HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Comment - Widmier 081217.pdf1
Town of Vail Council towncouncil@vailgov.com Mr. Jonathan Spence Town of Vail – Planning Department jspence@vailgov.com
Tammy Nagel – Town of Vail Clerk
tnagel@vailgov.com
Re: Objection by Owner at Vail Mountain Residences on Gore Creek, Inc. (“VMVR”) to the Pending Application for Special Development District No. 42 Dear Town of Vail Council Members: I own Unit 302 at VMVR which will be part of Special Development
District No. 42 (“SDD”) if the Application for SDD No. 42 was approved. I object
to the Application as follows:
1. Lack of Notice and Failure of the Applicant to meet the requirement
under the Town of Vail Code to procure “written consent of owners of
all property to be included in the SDD, or their agents or authorized
representatives.” No notification of this public process was provided at
any time to the Residential Owners at VMVR. The Residential Owners at
VMVR have been denied the right to meaningfully address the
Application through this public process though our property rights are
most impacted by the Application. Mary Anne Redmond, the Applicant’s
employee, did not have apparent or actual authority to submit an
Approval Letter for the SDD Application as the authorized representative
of VMVR. (See below for more detail).
2
2. The SDD removes zoning restrictions at VMVR leading to a
significant change in the VMVR community by allowing a much
taller and dense building to be constructed which will adversely
impact air, light, privacy and the residential feel of VMVR. When I
purchased my Unit at VMVR I relied upon zoning restrictions applying
to the Declarant’s future Development Rights in relation to Phase 2
which Declarant represented to me would be applicable thereby
protecting my investment. Phase 2 of VMVR as proposed under the SDD
will be a 700 foot tall, high density, mostly transient-occupied building
with 34 hotel rooms and lock offs in addition to 22 condos and employee
housing units. Phase 2 will be cantilevered over the Phase 1 parking
garage entrance potentially blocking access to the parking garage by
delivery trucks and taller vehicles. A 2,000 square foot Lobby Deck will
overhang the Pool. There has been no proposal provided to date to the
Phase 1 Owners on how Phase 2 will interrelate with Phase 1 in terms of
assessments, maintenance and use.
My awareness of the SDD Application occurred recently when a fellow
Owner saw an article in the Vail Daily and reached out to me and other Owners.
There has been no effort to vet the SDD Application through the Phase I Owners
and in fact there has been a disturbing lack of transparency about it from the
Applicant whom is also the Commercial Owner at VMVR. The only
correspondence I received about Phase 2 at VMVR from the Applicant was in
March 2017 which merely stated that Phase 2 as initially planned in 2007 was
going forward. There was no mention or disclosure of the SDD Application. Most
disturbing is that on March 27, 2017 Mary Ann Redmond – employee of the
Commercial Owner and Applicant for this SDD – signed an “Approval Form” that
was submitted to the Town of Vail stating that the Association had approved the
3
SDD. This occurred without proper Meeting requirements or any notification of
the Residential Owners at Phase 1. This “Approval Letter” does not meet the Town
Code requirements for such approval and the Application should fail as a threshold
requirement of the Application has not been met.
As a result of the failure to meet Code and notice requirements, the SDD
Application has progressed through the Town of Vail administrative processes
without objection or involvement of the Phase 1 Residential Owners despite the
great impact the SDD Application will have upon our homes. These actions do not
meet the requirements of the Town Code or the spirit of the public process.
I also object to the SDD Application as it fails to meet the 9 Criteria
for an SDD as follows:
1. Compatibility: This criteria is not met for the following reasons:
i. VMVR is small residential project with an underground
parking garage located in an area of the Town of Vail that
does not have large buildings around it. The proposed SDD
and related plans will allow a taller building than Phase I to
overshadow and overpower the Phase I building. This will
adversely impact light, air, heat energy created by sun and
privacy.
ii. A hotel facility coupled with Units that can in essence be used
as hotel like rooms (i.e. lock offs) creates a high use that is not
4
consistent with the residential area in which the project is
located and adversely impacts Phase I and neighboring
properties. This high use creates an adverse carbon footprint
for a Town that is moving toward Green certification.
iii. Parking is already a major issue and problem for the Phase I
portion of the VMVR. Creating a large, dense additional
project subject to use by a large volume of people at the same
time could highly exacerbate this problem. There is currently
no handicap parking spaces at all and the plans do not indicate
any are being considered. This is violation of the Americans
With Disability Act. The current parking only provides 3
guests spaces and this is not sufficient, particularly when our
primarily 3 plus bedroom residences are provided with only
one and a fraction of a space on average.
iv. The Phase II project is proposed to be cantilevered over the
current entrance to the Phase I garages making it improbable
for trucks and delivery vehicles to pull into the garage
entrance area. A separate loading area is needed for Phase I
but is not proposed.
5
v. Pedestrian access is compromised.
vi. A 2,000 square foot “lobby deck” is proposed for Phase II
which will abuts and overlooks the pool area for Phase I. This
creates an incredible invasion of privacy and impact on light,
air and noise around this important Phase I amenity. It also
creates a life safety hazard as it creates an attractive nuisance
for persons to jump off the Phase II Deck and into the Phase I
pool.
vii. Abuse of SDD – It was represented to the Owners of Phase I
and said Owners relied upon the scope of the original project
and Town zoning restrictions when they purchased Units at
Phase I. To allow GRFA, height, use and density restrictions
to be simply circumvented by an SDD undermines the entire
zoning process or ability of any purchaser of property in the
Vail Village to rely upon what may or may not be built around
them. It is my understanding that Ron Byrne has utilized all
his allowed square footage per the current zoning (save for
less than 300 square feet).
2. Relationship: The planned uses, activity or density for Phase II are not
compatible with existing Phase I. See above.
6
3. Parking and Loading:
a. The planned location for the loading zone atop a public walkway is
not just atypical, it is unsafe and certain to interfere with surrounding
uses and activity.
b. Parking is already major issue at VMVR and this will substantially
aggravate that issue;
c. Delivery trucks and tall vehicles will not be able to access the parking
garage or even the parking garage entry area;
d. The design will lead to guests at Phase II to park in the Phase I garage
entry area blocking Phase I Owner access. This creates an emergency
vehicle access issue as well.
e. To the extent Phase II parking will utilize the Phase I garage it can
lead to major enforcement issues for Phase I on parking abuses and
poaching as well as allocation of maintenance responsibilities.
4. Comprehensive Plan:
a. The deviations from the code associated with the project include: east
side setback, building height, density, site coverage, and loading in the
front setback. Each of these proposed deviations directly and
negatively impacts existing usage and value of the neighboring Phase
I development.
7
b. The proposed deviations concerning height, density, mass, and bulk
must all be weighed against the perceived public benefit of the
Application. Public comment offered in support of the Application
during the June 12, 2017 PEC meeting focused exclusively on the
addition of Employee Housing Units (“EHUs”). However, the
proposed deviations are certain to exceed permissible Gross
Residential Floor Area. As the PEC pointed out, such deviations
should not be granted strictly based upon provision of EHUs. The
benefit of EHUs does not offset the requested deviations and
neighboring owners have not been adequately informed of the extent
of the proposed bulk and mass are far beyond anything anticipated for
the site. Thus, the Application is not compatible with the surrounding
area.
5. Natural and/or Geologic Hazard: None known except creation of
shadows, cold pockets and lack of air and light to Phase I.
6. Design Features: See above in relation to this criteria not being met.
7. Traffic:
a. The Application would increase density in relation to the Phase I
development and is therefore practically certain to generate additional
traffic. In fact, Tom Kassmel of Public Works noted in the June 12,
8
2017 PEC meeting that proposed uses on the site will generate
additional traffic which may have some broader impact on the system
8. Landscaping: The landscaping is very limited and artistic license was made
in the submitted plans in this regard.
9. Workable Plan: There has been no proposal on how Phase II is to integrate
with Phase I. The 2 Phases are very different uses, different Common Areas
and maintenance responsibilities.
Section 12-9A-8 requires the Town Council to make the following findings
with respect to the proposed SDD:
1. That the SDD complies with the nine (9) criteria, unless the applicant can
demonstrate that one or more of the standards is not applicable, or that a
practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved.
2. That the SDD is consistent with the adopted goals, objectives and
policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and compatible with the
development objectives of the town; and
3. That the SDD is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses and
appropriate for the surrounding areas; and
4. That the SDD promotes the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of
the town and promotes the coordinated and harmonious development of
the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment
9
and its established character as a resort and residential community of the
highest quality.
I object to a finding by the Town Council that any of the foregoing matters
have been established per what I stated above. I respectfully request that the
Application be denied. I will be shocked if the Town Council approves this
rezone given the deviate why that Ron Bryne has handled this. I will truly be
disappointed in the government of the Town of Vail. The Town needs to
remember that it takes an economy in order to employ a workforce and to pay the
necessary taxes to maintain the Town. The two largest contributor to the economy
of the Town of Vail are: Tourism and Real Estate. By allowing this rezoning to be
approved even when you know of the unethical methods that were employed, you
are voting against the interests of Tourism and Real Estate. I think that if word
gets out that this is how property owners are going to be treated by the Town –
there will be imploding consequences in the economy of Vail long term. Word will
get out.
Sincerely,
Lisa Widmier, VMVR Residence #302