Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-03-19 Support Documentation Town Council Regular Session UAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 19, 1991 7:30 P.M. AGENDA 1. Ten Year Employment Anniversary Award to Michael Chapman 2. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION 3. Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1991, second reading, an ordinance amending Title 18 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail by the addition of Chapter 18.67 Vested Property Rights; and setting forth details in regard thereto (Applicant: Town of Vail) 4. Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1991, first reading, an ordinance amending Section 18.52.160 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail to set parking in lieu fees for Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II at eight thousand dollars ($8,000) per space; and setting forth details in regard thereto 5. Appeal of Design Review Board decision to approve the Christiania Lodge remodel, 356 Hanson Ranch Road, Part of Lot D, Block 2, Vail Village 1st Filing (Applicant: Jack Morton Associates, Inc. represented by Peter Harris Rudy) 6. Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1991, first reading, an ordinance amending Sections 8.10.020 and 8.10.030 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail to provide for increased fees in the provision of fire protection services out of the Town limits; and setting forth details in regard thereto 7. Ordinance No. 4, Series of 1991, first reading, an ordinance enabling the Finance Director of the Town of Vail to declare sales taxes immediately due and payable, if he finds that the collection of the tax would be jeopardized by delay; and setting forth details in regard thereto 8. Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1991, first reading, an ordinance amending Section 18.40.130 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail to provide that fees for special development district applications, and for major and minor amendments on special development districts, may be set by the Town Council by resolution rather than ordinance; and setting forth details in regard thereto 9. Resolution No. 10, Series of 1991, a resolution increasing fees for certain Community Development Department services; and setting forth the parking in lieu fees for Commercial Core I and II 10. Resolution No. 11, Series of 1991, a resolution opposing Senate .Bill 91-220 11. Adjournment VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 19, 1991 7:30 P.M. EXPANDED AGENDA 7:30 1. Ten Year Employment Anniversary Award to Michael Chapman 7:35 2. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION. 7:40 3. Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1991, second reading, an Larry Eskwith ordinance amending Title 18 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail by the addition of Chapter 18.67 Vested Property Rights; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Town of Vail Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1991, on second reading. Background Rationale: Ordinance establishes how development rights are vested within the Town of Vail. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1991, on second reading. 7:50 4. Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1991, first reading, an ordinance Larry Eskwith amending Section 18.52.160 of the Municipal Code of the Town Mike Mollica of Vail to set parking in lieu fees for Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II at eight thousand dollars ($8,000) per space; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny Ordinance No. 6, Series. of 1991, on first reading. Background Rationale: This ordinance increases the parking in lieu fees to $8,000 per space. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1991, on first reading. 8:05 5. Appeal of Design Review Board decision to approve the Jill Kammerer Christiania Lodge remodel, 356 Hanson Ranch Road, Part of Kristan Pritz Lot D, Block 2, Vail Village 1st Filing (Applicant: Jack Larry Eskwith Morton Associates, Inc. represented by Peter Harris Rudy) Action Requested of Council: Hear the appeal of the DRB approval of March 6, 1991 and determine if the DRB decision should be overturned or upheld. Background Rationale: On March 13, 1991, Mr. Peter Rudy filed an appeal of the March 6, 1991 DRB approval of the Christiania Lodge redevelopment proposal on behalf of Jack Morton Associates, Inc. Please see enclosed letter from Peter Rudy and memo from Larry Eskwith. Staff Recommendation: Uphold the DRB approval. 8:50 6. Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1991, first reading, an ordinance Larry Eskwith amending Sections 8.10.020 and 8.10.030 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail to provide for increased fees in the provision of fire protection services out of the Town limits; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1991, on first reading. Background Rationale: Council directed staff to adjust fees for fire services outside Town limits to reflect actual costs. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 3, Series of 1991, on first reading. 9:05 7. Ordinance No. 4, Series of 1991, first reading, an ordinance Steve Barwick enabling the Finance Director of the Town of Vail to declare Larry Eskwith sales taxes immediately due and payable, if he finds that the collection of the tax would be jeopardized by delay; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny Ordinance No. 4, Series of 1991, on first reading. Background Rationale: This ordinance would allow the Town's Finance Director to declare sales taxes payable immediately in situations where evidence exists that the taxes due will be jeopardized by normal collection procedures. It is expected that this practice will be used very infrequently in Vail and only in situations involving imminent failure of a business. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 4, Series of 1991, on first reading. 9:20 8. Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1991, first reading, an ordinance Larry Eskwith amending Section 18.40.130 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail to provide that fees for special development district applications, and for major and minor amendments on special development districts, may be set by the Town Council by resolution rather than ordinance; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1991, on first reading. Background Rationale: This ordinance will enable the Town Council to increase the SDD application fee by resolution. The SDD ordinance must be amended to delete the fee and provide for fees to be set by resolution. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1991, on first reading. 9:40 9. Resolution No. 10, Series of 1991, a resolution increasing Larry Eskwith fees for certain Community Development Department services Mike Mollica Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny Resolution No. 10, Series of 1991. Background Rationale: Town Council requested an increase in fees to reflect actual costs. Staff Recommendation: Approve Resolution No. 10, Series of 1991. 9:55 10. Resolution No. 11, Series of 1991, a resolution opposing Larry Eskwith Senate Bill 91-220. Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny Resolution No. 11, Series of 1991. Background Rationale: Thornton is attempting to solve a dispute with Northglenn over the location of a sewer treatment plant and its use in an annexation by requesting an amendment to the State annexation laws. Staff Recommendation: Approve Resolution No. 11, Series of 1991. 10:10 11. Adjournment. -2- ORDINANCE N0. 2 Series of 1991 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF VAIL BY THE ADDITION OF CHAPTER 18.67 VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO: 1. Title 18 is hereby amended by the addition of Chapter 18.67 to read as follows: 18.67.010 PURPOSE The purpose of this Chapter is to provide the procedures necessary to implement the provisions of Article 68 of Title 24, C.R.S., as amended. 18.67.020 DEFINITIONS A. Site specific development plan shall mean and be limited to a final major or minor subdivision plat, or a special development district development plan. B. Vested property right means the right to undertake and complete the development and use of property under the terms and conditions of the site specific development plan, and shall be deemed established upon approval of a site specific development plan. 18.67.030 NOTICE AND HEARING No site specific development plan shall be approved by the Town Council or any Town board or commission as applicable, until after a public hearing proceeded by written notice of such hearing, in accordance with Chapter 8.68 ` of the Vail Municipal Code. Such notice may, at the option of the Town, be combined with the notice for any other hearing to be held in conjunction with the hearing on the site specific development plan for the subject property. At such hearing, persons with an interest in the subject matter of the hearing shall have an opportunity to present relevant or material evidence as determined by the Town Council or Town board or commission as applicable. 18.67.035 ACTION FOR APPROVAL OF SITE SPECIFIC.DEVELOPMENT PLAN CONDITIONS The action of the Town Council or Town board or commission as applicable for approval of a site specific development plan shall be in the same form as that required to approve any request being considered for the subject property in conjunction with the hearing on the site specific development plan, such action being either by ordinance, resolution, or motion as the case may be. - If any action by any board or commission is appealed to or called up by the Town Council, approval shall be deemed to occur when a final decision of the Town Council is rendered approving the site specific development plan. The approval may include such terms and conditions as may be reasonably necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, and the failure to abide by any such terms and conditions may, at the option of the Town Council or Town board or commission as applicable, and after public hearing, result in the forfeiture of vested property rights. 18.67.040 APPROVAL - EFFECTIVE DATE A site specific development plan shall be deemed approved upon the effective date of the approval action relating thereto by the Town Council or the Town board or commission as the case may be. 18.67.045 VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS - DURATION A. A property right which has been vested as provided for in this Chapter shall remain vested for a period of three (3) years. In the event amendments to a site specific development plan are proposed and approved, the effective date of such amendments for purposes of the duration of the vested property right, shall be the date of the approval of the original site specific development plan, unless the Town Council or applicable board or commission specifically finds to the contrary and incorporates such finding in its approval of the amendment. 18.67.050 NOTICE OF APPROVAL Each map, plat, or site plan or other document constituting a site specific development plan shall contain the following language: "Approval of this plan may create a vested property right pursuant to Article 68 of Title 24, C.R.S., as amended." Failure to contain this statement shall invalidate the creation of the vested property right. In addition, a notice describing generally the type and intensity of use approved, the specific parcel or parcels of property affected, and stating that a vested property right has been created, shall be published once, not more than fourteen (14) days after approval of the site specific development plan in a newspaper of general circulation within the Town. 18.67.055 EXCEPTION TO VESTING OF PROPERTY RIGHTS A vested property right, even though once established as provided in this Article, precludes any zoning or land use action by the Town or pursuant -2- to an initiated measure which would alter, impair, prevent, diminish, or otherwise delay the development or use of the property as set forth in the site specific development plan except: A. With the consent of the affected landowners; or B. Upon the discovery of natural or man-made hazards on or in the immediate vicinity of the subject property, which hazards could not reasonably have been discovered at the time of site specific development plan approval, and which hazards, if uncorrected would pose a serious threat to the public health, safety, and welfare; or C. To the extent that the affected landowner receives just compensation for all costs, expenses, and liabilities incurred by the landowner, including but not limited to all fees paid in consideration of financing, and all architectural, planning, marketing, legal, and other consultants fees incurred after approval by the Town Council, or applicable town board or commission, together with interest thereon at the legal rate until paid. Just compensation shall not include any diminution in the value of the property which is caused by such action. D. The establishment of a vested property right pursuant to law shall not preclude the application of ordinances or regulations which are general in nature and are applicable to all properties subject to land use regulation by the Town of Vail, including but not limited to, building codes, fire, plumbing, electrical and mechanical codes, housing, and dangerous building codes, and design review guidelines. 18.67.060 PAYMENT OF COSTS In addition to any and all other fees and charges imposed by the Municipal Code of the Town, the applicant for approval of a site specific development plan shall pay all costs relating to such approval as a result of the site specific development plan review including publication of notices, , public hearing, and review costs. At the option of the Town, these costs may be imposed as a fee of 18.67.065 OTHER PROVISION UNAFFECTED Approval of a site specific development plan shall not constitute an exemption from or waiver of any provisions of this Code pertaining to the development and use of property. 18.67.070 LIMITATIONS Nothing in this Chapter is intended to create any vested property right, -3- . T but only to implement the provisions of Article 68 of Title 24, C.R.S., as amended. In the event of the repeal of said Article or judicial determination that said Article is invalid or unconstitutional or does not apply to home rule municipalities such as the Town of Vail, this Chapter shall be deemed to be repealed, and the provisions hereof no longer effective. 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 be declared invalid. 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. 4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail 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. 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are 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, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING this day of , 1991, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the day of 1991, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this day of , 1991. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: -4- c Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ, AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of 1991. Kent R. Rose Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk -5- ORDINANCE N0. 6 Series of 1991 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 18.52.160 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF VAIL TO SET PARKING IN LIEU FEES FOR COMMERCIAL CORE I AND COMMERCIAL CORE II AT EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS ($8,000) PER SPACE; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to increase the parking in lieu fees for Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II to reflect inflation and the increased costs of constructing parking spaces. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1. Section 18.52.160 B (ii) of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.52.160 B (ii) The parking fee to be paid by any owner or applicant is hereby determined to be eight thousand dollars ($8,000) per space. If any payer's funds are not used by the Town for one of the purposes specified in subparagraph 1 within five (5) years from the date of payment, the unused portion of the funds shall be returned to the payer upon his application. 2. Section 18.52.160 B 5 is hereby repealed in its entirety. 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 be declared invalid. 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 the inhabitants thereof. 5. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail 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. 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 APPROVED ON FIRST READING this day of 1991, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the day of 1991, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this day of 1991. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ, AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of 1991. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk _Z_ ( REC'~ MAR 1 3 1991 Peter Harris Rudy Attorney and Counsellor at Law Suite 214, Vail National Bank 108 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 (303) 476-8865 FAX (303) 476-1645 March 13, 1991 Town Council Town of Vail Vail, CO 81657 Re: Design Review Approval of Christiania Lodge/Paul Johnson and Sally Johnson Dear Mayor Rose and Members of Council: I represent Jack Morton Associates, Inc., and particularly Bill Morton, owner of a condominium unit in the Mill Creek Court Building. This property is located adjacent to and across Hansen Ranch Road from the property which is subject of the above application. My client has requested that I appeal to the Town Council the determination of the Vail Design Review Board granting approval for the design review proposal of the Christiania Lodge. This appeal is based upon the fact that the application violates the Zoning Code of the Town of Vail, the application failed to address serious parking problems in the neighborhood relating to Tract P-3 and J, the application failed to address the pending view corridors in the immediate area, and for reasons to be more fully set forth to the Council within a reasonable time. ery ruly your , ter Harris Ru cc: Mr. Bill Morton ~ ORDINANCE N0. 3 Series of 1991 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 8.10.020 AND 8.10.030 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF VAIL TO PROVIDE FOR INCREASED FEES IN THE PROVISION OF FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES OUT OF THE TOWN LIMITS; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO WHEREAS the Town Council hereby determines that the fees for the provision of fire protection services outside of the Town of Vail should be increased to reflect the increased cost of the provision of such services, and to compensate for inflation; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO: 1. Section 8.10.020 Fees is hereby amended to read as follows: 8.10.020 Fees The Town of Vail Fire Department shall respond to requests for fire protection services out of the Town limits, and shall charge the following fees. A minimum charge for each response shall be no less than one hour. Medical Calls: $150 per hour. Pumper Truck: $250 per hour. Ladder Truck: $500 per hour. Charge for hour for each individual responding to call: $35 per hour. 2. Section 8.10.030 Optional Fees for Commercial Dwellings shall be amended to. read as follows: 8.10.030 Optional Fees ` As an option to the fee schedule set forth in Section 8.10.020, the Town of Vail may enter into contracts with property owners who live outside of Town limits for the provision of fire protection services at a rate of not less .14 dollars per square foot. 3. Chapter 810 is hereby amended by the addition of Section 8.10.035 to read as follows: 8.10.035 Ad,7ustment for Inflation The fees and rates set forth in Section 8.10.020 and 8.10.030 of this chapter shall be automatically increased each year by the percentage the Consumer Price Index has increased over the preceding year. 4. 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 APPROVED ON FIRST READING THIS DAY OF ,1991, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the day of 1991, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this day of 1991. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ, AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of 1991. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk -2- Ordinance No. 4 Series of 1991 AN ORDINANCE ENABLING THE FINANCE DIRECTOR OF THE TOWN OF VAIL TO DECLARE SALES TAXES IMMEDIATELY DUE AND PAYABLE, IF HE FINDS THAT THE COLLECTION OF THE TAX WOULD BE JEOPARDIZED BY DELAY; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS, IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, in certain situations involving the insolvency or bankruptcy of businesses within the Town, it is necessary for the collection of the sale tax that the Finance Director be empowered, in his discretion, to declare the sales tax immediately due and payable. NOW THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: that: 1. Section 3.40.200 is hereby amended by the addition of Paragraph K to read as follows: Section 3.40.200K JEOPARDY ASSESSMENT 1. If the Finance Director of the Town of Vail finds that collection of the sales tax will be jeopardized by delay, in his discretion, he may declare the taxable period immediately terminated to determine the tax and issue notice for demand for payment thereof; and, having done so, the tax shall be due and payable forthwith, and the Finance Director may proceed immediately to collect such tax, as provided for in this Section 3.40.200. 2. Collection under this Paragraph K may be stayed, if the taxpayer gives such security for payment as shall be satisfactory to the executive director. 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 be declared invalid. . 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. 4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail 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. 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 APPROVED ON FIRST READING THIS day of , 1991, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the .day of 1991, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this day of 1991. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ, AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of 1991. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk ' -2- ORDINANCE N0. 5 ` Series of 1991 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 18.40.130 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF VAIL TO PROVIDE THAT FEES FOR SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT APPLICATIONS, AND FOR MAJOR AND MINOR AMENDMENTS TO SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS, MAY BE SET BY THE TOWN COUNCIL BY RESOLUTION RATHER THAN ORDINANCE; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to set fees for Special Development District applications and major and minor amendments to Special Development Districts by resolution rather than by ordinance; and WHEREAS, there is no requirement in the ordinances of the Town o_r in the Town Charter which require that such fees be set by ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1. Section 18.40.130 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.40.130 FEES The filing fee for Special Development District applications and for major and minor amendments to Special Development Districts shall be set by the Town Council of the Town of Vail by resolution. Applications deemed by the Community Development Department to have significant design, land use, or other issues which may have a significant impact on the community may require review by consultants other than Town staff. Should a determination be made by the Town staff that an outside consultant is needed to review any Special Development District application, the Community Development Department shall obtain the approval of the Town Council for the hiring of such a consultant. Upon approval of the Town Council to hire an outside consultant, the Community Development Department shall estimate the amount of money necessary to pay the outside consultant, and this amount shall be forwarded , to the Town by the applicant at the time the Special Development District application is submitted to the Community Development Department. 'Upon completion of the review of the application by the consultant, any of the funds forwarded by the applicant for payment of the consultant which have not been paid to the consultant, shall be returned to the applicant. Expenses incurred by the Town in excess of the amount forwarded by the applicant shall be paid to the Town by the applicant within thirty (30) days of notification by the Town. 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 be declared invalid. 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. 4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail 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. 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 APPROVED ON FIRST READING this day of ,1991, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the day of 1991, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this day of 1991. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ' ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk -2- Y ' INTRODUCED, READ, AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of 1991. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk -3- RESOLUTION N0. 10 Series of 1991 A RESOLUTION INCREASING FEES FOR CERTAIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SERVICES WHEREFORE, it is the Town Council's belief that the costs relating to certain community development department services should be increased to reflect inflation and the actual value of services provided by the Community Development Department .staff NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Vail: 1. The following fees shall be charged for services by the Town of Vail Community Development Department: A. Conditional Use Permits $200.00 B. Variances $250.00 C. Special Development Districts: 1. Establishment of SDD $1500.00 2. Major Amendments $1000.00 3. Minor Amendments $200.00 D. Zoning Code Amendments $250.00 E. Zone District Amendments (rezonings) $200.00 F. Exterior Alterations: 1. Less than 100 sq. ft. $200.00 2. More than 100 sq. ft. $500.00 G. Subdivisions: 1. Major (Prelim/Final) $1000.00 2. Minor $250.00 3. Duplex $100.00 4. Single Family $100.00 5. Condominium and Townhouse Plats $100.00 6. Condominium Conversions $500.00 H. 7. Additional GRFA (250) $200.00 I. Secondary Unit on Lots of Less Than 15,000 sq. ft. (P/S) $100.00 J. Sign Review $20.00 K. Sign Variance $200.00 t M. Hazard Regulations: 1. Dispute of Designation $200.00 2. Map Amendment $200.00 3. Floodplain Modification $250.00 N. Art In Public Places 1. Temporary Site Approval $50.00 2. Project Review Fee -0- 0. DRB Application Fees: ' Valuation $ 0 - $ 10,000 $20.00 $ 10,001 - $ 50,000 $50.00 $ 50,001 - $ 150,000 $100.00 $150,001 - $ 500,000 $200.00 $500,001 - $1,000,000 $400.00 Over - $1,000,000 $500.00 This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 1991. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk -2- RESOLUTION N0. 11 Series of 1991 A RESOLUTION OPPOSING SENATE BILL 91-220 WHEREAS, the City of Thornton has requested the passage of Senate Bill 91-220 which concerns the prohibition of annexations of land directly or indirectly to a previously annexed area which did not have the contiguity required by 31-12-104(1)(a), Colorado Revised Statutes, as amended, and which was not contiguous at any point with and was located more than three (3) miles from the annexing municipality when annexed, and in connection therewith provides for the judicial review of such annexations; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 91-220 is being requested by Thornton solely to address an annexation dispute between the City of Thornton and the City of Northglenn, which dispute has no relevance to annexations in the rest of the State of Colorado; and WHEREAS, it is the Town Council's belief that the annexation statutes of the State of Colorado should not be amended to solve one issue existing between two municipalities; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 91-220 allows annexations which are challenged to be found void ab initio (from their inception) which is contrary to the remainder of the Colorado Annexation Statutes; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 91-220 eliminates the ninety (90) day challenge requirements for seeking judicial review of an annexation contrary to the other provisions of the Colorado Annexation Statutes; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 91-220 may negatively affect the Town of Vail's ability to annex lands in the future. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: The Town Council of the Town of Vail strongly opposes the passage of Senate Bill 91-220, and directs the Town Manager to send a copy of this Resolution to all appropriate legislators. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of 1991. Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk WORK SESSION FOLLOW-UP 3/15/91 TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOW-UP SOLUTIONS D?rip 1 of 7 8/8/89 WEST INTERMOUNTAIN ANNEXATION ARRY: Proceeding w/legal requirements for arijke Brofos will be circulating petitions when Larry (request: Lapin) annexation. gets them to her. Larry is holding off so annexation will occur closer to end of next year for tax purposes. 5/1 AMEND CODE, 12.04.240, STREET CUT REG/LARRY: Per Council direction, proceed. roposed ordinance being redrafted after joint meeting with PERMITS Public Service and Holy Cross. Utility conference held 3/14; concerns in writing to staff by 3/22/91; proposed ordinance to Council. 1/17 BIKES/ROLLER BLADES AND SKATES/ EN/LARRY: Should bicycles, roller blades, etc. be Researching appropriate ordinances for application to be SKATEBOARDS prohibited from highly pedestrianized areas in discussed in May, 1991. the Village and Lionshead, and also including the parking structures? 7/27 UNDERGROUNDING UTILITIES IN ARRY/GREG: Work with Holy Cross Electric to Revised estimate of costs to property owners to be EAST VAIL establish special improvement district(s) for mailed. Undergrounding may occur in fall of '91 or undergrounding utilities in East Vail. spring of '92. 9/20 LIONS RIDGE FILING 4 ON: Homeowners Assn. would like Town to buy Ron contacted Jim Fritze about tax abatement if Town takes common area for back taxes and penalties. ownership. Tax liability only about $5,500. County Attorney says no tax abatement is possible for a property such as this. 11/27 HERITAGE CABLEUISION ON: Schedule meeting with Ran/Larry/Lynn Johnson Will do. Lynn Johnson is out of town for a few weeks. to discuss limited franchise agreement. 12/18 MILLRACE CONDO. ASSN. LETTER RISTAN: Respond. Vail Ventures will respond in writing to our letter. Shelly has written a second follow-up request. 1/11/91 SNOW DUMP ON/GREG: Workout site acquisition with VA. Final negotiations on land lease underway. Design omplete design. has begun. 1/11/91 AGRICULTURE OPEN SPACE LAND RISTAN: Locate all Agriculture open parcels. All located. There are approximately 12 pieces privately owned not including VA parcels. Item tabled indefinitely per Mike Mollica, pending further research on additional parcels. 1/11/91 OLD TOWN SHOPS/HOLY CROSS ARRY/GREG: Environmental investigation. Drilling completed, Waiting for final lab reports. SITES 2/5/91 CHUCK ANDERSON/YOUTH OB/RON: Are we 2 or 3 years behind on this? Last year nominations were solicited twice and none RECOGNITION (request: Rose) Let's be prepared to award this spring. reeived. Rob will proceed. Process has been outlined by VMRD and will be reviewed by staff. WORK SESSION FOLLOW-UP TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOW-UP SOLUTIONS 3/15/91 ~a~~ ~ cf ? 5/91 AUSTRIA HOUSE PARKING LOT ARRY/MIKE BRAKE: Research policy for encroach- Staff to seek Council direction on encroachment issue (request: Lapin) ment on Town of Vail property. during April 2 Work Session, after Ron, Ken, Mike Brake, and Greg discuss. +7-''~, < . , - - .~.+z 3. .f-,; B-;.z.., Gt •+~a ~~r- X. 's r~~c ax. a,:.>;~-a r.,, _ _ n•.~a••N ~ :•w ls..•,e. - { _ . ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~iri1, WALL STREET JOURNAL WEI , ;.._.y. '•t ~ L rye. 'Yrf: t ,y'r C r_ " ~ h u"', e+i y-,M1- . ~ _ :.Free. S eech~ and Colorado : - _ _ p _ _ _ Victuals _ Free speech for Americans is always in of Aspen; `maybe: Mr: Acquafresca should In Colorado, however; HB 1176 would ~ - dan er,'never more than now. I'm not talk- also think about closin down the ~ reten- ; g g P stamp out the meat-hating Chicken Littles. - ing about 'Pentagon-'restrictions -on re-. tious restaurants that• line the• streets of Brad Anderson, vice president of the Colo- ' - porters' in 'the Gulf. 'What worries. me is this yuppified ex-ghost town. They are the rado Cattle Feeders Association (members t _ ; something closer to home: It's called HB kinds of phony baloney places that impress own feed lots, places where obese cas- 1 1176. And the'man behind it is the Colorado rich oil men•from •Dallas and make them trated bovines compete to create the larg- c . G state representative Steve Acquafresca. believe they're in Paris. • ~ - ~ ' est cowpie Alps and then stand on their ' Colorado House Bi11 1176 would make•it Aspen is supposed td have'the best food' summits), says he hopes, to sue ahealth-- 1 . , 'possible to sue 'people who ,"disparage" 'scene between` the Mississippi and San food store in Boulder that recently adver • ~ " • food products. Mr. Acquafresca's poetic Francisco. But this reputation is based on tised its view that beef .ought to be sold in f name may make him sound like an eco- the appetites and taste of people who have drugstores. . ` - - been overexerting at high altitude under My view, is'that beef should be labeled , . - • the influence of cocaine: • ~ • Colorado and non-Colorado. But by now -Okay, then :there's Colorado .ham- . you have discounted my views as those of ' Cl'1t1CY118 burgers. In otherparts of the country, un- a person who has made up his mind. This . ~ scrupulous.. chefs and penny-pinching ~ . ~ unfair..I am happy to line up behind a - . . ,~Bq RagmOnd Sokolov mores stretch the ground beef with cereal Colorado dish that shows the state at its ~ ' ~ products .and "extenders:" In Colorado, 'most authentic:, Rocky Mountain oysters ~ you can't even be sure there's any beef be- ' - (ovoid sheep organs that separate rams 1 ' freak, but he's actually, an apple grower tween those tasteless bun halves. I ate a from ewes from ~Cedaredge (pop. 1184 just apiece cheeseburger in Breckenridge once, and.I ~ .Let's -agree, however, that mountain ~ north'of Orchard City. And like most apple was sure that the patty had been ground oysters are .not always first-rate. I had growers, he wants revenge on the zealots . from road-killed marmot. some loathsome flat, chewy ones in a , who .scared off consumers last year by .Marmots are defer?seless rodents that hyper-Far West Denver eatery some years j claiming (unjustifiably) .that the .apple normally live under rocks in high places. ago, mountain oysters redolent of freezer growth-promoting chemical. Alar could Coloradans trap them and serve them to • burn under their deep-fried crust. The real , cause cancer in humans. ~ - , tourists, for laughs. You can tell if they're , .problem with mountain oysters, however, . • HB 1176 passed the Colorado House ear- road-killed because -of the little flecks of is cleaning them. They :come ..out of -the I . lies this month and is pending before the. rubber and asphalt. lamb covered with a tenacious mucous State Senate. So there .,is still time to wrould these burgers make you~'sick?~ membrane..But .there :is a way around squawk against this idiotic bit of you bet. 'And not just from indigestion. this. crypto-fascist self-regarding rube para- Let's start with rodent-borne cholera and As the wife of a sheep producer north of noia. More importantly, there is still time bubonic plague. -Rifle once told me, you pop the oysters into • to say what we think, .without fear of.sub- The most sick-making of all Colorado your garbage disposal. A short .while later ~ pcena, about Colorado food. So •here area food products are apples. Even if you think the oysters emerge clean and white, ready ' 'few of my gripes.. ~ Alar is good for infants and lactating for the pan. The .emblematic recipe-my Have you ever -tasted one of those in- • women, you'll be amazed to hear what Col- nomination for the state dish of Colorado- - sipid Western,Slope tomatoes? Speak up.' orado apples can give you: dengue fever, would be braised oysters from the state an- • Just say yuk. - : ~ Aleppo button, decubitus, dysmenorrhea; tea), the Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep. And how about the beer•they make with pruritus .ani, . rickettsialpox, shigellosis, It's •not every day that one comes across water from mountain streams fouled by Crohn's disease, Churg and Straus syn- ..the basic ingredient..But, as the Colorado upstream elk and trout before 'it ever gets drome, myasthenia gravis, onychophagy, ;state motto puts it,,Nil sine nu»une, noth- to the beer vats? Low-voltage swill if you "flea-bitten" kidney, . peau d'orange, ing without Providence.. - - . ' ask me. I wouldn't drink Colorado. beer peyronism, sociopathy, Volkmann's con- , . even in a paid commercial. Its not that it tracture, fecaliths, in the circle of Willis, - • tastes bad. It has no taste at all. Let me.-' Klumpke's paralysis, gynecomastia, azoo- tell you, Mr. Acquafresca, the beer in your spermia,. poison .oak, Heberden's node, state is an embarrassment to eve bod in Roth's s ts, Janewa lesions, sin tus, rY Y. Po Y ~ the whole country. You should pass a law tic douleureux, Bell's palsy,• Herpes iris, ~ ~ 1= , making it illegal. Or have it all shipped to 'erythema 'nodosum, •splenomegaly; cere- the Gulf to dilute the oil spill. Or in case brat edema, epidydimitis, yaws, espundia, ~ • their desalination plants clog, there'll:be visceral leishmaniasis,;a.k.a. dumdum fe-• something for desperate Saudis to drink. _ ver, and sick headache. _ ~ ; ~ • ~ , For a few days, it. probably won't hurt .How do you like_them apples? . .them. They'll just slow down to the mental And come to thihk of it, what about the pace of the average urban escapee you run ~ beef? Almost everywhere .in the country , : F .,-,Y.,,LL . - _ ' . into in Aspen; and the brain damage will ~ folks ace worried about beef; because it, i. ~ - ` ~ • _ probably not be irreversible the way it is has a lot of artery<jamming fat in if and , for lifelong in-state consumers.:: , 'because cattlemen put antibiotics "in, their. . , If you think• I'm being.unfair about As-. (cattle) feed. And .all over the country; ~ . pen alertness levels, try asking directions beef producers ,have-been getting :red iq , , - _ from some .freckly bouncing ski bunny the face. denying that -they are undermin . ; . ~ ~i°' 'there. On second thought, don't try::Life is ing the normal medical power-of aritibi ~ . - ~ - - too short to wait for the answer. Speaking ics as medicine for H. sapiens.:. : Ems: , : ~ :.w A • JOHN R. GABRIEL P.O. BOX 268 PARAMUS, NJ 07653 RECD MAR 1 5 1991 March 14, 1991 Mayor Kent Rose and The Town Council Town of Vail ZS So. Frontage Road W. Vail, CO. 81657 RE: Sonnenalp Expansion Gentlemen: _ As an owner of an apartment (VVI/Phase V/Unit 305) who would be impacted by the above captioned proposal, I would like to make the following comments. It is my understanding that, while the project has been tabled, there is a possibility that it will be on the agenda July 2nd, and could be passed at that time. I have had the opportunity to meet Johannes Faessler, and consider him to be an intelligent and honorable man who has proven to be a tremendous asset to the Vail community. However, the current plan would be detrimental to the ..Village in general and to specific existing apartments (including my own) in particular. Specifically, my objections are the closeness of the building to Meadow Drive, thus cutting off light from the street and its immediate environs, and the height of seven stories of the Tower section nearest to the Chapel, restricting mountain views and changing the character of this portion of the Village. Therefore, while not opposed to the expansion and upgrading of the existing hotel, I feel the two areas mentioned must be addressed and revised. As a real estate.. developer, I am certainly aware of the economic realities that dictate the need for a certain density of units per acre, but I feel confident that an economically viable alternative to the existing proposal could be found, and urge the governing body to consider the consequences of the proposal on nearby properties and the character of the Village in general. This should lead them to encourage the Sonnenalp owners to revise and resubmit their proposal for approval, but not to approve any plan that includes a building over, say, four stories and does not provide for adequate setback from Meadow Drive. Thank you for your consideration. Sincer y urs, Th G riel Family _ Copy to: The Vail Daily The Vail Trail RECp MAR 141991 March 11, 1991 SOLVING COLORADO'S WATER PROBLEMS. Two out of three key decisions have been made toward solving Colorado's major water problems. The first was EPA's courageous decision to veto the damaging and costly Two Forks Dam. The second was Aurora's recent decision to drop its Gunnison diversion concept, because of similar environmental and economic faults. The only basic decision left is for Colorado to unite behind Arapahoe County's multipurpose, environment-enhancing Union Park Water Conservation Project. Union Park's million acre-feet of off-river storage on the Gunnison side of the Continental Divide will substantially solve Colorado's four most critical water problems: (1) Union Park will satisfy Metro Denver's 50-year growth needs, for about half the safe yield cost of Two Forks; (2) Union Park will provide much needed multi-year drought protection for Colorado's environment and economy on both slopes; (3) Union Park will help correct Colorado's grossly unbalanced water usage between its untapped Gunnison Basin and its overdepleted Upper Colorado Basin. (The drier Upper Colorado supplies all of Colorado's transmountain water via 18 diversions to Front Range farm and urban users.) (4) Union Park will help save Colorado's unused compact entitlements from being permanently lost by default to water- short California. Union Park's unique reservoir site is truly an invaluable asset for all of Colorado - especially for the Upper Gunnison's water based way of life. The entire project could be paid for in ten years with Representative Ben Campbell's idea to temporarily lease Colorado's wasted flood flows to California. Regardless of who ultimately pays, Colorado environ- mentalists, water developers, and citizens will soon be united in common appreciation of an uncommon water conservation project. Dave Miller, President Natural Energy Resources Company P.O. Box 567 Palmer Lake, CO 80133 (719) 481-2003 Nation/world y~s~ With more than lOpercent of all In response to Romer's offer, , COIOI (,l~ti.iO •4merican voters now living in officials from California and the California and with the 1990 cen- other water compact states are sus giving the state seven more carefully reading the complex offers water House seats for a total of water laws to draft contracts that California's political clout fug must be signed by all the parties, outweighs that of its fellow Colo- a process that oflicials said wtll '~f~ r ~ rado River water users, who will take at least two weeks. W ~l~tvlil O~~ combine for slightly more than 20 After a meeting in Denver last seats. week with California oflicials and Despite the torrential rains that representatives of the other Colo- By James Coates 3~3 hit California late last week, the rado River Compact states, a Chicago Tribune 1 five-year dry spelt there has spokesman for Romer said Cali- DENVER-Mindful of the pop- erm orarilst theoamountt ofew ter fornia indicated it wants the water ular wisdom in the grid West that p y and is considering Colorado's re- used for agriculture and to cut quest that it agree not to seek "whiskey is for drinking and water supplies to cities. water allocations granted to other water is for fighting," Colorado The Colorado River is the arte- states. leaders are offering to help ry carrying the lifeblood of seven drought-stricken California in an Western states. It starts as a bur- The Colorado proposal also effort [o stave off an interstate urges that California make perma- bling brook not far from the ski vent the tem battle over water rights. com lex at Vail, Colo., and tum- porary cats to the The rush to find ways to slake tiles down the western face of the ame?int of water used for agricul- the thirst of the nation's most Rocky Mountains, picking up cas- lure. Farmers now account for 83 populous state began Feb. 13 cading runoffs. percent of California's water use, when Interior Secretary Manual It then pours into the low de- making Colorado's suggestion Lujan suggested to the Colorado controversial because of the valu- Legislature that other Western serts to carve the Grand Canyon able cash crops at stake. states share with Los Angeles in Arizona before slowing to a Meanwhile Re Ben Ni thor- trickle and ending in the Gulf of ~ p• ~ some of their rights to water in California. se Campbell (D-Colo.), whose dis- the mighty Colorado River. trict includes much of the Colora- Colorado leaders quickly re- The Colorado River Compact do River's headwaters, entered the s p o n d e d with a promise o f overseen by Congress and signed fray by suggesting that instead of 400,000 acre feet of water, in 1922 when California was dust giving the water to California, roughly the amount used by Den- another sparsely settled Western Colorado should lease it. ver ~n a year, so that California state gave California annual water The lease money, which Camp- would not go after all the states' rights to 4.4 million acre feet, bell estimates would total billions precious future water rights on Colorado to 3 million, Arizona the river. 2.9 million, Utah 1.4 million, of dollars, could be used to build "We want to help Southern Cal- WYoming 840,000, New Mexico more storage reservoirs in Colora- ifornia with its drought situa- 435,000 and Nevada 300,000. do. lion," said Colorado Gov. Roy An acre foot, enough to cover This, in turn, would allow the Romer. "But it also is in our self- 43,000 square feet with 12 inches state to keep its entire allocations interest to get California to live of water, equals about 330,000 inside Colorado. within its entitlements in the gallons. Tom Eggert, a member of the river." This is enough water to meet ArapahoeCounty Commission, the needs of three average Ameri- satdthe idea of getting money Romer wrote a letter on Feb. 21 can households for one year. from California t o ft n a n c e to California Gov. Pete Wilson Colorado's own water plans ex- Since 1989, California has con- offering to give Los Angeles the sumed more than its 4.4-million- cited him. The county commis- 400,000 acre feet of water if Cali- acre-foot share while some of the Sion is building a pipeline that fornia would agree to adopt strict. other states, particularly Colora- would pump Colorado River permanent conservation rules to do, have used onl a portion of cut water use in the future. Y water from the west side of the the water they have coming. Col- Rockies across the Continental With effective conservation orado has only enough dams to Divide and into the Denver area. measures, Romer told legislators store 2.2 million acre feet and "We need to find wavs to store last week, California wouldn't re- therefore lets 800,000 acre feet our water here in Colorado rather sort to using its substantial polio- that it owns pass down the river. than letting it flow down the river cal clout to seize a larger portion That water is stored in Lake and out to sea where it evaporates of the water supply that the state Mead, the gigantic reservoir out- and comes back as~ mountain shares under federal law with side Las Vegas created by Hoover rains," Eggert said. Wyoming, Utah, New Mexico, Dam, which supplies Southern "If we don't store it here we're Arizona, Nevada and Colorado. California much of its electrical going to lose it to people who will power as well as its water. use tt to water the sidewalks of Lake Mead thus amounts to a Pasadena and to fill the hot tubs water bank, which means that of Hollywood." Colorado in future years can draw upon the reserves stored there. It is this water that Romer is of- fering to share with California. Dave Miller defends his Union ~ ' Park and Rocky Point projects ~ by Bonnie Minshall management practices. cost therefore making it a valuable - Miller said that future asset to the state of Colorado. F David Miller, president of projections of Colorado's population ep)1 en Rnckv Pninf, Z Natural Energy Resources Company growth show that the ercnd to locate The Rocky Point Pumped t>~ (NECO), claims, "you have to on the Front Range will continue, Storage Project would pump water ~ consider the greats: t good fur the where most growth on the Western from ehe Taylor Reservoir up ro a greatest number" when deciding Slope is attributed to tourism. smaller new reservoir at times when whether to divert water from the According to Miller, "You con try to electricity is cheap, such asduring the Western Slope. manipulate the population with night. Then, at peak times of the day Miller spoke at Western Slate water, but must experts say you when power is more valuable, the College on «'ednesday, February 20 can't." water would be released back to in the second of a four-part series Miller stated that we have to Taylor Reservoir, generating 1000 v megawatts of electricity. rr According to Miller, the Rocky Coloradoans face a sit:lation wltere one basin is point Pumped Storage Project would completely overburdened while the otlter is reduce power costs. He commented a forgotteff." -Dave Miller that the estimated 70-year savings over fossil peaking power alternatives is 11..3 billion (19A7) dollars. The addressing water politics. Flis look at Colorado's water issues in a project would cost 5997 million to presentation was interrupted state-wide perspective instead of build. frequently by antagonistic questions fromalocal perspective. Acmrdingto Miller believes the lrmeRt<„r from a concerned audience. Miller, the situation within lhestate is this project are: NECO filed for water rights to essentially going to get worse because •itwouldbetheworld'shighest 5 build the Union Park Water Diversion the water is in one plain with the head, most efficient peaking power ~ Project in ]986, and later sold the purple in another. facility. ~ proposal to Arapahoe County; the Miller explained that there are •itwouldcontributeronationat 5 company stands to gale, millions of lour main drainage basins in the state: clean energy and clean air goals. b dollars if the project is built. NECO the Upper Colorado, the Gunnison, • it would reduce future need e also is the developer of the proposed the Arkansas, and the South Platte. for additional coal-fired plants in the Rocky Point Pumped Storage Project The Upper Colorado only generates a west, ~ which would be built in Taylor Park few more acre feet of water than the • it would increase 24 hour Pp', and would supply peaking power Gunnison and currently has 18 productivity of existing fossil fuel 7 thntughout the west. diversions to the Eastern Slope. plants. ~ Oe the Melee Park Peoieet Meanwhile the Gunnison Basin, a • it would improve local tax _.~q The Union Park Project would smaller but wetter basin per square base,employmentand infwstructure. •Y divert 80,000 acre feet of water mile,remainsunwpped.Accordingto • it would have minimal local annually from the Taylor Basin to the Miller, "fhe basic ingredient of an environmenwl impact. Front Range, storing the water in a environmentalist is the balanced use Mtlhrs vrotMion not adeeeate new enormous ..ir lomted in of natural resources and Coloradoans Attorney Richard BrattoM who Gunnison County'sUttionParksouth face a situation where one basin is has represented the Upper Gunnison of Taylor Park. An acre foot is an completely overburdened while the River Water Conservancy District amount of water one foot deep other is forgotten." since l%1, said the protection the covering roughly the sizeofafootball Under the Colorado River Union Park Project is offering to the field andrsenoughlosupplyanurban Compact, the state is entitled to one Gunnison area guarantees only family of four for a year. million acre feet of the water flowing minimal stream (low and that this is At his presentation, Miller through it. The total water (low in not adequate (or envirortmenwl or stated that the proposed Union Park Colorado is estimated atthrcemillion economic purposes. Bretton said, project mold solve Colorado's (our acre feet. Miller sorted that one-third "We want to see 100-150th remain in most critical water issues by: of Colorado's compact entitlement is Taylor Reservoir during winter • serving as a low cost, lost by water flowing through months,notMilleisproposed50cfs." environmentally sound replacement tributaries to Arizona, California and Acmrding to Bretton, under the to the vetoed Two Forks Project for otherdownriverstates. proposed Union Park Project, the Metro Denver. Acmrding to Miller, the Union amounts of water taken out of the • saving Colorado's interstate Park Project would utilve Taylor Taylor River andtheEast River would compact waters from ultimate "use it Reservoir surplus water. He stated, drastically hurt Cunnison's economy or lose it" realities caused by faster "We're only talking about taking and disturb fish habitats. The Upper growing downrivcr states. water out in spring Rards that is Gunnison River Water Conservancy • providing drought protection usually lost to runoff." District on Sept. 18, 1990 sM a Icgal fur the environments and economies Miller continued, 'The whole precedent when it receivcdadecreetu of both sluees. idea is you don't hurt Gunnison" store and rclcase Taylor Rcsenoir • correcting the current Therc would be 60,000 acre feet water for recmational purposes. unbalanced useof Coloradti s surwce pumped into Union Park on average, There is not enough existing waters lxtwmn the overdepleted "still guaranteeing the Taylor 2W cfs water in the Gunnison area, Bretton Upper Colorado Basin and the (cubic (eetpersttvndl in the summer said, for Miller to receive the water untapped Upper Gunnison Dasin. and 50 cfs in the winter" before any rights he nttds to complete his AccordingwMiller, Colorado is water would be divencd east. project. Bretton hrlicves thatpmvious the only western swte that still Millerdaimsthatthereisaneed existing water rightsmekcitpcnsiblc adheres to a rigid doctrine that to protect ourown swte from drought to stop Miller's pmjcct. Acmrding to prohibits strategic water planning. by building additional reservoirs. Dratton, the United Slatcsalready has Miller sorted, "The key Thing is a Presently, the largest reservoir in the mapr water rights exceeding the protected future," and although the scare is the cyclical Blue Mesa Taylor River runoff which averages first priority is to conserve the water Reservoir with close to one million 150,000 acre feet. we have, them is a need for Colorado acre feet. Miller said, 'The purposed Drattun explained that Taylor state policy and planning to Union Park Reservoir would be the Basin ranchers and property owners ~ modernize Colorado's water highest large reservoir in the world" own private instrcam Row rights that "Union Park is the ultimate in the City of Aurora and Arapahoe conservation," according to Miller, County have challenged. If These because when you hold water at a rights remain valid, this would high altitude it helps everyone in effectively tic up mom of the runoff times o(drought and when you Ict water rights. water run out of the stale it doesn't ~i-families nut of businegg help anyone. The proposed high A corxerncd Gunnison citizen altitude project, situated nwr the cup attending Miller's address at WSC of the Continental Divide, would nut said, 'Thedam in Union Park will put lose water ro evaporation and could ten ranching families out of business be managed to Rowin both directions. that have bcen them for generations." Miller said them are added Miller's comment to this was advantages to the proposed Union "right." Park site: A rancher said, "We have to • it is an off river site, therefore defend what we've owned for not disturbing a free Rowing river generations." • it is one location in the world To this Miller replied, "You where fourmaprdrainageareascome have to considerthegreatestgoodfor together in a 30-mile area. the greatest number before the few; •itisasiteofrelativelylowdam this is the American way."