Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-06-19 Support Documentation Town Council Regular Session VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, JUNE 19, 1990 7:30 p.m. AGENDA 1. Ten Year Employment Anniversary Awards to Pam Brandmeyer, Jan Choti, and Betsy Rosolack 2. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 3. Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1990, first reading, an ordinance amending Section 18.12 of the Vail Municipal Code to provide for bed and breakfast operations under certain provisions and circumstances and setting forth details in regard thereto. (Applicant: Town of Vail) 4. Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1990, first reading, an ordinance designating an underlying zone district of high density multi-family to Special Development District No. 7, commonly referred to as the Marriott Mark Resort; and setting forth details in regard thereto. (714 West Lionshead Circle, Lots 4, 7, C, D, Block 2, Uail-Lionshead 3rd Filing) (Applicant: M-K Corporation, Mark Lodge Condominiums, and Mark Resort & Tennis Club) 5. Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1990, first reading, an ordinance amending SDD No. 7, commonly referred to as the Marriott Mark Resort, and the development plan in accordance with Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code; and setting forth details in regard thereto. (714 West Lionshead Circle, Lots 4, 7, C, D, Block 2, Vail-Lionshead 3rd Filing) (Applicant: M-K Corporation - Kaiser Marcus and Marriott Corporation) 6. Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1990, first reading, an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1990, Special Development District No. 4, Section 18.46.100 C, Density Floor Area, Area C Glen Lyon duplex lots to provide for gross residential floor area to be calculated per the requirement of the primary/secondary zone district Section 18.13.080 Density Control; and setting forth details in regard thereto. (Applicant: 75°~ of Glen Lyon subdivision property owners) 7. Resolution No. 15, Series of 1990, a resolution setting forth the intention of the Town of Vail to issue its multi-family housing revenue bonds for Professional Development Corporation, setting forth the conditions of said intent; and setting forth related matters thereto. 8. Appeal of PEC decision to support staff position to deny Mr. Todger Anderson's request to allow the construction of 2 additional masonry fireplaces with type A vents for installation of two Peterson gas log fireplaces (1175 Sandstone Drive, Lots 1 & 2, Block 1, Lionsridge Filing 4) (Applicant: Mr. Todger Anderson) 9. Action on Vail Resort Association Lease Agreement 10. Action on Vail Resort Association information booth and special events contract 11. Adjournment I VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, JUNE 19, 1990 7:30 p.m. EXPANDED AGENDA 7:30 1. Ten Year Employment Anniversary Awards to Pam Brandmeyer, Jan Choti, and Betsy Rosolack 7:40 2. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 7:50 3. Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1990, first reading, an Betsy Rosolack ordinance amending Section 18.12 of the Vail Municipal Code to provide for bed and breakfast operations under certain provisions and circumstances and setting forth details in regard thereto. (Applicant: Town of Vail) Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1990, on first reading. Background Rationale: In December of 1989, the Council passed Ordinance No. 31 to allow bed and breakfast operations in the Town. The two family residential (R) zone district was inadvertently omitted. This amendment is to correct that omission. The PEC voted 5-0 to recommend the amendment. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1990, on first reading. The omission of the two family residential zone district from Ordinance No. 31 was unintentional, and persons in this zone district should be permitted to apply for a bed and breakfast conditional use permit to operate such businesses. 8:10 4. Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1990, first reading, an Kristan Pritz ordinance designating an underlying zone district of high density multi-family to Special Development District No. 7, commonly referred to as the Marriott Mark Resort; and setting forth details in regard thereto. (714 West Lionshead Circle, Lots 4, 7, C, D, Block 2, Vail-Lionshead 3rd Filing) (Applicant: M-K Corporation, Mark Lodge Condominiums, and Mark Resort & Tennis Club) Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1990, on first reading, the application of an underlying zone district of high density multi-family to Special Development District No. 7, Marriott's Mark Resort. Background Rationale: The PEC requested that the applicant, Kaiser Marcus, clarify the underlying zoning for SDD No. 7. The HDMF zoning is also requested in order to allow for the construction of 56 timeshare units. The PEC reviewed this request on June 11th and voted unanimously to recommend approval to the Vail Town Council with the deletion of the staff condition that the requested amendments to SDD No. 7 also be approved. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1990, on first reading. 9:10 5. Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1990, first reading, an Kristan Pritz ordinance amending SDD No. 7, commonly referred to as the Marriott Mark Resort, and the development plan in accordance with Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code; and setting forth details in regard thereto. (714 West Lionshead Circle, Lots 4, 7, C, D, Block 2, Vail-Lionshead 3rd Filing) (Applicant: M-K Corporation - Kaiser Marcus and Marriott Corporation) Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1990, on first reading, the amended SDD No. 7. Background Rationale: The applicant is requesting to amend SDD No. 7 to construct 56 timeshare units and 10 employee housing units. This expansion will be located primarily on the existing parking structure. The parking structure will also be expanded. Additional landscaping and pedestrian improvements are also proposed. On June 11, 1990, the PEC voted 4 to 1 to recommend approval of the amendment with conditions. (Please see enclosed cover memo.) Connie Knight voted against the motion as she believed the additional density and GRFA were inappropriate. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1990, on first reading. 10:10 6. Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1990, first reading, an Kristan Pritz ordinance amending Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1990, Special Shelly Mello Development District No. 4, Section 18.46.100 C, Density Floor Area, Area C Glen Lyon duplex lots to provide for gross residential floor area to be calculated per the requirement of the primary/secondary zone district Section 18.13.080 Density Control; and setting forth details in regard thereto. (Applicant: 75°k of Glen Lyon subdivision property owners) Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1990, on first reading. Background Rationale: The applicant is requesting a major amendment to SDD No. 4, Cascade Village. The amendment concerns the Glen Lyon subdivision duplex lots' method of calculating allowable GRFA. On June 11, 1990, the PEC recommended approval of the request 4 to 1. Diana Donovan voted against the amendment as she did not believe it was appropriate to allow the additional GRFA on the duplex lots. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1990, on first reading. 10:40 7. Resolution No. 15, Series of 1990, regarding the Town's Charlie Wick intention to issue multi-family housing revenue bonds for Larry Eskwith Professional Development Corporation Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny Resolution No. 15, Series of 1990. Background Rationale: The Council directed staff at the June 5th Work Session to prepare for Council's adoption an inducement resolution to allow PDC to seek private activity bond financing for PDC's Vail Valley multi-family housing proposal as presented. Staff Recommendation: Approve Resolution No. 15, Series of 1990. 10:50 8. Appeal of PEC decision to support staff position to deny Mr. Susan Scanlan Todger Anderson's request to allow the construction of 2 additional masonry fireplaces with type A vents for installation of two Peterson gas log fireplaces (1175 Sandstone Drive, Lots 1 & Z, Block 1, Lionsridge Filing 4) (Applicant: Mr. Todger Anderson) Action Requested of Council: Review the proposal of Mr. Anderson submitted to PEC and staff memo including the existing ordinances and render a decision on the request. -2- Background Rationale: Mr. Anderson has requested a variance to the existing fireplace ordinance to allow for the construction of 3 woodburning fireplaces - one to burn wood and two to be equipped with gas logs. This is not in keeping with the existing ordinances or the proposed ordinance revision proposed by Council whereby people can build 2 fireplaces for gas logs only - thereby the owner gives up the right to burn wood. The PEC voted 5-0 in favor of denial of Mr. Anderson's request. Staff Recommendation: Support the PEC decision of June 4th and denial of Mr. Anderson's request. 11:05 9. Action on Vail Resort Association Lease Agreement Larry Eskwith Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny lease agreement. Background Rationale: This is the lease for the new VRA business offices. Staff Recommendation: Approve the lease agreement. 11:20 10. Action on Vail Resort Association information booth and Larry Eskwith special events contract Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny the contract. Background Rationale: This is a contract which provides for the Town to compensate the URA for staff information booths and doing special events. Staff Recommendation: Approve the contract. 11:35 11. Adjournment -3- i TO: Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 19, 1990 RE: A request to amend Section 18.12.030, Conditional Uses in order to allow Bed and Breakfast operations in the Two Family Residential (R) zone district. Applicant: Town of Vail I. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST In December of 1989, the Town Council passed Ordinance 31, Series of 1989, which allowed Bed and Breakfast businesses in the Town of Vail.. The Two Family Residential (R) zone district was inadvertently omitted. This request is to correct that omission. II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff recommendation is for approval. The omission of the Two Family Residential Zone District from Ordinance 31 was not intentional, and persons in this zone district should be permitted to apply for a Bed and Breakfast conditional use permit to operate such businesses. The Planning and Environmental Commission voted 5-0 to recommend amendment to the Town Council. - ORDINANCE NO. 18 Series of 1990 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 18.12 OF THE VAIL MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE FOR BED AND BREAKFAST OPERATIONS UNDER CERTAIN PROVISIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town Council has passed an ordinance allowing bed and breakfast operations under certain conditions and in certain locations; and WHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to allow bed and breakfast operations as a conditional use in Two Family Residential Districts within the Town of Vail. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 18.12.030 Two Family Residential (R) District of the Town of Vail Municipal Code--Conditional Uses is hereby amended to add paragraph G as follows: G. BED AND BREAKFAST AS FURTHER REGULATED BY SECTION 18.58.310. Section 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases by declared invalid. Section 3 The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and inhabitants thereof. Section 4 The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provisions of Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. 1 Section 5 All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, heretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED ON FIRST READING THIS day of 1990, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the day of , 1990 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in this day of , 1990. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of , 1990. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk 2 k ~ ~t ORDINANCE NO. 31 Series of 1989 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 18 OF THE VAIL MUNICIPAL CODE AND REPEALING AND RE-ENACTING SECTION 18.58.310, SHORT TERM RENTAL ACCOMMODATION UNIT OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE FOR BED AND BREAKFAST OPERATIONS UNDER CERTAIN PROVISIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND TO DEFINE 8ED AND BREAKFAST AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to allow bed-and breakfast operations under certain conditions and in certain locations within the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that bed and breakfast operations operated under certain conditions provide high quality and desirable lodging appropriate for a resort community; and WHEREAS, policies within the Town of vail band Use Plan support the provision of high quality lodging utilizing existing facilities; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental commission has reviewed and recommended changes to the zoning code to accommodate bed and breakfast uses as contained herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 18.10.030 Single Family (SFR) District--Conditional Uses shall be amended to add the following: G. BED AND BREAKFAST AS FURTHER REGULATED BY SECTION 18.58.310. Section 2. Section 18.13.030 Primary/Secondary (P/S) District--Conditional Uses shall be amended to add the following: F. BED AND BREAKFAST AS FURTHER REGULATED PY SECTION 18.58.310. Section 3. Section 18.14.030 Residential Cluster (R/C) District--Conditional Uses shall be amended to add the following: H. BED AND BREAKFAST AS FURTHER REGULATED BY SECTION 18.58.310. ~ _ t Section 4. Section 18.16.030 Low Density Multiple Family (LDMFj District-- Conditional Uses shall be amended to add the following: H. BED AND BREAKFAST AS FURTHER REGULATED BY SECTION 18.58.310. Section 5. Section 18.18.030 Medium Density Multi-Family (MDMS) District-- Conditional Uses shall be amended to add the following: L. BED AND BREAKFAST AS FURTHER REGULATED BY SECTION 18.58.310. Section 6. Section 18.20.030 High Density Multiple Family (HDMF) District-- Conditional Uses shall be amended to add the following: L. BED AND BREAKFAST AS FURTHER-REGULATED BY SECTION 18.58.310. Section 7. Section 18.22.030 Public Accommodation (PA) District--Conditional Uses shall be amended to add the following: O. BED AND BREAKFAST AS FURTHER REGULATED BY SECTION 18.58.310. Section 8. Section 18.24.060 Commercial Core I (CCl) District--Conditional Uses - Generally shall be amended to add the following: E. BED AND BREAKFAST AS FURTHER REGULATED BY SECTION 18.58.310. Section 9. Section 18.26.040 Commercial Core II (CCII) District--Conditional Uses Generally shall be amended to add the following: H. BED AND BREAKFAST AS FURTHER REGULATED BY SECTION 18.58.310. Section 10. Section 18.27.030 Commercial Core III (CCZII) District--Conditional Uses shall be amended to add the following: P. BED AND BREAKFAST AS FURTHER REGULATED BY SECTION 18.58.310. . 2 ~i } i Section 11. Section 18.28.040 Commercial Service Center (CSC) District-- Conditianal Uses shall be amended to add the following: K. BED AND BREAKFAST AS FURTHER REGULATED BY SECTION 18.58.310. Section 12. Section 18.29.030 (A) Arterial Business District (ABD)--Conditional Uses shall be amended to add the following: BED AND BREAKFAST AS FURTHER REGULATED BY SECTION 18.58.310. Section 13. Section 18.39.050 (A) Ski Base/Recreation District--Conditional Uses shall be amended to add the following: 12 BED AND BREAKFAST AS FURTHER REGULATED BY SECTION 18.58.310. Section 14. Chapter 18.40 Special Development District of the Vail Municipal code shall be amended to add Section 18.40.160 as follows: Section 18.40.160 Bed and BreaY.fast--Conditional Use Permit ANY SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT CONTAINING MULTI-FAMILY, SINGLE FAMILY OR TWO FAMILY DWELLINGS SHALL BE ALLOWED TO APPLY FOR A BED AND BREAKFAST CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ACCORDING TO CHAPTER 18.60 AND AS FURTHER REGULATED BY SECTION 28.58.310. Section 15. Section 18.09.030 Hillside Residential (HR) District--Conditional Uses shall be amended to add the following: E. BED AND BREAKFAST AS FURTHER REGULATED BY SECTION 18.58.310. Section 16. Section 18.58.310 Short Term Rental Accommodation Unit shall be repealed and re-enacted as follows: Section 18.58.310 BED AND BREAKFAST OPERATIONS A. DEFINITION BED AND BREAKFAST MEANS A BUSINESS WHICH ACCOMMODATES GUESTS IN A DWELLING UNIT IN WHICH THE BED AND BREAKFAST PROPRIETOR LIVES ON THE PREMISES AND IS IN RESIDENCE DURING THE BED AND BREAKFAST USE. ABED AND BREAKFAST OPERATION MAY SHORT TERM 3 j RENT SEPARATELY UP TO 3 BEDROOMS OR A MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 900 SQUARE FEET OF THE DWELLING UNIT. BED AND $REAKFAST OPERATIONS SHALL ONLY BE PERMITTED TO ACCOMMODATE A FAMILY AS DEFINED IN SECTION 18.04.110. B. LOCATION AND CRITERIA BED AND BREAKFAST OPERATIONS MAY BE ALLOWED AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THOSE 20NE DISTRICTS AS SPECIFIED IN TITLE 18 OF THE VAIL MUNICIPAL CODE. IF PERMITTED AS A CONDITIONAL USE PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 18.50 OF THIS CODE, BED AND BREAKFAST OPERATIONS SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS: 1. OFF STREET DESIGNATED PARKING SHALL BE REQUIRED AS FOLLOWS: 1 SPACE FOR THE OWNER/PROPRIETOR PLUS 1 SPACE FOR THE FIRST BEDROOM RENTED PLUS 1/2 SPACE FOR EACH ADDITIONAL BEDROOM RENTED. 2. ENCLOSED TRASH FACILITIES AND REGULAR GARBAGE REMOVAL SERVICE SHALL BE PROVIDED. 3. REMOVAL OF LANDSCAPING FOR THE PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL PARKING IS STRONGLY DISCOURAGED. 4. EACH BED AND BREAKFAST SHALL BE ALLOWED ONE RESIDENTIAL NAMEPLATE SIGN AS DEFINED AND REGULATED BY THE TOWN OF VAIL SIGN CODE. 5. IF A BED AND BREAKFAST OPERATION SHALL USE PROPERTY OR FACILITIES OWNED IN COMMON OR JOINTLY WITH OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS SUCH AS PARKING SPACES OR A DRIVEWAY IN DUPLEX SUBDIVISION, BY WAY OR EXAMPLE AND NOT LIMITATION, THE WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNER, OWNERS, OR APPLICABLE OWNERS ASSOCIATION SHALL BE REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED WITH THE APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. C. VIOLATION IF THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DETERMINES THAT THE PROVISION OF THIS SECTION 18.58.310 OR A?dY CONDITION OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ARE BEING VIOLATED, HE SHALL GIVE NOTICE OR REVOCATION TO THE BED AND BREAKFAST PEFtMITTEE IN WRITING DESCRIBING IN REASONABLE DETAIL THE VIOLATION ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN COMMITTED OR TO EXIST AND SHALL SERVE 4 l THE NOTICE ON THE PERMITTEE IN PERSON OR BY FIRST CLASS MAIL AT THE ADDRESS LISTED IN THE APPLICATION FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. IF THE PERMITTEE DISAGREES WITH THE DETERMINATION OF THE DIRECTOR OF .COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT THAT A VIOLATION EXISTS, HE MAY APPEAL SUCH DETERMINATION BY FILING A WRITTEN NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE TOWN OF VAIL PLANNING COMMISSION NO L11TER THAN 30 DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF THE NOTICE OF REVOCATION. AT SAID HEARING THE BURDEN OF PROOF SHALL BE WITH THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TO PROVE THE NOTICE OF REVOCATION BY A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE. AFTER THE HEARING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION SHALL CONFIRM OR REVERSE THE NOTICE OR VIOLATION ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. IF ANY PERMITTEE FAILS TO EXERCISE THE RIGHT OF APPEAL TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE NOTICE OF APPEAL OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR SHALL BE CONSIDERED A FINAL ORDER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVOKING THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. Section 17. Compliance It shall be unlawful for a bed and breakfast operation to do business without a conditional use permit from the Planning and Environmental Commission after June 12, 1990 or to operate in violation of any of the provisions of the Vail Municipal Code. Section 18. Discontinuance Any bed and breakfast operation which is discontinued for a period of twelve months, regardless of any intent to resume operation of use, shall not be resumed thereafter, and any future use of the site or structures thereon shall conform with the provisions of this title. Section 19. The Town Council, the applicant, adjacent property owner or the Town Manager, may appeal/call up to the Town Council for review any decision made by the Planning and Environmental Commission regarding a Conditional Use Permit for Bed and Breakfast as per Section 18.60.070. Section 20. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall 5 ~ _ j not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 21. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 22. The repeal or the repeal and re-enactment of any provisions of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and re-enacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED ON FIRST READING THIS Sth day of December 1989, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the 5th day of December , 1989 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this 5th day of December , 1989. Kent` R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: ~a~~.~ f Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED by title only this 19th day of December ~ , 1989. Kent R. Rose, May r ATTEST: Pamela A.~~Brandmeyer, Town Clerk 6 Caryn Deevy 1 Littendge Lane Engiewooc~ CO 80110 June 6, 1990 Action Vail, Inc. Friends of Open-Space P. O. Box 1426 Vail, Colorado 81658 - Attention: Gordon Brittan Mr. Brittan: I received your recent mailing protesting the Bear Tree Land Exchange. As a Forest Road Homeowner, I am, of course, interested in this issue and its implications for the future. I am addressing my concerns to your agency as I believe that we are on the same -team and I would like to determine how our combined efforts can be most fruitful. My concern is that while you are busy with the Tennenbaum case, a much more egregious project is going through right under our noses. To summarize my perception of these two quite similar proposals occurring simultaneously: The Tennenbaum's are offering 2,000 non-Vail acres to the U.S. public in exchange for one not very visible acre on Vail mountain in an already residential area, where they plan to put a single family home. (The design of which must be approved by Vail representatives.) On the other hand, a private developer is proposing to alter zoning codes (to increase density) to allow expansion of the atrocious looking and already overbuilt Mark Marriot to include 60+ time share units right on Gore Creek. Once the developer has sold the prime units he will disappear with his profits and leave behind less open space, a restricted view corridor, a less enjoyable bike path, traffic and people pollution and a large, ugly ill maintained and poorly landscaped (if Marriot is true to form) blight on the Lionshead vista. Frankly, I am perplexed by the amount of attention focused on the Tennenbaum case by Action Vail, the Town Council and the media when it is by the lesser of two evils from an environmental/aesthetic perspective. I suspect that the issue in the Bear Tree Land Exchange is less about open space and more about power and control of our own destiny. In other words, the Tennenbaum's went over Vail's head. If we choose to desecrate our landscape for no purpose other than greedy indulgence we'll do it - i.e. Marriot -But, we won't let the Tennenbaum's and the U.S. Government do it ~ us. This is a sensitive and real issue. Claim it or drop it! If the concern is truly environment, the two cases remain - incredibly similar. It would seem that Action Vail has blinders on with respect to the Marriot expansion. Afar greater curiosity is the untenable position that the Vail Town Council has placed itself in by supporting the Mamot proposal and rejecting the Tennenbaum Trade on environmental grounds. Kent Rose - Vail's mayor, was quoted in the Rocky Mountain News on March 18, 1990 in a protest of the Tennenbaum Trade: "From our standpoint, which acre is it that makes the difference? Is it this acre, or is it the next acre or is it the next acre?" Apparently the Tennenbaum acre makes a difference but the Marriot acre doesn't. I would like an explanation of that one. Finally, the media has taken an interest in the Tennenbaum Trade but not the Marriot Expansion. Why and why not? If we are all concerned about the preservation of open space, view corridors, the quality of life and of the Vail nature e.Yperience for residents and visitors -certainly high minded and commendable goals -let's get it together and avoid shooting ourselves or our neighbors in the foot. Lack of consistency will undermine all of our credibility. Thank you for your consideration of these ideas. Sincerely, i ~ 1 j. f~ G a y Cazyn Deevy , CD/ee cc: Kent Rose: Town of Vail Vail Trail West Forest Road Homeowners Association _ ...F E. F. MAYNE JR., INC. 100 WEST LONG LAKE ROAD, SUITE 220 6LOOMFIELD H1LL5, MICHIGAN 48013 313 - 258-0300 June 13, 1990 Mayor Kent Rose and Town Council Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Subject: Mark-Marriott Property Building Expansion Program Dear Mayor Rose and Council Members: My name is Edward Mayne and I have owned Condominium A-5 in the Cross Roads Building, Vail, since 1968. As an owner of a condominium in the core of Vail who spends approximately 80 days per year during the winter months in Vail, I wish to express my concern and objection to the Mark- Marriott proposal to add an additional 74,000 square feet on their property in Lionshead for the following reasons, based upon my personal knowledge, feelings, and information provided by others who are in agreement with my opinion. The Marriott properties will be built beyond maximum density and square footage. The 1\~larriott has at least twice previously been given the privilege to exceed the building code permits originally designed for the present Marriott building which not only creates an abuse in over-taxing the intent, but compounds the problem when combined with additional exceptions to the building code. The high rise of hotels and condominiums along Gore Creek in Lionshead already presents a formidable wall of unbroken mass and, in my opinion, runs contrary to the original plan of maintaining an openness and a green belt between concentrated building sites. It has been recognized mistakes have been made in maintaining a balance between building and nature. Why compound it with another potential mistake of this magnitude. Over the years, the art of negotiating and achieving the objectives of over-zealous land developers and owners has pretty much washed away the early concepts of Vail's planning and environmental objectives. June 13, 1990 Page 2 of 2 Mayor Kent Rose and Town Council Vail, Colorado 81657 Subject: Mark-Marriott Property Building Expansion Program . I understand the people representing the Mark-Marriott property interests, presenting statistics, documentation and promotional assistance, have no invested interest in the town, with questionable responsibility in the town's best interests. I believe Mark-Marriott is a franchised management hotel chain which is profit driven and holds little owners' personal concern for the impact of its excesses on the community. Historically, if investment does not justify the means, the real estate is cast off to the highest bidder with little feeling to the impact of the community. The present facilities and proposed expansion presents substantial potential future problems. It is obvious in many cases promises made for concessions given by previous planning environmental commissions have not been fulfilled, leaving a compromised construction and landscaping mess. In my opinion, Vail does not need athird-tier, time sharing, housing project and the economic community attracted. The maintenance and repair of this type of housing only adds to an already overloaded service community. The economic troubles affecting credible housing projects such as the Athletic Club and the Westin, and the possibility of others in a very shakey position, only adds to reasons against this proposal. The mountain is already overcrowded and until this condition is corrected, wl~y compound the problem with more skiers who contribute little to the motmtain or commercial environment of the town. What is financial solvency of the group proposing this addition. I would respectfully cast my vote against such a project. Sincerely, ~L~. E. ayne, Jr. EFM: ms-90-1040 ~ - ,y NEIL. F, RUS,TRiAhF 22 B.?.LLwQC)p Rpe,P Q~C~ ~S"*cEl:'a!3G1{, :y ;~'NME.''~,.Yj~lJ7 `J66^. C 71~ne 15, 1990 h~iernbers cf VaL 'Fcwn Cc+:Tr:,il Town of Vail ?5 So~c'~ ~rortage Road Vail, Colorado ~L; ~;cl;.~,~d ~..;~~r<sl,a~ ~f ~ P~,,as~otit ~otei ~r~ar T o~~^ Cout~Cil '~,fem~ers: AS s'+ TC'+lr:a ~~~i~ #;s~;~v~ti~i ~'.h'ri4°.a A t:''a'~ i C''~,s^:°r211•R~ ~s~ w~ ~ d=.~I:Cir^ln~ ya~~~:a~ °';,+2~ }}3. ~ a5 tre :`pl? 1J ;a~" 1i:`~^ tyu +s• FfyS~+i '~.~.'rJ Ci ~11`C°+2Lla L,~iw.4'~ f„lFe,k~ 4'~b!.. a+~~L~.i ~ F~ ~1 ~i~lCs~ ~:1r~. ? - ~i'~~ iii`:';TY y+1i~' ~ti_'~..R ~~^~~7P'.I~11~T'33 1+~~',~Il ~~~.3~-j ~3?I^vi, I ~~011~~_~ T13{ 3!!',~.aL }'~()I''is° ty{?il aV~r ;,,rat RJ~d, I'a ~°,C.~',~t.i iQ~u ~1;T..«~~`~ r•l;1' ~U*I~'^4 S~?1~?a f4Ti:jr 12`~Trti+a., 4V~~ Cfii ~vZ~t'S4 1 (':vtw lCow~- tat ~E' ~:'1'a° :iii' ~'-Ze2;,~~~ ~F,~~`~a.4•°., ~,tr s[a~Ii ~.a^, i?~Sv, i. 3tl`~ `-St,3".s.:;;id Tt~, y.~~Ai ~?;:?`'I~-;1 ~i j ss c~ ~~G4+: s'~,`-~_,;,~`. ~'y, ,•'.S is': F~itr' st:~..d 4'~2j:'.?13 ~~712i~,-~~ ra ~~f. ~ # .-r%~?. T-r 3 r r r:.~l~~;~~ ~„''i jT 3I'se"~;.~. v~3ad~-i;Y~" +~y :ti~:.~. e a~ ~ S ~T ~ai~ $+'~3,t. iic°~.;-~: fi~~~~S:`~?':t~J~23r1:~a;Tis. I~ ~s5 ~,~e~~~.iS. li~`,t ° E.c_'~,t;~, .s~t~y~P~ :t~:i~ z C~'~Ci~U & ll~l'?.v, ,S iFF a ti ' ? ' -nr n ~ r 4f l...Y A. , Yr~ R.,.~ rl. 1 a ~.'la~ G.:~;v.. $t.s.:CI..tE$ 4~=4Y~~.I~,is~ ?!T?~,~,~ ~st'..~ r.~t~ y:S .I..~~,.._~..~1},c~ ~..~S.t C13Liu, ~s:~:.~'_; r?~i~n ~ecr tFa value of ~;v ~r~~y. Ir. tre 19 y:a.-s :~+e ha~%fit'. t~1en z~rT~:,gig u~s'!Iai ;1~ ye~.'s ~ ~ zo:tt ewTrers; 1~ ? . n"ITl,~~ l~~iZei;~,~ i?-,r. 11j,?YT;~~'r ~,f s.c~iilr}~ C. 3i,~~s" , N A u~,V~ ~.~t C~ tiv ~1 Ia~Crv,.W `~"3` Se-;~Tn XC ~3 4~r+:~T.°I~ri`~,r ! ~~i s'Yt' t~1.,'3L 3 fit3i C.~SS trJtiall, i''v;icC,:a~~~+'~:l !S, ;YT,:SI i?'1~'Z~:~.:~4 ~u~~1tTi°~r16~ Cii TW L~iLT~7,~~``ri~ .~~.i7G~~iJ~~ ?'2.3ir: ;.Il`ab ~iJci~ ti~,7~+-~-~+~5,~21a.~r':~ 1_''~ ~r4:IlF'v.~t ii{~i'.~~QtiTft~a~.P`J t~.~~t:~Ll, ry~I~Ci~~$. Kl~L~~Ctl{J?: s.•G~?.L3:~ +Jf ~~s's ~~Gi~~;ip'~ r ~V~Z`:J'~ ~s$:i:?S c~,.r~ d'.~SJ ar tl<~ re.~sc~ns :~~.;r hour?:: ~ ror~rt; in V1i1 in t:1e first nlas~. i ~~Iia1tC~ t1°ie S`;~a`1C~ tl%; ii?WPa ~li'~,'S 4~.~~i 1~•i~`ii rp~~1'~ ir.? tii~.+,c7~3Q~3S~,.~~ ^'ann~*; 2~1^,a pro~rty ~a~. ~e.lln~ law; 5:~ould char.~~i a.*hir,,,riv or V ~:1;.i;~1vUS~Y. Tloere ai~ Cv,"~iii1 t,`?ahgs t.~-~3~ 1?'.~t~~'r' S~;9~3is1 i~G`Z `y ~ilt3W ICS e~~;y.:~~ ~t iS i~rCnSi~:ert to TT'i~ not Ct~ tatt', thL s:~r~a:' viyw arid: ii~e ~*3crie~: ~~.riar,~. The noise l„vesS %t'i i?~ SJFi2!?'.Z iza~":Z`.~. «.,s, a,,,,;~ ~t i~~ '~.1~ ~~i ;'~tiT~7tl~ 11Si ?41~13`vl~; ;~';t1A ex~~.rS.C*.; J';?+~. t~'11l sl'~~;''. ~:~i::1;^t'+~. rtcti.3ry dr tl'g 3If21Jte1T1G. i0 One 1J~li}l'i h3~ 1 ;1Q5~sT^ 'v~r'~L~-.'.' l[i~i'f7,'.~ ~ ;o'.;~,'Is',' :'it+~ il'3 u~ }f~~4~~'i1~ 2 i?~iL' QCl ~.Fllr. $srf:?I. Till VSC;.S +S~1~i CllY WiT1~aJu'S ~:rl~ ;]4i F?~' Same. ~'s~ e.~l::'~i:3:C all ~1•'. ~XIdiIT;~ "~,i.'.ti'tl 5~~;~" Sc~~tS 1+'eY+' S1-i0~ t2~1'+iel~., 1-3T~C.°.• ~~~f: ~.n.Fi 21t'i'ti°..~ r~~?.$C~. Ti is the first letter I rave cv ,r '~'ti;teri t.~?e 'I'c~wra Cuu~,c:il. I didn't writs to t;11, as ~1:e.s Dave done, ,^,onc.~rnirg aiio+N c?n `r~,i;:;;t sorest Read he;,au:i;'. I ;\'i?~`;J Q`;:t t~'i1S Z~15L ii ~';i~;l i ~t`~',.~yllt 1:1.,1 l:otil'~'. i i1E: IZ'PS $+t'i ~C.~I~c'.~ a3i~ I ~a?~j~ ma.~:~e a e;1Ci':e hared on, ~now.~ facL>, ' d ~t)101 I urge yQU tie ;s ttus I~~,~r alor. ~ all t~he ;nemhe.•s of T,awn ~auneil ~^,~i i invite their ~uestians duwcl~v :o m~ if neces~y. W at ~ssLr~:~ties wiii u~,° T~~n ~ Q~ie t:~ gijie ar_y Cu:i#':tt or i1: *re ~.orneo~ tee`' if once 8g~i:i you :modify i.'1~ rules in ~e svd3ie of the g~-~y? Y1e have ~ *~~or~y L '1 Tcxn which I am proud to tali my s~wrd :-~om:e, 2.nd ~,~~.e: oar i.~Iii~y sends a ccnsire.~~la of euery ye~.-. Let's ina~~ t.~:e ~onu°~g ia~s, •~~:cl~. mere m;~t ?itc~:y ~e1 ~?a°~.;1,{y co~si~ere~ when r21S5~, stand for so~;:ething. ~IriCEf~~y y01lI'S, . 1~VtU(~dt.. Action ~f~ai~ .Inc. FRIENDS OF OPEN-SPACE P.O. Box 1426 Vail, Colorado 81658 Town of Vail Town Council 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 June 19, 1990 Dear Mayor Rose and Tocan Council Members: Action Vail, Inc. Friends of OL~en Space would like to express the concerns of its riembers with regards to the unresolved issues associated with the amendments being proposed to Special Development District Seven, The Marriott Mark Resort. Because of the need for greater detailed research, several of our concerns which have been left unresolved by The Marriott Mark Resort application, staff review, and PEC recom.^~endations, are still under study. Among our concerns are the following: 1. It appears to us that there are no unique and specific conditions which sets the proposed expansion of The Marriott Mark Resort apart from other properties having similar conditions in the community. 2. It is clear that there are several other properties in the community that would be eligible for rezoning and density increases, through the variance or Special Development District approval procedures, based upon the conditions identified by the staff as favorable reasons for granting The Marriott Mark Resort application. 3. Undoubtedly the specific conditions that exist for The Marriott Mark application demonstrate, if approved, that the method of approval and the degree of density increase granted will establish a precedent that could be emulated by other properties throughout the community. 4. The unprecedented amount of the square footage being requested, beyond the limitation of density and unit restrictions for standard zone district, is unacceptable under any circumstances and in our opinion is a grant of special privilege that would be denied other property owners with similar conditions and circumstances. 5. No extraordinary contributions to the community, other than those that would be expected of any similar development application in the community or which would not be considered as normal and expected maintenance, have been made in the Marriott Mark application. r Town of Vail Town Council The Marriott Mark Resort Amendment Application June 19, 1990 Page Two 6. We believe that insufficient actions have been taken to preserve, protect, and correct the maintenance deficiencies of the public and private open space which occurs in association with The Marriott Mark Resort. 7. The master planning documents which have been used to evaluate the merits of the proposed Marriott Mark Resort infill site are not of comparable and sufficient detail to the master planning documents used to make similar evaluation for Vail Village and the Golden Peak infill sites. 8. There are no circumstances or extraordinary conditions that we can see that would not allow the changing of underlying zone districts in other similar Special Development Districts or standard zone districts. 9. We believe that the changing of the underlying zone district to HDMF would allow for the timesharing of both proposed and existing units which will more than likely result in the abandonment of on-site convention facilities which are critical to the Lionshead short term rental bed base and the community-at-large. Prior to making an informed evaluation with regards to the scope and implications of The Marriott Mark Resort application we believe that it is essential to have the following planning information available. 1. The number of additional timesharing and hotel rooms that could be constructed in the community, assuming a comparable increase in density being requested by The Marriott Mark Resort application were granted to properties with similar circumstances. 2. Identify the specific amounts of increased public funds that would be required to finance necessary improvements to the community~s infrastructure, including roadway and transportation improvements, that would result from community wide increases in short term timesharing and hotel units. 3. Provide specific planning reports based upon credible statistical and demographic data that substantiates or refutes the assertion that timesharing units have significantly better annual occupancy rates than hotel rooms. Town of Vail Town Council The Marriott Mark Resort Amendment Application June 19, 1990 Page Three 4. Provide specific planning reports based upon credible statistical and demographic data that substantiates or refutes that the occupants of timesharing units have an equal or significantly higher expenditure level while visiting the community as compared with the occupants of hotel rooms. 5. Provide specific planning reports which substantiate or refute the consequences that timesharing will have upon the availability and operations of The Marriott Mark Resort on-site convention facilities. 6. The 1986 Land Use Plan should be updated according to the review provisions of these planning documents, prior to making a determination with regards to The Marriott Mark Resort application. 7. A Lionshead Master Plan and Ur-ban Design Guide Plan should be completed to a similar level of detail as the Vail Village Master Plan before a determination of infill sites is made for the Lionshead area. It is the position of our organization that until sufficient independent investigation and information is available from the Town of Vail with regards to the foregoing unresolved concerns, it is inappropriate and impossible to adequately evaluated the merits of The Marriott Mark Resort application. We firmly believe no exceptional conditions exist or that extraordinary community benefits are acquired within the scope of the present application. Approval of The Marriott Mark Resort applications is premature and unwarranted at this time. Sincerely, Executive Committee Action Vail, Inc. Friends of Open-Space MRS. DONALD p. ROSS, JR. 2 ktt, JUN 1 q 1 97 VAIL VALLEY DRIVE VAIL, COLORAQO 81657 June 13, 1954 Action Vail c/o Greta Parks • P 0 Box 1289 Vail, Colorado 81657 4 Action Vail Committee; My husband and I have been very concerned with the quality of life in Vail and it's future, It seems to me that the present zoning laws and build- ing Codes are not being upheld, so how can we possibly consider future plans. We think the architects and the builders should be liable when they do not stay within the building codes. We came to Vail in 1969 and rented different places un- til we could afford our own place. We loved the Vail Valley for it 's open space , it 's charm and the quality of 1 i fe i.t had to of far, It is not supposed to be a enormous city with high rises. The people who feel that way should go someplace else. Haw can you bring in young, inexperienced people to decide the future of Vail when they do not have any conceivable idea of what the people who have come here a long time ago desire. Imagine truying to railroad through a bike path a3ong the Gore Creek. That would take away from the natural beauty of Vail. We pay taxes and support a great many businesses in Vail, To mention a few; restaurants, florists, vil3age market, landscaping, snow removal, plumbers, electricians, window washers, painters, construction people, etc. T think we need representation as well as protection. Sincerely yours, Susan W, Ross Si~JR/ 1 cs F - 1 F,l~.~nc~r ~T. C,~~~11ci~1s 11~ t~lesLwcxxi I)slve I~i~ver, Cc~lcar7ti~ fi02Ufi tiit?~) ~`i3, ~~tR:i • V s ~a«.~ , ~ i ~ . r ~ _ ~ BUSINESS - ' x:ky Mountain News Deborah Goeken, Business Editor ¦ 892-5157 ~ Sun., June P, t99o Conventional OVER STORY w2sdon2 shows 01. Monarch: For sale for S3 millron. ne grOZtip, hoping O2. Conmrlstador. For sale for $5 million. O to take advan- ~3. Crested Butte: Seeks partner to help finance 530 million Ugly as a dirt clod. Pretty as expansion. a garden. ~ 4. Keystone: Seeks partner to help finance S25 million expansion, rage of Va i l owner Nobody's going to walk up to twt also reportedty is exploring a full sale. our new Colorado Convention ~ b. Copper MouMaln: Reportedy available for S40 Mlliat.+ George Gi llett's fi n a n - Centerand walk away marvel- ~ 4. Yea: Reportedly has attracted olers, including one for more than ing at its contribution to the art 5500 million. alai woes reportedly and science of architecture. ~ 7. Powderirom: Reportedy available f But itisabeautifulthingto for:~OmiIIWn.• offered as much as behola. Lyttde Appeazanceaside,thecon- $5OO mZllZOn fOr the McCormick vention carter, which opened Friday, is an inspiration. COLORADO ~ resort. For survivors of the oil boom ~ and bust, the center gratifies the soul and Deriver solidifies one's optimism. It says, more even Grande. 8 than big companies setting up new operations Junction 70 ~ here, that this economy has not just recovered ~ 4 but feels good enough to move. ~ B s F'or Sa Le ¦ But it also feels different. It might not even 7 ~ be accurate to talk about it as, so much aschanged -the next economy rather 3 1~ '~Wa than an extension of the past one. i'liieblo ¦ Deaver took off not because of oil prices but ~ S kl a rea s money. A bundle of new federal rules and tax incentives in the late 1970s and eazly'SOs favoredoil exploration, realcstate consttuc- 50 Ai"'' + Estimate Lion arxk business investment. And they sent a ~ ~ ~ O fkxxi of greenbacks our way, fueling ahistoric econormcexpansion. ~ Success m business sometimes seemed no ~ ~ "t s+ i° ` ~ ' more complicated thanfmdingabuckettodip ~~~vaa^~ aca.~~a~~*~ 4.'' ~D°~ _ into a river of dollars. ~ Intematbrml ! recent purchases bl' Japanese groups have t h e s i ~ S But the river choked to a trickle when raised values and Increased attention. Congress shut down the faucet -retracting ®Reai slate: some resorts own more real estate than others. the tax incentives, changing the Hiles. And ~ ProxYnay to airport: access can improve value by 3040%. now, about the best we can expect is a stream ~ a rule of thumb usetl to be S50 per skier Nsit in one and hope that it's steady. year, Now It's closer to $100. So that means a different kind of business Surrrner tersYrus ~ year--round attractions ere a bonus. environment, different ways of coaxing a few arorrdr ~ tourbm: some experts predict tourism will be the apanese ownership cents profit out of each dollaz invested. world's biggest industry in , ° years. has redefined values Kevin Somerville, for example, is an indus- trialpsychologist who helps companies, espe- ~ M01"W" "+"s dally banks and technology toms, with execu- ey Steve Caulk r to het five recruiting. He says the most unusual ~ 6ETi1M6 THERE ` ~rt°e . P fund a $30 million feature in his work of late is an effort to Raley MoreWis News StoN writer 1 expanson. improve management, not add to it. ¦ Easy access equals wecess/14-8 11 ¦ Keystone- conducted a similar he sales pitch was so effective search, while it re They aze making considerable effort to portedly considered upgrade management, moving people aside to the salesman bought his own selling the resort for $110 million. get the best person in the job," he says. Product. But there aren't many offers, only One group, hoping to take advantage That's one industry version of thq~es• of financial woes being suffered by Vail 1 met the probident of an oil and gas the recent negotiations to. self Key- There aze a lot of people sniHmg owner George Gillett reportedly of- company this week, and he said he launched his stone Ski Resort. azound," said John Lay, president of fared as much as $500 million for the company in 1982 -when others were losing There's another scenario: "I think Colorado Ski Country USA. resort rhea grip - because he thought his 25 years they just want to put the best face on a Still, a number of resorts remain Wlille they wait for buyers, industry as a petroleum geologist could make asuccess- deal that didn't work," says an industry either for sale or in seazch of financial executives say they are excited about ful company over the long run, source. partners: the potential for growth, particularly He's kept the staff small and the budget Was it a real good buy or a goodbye ¦ The government has been trying to long-teen. And it's that short-term tight, and at a time when "successful Denver deal? unload Conquistador for $5 million. stagnation and long-tens excitement energy company" seems an oxymoron, he's got The Keystone case - in which Ral- ¦ A Seattle church is selling Monarch that wrote the story of Keystone's himself a successful Denver energy company. ston Purina Co. said it was shopping for for $3 million. deal. Technology, energy, banking and other com- an equity partner but ended up buying ~ Financial problems reportedly have The owners of Keystone hired an parries can succeed in this new Denver econo- out its partners - is a microcosm of trade Copper Mountain available for an inv: ,....:...t research company to iden- my, but not because of a technology, energy, Colorado's anxious ski industry. estimated $40 million. tify ,,,.,._-:.u»ties for a partial or total real estate or general economic boom. They In the wake of premium pnces paid ~ powderhom, in a similar financial sale. They reportedly wanted a price can make it or break it on the merits of by the Japanese for the Steamboat position, reportedly is for sale at an approaching the $110 million paid by management, service and products. A normal Springs and Breckenridge resorts, the estmtated $10 million. approach to business, industry stands ready to unload several !The.,«...:.~ of Crested Butte want a See SKlon 14-6 That's what this convention center is all other resorts. about. We've come through a boom that often guazanteed success, a bust that did the same for failure. And that's over. The convention j center wiL'carty,,,......:rce to Denver and COMING MONDAY Y p pr P i attention from companies considering expan- ~ Gre hOUtid iekets di traffic ll / 3'6 slog but it won't make anyone rich quick. jf you play the Credit- ~ The nght FatheT'S Day ties / 3'B It promises to add a fundamental element to nurturing this economy, but not without help. Cat d gafllB, -y'OfL'l1E gOt t0 ~ ~e Insider looks at Steamboat / 12'B LyndeMeCormickiser¢estivebusirtesseditoroj know when to hold and the Rocky Mountain News. ~ ~ when to ford. ¦ Stock market listings / 18'8 ' - .3; t,. 14-B ~ BUSINESS Rocky Mountain News Sun., June 17. 1990 c COVER STORY Potential buyers wary .rt°~~ ~ Resorts near of resorts' peak prices ~ ~ ~ tr airports wirf ~Yt ' ~ have an edge But international awareness sparked by 3 big sales z should translate into economic boon for most areas ~ `Skung is a hassle-filled SKI from 1-6 similarity to the out-of Y.,.r.,..:on values n .rS' s the Japanese have set on artwork recently ~ t ; eXpenence if you can t Steamboat's Japanese owner, Komori Some r.,,....,.,,,tatives of the ski industry 46 s y 4~ ~ Kanko. Instead, they reportedly fielded an speculate that if American investors want ~ r„ ; - get. there COnvenieritly offer for less than the $65 million Victoria to operate within the new scale set by the p Co. Ltd. of Japan paid for Breckenridge. Japanese, they'll have to re-evaluate their ~ ~ By Stere Caulk Keystone's majority owner, Ralston motives. The Japanese seem committed to s e Rocky MaYnrainNews StafjWnter Purina of St. Louis, decided to buy out its long-term development. Americans tend ~ ~t s partners, Morgan Guaranty Capital Corp. to chase the quick profit, the represents N One airport plus one ski resort equals and Prudential Insurance Co., who were fives say. 3 pizazz. And pizazz equals money. reluctant to join Ralston in expansion ef- David Peri, vice president of mazketing r~` `r; That's the formula computed by Ralph forts. Ralston realized it couldn't afford to at Breckenridge, has seen it from both `it Walton, chairman of the boazd of Crested let Keystone languish while the rest of the sides. He now works for Japanese owners. ~r ~ ; Butte Mountain Resort. And it`s a formula. Colorado ski industry marketed its four- "I wish I had a dime for each time I was ' that has worked wonders for Walton's ski season programs, pursued international told by the previous owners that they could ~ ~ area. skiers and upgraded equipment and facpi- get a better return on a ce~cate of The ski resorts that will prosper the ties. deposit; ' Peri said. "The problem is, when ~ ' most over the next decade are those with t you ie looking at the balance sheet all the 1,~ . reasonable access to airports, say top offi- ~ ;ral time, you're really only looking at the iY;~ cials of the Colorado ski industry. Areas short term. We were never allowed to look ~ such as Crested Butte and Steamboat x ~ farther down the road." Springs aze proof. Despite the turmoil in the market treat- _ _ "Crested Butte was a resort looking for ed by the Japanese, competing resorts ~ 1 a place to happen before they dreamed up ~ stand to reap two duect benefits. 4~ , their air program (with direct flights); ' First, the Japanese focused international ~3+ ~ ~ 4 ~ 1, says Dan Love, director of mazketing at ' attention on American ski resorts. Several Keystone. "They had a marvelous resort, of the groups "sniffing azound" the Colors- ~ ~ but no way to get there. I think Crested _ do resorts have been international, Lay ~ ~ Butte would be dead as a resort if it didn't - ~ says. The next wave of international Ives- r ~ have the duect air program." f ~ ~ - tors could come from Germany, theorizes ~ ' Walton contends that a nearby airport ' r ~ Kent Myers, vice-president of marketing ~"4 ~ ~ would have a decided impact on the value ` - ~ at Vail. qo ~ ~ u.,, of the resort, as the ski industry chases the ;''mss°~ "I think Germany is the next economic ~"'t _ ~ international traveler and competes with ! ~ ~ a force in the world; ' Myers says. "There 'f` ~ the convenience of a Disney World or ~ other direct-arrival tourist attractions. ,anal keaVes/R~YMauntan nexus aze a lot of smart people over there and they'regaodfinanciers." ~ ~ "When you combine flying with skiing, Conquistador near Pueblo is on the And Myers sees the ski resort Indus r i ~f i ` ? you have as much pizau as you have in the block for $5 million. ~ c ~ as a "golden ..YY....,urity." Others agree r " : world; 'Walton says. "People look at three saying there is unlimited potential for { } , ~ - things when they choose a place to ski: "In this business, one needs to grow and growth in attracting international skiers snow conditions, the facilities and access." move forwazd and take an aggressive tack; and off-season visitors. r M In fact, access is a major factor in any and a financial commitment was needed to And they say there are ways to increase tourism destination. make that happen; 'says Lamm Haffeman, visitors and their spending: ` "You can say a vacation has three com- Keystone's vice president of real estate ¦ Untapped international market. L ponents: getting there, staying there, and and development. About 85% of the skiers in the world aze doing what you do there;'Love says. "And y ppazenti fell victim to the the first component represents 25% to Ke stone a y outside the U.S., Lay says. In 1985, ' market inflation rt had tried to exploit Breckenridge initiated special efforts to 30% of the total vacation cost." when it set its $110 million price tag. attract those skiers, and it has paid off Kamori Kanko of Japan wouldn't have Things had changed since fast yeaz "These people spend much more free been neazly as interested in purchasing when the Japanese bought Steamboat and ly," Peri says, "especially in areas outside Steamboat Ski Corp. for $110 million if not Breckenridge (and Stratton in Vermont for siding. The typical destination skier (do- for the airport ahalf--hour away, according $70 million). Japanese investors had be- mastic) spends $140 to $160 per day. The to John Lay, president of Colorado Ski come more tentative because of a sinking international skier spends $200 to $240 ~ Country USA. And one industry executive stockmarket and a rising dollaz. And other per day. And the international skier spends ~ , : airport boosted the estimates that the investors sat on the sidelines, waiting to an average of 10 to 20 days while the - purchase price by $30 million. see whether the values established by the destination skier spends 3.2 to 4.2 days." . "S " is a hassle-filled ' -...:e if Japanese would hold up. ¦ pff-eeasoa mazket. If resorts aze . ' ~ * e~ ~ " The fundamental problem is, the Japa- wiping to build summer facilities (such as ~ you can't get there conveniently," Lay nese have reset the whole mazket "says Keystone's _,,...:....ion center) and pro- ~ says. industry analyst John Westergaazd of Wes- mote non-suing activities, the resorts ~ ~ When he tours the country talking to tergaazd Reseazch Publishing Corp. is could make themselves valuable yeaz- - ~ , ~ people about the joys of skiing in Colorado, New York City. round. Industry representatives say they : yt` " he says the most common complaint he It used to be easy enough to value a gave to overcome the promotional attitude .,'.r, _ _ . heazs involves Stapleton International Air- resort at $50 per skier visit (one skier for that emphasizes winter almost to the ez - r port, one day). Now it's closer to $100. And the elusion of other seasons. *'r Stratton sale seta $200 standard. ~ Squeezing more money out of visi ~ x~ ' "Consistently, the biggest ~ _ I , "The reset of the market is not based oa tors. h-s ' ~ ` ~ have to speak to is Stapleton Airport be- traditional economic rience; 'Wester- ~ peed chair lifts transport the ~.°`"~y''~. ~ ~ caLLSe it's perceived as a bottleneck; ' he exPe skiers up the mountain faster and whisk gaazd says. "An American buyer isn't 8o- them through their ski day, Peri says. That L ~ ~ says, adding he thinks Denver's new air- ing to be able to justify what these people means skiers aze leaving the mountains at - rem ~ ~ Wawa port due to open in 1993 will provide a think the resorts aze worth." 2 p.m. or 2:30 p.m., one or two hours significant boost to the ski industry. He refers to this market phenomenon as eazper, giving them extra time to spend Monarch's owners are asking $3 mil- "Convenience is the name of the game; ' "the Van Gogh principle.. because of its money elsewhere. Ilon for the resort. he says. eystone apparently fell victim to the market inflation it had tried to exploit Kwhen it set ats $110 million price tag. , !Vt;..fL Fi ...v:~TF2:~..~k 2a'. FiALI_WG7C1 RC•~U f.)"_~ i_y:g'~hJ.!~r:':~H, G{~t-..fV4.CTILU7 .:bE3"?L: 7un~ I5, x 90 Ivtel :hers Or" ~'~iil Tc+a,~s~ C~~t:~'~cii Tern ~1 Vail `;5 South Frart~bc; FOad '~'ai1;. ~cicrauo ~zo~~o~ed Ex,~:~~aaic7n +~f ~h.e i'~~:tz°ric?tt ~c~~e~ Dear T~~n <cun+~il :~~e>~ti~ers: t n7'~~l'~d ' ,+r, to ccrcernl~~ n" S $ i0i1~ i.Ii1C. ~5~+~~="t~ 9J,~Il+;:r I:t i :C: r i ~ ~~ie sc~i:~°,tJS~~ t~'~~itL~ls'~ ~'~t ~!csS G~'#~13 Tel,'si1~:SC~a~ ±~1° :L,fw:.i'CIC1tt ~~~.k:. F3JL' V~'~rS 3~~ ~_"i~:* c"13a."3^~:,{~ E+~.';"~~ SLY'~'.r~. CL'y3~`ct~!'i1:!;~~?F'a7s ~Cy CCil c'~I'S ~.',1f~'_'y i ~C~CI~~"it rT1y :iIS1~ ~lOri1 f)i't `k~%~~i. ~'~?I~S}. ['+.i~!u~, ~Il YJ~k'«:`3t~'ld~r L~C}~1 J.t~ _ L'r;..::~.r~~~L: t73ii C,'.li~l.'.C~ ;~tA3~`t' 1'isiYlll~r I?s~iY?:', ,~~;~.'-_1? ~t ~/~1+"'..SC I"L~:~'3< ~f)~.Lt. :1t C4~ r_'i:'iL' i`iL' 43?~:~lS~l jJI~Z~;~1i.!~t', :J-i~C~ ~~r:i! i~ Z~~r'y it ~rt~S s"t`]~ n~ ,~,Af" i . Y~~ ~.a, t f r~ 'r? ? Y tl' +`'`~7e C: -~•+Cl~7~ Zt3i;i<1 ~I~d~,..SLr~r~l:."`,, (:i).t lY'iiCt J~' ~.y ~3f.G~ Sy it4,..~i~~]3 ~t~+ u -tC'.. w.a:~ rrec;luded and ..t!;ra; 1;t;~.I~ing b}' ti!e ?~Iarrac~tt cr of the n~'~~l ,y y m1:, i n i~a M i,4?-a~w:~~t"'T=:~y T'_`1CI'Jir~~ fi~'tFtt ~ +~"ry't~ill} ~C'~ s'~ il`171i:C:'7 hVC~,.R~/C~T':Cati,ri.. I„i S. sa ~ .+:i ~ ~C'IIG`il a r. n « +t7~t I 'toiid i«~..'~'i"t?rc~ tt3 t~rderSC~.r~d W~i3t COJiG'y ~'t~. Chl~ ~f w_. ~ t ~'x31`..rt%,Iw;, l-n"~ »t:.:. t4_ , ~C:SSi'~iy Y":c'iA?rcni t+.;`' ~e^r~~S~ ti7° ';t'~''..~'~tEt? (7r IIa~' ~rGj~~.~t~. Ir: ii:C 1~ Z~~'S vdE~ ~'.a%~ liC~:il ~riS'Tii:l~ C ~'!.'-.la tt } ~F~:.II-"s a] ~3i'v~~.t'i~tV ~J'~v'11CL'S} I i?~a~ T~~iA~~'~ ~t;t~i ir:ire~.s'n'~ fz'°fiil,~c'nC~' t~'i~ I?tiR1~C:~ CC Z(~1?i;?a' Ci:2.^~?S'S t~'?2C Si'.e(l7 t0 ~7'~ y-ry ~ r ' th~l 1 ~1T5~ ti:i~~4 tl~'rVrJ ~Sii12C'll ~+~1:1~ 15,. II'i1St ?il.'.,.t.Ilt3i2? t11e lritf~~rlCV Of its zc~I~ina, cr s.Iie:s,~s:~ n:n t~:e ri_k ~~f al,iun~.ii^.~ tlh~ caz~r~nlt'~'~Qme~'.~,n~rs ar:d ' + in ~ ' zd ca~j f--~,s;'t 4%411t~~~ ~-r~ ~S C(~~ iL'Sii~~:"1t5. Ai:~_i .'.'-.tl~n `Jc.L.^aLiSk' ~iC?t ..Tr:,~~_,. j i ~r 4~ i re'w:;`+~r.S :;;es' b~uQ~t ~•~~u~~ in ~'a;,~ it t~l.~. ~z~st n;~C:. ~ 3~:.f]iwu~ IIl>? :~`;.as'3CC the :G',~VPs tlal ~,a~~~n '.b'lt'1 re and T(3 t~?~ ~TO;J{~5°d Tanneni;.:x~r^ nrc~e-tti' swag. honing l~.ws s`~~~ld ryc+t be charged ari~izrarily or i... ~ , 5 ' k c fii ~ sI ~ Id of al!CS~,' tC> ~uv It 5e~r1S C;3ClZlc: i..~the~. ~ L.i~ aI ~,+,-1-C.'3.`t tysll4.. ~4ir.~t ??'1~ 1:U lI:4:~naiSL.'i.G *0 i'?1e [iOC f~:' tcl;:~'. ~iL $ I;':e 't'1.~.'~' :i'1%~; %Ii~ i4~arI:C`CI S'3i13I1C~'. T'he T1O1Se 1~''r~1:i i31 'tt':t', Si:~"iIt7CT Za`ti!'1 +i ~7t:ti~J+sr +G~'~^.r.S ~t C;:° -~~ZIi'~C?ti ~~.7+r CLIi'-`~n~.:~' Ji,1Si t0'.3ra'~i~~ v.^in ?~p4tr~.s.ic>!!, ~-p1.1 r~i11 13~V~ C`~~~?get{ ti•+e nature Of il~.e ambiance tp One ~t~hich has 1 i`.o,~~n ~.=~~~:et~ r~ag~~~, ~~~rt~la I~t ?VG J71.l~i~t a h~>m can t:-?is str°.s~r, The v;st?s ;r~+nt ~;:r a~Jindo~Ns ~.~'iii not be quite ~1'.~ ~.nc:, elirrinat~ all the e~istina a;-ta,~:.~` ~'zrl:> ~'e.ry si7ilyd sihtecl, c~r.ce ~~n:" it can river Cie repia~~. ~.'i'li5 ij tl:i, firS~ ?K'.tiC:T' ~ F:aVC ~'.'r;iC31 t±.~: ~~l~L4'r2 ~L~L'P.Cll. T di~:l't '.xrIlti~ ttJ y~',Iy as cthe~ have tis:•".e. ccr,erning the sr.~~~it ~a.ts on Wes[ Forest I~aad because I r ~ n ~ ~ 4 r 1-<<,:;~e, 'S'1e r4:Ies ~'~•e ~~eti~~~:d and I cat~lti ~~:.ut•y tray ,~s G:xi~%..f~ cte.~ T ~ou~tt :r~.y Y~rl.~..~' a x,.:1131.... lwa~+.: Or: ~c:c~,~rn iaCtv~•. I; I u,z~e yep t~ pass thi ~e:iex alrng t~ zll tie tr~embers of Town Council and T invite t. etr q~:~s ' ~ c; t+K raze i,: n~oaa.~y'. `~v~~.t ~ssujr:~izces wzl: the Torx~n be ~ X.Gt;.. zrec.;~. ablw t~^ give any c~.~rrent or utare hom~~wner zf one. again you mo<iiiy the rules in ta~ze middle off' z#~~w ga-rv? ~~'V; have a ~;oz:de-fil '~'c~wi~: whivh ~ am proud to ca11 my se,^,~nd home, a.d where nor fzznily sends a ~.orui~IPrahle part of even year. Let's make t~~ee',.~Jl:ii1~, la.w 3, vv-hich ~~ere iliL~s* lilti.tly vc~ ~:,r i'u.lly corsiLe'2:G when gassed, st.~nr3 foz some~in~. sincerely yours, ~ ~ . , T _ _ VA t L FINANCIAL PLANNING, tNC, P,~, Lox 1915 Vail, Colorado 81658 303-476.0508 V ~ ~ f r ~ t ~ t~ n ~ r r r~ ~ eat S r ~ n ~ ~.>z.~e J`C ~ ~ e. ~ ~ ~ ~ t l~ ~ a ~ C~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ `f' C_~X Coil ~ r' ~ (~G r' t a n c~ t S ~ ~ e. ~ ~ n Y o n e .S ~ cQ~.,~c-P .s . ~Q ~ .S ~ f c~a e S ~ ( 11~2~C?~~ . S c Cdr ~cQ ~ a ~ w ~Vi U Cr- ~ (+/1 +0 l~~ ~ ~ n e ~ o ~ ~ t E'_ c n C~ S~? ~ f . C~:~' ° n a ~ ~ C~ tom,. n~..~_ ~ ~..ti c..i`~. `~~n~ ~ ~a~ n tC~. ~t~/1in~t REVISED 6/18/90 TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 19, 1990 RE: Summary of Planning Commission action on a request for a major amendment to Special Development District No. 7 (The Marriott Mark Resort) in order to add 56 timeshare units and 10 employee housing units at 714 West Lionshead Circle, Lot 4, 7, C, D, Block 1, Vail- Lionshead 3rd Filing. On June 11, 1990, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommended approval of this request with conditions. The motion was made by Kathy Warren and seconded by Jim Shearer. The vote was 4-1 for approval of the motion. Connie Knight voted against the motion. Connie Knight voted against the request due to her concern about the overages in GRFA (70,077 sq. ft. over HDMF allowed GRFA), units per acre (22 units above allowable under HDMF), and the number of units (115 units over HDMF allowable). Below is a list of the Planning and Environmental Commission's changes to the staff conditions for the SDD. The PEC's changes have been indicated in bold type. 1. Deed restrictions limiting the use of the ten employee units to long term employee rentals in perpetuity shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit. The units shall meet the conditions for employee housing outlined in Section 18.13.080 B10 a-d of the Zoning Code except that the units are restricted permanently. 2. A detailed drainage plan and other design issues relevant to public works concerns shall be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. Pollution control devises shall be incorporated into the parking garage per the EIR. The creek shall be protected from any construction impacts by the use of an erosion control plan. 3. Working in coordination with the Town staff, the applicant shall fund and conduct a comprehensive traffic study of the West Lionshead Circle area suitable for determining the Marriott Mark's contribution to the cost of constructing any necessary turn lanes on the S. Frontage Road to West Lionshead Circle. Preliminary design and cost estimates for the turn lanes shall be provided. At a minimum, the applicant shall be responsible for contributing this agreed upon amount toward the cost of this improvement. 1 4. A preliminary design and funding strategy for constructing any turn lanes shall be established prior to the issuance of any building permit, and the turn lanes shall be completed prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy unless deferred by the Community Development Department and Public Works. The funding and construction plan must be approved by the Town of Vail engineer, Community Development Department, Town Council, and Colorado Division of Highways before the building permit is released for the expansion. The applicant shall be required to submit a CDOH access permit application on behalf of the Town for the West Lionshead Circle/South Frontage Road improvement. A signed CDOH permit must be obtained by the applicant before a building permit is released unless deferred by the Community Development Department and Public Works. 5. All aspects related to the timesharing of this facility shall comply with all applicable town ordinances that regulate timeshare activity. Timeshare is only approved for the proposed 56 unit building. The 10 employee units shall not be allowed to convert to timeshare. 6. (Any landscaping) Detailed landscaping similar to the Westin Hotel landscaping along the recreation path proposed on Town of Vail land shall be submitted by the applicant to the Town of Vail landscape architect and engineer for approval before the proposal is submitted to the Design Review Board. All landscaping proposed on Town of Vail land shall be maintained by the applicant. 7. The applicant shall agree to regrade, revegetate, and repair the drainage on the bank adjacent to the bike path along the southern property line of the Marriott Mark by August 1, 1990. A letter of credit shall be submitted to the Town of Vail before second reading of the SDD ordinance. The landscape and drainage work shall be submitted to the Town Engineer and Landscape Architect for approval before the proposal is presented to Design Review Board. 8. A temporary certificate of occupancy shall not be released for the expansion until all site improvements have been completed such as sidewalks, landscaping, drainage etc. If the weather prohibits the completion of the site improvements, the applicant shall be required to provide a letter of credit to cover 125% of the construction costs for these improvements. The construction estimate shall be reviewed by the Town Engineer and Landscape Architect. The agreement stipulating how the site improvements will be completed and letter of credit shall be submitted by the applicant to the Town Attorney for approval before a temporary certificate of occupancy may be released. 2 ° ~ - 9. Before a temporary certificate of occupancy is released, the applicant shall plat a public easement to insure public access through the site on the proposed sidewalk improvements. The applicant shall submit the easement agreement to the Town Attorney and Town Council for approval before recording the easement. 10. Marketing language for the sale of the timeshare units shall be submitted by the Town Attorney by the applicant for approval. This wording governing the marketing of the timesharing shall be added to the SDD Ordinance. 11. No amplification of sound on the greenspace created by the removal of the two tennis courts shall be allowed for conventions or other special events. The following items were staff recommendations to the Design Review Board if the project proceeded to that review level. The Planning Commission changed these recommendations to conditions of approval. 12. Landscaping beyond sod shall be provided on the landscape terraces over the parking. 13. Additional landscaping shall be provided along the west elevation of the parking structure. A mix of deciduous, evergreens, and shrubs shall be provided of a size adequate to screen the structure as much as possible. The applicant is directed to work with vail Associates on the landscaping buffer. 14. All loading areas shall have additional landscaping and screen fencing. 15. The amendments to Special Development District No. 7 are approved conditional upon Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council giving approval to the underlying zone district request. 16. The ballast on the existing building shall be changed to match the color of the metal roof of the proposed addition. In addition, the staff and PEC recommend that the Design Review Board address the following design issues if the project proceeds to DRB: Pedestrian access should be provided from the West Day Lot through the lowest level of the parking structure. The entry stair on the north elevation should be decreased in width to allow more landscaping. The north elevation adjacent to the parking structure stair should have more windows. Landscaping should be planted along the stairway and building. These conditions of approval have been incorporated into the Special Development District Ordinance. The recommendations to the Design Review Board will be passed onto the DRB by the Community Development Department. 3 t~ D. The URA will not be responsible for cleaning or maintenance of the booths. II. SPECIAL EVENTS The URA shall organize and market special events from time to time throughout the calendar year to promote and create an image of excellence for the Town of Vail and to enhance a spirit of community and a feeling of pride amongst the inhabitants of the Town of Uail. The special events to be organized and marketed by the URA are set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part of this Agreement by reference. In addition, the URA will work with the Vail Metropolitan Recreation District to promote special events at the John Dobson Ice Arena from time to time when such events are practical. III. CONSIDERATION The Town agrees to pay the URA for their services as set forth herein as follows: A. The sum of twenty-one thousand two hundred seven dollars and two cents ($121,207.02). The receipt of one hundred fifteen thousand sixteen dollars and twenty-five cents ($115,016.25) of said amount is hereby acknowledged by the VRA. The remainder of said payment shall be made in two (2) equal installments of three thousand ninety-five dollars and thirty-nine cents ($3,095.39), on and 1990. B. The Town agrees to pay the URA thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) to be utilized solely over a twelve (12) month period for the payment of salary benefits and expenses for a special events coordinator to be employed by the URA. IV. EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS The URA has attached for comparison purposes the Chamber of Commerce's actual expenditure budget for the year 1990 as Exhibit C which is incorporated herein by reference and has further attached its proposed 1990 expenditure budget as Exhibit D which is incorporated herein by reference. The URA hereby warrants and represents that it will spend the funds received from the Town pursuant to this Agreement in accordance with the terms and conditions hereof and in accordance with the proposed 1990 budget. U. ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL OF FUNDS A. The URA will monitor each special event organized by it pursuant to this Agreement and shall provide the Town with a financial report of each special event within thirty (30) days after its conclusion. The report shall provide information as to how Town of Vail funds were expended and shall in addition -2- RESOLUTION N0. 15 Series of 1990 A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH THE INTENTION OF THE TOWN OF VAIL TO ISSUE ITS MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, SETTING FORTH THE CONDITIONS OF SAID INTENT; AND SETTING FORTH RELATED MATTERS THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town of Vail (the "Issuer") is a town and a political subdivision duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Colorado (the "State"); and WHEREAS, the County and Municipality Development Revenue Bond Act, Article 3 of Title 29, Colorado Revised Statutes (the "Act"), authorizes the Issuer to finance one or more "projects," including any land, building or other improvement and real and personal properties (other than inventories, raw materials and working capital) suitable or used for or in connection with residential facilities for low- and middle-income families or persons intended for use as the sole place of residence by the owners or intended occupants, to the end that the Issuer may be able to induce private enterprise to build a sufficient supply of adequate, safe and sanitary dwellings; and WHEREAS, the Issuer is further authorized by the Act to issue revenue bonds for the purpose of defraying the cost of financing and refinancing any "project," and for paying interest on such revenue bonds for a period of time not exceeding three years, and for paying all incidental expenses incurred in issuing such revenue bonds, and to secure payment of such revenue bonds as provided in the Act; and WHEREAS, representatives of Professional Development Corporation, a Tennessee corporation, (the "Developer") have advised the Issuer of the Developer's interest in developing, acquiring, constructing, improving and equipping within the boundaries of the Issuer three hundred four (304) units of residential rental facilities (the "Project") to be owned by the Developer and rented to low- and middle-income families or persons intended for use as their sole place of residence, subject to the willingness of the Issuer to finance part or all of the necessary facilities as a "project" pursuant to the Act; and WHEREAS, the Project will be situated on multiple sites totalling thirty (30) acres of land within the boundaries of the Issuer and qualifies as a "project" within the meaning of the Act; and WHEREAS, a more detailed description of the Project is attached hereto as Exhibit A (Vai1 Valley Affordable Housing Proposal) and is hereby incorporated by this reference thereto; and RECD J U N 1 91990 vA~ Tow~v couNCa, The Liorishead Merchant Association met~cm June 5th. Approximately 35 ~~~~d~ers attended. The issue cn t~?.e Marriott expansion was discussed and the membership ove~ahelmingly suNM,rted the expansion . S~~C~ ly, Daniel Mulroo y Vice President Lionshead Merchant Association Connie knight 385 eost gore week drive • box 1307 • voil, colorodo 81658 • 303/476-3615 JUN 1 8 iy~~ June 15, 1990 The Honorable Kent Rose Town of Vail Council Members 75 Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 Dear Council Members: Regretfully, I will be out-of-town for your meeting on June 19th when your votes will be placed regarding the Mark-Marriott Time Share major amendment to Special Deve- lopment District No. 7. When this issue came before the Planning Commission June 11th, I voted against it. I think it is important that you know why. Using the High Density Multi-Family zoning guidelines, the proposed project exceeds the density allowed in three ways: 1. The GRFA is over by 70,077 sq. ft. 2. The Dwelling Units are over by 115. 3. The units per acre are over by 22 units. I have commended Ned Gwathmey, the architect, on the overall design of the proposed time share building, but I could not in good conscience recommend approval based on the above zoning code violations. I hope you as the Council will concur. Respectfully, ` Connie Knight E. F. MAYNE JR., INC. 100 WEST LONG LAKE ROAD, SUITE 220 BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MICHIGAN 48013 REC'~ JUN Z g ~ggp 313 - 258-0300 June 13, 1990 Mayor Kent Rose and Town Council Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Subject: Mark-A'Iarriott Property Building Expansion Program Dear Mayor Rose and Council Members: My name is Edward Mayne and I have owned Condominium A-5 in the Cross Roads Building, Vail, since 1968. As an owner of a condominium in the core of Vail who spends approximately 80 days per year during the winter months in Vail, I wish to express my concern and objection to the Mark- Marriott proposal to add an additiona174,000 square feet on their property in Lionshead for the following reasons, based upon my personal knowledge, feelings, and information provided by others who are in agreement with my opinion. The Mamott properties will be built beyond maximum density and square footage. The Marriott has at least twice previously been given the privilege to exceed the building code permits originally designed for the present Marriott building which not only creates an abuse in over-taxing the intent, but compounds the problem when combined with additional exceptions to the building code. The high rise of hotels and condominiums along Gore Creek in Lionshead already presents a formidable wall of unbroken mass and, in my opinion, runs contrary to the original plan of maintaining an openness and a green belt between concentrated building sites. It has been recognized mistakes have been made in maintaining a balance between building and nature. Why compound it with another potential mistake of this magnitude. Over the years, the art of negotiating and achieving the objectives of over-zealous land developers and owners has pretty much washed away the early concepts of Vail's planning and environmental objectives. June 13, 1990 Page2of2 Mayor Kent Rose and Town Council Vail, Colorado 81657 Subject: Mark-Marriott Property Building Expansion Program I understand the people representing the Mark-Marriott property interests, presenting statistics, documentation and promotional assistance, have no invested interest in the town, with questionable responsibility in the town's best interests. I believe Mark-Marriott is a franchised management hotel chain which is profit driven and hold; little owners' personal concern far tike impact of its excesses on the community. Historically, if investment does not justify the means, the real estate is cast off to the highest bidder with little feeling to the impact of the community. The present facilities and proposed expansion presents substantial potential future problems. It is obvious in many cases promises made for concessions given by previous planning environmental commissions have not been fulfilled, leaving a compromised construction and landscaping mess. In my opinion, Vail does not need athird-tier, time sharing, housing project and the economic community attracted. The maintenance and repair of this type of housing only adds to an already overloaded service community. The economic troubles affecting credible housing projects such as the Athletic Club and the Westin, and the possibility of others in a very shakey position, only adds to reasons against this proposal. The mountain is already overcrowded and until this condition is corrected, why compound the problem with more skiers who contribute little to the mountain or commercial environment of the town. What is financial solvency of the group proposing this addition. I would respectfully cast my vote against such a y~.,~ect. Sincerely, E. ayne, Jr. EFM: ms-90-1040 NEIL R. AUSTRIAN ~p,lUN 18~ 22 BALLWOOD ROAD OLD GREENWICii, CONNECTICUT 069'70 June 15, 1990 Members of Vail Town Council Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado Re: Proposed Expansion of the Marriott Hotel Dear Town Council Members: As a long time property owner in Vail I feel compelled to write concerning the proposed variance that has been requested by the Marriott Hotel. Five years ago after having owned several condominiums for ten years prior, I bought my first home on West Forest Road. In December 1986 we purchased our current single family home, again on West Forest Road. At the time of my original purchase, and again in 1986, it was my understanding, confirmed by the real estate agents, that the then existing zoning precluded any more building by the Marriott or any of the nearby hotels/condominiums. It was a serious undertaking, moving from a condo to a home, and one of sufficient economic impact that I paid lawyers to understand what could possibly happen to decrease the value of my property. In the 19 years we have been coming to Vail (15 years as property owners) I have noticed with increasing frequency the number of zoning changes that seem to be occurring. I believe that a first class town, which Vail is, must maintain the integrity of its zoning, or seriously run the risk of alienating the current homeowners and residents. Alienation because of both decreased property values and loss of the reasons they bought property in Vail in the first place. I applaud the stance the town has taken with regard to the proposed Tannenbaum property swap. Zoning laws should not be changed arbitranly or capriciously. There are certain things that money should not be allow to buy. It seems inconsistent to me not to take the same view with the Marriott variance. The noise levels in the summer from the outdoor events at the Marriott are cu~~~,.tly just tolerable; with expansion, you will have changed the nature of the ambiance to one which had I known would happen, would not have bought a home on this street. The vistas from our windows will not be quite the same. To eliminate all the existing "green space" seems very short sighted.. once gone it can never be replaced. This is the first letter I have ever written the Town Council. I didn't write to you, as others have done, concerning the snow cats on West Forest Road because I knew that this existed when I bought my home. The rules were defined and I could make a choice based on known facts. I urge you to pass this letter along to all the members of Town Council and I invite their questions directly to me if necessary. What assurances will the Town be able to give any current or future homeowner if once again you modify the rules in the middle of the game? We have a wonderful Town which I am proud to call my second home, and where our family spends a considerable part of every year. Let's make the zoning laws, which were most likely very carefully considered when passed, stand for something. Sincerely yours, kEC"~ JUN 1419 5TA1 OF COLOIZ,AD COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH of Soto R~~yo'', 4210 East 11th Avenue 7elefax: ~ o Denver, COlordd0 80220-3716 (303) 322-9076 (Main Building/Denver) Phone (303) 320-8333 (303) 320-1529 (Ptarmigan Place/Denver) (303) 248-7198 (Grand Junction Regional Office) * . MEMORANDUM `s'6 ~ ~j Roy Romer TO: Interested Parties S'l?~--'~ Governor FROM: Dick Parachini , Eagle Mine©~e Coordinator Thomas M. Vernon. M.D. DATE : June 8 , 1990 Executive Director SUBJECT: State Air Monitoring Results The following is a summary of the air monitoring data collected by the seven additional air monitors operated by the State of Colorado during the Eagle Mine remedial activities. Date Minturn Middle Minturn Middle Minturn Community School-Front School Foyer Center Rooftop 04/02/90 TSP 7 ug/m-3 Pb <0.09 ug/m-3 Cd <0.009 ug/m-3 As <0.008 ug/m-3 04/05/90 TSP 5 ug/m-3 Pb <0.09 ug/m-3 Cd <0.009 ug/m-3 As <0.008 ug/m-3 04/08/90 TSP 5 ug/m-3 Pb <0.09 ug/m-3 Cd <0.009 ug/m-3 As <0.008 ug/m-3 04/11/90 TSP SO ug/m-3 Pb <0.09 ug/m-3 Cd <0.009 ug/m-3 As <0.008 ug/m-3 04/34%90 TSP 6 ug/m-3 Pb <0.09 ug/m-3 Cd <0.009 ug/m-3 As <0.008 ug/m-3 04/17/90 TSP 8 ug/m-3 Pb <0.09 ug/m-3 Cd <Q.009 ug/m-3 As <0.008 ug/m-3 04/20/90 TSP 6 ug/m-3 Pb <0.09 ug/m-3 Cd <0.009 ug/m-3 As <0.008 ug/m-3 04/23/90 TSP 12 ug/m-3 Pb <0.09 ug/m-3 Cd <0.009 ug/m-3 As <0.008 ug/m-3 • . 04/26/90 TSP 14 ug/m-3 Pb <0.09 ug/m-3 Cd 0.012 ug/m-3 As <0.008 ug/m-3 04/29/90 TSP 12 ug/m-3 Pb <0.09 ug/m-3 Cd 0.025 ug/m-9 As <0.008 ug/m-3 The Colorado Department of Health Laboratory analytical results report indicate the occurrence of two 24-hour average air concentrations of cadmium (Cd) above the air monitoring trigger values. The dates of occurrence were April 26 (0.012 ug/m-3)and 29 (0.025 ug/m-3) in front of the Minturn Middle School. The trigger value for cadmium is 0.01 ug/m-3. This trigger value is set at a level slightly above the instrument detection limit that provides an accurate, quantifiable measurement of cadmium. The observed levels for TSP, arsenic (As}, and lead (Pb} were below the air permit values from April 2 through April 29. These two cadmium observations and the one at the North/Cross Creek monitoring station on May 2 do not pose an immediate concern from the short term health effects standpoint. As construction activities begin to start at the site, increased dust control will again be implemented to minimize all fugitive emissions from the site. i~rfl ~i~?r ~ ~ ;990 5T~1 ~ o~ coLo~~o COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ~~o"~e~cio~,~' 4210 East 11th Avenue Telefaz: ~e -'~'r* c~ Denver, Colorado 80220-3716 (303) 322-9076 (Main Building/Denver) * ~ ~ o, Phone (303) 320-8333 (303) 320-1529 (Ptarmigan Piace/Denver) * (303) 248-7"198 (Grand Junction Regional Office) s t876 ~ " Roy Romer MEMORANDUM Governor Thomas M. Vernon, M.D. T0: Interested Parties Executive Director FROM: Dick Parachini, Ea~'~ine On-Site Coordinator DATE: June 8, 1990 SUBJECT: Eagle Mine Preliminary Air Monitoring Results April 1990 The following is an update regarding the Eagle Mine air monitoring program during the 1990 spring season. The airborne particulate data collected by the Gulf+Western air monitors shown in the accompanying table are preliminary in nature. This means that the Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) values may be revised after auditing and validation by the air contractor and the State. The information is useful in assessing emissions during spring conditions, as well as trends in potential human exposure. The concentrations for TSP were not above the air emissions permit levels during the April monitoring period. The current standard for TSP at the site is 150 ug/m3. The notation ug/m3 stands for micrograms per cubic meter. A microgram equals one millionth (1/1,000,000) of a gram. The Colorado Department of Health received a analytical results report from Gulf+Western that indicate the occurrence of a 24-hour average air concentration of cadmium (Cd) above the air emission permit trigger value (0.01 ug/m3). The concentration of cadmium (0.013 ug/m3} on May 2 was above the trigger value at the North/Cross Creek monitoring station. The Gulf+Western air monitoring for total suspended particulates was switched to the 1 in 3 day schedule on April. 23. This change was done in conjunction with the beginning of the construction activities at the site. Construction _ activities in April have been primarily associated with maintenance of water control structures at the New Tailings Pile... The State air monitoring schedule was also switched to the 1 in 3 day schedule corresponding to the Gulf+Western monitoring days. For additional information, please contact Dick Parachini at 827-5928 (Minturn) or 331-4801 (Denver). AIRBORNE PARTICULATE CONCENTRATIONS EAGLE MINE SITE April 1990 (pg/m3) SCHOOL SITE NORTH/CROSS CREEK SITE Date Sampled TSP* Pb** As Cd PM10 TSP* Pb** As Cd PM10 04/05/90 11.6 11.8 04/11/90 13.0 17.6 04/17/90 12.1 14.3 04/23/90 13.8 < 0.003 0.003 < 0.007 7.4 14.5 0.007 < 0.002 0.009 ----- 04/26/90 10.7 < 0.003 < 0.002 < 0.008 4.0 11.5 0.005 < 0.002 < 0.009 5.1 04/29/90 9.4 < 0.003 < 0.002 < 0.008 --- 19.9 < 0.003 0.004 < 0.008 ----- Permit limitation 150 pg/m3 ** Permit limitation 1.5 pg/m3 THESE DATA ARE PROVISIONAL AND SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER AUDITING AND VALIDATION. CONSTRUCTION SEASON SAMPLING AND CONSTITUENT METALS ANALYSIS BEGAN ON APRIL 23, 1990. 1t J Engle-Voil Metropolitan District Box 5660/Avon, Colorado 81620 June 8, 1990 T0: EAGLE-NAIL HOMEOWNERS ASSN. EDWARDS METRO DISTRICT TOWN OF NAIL TOWN COUNCIL BERRY CREEK METRO DISTRICT / TOWN OF AVON TOWN COUNCIL ARROWHEAD METRO DISTRICT BEAVER CREEK METRO DISTRICT LAKE CREEK HOMEOWI~TERS ASSN. HOMESTEAD HOMEOWNERS ASSN. NAIL METRO/REC DISTRICT RE: BERRY CREEK RANCH SITE There has been enough positive response to our memo of May 8th regarding the above site and its purchase for long-term public use to warrant scheduling a meeting to further discuss its future. This meeting will be: JUNE 28, 1990 AVON TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 P.M. Please note that this notice is being sent to each entity only, so please forward this information to all the board members and any other interested individuals as we would like to encourage as much participation as possible. Thank you for your responses and we look forward to meeting with everyone! Sincerely, EAGLE-NAIL METROPOLITAN DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS Golf Shop 949-5267 Maintenance/Recreation 949-5686 Fre Department 949-5358 Water Department 476-7480 Ache ~ 129 north frontage road ~ ~earr~in ~ vail, Colorado 81657 - 9 RECD J U N - 11990 ~re~ 303-476-5684 7 - - May 30, 1'990 Dear Vail Town council wlembers, We at the Learning Tree would like to take this time to thank-you for your generosity in approving an amendment to your Sales Tax Ordinance. We wE:oleheartedly support your decision t,a donate back to Non-Profits the sales tax generated by occasional fundraisers» We appreciate you recognising the benefit of nan- prcfit schools to the Tcewn of Vail, we certainly feel that we are an enhancement to the community at large. It's also a good time to thank the Town for includir?g us in the proceeds of the annual clean-up Day. We really en,ioy being a part of this event, through providing childcare and our same man power. We thinE. you will see increased support for this goad cause each year. We will always be here to dc• our share! Thank-you again for being sc~ supportive of us» Learning Tree Parent Advisory board JUN 18 '9@ 16~@@ ~ N BUTLER R'1 . R/~7I V FACSIItII.$ TR~JS1fITxJL Kam, ri=m A~ddreea ' Teleaopier ~ Sander's psme DgSC'~IPTIOF OF ~OCCJ~~'!S T~SII~TZFD: . Y S4EC;AL ~f8?~tM.ZIOF8: . ' For your iafarmatian ~ . Im aaaordanae pith your requert Plea$e telaphoae mf . Pl+~aea advise or aoma~aat ~ . Itleaee handle ' Please give imt~edia?te mttention ~'or your approval (?then Cover page plus t pages Dtttr - ~ ~ ~ ~ Approx. Tama: ~ ~ ~ ,Atiaatral If the ~i~? pro lem rich trt?aemireion of this doaumeat, please oAll At (612) 633-9525. 2508 Webt County Road C (biZ) b33A525 Saint Paul, Mi~,ntdota 55113 fax (b1Z) 633.8211 JUN 1P '9~1 1E~0D G N SUTLER P.2 June l8, 1990 ~ To the Editor: Our ~xrm is presently developing the Grand on Avan, in Avon. We will be marketing the facility as a convention center in conjunction with major Vail and Beaver Creek hotels and facilities. Conferences and conventions are an ideal second industry for ayear- round economy in the Vail Valley. The Vail Valley will be far easier to market as s convention site with year-round air service. The functions typically last a few days. The shuttle vans from Denver, while providing good service, make for an all day trip from most of the country because of the many stops and long drive (even longer to Denver's nevi airport). Air freight service is also important. Regional air service seems the most practical out of ski season, when air service will be needed most to market conventions. Loss of the Stolport, in a practical location for Denver service, represents a tremendous loss to the Valley. We hope the community is doing everything possible to save this valuable economic asset, which seems also part of the solution to the serious parking problems. Respe tfully, G taN AVON , Gerald N. uder faxed to: The Vail Trail (303) $27-5374 Beaver Creek Times {303) $4~-?204 .2504 West County Rosd C (612} 633.9525 Saint Paul, Minnesota 55113 Fax (612) 633.8211 ~y towo ofi nail ~ 75 south frontage road vail, Colorado 81657 (303) 479-2105 office of town manager June 18, 1990 Ms. Sydney Summers Mountain Ironworks and Gallery P. 0. Box 460 Minturn, Colorado 81645 Dear Sydney: Thank you for sending the copy of the article concerning the NEA grant received by the Steamboat Springs Arts Council. The Town of Vail is very interested in working together with the arts community. I hope that more art work such as the accomplishment of the wonderful ' children's mural in the Vail Village bus stop and. the children's fountain sculpture will result from joint efforts on the part of private donors, the Vail Valley Arts Council, Gallery Association, and the Town of Vail. In order to encourage public art, the Town has appointed the Art in Public Places Board to work on reviewing proposals, developing projects, and supporting efforts of other arts organizations in the community. The Town committed matching funds for the purchase of the Bird of Paradise sculpture for Lionshead, and the Art in Public Places Board is now considering another sculpture for Lionshead which has been offered as a donation. The Town Council has recently committed $5,000 of a total $25,000 raised to do the programming analysis for a proposed performing arts center which is hoped to include gallery space for visual arts as well. The Arts in Public Places Board is also developing funding ideas for the 1991 budget year along with program goals. One aspect of the proposal will be to look at possible grants. The National Endowment for the Arts grant opportunities will be addressed in their proposal. Ms. Sydney Summers June 18, 1990 Page 2 We certainly have much more that can be achieved in this community, and I believe many groups including the Town are working to expand the arts. I hope you will continue to share this type of information with us and be supportive of the joint efforts that are so exciting in this community. Sinc e y, Rondall V. Phillips Town Manager RUP/bsc cc: Vail Town Council mountain ironworlts and allery ~ a blacksmith shop and art gallery R~'o JUN 121990 Tune 10, 1990 Ron Phillips T 1CITNIZ QL Jc~, Vail, CO 81658 Dear Ron, I am sending this article to you as an example of how a town and the arts can work together to each other's benefit. I am hopeful that in the future Vail can do the same - realize that it is indeed good business to be involved with and support the arts. Sincerely, ydney Summe s p.o. box 460 201 main street mintum, Colorado 81645 (303) 827-4226 sculpture watercolors drawings fireplaces design fabrication Vol. VIII No. 3 Summer 1990 - - `~~y COLORADO O\SORTIL~tii OF CONL'~1LNITY ARTS COt~CILS ~ ~ ~ ` Steamboat's NEA 'tom ''4 ,.:1, .iY^. ~ ~ ~y ~ _ 'y ~ 'Ss ~a7Ct ll1QS 1 ~ announced at a ' 1 celebration in April. _ ~ ~ Shown here rise ~ Melissa Williams, - s ~ _ President, Steamboat ti ~ ` ~ Arts Council; Richard Huff; ~ Director of Locals ~ ~ ± m : j t. r ~ ~ Program of1VEA; ~ ~ _ ~ t ~ : Harvey Rose, ~ # ` ~s ~ a . ti - ,r Steamboat Springs ~ ~ City Manager; and i , ~ ~ _ Rita Valentine, * ~ ~ i~ ; ~ aL ~ ~ Steamboat Springs a ` ~1 L " ~,~Ry ' City Council Member. Steor~boot Springs Ards Council Receives Niajor NSA ~ron# by Karolynn Lestrud On Saturday, April 21, 1990, Richard Huff, communication between local governments and local Director of Locals Programs for the National arts agencies and to be n local government funding Endowment for the Arts, visited Steamboat Springs of arts programs-funding that will continue and to announce that the Steamboat Springs Arts grow beyond the grant period. Council has been granted a $150,000 grant from the The grant application process was initiated by Local Government Incentive Category. The grant will Harvey Rose, City Manager of Steamboat Springs. be matched by $300,000 :tom the City of Steamboat Rose visited Huff in Washington last year to discuss for athree-year program that will develop a master Locals Program possibilities for the Steamboat plan for the arts for the community, initiate an artist- Springs area. Rose and city grant writer, Linda in-residence program, pro~zde funding for renova- Kakela, then met with arts council people to develop tion/revitalization of arts fsciIities, and provide fund- the outline of the program. Through a Resolution, ing to agencies for performances, exhibitions, and the city council authorized the dollar match and culturaUhistorical special events. authorized the Steamboat Arts Council to act as the The purpose of this grant category is to develop city's Office of Art and Culture. Continues on page 2 C:.^.. ~i i I_ V i Letter from the President 3 CCCAC President Lyn Dodd reminds readers of another side to the advocacy issue. FY] 4 Notes, important dates, and helpful tips "For Your Information." The Colorado Contemporary Native American Traditions-and You g Consortium of Folklorist Bea Roeder advises on how to celebrate Folk Ans Community Arts in the community. Councils is a statewide The Arts in Public Places ~ service organization for and about local arts An update on national and statewide advocacy issues councils. CCCAC affecting Local Arts Councils. addresses the needs of A Discussion of Cultural Diversity 14 its diverse membership Karolynn Lestrud, Steamboat Springs, o,~`'ers a new by providing manage- perspective on the concept of cultural diversity. meat services, work- Are You "Totally" Tax Exempt? 15 shops and seminars, Carol McColl, Technical Assistance Center, provides an technical assistance, overview on tax exemptions available to S01(c)3s. and inf.,.,.~ative publi- cations. Its activities Steamboat Receives NEA Grant are funded, in part, by Continued from page 1 the Colorado Council for the Arts and In response to a question, Huff said the clarity of presentation was particu- Humanities. laxly striking in this grant. The grant also showed long-standing community and city council support of the arts and a substantial commitment to planning The Mission of the by both the Steamboat Arts Council and the City of Steamboat. The Steamboat Arts Council plans to involve as many local people as possi- CCCAC is to provide ble in the planning and implementation processes. Artists and arts enthusi- services, support, and asts will work together to set priorities, draw up guidelines and procedures, interaction among com- make review decisions, and prepare evaluations. The Steamboat Arts Council, munity arts councils so in networks established through the Consortium, will seek information and they can help them- advice from other arts councils throughout the state. For example, art in pub- selves and each other to lic places programs from Loveland, regrantang programs from the Denver foster and enhance the Commission on Cultural Affairs and from Greeley, producing an artists cata- quality and accessibility log from Carbondale, and so on. And as the project progresses, Steamboat will of the arts in Colorado, make the materials it develops available to other arts councils. The project will be guided by a Steering Committee composed of Mary Brown (City Council President), Harvey Rose (City Manager), Frank Leonard (Arts Council Board Member), Gloria Gossard (Arts Council Board Member), State of the Arts Melissa Williams (ex officio, Arts Council President), and Karolynn Lestrud ©1990 (Arts Council Director Emeritus), Chairman. The City Manager's assistant Carolyn Kallemeyn, and the Arts Council Executive Director will assist with administering the Editor grant. The project will begin with soliciting a consultant to guide the commu- nity cultural planning process. At the same time, the Arts Council will begin 2$83 S. Butte Circle to gather information about similar programs around the country. The broad- Sedalia, CO 80135 est possible community involvement will be invited and encouraged during 303/688-9136 every step of the process. For more information about the NEA's Locals Programs, contact Richazd Huff, Director, Locals Program, NEA, Nancy Hanks Center, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20506. Karolynn Lestrud is Director Emeritus of Steamboat Arts Council, a six year member of the CCCAC Board of Directors, and Chair of Rural and Small Communities Interest Area for NALAA MEMORANDUM T0: Vail Town Co cil FROM: Ron Phillip DATE: June 18, 1990 SUBJECT: Forest Service Land Ownership Adjustment Plan Attached please find a copy of the White River National Forest strategy paper for preparing a land ownership adjustment plan in our area. The Holy Cross Ranger District Office is just getting back up to full staff level this summer with one additional person coming on board by August 1. Bi11 Wood's staff will be working along with Mike Spencer of the Forest Supervisor's Office in Glenwood Springs to address the land ownership adjustment planning process. Bill Wood has been very cooperative along with Mike Spencer and Thomas Hoots, Forest Supervisor, in moving toward a point in the near future where they can initiate this process. They are seeking the Town's cooperation and input and they have had a number of positive discussions with Kent Rose and me over the past two to three months. No action is required at this point by the Council, but I thought providing this information in advance would give each of you an opportunity to review it in-depth before the planning process begins. RUP/bsc Attachment cc: Larry Eskwith Kristan Pritz • IInited States Forest Tahite River P.O. Boz 968 Department of 3ervica Rational Gi.~_•+~, .,od Springs, A+otir~l tnra ~ ~4~t88t ~%Q~o R1b0~ reply Cot 5400 Dataz April 2, i9g0 REC'~J MAY 16 ~g~~ Subjectz Landownership Adjustment Analysis " 2os SO Staff and District Bangers As presented to you in a previews leadership team meeting, the Forest will he developing a Landoy+Jnership Adjustment Analysis during the neat 18 ~sonths. This analysis will serve as a strategic guide to manage tae landownership base of " the Forest. Adapted as a goreat Plan amezsdment, the analysis wit: "classify" the Forest with regards to disposal sad acquisition vbjecrivea. Sucssequent load adjustment proposals will continue to need separate environmental analysis sad decision docuccueents. ~ I cannot overstate the iaportance of gaining public and local government support'£or ouz land ownership cbjezti~~es oa the Porest. Cooperatively developing a "desired" ownership pattern with affected counties, aunicipalitiea and private land owners will be a difficult yet positive step. Enclosed are the propgsefi strategy f~;r devplop~asg the analyse, sad t~.ction and PuQI::: Iyvoivemant :~lsn. F:,sa3e review .:xr~w pr;~ide us with your cvn~.s oa these tae itzms by ~.sy 3. 3a addition, Z wsuld like your input as to tae feasibility of having a first draft of the l;and~~ownerahip Adjustment ~.nai'ysis ~ne~-by • Gct:.h.ar_ 1 court n the 3ancis outside t:?e speci :it ;slanging areas. . w K ~ . Forest Supervisor Baclosures . M.7S/REL s BEL - ` .rte= - ACTION AND PUBLIC IiWOLVE~E:~IT PLP.~Y FOR PREPARATION OF Tf~ LANDOWNFRS'cilP ADJUSTMENT ANAL:SZS WHITE RIVER & ARAPAHO {DILLON DISTRICTS NATIONAL FOR.E.~TS APRIL 19Q0 PURP~JSE AND 08JECTZT,IE The White River National Forest (including the Dillon District of the Arapaho National Forest), hereafter referred to as the Forest, is planing on preparing a Lando-anership Adjustment Analysis (LAA) to implement land adjustments actions in conformance with the Forest Plan. This LAA will be glace in the Forest Plan as an amendment, and will classify lands for acquisition and disposal to achieve the following objectives: 1. Enable tP:e Forest to imglesaent a proactive land acquisition and disposal program. 2. Enable the Forest to achieve t`~e Legislative objectives for which it was established. 3. Enable the Forest Service to acquire lands valuable for recreation. wildlife habitat. wilderness. and other natural resource management - purposes. s 4. Enable the Forest Service to respond to direction given by Congress for establishment of classified areas such as Wilderness, National • Recreational Areas, and Scenic Rivers. 5. Consolidate landownership to improve operating efficiency, improve efficiency for the devei:.pment of private lands, and improve opportunities for commanity expansion. 6. Reduce the need for armed n=.aauber of rights-cf -way to provide for gub.i~.c access to National core~t S;{siem Ianzi and private access to inholdings. • 7. Reduce the miles of pric~atQ/Forest Sew rice t~oaerty li_^:e and to r~duc` t,~ae miles or' p~perty bogy::~dar„; se:rrey, posti.~g, and a:aintmnance. Reduce special use permit administration. 9. Dispose of lands,` especially near c..~.....mities, that are encumbered - - with private uses and where acquisition of other lands can better serve the public interest. 10. Improve opportunities for agency and private partners to provide recreational, wildlife, and other natural resource services. 11. Maintain and improve the ability to acquire key parcels through tt:e Land & Water Consveration Fund Composite and Wilderness Program. ' 12. Reconcile Recreation Composite Plans and ether private properties that meet recreation purposes with the Forest Plan. { -1- THE FOREST LANL'OWNERSHIP AD3UST~NT ANALYSIS WILL CONSIST OF THREE SECTIONS' 1. Narrative Section This section describes strategies for acquisition and disposal that will maintain or enhance achievement of Forest Plan objectives. This section will also identify specific study areas with appropriate scoping and public involvement to make the necessary classification decisions. In addition, this section i.~corporates recreation composite plans, or portions thereof, approved prior to the Forest Plan. - 2. Graphic Section This section consists of a map displaying tracts identified far acquisition and disposal through application of strategies in the narrative section. 3. Tabular Section This section will identify specific tracts meeting the strategies and/or general direction in the Forest Plan. Appropriate references to narrative and graphic sections, and Forest Plan ar-~ to be displayed for each tract. Forest Plan Ame_zdae ~t - the three sections of tie Landos~zaership Adjustment - Analysis will be in~.orporated into the Forest PIan by aaendment. Narrative Se~Ltion - Appropriate parts of tEhe narrative section - c.-ill be incorpvratad in the i+ianagement Directirn for Landownership Adjustments (Chapter III). Graphics and Tabular Sections - These sections will be included as an appendix to the Forest Plan. -2- ACTION PLAN i LANDOWNERSHIP ADJUSTMENT ANALYSIS Action Item: ti 1.` 'Develop Public Involvement Plan. a. Consult with Rangers and Staff to develop list of contacts. b. Prepare public notice and letter to interested parties (See Draf t Exhibit 1}, c. Obtain Forest Superrisor Approval and R.O. Lands concurrence. d. Responsibility - S.O. Lands Staff. r 2. Conduct Scoping of Issues and Concerns (Public involvement necessary}. - a. Send notices to news media and persons on key contact list. b. Develop. Forest Service management concerns. c. Analyze responses and identify significant issues. d. Responsibility - S.O. Lands Staff 3. Draft Part A of the Landownership Adjustment Analysis Narrative. a. Part A is the ex^laration of t.':e specific. strategies for land acquisi viQn a.^.ri disposal . . b. Responsibility - S.O. Lands Staff 4. .Review and Approve Strategies. - ~ Responsibility - Rangers, S.O. Staff, and Regional Office Lands Staff. 5. Apply Strategies a. Identify lands for acquisition and disposal. b. Validate prior approved Recreation Composite Plans. c. Responsibility - S.O. Lands Staff and Districts. 6. Prepare Tentative Graphics and Tabulation Section Responsibility - S.O. Lands Staff. 'J. Review and Approve Tentative Results Responsibility -Rangers, S.O. Staff, and Regional Office Lands Staff. -3- 8. Display Results to Public and Solicit Public Comment Responsibility - S.O. Lands Staff and Districts. 9. Analyze Public Comment and Make Revisions (Public Involvement Necessary) Responsibility 5.0. Lands Staff and Districts. 10. Review Approve Results of Revisions Generated by Public Comments Responsibility -Rangers, S.O. Staff, and Regional Office Lands Staff . Il. Prepare Final Landownership Adjustment Analysis Responsibility - S.O. Lands~Staff. 12. Approve the Final Landownership~Adjustvent Analysis Responsibility -Regional Forester. 13. Draft Forest Plan Amendment and NEPA Documentation Responsibility - 5.0. Lands Staff Prepare and S.O. Planning Staff revie*a . 34. Issue the Forest Plan Amendment {Public Involvement Necessary} Responsibility - S.O. Planning Staff and Forest Super,-3sor. -4- ` PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN FOREST LANDOWNERSHIP ADJUSTMII~JT ANALYSIS Public irsvolvement is an integral part of the land management planning process. It is detailed separately in this plan to ensure the accomplishment of the following goals: r ~ 1. Ensure that the public has adequate notice and opportunity to conaaent on the formulation of the Landownership Adfustment Analysis. 2. Identify and consider all public issues and ccacerns that can be addressed at the Forest level. 3. Coordinate with other land management agencies and public planning efforts. 4. Prepare the Landownership Adjustment Analysis through an integrated resource glanning approach involving key staff specialists and all Rangers. A. General Guidelines 1. The public will be notified andlor involved in items 2, 8, 9. and 14, of the Action Plan. 2. Ne*«s reie~~~es, mai3ing5, pub~.~.c meetings, and personal contacts will bs utili~e3 as a~.propriate. 3. O t'~er agencies, private evntractors, special interest groups, and kz,,~ individuals will be contacted throughout the planning process to: a. Caordi.nate wit: heir plar,~*ng efra.`:s. b. Collect pertinent dam and infor°.::aticn. c. Obtain technical assistance. d. Solicit ot~ier vie~~zzoints and comments on preliminary documents. e. Keep them informed of our grogress. - Each of thesz contacts will be documented in writing. B. Key Contact List ` 1. Local, State, and Federal Agencies to be contacted: a. Bureau of Land ManaR~ement b. Bureau of fieclamation c. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service d. Farmers Heme Administration e. National Park Service P. Soil Conservation Service ` g. Colorado State Forest Service h. Colorado State Board of Land Commissioners i. Colorado Division of Wildlife 3.~ Colorado Division of Parks and Recreation k. County and city governments 1. Others . -5- 2. Key individuals and groups to be contacted: a. U.S. Senators and Representative b. State Senators and Representatives c. Colorado Governor d. Colorado State Clearinghouse e. State Planning Boards f. Conservancy Districts g. Councils of Government h. County Ccmraissioners (Including their respective Planning and Zoning Offices) i. Local Planning Boards j. Forst Service Permittees - k. Others 3. Private organizations to be contacted: a. National Forest Recreation Association b. The Nature Conservancy _ c. The Trust for Public Land - ~ d. Land Adjustment Companies (Western Land Exctaange Company, Dale R. - Andrus Associates, etc.} e. Grazing Advisory Boards f. Colorado Trail Foundation g. Mineral Exploration Coalition h. Colorado Environmental Coalition i. Colorado Mountain Club j. Conservation Organizations (Sierra Club, Wilderness Society, i5aar Wa?ton Leaa~ue, etc.) 1~. Wildlife Interest,; {Audubon Societ•; , Duc3~.s Unlimite3. Trout Unlimited, etc.) 1. tither Forest ?lan ilvling s-~s (Frar Proposed Amendment) (200 individuals and organizations) 5. News Media to be contacted a. Roc_{y Mountain Nes,rs .(Denver) - _ b. The Denver Post {Deaver) c. KSPN Radio (Aspen) ~ . d. KSND Radio (Aspen) e. KAJX Radio (Aspen) f. Aspen Times (Aspen) g. Aspen Times Daily (Aspen) h. Pspen Daily News {Aspen) i. Aspen Magazine (Aspen) j. Grassroots Community TV (Aspen) k. Pro-Video TV (Aspen) 1. Snowmass Sun (Snakmass Village) m. ABC, NBC, CBS TV {West Slope Correspondents from Denver) n. KREG TV Carbondale} o. Roaring Fork Valley Journal (Carbondale) p. KDNK Public Radio (Carbondale) - q. High Country News (Paonia) r. Glenwood Post (Glenwood Springs) -6- s. The Free Weekly (Glenwood Springs) t. Tfie Daily Sentinel (Grand Junction) u. KMTS/KGLN Radio (Glenwood Springs) v. West Valley Citizen (Rifle} , w. Rifle Telegram {Rifle) ' x. KKGD Radio (Rifle) y. Meeker Herald Meeker} z. Eagle Valley Enterprise {Eagle) aa. Avon-Beaver Creek Times {Avon} - bb. KZYR Radio (Avon) cc. Vail Community Television (Vail) dd. Vail Daily (Vail} ee Vail Trail {Vail} ff. K-CITE TV (Vail} ~ . gg. KVMT Radio (Vail} , hh. KSKI Radia {Vail) } ii. Summit Sentinel {Frisco) ~j. Summit County Jour-ial (Breckenridge} kk. The Ten Mile Times/Copper Mountain Cable (Frisco/Copper Mountain) 11. The Quandry Times {Breckenridge) - mm. Su.~r~nit Daily News (Frisco) rn. KYSL Radio (Frisco) oo. Kh~ZH Radio (Dillon) PP• K~'3'P Radio and TV (Breckenridge) qq. KJCT TV {Grand Junction) _ ' rr. KS x 4 Radio ( Grand Ja~ction) - - ss . KIZi3 Radio ( Grand J u~c'ticn } tt. K~Zy/3~~1K R~:dis~ {Gra:nd Juzct~.on) uu. K.rxC~/~^.is.Y Ratio (Grand Junction; vv. > Others - _ - - Prepared By: Rabert E. Lawton, Forester Date - Recommended By: Michael J. Spencer. Acting Lands Staff Date Reco~e.~ded By: Gerald P. Hart. Program Planning Staff . . - Date Approved By: ~ Thomas A. Hoots, Forest Supervisor _ Date Concur: Eleanor Towns, Director of Lands Date -j- EXHIBIT 1 (DRAFT Lr.ii~.ri) - PUBLIC NOTICE OF LAND ADJUSTP~.'VT ANALYSIS PREPARATION PP.OCESS We are beginning the process of preparing a landownership adjustment analysis for t'~e White River Forest and the Dillon District of the Arapaho National Forest. This analysis will display the desired future landownership pattern of the National Forest, and will identify specific tracts of land within the National Forest boundary for acquisition or disposal. The results of this analysis will be incorporated into the White River National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan by amendment. t The principal purpose of the this landownership adjustment analysis is to achieve the opt=mum landownership pattern for the Forest. No major enlargements or reductions in the land area of the Forest are contemplated. Some land acquisitions may be justified in furtherance of national policies of preserving unique environments or to meet the resource management goals and ' objectives of the Forest Plan. .Score land disposal actions may be justified . ' where Farest Service administered lands are no longer suitable for National Forest purposes due to crmpeting private uses or urban land use influences. - Some rearrangement of landownerships may be justified to enable intermingled private-State-Federal ownerships to be more efficiently administered, developed, or accessed. The preparation of land adjustment analysis is not a n*xa activity. Throughout most of its histor-,~, t':e Forest Service has periodically reviewed landownership adjus went bene.its aid needs. °Ihis current analysis is basically an updating pr~mpte~ by recent development c~~ t'~e Forest Plan. The prccessizag of land adjustment actions has been a continuing activity on the Forest. The principal means available to the Forest se.~ice for acquiring l~id5 ore purc:;use, doratlcn, ~~C:Ia.^~.~',°, and tr3i.Sse~ fZ'G~ CC^'~c~r. other Feded^8i age^Lies. The principal means available for dis~osirg ai la..ds are exchange, sc?:ooi sites, small tracts act, townsite act, and trans~'er to certain other _ Fede_al agencies. As an initial step, we are see_?;ing public views relating to the preparation of the analysis. We need to 3uzcw what the public wants us to consider in this analysis effort, suc*~ as the type and location of lands that should be identified for acquisition or disposal. Public ccm:nents and ideas will be evaluated and used along with other data to formulate land selection criteria. These criteria will then be used to identify specific tracts of land. Later, the public will be given an opportunity to review and respond to the preliminary results. ' We request the public comments be sent in writing to: Thomas A. Hoots, Forest Supervisor, USDA Forest Service, P. 0. Bax 948, Glenwood Springs. CO 81602. Comments will be received until 1990. Further information regarding this land adjustment analysis can be obtained by contacting Bob Lawton by telephone at 945-2522 or by writing at the above Forest Supervisor's address, i Each Wfiite River National Forest District Ranger(including the Dillon District of the Arapaho National Forest) will be setting up meetings to discuss this 1 process in detail as it relates to their particular District. Public - participation is encouraged at t`:ese sessions. -8- i t WRITE RIVER NATIONAL FOREST PROPOSED LANDOWTVERSHIP AD3tISTMENT ANALYSIS 1 A. Policy ~ - Each National Forest and National Grassland wi21 prepare a Landownership Adjustment Analysis (LAA) for incorporation into the Forest Plan as an amendment. The LAA shall classify Lands for acquisition or disposal to . achieve the following objectives: 1. Enable the Forest/Grassland to implement a proactive land acquisition and disposal program; ' 2. Enable the Forest/Grassland to achieve the legislative -objectives for which it was establisred; - - ~ 3. Enable the Forest Service to acquire lands valuable for recreation, - - wildlife habitat, wilderness, and other natural resource management purposes; E ~ 4. Enable the Forest Ser*rice to respond to direction given by Congress i for establishment of classified areas such as wilderness, national 4 recreation areas, and scenic rivers; - 5. C.;nsoliaate lands*,~T;ers~.ip to imrssove c^~eraing efficiency, i.Tpr*.~ve efficiency s'or the development of privets Lands. and improve opportunities for cemmi,nit~; expansion; 6. Pecuce tat2e need lar ana :'i:l'.~i7er (3f r_gntsro;-Way tc prov~ae for pshllc access t0 Nat+onGl Forest System lane and private access to inholdings; 7. Reduce the miles of private/Forest Service property line and to reduce the ..miles of property boundary survey, posting, and maintenance ; , . - - 8. Reduce special use permit administration; -9. Dispose of lands, especially near communities, that are encumbered - with private uses and where acquisition of other lands can better serve the public interest; 10. Improve opportunities for agency and private partners to provide recreational, wildlife, and other natural resource services; 11. Maintain and improve the ability to acquire key parcels through the L&WCF Composite Program; 12. Reconcile Recreation Composite Plans with the Forest Plan. 1 ~ B. Summar*~ of White River National Forest Land and Resource Manasement Plan Direction for Landownership Adiustments Chapter 3 - Management Direction has two major parts: Forest Direction and Management Area Direction. The Forest Direction Section includes broad Forest-wide direction in terms of goals and objectives for goods and services the Forest will provide. The Forest Direction Section also includes detailed management requirements describing the minimum conditions to be maintained while pursuing goals and objectives. Broad direction statements are Pound under Gals in the Forest Direction Section of Chapter 3 in the Forest Plan. The Coal statements are under 12 ' subheadings: Vegetation, Recreation-Cultural-Visual, Wilderness, Range, Wildlife, Timber, Soils-Water, Minerals, Lands, Facilities. Protection, and Human and Community Development. The goals under the Lands subheadings are: - - Acquire private lands within wilderness. Consolidate National - Forest Ownership patterns. ` - Acquire necessary rightsrof-way to facilitate management of the Forest including public access to National Forest System lands. - Pursue opportuzaities to make la~dow~iership adjustments to i:~~rove management e?ficienc~, for both National Forest System 1:~~~d and intz^nix:glej private W-:ds to meet: i:iah priority resource management objectives. Coal st.:.te~:~~ts under other resource headings may be serve~ by a specific c~•nership adjustment. For e;~ample, acquisition of a non-Fec:ervl tract where d.eve? opment is likely could serve t~:e Sons and T~ater Goal ; "maintain or improve soils and water productivity so neither will be - significantly or permanently impaired." Tire disposal of a developable National Forest parcel could be linked with the Human and C.........uiity Development Goal; "provide the _ opportunity for economic b~~~tsh of industries and CC~I12I1itieS dependent upon Forest outputs." The term, "Forest outputs" is intended to include recreation experiences as well as materials such as board feet of lumber or mineral outputs. The Objectives segment of the Forest Direction. Section of Chapter 3 in the Forest Plan is in the form of Table III-1. It estimates the quantities of goods and se.zrices the Forest will provide. It includes a disclaimer, "In these projections, it is assumed funding and personnel will be available to implement the tasks necessary to achieve t.'~e objectives." The portion of Table III-1 dealing with Landownership Adjustment activities is excerpted here: 2 TABLE IIZ-1 {Excerpted) Projected Average Annual Outputs ; Lands Activity Units 1981 1981- 1985- 1991- 2001- 2011- 2021- t98~ 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030, Purchase & Acquisitions Acres 7$4 150 150 300 300 300 300 Exchange Acres 0 150 150 300 300 300 300 .Right-of-Way . Acquisition Cases 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 Under Management Requirements in the Forest Direction Section of Chapter 3 in the Forest Plan (pages IZI-b2 to 63}, six General Direction statements relate to the rights-of-way and Land adjustments management activities. These statements, like all Management Requirements in the section, represent minimum conditions to be maintained while pursuing Forest goals and objectives. Of the six General Direction statements. Statements 3 and 4 have the most direct bearing an development of a Landownership Adjustment Analysis. The six statements are listed below. O1 - Acquire rights-of-way on existing Forest system roads and trails that cross private land. 02 - insure floodplain and we~iand values are apQroximately equal cn both • offered. and selected tracts in proposed Land exchanges or that vaiuas are in favor of t.'~e United States. 03 - Classify Lands for acquisition or to acquire interests where lards have been identified as more valuable for National Forest purposes. or - where current or potential use of private lands would adversely affect National Forest values and where acquisition would not transfer impacts to _ .another site according to t_he following priorities: a. In designated wilderness areas and other Congressionally classified areas. b. ~v'here lands or rights-of-way are needed to meet resource management goals and objectivities. c. Lands which provide habitat for threatened and endangered species of animals and plants. d. Lands which include floodplain or wetlands. e. On lands having outstanding scenic values or critical ecosystems, when these resources are threatened by change of use or when management may be enhanced by public ownership. 3 Y. Lands which are National Forest in character that provide essential big game winter range and are valuable for other National Forest purposes. 04 - Classify lands for disposal according to the following priorities: _ a. To states, counties, cities, or other federal agencies when disposal will serve a greater public interest. b. In small parcels intermingled with mineral or homestead patents. c. Suitable for development by the private sector, if development t (residential, agricultural, industrial, recreational, etc.) is in the public interest. _ d. When critica3 or unique resources (wetlands, flood plains, ` essential big game winter range, threatened or endangered species ha~aitat, historical 'or cultural resources, critical ecosystems, etc.) only when effects are mitigated by reserving interest to protect the resource, or by exchange where other critical resources to be acquired are considered to be of equal or greater value. 05 - Effect jurisdiction transfers whic.~ achieve the following objectives: a. Re uce duplicatie*a of a*""forts by users and age cies in ter:as or" time, cast, and coordination. b. Z~prove or maintain user access to the.adyinistering agency. c. Decrease travel and enhance management. _ . d. Improve public understanding of ;applicable laws, regulations, policies, and procedures. - _ _ r e: Develop more effective and efficient wor4c units. f. Reduce administrative cost. Ob - Allow only one access route across National Forest per subdivision or tract of private land. C. Pursose and Need of a Landownership Adjustment Analysis This Landownership Adjustment Analysis is needed to: 1. Incorporate the respective purposes of laws which authorize land purchases, donations, sales, and exchanges along with implementing regulations in 36 CFR 254, Objectives and Policies ' ~ in FSM 5400, and the White River Resource Management Plan (L'~IPa . 4 Z. Display the strategy for landownership adjustments on the wfiite River National Forest. 3. Incorporate valid Recreation Composite Plans or appropriate portions thereof into the LP~IP. } 4. Provide a basis for cost effective lands management decisions by displaying lands whose acquisition or disposal will contribute toward accomplishment of the objectives developed to implement the L~ . 5. Display areas where detailed analysis is necessary to determine which lands are appropriate for acquisition and/or disposal. j t D. Landownership Ad.iustment Stratezy - Non-Federal lands identified for acquisition and .National Forest - identified for disposal in the graphic and data base sections of this analysis represent a long range program of landownership adjustment which will accomplish certain of the Management Direction and Goals of tf:e LIP. In order to manage a cost effective landownership adjustment program, individual cases conforming with the analysis will be accepted and processed (as money and manpower allows) without further analysis relative to the LMP. Sr~ecifi^ acrsuis.tion and dis~~, osal strategies, along with a brief explanation of eac:~, us?d to classify Ia.~ds displayed in the g~-aphis and data base sections of this analysis follows: Developed Areas Develop-meat cr LiJar3lvy~L~Gn C3 Iocsli~ed areas W=thin t~'I2 ~vt2it8 River National Forest has oc-~-~red a.-ad is contir:._=ing at a re?atively fast pace. Urbanization occu~-~s in several forms: (1} skiing commmunities like Aspen, Vail, Snowzaass, and Breckenridge; (2) small communities becoming centers of tourist services or recreation subdivisions such l - as Basalt, Redstone, Minturn, Dillon, Silverthorn, Frisco, and Marble; ranching and farming communities fighting to retain their historic identity while being pressured by outside forces such as Rifle, Gypsum, Meeker, Eagle, Silt, and New Castle; (4) Unincorporated urban areas such as Keystone and Copper Mountain. In each case. an infrastructure including transportation facilities. electrical power grid. utilities, and public services is wholly or partly in place. There is now and will continue to be a demand for numerous special use permits for activities and iasprovements on National Forest System lands in these areas. Where special use authorizations become concentrated, the National Forest System land is often no longer available for public use. The concentration of people in a developed area adjacent to the National Forest often limits manages~ent options for the National Forest System Land. Special concerns for road maintenance, traffic safety. and visual ` impacts often limit options. Local eceromies and management of the Forest can be enhanced by reducing isolated and non-Federal inholdings. and concentrating non-Federal ownership and development in areas now supporting urbanized development, 5 la *Dispose of National Forest System lands in developed areas which have lost or are losing their National Forest character. _ lb "No Action on non-National Forest System lands in developed areas that cannot be protected from urbanization. lc "No"Action on non-National Forest System lands in developed ,j areas that are subdivided and/or developed. ld ~'No Action on National Forest System lands in developed areas"where important for National Forest purposes. i_ t :Kineralized Areas Several thousand acres of land within the boundaries of the ~r'hite River National Forest have been patented under the mineral laws. In " score cases,•the patented areas are relatively small and scattered. Generally, there is little current mineral activity on these lands, many of whicis are most suitable for residential or other recreational uses. Acquisition of many of these lands will enhance and/or protect National Forest Resource ?Kanagement Programs. However, acquisition " meyhods should ensure that the land acquired is not subject to future patenting under the mining laws. In other "cases, mining on patent c;aims left be?~ind e~ctensive mine dumps, tailings ponds, etc. The potentially high cost of recl~~ation or pollution abatement work makes such land undesirable for acquisition. _ Finally, ir, cases s~:cia as Rec'stone, marble, Aspen. and most of the southern part of .Summit County, numerous patents have been issued in concentrated areas. Federal lands are intermingled with the patented " lands resulting in a very complex landownership pattern. Because of ' t'~e land pattern, management of the Federal lands is costly, and the - public is unable to make any significant use of the National Forest System land. Federal land disposal can enhance the efficiency of non-Federal enterprise and management of National Forest Syste:~ - lands . - _ - - = _ . 2a "Acquire non-National Forest System lands in mineralized areas if not subject to future mineral patent. r 2b Dispose of National Forest System lands in mineralized areas with complex ownership patterns. 2c "No Action on non-National Forest System lands in "mineralized areas Heading major reclamation work. ~ " i 2d ~'No Action on non-National Forest System lands in mineralized areas with active mining. 6 s Ze "No Action on non-National Forest System lands in mineralized areas where we can not obtain the entire bundle of rights ~ ~ all the owners . State School Lands ' ! The State of Colorado through the State Board of Land Commissioners is a landowner within the boundaries of the white River National Forest. These lands are managed far the purpose of providing funds for the state educational-system, They are subject to sale to the private sec~..or and subsequent development and to development by the State and its lessees. These lands are scattered throughout the Forest. The State may own the entire estate or only the mineral estate . . - Acquisition of the scattered State Iands will enhance and/or protect wildlife, recreation, timber, soil, and watershed programs of the 6v'hite River National Forest. Acquisition of the State mineral estate • - with Federal surface will consolidate management of the entire estate under one age_~cy thereby eliminating potential conflicts in management programs between two levels of Government. However. acquisition of the mineral estate with private surface could lead to _ serious potential conflicts wi to surface owners because of the difference in Federal and State mining laws. Federal acquisition of State lands by land exchange wo=old greatly e_*shance retur^s to t.~e State educations fund if they were to acquire cevelovabie Federal Iand in urbanized areas. ~ ~ . _ 3a *Acquire State school lands w;.ere surface and minerals are State owned. 3b *Acquire State minerals where the surface is National Forest land. - 3c *Acquire -,State minerals where surface is non-National Forest and where surface is to be acquired. 3d *No Action on State minerals where surface is non-National Forest if surface is not to be acquired. Support Improved Tourist and Recreation Services in the Private Sector. The White River National Forest I.i'~' discusses the economic and social settings of the Forest and how it influences the Counties of Eagle. Garfield, Pitkin, Rio Blanco. and Susmnit. Small portions of Gunnison. Mesa. Moffat, and Routt Counties are also included within Lhe Forest boundary,• but the activities in the fringe portions of these Counties in the White River art primarily oriented toward one of the five major Counties. For example, in the Marble area of Gunnison County people do their shopping and attend schools primaril}• in Garfield and Pitkin Counties. 7 The primary industries in the local economy are tourism, ranching. mining, and logging. Each of these resources has a potential to support use and faces different present and future demands, and interacts with other resources differently. In general. the geography, geology, topography.~and climate of the Forest limit its resources to low or moderate productivity. The exception is the Forest's recreation use, which has a high potential for development. The groatest demand on the Forest is for increased recreation opportunities. This primarily reflects the needs and desires of .the b~~~aing Colorado population and visitors outside the State. 1oderate demands are also e.~cpressed for other resources. The Sdhite River National Forest provides a large undeveloped land base for tourist recreation. The Forest Plan includes the human and community development goal to "provide the opportunity for economic growth of industries and c...L....u~ities dependent upon Forest outputs." Growth of tourism depends in part on improving the services and facilities the private sector supplies tourists. The Forest can assist in improvement of these services through disposal of National Forest System lands suitable for such use, when such. disposal serves the public interest. ` 5a *Dispose of National Forest System lands suitaais for development where the public interest is served. Frotect or Enhance Resource Programs A Tesour^.° p~gr~sn is e:ihanced wren acquisition o' non-National Forest System Lands acids significantly to the goods and services available from t.'~e National Forest. A resource program is protected t~:rough acquisition of ;ion-National Forest Systa:~ lands where conflict~.ng uses on private land coa~ld have c negative iy~act en tine output o:i goods and sez-,rices from existing Fe^e_aa ia~-~d. Several key parcels within the White River National Forest can significantly enhance•reseurce management programs if acquired. This is most evident .in wilderness, recreation, wildlife, and wetlands programs. In some situations, ..these programs can be enhanced by acquisition of access rights through a parcel. However, it is often more 'feasible to acquire the entire parcel than to acquire a right-of-way through it. Acquisition of parcels within the National Forest to protect resource management programs is frequently desirable. Subdivision of undeveloped parcels often has adverse effects on resources and management programs on surrounding National Forest System land. The umber program is affected when landowners object to harvesting practices in or near their viewing vistas. 8 The range program is affected when private land development creates an obstacle to livestock movement or when stock belonging on private land trespass on the Forest. Subdivision of a parcel located in a big game winter range or other key wildlife area often adversely affects several thousand acres of National Forest even though the subdivision may only be a few hundred acres in size. Providing vehicular access for development of non-National Forest System lands may cause more serious impacts to resource management programs than f actual development of the parcel. 5a *Acquire non-National Forest System lands which will add ' significantly to available National Forest goods and sezvices. 5b *Acquire non-National Forest System lands where conflicting s. uses would impact National Forest land or land management. 3 , 6c *No Action on non-National Forest System lands where private uses are not predicted to impact National Forest management. Management Efficiency r Acquisition of non-National Forest System lands and disposal of National Forest System lands cars result in significant savings of administrative t_'.me and expense. These savings are often a:,;aociated wits ok-rership ad~ustme_^.c cf iso_atz*i National Forest Syst•~.3 ar_dJor ' non-National Forest, Sys Lem lands. "Tile cost cf Suz'Ei?y, marking. and pasting of the beuncary can orte.^. excAeQ the value of the land to be sur•~eyed. The sane is true of providing access, especially to isolated Federal parcels, and witaout access these parcels are not usable by t:~se public. It is generally undesirable to acquire land for its tra3itional resource values where e_Ytensive iffiprove:nents are in glace; however. . - .-there may be significant e:cceptions such as use .of„ acquired --improvements for administrative pur^t,oses. The acquisition of a tract with improvements where the value of the improvements is ' significantly less than the value of the land itself, and the removal of the improvements following acquisition is feasible. may be appropriate. _ Acquisition of improved properties where the improvements could effectively be converted to increase public enjoyment of an area may also be desirable, suc:~: as ~zique historical or archaeological properties. 7a *Acquire non-National Forest System lands where manageaent efficiency will be enhanced. 7b *Acquire non-National Forest System lands with improvements suitable for National Forest purposes. - 7c *Dispose of isolated National Forest System Lands that do not contribute significantly to National Forest programs. 9 7d' "No Action on non-National Forest System lands with significant improvements unsuitable for National Forest purposes. - Wilderness There are seven designated wildernesses administered either wholly or partially by the White River National Forest {Please see No. E below for list.) The White River National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan identifies non-National Forest System Lands in . designated wilderness as a high acquisition priority. Subdivision or any kind of development of a parcel located within a wilderness has serious effects on wilderness values and the experience of wilderness users. Acquisition of these parcels will enhance the public's wilderness experiences. and assist in the administration of the surrounding national forest. . 8a ~'Acauire non-National Forest System Lands in designated - Wilderness on an opportunity basis as the Lands become available on the market, either through purchase with Lard & Water Conservation Funds if available, or thro~:gh land " ; exchange . _ 8b 'Acquire non-National Forest System Lands in designated iii? dernesJ on az opiscrt.azait-, basis as the lands become available on the mar~e9t, "bLt establishes as a higher priority, due to threat of development that wi31 effect wilderness values, over other non-National Forest System la..nds in cesignated Wilderness. E. Doc•~sments Authorizine Las:d anti Slater ~onse^:ation Fund Purcraase . Various documents including Recreation Composite Plans, Recovery Plans for threatened ar:d endangered species, 'and legislatively mandated managesaent plans for Congressionally classified areas such as wilderness, National Recreation Areas and Wild and Scenic Rivers authorize the use of Land and Water Conservation Fund appropriations to purchase non-National Forest Systea Lands for specific purposes. Seven wilderness areas are located an the ir7iite River National Forest. Five Recreatior. Management Composites covering portions of the White River National Forest have been approved. Tw-o Aecreatien Management Composites were in the pipeline to be approved when the Heritage Conservation and Recreation Services agency was disbanded in 1980. Listed below are the five approved and two unapproved Recreation Management Composites. The non-National Forest System lands identified for " acquisition in the approved composites still open. and in the two unapproved ones are incorporated into the Land Management Plan. 10 i 1 y 1. Closed Recreation Management Composites {closed because all the Wort-National Forest System lands have been acquired or they were not suitable for purchase at the time the composites were approved). a. Castle Creek Composite b. Keystone Ccxaposite c . Maroon Creek` C..t..,.~si to d. Minturn Composite i 2. Open Recreation Management Composites s a. Piney Composite - approved December 21, 1978 ` b. Lily Lake Recreation Composite (not approved) - c. Hunter-Independence Composite {not approved) Listed below are the wildernesses on the White River where L&WCF can be spent for non-Federal Iands: `s i 1. Collegiate Peaks Wilderness Area 2. Eagles Nest Wilderness Area - 3.. Flat Tops Wilderness Area 4. :Holy Cross kTilderness Area 5. Hunter-Fryingpan Wilderness Area G b. Maroon Bells-Snowmass Wilderness Area 7. Ragged Wilderness Area Z"nere are ocher non-Federal Iands that are not in current or prcgosea Recreation Cca:posites, but could be eligible for Land and Water Conservation Funds otherwise. This Landownership Adjustment Analysis will allow the forun to identify and authorize their purchase .using Land a_nd Watn_ C-onservation Funds. The data base part of this analysis identifies parcels included in a Recreation Composite and the recommended action relative to Land and Water Conservation Fund criteria. That recommended action may differ from the action recommended under this Landownership Adjustment Analysis stratery. A ,parcel may be ineligible for purchase under the out3oor recreation emphasis of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1Q67, but be desirable for acquisit=on for reasons other than recreation value.- In such cases both the Recreation C:,aposite and this analysis recommendations will stand. In some cases a parcel recommended for purchase in a Recreation Composite Plan was subsequently developed and is no longer desirable. Zn such cases the data base part of this analysis will recommend no action. F. Non-Conforming Proposals It is possible to receive proposals for landownership adjustments which do not conform to this analysis, but which initially appear to be in the public interest as well as comply with the goals and directions in the \ LrII'. Past proposals by Mid-Continent Resources and AMAX Mining Company are examples of this kind of proposal. Proposals not conforming with this - analysis may be processed only after amendment of this analysis. These amendments shall be suppor~eQ by an analysis of the proposal and hay-~e written agreement by the Regional Forester. 11 G. Specific Stud~v Areas i Areas encompassing the Roaring Fork Slalley between the Towns of Aspen and Glenwood Springs. Town of Vail, and Town oP Breckenridge are identified as needing more specific study before lands can be classified for acquisition. disposal. and retention. Significant development of non-National Forest System lands within these areas has occurred in past years, and National Forest System lands are subject to urban type demands i and uses. The demand for urban type uses and associated encroachment is expectzd to increase in the future with an anticipated result that a significant amount of National Forest will lose its character. Zt is also expected that retention of some Naticnal Forest will be in the public interest. More specific study with appropriate scoping and public involvement is necessary to make ciassificaticn decisions in these areas. Upon completion of these studies, this schedule will be amended to include classifications for Iands within the study areas. F., H_ Small Tract Act Proposals by Aoviications ' The Small Tract Act authorizes small disposals and acquisitions proposed by applications. Although many ownership adjustments authorized by this Act may coincidentally confora to the classifications in this schedule, it is impractical. to anticipate most Small Tract Act applications and provide for t~:em through the classification process. Therefore, Small Tracts Act transactions proposed by application are not subject to this schedule, and analysis of such proposals shall comply witP: direction in 36 CFR 254.30. i. P^o?e_te;i Avera~~: r~nua.l UutL=_ts Projected average annual outputs for the La.*~ds Activities are shc~.-n in Table IIT_-~ of the Land .and P.esource ~?.anagement Plan for the WE:ite River National €s~rest, Outputs":,r the Lands P.ctivities werA based on a ccnse~~ative estimate based on past budgets and priorities and persons available to do the job. "-The table shown belcw was revised to show a more ` reai~~tic estimate based on c~,irrent information. As amended, Table III-1 is shown below: . - - - TABLE III-1, Amended Projected Average Annual Outputs - Lands Activity ~ Unites 19$1 1981- 1986- 1991- 2001- 2021-. i98, 1890 •2oeo 202a 2020 Purchase & Acquisitions Acres 784 150 150 200 300 300 Exchange Acres 0 150 150 200 300 300 Right-of-Way Acquisition Cases 1 4 4 6 6 6 1' J. Summary Sane factors which influence the desirability of a particular ownership adjustment are outside the scope of this analysis: Managerial decisions to pursue a particular adjustment ~at a given point in time will be influenced by considerations such as the available funds, the available staff, and the opportunity, to achieve economies of scale. Non-National r Forest System lands classified for acquisition and National Forest System lands classified for disposal in this analysis represent the long-range -goal for the landownership adjustment program on the White River National Forest. ,Individual purchase, donation, sale, and exchange projects conforming to ,the classifications shown in t'he data base section will contribute toward achievement of this long-range goal. t . - - ~ ~ ~ 13 i T0: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 19, 1990 RE: Summary of Planning Commission action on a request for a major amendment to Special Development District No. 7 (The Marriott Mark Resort) in order to add 56 timeshare units and 10 employee housing units at 714 West Lionshead Circle, Lot 4, 7, C, D, Block 1, Vail- Lionshead 3rd Filing. On June 11, 1990, the Planning and Environmental Commission recommended approval of this request with conditions. The motion was made by Kathy Warren and seconded by Jim Shearer. The vote was 4-1 for approval of the motion. Connie Knight voted against the motion. Connie Knight voted against the request due to her concern about the overages in GRFA (70,077 sq. ft. over HDMF allowed GRFA), units per acre (22 units above allowable under HDMF), and the number of units (115 units over HDMF allowable). Below is a list of the Planning and Environmental Commission's changes to the staff conditions for the SDD. The PEC's changes have been indicated in bold type. 1. Deed restrictions limiting the use of the ten employee units to long term employee rentals in perpetuity shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit. The units shall meet the conditions for employee housing outlined in Section 18.13.080 B10 a-d of the Zoning Code except that the units are restricted permanently. 2. A detailed drainage plan and other design issues relevant to public works concerns shall be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. Pollution control devises shall be incorporated into the parking garage per the EIR. The creek shall be protected from any construction impacts by the use of an erosion control plan. 3. Working in coordination with the Town staff, the applicant shall fund and conduct a comprehensive traffic study of the West Lionshead Circle area suitable for determining the Marriott Mark's contribution to the cost of constructing any necessary turn lanes on the S. Frontage Road to West Lionshead Circle. Preliminary design and cost estimates for the turn lanes shall be provided. At a minimum, the applicant shall be responsible for contributing this agreed upon amount toward the cost of this improvement. 1 4. A preliminary design and funding strategy for constructing any turn lanes shall be established prior to the issuance of any building permit, and the turn lanes shall be completed prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy unless deferred by the Community Development Department and Public Works. The funding and construction plan must be approved by the Town of Vail engineer, Community Development Department, Town Council, and Colorado Division of Highways before the building permit is released for the expansion. The applicant shall be required to submit a CDOH access permit application on behalf of the Town for the West Lionshead Circle/South Frontage Road improvement. A signed CDOH permit must be obtained by the applicant before a building permit is released unless deferred by the Community Development Department and Public Works. 5. All aspects related to the timesharing of this facility shall comply with all applicable town ordinances that regulate timeshare activity. Timeshare is only approved for the proposed 56 unit building. The 10 employee units shall not be allowed to convert to timeshare. 6. (Any landscaping) Detailed landscaping similar to the Westin Hotel landscaping along the recreation path proposed on Town of Vail land shall be submitted by the applicant to the Town of Vail landscape architect and engineer for approval before the proposal is submitted to the Design Review Board. All landscaping proposed on Town of Vail land shall be maintained by the applicant. 7. The applicant shall agree to regrade, revegetate, and repair the drainage on the bank adjacent to the bike path along the southern property line of the Marriott Mark by August 1, 1990. A letter of credit shall be submitted to the Town of Vail before second reading of the SDD ordinance. The landscape and drainage work shall be submitted to the Town Engineer and Landscape Architect for approval before the proposal is presented to Design .Review Board. 8. A temporary certificate of occupancy shall not be released for the expansion until all site improvements have been completed such as sidewalks, landscaping, drainage etc. If the weather prohibits the completion of the site improvements, the applicant shall be required to provide a letter of credit to cover 125$ of the construction costs for these improvements. The construction estimate shall be reviewed by the Town Engineer and Landscape Architect. The agreement stipulating how the site improvements will be completed and letter of credit shall be submitted by the applicant to the Town Attorney for approval before a temporary certificate of occupancy may be released. 2 9. Before a temporary certificate of occupancy is released, the applicant shall plat a public easement to insure public access through the site on the proposed sidewalk improvements. The applicant shall submit the easement agreement to the Town Attorney and Town Council for approval before recording the easement. 10. Marketing language for the sale of the timeshare units shall be submitted by the Town Attorney by the applicant for approval. This wording governing the marketing of the timesharing shall be added to the SDD Ordinance. 11. No amplification of sound on the greenspace created by the removal of the two tennis courts shall be allowed for conventions or other special events. The following items were staff recommendations to the Design Review Board if the project proceeded to that review level. The Planning Commission changed these recommendations to conditions of approval. 12. Landscaping beyond sod shall be provided on the landscape terraces over the parking. 13. Additional landscaping shall be provided along the west elevation of the parking structure. A mix of deciduous, evergreens, and shrubs shall be provide8 of a size adequate to screen the structure as much as possible. The applicant is directed to work with Vail Associates on the landscaping buffer. 14. AlI loading areas shall have additional landscaping and screen fencing. 15. The amendments to Special Development District No. 7 are approved conditional upon Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council giving approval to the underlying zone district request. In addition, the staff and PEC recommend that the Design Review Board address the following design issues if the project proceeds to DRB: ` Pedestrian access should be provided from the West Day Lot through the lowest level of the parking structure. The entry stair on the north elevation should be decreased in width to allow more landscaping. ` The north elevation adjacent to the parking structure stair should have more windows. Landscaping should be planted along the stairway and building. These conditions of approval have been incorporated into the Special Development District Ordinance. The recommendations to the Design Review Board will be passed onto the DRB by the Community Development Department. 3 TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June il, 1990 RE: A request for a major amendment to Special Development District No. 7 (The Marriott Mark Resort) in order to add 56 timeshare units and 10 employee housing units at 714 West Lionshead Circle, Lot 4, 7, C, D, Block 1, Vail-Lionshead 3rd Filing. Applicant: MK Corporation, Kaiser Marcus, and the Marriott Corporation I. INTRODUCTION A. Proposal Below is a summary of the proposal: 56 timeshare units each having 1200 sq, ft. for a total of 67,200 sq. ft. of GRFA. One week timeshare intervals are proposed for each unit (50 intervals/unit/year). All timeshare units shall meet Town of Vail Ordinances governing timeshare. 10 employee units at 400 sq. ft. each for a total of 4000 sq. ft. of GRFA. Units are permanently restricted as employee housing. ` Replace two of the western most tennis courts with landscaping to create an open green space area. ` Landscape improvements around the pool area. Pedestrian path connections for general public use throughout the project. Pocket Park for public seating adjacent to the Lionshead Recreational Path located on Town of Vail property. 127 additional parking spaces which provides 2 spaces per dwelling unit and 1.5 spaces per employee unit per Town of Vail code. 5 spaces are valet. Landscaped terraces are proposed to cover the parking. Regrading and revegetation of hillside adjacent to Town of Vail Recreation Path along Gore Creek. 1 " No wood-burning fireplaces are proposed for any of the units. This addition would be located on the west end of the property and built primarily over the existing parking structure. Since the Planning and Environmental Commission review of the proposal on April 9, 1990, the following changes have been made: " Decreased timeshare units from 57 to 56 units. " Decreased GRFA from 74,205 sq. ft. to 71,200 sq. ft. for a net decrease of 3,005 sq. ft. " Decreased height from 58 to 48 feet. " Increase in employee units from 8 to 10 units. " Commitment to participate on a fair-share basis in the provision of a west bound turn-lane on the South Frontage Road. " Commitment to repaint the entire existing Marriott Complex to compliment the new building. " Significant changes to the massing and architectural style of the expansion. " Completely enclosed parking area on west elevation. These changes were made in response to comments from the Planning and Environmental Commission as well as adjacent property owners. As outlined in the SDD section of the zoning code, the following nine criteria are to be used in evaluating the merit of the Special Development District. It is the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following standards or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved. 2 Development Statistics Site Area: 5.17 Acres 225,205 sq. ft. Existing Proposed pevelopment Development Total Accommodation Units 248 0 248 Dwelling Units 53 56 109 Employee Units 0 l0 10 GRFA 134,000 71,200 205,200 Meeting Room (sq.ft.) 12,000 0 12,000 Ancillary Retail (sq.ft.) 1,500 0 1,500 Restaurant/Bar (seats) 426 0 426 Parking Spaces 273 127 400 II. SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT CRITERIA A. Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk. building height, buffer zones. identity. character. visual integrity and orientation. The Planning and Environmental Commission, staff, and adjacent property owners had concerns about the height and mass of the building. In response to these comments, the applicant has decreased the height from 58 to 48 feet. The mass of the project has been centered in the existing parking structure footprint. As with the original proposal, the mass and height of the proposed expansion have been designed to "step- down" from the existing 7-story hotel to a three to four story element along Gore Creek. 3 In respect to setbacks, on the south side "Gore Creek side", the new building maintains a 20 ft. to 43 ft. setback. On the side of the project adjacent to the Vail Associates parking lot, the expansion of the parking structure would continue an existing 5 foot setback. The actual timeshare building on the southwest corner of the property maintains a minimum 20 foot setback. The north side or west Lionshead Circle side of the project maintains a 35' setback. View studies have been completed from a variety of vantage points. The addition conceals the existing parking structure and eliminates any open parking on the site except for a few spaces on the north elevation. The addition of any new structure will have some degree of impact on views. There are no major negative impacts on views from public spaces. When walking along west Lionshead Circle in front of the project, instead of seeing exposed cars, one will view a three story building. The view analysis indicates that the vantage points from the interstate and the Frontage Road are not affected greatly.. The view of the Mountain and ski slopes is substantially maintained. There are some impacts on views from the Antlers (looking towards Red Sandstone Mountain), the residential area along Forest Road (looking toward Potato Patch), and the Vail Spa (looking toward Vail Mountain). From these vantage points, the proposed building is blocking either a view of the existing parking structure or other commercial or residential development. Obstruction of views of undeveloped mountain sides does occur in some areas. By terracing the building down to Gore Creek to relate to the lower density devel~r~ent on Forest Road and also the public recreational path and stream corridor, the applicant has responded to view concerns raised by the public at previous reviews by lowering the height of the building by 10 feet. The architecture of the proposed addition does not mimic the existing hotel. Instead, the applicant proposes to relate the two buildings by the use of complimentary colors. The applicant has agreed to repaint the entire existing Marriott project in a manner which will compliment the proposed expansion. 4 B. Uses. acfi.i,vi.ty end, density which provide a compatible, efficient ~,nd; wc,~rkable .relationship with surrounding uses and. activity. Density The residential uses proposed for this facility are consistent and compatible with surrounding development. Located in the Lionshead area, overnight lodging accommodations are appropriate for this site. One of Vail's major mixed use activity centers, Lionshead is centrally located and well served by the Towns transit system. At the present time, the site is developed to approximately 34.2 units per acre. The development proposed with this amendment would increase the site density to approximately 47 units per acre (this includes the 10 employee units). This level of development exceeds that permitted by the Town's highest density residential district (PA or HDMF, 25 dwelling units per acre). However, 47 units per acre is not unprecedented. The Lionsquare Lodge is developed at 55 units per acre, the Antlers is at 60.5 units per acre, the Doubletree is 51 units per acre, and Vantage Point is at 71 units per acre. The Vail Spa directly to the north is at 27.2 units per acre and the Enzian is at 31.4 units per acre. However, looking only at units/acre misses many important planning issues. The relationship of the building to the site and surrounding neighborhood is extremely important. Staff believes this project relates positively to the specific site and surrounding neighbors. The density proposed for this site is much greater than the low density development on the south side of Gore Creek. Gore Creek provides a natural buffer between the low density residential development along Forest Road and the entire Lionshead area. This open space provides an adequate buffer between these two residential areas. Gore Creek also serves as a natural barrier defining the physical limits of the Lionshead core area. Please see the attached chart indicating the existing development on adjacent properties attached to the zoning memo. Timeshare The proposed timeshare use is acceptable to staff. Timeshare would only be allowed in the new west building through this amendment. Any additional timeshare would require that the applicant amend the SDD. This use is encouraged by the Land Use Plan. The applicant has agreed to comply with all conditions of 5 Town of Vail Ordinances governing timeshare. Timeshare _ projects generally retain a higher year round occupancy than any other tourist accommodation use and this use fits well within Vail's policies to level off seasonalities of guest visits. Emnlovee Housing Originally, the staff requested seven employee housing units. The applicant is proposing 10 units or 17.8$. The Housing Task Force is discussing a possibility of a 20$ or greater housing requirement for SDDs. The Marriott proposal has been evolving at the same time that the Housing Task Force has been refining its policy recommendations. The staff opinion is that the applicant is providing 10 high quality employee units, permanently restricted. We believe the applicant has taken the staff's original request of seven units (March 1990) and increased the amount to 10 units which is appropriate for this SDD. The 56 timeshare units will generate an employee demand of 5 to 7 additional employees. This is due in part to the fact that the existing Marriott will provide most of the services for the timeshare project. The employee demand generated by the expansion is met by the 10 units. C. Compliance with narking and loading requirements as outlined in Chanter 18.52. Assuming 1.5 parking space for each of the 10 employee units, and two parking spaces for each of the 56 timeshare units (as per zoning requirements), the new parking requirement for the proposed addition is 127 spaces. The expansion of the existing structure will satisfy this requirement. To the best of staff's knowledge, the parking required through previous approvals has all been constructed (273 spaces). As required by existing SDD No. 7 there are to be 273 parking spaces on the Marriott property. As with any property, the management and control of parking spaces is critical to their efficient use. At the present time, the westerly parking structure provides a very inviting environment for illegal parking. Locating a building over the structure should provide greater control and increase efficiency in how these spaces are utilized. Two loading areas presently exist. Staff Will also require that the screening of loading areas be addressed by the applicant at DRB. In particular, the loading area on West Lionshead Circle to the east of the main hotel's entry must be landscaped and fenced. 6 D. Conformitv with applicable elements of the Vail omi?rPh,Pn,Sye Pl,~,tl. Town uolicies and Urban Design Plans. The Vail Land Use Plan is the most relevant document to be used in evaluating this development proposal. The project is consistent with a number of goals outlined in this document: 1.1 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. 1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 2.1 The community should emphasize its role as a destination resort while accommodating the visitors. 4.2 Increased density in the Core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character is preserved through implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan. 5.1 Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas and is appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. 5.2 Quality timeshare units should be accommodated to keep occupancy rates up. 5.4 Residential growth should keep pace with the market place demands for a full range of housing types. 5.5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and upgraded. Additional employee housing needs should be accommodated at various sites throughout the community. 7 These goal statements provide the fundamental framework . to be used in determining whether or not additional density is appropriate on this site. As reflected in the above goals, this proposal is very consistent with the direction provided in the Land Use Plan. *Please note that the Lionshead Urban Design Guide Plan does not apply to this property. E. Identification and m.~;t.gation of natural and/or Geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development ~l,.i:st,rct 1:$ proposed. This property is not affected by any natural and/or geologic hazards that have been identified within the Town of Vail. F. Site plan. building design and location and open space p,rovi_si.~x~s designed, t~ produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. The site planning for the addition has changed in that a major portion of the addition has been centered over the existing parking structure. The location of the mass and bulk of the building in this area has allowed the designer to reduce the height by ten feet. It has also helped to reduce the building mass along Gore Creek. A portion of the new development is proposed on what is now undeveloped open space directly south of the existing parking structure. Several aspens will be removed to allow for the building. However, this open space is generally not accessible and not an aesthetically pleasing area. A major element of the proposal's landscape plan is the elimination of two tennis courts. Converting this area to functional green space will more than off-set the loss of open space south of the parking structure. A major concern of the staff is the physical relationship of the building addition to Gore Creek and the recreational trail. Originally proposed at 5 stories and within 5 feet of the property line, the addition would have seriously impacted the enjoyment of this trail. The building is now 20-40 feet from the rear property line. The building is approximately 50- 60 feet from the. recreational trail. The south facade is three and four stories. The location and mass of the building now provides for a comfortable relationship with the recreational trail. 8 G. A circulation svstPm desioned for both vehicles and pedestrians ad~ressnQ on and off-site traffic circulation. Improvements to the pedestrian circulation system include a path connecting to the Gore Creek bike path, a walkway through the proposed development connecting the West Day Lot with other parts of Lionshead, and the development of a sidewalk along West Lionshead Circle connecting to an existing sidewalk on the South Frontage Road. This improvement is located off the applicants property. These improvements are designed to serve not only the proposed development, but also to improve pedestrian circulation throughout this area of Lionshead. Staff would suggest that the applicant include a pedestrian connection between the west day lot and the lower level of the parking structure to allow for easier pedestrian access. We would also ask that the owner provide a public pedestrian easement through the property. Internal vehicular circulation will also be improved by redesigning the existing parking structure. Currently each level is accessed individually, resulting in difficult circulation patterns. The proposed modifications to the structure will introduce internal circulation between the three levels of the structure. An assessment of the potential traffic impacts of this development has been included as a part of the environmental impact report. A March 9 addendum to this report indicates that a westbound left turn lane off of the S. Frontage Road onto West Lionshead Circle is needed today based on existing traffic volume. Currently, 35 vehicles make this left turn during the p.m. peak hour. This development would increase this situation by 20~, to 42 vehicles during the p.m. peak hour. Based on the State of Colorado Access Code, a left turn lane is warranted with more than 30 turns per hour. Given the 20g increase in this left turn activity, there is no question that this improvement dust be completed before the proposed expansion receives a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. However, the Marriott addition is not the sole contributor to the need for the left turn lane. Town buses, the West Day Lot and a number of other properties are creating the need for this lane. Because the Marriott is the "last guy in the door" does not justify requiring them to 9 fund and construct 100$ of this improvement. The Marriott is responsible for, and is willing to contribute to, their fair share of the expense in constructing this improvement. There are a number of alternatives for how this improvement can be implemented. The main issue with each of these alternatives is with regard to the timing of the improvement. The Town will be completing a comprehensive transportation plan for the Frontage Road this fall. It is very likely that this improvement will be identified by this plan. However, the Town is in no position to commit to funding or a specific schedule would assure this improvement is in place prior to completion of the Marriott facility. This essentially puts the burden on the applicant to develop some mechanism for assuring that the turn lane is completed when the addition is finished. The simplest way to accomplish this is for the Marriott to fund 100$ of this improvement. However, this is not an equitable solution. Other alternatives involving the participation of the Marriott, surrounding property owners, and the Town are possible, and should be explored to arrive at an equitable solution. H. Functional and aesthetic landsca~ina and oven space in order to optimize and Dreserve natural features. recreation. views and functions., There are a number of significant improvements proposed to landscaping and open space throughout this site. Foremost among these is the conversion of two tennis courts to green space areas, a pocket park/pull off area to be developed along the Gore Creek trail, landscape improvements to the berm around the proposed addition, and landscape improvements along Lionshead Circle throughout the length of the property. These changes will provide not only functional open space, but also aesthetic improvements to the site. The pocket park is a positive addition. Staff would like to see a picnic area added to the pocket park and more landscaping. The developer has also agreed with the staff's requirement that the stream bank be " regraded and revegetated this summer. The drainage walls and pipes will also be cleaned and integrated into the slope. 10 - In addition, more landscaping is required along the west elevation of the structure. A mix of aspens, shrubs and evergreens is appropriate. Staff acknowledges that the space for planting is only 5 feet. However, more landscaping and a variety of materials are necessary. I. Phasing elan or subdivision elan that will maintain a work~,hl,e. fun,Ct.i~n,al ~nr~, e~~i-ca.ent relationshiti throughout the ~;eval,gP~ent ~f the special development district. As proposed, the addition and all related site improvements are to be completed in one construction phase. V. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT The Environmental Impact Report prepared by Peter Jamar Associates (Revised May 10, 1990) summarizes any impacts and proposed mitigation on p. 32 of the report. The primary impact areas relate to views, traffic, and the question of additional density. These issues are reviewed by staff in Sections IIA-Views, IZC & G-Traffic, and IIB-Density. All mitigation measures proposed in the EIR shall be incorporated into the SDD. VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION In evaluating this proposal, one must first consider the fundamental question of whether or not additional development should be considered in Lionshead on this site. Based on the goals of the Vail Land Use Plan, it is appropriate to consider a request of this nature. A number of goal statements support the concept of timeshare units and infill development in the Core areas. The task at hand then, is to evaluate whether the design of this project is sensitive to all applicable criteria outlined in the SDD section of the zoning code. A review of the SDD criteria indicates that this project is consistent with the purpose and intent of this zone district. A number of issues have been raised by the PEC and staff during the review of this project. In each case these concerns have been addressed by the applicant in a manner that is consistent with the Design Criteria. Parking, circulation, height and massing, view impacts, employee housing, and landscaping/open space have all been addressed by this development plan. 11 Staff must emphasis the uniqueness of the Marriott Mark situation. There are very few sites within the Town of Vail that have the capability to add this type of density. Staff believes that there are unique characteristics related to this site that make it possible to add a proposal of this scale. Unique factors include: 1. The existing parking structure is in a location that would actually be improved in appearance with this expansion. The site is very well suited for infill development. 2. The Lionshead area (excluding the Forest Road neighborhood) has similar lodging uses, mass, bulk and units per acre which are compatible with this type of addition. 3. The applicant has maintained a 48 foot height which does not exceed the limits of the Town's highest density zone district (HDMF or Public Accommodation zoning). 4. The proposed use is in keeping with the Land Use plan goals calling for additional timeshare units and other Land Use policies as listed in Section IID of the memo. 5. The Environmental Impact Report and staff review have not identified any major negative impacts with the project. Any impacts that have been determined by the environmental impact report have been mitigated in a reasonable fashion. 6. The project meets parking, setbacks (except on the east side by the parking structure), site coverage and landscaping requirements. In fact, the minimum requirements for site coverage and landscaping are substantially exceeded by the project. 7. The site has good vehicular and pedestrian access. Vehicular traffic will use the Frontage Road. It is not necessary to access the site through a low density residential neighborhood. 8. The site is located near all of the services and a primary ski base area, Lionshead. It is very appropriate to allow for infill development in an area that already has a wide variety of guest services. Staff feels it is critical to identify the uniqueness of this special Development District to ensure that density increases are not deemed automatically acceptable by using the Special Development district process. 12 It is also important to identify the "public benefit" which results from this project. Below is a list of the benefits which are derived from this proposal: The substantial upgrade of landscaping on the Marriott property as well as area adjacent to the recreational path along Gore Creek owned by the town of Vail. ` The provision of public walkways along west Lionshead Circle through the center of the Marriott site from the West Day Lot. ` The entire repainting of the existing Marriott Project to compliment the proposed expansion. Enclosure of the existing surface parking and the addition of landscaped and open area above the parking. This is achieved by the landscaped terraces over the parking area as well as the elimination of two tennis courts. ` The provision of 10 employee housing units which have been fully counted in the density and GRFA for the project. ` The provision of additional high quality timeshare units which diversify the existing unit type and mix and provide Vail with additional destination guests year-round per the Land Use plan goal 5.2. Staff recommends approval of this proposed amendment with the stipulation that the developers/owner meet the following conditions: 1. Deed restrictions limiting the use of the ten employee units to long term employee rentals in perpetuity shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit. The units shall meet the conditions for employee housing outlined in Section 18.13.080 B10 a-d of the Zoning Code except that the units are restricted permanently. 2. A detailed drainage plan and other design issues relevant to public works concerns shall be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. Pollution control devises shall be incorporated into the parking garage per the EIR. The creek shall be protected from any construction impacts by the use of an erosion control plan. 13 3. Working in coordination with the Town staff, the applicant shall fund and conduct a comprehensive traffic study of the West Lionshead Circle area suitable for determining the Marriott Mark's contribution to the cost of constructing any necessary turn lanes on the S. Frontage Road to West Lionshead Circle. Preliminary design and cost estimates for the turn lanes shall be provided. At a minimum, the applicant shall be responsible for contributing this agreed upon amount toward the cost of this improvement. 4. A preliminary design and funding strategy for constructing any turn lanes shall be established prior to the issuance of any building permit, and the turn lanes shall be completed prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. The funding and construction plan must be approved by the Town of Vail engineer, Community Development Department, Town Council, and Colorado Division of Highways before the building permit is released for the expansion. The applicant shall be required to submit a CDOH access permit application on behalf of the Town for the West Lionshead Circle/South Frontage Road improvement. A signed CDOH penait must be obtained by the applicant before a building permit is released. 5. All aspects related to the timesharing of this facility shall comply with all applicable town ordinances that regulate timeshare activity. Timeshare is only approved for the proposed 56 unit building. The 10 employee units shall not be allowed to convert to timeshare. 6. Any landscaping proposed on Town of Vail land shall be submitted by the applicant to the Town of Vail landscape architect and engineer for approval before the proposal is submitted to the Design Review Board. All landscaping proposed on Town of Vail land shall be maintained by the applicant. 7. The applicant shall agree to regrade, revegetate, and repair the drainage on the bank adjacent to the bike path along the southern property line of the Marriott Mark by August 1, 1990. A letter of credit shall be submitted to the Town of Vail before second reading of the SDD ordinance. The landscape and drainage work shall be submitted to the Town Engineer and Landscape Architect for approval before the proposal is presented to Design Review Board. 14 8. A temporary certificate of occupancy shall not be released for the expansion until all site improvements have been completed such as sidewalks, landscaping, drainage etc. If the weather prohibits the completion of the site improvements, the applicant shall be required to provide a letter of credit to cover 125$ of the construction costs for these improvements. The construction estimate shall be reviewed by the Town Engineer and Landscape Architect. The agreement stipulating how the site improvements will be completed and letter of credit shall be submitted by the applicant to the Town Attorney for approval before a temporary certificate of occupancy may be released. 9. Before a temporary certificate of occupancy is released, the applicant shall plat a public easement to insure public access through the site on the proposed sidewalk improvements. The applicant shall submit the easement agreement to the Town Attorney and Town Council for approval before recording the easement. 10. In addition, the staff recommends that the DEsign Review Board address the following design issues if the project proceeds to DRB: " Additional landscaping shall be addressed along the west elevation of the parking structure. A mix of deciduous, evergreens, and shrubs should be provided of a size adequate to screen the structure as much as possible. " Landscaping beyond sod should be provided on the landscape terraces over the parking if possible structurally. " All loading areas should have additional landscaping and screen fencing if necessary. The loading area to the south of the Enzian or L'Ostello should be fenced. " Pedestrian access should be provided from the West Day Lot through the lowest level of the parking structure . " The entry stair on the north elevation should be decreased in width to allow more landscaping. " The north elevation adjacent to the parking structure stair should have more windows. Landscaping should be planted along the stairway and building. 15 ' CHART 1 - COMPARISON SETka~:.~ PEC 4/9/90 AND 6/11/90 PROPOSALS ~l EXISTING PEC 4/9/90 PEC 6/11/90 TOTAL KITH TOTAL aisi. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL PROPOSAL 4/9/90 PROPOSAL 6/11/90 PROPOSAL DIrrG~ENCI ACCOMMODATION UNITS 248 0 0 248 248 0 DWELLING UNITS 53 57 56 110 109 (1) EMPLOYEE UNITS 0 8 10 8 10 2 GRFA* 134000 74205 71200 208205 205200 (3005) ~~r.~.ING ROOM (SQ. PT.) 12000 0 0 12000 12000 0 RETAIL (SQ. FT.) 1500 0 O 1500 1500 0 RESTAURANT BAR (SEATS) 426 0 0 426 426 0 PARKING SPACES 273 122 127 395 400 5 SITE COVERAGE 83997 (37~) 16773 16773 100770 100770 OR 45= 10 FT) HEIGHT 85 F'P 58 FT 48 FT ( 7 STORIES SETBACKS PER DEV PLAN Sv~Yis: 20~-43~ Sv~W.i.: 20~-43~ EAST: N/A EAST: N/A WEST: 5~ PARKING WEST: 5' PARKING 20~ BUILDING 20~ BUILDING NORTH: 35'MINIMUM NORTH: 35~MINIMUM +?GRFA INCLUDES EMPLOYEB UNITS ` TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 11, 1990 RE: A request to apply the underlying zone district of High Density Multi-Family to Special Development District No. 7 (Marriott Mark Resort) 714 West Lionshead Circle, Lots 4, 7, C, D, Block 1, Vail-Lionshead 3rd Filing. Applicant: MK Corporation, Mark Lodge Condominiums, and the Mark Resort and Tennis Club. I. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST At the April 23, 1990 Planning and Environmental work session on proposed amendments to SDD No. 7, the PEC recommended that an underlying zone district be clearly identified for this Special Development District. The Planning and Environmental Commission made this request of the applicant in order to clarify the underlying zone district. An underlying zone district is defined in Section 18.40.020, Definitions D as: "Underlying Zone District" shall mean the zone district existing on the property, or imposed on the property at the time that the Special Development District is approved. As stated in previous memos, there is some question as to what the underlying zoning was when this Special Development District was approved in 1977. (Please see Section II for background on underlying zone district staff research.) A second reason for applying HDMF zoning to the entire Special Development District is to allow for the timeshare use. The HDMF zone district is the only zone district within the Town of Vail that allows timeshare as a conditional use. In Section 18.40.070 Uses of the Special Development District it states: Determination of permitted, conditional and accessory uses shall be made by the Planning and Environmental commission and Town Council as a part of the formal review of the proposed development plan. Unless further restricted by the review of the proposed Special Development District, permitted, conditional and accessory uses shall be limited to those permitted, conditional and accessory uses in a properties underlvina zone district... 1 In summary, the purpose of applying HDMF zoning to the property is to clarify the underlying zone district for the entire SDD, allow for the timeshare use specifically for the 56 unit timeshare expansion, and to also provide a guide for any future proposals that may be submitted to the Town. II. BACKGROUND RFSFARCCI~ QN THE UNDFRI,,YTNG ZONE DISTRICT FOR SDD NO. 7 The staff has pieced together a sequence of events relating to the Marriott Mark Resort property. We must emphasize that this information was taken from the Community Development Department file and is not conclusive. Below is a summary of this research. 1973 The Mark Resort constructed 74 hotel rooms and 14 condominium apartments. This original development (east building) is referenced as having HDMF zoning in an Environmental Impact Report prepared by John Ryan dated January, 1977 (pg 36). A building permit dated May 31, 1973 also references HDMF zoning. 1977 Ordinance 3 of 1977 rezones Lots 4 and 7 and a portion of Lots 5 and 6, Block 2 Vail Lionshead 3rd Filing from Public Accommodation and HDMF to Special Development District to allow the development of the site "in a more innovative manner". However, in reviewing planner staff zone checks in the file, Lot 4 is referenced as having HDMF, Lot 5 - HDMF, and Lot 7 -Public Accommodation zoning. Lots 4 and 5 relate to the western portion of the Mark property while Lot 7 appears to be the original lot for the very first building on the eastern portion of the site. 1977 A resubdivision of Lot 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8, Block 1, Lionshead 3rd Filing was approved by the Planning and Environmental Commission. Please note that the block references are different for the SDD Ordinance and for the resubdivision 1978 A building permit was released for the Mark Resort and Tennis club which has been referred to as Phase I (second building to the west). 1981 Ordinance No. 25 of 1981 approved a specific development plan for Phase II which allowed for the construction of the convention center, parking structure, two additional tennis courts and allowed 8 fireplaces in 8 dwelling units. 2 L 1981 The building permit for the development approved Ordinance No. 25, commonly called Phase II was released. 1985 The request for timesharing for Phase II was denied by the Planning Staff. This request proceeded to Planning Commission and the applicant tabled indefinitely. From this research, it appears that the Special Development District actually had two underlying zone districts. The eastern Lot 7 had been Public Accommodation Zoning. However, this conflicts with John Ryan's reference to Lot 7 as being zoned HDMF in his EIR. Lots 4 and 5 which are to the west of Lot 7 appear to have been zoned HDMF. Staff also contacted John Ryan, who prepared the original EIR in 1977, Jim Lamont who was on the Planning Staff when the Marriott Mark was reviewed in 2977, Danny Corcoran, surveyor of Eagle Valley Engineering and Tom Briner, architect for the Marriott Resort and Tennis Club in order to find out any additional zoning information. In discussing the issue with Jim Lamont, he stated that everything before 1974 had zoning. He also agreed that the site probably had either Public Accommodation or HDMF zoning originally or a combination thereof. The other persons contacted where unable to provide the staff with any definitive underlying zoning information. Suffice it to say, that the property appears to have been zoned HDMF. In the zoning analysis section of the memo, staff has compared the proposed SDD to HDMF and Public Accommodation zoning. The major difference is that Public Accommodation zoning allows for a GRFA maximum of 180,164 sq. ft. while HDMF allows for 135,123 sq. ft. In respect to parking, HDMF states that 75$ of the parking must be in a building or screened while PA zoning states that 75$ of the required parking shall be located within the main building and hidden from public view. In all other respects, the two zone districts have basically the same requirements. III. ZONING COMPARISON The Special Development District has been compared to HDMF and Public Accommodation zoning in Chart 2. Because the request is for underlying HDMF zoning, the staff comments will relate specifically to this zone district.' (Please note all calculations include the 10 employee housing units). 3 The existing Special Development District and the proposed SDD both exceed the HDMF maximum allowance of 25 units per acre. The existing SDD has 34.2 units and the proposed SDD would have 47 units per acre. In respect to GRFA, HDMF allows 135,123 sq. ft. The existing SDD is slightly under this amount while the proposed SDD exceeds the HDMF GRFA limit by 70,077 sq. ft. The HDMF zone district allows 128 dwelling units for the site. The existing SDD has 177 dwelling units and the proposed SDD would have 243 dwelling units. The height maximum for HDMF is 48 feet. The existing SDD has a height of approximately 85 feet while the new SDD expansion area will not exceed 48 feet. In respect to site coverage and landscaping, both the existing SDD and the proposed SDD exceed the minimum requirements of HDMF. The site coverage maximum is 55$ for HDMF. The proposed SDD has 45~ site coverage. The landscaping minimum is 30~ of the site. With the existing SDD 63~ of the site is landscaped and with the proposed SDD 55$ remains as landscaping. In respect to setbacks, 20 feet is required on all sides of the property. The built SDD encroaches into the setbacks in some areas. The new proposal on the west side of the property does not encroach into the 20 foot setback except on the western property line where the existing parking structure (setback of 5') is extended to the south. All parking requirements are met per the Town of Vail parking code with the allowance of 5 valet parking spaces. Each timeshare unit has 2 spaces and each employee unit has 1.5 spaces. IV. EVALUATION OF UNDERLYING HDMF ZONE DISTRICT FOR SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 7 A. Suitability of the ~ronosed zoning. The existing zoning is Special Development District for this site. A specific underlying zone district is not identified in the SDD ordinance. For the purpose of clarity, it is appropriate to apply underlying HDMF zoning to the entire SDD. The intent is to not tamper in any way with the existing development on the site but to provide an underlying zone district that can be used as a guide for the review of any future proposals. 4 ' In addition, it is appropriate to apply HDMF due to the request for timesharing for the proposed expansion by the applicant. Timesharing would not be approved for any other portion of the SDD unless the applicant requested to amend the SDD in the future. B. Is the amendment ~resentina a convenient. workable relationship within J.and uses consistent with municipal objectives. Staff prepared a chart titled "Development Analysis" in order to compare the proposed SDD with surrounding properties. As indicated by this chart, there are a number of properties developed beyond what is proposed on the Marriott site such as the Antlers, Landmark, Vantage Point, Montaneros, Lionsquare Lodge and the Doubletree Hotel. Staff believes that the proposal is in concert with many of the policies outlined in the Land Use Plan. The site is identified as being in the Resort Acc~mmodat~r? and Service Cateaorv,defined below: This area includes activities aimed at accommodating the overnight and short term visitor to the area. Primary uses include hotels, lodges, service stations, and parking structures (with densities up to 25 dwelling units or 50 accommodation units per buildable acre). These areas are oriented toward vehicular access from I- 70, with other support commercial and business services included. Also allowed in this category, would be institutional uses and various municipal uses. (Please see Special Development District Memo concerning this project and its relation to the Land Use Plan and surrounding neighborhood). In the Land Use Plan analysis, a development scenario was selected based on market demands and the desires of the citizenry. The Plan states (page 30): The public input had shown a general satisfaction with the location of existing land uses, which was used as the foundation for the preferred development alternative... The most important goals culled from the public meetings were used to formulate the Trends Alternative. These key goals are as follows: 5 A. Commercial Uses 2) Commercial growth should be concentrated primarily in existing commercial areas to acc..,.,...odate both local and visitor needs. 3) New hotels should continue to be located primarily in the Village and Lionshead areas. C. V~'l1a~Lionshead Core Areas 1) Increased density for commercial, residential and lodging uses in the Core areas would be acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is being preserved. This proposal supports the Land Use Plan "key goals" in that the expansion occurs in an already developed area of Lionshead, the uses proposed support the desire for timeshare, and the design of the proposal is respectful of surrounding properties and the character of the West Lionshead Circle area. C. Does the rezoning tirovide for the growth of an orderly, viable community? The staff believes that the Special Development District expansion does provide for the orderly development of the community. We believe that the project enhances many of the community's goals outlined in the Land Use Plan. The time share use is also specifically called out in the Land Use Plan. The suitability of this property for infill development is discussed in detail in the SDD memo in respect to traffic, density, design etc. which all relate to "orderly development." IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff recommends approval of the application of the high Density Multi Family zone district as an underlying zone district to the Special Development District No. 7. We believe it meets all of the three criteria for a zoning review. '.the recommendation for auaroval is conditional upon the SDD amendment being annroved. 6 DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS WEST LIONSHEAD AREA AND SELECTED SITES April 18, 1990 PARCEL SIZE UNITS UNITS PER GRFA GRFA BUILDING . SITE ACRES SQ. FT. ZONING PERMITTED EXISTING ACRE rGnilliir.D EXISTING RATIO HEIGHT MARRIOTT MARK 5.17 225205 SDD 177.0 177 34.2 134000 134000 0.60 85 Vail Spa 3.20 139392 HDMF 80.0 55 17.2 111514 83672 0.60 61 Antlers 1.19 51836 CCII 29.8 72 60.5 41469 54486 1.05 72 Landmark 1.49 64904 CCII 37.3 58 38.9 51924 81618 1.26 75-92 Vantage Point 0.91 39640 CCII 22.8 65 71.4 31712 54816 1.38 78 Montaneros 1.02 44431 CCII 25.5 41 40.2 35545 44297 1.00 N/A Enzian 1.21 52708 CCII 30.3 38 31.4 42166 45305 0.86 82 Lionsquare Lodge 1.79 77972 CCII 44.8 99 55.3 62378 94000 1.21 N/A West Day Lot 2.64 114998 PARKING 0 0.0 0 0 N/A N/A V.A. Shops 3.20 139392 ABD 0 0.0 0 0 N/A N/A Doubletree 2.62 114127 SDD/HDMF 65.5 134 51.1 91302 166153 1.46 88 Vail Village Inn 3.45 150282 SDD/PA 86.3 130 37.7 90169 120000 0.80 62 PROPOSED MARRIOTT 5.17 ~ 225200 SDD 243.0 177 47.0 N/A 205200 0.91 48 EXPANSION NOTES: Information gathered from TOV project files, building plans, condo plats and development statistics. Existing development for SDD's reflect total development at time of buildout. Unit counts reflect accomodation unit conversion at 2:1. Permitted development for WI and Doubletree was calculated using underlying zoning. CHART 2 COMPARING HDMF TO EXISTING SDD, 5DD ORD. AND PROPOSED SDD 6/11/90 SITE AREA 5.17 ACRES OR 225,205 SQ. FT. HDMF PA BUILT SDO TOTAL PROPOSED SOD TOTAL UNITS/ACRE * 25 + 25 ( 34.2 ' 47 GRFA * 135123 ~ 180164 ~ 134000 ~ 205200 UNITS * 128 DU'S ~ 128 DU•S ~ 177 DU•S ~ 243 DU'S SITE COVERAGE 123863 OR•5 1238630RQ55$T.I 83997 OR~37$•~ 100770 R•45$~ HEIGHT 48• SLOPING + 48• SLOPING ~ 85 FT.~ 48• FOR PROPOSED BUILDING ___45_ FLAT I 45' FLAT LANDSCAPING 67562 OR•30$~~ 67562 ~Q.3 ~.i 141879 OR•6 123863 OR•55$• ---------------------------------------+----------------+II---------------+-------------------- SETBACKS 20 FT. 20 FT. PER DEV. PLAN 20 FT MAINTAINED IN ALL AREAS EXCEPT WEST SIDE OF PARKING STRUCTURE 5 FT. PARKING 75$ IN BUILDINGI 75$ IN BUILDINGI PER DEV. PLAN) ALL PROPOSED PARKING OR SCREENED 273 SPACES ENCLOSED *ALL CALCULATIONS INCLUDE EMPLOYEE HOUSING. A T0: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 11, 1990 RE: Letters received regarding the Marriott Project Attached are all of the letters received by the Community Development Department concerning the Marriott proposal. r 14 Hutton # 1 Aurora, CO 80045 April 29, 1990 Honorable Kent R. Rose Mayor, Town of Vail P. O. BOX 2101 Vail, CO 81658 Dear Mayor Rose: This letter is in response to Mr. Peter Jamar's letter to the West Forest Road homeowners, in which he stated that he did not believe that the addition of the Marriott's sixty plus time-share high rise would "not have...a negative effect on your property". Mrs. Deevy's letter very clearly expresses hey-feelings that there will be a negative impact, not only on the Forst Road neighborhood, but all of Lionshead as well. For the Community Development Department to lead the Marriott Corporation into believing that their massive building will be approved in same form, is giving the clear message to all that the Town of Vail zoning rules are for sale to large corporations, and .only apply to those who cannot afford their price. Many cases can be documented of small property owners being emphatically told that the zoning rules cannot be changed nor circumvented even for very small pro,jectsf, and yet, this massive transgression of zoning regulations by a large corporation does not seem to bother some of the members of the Commission in the least! Your support for this unsightly project which goes against all the aspirations of the residents of Vail to keep our beautiful Valley Pram becoming another Manhattan or Cancun, with money making high rise structures as the only hallowed mausoleums, will certainly not go unnoticed by your constituents, most of whom are not in the line of f ire now, but are smart enough to know where your allegiance might lie when their turn comes. Please call Gretta Parks and hear her concerns; she is also most anxious to have your input . Her number in Denver is C303 ) 773- 3079, and in Vail, C303> 476-3671. fur phone numbers are (303) 367-4367 at home, and X303) 361-8575 during the day. , Sincerely, Roger V. and Sall Cadol Vail address: ?25 Forest Road - ,11~ VAIL SPA 710 West lionshead Circle Vail, Colorado 81657 (303) 476-0882 March 5, 1990 Planning and Environmental Commission The Town of Vail Vail I~tanicipal Building Vail, Colorado RE: Major Amendment to Special development District No. 7 (the Marriot Mark) Filed by Marriot Corporation. Dear Members of the Commission: ~ The Vail Spa Board of Managers, on behalf of its 55 members, hereby objects to the proposed amendment to the special development district for the Marriott Mark Proposed by the Marriott Corporation to add sixty (60) time-share units and five (5) employee housing units on the west side of the Marriott Mark. The Vail Spa lies immediately north of the proposed location of the addition to the Marriott Mark. The location, height and bulk of the proposed addition will substantially and adversely affect the Vail Spa. The addition will obliterate the mountain view from virtually all of the rooms at Vail Spa. Moreover, the increased traffic that will be generated by the addition will overload the existing internal roadway system adjacent to the Vail Spa. Traffic is already a problem in and around Vail Spa and this addition will make that problem even worse. We have reviewed the staff report on the proposed addition and corre- spondence from other property owners in the area, and we concur with their objections to the proposed amendment. This proposed addition, if approved by the Town of Vail, would result in a significant deterioration in the quality of the vacation experience of the owners of Vail Spa and their guests, as well as other visitors to Vail, with a negative impact on the reputation of Vail. The Town of Vail must be sensitive to pre- serving the excellent vacation experience available at Vail at this time. Vail must not approve requests for substantial increases in density of projects which mill change the pleasant experience to one which is much too similar to the urban experience of people who come to Vail for a change of pace. C2 Planning and Environmental Commission We will have representatives of Vail Spa present at the hearing on March 12, 1990, to provide additional input to the Commission's decision. Sincerely, VAIL S ARD QF MANAG 1 Mark tlieht - President MF/lh CC: James Kurtz-Phelan Action Vail Inc. FRIENDS OF OPEN-SPACE P.O. Box X426 Voii, Coiorodo 81658 Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 June 11, 1990 Dear Madam Chairman and Commission Members: Action Vail, Friends of Open Space would like to express the concerns of its members with regards to the unresolved issues associated with the amendments being proposed to Special Development District Seven, The Marriott Mark Resort. Because of the need for greater detailed research several of our concerns, which have been left unresolved by The Marriott Mark Resort application and staff review, are still under study. Among our concerns are the following: 1. It appears to us that there are no unique and " specific conditions which sets the proposed expansion of The . Marriott Mark Resort apart from other properties having similar conditions in the community. 2. It is our opinion that there are several other properties in the community that would be eligible for rezoning and density increases, through the variance or Special Development District approval procedures, based upon " the conditions identified by the staff as favorable reasons for granting The Marriott Mark Resort application. 3. Undoubtedly the specific conditions that exist for The Marriott Mark application demonstrates, if approved, that the method of approval and the degree of density increase granted will establish a precedent that could be emulated by other properties throughout the community. 4. It is apparent that no extraordinary contributions to the community, other than those that would be expected of any similar development application in the community or which would not be considered as normal and expected maintenance, has been made in the Marriott Mark application. 5. We believe that insufficient actions have been taken to preserve, protect, and correct the maintenance deficiencies of the public and private open space which occurs in association with The Marriott Mark Resort. Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission The Marriott Mark Resort Amendment Application June 11, 1990 Page Two It is the position of our organization that until sufficient independent investigation and information is available from the. Town of Vail with regards to the foregoing unresolved concerns, it is inappropriate and impossible to adequately evaluated the merits of The Marriott Mark Resort application. We find that no exceptional conditions exist or that. extraordinary community benefits are acquired within the scope of the present application. Approval of The Marriott Mark Resort applications is premature and unwarranted at this time. Sincerely, Action Vail, Inc. Friends of Open-Space i' v. _ a f, ,s 1~, _ _ ' t! - + ~ ';~.t .t S . ~ _ ~ --~`r_---r~ , ~ ~wf No ~ ~I M ~ ~ ~ - ',i u 1 j ~ . ~ ~ ~ j ~ _ y..--- ~f -~i r _ _ .1! ~ C ` 1 , ~ i . ..--r- rr i. _ •L ~ ~ __.--~-~J.- J ~ ~ { S ,J ,r ~ ~ ~ ~1 rY r f l: ~ ....r^"" ~ .rte 1 ~ a~~a c~ y,ars s /990 ~ ~ q~C'~ FEB ? 2 X990 _ 736 Forest Road Vail, CO 81657 1 Littleridge Lane Englewood, CO 80110 February 5, 1990 Mr. Peter Jamar Associates, Inc. Planning Development Analysis Research ~ _ Vail National Bank Building; Suite 308 108 So. Frontage Road West Vail, CO 81657 Mr. Jamar: In response to your recent correspondence, Imust confess it has been my hope for some 15 years that something would happen to the Marriott, allowing for a decent looking building to take its place. Since I have become a West Forest Road resident, I feel even more strongly about this, the singularly least attractive and ill maintained (landscaped) structure in town. The news that there were plans to expand rather than bulldoze came as a shock to say the least. The fact that the Town of Vail would consider changing zoning laws to allow an unattractive time share structure on its natural resources in such a visible area makes me wonder. Is no one minding the store? SincerCly, Caryn Deevy cc: Vail Associates: George Gillette West Forest Road Homeowners Association Vail Town Council: Rondall Phillips, Town Manager PETER )AMAR ASSOCIATES, INC. PLANNING. DEVELOP1vfENT ANALYSIS, RESEARCH January 5, 1990 Dear Forest Road Property Owner: As you may be aware, Marriott is proposing to add 67 units to their existing Hotel located in Lionshead. The addition is proposed to occur on the southwest portion of their property west of the existing tennis courts and adjacent to their existing parking garage. Along with the addition approximately $4 million, worth of improvements, renovating and upgrading is proposed for the existing buildings, landscaping, and amenities. These improvements' are badly needed and important for Marriott to keep the Mark Resort functioning on the same quality level as the other first class Hotels in Vail and Beaver Creek. We believe that the addition and renovation does not in any way negatively affect your property but rather will be an enhancement to the neighborhood and surrounding area. The purpose of this letter is to invite you to contact me regarding any questions that you might have regarding the proposal. You can also contact Jay Peterson at 476-0092. We represent the Marriott and would be happy to provide you with additional information or meet with you to discuss the addition and renovation at your convenience. Once again, please feel free to contact us regarding any questions that you might have. Sincerely, Peter Jamar, AICP PJ:ne cc: Jay R. Peterson Suite 306. Vail National Bank 8uildmg 108 South Frontage Road West • Vail, Colorado 81657 • (303) 476-7154 14 Hutton # 1 Aurora, CO 80045 April 29, 1990 Mr. Randall V. Phillips Manager, Town of Vail P. O. Box 1322 Yail, CO 81658 Dear Mr. Phillips: This letter is in response to Mr. Peter Jamar's letter to the West Forest Road homeowners, in which he stated that he did not believe that the addition of the Marriott's sixty plus time-share high rise would "not have...a negative effect on your property". Mrs. Deevy's letter very clearly expresses her feelings that there will be a negative impact, not only on the Forest Road neighborhood, but all of Lionshead as well. ' For the Community Development Department to lead the Marriott Corporation into believing that their massive building will be approved in some farm, is giving the clear message to all that the Town of Vail zoning rules are for sale to large corporations, and only apply to those who cannot afford their price. Many cases can be documented of small property owners being emphatically told that the zoning rules cannot be changed nor circumvented even for very small pro~ectsf, and yet, this massive transgression of zoning regulations by a large corporation does not seem to bother same of the members of the Commission in the least: Your support for this unsightly project which goes against all the aspirations of the residents of Vail to keep our beautiful Valley from becoming another Manhattan or Cancun, with money making high rise structures as the only hallowed mausoleums, will certainly not go unnoticed by your constituents, most of whom are not in the line of f ire now, but are smart enough to know where your allegiance might lie when their turn comes. Please call Gretta Parks and hear her concerns; she is also most anxious to have your input. Her number in Denver is C303) 773- 3079, and in Vail, C303) 476-3671. Our phone numbers are C303> 367-4367 at home, and (303) 361-8575 during the day. cerely, l t~ Roger V. and Sally M. Cadol Vail address: 725 Forest Road S. Robert Contlpuplla, M.D. Melvyn H. Klein, M.D. . Jeffrey L Mishell, M.D. Color~o Kidney Vti' Associates, P.C. € ~ April 25, 1990 Dear Sirs: We would like to strongly protest any plans for the development of a new Marriott high-rises timeshare property across from test Forest Roa3. We have been Yai2 property owners for over 10 years and our property at 736 Forest Road looks out directly over the proposed site. There is no question in our minds that building such an edifice would not only obstruct oust view of the Yail valley but also affect the value of our property. We have been great supporters of the Town Council and its movement toward increasing open space and recreational facilities in the Yail valley. Approval of this project would be contradictory to that movement. We would appreciate it if you would consider asking the Marriott to modify the structure of its buildings perhaps making it fewer stories in elevations and attempt to make the facade attractive to us homeowners. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, S. Robert Contiguglia, M.D. ~.1~,~. c~..~-~P Jef r y L. Mishell~ M.D. ~1 ~ ~ - Melvyn Rlei , M.D. SRC/dml cc: ~Ysil Town Council members Planning and Environment Commission members Design and Review Board members . 1545 East 9th Avenue • Suite 150 Denver, Colorado 80220 (303)320.2911 4`175 GKEC4~LVf ~gtL42C GHEE. SOO ~ LIIXiLEtJ ~4tLCD1 1'a ao~'~, L'a. g2o37 _ SERYICES~ January 19, 1990 Mr. Peter Patten Town of Vail Planning Director 75 South Frontage Road . Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Mr. Patten: I have a residence at 636 West Forest Road and it has come to my attention that it is Marriott's intention to get the approval of the town of Vail's planning staff to build an enormous six story time share building with sixty-seven ur%its which would be built right on Gore Creek. It is also my understanding that this building would violate all zoning codes for the area. The Marriott is already built out to their maximum and this density was even over the original allotment for the area. They were able to get it through by getting a special district approval, of which none the homeowners on Forest Road were given notification. We can not believe that they are at the Town's door again asking for more special favors. I bought this property for its privacy and seclusion and I do not want to wish for the further encroachment that this building represents. I believe this addition to the Marriott will create a "New York City" effect along Gore Creek and in our neighborhood. We also believe that if this encroachment were to be allowed it would create an obvious "me too" opportunity for all major development in Vail. Please do not allow this project. Y Y Yours , _ _ - - Ver trul 8. Lindley r bbs HLG:wer dKics (6~9) Sq6-2926 ('u: (6~9) 9so-9796 c1/orns (br9) 7s9-r9S9 ~as (6~9) 439•z8~2 ZQL U~ ~ ~yal ~ ~2 y~ ~~'`~a~ T~~ ~ v~- p ~'~y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~d ~ ~ ~ o, PE,RFOAMA11r~E - SPORTS _ 531 LionsHead Mall Vail, Colorado 81657 (303} 476-1718 ~ ~ ~~-~7~~ ~ t lZ ~ c.Zo ~C ~ ~ Gt1 w? rJ ~ t ~~f 7~i1~,C,p p~?•~P=~~7 -raw ~c v~-l rs ~ . I 1'11-2 ~ o-f v~ Pz~N s ~ d 1 N `~L ~ a ~ s ?~`d~7 ~r~D ~lM t.~2~ 7? ~Tt~! S LfL77~~ ~U ~i~'P~~S y F~~ svt'P~~-7 O~{ T!~! S ~t~ G 7 ~iC-, , ~ 1 ~ ~ 0 D I ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ i 1~ PR d ~os~~ G~ t1Ni~rS ~ 7~ OR-a-~t~c.~ tult.l Q~ ~ ®a~l~l~~ ~MP4c7 rv 12 L1 ON 5 i~~ ~ ~-b~ ~ al 'D ~fl W d ~ V ~ L Ns tJ ll L ~ . ~a~ ~¢-~~~z~arl o~ T/mf~ S~rre~N~ ~uITS ~s C~s~sz6~7 Gs 11 ~ -tt<t~ Nlrf~~ 't-~ 2 R i~ 9 t ~r ar+ n-C.. 8 tea 2-7 76~E Nt W p F ~ ~ d` ~.0007'?'~JA~T~ ~y~Jg ~1~f Z~ U ~NS~~ JdQE~. s<a~'""Q`a~1 S 5 ROBERT S. ENGELMAN, SK. ~ ONE FINANCIAL PLACE D SUITE 916 ~1 ~I CHICAGO, IL. 60605 TEL.: (312) 663-7086 ~ '~tt aenvary 1990 UJ ~ Mr. Peter Patten, 'lbea of Vail Planning Director - - 't5 ~ y ,,..tage Rodal Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear I+Ir. Patten: ~renty-fife years ago are wilt our res@deace at 655 West Forest Road and, as long term residents of Vail, we xeat to register a strong objection to the proposed zoning variations requested by the Marriot Hotel. I support P1i11y all the objections raised in the letter you have received from Cindy Jacobson. Sincerely, 1 !i!/~~ je S. ~ , Sr. RSPs~msh . ~ _ c.c. Ms. Diana Doanovaa - P.O. Booc 601, Vail Colorado 81658 Mr. Charles Crist - P.O. Bax 1I+82, Vail Colorado 81658 - - ~ S. Robert Contipuplia, M.D. ' Melvyn H. Klein, M.D. Jeffrey L Misheli, M.D. - Colorado Kidney - Associates, P.C. April 25, 1990 Dear Sirs: We would like to strongly protest any plans for the development of a new Marriott high-rises timeshare property across from west Forest Road. We have been Vail property owners for over 10 years and our property at 736 Forest Road looks out. directly over the proposed site. There is no question in our minds that building such an edifice would not only obstruct our view of the Yail valley but also affect the value of our property. We have been great supporters of the Town Council and its movement toward increasing open space and recreational facilities in the Yail valley. Approval of this project would be contradictory to that movement. We would appreciate it if you would consider asking the Marriott to modify the structure of its building, perhaps making it fewer stories in elevations and attempt to make the facade attractive to us homeowners. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, S. Robert Contiguglia~ M.D. ~ Jef r y L. Misheli, M.D. - - Melvyn Rlei ~ M.D. SRC/dml cc: Yail Town Council members Planning and Environment Commission members Design and Review Board members 4545 East 9th Avenue -Suite 150 Denver, Cdwado 80220 f303) 320.2911 dune 8, 1990 Planning and Environmental Commission Town of Vail 75.South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Commission Members, On behalf of ourselves and many home owners in Vail we strongly oppose the granting of additional zoning privileges to the Marriott Resort in their request to be able to add approximately 74,000 square feet of additional building on their property. The following are good basic reasons why this project should be flatly turned down. 1. The Mark-Marriott property is currently built to it's maximum allowable density and square footage. They have twice previously recieved increased density allocations, and already exceed the density origionally planned for the area when it was platted. This application proves no benefit for the general public good, as would a hospital or school. There is no evident and purposeful reason for them to be granted special privileges for increased density or squarefootage. 2. The encroachment of this huge building project on Gore Creek and the surrounding area is a threat to the one main element of pristine natural beauty in the Town of Vail. The Town has spent $10 million dollars to provide open space, and this proposal will under- mine the Town's and the citizenas efforts in this endeavor. 3. The "Vail Comprehensive Plan" or Vail Master Plan, which the Marriott is using to justify this additional building is both grossly out dated and quite opposite of the current attitudes of many of Vails property owners regarding massive buildings in the core areas , of the Town of Vail. Many families who have been long time property owners in Vail and who have worked hard and sacrificed much to make this a quality place are against huge developments such as that proposed by the Marriott. It is these property owners that will bear the blight of this mistake long after the temporary and the transient folks are long gone. 4. Mr. Tom Braun's review and apparent favoring of the Marriott Resort's projec in his April 9, 1990 'memo to the Planning Commission should be rejected. A project this large and with as many far reaching effects as this one should not be analized by a "temporary staff member". He is neither a property owner in Vail or a permanent full- time citizen, and he certainly will not live with the consequences of not addressing the current needs and wants of the community, and the long term effects to the Town in this memo when he is back in Boston. 5. There has been no statistical proof (using professionally accum- ulated, unbiased figures) presented that this amount of dwelling space is needed. In fact the Town currently has one major hotel project in Chapter 11 due to inadequate occupancy, the WE5TIN, and another, The Vail Athletic Club, with it's doors locked. Not enough research has been done to prove the need for large amounts of additional "bed space" in Vail. Greed is certainly no indication of need. Page 2 ~ - 6. This massive transgression of zoning is but the tip of the ice- berg. To grant this increased density and massiveness will generate _ a "me to" effect that will ripple throughout the commercial hotels and the yet to be developed properties. This town and Vail mountain can not hold the extra bodies generated by another five or sift hundred units, which will be the effect of this increased zoning. The city services, especially the sewage plant which stinks now when the town is only moderately full, certainly can not handle another big building. 7. The numbers of skiers on Vail mountain are at their maximum most of the year now, to allow more massive developments will deteriorate the quality of the "Vail Experience" and ~eapordize skiing safety. Tourists and others that spend a great deal of time on the ski mountain will confirm this. If the commission members are like most other residents they do not ski on the peak days and really aren't exposed to the enormous crowds we have on the hill. 6. Time-share units are not desireable for Vail. They are notoriously seen as a rip-off. When the idea is mentioned to a community minded person they are very opposed to the idea. The county tax roles are filled by abandoned "shares", which then become a nonrevenue producing element and a burden on all property taxpayers. In many communities time-share is referred to as the soup can and cracker box crowd. To think they are going to flock to the fine resturants in Vail nightly is a poor assumption. As far a business being generated for the resturants, hotel rooms and bed and breakfast establishments would be more productive. 9. As stated by the "Marriott Corporation representatives" at one PEC meeting "they can pull out any time". They are but a contract organization on this project. If they can pack their bags and leave anytime, who will be responsible for the promises they made? The Marriott's already established poor track record of keeping promises to the Town, the community and the neighborhood has already been documented, The landscaping they were to do to the berm they created on Gore Creek the last time they built, about ten years ago, is still a thistled, weedy mess with huge blue plastic pipes and metal culverts sticking out. Their use of amplified sound systems all summer long is very irritating and disruptive to the neighbors across the creek. Even with citations and complaints they continue to blast these unwanted noises. Now with the proposed removal of the tennis court in this proJect,an even larger area, closer to the creek and the homes on the creek could be used far parties, meetings and such, creating an acoustical nightmare. We, and other homeowners on west Forest Road are not selfish,as some others that you may hear from are. We have not tried to make any back door deals dust to benefit a few, and the rest of the community be dammed. We have all sacrificed muCh~ f or the good of our community, and feel that this is an issue that effects us all. We have spent many a sleepless night as the snow cats roar by our houses, which results in a perfectly groomed ski mountain for all to enJoy. We paid the bill to spray the tall pines along Gore Creek on the Town property when they would not. Many of us were origional owners in Vail, long before a building was ever built Page 3 in Lionshead. We have shown you pictures of the once grassy and beautiful banks of Gore Creek. And as the massive concrete buildings have sprung up on its banks, cutting away at it's openess and beauty perhaps we have been too complaisant. But complaisant we are no longer. We realize now the time has come to preserve what little is left for all who own property in Vail, their families and the next generations who will own homes here. Let us all held the lessons taught by the over development of places like Aspen, Cancun and Waikiki Beach, Hawaii, and not let over development and greed ruin what so many have worked so hard to create in Vail. Most of the twenty-three west Forest Road homeowners have written or called members of the Planning Commission and the Town Council, attached are but a few of their letters. All express that this project must not be approved. The far reaching effects of this one zoning change will open the flood gates to an overdevelopment of Vail, that will fain it. Sincerely G`7'V r Tom & in y Jacobson 1/ail r'" - y~ ~ COAST SAVINGS TOWER ® 225 Broadway, Ste. 120 San Diego, CA 92101 (619) 696-6290 FAX (619) 696-7878 ~ '~,L~ sJ~S. May 10, 1990 a:.~~ Rondall Phillips, Town Manager P.O. Box 1322 Vail, CO 81657 Dear Mr. Phillips: As a concerned owner of a residence at\636 West Forest Road, I am writing to the Planning Commission to protest the proposed six story time share building that the Marriott is trying to build on Gore Creek. Not only will it be an unsightly addition to the area, increase an already over developed space, but more importantly it violates all zoning codes for this area. I can not believe that the planning commission will allow this to happen. I, along with all my neighbors, purchased this property far its privacy and seclusion and I do not wish the further encroachment that this building represents. It is also of great concern to me that if you allow this rezoning request that you are opening the doors for further big developers to encroach on this beautiful land. Please do not allow this project. Sincerely, H. Lindley G bbs Homeowner HLG:wer 14 Hutton # 1 Aurora, CO 80045 April 29, 1990 Tom and Cindy Jacobson 1777 Ala Moana Blvd, Ilikai #1130 Honolulu, HI 96815 Dear Tom and Cindy: This letter is ir, res~.~onse to Mr~. Peter Jamar' a letter to the ~?'eE:t Forest Road homeowners, in which he stated that he did not believe that the addition of the Marriott's sixty plus time-share high rise would "not have...a negative effect on your property". Mrs. Deevy's letter very clearly expresses her feeling6 that there will be a negative impact, not only on the Forest Road neighborhood, but all of Lionshead as well. For the Community Development Department to lead the Marriott Corporation into believing that their massive building will be approved in some form, is giving the clear message to all that the Town of Vail zoning rules are for sale :to large corporations, and only apply to those who cannot afford their price. r Many cases can be documented of small property owners being emphatically told that the zoning rules cannot be changed nor circumvented even for very small projects, and yet, this massive transgression of zoning regulations by a large corporation does not seem to bother some of the members of the Commission in the least! Your support for this unsightly pro3ect which goes against all the aspirations of the residents of Vail to keep our beautiful Valley from becoming another Manhattan or Cancun, with money making high rise structures as the only hallowed mausoleums, will certainly not go unnoticed by your constituents, most of whom are not in the line of f ire now, but are smart enough to know where your allegiance might lie when their turn comes. Please call Gretta Parks and hear her concerns; she is also most anxious to have your input. Her number in Denver is ~303> 773- 3079, and in Vail, 1303) 476-36?1. Our phone numbers are 0303) 367-436? at home, and <303) 361-8575 during the day. Si cerely, 1 Roger V. and Sally M. Cadol Vail address: 725 Forest Road S. Aobert Contigugila, M.D. J Melvyn H. Klein, M.D. Jeffrey L Mishell, M.D. Colorado Kidney ;:f~I~ ~,w. Associates, P.C. 't ~ . 1 April 25~ 1990 Dear Sirs: We would like to strongly protest any plans for the development of a new Marriott high-rise, timeshare property across from West Forest Road. , We have been Yail property owners for over 10 years and our property at 736 Forest Road looks out directly over the proposed site. There is no question in our minds that building such an edifice would not only obstruct our view of the Yail valley but also affect the value of our property. We have been great supporters of the Town Council and its movement toward increasing open space and recreational facilities in the Yail valley. Approval of this project would be contradictory to that movement. We would appreciate it if you would consider asking the Marriott to modify the structure of its building, perhaps making it fewer stories in elevation, and attempt to make the facade attractive to us homeowners. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerelyr S. Robert Contiguglia, M.D. dam-. c~.,c~-4' Jef r y L. Mishell, M.D. . Melvyn Klei , M.D. sRC/dml cc: Vail Town. Council members Planning and Environment Commission members Design and Review Board members X545 East 9th Avenue -Suite 150 Denver, Cdorado 80220 [303) 320-29i 1 736 Forest Road Vail, CO 81657 1 Littleridge Lane Englewoad, CO 80110 February 5, 1990 Mr. Peter Jamar Associates, Inc. Planning Development Analysis Research Vail National Bank Building, Suite 308 108 So. Frontage Road West Vail, CO 81657 Mr. Jamar: r In response to your recent correspondence, Imust confess it has been my hope for some 15 years that something would happen to the Marriott, allowing for a decent looking building to take its place. Since I have become a West Forest Road resident, I feel even more strongly about this, the singularly least attractive and i.ll maintained (landscaped) structure in town. The news that there were plans to expand rather than bulldoze came as a shock to say the least. The fact that the Town of Vail would consider changing zoning laws to allow an unattractive time share structure on its natural resources in such a visible area makes me wonder. Is no one minding the store? Sincerely, C~ ~7~~ ~ Caryn Deevy cc: Vail Associates: George Gillette West Forest Road Homeowners Association Vail Town Council: Rondall Phillips, Town Manager ~s ~t~n~ c~iquau doo ~ ~:ndt~ ~:4g6s • dERVICES.~ January 19, 1990. Mr. Peter Patten Toxn of Vail Planning Director 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Mr. Patten: I have a residence at 636 West Forest Road and it has come to my attention that it is Marriott's intention to get the approval of the town of Yail's planniag staff to build an enormous six story time share building Mith sixty-seven waits Mhich would be built right on Gore Creek. It is also my uaderstnnding that this building Mould violate all zoning codes for the area. The Marriott is already built out to their maximum and this density Mas even over the original allotment for the area. They Mere able to get it through by getting a special district approval, of Mhich none the homeo~vners on Forest Road Mere given notification. We can not believe that they are at the Town's door again asking for more special favors. I bought this property for its privacy and seclusion and I do not Mant to Mish for the further encroachment that this building represents. I believe this addition to the Marriott Mill create a "New York City" effect along Gore Creek and in our neighborhood. We also believe that if this eacroachment Mere to be allowed it Mould create an obvious "sne too" opportunity for all sajor development in Vail. Please do not allow this project. Very truly yours, 8. Lindley r bbs HLG:Mer ~•sgz6 ~+s (~9~ ¢ao'4T06 ~omc (6~q) 7s9-iq~9 ~ (~0~ 439•sStz ROBERT S. ENGELMAN, SR. ONE FINANCIAL PLACE SUITE 916 -j CHICAGO, IL. 60605 TEL.: (312) 663-7086 , January 1~, 1990 ~[r. Peter Patten, 'lbvn of Vail Planaiag~Director ?5 Frontage Ro$s~ Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear 1fr. Patten: ~venty-rive years ago tre built our resLdeace at 655 ikst Forest Road and, as long term residents of veil, ve vent to register a strong objection to the proposed zoning variations requested by the Marriot Hotel. I s..ryort ful]y 811 the obJectioas raised in the letter you have received from Cindy Jacobson. Sincerely, S. , Sr. FSE/ssh c.c. Ms. Diana Donavan - P.o. Boac 601, Vail Colorado 81658 Mr. Charles Crist - P.o. Bwc 1k82, Vail Colorado 81658 June Il, 1990 Susan ~ Neal Erickson 716 Forest Road (East) Vail, CO 81657 Town of Vail Planning & Zoning 75 South Frontage Road West Vail, CO 81757 Re: Proposed Addition to Marriott's Mark Resort Planning & Zoning: The purpose of this letter is to support the proposed addition to Marriott's Mark Resort at 715 Lionshead Circle. As a seven year vacation resident of West Forest Road I believe that this addition will upgrade the view from my home without impacting the character of the neighborhood. At the present time we are looking at two parking lots. The proposed structure would cover the existing garage resulting in a perceptible improvement to the entire area. Sincerely, Q- Div ~ Neal D. Erickson January 2,1990 Mr. Jim Shearer 5109 Black Gore Drive Vail, Co. 81657 Dear Mr. Shearer: + Mr. & Mrs. Tom 3acobson have sent a letter to Peter Patton and members of Veil's Planning and Environmental Commission in which they give reasons for objecting to the construction, by the Marriott, of a Six Story Time Share Building which will be directly across Gore Creek from my residence. I certainly endorse and support the Jacobsons and other owners in our neighborhood in objecting to the construction of this high rise building in an already concentrated and• crowded core area of Lionshead. In addition to all the objectionable factors such as view blockage, zoning violation, noise, failure to fulfill past commitments, grid lock traffic which strain all the community services and infrastructure, the fundamental question must be asked-- how big and how crowded do you want Vail to be? A short distance from the proposed project site property is selling for multi million dollars In addition to excellent skiing, the reason for this high value is that Vail is special and unique in retaining village charm, culture, beauty, status, and a controlled balance between expansion and village style living objectives. Evidently Marriott recognizes this value and wants to cash in on the past control, risk taking, and investment of others by jamming a high density type structure into this high value core area. The construction of this high rise project will be a giant step in the direction of too big and too crowded. It will hurt Vail and all property owners by cancelling some of the charm, status, past hard work, and value of Vail. Opinions, judgement, and feelings are formed by different exposures. Unfortunately, my residence in located next to a high density rooming house where Marriott houses a number of men and women employees during the summer. I understand they are part of a management training program. They also raise a lot of hell with frequent very loud parties lasting well into the morning and individuals getting so high on something they scream into the night darkness. Phone calls asking for noise reduction after normal sleeping hours resulted in defiant increases in intensity. I finally had to call the police to ~ get a reduction in a continuous mind numbing sound system. I don't know what happened to the famed clean cut, consideration for others, work ethic, philosophy of the I Page 2 Marriott Corporation but based on personal exposure, my feeling is Marriott doesn't give a damn about it's neighbors, the neighborhood, or preserving the long term value of Vail. I am a property owner and a taxpayer intensely interested in maintaining Vail as a unique and special place. I ask for your action and support by defeating further consideration of this project. Very truly yours, Clinton G. Ames 725B Forest Road Vail, Co. 81657 ..._...w`..~,.,. . ` ~ ~ ~ ~st,.d.,,-~., .--mss i „0 0 ,r CGS ~ ~Q~Y ~T I~.~Y . ~ L .7t"~. 7Y n~ ' c~ Y f ` ~•C? t ' j ` ` ~ j'~ ' ~ ~ y .~.,.rQ J ll , 1 S t-'~ ~ n~~.,4`1^ c. ~ ~i.~u..r~ ~ hQ~l..~ ~~5~ ~ ~rY b ~,O . Y ~ . r L ORDINANCE NO. 21 Series of 1990 AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING AN UNDERLYING ZONE DISTRICT OF HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY TO SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 7, COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS THE MARRIOTT MARK RESORT; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the existing Special Development District No. 7, Marriott Mark located on Lots 4, 7, C, D, Block 1, Vail-Lionshead 3rd :',?fling do not indicate a specific underlying zone district for •~:.he purposes of establishing uses and activities for the Special Development District; and WHEREAS, the application has been made by the MK Corp~~ration, Mark Lodge Condominiums, and Mark Resort and Tennis Club to apply the underlying zone district to Special Development District No. 7; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission has expr~~assed their desire to clarify the underlying zone district for ,.>pecial Development District No. 7; and WHEREAS, the application of the High Density Multi-family zone district as underlying zoning to the Special Development District No. 7 will allow the applicant to request the timeshare use; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 18.66.140, the Planning and .Environmental Commission on June 11, 1990, held a public hearing on the proposed zoning amendment and has submitted its reco unendation of approval to the Town Council; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has held a public hearing as required by Chapter 18.66 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY' THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The 'T'own Council finds that the procedures for a zoning amendment as set forth in Chapter 18.66 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail have been satisfied, and all of the requirements of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail relating to zoning amendments have been fully satisfied. Section 2. The Town Council hereby designates an underlying High Density Multi-Family zone district for Special Development District No. 7 (Marriott Mark Resort) located on Lots 4, 7, C, D, Block 1, Vail- Lionshead 3rd Filing. Section 3. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases by declared invalid. 1 Section 4. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and inhabitants thereof. Section 5. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provisions of Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 6. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, heretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED ON FIRST READING THIS day of 1990, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the day of , 1990 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this day of , 1990. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of , 1990. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk 2 t TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Department of Community Development DATE: June 11, 1990 SUBJECT: A major amendment to Special Development District No. 4-Cascade Village, Area C, Section 18.46.100, Paragraph C: deletion of the following sentence "No residential lot shall contain more than 4200 square feet of GRFA per the Glen Lyon subdivision covenants", which amends the GRFA requirement to conform to the Primary/Secondary zone district, Section 18.13.080, Density Control. Applicant: Greg Amsden for 75$ of the property owners. I. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant is requesting a major amendment to Special Development District No. 4, Cascade Village. The request is to delete the requirement which states "No residential Lot shall contain more than 4200 sq. ft. of GRFA per the Glen Lyon Subdivision covenants." The amended code will read "GRFA shall be calculated for each lot per Section 18.13.080, Density Control A and B for the primary/secondary district of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. With the deletion of this restriction, the density controls for duplex Lots 1-38 and 40-52 of Area C will be governed by Section 18.13.080 of the Vail Municipal Code. Because of the lot sizes, the amendment will allow 40 of the 51 duplex lots to increase their GRFA over what is currently allowed by the SDD No. 4 density requirements. However, these lots will not be granted more than what is allowed under the Town's density control for Primary/Secondary lots. The applicant is not requesting any other changes to the development standards. II. BACKGROUND At the time that SDD #4 was adopted, the GRFA definition was in the process of revision. By putting a maximum GRFA in the density requirement for the SDD, the developer's intent was to lock in a specified GRFA allowed for the lots. This was intended to protect against future changes in the interpretations of GRFA. The ceiling, however, became a restriction for the Glen Lyon property owners, as the GRFA requirements did not become more restrictive (as the developer had anticipated). Jim Rubin, the Community Development Department director at the time of the original adoption, confirms that the GRFA maximum was initiated by the developer to guarantee the GRFA for Glen Lyon lots. 1 The applicant has received signatures from 76.07 of the property owners approving the change in the GRFA requirement. The amendment will not include Lot 53 (Coldstream). The amendment will only affect duplex lots located in this Area C. Also, the amendment will not include Lots 39I and 39II. Under resolution #10, Series of 1982, these lots were subdivided and zoned Single Family Residential with a height restriction of 25 feet and a maximum GRFA of 3100 square feet per lot. III. SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT CRITERIA Section 18.40.080 of the zoning code sets forth the following design criteria to be used in evaluating the merits of a Special Development District. It is the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following standards or demonstrate that one or more are not applicable or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved. A. Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment. neighborhood and adjacent nronerties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones. identity. character, visual integrity and orientation. The granting of the request will allow for an increase of the allowable GRFA for many of the duplex lots located in the Glen Lyon Subdivision. Currently the lots are regulated by the density requirements for Primary/Secondary zoning with a maximum allowable GRFA of 4200 square feet. 40 lots in Glen Lyon are restricted by this maximum. It is important to recognize that by deleting the maximum for GRFA, they will only be allowed to build what is allowed under Section 18.13.080 which regulates the GRFA on all Primary/Secondary lots. The mass and bulk of the buildings will increase in comparison to what would be allowed with the 4200 sq. ft. of GRFA maximum due to the increase in allowable GRFA. B. Uses, activity and density which provide a combatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. The request will have no effect on the uses or activities of the area. The application will have no effect on the number of units in the subdivision. It 2 t'. will increase the mass and bulk of the buildings because the allowable GRFA will be increased. The following is a chart depicting the range of additional GRFA that would be allowed for a number of lots: # of Lots Additional GRFA 11 0 18 1-250 sq. ft. 10 250-500 sq. ft. 5 500-750 sq. ft. 6 750+ sq. ft. C. Compliance with na.rki.na and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 18.52. Off-street parking shall be provided as stated in the SDD Ordinance. This would require dwelling units with up to 2,000 square feet of GRFA to provide 2 parking spaces, and dwelling units over 2,000 square feet to provide 2.5 spaces per unit. These are the standard Town of Vail parking requirements. D. Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. Town policies and Urban Design Plans. The application does not request any additional GRFA other than that which is allowed on other comparable Primary/Secondary lots in the Town of Vail. There are no planning studies that relate directly to this request. E. Identification. a.nd mita.aation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect. the property on which the special development district. is proposed. Geologic hazards will be identified and mitigated as required by Section 18.69 Hazard Regulations of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. F. Site elan. building design and location and open space provisions c3;es_ ia_nPC~; to ncoduce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of thq community. The only element of the above criteria that will be affected by this request is building design. By 3 / ~r deleting the 4200 square foot maximum, the mass and ` bulk will be increased over what is currently allowed in the subdivision. However, the mass and bulk of the structures will be no more than what is allowed on other comparable Primary/Secondary lots in other areas of Vail. G. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedetrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. There will be no change to the circulation system. Since there will be no increase in density, there are no expected increases in use that would require a change to the circulation system. H. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions. There will be no change to the existing landscaping and open space plan. Individual lots will be required to landscape 60~ of lots as per the Section 18.46.170 - Landscaping of SDD #4. I. Phasing elan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. There will be no effect on the phasing or subdivision plan. 23 of the 50 lots involved have either existing homes or are under construction. No additional lots are proposed with this application. IV. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS All development standards for SDD# 4 are very site specific. For Area C, development standards including height, setbacks, site coverage, parking and landscaping are in accordance with the requirements for the Primary/Secondary zone district. This request would allow the Area C density control (GRFA) to be in accordance with Section 18.13.080 of the Vail Municipal Code. 4 • V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the request to delete the statement that "No residential lot shall contain more than 4200 square feet of GRFA per the Glen Lyon Subdivision covenants" as stated in Section 1.8.75.100 of SDD #4 Ordinance #10, Series of 1990 as applicable to Lots 1-38 and 40-52. The staff feels that this restriction was used as a means of guaranteeing GRFA to the Glen Lyon lots and instead, the maximum became a restriction. We feel that the deletion of the maximum will have no negative impacts on the surrounding properties. The amendment will allow the above lots to be controlled under the density requirements that are used for all other Primary/Secondary lots. There will be no change in the density requirements for Lots 39I and 39II which are controlled by Resolution No. 10, Series of 1982. 5 ORDINANCE N0.20 Series of 1990 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 10, SERIES OF 1990, SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 4, SECTION 18.46.100 C, DENSITY FLOOR AREA, AREA C GLEN LYON DUPLEX LOTS TO PROVIDE FOR GROSS RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA TO BE CALCULATED PER THE REQUIREMENT OF THE PRIMARY/SECONDARY ZONE DISTRICT SECTION 18.13.080 DENSITY CONTROL; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code authorizes Special Development Districts within the Town; and WHEREAS, the Town Council approved Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1990 Special Development District No. 4 Cascade Village; and WHEREAS, a majority of the property owners within Area C, Glen Lyon Subdivision of Special Development District No. 4 have requested to amend Section 18.46.1000 of Special Development District No. 4; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission has recommended that the Gross Residential Floor Area for Duplex lots within the Glen Lyon subdivision be calculated per Section 18.13.080 of the Vail Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Town Council considers that it is reasonable, appropriate, and beneficial to the Town and its citizens, inhabitants, and visitors to amend Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1990 to provide for this change in Special Development District No. 4, Cascade Village, Area C Glen Lyon Duplex Subdivision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. All the procedures required for a Major amendment to an SDD as set forth in Section 18.40.1.00 have been complied with. Section 2. Section 18.46.100 Paragraph C, Density Floor Area, Area C, Glen Lyon duplex lots is hereby amended by the deletion of the following sentence: "No residential lot shall contain more than 4200 sq. ft. of GRFA per the Glen Lyon subdivision covenants." Section 3. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases by declared invalid. 1 Section 4. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and inhabitants thereof. Section 5. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provisions of Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 6. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, heretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED ON FIRST READING THIS day of 1990, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the day of 1990 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this day of 1990. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of 1990. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk 2 p f RESOLUTION N0. 15 Series of 1990 A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH THE INTENTION OF THE TOWN OF VAIL TO ISSUE ITS MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, SETTING FORTH THE CONDITIONS OF SAID INTENT; AND SETTING FORTH RELATED MATTERS THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town of Vail (the "Issuer") is a town and a political subdivision duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Colorado (the "State"); and WHEREAS, the County and Municipality Development Revenue Bond Act, Article 3 of Title 29, Colorado Revised Statutes (the "Act"), authorizes the Issue to finance one or more "projects," including any land, building or other improvement and real and personal properties (other than inventories, raw materials and working capital) suitable or used for or in connection with residential facilities for low- and middle-income families or persons intended for use as the sole place of residence by the owners or intended occupants, to the end that the Issuer may be able to induce private enterprise to build a sufficient supply of adequate, safe and sanitary dwellings; and WHEREAS, the Issuer is further authorized by the Act to issue revenue bonds for the purpose of defraying the cost of financing and refinancing any "project," and for paying interest on such revenue bonds for a period of time not exceeding three years, and for paying all incidental expenses incurred in issuing such revenue bonds, and to secure payment of such revenue bonds as provided in the Act; and WHEREAS, representatives of Professional Development Corporation, a Tennessee corporation, (the "Developer") have advised the Issuer of the Developer's interest in developing, acquiring, constructing, improving and equipping within the boundaries of the Issuer three hundred four (304) units of residential rental facilities (the "Project") to be owned by the Developer and rented to low- and middle-income families or persons intended for use as their sole place of residence, subject to the willingness of the Issuer to finance part or all of the necessary facilities as a "project" pursuant to the Act; and WHEREAS, the Project will be situated on multiple sites totalling thirty (30) acres of land within the boundaries of the Issuer and qualifies as a "project" within the meaning of the Act; and WHEREAS, a more detailed description of the Project is attached hereto as Exhibit A (Vail Valley Affordable Housing Proposal) and is hereby incorporated by this reference thereto; and L r WHEREAS, the governing body of the Issuer has considered the Developer's request and has concluded that the economic and other benefits to be derived by the Issuer from the Project will be substantial and desires to indicate its present intent to proceed with the issuance pursuant to the Act of its Multi-Family Housing Revenue Bonds (the "Bonds") and the financing of the Project provided that certain conditions are met; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the governing body of the Issuer to set forth the conditions of its intent. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, that: 1. In order to assist and induce the Developer to locate the Project within the boundaries of the Issuer, it is the present intent of the governing body of the Issuer to take all necessary or advisable steps to effect the issuance of the Bonds in the maximum aggregate principal amount of fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000) or such lesser amount as shall be determined and agreed upon by the Developer and the Issuer to finance the Project. 2. The intent of the governing body of the Issuer to effectuate the issuance of the Bonds is subject to and specifically conditioned upon the following: a) The Developer and the documents designed to effectuate the financing shall comply in all respects with the Act and any criteria subsequently adopted by the governing body of the Issuer with respect to the issuance of the Bonds, and the documents and the method of selling or placing the Bonds shall be satisfactory to the Issuer in its sole discretion. b) The Developer's acquisition and development of the Project shall be in accordance with the Issuer's zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations and all other applicable development requirements, including without limitation income requirements that may be determined by the Issuer pursuant to the Act. c) No costs, expenses or liabilities shall be borne by the Issuer regarding any matter pertaining to the issuance of the Bonds, the preparation of any documents relating thereto, or any legal or financial consultants retained in connection therewith. d) Prior to any execution of a financing agreement, bond purchase agreement, indenture of trust, mortgage or any other necessary documents and agreements in connection with the Project and the Bonds, such documents and/or agreements shall be subject to authorization by legislative action of the Issuer pursuant to law. -2- 3. The Developer is hereby granted permission to prepare an application for a volume allocation for submission to the Division of Local Government, Department of Local Affairs, State of Colorado, pursuant to the provisions of the Colorado Private Activity Bond Ceiling Allocation Act, Part 17 of Article 32 of Title 24, Colorado Revised Statutes, subject to review thereof by the Issuer prior to submission. Any officer of the Issuer is hereby authorized to execute such application, after which the Developer may submit the same to said Department. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 1990. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk -3- - EXHIBIT A VA! L VALLEY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROPOSAL PRESENTED BY: PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 6685 CIUINCE ,SUITE 111 MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE 38119 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. PROPOSAL 2 EXHIBIT - A DEVELOPER'S RESUME 3. EXHIBIT - B BOND FINANCING WITHOUT ASSISTANCE. 4. EXHIBIT - C RENTS WITH D.O.L.A. GRANT OF X500,000.00 5. EXHIBIT - D RENTS WITH D.O.L.A. GRANT AND NO LAND COST. 6. EXHIBIT - E UNDERWRITER'S RESUME 7. EXHIBIT- F ARCHITECTURAL FLOOR PLANS AND ELEVATIONS VAIL VALLEY MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING P$OPO$~; TO SECURE AN INDUCEMENT RESOLUTION FOR INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BONDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OFMULTI-FAMILY HOUSING IN THE VAIL VALLEY. bEEQ~ AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE EMPLOYEES IN THE VALLEY, A NEED OFFICIALLY RECOGNIZED BY THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL AFFAIRS (DOLA) & COLORADO HOUSING AND FINANCE AUTHORITY (CHFA). DEVELOPMENT: PRIVATE DEVELOPER WITH EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE IN MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING. SEE RESUME OF PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION EXHIBIT -A. FINANCING: NO LOCAL FUNDS REQUIRED ; NON RECOURSE ,TAX EXEMPT BOND ASSISTANCE. (a.) IF A GRANT IS RECEIVED FROM DOLA TO ASSIST IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE ,LOCAL COUMMNITY MAY 8E REQUIRED TO PROVIDE SOME WAIVERS OF FEES, ANDJOR ; (b.) PROVIDE SITE FOR PROJECT. TOTAL UNITS: THREE HUNDRED AND FOUR (304) a. 100 EFFICIENCY (20%) LOW (NOME 20 UNITS b. 100 ONE BED ROOM (20%) LOW INCOME 20 UNITS c. 104 TWO BEDROOM (20%) LOW INCOME 21 UNITS FEASIBILITY: EXHIBIT - 8 DEMONSTRATES THAT THE PROJECT WORKS WITH BOND FINANCING WITHOUT ASSISTANCE FROM DOLA IN THE FORM OF A GRANT. EXHIBIT - C DEMONSTRATES THE LOWER RENT LEVELS FOR THE PROJECT WITH THE DOLA GRANT OF $500,000.00 . EXHIBR - D DEMONSTRATES THE RENTAL STRUCTURE WITH THE DOLA GRANT AND COMMUNITY SUPPORT IN THE FORM OF WAIVER OF FEES AND WITH A SITE PROVIDED AT.NO COST TO THE PROJECT. INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BONDS; ISSUED BY LOCAL COMMUNITY. (NON-RECOURSE) UNDERWRITER: MORGAN KEEGAN 8~ COMPANY: SEE EXHIBIT - E. BOND COUNSEL: KUTAK,ROCK AND CAMPBELL, DENVER OFFICE. ~ - FEES: ~QF THE LOCAL BOND ISSUE FEES WILL BE BnRP(~Y'jHF, PROJECT. ARCHITECTURE: DESIGN WILL CONFORM TO LOCAL COMMUNITY AESTHETIC VALUES. SEE EXHIBIT - F FOR FLOOR PLANS AND ELEVATIONS. SITE: THE PROJECT DESIGN WILL ENABLE IT TO BE LOCATED ON EITHER A SINGLE OR MULTIPLE SITES. EXHIBIT A RESU1~ PROFESSIONAL DzsvrLOPI~NT CORPORATION PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION is a Tennessee Corporation. It was formed in 1980 and has developed sixty (60) million dollars in rental housing, single family housing and retail space. Financing for its developments has been secured from the Department of Housing & Urban Development, The Department of Agriculture, Farmers Home Administration, Tax Free Municipal Bonds, and Conventional Lenders, with recourse and non-recourse funding. Professional Development Corporation has developed the capability to develop, construct, finance, own, and manage all its properties, regardless of size, location, or type of development. The management of these projects is under contract to Campbell Properties, a sole proprietorship owned by Thomas H. Campbell, which has an established home office staff to handle this function. Professional Development Corporation throughout its history, has maintained a policy of close contact with the management of all its projects to assure compliance with all the regulatory agreements, requirements of the lenders, FMHA, and HUD guidelines, and to assure the financial and physical stability of all its projects. Professional Development Corporation has never had a project fall into a cash deficit position, for had a project in default of any of the above regulatory agreements. THOMAS H. CAMPBELL Mr. Campbell is, by degree, an Electrical Engineer, with a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from Christian Brothers College, 1959. He was the owner of Campbell & Campbell Consulting Engineers from 1963 to 1972, and was involved in the Architectural Engineering of various projects, a partial list of which is attached, representing a cross section of the various projects. Since 1972, Mr. Campbell has been involved in the real estate development business, and was the President of UMIC Real Estate Development Corporation from 1976 to 1980. While serving in this position, he was involved in the development of approximately 3000 units of housing. From 1980 to present, Mr. Campbell has been the President and Chairman of Professional Development Corporation, and has developed approximately $60,000,000 in new developments, incorporating some 1600 units of housing, 150,000 square feet of retail space and several single family subdivisions and single family housing. Mr. Campbell is 58 years of age, and carries $1,700,000 of key man insurance for his company. All construction is personally monitored by Mr. Campbell, and the company's Project Managers. Personal inspections of all occupied projects are made by Campbell Properties staff on a monthly basis. A list of the properties developed by Professional Development Corporation and managed by Campbell Properties follows: LOCATION ~kUNITS DATE OCCUPANCY MORTGAGE* ROSEDALE, MS 24 1981 98$ $537 DREW, MS 36 1982 92$ $865 MEMPHIS, TN 147 1984 98$ $5,050 IUKA, MS 78 1983 96$ $1,443 CLEVELAND, MS 40 1983 98$ $1,045 HOLLY SPRINGS, MS 50 1983 98$ $1,083 BYHALIA, MS 25 1984 98$ $660 RED OAKS, MS 25 1984 98$ $663 HORN LAKE, MS 48 1984 98$ $1,292 GREENVILLE, MS 48 1985 98$ $1,283 FORREST CITY, ARK 37 1985 98$ $1,120 WINDSOR, CO 36 1984 98$ $1,193 BERTHOUD, CO 31 1984 98$ $958 MEMPHIS, TN 396 1985 98$ $7,254 FT. LUPTON, CO 12 1985 98$ $300 CLEVELAND, MS 37 1986 98$ $989 MEMPHIS, TN 98 1986 98$ $6,400 TUNICA, MS 80 1986 98$ $2,376 WEDOWEE, AL 24 1985 88$ $584 _ DALEVILLE, AL 48 1985 98$ $1,045 MEADOWOOD, AL 32 1985 98$ $580 SUNRISE I 50 1986 98$ $1,268 SUNRISE II 50 1986 97$ $1,305 EAGLE, CO 36 1986 98$ $1,031 LAMAR, CO 37 1986 98$ $989 FORT MORGAN, CO 25 1986 98$ $800 THE WILLOWS, MPHS (S.F.) 56 1987/88 100$ $1,548 THE WILLOWS, MS (S.F.) 84 1989/90 (U.C.) $ 958 LAJUNTA, CO 24 1989 100$ $369 WESTWIND, MS 92 1989 (R.S.) $3,300 WILLOW GROVE, MPHS. (S.C.) 1989/90 (R.S.) $3,700 * Thousands (S.F.) - Single Family subdivision and Single Family residences. (S.C.) - Shopping Center (R.S.) - Renting Stage (U.C.) - Construction Stage LIST OF PROJECTS: (Architectural Engineering Design) APARTMENTS Amarillo, Texas 12-story high-rise Little Rock, Ar. 12-story high-rise Albuquerque, N.M. 10-story high-rise E1 Paso, Texas 10-story high-rise Lexington, Ky. 14-story high-rise Louisville, Ky. 10-story high-rise Evansville, Ind. 12-story high-rise Nashville, Tn. 12-story high-rise Hot Springs, Ar. 12-story high-rise NURSING HOME FACILITIES: Greenville, N.C. Fairhope, Alabama Richmond, Virginia Spartanburg, S.C. Towson, Md. Columbia, S.C. Cherry Hill, N.J. Wilmington, S.C. Greensboro, N.C. Tampa, Fla. Winston-Salem, N.C. Lafayette, Ind. Gastonia, N.C. MOTEL PROJECTS: Miami Springs, Fla. Bloomington, Ind. Tucumcari, N.M. Shreveport, La. Lancaster, Ohio Indianapolis, Ind. OFFICE BUILDINGS: Cincinnati, Ohio 3 five-story Indianapolis, Ind. 12 story Louisville,_Ky. 5 story Paducah, Ky. 4 story Kansas City, Mo. 5 story St. Louis, Mo. 5 story Houston, Texas 3 story Atlanta, Ga. 10 story New Brunswick, N.J. 6 story Memphis, Tn. 14 story SCHOOL PROJECTS: Twelve (12) in the Memphis, Shelby County Area EXHIBIT - B NON-RECOURSE BOND FINANCING EXHIBIT B PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION VAIL COLORADO 304 UNITS USE OF FUNDS $15,000,000 100.00$ ISSUANCE COST (UNDERWRITER) 300,000 2.00$ LAND 2,920,500 19.47$ CONSTRUCTION 8,085,000 53.90$ ARCHITECT 280,500 1.87$ CONSTRUCTION INTEREST 1,713,000 11.42$ DEVELOPERS COUNSEL 54,000 0.36$ BOND COUNSEL 63,000 0.42$ BOND PURCHASERS COUNSEL 31,500 0.21$ DEBT. SERVICE RESERVE 1,500,000 10.00$ ISSUERS COUNSEL 37,500 0.25$ TRUSTEE 4,500 0.03$ TRUSTEES COUNSEL 6,000 0.04$ BOND PRINTING 3,000 0.02$ OFFICIAL STATEMENT 1,500 0.01$ TOTAL $15,000,000 100.00$ 5J31 /90 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATON 6685 QUINCE ,SUITE 111 EXHIBIT - B ~ MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE,38119 TEL 901-T53-9100 FAX 901-753-1127 VAIL, COLORADO PRO FORMA OPERATING STATEMENTS REVENUE RENTS. 20 EFFICIENCY CHFA $323 77,520 0.71 20 1 BEDROOM CHFA $347 83,280 0.60 21 2 BEDROOM CHFA $416 104,832 0.55 80 EFFICIENCY $582 559,065 1.28 80 1 BEDROOM $742 712,317 1.28 83 2 BED ROOM $971 966,716 1.28 304 GROSS INCOME 2,503,730 VACANCY ALLOWANCE 5% ($125,175) NET OPERATING INCOME 2,378,556 EXPENSES OPERATING EXPENSES 486,400 AMOUNT AVAILABLE FOR DEBT SERVICE 1,892,156 DEBT. SERVICE RATIO 1.25 l VAIL300R.XLS 1 5/30/90 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATON 6685 QUINCE, SUITE 111 MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE,38119 901-753-1100 FAX 901-753-1127 VAIL COLORADO CONSTRUCTION COST BREAKDOWN AND LAND VALUE THE FOLLOWING ESTIMATED COSTS WERE OBTAINED FROM THE OWNER'S RECORDS AND INFORMATION, AND REPRESENT THE OWNER'S ESTIMATE OF OR THE ACTUAL COSTS. COST TOTAL OF TOTAL PER S.FT. LAND /OFF SITE IMPROVEMENTS $2,920,500 19.47% 7.00 HARD COSTS SITE UTILITIES 275,419 1.84% 1.51 PAVING 436,020 2.91% 2.39 SITE IMPROVEMENTS 215,630 1.44% 1.18 BUILDINGS 7,157,931 $8,085,000 53.90% 39.17 SOFT COSTS 0.00% 0.00 ARCHITECT/ENGINEER 280,500 1.87% 1.53 UNDERWRITER 300,000 2.00% 1.64 LEGAL,ETC 201,000 1.34% 1.10 $781,500 5.21 % 0.00 INTEREST 0.00% 0.00 INTEREST 3,213,000 $3,213,000 21.42% 17.58 BOND/LOAN 215,000,000 73°k 82.08 TOTAL PROJECT VALUE 620,455,735 700°k 111.94 VAIL300R.XLS 1 5i3o~so PAIL COLORADO ANNUAL OPERATION & MAINTENANCE EXPENSES: CARETAKER 31,616 SUPPLIES ~ 2,432 PAINTING 8~ DECORATING 13,376 GENERAL MAINTENANCE 12,160 GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 38,912 SERVICES 9,728 FURNITURE 8~ FURNISHING RELACEMENT 0 MISC OPER. COST 4,864 SUB TOTAL 113,088 0 ELECTRICITY 27,968 WATER 17,024 SEWER 17,024 HTR.FUEVOTHER (TELE.) 0 TRASH REMOVAL 7,904 SUB TOTAL 69,920 0 MANAGER SALARY-RESIDENT 26,266 MANAGEMENT FEE 84,050 ACCOUNTING 7,296 LEGAL 3,648 OTl-IER ADMINSTRATIVE 6,080 SUB TOTAL 127,340 0 REAL ESTATE TAXES 95,213 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 0 OTHER TAXES FEES PERMITS 0 SUB TOTAL 95,213 0 PROPERTY INSURANCE 77,192 COMPENSATIONS 0 BOND PREMIUMS 3,648 SUB TOTAL 80,840 0 INTEREST EXPENSE 0 OTHER EXPENSES 0 SUB TOTAL 0 0 TOTAL $486,400 VAIL300R.XLS 1 - 5/3o~so CONSTRUCTION TRADE ITEM BEAKDOWNS PROJECT: VAIL COLORADO TRADE ITEM AMOUNT 1 2 LANDSCAPING 3 INT. TRIM DOORS WINDOWS 4 CABINET-TOP-VANITY-PANTRY 51NSULATION I 6 CAULKING & SEALANTS 7 FINISH HARDWARE 8 DRYWALL 9 CARPET 10 PAINTING 11 FIREPLACE 12 HOUSE NUMBERS 13 TOILET ACCESSORIES 14~MIRRORS ~ I 151METAL CLOSET SHELVING ~ 161KITCHEN EQUIPMENT I 171PLUMBING ~ 181 19~ ELECTRICAL 20~CEILING FANS 21 ICONCRETEISTEEL I 22ICERAMIC TILE ~ 231ROUGH CARPENTRY 241ROOFING/SHEET METAL I 25~GUTTERS & DOWN SPOUTS ~ 26 MISC. I I 27 SEWER/WATER/STORM 28~ WALKS ~ 29~PAVING GRAVEUDIRT I 30~BLINDS ~ 32'PLAYGROUND 331 34~GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 351GENERAL OVERHEAD 361 ~ 371TOTAL ~ 8,085,000 VAIL300R.XLS 1 IFMIIIS - H 11-17 It[IIE 1 tE11 to/tE F/1 SI1 A11 A11 IF REIIAI E/[ItE IF t11fE1111 IItE I~lt NM 3ri~lsslt 12-11 Nl~dpfAlpalt 11-11 M11'1 L//•It[IME IIMiTi llOi /F IEIIAII IA11t/t REITI IICINE l1MlTI A3EA 1 1EASIli ! FElidi 3 4EIS03 4 IEJISN 3 IIIM 1 11tH 2 A0311 31111 l 1EA501 2 ?EAS011 3 rER501 1 ~SOM S rER: Galry 11/,451 III,IM 114,2M 321,331 301 1231 1251 /3N 1311 /4,3N /10,31 112,100 113,31/ 11/,~ • A01 {211 1311 f3N N1A /11,213 /12,125 314,10/ I1L,113 117,: Gstlr 111,151 il7,IN 1N,IM 121.351 SIT 1231 3251 /3N 131] {1,311 111,4N 112,001 4!3,311 113,3 Ali 1211 13N 13W N1A Ill,2R /II,QS 111,400 1t~,013 017,: kll~ IIi,9S1 II1,IM 1N,2N i21,JS1 S01 1234 /231 1301 1311 N,SN 111,4N 112,000 113,314 114,4 A11 12M '1301 i3N N11 11!,2!3 112,125 11/,/N 1t~,O13 117,: klares 111,431 il1,IM 114,IN 121,351 SII 1231 12:A IiN 1341 N,344 114,31 112,ON 113,343 {11,1 301 1211 3301 - i3M M1~ 31!,213 112,125 11/,4N 111,013 111,3 ENIt ~ t20,7N i23,1N 12A,A51 124,AM Sli 3323 13q NlL N/1 112,431 333,!!3 8!(1,1151 111,511 111,4 A01 13M N1~ 1511 IS77 I1S,52S 117,175 11!,411 122,2N 123,1 Elltrl il1,IS1 iN,4S1 172,151 124,4'SI S01 1273 1242 3151 NOS 111,401 112,149 111,131 /lS,S11 111,1 A11 1311 1351 N2l Ntl 1l1,N1 11/,M3 /1,131 111,713 120,2 Frtasal i11,4S1 111,IN 114,1N 121,351 331 Q31 1151 33M 1311 19,3N IIi,YI 112,ON 113,341 114,1 A!i 1211 1311 /3M N1~ 111,213 012,325 133,101 01'+,113 /17,2 ' br1u11 111,311 321,IS1 I23,W 3L,3N 511 1211 1311 1571 (117 011,500 01],IS4 111,711 11A,13t ill,) 111 fi4S 1371 M43 1313 113,100 iiS,711 117,731 H4,T23 121,3 ` 33!13! 1I7,1S4 114,Af1 372,151 121,311 311 1211 1217 i3/3 q11 110,714 112,251 113,711 flS,I13 111,5 311 1312 1345 Mii N71 11I,N3 111,7N 111,533 111,373 311,1 &~A 111,301 i11,1S1 123,A5i i2i,3N SIi i2M 1311 1371 N21 111,501 113,134 (13,111 11A,131 II1,T • 301 3313 1311 N13 IS13 113,300 IIS,n3 /U,731 114,121 121,3 iwoisa {l1,7N 120,250 122,151 i25,3N 501 1271 i2K 1335 NI1 1!1,013 112,151 111,214 015,113 111,0 N3 1332 3351 N27 N43 113,:75 115,111 117,K3 111,475 120,1' Mi~sNle 111,4.A 111,1N 111,2N i21,JS1 511 1231 1250 3341 _ 1317 t4, 34/ 110,133 112,000 /13,34/ 111,1 111 1210 3300 ~ 13N NI` 111.213 (12,125 114,100 111,013 117,2' • Murl~o I1/,f50 117,1N 111,2N 121,350 511 1231 12`+u 1101 1317 19,311 111,138 (12,000 113,344 1!4,1 M1 (230 1300 Ii~O N11 /11,213 /12,125 111,100 11L,013 111,: i~ctsa 11S,P~0 Il1,lN t20,IM 312,150 501 1241 1265 I;N 1331 34,401 111,313 132,150 11/,133 115,:1 AOI 1291 1311 1313 N12 111,111 IR,575 015,340 IlL,4N 111,3' K~a~ 11/,/SO 117,IN i19,2N 121,351 N1 1231 1:54 1109 1141 N,34/ 110,111 112,000 111,1// 111,1 All IiJO 1'N /~60 N11 111,211 112,125 114,100 111,013 (17,2' ~ ExH181'T -c ~ RENTS WITH DOLA GRANT OF a500,000A0 5/31 /90 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATON 6685 QUINCE ,SUITE 111 ~ EXHIBIT - C MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE,38119 TEL 901 753-1100 FAX 901 753-1127 VAIL, COLORADO PRO FORMA OPERATING STATEMENTS REVENUE RENTS 20 EFFICIENCY CHFA $323 77,520 0.71 _ 20 1 BEDROOM CHFA $347 83,280 0.60 21 2 BEDROOM CHFA $416 104,832 0.55 80 EFFICIENCY $565 542,425 1.24 80 1 BEDROOM $720 691,115 1.24 83 2 BED ROOM $942 937,942 1.24 304 GROSS INCOME 2,437,115 VACANCY ALLOWANCE 5% ($121,856) NET OPERATING INCOME 2,315,259 EXPENSES OPERATING EXPENSES 486,400 AMOUNT AVAILABLE FOR DEBT SERVICE 1,828,859 DEBT. SERVICE RATIO 1.25 ' VAILC300.XLS 1 DOLA and CHFA are willing to match the local private sector contribution dollar for dollar up to approximately S3, 000, 000. DoLA will provide up to $500,000 in State funds to help pay for infrastructure and/or site development. CHFA will allocate up to $500,000 in 1990 Federal Low Income Housing Tax Credits. The LIHTC provides a toll for raising cash equity for the housing project. The developer can sell the tax credits to investors who will receive a ten year stream of credits against Federal Income Taxes. In return, they become limited partners in the housing development, paying in a discounted value of roughly fifty cents on the tax credit dollar to the groject. ($500,000 in tax credits times 10 years times $.50 equals $2,500,000.) ' Protect Selection Criteria SELECTION WILL BE BASED ON THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA ARE ADDRESSED: 1) FINANCIAL COMMITMENT FROM THE LOCAL INDUSTRY. The minimum is one dollar for each dollar requested from DOLA and CHFA. It is critical to the positive evaluation of the project that the local business interests demonstrate a significant financial contribution. In order for a groject to work and for the proposal to meet this first criterion, commitments from the private sector may be included that have real economic value but are difficult to quantify with an exact dollar figure. An example may be a commitment to cover some portion of a developa?ent's operating losses during rent-up or slow periods, to share in a lawn guarantee, or to invest in tax credits. With that in mind, DOLA and CHFA are open to reviewing proposals with creative or unique financial commitments. 2j FINANCIAL COMMITMENT FROM THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTFS). This is a competitive process and the commitment ahouid be appropriate to the scale of the project. For example, local governments could provide cash, donate land, provide services, or waive fees. Proposals will only be considered that have the full support of the local governments. 3) A COMMITMENT TO SERVE THE LOWEST INCOME PERSONS FOR THE LONGEST TERM. For example, with all other things being the same, a project that includes 150 low income units is better that one with 100 units. Likewise, a project that commits to reserving the units for low income persons for 20 years is better than one that includes a 15 years commitment. The LIHTC allocation plan provides specific criteria for evaluation of this criteria. 4) SITE CONTROL. This means ownership of the site or an option to buy the site. This criterion will be evaluated based on the degree of certainty that the site is available for development within the constraints of the proposed schedule. RENiKS • 1a 11-07 INCOME 1 RENT Ti1lE fOf SI1 /NI 601 OF MEII/N IMCINE /r YIYIEMIIi IIfE Nle of 8111 ftialalr 11-8 I~tt of CNiA Ae{orl: 01-90 N Y I' N L O N•! M C O N E 118117 tWf 1i NE111M1 MAIiNUN NEMTI INCOME UNITS AREA i PERSN 2 PEASa1 3 PEISdI / PEJt50• 1 /INN l IORII 2 IO1N 3 IIRN 1 PEASIN 2 PERSON I PERSON / PERSIM S PERS1 Ga1ty 111,9'30 017,18 011,28 121,J51 SOI 1234 1251 138 /3/I 8,31/ 110,68 III,000 113,311 177,17 601 1210 9501 038 Nlb 111,213 112,125 111,100 116,013 117,:5 CYSIer i1/,931 111,18 111,28 121,331 512 1231 1250 !3N 1317 f9, 311 110,611 112,001 /13,38 114,11 101 1210 1300 03M Nib 111,211 112,121 111,101 116,013 /17,29 Otli~ 111,150 117,18 iH,2N f21,3S1 SOt 0231 1250 1300 031) N,SN 110,681 (12,000 111,311 111,11 601 128 f3W 1361 Nlb 117,273 112,025 1 8,100 11/,013 117,29 Delara 114,9'A 111,18 019,28 121,330 SOi 1231 I2`J0 1700 1311 19,341 110,bB1 112,001 /13,31/ 011,11 601 1~1 /30/1360 816 111,213 112,125 111,400 116,073 !17,19 Et1le f20,7N 123,78 126,651 029,68 Sot 1323 13/I 1111 1117 112,131 it1,113 116,656 IlI,S00 119,40 601 1311 816 1500 1577 115,525 117,775 119,911 122,28 123,97 Ellttl 111,150 f19,1S1 f22,IS1 (2/,950 SOt 1273 1242 1351 1405 110,101 912,169 f14,031 115,594 111,91 601 0321 q51 821 1117 H3,OM 111,913 111,131 111,)13 120,21 frttat 114,95! 011,18 111,28 121,350 SOt 0231 9250 1390 13/1 19,38 110,601 112,08 113,311 111,41 60L 1210 1300 1310 NI6 011,213 /12,125 111,100 116,013 111,29 6ulitl/ 171,48 121,051 t23,6S0 026,300 SOt 1211 9301 1310 827 /11,500 i13,IS6 (11,711 116,131 117,75; " 601 1315 1370 NIS 1311 (13,100 /13,18 111,131 18,125 121,30; iilfi~ 111,130 919.600 122,150 021,501 301 1261 1217 f3/S 1341 110,119 112,250 173,181 /13,311 116,331 60>< 1322 1315 Nl3 871 112,863 111,100 116,331 111,375 119,11: 6na1 111,100 121,030 123,650 126,300 SOt 1281 1301 1370 827 111,500 113,156 111,711 /16,131 /11,75: • 601 1345 1110 /113 1513 113,800 f13,JN 117,138 119,725 121,30: 6unnisoe 117,740 120,250 122,750 123,300 SOi 1271 1246 1355 f/11 (11,063 112,656 111,219 115,113 117,07E 601 1332 1356 827 1193 113,275 113,181 417,063 U0,975 120,19: Mitsf~le 111,930 111,100 119,200 121,351 SOt 1231 1.''30 1X10 1311 19,341 110,611 (12,000 (13,3/4 111,111 i0t 1210 0300 ~ f3N 1416 111,21) 112,125 1!4,400 116,013 IiJ,291 Nuerl~to ~ 111,950 (11,100 019,201 121,310 SOY, uN 12'.A 1300 1347 19,341 110,611 012,000 013,341 177,177 601 f2N 1300 1360 1176 111,213 112,125 (11,/00 116,013 117,291 Juksw 115,130 111,101 120,/N 112,631 SO! 128 1263 1;11 1361 19,906 011,313 112,150 111,156 113,289 601 1291 1311 0313 812 411,811 113,313 015,300 116,911 /11,31) K1ari 111,939 11],100 119,200 121,350 SOt 1211 1'SO 1301 ii/7 19,311 110,68 112,440 111,311 114,411 601 1280 1?00 160 1116 411,213 112,125 /11,/00 116,013 (11,291 EXHIBIT - D RENTS WITH DOLA GRANT OF 500,000.00 LAND AT NO COST TO PROJECT. 5J31/90 - PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATON 6685 QUINCE ,SUITE 111 EXHIBIT - D MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE,38119 TEL 901-753-1100 FAX 901-753-1127 - VAIL, COLORADO PRO FORMA OPERATING STATEMENTS REVENUE RENTS 20 EFFICIENCY CHFA $323 77,520 0.71 20 1 BEDROOM CHFA $347 83,280 0.60 21 2 BEDROOM CHFA $416 104,832 0.55 80 EFFICIENCY $461 442,931 1.01 80 1 BEDROOM $588 564,349 1.01 83 2 BED ROOM $769 765,902 1.01 304 GROSS INCOME 2,038,815 VACANCY ALLOWANCE 5% (6101,941) NET OPERATING INCOME 1,936,874 EXPENSES OPERATING EXPENSES 486,400 AMOUNT AVAILABLE FOR DEBT SERVICE 1,450,474 DEBT. SERVICE RATIO 1.25 VAILD300.XLS 1 IEMTIl3 - b 11-11 1NLtNE 1 LENT Ti1tE ft1 SO3 INI E11 1F MEtIAN IMC/NE 1T NINfEM111 t12E t~l~ N Nlr O~ielwt~ 12-11 bleNOiLlgwlt 0l-N NNt't i1N-lNttNE LINITt IIOI 1F NEIIANI NAt1NNN IENTI 1NCINF IINiTt IAEA i fE1SOr 2 PE1iN 3 FENSrI / lEJf501 ! IIIM 111tH 2 i01M 3 IIIN l PEtSON 2 tERSON 3 ?EISON 1 ?EASOM S PERSI Qaley 01/,151 117,1N 111,2M 121,JS1 Slt 1231 1250 1300 1317 11,311 /IO,EN 112,000 113,341 111,1 • LIt 0211 1311 IJN NIL 111,213 112,125 114,101 Ill,Oli 117,P Gsle? Oli,fil 1U,IN 111,211 021,351 51t 1231 0251 1301 1347 If,304 III,Nt 112,001 013.341 111,1. MI 1211 1311 13N NiL 1!1,213 112,125 111,100 IIL,Ol3 017,2' hlt~ 114,150 117,IM 111,2M 121,351 5At 0231 1251 1300 iii? N,3N 011,EN 112,001 113,311 011,1: EIt 12M "130! ISN NiL 111,213 112,125 114,400 01E,013 177,2' lelwas 114,131 1f7,1M 111,2N 121,351 SI1 1231 12:~ 1300 1317 N,IN 010,111 112,001 113,341 011,1: • NI 1210 1301 ~ 13N NiL 011,211 N2,i25 111,400 fU,Ol3 117,2' F~l~ 121,7M f2I,7M 1?L,LSI 12f,1N SIt 1327 IS/7 IIIL Iii! H2,f31 /!1,113 01E,ESE 0!1,500 Ilf,fl LOt 13N NiL 15M 1577 115,525 11),775 IN,1N 022,2N 123,1; ElNrl 017,151 111,151 {}2,151 121,151 SOt 1213 0212 1351 1405 010,101 112,Nf 011,131 Oli,5f4 OIL,1~ L1t 1327 1351 1121 1117 /I3,OM 01/,113 O1L,131 /11,113 020,21 f?srrl ~ 011,151 117,IM 01f,2N 021,351 SII 1231 1251 03M 1347 N,3N 011,E11 112,001 113,341 011,11 LIt 1210 1311 /3M N1L 111,213 I12,t2i 111,101 111,113 117,21 Wtiell NI,IN RI,OSI 123,LS1 12L,3M 511 12N 13N ISn 1127 011,501 115,151 ill,nl NE,431 tq,7: L1t 1313 1370 NI3 ISI3 013,100 113,711 117,731 /11,725 121,31 iil0i~ 017,150 IN,L11 122,151 121,501 Slt /2M 1211 RIS 1311 110,7 N 012,251 /13,711 /15,111 111,5] LOt 1322 1311 1111 N71 112,N3 111,100 111,531 111,371 111,1/ ira.l (11,100 111,051 123,151 12L,3N 51t 1211 1311 0371 N27 111,501 113,151 114,)11 111,431 117,75 • LIt 1315 1371 N43 1313 Il],100 IlS,7N 01],131 111,)13 121,31 iwieisa {17,700 020,250 122,751 125,310 SOt 1271 12K 1355 N1! 011,013 012, ESE 011,211 IIS,Il3 117,07 Nt 1312 1351 N27 N13 115,.75 IlS,iN 117,013 /ft,17i 020,19 Mus/ale 111,1`.A 117,100 111,201 121,351 SIt 1:31 1230 13~i0 0317 11,511 010,111 012,000 013,311 011,1.1 LIt 0210 1300 ~ 13N NIL Ill,2l3 112,t2i 011,100 tfl,il3 117,29 • IYutive 011,150 /17,100 111,201 121,350 SII 0231 42`~1? 1300 0311 09,341 /II,NI 012,000 113,311 111,11 • Nt 1210 1300 1310 N1L 011,213 112,125 111,000 111,013 117,29 iK1sa 015,150 III,l01 /20,4M 122,E50 SOt 1'.11 1265 /;1f 1511 09,10E !11,313 112,750 111,15E O1S,:B Nt 029) 1311 1313 N12 111,111 113,575 015,300 /lE,9N 111,31 Kiar~ 111,130 017,100 011,201 121,350 50t /:il /.'SO Ii00 1111 If, 341 N1,111 112,000 113,510 111,11 Nt 1:10 0'00 /~b0 NIL OII,:IS 112,125 011.100 01E,OII 011,:9 EXH181T E UNDERWRITER'S RESUME JWnRGAN KEEGAN & COMPANY Ifs, Morgan Keegan & Company, Inc. ("Morgan Keegan") is a full service investment banking firm based in Memphis, Tennessee, serving clients nationally and internationally. The firm has twenty offices in ten states and employs over 850 people. Morgan Keegan is a member of the New York Stock Exchange and its parent, Morgan Keegan, Inc., is publicly traded with its stock listed on the New York Stock Exchange. The firm's sales department has over 400 registered representatives including over 100 institutional salespersons. Morgan Keegan is the nation's largest underwriter of taxable municipal bonds; the only firm based outside of New York in the list of top ten underwriters of municipal housing bonds; and the 52nd largest underwriter of bng term municipal bonds. The Public Finance Division is responsible for structuring and managing municipal bond underwritings and placements. The Public Finance Division is part of the firm's Investment Banking Division which maintains offices in Memphis, Little Rock, and New Orleans. A lisitng of Morgan Keegan's senior management transactions is available upon request, a{ong with references. PERSONNEL ,)amen M. FoyvlPr. ,j~„ First Vice President, works out of Morgan Keegan's T. J Raney & Sons Division in Little Rock, Arkansas. Mr. Fowler is a graduate of Hendrix College where he earned a B. A. degree, the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville School of Law where he earned a J. D. degree, Southern Methodist University where he earned a Master of Law degree and the Goethe Institute in Staufen-im-Breisgau, West Germany. Prior to joining T. J. Raney ~ Sons in 1983, Mr. Fowler was a member of the Rose Law Firm, a professional association, where he practiced in the municipal and corporate securities law area. Mr. Fowler has specialized in multi-family housing revenue bonds. i , ~ ~ ,(I ~ O~MON S i 7 _ - _ ~ D I I .A _ - _ I ~ ~vb. Moo • ~ f~ 1 ~ I I I t r ~ b I C~, ~ III~~? 0 tll ~ ~I? itIII1~~ it A I - n' 1 1 1 1 1 1 t,j,j~ V ~,j j l 1 1 1 1 1 _ I f I II(,I~ lam' ~ ~ 1111 il" I . 11 ~ b ~ UI i. I •~'111~ Ir ~ I ~E 11 ~ I ~~T ~ ~Iil II ~ . " ~ ~ v~ Y c~.ta6 ` ~ I~ E - 6 ~j ~ ~ pL~'t Y,.nn l u No • I 4 I. ' h'fG+k~~' ' o s ~ i 0 7 i6 4~ ~ I e v V _ D 8 ~~4_ _ _ _ ~ r ii ~ -r~ P P-o P O S E D ~G' A SITE • ioo goo io4' 304u~Jrrs -N--- - - Rt; _ . i PLAY ~ PLAY 1111 COMM. i l ~ ~ ~ ~ t ' ~ =_f21~ Y . Y ~ I. }'x'17 . \ prAY CARE ~ ~ . ' 1 ~ ~ ~ i ~ - C ~ 57REET - A TYPICAL 10 Ac. SITE 96 UNITS ~ ~ ~ ~ s . ' 1~ i ~ ~ . r., . ~ ~ - r ter. ' ~ . r t ~ ~ - r r ' V ~ ( / I ti' ~ i .L I 29~-9~~ . i BED RM. BATH j KIT., ~a. ~ ~ I ~ ~ DINING - - n - V i t• ~ ~ ~ I ~ { ~ BED RM. ~ O ~ LIVING ~~I 2 BEDROOM 760 S.F (64S.F. I/2 STAIR) (B) 2 BEDROOM _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 , _ _ ` , _ ~ ~ 1 i'' ~ _ l~lr~~ i ~ _ 9.. ` _ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~-'1--U BATH KIT. _ BED.RM. ~ ' m ~ ~ ~ - LIVING DINING i !V r 10~- I~~ ~ IB -10~~ I BEDROOM 606 S.F. (34 S.F. 12 STAIR) (8) I BEDROOM i ~i ,i ~ ~ . t . t' tg -10 I 1 ~ I rt-t K1t ~ I g,AT H t t . _t Dt~tNO LtV, gE0 RM" V V F ~i2 STAtR~ q~g~ S.F. ~34 s` 4 BEDROOM t8~ ~ BEDRQp~AS 29 - 9~~ C~ I OBI BEDROOMI DEN i ' ~ U ~ N I i B.2 BEDROOM 2 KIT. j ~.r~ , DINING BEDROOM B. ~ ~ KIT. ~ B.3 BEDROOM 3 ' ~ ~ ° ~ ~ DINING _ ~ - ~ ' N - ~ N I BEDROOM I ~ i i B 4 BEDROOM 4 t_IVING LIVING M W 29-9~ 1 2 BEDROOM 760 aF 4 BEDROOM 150 S. F• CONVERSION (4) BATH (LIVING,DINING,DEN) L 29`-9 ` ~ 18`-10" ~ 10 -8" h i - i N LIVING - 1 i - r~- • DINING I BEDROOM I -M . STO BATH I ~i~i I BEDROOM BATH ~ KIT. I KIT. ~ gEDR00M 2 I~ ~ . 'I' _ _ µ Q ~ - - - ~ ' DINING - .II c~~t -N 4 I ~ ~ i :BEDROOM r,l ~ BEDROOM 3 B, LIVING DEN Q kL B_ rn i 29 -9" 2 BEDROOM 760 S,F. 3 BEDROOM 1366 S.E CONVERSION 2~ BATH (LIVING, DINING, DEN) • ~ 29~-9~ .L 18-10~~ 10-II~~ ~ . tl..~r-~.....~ i i i BEDROOM ! ~ i ~ r~ • ~ - N r-- ~ DINING BATH i STO ~lU I KITCHEN BEDROOM BAT I K1T. ~ ~ ~ ~ g• 2 BEDROOM 2 I ~ - - _ DINING - ~ N ~ ~ N, 1 I i BEDROOM I ~ LIVING ~ LIVING ~ g. BEDROOM 3 B. . . rP 29~-5 2 BEDROOM 760 S.F - 3 BEDROOM 1241 S.F OONVERSION (LIVING.KITCH~IV, DINING, 2~t BATHS 18-10~~ ~ 10~-II~~ a ~ o 'I . I LIVING/DINING 'c~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~CL. BEDROOM 2 co 18~-10~~ ~ KITCHEN BATH 2 10 i ~ ! 3' v I I ~ ~ IUI BATH , BATH I ~ KIT. ~ BREAKFAST _ - j LIV./BEDRM./DIN. i n -~n N BEDROOM I i 18~ -10~~ 0 BEDROOM ~ 48 t S. F. 2 BEDROOM 1087 S.F CONVERSION (LARGE MASTER BEDROOM, BREAKFAST - k;~ ~ ' ~ -s- 1 Deaver Invest~rt Advisors, Inc _ _ . ~ri J b33 S. ~..:.....d. Saat ~ Sure 1800 - _ ~ Pbst Office Boz 17487 Deaya, Colorado 80217 {303)293-5388 lodger Anderson, C.F A. Preadent Direrta of Portfolio Management June 5, 1990 Ron Phillips Town I`sanager .Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road West Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Ron: ' I would like to appeal at the next Town Council meeting the decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission made on June 4 to deny me permission to install two gas fireplaces in place of one wood burning stove in my home being built at 1175 Sandstone Drive. The Planning and Environmental Commission indicated that the current ordinance did not have flexibility to meet my request. A brief review of my request is as follows. I wish to install one wood burning fireplace and two Peterson gas log fireplaces. It is my understanding that under the current ordinance I am allowed one wood burning fireplace and one wood burning stove to be installed in my residence and in a caretaker unit. I am willing to give up the right to a caretaker fireplace and wood burning stove and wood burning stove in the main residence for the right to install two Peterson gas log fireplaces. I share the Valley's concern about pollution. It is my belief that I am offering the Valley a better solution than the current ordinance. Sincerely, odger Anderson - - /Im TO: Planning & Environmental C~.~.~...ission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 4, 1990 SURTECT: Appeal of Staff Decision Relating to Fireplaces for the Anderson Residence, 1275 Sandstone Road Lots 1 & 2, Blk 2 I~ionsrfdge Fil 4 Applicant: Sidney Schultz for Todger Anderson I. ISSUE Sidney Schultz, as representative for the Andersons, has filed an appeal of a recent staff decision to prohibit the construction of three masonry woodburning fireplaces in the following configuration:~ne woodburning fireplace with ah ~i vent and two gas 3oq fireplaces with the .A vents, in the Anderson residence which is currently under construction. One of the fireplaces would be used for woodburning and two would be equipped with gas log sets. The request was made initially at the time of application for a building permit. Based on our existing ordinance, the staff denied the request for a second fireplace. The appeal of this decision is now being brought to members of the Planning Commission. II. STAFF DECISION The staff based the denial for the Anderson's request on t3rdinance ~4 Series of 3983. the ~crdinance provides #or ethe construction .af one solid #uel .burning device per dwelling unit with the exception granted fora second soli8 ef'uel burning device if it is a 'clean" woodburning stove. d'he ordinance also allows for the installation of unlimited" was appliances ~„rhich utilize the B vent.' An exception to this ruling was granted exclusively for accommodation units in Ordinance 28 Series of 1987. This ordinance allowed for the construction of a masonry fireplace in accommodation units only if it was equipped with a gas log set. A gas log set requires an A vent as does a woodburning fireplace. In response to public request the staff also took the issue to Council on stay 14th°for discussion and policy direction because of continued requests for the construction of additional fireplaces to allow for gas logs. ~is°issue ~ _ related specifically to residential units. ~'!ie ~ouncif riirected staff ato aaend the +ordinance to a:Llow for the construction -of two ,masonry "fireplaces only if #~oth were 'to ~e 4squipped with gas logs: the ~wr?er ~rould Abe sequined to wive _ ~tp 'xh~ Might ato mourn -good: Staff is scheduling a worksession on this issue for the July 9th PEC meeting with final approval scheduled for the July 23rd PEC. The Town Council and the Planning and Environmental Commission directed staff to research fireplace ordinances and enforcement in other communities before implementing this change. ~?t"~this'~'time the ~stnff ~continues'to '?stand 7by the isP~; Sion tab teeny 'the s"equest Hof the -~ndersons Ito allow *he~ ...~..~..~struction ~ of two `e?dditionnl masonry #ireplaces for the " ~nstallatfon of gas logs. The staff believes this decision is appropriate given the existing ordinance and direction given to staff at the joint Council/PEC worksession. 21, May, 1990 APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION REGARDING USE OF GAS LOGS ANDERSON RESIDENCE - 1175 Sandstone Drive Approximately one month ago a building permit was issued for the Anderson Residence. The Building Department was told during the permit review process that the Owner wished to have one wood burning fireplace and two fireplaces with gas burning Iog sets. Since Town ordinances currently allow only one fireplace capable of burning wood per dwelling unit, the Building Department indicated that two of the three fireplaces shown must be gas 8ppliances. At Lhe Town Council work session an May 5, it was decided that no change to the ordinance would take place et this time. The general consensus was that if today someone wished to give up his right to burn wood entirely the Town would be willing to allow a maximum of two gas log sets per dwelling unit. The current ordinance allows one wood burning fireplace and a clean-burning wood stove per dwelling unit. In the case of the Anderson Residence, there were originally two lots that would have allowed a maximum of four dwelling units. With the down- zoning that occurred with this project there is still the possibility of having two dwelling units with a total of two wood burning fireplaces and two wood stoves. The appellant is requesting that he be granted the same privilege as others have who have installed gas log sets in their homes. He is willing to deed restrict the property as required, give the Town right of entry for inspections, or any other reasonable condition that the Town considers appropriate. If this request is not granted the Anderson Residence will have the wood burning fireplace and wood stove that is allowed. There - is no question that there will be less wood burning in the home and less pollution created if the two gas logs as proposed are installed. Aspen's resolution allowing gas logs is based on the facts that "fireplaces containing gas logs can pollute less than certified stoves, and many people would prefer a gas log- containing fireplace to a certified stove, end whereas even though gas log-containing fireplaces map be used to burn wood, the risk of citizens doing that is balanced by the desire of the city to allow devices that most residents and visitors will use properly..." If it is the intent of the Town to encourage the use of gas rather than wood, then this appeal should be granted. d for Todger Anderson ~ r ORDINANCE N0. 28 Series of 1987 AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 8.28 AIR POLLUTION CONTROL OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF VAIL PROVIDING FOR THE INSTALLATION OF SOLID FUEL BURNERS WITH CERTAIN SPECIFIED CONTROLS IN CERTAIN TYPES OF BUILDINGS IN SPECIFIC ZONE DISTRICTS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL, AND ADDING A SECTION SETTING FORTH PENALTIES FOR A VIOLATION OF THE ORDINANCE. WHEREAS, technology has been developed to allow certain types of gas burning fireplace logs to be utilized in solid fuel burning devices; and WHEREAS, the Town Council believes that the public health, safety and welfare will best be served by amending this Chapter to allow this new technology to be utilized in certain kinds of buildings and certain zoning designations within the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to ensure that should such devices be installed, they not be utilized for the burning of solid fuels. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Uail, Colorado, that: 1. Section 8.28.03.0 Solid Fuel Burning Devices of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail paragraph B. is hereby repealed and reenacted with amendments to read as follows: 8.28.030 Solid Fuel Burning Devices B. Gas Fireplaces The restrictions of this Chapter shaTi not apply to a fireplace fueled by natural gas, so long as said fireplace is designed and constructed so that said fireplace cannot be used or modified to burn solid fuels. Notwithstanding the foregoing, solid fuel burning devices may be installed in properties classified under the Town of Vail Building Codes as R-1 and which are also accommodation units pursuant to the definition of such contained in the Zoning Code, may install equipment, flues, fireboxes and other features in accordance with the applicable listings of U.L., A.G.A. or other recognized testing organizations for the sole purpose of placing within such equipment artificial logs which burn natural gas. Should such equipment be installed in accordance with this Section, it must be done pursuant to a Town of Vail building permit and in accordance with all pertinent building codes of the Town of Uail. Upon such installation, all such equipment shall be subject to a periodic inspection by reasonable notice by the `r Town of Vail Environmental Health Officer. The owner of any property containing such equipment shall pay to the Town of Vail the amount of thirty dollars ($30) per year on the first day of the year following the year in which said equipment was installed for each such solid fuel burning device, and the first day of each year thereafter during the time said equipment remains installed. The owner of any such device shall allow the Town of Vail Health Inspector access into the area where such device is located for the purposes of doing such an inspection. Such equipment shall have fixed a means to prohibit access to the firebox by casual means and unauthorized persons. There shall be a sign on the fireplace reading: "Caution - Gas Fireplace Only". Access to the firebox shall be for maintenance and repair, testing or inspection only. The device utilized to prohibit access shall be permanently closed by means of tamper resistant screws or other suitable means. 2. Chapter 8.28.030 Air Pollution Control of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby amended by the addition of Section 8.28.060 Penalties to read as follows: 8.28.060 Penalties It is unlawful for any person to violate any provision of this Chapter or to fail to comply with any of the requirements of this Chapter. Any person performing any act prohibited or declared to be unlawful by this Chapter or failing to perform an act required by or otherwise made mandatory by this Chapter shall be punished by a fine of not more than four hundred ninety-nine dollars ($499). Any such person shall be guilty of a separate offense for each and every day during any portion of which a violation of any provision of this Chapter is committed, continued, or permitted by such person and shall be punished accordingly. In addition to penalties provided in this Section, any condition caused or permitted to exist in violation of any provision of this Chapter shall be deemed a public nuisance, and may be by this Town similarly abated as such, and each day that such condition continues shall be regarded as a new and separate offense. 3. In order to enable development projects within the Town to install technologically superior gas logs this current building season, the Town Council determines that this Ordinance is necessary for the preservation of the public property, health, welfare, peace and safety. 4. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance; and the Town Council hereby -2- r ~ i - declares it would have passed this Ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. 5. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. 6. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this Ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED AS AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE this 28th day of July 1987, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this 28th day of July 1987. ~ p'y~ . Kent R. Rose, Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk -3- r'~ t ORDINANCE 24 Series of 1983 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REENACTING CHAPTER 28 OF THE VAIL MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO SOLID FUEL BURNING DEVICES; PROVIDING CERTAIN DEFINITIONS; REGULATING THE NUMBER AND CONSTRUCTION OF SOLID FUEL BURNERS; REQUIRING HEAT EFFICIENT UNITS; PROHIBITING COAL USAGE. WHEREAS, the setting of the Town of Vail in a valley between two mountains restricts air movement through the valley; WHEREAS; the movement of air through the Gore Valley is further restricted in cold times of the year; WHEREAS, the pollutants in the air caused by solid fuel burning devices have become increasingly worse; WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the pollution caused by solid fuel burning devices is exacerbated by the altitude, topography, climate and meteorology of the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that these sources of air pollution may be minimized by presently-existing, practical and economical technologies. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED 8Y THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. The Vail Municipal Code is amended by the addition of a new Chapter 8.28 "Air Pollution Control" which reads as follows: 8.28.010 Purpose and Applicability . These regulations are enacted for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, and general welfare of the residents and visitors in the Town of Vail. These regulations are intended to achieve the following more specific purposes: (1) To protect the air quality in the Town of Vail; ` (2) To reverse thd'trend towards increased air degradation in the Town of Vail; (3) To provide heat sources that are efficient and have a reduced polluting effect; (4) And to generally protect the air for the purpose of the public's health, safety and welfare. The provisions of this Chapter shall apply to all areas of the Town of Vail. v -2- 8.28.020 Definitions (1) Solid Fuel Burner: A fixed apparatus that burns fuel to provide heat, including, but not limited to, a masonry fireplace, prefabricated Zero clearance fireplace, freestanding fireplace, Franklin Stove, or air tight stove. (2) Oregon Method 7: Shall mean tests promulgated by the State of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality in effect on the date of certification as provided herein. (3) Refuse: Means all solid wastes, garbage and rubbish, whether combustible or noncombustible, including rubble. (4) Clean Solid Fuel Burnin4 Device: Any solid fuel burning device having particulate emissions of less than 0.33x10-6 gm/joule of useful heat output, averaged over at least six tests, or no more than 0.65x10-6 gm/joule of useful heat output for any single test. (5) Any word, term or phrase not hereto defined or specified shall be defined in accordance with Title 18 "Zoning" of the Yail Municipal Code or Title 8 "Health and Safety of the Vail Municipal Code. Seciton 8.28.030 Solid Fuel Burning Devices It shall be unlawful for any person to construct, install, maintain or operate any solid fuel burning device within the Town of Vail in a manner not in compliance with this section. (A) No building permit shall be issued for or including the installation of any solid fuel burning device(s) or component(s) thereof unless the number of such device or devices in each structure is less than or equal to the following: (1) Each dwelling unit may have one solid fuel burning device per dwelling unit. Reference (C) for exceptions. (2) A hotel, motel, inn or lodge may have one solid fuel burning device per lobby. Solid fuel burning devices in individual guest rooms, accorm~odation units and lock-offs are hereby prohibited. (3) A restaurant or bar may have one solid fuel burning device per restaurant or restaurant/bar combined. - -3- (B) Gas Fireplaces: The restrictions of this Chapter shall not apply to a fireplace fueled by natural gas, propane, or any similar liquid fuel so long as said fireplace is designed and constructed so that said fireplace cannot be used or modified to burn solid fuels. Gas fireplaces shall be permitted in any unit. (C) Additional Solid Fuel Burning Devices: Each dwelling unit may have two solid fuel burning devices in the following types of combinations: one fireplace and one clean woodburning stove or two clean woodburning stoves. 1. No building permit shall be issued for installation of any clean burning solid fuel burning device in any building of the Town of Vail unless the Vail Environmental Health Officer has first certified in writing that the device has particulate emissions less than or equal to those specified above. The Environmental Health Officer will so certify any device found to have the required emissions provided tests on that brand or class of de~cice are conducted by an approved independent testing using the "Oregon Method 7" and operating procedures as determined by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality or an equivilant procedure, as determined by the Environmental Health Officer. Tests must be conducted as a low-medium or lower burn rate, as defined by Oregon Method 7". On or before June l or each year, the Environmental Health Officer will publish a list of devices known to be certified, which list shall be available for inspection at the Community Development Officer. r 2. All solid fuel burning devices shall be constructed, installed, maintained and operated in such a manner that their operation will result in an increase in heating energy, i.e. that the heat supplied to the living area will be greater than that lost through air exchange during combustion. -4- 8.28.040 Coal Usage Prohibited The burning of coal is hereby prohibited within the Town of Vaii. 8.28.050 Refuse Burning Prohibited The burning of refuse in any solid fuel burning device is hereby prohibited within the Town of Vail. Section 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decisions shall not affect the vailidity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED ON FIRST READING TNIS ,~zz,G day of , 1983, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the /p ~ day of Q~~y 1983, at 7:30 p.m, in the Council Chambers ~of the _ Vail ~~lunici~l Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this ~T.~ day of , 1983. Rodney E. S1 ife'h, Mayor 1 ATTEST: Pamela A. 8randmeyer Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND OP.©ERED PUBLISHED _ _ ti:is /9Z`,~, day of _ _ 1983. ~ , ~ ~ rcdney Slit r, Mayor Par^21a A. 5randc.eyer Town C12rk ` TOWN OF NAIL/NAIL RESORT ASSOCIATION LEASE AGREEMENT THIS LEASE made and entered into this day of , 19 by and between the TOWN OF NAIL, a Colorado municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "the Town," and the NAIL RESORT ASSOCIATION, a Colorado not-for-profit corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Lessee." WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Town and Lessee entered into a lease on December 26, 1986 for the lease by the Town to the Lessee certain space in the Vail Transportation Center which lease convened on October 10, 1986 and is to terminate on October 9, 1991; and WHEREAS, the Town wishes to terminate said lease agreement and enter into a new lease agreement for the rental of a certain building owned by the Town and known as the old Post Office building and the Lessee is willing to do so. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and agreements contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Termination of Previous Agreement The lease made and entered into on December 26, 1986 by and between the Town and the Lessee for the lease by the Town to the Lessee of space at the Vail Transportation Center is hereby terminated. Z. Lease of Premises The Town hereby leases to Lessee and Lessee hereby leases from the Town a premises commonly known as the old Post Office building as more specifically described in Exhibit A attached and incorporated herein by reference. 3. Term The term of this lease shall commence May 1 19 90 and shall terminate on April 30 19 91 unless sooner terminated pursuant to the terms of this lease. 4. Rent Lessee shall pay to the Town as rent for the premises monthly rent in the amount of one thousand five hundred eleven dollars and twenty-five cents ($1,511.25) per month. Lessee agrees to make all payments to the Town under this Agreement on or before the first day of each month during the term hereof. Such payment shall be made without notice at the Finance Department of the Town of Vail, Colorado, in the Municipal Building in Vail, Colorado, or at such other place as the Town may hereafter designate by notice in writing to Lessee. 5. Leased Premises j Lessee shall use and occupy the premises solely for the operation of central reservations and marketing services, and for no other purpose. Lessee shall not use or permit the premises to be used for any purposes prohibited by any federal, state, county, or municipal law. Lessee shall use the premises in a careful, safe and proper manner. 6. Taxes and Fees Lessee shall pay to the Town all taxes, excises, license fees and permit fees of whatever nature, applicable to its operation in the premises and to take out and keep current all licenses, municipal, state or federal required for the conduct of its business hereunder. 7. Utilities The Town agrees that it will, at its own expense, furnish the necessary electricity, heating, lighting, trash removal, and water for the leased premises. Janitorial and all other services necessary to maintain the leased premises in a clean and orderly condition, as well as special lighting lamps not normally furnished by the Town, are to be secured and supplied at Lessee's own cost and expense. 8. Town's Access to Premises The Town and its agents shall have the right to enter the premises at all reasonable times to examine them, to show the premises to prospective purchasers, mortgagees, lessors or lessees, and to make and perform such cleaning, maintenance, repairs, alterations, improvements or additions as the Town may be required to perform under this lease or as the Town may deem necessary or desirable for the safety, improvement or preservation of the premises. If Lessee shall not be personally present to permit an entry into the premises, at any time when for any reason an entry therein shall be necessary or permissible, the Town or the Town's agents may enter the premises by use of a master key, or may forceably enter the premises, without rendering the Town or its agents liable therefor. 9. Alterations by Lessee Lessee shall make no permanent alterations, additions or improvements in or to the premises without the Town's prior written consent. All such work shall be performed in a good and workmanlike manner. All permanent alterations, additions or improvements upon the premises, including all panelling, partitions and the like, shall, unless otherwise agreed at the time the Town's consent is obtained or unless the Town requests removal thereof as provided in this agreement, become the property -2- of the Town, and shall remain upon, and be surrendered with the premises, as a part thereof at the end term of this lease. 10. Maintenance and Repairs Lessee shall not cause or permit waste, damage or injury to the premises. It shall at its own expense keep the leased property and all improvements thereto in good condition and shall make all repairs and replacements necessary to maintain the leased premises. All maintenance, repairs and costs associated with the Lessee air handling and conditioning system shall be paid for exclusively by Lessee. The Town shall remove snow from the parking lot and maintain the grass and landscaping. 11. Mechanics Liens a. Lessee shall pay or cause to be paid all costs for work done by it or cause to be done by it in or to the premises and Lessee shall keep the premises free and clear of all mechanics liens and other liens or claims of any kind on account of work done for Lessee or persons claiming under it. Should any liens be filed or recorded against the premises or any action affecting the title thereto be commenced, Lessee shall give Landlord written notice thereof. Lessee shall thereafter cause such liens to be removed of record within five (5) days after the filing of the liens. If Lessee shall desire to contest any claim of lien, it shall furnish the Town with security satisfactory to the Town of at least one hundred percent (1000 of the amount of the claim, plus estimated costs and interest. If a final judgment establishing the validity or existence of a lien for any amount is entered, Lessee shall pay and satisfy the same at once. b. At least thirty (30) days prior to the commencement of any work to the premises, by or for Lessee, or anyone claiming under Lessee, Lessee shall notify the Town of the proposed work and the names and addresses of the persons supplying labor and materials for the proposed work. During and prior to any such work on the premises, the Town and its agents shall have the right to go upon and inspect the premises at all reasonable times. 12. Casualty and Obsolescence a. If the premises shall be damaged by fire or any other cause and the Town shall elect to repair the damage, this lease shall continue in full force and effect and, if such damage shall render all or part of the premises untenable, the minimum rent due hereunder shall be proportionally abated (based on the proportion of the premises rendered untenable) from the date of such damage until such time as the premises have been made tenable. However, there shall be no abatement of rent if the fire or other cause of the damage shall be caused by the negligence or -3- misconduct of the Lessee, its agents, servants or employees, or by any other persons - entering upon the premises or the building by the expressed or implied invitation of the Lessee. b. If the premises are damaged by fire or other cause and the Town shall elect not to repair such damage, then this lease shall automatically terminate upon and effective as of the giving of notice by the Town of such election. Thereupon within thirty (30) days of the receipt of such notice, Lessee shall surrender to the Town the premises and all interest under this lease and the Town may reenter and take possession of the premises and remove Lessee therefrom. Lessee shall pay rent duly apportioned as of the date of such termination of this lease, and the Town and the Lessee shall be free and discharged from all obligations arising hereunder after the date of such termination. c. The Town shall notify Lessee of the decision of the Town to repair any damage to the premises promptly after making such decision. If the Town elects to repair, reconstruct or restore the premises or the building after any such damage, the Town shall promptly commence and with due diligence complete the repair, reconstruction and restoration of the premises so far as practical to the condition in which the premises or the building were immediately prior to such damage. In no event shall the Town be required to make any repairs or replacements to or of any of Lessee's lease hold improvements, fixtures, equipment, furniture, furnishings and personal property. Should the Town insure the personal property, furnishings, and equipment located within the premises, any proceeds received by the Town for damage to said personal property shall become the property of the Lessee. 13. Assignment and Subletting Lessee shall not assign, convey, mortgage, hypothecate or encumber this lease or any interest herein or sublet all or any part of the premises (any and all of which hereinafter shall be referred to as a "transfer") without the prior written consent of the Town in each instance. Any attempt to transfer without the Town's prior written consent shall be void and shall confer no rights upon any third person. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, if Lessee is not a natural person, any merger, dissolution, consolidation or other organization of Lessee, or any sale, transfer, pledge or other disposition of corporate stock or voting securities of Lessee or other ownership interests if Lessee is not a corporation which results in a change in the voting control of Lessee for which involves ten percent (10°~) or more of the voting securities of Lessee or other ownership interests if Lessee is not a corporation, all on an accumulative basis, -4- shall be deemed a transfer subject to the provisions of this section. Any transfer, assignment or sale by operation of law and any involuntary assignment of this lease or any interest of Lessee hereunder or any interest of Lessee in the premises shall be deemed a transfer subject to the provisions of this section. 14. Insurance Lessee covenants and agrees that it will, during the term hereof, carry a comprehensive general liability insurance policy, including automobile liability and products liability, with limits of not less than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00) for bodily injury or death of any person or persons or damage to property, naming the Town as an additional insured. Lessee shall furnish the Town a certificate of insurance. Ali such policies shall contain a provision that the same may not be cancelled or materially changed or altered without first giving thirty (30) days prior written notice to the Town. Lessee shall not at any time carry any stock of goods or do or suffer or permit anything to be done in or about the premises that is hazardous or that in any manner will violate, suspend, void, make inoperative or tend to increase the rate of any policies of insurance of any kind at any time carried by the Town upon the premises. 15. Injury to Person or Property Lessee covenants and agrees that the Town, its agents, servants and employees shall not at any time or to any extent whatsoever be liable, responsible or in any way accountable for any loss, injury, death or damage to persons or property or otherwise which at any time may arise in connection with the premises or be suffered or sustained by Lessee, its agents, servants or employees, or by any other person rightfully on the premises for any purpose whatsoever, whether such Toss, injury, death or damage shall be caused by or in any way result from or arise out of any act, omission or negligence of Lessee, its agents, servants or employees or of any occupant, subtenant, visitor or user of any portion of the premises, or shall result from or be caused by any interference with or obstruction of deliveries to the premises by any person or by the loss or destruction by any person of furniture, inventory, valuables, files or any other property kept or stored on or about the premises or by any other matter or thing unless resulting solely from the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Town, its agents, servants or employees. Lessee shall forever indemnify, defend, hold and save the Town free and harmless of, from and against any and all demands, claims, causes of action, liabilities, losses, damages or judgments on account of any of the foregoing -5- provided that this indemnity shall not extend to damages resulting solely from the ` gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Town, its agents, servants or employees. The foregoing obligation to indemnify shall include indemnification to the Town for all costs, expenses and liabilities (including, but not limited to, attorneys fees) incurred by the Town in investigating and defending any of the matters covered hereby. Lessee hereby waives all claims against the Town, its agents, servants and employees for damages to furnishings, fixtures, Lessee's improvements and betterments, goods, wares, merchandise or other property, in or upon or about the premises, and for injuries to or death of persons in or about the premises, and for loss of income or goodwill in connection therewith arising from any cause at any time other than damages resulting solely from the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Town, its agents, servants or employees. 16. End of Term Upon the expiration or other termination of the term of this lease, Lessee shall promptly quit and surrender to the Town the premises, broom cleaned, in good order and first class condition, ordinary wear excepted. If Lessee is not then in default hereunder, Lessee may remove from the premises any trade fixtures, equipment, and movable furniture and exhibits stored therein by Lessee, whether or not such trade fixtures or equipment are fastened to the building, provided however, that under no circumstances shall any trade fixture or equipment be removed without the Town's written consent if such fixture or equipment is used in the operation of the building or improvements or the removal of such fixture or equipment will result in impairing the structural strength of the building or improvements. Whether or not Lessee is in default hereunder, Lessee shall remove such alterations, additions, improvements, trade fixtures, equipment and furniture as the Town shall require. Lessee shall fully repair any damage occasioned by the removal of any trade fixtures, equipment, furniture, alterations, additions and improvements. All trade fixtures, equipment, furniture, inventory, effects, alterations, additions and improvements not so removed shall conclusively be deemed to have been abandoned and may be appropriated, sold, stored, destroyed, or otherwise disposed of by the Town without notice to the Lessee or any other person and without obligation to account therefor; and Lessee shall pay the Town for all expenses incurred in connection with such property, including, but not limited to, the cost of repairing any damage to the building or premises caused by removal of such property. Lessee's obligation to observe and perform this covenant shall survive the expiration or other termination of this lease. -6- - 17. Holdover If Lessee or any assignee, subtenant or other transferee of or from Lessee shall remain or continue to be in possession of the premises or any part thereof after the end of the term of this lease, at the Town's option, Lessee shall be deemed to be illegally retaining possession or shall be deemed to be a month-to-month tenant of the premises on all the terms and conditions of this lease except that the monthly rent shall be in an amount equal to three hundred percent (300°~) of the monthly rent payable immediately prior to the end of the term. In the vent of any unauthorized holdingover, Lessee shall indemnify the Town against all claims for damages by any person to whom the Town may have leased all or any part of the premises effective after the termination of this lease. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to limit the Town's right to obtain possession of the premises upon termination of this lease by unlawful detainer proceedings or otherwise in the event that the Town does not exercise its option to treat the continued possession by the Lessee as a month-to-month tenancy. 18. Default The occurrence or existence of any one or more of the following events or circumstances shall constitute a default hereunder by Lessee. a. Lessee shall fail to pay when due any installment of rent, additional rent or any other sum payable by Lessee under the terms of this lease; b. Lessee shall neglect or fail to perform or observe any of the covenants herein contained on Lessee's part to be performed or observed and Lessee shall fail to remedy such default within ten (10) days after the Town shall have given to Lessee written notice specifying such neglect or failure (or within such period, if any, as may be reasonably required to cure such default if it of such nature that it cannot be cured within such ten day period, provided that Lessee commences to remedy such default within such ten day period and proceeds with reasonable diligence thereafter to cure such default); c. This lease or the premises or any part thereof shall be taken upon execution or by other processes of law directed against Lessee or sha1T be taken upon or subject to any attachment at the instance of any creditor of or claimant against Lessee, and such attachment shall not be discharged or disposed of within fifteen (15) days after the levy thereof; d. Lessee shall vacate or abandon the premises (which shall be defined to include, but not be limited to, any absence by Lessee from the premises for five (5) or more days while otherwise in default under this lease) or lock them so as to -7- prevent entry therein of the Town or its representatives as permitted by the terms . of this lease; e. Lessee shall remove or attempt to remove any goods or property from the premises other than in the usual course of business; f. Lessee or any guarantor of Lessee's obligations hereunder shall: i. Admit in writing its inability to pay its debts generally as they become due, ii. Make an assignment of all or a substantial part of its property for the benefit of creditors, iii. Apply for or consent to or acquiesce in the appointment of a receiver, trustee or liquidator of Lessee or such guarantor or of all or a substantial part of Lessee's or such guarantor's property or of the premises or of Lessee's interest in this lease, or iv. File a voluntary petition in bankruptcy or a petition or an answer seeking reorganization under any bankruptcy or insolvency law or any arrangement with creditors, or take advantage of any insolvency law or file an answer admitting the material allegations of a petition filed against Lessee or such guarantor in any bankruptcy, reorganization or insolvency proceedings; or g. The entry of a court order, judgment or decree without the application, approval or consent of Lessee or any guarantor of lessee's obligations hereunder, as the case may be, approving a petition seeking reorganization of Lessee or such guarantor under any bankruptcy or insolvency or appointing a receiver, trustee or liquidator of Lessee or such guarantor or of all or a substantial part of Lessee's or such guarantor`s property or of the premises or of Lessee's interest in this lease, or adjudicating Lessee or such guarantor a bankrupt or insolvent, and such order, judgment or decree shall not be vacated, set aside or staid within thirty (30) days from the date of entry. 19. Remedies If Lessee shall default under this lease as set forth in the preceding section, the Town shall have the following rights and remedies, in addition to all other remedies at law or equity, and none of the following, whether or not exercised by the Town, shall preclude the exercise of any other right or remedy whether set forth in this agreement or existing at law or equity: a. The Town shall have the right to terminate this lease by giving Lessee notice in writing at any time. No act by or on behalf of the Town, such as entry of the premises by the Town to perform maintenance and repairs and efforts to relet the -8- premises, other than giving Lessee written notice of terminatian, shall terminate this lease. If the Town gives such notice, this lease and the term hereof as well as the right, title and interest of Lessee under this lease shall wholly cease and expire in the same manner and with the same force and effect (except as to Lessee's liability on the date specified in such notice as if such date were the expiration date of the term of this lease without the necessity of reentry or any other act on the Town's part. Upon any termination of this lease, Lessee shall quit and surrender to the Town the premises as set forth in Section 16. If this lease is terminated, Lessee shall remain liable to the Town for all rent and sums accrued and unpaid hereunder to the date of termination of this lease and the Town shall be entitled to recover from Lessee the worth at the time of the award at the amount by which the unpaid rent and other sums for the balance of the term exceeds the amount of such loss for the same period that Lessee proves could have been reasonably avoided. b. The Town may without demand or notice reenter and take possession of the premises or any part thereof and repossess the same as of the Town's former estate and expel the Lessee and those claiming through or under, and remove the effects of any and all such persons (forcibly, if necessary) without being deemed guilty of any manner of trespass, without prejudice to any remedies for arrears of rent or preceding breach of covenants and without terminating this lease or otherwise relieving Lessee of any obligation hereunder. Should the Town elect to reenter as provided in this Section 20(b), or should the Town take possession pursuant to legal proceedings or pursuant to any notice provided for by law, the Town may from time to time, without terminating this lease, relet the premises or any part thereof for such term or terms and at such rental or rentals and upon such other conditions as the Town may in its absolute discretion deem advisable, with the right to make alterations and repairs to the premises. No such reentry, repossession or reletting of the premises by the Town shall be construed as an election on the Town's part to terminate this lease unless a written notice of termination is given to the Lessee by the Town. No such reentry, repossession or reletting of the premises shall relieve the Lessee of its liability and obligation under this lease, all of which shall survive such reentry, repossession or reletting. Upon the occurrence of such reentry or repossession, the Town shall be entitled to the amount of the monthly rent, and any other sums, which would be payable hereunder if such reentry or repossession had not occurred, less the net proceeds, if any, of any reletting of the premises after deducting all of the Town's -g- expenses in connection with such reletting, including but without limitation, all - repossession costs, brokerage commissions, legal expenses, attorneys fees, preparation for such reletting. Lessee shall pay such amount to the Town on the days on which the rent or any other sum is due hereunder would have been payable hereunder if possession had not been retaken. In no event shall Lessee be entitled to receive the excess, if any, of net rent collected by the Town as a result of such reletting over the sums payable by the Lessee to the Town hereunder. c. If the Lessee shall default in making any payment required to be made by Lessee (other than payments of rent) or shall default in performing any other obligations of Lessee under this lease, the Town may, but shall not be obligated to, make such payment on behalf of the Lessee or expend such sum of money as may be necessary to perform such obligation. All sums so expended by the Town with interest thereon at the rate provided in Section 20f shall be repaid by the Lessee to the Town on demand. No such payment or expenditure by the Town shall be deemed a waiver of Lessee's default nor shall it affect any other remedy of Lessee by reason of such default. d. If the Lessee shall default in making payment of any rent or other sum due under this lease, Landlord may charge and the Lessee shall pay upon demand interest thereon at the rate provided in Section 20f. e. In any action of unlawful detainer commenced by the Town against the Lessee by reason of any default hereunder, the reasonable rental value of the premises for the period of the unlawful detainer shall be deemed to be the greater of the amount of rent, additional rent and other sums reserved in this lease for such period or the actual rent, additional rent and other sums paid for the comparable period of the preceding year unless the Town and the Lessee shall prove to the contrary by competent evidence. f. Whenever Lessee shall be required to make payment to the Town of any sum with interest, interest on such sum shall be computed from the date such sum is due until paid, at an interest rate equal to the discount rate of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (as the same may change over time) plus four percent (4%) per annum, except in the case of past due rent. If rent is not received by the Landlord on or before the first of the month, the sum of ten dollars ($10.00) per day shall be charged to the Lessee as additional rent. Z0. Signs Lessee shall not install, place, inscribe, paint or otherwise attach and shall not permit any sign, advertisement, notice, marquis or awning on any part of -10- the outside of the premises (~nclud~ng any portion of the premises fronting on any interior corridor or lobby) or on any part of the inside of the premises which is visible from outside the premises or on any part of the building (including the outside walls and the roof) without the prior written consent of the Town in each instance. Any permitted signs shall comply with the requirements of the Town of Vail and the Lessee shall be solely responsible for such compliance. Lessee shall, at its own expense, maintain in first class condition all permitted signs and shall, on the expiration or termination of this lease and at its own expense, remove all such permitted signs and repair any damage caused by such removal. The Town shall have the right to remove all non-permitted signs without notice to Lessee and at the expense of the Lessee. Lessee's obligation under this Section 21 shall survive the expiration or termination of this lease. 21. Indemnity Lessee shall indemnify and hold the Town and the premises free, clear and harmless from any and all demands, claims, causes of action, damages, liabilities, losses, expenses (including, without limitation, attorneys fees) of any kind whatsoever, in connection with, arising out of or by reason of any breech, violation or nonperformance by Lessee or its agents, servants, employees or invitees, or any covenant or provision of this lease or any law, ordinance, rule, regulation or order. 22. No Implied Waiver The failure of the Town to seek redress for violation of or to insist upon the strict performance of, any covenant or condition of this lease shall not prevent a subsequent act, which would have originally constituted a violation, from having all the force and effect of an original violation. If it should be necessary or proper for the Town to bring any action under this lease or to place this lease with any attorney for the enforcement of any of the Town's rights hereunder, then Lessee agrees to pay the Town's reasonable attorney's fees and all expenses and court costs. The receipt by the Town of any rent with knowledge of the breech of any covenant of this lease shall not be deemed a waiver of such breech. No provision of this lease shall be deemed to have been waived by the Town unless such waiver is in writing signed by the Town. No act or thing done by the Town or the Town's agents during the term of this lease shall deemed an acceptance or a surrender of the premises and no agreement to accept such surrender shall be valid unless in writing signed by the Town. No payment by Lessee, or receipt by the Town of a lesser amount than the rent due hereunder shall be deemed to be other than on account of the -11- r earliest stipulated rent, nor shall any endorsement or statement on any check or any letter accompanying any check or payment as rent be deemed in accordance satisfaction, and the Town may accept such check or payment without prejudice to the Town's right to recover the balance of such rent or pursue any other remedy available to the Town. 23. No Representations by the Town; Entire Agreement The Town and the Town's agents have made no representations, warranties, agreements or promises with respect to the premises, the center or the building except such as are expressed herein. The Town nor its agents have made no representations, warranties, agreements or promises with respect to the exact size of the premises. The entire contract of the parties is contained and there are no promises, agreements, representations, warranties, conditions or understandings, either oral or written between them other than as are set forth in this agreement. 24. No Partnership Notwithstanding anything contained in this agreement to the contrary, the Town is not and shall not in any way or for any purposes become principal or partner of Lessee in the conduct of its business, or otherwise, or a joint venturer or member of a joint enterprise with the Lessee. 25. Miscellaneous a. If any provision of this lease shall prove to be illegal, invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this lease shall not be affected thereby. b. Except as provided herein, no amendment, alteration, modification or addition to this lease shall be valid or binding unless in writing and signed by the party or parties to be bound thereby. c. The caption of each section is added as a matter of convenience only, and to be considered of no effect in the construction of any provisions ofi this lease. d. The covenants, conditions and agreements contained in this lease shall bind and inure to the benefit of the Town, the Lessee, the respective heirs, distributives, executors, administrators, successors, and subject to the terms of this agreement, their assigns. e. This lease shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. -12- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Town and the Lessee have executed this lease as of the date first set forth above. TOWN OF VAIL, a Colorado municipal VAIL RESORT ASSOCIATION, a Colorado corporation not-for-profit corporation By: By: Rondall V. Phillips, Town Manager Sylvia Blount, Executive Director -13- EXHIBIT A . A part of the Southeast one-quarter of Section 6, Township 5 South, Range 80 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, County of Eagle, State of Colroado, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Section 6; thence N.00°28'16"W. and along the East line of the said Southeast one-quarter of Section 6, 72.75 feet to a point, said point being 110.00 feet Northeasterly from the Southeasterly right of way line of U.S. Highway No. 6 as measured at right angles thereto; thence N.79°46'11"W. and along a line parallel to the said Southeasterly right of way line, 145.50 feet; thence N.16°08'47"E., 63.50 feet; thence N.72°03'02"W., 226.70 feet; thence N.68°08'34"W., 201.00 feet; thence N.66°43'48"W., 164.39 feet to the true point of beginning; thence continuing along the aforesaid course, 238.00 feet; thence S.25°53'00"W., 47.79 feet; thence S.41°24'53"E., 183.50 feet to a point of curve; thence along a curve to the left having a radius of 197.40 feet, a central angle of 19°26'49", an arc distance of 67.00 feet; thence N.27°16'08"E., 144.48 feet to the true point of beginning; containing 23,908.21 square feet or 0.5488 acres, more or less. With the exception of the following areas which are specifically excluded from the leased premises: A. The west loading dock B. The east room C. Space for the Women's Resource Center f TOWN OF VAIL and VAIL RESORT ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into on this day of 19 by and between the TOWN OF VAIL, Colorado, a Colorado municipal corporation (the "Town") and the VAIL RESORT ASSOCIATION, a Colorado non-profit corporation (the "URA"). WHEREAS, the Town has a vital interest in the economic health of the Town; and WHEREAS, the Colorado Revised Statutes provide the Town with the power to appropriate money for the purpose of advertising the business, social and educational advantages, the natural resources and the scenic information attractions of the Town; and WHEREAS, the Town wishes to retain the services of the VRA to manage and operate information booths located within the Town of Uail and to manage certain special events within the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the parties wish to enter into an Agreement to establish the amount, duration, terms and conditions for the URA to provide such services to the Town. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: I. VAIL INFORMATION BOOTHS A. The VRA will operate the information booths in Vail and the Lionshead parking structure, and the information booth at the Lionshead Mall. B. The booths will be staffed and the hours of operation shall be as set forth in the schedule attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated into this Agreement by reference and shall be financed in accordance with the budget attached hereto as Exhibit D. C. The VRA shall provide through the information booths the following information and services to the general public: 1. Information relating to all current events and activities in the Vail area. 2. General information relating to investing and living in Vail. 3. Information regarding the physical layout of Vail and from time to time as needed, directions to the location of things and activities within the Vail area. 4. Displays and information from all URA members and all Town of Vail businesses. The VRA shall encourage members and businesses to display their informational material and brochures in the information booths, and the booths generally shall be a clearing house for all such Vail information. ,s D. The VRA will not be responsible for cleaning or maintenance of the ` booths. II. SPECIAL EVENTS The URA shall organize and market special events from time to time throughout the calendar year to promote and create an image of excellence for the Town of Vail and to enhance a spirit of community and a feeling of pride amongst the inhabitants of the Town of Vail. The special events to be organized and marketed by the URA are set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and made a part of this Agreement by reference. In addition, the URA will work with the Vail Metropolitan Recreation District to promote special events at the John Dobson Ice Arena from time to time when such events are practical. III. CONSIDERATION The Town agrees to pay the URA for their services as set forth herein as follows: A. The sum of twenty-one thousand two hundred seven dollars and two cents ($21,007.02). The receipt of dollars ) of said amount is hereby acknowledged by the URA. The remainder of said payment shall be made in two (2) equal installments of dollars on and 1990. B. The Town agrees to pay the URA thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) to be utilized solely over a twelve (12) month period for the payment of salary benefits and expenses for a special events coordinator to be employed by the VRA. IV. EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS The VRA has attached for comparison purposes the Chamber of Commerce's actual expenditure budget for the year 1990 as Exhibit C which is incorporated herein by reference and has further attached its proposed 1990 expenditure budget as Exhibit D which is incorporated herein by reference. The VRA hereby warrants and represents that it will spend the funds received from the Town pursuant to this Agreement in accordance with the terms and conditions hereof and in accordance with the proposed 1990 budget. V. ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL OF FUNDS A. The VRA will monitor each special event organized by it pursuant to this Agreement and shall provide the Town with a financial report of each special event within thirty (30) days after its conclusion. The report shall provide information as to how Town of Vail funds were expended and shall in addition -2- •4 provide information as to the amount of sponsorship funds received and how such sponsorship funds were expended, and utilized to enhance each respective event. B. The URA shall submit to the Town an accounting of funds received and expended by it for each quarter during the term of this Agreement within thirty (30) days after the end of each quarter. C. The URA shall submit to the Town its unaudited financial report no later than March 1, 1991. In addition, the URA shall submit to the Town for its review the VRA audited report a reasonable time after it is completed. The expense of this audit shall be paid by the VRA as an expense of administration. D. The URA shall provide the Town on or before September 1, 1990, its proposed expenditures budget for the year 1991. E. The VRA shall keep or cause to be kept true, accurate and complete accounting records of all business and financial transactions conducted pursuant to this Agreement and shall make such records available to the Town upon reasonable request therefor without delay and without expense. The URA agrees the Town shall have the right through its duly authorized employees, agents or representatives, to examine all pertinent records at any and all reasonable times for the purpose of determining the accuracy thereof and other reports required to be provided and filed with the Town pursuant to this paragraph. F. The VRA will endeavor to develop a method of monitoring the effectiveness of each special event organized and marketed by the VRA in accordance with this Agreement. Upon the development of such a method, the URA shall provide the Town with a report as to the effectiveness of such event within thirty (30) days after the conclusion thereof. G. The URA hereby agrees that within a reasonable time prior to the date each respective special event is held, a committee shall be formed to help with the planning of such event and the committee for each event shall include all pertinent Town of Vail or Vail Metropolitan Recreation District personnel to help in planning and coordinating the activities. VI. TERM OF AGREEMENT This Agreement shall become effective on March 1, 1990 and shall terminate on December 31, 1990. -3- This Agreement has been executed on the day and year first written above by the parties hereto. TOWN OF VAIL, a Colorado municipal VAIL RESORT ASSOCIATION, a Colorado corporation non-profit corporation By: By: Rondall V. Phillips, Town Manager Sylvia Blount, Executive Director -4- WORK SESSION FOLLOW-UP 6/15/90 Page 1 of 2 TOPIC _QUESTIONS FOLLOW-UP SOLUTIONS 8/8 WEST INTERMOUNTAIN ANNEXATION LARRY: Proceeding w/legal requirements for A new advocate for petition circulation is being sought. request: Lapin) annexation. Cindy Callicrate to be contacted. 2/27 SATELLITE POST OFFICE (request: RON: Pursue station "in town" and/or increase Meeting to be set up with Ernie Chavez. Summer bus service Osterfoss) summer bus service? increased. 3/27 COMPENSATION FOR PEC, DRB, RON/KRISTAN/LARRY: Should additional compensation Will prepare alternatives and recommendation for Council LIQUOR AUTHORITY/RAISING be considered for appointed, standing Town by 6/22/90. Will prepare ordinance for adoption by COMPENSATION FOR MAYOR TO $1,000/ boards? November 1991, re: Mayor. MONTH 4/10 CML CONFERENCE/Colorado Springs COUNCILMEMBERS: Conference will be held June 20-23 Ron, Tom, Rob, and Larry signed up so far. this summer - reservations should be made as soon as possible. 5/8 TENNENBAUM RESOLUTION RON: Contact entities re: similar resolution signed Similar resolutions sent for their adoption to Aspen, by Eagle County Commissioners. Crested Butte, CAST, TOA, etc., re: transfers of publicly held land for personal gain. 5/1 ANNUAL CHUCK ANDERSON YOUTH BRIAN JONES/JOANNE MATTIO/PAT: Apparently this Set up meeting w/Kent Rose to select individuals and schedule AWARD (request: Lapin) youth award fell through the cracks last year; far evening Council meeting in June. Caroline fisher to pursue selection and presentation for BOTH years. submit application. 5/1 AMEND CODE, 12.04.240, STREET CUT STAN/LARRY/KRISTAN: Per Council direction, proceed. Will be developed by July, 1990. PERMITS 6/5 COUNTY-WIDE RECYCLING MEETING RON: The County Commissioners have scheduled a Tom, Kent, Ron, and (tentatively) Rob are scheduled to meeting with representatives county-wide to attend. discuss what efforts are currently being made/ future plans? June 25, 12:00 noon, in Eagle, w/ details to follow. 6/5 CLAIRE MARTIN ARTICLE IN THE RON: Respond to her article w/updates on spring Will do. WEEKEND EDITION OF THE POST conditions for bicycling in the mountains and (request: Rose) CDOH road maintenance responsibilities. 6/12 VAIL GLO SIGN (request: Levine) RON/KRISTAN: Through DRB, or some other process, Kristen will handle. can the lettering color and lighting be modified? WORK SESSION FOLLOW-UP 6/15/90 Page 2 of 2 TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOW-UP SOLUTIONS 6/12 SONNENALP JOINT WORK SESSION KRISTAN: Monday, 6/25/90, PEC will review this Council will be notified of time. PEC/COUNCIL project, for all Councilmembers who can attend. 6/12 BERRY CREEK 5TH FILING COUNCIL: Attend meeting w/various special districts Council to discuss position at 6/26 Work Session. throughout upper valley to discuss joint purchase of this parcel. Meeting scheduled for 7:00 p.m., Thursday, fi/28/90, at TOA. 6/12 JEFF CAMPBELL DINNER EVERYONE: Scheduled for Friday, 7/6/90, at Town can pay for Councilmembers and a guest to attend. Marriott's Mark. $50.00/pp or $75.00/couple. Please contact Brenda for reservations. Fund-raiser for Casey Cuny and Vail Junior Hockey. PRESENT: ABSENT: Steve Simonett None Bill Bishop Kevin Cassidy John Milligan Mitzi Thomas _ Pam Brandmeyer AGENDA REGULAR MEETING LOCAL LICENSING AUTHORITY WEDNESDAY, JUNE 13, 1990 10:00 A.M. SWEARING IN OF JOHN MILLIGAN So sworn. 1. Consideration of the Board of the following modifications of premises: a. Woo's Company, Inc., dba, the May Palace Restaurant Continued to 7-11-90. b. Red Lion Inn, Inc., dba, the Red Lion Inn Restaurant Continued to 7-11-90. c. Sweet Basil, Inc., dba, Sweet Basil Continued to 7-11-90. 2. PUBLIC HEARING - Consideration of the Board of an Unanimously approved. application for a Special Events Permit, Malt/Vinous/ 5-0 Spirituous Beverages, by the Town of Vail, in conjunction with its annual summer employee picnic, on Friday, July 20, 1990, from 8:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M., at the location of the Lower Bench of Ford Park, 530 South Frontage Road East, Vail, Colorado. Officers for this events are as follows: a. Town Manager - Rondall V. Phillips b. Events Manager - Charlie Wick 3. PUBLIC HEARING - Consideration of the Board of an Unanimously approved. application for a Special Events Permit, Malt/Vinous/ 5-0 Spirituous Beverages, by the Colorado Ski Museum - Ski Hall of Fame, in conjunction with the Arrangers on behalf of OPEL, on Sunday, July 1, 1990, from 5:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M., at the location of the Gore Creek Prome- nade, the 200 Block of Gore Creek Drive, Vail, Colorado. Officers for this event are as follows: a. President - Robert C. Johnstone b. Events Manager - Julie Ware 4. Notification of the Board of recent renewals: a. J.A.M.E. Corp., dba, the Fountain Cafe and Restaurant Unanimously approved. 5. Any other matters the Board wishes to discuss. Meeting adjourned at 10:35 A.M. ` VMRD SURVEY RESULTS VAIL NATURE CENTERa STAFF: 3.9868 3.]577 " PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 71.15 75.87 SCALE IS AS FOLLOWSS 5 - EKCELLENT PROGRAMS AND CIASSESs 3.849 3.1555 4 - GOOD PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSr 71.76 76.02 3 - ADEQUATE SPECIAL EVENTS: 3.7777 3.175 2 - FAIR PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSt 73.97 77.39 l - POOR MAINT ~ CLEANLINESSS 3.9294 3.1472 0 - DO NOT KNOW PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWS: 69.78 75.19 HOURS OF OPERATIONS 3.6426 3.1588 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSr 71.46 7b.57 OLTY LVL RED SANDSTONE GYM: VAIL TENNIS CLUB: STAFFS 3.6067 3.2062 STAFFr 3.8146 3.0909 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 93.22 93.91 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSr 75.57 78.23 PROGRAMS AND CLASSESr 3.4175 3.253 PROGRAMS AND CLASSESr 3.7509 3.1006 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSS 93.07 93.83 • PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 79.68 81.12 SPECIAL EVENTS: 3.405 3.1986 SPECIAL EVENTSS 3.5463 3.1171 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 93.98 94.44 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 80.28 81.81 MAINT 3 CLEANLINESSS 3.3888 3.2088 MAINT a CLEANLINESSs 3.6867 3.1122 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 93.15 93.98 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 74.12 77.52 HOURS OF OPEkATIONr 3.2888 3.2256 HOURS OF OPERATIONS 3.7171 3.0874 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 93.15 93.75 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 76.64 78.23 CAPITAL PROJECTS: DOBSON ICE ARENAS SWIMMING FACILITY: 2.6166 STAFFS 3.6477 3.1808 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 5.09 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWS: 66.51 72.22 OUTDOOR ICE RINK-GOLDEN PEAKS 2.9221 PROGRAMS AND C.LASSESS 3.4453 3.2024 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWS: 11.03 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSS 70.77 74.8 OUTDOOR ICE RINK-LIONSHEADs 2.983 ~ SFECJAL EVENTSt 3.7742 3.2127 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 32.57 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWS: b1.5b 68.87 PAR-3 NINE HOLE GOURSEt 2.x301 MAINT & CLEANLINESS: 3.5884 3.1469 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSS b.69 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSS 60.42 b8.41 BOWLING ALLEYt 2.114 HOURS OF OPERATIONS 3.2392 3.2513 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 6.62 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 6b.28 71.23 VAIL GOLF COURSES STAFF: 3.8476 3.1774 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs b2.02 bb.97 PROGRAMS AND CLASSESs 3.6424 3.1512 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 73.82 75.34 ~ SPECIAL EVENTSe 3.6775 3.]223 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 72.14 74.5 MAINT ~ CLEANLINESSs 3.9635 3.1722 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSa b0.36 65.98 HOURS OF OPERATIONS 3.964 3.1674 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSS 61.87 b6.81 VAIL YOUTH CENTER: , STAFF: 3.590b 3.2518 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 88.6b 89.72 PROGRAMS AND CLASSESS 3.2269 3.3282 . PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSe 89.26 90.03 ` SPECIAL EVENTSt 3.1931 3.3 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 88.96 90.1 ' MAINT & CLEANIINESSr 3.2797 3.2307 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSs 89.11 90.1 HOURS OF OPERATIONt 3.262 3.2575 PERCENTAGE DON'T KNOWSS 88.96 89.96 ~ ' Y r TOWN OF VAIL MEMORANDUM T0: Ron Phillips Council Members FROM: Steve Thompson DATE: June 14, 1990 RE: Investment Report Enclosed is the investment report with balances as of May 31, 1990. The balance of the portfolio that can be used for operations on May 31, 1990 was $1.3 million less than on May 31,. 1989. During the month of May we purchased $794,000 in certificates of deposit and $1.0 million of FHLB discount notes all maturing in November 1990 at an average yield of 8.36 and 8.31 respectively. Please let me know if you have any questions. Posn of Pail, Colorado Iaveet~ent Report Snuary of Accounts and Invest~ente For the Konth Badiag Kay 3I, 1990 Funds Fot Beaerve Balances Percentage Percentage Operating Faads 6/31/90 of Total Allowed Koney Karket Accoaata see page 1) Couercial Basks ;71,039 ;291,961 ;342,998 1.69X 60X Koney Karket Funds ;2,196,604 ;2,196,60! 10,92X 100X Colorado Invest eat Poole (2,292,391 ;2,292,391 11,09X IOOX Total ;2,343,428 ;2,468,666 ;4,811,993 23.48X. Couercial Saviaga ! Banks Loans Certificates of Deposit see page 2J Bagle Coanty Institationa ~ O,OOX Other Colorado Institationa O.OOX Bationnl Institationa ;1,486,000 ;1,186,000 ;1,982,000 ;891,000 ;2,693,000 13,04X Total ;1,483,000 ;1,188,000 ;1,982,000 ;891,000 ;2,693,000 13,04X 100X Percentage of Portfolio in Saviaga t Loans 6,80X 25X O.S. Goverment Secatitiee (see page 3) Beparchase Agreeeeata ;0 O.OOX T6X Preasary Botea ~ Bills ;230,000 ;1,810,890 52,040,890 9.96X IOOX GBMA's ;166,132 ;166,132 O.B1X 100X O.S. Saviaga Bonds ;19,898 ;19,898 O.IOX 100X Federal Agency Discount Kotes A Bonds 55,613,840 ;6,165,390 ;10,999,230 62,60X 100X Total ;6,029,830 ;6,996,260 ;13,006,110 63.49X Potal Portfolio ;10,165,278;10,335,825 ;20,491,103 100.00X Katnring Qithin 12 Kontha ;9,442,268 ;9,636,825 ;19,081,093 93.12X Kataring Oithia 24 !loathe ;299,000 ;598,000 ;895,000 4,37X Katnring After 24 Kontha ;416,010 ;99,000 ;516,010 2,S1X ;10,155,298 510,335,825 ;20,491,103 100,00X - . Breakdown of Beaerve Farads 0.0. Bond Beaerve 52,363,50? Parking Stractare Bond Proceeds ;9,566,648 Booth Creek Mitigation Proceeds f 189,424 Chuck Andetaoa Ke~orial ;10,991 Health Insurance Funds ;206,066 ;10,335,825 6/13190 SJT IBVSM005 . lfoney Market Accounts as of May 31, 1990 --For the Month of May-- Account Institution Balances Type of Accounts Nigh for Average 5/31/90 Money Market 6 Savings Accounts: first Bank of Yail -Operating Interest ],4803 b.890t 1,2301 Balance SI35,200 (308,946 1483,118 SSO,SB! First Bank of Yail -Insurance Interest 1.4808 b.890t 1.2301 - Balance =20S,OS5 Central Bank of Denrer Reserve Accounts Interest 5.0001 Balance f3,429 Central Bank of Denver Interest 1.3201 General Operating Account Balance ~ =31,44] Parking Structure Clearing Account Balance SS1,986 Total Money Market 6 Savings Accounts :342,998 local Goverment lnvest~ent Pool: Colorado Trust (Invest~ent Pool) Interest 1.730$ Balance (2,272,391 Money Market Mutual Funds: Federated Securities Corp. U. S. Treasury trust Reserve Account Interest ].1401 Balance ;111,200 Fidelity Inaest~ent Goverment Money Market Accounts Interest I.]40Y Bond Issue Reserve Account t} Balance S9S1,378 Booth Creek Up Funds Balance 5189,424 Parking Structure Const Fund Account 3940,602 Balance Total Money Market Mutual Fund f2,196,b04 Total ail accounts 54,811,993 ssAccount Subject to Rrbitrage Rebate 06/13(90 SJi 1MYMMOOS Page t _ certificates of Deposit as of Kay 31, 1990 Bank Kaae, Location Days to Bates Parcheae Katarity Katurity Katurity Ins Coapoa Yield Date Date at Purchase Value First Aaerican Bank, Boston, KA FDIC 10.290X 10.290X 12-Bov-87 12-Bov-90 1096 ;99,000 Standard Pacific Savings and Loan, Nerport, CA Beserved Fande FSLIC 9.8751 9.670X 26-Kay-89 28-Kay-91 732 ;99,000 Centary Bank and Yrust, Soierville, KA Beserved Funda FDIC 9.450X 9.4501 26-Kay-89 26-Kov-9D 549 ;99,000 Centary Bank of Snffolk, Snffolk, KA Beserved Funda FDIC 9.450X 9.4501 30-Kay-89 29-8av-90 548 ;99,000 Security Savings and Loan, Chicago, IL FSLIC 8.250X 8.250X 18-Apr-90 19-Oct-90 184 ;99,000 Kidatate Savings and Loan Aeaociaton, 9alti~ore, KD FSLIC 10,350X 10.100X 2I-Apr-89 18-Oct-90 545 ;99,000 First Savings and Lonn, Beverly Bills, CA FSLIC 10.375X 10.125X 10-Apr-89 03•Jun-91 ~ 784 ;99,000 Sterling Savings and Loan, Irvine, CA FSLIC 10.500X 10.250X 10-Apr-89 02-Dec-91 966 ;99,000 Bap Loan t Inveataent Bank, Bast Creenrich, BI, Beserved Funda FDIC 9.3001 9.0501 I1-Jul-89 02-Dec-91 874 ;99,000 Boreatead Savings Association, KiddletoKn, PA, Beserved Funds FSLIC 9.100X 8.9001 21-Jul-89 02-Dec-91 864 ;99,000 3ecnrity Pacific State Bank, Irvine, CA Beserved Funds FDIC 9.1501 8.900X 11-Jul-89 11-Jn1-90 365 ;99,000 Bast Bank, Bea York, BY FDIC 9,000X 8.900X 11-Jul-89 11-Jul-91 730 ;99,000 Brentrood Square Savings and Loan, Loa Angeles, CA FSLIC 10.1501 9.9001 09-Kay-89 OB-Kay-91 129 ;99,000 St. Bd~ond's Savings and Loan Association, Philadelphia, PA FSLIC 10.2501 10.0001 05-Key-89 05-Bav-90 549 ;99,000 A~erican General Financial Center, Kidvale, OT FDIC 8.451 8.25X 23-Kay-90 23-Kov-90 184 ;99,000 Paper Rational Bank, Bashington, DC FDIC 8.25X 8.251 22-Kap-90 30-Bov-90 I92 ;99,000 Kodeato Bank Co~pany, Kodesto, CA FDIC 8.35X 8.35X 23-Kay-90 20-Kov-90 181 ;99,000 Seacoast Savings Bank, Dover, BH FDIC 8.25X 8.251 22-Kay-90 30-Bov-90 192 ;99,000 Neatside Savings and Lonn Association, CA FSLIC 8.450X 8.450X 13-Kar-90 30-Kov-90 262 ;99,000 Page 2 Continued _ Certificates of Deposit as of Kay 31, 1990 Bank Kane, Location Daya to Bates Purchase Natnrity Natarity Nntnrity Ina Coupon Yield Date Date at Purchase Value Republic National Bank, Phoenii, At Beaerved Fande FDIC 9.960X 9.600X 30-Nay-69 t9-Nov-90 648 ;99,000 Bepublic Bank of California, Torrance, CA FDIC 8.600X 6.600X E2-Nay-90 14-Dec-90 206 ;99,000 Colonial National Bank USA, Nil~ington, D6 FDIC 8.600X 8.Z60X 14-Nay-9D 13-Nov-90 I83 ;99,000 Neatern Federal Saviaga L Loan, Ban Nateo, CA FSLIC 8.960X B.SOOX 14-Nay-90 13-Nov-90 I83 =99,000 Neatern Financial Savings Bank, Irvine, CA FSLIC 8.960X 8.b00X 14-Nay-90 13-Nov-94 163 ;99,000 Lyndoaville Savings Baak t Traet, Lpndonville, VT, Reserved Funds FDIC 9.260X 9.060X 26-Ja1-89 41-Jan-9t 1041 ;99,000 Coast Bank, Long Beach, CA FDIC 9.250X 9.000X 10-Ja1-89 10-Jul-90 365 ;99,000 Charter Bank for Savings, Santa Fe, NN FSLIC 9.260X 9.000X 10-Jn1-89 13-Jul-90 368 ;99,000 Avg Yield 9.099X fE,693,040 Days to Maturity 249 invcd00b 6/13J90 SJT Page 2 _ Goverment Securities as of May 31, 1990 iY=ireasury Notes 5 Billsstt Years to Interest Rate Purchase Maturity Maturity Years to Book par Type fund Coupon Yield Date Date at Purchase Maturity Yalue Yalue Bond Pooled Cash 8.815$ ].410$ Il-Mar-8b 1S-Feb-96 4.94 S.T2 =230,000 3230,000 Bond Parking 6.8]5$ 9.061$ 01-Dec-88 30-Nov-90 1.99 0.50 3250,000 3150,000 Bond Debt Service 9.315$ 9.636$ 28-Feb-89 18-Feb-9I 2.00 0.15 3200,000 1200,000 Bond Oebt Service 8.250$ 8.259$ 31-Auq-84 3I-Aug-91 2.00 1.25 (400,000 3400,000 Bi11 Parking 8.161$ 08-Feb-9D 09-Rug-90 O.SD 0.19 3960,810 31,000,000 Average Maturity Years 1.68 32,040,8]0 32,080,000 Rverage Yield 8.36$ tt:Repurchase Agree~entsxtt Purchase Maturity Par Institution Yield Oate Date Yalue Morgan Stanley r 1,850$ 1st Deposit Oue June 1, 1990 = Sinking Fund Invest~ent to Retire G.O. Bonds =;tGNMA'Stt: Years to Esti~ated Interest Rate Purchase Maturity Maturity Years to Principal Pool Coupon Yield Date Date at Purchase Maturity Outstanding 5803 8.000$ 8.480$ 14-Nav-S6 1S-Oct-OS 19.10 16.00 341,318 13003 8.000$ 9.500$ 14-Oct-Sb 15-Oct-06 20.20 11.00 354,609 14654 8.000$ 9.100$ 24-Oct-86 15-Jan-01 21.20 18.00 369,195 Avg Yield 9.115$ 3166,132 tjiU.S. Savings Bondstst Years to Issue Maturity Maturity Years to Book Maturity Series Vield Date Date at Purchase Maturity Yalue Yalue EE 1.110$ Ol-Oct-Bb 01-Oct-9b 10.00 6.43 319,818 330,000 a==Federal Agency Discount Notes 6 Bondst:t Days to Interest Rate Purchase Maturity Maturity Days to Book Maturity Agency Fund Coupon Yield Date Date at Purchase Maturity Yalue Yalue FHLB Pooled Cash 8.305$ 15-Nay-90 lb-Hov-40 185.00 169.00 3948,313 31,040,000 FHl6 Parking 8.000$ 8.000$ 25-Jan-90 25-Jan-91 365.00 239.00 3250,000 3250,000 FHIB Parking 8.20St 09-feb-90 01-Aug-90 173.00 61.00 f962,565 31,000,000 ' FHLB Parking 8.300$ 8.060$ 14-Feb-40 25-Sep-90 223.00 121.00 31,000,000 31,000,000 FNIB Parking 8.125$ 8.130$ 15-Feb-90 25-Oct-90 252.00 141.00 31,400,000 ;1,000,000 FNMA Pooled Cash 8.265$ 23-Feb-40 2b-Oct-90 245.00 148.00 3710,188 3150,000 FNl6 Dooled Cash 8.400! 8.1]0$ IS-Feb-9D 26-Nov-90 184.00 119.00 5500,000 (500,000 FFC Pooled Cash 8.300$ 8.300$ 01-Mar-90 04-Sep-90 181.00 96.00 31,000,000 31,000,000 FHl6 Parking 8.213$ 19-Mar-90 15-Jun-90 88.00 15.00 3490,222 3500,000 FNNR Parking 8.192$ 30-Mar-90 06-Ju1-9D 98.00 36.00 34]8,222 31,000,000 FNMA Parking 8.500$ 8.500$ 26-Mar-90 26-Sep-90 184.00 118.00 3250,000 3150,000 FNMA Pooled Cash 8.342$ 2T-Mar-90 11-Auq-90 153.00 88.00 3483,106 3500,000 FNMA Pooled Cash 8,443; 21-Mar-90 28-Sep-40 165.00 120.00 3419,631 3500,000 FNMA Pooled Cash 6.500$ S.S00$ 1F-Mar-90 26-Sep-90 184.00 118.00 3250,000 3250,000 FNIB Pooled Cash 8.193$ 11-Apr-90 11-Ju1-90 96.00 41.00 3484,453 3500,000 FNMC Pooled Cash 6.110$ 30-Jan-90 10-Nov-90 294.00 1]3.00 3103,143 3150,000 FNMC Parking 8.1]0$ 30-Jan-90 20-Nov-90 294.00 113.00 3134,381 3150,000 310,]14,130 311,044,000 Average Yield 8.24$ Average Days to Maturity 120 total 313,006,110 6~13J90 SJ1 INYIROOS Page 3