Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1992-08-04 Support Documentation Town Council Regular Session
r VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1992 r7a 6:30 P.M. AGENDA 1. Discussion Re: Town of Vail 1992 CDOT Funding Requests/5 Year Program of Projects. 2. Update on Town of Vail Snow Storage Facility. 3. Update on Ski Museum Pocket Park Implementation Schedule. 4. Other. 5. Adjournment. 4~?44O~Od~44b4O4 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1992 7:30 P.M. AGENDA 1. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION. 2. Consent Agenda: A. Approval of July 7, 1992, and July 21, 1992, Evening Meeting Minutes. B. Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 18.24 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail by the addition of Section 18.24.058, controlling undesirable plants within the Town, declaring such plants a nuisance, setting forth penalties for the violation of this ordinance; and setting forth details in regard thereto. C. Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance amending Section G of the Vail Village urban design considerations relating to the protection of views within the Town of Vai( and creating a new chapter of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail to provide for the protection of certain views within the Town and setting forth the details in regard thereto. 3. Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance amending Section 16.24.010(G) of the Vail Municipal Code, setting forth provisions relating to signs displayed on balloons which are associated with a special event within the Town of Vail. 4. Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1992, an emergency ordinance setting forth a special review process to allow for staff approvals for temporary signage, structures, street decor, and other temporary improvements for the 1992 Mountain Bike World Cup Finals. 5. Resolution No. 13, Series of 1992, a resolution authorizing the Town of Vail to hire certain consultants to provide expert advice to the Town for the purpose of protecting the Town's interest in the proper operation and management of Vail Associates, Inc. 1 6. Selection of Underwriter for the planned refunding of some of the Town's existing debt issues. 7. Review of Town of Vail Agreement for Fire Suppression and Protection Services between the Town of Vail and Vail Associates, Inc. 8. Action on Proposed Contract for Town of Vail 1992 Street Seal Program. 9. Town Council Appeal of the Planning and Environmental Commission decision to approve a request to amend a condition of a previously approved exterior alteration relating to the CCI parking pay-in-lieu fee for the Red Lion Building, located at 304 Bridge Street. Applicant: Vencura, Ltd./Jay Peterson. 10. Adjournment. C;VIGENDA.TC 2 r• VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1992 ~a? 6:30 P.M. EXPANDED AGENDA 6:30 P.M. 1. Discussion Re: Town of Vail 1992 CDOT Funding Requests/5 Year Larry Grafel Program of Projects. Action Requested of Council: Approve/disapprove/revise the submittal requests. Backaround Rationale: Staff is in the process of completing CDOT 5 year funding submittal. Staff would like Council's input. Staff Recommendation: Approve submittal requests. 6:45 P.M. 2. Update on Town of Vail Snow Storage Facility. Larry Grafel Action Reauested of Council: Approve/disapprove project contract. Backaround Rationale: TOV has opened bids for the Snow Storage Project as designed and approved. Bids were within the engineer's estimate and budget. Staff Recommendation: Approve project contract. 6:50 P.M. 3. Update on Ski Museum Pocket Park Implementation Schedule. Mike Mollica 6:55 P.M. 4. Other. 7:29 P.M. 5. Adjournment. 4444444444444444444444 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL EVENING MEETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1992 7:30 P.M. EXPANDED AGENDA 7:30 P.M. 1. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION. 7:35 P.M. 2. Consent Agenda A. Approval of July 7, 1992, and July 21, 1992, Evening Meeting Minutes. 1 Todd Oppenheimer B. Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 18.24 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail by the addition of Section 18.24.058, controlling undesirable plants within the Town, declaring such plants a nuisance, setting forth penalties for the violation of this ordinance; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Andy Knudtsen C. Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance amending Section G of the Vail Village urban design considerations relating to the protection of views within the Town of Vail and creating a new chapter of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail to provide for the protection of certain views within the Town and setting forth the details in regard thereto. 7:45 P.M. 3. Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance Tim Devlin amending Section 16.24.010(G) of the Vail Municipal Code, setting forth provisions relating to signs displayed on balloons which are associated with a special event within the Town of Vail. 8:00 P.M. 4. Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1992, an emergency ordinance setting Larry Eskwith forth a special review process to allow for staff approvals for temporary signage, structures, street decor, and other temporary improvements for the 1992 Mountain Bike World Cup Finals. Action Reauested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1992, on first reading. Backaround Rationale: If the Council does not wish to approve signs on cold air balloons for the current Mountain Bike World Cup Finals, this ordinance sets up a special process for approval of cold air balloons and other temporary structures just for the World Cup. It is the same process used by the Town for the 1989 World Alpine Ski Championships. 8:30 P.M. 5. Resolution No.13, Series of 1992, a resolution authorizing the Town Larry Eskwith of Vail to hire certain consultants to provide expert advice to the Town for the purpose of protecting the Town's interest in the proper operation and management of Vail Associates, Inc. Action Reauested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Resolution No. 13, 1992, on first reading. Backaround Rationale: This resolution gives the Town the authority to hire experts to help it analyze its options in regard to Vail Associates, Inc.'s Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding. 9:00 P.M. 6. Selection of underwriter for the planned refunding of some of the Steve Barwick Town's existing debt issues. Action Reauested of Council: Formally select an underwriting firm(s) for this bond issue. Backaround Rationale: The Town of Vail recently conducted a formal bid process for underwriting services. The firm of Hanifan Imhoff was selected to serve as financial advisor on this bond issue, and has completed an analysis of the proposals. This analysis was used as the basis for the selection. 2 9:30 P.M. 7. Review of Town of Vail Agreement for Fire Suppression and Dick Duran Protection Services between the Town of Vail and Vail Associates, Inc. Action Requested of Council: Review the Agreement. Back round Rationale: Vail Associates, Inc. has approached the TOV Fire Department to provide fire suppression and protection services. Staff Recommendation: Approve the Agreement. 9:35 P.M. 8. Action on proposed Contract for Town of Vail 1992 Street Seal Larry Grafel Program. Action Reauested of Council: Approve/deny/modify proposed Contract. Backaround Rationale: Seal is to protect roadways that have been rebuilt. Since road reconstruction projects are on hold, this is a good time to maintain and protect rebuilt roads to prolong the asphalt life. Staff Recommendation: Approve the Contract based on above background rationale and consideration of the fact that low bid was within engineer's estimate. 10:05 P.M. 9. Town Council Appeal of the Planning and Environmental Mike Mollica Commission decision to approve a request to amend a condition of a previously approved exterior alteration relating to the CCI parking pay-in-lieu fee for the Red Lion Building, located at 304 Bridge Street. Action Reauested of Council: Uphold/overturn the decision of the PEC. Backaround Rationale: The PEC, at their July 27, 1992, public hearing, unanimously approved (vote of 7-0) the request to delete a condition of a 1990 exterior alteration approval, relating to the parking pay-in-lieu fee for the Red Lion Building. Staff Recommendation: Please see the staff memorandum dated July 27, 1992. 10:35 P.M. 10. Adjournment. C:VIGENDA.TCE 3 l \ 1 TOWN OF VAIL ~ 75 South Frontage Road Department of Public Works/Transportation Vail, Colorado 81657 303-479-2158/FAX 303-479-2166 TOWN OF VAIL'S COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FUNDING REQUESTS: 1) West Vail Improvements - Cost $855,000.00 Improvements include; interchange modifications as presented in the Master Transportation Study, Frontage Road widening of turn and bike lanes and landscaping as included in Town Landscape Plan. The Town will provide all design and right- of-way acquisition costs. 2) Simba Run Underpass - Cost $2,550,000.00 The Town will provide all design and right-of-way acquisition costs. 3) Cut Slope Reveaitation - Cost $160,000.00 The Town will provide all design costs. e TOWN OF VAIL ~ 75 South Frontage Road Department of Public Works/Transportation Vail, Colorado 81657 303-479-2158/FAX 303-479-2166 MEMORANDUM T0: Larry Grafel FROM: Greg Hall DATE: July 22, 1992 RE: Vail Snow Storage Facility The Public Works Department opened bids for the Snow Storage Facility on July 14, 1992. The project consisted of a °Base Bid" and three alternates. The "Base Bid" included all on site drainage, earth work and landscaping. Alternate "A" was the paving of the ring road around the facility. Alternate "B° was an extension of the water line and installation of two fire hydrants. Alternate "C" was off-site drainage improvements. The Town received five bids on the project. The results are as follows: Base Bid Base Bid Alt. A Alt. B Alt. C Total Randall and Blake, Inc. $152,071.00 $ 26,000.00 $ 30,300.00 $ 11,872.00 $ 220,243.00 Hudick Excavating, Inc. $175,214.81 $ 28,600.00 $ 28,308.78 $ 18,378.02 $ 250,501.61 Tarco, Inc. $ 207,856.50 $ 27,300.00 $ 40,747.00 $ 13,190.00 $ 289,093.50 Pebble Haulers, Inc. $ 306,137.00 $ 24,180.00 $ 29,800.00 $ 29,980.00 $ 390,097.00 B&B Excavating, Inc. $ 305,521.50 $ 23,400.00 $ 49,250.00 $ 19,104.00 $ 397,275.00 Engineers Estimate $194,848.00 $ 20,800.00 $ 21,600.00 $ 12,220.00 $ 249,468.00 As of July 1, 1992 there is approximately $310,000.00 left in the capital budget. In addition to the contractors cost, the following costs will be charged out: Drip irrigation system $ 15,000.00 2 Shop lights and wiring $ 8,000.00 Memorandum Regarding Vail Snow Storage Facility July 22, 1992 Page 2 Construction Surveying $ 4,000.00 Construction Testing $ 6,000.00 Construction Project Management $ 4,000.00 Contingency $ 25,000.00 Subtotal $ 62,000.00 Apparent Low Bid $ 220,243.00 Estimated Cost $ 282,243.00 A pre-construction meeting is scheduled for next week with an anticipated construction start up the first of August. Completion of the project will be 60 days after construction begins. GH/dsr MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING JULY 7, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, July 7, 1992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:55 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Gibson Jim Shearer Tom Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the T.,~u Manager Martha Raecker, Town Clerk Merv Lapin and Jim Gibson were not present as the meeting was called to order. First on the agenda was Citizen Participation of which there was none. Item No. 2 was a Consent Agenda consisting of three items: A. Approval of Minutes of June 2, 1992, and June 16, 1992, Evening Meeting Minutes. B. Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 2.32 of the Vail Municipal Code by the addition of Section 2.32.135 - Court Costs, empowering the Municipal Court Judge to assess court costs to be paid by defendants in the Municipal Court of the Town of Vail; and setting forth details in regard thereto. C. Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1992, second reading, an ordinance amending Title 10 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail by the addition of Chapter 10.28 - Parking Infractions; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the titles in full. Jim Shearer moved to approve the Consent Agenda with one correction to the fourth item of the minutes of the June 16, 1992, evening meeting to indicate newly appointed Planning and Environmental Commission member, JeffBowen's, term would expire in February, 1994. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-0, Merv Lapin and Jim Gibson not yet present. Merv Lapin and Jim Gibson joined the meeting at this point. Item No. 3 was a presentation of the 1991 audited financial statement. Steve Thompson introduced Jerry McMahan, President of McMahan, Armstrong, Novosad and Anderson, P.C., the firm which had performed the audit. Mr. McMahan indicated the audit was now completed, adding the audit had gone very well with very few item adjustments having been required. He advised a letter regarding minor accounting housekeeping issues had been delivered to Steve Barwick, and commented on the drastic improvement in the Town's accounting system over the last six to seven years. The audit materials and report had been assembled by the Town, resulting in unspecified savings to the Town. Mr. McMahan advised the approximate cost of this audit was $19,000, about the same as last year's audit. After brief discussion, Merv Lapin moved to approve and accept the 1991 audited financial statement as presented, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Steve Thompson informed Council the report contained two minor typographical errors which would be corrected. Before adjournment, Ron Phillips officially introduced TOV's new Director of Public Works, 1 Larry Grafel. Council welcomed Larry. In addition, Jim Gibson moved to schedule an Executive Session, regarding the GHI Bankruptcy status, for Thursday, July 9, 1992, at 6:00 P.M. at the offices of Kutak Rock & Campbell, 2400 Arco Tower, 707 17th Street, Denver, Colorado. Merv Lapin seconded this motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 6-0-1, Bob Buckley absta~n;,,g, There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 7:42 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor A'1'"1'1:ST: Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianne S. Deto C:Vu11NSJUL7.92 2 MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING JULY 21, 1992 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, July 21, 1992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Pro-Tem, Tom Steinberg, at 7:30 P.M. Mayor Osterfoss arrived after Tom read the title of agenda item No. 6, Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1992. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Tom Steinberg, Mayor Pro-Tem Bob Buckley Jim Gibson Rob Levine Jim Shearer MEMBERS ABSENT: Merv Lapin TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, T.,~~~ Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Davey Wilson, former member of the Liquor Licensing Authority, expressed his concerns relative to the May 26, 1992, Council interviews of applicants for two positions which became open on the Authority in June, 1992, due to term expirations. Mr. Wilson was not reappointed to the Authority after the interviews. He questioned the effectiveness of the interview process, and asked Council to explain the decision making process for selection of new members to the Authority. He also noted there were no longer any members on the Authority in the liquor service industry. For the record, Larry Eskwith said there could not be a licensee sitting on the Authority, but there could be individuals working in the liquor distribution industry. As it was agreed this was not the forum for individual questioning of Council members, Jim Gibson advised Mr. Wilson to contact Council members individually to discuss their personal votes. Next, Blondie Vucich advised the final adoption of the trapping regulation would take place on Thursday, 7/23/92, at the Holiday Inn/University Park in Ft. Collins. She state there was still concern the proposal recommended by Division of Wildlife staff was not in line with what had been agreed upon through numerous meetings with Division of Wildlife representatives and Vail's community representatives. She felt it needed to be known that, in the event a statewide regulation failed, Vail's regulation could remain in place. Ms. Vucich thanked Council for their most recent letter dated July 16, 1992, to individual members of the Colorado Wildlife Commission. Item No. 2 on the agenda was apN~„~al of the minutes of the June 30,1992, Special Evening Meeting minutes. Jim Gibson moved to approve the June 30,1992, Special Evening Meeting minutes, with a second from Jim Shearer. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 5-0, Mayor Osterfoss not yet present. Item No. 3 was the appointment of Building Board of Appeals Members. Gary Murrain asked Council to appoint all six applicants interviewed on July 14, 1992, for the five positions on this Board. He noted the first challenge for this Board would be to write up the Board's procedures for presentation to Council for adoption. Rob Levine moved to appoint all six applicants, Bill Anderson, Robert L. Arnold, David M. Floyd, Mark J. Mueller, David M. Peel, and Saundra Spaeh to the Building Board of Appeals with the understanding that Gary would return to Council with the rules and regulations developed for the Board before they were finalized. Jim Gibson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 5-0, Mayor Osterfoss not yet present. Item No. 4 was Ordinance No. Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 18.24 of the Municipal Code of the T~wu of Vail by the addition of Section 18.24.058, controlling undesirable plants within the Town, declaring such plants a nuisance, 1 setting forth penalties for the violation of this ordinance; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Pro-Tem Steinberg read the title in full. Mayor Osterfoss arrived at this time. Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1992, on first reading, with a second from Jim Shearer. Before a vote was taken, Bob Buckley stated the penalties shown for violation of this ordinance were too severe. He requested the penalties be modified to eliminate the jail sentence, and reduce the indicated fine to be more in line with what it would cost Town or the State to have the weeds removed. Larry Eskwith advised the penalty shown was a standard penalty listed in the Municipal Code for an ordinance violation, but Council could set whatever minimum or maximum penalty they felt was appropriate. Ron Phillips explained the penalty shown covered the range of penalties set in the Municipal Code, and the appropriate penalty within that range would be determined by the judge. Larry indicated the State, in the 1991 Legislative Session, passed a statute which required both counties and municipalities to either have an undesirable plant management plan for all lands within their jurisdiction, or pass an ordinance outlawing the undesirable plants by January 1, 1992. Todd Oppenheimer explained the state legislation came about primarily as a result of large agricultural industry economic production losses determined to be caused by the weeds identified by the State. Tom Steinberg initiated discussion regarding the four weeds identified by the State, and also the use of herbicides and their potential non-point source water contamination. Todd noted the State Act was very clear about integrated management techniques including educational preventative measures, good stewardship, and mechanical, chemical, and biological control methods. He said TOV presently used all three control methods. James Johnson was concerned about the enforcement section of the ordinance. He felt it should be clarified that proper notice should be given during reasonable business hours prior to TOV's entry upon any premises, public or private. Larry indicated the State statute specifically gave the right for entry as indicated. He noted that could be deleted, but that would make it very difficult to enforce the ordinance. Discussion followed regarding the need for public education, and Jim Gibson agreed to add the need for an educational program to his original motion, and Jim Shearer agreed to second the motion with that addition. A vote was taken and the motion failed 3-3, Tom Steinberg, Rob Levine, and Bob Buckley opposed. Rob Levine then moved to ap~,~.. ~e Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1992, on first reading, with elimination of the ninety day potential jail sentence, deletion of the Russian and Canadian Thistle, and the addition of an educational program. Peggy seconded that motion. Before another vote was taken, the general penalty clause in the Municipal Code was again explained, and it was determined no precedent would be set if the penalty was changed for this ordinance. A final vote was taken and the motion passed, 4-2, Bob Buckley and Tom Steinberg opposed. Item No. 5 was Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1991, second reading, an ordinance amending Section G of the Vail Village urban design considerations relating to the protection of views within the T„WU of Vail and creating a new chapter of the Municipal Code of the T,.wu of Vail to provide for the protection of certain views within the Town and setting forth the details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Andy Kn.udtsen explained this ordinance was passed on first reading on May 7,1991. Since that time, staff had worked with concerned individuals, and revised the ordinance significantly. He noted the Town had updated the monumentation for all of the view corridors, and a new ordinance, No. 18, Series of 1992, was written which included different legal descriptions for each view corridor. Andy said staff now recommended Ordinance No 13, Series of 1991, be denied on second reading, and indicated the revised version, Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1992, was prepared for first reading as agenda item No. 6 at this meeting. Tom Steinberg moved to deny Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1991, on second reading, with a second from Bob Buckley. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 6 was Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance amending Section G of the Vail Village urban design considerations relating to the protection of views within the Town of Vail and creating a new chapter of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail to provide for the protection of certain views within the Town and setting forth the details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Andy Knudtsen advised staff and a public committee worked on this new ordinance, and he said three major areas were discussed during their meetings. The first was identifying criteria for evaluating requests to alter view corridors, second was addressing focal points such as the clock tower within this ordinance, and third was establishing the appr.,~,~:ate processes to allow for variations to the proposed standards. Jim Lamont suggested there be an appeal process for consultants the T„~u may hire to evaluate a proposal for view corridor alterations. Council agreed the process to hire a consultant for an SDD that involved review by Council would be acceptable 2 E s for this process and decided to add wording consistent with the SDD section. Andy spoke next about the second issue raised by Mr. Lamont which concerned height limitations. Andy said Mr. Lamont and he were basically in agreement at this point that when an SDD application was submitted, it would still need to conform to the view corridor boundaries, and anyone applying for an SDD which would exceed the identified boundaries would simultaneously have to apply for a view corridor amendment or an encroachment. Andy advised no encroachments, including vents, elevator shafts, chimneys, pipes, etc., were allowed within the view corridor without and amendment or an encroachment. Andy then briefly reviewed the entire ordinance item by item, expressly indicating the Notice and Hearing Procedure section as a key element of the ordinance. After further discussion, Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1992, on first reading, with a second fem.,,,, Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 7 was Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1992, first reading, an ordinance amending Section 16.24.010(G) of the Vail Municipal Code, setting forth provisions relating to signs displayed on balloons which are associated with a special event within the Town of Vail. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Tim Devlin reviewed research done on how other resort communities were dealing with the cold air balloon issue. Tim noted input was also received f~„ Tom Davies. Discussion followed concerning the number of cold air balloons allowed for any special event, details concerning the time and work involved for inflation and deflation of the balloons, and tightening of the ordinance verbiage to specify limitation of inflation time. Jim Shearer asked if the Vail Valley Foundation had made any input on the issue. Jce Macy stated this issue came up in the Vail Valley Foundation's planning for the World Cup Mountain Bike Finals. He said sponsors involved wanted recognition of their participation, and he thought some events might be lost without the option of the cold air balloons available for sponsors to showcase their products. He noted the special events were a great financial benefit to Vail. After discussion, Rob Levine moved to approve Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1992, on first reading with the added provision that the balloons could only be inflated during the special event and related ceremonies, with reasonable time allowed for set-up and take-down of the balloons; also, the ordinance was to be reviewed in one year. Jim Shearer seconded the motion. After brief discussion, a vote was taken and the motion passed, 4-2, Tom Steinberg and Jim Gibson opposed. Item No. 8 was Resolution No. 11, Series of 1992, a resolution adopting a Joint Paratransit Plan with the T..~.. of Avon and the City of Leadville. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Mike Rose advised July 26,1992, was the deadline for adoption of the plan in order to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. After brief discussion, Tom Steinberg moved to approve Resolution No 11, Series of 1992, with a second from Jim Gibson. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Before adjournment, Mayor Osterfoss acknowledged receipt of a gift of $5,000.00 from the Vail Valley Foundation to be used toward the Art in Public Places project at the Vail Transportation Center. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk Minutes talu3n by Dorianne S. Deto C:WIINJUL21.92 3 ORDINANCE NO. 1 i SERIES 1992 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18.24 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF VAIL BY THE ADDITION OF SECTION 18.24.058, CONTROLLING UNDESIRABLE PLANTS WITHIN THE TOWN, DECLARING SUCH PLANTS A NUISANCE, SETTING FORTH PENALTIES FOR THE VIOLATION OF THIS ORDINANCE; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to institute the provisions of C.R.S. Section 35-5.5- 109 dealing with the control of undesirable plants within the State of Colorado. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1. Chapter 18.24 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby amended by the addition of Section 18.24.058 to read as follows: A. Undesirable Plants Russian, Spotted and Diffuse Knapweed and Leafy Spurge are declared to be undesirable plants to be controlled in accordance with this ordinance. B. Declaration of Nuisance Leafy Spurge, Russian Knapweed, Spotted Knapweed, and Diffuse Knapweed, TtT.ZtTe ~r:d-Cw::ad~:: T~:iette; and all other plants designated "undesirable plants" by the Town are declared to be a public nuisance. Such action may be taken as is available for nuisance abatement under the laws of this state and the Town of Vail, and as Town Council, in their sole discretion, deem necessary. C. Removal of Undesirable Plants Required by Property Owner Property owners within the Town of Vail shall be responsible for the elimination of undesirable plants from their property within ninety (90) days of the effective date of this ordinance. Such removal shall be accomplished in an ecologically feasible and environmentally safe manner in accordance with all applicable laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. D. Enforcement The Town shall have the right to enter upon any premises, lands, or places, whether public or private, during reasonable business hours or upon proper notice for the purpose of inspecting for the existence of undesirable plants, and shall have the right to propose, implement or enforce the management of undesirable plants upon such lands in accordance with the provisions of C.R.S. Section 35-5.5-109. 1 E. Penalty Violation of this chapter/article shall be subject to a penalty of ap-te-ein~tj ~99~-days-ie fa+f-er a fine up to nine hundred ninety nine dollars ($999.00), er-be#~q-sae#~ir~e ~n~l in;pr+set in addition to any other remedies provided herein or allowed by ordinance, law, rule, or regulation. 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 repeated 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, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 21st day of July, 1992, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the 4th day of August, 1992, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vaif Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk 2 READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of , 1992. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk C:\ORD92.11 3 ~ ~ LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL~~. r TO: _ Nancy Rondeau ~ ~i~ ~y 930-R Fairway Drive TO~`"lV Qi'+ VAIL Vai].. CO 81657 1309 Vail Valley Drive Vail, Colorado 81657 ATTENTION: 303-479-2158 /FAX 303-479-2166 Chemicals used in weed spraying DA.I-F 6/17/91 SUBJECT: JOB NO: We are forwarding to you: ? Estimates Proposals ? Reports ? Plans ? Prints ? Under separate cover via: ? Shop drawings,- ? Samples ? Specifications ? Copy of letter ? Change order ~ Copies' from Manufacturer's COPIES DATE ( NO. DESCRIPTION - - 1 ( Surflan ~ Clearv's Sevin SL ~ Rmhark Rra,n.d ?.-S Plant Growth Regulator ~ Rn„n~,n.p Herbicide 1 Trimec Broadleaf Herbicide . I _ ~ THESE ARE TRANSMI 111;D: ? For aYt...,va1 ? Resubmit copies for review ? No exceptions taken Fpr yp~ ttse _ ? Submit for distribution. ~ Make c,,......tiorLS noted As requested ? Return corrected prints ? Amend and resubmit ? For review and comment ? REMARKS: Town of Yail, Colorado Department of Public Works/Transportation CC: SIGNED ~ .K~;, a/ i ~ ~ ti . ~ ~ ~ 34 ! w-+ r ,gyp ~ ~ Y~ ~ P,tx + ~ 3~~ ,.n. f"' . i t i ;y~?x,~ xs~'a r ~ r ' ~ LFy ~ ~ ~~L~` ~ ~r~~' " r ~ t ~ ? 'lip ~X~. I~' ! h i 1 1 i I a. tI ~gn, di a~ y= i 4 fc ~ i ~ - fL s ~ 1 ~ n. 4.! 7~~'..~. SUAFLAf,A.S., aqueous suspension, is a preemerger~e sur- kII, STABILITY AND STORAGE face-appliea~ firerbi>~c3e for the control of most annual grasses Stcr~ Pn,origirial container only. 0o no2 contaminate and certain ta?~ssacl@ea€ weeds. wa>~*, food, or feed by storage or disposal. Pt{1lS;it:A1 AND CHEMICAL. PROPERTIES A. Active ingredient Generic Name f- UAIt8.St1A1 FIRE AND EXPLOSlL~N HAZARDS flsyza3kt ~ Non: known B, t~remi~l Name . •.r 3,~a-dir~tra-N4,N4-dipropytsulfanilamide SPILL INFORMATION C, t~todtret Components M cue of leak or spill, use absorbent materials to con- s' ' tiRrYzafirs 40.4 rain squids and dispose as waste. ©o not contaminate l~nert i ngredients 59.6 any rody of water. Small spills should be cleaned up ` D. L?OT Classification with suitable absorbent material. Place material and v l~onre~ulated darraied unusable containers in a landfill approved for _ l.~a:des in accordance with applicable regulations. ° E. LNorma~l Physical State ' Solids dispersed in water based product. Bright L~ spills due to traffic accidents, etc., should be re- ` mrartge opaque liquid, P~"~ immediately to CHEMTREC arrd Elanco Prod- ut~ ,-,ampany for assistance. Prevent spilled material F. Auto-#~rixion Temperature from: flowing onto adjacent land or into streams, ponds '~fateT d product ~ :aces. . G, t'tashpaint ' £reat;~: than 200°F (93.3°C) "ff. PROTECTIVE EOUiPMENT REQUIREMENTS H, Explcsiwe Limit ~"?'9 manufacture, wear goggles to protect eyes, wear illlfater rased product im~-meable gloves and protective equipment to avoid f, - Solu6~aty dir'~€ contact with akin. In enclosed spaces, wear _ NIQSI-i (1) approved respirator for organic solvent -r E3isp~~..~, in water v~~ J, Tilrresirald Limit Value #fbt established FLRE FIGHTINt3 iNFORMATIOH 1C 'IpH (squeou:60/50) Sl1R=LAN A.S. is a water based suspension and will ry ~.8 not burn. Iw Honiara Point (at 1 atmosphere) ~?pprcxtrnately 2f2°F (100°C) kl. 'Vapor Pr®aure Apprcxirnately 23 mm Hg at 25°C ti. Vapor Specific Gravity f 7& relative to air at 25°C • O 5peccfic Gravity 9.13 tc~ 1.239 at 25°C , NOTE: M caseates „ Involvlny human or eontaet, eaa the Ea :may aaafl c. . waphona operator, (3t7) 2x1.2000 for ra#arrai ~ tl» phystcbn on call. _:i j qy ~ lam') _ " T - . • ~ , r ~ r.±y ~Y 9' ty ~ t .d is 4 ? 1C.t, ti.. ~ ; tt. ' ° ~:1. - i« ~ ;t < tr ICS a~ ~y. c - ~ yw ~ ; • - '3f3k ~ -~r a > s. " ~ 'a ~ rti ? < ` ~ , - 'Qie_ ~s +:9Gr ~ ~~1 '.,~ry_yy z ~N. fsd,, t ~a 1 DESCRIPTION CLEARY'S SEVIN SL Is ~lowa_-~ insecticide containing 4 lbs./US ~aflon or 480 g/I carbaryl to be used for the control of certain in~._Ls or zrf and ornamental plants. ~g COMPOSITION Active Ingredient: Cas. No. Carbaryl.._...... ..........43.0°k 63-25-2 z. Inert Ingredient(s)w~_....___..... m. .57.0% PHYSICAL DATA T Appearance: Wtxtist~-moray ~~:.ous liquid Odor: Slight characteristic Specific Gravity: WeighUGallon: 9.24 lbs. pH: 52 - 6.5 Evaporation Rate: NA _ Boiling Pointe Decor~s~ose_ Freezing Point: 30° F {-4°C) Vapor Pressure: N~~ % Volatile: 52.3 Solubility In Water By ~l/eight): 10096 Dispersible k; . DIRECTIONS FOR USE Refer to label on last page. k A t 'IMP RTANT: Head er~ire t~el bRae using prod: a. See Laliei for more complete information. - Sevin a a Registered Trad~..~rk o _^~on Carbide `corp. 4/85 A ' . ~-SMATERiAL SAFETY • 3M DATA SkEET 3M F NTEft ~,T. PA~.1L, MIN'JE'_.:~~TP 55144-it~uG J LEI</7_;:;;-i11~7 -'J.rrS Nv.: t7t~-G17-~CS2 DIVISION: AGRICULTURAL PRCIUUCTSILIFE ~+a.[Er.~:E TRADE NAME' EMBARK bRANU ~-S PLANT GRir°WTFi RE ~~UL=-uR 3M I.D. NUMBER: 9$-uLll-ahi3-7 ISSUED: JANUARY 2S, 1 X87 . SUPERSEDES. DErEMbER 12. i~SG , DOCUMENT = 1 t?-955-~ assxsa....-_.._~-os-...._;n-x_-..o-.....-...-....~c._=_._..._--___---_=~=_a.~-......a-r.a_....._=c._ocaaa 1. -INGREDIENTS G. A.:.., Nu. F'~=SCENT EXPuSURE LIMITS. . ACTIVE: MEFLUiD I DE , 5 _;7;.;C_1-34-U ::'C~ . ~a NuNE 5 _ " 'DIETHANOLAMINE SALT uF • ~ ~ INERTS: WATER 7`7~~'-1;3-5 72. t~ NONE 5 " SOURCE OF EXPflSURf: LIMIT DATA . ` ~ :'i~ri 1.,~ , ACt3IH THRESHQLD LIMIT VALUES = 2. FEDERAL OSHA PERMISSIBLE EXF'~1~.UFE LIMIT _ 3. 3M EXPOSURE GUIDELINES G` • 4.' ~ ~ CHEMICAL !'~NUFACTURER RECG~MMENL"~F U i~U I TaEL I NES _ ~~..5. NOtVE ESTABLISHED j;,, .ABBREVIATI(1NS ~ _ N/D""` NOT AETERMINED =J'~~, N/A ~ _ NOT ~ AFPLICABLE - ~-t,~ caaa~==-~_ -__=-_..ass__•------_---____-°-__---~'_---_---_..._-n=~-_=coca::.-:a 2. PHYSICAL DATA ~~.J:1,~. ' maaa~saa..o__a;anc= r_...sc;.._._..._.___c.-^---•_-_----_--__._a~_c___^a-^---_=..-=oa:..as= BCSILINO POINT= -x100 degrees Celsius - : VAPOR PRESSURE: ^~20 Torr at 24 do gees Cel s ~ us s' ' ~ VAPOR DENSITY L A I R=1) : N/ D "'"`r r. wa ;EVAPORATION RATE t WATER . ~ 1) : i ,~,~rSOLUHILITY IN i~iATER: INFINITE ~`~~.;SP. C~ftAVITY t WATER=1) s 1. i i - PERCENT VOLATILE: 72 - VISCOSITY: NID ~ - ,~r, pHs S. O TI7 ~.43? APPEARANCE AND ODOR. ~pARK BRi:~WN L I ~:~U I D WITH Nt7~ D I rT I NGU I SHABLE ODOR. - . ~ :::asp^--. a==o---a-~-...-_......__...__.---------===ca.=a. =a=~=sc==cc=====p=moaaaac . . 3. FIRE AAiD EXPLOSION HAZARD L+ATA FLASH POINT O s N/A FLAMMABLE LIMITS - LEL: N/A UEL: 1~#A EXTINGUISHING h€DIA: _;'•sr. NlA SPECIAL FIRE FIIX-ITINu PROCEDURES: ~ ~ f'~== N.+y4~2: j~ ~¦1 r ri ' ~ F~ Na. IIT i 8T r, ' O~S+~ MATERIAL SAFETY DATA Page 1 of 4 MONSANTO COMPANY ~ 800 N. LINDBERGH BLVD. ~,f O'ti ~.f+JTO PRODUCT '~3AME ST. LOUIS, MO. 63167 ~~?~.lNQCII©~ Emergency Phone IYo. ~G ~~I V ~ ~ (call Cotlectj G it 314-694-4000 PRODUC'!' 11:3ENTIFtCATiON Synonyms: None Cfeemlca/ me± Not Applicable, Formulated Product . Adlve hgr~dlen#: *Isopropylamine salt of Glyphosate ............................41.0% lneort ing. ~.llen~: ............59.0% 100.0% `Contains 480 grams per liter or 4 pounds of the active ingredient isopropylamine salt of /Y-(phosphonomethyf) glycine per U. S. gallon. Equivalent to 356 grams per liter or 3 pounds per U.S. ga/bn of the acid, glyphosate. CAS Reg- Ato.; Not Applicable, Formulated Product ~ CAS Reg. Afo. ~ y' Actlve ~agresfie~#: 38641-94-0 ~ EPA Reg. No.: 524-308-AA ? r DOT Slrlppfng ~f~e: Not Applicable F G DOT H.a...:.~ Cam/ 1 ~D. Na.: Not Applicable - ~ DOT Lab~f(s~: Not Applicable tifszardou~ Sc~sal~ance(s)/ - _ ~ y R(Xs): Not Applicable i;~s. Surface Freight C/assi'>~icatf~: Weed Killing Compound, N.O.I.B.N. IiVARN~rIG STATEMENTS Keep out. aof reach of children. 1AtARNIN~! CAUSES AYE IRRtTAT10N. f=><ARMFt~ IF SVYYALLOWED. Sse Addi~iona Comments section for Physical or Chemical Hazards. PRECAUT~~IARY MEASURES Do rpt get in e~,{es, on skin or on clothing. ~ Avon ..~.tamr of seed, feed and foodstuffs. EMER~EI"~~CY AND FIRST AID PROCEDURES FIRST i~tD: = tN EYES, immediately flush with plenty of water for at least .l5 minutes. Call ti.physi- clan. IF ~3N ='N, flush wish water. Wash clothing before reuse. G-4048!382 ooRD~n?~s .PROFESS/O.+IAL TURF & ORNAMENTAL PRODUCTS r Q ~ ' ~ ~ ~ 1 s ~ ' UAR ~ A o~ ONE GALLON COVERS 2-2'/z ACRES T Kf3.LS:~Dandelion, Chickweed, Knotweed, Plantains, t{enbit, Spurge, Kudzu and ¦ MEC msny other species of broadleaf weeds; some of which are listed on this label. ,p COMPLEX ACTiYE INGREDIENTS: ~tONA~ pP 'D"smethytamtne Salt of 2,4-Dichloroph.,noxyacetic aad 25.9396 '"thmethylamine Salt of 2-(2-methyl-4-diioroPhenoxy) Propionic acid 13.85°k "'Dicnethylamtne Salt of Dicamba (3, acid) . 27696 IM_r, ~ INGREDIENTS ~ ~ 5'/~48°.~ TH5 PRODUCT CONTAINS: TOTAL 100.00% 2ir3 mss. 2,4-Dichbrophenoxyacetic acid per lion or 21.5396. "'021 di. 9.6-cAchloto•o-anisic acid per Radon cr 22896. ~tDB bs 2-{2-methy4-4-chloroP~XY} r~,--~ ~ P~ S~ 'Isomer SpeddO by AOAG Methol 7 11.<59~ TRIMEG~ is a registered Vaclemartcc of PBUGORDON CORPORATION. KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN DANCER See back panel for Staterner?t of Practical'tteatmentend addltionat procautioaary statamatts. i ~ ~ i I ' rnme~cl~l ~~d'~r~t R' Facsimile - (402}~390~5392 FACSIMILE TRA.NSMISSIOH DATE : j,\~- ~ 2.. T0: ~.1.rt..x~.S,~,.,F_a_ COMPANY: - l n-~, • ~A~SIMILE NUMBER: ~ ~-/..~'7 CONFIRMATIQN _ NUMBER: cG`fl~.~ ~ 9~ -..S"39.I~ . FROM: pA~ES: ~ (including transmission farm} *+*-r*+*+*~*t*+*+*+*+*+~+}t*t~t*~*+*+*+*+*t*t*+*+*+*+*+*+~++*+*+***+*+*+*+* FOR FILE ONLY: • :Tfine Sent /~•~4 /PM 8y r_ MESSAGE: . ~ . ~ . ~ ~ ~ , . . ~ ~ G~ . Cnrparata Heearters R0. Bost 1103 ' 2120 South 7Pnd Street OmaF~e, I~ebrattlca 68101 T0'd LSiZ6Lb~0~I6 Ol 71NkiS ~d~13Q3~ ~tlIa~13WW00 W0~1~ Wd80:0T Z66T-~0-80 ' a " ORDINANCE NO. 18 Series of 1992 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION G OF THE VAIL VILLAGE URBAN DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS RELATING TO THE PROTECTION OF VIEWS WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL AND CREATING A NEW CHAPTER OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF VAIL TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROTECTION OF CERTAIN VIEWS WITHIN THE TOWN AND SC ~ ~ iNG FORTH THE DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO WHEREAS, i# is the opinion of the Town Council that the preservation of certain existing view corridors is essential to the character of Vail as a mountain resort community; and WHEREAS the preservation of views will protect and enhance the Town's attraction to guests and visitors; and WHEREAS the preservation of views will stabilize and enhance the aesthetic and economic vitality of the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS this new chapter will more clearly identify existing view corridors and development procedures for the benefit of the public; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Title 18 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby amended by the addition of Chapter 18.73 to read as follows: Chapter 18.73 -View Corridors 18.73.010 - Pumose The Town of Vail believes that preserving certain vistas is in the interest of the Town's residents and guests. Specifically, the Town believes that: A. The protection and perpetuation of certain mountain views and other significant views from various pedestrian/public ways within the Town will foster civic pride and is in the public interest of the Town of Vail; B. It is desirable to designate, preserve and perpetuate certain views for the enjoyment and environmental enrichment of the residents and guests of the Town; C. The preservation of such views will strengthen and preserve the Town's unique environmental heritage and attributes; D. The preservation of such views will enhance the aesthetic and economic vitality and values of the Town; E. The preservation of such views is intended to promote design which is compatible with the surrounding natural and built environment, and is intended to provide 1 r for natural light to buildings and in public spaces in the vicinity of the view corridors; F. The preservation of such views will include certain focal points such as the Clock Tower and Rucksack Tower, which serve as prominent landmarks within Vail Village and contribute to the community's unique sense of place. 18.73.020 -Definitions For the purposes of this chapter, the following terms shall be defined as shown below: A. Structure: Anything permanently constructed or erected with a fixed location including, but not limited to, new buildings, building expansions, decks, mechanical . equipment, vents, ducts, satellite dishes, fences, stop lights, light poles, signs, utility poles, sky lights or any similar object. B. View Point Origination: The survey pin, called out as the instrument in each legal description defining a view corridor boundary, which 'rs the basis for each view corridor. Section 18.73.030 -Limitations on Construction No part of a structure shall be permitted to encroach into any view corridor set forth in this ordinance unless an encroachment is approved in accordance with Section 18.73.060 of this ordinance. Section 18.73.440 -Adoption of View Comdors Photographs on record with the Community Development Department and the following legal descriptions are hereby approved and adopted as official view corridors protecting views within the Town. The photographs taken represent the boundaries defined by the legal descriptions. The camera used to take the photographs was held 5.4 feet above the instrument, which is approximate eye level for most adults. A 35 millimeter camera was used for each photograph; however, once developed, some photographs were cropped or enlarged to improve the graphic representation of each view corridor. A. View Point #1. A view from the south side of the Vail Transportation Center from the main pedestrian stairway looking toward the Clock Tower, 232 Bridge Street, the Rucksack Tower, 280 Bridge SVeet, and beyond to the ski slopes; Purpose - To protect the views of Vail Mountain, views of Vail Village and to maintain the prominence and views of the Clock Tower and Rucksack Tower as seen from the central staircase of the Transportation Center. 2 Instrument -View Point #1 - a 2" diameter brass disc, marked V.P. 1 on stair landing between Levels 2 and 3 of Vail Village Parking structure. Backsight - CW 1/16 corner of Section 8 Height of Survey Transit Above View Point #1 - 5.4 fee# Horizontal Angle Zenith Angle Foresight Point on Photo as of 2/7/92 348°51'10" 77°21'30" A -intersection of the horizon with a vertical line defined by the southwest comer of the sixth floor deck enclosure on the Mountain Haus, 292 E. Meadow Drive. 348°30'10" 87°11'30" 61 -uppermost railing of the southwest comer of the balcony on the fourth floor of the Mountain Haus, 292 E. Meadow Drive. 355°23'00" 87°37'40" B2 -east end of the Red Lion roof ridge, 304 Bridge Street. 357°39'04" 87°40'43" B3 -intersection of the Red Lion roof ridge with the southeast comer of the Rucksack Tower, 280 Bridge Street. 357°57'59" 88°27'22" B4 -northeast comer of the base of the Rucksack Tower, 280 Bridge Street. 004°05'19" 89°16'02" C1 -intersection of the Gallery Building, 225 Gore Creek Drive, with the northeast corner of the Clock Tower, immediately below the balcony. 004°39'58" 89°16'33" C2 -western end of facia board on Gallery Building 004°47'18" 89°41'44" C3 -intersection of the sloping roof of the Gallery Building with the ridge line of the Clock Tower Building, which extends west 006°59'11" 89°42'12" D -intersection of the Clock Tower :wilding roof and the northwest comer of the Clock _ •~wer 012°25'56" 87°38'01" E -peak of the Ptaza Lodge vent chase, 232 Bridge Street. 027°08'54" 87°28'43" F -intersection of the north side of roof, Gasthof Gramshammer Building, 231 East Gore Creek Drive, with the east side of two large trees 031 °53'27" 76°26'35" G -intersection of the horizon line on Vail Mountain with the vertical line defined by the top of the western, very large pine tree west of Point F 3 J B. View Point #2. A view from upper Bridge Street looking toward the ski slopes between 228 Bridge street, the Golden Peak Building, and 311 Bridge Street, the Hill Building; Purpose - To protect views of the ski runs and ski base area as seen from upper Bridge Street. Instrument -View Point #2 - a #6 rebar with a 2'/i" diameter aluminum cap marked V.P. 2 (PLS 16827) set in an aluminum monument box in Bridge Street in front of the Red Lion Building, 304 Bridge Street, Backsight -View Point #4 - a #6 rebar with a 2'/i" diameter aluminum cap marked V.P. 4 (PLS 16827) set in an aluminum monument box, in the brick pavers, approximately 8 feet from the entrance to Frivolous Sal's, located near the northeast corner of One Vail Place Building, 244 Wall Street. Height of Survey Transit Above View Point #2 - 5.4 feet Horizontal Angle Zenith Angle Foresight Point on Photo as of 11/15!91 289°25'48" 74°28'18" A -northwest comer of third floor balcony roof of Golden Peak Building 290°58'11" 89°58'00" B - PK nail in top of the 24 inch tail retaining wall on west side of Golden Peak House, 1 foot east from west edge of planter wail, and 10 feet west from the west face of the building 300°32'46" 92°05'34" C1 -top of south end of ski lockers, which are on railing 301 °35'24" 83°31'08" C2 -southeast corner of top deck rail on Hill Building 303°32'24" 73°38'55" D -southeast corner of brick chimney on Hill Building C. Reserved D. View Point #4. A view from the northeast comer of 244 Wall Street, the One Vail Place Building, looking over the roofs of 304 Bridge Street, the Red Lion Building, and 356 Hanson Ranch Road, the Christiania Lodge, toward the Gore Range. Purpose - To protect views of the Gore Range as seen from the alley between Founders Plaza and Seibert Circle. Instrument -View Point #4 - a #6 rebar with a 2'/i" diameter aluminum cap marked V.P. 4 (PLS 16827) set in an aluminum monument box, in the brick pavers, approximately 8 feet from the entrance to Frivolous Sai's, located in the northeast comer of the One Vail Place Building, 244 Wall Street. 4 4 Backstght -View Point #2 - a #6 rebar with a 2'/z" diameter aluminum cap marked V.P. 2 (PLS 16827) set in an aluminum monument box in Bridge Street in front of the Red Lion Building Height of Survey Transit Above View Point #4 - 5.4 feet Horizontal Angle Zenith Angle Foresight Point on Photo as of 11 /15/91 343°56'53" 62°24'10" A -south facia board of third floor roof of Plaza Lodge Building, 281 - 293 Bridge Street 348°37'05" 73°05'43" B -intersection of upper and second floor roof lines of Plaza Lodge Building 352°55'25" 73°34'26" C -south end of peak of second floor gable of Plaza Lodge Building 352°31'05" 79°24'44" D - eastern edge of second floor gable roof of Plaza Lodge Building 352°13'16" 79°24'55" E -intersection of second floor roof facia and southeast comer of Plaza Lodge Building 352°13'14" 84°44'25" F -intersection of southeast corner of building and top edge of first floor faaa of Plaza Lodge Building 354°30'20" 86°13'30" G -top of southeasterly corner of first floor facia of Plaza Lodge Building 354°47'22" 86°07'58" H -intersection of south edge of Red Lion chimney and upper Red Lion roof line 358°21'46" 85°17'48" I -peak of upper Red Lion roof line 359°04'31" 85°30'36" J -intersection of upper Red Lion roof line and northerly roof line of the Christiania 000°16'55" 84°36'56" K -peak of northerly roof line of the Christiania 001 °59'47" 84°36'56" L -intersection of northerly roof peak and southe~y roof line of the Christiania 003°05'44" 83°32'42" M -northwesterly comer of second floor balcony on Hill Building 006°23'31" 83°33'52" N -intersection of top of second floor balcony rail and brick wall on Hill Building 005°32'14" 67°54'58" O -northwest comer of top of facia on third floor roof of Hill Building E. View Point #5. A view of the Gore Range from Hanson Ranch Road just east of the Mill Creek Bridge and south of 302 Gore Creek Drive, the Mill Creek Cart Building.; Purpose - To protect views of the Gore Range as seen from Hanson Ranch Road and East Gore Creek Drive. Instrument -View Point #5 - a #6 rebar with 2'/x" diameter aluminum cap marked V.P. 5 (PLS 5 16827) set in an aluminum monument box in Hanson Ranch Road in front of the Mill Greek Court Building Backsight - #4 rebar with aluminum cap (LS 2568) in iron "Landmark" monument box marking centerline of Hanson Ranch Road -box is just west of Mill Creek in front of the Cyrano's Building at 298 Hanson Ranch Road. Height of Survey Transit Above View Point #5 - 5.4 feet Horizontal Angle Zenith Angle Foresight Point on Photo as of 11/15/91 199°03'06" 81°23'49" A -intersection of southerly utility pole with ridge line 204°06'43" 85°10'40" 61 -intersection of northerly extension of Garden of the Gods Building, roofline with hillside ridge line 206°00'02" 85°10'40" 62 - northern end of roofline of the Garden of the Gods Building, 365 Vail Valley Drive 208'12'53" 85°10'40" C1 -intersection of southerly extension of the Garden of the Gods building roofline and the Villa Valhalla roofline, 360 Hanson Ranch Road 208°33'36" 84°55'50" C2 -northwest comer of the Villa Valhalla at roof facia 210°41'41" 84°01'47" D -intersection of top of the Villa Valhalla roof facia and the upward extension of the north edge of the trim on the window column 210°41'41" 82°01'51" E -the upward extension of the north edge of the trim on the window column on the Villa Valhalla to a point above the horizon F. View Point #6. A view looking east to the Gore Range from Gore Creek Drive between retail shops at 174 Gore Creek Drive, the Lodge at Vail, and 193 Gore Creek Drive, the Gore Creek Plaza Building projecting east to the Gore Range. Purpose - To protect views of the Gore Range as seen from the Gore Creek Drive Area. Instrument -View Point #6 - a #6 rebar with 2'/i" diameter aluminum cap marked V.P. 6 (PLS 16827) set in an aluminum monument box in Gore Creek Drive in front of the Gore Creek Plaza Building Backsight - a #6 rebar with 2'/i" diameter aluminum cap marked V.P. 6 B.S. (PLS 16827) set in an aluminum monument box in Gore Creek Drive near the southwest comer of Pepi's deck 6 F - Height of Survey, Transit Above View Point #6 - 5.4 feet Horizontal Angle Zenith Angle Foresight Point on Photo as of 11 /15/91 356°08'35" 81°02'17" A -point on horizon left of the chimney on Gasthof Gramshammer roof, 231 East Gore Creek Drive 356°55'02" 83°02'06" B -intersection of southeast edge of chimney and Gasthof Gramshammer's roofline 000°31'36" 82°54'27" C - southern end of gable on Gasthof Gramshammer's roof 001°48'10" 85°17'34" D1 -intersection of northerly extension of Gorsuch Building's roof line and Gasthof Gramshammer's roof, 231 East Gore Creek Drive 003°14'42" 85°17'40" D2 -north end of Gorsuch Building's roof 007°56'03" 85°11'32" D3 -south end of Gorsuch Building's roof 013°30'31" 85°11'32" E -intersection of southerly extension of Gan;uch Building's roof line and brick pillar on Lazier Arcade Building /Wall Street Building, 225 Wall Street. 013°38'14" 78°48'35" F -intersection of face of stucco and eve line on Lazier Arcade Building/VNall Street Building 012°55'17" 78°14'51" G -top of facia on northeast comer of roof on Lazier Arcade Building /Wall Street Building 014°44'21" 73°13'39" H -top of roof on Lazier Arcade Building /Wall Street Building Section 18.73.050 -Amendments An amendment of the regulations of this Chapter, including a request to add a new view corridor, delete an existing view corridor, or amend the boundary of an existing view corridor, may be initiated by the Town Council on its own motion, by the Planning ~ environmental Commission on its own motion, or by application of any resident or property owner in the Town, or by the Director of the Community Development Department or his/her designee. A. Application Information for Amendments An application for the amendment of the provisions of this Chapter including the addition of a new view corridor, the deletion of an existing view corridor or an amendment to the boundary of an existing view corridor shall be filed with the Community Development Department on a form to be prescribed by the Director of the Community Development Department. The application shall include the fdbwing information: 1. A summary or description of the proposed amendment. 2. A photograph of the proposed view to be protected if the application is to add a new view corridor or amend the boundary of an existing view corridor. The point used as the view point origination and the height of the camera above existing grade or pavement at the time the photograph was taken shall be identified. The photograph or photographs shall be marked 7 a to show the proposed view corridor boundary or shall be marked to show the proposed ' improvements in relation to existing improvements and existing view corridor boundaries. 3. The Community Development Department may require models, overlays, sketches, or other submittal requirements to show: (a) For a new view corridor, the potential impact the new view corridor could have on the development potential of surrounding properties; or (b) For a modification to a view corridor boundary, the potential impact the change would have upon the protected view corridor. 4. Names and addresses of the property owners whose development potential, asset forth in Chapter 18 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code on the date the application is received by the Community Development Department, may be increased or decreased by the proposed view corridor or by the proposed modification to the existing view corridor. 5. If the application is to add a new view corridor or amend the boundary of an existing view corridor, the applicant shall submit a legal description of the new view corridor or the amended boundary prepared in the same format as those set forth in Section 18.13.040 of this ordinance and any other survey information deemed necessary by the Community Development Department 30 days prior to the final PEC public hearing. 6. An application for an amendment 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 an amendment 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 amendment application Is subm{tted 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 appi[cant. 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. B. Notice and Hearing Procedure 1. Upon the filing of an application for an amendment to this Chapter, or upon initiation of an amendment by the Town Council, Planning and Environmental Commission, or 8 ~r Community Development Director, the Community Development Director or his designee shall set a date far a public hearing before the Planning and Environmental Commission. Subsequent to the hearing, the Planning and Environmental Commission shall make a recommendation for approval or denial to the Town Council. After considering the Planning and Environmental Commission's recommendation, the Town Council shall make a final determination on the amendment at a public hearing by ordinance. 2. Notice for the public hearing before the Planning and Environment Commission shall be given to the property .owners designated in Section 18.73.050 (A)4 or Section 18.73.060 (A)2 in accordance with Section 18.66.080 of this Code and the hearing shall be conducted in conformity with Section 18.66.090 of this Code. C. Criteria for Amendments The Town Council shall only approve an amendment to this Chapter adding a new view corridor, deleting an existing view corridor, or amending the boundary of an existing view corridor if the amendment complies with the policies and goals of the applicable elements of the Vail Land Use Plan, Town Policies, and Urban Design Guide Plans and other adopted master plans, and meets all of the following criteria: 1. If the request is to add a new view corridor or to amend the boundary of an existing view corridor in such a way which expands an existing view corridor: (a) That the proposed view corridor or the boundary amendment protects and perpetuates a view or views from public pedestrian areas, public ways, or public spaces within the Town which foster civic pride and are in the public interest for the Town of Vail; (b) That the proposed view corridor or boundary amendment protects and enhances the Town's attraction to residents, guests and property owners. (c) That the proposed view corridor or boundary amendment protects a view which is commonly recognized and has inherent qualities which make it more valuable to the Town than other more common views. 2. If the amendment is to amend the boundary of an existing view corridor in such a way which reduces the existing view corridor or is to repeal an existing view corridor: (a) That the boundary amendment or repeal will not reduce or eliminate any view or views from public pedestrian areas, public ways, or public spaces within the Town which foster civic #xide and are in the public interest for 9 the Town of Vail; (b) That the boundary amendment or repeal will not reduce the Town's -attraction to residents, guests, and property owners nor be detrimental to the enjoyment of public pedestrian areas, public ways, public spaces or public views. (c) That the boundary amendment or repeal will not diminish the integrity or quality, nor compromise the original purpose of the existing view corridor. Section 18.73.060 -Encroachments into Existing View Corridors An application for approval to encroach into an existing view corridor may be initiated by the Town Council on its own motion, by the Planning and Environmental Commission on its own motion, or by application of any resident or property owner in the Town, or by the Director of Community Development Department or his/her designee. A. Application Information for Encroachments An application for an encroachment shall be filed with the Community Development Department on a form to be prescribed by the Director of the Community Development Department. The application shall include the following information: 1. A summary or description of the proposed encroachment. 2. Names and addresses of property owners located within 500 feet of the proposed encroachment. 3. Photographs of the existing view corridor. The photographs shall be marked with tape to identify the existing view corridor boundaries, and shall show the proposed encroachment. The photographs shall be taken from the view point origination at the same height as identified in the legal descriptions in Section 18.73.040. 4. The Community Development Department may require models, overlays, sketches or other submittal requirements to show how the proposed encroachment could impact the protected view corridor. 5. An appitcation for an encroachment 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 an encroachment 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 h+in #tn outside consultant, the Community Development 10 ` 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 encroachment 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, shad 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. B. Notice and Hearing Procedure Notice and hearing on an application for an encroachment into an existing view corridor shall be in accordance with Section 18.73.050(8) of this Chapter. C. Criteria for Encroachment No encroachment into an existing view corridor shall be permitted unless the applicant demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that the encroachment meets all of the following criteria: 1) That the literal enforcement of Section 18.73.030 would preclude a reasonable development of a proposed structure on the applicant's land. 2) That the development of the structure proposed by the applicant would not be such as to defeat the purposes of this Chapter. 3) That the development proposed by the applicant would not be detrimental to the enjoyment of public pedestrian areas, public ways, public spaces, or public views. 4) That the development proposed by the applicant complies with applicable elements of the Vail Land Use Pian, Town Policies, Urban Design Guide Plans, and other adapted master plans. 5) That the proposed structure will not diminish the integrity or quality nor compromise the original purpose of the preserved view. Sectlan 1x.73.070 -Non-Conforming Structures A) Any s~uc~ure which presently encroaches into an existing view corridor which was lawfully authorized by ordinances or regulations existing prior to the effective date of this ordinance may continue. However, such encroachments will be encouraged to be removed as part of any remodelling or reconstruction of the structure. In the case of certain focal points, such as the Clock Tower end Rucksack Tower, the Town recognizes their importance to the character 11 of Vail Village and to the quality of the urban design of Vail Village. Notwithstanding their nonconforming status, the Town does not encourage their removal. Bj Structures lawfully established prior to the effective date of the ordinance codified in this Chapter may be modified provided that such modification does not cause the structure to encroach into a view corridor to a greater extent In any dtmenslon or configuration, specfficalty height, width or mass, than the existing structure. C) Non-conforming structures may be maintained and repaired as necessary for the convenient, safe, or efficient operation or use provided that no such maintenance or repair shat! cause the structure to encroach into a view corridor to a greater extent In any dtmenslon or configuration, speciflcatty height, width, or mass, than the structure encroached prior to such maintenance and repair. D) Restoration: Whenever anon-conforming structure which does not conform with the provisions of this Chapter is destroyed by fire or other calamity, by Act of God, or by the public enemy, its use may be resumed or the structure may be restored provided the restoration is commenced within one (1) year and diligently pursued to completion. The structure after such restoration shall not encroach into a view corridor to a greater extent In any dtmenslon or configuration, specifically height, width, or mass, than the encroachment which existed prior to destruction. Section 18.73.080 - Heiaht Limitation If the maximum height allowed in any zone district within the Town differs from the height permitted by a view corridor, the more restrictive height limitation shall apply. Section 18.73.090 -Fees The Town Council shall by motion establish a view application fee sufficient to cover the cost of town staff time and other expenses incidental to the review of the application. The fee shall be paid at the time of the application, and shall not be refundable. Section 2 Section G of the Urban Design Considerations is hereby modified to read as follows: Paraara~h G Vail's mountain/valley setting is a fundamental part of its identity. Views of the mountains, ski slopes, creeks and other natural features are reminders of the mountain environment and, by repeated visibility, are orientation reference points. Certain building features also provide important orientation references and visual focal points. The most significant view comdors have been adopted as part of Chapter 18.73 of the Vail Municipal Code. The view corridors adopted tit - should not be considered exhaustive. When evaluating a development proposal, priority should be given to an analysis of the impact of the project on views. Views that should be preserved originate from either major pedestrian areas or public spaces, and include views of the ski mountain, the Gore Range, the Clock Tower, the Rucksack Tower and other important man-made and natural elements that contribute to the sense of place associated with Vail. These views, which have been adopted by ordinance, were chosen due to their significance, not only from an aesthetic standpoint, but also as orientation reference points for pedestrians. Development in Vail Village shall not encroach into any adopted view corridor unless approved under Chapter 18.73. Adopted comdors are listed in Chapter 18.73 of the Vail Muniapal Code. Whether affecting adopted view corridors or not, the impact of proposed development on views from pedestrian ways and public spaces must be identified and considered where appropriate. The Vail Land Use Plan, Town Policies, the Urban Design Guide .Plans, and other adopted master plans, shall be used to help determine which views may be affected, and how they should be addressed. Section 3 If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such deasion shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town C~ ~ 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 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. Section 5 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 proceeding as commenced under of 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, resoiu~ons and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are 13 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 ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL, this day of ,1992. A public hearing shall be held hereon on the day of , 1992, at the regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, in the Municipal Building of the Town. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Martha S. Raecker, Town Cierk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of , 1992. Margaret A. Ostertoss, Mayor ATTEST: Martha S. Raecker, Town Cierk C:\VIEWCORR.ORD 14 ORDINANCE N0.20 SERIES 1992 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 16.24.010(6) OF THE VAIL MUNICIPAL CODE, Sr ~ ~ iNG FORTH PROVISIONS RELATING TO SIGNS DISPLAYED ON BALLOONS WHICH ARE ASSOCIATED WITH A SPECIAL EVENT WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL. WHEREAS, Town Council wishes to provide for signs to be displayed on both hot air and cold air balloons and other types of balloons within the Town of Vail subject to certain conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: Section 16.24.010(6) is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 16.24.010161 Signs displayed on balloons which are associated with a special event as that term is defined in Section 5.20.100(8) of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail pursuant to the following conditions: 1. The special event with which the balloon is associated has obtained a Special Events Ucense from the Town as provided for in Section 5.20.100 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vaii. 2. Any individual business partnership or ~rporation wishing to display signs on a balloon shall file an application with the Town Clerk on a form to be provided by the Town Clerk. Each sponsor shall be entitled to have no more than one (1) balloon for each speaal event. 3. There shall be not more than three (3) cold air balloons for any special event. The number of hot air ballons shall be reviewed through the special event application .process. 4. Cold air balloons shall not exceed thirty feet (30') in height as measured from existing grade to the top of the balloon. 5. No balloons shall be permitted to be inflated within the Town until evidence is given to the Town in the form of aircraft liability insurance and/or general liability policy or certificate of insurance evidencing that the applicant has obtained aircraft liability insurance and/or general liability for the balloon covering third party liability in an amount of not less than $1,000,000.00 (one million dollars) combined single limit. All such policies shall name the Town of Vail, its officers, and employees as additional insureds. 6. Balloons shall not be tethered or attached to the roofs of buildings with the exception of the Lionshead Parking Structure and the Vail Parking Structure. 7. Balloons shall be displayed only during the special event activities and related ceremonies, with allowance being made for appropriate set up and take down time. In no Instance may a balloon be left up over night. 8. The applicant shall designate the specific location at which he or she desires to display the balloon and that location shall be subject to the approval of the Director of the Community Development Department or her designee. 9. The applicant, his agent or employee shall be present at all times when the balloon is inflated to make sure that appropriate safety measures for the protection of the public are taken. 10. This ordinance will be reviewed by the Town Council one (1) year after its passage. 1 11. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such dedsion 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. 12. The Town Coundl 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. 13. 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. 14. 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, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 21st day of July,1992, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the day of , 1992, at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED by this day of , 1992. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk c:~oRO~zo 2 ORDINANCE NO. 21 SERIES 1992 AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE SETTING FORTH A SPECIAL REVIEW PROCESS TO ALLOW FOR STAFF APPROVALS FOR TEMPORARY SIGNAGE, STRUCTURES, STREET DECOR, AND OTHER TEMPORARY IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE 1992 MOUNTAIN BIKE WORLD CUP FINALS. WHEREAS, the Town of Vail shall be hosting the 1992 Mountain Bike World Cup Finals, from September 3 through September 7, 1992; and WHEREAS, said event is the major international mountain bike competition for 1992; and WHEREAS, said event is a major undertaking requiring temporary structures, signage, street decor, and other temporary improvements in order to be properly staged; and WHEREAS, said event is determined to be of major importance to the Town for economic, cultural, and social reasons; and WHEREAS, in order to facilitate the preparation necessary for such an event, the Town Council has determined that in the areas of temporary signage, structures, and street decor, it is necessary to exempt the Vail Valley Foundation, which is the sponsoring organization of the World Cup Finals, from complying with all the Town's zoning, Design Review Board, and sign code requirements, and in their stead to set forth a special process to handle such temporary signage, structures, street decor, and other temporary improvements for the event. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1) The Town Council hereby endorses the general planning documents for the 1992 Mountain Bike World Cup Finals. 2) It is understood that in order to facilitate the 1992 World Cup Finals, certain temporary improvements shall be utilized by the Vail Valley Foundation, and that these improvements may include the following: a) Flags and banners b) Structures c) Entertainment and hospitality d) Opening and awards ceremonies e) Race finish stadium f) Food, trade, and festival centers g) Media centers h) Temporary signage and transportation 1 i) Cold air balloons In order to facilitate the construction of the temporary improvements set forth above which are necessary for the conduct of the World Cup Finals, the following process shall be substituted for the customary review process for zoning, design review, and sign review as set forth in the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail: A. All temporary signage, structures, and street decor, and other temporary improvements necessary and desirable for the conduct of the 1992 World Cup Finals shall be submitted to the appropriate members of the Town staff a reasonable time prior to their construction or placement within the Town. B. The Town staff will review the requested structures, signage, or improvements in cooperation with representatives of the Vail Valley Foundation. The Vail Valley Foundation and the Town staff shall work closely on an ongoing basis to facilitate the approval process and to implement the general planning document. If the temporary signage, structures, or other temporary improvements meet the approval of the Town staff, they may be implemented by the Foundation. C. If the Vail Valley Foundation and the Town staff disagree on the approval of any temporary signage, structures, street decor, or other temporary improvements, a final decision shall be made by the Town Manager, a representative of the Design Review Board, and a representative of the Town Planning Commission. ff said three (3) individuals are unable to reach a decision or should they feel Town Council input is necessary, the issue may be presented to the Town Council for their review. 3. Nothing in this ordinance shall relieve the Vail Valley Foundation from the obligation to conform with all Town building and construction codes, including the uniform building code, the uniform fire code, and the national electric code. Nothing herein shall be deemed to relieve the Foundation from complying with any and all applicable ordinance, laws, and regulations relating to life, health, and safety. The Foundation shall obtain all required permits and be subject to all required building inspections for the construction of any temporary structures. 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 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. 2 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 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. 7. 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 AS AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE this 4th day of August, 1992, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado, and this ordinance shall take effect immediately. ORDERED PUBLISHED IN FULL this 4th day of August, 1992. Margaret A. Ostertoss, Mayor ATTEST: Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk C:\ORD92.21 3 JIM LAMQNT 0130302?5656 P. 01 Xc~` R r l~r} ~V rIA F1~~ 1 ~~~.A1~T~1VI1~ SIC~l~T 3 pages Including cover, To: Vail Town Council cc: D.D. From: Jim Lamont Date: Tuesday, August 4, 1992 If you do not receive ail pages, please contact: East Village Homeowners Association post Office Box 23B Vail, Colorado B1658 Phpne Number: 303-827-5880 Fax Number: 303-827-585fi Subject: Letter in response to proposed sign code amendments. Special instructions: Piease distribute to the Town Council in regards to their consideration of the sign code/balloon matter on tonight's agenda. Thank you. JIM LAM4NT 013038275856 P.@2 n t To: Vail Town Councfi From: aim Lamont, Planning Consultant Date: .A.ugust 192 RE: Hot and Gald Air Balloon, Sign Code Amendment. On behalf~of the East village Homeowners Association, please consider the followixiq comments and Concerns with regards to the sanctioning by ordinance of hot and cold air balloons for special event. The Homeowners Association does not oppose the use of hot and cold air balloons at special events. Tt does however, oppose the use of these infiatables as a means of advertising products, services, and sponsors. Specifically, the xomeowners Association apposes the Proposed amendment to the s~.qn code because it would allow for the proliferation of undesirable advertising devices in the T..•r~.~ of Vaii. The ,introduction of thirty foot high hot and coXd air balloons, that are replicas of products ar from which 1 e advertising signs are suspended, is net in keeping with the quality public image that veil has striven to Canvey and maintain. Historically, the oontent of signs in the T~..~,~ of Vail has been restricted to wording or symbols that locates or identifies a particular business. The advertising of products or services has not been generally permitted. The reason for limiting advertising devices ~Ls to provide that the commun~.ty presents a quality image and dignified appearance to its visitors, residents, and property owners. The Homeowners Association does trot believe that any standard should be adopted into the sign Code that favors or encourages the advertising of products, services promoters, and sponsors. The. potential for the proliferation of inflatable advertising devices at special events or in con junction with other C.~.,....ercial activities is of paramount concern. such activity should not be condoned or promoted by the sign code. The Town Council is also being asked to approve by emergency ordinance a special exemption for "temporary signage" for the 1992 Mountain Sike World cup Finals. The application for "special event" temporary signage, under the emergency ordinance provision o~ the Town Charter, does not JIM LAMONT 613638275856 P.63 f H Vail T..~r.. Council xot and Cold Air Balloons, sign Code Amendment Augue~t 4, 1992 Page x a pear to ba sXnonymous with temporary signage needed to cope t~t~th an impending threat to the pubiic~s safety and welrare which the emergency ordinance provision implies. The xomeoamers Association doe3 r?ot rase the need for "special event~~ temporary signage rovided ~he terminology cannot be construed to allow for the advsrtising of products, services, preamaters, or sponsors. RESOLUTION NO. 13 SERIES 1992 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN OF VAIL TO HIRE CERTAIN CONSULTANTS TO PROVIDE EXPERT ADVICE TO THE TOWN FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECTING THE TOWN'S INTEREST IN THE PROPER OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT OF VAIL ASSOCIATES. WHEREAS, Gillett Holdings, Inc. and its subsidiary, Vail Associates, Inc. are both debtors in consolidated Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings pending in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado; and WHEREAS, the continued successful operation of Vail Associates, Inc. is of great importance to the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, this bankruptcy proceeding may have a significant impact on the structure and operations of Vail Associates, Inc.; and WHEREAS, the Town Council believes it has an obligation and duty to the Town's residents, business people, and visitors to investigate and evaluate all the Town's options to ensure the continued effective and proficient management and operation of Vail Associates, Inc.; and WHEREAS, on the 20th day of August, 1991, the Town Council passed Resolution No. 16, Series of 1991, which gave the Town Council the authority to take all steps necessary to protect the public interest in the continuation of the effective and proficient management and operation of Vail Associates, Inc.; and WHEREAS, in order to continue the evaluation of its options in this regard, and in furtherance of Resolution No. 16, Series of 1991, it is necessary for the Town to retain certain consultants to provide expert advice to the Town Council. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1. The Town Council shall retain a team of legal consultants to include the law firms 1 of Kutak Rock, Opperman & Associates, and Wilke Farr & Gallagher. In addition, it shall take all steps necessary to retain an investment banking company and financial advisor to be chosen through an appropriate selection process. 2. The Town Manager and other members of the Town staff are hereby authorized to take all steps necessary and proper in furtherance of this resolution. 3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this th day of , 1992. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Martha S. Raecker, Town Clerk C:\RESOLU92.13 2 RESOLUTION NO. 16 SERIES 1991 A RESOLUTION TO INVESTIGATE AND EVALUATE WHICH FACILITIES IT MAY BE NECESSARY FOR THE TOWN TO CONTROL OR ACQUIRE FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECTING THE TOWN'S INTEREST IN THE PROPER OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT OF THE VAIL SKI AREA WHEREAS, Vail Associates, Inc. is a subsidiary of Gillett Holdings, Inc.; and, WHEREAS, Gillett Holdings, Inc. is the debtor in a Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding; and, WHEREAS, the Town Council therefore considers it necessary to evaluate its options in an effort to protect the public interest of the Town in the continuation of the Vail ski area and its effective and proficient management. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1. The Town Council shall take all steps necessary to investigate and evaluate which facilities it may be necessary for the Town to control or acquire for the purpose of protecting the Town's interest in the proper operation and management of the Vail ski area. 2. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of August ^1991. J Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: `~~~ccGvsl.~~~,lu-d.~l Pamela A. Brandmeyer, own Clerk C:~RESOLU.16 SALBSTAI Revised: 7/30J92 TOWN 4F VAI6 SALES TAX HSTINATION WORHSRBHT % Change X Change 1992 1992 Eros from NONTB 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 BODGBT ACTOAL Variance 1991 Budget January 675,186 696,752 742,262 881,304 890,585 1,063,196 1,126,496 1,465,870 1,599,123 1,713,091 1,795,500 1,708,751 ( 86,749} ( .3X} ( 4.8X} February 687,792 751,856 824,650 918,154 946,552 1,135,786 1,205,101 1,561,286 1,695,850 1,737,343 1,835,000 1,178,728 ( 56,272) 2.4X ( 3.1X} Narch 853,648 97?,828 1,084,814 1,187,520 1,316,652 1,378,782 1,591,705 1,939,758 1,891,718 2,051,820 2,167,000 1,974,450 (192,550) ( 3.8X} ( 8.9X} April 355,300 319,546 481,204 531,668 430,877 425,961 550,205 567,684 634,174 616,648 659,000 687,873 28,873 11.6X 4.4X Nap 147,378 156,588 166,200 162,912 244,987 245,518 170,567 215,548 236,359 250,809 265,000 266,512 1,512 6.3X .6X June 247,326 257,744 262,696 280,828 361,627 331,581 329,039 393,470 448,227 468,948 ; 500,000 476,000 ( 24,000) 1.5X ( 4.8X) TOTAL 2,966,630 3,160,314 3,561,826 3,962,386 4,191,280 4,580,824 4,973,113 6,143,616 6,511,451 6,838,659 7,221,500 6,892,314 (329,186) .SX ( 4.6X) July 349,116 407,474 406,462 447,815 479,507 479,201 559,683 649,139 665,094 737,288 780,000 August 348,T56 384,338 402,792 386,985 512,513 536,904 575,887 668,119 678,071 161,992 810,000 September 268,598 324,670 384,864 340,102 374,060 442,402 422,502 469,032 482,328 491,684 ; 490,000 October 223,830 198,614 206,248 209,282 237,504 273,951 291,204 335,740 364,002 324,802 375,000 November 245,894 281,704 310,588 229,083 376,657 386,270 376,235 430,820 438,731 428,086 450,000 December 737,506 853,100 906,758 905,955 1,167,280 1,245,612 1,455,948 1,615,278 1,625,219 1,691,775 ; 1,764,000 TOTA6 5,140,330 5,610,214 6,179,538 6,481,608 7,338,801 7,945,164 8,654,572 10,311,744 10,764,896 11,274,286 11,890,500 6,892,314 (329,186) ,v. , Hanifen, Imhoff Inc. Investment Bankers w ' ~ ~ 1125 17th Street, Suite 1600 Denver, Colorado 80202 {303) 296-2300 MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council and Administration, Town of Vail FROM: Nate ,Senior Vice President, Hanifen, Imhoff Inc. Larry .~e~it, Vice President, Hanifen, Imhoff Inc. DATE: August 4, 1992 RE: Financial Advisor Evaluation of the Proposals to Refund the Town's Sales Tax Revenue Bonds I. Background A Request for Proposals (RFP) was sent to a large number of firms by the Town of Vail wherein the firms were asked to evaluate the possibility of refunding all or part of the Town's outstanding Sales Tax Revenue Bonds to improve the cash flow of the Town and issue new money bonds to f Hance a new municipal building. Six (6) firms, or groups of firms, responded to the Town's Request for Proposals which included in alphabetical order: 1. A.G. Edwards/Coughlin & Company 2. Dillon Read 3. George K. Baum 4. Kemper Securities 5. Kidder Peabody 6. Kirkpatrick Pettis/Piper Jaffray Additionally, responses received were from Lehman Brothers and Goldman Sachs. Lehman Brothers' proposal was non-responsive. Goldman Sachs said that at this time they did not feel that they could respond to the RFP. 1 ~•m~a Denver • Glenwood Springs, Colorado Wichita, Kansas y Members Belle Mead, New Jersey New York Stork E~:;hange, Inc Albuquerque, New Mexico wd.,.~.. s-..~a American SYOUk Exchangry, Ina (Associate) Cheyenne, Wyoming Hanifen, Imhoff Inc. Investment Bankers II. Methodolo~v Our methodology was to review the six proposals based upon the following questions. 1. Which refunding structure provided the lowest present value cost to the Town of Vail? (The new money portion was handled simiarly by all six proposers. ) 2. Does the firm have experience in structuring Colorado sales tax revenue bonds? 3. Which firm has the most experience in rating and/or insuring bond issues for Colorado mountain communities and resort communities: 4. Which firm provided a reasonable fee to the Town of Vail? 5. Did the firm have the ability to market the bonds? 6. Could the firm meet the November 3, 1992 deadline? Each of the six proposals approached the refunding differently. To allow an "apples to apples" comparison to be made of the six proposals, we developed a computer model to "equalize" the proposals. The extensive computer model allowed us to analyze how each firm dealt with issues such as the reserve fund; the use of zero coupon securities, the handling of the repurchase agreement (Repo) with Morgan Stanley, etc. To insure an accurate result, we double-checked our approach. A full numerical analysis has been made available to the Town. As we moved through the analysis of each of the six proposals, it became obvious that the proposal of Dillon Read was not as strong as the remaining five proposals. We came to this conclusion because Dillon Read's proposed structure was similar to several other proposals (and not as cost effective) and their fee was much higher than the other competitors. Thus, the Dillon Read proposal was eliminated. In ranking the other five proposals by present value cost, as determined by our model, we came to the following conclusion. Firm Scenario Present Value Rank Kemper Securities Primary $23,479,852 1 Alternate 23,462,743 1 George K. Baum Primary 23,489,620 Alternate 23,544,313 2 KPSP/Piper Jaffray Primary 23, 829, 897 3 Alternate 24,254,313 4 2 Hanifen, Imhoff Inc. Investment Bankers Kidder Peabody Primary 23,984,801 4 Alternate 23,901,813 3 A.G. Edwards/ Primary 24,423,047 5 Coughlin & Co. Alternate 24,439,580 5 Other items considered in our evaluation of the proposals included the experience of the firms (and individuals) in structuring sales tax revenue bonds in Colorado and experience with rating or upgrading the rating of bonds for Colorado mountain communities and resort communities. Furthermore, we evaluated the underwriting fee proposed by each firm. From our evaluation of the current market, an underwriter's discount from $7.50 to $9.00 per thousand is reasonable in today's market for an issue of the magnitude of the Town of Vail's issue. We also evaluated the marketing ability of each firm. Finally, we commented on the reasonableness of the scheduled closing in light of the November 3, 1992 deadline. III. Analysis of Each of Proposals A. A.G. Edward/Coughlin & Company The A.G. Edwards/Coughlin & Company proposal had a present value cost of $24,423,000 for the primary alternative and $24,439,000 for the alternate approach. Their proposal had the highest present value cost under both approaches. Their approach was geared towards refunding all of the 1985 and 1989 bonds in an attempt to have one ordinance govern all of the Town's .Sales Tax Revenue Bonds. This is the most costly structure. In discussions with the Town, there seems to be no advantage in having one bond ordinance. The existing covenants are workable. A.G. Edwards does have sales tax revenue bond experience, but neither A.G. Edwards nor Coughlin & Company has a lot of recent experience in upgrading the bonds of Colorado mountain and resort communities. A.G. Edwards quoted a fee of $7/$1,000 which is a reasonable fee. A.G. Edwards does have excellent retail distribution. The calendar proposed by A.G. Edwards/Coughlin & Company showed a closing on October 30 which is too close to the November 3, 1992 deadline. B. George K. Baum George K. Baum had the second lowest present value cost with the primary alternative having a cost of $23,489,000 and the alternate structure having a cost of $23,544,000. However, their numbers must be evaluated in the light that they used all zero coupon securities in their proposal. The interest rate for zero coupon securities is higher than the interest rate for serial bonds. George K. Baum's present value cost would have been higher 3 Hanifen, Imhoff Inc. Investment Bankers had they adjusted interest rates to account for the extensive use of zero coupon securities. George K. Baum's proposal attempts to refund as few bonds as possible to keep the cost to the Town at a minimum. The George K. Baum proposal did not address the probable need of a reserve fund for the 1992 issue. George K. Baum has excellent experience in underwriting Colorado sales tax revenue bonds. George K. Baum has the most experience of any of the six proposers in rating or upgrading the rating of the bonds for Colorado mountain or resort communities. George K. Baum's fee was quoted at $11/$1,000 for zero coupon securities and $6.50/$1,000 for serial coupon bonds. They based their proposal on $11/$1,000 as they used zero coupon bonds exclusively in their proposal. Thus, their fee was slightly higher than most proposers. They scheduled the closing to occur on October 27 which allows about a one week cushion to meet the November 3 deadline. This is a reasonable expectation. C. Kemper Securities Kemper Securities had the lowest present value cost with $23,479,000 for the primary alternative and $23,462,000 for the alternate scenario. As with George K. Baum, Kemper Securities refunded a small amount of the Town's outstanding bonds. This helped Kemper to achieve the lowest present value cost. However, the low cost is a product of how the Repo with Morgan Stanley was handled and innovative substitution of a surety policy for the debt service reserve fund. These items need to be clarified. Kemper Securities has some sales tax revenue bond experience and some experience in upgrading the ratings of bonds for mountain and resort communities. However, their experience is not as extensive as that of George K. Baum. Kemper Securities used serial bonds exclusively without zero coupon bonds being necessary. The underwriting discount proposed by Kemper Securities is $7.85/$1,000 which is reasonable in light of the size of the transaction. Kemper Securities has the experience to market the Town's bonds. Their scheduled closing on October 20 allows a reasonable cushion to meet a November 3 deadline. 4 Hanifen, Imhoff Inc. Investment Bankers a D. Kidder Peabodv Kidder Peabody had the fourthe highest present value cost with $23,984,801 for the primary alternative and third highest cost with $23,901,813 for the alternate scenario. Kidder Peabody seems to offer a strong presentation in the way of structuring a refunding bond issue, but little in the way of day to day service for the Town of Vail. Kidder Peabody is a very large investment banking firm but has no Colorado sales tax revenue bond experience and relatively little experience in underwriting Colorado bonds. The fee proposed by Kidder Peabody is relatively high with $12.80/$1,000 being proposed for the zero coupon bonds and $10/$1,000 being proposed for the serial or current interest bonds. They proposed a closing by September 24. If they were aware of the ordinance procedures of the Town they would realize that the closing would almost have to be in October. E. Kirkuatrick Pettis (KPSPI/Piper Jaffrav KPSP/Piper Jaffray had the third highest present value cost with their primary alternative totalling $23,829,000 and the fourth highest cost with their alternate scenario totalling $24,254,000. KPSP/Piper Jaffray has a moderate amount of sales tax revenue bond experience in the State of Colorado and has some experience in the upgrading the ratings of Colorado mountain and resort communities. The underwriter's discount proposed by KPSP/Piper Jaffray was the lowest being $4.90/$1,000 including a takedown (selling expense) of $3.90/$1,000. Our only comment is that a takedown of $3.90/$1,000 is quite low. A low takedown (sales expense) would make it difficult for the sales people at either firm to get terribly excited about selling the bonds for the Town of Vail. Thus, the interest rate for the Town of Vail might be ever so slightly higher to encourage the salesmen to sell bonds for a low of fee. KPSP/Piper Jaffray does have strong marketing ability. They scheduled their closing for October 19 which is very reasonable and leaves a cushion to meet the November 3 deadline. 5 Hanifen, Imhoff Inc. Investment Bankers IV. Recommendation Based on our analysis of the proposals, we recommend that Kemper Securities be selected to serve as the senior managing underwriter for the Town of Vail's 1992 Sales Tax Revenue bond issue and George K. Baum be selected as a co-manager. This recommendation is conditioned on two items. First, Kemper Securities must prove to the Town of Vail that nearly $400,000 can be obtained from the early cancellation of the repurchase agreement with Morgan Stanley. Second, Kemper Securities innovatively substituted a surety policy for the debt service reserve fund. It is unclear whether MBIA (or any other insurance group) will allow a surety reserve policy to stand in the place of a fully funded reserve. Thus, there is some uncertainty with Kemper's proposal. George K. Baum (the second place firm), did not have the same uncertainties with the handling of the repurchase agreement or the surety reserve fund. However, George K. Baum's proposal is conditioned on the sale of zero coupon securities at the same interest rates as serial bonds. If George K. Baum's proposal were adjusted to account for the higher interest rate needed to sell zero coupon securities, then their proposal would be several hundred thousand more in present value cost than Kemper's proposal. George K. Baum does have more experience than any other firm in receiving ratings for and upgrading the ratings of Colorado mountain communities and resort communities. Thus, we recommend that Kemper Securities be the lead underwriter and George K. Baum be a co-managing underwriter. Kemper's numerical approach would be utilized and George K. Baum's experience with the rating agencies would be utilized. If it becomes apparent that Kemper Securities cannot follow through with the repurchase agreement with Morgan Stanley or the receipt of a debt service reserve fund surety policy, then George K. Baum would be the clear winner. However, Kemper Securities should be given a chance to prove their proposal. 6 TOWN OF VAIL AGREEMENT FOR l FIRE SUPPRESSION )~Q ` +4. THIS AGREEMENT FOR FIRE SUPPRESSION SERVICES is made effective the _ day of , 1992 by and between the TOWN OF VAIL, a Colorado municipal corporation ('Yhe Town"), and VAIL ASSOCIATES, INC., a Colorado corporation ("Vail Associates"). WHEREAS, the Town maintains a Fire Department and is willing and able to render fire suppression services outside of its corporate limits at rates designated by the Municipal Code for the Town of Vail, Section 8.10.020, et s~ce and WHEREAS, Vail Associates is: (a) a permittee of the United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (the "Forest Service") for (i) real property on Vail Mountain and (ii) real property surrounding the area known as Piney River Ranch; and (b) a lessee of the City and County of Denver, Board of Water Commissioners for real property containing what is known as Piney River Ranch; all of which is located in an unincorporated area of Eagie County, outside the Town's corporate limits. Vail Associates is also the owner and operator of certain commercial dwellings located on such permitted or leased premises ((a), (b) and such commercial dwellings collectively hereinafter referred to as the "Property"). WHEREAS, Vail Associates desires to have fire suppression and assistance by the Town of Vail Fire Department and is willing to pay the sums required by ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the terms, covenants and conditions described herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Services. The Town shall, during the term of this Agreement, provide fire suppression services and assistance on the Property (the "Services"). The level of Services to the Property shall be determined by the Vail Fire Department Chief or his designee at the time of the incident. 2. Limitation of Services. The parties hereto specffically understand and agree that ft may from time to time be necessary for the Town to limit Services to Vail Associates to whatever extent necessary to enable the Town to provide adequate fire protection to the people and residents within the Town's corporate limits. The extent to which limitation of Services to Vail Associates may be necessary to enable the Town to provide adequately for the people and property owners inside the Town's corporate limits is a fact which will be determined exclusively by the Vail Fire Department Chief in the exercise of reasonable discretion, from time to time, as the occasion may require. Therefore, in times or emergency, or where a shortgae of equipment is experienced, the fire suppression services outside the Town's corporate limits will be curtailed to the extent that may be required by the circumstances existing. However, all reasonable efforts, in the event of simultaneous emergency existing at both Vail Associates Property and within the Town's corporate limits will be made by the Town to provide Services to Vail Associates to whatever extent possible and consistent with the terms of this Agreement. 3. Limitation of Liability. Neither parry hereto shall be deemed to assume any responsibility or liability for the negligent or intentional acts of the officers or employees if the other party. In the event that either party pays or is required to pay any claim arising out of the negligent or intentional act or failure to act of an officer or employee of the other party, then the parry making such payment shall be indemnified by the other party for the amount of such claim or judgment. 4. Term. This Agreement shalt commence on the effective date first written above and shall automatically expire 120 days following any amendment to the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail which affects the amount or payment of fees for the Services. Either party may terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, by giving 120 days' written notice of such termination to the other party at the address set forth below: Town of Vail, 75 S. Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657 Vail Associates, Inc., P.O. Box 7, Vail, Colorado 81658, Attention: Manager of Vail Security 5. Compensation. Vail Associates shall pay the Town for Services provided in accordance with the fee structure established by Section 8.10.020, 8.10.030 and 8.10.035, Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, which fee structure is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. Such amounts shall be paid by Vail Associates to the Town within 30 days of receipt of a proper invoice by Vail Associates. All amounts accruing hereunder shall be paid in full by Vail Associates notwithstanding Vaii Associates' subrogation of any such amount, if any, to the Forest Service and/or the Water Board. 6. Insurance. (A) The Town warrants that, at all times during which it performs the Services hereunder, it shat) carry (i) comprehensive general liability insurance in an occurrence format in an amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence, and (ii) comprehensive automobile liability insurance on all vehicles entering the Property, in an I amount of $500,000 combined single limits for bodily injury and property damage, per occurrence; the Town shall provide Vail Associates with certificates of insurance evidencing such coverage during the term of this Agreement. The Forest Service and Vail Associates shall be named as additional insured as its interests may apper on such policy. Additionally, the Town shall carry workers' compensation coverage for all employees engaged in the Services. (B) Vail Associates warrants that, at ali times during which this Agreement is in effect, it shall carry comprehensive general liability insurance in an occurrence format in an amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence, and that the Town, its officers, agents, and employees shall be named as additional insured as their interests may apper on such policy. VAIL ASSOCIATES, INC., TOWN OF VAIL, a Colorado corporation a Colorado municipal corporation BY~ By: Rondalf V. Phillips Tftle: Title: Town Manager EXHIBIT A (Attached to and forming a part of the Agreement for Fire Suppression by and between Vail Associates, Inc. and the Town of Vaii, dated , 1992.) SECTIONS 8.10.020, 8.10.030 AND 8.10.035 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF VAIL (Attached) A-1 , ORDINANCE N0. 3 Series of 1991 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS Q.10.020 AND 8,10.030 OF THE Mi1NIC1PAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF UAIL TO PROVIpE FOR INCREASED FEES IN l'HE 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 far 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 ORpAINED 8Y THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAII, COLORADO: 1. Section 8.10.020 Fees ie 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 fallowing 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 lndividual responding Lo 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 Vaii 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 Adiustment 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 thQ percentage the Consumer Price ' Index has increased over the preceding year. F 1 ~ d ~ i,~ , 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, R~Aa, AND APPROVED ON FIRST READING THIS 1q~ DAY OF ~Ylanc.G. ,1991, and a public hearing shall be held on this ardinanca on the ~ day of Qom. 1991, at 7:30.p,m, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal , Building, Vail, Colorado. ,Ordered published in full this, I°I'~ day of cdt. , 1992. . ~ ~ ~ • ~ v ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ Kent R, Rase, Mayor ' ATTEST: . ~ Pamela A. 8randmeyer, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ, AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORaERED PUBLISHED b~ tdc, oh,t,~ this ~ h` aay of Q.~ri ~ 1991, ~ ~ ~ ~ Kent R, Rose, Mayor ATTEST: Pamela;A.;Brandmeyer, Town Clerk • . -2- ~ i~`1 1~ \ ~u Iy TOWN OF VAIL ~ 75 South Frontage Road Department of Public Works/Transportation Vail, Colorado 81657 303-479-2158/FAX 303-479-2166 MEMORAf~DUM TO: RqN PHILLIPS FROM» MIKE. BRAKE DATE » .7U1-Y :3C~ , 199 RE» 192 STREET SEAL PROGRAM 'T'HIS YEAR THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPAR`i"MENT WOULD LIKE TO START A PROGRAM DESIGNED TO UPKEEP THE ROADWAYS THAI` HAVE BEEN REBUILT TO GATE. 'T'HIS PROGRAM IS AN ASPHALT" SEALING PROCESS DESIGNED 'C"O REJUVENATE THE EXPgSED SURf=ACE qE THE ASPHALT ANC7 Tq APfaLY A WEARING COURSE WHICH WILL PROLONG THE. LIFE OF"°iHE ROADWAY. 1°HERE ARE TWO PROCESSES PLANNED FOR THIS YEAR. qNE IS A SLURRY SEAL AND THE OTHER IS A MICRO SEAL . BASICALLY 'THE.Y ARE C~UIT"E SIMILAR A5 FAR AS APPLICATION IS CONCERNED BUT THERE ARE SOME: INHEREN°i" DIFFERENCES . 'THE SLURRY SEAL IS A COMBINA't"ION qF 313" MINUS AGGREGA"T"E , MINERAL. BILLER AND ASPHALT EMULSION. 1"HESS MATERIALS ARE MIXED "~`OGE`C"HER IN'1"O AN "OAT'MEAL" CgNSIS°CENCY RND °~'HEN APPLIED TO THE ROADWAY. NgRMALLY TRAFFIC CAN BE ALLOWED TO TRAVEL ON `(`HE SEAL WITHIN AN HgUR. 'T`HE MICRO SEAL IS ALSO A COMBINAI"ION qF :3/~3" MINUS AGGREGATE, MINERAL FILLER AND ASPHALT EMULSION, AND APPLIED IN "1`HE SAME MANNER. "1"HE DIFFERENCE I5 IN THE ASPHALT EMULSION. "1"HE EMULSION USED IN A MICRO SEAL. PROVIDES A S'rRgNGER BOND BETWEEN THE MINERAL. ~="ILLER AND AGGREGATE WHICH MAKES THE FINISH PRODUCT STRONGER THAN ~`HE 5LURRY SEAL.. THIS PRODUCT WA5 CJESIGNED FOR RUT FILLING, AND FILLING UNEVEN SURFACES. A FINAL SEAL COA°i" IS APPLIED OVER THE "LEVELING" COURSE AND THE EN`i`IRE ROADWAY. 1°HE EXPEC"i'ED LIFE I5 S TO E3 YEARS FqR BOTH PRODUCTS . FOR MANY CI'T'IES THIS IS COMMgNL'Y CON5ID~RED AN INEXPENSIVE MAINTENANCE PRACTICE Tq ENSURE `T"HAT" THEY WILL GET THE LONGEST" POSSIBLE USE. OF A ROADWAY. °1`HE ROADWAYS PLANNED FqR THIS YEAR ARE ALL ROADS INCLUDED IN THE VAIL RIDGE ! VAIL DAS SCHONE PROJECT, POTATO PATCH PROJECT, AND THE FOREST ROAD r BEAVER DAM ROAD PROJECT. i - ~ ~ ~ r .t TOWN OF VAIL 7S Soutb Frontage Road Department of Public Works/Transportation Vail, Colorado 81657 303-479-2158/FAX 303-479-2166 MEMORANDUM T0: Larry Grafel FROM: Mike Brake DATE: July 24, 1992 RE; Town of Vail, 1992 Street Seal Program Bids were opened for this project on July 21, 1992. Out of three possible bidders, two submitted bids and the results are as follows: Bidder Total Bid Vance Bros, Inc. X172,047.75 Intermountain Resurfacing, Inc. X208,351.25 Engineer's Estimate ~1b9,587.20 A pre-construction meeting will be scheduled during the first week of August and the anticipated construction start up date is August 7, 1992. Completion of the project will be 15 days after construction begins. cc Larry Eskwith msb y: N coop } FAIR i Cat I POOR ( ! ~A - UNACCEPI•ABLE 0 S 1 ~ - 15 20 YEARS . Figwe 1. Pavement Lije Cycle ~ 14 APWA REPORTER /JULY 1991 r t Years of Pavement Life Extension Major Collector Commercial Residential Arterial Hvy.Industrial Local Cul-De-Sac Rejuvenating Agent 1-3 2-4 3-5 4-5 Fog/Oil Seal 1-3 2-5 3-b 4-6 Slurry Seal 3-5 3-6 5-8 6-9 ~ Chip Seal 3-5 4-6 5-9 6-9 Overlay 6-10 7-12 8-12 9-15 ; Reconstruction 20-30 20-30 20-30 20-30 Toble 1. L;Je Extension Chart _ \ GOOD ~ f ' ~ TEL - ~ r. ` ~ ` '~+i'\`;`. ~ FAIR ~ \ ~ ` POOR \ \ \ \ t UNACCEPTABLE \ \ \ a Zs so ~s too YEARS KEY TO TREATMENTS • • REJUVENATING AGENT ` i OIL SEAL SLURRY SEAL/CHtP SEAL A.C. SURFA6ING (Overlay) Figure 1. Pavement Life Cycle With Preventive Maintenance r MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: July 27, 1992 SUBJECT: A request to amend a condition of a previously approved exterior alteration, - regarding the CCI parking pay-in-lieu fee for the Red Lion Building, located at 304 Bridge Street/Lots E, F, G and H, Block 5A, Vail Village First. Filing. Applicant: Vencura, Ltd/Jay Peterson Planner: Mike Mollica ' ::•'?Y:F K:..•fr. ;:,Y,.r ri.. ~•.L'~.,. :f~$~'.`+i'.••.+'~i••{.••.•:•:S'~`f'.+••..•+J.i~'. ::f".•'l^,'.:h•.~ ..1.:: is ~::::::i. r. +.:a. :.f..:cx,,...:y+'n¢`>.. ,7.'.::•.::. :::%zy S.•: •;{:,~;.>••v:.x?5:;;•{:•.? •'~1~•r '..t•::'•:• :k.:, ,.1,•i::.:::,:::t::} w.;. r 9T f {1'bi:~ .a%r:~ d3 Jl:+. of S` ..:nt %t ~ j9 J a,~ sc'3 ! ~`~liYm.•:Y.%//A'%•: f INNA1'NG.i:ik vv y ` `+~Yl'/ r, „ ~ ~KS~1.~ / vkrH,4~iY6SyL: ~r`'/+~.kfCtti.~` _ , N r/ . ~ sv . I. BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST Jay Peterson, acting on behalf of the owners of the Red Lion Building, Vencura, Ltd., is requesting that the Town amend a condition of a previously approved exterior alteration in the Commercial Core I zone district. During the spring of 1990, the applicants received the necessary Town of Vail approvals to redevelop the Red Lion Building. These development approvals included a site coverage variance, a stream setback variance, a conditional use permit for an outdoor dining deck, an exterior alteration for Commercial Core I and a modification to View Corridor No. 1. Subsequent to the Planning and Environmental Commission's review of the above requests in 1990, the Town Council appealed the decisions of the PEC and called up the redevelopment proposal for review. On May 1, 1990, the Town Council reviewed the PEC decisions. During the review of the exterior alteration approval, the Town Council added an additional condition of approval. This condition specifically stated that the applicant would be required to pay any incremental increase in the Town's pay-in-lieu parking fees that may be established within two years from the time a building permit is issued for the project. As indicated in the attached minutes of this meeting, this additional condition of approval was accepted by the applicant's representative, Jay Peterson, at the previous Town Council evening meeting on April 17, 1990. It is this Condition of the exterior alteration approval with which the applicant is requesting to be deleted. On April 2, 1991, the Town Council approved Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1991, on second reading. This ordinance specifically amended Section 18.52.160 of the Vail Municipal Code and set the parking-in-lieu fees for Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II at $8,000 per parking space. Subsequent to the approval of this ordinance the parking pay-in-lieu fees, for development within Commercial Core 1 and Commercial Core II, were set at $3,000 per commercial space and $5,000 per residential space. The result in this increase in the parking pay-in-lieu fee, for the Red Uon Building redevelopment, resulted in an additional fee of $14,600. The fee calculated under the "old" system, totaled $18,360. The fee calculated under the "new" system, equals $32,960. ti li. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff does not have a formal recommendation of the applicant's request to delete Condition No. 12 of the exterior alteration request for the Red Lion Building. It is the staff's position that because Condition No. 12 of the exterior alteration approval was a condition specifically added by the Town Council, that the Council should make the decision to either approve or deny the applicant's request. C:WECV~AEMO6~REDLION.727 ' REVI8ED TO: Town Council FROM: C~,~.u.,.,inity Development DATE: April 25, 1990 RE: Appeal of PEC decisions of Red Lion redevel.~r~ent and consideration of Ordinance No. 16, amending view Corridor No. 1. The first of two separate items to be reviewed by the Council is a recall of the Planning Commission's approval of the Red Lion redevelopment. The background information on this request is provided on the Apri3 17th Council memo and the three PEC memos. One modification to this proposal, that was agreed to by the apUlicant, is that ~;~p gw,~,a};a ~aj.l;). ~av ~ncr~ase },n the parkinct fund rate if the rate ~,s chancred within two years of the issuance of a bu,ildinor narmi;.~ fir this tiro~ect. The second item pertains to amending Vail Village View Corridor No. 1. The accompanying memos provide background information on this request. In response to the Council's discussion of this amendment, the staff has requested additional information from the applicant and has discussed the view corridor with Jeff Winston. 1) The applicants have provided a cross-section of the Village from the parking structure to the Golden Peak House. This was done to demonstrate whether any other properties would encroach into the view corridor if they were redeveloped within the 43 foot height limit. 2) Jeff Winston was the lead consultant involved in establishing the Village view corridors. Jeff has reviewed this project and concurs with the staff recommendation. He reiterated that the purpose of this view corridor was to maintain views of the mountain, the Clock Tower and the Rucksack Tower. It was his feeling that the line could have been drawn at the Golden Peak House ridge and the objective of this corridor would be met. The proposed Red Lion ridge would not diminish any view of Vail Mountain. ' n I 4 Town Council ' FROM: Community Devel..r.~ent Department DATE: April 27, 1990 RE: The appeal of the Red Lion redevelopment approvals and Ordinance No. 15. The Council's review of the`Red Lion redevelopment proposal - entails five (5) separate requests. This memo is intended to assist the Council by outlining each of the motions necessary in responding to these requests. 1. A site coverage variance to permit a .25$ increase in this property's site coverage. This request was approved by a 6-1 vote. A motion to uphold or overturn this request is necessary. z: A stream setback variance to allow a 2 foot encroachment into the required 30 foot stream setback. This request was approved by a 6-1 vote. A motion to uphold or overturn this request is necessary. 3. A conditional use permit for an outdoor dining deck on the east side of the Red Lion Building. This request was approved by a 7-0 vote. A motion to uphold or overturn this request is necessary. 4. An exterior alteration to add enclosed floor area to the Red Lion Building. This request was approved by a 5-2 vote with 11 conditions as outlined in the April 17th, 1990 memorandum to the Town Council. A 12th condition to be added to this approval would require the owners to pay any incremental increase in parking fees that may be established within two years from the time a building permit is issued for this project. A motion to uphold or overturn this request is necessary. If the Planning Commission's approval of these four requests is upheld by the Town Council, the Co,„il ~.~?nd~,tion~their approval upon the approval of~~dina~, ~p ~N~,~6. Ordinance No. 16 won3't!' arr....~e the mo`d'i'~ cation of View Corridor No. 1. This ordinance was approved by a 4-2 vote at first reading. A motion - - to approve or deny Ordinance No. 16 with 2 recommended conditions as outlined in the April 17, 1990 memorandum, is necessary. ' MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MAY 1, 1990 7:30~P.M. M.., A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, May 1, 1990, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor Lynn Fritzlen Jim Gibson Merv Lapin Robert Levine Peggy Osterfoss MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom Steinberg, Mayor Pro Tem TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Charlie Wick, Assistant Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney • Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was approval of minutes of the April 3 and 17, 1990, meetings. Rob Levine moved to approve the minutes as presented, with a second coming from Lynn Fritzlen A vote was taken and the vote passed unanimously 5-0. At this point in the meeting Merv Lapin was absent. Item number two was Citizen Participation. There being no Citizen Participation, the council moved to item number three. Item number three was an appeal of the Planning. and Environmental Commission decisions regarding the redevelopment of the Red Lion hiaildina (Conditional use permit, Stream setbaZ~R'~~T"a4R"~""Si ~e coverage var7 ance; and ~ an Exterior alteration). Kristan Pritz initiated the discussion by calling the Council's attention to an Aprii 27, 1990, memo from Community Development in regard to the appeal of the Red Lion redevelopment approvals and Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1990. She stated five separate motions eventually would be made to deal with various considerations before the council. To be considered prior to the reading of Ordinance 16, 1990, were the following: 1. A site coverage variance to permit a .25 percent increase in this property's site coverage. This request was approved by a Planning Commission 6-1 vote. A motion to uphold or overturn this request would be necessary. 2. A stream setback variance to allow a two foot encroachment into the required thirty foot stream setback. This request was approved by a 6-1 Planning Commission vote. A motion to uphold or overturn this request would be necessary, 3. A conditional use permit for an outdoor dining deck on the east side of the Red Lion building. This request was approved by a 7-0 Planning Commission vote. A motion to uphold or overturn this request would be necessary. 4. An exterior alteration to add enclosed floor area to the Red Lion building. This request was approved by a 5-2 Planning Commission vote, with it conditions as outlined in the April 17, 1990, memorandum to the Town Council. The council asked the applicant to a ree to a 12th condition at the Ma~~ a ~ ~ ~ uu i,~.? uN ~naen ro •rni s aaprova wuuiu re uire the owner to pay n incremen•° 1r aSe 7n QarKin tees that q a ~Ea~ cre .{~,~.dl~ ~ l l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u i a ~ r~ a rmi i s ss~~ed~ roiect. A motion to upho or over urn ~s uld de necessary. Merv Lapin arrived at 7:55 P.M. - Kristan further specified that if the Planning Commission's approval of these four requests were to be upheld by the Town Council, the Council should condition their approval upon the passage of Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1990, a modification of a View Corridor #1. Kristan stated that the PEC recommended approval of the Uiew s ~ r . Corridor amendment by a vote of 6-1 ~in favor, with two conditions. She further ' stated the Ordinance was approved by a 4-2 Council vote at the first reading in April, and a motion to approve or deny Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1990, with two recommended conditions as outlined in the April 17, 1990, memorandum, would be requested. Kristan advised Council to focus on the appeal of the entire project in consideration of each of the variances and the conditional use permit that were being requested in order to complete the project. The first area to be discussed was the exterior alteration review criteria. Included in this was the discussion of the urban design guide plan and urban design considerations which included the following: a: pedestriazation b: vehicular penetration c: streetscape framework d: street enclosure e: street edge f: building height g: views and focal point h: service and delivery is sun/shade j: architectural and landscape consideration. All details were presented as described in the March 19th, 1990, memorandum from Community Development to the Planning and Environmental Commission. Information in regard to the Stream setback variance to allow a two foot encroachment into the required thirty foot stream setback was discussed next, with reference to the March 19, 1990, memorandum. Review criteria for each variance and the conditional use permit were presented for Council consideration. The third item to be considered was a conditional use permit for an outdoor dining deck on the east side of the Red Lion building. The fourth item was a site coverage variance to allow for an entry on the east side 'of the Red Lion. Kristan explained that at the PEC's regular meeting, April 9, 1990, approvals were given on those items. PEC conditions of approval per the April 17th staff memo for the project included: 1. As a part of this redevelopment, the applicants agree to point and repair the brick wall along Bridge Street and in the area of the small Plaza to the northwest corner of the site. Improvements to this Plaza may also include upgrading existing benches, planters, newspaper box and trash receptacle locations and landscaping. 2. The streetscape improvements shown along Hanson Ranch Road are considered conceptual and the applicants shall agree to work with the Staff and Winston & Associates in refining this design relative to the Vail Village streetscape Plan. This condition shall also apply to the Plaza`-"area referenced in condition #1 and the landscape improvements proposed adjacent to Mill Creek. 3. All windows located on stucco wall plains shall be recessed a minimum of three inches. 4. State-of-the-art venting shall be used to reduce negative impact (smell, smoke, etc.) emanating from the site. 5. The owners/developers of the residential development on this site shall agree to permanently restrict gross residential floor area (GRFA), building height and density on this site to what is permitted by this approval. The Town of Vail shall be a party to this restriction and the restriction shall be recorded with the Clerk and Recorder's Office in Eagle County. These restrictions on GRFA density and height must be acceptable to the Town Attorney as submitted by the owner and approved before recording. 6. Any trees damaged or killed within two years of the completion of this project shall be replaced with similar size and type tree. 7. The Red Lion logo shall be retained as a part of this redevelopment in approximately the same size and location. 8. The developers/owners will be encouraged to participate in developing solutions to traffic, loading, and delivery problems in Vail Uillage. 9. The Rekord (or other type of window system installed) to the Red Lion Restaurant along Bridge Street, shall remain totally opened during business hours between June 15 and September 15 of each year. These windows may be opened at any other time during the year at the discretion of the restaurant management. 10. The applicant shall complete stream-bank stabilization work on both sides of Mill Creek over the entire length of the Red Lion property. The final design and implementation of these improvements shall be subject to review by the Staff and the Design Review Board. 11. The owners shall agree to participate in, and not remonstrate against, a Special Improvement District, if and when one is formed in the Village. 12. The owners/developers agree to pay any incremental increase in parking fees that may be established within two years from the time a building permit"i' issued for this project. (This condition was accepted by the applicant's representative, Jay Peterson, at the previous Town Council evening meeting on April 17, 1990.) Approval of this exterior alteration, variances, and conditional use are contsingent upon the Council giving final approval to Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1990. Kristan explained that the PEC also recommended approval of the View Corridor Ordinance with the following conditions: 1. That the photo depicting View Corridor No. 1 be modified to reflect the new Red Lion Building at a time when the expansion is completed. The Commission preferred this alternative as opposed to modifying the line that delineates the View Corridor. -2- ' t. ,i i 2. That the specific reasons justifying this request be included in the ' preamble of the ordinance authorizing this amendment. At this point in the meeting discussion turned to Item five which was Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1990, second reading, an~Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1983, in order to modify View Corridor No. 1; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Mayor Rose read the title in full. Kristan stated the current remodel falls within the height allowed in the zoning code.and that Jeff Winston had stated that in coming up with the original View Corridors, the consideration was to preserve the visual connection between the parking structure and the mountain and to maintain the views of the mountain, the Clocktower, and the Rucksack Tower. It was Jeff Winston's feeling that the line could have been drawn at the Golden Peak House Ridge and the objective of this corridor would have been met. The proposed Red Lion Ridge would not diminish any view of Vail Mountain. In regard to the height of the building, the applicants had provided a cross section of the Village from the Parking Structure to the Golden Peak House. This was done to demonstrate whether any other properties would encroach into the View Corridor, if they were redeveloped within the forty-three foot height limit. Larry Eskwith discussed whether the nonconforming height of the Golden Peak House was legal and referenced 18.64.090 under the••zoning code, restorations. Also, Larry pointed out a section on structures and site improvements and stated that a nonconforming use cannot become more nonconforming through a remodel. However, the Golden Peak House could be built back to its existing height so long as the area of the roof that was nonconforming was not increased in area or height through a remodel. He stated that this decision regarding the Red Lion would not create a problem. Kent Rose stated he believed the amendment to the view corridor did not go against the intent of the ordinance or the purpose of this specific view corridor. Rob Levine questioned Item No. 4 and the state-of-the-art venting on the roof and received an explanation about the stacked chimney arrangement. Jay Peterson, representing the applicants, Frankie and Oscar Tang, presented additional information from individuals within the community. Jim Morter, acting as architect for the project and Dan Corcoran, field engineer, spoke on behalf of the project, with Dan Corcoran stating that as a PEC member at the time view corridors were first discussed in the Town of Vail, he had discussed the process used in designations, their history, and their intent. His opinion was that the intent of the view corridor was being met. Further discussion from the audience included E11a Knox and Gordon Brittan, who spoke out against the granting of these variances, the conditional use permit and the change or the modification in the view corridor ordinance, Speaking for the project were Oscar Tang, Diana Donovan and Jack Curtin, representing Mrs. Cortlandt Hill. At this time, Merv Lapin moved to uphold the Planning Commission decision to allow the exterior alteration based on the staff memorandum dated April 17, 1990, and incorporating conditions 1 through 13 as previously stated, in his motion, with amended conditions as follows: 1. Amend condition 5 to say this agreement shall be submitted by the owner and approved by the Town Attorney before a building permit is released. 2. Amend condition # 8 to state if a central trash area is built in the Village, the owners would agree to use the trash facility and "will be encouraged" changed to "will participate in." 3. Conditions # 12 and 13 as reviously stated on page 2 of these minutes, are ~ncue 4. Condition 14 was added to state, "The proposed addition of the enclosed deck along Bridge Street will have a glass roof and be as transparent as possible. This motion was seconded by Peg Osterfoss, a vote was taken, and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0 in favor. • In regard to the stream setback variance to allow a 2 foot encroachment into the required 30 foot stream setback, Peggy Osterfoss moved to grant this variance to uphold the Planning Commission recommendation to approve, based on the fact this was not granting special privilege, was not detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the community, and there were extraordinary circumstances in that the Red ' Lion building is already located within the stream tract setback. Jim Gibson seconded this motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. r' ~ ~ . ' 304 Bridge Street • Lot E, F,G,Ii, Block 5A, Vail V111a8e 1st ' prvf;e7-ty; JtED LION PROJECT KL1) I.J.ON KGS1I). CY.I'Y`1'i;ltt~il'T t_70. $ 15,000 Vail, Colorado, July 3 ~ 1.990.: Total Parking Fee In installments after date, for value received, 2 promisA to p,y t~ l:1-~~: order of the Town of Vail at the Office of the Fznance DirectUr., , t•tun~ Building at Vail, Colorado, Fifteen thousand---------------------------------------------=--------- I7o].1.a~:F- Total Parking Fee Dotvr~ Payment ~3, 000, 00 ~ . with interest of ten percent per annum on the unpaid baJ.ay~ce, J~~~y~~1:,1.c• ~ . yearly installments as follows:. The first installment of $ 3,'785.65 due and payable oi~ U7/15/91 the :second installment of $ 3,785.65 due and payable oil 07/1.5/yl t:i8 t:~ird installment of $ 3.785.65 due ana payable v,i ^tt7/ 1 rilt.3:1 the ~~urth installment of $ 3.785.65 due and payable on 07l15J94.._. . It is agreed that if this note is not paid when dtie oz- dcc~lar.~c] dt:~~. hereunder, the principal and accrued interest thereon rl~all dray.! at tr:e rate of 18 percent per annum, and that failure t-~ make 1n}' F~,:~ of principal or interest when due or any default under. at~y i.t~c~~iml:,rr,~~ agrc:en~ent securing this note 6hall cause the whole note t.o t~r~~°c.~m•r c1i~~. oncA, or the interest to be counted as principal, at the op1.9.c~u oC i:~.~• holder of the note. The makers and endorsers hereof severally ~.>>e presetament for payment, protest, notice on nonpayment =~~sd nl' 1~~-c.~L^~,~.: agree ¢o any extension of time of payment and partial payments t>~t~~r~~~: or aJ`~tpr maturity, and if this note or. interest thereon. is t~vi: i.~l a~.. . due, ar .suit is brought, agree to pay all reasonable co~:;ts cif r..~,l.] i including reason~le attorney's fees. ~ ~ ~ by ~ Oscar and ranks ~ Tang D~„tr. The o.n.~ers agree to pay any increase in the Commercial Core I prar.lcint; fec if r•nlci incr2~ae is made within two years from the issuance of a buildi~~F, {-ermir. fo~• ~.1~1~: pro (Ju y ~3~J) . . ~ G ~~I~v 1 BMX by: G~:ar and/ Franks Tang ~itl.K, HNll H55U1.. i tL ~ . SUS-4 (b ( (b3 JU lfr.-.b ~ yU lU ~ 4U NO . UU4 t' . US , } } ,yjs town of ~a~l 'Yai 75 south frontal roan office of community development vau~ ~otorado x1657 . (303) STS-n3a (303) 479-2139 Permit No. 444 ,Red Lion Restaurant Exterior Alteration,•July 3, 1990 • Parking Fee Analysis for Restaurant Expansion Only Sq. Ft. Parking Spaces New Deck Enclosed {seating area only) ~ 135 ~ 1.12 . 1.12 parking required x ;3,000 ~ 113,360 total fee. • e The staff checked the finance records and found the existing enclosed dining area has been covered by previous parking. fees. These fees have all been paid. ' ~ ' 304 Bridge Street ~ Lot E,F,G,H, Block SA, Vail Village 1st ' Property: RED LION RESTAURANT PROJECT RED LION RESTAURANT EXP. PERMIT NO„ 4454 $ 3.3b0 Vail, Colorado, July 3 1990. Total Parking Fee In installments after date, for value received, I promise to pay to the order of the Town of Vail at~the Office of the Finance Director, Municipal Building at Vail, Colorado, Three thousand three hundred sixty----------- Dollars, Total Parking Fee Down Payment S b 7 2.00 with interest of ten percent per annum on the unpaid balance, payable in yearly installments as follows: The first installment of $ 847,99 due and payable on 07/15/91 the second installment of $ 847.99 due and payable on 07/15/92 p y 07/15/93 I the third installment of $ 847.99 due and a able on ~ the fourth installment of $ 847.99 due and payable on 07/15/94 It is agreed that if this note fs not paid when due or declared due hereunder, the principal and accrued interest thereon shall draw interest at the rate of 18 percent per annum, and that failure to make any payment of principal or interest when due or any default under any incumbrance or agreement securing this note shall cause the whole note to become due at once, or the interest to be counted as principal, at the option of the holder of the note. The makers and endorsers hereof severally waive presentment for payment, protest, notice on nonpayment and of protest,. and agree to any extension of time of payment and partial payments before, at, or after maturity, and if this note or interest thereon is not paid when due, or suit is brought, agree to pay all reasonable .costs of callection, including reasonable attorney's fees. b L ~ 43~L°~`^' Y ~ 7 ~D . Date The owners agree to pay any increase in the Commercial Core I parking fee xf said increase is made within two years from the issuance of a building permit fus this project (July ~o , 90). . ~Ls~ ~ ~ ~ by: lOw~ers t ' ~ e '~'t Sawa of ~a~l T5 south trorttage road ~~---ot1{CO of cunmiunity dove{upn.oT,l valt, Colorado 81657 (303) 479.2138 • (303) 479-213H Permit No. 4454 Red Lion Residential Exterior Alteration, July 3, 1990 Yanking Fee Analysis for Residential Expansion Only Existing: ' GRFA Required Parkinp~ Whitehead Unit 4,665 s.f. 2.5 spaces Caretaker Unit 566 s.f. 2 spaces Total 5,237 s.f. 4.5 spaces Proposed: Unit 1 2,954 2.5 Unit 2 2,945 2.5 Unit 3 2,842 2.5 Total. 8,741 7.5 spaces ' Total Proposed Required Parking 7.5 Total Existing Parking 4.5 3.0 3.0 spaces x $5,000 ~ ~15,O00 total residential parking tee MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 7, 1990 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, August 7, 1990, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. MEMBERS PRESENT: Kent Rose, Mayor Tom Steinberg, Mayor Pro Tem Lynn Fritzlen Jim Gibson Merv Lapin Robert Levine Peggy Osterfoss MEMBERS ABSENT: None TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ron Phillips, Town Manager ' Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk There was no Citizen Participation, the first item on the agenda. Next was a public hearing on the 1990-91 parking policies. Stan Berryman gave an introduction to the hearing stating the Parking and Transportation Advisory Committee had met several times to discuss recommendations for these policies. Arnold Ullevig then gave an in-depth presentation regarding the proposed policies and the reasoning for the changes from the current practices. He then held a question and answer session with Council and the public. Trevor Bradway felt the policies were discriminatory against Village workers and those who had paid into the parking fund for parking spaces in the Village Transportation Center. Josef Staufer commented that making employees (who get off work at 2:00 a.m.) park in Ford Park was unfair. There was some discussion regarding employees getting off at late hours, and why coupons worked well before and some people hated to get rid of them. Much discussion by the public and Council ensued regarding pros and cons. Rob Levine made a motion to table the item and send it back to the Advisory Committee for further review. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. Jim Gibson stated he wanted to pass the program with the following conditions: lift restrictions on the Village parking structure parking; parking free at Ford Park; and other modifications to be made as the program went along. He felt this was a step in the right direction. Mayor Rose explained why he felt it should go back to the committee. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-2, with Lynn Fritzlen and Jim Gibson opposed. Ron Phillips asked Council to specifically name the items they felt the Advisory Committee should review. Lynn Fritzlen felt the added stress on employees because of the parking and housing situations was bad, and the plan could help by providing a pass specifically targeted to Village employees. Rob Levine thought the Village Transportation Center could be shared by a first come, first served basis by access or price; include the coupons at a reasonable rate; and there be one pass with no restrictions for $750, that the person could come and go as he pleased. Mayor Rose remarked since the audience felt the blue parking passes would promote more cars in the Village than the coupons, he felt a combined window sticker and coupon program ' was good and would work. He added he did not think there should be any summer charges for the Village parking structure, and was not sure differential rates on everything in the Village structure was proper. Jim Gibson thought a blue pass should have "a number of times used" and not "number of days." Peggy Osterfoss commented the audience wanted to have the ability to do what they wanted and parking where they wanted, and paying more was not an issue. The third item was a Consent Agenda of the following items: A. Approval of Minutes of July 3 and 17, 1990 Meetings B. Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1990, second reading, an ordinance modifying Section 18.13.080(A) of the Municipal Code of the TOV regarding density control for the primary/secondary zone district (Applicant: Town of Uail) C. Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1990, second reading, an ordinance making supplemental appropriations from the Town of Vail general fund, capital . projects fund, Communities for Drug-Free Eagle Valley fund, special parking assessment fund, Vail marketing fund and the real estate transfer tax fund, of the 1990 budget and the financial plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado; and authorizing the expenditures of said appropriations as set forth herein. D. Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1990, second reading, an ordinance amending the plan document of the Town of Vail employees' pension plan; and setting forth details in regard thereto. E. Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1990, second reading, an ordinance amending the Town's Police and Fire pension plan document subject to approval by sixty-five percent (65~) of the Town`s Police and Firemen; and setting forth details in regard thereto. F. Ordinance No. 30, Series of 1990, second reading, an ordinance amending the trust agreement pursuant to the Town of Vaii employees' pension plan; and setting forth details in regard thereto. G. Resolution No. i8, Series of 1990, a resolution authorizing certain Town employees and officers to sign checks drawing on an operating account to be opened by the Town at the FirstBank of Vail and further authorizing certain employees of the Town to make deposits in said account. H. Resolution No. 19, Series of .1990, a resolution authorizing the Town of Vail to rent a safe deposit vault at the FirstBank of Vail and authorizing certain officers to sign a lease therefor, to terminate the lease, to surrender the box, return the keys, and release the Bank from any liability in connection therewith. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. There was no discussion by Council or the public. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 6-0. Lynn Fritzlen was out of the room at the moment. Next was Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1990, second reading, an ordinance amending Special Development District No. 23, the Vail National Bank Building, and setting forth the details in regard thereto. Mayor Rose read the full title of the ordinance. Mike Mollica stated the only change made since first reading was under Section 4.E. Anew palragraph had been added. Larry Eskwith then discussed Vail Associates' waiver of right of reverter clause which Jim Gibson had questioned at the first reading. Jay Peterson, representing the applicant, gave backgroun d information regarding the parking situation, and did not feel the ordinance's new paragraph 4.E. was fair. After some discussion by Council and Jay, a motion to approve the ordinance on second reading with the additional language was made by Merv Lapin. A second came from Rob Levine. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-2, with Tom Steinberg and Lynn Fritzlen opposed. _ Fifth on the agenda wars 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 detarils in regard thereto (714 West Lionshead Circle, Lots 4, 7, C, D, Block 2, Vail-Lionshead 3rd Filing) (Applicant: M-K Corporation - Kaiser Morcus and Marriott Ccrporation). The full title was read by Mayor Rose. Jim Gibson made a motion t:o table this item until the September 4 evening meeting, per the applicant's request. Rob Levine seconded the motion. Kristan Pritz explained what rezoning the applicant was trying to change to and why. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Next was Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1990, first reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 18.04 of the Wail Municipal Code by the addition of Section 18.04.035 Brew Pub; and amending Section 18.28.030 of the Municipal Code to add Brew Pub as a permitted use in the Commercial Service Center zone district; amending Chapter 18.28.040 of the Vail Municipal Code by the addition of Brew Pubs that sell beer wholesale and Brew Pubs which sell fifteen percent of the manufactured beer or ale for off-site consumption as conditional uses to the Commercial Service Center zone district; amending Chaipter 18.28 of the Vail Municipal Code to provide certain restrictions in the oK?eration of a Brew Pub; and setting forth details in regard thereto. The full tittle was read by Mayor Rose. Andy Knudtsen gave brief background information on the request. He stated three changes to the Code which had to happen regarding this request for a brew pub: 1) it had to be defined; 2) Council had to make a brew pub a use by right; and 3) they had to state specific -2- • items for conditional use. After some discussion, Andy then answered questions of Council. Merv Lapin then made a motion to approve the ordinance, which Jim Gibson seconded. Larry Eskwith suggested combining the two conditional uses shown in the ordinance into only one. Merv then amended his motion to approve the ordinance and to combine both conditional uses into one, and Jim amended his second. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Seventh on the agenda was an appeal of the PEC decision to approve requests for an exterior alteration and landscape variance in order to construct an addition to the Lancelot Resta~~r~n, at. the Bell Tower Building located at 201 Gore Creek Drive (Part of Irac Block 5B, Vail'VTTT'~s~ riiiiiy~~ (Applicant: Hermann Staufer, Lancelot Restaurant). Kristan Pritz gave background information on the exterior alteration request andl explained why staff recommended approval with two conditions: 1. The applicant must remove railings surrounding the patio from November 1 to May 1 of each year. 2. The applicant, must participate in a project involving the property owners and the Town's Public Works Department in an effort to resolve drainage problems adjacent to the Bell Tower Building. These drainage problems are a result of the undirected drainage of"f of the building. Staff does not feel that the applicant should be required to provide the solution individually. However, staff feels it is fair to require him, a~s a property owner in the building, to participate and pay for his fair share as deerrsed by the building association. Any drainage improvements necessitated by the deck enclosure shall be addressed by the applicant in the Oesign Review Board submittal and building permit plans. Kristan then reviewed the landscape variance request and explained the reasoning for the request. She stated the staff recommended approval of the variance, and reviewed the Planning and Environmental Commission's vote for approval of 5-2. Kristan answered questions of Council. Peggy Osterfoss felt these were good ideas for the area. Tom Steinberg commented there should be an agreement with the applicant th~t~ a d NarKi ri ree ana T i i amenas one oral na ~~~~reases stated ees some ~m r,r tie next year, a wou a ~ncrease~ as well. reggy ustertoss made a~ motion to upho cision o rove an ex erio addition to the Bell Power Building, finding that the granting of this variance would not constitute a~ grant of special privilege, and was substantiated by the Vail Village Master Plan which encourages a wide variety of activities, events, and street life along pedestrian ways and plazas, and including the conditions required in the staff memorandum dated July 23, 1990. The motion was seconded by Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Peggy Osterfoss then made a motion to uphold the PEC's decision to approve a variance request to reduce the landscapincl to increase the Lancelot's deck. She stated the granting of this variance would not constitute a grant of special privilege, and was in compliance with the Vail Village Master Plan, and including the conditions that the landscaping be added k~etween the two buildings, and bench/possible boulder/Aspen tree be added to the Gore Creek Promenade greenspace as mitigation for the reduction of the landscaped areal. Tom Steinberg seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Next was an appeal of DRB approval of the proposed residence at 3010 Booth Creek Drive (Lot 4, Block 3, Vail Village 11th Filing) (Owner: George P. Caulkins, Jr.). Shelly Mello garve background information regarding the request. Eliot Goss, an architect representing the Caulkins, presented the Council with drawings of the building in question. Kristan and Shelly then answered questions of Council. Werner Kaplan presented to Council for their review photographs of residences in the neighborhood, stating reasons why he was opposed to the building of the new home next door. Harry Frampton, a neighbor, requested Council overturn the DRB decision because he felt the Sa~iss style chalet in a contemporary neighborhood was totally out of place, plus they house needed a garage. August Grassis and Byron Rose, neighbors, supported h1r. Frampton's statements. Pepi Gramshammer felt the house was fine and should be approved, that everyone should have the right to build his/her own home. George Caulkins read aloud a letter he received from Rod Slifer in support of the chalet style as far as real estate price was concerned. After much discussion by Council„ staff, and the public, Merv Lapin made a motion to uphold the DRB decision with the conditions the shutters be done in a solid color, a landscaping plan be incorporated on the open area, and a two car garage be put on the property. Rob LeUine seconded the motion. Ned Gwathmey stated how the DRB had come to its decision. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-3, with Mayor Rose, Tom Steinberg, and Lynn Fritzlen opposed. Mike Cacioppo gave reasons why he was against the Council's decision. -3- r At this time, Council decided to take the last two items out of order to expedite the last item a member of the public was waiting to address. Therefore, action on proposed lease between the TOV and the Eagle County School District for a playground at the Red Sandstone Elementary School site at 551 North Frontage Road was next. There was no discussion by Council or the public, except to delete the staff recommendation that the lease be conditioned on the School District renewing the Town's lease on the elementary school gym. Merv Lapin made a motion to approve the lease agreement, which was seconded by Jim Gibson. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 7-0. Discussion regarding an appeal of a DRB decision on the Wittemyer residence which included a new detached garage and gondola building and a revised front entry (338 Rockledge Road; Lot 1, Block 1, Vail Valley 3rd Filing) (Applicant: Mr. Wittemyer) was next. Mike Mollica remarked this item, which had been approved by the DRB, had been called up by the Council. He presented drawings of the plans and a scale model of the detached garage and house. Mike added it had been a unanimous decision. to approve the plans by the DRB. Ned Gwathmey, Chairman of the DRB, gave additional information regarding the plans and DRB's reasoning for the decision made. John Wittemyer also added background information. Ned then answered questions of Council. Lynn Fritzlen made a motion to uphold the DRB decision, which Peggy Osterfoss seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed 6-l, with Merv Lapin opposed. There being no further business, this meeting was adjourned at 12:15 a.m. Respectfully submitted, ~ 7° ~ Kent R. Rose, Mayor ATTEST: . ~~~~t[.~ii'N~l,l~~ Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Brenda Chesman -4- i - f z.. .......r .1 ` ' ' .R• • 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 ardained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1. Section 18.52.160 B (5) of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby • amended to read as follows: 18.52.160 E'~ (51 The parking fee to be paid by any owner or applicant is hereby determined to be eight thousand dollars ($8,000) per space. This fee shall be automatically increased every two (2) years by the percentage the Consumer Price Index of the City of Denver has increased over each successive two (2) year period. 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 remaiining 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. • ~ 1 6. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, i 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. 7. This ordinance shall become effective immediately, with an exception for projects which receive final Design Review Board or Planning and Environmental • Commission approval by May 1, 1991. Said pro3ects will be eligible to pay the previous parking in lieu fees should a building permit be received by November 1, 1991. INTRODUCED, READ, AHD APPROUED ON FIRST READING this 19~~ day of ~~dv 1991, and a public hearing shall be held on this ordinance on the oZh~ day of Q~ril 1991, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Ordered published in full this ~9~' day of ~`l 1991. -~lllli`~ ~I ~l ~ Kent R: Rose, Mayor' ~ ATTEST:: J Pamela A. Brandmeyer~Clerk INTRODUCED, READ, AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ,lit~v 1 this end. day of t.(i1~v'i 1 1991. . U \l C - Kent R. Rose, Mayor ~ \ ATTEST . • t,l.f~-al• ~~G~1Ld~t~tlt.l~J . Pamela A.. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk SENT BY ;EAGLE COUNTY ~ 7-28-92 17:57 ~ 303287207-~ 303479157;# 1/ 4 a ~ ,A Jvty 29, 1992 - 1(:16 • . " EAC~.r= c~urlTY tun~anvc y ~ •_f' i. • OFFICE (5F THE F.c]. RUX SSO HOARD C7F CCMfTJ~I$$~ryE~S ':'`a~ . ° .h.' ~ EAGI.E~ L"OI C71i1tDU 8! 6 ~ I 1303) 328-86D5 ' ;-:~'ti • FAX: {303) 328.7207 ~•'4 q •i Y~! • EAGLE +C~OtI(VT1f, ~C~Lt~RADO - AG•E1~TDA Bt~ARD OF CCIUNTY COMMTSSIUNERS ' REGULAR MEETING DAY TUESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1992 09:00 - 10:00 V4+'t]Ri{ S~SION - w~ 1sr~1CI,Y U1~UATE err: ~,a~ xoEx cross;!:aohr James R, Fritze ,County Manager 10:00 - 10:45 x'~+TDYNG LITIGATION :rt: ~nr c~ossRO~r I~nviYt Linttahl, County Attorney 10:45 - 11:Q11 ***$IIEA~**s 11:00 - 11:~ WORD. SESSION - CON~G MINE APFRAISAI,?5 a~of~ >r doss R003f Cherlyn BII?l~r, Asses~r • Yames R. Fritze, County Manager I1:50 - 01:20 fss~Cg*** 01:20 - 01:30 REL~A5E OF COi~,A a',+~tAL IN SAGEWOOI] TO~DVl!`DOML~'+!~ SUBIII~,:~~ON ~ covmrr Phut Scott, Engineering Technici~ ACTION: taonsider aPP. SENT BY~EAGLE couN~t ~ 7-~~-~~ 1'7:56 30332672x7-~ ~0~4792157;# ~ I 111:30 - 01:45 COATSI~iT CALF~+TDAl~ t~r~8 cnunrrYxa~[ r1sKS fXr A SD'U7lAiL AND N~711~CX1N(RQ ru.,:~L 1V~Ti1R8 Aim 1~elC~D UN TfIB apN~r cac ~ ~w ~ ~uA~v ctF COIXXI' (X~l1fMlSSlOlt~it8 i!')S.v~u lIS7~VBAiVi~ EI~GYDIYA!(~IBUIPtl~R7AM'r18+1iSON.! i8b+r:st. AGB11®N. ,4NY~IYp1lC~41(iAB~ 1lfi1YRBQt1F,t TFldTdNl?~i(86'Y~i[OY~Ii'FROM2f~G~pYV~NrCr![~IIRM~.s?u~rSBJ~..lR~!!Tffi!: ANY,IIBJId~t?F788PU~T3Cki1Y"R~+~. d111Y17811! 'ltBAlOVdD".FJPOM THE QON'dGBl1~l. 1. BILL FA'Y"Il~TG i Linda P~inkuch, Awttung Larry Clever, Controller A~.. ~ itlN: AFpnnval subjoct tc? review by the County I4tanager. 2. PAYROLL p'C?R AUGUST 6, 1992 Tames R. Frit~e, County Managua Ak.. ~,'s~Ol~i: Approval subject to review by the County Manager. 3. APPROVAL C1F l4[INIJTES 7ohnnette Fhiliips, Clerk to the Board A~.'la{.11Y: Consider approval. 4. AGR.~t.+iF~iT BE a'~~~+I IIAN'A KYLE STOII;ES ANTI EAGLE COUNTY, STATE C!F COLORADO FOR ~ i'~TA1T A.~T .r r~ EAGLE COi]1VTY FAIQt AND RODEQ FOIL Y.u.~+, SUM (3F X150.00 Jackie Lacy, Fair Coardinatr~r ACTION: Canalder srr..~.vai. . S. AGREEN,~.~ i Ida r.N.i'~ I~E>~TY R.ai~l A1VD EAGLE COVNi'Y, STATT OF COLORADO FUR Elw' x ~.TAIlYJMENT A~' r ~ EAGLE COUNTY FAIR AIVII RODEO FDR 7, SUl1d OF X350.00 Jackie I..acy, Pair G~ ~ i~ ~linator ACTIClN: Consider „rel. 6. AGR~rivIENT BETWEEN EAGLE VALLEY TEAM :~~ING A~ATION AND TAGS COUNTY, STATE OF CQLORADO FOIL DELI.VFdtY A1VD ItIIVIQVAL OF 00 HF~iD OF CATTLE FOR THE TEAM PENNING ~ ~ ray ~ AT ~ EAGLE COUNTY FAIR A1ND RODEO AT A PRICE OF $18,SD PER HEAD; A TO'T'AL faF $I110. 7ackie Lacy, Fair Caardinator Ak.; i aO1V: Consider . ..~rrval. 7, NOTI9'ICATION OF PRENATAL pRUGRAM, CONTRACT PdQ. P`ItN +9$0434r COVE1~IlYG THE ]PERIOD 0~:~~t,SER 1, 1992 a~.OUGS Sr.r i'.~n+1BE1130, 1992, IS INCRFA.9ED B'Y ~t,069. p'OR A TtyTAL ~MOaNT OF si~,~sl. Margie rates, t]irectrar o~ Nursing At.,: Y ii3N: Consider signing the nobfitcation. SENT BY ~ EAGI.~ CQUNTY ; 7-29-92 ; 17 58 30332872071 3034792157; # 4 8. LIQUIIR .~.~[CEI~E HEARINGlRENEWAL REQUEST FCl?R WII.I)WOOD ~n~~Yr~c Kevin Lutciahl, CQUnty Attorsuy Ar~ i'ivN: Coasider approval. ~Q~R LIC»rsE HE~lRINGIRENEWAI. 11~:1R BEAti r~ C FDOD SERVII~FS, INC. d/hl~ BEAM CREC~K coi.F CLUB BAR ANn Kevin Lindahl, County Atba?rney ACTICIN: Consider a~,~~~„ ~ val. 10. LIQUOR LICENSE $EAk1NG/R,d.~ ~,a. ~t`AL p'OR ROCKY 1VIDUNTAIN Eh Y INC. dJ6Ja RANCHQ DEL RIO K+~vin Lindahl, County Attorney ACTION: Consider arr.,~~u rat. 11. LIQUCIR, LiL:~JSE HEARING/RENEWAL FOR LAKE .CREEK LIQUORS dlWa SO[r'1.~ FORTY LIQUORS Kevin Lindahl, County Attorney ACTION: Consider apprrpwat. I2. BIII AC~..ar t AlV'CE FUR CAST IRQ1Y "EAGLE" mike Bradley, Buildings and Gxaunds supervisor ACTION: Consider approval. 13. CONTRACT BETWrrr.~~i STATE ClF CQLORApO, Ill&FARTNIENT OF HEALTH AND EAGLE COUNTY ~R Cl7?UNTY NURSING SEYtVICES; AL'30 u ~ SAL CU.RRF~. a PAGE FOUR OF ~ air,t, CONTRACT. A~Iargie Gags, I~vector of Ntn`sigg ACTIt~N: Consider vat. 1d. CHANGE ORDER NUl4,ir~.~ ONE I1Q?It THE FI.y~'tG IS FIIN PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE CONTRACT WITH DUCT~EI,tS Ct~P~~~~UC'1'Ii~N', ~C., INCREASE OF 9i7,~20. Mike Bradley, Buildings and Grounds 5upeavisar Ak.'Y,~N: Consider are:: ~ rat, iS. AGR~.~.,~1T GRANTING LI~:r~~~~E TO SUMIVII~' VXEW, INC., T{) BEGIlV CONS ii.J~. Y SUN OFIlVIFROVEI~'S TO CA. ' ~ ~E CREEK IiUAD (COUNTY It0rAI1 13), AND P1tOVIDING FOR 'Y~. EXCHANGE Ali1D VAC~ATI+QN OF ~..~aiTAIlV' PRU~TY Larry Meuernick, County Bngio~r AC7'I(l?N: Consider ~r,.a~~~ra1. -3- SENT BY:EAGLE BOUNTY ; 7-29-92 ; 17:5J ; 3D332872D?-~ SD34792157;# ~l 4 16. AG1tTII1~.1TT ITW r,,~+T THE F~IGLE VALLEY WRESTLING CLUB AND EAGLE COUNTY, ~?TATE l~F CGi.~RAT10 GRAS ~ 11 LTG i i~L CLUB PERA~IIS~SION TQ QPF.RATE ~ Ct~NCEir~~~~T& FO?R aa~.c. FAIR AND RUDEO Jackie Ivey, Farr Coordinator ACTION: Consider a,~*;,~~~ rat. 01:40 - 01:45 LIQ[TpYt LICENSL~ HEARIlYG/RELti~~AL RT+.(~UEST R SNt~?WSHOE, INC. d!b!a V1+rrwr!?EY CRE~? ~t~ f.1DtlXlY'ROO~[ Kevin I.andahl, Cauaty Attamey ~4CTI~N: Ca(ISlder ap~1I+0Ye~1. 01.45 -02:00 LIQUOR LYCENSE ~"ARINGrl1~+W ApPLICAI~Q~T FU~k SIi ~,~'~,tJAN GARDENS dltx/s< SIt,.nuAN t,,,,~.r,~IFSE RTSTAU~' PefQlE..urr11lYRDOX KeV1I! Lindahl, County Attorney ACTIUN: Consider ~h~,2.~,1.~ cV/'l~. LIQUOR LIti.~dSE HF.ARIl'~IG/CHANGE Off' COItp'ORATE S1ar.wICTURE I~R a~ URCHARII INN CORPORAYI.,N dJblsr il'~i ORCSARI) INN Kevin Lindahl, County Attorney Ar,..aYON: Consider arr~~.,~e~ral. 02:00 -03:15 BOAILA OF EQUALIZATION HLA1tINC5 a~ota coomrx~r Mary Ja Bereaat0, A~sistaat County Attcsrncy A+i.,:iaON: Far the Bird of ~quatizatian W review the reCOt1'Imendatians of the hearing a~fficer. 03:15 - 03:30 °°'°BR,FAI~~* 03:iS -05:00 BQARD OF EQUA~tlTXON aEARING~ {cant~nued) ~aarrt OODN7YROOM Mary Jo Berens~tc,, Assist$nt Cc~nty Attorney THE NSi!'1' Mra,~,.74 OF THE EAIrI.E CO[JNTY COMM[331ON6Rd R1:[.L BB H~i~ ON AUC11ISr 10. 1992. THbB ACRIYDA ~ F1t~0'VH)ED FOR 1NFORMAT~IVAL PURP03B3 ONLY -ALL TIl~dSR AHB APFROXDuIAT&. THE BOAflb ~L$ IN S1~S1f3'N MAY ~~,~.w.r~,.o:...~IL~I+7S?HATAIIESQf]uGHT,.,y~~.:,,E~1'. PAGE 4 WORK SESSION FOLLOW-UP July 31, 1992 ' Page 1 of 2 TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOW-UP SOLUTIONS 1991 11/19 NEWSPAPER VENDING LARRY E./ANDY/MIKE M.: What can be done to make Locations for the newspaper boxes have been MACHINES these uniform and locations less prolific? determined and approved by all TOV departments. Will be stepping up efforts to seek voluntary agreement. 1992 01121 EVENING PARKING MIKE ROSEISTEVE B.; Evaluate financial Mike will prepare new analysis of data prior to the STRUCTURE FEES ramifications of eliminating parking structure fees beginning of the budget-setting process in September. (request: Lapin) after 6:00 p.m. each night. Staff to explore other options. 02/04 HERITAGE CABLEVISION RON; Prepare new letter of protest for Mayor's Wili do. FRANCHISE NEGOTIATIONS signature. XC: Newspapers, Dillon, Minturn, etc. (request: Lapin] 02/17 EXTERIOR LIGHTING KRISTANIANDY: Draft ordinance. Input received and joint discussions will continue including all interested parties. Initial meetings held with night tour to be scheduled within next few weeks. 03!10 AFFORDABLE HOUSING KRISTAN/LARRY E.; Finalize ordinance. Ord. No. 9, Series of 1992, to Council for first PROVISIONS ORDINANCE reading in the near future. 03110 LIONSHEAD SALES TAX FIGURES STEVE B./STEVE T.: Packy Walker, on behalf of the Wi11 investigate. Staff time now being spent on special (request: Osterfoss, Levine, LH Merchants Assn., is requesting an accounting of events/daily sales tax reporting program. Staff will Gibson, Steinberg) sales tax taken from a square footage basis, standard attempt to meet these other concerns after completion number (such as Dow Bones) of businesses reporting, to of the special events program. offer a comparative analysis. ' WORK SESSION FOLLOW-UP July 31, 1992 Page 2 of 2 TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOW-UP SOLUTIONS 04107 REVIEW RETT PEGGY/LARRY E: Schedule for Council review. Ongoing process. Larry E. will develop land trust recommendations. Tentatively scheduled for review at 8111/92 work session. 07/14 LETTER TO CDOT/ KEN/LARRY G.. Draft a letter for Mayor's signature Draft letter is complete. To Peggy for signature JOHN UNBEWUST reaffirming how extremely dangerous this side of the 7-31-92. Copy in packet. (request: Osterfoss) Vail Pass bicycle path is, i.e., sand/gravel on path, general lack of maintenance (even though we realize the eventual installation of fiber optics along this route may allow a reconstruction and realigning of the path - propermaintenance is required now!). Additionally, Bob Buckley has inquired whether some type of barrier can be installed on overpasses where the Frontage Road can be inundated by overhead snow removal? 07/14 U.S. WEST RON: Prepare letter requesting information on how U.S. West's installation of fiber optics will be used to transmit cable television. 07/28 INTEREST RATES FOR KRISTAN/GARY M.. When an applicant chooses to defer IN-LIEU-OF-PARKING in-lieu-of-parking fees, what is the interest rate to be FEES paid? Should this be raised? _ JUL-29-1992 08 26 FROM TO 4792157 P. 01 . . . 1 t+'1~111~~ 1'1'.ti '1'tl.~+' C~!?1'J.~A'~'.~S AUGUST Z, 199 Jain us ~ for a buffet !s....~. and meet the three D,:....~cratic - Candidates for U.S. Serrate, Josie Heath, Dick Lamm and Ben °Nighthorse" Campbell. Also meet c~adidates Jamison Smith for Colorado Mouse, District S6 and James Johnson and Sandy l]avies for Eagle County C~,~issio~r. COST $I5.0~ CCt;~.xA~LS AT 6:00 PM DINN AT 7:{l0 PM . Please R.S.V .P. to Anent faller (92f~52.81) or Laurie Barer (476-5963' by July 30. SF()NSOJ.tED BY Y~ BAGI.E Ct~IJI~`1`~ jr~MC~CRA1'S TOTAL P. 01 ~ ~ nA JZA DTI C~' ~ NnA DTI C~' ~ i ME AND OBSEg-VE ` . CO ,.~RAIN~NG ; ~ DEMY OF MOSCOW 1N LSHOi ~AI,L~~,T ACA 'I I~I~ 130 1992 UGUST 12, ~EDN~DAY, A ; 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a'm~ OUNTAIN CO~LE,GE COLORADO THAVEN DRIVE ~ 1310 wES COLORADO ,yl, VAIL, ~ ` 476-9500 R S V.p, (303) X J~ 1~ v~ P ~ . - . . i; DISTRIBUTION LIST - PUBLIC WORKS PRIORITY LIST BRIAN ANDERSON ERNST GLATZLE TOWN COUNCIL STEVE BARWICK GARY MURRAIN DEBBIE ROELAND MIKE BRAKE GREG HALL MIKE ROSE DICK DURAN SUSIE HERVERT TODD SCHOLL CAROLINE FISHER JIM HOZA DAN STANEK ANNIE FOX ~ LEO VASQUEZ JOHN GALLEGOS 4 JOE KOCHERA PAM BRANDMEYER KRISTIN PRITZ CHARLIE OVEREND LARRY ESKWITH PETE BURNETT TODD OPPENHEIMER KEN HUGHEY JODY DOSTER MANUEL MEDINA FILE MEMORANDUM T0: RON PHILLIPS, TOWN MANAGER FROM: LARRY GRAFEL, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/TRANSPORTATION DATE: JULY 27, 1992 RE: PUBLIC WORKS PRIORITY LIST FOR THE WEEK OF JULY 27 - 31, 1992 STREETS AND ROADS A. 1. Conrad to recharge boiler at bus barn 2. Remove timbers on chute going down to Check Point Charlie. 3. Repair shoulders on various bike paths: a. Red Sandstone b. Timber Ridge (locates Tues., 7/28) - install culvert. 4. Remove dead trees, clean up, haul spoil from shop area and revegetate the old snow dump at Ford Park. 5. Striping: a. Install stop bars in Lionshead & Crossroads b. Layout striping for contractor 6. Cut brush from road sides and bike paths in various locations. 7. Mike Brake to design rock retaining wall for PW to install on Pedestrian Overpass. 8. Install sleeve for directional sign on Covered Bridge. 9. Investigate leak at Slifer Fountain by digging potholes to locate leak. 10. Provide backhoe for tree removal at Intermountain Pocket Park. 11. Train landscaping personnel on heavy equipment. 12. Provide operator on 7/28 to straighten street light poles. 13. Haul rock from Lionshead Charter bus lot to Donovan Park. 14. Extend paved bike path up to the gravel lot at Ford Park. 15. Remove speed bump on Matterhorn. 16. Cut end of culvert off~at Ford Park bus stop. 17. Obtain cost for dust control at Ford Park snow dump and Matterhorn Circle. PUBLIC WORKS PRIORITY LIST Page 2 PARKING STRUCTURE/TRANSPORTATION A. 1. Resolve paver problems. 2. Install curb for partition for bus waiting area at terminal building. 3. Meet with contractor to set up chip sealing at Lionshead Charter lot. 4. Number all bus stops. PARKING STRUCTURE/TRANSPORTATION (CONT.) A. 5. Paint new Personnel Department. 6. Repair P.D, closet doors. 7. Sign "Van Accessible Parking" for the physically challenged at west end of VTRC transit deck. 8. Remove and replace handrails at LHTRC. 9. Clean drain line for air conditioner at Muni. Bldg. 10. Install knox box at Muni Bldg./Muni Bldg. Anex. CARPENTERS A. 1. Construct picnic pavilion for Stephens Park. 2. Repair Kinnickinnick Bridge - hit and run damage. 3. Replace handrails in Lionshead (new construction area). 4. Construct Electrician's tool box. 5. Construct directional signs for community development. 6. Build wall for shelter at VTRC- west end. 7. Install "bike slowly" signs. ELECTRICIANS A. 1. Perform line locates as requested. 2. Install disconnect and sub-panel at VTRC. 3. Perform street light check. 4. Repair sprinkler system at Concert Hall Plaza. 5. Install lights at Manor Vail Bridge. 6. Move smoke detector in PW lunchroom. 7. Replace ramp light breaker at VTRC. 8. Clean and change bulbs on top level VTRC. 9. Install new light in North day lot at Pedestrian Overpass. 10. Order end clips for Municipal Building Conference room and mail room. 11. Investigate moving P.D, conduit for new window. 12. Check on Lionshead Mall lighting system. 13. Assist with awning and lighting at Lionshead Mall. 14. Support PVC conduit at Slifer Fountain. PUBLIC WORKS PRIORITY LIST Page 3 PARKS DEPARTMENT A. 1. Complete project management contract for Lionshead with Alpine International. 2. Inspect Willow Bridge sprinkler system. 3. Install landscape material at Pedestrian Overpass. 4. Plant replacement trees at Intermountain Pocket Park, Ford Park and Buffehr Creek Park. 5. Issue "Notice of Award" for Stephens park Phase II. 6. Repair wildflower area on Bald Mountain Road. 7. Coordinate construction documents for Ski Museum Site. 8. Attend cemetery consultant interviews on Wed., 7/29. 9. Coordinate Stephens Park Phase II start up. LG/dsr ~ S, ~ 715 W. Lionshead Circle ~arr~ott. Vaii, Colorado 81657 Marriott's Mark Resort (303) 47E HOTELS • RESORTS • SUITES July 23, 1992 Peggy Osterfoss Mayor of Vail TOWN OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Mayor Osterfoss: Pursuant to Section 2102 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Actr 29 U.S.C. S 2101 et seq., please be advised that the attached written notice was delivered to the employees of the Marriott Mark Resort in Vail, Colorado on July 22, 1992. Very truly yours, Stan Engeldor~ General Manager /srh MARRIOTT'S MARK RESORT #753 MEMORANDUM TO: All Associates FROM: Stan Engeldorf, General Manager DATE: July 22, 1992 SUBJECT: EXPIRATION OF MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT On September 11, 1992, the management agreement for the Marriott Mark Resort between Marriott Corporation and the Resort's owner, 5850 Corporation, Inc. (a subsidiary of Columbia Savings), is scheduled to expire. Although we cannot give you any assurances at this time, Columbia has indicated to us its desire to continue to operate the Mark Resort after September 11, 1992 and its intention to send notices to our current associates regarding continued employment at the Mark Resort. We believe that you will receive such notices from Columbia very soon. We regretfully must inform you, however, that if Marriott is not the manager of the Mark Resort after September 11, 1992, your employment with Marriott will be terminated. At present, Marriott is actively engaged in negotiations to continue to operate the Mark Resort after September 11, 1992. We remain hopeful that such negotiations will be successful and we will keep you advised of the status of these negotiations. /srh C c - C~c,ec~. RECEIVED J!~(~ ~ ? f992 COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division IN i t?ROFFICE COMMUNICATION TO: Interested Parties ~p~~ FROM: Dick Parachim, Eagle Mine Project Manager DATE: July 22, 1992 SUBJECT: Eagle Mine Preliminary Air Monitoring Results -June 1992 (EAG 7.1.6.3) The following is an update regarding the Eagle Mine air monitoring program during the June 1992. The airborne particulate data collected by the Paramount 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 this time period, as well as trends in potential human exposure. The monitoring frequency during June continues on the one-in-six day program. Metals analysis is temporarily suspended until startup of construction activities in the spring. Both of these changes are allowed by the Remedial Action Plan and have been implemented in past shutdown periods. The concentrations for TSP were not above the air emissions permit levels during the June monitoring period. The notation ug/m3 stands for micrograms per cubic meter. A microgram equals one millionth (1/1,000,000) of a gram. Site activities in June were associated with collection and transfer of mine seepage and other contaminated water to the Consolidated Tailings Pile. The water treatment plant has continued to treat this water and discharge it to the Eagle River. Sludge generated from the treatment plant continues to be deposited on top of the Consolidate Tailings Pile. Sludge was removed from the supplemental surge pond and transferred to the historic pond area. The mine seepage collection system was extended to collect the flow coming down the rock face near Rock Creek. Additional lime was spread on the Roaster Pile #1 area to raise soil pH, The removal activities in the Gilman and Belden areas were also continued. For additional information, please contact Dick Parachini (331-4801) or Marion Galant (331-4855). Attachments DP/dp DAMES MOORE - AFFILIATED NATIONAL BANK BUILDING 1125 SEVENTEENTH STREET, SUITE 12UU, DENVER, COLORADO 80'_0"_'=_'027 (303) 29~i-9100 FAQ: (303) 299-7901 _.~'~N- . .~1_. ~ July I3, 1992 Mr. Richard Parachini Colorado Department of Health Fagle Mine Project 4210 East 11th Avenue Denver, CO 80220 Dear Dick: Enclosed aze three copies of the June 1992 Airborne Particulate Concentrations Report for the Eagle Mine site. We would emphasize the provisional nature of the data and the fact that revisions may be made after auditing and validation. Sincerely, DAMES & MOORE r Brian Kiernan Project Manager BK/alb cc: Howard Roitman, Remedial Programs, CDH Douglas Ikenberry Bob Winn Bob Neukirchner Dave Wa..~,.~ Bazbara Lewis Daryl Longwell • t C AIRBORNE PARTICULATE CONCENTRATIONS EAGLE MINE SITE JUNE 1992 (N9/m'1 DATE SCHOOL S1TE NORTH SITE SAMPLED TSP (UQ/m3~a TSP fua/m'1' 06/05/92 17.1 15.6 06/11 /92 21.9 17.7 06/17/92 17.5 19.5 06/23/92 29.4 39.1 06/29/92 21.3 21.8 'Permit limitation is 150 pg/m' These data are provisional and subject to revision after auditing and validation. M~~ ~1 TOWN OF VAIL ~ 7S Soutb Frontage Road Department of Public Works/Transportation Yail, Colorado 81657 303-479-2158/FAX 303-479-2166 July 28, 1992 Mrs. Rosalie Lier 4014 Bighorn Road Vail, CO 81657 Dear Mrs. Lier, I am writing to follow up on a conversation you had with Mayor Osterfoss on July 17, 1992. You voiced some concerns over the tree planting project in East Vail, concerns we both share. This project did experience a higher than normal loss of trees following planting. A loss of 10~ is generally considered normal due to stress, root damage, etc. At East Vail we lost about 24$, all of which are covered by a two-year warranty. The tree species chosen for the East Vail project were Subalpine Fir because of the growth habit desired and the altitude of the area. We have instructed the contractor to make all replacements with Lodgepole Pine rather than Fir. Subalpine Fir and Lodgepole Pine are both difficult to find as "Nursery Grown" material. All material was collected from Northern Colorado by an experienced digger operating under permit from the U.S. Forest Service. Park Superintendent, Todd Oppenheimer met with the digger and inspected ~ his operation prior to approving this source. Given the variability of soils and individual tree specimens the condition of the trees and rootballs were the best that could be obtained locally. Importing trees from different parts of the country is expensive and risky because of the differences in growing conditions. The contractor still has a large number of trees to replace at the project. Todd Oppenheimer has instructed them to wait until late September or early October to dig the trees and replant them. He also told the contractor to make sure the rootballs are close to Nursery standards for collected material. This should increase our survival rate to a normal percentage. We appreciate your input and hope we've addressed your concerns. Please feel free to contact either myself or Todd Oppenheimer at 479-2158 if you would like additional information. Si c rely, La ry rafe , Director Depar ment of Public Works/Transportation LG/cp cc: Mayor Osterfoss ~£ff ~o~£n 5047 Main Gore Drive 2 8 J u l y 19 9 2 Vail, Colorado 81657 Mayor, Members of Council, Town of Vail Facsimile 479-2157 Xc ; T~~~ Dear Mayor Osterfoss and Councilmembers: ~'7~t '?f/ There was an article in the Vail Daily today, PAS Lion pay-in-lieu parking issue, which was discus: Commission meeting yesterday. In that art: misquoted and quoted out of context, I find y.. ~~c~C~~ary zo correct the error, as the genre my mis-quoted remarks could be interpreted as being critical of the Council which was not the case or intent. My issue with the article. is the fact that during our discussions on the Red Lion matter, I queried Say Peterson about whether his client had agreed to pay tine larger parking amount and therefore simply had a Iegai contract with the town, regardless of what may have occurred with other applicants. Say agreed that that was the case, but then related that the Red Lion deal was identical to that of two concurrent applicants who were not required to pay the higher parking fees. My response was that for any commission, body, council or government to be inconsistent with its constituency was politically stupid and probably unlawful , however since I had not been involved in anv of the subiect hearings. I doubted. but had no wav of iudaina the inconsistencv he alleged and it was not proper for me or in my opinion the planning commission. to approve his reauest. The Council had made each decision. probably after a lot of, negotiation on the merits of each case. Unfortunately Scott Taylor from the Daily, picked up the ward "stupid"--which I regret having used--and shortened my remarks to fit that framework, There is a caveat to this issue, which I think should be addressed: Staff assured us that the Commission's consideration of the Red Lion matter, prior to its going to Council was necessary according to the Town Code. That is well and good, but I dissented strongly at the approval by the Planning Commission, fearing that the Council might not call it up; I believe that if a similar issue occurs, there needs to be a system where the Commission, without being required to make a decision, can specifically request that it be called up by Council. You as councilmembers are the governing body of the Town of Vail, and I believe that the commissions have a duty, as advisory bodies, to request that you hear an issue. The buck stops with you. Best R gards, efif owen j .July 25.26. 1992 • ' Skico oised to .take over at c s Index ACRT if `conditions' are met-. by John Colson elusions, he said, "I'd say it'a a Chamber Resort Association The Aspen Skiing Company go" to buy 61 percent ofthe stock and the city were to meet today has all but decided to go ahead inthe company. (Friday) to talk about the 1 with the purchase of majority But, he cautioned, that deci- ACRA's lease for office space in ~ stock in the ailing reservations sion cannot be final until a the city-owned Rio Grande service once controlled by the stockholders meeting of the parking plaza, which• is where v ~ ' chamber of commerce. lodges in town, who together the chamber and the ACRT are ' Skico Vice President Doug -own 49 percent of the reserva- located. Cazlson said Thursday he has tions service. City Attorney Jed Caswall , completed his analysis of the He said that meeting is said the lease does not need to be finances of the Aspen Central expected to be held sometime amended simply because the Reservations Travel, Inc., and next week at the soonest. Skico, afor-profit corporation, is "'r'"°`~'' that the com an s debt load is Skico President Bob Ma to over the ACRT. He said ,~~H„~. P y- =n> now known to be gust a little bit nand, concurring with Carlson's the city council last year gave its over $100,000." prediction that the company will approval for the ACRT to be Approximately 40 p.:..,~,..t of betaking over the ACRT, said located in the building, even that debt, he said, is owed for the only remaining issues to be though it, too, is legally afor- outstanding telephone bills on discussed are some "conditions" profit company despite the fact the service's toll-free reserva- sought from the ACRA. that ft has never made any 1 _B tions number. One of those conditions, he money. He said the company is still said, is that the ACRA assume ACRA's Tom Hines, who will negotiating with someofACRTa some of the ACRT's debt, beat the meeting with the city, loafing spheres, creditors, and that those credi- although he did not say how said he does not expect any alendid forms in ~ hr's have indicated swilling- much of the debt the Skico changes to be demanded in the hard to believe the ness Ito work with usA on wants to get rid o£ lease because, °I don't ;..~.Y:.,,t from molded sand. _ cancelling some of the debt. In the meantime, officials the Skico to do anything difl'e- Asked about the Skico'a con- from the Skico, the Aspen rently than we (ACRA) did." - Charle Crone former valle e but already the' ~ r ! n i s of cancer at 45 ived 'ob ueries es de t, d e 1 4 ngry locals. _ Former Aspenite Charley Tied, had two children during memorial services are to be held Crone, 45, died Thursday at a their five years in the valley - Saturday, July 25 at the B.„~...- - Florida hospital after afive-year Christopher, l9, and Allison, l6. lie Maxwell Funeral Parlour, battle with lymphoma, a form of Crone had been living in Palm 1010 E. Palmetto, in Melbourne, usiness, 5-c - cancer. Bay, Fla., near Melbourne, Fla., which is where flowers can - Crone lived in Aspen in the working as a mechanic accord- be sent. musician, really mid-1970x, when he owned and ing to a longtime friend, photo- Cassatt said the body is to be tut musician not ~ operated the Aspen Foreign Car grapher Chris Cassatt ated, according to Crone's _ Clinic. Cassatt, who has remained in wishes, and the remains scab td bank account _ ~ - - He and his wife, Diane, now touch with Crone throughout his tered at an unknown location in 1 a recording, film . - divorced from Crone and remaz- fight with cancer, said the the Florida Keys. _ airport Business. - ' . ' ~ ads _ _ Welch promoted to top spo _ - i ~ i Imes advertis~.ng:..ofif~ce~:, vents . , . , ~ a ~ . ~Y.. will con .`:MethodiatiUniversity is D~Das, _ . , _ . , by John Colson ~ Times the paper it is, `Texas: ~~`'~'t. _ . . 1, _ B ~ - Candice Welch, who joined time in the advertising depart- ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' - _ the Aspen Times ad sales staff in went as senior sales represents- She began her business career June has been romoted to the five " Jenkins announced this at Neiman-Marcus before tak- ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ • ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ • • • ~ ~ ~ ~ 1-C position of adveprtising depart- week. tatgfve for the Dallas-Fort • sen- ...................27-C went manager. Welch, who rs the former asso- Worth Su Lum, who has held that ciate publisher and. general Home & Garden magazine. ...................22-A post for almost 2? years,' has manager of the Snowmass Sun, She moved to the Roaring • . ; • _ • • • , • , • . , asked to. be relieved of her man- "will be presiding over the reor- Fork Valley three years ago to ' 18-A agerial duties "to better serve ganization of an expanded join the Sun as a sales rep, and F ..................12-C her advertising clients,' said advertising department to make was appointed associate 30-B Aspen Times publisher Loren it better meet our sales needs in publisher and general manager • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Jenkins. the coming years,' Jenkins in January 1990, where she 28_B "Su, whose valuable service continued. worked until being hired as as ad manager over the years Welch holds degrees in mark- deputy ad manager at theAspen -A • The Aspen Times, Soltuday-Sunday. July 25-26. 1992 Editorial ~ tM ~TL•UNKINC. chamber, put your ~ ~ ~ <~M ~?t~~~ ~N~MEG'z r• v house in order hem-can be no question that Aspen Deeds a good chamber of conunerce_ We are, after:ill, a community whose eeoac>. ! my depends primarily on tourism. I ike it or not; a healthy i economyhei•Gemeans:agoodtoimst:season:-strtnmerandwin- terand, someday even, maybe drtring the saered off-season. successful tourist busirtess demands reaching out beyond: ~ ' our b.,.d:,.~ to those looking for the best place to ~r;...l their hol- ~ ideas and leistue tune:: The best vehicle to promote the charms and delights of our valley and to It>re visims here is an orgattiza- / ~i , ~ ~~i/~i non funded and supported by the business commrmiry that natu- ~ . tiu.i tally benefitsmostfromthosetotmst visits. TLtatis:achambe~ ~ / 1~ t R ~~wi.+ i~•- of ..~..~ce ' ~ , , ~ / war nfotturrately our .r, .:ences with the Aspen Chamber ~ / ; ~j ~ V ~ d I ~ - i ~ f '`"''te'a; Resort Association (ACRA) have; repeatedly, proved _ t "~t ~~~'t~ . unsatisfactory, if ootdesultory. ~CR~ has notreceived the full R support of our business cotrununiry, something that is reflected + ~ ' " ` ~ ~ r w~,. ~ • I Fj~'r~"''" by the fact only J7 percent ofour bnsinasses are membes. - ~~N ~ ~A4' Retailers ceinplatn thit.-SCR?: is too oriented to the lodging ~ ~;'~.r a z 1~..+-nn.Es basir>sss. The lodees complain that its rzservation ~ivices Yrave : r::„ never functioned strccessfully. ~I1 of wfrich ltas meant that ~Spen h:>s been Iefr to be represented by a weak and var'rllating ~ ~ tax revolt really just complaining :And now, for the second time in two yeas. the ch:trrrber haS been forced tasacki~directorfornasnranagementaud about government aclmowledge that the otganrization is in total ti:.>ti.,, r and its depleted staffdemoraIiied. ~ Then a group of disgruntled taxpayers met at continued survivability of culturally invaluable but For an oiganrzanon tun an,l r~~>:ded over by btrsirtessmen r ~e Hotel Jerome ttris week to mount a "tax- economically endangered ans :utd non-profit groups (and some bankers), we are appalled to discover that the dram-; payers revolt," all they were really doing was voicing For the past severtl yens, govemment has bees ber has. been inn in amost un-businesslike mannez Not onlp old complaints about the way govemment has grow? moving to rectify those oversights -buying up ope have its finances beenmrsmanaged and badly overseen by its Found here. space, building and buying affordable housing for llr board members, bunt has been allrnved m slowly slip into a Mary and Bill Martin, Wink Jaffee Jr. and other working class, and now :eking for voter approval to deepenrrrg pool of red ink. outspoken cricks of local government have been at ptrrchase and renovate the vacant Red Brick So as not to drown in its debt,. ACRA has now been forced to ~ for years, and their message has not attracted Elementary School building, among other efforts. eve up its two major ftinctioas -its reservatiot>,s service acrd its much local support. These things take money, and tiro main souse o public relations „r;....,:on ro the Aspen Skiing Company, whose rnce the no-growth initiatives of the early 1970s, that money must be tares, since the private sector is offici:ils maintain t}xy have only-taken them over reluctantly. ~ when the Pitkin County commissioners began more devoted to the bottom line than in providing fc To have failed to doso would have meantan emh.:..,~:.,g looking for ways to keep growth from overwhelming the public welfare. bankruptey for our chamber of commerce and a black eye for ~ upper Roaring Fork Valley, this group has cried It is also true that govemment in the valley has oar whole community:. foul They have championed the rights of developers grown exponentially in an effort to deal with the hat is done is done and noihirtg we say here can reverse to do as they wished with their property, without multi-faceted pressures associated with this resort it. But as 4CRA boani rnernbes vty to pick up the interference from govemment, and have maintained a economy, and maybe not all that growth is good. B u pieces, we think it is time for alf of us to think hard about how wnfused but continuous lament every time govern- many of the projects that have come from all this tai we can help them came up with the creative ideas and talent atxi ; merit made a move toward preservation of the val- money have proven to be good for the community a! resources to tesutrcttne our chamber of commerce so that iE ley's open spaces, architectural heritage, quality of large, including the Lifestyles of those doing the mos serves us all, not just the self•~etving few: life or tradition of a lively mix of social classes. complaining. - - True, govemment has made some mistakes. Tire veryone has tics right, and even the duty, to cri- :4s AC12A board members go into a private next week to lick theirwounds; we urge them to open themselves up to the growth control measures prevented the valley from tique the performance of govemment, and coin - community at large-to business and outs leaders alil.-e -for ~mg overbuilt and completely ovesold it ro outside plain when it is not to their satisfaction. But it is go,~ help in building a new, teay.,,,,.1e'and, }'es, bus7rte~-tike orgy- interests and spectilatos, while doing nothing to to keep things in perspective and not to whine ever}• rtization thatwiIl help promote our cotrununity instead of keep the cost of housing within the teach of ordinary time they are asked to contribute to the common embarrassing it working people. It also did nothing to ensure that the good. Letters t~ the Times ~ " OM~if1V V~IUQS o:.r-:., r:,,...~. -.,n., ,n .F.,. r,nrrtc •,,,,t This hrin~s me to the suhier 22-A • the Aspen Times. Saturday-Sunday, July 25-26. 1992 E d it o r i a _ ~ fM'TWNKINC~.. chamber, put your ~ T~l~>~~ MECR v hOUSe In Order N6r~ here can be no question drat Aspen needs a good chamber AG~7' T of conu»ere;e. We are. after .ilI 3 .,,,..,,..,miry whose econo. ~ my, depends prunarily, on tourism. Like itpr not, a healdry economy here means a good tom-ist se:~son summer and win- tea: and, someday even; maybe during the sacred off-season. A successful tourist business dem;uids reaching out beyarxl > our borders to those lookingfor the best place to spend their hot- ~ ideas and leistue time.. The besC.vehicle tv Y~~..,ote the chartns> and delights of our valley and toiure visitors bete is an organiza- ~ / tionfunded and supported by thebusiness community that ante- /~i, ~ "C rally benefits most from dtose totuist visits:: That is: a chamber ~ / I ,~!r'~~ . ? i nfortunately, ourexpenences widr the Aspen Chamber ~ ~ i ~ ~ ` _ U ResortAssoaation (ACRA)1>iave, r..... ~y> proved • ¦ ~ • r' Jl L r unsatisf<acto rf not desulto ?:CliA has not received the full _ r~ ~LL support of our business commuriiiv, something that is reflected ' - _ ~ ~ ' ~ h , - k-,`;%:'- ~S by the fact only 57 percent of our businesses are members. - :~,.~a~ ~sP"", t . ~.r.F,;¢r~ Retailers com 1•ain t11atACRA is too onented to the 1od ~ a ~ r4 s,~ P "moo ~ ::u-a,.~.~._ a . -rtn.Es business, The lodges. compitin that its resen~ation services have r::~= never functioned successfully. AIl of which has meant that Aspen has been left to be represented by a well and vaedlatirtg ~ c~~~r. ~ tax revolt really just complaining And n6w, for the second time in two years. the chamber has been forced tosackitsdirectorfornusmanagemernand about government ado7owledge, that the organization is in total disarray'and its depleted staff demaraliied. J hen a group of disgruntled taxpayers met at continued survivability of culturally invaluable but For an organization rata and r..a~~ed aver by businessmen the Hotel Jerome this week to mount a "tax- economically endangered arts and non-profit groups (nod some bankers), we are appaIled to drscover thatthe dram- payers revolt," all they were really doing was voicing For the past several years, govemtnent has been bet has been>rtrn in a most urr.bt..>u.. ~~irl<'e manner. Not only old complaints about the way government has grown moving to rectify those oversights -buying up ope have its fitiances beennussnanaged and badly overseen by its around here. space, building and buying affordable housing for tti board members, but rt has been allowed to slowly slip into a Mary and Bill Martin, Wink Jaffee Jr. and other worfang class, and now ;eking for voter approval to deepetring pool of red ink outspoken cricks of local government have been at purchase and renovate the vacant Red Brick So as not to drown in its debt, ACRA has now been forced to ~ for years, and their message has not attracted Elementary School building, among other efforts. give up its two major functions -its zeservations service arrd its , much local support. These things take money, and fire main souce o public relations operation to the Aspen Sl,^iin~ Company, whose race the no-growth initiatives of the early 1970s, that money must be taxes, since the private sector is offic7als marntarn they Gave only taken them over reluctantly. when the Pitkin County commissioners began more devoted to the bottom line than in providing fo To have failed to do so would have newt an embarrassing looking for ways to keep growth from overwhelntittg the public welfare. bankruptcy for our chamber of commerce and a black eye far the upper Roaring Fodc Valley, this group has cried It is also true that govemmen[ in the valley has our whole cc..u ,.~.:ty, foul. They have championed the rights of developers grown exponentially in an effort to deal with the hat is done is done a~ nothing we say here can reverse.- to do as they wished with their property, without multi-faceted pressures associated with this resort it $ut as ACRA board members try to pick up the interference from government, and have maintained a economy, and maybe not all that growth is good. Bu ..pieces, we drink it is time for all of us to think hard'about how confused but continuous lament every time govern- many of the projects that have come from all this tai we can help thenr come up with the creative ideas and talent and meat made a move toward preservation of the val- money have proven to be good for the commm~ity a: resources to mswc-trtre our chamber of c so that it ley's open spaces, architectural heritage, quality of large, including the lifestyles of those doing the rocs serves us all, not justthe self serving few. life or tradition of a lively mix of social classes. complaining. As ACRA board members go into a private next week Tme, govemmen[ has made some mistakes. The veryone has dre right, .uxi even the duly, to cri- wlick them wounds, we urge them to open themselves up to the growth control measures prevented the valley from E dque the performance of eovemment, and com cornmunity,at large.- to business anti civic leaders alike -for being overbuilt and completely oversold it to outside plain when it is not to their satisfaction. But it is goa help m building a new, re~rn,ua,ve and, yes, business=tike orga- interests and speculators, while doing nothing to to keep things in perspective and not to whine every nization that «tiIl help promote our conununrty instead of keep the cost of housing within the reach of ordinary time they are asked to contribute to the common embarrassing it working people. It also did nothing to ensure that the good. Letters to the Times , - !]I11O1'eV V2IUrES o:.r-;., ~,.,t ,,•,n-.a ,n rt„~ hr,trlc ~r,ri This hrin~s me to the suhier 3- • acronym; n:-~ 1. The'Aspen Chamber. Resort Association. 2. Aspen's fractured, directorless, and in-debt chamber - of commerce. 3. Benefactor of the local communi and ,the Aspen •businessperson's champion. 4. A necessar y evil and the .only way to get a discounted •As en Skiin p g .Company season pass. ~ Gree1~ < ARA] truggling under an image of , And the :Aspen complete rnnfusion and inef- Chamber Resort Associ~ fediveness, the ACRA wanks ation board, in an attempt to , ~ • people to see it as more than sort out the mess, is about to ~ ` ` just a way for businesses to get cheap go on a day-long retreat. ~ . j ~ .j ski passes for its workers. Because, as every single ft`. And while these may not be the top- official agrees when asked, ' ics of the average breakfast or barroom Aspen needs a strong chamber ~ conversations in Aspen these days, ~ of commerce. Like it or not, the ~~'~t~•~~ ry civic leaders are talking about it a lot. sentiment goes, Aspen lives or They are talking about it because the dies by the health of an ecano- f chamber of commerce which is sup-,,.. my driven by tourism, which .expected things to be the%other:way. posed to represent them - and'Aspen means reaching out to people'"~ ''around. The reservations ~ervice'was ~ ' - is in total disarray. Financial misman ~ looking for somewhere to go and ' to;have been'a. fog-profit enterprise, agement has left it teetering on the verge spend their leisure time, and and its profits were to have helped of bankruptcy and its staff demoralized. bringing them here. ~ ACRA do its work as anon-profit busi- . To avoid the debtor's gavel, the And t$e ACRA, thg mostili}cely,. Hess prganization.'.~.~.~ - chamber's trouble-plagued reservation vehicle for directing such ran ' Despite these covert efforts, the service is about to be turned over to effort, has had trouble keeping its ACRT plunged into a debt crisis that the Aspen Skiing Company and a head above wathr, let atone setting has yet to•be frilly uhdcrstaod or even membership drive has been accelerat- a strong pace against the competi-, quantified. The Aspen Skiing Company ed to try to raise new funds to replen- lion in the ski industry. ~ • officials looking into taking over the ish its depleted bank account. What happened ACRT say it is close to $100,000 in debt . Even its key function of public rela- For the semrid tune in two years, even after the 5kico has stnrck deals ' lions has been farmed out to the Skiing the ACRA has lost its director because with some of its creditors. Company temporarily because the of what chamber head Evan Boenning Curley also reportedly misused chamber simply doesn't have the has called "a mess.ltwasadisaster." money from corporate sponsorships, money to carry on its work David Curley, hired because of including $15,000. in sponsorship • his supposed expertise in running money from Continental Airlines that reservations services, is said to have i Boenning said went to the. ACRT . . instead "ruled by terror;' in the : instead of ACRA's budget. - ACRA words of one former chamber board Although it is not certain how much - ~ ..member - a rule intended at least in of this was known by ACRA staffers, board part to hide his apparent failures. ~ • Curley is said to have ordered at least • ;chairman , Acwrdin to several sources, Curl one of them, a bookkeeper, specifically a r g ey EVs'in . ~ ~ ~ was unable to get the chamber's reser- not to disclose his machinations to the •'r vctions service, Aspen Central Reserva- ACRA board. Boenning: °I want to lions Travel, to a level of smooth ' "They were afraid," Boenning and efficient operations. It was ~ ; said of the staffers' reluctance to know how 1 losing money (no one is entirely ~a~ ~~%w:~'*<.v say anything to the board. can get them (area sure why), it was losing cus- ~ Chamber officials say none of businesses to be a tourers (phone calls unanswered, Curley's actions were violations unhappy reservationists treating of law, but that they were ethical- member, and not just callers brusquely), and it was ly questionable at the worst and with the ski pass." under fire from its own owners, ~ sloppy business practices at best. " the lodging community. ~ Even as the ACRA and the To keep the truth from com- - ~ ACRT' try to rebuild their mow: Story by ing out, many have said and finances and their shattered .lOhrl COISOn Boenning confirmed this week, : organizational frameworks, the hOto illustration b Curley was "robbing Peter to pay ACRA struggles with Curley's . P y Paul, using ACRA money to shore up Frank Martin the ACRT, when chamber officials had continued on page 6-C - 6-C ~ The Aspen Times, Saturday-Stxiday, July 25-26. 1992, A C R A ~ ~ continued from page 1-C) • - ' demands for higher severance summer tourism as strong as ' • ~ ~ and bonus pay than some think the winter season; and creating ~ . ~ he should get. more special events besides the ~ ' t ~ ~''t~: _ ~ ' ' Boenning confirmed this Food and Wine Classic, Fourth ~ ~ i~ s;, week that the board is girding of July, Winterakol and others : ~ t ~ f;R ti , ~ ~<;.t~~ for a closed-door session, per- that currently are a large part of r ~ < i - ~ , haps as early as today (July 24), the ACRA's job. ~ ~ i $ ~ ~ ~ s to determine exactly what Cur- Boenning said one ofhis main l~~ ~ ~ . ,;t ~ ley is owed. Boenning said the goals is to improve the relation- ~ ~ ~,,~~y~ ~ . ~ ~ - contract calla for varying levels ship between the retail com- ~-~s~ti~ ~ r ' ' , of severance and bonus pay, munity and the ACRA. ~ ' " ~ { • including up to 90 days' worth of "I want to know how I can get { ~ ~ ~ ~F ~ ~ _ ` salary and vaguely defined them (area businesses) to be a ~ .w~~;. I ~ bonus payments for good ~ member, and not just with the ~ ~ ~ = 4 performance. ski pass," he said, referring to ~ 3-bE He said Curley is seeking the the host pass program that gives , t/ ' , full period of severance as well season pass discounts to local as bonus pay, equalling apack- employees of local businesses. ~ ~ age of around $20,000, but that One of the issues Boenning La the chamber board is more said will be coming to the fore- 4 ~ ' ~ ' G • ~i~i inclined to pay him through July front soon is the influx of large ; ~ ~ , - ~ 15 and not offer any bonus pay- national chain stores into the ~ } ~ ments. That package would local market. ~ y amount to more like $6,000, Citing the Banana Republic € ~ ~ y ~ Boenning said. (owned by part-time local Leslie t ~ ~ i'~~ But, what now? Wexner) as an example of a ~ i The ACRA board is planning chain that takes revenue out of , a da -ion retreat on Jul 2? to ` ~ ~d Y g Y the community and gives little allow the board members to get back, Boenning said a memtter together and talk about the had complained to him recently obe s a d r 1 m n th sib e o a le be k- ha r e ould to e c nibs h P that t P h solu 'o tt ns e e in th ae sad role in tt al in g g g v Obae ens of t r he debacle v v o i ' ss s o of ed r n bust e m re in ne s t e u de cube h c rte a nt bo rd in o w . hem out f to n k t ee in g P " „ , . s w - termssuch a e 1 ' 1 Intentioned c nin noted that su h Den B , ; g " w a d a d wo i r b t onder g~ businesses while the often Y + if the board is u to the task of hi h- ualit Dade and relative- P g Y g q c ea i 'ta own o I n n t h use a nd find- r do s le 'ce e t onab rt s a tea 1 g P Y in anew director. u 't a o t comm nt a rt f he reall g Y Y P o~ Members say they support For example, he said, they do ug the boa d thro t i r h h s diflicu - 1 local v r ie 'n t ad e t e no l o - t and for the b t h es . rs ewa a n Y. Pe Pe P " I view the board kind of the " ' ' I d like to et a little feedback .1 .LJI<J~ . s;::. g ; r w a U J A U ited J w' n e tsh . a' e b a std. ( m m e he m r from Y Y 'w _ A al vie a Is a r el. It has to w't the enin t h to ha "Wha > :>:>c' ( Pe P PP g exist," said fot'mer board mem- chain businesses) is, there isn't w ben Bill McDonough. "We do any give -back t o the ; ; . a V V ha a to ha a an ACRA. We re community. uc Din to su rt it a d o a t be ave s h n h he mem ra h W en h PPo c a ng work through the complaints, he said, they need to o o~~ r also d'llicul 'ea oa d. He t tt m to the b r b 'n the n g a a a membe r h d ' tad th t admit 's ar- t bout thI Cu le a McDonau h a talked to p g nd others Y e had e a d url obi m n C ' ular r ex a tic r ass co d nce rn s abo Y u t the P P hi h to Hove i ored it. r r anion o 1 cal g ~ g buai nesses and a concurrent Boe n <:<;::::<::: e C e RA th A n in said g perception that short-term buai- om ' to ere T ~ . :::>::>;:;:::>'is:;>:>ss> ::::~~s~s;::~ >;::::.s::>:•.;:::.; two continuing s ff Hess owners don t know the co - >~?':~>:'s<><>:•; Hines and George Newman, ~ munity well and don't get involved in chamber affairs. both have applied for Curleys "I don't think there will be a Job, and added that he believes . . • n should make - be board r am the ch sr ton c Hambe r c M Do ou n h g g om o t wh " 'ckl ab u ' 'o ut to cautioned unti t Its q Y - I he merchants s:>~::;.:;: 0 tr so as al h a' d he r es t e. H to hit g feel th t e a t re - h ail need o ne. Y Y _ bou t ' 'es a u n . us in t iL'~'~:-. , ero ten Hum q 4 ri!.;:;: ~v! He and others also said the - w .~!!i! " ~fY-!- u ' le comm from ~ b e o th P PceP C J A R.A ma e n e d to focus is - i - - Y eon ,N..~ . t - tree . t es h to m at tent' ton on fewe - r r - - a eas o fra ' --~~TM--~ - g f o'ce o ch t s f the d e s a ar l t re Bu wh' e tl a new director the ACRA is John Norton vice resident o f P ' a w t o ki ib re r sa 1 t kin a loo ~ Y Po b the a A Sk'i n t Co a ng m n and Pe P Y e ak u al m ' z ion ant at or internal P g the o' int man ' t t n h C e A RT P f 'on o ah ' a r e e n u n d the ha a th t an d rh Pe P e t' ' t o sal n Drat a g c mbar nol O a " 8 - e adVi w red ih ah t7' P Po nee a g d to concen Irate - on du e c a p ead- ai e tioc 1 ..~~.i n of n ad u m e 'o r ti P n to t le merchants know _ s c amber' ' ec the h 1 dI t e r e to h re w - hat to a P h ch m bet's ro s le hou ld :r < - - e e 'es. - - n be; summer marketin , to keep ~ <;:>s~:_::«::::>::z»::>:~<: ;>:;~;:z~»:. _ . .~:z g f ~~.:r ~ r1 'r.::: • t; _ - .s., $`t - ;itit5is ''s %zo: r:ar~ • - =czi t•::::~::::.:~ . :•.~:........r..::. ~Sz,... :tax;-axcz.-.~ ':s:•- c - `,t F =T ::::'i:: T' e adv~ax~.t~. e o .<::;>:.::~r:: ~ ; IN MD PC ATTHEW L D TE M .Goo s OTOLARYNGOLOGY- ` }-IFAn ANI~ NFt'K SI )pr-rRV R ~ ~ ~1~ aril` 11 w-~-~.+. 60-: c6 u tLt RECEIVED ALSO 199~ The Resource Center TRC of EogleCounV Post Office Box 3414 Vail, Colorado 81658 HONORARY BOARD 303/476-7384 Dr. Jack Eck ,Betty Ford Renie Gorsuch `Tail Town Council Sheika Gramshammer 75 S. Frontage Rd. Mrs. cortlandt Hill. Vail CO 81657 David Konally Dottie Lamm Richard Lamm 29 July 1902 Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal Darlene Deer Truchses Dear Council Members: Thanks so much for the "Free Lunches" at Michael's! It was great- to be able to give this great benefit to a couple of our most deserving volunteers. They thoroughly enjoyed their meals. Thanks again for thinking of us. We appreciate it. Sincerely yours, Cheryl L. Paller (Cherie) Director Peace on Earth Begins at Home f ~ ' ~7: ~ - ,~E ~ t .~-8, 2U C~ R~ T~ ~U CAS gg2 ~ ~ r18'~'J,1 e . Septem~ .Milton tion rand` j~~e G Sr ENDAR YOUR CAL N~R~ . w u ~y TOWN OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road Office of the Mayor Yai~ Colorado 81657 303-479-2100 FAX 303-479-2157 July 31, t 992 Mr. John Unbewust District Engineer, District 1 Colorado Department of Transportation (CDO~ 18500 East Colfax Avenue Aurora, CO 90111 Dear John: As you know, we have Jong been concerned about the condition of the recreation path which extends west from the top of Vail Pass. Issues such as frequency of sweeping, poor drainage, inadequate maintenance, lack of signage and general design have been continually raised by residents and guests of Vail through the years. Recently, however, complaints have been more frequent and increasingly serious in nature. As you know, the path is heavily used between Dillon, Breckenridge, Frisco and Vail, and is one of the premier bicycle routes in the state. While we are aware the Colorado Department of Transportation invests a certain amount of time and effort maintaining the path on the west side of the pass, it is clearly not as well maintained as the stretch to the east. The buildup of sand, gravel, and rocks, combined with the elements mentioned above, renders the western portion of this route dangerous for cyclists of all experience levels. Unfortunately, this does not reflect well on the CDOT or the State of Colorado, and hinders the efforts of both Summit and Eagle Counties to provide a top quality cycling experience for residents and guests. We are aware of plans by US West to install fiber optic cable along the route at some point in the future and would appreciate a periodic update from you regarding this proposal. It seems this might provide an opportunity for some cooperative reconstruction or realignment on the part of CDOT and others. This opportunity could be taken to correct design problems with the path and to minimize future .maintenance. Again, we consider the condition of the recreation path on the west side of Vail Pass to be an extreme danger for which we should all be concerned and, inevitably, a liability for CDOT. The enclosed letter reaffirms our concerns. We respectfully request that you add this matter to your list of priorities in your new role as District Engineer. Thank you in advance for your assistance with this situation and for keeping us apprised of your efforts. We look forward to working with you on future matters of mutual concern. Sincerely, Margaret A. Osterfoss Mayor cc: Mr. Robert Clevenger ~ 3'UL-Q7-1992 13 47 FROM THE PRUDENTIAL GRP TO 4792157 P.01 RE~~'!'~~~ ~r ~ 7 1992 July 7, 1992 Ran Phillips Town of Vail Managex Vail, CD 8].657 Dear Ron, Some friends (a11 Town of Vail second home owners} and X bicycled over Vail Pass on Saturday, July 4. We were sadly dis2eppointad at ' the condition of the bike path. Not even minimal mair:tenanae had been done to the path. There ara patches cif gravel several ~.nches deep across the path in numerous places, Also, on 'the wall~~ there . are large xocks strewn across the path at a very difficult part v£ the path. To have two bikes pass in that section (one going up, one coming down) would be extremely dangerous for both bikers. My friends had orally disparaq~,ng remarks to make about the Town of Vail artd their maintenance of the path. T told them that I thought it was Eagle County that was responsible for maintenance of the path. They felt that Vail advertised the bike path as an amenity 2nd had some responsibility for seeing that #.t was properly taken care of. They painted to the obvious dxfferer~ca between the care taken on the Summit County side and the Eagle County side of the pass. I think they are xight. Who ever is respons~.bie....would you pass along the word that so~lethiag needs to be done. The conditions that ex~,st there now axe an accident waiting to happen. It's dep~.orable. Thank you for anything you catZ do tp remedy this pro3~Yem. . Cordially, . f Ginn Culp . TOTAL P.01 r DISTRIBUTION LIST - PUBLIC WORKS PRIORITY LIST BRIAN ANDERSON ERNST GLATZLE TOWN COUNCIL STEVE BARWICK GARY MURRAIN DEBBIE ROELAND MIKE BRAKE GREG HALL MIKE ROSE DICK DURAN SUSIE HERVERT TODD SCHOLL CAROLINE FISHER JIM HOZA DAN STANEK ANNIE FOX DD DETO LEO VASQUEZ JOHN GALLEGOS JOE KOCHERA PAM BRANDMEYER KRISTIN PRITZ CHARLIE OVEREND LARRY ESKWITH PETE BURNETT TODD OPPENHEIMER KEN HUGHEY JODY DOSTER MANUEL MEDINA FILE MEMORANDUM T0: RON PHILLIPS, TOWN MANAGER FROM: LARRY GRAFEL, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/TRANSPORTATION DATE: AUGUST 3, 1992 RE: PUBLIC WORKS PRIORITY LIST FOR THE WEEK OF AUGUST 3-10, 1992 STREETS AND ROADS A. 1. Conrad to recharge boiler at bus barn 2. Repair shoulders on various bike paths: a. Red Sandstone 3. Striping: a. Install stop bars in Lionshead & Crossroads b. Layout striping for contractor 4. Cut brush from road sides and bike paths in various locations. 5. Mike Brake to design rock retaining wall for PW to install on Pedestrian Overpass. 6. Install sleeve for directional sign on Covered Bridge. 7. Investigate leak at Slifer Fountain by digging potholes to locate leak. 8. Provide backhoe for tree removal at Intermountain Pocket Park. 9. Train landscaping personnel on heavy equipment. 10. Extend paved bike path up to the gravel lot at Ford Park. 11. Remove speed bump on Matterhorn. 12. Extend 42" culvert at 2516 Arosa. 13. Install traffic sign at International Bridge. PARKING STRUCTURE/TRANSPORTATION A. 1. Resolve paver problems. 2. Install curb for partition for bus waiting area at terminal building. 3. Schedule chip sealing at Lionshead Charter lot. 4. Number all bus stops. 5. Paint new Personnel Department. 6. Receive bids on repairs of the expansion joints and the top deck of TRC ~ _ PUBLIC WORKS PRIORITY LIST Page 2 PARKING STRUCTURE/TRANSPORTATION (CONT.) A. 7. Sign "Van Accessible Parking" for the physically challenged at west end of VTRC transit deck. 8. Remove and replace handrails at LHTRC. 9. Remove metal edging from bus islands at TRC. CARPENTERS A. 1. Construct picnic pavilion for Stephens Park. 2, Prepare budget. 3. Replace handrails in Lionshead (new construction area). 4. Construct Electrician's tool box. 5. Construct directional signs for community development. 6. Build wall for shelter at VTRC- west end. 7. Install "bike slowly" signs. ELECTRICIANS A. 1. Perform line locates as requested. 2. Install disconnect and sub-panel at VTRC. 3. Perform street light check. 4. Investigate meter installation at Gore Creek Promenade. 5. Install lights at Manor Vail Bridge. 6. Install power outlet far International Bridge. 7. Clean and change bulbs on top level VTRC. 8. Install new light in North day lot at Pedestrian Overpass. 9. Order end clips for Municipal Building Conference room and mail room. 10. Check on Lionshead Mall lighting system. PARKS DEPARTMENT A. 1. Complete project management contract for Lionshead with Alpine International. 2. Inspect Willow Bridge sprinkler system. 3. Install landscape material at Pedestrian Overpass. 4. Plant replacement trees at Intermountain Pocket Park, Ford Park and Buffehr Creek Park. 5. Issue "Notice of Award" for Stephens park Phase II. 6. Repair wildflower area on Bald Mountain Road. 7. Coordinate construction documents for Ski Museum Site. 8. Revegetate the old snow dump at Ford Park, 9. Coordinate Stephens Park Phase II start up. LG/cp ' - ~ ~ ; ~ t~- THE DE1vvElt POST' As en firm to enhance Banff ' p BANFF from Page 1H from the other teams," Bennett , c said. The team is prime consultant Workshop Principal Richard Shaw The fact that our in a consortium of seven firms. and Landplan Principal Garth plan began to push Through a co-design process that Balls - proposes a pedestrian- involved the entire community, the friendly downtown area plus a Dis- the pOSS1b111t1eS fOr parameters for the project were covery Park, a new municipal cen- the future, Ina Set`The community was in from ter, a tourist information center, an amphitheater and a scale repli- COmprehenSlVe plan the beginning," said Shaw. "This ca of Banff National Park. f -pr mana~'1Tlg trlfflC was an opportunity for them to ar- The innovative and revolution- ticulate their values and was a ary plan calls for reducing the and creatln a real opportunity for them to do width of the congested main street g something big. Design Workshop's from four lanes to two, widening user-friendly place of task is to interpret the communi- and enhancing sidewalk space and tourism While ty's values." increasing parking outside the Banff has long reigned as Cana- downtown core. V1SUa11Zing hOW da's premier resort destination. Pending approval by the town . eXlStln atterns have But the town is now faced with council in February 1993, con- g p stiff competition internationally. struction is slated to begin in April gone on, made fora According to Bennett, "Unless 1994. The $6-million first phase we address some of the issues of should be complete by the end of Very COheS1Ve, having so many people here, the November, with most of the heavy CreatlVe lan.' ~ tourists will end up going some- construction finished before the p where else. We need to keep our tourism season starts, chair of the Richard Shaw competitive edge." downtown enhancement commit- Design Workshop has developed tee and Deputy Mayor Brent Bak- master plans and site plans for re- er said. user-friendly place of tourism, sort communities, hotels, villages Titled "A Mirror to the Moun- while visualizing how existing pat- and mountain base areas through- tains," the Design Work- terns have gone on, made fora out Canada since 1978, as well as shop/Landplan Associates propos- very cohesive, creative plan," ~ Spain, Japan, Norway and Rus- al emphasized creating a Shaw said. Our ability to illus- sia. Shaw called Canada.a natu- user-friendly place for tourists trate the thing as being tangible ral location for us because of the relied heavily on graphics. ~ ease that characterizes the wa that draws on the natural beauty y of Banf#. Banff Town Manager Jim Ben- provincial government, private in- Banff citizens played a large nett said the competition was dustry and local governments part in developing a fresh image very close, especially among the work together. for the town. One of the new town top two teams. Design Workshop is a 50-mem- council's first acts was organizing "The Design Workshop/Land- ber land planning and architectur- an international competition to plan Associates' approach to the al landscape firm with offices in find a firm that would update its plan, the quality of their presenta- Aspen, Denver and Phoenix. A Sao community. While hundreds of tion and their experience played a Paulo, Brazil, office will soon North American firms were tar- large part in setting them apart open. geted, Design Workshop speculat- ed that their plan's creativity, graphics and risk-taking earned them the top spot. "The fact that our plan began to ,,push the possibilities for the fu- pure, in a comprehensive plan for managing traffic and creating a 4 , i I~III i I II I I II, I it I....i~ ili ii.i i iii rWr..r.s. a__ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~,~-'sihaeaMr~+++ '~IIQ ~ y As en architect arners ~ ~ hry~~ ; ~ s~, ntract to revam Banff _ ~ co p 7 ~ x+~,~ it ; , ~ By Dion M. Harris ~ - ~ 1 a. Special to The Denver Post ~ i i t ~ ~ ~ : Y ~ n Aspen architectural landscape ~ ~J ~ ~ - firm beat out 42 international de- ~ sign teams to win the $250,000 _ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ( master planning contract to redesign -and ~ x,!i' - yti. enhance the recently emancipated Canadi- ~ r , j j iii t~, an town of Banff. ~f° ~~t~~ • a ~ The Aspen office of Design Workshop, i ~q~'~~\~;~, together with Landplan Associates of Cal- ~f, ~ - • ~ ~ ~ j h j ` + gary, Alberta, will develop the Banff, Al- ~ J' , : r t. K„ ~ ~ ~ ~ Berta, Downtown Enhancement Project ~1J~ , 1` ` 4~ - J, r ~o next year - a venture expected to cost $6 1 j i ~ million to $8 million. ~ 1~~ ~~I ~ e~ ` ~ v ' ' ° ° ~°E' . °'r^, ~t Banff is a 100-year-old vacation com- ~ , , p ~ { munity that won autonomy from the Cana- ~ ' - v;,, dian federal government a year ago. Nes- r , , ~ - ~ National Park in ~ , , ~ - _ ~ . _ the~Canadian Rockies,ithe town of 7,000 is - ~ - considered the park's gateway and hosts ~ _ 5 ~ ~ ~ i more than 3 million visitors each year. ~ - ~,rt"?.~F: ~ , ~ .'a~~: ~'w .p ,...-fie,. The master plan -created by Design Special to The Denver Post! - D@Sl9n Workshop Principal Richard_ USER-FRIENDLY: Plan would reduce width of main street, enhance sidewalks. Please see BANFF on 6H Shaw. - L' 1' i ' 3. ~ making stores user-friendly. Returns fan~7i)oohttle, a Chicago reran consuitmg z shouldn't be a problem, nor should long . ° a 'M ' . lines at the register. Several barriers stand in the way. Em- Unfortunately, it doesn t always work Please see SERVICE on 7H :tea out that way. An informal survey of Den- GerrycnawesNtoe,. f , f a . " ~ . ~ ~ ~ As en arc itect arners fi ~ a g "f~. ~ ~ contract to revam Banff ,r~ r N~~ ~ ~ ~ - By Dion M. Harris ~ ~ ~ i. ~ 5pecial to The Denver Post ~ ~ ~ a ~ - ~ "j' ' n Aspen architectural landscape , i ',rt': - ~ ~ _ firm beat out 42 international de• ~ ign teams to win the $250,000 ~ ~ i ' ! master Tannin contract to redesi and ~ r~ \ r Bio Barrier founder Robin Shlenker: ~ ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ s~~ P g Y P ~ ~ r- x j~_t ~I sh~.~., ~ ~ = rr ~ , ~ enhance the recentl emanci aced Canadi- r'~, x , _ . ~f,~ ~ an town of Banff. ~ i ~,~~;~j LATEX BREAKTNROUGN ~ The Aspen office of Design Workshop, ~ f At the same time the medical profes- ~ `J together with Landplan Associates of Cal- ~ - j ` gory, Alberta, will develop the Banff, Al- sion isrelying ongloves for protection ~ t ~ ~ berta, Downtown Enhancement Project j against AIDS, studies indicate that latex o ~ next year - a venture expected to cost $6 ~ ~ technology alone may not provide ode- ~ quote barriers to the transmission of in- T o a o o e ~ ~ million to $8 million. ~ i . Banff is a 100-year-old vacation com- fectiousdisease. Bio Barrier Inc may F... have just the solution. , , p 0 t ~ muaity that won autonomy from the Cana- ~ ; . ~ ~ ; dian federal government a year ago. Nes- - ' - ~ tied in the heart of Banff National Parkin ALARMING SUCCESS ~ ~ Denver Bur Tar Alarm's ast is r- _ - ~ the Canadian Rockies, the town of 7,000 is t ed with sto es of missin bodies, mp s- cronsidered the park's gateway and hosts ~ ~ fi 9 Y more than 3 million visitors each year. , terious bombings and hard-working ~ ~ ' :,.,`v,~ The master plan -created by Design H' ~ owners. specfs~torne Denver Pose i _ Design Workshop Principal Richard, - USER-FRIENDLY: Plan would reduce width of main street, enhance sidewalks. ~ Please see BANFF on 6H Shaw. ' ' ~ ~ to vest ~ " 1 aubman holds downtown aces but ~ - la s them close ti ~e p~ ~ - a en it comes to downtown and possibly J.C. Penney in a $300 mil- ty is the now-vacant Denver Dry Goods show the people of this city that down=' Denver, two things are lion project located either at a midpoint store at 16th and California streets. So town can be fixed. It's also the best way abundantly clear: ' : on the 16th Street Mall or somewhere far, efforts to jump-start downtown with to show Taubman that there's more than First, something sorely near the mall's lower downtown end. a Denver Dry project have been, to put it one way to fix it. ~ needs to be done to revitalize the city's Despite the huge break it got from Re• NENRY . ' bluntly, half-baked. _ ~ On the money core retailing district. ~ . gency's demise, Taubman, developer of DUBROFF . Waxman's camera and video will take Second, if the "something" means a Cherry Creek, is playing its hand very half the retail space but a tenant for the Ross Perot caused a lot of ruckus major new shopping development, the carefully. And for good reason. other half hasn't been found. New York ~d he made the economy the No. 1 issue in the presidential campaign. ~ Detroit-based Taubman Co. is holdutg Soon, Taubman and its investors are developer Jonathan Rose had half the most of the cards. - going to come to Denver taxpayers with a ment is irrefutable. space and David French, recently tossed We may never know why he bowed outs. Make that virtually all of the cards. demand for a huge subsidy -most likely And when it comes to determining the .out, had the other half. Just last week the last week, but it's clear Perot couldn't ~ Last week's collapse of the. Regency ~ the form of low-cost loans. size of the subsidy, Denver's downtown sales tax district to pay for the Denver stand the media heat -nor would he risk Fashion Centre mall at the Denver Tech They are going to argue that times are agencies will have no choice but to whine Dry renovation bonds was slashed, for spending perhaps $200 million in order to, Center ves a ro osed Taubman ro ert tou h in retailin that risks are ver a little then cou h u the dou h. fear it wouldn't be able to raise the mon- finish second. The pundit who said "You ' ~ ~ P P P 1 g g' Y g P g ~ e necessa to a for the ro ect. can't be a billionaire o ulist" was ri ht µ at least a 50 percent chance of success, high, that investors need an incentive to The only counterweight to Taubman s Y rY P Y P ] P P g - - - - nn 46o mnnnn ,o~, i~ ~y TOWN OF VAIL ~ 42 West Meadow Drive Vail Fire Department Vail, Colorado 81657 303-479-2250 *****MEMORANDUM***** TO: Town of Vail Council Members FROM: Jeff Atencio, Channel 23 Liaiso~~~ DATE: July 31, 1992 RE: Channe123 As the liaison for the Town of Vail and Channel 23, I feel that in order to continue quality service from Channel 23, I think it would be helpful if we had your input, and your constructive criticism. Your input in the areas of coverage of TOV Council meetings and other programming currently being offered by the Community Access Television station will be appreciated. I would be happy to speak with you individually or receive written suggestions from you regarding any ideas and/or suggestions you may have to offer to make Vail's representation -via Channel 23 -the best. I am available Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at the Vail Fire Department at 479-2250. Thank you. THE DErrvEx Poll' As en ~ rm to enhance Banff p BANFF from PagerH from the other teams," Bennett `The fact that our said. The team is prime consultant Workshop Principal Richard Shaw in a consortium of seven firms. and Landplan Principal Garth plan began to push Through a co-design process that Balls - proposes a pedestrian- involved the entire community, the friendly downtown area plus a Dis- the pOSS1b111t1eS fOr parameters for the project were covert' Park, a new municipal ceII- the flltUre, Ina see ter, a tourist information center, "The community was in from an amphitheater and a scale repli- COnlprehenSlV~ plan the beginning," said Shaw. "This ca of Banff National Park. for managing traffic was an opportunity for them to ar- The innovative and revolution- ticulate their values and was a art' plan calls for reducing the and Creating a real opportunity for them to do width of the congested main street something big. Design Workshop's from four lanes to two, widening user-friendly place of task is to interpret the communi- and enhancing sidewalk space and tourism wh11e t9's values." increasing parking outside the Banff has long reigned as Cana- downtown core. V1SUallZing hOW dg's premier resort destination. Pending approval by the town eXlStln atternS have But the town is now faced with couacil III February 1993, con- g p stiff competition internationally. struction is slated to begin in April gone on, made fora According to Bennett, "Unless 1994. The $6-million first phase we address some of the issues of should be complete by the end of Very COheS1Ve, having so many people here, the November, with most of the heavy creative lari.' ~ tourists will end up going some- construction finished before the p where else. We need to keep our i tourism season starts, chair of the Richard Shaw competitive edge." downtown enhancement commit- Design Workshop has developed tee and Deputy Mayor Brent Bak- master plans and site plans for re- er said. user-friendly place of tourism, sort communities, hotels, villages Titled "A Mirror to the Moun- while visualizing how existing pat- and mountain base areas through- tains," the Design Work- terns have gone on, made fora out Canada since 1978, as well as shop/Landplan Associates propos- Shaw sallldesi Our abilityetopijlus- Sias ShawJcaljed Canada a d atu- al emphasized creating a trace the thing as being tangible ral location for us" because of the user-friendly place for tourists relied heavily on graphics." ease that characterizes the wa that draws on the natural beauty y of Banff. Banff Town Manager Jim Ben- provincial government, private in- Banff citizens played a large nett said the competition was dustry and local governments part in developing a fresh image very close, especially among the work together. for the town. One of the new town top two teams." Design Workshop is a 50-mem- council's first acts was organizing "The Design Workshop/Land- ber land planning and architectur- an international competition to plan Associates' approach to the al Iandscape firm with offices in find a firm that would update its' plan, the quality of their presenta- Aspen, Denver and Phoenix. A Sao community. While hundreds of clop and their experience played a Paulo, Brazij, office will soon North American firms were tar- large part in setting them apart open. eeted Design Workshop sneculat- ~ THE DENVER, POST ,C~•~-y r sECTloly , , , m ...~a-.. ~ Q: , ~ , . ~ • • • i r in ~n~se e as a e refurbish Ski mogul must ~ ~ , image to creditors, owners , By Drew Elder Special to The Denver Post F{oldtngs 8 n the fast-paced 1980s, George Gillett's market- ~l?tett could take r ~ ing savvy took him to the top. From TV stations bankruptcy • forward ' to lean beef to the Vail and Beaver Creek ski b,g step en penver's ' - resorts, his ima a makin skills made him the Wh ~ g - g tomorrow tcy Court highest-profile entrepreneur in Colorado U g, gankruP Brooks is ~ The 1990s have been a different story for Gillett and ,fudge g~dneY rove the ~`tF#: ~ , - ~ y,_ ~t~ his Gillett Holdings Inc. The collapse of his empire - expected tS chapter 11 Y~~* ~ ~ ~ which forced his company into bankruptcy -has cost company tan. ~ ~ ~ , t; • him money, prestige and control. Now, Gillett faces reorgan1zatiwhph has ti . ~~'<t~x~. ~ xk - the challenge of a lifetime: He must relearn how to The plan, is t ~'R'', market himself. received broad i n ~ ~ ;~E lance from ~ t c ~ Fifty-three-year-old George Gillett finds himself re- accep ..Would make `~.a L`" a ~ starting the same game with a new set of rules: He is credltOrs, Creek thQ d . ~ , ~ y:~ the head of a company he no longer owns, he must W~~t~geaver Ctttett ~ m, ~ ~ once again restore the confidence of the people of Col- cdrnerstQne ost of the ;q~ orado, and he must resolve pressing personal financial Notdings•,Mno~resort " y- issues that could spell the ultimate end of the George comPa!'y robabty Wdl r ' Gillett era in Colorado. oPerat~Ons P 3 ~ • In an interview last week at his headquarters near sold. downtown Vail, Gillett says his life continues to be guided by the simple maxim that has guided his ca- - : ~ ~ reer: "If you don't start out expecting to be someplace, ' The Denver Post /Karl Gehring GEORGE GILLBTT: Refurbishing tarnished image. ,Please see GILLETT on 5H . Sunday, August 2, 1992 THE DINNER POST 5M ~ Master marketer George Gillett relearning marketing game _ GILLE7T from Pa a 1H y ~ . ~ x~ ly resort in the world. lifeline to help keep at bay credi{ g h ~ . ~ 57 And Gillett hopes to make Vail tors owed millions of dollarsr not getting there or having to ~ r~ 'and Beaver Creek even more of an leave there is not so significant." Trr„` ~K•~ international resort. 'Much of the debt is in the form of Direct international fli hts to Persona] guarantees to Gillett: In lainer words: Set our oats ~ g , P Y g Holdings made when he was trying ~ ~t ~i T' h_ Eagle will be added, and extensive g ~ _ it ~~s 51 to keep it afloat. Although Gillett states flatly ~ $ r.' `i4,• international marketing cam- There has been talk that George. . ~ paigns will begin. that little about his life has i r ~ Gs};n",}Ar,~~, - Gillett might be required to file xr And, in what is erha s the most changed and that his day-to-day , . ~ - ~ Y ~X, ; ~ ~ s 't'~'~" shocking move of all, Vail will be- Personal bankruptcy, because his~~ routine is still the same, the fact is i1, , ' k that some things will change a v. ~ ~ ~ cS.-fi~; j gin a partnership with the Aspen creditors may feel the tremendous;: ~ ' F ~ ~ Skiing Company resorts - Tie- debt he took on to try and keep the great deal for him. ~ i ,,rr ~ ~ti~ company afloat has gotten out of ' Gillett Holdings will likely ~ f x r ~ e : hack/Buttermilk, Snowmass and control emerge from bankruptcy protec- „ ~ , xr ~ r_~: Aspen -offering combined lift And, even as the com an lion on Monday. But this time ~y~'{~~ir* n S'~. tickets and lodging packages. emerges from bankruptcy,pGil ^ George Gillett won't be the sole , ' ~x~ But even while he works on )on- lea's financial troubles are still: stockholder. Gillett Holdings will 5t`)^" cr-term tans, Gilletl's res onsi- resent; his ersonal bankru tc becmne n public cmnpnny whose g P P P P P y-' stock will be controlled by Apollo ~-'~''s~~` Y ~ bility to the company's new own- attorney, Craig Christensen, has Investors, a New York firm back- " x t ers is to deliver a blockbuster ski been working overtime to cub- ed by French bank Credit Lyon- ' ~ season in its first post-Chapter 11 deals that would prevent an em=.. nail. ~ - ~ ! ~ year, barrassing personal bankruptcy. Gillett will be chairman of the "Advanced bookings are up, and "This has been a difficult pro= business is good," said Gillett. cess, and it has been significantly-; company, and Leon Black, afor- ~ ~d Market research has been one of more difficult for my family than mar Drexel Burnham Lambert ~ ~ - employee who now heads Apollo, ~ ~ ~ ~ the tools Gillett has used to make me," said Gillett. "To be honest, I^ will become the man to whom w his resort a better place, and dil- didn't think we could get through it. Geor a Gillett is accountable. tell expects its use to continue to this cleanly." "I don't sense that ublic owner- - y ~ti ~'I~ -make the resorts even more ap- Unfortunately, in getting . p , ; pealing to visitors. "We will con- through the bankruptcy of his com--. ship or the recognition that Apollo The Denver Post /Kea Gehring tinue to try to understand what the pany cleanly, George Gillett was " owns controlling interest in the. guest wants and try to do the best forced to the u man thin s He,. company will change our ap- TOUGN ROW TO HOE: Even as Gillett Holdings emerges from bankruptcy, George Gillett's job of providing it," he said. g P y g ' proach - or George Gillett's en- financial troubles are still present. As chairman of Gillett Holdings, gave up control of his company,- thusiasm," said the man who cut George Gillett will turn over re- and he gave up a great deal of his' hIs teeth in the entertainment busi- And "responsibifity to share- Packerland Packing Co. and sev- reaffirming the quality of the sponsibility for day-today opera- personal wealth. And be may havg; Hess in the froq_t office of the Mi- holders" is a tilt toward Black and eral TV stations -and it was the team we have in place here," said lions to someone else. Andrew Da- given up the prestige and image h~~ ami Dolphins and the Harlem Apollo. "Apollo didn't do this deal enormously high prices paid for Gillett, "I think we are dealing ly wi116ead the management team worked so long to build. Globetrotters. for charitq," said Mike Sitric, an those stations using Drexel's junk- with a rare gem (in Vail and Bea- at the ski resorts, Robert Selwyn But one thing he hasn't given up* Gillett still seems to be the man Apollo spokesman who sat in on bonds that forced Gillett Holdings ver Creek) for the benefit of the and Larry Haugen will continue to is his determination. Gillett will you'd run into at the lift line ask- the interview. into Chapter 11. It's expected that public, and I believC the new own- head the TV subsidiary, and Kevin have to work very hard to re-mar, ing you if you're having a great Apollo has said it wants along- the company will sell its non-re- ership will enable us to be better McCullough, Rich Vesta and Jeff ket himself to his new owners, hi$ day. His enthusiasm for sports and term commitment to the Vail Val- sort businesses, if the price is public trustees." Joyce will run Packerland. creditors, and, perhaps most im_-:~ entertainment was underscored by ley and to George Gillett, but the right. Gillett has even more expansion "I believe we have a hell of a portant, to Colorado. _ the fact that he wanted to conduct details of Gillett's job description "Gillett Holdings is predomi- in the works. He hopes to bring group of managers here," said Gil- The new image is a miature of an interview in front of the TV so haven't been etched in stone. Craig nantly interested in becoming a ski Beaver Creek's size to 70 percent tell the old and the new and the ever.+ he could watch the Olympics. Cogut, the ex-Drexel exec who is resort operator, and it is in the of Vaii's, and possibly tie the two Gillett's personal debt has been upbeat approach of a veteran mar- Bnt there are some subtle Apollo's operating manager, said: best Interest of our stockholders resorts together with a 11[t or gon- the subject of much debate keting man. "Ubvlously some.: changes about the way Gillett ap- "We'll have to wait and see, but I [or us to be that way," said Gillett. dots. New children's programs throughout the company's bank- things are different now, but we^ proaches his new company. "Re- expect that George will provide When it comes to Gillett's sec- will continue to be added, as Vail ruptcy. His post-bankruptcy salarp intend Eor everything to be better, sponslbility to our shareholders" the same guidance, vision, advice and task, marketing himself as a seeks to become the premier farm- of ;1.5 million a year is, in part, a than it was before." has become his new catch phrase, and leadership he provided in the major player on the Colorado and, indeed, the interview took past." scene, the ski resorts are the key. - place in a conference room with no But Cogut said Apollo wants Gil- Gillett's marketing savvy and TV. Lett to confine his vision to the ar- his extensive experience with the ea where be has been most sue- people of Colorado is the primary cessful: marketing aworld-class reason he's still chairman. ski resort. "George has the green Gillett says he will keep Vail light to bring ideas to the (Gillett number one by using the same Holdings) board, but only in resort- tools that worked in the past: ex- type areas," said Cogut. cellent management, highly moti- It was Gillett's other ideas that vated employees and extensive got him into trouble. Gillett Hold- market research. ings also owns lean beef specialist "We are now very interested in ,5, _ ' . ' THE DENVER POST d~d-4Y SECTION ® ~ ~ 1 lI1 S r e S . Ski mogul must refurbish _ ~ ; ~1~~- ~ image to creditors, owners By Drew Elder ' ^ c Special to The Denver Post y - g ~ Gillett Moldings take. a ~ ~ _ n the fast-paced 1980s, Geor e Gillett s market- tcy could ~w , ' ing savvy took him to the top. From TV stations gankrup to lean beef to the Vail and Beaver Creek ski gig step forwardpenver's - resorts, his image-making skills made him the tomorrow wh tcy court highest-profile entrepreneur in Colorado. ~ g, gankrup Brooks is the 8.' The 1990s have been a different story for Gillett and fudge Sidney rove his Gillett Holdings Inc. The collapse of his empire - expeca y s Ch Ater 11 - ~ which forced his company into bankruptcy -has cost companiZation plan• - ~ k~~ ~ ~n ~ the challenge of aglifet~me ~Heomust relearnthow to r ,lh plan, which has market himself. received Broad - ~ Fifty-three-year-old George Gillett finds himself re- accePtancWO~ a make s' starting the same game with a new set of rules: He is creditors, kthe the head of a company he no longer owns, he must Vail/Beaver Cof Gillett , ~ _ once again restore the confidence of the people of Col- ~ cornerstoneMost ofthe - orado, and he must resolve pressing personal financial Holdings' s non_resort ~ ~ issues that could spell the ultimate end of the George company robablyWrll _ ~ Gillett era in Colorado. operat?ons p ti:~ - ' ~ In an interview last week at his headquarters near be SOId' _Y . ~ - ; v downtown Vail, Gillett says his life continues to be ~ - guided by the simple maxim that has guided his ca- t reer: "If you don't start out expecting to be someplace, The Denver Post /Karl Gehring _ GEORGE GILLETT: Refurbishing tarnished image. Please see GILLETT on 5H Sunday, Augtast 2, 1992 THE DENVER POST gp btu • • . Master marketer Geor a Gillett relearn~n marketln ame ~ g gg GILLETT from Page 1 H = ` m ly resort in the world. lifeline to help keep at bay credi% And Gillett hopes to make Vail tors owed millions of dollar'; not getting there or having to ~ 'and Beaver Creek even more of an Much of the debt is in the form of leave there is not so significant " ~ . international resort. personal guarantees to Gillett`. In plainer words: Set your goals ~ Direct international flights to Holdings made when he was trying high. r ~ Eagle will be added, and extensive Although Gillett states flatly ,r~ international marketing cam- to keep it afloat. that little about his life has h ' P g gin, There has been talk that Geor e ai ns will be g changed and that his day-to-day ~ ~ .And,. in what is perhaps the most Gillett might be required to filerv routine is still the same the fact is , ~ ~ shocking move of all, Vail will be- Personal bankruptcy, because hiss ' f ~ ` E creditors ma feel the tremendous:: that some things will change a ~ 3' gin a partnership with the Aspen debt he took on to try and keep the great deal for him. ~ , ' ~ c ~~P Skiing Company resorts - Tie- company afloat has gotten out of` Gillett Holdings will likely ° " hack/Buttermilk, Snowmass and control. emerge from bankruptcy protec ~ Aspen -offering combined lift And, even as the company lion on Monday. But this time ( ~ ~ • tickets and lodging packages. George Gillett won't be the sole emerges from bankruptcy, Gil-~ stockholder, Gillett Holdings will But even while he works on ion- Lett s financial troubles are still= become a public company whose ger-term plans, Gillett's responsi- ,present; his personal bankruptcy` stock will be controlled by Apollo u bility to the company's new own- attorney, Craig Christensen, hasY Investors, a New York firm back- ~ " ~ ers is to deliver a blockbuster ski been working overtime to cut> ed by French bank Credit Lyon- f season in its first post-Chapter 11 deals that would prevent an em•;; naffs. ~ year, barrassing personal bankruptcy . t * ' 1r~~` ' "Advanced bookings are up, and "This has been a difficult pro• Gillett will be chairman of the ~ ; ~ x ~ business is good," said Gillett. cess, and it has been significantly company, and Leon Black, afor- ~ ~ ' " Market research has been one of more difficult for my family than " mer Drexel Burnham Lambert t , ~ the tools Gillett has used to make me "said Gillett. "To be honest I employee who now heads Apollo, ' t s , s Y ` ' , ' ' his resort a better place, and dil- didn t think we could get through it+ will become the man to whom : t ~ _ ~,fre ~ Lett expects its use to continue to this cleanly." George Gillett is accountable. r x r r t < 1l ~ make the resorts even more ap- ~ • "I don't sense that public owner- ~ ~ ~ Unfortunately, in getting' ` m pealing to visitors. We will con- throu h the bankru tc of his com• strip or the recognition that Apollo ~ me Denver Post iKar~ cehrng time t0 try to understand what the pan B leanl Geor a Gillett was . owns controlling interest in the''. guest wants and try to do the best y y' g company will change our ap- TOU6N ROW TO HOE! Even as Gillett Holdings emerges from bankruptcy, George Gillett's job of providing it," he said. forced to give up many things. He thusiasm," said the manlwho cut financial troubles are still present. As chairman of Gillett Holdings, and he gave up a grealt deal of his" George Gillett will turn over re- ersonal wealth. And he ma ha ness mthe frost offi a ofethe Mi- ho tiers" is a tilt toward Black and eral TV stationsk~n andoit was the teamf we have ten lacel here f sated sponsibility for day-to-day opera- given up the prestige and image h~~ c4 P ~ lions to someone else. Andrew Da- worked so ion to build. amt Dolphins and the Harlem Apollo. Apollo didn t do this deal enormously high prices paid for Gillett, I think we are dealing ly will head the management team g , ` Globetrotters. for charity," said Mike Sitric, an those stations using Drexel's junk- with a rare gem (in Vail and Bea- at the ski resorts, Robert Selwyn But one thing he hasn't given uR<.. Gillett still seems to be the man Apollo spokesman who sat in on bonds that forced Gillett Holdings ver Creek) for the benefit of the and Larry Haugen will continue to is his determination. Gillett wilb~, you'd run into at the lift line ask- the interview. into Chapter 11. It's expected that public, and I believe the new own- head the TV subsidiary, and Kevin have to work very hard to re-mar.., ing you if you're having a great Apollo has said it wants along- the company will sell its non-re- ership will enable us to be better McCullough, Rich Vesta and Jeff ket himself to his new owners, hid- day. His enthusiasm for sports and term commitment to the Vail Val- sort businesses, if the price is public trustees." Joyce will run Packerland. creditors, and, perhaps most im-:: entertainment was underscored by ley and to George Gillett, but the right. Gillett has even more expansion "I believe we have a hell of a portant, to Colorado. the fact that he wanted to conduct details of Gillett's job description "Gillett Holdings is predomi- in the works. He hopes to bring group of managers here," said Gil- The new image is a mixture of an interview in front of the TV so haven't been etched in stone. Craig nantly interested in becoming a ski Beaver Creek's size to 70 percent lett. the old and the new and the ever he could watch the Olympics. Cogut, the ex-Drexel exec who is resort operator, and it is in the of Vail's, and possibly tie the two Gillett's personal debt has been upbeat approach of a veteran mar- - But there are some subtle Apollo's operating manager, said: best interest of our stockholders resorts together with a lift or gon- the subject of much debate keting man. "Obviously some,' changes about the way Gillett ap- "We'll have to wait and see, but I for us to be ttlat way," said Gillett. dola, New children's programs throughout the company's bank- things are different now, but we~~ proaches his new company. "Re- expect that George will provide When it comes to Gillett's sec- will continue to be added, as Vail ruptcy. His post-bankruptcy salary intend for everything to be better~~ sponsibility to our shareholders" the same guidance, vision, advice and task, marketing himself as a seeks to become the premier faint- of $1.5 million a year is, in ,part, a than it was before." has become his new catch phrase, and leadership he provided in the major player on the Colorado and, indeed, the interview took past." scene, the ski resorts are the key. place in a conference room with no But Cogut said Apollo wants Gil- Gillett's marketing savvy and TV. lett to confine his vision to the ar- his extensive experience with the ea where he has been most suc- people of Colorado is the primary cessful: marketing a world-class reason he's still chairman. ski resort. "George has the green Gillett says he will keep Vail light to bring ideas to the (Gillett number one by using the same Holdings) board, but only inresort- tools that worked in the past: ex- type areas," said Cogut. cellent management, highly moti- It was Gillett's other ideas that vated employees and extensive got him into trouble. Gillett Hold- market research. ings also owns lean beef specialist "We are now very interested in cC: C~ ~N N .:~~ot Av~od RECEDED ~A 192 C%raa 1891 - 1991 UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Administration 1470 South Havana Street Aurora, Colorado 80012 303/695-7370 July 31, 1992 Ron Phillips Town Manager Town of Vail 75 So. Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Ron: Each year the City of Aurora conducts a 2 day tour of the City's raw water supply and delivery system. This year the tour will be held on August 13th and 14th. Participants will include members of the Aurora staff, City Council, community leaders, the media, state legislators, and congressional staff. We would be very pleased to have you join us. An itinerary of the tour and a schematic of our raw water delivery system are attached. We will travel in vans, and meals and lodging will be provided. I think that you will find this tour informative and enjoyable. Please let me know at an early date whether you will be able to participate by contacting either me ar Beth Adams at 695-7378. Sincerely, r. _ To>a Griswold Y D erector of Utilities attn. TG/py cc: File copies P.S. Ron: It would be ideal if some of your Council would like to meet us in Leadville, and stay with the tour through the Thursday night dinner. WATER TOUR AGENDA Thursday, August 13th 8:00 a.m. Depart Kuiper Water Treatment Plant 11:00 a.m. Arrive Leadville 11:30 a.m. Tour Homestake Reservoir and Homestake Phase I Collection Facilities (Cook out lunch on site) 3:30 p.m. Tour Downstream Portal of Homestake Tunnel and Turquoise Lake 5:00 P.M. Check in at Silver King Motel, Leadville 5:30-7:00 p.m. Cash Bar - Slide Show Presentation on Aurora Water System (2nd floor conference room at Silver King) 7:30 p.m. Dinner at Prospector Supper Club Friday, August 14th 7:30 a.m. Depart Silver King 8:15 a.m. Tour Twin Lakes Outlet 9:15 a.m. Tour Otero Pump Station 11:15 a.m. Tour Spinney Reservoir (Box lunch on site) 3:30 p.m. Tour Strontia Springs Dam and Aurora Intake Facilities 5:30 p.m. Arrive at Kuiper Water Treatment Plant ('1 !'r r ` + s ^ MstroS ~I_L r y, HomeStake Reservoir r n~ Dlaposal P/a ~iv_ i ~ r~ aH(1 VIC1Hit)' ~ ~ Denver- ~ Saael k ~~-Vr~ \ ~ a ~ ti ,n ~ - J ifu a , ~ 1'A i .nl ~ rCrjek sSGsrr C}°4 vale ~ . ~ Au rA rv ~ ~ G`0 ~ ~ ~O~ Dillon Reservoir ~ r ~'"r r 1 ~ f ~ ~ ~ , Sao ke Rive --L'~ r ~ r ~ Gee SEE DETAIL MAP 'r ~ i ~ 1 I'~1 ~ r-~'i ~ e+:i..,. ~ Homeateb Co/bcflon Sysfem o y. ? JZ1Reserv~' u Fre„rl 5 S~`..rui' `l, % US.2~ r'-_ ' r~~ ~ I $ ~9• reek c^eek tk~4 v ~ ~ ~ r ' ~ Missouri Crerk r ~W+r Cnek G ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Pp' SEE DETAIL I Homesque ; MlsaovH7pn~a~ o. 3. ' MAP ' ~ Ll_%- , ' ~ ~ _.--i F i „ ~ cY j r; 'kip 2R' i r~ Stronda Springs Rese ~ ~ v rake c ek ~ , Homeslake i x / \ - ~ \ H yi-~- ~ Ar 'L3 Fob` ~e ~ ~1 ~J~wteb Gds: ~ \ ~ ' ; j' Il`ll Iwny~ nek ~ iunml 4 1~ ~ 1 I 7 ~ c~ ~f~ ~ ~ I ~ 1Lrglake ~ ~c1~ 11 / ~ 'Ihrryall Reservoir ~yS' ~ S~G~ 1 ~ teadvilla 'lltc~l`~. I ~ I Fetrpl ~ ~ c~ hype ~ r Coreinental 3' i , J ~ > ' ~ South Perk ~ BWk ` DNitle I ~f o ~ f - 1 i Midd4 water Rlghb 4 Cheesman lake lwln Leb~ I un F'r I , 1 ' tee' ~ 7Ln/ns/la/ank 7hnnel~ o. 1 ~ 1 _ 7~v1n Ickes ~ S4 - C?, 1 ~ I ~ HOlhno~ ~ is Spmney Mt. Elbert 1 Tom. ~ r-.,_...~.~---~ Clear . Mountain ~ 8 1 i! Creek \t Reservoir I Otero ~ Antero Reservoir Z' r 1 _ ~ ~ Reservoir ~ Pumping ~ Eleven Mile J5. G'~ j ~ ~ Station ~ Homesteb Reservoir C P~ \ 1 Diversion Channel S-~ ~ It Grnz{y' Tr.~ .L"'-; ~ ll1 'v-~ Resfivoir Ickes ~ _ i ~ Homestab Pipeane Zrl I Texas Creek Ir Buena Vista n To Colorado SpHnm CeOlOf8d0 ~ ~ Iper Wabr Tleetment Pianf r y 'IgbrPark '~~2 L Springs ~ ~mn warern..emenrPlanr Reservoir G{eeR ~ r., ~ ~ Cherry Creek - 1 t ,,,e jot R'~e `-co,~m+rr"- ~ J JS r UlJ1i ~ Reservou i~`-- ---------------I - ~q ~Quimy Reservoir ~ marry + \vump Stations ~P' ~ crek Chatfield ye wall FkrW Aurora Reservoir ~~~ati Reservoir Ho/ty Strost ,~j Pump Station gl, . ~ /r 3 a ~ ii 0 1 ~a ~ ss` Canon City `1 ~ ~ pert Recerwdr Sou hMetro/ 1, LS ~ s ti~ Strontla Springs Reservoh' Aqueducts/Oiverslon 7ltnnels r PUeblO ~i- Streams/RiversJCanals on which Aurora has water rights r Uzi Other Streamt?Rlvers ` Reservolrs/lekes Reservov Indicates Streams/RJvers/Facillties on/ot which Aurora owns lull or partial rights pl~gry Pueblo Reservoir 7 [eke Henry River i e, Beek Gs ~ ~+al Raw Water Supply System lake Meredith Fowler ~ ~v~3iryr City of Aurora . ~ ~ . ..__..._...~.~.~...~~:~~~~w_ Xc, ic: KaN~ CAf~ b GREENHOUSE BAR P.O. Box 1234 Vail, Colorado 81658 303; 476-1818 July 30, 1992 Dear Council Member: I am writing you in response to my appearance before you during the citizen participation period at the Council meeting on July 21, 1992. As this was a secret ballot, it was never my intention to ask who you voted for. It was, however, my desire to find out at what point in the process your decision was made and upon what basis you formulated that decision. With all the evidence presented during the interview I am finding it very difficult to rationalize the final decision. It seems to me that it would behoove the Town Council to gain as much information as possible (i.e. talking to the Chairman of the liquor authority) previous to the vote. I would also suggest some criteria for members making up the board (i.e. a member of the liquor service industry). Your response is welcome and desired as I think communication is the key to making things better. Thank you for your time and concern Very truly yours, Davey Wilson DW/aw ~ ~ ~ ~ ' r ' Alt~rnaave Governmental Structures Avauable To Address recreation, TransFortation, Land 1Jse Planning, • and Businzss De~~elupment in Eagle County ivL3y 24, 19y2 - - ~ F~~,~?:sed bf Kevin Lir_dahl, Eagle jaunty Attorney and Christopher Rich, Esq. i- I. INTRODU~, r iON Eagle County and the Towns of Vail and Avon aze exploring the possibilities for intergovernmental cooperation related to common interests. Areas of mutual interest include land use planning, recreation, transportation, and business development. This discussion outlines the statutory authority I and guidelines for entering into such agreements and describes the resulting organizational structures. The specific azea discussions include: 1) the authority and method of creation, 2) the function each organizational structure provides, 3) the source(s) of funding, 4) significant statutory limits, and 5) miscellaneous points of interest. I -ii- I 0 TABLE OF COIv i r.~~1TS I. GENERAL AUTHORITY FOR IlV i xxGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS P• 6 4 A. Constitutional Based Authority P• 6 B. Associations of Political Subdivisions P• ~ II. SPECIFIC AREA5 OF COOPERATIVE INTEREST A. Land Use Planning P• ~ 1. Land Use Control Enabling Act P• ~ (a) Creation (b) Function (c) Funding P• 8 (d) Limits (e) Miscellaneous t 2. Regional Planning Commissions P• g (a) Creation (b) Function (c) Funding (d) Limits p. 9 (e) Miscellaneous B. Recreation p. 9 1. Recreation Facilities p. 9 j (a) Creation I (b) Function (c) Funding p. 10 (d) Limits 2. Recreation Districts p. 10 (a) Creation (b) Function (c) Funding (d) Limits P. 11 (e) Miscellaneous 3. Open Space p. 11 (a) Creation (b) Function P • 12 (c) Funding (d) Limits p. 13 i -iii- t C. Transportation p. 13 1. County Agency P. 13 (a) Creation (b) Function (c) Funding p. 14 i 2. New Authority by Creation of a District p. 14 i (a) Regional Service Authority (i) Creation (ii) Function p. 15 (iii) Funding (iv) Limits (b) Metropolitan District p. 16 (i) Creation (ii) Function (iii) Funding (iv) Limits (c) Statutory Districts p. 17 (i) Creation (ii) Function (iii) Funding D. Business and Marketing Cooperation p. 18 1. Business Improvement District p. 18 (a) Creation (b) Function (c) Funding (d) Limits 2. County and Municipal Development Revenue Bond Act P. 18 (a) Creation (b) Function (c) Funding p. 19 (d) Limits 3. Business Tax Incentives p. 19 (a) Creation (b) Function (c) Limits 4. Enterprise Zones p. 19 j (a) Creation 1 (b) Function p. 20 (c) Funding (d) Limits 5. Downtown Development Authorities p. 20 (a) Creation (b) Function (c) Funding p. 21 (d) Limits 6. Lodging Tax Revenues p. 21 (a) Creation (b) Function (c) Funding (d) Limits -iv- GENERAL AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO 1 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS Colorado Statute provides several bases for entering into intergovernmental relationships. These authorities include codification of State Constitutional requirements and f.,~..~ation of associations of political subdivisions. Constitutional Based Authority. _ The Colorado Legislature codified several sections of the Colorado Constitution in C.R.S. §29-1-201 which reads: and ~urpose of this part 2 is to implement the provisions of section 18(2)(a) ( )(b) of article XIV of the state constitution ...and the amendment to I section 2 of article XI of the state constitution . . . by nerinittinQ and encouraging ¢overnments to make the mist efficient and effective use of their powers and ~resnonsibilities by cooneratin~ and contracting with other governments, and to this end this part 2 shall be liberally construed. The statutes ificall authorizes local overnments to coo rate or contract with each P~ Y g Pe other "to provide anv function. service. or facility lawfully authorized to each of the cooperating or contractine units C.R.S. §29-1-203(1). Local governments may enter into cooperative agreements only where each governmental entity has, or may obtain, authority to perform that function. Any contracts entered into under this section must specify purposes, powers, rights, obligations, and responsibilities of the contracting parties which may act individually or jointly. C.R.S. §29- 1-203. When other statutory sections provide requirements for special types of intergovernmental cooperation or contracting, such provisions shall control. Id. Associations of Political Subdivisions. Two or more political subdivisions ma form or maintain associations "for the Y purposes of promoting through investigation, discussion, and cooperative effort interests and welfare of the several political subdivisions of the State of Colorado and to promote a closer relation between the several political subdivisions of the state." C.R,S. §29-1-401. The statute does not delineate particular organizational structures, specific goals, or funding mechanisms for such associations except for the purpose of lobbying. See, C.R.S. §29-1-403. -1- i t i I SPF.~.iriC AREAS OF COOrricATIVE IIv i rxEST The rest of this discussion explores particular areas of interest for intergovernmental cooperation including specific authority and procedure for creation, function, funding, significant limits, and miscellaneous points of interest. t LAND USE PL.ANNIl~iG Land Use Control Enabling Act. Creation. The Land Use Control Enabling Act authorizes local governments to "cooperate or contract with other units of government ...for the purposes of planning or regulating the development of land including, but not limited to, the joint exercise of planning, zoning, subdivision, building, and related regulations." C.R.S. §29-20-105(2)(a). Function. This Act specifically provides that local governments may enter into mutually binding and enforceable comprehensive development plans for areas in their jurisdictions. C.R.S. §29-20-105(2)(a). A comprehensive development plan may contain "master plans, zoning plans, subdivision regulations, and building code, permit, and other land use standards, which, if set out in specific detail, may be in lieu of such regulations or ordinances of the local governments." C.R.S. §29-20-105(2)(b). The statute does not specify an exact organizational structure for carrying out planning, g=g: ,there is no suggestion of which members should make up a cooperative planning body or how such a body should be structured. Funding. For funding intergovernmental land use planning the Act states that "without limiting or superseding any authority presently exercised or previously granted, local governments are hereby authorized to receive and expend funds from other governmental and private sources for the purposes of planning for or regulating the use of land C.R.S. §29-20-106. Limits. In the event that a cooperative plan is silent as to a specific land use matter, existing local land use regulations control. C.R.S. §29-20-105(2)(e). Furthermore, local governments may not be required to enter into intergovernmental agreements or comprehensive land use plans under the Act. C.R.S. §29-20-105(2)(1). The provisions of the Act do not apply to Regional Planning Commissions discussed in the next section. -2- \ i f( i Miscellaneous. The Land Use Enabling Act allows cooperating governments to include clauses in their agreements requiring mutual amendment of plans, cooperative control over annexed land, and revenue sharing. C.R.S. §29-20-105(2). Regional Plannine Commissions. Creation. The governing bodies of municipalities and the board of county commissioners may cooperate in creating a regional planning commission "for any region defined by said cooperating governing bodies or officials or boards limited to a region within the jurisdiction of said governing bodies." C.R.S. §30-28-105(1). Function. It is the duty of a regional planning commission to make and adopt a master plan for development of the territory within the boundaries of the region. C.R.S. §30-28- 106(2)(x). The regional master plan includes the regional planning commission's recommendations for development and may include numerous planning concerns and suggestions. C.R.S. §30-28-(3)(a)-(d). A regional master plan must include a plan for the extraction of minerals. C.R.S. §30-28-106(3)(c). Fundin g• The expenses of a regional planning commission are to be borne proportionally by each respective participating local government. Maintenance of such a commission is determined by agreement of the cooperating parties, and each has authority to appropriate funds for this purpose. C.R.S. §30-28-105(4). Regional planning commissions are empowered to receive and expend all grants, gifts, and bequests from the state and federal sources. C.R.S. §30-28-105(6). Limits. Regional planning commissions may only plan for areas within the region encompassed by the local governments participating in the commission. C.R.S. §30-28-106 (2)(a). Furthermore, any plan adopted by a regional planning commission will not be deemed an official advisory plan of any municipality or county unless adopted by the planning commission of that municipality or county. C.R.S. §30-28-106(2)(b). Miscellaneous. Unlike other county or district planning commissions, a regional planning commission is a "body politic and corporate," and may sue and be sued for its actions and on its contracts. C.R.S. §30-28-105('n. Individual members of the commission shall not be liable for actions or undertakings of the commission. Id. Any development in a region where a master plan has been adopted is subject to review and approval by the regional planning commission. C.R.S. §30-28-110. -3- i RECREATION t R~.,..ation Facilities Districts. Creation. Any city or county is authorized to "acquire, sell, own, exchange, and operate public recreation facilities, open space and parklands, playgrounds, and television relay and translator facilities; acquire, equip, and maintain land, buildings, or other recreational facilities either within or without the corporate limits of such city, town, village, or county C.R.S. §29-7-101(1). A city or county so authorized may "unite with any other similarly authorized political subdivision in owning or operating any recreational facility." C.R.S.§29-7-108. Pursuant to this authority, local governments are authorized to operate a recreational facility independently, cooperate in any manner which is mutually agreed upon by the participating parties, or delegate operation to a recreation board created by any or all participating bodies. C.R.S. §29-7-103. Function. The function of a Recreation Facilities District is to allow local governments to acquire, own, or operate public recreation facilities, open space and parklands, playgrounds and other related facilities. C.R.S. §29-7-10i(1). This section applies primarily to particular recreational facilities or sites, and not to entire "recreational districts." Funding. Local governments are generally authorized to expend funds "for all purposes" connected with recreational facilities. C.R.S. §29-7-101(1). Operation and admission fees are also authorized. C.R.S. §29-7-103. Any municipal corporation or board given charge of the recreation system has authority to accept gifts and bequests for the benefit of recreational services and also to exercise eminent domain. C.R.S. §29-7-104. Limits. A recreational facility is limited by definition to mean "such land or interest in land as may be necessary, suitable, or proper for park or recreational purposes or for the preservation or conservation of sites, scenes, open space, and vistas of scientific, historic, ~ aesthetic, or other public interest." C.R.S. §29-7-107. This broad definition provides significant discretion as to what constitutes a "recreation facility." -4- i J County Re..~r.dtion Districts. Creation. Whenever a county has acquired property for recreational purposes, (e. e., "recreational facilities" as authorized in C.R.S. §29-7-101 to 29-7-104), the board of county commissioners may establish and set the boundaries for a County Recreation District. C.R.S. §30-20-702(1). If a county planning commission exists, the planning commission has the duty to formulate a tentative plan for the district if the board of county commissioners [ so requests. Id. Function. A County Recreational District's primary purpose is to provide for long term recreation planning and management for the benefit of county residents. The board of county commissioners may choose to appoint aboard of county residents to administer the district. C.R.S. §30-20-703(1)(b). Funding. The board of county commissioners has the authority to levy a tax on all real and personal property situated within the district, not to exceed one mill, for the purposes of operating, maintaining, and expanding the County Recreation District, when the District boundaries are less than the entire County. C.R.S. §30-20-703(1)(a). Voter approval of the mill levy does not appear to be required. If the recreation district encompasses the entire county, the board may appropriate from the general fund, but may not enact a special levy. Id. The board of county commissioners may provide for the creation of a reserve fund for maintaining and improving the County Recreation District. C.R.S. §30-20-703(1)(d). All operations of the recreation district must be conducted in accordance with the local government budget law, in the same manner that budgets are submitted by other county departments. C.R.S. §30-20-704. Limits. Although a County Recreation District is set up to be run by the county, cooperative agreements between the county and local governments are not precluded. The statute specifically states that " no part ...shall repeal or affect any other act or part thereof, it being intended that this part 7 shall provide a separate method of accomplishing its objectives, and not an exclusive one." C.R.S. §30-20-705. Thus intergovernmental cooperation should be an acceptable method of achieving the statute's recreational goals. Miscellaneous. Nothing in the statutes expressly states that a County Recreation District may not overlap the territory of a special Metropolitan Park and Recreation District, created under C.R.S. §32-1-1005. A Metropolitan Park and Recreation District may exist wholly or partly within another special district, so long as overlapping services are not provided. C.R.S. §32- 1-107. The legislative motive for this was to prevent inefficient governmental efforts (overlapping services) and to prevent a double tax on residents for the same service. See, C.R.S. §32-1-102. -5- L l ~ This int.,~Y~etation finds additional support in the statutory section that expressly authorizes counties and special districts to unite and jointly own or operate recreational facilities.. C.R.S. §29-7-108. This section suggests that the Colorado Legislature contemplated cooperative efforts relating to recreation districts of diff;,,~.„t types. In the event that a County Recreation District encompasses some or all of the territory of a special Metropolitan Park and Recreation District, tax levy conflicts should not arise. Even if a levy has been imposed for a County Recreation District, the fact that the two ,districts serve distinct purposes undermines a claim that a double tax for overlapping services is imposed. An analogous situation exists when the same property owner is assessed two different tax levies for divergent services such as sewer and trash removal. Both services are similar, but not overlapping. Open Space. Creation. Local governments can obtain open space lands through several vehicles. Counties and local governments may hold an "interest in land" for the purpose of open space, individually or jointly, as a "recreation facility" under C.R.S. 29-7-107 (discussed above). The term "interest in land" as used in the statute "means and includes all rights and interests in land less than the full fee interest including., but not limited to .future interests, easements, covenants, and contractual rights." C.R.S. §29-7-107. A county may additionally establish a County Recreation District for open space lands. C.R.S. §30-20-702. Under the Park and Open Space Act of 1984, C.R.S. §29-7.5-lOl,g~ esp., owners of land subject to utility transmission rights-of--way in urban areas may dedicate or grant use of the right-of--way to a "park board." C.R.S. §29-7.5-104. "Urban areas," as used in this statute, include land located within any incorporated municipality or unincorporated land of the county which has been zoned residential and for which a final plat for subdivision has been approved. C.R.S. §29-7.5-103(5). A "park board" is the .governing body of any local governmental entity, including a board of county commissioners, authorized by state law to accept land for park, trail, or open space purposes. C.R.S. §29-7.5-103. State law authorizes any "city, town, village, county, metropolitan recreational district, or park and recreation district organized under article 1 of title 32, C.R.S...." to accept land for park, trail, or open space purposes. Local governments are authorized to obtain "conservation easements" for the purpose of restricting the fee owner's use of land to open space. C.R.S. §38-30.5-102. A conservation easement "may only be created by the record owners of the surface of the land by a deed or other instrument of conveyance specifically stating the intention of the grantor to create such an easement under this article.." C.R.S. §38-30.5-104(1). -6- t r Function. A county, municipality, or park board, as defined above, is entitled to hold and maintain land in an undeveloped state as open space for the benefit of the public. C.R.S. §29-7.5-101; C.R.S.§29-7-102. i Aboard of county commissioners may adopt, by resolution, rules and regulations to control public recreational lands and facilities owned or operated by the county. C.R.S. I §29-7-101(2). Aboard of county commissioners may also, acting on behalf of a recreation district, levy taxes, establish a residential board to administer the district, provide for personnel to operate and manage the district, and provide for a reserve fund adequate to meet the obligations of the district for operation, maintenance and enhancement. C.R.S. §30-20-703. In urban areas, ~ park boards are authorized to accept or reject aright-of--way dedication or grant of use based upon the reasonable needs of the public, applicable rules and regulations governing the park board, and safety of the transmission nght-of--way area. C.R.S. §29.7.5-I04. Both the owner of the right-of--way and the fee owner of the land must consent to the dedication or grant of use. Id. A conservation easement in gross serves as ales-than-fee property interest restricting a landowner's use of land. The landowner retains all residual interest in the land that is not granted by the easement. C.R.S. §38-30.5-105. The advantage of such an easement is that local governments may enjoy the benefits of open space, and yet pay less than full value for the land. A conservation easement is perpetual, unless otherwise stated in the instrument of creation and such an instrument may specify the particular characteristics of the easement. C.R.S. §38-30.5-104. Funding. Funding for open space, recreational facilities, and recreational districts is discussed in previous sections. Funding of conservation easements is not specified in the statute. I Possibilities include private donations of easements (which may qualify as tax exempt donations), funding through a county reserve fund (C.R.S. §30-20-703(d)), and private cash gifts, donations, or endowments to local governments. C.R.S. §29-7-104. I Limits. Colorado statute limits the combined total sales tax or total use tax imposed by local and state governments seven percent. C.R.S. §29-2-108(1). There are relevant exceptions in the event that the combined state and municipal sales or use tax has already reached seven percent. Id. There are a limited number of purposes which are exempted from this tax cap. These exemptions include: 1) sales tax for mass transit (C.R.S. §29-2-103.5), 2) lodging tax for the advertising and marketing of local tourism (C.R.S. §30-11-107.5), 3) district sales tax for public improvements in counties with more than 100,000 residents (C.R.S. §30-20- 604.5), 4) county rental tax on the rental of personal property (C.R.S. §30-11-107.7), and 5) the Colorado Tourism Promotion Fund Tax on tourism services (C.R.S. §39-26.1-lOl,et The Colorado Legislature has not provided any other exemptions from the seven- ( percent tax cap. -7- i i- The state legislature could be petitioned to exempt sales tax dedicated to open space land acquisition from the sales tax cap in the same manner that sales tax for mass transit was exempted. 1 TRANSPORTATION County or In6:,.~,oyernmcmtal ,Agency. Creation. The general powers of a county include the power to "develop, maintain, and operate mass transportation systems either individually or iointly with any government or political subdivision." C.R.S. § 30-11-101(1)(f). Similar authority exists for municipalities. Function. There are two main options for operating amass transit system under this authority. First, the mass transit system may be administered by a governmental agency, but operated using a private contractor. Second, the system may be administered and operated "in house" by a participating governmental agency. Under the authority cited above, the County may contract with other political subdivisions to provide service and receive revenues pursuant to an intergovernmental agreement with the Towns of Vail and Avon. A specific example of an intergovernmental operating system is the Roaring Fork Transit Authority (BETA). The Town of Aspen and Pitkin County created this authority by Intergovernmental Agreement. Pitkin County continues to provide many administrative services for the agency. A similar model might solve management and control problems in Eagle County. I Funding. Under either of the two arrangements discussed above, the funding process would I be essentially the same. All spending agencies of a county must be funded through appropriations by the board of county commissioners from the general county fund. C.R.S. §30-11-107(2)(a). The system would be funded pursuant to the intergovernmental agreement. One revenue source might be a special transportation sales tax authorized by statute. C.R.S. §29-2-103.5. This special tax must be submitted to the registered voters of the county for approval. C.R.S. §29-2-103.5(3)(a). Such a tax may not exceed one-half of one percent, but is exempt from the seven percent total sales tax limitation on counties. C.R.S. §29-2-108(4). -8- J I~ When using revenues generated by this special sales tax, a county must issue a request for proposals from potential private contractors, and analyze the costs of a private carver versus the costs for an in-house system. C.R.S. §29-2-103.5(2)(c). If the costs are less for a private carrier, a county must contract with a private carrier, and may not commence an in-house operation. C.R.S.§29-2-103.5(2)(d). Under the RFTA model, Pitkin County issued debt for the agency's use to be paid by a one percent county sales tax dedicated to transportation. Initially, the RFTA was funded through contributions by the Town of Aspen, Pitkin County, and the local ski corporation. Now the RFTA is funded through the sales tax. A similar approach might solve funding problems in Eagle County. Fees, fares, and property taxes may also be used to fund mass transit. Finally, I UMPTA grants may be available from the Federal and State Department of Transportation. New Authority by Creation of a District. Regional Service Authority. Creation. Regional Service Authorities may be created pursuant to authority granted by Article XIV, § 17 of the Colorado Constitution. A Regional Service Authority must include the entire territory of at least two counties. C.R.S. §32-7-101-104. A service authority is initiated by a petition signed by five percent of the registered voters in the service area or by a resolution adopted by the majority of the counties and municipalities having temtory i within the proposed district. C.R.S. §32-7-105(1). i A Regional Service Authority is run by a board of directors of five members to be elected by the qualified electors of the proposed district. C.R.S. §32-7-110. Function. The State Legislature has designated numerous services that may be provided by a Regional Service Authority. These services include: 1) domestic water treatment and distribution, 2) flood control, 3) sewage collection, treatment and disposal, 4) solid waste collection and disposal, 5) parks and recreation, 6) libraries, 7) fire protection, 8) hospitals, 9) housing, 10) weed and pest control, 11) cultural facilities, 12) local government management services, 13) public utilities, 14) jails, 15) land and soil conservation, and finally 16) ground transportation. C.R.S. §32-7-111. The Regional Service Authority may provide revenue, manage the district, acquire property, and perform other duties as required. C.R.S. §32-7-113. Additionally, the board may create a local improvement district within the service authority to facilitate the financing, construction, or improvement of facilities within a portion or portions of the service district. C.R.S. §32-7- 134. -9- i f Any municipality may plan and operate a public transportation system, and any county or municipality may contract with a service authority for the planning or operation of such a system. A service authority may also exercise any additional powers that are granted to the Regional Transportation District under C.R.S. §32-9-101, ~ ~ , and contract with counties and municipalities for transportation services. C.R.S. §32-7-140. Funding. Funding of a Regional Service Authority is limited to property taxes, revenue bonds, contributions from government or private grants, and fees for service. C.R.S. §32-7-11? to 132. Each county participating in the service authority may be able to submit a special transportation sales tax to the district voters that would be exempt from the seven percent limitation. C.R.S. §29-2-103.5. The limitation on mill levies applies to Regional Service Authorities, but a mill levy increase can be achieved through general election in the service area. C.R.S. §32-7-118(1). A special taxing district may be formed within the service authority to facilitate the furnishing of services and collection of property taxes and service charges. C.R.S. §32-7- 132 to 133. Any decision to incur debt on behalf of the service authority must be submitted to the registered voters of the service authority. Bonds issued for local improvement districts under C.R.S. §32-7-135 are not considered debt under this section. C.R.S. §32-7-122. I.amits. The law currently requires two entire counties to be included in a service authority. C.R.S. §32-7-131(1). Either Lake or Pitkin County are logical choices to join Eagle. If Pitkin were selected, Garfield could also logically be included. Eagle County may be able to draw on RFTA's resources in system operations for the Roaring Fork Valley. The enabling legislation might be amended to allow the creation of a Regional Service Authority which includes parts of one or more counties. Once a service authority is established in a given area, no new special district may be established within the same territory if the purpose of the special district is substantially the same as the service authority. C.R.S. §32-7-137. M:;...~.,yahtan Distracts. Creatlon. A "Metropolitan District" is a type of special district that can provide transportation services. The particular purposes of a metropolitan district must be specified in a "service plan," to be approved by voter election in the district. C.R.S. §32-1-802(1). -10- t Function. A Metropolitan District must provide two or more distinct services from the following list: fire protection, mosquito control, parks and recreation, safety protection, i sanitation, street improvement, television relay and translation, water, and transportation. l C.R.S. 32-1-103(10}. A special Metropolitan District for transportation would have to be coupled with one or more services from this list. A M~u~.,~.olitan District is free to enter into cooperative agreements with other local governmental subdivisions. C.R.S. §32-1- 1004(5). Under this scheme, transportation could be combined with parks and recreation into a single district. A Metropolitan District may only provide transportation services in the county or counties which are within the boundaries of the district. C.R.S. §32-1-1004(5). A Metropolitan District may be formed within an existing special district which provides or is authorized to provide transportation, so long as the improvements or services are not overlapping. C.R.S. §32-1-1004(6)(b). This would allow a "mass transit" district to overlap a "street" district. Funding. Boards of special districts are authorized to generate funding for the district through property taxes (C.R.S. §32-1-1201), grants (C.R.S. §32-1-1001(1).(1)), and through fees for service (C.R.S. §32-1-1001(1)(k)). The special district board ma create eneral obli ation indebtedness u to one and Y g g P one-half percent of the valuation for assessment of the taxable property in the special district. Voter approval is required for any debt that exceeds the one and one-half percent limit. C.R.S. §32-1-1101(2). Any increased property tax levy for the special district must also be submitted for voter approval. C.R.S. §29-1-302(1). Limits. The major limitation of the metropolitan district is the requirement that a second, non-overlapping, service is provided. C.R.S. §32-1-103(10). Additionally, a metropolitan district may not operate a transportation system in a city or county where the city, county, or any other political entity has entered into an intergovernmental cooperative contract to provide transportation services. C.R.S. §32-1-1004(5}. No special district can be formed if its boundaries are wholly contained within the boundaries of a municipality or municipalities, except upon the adoption of a resolution of approval by the governing body of each municipality. C.R.S. §32-1-204.5(1). Sr;,.,:al Statutory Districts. t Creation. New authority for a transportation district could be created through special legislation by the Colorado State Legislature. ,E~. . C.R.S. §32-9-106. Benefits of this organization would be acustom-designed district to meet the needs of our system. ~ -11- i ~4 Two main approaches may be taken. First, other resort areas, with needs similar to ours, might be interested in jointly approaching the legislature to create more generic authority to operate transportation systems. This authority could include the ability to fund ` the district with sates tax as well as property tax, and allow only portions of entire counties ( to be included within the district. Second, the State Legislature could create a specific service district to specific specifications. This is how Metropolitan Denver's Regional Transportation District was created. This method, while initially giving us a tailor-made district, might require further legislative action as adjustments become necessary. Function. Certain statutory requirements apply to regional transportation districts. The special legislation for such a district outlines the district area and also provides specific authority to the board of directors for carrying out the district's needs. Funding. The Metropolitan Denver's Regional Transportation District is authorized to levy a uniform district sales tax not to exceed six-tenths of one percent to be approved by a district voter election. C.R.S. §32-9-119(2)(a). The district may also levy a variable sales tax, depending upon the level of service provided m different areas of the distnct, not to exceed one percent. C.R.S. §32-9-119(2)(b). The district is authonzed to pursue pnvate financing, collect service fees, issue revenue bonds, and impose property taxes on commercial entities within the transportation corridor. C.R.S. §32-9-119 to 120. No general property taxes may be levied, directly or indirectly, except for the payment of any annual operation and maintenance deficit. Such a levy must not exceed one-half mill on each dollar of valuation for each assessment year. C.R.S.§32-9-120. BUSINESS AND MARx~ t u1G CO~rr.~ATION Business I ~ , ~ ~ ~ cement Districts, Creation. Within a municipality, a business improvement district may be created to fund business development and marketing. C.R.S. §31-25-1201 ~ se~,c.. Business improvement districts are initiated by a petition signed by persons who own real or personal property amounting to 50 percent or more of the total assessed property value for the district. C.R.S.§31-25-1205. ( Function. f The Business District's powers include authority for planning, construction and maintenance of improvements, business promotion, security, and design assistance. -12- 4 I Funding. Property tax levies are authorized if the initial petition specifies the amount of such a tax. If the petition does not specify a tax levy, an election must be held in the district to authorize the tax. C.R.S. §31-25-1215. Limits. No similar authority exists for creating a Business Im~,~., cement District within the unincorporated areas of the County. County and Municipality D~+el~pmer~t Rrvv~,nue Bond Act, Creation. The "County and Municipality Development Revenue Bond Act" allows local governments to: finance, acquire, own, lease, improve, and dispose of properties to the end that such counties and municipalities may be able to promote industry and develop trade or other economic activity by inducing profit or nonprofit corporations, federal governmental offices, hospitals, and agricultural, manufacturing, industrial, commercial, or business ento~~,~~ses to locate, expand or remain in this state. C.R.S. §29-3-102(1). Function. Local governments may chose to execute the provisions of this act individually or, alternatively, any county or municipality may delegate, by resolution or by ordinance, authority to any other county or municipality to act on its behalf in the financing, 1 refinancing, acquisition, leasing, ownership, improvement, and disposal of projects. C.R.S. §29-3-104(2). Thus, intergovernmental cooperation is possible if concerns over the repayment of the obligation can be adequately addressed. Funding. This Act authorizes financing through special, limited obligation bonds to achieve the goals of encouraging economic activity. C.R.S. §29-3-105(1). The total dollar amount of tax-exempt private activity bonds that the county may issue is allocated from a statewide ceiling on these bonds. C.R.S. §24-32-1706. Bonds issued under this Act are payable only out of project revenues, and do not create "debt" for the city or county. Allardice v. Adams County, 476 P.2d 982 (Colo. 1970). No tax levies are authorized for financing acquisition of properties for manufacturing or industrial enterprises. Limits. Significant limits are imposed by the Internal Revenue Service for tax exempt status. The local government must apply for part of the allocation made to the state. -13- i I 1 Business Tax Incentives. Creation. A county is authorized to negotiate a tax incentive with any taxpayer who establishes anew business facility in the city or county. C.R.S. §30-11-123(1). A county may also negotiate for an incentive payment with any taxpayer who expands a facility in such a way that the expansion constitutes anew facility. Function. The purpose of the business tax incentive is to promote new businesses and to initiate expansion of existing businesses in the city or county. Limits. A Business tax incentive may not exceed 50 percent of the amount of taxes levied by the county upon the taxable personal property located at or within the new business facility. The same tax limitation applies to expanded facilities. C.R.S. §30-11-123(2). This statute is scheduled to expire in January, 1995. EnI,:,Y.,.:se Zones. Creation. A county, municipality, or a group of local governments may propose an area as an "enterprise zone" for the purposes of encouraging economic activity. C.R.S. §39-30-103. A proposed enterprise zone must have a population of 50,000 or less, and qualify under at least one of several listed economic distress criteria. Imo. The Town of Gypsum and certain areas adjacent to the Eagle County Regional Airport are within an enterprise zone. Function. Enterprise zones provide significant incentives for businesses including triple investment tax credit exemption from state income tax. New businesses can earn tax credits and refunds up to $500 per employee. Companies purchasing machinery and equipment for use in enterprise zones may be exempt from sales tax or use tax on such purchases. A new business facility owner may also negotiate for a property tax refund equal to the amount of any increase in property taxes resulting from the improvement. Businesses that qualify under this Act are free to negotiate with a city or county to have that city or county refund the incremental increase in sales tax due to the increased valuation of the businesses property. C.R.S. §39-30-107.5(1). A qualified business may also negotiate for a refund of sales tax levied by the city or county on purchases of equipment, machinery, machine tools, or supplies used in the taxpayer's business in the ent.,~r~:se zone. . C.R.S. §39-30-107.5(2); see also,"Economic Development Incentives for Colorado Municipalities," Paul D. Godec, 19 Colo. Law. 239 (1990). 1 -14- I Funding. The local impact of this tax incentive scheme is potentially quite low since most of the tax benefits come from state sources. Any initial refund of local sales or property tax revenues should be offset with the corresponding long term gains provided by the new facility. Limits. At the present time, all twelve ent;,~r~~se zones authorized by statute exist. The legislature would have to be petitioned to authorize any additional enterprise zones. See, "Economic Development Incentives for Colorado Municipalities," Paul D. Godec, 19 Colo. Law 239 (1990). Downtown Development Authorities. Creation. Municipalities are authorized to create, by resolution, "downtown development authorities" in order to "halt or prevent deterioration of property values or structures within central business districts, [or to] halt the growth of blighted areas within such districts..." C.R.S. §31-25-801. A special municipal election is required to form a downtown development authority. C.R.S. §31-25-804(1). Function. A development board has the power to create long-range plans for the development of the downtown area, and actually undertake development with approval of the municipality. C.R.S. §31-25-807. Funding. The development district may issue bonds payable from revenues or previously authorized taxes. C.R.S. §31 25-809. A downtown development authority resolution must state any proposed property tax or sales tax levy. This resolution must be submitted for voter approval. C.R.S. §31-25-804. Limits. No similar authority for downtown development authorities exists for counties or i intergovernmental associations. Lodging Tax Revenues Creation. The board of county commissioners of each county may levy a county lodging tax, not to exceed two percent, on rooms and accommodations. C.R.S. §30-11-107.5(1). The board must, by resolution, approve a proposal for the county lodging tax and then submit the proposal to a special election by the voters of the unincorporated areas of the county and any municipalities that are subject to the tax. C.R.S. §30-11-107.5(3)(a). -15- `1 I~ f_ Funefi~. Funds derived from the county lodging tax are to be used only to advertise and market tourism, reimburse election costs, and construct tourist information centers. No other capital expenditures are authorized. C.R.S. §30-11-107.5(4)(a). Counties and municipalities are free to cooperate in creating county-wide uniform lodging taxes with voluntary abandonment of municipal lodging ordinances. C.R.S. §30-11-107.5(c)(5). Funding. Voter approval is required in the county prior to imposing any lodging tax. C.R.S. ( §30-11-107.5(3)(a). l._ I units. The county lodging tax does not apply within any municipality that has already levied a municipal lodging tax. I i -16- PUBLIC NOTICE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING SCn~DULE AUGUST, 1992 The Vail Town Council has been reviewing its meeting schedule. In an attempt to respond to scheduled meeting demands, as well as adhere to mandated ordinance and charter requirements, Council will now be meeting at the following times: EVENING MEETINGS Evening meetings will continue to be held on the first and third Tuesday evenings of each month, starting at 7:30 P.M. These meetings will provide a forum for citizen participation and public audience for conducting regular Council business. WORK SESSIONS Work sessions, which are primarily scheduled for Council debate and understanding of issues before the Council, will now be scheduled at 2:00 P.M. on the alternating Tuesday afternoons, i.e., the second, and fourth Tuesdays of each month. A brief overview work session for Council will precede the evening meetings, from 6:30 P.M. - 7:30 P.M. 'rn~ AUGUST, 1992, VAIL TOWN (_"OUN(_;IL MEETING SCHEDULE IS AS FOLLOWS: Tuesdav. August 4, 1992 Work session ...................6:30 - 7:30 P.M. Evening meeting .............7:30 P.M. Tuesdav. August 11, 1992 Work session ...................2:00 P.M. (starting time to be determined by length of agenda} Tuesdav. August 18. 1992 Work session ...................6:30 - 7:30 P.M. Evening meeting .............7:30 P.M. Tuesdav, August 25, 1992 Work session ...................2:00 P.M. (starting time to be determined by length of agenda) TOWN OF VAIL ~`==~~~i~llla.~~<~~~,a~~,~1,t~u~.~ Pamela A. Brandmeyer Assistant to the Town Manager