Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1993-07-06 Support Documentation Town Council Regular Session
,~1. , VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING TUESDAY, JULY 6, 1993 7:30 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS AGENDA 1. Presentation of the Chuck Anderson Youth Awards. 2. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION. 3. Consent Agenda: . Approval of Minutes of the June 1, 1993, and June 15, 1993, Evening Meetings. 4. Vail Valley Performance and Conference Center (VVP&CC) Community Opinion Forum. 5. 1993 Community Survey Final Presentation. 6. Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1993, second reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 16.04, and Sections 16.12.010, 16.20.010, 16.20.220, 16.22.010, 16.22.160, 16.26.010, 16.20.015, and 16.22.014 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code to provide for the prohibition of neon signs and exterior gas filled, illuminated and fiber optic signs, and providing regulations regarding the review of all other gas filled, illuminated and fiber optic signs, and interior accent lighting; and providing details in regard thereto. 7. Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance amending Paragraphs 16.32.030(F) and 16.32,040(A) of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, to provide for the termination of any non-conforming sign five years alter the effective date of any amendment to the Sign Code Ordinance, and setting forth details in regard thereto. 8. Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance amending Title 12 -Streets and Sidewalks of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, by the addition of Chapter 12.16 -Revocable Right of Way Permits, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Town of Vaii. 9. Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance amending Section 15.02.020(A) and 15.02.020(G) of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, to provide for the adoption of Chapter 31 of the 1993 Supplement of the Uniform Building Code and to provide for the adoption of the 1993 Edition of the National Electrical Code, and amending Section 15.02.030(C) of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail to provide for the adoption of an elevator inspection fee in the amount of $150.00 for each elevator, and a commercia{ dumbwaiter inspection fee in the amount of $75.00 for each dumbwaiter, and a will call inspection fee in the amount of $3.00 per permit; and providing details in regard thereto. 10. Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1977, Ordinance No. 33, Series of 1978, and Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1986; an ordinance amending Special Development District #5 and providing for a development plan and its contents; permitted, conditional and accessory uses; development standards, recreation amenities tax, and other special provisions; and setting 1 Dun forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Simba Land Corporation/Walid Said. 11. Appeal of a Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) decision to not allow the removal of a dwelling unit in the A & D Building/286 Bridge Street/Lots A-D/Block 5A, Vail Village First Filing. Appellant: Vail Associates, Inc. represented by Jack Hunn. 12. Adjournment. • • • • • • • THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 7/13/93, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL OVERVIEW WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 7/20/93, BEGINNING AT 6:30 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL EVENING MEETING WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 7/20/93, BEGINNING AT 7:30 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. • • • • • • • CAAGENDAM 2 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING TUESDAY, JULY 6, 1993 7:30 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS EXPANDED AGENDA 7:30 P.M. 1. Presentation of the Chuck Anderson Youth Awards. Mayor Osterfoss Backaround Rationale: The purpose of the award is to recognize and reinforce outstanding achievements by youth of the Upper Eagle Valley, both for individual achievements and for their endeavors as role models for others. Chuck Anderson was a member of the Vail Town Council and was working to recognize outstanding youth at the time of his sudden death. Michael Johnston and Ernest Medina, Jr. are this year's recipients. 7:35 P.M. 2. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION. 7:40 P.M. 3. Consent Agenda: Approval of Minutes of the June 1, 1993, and June 15, 1993, Evening Meetings. 7:45 P.M. 4. Vail Valley Performance and Conference Center (VVP&CC) Community Caroline Tremblay Opinion Forum. Action Reauested of Council: Hear input from the community about whether they feel a Performance & Conference Center would improve or hurt the quality of life in Vail; whether they think more groups would be good for the economy; whether they think an additianal 0.9% tax on restaurants and bars and an additional 1.8% tax on hotels is the right way to help pay for this facility. Backaround Rationale: The Community of Vail has been studying the feasibility of building a Performance & Conference Center for the past three years. Based on the response to the project from many meetings and numerous presentations, a plan has been developed to finance the construction and annual operating costs of the building through a combination of taxes on hotels, restaurants, and bars as weH as private contributions. TOV is planning to commit up to $1,000,000 to this project and has asked the community to come forward to voice their opinions about the proposed VVP&CC to determine the level of community support before pledging such a significant amount of money. 8:30 P.M. 5. 1993 Community Survey Final Presentation. Chris Cares Caroline Fisher Action Reauested of Council: Carefully review survey findings in preparation for the July 7, 1993 short term goal setting session and for upcoming budget process. Backaround Rationale: The 1993 TOV Community Survey began in March. In past years, a written survey has been sent to residents, second home owners, and box holders. This year a more comprehensive survey was conducted, with the assistance of Nolan Rosall of Rosall, Remmen and Cares of Boulder. Focus groups were held with community members in March to determine which questions should be asked on this year's survey. A written survey was produced and sent to 9,000 residents, second home 1 owners, box holders, and merchants. Following the written surv~sy, a random phone survey was conducted to follow up on issues raised within the written survey. These results were tabulated and presented to focus groups from the community to receive their feedback on the survey's findings. Staff Recommendation: Carefully review findings of this comprehensive survey. A letter will be sent from Mayor Osterfoss to all focus <froup members thanking them for their involvement and giving them the final analysis of the survey. 9:15 P.M. 6. Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1993, second reading, an ordinance amending Shelly Mello Chapter 16.04, and Sections 16.12.010, 16.20.010, 16.20.220, 16.22.010, Larry Eskwith 16.22.160, 16.26.010, 16.20.015, and 16.22.014 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code to provide for the prohibition of neon signs and exterior gas filled, illuminated and fiber optic signs, and providing regulations regarding the review of all other gas filled, illuminated and fiber optic signs„ and interior accent lighting; and providing details in regard thereto. Action Reauested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1993, on second reading. 9:30 P.M. 7. Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance amending Shelly Mello Paragraphs 16.32.030(F) and 16.32.040(A) of the Municipal Code of the Larry Eskwith Town of Vail, to provide for the termination of any non-conforming sign five years after the effective date of any amendment to the Sign Code Ordinance, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Action Reauested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1993, on first reading. 9:45 P.M. 8. Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance amending Title Tim Devlin 12 -Streets and Sidewalks of the Municipal Code of the Town of V~iil, by Larry Eskwith the addition of Chapter 12.16 -Revocable Right of Way Permits„ and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Town of Vail. Action Reauested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1993, on first reading. Background Rationale: Council had directed staff to review the existing Revocable Right of Way process and asked for an ordinance to be created that would serve both the private and public needs by providing funding on TOV land for improvements recommended by the TOV Streetscape Pian, the TOV Village Master Plan, and the Lionshead Urban Design Guide Plan. Council reviewed the draft ordinance at the June 22, 1993, Work Session and made no changes. Please note that the Mill Creek Court Building representative, Mark Matthews, has indicated that he would like to include the design and labor costs in the amortized costs of the project, as well as construction costs. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 6, Series of 1993, on first reading. 10:15 P.M. 9. Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance amennding Gary Murrain Section 15.02.020(A) and 15.02.020(G) of the Municipal Code of the 'Town Larry Eskwith of Vail, to provide for the adoption of Chapter 31 of the 1993 Supplement of the Uniform Building Code and to provide for the adoption of the 1993 Edition of the National Electrical Code, and amending Section 15.02.030(C) of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail to provide for the adoption of an 2 elevator inspection fee in the amount of $150.00 for each elevator, and a commercial dumbwaiter inspection fee in the amount of $75.00 for each dumbwaiter, and a will call inspection fee in the amount of $3.00 per permit; and providing details in regard thereto. Action Reauested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1993, on first reading. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1993, on first reading. 10:45 P.M. 10. Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance repealing and Tim Devlin reenacting Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1977, Ordinance No. 33, Series of Larry Eskwith 1978, and Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1986; an ordinance amending Special Development District #5 and providing for a development plan and its contents; permitted, conditional and accessory uses; development standards, recreation amenities tax, and other special provisions; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Simba Land Corporation/Walid Said. Action Reauested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1993, on first reading. Backaround Rationale: Please see the CDD memorandum to the PEC dated June 28, 1993. On June 28, 1993, the PEC recommended approval (by a vote of 5-0-1) of the applicant's request for a major amendment to SDD #5. The PEC did allow for one (1) additional unit having a total GRFA of 1602 square feet to be added to the project in the future. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1993, on first reading. 11:45 P.M. 11. Appeal of a PEC decision to not allow the removal of a dwelling unit in the Kristan Pritz A & D Building/286 Bridge Street/Lots A-D/Block 5A, Vail Village First Filing. Larry Eskwith Appellant: Vail Associates, Inc. represented by Jack Hunn. Action Reauested of Council: Uphold/overturn/modify the PEC decision. Backaround Rationale: The PEC voted 4-1-1 to not allow the request. Please see the PEC memo to Council in this packet. 12:15 A.M. 12. Adjournment. • • • • • • • THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 7/13/93, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL OVERVIEW WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 7/20/93, BEGINNING AT 6:30 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL EVENING MEETING WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 7/20/93, BEGINNING AT 7:30 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. • • • • • • • C:WGENDA.TCE 3 • PAIL GOOF CLUB JOHN A. 1]OBSON ARENA ' 303-479-2260 J1t Fast Ltonshead Circk FORD TENNIS COMPLEX Wii• Cobndo 81657 r • ~ 303'79-2294 303.479.2271 ~~rl ~ ~O MARKETINGISPECIAL EVENTS VAIL YOUTH SERVICES $pOlj'1$ 395 Fast Ltortshead Clrck DISTRICT ,~3-d79-2279 x.11. Colo~do ate NATURE CENTER ~~"2191 292 West Meadow Drive • Yell, Coloredo 81657 303-4'79-2291 30379-2279 • FAX 303.479-2197 CRITERIA FOR NOMINATION CHUCK ANDERSON YOUTH RECOGNITION AWARD - The applicant must be a resident of the Eagle County School District and either be attending or have attended a local school in Upper Eagle County (Vail to Edwards) either as a full time or part time student. -The applicant must have accomplished something special either through academics, athletics, or fine arts. -The applicant should have received prior recognition or honor for his or her accomplishment outside the Town of Vail (preferably state or national recognition). -The applicant must exemplify ideals which set standards for other students in all facets of life. -The applicant cannot be older than 21 years of age. ~ YAII fAll CLiI JOHr A. ~OdSU\ AREA • . - X1d7~22M 311 I.. II..+.r flrrf FOLD Tk.\\lS COAIr1.EX w. C•"•~• p?~` MARkETi\G.STF,[IAL E~LY[5 YAIL 101T11 SFR~ICES ail cre io DISTRICT „ ~M,,.~c'.,;,.: rr,.n""* ~An.~e c~~~ 1.-+.a?lra »2 vvhl Maao. D~K • we. c~.eo a~s~l ~a+-u+l CHUCK ANDERSON YOUTH RECOGNITION AWARD NOMINATION FORM NOTE: All nominations will be kept CONFIDENTIAL and we ask you to do the same until the awards are announced. De,TE: October 14, 1992 *CANDIDATE~S NAME' Michael C.C: Johnston ADDRESS: 356 E. Hanson Ranc'~ Roar' CITY/STATE/ZIP: Vail, Colorado 81657 TELEPHONE: (303) r,76 - 5229 .AGE: '-7 AREA OF RECOGNITION: Academic NAME OF SCHOOL LAST ATTENDED: pail Mountain School *'i. team nomination, you must attach a list of all individuals invol~~•ad and ir;~~:lude their addresses and phone numbers. PARENT OR GUARDIAN' Paul and Sarah Johnston ADDRESS' 356 E. Hanson Ranc*~ Road CITY/STATE/ZIP: Vail, Colorado 8'.65 NAME OR ORGANIZATION' Vail Mountain School CONTACT PERSON: David C. Schindel TELEPHONE' b76 - 3850 ADUicESS: 1160 Katsos Ranc;~ Road CITY/STATE/ZIP: Vail, Colorado 81b57 AFFILIATION: Please Return To: CHUCK ANDERSON YOUTH RECOGNITION AWARD COMMITTEE VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT, YOUTH SERVICES BRANCH 395 EAST LIONSHEAD CIRCLE VAIL, CO 81657 WE REGRET THAT WE WILL BE UNABLE TO RETURN TO YOU ANY PHOTOGRAPHS, CLIPPING: OR INFORMATION YOU SEND US REGARDING THIS CANDIDATE. ~ aJail Mounfain ~c~iool October 14,1992 Michael's a bright, articulate, aggressive, engaged learner. He is an active participant in class activities, and heezceeds expectations often to investigate ideas he finds particularly intriguing. Michael finds we joy in learning. He is an animated participant in discussions of ideas encountered both in the classroom and through independen investigations. His thirst for knowledge drives him beyond the classroom; often he returns wiith questions which reflect his exploration in the hours between organized sessions. Due to the size of our school, Advanced Placement sections of courses are offerea in rife hour before school ~gii?s. 1u the most recent meeting of A.P. literature, Michael came to class a few minutes before seven so he could ask questions about Dostoyevsky's "Grand Inquisitor." This is not an isolated instance, rather he has sought additional stimulation in each of the academic areas. Michael's diligerce and commitment have been recognised by his qualification as a 1992-93 National Merit Semi-Finalist; yet his inspiration has never been awards, but has been his genuine interest in ideas. Michael's commitment to learning models the ideal to students throughout our school. In addition to his leadership in the classroom, Michael is a leader in student activities. For the fast three years of high school, he was active in student council. This year, after again being the leading vote getter, he abdicated his position to make room for a younger student. His rationale was that he could help the council as an advisor while helping the school by allowing a younger student the opportunity of beginning a program of service to the school. Michael is the most genuine altruist I have encountered in any arena. In past y.;ars he has coordinated student volunteerism for a Denver soup kitchen and has trained student insiroctors `ar the Colorado Ski School for the Blind. Not only has he coordinated, he has been the first person to give of his time in volunteering for these programs. When something needs to be done on campus, Michael is the student we rely upon to organize student efforts. I have never known him to be anything but a willing and eager participant. He is a friend to peers and younger students alike. I am honored to have the opportunity to recommend Michael for the prestigious Chuck Anderson Youth Recognition Award. He is without question the finest student and the finest young person I have encountered in eighteen years of teaching. Sincerely, e David C. Schind~l, College Counselor 3160 KATSOS RANCH ROAD • VAIL, COLORADO 81657 • (303) 476-3850 ' ~ `"s 1 ;L I " ~ ' E• . • . - -a+. r. ~ r~~.. . ~ l Y/ T t . - r ~ ti i, ~ Four players on the Vail Mountain SchooPs soccer team were honored N the Northwestern League. Rik Littlefield, far left, was given honorable mention, and (from left to right) Tyler Sage, Mke Johnston, and Mke Slevin were named aN-Teague. Photo by Jim Schnebly. Parts ~.~~ake u t~i.e v~hole p Although the emphasis with success is inextricable from the Vai] Mountain School went the Vai] Mountain School soc- team's success," said Bandoni. into the Canon City game with cer team is on the group as a "Sure I'm proud, but that's the the idea of m~t•ely avoiding a whole, fate intervened and most important thing these slaughter. At t}?~, end of the first singled out four players. players get out of this. There's half VMS led 1-0, and no one Mike Slevin, Mike Johnston, no question these players did was more surprised than they and Tyler Sage were named something to deserve the at- were. After VMS lost the all•league players, and Rik tendon, but I have members of contest in a 3-1 match, the Littlefield was given honorable the team who were not picked Canon City coaches admitted mention in the Northwestern who I think were superior, too." they hadn't run up against a conference. If the team is proud of itself more formidable opponent all Coach Bob Bandoni empha- this season, it has plenty of rea- season. Indeed, by taking the sizes teamwork, but he's still son to be. This season VMS lead at the halfVMS did some- pleased the four were chosen. made it to the quarter finals for thing no other team accom- For himself and the rest of the the first time in the school's his- pbehed all year. team, the recognition is not an tory. Going into what would be 'We were happy to play individual laurel but a reflec- its final game, the team held a them; we looked forward to tion on the group. playing the best," said Bandoni. "What makes it more mean- record of 10-3. It was the most stringent test ingful is that each player rec- The team Lhat beat the we could ask for, and we gave ognizes that their individual Mountain School, Canon City, them a healthy response. Tm ' went on to pick up the state real pleased with the entire title. Local prep ski racers head for Tt~l k ~ state meet TQw~ . ^ • ' }q~ - Hattie Mountain and V: • - ~ =~zi • Mountain Schooi will be among tJ Y_ _ - ='r, , _ } favorites when the state high scho • - ~ ~ ~ ~ ,,y:. ski meet begins today at Brec. • ~ , _ . - r ~ enridge and Frisco. "'1" _ Alpine teams can enter only s ~ ~ ~ ~ , 4 racers in each race. even thous " h ` } s more may have qualified far tJ - - - - state meet during the season. .a ~ ~ The Vail Mountain School gv team will be Jennifer Mack, Ch r ` j Cortina, Miranda Bailey, Hoi . r:+ : _ c Johnson and Karma Valentine, T boys alpine team is John Johnsen t ~ t. ~ Mike Johnston, Chris Slevin, Ka~ •r~ , y Ogilby, Andrew Otw and M: - ~ { , Crowley. 1, ~ - - The VMS boys nordic team co ' sisu of Ogilby, Erik Malmgren a; _ Andy Warner. The girls team is li5on Otto, Sacha Hart, Kate Rag s and Erin Kunkel. The Battle Mountain boys alpi _ _ - - - - - team includes Mau Moser. P'atri r.. - - - ~ - ~ Welch, TJ. Ricci, Jeff M u~ Jamie Schnell Jay Henry a Vail Mountain School students are ready to perform Everybody Dance Now toctight at T p.m. for ttu Chad Lund, Jen• Patrick Bourke. school's tall arts and activitiesa ~ Ju J.I Bucktey.~ln the back row are Jalme Watlteh~ i~iks ~ n on, Alex Kendall, Erin lllacGrego Erik Edborg and Allison Otto• The defending state champs offer Mack, Kristi inlay, Chris Guerriero, Jon Gegerson, Christy Day, gins alpine team is Genet Kerr Jest Rasmussen, Birgit Krel Melissa Sherowski, Stacy Hooko Mollie Bourke and Alyson Wysor The boys nordic team is Dan Wer7artd, Julian Railton and Drt Lucas. Ricci, who will compete f the skimeister crown, will also ra country. The girls nordic team is Jade P tel, Marisa Rodriguez, Nicr Shanor, Jen Mason, Ingrid Mons , and Kyie Kenney. The alpine racers will have giant slalom this morning, and ~ nordic teams wt71 have their dividual race. The girls have a kilometer classical race and i boys a 7.5-kilometer classical rac On Saturday. the alpine raa have a slalom in the morning, ; the nordic racers a freestyle relay the afternoon. The boys will hay 3x5-kilometer relay and the girl 3x3.5-kilometer relay. • - ; y i : ` , v. . v ~ ~ Y f i _ , Vad OaiyMlarka lrfo Vail Mountain School's ski team members celebrate the boys state championship. The flirts t'inist-r, third. Front row, left to right: Laura Maitland, Erin Kunkel, Karina Valentine, Miranda Bailey, K.i: Ragan, Carrie Northrop, Kate Davis, Sasha Hart, Chus CoRina, Holly Johnson and Allison Qf Back row: coach Kevin Kaneda, coach Chris de Francis, Matt Crowley, Andy Warner, Jo Johnston, Andrew Otto, Enk Malmgren, Luis Gonzales, Joe Gold, Chris Slevin and Mice Johns:: Missing trom the photo are Kayo Ogilby and Jennifer Madc. • • • • • ~ Boys team xons 9. Steve McCakan, NED........ 180.28 OtJ>!er Ba:sls Mountarn Sd~ool rem.,r (With Dotal points scared in pant slabm, t0. Man Thomason, PS 181.29 ONF, ,tart Marquez: DNF, TJ. Rico; O individual cross country, slabm and sate Oo,er Varl Mountain Sttwd results: t 7, Jamie $G~MI. country relay) Andrew Oco, 165.19; 24, Man Crowley, Eagle VaCey retwits: 13, ADan Bar Team CS XC SL REL TOT 188.97; DO, John ,bhnsttx~ 96.11; t5, Shawn Jones. 97.04; 20, St'w Vail Mountain A^ s8 85 57 279 Other Base Mountav+ results: tt, Franzen, 107.81; ONF, Brian Bourne Summit 5 ~ 78 71 134 264 Patrick Wek7+, 161.67: t3, Jell Marquez. 00, Jeremy ShasRsr. Lake County Su 79 58 7t 256 162.66; 16, ,Ja.•rus 56hrMtl, 164.70; DNF, Battb Mountain 73 56 73 50 251 Man Mtuer. Glrts slalom Mddle Park 44 75 16 78 213 Other EagM Valley restdts: 19. Jeremy t. Jen Matte VMS Paposa Springs 35 17 1t 43 134 ShaeHS*. 167.79: DO, Alan Berki. 2. Genet Kemp, BM 8`. Nederland e2 2t 30 29 tt9 3. Chun Cortirsa, VMS - - - S,c Gear Creek 29 29 27 36 tt8 Glrts In6vidual uoss country 4. Sharon Muinwad, SUM - 9e. Plane Canyon. 2t 3t 25 22 96 5-kilorr»tar clas:fcd S. Modia Bourke. BM - S'% Eagle Valley 37 0 SO 0 87 t. Kely McC'.am. SUM t8:3t 6. Erin VanWinkls, CC - • S~ 2 Rebekah liertsztry, Sill .......19:28 7- Kasia WJalciewia, SUM - SE, Girls team scours 3. Valerie WnnhoR LC ..........20:07 8. Stag Hookom, BM Burnout Ss 68 55 EZ 239 4. Lana Pertoru, SUM ..........21:19 9- Robin Jones. SUM - 1G Battle Mountain 55 48 60 34 197 5. Ratriel wagon, LC 21:19 10. &andi Pabld, PC 'C, Val Mountain 53 31 60 4t 185 Bathe Mountain resuRs: 11, Nrcole Other Vatl IAorWain Schod resuln:: Lake County 3t 60 13 55 159 Stwtor, 2427; 14, Jads Piasl. 2437; t 5, Karma Valerrone, 10829: DNF, tvira* A~Sddle Park 39 48 19 48 154 Marisa Rodriguez, 2453: t7, Ingrid Morn Vailey: DNF, Ho9y JoMson. Gear Creek 14 9 36 20 79 son, 2507; 21, Jemifer Mason, 26:23:28, Other Battle Motauain results: Eagle Valley 36 0 33 0 69 Kyle Kenney, 32:46. Melissa Stterowsla, 118.76; G1VF, 6~ Platte Canyon 20 6 22 6 S4 Vatl Mourrtmn Sdtool revels 12. AEison Krebs: DNF, Jessie Rasnnusert. Pagosa Springs O 23 0 27 50 2429; 16, Sachs Hart, 25:04; 20, 109 9: t4~eYAmberMubon, 113A~3-~ Nederland 10 24 2 t3 49 ~ Kunkel, 2621: 72, Kam Ragan,. Annie wa, tt4.6s; ONF,Yoko Bigelow;. FRIDAY'S EVENTS Girls giarri slalom Boys individual cross country Girls 3x3K fre4styls Islay t. Kasia Wtltxkiewitz, SUM .....156.99 7.5-kibmalardassical t. Summi; 43:10 (AAcCarn t<: 2. Heather Yifilson, LC 157.54 t. Steve N'1 ~ l..,,lt, LC .•.........28x8 Perkins 14:43, Heruzey 1401), 3. Genet Kemp, BM ............158.60 2 Jamie Jones, SUM ...........2921 2. Lake County, 43:11 jWrenhdt t~. 4. Am M eve. EY t 59.04 3. T'rrt Chtlders, MP .............29:59 Watson 1420, KSmper 1524). Y ~ ~ ~ • ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3. Middle Park, 4734 Sdvoer tti s. Chun Cortina, VMS ..........1s9.o5 4. Jimmy s•,ega8. Lc 3o:4s s. Jen Mach vMS ,59.37 i Todd ausai'r MP 19anke 17:02, Cotatri6e 1521). 7. Sharon Muirhead, SUM • 159.48 Battle Morrtain rest>ffs: 8, Daniel 4. Vail Mountain Sdtool, 5231 Gr 8. Kely McGrath, MP - . 161.86 We+lartd, 32x0: 19. Jtfiart Rarhon, 3535: Ragan 1938. Sat3ta Hart 1654. A:u: 9. Birgit Krebs. BM ........163.02 23, Drew Lr.rat. 40:14. Otto 1609). t0. Alyson Wysong, BM • 164.56 Vai Maravt Sdtool rest/ta: 15, Kayo S. Battle Mountain. 5e:15 (Jade :Y other Barre Mountain results: tt, Ogtlby, 3409: t6. Erdc Afalmpren, 34:47: 17:2x. ir>grid 1Aonson 194, w.: Melissa Sherowski, 164.72; 73, Mollie 22, Andy warner, 3757. Sharwr 17:01). Bourke. 185.17; DNF, Stacey Hookom. Other Vail Mounta+rt Sdwd results: 12. SATURDAY Miranda Batley. 165.02; t8, Karma Valen- Boys slalom ' one. t 73.30: DNF, FbGy Johnson, t. John Jotrs~on, VMS - - . - - ..83.34 Boys 3xSK hssstyN play Other Eagle Valley rewlts: 20, Yoko 2_ Kayo Og=7y, VMS - ......86.31 1. AKddle Park. 48:26 (r. Childers t3 Bigelow; 23, Annie Hill. 3. Kan Oiewxk, SUM - - - ......87.20 k+l- Ctulders 17:11, Rusch 1528)- 4_ Pa:r:ck 6:.:^*e. BM ...........87.87 2. lake County. 48.32 (Da.:rx' on 'T4a, S!ecail t5:a6. YJre~ho4 15:02:' - VMS players present `West Side Stor ' y By laterite Moser ~ musical numbers. FM...a Club Majdc's dancer Sltd.,~. ta.iy sar vwt~. Butcher it ~l. s. o,,,:~ing the The gangs of Nc~v York City production. Several students wdl will sing and dance their a'aI' m join Club Maj,7c's band mangy this moiuttain vilky as Vat? to forth the pit orcltewa. Mountain School r.....,..:., "West With a modern R ~ ~ ~ and Side Story.' Juliet theme, the play mows The appcaliag mttsiat, plan- from nxtsirtg tight seq~~.,,s e ned fa May 3 and 4, will poignant love scertes. Junior tratuport the audxace buck b C1uisti Day plays Maria. ~vitb the late SO's in bagtnge and Frt~t Edborg. Kerins Valentine. style. Based on the caoctQtion Chad Lttnd, Jed Gottlieb. Diana of J". Y.Y~ RObbiaa Mith music Maitland, Jennifer Mack and by L~ ~ ..~.1 Btrnstein aM book Katy Ragan performing m other by Arthur I.aw..,..~w the fast- {coding roles. Joe Gold is tau ss moving and exciting production Officer Krumpke. will captivate audiences of all It's a major production wi~'~ ages. about 30 students joining in tk "It's an int~....":ttg view of major dance numbers 1~: teens during that time," said "Ama~ica" The entire hig~ Alexander Kendall ~vbo plays school is involved in "West Sidc gang leader Tony. "In many Story." if not oa stage then is ways, it hasn't changed much the stage management, sets a with the Crips and Bloods now." costuming. Blair Holmes is directing the "I1te dancing and music i; I play while Steve R'oimer and Paula Canning arc iA charge of v+..u,avMSpt,~p,,,~~2 VMS_ play Frompage 7 .fun;-and it's'eitcitittg'm have storyline is espocially appealing Other VMS students ~ ' r cast W high school sa~dents. Nearly Sharks and Jas gang memtx everyone paRicipafm~, - member Mite Johnston said. all the characters are about the are J NG Kc "It•s ~ ,b as be as ,..:.~.vagertt same age, rttaking the p~l~ BOYd• ~ .t ~ oa° ~ wo>ing~ r~ they face tttoro ~ ~ May. Jamie Walker, Erin lv G..,b..., 1. J. Buckley. a Sharon -has liaa 6:.~» L ~w..x stood- she's apro and so patient wilt "C'borooarw~~g ~ tight se- Guerriao, Sasha Bart. all os nor.' : _ - _ , ~ ~ : _ quatax has bees G,~,,,,:,.lly fun Guerrini, Alison Oao, Pc Although the denoe s„y~.... r.,~ for the gays," r.:~.~ rd Valentine Hart. Andy Otto and Merv amd music ai'Z-c1talleagutg, the who is CffiL 85 Anlli. Local hi h school students g in runnin for scholarshi s g p. By Marko Moser • oa:y snn wmer - = Two Eagle Valley seniors - _ - _ Elizabeth Fritze of Eagle Valley r - High School and Mike Johnston of ~ '~1 Vail Mountain School - were y+?',Y :T recently named aS SemlfinaLslS >n ~ ~ the 1993 competition for Merit r~ Scholarships. ~ ~ ' ~ J' ~ The semifinalist pool of _ : i ~ . academically talented high school ~ ~`_.~S - ~ - - seniors is made up of about half of ~ ~ ~ ` one percent of each state's gradual- ~ ~ ing class, or 15,OL`0 in the nation. - <_~-;T- . - . - _ - These two gifud locals have an op- - ~ - - portunity to continue in the com- E1172beth Frit2e Mlke Johnston petition for some 6.500 Merit Scholarships, worth more than S25 just may happen. Aptiwde Test/National Merit million. "Elizabeth is undoubtedly one of Sct~~larship Qualifying Test, which "It's swell-deserved recognition the most qualified swdents I've serves as an initial screen of for a student whose intellectual ever known," he said_ "Last year. as envants. The number of semi- ' breadth is eclectically curious "said a junior, she scored a 5 (the top finalists designated in each state is Dave Schindel, VMS college grade) in AP calculus. I'm mx sure allocated according to the state's ~ _ counselor and senior class advisor. she can be measured." percentage of the national total of "Mike's intellect is only matched Fritze is the daughter of Sheila graduating high school seniors. by the quality and depth of his and Jim Fritze of Eagle, while To qualify as a finalist, a semi- character." Johnston is the son of Sally and finalist must have an outstanding Paul Johnston of Vail academic record, be endorsed and Fritze has set a goal for herself to More than a million juniors in recommended by the high school become a Justice on the United 19,000 U.S. high schools entered principal or headmaster and submit States Supreme Court, and EVHS _ the 1993 Merit Program by taking SAT scores that confirm the Princiual Ivan Kershner thinks that the 1991 Preliminary Scholastic PSAT/NMSQTperformance. • Vail Daily February 17, 1993 .y i 1 ~ 9 n "~'E i ff7 .r ter fs ~~r ~ 3' ~ •y f; 1 s ~ ~ ~'t j;. y , , SS ~ ,gip ~ ~ R .~~'7'Y'~i , t', . ~.~r / ^I6 O^ + 4. ~ - ~.t- • > r • l Vail Daily / Marka Moser Speech and Debate Team sponsor Elizabeth Ackerman, left, is shown with Vail Mountain School members Elizabeth Milani, Elizabeth Staufer, Dana Carlson, Meredith Rose, Michael Johnston and Jaime Pyka. . each club roves O/MS s p p h I len i n fu n to be c a , g g B Mat'tca Moser compete in new events. More team members joined, Y and with each competition and subsequent certificates Day start writer earned, it condnues•to expand. Although a new club at Vail Mountain School, the In the State Festival Finals in Denver, senior Mike Speech and Debate Team has already carved a solid Johnston received superior and excellent ratings in niche in the school's activities. one-on-one value debate and solo acting, while Under the direction of Elizabeth Ackerman, the freshmen Dana Carlson and Elizabeth Milani both group has achieved an impressive first season. Both were awarded excellent ratings in one-on-one value Ackerman and team members learned as they alien- debate and impromptu speaking respectively. tied competitions. They had to start at the beginning , "Speech is a unique type of competition," Milani by learning all the events, rules and regulations. said. "You don't go to a meet to win, but to use your "It was a significant task considering they had no mind and accomplish something." experience as competitors or spectators, and I had no "It's not just about talking," added Jaime Pyka, a experience as a coach;' Ackerman said. freshman team member. "It's about thinking and ex- Although a neophyte in the coaching realm, Ack- pressing ideas." erman is a speech specialist, having -competed in Other team members include sophomore Meredith speech and debate while in high school, and she Rose and freshman Elizabeth Staufer. graduated from Northwestern University with a de- "I'm very proud of this year's team," Ackerman gree in speech. said. `°They have worked extremely hard and have Starting in September, Ackerman was quickly im- come a long way in a short amount of time. They pressed with the students' enthusiasm and dedication. have laid the groundwork for a program I hope will They learned quickly, and were always willing to be a permanent addition to the school:' The cast ~of ~ , Macbeth r ' t~ atatf report ' ~ ~ ~ i ° The cast of Macbeth, this year's ~ ~ ~ , K u~nter production by Vail Mountain ,4 f f School, includes: a Duncan, King of Scotland -Clark ? Anderson Malcom -Aaron MacDaniel Donalbain -Jaime Pyke ` Macbeth -Michael Johnston Banquo -Alexander Kendall r ~',;?~k; ' ' ~ ~ Lennon -Jennifer Mack a ~ ~ Menteith -Alexander Kendall ~ Angus -Brittany Lund Caithness -Jaime Brave _ ~ Fleance -Elizabeth Milam ~ - f Young Siwazd - Jce Gold ,,.~~_,`,M,s~ Seyton-ElizabethStaufer - - - - Captain -Jennifer Mack Vail Daily 1 Marka Moser ' Scottish doctor -Dana Carlson Witches Christi Day, Kristi May a. d Diana Maitland chant over the fallen warrior, Aaron Mac- MacDuff-Thomas Boyd Daniel, during a rehearsal of Macbeth. The Shakespearean drama will be presented tonight and Lady Macbeth -Karim Valentine Saturday at 7 p.m. at Vail Mountain School. Witch #t -Christi Day Witch #2 -Diana Maitland ¦ ¦ +Vitch #3 - Kristy May VMS t h e s i a n s b r i n Lady MacDuff -Meredith Rose p g A porter - Murph Gottlieb Old Woman -Dana Cazlson A gentlewoman -Jennifer Williams illl a e b et h ~?S ® S t a Pj Apparirion # 1-Elizabeth Staufer Apparition #2 -Elizabeth Milam Apparition #3 -Meredith Rose Murderer #1 - Nathaz: Corbin how they did it, you have to go to Murderer #2 -Todd Malloy By Randy Wyrlek the play. Murderer #3 - Mtuph Gottlieb Dairy Stag Writer For the uninitiated, the plot Messenger -Joe Gold, Meredith Somewhere, Shakespeaze is smil- What: MacBeth revolves around Macbeth's Rose ing. Who: Vail Mountain School stu- (Michael Johnston) bloody and Lord -Jaime Walker Students at the Vail Mountain dents mtuderous run at the crown, finally lviacDuff's sons -Nicholas Rose, School, who will never be confused When: Friday and Saturday, ending in his own demise by the Axel Wilhelmsen with the faint of heart, are present- March 5-6, 7 p.m. sword of MacDttff (Thomas Boyd). Where: Vail Mountain School ing Shakespeare's Macbeth, hart- Cost• $7.50 adults, students free A cast as lazge as the one re- dling one of theater's most difficult quued for this production (25 plays with aplomb. making it something of a cross be- members, not counting technical remain engaged through to the end. Their engaging performance, tween Shakespeare and Science crew) could be the solace of a Macbeth _ It would have been easier for the coupled with the supernatural Fiction Theater, logistical nightmare, but this bunch From @ $ crew to Produce something like dements Shakespeaze threads Their offering of Macbeth, brings the play off with proficiency. ~g Ow Town where the staging throughout the play makes the though, is a literal interpretation of The scenery, created by Paul ~ play's man challen a ?strally consists of a step ladder anc production a delight for both the one of Shakespeare's masterworks. Weber and a cast of thousands, Y g s. Several a wckload of over-acting, but they players and audience.. The only departure is Holmes' places the audience right in the fine atxors have refused to do it. chose instead to reel in and tame "The kids didn't want to do a slight reworking of the opening and time and place. bDe a~rodrsmts~taias a Place where one of the most feazed and respec- comedy and wanted >o try another close. He tightened the entire Macbeth has a long history of g led plays ever written. play by Shakespeare," explained production and increased the pace superstition in the theater, stem- The student cast, though, brought The Vai] Mountain School's director Blair Holmes.. by eliminating some long, boring ming partly from the extensive su- no preconceived notions to their production of Macbeth is a leamine Last yeaz's production, Mid- speeches and bringing the play to a pemattual elements and partly from Production, bringing instead youth- and expanding experience for both summer Night's Dream, was set more climatic conclusion. fu] enthusiasm and confidence that the actors and the audience, and well into the 21st century - And we're not going to tell you Please see Maebdhpsge 9 draws the audience in and helps it that ~ the Purpose of education. ' SAIL GOLF CLl1 JONN A_ DOdSON ARENA + 303/792260 ltt fir tarh~ Crs# FORD TEN\1S COlIPLEX ~•~"e ail cre io '0J1'~229` MARICFTItiGSPECIAL EYE.\TS SAIL 1plTH SER~'ICFS DISTRICT SPOR"IS Joa-rf9_u79 wa. c.~.., txs~ NATURE CENTEJt JOS~32r 211 Nest NeadoM Drive • NiO, G 61659 303-179.2291 301Rf-2Y19 • FAX 303179-2197 CHUCK ANDERSON YOUTH RECOGNITION AWARD NOMINATION FORM NOTE: All nominations will be kept CONFIDENTIAL and we ask you to do the same until the awards are announced. DATE: October 14 , 1992 *CANDIDATE'S NAME: Ernest Medina, Jr. ADDRESS: PO Box 638 CITY/STATE/ZIP: Minturn CO 81645 TELEPHONE: 1 827-59~~ AGE: 18 AREA OF RECOGNITION: ~cholarlAthletel~,eader NAME OF SCHOOL LAST ATTENDED: wattle Mountain Hiah School *If team nomination, ycu .must attach a_list of all individuals involved and include their addresse~'~ and phone numbers. PARENT OR GUARDIAN: Ernie and Toni Medina ADDRESS : PO Box 638 CITY/STATE/ZIP: Minturn CO 81b45 NAME OR ORGANIZATION: Va i 1 Mountain School CONTACT PERSON: Peter M. Abu i s i TELEPHONE: 303-476-3850 ADDRESS: X160 Katsos Ranch Road CITY/STATE/ZIP: Vail CO 81658 AFFILIATION: Community friend/Part time employer Please Return To: CHUCK ANDERSON YOUTH RECOGNITION AWARD COMMITTEE VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT, YOUTH SERVICES BRANCH 395 EAST LIONSHEAD CIRCLE VAIL, CO 81657 WE REGRET THAT WE WILL BE UNABLE TO RETURN TO YOU ANY PHOTOGRAPHS, CLIPPINGS OR INFORMATION YOU SEND US REGARDING THIS CANDIDATE. PLEASE GIVE A STATEMENT WHY YOU ARE COMMENDING THIS CANDIDATE, BASED ON EXCELLENCE, ACHIEVEMENT OR ACCOMPLISHMENT AS AN OUTSTANDING YOUTH. PLEASE INCLUDE IN THE STATEMENT INFORMATION REGARDING LEADERSHIP AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENTS, ACCOMPLISHMENTS, STRENGHTS AND WEAKNESSES. PLEASE STATE ANY SPECIAL CHALLENGES THAT HAVE EITHER BEEN MET OR ARE BEING MET. ATTACH NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS, STATISTICS, PHOTOGRAPHS, ETC. Ernie Medina is beine nominated for recoenition because of his personal characteristics and athletic achievements while a student at Battle Mountain High Schools He was a successful athlete in football. basketball and track as reflected in the attached articles. His style of play was characterized by sportsmanship, team loyalty and leadership. To my knowledge. he behaved as a Gentlemen when traveling to and from events. and he represented his school and community well at away games. He brought renown to his school through victories and to this valley by his style of play. Ernie's personal characteristics are also admirable. My knowledee of him in this reeard has several facets. He worked at Vail Mountain School during the summers of his iunior hieh and senior hish school years. He was faithful to his responsibilities, displayed good work ethic, and was always amicable ind responsive. His record in hieh school reflects the same seriousness of puroose and :ffort. He was an honor student. graduating in the top quarter of the Class of 1992. He served as senior class president. Ernie spent a vortion of two summers in the Pre-collegiate Proeram at C.U. in Boulder and two summers. one at C.U. and one at the University of Nev?~ Mexico. working to improve his basketball skills. Ernie's ability to keep "focused" on the admirable pursuits offered to secondary school students. was exceptional. Coupled with his warmth of personality and character traits. I view his career as a positive reflection of this Valley. He capitalized on opportunities to develop and to excel. and he used them for personal erowth and the eniovment of his family and friends. Being in Ernie's company was the good fortune of those who cheered for him and worked alongside him in high school. RespectfuIly submitted, f ~ Peter M. Abuisi Headmaster -Vail Mountain School Battle Mountain's Medina r n 1 wer award acne s Hor b o g . ~ ~ ~ - 9 zJ By Davld O. lAlllllams Buffs for academic reasons. into athletics at U. try sv~ t:dicor looked into (Hastings) more "I know tfiat it takes a kst of your but there warn t really anything I time, and I don t know if that s Ernie Medina, Battle Mountain was interested in staadying," what I want ro do at this point," he High School's all-everything 1992 Medina said, adding that he'll be said. class president, was presented with pursuing a degree in either sports On Qae down side, Medina said the Hornblower Scholarship for medicine or architecture in he'1t miss his teammates and the Athletics Tuesday night. Boulder. bonds that playing team sports can But the scan- Athletically, the all-conference form. dout quarterback basketball selection who holds `°The closeness that you tend to for the Huskies' three tram scoring records, - form with team athletics will be a Northwest ~ average, career and season -may great thing that I'D miss, the family League dram--:--,., ~ = try out for the Buffs' basketball bond between teammates and pionship football . ~ : team as a walk-on, but football is coaches," Medina said team is the last ' ~ out of the question. He snuggled with singling out a one to blow his "I dust want to get beat up too single moment during his four own horn when it MEDINA much," Medina said laughing. "It's years at Battle iviountain that stood comes to athletic accomplishments. not really my ~Y,,..." out above the rest, but after some Medina, who will attend th.. 'This seems 1sYe a contradictory consideration, two events stood University of Colorado nett fall statement when you consider that out: and receive a matching scholarship the Huskies' leading passer last Winning the Northwest League from CU, is focusing on mind over season was named to the aII-con- championship for the first time in matter as he emphasizes academics ference team the last two years. and school history in football, and in his higher education career. this year was an honorable mention being part of the bny s' 4 x 400 He was offered a full-ride All-State selection, relay team that won tape 3A state football scholarship to Hastings Time is another detw.~,..t against College in Nebraska but chose the Medina throwing himself headlong ~ h'~edina- . - track championship for the first time. Medusa turned in a personal-best time during his leg of the relay. lobo Garnsey, president of the Vail Valley Foundation, which sponsors the scholarship, and Mike loser, the No. 11 mountain bike racer in the world and y~~s - . Homblower scholarship winner, presented Medina wits the award at Battle Mountain, Medina will receive $1,000 a year fear four years, and joins Amy Mayhew and Benjamin Crock of Eagle fey High School, who Friday received the inaugural Hornblower Scholarships in the ~0~~-~d~P and Culture categories re~~,,.,; vely. ,~ATTL~ 1 Or. Erik S. Frede9 -Principal • Dr. Patrick D. Simmons • Assistant Principal ~0 U TA L~e~r I~embers of the Hornblower Scholar=hid ?~rogra.rt,. I have had the opportunity to wori=: with Ernie Medina for *~.,!cr wars as a. coach and as a teacher at Eattle Mountain High school . Ernie ~ledzna is a ycung man of grJat inner str ength and vz±al itv. He is active in many proorams at E~attle hlountain High School, Hthletlcallv', Ernie has earned many honors 1n three differrnt sports. ! believe that without the leadership that Ernie provided our 191 football team we would not have achieved o~_;r goal of being the Northwestern League champions. As a Senior in trac}:. , Ernie continues to displ ay the type of discipl ine that s repo z r•_•d or a 1 ender . Ernie 1s active In the youth gro~~p or the local Catholic ch~_;rch. For the past two summers, Ernie was accepted to the F're-Collegiate progrcm at the Univers=ty of Colorado. ht battle Mountain Ernie is accepted as leader amoung his peer. He is currently the President oT the Senior glass and is active in the o!;r Student Count i 1 thr~cugh this pos i t i an . While all of the activities above are a vital part or Ernie"= time, h. currently maintains a 3.35 GF~ and is ranked in the top 1 ` student= of his class . Ernie's enth~;=i=,sm + ;r ? ife and e~:cellence wil 1 surely lend to hi= .access and I hope that you would aide him in this endeavor. I wool ~d highly recommend him for the 1a~~ Hornblower Scholarship Program. ' Sincereiy, Bob Isbell Head Football and Track: .Coach Mathematics Teacher Battle Mountain High School Box 249 750 Eagle Road Minturn, Colorado 81645 (303) 949-4490 Serving: Awn, Eagle`Vail, Edwards, Minturn, RedcliH, 1fai1 and Eastern Eagle County. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~f~ `~7.Lu ti~~~t-t~4 td Arnie Medina r~_ ~ ~ . lN.~' !/l'L 19 9 Z r a c k ~,q~lsz ~ ~ 1 ~ 4 / ~ 1 ~ , ~ ~ Athletic Dirtctos a ' ~ . Coach + r.g~:tr. r~rnTn~n , CLI,l1~ t%/LGa VARSITY IlASKIsTBALL l~.Q/!1Z Q5Q ~X. «LP `~~.y ,4 thletrc Director Coach ~ Principal ` ,4 ~~.~ti ~ ~ . 1 ~ ;~1 ri k `~J:-. J ~ t, ~~I , ` >~Y Il. ' ~ q. ~ t 'r~ ~ ~ ~,oo ~ AcT 5G ~ ~ ~l s ~ ~s ~ 04' s Q y o ~ ~ C~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ O ~ ~O O S A5 U ~ Z ~~~~~a ~%L(,~ ~PQ~~f~~~~f~ ~~era~ntfi(m~ ~~~~Crnle Medl~~nu ~ / eTlyG Jf!/GL>'!,G~Zt~ alJ6f?1j2~ :~il(' 199 1-199 2 ~l!~lt(1(ll ~l~Pl2'?, ~12 AAA State Tracl: Meet COURTE6Y OF j~i~~ ~/'~~~~G'"~"" S~ CNSAA COMMISSIONER '~Ir y•htp~ ' ~.'Gr • ij'.. ~'YP~~"iI j'b 'F1:~' '~.g ; i M~; ~ •',.y,,- ..1: ~ J: . ' .t" ~ a .i , Y 7 a ~ r f"~ti., y yl: y.: y t'• {.rM' .Ny~M Y fin.. y.+ .yr. ry' .;a r j .~:y: .t~( i1~..lil. .[/l. _lAl. ,.lil...l..l~' 11~..11* 91'1=.111..RIN'n~.t~l. .Ul. ± tll...~ t~~~..tAl_ ~lAl. ?'~r~1~..0e1. .1~1..~`!~1~~.~'1~13~ .l! 1!~1. t~l r.Rt~la!~t/1~ tN ..li!~...1i1 1~1. ,lti!~,Pt~!3!C~.N! a•Mr~1~i rlr 11yt~r~i~y4J., ~ ~ . . . w.avsnavvsx.-x.^:.~a.~::;~nrr?~kwc Svia~rcaawavfi.~;avvewe: .,a~rvrva~:vraw.,-, ~ _ j ( .^..Wft4tzNftlVi%:43~+'7~~RV;V7J: t`1: ;~:.N.'..i: Tlf~~ `J ~i- ~ ;`'\1' ~ ~r s' y~V • it aUr~~~~ ~ xY ~ t ,tar .~.C a , { 1~,. ~ . y}! ~ r.Y ' 1 ~L,.^. .I ~ r.•~ - - - - - - - - - Ilr Ji!III!Illllllllll!!III!!illl'I!!IC:!~''I^` , ~'''I"" ~"'I'I"'' I'" I d , . , ~r ar I~' H ~ ~.i ..L,.L.IL...,,J'.L .....i.'lll'.'!'i~'li .:!il......... !ti".C:'I',..,..! r t ~ ! ~ = ~ i , ~ • ~ ERNI E MED I NA : r' ~ c':.~ _ h J - ~ ~r F ,a•, ; fnr np: ~ ~ • . ? 1991-92 SENIOR CLASS PRESIDENT ~ r ~i •rr t ,I~r,. M# BMHS AWARDS NICfIT MAY 19 ~ ~,g 92 ~ , ~ /rr1~~ ~ 1 • ~1 • a tr .'I.~'`` , 1 RT \ 1 •`~j° . .r: .y •..r. ~f M~r~. ~~~,.~.'In/.`-~~'.:~~.I,yV,~~:. }'rvl~`ryrJ ~._yr~~1...`,I I„S IW ',.1+1, '(.i~lv_l.,j~IViyi~~Wl. ,Iq "'~~wl Nl, r, l~l~'~w; ~ 1~1, rvl,,...rvl.!' IvIJ'~Lr, •~.1~r.J 'r~'JF I~,~JI~ ;~ry~,l ~R! ' 1~J~ ~ ~ ~1 Illr ~•%rr~' AP•I.r. IIA ' ~s ` '~J ~M ~ x i. ' y) J , iii al...'' i I. r`,i •1 i , ~ t a ur 1 1 ~ Y ' ~ ` ~ } ` ~'"V r. r t ^!ar' :J i'.' r •'Y F: :Ir. 1 :..R.; n .iii M u K.j'.d~+slc lryr~/,f,~+~'j!P+'SF,s ~11[ F~!~1-t~~ ~1. 7',a. ~'T'K :^r~iP~tr7~1~!'4c;..~~?di ~~?'1^tTt~ys.: r J ..sii... ,~r.~Y 'z;' 'J'~`-i: -i' ~~,v^^~ . ~ j: s~ Y.. ~ 'i ` ~ :.t`' Y ~ .•4`~ f~ .i' i .I. t' ;Yu~., k :G ~r~; ir:' ~iJ o~ . , r~+ .1 ~rn+ rnt rr.r J. r~+ ret'~.I` rA' ~ rn+ rat rnt rn+ . rn+.:. rnt : rn+ . rn+.. re+ r,+... rn+ . rnt . r,t':. rn+..: rnt rn+... ?e~ a+" `re+.:.!.t . r.t rni:... re+..:. ra? re+ . re+ . rr+' - "1 . ~ . , ~r' a;l j. 'vi, ii'Illilil'liil!ill!Ilillli!iliC"ai::i!iJ7;!".',:;ill!:ill;':IIIIICililliii!iC!II!;il!iGGlili'ili':;:CIil3;~~~~'~ ~'~~+i(iii!;'iai'.;:.!..:'i'ili:!Il!Illl!!111111lfIIlAl11111;1111!l11111i1111111JIlIlllIl1111111II11111111(1(I2111[ljjr• 1 bl' ~i . ~I ~ t~'. ~ c/ c' ,4~~y~~'i' ~ ' r~. ~ .`t T ,.5ii it"~, ERNIE MEDINA ~ ' ' ,NA s'~ is ttfuttr~e>Zt #hts ~ , i ~t~ 'r ~ 1 X11': l OUTSTANDI NC MAI,B SENIOR ATHLF,TB ~ (~tberi M# BMHS AWARDS NI CHT MAY 19 ~ g 92 ~ + ,;a; t~ r .y Nl~} ;ii~;~ 'r. 1~ s11C ; _ _ . MW .,O~y xsrwaueanwnrfc~raa!~rnaµro.... wt~a by1MArM~~. . ~i~i' "toi"•kioi,~{~j(olv~' 'iol i0i' i~l" fto~1R'fy~ ioi'At• Y~1' "'to1' • 't?l~ tii foi~ ?ol iU~ pt" 'NI" lii~' io~ly~'~ to~'1 " `1J Coi" 1~7 M tU N7 iq' p Iq 1•r o pl' N7 i+l" ioi' ~ f 7. , . Il:' ~ r ~ Y 'J.'' . ~ r. ,iti.p t v (K ~ : 1 i.. ya . ',ti ~+5 J' N~ M Vi/l Dolly Friday, May 8, 1992 - Page t 3 ' n track for first state title battle Mountain o BMH~ state track ~u~lifiers 80YS ,1oc1 Murner pole vault ; :Raul Yereida shot put ~ b Chris' Csbcll 4 x 800,. GIpL`S ~ 1 ~ , : ~ 1,600, 3,200 Amy Rush: 4 x 800 ' ~ t ~kM•^~ ''t : Duncari:`Allen 4 x 800, Jade l~lttel - 4 x 800 , 3,200 : Kt;11y Post - 4 x 80p " ':Cohn Acta~' 4 x 800 Holly Stanish 4 x 800, 4 x . ~ • , , it i, i i i ~iu~i initi ~ ~i , 1"avlus,Sims r,4 x 800, a x a00, 800 - ~ lOp, 4 x 400, X00 Kyle Denney 4 x 200 :,k~ • u ~ Ernle lvledlna' 4 x 100, 4 x Melody Barela 4 x 200 r ~ 4 x ~ `400 ~egntfer Robertson 4 x . . , t~ ~ . .f { iT'''~''t~ :::Alex Andasola 4 x 100 20q, 200 a~., • ~ . ~ w~ Cutler Mcjpre 4 x 1p0, 4 x Cellien l;i>rvera ~ ~ x X00, , v, • ~ , • l' ~ :'400 Shoc put, discus . , << , ~ . Jetf Rohlwing 100,. 200, Chloe Raton 4 x 400 . , Veil DalyMlarka Moser 400,, 4 x .400 ~ ~fl~lstt ltodriguex 4 X 400, Robert Y.opez pole-vault ' 700,100 iixteen of the Battle Mountain Huskies 21 state qualifiers for the division 3A state track meet. in Ft. ;arson today take time out from practice Tuesday. • L Devld O. WIIIlamB o[ fast weekend's oegionals by just Isbell set the new school mark in Y eight points over the Huskies. the 3,200-meter run last weekend, ..y svo.b E6iw won't have the depth to repeat this posting a time oC 9:55.20. He was 7?te Battle Mountain Huskies year, Quer6 said. also first in the 1,60()-meter run ,r~.; 4 ~S v~« 1, .H +~a h . ,~~5'~1~5 ~ - _ ~1~... r,.f~' it ~ ~ . _ ~a~~ Da~Y~~~ Bryn ba~~ b asset asketbafl +V ~C~ky h f'°°f h 70 lass r7 ntain H~~ N su Kies 79ed West of the Battle Mau during thNusktes pfaY Ernie Med'+na en t F~ d Yatr"ght. The ks far an oP an team too Lutheran tO env aturdaY night. Grand S ` `,B~*T'~Lk ~ , . 4. ~ Y ..Mrw,.....y ~)t.~~..~:•v. Veil pyyJMat~~ , .x~ . - . a;r ~atch~ g umPer ~m1e Medina retain High Sch~i tong 1 Medina and the Battte Mou a meet fast week• air during in the NorthWestem le to rauhgehHu~eS are corr'pen~adle. trac* ~ field meal today Page 2l -•Vi!! t'JrUr Tuesday, March 8, 1992 ~ • ~ • Medina sets records as~ Huskies nearl Y upset Steamboat DmHmfimport season and career scoring records to his tcngthy list of accomplish- Thc Battle b1ountain boys' bas- meats. ketbal! team very nearly pulled off A4cdina eclipsed Nate Richter's the uspct of the year Friday as they season mark of 370 points with ` fcil to league champion Steamboat 428, and Tyler Wood's career mark Jprings in Steamboat 64-56 in the of 820 points with 83b. district semifinals. "I can't say enough about Ernie «'ith four minutes Icft in the 1,lcdina," Query said. "Hc comes to game, the Huskies tied the game at play ci•cry night. lt's just unfor- S0, and Steamboat's ali-confcrcncc tunatc that we couldn't have won selection, A1:trkDrake, fouled out. this game so Emie could display "1 really thought u•c had them," his talent state-u•id~:." Battle A•iountain coach Paul Quere Steamboat post man Anthony said. "1'ou have to give them credit, Barrett proved to be the diffcren:.e though. The}• made some clutch in the game. Ihaensivcly, the Hus- shots down the stretch and kept us kips just couldn't stop the 6' i ' from making ours." senior. Senior guard Ernie Medina cap- Barrett scored most of his. ^6 pcd his ouutanding season with a points about the rim, and ,held 31-poirn effort. That total allowed him t0~, add the Batlle bfOUntain Phase see /!wslcies page 28 - - ~ Hu ky standout Tom Schocttle to won." § just one point. The Huskies finished their 8-13 Jon Stewart added nine points in season on an upbeat note, defeating what Query called his best perfor- Roaring Fork last Thtustlay in over- mance to date. No other Battle time to reach the distritt semifinals. A4ountain player scored more than Drew Anderson and Pete four points. Petrovski each scored two points "We played a fantastic defensive for Battle Mountain. Jeff Rohlwing game," Qyerd said. "We just need and Alex Andasola e~h had four one more player to have a good points. And Zach Carnahan scored scoring night and we would have three poinu. n.. tw I'rd ~a..ane• Is: Ifi01 ~ Huskies singled out, but team is real star BMHS coach t- refers to ut } P P emphasis on ~ • the group ' Although individual plnyers i • hove been singled owl for all. lengue designation end honor. t able mention, Battle Moun- ' Utin's football mach doesn't like _ b call too much attention b it. Conch Bob lsbell's proud of the whole teem, not just the nine playen who were selec4d ~ . for honors. R 'We like to strew the whole - teem here,' said Isbell, frown- 08tttty IIIIMjrtez Jeff ROl'1hMIfIQ ing et the thought of dividing ~ "r""•I hie learn with all-league an- ~ ~ - c1 nounaments. ~lt's great for the , f ` - Z individual playen, but we ~ r ~ t? ~ worked al! season to establish e , r tenor et this school. At the end i of the season the kids said 'our r whole team is all-league; and they were right' _ Thia year the Huskies worked more tightly as • ~ group than they have in recent yens, and both the cmrhing ~ _ etaR and the players agree it was because en a}moat family ` like atmosphere prevailed on ~ . and o1T the field. ]shat) goys be- - ~ cnuse the tenor wee so close in _ spirit it made it harder to finish 'i;y ~ ~ ~ ~ ' the season in the game against j ~ wee _ Hotchkiss on Nov. 2. JeY HMf7 Derek Jeramlll0 "Sure, thaC• probably the gtt~7"; ~ :~-tT1 toughest thing about it,' Isbell " - .~f. said. '7'he kids keep telling me •y, they wish they were still work- ing nut, getting ready for the finals. They came a long way ~ //•ll~~ J to make it to the playoffs this ~ il~:. , yenr. It was • very positive thing to see.. When trying to explain what mode this group diRerertt from - those of previous yeah, Isbell took s moment to think over his nnawer. He admitted it was ~:~~.i often hard W tell what made - V one group of athletes stand out, but he said Lhia year he knew of two things that made this team ~ ~ ~ ' specie}. de ~ "ITre firot thing that set these kids apart was the positive AIeX At>dasala Tom SChOettl@ leadership within the group f from • number of playen, Isbell said. 'lire second thing that made them what they en was their great desire to exeell. Without a doubt, Lhoee wen the two main ingredients for their eucese thisymr. 'Thia really was en e:cep• tional bunch ofkids.' This year'. all-leegu• Huskies were quarterback Ernie Medina, running beck 4 JeR Rohlwing, offensive line- men Derek Jaramillo and Jay Henry, defensemen Alex Ana r , dsaola end Robert Lope:, and linebacker Danny Marlines. Defensive lineman Tom Sehoettle and 6nebaeker Bobby Hermosillo wen both given e* Emle>Nedlni Robefllopez MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 1, 1993 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, June 1, 1993, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:40 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: Ken Hughey, Acting Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation of which there was none. Item No. 2 on the agenda was the appointment of three (3) Members to the Local Licensing Authority. There were three (3) positions available, each term beggnn~ng in June, 1993, and expiring in June, 1995. The candidates were Bill Bishop, Linda Fried, and Davey Wilson. All three of these candidates were applying for reappointment. No other applications had been received. A ballot was taken, and Merv Lapin moved to appoint Bill Bishop, Linda Fried, and Davey Wilson to the Local Licensing Authority until June, 1995. Jim Gibson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 3 was a Consent Agenda consisting of three items: A. Approval of Minutes of the May 4, 1993, and May 18, 1993, Evening Meetings. B. Ordinance No. 7, Series of 1993, second reading, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1993, to provide changes to Area A requirements for SDD No.4 that concern the development plans for the Millrace III Development Building site; and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Michael Lauterbach. C. Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1993, 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. Applicant: the Town of Vail. Mayor Osterfoss read the titles in full. Merv Lapin moved to remove item C from the Consent Agenda for further discussion, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and that motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Merv Lapin then moved to approve Consent Agenda items A and B, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. There was brief discussion about safety issues related to height restrictions for tethered hot air balloons and quality of the balloons. Mayor Osterfoss asked Fire Chief Dick Duran for his input pertaining to expressed safety issues. Dick stated he did not feel there was a problem, emphasizing hot air balloons could only be operated by licensed pilots. He did not feel it was necessary for this ordinance to include mandatory Fire Department inspections of the balloons. Ken Hughey reminded Council all applicants would need to proceed through the full special events process before receiving approval, and Kristan Pritz felt the Fire Department could be requested to inspect for safety issues if there were any questions about safety. After further technical clarifications, Jim Shearer moved to approve Ordinance No. 1 14, Series of 1993, on second reading, with a second from Jim Gibson. Before a vote was taken, Jim Lamont, representing the East Vail Homeowners Association, also expressed safety issue concerns, adding he felt a fire official should be present during filling of the balloons, and requested wording to that affect be included in the ordinance. He also voiced apprehension about noise factors and visual aspects associated with too many hot and/or cold air balloons. He requested the ordinance also contain language to specify that Council revisit the issue of hot and/or cold air balloons every five (5) years. Mayor Osterfoss suggested a record keeping procedure tracking the number of these balloons be instituted. Pam Brandmeyer was directed to keep track of the how many events there were each year requesting hot and/or cold air balloons and to keep Council advised. Mr. Lamont was satisfied with that self-evaluation direction. A vote was then taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 4 was Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 31, Series of 1992, to reduce the interest rate to be paid on installments of special assessments against affected properties within the Booth Creek Local Improvement District. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Steve Barwick explained that negotiations to refinance the Booth Creek Local Improvement District bonds through 1st Bank had allowed TOV to reduce the interest rate on the assessments from 9.5% to 7.75%. He advised this ordinance was required to change the interest rate on the assessments to pass savings on to affected homeowners. Rob Levine moved to approve Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1993, on first reading, with a second from Tom Steinberg. Before a vote was taken, Bob Buckley asked if there would be any Amendment 1 repercussions. Steve Barwick said there would not be because the bonds were not refinanced internally. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 5 was Resolution No. 6, Series of 1993, a resolution authorizing the Town Manager to sign an Intergovernmental Agreement for a Regional Plann;,,g Commission for the purpose of transportation planning. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Greg Hall explained that the ICETEA Act of 1991 required every State to have a statewide transportation plan; Colorado currently had no such a plan. Additionally, the Colorado Legislature had passed legislation explaining how to work out the required detailed statewide plan. Greg advised part of the legislation designated fifteen (15) regional planning areas divided by geographic and economic similarities. The Town of Vail was in the Intermountain Transportation Planning Region including Garfield, Pitkin, Eagle, Summit, and Lake Counties. Each region was responsible for development of a regional transportation plan, and Greg reported the Intermountain Transportation Planning Region had been meeting monthly to discuss plans for this region. Greg stated if a regional planning commission was formed, the region would receive $35,000.00 from CDOT to fund part of the region's study. He advised those involved in this region's planning wanted to maintain local control, because if a regional planning commission was not formed, the State would do the planning. The chairman to be elected from the each regional plarn~ng commission would serve as the region's member on the State's Transportation Advisory Committee. Greg said the Transportation Advisory Committee's main task was to take the fifteen (15) regional plans and develop a statewide plan. He advised this region's member was Joe Sands, County Commissioner for Summit County, and the alternate member was Ed O'Leary, County Commissioner for Lake County. Greg explained requests for federal funding had to go through the Transportation Advisory Committee, and before any federal funds could be secured, requests had to be in the statewide ,plan. Merv Lapin strongly encouraged continuous representation from this region. Tom Steinberg added, at the last NWCCOG meeting, there were representatives from the Rio Blanco and Routt County COG areas which parallel I-70. In general, Tom noted COG representatives felt the different regions ought to be working together because of similar interests, and if there was no choice to be one district, the regions could speak with one voice for two districts. Greg emphasized the one thing any plan had to be was financially feasible. He distributed a copy of the Intermountain Transportation Planr~ng Region Rural Planning Work Program. After additional discussion, Jim Gibson moved to approve Resolution No. 6, Series of 1993, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 6 was a review of the Art in Public Places (AIPP) Board approval of the acquisition and siting of "Terre Haute" by Bryan Hunt. The piece had been given to TOV by a benefactor who wished to remain anonymous, and, in addition to the gift of the piece, the benefactor had committed funds to the installation of the piece. The AIPP Board found this piece met all the criteria set forth in the AIPP Guidelines and that the proposed site would give the piece 2 high visibility. Kristan Pritz noted Council had visited the proposed site, Mayors' Park, presently under construction, adjacent to 1st Bank. Kristan noted the AIPP Board had voted unanimously, 9-0, on May 12, 1993, to accept "Terre Haute" from the private benefactor for the proposed site, and Council's role in the process per the AIPP Guidelines was to ensure that the AIPP Board had utilized the procedures and criteria outlined in those guidelines. She briefly referenced some of the points in the AIPP Board's memo to Council dated June 1, 1993, including the AIPP Board's feeling that, due to the a high concentration of art work in the Lionshead area, sites outside of that core area should be considered. Secondly, the AIPP Board discussed the prominence of the piece, and felt a high visibility location would allow pedestrians the opportunity to view the piece closely. Thirdly, the AIPP Board had discussed the importance of locating a piece in the Mayors' Park. The AIPP Board felt that should a piece be placed in the park at the time of installation and dedication of the park, this piece would become and identified element of the park versus an installation done at a later date, and, by installing it during the time of construction, the opportunity to install the piece mare conveniently and at a much lower cost existed. Kristan noted an area in the park had been planned to accommodate the art work. Further, the siting of this piece as well as the development of an artwalk was reinforced in the Streetscape Master Plan. This specific site was listed as an art work location as well as a number of other sites along West Meadow Drive. It was an intent of the Streetscape Master Plan to create an art walk or sculpture garden in this area. The AIPP Board, when reviewing sites for installation, considered visibility of the site to be very important. In locating this and other pieces, the AIPP Board attempted to place the piece in an area where there was a lot of traffic, as well as a permanent businesses or public facility, to try to avoid malicious vandalism. Another important criteria Kristan pointed out was the fairly low maintenance this piece would require. Kristan distributed letters from AIPP Board members who were unable to attend this meeting, Sally Brainerd, Kenneth M. Robins, and Cissy Dobson expressing strong support and reasons for the AIPP Board's decision. Mayor Osterfoss reminded Council their role in the process of the decision requested at this time, per the AIPP Guidelines, was to ensure that the AIPP Board had utilized the procedures and criteria outlined in those guidelines, Council's role was fairly narrow in this process, and the process was designed specifically as a check to determine that procedures and criteria had been followed. It was noted Council had a copy of the guideline criteria before them. The question under discussion was not a question of whether or not Council felt the criteria had been met or whether they liked or did not like the aesthetics of the piece, but whether or not the process that the criteria had been addressed and followed by the AIPP Board. Kathy Langenwalter, AIPP member, stated she felt the board had gone through the criteria as they viewed the piece and followed the procedure outlined in their guidelines. Jim Gibson initiated a lengthy discussion concerning safety of the piece in the proposed location. He recalled sculptures had been removed from the Children's Fountain because of fear of children falling on them, and he had the same concern about this piece. Kathy Langenwalter said the AIPP Board had discussed the safety of the piece, and they did not feel it presented the same safety concerns as the Children's Fountain. Jim Shearer shared Jim Gibson's concern, noting people were always climbing on pieces to have their pictures taken and danger was ever present. Kathy mentioned a few pieces she felt were "less safe" that they did not have problems with. Erich Hill said the artist had generously decided to build a platform the piece, and it was felt that would address safety and aesthetic questions. Kristan added they were trying to make it possible for pedestrians to be able to walk underneath the piece when it was sited, and the artist was willing to assist with that; however, the piece was already 12'7" high by 5'6" by 3" wide, and they did not want to make it too tall. Rob Levine stated he was more than willing to support the recommendation proposed at this time, but he asked if the AIPP Board was willing to take one more look at an another site, the pedestal site at the entrance to Lionshead by Vantage Point condominiums. He felt the Mayors' Park would be a wonderful site, but Lionshead needed help, and this might be a way to help that area. It also might take this sculpture out of the pedestrian traffic pattern, which might help with expressed safety concerns, and yet keep the piece very visible on the bus route, and even more visible from I70. He felt the Lionshead area would appreciate having it there. Kathy Langenwalter said she would be willing to bring that up to the AIPP Board and the artist. Mayor Osterfoss felt Council appreciated the fact that the AIPP Board program was going well and was the result of dedicated volunteer time on the part of board members and generous contributions from the community. She felt Council wanted to 3 support the AIPP Board's decisions, reviewing this issue was a good opportunity for Council to learn more about the process and to understand what, if any, role Council would have in the process. She stated TOV was honored to have a piece by an artist of this caliber, but she appreciated the fact that Kathy was willing to take Rob's input back to the AIPP Board. After further discussion, Tom Steinberg moved to uphold the AIPP Board's decision with regard to the "Terre Haute" sculpture, indicating that Council had done its duty with regard to this issue. He added he was sure the AIPP Board would speak with the artist about concerns discussed. Rob Levine seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Jim Gibson stated again he was very much concerned about the safety, and said .that concern was not satisfied by what he heard tonight. He said he would like to see this piece on display where safety concerns were eliminated or non-existent. Tom Steinberg noted one of the things discussed was that this piece might be a very good addition to the proposed Vail Valley Perf„~ , , , ante and Conference Center, if and when it was built, and even if the piece was put in the Mayor's Park right now, that did not mean it had to stay there forever. Bob Buckley echoed Jim Gibson's safety issue concerns. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 4-3, Jim Gibson, Merv Lapin, and Bob Buckley opposed. Item No. 7. was the appeal of the Design Review Board (DRB) regarding a deck, hot tub, and required landscaping at the Kandell residence located at 4259 Nugget Lane/Lot 2, Bighorn Estates Resubdivision of Lots 10 & 11 (east half of duplex). The appellant was Dr. Robert Kandell, who was not present. Mayor Osterfoss noted Dr. Kandell had requested this appeal be tabled for two weeks, until June 15, 1993. Jim Gibson moved to table this issue until June 15, 1993, with a second from Merv Lapin. Before a vote was taken, Tom Steinberg expressed serious reluctance about tabling the issue at all, noting this issue had been delayed for over a year already. He noted the appellant built illegally, and felt strongly the deck should be torn down. Tom felt if Dr. Kandell then wanted to build, he should apply for a building permit and go through the regular process. Tom felt this was the only way to stop illegal, abusive building. He felt abuse of the system was happening more and more, the problem was getting worse, and it would continue to get worse until owners of illegal buildings were required go through the expense of tearing down those buildings. Tom said he was willing to vote against tabling the issue at that time, because of the abuse of the system. Mayor Osterfoss noted the issue under discussion was not whether the ultimate decision was to tear it down; the whole issue needed to be discussed to make that decision. She said tabling the issue, if Council chose to do so, was strictly one final attempt at courtesy to Dr. Kandell. If the issue was tabled, that was not a decision that this potential law violation was being overlooked. Kristan Pritz explained staff had been through this issue with Dr. Kandell several times, as explained in the Community Development Department's memo to Town Council dated June 1, 1993. She added Dr. Kandell had met with Mike Mollica on Friday, May 28, 1993, and Dr. Kandell requested the issue be tabled, however Mike had told him no. Kristan stated she had supported that decision. Kristan said tonight's situation was acceptable to staff as long as they could proceed next evening meeting whether Dr. Kandell was present or not. Larry Eskwith had advised it was not required that the appellant or representative be present. Mayor Osterfoss said she personally had an opportunity to apprise Dr. Kandell there would be no further appeal after tonight's decision or any decision in two weeks if Council chose to agree with that there was not an opportunity for further delay. Merv Lapin asked staff if Dr. Kandell had been avoiding the process or acting in bad faith. Staff chose not to make that judgement of Dr. Kandell, but staff expressed it had been overly courteous trying to accommodate Dr. Kandell's schedule, and Kristan expressed that the neighbors involved with the project had been quite understanding and had been trying to work it out. Kristan hoped a two week tabling would allow Dr. Kandell to get things worked out with his neighbor to the east; apparently he had satisfied his neighbor to the west. There was additional discussion about previous Planning and Environmental (PEC) and Design Review Board (DRB) decisions related to stream setbacks and appeals from Dr. Kandell. Mayor Osterfoss pointed out Council was deciding whether to table the issue at this time, not make a decision at this point. After further discussion, Jim Gibson called the question. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 6-1, Tom Steinberg opposed. Mayor Osterfoss added she would be speaking with Dr. Kandell on Wednesday, June 2, 1993, and would reiterate that the issue was scheduled for June 15, 1993, at which time a decision would be made regardless of representation or other extenuating circumstances. Kristan Pritz suggested a joint work session with Council, the PEC and the DRB chairs and other board members to discuss how Council wanted the growing number of abusers of the 4 system handled. She felt a joint discussion would be helpful to all in determining what was fair and equitable. Tom Steinberg agreed that the system needed to be tightened up. Bob Buckley agreed with Tom and inquired about penalties for violators. Larry Eskwith said TOV had the right to bring the abusers in to Municipal Court and fine them for each day of violation. Larry said he had no legal problem with that, but felt it could turn in to a political problem very quickly. After discussion, Council agreed to schedule the requested joint session. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 8:50 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianne S. Deto C:iMINSJUN1.93 5 ri MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 15, 1993 7:50 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, June 15, 1993, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:50 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: Larry Grafel, Acting Town Manager " Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation of which there was none. Second on the agenda was a Consent Agenda consisting of one item: Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1993, second reading, an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 31, Series of 1992, to reduce the interest rate to be paid on installments of special assessments against affected properties within the Booth Creek Local Improvement District. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Tom Steinberg moved to approve the Consent Agenda, with a second from Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unan~*nously, 7-0. Item No. 3 was Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1993, second reading, an ordinance amending Chapter 16.04, and Sections 16.12.010, 16.20.220, 16.22.160, 16.26.010, 16.20.015 and 16.22.016 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code to provide for the prohibition of neon signs and exterior gas filled, illuminated and fiber optic signs, and providing regulations regarding the review of all other gas filled, illuminated and fiber optic signs, and providing details in regard thereto. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Kristan Pritz requested this ordinance and related Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1993, which was agenda item No. 4, be tabled until July 6, 1993. She advised staff had met with attorney Art Abplanalp, and staff had found his input helpful toward refining this ordinance. Merv Lapin moved to table Ordinance No. 5, Series of 1993, and Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1993, to July 6, 1993. Bob Buckley seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 4 was Ordinance No. 13, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance amending Paragraphs 16.32.030(F) and 16.32.040{A) of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail, to provide for the termination of any non-conforming sign five years after the effective date of any amendment to the Sign Code Ordinance, and setting forth details in regard thereto. The title was not read. The tabling of this ordinance until July 6, 1993, was passed unanimously as part of the motion, second, and vote on agenda item No. 3, above. Item No. 5 was Resolution No. 7, Series of 1993, a resolution recognizing Gordon Brittan as an honored citizen of the Town of Vail on the occasion of his 90th birthday. Merv Lapin moved to approve Resolution No. 7, Series of 1993, with a second from Jim Gibson. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full, and briefly mentioned some of Mr. Brittan's contributions to the community as detailed in this resolution. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 6 appeal of the Design Review Board (DRB) decision regarding a deck, hot tub, and required landscaping at the Kandell residence located at 4259 Nugget LanelLot 2, Bighorn Estates Resubdivision of Lots 10 & 11 (east half of duplex). The appellant, Dr. Robert Kandell, was not present; east side adjacent property owners, the McCue's were. Tim Devlin presented and discussed two sketches of the deck configuration and landscaping. He reviewed the chronology of events beginning with the building of the deck in Agril, 1992, without approval from the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) or the Design 1 is .j Review Board (DRB). He noted there had also been no building permit issued. Full details of the chronology were detailed in CDD's memo dated June 1, 1993, to Council. Tim advised that staff had been working extensively with the appellant and adjacent neighbors to resolve the issue. The issue had first been heard by the PEC in December, 1992, at which time Dr. Kandell was in town. At that time, his request was for two side setback variances, and a Gore Creek setback variance. The PEC's action on those requests was that the wE:st side variance (Dunahay side) would be granted as proposed by the appellant; the east side variance was granted with the condition that the final determination regarding landscaping be decided by the DRB. Tim noted that the staff at that time, working with the KK~ndell's and McCue's, had reached an agreement on the planting of five (5) 10' evergreen 1;rees to screen the deck and hot tub from the McCue's view. The PEC's determination on the Gore Creek setback variance was that the entire portion of the deck in the Gore Creek setback was not allowed by Code and should be removed. The matter was heard by the DRB in April, 1993, and at that time, a representative of west side neighbor Mr. Dunahay apgeared to express that the Dunahay's wanted the deck cut back on the west side to his privacy wall. On the east side setback, the DRB thought it was appropriate that five (5) 10'-12' evergreens should be planted in order to mitigate the encroachment into the setback. At that time, Dr. Kandell had withdrawn his proposal to plant any trees there; he did not feel that any trees could survive there and did not feel that trees were appropriate there. However, the direction of the PEC to the DRB was that the trees would be necessary, but the specifics would be decided by the DRB. The DRB's determination, again, was for five (5)10'-1~;' trees. Subsequent to that decision, Dr. Kandell appealed both the PEC's and the DRB's de~~isions. However, the ten (10) day period of appeal for the PEC decision had expired. Therefore, at this meeting, Council was hearing only the appeal of the DRB decision. Tim noted George Lamb, DRB Chairman, was unable to be present at this meeting a:nd had submitted a letter directed to Council in his absence. The letter described further the chronology of the issue, emphasized the duration of the matter, and encouraged it be finalized without further delay. Tim added a fax from Dr. Kandell had been received at 15:45 before this meeting explaining he would not be present this evening. Dwight Kudel, repre:aenting Dr. Kandell, read Dr. Kandell's letter in its entirety for the record. Dr. Kandell';> letter included admission of his error in building the deck without prior approval and appropriate building permits, but that this was done out of ignorance on his part with regard to the proper procedure to be followed. Tom Steinberg asked Mr. Kudel if the electrical work. on the hot tub had been done by electricians, if a plumber hooked up the water for the project, who the contractor waa, if there was there an architect involved, and if any of those peop]',e were licensed. Mr. Kudel advised he only labored on construction of the deck, and was unable to answer any of Tom's questions. Tom Steinberg moved that the appellant be required to tear down the project completely with no further appeal process, and that the tear down project be done by a contractor licensed within the Town of Vail. Bob Buckley seconded the motion. At this point, Larry Eskwith advised Council adjourn to Executive Session to discuss the matter before a vote:. Jim Shearer moved to adjourn Council to Executive Session, with a second from Bob Brickley. Mayor Osterfoss noted there was already a motion and second on the floor and called for comments from others involved. Tom Steinberg withdrew his motion; Bob withdrew his second, and the motion and second to adjourn to Executive Session remained. Under discussion before a vote on the remaining motion and second, Mr. McCue requested that a transcript of his comments to Dr. Kandell be made available for Dr. Kandell and Mr. Dunahay. Mr. McCue spoke in response to Dr. Kandell's letter, particularly referring to Dr. Kandell's repeated absence from hearings on this issue. Mr. McCue stated he had :spoken with John Tinker, the individual Dr. Kandell had hired to build the project. Mr. ]McCue related that Mr. Tinker commented the Kandell project was to be a "stealth" project, such that no licensing fees would have to be paid, and knew the project might not conform tc? Code, but the project was to be done quickly and quietly. Mr. McCue said he did not know if an application had been made for side setbacks with former TOV Planner Jill Kammerer, but if so, he felt there must be a record on file at TOV. Mr. McCue said that Dr. KandE~ll had called him over the past few days to try to find some mutually acceptable agreement to the matter; however, after his recent communications with Dr. Kandell, Mr. McCue fE~lt Dr. Kandell had completely negated their previous agreement for landscaping, and now Mr. McCue felt he must negate any support of the project. He said he had tried to work wiith Dr. Kandell, but now felt he could not make an agreement with him, and wanted the deck torn down. 2 There being no further public input, a vote was taken on the motion and second to adjourn into Executive Session regarding legal matters, and passed unanimously, 7-0. Council adjourned into Executive Session at 8:15 P.M. Council reconvened from Executive Session at 8:55 P.M. Jim Gibson moved to uphold the DRB's decision as detailed in CDD's memo to Council dated June 1, 1993. The full final motion included that the deck be brought into conformance with the Uniform Building Code, subject to the inspection and approval of the Town of Vail Building Department; that the deck be cut back on the west to the existing privacy wall between the Kandell residence and the Dunahay residence and from that point on the privacy wall on the west, the deck would be cut back to the northeast corner of the deck according to the configuration agreed to by Dr. Kandell and Mr. Dunahay; that in no case could the deck exceed five (5) feet in height above existing grade, measured from the existing grade to the top of the decking; that a minimum of five (5) evergreen trees 10'-12' in height be planted between the deck and the McCue's property directly to the east to mitigate the visual impact of the deck; that a Building Permit be obtained by a contractor licensed with the T., ~~u of Vail before any work was commenced on the deck; a double fee would be charged for the building permit as penalty for construction without a permit; the building permit application was to be submitted with an accompanying site plan showing the new deck configuration, as well as the specific size and location of the five (5) evergreen trees; that TOV's Building Department would require that a drawing detailing the structural, electrical, and plumbing specifications of the deck and hot tub be submitted for their review as part of the building permit application; that the deck/hot tub be brought into conformance with the National Electrical Code and Uniform Plumbing Code (as well as the Uniform Building Code), subject to the inspection and approval of the Town of Vail Building Department; that if any of the five (5) required 10' to 12' evergreen trees should die or otherwise be removed within two (2) years of their installation, that they be replaced by Dr. Kandell with a tree(s) of the same species and comparable in height; and that all of the aforementioned conditions be completed or the entire new deck removed by a licensed contractor no later than Tuesday, June 29, 1993. If the new deck and hot tub were not completely removed, or if the apr.~~ed project was not completed in its entirety with the above specified conditions of approval by June 29, 1993, Council direct staff to take all administrative actions and steps necessary to enforce the laws of the Town of Vail. Further, Council directed staff to issue citations to Dr. Kandell for every day after June 29, 1993, that said project remained uncompleted, unless the new deck and hot tub were completely removed. Council also directed staff' to talk with the carpenter that constructed the deck without approval or permits from the Town of Vail, Mr. John Tinker of Eagle, Colorado. Merv Lapin seconded the motion. Jim Gibson also indicated the project should be red tagged immediately because it had not been through an inspection process. After brief discussion, a vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 7 was an appeal of a Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) decision to not allow the removal of a dwelling unit in the A & D Building/286 Bridge StreetJLots A- DBlock 5A, Vail Village First Filing. The appellant was Vail Associates, Inc. to bo represented by Jack D. Hunn. The appellant had contacted staff prior to this meeting to request their appeal be tabled until July 6, 1993, as they required additional time to prepare their presentation. Merv Lapin moved to table this appeal until July 6, 1993, at the appellant's request. Jim Gibson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously. Before adjournment, Merv Lapin initiated discussion of an item not on the agenda concerning the Par-3 Golf Course area. He recalled TOV had given approval to the Water District to use that property as mitigation for the wetlands, and he inquired if Council was still in agreement with that decision. Tom Steinberg said the Water Board had already ordered the plants, had them grown, and they were concerned about time running out for transplanting. Kristan indicated that the Vail Recreation District (VRD) was aware of this issue, and the staff had asked the two boards to communicate and resolve the issue of whether or not the wetland improvements in the Par-3 area would be part of the Water District's final mitigation plan. Larry Eskwith announced he was leaving TOV on June 30, 1993, to join the law firm of Bailey, Harring & Peterson. He noted that firm represents The Lodge at Vail and litigation involving the exchange of certain Forest Service land adjacent to The Lodge at Vail with privately owned land located within the National Wilderness area. This was a matter TOV has opposed, and he has been involved with the matter on behalf of TOV for over six years. 3 He explained that in order to comply with Rule 1.11 of the Colorado Rules of Profe:~sional Conduct, subsequent to his joining the law firm of Bailey, Harring & Peterson, he would be totally screened from an participation in The Lodge at Vail litigation or any matters rE:lating thereto. He said that litigation of the matter had proceeded to a sum~aaary judgement on the part of TOV, and the briefs were now before Judge Nottingham. Larry discussed thE~ press statement he released at Council's request regarding this issue. Council expressed general discomfort with the arrangement, but Mayor Osterfoss stated TOV had Larry's verbal and written affirmation and identification of the rule and it was clear that he planned to abide by that rule. Jim Gibson asked Larry Eskwith if TOV should employ an attorney who was not; yet a member of the Colorado Bar. Larry said he could not say TOV should not do that, taut felt it could present some problems, particularly with representation of the TOV before any administrative hearing or administrative action or before the Court system. Jim ~~ibson asked if TOV could call on Larry for support that might be needed in an such insltances. Larry Eskwith said that was acceptable, and noted TOV would be billed for his time. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and ;passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianne S. Deto C:IMINJUN15.93 4 PRIVILEGED ~ONFtDENTIAL TOWN OF PAIL 75 South Frontage Road Department of Administrative Services Yail, Colorado 81657 303-479-2116 FAX 303-479-2157 MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Coungi FROM: Steve Barwick DATE: July 6, 1993 RE: Vail Valley Performance and Conference Center Donation The issue of a $1 million donation by the Town to the WPCC has been raised recently. Town staffs recommendation on this issue is as follows: • Show your support for the facility • Don't obligate the Town to a fixed amount of donation at this time. Town staff feels much more comfortable with the idea that we will endeavor to donate to the project in 1996 pending the outcome of Amendment 1 votes and the strength of the Vail economy. • Recognize that a sizable donation to the WPCC is likely to displace funding for another TOV project. SHB/dak ~ ~ V t4 ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ U s~ ~ a ~ any W'W ~~~U~ C~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y O ~ Q ~ Q ~ y o ~ ; ~ C/1 1r' ~ ° 4 ~ ~ A p a~. A ~ A w ~ ~ w o ~ ~ a o ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ 0 T ~ ~ y o ~ x ~ ~ . ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w 'T3 ~ ~ ~ 4~3 ~ ~ ~,0~3~ U a z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r~ ~ c~~~~ ~ ~ d W w z 4 ~ Q~ a~ 4 0 0 ~ ~ Q ~ ~ o A ~ v ~'W^~~ a ~ ~Q~~~ per, ~ 1~ r ~ H ~ ~ y a ~ a r~ O ~ ~ V1 ~ ~ M~? ~ 3 ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ M 1~ ~ ~ ~ ''C3 ~ C ~ G ~ June 30, 1993 Dear Friends and Business Associates, The Community of Vail has been studying the feasibility of building a Performance & Conference Center for the past three years. Many meetings have been held and numerous presentations have been made to a wide range of local groups seeking their feedback on the project. Based on the response to the project during these meetings, a plan has been developed to finance the construction and annual operating costs of the building through a combination of taxes on hotels, restaurants, and bazs as well as private contributions. The Town is planning to commit up to $1,000,000 to this project. We feel this is a very important facility, but we want to know we have the support of the community before we pledge such a significant amount of money. If the Town commits this money to help build the Performance & Conference Center, something else on our long term list of capital projects will receive less money. It's a matter of prioritizing this facility along with everything else we want to do in the community over the next several years. From the beginning we have heard very positive remarks about the project. Maybe everyone really is in favor! We suspect that we have not heard from those who ~rr.,se the project because they fear embarrassment or being labeled negative. If this is the case with you, please set aside those feazs and speak up. We want you to come to the Town Council Meeting on Tuesday evening July 6th, at 7:30 PM to tell us what your concerns are. Your opinion is important. No question or objection will be minimized, ignored, or laughed off. If you still have con.,.;,~.s, now is the time to make those objections known. We appreciate the involvement of so many members of the community. Thank you for letting us know what you think. Sincerely, Margaret A. Osterfoss Mayor 7(c = fc VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 RECE~VE'p J U ~ 1993 IMPORTANT INFORMATION IN EVALUATING THE NEED FOR A PERFORMANCE AND CONFERENCE CENTER Do1Zar-for-dollar advantages to having one vs. the negative side (i.e., traffic) Economic indicators, marketing research Environmental considerations Environmental impact, expansion opportunities (20-year projection), why are we squeezing it in such a sma11 space? Won't be able to expand Evaluation is over, I would be the first to vote NO Financial feasibility, is there really enough private donations to build it? Financial feasibZity without tax subsidy, backed by a Zist of all such facilities in the country and the degree to which they are self-supporting; will it place a strain on the town's infrastructure; wiZ1 it serve a self-interest core group Funding and projected use Hard facts showing why similar facilities in other towns have failed or require inordinate subsidies; how multi-use will actually work--who has priority to schedule prime dates? How can it possibly be used enough so that it does not need to be subsidized by Town? How it's going to be run, what it consists of, what the targeted customers are to be, quality How many performances and conferences we Zose each year for Zack of adequate facility, especially in summer How much additional summer business it wi11 ,bring to Vail How much my taxes are going to go up, and if I wi1Z get any benefit or if it wi11 all be for the rich, upper-class second home owners How much wi11 it be used? What is the cost? What is the "payback payoff" time? How profitable other centers are, and if they are, why aren't the private sector interested? How successful has Keystone and Beaver Creek been in attracting RECEIVED J1J~ 6 1993 July 5,1993 }(c : T-~ TO THE TOWN OF VAIL COUNCIL MEMBERS: The Board of Trustees of the Bravo! Colorado Music Festival strongly supports the concept of a Performing Arts Center in Vail. We, as a Board, feel we are acting in the best interests of the town, the community, and the individuals of the Town of Vail by expressing our support. In general, we feel that a performing arts center would be integral to the future growth of Vail. Only with adequate and proper facilities will Vail continue to have the power to draw increasing numbers of business and recreational visitors. Our long range plans and hopes have always been to see the cultural environment of Vail grow and improve, and it is for this reason that a performing arts center makes sense to us. The Board's support ,however , is not unconditional. We are concerned that the fund-raising necessary for this facility could jeopardize our own efforts. Therefore, during the processes of planning, locating funds, determining management, programming and building community support prior to the election, we would like the opportunity to provide assistance. Our input is as much a part of our concern for the success of the center as it is for Bravo!'s future. We cheer the efforts of the Performing Arts Center Committee in their pursuit to bring a quality facility to Vail. 7 /5 /93 `ky„iv~c~\4Y~~1n 5 ~cke"~ ~G?~ L ~CLI I. ~~CYT / ~ C~a~~pC ~ ~ ~U-s a ` j PRIVILEGED I~ & ~NF}DENTr1~~. TOWN OF VAIL C011~IMUNITY SU1~.VEY SUMMARY OF RESULTS July 1, 1993 Prepared for.• Town of Vail Prepared by: RRC Associates 4875 Pearl East Circle, Suite 301 Boulder, Colorado 80301 303/449-6558 ` Z0'd ~tI101 • A S S O C I A T E S Fiesxarch • N13Mrt1f~ • OCSgn MEMOYtANriUM TQ: Members of the Pail Town Council FROM: Caroline Fisher, Nolan Rosa11 and Chris Cares RE: Preliminary Results from the Vail Community Survey and the Scheduled Agenda Item for July t5, 1993 i DATES )uly 3, 1993 Enclosed is a summary of the findings from the Community Survey and focus groups, which will be discussed at the July b Council meeting. The packet contains a brief synopsis of each major topic addressed on the survey along with appropriate qualitative input from respondents' verbatim comments on the survey and focus group input. Also ~ included is a copy of the survey form that was used this year with question results ' summarized. Typically, the first number identified is the percentage responding in a particular category and the "n" is the number of respondernts on that particular question, . An overview of ttte results of two focus groups conducted by Nolan Rosatl in late June is also included (Nolan had also conducted 1wa groups prior to fielding the survey). In addition to the mailed survey distributed to residents of the Town, a telephone followup interview was conducted with a sampling of 100 households that did not respond to the original mailing. The purpose of the followup was to ensure that there were not significant differences between the "non-respondents" and those households ' completing the mailback survey. An evaluation of the results showed that there was virtually no diff~~;,.~ce in the response patterns on the two surveys; therefore, the results have been merged and are summarized together on the survey form in the packet, Together, the sample consists of 1,043 interviews, 943 obtained by mail and 100 conducted over the telephone. i 4875 PEyari East Circle Sure 301 Boulder, Colorado 6ai01 (303) 4496558 • (303) 449587 FAX T0'd LSZZ6LbT Ol S31tiI00SSSti Odd WO~Id Wti6t::[~T ~66T `Z0 I~r Jul 02,1993 10~27AM FROM RRC r,awCIATES TO 14792157 P.01 Tom of Vail Community Survey ~ iPtirmn~res or• SuRV~rs Arras FOCUS CROUPS Rtitupl Jr_. ('j1>itAt.: ~ ,;,c,~ „t.a The sample of survey resptmdents are characterized in order to provide background information on the survey results, The following statements briefly characterize the survey .~randents: • Seventy-seven percent 8re'r,.rrErty Owners. Over half are year-round residents (63 r...~.,trft); 18 r:,.~ent own vacation p.~r..rty in Vaii, and 11 percent are seasonal Vail residents. • Respondents' residences arc most lilacly to be locatod in irast Pail (26 r,,...,~.rtt), West Vail (15 percent), Sandstone/Potato Patch (I 1 percent), and Vail Village (10 percent), with other neighborhoods representing 38 percent. Fifty-eight percent of respondents have lived or owned p,.,fri.. ~y in the Vail Valley for five or more years (22 percent more than 15 years). • Thirty percent are single; 2? percent are singleleouple with children; 17 percent are couple with no children; and ZS percent are "empty nesters," or couples whose children are no longer at home. • Twenty percent are under 34 years of age; 29 percent 35 to 44 years; 27 percent 45 to 54; and 24 percent over 54 years. • Income levels are high-of chose responding to the question, 24 percent have annual household incomes exceeding $15U,UW. The following section summarizes survey results by major topic, with graphs and focus group information providing further elaboration where appropriate. ~lF(?RMATION • The public feels moderately well informed about what is going on, with over half wishing to be more informed than they are currently. The Vail Daily and Vail Trail are the most frequently utilized sources, more than local radio and "TV. + The first set of fcx;us grtyups noted that neighborhtxxis arc not often well informed on issues related to the Design Review Board and PEC. People often find out about issues of concern W them after the fact, and then come to Council late in the process, sometimes trying to reverse earlier actions of staff and boards. • There was a strong recommendation for a regular column to be taken out in the newspaper by the Town, netltrally written, which informs the public of issues coming 'up for action in one to two weeks, with brief background, location, etc. The column might also note staff Dosition, mgior long-term issues that Town Council is studying, what actions have been taken on other fcey items, etc. The column should be in the same place in the paper on the same day of the week, in recognizable format. RRC Asocute~ PaEc 2 Jul 02.1993 10~2(3Aht FROM RRC ASSOCIATES TO 14792157 P. 02 • Town of Vdl Community Sucvey • A sense exists among many that the Town does not follow up well when requests are made by citizens to staff, Frequently, calls are not returned and citizens are not told what action, if any, was taken on the matter. A Hoed exists for a more structured system of handling such matters. ~oA>.~s/Isst~s Please refer to figure on page A-3 for graphic ~w.~.~sentadon of data. ' • "Neighborhood problems" are lttostly related t0 automobile usage and the impact of cars on streets, traffic, and pedestrians. Street disrepair, inadequate off-site parking, unsafe walking routes, and speeding or r~kless automobiles were cited as "major problems" in res~ „dents' neighborhoods. • Focus groups provided more specificity with respect to the above issues. Regarding parking, it was expressed that retail and restaurant sales in the Village are negatively impacted because people don't want to pay to park during the evening hours, and that there is inadequate off-street parking to handle the demands of local residents and their guests. For pedestrians, the bike path is considered dangerous due to the conflictinE traffic of bikes and skateboarders-a soparate gravel pedestrian path is needed throughout town. • Respondents felt snow removal, crime prevention, trash and pollution were generally well taken care of in their neighborhoods. ~g The following ratings section discusses each general topic that wAS rated by Survey respondents, with graphs presenting the results included following this memo. The graphs illustrate two types of information: the average or "mean" ratings of a particular program or department, and the percent of respondents rating that program either "exc;ellent" or "poor9 (the extreme "poles" on the scale). Together, these two types of measures provide an overall indication of the relative position of programs in the opinion of Town residents, as well as areas of particular strength or weakness. Fraeh graph will be referenced in the relevant section. General Servicrr The service of snow removal is met with approval by respondents, both on streets and sidewalks/stairways {see figure on page A-4). Maintenance of park areas and municipal court services also receive high ratings. However, street sweeping, repair, and maintenance are rated "average" to slightly "below average." • Focus groups and comments reveal more of the public sentiment regarding these issues: A&C Aaaociatea Pale 3 Jul 02 1993 10~28AM FROM RRC ASSOCIATES TO 14?92157 P. 03 t 'folvn of Veil Cannwnity Swvay Large arrr~w bulWttp blocking sight of oncarring cars Plmving snow into driveways • 7lce "r~ncks " on naad~r are overdone-what happened to sand ? • Focus group input indicated that potholes should be handled Netter beft~re they get to such a major problem, and that there should be signs marking them to warn mote»sts. • While showing only moderate problems in the survey, in several focus groups, signage in town (traffic and directional) was criticized as being confusing, uncoordinated, and sometimes nonexistent. Stop signs should be lowered W be in view. Bus system • listings of the bus systcrn did not show a large degree of variance among attributes, with ratings generally in the "above average" range (see figure on page A-S). Operational issues related to the buses were rated the highcct-in-town shuttle, rcxiting, and hattrs of operation. Areas showing somewhat lower ratings were cleanliness (bus and parking stntcture} and employee courtesy (bus driver and booth attendant/host). Comments on the system include: (Need] buses for early employees Nn hus stop shelter Lighting at bus .stop Community Aevelopnient • Survey data, respondents' comments, and focus groups show that certain elements related t~ CD are quite well-received, such as the "art in public places" program, hours of operation, restaurant inspections, and environmental planning program (see figure on page Ate. However, review procedures such as building permits and development review assistance are arras of concern. 7.oning and sign code enforcement are also lower rated. Respondents were quite prolific in their comments and in focus groups regarding Community Development. Focus group input indicated that the review process has become too complicated and needs to be streamlined. Builders indicated major problems in handling routine changes in the field, such as a slight change in window location, so that the job has to be sboppetl far long periods to process "trivial" items. This leads to making changes without aN~?.aval and hoping not to be disc~ovcrtxi. It was also commented that people have been driven out of the Ya11ey because the process and costs of r.~,,.,essing arc ovcrwhclmiing. RRC Aeeociatce Rge 4 Jul 02 1993 10~29AM FROM RRC ASSOCIATES TO 14792157 P. 04 Iowa of vaU Community Survey Ponce + Traffic, again, is the major arts of concern as it related to the functioning of the police department (see figure on page A-7). Residents feel secure and appreciate the attitude of police officers. However, traffic enforcement and contml are the aspeeks that were less well received, particularly "management" of the four-way. One respondent recommended educating drivers as to how the proper etiquette at four-way intersections, and several felt that "rolling" stop signs are particularly troublesome. Other enforcement-related comments include: Pedestrians croirsing highway Reckless bicycles Police attitudes toward young adults need irnprovemeru Fire Department and Lr6rary Ratings of both the fire department and the library were rated quite high (see figures vn page A-8). With respect to the fire department, actual fire protection attributes were rated highly, while enfarivernent of the fire code, which is more preventive, is rated slightly lower. For the library, general services and access were rated highly, while only the hours of.,~;,.ation were perceived to be slightly less positive. Admintstratton/Marutgemenr of Tuwn C~vernrnenr • Employee friendliness is the most highly rated aspect of T4V administration (se+e figure vn page A-9}, "Information dissemination" is considered to be about "average," likely reflective of respondents' general desire to be more informed that they cu.,~~,tly are, as discussed above. Responsiveness to public inputlconcems, as documenoed in the focus grottps and c~mmcnts, is an area respondent's felt the administration could improve upon, General frustration existed with the level of regulation and bureaucratic routine of Town government. Several focus group participants felt the Town government was becoming less re.~....sive to citizen concerns and feedback. trommatsions and Efecred/Appointed O(~icials • The commi;siun and elected/appointad officials receiving the highest ratings ate the municipal court judge, Vail Valley Marketing Board, mayor, and the local licensing authority (sec figure on page A-10). The Housing Authority, Design Review Board, and Town Council were rated lower than other groups. I» the focus groups, the Design Review Rnard was frequently eritici~~d for arbitrary and inconsistent decision-making, and the Housing Authority was criticized for poor communication about what was being done, for over-studying the issues but not acting on them, and for not generating su~cient new housing units. Some wondered what has actually been accomplished since the creation of the Authority; others were quite sympathetic with the magnitude and complexity of the problems RitC Aaaociatea Page S Jul 02x1993 10~30Rf1 FROM RRC ASSOCIATES TO 14792157 P.05 'rbwo of Vdl Co~nnuaity Survey which needed attention. Stilt others questioned whether housing was really more of a private responsibility than a public one. • While overall survey results show the Town Council and Mayor are doing an adequate job, several comments received as part of the process take issue with a variety of subjects. They include perceived lack of leadership, tack of responsiveness, and a sense that no one is actually listening to public input. Some indicate resentment or lack of support for Town employees from the Council and Mayor. ~wrr ~onrs nrm Ot3.mcTTVts • Respondents were asked to help pflorittze the significant issues w be addressed in the next few years by the Town government. They were asked to indicate how important various improvements or politics are to them in rca~ching the goals they envision for the community. The graph on page A-1 shows that protecting the water quality, remedying traffic congestion in the main streets of Vail, growth controls, and prohibiting smotang in public places are more important than other endeavors. • Note that "other" was the most popular response. in general, the "other" responses tended to be fairly minor suggestions, such as dog control, mandatory recycling, and landscaping on frontage roads. However, several comments reflected a desire for more reEionat and long-range strategic planning efforts by the Town: "developing of a 20-year agenda about infrastructure," "Master Plan between Town and mountain," and "regional environmental conservation." • The general sentiment appears to be a desire for minimal or controlled growth in the Valley, but not at the exp~;nse of quality of life of the existing residents or the environment. Expanding winter tourism and general ecvnvmic development/job creation are relatively unsupported by respondents, nor is expanding year-round cultural programs. However, expanding tourism in the summer and fall was fairly well-received, indicating that economic development with dearly defined objectives are supported by recidentc_ In a somewhat different measure of the rank order of priorities, respondents were asked to assign #1 priority, ~2 priority, and sa on, to the goals (see figure on page A-2). By this measure, providing affordable housing opportunities is the top priority, followed by growthldensity controls. • The focus groups provide more insight in the affordable housing issue. Some participants felt that the housing issue is not as dominant because people, including marry businessmen, are trying to solve the problem themselves on a small scale, focal level-that the housing issue is no longer the single preeminent priority, RRC Aewaitlld PtYe 6 Jul 02.1993 10~31AM FROM RRC ASSOCIATES TO 14792157 P. 06 Town of Veil Comtttuttity &urvey AML~jNI• r1NN A series of questions were asked regarding respondents' understanding of and support for Amendment 1. Given the complexity of the issue, the questions and responses have been r:.r....itsoed below, followed by analysis of the results. Phnr~e Survex 79ee pessaga Rf Aayteadntent 1 !R Colorado plaers spesrRs~ lludts on flea Tows of tall and other ao?tenenreeetai' ba~diea. P(eaas answer the jo(low(etg gaeat(oas ?~egandGeg Atateeederetnl 1. 15. How in~,,~~~~.d d4 you believe you ere about the issues related to and inrplicstioas of Atneerdment 1? 1) 2t 96 Very well informed 2) 3398 Moderately intnrmed 3) 2496 3lightty informed 4) 1796 Not at all informed n=1t70 16. Do you support the passage of Arnendtrnnt 1 in its currCnt form? 1) 9196 Yes 2) 4098 No 3) 29% Uncertainldon't know n=1t~ 17. Amendment l limits total annual revenue growth la a formula which is dominated by the Boulder/Denver Consumer Price Index. Muuntain t:Otntttuniliee such as Vail get much of their revenue fmm fourisnt. which is IarEely unrelated to that index. )n order for Vail to utilize all tha annual revenue increases it normally receives, Atnendrnent l would require vottx approval on an annual hacis. Would you he inciinal to vote for a tneasute which would allow the Town of Vail to keep all revenue received ct~ (oag as the following aepPe7s of ~4rnendrnenr 1 nontintted ro bt In forcti: ALL tax rate increases or new taxes mturt be approve! by voters All new municipal debt must he approved by voters Any property fs>t milt levy rate increase must rte approved by voters All election controls remain in place 1) 73 % Yes 2) 896 No (why`d 3) 1498 Uncertain n=99 1tRC AssoCi~t~e Pq~c 7 Jul 02.1993 10~31AM FROM RRC ASSOCIHita TO 14792157 P.07 Mailback SyryEy Which of the following aspects of Amendment 1 are most dcsirablelimportant to you as they relatC to the Town of Vail? (Check all that apply) n-873 1) 5645 Voters must s~w,„re all tax increases 2) 45~ Voters mutt a,.~., ~ ~e any new municipal debt (even if a tax increase is not necessary) 3) 2196 Town of Vail revenue ~mwth shave the Denver inftatian rate, rlus the pVi'V~M.tage of growth in p.~~y, :rty values due to new construction, must be approved annually by voters 4) 1146 Elections may only be held in November 5} 1796 None of the above S) 2745 Need more information Would you consider voting in favor of a local modification to Amendment 1 to establish a different set of spending limitations which better match Vail's economy {if such art alternative were placed on the ballot)? 1) 5246 Yes 2) 1896 No 3) 3196 Need information • Over half of respondents are "moderately" to "very well inFormed" about issues related to Amendment 1 (59 percent). Twenty-four percent are "slightly informed," and I7 percent ate "not at all informed." • The aspects of Amendment I that respondents found to be the most desirable or important to them as they relate to the Town of Vail arc that the voters mast approve all tax incrca.4cs and any new municipal debt (even if a tax increase is not necessary). To a lesser extent, respondents also found voter approval of revenue growth tv be important to them. However, over one-quarter of respondents indicated that they "needed more information" and 17 percent said "none of the about." • Forty r..~ „ent of respondent Jo rwt support the passage of A»tendtnent 1 in its current form. When asked if they would consider voting in favor of a local modification to Amendment 1 to establish a different set of spending limitations which would better match Vail's economy, over half indicated they would consider such an alternative being placed on the ballot, and 31 percent "need more information." • Nearly three-quarters of respondents indicated that they would be inclined to vote far a measure allowing the TOV to keep all revenue received as long as the voter approval and election control components of Amendment 1 remain in place. Nineteen percent are "uncertain," Ju 1 tT~+ ly'j.5 lt~:.S~HPI rKUrl htKl: H~IJGI H 1 t5 1 U 14"(7~1~'( r. ~ Tows of Vai! Comnwrrty Survey In the focus groups, there was a clear consensus that the Town should move forward with attempting to change the criteria enabUng them to retain revenues from sales tax, etc. The Denver-Boulder CPI is not an app.~~,+;atC index for the Town to have to use. Many of the participants felt that someone would have to be hired to run an advertising campaign for the Town, as the local newspapers would not do an adequate job of covering the complex issues. ~fiiRfbR~AiPIG ARTS CtiN"IT3R • The data show support fot the performing arts/cronference center {53 p:,..,.,...t), although with many caveats as discussed in the focus group summaries. Respondents were asked what information is most important in evaluating the raced For a performance and conference centcK in Vall. Examples of responses are: Ar what level of need are current conference facilities lOD percent booked? Can we pmvirle the support services needed with the present employee base? (lard facts showing why similar facilities in other towns have failed nr require inordinare suhsidies; huw will multi-use will a~rually work? List rlf who, in the lust 10 years, considered Vail fnr meeting, but did not come because of lack of facilities. 111 it help businesses in shoulder season? arcs ~i.t~. TOTRL P. 08 QUESTION 10: RATE THE IMPORTANCE OF THE FOLLOWING ISSUES 90 /o -Percent Very Important 5 0 I' ~ Percent Not Important 80% Mean Rating 4.5 a ~ 70% ~ 0 4 a 60% ~ 3.5 = 50% ~ II a~ ~ 3 Q Y Y c°. 40% y ~ ~ ~r 2.5 zo 30% aE C O 2 r-. 20% II 10% 1.5 w Fz o~ H oa w> ~o W z ~ d ~ o ~x O ~ V wz pa=.w cza0 ~vFi O~ ~w OwoGZ~ Oq~ Qw~'-~ c,, SJ.. ~FQ"~ ~z0 O~ dw oa z Qx caw oW ~ dl- ooo-- zx~ I-~-~~a a ~ c~z w-- aF- z~ H U ~E- z3 zyw p;o z E., F" Ow~ w wu, z~ ~a W ~ za~„Q rs.~w wp O~ C]C7~ F.z O O > 0. OVWQ? v,..~ O [~w OQ~7 ~O 0OWW OF-F Qa U W x~ya 3~ U W F'OF~ ~ FoQ.~»U >~x Z~y,.a~ z~ y. A~x ~U.~U z 3 no.0 z wQ ~UZ ~v,U¢ ~Qxa~ ~r~¢~ ad,o~ Q~¢ r>,.i ~~3 ~c~c1 ti c7 ~w~c.,~ dam d y"~ °'t~OO az,OwvOi W a pz,QU O pz.,oC a F- a F- rs: ¢ v' Q 4 p" d QW ax ~ June 1993 RRC Associates Boulder, CO QUESTION 11: INDICATE THE TOP PRIORITIES FOR TOWN OF VAIL FOCUS ° ° 14 /o First Priority 35 /o First, Second, or Third Priority 12% 30% 10% ' ~ ~ 25% C 0 'C a t a .L x a ~ L ~~+"~n .ate N ~ ,y~ qy ~ ~ ~ y~ v r y r 4% ~ -H' e ~ - 10% it ~ t ti ~ ~ ? ~ ~ 2% ~ ~ ,i 5% x{ 4. £ .k _ y3~ 4 '4 .I 0% L ~ k~~'. Yv,1a~~. ~ 6 ~ ~.~y. ~+~{.4 iS~ ~ I~ t~'~ri y~~ ~ . J 0% c7 z z z ~ U z . a ~ z ~ w oa Z F a> OQ ~ ~n w:~ F-'O ~ F-z w~ ~ O~ v,x O w.7r~ z`3 pw~ p ~ ~y ..a p~ ~O r„ z~ E=> aF' ~E,., v~ w z`n7 Zt...a zn.~n ~w ~ ~ ~ WE., pZ~ o z°x~" wa o~~ °op~o~.~¢ ~~u aH p p'w caw °~x owH pw~~ z'o- z~ ZwF• w w d ap c~E• zU ~ z3 w~W zwd v~.Wca E"0 QO~ Vpv~ OV W Sp~F'w W zw ~¢a Fa O~~ pazx O~ OF-~E-~ p~u~. Odp pU ~m~ UQ ~an:Uprx'~~ Oy"~ da a wW Uw O 3 wwV ~~OaO Cal aati t+.~ a~adzO~~ aN 3 g7~pd k'~ Z~ Q June 1993 RRC Associates Boulder, CO QUESTION 5: TO WHAT DEGREE ARE THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS A PROBLEM IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD? 80% 4.5 ~ Major Problem 70% I ~ No Problem 4 8 a? Mean y c 60% ~ a 3.5 ~ o p" z 50% ~ c ~ ~ ~ 3 a ~ ~ ° ~ I ~ u ~ L 40 /o O(., v~ w a ~ R~ o n I . 2.5 ~ 30 /o a L 20 /o ~ II W ( I. o I I 15 10 /o ° 0 /o I ! I 1 cs: w w C7 a ~ H v~ w ~ ~ cc~ ~ ~ y ~ w w F- ~ ~ C76Nut0a oG ~ F"O Zw~ W aN ~X ~ ~ U ~ ~ F Q w v~ w~ ~ w z F o ~ °z 3~ oUO w~ ~ ~,~z~~¢a oq° o~ ~Q ~qN g A w~ wO ~waujo ~vo~¢~~`~V¢ 03 A O¢ ww E- 4, O w ¢ h ~ ~C'7 aa.C~ Uw ...10 ~w ~O y~ ,'ern ~ pia. ~ ¢ °':a a ~ `'3 ~ ~x Q ~ F w ~ Z a a 3 ~ R7 U 3 E~ 3 0 rn ~ z w z ~ ~ z June 1993 RRC Associates Boulder, CO QUESTION 6a: RATE QUALITY OF GENERAL SERVICES ~ Percent Excellent 40% 4.5 I : , . ; :1 Percent Poor 0 35 /o - Mean Rating 4 30% 3.5 C ar ~ C y 25% ~ W 3 ° ~ W p 20% II ~ ~ ~ 2.5 ~ g L 15% o, ~ u a 10% 2 5% 1.5 ° 0/o I ~C 1 I I I I I I 1 w ~ Fa' 4`' ~ w c7 ~ V ~ ~ Oa ~ wv~ V ¢ w ~ ~ V z ~ Ovw z~ ~3 x ~v w aid 3~W ~a5 3~F ~ ~ ~F O~' U `:oG O~v' U'-' ~ F w ~ 3 z H ~z ~ O E- ~ ~ w cn v~ CwJ ~ ~ ~ z ~A ~ June 1993 RRC Associates Boulder, CO QUESTION 6b: RATE QUALITY OF BUS SYSTEM 60% -Percent Excellent M Percent Poor = Mean Rating 4.5 = 4 50% 3.5 y 40% y rya C w 3 ~eq, W c 30°/a a' in A a ~ can a 2.5 °o ~ a L ~ 20°/O ry Q~ 2 10% 1.5 W W W W W W y H ~ Z fW- w ~ ti Wh ~ ~ ~ ~Op ~ a O ~ E'~F a~ 3 ~ ~ F m~ °W~ ~ g~o v~ O p > w v, > ti W V w ~ a a. co m June 1993 RRC Associates Boulder, CO QUESTION 6C: RATE QUALITY OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ~ Percent Excellent 35% 4 ~ I Percent Poor 30% - Mean Rating 3.5 25% 3 v v W 20% ~ W ~ 2.5 ~ II $ ~ h ~ u 15% - ~ a 2 n 10% 1.5 5% - ;:I , 0% I ~ I I ~ I + ~ 1 z H rn v, ~ ~ H V O ~ ~ ~ ~ wW w ~ w a ~ ~U z~ U wO' OUP u~] H ctiw w Qw w w U U zUz po ~z oo ~z ~z z a5 o~.,~a' ~ xzzz c7 zo w w C7`~ ap. vv,~ F-~a w¢ a Z q 7¢ ~ a ~ ~ ~w.., O 5 C] N 0] G June 1993 RRC Associates Boulder, CO QUESTION 6f: RATE QUALITY OF POLICE 60% - J -Percent Excellent 4.5 ~ Percent Poor Mean Rating 50% 4 3.5 ~ 40% ~ -a a~ ~ a~ u ~ u a w 3 V W ~ Lo° 30% - ~ ~ a ~ [ y L u 2.5 ~ ~ W 20% 2 10% 1.5 ' ° _ , i ~ 0% ? ? ~ ~ ~ 1 FEELING OF ATTITUDE AND OVERALL BUSINESS AREA NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC TRAFFIC SECURITY DEMEANOR PERFORAMANCE POLICE SERVICE POLICE SERVICE CONTROL ENFORCEMENT WITHIN TOV OF VAIL POLICE LIMITS DEPT. June 1993 RRC Associates Boulder, CO QUESTION 6D: RATE QUALITY OF LIBRARY 60% 4.5 -t. 4 50% d 3.5 40% ~ y ~ " ®Percent Excellent 3 w w ~ n g 30% ~ I I Percent Poor a, 2.5 ~ g Mean Rating c py 20% 2 Iy a 10% 1.5 0% - ~ I ~ I 1 GENERAL. ACCESS TO HOURS OF SERVICES LIBRARY OPERATION QUESTION 6e: RATE QUALITY OF FIRE DEPARTMENT 70% _ 4.5 ~ -i 60% 4 C O 50% 3.5 ~ K ~ w ~ Percent Excellent V W 40% 3 oG ~ I I Percent Poor L ~ 0. 30% 2'S ~ a Mean Rating ~ 0. 20% 2 tt d a 10% 1.5 0% ~ ~ 1 ~ z z ~ tt m ~ ~ W ~ U m aE= ~O ox ~~v, w a a0 u~ G: a ~ w ~ A-8 QUESTION 7: RATE ADMINISTRATIVE/MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS OF TOWN GOVERNMENT 18% ~ Percent Excellent 4 ~ 1 Percent Poor 16% Mean Rating 3.5 14% 3 12% 3 a~i o v ~ ~ j 10% _ a r"e a ww ~o 0 2.s ~ u ~ Ar a II w 6% 2 ..i 4% 1.5 2% OVERALL EMPLOYEE INFORMATION OVERALL FINANCIAL RESPONSIVENESS TO GENERAL A ~ ? i i JDES/FRIENDLINESS DISSEMINATION MANAGEMENT PUBLIC INPUT/CONCERNS ADMINISTRATION June 1993 RRC Associates Boulder, CO QUESTION 8: RATE PERFORMANCE OF COMMISSIONS AND ELECTED/APPOINTED OFFICIALS 40% _ Percent Excellent 4.00 = ~ Percent Poor 35% Mean Rating 3.50 30% ~ 3.00 25% u °v° o rya c ~w c 20% - 2.50 ~ a ~ c 0 15% a a" 2.00 ~ 10% 1.50 5% 1 0% ~ ~ ~ > > ~ ~ ~ ~ 1.00 MUNICIPAL VAIL VALLEY MAYOR LOCAL PLANNING & HOUSING DESIGN TOWN COURT MARKETING LICENSING ENVIRON. AUTHORITY REVIEW COUNCIL JUDGE BOARD AUTHORITY COMMISSION BOARD June 1993 RRC Associates Boulder, CO Vail Community Survey • Owners vs. Renters Fire ~ ' ' . ~ ~ Bus S stem ; .._~_.._..;.....;.-.,._.._-,.....~..w...;-...~..,.-.w_._ Y I Si 'ficant Issues ~ . !General Services 1 rF \ . . . ~ ~ r ~ Libr ~ . 'r. ~ Administrative/ : ; F unctions t ~ , - • Pol1Ce 'r , ~ [ ti~i ` `I i- \ t r; 1 - - ' is , i pp ~ Nei hborbood Problems : ' ` l 4 1 r _ , i unity De elopme - - - - - - - - ' ~ 1Comm v nt 1 . ~ i ~ i i ~ . . . ' ' ~ ! : : ec a ppom e 2.5 ~ ~ ~ - - - - Officials, } G ` i 2 ~ - - - = Owners Renters I !I t ~IIIIIIIIIIIIIIlIIIIIIIIIil~lllllll~lllllll~llllllll~lllllilllllllllllllllllillilllllllllllllllllll °~~a~3o~W~w~°~C ~~"gigs k~FWm~W$ E:<agF m~ u:z mz z~F °g Jga m : m ° o. i m a W i > ; W S W ¢ m i i z W W o ~ o i W i ~ u o 0 0 n C `a o ° C m 2 Z°> si j s W~ i z ° a 6~ o m° ~ a g> z u < a e? o c ~ > i° W W~ W $ Q r - i z~ e ~ ¢ i ~ c i 9 u'i ° > > u~ ~ a o W F s<£ e$ m m • W~ ~ g & g~ i g s o° m W W W a W e W u F W ~ u z W 6 F E ~ 8 x o ~ i ~s i ' G y ~ S~ E j O m F m C O~ b 2 2 2¢ 2 u~ u~ W~ 3 n n u~ y b 0 x~ > U N F W 0 3~ G F° ~ : u m w~ ° OW i Z m 3 W j ~ i j i g~ i W o g y i_ j y` > W u m u m i~ i W~~ 2~ o u g o m~ z P `-W' o°~° u W o u° n e t g m t a x i g 3: ° u" i W v~ z z o $ j~~ 3 0 u ~ +W- ~ S°~ u m~ m o W u< o z o W> n c W~ g: J i z( i W°° E Z 3 ? ~ o C W ~ aka W o F z ~ k' s i c g g e ~ i j m ~ W 6 m < 3~ o u i m~ F~ s~~ W o~ u i a W Y~ i" a u z° s i W o < o j u i§ $ j W ° jW ~ ~o` Q i e W~ o° W d m n z i ~ 3 m u~ ° m~ a W ~ d x o~~ a" ° x > u~ C~ i~ z i~ i i d ~ W~ ~ c x e s i a o o i W `o m E ~ ° mW 8 >ioir m> ~ d ~ ¢a ~a o ~~wt~ ~i8> Wtl'd Ej: • e>oi> °iYio°°iz`W ~ S 3 S E S° r~~ u t~ E u ~ 3 . i° c~ W ~i~am;;zl i o ~ a~ a ; i s ° i~m ~W~~7~ °~•o W ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ < $ ~ s ~ c a ~ i ° ~ $ i ~ n ~ _ <g CEO 2° u ° ~ ° @ W ~ S i ~ u pu i i W ° S" u ~ ~ ° g`° ~~0 °0 0 • c z ° j u ~ c i « o. a 0 c m o~ W a ~ 8: ~ ~ k & June 1993 RRC Associates Boulder, CO Vail Community Survey Overall Results 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Fir e i Lb r I ~Y ~ . ~_._I..._. 4 ._l .5 ~ , . , . Bus S m . Y~ II.:. Police - , Si 'ficantIssues.._!. . r. - - - - - - - - - - - I r _ - General 5 rn e e cs Administrative/ - - . ~ en Managem t s Functions ;[Neighborhood Problems 3 . - - _ _ C ommunity Development - ElectedlAppotnted Offictals - Overall Average . l ,IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiIIllllll,Illlllllllll,l~~lllll,lllf~llll~lllll;I~~~IIIII ¢ W Z W W Z f b O w d m ~p ~p ° wb K F m i m ~ m w w w Z w> w ~ W w~ Z u 2 w ~ w w m 2 S a Z+ m ~ ¢ Z + Z m ~ i m _°Z- WW 4< a a W< w S i~ w C i F i m w a ~ a o a~~ u< o o F i a Y ~ e u o u i a m m m W~ 8< ~o m i W K i ° g g m a 4 g m:° F~. a i w o a z! i g g~ 3 i - W W; W i W W W - F a e a g~ ~ i g i °D-~ x m ° ' m+ 4~° g m w~ ~ ° g i ~ a a° a W W~ W W u Q + ~ W z 3 e i 2 i j~~ Q i `o W~ F e ~i ~ ¢i W ° m m F > z 7 °a 2 m Q m+ m d w i W + > ~ W x w i . . z . 3 $ ~ m w g.: o g m W ° s z i o~~~ F W a 6 3 n°° q~ m° a m~ g o u~ o~ u s 3 4 °l+ 2~ W 3 p 2 °u i go u Pi - a i m ~ w u ~ a t r < ~ - W ~ . Q ¢ ~ ~ ° _ _ ~ a Q ~ . - ~ ~ ~ W m $ . i W d : & 3c m w ~ m ° z x g g ° ° u F a W: ° S a q 'm ~ i w y o z i ~ 3.. °m o m W i P-°- ~ n o ° 3d L W a 2 7 R m o. m `m °¢w 3~° ~ ~ 3 e W! °u b` 3§~ ~ i o~ i~ s~ s~ o i W e i w m ? g i 'e 4~ < ~ 3 i R n C W c Cw i~ W `o ~ w g i ~ m y w z m ~ ~ w m° w - 2 ~ w o ~ i`? ~ z m i> W a$° o _ f~ g = W a <W ~ ~o c S¢ u~ 9 c ~ i i~ m b~ o W ° ~ ~ i s:~ 3 N¢ Y i ' °u ~ K W< 2 Z i<~ d W ~ i c a 'o ` S u LL z g x ° a W o F a d ° ~ i m z a o o ° ° H K z 3 § ~ o z a ca ~ a W o o< cm ° 0 os a ~ ke a ~ 33 ~ CWm~ $E <~o o z> W o.z 9i Yw ° m g 3+ a K i z~ m f 3 ~ a < ; 3 u ¢ m ° ~ mam°W W 'i i< 8 F W ° i~ Q 0 3w ~`b:F2~ oeiw ~ We 23r a7; < ~ z3 ~ i °,d W mi°°a c 3Q 3°- 3 .mmw ~j°~~~~id°i m W ~ ~ ~ ~ . ° o g < P '3i i W 3 "o i i~ > ~ o i a z m e i o 7 i Y w g ~ ~ m ~ 8 i i ° u u 3° 3 W m~ u ~ 3 0 ~o ~~o oc o m ~ F ~ ~ a m S~ W i i yyY 4 m e ,o ° 7 ac ~ i ¢ o Q d ~ o a m i i o °zt ~ ° m ° P m ~ ~Y~ ik ~ 8 ~ Y ~ ~ & June 1993 ]tRC Associates Boulder, CO . 1993 VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY ` TOWN OF PAIL ~ - The Vail Town Council and Town ojVail stajjrely heavily upon the input ojr+esidents, merchants, andsecond home owners in establishing their budge! priorities and in !heir dai/y decision making. Please take a jew minutes to fill out the 1993 CommunitySurvey.ThefndingsjromthissurveywiUbecombined with information obtainedthroughcommunityjocusgroups and a nandom.telephone survey. The Town's goal u to continue the input process on a yeararound basis in order to jacilitnte ongoing communication with the Vail community. Thank you jor working with us.in our continuing goal ojexcellence. • For each question, please circle or check the box which corresponds with your answer. • Your responses are confidential. No individual signature, name, or address should be written on this questionnaire. • Please return the completed survey to us at 7~ Sout6 Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 8167, no later than April 30, 1993. The following questions probe certain issues re/aced to the adequary ~ry TC ~'Y ~r and perfonnartceoftlreTownofVailgor~ernment.Wex•ouldappreciate °o• Speeding or recklessautontobiles 1$ 2'S'~ I~„ lOt3 your response to the extent whit!: you are able, l f yotr hai~e no opinion, h. Inadequate off-site parking 7~bo x.91 ,~3 lt~b . - or no knoN~ledge of a particular subject, please indicate in the t. Inadequate enforcement of parking Legs. ~ z~'' 8 gq appropriate space. , - j• Trash litter, abandoned vehicles ~O l.$8 H 40~ k. Neighborhood noise b'{ 1.-t l 3 qtJ~ 1. How informed do you consider yourself about local - 1. Animals (rumting at large, barking) H,Z 2~- lD IOtC ~ nt. Si s street names, traffic controls 51 lA3 ~ 90~; . governmental issues and operations of the Town of Vail. ~ ( ) ~ n. Pollution front woodsmoke y(o 198 ~ 1) 13 Very well informed ~ o. Pollution from road dust ~p tp ~q 3) yq Moderately informed p. Lack of recreational facilities (bike paths, ` 31 Slightly infomted parks, playgrounds) ~ 7 ~ i 4) b Not at all informed q. Other. (p '73 t0?~ ' S) r Uncertain f1= lo~j ~ - • - ~ - 6. Using the same scale, with 1 being "Poor," 5 being "Excellent," _ _i 3. Do you wish to be more informed than you are currently? and 0 being "Don't Know," how would you rate the overall • } 1) ~ Yes performance of the following services provided by the Town of 3y No t1-qOg' Vail? Rate the Duality of each service and, where appropriate, use the scale of 1-5 to rate the ]evelffreouencv of service. Tn other 3. .What are the most cotnmon means you utilize to keep infomted words, indicate how well TOV performs a given service, as well ' "t0i~ about local issues? (Check all which apply as whether or not the service is provided enou~fi to meet your expectations. - j m,_„0. Z 1) 7!p The Vail Trail t~ a~ ~ 5'6 3} 8q Vail Daily General Services: t 3) . 'jam, Vail Valley Times (formerly Avon-Beaver Creek Times! Example: Cleaning of public restroonts r 4) • ~ Local Able television ~ 8~ Z 5) ?q Local radio a. Snow removal/sanding of streets ~ 2. 821 6) 1~ Attendance at public Town meetings and hearings b. Snow removal/sanding of sidewalks) H 3'n' ,2~{ ~ 7) Word of mouth/friends stairways 2.~ ~ Ipo~ b S) 1~{ Individual contact with local officialsand/or staff c. Street repair & maintenance l3 y`~ 9 None d. Street sweeping 8 ~j ~ lOj ~ Other (specify) R=~d•1.3 e. Street lighting 3.3`l 17 4~ f. Maintenance of park areas Z ~ D5 3~ ~ Which of the above is the MOST effective source? I. Sales tax & business license services It7 3'~ ~ ~g (INSERT ~ FROMLIST) Yt ~A ~ ~ m. Finance cashier window 3 ~ 3~ n. Municipal Court services S To what degree are the following conditions a problem in your gus System: ~r" 1 neighborhood? Use a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being "No Problem' a, in-town shuttle 2' ~'3S ~ Z$p and 5 being a "Major Problem.' ~ I~`i"Y b. Sandstone roue ~ ~j ~ yy3 ~Z- ~ c. East Vail route ~D ~ q1 l a. Snow• removal from roads d. .West Vail route ~ b. Stow removal from w•alkwavs 55 1'~' ~ 3 ~{•l~ ~ 8'il e. Bus service hours of ope:at:on tOt 1 c. Street disrepair (potholes, aaclcs. etc.} t3 ~ f, Bus service frequency '1.d3 ~ i~ppd. Unsafe walking routes 33 Zl7 l3 Qyt~l g. Bus driver courtesy 3 y.~ ~~e. Inadequate street lighting 3S ~,Yb tC H1 qp3 t'. Crime, setae of seevrity ~ 1 67 l h• Bus cleanlincss i. Parking structure cleanliness ~ 3•"t~ ,Z.3 SZ~ j. Booth attendant;hest :'ourtes~ ~ 3•~ 3l Zt5 1 • :y Cvmmunit~ De.elopmenk ~ ~ ~ 9. Rate the following priorities in order of impor;anct to you, with js7 a. Hours of operation y 301 ~ 1 being most important and 1 being least important. A11 projects g would be funded out of the Real Estate Transfer Tax fund. Due ,53,,. Respursivettcss to telephone inquiries 3.3,2. 13 mac. Deveiopnrent review assistancz 1.,, ,Z.9O $ to limited dollars, however, it is important for the Town to know y~•c. Zoning enforcement lb 298 I1 which of these projects are most important to you. ~ e. Building permit plan review ~ x,'17 Q . 373 f• Building inspectiotu t 1 3.710 I~ X= ZN_ Additio:ral open space purchase for habitat protection ..fig. Sign code enforcement 3-18 13 Park Development n='Ib~. X31 h. Restaurant inspections tl 3'~ ~ Pocket/neighborhood park development n=lftw S78 Art in Public Places program ~ ~ ~ - 3.l Large, centralized park (i.e., Ford Park) ~7tf~' i. Environmental planningprogrants 9 development ~QZ Bike/pedestrian path development R~73~ Library: I 7$j a. Ge:reral services 10. Thinking about the significant issues facing the Town of Vail X9`1• b. A~ress to library (i.e, bus system, y ~i~ ~ over she next several years, please rate the following in temts of parking stru~,ure) ~ 38 13q c. Hours of opc-atian y0~. their importance to the overall community and their need for attention from the Town. Local government facts limited funds and must establish which goals are most important in the Fire: ~t3 a. Fire rnde enforcement ~ ~ Iffi ~ _ community's view. b. Fite response time ~ ,'Z ~ ~ 'a Fro+ ?,y,or a. Acquisition of open spas for .1C.. ~ c Fire protection I y,~7 53 `t2~ ' ~ ~j 1~4reaeatiatal activities ~ 3,~{ 3~ R~ ze.o ~9d. ,Emergency medical services y~~ b. Acquisition of open space to preserve ~ ~ y~ 6l•10 3s3 Police: 1o~$environmentally seruitive areas '167 a. • Neighborhood police service ~ ~ _ c. Provision of affordable housing opportunitie ~ 3`W aj, 1~,~ ?b `t lapjwithitt the Town of Vail limits fib. Business area police service S 3$I ~ _ ~i ,rowth/density controls yA~'j ~ ~,1fJ 2°l ~1 bbc. - 7rafTc control (4-way stop trafTic direction j,, 21 ~ . 3~ - e1ao8Traffic congestion remedies -Main Vail 3 ~{.ls ll •l0 3'i.9 mod. • Traffic enforcement (speeding vehicles, t1 parking violations) _ fg5$I'raffic congestion remedies -West Vail ~j ' K't Z•I t,'l•Q 'j(pe. Attitude and demeanor of Vail Police 3.78 37 ggWEconomic development/,lob creation llo • 15 I.t1 ` S~ employees with whom I have had contact hY~o®Air quality protection 'S r~.ul 4y ~ ~3.g j~7f. Feeling of security within TOV limits ? s~~ ~ i•l°ODWatet quality protection 1 ~'{t{0 (p0 ~r'p ~,g,~, Overall performance of Yail Police Dept. ~ g1 J• Expattsiott of tourism opportunities,' lO 3.64 31 '1.0 ,'~.1 d~ g' follyfacilities in suntnrer/fall _ _ k. Expanuion of tourism opportunities! 1~ ~S• 1~ 1•~' 7•G h. To what extent do you agee with the following statement: lpo~(Cacilities in winter "Private citizens pn and should help the police department." .Ip~ 2~1 . 3 q IY~ .,r,~ ~ 1. Expansion of year around cultural ~ 3 (i.e., community watch program} s: (ot76progranrs/facilities ~ ~~s ~ m. Expanded "regional" governmental authority 11 3•`4~- ~ 3,3 a to address problems of she entire Vail -jp9 i. Do you feel high police visibi]ity controlsheduces the crime rate? Valley, including areas dower-valley ~ 37 ~ n. Prohibition of smoking in public places (3+ 3.13. W t?-Z. How would you rate the overall performance of the following (glA(i.e., restaurants,,scores) , other ~,s r.G I f e.S,p~n .S r ~Cr'~1_ 1 y.4f( ~ •5.'~ b•~i administrativeimanagement functirnu of the Town govenvrrent? :u.- ,.re ~ ~ srr 67y General administration 3~ LO - 11. Of the issues cited in the previous question (#10), please Responsiveness to public input;'conrrns 9 3~,2p 1l ~ Infontation dissemination b ~ ~ indicate by letter your top Gve priorities for Town of Vail focus. (oS1p:. Overall financial management $ ~ j I Overall employee attitudesifriendliness ~j g,b( 1~ 1st Priority '_nc! Priority 3rd Priority 4th Priority Slh Priority ~=~5 S. ~ How would you rate the overall perfomrance uCthe following commissions and elected/appointed uffcials' 1?, What information is most important to you in evaluating ~.r. .__s L ~ the need for a performance and conference center in Vail? titayor q ~ b. Town Counc:t a S Planning & Environ. Commisston tPECI p ~ (,rI Design Review Board (DRB l9 +~z. Housing Authority ~3 ~jp[. Lx~1 Liansing.~uthority (Lyuor 'Q 3!~3 10 Y~ g• ~funicpa! Court Judo 5 34''~ - S'?$ Vail Valley Marketing Boar:.' ~ 3,~ ~ CO~(~IE~TS: Tlu aua c o Arrrendment 1 in Cvlorn~ !acts s rncfin limits nn 3. How ton have ou lived at our wrrent :Khlress or owned our ~ g f P P g S Y Y ( Y the Tvwn of Yail anrf other goaernmrntal bodirt. P/easc ans+vcr lke property, if a rton-resident)'? y fvllo~~ing questions regarding this measurr. 1) 9 Less than 1 year _ 1''. Which of the following upects of rLtttettdntettt 1 are most fS 1 . years ' desirabte/important to you as they relate to the Towtt of Vail? 1~ 3-•t years (Check af! which aPP1Y+) 5-7 Years j) a S-10 years _ 1) 5~a Voters must approve all tax in~ieases 6) 11-14 years 3) Voters must arY..,ve any ttea• municipal debt (even if a tax 7) ~2-More than 15 years' 1(1= ld(~.: . increase is not necessary) 3) ~.1 Town of Vail revenue gowth above the Denier inflation 4. How long have you lived within the towtiof Vail (or owned rate, plus the percentage of gowth in property values due to property if a non-residett[)? ' new construction, must be approved atuiually by voters I} 5 Less than 1 year 4) ~ 1 Elections ntay only be held in November q 1-3 years ~1 None of the above 6) Needntoreinformation r1%x"13 I$ 3-4 years i~ 5-7 years 13. Would you consider voting in favor of a local modification to 1U 5-10 years Amcndrnent 1 to establish a different set of spending 6) l~ 11-14 years limitations which would better match Vail's economy (if such ~ More than 15 years ~=81st " an alternative were placed on the ballot)? 5. Da you own or rent your property? 1) Yes 1) '1?~'~'n ~ . 2) ~ No _ ~ Rent ~ ' 3) 3t Need more information R= 91d'~ 3) 1 Other (specify) If you answered yes or no, please explain your reasottittp: 6. Which of these categories best describes your marital status? 1) 36 Single 2) ~1 Single with children 3) b Single, children no longer at home Thank yoir for your time and effort in ansx~ering t/rose questions. 4) I~p Couple, no children Please provide the followi»g demographic information. Feel free x)13 Couple with children 6) lq Couple, children no longer at home = aolt'l roleat~e any questions yort are not comfortable answering blank, or simply check "DO NOT WISH TO RFPLY."Again, strn~eys will ~ (IF YOU HAVECHILDRErV~ Now ntatty are in the remain anonymous. Please do not xlrite your name or address on following age groups? this srrn~ey. . 1) as years ~ . t.l~. W>=.43 1. Where is your property within the town of Vail located? 6-12 years X ~ ~.$U Y1=11(~ 1) ~ East Vail 3} 13-18 years ~1R7 2) 3 Booth Falls and Bald Mountain Road areas S. Including yourself, how many persons reside in your household? 3) $ Golf Coursc 4) l0 Vail Village Y s3i.H h~ ~I 5) S ~0~~ 9. How many persons residing in your household are adults over 6) L 1 Potato Patch, Sandstone the age oC lb`? X = ~ _n tR= ~i4 7) 5 Buffehr Creek, Lions Ridge. the Valley S) West Vail (north of I-70) ]0. How many bedrooms ate in your housing urtit^ X i1'1 R 9} ~ Matterhorn, Gkn Lyon 10) Z Intermountain n~ 9~ 11. How many cats are ow~ted and kept at your (wnte or place of 11) Not a resident/pr..r....;+ ow•tter;business owner of the town business itt Vail'? "ii'a l '1. h=8'1~'l of Vail 12. How many cars do you own? 'rC = Z.2, M_ 8q6 Which oCthe following categories best describes your 13, What is your primary method of transportation in the Vail area' residency status? 1't ~t3 Private car,vehic!e 5) --Hitchhike 11 Year around Vail resident 't (Q Outlyingbus service 6) a Walk It Seasonal Vail resident =r .!j In-town sttutt:e 7) Catpcvl f$ Owner of vacation property in ti"ail a • ! Bicycle Sl 1 Ot::e: 'i soeafv) Yl % (Dy~J s) 3 Non-resident. owner of business or commercial ~,~rty in Veil ~ Other 3 14. Your gcndcr Please use available snacc for anV additional comments: 1) Stl Male 2) ~{l Fcmale 1t1}~~ 1S. Which of these categories best describes your age? 0) 15-17 5) Ir 35-39 10) 860-64 n= (010 1) 1S-19 6) l4 40.44. 11) 5 65-69 2) 3 20-24 7) lb 45-~9~ 12) 3 70 or over 3) ~ 25-29 8) !1 50-54 13) J Do not wish to reply 4) Q 30-34 9) ~ SS-59 • 16. Which of these categories best describes the annual - inconie of your household (before taxes)'? 1) I $0-6,999 S) t~" $50,000-74,999 ~ . J $7,000-9,999 9) 9 S7S,000-99,999 ; Z $10,000-14,999 10) g $100,000.124,999 4) y $15,000-19,999 . ' - 11) y $125,000-149,999 S) `S $20,000-24,999 12) 5 $150,000-199,999 6} $ $25,000-34,999 13) $200,000-249,999 7) l~ $35,000-49,999 14) l2. $250,000+ 1S. (2.Do not wish to rcp{y 1ry-aZ'Co 17. What is your occupation? Please fold along thu line, staple, and drop off or mail~~o flee Town of Vai! byApri130, 1993. - • _ - 75 South Frontage Road z,~=.~ Vail, Colorado 81657 ~r ~ i?~.~ _ TOW~i OF PAIL ~ ' _ + . ~ Town of Vail - 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 . - ATTiv: Vail Community Survey a PR1V1tEGED ~IVFIDEI~TIAL Discussion of the Focus Groups TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY • FOCUS GROUPS OVERVIEW The purpose of the two final focus groups was to review the results of the community surveys, both the mailback and the telephone followup versions. The focus group sessions were held on June 21, 1993. They were moderated by Nolan Rosall of RRC Associates and were observed by Caroline Fisher and Steve Barwick of the Town of Vail staff. A synopsis of the focus group discussions follows. Generally, the sessions confirmed the pnncipal conclusions of the community surveys. • Clearly, issues related to street maintenance, traffic control and congestion, parking within the corea and in several neighborhoods, and pedestrian circulation were of paramount concern. • Along with the increase in traffic congestion and overall sense of crowding, greater focus and attention need to be dedicated to dealing with quality of life issues: growth and density, acquisition and preservation of open space, protection of water quality, and the need for greater options in affordable housing for the work force. • Frustration with the performance of selected Town of Vail departments, boards and authorities existed. Among the administrative departments, most concern existed with the Community Development Department, although others were also mentioned occasionally in connection with specific issues. The Design Review Board was frequently criticized for arbitrary and inconsistent decision-making, and the Housing Authority was criticized for poor communication about what was being done, for over-studying the issues but not acting on them, and for not generating sufficient new housing units. Many wondered what has actually been accomplished since the creation of the Authority; others were quite sympathetic with the magnitude and complexity of the problems which needed attention. Still others questioned whether housing was really more of a private responsibility than a public one. • General frustration existed with the level of regulation and bureaucratic routine of Town government. Several felt it was becoming less responsive to citizen concerns and feedback. • With respect to Amendment 1, most believed it was important for the Town to proceed with attempting to modify the criteria which tied revenues to the Denver-Boulder CPI. However, several cautioned of the need to carefully, clearly, and fully explain the issues involved in order to have any real chance of success in achieving voter support. • The potential performing arts/conference center was discussed with the second focus group. The consensus was that the facility is a positive idea in concept, but that many important concerns need to be answered before a final decision can be made. Foremost among these concerns was the method of funding for both capital construction and operating/maintenance costs. The size of the facility and its impact on existing facilities was a second major concern. There was also a sense that the performing arts portion of the complex was of higher priority to the community than the meeting/convention center. RRC ASSOCIATES • PAGE i TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY • FOCUS GROUPS TOWN OF VAIL FOCUS GROUP #1 DATE: Monday, June 21, 1993--3:30 PM MODERATOR: Nolan Rosall, RRC Associates PARTICIPANTS: Patty Kaplan Beth Slifer Kent Rose Jeanne Tilkmeyer Craig Struve Je,~`'Bowen . Charmayn Bernhardt Susan Frampton DISCUSSION OF SPECIFIC QUESTIONS QUESTION S: RATING NEIGHBORHOOD ISSUES The top five major problems that arose from the citizen survey were: street repair, parking, unsafe walking, speeding and street lighting. Do you feel traffic and circulation are the major problems, and are they a uniform problem all over town or just in specific areas? All of the participants felt that the list of major problems that came from the citizen survey were prioritized correctly. A few of the participants also added a few comments about concerns of particular interest to them. Roads • Maintenance of road surfaces, not only on the frontage roads but many of the local neighborhood roads as well, was a clear problem, particularly this spring. Not only were potholes left unattended for long periods, but when patching was done it was frequently done poorly and the prepared surface did not last long. This was an obvious mayor imtant to the group. Many were frustrated by the seeming inability of the Town or State to solve the problem. • South Frontage Road is a particular problem. The State does a very poor job of maintenance on the frontage roads. • Roads are a major problem due to more snow this year, especially in April. • Many of the roads are so bad that people are afraid of damage to their vehicles. • On frontage roads and the Old Pass road, the State Highway Department does a terrible job of repairing potholes--poor quality of work. • East Vail had lots of road damage and potholes, but it was handled quickly by public works. RRC ASSOCIATES • PAGE 2 TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNrI'Y SURVEY • FOCUS GROUPS Parking • The parking problem existed both in the core area, where tourists and local employees shoppers converged, and in many of the neighborhoods where there was inadequate off-street parking to handle the demands of local residents and their guests. If someone has a party, and guests park on the street, they get ticketed by the police. • It is always a problem to drive in town. • Parking problems are not limited to neighborhoods but also exist in tourist areas. It affects our tourism as well as residents. • Parking will always be a problem; it will never be totally solved. . There is not much parking in Vail, there should be more incentives to use the bus. • Inter-Mountain has some problems due to increased densities and lots of cars per unit. • Outside of the Village is worse than in; West Vail is particularly bad. • Off-site parking is always difficult, especially in the Village. One should only have to pay for parking dunng the ski season during the day. Retail and restaurant sales in the Village area are lost because people don't want to have to pay to park during the evening hours, after 6 PM or so. Minturn, West Vail and Avon all have free parking, so the Village commercial district is at a competitive disadvantage. • Additional parking was added this year, so the supply of parking has not been a problem as much as the fees charged. Pedestrian Safety • Two of the citizens felt too many vehicles are let into the Village pedestrian area, detracting from the atmosphere of the entire area. • Walking to the golf course from the Village is dangerous. • The bike path is dangerous for pedestrians, due to the conflicting traffic of bikes and skateboarders; a separate gravel pedestrian path is needed throughout town. • Bikes and rollerbladers are a safety problem for children and the elderly--the speed is too fast (Gore Creek to Bridge St.). More courtesy is needed from the bicyclists and rollerbladers. Mountain bikers coming down off the mountain and speeding into the Village are another source of the problem. • Most of the roads in town have no shoulders and no easements for sidewalks. This forces pedestrians to walk out on the street, which itself is narrow and poorly lit. Cars parking along the street add further problems. This is an expensive problem to fix, involving street widening, purchase of easements for sidewalks, installing curbs and gutters. It may be too expensive, but there is a real problem. Speeding • This is not a major problem; the police do a good job. RRC ASSOCIATES • PAGE 3 TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY • FOCUS GROUPS • There is a problem in East Vail and the Frontage Road. • East Vail has had a much better presence of police lately. There is a need for constant police presence in East Vail Street Lighting • This is not a major prablem, except for certain localized areas. • In the Inter-Mountain area it is not a problem. • East Vail residential area by the golf course does not have enough lighting. Signage • Signage in town is confusing and inconsistent. It needs more uniformity. • Stop signs at intersections need to be lowered in order to be within most people's sight line. • The North Frontage road stop sign is confusing. • Three citizens felt all signs in the Village are "poor"--small, hard to see and often not pointing in the right direction. • There is a need to bring back the signs to Lionshead parking. General Safety • Police are always prompt and courteous when called. • Police do a good job; worried about the safety of children and tourists. • The primary police problem is tied to traffic control, most particularly at the four-way stop. There Is still debate about whether there should be a stoplight there. The West Vail intersection is also noted as a major problem with the number of intersecting traffic flows and turning movements. One can be stuck there for longer periods of time even than at the four-way stop. Animal Control • Animals running at large are a major problem for some. • You never see animal control. • In Inter-Mountain, the bear is unsettling. QTJESTION fi: RATF THE ~UALTTY OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, • The review process has become too complicated. It needs to be streamlined. One participant is on the Planning Commission and spoke to their issues and efforts to improve the process. RRC ASSOCIATES • PAGE 4 TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY • FOCUS GROUPS • People have been driven out of the valley because the process and costs of processing are overwhelming. • The Boards all think the owners have lots of money and often they impose unreasonably high costs. The Boards are inconsistent in their decisions. • Town Council is at least partly responsible for the problem. They make very political decisions and sometimes undermine the staff. The way they handled the house next to Andy Daly was an example. One of the Community Development staff members was in tears after that; "How is she going to take a chance and make a decision after that happened?" • Community Development staff is young and afraid to make a decision. Even simple staff decisions require a "committee" process. There is a need for more experienced staff who can respond more quickly to requests. • At least one of the participants indicated that Community Development staff is trying to improve and in some areas is getting better, at least recently. There have been good experiences; they're not all bad. QUESTION 8: RATE THE COMMISSIONS AND ELECTED OFFICIALS, All of the participants agree that the Housing Authority and the Design Review Board are viewed most negatively of the various boards. Housing Authority • Several reasons exist for relatively low ratings of the Housing Authority. They include a combination of factors such as: they have overstudied the problem but not gotten any units built, there is poor communication with the public in that very few people are aware of what they are doing, there is a problem of neighborhoods opposing employee housing near them (NIMBY), and the housing problem is very complex. • How can they succeed? The problem is too large and there is much frustration that the problem exists. • Inter-Mountain people were told that they were not allowed to put cone-bedroom rental above their garage. There should be incentives promoting that type of building. • The Housing Authority has over-studied the problem and the solutions they have come up with do not fit in the Valley. • They need a wider vision encompassing a variety of smaller-scale, multi-dimensional solutions. RRC ASSOCIATES • PAGE 5 TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY • FOCUS GROUPS Design Review Board • The primary complaints about the DRB are that they are arbitrary, inconsistent, and use personal opinion rather than following the regulations. As architects and realtors on the Board, they can't avoid trying to design each project themselves. • A few believed the PEC and the Design Review Board seem to be interchangeable. They have the same problems and seem to overlap on many issues. • The individual DRB board members seem to have conflicts of interest and cannot agree on anything. • Frequently, people make changes in the field that they should not have to make, just to avoid having to deal with the DRB. QUESTION 13: SHOULD THE TOWN OF VAIL TRY TO CHANGE AMENDMENT 1 TO REFLECT THE RESORT ECONOMY. AND HOW DO YOU FEEL THE CITIZENS WILL REACT? • All agreed that the issue needs to be raised. There was a clear consensus that the Town should move forward with attempting to change the criteria enabling them to retain revenues from sales tax, etc. The Denver-Boulder CPI is not an appropriate index for the Town to have to use. • Many of the participants felt that someone would have to be hired to run an ad campaign for the Town, as the local newspapers would not do an adequate job of covering the complex issues. QUESTION: WHAT SHOULD BE THE TOP PRIORITY FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL? Has the trend really moved away from the singular issue of affordable housing seen last year to the top five list of: density/growth control, open space acquisition, water quality, affordable housing and traffic congestion, and if so, why? • In many respects, the priorities being raised are quality of life issues: growth and density, traffic congestion, open space, water quality, housing. • Other items besides housing are popping up as priorities. Density, growth, and traffic congestion are all moving up in terms of importance, and are now at least equal to housing. It isn't that housing is not aproblem- just that others are also becoming very important. • Perhaps people think the housing problem will probably be solved down-valley, and therefore are looking at other issues as well. • The housing issue is not as dominant because people, including many businessmen, are trying to solve the problem themselves on a small scale, local level. • Open space is an issue involving quality of life for residents and visitors. The preference is for open space as a passive, scenic use rather than as devoted to active recreation. • A task force has looked into all the available lots for open space; "they must act now or the lots will be gone soon." RRC ASSOCIATES • PAGE 6 TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY • FOCUS GROUPS • With respect to why water is mentioned by many as a top priority, more pollution into the Eagle River (from Gilman) and Gore Creek may have contributed to these concerns. • Drinking water in East Vail had to be boiled in November for 10 days and caused a lot of concern. Drinking water usually tastes terrible because of all of the chlorine they add to kill the giardia. RRC ASSOCIATES • PAGE 7 TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY • FOCUS GROUPS TOWN OF VAIL FOCUS GROUP #2 DATE: Monday, June 21, 1993--7:00 PM MODERATOR: Nolan Rosall, RRC Associates PARTICIPANTS: Larry Ast lives in East Vail and has been in Vail for 16 years. Mo Mulruney is the Director of the Learning Tree Preschool and has been in Vail for 18 years. Al Dorsett lives in East Vail and has been in Vail for 10 years. Bill Bishop has lived in Vail for 31 years and is the Chairman of the Liquor Authority. Jack Curtin has lived in Vail for 25 years and owns shops here. Terry Lame lives in Sandstone, has been in the area for 21 years and owns two retail businesses. QUESTION 5: RATING NEIGHBORHOOD ISSUES The top five major problems that arose from the citizen survey were: street repair, parking, unsafe walking, speeding and street lighting. Do you feel traffic and circulation are the major problems, and are they a uniform problem all over town or just in specific areas? Similar to the responses from the first focus group, all of the participants felt that the list of major problems that came from the citizen survey were prioritized correctly. A few of the participants also added a few comments about concerns of particular interest to them. Roads • All agreed that they are a problem valley-wide. • West Vail is not too bad. • East Vail is really bad, enough to damage a vehicle. • Several felt that problems related to potholes are predictable, occurring every year at the same time and in the same general locations, and should be handled better before they get to be such a major problem. There should also be signs marking them to warn motorists, similar to VA ski patrol marking rocks and hazards on the mountain. • One participant felt that road repair should be contracted out to a private company so it gets done properly and efficiently. Potholes do not get repaired properly at the State level. Tra„~`ic • Two participants mentioned that there was a saturation of traffic around Christmas, when virtual gridlock occurred. It is bad year-round but the Christmas traffic this past year RRC ASSOCIATES • PAGE 8 TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY • FOCUS CROUPS solidified the problem. As down-valley continues to build out the problem will get worse, with more cars attempting to commute into town during peak periods. • At Christmas it took one participant 41 minutes to go two blocks from Willow Creek to the four-way stop. • Getting people in and out of town is the major issue. • Traffic control can be handled better. • North Frontage Road and four-way stops are bad. The winter traffic control officers are not doing their job--they are often just standing on the side of the road observing as traffic builds up. Good traffic control people are needed there; a traffic light just would not work in that situation as it can't react to changing conditions as can a trained officer. A traffic person also seems much more user-friendly to people. • A large problem in the mornings is congestion when people are trying to come into town for work. • Traffic is also a problem in the pedestrian area of the Village. Many cars are just lost and/or looking for adrop-off spot for skiers. In comparison, Beaver Creek handles drop- offs much better. • One person felt that in the past year there has been a significant drop in the number of cars in the Village. People and the Town need to realize that the Village is not purely pedestrian and that people live there and deliveries must be made to the shops there. Parking • There are so many cars per unit that they cannot all park at their housing unit. In the neighborhoods a lot of those on the streets get tickets or have to deal with constantly moving their vehicles. • The town should work closer with Vail Associates and have VA pay for traffic control that occurs at peak times. • Employees have problems finding parking; this is increasing the problem of employers being able to recruit and retain good workers. Most of the good employees want their employer to provide a parking pass. • Business revenues are lost in the evenings because of the pay parking situation. As in the other focus group, most felt parking should be free after about 6 PM. Pedestrian Safety • There are no safe places to walk in the winter due to accumulation of snow, lack of sidewalks, narrow road widths, etc. • At the Westin and the Valley highway, and near Safeway, pedestrians are always trying to cross the frontage roads and I-70 in these areas. This is extremely dangerous; underground pedestrian crossings are needed. RRC ASSOCIATES • PAGE 9 TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY • FOCUS GROUPS General Security • It is great. Additional Comments • A lot of money was spent in East Vail on landscaping at the interchange; it was a waste, one cannot see where the money went. • The quality of snow removal has gone downhill over the past few years, especially from East Vail to the Village. • The town does not address citizens concerns. When citizens call with a request, question or complaint, there is hardly ever a followup by staff to get back to the citizen to explain and deal with the issue. • The study and survey did not adequately address the regional scope of many of the problems such as traffic, public transit, and housing. Many of these problems are beyond the Town's ability to address alone, and the survey did not give sufficient room to note these concerns. QUESTION 8: RATE TI-ITr ~'nMMISSIONS AND ELECTED OFFICIALS . Evaluations of the Housing Authority and Design Review Boards followed similar patterns to the earlier discussions. Housing Authority • The perception is that they are not doing anything. They have operated for two years and no housing units have been built. They are relatively inactive. • People do not understand what they do. There is need for better communication with the citizenry. • Employee housing should be the responsibility of private businesses. The Housing Authonty should be disbanded and let the private sector deal with the problem. Design Review Board • It has no direction or focus. • The board does not follow guidelines; they are too subjective and arbitrary. • They automatically say "no" to anything new. They need to address the 90's and new ideas. • With respect to the Crossroads Center: it is very hard to get simple changes made, DRB always wants grand master plans for everything. This is getting in the way and it discourages incremental improvements which would be in the public's best interest. • They are inconsistent. They limit creativity with the out-dated materials they require to be used. They do not require ongoing maintenance once the improvements have been built. RRC ASSOCIATES • PAGE 10 TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY • FOCUS GROUPS General Comments • There is no unity between the boards, they all interpret the rules differently. • People feel it is a hassle to get anything done. • It is easier to tear down a building and rebuild a new one than it is to make changes to existing structures. • There are too many rules and regulations. • Comments regarding Community Development staff were generally negative. A particular issue was that the Town hired young and inexperienced planners and the taxpayers were paying for their training, with poor results. QUESTION 13: SHOULD THE TOWN OF VAIL TRY TO CHANGE AMENDMENT 1 TO REFLECT THE RESORT ECONOMY. AND HOW DO YOU FEEL THE CITIZENS WILL REACT? This group had more mixed opinions regarding the advisability of putting the issue on the ballot and the probability of a successful vote. While most felt the current Amendment 1 restrictions were difficult, several were ambiguous about whether the matter should be pursued so soon after the election. The comments reflect the mixture of opinions. • Three participants would like to see the issue on the ballot in the fall and two felt it would most likely be defeated because the residents do not trust the Town. • If it is properly publicized it might pass, but the facts must be clearly relayed to the public. • It should not be put on the ballot until next year. • Publicity needs to occur very early (this July or August), as many residents leave town and do not return until just before the election. • People did not fully understand Amendment 1 when they voted on it. They did not realize the problems when applied to a resort community. Vail needs to amend it. • It will be a confusing issue to the public, especially because so many other issues will also be on the ballot at the same time. • The "downside" risk of not attempting to amend the restrictions is greater than the risk of losing the election. The Town has no real choice but to move forward and attempt to change the current criteria. QUESTION: WHAT SHOULD BE THE TOP PRIORITY FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL Has the trend really moved away from the singular issue of affordable housing seen last year to the top five list of: density/growth control, open space acquisition, water quality, affordable housing and traffic congestion, and if so, why? • Most of the participants felt the list of priorities from the citizen survey was generally accurate and that the housing issue was no longer the single preeminent priority. RRC ASSOCIATES • PAGE 11 TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY • FOCUS GROUPS • The private sector is doing more about housing their own employees, so housing is not as critical an issue as it once was. • Many are concerned that as Vail Associates expands the mountain capacity, the Town has to be responsible for expansion of the infrastructure to keep pace with mountain capacity. They feel that this is unfair to the Town and that VA should share in the expansion responsibilities. They also feel the Town of Vail is in danger of losing its current town quality if more people are forced upon it. • Water quality is a concern in a generic sense, whether it has to do with the Eagle River or the fear of glazdia in the drinking water. QUESTION: WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON A NEW CONFERENCE AND/OR ARTS CENTER Comments regazding the performing arts center were generally positive in the abstract, but quite concerned in terms of specifics. Participants were most concerned about funding for both the capital cost and the ongoing maintenance and operational expenses, as well as the size of the facility. Several were skeptical that sufficient private funds could be raised, especially for maintenance. Many particularly questioned the funding potential of the conference center. • All agreed that an arts center is a greater priority than a conference center. Many of the hotels in Vail already bring in conference groups, so it would seem inappropriate for the Town to repeat the effort and to subsidize it. • The concept of the facility is good, as it would enhance the quality of life. • Several believed that the facilities already here should be used before the decision to construct an entirely new performing arts and conference center is made. • Size of the facility is an issue. • The funding will be difficult but the community is getting large enough to support it. • Who will maintain the facility and fund it? People are worried that an arts center would take funds away from other areas of greater priority, such as roads. • Several believed the proposed location of the center was a positive aspect, with close-by parking, proximity to the Dobson Ice Arena, etc. RRC ASSOCIATES • PAGE 12 VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 COMMENTS CONCERNING THE MAYOR Council & Mayor need to learn professional maturity re: Rec Dist. Agreemt Mayor & Council are to be admired for the time and effort they commit Mayor and Council are involving the govt where it doesn't belong Mayor and Council should be rated lower than poor Mayor seems above the rest of us Not at all impressed with Ms. Osterfoss No. B. The mayor should conduct council meetings with less sarcasm and more dignity. People are there to try to get things accomplished, not to be performer's in what they mayor seems to think should be her best effort at situation comedy. A mare businesslike approach might result in more credibility for the way the council conducts its business. Speaking of the Mayor, can't Vail do better than bringing one in from New Mexico? I understand that her husband is on the planning commission or some other commission like that in Taos. Doesn't that tell you something about their roots in Vail. They must laugh at the Vail community most of their trips back and forth from their real home in the next state. April 14, 1993 I would like to thank the staff of the Town of Vcal for creating Phis opportunity for me to make my feelings known. I am a friend of several employees of the town so I have some chances to talk with them and gain their perspective on things. l also attend town council meetings from time to time or I watch the meetings on cable, ff I happen to have been out of town at the time of the meeting. I am aware of the pditics involved in the firing of Ron Phillips. I think if really stinks that he was given direction "for improvement" less than a year ago and then not given adequade time to make the changes as directed by council. The survey given to your employees last year emphasized that they felt town council was not a part of the employee system. The survey completed by the other consulting group seemed to have reinforced those feelings about town council. Over the past two years council has become known cis a body of weak-minded indivi~als to constantly succumb to the pressures of a few sneaky wheels within the business infrastructure who seemingy wield great power. Our current mayor has absolutey no leadership skills and consistently demonstrates a propensity for untruthful statements and a great deal of apathy toward the town empbyees. The council has demonstrated a continual application of a hidden agenda and uses their "executive sessions" as a way around the statutory requirements of the sunshine knn?. I am waling until this fall to make my feelings know to fellow voters who have the power to make the needed changes. Ron Phillips was very much a scope goat for several ineffectual and weak council members who don't possess the intestinal fortitude to admit their own errors. As representatives for those of us who live, shop and work in the Town of Vail, our council does not speak well for our interests, rather they speak for a chosen few who have the financial power to influence council to make changes for the good of those who are financially affluent. fie employee housing situation in Vail must be addressed. R is only going to continue to worsen and it is not going to go away. Council must make a decision to do something for it's human resource pool or the town won't have the people to do the work to make council look good. The traffic situation in Vail is truly an embarassment to the community. fie time has come for the town council to let the area mature just a bit. The Colorado Department of Highways has wanted to install traffic control lighting at the four-way for years and has continually been shot down by a town council that doesn't want traffic lighting to diminish the "town" image. fie time is here for the town council to realize that the safety of it's visitors and residents far outweighs the image that council wants to project. When you compare Vail to the other ski meccas in Colorado you will see that those areas have matured to the point that safety is more important than image. fie employees of the Town of Vail are doing an excellent job of providing services as expected by visitors and residents of the area. B seems to me that perhaps town council could look at it's employment staff and learn ham ahem. At this point town council seems to bean entity of it's own with an agenda of it's own that doesn't coincide with that of the town management or staff. Comrrter-It.=_ for Town Counc i 1 (#B ) T ? ; t.. to t.. _ E:' i c. v i t~~ E: i -t cJ i r; t~ J; i i i d l : 1. d to c~ 1. _ t- I'_: i t i ° t r_+ c+ i c: kll~'1 f CC'11C:Ei1"i'lC. T i"e=?CE'i'1 t.1 •a G~i=;C'i"'iC'CJ yi_Gt_t~, hl..•~;7 i'1CT tC! VG1CF_' k' k-~ c' i r° c c: n c e r. i l t} c~ t. ;.a c~ k : i C'I : 4~r°fr:~~~~- c~~r_~tr'c+] J.c:.•cJ t.FiE_ coi_Ivc•i _ tiort _ c°t~J ti ic:J t:o ~ a. ' fiT i _t l j . t_t _ t• t t'i i•' p T- c' : t= ri t: k: i C+ r i c+ f t i ; t: i_:Oiif:t'i°i°;W t. c• ti-,t•_~ Cc~t~.i-ic:i.1 . Tk-le_` pE;'r_ar_~ tr`firicl tc+ mc~b::t;:, t".I_'tr, : , r+ ! ! t ..1 7 ! 1't ! I : + t: 1 F' t ~ 1' !...I J. (F5 't ~ F-' - ; k_t E} .i.. C G ! ! C t' 1 1 U L? C. .1..t .ii t'om' ki~r_: rii~,~,•!.~t t~Jca'i1~:r•i~ t_tJ.l "c:c+l-;t:i_r:+l " car k_tot::,! the dirct_I=_~-i.c+t_! ~-~e_i-tt. LiLtii.'. t i + k ! e~:' ! t.+ ! ! t 1 t:~ ~ kl Fri' 1. t: L.'. 1: t_, ! I , t k'I c1 t' - t C+'I ~ ' f F'!i' J. ] 1 i C L°~ l..I :I to - P i._ r:c~'k 1:;-~: iL~].3.`, ca:;~';i'e~_~~E:d t'o t;I°i t? fLt].1 cc?:~i-tcil pi-ecc'nt:., l: 't' ~~ra va. t'- 1 a f t:'ili'i-! C+tiC' C:+ k k_t~:'i_ CC:+I_! i tr~ ] .L fi;~~iiik]t:~T' f l a_. J. l'•,•" ~ 1 Ci tki ~i r ti'!E' i t~lE'~:c'-_ r F' tf E:1 _ I: tii:' i.J fY .ti' Ca C} C'+ ~ 7. tj i c_ kl c.'• 5 I' ; L I. 1 l.J k' t=.' ] 1"1 ~ 't 7 C1 t L'- L1 I•-I C+ 4`,! Ef .w E''i' N , _ ~ . _ r..~ ~ .1_ v r_ ~ r . 'I tk't ;_r CJ r~~t lil 7. k'. t"' liu~,'i"i. 7 f') k:l!_ i~l ~y.i ;y CC:: t_"i 't :"1.1 tT!:'lllk:: ~.=i`c. CJT ~ t_I ,_+k: C::::l:ti l=: 1:,1...![;:7.1" C+(7 :l. .i..!1C~.i..!:~:: fiis-: r':i:IL.I`_f::? i:)..~ t,:l'_ !.1<_ i~:_:'.i...fC,;_r.:: " 7'i't'I; J 1117 i:.je"?'k' ] 1'11. <i.i'1i:~ . F I _ 1. L.1:.. i • .r:. r. i T::! t~ C+ i'i 1 l.. i T fil .l C'i k: (?i Eii :c!. ! - i ~ i i:: is 'k; 7 E' i', b d l'"! r , F; { , I_y _ _ ~ ! ! I: :a i- l ! ; . E: ! t t_ C t ! i_. E'r i' I": ~ =r U t: + , I' ; E= i' t .....1 . C:; b ; t ; ~ ! 1'i F:? i } _ fir- . ~ t_' a. 'i _I i~ ~ ~ :1. T't _ f 1 i,.' „ k : 1 _ ! .a C Ci: i fI i~ ~ C: i' c ~ 't i' ~ i_. L'. I-, ! l i.. i t. ' _ t: , i i. i° i : r-:, r-, i r.:. { J. f.~ ..i ~ + ! , r'. ~ c ~ j,, r~, k c::, f: I i_;..~Ut tC_:) p.. ...(,..i. 6•.'•t:+:.. .1. Ca Li+_ .I t t:._ t ir.~iii,'.;;'c+tT I. I r:1 r... ~ t.:'•.:. ;,~L;,-.: ~_C' Lti'.I_ i.+-,.i..,'1-, i:~'t ~ fii-1 r:.,_=,L..t~,,,7C•.t.. k: r,i-` t-r:t.!iii_: ~ i'ii:,k: _~III t lr:': l_ii .-T.: l.!;~ t ! C; i';-. C:`i_..i 4:!I}_. i~L1 .1. T. 7 ~?h: 7 i~i ..1 cd '.i c. is ; : t`; tc:' ; ! is I ! F? , a c+ 1 t: i k:! F: ~ I't s: ~ i:; ! t .1. ct i:: t.' ~ 'i :1. 1 ~7rE? t W: t + i I k-~ L? E(i 1 t:~ Ct _ r'; ~ is izrl l'ii' - :...:...:::::.!I is?::6e'i' ,.`i::~;_li' !:'i_'li::~4"J-'. I;k-!::::t, ~:,f-;F::, I')t.:i t..trz,.. ~ .,./1i;"I f'iL.l°~k';~;il_ l':i'!' I i°Lli' :1 _ , _...r. ! I t.J J. i.; i l i`.i C' I°Ir_'' ; i::: r' .i t,, t ! . r.. i.. r i ~ i ~ ~ I ~i't'k' C:: C:' I'1 i:: C: k h :iii ! _ ~ i.. t_! i' 1 c..` F..:' L 1..: _s .1 kl 'il i ci k• k-i Eii' ; ' ? [_t VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 HOW DO YOU KEEP INFORMED OF LOCAL ISSUES?--"OTHER" Condo association Eagle Valley Enterprise East Village Homeowners Assoc. Employer Hotel meetings Newsletter is great Newsletters Newsletters Zike this Newsletters such as this one containing the questionnaire--good ideal Phone calls to Town Property manager Real estate agents Scuttlebutt Speakers at Rotary Club This newsletter This publication Town of Vail Work (VA) VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 OTHER PROBLEM IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD Access to S. Frontage Rd. from Forest Rd. Bike path hard to walk at night--needs white strips on the sides Bike paths in W. Vail south not maintained in winter Bikers not using bike path Bikes, skateboards speeding through path from Checkpoint Charlie-Willow Buildup of cinders Bus stop Buses for early employees Business signs are totally inadequate--can't read many Cars & bikes disobeying stop signs Closeness of bus stop Construction equipment permanently parked in Timberfalls Bldg #B Construction of huge second homes destroying a Zocals' neighborhood Dog doo Enforce stop signs at W. Vail exits Garages used as business Garbage cans on street Greenery left up Zong after Christmas even though it's brown and dry Highway noise, pedestrians crossing highway I-70 corridor through town Ice on corner where Bighorn Drive turns to I-70 Inadequate public restrooms Lack of activities for teens Lack of fishing enforcement on Gore Creek VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 OTHER PROBLEM IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD Lack of sun1: Lack of town code enforcement Large snow buildup blocking sight of oncoming cars Lighted softball fields in Ford Park Lighting at bus stop Lionshead buildings (mainly VA) are decrepit and eyesore Need better road signs for location of ski parking and hospital Need for trees Need new non-slip deck for covered bridge No bus stop shelter No housing for married couples No public golf course with reasonable green fees Noise from highway Noise pollution--I-70 Off Forest Rd., very dangerous--speeding mountain bikers Overdevelopment Owners not cleaning up after animals at large Plowing snow into driveways Police on streets Public restrooms Pu1is Bridge Reckless bicycles Rocks on Potato Patch Rd. Snow plow removal noise at 5 AM VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 OTHER PROBLEM IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD Stop sign abuse Street sweeping The "rocks" on roads are overdone--what happened to SAND? Too many Mexicans Too much gravel on road which is thrown into garden TOV attitude toward residents Traffic Traffic control at 4-way Unfair ticketing Vehicles not stopping at stop signs VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 COMMENTS ABOUT ELECTED/APPOINTED OFFICIALS Anxiously await next Council elections! Approval of shoddy-looking homes downgrades the entire town Caroline Fisher is a superior employee Colorado voters have spoken; don't spend tax money fighting Am. 2 Comm. Dev. process involves too much politics Community Development needs a major management change Council needs to be more focused, supportive of staff & boards County Commissioner Johnson should be fired Did not listen to the Bruce amendment DRB & Housing Authority are a joke! DRB has a weZ1-deserved reputation for being arbitrary & officious DRB has too many hoops to jump through DRB makes too many exceptions to the rules DRB procedures need study--as it stands, accomplishing NOTHING! DRB, Bldg. permit boards need overhaul--seem overzealous Eliminate Housing Authority; Council seems incapable of decisions Eliminate old blood on Town Council Felt Council was railroading Par 3 course--community didn't want it Fire all of the Comm. Dev. staff Get into the community--ride the bus--pay for parking--get a grip Housing moving too slow; talk is easy, how about some concrete plans I thought the muni judge just quit Infrastructure needs to keep up with marketing (even things up) Kick the Hous.Auth. in the butt and get them moving VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 COMMENTS ABOUT ELECTED/APPOINTED OFFICIALS Kristan Pritz does an EXCELLENT JOB, please get rid of Peggy! Listen to all the people of Vail, not just the rich ones Lose Comm. Dev. ~ DRB; Council takes way too Zong to make decisions Major attitude problems Marketing Board does an excellent job--summer business is up Marketing Board is too expensive, does not need more-money Marketing is overshadowing community needs Mgmt doesn't seem to listen to employees; Council listens even Zess! More consistent, less personal interpretations of codes Need sensitive Council to put issues on ballot when needed Never seen such a pathetic town council No leadership or vision on part of Council No sound Leadership: No strengths in saying yes or no, right/wrong PEC and DRB need to be replaced: Police attitudes toward young adults need improvement Raising the tax at midnight just before Am. 1 passed was sleazy Seem to continually Zook for ways to spend money Some of these departments are a waste of my tax dollars Stronger 5-7 years ago than now The Town has not used real estate transfer taxes properly The Town Manager's severance package was way too generous This group doesn't care what the town is about, they're self-serving This group is TOO exclusive and not responsive to individuals Too involved with tourism, not enough with citizens VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 COMMENTS ABOUT ELECTED/APPOINTED OFFICIALS Too many codes, hoops to jump Too many realtors and developers are elected Too many rich people pushing through too much development) Too much poor quality and ugly construction! (DRB) Town Attorney (Eskwith) below average Town Attorney was excellent--sorry he's Ieft Town does not seem to cooperate with VA very well Town management concerned with personal jobs, not community: VVMB has done tremendous things for Vail, esp. summer guests We need more public involvement in govt, not just real estate people Where is affordable employee housing going to be built in the TOV7 Why do the papers not accurately report Council meetings? VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 OTHER SIGNIFICANT ISSUE FACING THE TOWN OF VAIL Affordable child care, especially in summer Better bus service in the summer Better Zighting on frontage roads Better parking programs for Zocals Bike lanes in Matterhorn Communication with out-of-town owners Concern police with crime, not just traffic violations Control/prohibit unnecessary (a11:) mercury Zights--inappropriate: Day skier problems--traffic, parking if mtn. is to be expanded Development of 20-year agenda re infrastructure Directional signs at 4-way stop Dissolve VA's mountain monopoly, i.e. more open to public use Dog control Dogs running loose Early/frequent pothole repair Get rid of illegal aliens Increase quality bedbase through zoning to meet expanded mtn. Landscaping, esp. frontage roads Locals should be able to buy a bus pass for $10 a month Mandatory recycling Mandatory recycling or recycle dropoff points Master plan--town/ski mountain More stress on recycling by businesses Multi-purpose rec center VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 OTKER SIGNIFICANT ISSUE FACING THE TOWN OF VAIL Municipal pool Needs of locals ahead of guests No more expansion, bigger is NOT better Prohibition of overbuilding Provide visible recycling opportunities Regional environmental conservation Residential health care for the aging Restoration of Gore Creek Sanitary standards in restaurants Stop development, cancel plans for convention center Stop growth and development., especially commercial Stopping brain drain down valley by keeping young people in Vail Summer bus schedule expansion Too much greed/development by real estate developers and vA Trees along I-70 to provide soundproofing and improved appearance Trees along paths Underground interchange near Cascade & Timberidge bet. frontage rds. YMCA type project--public pool--not a game park VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 IMPORTANT INFORMATION IN EVALUATING THE NEED FOR A PERFORMANCE AND CONFERENCE CENTER A survey of visitors in the summer--what they want, why they chose Vail, etc. A well equipped small theater for Zoca1 performances; should have shop for building scenery and a place to store theater stuff. 400-500 seats should be good--not 1000. Ability to draw year-round cultural events Acoustical suitability for choral music and theatre presentations; accessible to ZocaZ as well as imported cultural performances; spaces for small as well as large audiences Adequate parking, type and amount of utilization, availability for Zoca1 use, accessibility Affordability to attend; big enough for concerts; money well spent/cost effective Are aZZ current facilities being used to their maximum? Are local businesses willing to take affirmative steps to cater to the needs of the less affluent visitor? Are many inquiries received for above? As a long-time resident, I feel the existing facilities are adequate--let's concentrate on fixing up what's already here before adding more. Some of the outlying areas are in really poor shape--enforce codes on the books: As a member of the programming committee, and having been involved in the performing arts here for 15 years, I don't need more info--just get us the center: Aspen after 45 years is now building a closed performing arts facility to seat only 350, knowing that they can't fill more seats in the winter--shouldn't we learn from them? At what level of need are current conference facilities 100 booked and what percent of market do estimates tell us we would fill if we had a center Availability of qualified personnel to operate facility Background of private patrons interested in establishing such a philanthropic institution; have Zoca1 school children submit designs VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 IMPORTANT INFORMATION IN EVALUATING THE NEED FOR A PERFORMANCE AND CONFERENCE CENTER Can the town's natural resources absorb the problems that come with building out to attract tourists? We need to be more environmentally proactive toward preservation and clean air. Can we provide the support services needed with the present employee base? Could this center be located somewhere else? Why does Vail need this? Comparisons to the competition, justification of need/local use, design/location, costs/financing, being a top resort Cost & who will pay for it; bed tax seems the most logical--guests have to sleep, they don't have to shop. Sales tax a bad idea. Cost and real need; do we really want more people in town? Cost and the ever-present usage of outside "professionals" (I use the term loosely) brought in and paid exorbitant monies from our funds!!! Use our own expertise that is certainly right here in Vail. Cost effectiveness, availability to Zoca1 organizations--dance students, community theater, etc. Cost of facility, expected Zeve1 of usage Cost, how financed, where located, how large Cost, means of financing; marketing figures--size, tope, source of audience Cost, visibility, uses, possible benefits Cost-financed by taxes, bonds, private contributions? Cost/benefit analysis; address the needs of ZocaZ performance groups Cost/benefit analysis; source of funding for construction and upkeep Cost/benefit, use projections, architectural design Costs, benefits, impact; if Vail is to become nothing more than a profit center, it will quickly lose its appeal. Business is very good now, traffic is manageable. Who needs a performance and conference center? Costs, impact on traffic in immediate area, alternative uses, aesthetics of building, capacity Desirability of having large groups come to Vail--why is that necessary? Intimate experiences rather than large/grand ones are important too. VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 IMPORTANT INFORMATION IN EVALUATING THE NEED FOR A PERFORMANCE AND CONFERENCE CENTER Do11ar-for-dollar advantages to having one vs. the negative side (i.e., traffic) Economic indicators, marketing research Environmental considerations Environmental impact, expansion opportunities (20-year projection), why are we squeezing it in such a small space? Won't be able to expand Evaluation is over, I would be the first to vote NO Financial feasibility, is there really enough private donations to build it? Financial feasiblity without tax subsidy, backed by a list of all such facilities in the country and the degree to which they are self-supporting; will it place a strain on the town's infrastructure; will it serve a self-interest core group Funding and projected use Hard facts showing why similar facilities in other towns have failed or require inordinate subsidies; how multi-use will actually work--who has priority to schedule prime dates? How can it possibly be used enough so that it does not need to be subsidized by Town? How it's going to be run, what it consists of, what the targeted customers are to be, quality How many performances and conferences we Zose each year for lack of adequate facility, especially in summer How much additional summer business it will bring to Vail How much my taxes are going to qo up, and if I will get any benefit or if it will a1Z be for the rich, upper-class second home owners How much will it be used? What is the cost? What is the "payback payoff" time? How profitable other centers are, and if they are, why aren't the private sector interested? How successful has Keystone and Beaver Creek been in attracting VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 IMPORTANT INFORMATION IN EVALUATING THE NEED FOR A PERFORMANCE AND CONFERENCE CENTER conventions/meetings Xow successful have conference centers been in other Colorado resorts? Wi1Z other Eagle County municipalities contribute to the cost and maintenance? How well are the existing summer programs supported I am not pleased with the method of decision-making to date. It is being promoted by what is perceived as "good o1e boys." I am opposed because I think it will cost me too much I do not believe it is appropriate for TOV to build or manage a performance/conference center I do not favor this; it was proven several years ago, in many heated meetings, that the above would be a financial burden to the Town and the taxpayer I don't feel Vail needs one; create more parking instead I don't need to evaluate--we need a performance center ASAP: I need to know if it really would bring groups to Vail that are now unable to come here due to lack of space I think it is the worst idea to hit Vail and I will do what I can to stop it I think it would be a waste of money I thought the Town spent an excess of money years ago on deciding not to have a conference center. I'm 100 for it, I need no other information If it brings jobs, do it If it will take up any current free parking--soccer field or Ford Park If there is a need for a conference center in Vail, it should be built and run by a private firm with tax and other breaks by Vail If you build it, they will come Impact on traffic and parking, cost to Zocals VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 IMPORTANT INFORMATION IN EVALUATING THE NEED FOR A PERFORMANCE AND CONFERENCE CENTER Is it better in Vail where the design will have to be compromised because no site is Large enough, or down valley where there is adequate space and better accessibility? Is it really a necessity? Or would it do just as well to have it located in Avon, Edwards, or even Wolcott or Eagle? Is the money available and will the center be self-sufficient after construction? Its design must fit well into the town; why not use the Peregrine Building in Avon and leave Vail alone Just truthful answers from Council and staff--both groups should listen to the public Knowing that we don't already have the places to accommodate these needs, and that this money couldn't be more wisely spent Let's worry about how and where, not if List of potential users and size of groups; will it operate at a Zoss? List of who, in the Zast 10 years, considered Vail for meeting, but did not come because of Lack of facilities Location not to infringe on open space, Zow profile building Location, parking considerations, affordability tax-wise and event-wise, accessibility, type of events/conferences Long-term impact on the valley--do we really need this growth? Long-term operational expenses and who will manage and maintain it; don't want people whining about it like Dobson Money, design (post office design was terrible), do we really need it? Number of groups per season, do we have to give big discounts (Church of God & Dobson Arena) Parking, traffic control & Location Parking, year-round usage, existing housing should not be adversely affected by sound or traffic Payback VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 IMPORTANT INFORMATION IN EVALUATING THE NEED FOR A PERFORMANCE AND CONFERENCE CENTER Performance/track record of similar venues such as Keystone; anticipated economic benefit tothe community; impact of people, traffic, etc. Potential demand versus conference facilities already available; also would like to know how the Keystone Resort Conference Center is doing Potential revenue for the community broken down into categories (hotels, business, etc.) Privately funded only! The town should only evaluate planning and zoning and should not be in this business. Providing a center that the town can grow INTO with the future, and not OUTGROW in the future, while sti11 keeping it affordable Quality of performance we wi11 aim for; quantity of events; cost of a first-class facility; location; quality of convention groups we should aim for Real data on how the projections made by our consultants for other projects have worked out, in those cases where the projects were built Serviceability to the entire community Site, public transportation to site, conflicts with ice arena use, acoustics, sufficient seating Size adequate--we don't need a center which is the same size as the Westin 's largest room Some wi11 benefit more than others--wi11 they pay more? Will all businesses contribute via a town sales tax? Don't pick on one industry to pay an unequal share of facility cost. Wi11 it bring in more business, or replace families/skiers w/conventions? That it serve our 1oca1 groups, not just Bravo Colorado! 'One half of conference space must double as exhibit space. That it won't become a huge "resort center" with hundreds of rooms that would take away our summer rentals That there are enough public eating facilities to support the visitors and there are enough quality evening events to entertain at reasonable cost That we don't have the biggest and the best "just because"--they should build a facility out of need, NOT egol VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 IMPORTANT INFORMATION IN EVALUATING THE NEED FOR A PERFORMANCE AND CONFERENCE CENTER The actual purpose; too many rooms and meeting spaces are empty 50-60$ of the year The most important thing to me is to get conferences and special events out of Dobson so that our kids can use the arena for its INTENDED purpose!!! The MULTI-USE function of the building; try to be as beneficial to as many uses as possible The situation with using Dobson is too political! There is NO need, unless private enterprise can pull it off on their own; Vail already attracts ENOUGH people. If you bring more people here for mud season, it will tarnish Vai1's reputation, because that time of year here can be ugly and boring This should be achieved by the hotels or V.A. Usability by local arts organizations, seating to be adjustable by partitions to present small productions Vail is not Chicago and should not strive to become such a place We cannot fund one. VRA must be supported to gain strength--we need a good Chamber, not a social club. We do not need a conference center! We don't need one; the cost is too high for any returns. Performance center a possibility, but a conference center is a loser. We need an alternative venue to Dobson for concerts--the acoustics there stink! It's an insult to performers to offer an ice arena. We need this facility! It is the most important "visionary" project this community can embark onl Please see the big picture and move forward with this proposal! We needed it ten years ago. Where is our Leadership that has the focus and courage to get it done rather than succumbing to the different interest groups? What is the potential volume of business and would it be cost effective? The center should definitely accommodate performances for winter and bad summer weather. What is the primary focus of such a center? To bring more culture to Vail VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 IMPORTANT INFORMATION IN EVALUATING THE NEED FOR A PERFORMANCE AND CONFERENCE CENTER or to draw more business? I feel that the primary focus should be on enriching the lives of the residents. What is the size needed to attract the groups that cannot presently be accommodated? Don't get so extravagant with design/cost. It can still look attractive but be reasonable cost-wise. Now many groups do we lose presently? What type of facility will be built, what kind of profit does the town expect to make What types of events would it host? Parking? What would it cost the taxpayer? Is it really needed? Where will people park? How many can use it at one time--can several groups? Now much will it cost? How much will it cost me? Whether it will attract more visitors Whether the Town of Vail could operate such a facility fairly and efficiently who pays for it? Business will use it, they should pay. Do we want the congestion it could cause? Probably not. Who will pay for it: Who will pay for it? Those who use it should pay for it, not casual skier or visitor. Who will run it? (not VRA I hope); Frank J. has you all fooled; what do the hotel salespeople say; what percentage has group business increased Who would use it, who would be in charge of scheduling? Who's making money off it, and will it be affordable to attend, unlike elite items such as "Bravo" and the ballet Why current space too small or insufficient Why we need such a facility, how much it will cost, how it will impact traffic Wi11 it be utilized often? Wi1Z it help businesses in shoulder season? Wi11 the business only help hotels or will condo owners benefit from increased rentals? VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 IMPORTANT INFORMATION IN EVALUATING THE NEED FOR A PERFORMANCE AND CONFERENCE CENTER Wi11 it pay for itself without an increase in taxes! Wi11 it pay for itself, what kind of people will be drawn to Vail? Wi11 this be an arena, hall, or community center with a gallery, conference rooms, showrooms, and classrooms? Where would it be, how funded? Wi11 we be able to effectively market the facility so that it doesn't go unused? Would it support itself when established? Young people's desires i VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 COMMENTS BY THOSE WHO WOULD CONSIDER VOTING FOR A LOCAL MODIFICATION TO AMENDMENT 1 Amendment 1 could hurt us seriously! We must approve an alternative. Amendment 1 doesn't take into consideration our seasonal economy Amendment 1 is a tragically stupid law; would support ANY Iegislation to empower TOV to make own choices without continual electorate approval Amendment 1 is bullshit Amendment 1 is impractical for Vail Amendment 1 is stupid! However, you cannot ask the voters for an open checkbook as in the past Amendment 1 undermines representative government Amendment 1 will not allow Vail to meet the needs of its quests or its citizens; it's burdensome and unrealistic. Amendment 1, if not defeated or modified, will destroy many municipalities in Colorado Amendments 1 and 2 are disasters in the making As far as surplus sales tax, or problems caused by poor tourism years, Zet the town government handle it Capital expenditures in excess of that allowed by Amendment 1 may be necessary to maintain/improve quality of Iife Council is elected to make decisions based on elaborate information--not the electorate Don't tie it into Denver inflation Doug Bruce is a raging fanatical idiot Each community is different and has different needs/priorities Especially if we need to vote increases for school budgets I do want to vote for tax increases and new debt, but not for normal growth of administrative responsibility I don't think Vail is guilty of the irresponsible spending that is prevalent on the state level VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 COMMENTS BY THOSE WHO WOULD CONSIDER VOTING FOR A LOCAL MODIFICATION TO AMENDMENT 1 I don't think we should be tied to Denver's Consumer Price Index, because we are dependent on tourism I don't want a project canceled or delayed which is needed to keep up the quality of Life I elected Council to act on my behalf; they do not need to check with me for approval all the time - I feel TOV officials are better prepared to make budgetary decisions than I am I think we missed the boat on the true impact of Amendment 1 I would need to understand the motivation and reasoning for a responsible deviation I'm not positive Amendment 1 was aZ1 that good an idea, I do feel something is needed in the way of control If public dollars were not wasted on needless studies and unneeded "public works projects"--use them to reduce debt & for primary services Individual town/city tax increases should not depend on a state amendment Locals know best what their problems are Money should be available on an "as-needed" basis Our economy (and our overall situation) dictates flexibility, not restrictions! Also, so no 1oca1 body can use Amendment 1 as an excuse. Our economy is so different from that of the Front Range, our spending limits should be modified accordingly. Our needs vary in a different cycle than the regional economy, especially if we wish to attract foreign guests Our representative government is a time-tested good method. I don't want or have time to study for every issue to vote informatively. Please pursue viable avenues to elude the restrictions! Public officials are elected to handle routine decision-making; how can govt work when the general public must be involved in every matter? Resorts are different animals VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 COMMENTS BY THOSE WHO WOULD CONSIDER VOTING FOR A LOCAL MODIFICATION TO AMENDMENT 1 Sometimes voters just vote down tax increases, even if they may be necessary--give elected officials more say in this Spending here differs in priorities and should be re-evaluated Spending limits or increases must fluctuate with seasonal revenue The amendment is so poorly written it can't address the needs of many areas in the state having differing situations The Amendment was a major mistake and any amount of modification would be a help The town needs a free hand when it comes to (illegible) response to a critical situation There are asinine provisions iri the amendment, such as prohibition against multi-year contracts There may be times when funding/spending are neded immediately This is a "special case" economy This is CRITICAL to our future--Council should bring this issue to a vote ASAP TOV has a good grasp on what it can afford in the future; it appears to be trying to limit its long-term debt, please continue this effort Vail different than Denver--needs local ruling Vail is not Denver or Grand Junction--different factors at work here Vail should be responsible for itself; Denver is NOT Vail. Our needs and expectations are different. Vai1's economy is based differently than a non-transient urban center ~ VaiZ's economy is different from Denver's Vai1's economy is so different from Denver's and needs a different set of guidelines We cannot match sources to needs (sudden growth, potholes) with these restrictions We don't believe Amendment 1 is in the interest of our community VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 COMMENTS BY THOSE WHO WOULD CONSIDER VOTING FOR A LOCAL MODIFICATION TO AMENDMENT 1 We elected a ZocaZ government to run the day-to-day business of the town We have elected officials to make most decisions for us, but big ticket items should be voted on We need to spend money on tourism marketing if the CTB is no Zonger funded We want to decrease the expense of administering, and get some good out of aI1 the taxes we cough up! Would consider some modifications, but basically consider the review process healthy VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 COMMENTS FROM THOSE WHO WOULD NOT CONSIDER VOTING FOR A LOCAL MODIFICATION TO AMENDMENT 1 "Special status" is an easy out--live with state parameters Amendment 1 is the Zaw! Citizens must control the purse, not self-serving politicos Elected representatives soon become insensitive to dollar value and historically send all communities into debt for Zove of "doing projects" Government is not the means to solve all problems I don't have to justify my answer any more than the TOV has chosen not to also, on many occasions I think TOV and other governments found out voters not happy with the way they are spending our money If democracy voted Amendment 1, it should stay as it is If I have to learn to work within my budget, so do you: In my business, if I have a bad year I cut back--you just raise taxes Let's see if it works: The Colorado legislature is not having that much of a problem. Let's try this amendment for a while; if it needs change in two years, Zook at modification then Not until Council and Boards get serious about some of our "REAL" problems. No more band-aids. Past experience proves that special interests get pet projects approved which are not in the taxpayers' best interest The state constitution should not be subject to 1oca1 "re-writing" The Town is very spoiled and has wasted a lot of money on equipment and services that should be contracted out This is an attempt to qo directly against the majority of the voters and another example of MINORITY RULE This place gets so much money, how about a little Zess salary and a little more work This question is very slanted to get a yes response. I'm tired of VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 COMMENTS FROM THOSE WHO WOULD NOT CONSIDER VOTING FOR A LOCAL MODIFICATION TO AMENDMENT 1 increasing taxes, esp. when Comm. Dev. has increased budget 60$ in 3 yrs. Too many temp workers can vote without knowing the.issues and 1ocaZs are left with their results!!! i.e. Slifer vs. Johnson TOV has been irresponsible in their spending, controls must be strong! TOV has budgeted expenditures on a steadily increasing tax expectation TOV just wants to keep the status quo--which Zed to the Council spending over $200K quietly on lawyers to get control of VA TOV spends and has spent too much money on studies Vail already has a unique ability to spend--the new police station without a jail is ridiculous (crazy) Vail is not an iceberg, free-floating and flying its own flag Vai1's economy does well even in recession and Zow-snow years Voters throughout the U.S. have sent a message to public officials: limit spending. Vail should heed that message. We should expect our government to be as accountable as any other in the state Work 5 months of the year just to pay our tax burden You are already spending far more than is necessary to be a town gobvernment in a wonderful town. Let nature and free market work. You are not exempt from wasteful spending--the reason for Amendment 1 VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS A comprehensive quarterly newsletter would be heZfpul in attaining a better understanding of the important issues facing Vail. AZ1ow people coming under I-70 the right of way because they don't see the stop sign anyway. Amendment 1 & 2 were passed by a vast majority of the voting public. I suggest you abide by them or be replaced come next November. General disregard for rules of the road is a national problem, where does this come from? You our Leaders who say Amendment 1, we just will not abide by it because it may have an adverse effect. Let's not even give it a try to see if it works. "I know better than the vast majority because they are stupid." As a young person, I would Zike to make a Zife for myself here in the Vail Valley. Since I've been here I've heard a lot of talk about having some affordable housing, but I've seen no results. Something has to be done. I've spoken to Zonq time ZocaZs and they .said that there hasn't been much help for lower income ZocaZs. As I watch locals continue to move down valley, I fear a drain on our leadership resources and on the vitality of our community. I think Town Council needs to consider stronger policies to preserve existing neighborhoods and prevent their transformation into second home enclaves. More aggressive annexation efforts and a push for regional governments (at least Vail, Eagle-Vail to Avon, maybe Edwards) might also help. As the parking structure is supposed to be of benefit to locals, I would Zike the rates to change so it would be free for the first two hours and raise the rates to make up the difference off the tourists. You can't go eat in an hour and a half. At a recent Council meeting when someone said they had a Zot to say, Jim Gibson 's comment, "Well, you'll excuse us if we're done listening before you're done talking" was TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE: Better security (telephones every Zeve1) inside parking structure. As safety becomes a bigger issue the parking structure can be an easy scene for crime. Buses and pedestrians mix poorly; interior walkways and mall areas should be kept as free as possible of vehicular traffic. Lionshead area needs sprucing up--more trees, plantings around parking structure, etc.. In general, Vail keeps getting better: Concerns: the money you spend on consultants; the health risk from cloud seeding; the Council overturning approval of building projects which passed through the DRB; your intent to cut the judge's hours VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS CongratuZations on this survey program. I hope you wi11 honestly use the information collected. This is public service at its very finest. Council should be recalled for secretly spending $200,000 on lawyers to "condemn" VA. What a sham and disgrace! Merv Lapin type of backdoor financing should be illegal and subject to indictment. Is a public pool (as contrasted to an "aquatic center"--how silly and pretentious) at least partially alive? (Note: don't have the vote in Feb.)- Also, this winter has seen the worst snow removal programs on the frontage roads I've ever seen. I know these roads are state responsibilities but can't the town force the issue of cleaning them better and more often? A trip to the post office might be your last. Create organized transportation for destination skiers--work with the VVTCB; prohibition of smoking: are we in China? I don't think this is in the Town's best interest. DRB does a very poor job. Who do they think they are and what right do they have to think they can stop home improvements, particularly when the plans are not exotic and all the neighbors are in agreement? What a bunch of jerks who have no common sense. Whose interests do they represent? Certainly not the town residents: Get policemen out of Saabs and on foot and bikes in commercial areas. Get the DRB out of the plan review process. Let the staff do this. Have the DRB act as liaison to the community and to revise regulations as appropriate. Recognize that good design is in the eye of the beholder--design, scale, respect for the landscape and neighboring structures are the limits to what can be accomplished with this process. Get the State of Colorado to eliminate the stop signs on Chamonix after exiting from under the bridge. This wi11 change a TEN-WAY stop intersection to a manageable EIGHT-WAY stop, and help the congestion at our West Vail MALFUNCTION JUNCTION! I am very concerned by what I see as Vail turning into a sma11 city (vs. a sma11 town). I Zike the small town "attitude," I think attitude is the key word here because the town employees no longer have it. Now we have regulations for everything: A Zoca1 can go over there and the people don't know you or care to. A Zot of us helped build this town, and it has changed dramatically and detrimentally in maybe the Iasi 2 years. The bus drivers have been rude all season, the police dept. has become "a bunch of cops" and the sign code enforcement is ridiculous. "You vi11 follow ze rules." Where's Vai1's heart gone? I am very upset with TOV1 You people almost built a sledding park in my back yard and gave me great grief when building my home. You are not VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS consistent and the DRB and PEC members need to be replaced. The appeal of Vail is being destroyed due to your stupidity. I feel that the town overall is doing a great job, however the DRB and PEC are doing a HORRIBLE JOB! I appreciate "Dateline;" there is a tendency among some who become active in government to become builders of bureaucracies, to become self-important, to promote personal agendas, forgetting their purpose. I Love Vail. We seem to be followers in promoting the town, behind Aspen. Need jazz festival or something else in summer. Vail cooking school (etc.) It looks like--we don't do it if we might possibly infringe on what other ski areas do; need to be more aggressive. I rate TOV's bus system very highly although there is one driver on the Vail South/Green route who is very rude at times--drives evenings, named Liz. It gets very old riding her bus. Also: I suggest you run a weekly "ad" in the paper describing HOW to use a 4-way stop sign. This would be educational and helpful to tourists and residents alike: I think open space and the allocation of the real estate transfer tax should be re-evaluated. I see more need for preserving and developing a standard of visual aesthetics as a primary purpose of open space. Too many projects try to fill open space with recreation, cemeteries, employee housing, etc. In urban areas could include landscaping improvements and green space; in rural areas, purchase of development rights, recreation easements on agricultural land. I think someone should monitor the blue pickup trucks driving around town all the time with one or two employees in them who do no work. A classic example--why does it take two people to empty trash at the bus stops aZ1 the time? Too many supervisors, not enough productivity. I think the newspaper stands are colorful and cute. I can't believe you would spend tax money to create institutionalized-Zookinq wooden stands. I also appreciate being able to spot the stands easily when I'm in search of a paper. This is an example of how trying to make Vail look perfect can make it a tougher place to Zive (as do big parking structures, stores without auto access). I think the TOV and its employees do an excellent job. I enjoy the quality of Zife we have here in the Vail Valley. I was given a parking ticket for utilizing a completely empty RV/bus parking Zot next to the FREE L.H. parking structure in the mud season. Get serious. I live in Ptarmigan and have to ride the bus all the way to InterMountain to get to L.H. Find a place for it to stop on the way in! The frequency of in-town shuttles during events such as demo shows is VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ridicuZously low--I was able to walk from L.H. to Gold Peak in ski boots to see a demo show, and saw NO moving buses. I Iove Summervaill I was very pleased to find many open space areas in European communities that are "older than dirt"!! Please protect vail's open space areas for all to use. I shed no tears at the Zoss of the Par-3 course (driven by greedy homeowners for the FEW who would play). Non-winter Vail is more than golf. In 100 years someone else wi11 be glad to see open areas around the town. I wish there were a way to keep the plowed snow from blocking my driveway after I shovel it. More attention should be paid to when to use the bigger buses; ;I hope you don't switch to all perimeter buses, I get carsick on them. I would be delighted to convert my fireplace to gas with an "economic incentive" such as a reduction in property tax. PLEASE ENFORCE THE SPEED LIMIT on Bighorn Road: The cemetery should be for ZocaZs. I would Zike to see a real initiative undertaken to explore burying part of I-70, reworking the interchanges and 4-way as presented in a plan this past summer/fa11 by a graduate student. I would Zike to see woodburning banned and plans to convert all fireplaces to gas. In the meantime, a1Z fireplaces should have glass doors added. We would burn wood much more slowly since fires could be precisely controlled. There would be MUCH less smoke. We made this suggestion to Ms. Scanlon who ignored us. I would urge that the Sandstone bus route be changed to go around the rock circle on Red Sandstone Drive. I'm totally against affordable housing in Vail proper. It wi11 TRASH the area, then we won't need employee housing because no tourists wi11 want to come. Vail will Zook Like every other suburb in the U.S. I think locals should get a BIG break on parking cost in the structure. I'm totally against tax dollars being used to subsidize housing. Why should we pay because business doesn't pay their employees a decent wage so they can afford to Zive in Vail. Projects like Pitkin Creek should be built with longer-term limitations. The pothole answers in the Vail Trail are bullshit. If the streets were fixed in in the summer, the water would not get to the svbgrade and fail during the winter. I've been disappointed to notice that the guys who issue parking tickets are above picking vp trash. I've noticed them standing around (sometimes several) chatting up a storm. I hate to see our tax dollars "standing around"--te11 them to do something when they aren't searching out VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS "violators!" If Comm.Dev. were done properly, how do projects exceed what has been approved? It cost more to build in Vail (i.e., architect fees much higher due to the aproval process), hardly encourages development or remodels. If we have 34 on police staff and only 17 patrolmen, what do the other 17 do? This is not an efficient management system when patrolmen are bogged down with paperwork. If there is anything that would help traffic at the W. Vail and Vail exits and on frontage roads, it is a way to cross I-70 in the middle. Much of the exit traffic is just Zoca1 people trying to go to the post office and stores. They just want to cross under the highway. In general, the Town of Vail is doing a great job. The problems arise with the increase in population and difference of views. Growth can't be avoided, it needs to be dealt with, and this survey can only help. Keep up the good work! It may be late to say it, but getting rid of someone as competent as Ron Phillips was a BIG mistake, Council! It would be nice if the town could do something with the lower bench of Donovan Park--intersection of Alpine Dr. and S. Frontage Rd. The land is there and it doesn't seem unreasonable to have a pocket park on the site. Neighborhood pride or pressure from TOV seems to have brought Intermountain back from its bad state--maybe the same could be done here. The first thing you see is the Elmore house--would like to see it fixed up or torn down as it sets the scene for many properties in VVW and Matterhorn. It's good to see a change in the town manager; it's important for someone to be here Zong enough to be effective, but not too long. Keep up the good work! Government work is not easy or fun, but vital for the future of our community. Let's take a break from greed, i.e. building permits and more growth which means more people and more problems! Make Cascade Village a part of Vai1's commercial core area by including it on in-town bus route and including it on TOV official map (instead of half of Cascade Village at the corner of the map). Music on the buses is terrible--loud blaring young people's music detracts from the scenic peaceful environment; Gold Peak music terrible also--why pollute with noise? Being a visitor for 21 years and now a property owner, I see Vail going downhill in attempts to be bigger. You need mandatory recycling for cans, glass, plastics and paper--what a waste is going on. VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS My experience with DRB & PEC was the worst nightmare one can experience. I'm not the only one who feels this way--you should poll these separately--we need CHANGE here. Need bike routes connecting Beaver Creek/Avon to Vail; access to Zaw books and info Need electric buses--diesel buses should not be in Vail Note: I rate the buses highly ONLY in the winter; summer hours are OK, but off-season is horrible! Are the buses only for tourists? Often it seems that people with limited financial stake in Vail are very aggressive pushing agendas of "right," "good," "need," with little consideration of property owners with a significant financial interest, but are seasonal and have no vote. On 4/4/93 I hit a pothole between Vail Pass and the East Vail exit. By the time I finished repairing my car, the bill was $600--the hole was the size of a Lake! I'm sure I'm not the only one to hit it--it could hardly have been avoided--I've been told they can't be repaired until the road dries out but what about a temporary fill? Out-of-towners aren't familiar with black Saab police cars Planning staff should not be able to approve additions that will devalue an abutter's property, especially remodels that have been voted on by the Planning Commission and DRB. The staff should not be able to alter their decisions. Code requirements are too strict, especially in the older complexes. Please keep employee housing out of Vail. We do not need the visual impact of dirty laundry, bikes, etc. Look at Solar Vail (used as Sonnenalp employee housing)--looks terrible from the street and lifts. Please put a library bookdrop at places more convenient than the library; also, get the bikes off the road--build more bike paths! Please put some sidewalks in along the Frontage Rd. in East Vail and fix a1Z potholes! Please keep Zate bus hours to East Vail in the summer. Please remove the Israeli fZaq from the International Bridge. Does Vail support the cause of 95$ of the world's terrorism and the occupation of other people's land? Has Vail given in to special interest groups? If so, add the Iraqi and Serbian flag. Our international reputation is too important to risk like this!! Besides the fZaq, Vail is probably one of the best-run towns in the country:: VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS Please stop growth; it lowers quality of life. Commercial growth must end. I doubt if every hotel room is filled even Christmas week. Additional commercial growth decreases existing business' maximum potential, creates additional employment staffing from a currently stressed employee pool, and causes further need of housing for employees. This creates more ugly, cheaply built, overpriced ghetto buildings. Unfilled positions mean additional work for Iow paid hourly employees who are beyond burnout in January. Stopping growth wi11 a11ow us to get a grip on things. AZZ employees should be given a ski pass. Police are not as friendly as they were 5-10 years ago. Public servants should be able to return phone ca11s promptly instead of two days later, if at a11. Especially Community Development and Public Works. Questions regarding stimulation of economic growth are inappropriate on a simple municipal services questionnaire; open space questions are duds--there is no more open space. The questions now are regarding the "microcosm" management of the space we share in municipal ownership. Water quality is terrible--high chlorine, and our "gold medal stream" smells bad on high volume days: Right or wrong, employee housing is not economically possible in town. Accepting this and providing "down valley" housing is a progressive step that needs to be addressed through the private sector with public guidance. Seldom see traffic enforcement on East Meadow Drive near Racquet Club and Biq Horn Park. Posted limit is 15 mph but most vehicles drive 35+ mph! There are many children biking, and others walking and jogging in this area. Several years ago we applied for a permit to put in a BAY WINDOW and were turned down. Hopefully, permitinq practices have improved: Something needs to be done about Vail VaZ1ey Dr. in the summer. Bikes and walkers need to go single, or you need a bike path to get to the bike path. Spend less money on outside studies; use Zoca1 talent and common sense. We need less government, more cooperation from Town staff. Police needs to be part of community, more polite and professional, and wiZ1 get more support from business community. Stop abuse of Dobson Arena--this facility should be reserved for skaters, not religious fanatics. Summer bus service for S. Frontage Rd. is terrible. To be at work at 9 AM you either have to take the 8 AM bus and be an hour early or the 9 AM bus VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS and be 15 minutes late--neither is acceptable. Why are the bicycle paths not Zit? We are not allowed to ride ovr bikes after dark without lights but we can use the dark path which is extremely dangerous. Stop concerning yourselves with the tourists so much and start helping the locals. Thanks for sending out the survey to get our opinions Thanks for the chance to speak out. One additional comment on the police building renovation--the existing entry and greeting area is very cold and intimidating. My hope is that the new "reception" area can be constructed to provide a feeling of more openness and ready assistance without compromising security. The sma11 brown street signs in East Vail are horrible, plus they don't have adequate lighting. When it snows, the snow sticks to the signs. The snow removal in my neighborhood was bad in that every time they came by, the blades pushed more snow into the driveways and I ended up having to shovel my driveway several times just to get my car in and out: It would have been easier if the roads hadn't been cleared at a11. The Town has got to address the traffic at the 4-way stop: I would propose removing the exits from I-70 at the main Vail exit to relieve in-town traffic--the traffic cop only makes the problem WORSE! Don't even think about putting a housing project at the Mountain Be1Z site: Poor choice of area, TOO close to the schools and wi11 ruin open space needed there. The traffic officers at the 4-way in Vail Village did an excellent job; snow removal is excellent. The speed limit of 25 mph on Chamonix Lane behind the Texaco station is too high. Everyone seems to want to go 40+ mph. Lower it to 15 mph and issue some tickets. There are a number of children on that street, someone is going to get hurt: There is a problem at 2166 Chamonix Lane. Cars are speeding on this curve, so exiting from my driveway presents a serious danger. There is.a bus stop shelter on one side and a dumpster on the other. There seems to be an insensitivity to the needs of 1oca1 working people in terms of housing, parking and day care. The planning department needs more direction from the PEC, town attorney, and the public in terms of reasonable interpretations of ordinances and communication with the public. We are all in this together. There was really no excuse for the pothole situation at the West Vail exit. No short-term solutions were even tried. Also, there needs to be an effort to build affordable housing somewhere in the Vail Va11ey (East Vail to Intermountain). Employee housing wi1Z never be built, but an affordable housing project would free up rental units for seasonal workers. A.Zso, too VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS much money is spent on consultants for problems that could be solved internally. This Council is terrible. They're indecisive and change their vote on a regular basis. Their attitude toward Town staff is adversarial; they seem not to care about Town employees. They're more concerned about their own egos than doing the right things for the Town (V.R.D. decision). This Council totally lacks leadership. This is an expensive self-serving survey; all government bodies are trying to get around Amendment 1 instead of becoming more economical and efficient in management, as the vote of the people asked you to do. This survey is a healthy opportunity for members of the community to express opinions. We must take stock of what we have before it's Zost. I believe the time has come to begin to be VERY CRITICAL of new development, expansion of present facilities and increased spending on projects not necessary to the health and welfare of the Vail community. Many feel we don't need more tourists, isn't that the truth!!! This survey is an excellent opportunity to express wishes This survey is too Long, and wi1Z adversely affect response rate. Town of Vail Police create a bad image when they hide out and write tickets to guests exceeding the 25 mph on Frontage Rd. Either the speed limit should be raised or the policemen should find alternative ways to serve the community. Town should not have spent the money for a special planner for the cemetery Vail is similar to other governments: it seems to struggle with the American idea that governments were created to serve people, not the other way around. Vail needs a place for the 17-21 age group--the teen center is a "kids" hangout. Vail needs better noise control from people who party Zate into the night; also, woodburning bans; and police uniforms need to look more professional in the summer. We are greatly disturbed that the town has eliminated the Bald Mountain bus stop. We have 12 people to go to our home, 4 very young and 2 very o1 d; the walk under the overpass is not kept shoveled and is dangerous, next stop is too far. We bought our home to have the convenience of the bus; eliminating it is of grave concern and in time wi11 lower property values. VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1993 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS We need the performance center: Aspen and Telluride both have wonderful art and music festivals: Conventions would also bring business into the area. When is the town going to take a serious Iook at the pobrlems associated with I-70, main Vail exits, 4-way stop, etc. The transportation Master Plan completed in '92 is a joke. Nothing but a political document. I'd love to walk more to get around if I-70 weren't in the way: You cannot waste $200K+ studying LBO's of VA (Merv Lapin) Your newsletter is great--the "Speak Up" meetings are also. Bridge entrance and golf course off Frontage Rd. needs improvement. _ ORDINANCE NO. 5 SERIES OF 1993 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 16.04, AND SECTIONS 16.12.010, 16.20.010, 16.20.220, 16.22.010, 16.22.160, 16.26.010, 16.20.015 AND 16.22.014 OF THE TOWN OF VAIL MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROHIBITION OF NEON SIGNS AND EXTERIOR GAS FILLED, ILLUMINATED AND FIBER OPTIC SIGNS, AND PROVIDING REGULATIONS REGARDING THE REVIEW OF ALL OTHER GAS FILLED, ILLUMINATED AND FIBER OPTIC SIGNS, AND INTERIOR ACCENT LIGHTING AND PROVIDING DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that signage has a significant impact on the visual quality and character of the Town; and WHEREAS, it is important to maintain the quality of the signage in order to maintain a resort market preserving the unique character of the Town and fostering the quality of the Town; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that the proliferation of signs in the city would result in visual blight and unattractiveness and would convey an image that is inconsistent with the high quality resort environment; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that effective sign control has preserved and enhanced the visual character of other resort communities in Colorado and other states. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: Section 1 Chapter 16.04 is hereby amended by the addition of the following sections: Section 16.04.165 Neon ~~ph~ ~ Sign - a sign e~-If In which a colorless, odorless, primarily inert gaseous element known as neon is found and produces Illumination. Section 16.04.115 Gas Filled ~lo~e~ Sign, - a ffg~-e~ sign fn which Illuminating gas is heated to produce light. Section 16.04.116 Gas Filled Tubing - a tube in which Illuminating gas is heated to produce light. Section 16.04.125 Illuminated. N~q#-e~ Sign - a tlgf~-a~ sign emitting or reflecting a steady suffused or glowing light. Section 16.04.075 Fiber Optic "~Y Sian - a -e~ sign of very thin, transparent, homogeneous fiber of Mass or Mastic that is enclosed by material of a lower Index of refraction and transmits throughout its length through internal reflections. 1 .r' y Section 16.04.126 Lighting, accent - "accent lighting" means a light source located within the interior of a building that illuminates a s6t:faS2 display window and or merchandise iri a building whale use'Is In whale ar Isaa part cammerclaC by the means of spotlights, gas filled tubing or other similar features. Section 2 Section 16.12.010 - Paragraph C of the Vail Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: C. Review and approval of the Design Review Board for window signs exceeding flue (5) square feet but not more than ten (10) square feet, exterior signs exceeding 5 square feet, subdivision entrance signs, all sign programs, permitted gas filled window sign, illuminated window sign, fiber optic window sign and accent lighting. Section 3 Section 16.20.220 -Paragraph B(1) and Section 16.22.160 -Paragraph B(1) of the Vail Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows: Section 16.20.220 - Paragraph B(1) -Size and Section 16.22.160 Paragraph B(1) -Size Any sign or signs attached to or applied to the inside surface of any exterior window will be limited to a coverage of 15% (fifteen percent) of the total window space. Further, with the exception of illuminated, gas filled and fiber optic window signs, no sign or signs a~hall cover more than ten (10) square feet of any window space. Illuminated, gas filled, and ~flber optic window signs shall not cover more than three (3) square feet of any window space. Section 4 Section 16.20.220 - Paragraph D -Number and Section 16.22.160 Paragraph D -Number of the Vail Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows: Section 16.20.220 D -Number and Section 16.22.160 D -Number D. Each window frontage may contain sign or signs within the prescribed sign limits for each frontage on a street or major pedestrian way with a maximum of two (2) signs per frontage. Not more than ore (1) sign for each frontage shall be permitted to be an Illuminated or gas filled or fiber optic window sign. Section 5 Section 16.20.220 F - Gesign and 16.22.160 F -Design of the Vail Municipal CodE; are hereby amended to read as follows: 2 r s F. -Design, -All Illuminated, gas filled or fiber optic window signs shall be subject to review by the Design Review Board. Section 6 Section 16.20.220 Paragraph I(4) -Special Provisions of the Vail Municipal Code is hereby amended by the addition of sub paragraph I(4) to read as follows: I(4) - An llluminated, gas filled or fiber optic window s(gn may be used to identify a business which has no other exterior business identification sign. One (1) square foot of sign shall be allowed per each five lineal feet of frontage of the individual business or organization having its own exterior public entrance in a single business use or a multl- tenant building with a maximum of three (3) square feet of sign allowed for a business with Insufficient frontage. A maximum of 10 sq. ft. shall be allowed for one (1) sign. A maximum of one (1) sign per frontage, not to exceed a total of two (2) signs for the business shall be allowed. Section 7 Section 16.22.160 Paragraph I(2) -Special Provisions of the Vail Municipal Code is hereby amended by the addition of paragraph i(2) to read as follows: I(2) An illuminated, gas filled or fiber optic window sign may be used to identify a business which has no other exterior business Identification sign. 2.5 square feet of sign shall be allowed per each five (5) lineal feet of frontage of the individual business or organization having its own exterior entrance in a single business use or a multi-tenant building, with a maximum of five (5) square feet of sign allowed for businesses with insufficient frontage. A maximum of ten (10) square feet shall be allowed for one (1) sign. A maximum of one (1) sign per frontage, not to exceed a total of two (2) signs for the business shall be allowed. Section 8 Section 16.26.010 of the Vail Municipal Code is hereby amended by the addition of Paragraph M to read as follows: Section 16.26.010 - Paraaraph ~ 1. All neon signs. 2. All llluminated, gas filled and,fiber optic signs and a;ccen:~ lighting located on the exterior of any building or structure. 3 3. Illuminated, ga:> filled and fiber optic sign or signs within the interior of the business and snot considered to be a window sign which have a total accumulative square footage greater than ten (10) square feet In size and which can be seen from any public way within the Town. Section 9 Chapter 16.20 is herek?y amended by the addition of Sections 16.20.015 to read as follows: Section 16.20.015 Accent Llghting. Accent Ilghting shall be regulated by the following: A. Purpose. To Illuminate display windows and/or merchandise; B. Location. Subject to the approval of the Design Review Board pursuant to Chapter 16.16 of the Vall Municipal Code. The lighting source of accent Ilghting shall not be visible from any public way as viewed from the exterior of the business and shall be located within the interior of the building. C. Design. Subject to the approval of the Design d~eview Board pursuant to Chapter 16.16 of the Vail Municipal Code. Section 10 Chapter 16.22 is hereby amended by the addition of Section 16.22.014 to read as follows: Section 16.22.014 Accent Llghting. Accent lighting shall be regulated by the following: A. Purpose,. To illuminate display windows and/or merchandisE~; B. Location. Subject to the approval of the Design Review Board pursuant to Chapter 16.16 of the Vall Municipal Code. The lighting source of accent lighting shall not be visible from any public way as viewed from the exterior of the business and shall be located within the interior of the building. C. Design. Subject to the approval of the Design Review Board pursuant to Chapter 16.16 of the Vail IVBu.r.UGlpa1 Gpde. Section 11 Section 16.20.010 - Paragraph. Q ~ ~ M~nlcipal Code by the addition of Sub Paragraph 22 is hereby amended to read as follows: 22. Accent Llghting 4 • Section 12 Section 16.20.Oi0 - Paragraph C of the Vail Municipal Code by the addition of Sub Paragraphs 1(g) and 2(f) is hereby amended to read as follows: 1(g) -Accent Lighting 2(f) -Accent Lighting Section 13 Section 16.22.010 - Paragraph B of the Vail Municipal Code by the addition of Sub Paragraph 18 is hereby amended to read as follows: 18. Accent Lighting Section 14 Section 16.22.010 - Paragraph C of the Vail Municipal Code by the addition of Sub Paragraphs 1(g) and 2(f) is hereby amended to read as follows: 1(g) Accent Lighting 2(f) Accent Lighting Section 15 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. Section 16 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 17 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 r ,r t Section 18 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 ri3vise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 4th day of May, 1993, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the 6th day of July, 1993, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vai! Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town ClE;rk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of , 1993. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town CIE:rk C:~ORD93.5 6 c - ORDINANCE NO. 13 SERIES OF 1993 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PARAGRAPHS 16.32.030(F) AND 16.32.040(A) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, TO PROVIDE FOR THE TERMINATION OF ANY NON-CONFORMING SIGN FIVE YEARS AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF ANY AMENDMENT TO THE SIGN CODE ORDINANCE, AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Vail has enacted an amendment to the Sign Code regulating neon and gas lit signs; and WHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to amend the Sign Code to require that non- conforming neon and gas lit signs shall terminate five (5) years after the effective date of the amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1. Paragraph 16.32.030(F) of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby amended to read as follows: By amortization the right to continue to use oroperate anon-conforming sign shall terminate five (5) years after the effective date of the ordinance codified in the title or any amendment thereto or the annexation of the area in which the sign is located to the Town of Vail. 2. Paragraph 16.32.040(A) of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby amended to read as follows: A) Within a reasonable time after the effective date of the ordinance codified in this title, any amendment thereto, or the effective date of the annexation of any area to the Town, the Sign Code administrator shall compile a list of the existing non-conforming signs and present said list to the Design Review Board at its next regularly scheduled meeting. The Design Review Board may affirm, add to, or delete signs from the list as presented by the Sign Code administrator. After the review of the list of non-conforming signs by the Design Review Board, the Sign Code administrator shall send written notice by regular mail, postage prepaid, to the owner of the non- conforming sign (if know to the Sign Code administrator) and to the owner of property, business interest or enterprise advertised or identified by the non-conforming sign. Within fifteen (15) days from the date of said notice, 1 the owner of the sign or the property, business interest or enterprise advertised or identified by the non-conforming sign may appeal the classification of the sign as non-conforming to the Design Review Board and the Town Council, or he may file an application for a variance. The date of the notice shall be deemed to be the date of its mailing. The Design Review Board may recommend to the Town Council that the application for a variance be granted, and the Town Council may approve the application if it is found that the sign substantially conforms to this title, that it does not adversely affect the character of the neighborhood, and the same would be in the public's interest. If the variance is granted, the sign may continue in existence subject to the provisions of this title, and subject to any conditions that may be made on the approval by the Town Council. If the application is denied, the right to continue anon-conforming sign shall terminate in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. 3. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. 4. The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. 5. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. 6. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are 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 2 repealed. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this _ day of , 1993, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the _ day of , 1993, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of , 1993. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk Q\ORD93.13 3 '1 ORDINANCE NO. 6 SERIES OF 1993 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 12 -STREETS AND SIDEWALKS OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, BY THE ADDITION OF CHAPTER 12.16 -REVOCABLE RIGHT OF WAY PERMITS, AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Vail (the "Town") believes it will benefit the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Town of Vail to regulate the placement of structures such as buildings, landscaping, and fences on public property such as street right-of- ways and sidewalks to assure public access to and safe use of the Town's property. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: I. Title 12 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby amended by the addition of Chapter 12.16 to read as follows: CHAPTER 12.16 -REVOCABLE RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT. Section 12.16.010 -Revocable Riaht of Wav Permit Required A. No person shall erector maintain any building, structure, stand, cart, fence, barrier, post, hedge or other obstruction or encroachment under or upon any street, alley, sidewalk or other public property without first obtaining a permit from the Community Development Department under this Section. B. An applicant for aright-of-way permit shall: 1. File a written application on forms furnished by the Community Development Department that include the following: the date, the name of the applicant, the location of the proposed encroachment or obstruction, the type of encroachment or obstruction, and such other information as the Community Development Department may deem necessary. 2. File a site plan showing the location of the encroachment and how it relates to the public right-of-way and where relevant a survey may be required. 3. With the exception of minor landscaping encroachments, file evidence of adequate public liability insurance naming the Town as 1 t' an additional insured. 4. Pay a fee in the amount of $ If an applicant's encroachment is subject to the terms of Paragraph D hereof, an additional fee of $ sha11 be required. C. Before issuing a right of way permit under this Section, the Comrnunity Development Department shall consult with relevant Town departments which may include the Fire, Police, Public Works Departments, and all public utilities to determine whether the permit meets all the requirements of this Code and other ordinances of the Town. The Comrnunity Development Department shall issue each permit upon a finding that In view of the locat(on or area proposed to be used anci the type of encroachment or obstruction proposed to be carried on, the proposed encroachment or obstruction does not constitute a traffic hazard or destroy or impair the use of the right of way or land by the public or serves a purpose that can not oths~rwise be accomplished and is a temporary obstruction of the right of way. D. For any encroachment, obstruction, or other structure which is (a) recommended by the Town of Vail Streetscape Plan, (b) the Town of Vail Village Master Plan, or (c) the Lionshead Urban Design Guide Plan, or other plans which are a part of the Town's comprehensive plan, the following process shall be utilized for the termination of any revocable right of way permit for such improvement. 1. Prior to installation, the improvement shall be presented to the Town Council at a work session or regular Town Council me~;ting. The Town Council shall establish an amortization schedule piroviding for specific payments to the permittee upon the termination by the Town of the permit. In determining the maximum length of time for the amortization scheduled, the Town Ce~uncil shall use the public interest as a guideline. However, in no Event shall the amortization schedule extend for a period greater than eight (8) years. The amortization schedule shall be based on the hard costs of the improvement, and shall not take into consideration design or labor costs. The costs shall be set after a review bey the Town Council. 2. Should the Town terminate any revocable right of way permit for ar~y improvement set forth in this Paragraph C, the Town shall pay 2 . , the permittee the funds provided therefore in the amortization schedule for the year in which the improvement is terminated. Should the improvement be destroyed or eliminated for any reason other than the Town of Vail's revocation of the permit, the Town shall not be liable for any payment to the permittee. II. Section 12.16.020 -Revocation of Permits A. A permit may be revoked whenever the Town Manager determines that the encroachment, obstruction, or other structure constitutes a nuisance, destroys and impairs the use of the right of way by the public, constitutes a traffic hazard, or the property on which the encroachment, obstruction, or structure exists is required for use by the public; or it may be revoked at any time for any reason deemed sufficient by the Town of Vail. The permittee will remove, at his expense, the encroachment, obstruction, or other structure within ten (10) days after receiving notice of revocation of the permit. B. If a person is notified under sub-section a of this Section and fails to comply with the order to remove the encroachment or obstruction, the Town Manager may cause the encroachment or obstruction to be removed and charge the cost thereof, plus up to fifteen percent (15%} of such cost for administration to the person so notified. If any person fails or refuses to pay when due any charge imposed under this Section, the Town Manager may, in addition to taking other collection remedies, certify due any unpaid charges, including interest, to the Eagle County Treasurer to be levied against the person's property for collection by the County in the same manner as delinquent general taxes upon such property are collected. 111. 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. IV. 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. V. 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 3 ~ 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. VI. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, incan.sistent 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, therE;tofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this -day of , 1993, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the -day of , 1993, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chaimbers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this ~ day of , 1993. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk C:\ORD93.8 4 ORDINANCE NO. 15 SERIES OF 1993 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 15.02.020(A) AND 15.02.020(G) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, TO PROVIDE FOR THE ADOPTION OF CHAPTER 31 OF THE 1993 SUPPLEMENT OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, AND TO PROVIDE FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE 1993 EDITION OF THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE, AND AMENDING SECTION 15.02.030(C) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF VAIL TO PROVIDE FOR THE ADOPTION OF AN ELEVATOR INSPECTION FEE IN THE AMOUNT OF $150.00 FOR EACH ELEVATOR, AND A COMMERCIAL DUMBWAITER INSPECTION FEE IN THE AMOUNT OF $75.00 FOR EACH DUMBWAITER, AND A WILL CALL INSPECTION FEE IN THE AMOUNT OF $3.00 PER PERMIT; AND PROVIDING DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Vail believes it will be a benefit to the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens and visitors to the Town of Vail to provide for commercial inspection of elevators and commercial dumbwaiters, and in order to provide for the cost of such inspection wishes to assess a fee in the amount of $150.00 for elevator inspections and $75.00 for commercial dumbwaiter inspections; and WHEREAS, the Town of Vail believes it necessary to provide for the assessment of a will call inspection fee in the amount of $3.00 per permit to pay for building inspector call services; and WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Vail wishes to update the National Electrical Code by providing for the adoption of the 1993 Edition of Code. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1. Section 15.02.020(G) of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby amended to read as follows: The National Electric Code, 1993 Edition and all appendix chapters thereof is hereby adopted by reference. The National Electric Code, 1993 Edition, is published by the National Fire Protection Association, Batterymarch Park, Quincy, Massachusetts 02269. 2. Section 15.02.030(C) of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby amended to provide for the addition on the Construction Fee Schedule for an elevator, escalator, and moving walkway inspection fee in the amount of $150.00 for each elevator, escalator, or moving walkway; to provide for the addition of a commercial dumbwaiter inspection fee in the amount of $75.00 for each dumbwaiter. 1 3. Section 15.02.030(C) of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is further amended to provide for the addition on the Construction Fee Schedule for a will call inspection fee in the amount of $3.00 for each permit. 4. Section 15.02.020(A) is hereby amended to read as follows: The 1991 Edition of the Uniform Building Code, excepting Chapter 31, and all appendix chapters thereto, excepting Appendix Chapter 12 is hereby adopted by reference. Chapter 31 of the 1993 Supplement of the Uniform Building Code is hereby adopted. The Uniform Building Code, 1991 Edition and 1993 Edition is published by the International Conference of Building Officials, 5360 S. Workman Mill Road, Whittier, California 90601. 5. Section 15.02.030 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby amended by the addition of paragraph D to read as follows: Section 3501(a), first paragraph, is hereby amended to read as follows: In Group R occupancies, wall and floor -ceiling assemblies separating dwelling units or guest rooms from A-1, A-2, A-2.1, and A-3 from each other and from public space such as interior corridors and service areas shall provide airborne sound insulation for walls and both airborne and impact sound insulation for floor - ceiling assemblies. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. 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 2 herein. 9. 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 6th day of July, 1993, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the 3rd day of August, 1993, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 3rd day of August, 1993. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk C:\ORD93.15 3 { ORDINANCE NO. 16 Series of 1993 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REENACTING ORDINANCE NO. 29, SERIES OF 1977, ORDINANCE NO. 33, SERIES OF 1978, AND ORDINANCE NO. 24, SERIES OF 1986; AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 5 AND PROVIDING FOR A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND ITS CONTENTS; PERMITTED, CONDITIONAL AND ACCESSORY USES; DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, RECREATION AMENITIES TAX, AND OTHER SPECIAL PROVISIONS; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code authorizes special development districts within the Town in order to encourage flexibility in the development of land; and WHEREAS, an application has been made for the amendment of Special Development District (SDD) No. 5 for a certain parcel of property within the Town, legally described In the attached Exhibit A, and commonly referred to as the Simba Run/Vall Run Special Development District; and WHEREAS, in accordance w(th Section 18.66.140, the Planning and Environmental Commission, on June 28, 1993, held a public hearing on the amended SDD, and has submitted its recommendation to the Town Council; and WHEREAS, alt notices as required by Section 18.66.080 have been sent to the appropriate parties; and WHEREAS, the Town Council considers that it is reasonable, appropriate, and beneficial to the Town and its citizens, inhabitants, and visitors to amend SDD No. 5; and WHEREAS, application has been made to the Town of Vail to mod(fy and amend certain sections of Special Development District No. 5, which relate to Development Area B, and which make certain changes in the development plan for Special Development District No. 5 as they specifically relate to Development Area B; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has held a public hearing as required by Chapter 18.66 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAIN:Ei) B.Y.; TH,E TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: SECTION 1 The Town Council finds that ail the procedures set forth for Speciai Development Districts in Chapter 18.40 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail have been fully satisfied. Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1993 r SECTION 2 -Purposes. Special Development District No. 5 is established to ensure comprehensive development and use of an area in a manner that will be harmonious with the general character of the Town, provide adequate open space and recreational amenities, and promote the objectives of the Zoning ordinance. The development is regarded as complementary t~~ the Town by the Town Council and the Planning and Environmental Commission, and there are significant aspects of the special development which cannot be satisfied through the imposition of standard zoning districts on the area. SECTION 3 -Special Development District No. 5 Established. (A) Special Development District No. 5 is established for the development on a parcel of land comprising 8.84 acres in the Lionsridge area of the Town; Special Development District No. 5 and said 8.84 acres may be referred to as "SDD No. 5". (B) The existing building {Nall Run) consisting of 55 dwelling units, approximately 18,00 square feet of commercial space, a swimming pool and three tennis courts, shall be known as Development Area A.. The remainder of the property containing approximately 6.3 acres shall be described as Development Area B (Slmba Run and Savoy Vlllas). SECTION 4 -Approval of the Development Plan Required Prior to Development. (A) Before the developer commences site preparation, building construction, or other improvement of open space within SDD No. 5, there shall be an Approved Development Plan for said district. (B) The proposed development plan for SDD No. 5, in accordance with Section 4 hereof, shall be submitted by the developer to the Zoning Administrator who shall refer it to the Planning and Environmental Commission, which shall consider the plan at a regularly scheduled meeting, and a report of the Planing and Environmental Commission stating its findings and recommendations shall be transmitted to the Town Counci! in accordance with the applicable provisions of Section 18.66 of the MuniC~al Code. (C) The Approved Development Plan shall 1?e used as the principal guide for all development within SDD No. 5. (D) Amendments to the Approved Development Plan which do not change its substance and which are fully recommended in a report of the Planning and Environmental Ordinance No. 26, Series of 7993 Y Commission may be approved by the Town Council by Resolution. (E) Each phase of the development shall require the prior approval of the Design Review Board in accordance with the applicable provisions of Chapter 18.54 of the Municipal Code. SECTION 5 -Content of Proposed Development Plan. The Proposed Development Plan shall include, but is not limited to the following data: (A) The Environmental Impact Report which shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator in accordance with Chapter 18.56 hereof. (B) An open space and recreational plan sufficient to meet the demands generated by the development without undue burden on available or proposed public facilities. (C) Existing and proposed contours after grading and site development having contour intervals of not more than two (2) feet. (D) A proposed site plan, at a scale not smaller than 1 inch = 20 feet, showing the locations and dimensions of all buildings and structures, uses therein, and all principal site development features, such as landscaped areas, recreational facilities, pedestrian plazas and walkways, service entries, driveways, and off-street parking and loading areas. (E) A preliminary landscape plan, at a scale not smaller than 1 inch = 20 feet, showing existing landscape features to be retained or removed, and showing proposed landscaping and landscaped site development features, such as outdoor recreational facilities, bicycle paths, trails, pedestrian plazas and walkways, water features, and other elements. (F) Preliminary building elevations, sections, and floor plans, at a scale not smaller than 1/8 inch = 1 foot, in sufficient detail to determine floor area, gross residential floor area, interior circulation, locations of uses within buildings, and the general scale and appearance of the proposed development. (G) A proposed plan of parking, loading, traffic circulation, and transit facilities; and a proposed program for satisfying traffic and transportation needs generated by the development. (H) A volumetric model of the Site and !0'>i•9 proposed development, portraying the scale and relationships of the proposed development to the site illustrating the form and mass of the proposed buildings. (I) An architectural model of each proposed building, at a scale not smaller than 1 OrdlnanCe No. 26, Series of 1993 r inch = 40 feet, portraying design details. (J) A proposed program indicating order and timing of construction phases and phasing of recreational amenities and additional amenities. SECTION 6 -Permitted Conditional and Accessory Uses. (A) In Development .Area A - Vall Run (existing building and recreational facilities), the following uses shall be perrnitted: (1) Multiple family residential dwellings; (2) Accessory retail, restaurant and service establishments not occupying more than 18,OOg square feet including the following: Apparel Stores Art supply stores, and galleries Book stores Camera stores and photographic studios Candy stores Chinaware and glassware stores Specialty food stores Florists Gift stores Hobby stores Jewelry stores Leather goods shores Liquor stores Newsstands and tobacco stores Professional and business offices Sporting goods stores Stationery stores Toy stores Variety stores Barber shops Beauty shops Travel and ticket agencies Ordinance No. 26, Series i>f 1993 Delicatessens with food service Cocktail lounges, taverns and bars Coffee shops Fountains and sandwich shops Restaurants Additional businesses or services determined to be similar to permitted uses. (B) In Development Area B - Simba Run, the following uses shall be permitted: (1) Multiple family residential dwellings which may be condominiumized for sale as interval ownership fee interests and the employee housing units required per Section 18.48.110 which shall be rental units. (C) In Development Areas A and B the following conditional uses shall be permitted, subject to issuance of a Conditional Use Permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60 hereof: (1) Public utility and public service uses; (2) Public buildings, grounds, and facilities; (3) Public or private schools; (4) Public park and recreation facilities; (5) Meeting rooms. (D) In Development Areas A and B the following accessory uses shall be permitted: (1) Indoor and outdoor recreational facilities, including, but not limited to, swimming pools, tennis courts, handball and squash courts and similar recreational facilities. (2) Home occupations, subject to issuance of a Home Occupation Permit in accord with the provisions of Section 18.58.130 hereof. (3) Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional uses, and necessary for the operation thereof. SECTION 7 -Development Standards. The following development standards have been submitted to the Planning and Environmental Commission for its consideration and recommendations and are hereby approved by the Town Council; these standards shall be incorporated in the Approved Development Plan pertinent to each Development Area to protect the integrity of the Ordinance No. 26, Series of 7993 5 development of SDD No. 5; the following are the minimum development standards and sh~rll apply unless more restrictive standards are incorporated in the Approved Development Plan. The standards set forth in this Article shall apply only to Development Area B. Development Area A may be modified providE;d that no such modification shall increase the discrepancy between the structure or site improvements and the development standards set forth in this; Article for Development Area B. (A) Lot Area -Development Area B shall consist of approximately 6.3 acres. (B) Setbacks -The required setbacks shall be as indicated on the Approved Development Plan, being a minimum of 20 feet from any perimeter property line of the total site. (C) Distance Between Buildings -The minimum distances between all buildings on the site shall be as indicated on the Approved Development Plan. - (D) Height -The ma~:imum height of all buildings shall be 45 feet, with the exception of the buildings located in Phase 11 of Development Area B, which shall have a maximum height as indicated on the Approved Development Plan. (E) Density Control -The floor area of all buildings and the number of dwelling units shall not exceed the followring provisions: Development Area B Total SDD No. 5 Maximum gross resideni:ial floor area (sq. ft.) Interval Ownership Units 124,691 197,691 Maximum gross resideni:ial floor area Employee Dwelling Units (sq. ft.) 7,137 Maximum number of dwelling units, not including the employee dwelling units 115 189 (F) Building Bulk Control -Building bulk, maximum wall lengths, maximum dimensions of building groups, and requirements for wall off-sets, shall be as indicated on 'the Approved Development Plan. (G) Site Coverage -Not more than 20 per cent of the Development Area B shall be covered by buildings, with the exception of Phase II of Development Area B, which shall be as designated on the Approved Development Plan. (H) Landscaping and Natural Open Space - A minimum of 60 per cent of Development Area B shall be laindscaped or natural open space in accordance with the Ordinance No. 26, Series <d 1993 Approved Development Plan, with the exception of Phase II of Development Area B, which shall be as designated on the Approved Development Plan. (I) Parking and Loading - (1) Offstreet parking shall be provided in accord with Chapter 18.52 of this ordinance; at least 85 per cent of the required parking shall be located within the main building or buildings, or beneath accessory decks, terraces, plazas, or tennis courts and shall be completely enclosed and screened from view, with the exception of Phase II of Development Area B, which shall be as designated on the Approved Development Plan. (2) No parking or loading area shall be located in any required front setback area or on the south side of any building, and no parking or loading shall be permitted at any time in areas designated for recreation or open space use on the Approved Development Plan. (3) Driveways, passenger loading areas, and parking areas not located within a building shall be permitted only as indicated on the Approved Development Plan. (4) On-site parking shall be provided for common carriers providing charter service to the development; said parking sites shall be indicated on the Approved Development Plan. (J) The Approved Development Plan for Phase II of Development Area B shall consist of the following drawings provided by Morter Architects: • Sheet No. 1, dated June 1, 1993, and revised June 14, 1993 (Landscape Plan) • Sheet No. 2, dated April 12, 1993, and revised May 13, 1993 and June 14, 1993 (Vicinity Plan/Site Section) • Sheet No. 3, dated June 1, 1993, and revised June 14, 1993 and June 15, 1993 (Site Plan) • Sheet No.'s 4, 5 and 6, dated Aril 12, 1993 (Floor Plans for Un(t Types A, B and C) • Sheet No. 7, dated May 13, 1993 (Floor Plans for Employee Housing Building) • Sheet No. 8, dated April 12, 1993 (Elevat(ons for Unit Types A and B) Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1993 7 • Sheet No. 9, dai:ed April 12, 1993, and revised June 1, 1993 (Elevations for Unit Type C) • Sheet No. 10, dated June 1, 1993 (Project Phasing Plan) SECTION 8 -Recreational AmE:nities Tax. The recreational amenities tax due to the development within SDD No. 5, shall be assessed at a rate not to exceeid $0.75 per square foot of floor area and shall be paid in conjunction with construction phases and prior to the issuance of a building permit. SECTION 9 -Special Provisions. (A) Conservation and Pollution Controls. (1) If fireplaces are provided within the development, they must be heat efficient through the use of glass enclosures, and heat circulating devices as technology exists at the time of development. (2) Developer's drainage plan shall include provisions far prevention of pollution from surface run-off. (3) Developer shall include in the building construction in Development ~~rea B energy and water conservation controls as general technology exists at the time ~of construction. (B) A minimum of ten (10) employee dwelling units shall be provided to be leased to employees of Vail F;un or to permanent residents employed in the Gore Valley. The employee dwelling units required herein shall all be two bedroom units of no less than 850 square feet and shall not have fireplaces. The ten ('t0) employee dwelling units shall be maintained as rental units for employees for a period of not less than twenty (20) years. Appropriate covenants, shall be filed of record in the Clerk alt Recorder's Office of Eagle County to insure that the provisions of this Section are complied with. The above shiall not be applicable to Phase II of Development Area E3 which shall consist of four (4) employee dwelling units, and which shall satisfy the requirements of a "Type III EI-IU" according to the Town's adopted housing ordinance (Ordinance 27, Series of 19920. (C) Approval of Subdivision and Interval Ownership -Interval ownership of multfpfe-family dwelling units, with the exception of the required employee dwelling units and the dwelling units in Phase II of Development Area B, Is hereby approved. Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1993 Subdivision of the multiple-family dwelling units (not designated for employee housing) permitted In Development Area B Into interval ownership fee interests shall require no additional approvals from the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission or from the Town Council for the Town of Vail. (D) Recreational Amenities -The Approved Development Plan shall include the following recreational amenities: (1) A minimum of five additional tennis courts (Development Area A presently has three tennis courts with two of them covered during the winter season). Said tennis courts shall be made available to the general public on a fee basis, subject to reasonable regulation in favor of owners or guests of the development. (2) Recreation amenities fund contribution of $10,000 to be used for general recreational improvements by the Town of Vail. (3) Bike and pedestrian path traversing property from east property line of Development Area A to west site line of Development Area B shall be provided by developer with exact location to be mutually acceptable to developer and the Town. (4) Swimming pool (in addition to existing pool in Development Area A) of adequate size to reasonably serve the needs of the development and shall be open to the public on a fee basis subject to reasonable regulation in favor of owners or guests of the development. (E) Additional Amenities - (1) Developer shall provide adequate transportation services to the owners and guests of the development so as to transport them from the development to the Village Core area and the Lionshead area. (2) Developer shall provide in its Approved Development Plan a bus shelter of a design and location mutually agreeable to the developer and the Town Council. Said shelter to serve the Lionsridge area generally. SECTION 10 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, Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1993 regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid. SECTION 11 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 its inhabit~~nts thereof. SECTION 12 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 imposE:d, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed) or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provisions or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless stated herein. INTRODUCED, I~EAD ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDEREC) PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL, this day of , 1993. A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held at i:he regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, on the day of , 1993, in the Municipal Building of the Town. Mayor Attest: Town Clerk Ordinance No. 26, Serles of 1993 10 INTRODUCED, READ, ADOPTED AND ENACTED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED (IN FULL) (BY TITLE ONLY) THIS DAY OF , 1993. Mayor Attest: Town Clerk Ordinance No. 26, Serles of 1993 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development DATE: June 28, 1993 (Revised June 29, 1993) -All revisions In bold SUBJECT: A request for a major amendment to SDD #5 to allow for the development of the remaining portion of the Simba Run SDD, Savoy Villas, located at 1100 North Frontage Road and described as follows: That part of the Flrst Supplemental Map for Simba Run Condominium, according to the map thereof recorded in the office of the Eagle County, Cobrado, Clerk and Recorder, described as folbws: Beginning at the most southwestery corner of said map, thence the folbwing three courses abng the westerly lines of said map; 1) N03°33'01"E 160.79 feet; 2) N12°50'33"E 144.72 feet; 3) N17°56'03' 70.60 feet; thence, departing said westerly line, S13°16'03"VN 157.26 feet, thence S76°43'57"E 91.50 feet; thence N13°16'03'E 35.00 feet; thence S76°43'STE 72.31 feet to the easterly Gne of said map; thence the folbwing two courses abng the easterly and southeasterly lines of said map; 1) S24°44'5TE 52.38 feet; 2) S52°50'29"W 272.50 feet to the Point of Beginning, containing 0.6134 acres, more or less; and That pan of Simba Run, according to the map thereof, recorded in Book 312 at Page 763 in the Office of the Eagle County, Cobrado, Clerk and Recorder, described as follows: Beginning at the most southerly corner of said Simba Run, thence the folbwing four courses abng the southwesterly and northwesterly lines of said Simba Run; 1) N37°09'31"W 233.28 feet; 2) 334.57 teat along the arc of a curve to the left, having a radius of 1771.95 fast, a central angle of 10°49'06", and a chord that bears N42°13'20"E 334.07 feet; 3) N36°48'48" E 201.36 feet; 4) 15.96 feet abng the arc of a curve to the right, having a radius of 428.02 feet, a central angle of 02°08'12", and a chord that bears N37°52'54" E 15.96 feet to a corner on the westerly boundary of the First Supplemental Map for Simba Run Corxiominium, according to the map thereof recorded in the office of the Eagle County, Cobrado, Clerk and Recorder; thence the folbwing four courses abng said westerly boundary; 1) S21°51'28"W 69.90 feet; 2) S17°56'03"W 181.17 feet; 3) S12°50'33"W 144.72 fast; 4) S03°33'O1"W 160.79 feet to the southeasterly line of said Simba Run; thence, abng said southeasterly Gne, S52°50'29"W 113.08 feet to the Point of Beginning, containing 1.560 acres, more or less. Applicant: Simba Land Corporation/VNalid Said Planner: Mike Mollica .;;5?~^•.~Y:Y...,•:::.,:f?.., r t•'.J?:??y..v:,:.b :f: Fryr frtan~yfFfa• rrw~f'..:Y'+; ~ j<o:9y,?{,.t.: ::fir?r.::::::: :rr.: •x:r.•::rr r:::: , /r.~ffY ff tN•~f: o < r r~ tta?"v.....y::.Yw::::;.:.r:;:. ~ .:......r ~r:?:-:;:'::y,: r v { t?'. :1{:.~: :r::::::.?:: r::f::...:..1....,:•...:.?~.v.:•f.•r::x:::.::, ...•..n. .::x:::.. ..:......w.::::x.w::,.~::?/:..:..?.,.....::n.n......x.n.....;r:.:.1?X: u:?x::: :u...:.. m::::f.vr..: ?.•rfr,:.A:. :•w:;; n . f............::: ~_::.::::v :i::4::::v::: L': v. . •v•::i::::... w :•.....::~v ::::.............iiii^ifi: Y: i:4iiii:.iiii:0':.: ~........:::::::::::::::.:~n~r: ~ry:.YVi: v. fi ~v-.~ . n.... ~:::::::::.:~xru:::..:...,• x~:::::::::n:i:. fi:.:..:::: ~.::.ii:CLLLyi:?.ipi?4ii:::::x:::::::: iii:•: i:•iiiii::i:4:'!::: v.:::. y.....: fv:.; v: v. ..............x: ~ n................... n.Y.:::.r.:.:; fv:::?::::....... fi::: ii}: is iiii:•ii:4:x::~r.frx:::r•rfi....:.:xn:..:..:1.^:'.~iiii: iv: .xx:::.•::: ~ n:.:.+eu:rnvny.•...~ rw.airir:i. xxrx:f:. .:yi: ~ ? _:"•:v~::a'.: ,::..:ur.:.. :::f.tttW/.Ci%4„E?.2+• St•l~lf%.1GXLlu?.'Cf/%t:.::.:.:!fdiY,'. I. PROJECT INTRODUCTION The property owner and applicant, Simba Land Corporation, is requesting a major SDD amendment for the remaining phase of Special Development District #5 (Simba RunNail Run). The property is located at 1100 North Frontage Road and is bounded by the Timber Ridge Apartments to the west, the North Frontage Road and Interstate 70 to the south, Phase I of Simba Run to the east and Lionsridge Loop Road to the north. 1 r Ordinance #6, Series of 1976, originally established SDD #5 and set the parameters for the development of the Vail Run Building. Ordinance #29, Series of 1977, amended SDD #5. This amendment expanded the SDD with the addition of 6.3 acres immediately to the west of Vail Run and in addition, divided the SDD into what is now known as Development Area A (Vail Runj and Development Area B (Simba Run). The development standards for both areas were specifically stipulated in this ordinance. SDD #5 was further modified by the passages of Ordinance #33, Series of 1978, and Ordinance #24, Series of 1986. II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REGIUEST The proposed development plan for the final phase of Development Area B, in SDD #5, consists of nineteen condominiums and four deed-restricted employee housing units. The development plan calls for one three-unit townhouse building to be located on the southern portion of the property, with vehicular access taken from the existing Simba Run curb-cut off of the North Frontage Road. The northem development of the property would take access from Lionsridge Loop and would consist of four, four-unit condominium buildings and one, four-unit employee housing building. Two curb cuts are proposed off of Lionsridge Loop. On the northem bench of this sate, each condominium is proposed to have aone-car garage, and on the lower, or southern part of this site, each condominium would have atwo-car garage. This final phase of the SDD will be part of the existing Simba Run Condominium Association, and as such, will have access to all of the existing recreational amenities located in the existing Simba Run project. These recreational amenities include three outdoor tennis courts, two indoor racquetball courts and one indoor swimming pool. Vail Run has its own outdoor swimming pool and two indoor i:ennis courts. This project site is located within a high severity rockfall-geologic hazard zone. The applicant's consulting geologist, Nicholas Lampiris, has completed three geologic investigations for the property. The original study is dated April 18, 1993, with updates of i.he study completed on May 18, 1993 and June 18, 1993, and all three are attached to this memorandum. The SDD departs from the approved development standards in the following areas: •slte coverage •enclosed parking •landscaping •helght Since the initial PEC work session on May 10, 1993, the applicant has modified the proposal in the following areas: •Due to legal questions regarding the allowable uses on the "easement area", the townhouses proposed for the lower bench of the project have been shifted to the west so that they are completely within the boundaries of the final phase property. In order to accomplish this, the applicant has eliminated one of the originally proposed four townhouses. Three units are now proposed in this area. •Vehicular access to the lower bench is now proposed from the existing Simba Run curb-cut. •For safety reasons, the existing Town bikepath would be relocated to the south, to the area where the property line crosses the Simba Run vehicular curb-cut. •Additional landscaping and berming has been added throughout the site. •A pedestrian path has been added between Phases I and II on the upper bench. This path will allow pedestrian access from the upper bench to the lower bench, and to the existing Simba Run recreational facilities and shuttle van parking to the east. 3 III. ZONING ANALYSIS Listed below is the zoning analysis for DevefoDment Area B, located in SDD #5 (Phase I includes the two existing Simba Run buildings). Please note that SDD #5 has no underlying zoning, as it was annexed into the Town in December of 1975 and the original SDD was established during March of 1976. REMAINING DEV. APPROVED DEV. PHASE I POTENTIAL AFTER PHASE II TOTAL STANDARDS DEV. AREA B PHASE 1 CONST. DEV. AREA B DEV. AREA B Site Area: 6.3 acres/274,428 sq. ft. 4.7 acres/204,732 sq. ft. 1.6 acres 1.8 scros/89,896 sq. it. 6.3 acres Setbacks: 20' -all perimeter 20' - aN perimeter N/A 20' -all perimeter N/A property lines property lines Property Ilnes Height: 45' 20- 60' N/A 25 - 49' N/A GRFA: 129,000 sq. ft. - DU's 90,807 sq. ft. 38,193 sq. ft. 32,282 sq. K 123,089 sq. ft. - OU's 10.000 sq. ft. - EHU's 4.601 sa. ft. 5.399 sq. ft. 2.536 aq. ft. 7.137 sq. ft. - EHU's 139,000 sq. ft. 95,408 sq. it. 43,592 sq. ft. 34,818 aq. it. 130,226 sq. it. Units: 139 95 44 19 114 Employee Dwelling Units: 10 (min.) 6 4 4 10 "Site Coverage: 54,886 sq. R. (209`x) 65,089 sq. ft. (32%) <10,203 sq. ft.> *17,846 sq. 1t. (26%) '82,935 sq. ft. (309'x) "Landscaping: 164,657 sq. ft. (60%) "'110,772 sq. ft. (54%) N/A 32,924 aq. it. (47%) "'143,696 sq. ft. (52%) "Parking: 85% enclosed 128 enclosed (95%) NIA 22 enclosed (SO%) 150 enclosed (84%) (of required parking) 6 surface 26 surface 28 surface 134 48 (44 spaces are roqulrsd). 178 (182 spaces are proposed) Commerclal Area: -0- -0- N!A "0' -0- ' Includes 1,292 square feet of Timber Ridge's eastern-most building. " The p..,r,.~ed project departs from these approved development standards. Includes 5,530 square feet of landscaping which would be removed fnxn the Phase I property to accommodate the driveway to the lower bench development of Phase 11. 4 - IV. CRITERIA TO BE USED IN EVALUATING THIS PROPOSAL As stated in the zoning code, the purpose of special development districts is to: encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land in order to promote its most appropriate use; to improve the design character and quality of new development within the town; to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of streets and utilities; to preserve the natural and scenic features of open space areas; and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail Comprehensive Plan. An approved development plan for a special development district, in conjunction with a property's underlying zone district, shall establish the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included in the special development district." The following are the nine special development district cxiteria to be utilized by the Planning and Environmental Commission when evaluating SDD proposals: A. Design compattblllty and sensltlvtty to the Immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, Identity, character, visual Integrity and orientation. The original design plan for the final phase of the Simba Run development proposed one large building on this Phase II site. This building was designed to be similar to the existing Simba buildings located immediately to the east. These buildings are approximately 260 feet in length and approximately 50 feet in width. The project was designed to take access off of Lionsridge Loop (one curb cut) with a fairly large surface parking area, as well as one level of underground (structured) parking. The current proposal before the PEC suggests a series of six smaller buildings. Access is divided between the North Frontage Road and Lionsridge Loop, and the parking for the project is almost equally divided between enclosed parking and surface parking. Architecturally, the design is very similar to that of the, existing Simba Run project, although smaller in scale. The four condominium buildings proposed on the northern or upper bench of this site, are in keeping with the multi-family character of the neighborhood, with each building consisting of four dwelling units. The employee building to the east also consists of four dwelling units.. The lower bench of this site is designed to accommodate three attached townhomes, also meeting the multi-family definition. The staff believes that the applicant has done a reasonable job with the overall site planning of the project to insure the project meets this criterion. We feel that the mass of the proposed buildings creates a transition from the existing Simba Run buildings to the east, which are upwards of 60 feet in height, and the existing Timber Ridge buildings to the west, which are approximately 30 feet in height. The approved development standard for building height within SDD #5 Is 45 feet. The staff does recognize that three of the units which are proposed to be located on the 5 upper bench of the development would exceed 45 feet. Specifically, the three J eastern-most units on the upper bench would exceed the maximum height. The proposed heights woulld range from 46 feet to 49 feet. It should be noted that; the maximum bulldtng heights were measured from existing grade, which happens to be the more restrictive than the final grades. The final grades for the project, would put the ridge heights at approximately 44 feet. It should also 6~e noted that the previously approved building for this site had a bulldtng height of approximately 60 feet a>rt some points. B. Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. It is the staff's position that the proposed residential use on the site is compatible with the existing uses on surrounding properties. The proposed density (numbers of units) is also compatible with aidjacent properties and would be in conformance with the Hligh Density Residential identification that the Town of Vail Land Use Plan has placed on this property. The proposal meets the technical definition of amulti-family project. We also believe it is positive that four employee housing units are incorporated into the development. The staff would also like to point out that with the approval and construction of this final phase of the Simba Run project, Development Area B would be under the approveKi density (number of units) and GRFA. The project would be under the approved density by twenty-five duelling units, and under the maximum allowable GRFA (DU"s and EHU's) by 8,774 square feet. The staff feels that it is not sound planning to le~~ve this type of remaining density on the books without an approved development plan. For this reason, staff is recommending that should this final development proposal k~e approved, that the remaining number of dwelling units and GRFA be reduced to zero for the entire Development Area B. C. Compliance with the parking and loading requirements as outlined In Chapter 18.52. The Town's parking requirements indicate that a total of 44 parking spaces are required for this Phase II site. The applicant has proposed a total of 48 parking spaces for the project. The ratio of enclosed versus surface parking spaces for this Phase is approximately .a fifty-fifty split, although the overall enclosed parking percentage for the entire Development Area B is 84%, which is less than the re~quir~ed 85%. Please see the Zoning Analysis on Page 3 of this memorandum for the speciific numbers. Each individual phase of this project has been designed to meet the Town's parlang requirements. 6 D. Conformity with applicable elements of the Vall Comprehensive Plan, Town policies and Urban Design Plans. 1. The Town of Vail Land Use Plan identifies this area as High Density Residential (HDR). High Density Residential is defined in the Land Use Plan as follows: "The housing in this category would typically consist of multi-floored structures with densities exceeding fifteen dwelling units per buildable acre. Other activities in this category would include private recreational facilities, and private parking facilities and institutional/public uses such as churches, fire stations and parks and open space facilities." The proposed plan for the final phase of Simba Run would set the overall density for Development Area B at 19.7 dwelling units/acre. This figure includes the employee housing units. 2. The following are the applicable Land Use Plan goals and policies which relate to this proposal: Goal 1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and permanent resident. Goal 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). Goal 5.1 Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. Goal 5.3 Affordable employee housing should be made available through private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the Town of Vail, with appropriate restrictions. Goal 5.4 Residential growth should keep pace with the market place demands for a full range of housing types. Goal 5.5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and upgraded. Additional employee housing needs should be accommodated at varied sites throughout the community. The staff believes the project is in compliance with the Town's Land Use Plan. 7 E. Identiftcatton and mlttgatlon of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district Is proposed. This project site is located within a high severity rockfall hazard zone. The applicant's geologist, Nicholas Lam~piris, has reviewed the proposed site plan and has agreed ghat the berming along Lionsridge Loop Road (south side), combined with internal mitig~ition for the two eastern-most buildings, is sufficient to mitigate the rockfall hazard. Please see the attached letters from Nicholas Lampiris at the end of this memorandum. F. Site plan, bulldtng design and location and open space provlstons designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. The staff believes that the applicant has been responsive to the PEC's suggestions regarding minor modifications to the site plan. We believe that the changes made to the building locations have resulted in maintaining adequate distances between the Phase II project and the existing Simba Run building. The project would continue t~~ exceed the 20% maximum site coverage for the entire Development Area B, however, the staff believes that the overall site planning for the project is acceptable and that the proposed 30% site coverage is reasonable given the approved density. All of the building locations have been sited to take advantage of views both to the east and 'to the west. The site plan has also been modified to accommodate the needs of the \/ail Fire Department. Since the original PEC vvorksession, the applicant has modified the upper bench of the development and has eliminated all parking within the required 20-foot front setback area. One of the three proposed curb cuts off of Lionsridge Loop has also been eliminated. The staff believes that all of these changes are positive changes and result in a higher quality project which will further enhance its compatibility with the immediate neighborhood. G. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. Site PlanNehicular Access (CDOT access permit). Access to the lower bench of this site, to the three "townhouse-type" units, is proposed via the existing Simba Run curb-cut off of the North Frontage Road. Access to the units on the northern or upper bench of this site is designed as a series of two curb cuts off of Lionsridge Loop Road. Due to the change in use, a Colorado Department of Transportation access; permit will be required before a building permit can be released for the three units that take access off the North Frontage Road. Future Simba Underpass. As discussed in the recently adopted Vail Transportation Master Plan, the construction of an I-70 underpass in the vicinity of Simba Run, is proposed as a first priority 8 recommendation for both the West Vail interchange and the Main Vail interchange improvements. The underpass would be constructed immediately opposite the lower bench development. To accommodate the underpass, it would be necessary to lower the North Frontage Road approximately 13 to 15 feet in this area. The applicant has submitted a regrading plan which indicates the regrading which would be necessary to accommodate. the future I-70 underpass. It appears that the applicant's proposed design would not be in conflict with the future underpass, and the Town Engineer has approved the access and regrading plans. Pedestrian Access. The staff has requested that the applicant pursue the possibility of locating a public pedestrian path through the property so that pedestrian access can be maintained from the Lionsridge Loop area down to the North Frontage Road. We believe that this pedestrian access would become even more critical should the proposed Simba underpass be constructed. The applicant has agreed that such a public easement through the property would make good planning sense, however, the applicant is concerned about the potential liability and maintenance issues surrounding a public pedestrian path. The applicant has agreed to consider adding a pedestrian connection through the property should the Town Attorney be able to provide them with a level of comfort regarding the liability concerns. H. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space to order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions. At the suggestion of the Planning and Environmental Commission, the applicant has modified the proposed landscaping plan to include larger evergreen trees (12 - 15 feet in height) at the base of the upper development area. Additional landscaping has been provided throughout the site, however, the project as a whole (for the entire Development Area B) does not meet the required 60% minimum landscaped area. The staff has thoroughly reviewed the applicant's proposed landscape plan for the project, and we feel comfortable with the proposed 52% total landscaped area for the entire Development Area B. The staff would point out that given the density of this site, the property could be compared with the standard HDMF zoning, which would require a minimum of 30% landscaped area. Overall, staff believes that the landscaping plan generally provides adequate screening and green space throughout the site. We would recommend, however, that the applicant consider additional screen plantings in the berm along Lion's Ridge Loop Road. For safety reasons, the existing recreation/bike path has been realigned so that it crosses the vehicular access to the lower development area at the driveway's intersection with the property line. 9 I. Phasing plan or :subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functton,al and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development dls~trlct. Since the initial PEC workk session, the applicant has modified the project's phasing plan. Phase I would now consist of the two condominium buildings located on the northwest comer of the site. This would consist of a total of eight dwelling units. Phase II would include ttie remaining two buildings in the upper development area and the employee building. T'he final phase of the project would consist of the three townhomes located on the lower bench of the property. The staff believes that the applicant's modifications 'to the phasing plan are now acceptable. V. STAFF RECOMMENDA1nON The staff is recommending appn~val of the applicant's request for a major modification to Special Development District No. 5. We believe that the modifications which have been made to the project, since the initial PEC work session, have brought the project into compliance with the nine Special Development District review criteria listed in this memorandum. With regard to the development ;standards as indicated in the Zoning Analysis section of thi;~ memorandum, the staff does acNcnowledge that the project is over on site coverage and bullding height and is under on the required enclosed parking percentage and minimum landscaping percentage. With regard to site coverage, the Phase I development on this sitE3 (the existing Simba Run buildings) has already exceeded the 20% maximum site coverage Iby 12%, or 10,203 square feet. We. think that the total site coverage proposed, 30%, is reasonable given the high density residential nature of this project. As a point of comparison, should this property have been ~:oned High Density Multi-Family, the maximum allowable sii:e coverage, according to current Town of Vail zoning, would be 55%. The staff finds that the proposed 30% site coverage anti the overall site plan design is reasonable. We also belle~re that the proposed bullding heights are reasonable given the existing grades on the site and given the height of the Slrnba Run Phase I buildings. Although the applicant has not met the required 85% enclosed parking percentage for the entire Development Area B, the ;staff does find that the applicant has designed the project rnrith all of the surface parking located on the north side of the buildings, and that the proposed 82% enclosed parking is reasonable. Again, we would point out that if the property had beE;n zoned High Density Multi-Family, the required enclosed parking percentage would be 75%. As indicated in Section IV, H, of this staff memorandum, the applicant has not met the required 60% minimum IandscaF?e percentage for the entire Development Area B. After careful analysis of the proposed landscaping plan for the property, the staff believes that thE3 overall site planning and landscaping plan for this site is reasonable. We would also point out that if the property had been zoned High Density Multi-Family, which would be consistent wlith the density on this site, the required landscaping percentage would be 30%. In summary, the staff is recommending approval with the understanding that the applicant agrees with the following conditions, and we believe the project substantially complies with 1:he nine SDD review criteria as indicated in this memorandum. The conditions are as follows: 10 y 1. The Town shall not issue a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for any of the Phase II condominiums until such time as TCO's have been issued for all four units in the employee housing building. 2. The applicant agrees that if the liability issues concerning the construction and maintenance of a public pedestrian path/easement through the property can be resolved with the Town Attorney, the applicant shall construct a pedestrian path and grant a public access easement to the Town of Vail. 3. A Colorado Department of Transportation access permit shall be granted prior to the issuance of any building or grading permits for the lower bench of the development (three townhomes). 4. The applicant agrees to permanently restrict the four employee housing units as "Type III" EHU's, according to the Town's adopted housing ordinance. 5. That the applicant add additional screen plantings in the berm along Lion's Ridge Loop Road, and also between the North Frontage Road and the bike path, subject to the review and approval of the Design Review Board. In addition to the above, the staff recommendation for approval is contingent upon the applicant agreeing to reduce the remaining density (number of units and GRFA) for the entire Development Area B to zero. If this current development proposal is approved, the staff believes that it is not appropriate to allow excess development rights to exist for this property, without an approved development plan. c:\pec\memos\si m ba.629 11 4 i O d r ~ ` _ _ ~ ~ ci / y~or+~•? Iii ti ~ ; ~ ~ • ~ ~Cw O 7 + ~ N N ~ ~ " ' ` ~ e.+. ~ p - ~ te"""a) ~ r p \ yne M _rn+r ~ +Q A - ' ' ~ ~ I rs~` .,,r ~ +1 1-- "`~-c.J M ~r-TH b _ _ J s ?w+? NoK ~ j J , - • ?e V~r«ar~R9r- 0~ ~ X41 0 ~ 1'~"~.1 ~ ~ S ~ { D ; _ r \ ~ / / ~ ~r. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ V , ~ ~ ~ o - ~-.,..w ....~.,s ~ av ~M~~~ _ • / ~S O /0 O i r...~ .sa ~ ~*..r*~ tin . r uu~tni. b~ ~ j O~~ ~ ~ _ .rte ~ SITE rP~r''tAN f---' (11 `5rfi ~-iir~.* r~r~ar~ r~w.~ ~.r +r. ~r i ~ ~ ~ • ~ K 1 a+~I+,~tia'F ~0~~ 1 ~ k"?'~`F ~ Co r 1 ,gyp/~'~~ ~ e 'y-~.,- M ~ • R 1 1 ~ yl~ r~ 1 \ N~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ . ~ t~' .r ? w ~ ~ > r - . ~ N - L. / \ \O ~ ~ o • 1 ~..n . wrr rTn. y,, ~ ~ ~ y,~.? t~ r ~ _ _ - ~ ~ : j S1TE P .A~ w» j~ ~ Y _ O' --1 Noµ-73r FrorlTf.tiG a=~~ ~ . ~ ~ , i. s 4 A ~ b..~ ~ _ ~ .L _ r- eacsrk e~owH r Q ~ . ~..eri .~-•H ~I. ~ _ W D ~p lrM~4 M' 4~+'~4 ~Or f:ZM1 N'r~) r I_ ~ h ~ S o ~ - N ,s.d 1 V.. s• r• O hwr?r . r Mrra.. ~ 0 ~~.a. ti +~W q'd a~•v r ~ V O .y g I I ~ Na \ ~ ~ / . L.~n.w r..H C..Hw . ~ ~ ~ ~•m . i.r"' I D!C? I I' ~ ~ ~ 9uuNb w~ r f'bN r-{ L F ~l~• 4 I vr• 1'•a UNIT TYPE_.'A' ~ LL..~ .1 / .•ir ~i'4 1 I I Q. ~ - h..~« ~ O • ~ ..~..a, ~ G i ~ I 0 • ~.a,.~ 1_f W _.,oaer.a~ I r 0~~ wo m,N+.a NI 4w~~~' MRnI Cnvnl 3 ? f _ ' Is' ~ r ~ v N I o I ~ wov. Q Il u~ o[ ~ 0 i Y~ i ~ 0 ~A.. ~ O Gc ~ ` i / ~ NWM _ I V/ t «.~ww ~t IHI I r_.. y fi«~„e,. r.,„ t W~~ ~~•d yv~w. >w • 6 ISM- I'~o~ ._ri I~ ~ Y y UNIT TYPE 'B' ~ ; If it ~ I! 11 ~~_o I r 4 O ~ j _ ~ I__I LJ I r ~ ~ 1.4? VI+M ~ ~ j ~ I o.... - I ~ ~ r o ( ) I _ x J r_~___~ V ~ 1 ~ H=wsN. rwca ? ~MMM G 4L9 l + I, ~V J~ F R y Y ~ s O LJ ~ G~ O ~ ~ ~ ~~1_I- Ito ~ i o PMS14 W W f. O ~ U F --7 ~(/Q~ ~ reer...~ I ~ v/ ~ s ~ 2 ' _ _ t' - z I I I I CYh _ N !f~' ~evV sV ~ e'. n's• R'~ a'J •.~1 s•...~. ri ~ I 1c)LrY 7; t» _ 4,_., ~ ~ . 1-~~cfF~+- LEV6L_~V,,,,777_~{_ ~ - M.~-IN . L~VEI.. 1'L/~i~.__.. 6 UNIT TYPE'C' ! 4 ~r ~ _ j. ~ _ GV ~~t`~'na T~ O ttJ . K. ~v i ' ~""r , 1 ~ ~ ~ f _.r~ . nJ i - i~ ~....,1 ~ - I.IL.~ ~ _ : . NoP-~++~ ~~~.vr~.Yior-~ _ . ~ ~ • __i., - - ~ ~ ~ ` ~ ~ , I I o _ ~ E _ ~ . - n n n r~ l -~~•s-r- EL~w~rlol--l UNIT TYPE 'C' i ~ ~ ` ®I I ~ ~ ~ _ I C ~ ~ I- ~ ~ W~~1" sGL~l.~vrlol.l - ~.,o~trJ•F ELE~.f•.Tloh! ~ ~ 0 . E9 ~f~U moo= ~ ~ N I ~ _ ~ ~ L ~ _ F-------- ~ - - - - -1 ~ i»s C.sST e~:.~w.TION ~JoPtl+ EL~u~Tlot-1 ~n .v I ' - _ Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D. CONSULTING GEOLOGIST rt`C~~U ~ ~ ' P.O. BOX 2 ~`L SILT, COLORADO 81652 (303) 876-5400 (24 HOURS) June 18, 1993 Sally Brainerd Morter Architects 143 East Meadow Drive Crossroads at Vail Vail, CO 81657 RE: Savoy Vi 11 as (p //~~~~.'.4~•~ ~ Dear Sally: I have reviewed the site plan which you have recently sent, as per our discussions, for mitigation of the rock fall hazard at the site. You have addressed my concerns very well and only some of the garage areas remain somewhat unprotected. With the berms in place as you have defined them, very few rocE:s can reach the units, and, because the fronts of most of those units are in the form of garages, I am not concerned that damage - can occur to living quarters. If there are still questions contact me. , Si ncerel y,~ ~ ' f~~, Nicholas Lakfpiris Consulting Geologist I i,~•~ i G+~ ~ Jai - J i S? k~tJE:~ Vie. `.~r~i,~1J? S! 1. E r• E 4.._ - .i,• 1, • 1 ` . ' . Nicholu~ (_ampiri~, Ph.~J. CONS;ILIrtQli :'yeot.octsr 8135 :NC:EI-t~t.~l~ v>Nr_ SILT, GClCRA1~C~ C1G`.~2 flay 1~3, iq~~ 5ia.x Z y L'rai n~r-a t~tGrt~r F~r~~ilit~[~`5 ~.c~SC t"~f~w!~al~t XJY•1 V5? Cr-asf~ra€~c1a at Vr'ti X Vaii, L'Q ~1~~7 tY\i: w ~c~'JQ'~ {1L X 1 ~ z J. tlc`c'?t? t"~'tVi.E3k'r'E~~ tl1F]' "_;1~~ Fl,~-.t} y~tl~C~1 'y'GL.I iii`?f' Y"~yG[`rtZ~~ 53r-It. a^3 ~t°i` f?t.lt' r~~:"C:c.i;~;~.XC~iI':~f 1~C]t' rP.ii:1~7c:~,'CXi~;1 Cf ltht? 1-~:st~l< 'r`a1Z fl?~x~.r[i 3~'C ~tif~ a2 +;E.a. 1`{1Li 1'}r.~,Y:, ct[~ ~t'._S`=~C1 lily' i:~:!"IG''C'fli:. Vi:f"?/ i:s::'Z r. t~ul_ ,_il>.[ C; ;!,r'ra ~ti; l ri c~:uNic; o~ ~_hargt~~ rr ~cidi,'cian<~ which ~tlt~t.flr.1 tie t~CCi;'pQC"~t~C~!~. (%~a'i.;1 i:ilE~ tl~i'`;~; 1r1 ~'t~:r-rt r;~r ;'r]Lt }1.;tV" Ii^y'~'lllr:?ti ~l:?iT1y VE°r'~ f'£2i~ t`CCit[3 ('G~fl r~.z[:fl i:i1G} t•, ..F%~::.'t~i3 'i'G'..ii'' tJtl~t;~, r,':ilt{t j~ C,,-.ti,arQ L'rltr' ~'r't:il1~~,~ Qf Ci)'~~° ui)i'k~: nr'i~ ill tt;° fL~r'm of c~~rr7~}~t,;, I ~7.1h nC71; r{~rlrc:rr,:) t:hu~t~ (;~)".=.C;7 `;t?.I7 QC•'[r't.lt' 1_':J ~1Ya[;t~ t`#1"t `?1"~~i'~. Trt:_ fi~f5%~t"'!'ir~l7'i'd'. x:11+r:.y tipt~r?'ti'•'~C'~ l"~lerl"t3 r'CJCr=: Tr?.j i }'IaZ~c:~n(~IJ^.~ c~t~:~ Z": ;ii~s :i~'i'e:''['S liM~ ill ~C:JI'¢t."I" Ll~~r•rn artf~ I~t.~ ~u.r`~~gr:: h~~ pt-11c.;:.{{r~~::{: z ivin~:~ yu~t'~€ar:~, t-zl~'r ~Srcr~, Y end a thrc~G f~uclfi hAt-:It :`'CfYl;l :'lty..t1 t;171 f:F):' !tC?'"~i? ;^~;?~2 1~•'ilt,C"il A'}1[,Lt~~ ~"lc*;V;~ r, F~~.t't?rlt~t',tl t':` ~T.ryf.) ~li:tjri:.:~; ~li?1' .:;i.~i..(:..~ ~;1' +'.:CiY, "i;t.j :'i'.l~;.j s •c r . n .j ~.~:a + i tJ } : } is t : i i. ~•~`1E?i"r? I:3 ~i"E'tr: 1r1 C. i1 f:' iJi.'r"i!f ~Yl i'i`t?f'1'~ i~'. :1::,3 ri:_.... '.ri1.. ;J t.i;f-~ w~>st ~or• -~r-i. v~~'r~.y :~c:;::~t~s. ~i"„~~ ..;1~~~.',.,_a! js ' ~ Lrr}i i:. L:i'S1' C'fl ~ SR 1'2C)T t]~tf'~~ri~ 8:+"1rJu) i.t t7~w wlly? ....=rY:S. S~r"6nt~i:Cl 4ti'ra.l.: i:.~~ -ti.I~IY'rc:la, r~cy~=T:. T•i Vii: ~:'F'rs u',rc? 5s~i ~ 4~U~~~~ t.']ii±; Cl~ilf:c"tC:C tl'i+~. / ~ -t idiC.:~oIaS :_ramp ray. ' !:on5u2 ti nr CeaZ a~ai sir " Nicholas Lampiris, Ph.D. CONSULTING GEOLOGIST ~ 0185 INGERSOLL LANE SILT, COLORADO 81652 (303) 87Cr5400 (24 HOURS) . ~~;~r.9.1 ia, 199 ~ . S;al 7. y Far-~ai nerd : _ l~lrJrtc~~r- ~-lrrhi tcact~~: l t~ as t h`!r~! ad G1 iw I~I•- i ~f e ' ~;r-c~s>~~rc~4 rig, <:rt V~t:i I Vai 1 ; CCU i31f~~7 Deg:ir J•.Ally: !"t?',Ike !-f~YiG'lwf^d tl'le ~sltC~?' Q•~' tllC' 1^e'fer'(~nc(zd (.]rC3,~er:t' c1L~ S1lL~rwn []n t!-„~ ,~,c~_r._rrnpanyi.r'rg m~::;;a liar ~a(..(r{~~a~~~; o-F F',~acl`•: 1~•":~11 , rA''ri.o~w '{~or the '!":~iwrr ll~a.i 7.. '1"17k-a nL7rtP'I(~rn 'FoL(r L(ni.t~ G~rc~ w:i't:h9.n th~~ !-lirjl-: C;c(_k:•{'all 'I.onW= ci~._(e t:o •L-h~ c~L.ltcropping o-F ~~;nds;~tnnk-~ on thca ot.h-ier- r.,a, t:ir:• ref 'l:hc~ L_.:i r~r~l ' ~~i cicae Loop. 1`he sf~e.onrJ i:ir-.•.r o•f Lrni. t~ i s nr_~t i;r l~.hc~ h:~~~:Irci ~c:rnc='„ "I_Iri? :i.?', i. r7 ~1 lt~r_::rttir.,n tahnrr thc: .'°idc.:]r_, sari':~l.nlr'rc;I 'l:h ~>e3~.(rr..c~ ai' rr'' t::l t: i-t 1 :-i .L cA l 3.1-; C.I r. f7 i y 1. `t:e ~ l (7 iw V l i'2 X 't i'1 r ,-a ril:, F? ' j": 'l:. C' . .i.... - , , i : - F • • ; ~ .h i.- , c^ r 3'.' fir ! l"j i..!. , , ~"i L l I`- t..: C: !t ~a i, , l 1_ , . G. n c~, i. l-i Es. l" !'1 ' >.,.z 3, > . 1' h r;a c ~ . I' 1 :':i `J ~i' : i. C? r' i a is is l"~ t:.,1,., 1,.. r ~ 't fr ai'f? m i t i- q t l ca n ~+11 .1. 1 l~'J e?! !1 r' F! r i •if:'. r'" I`l:::rv ~._:rr•-s'1::=th'l.r., I:-c::,::1::~> r.3c.(.L.(r <•:~L~(~v? {:hlC ~ar~nr~o~Cd dc''vcalcrpare~nt, 171_It . ti-ik~~ I_.i:l:°~c:~ i•-ca:~,r_l. :^:i 1. :I. oc•~tt:.h -ac7rnc? cr•F thc~7rn. TI•io h<-~z~~rd inrrc~.i_i`.;,w, try .t ~ a ~ ~r hi c~her y thr-.,•rcL~y a. mp~nr'~i nr., rnc;re . •l:. h r::. i•.:::-.-, (•a~ , E-:•r- ~l. h r r i ci cl r~ h F c L7m~..~ _ . !<:S.rli~~'!_ic F~~nc~rr;y to potenti<~al •f~I,ling I^ock:a. T 1~1-i31:3t~'.:,('? ~iE?VeY'c~~, ~l~.tr?I'"ncltiV!~a tC7 ~t.(k7'3{:c~I"1'1:ic~.~l,~ rninimi:'_(-~ t11 l`r~aa~rcl 'from •;,~I.-1 i.nra=-r~x.:!•:~a.":. A •fo(.tr •fcac>t. hi~~h bt~rrsr _m~y_.hn - • r..:c~n_:>•t.;•_I_(t::tc~c:I ::t:tcanr.] •!rl°r:~ roLt'tl•1 (=dr~e o'f 'thc:~ ro,~r_'I ~-.~h;-~v.r_ •I:he -~i•tc'r. 'I r-, ~ rn.:ty nat L,k~ tea. i oweo bk=c~~use i. t m,~y i nter-•f er-ki' (w9. th the road . rl c.,ht. w::-;y. (-knot.:Heir step which cars" I]F: '1:r11~•',(~n i ~ to dF~~l nn tt'le •fr-r.,r;{: !nr.,rtl-r ~:,idF?) o•f L?~:~ch o•f these -fo(_Ir units t~.cl a _,tren~~th cif .::ii:, l e<>.?ss'l. 4~~ ~c:? I~nl.cnd~a per sL~uare •f oo ar a'L- l eC;st 'f clur 'feet ~~:3r_,vr f i ni {:ihed gr'•<~dr. 'T'here should be. na wi rdaws i n • t.1~:..~~ 1 r.,iv 1 nterv~:~I ?r.3 thtit rk~(~i.s canncat cr~~sh through tt-~em into. _thra: unlt. YcaL(r c i Sri er~~;':, nec;?r array . st_ccte,est 'art energy a~i ~or-b i n>~ •f ar i lig sur_h as l rrc~~:, tra prcy•t~-~r_'1: th(~~: bl~:~. t:1:1 e concrete.:...I~ .gooC>i b]. ~ . boi.h r..,i' hes~ >-.Insi~-~n:3 sF'~oL.llc.'i b~ uti.li•::~d, ~ap~ci<•:~17.y fnr thr~ w~~-,te>rn twn units. (a rr,t-~r-~r-rrtr:~ w,-r] ] r..C-(n' bk~ dc?s:i ?nedr.l o~•>r~~ t:o the units rwhi ch :i 'f t c?'r h i ~-lh (with {:hra S.3rnti ~{:renc~th 41 ven ~rt3ave. Thx s (w~-+7. 1 could :o b~? ,:o,; iwc~•I. 1 p.l ~-~r..E=c:1 1 ~rrra(= (.:3 ,~ont) baL.rl dorr:.;. F•r~:causes c,f th•o r-r::1t(.crr? n r the ti<~a <arcl and the rpt i onr:~ ~ or- mi i r~~tt i c317 , I s(~pgr'::~t {::hit •f a. r,<(1 (Jli:~n?:3 Lzo rc~vi.ei•JC-'d by. yo(.(r- cngi.l-recr- G•~nd mF~ (nr r.3i'.ht?r^ grrya~-sir.:l-rl~lc~al o:;nc~rt) once i:hrt-? nrtat'err-eci tTrc~tl-roclti !-ra~.~t? b~at~n chosen.- ^ "i"I°t~ c_nn~~~rt..ti.`:t:i.r_tn-a~F tl~e~~c t_tnit~ ar an}~ a~r the ~rc:Ypaser.!_ mitiq~atir_,n • l•J7.1.i. I'"!Ot ].nCl•'E+c'~~~E? tll6? ha~::~rd to iatf"tc~r ~r-r~ptrty ar '.~~.rLlr_tl.lrf=s~ or . t:c-r i-~t..tl~lir, ri.c~f:~s_csf-w,~y, bt.til.dinc~r, r0'd~, strec•i_~, e~•~~ern~nt..:, . ~.i•L.i:litic~=~ c~r° faci].i•l~+r-at, ar- ntnej+^ ~~ronertx~:+~ a•f any I•tiYnd. ,1'~ ~:t1(:.:~r"C.' flr[? t:~L.IE?'.~ j:.1 an ~ ~ EW'a C' Cf]nt,C:1Ct tree , E'_3pcer:t c~1 .l',.~ dl.lY'1. rlC.! yalt:" !a r-(::~:Limi;t:~r•y cc7n~-e~:~•r,_.~~li~t:~iians. Si nCe~ -F~1 y y ~ - . f.:c~nr~~.tJ.tin~ 1:;~~alocyic~t _ JamesStress TEL P~0.708-381-9395 Jan 29,4 951 P.Ol ~.a~.~ ..net7tniTS. ~iTNr!+*^;'~j,L ~.y ~.~~'t~( 7~G''f~++y . ~ ~ . ' ~ ~'ro ert~'es _ J~C p ; June 6, 1993 ` Mr. Tim Devlin City of Vail Planner of Property 755 So. Frontage Rd. ; Vail Colorado 81657 Dear Mr. Devlin; i A s owners of unit 2203 at Simba Run, we strongly appose trite plans of Walid~ and Simbaland Corp. to develop the land adjacent; to Simba Run on the edge of section 1 and 2. It will Beverly; impact the value of our property, by destroying the view which is the ma~ar part of the value of our units. This plan was put into effect in 1990, before the control of the homeowners association was turned over to the homeowners. '~~e were not aware at they. time of purchase that this had occured. A ma~or selling point of all the units at Simba Run, is tree view. That s what convinced us to purchase. We Cher®fore request that the plans of Walid and Simbaland Corp. be denied because of the financial impact on the value of many unit owners at Simba Run. Cordially; es Stress ~ws/cp , O~ 401B Deertrail Hill Barrington, Iltirtois 60010 -381-9395 ,JUN-08-1993 15 03 FROM C303:) 421-3427 TO 14792452 P.01 . FAX 70: Tim Devlin 303/479-7457 Planner of Community Property fox City of Vail X55 S. FrontA~,~Q Road Vail, CO. 81657 ~ I oppose the plans of Walio Said and Simba Land ~ Corporation for d~avelopment of land next to Simba Run. I own a unit in Simba Run and feel the planned new build- ings an the edge of the present two buildings will have a d'stinct adverse effect on sight lines and values of owners in the present building. Plans for thE: new development, use of land now a part of ,present Simba Run and a tie in with>the facilities of Simba Run were put into effect in 1990 before pruchased my unit. I wras not told of tl-~CSe plans and at present many homeowners are still not aware of the new plans. 2 feel there has been obfuscation and disregard for the rights of others in ~liis proposed plan that sflvuld not be allowed to continue. l F4~ANK N. CLRFtK _ ~ Fp.OM p, ~ c ~ • ' C June B, 1993 MR . TIM DfiVLIN City ~f VATT., Planner of Property 755 S_ Frnnl:AC~P Rrl. Vail Colorado 81b57 Dear Mr. Aeviin; We are owners of #1425 at Simba Run Condominium and we strongly' oppose the plans o~ valid and Sim1?~1anc7 corr. to build a new project neighborin^ with our buildings. This will have a very strong impact on the value of our propGLties. xili nob only destroy the view but definitely lower their prices. Because we did not knew about it at the dime of purchase we request that You deny Walid itr?c~ S1Al~dldIld Gc,r~. plans to build in this location. '1'riis nrojeet would r?avL a negative influence nn the vdiue of ail units in Simba Run. S i uu e r e 1 y; r„~.--- ~'t J / Yr `Maria I. Bioniarz 8440 N. Clifton Ave. Niles, Ili. 60714 tel. (706) 696-0925 i\' RECD J ~ ~ 1 Eric Beringause 1487 Shoreline Dr. Wayzata, MN 55391 (H) 612-476-8672 (O) 414-696-3331 Mr. Michael Mollica Assistant Director of Planning Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Rd. Vail, CO 81657 Dear Mike: As per my conversation with you, as well as a previous conversation with Jim Morter, the architect for Simba Run, I would strong]_y urge the Town of Vail to try to work out the inclusion of a public pedestrian walkway through the new Simba Run development. As the owner of two separate properties in the Sandstone area I can attest to the current frequency of use of that land as a pedestrian walkway. When the I70 underpass is finally constructed a pedestrian walkway through Simba would save at least a quarter mile walk for people living directly above Simba (Casolar Dr., Vail View Dr, etc...) and encourage people to walk to the Cascade Village Chairlift, which is currently underutilized. I believe the new Simba construction will be quite attractive and is well thought out and commend the Planning Group on a job well done. I hope the Town of Vail can figure out how to include a public walkway in those plans. Sincerely, ~Z Eric Beringause MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development DATE: May 24, 1993 SUBJECT: A request for a conditional use permit to allow for the elimination of a dwelling unit in order for the Vail Assoaates Real Estate office to expand in the A 8~ D Building, located at 286 Bridge StreeULots A - D, Block 5A, Vaii Village First Filing. Applicant: Vail Associates/Jack Hunn Planner: Mike Mollica :..::.N•.;•..,..;n.;~:•'•R'•tih;:v'Y':`•i':$:~"r:"•i•`•i~'j:~N.•.::.r-w•:: x:.: y,C~x•~•~,r~- ~r ;:,,;•x- •!e~:x;!~::, •r I'^^xorw~ay}yn .,y+fa~r pppp~{.x. : ! w. fi':N.... %H.:i !i}' .~Ny+};: ;,s•'. :•:!Y.•ii:4i:M.' ..:'~YJ.T..4Y1.:....+f.•:•r:::: rn.w:~$ii:•i'/.: i}`f... :.:.~M~3~'N.... giY'.:.....::...r.:: O:rri :xL~... ' fr:..%i:•vif /.~::rii:?~i ~:it ........:.............................N;:.p.;ti.. ...........}•.i:vvu :>..r ii:Li: :$iv /..x4........... n, V.r , /f/.! L f . 4 ~r:.•::::.~i'::ij::i•:!•ix!^ir.!!: r: i:•iii;{:.i[: p'...... '!•r./r~•.j.{:};:!;i:-0 n v~^ .•'~G: r rf..'dyr .:.:.:~'.:i :niiiir:0iii i :n.;......:...:..;......:....:.:C......,.•M:.:::r./.vvi:••••x:::+xw :!vx}: ::w.x?:::: ...:.y{.: r.. k:.::'h:r...~~. ry,.,r;!x{.:.+.::.::::: m::.~v.......... ::...................::::w:... f. 4. n..' :K•.4:: • x: i; •iiii::.:ri. J::v::!:4':v •.%r •i.:w::::..:::v.:v: wx:: yr r ::...:..:i}: x • , rrfvY.•i:.,N+h.•. i::•.::.i:.'-i: i. ~ is k: ii ch'~.dc''~<:w.:;a:;u«:.,:rx .xawr...............r..r.r.....z..!!.:...!!. ..:::...:..:.C&:...........ff...l9o:ry..:...:...~..~iwooooucaurar.:.:xf~:y I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED REQUEST Barry Florescue, owner of the A & D Building, is represented by Jack Hunn with Vail Associates, Inc. and is requesting a conditional use permit to allow for the elimination of a dwelling unit within the Commercial Core I zone district. The A 8 D Building is located at the southeast intersection of Bridge Street and Gore Creek Drive. Vail Assocates Real Estate currently operates a real estate office, of approximately 575 square feet in size, on the ground floor of the A & D Building. Vail Associates is now interested in expanding their existing real estate office through the conversion of a second floor residential condominium. This condominium consists of approximately 1,820 square feet, and is located on the second floor immediately above the existing real estate office. According to Section 18.24.040 Permitted and Conditional Uses -Second Ftoor "a conditional use permit will be required in accordance with Chapter 18.60 for any use which eliminates any existing dwelling or accommodation unit or any portion thereof." Real estate offices fall under the category "professional offices, business offices and studios" and are considered permitted uses on the second floor within the Commercial Core I zone district. Because the existing area proposed to be converted to a professional office is currently a three bedroom condominium, a conditional use permit is required. II. ZONING ANALYSIS The only development standard which would be effected by this request would be the parking requirement. The differential in the parking requirement, for the conversion from residential to professional office, would be an increase of 5.28 parking spaces. The residential parking requirement is two parking spaces. The professional office parking requirement would be 7.28 parking spaces. Since properties located within the Commercial Core I zone district are not allowed to provide on-site parking, the applicant will be required to pay into the parking fund. Since the parking differential is 5.28 parking spaces x $8,000 per parking space, the payment into the parking fund would be $42,240. 1 7 y III. CRITERIA AND FINDINCaS ~ The Commercial Core I zone district contains its own conditional use permit factors, which acre listed in Section 18.24.070 of the Municipal Code. Upon review of the Commercial Core I conditional use permit factors, the Department of Community Development recommends dental of the conditional use permit based upon the following criteria: A. Effects of vehicular traffic on Commercial Core I district; B. Reduction of vehicular traffic in Commercial Core !district; C. Reduction of nonessential off-street parking; D. Control of delivery, pick up, and service vehicles; E. Development of public spaces for use by pedestrians; F. Continuance of the various commercial, residential and public uses in Commercial Core 1 district so as to maintain the existing character of the area; G. Control quality of construction, architectural design, and landscape design in the Commercial Core I zone district so as to maintain the existing character of the area. It is the staff's position that the only criteria or factor which is applicable to the applicant's request is Letter F above. The Commercial Core I zone district is intended to be a mixed use, commercial, residential and lodging zone district. The horizontal zoning established by the zone district is set up to maintain these uses. It is the staff's opinion that the reduction of the bed base in the Village does not further the purpose and goals of the Commercial Core I zone district. Additionally, we believe that the following goals, objectives and policies, as listed in the Vail Village Master Plan, arE; applicable to the applicant's request: Goal #2: To foster ~a strong tourist industry and promote year-round economic health. Objective 2.3: Increase 1:he number of residential units available for short-term ovemight accommodations. Policv 2.3.1: The development of short-term accommodation units is strongly encouraged. Residential units that are developed above existing density levels are required to be designed or managed in a manner that maN;es them available for short-term ovemight rental. 2 ~1 IV. REVIEW OF SIMILAR REQUESTS In 1988, the PEC approved a conditions! use permit request for the elimination of two dwelling units in the Commercial Core I zone district (Mill Creek Court Building). This request involved combining three dwelling units into one larger unit. The request was approved as it was determined that the elimination of the two dwelling units would not upset the balance and mix of land uses as the actual "bed base" of the units was not being reduced and the residential use was maintained. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff is recommending denial of the requested conditional use permit to eliminate one dwelling unit within the Commercial Core I zone district. Although the request has no impacts on six of the seven review criteria, we believe that Criteria F would be impacted in a negative fashion, and that the elimination of a dwelling unit in the Village Core does not further~the Vail Village Master Plan goals and the purpose of the Commercial Core I zone district. Should the PEC decide to approve this request, the staff would recommend two conditions of approval. The first condition would be that the applicant be required to pay into the parking fund the required amount as indicated in Section II of this memorandum. The second condition of approval would be that the applicant meet all of the Fire Code requirements necessary for the conversion from residential to commercial use. c:\peclmemoslvarealest.524 3 - ~ a , ~ Jeff Bowen made a motion to approve this request per the staff memo with Greg - Amsden seconding the motion. A unanimous 6-0 vote approved this request. 3. A request for a conditional use to allow tee-pees to be used in conjunction with V~iil Associates summer prc?grams to be located adjacent to the Base of Chair 8, Tracts B and D, Lionshead 1st Filing. Applicant: Vail Associates Planner: Jim Curnutte Jim Curnutte made a brief presentation per the staff memo and stated that staff was recommending approval of this request and that no conditions were being attacheci to this approval. He also stated that he had not been contacted by any of the adjacent property owners concerning this request. Kristan Pritz added tha~l the approval would be for one year and that after that timE; the Tee-pee Village would be relocated to the top of the Gondola. Greg Amsden asked the applicant, Bob Matarese, about access to the pedestrian bridge. Bob Matarese responded that access would be available without needing to go through the Tee-pee Village. Kathy Langenwalter made a motion to approve this request per the staff memo wi1:h Bill Anderson seconding the motion. A 5-0 vote approved this request with Allison La;>soe abstaining due to her employment with Vail Associates. 4. A request for a conditional use permit to a11ow for the elimination of a dwelling unit in order for the Vail Associates Real Estate office to expand in the A 8~ D Building, located at 286 Bridge ~~treet/Lots A - D, Block 5A, Vail Village First Filing. Applicant: Vail Associates Planner: Mike Mollica Mike Mollica made a presentation per the staff memo and stated that staff is recommending denial of this request for a conditional use permit because staff believes this proposal would be in conflict with the purpose section of the Commercial Core I zone district and' would be contrary to the relevant Vail Village Master Plan goals, objectives and policies outlined in the staff memo, particularly Goal #2. Ken Wilson, the representative from Vail Associates, stated that he does not feel tlhat this project contradicts Goal #2 of the Vail Village Master Plan because he feels that real estate offices contribute to tourism. Greg Amsden stated that he was concerned with this proposal because if it was granted, it could set a precedent. P'lanning and Environmental Commtsslon May 24, 1993 2 Diana Donovan stated that the PEC's main concern with this request was that the conversion to a professional office could result in a "loss of life and excitement on Bridge Street". Greg Amsden made a motion to deny the request for a conditional use permit per the staff's memo and also because this request could open up future problems at this site, by allowing more GRFA to be added above the. professional office (new third floor). Bill Anderson seconded this motion. Kristan Pritz added, for clarification, that future scenarios would have to be considered separately in respect to GRFA additions. Greg Amsden withdrew his previous statement and a 4-1-1 vote denied this request with Allison Lassoe abstaining due to her winter employment with Vail Associates and Jeff Bowen opposing this vote. Jeff Bowen stated that it was his opinion that reducing the bed base on Bridge Street had merit because of the noise in this area. . 5. A request for a major amendment to SDD #5 to allow for the development of the remaining portion of the Simba Run SDD, Savoy Villas, located at 1100 North Frontage Road, more specifically described as follows: That part of the Frst Supplemental Map for Simba Run Condominium, according to the map thereof recorded in the office of the Eagle County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder, described as folbws: Beginning at the most southwesterly corner of said map, thence the following three courses along the westerly Tines of said map; 1) N03°33'01"E 160.79 feet; 2) N12°50'33"E 144.72 feet; 3) N17°56'03" 70.60 feet; thence, departing said westerly line, S13°16'03"W 157.26 feet, thence S76°43'57"E 91.50 feet; thence N13°16'03"E 35.00 teat; thence S76°43'57"E 72.31 feet to the easterly line of said map; thence the following two courses along the easterly and southeasterly lines of said map; 1) S24°44'57"E 52.38 teat; 2) S52°50'29"W 272.50 feet to the Point of Beginning, containing 0.6134 acres, more or less; and That part of Simba Run, according to the map thereof, recorded in Book 312 at Page 763 in the Office of the Eagle County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder, described as follows: Beginning at the most southerly corner of said Simba Run, thence the folknnring four courses abng the southwesterly and northwesterly lines of said Simba Run; 1) N37°09'31"W 233.28 feet; 2) 334.57 feet along the arc of a curve to the left, having a radius of 1771.95 feet, a central angle of 10°49'06', and a chord that bears N42°13'20"E 334.07 feet; 3) N36°48'48" E 201.36 feet; 4) 15.96 teat abng the arc of a curve to the right, having a radius of 428.02 feet, a central angle of 02°08'12", and a chord that bears N37°52'54' E 15.96 feet to a corner on the westerly boundary of the First Supplemental Map for Simba Run Condominium, according to the map thereof recorded in the office of the Eagle County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder; thence the following four courses along said westerly boundary; 1) S21°51'28"W 69.90 feet; 2) S17°56'03`W 181.17 teat; 3) S12°50'33"W 144.72 feet; 4) S03°33'01"W 160.79 feet to the southeasterly line . ~ of said Simba Run; thence, abng said southeasterly line, S52°50'29'W 113.08 feet to the Pant of Beginning, containing 1.560 acres, more or less. . Applicant: Simba Land CorporatioNVNalid Said Planner: Mike Mollica Kathy Langenwalter made a motion to table this item until June 14, 1993 with Jeff Bowen seconding this motion. A 6-0 vote tabled this item until June 14, 1993. Planning and Environmental Commission stay 2a, 1993 g l '~Vail© ' Vail Ass®ciates, Inc. Creators and Operators of Vail and Beaver Creels Resotts May 28, 1993 Ms. Kristan Pritz Director of Community Tevelopment Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Co 81657 RE: Vail Associates F~~al Fstat.P Office Proposed Vertical Expansion REQUEST FOR APPEAL HEARING Dear Kristan: The purpose of this letter is to notify the Town of Vail that Vail Associates, Inc. :intends to appeal the decision. of the Planning and Environmental Commission relative to the above referenced application. Therefore we anticipate an appeal hearing with the Town Council on June 15, 1993. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely, V LASS IATES, INC. cc: Dan Fitchett ~ Ken Wilson Greg Stutz Jac D unn, Director Real Est to Development JDH•'d J ISC. 44 ~ ~ ~ Post Office Box 7 • Vail, Colorado 81658 • USA - (303) 476-5601 c: y ~Vailm Vail Associates, Inc. Creators and Operators of Vail and Beaver CreelN` Resorts June li, 1993 Ms. Kristan Pritz Director of Community Development Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 RE: ~~ail Ass~~iat~s, Inc. Real Estate Office Proposed Vertical Expansion REQUEST TO TABLE APPEAL HEARING Dear Kristan: The purpose of this letter is to notify the Town of Vail that Vail Associates, Inc. requests that its application to appeal the decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission relative to the above referenced application be tabled until the first meeting in July. We require additional time to prepare our appeal presentation. Therefore, we anticipate an appeal hearing with the Town of Vail Council on July 6, 1993. Please contact me if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely, VAIL ASSOCIA ES, INC. cc: Dan Fitchett Ken Wilson Greg Stutz Jack D H Director Planni g, D sign & Construction JDH:j JD SC.25 Posr Office Box 7 • Vail, Colorado 8] 658 • USA - (303) 476-5601 ~Vail© 1993 O Vail Associates, Inc. Crearors and Operators of Vail and Beaver CreelF"~ Resorts July 6, 1993 Ms. Kristan Pritz Director of Community Development Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 RE: Vail Associates, Inc. Real Estate Office Proposed Vertical Expansion REQUEST TO TABLE APPEAL HEARING Dear Kristan: The purpose of this letter is to once again notify the Town of Vail that Vail Associates, Inc. requests that its application to appeal the decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission relative to the above referenced application be tabled until the second meeting in July. We require additional time to prepare our appeal presentation. Therefore, we anticipate an appeal hearing with the Town of Vail Council o my 13, 19~9"3~ Please contact me if you have any questions or c uY~~ aciaitional information. ~'v~y 26 ~ Sincerely VA ASS IATES, INC. cc: Dan Fitchett ' Ken Wilson Greg Stutz Jac D. nn, Director Pla nin Design & Construction JD :jd HMISC." 99 Post Office Box 7 • Vail, Colorado 81658 • USA - (303) 476-5601 X ~ : Tc ~Vailo c: RECD 6 199 0 Vall A,SSOC1ateS~ InC. Creators and Operators of Vail and Beaver Creelf'~ Resorts July 6, 1993 Ms. Kristan Pritz Director of Community Development Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 RE: Vail Associates, Inc. Real Estate Office Proposed Vertical Expansion REQUEST TO TABLE APPEAL HEARING Dear Kristan: The purpose of this letter is to once again notify the Town of Vail that Vail Associates, Inc. requests that its application to appeal the decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission ~-1 relative to the above referenced application be tabled until the second meeting in July. We require additional time to prepare our appeal presentation. Therefore, we anticipate an appeal hearing with the Town of Vail Council on July 13, 1993. Please contact me if you have any questions or require additional information. Sincerely VA ASS IATES, INC. cc: Dan Fitchett Ken Wilson Greg Stutz Jac D.~ nn, Director Pla nin Design & Construction JD : j d HMISC." 99 Post Office Box 7 • Vail, Colorado 81658 • USA - (303) 476-5601