1
A. TYPEOFAPPLICATION:
tr Additional GRFA (250)
tr BedandBrealf,ast
tr Conditional Use Permit
tr Major or E Minor Subdivision
tr Rezoning
tr Sign Vriance
tr Variance
tr Zoning Code Amendment
tr Amendment to an Approved Dwelopment Plan
B EmployeeHousingUnit(IYPe: )
tr Major or tr Minor CCI Exterior Alteration
(Vail Village)
tr Major or tr MinorCCII ExtcriorAlteration
(Lionshead)
tr Special Dwelopment Dis{rict
tr Major or E Minor Amendme,nt to an SDD
B.DESCRIPTIONOFTHEREQLJESI' Amendment to Va11 Villaqe
c.
D.
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:
ZONING:
LOT-BLOCK-FILING (see attached)
ADDRESS:BUILDINGNAME:
Natural Area Preservatlon (NAP) District
F.
G.
NAME OF OWNER(S):
MAILINGAIIDRESS: The Lodqe at Vail, 174 E. Gore Creek Drive
ONE: 476-5011
OWNER(S) SIGNATTJRE(S):
NAME OF REPRESENTA Tim Losa
MAILING ADD Zehren and Associ.ates Inc. P.O. Box 1976
Avon, Colorado 81 620
FEE - SEE THE SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE APPROPRI.ATE FEE.
ST'BMIT THIS APPLICATION, ALL STJBMITTAL REQIIIREMENTS AND THE FEE TO TIIE
DEPARTMENT OF COMMT'I\IITY DEVELOPMENT. T5 SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD'
vArL.coLoRADO 81657.
r*pat:/6bfD cw,lqDtlb ", ln'i ,'l /ao
I
Application Datc , I 7 -'| 4 'dl lz PEC Me*ing Date :
RsYinod 6/96
Ouesf Cail the Planning Staffat 479-2138
inforrnation, see the sgbmifal .eqoiti-*f foi the particular approval tlat is requested- The application can not be
accepted until all required information is submised. The project may also need to be reviewed by the Town Council
and/or tbc Design Rwiew Board.
A. TYPE OF APPLICATION:
tr Additional GRFA (250)
tr BedandBrealf,ast
tr Conditional Use Psnrit
tr Majoror E MinorSubdivision
tr Rezoning
tr Sign Variance
tr Variance
tr ZoningCodeAmendment
APPLICATION FOR PLAI{NING AND
COMMISSION APPROVAL
tr Amendme,nttoan ApprovedDevelorpmantPlan
tr EmployeeHousingUnit(TYPe:
tr Major or tr Minor CCI Exterior Altemation
(Vail Village)
tr Major or tr Minor CCII Extcrior Alteration
(Lionshead)
tr SpecialDwelopmentDistrict
tr Major or tr Minor Amendment to an SDD
B. DESCNPTIONOFTHEREQUEST: Amendment to VaiI Land use PIan
c.
D.
E.
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LOT-BLOCK-FILING (see attache4j
ADDRESS:BUILDINGNAME:
ZONING: Natural Arg_a Preservation ( NA F
NAME OF OWNER(S):T.odcc Prnncrf i cs - Tnc -
Iorado 81 657 ONE: 4't 6-5011
OWNER(S) SIGNATT]RE(S) :
NAME OF REPRESENTA Tim Los
MAILINGADDRESS:-Zehren and Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 1976
Avon, Colorado 81 620 PHONE: 949-02s7
FEE - SEE THE SIJBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE APPROPRIATE FEE.
STJBI\IIT THIS APPLICATION, ALL SIJBMITTAL REQURBMENTS ANII THE FEE TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF COMMI'NITY DEVELOPMENT. T5 SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD'
F.
G.
For Office Use Only:
reeYdd: 7 ,6tJ c,*ft1!6L
,l, I I . I -l
vy: I 840 nf \ln,l
ApplicationDatc' 17' rc' q U PECMeetingDate:
MAILINGADDRESS: The r,odge at Vail. 1?4 E- Gore Creek nriwc
VAIL, COLORADO E1657.
RcrirEd 6D6
Ah'ACENT PROPERTY OIINERS
Lodge Tower Condominium Association
200 Vail PlaceVail, Colorado 8L657
Forest Service
Box l-90Minturn, Colorado 81645
Parcel A, Lot l-, Block 7 VVI
Ronald J. Byrne
285 Bridge StreetVai1, Colorado 81657
Parcel B, Lot 1, Block 7 wI
Deep Powder, Inc.
c/o Ralph H. Hobart
43 Oakdene Road
Barrington, Illinois 600L0
Riva Ridge Condominium Associationc/o Tom Saalfeld
P.O. Box 832Vail, Colorado 8L658
Lodge Apartments Condominium Associationc/o ceorge Boscb., suite Loos
orida 331-31-1604
Vail Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 7Vail, CoLorado 8L658
One Vail Place Condorniniurn Associationc/o Steve Simonett
REI'{AX VAIL
L43 East Meadow DriveVail, Colorado 8],657
| ! i .l(.dd.; Lvaane Wellf
lt A A^ b. FrtLl,t
toso l7\^ 4+r, ,S,ti[e lSaO
(k^vet, (O 3OU5
!h^, I {o,
/'l r-
Qlcl^",A I fattf<
1lz (l*^Lp,', €v,lJq, g,leL00
lo0o 5. Fn^t.gaA'w'*
\[a,\, LD 'lturl
Po'l C. Hezsd^an'ii'o"u'ntrn (e"lerDr' ' {,,ik 45o
Ua^p.+ irr.^, cfr 1L66o
;o f
I
TOWN OFVAIL
lo-r.-
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970479-2 1 05/Fax 970-479-2 I 5 7
February 12,1997
Ofice of the Tbwn Manager
Kenneth D. Hill
12601 Briar
Leawood, Kansas 66209
Re: Lodge Properties, Inc. request for amendments to the Town of Vail Land Use Plan and
Vail Village Master Plan
Dear Mr. Hill:
Thank you for your interest in the above referenced amendments. As you may already know,
Lodge Properties, Inc. obtained title to a two acre parcel known as the "exchange parcel" located
south of the Lodge Tower Building. The parcel was previously owned by the Forest Service.
The area is cunently governed by two planning documents: the Vail Land Use Plan and the Vail
Village Master Plan. These documents are general planning docum€nts which guide zoning and
development requests. The proposed amendments do not approve a specific development plan or
specific land use densities on the property.
The "exchange parcel" land is currently designated by the Vail Land Use Plan as Ski Base
Recreation and is designated as being subject to the Vail Village Master PIan (the "Plan"). The
Plan, a more specific planning document, identifies portions of the site as being appropriate for
Commercial Core 1, Ski Base Recreation, Mixed Use, and Greenbelt Natural Open Space. The
Plan also shows the site as providing controlled vehicular access and bike/pedestrian access.
The applicants have proposed several amendments to elements ofthese plans. I have enclosed a
copy of the application for these amendments which describes the proposal.
The Community Development Department staff is waiting for the applicant to submit more
information before the amendments are scheduled for a worksession with the Planning and
Environmental Commission (PEC). The process for these amendments requires review and
action by the PEC and final approval by the Town Council. These public meetings will be
advertised in the public notification section of the Vail Trail.
$RECYCLDD PAPER
a
a
. ..1 o YC, BT4
. TOWN OFVAIT
. Input/InquiryResponseRecsrd
The attached consrents were recentlyreceived bythe-Toyn of vail we enco'nge vagresidenls and guests tg g_". rs mcir input and rJe *ive for tinoJresporues. pLEAsE
ADDRESS TIiFSE CONCERNS T4IIIIfl.I FTTC WORTC.IEbXE'A},D REIIJRN llitsCOMPLETED FORM TO pAI4 BRAlrDir[EIGn"
d, t0. tl(
D EPASTIyIBIT To Hfu\DLE INQuny
INDI\@ L'AL TO TIfu\DI.E INQTIIRY
DATE TOV RECETITED INPTJT/INQTJIRY
TYPE OF hrPUT/NOUTRT
PfiONE CALL (indicate date)
LEI'TER (atradreC)Gt"".[c: tatatjL ffi,@hr-&.b'a%
I{ESPOT\SE CARD (attached)
T]@E OF RESPONEE fcheckone):
LEITER (attadr copy)
PHONE CAII (indicate date)
DAG OF RESPONSE FOR\( IiEI'URN@ BY DEPART}fSIT TO PAA4 BRfu\DMER
l-Tili :'\lJgir.v.rnd fo-an witt r:rnein on 6lc rr thc lttv cqnaronily Rclelloar o6ca Ar sr u tbir forn L k,",.d b ?:r,,6nn6meyc!, thi! inquitywill bc conridrcd Corcd. :
m_:if:fI:L]]51ya."or5GoF1I{Ls6$E trrlur.r^!EAI$/QrrEnor{s,pLEAsEFE=LlREroccN-,.{cT
t
Kenneth D. HiA
12601 Briar
Leawood, Kansas 66209
February 6,1997
Mr. Robert Mclaruin
Town Manager
75 S. Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Dear Mr. Mclaurin:
It has come to my attention that a zoning change issue is going to come up before the
Vail Town Council, which would deal with a land exchange site which is located to the south of
Lodge Tower. It is also my understanding that the zoning change would permit the Lodge at
Vail to build condominiums and townhouses on this property. lrealizn that the Town Council
may have interest in passing this change because it would increase the sales tax base and revenue
for the town of Vail. I strongly urge you to vote 'no' on the zoning change which would permit
the land exchange site to be developed.
I have been a owner of a unit in The Willows Condominiums since l97l and I do not
wish to see development encroaching the ski area. I also feel that this development will lessen
the value of my property in The Willows.
Again, please vote 'no' on this issue.
We have noted your position on the amendment and will forwrd your letter to the decision
making bodies for consideration druing the review of the proposal.
If you have questions regarding this requesq please contact Dominic Manriello, Town planner at
970479.2'48.
Sincerely,
Robert W. Mclaurin
Town Manager
enclosure
xc: DominicMaruiello.TownPlanner
Pot--
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
974479-2 1 OS/Fax 970-479-2 I 57
Februarv ll.1997
Ofice of the Titwn Manager
Irving S. Hook
3515 S. Tamarac
Suite 300
Denver, CO 80237
Re: Lodge Properties, Inc. request for amendments to the Town of Vail Land Use Plan and
Vail Village Master Plan
Dear Mr. Hook:
Thank you for your interest in the above referenced amendments. As you may already know,
Lodge Properties, Inc. obtained title to a two acre parcel known as the "exchange parcel" located
south of the Lodge Tower Building. The parcel was previously owned by the Forest Service.
The area is currently govemed by two plaruring documents: the Vail Land Use Plan and the Vail
Village Master Plan. These documents are general planning documents which guide zoning and
development requests. The proposed amendments do not approve a specific development plan or
specific land use densities on the property.
The "exchange parcel" land is currently designated by the Vail Land Use Plan as Ski Base
Recreation and is designated as being subject to the Vail Village Master Plan (the "Plan"). The
Plan, a more specific planning document, identifies portions of the site as being appropriate for
Commercial Core l, Ski Base Recreation, Mixed Use, and Greenbelt Natural Open Space. The
PIan also shows the site as providing controlled vehicular access and bike/pedestrian access.
The applicants have proposed several amendments to elements ofthese plans. I have enclosed a
copy of the application for these amendments which describes the proposal.
The Community Development Department staff is waiting for the applicant to submit more
information before the amendments are scheduled for a worksession with the Planning and
Environmental Commission (PEC). The process for these amendments requires review and
action by the PEC and final approval by the Town Council. These public meetings will be
advertised in the public notification section of the Vail Trail.
{p *"n""* '^'"'
J. .\-i
II
We have not€d yorr position on the amendme,nt and will forward your letter to the decision
making bodies for consideration druing the review of the proposal.
If you have questions regarding this request, please contact Dominic Marriello, Tov,'n planner at
970479-2t48.
Sincerely,
Robert W. Mclaurin '
Town Manager
enclosr:re
xc: Dominic Mauriello. Town Planner
l - .'.-
ll^1:1u.,
. TO?YN OFVAIT
. Input/InquiryR€qponseRecord
The attadred com.srents w.'e recentry receive{ by thlTolm of vail we enco'n6e vailresidents and qrests t?_qr.'s srcirinputana westiv"tturayr"rponses. pLEASEADDRE'' fidse coruba*s-ilEffiiffire woRrorc DAys'Ar.rD RErrrRN *iECOMPLETD FORM TO pAr4 Ana}lpldrtn
D EPARTT'/E\IT TO tItu\DrE INQIJIRY
NiPiiMUEL TO TIA.NDIE INQUIRY
DATE TOV r€CEn/D INTVTNQIjIRY
Tl'@EOF hn UT/n\iOUrRt
PIiONE CALL (indicate date)-
lLxlw tlU.ufu,. #.,l^)"rL A*
d.6'9{
. Qte'p":,l- 'A, t{44)rrv4t- ?t.6oti a 4'44wtL}L'm! a !LETTER(attacired)',,llWt
I€SPONSE CARD (atacired)
LETTET(attad *py)
PIIONE CALL (hdicate date)
D ATE oF RESFONSE FoR\f REfiiRNED By DEARTIfBTT To pAM BRAND.T{fl E .
l-:ii"f ol.tlTir-w.rnd forn will crnrin on 6lc rr urc iclv c.anarunily id:tbnr o&cr. Ar sr g lii: fcra b En rn { b &!t5trncni.v.f, thit inquiry.rill bc coaridrr:d Co:d-
r-f i.\<'rcU FCR tel? 3€ly tr_.r.-\ri '\.r a€--'c r.- = t.F..rJ r.=,r&^,--
BSQE|VEDii3 Iiog7 '"'I
v TELE'HoNE (go3t 773.1236
tRvtNG s. HooK .
ATTORNEY AT LAW
3srs so. TAMARAC, SUtrE 300 - OENVER COLORAOO SO237
January 31,1997
Bob Mclaurin, Town Manager
75 S. Frontage Road
Vail, Co. 81657
DearMr. Mclaurin:
It has been reported to me that The Lodge at Vait may seek to change the "Exchange Land Site"
from open space to a development site.
As a condominium owner at the Willows since 1970, I have seen many changes in Vail Village
that were not originally contemplated. The master plan should not be amended so often relaiive
to more development.
Any attempt to develop the Exchange Land Site should be turned dowr\ particularly having the
road in back of the Willows carry such heary traffc. If not what will hapien to the road in fiont
of the Willows.
Sincerely,
A""uA\"K
Irving Hook
IH:cml
or/Li/s7 FED 15:02 FAr 1514f88308 NASSAU SUFFOTI
Stwel S. Schwer&reich, esq.
286 Northem Blvd.
Grcet Ncch N.Y. I l02l
5t6-{6ffis00
800-93il)886
(nrt 431)
FAX INTORMATION SHNBT
FAX NIJMBER 5 1 6-466.8368
o !d oor
Drte: ll15/97
1'O: Tnwn of Vail Planning Board - 910479-2452
/ l&"^Ca' I Z:oqft^
rlrs)t7 ,o- (xo4,te
+. ?v( ''?rru.-
From: Steven S. Schwartaeich
Number of pagcs including 0re cover sheet I
Additional Mes:xge: [t has comc to my anertion that the lodge at Vail (LPl) will bc submiuing
plans to dcvelope thc property directly ro the soutb of a condominirm tbat I own at the Indge
Tower,200 Vail Road, Vail, Colorado- Since this proposed developmeot dircctly affects my
property I requcst that I be informcd of any rcqucsts by the l-odge at Vail (,Pl) to appcar before
$te plqnning Board in furlherance of their dcsirc to build to on the property in qrrcstion- Plcase
send all nodces in this regard to my officc at:
Stwen Schwartzreich
2S6Norhern lJlvd.
GrcatNock, N.Y. I1021
Thank you lbr your pnrmpt attention to thc abovc.
:'\' :2:17PV;BA ILEY H,{RR t\C-9701790167i# 2/ 7
T tit-\ I nsurance Corporation
wffit'jers Policy of
,r Insurance
PC ; TITLE INSURAI$CE issued bv Title USA lnrurrncc Corporltion. SUBJECT TO THE
EX -r rS FBOM COVERAGE, THE EXCEPTIONS CONTAINED lN SCI'{EDULE BAND rHE
ilti. .15 oF THE COIDmONS AND STIPULATIONS HEREOF, Tirle USA InBurancc cor.
orr '' lexas corporation, hGrcln call€d the Comparry. inrurar, rr of Drtg ol PolicY thown
rn , a, lgrins! lott or damage, not exccoding thc rmount of insurgncs {ersd in
Sc',: .. and coste, rttomsys'lees rnd sxp!fl!98 which the Comprny may bacome
ob' i r,ev herevndcr, lultained or incurrcd bY thg inturod bry rearon ot:
1 :' .: ostete or intciast deocrlbsd in Schcdulr A being vorted oth€twitrthln rl rlltad
tht'"
?. : - . rn or lion or cncumbf anc€ on Duch title;
3. , , f igtrt of occcf s tg lnd lrom the land; or
a. ). 'itrility ol ruch title.
Itl .' I WHEREOF, Titla USA Ingurlncg Corpor|tion hcs crutcd lhi! PolicY to bc tigned
sn.1 ; .,v rts duly authorirEd ofiicorg in tacllmlb to ba vllid, t9 of Oatc ol PolacY shown in
Scir,: only whgn lt bgarS en aulhorizsd, originEl cguntarsighature.
":, .lnsuronceCorpontion
it-
l't-\- v../
=,clett"' *
Attlwrind &grwtort
oP - 27 3065
".J-l L.iD tlr|. AaaOCUttO Olr}lagF! f}iruct - tf/
Secrrrry
' -rql - Ralsatt tr{L ! D eanaoc I o^,y OrS l!trll
B\':
t f ollowing m!ttarr rrB axpr?g6l', rt 1
.--rrg{ ot tha! lotic,y:
Any l8w, ordinlne or govsrn]nerltsi r:
Ing but not linitrd to building ar rj : t r
rcctricling or rugulrting or prohi:(i: ;
u8€ Or €njoyrnrflt of tha l!nd, of '€g,.iii
ter. dinrengigng Ot bcation ol lny inrc
h.rorft€r orictd on th! ltnd, or p ri,'. ;
|n ownc|lhlp or a rtduclron an th! dini.r'
thc land, or tha tHlct of lny violrrtron
Otdin gnc! 91 gqylrnm6ntal rggulAtioir.
2. nbhtt ot sminant domrin or gc'vn, .,.
policg power unl*r noligr gf lhg r,i..i:r.
,ppgrrr in thc public rrcords rt Dr to ul
C.::
$afinition of Tcrmg
i;.) follqwing tsrrns whrn ugod in thi6 +rl::
.'r) 'inrurrd": tha inruEd ntmed in jclrr
' to rny rights or dcfcnrgs ihe Cornp..,,
'nd lhc named insurtd, thora who tu;(.' -
, .rch insurod by oprrrtion of lew :rp .r
;;hrgs includlne, but not llmhed t ). . ,r.
. 'ss€r, gurvivprt, pCrton8l isprlarnt tin i
.:)r8t€ or tiducirry luocessorS.
.rt "lngurrd cloinrnt": ln ingvred dr,in r'.
.:) ^kngwlodge": rctull knowlcdge, r ot :,r '
.., Or nglica which mry ba imputed tc s'
,ry public r,ecordr.rl "lrnd": the lgnd dg3crlbad, loeii,,^"{
..rhcdule A, rnd improvcmonts affi rn(j
conglilule rGal property; provids<, i .
'fr" doss ngl Includ€ rny prop€l-ty b:r,-c.r ::p..cifically dotcribod or rsfarrsd c ..-,
ight, thle, intgrrEt. 6t!t! or ereom? nl :r .
:, rwnsli, tllew, lenot, wal.t or w rte .
",
.r in ghall modify or llmlt the ort€nt to v,,hri:l-,
:d trom thc land is intursd by thit oolic r
.r) "mortggge": mo(grgs, dcqd ot trr:1,
. ; r€cufity InStrum€nt.
i "public Fgcordr": lhon rocords ry\,..r
rlruclivg notics o( msttGr! r€lSting t') : .ii
r.iontinuetlon of In3urlnca &ftr ,
rlonvoyance of Titls
i')i, cov€rsgc of thb polig1 ahall Cs lir j i,.
.. cf Polry irr frvor of !n ingur:d ao ior r,
itr 6n c8t9t6 or intrr€3t in lht lend. :r :r
E curgd by 0 pu?chrge tDoney rnor:Ea,:.
..:r trom auch inlur6d, or 0o long ,$ . .
'lrlbility bV rgacon ol covanantg r,{ v-.,,
. insurFd an cny tlantlar or convoyc. nxl
':st: provided. howlver, thie polisy 6y. r'
,, in llvgr Ot lny purchlgcr trom tJ(,"i
,.8tatE or inlargst or the indebltdnllcs
"...{' monsy mongrg3 givln to Such ih;i.,, t
'?efgnrt lnd P/os€cutaon gt ,{'
'..lioticc ot Glaim to be given t',
iilairnont
; Thc Compe ny, rt its own co31 lnd "!,,- i
provide lor lhe alOf6ns! ot !n Inl,.:, J,i
,i$t og of lstion3 gr procaodlnge c.c '.I' in8ur€d, or r dcf6or. intcrgogod .iee,r
ljlion to onlorco ! @ntrrct tor e l"l':
'r3l in laid l6nd, tothtaxtant thEt 6uch h :
(Condltlonr anr $t:.
BA I LEY 970179016711 3/ 7
Coveragr
3. Drfcctr, licnr, cncurnbrrncee. tdvlrt! drlm3, gr othlr
'nrttgrs
(r) cildrd, .ufhrud, a]rurn d or rgroed io by
th! inrursd clril nt;(bl not knorvn to thc Company tnd
nol !ho',r,n by tha puuic rlcord! but knor|n to thc Insurad
drimsnt .ithor rt Ottg of Pglicy or rt tho drte ruch
clrlmgnt lcqsirrd rn c|t|to or ir rrrrl incurcd by thlr
Folicy 6nd not dirdoa.d ln rrhing by thr lnrurod clein.
tnt to thc Company prior to th. drt ruch inrurtd ctrirn..nt becrmr rn Inrurcd ht und.r; (cl raulting in no
locr or dr]frlga tg tha inaul.cd c.himrnt; ldl lttschang gr
crratad rubqcquont lo Dllr ol Policy; or lll r€BUhinO in
lorr or dcmrgr which urould not hlvc brgn rustrlnad it
th. inrured cltinntnt hrd prid vtluc fro? thc oetclc or
Int€rslt inrurrd by this policy.
n"u-1'
^v
c.
: ?:17P\l :
.ions from
iJ oln tho
r.in (includ.
,'. Jrncnoog)
'ccu9tncy,' '\s ch!r!c-
..inl now Or
,riDa r!tiOn
.. 0r troa ot
, evch ttw,
' rl€hts ot
'ch right6
iens and Stipulations
upon tn allogcd dat ct, licn, rncumbranc€, or elhlr rnlttlr
iuurrd !€dnsl by thir polioy.
{b) The inrurcd $.ll notify tho Comprny promptly In \arr[-ht lll In c.ss rny ac,tion or groca|ding i brgun gr dden!. i!
irtcrpored.t let lorlh in (rl lbove. liil in c.t knowlodgr
a$rll come to on inrurld horlunder ol any cbim of tltl. orirl.rst whlch lr !dr/cr!a lo thc tatla t0 tha cgtglf o? intar.3t.
la inrurcd, lnd u.trich mie hl crus! lo'| or dsnrgc {or whlch
tre Corngrny tnty b. lbbl. by virtur ot ftb policy, or (iiil if
tltlo to lhE stlte or lntar.3t, u ifirurtd, ia ruisctrd ao unmtr.
lrtrblr. lf auch grompt notic. ahsll not tr gwn to the Con-
prny, thsn 99 to ruoh inrured rll licbility ol thc Company rhrll
caraa rnd tsrminrt! In rlglrd to lh3 mlnar or mlttcll for
which auch p/omDl nqtig. k ?cquiEd; jrwdrd, horrrcvcr,
th0t flilurc to notafy thdl in no slr. praludicr thr rightr of rny
trch ingurqd undar thi! pnlic"y unlslr ths Comprny rh.ll ba
poiudicod by such tlllur. ind thrn onty to tho art.nt of such
pr.iudica.
ls) Thc Company rhrll hrvc fhc right st ii8 own co6r lo
Indituts .nd withotrt unduc drby progecuta eny rction or pre
olodino or to do lny othor ict which in h3 opinion mry bf
naolsoary or drairrblo to catlblirh ttr title to ths o3tate or
intrrsrt or insured, rnd lhr Comprny mry trkr rny approprirt.
tqtion undcr ths torm3 ol this policy, whoth€r or not il Eholl
br lirblc thereundcr, rnd rhrll not th.rcbry concld! liobltity or
waivr lny provieion of lhb policV.
{d} Whaneve r thr Congany rhrll hrw brought any adbn
9r intarpoo.d r drf'en|| !! rlqulrod or frsrmitrgd by tha pr+
vifionr ol thir policy, thr Cgnplny mry purcuc rny ruch liti.
ealian to finol detarninrtion by e court of competant
luf bdiction snd gxprf$ly regcrwg the righf , In h3 colo dbCra.
tion, to rppdsl lrom rny rdvorta judgmtnt or ordor.
(cl In ell crscs whcnc thir policy pnrmltl or requirar thc
Conrprny to pros.culc ot provld€ for tha rtgfansr d !ny action
or proca€dang. tho lncurud htrounder gh0ll r6cur€ to the Com.
F|ny th€ right to ro Dro$cuta or provide defrnse in such
tction or proceeding. rnd rll rppsals thercin. ond p€rmit thc
Company to urr, Nt lu option, tho nrme ol auch ineured lor
trch purpoa€. Whtnfwr ruqucdtad by thr Company, auctr
lmursd rhall giva thc Comprny all ruBron8bb rid in rny euch
action ot prooogding. in rffecting tlnbmcnt, 619rrring wi.
Cmqc. g$fsining witnar|.r, gr pno3gcuting or drfrnding 3uch
rclbn or proccrding. and thc Compcny ohall reimburr cuch
lruur.d ior lny !xfn! ro lncurrd.
tl. Notice ol tolg-Llmitrtion of Action
In rddition to th. noticlr rcqutrad undar goragraph 3(bt oltltl Condilions rnd Stipulrtions. . Statlmlnl in writing olfny lo88 or dlmaga for !^.hich it ii Clsimed thr Conlpany is
bblr under thie policy ehall br furnishcd to the Company
wtthin 90 dryr rftrr luch lols or dsmagc ohall hrve bccn
rrnCi, rUb-
turva hld
.,r int6regt
, "\o{ trom
: :1:"ibulee3.
of kin. or
:," dornlge
'i:!,€ knO!v.
1!' roagon
r {le ronO6
rlh lch by
'!he tlrm
:9 ot thc
",1 A. nor..1 arf!€t3.
-,1 nothing
' of 8carrr
' de€d, gr
, ,.v imparl
'ae ss sf
': insured
idd6bl0d.
;y 6 pur'
,d Ehrll
; rr0d8 b|,:rle!€ Or
-ritrnUg In
rf alth€r
lv a Pur.
, "r:Cd
. l.)s detoy.
iitrgetion
'!9.init
rrured in
)il8le or
, :)undod
..oni|nuaa rrl *lude€ on l[t p.g. or htt po ct)
'I A\r 'L't'a:: ;j':, ; 2:18PI ; BIILEY **ry
SCHIOI'LE A
otpolicy. June 26, 1989 et 9:14 A.M. GFNo. 501 l?6-0
rnt of lneunncl t l 1480r9Z5'00
.lme ol ln3utld:
L0DGE PROPERTIES, INC , r Colorado corporatton
-' eslate or intatad in thc ||nd described l"err,n rnd whlch h Covcrcd by thlr Follcy ir: (r t€r, r lrarchgld, atc.l
FEE
'i cltrt? gr Intutrl rftcrrcd lO hor€ln iS e. [J.to ol Pglloy vfdfd In;
L0DCE PRoFERTIES, lNC., o oolorcdo Gsporuflon
.r lsnd tllettcd tO h thit policy ia doBcnt .-- ls lollows:
LEGAL ESCRIPTION SE; 'IRIH ON SIETT ATTAEIED HEREIO AND BY TI{IS
REFERENCE IN@FF,OF(A?|I, I.IEREIN fu'lD FIDE A PART I€REOF.
9704?90+67i# 4/ ?
.- rc''| I (R9r. !o'r7.70ai(t O.s{a} - Sch.dvr. A
Iitir USA riar/?a t Gdraraiion
o t00a orrtt
9701730167t# i/ 7
Polrcy, Bindcr or Commitmeri No
'IEoULE A - @nftnued Pollcy No. 027J065
Order No. ,01 .|76-0
The lsnd roferr€d to r ;ilcy ls sltuoted ln the Stote of Colorodo,
County of Eag le , Eir.., :r- lbed as fol lows I
Coverlng fhe Lanc u Stete of Colorodo, County of Elgle
Descr lbed os r
Lot 2,
Scc+lon 8, Towrs' ' South, Rcngo 80 l{est of the 6th P.M.
I 3?00 t11/af)
3Y:1
^.
-
t'$,1'.*.'8
BB'rlLEY
**U-
POrtcY No. 0 271065
' ;rlicy doe! nol lnluro rgelnsl loe r s. ,:i; by r€uon of lhs toltowrng. Ordor No' 301 | 76'0
'his or clllms Ol pr(ls3 ln po3resstc" ,,.:wn by tha FbltC frcordg.
:€menls, or oloirng of atarmonb, roi , ;ry the public nr@rdr.
;tr6PencioE' conllictr in boundgry li: I rege in arol trlctolchmehts, rnd tny frctr whrch ! @rrtct rurvey and rnspcc.) of the pramittr would dieclose rni ; erj not ctrOwn D, $g pubtio rucordr.
'i lien' or right to r llen. for 8€rv'te3 ' or msttrlal horatoloro or hercrttcr fumirhcd, lmpgioct by law rnd not thownii9 publlc rccord8.
TcxEs drr !0d pcyobre; er : i€x, specrar
".is.ssmenfs, chlrge or ilen rmposed forwater or serer s€rv lce , . ;ny other ipsclal faxlng'disirlct.
Al I oll and g€s rlghts aI 'ed tn Unlted Stotes pctenf recordgd June ?6, 19g9,in Book 508 rf page 591,.
llglt of rcy for dttchr;s r. ,rrs consfrrrcted by rhe authorlry of the unitedStct€s' as rgserv€d ln l.,jr; : rtates pitant recorded June 26, tgg9, In Book 508 atPage 595.
, Reservatlons for rccess *r ,.irvsd In Unrfsd stofcs potont regrdgd June 26,t989, In Book g0B ot pcge ::
feser1:tl9l1-for sP€clr1 'r "mlts es rllorved ln Unlted States pofent recordedJune 26, 1989, ln Book 5,lii .ge 595.
Agrement betveen Lodge pr-,-' . ies and For[t servlce, Dcprrtment of Agrtcurturerecorded l,lay ll, t988 ln ili, ,85 et pcgc ?Z).
9701790107;# 6/ 7
e F. Rose
Arasl.- Carra.T.lfvr.
.:rPoi'cy-Schadvt€B
G 1008 (CO) (11i8E)
i',I:
' (Coaruonr en- .- :
:isrminsd lnd no right ol oction rh;ill i,r:.' rflrlnl until 30 drvc lftgt such !l!:en '
,-ni!hsd. Ftilura to furnish ruch etr'lernp',a
'.ail torminslo rnv liebility o{ lhc Corrlrt r .
i 'io such log| or dlmrgs.
" Optionr tg Pry gr Othsrwiso 1;
The Comprny thall hrvc the opticrr ti:
ille tor or an lhg nlme of !n ingu Ei: i
r:ured rgsin3t or to trrtninlta rll lati)iiriy
:r Company hartundrr by psylng o rt"
'J Emount gf iniurunce under lhis 9clit.- 1s, lttorncw'f.tc3 rnd gxDO'1t99 In::u'
',ah pgymsnt of trndcr o{ plyrnsnt, rv il',
,:C s'rthoriz€d by the Comprny
,. Delerminstlon rnd Plymorlt ri r.
rrcnt of gny ruch rngrtga!ff rny rrnount thtt othlrwigf would
be oryoble hcrcundet to the imurud ownrr ot the retale or
anb€31 coveod bV thb policy and th. ,mount !o Dgid rhrll
bc dccmed e peyment undor thb policy to sald Insunld owno?.
10. Apporlionmrnt
lf thr hnd drrcribed in Schrdulr A conrirt3 ot tw$ or rnorc
grrocb which sr6 nol uaod l' | lingls dtc. lnd . loec lr etttb-
lashod rfiecling onG or m6! of |3id pfcrlr but nol !ll, ths lo3.
rhrll bs computod rnd .dtbd on t Dro rrt! brlir ar ll thc
amounl of inEurlnca undsr thb polkY wu dlvidad pro rltr t3
!o tho vlluo on Drte of Poficf st rach rprrrto prcal to th.
wtrole, cxcluriva of tny imgrowmrnE mrde Subaoauant to
9rtc of Policy, unLrs r liability or vllu€ hr8 othrrwi$ be€n
rorrod upon rt to arch tuch prhoal by th3 Cornptny lnd thr
inrur.d sl th. tim. ol thr bsurnc! ot thi. polkry rnd shown by
tn rxprelrs stalcmcm hcrain or by an lndof3ernsnt ttttchad
hrrgto.
I 1 . Subrogrtlon Upon Ptymsnt or Irttloment
lvhlnsvsf lhe Comprny Nlrrll hrw aafiLd a cleim undcr
thil policy. lll righl of rubrogrtion rhrll wst in thc Comgrny
unaflacted by rny rct of the Inrurrd chimtnl, Thr Conprny
ahrlibG oubrogrl.dto lnd br lntltl€d ro rll righls rnd r€madi.8
rvlrlch.uch lngurod cbimrnt wo{H hrve hrd rOrind lny
grllon or prop0 rty in ?rqrect to such claim h|d thir t olisy nol
bccn isru.d. and if rrguttrd by thr Comprny, ruch lmurld
Cbimlnt rhllltrurltor to the Gompany rll rightr rnd rornodicr
fglingt f ny porson gr prlporty noo !.ry ln ord.r to par{acl
tuch right ot 3ubrgettion rnd shrll p.rm[ the Conprny lo
us thN nsrig of rudr in3uitd clrlmant in uy trrnetc,tbn or
lldg:tlon involvlng luch dghta or rrmsdi€3. ll tha pr}|tncni
doat not co^rrr th. lsl of ruch lnsrtod chlmrnl, thc Cornpsny
thrll be subrogrted to ruch riglr$ rnd r.m6dica In th3 propor.
tion wtrich reid pryynrnt berru to thc rmount of uid losr. lf
bcr rhould rcrult from rny lct ot such inrurrd cljmtnl, iuch
act 3hall not voirj thlr golicy. 6u1 tho Cornpsny, in thll ry€nt,
lhtll bp rwuircd to pry only th6t p8rl ot tny lG!!s imurrct
rgrinrt hordundar which shrll cxcccd tho rmount, il ony, lsst
to the Compeny by rurrcn of tbr imprlrmcnt qf the rbht ol
lubrogation.
12. Liabitit|, Lhnhcd to thir Poticy
This anrtrum.nt to0rthor wtth all rndorromrnir ord dhrr
inrirum€nts, lf eny. rttrchcd hcrelo by the Company b thl
rntirc policy rnd @ntt.rct brtwcsn tho lruurGd .nd tha
Compsny.
Any claim ot lqrs or drmage, whrthsr or not l}ltad on
nogligcncs, rnd wfiich rrisrs out o{ the slrtue ot thr tirleto tha sEratc or intaratl covsrcd hcreby or 8ny tclion
asgtrting such elsim, rhall bc reglrictcd to thc provisionl! d condrlrong rnd rtipuletions ol thie policy.
l{o amendmcnt of or rndorrerrpnt to thtr pollcy crn b.
mada axcapt by writing rndorrad hcraon gr rntchod hcrrto
rhnld by shhrr thc Prcridrnt, r Vicr Preddent, lhp Sactc-
tsry, In AsEirtrnt Eacrttlry, or vtlidtting Ofticlr or ruthor.
Itad lignslory ol the Comprny.
13, Nottces, Wher! Sent
. All noticas lnd 3tatcmcnti pcrmifled or rcqui'ed to br givgn
thc Company harrundsr musl b€ givgn tg thc Compairy in
wrlri^g gt irs homg oflicarddr€$s, TitleUSA lhgurenca CorDo.ntlon 680 Dcckcr Driw, lMng, Trxr: 26O62.
o.to9l.t '
qa insurud
. 'rE!€ b€€n
' +f dlrnrgc' thi8 golicl
" Clsimt
, o'lhtrw|Egri 6ny cLirr1
'J{rirgglion! of
i,ryrncnt Of
,,tr with rnyi' ttl€ lim'3 of
. -s6 clrimlnt
E
BilLEY**U 97017901671# 7/ 7
i;) The liability of th. Company urdEi iir': . t ri.ll In no
.re€ excaCd tha l.rst ol:
{i) the rctuat losa of the insuroa iL lf.
(ii) thc !mount of insurancs Eleled 'io) Tho Comprny will pay. in rddir io- ".
:lainst by this pollct, rll costs impo:laC I
..lation crrried on by tho Complny l: ;,
':i8, lnorngyt'fogs rnd cxp€ng€6 in 11..:
.;,i h insured with lhe rwitlen ruthorirrt',
1e l Whln lisbllity has been delinrt rit
.l\ lhe conditiont of ihig policy, tlr€ 03,
ryable within 30 dryr thereafter.
l-imitttion of Llebllhy
i.io claim thgll rri5r or be rn0int8i,tsbt-r
if ths Comprrry, rfie I hsving r€cdr\,6d i1..
::rcl, li€n gr lncumbr8nca ingured q-:.
::9tion or Othcrwigc, Frmovas srrch ,iji ,
rflce or 68t8bli8hrt tho t,tle. !3 in$u!e.i ' i
;.: ster rec€ipl of auch nolicej (b) l', r;
r'ril !hs7s hpg bo€a a tinal dalerminsli, )n '. ..rt iurisdiction, !nd disposition of srl .':
'r,l rse to thr tillc, ri lnSurcd, a8 prov; I.
' ' ro{; or lc) tor liobilily volunll rrly gr s'Jr, L,
'illlng cny cl8im or suit wilhout Drlor w' ji,
'j.i' ol nY.
Roduction ol Liebiliry
.ril psyrn€nls under thie policy, exoli.t :
:.-i9, Bttorneys' t€es and expenscs, sri, i..
:1o rnEurtncg pro t!t1lO. No paymenl 11.:,'
''duclng thig pOlicy for €ndoru€men'i or' ,r.
', policy bt losl or dgtlroyed, in vrr ic i. .
.D ot drrlruction ghall be lurniehsrl tr
,'r Compsny.
Lirbility Noncumulativs
:l is ?xprlErly undcrstgod thal lhr. 8,.
'rJor this polisy Ehall be reduced by s.r,
' 'Y mav pay under lny golicy insu.rr g i
, :lvn or rclemed to in Schedul€ B h,r:,*,,'
: eet€te or int0n96l COVarod by lhis p rr c ,,'.8ner oxocutld bV an insurod whi( 5 r:
, rstrlq gr anttrusl dGtcrib€d or rei '-r," '
d the rmount so prid rh6ll ba deemcd , r'
-i,.*/. Thr Comprny thlll hrve the op ir-'r ,
"- ic A.
,.:'ss ingurud
, intu rsd in
' :C, and sll
r.ried on by. Company.
t acordrncc
' Ee rhall bc
thb policy
.t nn .llsged
su ndcr, by
.)r gncum'
'6Ssonablaar lit igetion
'' 'r o{ compe-. th!rgtrom,
. '-'agrrph 3
i, rngurgd in
slnt d th€
.., rrade lor
:,e Smount
n i.l s wlt hout
'tBnl unloss'Lri of tuch
'i.rl6clion of
. inEur!nce
: ihe COm-
: morlgage
;!rttnon
, fiortg0g€
?r lton On
,\eculc A,
u nder lhig
' ) tho pgy.
and/or thc Desigrr Review Board.
A. TYPE OF APPLICATION:
tr Additional GPJA (250)
tr Bed and Brealdast
tr Conditional Use Permit
tr Major or tr Minor Subdivision
tr Rezoning
tr Sig: Variance
tr Variancc
Cl Zoning Code Amendment
auest! Call thc Planning Staffat 479-2138
PLICATION FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
COMMISSION APPROVAL
tr Amendmcnt to an Approved Development Plut
tr Employee Housing Unit (TYPe:
-)
tr Major or tr Minor CCI Extcrior Alteration
(VailVillage)
tr Major or tr Minor CCII Extcrior Alteration
(Lionshead)
O Special DweloPment District
tr Maior or E Minor Amcndment to an SDD
o
AP
GENERAL INFORMATION
This application is for any project roquiring approval by the Planning and Environmcntal Commission' For spocific
information. see the submittatiequiremcn6 for the particular
"pptouul
that is requestcd. Thc application can-not be
accepted until all required information is submified. The projecimay also need to be reviewed by the Town Council
B.DESCRIPTIONOFTHEREQUEST: Amendment to VaiI Villaqe Master
TOWN OF VAIL
c.LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:LOT-BLOCK-FILING ( see attached)
ADDRESS:BUILDINCNAME:
D.
E.
ZONING: Natural 4tea Preservation (
NAME OF OWNER(S1; Lodge Pro rties, Inc.
MAILING ADDRESS: The Lod e at VaiI , 174
PHONE: 475-5011
F.OWNER(S) SIGNATTJRE(S):
G. NAMEOFREPRESENTA Tim Losa
MAILINC Zehren and Associates , Inc. P. O. Box 'l 976
Avon, Colorado 81 620 PHONE: q4q-0257
FEE - SEE THE SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE APPROPRIATE FEE.
SUBMIT THIS APPLICATION. ALL SUBMTTTAL REQUIREMENTS AND THE FEE TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, T5 SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD'
For Office Use Only:
Fcc Paid:- Ck#:By:
Application Date:PEC Meeting Datc:
H.
VAIL. COLORADO EI657.
Rcvi$d 6/96
o
A
GENERAL INFORMATION
This application is for any project requiring approval by the Planning and Environmcntal Commission' For spccific
information. se€ the submittat re4uiremens foi ttre particular
"pprou.l
that is requestcd. The application can-not be
accepted until all required information is submitted. The projecimay also necd to be reviewed by 0rc Town Council
and/or the Design Rwicw Board.
A. TYPE OF APPLICATION:
tr Additional GRFA (250)
tr Bed and Breakfast
tr Conditional Use Permit
tr Major or El Minor Subdivision
tr Remning
tr Sigrr Variance
tr Variance
tr Zoning Code Amendment
Oue! Call the Planning Staffat 479-2138
PPLICATION FOR PI,ANNING AND ENVIROI{MENTAL
COMMISSION APPROVAL
tr Amcndmcnt to an Approved Development Plan
tr Employee Housing Unit (TYPc: )
El Major or B MinorCCl Exterior Alteration
(Vail Village)
tr Major or tr Minor CCII Exterior Alteration
&ionshead)
tr Special DeveloPment District
tr Maior or tr Minor Amendment to an SDD
DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST:Amendment to Vail Land U
TOWNOFVAIL
c.
D,
E.
ADDRESS:
ZONING:Natural Area Preservation Di stric
NAMEOFOWNER(S): Lodqe Properties, fnc-
MAILING ADDRESS: The r,odge at Vail. 174 E- Gore creek l-triwc
Vai1, Colorado 81 657 ; 476-5011
F. OWNER(S) SIGNATURE(S):
C. NAMEOFREPRESENTA Tim Losa
H. FEE - SEE THE SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE APPROPRIATE FEE.
SUBMIT THIS APPLICATION. ALL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS AND THE FEE TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUMTY DEVELOPMENT. 75 SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD'
For Officc Use Only:
Fee Paid:cld:By:
Application Datc:PEC Mcctinq Datc:
MAILINGADDRESS: -Zehren and Associates, Inc. P
Avon, Colorado 81620 PHONE:949-0257
vArL, coLoRADO 81657.
Rctiscd 6/96
'fhc l,odge at Vail
Lodge ('Irade) Parcel
Project Number 95977 .02
Master Plan Amendments
Revisions to Town of Vail Comprehensive Plan
Site Description
The site is that as described in United States Land Patent Number 05-89-001 l, Sixth Principal Meridian,
Colorado, T. 5 S., R. 80 W., sec. 8, lot 2, containing 2.07 acres.
Revisions to Vail Land Use Plan
Existing Conditions
The existing Land Use Plan indicates that approximately 45%o of the site to the east lies within the
Village Master Plan (VMP) boundary while the remaining 55% is within the Ski Base (SB) boundary'
The site borders land indicated as Low Density Residential (LDR) immediately to the northwest.
Proposed Amendments
The entire site should be included within the Village Master Plan (VMP) boundaries.
Summary
The adopted Land Use Plan is not consistent with actual lot boundaries and zoning. For any
improvements to occur within areas designated in the land use plan as suitable for development, the
adopted Vail Land Use Plan should be revised to reflect actual site boundaries.
Revisions to Vail Villase Plan
Master Plan Terms
Existing Conditions
The existing plan indicates that only 80% of the site lies within the Vail Village Master Plan Boundary.
' The plan also indicates that approximately 40Yo of the is site to the northeast is designated as
Commercial Core l, while the remainder of the site within the plan boundary is indicated as
Periphery/Sunounding Area and Area Included in the Urban Design Guide Plan.
-p-. ProposedAmendments
The entire site should be included within the Vail Village Master Plan Boundary. The site should be
removed from the Commercial Core I designation and indicated as Periphery/Sunounding Area.
Sumntary
The existing plan is inconsistent in that it only recognizes a portion of the site. Any development that
ma\i occur on the site should coherently relate to the surrounding village through inclusion of the entire
site rvithin the Village Master Plan and Urban Design Guide Plan. The entire site should be removed
frorn tl.re Commercial Core I designation because this may dictate a particular ztining designation that
could lirnit certain aspects of future development on the site.
Revisions to lllustrative Plans
Land Use Plan
Existing Conditions
The existing Land Use Plan indicates that approximately 30yo of the site lies within the Mixed Use
designation to the northeast with the remainder within the Ski Base/Recreation designation to the south.
The site is also immediately adjacent to Medium/High Density Residential as well as Low Density
Residential land use designations to the northwest.
Proposed Amendment
The entire parcel should be included within the Mixed Use designation.
Summary
The existing plan only identifies a portion of the site as mixed use and ski base/recreation. Designating
the site as Mixed Use would allow for the maximum flexibility in the development of the site in that it
would allow for a subtle transition from the higher density mixed use and public areas bordering the
northeastern areas of the site to the low and medium/trigh density residential areas bordering the
northwestem edge of the site.
Open Space Plan
Existine Conditions
The Open Space Plan indicates that approximately 50Yo of the site to the southwest lies within the Open
Space designation.
Proposed Amendments
The entire parcel should be removed from the Open Space designation with a portion of the site
indicated as PIaza /Green Space.
Summary
The complete removal the open space designation from this parcel from would allow for the flexibility
in developing a subtle transition from the built environment to the north to the national forest to the
south. A portion of the site immediately below the ski run termination to the southeast should be
indicated as plaza with green space to promote a pleasing, more public area for skiing activities.
Parking and Circulation Plan
Existine Conditions
The Parking and Circulation Plan indicates Controlled Vehicular Access from the northwest comer of
the site to the southeastern comer the site with adclitional vehicular access at the northrvest corner of the
site. No Parking or Delivery/Loading Zones are indicated on the site.
Proposed Amendments
The entire site should be designated as a Study Area with the possibility of Delivery /Loading Znne as
well as Public Parking based upon further research. The Controlled Vehicular Access across the site
should be maintained.
Summary
The existing circulation patterns for Mountain Service as well as access to One Vail Place through the
site should be maintained. Areas indicated as Public Facility/Parking on Action Plan Sub-Area#3'1,
(The International Wing), should be relocated to this area of the village as they are not feasible for area
indicated as Sub Area #3-1 at this time.
Buildins Heieht Plan
Existins. Conditions
The Conceptual Building Height Plan indicates no building heights on the site. The site is immediately
adjacent to areas designated as Eight Stories (non-conforming) to the north, as well as two areas
indicated as Three to Four Stories to the northeast and northwest.
Proposed Amendments
The entire site should be designated as Two to Three Story Maximum Height.
Summary
The Building Height Plan and Building Height Profile generally indicate a stepping of building heights
from five to six stories from the frontage road to two to three stories at the mountain. As the current plan
indicates no building heights in this area with three to four story structures immediately to the north, the
site should be designated as two to three story building height to maintain overall consistency with the
plan and a stepping ofbuilding heights from north to south as well as away from the village center.
Action Plan
Existine Conditions
The Action Plan indicates that approxim ately 30Yo of the site to the northeast lies within the Commercial
Core One (#3) Sub-Area. The site is also directly adjacent to the Willow Circle Sub-Area (#2) to the
northwest.
Proposed Amendments
The site should be completely removed from it's Commercial Core I designation and identified as a
Study Area with the possibility of Comnrercial Infill and Public Plaza at the eastern edge of the site,
Public Facility/Parking below the northem edge ofthe site, and Residentialilodging Infill over the entire
site. Special Emphasis should be placed on Master Plan Objectives 1.2.2.3, 2.4,2.5,2.6,3.1,3.4' 5.1'
and 6.1.
Summary
Increasing the number of short term rental residential units, (2.3), encouraging new commercial activity,
(2.a), and upgrading existing commercial and residential facilities, (2.5), should be encouraged with any
development on this site as it is integrally connected to the existing hotel as well as being located
immediately adjacent to the village center and ski slopes. Additionally, development of affordable
housing units or other mitigation measures, (2.6), should also be encouraged in the development of this
parcel.
Existing pedestrian paths and plazas atthe ski area base should be expanded to include this area which is
cunently an exposed parking and service area, (3.1). Additionally, the existing recreation path ttrough
the site should be fully developed to the western edge of the site, (3.4).
Existing conditions at The Lodge at Vail/Intemational Wing effectively eliminate the possibility for
parking and delivery facilities, (5.1, 6.1) as identified in Sub Area #3-1. These objectives should
therefore be relocated to this adjacent parcel ofland.
It
Il!
fI
a
r
J
r
!
A. BvB. Bvc. 8v
I
I
t
;
I
E.
requested zoning is not consistsnt with the adopted plan, this non-conformance shall be addressed by the applicant. It will be theresponsibility of the applicant to clearly demonstrate how conditio;rshave changed since the Plan was adopted, iro" tn" plan is in error orhow the addition, deletion or change to the plan is in concert withthe Plan in general . Such nonconfoimance shall then become a i'ac.::rfor consideration in the rezoning process, arong with all other fac-tors considered in such casesi with respect to- Town ordinances andpol i ci es.
Annexation of National Forest Lands
In the future, the Town may desire to annex National Forest lands forthe-pu-rposes of recreat'i onal and,/or public iacility development. Thiswi l l i nvol ve close coordination wittr ttre Forest service. However,National Forest land which is exchanged, sold or othenvise falls intoprivate ownership shouid remain as -open space and not be zoned forprivate development.
Parks and Open Soace
-
consideration should be given by the Town to amendin! tn. ordinancetnig! regulates the reaf estate transter tax to all-ow funos to beutilized for the devel-opment of parks and open spacd, in iooition tothe purchase of these lands.
Anendment Process
The amendme.nt process is one which is intended to assure the pran,s effec-rrveness wrtn periodic updates to reflect current thinking and changingmarket conditions. The process inciudes amendmsnts which rna-y ue lniiiiteiin any of the following it"ee,lys: ----
the Communi ty Devel oprnent Department.
:lt. llanning,and Environmentil Corrn.ission or Town Council.the Pri vate Sector
F.
3.
r
The community Development Department should update and revise the pranevery three to five years, whenever possible. However, it ine plan isnot updated wiihin such . timei'rame, this shar r not'jeopirdize th€validity of the pran- This shouia incrude analysis of the goars and
?3li9ies.; updating of the forecaiting'iooer and review and revision ofthe Land use Plan map.. The conrnuriity Developm"nf o.pu.trent wouldthen make reconrmendations. for p.opot"'o changes to the planning andEnvironmental conrnission where tr'ar.-aninges would then be consideredin a .pubi ic hearing format. in" pG"ing ano Environmentar conmissionwouid then make relornmenoations to i.he Town councir, whic; xourd arsohold a public hear.i ng on in. p.opol"o changes. If adopted, thechanges would then become a part of lfre plan.
61
I
a
t B. Planning and Environmental conmi ssion or Town counci l Amendments
These entities could also initiate plan amendments periodically, as
deemed appropriate. These amendments would also require puDiic triar-ings with both the Corrnission and the Council, and upon adoption then
become a part of the plan.
Private Sector Amendments
The private sector may a1 so initiate amendment reouests. These shouldbe initiated in the following way:
c.
Make application with the Cormunity Development Department.Appiication rnay be made by either a rigistered voter, a properEy
owner or a pr0perty owner's authorized representative. Suchappl ication may be made at any time.
!!!! upptications wilI then be consirlered at a meeting with theP&EC. At the Planning and Environmental Commission hearing, arecormendation shail be made to the Town Council, whereupon adecision shall then be rendered. To change the pian oy ttris p"o-cedure, it will be the. responsibility of tne appliiant to cleirlydemonstrate how condi t,ions have itrangeO since the pl an wasadopted, how the Plan is in error or hdw the addition, <te'l etionor change to the plan is in concert with the plan in general.
Such decision may 'include approval , approval with condifions ordeniai. Anendments may De requested fii cnanges to the goals an<lpolicies and/or Land Use p1 an'map. If such iequest is ipprove<!,such change shall be made to the plan documeni anO/or map. Ifsuch request is denied, no such request that is suostantial ly thesame as that previously denied shall be considered for a periodot one year.
4. Use of the Land Use pl an l.lap
The Land use Plan nap and the goar statements are intended to serve as the. primary focus for the review of development proposais, along witir-Town'ordinances and.regulations.. The Plan ltai: ana !oii itai6menrs-are rounoeo.upon the supporting information and data contiined i.n this document andtherefore should not be uti lizeci as the sole instrument ior analysis of iproject. Any- project should be reviewed within the context of the intentof the overall Plan Document. The conmun.i ty Developm"ni-o.pu.t"ent, alongwith the -Planning and Environmental Conmission and To*n Council will beresponsible for the interpretat'i on and implementation of the pran.
1.
2.
I
I
I
I
A
II
62
t
I
I
i
I
r
t
i'
I
II.t
I'lhere the 400 scale Land Use Plan map (adopted by reference herein) does
not adequately define a land use category boundary, the boundary shall be
interpreted by the Connunity Development Staff. It should be noted that
the boundaries established on the Plan l,tap are general in nature and werenot determined based on parcel by parcel property boundaries. tthen
ambiguity exists, generally, roadways, natural barriers and property edgesshal'l define such boundaries. Hhen a property in single ownership is
divided by a land use category such that the property cannot be developedin a feasible and logical way for either-land'use, ttie staff may determine
which use.i.s appropriate, based on compatibility of surrounding land uses,Dotn exlsErng and proposed, and physical site characteristics. [here adisagreenent between che staff and the applicant occurs, appeal.s may be
made to the Planning and Environmental Corriission.
In conjunction with the use of the plan fiap, the constraint maps adopted bythe Town for geologic hazards, snow avalanche and flood plains referencedherein shall also be utilized in the review of any deveiopment proposal .
Areas_ wtrich may fall within the I-70 corridor shalI be dqtermined byconsulting the Town right-of-way maps also referenced herein.
I
I
II
1'I
I
t
I
63
VIII. II.IPLEMENTATION AND AMENDMENT
A. Irnplementation
The Vail village Master PIan, once adopted,.will become a
part of the vail comprehensive PIan which, in its entirety'
will serve to !u:.ae growth within the To!'n of VaiI for the
next fifte.n y6utt. The Vail Village Master PIan is not
intended n. tatufutory in nature, but is intended to provide
a general ttit6"".r. t6 guide decision naking' specific -inflementation rneasures should be undertaken to assure that
the intent of the Plan is carried forward throughout ttre life
ofthePlan.Suchmeasuresshouldincludechangesto
ordinances and regulations or policies adopted by the Town'
These .""=rrt"" sh5uld also i-nclude developing a systen -by - -which tne pfin tuy U. continuously rnonitored and periodically
amended. This is important because the planning process rs
one of continuou= "vtlution with data, public opinion, and
market forces changing over time' The followlng are some
more sbec:if ic wavs-th;t the r/ai1 Vl-Ilage Master Plan might be
ruvrv vFvv--4
irnplenented:
1. The creation of an overlay zone district for the
area covered bY the Master PIan'
'2. The adoption of an inpact fee system to provide for
inproveirents in the Townrs service infrastructure
toacconnodateadditionaldeveloprnentinthearea
covered by the VaiI Village Master Plan'
3.TheinitiationandcornpletionoftheVailVillage
StreetscaPe ImProvenent PIan'
4. The incLusion of public i-rnprovement pro;eccs ..
discussed and outlined in the plan in the Capital
Inprovement Progran of the Town of Vail' and the
neil nstate Transfer Tax improvement program for
parks and open space of the Town of Vail'
B. PIan Review
within one year after its adoption, and not less. than every
three years, or as deemed necessary' the.communrty
Devetoprnent Department of the Town of Vail should undertake a
review of the pf.n. Any changes recommended by the staff
will be subrnitled to tht Planning and Envi-ronmental
Commission of the Town. If the plan is not updated or
reviewed within the tj-rneframe suggested in thi-s paragraph, it
shall in no way affect the validity of the plan'
63
I
I
I
I
I
l
I
I
t
t
i
il
a
T
I
I
a
t
t
c.Extensions and Amendments
D.
In accordance with Section 2'24'06o of the Municipal Code of
the Town of VaiI,''tli;-pfttt shall be adopted bY-the Planning
and Environlnental i.*ti'==itn of the Town of vaif and approved
by the Town coun"ii.-----tn" Planning and Environnental
conmission tuy uoiii .xt.tt"iotts, idditions' or amendnents to
the PIan ror approial by the Town council' Before the
adoption of the pri"l ol "ny such arnendrnent' extension' or
addition. tne pfanning conrnission-sha11 hold at least one
public hearing, tit"i.6", notice-of the tine and Place of
;hi;h snall l"'gi;""-ry'".," publication in a newsPaper of
;;;;;"1
-;ii""i"[i""--in-tne r-own of Vail no later then seven
days prior to the Jate set for the public hearing' The
adoption of the plan shall be by motion of the Planning and
Environmentar cornrnission recornmending approval of the PIan by
the Town council.
Approval of the Plan or any amendment' extension' or adoption
thereto shall oa iy"u-tesoiution of ttre Town council at a
regular or special public meeting'
Docurnentation of Pro'iect Cornpletion
Upon project courpletion, the Master Plan shall be updaLed as
appropriate Uy tn--cornrnunitv Developme"t l|?fl:--Tni"adrninistrative uplati"g-*iri not reguire the amendment
process. lrojeci-;;;;i"iiol^itt, a pirticular sub-area may
warrant a review-of other affected sub-areas' Such a revi'ew
shall folrow ptotJi"i.i-is tound under PIan Review in
Section B above.
o9
r" -L_ :+- "
?<'----'.I
-.--..t_
-..--
''
?\-\---.- - \ ....----.r_.- --\- _ .-../
.--\-.=-------+
'L.-----"-----
.\ -----.--t-'.r'. '..._s
F= "= _- -, : i.\.==,>
^ ;: =.{
J
It.
Ii'
I
i
t
J:
. CHAPTIR iI - LANO USE PLAN GOALS/POLICIES
The goals articu'r ated here refr ect the desires of the citizenry asexpressed through the series.of pubric meetings itrat-were n.io -tn-ror6nori
the project. A set ^of initiar loars were developed which were then sub_stantially revised after. differeit types of opinions *.." u.orght out inthe second meeting. fhs goar_.stalimenrs were developed to ref'l ect ageneral consensus'-once.the.-p-ubric hac had the opportunity to reflect onthe concepts and ideas rnitidlly presented. The goar statements were then.revised through the r.eview proi.ss with the ruit'-ro"cel-ine ptanning andEnvironnBntal conrnission and'lown councir ana non'ripr.lJrt a poricy guide_line for the Land use. p'ran.- irr.re-go.rs are to be used as adopted pol icyguide] ines in the review frocets-io""new oevetofr.nt p"oporuir. These goalstatements should b.e usei in conjunction wittr- ine- ;oJ[i.o Land use planmap, in the evaluation of any Aeve-topnent proposal
The goal statements which are reflected in the design of the proposed pranare as follows.
l. General Growth/Devel opmnt
1.1 vail shourd continue to grow in a controiled environm?nt, naintaininqa balance between. resid6ntiar, cornrnercial and recreiii;r;i ';;;";;
serve both the visJtor and the permanent resident.
I'2 The quality of the environment including air, water and other naturalresources should be prot,ected as the Tow-n grows.
1.3 The quality of developrnent should be maintained and upgraded wheneverpossible
1'4 The original theme of the old village Core should be carried into newdevelopment in tle. yil rage core through continued imprementation ofthe Urban Oesign Guide plan.
1.5 commercial strip deveropment of the vailey should be avoided.
1.6 Development proposars- on the hirrsides shourd be evaluated on a caseby case basi s ' . - lilt t.d-, de.ver opment .may -De perrni tte<' for sorne .l
owintensity uses in areas that are not-nilnry fiiioie-i.om the val.leyfroor. New projects shourd be cjrefurry ionlroir;; ;rj o.r.i"p.o ,riiisensitivity to the envl'ronment.
I
I
I.7 New subdivisions shoul d not be permi ttedareas.
1'8 Recreational and puolic facility:developm.ent o-n National Forest landsmay be permitted where no high hazards ext!t-i},i "--'-"
in high geologic ha::rd
a) Conununity objectives are
Pl an.b) The parcel is adjacent toc) The affected nefghborhood
process.
net as articulated in the Comprehensive
i
the Town boundaries, with good access.can be involved in the Ceiisfon-matlng
{t
I.
t'
il
f.'
Il.
1'9 National Forest.rand which is exchanged, sold or otherwise fails intopri vate ownershi p rnoui o
'""*'''i'i',
op.n space and not be zoned forprivate developmenr
1.10 Development of Town owned lglds by, the Town of Vail (other than parksand open sDace).may b.e- permittao-in.r. no high hazards exist, if suchdevelopment is for puuljc use.
1'11 Town owned lan!.1-^sha,.not be sold to.a private entity, long termleased to a orivate entity-or c-oiverted to a private use without apublic hearing process.
i.
,.
t'
I
1.12
r.l3
2.
2.1
vail should accommod-ate most oi" the additional growth in existingdevel oped areas ( infi I I ur.rij. -'
vai-l recognizes its -stream tract as being a desirabre land feature aswer I as its potential for puUf i. ,*. -
Ski erlTouri st Concerns
The conmunity should emphasize its role asaccommodating day visitors.
2'2 The ski drea owner,_the business communi!r qF the Town readers shouldiill '"o|""tj|i,.tt"t^';ti.
to make exiitine ti.liiti"! uii .n" ro,,n luncl
2'3 The ski area owner,-the busir::s:cornrrunity and.the Town readcrs shourdwork together to improve facifliiei ior day skiers.
a destination resort |{hile
sunmer recreational and cultural oppor-touri sn.
non-skier recreational options to improve
I
iItI
!
I
:
2.4 The.cormunity should improvetunities to encourage summer
2.5 The community should improveyear-round tourism.
2'6 li#'ilil:1"."t,?,t;rii!!'l."tinX"'.,1*' Th.- rown shourd work with the
ij: il,, I. r, i;;i,; i; F, i",..,.Ju", ifr . i.?! :L:! ::;.j,. f "i#..11.::i:,: i
2'7 The Town of vail snouio improve the_existing park and open space randswhi le continuing to purchaie op"n ,pu...
z.B 3ll.;lJ:"rJ]Tf,rr#:J;r:Tl and access sholld be accommodated throush
a) Increase busing from out of town. \.b) f]3:tffl.it"ints ot dccess to ttre mountain by addins additionarc) Continuing.to. provide temporary surfice parkino.d) Addition 6f structurJo-iiliiis. ;
3. Conmercial .
3.1 The hotel bed base should be preserved and used more efficiently.
rt.
t1,
i:
t,,
ll
ir
t:
3'2 The village and Lionshead areas are the best rocation i,or hotels toserve the future needs of the destination ifii."r.----'
3'3 Hotels are important to the continued success oi. the Town of vail,therefore conversion to conJominiums snoutd be discouraged.
3'4 commercial .growth shourd be concentrated in existing cormercia.r areasto accofinodate both local and vili.tor needs.
3'5 Entertainment oriented businesses and curturar activities shourd beencouraged in the core areas to create-diru.riiy. "Nor. night timebusinesses, on-going events and sanction.c';st"..i happen.i ngs,, shourdbe encouraged.
4. Vi I I age Core,/Li onshead
4'1 Future conmerciar development shourd continue to occur primarily inexisting commerciar a.eai. Future.cornmercial deveropment in the coreareas needs to be careful'ly controiled io r..r'iiiut. access anddel i very.
4'? Increased density in the core areas is acceptable-so rong as theexisting character of each area ii preserved through implementation ofthe urban Desisn Guide pran ano t,."viii''iiiri'i!"Nil'r." prun.
4'3 The ambiance of the vil,r agq is important to the identity of vail andshoul d be preserved. (scil e, at fi ne .rturu.t."l 's*il
town f ee l i nq.mountains, naturar setring,' in*mate siie,- irirrJ"rii.ir" i"iiiliilenvironmental quality. )
4'4 The connection. between the vi r r age core and Lionshead shour d beenhanced through:
a) Installation. o,' a new type of people mover.b) Improving tl:.-q:1",r!"iin -iv'rt"m with a creative.ty designedconnection,- oriented toward i nature walf, aipine garden, and/or
. r .sculpture plaza. 'r' e'r"'s
c) New deve'r opment should be controted !o r imit conrnercia.r uses.
5. Residential
5.1 Additional resident,iai growth should continueexisting, platted. areas- unO ur
"ippropriate
inhazards do not exist.
.l
l.
I?'
I
t
L
,.L
II
tb occur primarily innew areas where high
5'2
::l:ltilo:ttte share units should be accormodated to herp keep occupancy
5.3
5.4
Ai'fordable employee ho.us.ing shourd be made u.uu\11ote through privateefforrs, assisted bv rimite? rnceniiues, prpvided uv inl'iii,^ of vair,wi th appropriate restrictions.
Residential qrowth tllllL l..p pace with:the market place demands fora full range-oi' housing uypesj ' r':r' rrrrE rrrdrKer place d
5'5 The existino rrr].:{.q. hou.sing base shourd be preserved and upgraded.Additionar improyee nousing'ne-el-i shourd be accommodated at variedsites throughdut-the co-unitv.""
L
.1.
I
rlr
l-
(!'
r-i!l
I'
6. Corrnunity Services
6.1 Services should keep pace with increased growth.
6'2
llirrtoi"&;l.Ji;t.,11':1',",?::i. a rore in future deveropment throush
6'3 Services shourd be adjusted to keep pace with the needs of peakPeriods. ^r\'P PqLC vr I Lrr Ltltr
A number of addition.L g,orls were.developed as a result of the publicmeeting input. These goirs were retiieo to other erements of the compre-hensive Plan such as Farks ano necreition, rrinspirtiii6n uno EconomicDevelopment. These _are included only 16, i;;;;rti;;;l purposes inffltifrflil;o Jl!'F,goar! i"e ;iio-nsi"oeied as a part or lne eoais adopted
tiIai
itr
Iil
ir
II
I
t'
T
8A
1.9 National Forest land which is exchanged, sold or otherwise falls into private ownership
should remain as open space and not be zoned for private development.
I .10 Development of Town owned lands by the Town of Vail (other than parks and open
space) may be permitted where no high hazards exist, if such development is for public
use.
l. I I Town owned lands shall not be sold to a private entity, long term leased to a private entity
or converted to a private use without a public hearing process,
l.l2 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill
arcas).
1.13 Vail recognizes its stream tract as being a desirable land feature as well as its potential for
public use.
2, Skier/Tourist Concerns
2.1 The community should emphasize its role as a destination resort while accommodating day
visitors.
2.2 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders should work together
closely to make existing facilities and the Town function more effectively'
2.3 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders should work together
to improve facilities for day skiers.
2.4 The community should improve srunmer recreational and cultural opportunities to
encourage summer touri sm.
2.5 The community should non-skier recreational options to improve year-round tourism.
2.6 An additional golf course is needed. The Town should work with the down valley
communities to develop a public golf course as well as other sports facilities to serve the
regional demand for recreational facilities.
2.7 The Town of Vail should improve the existing park and open space lands while continuing
to purchase open space.
2.8 Day skier needs for parking and access should be accommodated through creative
solutions such as:
a) Increasebusingfromoutoftown.
b) Expanded points of access to the mountain by adding additional base portals,
f:\everyone\dom\codesect\landuse. I 28
c) Continuing to provide temporary surface parking.
3. Commercial
3.1 The hotel bed base should be preserved and used more efficiently.
3.2 The Village and Lionshead areas are the best location for hotels to serve the future needs
of the destination skiers.
3.3 Hotels are important to the continued succcss of the Town of Vail, therefore conversion
to condominiums should be discouraged.
3.4 Commercial $owth should be concentrated in existing commercial areas to accommodate
both local and visitor needs.
3.5 Entertainment oriented businesses and cultural activities should be encouraged in the core
areas to create diversity. More night time businesses, on-going events and sanctioned
"steet happenings" should be encouraged,
4. Village Core/Lionshead
4.1 Future commercial development should continue to occur primarily in existing commercial
areas. Future commercial development in the Core areas needs to be carefully controlled
to facilitate access and delivery.
4.2 Increased density in the Core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character ofeach
area is preserved through implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail
Village Master Plan.
4.3 The ambiance of the Village is important to the identity of Vail and should be preserved.
(Scale, alpine character, small town feeling, mountains, natural setting, intimate size,
cosmopolitan feeling, environmcntal quality).
4.4 The connection between the Village Core and Lionshead should be enhanced through:
a) Installation of a new type of people mover.
b) Improving the pedestrian system with a creatively designed connection, oriented
toward a nature walk, alpine garden, and/or sculpture plaza.
c) New development should be controlled to limit commercial uses.
5. Residential
5.1 Additional residential growth should continue io occur primarily in existing, platted areas
and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist,
i\everyone\dom\codesect\landuse. 1 28
5.2 Quality time sharc units should be accommodated to help keep occupancy rates up.
5,3 Affordable employee housing should be made available through private efforts, assisted by
limited incentives, provided by the Town of Vail, with appropriatc restrictions.
5.4 Residential growth should keep pace with the market place demands for a full range of
housing typcs.
5.5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and upgraded. Additional
employee housing needs should be accommodated at varied sites throughout the
community.
6. Community Services
6.1 Services should keep pace with increased growth.
6.2 The Town of Vail should play a role in future development through balancing growth with
services.
6.3 Services should be adjusted to keep pace with the needs of peak periods.
A number of additional goals wcre developed as a result of the public meeting input, These goals
were related to other elements of the Cornprehensive Plan such as Parks and Recreation,
Transportation and Economic Development. These are included only for informational purposes
in Appendix B. These goals are not considered as a part of the goals adopted in this Land Use
Plan.
f:\everyone\dom\codesect\landuse. I 28
Chaptef ll
Vail Transportatlon Masler Plan
CHAPTER II. VAIL VILI..AGE DELIVERIES
DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
While the Town of Vail was originally conceived as a pedestrian oriented village' goods delivery and
various service functions'i"*".*ii.O in sienificani anJ unOesitat! ::f^k activitv in desiSnated
pedestrian areas. This p.oUl.* is partialty the result of inadequate service and delivery facilities'
especially alleys, which ,.quir., tfrat good! .nO t.tui..t be provided via "front-door" access points'
This condition is most eviient in Vaifvillage in contrast to the Lionshead area which was desiSned
with delivery a...r, ,yr,uriJ.'fii siiuutionlcombined with Vail's greater than expected growth' has
magnified the problem oit.t"i.. tna delivery vehicle conflicts with pedestrians' The result is not
only an inefficient aeriuerv svrte tut.tto an adverse effect on vail's appearance and image'
The specific area of Concern for this analysis is shown in Figure l and generally lies south and west
of Gore Creek Drive u"i'rrliri-Ci..r.. rttit area is accesseld by Willow Bridge Road' Gore Creek
Drive, Bridge Street, Vail RouJ, .na Hanson Ranch Road. There are 3l designated loading zones for
deliveries which are currently located along the wesi side of Willow Bridge Road south of willow
Bridge (t4 parking rpu..ris u.ii.le spaces plus I handicap space near summers Lodge and 4 near
Riva Ridge), the south siie tf Gore Cieek Drive ( l0 parking spaces, 5 near. Lodge at Vail and 5 near
Mill Creek Court), the west side of Bridge Street adjacent io ine Plaza Building (4 parking spaces)'
and on Hanson nancn noaO (f i,-"trif "i til;*1. nifteen minute parking zones for all vehicles are also
provided adjacent to the ah;istiania -paitine lot. Larger delivery vehicles -are
currently prohibited
in the Village area from t:lO evt to io'go er"r anJiiom 2:00 PIri to 5:00 PM during ski season and
I l:00 AM to 2:00 pM in the summer season. Atl delivery vehicles are required to pass through
Check- point Charlie f o.rtJ on ifr" west end of' Gore Creek brive. A survey of land uses within this
area was conducted by T;;;iliir to ietermine floor areas of primary truck trip Senerators' Table
I summarizes this data.
Because of the many ditferent establishments represented in the area' it is not possible to define a
typical delivery pu,,.rn.
-'Ho*."tt, o cumulaiive demand level for the entire Village can be
established with reasonable accuiacy. The quantity ofgoods and associated truck volumes generated
is based upon typical O.fi".ty tiO.is and standard itu.t"ttip generation rates bv land use type' These
data are compared with simiiar information documented ina-tggo ptanning study in the village 1 and
were updated to reflect 1990 conditions'
The analysis of goods delivery operations indicates that peak summer activity is approximately l3%
less than peak winter activity. While this is not a majoi difference in magnitude' winter operating
conditions are much ,nor" r.u.r" indicating that the *inter season is clearly the critical design period'
In addition to basic goods delivery, however, there is a considerable amount of related vehicular
activity consisting or autos, uun, und pick-ups, as o'ett as large trucks. These vehicles are typically
performing a variety oi fun.iiont inctuding maintenance and repair' customer service' and trash
pick-up, Table 2 Oocurn.nts each of these functions along with their relative daily activity levels'
Technica|Report(undated),TownofVail,DepartmentofCommunityDevelopment'
19E0.
Tov/n of Vail
Page 6
Vail Trampondion r".,el J Chapler ll
oq)
r(Abo >\ii v)
c,)
o
IJ
q)Eooo
o0
,2x
rrl
sc
.la
E
a.
i
:
|(,
E
q)
(!
a.U,
o
oa
:a
14
qto
t4
14ooo{
o
o<t,
o
ql
ir{
r(ttt\\N
o
ot\
q
ctao{
o
()
€
E
o
soa
tFt
l..1l .lt!
U
o
o
Pago 7Town ol Vail
Vail tran sporiation Master Plan
I
I Teble I
Floor Arees of Prlmery Truck Trip Generators
(1980 Square Footages)
l. Sitzmark (83 cCD)2. Gore Creek Plaza (193 GCD)3. Schober (201 cCD)4. Creekside (223 cCD)5. Covered Bridge (227 Bridge Street)6. Gasthof/Gramshammer (231 Bridge St.)7. Gallery (228 Bridge Street)8. Slifer(230 Bridge Street)9. Clock Tower (232 Bridge Street)10. Lodge at Vait (t58-t98 GCD)
I l Lazier Arcade (225 Wail Street)t2. Casino (250 GCD)13. Plaza(281-293 Bridge Street)14. Hill (31I Bridge Street)15. One Vail Place (244 Wall Street)16. Liquor Store (280 Bridge Street)17. Red Lion (304 Bridge Street)18. Gold Peak Hs. (2ZB HRR)19. Cyranos (298 HRR)20. Mill Creek Court (302 HRR)
Totals
GCD = Gore Creek Drive
HRR = Hanson Ranch Road
4,600
3,004
3,500
3,338
8,816
7,477
859
2,790
9,035
7 ,371
3,744
8,000
8,056
2,348
5,408
2.,194
5.,321
3,080
3,800
2,,937
5,798
6,583
5,247
8,997
3,000
3,835
4,800
524
2,102
2,528
2,342
3,916
4,199
3.553
89,4t4
I I,448
t,260
5,434
aaug
9,953
r,000
2.746
29,31O
Note: Numbers were increased to reflect I 990 status.
Town ol Vail Page I
Vail Trans Dortilion Master Plan Chspter ll
Table 2
Peak Season Delivery and Service Volumes
(Estimates of 1990 Activity)
Average DeliveryFunction Trios Per Dav
Emergency Operations
Priority (Police, Fire, Ambulance)
Non-Priority (Maintenance, Repair, Service)
General Maintenance, Repairs and Service
Major (more than I day)
Minor (less than I day)
Product Delivery (r)
General Retail Goods
Food/Perishables
Vending (Soft Drinks, Confecrions, Tobacco)
Liquor and Alcohol
Taxi Services
Package Delivery and Pick-Up
Customer Specialty Service
Trash Pick-Up
Totals
As Required
As Required
As Required
2- 4
t40 - r70
8- l0
8- l0
2- 4
As Reouired
t62 - 202
Product delivery activity of 140 to 170 vehicle trips (half of the vehicle trips enrer the Village
area and half exit the Village area) is made by 70 to 90 trucks. This truck volume conducts
approximately 230 to 250 separate deliveries and generates a total commodity volume of 1,900
to 2,100 cubic feet per day.
Town of Vail Page 9
V;il Transoonatlon Master Plan Chapter ll
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Basic planning objectives relative
following hierarchy:
o Pedestrianization should be emphasized as a priority.
vehicles should be eliminated from the Village core'
Ideally, therefore, all trucks and service
o If this is not feasible, the number and size of trucks in the Village core should be reduced.
o Gore Creek Drive (between Check Point Charlie and Mill Creek) and Bridge Street should not
carry any vehicular traffic.
o Design solutions need to be sensirive to surrounding neighborhoods and the natural
environment,
Demand estimates indicate that approximately 25 to 30 delivery and service parking spaces are
required to accommodate rhe existing delivery demand during the peak season' In the future
approximately 35 to 40 delivery and service spaces will be needed. These new loading zones should
be located in response to both environmental constraints as well as pedestrian and retail space needs.
CHARACTERISTICS OF DELIVERY SYSTEMSz
In order to better understand the consequences of the alternatives which are available to Vail, it is
important to ctarify the two basic characteristics of any goods and services delivery system which
fully or partially fulfill the previously stated objectives. These characteristics are:
o Surface vs. Subsurface Operations
o Direct Service or Decentralization vs. Non-Direct or Centralized Operations
Subsurface (or underground) delivery systems may be applicable when (as is the case in Vail)
insufficient space is available on the surface level to separate incompatible delivery functions from
other activities. The primary factors affecting the feasibility of subsurface delivery systems are
constructability, liability, and costs. If these factors can be overcome, the primary objective can be
satisfied.
Direct service delivery refers to the situation in which individual merchants order their products from
multipte vendors who are responsibte for bringing the product directly to the merchant. This type
of detivery system emphasizes a high level of service to the merchant and can, therefore, result in
excessive truck volumes in the core area due to multiple product types and varying delivery times.
The entire product delivery effort, however, is the responsibility of the merchant and the vendor.
to the goods and services delivery system ate,ordered in the
Much of the material presented in this section is
meetings held with vendors and truck transportation
based upon conversations and
providers during March, 1990.
Town of Vail P89e 10
Vail Transportation Mester Plan Chepter ll
By
to:
contrirst, the application of a centralized delivery system in Vail Village would be done in order
o Transfer less-than - truck- load (LTL) deliveries to smaller vehicles, and
o Consolidate small deliveries onto fewer vehicles.
To accomplish these objectives of smaller and fewer trucks in the Village core, service to the customer
is typically reduced primarily in terms of delivery times and frequency. This is due almost solely to
the fact that a third party is involved in the product delivery system. Construction of a warehouse
facility, purchase of down-sized delivery vehicles, personnel to operate and maintain facilities,
insurance, and product replacement are all third party responsibilities. In most instances, this third
party would be the Town of Vail or a private business under contract to the Town. In any case, the
Town woirld be responsibly involved in the product distribution system.
Time restrictions on goods delivery is a means by which competing uses of limited physical space can
be monitored and allocated to priority functions. As such it is a compromise which is imposed on the
area in order to avoid excessive capital expenditures while retaining a certain level of convenience
and efficiency for delivery operations. In addition, rhe Town's involvement is restricted to its typical
regulatory and police powers. The Town currently has time restrictions for product delivery and
intends to continue these restrictions.
ALTERNATIVES
Five alternatives have been identified which address, in varying degrees, the objectives listed
previously to reduce vehicle/pedestrian conflicts in Vail Village. These alternatives are defined as
follows:
Alternative I - Subsurface Tunnel Svstem
This alternative consists of tunnels directly below Gore Creek Drive, Bridge Street and Hanson Ranch
Road. The tunnels would be large enough to accommodate full-size trucks such that direct service
to all merchants is retained. The tunnel entrance would be located north of the current site of Check
Point Charlie and exits would occur in the vicinity of Mill Creek, with underground traffic oriented
one-way in the eastbound direction. Underground access to buildings would be provided via
installing basement doors, staircases, and service elevators to the surface level.
Alternative 2 - Small Vehicle Subsurface Tunnel Svstem
This alternative is similar to the subsurface tunnel system except that the underground tunnels would
be sized to accommodate smaller vehicles (such as Cushmans) to reduce costs. Such an operation
would require centralization of deliveries where goods would be transferred to third party vehicles.
Tovvn of Vail Page 1 1
Chapler ll
vail TransPortatlon Mesler Plan
This alternative is similar to the existing situation exceot^truc.ks Y:,u-,ld"1o:^b'::::"^-:: :lj:tii:l,l:'.i"'ffi"hlT;T1i.'il";:ilil";;;;;tdc; sT:'!,:"-Y1.9l"'..:::::'SX":.::'l1l"X
Christiania Parking area or
under Hanson Ranch Road.
i"'" *irv .""i,ru"t.d site" in ttte vicinity of where Mill Creek passes
This alternative consists of a central receiving area at which delivery trucks would transfer product
to smaller vehicles. fne iOea is to replace targe, ttucLs currenrly 6eing used in Vail Village with
smaller vehicles. ro matce inis feasible, a ,"arehouse rrtoura u. wit-hin ctose proximity of the village;
rr"iit"uiv i7n til. o, less, and in no instance greater than l/2 mite'
This alternative is identical to close-in centralization except that th: *"-t:l-o:* receiving area would
be located away from tfre-Vlffage area where f"ni-ptitt-' would be more feasible' The idea is to
consolidate goods so that fewer delivery trucks would be needed' However' it is unlikely that small
vehictes would have rurri.j.ii torqu. ino g.uringio putl rhe larger loads over the longer distances
inherent in this alternatir;:-i;";, *nite tt e nurnU.i Jl t'ucks would be less' the size of the typical
delivery vehicle would be relativelv large'
Alternative 5 - Decentral izat ion
FIRST LEVEL EVALUATION
Rn initial screening of the five alternatives was conducted in order to identify key factors which may
mak€ an alternative un....piuUi.. it is "tatat ftaw" evaluation is summarized below'
The subsurface tunnel system would be a major undertaking involving three major issues:
ConstructabilitY
o LiabilitY
o Costs
The construction of such a project would require the excavation of approximately 32,000 cubic yards
of material, and 5g,000 square feet of new ,uppoit-r-tru"iure for ihe pedestrian areas above' All
utilities and other infr*ii*t*" that are "urt.tttfy
!"-fo* the surface such as storm and sanitation
sewers, water, gas, tefepnone, unA electric *outO neeOlo be relocated' Construction would take a
minimum of 2 years and more likety 3 to 4 years.
-poiaiont
of the Village would be entirely closed
off to pedestrian traffic, anJbusin.sses would be t.quii.Jio tttut down during certain critical periods
of the excavation Process.
Town ol Vail
Pago 12
o
PlanVail Transportation Master Chapter ll
Town liability would be siSnificantly affected. Tunneling in cldse proximity to existing development
would have to be done ut-ithing special procedures to minimize potentiat damage or weakening a
building's structural integrity. tuen upon completion of the project, it is possible that structural
J"r"g. t".Ji..rnt buildings may not bi evident for l0 to 20 years or more after project completion'
The liability ionsequences of this alternative would continue indefinitely.
The cost of the tunnel project can only be grossly estimated at this time' Basic excavation, Structural
components, and utility rilocation would be approximately $30 to 40 million- Costs associated with
building access modifications, insurance, material disposition, and portal treatments would increase
total project costs to $50 million or more.
Although this alternative achieves the primary objective, its construction, liability' and cost
implications make it impractical.
Thereforc, thls alternative is recommended to be eliminated from further consideration.
Alternative 2 - Small Vehicle Subsurface Tunnel Svstem
The srnaller subsurface tunnel system involves the same basic issues of constructability and liability
but at a reduced project cost ol ;pproximately $ | 0 to $ I 5 million. In addition, this alternative would
involve maintaininj a central receiving area where goods would be consolidated and transferred to
smaller vehicles foi ultimate access to the customer. Given the fact consolidated loads would be
carried by small vehicles, this kind of delivery centralization would be just as appropriate on the
surface. As a consequence, tunnel excavation would not be financially necessary if delivery
centralization was to occur.
Therefore, thls alternative is recommended to be elimlnated.
Alternative 3 - Centralization (Close-ln)
The centralization alternative urilizing a close-in receiving area (within one-quarter to one-half mile
of the Yillage) would make use of smaller vehicles in lieu of larger trucks within the Village to
complete thi delivery, Delivery trucks would unload their cargo onto smaller vehicles (such as
Cushmans or tractor units simllar to airport luggage trains) and then transport it to Village
destinations. Operators of the vehicles could either be the truck driver himself or a third party
employee. Delivery vehicles within the pedestrian area would be smalter in size, and the number of
vehiclis required to deliver the same volume of goods would decrease by approximately l5% to 20%
over the existing situation.
Advantages
o Many or all of the larger delivery trucks would be removed from the core area.
o Total truck volume in the core area would be reduced.
Town ot Vail Page 13
Vail Tran sportetion Master Plan Chapler ll
Disadvantages
o Land acquisition costs would be extremely high for a close- in receiving area and a warehouse
operation. may not be considered a compatible land use with adjacent properties.
o All delivered goods would need to be "double-handled", that is, they would need to be
unloaded at the receiving area and reloaded onto another vehicle before delivered to an
establishment.
o The Town of Vail would likely become financially and legally involved in the goods delivery
business. Maintaining the loading facility purchase, operation, and insurance of vehicles; and
product liability would all be elements of the Town's involvement.
o This alternative may not be appropriate for all types of deliveries, and therefore may only be
. a partial solution. For example, special arrangements would likely be required for liquor
deliveries, since the law requires liquor to be delivered directly to liquor-licensed establish-
ments,3 This may be resolved if, in securing the liquor license, the establishment also obtains
a license for an optional premises, such as a warehouse.
This alternative (or variation thereof) may be an appropriate solution, but further evaluation is
necessary to determine its feasibility.
Alternative 4 - Centralization (Remote)
The idea behind a remote centralized facility is to locate tlie facility away from the Village where land
acquisitioo is less expensive and construction is more feasible. Such a facility would have similar
characteristics to a close-in site, and many of the advantages and disadvantages would still apply.
However, a remote site would introduce additional problems which include:
o Less flexibility would exist for merchants requiring essential deliveries. If a particular
establishment has placed an order that it needs as soon as possible, the delivery truck may be
punctual in delivering the irem(s) to the warehouse facility, but the final delivery would be
subject to the toading of the third party delivery truck. That is, a delivery from the ware-
house to the Village woutd not occur to accommodate just one merchant, The truck must be
sufficiently loaded to warrant making a delivery trip to Vail Village.
o Smaller delivery vehicles woutd not be appropriate for a remote site. A larger truck would
be required to efficiently consolidate products and to operate in mixed traffic conditions
between the warehouse and the village. Therefore, large delivery trucks would still access the
Village.
Conversation with the Colorado
Division. March 23. 1990.
Department of Revenue, Liquor Enforcement
Town of Vail Page t4
o
Vail Transportation Mestet Plan Chapter ll
o Delivery of perishables, food, or vending products may need individual attention and they
may not lend themselves to be consolidated into a common truck. As a result many special
trips to the Village would be required which is contrary to the objective of reducing truck
volume in Pedestrian areas.
For these reasons, Alternative 3 (close-in centralization) is a more practical solution than Alt'rnative
4 (remote centralization)'
Therefore, thls altcrnative ls recommended to be eliminated from further consideratlon'
Alternativg 5 - Decentralization
The primary focus of a decentralized delivery system is to maintain the current delivery scheme' but
to piohibit aU delivery vehicles from the Viltage core. This concept could be implemented with
continuing time restrittions so that trucks would not be allowed during heavy pedestrian traffic
periods. in addition, restrictions could be imposed such that no delivery vehicles would be allowed
ln the Village on certain days of the week. Additional loading and unloading areas could be provided
at the Chriitiania parking iot ond/or a newly constructed loading zone which would be located on
Hanson Ranch Road in th-e vicinity of Mill ireek. AdVantages and disadvantages of this alternative
are as follows:
Advantages.
o Bridge Street would be free of all delivery iraffic.
o Goods are not "double handled".
o Town of Vail would not be financially or legally involved in the delivery business'
Disadvantages
o Does not relieve Gore Creek Drive of delivery activity.
o Drivers would be required to handcart goods further for deliveries destined to establishments
on Bridge Street north of Gore Creek Drive.
o Vehicles would be parked for a longer time period.
o Impacts on surrounding neighborhoods and the natural environment which may result.
This alternative or a variation thereof may be an appropriate solution, but further evaluation is
necessary to determine its feasibility.
Town ol Vail Page t5
Vail Tran sportation Master Plan Chapter ll
SECOND LEVEL EVALUATION
The preliminary technical analysis conducted to this point suggesc that two basic goods and service
delivery alternatives have sufficient potential to warrant more detaited investigation. These
alternatives are:
o Alternative 3: Close-in Centralized Delivery
o Alternative 5: Decentralized Delivery with Bridge Street, Gore Creek Drive, and Hanson
Ranch Road Loading Zones Relocated
A more indepth analysis is now required to select the preferred plan.
Alternative 3 - Centralization (Close-ln)
A review of this alternative yields several issues and concerns to be addressed as follows:
o What is the best location for a decenlralized warehouse?
How big should the "small-vehicte" fteet be?
o To what degree would the Town of Vail need to be involved and be responsible?
Alternative locations for a central receiving area are limited to the tightly spaced build out of the
Village area. Four alternative sites have been identified for additional evaluation which include the
Christiania parking lot, the parking area east of Garden of the Gods, the Golden Peak tennis courts,
and an area just off of Vail Road immediately south of the Lodge South condominium towbr.
The Christiania parking lot site illustrated in Figure 2 is characterized by having the dock area below
the Christiania guest parking area. The grade difference between Hanson Ranch Road and Gore
Creek Drive lends itself to construct a two-level structure on this site in which the lower level would
be used for unloading and the upper level would be used to replace the parking that currently exists
on that site. Access to the lower level would be on Gore Creek Drive and access to the upper level
would be provided via Hanson Ranch Road.
The Garden of the Gods site shown in Figure 3 is characterized by having the dock area entirely
underground below the surface parking at Vail Trails. Since this is a relatively flat area, a significant
amount of 'ramping" is required to transfer delivery vehicles from the surface level to the lower level.
The single unit delivery truck ramps would need to be a minimum of 330 feet long to traverse the
elevation difference, and the small delivery vehicle ramp would need to be approximately 220 feet
long. The single unit truck ramps would have to begin descending immediately south of the Gore
Creek bridge along Vail Valley Drive. Consequently, Gore Creek Drive and other parking accesses
would have to be closed off from Vail Valley Drive due to the access ramps. In addition, these ramps
would be located very near existing buildings (Vorlaufer and VailTrails), and the excavation required
in constructing the ramps may adversely affect the structural integrity of these buildings.
Town ol Vail
-
Page 16
chapter ll
Vail Transporlrtion Mastr Plan
Small Vehlclc
DellverY Acccar
\\
Dock Ar€a Accesl
(Lower LeYol'
nri{o
GoPdoo2
I //
\/
\/\" -/ Dock Aroa\ \'z' rr-"oi?tliiu
Lol Accels
(upp€r
Levcl )
Figure 2
Centralization Site
I
lt
t\\
%oo
\t..
:t\
\un".Qec^i
\l\::ltlll
Chrlstlanla\- Parklng
Mitl Craek Court
Town ol Vall
Christiania Lot
Pagr t7
o
VEil Transportauon Masler Plan Chaplef ll
. rat\%'\'.q'\ o*
\
\
Vail Trails
/\
I/)
Figure 3
Garden of the Gods Centralization Site
,-Close Parking Access /z\
Town ot Vsil
Page l8
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
E
I
I
Tr
I
I
I
r-{.l
Vall Trans portatlon Master Plen Chapter ll
The Golden Peak tennis courts site shown in Figure 4 is characterized by a loading area located on
the current tennis court level. The embankment along the south and west sides could be used to
support a roof over the loading area in which 3 tennis courts could be replaced. No tunneling would
be required since the loading area and rarnps would be at about the same level as Vail Valley Drive.
The Vail Road site shown in Figure 5 would essentially be located into the side of the moudtain.
Delivery vehicle access would be via tunoels located off of Vail Road. The southern side of the dock
building would be 35 to 40 feet below the ground surface, and the northern side of the dock building
would be partially exposed.
ltems of concern regarding a close-in facility site include the following;
o The site should be located as close to the Village core as possible to shorten the small deliverv
vehicle trip length and to minimize intermixing with regular traffic.
o The site should be sufficiently large to accommodate the maneuvering of combination unit
trucks off of the public street system.
o The facility should be covered and concealed to the extent possible for aesthetic reasons.
o The site should not significantly affect the surrounding neighborhoods and narural
environment.
o Constructability and costs of the site should be-reasonable.
Of the four sites, the Christiania site would be located closest to the Village area which is its biggest
advantage over the other three sites, Planning level costs are estimated t; be $1.4 to $1.7 milli;.
The Garden of the Gods site would be totally underground. However, installing the necessary
ramping would close off key access points onto Vail Valley Drive (e.g. Gore Creek Drive) as well as
impacting adjacent buildings. This alternative conflicts with many goats of the Streetscape plan forVail Yalley Drive. Because this site requires extensive tunneling and excavation total impl;mentation
costs are estimated at $2.4 to $2.9 million.
The Golden Peak tennis courts site is located furthest from the Village core, but would be easier and
less costly to implement since minimal excavation is required. The structural needs for the roofingat this site would also be less stringent since roof toading would be much less. In addition, thi
impacts on surrounding parking and the tennis court area are easily mitigated and additional space
is available to expand the dock and apron area if future needs so dictate. iotal implementation iostsare estimated to be $t.4 to $1.7 million.
Town ot Vail Pago 19
vail Transoortation Master Plen Ch8pter ll
tf ()
gca
b0=
tL .-
ctt
N
(\l
Q)r\
ja6
c)
c)!
oo
c
rglz
lc
\qt
q)
a.
€
o(lCD
.EJ'
6o-
o(,qt
t(r,
6o
oq
7,'33lli3*
6o
too
3oEl4ac(/r.6
. €Eg€ Eli
E EEi
'f 'Ei
Page 20Town of Vail
Vail Tran spor|lion Mast6 Plan Chapter ll
r(D
YA
O0 L.
6N
c!
q)
Q
E
cdo
cl
' --7
!--l
E6Cotie
-oo(DAP<5
I f-J
/
=s
q)Io
-,t
--7.,
tl
, ^cr'.oo /
F-/
Cr.
Psge 21Town ot Vail
o
Vail Transpgrla0on Master plan
Chapter ll
The vail Road site south of the Village core also requires extensive tunneling and excavation on adifficult construction site. while nearly totally concealed, implementation costs are esrrmated to be$2.0 to $2.4 million.
In the event that Alternative 3 is implemented, the Christiania site would be the most desirable of thefour since it is located closest to the village area, it is not as disruptive to ihe sur.ounding area as theother alternative sites' and would be one of the more inexpensive alternatives to construct.Implementation will require extensive treatments to deal with the many aesthetic concerns oiat;,;;;.
The size of the Cushman fleet. is dependent upon vehicle detivery times; that is the time that eachvehicle is away from the _w.arehouse making deliveries. These rimes witf be higher for warehouses .located further from the village core. Based on an estimated quantity of about 2,000 cubic feet ofdelivered goods and an effective small vehicle capacity of 40 cubic fiet, a close-in site such as thechristiania lot will require a fleet of 7 veh.icles *h.ruu, the other sites wourd require g to 10.
The only logical third party would be the Town of Vail which would ultimately need to construcr rhewarehouse facility, acqu.ire land for the facility, acquire the Cushman vehicles, and maintain theentire operation. The Town would also be directly or indirectly responsible for the condition ofdelivered goods. The burden of implementing and maintaining i ceniralized delivery system couldbe placed upon Village merchan$ or the delivery companies.
Alternative 5 - Decen tra lization
Three areas were discussed as potential locations for new truck loading zones under the decentratizeddelivery system. These areas are:
o Development of a combined alley/pedestrian corridor along Mill Creek between Gore CreekDrive and Hanson Ranch Road.
o A formalized truck roading zone between cyranos and christiania.
o A lower lever roading zone benearh the existing christiania parking rot.
The Mill creek corridor is sufficiently wide to accommodate a one-way alley, provide an open waterarea, and retain a landscaped pedestrian corridor, Relocation of the Mill Creek channel would occurfrom a point north of Hanson Ranch Road to Gore Creek Drive. The ability to provide a walkwayconnection through the build.ings along Bridge Street (North of the Red Lion) is complicated bystairways to upper level dwelling unitJ and 6tn"r building elements *rrict *ouro have to be re-constructed and modified. If access between these buildinls cannor be pro'rrided, the alley conceptstill performs two imporrant functions:
Town of Vail
Page 22
o
Vail Tranaportadon Master plan
Chapter ll
I
x
il
I
o Close-in replacement space for the loading operations which now occur on Bridge Street, and
o A connection between Hanson Ranch Road and Gore Creek Drive which enhances truckaccesstothesouthendof BridgeStreetandtheareanorthof GoreCreekDrt;.- - -'-."
Up to six 35-foot truck spaces and nine 25-foot truck spaces can be provided along the alleyway.Basic construction costs are estimated to be approximateli $100,000. ttie amount of landscaping andpedestrian improvements desired and the structural modilications involved in providing
"
p.j.rtri""
access through the buildings facing Bridge Street could increase ttre lmpternentation cosis ,,i iisorooiito $250,000.
The ared between Cyranos and the Christiania building can be designed to accommodate up to eighttruck spaces: but more realistically five spaces in consideration of tie natural environment. cvrio,would be affected with.the majol change occurring to the small parking area and trash containerholding area next to Christiania. Exclusive of any rilht-of-way costs, thir""r." could be constructedfor approximately $50,000.
The area under the existing Christiania parking lot results in approximately l7 additional truckparking spaces under a simple parking deck struci.rre to replace the christiania parking area. productdelivery to the core area would also be via handcarts. Implementation costs for an jnformal truckloading zone at this sight is estimated to be $750,00d to $aso,oo0 exclusive of land costs.Implementation will require extensive treatments to deal with ttre aesth*ic concerns of the site.
Table 3 summarizes the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative. Details of the planningIevel cost estimates for all of the alternatives are presented in the Technicar Appendix.
Alternatives 3 and 5 were presented to vail village merchants and representatives from variousproduct vendors. Two meetings were held for discusiion.no "g.n.i.iugiI"..n, *., made regardingthe following items:
o Elimination of goods delivery operations from Bridge Street was agreed to be an importantobjective.
o The truck loading^ area -between Cyranos and Christiania was generally considered a good. replacement area for Bridge Street.
o Th9 truck loading area on Gore Creek Drive immediately east of Check point Charlie wasdesired to be retained in order to keep walk distances and truck d*"ll times to a minimum.
o Existing short-term p^arking areas were suggested to be converted to truck loading zones onlyand adequately enforced. This includes thi areas on Gore Creek Drive next to the Mill creekbuilding and the Christiania parking lot and. on Hanson Ranch Road next to the christianiaparking lot.
t
I
Town of Vail
Pag6 23
Vail Transoortation Master plan
Chapter ll
==33oo33> > zz> >7
f;: :6; 5:o .: s;g K; 'E
y,n ;; trEg .:l f.;P 3E E
Elt €€ EE;;^c E!- 6e
9:H .= tr e) 4tHgt SI. EEE";E ts! 6F€$; F-! :9x.=5 :6 :!!i;d FE Ega Eo o ZEE Z
6=gi .i g
UD.- G - :-'^E -- z E.='- > c
=-g ;Ee d's:; $$i i:3s '::E ;3 iii'; : E q g o) ';
f,€ i'*EEe :€,Hr ':;; :sE'E 3s; rs-g E =Eg;!,;Egi't-. 3:gE
E"E ii: :9 's g8,E#;! F gg sf^ E d a? ---=:" :*'gi9 g,,g :s.F iisggi
c.:i Es t sf -i ="Eg -Sg,€€s* .i_qE 96€
ts E;* ff3E igE;EE:.;g €,gE ;siS !,EEFJE."sot d c-' 5
I
q,
I
(l
O
o
<)
Q)
Ea,
oo
!)
t
.,
o
o
o
ID
qJ
:
o
A
o
E
a5
a
trl
raar,E
=E,aIF(h
Ir
Ir
I
I
I
H
t
I
s
r
I
I
I
t
I
I
Pags 24
Town ol Vait
. Vel Transpona0on Master phn
Chaotef ll
g
it)
Ian
t-
E
t660o. -o- I3-3 Eas8 *
-+- (,
3sB e"q.6-e- ! .=a;o; (l
'ai '.r..-- ::
iA 19 e9 LrJ C
qcE
.= .9E66rt t/,oq)ed,ge
'EO:-
g>
>3
rT
:H
€.EEl!
-!o
g
(!cta36Ef
* q g f? reag-.: A -! d5 3?_3f,qE ; : q,F€ i 3*i;; sY:;i E
E- I g5;?f !EE€f r
; E E E5EE3 x=55i ?.;.= u) = J q)5,1 ,E
lua
zz
Io.o3tA crc t\v
O -a!-c!- aata9atAI eges3 >:E:o :aaC
- <a!qa{q ta 91 tAgo
o
5!(,
t
o
-t0-(|:!:c
,'t r{
,-r ioE.cE.ct :t- tt
Page 25
Town ol Vail
Chaptg ll
Vail TJansportadon Master Plan
gTheideaofconnectingHansonRanchRoadtoGoreCreekDrivewithaone-wayroadway
behind the Red Lion was suggested to be-further considered' recognizing that extensive
landscaping anO peJestrian ariJnities woutO aiso be included atong Mill Creek'
gThetruckloadingareasonWillowBridgeRoadinthevicinityofClreckPointCharliewere
recommended to u,
-rrt"inuo
with major nnascaping and amenities provided to separate
pedestrian movements from truck operations'
oDependinguponthefinalcombinationofofficialtruckloadinS.zonestobedesiSnatedbythe
Town council, check point charlie *ouro i. rlio;;J;; adiitional control points defined
to not only ,ontroiiru"t operations Uut .ft]o-to lniei.upt fost tourists prior to reaching the
Village core.
This input was combined with additional citizen input obtained from gublic work sessions held by
the Town Counci{ una rt"ii. After considet.,ion'[i-uiiitte ieclnicai and communitv factors the
ioiro*ing recommendations and priorities were established'
RECOMMENDATIONS/PRIORITIES
The Vail Village goods delivery plan is illustrated in Figure 9,(A 111,1]:"iid
consists of a modified
decentralized delivery strategy. Elements of the plan are as follows; prioritized by short- term (Figure
6A) and long-term (Figure 68) actions'
Short Term
o Total delivery and service parking spaces needed in the short-term is 25 to 30 spaces'
o Modify policies at Checkpoint Charlie'
-Eliminate30%ofthetraffic(cars)accessingthecoreforsma|ldeliveriesandminor
tasks through use of rhe r - r lz r,ouri-oii.." p"ili"g in the vail Parking Structure for
this tYPe of need.
.DesignateadesirableareaoftheVailParkingstructure.forshortterm
parking.
il'f T:H'iiHY,:'#"#]:'",:;,-:il"',1!il"X!'11;i1"n:'*iHilif;
iiiu.tu*, however, .uuse or these spots will result in strict enforcement'- Deve o';, J::;".":::;,::,::il-:.il' ;:1il;;
Village or in the foaOlng-,ories'
- Us" of the parking structure would be
required for these triPs.
Town ol Vail
Page 26
oo
Vail Transportetlon Mest€r plan Chapter ll
.9trtr\, -a--(Dl-s, I -(D
= cr, l_
,98r,H hoEF
6)-, (/)
=q)
q)Eoo
E(l)
!
(u
o
O(u
-z!r .
;E.E
rs!g3:E-
3ie.9
aL(
\{
r-'ltlJ\\l
LI
5lllft
\/
I
I
t
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
o->
:oi E*
s, Er:
El Yc:-? iero=r€961-i
P,
\i
o(Ct4sq;Pod\.<ii
9o!oox<>(/)>3b
i"h6\:>N::>E3 t ig
HNo !
oz
:n5t f
=t)3L]
'1FJ
oc
'o
BI
oa
(J
t
o
9r.:a
i,glll q
:€
€:
<t
.a
ql
oz
oo
!l!
oco
€
o
ENOo
I:c;:q
Page 27
,,^
Town ol Vail
Vail Transporlrtion Master Plan Chapter ll
-o trtrtr;s.b-vr-5 h-r.g(/) botL iE.gr
c)o
(h
15ooo
Eq)
q)
troo(u
-. coF.
c(J
o
ooa
ac\
o
ro
o
o
*;-
t(!
{o
o
T
Q
t4(llI
qt
p
qlov,
o
o
a
rE
o
oa.
b
o
O)
Q)
\l
AV
t\
ot
B
a
o(5
l)tI/I
-
-1 I(-J
Page 28Town ot Vail
Vail Tran sportalion Masler Plan Chapter ll
. Trucks and cars that are making deliveries of large quantities of goods will be
allowed access to the village loading zones and will be given priority for these. zones. Time will be limited to only what is needed to load or unload thesegoods. In addition, a permitting process could be established to access these
zones.
. The towing of vehicles for violation of loading zone restrictions will be
strictly enforced.
. constructibn work requiring parking will need to be ptanned and approvedin advance by the Town of vail's community Development, public works,
Fire and Police Departments.
. service vehicles will be allowed limited access to some loading zones for
emergency work only. Non-emergency service work should be scheduled for
non-peak traffic hours in the village, All service vehictes will need to
contact the Police Department for a parking permit for both the emergency
and non-emergency work,
. Loading zone restrictions may be lifted after 6:00 p.M. The loading zones on
Gore creek Drive, however, will be posted rui a "No parking Area" in the non-
loading hours.
Investigate the possibility of locating "drop boxes" in designated places for overnight
couriers.
Implement the following actions and procedures.
- Eliminate loading zones on Bridge Street and
only.
Hanson Ranch Road near Mill Creek
r
E
i
I
6
Allow only morning use of the Gore creek Drive loading area in the vicinity of theLodge Promenade (winter:9:00 A.M. to 2:00 p.M. and summer: g:00 A.M. to ll:00A.M.).
- Convert the 15 minute parking areas on the north side of the Christiania lot and' adjacent to Riva Ridge North to delivery and service vehicles only with no largedelivery trucks allowed except for over flow.
- Iostall "One Way/Do Not Enter'! signs further norrh on Willow Bridge Road.
- convert the 15 minute parking north of wiilow Bridge to truck only.
o Authorize capital improvements in an attempt to reduce the 33% "lost guest,' number and thosewho enter the Village the wrong way,
- Relocate Checkpoint Charlie south to the vicinity of Wiltow Road.
- construct landscaped medians south on vail Road from the Frontage Road,
Town ol Vail
---
Page 29
Vail Tran sporladon Mast€r phn
Chapler ll
f;jj|;:evatuate
informational and directionar signing crarifications and modify as
construct entry feature monument signs, at alr entry points to pedestrian areas.
Prior to cons'uction of monument signs provide and instail a standard sign whichwarns motorists with the wording "Pedesirian Zone Automobjles Restricted,, at allpedestrian zone entry poiDts.
Review the information signs and traffic control procedures at the I-70 Main vail exit rampsand at the 4-way stop intersection.
Iostall portabre, variabre message signs at the 4-way stop intersection (vair Roadmedian) and the I-?0 exit ramps prouiding crear messages to drivers. Messages can beupdated based on varying demands throu;ho;;,il;;:-
Devefop action poricies for the forowing groups; (r) cSo's in vitage, (2) 4-waytraffic controilers' (3) checkpoint petor;.j, ?;t ;;lking structure operations and otherTown employees. These action poricies rr,ouri LLtu to enforcement, who is ailowedaccess to the virrage, and vehicre towing procedure,s Evaruate disailowing certaintraffic movements during peak periods uLLoo" tr.eeib circumstances and demands.
work with vail Associates in- designating ailowed skier drop-off areas. This would be anattempt to recognize the probrem virsus 6anning utt ,ti.. arbp-orrs --'
Lonc Term
Total delivery and service parking spaces needed in the long-term is 35 to 40 spaces.
Christiania lot.
Resolve the land ownership issues.
Evaluate in greater detail:
Technological options of hand cart deriveries, srnail vehicres for deriveries andstorage lockers.
operational characteristics and regutations for hand carts and small vehjclesalong with liability issues, storage problems, and financing options,
Evaluate options to make the site both aestheticaty compatibre with theneighborhood and operationt ro, tt e iruJ;;;;ry functions.
Town ot Vail
Page 30
Vail Transportatlon Maaler Plan Chapler ll
Additional sites to be evaluated:
- South of Lodge at Vail
. Resolve land ownership and legal issues.. Evaluate compatibility with International Wing development plans.. . Address Vail Associates concerns. Address United States Forest Service concerns.
- Golden Peak
. Resolve land ownership issues.. Address Vail Associates concerns.
- Other Location Options
Town of Vail Pego 31
, j'r o q
RECEI\ILrr t\PR 4$s
rN rr{E rrN,,ED srArEs DrsrRrcr corrRrnmoft!#.3*rt
FOR TI{E DISTRICT OF COLORADO _ilI|VT.OOIO$DO
llaR 5 | 1995
J^nbs H. ilAr{s8ff$fiB
Civil Action No. 89 N 1098
LODGE TOWER CONDOMINIIIM ASSOCIATION
and TOWN OF VAIL,
Plaintiffs,
LODGE PROPERTIES, INC.; WESTERN LAND EXCHANGE COMPANY; CLAYTON
YEUTIER, Secretary, United States Department of Agriculture; F. DALE ROBERTSON,
Chiei United States Forest Service; MANUAL LUJAN, JR., Secretary, United States
Department of the Interior; GARY E. CARGILL, Regional Forester, Rocky Mountain
Region, United States Forest Service; and NEIL F. MORCK, State Director, Bureau of Iand
Maragement, United States Department of the Interior,
Defendants.
MEIVIORANDUM OPIMON AI\D ORDER.
NOTTINGHAM, Judge
This litigation arises from an effort by the United States Forest Service (an
agency in the United States Department of Agriculture) to exchange a twG'acre parcel of
federal land - administered by the Forest Service but lying entirely within the boundaries of
the Town of Vail (a Colorado municipal corporation) - for a 385-acre parcel of
privately-owned land lying within the boundaries of the F^gles Nest Wilderness Area.
Plaintiff Lodge Tower Condominium Association ("Lodge Tower") is an unincorporated
association representing owners of condominiums constructed on land adjacent to the
two-acre parcel. Lodge Tower and the Town of Vail ("Vail") initiated this action to review
the agency proceedings which culminated in the land exchange and to rescind the
United States' issuance of a patent conveying the two-acre parcel to a private owner,
o
i
Defendant I-odge Properties, Inc. ("Lodge Properties"). A second defendaat, Westem hnd
Exchange Company ("Westem I.and"), acted as Lodge Properties' agent in pursuing
negotiations and administrative proceedings leading to the land exchange. All remaining
defendants are fedenl officials involved in issuing the patent to the two-acre federal parcel or
in making the decisions which led to the issuance of the patent. They will be referred to,
collectively, as "the fedenl defendants.' Jurisdiction is premised upon 28 U.S.C.A. $ 1331
(West 1993).
Procedurally, the matter is before the court on several motions. These
motions were referred to a magistrate judge, 28 U.S.C.A. $ 636OX1XB) (West 1993), and
the magistrate judge has made recommendations concerning the motions. The private
defendants, lodge Properties and Western l:nd, have filed a motion to dismiss and a motion
for summary judgment. Plaintiffs and the federal defendants have filed motions for panial
summary judgment. A motion for partial summary judgment suggests that, even if the court
resolves the motion entirely in favor of the movant, some issues will remain for future
adjudication. The parties who seek partial summary judgment here do not specify what those
issues are or why, in a case seeking judicial review of administrative action, czy issue should
remain for future adjudication, at trial or otherwise. Before addressing the facts and merits
of the case, I must therefore attempt to clarify the procedural posture of the case.
When a federal district court is asked to review agency action under the
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C.A. $$ 701-706 (West L977), its function is different
from the function it performs in most cases which come before it, for it does not sit as a
finder of fact. Instead, it reviews the record compiled before the administrative agency
under the standards articutated in 5 U.S.C.A. $ 706. Naioml La'nt Ct. v. Depamnen of
-v
{
veteran Afairs, 736 F. supp. 1148, 1152 (D.D.c. 1990). see also Deubtejian v. NrcIear
Regulatory Comtn'n, 75I F.2d 1287, 1323-27 (D.C. Cir. 1984). Although there may be
unusual cases where the court will have to determine what was before the a}ency, e.g.,
Natural Resources Defense Council, htc. v. Train, 5I9 F.zd 287,291-92 (D.C. Cir. 1925),
that does not appear to be the case here. Despite some initial skirmishing conceming the
adequacy of the administrative record before the court, the record has now been
supplemented, and no party questions the content or completeness of that record in the latest
round of briefing and objections.
Because a district court's function in reviewing administrative action is
different from the function it usually performs as a trier of fact, some of the procedures
designed to prepare a case for trial do not work well when the court is reviewing agency
proceedings. Specifically, a motion for summary judgment under rule 56 of the Fedenl
Rules of civil Procedure - especiaily a motion for panial summary judgment - makes no
procedural sense when a district court is asked to undertake judicial review of administrative
action. Such a motion is designed to isolate factual issues on which there is no genuine
dispute, so that the court can determine what part of the case must be tried to the court or a
jury. Nickol v. United Staes, 501F.2d 1389, 1392 (10th Ct. 1974). Agency action,
however, is reviewed, not tried. Factual issues have been presented, disputed, and resolved;
and the issue is not whether the material facts are diqputed, but whether the agency properly
dealt with the facts. Only recently, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
has followed Nickol and cautioned, "When acting as a court of appeal, it is improper for a
-3-
I
district court to use methods and procedures designed for trial. " Olenltouse v. Commdity
Credit Corp.,42F.3d I56f'15il (10th Cir. l99a).
In accordance with my understanding of Nickol and Olenhowe, I will
disregard the procedural posture in which the parties have placed the case. Instead, I will
treat plaintiffs' complaint, their motion, and all material filed in support thereof as argument
in support of their position that the agency action here should be set aside. Conversely, I
will teat the federal defendants' motion and materials in support thereof as argument in
support of their position that the agency action should not be set aside. The private
defendants' motions do not directly discuss the propriety of the agency's action here. These
defendants, rather, question whether the court has jurisdiction to set aside or otherwise
interfere with the land patent which Lodge Properties received in the exchange, even if the
agency action were set aside. I will therefore deal with ttrese motions after discussing the
administrative proceedings.
I.
FACTUAL BACKGROT]ND
Lodge Properties acquired, from unrelated third parties, a purchase option on
385 acres of privately-held land lying within the boundaries of the Fagles Nest Wildemess
area (hereafter called "the wilderness land"). lndge Properties then exercised the option and
exchanged the wilderness land for 2.M acres of federal land (hereafter called "the lodge
parcel"). The lodge parcel is physically within Vail's town limits. It is next to land owned
by plaintiff Lodge Tower and other land owned by defendant Indge Propenies. The lodge
parcel was appraised and reappraised during the administrative process, and the appraisal
which the United States Forest Service (the "agency") finally accepted set a value of
t
-4-
!7
$915,000. The wilderness land was appraised at $770,000, and Lodge Properties thus paid
the United States $145,000 in cash to equalize the value of the exchange.
The land exchange was first proposed late in 1983. The agency thereafter
conducted the required studies, made the required notifications, and received extensive public
comment. Beginning on January 31, 1986, and continuing through November 8, 1988, the
proposed land exchange was the subject of four successive notices of decisions by the
agency's regional forester. Each decision was administratively appealed. The extensive
administrative record, upon which the parties were finally able to agree, details this
administrative process in punishing detail. The magistrate judge assigned to make
recommendations on the motions in question has accurately outlined this record. See
Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge at2-8. There is no need to repeat the
magistrate judge's discussion here, and it is hereby adopted as a part of this Memorandum
Opinion and Order. To capsualize the administrative history: the regional forester's first
Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact ("DN") was made on January 31,
1986. It was reversed because the agency perceived defects in the environmental assessment
("EA") on which it was based. The second DN, accompanied by another EA, was issued on
June 19, 1986. On rwiew, the agency determined essentially that the DN was premature
because the lodge parcel had not been appraised. An appraisal was done, and the regional
forester issued his third DN on September 17, 1987. On review, the agency concluded that
the appraisal was inadequate, and a new appraisal was ordered. The reappraisal was done,
and the regional forester issued his fourth (and last) DN on November 8, 1988. This
decision was also appealed.
-5-
After these years of administrative review, the Associate Deputy Chief of the
National Forest System approved the land exchange on June 16, 1989. R., Vol. I a 199.
The Assistant Secretary of Agriculture declined further administrative review on June 26,
1989, at 10:20 a.m. (EST). R., Vol. il a 413. On the same day, at approximately
8:30 a.m. (MST), after the Assistant Secretary of Agriculture had declined further review of
the Associate Deputy Chief of the National Forest System's approval of the land exchange,
the United States placed its land patent to the lodge parcel into a prearranged escrow. The
exchange of title to the lodge parcel and the wilderness land occurred at 8:38 a.m. (MST)
and was recorded at approximately 9:10 a.m. (MST). See Privae Defs.'Mot. for Swnrn. J.
to Dismiss for Fatlure to Join hdispensable Parties, Affidavit of Daniel E. Pike.
At 9:10 a.m. (MST) on June 26,1989, plaintiffs filed this action seeking
review of the land exchange under tle Administrative Procedures Act ("APA"), and an
injunction against transfer of the properties. Since title had already passed, however,
plaintiffs later frled a First Amended and Supplemental Complaint (the "Complaint"), seeking
APA review and recision of the land exchange. This Complaint sets forth eleven "claims"
for relief, but this nomenclature is simply further evidence of plaintiffs' confusion regarding
the procedural nature of a complaint for judicial review of administrative action. The first
nine 'claims' simply qpecfy various perceived deficiencies in the United States' adminis-
tative procedures. The tenth claim seeks a judgment declaring the parties' respective rights
and obligations. ^See 5 U.S.C.A. $ 703 (West 1977) (judicial review of administrative action
may take form of request for declaratory judgment). The eleventh claim seeks imposition of
a trust on I-odge Properties' title to the lodge parcel. Plaintiffs also seek (1) an order
-6-
t
rescinding the land exchange and (2) a mandatory injunction directing that the lodge parcel
be reconveved to the United States.
n.
DISCUSSION
A. Standard of Reiew
To the extent that agency action is reviewable at all (a question I will reach
momenarily), the standard of review is expressly set forth in the APA. The applicable part
of that standard is as follows:
To the extent necessary to decision and when presented,
the reviewing court shall decide all relevant questions of law,
interpret constitutional and statutory provisions, and determine
the meaning or applicability of the terms of an agency action.
The reviewing court sball -
(2) hold unlawful and set aside agency
action, findings, and conclusions found to be -
(A) arbitrary, capricious, an
abuse of discretion, or otherwise
not in accordance with law;
@) contrary to constitutional
right, power, privilege, or
immunity;
(C) in excess of statutory
jurisdiction, authority, or
limitations, or short of statutory
right; [or]
@) without observance of
procedure required by law[.]
4
I
In making the foregoing determinations, the court shall review
the whole record or those parts of it cited by a party, and due
account shall be taken of the rule of prejudicial error.
5 U.S.C.A. $ 706.
uThe 'arbibary or capricious' concept, needless to say, is not easy to
encapsulate in a single list of rubrics because it embraces a myriad of possible faults and
depends heavily on the circumstances of the case." htcrto Rico Sun Oil Co. v. EPA, 8 F.3d
73,77 (lst Cir. 1993). The case law nonetheless describes the approach which a reviewing
court must take. Consistent with the introductory language of section 706, the court must
first look at the relevant statute to determine whether the administrative agency properly
construed its authority and acted within the scope of that authority. Citizens to Preserve
Overton Parkv. Volpe,40l U.S. 402, 415-16,91 S. Ct. 814,823 (L97I). Next, 'the court
must consider whether the decision was based on a consideration of the relevant factors and
whether there has been a clear enor of judgment. [Citations omitted.] Although this inquiry
into the facts is !o be searching and careful, the ultimate standard of review is a narrow one.
The court is not empowered to substitute its judgment for that of the agency." 1d.,401 U.S.
at 416,91 S. Ct. at823-24. In evaluating the agency's factual findings and inferences, the
"court must find that the evidence before the agency provided a rational and ample basis for
its decision," Nonhwest Motorqcle Ass'n v. Ilnited Staes Dep't of Agic., 18 F.3d 1468,
I47l (9th Cir. 1994). If the agency relies on a factual finding or assumption which the court
regards as cleady erroneous, application of the "arbitrary or capricious" standard rcqufues
that the court set aside the agency action only if 'there is a significant chance that but for the
errors the agency might have reached a different result. " Mouttt Evans Co, v. Mad.igan, 14
-8-
F.3d 1444, 1456 (l0th Cir. 1994) (quoting Naiorwl Parlcs and Consemation Ass'n v. FAA,
998 F.2d L523, 1533 [10th Cir. 1993)). With this standard of review in mind, I now turn to
plaintiffs' arguments.
B. Administmtive Deficiencies Alleged by Phintiffs to Require That
Agency Action Be Set Aside
1. Plaintiffs' contention that the land exchange was not in the
public interest
In their first "claim for relief," plaintiffs argue that the land exchange is not in
the public interest, as required by the pertinent parts of the Federal hnd Policy and
Management Act ("FLPMA"), 43 U.S.C.A. $ 1716(a) (West 1986), and the General
Exchange Act, 16 U.S.C.A. $ 485 (West 1985). The authorizing statute provides as follows:
[A] tract of land . . . within the National Forest System may be
disposed of by exchange by the Secretary of Agriculture under
applicable law where the Secretary . . . determines that the
public interest will be well served by making that exchange:
Provided, That when considering public interest the Secretary
. . . shall give full consideration to better Federal land manage-
ment and the needs of State and local people, including needs
for lands for the economy, mmmunity expansion, recreation
areas, food, fiber, minerals, and fish and wildlife and the
Secreary . . . finds that the values and the objectives which
Federal lands or interests to be conveyed may serve if retained
in Federal ownership are not more than the values of the
non-Federal lands or interests and the public objectives they
could serve if acquired.
43 U.S.C.A. $ 1716(a). Similarly, the General Exchange Act permits such an exchange
"[w]hen the public interests will be benefitted thereby." 16 U.S.C.A. $ 485. FLPMA
explicitly reflects the congressional intent that "judicial review ofpublic land adjudication
decisions be provided by law." 43 U.S.C.A. $ 1701 (a)(6). Thus, this court has the
authority to review the Secretary's decision to determine whether it complied with these
-9-
explicit statutory standards. Naional Coal,Ass'n v. Hodel, 617 F. Supp. 584, 588 (D.D.C.
1985), afd,825 F.2d 523 (D.C. Cir. 1987).
Defendants preliminarily argue that plaintiffs cannot raise the public interest
issue now because plaintiffs failed to raise the issue in the administrative proceedings. See
Wlson v. Hodcl,758F.2d 1369, 1373 (10th Cir. 1985). I agree with the magistrate judge's
view of this argument. .See Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge at 12. The
administrative record indicates that plaintiffs did indeed raise this issue. In addition to the
instances cited by the magistratejudge, I note that local opposition to the land exchange was
documented in the form of petitions from the townspeople opposing the land exchange. .R.,
Vol. W a 159. The record also contains a letter from Vail's mayor raising numerous issues
concerning the exchange. R., Vol. W a 25-32. While these materials did not use the verbal
talisman, "public interest," they either address and/or reflect some of the matters which the
agency is expressly required to consider under section L7L6(a) in deciding whether an
exchange is in the public interest. I find and conclude that the issue was sufhciently raised
during the administrative proceedings.
Defendants next urge that there can be no judicial review of the administrative
determination that the exchange is in the "public interest," because the action "is committed
to agency discretion by law." 5 U.S.C.A. g 701(aX2). The magistrate judge appeared to
indicate partial agreement, relying on decisions from the Sixth Circuit and the Ninth Circuit
for the proposition that public interest findings made in connection with federal land
exchange decisions are unreviewable. Those c:ses, however, are not persuasive, because
they were decided before Congress enacted FLPMA n 1976. As noted earlier, FLPMA
-10-
expressly provides for judicial review of public land adjudication decisions, 43 U.S.C.A.
$ 1701(aX6); section l7l6(a) (quoted above) lists the considerations which must guide the
agency in making exchanges. In contrast to the narrow set of circumstances where a matter
is committed to agency discretion because "there is no law to apply," Citizens to Preserve
Overton Park v. Volpe, 40I U.S. at 410, 91 S. Ct. at 821, FLPMA does provide legal
criteria by which to review the agency decision - as the magistrate judge ultimately
concluded. ^See Recommendation of United States Magisrate ludge at 14.
Application of the legal criteria set forth in section l7l6(a) brings me to
defendants' next contention, the argument that the agency determination finding the exchange
to be in the public interest was not arbitrary or capricious, nor an abuse of discretion. The
primary issue is whether the agency properly weighed the considerations set forth in section
l7I6(a). The first consideration fisted is "better Federal land management,' and the record
discloses that this consideration weighed heavily in the agency decision. See R., Vol. W
a 115. The hnd and Resources Management Plan for the White River National Forest (the
national forest which encompasses all of the land exchanged in this hansaction) places a
priority on federal acquisition of privalely-held realty lying within wilderness areas. R.,
VoL W at 1-2. The 385-acre wilderness parcel (which actually consisted of two tracts
located less than a mile from one another) was 'the largest remaining private inholding in the
Fagles Nest Wildemess," and its acquisition was therefore made the highest priority. l?.,
Vol. W at 100. The Environmental Assessment ("EA") of June 19, 1986, recites the
physical characteristics of the parcel in detail, stating that the ground is traversed by the
Piney River and Meadow Creek (habitat for the Colorado River cutthroat Eout, a fish on the
- 1l -
Colorado endangered species list), that it contains two acres of wetlands and four acres of
floodplain, and that it was used extensively by the public for hunting, hiking, and camping.
R., Vol. W a lOL The EA concludes:
Acquisition of these parcels would facilitate management of the
wilderness area. . . . By acquiring fee title to these parcels, the
Forest Service would eliminate chances for inappropriate
development of these private parcels . . . thereby achieving a
primary objective for this . . . area. The management objective
cannot be achieved through a partial interest acquisition since
any level of development will conflict with Wilderness manage-
ment objectives.
R., Vol. W at 94-95.
The hnd and Resources Management Plan for the White River National
Forest also classifies certain lands for disposal. R., VoL W a 1. Although the district
ranger had suggested that the lodge parcel be considered for disposal, there had been no
formal action on the proposal at the time this exchange was proposed . R., Vol. W at 99-
The land is on a predominantly steep slope between the Vail Mountain ski area and the
Lodge at Vail. It contains no wetlands and is subject to frequent disturbances related to use
of roads, ski runs, and adjacent urban land. The EA also recites the physical characteristics
of the lodge parcel and its uses. /d. Based on this analysis, the EA concludes that disposal
of the lodge parcel "will significantly benefit management efficiency of the White River
National Forest." R., Vol. W a 93.
As the foregoing narration suggests, the agency, in the course of considering
better federal land management, also weighed other factors enumerated in section l7l6(a).
Recreational concems are addressed, R.. Vol. W a 9j, as are concerns about wildlife and
fish, R., VoI. W at 99. T\e need of either the wilderness land or the lodge parcel for the
-12-
I
production of food, fiber, or minerals was not addressed, since it is clear from the record
that these considerations were irrelevant. When viewed as a whole, the record abundantly
supports the agency's conclusion that this land exchange is in the public interest.
Approximately two acres of federal land - on a slope adjacent to Vail's highly developed
condominium area, devoid of wetlands, possessing no value for fish life, and having
insignificant value for other wildlife - was exchanged for 385 acres of wilderness land -
containing wetlands, steams, and an endangered species of fish - in order to supplement
1hs Pqgles Nest Wildemess Area.
The January 31, 1986, "Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant
Impact," which was subsequenfly replaced by the June 16, 1986 decision discussed in the
preceding paragraphs, similarly considered public interest concerns, R., Vol- WI. at 5. So
did the September t7 , 1987 , 'Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact. " R. ,
Vol. I a 177-81. The methodology employed by the agency, and the assumptions made
therein, must be sustained if reasonable. Naiorul Coal Ass'n v. Hodel, 675 F. Supp. 1231,
L244 P. Mont. 1987), afd, 874 F.2d 661 (9th Cir. 1989). It is clear that throughout this
lengthy administrative process the agency adequately considered the public interest criteria
set forth at 43 U.S.C. $ 1716(a). Consequently, its decision that the land exchange was in
the public interest was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion.
The magishate judge, in recommending a conbary result, seems to have
focused on perceived inadequacies in the agency's consideration of the one section l7l6(a)
criterion which I have not yet discussed - "the needs ofState and local people, including
needs for lands for the economyfl [and] community expansion." Specifically, the magistate
-13-
I o
judge concluded that the agency's public interest determination "was premised in subsandal
part on an assumed use of the Indge Parcel for additional hotel accommodations."
Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge at 15. As the administrative proc€ss
wore on, this assumed use, first mentioned in the EA which was a part of the Decision
Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact issued by the regional forester on June 19,
1986, changed. It changed primarily as a result of the reappraisal process required by
intervening administrative decisions in the case. By the time the regional forester made his
fourth (and last) Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact (on November 8,
1988), he had accepted an appraised valuation which assumed that the lodge parcel would be
zoned to permit "primary/secondary residential use with ski in/ski out access." R., Vol. I
a 196. This factual inconsistency between land use assumed in the June 19, 1986, EA
(which was never revised and thus remained as one basis for the November 8, 1988,
Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact) and land use assumed in reappraisal
of the property (which was also a basis for the November 8, 1989, Decision Notice and
Finding of No Significant Impact) led the magistrate judge to characterize use of the property
for development of a hotel as "speculative[,] . . . illusory[,] . . . [or] largely fictional. "
Recommendation of United States lvlagistrale Judge at 17-18. Because of the procedural
posture in which the case came before him, the magistrate judge merely recommended that
the federal defendants' motion for partial summary judgment be denied. He did not confront
the question whether the administrative inadequacies which he perceived rcse to a level
which justified setting aside the agency action.
The question which the court must address, in the case as it has been
procedurally re-postured, is whether the problem described by the magistratejudge rendered
-14-
I -.
-I
the agency decision arbitary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion. Having reviewed the
record in light of the magistrate judge's recommendation, I still conclude that the agency
decision is not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse ofdiscretion. To the extent that the agency
did discuss and consider the potential use of the lodge parcel for a 100-unit hotel, I do not
think the eror so tainted the agency's weighing of the section l7l6(a) considerations that the
agency made a clear error ofjudgment.
In general, I think both plaintiffs and the magistate judge (1) overstate the
degree ofinconsistency between the EA ofJune 19, 1986, and the later reappraisal and
(2) - partly as a consequence of this overstatement - overestimate the importance which the
agency's decision attached to the lodge parcel's possible use for construction of a hotel. The
administrative record discloses the agency's continuous awareness that past and future use of
the lodge parcel would depend heavily on zoning and land use decisions made by local
officials. (Ironically, it appears that the bulk of these decisions will be made by Vail, one of
the plaintiffs here.) Lodge Properties and Westem I:nd have always manifested an intent to
develop the lodge parcel as a hotel. That intent was acknowledged in the regional forester's
decision of June 19, 1986, R., vol. w at 116, and this acknowledgment was repeated in the
regional forester's last decision of November 8, 1988, R., vol. I at 194. The EA underlying
both documents, however, demonstrates full awareness of the fact that proposed use of the
lodge parcel for erection of a hotel would depend upon negotiations between Lodge
Properties and the Town of vail and, ultimately, upon vail's own zoning decisions:
The proponent [Westem Land] has made two proposals to the
Town of Vail to insure low density on the Spraddle Creek parcel
[which was later eliminated from the land fade] in exchange for
Town assurances of higher density zoning on the lndge parcel.
-15-
,o
. . . Development of either the Spraddle Creek parcel or the
lodge parcel after any oonveyanc€ by the United States will be
subject to comprehensive zoning and land use ordinances. . . .
These ordinances will mitigate any impact on the human
environment by limirtng the magnitude of afiy subsequent
devebpment of the proponen of thz land uchange.
R. Vol. W a 95. @mphasis added.) The EA later notes that "[a]pproximately 100 hotel
rooms will be added if the proposed use of the parcel is approved by the Town. " .R.,
Vol. W a 93. (Jndescoring in original.; Even ltreugh ltrs 64 lxter avers that ths rn6sl
significant positive benefit of trading the lodge parcel would be the economic benefit of hotel
development, this averment is still qualified by characterizing it as a "potentialfl' benefit. R.
Vol. W at 91. In view of the agency's clear awareness that hotel use rras problematic and
depended on the agreement of apparently hostile town officials, and in view of the qualified
prediction that development of the site as a hotel was a potential positive benefit, I must
disagree with the magistrate judge's view there is a critical and faal contradiction between
the EA's suggestion that development as a hotel site was a potential benefit and the
reappraisal's assumption that the lodge parcel's most like$ use in private hands would be
low-density residential development.
It appean to the court that plaintiffs and the magistrate judge also overestimate
the importaace which the agency's decision attached to the lodge parcel's potential use.
Section l7l6(a) requircs merely that the agency consider and weigh the factors which are
listed in the section. It does not give the factors any particular priority, nor does it require
the agency to do so. As I have previously stated, the agency chose to give paramount
importance to the advantages which this land exchange afforded for better federal land
management, recreation, fish, and wildlife. The agency did not fail or refuse to consider the
-16-
o
needs of local people or local economic impact. R., vol. w u 91-93. It simply attached
much less importance to these factors than it did to the other ones. Given the agency's
approach, and given the facts supporting its conclusions conceming land management,
recreation, fish, and wildlife, I conclude that, even if the agency's factud assumption
concerning use of the relinquished land were erron@us, there is no "significant chance that
but for the errors the agency might have reached a different result. " Mouru Evans Co. v.
Madigan, 14 F.3d at 146. The agency's ultimate public interest determination does not
reflect a clear error in judgment and is thus not a ground for setting the agency action aside.
2. Plaintiffs' contention that the agency violated statutory
requirements that the lodge parcel and wilderness Iand be
equal in yalue or that the value of the exchange be equalized
by payment of money
FLPMA requires that, when non-federal lands are exchanged for federal lands,
the "values of the lands exchanged . . . either shall be equal, or if they are not equal, the
values shall be equalizal by the payment of money to the grantor or to tle Secretary
concemed as the circumstances require . . . .' 43 U.S.C.A. $ 17160) (West 1986). In
their "second claim for relief," plaintiffs contend that the agency violated this provision.
They claim that the lodge parcel ceded by the United States was more valuable than indicated
by the agency's appraisal. Plaintiffs argue that the agency's appraisal used an improper local
zoning classification, which had the effect of depressing the value of the todge parcel. Thus,
plaintiffs argue, the lodge parcel was not appraised consistent with its highest and best use,
as required by Forest Service Appraisal Handbook Valuation Guideline 54C.9.12, g 1.12 (Br.
in Supp. of Pk.' Mot. for Summ. J., Ex. B) and a United States Department of Justice
booklet entitled "uniform Appraisal standards for Federal hnd Acquisitions," R., vol. N
-t7-
a 345a-345dd. Plaintiffs argue that the appraiser considered the land as if it were zoned for
"primary/secondary residential," and that it should have been considered as ucommercial
core I district.'
The magishatejudge, after a thorough analysis of the issue, concluded that
plaintiffs lacked standing to advance this argument. Citing Colorado statutory and decisional
law, as well as cases from other states, the magistrate judge demonstrated, as a matter of
law, that the value assigned to a parcel in a land exchange cannot be used to establish value
of adjoining parcels, nor can it be used in making a property tax assessment. He also noted
that plaintiffs had failed to show that actual or assessed property values had decreased as a
result of this transaction. Perhaps the most conclusive item of evidence ia the record on this
point is the affidavit og ths Fqgle County assessor, which states that the assessed fair market
value of the lodge parcel for 1989 was $3,606,760 and that the assessor did not take zoning
into accouW in setting this value. Accordingly, I am in full agreement with the magistrate
judge's conclusion that plaintiffs do not have standing to challenge the agency's equal value
determination.
Since I have had to review tlte agency's appraisal process anyway, I reach the
merits and alternately hold that the agency action was not arbitmry, capricious, or an abuse
of discretion. The administative record reveals that the initial appnisal of the lodge parcel
was done by Raymond Hart. His fust report was submitted to the agency on August 3,
1987. It estimated the value of the lodge parcel to be $600,000 as of May 15, 1982. R.,
Vot. V a 202-74. One of the four appeals in the case centered on Mr. Hart's conclusions.
This appeal required a reappraisal, since the agency concluded that the valuation guidelines
-18-
a
had not been met, R., vol I a 188-91. specifically, the agency concluded that Mr. Hart
had not considered the value of the property as if it were to receive a zoning designation
similar to the designation given nearby private property. On July 8, 1988, written appraisal
instuctions were issued to the appraiser, requiring that the appraisal be redone. R., Vol. IV
at 432-34.
The second appraisal was completed on November l, 1988. R., vol. IV
at 346411. The value of the lodge parcel was reappnised at $915,000. This reappraisal
was reviewed and subsequently approved by the regional office reviewer on November 2,
1988. R., Vol. IVa 418-27. Theregional forester's determination of this valuation was
affirmed by the Associate Deputy Chief of the National Forest System in his June 16, 1989,
decision. R., Vol. I a 198-9.
The July 8, 1988, instructions stated that Mr. Hart should reappraise the land
considering higher uses, zoning, and political influences. R., vol. N a 432-34. Mr. Hart
considered zoning in his reappraisal. He reappraised the lodge parcel as if it were zoneA for
"primary/secondary residential. " He determined that this zoning classification was the
highest and best use of the propeny and that, as a result ofpolitical influences in the Town
of Vail, the property would not be rezoned:
The current primary/secondary zoning of the subject is legal and
consistent with adjacent zoning. No history of upzoning similar
to that necessary to allow commercial uses on the subject
property exists. Case history shows density increases are
difficult to obtain. Therefore, the appraiser concludes there is
no evidence to show the political feasibility of upzoning of the
subject property for a free-standing hotel is reasonably probable.
R., Vol. IV a 384.
-19-
The Forest Service Review Appraiser, Donald E. Howell, stated in his
November 2, 1988, appnisal review report that Mr. Hart complied with the instructions for
reappraisal, and that the appraiser adequately supported his position that the lodge parcel
would not be rezoned. R., VoI. N at 418-27. The Associate Deputy Chief of the National
Forest System, on June 16, 1989, stated that the appraisal was completed by an independent
qualified appraiser, that the appraiser's work was reviewed by review appraisers who
conducted on site reviews, and that the reviewer's concurred with the appraiser's value
estimate. R., Vol. I at 198-99. As the Uniform Appraisal standards for Federal Land
Acquisition note, appraising is not an exact science, and reasonable people may differ
somewhat in arriving at an estimate of fair market value. R., vot. IV a 345y, \\e rtnrd
clearly shows that the Forest Service considered the Forest service Agency Appraisal
Guidelines and 43 U.S,C. $ 1716(b) in its appraisal determinations. Ptaintiffs have failed to
demonstrate that the agency made a clear mistake in judgment in handling the appraisal
process, and their challenge to the appraisal supplies no reason to set aside agency action.
3. Ptaintiffs' contention that the agency violated its own
guidelines for processing land exchanges by proceeding on a
stale appraisal
In their "fifth claim for relief," plaintiffs argue that the agency violated its
own guidelines for processing land exchanges. Plaintiffs argue that the offered non-federal
land (the wilderness parcel) should have been reappraised, once the agency remanded for a
reappraisal of the federal land. Plaintiffs argue that the appraised value of the non-federal
land set forth in the May 11, 1988, exchange agreement, R., vol. 1 a 284, was valid for
only one year, and that this period had expired when the federal land was reappraised. ^9ee
-20-
Compl. a 20. Brrr.ause of the magistrate judge's resolution of the standing question, he did
not reach this issue. I do reach the issue, consistent with my attempt to resolve the merits as
an alternate basis for decision.
I do not find plaintiffs' argument persuasive. The internal agency guideline
which plaintiffs cite at the referenced page of the Complaint says that an appraised value is
valid for only one year, unless fixed by an uchange agreement. The May I l, 199g,
Exchange Agreement between l,odge Properties and the United States fixes a value of
$770,000 for the non-federal wilderness parcel. R., vol. I a 282. This agreement was
conditioned on favorable resolution of the pending administrative appeal. As plaintiffs
observe, that very appeal required reappraisal of the federal land, and plaintiffs somehow
conclude that this circumstance similarly required reappraisal of the non-federal wildemess
parcel. This is simply not the case. The May 11, 1988, Exchange Agreement was made in
circumstances where both parties were aware of an appeal which could invalidate the
agency's appraisal, and the agreement is expressly conditioned on the outcome of the pending
appeal. There is no similar provision allowing Indge Properties to set a new value on the
wilderness parcel. The agency acted in accordance with its own guidelines in not requiring a
reappraisal of the wildemess parcel, since the value of that property was fixed by the
agre€ment of May 11, 1988.
4. Plaintiffs' contention that the Environnental Assessment
(EA) was insufficient and that an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) was necessary
In the National Environmental Policy Act ("NEPA"), Congress has mandated
tlat "major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human envhonment"
must be accompanied by a "detailed slatement" covering certain broad topics set forth in the
-21-
Act. 42 U.S.C.A. $ 4332(2)(C) (West 1994). In regulations implementing NEPA, this
detailed stalement is called an "environmental impact statement" ("EIS"). 40 C.F.R.
$ 1508.1I (1994). When an agency proposes any sort of action, it must decide whether the
action is a "major" one which "signifrcantly affects the human environment." The Council
on Environmental Quality established by NEPA has promulgated an extensive set of
regulations to govern federal agencies in making this basic decision. Unless the action falls
within a "categorical exclusion" establishedby theagency, 40 C.F.R. $$ 1508.4, 1507.3,
these regulations require the agency to preparc an 'environmental assessment" ("8A") to
determine whetler the proposed action significantly affects the human environment.
40 C.F.R. $ 1508.9. If the agency determines that there will be a significant impact, then it
must prcpare a fulI EIS. If it determines that there will be no significant impact, then it must
issue a brief witten 'finding of no significant impact" ("FONSI'). 40 C.F.R. $ 1508.13.
The regional forester determined, during the course of each appeal and remand
in this case, that the proposed land exchange would have no significant impact on the human
environment. The first appeal of the regional forester's decision resulted in a reversal of the
decision, this reversal being premised on a determination that there were deficiencies in the
EA on which it was based. A new EA was prepared. That EA, which I have already
discussed, accompanied the regional forester's second decision, made on June 19, 1986.
This EA was never supplemented or modified, and it remained the basis for all later
decisions finding there was no significant impact on the human environment. It is therefore
the key NEPA document in the case, on the basis of which the agency's compliance with
NEPA must be judged.
aa
o
Like the other agency decisions in this case, the various findings of no
signifrcant impact, and the 1986 EA on which they were all based, are reviewed under the
"arbitrary and capricious" standard. Marsh v. Oregon Natural Resources Council,490 U.S.
3ffi,375-78, 109 S. Ct. 1851, 1860-61 (1989). The court's role is to examine whether the
agency's conclusion that the exchange will have no significant environmental consequences
was reasonable. Park Couttty Resource Council, Inc. v. United Staes Dep't of Agric.,8l7
F.zd, ffig,621 (10th Cir. 198?. After reviewing the administrative r@ord, I hold that the
Forest Service took the requisite "hard look" at the land exchange, id. at 622, and that this
exchange was not arbirary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion.
Plaintiffs attack the EA on several grounds. They contend that the EA did not
address: (1) anticipated uses of the land ceded, or enyironmental consequences of the land
exchange, 40 C.F.R $ 1502.16; (2) alternatives to the land exchange, 40 C.F.R. $ 1502.1a;
or (3) cumulative impacts of this land exchange, 40 C.F.R. $ 1508.7. The administrative
record, howevet, belies these contentions. For example, the anticipated uses and environ-
mental consequences, are discussed n R., Vol. W at 91-93, 95, aild /03. Alternatives are
discussed at R., VoI. W a 103. Cumulative effects of this land exchange are discussed at
R. , Vol. W at 89, and mitigation of problems from the land exchange is discussed at R.,
Vol. W at 9l-93. Public review occurred throughout this process. R., VoI. W a 5-6. A
reviewing court must remember that the EA is not a full-blown EIS. The EA need only
briefly provide evidence and analysis sufficient to determine whether an EIS is necessary.
40 C.F.R. $ 1508.9(aXl); a0 C.F.R. $ 1501.4(c). The 1986 EA tulfills these requirements.
-23-
I a-
The magistrate judge accepted two of plaintiffs' arguments, recommending that
the federal defendants' motion for partial summary judgment be denied, that plaintiffs'
motion for partial summary judgment be granted, and that the ultimate finding of no
significant impact be deemed arbitrary and capricious. Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge at 28-30. First, the magistrate judge was persuaded by plaintiffs'
contention that the EA mistakenly identified the most probable use of the parcel as a site for
a hotel, a supposition which was erroneous in light of the agency's own appraiser's opinion
(ultimately accepted by the agency) that zoning to permit such a use was unlikely and that the
highest and best use w:ui probably primary/secondary residential development. Second, he
concluded that the EA's failure to consider the possible relocation of an easement styled
"Mill Creek Road" on the lodge parcel was a fatal flaw.
Although the mere act transferring title to federal land by issuance of a land
patent has no impact on the environment, courts have recognized that the transferee may plan
some action which will significantly affect the environment and which could not occur
without the tansfer of the land. The agency cannot tum a blind eye to the transferee's plan.
It has "an affirmative duty . . . to receive assurances of the plans of the private developer
prior to the exchange." National Fore$ praervation Group v. Butz, 485 F.2d 408, 4Lz (9th
ctr. 1973); Locldnn v. Kennps,927 F.2d.1028, 1033 (8th cir. 1991). The agency tried ro
perform this dufy here, but the magisbate judge thought its analysis was flawed because the
proposed use of the lodge parcel as a hotel site was wholly unrealistic.
I cannot agree that the agency's analysis of the lodge parcel,s probable use
was flawed. As I noted earlier, the EA did study this proposed use and the environmenial
impacts thereof. As the agency's fact finding over the next two years began to reveal that
-24-
o
such intensive use w:ui unlikely, the agency eventually concluded (in its valuation reviews)
that the most probable use was for construction of primary/secondary residences. The EA
was not modified or supplemented to reflect this metamorphosis in the agency's assessment.
Iodge Properties, however, never abandoned its development proposal. It continued to press
for the more intensive use of the parcel as a hotel site, and the agency's use of the
developer's proposed use as the basis for its analysis was fully consistent wth Butzand
Lockhan.
Even if the agency was mistaken in continuing to base its EA on the
assumption that the lodge parcel would be used as a hotel site, I cannot agree that the agency
was required to supplement the EA by including another section which analyzed the alternate
use of the property for construction of two primary/secondary residences. There are two
reasons for my position. First, the agency analyzel the environmental effects of Lodge
Properties' proposed 100-unit hotel development in terms of its impact on traffic congestion
in Vail, air quality, water quality, and parking. It concluded that the impact would be
insignificant. R., VoL W a 91-93. Use for two primary/secondary residences (as assumed
by the appraisal) would be a less intensive use, involving fewer people, than use as a hotel
site. It is, I conclude, extremely unlikely that this less intensive use would qluse a greater
impact on the matters which the agency analyzed or that the less intensive use would raise
separate, new environmental issues. If the agency decided that there would be no significant
impact from the construction of a 100-unit hotel, it is impossible to imagine that it would
find a significant impact from the construction of two primary/secondary residences.
Supplementation of the EA to include a separate analysis of primary/secondary residential
a
-25 -
o
development would not have changed the agency finding of no significant impact, and any
flaw in agency methodology does not undercut iC frnal decision.
My second reason for not requiring the agency to have included a separate
discussion of primary/secondary residential development in its EA is that any use of this land
in private hands is heavily dependent on local zoning and land use decisions. While I doubt
that federal agencies would be able to impose on local entities the burden or expense of
mitigating any significant environmental impact, the agency can consider existing zoning,
building, and view ordinances in evaluating whether an impact is so significant as to require
an ElS, Locldnn v. Kernps, 927 F.2d at 1033, since those existing ordinances are part of the
factual background against which the agency evaluation is made. That is exactly what the
EA here did. Indeed, the agency's evolving assumptions about the most likely use of the
lodge parcel (which form a signifrcant part ofthe basis for Vail's challenge in this litigation)
rest largely on the appraiser's prediction that the very zoning laws which the EA thought
might limit development are probably going to have that exact effect. The EA's conclusion
that any environmental impact of the transferee's proposed use could be adequately addressed
through local land use decisions was simply not a mistake - much less a clear one.
The magistrate judge also thought the EA's failure to evaluate the impact of
relocating an existing easement for Mill Creek Road to be a fatal omission. The federal
defendants respond that (1) the EA did consider possible relocation of the easement and
(2) plaintiffs failed to raise the issue during administrative proceedings. The arguments are
both disingenuous. The federal defendants suppoil the former by claiming that there is a
cryptic reference to "relocation of roads" in a 1985 agreement between Lodge Properties and
Vail Associates, Inc., which agreement is itself attached as one of ten exhibits located in one
-26-
a
of five appendices to the EA. R., VoL W a 50. This obscurity intened deep in the silt of
irrelevancy does not suggest even fleeting awareness of the relocation issue by anyone in the
agency.
Defendants' argument conceming plaintiffs' failure to raise the easement
relocation issue is unavailing, for similar reasons. Relocation of the road was never
mentioned or considered by the agency until the regional forester's fourth and final decision
in the case. This decision was preceded by the appraiser's determination that the most likely
use of the lodge parcel was for primary/secondary residential units. This determination was
accompanied by the suggestion that the most desirable residential use would involve
relocation of the road. R., Vol. N a 380. Whether the appraiser's conclusion triggered
recognition of the problem (as the magistrate judge supposed) or whether there was some
other reason, the regional forester's decision of November 8, 1988, was premised on the
following added condition:
3. Reserve in patent a perpetual easement for public
access on the existing Mill Creek Road . . . . Provided,
however, that I-odge Properties, Inc. shall have the right to
relocate said access easements at the Lodge's sole expense,
provided such relocation does not interfere with use of the road
by the United States or the public.
R., Vol. I at 193. As the magistrate judge found, plaintiffs raised the issue which they now
raise here when they appealed this last decision of the regional forester.
I do not believe that federal defendants can avoid the conclusions that (1) the
provision allowing hdge Properties to relocate Mill Creek Road was never a part of the
agency's decision-making process until on or about November 8, 1988, and (2) the earlier
EA never addressed the environmental consequences of this relocation. The EA should have
-27 -
a
been supplemented to consider the potential effects of this action. Thus, the question which
the court must address is whether this deficiency means that the finding of no significant
impact is arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion. In dealing with this issue, I am
mindful of the admonition that "[i]f the record before the agency does not support the agency
action, if the agency has not considered all relevant factors, or the reviewing court simply
cannot evaluate the challenged agency action on the basis of the record before it, the proper
course, except in rare circumstances, is to remand to the agency for additional investigation
or explanation." Floida Power & Ligltt Co. v. Loion 470 U.S. 729,7M, 105 S. Ct.
t598,1fr7 (1985).
For several reasons, I conclude that the record before the court is adequate and
that the EA's failure to address possible relocation of Mill Creek Road does not render
arbitrary or capricious the agency's finding of no signifrcant impact. First, relocation of the
road is speculative. The sole mention of relocation is in connection with the United States'
reservation of a perpetual easement in the property. Lodge Properties has certainly never
proposed relocation, even in connection with a hotel development, and the reappraisal
suggested mere$ that it was but one convenient way of developing the property for
residential use. R., Vol. IY a 364-77. Cf. Inckhart v. Cannpes,927 F.2d at 1035-36
(agency not required to consider possible use by subsequent purchaser where ftansferee of
federal land had run out of money during long administrative process and was considering a
resale). Second, I am satisfied on the record before me that the agency's consideration of
the relocation issue would be highly unlikely to affect the finding of no significant impact.
See Mount Evans Co. v. Madigan, 14 F.3d at L456. There is nothing in the agency
proceedings which permits Lodge Properties to change the width of the road, to modi$ the
-28-
+
nature of the easement, or to lighten the burdens which the United States, as holder of the
dominant estate, could impose. I have examined the site maps which accompany the
reappraisal of the property and which illustrate the one relocation which the appraiser thought
might allow more convenient development, R., Vol. IV at 357-58, and I cannot conceive that
remand of this case for consideration of the relocation issue would result in a finding of
significant irnpact and thereby necessitate preparation of an EIS. My conclusion is
reinforced by the fact that the agency has clearly (and reasonably) suggested that existing
local zoning and land use laws suffice to control development of the land.
5. Plaintiffs' miscellaneousremainingcontentionsconceming
defects in the administrative process
Plaintiffs point out that the magisrate judge failed to rule on the motion for
partial summary judgment pertaining to their sixth, seventh, and eighth "claims for relief." I
also note that their ninth "claim" is apparently not the subject of any motion, but I think is
lack of merit is apparent from the record. @aintiffs' fourth uclaim for relief" was
voluntarily "dismissed" on April 1, 1990.) It is convenient to group all of these remaining
"claims" together, partly because I do not think that they provide any basis for relief, and
partly because I think the rulings already made herein effectively moot the claims.
In their sixth 'claim for relief," plaintiffs allege a denial of their right of
administrative review. Specifically, plaintiffs argue that a June 2, 1989, document, R.,
VoL II at 403-05, in which the forest service's regional director oflands certified that the
land exchange met the requirements of law, even though the Associate Deputy Chief and the
Assistant Secretary of Agriculture had not yet ruled on plaintiffs' appeal, somehow cuts short
their administrative review. It is clear, however, that the federal defendants, lodge
-29-
e
Properties, Western land, and the third-party owners of the wilderness parcel intended to do
- and did - nothing more than take steps to expedite the exchange once the final agency
decision was made. To this end, they agreed to escrow ail closing documents and to close
the transaction only after a final agency decision had been made. The administrative review
continued, even though a patent was requested from, and issued by, the United States Bureau
of knd Management. The key fact is that the patent was not delivered, and the escrow was
not closed, until after the agency's decision had become final. The actions relating to the
escrow and issuance of the patent were distinct from the continuing administrative review and
did not deprive plaintiffs of their right to that review.
In their seventh "claim for relief," plaintiffs allege that defendants violated a
stay providing that the deeds would not be exchanged until the agency had ruled on the
merits of plaintiffs' appeals. R., Vol. N at 23, 30. See also 36 C.F.R. $ 211.18ftX4xi)
(1994). I hold that no such violation occurred here. The Associate Deputy Chief of the
National Forest System ruled on the merits of the appeal on June 16, 1989, stating that his
decision "constitute[d] the final administrative determination of the Department of
Agriculture unless the Secretary, on his own volition, [chose] to review the appeal." R.,
Vol. IV u 607. The Assistant Secretary declined to review the appeal on June 26, L989.
The stay was in effect until ten days after the agency's final administrative determination -
that is, until June 26, 1989. It was not until June 26 that the exchange was closed and the
documents recorded. The purpose of the stay was to allow an appeal to the Secretary of
Agriculture. This appeal process occurred in this case, and it was complete when the
Assistant Secretary declined to hear the appeal.
-30-
a o
In their eighth "claim for relief," plaintiffs argue that the issuance of the land
patent for the lodge parcel violated 43 U.S.C.A. $ l7l8 (1986), which discusses the issuance
of patents by the Secretary of the United States Department of the Interior. I do not accept
this argument either. The merits of plaintiffs'appeal were decided on June 16, 1989. The
patent was not issued until June 23, 1989, R., vol. I a 322, and it was not delivered or
recorded until June 26, L989, after the Assistant Secretary of Agriculture had declined to
review the decision, id. Thus, plaintiffs have not shown how the patent violated 43 U.S.C.
$ 1718. If the Associate Deputy Chief or Assistant Secretary had decided in plaintiffs'
favor, then the patent obviously would not have been delivered or recorded, for that was the
entire purpose of the escrow arrangement.
In their ninth "claim for relief," plaintiffs allege an unlawful termination of a
qpecial use permit. Plaintiffs clairn that, on June 23, 1989, the title company handling the
closing mailed vail (l) a proposed easement from Lodge Froperties, and e) a panial
surrender and relinquishment of a special use permit in which Vail was asked to surrender all
interest in a special use permit for a bike path. Plaintiffs allege that the termination of the
Vail special use permit on the lodge parcel, the terms of the patent reservation relating to this
permit, and the provisions of the easement offered to vail violate 43 u.s.c.A. $ 1266
(1986)' which requires due notice for the termination of such rights. This argument is
devoid of rnerit. The patent itself does not t€rminate the special use permit until
December 31, 1989. Thus, the title company's delivery of the referenced documents on
lune 23, 1989, gave Vail notice and ample opportunity to contest the proposed termination of
its rights.
-3r-
Finally, I think that plaintiffs' sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth "claims for
relief" are essentially ancillary to their f,rrst, second, third, and fifth "claims.' Had they
prevailed on their main attack embodied in the eadier "claims,' these additional "claims"
might be treated as further equitable arguments supporting their overall effort to undo this
entire exchange transaction. I am, however, upholding the agency's decision to proceed with
the land exchange and its subsidiary determinations that the exchange is in the public interest,
that land values have been eq'nlizsd, and that the exchange has no significant environmental
impact. I do not think that the related but distinct machinations designed to expedite closing
of the transaction after the exchange received final approval - even if they were irregular
and procedurally improper - would justify setting aside the decision to exchange the land.
In light of this determination, it would be hollow to remand the ancillary machinations so
that the agency could go through the exercise again. In other words, the determination that
the land exchange decision was proper effectively moots the remaining arguments.
C, I-odge Propefties' and Westem ltnd,s Motion to Disniss and Motion
for Summary Judgment
The private defendants' motions essentially urge that, even if the
adminisuative process were so capricious that the agency action should be set aside, Lodge
Properties has received its land patent and cannot be divested ofit. The motion goes to the
heart of plaintiffs' eleventh claim for relief, which asks that the court undo the entire
exchange transaction and require reconveyance of the lodge parcel to the United States.
Because I am upholding the agency decision, there is no basis for the request that I undo the
land exchange. Defendants' motions are therefore denied as moot.
-32-
IN THE UNTIED STATES DISTRICT COIIRT
FOR TI{E DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 89 N 1098
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
I hereby.."{fy that a copy of the Memorandum Opinion and Order signed by
{udge Edward W. Nottingham on March 31, L995, was mailed to the following on liarch '
i1, r99s:
Charles B. White, Esq.
Wayne F. Forman, Esq.
Andrew W. I-oewi, Esq,
Margaret E. porfido, Esq.
BROWNSTEIN I{YATT FARBER
& STRICKLAND
410 Seventeenth Street, 22nd Flwr
Denver, CO 80202
Iawrence A. Eskwith, Esq.
Town Attorney, Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
James S. Bailey, fr., Esq.
BAN-EY, HARRING & PETERSON, P.C.
Lincoln Center
1660 Lincoln Stre€t, Suite 3175
Denver, CO 80264
Pauline Milius, Esq.
Kenton W. Fulton, Esq.
Department of Justice
Land and Natural Resources Division
General Litigation Section
Post Office Box 663
Washington, D.C. 20044-0663
Robert D. Clark, Esq.
Assistant United Staies Attomey
Magistrate Judge Bruce D. pringle
JAMES R. MANSPEAKER, CLERK
7 ,-./sy '< K.eta,<
Deputy Cierk
JUN-04-96 TUE 12:10 Pll
t.'t
ut*5* r.rHrTE LLc FAl{No,3o38tl83
PUBr-TSS
IJNNED STATES COURT OFAPPEAIS
TENTHCIRCTIIT
P, 03/00
o"r,u$[kHA*"T.oO.Clat --
JUN -3lgs
I,ODGE TOWER CONDOMINIUM
I{SSOCIATION, TOWN OF VAIL,
Plaintift.Appellants,
v,
LODGE PROPERTIES, INC., WESTERN
L{I{D E)(CHANCTE COMPA}.I'!f,
CLAYTON YEIJTIE& Sccretqr, U.S-
Deprtnent of Agrisultue; F. DAIE
ROBERTSON, Chid, U.S. Forest Scrvicci
GARY CARGILL, R€gional Forester; NEIL f.
MORCIL State Director, Brrreau of I^aud
lvtanagsnenc DELOS Cy JAJ\fiSON, ftecw
of Burearr of Land lvlaragemeq MANUAL
LUTAI{, Setre@y, U'S. Departnent of thehnior,
Dcfendants-Appellces
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
APPEAL TROM TIIE I'NITED STATES DIITRICT COURT
FOR TI{E DXSTRICT OF COLORADO
@.C.Na g9-N-1098)
PAmrEf;IxsrER
No.95-1223
charles B whitc, (chrisopher J. Melc,her, Broumseia Hyafi, Farber & shickla4Davcr, colorado, with him on the kicf), ietros & lryhirc, o*o, cororroo, tn
Pl aintif fs-Appell aErs.
James s. !"il.y, Jr-, @andall tv{. Livingsbn wifr hin on dre brief), Bailcy, Ilaniug &Petcrson, D€nvcr, Colorado, for privarc-Oefadant_nppe[ees.
Jacques B. Geliu, (Iois J. schiffer, Assistant Attorney GeilGraL Albcrt M Ferlo, Jr_,
JUN-04-9O T1JE 12:11 Pil *r*lt l,rHITE LLC FAx N0. 30383s83 P, 04/06
Attoney, Depertnent of J'sticg washingbn, D.c., Hcory J. solao, uuitcd sratesAltomey, williu R Lucao, .cssistant unitEd sta&s enomey, Dcaver, colorado, with
lin on the brid), Amnrey, Deparhent of Justicc wasbineda D.c.,ior federat
D*ndants-Appellecs.
Bdore BALDOCtrg LOGAI.I, md BRISCOE, Circuit Judges.
BALDOCK, CiroritJudge
PlziutfPc Lodgc Tower condominiuu Association ad thc Town of vail,
Colorado apPcal a district court ordcrrcjecting 6eir sdniristrative clalleages to a
decisiod by the United States Foreet Service b eicchange ffcral lmd located in vail for
Fivde land localed in a wildcraess rea- we erercise jruisdistion undcr 2g u.s.c.
$ l29l ed 'ffrm.
section 1716 of thc Federal l:ad policy ad I\fan4gemart Act C'HJI\4A)
ar&orizes the Deparuncnt of IrlEsior ard the Forcst Senrice to ore;hangc puhlic lands for
piwte lands if 'lfre public interect will be wEll serrrcd by 'naking that enc;hanga" 43
u.s.c. $ 1716(a). Prusuant to this stdut€, the Forest sendcc sgced b achange a
two-acre parccl of fedcral land-afuinistcred by fte Fuest Senicc but located witrin the
botndrics ofthe Town ofVail-frr a 3E5.acrc parccl of pivatdyowned land loc*ed
wi&ia the Eagfes Nest wildenress Area The erchmge poponcot-LoGe propertieq
Inc.-proposcd buitding an hotcl €xpansiou on the tqro-acre parcel. west€rn r.od
Frrchargg companyassisted IadgePropcrties,Inc. in th adnrinisuative proceedilgs
priuto theerchaga
. JUN-04-96 TUE 12:11 PH PETL& t^rHrTE LLC Ffl( N0, 30383s83 P. 05/06
Lodge Towtr Condominium Association, a unincorporated associatiou of owusrs
of condominirqs constucted on land a{iacent b the two-acre parcel, and &e Towu of
vail opposed trc *change at the afrninigrative lwel. Aftcr ihe Forest Serrrice rcjected
pl8intifs' objcctions md approved the exchaagq the Bureau of Lad lvlaaagencnt issued
a pffit b dre tcn.acre pmoel to Iodge pnop€rties, Inc
Plaiutiffs filed a coruplaint in the district corrt seekingjudicial rwiew undcr g 206
of the Adninisaatirrc Procedne Act (*Ap,{-), oftte agcocy prccccdingp which
culnined in the land ochange. See 5 u.s.c- $ 70d. ptaintifis naured as defcndan8
fedcral offciale rvto made tLe adnriuistairc dccisions urbich led o the issrance of the
patcot b the twoacre parcel Plaintiffs also naned the pri@e exchange proponeute as
defendmB Plaintitrs cont€lded frst 6c disrict court slrould sct asidc the e*cLange
becaruse it violated ElPrdA and the Nationel Environmental policy Act CNEPA). The
distict court rerrieued Plaiutiffs' conteations under the sbdards governing jndicial
rcview of agacy action set forth iu $ 706 of the APA aod concluded &d there was 1no
basis for sating aside any agacy action in this case" rodge Tgurcr condominiqm .Ass'n
v. r'rdge PmJ'ertigs Inc., 880 F. s.pp- l37e l3s7 (D. colo. 1995). conseq'eutly, the
disfiict court disnissed Plaintiffs' case.
On appeal, Plaintiffs contend tfie distict court ened in disrrissing their couplaint
bccause the eschange uas arbitrary, capricious, ud conrary to law. specifically,
Plaintifrs rgue (l) the exc;hangc was not in the public inhest as requircd under
EIJI4A 43 u.s.c. g t7l6(a); (z) the occhangs violated NEpA because it was prcmiscd
JIJN-04-90 ruE I2:I2 PIl PETRS& I.IHITE LLC FA)(N0.3038flsB3 P, 06/06
oa al inadeqs4 eavfuonn€ntal assesilenB and (3) tre Forest Scrvice aud rhe Bureau of
LandlvlmagCmcut violarcdrqulations gprqnfug r&,,iuistrativp stays andiszued the
pstcat b &e tno'acre pucel in violdion of an administuive stry. Plaiatiffs rcquesr &is
colllt to lEucnF the distist court, rescitrd the patent to the property, order the Forcst
Ssvice b qdblainl the wildenress prroperty back b ec privaE o,eyner, aud remad the
case b the agenry for further poceedings rndcr ELplvIA ed NEPA
We rwic*v Plaintiffs' chdlp6ggs 5 the land occtrauge under the dcfecmtial
shodard sct frrth in the APA: Thc rwierring court shall . . . hold unlaqrftl dd set aside
4Fncy action' firrtli'81 and cmclusions found to be . . . rbiray, capriciou+ an ab,use of
discrctiorL or othsrdse not in accordancs with lsrv.' 5 u,s.c. $ 70d(2XA). .R.eview
' under $ 706(2XA) is nanoq and 6e agency nced only demonstsat€ tratit coruidcred
relcvat facers and altqrnatives aftcr a full veqtil,uion of issues aud rh+ g* 6toi"" tt
made rrras reasonable based m 6u considcrarion-" MorFrt Evens co- v. \fadigm, 14
8.3i1t444,1453 (10th Cir. 19%).
We hsvl considcrcd the distict @rrt's order, the hiefs of the partics, the paties'
oral argment, and revie$ted the entire record ol appeal. After cxamining the applicable
law and alDlying the defercntial stmdads govcraing judicial rwicw of agrnry acliot sct
forth iu s 706(2xA) of the ApA we fiad no revssible ermr ad affrnr-
AEFIRMED.
4
O A*b*ta^t
75 South Frontage Road
VaiL Colorado 81657
970-479-2100
FAX97U479-2157
MEDIA ADVISORY
September 25, 1996
Contact: Suzanne Silverthorn, 479-2115
Community Information Office
VAILTOWN COUNCIL HIGHLIGHTS FOR SEPTETIIBER 24
Work Session Briefs
Gouncil members present: Armour, Foley, Jewett, Johnston', Kurz, Navas
('Johnston excused himself mid-way through the meeting)
--Loading and Delivery
An experimental approach for delivery in the Village Gore will continue for another 30
days while town officials work to refine a recommendation presented to the Council
yesterday. The recommendation-allowing loading and delivery in ouflying loading
zones from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m., with interior delivery anywhere along Gore Creek Drive
during a three hour window in the morning (starting after 7 a.m. and ending by
11 a.m.)-was met with some concerns by the numerous delivery drivers who attended
the meeting. While drivers were generally supportive of the recommendation to park
anywhere along Gore Creek Drive for interior deliveries, they said the three hour
window wasn't long enough to do their work. Representatives from the mail delivery
services, for example, said they needed time to service their customers (the
businesses), most of whom aren't there until 10 a.m. Others expressed concern for the
mix of trucks and ski-bound pedestrians during peak season. Some of the drivers
suggested mandating a "lock out' period during the peak pedestrian period similar to a
program at Denver International Airport. There, drivers are allowed to make deliveries
on foot, but are not allowed to move their trucks until the lock out period is over. -Another driver suggested a gate system with strict enforcement that would honor the
sensitivities of noise and engine exhaust issues of the core. Hepresenting the
surrounding residential community in the core, Jim Lamont of the East Village
Homeowner's Association criticized the recommendation for continuing to allow delivery
trucks in the outlying areas. He said the residents have been saddled with the trucks
for too long and demanded the problems be handled without the boundaries of
Commercial Core l. He then went on to describe potential parking opportunities, most
of them in private lots, to service each of the buildings in the core. Lamont also called
for a long-term solution to the problem and criticized the town for not including
concerns of the residential constituency in the current recommendation. Councilman
Paul Johnston and his wife sally, operators of the christiania Lodge, said they, too,
were tired of being saddled with the burden of delivery trucks lined up along Hanson
{9""n*o""*
TOV Council Highlights/Add 1
Ranch Road. Paul Johnston suggested opening up both Gore Creek Drive and Bridge
Street for interior deliveries to spread the burden to those who benefit from the
deliveries. lUaybe.then, Johnston said, the businesses will see fit to work toward a
long term solution. The solution, said Town Manager Bob McLaurin may be the
construction of a centraldelivery system, which could cost as much as $10 million.
That's the easy part, he said. The difficulty will be determining how the project would
be funded and how it would operate. The reaction from council members to the
discussion included: a suggestion by Michael Jewett to create a schedule for
deliveries with assigned parking spots; a comment by Kevin Foley to understand
staffing levels of the community safe$ officers in the Police Department for improved
enforcement; a comment by Ludwig Kurz who expressed disappointment in the lack of
representation at the meeting by the merchant, restaurant, and lodging community and
a suggestion that truckers, too, will need to be prepared to compromise on certain
issues; a suggestion from Paul Johnston that the Vail Transportation Genter should be
incorporated as a distribution center; remarks by sybill Navas that the short-term
solution should be more creative; a suggestion by Bob Armour that vehicles be
categorized by size and dealt with accordingly; and written comments from Rob Ford
who suggested limiting the delivery by refrigerated trucks to three days a week. In
addition, Navas said she agreed with Paul Johnston that delivery trucks should not be
placed in the outlying residential areas during the 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. period. ln the
meantime, the following plan was developed to be continued on an experimental basis:
parking in outlying areas allowed from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m., while interior parking anywhere
along Gore Creek Drive will be permitted from 7 a.m. to noon. For more information,
please contact Police Chief Greg Morrison at4Zg-2209.
--1 997 Contribution Requests
The council reviewed contribution requests from 28 organizations and agreed to
fonryard the following funding recommendations for the 1g97 proposed budget:
Cultural:
Golorado Ski Museum-Ski
Economic:
Hall of Fame, corporate table sponsorship,9600
Bravo! Colorado, $27,500
The Chamber of Co
Colorado Avalanche , $200
United States Demonstration Association, declined
United States SkiTeam. declined
Vail Associates Cloud seeding, $8,000
Yail Jazz Foundation, declined
Vail Mountain Rescue Group, $2,000
Vail symposium, declined (but sent on to the commission on special Events &
Activities)
Vail Valley Arts Council, declined
Vail Valley Exchange, $6,300
Vail Valley Foundation, $72,500
(More)
TOV Council Highlights/Add 2
Educational:
Learning Tree, declined
Meet the Wilderness, declined
Health and Human Services:
Golorado West Mental Health Center, 4 blue parking passes and 60 debits
Eagle Valley Family Assistance Fund, declined
Echo Ranch, declined
Food Resource Center. declined
Healthy Babies & Families, dectined
Minturn Volunteer Firefighters Assn., 60 parking debit cards and in-kind bus
service for July 4 fireworks (contingent on fireworks being held another night
than Vail's).
Northwest Colorado Legal Services Project, declined
Recreation:
Ski Club Vail, 4 days at Dobson Arena
Snowboard Outreach Society, declined
Vail Junior Hockey Association, declined
Vail Recreation Gymnastics program, declined
Vail/Beaver Creek Buddy Werner League, declined
Contractual Arrangements:
VailValley Tourism & Convention Bureau, g41g,7OO
Channel 5 (franchise lee 40o/o contribution), 944,094
Avon-Beaver Creek Transit, $1 1 5,000
^ Vail Valley Foundation (Wortd Atpine Ski Championships), $1 12,000
Contributions from Real Estate Transfer Tax:
Vail Alpine Gardens, $10,000 ptedge
ln using the town's four criticalstrategies as a criteria for reviewing the 19g7 proposals,
the town saw significantly fewer requests from community organizitions this yeai
(nearly half), although those requests were $114,500 more than the gg1s,00b cap
allocated in the proposed budget. The town's critical strategies are: 1) etfective ind
efficient municipalservices; 2) responsible municipal leadership;3) environment;and
4) sustained economic climate. Next steps in the 1gg7 budget process include
preparation of departmental budgets by oct. 4. For more information, contact
Christine Anderson in the Finance Department at 479-2119.
(More)
TOV Gouncil Highlights/Add 3
-lnformation Update
Public Works Director Larry Grafel gave an update on the Serrano's construction. The
project is on schedule, he said. Concrete foundation slabs have been poured, with
crews now working on framing-up the exterior for the next concrete pour. Steel work
wif f begin the week of Oct. 7. He said the contractor has asked for permission to work
on Saturdays and Sundays through Nov. 20 to maintain the schedule. Grafel said he's
prepared to authorize the weekend work, with slightly reduced hours on Sunday.
Council members have asked the town to assist the contractor in minimizing
construction impacts on tratfic, residents and guests.
Assistant Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer said a discussion on changing the
municipal election date in the Town Gharter will be scheduled at the oct. g work
session. The topic was mentioned by Bob Armour at last week's work session during a
discussion on procedural issues. Currently, the Charter calls for municipalelections to
occur the first Tuesday after the third Monday in November, odd-numbered years,
whereas county, state and federal elections are held the first Tuesday in November,
annually. Armour said it might make more sense for Vail's election date to now be
consistent with the others. Any change in the charter would require an election.
--Council Reports
Kevin Foley reported the Eagle County RegionalTransportation Authority has hired a
director. Jim shrum, who previously ran the transit system in scottsdale, Arizona,
begins his new position Oct. 14. Foley also said the Trails Committee met on Monday
for a site visit of the Dowd Junction recreational path. He said the Committee is
interested in designating a portion of the trails fund to help pay for construction.
Bob Armour said he attended a Tov-VA Task Force meeting in which projects were
prioritized for the upcoming ski season. The group will work on increasing
communications in working with the business community in promoting the Vail Valley
Club card and the new recreational activities that will be opening at Eagle's Nest atop
Vail Mountain.
(More)
TOV Council Highlights/Add 4
-Other
Saying she wanted to follow up on Paul Johnston's inspirational "watering the seeds"
comment at last week's meeting, Sybill Navas said she had two causes she wanted to
bring forth. The first, is a connection of the streamwalk from Ford Park to Donovan
Park. The second issue, she said, is to pursue locals' housing at the water district site
near the Glen Lyon Office Building. Navas also said she was interested in seeing
progress at the "ruins" site at cascade village.
Prompted by the pending merger of area ski resorts, Bob Armour said he and Bob
McLaurin met with municipal officials in Breckenridge to begin discussions of common
interests. Vail council members expressed interest in having a dialogue with the entire
Breckenridge Councilon Oct. 29
Bob Armour shared his enthusiasm for the recent Oktoberfest and complemented the
staff of the Vail Valley Tourism & Convention Bureau for coordinating the activities in
Vail Village and Lionshead.
UPCOMING DISGUSSION TOPICS
October 1 Work Session
Site Visit. Vail Pointe
Amplified Sound Update
October 1 Evening Meeting
Vail Gateway Building Special Development District Amendment
Town Council Selection of FinalAlternatives for West Vail Interchange
Appeal of PEC Decision re: Vail Pointe
October I Work Session
VailCommons lnterior Package Tour
Discussion of Changing the Regular Municipal Election Date
October 15 Work Session
Joint Presentation by Vail Village & Lionshead Merchants Associations
October 15 Evening Meeting
Lionshead Redevelopment
Review of Ford Park Conceptual Master plan
###
(r:]*- /-<-
U
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
woRK sEsstoN
TUESDAY, SEPTEiIIBER 24, 1996
2:00 P.il. AT TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA
1. Discussion of Parking/Loading in Vail Village.
2. 1997 Contribution Requests.
3. PEC/DRB Review.
4. Information Update.
5. Council Reports.
6. Other.
7. Adjoumment
NOTE UPCOMING MEETING STARTTIMES BELOW:
(ALL TTMES ARE APPROX|MATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE)|||||l
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 1011196, BEGINN|NG AT 2:00 p.M. tN TOV COUNCTL CHAMBERS.
THE FOLLOWING VAIL TOYVI{ COUNCIL REGUI.AR WORK SESSIONwLL BE oN TUESDAY, 1018196, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. tN Tov couNctL CHAMBERS.
THE NEXTVAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING
wlLL BE oN TUESDAY, 1011196, BEGINNING AT 7:30 P.M. lN Tov couNclL CHAMBERS.||rl
Sign language interpretauon available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please catt 47g-z332voice or
479-2356 TDD br information.
C:\AGENDA\rrS
a
3:30 P.M. 2. 1997 Contribution Requests.
Christine Anderson
steve Thompson AcrloN REQUESTED oF couNctL: Approve/modify tist of
Pam Brandmeyer contribution requests for 1g97.
2:00 P.M. 1.
Greg Monison
4:30 P.M. 1.
4:45 P.M. 4.
4:55 P.M. 5.
5:05 P.M. 6.
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 1996
2:00 P.M. AT TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS
EXPANDED AGENDA
Discussion of Parking/Loading in Vail Mllage.
ACTION REOUESTED OF COUNCTL: Poticy direction to staff for toading
and delivery in Mllage.
BACKGROUND MTIONALE: Village merchants requested Council to
change delivery plan. On June 1 1th Council directed staff to try
experiments. Three plans have been tried.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Allow detivery on alt of Gore Creek Drive
from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. From 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m. and after 10:00
a.m., trucks must park near lntemational Bridge or Hansen Ranch Road.
BACKGROUND MTIONALE:Applications for 1997 have been received
and need to be reviewed.
STAFF RECOMMENDATTON: Approve/modify list of contributions
requests for 1997.
PEC/DRB Review.
Information Update.
Council Reports.
Other.
5:10 P.M.7. Adjournment.
NOTE UPCOMING iIIEETING STARTTIMES BELOW:
(ATL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUEJECT TO CXANGE)|||tll
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSIONwLL BE oN TUESDAY, 10/1/96, BEGINN|NG AT 2:00 p.M. tN Tov couNctL cHAitBERs.
THE FOLLOWING VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION
wlLL BE oN TUESDAY, 1018/96, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. tN Tov couNctL CHAMBERS.
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENTNG MEENNG
wlLL BE oN TUESDAY, 1011196, BEGINNING AT 7:30 P.M. tN Tov couNctl GHAMBERS.||ttl
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. please call 47g-2g32 voice
or 479-2356 TDD for information.
C:\AGENOA.IA,SE
PUBLIC NOTICE
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE
(as of 9/2O/96)
October, 1996
In an attempt to respond to lcheduled meeting demands, as well as adhere to mandated ordinance
and charter requlrements, c-ouncil meedngs are scheduled at the following times:
EVENING MEETINGS
Evening meetings wlll continue to be held on the first and thlrd Tuesday evenlngs of each month,
saning at 7:3O P.M. These meedngs will provlde a forum for citizen panicipation and public
audience for conducting regular Council busines.
woRK sEssloNs
Work sesions, whlch are primarily scheduled for Council debate and undersanding of isues before
the council, wlll now be scheduled to begin at 2:(x) p.M. (unles othenrise notedf on everv
Tuesday afternoon.
THE OCTOBER" I996- VAIL TOWN COUNCTL MEETTNG SCHEDULE
IS AS FOLLOWS:
Tuesdav. Ocober l, 1996
WOfk SeSiOn 2:0O P.M. (stantns dme deermtneo uy rengrn of agenda)
Eveningmeeting......... 07:30p.M.
Tuesday. October 8, 1996
WOrksesiOn O2:0OP.M. (starungumedetcrminedbytenldrofagenda)
Tuesdav. October | 5, 1995
Work session 2:00 P.M. (surtlng ttme determtne<t by ten$h of asenda)
Eveningmeeting......... 07:30p.M.
Tuesday. October'E. l 9a6
WOrk seSion 02:0O P.M. (sorung ume derermined by ten$h of agenda)
Tuesdav, October 29. 1996
No work session............ (5th Tuesday of the month)
TOWN OF VAIL
&t6waw6u
Pamela A. Brandmeyer
Asslstant Tovm Manager
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. please call 479-Z33J2voiwor479-2356 TDD for inbrmation.
I.
ME!{ORAIIDI'U
To: Vail Town Council
Via: Bob McLauren, Town Manager
Frorn: Chief Greg MorrisonLt. ,teff Layman
Date: 09 /17 /96
Re: Vail Village parking and delivery zones
II.
Description and background
For at least eight years, a loading zone has been locatedalong Gore Creek Drive in front of the shops of the Lodgeprornenade. Since 1993, this zone has been operational from9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., seven days a week. The rnerchants inthis area have grown tired of this arrangenent, citing Ehedifficulty to carry on with t.rucks parked in front of theirbusinesses. They requested that a new delivery scheme beimplemented.
At the same time, the lodging corununity is concerned aboutwhat they see as an increase in early rnorninq activitycreating noise. Trash and snow removal operations, as well asdelivery t,rucks are generally identified as causing the mostdisrupt,ion.
Last spring, Town of Vail staff members met with The Lodge atVail representatives, Ert their request, Eo discuss theproblem. On .June 11, 1996, the town council hosted an openforum on the same issue. Meebings with the Vail RestaurantAssociation, the village Merchant,s Association, and the EastVail Homeowners Association were also held. As a result. ofthese meetings, bhree approaches were idenbified. In the
.ensuingr weeks, all three approaches were tried. Option Onehad delivery vehicles parked in the middle of Gore CreekDrive, Option Two shifted bhem to Wi11ow Bridge Rd. to do allunloading and Plan Three allowed them to park on Gore CreekDrive from 7:00 a.m, to 10:00 Er.rt., with alternative outlyingloading zones available from 6:00 a.m. to G:00 p.m.
Review criteria for this request
The review criteria for requests of this nature are many andvaried. The Vail bortrn council has several sourcel ofinformation to consider in evaluating this request.
A.vail village Master Plan
3.0 Goal To recognize as a top priority theenhancement of ehe walking experiencethroughout the Vi11a9e.
3.2 Objective Minimize the amount of vehicular trafficin bhe Village to the greatest extentpossible.
3.2.L Policy Vehicular t.raffic wiLL be eliminated orreduced to absolutely minimal necessarylevels in the pedestrianized areas of theVi11age.
Action Step #8 Irnprove traffic control systems
ef f ectiveness 45! appearance.
Action Step #9 Monitor time zoning and revise as. possible. Continue to explorealternative service/delivery
mechanisms. . .
5.0 To insure the continued J-rnlrrovement ofthe vital operational elenents of the
B.
Village.
Vail Transportation Master plan (page 10)
Goals and Objectives
- Pedestrianization should be emphasized as aprioriEy. Ideal1y, therefore, all trucks andservice vehicles should be elirninated from theVil-lage core.
- If this is not feasible, the nurnber and size oftrucks in the Village core should be reduced.
- Gore Creek Drive (between Checkpoint Charlie andMill Creek) and Bridge St.. should not carry anyvehicular traffic.
- Design solutions need to be sensitive tosurrounding neighborhoods and the naturalenvironment.
rrr. A.
- Demand estimates indicate that approximately 25 to30 delivery and serwice parking spaces are requiredto acconrnodate the existing delivery demand duringthe peak season. In the future, approximaEely 35to 40 delivery and services spaces will be needed.These new loading zones should be located inresponse to both environmental constraints as wellas pedestrian and retail space needs.
Findings
Based on the experirnental use of the three deliveryapproaches, Plan Three generated the most favorableratings and observat.ions. Additional PIan Three test.inghas been conducted for the past four weeks.
This plan involves:
1. Allowing loading/unloading and delivery parking inoutlying loading zones from 5:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.This is not. a change from the current systen.
2. No delivery parking be allowed anywhere prior to6:00 a.m. This is a change in the currentpractice.
3. Creabing a three hour window during which timedelivery parkj-ng is allowed in many places on GoreCreek Drive. This permits delivery drivers to parkcloser to their destinations for a linited time,thus encouraging Ehern to make one Erip to theViLlage and to clear the Village before primepedestrian tirnes. ft is hoped that this changewill create a situation where brucks are not parkedin front of stores, shops, and restaurants wtrenthey are open.
4. Encouraging business owners to make arrangementswith suppliers that allow shipments to be receivedduring those three hours of operation. This willreduce the numbers of trucks rnaking multiple visitsto the Vi11a9e.
5. Allowing trash operationsVillaqe af t,er 7:00 a.rn.
to conmence in the
6. No modifications to snow removal operations.
3
B. Inpub from the conununity
Generally, connenbs about this systen have beenfavorable. Lodge merchants enjoy not having the trucksparked in front of their shops, tnost toba deliverydrivers like the shorter delivery walks (between Z:Oba.m. and 10:00 a.m.) and guests will appreciat,e the factthat truck traffic on Gore creek Drive is restricted tothat three hour block of time.
concerns have been expressed by some delivery corq>anieswho, in the winter, will not be able to ariive in theVillage until after noon, and. from some lodging hosts whofeel thaE 7:00 a.rn. is too early to alrow tiuc[s into theVillage
Finally, the Eas-t village llotneowners Association, through.Iim Lanont, has expressed their concerng aUoutloading/unloading activities in the four spaces locatedalong Gore Creek Dr. adjacent to the p3 and iI lot.
fV. Staff reconunendations
The Vail Police Department recomnends the following:
A. That the experimental approach (plan Three) now beingused be made permanent, to include all of the conditionlfound under IfI.A. of this memorandum.
B. That the loading time allowed in Vail ViJ-Iage berestricted to three consecutive hours between 7:06 a.m.and 11 : 00 a.m.
1. Irq)acts
a. 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.rn. will be acceptable tofood delivery co(panies and shop owners, butless desirable to sorne lodges.
b. 8:00 to 11:00 witl be better for the lodges,but. will make food deliveries nrore difficuft.fb will also be less palabable for shop ownerswho open for business at 10:00 a.m.
c. Neither plan will satisfy some detiverycompanies that rotl into vail after 11:00 a.m.Keep in mind, however, that theee companieswill be able to park in outlying lo4ding zonesfrom 6:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
I'
c.
d. This plan inpacts snow removal operations.Occasionally, the parking spaces near
Checkpoint Charlie are utilized for short termsnow storage. Public Works is evaluatingirnpacts and alternatives.
e. This plan fails to meet the recorrnended numberof j-oading/unloading spaces as specified inthe Vail Transportation llaster plan (25-40
spaces) by having only about 21 total spacesin outlyinq loading zones, including the fourspaces below P3 and .t. This is offset,however, by the fact that during the threehours in the morning, delivering can beaccornplished nearly anlnvhere on Gore CreekDrive.
That no passenger cars be allowed to park betweenCheckpoinE Charlie and tbe Int,ernational Bridge ac anyt,ime.
,
I
a
Ageda lan revisod 9/18/95 lPt
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA
Wednesday, SePtember 18' 1996
3:00 PM.
PROJECT ORIENTATION / NO LIJNCH - Community Development Depertment 1:45
QUoRUM - (October 2,lgg')Amettf Almt' srittainf Hingst/ Goldeny'
SITE VISITS 2:00
l. HinE - 3130 Booth Creek Drive
2. Lionsmane - I I 16 Sandstone Drive
3. Pennock - 2844 Snowberry Drive
4. Spinelli - 2851 & 2915 Basingdale Blvd.
Driver: Dominic
PUBLIC HEARING - TO\TN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3:OO
1. Hitrtz - Addition to existing single family Dirk
3 130 Booth Creek Drive/tot I 0, Block 3, Vail Village I I th filing
Applicant Jurgen Hintz
MOTION:Atn SECOND:Hingst VOTE: 5-0
CONSENT WITH COI\IDITIONS
2. Lionsmaue - Final repaint approval Dirk
I I l6 Sandstone Drive/Lot A5-1, Block A, Lions Ridge tl4
Applicant Steve McSpadden
MOTION: Abn SECOND: Brittain VOTE:5-0
APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS
3. Pennock - Conceptual review of parking Dominic
2844 Snowberry Drive/Lot l8B, Block 9, Vail Intermountain
Applicant Levis Pennock
WITIIDRAWN.NO VOTE
4. Spinelli - New &iveway and retaining walls Dirk
2851 & 2915 Basingdale Blvd./tnts 4 & 5, Block 8, Vail Intermountain
Applicant Donna Spinelli
CONCEPTUAL- NO VOTE
t
I
I
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Michael Arnett
Brent Abn
Ted Hingst
Cla* Britain
Diane Golden (PEC)
StaffApprovals
Walter - New deck for hot tub Lauren
2940 Basingdalellot 2l,Block 9, Intenrrountain
Applicant Kristen Walter
Golden Peak Ski Base - Temporary tent l-auen
458 Vail Valley DrivdTract F, Vail Village 5th
Applicant Vail Associates, lnc., represented by Jack Hunn
Knowlton - Minor changes to approved plans George
1999 SunbuntJIat14, Vail Valley 3rd
Applicant Dick Knowlton
Loftus - Rernoval of one uee Dominic
4126 Columbine Drive/Lnt 16, Bighom Subdivision
Applicant Caroldeane and Bob Loftus
RuderlBaker - 250 Requests Dominic
2415 Bald Mountain P:oadllot22, Block 2, Vail Village l3th
Applicanc PaulBakerandBobRuder
Futemick - Exterior addition Dirk
930 Fairway Drive/I-ot 7, Vail Village lOth
Applicant Monis Futtemick
schafer - Interiorremodel Laurel
63 Willow Placey'Lots l&2, Block 6, Vail Village lst @ishop Park)
Applicant Oscar Schafer
Levy - Interior remodel lauren
4494 Steanside Circle East/Iot 13, Bigborn 4th
Applicant Donaldl*vy
Thoma -Newhottub Lauren
1220 Ptarmigan Road/lot 2, Block 8, Vail Village 7th
Applicant Carl and Marilln Thoma
t
Vail Heights Condos II - Repaint Lauren
2099 Charnonix Lane/Lot 14, Vail Heights
Applicant Suzanne Migone
Renner - Remove stair Lauren
901 Red Sandstone Road/Tract A, Sandstone 70
Applicant Linda Renner
Indge at Vail lntemational Wing - Modify landscaping/modiff Wildflower enftnce Andy
174 Gore Creek Drive/
Applicant Lodge ProPerties
Safeway - Building expansion Dominic
213l N. Frontage Road/Lot 3, Vail das Schone
Applicant Safeway, Inc.
Village Ski School -New sign Dirk
I Vail Place (south side)
Applicant Vail Associates, Inc.
Brown duplex - Changes io approved plans George
1225 Westhaven Circle/I-ot 37, Glen Lyon Subdivision
Applicant Daryl Brown
Savoy Villas, Phase II Buildings 3 & 4 (only) - DRB renewal of approval of 415/95 Dominic
1230 tions Ridge Loop/Simba Run Development & Area B Phase II Savoy Villas
Appticant Chris Klein
Thc applicaions and information about tbc proposals are availablc in thc project planner's oIlice during rcgular officc hous for
public inspcctiotr, locarcd ar thc Towu of Viil Corunmity Dcvelopment Dcpartmen! 75 Sourh Fronugc Road
Sign language interpretation available upon reque* with 24 hour notification. Please call 479'2114 voic*, or 479-2356 TDD for
information.
Agsodr hn Evisod 9/l t/96 $nt
PI.ANNING AND ENVIRO}ITIENTAL COMMISSION
MondaY, SePtember 23, 1996
AGENDA
Proiect Orlentation / Lunch - Communlty D,evelopment Dspaftnent 12:30 pm
ouoRUM - (oc'tober 14, 1996)
She VislE l:dl Pn
1. Campisi - 742 Sandy Lane2. Sentry Construction - 1225 Westhaven Lane3. Charlie Alexander - Lionshead
Driver: George
Publlc ]learing -Town Councll Chamberc 2:00 p.m.
1. A request for a conditional use permit lor a Type ll EHU, to be located e|1?25 Westhaven
Lane/Lot 43, Glen Lyon.
Applicant: Sentry Construction, rep. by Pam HopkinsPlanner: George Ruther
2. A reguest for a conditional use permit to allow lor a miniature golf course in the CG2 and
AG/OPEN Zone Districts, located on portions of Tracts B & D, Vail Lionshead lst Filing.
Applicant Charlie AlexanderPlanner: Dirk Mason
3. A request for a site coverage variance to allow lor the @nstruction of a one-car garage, located
alT42Sandy Lane/Lot 3, Vail Potato Patch 2nd Filing.
Applicant: JeriCampisiPlanner: Dorninic Mauriello
4. A request for an exterior addition to a master bedroom and bathroom and adding a 3rd floor,
utilizing the 250 Ordinance, located at 8028 Potato Patch/Lot 4, Block 1, Vail Potato Patch.
Applicants: Padraic Deighan and Birgit ToomePlanner: Dominic Mauriello
TABLED UNTTL OCTOBER 14,1996
ASendr lrst Fvi.cd 9/l$96 hD
S. A request for a minor exterior alteration to allow tor the consfiuction of a walk-in freezer, located
at 53'6 West Lionshead MalULot 5, Block 1, Vail Uonsheed lst Filing'
Applicant: MlEh GarfinkelPlanner: George Ruher
WM{DBAWN
ttttltttilt
6. Information Update
7. Approval of September 9, 1995 minutes
The applications and information about the proposals are avallable in the project planner's offtGe during
reguldr'otfice hours for public inspection, located at the Town of Vall Community Development
Department, 75 South Frontage Road.
Spn hnguege in0erpotation arnilebb lpon nqrnst wih 24 horr mtificatin. Plelre cdl 47S2114 vobe or 47t-2t56 TDD lor
iniom.lbn.
Community Development tlepattmonil
PLblbhed Seplember 20, 1996 in the VailTrail.
75 South Fronnge Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-213V479-2139
FAX 970-479-2452
Septembcr 16,1996
Mr. Jay Peterson
Wcststar Bank Building
108 S. Frontage Road West
Vail, Colorado 81657
Department of C ommunity Deve lopnent
RE: Rezoning of the trade parcel
Dear Jay:
Thc Town anticipates you will be submitting a redevelopment proposal for the tade parcel in the
near future. fne nrst itep o'itt be to apply for amendments to the Vail Village Master Plan and the
Vail Land Use Plan. As part of the analysis required to amend those documents, the community
need for a better loading and delivery system will likely arise. Rather than spending your client's
time and money developing architectural proposals, we request you work with us and address the
Mastcr Plan issues first.
The Tovm has made $20,000 available for a loading and delivery strdy. We are asking that you
work with Town of Vail staff in hiring a team of consultants to make recommendations for the
optimum loading and delivery solution for the Village. We are also asking you to pay for the balance
ofthe study, above the $20,000level.
The Town staffbelieves this is an important priority and is available to help in any way needed. Greg
Hall, the Town Engineer, is knowledgeable about the past studies and has suggestions as to fimn to
contact to get the Uitt rotting. If the t:ade parcel is to be developed, which will ultimately be
detennined by the Town Council, there is i potential for a win-win. Addressing community needs as
part of the redevelopment site will play a critical role in any development proposal you make.
If you would like to discuss this any firtheq I am available to meet with you at any time'
Sincerely,k*r^
Town Manager
cc: Town Council
tgun'uo'uu
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2 I 3 8/479-21 39
FAX 970-479-2452
August30, 1996
D epartne nt of C o nmunity D eve lo p ment
Mr. Jay Peterson
Weststar Bank Building
108 S. Frontage Road West
Vail, Colorado 81657
RE: Rezoning of the trade patcel
Dear Jay:
The Town anticipates you rvill be submitting a rcdcvclopment proposal for thc trade parccl in the
near future. Thc first step rvill be to apply for amendments to the Vail Village \'Iaster Plan and the
Vail Land Usc Plan. As part of the analysis rcquired to amend those documents, the community
need for a bettcr loading and dclivery systcm will likcly arise, Rather than spending your clicnt's
time and money devcloping architectural proposals, we request you rvork with us and address the
N{astcr Plan issues first.
Thc Town has ma{e $20,000 available for a loading and delivery study. We are asking that you
work with Town of Vail staff in hiring a team of consultants to make recomtnendations for the
optimum loading and delivery solution for the Village. We are also asking you to pay for the balance
of the study, above the $20,000 level.
The Town staff believes this is an important priority and is available to help in any way needcd. Greg
Hall, the Town Engineer, is knowledgcable about thc past studies and has suggestions as to firms to
contact to get the ball rolling, If the trade parcel is to be developed, which will ultimately be
determined by the Town Councii, there is a potential for a win-win. Addressing community needs as
part of the redevclopment site *'ill play a critical role in any development proposal you make'
If you would like to discuss this any further. I am available to mcet with you at any time.
f1 rrrr"rrr, r*r^I'
Sincerely,
//// tl
/T|-t'-
Bob Mclaurin
Town Manager
Torvn Council
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2 1 05/Fax 970-479-2 1 5 7
MEMORANDUM
TO: Susan Connelly .z/
Suzanne Silverthorn
Tom Moorhead
Larry Gralel Q
Greg Morrison
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Robert W. Mclaurin, Town Manager F
June 2'1. 1996
Loading and Delivery
\Mth the land exchange lawsuit resolved, we are attempting to facilitate a site plan with the parties
(LPl and Lodge Tower) for the development of this parcel. In our preliminary meetings with LPI and
Lodge Tower, both have questioned the Town's needs and intentions regarding loading and
delivery.
As you are aware, we have not yet articulated how we wish to address this issue. In my
discussions with the Village merchants, restauranteurs, and other affected parties, there appears
to be a wide range of opinions regarding the need and the viability of a loading and delivery facility
which has been contemplated for this site.
Obviously, we need to understand the need and the viability before expressing how we wish to
address the site. I believe the best method to do this is through a series, perhaps two or three, of
focus groups with the affected parties to gain a better understanding of their views on this matter.
These focus groups would then be followed up with a small survey. This survey should help
quantify the feelings and opinions on this matter.
I have asked Chris Cares of RRC to assist us in this work. lt is my intention to utilize a portion of
the $20,000 currently allocated to fund this work. We have scheduled a meeting to brainstorm and
for formalize this portion of this work. This meeting will be held Wednesday morning, June 26th
at 8:00 a.m. lt will be held in the small conference room. lf you are unable to attend, please
designate someone to attend on your behalf. lf you have questions or need additional information,
please stop by or give me a call. I appreciate your willingness to help resolve this matter.
Because LPI is anxious to move forward we need to resolve this matter in the next 45 to 60 days.
RWM/awxc: Pamela A. Brandmeyer
Greg Hall
Ci\loading.rnem
Office of the Town Manager
{i *""'""'o "*"
TO:
cc.
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
STAFFMEMORANDUM
Town Council
Bob Mclaurin
Tom Moorhead
Larry Grafel
Greg Hall
Susan Connelly
Andy Knudtscn
Undergrornd Loading Facility/ The Lodge Exchange Parcel
September 15, 1995
BACKGROUND: With the recent decision by the Distict Court to support the Lodge
Properties' land exchange, the Lodge has hired Jack Zehren ofZehren and Associates to begin the
site plan and architectural design for the site. The site is a two-acre parcel located immediately
south of the Lodge Tower and Thc Lodge at Vail. If the most recent court decision stands, the
status of the site is that it is annexed. considered to be within the Town of Vail, and is zoned
Greenbelt/Natural Open Spacc. The next step for the lodge is to propose a rezoning and/or a
Special Development District (SDD). Mr. Zehren approached the Town staffand requested
direction regarding the TOV's interest in an underground loading and delivery system, as
described in the Vail Transportation Master Plar\ as well as appropriate community benefits to
be incorporated into the application. Staffbelieves this site is a critical connection between thc
mountain and the Village and there is a general interest by Vail Associates and the Town of Vail
to improve this connection.
VAIL TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN (1993): As part of the comprehensive
transportation master plan, different types of dclivery systems were discussed, altematives
explored. and recommended locations for deliveries within Vail Village addressed. Four planning
goals and objectives were identified conceming deliveries. First, pedestianization should be a
priority. Second, reduce the number and size of trucks in the Village. Third, within the core,
Gore Creek Drive and Bridge Sheet should not have any vehicular traffic. And fourth, any design
solutions need to be sensitive to ncighborhoods and the environment.
Five alternative delivery system t5pes were looked at, tlree were eliminated and two remained.
They were: a cenhalized, close-in recciving area with subsequent distribution within the core via
smaller vehicles, and a decentalized delivery system using smaller satellite delivery areas on the
edges of the village core. Potential sites for the long term plan for delivery systems were
subsequently identified, with the Lodge site and Lots P3 and J recommended for some type of
facility.
Since no indepth delivery opaations plan was included in the fansportation plan, it has become
necessary to study specific delivery system requircments in order for the Town of Vail to
determine the opporhrnities that the Lodge Exchange parcel may provide. Specific answers are
needed regarding what alternatives exist tro answer the real questions of how many delivery spaces
are required, what size and types of vehicles will be accommodate4 what are the optimum
location(s) for the facility, is interim or long term storage a requirement, who will operate, who
pays, etc., etc., as well as what level of desire exists by business owners, tnrcking companies,
Town of Vail, and other interested parties for these types of solutions.
ANALYSIS: While discussed in the Transportation Master Plan, an underground
loading and delivery system is not at this time a high priority project for the TOV. A sense of
urgency has been created as a result of a combination of (l) the possibility of a favuable
settlement of litigation, (2) design urgency e4pressed by Lodge Properties, Inc.'s architect, Jack
Zehren of Zehren and Associates, and (3) a concem on the part of staffthat an opportunity not be
lost, TOV staffdoes not. however, at this time have sufficient information to respond to Zehren's
request for the TOV to comrnit to a position regarding public use of an facility.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Town Council authorize
the expenditure up to $30,000 for a comprehensive loading and delivery needs and location
assessmcnt including all recommended sites, not limited to those contained in the Vail Master
Transportation Plan. A feasibility study would determine cost effectiveness of implementation
and expenditure of further dollars, provide a detailed implementation plan that provides estimated
costs for a range of options, identification of and recommendation of locations, identification of
and rccommendation of operational considerations and requiremants, and final plan for
implementation with recommended potential fimding strategies and parhers.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED: Accept or modiS the Staffrecommendation or give
Staff other policy direction.
Cbvcrym.\sDian\|'drsmd.wpd
o Eest wlege Homeowrrers Assod.tct O
Easr Vr,l,acn HomrowNERS AssoctATIoN, Ixc.
Officers: President - Bob Galvin Secreary - Grena Parks Treasuer - Parick Granm
Directors - Judith Berkowitz - Dolph Bridgewaler - Ellie Caulkitrs - Ron Langley - Bill Morton - Connie Ridder
To: Bob Galvin
Board of Directors
Vail Village President's Advisory Committee
From: Jim Lamont Administrator
Date: July 5, 1995
RE: Lodge atVail Land Exchange Site Status Report
I have been informed by the Town Attomey that tre lodge at Vail International Wing, as
proposed, has received a favorable response from fte Design Review Board (DRB) at a recent
conceptual review session. The Town Attomey expects thatlhe Lodge at Vail will seek final re-
view at fie July 12, 1995, DRB meeting. It was reported, speaking on behalf of fie Lodge at
Vail Condominium Association at the DRB conceptual review hearing, its attomey stated the
Lodge at Vail Condominium Association's supports tre application.
The Town Attomey is reviewing the record conceming lhe legal standing drat fte Town of
Vail will take toward allowing final DRB approval of tre application. The application for dre
lnternatiqral Wing, as proposed, as had been pending since 1983. It is expected frat dTe Town
Attomey will not seek to overtum the 1983 Town of VaiVlodge at Vail settlement agreement that
permits the TOV to waive any GRFA requirement for the International Wing as proposed. The
Lodge at Vail presently is at or near the maximum GRFA allowed for rhe site. It is expected fiat
tre Lodge at Vail will receive DRB approval for the International Wing, as proposed. The DRB
approval will most likely be called up for additional review by the Tou'n Council.
The 1983 settlement is a one-of-a-kind agreement that resulted from a complaint over a
claim of alleged air development rights by dre Lodge at Vail. The Lodge at Vait by means of an
unsanctioned resubdivision of the site in fie early 1970's, separated the ownership of the land
from the condominiums located on the land. The Town of Vail has ttre sole aulhority to approve
the resubdivision of the site. It has been alledged that the Lodge at Vail did not receive approval
for the l97l resuMivision of its site. The Lodge at Vail subsequently claimed that because the
condominium units were granted air rights by the unsanctioned subdivision they rvere not subject
to density contols (GRFA) by the Town of Vail. The unsanctioned subdivision has never been
challenged by frre Town of Vail-
Some informed observers take the position that because the l97l unsanctioned subdivision
was an illegal action, lherefore, the resubdivison to this day has no @a-standing. Because it was
an illegal act it is not subject to de facto approval frough the statute of limitations. As a conse-
quen@, the Vail Town Council could notviolate or contact away its own zoning and suMivision
regulatory authority by means of the 1983 agreernent. Therefore, the action taken by the Town
Council in approving the 1983 agreement was, in itself, an illegal act. There is no evidence trat if
the precedent setting 1983 agreement is consummated; by the granting a constuction permit for
the Intemational Wing, as proposed that fie agreement cannot be used to threaten the zoning den-
sity contol system for the entire community.
An adjacent property o*ner has retained an attomey to represent dreir interest because of
an adverse impact upon treir property by the Intemational Wing, as proposed. An agent
Pct OIfice Box 238 Vail, Colorado 81558
Tdephone: (970) 82?-5680 Message/FAX: (970)
\n c>"
ll oc ./Vt \oftI t,tz.lt I J!
lr
Eesl Mll.ge Hdn@nerl essoCefcr I
EVIIA/Land Exchange Site Progress ReprotlT /51 1995
d
representing tre affected property owrer says that they will not enter into litigationp-nless otler -^td'adjacent property owners join them../ Lr{"V
"*o"Some Town of Vail officials believe thatonce tre final DRB/proval is givEn, in order to
estop construction, an injunction will need to be filed widr the courti They do not believe an in-
junction will be for0rcoming because it requires the plaintiffto file a multi-million dollar bond
wilh the court in the amount of the cost of consttrction. As has been reported, according to some
observers, lhe legal standing for these officials'beliefs is arguable.
A recent discussion with a principal representative of lhe Lodge at Vail, he indicated f;-\
dre Lodge at Vail was unaware of trc Homeowners Association's position lhat a more appropriate
location for the Intemational Wing, as proposed, could be found on the Land Exchange Site. A '
similar response of unawareness was made by a knowledgeable Land Exchange Site negotiator .
for Vail Associates. It was pointed out to both parties trat tris has been the public, as well as the ' r,
published position, of the Homeowners Association for the past four years. - -\
In conjunction widr Vail Associates and tre Toun of Vail, flre Lodge at Vail has been pur-
suing an architectural design and development program for the Land Exchange Site. The first
proposal, as presented in early Jung to the participating parties was summarily rejected because
of its impact upon views from the Lodge South Towers. A second proposal has been drawn up
and is now under review by the participating parties.
A cursory analysis of the second Land Exchange Site proposal by fie Homeowners As-
sociation indicates that major components of the plan appeaf, to be either firnctionally inappropn-
ate, politically unacceptable, or environmentally incorrect. From the quality ofthe proposals to
datg there is the appearance fiat none of the parties are seriously committed to u'orking towards
finding a functional or politically acceptable solution that serves dre public interest or the interests
ofall adjacent property owners.
As frequently requested by tre Homeowner Association, tre Town of Vail has yet to de-
fined dre design parameters or operational requirements of an underground tuck docking facility.
Some midJevel managers at Vail Associates are undermining frre underground truck dqgking be---
cause of a predispositiin against the need to reduce on-steet-tuck delivlries in Vail.fffiffiEfl
il ners.appear to be making recommendations based upon personal opinion rather than documented /I od.
The Lodge at Vail shows no indication of entertaining any compromise regarding the re-
location offrre International Whg as proposed. The Town of Vail has filed an appeal to the Fed-
eral Distict Court decision regarding the disposition of dre Land Exchange Site. In addition to
the International Wing as proposed, the Lodge at Vail wants a large number of additional condo-
minium units on the Land Exchange Site as reciprocity for allowing Vail Associates to build a
Skier Service Building and allowing the Town of Vail to constuct an underground truck terminal.
Vail Associates, for the past several monlhs, has not been engaged in an active dialogue
witr the Homeowners Association on this matter. It has been reported that Vail Associates does
not want to antagonize the Lodge at Vail for fear of losing the possibility of gaining approval of
their proposed Skier Service Building on fie Land Exchange Site or ifapproved, in conjunction
wilh the Intemational Wing as proposed.
Eestvtllsge Hdreownsr AseodeEm O
EVfIA/Land Exchange Site Progress ReprotlT / 5 | 1995
The Lodge Souih Towers is expected to give its response to the most recent (second) pro-
posal for the Land Exchange Site in tre near future. It has been reported that the Towe/s priority
is not to support any proposal that affects their view of Vail Mountain. As a consequence, the ar-
chitecfural proposal concentates several dozen condominium units west of the Tower on a steep
hillside. The proposed location for fie condominium units will have the effect as a result of a
massive excavatiorq to denude a thickly timbered hillside frrat would be seen from throughout Vail
Village.
An influential adjacent Vail Village property owner believes that there is an overriding
economic importance to Vail Village to increase its short term bed base inventory. It is his view
that this all-e,ncompassing priority should be atbined eifier by fte Intemational Wing, as prG
posed, or as an alternate, by allowing construction of a hotel on the Land Exchange Site. A well-
respected autrority on real estate development in Vail has conducted an economic analysis of a
hotel witr ancillary facilities on the I-and Exchange Site as an alternative to lhe International
Wing, as proposed. It is his conclusion trat the hotel is not economically feasible, unless it is a
condominium hotel.
It is noted drat the International Wing, as proposed, is not permitted by fre zoning code
to constuct on-site parking. As a consequence, the Lodge at Vail will be required to purchase
several scores of pay-inJieu parking rights in the Vail Village Parking Structure. The Vail Trans-
portation Plan indicates trat the Town of Vail has a deficit of 500 public parking spaces. The im-
pact ofdre International Wing, as proposed will furdrer exacerbate the public parking deficit
A recently completed community service reports flrat lhe highest priority for Vail residents
is open space preservation and acquisition. The zoning for the Land Exchange Site is Natural
Area heservation which permits no development on the site. Even though podions of the Land
Exchange Site bas been scarified by developmort, upzoning of the site will be extremely contro-
versial. The community survey reconfirms ftat tuck delivery rernains a modest concern of Vail
residents. Because non-resident property owners are not queried by the community survey, its re-
sults are not necessarily an accurate reflection of Vail Village property owners' altitudes. Without
an agreement on the Land Exchange Site, on-steet tnrck deliveries will remain a permanent fix-
ture on lhe steets throughout Vail Village.
The intransigence of the lodge at Vail's position with respect to the location of Intema-
tional Wing as proposed, if left unchallenged in the context of a comprehensive plan for the Land
Exchange Site, could result in a development that will not serve the long term economic interests
of the neighborhood or tre public interest of the communify. Without the ability to assess the
practically of relocating and possibly expanding the Intemational Wing, as part of lhe Land Ex-
change Site development, a rational or acceptable planning proposal for dre Land Exchange Site
will more dran likely be precluded. It has been reported trat dre Lodge at Vail does not wish to be
involved in any proposal that prohibits the constuction of treir proposed additional condominium
units by tying their portion of the development to any oflrer facilities developed on the Land Ex-
change Site.
It is recommended that the Homeowners Association, which to date has not been involved
in the planning process for the Land Exchange Site, call upon all parties to use their best effirrts to
bring a realistic proposal for the Land Exchange Site before Vail Village property owners and the
community at large. Wifiout a willingrress to intervene and provide guidance at the highest levels
of community and corporate leadership, regrettably, the process for tre Land Exchange Site ap-
pears to be moving inexhicably towards a legal and political impasse.
..4-
'7-
.tr '
,:: t'-
=:T
o
MEMORANDUM 'y )rt t...l|4
TDavid Corbin, Chris Ryman, Bob McLaurin ?)"' '
S t**'*
at; tt-
.V
FROM: Bill Kane t*
DAIE: February 16, 1994 \ t" ('h't ,v .{,r
RE: Centralized Delivery for Vail Village - site tests for the Lodge at Vail and Lot t ^
/
P3 and J. ,{," U-
We have evaluated two potential sites which might serve as centralized shipping and t .qtu
receiving centers for Vail Village. The conceptual basqfor tlds planning effon is outline in 1 r ( J
the Vail-Transportation Mastei Plan, January 1992. The majoi assumptions which have tl i
driven this site
-test are: 4' 'a
----z/dq44'""YL '',T1) Algq{reak truck volume (Wint€| of 60 to 90 truck per day completing an average l)L t 'l) A,tata\peak truck volume (Wint€| of 60 to_,lQguck per day completing an average'
of zso{efiveries. -.:t".:?v2) A demand for delivery of2,100 cubic feet per day ofgoods.
Design Workshop. lnc.
A capability for small, electric Cushman-styled vehicles to handle 4O cubic feet per
day.
An average centralized delivery urmover of rate of 2/bour for large trucls.
Availability of I.57 acres of USFS land as a land trade parcel for the Lodge at Vail.
The drawings which accompany this memo reprEsent a simple, two-dimensional review of
the two etigiute sites. For the Lodge at vail, more will be required to understand the
relationship to the existing building and, in particular conference functions and plans for the
'International Wing."
Lodge at Vail
This site could supply 9 delivery spaces for everything up to 40 foqt, articulated vehicles.
The concept woulil be to arrive at the lower, excavated level ofthe site and transport goods
to the Bridge Street elevation with use of a freight elevator. 4,000 ft. of storage spac-e -lsshown thai would allow for refrigeration of perishables, if necessary, and overnight
storage. However, this system as viewed as a modified direct delivery system with the
smallEr vehicles providing freqrrent, hourly service. Due o their small size, electric, water,
and unobtrusiveness, it is assumed that these vehicles could provide service virnrally on
demand. As packages arrive at the delivery center, they would be delivered to merchants
within I hour of arrival.
The site with 9 stalls, an 8 hour delivery period and a 30 minute turnover rate could
accommodate 144 truck deliveries per day; far in excess of that required to service the
village core. Use of ttris site could also, with completion of decking over the existing
parking area, create an opportunity for expanded and improved skier services. A plaza
migtrt -xist over rhe delivery area which would closely match grade with the milling area
foilift #1. Conceptually 5,000 sq. ft. of building space is shown to house: ticketing,
limited food services, ski school, retail, restrooms etc. This could produce an exceptional
apres ski space with its proximity to skiing and south western solar exposure. Design for
3)
4)
5)
A"4
{ r,r,fi
I
r
1
s&,
Design Workshop. Inc.
this_site will require redesign and relocation of the conference space as currently
confignrcd.
LotP3&J
This sie could qrovide a secondary facilig lor qmaller nehicles with service by hand cards
or pick up by Cushman's as needed- V/hile the entire demand could be served bv the
Lodge at Vail, it might be desirable to accommodate vans and smaller vehicles for ihon
term deliveries o help unclutter the main facility.
Ilir sp is approximately@br.es a1d-c9ul{ provide 5 smaller, 30 foot delivery spaces and
24 parking spaces. Jhe top-of the-deck is shown with two alternatives; surfacd pirting for
37 spaces or a landscaped, garden space. The entire site area is .6 acres. It is-our
undersunding that 25 spaces must be reserved for the g56g[ania Lodge. This could be
accommodated with use of 4 delivery stalls and creation of ?526 spaces.
Z E H R E N
AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
June 16, 1995
Andy Knudtson
Town of Vail - Community Development
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dcar Andy:
Enclosed is a preliminary design for development of the property to the south of the Lodge at Vail
(Irade Parcel). The most recent design dated 6116195 has been revised in response to comments
resulting from the May 23rd meeting with Vail Associates, The Town of Vail, Design Workshop and
The lodgc at Vail.
Chalet Units
The owners, Orient Express Hotels, maintains as a primary goal, for this site, is to develop tlre
property for 24 Chalet units which will be operated as guest rental rooms for the I-odge at Vail. The
Chalet units will be located at the west end of the property. They would like to provide two parking
spaccs per unit on-site which will be accessed from the existing mountain road and located below the
Chalets. We would liJce to provide ski-in access and a connection to the base of the adjacent ski lifts.
We understand that to develop this property as designed would require rezoning the property The
owners are willing to cooperate with the Town of Vail and Vail Associates to facilitate this rezoning.
Revisions since the original 5123195 drawing include : increasing the density by moving the units to
the west and out of the Lodge South mountain vicws.
Senice Center
The Town of Vail has designated this site in its maserplan as a possible location for a Service Center
for delivery, pick-up and service vehicles which operate within the village core. We havc designed
a possible Service Center which would be located below ground at the east end of the site. The
primary access will be by the existing mountain road via a 25' wide tunnol along the north propefiy
line. The Service Center as designed will accommodate (12) - 25' to 35' delivery trucks (Noble-
Sysco, UPS etc.) and (4) - 6U trailer type trucks (Rax, Coca-cola and beer trucls). Our design also
incorporates 12,550 s.f of storage / lockers space.
The intention of this design is tlnt the trucks would drop off merchandise into a locked storage
system. The hdividual merchants would then take their merchandise by carts from the storage to an
elcvator, located at the southw€st corner of One Vail Place, and then to the ground level frorn which
they can then access the village street level and then to their shops. This design would reduce the
number of trucks on the village streets and the town would be able to lift most strict delivery time
requirements, due to the trucks not crossing guest paths.
ARCHITECTURE . PLANNINC . INTERIORS
PO. Box 1976 Avon, Colorado 81620, (303) 949-0257 FAX (303) 949-1080
Andy Knudtson
Town of Vail - Community Development
Page 2
June 16, 1995
Revisions to the Service Center since 5123195 include: Enlarging the size and capacity to what we
feel is the maximum that the site will accommodate per public works desires and moving the entire
Service Center onto the Trade Parcel and off of forest service land.
Swimmins Pool
The owners of the lodge South would like to have access to a swimming pool for the use of their
guests. We have incorporated a swimming pool in our site design which is accessible from and
visible to the lodge South. The Swimming Pool is located directly above the Proposed Service
Center.
Skiers Services Plaza
Vail Associates would like to irnprove guest services at the base of the Vista Bahn and Chair One.
The Town of Vail would like to integrated the village and mountain better. Orient Express Hotels
would like to increase its guest room base. In response to these stated goals, we have designed a
mountain front plaza which stretches from the south end of the lodge at Vail to the new Golden Peak
building.
This plaza would be accessed by the three streets which lead to the base of the mountain - Bridge
Street, Wall Street and a widened alley between the proposed Intemational Wing and One Vail Place
tentatively named fulberg Street. The Plaza would incorporate needed guest services in this area -
ticket sales, ski rentals, ski school, snacla and rest roorns in the Skiers Services building at the west
end of the plaza. The plaza would be an inviting, sunny transition from the Mountain to
the village which could serve many functions similar to the plazas at Beaver Creek and Aspen
Mountain. The proposed plaza ls also designed to dovetail in with the desired location of the
proposed Intemational Wing addition to the Lodge at Vail with some modifications to its original
design.
Revisions to the plaza since the 5123195 drawings include: incorporating fulberg Street, a patio
transition area from the International Wing / Conference Room level to tlre Plaza level, indicating
focal point / gathering areas and moving the skiers services to the west.
In conclusion, we feel the design as a whole is a positive step in improving the stated goals of all
involved and will in the end sfiengthen and enhance the overall guest experience. If you have any
questions comments or concems in regards to this design please let us know.
gsw.@
cc: John Volponi
hoject Manager
/* l- )l il/l
v/T..i//;,1 ,! ,
-,xo,i,,i ,j;'i!i' ,' ,'' ,
t4i I i,j
hJ i' ,{)r*'i,*'i
i'i/
,,,,/ l?a:
t
'''',: ','[;*;'1i
#{F#',Nt,im)i t,,i,,
;] ii , ii'l,t!':
,il: tllrl ;
i
\
.i
I\
. ;,,
A
)\
\
ffi
ri
\rt'.\
\ l'
\-l
i-.,,*,-t,niv.q
-'-t;)
I
--l{6t i iii'ri:\ A /iji!/:$)),/,' t,, iit
r\
\i
\
\,A
('\
\J-..
\ - t , " ""-'--"""; "
q,,,,!l liit ij) / lli ll'4-- ( lll ii;1,'' \"r'.. I i .l i tl':i/i l 'il / ;' ,'' I i i\1, I ir, i i i i I . ..
' io l' ,/; ! i i i !' ,i ;',I tii,i/; ii.l/
r/ ,/,/ ,,'-' ,ii'"*,,,:.)i',,
,{ i /(,' ' ,' " ',l1u'1l ,'' , ;'
l[':gi'
" "'' "'
'"| \{; i !i EEi *'i' ,! ,' ,' ,5,W i : :, ,EAfi i ! : )isi_{ iii
r'38ji !.-! i )$i :ji'
-E3 ',,{ i\ I ,\'',^.'"i':\1 ,,i, a\iUN!'.'i'.iii i,,*i\/ i,t'ii,.i .l
,i ! ,, l,rl ". j \r, ,r i ! ! ,/,1,',' l
\', :l ;di:i ,i ' ,;i','1,, i '
:iffiiffi'fi $,i,; ,,!lii,!i!'l [iI '\ '\',
o
'r t-J IIo
;gJ
ojlE
.g
j
"t
I
r)
Jtu(J
q
'-..-.'
t
r\
\r
't,\
'\,-'
O: MIKE McGEE GREG HALL TODD OPPENHEIMER
Retum to Andv Knudtsen
Town Planner
INTER-DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW
) //a 8"o-. p" /"-4 {
lA4. /Lbd, Ca--ft- c.,4(<$--,t.'j lrz.) /-*-z-.-
frf""?"n'-t'z-Qz'--A' -' ( - t"'{l )
s L*^-;t {
a{ I i{S ur* l.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:7
ATE OF PUBLIC HEARING ru/o,-
3lzz
d'=/
trL*./
Lc...-c
4'uJ
DATE SUBMITTED:
COMMENTS NEEDED BY:
Reviewed by:
Comments:
Landscaping:
Heviewed by:
Comments:
Fire Dept.:
Reviewed by:
/o--J,4o'9j
Date:
Date:
Ir
Comments: i11c-4ns fh*t N€€D lo t>e As.*=J"
t, (cc.o'ss, -1 ut-*'-'\n'';i Q-.J i..' 1/
Z, De\e-|ion ($r" +1L"-..- Sysle-^)
3, €>ri...\<\er =-YS\er'^,
1, \enli \q\ion (
5 D*-'\eA - Jq'+\ed
'^to,/N6"" oate: 3 -/"1 - 1'l
Q\"""--s,
e*4 A.rU,
f-<.r"--- n-, A
f/- fju-,
d.," rl,4-A {
,,Or€,r- ^. t/r/rZ
_. b_, UJ N\ e{- 5.-'ppr.y-
oistributed to trre rie Department, pubtic Works, and Landsc aping on--S /P---.
TO: MIKE McGEE GREG HALL TODD OPPENHEIMER
Return to Andy Knudtsen
l'own Planner
INTER-DEPARTM ENTAL REVI EW
DATE SUBMITTED:
COMMENTS NEEDED BY:
landscaping:
Reviewed by:
Comments:
Fire Dept.:
Reviewed by:
Comments:
/'*J4o'9j) //a 8""-
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING
ilzz
{
BRIEF DESCHIPTIoN oF rHE PRoPoSAL: ? d-./" UA L- -,r j,*f /23o, ^4.<) ct-t c.i(< { *'/,'l 6*,.-.-
Date:
Date:
Distributed to the Fire Department, Public Works, and Landsc
^ping
on 3 /P
1-^^E-4 oA'Lo.--^-.. '
o
I/Vt 4".
TO: MIKE McGEE GREG HALL TODD OPPENHEIMER
Return to Andy Knudtscn
Town Planncr
t,L cJW- d4M,/r-.vt .'.,L-,v -t
No, ^
Landscaping:
Date:
Dale:
Dalc:
Distributed to the Fire Departmcnt, pubric Works, and Landsc aping on (z f zz .
COMMENTSNEEDEDBY: .)l,l
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
.l tv--*Ao.T"*,1 11"^d,6, z(l_ ^e<)
kt ec-\ u ft 6 d; #_" . , /,,4, r0..,-2. .,r_
Engineering:
Reviewed by:
Comments:
Reviewed by:
Commenls:
Fire Dept.:
Reviewed by:
Comments:
T*o.,
Yi[6", l^- --/L K--( nA T
T/'\..fi/lIKE
A-<rfi\'\ .
McGEE GREG HALL TODD OPPENHEIMER
Relurn to Andv Kolrcllscn
Town Planncr
INTER.DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW
PROJECT:
DATE SUBMITTED: +l;f-DATE OF PUllLlC HEARTNG
COMMENTS NEEDED BY I II
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF TIIE PROPOSAL:
u-^-A* "f-,---l \ l" ^ d,g. , z+
dJon,r, ,/F2tu- Aey"l _--- . ,j
t ) /tc"/s,/ a4/ ;^' "/td&"(),,r,/rAr'1 ry /f
Cot-rn.t"tL Zze/5,lJc_{)t-zt.t -" - /1 ,&n -t2) 6'/o/Jt o"::"t ,'ol;; ,r*"-uoo" 4 se":5
Datc:- , ' -\./ //hz mnr) 74tt"''25
/ ] - .n4,{C/ (
iiffir* ."' tr em'/ v&tc'a adE
ot/,,\,/./L 21ee/5r/ azrn,eil"2, ,",J, ooc"z ,t ffi
;; ,r" ,fnod*tL
//8,/ a&€s'{-'*' 4 N '7* tlft
s,,4#'zJ F itlrJ"t ;; 7/'4/€/e''1 74'{rz<nutr"
r
"/ '{st",t 't
'' '-
''^^"
l<'tz'vt* 7g'6'/us (&uo "u#' ralytn4'
":o':,.: *;iZ';"'tM)'
z) 5ran'89 caztzt' paro { 41 Sc:'fti*TtinYJ -
Fire Dept.:
Reviewed by:
Comments:
her;, U& dd; /._*,/,4,
Enginepripf :
Reviefbd by:Date:
zt)
4 e4) t. av- l<lvvr-"n r!r^-n^-1
t[.<= <.r- ft[cg o
by:
Dato:
Distributcd to thc Firc Departmcnt, pubric works, and Landsc aping on (a / zz .