Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-11-02 Support Documentation Town Council Regular Session 6~ NAIL TOVUIV COUiVCIL 'P~3ES®~~, t~®VEIVI~E~ 2, 1993 7:30 ~.flfl. 0~1 T®!! ~®tDRIIC@L C~IAMSERS ~XPAN®E® AGEN®~ 7:30 P.M. 1. CITIZEN PARTICIPATIOiV. 7:35 P.M. 2. Approval of the Minutes of the October 5, 1993, and October 19, 1993, Evening Meeting Minutes. 7:40 P.M. 3. Ordinance fVo. 21, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance Andy Knudtsen rezoning 7.710 acres from Agricultural and Open Space, Section 18.32 to Low Density Multi-Family, Section 18.16 located between Tract C, Block 2, Vail Potato Patch and Parcel B. Applicant: Town of Vail/Nail Housing Authority. Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance fVo. 21, Series of 1993, on first reading. Backaround Rationale: Please see background and analysis of criteria in the staff memorandum dated 10/11/93. On 10/11/93, the PEC recommended to approve (7-0) the requested rezoning with the conditions as outlined in the staff cover memo dated 11/2/93. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance fVo. 21, Series of 1993, on first reading. 8:25 P.M. 4. Ordinance IVo. 26, Series of 1993, second reading, an annual Steve Thompson appropriation ordinance: adopting a budget and financial plan and making appropriations to pay the costs, expenses, and liabilities of the Town of Vail, Colorado, for its fiscal year January 1, 1994, through December 31, 1994, and providing for the levy assessment and collection of Town ad valorem property taxes due for the 1993 tax year and payable in the 1994 fiscal year. Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance IVo. 26, Series of 1993, on second reading. 8:30 P.M. 5. Ordinance IVo. 28, Series of 1993, second reading, an ordinance Mike Mollica providing for the establishment of Special Development District fVo. 31, Golden Peak House; adopting a Development Ptan for Special Development District rtlo. 31 in accordance with Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code; rezoning a portion of Tract E from Agricultural and Open Space Zoning to Commercial Core I Zoning, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicants: Golden Peak House Condominium Association/Nail Associates, Inc./GPH Partners, Ltd./Margaritaville, Inc. Action Requested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance fVo. 28, Series of 1993, on second reading. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance fVo. 28, Series of 1 1993, on second reading. 9:00 P.M. 6. Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1993, second reading, an ordinance Shelly Mello approving a Special Development District (known as SDD No. 30, The Vail Athletic Club) and the development plan in accordance with Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code and Setting forth details in regard thereto. Action Reauested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1993, on second reading. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1993, on second reading. 10:00 P.M. 7. Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance Larry Grafel granting a franchise by the Town of Vail to Public Service Company Tom Moorhead of Colorado, its successors and assigns, the right to furnish, sell and Ron Carpenter distribute gas to the Town and to all persons, businesses, and Phil Noll industry within the Town and the right to acquire, construct, install, locate, maintain, operate and extend into, within and through said Town all facilities reasonably necessary to furnish, . sell and distribute gas within the Town and the right to make reasonable use of all streets and other public places and public easements as herein defined as may be necessary; and fixing the terms and conditions thereof. Action Reauested of Council: Review and discuss Franchise Agreement and approve/deny/modify Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1993, on first reading. Backaround Rationale: The Franchise Agreement is needed in order to maintain sufficient gas service for the Town of Vail. (Note: Second reading of this ordinance will be on December 7, 1993.) Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 29, Series of 1993, on first reading. 10:45 P.M. 8. Ordinance No. 30, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance Greg Hall dedicating a public, non-exclusive right-of-way in and upon Tract A, Tom Moorhead Vail Village 8th Filing. Action Reauested of Council: Grant an easement for utility purposes along Vail Valley Drive. Backaround Rationale: There is a need to maintain sufficient access to construct, maintain, and service utility facilities. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance No. 30, Series of 1993, on first reading. 11:00 P.M. 9. Ordinance No. 31, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance to Tom Moorhead amend Section 18.57.060 B 13 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail. Action Reauested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance No. 31, Series of 1993, on first reading. Backaround Rationale: This ordinance will correct a typographical error in Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1992. .2 Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance IVo. 31, Series of 1993, on first reading. 11:05 P.M. 10. Ordinance fVo. 32, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance Tom Moorhead amending Title 2, of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail by the addition of Chapter 2.38 -Limitation of Terms, to provide for the limitation of terms for all permanent Town of Vail Boards and Commissions. Action Reauested of Council: Approve/deny/modify Ordinance fVo. 32, Series of 1993, on first reading. Backaround Rationale: This ordinance will allow for proper codification in the Municipal Code. Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance fVo. 32, Series of 1993, on first reading. 11:10 P.M. 11. Resolution fVo. 13, Series of 1993, a resolution establishing support Pam Brandmeyer by the Vail Town Council for the Vail Valley Foundation's efforts to Tom Moorhead secure and host the 1999 UVorld Alpine Ski Championships. Action Reauested of Council: Consider support for VVF's efforts to secure and host the 1999 World Alpine Ski Championships. Backaround Rationale: The 1989 UVorld Alpine Ski Championships proved to be in the best interest of the community, and it is . anticipated that the 1999 Championships would prove to be equally beneficial. Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution IVo. 13, Series of 1993. 11:15 P.M. 12. Resolution fVo. 14, Series of 1993, a resolution establishing support Pam Brandmeyer by the Vail Town Council for the Vail Valley Foundation's hosting Tom Moorhead of the 1994 World Mountain Bike Championships. Action Reauested of Council: Consider support for VVF's efforts to secure and host the 1994 UVorld Mountain Bike Championships. Backaround Rationale: The 1993 IAlorld Mountain Bike Championships proved to be in the best interest of the community, and it is anticipated that the 1994 Championships would prove to be equally beneficial. Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution fVo. 14, Series of 1993. 11:20 P.M. 13. Special Event Request re: Vail Valley Special Events Commission Pam Brandmeyer Festival of Lights. Action Reauested of Council: Review request from the Special Events Commission to approve $10,600 for the VVT&CB Festival of Lights in conjunction with the VRD-sponsored Vllinter Carnival (1993). Backaround Rationale: Review enclosed requests from the Vail Valley Special Events Commission. Staff Recommendation: Deny. This application is ludicrous at best and has absolutely no merit. 3 11:25 P.M. 14. Adjournment. N®~~ REbISE® ~IPC®NIING I~IEI=~II~G S~AG~T ~'IMES BEI~®@fi/: ~'I•IE NE1C4 bAll.. ~®lIVN 4;4JIJNCII_ REGULAR WORK SESSI®N ~!lILL BE ®N SUES®Ab, 19/9/93, BEGINNING A~ 4:30 ~.nfl. IN ~®b COUNCIL QrOiAIV113ERS. ~6~E P4JLL®l~ING BAIL ~®WN C®UNCIL REGULa4R ilV®RIC SESSI®N ~!lILL BE ®N SUES®A~f, 11/14;/93, BEGINNING A~ 2:00 R.Ilhi. IN ~'®b C®UNCIL C~IAIIIIBERS. SHE f~4~LL®yVING BAIL ~®WN C4JUNCIL REGULAR EbENING 6~lEETING 1NILL BE ®~I SUES®A~f, 11/16/93, BEGINNING 7:30 P.11~. IN ~'4Jb dy®UN4;IL CFIAl111B1=RS. C:UIGENDA.TCE ~ 4 1 1. O 1. 9 3 4 3 3 4 P M etc 'a` fb1 8~. t~ ~ C O Q a} &g 6Z P d 9 I 1 d ' (90BY 876.330] Raa~R~ w. a,~~vi~ (~02 6ASI' aLGDNOUIN ROAD BCHAUMBUR6. ILLINOIS ®OI(~B•100~ October ~9, g993 • Town Council Towt? of Vail 75 South Frontage li`oad FNe~t `/ail, $16~? RE: l~ezosaing of Agricultural and Open gpaca Ta~act 11Roeantaim dell 1'?arcel to ~.ovA L~emsity RdultiPamlly bear A~ayor Osterfose and 'Tow¢~Council I~ernbers: A protest is herohy subanltted an behalf of the fast Village Hoaxaeownera Associa- tion of the appli6ation aequestin~ the seining o! a p*~rtloa of a publicly owned agricultural aced open space tract to a low donaity ffiultifanaily gone district. The Homeowners Association ®mcouraffies BbB provision og eaetployee houslaYffi In appropriate locations. Xt is the position o~ the ~IoaYarroaners Association beat Blee above cited rezoning proposal b8 rejected based upon tide followia$: fl. It is sad inappropriate ease of a publicly owned agriculture and opera space tract. ' It is atE inappropriate site to locate a lard scale building project. 3. The p..,e,„sed use diminishes the aosthetlo quality of the site as it pa~eaexatly exists. 4. The irecursiona that pres~tly exist on the site are axeia7isnal and temporary. 3. There are othcr morly appanpa~ate sites fbp the proposed use havrimg the ap- propriate zoning that is intended for , higher deceeity developxadeae8. ti. The proposal is precedent setting and cndan$ers ocher agricultural aldd open space tracts. 7. 'The tract vuas acquired frvna Flail Associates to provide an open spaco ooaridor and park land at the entrance to Fall. It is axay umdorstandimg fleet the., Bract was acquired to be preserved as open space well before the adoptioaa of the real estate transfer tazc. 7Che tract is to provide a contrast to the urban deaasigy of Flail. %t was imtez?ded that at was to lee a statement to the co9nrtaunity'r3 caYnaaitasaent Ba prty8erere and enhance publicly ,awned open space. Also, it was to be a statement the comanunity's en- vironmental coanaaaitaYaent and sexasitivitles. i i. o i. s~ o~ : ~4 Pry mavaa~a-a~o~.~ co~~ t-arms P 1 on o ~Tctobee 29, 1993 Page 'Two g. ~'he tract along wis17 all open spade ant8 undeveloped tracts a~ undea 8eview as part of the pest 5paoe and Park fl~lan. Xt is preanatur® to auatove 6hls tract from consideration as at is an Integral par'¢ t1f thdr ~pemm ~paoe and P~xlc Plan. 9. The approval of the rexommiaag v~rifll flaathcr ~adcrailrac commfideaco imm Bhe 'Town of ~faifl's co~mmflttnettt to paeserve and protect op~ space tracts. 1Q. 'The GOnversiatt off agrictalturafl and opemm space Bracts fAr pubflicfly ixgvned housing will us~detnniae confidence in the 'Town of ~/aal°s empfloycc fladausimmg pgo$rant. 1 The esei4natad cost . of the pro3ect fae exceeds more economical aneana encour- aging affordable employee housing. There arc other means and site on which to encourage affordable eattplolree housing. it is our concern tha¢ the rexoaing df thls site evflflfl bo detrimental to the public interest. ~e ask that the down GaunCil deny the requested re~on appfliGatiomm. Bes¢ ~ish ~ l~obert' Vtl. Gaflvln, Preaiclent B:.A~Z Vflddogo IIEo~6o9Px~a,vaw lhawv~lmtlv,o RVITG~ch cc: Jim I.arnoa~t i o i. ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ P~ ~r~aa~soraoa.rs ~oaa~ r~~•ss ~ P o z.-'i ~ t70BY 579-8304 R[~lt3ERT W. C~.~LVIFI 13b9 EAST ALQONOU~N RpAD t~4HAUM6UR0, ILLINOIS 4019E-14QF3 ®ctober ~9, 1993 . 't'own ~ounci% 'own of Mail . ' 75 South liaontage road i~leat Mall, ~O 81657 ltE: holden Peak IIiouse Special Development District Dear Rhtayor ~sterfosa and 'l"own iCouncil l~dotzabcra: A protest is her®by subataitted on behalf of the East Tillage Hameowner$ associa- tion of the application requesting deaignr~tion of the Golden I"cak Ho~aac 4f31a~) a$ a Special Development District (91~1~). ft is the position of the I•iomeowl~ers associatioat to oppose Lisa oaeati0n of Special Development I2lsericts that: 1. Exceed zoning standards far established zono dastri6ts. . 2. !I'iolate established or proposed view carridoss said open apace lands. 8. , t3rrcomes a grant of apeelal privilege, mat ~nerally available iv all property owners, 4. lµor exi8ting buildings, any provision that would cause an already exceadad zoning standard to be fhrther expanded. 'The Golden Peak IElouse Special Development District application does sot confornx to items 1, ~ 3, and ~ above. ~ '1'hr3 Glii~ SDI pa+oposal exceeds all zoning standard: for the Cosnrneraial d~oee % zon® distri+rt. according to planning seaff aoemoranda. * ~'he existing building exaedds all coning standards, accdrdin~ td planningg staff rnenaoranda. ~ ~ T'lte expansion of the building beyond zoning standards or an expansion of a nonconforming condition is a grant of special privilege noe gesaerally avail- able to aIi property owners. ~ [lnfashionable architecture ar failure. of the property owners to maintaiaa properly a building is insufficient cause to exceed aoa?ing standards. i i. o i. ~ ~ o ~ : ~ ~ Prn m1VLC'E'OS~OY.d~n C[7i~F' t3ta'E'S P O 3.~1 0 Gctober 29, 1993 Page Two q'he I~om~owaers Assocsation recognizes that the xoaing soda provides for the right of the property owner to replace the structure to its present confi~aration should ~ it become destroyed. Therefore, it is recommended that any alteration t4 the structure be done within the confines of th+s existing building envelope. ~ a consequence, the build'aatg would qualify for the required variances necessarg+ to reconfigure the interior space amd upgrade the building exterior. Be is recommended in order to achieve the building's exterlar upgrade and recan4 f gttration of the interior space: a, hoof dashers sea the Sth f1Qar a®st wing, north elevation should be removed. T'he sloping roof should be retained and brought into oott0 forntaatce with the Vail Village View Corridor, 'his approach would have the net effect of reducing G1~F~, as wail as reducing the build- ing's bulk and mass of the building. b. Ceiling heights on the 5th floor east wing penthouse, south elevatiart should be induced to eight (8) feet, using dormers to reduce the flat svof areas. 'I'he resulting effect will reduce ~e~ as well as the bulk and mass of the building, also, it w911 bring greater compliance with the Vail Village View ~Corrldor. c. Ceiling heights on the 5th floog wese wing penthouse, south elevation, should be lowered, thus reducing the bulk and mass of the building. The double pitch of proposed roof should be anaintained. 'Th® resulting effect wtll further open View of Vail 11~[ouzrtaizx from Bridge street and bring greater cotrepliance with the Mail Village View Corridor. d. Drip egsernent/opea space tract should b8 used Daly to improve fife building's compliance with zoning standard. 1. 'The estimated 410 sq. ft. of Glen proposed to project iytt0 the drip easetraortt/apen space tract land should be eliminated. 'The effect w¢pl¢ be to reduce further e:rceaaive 23YtPA as well as reduce Yhs bulls ~d aat~aa o£ Bhp b~ildiaag~ Z. balcony projections proposed tp projece further Sato the drip easethene%pea space tract land should bo elimirlat®d. The effect would be to reduce furtl?er the bulk aYtd oases of the building. 3. %~eck covering proposed far restaurant deck located oa the drip ensentent/opett space trace should be eliminated. 'Fhe effect would be to reduce further fife btalk attd fosse of the building. ' la addatioa to the forgoing, the following conditions should be attached to any ap~ praval of ehc project: 1 1, 0 1, o~ : p~ ~tvao~soaaaa~c~ cc~a~t~ tira~s Po4~i orz ~lctober 29, 1993 l?a$e Thane ai. Streetscape ltngrovetaents ahauld be a proportianal artaoucat of the cGltff~,~. in excess of the tauderlying none to that required of the 'Clat~is- ti$atia Special IDevelopanent District. The Christiania requirement was 'for 19 percent In a;sccess ~A allowed. oonditipn ofapproval was ~4d.OQl7 fn landscapeJstreetscape ianpravean®nes on public ,and private • 1?Y4pl:rtjt. The gpi-I ~~A requested, exceeds the standard by 39 percent. If approved ass proposed, the gPl•I SDI should be required to pay at a aninlmuan for S2$i36QOD of new landscape artd streetscape improvements. A specified aanouaat should be a condi~ lion pf approval. Sireetseape improvements should not be canditioated upon the foranatiara of tt Special Impravcment District. An Escrow fund should ba established for the oan- structioa of Siebert Circle, to be spend w>ien sufficient Hands are avallablt: from rleiglaboriaag ggoperty owners and other sources. f. Acquisition of ARil1 creek Stream 'Tract and Spacaa/g'iratc Ship pars shauld be required in e~chanSe for tla® appenditag of the drip eas+a- mentJopen space tract to the C3Pl~[ site. 'The cost of at;qulrltag the park should be cred'ated to the Str~tscape esCxow account. The applicant should be rdspt~naible for the care and taaiatettan~ of the opexz spacejpark aceopdin~ to approved standard:. ~anployee housing gequirem®nts ~ sho~%d be met either onasite or off- 8it~, i h . 'The "Pay-In-lieu" ~.oadit~g epac~i, feg should be regttirad for the ~?b- sence of a required on-site load~atg space. e~ tninitaum of $50,t)t70 should be set aside i>s an escrow account. i. A central storage roonb wathixt the building, large enough to provide chart reran freight storage for all oa-site uses should be a~equirred. The storage moan should be d'arectlX accessible to a freight elevator that must have direct and adequate access to the street. The Fridge StreetjCotdcn Peak I~otese View ~orrsdar be established as a Condition of the approval process. The view corridor wduid include the specific elevatiot7 for each view paint. establishing the view cor- • rldor in this manner wilfl avoid abuses d~aristg the construction pro- cess such as occurred with the loss of lire 1'rlvolaus Sal View Corridpr as a result of the ~hrlstiania 51~%~. ic. If the conditions of approval for the proposed 517 are not east in total, the ~oldett Peak Mouse Special l7evelopatent District wilfl terminate. I l i i. o i. s ~ o ~ : ~ ~ P~ ~ava~~a~cia..~ co~~ o-a~e~s~ P o s~-:t ~ ~~ctober 29q 1993 page dour It is noted that in the ®taff r®poaY these is a discn:pancy fas CiRF.A Galculatioa bee tween priginal and fgnal submissions. IIt is gequesBed Bleat th9a dascrepancy be _ re~ solvedo 'r'he Homeowners .4ssocaatian's board of Directors believe Yhat the Special T7evela opment laisenict is Bsed to a11ow snare®ses is demsaty that will daaBage the charac~ ter of our neighborhoods. In ®ug jud~naent thean i$ ittstufficient demonstration off benefit to the corngnunity and neighborhood t® justify the ®pproval of 4lae Special I]evelapment District application. ~'ho Town 6~ounoll is quested to dea~y the ap- g~licativn fpr a Special >~ee?elopmen4 1l~istriot fop the ~Isil At4tletio 4Club. c East ash ~ beat VVo ~ralvit~, isresident East ~lallage Homeowners association >$1~V~:ch cc: Jim L$snpnt I 10-31-1993 09~46AM FROM TO 3034792157 P.01 F'oxlia9.l Ao Parleer 2Q5 I~oneg Dollov Road Pound Ridges R)% I0576 . ~E~EIVED i~OU - 9 9~3 October 31, 1993 Vail Tatira Council Town of wail 75 South Frontage Road West veil., CO 8I657 Dear F1aXor c~stergoss and Torn Co~ancii Members: Ml+ wife and I are o~mera of a condominium in villa valhelia on East Gore Creek Driven yde would like to endorse the protests submitted by J3.m %amont for the East Village xomeowners Association against the applications of th® Vail Athletic Club and the Go3dea~ Peak Tiou$e for des~.gnatioa~ ss Special Development Districts o . _ Yn botl'L Gases, Ede see no x'eason far the buildings to be gebui3.t outside their existing envelopes except to enaY~le their ovgers to expand their operations, xhich already eXCeed t23e density limits of the coning ordinance. If this is accepted ass sufficient reason fcr a specie]. Development District, fsn°t the area as a whole being deprived og the ~rrotection that the zoning eras meant to prvgide~ SincePeig, ~ ~ Foxhall A. FaPker TOTAL P.01 NOV-01-1993 18 49 FROM OFFICE DEPOT 1?9 TO 14?9215? P.03 1• ~carbar~a C. ~.D~Re~ 133 ~ae~ Stra~e, ~1 ~oaaeb iD~~~p, Cr~larada 80~+D~r-~$'~~ . Vail Town Council November 2, 7.93 - Tawn of Vail 7 5 Sdutia Frontage. goad West . Vail, Colorado 87.G57 pear 1~[ayax~ Csterfoss and Town Council Membersa . ~ r R. ~ratest is hsz~eby submitted aonceraiinq the application requesting designatxazl, of the Golden Peak House(GpFI) as a Special Development .District{5DU). The areataan Of the Special Development District is opposed because: ~ The GPH SDD proposal exceeds all coning standards for the Commercial Care X 2ori~ district, according to p~.anni,ng staff memoranda. s • * The existing building exceeds al.l zoning standards, according tb planning staff memoranda. ~ The expansion of the building be Arid zoning standards or an expansion of a non-conformingt condition is a grant of special privilege not generally available to all prr~p~:rtX owner . * Unfashionable architactur$ or failure of the property owners to maintain properly a buildxr~g is insufficient cause ~ to exceed zoning standards. & The e~c~ansion of the buildaxag encroaches into the Vail village View Corridor. ~ It is recognized triat the zoning code. provides :Eor the right of the property owner to replace the structture to its gr,esent configuration should it become destroyed. ThereiEore, it is recommended that. any alteration to the structure be done within the confines of tlae existing building en~relope. Pis a conset~uence ~ the building would 'qualify for the required varianpes necessary to recan£igure the interior space :and upgrade the building exterior. In our judgement there is insufficient demonstration of benefit to tine community and neighborhood to justify the approval of the special Development District a~plicatian. The Town Council zs request~:d to deny ttae application for a s, special Development District far the,Go].d,en Peak House. f` sxncere'lY? • ~ ~ P` ~~r,-uc' , 3~3 o i zw C..~ ~t~ "Dc~ 3 , ~r r~ 1, t~ qll n TOTRL P.03 I BfOWn GfOUp, InC. 8400 maryland avenue O r~ p/~pr~ post office box 29 ~p~~/~/p p ~pQ~(vl st. louis, missouri 63166 If~ (314) 854-4000 B. A. Bridgewater, Jr. _ ~ chairman of the board, R~(~'~6~~® ®1 (9~ president and (1=( ~~jj t{ Od chief executive officer (314) 854-4200 November 1, 1993 Vail Town Council Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road West Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Mayor Osterfoss and Town Council Members: I should like to protest most strongly the designation of the Vail Athletic Club and the designation of the Golden Peak House as Special Development Districts. Both projects as proposed exceed all zoning standards for structures of their particular types, as determined by your planning staff. Further, the. Golden Peak House structure will extend into the Vail Village View Corridor, which is particularly troublesome. The protest already submitted on behalf of the East Village Homeowners Association, Inc., of which I am an officer, details these and other variances from zoning or code requirements. It also covers the pros and cons of a variety of modifications to proposals in both cases, and you are well familiar with these. I am particularly concerned that the process has evolved into a form of negotiation which will determine not whether Vail's zoning and standards are to be maintained and enforced, but rather the extent to which they are to be ignored or compromised. This is clearly not a simple problem, because no thoughtful and responsible resident of the community would advocate a review and approval system that was totally inflexible, and made it impossible for common sense to prevail where minor issues were in dispute. Vail Town Council November 1, 1993 Page 2 But the continuing and relentless use of the Special Development District to grant special privilege to the developers of large properties, creates a different set of rules for one class of citizens, far more lenient than the rules applied to other property owners. Further, I believe the developer- friendly Special Development District rules 'frustrate several vital preferences of most residents of Vailo o Preservation of generally open views within the village o Reasonable balance and aesthetic harmony among the structures in Vail, and minimal commercial bulk o Open streets and walkways, free from the spillover of bulky structures o A balance favoring green grass, rather than brown stone, in the summers o Consistent discipline applied to limit ever- increasing population density The Special Development District was a sound idea in concept, that has been ruined by excessive exploita- tion by development interests, and weak and flexible review by responsible authority. Excessively large structures of the sort proposed by the Vail Athletic Club and the Golden Peak House considered separately are seductively attractive, but collectively they have a special malignancy all treir own...each requiring the next structure to be larger and to eliminate a little more of our view and our open space. A line of responsibility will have to be drawn somewhere at some time. Will you please seriously consider drawing it here and now. Very truly o~, 7~ BABjr/san 1 1. O 1. 93 03 34 PM aMSVaO'S'G1~,Qg.tFs CC7~~' &tQ'8'~ Pt7Bf1 [7 ~~oei s~6.800 spa s ~ R-r vf<. a,a ~v~ N , 1303 csa7 AL®bNCU1N ROAD , $pMAUMBURCd, ILLIN01~ 601®~-If7®S ®ctobc~ X94 194 'power Council 'g'oww of /ail 7~ South lrroatage Road west `daily CC ~16~7 Vail athletic Club Special Devrelopffient Dlstaict Drag 1VYayor ®stergoss and Town ~otancifl l~~begs: pretest is ltercby subanietcd on behalf off the Ii;ast Village ~Yomcownora ~asoela° floe of the application requesting designation off the Vail ~thflcti6 Club 4~TAC) ~ a Special DeveIopzneat District (51D]~). IIt is the position off the ]~lpmeorvmers ~issaciation to opplose the creation of Special ip®vclopment IDistgicts Shat: 1. ~xcced zoning standards for established pane districts. 2. Violate established or proposed vie'w~ corgidors attd open space lands. '3. becomes a grant of special privilege, not generally avrailable to all pmpcgty owners. 4. Fog existing btaildings, any provision tb~at wotald cause Wn already exceeded zoning standard to be further expaanded. The Mail athletic Club Special IDavelopmont Distaict application does aaot conform ao items 1, 3 and 4 about. ~ . ~ ' ~ The VAC 81,3D proposal exceeds all zeni8lg standards for the Pttblac A~omano- elation zone district, according to plarytaing stafff naernoraada, The existing building excoeds all zoning standards, aecordtet~ to plaa~nistg staff mesaaoraatda, The cxpransloa of the building beyond zoning standards or an expaaslou off a nonconforming condition, is a grant of special p~ieilege not generally avail- able to all property owners. ~ gTnffashionable agchitecture or ffailure of the property owners to , enaintaln properly a building is insufft3cient cause to exceed zoning standards. 1 1. C! 1. 93 03 34 PM mbVd~'8'G~GtB..~ CCa~~ ~EQ'8`S PO'7/1 O October 29, 1993 \ Page Two . The l3Comeawaers Association recognises that the xonlag Dods provides for the right of the psopcsty owner to repines the str?actura to its pr~;sent coafiguratian should it becotx?e destroyed. Thereforeo it is recamttaeaded that stay alteration to the structure be doaa® within the comes of the existing building envelope. As a consequ®nca. the building would qualify far the gequired variances necessary to seconfi$ttre the fnterios space and ttg5grade the building exterior. Ye is recammetaded in order to achieve • the buildln$'® exterior upgrade and recota- figuratioea of the interior space: a. Iaormers should be replaced v~rith roof indentations, in the same ffash- ion as the proposed units located on the nth floor, south elevailota. This approach would have the net effect of reducing ~l~esi, tts well ag the bulk and mass of the buitdatag. b. expansion of the restaurant area oa the north elevation sho,ald be denied thus reducing the .percentage of sift coverage as well as the bulk and mass of the buildia$. In addition to .the forgoing, the following conditions should be attached to any ap- proval of the project: c. Streetscape improvements should be a proporl'aoual nffio~ant of the GYtFA in excess of the underlying sotae to that required of the ~hais- tiania Special development DiBtrict. Tlae Christiania requirencaerat was for 19 percent in excess ~I~e~ 8~llgwed. A condition of that approval was ~4QoQ00 its landsoape/streeYSCape improvements on public and private property. ~ The 'ilA~ ~rRFA requested, exceeds the stataddrd my S9 percent. If approved as pro- posed the @rAtr SL~l7 should be required to pay at a $ninimum for $120,000 of new landscape and atreetscape irnprovetaeata. A specified amount should be a condi- tion of approval. d. ~ Qpcn Spaco/warden park should b® created 'eta the area of the prey sent garden located on sta~ana tract lands, adjacent Bo the SAC site. The applicant should be respoaasible for the care and tuaintenance of the area according to approved standards. ~onslderatian should be given eo the dedication of the wpera Spaee t:3arden Fork in hoaaor of 1V~r. and lYdrs. F'itahugh Scott, the creators off the garden. e. parking should be met either on-site or afff--site. The "Fay-in-lieu" parking fee should be required of parkitag located off-site. The anoxia tnum standard parking roquirements9 with exoeption for parking . spaces having received a documented variance, should be enforced. 1 1. 0 1. 9i3 03 : 34 PM ; KMO70ROZ..A CORP gE070 P08/1 o October 29, 1993 Page Three The. building expansion is not being effectively offset by the creation of a sufficient number of available panting' spaces. The result will create increased panting pmbleme and costs for Mail Tillage. ff. Employee housing requirements should be net either on-site or off. site. g. Because the Special Deve$pm ent Mirict grants a special privilege, no view. blockage of neighboring residen as due to the expansion of the building should be permieted. The Homeowners Association's Board of Directors believe that the Special Devel. opment District is used to allow increases in density that will damage the charac- ter of our neighborhoods. There is inadequate documentation that justifies the goal that additional accommodation units will benefit the community. In our judgment there is insufficient demonstration of benefit to the community and neighborhood to justify the approval of the i Special Development Distriot application. The Town Council is regucsted to dopy the application for a Special Development District for the Vail Athletic Club. C f Best ish , obeit W. C3alvin, President East Village Homeowners Association RWG:ch co: Jim Lamont I - NOV-02-1993 09 30 FROM FUNDMINDERiCENTURION TD 13034792157 P. 01 ~td~T,D ~1NGLEY LTYrTIT 10 , VgIrYaA ~P~t. ~AY.t.~ , 38 ~4 ~1ppGQ//~~~E ~~C~~~3gpEI;gK //1~7ItI~ , 6bVo 67VA 15V~p vt~1Cla, CQ%,ORAT~ 81558-2508. 4l~ovember ~0 199 tlC~,~l .6V~Yd1 ~r~~n~°.~J.~ . TO~Tn Of Mail, 75 ~oaatla ~'rontar~e Road waste Vail, Colorado 81~i5'd e Pear F~aycp C~stea:f®ss and ~o~raa Cauncil l~emberse ~ pretest is hereby submitted rec~ardia~g ache use and averus~: of the Special meve~.opment District because cf the gollawing factoa:3o o ~asaiaag standarcds are we11 thought stet and have spacafic at~d genera]. reasons for ccaatralliYeg development and veacging frcan these standards has as?talt.ip].e nand uaapacedi~stable adverse ramigieaticaas; ~s a tanatter of fairness, any tame zauing s~tartdarcis are allowed co be e~cceeded, gt represeaats a grant of specia3. privilege net a~aa].able to all prcaperty owners ~ e any t~.xae tie zoning s~ca.ndaa:da are a.~AQt~ed to be breackaed, th~:re is a asassage of enac~ugagemexat sent to others that they sb.ou].d attempt the wane aeenue to '°o~aeat ache system09: o ~~ist#.ug chef ica,encies of a bu~.lding should not kre re~.soat ~®r alb-otaing standards to be ovrar3oo~Cec~o ~aa all of tl~e 5~1~ applaca"cions fleet a taave seeaa a.aa the few years that ~ have beeaa anterested ban icYxis un~.c;tae G,~.~.~anity P my personal . opi~iaaa as that there was 3nsugficieaat demonstration of benefit to the aaeighbarlaoode Hawev~:r, flee financial iaacentives of each c~evelloper weave obva.ouso YI3 ooaaclusaona I th.l.kak that it is a tote]. farce tc~ have sitaf~ acaa.].es seed standards ancg ttieaa a manner in iahich well~cvnnected, well prepared aald ~rellmheeled people can o~rercome the system with some effmx't sand wYaeeling and dealiaigo In the interests of ttae c~.Wl~.uni.gya ~ iaaploge yoia to tighten adhescence to the e~~.stang acceptable k~t~aldbaag codes and eliminate the avenue for bestawa.ng special pra~rglege a I S fY1C63r~ly v ~ ~t~S7~t~Ca Ix~nCJ 1 NOV 0z '93 11 04 P M PETROLEUM P.1 ~'!kK NtiTQB~R _ I• ~ ~ . • - ~ . - ~ . ~ ¢;or~et~s l - r- i 4 - I I ' r i/ CJl"1S T$$ER~ _ FAf3ES FOY.$~IJ$A6G TEfl S CO~1~R 5HE&T. Y~ YOLT @i~i/E A$~!K R!D Y, • $t~G~[tD~idC ~$t~N51KISSI0t3 {D$t ~F ~~7U pip R~C$y'~~ ~Z? THB ~~1~3ESc FL.E~S~ 6 • ~ ~ - ~ I MOV 02 '93 11 05 P M PETROLEUM P'Z I , . ~ ,r ~a I o0 ~ ~ ~ or.~ _ ~ ~ , n aendoml~iu~ a6+w~mv+* f . ~~~Q i . _ w.- _ . _ ..ro-a ~ •~rr• ' Vail Tawn Counc~.~. ~ Novemmer 199 • Town of Vail 75 south Frontage Road West Vail, Colorado $1~b57 I Dear l~ayar Ostsrf'oss an%,d Town Council Pgembers a . A ~zotest is hereby subi~ittecY concerning the application • requesting desigriatian of the flail Athletic Club(V~c) as a Special bevelQpmeztt District~(SDD) . The creation of the spe~Cial Development Distract is opposed because: ' * The VAC sDD proposal;, exceeds all zvninc~ standards gar the Public Accommodation zotn~ district, accord~.ng to planning stafg memoranda. * The existing bu~.].ding axcaeds all zoning standards, according t.o planning staff memoranda. * The expansion of thelbuilding be~and zoning standards or an expaMSian ag a non-van~arming_conditiox~ is a grant of special p~:.ivilege not genera ly available to X17. property' owners. * unfashionable artchit~cture of the unproven need gar additional accommodation units in Vail Village is insufficient cause to exceed; zoning standardso . * The expansion blocksi viQws Pram aaa existing privats~ residence_ ~ • It is recognized that t$~e zoning codE provides for the right of the property owner ~a geplace the structure to its resent configuration shouldiit become destroyed. 3'heregore, Lt is recommended that any alteration to the structure i.s . Gone within the confines of the existing bui7~ding envelope. As a cansequenae, the bui],di~c~ would quali~€y , f'or the required variances necessary try recon~.~g?zre the interior space and upgrade the building ca~tex3o , • In our 'udgement,there ~s insuf~'icient demonstration of benefit to t~e cammuna,ty and~neighbQrhoad to justify the approval of the special Development District•a~pli.cata.on. The Town Council is requeste tv deny the appllcatian for a Special Development District~~ar the veil P,thlet~.a Cium. Sincex~elY ? ~ . T~ VO~FaUFER CONDO2MINIUQM.~ AMSOCIAT~O~S • Ei~.ward D. Wasson, Ptesid~nt r ~'•z•~- ' NOV 02 '93 11 05 P M rtiKOLEUM j P'~ ' ~ .ter.,. - _.....~.w.+.r.v,rcura.a+.arat+v~•~;+^.uxw' .....».,.y.,. ...q.•,v-...+y.ls. ~.s..:r+. .••-.r.x...o-:NCOasr MHmM6.+'F..K ..un . .u.u... , • _ O 9 a • ~ I _ - • • ~ ~ 1 ' Q iniuM GpOrhR0~11' .r.~"_. "L'J'~ .v~J •~1.+Y Vai], Tciwn Gau~cil November ~8 1993 Town o € Va I 75 South ~x'ontage Atoad West j ' Vail, Calarado 81657 i ere s . pear Mayor c7sterfoss as i Town Cvunoi~. P~emb A protest is. hereby s~ab~aitted 4~,ncsex~ninq t4~e application requesting designation of th'a Golden peak House~GPI3) as a spec~.a]. pevelogsment District;(SDi7) . The creation of the Special Development pistrict is opposed Iaecausea - ~ The GF~ SbD ~ixoposa.~.!• es~aeeds a~.l xoninq standards iEor . the Commercia7~ Core x zone t~;i.strict, aocorr3,ixag to planning . staff memoranda- ~ The existing building exceeds aal zoning standards, ; according to planni.r~g staff ~+eme~7~arada> ~ The expan5i~n of thei building bexomd zvr~ing Staridatds ' . or an expansion oaf a non-con~€orming aond~tion is• a grant of special privilege not generallly available to all property owners. ' ~ [tnfashiQnable architecture or 3Eailura of the roperty owners to maintain properly a bui~.dinq is ynsuff'ici~en~ cause . to exceed zoning standards- • ~ 7Che expansion of the building encroaches into the Vail'Village View Corridoro I • It is recognized t$aat the zoning code provides fror the xi.c~ht of the property owner to replace the structure to its present configuxatf,on shouZdi it Aaecama destroyed. Therefore, it is recommended that any a~te9Catic~n to the structure be daa?e within the confines of the existing building envelop. l~s'a Consequence, the buildi~q would qualify for the required variances necessary to reconfigure the inter.~or spice and upgrade the building extex'io~.~ In our judgement there ~as~insugficient demonstration of benEEa.t to the community anc~j neighborhood, tv justify ~.he approval o€ the special Development Distract a p]sicat~.on. Z`he Town Council is ret~rtestecl to deny the e~pp3~c.8,,t~.ori for a Special bevelopment D~.strict~ for the Golden peak 1Ho~?seo- sincerely, • T~ vo~A.t7~~ cormaMZrT~t~rt ~socr~~or1 z ~clwartl B. Wasson, P'resi~.en r''.~ . NOU-01-1993 18 48 FROM OFFICE DEPOT 179 TO 1479215? P.02 ~tar~cxr~ L~1s 113 ~ice~ Stt~,1~ ~auth band~P. ~a~~orado ~t?~~G-~~7~ Vail TOWI'1 Go~dElCil Nove'inbe7C 2, ].9g3 Tawas of Vail . 75 South Fron,ta a Road West Vail., Co3orado ~~.6~7 Dear Mayor Osterfc?ss ar~d Town Council Memberse . ~ ~ratast is herseby submitted cancex~hixzg ~tlxe applicai:~.on requestYrrg designatioa~ of the Ve~.l Athletic club(VACy as a Special Development District(S~fDj. 'The creatie~n o~ tlae Speci.a'~. Devel~~,~ent bistrict is apposed b~:causea ~ The VAC S1DD proposal excee.<3s all zoning stat~da~rds fore the Public Accommodation zone district, according 'to p3.anr~ing staff sneznorandx . * The existing building exceeds 'sill ~onitag standards, according to plann~.ng staff memoranda. * The expansion of tl~e building Ioe'~ond zon~.ng standards or an expansion of a non°canformin~.condition i.s a grant of special px~rivilege not genexc~lly ava~.lable to a1Z property awnsa: s. * Unfashionablr~ architecture csx the unp~eoveaa need fox adda,tiona~l accammoc~a~.ion units in ~1a~.1 Village is r: a.nsuffi,cient cause to exceed xorifng standards. I° ~ The expansion blacks views from an existing private f' x'esidence- It xs recognized that the zoning cede provfdes far the righf. of the property owner to replace the structure to its _ ~iresen't confExgurat.zan should it becente destroyed. 7Phex'efare, it xs recommended that any alteration to the stxucttaxe is done within the confines of th,e existing building envelope. P,.s a consequence, the buiidin.g would qualify f'ar the required variances necessary tc~ reconfigure the i.ntcrzor space: and upgrade the buxldit~g exterior. j'. Zn our judgement tRaere is a.nsuffxaxer?t demonstration of ber~ef it to the community and neigrib4r}rood t0 justafy tkae approva3 of tl~e S~aecial Development i]3stri.ct, a~?plication. The Town Council ~s requested tv deny tFte applzcatian for a Special Development Distxic~.for the Vail Athletic Club. t Sincerely, ~cop-~-~ .~~rx~ C.~~St.1t `p~zd`c , ~Cnn1, '~1~~'~ MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 5, 1993 7:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, October 5, 1993, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 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 Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager Holly McCutcheon, Town Clerk The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation of which there was none. Item No. 2 was a Consent Agenda consisting of one item: Approval of the Minutes of the September 7, 1993, and September 21, 1993, Vail Town Council Evening Meetings. Merv Lapin moved to approve the Consent Agenda, with a second from Tom Steinberg. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 3 was Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1993, second reading, an ordinance submitting to the registered electors of the Town of Vail at the Regular Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, the 16th of November, 1993, the question of whether the Town of Vail sales taxes should increase $2,100,000.00 annually by the imposition of a new sales tax of 0.9% on restaurants and bars and a new sales tax of 1.8% on lodging begmning on January 1,1994, and each subsequent year; the annual revenues shall be designated exclusively for the construction, marketing and operation of a performance and conference center; authorizing the Town of Vail to increase debt up to $12,600,000.00 by issuance of negotiable interest bearing bonds for the purpose of providing the construction, marketing and operation of a performance and conference center; providing for the cessation of such portion of the tax increase that is no longer necessary to service the revenue bonds; setting forth the ballot title; providing for notice of the election; providing for conduct of the election; providing further details in relation to the foregoing. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Tom Moorhead advised he had spoken with Dee Wisor, attorney with the firm of Sherman and Howard, regarding wording of the ballot question proposed in this ordinance, and indicated that the resulting proposed alternative wording for the ballot question as presented to Council at this meeting was reworded to meet Amendment 1 requirements. Tom Moorhead noted that Amendment 1 required the proposed sales tax increase amount for the first year had to be specified, and noted that it was Mr. Wisor`s opinion that this proposed ballot question include the proposed sales tax increase amount and repayment cost in the first paragraph of the proposed ballot question. Tom Moorhead addressed other proposed wording changes including language that dealt with making certain TOV would not be limited to $2,100,000.00 if, in fact, more was raised from the proposed tax increases. Additionally, Tom Moorhead proposed wording was added to the last paragraph of the proposed ballot question indicating that the bonds would be payable from the revenues of the tax authorized by this proposed ballot question and other Town of Vail revenues as determined by Council from time to time. This wording had been added at the suggestion of Mr. Wisor, who had indicated that, from the standpoint of issuing the bonds, it would be important for the issuance of the bonds to recognize that they would not be driven solely by the proposed revenues if Council determined that other revenues should be used. Further change to the proposed ballot question would changed the collection and retention period for the revenues from three (3) to four (4) years, which Council had suggested on first reading. Merv Lapin was opposed to the portion of the last paragraph of the proposed ballot question which indicated the bonds could be payable with the revenues of the tax authorized by the proposed ballot question and other Town of Vail revenues. There was lengthy discussion about the coverage factor for these bonds. Steve Thompson indicated these bonds needed 25-50% coverage. Merv felt the proposed wording maintained that other sales taxes could be used in order to pay back the bonds. Mayor Osterfoss felt it was important to note that only existing revenues were being discussed. TOV would have to take the matter to a vote if another new tax was to be a coverage factor for these 1 Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 10/5nJ3 bonds. There was further language clarification and bond issue coverage discussion. Merv continued to contend people were going to read the proposed ballot question as presented to say if there was not enough money to cover the payment of the operating costs of the facility, TOV could use other sales tax revenues above the proposed 0.9% restaurant and baz sales tax and the proposed 1.8% lodging sales tax to retire the debt, and that was not the intent. Rob Levine noted that in order to sell the bonds, the coverage indicated by the proposed language was needed. It was the Vail. Valley Performance and Conference Center Steering Committee's (VVP&CC's) job to educate the public about the rationale for the proposed bond coverage language. Jim Gibson said what he read int the proposed ballot question was that any source of revenue that presently existed could be used to retire these bonds, and he felt that was a very serious negative. Merv agreed. Mayor Osterfoss maintained that the reality of the situation was the coverage factor. She noted there was always abackup-up position and additional collateral required on any kind of bonds or money lending. Further alternative wording was discussed. Merv Lapin asked how the time schedule would be affected if the ordinance was sent back to the VVP&CC Steering Committee for further work. It was noted the Town Clerk would have a very difficult time meeting required schedules if the ordinance were delayed, but it could be done. Tom Moorhead explained that the only reason the language addition to the last paragraph had been made was at the advice of Mr. Wisor in order to deal with the marketing of the bonds. jim Gibson did not feel this ballot issue should be used as a method of education, but rather as a method of explanation. His concern was that the proposed language said any source of revenue today could be used to retire these bonds or make up a shortfall in operating expenses, and he wanted to know if that was needed in the ballot question. Steve Thompson said that it was needed in order to provide the coverage factor for the bonds. Rob Levine asked if Council would be obligated to pay from the existing revenue stream to make up a shortfall. Steve Thompson confirmed it would, in a worst case scenario. If things did not work out, TOV would then be able to go into sales taxes, and again it was agreed that was not the intent. Caroline Tremblay said it had never been the intention of the Steering Committee or Town staff to use other sources of revenue beyond the restaurant, bar, and lodging taxes in this proposed ballot question to pay for the construction, operations or mazketing of the facility. She said it was the bond counsel who advised that TOV's revenues in some way be used as collateral. She said the Steering Committee did not realize that stipulation had to be in the ballot question, but bond counsel had told them they would not be able to sell the bonds without that because the bond rating would be bad. The marketability of the bonds was discussed. Mayor Osterfoss suggested the language state it was the intention that the taxes proposed in this ballot issue be full repayment for the bonds, and if additional bond coverage was required, other existing revenues could be pledged as determined by Council. She felt that was an honest representation of the situation. Merv Lapin felt the alternative was to have the wording say only the revenues from the proposed taxes could be used to sell bonds and all other coverage would have to come from savings or donations. He was very much against the idea of being able to have the ability to resort to other TOV sales taxes. Other funding scenarios were discussed. Stan Cope, member of the Steering Committee, felt if the revenue bonds were made to pay exclusively, the wait for this facility would be three (3) to four (4) years longer. Mr. Cope felt that might even kill the issue. He said he would gamble on trying to explain that half the money proposed to be raised was to go to debt service, the balance, while very necessary, was for appropriations and mazketing. He said he realized that put TOV at a slight risk, but because this facility was a benefit across Town, asked if that small risk was worth killing the project. Mayor Osterfoss felt all voters were now responsible for studying and understanding implications of ballot issues. She felt if voters did not know what coverage factors were, they needed to understand that any bond issuance municipalities have ever had always had aback-up in addition to a pledge source of revenue. Jim Gibson indicated he would probably support this ballot issue, but it was not his understanding that TOV could use funds from any source in order to finance a shortfall either in the bond obligation or the operation back-up. Bob Buckley said every revenue bond TOV had had been backed-up by sales tax, but Jim Gibson felt those bonds were for integral parts of the workings of the Town of Vail, i.e. parking structures, the police building, etc., but the performance and conference center, although an integral part of Vail, was not an integral part of the workings of the Town of Vail.. Rob Levine felt anyone who did not understand coverage factors and how bonds were paid off would easily understand the fact that only half of the revenue being raised by this proposed increase tax was going towazd the obligation of paying the debt. He said the likelihood of TOV dipping into other existing sales taxes was so remote it was a tiny little risk weighed on an outside factor that was substantial and he felt, Council as a group, had consistently said they would take calculated risks on well thought out projects, the performance and conference center being one. Jim Gibson was not concerned about the voters who understood the bond coverage issue, but was concerned about the education of voters who did not understand in time for the November 16 election. 'Z Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 10/&93 Caroline Tremblay noted Council had been presented with a ball park figure of $1.2 million in additional costs to TOV if the performance and conference center were to be built. She advised, after further review, the Steering Committee was able to eliminate $500,000.00 from the $1.2 million figure by elimination of duplications in their budgets and from work that did not need to be done. She said it had been assumed by members of the Design Committee, the architectural firm, and members of the construction firm that costs associated with moving the entrance to the parking deck, roadway improvements, lowering of the Vail International roadway, an other miscellaneous improvements to the parking deck were to be paid for by TOV. She stated she had not found a written memo from TOV advising the contractors not to include that in their budget; they had been verbally told that. She listed their outline of construction documents, and reviewed how the $1.2 million was reduced to $700,000. She distributed and reviewed four proforma cash flow spreadsheets based on a 1996 construction start date and 1996 bond issuance. She advised that the Steering Committee was recommending the figures listed on the spreadsheet numbered " 2" showing a total bond issuance cost of $15,535,000 with a total repayment cost of $38,800,000 for the proposed ballot question, and explained how the figures were calculated. The figures were discussed. Caroline also advised that private fund raising had not kicked in to the extent that might be imagined because significant donors wanted to know that the community was behind this issue before seriously considering participation. Mayor Osterfoss noted the material presented was a substanrial amount of new material to be considered and asked what the impact of not proceeding at this time was in order for Council to review and fully understand the new material. Beside the timeframes for the Town Clerk's mailing schedule, Caroline stated the window of public education on the issue would disappear. After further discussion, Rob Levine moved to approve Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1993, on second reading, with the bond issuance amount being $15,535,000, the total repayment cost being $38,800,000, and wording changes to the proposed ballot question to include the fact that funds would be collected for no longer than four years, and if construction had not begun on December 31,1997, a vote would be taken to determine the utilization of the unused revenues at the General Election in November, 1998, and that the last paragraph of the proposed ballot question would consist of an explanation which would state that the intention of the tax references therein would be full repayment for the bonds and if additional bond coverage was required other existing revenue sources could be pledged as determined by the Town Council. Bob Buckley seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, Jim Gibson stated he wanted to delay a decision until October 19,1993, after Council had time to more thoroughly digest the options and the impact on TOV. Tom Steinberg and Jim Shearer agreed. When reminded about the decreased opportunity to provide information to voters as a result of that delay, it was suggested this be further discussed at the October 12, 1993, Work Session. Merv Lapin suggested Dee Wisor be asked to come to Vail on October 12 to discuss the bond coverage issue in greater detail. Merv did not agree that sales tax revenues beyond 0.9% and 1.8% were needed if the numbers presented to Council were correct. Jim Gibson agreed. Steve Thompson also noted with the shortened timeframe, it would be difficult to produce and distribute the pro and con statement which were to be part of the mailing scheduled for October 22,1993. In fact, no con statements had been received yet because there was no ballot measure yet for anyone to respond to. After examining the potential problems with delaying passage of this ordinance on second reading at this meeting, Rob Levine withdrew his motion, although he said he felt comfortable passing the ordinance at this meeting. Bob Buckley withdrew his second. After brief discussion, Jim Shearer moved to table Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1993, second reading, until a special meeting on October 12,1993, following a meeting with Dee Wisor on that date. Jim Gibson seconded this motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 4 was Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Section 3.40.170 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail deleting the definition of "charitable." Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Steve Thompson advised that TOV did not presently exempt all non-profit organizalaons. This ordinance would remove the present restrictive definition of "charitable organization" currently in TOV's Municipal Code, and would allow TOV to follow the State of Colorado's, Aspen's, Breckenridge's, and Steamboat Springs' policy. Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1993, on first reading, with a second from Merv Lapin. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. Item No. 5 was a public hearing regarding newly proposed parking structure rates. It was noted the number one issue raised on this year's Citizen Survey responses was the need for action on parking problems. Mayor Osterfoss advised that Council had discussed the issue at a recent budget session, and it was agreed that an opportunity for additional public comment on the issue was in order. Greg Hall reviewed the newly proposed parking structure rates. He said the recommendation of the Parking and Transportation Task Force was based on the goals of reducing vehicle traffic in Town, reducing vehicle demand on infrastructure, developing good commuting habits, reducing dependency on automobiles, reducing automobile emissions, and encouraging use of alternate transportation 3 Vail Town Council l~ening Meeting Minutes 1W5~93 modes. As proposed and detailed in the Town of Vail news release dated October 1, 1993, free parking in the Vail Village' and Lionshead structures would be shortened from 90 minutes to 45 minutes with a $1.00 fee up to 90 minutes. A second part of the proposal would extend free evening parking in the structures to 2 1 /2 hours between 6:00 P.M. and 10:00 P.M. This plan was expected to generate additional revenue to be used for increased bus service on outlying routes and reduce gridlock traffic as experienced in the past. The goal was to increase average daily ridership on the West Vail and Sandstone routes by 8%; and 4% on the East Vail route. Simultaneously, it was hoped this proposal would reduce the number of free parking transactions in the structures by 40%, thereby reducing overall congestion throughout Town. The proposal to expand free parking after 6:00 P.M. was intended to help shop and restaurant owners increase their evening business. Further, the plan proposed conversion of the 250 parking spaces at Ford Park into a carpool lot, with free parking for riders of three or more between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 2:00 P.M. seven days per week. Non carpool vehicles would be charged $10.00. It was noted paid parking would begin the day before Thanksgiving, regardless of any decision by Vail Associates, Inc. to begin the ski season early. Mayor Osterfoss noted the suggested changes were not so TOV could generate additional funds as much as it was an attempt to respond to increased traffic congestion and problems people had reported over the last year as they had tried to get in to Town. After hearing the Parking and Transportation Task Force`s proposal, Mayor Osterfoss said Council had an additional suggestion. The restaurant and retail community felt it would be helpful to introduce a longer period of free parking in the evening. This would be in face of what was perceived as increased competition from other restaurants and shopping areas located in other parts of the Valley. The longer free evening parking was proposed in order to encourage patrons to return to Vail in the evening to increase business during that time. Council had suggested going to 2 1 /2 hours free parking for anyone who came into the parking structure between 6:00 P.M. and midnight. She also mentioned that Council felt the parking structure fit Douglas Bruce's "enterprise concept." An enterprise fund was one which could only get up to 10% of its funding from a government source. At this point in time, TOV was not free to turn parking into free parking because that would result in substantial subsidy coming from other Town of Vail sources. She added Council had been told that the existing level of bus service and existing frequency apparently had to be supplemented on a regular basis in order to accommodate everyone who was trying to use it. Greg Hall displayed and reviewed charts and graphs detailing the 1992-93 Village and Lionshead parking structure lengths of stay, number of vehicles, and fee paid details. He particularly noted 167,000 parking transactions were free parking transactions, and those transactions were fairly even throughout the day. Input was received from Ken Koenig, Rod Slifer, Mike Staughton, Mark Halsted, Sybill Navas, Jeff Christianson, Rick Sackbauer, Stan Cope, George Knox, Beth Slifer, Chaz Bernhardt, Bob Moroni, and Jack Curtin, all who primarily collectively agreed something had to be done to compete with free parking. They felt the Parking and Transportation Task Force's goals were well stated, but did not solve the problems for reasons including: parking fees that would be an irritant to locals and tourists at the expense of small businesses in Vail and sales tax revenues that would be further eroded by encouraging people to go down Valley, where alternatives to eat and shop without paid parking had grown. It was felt peak traffic times in Town were at 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. when people were arriving or leaving work or skiing, but after 5:30 P.M. the traffic flowed smoothly. It was also agreed that the proposed 45 minutes of free parking in the evening was much too short - it took at least three hours to park, have dinner and browse; that the current bus schedule was too complicated, infrequent, and un-synchronized; that the proposed free parking times were confusing; that people who were least able to afford parking were being targeted the most and encouraged what was referred to as "turning" -employees and others returning to the parking structures just before their free parking time expired and driving right back into the structure for another free parking period, only to repeat this ritual several times a day; that the bus system needed to be made more convenient to use as it was not getting locals around expediently, only skiers; that the whole bus system was not user friendly; and that carpooling was difficult with the variety of different employee work schedules. Parking for use of the Library and other public facilities and events for locals such as hockey were noted as areas requiring specific parking use analysis. Park 'n Rides, 1 /2 price employee parking, one-time fee extended parking passes, outlying lots, were some of the suggestions other than those proposed, but all agreed alternative parking places were needed if the buses were not synchronized. Interspersed with public input were explanations by Mayors Osterfoss on efforts being made by the Regional Transportation Authority and how the parking structure issues were related to the bus schedule as it could reduce subsidies that would have to be paid to the enterprise fund. Some hesitancy was express by Council and public about making major changes all at once. It was felt changes should be made, but after further analysis. After all input was hearing, Mayor Osterfoss directed staff to review and analyze the input, get a grip on the 167,000 free parking transactions, and respond with suggestions to structure the ideas. She advised that Teresa Albertson at Town of Avon was taking bus problem input, and that Jody Doster . could be reached to discuss bus schedules needed. 4, Vail Town Counci] Evening Meeting Minutes 10/553 There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk Minutes taken by Dorianne S. Deto C:WIINSOCT5.93 5 Vail Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 10/b93 O T MINUTES VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 19,1993 7:30 P.1VI. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, October 19,1993, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Peggy Osterfoss, Mayor Merv Lapin, Mayor Pro-Tem Jim Gibson Tom Steinberg Rob Levine Bob Buckley MEMBER ABSENT: jim Shearer TOWN OFFICIAL5 PRESENT: Larry Grafel, Acting Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to the Town Manager The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Bob Armour stated he wanted to keep the Davos Trail area as open space and, requested that TOV purchase the forty acre parcel in the light of proposed development of the Trapper's Run area. He noted the Davos Trail area was the last large pine forest undeveloped on the west side and felt it would be a great visual loss if developed, Davos Trail was a highly used recreational area, and environmentally, it was the second largest deer migration area in the State. He felt the proposed development of the Trapper's Run area would have a negative impact on the entire neighborhood there, including traffic and safety problems. Kent Rose delivered a petition of 739 signatures to Council. Mr. Rose read the petition title into the record: "We the undersigned concerned citizens who support the preservation of open space, encourage recreational opportunity and strongly believe in maintaining the quality of life in the Vail Valley, are opposed to development of the proposed subdivision know as Trappers Run. We herewith petition the Vail Town Council to consider Trappers Run only if it can be shown that no variances will be granted, that no adjacent public lands will be utilized or otherwise negatively impacted, that wildlife and wildlife migration routes will not be negatively impacted and that the surrounding neighborhood will not be adversely affected. We further petition the Vail Town Council to consider purchase of Trappers Run to advance that preservation of open space, encourage recreational opportunity and enhance the quality of life for future generations." The petition included a summation defining the "immediate neighborhood" as Chamonix Lane west of Chamonix Road, Garmish Drive, Arosa Drive, Davos Trail, and Cortina Lane. That immediate neighborhood consisted of 163 platted lots, 38 vacant lots or lots under construction, leaving 125 lots available for canvassing of which 107 were represented by signature on the petition. Mr. Rose noted those 739 signatures represented 86% of the above identified immediate neighborhood. Cary Arthur, proposed developer of Trapper`s Run, felt lack of communication was responsible for people's opposition to development of the area. He briefly discussed the proposed project. He asked Council what funds were available for purchase of open space or what alternatives there were. He advised that a presentation of what was being proposed would be made on Monday, October 25, 1993, and encouraged all interested parties to attend. Mayor Osterfoss indicated Council could receive the petition at this time, but the issue would have to be taken under advisement. Item No. 2 was Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1993, second reading, an ordinance submitting to the registered electors of the Town of Vail at the Regular Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, the 16th of November, 1993, the question of whether the Town of Vail sales taxes should increase .$2,100,000.00 annually by the imposition of a new sales tax of 0.9% on restaurants and bars and a new sales tax of 1.8% on lodging beginning on January 1,1994, and each subsequent year; the annual revenues shall be designated exclusively for the construction, marketing and operation of a performance and conference center; authorizing the Town of Vail to increase debt up to $14,400,000.00 by issuance of negotiable interest bearing bonds for the purpose of providing the construction, marketing and operation of a performance and conference center; providing for the cessation of such portion of the tax increase that is no longer necessary to service the revenue bonds; setting forth the ballot title; providing for notice of the election; providing for conduct of the election; providing further details in relation to the foregoing. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Tom Moorhead advised that the wording of the proposed ballot question presented within Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1993, on second reading, was set forth as a result of discussion during Council's last Work Session. Jim Gibson asked if the final sentence of the proposed ballot question indicating that if additional bond coverage was required, other sales tax revenue could be pledged as determined by Town Council, had to remain in the proposed ballot question. Both Tom Moorhead and Steve Thompson advised that John Buck, bond underwriter with Hanifen Imhoff, recommended that 1 Vnil Town Council F.vcning Mooting Minutoe 10/19/93 provision be left in to assure an "A" bond rating and to help avoid any need for TOV to have to purchase bond insurance coverage, the approximate cost of which was estimated at $110,000. It was noted the need for other sales tax revenue was a remote possibility, and Merv Lapin indicated TOV might still have to buy the insurance anyway. Steve Thompson confirmed that. Caroline Tremblay stated the Vail Valley Performance and. Conference Center Steering Committee recommended approval of this ordinance as presented on second reading at this meeting. After brief discussion regarding the possibility of a revenue stream shortfall, Rob Levine moved to approve Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1993, with the deletion of the final sentence of the proposed ballot question indicating that if additional bond coverage was required, other sales tax revenue could be pledged as determined by Town Council. Merv Lapin seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 3 was Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1993, second reading, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Section 3.40.170 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail deleting the definition of "charitable." Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Merv Lapin moved to approve Ordinance No. 24, Series of 1993, on second reading, with a second from Jim Gibson. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 4 was Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1993, first reading, an annual appropriation ordinance: adopting a budget and financial plan and making appropriations to pay the costs, expenses, and liabilities of the Town of Vail, Colorado, for its fiscal year January 1, 1994, through December 31, 1994, and providing for the levy assessment and collection of Town ad valorem property taxes due for the 1993 tax year and payable in the 1994 fiscal year. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Jim Gibson moved fo approve Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1993, on first reading, with a second from Bob Buckley. Before a vote was taken, Steve Thompson reviewed the funds within the ordinance that were different from in the past, including the Parking Structure Fund, the Vail Housing Fund, and noted the mill levy decrease from 6.35 to 6.19. He noted that 18% growth in assessed valu_ ation would generate more revenue than TOV could keep under Amendment 1. It was noted mill levies could no longer be increased without going to a vote. ,Steve also noted the Enterprise Fund was exempted under Amendment 1. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 5 was Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 31 (Golden Peak House) and providing for a development plan and its contents; development standards; and other special provisions; and setting forth details in regard thereto. The applicants were Golden Peak House Condominium Association/Nail Associates, Inc./GPH Partners, Ltd./Margaritaville, Inc. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Mike Mollica reviewed the applicants' requests to accomplish the proposed redevelopment of the Golden Peak House as detailed in the Community Development Departments (CDD) memo to the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) dated October 11, 1993. The five requests included a request for the establishment of a Special Development District (SDD), a request for a Commercia Core I (CCI) exterior alteration, a request for an encroachment into View Corridor No. 1, a request to rezone a portion of Tract E from Agricultural and Open Space to CCI, and a request for a minor subdivision involving the inclusion of the rezoned Tract E parcel into the Golden Peak House (GPH) parcel, and the inclusion of a portion of Lot C into the GPH parcel. Mike also reviewed the twelve understandings as detailed in Section 8 of Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1993,. which the developer agreed to as a part of TOV's approval of the establishment of SDD No. 31. This included the details of the restriction of employee housing units per the Town of Vail Housing Ordinance, streetscape improvements including the applicants contribution of $32,000 toward the redesign and redevelopment of Seibert Circle, permanent dedication of open space to TOV by co-applicant, Vail Associates, Inc. (VA), dedication of a public pedestrian easement across Lot C, located between the GPH and the Hill Building, to TOV by the developer, deed restrictions on two three-bedroom dwelling units to be included in the GPH short-term rental program at all times when they were not occupied by the owners or guests and, in addition, the developer would agree to restrict the remaining two lock-offs in the building as well as the two accommodation units in the building, also at times when they were not occupied by the owner or his guests. Mayor Osterfoss asked for more information about that restriction as it was different wording than usually seen by the TON. Mike advised the standard wording normally used was in the Subdivision Regulations which essentially allowed an owner to use his unit only twenty-eight days during peak ski season and also stated it could not be used as a permanent residence, it could not be lived in longer than six months. Mike noted Clark Willingham, the developer, was proposing that these units be placed in the short-term rental program for the GPH whenever they were not used by the owner or his guests. Mike observed that left it fairly open as there were no assurances about the duration of tune an owner would occupy these units. He acknowledged that was a deviation from what had been done in the past. Mike continued review of the remaining understandings in Section 8 including language regarding the possibility of a future improvement district for streetscape improvements and/or the implementation of the Transportation Master Plan, and language Mike referred to as d>recdon to the Design Review Board (DRB) with regard to certain exterior elements on the building, including the understanding that the proposed tar and gravel roof for the building was acceptable to the PEC. He pointed out that Section 9 of the ordinance included the PEC's action, as well as the recommendation of staff, that the retractable enclosure over the outdoor dining deck not be a part of the project. He 2 Vail Town Counc~ Evening Meeting Minutes 10/19/93 added that a letter of protest against the application requesting designation of the GPH as an SDD dated October 18,1993, had been submitted earlier today by Jim Lamont on behalf of the East Village Homeowners Association, Inc. Mr. Willingham felt the main controversy was over whether or not there should be a deck enclosure of some sort and discussed the details of a proposed compromise. This was followed by Council discussion regarding the size of the deck enclosure. Drawings of the GPH project were displayed. Mr. Willingham reviewed desired changes in their proposal and related those changes to the changes and understandings listed in Section 8 of Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1993. He was particularly concerned with the language of Section 8, Item 3, regarding the minimum area of open space designated to be dedicated to TOV. Mayor Osterfoss advised the proposed clarifications could be worked out with staff between now and second reading. She indicated if the SDD concept was to be supported, there needed to be reassurance that there would be some major contributions coming back to the community in terms of permanent open space. Tom Steinberg felt an appraisal of the CCI square footage versus an appraisal of the open space should be conducted, and felt TOV might end up with all of Tract E. Mr. Willingham said the land VA was proposing to give TOV was approximately 3,000 square feet. Gerry Arnold, representing VA, read in full a letter dated October 19, 1993, signed by Chris Ryman, Senior Vice President, VA, regazding the open space parcel dedication proposal. By that letter, VA agreed to convey to TOV no later than December 31,1993, that portion of Tract E (comprising approximately 2,000 to 3,000 square feet) bounded by the centerline of Mill Creek on the east, Hanson Ranch Road on the north, Cyranos property line on the west, and a line which would extend from the southeast corner of the Cyranos lot easterly to the centerline of Mill Creek on the south, as approximately represented on a map attached to that letter. The letter stated that because VA felt that TOV's vision regarding uses for the above described land were basically consistent with VA's vision, they proposed the conveyance of the land, subject to six conditions detailed in that letter. After discussion regarding those conditions, Ms. Arnold stated she would take Council's suggestions, including the request that the land dedication include land south to the bike path and that there be a permanent easement or lease for Pirate Ship Park, back to VA management for review. Mayor Osterfoss advised that Tom Moorhead also needed to review the proposal. Mr. Willingham continued discussion about proposed changes and clarifications for the balance of Section 8 of the ordinance. He proposed to either delete Item 9 of Section 8 altogether since their new plans would include a modified deck enclosure, or to amend Item 9 to read, "The Town Council's approval for the establishment of SDD No. 31 includes the developer's request to enclose approximately 200 square feet of the Los Amigos outdoor dining deck on the south side of the building by the use of a ReKord glass door system." Further comment included expression of concerns about that request. Kristan Pritz was directed to informally discuss this issue further with the PEC members before second reading. Tom Steinberg suggested the developer be required to pay into a loading dock fund. Mike Mollica noted that the specific language in Item 8 of Section 8 of the ordinance included the Streetscape Plan improvements and the Transportation Plan improvements. Mayor Osterfoss asked Mike Mollica to review what criteria the PEC used to recommend approval of this ordinance. Mike stated the SDD was the most important aspect of this. He noted the SDD was an overlay zone district which allowed TOV and property owners flexibility with regard to the development standards. It also allowed TOV to weigh public benefits associated with an SDD and to balance that with the devel„Y.~~ent standards. Staff felt an SDD was an appropriate vehicle in this case primarily because of the existing conditions on the site. He noted the GPH, as it presently existed, was well over on almost every development standard. He referred Council to review the displayed GPH Zoning Analysis chart. Mike stated that to review a proposal based on those development standards and to stick to the specific numbers was very difficult, but staff had been able to review the project based upon TOV's Comprehensive Plan's goals and objectives. The criteria used in evaluating this proposal were detailed on page 7 of the CDD memo to the PEC dated October 11, 1993. Specifically, Mike discussed the Vail Village Master Plan's Goal No.1 and Policy No. 3-2 which called out the GPH as a primary renovation site. Mike said staff had looked at the pros and cons of the project and identified the public benefits of the project, such as employee housing, improvements to Seibert Circle and the rental restrictions on some of the accommodation, lock-off and dwelling units. He advised Council that the architectural changes and modifications that had occurred to the project over the last two years were fully addressed in this same memo. The SDD allowed staff to review the architecture, landscaping, streetscape improvements, etc. He said the PEC and staff recommended approval of the project with listed conditions and understandings. The criteria for CCI exterior alterations, zoning district amendments, and minor subdivisions were all also addressed in the October 11, 1993 memo. He noted the property was encumbered with easements and that was the primary reason staff was supporting the request for a zoning change to CCI. He added the project would meet all of the minor subdivision criteria. Mike summarized the view corridor encroachment criteria, and stated staff supported the applicants request because staff did not believe the encroachment would negatively modify or effect the overall purpose and intent of creating View Corridor #1. He stated the View Corridor Ordinance also gave staff the ability to look at view corridors or vistas from other public plazas. The PEC had identified the area at the top of 3 Voil Town Council Evening Meeting Minutes 10/19/93 Bridge Street as an important view, and that was the primary reason the project had been redesigned so the central portion of the building had been kept open, so that view was going to 'be maintained with the redevelopment of the site. Discussion followed about the view corridor modification processes. Jim Lamont, representing the East Village Homeowners Association, (EVHA) read in full the previously distributed letter of protest dated October 18, 1993, against this project. It was the position of the EVHA to oppose the creation the GPH SDD because the proposal exceeded all zoning standards for the CCI zone district, the existing building exceeded all zoning standazds, the expansion of the building beyond zoning standards or an expansion of anon-conforming condition was a grant of special privilege not generally available to all property owners, and iunfashionable architecture or failure of the property owners to properly maintain a building was insufficient cause to exceed zoning standards. The letter of protest offered a number of recommendations to achieve the building's exterior upgrade and reconfiguration of the interior space. Mr. Lamont requested a meeting with staff and the applicant to review the numbers. He also stated he wanted to see a financial guarantee that the view corridor would be protected. He was not assured by design drawings, etc. that the view corridor would be protected during construction and felt fines should be levied against developers if the view corridors were encroached on. Mr. Willingham responded to Mr. LamonNs comments by citing the project's benefits to the community. Hank Frazier, George Knox, Kent Rose, Harry Frampton, and an unidentified seven-year Vail resident encouraged Council to pass this ordinance to renovate the GPH. All felt the existing building was not characteristic of Vail quality. Jim Gibson, Bob Buckley, and Rob Levine expressed strong support for this project, indicating it was a positive change for the Town and beautification of Bridge Street. Merv Lapin stated lie had no complaints about the architecture of the building, but was concerned about the level of development in the Town of Vail. The smallest building was the original one and the largest one (showing the most mass) appeared to be the latest one. He asked when the bigger and bigger buildings should stop. He felt TOV was giving up a lot for the density of such buildings. At what point was the obligation on the part of the land owner to improve buildings without additional square footage. He felt the result was going to be an eight and nine story Bridge Street. He agreed the GPH project was an attractive building, but asked at what price. He felt the density and number of people that could be handled and still have a quality experience for the tourists and locals was diminished by greater and greater density. More people would be in the restaurants and shops and TOV had not increased its infrastructure to handle those people. He felt they quality of life he wanted, and what he wanted for the tourists, was not represented by the increased density of this project. Tom Steinberg agreed. After further review of the purpose of SDDs and view corridor protection, Jim Gibson moved to approve Ordinance No. 28, Series of 1993, on first reading, on the basis that it satisfied the nine criteria required for an SDD and also met the twelve conditions of approval recommended by the PEC as listed in the October 19,1993, CDD memo to Town Council, and on the condition that terms of the amount of land proposed to be dedicated by VA be reviewed and confirmed by second reading, and that Section 9 of Item 8 of the ordinance be amended or deleted, and that the $32,000 Sireetscape contribution be due upon issuance of the building permit. Bob Buckley seconded the motion. Before a vote was taken, staff was directed to work with Clark Willingham on Section 8, Item 9. A vote was then taken and the motion passed, 4-2, Tom Steinberg and Merv Lapin opposed. There was a brief meeting break from 10:05 Pm to 10:15 P.M. at which time all reassembled for the next agenda item. Item No. 6 was Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance approving a Special Development District (known as SDD No. 30, The Vail Athletic Club) and the development plan in accordance with Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code and setting forth details in regazd thereto. The applicant was JWT/1987 Vail Limited Partnership, aka The Vail Athletic Club. Mayor Osterfoss read the title in full. Shelly Mello first reviewed the CDD memo to Council dated October 19, 1993 regazding the parking history for the Vail Athletic Club (VAC) in response to Council's request for additional information. According to that memo, after reseazching the issue, staff found that the parking requirement as calculated in 1977 appeared to be less than the pazking requirement which would be assessed for the same plans today. The research showed there was a net difference of 5.39 parking spaces between what the staff calculated on the 1977 plans and what was calculated for the existing building. The issue was briefly discussed after which Mayor Osterfoss noted the difference between the existing and the proposed parking for this project was approximately nine spaces, and part of this proposal was to have those nine spaces provided. Shelly referred next to the CDD's memo to Council dated September 30,1993, wherein the pazking issue was further addressed. It was noted parking had been a long standing issue on this site. As detailed in the September 30, 1993, memo, staff research on the issue had found that there were a number of variances granted to this project. Different arrangements had been made over the yeazs for pazking on TOV land as well as other properties for this project to address the deficit. Variances had been granted for a total of twenty spaces over the life of the project. Using today's standazds, there was an existing deficit of 58.4 pazking spaces for the project. There would be a nine space pazking requirements increase as a Vail Town Council Evening Mceting Afinutes 10/19/93 result of this expansion. This was based on the difference between the required parking for the proposed project and the existing development. The applicant was proposing per the PEC's recommended action that an additional six on-site parking spaces be provided and three spaces be paid for into the parking pay-in-lieu program which would bring the total to twenty-nine spaces. All of the parking spaces would be valet. Shelly Mello noted the CDD memo to Council dated September 30, 1993, outlined the PEC's recommended conditions on the project. The first condition required the applicant to restrict 52 accommodation units (AUs) for permanent short-term rental and that they would not be subdivided in the future to allow for individual ownership. The Condominium Declarations had to be amended to include this point before an occupancy permit would be released for the project. The second condition addressed employee housing, requiring the applicant to provide one 1 bedroom and one 2 bedroom employee housing units (EHUs) and restricting them per the Town of Vail Employee Housing Ordinance. The EHU restriction agreement was to be signed and submitted to staff for approval before a building permit would be released for the project. These EHUs were to provide the minimum standards specified in TOV's Employee Housing Ordinance and would provide housing for a total of six employees. Four additional PEC recommended conditions addressed pay- in-lieu parking for three spaces ($8,000 per space) and removal of two exterior parking spaces adjacent to the structure entry so that area would be designated for loading and delivery, landscaping on the south side of the building to improve the public access through the area and returning of it to its natural state, DRB review of architectural details of the building, and requirement that the applicant work with the DRB to address signage and landscaping at the base of Blue Cow Chute as it intersects with East Meadow Drive. ICristan Pritz noted the CDD opted to try to get all of the parking on site was in an effort to follow what was in the Vail Village Master Plan to get parking on site and improve the street area for pedestrians. Shelly Mello reported that three letters had been received from the public in opposition of this project, one from the East Village Homeowners Association (EVHA), one from Rohn Robbins on behalf of Joan Lamb, and one from Joan Lamb, an owner in the Mountain Haus. Shelly detailed the zoning analysis statistics for this project as set forth in the September 30, 1993, memo. She advised staff had discussed at length the criteria to be used in evaluating this proposal and said staff supported approval with conditions. Staff found this application met the purpose of the SDD. It was felt the project was in keeping with the same SDD intent previously discussed at this meeting. Staff felt an SDD provided flexibility for the project while providing amenities for the Town. Staff recognized that the existing building exceeded the underlying zone requirements, but believed that due to the site and location it was suitable to allow for such deviations as proposed in the application given the goals and policies in the Town's Land Use Plan, Vail Village Master Plan, and Streetscape Master Plan. There was discussion regarding the Accommodation Units (AUs) stats. Merv Lapin disagreed that more AUs were needed based on occupancy on a year round basis. Shelly Mello indicated that there was an increase in occupancy of hotel rooms between 1991 and 1992. Mayor Osterfoss felt it was interesting to note that Beaver Creek occupancy levels were even higher for hotels during peak season and she was concerned about developing more first class four or five star AUs in Town. Stan Cope, representing the Vail Athletic Club, presented a model of the project for review. He advised the building was already condominiumized. He discussed removal of condos from the market and offering of hotel rooms to accommodate people in Town. He also noted the project had three or four public sides with regard to landscaping and streetscape, being a corner building. Mayor Osterfoss asked if the developer was paying for the improvements. Rohn Robbins of Dunn, Abplanalp & Christensen, noted he represented an adjacent Mountain Haus property owner, Joan M. Lamb, who was unable to be present at this meeting. Mr. Robbins felt the bottom line of this whole issue was the same as the question asked Merv Lapin asked during the discussion of Ordinance No. 28, 1993, regarding proposed SDD No. 31, i.e. when was enough enough? With regard to proposed SDD No. 30, he did not feel TOV was getting anything of value in return for the greater density, greater traffic, and greater parking problems imposed by the creation of SDD No. 30. He felt in the interest of preservation of open space, view corridors, and in consideration of the financial interests of landowners in the area, it would probably be a reasonable compromise to review this as he felt all of the units were excessive. Shelly Mello clarified that the additional GRFA was not attributed specifically in the project's dormers. There was discussion about Ms. Lamb's particular situation and the impacts on her view of the Gore Range. Mr. Robbins stated that view was a significant view in terms of the property value. Jim Morter advised that he had been asked many months ago by three unit owners in the Mountain Haus to monitor the development being proposed, and, if necessary, to take a look at the design of the improvements if they were affecting those three owners' views. After monitoring the project throughout, he advised that Stan Cope and Mike Barclay, architects for the project, had been most cooperative and ingenious with some of the solutions they had come up with to address many of the 5 Vail Town Couneil Evening Meeting Minutes 10/19/83 concerns of three of the owners. Mr. Morter said Joan Lamb, owner of unit 560, presently enjoyed a Gore Range view from her master bedroom. He used visual aids to show how much of that view Ms. Lamb might lose, but it was concluded the view loss depicted was not scientifically calculated. Kristan Pritz explained TOV's approach when individual's views were affected by development. She advised there was not an ordinance protecting private views from all angles, but staff tried to address this issue to make sure no undue impact was created on surrounding properties. Jim Lamont, representing the EVHA, stated that the concerns as detailed in his letter dated October 18, 1993, to Council were essentially the same as for the proposed Golden Peak House SDD previously discussed. He reviewed suggested ways to bring the VAC building into conformance with the envelopes that currently existed, including reversing the roof dormers to indentations as had been done on the upper floor, south side, thereby reducing the bulk and mass and reducing the GRFA, denying expansion of the restaurant area on the north elevation bringing it back within the original building envelope, that the dollar commitment for $120,000 for streetscape improvements be specified in writing, that the VAC should be responsible for maintenance and care of the open space garden park and that Council consider dedication of this park to Mr. and Mrs ~ Fitzhugh Scott if this project was approved, and, he emphasized consistency with regard to parking and employee housing, which, as stated in his October 18, 1993 letter, stated parking and employee housing requirements should be met wither on-site or off-site and added that a "pay-in-lieu" parking fee should be required of all parking located off-site. Rob Levine was in favor of the project and stated he felt TOV was getting some benefit and the project was an improvement for the area. He was concerned about the loss of the rieighbor views. He stated he would vote for the project on first reading, but wanted to see the view impact mitigated. Bob Buckley was in favor of the project, noting the large gain of AUs. He agreed with Rob about the need to look at mitigating Ms. Lamb's potential view loss. He was not concerned about 6,000 additional feet because most of it was in the mass and bulk of the existing building. Rob pointed out the need for AUs because of the trend towards condominiums falling out of short term rental programs and not being rented as much as they had in the past. Bob added the reason he voted against the VVI was because commitments made on that project had not been lived up to. He liked the trend towards more AUs. Merv Lapin said he had nothing more to add to similar logic expressed regarding the proposed GPH SDD. He felt this building was already over what it was allowed, and felt the same effect could be obtained without the addition of the approximate 6,000 additional feet proposed. Tom Steinberg felt this project was a big improvement, but felt moving the EHUs off-site should be considered with conversion of some or all of those EHUs to hotel rooms to up the hotel room quantity, because he felt more hotel rooms was what was needed long-term. If there was any way to pull the two dormers impacting the views into the roof lines, he encouraged that. But, overall, he felt TOV was getting something for what it was paying. Jim Gibson felt this project was a positive move. He felt this building started out too big to begin with and it was being expanded so he had trouble with the mass and bulk, however the overall design Hof it was being improved and it would be a much better looking building styled to the Village. He felt the park area in the back should be cleaned up and developed into a park area as an accommodation for the streamwalk. Mayor Osterfoss noted it was planned that the DRB would work with the applicant on that proposal. Kristan Pritz noted the direction was to make the proposed park look natural rather than formal. Tom Steinberg suggested signage stating it was a public park. Stan Cope said they would be responsible, but it was not to be assumed they would be developing an Alpine Garden. As long it was within reason, they obviously had a vested interested in making the back of the building look nice. After brief further discussion regarding modifications to be made by second reading, Rob Levine moved to approve Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1993, on first reading, based on the staff memo indicating the project was in compliance for an SDD with the amendments to the ordinance as discussed: (1) That a minimum of $20,000 was to be spent by the developer on the design and redevelopment of the landscaping on the south side of the project; (2) that a minimum of $100,000 was to be spent on the design and installation of the specified streetscape improvements; (3) that the reference to the "natural conditions" on landscaping the south side would be deleted; (4) that the reference to the parking fee and the Denver CPI would be clarified; and (5) that the owner would be responsible for the maintenance of all improvements. Bob Buckley seconded the emotion. A vote was taken and the motion passed, 5-1, Merv Lapin opposed. Item No. 8 was Resolution No. 12, Series of 1993, a resolution renaming Kel-Gar Lane to Black Bear Lane. Merv Lapin moved to approve Resolution No. 12, Series of 1993, with a second from Jim Gibson. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 9 was the appointment of Election Judges for the November 16, 1993, Regular Municipal Election. Merv Lapin to appoint Karen Morter, Kay Cheney, Mary Caster, Joan Norris, Pat . Dauphinais, as Regular Municipal Election Judges for the Regular Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 16, 1993, and Mary Jo Allen as an alternate judge for the November 16, 1993, Regular Municipal Election as detailed in Town Clerk Holly McCutcheon's memo to Council dated October 7, 1993. Jim Gibson seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed Ej Vail Town Counei] Evening Meeting Minutes 10/19/93 unanimously, 6-0. Item No. 7 was .Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1993, first reading, an ordinance rezoning 7.710 acres from Agricultural and Open Space, Section 18.32 to Low Density Multi-Family, Section 18.16 located between Tract C, Block 2, Vail Potato Patch and Parcel B. The applicant was the Town of Vail/Nail Housing Authority. Merv Lapin moved to table Ordinance No 21, Series of 1993, until November 2,1993, with a second from Rob Levine. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. There being no further business, a motion to adjourn the meeting was made and passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11:40 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor , ATTEST: Town Clerk Minutes taken by Donanne S. Deto C:UAINOCT19.93 7 ~ Vail Town Counml Evening Meeting Minutes 10/18/83 , i1HEflllORANDUItiN TO: Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: November 2, 1993 SUBJECT: Summary of Planning and Environmental Commission action on the proposed Housing Authority rezoning. ~ n n...... n.........t.~~......... ...v ~ .~~~u..~~:':i~\~:. nvv.. .x .vi ti'i~n~~v~ .A. On October 11, 1993, the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) recommended to approve the rezoning request for the Mountain Bell site with a vote of 7-0. In their motion, the PEC included six recommendations which the housing authority must incorporate into their project. The last o.ne has been included in the ordinance as a condition. The PEC recommended approval of the rezoning with the strong recommendations that: 1: All future designs for the site protect the aspen grove at the eastern portion of the site~or provide a strong landscape buffer in this area; 2. The drop-off and pick-up areas for the daycare centers be separated from any housing development; 3. The development includes pedestrian connections to the Village and Lionshead; 4. The Housing Authority return to the PEC for comments about the specific design of the proposal; 5. Parking and buildings be heavily screened by landscaping and berms; 6. The new zone, Low Density Multi-Family (LDMF), be applied to the site with the condition that the only use to be allowed in this new zone is employee housing. The two pre-schools, as conditional uses, would continue to be allowed and uses that are accessory to the housing and schools would also be allowed. In addition, the PEC. required that the Town of Vail must retain control of any future housing development. . 1 - ~ PVIEMORANDUM TO: Plannirig and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: October 11, 1993 ~ SUBJECT: A.request for a rezoning from Agriculture Open Space to Low Density Multi= Family for an unplatted parcel located between Tract C, Block 2~, Vail Potato Patch and Parcel B for the purpose of allowing an employee housing development. Applicant: Vail Housing Authority, Town of Vail Planner: Andy Knudtsen ~z I. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The Vail Housing Authority and Town of Vail are proposing to rezone the area of land located east of the Mountain Bell facility from Agriculture Open Space to Low Density Multi-Family (LDMF). There is a map attached to the end of this memo showing the specific area proposed to be rezoned. This area is 7.71 acres. The total site area is 25.18 acres. This area includes the tyro daycare centers, the playgrounds, the ne~v access road, a portion of the accel/decel lanes as well as the area for the housing development. The steep part of the slope north of the housing development would not be rezoned and ~vou(d remain as Agriculture Open Space. The Mountain Bell site and the western portion of the parcel are not included in the proposal and would not be rezoned. Since the worksession on September 27, 1993, the Housing Authority has decided to delete the subdivision request, the proposal to rezone the west half of This parcel, and the variance to allow parking in the front setback. Staff believes that the mass and bulk of the proposal, access, and parking are issues tivhich will influence the discussion of the rezoning request. At this time, the extent of the development includes twenty-four to thirty-two dwelling units. These would be located in two buildings. The building footprint is approximately 120 by 55 feet. The proposed zoning would allow structures 38 feet tall. Parking for these units vrould be located around these buildings and possibly to the west in the area of the current access road. The proposal includes rie~v acceleration and deceleration lanes and a new roadway into the development. The new access point is approximately 215 feet to the west of the existing access. This new roadway would cross Middle Creek and a culvert/bridge wo ~ Id be required. The site has been identified as a rockfall area as well as a debris flow area. Sife specific analysis by Arthur Mears has shown that the rockfall does not require mitigation. The debris flow affects the portion of the site adjacent to Middle Creek. Any bridge construction would have to be designed to accommodate debris flows; however, there is no other portion of the site which would be affected by this hazard. Please see the attached Hazard Report prepared 1 P - - by Art Mears, dated November, 1992. 19. 13ACKGR®lJl~l7 - The reason the Housing Authority is no longer requesting a variance to allow parking in the front setback, a subdivision, or a rezoning of the remainder of this parcel is that the Housing Authority has tried to simplify the project. The Housing Authority had the opportunity to meet - recently with Vail Associates regarding this proposal. The previous proposal required financial -support not only by the Town Council but also by private companies to make it financially viable. After reviewing the plans with the representative from Vail Associates, it became apparent that the amount of subsidy required to make the project financially sound was more than what could be generated. As a result, the Housing Authority has now shifted the development plan from an all-rental project to a for-sale project. This will allow individuals to purchase condominiums as permanent residences. The mortgage payments will actually be less than the rents would have been; and the amount of subsidy required to develop this project will be significantly less. As a result of this change in financing and programming, the architecture of the project will change in the future. At this time, the Housing Authority would like to focus specifically on the rezoning request. The plans reviewed at the worksession (which are attached to the end of this memo) are important in that they should be used to determine if the site, under the proposed LDMF zoning, can support the level of density which would be allowed. The Housing Authority would like to provide detailed architectural solutions later, once the zoning is established. Since the September 27, 1993 worksession, the Housing Authority has focused on the site planning and the issues raised by the PEC. These included: leaving as many trees on the site as possible; reducing the parking area; conditioning the rezoning so that the employee housing is the only use that can be built on-site; breaking up the buildings; and showing the accel/decel lanes. It seemed to be the general consensus of the PEC that the site was appropriate for housing and that the size of the buildings was acceptable, as long as the architectural details broke up the mass and bulk of the buildings. In response to the PEC, the proposed site plan shows alternative parking plans: The accel/decel lanes have been shown on the plan. Concerning the architecture, the Housing Authority has proposed to address this in greater detail when the floor plans and building plans are changed to reflect the ownership approach instead of the rental project. The Housing Authority is -willing to bring this proposal back to the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) for a worksession, once the architecture has been completed. Concerning the deed restriction, staff has found that in some cases the rezoning may be conditioned to restrict future uses. Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney, will discuss this more with the PEC on October 11, 1993. It is important to note that the land is owned by the Town of Vail and that future uses will be determined by the Town in accordance with zoning. 2 tt. ZONtNG ANALYSIS Listed. below is the zoning analysis which provides a comparison between Agriculture Open Space zoning, LDMF zoning, and the conceptual housing development. Existing Zoning: Agriculture and Open Space Proposed Zoning: Low Density Multi-Family Buildable Area: 190,000 square feet or 4.36 acres in rezoned area Total Area of rezoning: 335,847.6 square feet or 7.71 acres • Total Site Area: 25.18 acres Agriculture Conceptual • Ooen Space Allowed per LDMF Housing Pian Density: 1 unit if site 9 units per acre 32 units has one acre of or 39 units buildable GRFA: 2,000 sq. ft. max. 57,000 sq. ft. 28,914 sq. ft. Common Area: 0 19,950 sq. ft. 8,254 sq. ff. Wall Heights: 6 feet 6 feet 6 feet Parking: 2 parking spaces 64 parking spaces 64 parking spaces Setbacks: front: 20 feet 20 feet 50 feet* side: 15 feet 20 feet 225/200 feet rear: 15 feet 20 feet 400 feet Height: 33 feet 38 feet 38 feet • Site Coverage: 5% or 35% or 4.8% for 16,792 sq. ft. 117,546 sq. ft. 16,031 sq. ft. Landscaping: N/A 40% or 80% or 134,339 sq. ft. 270,017 sq. ft. A variance for arkin in th f p g e rout setback may be requested in.the future. In addition, there may also be wall height setbacks for the road and parking area. 3 III. EVAt.UATI®Pd ®F ZONE CIiA~tGE REQUEST A. Is the Existing Zoning Suitable? This existing zoning is not as suitable as the proposed zoning, in staff's opinion, as the site already carries quite a bit of development which includes the Mountain Be11 facility and two daycare centers. As these uses are not typically found in open space zone - districts, staff believes that the zoning could be changed to better reflect the actual use of the land. The two daycare centers under the Agriculture Open Space zoning are allowed as conditional uses. Under the proposed LDMF zoning, the schools would continue to be conditional uses. The housing is not currently allowed under Agriculture Open Space zoning; however, the proposed zoning would still allow the existing uses as well as the housing development. It is important to note that the remainder of the parcel will continue to be Agriculture Open Space zoning. ' B. Is the Amendment Preventing a Convenient. Workable Relationship with Land Uses Consistent With Municipal Objectives? The municipal objectives that relate to this site are the Housing Study adopted by Town Council on November 20, 1990 and the Land Use Plan. The Housing Study was done by Rosall, Remmen and Cares and evaluated the need for employee housing. The rezoning request would be consistent with the Housing Study as it calls for the generation of housing units. Other municipal objectives can be found in the Land Use Plan. Staff has taken the relevant goals from the Land Use Plan and listed them below: 1.10 Development of Town owned lands by the Town of Vail (other than parks and open space) may be permitted where no high hazards exist, if such development is for public use.. , 5.3 Affordable housing should be made available through private efforts, assisted by limited incentives provided by the Town of Vail, with appropriate restrictions. 5.5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and upgraded. Additional employee housing should be accommodated at varied sites throughout the community. 2.7 The Town of Vail should improve the existing park and open space lands while continuing to purchase open space. Staff believes that the requested rezoning is consistent with the first three criteria listed above: The first goal is met as this would be a "development of Town owned lands by the Town of Vail" where the rockfall hazard does not exist. The second goal is met as this proposal would make employee housing available through a combined effort between the Housing Authority, the Town of Vail and possible contributions from the 4 private sector. The request is also consistent with the third goal listed as this is the first effort to locate employee housing on various sites throughout the community. Staff believes it is important to bring up all pertinent criteria, which includes Goal 2.7. The request is not altogether consistent with this goal: However, staff ielieves that taking a po?iion of the Town owned land next to the daycare centers and developing it is reasonable. A majority of the parcel zoned Agriculture Open Space will be left as open space and the area of the site which is to be developed already has the Mountain Bell facility and the daycare centers around it. (Please note that the Mountain Bell Building is not in the area to be rezoned.) Staff believes that exempting this area from. the request made the most sense given the timing of the project and primarily because working through the corporate structure of US West for the appropriate signatures was more complicated than originally thought. Concerning the criteria requiring a workable relationship between land uses, staff believes that there needs to be a buffer between the daycare centers and the housing project. This would include landscaping between the structures and the playground. In addition, staff believes that the future design should be consistent with the one currently shown, which provides a separate driveway to the housing site. This driveway skirts the daycare center parking lot and pick-up and drop-off area. Staff believes that it is important to provide a safe location for children to be picked up and dropped off. The new road will impact the playground on the south end of the Learning Tree and the trails on the east side will be effected. by the building and new landscaping. The Housing Authority has discussed these impacts with the Directors of the Learning Tree and ABC Schools. There will be visual impacts from this development, if the rezoning is approved. The building envelopes, as designed at this time, do not encroach into any 40% slope area. Although the parking and buildings will be visible from the four-way stop and I- 70/Frontage Road, staff believes that landscaping and berming could be created on the perimeter of the project to provide screening. The mass and bulk of the project will be similar to Solar Vail. The building footprint on the proposed structure is approximately 120 ft. by 55 ft. The proposed zoning would allow structures to be 38 feet tall. Solar Vail's footprint is approximately 130 ft. by 45 ft. Basing the measurement from Solar Vail's parking slab, the building is 38 feet tall. The proposed buildings will be .terraced in a way to help them blend into the site. The rear portion of each building is designed to step up with the hillside to reflect the existing grade. In addition, the portion of the building closest to the daycare centers is stepped down a story so that it provides a transition. The site planning has been done in such a way as to cluster the existing and proposed buildings together in one portion of the site. Having the proposed housing located close to the other buildings will reduce the visual impact by using less of the site. The site disturbance will extend up the slope behind the buildings approximately 15 feet. It will come out to the south of the buildings approximately 100 feet and will extend into the Frontage Road right-of- way approximately 15 feet. . 5 d Staff would like to see as many parking spaces as possible relocated from the area around the buildings to the western end of the site. We understand that this remote parking will not be able to have very many parking spaces. 1Ne still believe that it is worthwhile to try to reduce the parking area as much as possible and protect and enhance the aspen groves on the east end of the site. The access issues include the new road, the new culvert/bridge, and the new road cut. We believe the new access road will improve the situation for the daycare centers as well as the housing development. Currently, the road is an average of 9.2% with some portions as steep as 12.5%. The new road is proposed to be 6%. Staff understands from the schools that many times parents cannot make it up the road during the winter to pick up their children. The new design should alleviate that problem. Staff would like to look closely at creek impacts when the design for the culvert/bridge is done. We would also like to see a bridge option investigated. At a minimum, an Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit will be required. Impacts to the stream bank will need to be minimized. The new road cut will involve new acceleration and deceleration lanes. This will require widening the Frontage Road. Staff believes that any widening should not result in any slopes steeper than 2:1 at the edge of the road, unless steeper slopes save more vegetation. In general, we believe the rezoning is consistent with municipal objectives and that the rezoning and subsequent development will provide a workable relationship among land uses. C. Does the Rezoning Provide for the Growth of an Orderly. Viable Community? Staff believes that the rezoning helps provide for the growth and viability of the Vail community. Staff believes that the need for housing is being addressed with this project. More importantly, staff thinks that providing. housing within the Town of Vail helps solve the transportation problem. We believe that housing in this location will allow residents to walk to jobs in the Village and Lionshead. The Housing Authority should include pedestrian connections to the sidewalk and underpass at the four-way stop and the sidewalk overpass in Lionshead to insure pedestrian access. D. Land Use Plan The Land Use Plan designates this area as Semi-Public, which is defined as follows: "Public/Semi-Public. The Public and Semi-Public category includes schools, post offices, water and sewer service and storage facilities, cemeteries, municipal facilities, and other public institutions; which are located throughout the community to serve the needs of the residents." Staff has checked with the Town Attorney regarding this definition and understands that a residential development for employees is consistent with this land use designation as it will serve a specific need of the community. ~ . 6 a IV. -OTHER . ' A. Public Works: i. CDOT access permits will be required. 2. Coordinate the pedestrian access with improvements to be made on the Frontage Road. At this time the Frontage Road is desig ~ ed to accommodate a 10 foot shoulder on the north side to allow for bikes and pedestrians. B. Fire Department: 1. A!I Fire Department concerns have been addressed. The buildings will be sprinklered, will have a fire alarm system, and will be constructed with Type V standards. V. CONCLUSION Staff believes that the proposed request is reasonable. We support the rezoning change from Agriculture Open Space to Low Density Multi-Family. We believe that the criteria are fulfilled as discussed above. We also believe that the Housing Authority has shown that the density associated with LDMF can be located on the site. In the future, it is likely that ivariances will be required, particularly for the parking in the front setback and perhaps for retaining wall heights. Even if no variances are needed, the Housing Authority is still requesting to return to the PEC for their comments on the architecture, road, and landscaping. Staff supports the rezoning with the strong recommendations that: 1. All future designs for the site protect the aspen grove at the eastern portion of the site or provide a strong landscape buffer in this area; 2. The drop-off and pick-up area for the day care centers be separated from any housing development; 3. The development includes pedestrian connections to the Village and Lionshead; 4. The Housing Authority return to the PEC for comments about the specific design of the proposal; 5. The parking and buildings be heavily screened by landscaping and berms. c:~pec~me mos~housng 10.11 ~ 7 U.S. FOREST SERVICE . N 89°2i'21° W - 2633.76 ' A ~ EXCEPTED PARCEL I.osa~ ncxcs _ N 88°34' W S 88.34'00' E - 679.63 143.67 Z s so°os• w j ~ S 20'04.39' K g g8°30'00e W 107.00 47.64 z ~ C S'S6.28' f ~ S Ba'30'00' W 280.59 120.00 32.25 0 {24.{p i / / / / / a~ (n //23' 65.24 / S 83°3E•_Zrr e ~ 'Tl S W / - 411.93 ~ O ' S? r• f 3 0 p ~/N /fn?i~~/ ~is~:w./~~ bl aourr of u m NT p . ~ a0 / r a•~ /Sef ie ~ BEGiNN~11C A A 1 ~RSrarE ~ 3?° S 2 p4 ~o s. ~ / m N yl cy~gY s e3•as'z9- E _ c~ ass.3o m No s / ~ 196 j~s' f varrr or (NORTH BECUw..`.C FRONTAGE PROPERTY DESCRIPTION <cROSt-NArC+Ee AREA) A trnrt nr' InnA In }pe tn.•}h 1 ne • Fe tti.•I.ew 1 14 lnr 1.•nn L, 1 ?}h Prlw~.nnl Ven.Alnn i 1 DEBRIS FLO'4'Y AND ROCKFALL HAZARD ANALYSIS . ~ "L~'lUUl`tlA'.11~ 15FJLL" Sl~1L i 'SAIL, COLORAD O Prepared For M[r. Diane Piper Prepared By Arthur I. Mears, P.E., Inc. Gunnison, Colorado It'ovember, 1992 • 1 SU~VIMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS The follo~.vi:l~ summarizes the findings of this study and provides recommendations. Additional detail is given in Sections 2 - 4 of the report. ROCKFALL . Rockfall is not z potential hazard to the proposed development as shown on a conceptual site . plan prepared on 3-19-92 by Alpine International. This conclusion is based on the following observation:,: a. F:ockfall source areas do not exist above the eastern portion of the proposed development (the "East Parcel"); , b. ~Ithou~h rockfall may occur above the "~~'est Parcel" it will consist of r,~odcrate-sized, rare rockfall events that ~vi11 not reach the proposed building. DEBRIS FLOWS - Debris flows will not affect the East Parcel but can ovcirun t c West Parcel. This conclusions are based on the following observations: a..7'he East Parcel is not in line with debris flo~vs;~ I"---- b. The West Parcel is located on an alluvial fan produced by debris-flow deposition as evidenced b}' 1) granite boulders 1 - ~ feet long on the surface, 2) depositional lobes ~ feet high, and 3)' a large source area; c. 77~e flows may be deep as they are channelized through the can}'on eroded into the Ucdr~~ck directly about the site. RECOtifgll:NDATIONS The following recommendation alternatives are based on the conclusions outlined above and on my experic~cc with the debris-flow process in Mail and at other locations: a. ~woid construction on the West Parcel; or . b. Design structures on the 'Vest Parcel for impact and depositional forces from debris flows; or e. Proceed with the development plans as shown on the 3-19-92 conceptual study, build no mitigation, and. accept the risk of flows with return periods of approxir,~atcIy 300 - 1000 years tha, would damage structures. 1 ~ - ,r ' The return period of debris flo«'s can only be estimated, based on the observational evidence discussed above. An order-of-magnitude (nearest factor of 10) return period estimate for debris flows at this location is 300-1000 years (annual probability range of 0.1% to 0.3%). 3 DESTI.L'CTIVE EFFECTS OF DEBRIS FLOWS Debris fIo«'s affecting the «est Parcel will probably be relatively sloe-moving deep flows, similar to the debris flow that occurred in Booth Creek in May, 1934, but probably of smaller volume. On the fan near the proposed building site, the debris flow conditions that should be considered in design will be: Vclocit}': 1 - 5 feet/second; Densit}': 125 lbs/ft3; Flow thickness: 4 - 8 feet; Boulder size: 1 - 5 feet diameter. Because of small velocities, depositional loads, rather than impact Loads tvili probably govern . design of structures. The depositional pressures may exceed 500 - 1000 lbs/ft on exposed wall and roof surfaces, which is many times the loading capacity of ordinary structures. This means building walls probably would be crushed if a major flow reached the site In addition to depositional loads, debris flo"'s will divert stream water (the tributary drainage will probably be in flood at the time), to unpredictable directions on the fan. The diverted flood water could erode foundations and landscaping and flood buiidi`ngs. Even if the building is completely protected by structural reinforcement, (Section 4), considerable damage to the surrounding terrain and landscaping would occur during a major debris-flow episode. 4 MITIGATION ' r' ~ i~ If the risk from debris flows with a return period o 300-1000 }'ears with the dynamics characteristics listed in Section 3 is unacceptable and' the site will be devMoped, structural mitigation should be used to protect buildings. Buildings must be specially. designed to resist design loads. Design loads should be derived from the loading charactenst~cs discussed in Section 3 of this report. Loads will depend on the following architectural details: - Building shape; . -Building orientation; - Landscaping details and grades near the building. The required design loads will depend on exactly how adebris-flow deposit is distributed against building surfaces. Landscaping and building structure should be designed, therefore, so that large, thick deposits do not accumulate on building walls or roofs. ~'Vindow and door openings must be avoided on the uphill sides of buildings. Final design-loading details cannot be provided until architectural details are known. . 3 .e . r ` . w Mai ' yq- ~r~.V.4 "di '~ft.•• .4 ~`r.'• r:'. s.y`: 'ItP. ^t.i. 'Y.:T.r \'Yr. t'-1•".V~~17 .•t :.p:. iM ri' 'r. ry., at• ..Lc ~ l: .:1~i,L':. ;1..,~. .s t:: :.Zai •P, •.~`+.ti•{~•... °`Mf7. r, ~F' .,w f+ ci.. •i..,.1. e"Gr .t~, -t ..C?E C]t ~u - ~ i_..., .inM1J lb i ~ i. ? $t at. . e, t. Y. •.1 : t. • : ~7.•. % .i:%= ra'•"tir' pr l.ti• :i•°~'}. • `f ~ 1 io "4 • Y~~ ! »i _ •'•d . % c t•~ 'R i :1.. l 'Y • ~:ti+ ..t. i . •i' •'E •i!. • ' ~r ~',i . . •'.1, . • 1 ~ • :t. . :r: a' i ~ , r• •t. • + , . • • •''r ~ - . _ - ~ _ L.• I , ~.1 - - _ . - ~ - _ - ~ _ ~ - . . , ' •5 • ~ ..,'6 a f • ~ ~j: - ~ _ - - . - . ~~_--u'-- - 11= - - _ - ter.- - . . - _ • - ~ _1 n ~I-~-~:~~~~ - . ~ o ~=lei ~ ~ ~ - - jam: - - a _ _ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . _ . O I ~ ~ I . ~ C . • ¢ ~ . . . F _ ~ yr3 i ~ • - ~l , . . ~ ~ ~ _ • ~ T r,:. - . , ~ t I .n . d . . . ®1"8 ®'UQAA~l0.o~ A®®. ~ 1 SIERIES OF 1~3 iyUFl ®Rll~`I~A~ICIe ~~®OVII~I~A 9,/ Eo PUWr6~~S IF~®~Y6 C9~A~®6v6Y 6.0id~/'91. b`11®® ®Y'~Y® e71'~9'ds p ~p~sppT SECIt'Ip®g~l~~9 1f~®.~32 ~'p®/~~p,•®~/~V ®pE~/~S0.9lTs~~ Ii~1At1yl.'6'I-FATRp~ILZ~, SpE ,C~Tq'g10p~~9®98.1p6®,/~ p !~®CP4 0 U CO~~AV ~~&*6ie U 60, ~IL®MIC! 6, tl~®I_ ~®E d'9T® ~~'BTbC~ 6"i1V® I'~9S7 ~el~F.~ WHEREAS, the Town of Vail is the owner of an unplatted parcel generally located between Tract C, Block 2, Vail Potato Patch and Parcel B which is more fully described as: A tract of land in the South 1/2 of the Southeast 1/4, Section 6, Township 5 South, Range 80 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Eagle County, Colorado described as fo{lows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the easterly line of said Section 6 and the northerly right-of-way of Interstate Highway lVo. 70 whence the southeast corner of said Section 6 bears S00°28'16"E 686.60 feet; thence the following four courses along the northerly right-of-way of Interstate Highway No. 70: 1) RI71 °33'45"IA/ 196:10 feet; 2) N83°36'29"W 826.30 feet; 3} N74°21'35"W 204.82 feet; 4) 8169°55'21 "W 170.00 feet; thence, departing the northerly right-of-way of Interstate Highway No. 70, IV20°04'39"E 87.64 feet; thence N88°30'00"E 280.59 feet to a westerly angle point of a parcel of land described in Warranty Deed, Reception Rlo. 114010, Book 218, Page 419 recorded in the office of the Eagle County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder; thence the following three courses along the westerly, southerly, and easterly lines of said parcel: 1) S36°23'30"W 65.24 feet; 2) S83°36'23"E 411.94 feet; 3) N00°00'00"E 180.11 feet to the northeasterly corner of said parcel; thence, departing said easterly line, S88°34'00"E 679.59 feet to the easterly line of said Section 6; thence, along said easterly line S00°28'16"E 421.99 feet to the Point of Beginning, containing 7.710 acres, more or less. The above description is based on a written metes and bounds legal description and not a field survey; and WHEREAS, the Vail Housing Authority and the Town of Vail have submitted an application to rezone an area of land from Agricultural and Open Space to Low Density Multi-Family Residential; and WHEREAS, the rezoning effort is consistent with the surrounding and immediately adjacent properties; and WHEREAS, the rezoning effort will better reflect the actual use of the land; and WHEREAS, the proposed rezoning is for the benefit of the community as it meets the 1 Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1993 h~ . .a ~ ' municipal objectives identified in the Housing Study adopted by Town Council on November 20, 1990, and the existing Land Use Plan; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 18.66.140, the Planning and Environmental Commission had a public hearing on the proposed zoning amendment and has submitted its recommendation for approval to the Town Council; and WHEREAS, all notices required by Section 18.66.080 have been sent to the appropriate parties; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has held a public hearing as required by Chapter 18.66 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT: Section 1 The Town Council finds that the procedures for a zoning amendment as set forth in Section 18.66 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail have been fully satisfied, and all of the requirements of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail relating to zoning amendments have been fully satisfied. Section 2 The Town Council hereby rezones the property from Agricultural and Open Space to Low Density Multi-Family Residential for the exclusive use of Town of Vail controlled employee housing in addition to the existing public uses on the site. Section 3 If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless ofl the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 4 The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 5 The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the 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 2 Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1993 .j, . 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. Section 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 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: Holly L. McCutcheon, 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:~ORD9321 3 Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1993 Y ®RD111~tANCE N®, 26 SERIES ®F 1993 ANNUAlL APPFi®PRIAT90N ®FtD11NANCE: AD®PTING A lBUDCaET AND FENANCIAL PLAN Af~D B~A9CBNG APPR®PR9ATV®NS T® PAY THE C®STS, EXPENSES, AND L9AB9LIITIIES ®F TIRE T®1NN ®F VAIL, COL®RAD®, ~®R VTS F6SCAL YEAR JANUARY 1, 1994, THR®UC;H DECEMBER 31, 1994, AND PP®VID9NC F®Ei THE LE!!Y ASSESSMENT AND C®LLECTB®N ®F T®i~lN AD !/AL®~EM PR®PERTY TAXES DUE F®R THE 1993 TAX YEAR AND PAYABLE ~N THE 1994 F@SCAL YEAR. UVHEREAS, in accordance with Article IX of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado, the Town Manager prepared and submitted to the Town Council a proposed long-range capital program for the Town and a proposed budget and financial plan for all Town funds and activities for the 1994 fiscal year; and VIIHEREAS, notice of public hearing on the proposed Town budget and capital program was published on the 19th day of October, 1993, more than seven (7) days prior to the hearing held on the 19th day of October, 1993, pursuant to Section 9.5 of the Charter; and V1/HEREAS, it is necessary for the Town Council to adopt a budget and financial plan for the 1994 fiscal year, to make appropriations for the amounts specified in the budget, and to provide for the levy, assessment and collection of Town ad valorem property taxes due for the 1993 year and payable in the i 994 fiscal year. IVOVV, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, that: 1. The procedures prescribed in Article IX of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado, for the enactment hereof have been fulfilled. 2. Pursuant to Article IX of the Charter, the Town Council hereby makes the following annual appropriations for the Town of Vail, Colorado, for its fiscal year beginning on the first day of January, 1994, and ending on the 31st day of December, 1994: FUND AMOUNT General Fund $14,154,686 Capital Projects Fund 6,979,594 Real Estate Transfer Tax 2,528,525 Parking Structure Fund 2,033,766 Heavy Equipment Fund 1,523,391 Police Seizure Fund 236,535 Debt Service Fund 3,129,618 Health Insurance Fund 942,860 Vail Marketing Fund 609,501 Booth Creek Debt Service Fund _ 41,856 Vail Housing Fund 30,000 Total: 32,210,332 Less Interfund Transfers: <6,626,829> Total Budget $25,583,503 1 Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1993 3. The Town Council hereby adopts the full and complete Budget and Financial Plan for the 1994 fiscal year for the Town of Vail, Colorado, which are incorporated by reference herein and made part hereof, and copies of said public records shall be made available to the public in the Municipal Building of the Town. 4. For the purpose of defraying part of the operating and capital expenses of the Town of Vail, Colorado, during its 1993 fiscal year, the Town Council hereby levies a property tax of 6.19 mills upon each dollar of the total assessed valuation of $354,702,270 for the 1993 tax year of all taxable property within the Town, which will result in a gross tax levy of $2,195,607. Said assessment shall be duly made by the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, as directed by the Colorado Revised Statutes (1973 as amended), and as otherwise required by law. 5. This Ordinance shall take effect five (5) days after publication following the final passage hereof. 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 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 !N FULL ON FIRST READING this 19th day of October, 1993, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the 2nd day of November, 1993, at 7:30 p.m, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk 2 Ordinance No. 2S, Series of 1993 READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of , 1993. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk i C:\ORD93.26 3 Ordinance No. 26, Series of 1993 1 I~EItAOFiAIN®14J1V/ O TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: October 11, 1993 SUBJECT: A request for the establishment of a Special Development District, a Commercial Core I exterior alteration request, a minor subdivision request, a zone change request and a request far an encroachment into View Corridor No. 1 for the redevelopment of the Golden Peak House, located at 278 Hanson Ranch Road/Lots A, B and C, Block 2, and Tract E, Vail Village First Filing. Applicants: Golden Peak House Condominium AssociationNail Associates, Inc./GPH Partners, Ltd./Margaritaville, Inc. Planner: Mike Mollica D. PROJECT' OVERNIEl~! ®ESCRIPTOON OF THE RE®IJEST'S The Golden Peak House was originally constructed in 1966, and since that time there have been only minor, cosmetic modifications made to the exterior of the structure. The project is located in the Commercial Core I zone district. Generally, this proposed redevelopment for the Golden Peak House includes a renovation of the entire building. The existing "butterfly" roof form would be removed, and gable roofs added. The proposal includes the addition of a new fourth floor (on the western end of the structure) and the addition of a new fifth floor (on the eastern end). Architectural modifications to the structure would include the addition of sloped roofs, a small area of flat roof, the addition of.dormers, balconies, bay windows, and other architectural projections. - The existing center area of the building, which includes the circular ramp, is generally used as common area for pedestrian circulation. With the redevelopment, the applicant is proposing to infilt this entire central area and to add a full basement beneath the structure. Additional retail/commercial space would be added to the building. Specifically, at-grade retail shops would continue to be located along the north elevation, and the second floor restaurant (Los Amigos) would remain. However, the restaurant's public entrance would be relocated to the northwest corner of the building and the restaurant would be expanded with the addition of a retractable enclosure over a portion of the outdoor dining deck. The following is an outline of the major modifications which are being proposed for the building: Fourth Floor -The proposal. includes: the addition of a new fourth floor, which would be located on the western end of the structure. The proposed fourth floor has been designed to be set back approximately 12 to 18 feet from the face of the building 1 adjacent to Bridge Street. The roof ridge, in this area, has been reoriented so that it runs east to west: • This new fourth #loor area is designed to include one dwelling unit, with a GRFA of 1,834 square feet. By pulling the fourth floor back from Bridge Street, ttie applicant proposes to shift some of this new GRFA into the "overhang and deck" easement area (Tract E} along the south side of the building. The staff has calculated that approximately 410 square feet of GRFA would be located in this easement area. Fifth Floor -The proposal includes the addition of a new fifth floor, whi Ih would be located on the eastern end of the structure. As with the new fourth floo the fifth floor would also be set back from Bridge Street, in this case approximately 10-14 feet, from the face of the north elevation. This new fifth floor area is designed to include one dwelling unit, with a GRFA of 2,763 square feet. The fifth floor unit would have asouth-facing exterior deck, which has been designed so that it would not project over the central portion of the structure, and therefore would not be visible from Bridge Street. The Tract'E and Lot Cissues - Tract E is the large parcel of land located to the -south of the Golden Peak House. The parcel includes a portion of the Mill Creek stream tract, Pirate Ship Park and the Vista Bahn ski base. Tract E is owned by Vail Associates. In 1971, Vail Associates granted easements to the Golden Peak House Ito allow for specific encroachments (such as roof overhangs and balconies} to extend into portions of Tract E. These easements have been referred to as the "overhang and deck" easements. The Tract E easement areas total 1,240 square feet. Tracts E is currently zoned Agricultural and Open Space. The Town considers these encroachments to be legal, non-conforming uses within the Agricultural and Open Space Zone District, and as such, they cannot be enlarged or expanded, and if modified, they must be brought into full compliance with the zoning code. The applicant is now requesting that these easement portions of Tract E be incorporated into the Golden Peak House parcel and be rezoned from Agriculture and Open Space to Commercial Core I zoning. Generally, the easement areas are those areas which are labeled as Easement #1 ~ Easement #2 and Easement #3, on the property survey. Part of Lot C is approximately 209 square feet in size and is zoned CCI. Lot C is located west of the Golden Peak House site and is also owned by Vail Associates. Lot C includes part of the skier access, between the Hill Building and the Golden Peak House. The applicants have entered into a contract with Vail Associates for the acquisition of the above described portions of Tract E (generally located to the south of the building) and Lot C (to the west of the building). 2 . - The applicants (including Vail Associates, as co-applicant), have requested a zone change amendment for the easement portions of Tract E that are proposed to be incorporated into the Golden Peak House parcel. In order to allow for building additions and modifications in the easement areas, and to be in full compliance with ~ the zoning code, the applicants have proposed the following: Rezone the Tract E easement areas from Agricultural/Open Space to CCI. Minor subdivision to incorporate the easement areas (Tract E and Lot C) into the Golden Peak House parcel. ~SDD overlay on the entire Golden Peak House parcel. As proposed, there would be approximately 71 square feet of above-grade commercial floor area located in the west "overhang & deck" easement area {on the basement, ground and second floors), and the south "overhang & deck" easement would have approximately 410 square feet of above-grade GRFA, (on the fourth floor).located in the easement area. There would also be approximately 775 square feet of below- grade commercial square footage in the south easement area. This below-grade space would be owned by Vail Associates and the proposed use of the space would be for the Vail Associates private ski school, customer lounge. Streetscape improvements -The applicant has proposed a contribution, to the Town, to be used specifically for the future redevelopment and improvement of Seibert Circle. The contribution would be in the amount of $10,000.00. Employee housing -Two off-site, permanently restricted, two-bedroom employee housing units, are proposed as apart of the redevelopment. tlse Restrictions -The applicant has proposed to "restrict" two three-bedroom dwelling units (Units 201 and 401), to be included in the Golden Peak House rental pool. These units would be included in the rental pool at all times when they are not occupied by the owner or the owner's guests. The total GRFA for these units is 3,002 square feet. dos Amigos deck -Ron Riley, one of the co-applicants in the redevelopment and co- owner of the restaurant, has proposed a retractable enclosure over a portion of the Los Amigos outdoor dining deck, on the south side of the building. This enclosure would cover 580 square feet; or 53%, of the Los Amigos dining deck. The total deck area is 1,094 square feet. The proposal includes the addition of an overhead retractable (canvas) awning, with folding Rekord doors an the east side and sliding glass doors (which fold back into a pocket) along the west side of the enclosure. The south facing portion of the deck enclosure would consist of removable wood and glass panels. The applicant proposes to remove this enclosure during all daytime hours when weather permits so that the space may be used for year round evening dining. 3 General site improvements -The proposal includes the following site modifications, which would be completed around the perimeter of the Golden Peak House: 1. A concrete unit paver walkway, with an integral snowmelt system, would be added along the north elevation and along a portion of the west elevation. A flagstone walk is also proposed along the south side of the building. 2. The existing trash enclosure, currently located along the west elevation of the building, would be removed. Anew trash compactor would be located in the basement of the Golden Peak House. A small elevator would be added to transport the refuse up to the ground floor when trash pick-ups are scheduled. This would occur at the northeast corner of the building. 3. Improvements to the skier/pedestrian access, west of the building, would include the relocation of the existing fire hydrant (out of the pedestrian way) and the addition of a permanent planter with a large specimen evergreen. The details of the specific improvements are described - further in the Streetscape Master Plan section of this memorandum. Construction Codes -The entire structure would be brought into compliance with all of the current Building and Fire Codes, (the building. would be fully sprinkled). Zoning issues -There are currently 18 dwelling units (0 accommodation units and 0 lock-offs) located in the building. The redevelopment proposal would include 14 dwelling units (3 with lock-offs) and 2 accommodation units, for a total of i5 dwelling units. Please note that for zoning purposes, two accommodaticn units are equal to one dwelling unit. The existing Golden Peak House exceeds the GC1 development standards in the categories of Building Height, Common Area, GRFA, Density (units), Site Coverage and Loading. a) The redevelopment project would further exceed the existing conditions in the following categories: •Building Height - An increase of 3' for the eastern portion of the building and an increase of 7-11' for the western portion of the building. •Density -GRFA - An increase of approximately 5,300 square feet. •Site Coverage -'An increase of approximately 1,522 square feet. b) The redevelopment project would be brought more into compliance with the standards, than the existing building, in the following zoning categories: •Common Area - A decrease of 1,191 square feet of common area. •Density (Number of Units) - A decrease of 3 dwelling units. 4 c) Although the existing project does not meet the loading standard, the . redevelopment project would not increase or modify the requirement, per the . zoning code. The project would continue to lack the required one loading berth. In order to accomplish the proposed redevelopment of the Golden Peak House, as outlined above,.the applicants have made the following requests: 9. A reauest for the establishment of a Special Development District -This provides the overlay zoning which allows the applicant to design the project with some flexibility regarding the development standards, and it allows the Town the ~oility to review the project with regard to overall community benefit. 2. A reauest for a Commercial Core I exterior alteration -Any project which is located in CCI, and which proposes to add or remove 100 square feet of floor area, must meet the exterior alteration standards. 3. A reauest to encroach into View Corridor lVo. 9 -The proposed redesign of the Golden Peak House will involve an encroachment into View Corridor IVo. 9. The vantage point of this view corridor is at the Vail Transportation Center central stairway. The view extends over the Village Core up to the ski mountain. At the maximum point, the existina building encroaches 92.9' into the corridor. At.the maximum point, the proposed building would encroach 97' into the corridor. 4. A reauest for a rezoning -The applicant is proposing to rezone a portion of Tract E, from Agricultural and Open Space, to Commercial Care I. The area of Tract E proposed to be rezoned consists of 9,240 square feet. 5. A reauest for a minor subdivision -This request involves the inclusion of the rezoned Tract E parcel into the Golden Peak House parcel, and the inclusion of Lot C into the Golden Peak House parcel. . 5 !l. GOLDEN PEAK FiOUSE ZONING ANALYSIS 'UNDERLYING ZONING: EXISTING PROJECT 'EXISTING PROJECT COMMERCIAL CORE I ~existinq lot area) (expanded lot area) 'PROPOSED SDD Site Area: 8,375 sq. h. 6,926 sq. h. 8,375 sq. h. 8,375 sq. h. Setbacks: Per the Vail Village N: 0-6 tt. N: 0-6 h. N: 0.4 h. Urban Design Guide Plan W: 0-7 ft. W: 1-13 h. W: 1-11 h. S: 0-8 h. S: 10-15 h. S: 6.15 h. E: 0-2 tt. E: 0-2 h. E: 0-2 ft. Height: 60%: 33 h. or less East: 46 h. max. same East: 49 h. max. 40%: 33 h. - 43 ft. Wesi: 36 ft. max. West: 42 h. max. Common Area: 2,345 sq. h. or 359'° 6,627 sq. h. or 120% 6,627 sq. h. or 999'° 5,436 sq. h. or 819'° of allowable GRFA -1,939 sq. h. or 35% -2,345 sq, h. or 35% -2,345 sq, h. or 35% 4,888 sq. h. added to GRFA 4,282 sq. h. -added to GRFA 3,091 sq. h. -added to GRFA GRFA: 6,700 sq, h. or 809'° 8,9513 sq. h. 8,958 sq. h. 15,855 sq. h. +4,688 sq. h. (excess common area) +x,282 sq. h. (excess common area) + 3,091 sq. h. (excess common area) 13,646 sq. !1. or 246% 13,240 sq. h. or 198% 18,946 sq. h. or 226% Units: 25 units per acre, 18 units (all Dus) same 14 DUs + 2 AUs ~ 15 units 4.8 units for the site (includes 3 lock-offs) Site Coverage: 6,700 sq. h. or 809'° 6,352 sq. h. or 929'° 6,352 sq. h. or 769'° 7,874 sq. h. or 949'° Landscaping: Per the Vail Village same same same Urban Design Guide Plan Parking: Per the TOV parking standards Required: 55.09 same Required: 70.11 Loading: Per the TOV loading standards Required: 1 same Required: 1 Existing: 0 same Proposed: 0 Commercial Uses: N/A 7,196 sq. h. samo 14,031 sq. h. Gross Floor Area: N/A 22,781 sq. h. same 35,444 sq. h. ' All developmern statistics, including the setbedcs, have been celalated by stall and are based on the applkenrs proposed new bt area of 8,375 sq. R. This lot are assumes the incorporetion of portbns of 7red E end Lot C Into the Golden Peak House parcel. The er<Fsting Golden Pock House bt area b 0.159 saes, or 6,926 sq. h. The ne+u areas {portions of Tred E end Lot C) proposed to be Included into the Golden Peak House parcel consist - of 1,449 sq. it. for a total 01 8,375 sq. h. Gross Iloor area indudes common arses, GRFA, end opmmerdel square foolages. 6 88I. (~FtITERIA T® SE USE® IN EVALUATING THIS PR®P®SAL. As stated in the zoning code, the purpose of Special Development Districts is as follows: "The purpose of the special development district 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 Planning Staff finds that the Golden Peak House application for the establishment of an SDD meets the Special Development District purpose as stated above. Specifically, we find that the Golden Peak House application furthers the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail Comprehensive Plan (i.e Vail Village Master Plan, streetscape Master Plan and Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan). The overall redesign of the project proposes to improve the design character, function and overall quality of the development. Employee housing units are proposed to be provided as a part of the redevelopment as well as streetscape improvements. Two dwelling units would be "restricted" and placed in the short- term rental pool. Two new accommodation units and three new lock-offs would be added to the building. Overall, the staff finds that the redevelopment project meets many of the specific goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recognizes that the existing building exceeds many of the underlying zoning's development standards. lAle feel that the project's overages have been handled in a way that minimize the impacts on adjacent properties and public spaces. UVe also believe that there are a number of community benefits associated with this redevelopment. These benefits would include the provision of employee housing, streetscape improvements, the two new accommodation units, the two restricted dwelling units and the contribution towards the future redevelopment of Seibert Circle. Overall, we feel the project will further the Town's design and development goals, and we would specifically cite Goal No. 9 and Policy No. 3-2 of the Vail Village Master Plan, which state: . "Goal #1 - Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving the unique architectural scale of the Village. in order to sustain its sense of community and identity." "#3-2 Golden Peak House - Due to this building's gross inconsistency with the Urban Design Guide Plan and neighboring buildings, it is identified as a primary renovation site. Relationship to greenspace on south, Seibert Circle on north, as well as to mountain entryway, are important considerations. Loading and delivery must be addressed." 7 IV. SDD CRITERIA The following are the nine special development district criteria to utilized by the Planning and Environmental Commission when evaluating SDD proposals. A. Design compatibility and sensitivity to the Immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. The staff thought that it would be helpful to provide the PEC with a summary of the architectural design issues that have been identified and addressed by the applicants over the course of the last four or five worksessions. The following comments should be reviewed in conjunction with the proposed elevation drawings for the Golden Peak House. In general, staff believes that the overall architectural style is positive and would be compatible with the alpine character of Vail Village. The applicant has responded to many of the PEC and staff comments regarding the architectural design. NORTH ELEVATION 1. The central connection between the east and west halves of the building has been cut back to the east, and the roof forms have been simplified and lowered. The deck and hot tub, originally located on the roof of this central connection, has been relocated to the south side of the fifth floor addition, to a less visible location. 2. The originally proposed flat roofs have been redesigned, and are now pitched. The design is similar to the roof forms utilized at the Sonnenalp and Christiania. The roof design incorporates a truncated peak instead of the traditional ridge peak. The intent of this design is to remove all flat roofs which would be visible _ from the Bridge Street vantage point, and from the ski mountain. 3. The fifth floor building mass has been pulled back from the face of the building's north elevation approximately 10 to 14 feet. In addition, the applicant has added three dormers on the north elevation of the fifth floor, to provide architectural relief for this portion of the building. 4. The staff believes that the first floor commercial spaces continue to be in need of refinement to create more of a pedestrian area and to bring the north facade down to more of a pedestrian scale. The staff has recommended the following: o Embellishing the design of the windows and doors through interesting detailing, such as subdivided window panes (to express individual window elements), articulated entry doors, etc. • . Lowering the roof form over the main entry. 8 Adding the arcade, or canopy, back into the design. -This element was originally proposed over the first floor retail windows on the north _ elevation, and has recently been eliminated. 5. The staff has concerns with the recently modified ground floor plan, which includes a curved store front at the eastern end of the building. We believe the applicant should utilize the original ground floor plan, which provides a much more pedestrian-friendly environment along the shop fronts. The addition of the arcade along the north elevation would also be an asset to the building. EAST ELEVATION 1. The applicant has designed a peaked roof form that conceals fhe small flat roof section behind it. Architectural detailing has been added to this elevation. WEST ELEVATION 1. In order to~diminish the "canyon" effect through the skier/pedestrian access to the mountain, the third and fourth floor projections have been decreased in size and floor area. However, a small area of the three lower floors (Los Amigos Restaurant and lower level commercial space) continues to project into Lot C. All other floor area has been removed from Lot C. 2. The applicant has proposed to relocate three of the four evergreens, located adjacent to the building along the west elevation, onto Tract E. In addition, the large aspen located at the southwest corner of the building will also be relocated onto Tract E. Because landscaping in this corridor is so critical, as it is a transition area between the Village and the ski mountain, the applicant has agreed to add astone-faced planter, with a 20' tall specimen evergreen, adjacent to the west elevation in the skier access. . 3. The entry into the Vail Associates commercial space, on the south side of the building (under the Los Amigos deck), has been reconfigured by reorienting the entry to the north. Staff believe that this change provides a more accessible and inviting entry. Heated concrete unit pavers will be added in front of this entry. 4. The first floor retail windows have been changed to include smaller panes (divided lights) to add visual interest and to create a more pedestrian scale. S®IJTH ELEVATE®N 1. The applicant has redesigned the roof forms and has eliminated ail visible flat roofs as discussed above. 2. The fourth floor is proposed to have 410 square feet of GRFA located within the "overhang & deck" easement areas. Additionally, the new below-grade commercial area, located beneath the Los Amigos dining deck, would also be . 9 proposed to be located within the Tract E easement areas. To respond to this issue, the applicants have proposed to mitigate the use of the Tract E easement areas by donating open space to the Town. Vail Associates has proposed to donate a portion of Tract E, to be used as permanent open space. 3. The roofs over some of the south facing balconies have been cut back to help decrease the mass and bulk of the building. 4. Landscaping along this elevation has been addressed by the addition of the three transplanted evergreen trees and the transplanted aspen onto Tract E. The applicant has also proposed to add shrubs along the base of the Los Amigos dining deck and a flagstone walkway. 5. As previously discussed in Section I of this memorandum, the applicant is proposing to add a retractable enclosure over 580 square feet oflthe Los Amigos dining deck. As designed, the enclosure would consist of an overhead retractable (canvas)- awning, with folding Rekord doors on the east side and • sliding glass doors (which fold back into a pocket) along the west side. The south facing portion of the deck enclosure would consist of removable wood and glass panels. _ The staff believes that the applicants have done a very good job redesigning and modifying the building io reduce the mass and bulk. We feel that this • proposed deck enclosure, over approximately one-half of the outdoor dining . deck, would add further to the mass and bulk of the structure. We strongly believe that an outdoor dining experience is what many visitors to Vail desire, and we,seriously question the feasibility of removing the retractable cover and enclosure on a daily basis. Staff also believes that the design of the structure is not compatible with the design guidelines of the Village. Staff recognizes that, in addition to the deck enclosure, there are other portions of the building which would extend into the "overhang & deck" easements. However, we believe that the design of these areas of the structure have an overall positive benefit on the building's mass and bulk in that the public's perception of the buiiding mass would actually be reduced, and that view lines up to the ski mountain have been opened -up. In the case of the deck enclosure, we view this as a loss of 580 square feet of "public space", in a prominent location in respect to the skier services at the base of Vail Village, and we can find no community benefit in the request. We also believe that approving the deck enclosure, when there is no means at this time to expand the deck onto other areas (Tract E to the south), sets a negative precedent. GENERAL ARCHITECTURAL DETAILING 1. The detailing, on the balcony railings has been modified and the railings now have a more ornamental feel and reflect more of the Vail alpine character. 10 ' 2. The window detailing, such as the bay window, on the westem portion of the north elevation has been carried through to the other parts of the project. 3. .The proposed roofing material on the building is a tar and gravel roof. Staff believes that the originally proposed shake roof should be added back into the design of the building. We feel that a shake roof would be more in keeping with the character of the Village and would be more aesthetically pleasing. In summary, the staff believes that the building's architectural design is at a point where it would be compatible with the immediate environment and adjacent properties. We feel that the architectural style will be a significant improvement over the existing style of the Golden Peak House building, and we feel that the character of the design would be in keeping with the Town's Design Guidelines recommended for Vail Village, r excluding the deck enclosure. With regard to overall mass and bulk, we feel that by shifting the mass of the fifth floor to the south, as well as the fourth floor (of the western-most portion of the building) to the south, the pedestrian perception of the structure will be one of a three and four story building. We believe the building meets the CCI review criteria for Street Enclosure and Street Edge, as we feel the building will provide a "comfortable" enclosure for the street. The fact that the grade changes approximately one level, from north to south through the site, will also help minimize the appearance of the structure. [8. 0~ses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. It is the staff's position that the mixture of uses proposed for the site is compatible with the existing uses on surrounding properties. The uses proposed would meet the purpose and intent of the CCI zone district. With regard to density, the overall square footage of the project is proposed to be increased, (commercial and residential square footage). The redevelopment includes the addition of 5,706 square feet of GRFA and 6,835 sq. ff. of commercial floor area. A portion of this square footage is located within the central atrium area of the building. This area is 2,400 square feet in size. The "actual density" is proposed to be reduced. The number of dwelling units will be reduced from 18 to 15. The number of "keys", or rentable rooms will actually increase from 18 to 19, which is positive. Two new accommodation units would be added, which is also positive. Staff would recommend that the two new accommodation units be restricted, so that in the future, they cannot be converted into dwelling units via the Condominium Conversion section of the Subdivision Regulations and that the units be used only as short-term rentals. In addition, the applicant has proposed to "restrict" two three-bedroom dwelling units (Units 201 and 401) to be included in the Golden Peak House rental pool. These units have a combined GRFA of 3,002 square feet and would be included in the rental pool at all times when they are not occupied by the owner or the owner's guests. It should be noted that the applicant's proposed use restriction is not the same restriction that is 11 normally required by the Town. We generally use the Condominium Conversion ' restriction, which is in the Subdivision Regulations, a copy of which is attached to this memorandum (Exhibit B). In addition to the proposed rental restrictions on Units 201 and 401, staff believes that the rental restrictions. should also be placed upon the remaining two lack=off units proposed to be located within the building. This would include the lock~offs for Units 305 and 306. These two lock-offs would have a combined GRFA of 641 square feet. As indicated in many of the Vail Village Master Plan Goals and Objectives., increasing the avai{abi{ity of short-term overnight accommodations is strongly encouraged. The staff believes that 'it will be a benefit to the community to utilize these lock-offs as short-term accommodation units and we believe that by restricting these units, to be placed into the short-term rental pool, that we will fur#her the community's goals. Employee Housing Issues - As indicated in a number of the goals and objectives of the Town's Master Plans, employee housing is a critical Town issue which should be addressed through the planning process for this type of development p ~oposal. For the - Golden Peak House review, the staff has analyzed the employee housing issue utilizing two methods. We have calculated the estimated employee housing demand using the Town adopted Employee Housing Report, and secondly, we have studied information provided by the applicant with regard to the individual business owners' estimates of employee generation, due to increases in the sizes of their individual commercial spaces: The Employee Housing Report, prepared for the Town of Vail by the consulting firm Rosall Remmen and Cares, indicates the recommended ranges of employee housing units based upon type of use and floor area. For the Golden Peak House analysis, the staff has utilized the midpoint of the suggested ranges, for employees generated. A copy of the report's summary page is attached to this memorandum (Exhibit A). Utilizing the guidelines in this report, the staff has analyzed the incremental increase, of the numbers of employees (square footage per use), that the proposed redevelopment would create. The summary is as follows: a) Sar/Restaurant = 878 sq. ft.(@ 6.5/1,000 sq. ft.) = 5.7 employees b) Retail/Service Commercial = 4,436 sq. ft.(@6.5/1,000 sq. ft.) = 28.8 employees c) Lodging = 1 room (Cad 0.75/rooml = 0.75 emplovees d) Total = 35.25 employEes •35.25 employees x .15 housing multiplier = 5.2 employees. •35.25 employees x .30 housing multiplier = 10.5 employees. In summary, the staff estimates that the Golden Peak House redevelopment would create a need for six to eleven additional employees. This range is due to the housing multiplies that varies from 0.15 to 0.30. The 0.15 housing mu{tiplier is suggested to be ' 12 utilized when projects do not exceed allowable density and GRFA. The 0.30 housing multiplier is recommended for use when projects are over on density. The existing and proposed Golden Peak House is over on density. Depending upon the size of the employee housing unit to be provided, it is possible.to calculate up to two employees per bedroom. For example, for atwo-bedroom unit in the size range of 450 to 900 square feet, it is possible that this unit would be capable of accommodating up to four employees. Atwo-bedroom unit, with a size less than 450 square feet, would only be considered capable of housing one employee per _ bedroom. The applicant has provided letters from the "major tenant space owners" in the Golden Peak House to address and evaluate the employee housing impacts of the redevelopment. Paul Johnston, representing Christiania Realty, Inc., has addressed the hotel/condominium expansion in the Golden Peak House. Paul believes that there will be no increase in the staff for the lodging needs of the building, given this redevelopment. Michael Staughton, representing the Los Amigos Restaurant, also does not believe that there will be any need for additional employees as a result of the restaurant's renovation and expansion. Lastly, Jack Hunn, representing Vail Associates, Inc., has indicated that two new employees would be needed to operate the new Vail Associates space proposed to be located on the ground floor of the Golden Peak House. Overall, the applicant has estimated that a total of two additional employees would be generated as a result of the Golden Peak House expansion. To mitigate this impact, GPH Partners, Ltd. had originally proposed that one two-bedroom condominium unit, located in Pitkin Creek Park, be permanently deed restricted as an employee housing unit. Since the September 13, 1993 PEC worksession, the applicant has agreed to provide one additional two-bedroom employee housing unit as a part of the redevelopment. . According to the analysis above, two two-bedroom units (in the 700-1,000 square foot range) would provide housing for up to eight employees. The staff believes that the applicant's provision for housing up to eight employees is . reasonable. VNe think that the 6.5 multiplier, for the retail/service commercial use, may be slightly high, given the type of. commercial expansions associated with this project. Overall, the staff believes that with the two two-bedroom housing units provided, the project would now satisfy the Town's employee housing requirement. The employee housing units would be located off-site, however, the exact location of the units has not yet been identified. Both units will be required to meet the Town of Vail Housing Ordinance. C. Compliance with the parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 9 8.52. The staff has determined that the incremental increase in the required parking, due to the redevelopment of the Golden Peak House, would be 15.02 parking spaces. Because this .property is located in the Commercial Core I zone district, which does not allow for the provision of on-site parking, the developer will be required to pay into the 13 Town's parking pay-in-lieu fund. According to Section 18.52.160 (B,5) of the Municipal Code, "the parking fee is $8,000 per space. This fee shall be automatically increased every two years by the percentage the Consumer Price Index of the City of Denver has increased over each successive two year period." At $8,000 per parking space, the current amount required for the Golden Peak House pay-in-lieu fee would be $120,160, excluding the C.P.I. increase which would be calculated at the time a building permit is requested. Although the "existing Golden Peak House does not meet the Town's loading standard, the proposed redevelopment for the site does not increase this nonconformity. Given the iccation of the Golden Peak House, and the fact that there is ao service alley or rear vehicular access to the building, vehicular loading cannot be accommodated directly on site. Loading for the building currently occurs at the Hanson Ranch Road loading zones, located adjacent to the Christiania Lodge. This method off delivery is proposed to continue. The staff will work with the applicant on the issue of the possible formation of a special district, concerning a central loading/delivery facility, adjacent to the Christiania Lodge. D. Conformity with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Ptan, Town policies and Urban Design Plans. 1. RELATED POLICIES tN THE VAIL VILLAGE MASTER PLAN The Vail Village Master Plan specifically addresses the Golden Peak House, as indicated in Sub-Area Concepts 3-2 and 3-3. Said concepts read as follows: "#3-2 Golden Peak House Due to this building's gross inconsistency with the Urban Design Guide Plan and neighboring buildings, it is identified as a primary renovation site. Relationship to greenspace on south, Seibert Circle on north, as well as to mountain entryway, are important considerations. Loading and delivery must be addressed." ~ Tl.W ~ c~T.~.K:..; 14 I . "#3-3 Seibert Circle Study Area • Study area to establish a more inviting public plaza with greenspace, improved sun exposure and a focal point at the top of Bridge Street. Design and extent of new plaza to be sensitive to fire access and circulation considerations.Q ~ta ~ ~ ~ le ~ " Ol O:J. i e 1 ~~~Ill ~ ~ O^'t Yl.II aDtO[a Ka4 ~/C• / • I I rtiACE ,1 ~ .1.`.` The staff believes that the proposed redevelopment of the Golden Peak House would further the above sub-area concepts. Staff agrees that the renovation of this building is needed, and we feel the proposal relates well to the Tract E open space to the south, as well to the Seibert Circle/Bridge Street public spaces to the north. The loading. and delivery issue has been addressed in Section C above. Additionally, the staff believes the following goals and objectives, as stated in the Vail Village Master Plan, are relevant to this proposal: Goal #1 - Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving the unique architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain its ' sense of community and identity. 9.2 ~ Objective: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities. 9.3 Objective: Enhance new development and redevelopment through public improvements done by private developers working in cooperation with the Town. 2.2 Objective: Recognize the "historic" commercial core as the,main activity center of the Village. 2.2.9 Policy: ~ . The design criteria in the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan shall be the primary guiding document to preserve the existing architectural scale and character of the core area of Vail Village. 2.3 Objective:' Increase the number of residential units available for short term overnight accommodations. 95 2.3.1 Policy: ~ . 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 makes them available for short term overnight rental. 2.4 Objective: Encourage the development of a variety of a new commercial activity where compatible with existing land uses. • 2.4.1 Policy: Commercial infill development consistent with established horizontal zoning regulations shall be encouraged to provide activity generators, accessible greenspaces, public plazas, and streetscape improvements to the pedestrian network throughout the Village. 2.5 Objective: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to better serve the needs of our guests. 2.6 Objective: Encourage the development of affordable housing units through the efforts of the private sector. 2.6.1 Policy: Employee housing units may be required as part of any new or redevelopment project requesting density over that allowed by existing zoning. 2.6.2 Policy: Employee housing shall be developed with appropriate restrictions so as to insure their availability and affordability to the local work force. 3.1 Objective: Physically improve the existing pedestrian ways by landscaping and other improvements. 3.1.1 Policy: Private development projects shall incorporate streetscape improvements (such as paver treatments, landscaping, lighting and seating areas), along adjacent pedestrian ways. . 16 • 3.x.2 f~olicy: - • Private development projects shall be required to incorporate new sidewalks along streets adjacent to the project as designated by the Vail Village Master Plan and/or Recreation Trails Master Plan. x.9.3 Policye UVith the exception of ski base-related facilities, existing natural open space areas at the base of Vail Mountain and throughout Vail Village shall be preserved as open space. The staff believes that the proposed redevelopment of the Golden Peak House would further the above Vail Village Master Plan goals and objectives. As previously indicated, the staff believes that the character and style of the proposed design would be in keeping with the Town's Design Guidelines recommended for Vail Village. The Vail Village Conceptual Building Height Plan has included the Golden Peak House in the .3-4 story category. A building story is defined as 9 feet of height (no roof included). , With regard to overall mass and bulk, and building height, we feel that by shifting the mass of the fifth floor to the south, as well as the fourth floor (of the western-most portion of the building) to the south, the pedestrian perception of the structure will be one of a three and four story building. In addition, the grade changes approximately one level, from north to south through the site. This site topography will also help minimize the appearance of the structure. Overall, staff believes the project would meet the intent of the "3-4 story building height category", acknowledging that the building would actually be in the 4-5 story range. 2. RELATE® POLICIES IPJ THE VAIL VILLAGE UR13Ah1 ®ESIGRI GtJI®E PLA(~• The Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan specifically addresses the Golden Peak House, as indicated in Sub-Area Concepts 9 and 14. These concepts read as follows: Concept 9 - "Commercial expansion (ground floor) not to exceed 10 feet in depth, possible arcade. To improve pedestrian scale at base of tall building, and for greater transparency as an activity generator on Seibert Circle. Concept 9 0 - Seibert Circle. Feature area paving treatment. Relocate focal point (potential fountain) to north for better sun exposure (fall/spring), creates increased plaza area and are the backdrop for activities. Separated path on north sides for unimpeded pedestrian route during delivery periods." 17 V :51,14 to .E ~i11 - . ~ ~ . As indicated earlier, the staff believes that the pedestrian arcade (which was originally proposed over the first floor retail windows on the north elevation); and the original - ground floor plan, which does not include the curved retail windows along the eastern portion of the building, should be added back into the design. ~Ve believe that these modifications will bring the project into compliance with Sub-Area Concept 9 listed above (Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan). aua-Area Concept 10, Seibert Circle, is discussed below, in the Streetscape Design section of the memo. 3. RELATED POLICIES IPJ THE STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAiV- The Streetscape Master Plan specifically addresses the Golden Peak House area as follows: "Seibert Circle is proposed to be replaced by a large planter that is surrounded by low steps for informal seating. A large "specimen" evergreen tree should be maintained in the Circle. Seibert Circle's focal point could be a fountain or an artwork feature that will be visible from much of Bridge Street. Seibert Circle's ability to be used as a performance site should also be considered." "The primary paving material for the right-of-way area of the Village Core is recommended to be rectangular concrete unit pavers, in the .color mix specified in the Guidelines for Paving section of this report. The herringbone pattern, which is proposed for most areas, is edged by a double soldier course. The intent is to satisfy the need for a simple streetscape treatment without being monotonous." "Focal points -such as the Children's Fountain, the intersection of Bridge Street and Gore Creek Drive and Seibert Circle -will receive special paving- treatments." Streetscape Design Issues - The Town's Streetscape Master Plan lists numerous improvements which are recommended to be installed adjacent to the Golden Peak House. These improvements, some of which are described above, generally call for - the upgrading of Seibert Circle and the upgrading of the pedestrian/skier access to the Vista Bahn ski base. Some of these improvements are directly related toy the redevelopment of the Golden Peak House and are included in the project's work plan, however, all improvements are tied to the mitigation of the project's impacts on the Town and the adjoining public spaces. - 18 . Prior to the September 27, 1993 PEC worksession, the applicant and the staff met on- site and agreed to specific modifications regarding the project's landscaping and streetscaping. The applicant's redesign would now include the following: Three of the existing four large evergreen trees, located in the skier access west of the building, would be relocated onto Tract E. These trees would be relocated north of the Pirate Ship Park area and immediately north of the Town's recreation path. The fourth evergreen is not proposed to be relocated because of its poor condition. The existing aspen located at the southwest corner of the Golden Peak House would also be relocated onto Tract E. Due to the tree's close proximity to the building and the configuration of the tree's root system, it may not~be possible to relocate this aspen without significant. damage to the tree. The condition of the roots will not be knowri until excavation of the root ball has begun. However, if the tree cannot be relocated, then the applicant has agreed to install two new 3-inch caliper aspen trees onto Tract E. ~A permanent stone-faced planter would be added in the skier access immediately adjacent to the western elevation of the building. The type of rock used for this planter would match the stone that is in place in the Seibert Circle planter, as well as the existing planters along upper Bridge Street. The planter wall would be approximately 18-24" in height, with a stone cap, so it could be used for seating. A 20-foot tall specimen blue spruce would be added to this planter. The existing fire hydrant, which is located immediately off of the southwest corner of the building, would be relocated into the new planter described above. This would remove the hydrant from the pedestrian area. ~A flagstone or brick paver walkway would be added along the south side of the Los Amigos deck to provide for pedestrian access along the south side of the building. A 2'-6" wide planter would be added between the walkway and the dining deck. The applicant has proposed to contribute $10,000.00 to the redesign and redevelopment of Seibert Circle. The staff believes that the future redesign of Seibert Circle needs to be very carefully studied and that a Landscape Architect, in conjunction with the neighborhood, should analyze the design for the Circle. In addition to~the surface paver treatment, the staff believes that landscaping, public seating and perhaps a performance area should be provided for in the design. Drainage work around the Circle also needs to be addressed. The staff has reviewed the applicant's monetary proposal and we would suggest the following. We have estimated that if the Golden Peak House were to be required to add stone-faced planters along the north elevation of the building, similar in design to the planters along upper Bridge Street, then the 19 cost of these planters would be substantially more than $10,000. The Town Engineer's cost estimate for 49 lineal feet of planter along the north elevation of the Golden Peak House is $32,000. Staff believes that this is the amount that should be dedicated towards the redevelopment of Seibert Circle. We believe that if the Circle were not in place, the Town would request the north elevation planters. In summary, the staff believes.the proposed streetscape improvements would make a positive contribution to the quality of the area and would be in compliance with the Town's adopted Streetscape Master Plan. E. Identification and mitigation~of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the _property on which the special development district is proposed. There are no natural and/or geologic hazards, or_floodplain that effect this property. F. ~ Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. As discussed extensively at previous PEC worksessions during late 1992 and early 1993, the staff and the PEC have expressed concerns regarding the addition of floor area located in the "overhang and deck" easement areas. At the January 1993 PEC worksession, the applicant had modified the redevelopment plans to remove all above- grade floor area within the "overhang and deck" easement areas. As currently proposed, the west "overhang & deck" easement would have approximately 71 square feet of commercial floor area located in the easement (on the basement, ground and second floors) and the south "overhang ~ deck" easement would have approximately 410 square feet of GRFA (on the fourth floor), and 580 square feet of "covered" dining deck (on the second floor), located in the easement area. This issue was discussed at the September 13, 1993 PEC worksession and the Commission expressed a level of comfort with the additional GRFA proposed to be located within the easement area with the understandin that the licant would work 9 aPP with Vail Associates regarding the dedication (of at least an equal amount, and preferably more} of open space to the Town. Staff agrees that this amount of encroachment into the easement area is acceptable as it has allowed fo i the mass of the structure to shift out of the view corridor. It was suggested that the Mill Creek stream tract or the Pirate Ship Park area of Tract E be dedicated as permanent open space to the Town of Vail. In summary, although the proposed site coverage will further exceed the development standards for the CCI zone district, the staff believes that the project's design sensitivity to the site planning and open space issues has been positive. We find that pedestrian access adjacent to the building will be improved and open space maintained. Again, we do find exception with the proposal for the deck enclosure. 20 I ' } i ' ~ ' NVith regard to building height, we acknowledge that the existing and proposed building heights are over the maximum allowable height for the CCI zone district. However, we .feel the overall massing of the structure,-and the configuration of the roof planes mitigate the overage. circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. The Golden Peak House redevelopment will not impact the vehicular circulation system surrounding this site. Staff believes that the pedestrian circulation around the perimeter of the building will be improved as a result'of the project. Improvements to the skier access will include steps, adjacent to the southwest corner of the building, which will tie the skier access to a new flagstone paver walkway south of the dining deck. This area is particularly slippery and dangerous in the winter. Staff believes that the stair and walkway will enhance pedestrian access. B-f. functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions. Landscaping issues have been discussed above in the Streetscape Design section of the memo. Sun/Shade Analysis -The sun/shade analysis, which is indicated on Sheet A15 in the attached drawing set, indicates by the use of across-hatched pattern, the additional shading of the public spaces north of the building during the equinox. (iVlarch 21 /September 21). This additional shading, consisting of approximately 112 square feet in area, would encroach into the Seibert Circle area, as well as cast additional shadow on Hanson Ranch Road. The proposed building design would also eliminate, or reduce, the amount of shading on some other areas of Hanson Ranch Road and Seibert Circle. The reduction in the amount.. of shading would total approximately 160 square feet. Sheet A15 also indicates the shade and shadow line at the winter solstice (December 21), Although this analysis is not required per the Vail Village exterior alteration criteria, staff feels it is important to understand shade impacts during the winter solstice, as this is a peak time for our guests. Clearly, the proposed expansion of the western portion of the Golden Peak House would increase the shade and shadow on upper Bridge Street during this time period. Because the applicant has pulled back the proposed fifth floor of the eastern portion of the expanded Golden Peak House, the winter solstice shading in this area has been reduced when compared to the existing building. However, it should be pointed out that the reduction in the amount of shading in this area would actually reduce the shading on the roof of the commercial spaces in the Red Lion Building. Some improvements will also occur with the new building when compared to the existing shading on portions of Bridge Street and Hanson Ranch Road. 21 1. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that gill maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. ' The applicant has not proposed a phasing plan for the redevelopment of the Golden Peak House, as it is their intention to complete the entire renovation in one phase. V. COMIUtERCIAL CORE 1 EXTERIOR ALTERATION CRITER{A The nine criteria (listed below) for Commercial Core I Exterior Alterations shall also be used to judge the merits of this project. Staff believes these issues, or criteria, have already been addressed in the SDD review criteria above, and in other parts of this memo, so we will not reiterate and address each item here. A. Pedestrianization -See Section IV,G. B. Vehicular Penetration -See Section IV,G. C. StreEtscape Framework -See Section IV,D-3. D. Street Enclosure -See Section 1V,A. E. Street Edge -See Section IV,A. F. Building Height -See Section IV,D-2 and IV, F. G. Views and Focal Points -See Section VIII. H. Service and Delivery -See Section IV,C. I. Sun/Shade -See Section IV,H. VI. ZONE DISTRICT AMENDPIAENT CRITERIA The zone district amendment criteria (zone change) are listed below: A. Suitability of the Proposed Zoning. The staff is supportive of the applicant's request to modify the zoning of the "easement areas" along the south side of the Golden Peak House building. We believe that the request to modify the zoning from Agricultural and Open Space, to Commercial Core I, is justified given the extent of the development currently in the easement areas. This property is currently encumbered with an easement which allows for roof overhangs and decks to project out over the property.. Staff does not believe that ttiis portion of Tract E currently functions as an "open space property" and that the rezoning to Commercial Core I, with the SDD overlay, provides the Town the opportunity to change the zoning so that it allows for development which already exists in this area. The SDD overlay also allows the Town to carefully review the uses in this area. B. Is the amendment proposal presenting a convenient, workabile relationship among land uses consistent with municipal objectives? Again, the staff believes that due to the fact that the property is encumbered with the "overhang and deck" easements, and because the property does not currently function 22 ' as an open space property, we believe that the proposed Commercial Core I zoning would be more in keeping with the existing uses on the site. VNe also do not believe that the zone change request, for the easement portions of Tract E, would be precedent setting. NVe believe this property is unique, and not like other open space zoned properties, in that it is encumbered with easements which allow for roof overhangs and decks to project out over the property. C. ®oes the rezoning proposal provide for the growth of an orderly and viable community? The staff believes .that the rezoning proposal would provide for the growth of an orderly and viable community. We feel this can be accomplished by "cleaning up" an existing _ situation which allows for improvements to be constructed over an open space zoned property. VII. MINOR SUBDIVISION CRITERIA The minor subdivision criteria are as follows: dot Area -Chapter 18.24.090 of the Town's Municipal Code requires that the. minimum lot or site area for a property located within the CCI zone district be 5,000 square feet of buildable area. As proposed, the new lot area of the Golden Peak House parcel would exceed the 5,000 square foot requirement. The new lot area would be 8,375 square feet. [8. frontage -Chapter 18.24.090 of the Town's Municipal Code requires that each lot have a minimum frontage of 30 feet. The applicant is not proposing to modify the frontage of the Golden Peak House parcel. The existing frontage is approximately 115 feet. C. Purpose -Chapter 17.16.110 of the Vail Subdivision Regulations states that the PEC shall review the minor subdivision application and consider its appropriateness in regard to Town policies which relate to subdivision control, densities proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions, and other applicable documents, effects on the aesthetics of the Town, environmental integrity. and compatibility with surrounding uses. Staff does not believe that the applicant's request for this minor subdivision would have any negative effects upon the above-mentioned criteria. Vile believe that the issues regarding aesthetics of the Town and environmental integrity have been addressed through the SDD review criteria. In addition, we feel that the criteria regarding compatibility with surrounding uses and densities proposed has also been addressed. 23 In summary, the staff believes that the~applicant has met the criteria fort a minor subdivision. In essence, this minor subdivision request would vacate the lot line currently located between the existing Golden Peak House parcel and the "overhang and deck" easement portions of Tract E. Should this minor subdivision be approved, the "ovefiang and deck" easement portion of Tract E would be incorporated into the Golden Peak House parcel. Vlll. VIEW CORRIDOR ENCROACHMENT CRITERIA A. Purpose of the View Corridor Ordinance The applicant has requested an Encroachment into View Corridor No. 1. Because the staff believes that the original intent and purpose of the View Corridor Ordinance is very important to the Town, we have included it here for review: "The Town of Vail believes that preserving certain vistas is in the interest of the Town's residents and guests. Specifically, the Town believes that: . The protection and perpetuation of certain mountain views and other significant views from various pedestrian public ways within-the Town will foster civic pride and is in the public interest of the Town of Vail; It is desirable to designate, preserve and perpetuate certain views for the enjoyment and environmental enrichment of the residents and guests of the Town; The preservation of such views will strengthen and preserve the Town's unique environmental heritage and attributes; The preservation of such views will enhance the aesthetic and economic vitality and values of the Town; The preservation of such views is intended to provide for natural light to buildings and in public spaces in the vicinity of the view corridors; The preservation of such views will include certain focal points such as the Clock . . Tower and Rucksack Tower, which serve as prominent landmarks within Vail Village and contribute to the community's unique sense of place." 13. Description of View Corridor Encroachments _ View Corridor No. 1 is the view from the Vail Transportation Center south to the ski mountain. The existing Golden Peak House currently encroaches into View Corridor No. 1. The extent of the existing encroachment varies with the ridge lines, building outline and architectural design of the building. However, the general range of encroachment is as follows: . 24 - The eastern portion of the building currently encroaches approximately 1.0 to • 1.1 feet into the View Corridor. One area of the central portion of the building encroaches approximately 12.1 feet into the View Corridor. The extent of the western portion's encroachment into the View Corridor ranges from approximately 0 to 8.1 feet (at the very western edge of the building). As currently designed, the Golden Peak House redevelopment is proposing to encroach into View Corridor No. 1 as follows: The eastern portion of the structure would encroach approximately 3 feet. The central portion of the redeveloped building's encroachment would range from approximately 4, to 17 feet (elevator tower). The extent of the western portion's encroachment into the View Corridor would range from approximately 9 to 13 feet. When reviewing the view corridor encroachment request, staff believes that it is important to analyze, or visualize, the request in three dimensions. The proposal would encroach further into the view corridor, versus the existing building, in some areas. However, due to the design of the structure, with much of the upper level mass shifted to the rear (or south), the perception of the encroachment from the public spaces adjacent to the building, would actually be less than that of the existing building's encroachment. View .Corridor No. 2, the view between the Golden Peak House and the HiII Building, (skier access to Vista Bahn area) wilt not be impacted by the redevelopment. C. Review Criteria for the thew Corridor Encroachment The review criteria for the View Corridor Encroachment request are as follows: "IVo encroachment into an existing view corridor shall be permitted unless the applicant demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence that the encroachment meets all of the following criteria": What the literal enforcement of Section 88.73.030 would preclude a reasonable development of a proposed structure on the applicant's Band. The staff has extensively reviewed the applicant's request for an encroachment into View Corridor #1. Vile have weighed the pros and cons of the request and we should point out that, as with any view corridor encroachment request, it is not an exact science in the determination of whether to support, or to not support, an encroachment. There are numerous variables, and it should be noted that the review of a view corridor encroachment is. not like the review of a request for additional density or GRFA, as one cannot simply run numbers to determine acceptable levels. With regard to the Golden Peak House, understanding that many of the Town's Master Plans promote the 25 redevelopment of the site, and also understanding the ownership issues related to the building, the staff believes that the strict and literal enforcement of this section of the Town's regulations would preclude a reasonable development on the site. 2. That the development of the structure proposed by the applicant would not be such as to defeat the purposes cf this Chapter. The staff feels that the purpose and intent of the View Corridor Ordinance is extremely important to the protection of certain views and vistas in the Town. Again, we have very carefully reviewed the applicant's request to encroach into View Corridor #1 and we believe that the applicant's proposal would not defeat the purposes of this chapter, as specifically outlined above. We ~o not believe that the proposed redevelopment of the Golden Peak House would negatively effect the protection and perpetuation of View Corridor #1, nor would it - negatively effect the amount of natural light to buildings and to public spaces in the vicinity of the structure, nor would it negatively effect or modify the views of established focal points. Staff believes that the project would actually open up more views, from the Seibert Circle area, of the immediate ski runs. This is primarily due to the removal of the butterfly roof form, which currently projects out in an east and west direction and blocks views of the mountain. 3. That the development proposed by the applicant would not be detrimental to the enjoyment of public pedestrian areas, public ways, public spaces, or public views. The staff is of the opinion that the proposed redevelopment of the Golden Peak House would not be detrimental to the enjoyment of the adjacent public pedestrian areas and public spaces and views. We feel that the applicants have done a very good job of modifying and redesigning the building so that views of the Riva ski run, when viewed from the Bridge Street area, would continue to be visible. In fact, with the elimination of the existinglbutterfly roof, more views of the immediate mountain would be opened up from the upper Bridge Street and Seibert Circle areas. 4. That the development proposed by the. applicant complies with the applicable elements of the Vail Land Use Plan, Town Policies, Urban Design Guide Plans, and other adopted master plans. - The staff believes that the proposed redevelopment of the Golden Peak House generally complies with the applicable elements of the above-mentioned Master Plans. We feel that Sub-Area Concept #3-2, of the Vai! Village Master Plan, is applicable to this criteria. This concept identifies the "building's gross inconsistency with the Urban Design Guide Plan and neighboring buildings, and has identified it as a primary renovation site." Staff agrees that the Golden Peak House building is unique, due to its degree of nonconformance. We 26 believe that.the fact that this project is specifically called out as a prime site for redevelopment and our opinion that the new design brings the project into more conformance with the Village Design Guidelines serves to distinguish this proposal from other future view corridor encroachment requests. In summary, we feel that the project's relationship to the Comprehensive Plan issues have been discussed in depth under the SDD review criteria listed above. 5. That the proposed structure will not diminish the integrity or quality nor compromise the original purpose of the preserved view. The original purpose of View Corridor #1, with its vantage point located at the central stairway of the Village Transportation Center, is to frame the Rucksack and Clock Tower, with the mountain and ski area located behind the Town. From the viewpoint, the Golden Peak House is nearly imperceptible. In the staff's opinion, the proposed modifications to View Corridor #1, as viewed from the viewpoint, would not diminish the integrity or quality, nor compromise the original purpose of this preserved view. ,4s specifically stated in the View Corridor Ordinance, "the purpose of Viewpoint #1 is to protect the views of Vail Mountain, views of Vail Village, and to maintain the prominence and views of the Clock Tower and Rucksack Tower as seen from the central staircase of the Transportation Center." Ulf. STAFI` RECO~AMERI®ATI®~ The staff recommends approval of the applicant's requests. These requests include a request for the establishment of a Special Development District, a request for a Commercial Core I exterior alteration, a request to encroach into View Corridor No. 1, a request for a rezoning and~a request for a minor subdivision. We find that the redevelopment proposal, over the course of 11 PEC work sessions and approximately 2 years of review, has developed into one which is in compliance with the objectives and purpose section of the SDD zone district as well as the other Comprehensive Plan elements described in detail above. The staff's recommendation of approval is based on our understanding that the following are included in the redevelopment: 1. That prior to the Town's issuance of a Building Permit for the redevelopment project, the developer will provide two off-site, two-bedroom, permanently restricted employee housing units. Each unit shall be a minimum of 700 square feet in size. The units shall meet the Town of Vail Housing Ordinance requirements. 2. That prior to the Town's issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the redevelopment project, the developer will deed restrict two three-bedroom dwelling units (Units 201 and 401) to be included in the Golden Peak House short-term rental pool, at all times when they are not occupied by the owner or his guests. 27 3. That prior to the Town's issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the redevelopment project, the developer will contribute $10,000.00 towards the redesign and redevelopment of Seibert Circle. 4. That prior to the Town's issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the redevelopment project, the applicant, or Vail Associates (co-applicant), will dedicate open space to the Town. It was agreed that the open space area would be an equivalent amount, when compared to the amount of floor area proposed to be located in the "overhang and deck" easements. It was suggested that the Mill Creek stream tract or the Pirate Ship Park area of Tract E be dedicated as permanent open space. The staff's recommendation for approval does not include the applicant's request to add a retractable enclosure over a portion of the Los Amigos outdoor dining deck. We believe that the applicants have done a very good job of redesigning the building to reduce the mass and bulk and we feel that this enclosure, over~approximately one-half of the outdoor dining deck, would only add to the mass and bulk of the structure. Further, we strongly believe that an outdoor dining experience-is what many visitors to Vail desire, and we seriously question the use of a retractable cover and enclosure in respect to the Design Criteria for CCI. In addition to the above, the staff recommendation for approval carries with it the following conditions: 1. -That prior to the Town's issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the redevelopment project, the applicant agree to restrict, and place into the short-term rental pool, the lock-offs associated with Units 305 and 306. 2. That the pedestrian arcade (which was originally proposed over the first floor retail windows on the north elevation), and that the original ground floor plan, which does not include the curved retail windows along the eastern portion of the building, be added back into the design. 3. That the applicant further articulate the first floor "retail windows", by adding divided lights. 4. That the applicant lower the roof form over the main entry. 5. That the applicant utilize a shake roof on the building. 6. That the applicant contribute a total of $32,000 towards the redevelopment of Seibert Circle. 7. That prior to the Town's issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the redevelopment project, the applicant restrict the two new accommodation units, so that in the future, they cannot be converted into dwelling units via the Condominium Conversion section. of the Subdivision Regulations. c:lpecVn emosk~oldpeak fin 28 ' Golden Peak House SQUare Footage Analysis misting Conditions Commercial Common GRFA Office Basement Level: 1,932 2,460 0 0 Ground Floor: 3,963 1,237 0 292 Second Floor: 1,301 1,332 2,466 168 Third Floor: 0 1,480 3,749 0 Fourth Floor: 0 118 2.743 0 Totals: 7,196 6,627 8,958 460 Total square footage (gross area) = 23,249 sq. ft. Proposed Conditions Commercial Common GRFA Office Basement Level: 5,270 1,652 0 922 Ground Floor: 6,094 993 0 0 Second Floor: 2,667 1,358 2,577 0 Third Floor: 0 765 5,272 0 Fourth Floor: 0 626 5,243 0 Fifth Floor: 0 42 2,763 0 Totals: 94,031 5,436 15,855 922 Total square footage (gross area) = 35,444 sq. ft. 29 Golden Peak House Dwelling Unit Analysis Existing: DU AU Basement Level: 0 0 Ground Floor: 0 0 Second Floor: 8 0 Third Floor: 8 0 Fourth Floor: 2 0 Totals: 18 0 = 18 DUs Proposed: DU AU Lock-off Basement Level 0 0 0 Ground Floor: 0 0 0 Second Floor: 3 0 1 Third Floor: 6 2 2 Fourth Floor: 4 0 0 Fifth Floor: 1 0 0 Totals: 14 2 3 Note: 2 Aus = 1 DU 'total DUs = 15 30 Golden Peak House Parkina/Loadina Analysis Existing Conditions -Required Parkina Spaces Loadina Berths Retail Commercial/Restaurant 23.25 1 Residential 30.00 1 Office 1.84 0 TOTALS: 55.09 2 (minus 1 for multiple use credit)=1 berth required Proposed Conditions -Required Parkina Spaces Loadina Berths Retail Commercial/Restaurant 41.699 1 Residential 27.923 1 Office 0.488 0 TOTALS: 70.11 2 (minus 1 for multiple use credit)=1 berth required 31 ' AED LION INN ONDOMINIUAI ~ fi~ j I I ale > ~y U a ~ _ I *..nr ~LJf_ ~p~ ~ - - _ \ ' CYRANO'S M ~ ~ ' BUIlDINO NILL'BUiLD5N0 I ~ / i~~ i~ / / ~ ' 0 ~ ~ "`O / ;~}in t O 1 \ . \ 1V ~ l ' ern wMO Ar~Irt W \ W piwoR++r+w "''I'r ,QOLDEN' PBAK~ HOUSE ~ w.r,.....z.,ra ' / W f~; L MIK1f' ~ I ONw1„4. 4 6s ~~w.rl / / / 'I/rrorr HY L~ . _ L/ p~~ ~J.I~ir~i~ ,~Y.T~e fW~ i~ ~ ^ 1 1 ~ " ~ ~ ~w va t.v'~" .'r`H ~y ~ ~-CwsIL+iJt~rrof vrt ~ ~;•;~l~l~`~~..n -S'~J-i~ ~ ~w.r.u~: Y- r+r+W ~ ----f~'.av ~.In?+"d'^'"run W ' ~ ~~Y ^r~~ /~r~J'I~~~tr-W ~ ~ fM / 1 ~ ~"'"~~~~~~1~ K f \ ` / •1 O 09 ? 0 li ~ ~r j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / 8lTE PLAN N m 1 C ~ w, / rlrr4t .cn~f m 7bNIM~G O N i .I ~ • ~ ~d Y ~ ~1 . ~ f. ~w~ • VbV( ~ Vt. W.VV. Y7 ~ ~ 1 t'~\~ PCYb I I'CWL 1 1 d,.x,-.... ` ~ J wn•.w~ ~ - Q ' a.n.a .rru.o O ' I - ~ W - 1 w-.+ [1C . . .vn~ r+aow N aawB :EXISTING QROVNO FLOOR PLAN O O ~ nlgK O a o ,.,,Y.. k.. rv z v .w Q J ' (g.y .H+ - - I EXI3TIN0 BASEMENT PLAN ~ f ~.e ~ - ~ ..A2 •a • ~ ti 6~ 1 ~j Z aS ~.r ~m ~ ..y«, rc. wr Mw, ~ ~ r vr..r wit _ w.vut ' 7 • 5 ~ p~.w. . 4 LL ~ ~ w~ J _ ~ W . ra. wif O n W P ~.w~ ~ W w~ cn ~ o ~.~T x j Q .EXlSTtNO TNIRD FLOOR PLAN ~ ~ w..uwrx/ ' • 1I~• • L1 ~ Q O. W J. a O W _ nww ~ O Q ,rte vwr C7.. y . ~ ~ Ttr-a vs ' ~ Iiwrw.wo ia.) r ~ I ad _ 'EXISTIN~ SECOND FLOOR PLAN A3 _ . , aB ~I & 1~ ~ ~i! ` / ~ . b ~ ~ , i i o II O o ~ia ' O ! W ' i II ~ ~ i ~ r ii - Lt1 l r' cn 'EXISTING ROOF PLAN ~ . 3 OC . Rio' a i'..' ? Q O ~ U ro+ W O i O•> D o~ O `r ~ ` O Q c ~ ~ 4 ~ ` 4 w+, + ~ a ;EXISTING FOURTH FLOOR PLAN ~4 6 • ~ t; t ? ~d ~ ~ ass _ A, o a a a ~n~ ~ rr~ orr~ m~~ ~ uu m u ~:[c, ~imurr:.:~ ~..:r, ^C{ lr.,:._'7 ~W' ~ ..r_,':u:~'[:: iG•`•:7 to ¢~m~~~~ nn m u' om ,eui ru:, u~:u mni . LJ L_)~ I East Efevatlon._ez~s~~ South Elevation ex,s~inp W lb'.~.i•~ L. p - Q O u: W ~ i~ =o 00 ~oaoaaocn~~ ks_ Wool, i... ~.~ncu~ , pC Q C' 0 0 om p a a° o f~"1 o fTlo 0 m u.~ n:a r" uuu m:,r iaum ua_a uui muitpnm m uu nm uWm. w ^ ~aooo ooaoo ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~n~ndr~nooiu~ oaooon u~l i ~ I I I , .1 ~ ==s ~ ' North Elevation exsrinq West Elevation et~s~ing Cie'ad yY w Y b A5 . s a . f % / yp011 i / / i/ p{Af a bp4~ ' pi Q ~'"r" ~.c ._otuco 45 W oa ,,./t'~/ a CL ' gy. LL1 ~ ss r ~ 7 p{Mp~p . ~ ~ ptotoeoteGvou. ~ :G ~ pFtlCom~:.otnraop ~''~U%^:v' `4 1,L1 w 4 Loo ~ ~ ~ t . t~ ~ ~ ~4 - O ` . ~ ~f1 C~~ A~ . ,~A$~pp~g1 opL ~~a ~ . ..._---r i ' . r.u W i' Q ~ ~ . , ' 6 \Vf ~ 4 _ _ `~X,~ O ~t pta~o~ ~ ~ r. lobby Q ~ ~ 0 0 { 10 a i ,ate W O ~d rye ~ Z u " r ~ 'o P Q ~ ' ~ N n t ' ~ ~ ~4ROUltU', . . ti/r.. t ~@ . ~ ~ g . ~ ~ g ' . / i%` . • f8~f69/486 11 - ~ mwro Boa - o 11 ~ 1 '~`i c-Ji ~ t ~ jl8oullory a 408/884' ~ ~ I Kltchan ~ it 0' Qu. ~jJ Dlnln ~ 11 .aNt 808 ~ ' ~ (n Aroa _ _ ~ I .Moto( Labby ~ i ~ ' -,'s \ I tnfl a ortton' t v ~ • lea Bai Soatlnp _ _ _ / ~ 0 o a 1 1 v' 1 i....~~ to ~ U r----t i Loo Amlpoa'Pallo -Patle- ~ ~ • ~ • :3 of a O P D N O tSE®®PdD F1,mOR PLAPd ~ ~ ' ` a • d . b~ • is •:.~%r~ / j . Wt a01(s0a• 1• d.u: . _ p ~ iv~iaae• .1 'e:d. W di soz' p 1.: o ~ , a.n. ~ II _ V iii/ I I I I~71C .111 ~ /,:'~t~i l•T'.~ • 1 dy. adr a li / p Y ~ 1 i - _ ~ O - a ~ ~ I v` _ w v p J • O ~ C7• o o N i p • •THiRD FLOOR PLAN , "-"J ~ ~ A9. • . _ 8 q . ~ ~i / ./-~;i ~ .aw_ y,"~~ ;~~i~~ W , • i ~ ~ ~ ~ ° ~ ~ti 9oe ,~~j ~ ~ iii' . O ~ . N a„ m . ~~QURTFf'ELAOi1t~4AW " a . ~ b~ . / / t _ ~ ~ . ' . ~J , 1-- , Q U • . • j _ \ ~ . • \ O O A W I ~ _ i Y OC I --r ://i%/ ~%z • a- O - 1 Z V uJ ~ . ~ ..J - ~ ~ ~ • ~ N o 'o • o 0 . 'F-~~~~100R AlAtd I`LJ•~'J g~ o z 1 o p p A Q • 6~ . ~ • ' i ~ i i ~ ~ ~ / ~ ~ ~ ~ad . ~ y~ypt 'ply / / A~ . Onl ~ ~ ~ lo( / i o O " ' ~ ~ at . ~ ~ ~ . ' O _ ~v a ~ m m N RO~~p~~ o1*4O ip4~; , r R• • wAIP~ . a . , O ,~J . ~Q NnN.N6 ~wMw. . s ~ . t449.f~.43~SP414~4 Yr. ~.l 49 ~ 9 4 ~ ~ ' i ' z~ II ~ li I - I ial ' II I' ~ lill ' _ ~~'4~ C9p-44 94 I ~"P • I J~ l I ' j l I' .I 11Y11II I . - I ~ ~ •=P' _ ~ _ _ I -by~aHr r.'MC-.~ ~ •ssss` ~ss~-•-• i I I~ Ilc_~ I r w-t •'s ~s.I III I~=`' ~-------G----- ~ W ~Ot)'TPQ ELSVAT104Y' ®AST 13L~/ATIOPd 0 W • W--_ (n ~~O • O ` - _ .a _ a o - ~ ~ W - - ~ Q9 1 0 - 'fl!~ r III 'IO ~ J J I =d~'~ - _ I ~ ~y - - - fu4o4 ao4oahoP~~Eb4.a4a aa~ I L„,.- ~ - I i a--- I 1--1--------L---~---~ ~ ~ ' _ _ ~tORTH ELEVATIONS, 'UnB8T ELEVATION A1.~ .y~~-It.'- VS'.~'_i' - ~ E Orraeb.ery~/~' NMO rwnT ~rtb~C ~ ~ Hn? - 1 v • Y ~tb+ aaba r - ~ 409' I , ab ~ 405 \'~6+ax~Ft ~y,, ~ ~..J ~ I . ~ ~ ~ _ pp IllI I , ~ ~rlbaa.~w~ JI ~ ..._.618' II ~ I .Dt/8' iI X11' w.i :pnUe ~ ' .Loo AmlAoa N i I PnUo loa ~rd0oo' lll~~l -I u1 ,pl ~1lAAf I{ I _®o: j..Sbov.P: p •kobbY. ~ I~~ 31Af c9oD i . f --.bA®toe^rboreA' 9 ~ tltltl!8A' ataapo. ~ I I - I ~ -..:BIQ otwn0o II i ! :~ECT{OP~PTHRU1O6BY' f BELT{®P$ THRIY L®S AAAI®OS ~ ' •-,/Q'J r-o• - t/o• a t.,a• O L1J; Lr ;ii I~ = A _ ' ~ ~ri-,.....~.. OHCH T p ~ ~'z l.wP~ cCMO~+t ^ VQ let3 [C~~t LM~a P?o `lJ ~ ~ .r ~ _.`aoa' ~ B ~aot'. Q yooz ~ ~ II. aoi j ~ W U aos' ~ I ~ so7 ~ ~ I ~ aoa' ~ ~ aos' ~ I ~ ~ 0 Q ' ~ pp E ~ r r ~ l ~ 4CJ6pokora' II P07' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 808 1 I POS' i ~ I ~ , g pp }(~j ~ .VAf p IS~porC Stnikor' I[ ~ i ~S~ai Stelkor ~ -yr u '~~j i _o I { II u ` W N 1 }tfi!`nkLatodrepe~.o10_~ ~endr¢'..aa proatrml ~ I i .d18'nttfutor/ropod' ~ ~ e»ooBoO ~no~-.a+o~ora~ m 1 tt11 IIII IIII II ~ gg • I ~ S ' (SECT{OPd TF{RlY PENTHOUSE+~AIEST SECT1O~ THRIY PERYPH®193E-EASY ~ ~ g ~ FW 41/ri SrIN ~ fV ~ ~ ! • eo~+o~r-I~eolurlH ~ ~ bt ~i ~ pl,..v. \ ~ rt \ ~ ~ y, r ~ ~ ~ ~ s y~.~.s i / ~.rMw H ^`j ~ I X ~ t~• I 1 LJ ~ 11J ~ u % / 4Y1'~wt10~4 fJllu71'i[1 W 1 ` O ' = O ~ ~ z Y ac a o r ~ O ~I t-' nom. O ~ Z U ~ pr,oronep W ~l ' gow~erl pr,.w yvN~,t Q ~ ~ J J O Q i ' N A / O ~ N ~ ~81TE PLAN -SUN !SHADE ANALYS}8 / rr~r t . r-~.~-•~ A15 I--- ~ _ ~ Nrwlo wn..s. I . r ~s• s y lay-- ~YY14Qlp V, , S I _ ~.~q" ' I 'If'!riT~ ~ J'' ' _ ..rte +f ~ , t II'li ~ , ~ ,r ~ ~ '-'~Il~.l~r,~„ut I ' I~d nn if `III Iii ~ IIIII• (II ~ I ~ II ~ I lyil~ I it ~I' r .ill ~ I i, Irl ' ~I ' r'I~IILI li I'~ • • I I .o - P , p? i, I: r i ~ t' ~ ~ X14 1 I4"~~? ! 4 44 +tlao 4 9 e ~ t L ~ • 4444."_7.;:': - gl bnn n I _ ;~e4~ A~`tortl ~sY ~L~A'etet~ Vc• . 1'-d vd a P-o• . " • ' = a . P ~ . r-~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ..":`:ea~~ • I,y.~ R cwarwq ~r ..s- ~ ~ II tl ~ I~i~i.l I_ ~ p _ _ _ I ' ~ ~ i~_I ~ "7~!~ _ l~ _ ~F~ . /.noH !R?is.P ris.l ~ I I ~ ( ~ , o ~:y~ . • I .I ~r° 1i,~~~ •I~.. , r. 1~// 41~ pI~OB ) ~ ems' 'r , 1!N .'~`~~~44 _ 01000 a. II ~-------~---a------~-----~--------I--~ 1-~------------;--- ~ ~ 1.: ~BOR~. ~t.~lw~Ttor~y ~,;vl~ r ~tt,~~A~®at r~~ 6' - - 1 ' ~ ' ..ar . 6 N °t e b e • 4 ~ ~ ~ r ,F ,AM ~~Y .a' f " 1: - _ ~ L,,~ y • ~ V' i p ~~l.r=wli. t T~-i~..L..y~ ~y. ~ C '1~~ .l ~.f4 Y•~~'+lyL•1 ~`°)}f ~`I (I7 t1 [ry _ _ ~ 1`' ~ i~ 41.1~•Il~~tyY ~'Y~~! ~ r _ ~ f i-~ ~ t~ 3'{~. 1 111 111 1 i y ,y,,.:~w. ~ _ , ~A~1r ~ -a Y~.~ :h 1 i d f g _ ~ d{ ~~I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..,,II~ullpprlrl ~ 1~ ~ ~ ' ~,i~ y I ~ ~ Y ~ ~4 ~ , % A 111 - _ ^`ti1Y Irv ~ 5 ,~yt"' r r~}f y{ ab Y~~' ; I - ~ a ill ~'t : ~ ~'.rtF' ~'~m b.~t Y r ~Y~ 7±n r''~ t r1.~t1 ~ ..^M'~ S,Y _ 'mot -'i - ~ .ir1~"~'~7 ~~'?r. ~'3: 5~. ~A A ' huh :~iY`4 _ ~ ~ " ~ .Y 'Y 1{~ 13 k' r ~ wr Y ti ~ 1~ ..9 . ay a ff K "r' ems,.,. _ 7 / ~ ~'t ~•I,~~iy} ~r k'~ ,i ~ry y.~7.4 "^`R b. f`l'+.<.~. i ,,yhG ~.'r ~ ~ ~ k~~ ~i=i y..t'- ~ ..;,c y~r~,,, rs'r 1, ,.e tN riY~`'~~~¢~?,,~y{~:;t,~,d~•~~ y~~+:~ _ 4 .P~ ''a~.~`. ~ ls} 4~ ~ ~i ~ w.. r~.., t f )v~ ~ ~ ~vdrit' i{ ~n1~. i4 ~~~agT .°.~~..kY^ A ` ta. : 7~.: - ~b ~+.Y'~ 6 -C-- y - 'iii ~y:.i;J: r i ~:+-~w 1~wlya.~- ~ ~7 _ r ~ ~ '?j~•'~.x L~~ p, r ^ ,-i' . ~r 9t'~.`Y~'"*C1t .~X~; i^";?:'1 `~F'} ~ r: ~s_ 1 . ' ~ _ ti ~t fir'? 3.•~ Y ~ ~ A r ? r, ,I' v,~.r" ~~.A~ ~3 Ka~~H ,.^,,~i~r,Y,~Jh~~;~~' ~ 4• •y.~l.. ;y 5t_ r'._ v.' k~'t -j.~ ~~~ti~~.llt~~i{5t'.f.X<v~~K'a .~y;Ypf ~'.h+,:.~^ yN~+ ,5~:•ya;-y~.;tyr X71 t~ ~ ~ ~-:~y~4«~`.~.•~, t ,'~'ftw'd~~..~'+1 ~ .o CFf Lxaf~'•,. 1~ • a y,$ a~ ~ t to t f tit ` ~a . y ~ s}. •'f' ? . fry ~ i, ~ j + „d; ap: ..u • , fib,, {J ~ - ~ _ . fi ' as _ t Lys. 3.. ti; ~ M _ ~~~MMhA~~. , : t,.t i. ~jS ~ 4 r ~,1' Y~ V~ y~ ;rod s 1 A°9`+• l~ ~ x t ' Ate' ' t~/ 6FPo'Y pis ~ 11 V . {.{,O w~.a ~r a ~ ~ T ' , ~;u~...-~"~`•~-,,ms's:=~.''` s.:-+-~ . ~ \ _..-a ® ar ~ ~."^."`t'r .•i' ` :.:.-•."~_y~[y,.~`'`P- Iti.'a ``1a•'.'~9'r -~•C..._qu..w~.+ .k!.~ ~+y~.y'....._.y..d..~;L ~ "!r~n•F1 ~J^"!r .H:~.y"~~t ar'~"~.' ...3.,~ ~~.~~p1~_.1 J+~`_r 1!"~ .1. v! i+Y ~ ~ ~ 1 ~,~<~i~ ••MS •L__ Z•OysA'~-JJ(~t'^^:`,%~9' ,R~~r -i, '.'r .~;.j~ ~F"?Lyl~.~,a'~~~ti-'^"',~'A~--•~it'. '~+0~'" ,f,,~:~ ~ ~d.l v l.a "T-~...'S, Q~` D+~ O ttf . ~ ,^+~r-~~~=~~~C~- ~,'3 ,-~1 }'P,~~a~,h ~.'`Kc r' fi~.-s, Nr~1~ -~`~re '1~ 'r~~`,`gb.srw~ J ~ ' 1~. . ~I ~y ~i~" •.'~..no:-.~••<.~,J'~~~'~'t~+~i!:~+,: ...F.-. +,,...jr",j1e~J.~ s~'~'i~I}- -a t'i+.y.w.._.~.Yfe 3~ _a,{. ~ ~'1. rte';'. ~ ' "•,~o~'ratic.?~t~,`Y`~~~V(..s.i.~5-r~ ~ ~~~M'~, ~ ;yam ~'.:.yy.. j~ n'f -y~ ~rr.:'.;a nt 'i .r? . ,.ty,w,. ,.1*~..y ~•T'~dF~ L~pyQ~~lc'e' ~t ..:.L - • `~:.2 ~ .~'~i~=" 1 ter(! ~ • 3• ~~~.9 ~~~J.--A4~ti(rc-7A`'4: 3.4='+Cf~K~`y.' ~ C~~, •a~ ~ ~_•.i^,~. f f'1(~{~~5,~/~' 1. i'• 7~ n 1,' ri`~C;j,,~~NS}~~'i7n; ` i "~,4•`` .~,~~r/ "~.w~ ~ h,. ~ ~C •)•1.•i~~,,~ ! " ~ ~''~~~'J ~r~~y~Ci Y.'~ Y.al - ,~Y' . :~9 . t, Zf+C7 ~i{~~:~ •r. ~ ~ _ ~~4~ 5~1,4rr` h~° ~ r. • . .~r~ ; s,?t4~7t~x`~~ _ i0 r~Y 4 ::titvC,(~c°~.~,, j~: ~f` +.'ni? : F, . + °l i -,C'.dYt~, A~,:v~r+!~~hr~~~.{~tr: ~'e••r• ~,nwp~:V.c~y.tYi ~ ~Y i•.~•=ei>';~Jio }~~1:, ~ti.. r,?N~~ .~~r ~C4' ci~t 1 Y a' ~ C r ~l t t~ rte' _ p •i ~t° • ~?,•v yt;'~,~~ ;~t r,i.;~ •.~•4: ~P...., ~rr`} !f ~nt \ ~v ~i'=~ ~c~_rr'.~::-y;~_ .r\(`n1' :;Il' •.•:1 Y _ yJ,... .r(~,' y.. ,Ir ~ •f ~•,a 7j.~'~' .,T; it ,h ~./~~c-( "~.'N ` ~.r` "i ~!^r, ~ ~ h ( .c* ~9~~~ j /t ; ~ li. N, ~JsJ~;. ~N •ti')Y o~' S (~'1~,~}(•`''-~~ y~, f;~ rj, s~ i~ ~~J~~;; ' -yl-f'7~#~•»Z(-1 ~ _ ~,y tY. ti i.:,~.~?•3~ ~ 1~ •••"J~~~~ c1 L ~!y xr r 1, s''5 ,9_y..=~ tfFi .~r'-.vjc~rl~~ .•-,t.~ ..T~!\r(~ ,f~~~~T'1'r N t.sc.T~,.J'y,I/. iy~ r y ~'I~,frb ~~~t~l..f.. ~j,~ ,~~•(y~. .^3i~~f'cn ~••a_..//'r.~~{~ ^•1~ ~ !S~•~,~.~.c~.) l~~•Yti` 1?L~'-~i tii' Ay Z~l~: `'.L Pw`' ''•~~t',-fl'~~ ~ ?ir~Y4 -(xf•~~ ry%{1,;(~~,~c5_r~`•ft!^i%.7''" i . ~t~l•,.'~,~?i >:r.'~. = .`3`1~ ' i/,7'; ••f: +`C' aL_~;~2, f!'M ~ r ~ . , .~i:Jl. t j ~ ) .{.l•, ;~,+T-rl f. .o ~,p,~'>~ a... ~f'"~y;~ Y(I•`• v ~ ~ ? .r icy 4.h"',.:~.~~• ( ~.,~`y.~s,P L• .y~ C~• r ,+~..~'`r-: « ~~r''~,' r~` ;J. e~...Y fl f( ~ Y••~..:,••,~;i ~j ' ~,~,,~~r•~. n,1Cy~.~ ilu-,;~?~~~ t. ~I`•~'(rr. rt; ~ ~f 4y~. :~CU'.• ~-~.7-- C~'~`r ~~`~y~ ' .`/`~'(~~F"~~ I. l~~•~.~ y,r, ~'~~`i 'i• ,rr9 ~ (1"~;~~~1~"~~~r! i ~)I.S~~.r)S,(r~• L ~`t?~~/~!~t~~'i~. f~ `t •~r ~",y./~~~ t~~~ YP.. ti f,~4`~_:=+=1^~s _ ~ ~,y"lk~ ~ 1 .,4 ~ ~ ~,~~~~1~•.r'.) ,~J•~~ ~ , r II '~i.~i~,~ r~ • c1~-Gil .1~~~''~~~?i~ irn~, Jfilt i r}{{~.e~~~~ y't..~~.._v y i~} v~j,, r } '•Y~',_~ '"r•`~. s~,.`r~' r. 1 r ,j1~~Z~`o••t^~jl(~ ~ •~b,r~ r ~~~1 %'.r ~ ~ rT`f~ j ~'..rtr s r v.. av~~.~~.K 7~ 1~~•'~. J G t, f • '.•t~},,[7]'y,~- .io:.~~,7~:~ti'~~ y~Y.~ v~,nJy~Qt~} ?l ro-..f.`•.f~, _ ~`TY 1^,<<,•~c' ~ ~ ter, R'' Y.sG,, -43s~j~`'"" t~'~r l f,1'il.~ •Y w•r~_• .~~~,`,%{7`~1'•;,t~'f~~ ~.=I.IKU f 1 I~~~ A K _r-_- ~.,f r7~ Io~ ~ ~ r:~• ~ f~K~~,r • _ it _ r. ' -v 7 ? P'• ..A • ~ ~ >7 -p~.r,~jl`=!i) 1~~-~0~ t ~~c;+"r`1-.'~-` - ~..r... ~\.(?'~..f`"' ~~~~r~.~f/~%L ~yr~~~,•~,~s , ( ~ ~ f - 1 ~~.~~p~ C:_~a?hF. ~•~`p~r `^'n }ti^ _ '•i S ~ ~}N ~ ' -ik;• ~ ~l+,, S, fFi+f.t~.j~ C.^. -~•l- 1 `a J~ ~ : + ~ f '.'/'^l~Y>'>'~; .r. .dx;!'a~ a'il'-,~ ~'t:•"~Y-;(? ~ `~r l~I-'Vs~ t'~v~~~'v__f•:•~~~i~ •j~'_.``~s::;.''"„f ••.1P~1''~. ••t ~~~:j~;l~? 1 j~J'-~ .F ~~~n'~t~i,~; t_ I~Y....i, t7~ ae ~ ,1~,~ •[f X ,`,,•~v;~'ff' .r.'~~ ~':5,~'~ ~ ~.~r ~r~• j ~r~c% %'y i F~ ~{`~~~,;~C'(' o~ •~'''Y,S.y~.j 1~1~~~1'~r' ~ 1 ~ ~ 1~ ~ r 1,,i f.rllTr~ t ~•r f:'t: , J"" i ~•.~L~~'\••,`;,~.i~~~,'K, ~Y_~.~•f~~%~. ~ 9~~~~N~/~ ~ ~ 7 i~ . 1 1 _ r •.Y ,1;. Z yam.,, : -r ~ ,p I }r-~`~'Li. .7 ~~~7?.y j~.'R;°~r,. 'Y ~ 7s/ ~~i r.:. zS`~~~~a.r~~~~-y~,-'.."7'•CY,~~I.v ~~i• y t p)p) 'J~ t, • i~ ~'S ~"'i~jYl~• a.. d~I ~%K, ~'Y'.:~ _r ` ~ J. ~~')•7 fwi.r`-rL_ v S ice- F~~l i ~F: l S, •r l'( ~ G{;t ('1~ • w--,•,= ~ ~ ~ ~ i, . SiA. f,,l"\ fll: ~ • „'v.~~'. •~+rti.:./~~L~%r ` a n ^~:~~t ~r ' r~'~•~ ` ' T ~ ~ 17' .i. 1 ~ F r (1 I C~'~? ~'-`.~~-'r;...'..7~ ;~+5~] .~J' - IS ~ V~'~•d~t)n' { { ~:{mil i.~~•.,y .r •C1: ::~~•I~ J-i, ~t. ~ ~'~rk 1`,~` U''l:~~ 7 ~ ~./_1--l IJ !1 ~.."a:~ \ n• r•> ~ ~~7.~'~.s r~ .~r~,~JC~!•'~~ b~~;=•«^/~C/•'\~f_ ` _r~ ~''31 ii -r ky: ~~l" _ ~ 7 v ~+r~pr r..~• f~ t +f l CY / ~`'•y ( i.~f•f ~_c .l S"~• ~ 1.~~^T ..,r;~~ . ~ ;'i, .-.:1.~ ~ /1''2 . y~~f•,. 7„{~_'r~.?.J. FY;: .f"`~.•,-..{•>~ ,r~;~1 . . Fy, % y) t1 ~",'•i/{ 'r :~.-"'ma`r-~ f :~.r.~'-~~ y` :fir k. ~ !/„•c f'fly" .~J..:~,~: ~/;y~•W i~~ ,1(f'~":~r~: }7•'1• 4 ) ~t:fL • ~q.^~ •~'i.~r. •li, 7"'4 ,t-••.1• ~ ~^.J ~ - ~ c..--- •Y~S~ ,~~.yt~• ;F d ~/!+•Y. tf r•'s'~. + 1 ) t ~ rT,~. ?•C ~+?~',n{SI+1 ~a .'!~l.v=~,~•(~ ~ \ _ r, 7. ~ n: ~~•J;~~~-~, f.is,~„rr;~.,~.cL~:~};~:r~',_~''~r" \~Ji~f.>~ f`/ •.'L'•''•'i-~'.? rVr'. . n~,r-t+~'~_ _ .t i - - ~.l ) ~ .A,~' ~'Y~ ~r" .~?ayT' •s,;°^.~~:~!: rr~ ~ T.l, ~ , y;1J {'ti •r I`i~•~ i.-• ` `r •il y i ~ ~f. I r ~ra ~x~+ '`'ti~*~;r?,?.. ')'•v~ _ 1}1' _ ~I \-Z. ~ 1 7+'~ r' r/~!~,(~b;..~ r rin,f~ ~ y3', •ai- rc' s'~~9 >:'~17 ~ (('J--n~~_ fit--~~.:laJ'- "lam yr1 l ~ .=~Y~ ~,v~: ~l,• n.~ ~ s ~.1 L. `4 ~ 71~ } SSS,$ry~.1~-,:i~~i•i' a' ~ ti a)_( ~ jS t.f ^~)...,C.,. ~~a<r" ~Y~...~:;/'`/1'e~',:a lYr~:.,1 1 T ~ r~ r . J .i~!~~-1:~ , i~'~'',~~. LL~ j•'!~ ~-'"Y N •Y'/l._..}'~.~ 1.. •:.1 p ~(;K 1 , Y / 1, ~~T-~.•?~i:~~}? 1 ~ .1~!,r. r+---•C '-;fcc- rr-_~r rr;, I ~,Af. '•t ( L ~ l .(Gr. ~ ~ { ~ j. ,•'i' .:j• { i 's. Y7!`~ ti w E^ j`Lh-l.,. y~.~' _ U~`/) ~~U^:'o r •'`•l. !r'.: n~ •1C~ ^!::'a ~.i i r .l r. . .,C f>. ^.f ~ L=•r:~:~ ..J' r.'•~._ _1-.ij ~j 4 ) ^!`t .-i '1' l;~ r i !'•~!`r.h rf f•. 1".1 - r:~.. ~ `t. } 11~~ -'^-•'!c"`~' r'r'~'...~+=a,,: ter.-. ~ ~ • u•' - f . 7<•-` _ . CJ,,..'..ai .:L-- Y U.'. .fill: 13'~i~ , ~ C.' i. n:: ,:.y 1,t ~ a ~ r • .-1-.~-~'.r_ -o•o-~~J"`_~r--=~'~'rr:. ~;'*'~-c-`a' - I;~•J,--? to J ,•til. 1, ~4 ^ ~l~ r I • ~G / f, ~ t r ' r r 1.w1•~~-..=.:'--•oc: ~y--c<<~~ . - ' ~"~="~3~'"~' /ti.;~;'!~-i•~~~''"Pu~,'/• `•''=~•!1" ~•,~c'_; ~ j~; `<~t -rr -.~r 7'I sue' ~c J r-..::'~~r~ i(~~~1,1i/),~%..f)•'Yi4~ - ST'S-~E~ ' ,J1, Via; L~-;~ ~l_~~~ • ~~t~7 f~.~:• 1. J',: , ;.••a - ti:: '^•I'.'. ti ~/~:,~~c~~~/•'y1' h`J^.:, ~~1~G {e~ ,J~~ ~r •l~~_`'~:r ~~--1~ ~ r ~ 1 e... ~~f.'•t._ V j-• Y~. ~a~-i:Y<~".t.~ <S i•-•i.+ { •.f _~J.~~~ ~ ~ %~l%-•.,~ T.t ..{r. ',I ~l Z a•)y ~ S. b.~ ~ G~i.'i ~ / S•G'• ~ :'~~-rte ~OT,',.iy-' ~ •t~.• r:... • ~ ' r. ,..:~,..;~•.f•~:•'~~~.y- ~ , .'V • ~ t ' • ter: :i. ^v ....'~i^+ '-S . /I ~ 7y.: i ' EMPLOYMEAT GENERATION RATFS EXHIBIT A SUGGESTED EA~'LOl'R~lENT CATEGORIES A.'t'D RAItGES FOR VAIL EXPRESSED AS EA3PLOYEES PER 1000 SQUARE Fnni RRC RESEARCH OVERALL SUGGESTED AVERAGES RANGE Bar/Restaurant I 5.7/1000 s.f. 5-8/1000 s.f. I I Retail and Service Commercial ' 5.4/1000 S-8/1000 I Retail: Grocery/Liquor/Convenience ~ 1.8/1000 1.5-3/1000 Office: Real Estaee I 7.6/1000 6-4/14 Office: Financial ~ 3.1/1000 2.5-4/1000 Office: ProfessionallOther I 6.6/1000 5-8/1000 I Conference Center I NA ~ 1/1000 Health Ciub ~ NA ~ 1-1.5/1040 Lodgings I.3/room ~ .25-1.25/room Local Government I 6.5/1040 I 5-8/1440 Construction (Offices, Interior Storage, etc.) ~ 10.6/1040 9-13/1000 Multi-Family I N/A 0.4/unit Single Family ~ I N/A 0.2/unit Other: To be determined through the SDD process, upon submission of adequate documentation and a review of the application materials. Lodging/accommodations has particularly large variation of employees per room, depending upon factors such as size of facility and level of service/support facilities and amenities provided. The standards present a wide range of employment, but it is anticipated that a definitive report will be submitted by each lodging property requesting an expansions which would then be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. ROSALY. RFa4rlFSI CARFS - - - - PAGE 6 f~ - ~ EXHIBIT B SUBDIVISIONS - C - C. Plans and descriptions showing how the following will be performed: 1. All site work shall be brought up to current town - standards unless a variance therefrom is granted to the applicant by the town council in accordance with the - ~ variance procedures of this Title 17. The town council - may, if it deems necessary, require additional parking facilities to meet requirements of owners and guests of the condominium units, 2. Corrections of violations cited in the condominium conversion report by the building inspector, 3. Condominium projects shall meet current Uniform Build- ing Code requirements for heat and fire detection devices and systems. (Ord. 29 (1983) § 1: Ord. 2 (1983) § l (part).) 17.26.075 Condominium conversion. Any applicant seeking to convert any accommodation unit _ within the town shall comply with the requirements of this section. The requirements contained in this section shall not apply to structures or buildings which contain two units or less. - A. The requirements and restrictions herein contained shall be _ included in the condominium declaration for the project, and filed of record with the Eagle County clerk and recorder. The condominium units created shall remain in the short term (Vail l 1 • [ 5-83) 298-4 a;.. CONC)OMliv'IUMS AND CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS rental market to be used as temporary accommodations available to the genera! public. ~ Se~4soN I. An owner's personal use of his or her unit shall be restricted to twenty eight days during the seasonal iz~z~ - ~/t period of December 24th to January !st and . February 1st to March 20th. This seasonal period is hereinafter "referred to as "high season." "Owner's a/t - ~lao personal use" shall be defined as owner's occupancy of a unit or non-paying guest of the owner or taking the unit off of the rental market during the seasonal periods referred to herein for any reason other than for necessary repairs which cannot be postponed or which tray make the unit unrentable. Occupancv of a unit by a lodge manager or staCC employed by the lodge, however, shall rat be restricted by this S e cJt ~.i2p,j 2. A violation of the owner's use restriction by a unit owner shall subject the owner to a daily assessment rate by the condominium association of three times a rate considered to be a reasonable daily rental rate for the unit at the time of the violation, which assessment when paid shall be common elements oC the condominiums. Alt sums . ~ assessed against the owner for violation of the owner's personal use restriction and unpaid shall constitute a lien for the benefit of the condominium association on that owner's unit, which lien shall be evidenced by written notice placed of record in the office of the clerk and recorder of Eagle County, Colorado, and which may be collected by foreclosure, on an owner's condominium t~nie by. the association in like manner as a mortgage ar deed of trust on real property. The condominium associa- tion's failure to enforce the owner°s persona! use restric- tionshall give the town the right to enforce the restriction by the assessment and the lien provided for hereunder. If the fawn enforces the restriction, the town shall receive the funds collected as a result of such enforcement. In the event litigation results from the enforcement of the restriction, as part of its reward to the prevailing party, the court shall award such party its courl costs together with reasonable attorney's fees incurred. . :298-5 SUBDIVISIONS ' 3. The town shall have the right to require from the condominium association an annual report of owner's personal use during the high seasons for all converted condominium units. 4. The converted lodge units shall not be used as permanent residences. For the purposes of this section, a person shall be presumed to be ~ a permanent resident if such person has resided in the unit for six consecutive montFi~otwithstanding front time to tin?' urine such six month nrr?~e person may brie(lY dwell in other places. B. Any lodge located within the town which has converted accommodation units to condominiums shall continue to provide customary lodge facilities and services including . a customary marketing program. C. The converted condominium units shalt remain available to the general tourist market. If unsold thirty days after recording of the condominium map, the unsold con- verted condominiums shall be required to be furnished and made available to the general tourist market within ninety days after the date of recording of the condo- . minium map. This requirement may be met by inclusion of the units oC the condominium project at comparable rates, in any local reservation system for the rental of lodge or condominium units in the town. D. The common areas of any lodge with converted units shall remain common areas and be maintained in a manner consistent with its previous character. Any changes, alteia- tions or renovations made to common areas shall not diminish the size or quality of the common areas. E. Any accommodation units that were utilized to provide housing for employees al any tirne during the three years previous to the date of the application shall remain has employee units for such duration as may be required by the planning and environmental commission orthe town council. F. Applicability. All conditions set forth within this section shall be made binding on the applicant, the applicant's successors, . heirs, personal representatives and assigns and shall govern the property which is the subject of the application for the life 298-6 ! tv:~~t iz-i-R~t ORDINANCE NO. 28 Series of 1993 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 31, GOLDEN PEAK HOUSE; ADOPTING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 31 IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 18.40 OF THE VAIL MUNICIPAL CODE; REZONING A PORTION OF TRACT E FROM AGRICULTURAL AND OPEN SPACE ZONING TO COMMERCIAL CORE I ZONING, 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, the developer, Golden Peak House Condominium Association/Vail Associates, Inc./GPH Partners, Ltd./Margaritaville, Inc. or the successors in interest, has submitted an application for the establishment of Special Development District (SDD) No. 31, which includes a request for a Commercial Core I exterior alteration, a request for a minor subdivision, and a request for an encroachment into View Corridor No. 1, for a certain parcel of property within the Town, legally described as Lots A, B and C, Block 2, and a portion of Tract E, Vail Village First Filing and commonly referred to as the Golden Peak House Special Development District; and WHEREAS, the developer has submitted an application to rezone a portion of Tract E, Vail Village Fifth Filing, more specifically described in the attached Exhibit A, from the Agricultural and Open Space zone district to the Commercial Core I zone district; and WHEREAS, the rezoning effort is consistent with the surrounding and immediately adjacent properties; and WHEREAS, the rezoning effort will better reflect the actual use of the land; and WHEREAS, the proposed rezoning is for the benefit of the community as it meets the municipal objectives identified in the Town of Vail Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 18.66.140, the Planning and Environmental Commission, on October 11, 1993, held a public hearing on the establishment of an SDD and the rezoning, and has submitted its recommendation to the Town Council; and WHEREAS, all 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 establish SDD No. 31; 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. Ordinance No. 28, 1 Series of 1993 ~ ~ . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: SECTION 1 The Town Council finds that all the procedures set forth for Special Development Districts in Chapter 18.40 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail have been fully satisfied. SECTION 2 Special Development District No. 31 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, employee housing, streetscape improvements and other amenities, and promote the objectives of the Town's Zoning ordinance. The development is regarded as complementary to 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. 31 is established for the development on a parcel of land comprising 8,375 square feet in the Vail Village area of the Town; Special Development District No. 31 and said 8,375 square feet may be referred to as "SDD No. 31 SECTION 4 The Town Council finds that the procedures for a zoning amendment as set forth in Section 18.66 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail have been fully satisfied, and all of the requirements of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail relating to zoning amendments have been fully satisfied. SECTION 5 The Town Council hereby rezones that portion of Tract E legally described in the attached Exhibit A, from the Agricultural and Open Space zone district to the Commercial Core I zone district. Ordinance No. 28, 2 Series of 1993 .~Y SECTION 6 The Town Council finds that the development plan for SDD. No. 31 meets each of the standards set forth in Section 18.40.080 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail or demonstrates that either one or more of them is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved. In accordance with Section 18.40.040, the development plan for SDD No. 31 is approved. The development plan is comprised of those plans submitted by Snowdon and Hopkins Architects, and consists of the following documents: 1. Sheet No. A-1, dated October 25, 1993 (site plan). 2. Sheet No. A-6, dated October 25, 1993 (basement plan). 3. Sheet No. A-7, dated October 25, 1993 (ground floor plan). 4. Sheet No. A-8, dated October 25, 1993 (second floor plan). 5. Sheet No. A-9, dated October 25, 1993 (third floor plan). 6. Sheet No. A-10, dated October 25, 1993 (fourth floor plan). 7. Sheet No. A-11, dated October 25, 1993 (fifth floor plan). 8. Sheet No. A-12, dated October 25, 1993 (roof plan). 9. Sheet No. A-13, dated October 25, 1993 (building elevations). 10. Sheet No. A-14, dated October 25, 1993 (building sections). 11. Sheet No. A-15, dated October 25, 1993 (sun/shade analysis). 12. Sheet No. A-16, dated October 25, 1993 (View Corridor No. 1 analysis). 13. Other general submittal documents that define the development standards of the Special Development District. SECTION 7 In addition to the Approved Development Plan described in Section 6 above, the following development standards have been submitted to the Planning and Environmental Commission for its consideration and recommendation and are hereby approved by the Town Council; these standards are incorporated in the Approved Development Plan to protect the integrity of the development of SDD No. 31; the following are the development standards for SDD No. 31: A. Lot Area -The lot area shall consist of approximately 8,375 square feet. R. Setbacks -The required setbacks shall be as indicated on the Approved Development Plans. Ordinance No. 28, ,3 Series of 1993 a 'tA> C. Height -The maximum height of the Golden Peak House Building shall be as indicated on the Approved Development Plans. D. Density Control -The maximum GRFA for the Golden Peak House shall not exceed 18,715 square feet. This figure includes 2,847 square feet of excess common area that has been included in the GRFA. The approved density for the Golden Peak House includes fourteen (14) dwelling units and two (2) accommodation units, for a total of fifteen (15) dwelling units. Three of the dwelling units are approved to have lock-offs. E. Site Coverage -The maximum site coverage for this Special Development District shall not exceed 7,874 square feet, or 94% of the lot area, and shall be as indicated on the Approved Development Plans. F. Landscaping -All landscaping shall be in accordance with the Approved Development Plans. G. Parking - As provided for in Section 18.52 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code, Off- Street Parking and Loading, all properties located within the Commercial Core I zone district shall not be allowed to provide required parking on-site. Parking shall be provided by GPH Partners, Ltd. paying into the Town's parking pay-in-lieu fund. The required number of parking spaces, in accordance with the Approved Development Plan for SDD No. 31, shall be a total of 13.794 parking spaces. Payment into the parking fund shall occur at the time of Building Permit, according to Section 18.52.160(8,5) of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. SECTION 8 The developer, jointly and severally, agrees with the following requirements, which are a part of the Town's approval of the establishment of this SDD No. 31: 1. That prior to the Town's issuance of a Building Permit for the construction of SDD No. 31, GPH Partners, Ltd. shall cause to be permanently restricted, two off-site, two- bedroom, employee housing units per the Town of Vail Housing Ordinance. Each unit shall be a minimum size of 700 square feet. The units shall meet the Town of Vail Housing Ordinance requirements. 2. That prior to the Town's issuance of a Building Permit for the redevelopment project, the Golden Peak House Condominium Association will contribute $32,000.00 towards the redesign and redevelopment of Seibert Circle. The $32,000 contribution towards the redevelopment of Seibert Circle shall be credited towards the Golden Peak House, should a Ordinance No. 28, 4 Series of 1993 ~ ¦ future Special Improvement District be created for this project. 3. That prior to the Town's issuance of a building permit for the redevelopment project, Vail Associates, Inc., will dedicate open space to the Town. The minimum area of open space shall be at least an equivalent area, to that of the area of the Tract E "overhang and deck" easements. It was suggested by the PEC that the Mill Creek stream tract and/or the Pirate Ship Park area of Tract E be dedicated as permanent open space. 4. That the Golden Peak Mouse Condominium Association and Vail Associates, Inc. dedicate to the Town of Vail, a public pedestrian easement, across Lot C, which is located between the Golden Peak House and the Hill Building. The dedication of the easement shall occur prior to the Town's issuance of a Building Permit for the project. 5. That prior to the Town's issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the redevelopment project, GPH Partners, Ltd. shall deed restrict two three-bedroom dwelling units (Units 201 and 401) to be included in the Golden Peak House short-term rental program, at all times when said dwelling units are not. occupied by the owner or his guests. 6. That prior to the Town's issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the redevelopment project, GPIs Partners, Ltd. shall deed restrict, the remaining two lock-offs in the building (or equivalent), to be included in the Golden Peak House short-term rental program, at all times when said lock-offs are not occupied by the owner or his or her guests. 7. That prior to the Town's issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the redevelopment project, GPIs Partners, Ltd. shall deed restrict, the two accommodation units (or equivalent) in the building, to be included in the Golden Peak House short-term rental program, at all times when said accommodation units are not occupied by the owner or his or her guests. 8. That the Golden Peak House Condominium Association, or their successors in interest, shall participate in, and shall not protest or remonstrate against, any improvement district(s) which may be established by the Town of Vail for the purposes of constructing improvements as set forth in the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan and/or the Vail Transportation Master Plan, if and when an improvement district(s) is formed. 9. That the pedestrian arcade (which was originally proposed over the first floor retail windows on the north elevation), and that the original ground floor plan, which does not include the curved retail windows along the eastern portion of the building, be reviewed by the Design Review Board and included in the final building design, if required by the Design Review Board. 10. That GPI Partners, Ltd. further articulate the first floor "retail windows", by adding Ordinance No. 28, 5 series o1 issa i_ divided lights to the large single panes of glass. 11. That the Design Review Board review the proposed roof form over the main entry on the north elevation, and determine if the roof form needs to be lowered. 12. That the proposed tar and gravel roof for the building is acceptable. SECTION 9 Amendments to the approved development plan which do not change its substance may be approved by the Planning and Environmental Commission at a regularly scheduled public hearing in accordance with the provisions of Section 18.66.060 and 18.40.100. Amendments which do change the substance of the development plan shall be required to be approved by Town Council after the above procedure has been followed. The Community Development Department shall determine what constitutes a change in the substance of the development plan. SECTION 10 The developer must begin construction of the Special Development District within three (3) years from the time of its final approval, and continue diligently toward completion of the project. If the developer does not begin and diligently work toward the completion of the Special Development District or any stage of the Special Development District, the developer shall recommend to the Town Council that either the approval of the Special Development District be extended, that the approval of the Special Development District be revoked, or that the Special Development District be amended. SECTION 11 If any part, section, 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 12 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 inhabitants thereof. Ordinance No. 26, 6 ~ Series of 1993 i a SECTION 13 The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under 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 repeated or superseded unless stated herein. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL, this day of , 1993. A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held at the 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 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. 20, 7 Series of 7993 . . EXHIBIT A ~ • ~~aP:~~TY' ~ESC,~zP~'z~~t That part of 'Tract F, Va~.l V3.llagc~, ~a:fth F~.~.3.ng, according to the map thereof recorded in the office of thfl Eagle Countyt Colorado, Clark and R~carder~ ~ deecr~.b~d ag fnl].ow$; Comn~noing rat the X11/16 Caxner of Suction 8, 'fawnr~hip 5 South, Range 6Q Wovt bf tho Sixth ~r3ncipal Meridian, su3.d point also being thc? north~rraster~.y cornox of said ~'ract E? thence, along the nor-thorly 1.in4 of acid 'I.'xacL• E, N89 ° 44' 00 "E 9.00 feet tc7 the True Point at ~egir~ningj thez~c4, continuing along said northerly I,a,na, PI89'44'00"E 7.00 feat to tho ~touthw4$tex1~* oarnar of Golden Peak pouae (A Goz~damin~.u~ Project} according to the map thereof reaardad in the office of i:I~e Eagle. County, Colorado, CJ,erk z~nd Recorder; th®ncs the fol.],Qwing two couacseg a~.ong the co~an line o¢ ea~,d Tract E abd said, Goidan Weak IIou~aa a X89 ° 44' 4 4 t'E 84.40 feet y (2 ) X559°~5'Oa"E 52.50 feet to tho southeasterly corner o£ said Golden peak Hpue~~ th~azace, departing said c~.,,~,an 7.iz~o, 830°~.5'0~0"E G.00 faett thanes SS9°~5' 00"W 52.50. feats thence S31°42' 95''W S ~ 66 feet; thence S89'4~' 00"~~I 9,.00 fe©t j thez~~,a ~.Q~' ~,5' o.Q° the Truce Pont of Beginning, ~t~iataining 1.240 square feetr more ox les - y ~ Stan Sogfe~~3~ Coloxadr, P.S.S. 2659a rg~ri~ed par.~t of trmct e to golden peak, hautte ~1. . fiHE[ViORANDUt~i TO: Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: October 19, 1993 , SUBJECT: Parking history for the Vail Athletic Club (VAC) On October 5, 1993, the Town Council reviewed the proposed Vail Athletic Club SDD. At that time, the Town Council requested additional information on the parking history for the project. After researching the issue, the staff found that the parking requirement as calculated in 1977 ' appears to be less than the parking requirement which would be assessed for the same plans today. The.following shows how they compare. 1. 2. 3. 4. Required Parking over the years based on Parking required for Parking required for information in the original building permit existing building permanent file 1977 plans per 1993 per 1993 parking Proposed i.e. variances, etc, requirements' requirements Development Retail 1 1 1.84 .47 Conference Area: 0 11.8 11.8 11.29 Restaurant: 12 18 22.5 20.3 AU/DU 36 38.3 38.3 51.25 Employee Units: 4 4 4 4 Total 53 73.1 78.44 87.31 "Provided On-site/ ~ 41 -}r^° Approved Variances: 41 d1 41 Deficit: 12 32.05 37.44 ~ 46.31 ° Staff is unclear as to why there are differences between column i and column 2. 1t appears that the methods for calculating required . parking differed. As an example, it appears that parking was not counted for conference space in 1977. However, in 1993 staff does include parking for this use. Variances include a 16 space variance approved with the original project, 4 spaces for employee housing units and 1 space for retail use for a total of 21 spaces. 20 parking spaces are provided on-site. Originally an architect's office was approved in the building with a parking requirement of 12 spaces. During the construction of the project, a restaurant was added and the parking allotted to the office was used for the restaurant as the office was removed from the building. There is a net difference of 5.39 parking spaces between what the staff calculates on the 1977 plans (column 2) and what was calculated for the existing building (column 3). 1 i i~ i ` ~~(~o~A1~~~~ TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: September 30, 1993 SUBJECT: Request for the establishment of a Special Development District to allow the expansion of the Vail Athletic Club located at 352 East Meadow Drive. Applicant: Vail Athletic Club ' Planner: Shelly Mello 4 On September 27, 1993,-the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) reviewed a request from the owners of the Vail Athletic Club for the establishment of a Special Development District. This meeting was the final hearing after a series of three worksessions with the PEC and Design Review Board (DRB) beginning in June of this year. Attached please find a copy of staff's memorandum dated September 27, 1993 regarding the details of the applicant's request. The PEC voted unanimously to approve the project with Jeff Bowen making the motion and Dalton Williams seconding the motion. In addition to the staff's conditions which required the following: 1. The applicant permanently restrict the proposed 52 AUs as short-term rental units and that the 52 AUs shall not be subdivided in the future to allow for individual ownership. The Condominium Declarations shall be amended to include this point before an occupancy permit will be released for the project. 2. The applicant provide one 1 bedroom and one 2 bedroom employee housing unit and restrict them per the Town of Vail Employee Housing Ordinance. The employee housing restriction agreement shall be signed and submitted to the staff for approval before a building permit will be released for the project. The proposed employee units shall provide housing for a total of 6 employees. The units shall meet the minimum standards specified in the Town of Vail's Employee Housing Ordinance. Further, the PEC recommended the following conditions: 1. That three of the parking spaces currently being proposed on the site for the incremental increase in required parking shall be removed and the applicant shall pay into the parking fund for these three spaces ($8,000 per space =$24,000). With this provision, the applicant shall remove the two exterior ' parking spaces adjacent to the structure entry and this area shall be designated 1 r for loading and delivery. An additional space within the interior of the parking structure shall also be removed from the proposal. This condition was due to the PEC's concern with the ability of the parking structure to function with twenty-seven interior valet parking spaces. 2. That the applicant work with the DRB to develop a landscape plan on the south side of the building between the building and the streamwalk with the goal of returning this area to a more natural condition. This work includes improving and allowing public access through the property via the existing b~iridge and path on the southwest corner of the building and removing the existing sod and reseeding the area with a natural grass seed mix and possibly adding additional planting. The area to be returned to a natural condition begins just south of the willows adjacent to the VAC and extends south to the streamwalk. 3. That the DRB review the architectural details of the building further to insure that there is adequate architectural relief in the window mullions, trim, etc. 4. That the applicant work with the DRB to improve the signage, landscaping and general of East Meadow Drive as it intersects with Blue Cow Chute particularly the north side of East Meadow Drive. The objective of this effort is to not only to improve the pedestrian character of this area, but to also deter unnecessary vehicular traffic from entering East Meadow Drive. c:lshelly\memoslvac.930 2 dtRERJfORAiVDUYlf1 TO: Planning Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: September 27, 1993 (Corrections made September 27, 9993 are in bold.) SUBJECT: A request for the establishment of a Special Development District to allow the expansion of the Vail Athletic Club, located at 352 East Meadow Drive, and more specifically described as follows: A parcel of land in Tract B, Vail Village, First Filing, Town of Vaif, Eagle County, Colorado, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Tract B; thence N 79°46'00" W along the, Northerly line of Vail Village, Frst Filing, and along the Northerly line of said Tract B 622.86 feet; thence S 06°26'52" W a distance of 348.83 feet to the Southwest corner of that parcel of land described in Book 191 at Page 139 as recorded January 10, 1966 and filed in Reception No. 102978 in the Eagle County Records, said corner also being the True Point of Beginning; thence S 79°04'08" E and along the Southerly line of said parcel 200.00 feet to the Southeast corner thereof; thence N 62°52'00" E and along the Northerly line of that parcel of land described in Book 222 at Page 513 as recorded in 1971 in the Eagte County Records, a distance of 66.78 feet to the Northeasterly corner of said parcel of land; said corner being on the Westerly right-of-way line of Gore Creek Road, as platted in Vail Village, Fifth Filing; thence N 27°13'37" W a distance of 77.37 feet along said Westerly right-of-way fine of Gore Creek Road; thence N 89°29'22" W a distance of 12.80 feet to the Northeasterly corner of that parcel of land described in Book 191, Page 139 as recorded January 10, 1968 and filed in Reception No. 102978 in the Eagle County Records; thence Northwesterly 26.51 feet along the arc of a 37.50 feet radius curve to the left having a central angle of 40°30'00" whose chord bears N 53°40'00" W a distance of 25.96 feet to a point of tangency; thence N 73°55'00"Wand along said tangent 166.44 feet; thence N 85°10'21" W a distance of 50.40 feet to the Northwesterly corner of the Mountain Haus Parcel; thence S 02°18'00"Wand along the easterly line of said Mountain Haus Parcel a distance of 100.00 feet to the Southeasterly corner thereof; thence S 45°13'53" E a distance of 38.70 feet to the True Point of Beginning, containing 30,486 square feet, more or less. Applicant: Vail Athletic Ciub Planner: Shelly Mello . 0. PROJECT OVERVIEW The applicant is requesting a review of the proposed establishment of a Special Development District (SDD) for the redevelopment of the Vail Athletic Club located at 352 East Meadow Drive. The Vail Athletic Club is located on the southwest corner of Vail Valley Drive and East Meadow Drive at the bottom of Blue Cow Chute. The property is currently zoned Public Accommodation and is considered to be nonconforming with regard to development standards. The applicant has indicated that the purpose of requesting a SDD for this property is to improve the appearance of the building and site as well as make it a mare viable hotel. The proposal includes the deletion of six dwelling units, the addition of twenty-four 1 accommodation units, a decrease to the Club Area, a decrease in total restaurant area, . modifications to the elevations, a decrease in common area and the addition oIf nine underground parking spaces. The four existing employee units will remain on-site and will be permanently deed restricted. . The deviations from the Public Accommodation development standards include: 1. Density. The proposed density for the project will be 30.33 dwelling units (DU), which will include 52 AUs, 3 DUs and 4 employee housing units. The existing density for the project is 24.33 DU and the allowed density for the project 17.5 DUs.. The total. density increase is 6 DUs over the existing .development and 12.83 DUs over the allowable density. 2. GRFA. The applicant is proposing a total of 32,282 square feet of GRFA. In addition to this, there is an overage on common area of 8,456 square feet. When this is added to GRFA, the total GRFA for the project will be 40,738 square feet. The allowed GRFA/Common Area for the project is 32,924 square feet. Currently, there is 33,902 square feet of GRFA in the project which includes overages on common area. This results in a total increase of GRFA/Common Area of 6,836 square feet above the existing development and 7,814 square feet over the allowable GRFA/Common Area. 3. Common Area. The applicant is proposing to reduce common area, however, the existing project is in excess of the allowed common area by 13,541 squiare feet which is added to the GRFA. The proposal would exceed the allowabie common area bbl 8,456 square feet. 4. Height. The existing building is 67 feet in height on the south elevation and 59 feet on the north elevation. The allowable height is 45 feet. The applicant does not propose to increase the ridge height, however, dormers will be added to both the north and south of the building where the ridge heights exceed the 45 foot height allowance. 5. Site Coverage. Currently, the site coverage for the project is 20,796 square feet. The application will increase this to 21,350 square feet. Which includes the underground parking and service areas. The allowed site coverage for the site is 16,767 square feet. 6. Accessory Use. The accessory use allowance is 10% of existing, GRFA. If built as proposed, this project would have an accessory use allowance of 3,228 square feet. As proposed, the allowable accessory use will be 3,426 square feet. This is a . reduction from the existing 4,066 square feet. However, there is still an overage of 198 square feet. ~ . 7. Setbacks. The applicant proposes to add building along the north side of the project. This will be in the area of the entry and the restaurant. The addition of the entry will result in a 1 foot setback from the property line. The existing parking structure has a o foot setback. On the south side of the project, the applicant is proposing an at grade. terrace which will have a minimum seffiack of 2 feet. The required setb'iack in this area would be 10 feet. In addition, other areas of the building which are currently in the 2 setbacks will be infilled. This includes an area on the northwest comer as well as decks along the rear of the building. The dormers will also be increasing the amount of building in the setbacks. The applicant has proposed to do the following with the application:° 1. Decrease the amount of GRFA allocated towards dwelling units and increase the amount of GRFA for accommodation units. 2. Decrease the number of dwelling units and increase the number of . accommodation units. 3. Encroach further into the front setback with entry and second-story accommodation unit as well as an addition to the restaurant to the east of the entry. 4. Increase common area while decreasing the area allocated towards accessory uses and athletic club use. 5.. Add dormers to the building on the north and south side which do not exceed the existing ridge height of the building. Insert decks into the roof structure on the south elevation. ~ . 6. Increase the amount of site coverage as a result of the new entry and restaurant addition (554 square feet). 7. Add terrace and expand dining deck on south elevation. 8. Removal of deck on the south elevation which currently encroaches onto public . land. 9. The applicant is proposing to meet the incremental increase in parking requirements. There is an existing deficit of 58.44 spaces on the site. The new parking is located in the following manner: ~2 spaces built underground below the entry ~2 spaces added lay relocating an existing ski storage area ~2 spaces added by relocating the laundry room ~t space added along the south side of the parking structure . ~2 spaces in central area of oarkina structure 9 total 90. Change exterior materials of building. This includes stucco, wood trim, deck railings and a wood shake roof. l 3 11. Add streetscape improvements. These include: a 6 foot heated concrete paver walk along West Meadow Drive, an 8 foot heated concrete paver walk along . Vail Valley Drive extending over the Gore Creek bridge and street lamps. The ' pavers on the bridge will not.be heated. 12. Relocation of existing trash area and removal of the existing trash facility which ~ . is encroaching onto adjacent properties. 13. The applicant proposes to provide one two-bedroom employee housing unit within the Town of Vail which will be restricted according to the Town of Vail employee housing requirements. 14. Additional landscaping on the north and south sides of the building. *For further details on the deviations please see Section III, Zoning Analysis, of this memorandum, which specify the changes in development standards for the project. Also, please see applicant's description of proposal for specific details. 11. BACKGROUND A. Project History The Vail Athletic Club was originally developed in 1977 and included a mixed use building with condominiums and accommodation units as well as the health club facility and offices. Twenty on-site parking spaces were provided for the project and a variance was received for the remaining required spaces. Per the file records, it appears that the variance was granted in order to facilitate the construction of hotel rooms which were needed in the community at the time. In 1977, it was felt that it would be reasonable to grant a parking variance for the sixteen parking spaces for this property due to the proximity of the Town parking structure. Parking variances for four additional spaces have been granted for the project since that time. In addition, while variances were not granted for height or density, the project was allowed to deviate from these standards. Setback variances were granted in 1977 for the idevelopment of the project. The property has been the subject of numerous redevelopments over a number of years and subsequent parking variances. At the time of the project approval in 1977, it was discussed that possibly a portion of the property which the Vail Athletic Club had acquired would not be counted towards their . developable site area. Research has been conducted regarding this issue to determine whether or not that was actually done. The staff has found no definitive information which would indicate that this was completed. B. Previous PEC reviews On June 28, 1993, a joint worksession was held with the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) and the Design Review Board (DRB) to discuss the establishment of an SDD for this site. At this time, the applicant was directed to work with the existing volume of the building. It was also indicated that it might be acceptable to expand the building adjacent to the Mountain Haus. It was stated that some expansion would be axeptable on the 4 ' southwest comer and that no additional development should be proposed on the north side of the building. In addition, there was a concern with the additional shade/shadow being cast on fi/leadow Drive. In regard to parking, the PEC indicated that the applicant should strive to accommodate parking on-site. On Tuesday Juty 13, 1993, a worksession was held with the Town Council regarding the parking for this project. During this discussion, three of the Town Council members were open to discussing further the possibility of pay-in-lieu parking for this site. Three of the Town Council members felt that the applicant should accommodate parking on-site due to the already significant overage of parking which is not provided on the site. As a result of this discussion, the applicant has provided an additional nine parking spaces on the site which will accommodate all of the increases in parking generated by the renovation of the building. On July 26, 1993, an additional worksession was held with the PEC. Please see the attached minutes which detail the discussion 5 Ill. ZONING ANALYSIS , Listed below is ilia zoning analysis for the Vaii Athletic Club SDD proposal. ALLOWED DEV. EXISTING PROPOSED STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT Site Area: ~ 30,486 sq. ft. 30,486 sq. ft. 30,486 ft Setbacks: 20 feet north: -0- north: -0- south: 2' - 26' south: 2' - 26' 0' (decks) -0-(decks) east: 12 - 20' east: 12 - 20' west: 12' west: 1~2' . Height: 45 feet 67 south; 59 north 67 south; 59 north Slte Coverage: 16,767 sq. ft. - 20,796 sq. ft. 16,300 seq. ft. + 5,050 sq. ft. 21,350 sq, ft. includes - garage and below grade service area on east side. Landscaping: 9,145 sq. ft. 9,071 sq. ft. 9,730 sq. ft. • (including at-grade decks) Units: 25 units per acre 28 AU + 9 DU = 23 DU(2 LO)"" 52 AU + 3 DU = 17.5 units + 4 amp units" =24.33 DU(2 LO)' 29 DU (2 LO) + 4 amp units = 30.33 DU (2 LO) GRFA: 24,388 sq. ft. (8Q%) 10,927 AU + 8,122 DU 24,647 AU + 6,252 DU = 19,049 sq. ft. = 30,899 sq. ft. + 1,383 + 1,312 amp units = 20,361 amp units = 32,282 + 8,456 - + 13,541 common = 33,902 common overage = 40,738 Accessory Use: 10% of ebsting GRFA 2,036 sq. ft. (Allowed) 3,228 sq. ft. (Allowed) Restaurant: 3,606 sq. ft. 3,285 sq. ft. Club Retail: 460 sq. ft. 141 sq. ft. Total: 4,066 sq. h. 3,426 sq. ft. Comnwn Area: 8,536 sq. ft. (35%) Halls/Mech: ~ 19,235 sq. ft. 14,265 sq. ft. Conference: 2.842 sq. ft. 2.727 sq. ft. Total Common: 22,077 sq. ft. 16,992 sq. ft. (13,541 sq. ft. overage) 8,456 sq~ ft. overage) Club Area: 22,257 sq. ft. 20,881 . ft. Parking Garage: 4.131 sq. ft. 5.512 so. ft. Total Building Square Footage:"' 72,892 sq. ft. 79,093 sq. ft. 6 - Parking: 20 on-site due to 20 ~ 29 (24.29'° compact) approved variances. Halls/Mech: -0- -0 - Club Area: -0- -0- ' Retail: 1.84 parking spaces .47 parfcing spaces . Conference Area: 11.8 parking spaces 11.29 parking spaces Restaurant: 22.5 parking spaces 20.3 parking spaces AU: 21.8 parking spaces 44.75 parking spaces DU: 16.5 parking spaces 6.5 parking spaces Emp Units: 4 oarkino spaces 4 oarkina soaves Total Parking: 78.44 parking spaces 87.31 parking spaces (8.87 or 9 space increase) ° A lockoff is an accommodation unit which is attached to a dwelling unit and is no larger than one-third of the total floor area of the dwelling unit. Required by the Vail Town Council in 1977. Units are to remain on-site for the life of the building. Each employee unit counts as .333 units towards density. Indudes GRFNAccessory Retail/RestauranVClub/Common/Parking. There is a total increase of building area of 6,201 sq. ft. The memorandums on the Vail Athletic Club condominium conversion process indicate that 24 AU and 5 DU were rental restricted and 2 DU were approved whh no restrictions. There are no file records which indicate the approval of the 4 additional AU's and 2 DU's currently on-site. VV° ORITERIA TO SE tJSE® IFd EVALl3ATIIdG THIS PROPOSAL As stated in the Zoning Code, the purpose of Special Development Districts is as follows: "The purpose of the special development district 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 provide the natural and scenic features of open space areas; and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vait Comprehensive Plan. An approved development plan for a special development district, in conjunction with the property's underlying zone district, shall. establish the requirements guiding development and uses of property included in a special development district." The staff finds that the application meets the purpose of the Special Development District. Specifically, staff finds that this application furthers the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail Comprehensive Plan. The project proposes to improve the design character, function and quality of the development and provide additional short-term units within the Village which is a specific goal of many elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The staff as well as the PEC have identified in past reviews that this site is appropriate for increased densities as well as a variety of uses due to the location and proximity to the Village core area. In addition, employee housing and streetscape improvements are proposed which provide overall community benefit. Staff recognizes that the existing building exceeds the underlying zoning requirements, but believes that due to the site and location it is suitable to allow for such deviations as proposed in.. the .application given the goals and policies in the Town's Land Use Planr Vail Village Master Plan and Streetscape Plan. Please see Section VI for furl a details on these plans. 7 V. SPECIAL DEVELOPMIENT DISTRICT CRITERIA The following nine criteria should be used to review the project. A. Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual. integrity and orientation. Massing The staff feels that this criterion is especially important to the review of this project. While this application does not propose to increase the maximum ridge height, the proposal includes adding dormers to the existing roof. The amount of building area is increased with building infills and the introduction of a series of dormers. On the south side, .roof cut outs are being used for ithe three central top units. Otherwise, dormers have been added to both sides of the roof form in order to utilize existing "dead" space.. The a{~plicant has also modified the roof form on both the east and west elevations of the building. The east elevation terraces back from Vail Valley Drive and additional windows have been added to this elevation ~ Terracing has also been accomplished on the west elevation adjacent to the Mountain Haus. .The low eave line which is maintained with this proposal and the landscaping of the site bring the scale of the building down to a pedestrian level. The staff :feels that maintaining the ~pedestrian~ character of this area is important as it is . seen as a major corridor to Golden Peak and the Village from the parking structure and is also used by pedestrians to access Ford Park. The Vail Village Master Plan calls for this building to have a maximum of four stories. From the original application, the applicant has lowered the building to the existing ridge line in all locations and decreased the scale of the dormers in order to decrease the shadow on East Meadow Drive. Sun/Shade . .The proposed building increases the amount of shade on East Meadow Drive by 5 feet 6 inches in the area of the entry, 24 feet 6 inches on the west wing . and 5 feet on the east wing on December 21st (See attached sun/shade analysis). The impacts on shade on September 21st will be an increase of 1 foot 6 inches in the. center of the building, 11 feet on the west wing and 2 feet 6 inches on the east wing. The amount of shade is determined by both the angle of the sun and the height of the ridge or eave line. While the December 21st . date creates the most impact, the September 21st date is what is specified in the code for sun/shade analysis in the CCI zone district. Although this property is not in CCI, the shade impact is important to address for this pedestrian area. 8 The greatest impact iri shade is seen on the west wing of the building. On December 21st, the proposed building will cast shadow onto the sidewalk. On September 2.1 st, the increase in shade in this area will be 11 feet and does ' not cast shadow onto the sidewalk. It should be noted that the existing building casts. shadow beyond the sidewalk into the street in the center of the building and east wing. In the center and east wing, the additional shade cast - will be 5 feet 6 inches and 8 feet accordingly as a result of the dormers. The applicant proposes to heat the paver sidewalk which will make this area safer for the pedestrian.' The staff feels that the increases in shade have been minimized to a point that is acceptable. Entrv On the north side of the building, the applicant proposes to add a two and a half story entry area to the building. The entry has been lowered by two floors from the original proposal. The design of the entry minimizes the massing impacts of the element and does not add any more shade to the street. Building Footprint The applicant proposes to increase the building footprint by 450 square feet to allow for the restaurant addition and entry. Staff does not have a problem with the restaurant addition as no landscaping is removed. The entry will remove two to four trees which the applicant has agreed to relocate or replace. Streetscar~e The applicant has proposed to install required streetscape improvements discussed in section VIII of this memo. This includes a heated paver walk along Vail Valley ®rive as well as a heated paver walk along the south side of East Meadow Drive. The driveway to the garage will also be heated. In general, the project is sensitive to adjacent properties through the use of appropriate architectural design and massing as well as landscaping. B. Uses, activity and .density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. Density , The applicant proposes to increase the total density of the project by six dwelling units. This includes the removal of six dwelling units as well as the addition of twenty-four accommodation units. ®f the nine dwelling units on-site, six are currently restricted per the Condominium Conversion requirements. There are two existing units which are free market and the applicant wishes to retain one additional unrestricted unit. The staff feels that because this unit is already restricted that it should remain available for short-term rental according to Section 17.26 of the Subdivision Regulations, Condominium Conversion, or an employee housing unit should be provided in place of the restricted unit as was allowed with the Vail Village Inn Goodes space. The staff would prefer to see an additional 9 employee housing unit versus the restricted DU provided as we believe the employee housing unit also provides an important community benefit. . The staff feels that the applicant's desire to increase the short term hotel units is very positive. The GRFA attributable to dwelling units has been decreased by 1,$70 square feet. 13,270 square feet of '6RFA will be added to increase the amount of floor area for accommodation units. The additional GRFA has been gained by using existing dead space within the building, using common area more efficiently, and the addition of dormers and infilling portions of decks on the south side: An additional 6,201 square feet of total building area will be added with this proposal. !n order to insure that the AU's rem in as short- term rentals, the staff requests that the owner agree to not subdivide the units in the future per the Condominium Conversion section of the Subdivision Regulations. Em4lovee Housing Currently, four employee housing units are required on-site per the 1977 parking variance. The applicant proposes that these units remain on-site and has agreed to restrict these units on a permanent basis. Due to the requested increases in density, the applicant has ind+cated that there may be an increase of two to four employees on the site. Utilizing the Employee Housing Guidelines, based on the net increase in development over the existing building, two to four additional employees would be generated by the expansion. The staff would require that one two-bedroom or two one-bedroom units be provided to address the increase. The summary is as follows: a) Bar/Restaurant = 321 sq. ft. (~a 6.5/1,000 sq ft.) = 2.08 employees (decrease) b) Retail/Service Commercial = 310 sq. ft. (@6.5/1,000 sq; ft.j = 2.015 employees (decrease) c) Dwelling Units = 6 units (@.4/room) = 2.4 employees (decrease) dl Accommodation Units 24 units (C~.75/room) = 18 emAlovee (increase) e) Total ~ 11.5 or 12 employees X12 employees x .15 housing multiplier = 1.8 or 2 employees X12 employees x .30 housing multiplier = 3.6 or 4 employees ~Assumina two emplovees per bedroom, the proposed one two-bedroom unit would be needed per the employee generation formula. The staff has used the higher multiplier due to the overages in density. The Employee Housing Report does not differentiate between the provision of on-site or off-site housing. As 10 . _ stated above, the staff would like to see one more employee unit provided in order to lift the use restriction on the proposed dwelling unit. C. Compliance tnrith parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 18.52. Parking Parking has been a long standing issue on this site. In researching the history of this project, the staff found that there were a number of variances granted to this project. In December of 1977, twenty underground parking spaces were approved for this site. At that time, it was recognized that surface parking was not appropriate for this site and that these spaces would be the maximum number that could be placed on the site. Different arrangements have been made over the years for parking on Town of Vail land as well as other properties for this project to address the deficit. Variances have been granted for a total of twenty spaces over the life of the project. Using today's standards, there is an existing deficit of 58.4 parking spaces for the project. There would be a nine space parking requirement increase as a result of this expansion. This is based on the difference between the required parking for the proposed project and the existing development. The applicant is proposing an additional nine on-site parking spaces which would bring the total on-site spaces to twenty-nine. All of the parking spaces would be valet. Currently, the applicant valet parks eighteen parking spaces in the existing structure. The parking structure will be expanded which will accommodate the nine additional spaces: Due to the type of use of this facility, valet parking is appropriate and has been approved for other projects of this nature. With the full-time concierge and valet, this type of parking solution is feasible. In addition, after reviewing the function of the existing facility, it appears that the proposed plan is reasonable and, the additional nine parking spaces can be accommodated. The two existing exterior spaces will remain adjacent to the entrance to the parking structure on the west side. No additional square footage has been added to the health club and therefore the staff does not feel that it is appropriate to assess a parking requirement for this facility. Parking for a health club is determined by the PEC. There is no parking standard for this type of use. IVo parking requirement has been assessed in the past and the staff is not assessing any additional parking nor do we recommend to the PEC that a parking requirement be set as no club square footage is being proposed. 11 Loading and Delivery - The applicant is providing a loading facility with apull-out from East Meadow , Drive: This will accommodate the short-term parking needs of the project. Loading and Delivery will also be accommodated in this pull-off area. The . applicant will no longer be allowed to unload deliveries along Vai( Va(ley Drive adjacent to the restaurant entrance. This is a very unsafe practice which the Town does not encourage and will not allow to continue. In addition, the applicant proposes to remove the existing trash facility on the west side of the project. This enclosure encroaches both onto Town of Vai! land as well as Mountain Haus property. The applicant would propose to , include the trash facility inside the building in this same area. D. Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town policies and Urban Design Plans: There are three other elements of the Comprehensive Plan which apply to this application: The Vail Village Master Plan, the Streetscape Master Plan and the Land Use Plan. Please see Sections VI, VII, and VIII of this memo for further descriptions of these plans. Many elements of the Town's Comprehensive Plan encourage the development and preservation of hotel-type units. The applicant proposes to add an additional twenty-four AU's and delete six DU's for a total of fifty-two AU's and three DU's. This is in keeping with the Comprehensive P(an's objective to increase the hotel bed base. Please see Sections VI, V11 and VIII that identify the applicable goals and objectives of the plans.- E. Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is proposed. This site is located adjacent to Gore Creek. No portion of this proposal encroaches .into the 50 foot stream setback or the one hundred year floodplain. F. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive grid sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. Building Design While .the changes to the site plan through this proposa! are limited, the building design changes significantly. In respect to the south or Gore Creek side of the building, the applicant is proposing to change the character of the elevation with the. enclosure and redesign of balconies and to change the window design. Dormers will be added to the east and west wings and decks will Icut into the roof form in the center area. The applicant has adjusted the south elevation to break up the facade per PEC and staff comments. Initially the applicant . proposed to increase the height of the western section of the building. 12 Currently, the applicant proposes to maintain all of the existing ridge lines arid not increase the ridge in any area of the building. The staff feels that this is very positive. In addition, the applicant is proposing to add a terrace at the lower level on the south side of the project. This wi(I encroach into the 20 foot setback and result in a 2 foot setback a the tightest point from the south property line. On the north elevation, the applicant proposes to infill an area on the east wing adjacent to the restaurant and add an entry. In addition, balconies will be added to units on the east wing. Dormers will be added in all three areas on this elevation. This will allow for the additional accommodation units on the upper level. These additions will cast additional shade onto East Meadow Drive. Landscaping has been proposed along the retaining wall adjacent to the sidewalk on the north side of the building. This will increase the landscape buffer between the building and the public area. The staff feels that this . additional landscaping is very important to the project as it will screen the building and mitigate both the existing and proposed impacts of the building. Euildina's im®act on open space and vegetation The application impacts the existing landscaping on the north side of the building. Approximately two to four large evergreen trees will be lost as a _ result of this proposal. The applicant is proposing to landscape along the new stone retaining wall adjacent to the west wing in order to better screen the building in areas where landscaping does not currently exist. The staff feels that while it is unfortunate that these evergreen trees will possibly be lost, the addition of landscaping which includes- evergreen and aspen trees along the sidewalk, will mitigate the impact of the loss of these.two to four trees. The applicant will attempt to save these trees. However, in the event that they cannot be saved as a result of this construction, the applicant does agree to replace the trees. The applicant has also added a 3 foot planting step to the . east of the existing at- grade parking on the west end of the building in order to help screen the parking. The step will also reduce the height of the wall in this area. On the south side of~the building, the applicant will be removing an existing deck which is currently located on Town of Vail land. The applicant proposes to add additional landscaping in this area which includes shrubs and aspen trees. This will buffer the building from the public area. Due to the amount of land and landscaping between the streamwalk and the building, adequate buffer areas are provided. The proposed landscaping adjacent to the building will be positive and will not hinder the use of this open space area on the south side of the building. The applicant has also agreed to provide a maintenance agreement to the Town for this. open space. 13 G. ~l circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. The applicant proposes to add nine underground parking spaces. By adding additional on-site parking, the vehicular traffic on East Meadow Drive will be increased. While it is an objective of the Streetscape Plan to make this area more pedestrianized, it is also an objective of the Vail Village Master Plan to have properties in this area provide on-site parking. The staff feels that the provision of on-site parking to meet the additional requirement is important given the constraints on parking our community must deal with. The applicant does propose to install an entry and pull-off in order to facilitate the drop-off of guests and loading and delivery. The installation of a drop-off area will be a benefit to the area as currently there is no off-street drop-off area for this building and the existing situation creates congestion along East ' Meadow Drive as guests and trucks park in the bus lane on Meadow Drive. The Town Engineer has signed off on this solution. With this application, the staff recognizes that it would be difficult to completely restrict East Meadow Drive from vehicular traffic, but would strive to limit the number of vehicles which must access East Meadow Drive. We lalso believe that by providing safe well designed sidewalks, pedestrian circulation can also be accommodated. The applicant's proposal improves both pedestrian and vehicular circulation in an area that currently must provide for both uses. H. Functional and aesthetic Landscaping and open space in ordier to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions. Due to the installation of the pull-off and entry and relocation of the retaining wall in this area, two to four evergreen trees could possibly be lost. The applicant has agreed to attempt to save these trees, however, it would appear that this may not be possible. The applicant does agree to replace these trees in addition to increasing the landscaping along East Meadow Drive between the building and the roadway adjacent to the sidewalk. Trees in the 30 foot range will be required to replace the trees that may not be able to be relocated. The new landscaping in front of the building includes evergreens that range in size from 10 to 15 feet and aspens having a minimum of a 3 inch caliper. To the east of the main entry to the building, the applicant is proposing to redesign the sidewalk as well as the landscape area. This will involve cutting back the existing utility grate and bringing the landscape down to the same grade as the sidewalk. This is accomplished by moving the sidewalk and curbline to the south from the existing location. Landscaping will also be added on the south elevation in the area where the existing deck is being removed. Aspen trees and shrubs will be added to this area and the grades will be redone to match the existing topographic conditions. 14 . The landscaping 'on-site will be increased as a result of the removal of an above grade deck. lMith this application, the pro)ect will be in compliance with the landscaping requirement for the site. I. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functionaB and efficient relationship throughout the development.of the speciaB development district. The applicant has not proposed that the construction of this project be phased. !!l. i/AI~ ~AN® USA PLAi~ The goals contained in the Vail Land Use Plan are to be used as adopted policy guidelines in the review process for new development proposals. The Land Use Plans Goals/Policies applicable. to the Vail Athletic Club redevelopment are as follows: 1_1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 1_2 The quality of the environment including air, water and other natural resources should be protected as the Town grows. 1_3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 3_2 The Village and Lionshead areas are the best location for hotels to serve the future needs of the destination skiers. 3_3 Hotels are important to the continued success of the Town of Vail, therefore conversion to condominiums should be discouraged. 4_2 Increased density in the core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is preserved through implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan. 4_3 The ambiance of the Village is important to the identity of Vail and should be preserved. (Scale, alpine character, small town feeling, mountains, natural setting, intimate size, cosmopolitan feeling, environmental quality.) 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. 15 5_5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and , ° upgraded. Additional employee housing needs should b accommodated at varied sites throughout the community. The lication meets the oats and olicies in the Land Use Plan. The additi ~ n of short-term aPP 9 P Note{ rooms is a very positive addition to this area. Item 4.2 specifies that increased densities . in the core are acceptable if the character of the area is preserved. The applicant proposes to change the character of the building by changing the materials and design details of the building. While the proposal increases the size of the building, the staff believes that the applicant has attempted to utilize the unused interior spaces of the building to minimize the expansion on the exterior of the building. The scale and design of the building with the addition of new materials and landscaping maintain the alpine character of the development. VII. VAIL VILLAGE MASTER PLAN The proposed redevelopment of the Vail Athletic Club carries out many of the goals and objectives contained in the Vail Village Master Plan. Applicable goals and objectives are as follows: Goal #1 -Encourage high quality redevelopment•while preserving the unique architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity. Objective 1.2 -Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities. Goal #2 - To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year-round economic health and viability for the Village and for the community as a whole. Objective 2.1, -Recognize the variety of land uses found in the 10 sub-areas throughout the Village and allow for development that is compatible with these established land use patterns. Objective 2.3 -Increase the number of residential units available for short term - overnight accommodations. Policv 2.3.1 -The development of short term accommodation units is strongly encouraged. Residential units that are developed. above existing density {evels • are required to be designed or managed in a manner that makes them available for short term ovemight rental. Objective 2.5 -Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to better serve the .needs of our guests. Policv 2.5.1 -Recreation amenities, common areas, meeting facilities and other amenities shall be preserved and enhanced as a part of any redevelopment of lodging properties. 16 Objective 2.6 -Encourage the development of affordable housing units through the efforts of the private sector. Objective 2.6.1 -Employee housing units may be required as part of any new or redevelopment project requesting density over that allowed by existing zoning. Goal #3 - To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking experience throughout the village. Objective 3.4 -Develop additional sidewalks, pedestrian-only walkways and - accessible green space areas, including pocket parks and stream access. Goal #5 -Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency, and aesthetics of the transportation and circulation system throughout the Village. Policv 5.1..1 -For new development that is located outside of the Commercial Core I Zone District, on-site parking shall be provided (rather than paying into the parking fund) to meet any additional parking demand as required by the zoning code. Policv 5.1.5 -Redevelopment projects shall be strongly encouraged to provide underground or visually concealed parking. Objective 5.2 -Encourage the use of public transportation to minimize the use of private automobiles throughout Vail. Although this location is not addressed in any sub-area concept of the Vail Village Master Plan, it is discussed with regard to the height of buildings. The Vail Village Master Plan specifies that buildings adjacent to Gore Creek should have a height of four stories. The existing building is four stories along East Meadow Drive. The proposal builds into the existing roof to form a fifth floor. This is being accomplished by adding dormers, infilling portions of decks on the south side, and using existing common area and dead space in the roof form. None of the ridge lines will be increased and all of the existing eave lines will be maintained. This application addresses the four Vail Village Master Plan goals which are applicable to the site. It also meets the twelve policies and objectives which are applicable. l/ttL STREETSCAPE 1~,4STER PLAfi9 The Streetscape Master Plan points out that traffic on Vail Valley Drive is very heavy throughout most of the year. It is especially heavy in the morning and late afternoons during the ski season, and evenings and weekends during the summer months.. Pedestrian traffic has increased because of the expansion of the Village Parking Structure and the creation of a new eastern exit portal from this facility at Vail Valley Drive. Specific improvements for Vail Valley Drive in the area of the Vail Athletic Club include the addition of an 8 to i 0 foot wide heated concrete unit paver walk on the west side of Vail Valley Drive extending over the 17 bridge at Gore Creek and a 6 foot wide concrete unit paver. walk on the south side of East e Meadow Drive. The applicant has included these improvements in this application with the exception that only a 6 foot walk is being proposed along Vail Valley Drive due to site constraints and 8 feet along Meadow Drive. IX. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The staff recommends approval of the application. We find that the proposal has developed into one which is in compliance with the objectives and purpose section of.the SDD zone district as well as the other Comprehensive Plan elements as described in the memo. The approval includes the following understandings: . 1. That the owner will permanently restrict the 52 Aus as short-term yenta! units and that the 52 Aus shall not be subdivided in the future to allow for individual . ownership. The condominium declarations shall be amended to include this point before any occupancy permits will be released. 2. !n addition to the one two-bedroom permanently deed restricted employee housing unit, the owner shall provide one-bedroom employee housing unit.to allow for the use restriction to be lifted from the restricted dwelling unit. The employee housing unit restriction agreements shall be signed and submitted for staff approval before a building permit will be released for the project. ne following items will need to be addressed further as the project develops into working drawings. • 1. Engineered drawings will need to be submitted which address the streetscape improvements for review by the Town Engineer before a building permit is released for the project. The staff feels that the application is a positive one and does meet the goals and objectives of the Town's Comprehensive Plan. These include the Land Use, the Village Master Plan, Zoning Code and SDD Criteria. We recognize that the proposal deviates from the existing zoning. We recognize that it is important to increase accommodation units as well as maintain and improve existing buildings in town in order to maintain the area. We feel that this is a site which can handle increased density and deviations from the site development standards which include height, density and site coverage white maintaining the existing scale and character of the neighborhood. c:lpec\memos\vac.927 18 teal Ma.e•./ Oawa l _ . , ^ ; . ~w. I i I d: \ / • ~ I~L~JJrLr':,f~!' 'fr ~R~wn Y , I i Iwfrco, y~. H.n. A lut hf. LWA \ mow. .,,.e.p _ aM r f MK S \ a..p MIP 0•w.we n•4L /MAN. . fl6 ~ ~r ~ °r . \ v~ ~ ~ t ~ 1~-~vsa ~r~ ~ ~1 VAILATFitET'ICCLUB Slie Plan i Jaciutl aaRiq'. N[NMCt amGt 1/16'. 1'•P • ~ LIV II. ,w.. wl~rl wT IYCI ~ . r~LI JW a~R h'14 d.p C-a 7. 9.9'~ _ nnRer.,~~c u~fc0.~~l~J~ t _ ~ - ~ , pMvt .w ~ _ f~"_„i. f t t w~~ +t .r r r of ~ :fir ~h ' +r J~ywJi ~ 111 !'5+;• r~ ~°t. vM1s e `i. • or ~ ~ VNy l~lR~tttr' µV6 rr ~ o p' - ~ r \V .r • ~ , r r ~ ~1~n' ~ of t'A'- of M+`~' ~ w ~ q M~ uP~ i M O pa Y / ~ e nl - r+r .t W ~ 1 - • ~•»K` JJ\/} "-..J - 5lte Plan ~ V AiU A~ ~~+~G GLUE s~ ' ~ 1~. t `ew „e,er- ~ pi ~ l~ L1 p t • • ' I Y~tlil: ~1 ~ . ~ Il~~llIl ~1L~~ ~ ~ ~c ..cw..~...~ _ - - _ - 1 - - - C ~ I b~ lll< 1 ~/••x~ _ rt I ~ : i=1Li ! ~ ~~;~f l~~l~:l~ 1~~ ~La~°~i~~g~ .~~n:L i • i . ~ . _ ~ ~ !i! • ~ ~ .VAILATIi1.ETICCLUB SOUthEteYdtbn ` i • I1 biw~.D~b! GI..G . . I 16~1ed 6vcW MNcxt fmt~ UC.1~0 IM 4. I/O b+i I~l M IM1CJ l1 i.. ,..:wzavtF>'wwcm - co q•il •r ~ It i ~i i I~ ~ / ~ ~1-1- 1 ~ ` ' ~ ~~i ' 1' ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Iii ~?I~`=~: ~ :I ,~°'°'°~~.~:'~'--ten .ii-;~ H e~•;~ .~t~y~ - _ -i ; u~lii ~ittii~" - ~ N+~~1~ T _ t e ' ~ Nr Rfr :L~JA'.0.~ f^'^ / . _ _ . ~ 4. MM' ~ ®I i is _ ~ ~ _l WLni L4tv.~.ieo?.I S~nf tt.tvnleow. ~vnl~ nTHLETIC CLUB Elevations ? a. I+icna.e emcey, Ncw.r? suer ?~r. ?••o ?te per f..r w.. r..a •vr ~mm • ~r.r w nr em ~ w a ar om q • I e• M°^~w • i oa, • r1 r--~ _f- 1 it--~ • ~ witi me _Nn ow~ I -pao - - ~ o-.___~f- wa w~o L- • 1, .ca- ~ our- . -i Irv .ya ,J ; • 1 ~ ~i -J___~ .Mlu ~ \ ~`4•tY ~ ~1UVG / ~ • ~ • ` I • • ` • ' ~,Irt rLpi,~, \ \ . n i• a? "a ~ a` aaa ~ ` 1 1 ~ t ~ _ `C"" • r-~ 1 ~ I II ~ ~ I \I t\I w ,...rte f aA~.l M?YL VAILA7'Ii1.ET1CCLUB ,/11 wup It/sl plfAf).w Muo~as mev.na..ra cep ?6e~sa16oclar. ,vcNact ~ !mom Yw• • I•'o• ~,:msa«¢~mwc~ o~ 0 19.94 . ( I I I II 1 I i I I ~ \ . ' . ~ ' ~1 IMI Y _ . LM M IN 41r^~ I 1N I~ YN u wL ~ •11 ~ MI ~ Mr ~ ?ual ~ M Lr I~~ lM~ M M1Y /.Vb II IM II Wt II Mr i ~ . ' NI. . I~ • hat R ~ I ~1• II M` w.a I na/.r W+ ~ wMM ~ ~ .awwf \ i I - M 1.. .1 . ~1 a Il w ~ . II II " ~ I I i aMbM M.r I f 1.. ~ ~ ' 4 ..1 i . ~ ]I h(.LIfaN A•A ~ LW yy IrO ` - II 1 t• I I / I I I . • . r. ._1 . . "l r.. ~ • •1 .rte` W n M? 1?0+ II ~.•M ~ I'I~'I•I r ~ 4~ . ~N..? Y. y~ 1rM, ~ • `(~-+W It r. 1 • 1 • Mali Yr . M _ ' M w^ Nti .ti 1r 1•• ' , . . , 1 , i f ~ N./I.s. MHVN r.SL . - - : Nl4lvN v•o ' I .ww~~,tw~ ' . l ' ~ ~ ~ VAIL ATNLECIC CLUB SCCS]DDS i ! ~ 1 . i%.',J~ arrro.. w1 o~..r 1... ~ I~n.i?.nrrmwra Inr v?-1•-s~:~.`• ~ t •~s~.!:, au r.,. r, 4w. Ira w/ 1m - Y~ a.,". ! . 1 ~a.•e•La M Mq La p. r ~ ,,'1 : 11J iYV • - .%~lt.o~'~ 1~;~ J•^ ~~t...a~' .r I _ ~ ~ 1 YwOaT .I .I 1 'I 19 ' ~ 11 I -1- a+..r~ -J b.R.D•D (sq an^~"~~-1L J I _L 1 «ew.l ~ ! m v i t• 1 to I t9 ~ 7r 1 w ~ I ~ t, ~ mow' . •1 I I ~~II Dav uaa p..av rtf• I sW+M wr \ f~~rLL~-- ____tI ,`L~ 1 0' I I I~ 1 Iwv f ~f <w WwO t baMK Av ('MIM) (.IN p1 I Iwl ~~-..I \ it I 1' fIYOMt 1 Co.l ~ ter. --1 .I I fat I1 N.. ~....so I Ia ~ ,I Ia 1 ~ • t ~,_,'I 11 I ^ 1 1 I ` / Ia=n! '1 I . . fp1 ~ ~1 j; ' / ~ 'I I0. D P 10.1 1Rp ~ D O / Ial IR9 1( - ~~.1 ~ 1 _ ' . ; -4~s._ ll I t... a..aJOSa s.. au..•' I _ v.___..__~___. / ~,~ae.~...o eN Ymu1 4sD ~ , L • 1~.. . nn fK! . 1 J as , I RaA• A. DW• pra .~-~~~---ter-rr 0 0^u ' /yYVp bas wI•/O •a•a~. ~ O 00 ' a...I ry•e ~ae~ ?nw~wr. Y•tHr,Nr4 VAIL A7'til.)rT1C CLUB Upper Health Club • ~ Pnatiwti • uw M'O ra.f.••.~ P![4rr.nr~ - ~ 8aa..a}P4IG1 oc~e+ L~ ' }b w. WD•q a.u .q •tt1r ~ w•a+ee Sus. +t' o ~-tr. \d{'c,~li+. • 9 w'+ ~ V•+ R.1 t. ~ - Is. • s..wr /.IS..d H7) M e yt I.....``w.uwl,a4wa.R'borT) lrs )4daeLscb', ~BOn ~ PrS•• LPG sROi 14: . 9 sX~ases 9 9 °t4 ti. me'a~r n..r H..r~wf cm 7'•. • V~/ril4 a•D 11.0 -I.D • ~ ~•O ~ ,Yr11.DY O ml RIMi••a..9 9s.tH L..~ - /'~D ~ }y7A1L 191 51 ~9L M••ati ....L•' _ ~~c ua ro a4 P* uT mV ca N t ~ I~ : ~.9• Q ~ atl Nt. I.H .Y - LLO • ~ jy ;T SS.y. ..v' ~y ~•19•g°f .:'•t~-=~ • Y W wo'+_ sr~w»b vac o 9. a Dsxv. (N +~wt rr;Dl~` ~ • i _ _ r- _ - - • ~1 • 1, ----f--~ . 1~ 1 r4 ~ 1~ wa Iw II I • ~ w •w \ 1 ~.1..A Ia ~ O+ ~I 1 warms ra w ,t+ .e IllI I ` •r' 1 ~ w _ ~ W r N•• 1 r-- 111x1 ~Iw:T N7 1 1 (.v_r) ~ t r ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 1_ v... . • 1 . I I I I I 1 I ~ I I ' I ) ~RIw fRI SGLt t.)ALr Dew~ItY I.rlwt Y^1+ _ u~ rrr• wacw I.•a..y. s_r.MaJr+ +a .w+. ?s•r . • rr.• f yet • u /I v Ia•rrv. St . w r~•+ / +[v. • K er. 1 l ~ VAILATHIEf7C CI.UH Ftrsi Floof Plan' ' ? Cr^ 1 t V~ . aN• .11.1: a.ap ?I L+r1Nr.. fr N~ . 11 n+... t• rJ'•. r ~ rnfL. ~ t 1 an/u1.. •w1^ - IMf ~ Yraanwa• L L:+'+. , a r'~•vr Lt. w t \4r! i lvrYr. MNYn foYe 1•f • I~ V .I•NL 40f1•• 7a 1171M ,i~••-.../•1u/ 4rf •f ~ )U 4/1I<M.a M.. l••tN 1101 •waw ••.ra s.... tt.•11- u,•y. n.a•i,r .~:1.1~d..~!'1f-C~~. t°_1Gl@_..__-_ ~ p++)u r. r+¢I.1 >y)o. wr D.e 1.11•'11 .^r iwa au..rti. 771a? / ..w . n)1 . f••• 1.sr r r . u.. •y1. nr+.. ~.u Irs11 +1h1•.1/mar-c.l ?Yaa I ~ N 1N0 • Rrt1 •I r•-. /..1H 1ri..y f..11 111.1 ' 1'~ - I11e f t` •1111 H1n? Y •Y/K a"hI•~t•1• ~ r/ nr.v IYw) 1 . / i. I . 11 I ~ (I L~, ' ~ ~ hi ~ II-ti~ ;r~••• I fir--~ ~ ~ .1,~, ' M ~r`-1 I~e./_e p°' : L,1 s.\w\ I Is=_-~ II T - IILL'LJ11 ~ . ! { o.\~ Ml I`.~ • btlo4 ~ GI I, I eeo.~l~..seY I• I' 1l ' ~ Ion--1 u ~ ~ _ ~ I ~ ~~i~!~ . = I ~ . _ 11VU~~ ~ `F.~UVIIVI:.~ I ~~-w' U I U ~r ~ `~~'Q'~1' II i 1 ~ 1 I It ~ l a ~ I: ( ~ ~ I ~ (.,e V4M II (IM y1 f?Ob.r7 II I •Awr/ I 1~w.ww `7 He r. I svro ~ I 1 .w.w~ y\.., LL ~..I o.. ...m • ( •(M91 (MVl I (NOM) i . )1. +o , f M . I ~ if n-..\,~ ~ ~\l l1 I - ~ ; \ I ne.+ , Ii I re.l Iwwl~,~ _ _14 ~ ~ I ~ I I I I l 1f,~ ,..,w,w VA1L ATHLETIC CLUB Second Floor Plan u w~'+ 9>•~1 wr It•H 0•~.1w (w wtl,•.~ 1 .w,. r,l \.oa(++\~0~101', fmti srR-t'-p• 0(lthaol Buc1+Y. Nchuatt . onwoa.ry +r+ti+r I.fe aa\~s(• yye.a/iun.~.rw.r.Kwr ~ma• Ocs 9 • s) 'fie ' • s.wv«r.vr Svo a{ o ~xx :a sa octt FT ~ m'0 ra p.r. 9• ao•49 I ~ . 1..? ./y tl t .n fw.A I ~ 1/ ' G L/L~~.C I L 1 . • I ' lw wl yy '~7~~,~J tw, 1 U ~ ~ - Iwo) Ir~, I...'vl lM.l I . ~ F a~ ) I Q I V I _ x u.w ..I ..r ~ ?...•.w ti. V (MV) h.y (N,r) IM+I fY. wl fr., w) fi.. K) (M Vl w .-.a ...r w. w. ` ~ !j, w... o... I I I I I I f I i 1 l I I ~I ~ ( ' r...,..... ....«wi, _ . a/NIL ATHLETIC CLUB 7hli(1 Floor Plan .i ~ wnJ', II.wM n•N 1.....»+.. I+Y.a~1..q. hM.`•nrM O++~ . I . 1«~... ~..+wp . :q ~ j 1 10+'»••/..L Iw.. .,1 wn. w.aw w.,f .Iartu.d lv.4f. A.clJr, d~ I.M.1'•P ~ . i I.nN.u Iw ,f L Y1f~/.~.+..w.MMww/ 1 I .k....../tiW H•Ix p+a.f ~+~Mi+a +.r P.~ 1 4~1~ S 1f ~ _ ~ a... { VAIL ATHLETIC CLUB September 11, 1993 . S1~I? - STA~1 Lr~NT (~~PRC~,P(~5,~ TN~PRnV~v t The Vail Athletic Club (VAC) agrees as part of the implementation, of our SDD proposal to make the follotiving improvements: j~,dsc~ne - Fist Meadow i~r-~ / Vail Va11PV jive The VAC will extend the curb and sidewalk 6'-0" along East Meadow Drive and 8'- 0" along Vail Valley Drive to create a continuous, heated, rectangular concrete paver sideway extending from west end of the VAC service/parking drive on East Meadocv Dnve to the Gore Creek Bridge onVail Valley Drive. This will be coordinated with the town engineer. VVe will re~~ise the curb_line at intersection of East Meadow Drive and Vail Valley Drive in accordance with the "entry feature" concepts put forward in the Vail Village Maste i Plan and as shown on the site plan. At the "entry feature" and partially along Vail Valley Drive, we will eliminate the existing retainng wall to bring the landscape down to the level of the sidewalk. We will reface the existing landscape retaining walls along the garage and Vail Valley Drive with stone. ~1~'e will incorporate signage to inform vehicles that East Meadow Drive is a ".pedestrian area" open only to vehicles on "official business" with the VAC and the Mountain House. «~e will ~~~ork with the Design Review Board and AIPP to supplement the existing streetlainps along the VAC side of Vail Valley and East Meadow Drives. ~~~e will create a new car pull-off guest drop-off area directly in front of the new hotel/health club entry. This area dvill be paved with granite pavers and heated. We will need consent from the to~~n's authorities that short-term parking in the- opposite direction will be permitted here. The creation off the new hotel health club entry and car pull-off along East Meadow Drive should result lpinimal disruption to the existing vegetation in the landscaped area above the existing garage. All necessary steps will be taken throughout the course of consti-uction to protect the existing vegetation. New drainage grates will be introduced to handle melting runoff at East Meadow . Drive. This will be coordinated with the town engineer. We will replace the existing wood transformer grate with a new steel grate. i. nds apP - (T~re C'reelc / Sot~~h ~icle. ~Ve wiLi work with the town to formalize an informal maintenance agreement regarding the town's property between the VAC and the pedestrian path along Gore Creek. ~AIe will prune the dead brush in the area between the VAC and Gore Creelc~ VUe will remove the existing wood sundeck that is partially on town property, as well as the existing wood utility shed by the hot tubs and the existing wood trash shed at the service/garage drive. V~Te will create a landscaped path from the end of the existing service drive fire lane through to the town property on the south side of the VAC. Vile will construct a new stone terrace at the existing upper health club/swivt,ming pool level along the south side of the building as shown on the site plan. ~,ilciin~ F.x~ering We will restucco the entire outside of the building. The stucco color will be light, natural color. There will be a stone base by the new entry. We will be installing a new wood shingle roof throughout ~dVe will be introducing new wood trim and roof overhangs as shown on the elevations. Vile will be revising the existing porches, balconies and decks with new wood trim to create the more traditional porches shown on the elevations. Mlle will be extending the existing dining deck along. the south side of the restaurant to connect with the new hotel lounge. VVe will be constructing a new on-grade hotel/health club entry on East Meadow Drive. . Mlle will be extending the north wall of the restaurant 6"-0" to the north and filling in an existing 28' x 9' "indentation" along the south side of the duung terraceo ale will be installing new wood windows and doors throughout . Vile will be adding new dormers at the fourth floor level along both the north and south sides of the existing stucture. Vie wi11 be adding new chimneys throughout for the new gas fireplaces. . j~~r Tmt~rovementc - ~~i C'~ The improvements to the health club will not be extensive, they will focus on increasing the spa and cardiovascular capacity of the club and adding new doors and windows along the south wall of the upper level in order to introduce more natural light into, the club. Most areas of the club stay as they area We will be adding new floors at the upper health club Level above the weight room and the existing racquetball court. We will be creating a new staff locker/lounge area at the lower health club Level. . j~Qrinr Imnrnv~~tS - C'~g~ Our SDD proposal will create the need for an additional ~ cars to be parked on site. We will be relocating a portion of the existing laundry facility to create room for 3 additional cars and eliminating two storage rooms to create room for an additional 4 cars. The rem ;Wing 3 cars will be accomodated within the existing garage ~ . through a valet parking arrangement jnrPcior Improvemenrc - uQtel We will be creating a new double-high hotel lobby and lounge area which will connect to the new hoteUhealth club entry. There will be a new open stair to a balcony above the lobby at the second floor. We will be renovating and revising the existing conference room on the first floor, adding a new boardroom at the second floor and creating a new meeting room along the south side the first floor of the building. We will be relocating two. employee units from the fourth floor to the first floor. The other two employee units will be relocated to the third floor. These units will be maintained on-site, as per a previous agreement, for the life of the structure. We will be eliminating 6 existing DU°s and adding 24 new AU's to create a new room mix of 3 DU's and 52 AU's. The average size of our new hotel room (AU) will be increase by 54 square feet to 478 square feet from 424 square feet All of the existing hotel rooms will be totally renovated. All of the bathrooms will be renovated and made larger. in~-ericir ~mprovemenrs e hiealt ~ - . The iniprove~nents to the health club will not be extensive, they will focus on increasing the spa anti cardiovascular capacity of the club and adding new doors and windows along the south wa11 of the upper level in order to introduce more . natural light into. the clubo lost areas of the club stay as they arse Mlle wi11 be adding new floors at the upper health club level above the weight room . and the existing racquetball court ale will be creating a new staff locker/lounge area at the lower health club levels . ~nYeri~r Trrt~vPr~enYS e C:ara~ Our SDD proposal will create the need for an additional ~ cars to be parked on sites V~Ie will be relocating a portion of the existing laundry facility to create room for 3 additional cars and eliminating two storage rooms to create room for an additional ~ carse The rem fining 3 cars will be acCOmodated within the existing garage. . through a valet parking arrangement, Tn~eri~r T~,rnvPV~~gc - NntPl VVe will be creating a new double-high hotel lobby and lounge area which will connect to the new hotel/laealth club entryo There will be a new open stair to a balcony above the lobby at the second floors We will be renovating and revising the existing conference room on the first floor, adding a new boardroom at the second floor and creating a new greeting room along the south side the first floor of the buildings ~hle will be relocating two employee units from the fourth floor to the first floors The other two employee units will be relocated to the third floors 'These units will be gnaigitained on-site, as per a previous agreement, for the life of the structured VVe will be eliminating 6 existing DU`s and adding 24 new AU's to create a new room gnlx of 3 DU's and 52 AU`sa 'The average size of our new hotel room (AU) will be increase by ~4 square feet to 4~~ square feet from 424 square feet All of the existing hotel rooms will be totally renovatedo A11 of the bathrooms will be renovated and grade largera Other Im~rwPr~n s Most of the existing mechazucal systems will renovated and relocated to a plenum above the existing double-high space at the restaurant onto a new mechanical room at the lower health club leve.L V`1e will be installing a new S-storyy hydrauhc, passenger elevator within the existing shaft to serve the hotel and health club. We will be installing a new S-storyy hydraulic freight elevator for "back of the house" services. The existing dumbwaiter at the west end of the building will remain. We will be installing a trash compactor and roll away trash containers to handle the hotel/health club trash. The restaurant grease and trash will be handled in a' similar way. 'T'rash storage will be at the west end_ of the building and at new trash strorage closet at the garage. We will be adding a sprinkler system to the hotel portion of the building. The entire building will be brought up to the current handicap requirements. r~~l~ . We hope t~ start construction in the spring of 1994 and open the renovated VAC in by the start of the 1994-5 ski season. . - request. ~ ' The PEC asked staff to pass on to Council that they supported the Council's efforts to permanently restrict the six existing employee housing units. A request for a worksession for the establishment of a Special Development District to allow the expansion of the Vail Athletic Club, located at 352 East Meadow Drive, and more specifically described as follows: - A parcel of land in Tract B, Vail Village, First Filing, Town of Vail, Eagle County, Cobrado, more particuiariy described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast comer of said Tract B; thence N 79°46'00° W along the Northerly fine of Vail Village, First Filing, and along the Northerfy line of said Tract B 622.86 feet; thence S 06°26'52° W a distance of 348.83 feet to the Southwest' comer of that parcel of land descnbed Li Book 191 at Page 139 as recorded ~ - January 10, 1966 and filed in Reception No. 102978 in the Eagle Caunty Records, said comer also being the ,True Point of Beginning; thence S 79°04'08' E and along the Southerly line of said parcel 200.00 feet to the Southeast comer thereof; thence N 62°52'00° E and along the Northerly line of that parcel of land described in Book 222 at Page 513 as recorded in 1971 in the Eagle County Records, a distance of 66.78 feet to the Northeasterly comer'of said parcel of land; said comer being on the Westerly right-of-way line of Gore Creek Road, as platted in Vail Village, Fifth Filing; thence N 27°13'37' W a distance of 77.37 feet along said Westerly right-ot-way line of Gore Creek Road; thence N 89°29'22" W a distance of 12.80 feet to the Northeasterfy comer of that parcel of land described in Book 191, Page 139 as recorded January 10, 1966 and filed in Reception No. 102978 in the Eagle County Records; thence Northwesterly 26.51 feet along the arc of a 37.50 feet radius _ curve to the left having a central angle of 40`30'00" whose chord bears N 53`d0'00" W a distance of 25.96 feet to a point of tangency; thence N 73`55'00` W and along said tangent 166.44 feet; thence N 85°10'21" W a distance of 50.40 feet to the Northwesterly comer of the Mountain Hzus Parcel; thence S 02°i 8'00° W and along the easterly line of said Mountain Haus Parcel a distance of 100.00 feet to the Southeasterly comer thereof; thence S 45°13'53" E a distance of 38.70 feet to the True Point of Beginning, containing 30,486 square feet, - more or less. Applicant: Vail Athletic Club Planner: Shelly Mello Shelly Mello made a brief presentation per the staff memo and stated that her presentation would focus on the changes that had been made to the proposed Vail Athletic Club expansion since the worksession with the PEC and DRB on June 28, 1993. Stan Cope stated that they were trying to create a hotel. He said that the proposed fifth floor would consist of loft bedrooms. He stated that he would like to see this property become a. small hotel concentrating on suites. He said that they have decreased the dwelling units in order to increase the combination accommodation units. He stated that (heir goal was to have forty-nine accommodation units. He stated that jthe modifications that they .had made were an attempt to address the concerns that the PEC members had ' from the June 28, 1993 worksession. Kathy Langenwalter stated to the PEC members that she would like them to comment on whether the SDD process was appropriate for the project. - - Planning and Environmental Ca~nmissian Juty 26, 1993 4 F Y Michael Barcley, the architect for the project, stated that they were proposing to drop the height of the dormers 18°. He said the peak of the dormers would be about 4 feet above the ridge line, about 46 feet above the street. He said that because of the way the building sits on the site, the west section was much further from the street. He said that they were hoping that raising the existing ridge line 5 feet was reasonable. He said that " the dormers would be recessed more into the roof. He said that by doing this, th"ey would be able to eliminate one of the fifth floor bedrooms and that this would help reduce the GRFA for the proposal. He said that the final area that he focused on was the impact on the shading of Meadow Drive and that they were moving the shade line 3 feet further back on the east side of the building and two feet back towards the building towards the west • and center portions of the building. He said that the existing building casts a shadow well into Meadow Drive. Diana Donovan stated that she wanted Michael Barcley to discuss the patio on the south side of the building and its proximity to the property line. Shelly Mello stated that they could have that the deck portion of the site staked for the next site visit. Jeff Bowen stated that it was a shame that the athletic facilities had to be reduced in order to accommodate the parking. He inquired whether there would be a way to reduce the new parking requirement to five or six additional parking spaces so that the athletic facilities would not be reduced. Stan Cope stated that in his discussions with the Town Council concerning the parking pay-in-lieu program, that Jim Gibson had said that some of the parking spaces should be provided on-site. Dalton Williams stated That he was trying to look teri to fifteen years into the future, and see how the different boards would be able to pedestrianize Vail. He inquired whether the applicants would be willing to pay into the parking fund for all their parking in order to reclaim Meadow Drive as a pedestrian area. He said that this would help reduce traffic congestion in the area and that on-site parking could be restricted to loading only. Shelly Mello stated that there are already fifty-six parking spaces that have not been provided on-site and that Town Council was concerned about increasing the number of parking spaces to be located off-site in the parking stlvcture. Stan Cope stated that they have spent time trying to devise a workable solution to the . parking issue. He said that he realizes that the conflict of people and vehicles in this area " needs to be addressed. He added that he felt that the more pedestrianized that this part of East Meadow. Drive becomes, that this will be better for all parties involved. Planning and Environmental Commission July 26, 1993 5 Dalton Williams stated that he felt that this was the only site in Town where this t)~pe of parking scenario would be acceptable. Conceming employee housing, he said that he felt that additional employee housing units should be added. He felt that the building mass was acceptable in this location. " Allison Lassoe stated that she disagreed with Dalton's comment about the massing and that she felt that it was excessive. She did feel that the changes in mass and bulk were a step forward. Conceming parking, she stated that she feels that parking should be required on-site. With regard to the employee housing, she stated that she would like to see additional employee housing units added. She said that she felt that this project should not use the SDD process. Jeff Bowen stated that he felt that the proposed bulk and mass was acceptable and he appreciated the applicant's effort to work with the PEC. He said that the applicant's work to save the large trees on the site was positive. He said he liked the idea of the Porte cochere, but .was also concerned about how the Porte cochere would effect pedestrianization. He said that he felt that the additional accommodation units were positive. Jeff stated that he felt that possibly one additional employee housing unit should ' be added on-site. He said that he felt that this project did not fit the SDD concept. Michael Barcley inquired about the SDD concept. Kathy Langenwalter stated that the SDD concept was devised basically as a zoning designation. Kristan Pritz stated that the variance process is often much stricter than an SDD, individual circumstances will dictate whether it is.appropriate to request an SDD. Greg Amsden stated that the new access via the Porte cochere is positive. He said that he liked the original exterior design of the building better than what was currently being proposed. Greg stated that he was in favor of the SDD, primarily because there would be numerous variances which would not have hardship reasons to justify variances. Diana Donovan stated that she was not in favor of an SDD for this proposed redevelopment as SDD's areaway to break the zoning rules. Concerning employee housing units, she stated that she would like to see additional employee housing. She said that she would like to see the bulk decreased. She said that the changes .the applicant has made are positive. "She said that the parking issue still needed work. She wondered whether it would be possible to actually connect the parking structure via a tunnel to the Vail Athletic Club and the Mountain Haus. She said that she would like to see this entire area pedestrianized. ~ " Kathy Langenwalter stated that Bill Anderson is still not comfortable with the mass and bulk of the building, particularly the height. She said that she felt that this redevelopment proposal did not meet the criteria for an SDD. She said that she felt that additional employee housing was necessary for this site. She said that density was not a big Planning and Environmental Commission July 26, 1993 S concem to her, but that GRFA was still an issue. Kathy stated that parking was sti{I a significant issue. She stated that the mass and bulk was get`ung better, but that the west side still needed to be decreased. Jim Lamont, a representative from the East Village Homeowners Association, stated that he had attended the Town Council meeting and that the overall Town policy concerning parking was discussed. He said that the Council was concerned with grants of special privilege. _ Shelly Mello stated that the athletic club facilities were not originally counted as common area when the Vail Athletic Ciub was designed in 1977 and that staff felt that it would be unfair to the applicant to penalize them by considering the athletic club facilities common area at this time. Jim Lamont stated that he did not yet know where the Homeowners Association stood on this project. He felt that the SDD concept was becoming overused by developers. He stated that the public was becoming dubious about special development districts. He stated that the Town needed to further develop the SDD criteria. He said that the Homeowners Association would support an SDD that did not exceed existing zoning standards. Kristan Pritz asked Jim Lamont whether the Homeowners Association would accept an SDD as long as the underlying zoning standards were not exceeded. Jim Lamont stated that this was correct. Stan Cope stated that this project would be over the allowed standards, but that a full service hotel (i.e. The Sonnenalp) did not always conform to the standard that common area be 35%. Dalton Williams stated that he was on a task force that discussed this issue and that they felt that their could be exceptions (i.e. a modest hotel versus a five star hotel) when justified to increase square footage for common area. Kristan Pritz stated that the .staff has struggled with this issue and that they were trying to look at it broadly and look at what type of operation the applicants were proposing with the redevelopment of the Vail Athletic Club. In general, requests for additional square footage for common area have been supported by staff. Allison Lassoe stated that she would Pike to see a redevelopment proposal that would be a benefit to the Town,. Jeff Bowen stated that he sympathized with Jim Lamont's comments, but that in this instance, there is a problem that exists and that maybe this constitutes a hardship. He stated that the existing building may not have been built with a lot of foresight and that it currently does not meet the Town's needs. He said that the rules may need Yo be bent Planning and Environmental Commission July 26, 1993 in this instance because it is in file Town's best interests for this site to redevelop. ' It should be noted that Jeff Bowen left the meeting at approximately 4:00 p.m. Greg Amsden stated it would be helpful to have the numbers in a format that lent. themselves more easily for compar'son purposes. Diana Donovan inquired what the percentage of "dead space" was on the site. Jim Lamont stated that the special circumstances of the Vail Athletic Club should be clearly stated. He stated that it needs to be clearly defined that the Vail Athletic Club has available GRFA. Kathy Langenwalter stated to the applicant that there would be a significant number of variances required v?~th the project as proposed and that these need to be looked at and minimized or eliminated wherever necessary. • Stan Cope stated that he did not know what to cut back on and how much to cut back. He asked the PEC to give him direction as to what they should be focusing on before the next meeting. Diana Donovan stated, that the applicant was on the right track and that Michael Barcley had done a good job in addressing the PEC's concerns. Kristan Pritz summarized the PEC's feelings that the variance process was being recommended over the SDD process and that at this point, approximately five variances would be necessary. She said that the SDD concept applies to undeveloped as well as developed sites. Kristan Pritz stated there are some limitations as to what is possible to approve with the variance process given the criteria and findings. She said that the PEC and staff needed to discuss what the members thoughts were concerning special development district criteria in order for the staff to be clear upon the PEC's expectations. Diana Donovan stated that the existing building does not conform to the zoning standards and that consequently any subsequent development tivill not be in conformance with the zoning regulations. She said that is why she feels that this project could qualify for variances. Kathy Langenwalter stated that both the PEC and the DRB members like the existing architecture of the building. • 5. A request for a conditional use permit to allow an expansion of the Vail Associates vehicle maintenance shop located at the NW 1/4 NW 1/4 Section 7 and the SW 1/4 SW 7/4 Section 6, Township 5 South Range 80 W of the 60th P.M./Vail Associates. Applicant: Vail Associates, Inc., represented by Tim Kehoe and Jack Hunn Planner. Jim Cumutte Planning and Environmental Commission • July 26, 1993 8. ORDINANCE NO. 27 Series of 1993 AN OR®INANCE APPROVING SPECIAL DEVELOPIiff1ENT DISTRICT (KNOWN AS SDD NO. 30, THE VAIL ATHLETIC CLllf3) AND THE DEVELOP~IiENT PLAN IN ACCORDANCE lNITH CHAPTER 18.40 OF THE VAIL flflt1NICIPAL CODE AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO WHEREAS, Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code authorizes Special Development Districts within the Town; and WHEREAS, the developer, JWT/1987 Vail Limited Partnership aka The Vail Athletic Club, has submitted an application for a Special Development approval for a certain parcel of property within the Town known as The Vail Athletic Club to be known as Special Development District No. 30 ("SDD No. 30"); and WHEREAS, the establishment of the requested SDD No. 30 will insure unified and coordinated development within the Town of Vail in a manner suitable for the area in which it is situated; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission has recommended approval of the proposed SDD; and WHEREAS, the Town Council considers that it is reasonable, appropriate, and beneficial to the Town and its citizens, inhabitants, and visitors to establish such SDD No. 30. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. Amendment Procedures Fulfilled. Plannina Commission Report. The approval procedures prescribed in Chapter 18..40 of the Vail Municipal Code have been fulfilled, and the Town Council has received the report of the Planning and Environmental Commission recommending approval of the proposed development plan for SDD No. 30. Section 2. Special Development District No. 30 SDD No. 30 and the development plan therefore, are hereby approved for the redevelopment of The Vail Athletic Club. Section 3. Purpose SDD No. 30 is established to insure comprehensive development and use of an area that will be harmonious with the general character of the Town of Vail. The development is regarded as complimentary to the Town by the Town Council and meets the design standards as set forth in Section 18.40 of the Municipal Code. As stated in the staff memorandum dated September 27, Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1993 1 1993, there are significant aspects of SDD No. 30 which are difficult to satisfy through the imposition of the standards of the Public Accommodation zone district. SDD No. 30 allows for greater flexibility in the development of the land than would be possible under the current zoning of the property. SDD No. 30 provides an appropriate development plan that maintains the unique character of this site and the surrounding area. Section 4. Development Plan A. The development plan for SDD No. 30 is approved and shall constitute the plan for development within the Special Development District. The development pla I is comprised of those plans submitted by the developer and consists of the following documents. 1. Site Plan by Michael Barclay, Architect, dated September 24, 1993, (Sheet number 1). 2. A survey completed by Inter-Mountain Engineering dated June 8, 1993. 3. Elevations by Michael Barclay, Architect, dated September 11, 1993 and September 27, 1993, (Sheets numbers 2 and 3). 4. Floor plans by Michael Barclay, Architect, dated September 11, 1993, (Sheet numbers 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9). 5. Building Sections by Michael Barclay, Architect, dated September 11, 1993 (Sheet number 10). 6. Shadow Studies for September 21st and December 21st by Michael Barclay, . Architect; dated September 23, 1993 (Sheet number 11). 7. Other general submittal documents that define the development standards of the Special Development District. 6. The development plan shall adhere to the following: 1. Acreage: 30,486 square feet 2. Permitted Uses: a. Accommodation Units. b. Dwelling Units. c. Employee Housing Units. d. Health Club. e. Restaurant/Retail. 3. Accessory Uses: All other uses accessory or incidental to the allowed uses. Ordinance No. 27, Series of t993 2 4. Setbacks: The setbacks shall be those shown on the site plan. 5. Density: Approval of this development plan shall permit fifty-two (52) Accommodation Units (AU), three (3) Dwelling Units (DU) and four (4) Type IV Employee Housing Units. The developer shall permanently restrict the proposed 52 Aus as short-term rental units and the 52 Aus shall not be subdivided in the future to allow for individual ownership. The Condominium Declarations shall be amended to include this point before an occupancy permit will be released for the project. 6. Building Height: Building height shall be as indicated on the elevations. 7. Parking: A minimum of twenty-six (26) parking spaces shall be provided within the existing parking structure. The developer shall pay into the parking fund for an additional three spaces per Section 18.52.160 ~ of the Vait iVdunicipai Code or as arnended.(~AA9-per spaas - ~`'~1;880 9a~P-t). With this provision, the developer shall remove the two exterior parking spaces adjacent to the parking structure's entry and this area shall be designated for loading and delivery use only. An additional space within the interior of the parking structure shall also be removed from the proposal. 8. GRFA /Common Area: The GRFA allowed shall be 32,282 square feet with 24,687 square feet for Accommodation Units, 6,252 square feet for Dwelling Units, 1,383 square feet for Employee Housing Units and a total of 16,992 square feet dedicated for common area. 9. Site Coverage: The site coverage shall not exceed 21,350 square feet per the approved site plan. 10. Employee Housing: The developer shall provide four (4) Type 1V Employee Housing Units on the site which shall be restricted per Chapter 18.57 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code prior to the release of any building permits for the project. The developer shall provide one one-bedroom and one two-bedroom employee housing unit and Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1993 3 restrict them per Chapter 18.57 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. The employee housing restriction agreement shall be signed and submitted to the staff for approval before a building permit will be released for the project. The proposed employee units shall provide housing for a total of six employees. The units shall meet the minimum standards as per Chapter 18.57 of the Town of Uail Municipal Code. 11. Landscaping: The area of the site to be landscaped shall be as indicated on the landscape plan. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted to the Design Review Board for their approval. The developer shall k provide a landscape plan to the DRB and contribute a minimum of $20,000.00 to the design and redevelopment of the landscaping clan on the south side of the building between the building and the streamwalk. w+th th ~ natural ae~it+sn- This work includes improving and allowing public access through the property via the existing bridge and path on the southwest corner of the building and removing the existing sod and reseeding the area with a natural grass seed mix and possibly adding additional planting. This area is ~te-be-r~turr~d-tc a aa#ural se+~tie~ ~eg+as just south of the willows adjacent to the Vail Athletic Club and extends south to the streamwalk. The developer shall maintain this area in perpetuity. 12. Streetscape: The developer shall install a heated concrete paver walk and lighting per the Town of Vail Streetscape Plan along the perimeter of the Vail Athletic Club property continuing south across along Vail Valley Drive across the Gore Creek Bridge as indicated on the site plan. In addition, the developer shall provide a plan to ~i## the Design Review Board for their approval and shall complete such improvements with the project to improve the signage, landscaping and general pedestrian character of East Meadow Drive as it intersects with the Blue Cow Chute particularly the north side of East Meadow Drive. The objective of this effort is to not only improve the pedestrian character of this area, but to also deter unnecessary vehicular traffic from entering East Meadow Drive. The developer shall contribute a minimum of $100,000.00 for the design and installation of the streetscape improvements. Should the cost of these improvements be Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1993 4 . in excess of $100,000.00, the developer shall be responsible for these costs in their entirety. Stamped engineered drawings shall be submitted for these improvements to the Town of Vail engineer for approval prior to the release of any building permits for the project. the developer shall maintain the sidewalk, lighting and other streetscape improvements in perpetuity. 13. Design Reauirements: At the time of the DRB submittal, the developer shall submit drawings with architectural details of the building. Section 5. Amendments ' Amendments to the approved development. plan which do not change its substance may be approved by the Planning and Environmental Commission at a regularly scheduled public hearing in accordance with the provisions of Section 18.66.060 and 18.40.100. Amendments which do change the substance of the development plan shall be required to be approved by Town Council after the above procedure has been followed. The Community Development Department shall determine what constitutes a change in the substance of the development plan. Section 6. Expiration The developer must begin construction of the Special Development District within three (3) years from the time of its final approval, and continue diligently toward completion of the project. If the developer does not begin and diligently work toward the completion of the Special Development District or any stage of the Special Development District, the developer shall recommend to the Town Council that either the approval of the Special Development District be extended, that the approval of the Special Development District be revoked, or that the Special Development District be amended. Section 7. 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 8. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provisions of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shalt not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1993 5 . violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. INTRODUCED, READ AND PASSED 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. Ordered published. in full this day of 1993. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of .1993. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1993 6 4 ~ . TOba1N OF VAIL GAS FRANCxgsE CALENDAR (Newspaper - Vail Trail - Published Friday) (Council Meetings - 1st and 3rd Tuesdays at 7:30 p.m.) E~CPL~TATION OF EVENT First Council Nlee~ing Introduce and read the proposed ordinance. November 20 1993 {Charter, Section 4.10(a)(b)} (Tuesday) The Council shall order the Notice of Public Hearing and the proposed ordinance published. Council shall set a day, hour, and place for public hearing to be included in said notice. {Charter, Section 4.10(d)} November 18, 1993 Submit Notice of Public Hearing and the proposed (Thursday) ordinance to the Vail Trail for publication on November 26, 1993. November 26, 1993 Publish the Notice of Public Hearing and the (Friday) proposed ordinance in full. obtain two sets of affidavits of Publication. File one with the Town and retain the other for the Company file. {Charter, Section 4.10(d)} Second Council P2eeting Introduce, read and adopt the ordinance. December 7, 1993 Adoption shall require the affirmative vote of (Tuesday) the majority of the entire Council. {Not earlier than seven {Charter, Sections 4.7 and 4.10(e)} (7) days after first publication} December 9, 1993 Present the Ordinance to the Mayor for signature (Thursday) approving the Ordinance. NOT%FY THE FRANCHISE AND CONTRACT UNIT ON 29~-2175 OR 29~-2553 OF ADOPTION. SEND AN ORIGINAY,, SIGNED COPSt OF THE ORDINANCE TO THE FRANCHISE AND CONTRACT UNIT, SUITE 10000 SSPo AS SOON AS POSSIBLE ordinance shall be numbered and recorded in a AFTER ADOPTION book kept for that purpose. Adoption and publication shall be authenticated by signatures of the Mayor and Town Clerk and by certificate of publication. {Charter, Section 4.14} Present to the Clerk for signature the Certificate and Attestation as to Introduction, Reading, Publication, Passage and Signature by Mayor. {C.R.S. 31-32-103) December 10, 1993 Submit the Ordinance and the Certificate as to (Friday) Introduction, Reading, Publication, Passage and Signature by Mayor to the Vail Trail for publication on December 24, 1993. OAT OR BEFORE December 17, 1993 File Acceptance Frith Town Clerk. (Friday) {Colorado PUC Rules of Practice and Procedure, Rule 55(c) (14) } December 24, 1993 Publish the Ordinance and the Certificate as to (Friday) Introduction, Reading, Publication, Passage and Signature by Mayor. Publication following adoption shall be in full or by title as the Council may determine. Obtain two copies of the affidavit of publications File one faith the City and retain the other for the Company file. {Charter, Section 4.10 (f) and (g)} AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AFTER Present to the Clerk for signature the SECOND COUNCIL MEETING Certificate of Clerk as to Transcript of All Proceedings. Send one original set of Acceptance, all affidavits and additional documents to the Franchise and Contract Unit to begin processing the Application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. February l0 199 FRANCHISE ORDINANCE EFFECTI®E DATE (Tuesday) March 1, 1994 (approx.) FILE APPLICATION FOR CPCN ~IITH THE COLORADO PUC (Tuesday) April 1, 1994 (approx.) CPCN EFFECTIVE UPON PUC APPROVAL (Friday) 2 PItOCEEDIAIGS OF THE COIINCIL OF THE TOWN OF ®AI%B COLORI~DO OIJ ldO®EME ER 2 , 19 9 3 The Town Council of the Town of Vail, Eagle County, Colorado, met in session at a regular meeting on November 2, 1993 at 7:30 p.m. in said Municipality. Present: Mayor and and Town Clerk: . Absent: Public Service Company of Colorado, acting by Ron Carpenter, its Mountain South District Manager, then requested the Council to introduce a proposed ordinance granting a franchise by the Town of Vail, entitled: AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A FRANCHISE BY THE TOWN OF VAIL TO PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, THE RIGHT TO FURNISH, SELL AND DISTRIBUTE GAS TO THE TOWN AND TO ALL PERSONS, BUSINESSES, AND INDUSTRY WITHIN THE TOWN AND THE RIGHT TO ACQUIRE, CONSTRUCT, INSTALL, LOCATE, MAINTAIN, OPERATE AND EXTEND INTO, WITHIN AND THROUGH SAID TOWN ALL FACILITIES REASONABLY NECESSARY TO FURNISH, SELL AND DISTRIBUTE GAS WITHIN THE TOWN AND THE RIGHT TO MAKE REASONABLE USE OF ALL STREETS AND OTHER PUBLIC PLACES AND PUBLIC EASEMENTS AS HEREIN DEFINED AS MAY BE NECESSARY; AND FIXING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF. It appearing that all necessary steps had been taken to enable the municipality to permit the ordinance applied for to be introduced and read for the first time at this meeting, the Mayor directed the Town Clerk to read the proposed ordinance to the Council and after the same had been read it was moved by seconded by , that the proposed ordinance be passed on first reading and that this Council desired to further consider the granting of the rights and privileges sought for in said proposed ordinance and that copies of said proposed ordinance and a NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING OF ORDINANCE GRANTING A GAS FRANCHISE TO PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO be published in the Vail Trail, until the time such ordinance is again read and put upon its passage at a meeting of the Town Council to be held on the 7th day of December, 19930 The question, of passage on first reading of the ordinance, being out to vote, voted yes, and voted no, and the ordinance was duly passed on first readings Town Clerk NOTICE OF PIIBI,IC HEARING OF ORDINANCE GRANTING A GAS FRANCHISE TO PIIBI,IC SER®ZCE COA4PAN5C OF COLORADO . PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that at a meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Eagle County, Colorado, at 7:30 p.m. in said Municipality held on December 7, 1993, an ordinance of said Town of Vail, granting a gas franchise to Public Service Company of Colorado, entitledo AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A FRANCHISE BY THE TOWN OF VAIL TO PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, THE RIGHT TO FURNISH, SELL AND DISTRIBUTE GAS TO THE TOWN AND TO ALL PERSONS, BUSINESSES, AND INDUSTRY WITHIN THE TOWN AND THE RIGHT TO ACQUIRE, CONSTRUCT, INSTALL, LOCATE, MAINTAIN, OPERATE AND EXTEND INTO, WITHIN AND THROUGH SAID TOWN ALL FACILITIES REASONABLY NECESSARY TO FURNISH, SELL AND DISTRIBUTE GAS WITHIN THE TOWN AND THE RIGHT TO MAKE REASONABLE USE OF ALL STREETS AND OTHER PUBLIC PLACES AND PUBLIC EASEMENTS AS HEREIN DEFINED AS MAY BE NECESSARY; AND FIXING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF. will come before the Town Council of the Town of Vail for public hearing as to its adoption and passage, as provided by law. Said ordinance was introduced and read for the first time at the regular meeting of said Town Council held on November 2, 1993. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Municipal Seal this day of 1993. Town Clerk PROCEED%Y~TGS OF THE COIIYdCIL OF THE TOB~RT OF' ~7A%Y,, EAGLE COTTNTY, COLORADO HELD OItT DECEMBER 7, 8993 The Town Council of the Town of Vail, Eagle County, Colorado, met in session at a regular meeting on December 7, 1993 at 7:30 p.m. in said Municipality. Present: Mayor and and its Town Clerk. Absent: . The Town Clerk presented to the Council the affidavit of the editor and/or publisher of the Vail Trail as to publication of the NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING OF ORDINANCE GRANTING A GAS FRANCHISE TO PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO and as to publication of the proposed ordinance, entitled: AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A FRANCHISE BY THE TOWN OF VAIL TO PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, THE RIGHT TO FURNISH, SELL AND DISTRIBUTE GAS TO THE TOWN AND TO ALL PERSONS, BUSINESSES, AND INDUSTRY WITHIN THE TOWN AND THE RIGHT TO ACQUIRE, CONSTRUCT, INSTALL, LOCATE, MAINTAIN, OPERATE AND EXTEND INTO, WITHIN AND THROUGH SAID TOWN ALL FACILITIES REASONABLY NECESSARY TO FURNISH, SELL AND DISTRIBUTE GAS WITHIN THE TOWN AND THE RIGHT TO MAKE REASONABLE USE OF ALL STREETS AND OTHER PUBLIC PLACES AND PUBLIC EASEMENTS AS HEREIN DEFINED AS MAY BE NECESSARY; AND FIXING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF. Said affidavit indicated that said notice and said proposed ordinance were published in the entire and regular issue of the Vail Trail, on November 26, 1993, which affidavit of publication was ordered made a part of the records of the Town Council. Said NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING OF ORDINANCE GRANTING A GAS FRANCHISE TO PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO states that the proposed ordinance had been introduced and read for the first time at the regular meeting of the Council held on November 2, 1993 and that at a meeting of the Council on December 7, 1993, such proposed ordinance would come before the Council for consideration by it as to its adoption and passage as provided by law. Said proposed ordinance granting to Public Service Company of Colorado said franchise was thereupon put upon its final passage. The Mayor directed the Town Clerk to introduce and again read the proposed ordinance to the Council and after the same had been read for the second and final time, it was moved by seconded by that such proposed ordinance be now passed and adopted as an ordinance of the Municipality. The yes and no votes being called, the following voted yes, and the following voted no, It appearing that a majority of all the Council members voted yes, said ordinance was declared passed and adopted by the Town Council of the Town of Vail and was numbered as Ordinance No. . member of the Council, directed that the ordinance which had just been passed, upon its signing by the Mayor, be recorded~in the Ordinance Book and authenticated in such book by the signatures of the Mayor and Town Clerk, and that the Town Clerk issue a certificate as to the proper introduction, reading, publication, passage and signature of said ordinance, and that said ordinance be published in the Vail Trail on December 24, 1993. Town Clerk WoTIC~ oF' FIx~ PDBLICATIOId OItD%IdANCE X10 0 The above Ordinance entitled: AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A FRANCHISE BY THE TOWN OF VAIL TO PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, THE RIGHT TO FURNISH, SELL AND DISTRIBUTE GAS TO THE TOWN AND TO ALL PERSONS, BUSINESSES, AND INDUSTRY WITHIN THE TOWN AND THE RIGHT TO ACQUIRE, CONSTRUCT, INSTALL, LOCATE, MAINTAIN, OPERATE AND EXTEND INTO, WITHIN AND THROUGH SAID TOWN ALL FACILITIES REASONABLY NECESSARY TO FURNISH, SELL AND DISTRIBUTE GAS WITHIN THE TOWN AND THE RIGHT TO MAKE REASONABLE USE OF ALL STREETS AND OTHER PUBLIC PLACES AND PUBLIC EASEMENTS AS HEREIN DEFINED AS MAY BE NECESSARY; AND FIXING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF. provides for a grant of franchise by the Town of Vail to Public Service Company, for the period specified in and subject to the conditions, terms and provisions contained in the franchise, a non-exclusive right to furnish, sell and distribute gas to the Town and to all residents of the Town. Subject to the conditions, terms and provisions contained in the franchise, the Town also grants to the Company a non-exclusive right to acquire, construct, install, locate, maintain, operate and extend into, within and through the Town all facilities reasonably necessary to furnish, sell and distribute gas within and through the Town and a non-exclusive right to make reasonable use of the streets and other public places as may be necessary to carry out the terms of the franchise. These rights extend to all areas of the Town as it is now constituted and to additional areas as the Town may increase in size by annexation or otherwise. Copies of this Ordinance are available for public inspection and acquisition in the office of the Clerk. Town Clerk CERTZF'%CATE OF' CI,ERR AS TO ZNTRODIICTZONe READING PIIELZCAT%ON® PASSAGE AND SZGNATLTRE BY AgAXOR OF' ORD%NANCE NO o I, , the duly qualified and acting Town Clerk of the Town of Vail, Eagle County, Colorado, certify that the annexed Ordinance No. of said Municipality granting to Public Service Company of Colorado a franchise for the purpose therein mentioned was, introduced and read and passed on first reading at the regular meeting of the Town Council of said Municipality, held on November 2, 1993. That thereafter said Ordinance No. , as introduced and read, after having been published in full in the Vail Trail, on November 26, 1993, prior to the time when such ordinance was to be again read, was again read at a meeting of the Town Council of said Municipality on December 7, 1993, and after so being read was by a majority vote of all the Council members of said Municipality by yes and no vote, regularly passed and adopted as Ordinance No. . That after said ordinance was passed and adopted by the Town Council of said Municipality, it was presented to the Mayor of said Municipality, and was immediately signed by the Mayor and attested by me as Town Clerk under the Seal of the Municipality. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Seal of the Town of Vail, Eagle County, Colorado, on Town Clerk CERT%F%CATE OF CLERR ~S TO RECORD%NG ~dD ~IITRENT%C~T%NG OF ORDINAYdCE NOe I, the duly qualified and acting Town Clerk of the Town of Vail, Eagle County, Colorado, certify that on I did cause to be recorded in the Ordinance Book of the Town of Vail, Ordinance No. granting Public Service Company of Colorado a gas franchise as signed by Mayor, and attested by me as Town Clerk, under the Seal of the Municipality, which Ordinance so signed and attested and recorded in the Ordinance Book was authenticated in the Ordinance Book by the signature of the Mayor and of myself as Town Clerk of said Municipality under the Seal thereof. Dated at the Town of Vail, this day of 1994. Town Clerk CERTIF%CATE OF CLERK AS TO TRAYdSCRYPT OF ALL PROCEEDIY~TGS I, the duly qualified and acting Town Clerk of the Town of Vail, certify that the foregoing transcript of all proceedings relative to the passage and adoption of Ordinance No. of the Town of Vail, Eagle County, Colorado, is a full, true and correct copy and transcript of all affidavits and other papers on file in my office and a full, true and correct copy and transcript of all minutes and records of said Municipality relative theretoe 1. Proceedings/Minutes of the Town Council of said Municipality dated November 2, 1993, relative thereto; 2. Affidavit of the editor and/or publisher of the Vail Trail, as to publication of the attached NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING OF ORDINANCE GRANTING A GAS FRANCHISE TO PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO and as to publication in full of the proposed franchise on November 26, 1993; 3. Proceedings/Minutes of the Town Council of said Municipality dated December 7, 1993, relative thereto; 4. Signed copy of Ordinance No. attested by myself as Town Clerk; 5. CERTIFICATE OF CLERK AS TO INTRODUCTION, READING, PUBLICATION, PASSAGE AND SIGNATURE BY MAYOR OF ORDINANCE NO. ; 6. Affidavit of the editor and/or publisher of the Vail Trail, as to publication of Ordinance No. with certificate of myself as Town Clerk as to passage and signing by Mayor attached thereto on December 24, 1993; 7. CERTIFICATE OF CLERK AS TO RECORDING AND AUTHENTICATING OF ORDINANCE NO. ; . 8. Acceptance by Public Service Company of Colorado of Ordinance No. as of , Town Clerk. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have affixed my hand at the Town of Vail, Colorado, this day of 1994, and attested the same with the Seal of said Municipality. Town Clerk a t _1 Y ORDINANCE NO.: 29-Series of 1993 AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A FRANCHISE BY THE TOWN OF VAIL TO PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, THE RIGHT TO FURNISH, SELL AND DISTRIBUTE GAS TO THE TOWN AND TO ALL PERSONS, BUSINESSES, AND INDUSTRY WITHIN THE TOWN AND THE RIGHT TO ACQUIRE, CONSTRUCT, INSTALL, LOCATE, MAINTAIN, OPERATE AND EXTEND INTO, WITHIN AND THROUGH SAID TOWN ALL FACILITIES REASONABLY NECESSARY TO FURNISH, SELL AND DISTRIBUTE GAS WITHIN THE TOWN AND THE RIGHT TO MARE REASONABLE USE OF ALL STREETS AND OTHER PUBLIC PLACES AND PUBLIC EASEMENTS AS HEREIN DEFINED AS MAY BE NECESSARY; AND FIXING THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF. i ' °~RBLE OF COYd'Y~asi1TS 1. DEFINITIONS 1 2. GRANT OF FRANCHISE 3 2.1 Grant of Franchise . . 3 2.2 Term of Franchise 4 3. FRANCHISE FEE 5 3.1 Franchise Fee . 5 3.2 Payment Schedule 5 3.3 Change of Franchise Fee and Other Franchise Terms 6 3.4 Franchise~Fee Payment in Lieu of Other Fees 7 4. SUPPLY, CONSTRUCTION AND DESIGN 7 4.1 Sugply of Gas 7 4.2 Restoration of Service S 4.3 Obligations Regarding Company Facilities 8 4.4 Excavation and Construction 8 4.5 Relocation of Company Facilities 9 4.6 Service to New Areas 9 4.7 Town Not Required to Advance Funds 9 4.8 Technological Improvements 10 5. COMPLIANCE 10 5.1 Town Regulation 10 5.2 Compliance With Town Requirements 11 5.3 Town Review of Construction and Design 11 5.4 Compliance with PUC Regulations 12 5.5 Compliance With Air and Water Pollution Laws 12 5.6 Inspection 12 6. PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 13 6.1 Public Utilities Commission Regulation 13 7. REPORTS TO TOWN . . 13 7.1 Reports on Company Operations . . 13 7.2 Copies of Tariffs, All PUC Filings . 14 8. INDEA'~IFICATION OF THE TOOT . . . . . . . 14 8.1 Town Held Harmless . . . . . . 14 8.2 Payment of Expenses Incurred by Town in Relation to Ordinance . . . . . . 15 - i - 9. TRANSFER OF FRANCHISE 15 9.1 Consent of Town Required 15 9.2 Transfer Fee 15 10. PURCHASE OR CONDEMNATION 16 10.1 Town's Right to Purchase or Condemn 16 10.2 Continued Cooperation by Company. 16 10.3 Right of First Purchase. 17 11. REMOVAL OF COMPANY FACILITIES AT ~ivli OF FRANCHISE 18 11.1 Limitations on Company Removal 18 12. TRANSPORTATION OF GAS 18 12.1 Transportation of Gas 18 13. FORFEITURE n. 19 13.1 Forfeiture 19 13.2 Judicial Review 20 13.3 Other Legal Remedies 20 13.4 Continued Obligations 20 14 . AMENDMENTS 2 0 14.1 Amendments to Franchise 20 15. MISCELLANEOUS 21 15.1 Successors and Assigns 21 15.2 Third Parties 21 15.3 Representatives 21 15.4 Severability 22 15.5 Entire Agreement . 22 16. APPROVAL . 22 16.1 Council Approval . . . . 22 16.2 Company Approval . 23 r - ii - i ~ i BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO: ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS §1.0 For the purpose of this franchise, the following words and phrases shall have the meaning given in this article. TnThen not inconsistent with `the context, words used in the present tense include the future tense, words in the plural number include the singular number, and words in the singular number include the plural number. The word "shall" is mandatory and "may" is permissive. Words not defined in this article shall be given their common and ordinary meaning. 1.1 "Company" refers to and is Public Service Company of Colorado, and its successors and assigns, but, does not include its affiliates, subsidiaries or any other entity in which it has an ownership interest. 1.2 "Council" or "Town Council" refers to and is the legislative body of the Town. 1.3 "Distribution Facilities" refers to and is only that portion of the Company's gas system which delivers gas from the down side of the regulator station to the point-of- 1 ~ i delivery of the customer, including all devices connected to . that system: 1.4 "Facilities" refer to and are all facilities reasonably necessary to provide gas into, within and through the Town and include plants, works, systems, lines, equipment, pipes, mains, gas compressors and meters. 1.5 "Gas" or "Natural Gas" refers to and is such gaseous fuels as natural, artificial, synthetic, liquefied natural, liquefied petroleum, manufactured, or any mixture thereof. 1.6 "Public Easements" refer to and are public and dedicated eas"ements created and available for use by investor-owned, or other public utilities for their facilities. 1.7 "Public Utilities Commission" or "PUC" refers to and is the Public Utilities C~.~uul5Slon of the State of Colorado or other authority succeeding to the regulatory powers of the Public Utilities Commission. 1.8 "Residents" refers to and includes all persons, busi- nesses, industry, governmental agencies, and any other entity whatsoever, presently located or to be hereinafter located, in 2 whole or in part, within the territorial boundaries of the Town. 1.9 "Revenues" refer to and are those amounts of money which the Company receives from its customers within the Town from the sale of gas under rates authorized by the Public Utilities Commission as well as from the transportation of gas to its customers within the Town and represents amounts billed under such rates as adjusted for refunds, the net ~irite-off of uncollectible accounts, corrections or other regulatory adjustments. 1.10 "Streets and Other Public Places" refer to and are streets, alleys, viaducts, bridges, roads, lanes and other public places in said Town. 1.11 "Town" refers to and is the municipal corporation designated as the Town of Vail, Eagle County, Colorado and includes the territory as currently is or may in the future be included within the boundaries of the Town of Vail. • ARTICLE 2 GRANT OF FRANCHISE ` §2.1 Grant of Franchise. The Town of Vail hereby grants to Public Service Company, for the period specified in and subject to 3 the conditions, terms and provisions contained in this franchise, a non-exclusive right to furnish, sell and distribute gas to the Town and to all residents of the Town. Subject to the conditions, terms and provisions contained in this franchise, the Town also hereby grants to the Company a non-exclusive right to acquire, construct, install, locate, maintain, operate and extend into, within and through the Town all facilities reasonably necessary to furnish, sell and distribute gas within and through the Town and a non-exclusive right to make reasonable use of the streets and other public places and public easements as may be necessary to carry out the terms of this franchise. These rights shall extend to all areas of the Town as it is now constituted and to additional areas as the Town may increase in size by annexation or otherwise. §2.2 Term of Franchise. This franchise shall take effect on February 1, 1994. The teen of this franchise shall be for 20 years, beginning with said effective date of this franchise and expiring on January 31, 2014. 4 ARTICLE 3 FRANCHISE FEE §3.1 Franchise Fee. In consideration for the grant of this franchise, the Company shall pay the Town a sum equal to two percent (2~) of all revenues received from the sale and transpor- tation of gas within the Town, excluding revenues received from the Town for the sale of gas to the Town. §3.2 Payment Schedule. For the franchise fee owed on revenues received after the effective date of this franchise, payment shall be made in monthly installments not more than thirty days following the close of the month for which payment is to be made. Initial and final payments shall be prorated for the portions of the months at the beginning and end of the term of this ordinance. All payments shall be made to the Finance Director. The Finance Director, or other authorized representatives, shall have access to the books of the Company for the purpose of auditing or checking to ascertain that the franchise fee has been correctly computed and paid: In the event an error by the Company results in an overpayment of the franchise fee to the Town and said overpayment is in excess of $3,200, credit for the overpayment shall be spread over the same period the error was undiscovered. If the 5 overpayment is $3,200 or less, credit shall be taken against the next payment. §3.3 Chancre of Franchise Fee and Other Franchise Terms. Once during each calendar year of the franchise term the Town Council, upon giving 30 days notice to the Company of its intention so to do, may review and change the consideration the Town may be entitled to receive as a part of the franchise; provided, however, the Council may only change the consideration to be received by the Town under the terms of this franchise to the equivalent of the consideration paid by the Company to any city or town in the State of Colorado in which the Company supplies gas under franchise. The Company shall report to the Town within sixty (60) days of the execution of a subsequent franchise or of any change of franchise in other municipalities that could have a significant financial impact on the consideration to be paid by the Company to the Town hereunder. If the Town Council decides the consideration shall be so changed, it shall provide for such change by ordinance; provided, however, that any change in the franchise fee is then allowed to be surcharged by the' C~~~~~,any; and provided, further, that the consideration is not higher than the highest consideration paid by the Company to any municipality within the State of Colorado. For purposes of this Section, consideration means the franchise fee established in Article 3, Section 1; and also 6 includes any other provision which is of similar significant financial benefit to the Town. §3.4 Fran~hisP EPP Paymer~r i_n. r,j.P_.11 0~ nr,her Fees,. Payment of the franchise fee by the Company is accepted by the Town in lieu of any occupancy tax, license tax, permit charge, inspection fee, or similar tax on the privilege of doing business or in connection with the physical operation thereof, but does not exempt the Company from any lawful taxation upon its property or any other tax not related to the franchise or the physical operation thereof and does not exempt the Company from payment of head taxes or other fees or taxes assessed generally upon businesses. ARTICLE 4 SUPPLY, CONSTRUCTION AND DESIGN §4.1 Sut»ly of Gas. The Company shall take all reasonable and necessary steps to provide an adequate supply of gas to its customers at the lowest reasonable cost consistent vaith long-term reliable supplies. If the supply of gas to its customers should be interrupted, the C~,«rany shall take all necessary and reasonable actions to restore such supply within the shortest practicable time. 7 §4.2 Restoration of Service. In the event the C~~«~any's gas system, or any part thereof, is partially or wholly destroyed or incapacitated, the Company shall use due diligence to restore its system .to satisfactory service within the shortest practicable time. §4.3 Oblicrations Recra.rdinQ COmDariV Facilities. The Company shall install, maintain, repair, renovate and replace its facil- ities with due diligence.in a good and workmanlike manner and the Company's facilities will be of sufficient quality and durability to provide adequate and efficient gas to the Town and its residents. Company facilities shall not interfere with the Town's water mains, sewer mains or other municipal use of streets and other public places. The Company shall erect and maintain its facilities in such a way so as to minimize interference with trees and other natural features. Company facilities shall be installed in public easements so as to cause a minimal amount of interference with such property. §4.4 Excavation and Construction. All excavation and construction work done by the Company shall be done in a timely and 'expeditious manner which minimizes the inconvenience to the public and individuals. All public and private property whose use conforms to restrictions in public easements disturbed by Company excavation or construction activities shall be restored by the 8 , Company at its expense to substantially its former condition within a reasonable time. §4.5 Relocation of COmDanV Facilities.- Any relocation of the Company's facilities in any street or other public place required, caused or occasioned by any Town project shall be at the . cost of the Company. Relocation shall be completed within a reasonable time from the date when the Town makes its request, such time to be established by the Company as soon as possible after the Town's request. The Company shall be granted an extension of time pf completion equivalent to any delay caused by conditions not under its control provided that the Company proceeds with due diligence at all times. §4.6 Service to New Areas. If the boundaries of the Town are expanded during the term of this franchise, the Company shall extend service to residents in the expanded area at the earliest practicable time and in accordance with the Company's extension policy. Service to the expanded area shall be in accordance with the terms of this franchise agreement, including payment of franchise fees. §4.? Town Not Required to Advance Funds. Upon receipt of the Town's authorization for billing and construction, the Company shall extend its facilities to provide gas to the Town for 9 municipal uses within the Town limits or for any major municipal facility outside the Town limits, and within the Company certificated service area, without requiring the Town to advance funds prior to construction. §4.8 Technological Improvements. The Company shall generally introduce and install, as soon as practicable, gas technological advances in its equipment and service within the Town when such advances are technically and economically feasible and are safe and beneficial to the Town and its residents. Unless otherwise requested by the Town, the Company shall review and promptly report substantial advances which have occurred in the gas utility . industry that have been incorporated into the Company's operations in the Town in the previous year or will be so incorporated in the six months following the Company's report. . ARTICLE 5 COMPLIANCE §5.1 Town Rec7ulation,. The Town expressly reserves, and the Company expressly recognizes, the Town's right and duty to adopt, :.from time to time, in addition to the provisions herein contained, such Charter provisions, ordinances and rules and regulations as may by the Town. be deemed necessary in the exercise of its police 10 power for the protection of the health, safety and welfare of its citizens and their properties. §5.2 Compliance with Town Recruirements. The Company will comply with all Town requirements regarding curb and pavement cuts, excavating, digging and related construction activities. ~ If requested by the Town, the Company shall submit copies of reports of annual and long-term planning for capital improvement projects with descriptions of required street cuts, excavation, digging and related construction activities within 30 days after issuance. Except for emergencies, the Town may require that all installations be coordinated with the Town's street improvement programs. The Town Engineer shall be the Town's agent for inspection and for compliance with Town ordinances and regulations on any such projects. §5.3 Town Review of f'~nstruction and Design. Except in emergency circumstances, prior to construction of any significant gas facilities above ground, the Company shall furnish to the Town the plans for such facilities. In addition, the Company shall assess and report on the impact of such proposed construction on "the Town environment. Such plans and reports may be reviewed by the Town to ascertain, inter alia, (1) that all applicable laws including building and zoning codes and air and water pollution regulations are complied with, (2) that aesthetic and good planning 11 i ~ c principles have been given due consideration and (3) that adverse impact on the environment has been minimized. §5.4 Com~lian~e with PUC Recrulatians. The gas which the Company distributes shall conform with the standards promulgated by the Public Utilities Commission in the Rules ReaulatinQ the Service of Gas Utilities and with the tariff provisions of the C~~«rany setting standards, as the same may be amended from time to time. §5.5 Compliance With Air and Water Pollution Laws. The Company shall use its best efforts to take measures which will result in its facilities meeting the standards required by applicable Federal and State air and water pollution laws. Upon the Town's request, the Company will provide the Town with a status report of such measures. §5.6 Inspection. The Town shall have the right to inspect at all reasonable times any portion of the Company's system used to serve the Town and its residents. The Town shall also have access to Company records for the purpose of determining Company compliance with this franchise. The Company agrees to cooperate .'with the Town in conducting the .inspection and to correct any discrepancies affecting the Town's interest in a prompt and efficient manner. 12 ARTICLE 6 PUBLIC UTILITIES CO1~lISSION §6.1 Public T1ri_liries Commission ReQUlation. The Town and the .Company recognize that the lawful provisions of the Company's tariffs on file and in effect with the Public Utilities Cva~uulSSlon which are consistent with the restrictions and limitations of Article XXV of the Colorado Constitution regarding the rights of municipalities to franchise are controlling over any inconsistent provision in this franchise dealing with the same subject matter. In the opinion of the Company, no provision of this franchise is inconsistent with any of the currently effective provisions of the Company's tariffs. ARTICLE 7 REPORTS TO TOTnfiT §7.1 Reports on COmDariV Operations. The Company shall submit reasonable and necessary reports containing or based .on information readily obtainable from the Cam.«rany's books and records as the Town may request with respect to the operations of the C~,«rany under 'this franchise and provide the Town with a list of real property within the Town which is owned by the Company. 13 §7.2 Conies of Ta.r.i_ff,s. All PUC Filings. The Company shall keep on file in the nearest Company office, all tariffs, rules, regulations and policies approved by the Public Utilities Commission relating to service by the Company to the Town and its residents. Upon request by the Town, the C~.«Yany shall provide the Town with copies of filings affecting said service which it makes with the PUC. ARTICLE 8 INDEMNIFICATION OF THE TOWN §8.1 Town Held Harmless. The Company shall indemnify, defend and save the Town harmless from and against all liability or damage and all claims or demands whatsoever in nature arising out of the operations of the Company within the Town pursuant to this franchise and the securing of and the exercise by the Company of the franchise rights granted in this ordinance and shall pay all reasonable expenses arising therefrom. The Town will provide prompt written notice to the Company of the pendency of any claim or action against the Town arising out of the exercise by the Company of its franchise rights. The C~~«rany gill be permitted, at Fits own expense, to appear and defend or to assist in defense of such claim. Notwithstanding any provision hereof to the contrary, the Company shall not be obligated to indemnify, defend or hold the Town harmless to the extent any claim, demand or lien arises out of 14 or in connection with any negligent act or failure to act of the Town or any of its officers or employees. §8.2 Pavment ~f Fxvense4 Incurred r~? Tow*~ it Relation to Ordinance. At the Town's option, the Company shall pay in advance or reimburse the Town for expenses incurred in publication of notices and ordinances and for photocopying of documents arising out of the negotiations or process for obtaining the franchise. ARTICLE 9 TRANSFER OF FRANCHISE §9.1 Consent of Town Required. The Company shall not transfer or assign any rights under this franchise to a third party excepting only corporate reorganizations of the Company not including a third party, unless the Town Council shall approve in writing such trans- fer or assignment. Approval of the transfer or assignment shall not be unreasonably withheld. §9.2 Transfer Fee. In order that the Town may share in the value this franchise adds to the C~.«~.any's operation, any such transfer ~or assignment of rights under this franchise requiring the approval of the Town Council shall be subject to the conditions that the transferee shall promptly pay to the Town of Vail a pro rata share of one million dollars, which pro rata amount of one million 15 e dollars shall be calculated by multiplying one million dollars times a fraction of which the then population of the Town of Vail is the numerator and the then population of the City and County of Denver is the denominator. Such transfer fee shall not be recovered from the Town or from the Town residents. or property owners through gas rates of customers in the Town of Vail or by • surcharge by the transferee or the Company. ARTICLE 10 PURCHASE OR CONDEPRNATION §10.1 Town's Riaht to Purchase or Condemn. The right of the Town to construct, purchase or condemn any public utility works or ways, and the rights of the Company in connection therewith, as provided by the Colorado Constitution and statutes, are hereby expressly reserved. §10.2 Continued Cooperation by Comnanv. In the event the Town exercises .its option to purchase or condemn, the Company agrees that, at the Town's request, it will continue to supply any service it supplies under this franchise, for the duration of the term of -'this franchise pursuant to terms and conditions negotiated for such continued operation: 16 §10.3 Right of First Purchase. In the event the Company at any time during the term of this franchise proposes to sell or dispose of any of its real property located within the Town, it shall grant to the Town the right of first purchase of same. The Company shall obtain a qualified appraisal on any such property and the Town shall have sixty days in which to exercise the right of first purchase by giving written notice to the Company. Should the Town not provide the required written notice, the Company may proceed to negotiate with others for the sale of such property provided that the Company may not sell such property for an amount less than 90 percent of the appraised value without first providing the Town with an opportunity to purchase such property at such lesser price, in which event the Town must notify the Company in writing within 30 days if it wishes to purchase such property. It is understood that nothing in this paragraph shall preclude the Company from transferring real property to a subsidiary or affiliate without first according the Town the rights referred to above, provided that if the transferee proposes to sell or dispose of such property within one year, it shall not do so without first affording the Town the rights referred to above. 17 , ARTICLE 11 REMOVAL OF COMPANY FACILITIES AT END OF FRANCHISE §11.1 Limitations on COmDanV Removal. In the event this franchise is not renewed at the expiration of its term or the Company terminates any service provided herein for any reason whatsoever, and the Town has not purchased or condemned the system and has not provided for alternative service, the Company shall have no right to remove said system pending resolution of the disposition of the system. The Company further agrees it will not withhold any temporary services necessary to protect the public and shall be entitled only to monetary compensation in no greater amount than it would have been entitled to were such services provided during the term of this Franchise. Only upon receipt of written notice from the Town stating that the Town has adequate alternative gas energy sources to provide for the people of the Town shall the Company be entitled to remove any.or all of said systems in use under the terms of this franchise. ARTICLE 12 TRANSPORTATION OF GAS §12.1 Transportation of Gas. The Town expressly reserves the right to obtain or produce gas. The Company shall transport natural gas purchased by the Town for use in Town facilities 18 pursuant to separate contracts with the Town. The Company agrees to transport gas made available for sale on terms and conditions c~.«rarable to other -contracts entered into contemporaneously by the Company with similarly situated customers. . ARTICLE 13 FORFEITURE §13.1 Forfeiture. Both the Company and the Town recognize there may be circumstances whereby compliance with the provisions of this franchise is impossible or is delayed because of circumstances beyond the Company's control. In those instances, the Company shall use its best efforts to comply in a timely manner - and to the extent possible. If the C~.«~,any fails to perform any of the terms and conditions of this franchise and such failure is within the Company's control, the Town, acting by and through its Council, may determine, after hearing, that such failure is, of a substantial nature. Upon receiving notice of such determination, the Company shall have a reasonable time in which to remedy the violations. If during said reasonable time corrective actions have not been successfully taken, the Town, acting by and through its Council, shall determine whether any or all rights and privileges granted the Company under this ordinance shall be forfeited. 19 C §13.2 Judicial Review. Any such declaration of forfeiture shall be subject to judicial review as provided by law. §13.3 Other Lecral Remedies. RTothing herein contained shall limit or restrict any legal rights that the Town or the Company may possess arising from any alleged violation of this franchise. §13.4 Continued Oblicrations. Upon forfeiture, the Company shall continue to provide service to the Town and its residents in accordance with the terms hereof until the Town makes alternative arrangements for such service. If the Company fails to provide continued service, it shall be liable for damages to the Town. ARTICLE 14 AP~ENDMENTS §14.1 Amendments to Franchise. At any time during the term of this franchise, the Town, through its Town Council, or the C~.~~rany may propose amendments to this franchise by giving 30 days' ~rritten notice to .the other of the proposed amendment(s) desired and both parties thereafter, through their designated representatives, will •negotiate within a reasonable time in good faith in an effort to agree on mutually satisfactogy amendments}. The ~rord "amendment" as used in this Section does not include a change authorized in Section 3.3. 20 f ~ , 0 ARTICLE 15 MISCELLANEOUS §15.1 Successors and Assigns. The rights, privileges, franchises and obligations granted and contained in this ordinance shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon Public Service Company, its successors and assigns. §15.2 Third Parties. Nothing contained in this franchise shall be construed to provide rights to third parties. §15.3 Representatives. Both parties shall designate from time to time in writing representatives for the Company and the Town who will be the persons to whom notices shall be sent regarding any action to be taken under this ordinance. Notice shall be in writing and forwarded by certified mail or hand delivery to the persons and addresses as hereinafter stated, unless the persons and addresses are changed at the written request of either party, • delivered in person or by certified mail. Until any such change shall hereafter be made, notices shall be sent to the Town and to the C~.«rany's Mountain Division Manager. Currently the addresses •are as follows 21 r r O For the Town of Vail: Town Manager, Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 For the Company: Mountain Division Manager Summit County Operations Center P.O. Box 1819 Silverthorne, Colorado 80425 §15.4 Severability. Should any one or more provisions of this franchise be determined to be illegal or unenforceable, all other provisions nevertheless shall remain effective; provided, however, the parties shall forthwith enter into good faith negotiations and proceed with due diligence to draft a term that will achieve the original intent of the parties hereunder. §15.5 Entire Agreement. This franchise constitutes the entire agreement of the parties. There have been no representations made other than those contained in this franchise. . ARTICLE 16 APPROVAL §16.1 Council Aonroval. This grant of franchise shall not become effective unless approved by a majority vote of the Town Council. 22 ' v a a r §16.2 COmDanV A~~roval. The Company shall file with the Town Clerk its written acceptance of this franchise and of all of its terms and provisions taithin ten days after the adoption of this franchise by the Town Council. The acceptance shall be in form and content approved by the Town Attorney. If the Company shall fail to timely file its written acceptance as herein provided, this franchise shall be and become null and void. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this day of 1993. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this day of , 1993. Mayor ATTEST: Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Town Attorney Publication Dates: First Publication Second Publication 3667E 23 ®R®IB~~e~9CE N®. 30 SERIES ®E 1993 Aft ®R®II~A~ICE ®E®ICATIFIG ~a f~US1.IC, N®Id-fI=~CC~@1SIVE RIGHT-QF-~/~~( ICI ~~9® ~R®f~l TRACT !lAI~ @lIB,.D_AGE fitly EII.II~G. 1AIHEREAS, the Town of Vail finds it is necessary to provide such right-of-way for the benefit of the community to provide access as needed for the public good. NOVV, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT: Section 1 The Town Council directs that a public, non-exclusive right-of-way be dedicated for all public purposes over the described parcels "A", "B", and "C" as set forth in the attached Exhibit 1 which parcels are identified from Tract A, Vail Village 8th Filing. Section 2 Further, Town Council directs that a Certificate pursuant to 17.32.500 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail be filed with the Clerk and Recorder of Eagle County, Colorado for the conveyance of the public dedications set forth herein. Section 3 If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 4 The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 5 The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. 1 Ordinance No. 30, Series of 1993 a i Section 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 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: Holly L. McCutcheon, 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:lORD93.30 2 Ordinance No. 30, Series of 1993 . / . EXHIBIT..1 • PARCEL DESCRIPTION - °A° That part of the NW 1/4, Section 9, Township 5 South, Range 80 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, described as follows Beginning at the northeasterly corner of Tract A, Vall Village • Eighth Flling, according to the reap thereof recorded In the office of the Eagle County,.Colorado, Clerk and Recorders thence, along. the northerly line of sold Tract A, S78°11'20°W 249,43 feet, to the True Point of Beg?nning~ thence, continuing along said northerly line, .S 78°11'20'W 60,00 feed thence, departing said northerly line, N11°48'40'W 77.87 feet, to the southerly rlght- of-way line of Interstate Highway No. 70~ thence, along sold southerly right-of-way line, N77°36'S8'E 60.00 feet thence, departing said southerly right-of-way line, S11°48'40'E 78.,47 feet, to the True Point of Beginning, containing 4690 square feet or 0,1077 acres, more or less, The above description I's based on the northerly line of said Tract A, having a bearing of S78°11'20'W, . / ~ i. • ~i: . j ..1: C PARCEL DESCRIPTION - 'B' That part of Tract A, Vatl Village Eighth Flling, according to the reap thereof recorded In the office of the Eagle County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder, described as follows Beginning at the northeasterly corner of said Tract A~ thence, along the northerly line of said Tract A, S78°11'20°W 249.43 feet, to the True Point of Beginnings thence, departing said northerly line, 120.15 feet along the arc of a curve to the left, having a radius of 145.04 feet, a central angle of 47°27'55', and a chord which bears S35°32'38'E 116.75 feet thence S59°16'S0'E 136.88 feet thence 149.40 feet along the me of a curve to the right, having a radius of 408.77 feet, a central angle of 20°56'28', and a chord which bears S48°48'21'E 148.57 feet. thence 95.06 feet along the arc of a curve to the left, having a radius of 206.51 feet, a central angle of 26°22'30', and a chord which bears S51°31'22'E 94.23 feet, to a non-tangent point on curve on the easterly tine of said Tract A~ thence, along said easterly line, 77.65 feet along the arc of a curve to the left, having a radius of 125.00 feet, a central angle of 35°35'31°, and a chord which bears S18°36'15'E 76.41 feet, to the southeasterly corner of said Tract Al thence, along the southerly line of said Tract A, S88°36'19'W 100.00 feed thence, departing said southerly line, NO1°23'41'W 52.36 feet, to a non-tangent point on curved thence 62.28 feet along the arc of a curve to the right, having a radius of 266.51 feet, a central angle of 13°23'20', and a chord which bears N45°01'47°W 62.14 feet thence 127.47 feet along the arc of a curve to the left, having a radius of 348.77 feet, a central angle of 20°56'28, and a chord which bears N48°48'21'W 126.76 feet thence N59°16'35'W 136.88 feet thence 169.86 feet along the arc of a curve to the right, having a radius of 20.04 feet, a central angle of 47°27'55°, and a chord which bears N35°32'38'W 165.04 feet, to the northerly line of said Tract A~ thence, along said northerly line, N78°11'20°E 60.00 feet, to the True Point of Beginning, containing 35,260 square feet of 0.8094 acres, More or less. The above description Is based on the northerly line of said Tract A, having a bearing of S78°11'20°W. . _ ~ . PARCEL DESCRIPTION - 'C' , That port of the N 1/2, Section 9,•Township 5 South, Range 80 West of the 6th Principal Meridian, described as follows 9 Beginning at the. southeasterly corner of Tract A, Vall Village Eighth Filing, according to the reap thereof recorded In the office . of the Eagle County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder; thence, along the easterly line of said Tract A, 77.65 feet along the arc of a curve to the right, having a radius of 125.00 feet, a central angle of 35°35'31", and a chord which bears N18°36'15'W 76.41 feet, to a non-tangent point on curves thence, departing said easterly ll.ne, 173.50 feet along the arc of a curve to the left, having a radius of 206.51 feet, a central angle of. 48°08'09', and a chord which bears S88°46'41'E 168.44 feet; thence N67°09'14'E 116,43 feet;'thence N73°43'03'E 193.24 feet, to a point on curve on the northerly line of Sunburst Flling No, 3, according to the Map thereof recorded in the office of the Eagle County, Colorado; Clerk and Recorder; thence the following three courses along the northerly and westerly lines of said Sunburst Flling No. 3~ C1) 34.77 feet along the arc of a curve to the left, having a radius of 444,71 feet, a central angle of 04°28'47°, and a chord which bears S57°50'43'W 34.76 feet; <2) S55°36'19'W 37.99 Feet; C3> S12°57'43'W 50.01 feet, to the northerly line of Vall Valley First Filing, according to the reap thereof recorded In the offflce of the Eagle County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder; thence the following three courses along the northerly line of said Vall Valley First Ftling~ C1) S63°05'48"W 93.34 feet; C2) S71°15'58,°W 102.04 feet; C3> S88°36'19°W 185.00 feet, to the point of beginning, containing 27,760 square feet or 0.6374 acres, rlore or t ess . The above description Is based on the southerly line of said Trait A; having a bearing of S88°36'19'W, e. ®R®t~9~e~BCE N®. 31 SEIBIES ®E X993 ~H ®R®BHANCE T® AnAE~E® SECT@®~I 98.57.060E 13 ®F TIRE 6~~6Bd9C@PAL C®®fE ®F THE ~'®tlUN ®F VAaL. VNHEREAS, Ordinance fVo. 27, Series of 1992, amended Section 18.57.020 -Employee Housing Units (EHUs) generally of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail; and VNHEREAS, there was a typographical error contained in Section 6 thereof improperly referring to "Type I EHU". NOVN, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAIRIED BY THE T01NIV COUNCIL OF THE TO~lVIV OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT: Section 1 Section 18.57.060 B 13 is hereby amended to read as follows: (13) Thirty days prior to the transfer of a deed for a Type 8911 EHU, the prospective purchaser shall submit an application to the Community Development Department documenting that the prospective purchaser meets the criteria set forth in Sections 18.57.020 C and 18.57.060 B 11 (a) and shall include an affidavit affirming that he or she meets these criteria. Section 2 If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 3 The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 4 The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. 1 Ordinance No. 31, Series of 1993 Section 5 All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ, 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: Holly L. McCutcheon, 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:\OR093.31 2 Ordinance No. 31, Series of 1993 ®B®I{~9f~6iBCE 32 ~~RIiES ~~3 g 6~0~C~Ij~ p®~Vg'8~®T0~®6pp`9pE~1 ~6~00~ ~EYIG®N®~Ap,Vg~i] II ~TaL~~®~6, pip ®IF TQ~~ IIYAIUn9@CIIP9y IL C®®~ '~IHE ~®VI/N tlP~~~ BY TAE ~®®B'~9®N ®F CHASTER 2.38 - ~91ln9Td4Tl®IV ®F T~R61AS, T® f~R®!!B®E F®R THE LaMB~'~,T6®~I TERnAS CF®R ~~L PERIIA~41VEfdT T®!~!N ®E VAVL (8®AR®S ~,~9® C®NI~liIISS@®E~S. WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 30, Series of 1992, provided for the amendment of Title 2, by the addition of limitation of terms, to provide for the limitation of terms for all members of permanent Town of Vail Boards and Commissions; and UVHEREAS, Ordinance No. 30, Series of 1992, improperly identified the addition of the Chapter as Chapter 2.36; and 1h/HEREAS, there is presently existing in the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail Colorado a Chapter 2.36. NOVV, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT: Section 1 Title 2 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby amended by the addition of Chapter 2.38 -Limitation of Terms, to read as follows: 2.38.010 No member of any permanent Town of Vail Board or Commission shall serve for more than eight consecutive years. A Board or Commission member who has served eight (8) consecutive years may serve again after a period of one (1)year ofnon-service. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if there are an insufficient number of applicants for a vacant position or positions on any permanent TOV Board or Commission, a Board or Commission member who has served for more than eight (8) consecutive years shall be eligible to apply for reappointment. 2.38.020 All current members of the Town's permanent Boards or Commissions an the effective date of this ordinance shalt be entitled to complete their term of office regardless of whether the completion of such term would exceed eight (8) years. Section 2 If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any 1 Ordinance No. 32, Series of 1993 one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 3 The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 4 The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shah 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 provisian hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 5 All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ, 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: Holly L. McCutchean, 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:\OFiD93.32 2 Ordinance No. 32. Series of 1993 ,a DES®I°U'~I®I~I IV®. 13 SE6~IES ®F X993 A RES®Io4.ITl®~ fI=STAI3LISIiIhIC SUPfP®IRT 13Y ~'IiE VAIN T®1NN COllN9CII_ [~®I~ THE VAIN VA~~EY E®lJhl®ATI®IV'S EIFE®RTS T® SECt1RE AI~B® H®S~ THE X999 W®IRLC ~~I'INE SICI CH~?11API®I~ISFIIPS. WHEREAS, prior to the 1989 World Ski Championships the United States had not hosted the World Alpine Ski Championships since 1942; and WHEREAS, the International Federation of Skiing granted the 1989 World Alpine Ski Championships to Vail/Beaver Creek to establish that a major ski event could successfully be hosted in the United States; and WHEREAS, the 1989 World Alpine Ski Championships represented a public and private sector joint venture involving local, state, and federal agencies in a unified effort; and WHEREAS, the Championships drew citizen support and involvement from throughout the Valley, state, and nation with 1,200 volunteers representing an estimated one (1) out of every ten (10) Eagle Valley residents volunteering their services to the effort; and WHEREAS, the Championships brought widespread media attention to Vail, the State of Colorado, and the United States with members of the print and broadcast media providing 220 hours of international television coverage in 40 different countries with an international audience of 300,000,000 and over 10,000 newspaper and magazine articles; and WHEREAS, the Championships provided substantial favorable economic impact to the local communities and state during the period of time that the 1989 World Alpine Ski Championships were held from January 29 through February 12, 1989, with Vail's January, 1989, sales tax increasing 28% over the previous January sales tax experience and the February, 1989, sales tax increasing 24.7% aver the previous February sales tax, and the Town of Avon experienced an 81.6% increase in January, 1989, sales tax from the prior January and a 78.8% increase in its February, 1989, sales tax from the prior February; and, further, it has been estimated that the 1989 World Alpine Ski Championships generated $54,700,000 of spending in the State of Colorado; and WHEREAS, during the period of the time that the 1989 World Alpine Ski Championships were being held, in addition to the 300 athletes from 42 separate countries who were in attendance and competing, Vail experienced an 18% increase in skier visits and Beaver Creek experienced a 27% increase in skier visits; and WHEREAS, the successful hosting of the 1989 World Alpine Ski Championships helped 1 Resolution No. 13, Series of 1993 e to identify Vail as the Number 1 ski resort in North America and further established Vail's profile as a host for world ski events; and 1n/HEREAS, the Vail Town Council believes the staging of the 1999 World Alpine Ski Championships in Vail and Beaver Creek to be in the best interest of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado that: 1. The Town Council expresses its intention, desire, and expectation that the Town of Vail will support all efforts and offer any assistance that will be beneficial in the efforts to secure the 1999 VNorld Alpine Ski Championships. 2. That upon being awarded the 1999 World Alpine Ski Championships, the Town of Vail will support the effort in whatever way possible, including financial support to the Vail Valley Foundation to assist in funding expenses associated with the solicitation and production of the Championships in 1999. 3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 1993. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk C:UiESOLU93.13 2 Resolution No. 13, Series of 1993 b ~ ~ Tc Q F ~ a ocir,/ , • . VAIL'VAI.LEY n,,,,~,, ~ FOUNDATION ~ ' , ' - G~~~CaI~ED Q ~ T . 6 ~ ~.A-9~.~ ~ Providing leadership iri athletic, edaacation:al - _ - - _ _ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ and ealtural endeavors to enhance and sustain the quality of life in .the Pail Valley - October 1, 1993 Board of Directors - President Gerald R. Ford _ Robert E. Barrett Mr . Larry Gr e l L.e°n D. slack _ Acting Tow of Vail Manager Carolyn S. Blount - - Craig M. Cogut 7 5 Sout rontage Road James Berry Craddock V a 11 , O 816 5 7 Jack Crosby Andrew P. Daly _ H. Benjamin Duke, Jr. Dear Larry, Harry H. Frampton, III - John Garnsey George N. Gillett, Jr. I would like to sincerely -thank .the Vail Town Council PepiGramshammer - for granting us financial support of the 1994 Worlcl Steve N. Haber MarthaHeaa - _ Mountain Bike Championships, and also for agreeing to - williamJ.xybl draft a resolution supporting the 1999 World Alpine Ski _ Elaine w.xelton Championships if we are successful in our_ bid. It is Henry R Kravis FitzhughScott,Emeritus my understanding that this resolution will be passed Michael S. Shannon before the elections on November 16t'h.. ' Rodney E, Slifer - - C. Philip Smiley - >zchardL.swig Support from the Town of Vail is extremely important to Oscar L. Tang HerbertA Wertheim - 1.7s as we move forward in 'our bid for the World Championships. We couldn't do i't without you! - John Garnsey - President _ Thanks again for your time Larry, and please let me - know if you need any additional information for. the resolution< ' 1989 World Alpine _ ~ - SkiCham7ionships Best regards, ~ - AEF World Fonim _ American Ski Classic Bolshoi Ballet ~ - - Academyat Pai[ - JOh Garnsey - Gerald R. Ford Pr ident A»:phitheater Fund fer the Future - American Cycle Classic Hornblower Awards and Scholarships 1994 World Mountain Bike Championships P.O. Box 309 ~ ' Vail, Colorado 81658 , 303-476-9500 Fax 303-476-7320 Telex 910-290-1989 A Colorado 501 (cI (3) - Nonprofit Corporation i ICES®~4~'1'1®N N®. 14 SERIES ®F 199 A RES®~.4~TION ESTASLISIiING SUPP®Rl' BY THE @IAIIL T®WN C®llNCII_ F®R TIDE VAIN VA~ImE~f IF®IJNDA~'ION'S IHOSTING ®F TB~E 1994 W®R~® M®~NTAIN BIKE CIiAMPI®NSI-IIPSe WHEREAS, the hosting of the 1992 and 1993 American Cycle Classics established a successful public and private sector joint effort; and WHEREAS, the Cycle Classics drew citizen support and involvement; and WHEREAS, the Cycle Classics drew widespread media attention to Vail; and WHEREAS, the Cycle Classics provided substantial favorable economic benefit to the area; and WHEREAS, Vail has been selected to host the 1994 World Mountain Bike Championships; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council believes the staging of the 1994 World Mountain Bike Championships to be in the best interest of the community. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado: 1. The Town Council expresses its intention, desire, and expectation that the Town of Vail will support all efforts and offer any assistance that wiN be beneficial in the efforts to host the 1994 World Mountain Bike Championships. 2. The Town of Vail will donate to the Vail Valley Foundation $20,000.00 to assist in funding expenses associated with the production of the Championships in 1994. 3 This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of November, 1993. Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk c:wESO~usa.la Resolution No. 14, Series of 1993 C T - 1 ~ ~ F 'F' I e Y ~ ` 4-~ E i=i F` T E N -I"' t_ Yt' ~f 6-a t•1 E F-1 T F' s 4=1 ,g - i it 7°-~R~f ~ ~ ~ ~ e - _ - - - - ~__.~~Y___ ~i'~ a;zi~~.Cic~r,; ._~`ai l 1+~~i1~ e.y To~.l:r_ism and ~.Un~r~ntion i~u~~~au:_. ,.r~~es:,t~tt ~•r ur,~..,f. I_,r~._ ~ra~ R~,ms~,? t _ a~ _ :"lif~.~i~ti,{ €(1 a-~'!~ fU~~fi55kiF1~; ~&'•I'ST~9: ?.~'..Q ~J l:U ~7U US~~ _n~~~~-:,~t ~vc~r:f.~ ?~1~~IusiY~e U~ ariy- any. _..~ts rielc~t..~ in"-:~ .-SZa~t1~. _?:f~. t~kl'z~_~:~.~~.~.~._...~rc~1 ~Zdinca~ t.::, - -T~i:i_n_tez ._•Ca~'niv:~.•~~ _i~' `~1`~ ~-i_1 _ _.~II.U`_S~"~_ t~1S:=.]4?"_.'~-~7_~~?=_ t0 'C'Ilis -,t ~_t~`.ici_J!~,=___ T~i` . .4~?OU~ C~ ~.i1t1c~?nCL ~f1C,'ii.,::v~t;i~CUt it2S5u.•:C,;lYI~;;~t~C1C)t~'S b;3;;4:~(3Cl i~t~:; fCf~iC?1V~.~. ~r',ill~;}133tCe~ [i~l Yra..,i, ~rs~.,1ir',.v ;yrii.;ti.t;;, r'". ~ ~C>t~Ii~l'l.,S$iC?ii • S C^~~~9~ G s ~r~;=.las .l. ~rit.~ ~ . 'I alb. ells e~i 1 ~ p a~~ 1S S1 ~]1 ~ _ Special Event Request Application IMPORTANT: This form must accompany all applications. Please type or print. Use a separate form for each event. Name of Event: Festival of Lights Date of Event: Nov. 19 -Dec. 24 Is date firm?YES Tentative? Chairperson or Contact: Deberah Ramsey ' Address: 100 E. Meadow Drive, Vail, CO 81657 Day Phone: 476-1000 Evening Phone: Sponsoring Organization: Vail Valley Tourism & Convention Bureau Are you a Corporation? YES State and Date of incorporation: Sept. 1964 What is your tax status? (e.g. for-profit or non-profit) Not-for-profit Circle One: Is this event New or Pre-existing? If Pre-existing, how many years? 1 yr Location of Event? Vail Village, Crossroads, Lionshead Brief Description of Event: Magical Festival of Lights promoting value priced lodging, lift tickets and holiday festivities with Santa, carolers and a Town Crier. Who is the event targeted towards? Amount of Request: $ $20,000.00 Do you want input from the Special Events Commission regarding possible ways to improve your event? Yes 1 Q went Analysis n~uch additional i~rf~rr~irution tv this jvrm if more room fc~r erplunation is needed. ll. ()IZC~AIVIZIIVC EN"I'I'T~': la. 1-listory and experience of organizer: 15 Years of special event production experience. 1990-1991 fulfilled Town of Vail Special Events Contract. Ib. Event Beneficiary: No proceeds - community at large lc. What Percentage of proceeds goes to Beneficiary? 0 BI.J)DG1E'd': 2a. Amount requested: $ hold 2b. What percentage of the total event budget does this request represent? hold 2c. Attach detail of the sources and uses of requested funding? see attached 2d. Detail other revenue sources and sponsorship potential: see attached 2e. If a request for seed money is a part of the plan, detail your rationale and plan for repayment: 2f. How are Profits distributed? ~ - nrnfi rG 2g. If this funding request through the Special Events Conunission is not approved (in part or in entirety), will the event still occur? If will still occur (without this requested funding), what will the difference be? Yes. on a limited scale 2 2h. if this event is continued next yrar, do you plan on requesting funding again next yC:lr`? Yes, however, as the event builds a reputation, sponsor procurement will be easier. 3. INS(JI2AI~ICIE / I2ISIC )i9 r11\IAOE11'dE1+lT: 3a. Description of Insurance and Risk Management as pertains to the event: Resort Entertainment will be hired to provide entertainers and their policies will prevail. 3b. Are all involved parties co-named as insured? Yes, request that Resort Entertaimm~et list Town of Vail and Vail Vallev Tourism & Convention Bureau as additional insured. ®PEI2ATI0~1S PLAIN: 4a. Attach your Operations Plan, clearly detailing and addressing specific issues such as: 1. Staffing; paid and volunteer 2. Ticket Sales, concessions plan (if applicable) ~ 3. Operations set-up and tear-down 4. Environmental/Safety issues including security and clean-up. 5. Any other pertinent operations considerations. 5. MAI2ICETI~IG I'LA1~1: Sa. Attach your detailed Marketing and Advertising Plan. See attached III Sb. Will this event draw visitors to the Vail Valley? Yes Sc. Is this a "Quality of Life" event for local residents? Yes Sd. If this is a Spectator Event, how many spectators do you project? Locals 10 , 000 Visitors 20 , 000 Total 30 , 000 Se. If this is a Participation Event, how many participants do you project? ~ Locals Visitors Total ~ Sf. Will lodging be required for either Spectators or Participants? Yes What portion of lodging will have to be discounted or comped? ~ Sg. What geographic markets will this be marketed to? Colorado, Texas, Kansas 3 6. I31?1~IEFI"6'S TD 'V'81E VAIL V~LI.EY: 6a. Describe the benefits to the Vail Valley, both short and long-term: It will create a maraical holidav atmosphere and will be eeared towards families building the expectation to buy while on holidav. Goal will be to in~rPase i_ncrementa.l_ d.n~~rs. It w>vll become an Annual marektinQ event which will include the entire Valley. Avon. Beaver Creek and Vail. 9. C®IV'I'I1VGE1~'CY 1PLAl~t: 7a. An inclement weather plan (if applicable) should be detailed and attached. 7b. How are losses handled? IPREVI®US YEAR'S 1RESUILTS: 8a. If this is not a fu•st-time event, please submit an additional Event Analysis on last year's actual results. VERY I1l~PORTANT: Applications received without all requested information will not be considered for funding until all requested information is received by the Special Events Commission. You may provide any additional information you deem appropriate, but please be brief. PLEASE RFAn C'AR~'FJL.! Y AND SIGN: If financial support is allocated to this event, I agree that the funding will be used solely for the designated and approved purposes as stated in this application. I agree to follow all policies and guidelines, and will supply budgets, ad copies, affadavits and proof of expenditures to the Vail Valley Special Events Commission, as requested. If this funding is approved, the Special Events Commission will require a written post-event evaluation to be submitted within 30 days following the event. Acknowledged and agreed to by: Event Chairperson: Date Upon completion of this form, please submit to Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to Town Manager, 75 S. Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657. Applications/funding requests will be reviewed quarterly. Applications must be received 14 days prior to quarterly Review Meetings. Please check with Town Clerk for dates. 4 'IiO: Special Events Commission From: Deberah Ramsey Date: May 24, 1993 Re: Festival of Lights, Budget Considerations Entertainment: Carolers, Town Crier & Santa $15,000. The entertainment schedule is proposed for November 19, - December 24, 1993. Costumes, lodging, co-ordination fees and performers fees are included in this estimate. Entertainment locations rotate between the entire Vail community including Lionshead, Crossroads, Gore Creek Promenade, the International Bridge and Vail Village on a scheduled basis. In 1992 the local merchant communities subsidized the entertainment schedule, paying approximately $7,000. The plan for 1993 is to request an increased budget and schedule from the merchant community to support the entertainment effort. Public Relations Campaign: $5,000 The 1992 PR expense was $3,000. The fee included news releases of Festival of Lights which were released statewide to print, radio and broadcast media with follow-up phone calls to encourage coverage on an unpaid basis. The target market for 1992 was Colarado with an emphasis on the front range. The 1993 budget is increased due to an increased target market including, Texas, Kansas, Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming and other neighboring states. Advertising: $50,000 The 1992 expenses including purchasing a mailing list, postage, art design and printing of 25,000 Festival brochures. The 1993 budget does not include purchasing a mailing list or postage. It includes printing 100,000 upscale, self mailing promotional brochures. It also includes design and purchase of ad placement in a newspaper. IFIE~°TIVA~. ®F IL~~'I'S ~~93 GOAL: To promote the Second Annual Festival of Lights between Thanksgiving and Christmas with the objective of driving incremental dollars. The 1993 promotion would expand the targeted marketing regions from Colorado to include neighboring states. EVENT OVERVIE~'J: The project has two levels. 1. Marketing and Event Promotion: this involves an overall marketing plan to attract people to the valley and then inform them once they are here. 2. Event production: events that are created, produced, scheduled and paid for by individual towns or merchant groups, to create an effective event schedule MARKETING ~r PROMOTION 1. Regional states in the fly drive market, will be selected with an emphasis on the targeted demographic population including skiiers, families, income and age profile of the Vail guest. 2. Colorado campaign will include print, television and radio mediums to get the message out. 3. Valley wide local media will assist in promoting the schedule of events. 4. A full color upscale self mailing brochure will be used to promote the event. SPONSORSHIP 1. Airline, rental cars and credit card companies will be approached for cash sponsorship and in kind services, including mailing lists, mailing of the brochure and articles on the Festival in their respective publications. PROMOTION includes: Holiday special events, lift ticket discounts, lodging packages and enhanced values through restaurants and retail shops. GENERAL SPECIAL EVENT PLAN Town Crier: Costumed town crier will stroll through the town greeting guests and informing them of guest activities. He will lend color and hospitality to the community. Santa & Elves: they will greet the children and lend fun and ambiance to the comunity. Carolers : dill stroll and si.~g, inviting grzests to join there at restaurant or merchant hospitality sites for hot chocolate and cookies. Annual Tree Lighting: with President Ford Community Decoration Competition Each community will be asked to develop and add their own events and promotions, including Avon's "Icing on the Lake", "Christmas Through the Eyes of a Child" in Beaver Creek, sleigh rides and more. l~q~ ~~gc~~s~i 1 e 1 S YY1 1S 1 Y1 S ecial went ~undin Request Summary p - - ~ - Name of Event: Uall, ~Au~`~ ~T~{~. 0~ U(~-~I~ Date of Event: ND~ . 'L°~ • 23. 19 a 2 Sponsoring Organization: UAII. \lA~~,~ ~u ~l ~ ~ (`.~NJ~~n~~3u . Chairperson or Contact: t~~~i~ Amount of Request: $ ~ 5~a 'This request has been: approved; denied; X modified to the following terms: ~I~l ~'~pvDll~ • ('9'?nSTdQv2-~l~ -tom Wuxfi~,'LZfi~ W~5 vl~i~ llati's G~-wt~ k~ l~n.~v ?~-h~ . The rationale for this determination is based on the following: "(1nis i s -flit.2 k+ ~tC~ r~`puP,~.r#'" W2 J'e- .l~ev, I~~~a e ~ IMD~t i1~ufl B~-~.~t ~~'t- i s -I~zS i S a J~ ll2y - W i COVG~N']wt~ i ~ - w i~P~ e-{~-~- ~Ph?q ~j ~t.t.i Ld iv~U/~?1MPM~'2'~ ~-il~SihP~S C~wVilnO~ ail?S~'Os''iL?~IVI ~IDW ~PiV'if~G~~ ~~VPIt (1,6"82~c. T~rv~e't~'riuDarw~ ~laS 21v1~~, L''c~/1~Y1W~tP-~ o~ •~i~t?~itGi?~ ~_a'vr~-r ~ b~-1,`9~ -1~ -I-ti.~t:ti ~r-F,r~ . at~.L~ `~~fB-h JVYI ~-Fv~ rr~ I/i a '1'12 A .s ~~vrd~ha-hv~a t-lt..e.?r ~-~-s-~- as we'll. J W~ --}~y,1_ -1-G~~ ~ a vevN 5~-K.?~ a-v~,~. v~r~sf Two, Submitted by Vail Valley Special Events Commission c Thomas 3. Britz Chairman _ 1 ~~~1 1 S Special lEvent Request Application IMPORTANT: This form must accompany all applications. Please type or print. Use a separate form for each event. Name of Event: FESTIVAL OF LIGHTS Date of Event: Nov 27 -Dec 23, 1992 Is date firm? yeS Tentative? Chairperson or Contact: Deberah Ramsey Address: 100 E. Meadow Drive, Vail, CO 81657 Day Phone: 476-1000 x 3037 Evening Phone: Sponsoring Organization: Vail Valley Tourism & Convention Bureau Are you a Corporation? yeS State and Date of incorporation: Sept . 1964 What is your tax status? (e.g. for-profit or non-profit) not-for-profit Circle One: Is this event New or Pre-existing? If Pre-existing, how many years? new Location of Event? Vail Village, Crossroads, Village Inn Plaza, Lionshead Brief Description of Event: Magical Festival of Lights promoting value priced lodging, lift tickets and a holiday ambiance with Santa, carolers, & a Town Crier V~Tho is the event targeted towards? Colorado families , skiers shoppers and overnight guests Amount of Request: $17.500. Do you want input from the Special Events Commission regarding possible ways to improve your event? yes 1 Event Analysis Attach additional i~iformation to tius form if more room for explanation is needed. ®?2GAl~IIZIIiiC EN'I'I'd'Y: la. 1-history and experience of organizer: 15 years of special event production experience. 1990 and 1991 fulfilled Town of Vail Special Event contract. lb. Event Beneficiary: Na proceeds -community at lame lc. What Percentage of proceeds goes to Beneficiary? m B. BIIDGE'I': 2a. Amount requested: h_ Spa 2b. What percentage of the total event budget does this request represent? 1/5 2c. Attach detail of the sources and uses of requested funding? see attached ~ 2d. Detail other revenue sources and sponsorship potential: see attached sponsor request 2e. If a request for seed money is a part of the plan, detail your rationale and plan for repayment: 2f. I~ow are Profits distributed? of 2g. If this funding request through the Special Events Commission is not approved (in part or in entirety), will the event still occur? If will still occur (without this requested funding), what will the difference be? Yes , there will be limited entertainment i.e. Santa. Carolers and Town Crier 2 2h. If this event is continued next ye~u•, do you plan on requesting funding again next year? Yes. however reduced fee as costums will be purchased and a history established which is encouraging for local sponsorship. I1~ISIJl2ANCE ~ RISI{ MAl~1AGEMIENT: 3a. Description of Insurance and Risk Management as pertains to the event: A nr~duct_ic~n c~mnanv will hire the entertainers and their insurance policy will cover the entertainers. 3b. Are all involved parties co-named as insured? Yes we will request that that be so (TOV & VVT&CB) OPERATIOI~IS PLAIN: 4a. Attach your Operations Plan, clearly detailing and addressing specific issues such as: 1. Staffing; paid and volunteer 2. Ticket Sales, concessions plan (if applicable) ~ 3. Operations set-up and tear-down 4. EnvironmentallSafety issues including security and clean-up. 5. Any other pertinent operations considerations. MARI~ETII~10 PI,AI~I: Sa. Attach your detailed Marketing and Advertising Plan. cd}c;,~R~ Sb. Vdill this event draw visitors to the Vail Valley? Yes Sc. Is this a "Quality of Life" event for local residents? Yes Sd. If this is a Spectator Event, how many spectators do you project? Locals l o , o0o Visitors 10 , o0o Total Se. If this is a Participation Event, how many participants do you project? ~ Locals Visitors Total Sf. Will lodging be required for either Spectators or Participants? Yes Vilhat portion of lodging will have to be discounted or compel? ~ Sg. lWllat geographic markets will this be marketed to? Colorado, Front Range , Denver Ft. Collins, Colorado Springs, Pueblo 3 I3E1lIEFI'I'S T® 'II'lf-IE VAII, VAI,ILIE~'a 6a. Describe the benefits to the Vail Valley, both short and long-term: It will create a magical. hol.idav atmosphere and w; 11 ha gaared tai~~ards ~'^'^_'_-~-~s buildins? tfie exoectatiop to hnv whi 1 a nn hn1 ida3~. Qo.ai wi ~ 1 h~tn increase incremental dollars. It will become an anneal markaYino avant It will included"the entire Valley. Avon. B~/e`ave~"r (~ee(k and va; l ~~~d iVk.V~1~lilitT?i~ 1~Vl~jr~.LyS ~wt~l~ 2 ~I~l ~O7FfY'i~7/1 5~8-rr>`/~Z1i~~ 9. C O1~ITIlit G ERIC PlL AI~I: 7a. An inclement weather plan (if applicable) should be detailed and attached. 7b. How are losses handled? PIZEVI®US ~'EA)E8'S ItIJSUIL')I'S: Sa. If this is not afirst-time event, please submit an additional Event Analysis on last year's actual results. VERY IMPORTANT: Applications received without all requested information will not be considered for funding until all requested information is received by the Special Events Commission. You may provide any additional information you deem appropriate, but please be brief. PLEASE READ CAREFULLY A1VD SICK: If financial support is allocated to this event, I agree that the funding will be used solely for the designated and approved purposes as stated in this application. I agree to follow all policies and guidelines, and will supply budgets, ad copies, affadavits and proof of expenditures to the Vail Valley Special Events Commission, as requested. If this funding is approved, the Special Events Commission will require a written post-event evaluation to be submitted within 30 days following the event. Acknowledged and agreed to by: Event Chairperson: Date. .~~-9~ Upon completion of this form, please submit o Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant to Town Manager, 75 S. Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado S 1657. Applications/funding requests will be reviewed quarterly. Applications must be received 14 days prior to quarterly Review Meetings. Please check with Town Clerk for dates. 4 ~ ~~5~~ To: Special Events Commission ~ , From: Deberah Ramsey, WT&CB Date: September 25, 1992 Re: Festival of Lights , Budget considerations A. Santa & two elves: hourly fee for three employees = $28 assume - 3 hours ie 4-7pm @ $84 per day if we hired them for 20 days = $1,680 Purchase annual mobile "throne" & decorations = $ 500 Purchase 3 costumes for annual use = $ 500 total $2,680 B. Town Crier - Hourly fee for two employees = $22 Assume 4 hours per night @ $88 per night Assume 24 night schedule = $2,112 Purchase costumes for annual use = 400 total $2,512 C. Carolers ATightly fee for four employees = $300 Assume 3 hours per night Assume 24 nights @ $300 = $7,200 Purchase costumes for annual use 800 Sheet music & director 500 total $8,500 Total expense for the above entertainment $13,692 The entertainment schedule is proposed between the dates of November 26 and December 24th. The listed entertainers and the number of nights they might perform are merely suggestions. We would probably use most of these people on weekends during the apres ski times, when they would be most visible and enjoyed by the greatest number of guests, All entertainment locations would rotate between the entire Vail community including - Lionshead, Crossroads, Gore Creek promenade, International Bridge and Vail Village on a scheduled basis. We are actively pursuing a sponsor for funding the marketing side of this promotion. The TOV's participation in this promotion will be a key to our success. We have secured excellent value season lodging rates as well as a $30 lift ticket to include in the lodging package. The Vail Valley Foundation, Beaver Creek and Avon have all planned excellent events for their specific locations< - ~ ~1~11, ~A8.8,l:Y'I'~UitISl~9 t& C~Jdll&;fV'I't®N BUREA9J J00 Euat Alcudv,+• D~?+r VuiJ, CU R1GS7 (,ID,I) 476-1000 ~ ° I-dOb-.S2S-387S~ ° FAX (303) 476-6008 L~at~ a ~.e~tember 9, 1992 To~ Tom ~hephard, Sre V.F'a /Mil lsport - Visa ?JSA Fr~rr,~ Frank Johnson, President Re~ Sponsorship FE•~T I VAL ~~F L I~NT' # Is a magical holiday promotion geared towards families t~uildir,g the expectation to buy while on holiday, with a g~~al of increasing incrert+ental dollars between Thanksgiving and Christmas ~ Will become an annual marketing event # Is a valley wide promotion, including Avon, Beaver Greek & Vai] ~ Will have each community produce common festival events lee carolers, town criers, Santa & his elves, window decorating, and tree walks ~ Maj~~r special events wi11 occur within the time frame ie World e?'+~~~ races, concerts Veil's ~vth anniversary party, "I~=ing ~~r+ the f_ar;e" in Avon and more # Value priced lodging, lift tickets, great snow, superb dining ar,d the opportunity for unique shopping values will be promotede 1ST YEAR G~?AL~ The promotion emphasis would be in-state and locale Collateral material would be tai:en to National fki Shows, to begin an awareness that early December offers some fabul~~us values in the Vail Valleyo The promotional costs of 535,000 - 40,00~~ would be incurred by a National Sponsoro Local events will have local sponsorse We would like to measure an increase ~f 3% in ir,creaseQ sales tam: during this ~-4 weal: periods 21~D YEAR GnAL~ The promotional market expands to two or three designates national markets such as Dallas or Chicago and continues strongly in-stateo Sponsorship budget expands tc~ 550,000 and SO% of the sponsorship funding goes towards the promotion and 20% is spent on increasing the scope of the event productiono The goal as to show a 6% increase in sales tax revenuese 3RD YEAR GOAI.~ The prort,otional market expands to increased national. markets and maintains a strong in-state campaigno The g~~al is to have a nationally recognized Special Evento Press f am trips for a public relations campaign would begins The Sponsors hip budget would increase by 25%a The 1992 Sponsor would have prominent mentions in all co]lat~eral material, The marketing outline in+cludeso ~ 10 - 20 ad placements in local and front range newspapers ~ ~O,000 brochures for direct mail, ski shows and designated placements ~ Radio campaign ~ Posters & banners where appropriate ' THE VALLEY OF LIGHTS FESTIVAL 1992 "A Celebration of Traditions Of The Holiday Season" Project Goal: To create a valley wide themed promotion during the time between Thanksgiving and Christmas to drive incremental dollars. Promotion would become an annual marketing event. Project Overview: The project has two levels. The first level is "General Promotion & Events" which involves, a) The overall marketing plan to attract people to our valley and inform then. once they are here. b} Special events produced by the program committee which are scheduled throughout the Valley. The second level of this project is "Town/Area Events". These are events created, produced, scheduled and paid for by individual towns or areas to create a stronger schedule and attract more people to their area. GENERAL PROMOTION: General Budget Marketing Budget- Production Budget Marketing Plan Timeline National & Regional Target Areas Collateral Pieces, Posters Press Release Plan Airline Travel Magazines Fam. Tours. Sponsorship Ass~ciatians Lift Ticket Discounts Hotel Packages Restaurant Program Enhanced Values and Specials Summer Trip Give-Away All guests to our area can register at participating merchants to win a trip for four to the Vail Valley in the summer. GENERAL EVENTS & OPERATIONS: Valley of Lights Bt.~siness and residences throughout the valley will decorate their stores and homes with lights to create a magical atmosphere. The Town Crier 2 costumed town criers will be located in each area to add color and inform guests. From 5pm to lOpm they will ring in the hour. Throughout the evening they will stroll and talk to guests, informing them of all the special events. Window Decorating Competition Merchants throughout the Valley will decorate their windows in an international theme and compete regionally for a Grand Prize of a catered holiday dinner for their staff. Christmas Tree Exposition & Tree Walk A decorating contest for sponsored trees throughout the valley. Guests will walk around the villages viewing the trees. There will be prizes for the best trees in several categories. Strolling Carolers Caroling groups will be created to tour each area. These groups will be costumed in period costumes, stroll around the villages and invite guests to join them in the singing. The group will have a scheduled tour so families can easily locate and join them. Welcome Stations or Restaurant Hospitality Nights Each night the carolers will meet at a certain time at the host site, a restaurant, merchant or hotel who will host a Welcome Station that provides hot chocolate and cookies for the guests. INDIVIDUAL TOWN/AREA EVENTS: In addition to the general Operations Plan which will take place in each town, each area can develop and add their own events and promotions. These ,additional events and promotions would be done at the expense of the individual towns. These events could include Avon's "Icing On The Lake", Santa's visit to Beaver Creek, sleigh rides in Vail, and candle lighting in Minturn. ~a. :"ir °7;r: ~ .rte"y : r' ~ f :`rt' ~ -bt a ~ r~ J .+t +1 ~ ,y'S 7. ~ / . r t _.Pt* ~ t y £ r rt a ~ i41+f ,,i~S. ~ 's~ f ;tt . . ~Fa „s_{..~ ~ ~K . _ r.t'_"...~._.~.....~_.. ,'~1.i.'r .i....~r.+.r..Ssv.'o-.>rrk:'i~ "~~~,eL rd 'ur`n 1 :.+cy Jr~'~. ,.i~~~~f+l„tiF:l;"Irrac~~~~:'!~ .:sit . _ _ _ . '•t! g D .t C ~ i .3 fee - q . ~®~r®~ vArl, u . IZo's Pbsddaps - ~ y.~ . y ~ o 0 1 ~~eciai Event Request Application I1~PORTAN'I': 'T`his foam must accompany all applications. Please type or print LTse a separate form for each event 1Vame of Event: 6Ji nter Carnival , 1993 Date of Event: February 25-2D, 1993 Is date firm? yes 'Tentative? Chairperson or Contact: ~ ~ c': Chas-~ai n , Spe ~ cal Events Director Address: Vui 1 Decreati on District, 292 tdest t3eadow Drive, Vai 1 , CC 21b~7 Day Phone: 479-2279 Evening Phone: Sponsoring Organization: Vai 1 Decreati on District Are you a Corporation? State and Date of incorporation: lhlhat is your tax status? (e.g. for-profit or non-profit) "'on-Profi t Circle One: Is this event 1Vew or Pre=existing? If Pre-existing, how many years? I.ocationofEvent? Vail 'Jilla4e, Lionshead, Vail Golf Course 13rief Description of Event: 6]i nter Carnival . 1S~3 i s a comprehensive celebration of winter. It features spectator. participant and athletic events around a winter theme. Vdho is the event targeted towards? '.°Ji nter Carnival . 19'3" i s intended to attract vi SitOrs to the bail V,~lev during a r.haracreristic211v slow time of the year. Amount of Request: $ ? n . nnn Do you want inpue from the Special Events Commission regarding possible ways tm improve your event? vP ~ Post-Its" brand fax transmittal memo 7671 I # of pages ~ ~j itrwt ~i+~ ~'~~~t.~'~+~vruu co. i 9n ,bp,,, ~iK co. ~UtJ r1 I Dept. 1, V'~ ~ Phone # ! ~ , ~ (I 3 ~Fax# G~9" I QctJJ Fax# y~1.9'dl5"' 1 ~h. If this event is continued next year, do you plan on requesting funding again next year? Please See Attached ~o ~tSLJItANCE / IRBSI~ A~AIVAOElYIE1~1'I's 3a. Inscription of Insurance and Risk Aftanagement as pertains to the event: The 'flail '?ecreation District carries comprehensive event liability insurance in amounts exceeding ~1 million. 3b. Are all involved parties co-named as insured? Yes ®PEItA'T~®~tS ~}LAl~Ie 4a. Attach your Operations Plan, clearly detailing and addressing specific f ssues such as: 1. Staffing, paid and volunteer 2. Ticket Sales, concessions plan (if applicable) 3. Operations set-up and tear-down 4. Environmental/Safety issues including security and clean-up. 5. Any other pertinent operations considerations. R~ARI~E'I'~O PILAI~Ie Sa. Attach your detailed RRarketing and Advertising Plan. Sb. Will this event draw visitors to the Mail Malley? vF ~ Sc. Is ehis a "Quality of Life" event for local residents? Yep Sd. If this is a Spectator Event, how many spectators do you project? Locals ~ , r~pp ~Iisitors ~n gnnn Total nnn Se. If this is a Participation Event, how many participants do you project? Locals inn ~lisitors inn 'Total inn Sf Will lodging be required for either Spectators or Participants? vA~ Vdttat portion of lodging will have to be discounted or romped? ~n~i Sg. VV~hat geographic markets will this be marketed to? ~o cco 3 Vaal Valley Spesaal Events Co~nflssion ~ttacltntent 'l'o lZequest fog Eunciing ~Ilnteg ~aglflflva~l IntruduQion 'The Vail Recreation District will implement the winter celebration; Van's Winter Carnival on February 2tr28,1993. Specific rnmponents of Winter Carnival, 1993 are discussed below. While the VRD receives support from the Town of Vait foe this event ($5,000), the VRD anticipates over $35,000 in operating expenses in our efforts to provide a winter celebration worthy of the Vail rnmmunity. Within that rnntext, we are requesting $10,000 in support from the Special Events Commission to enhance the overall Winter Carnival and to offset a portion of our costs. Winter Carnival 1933 Friday- Sunday, February afr- 28 IEvent 'axsu air va uca my ° Scott Hamilton Ice Shoes (Sunday, February 28): Held in Dobson Arena, this show will feature 2 time Olympic medal winner Scott Hamilton, World Champion Davis Santi and other high profile professional skaters. 2 shows, 6:OOpm and 8:OOpm will be held. ° Ice Sculpting (All Weekend): Ovee 12 Ice sculptors from around the state will be featured in prominent Vail and Lionshead locations. This two day competition is tailor made for guest and spectator enjoyment and will enhance the appearance of key pedestrian areas. ° Snow Sculpting (All Weekend): Vail Adountain lift maces will be the site of major spectator appeal as lift crews from Vail Associates compete for prizes by making the mos4 creative snow sculptures. ° Ski Joring (Saturday, February 2~: This fascinating event features a skier drawn by a horse through an on-snow obstacle course in a race against time. Help under the Vista Bahn in Vail Village during apees' ski hours, the Ski Joring event is guaranteed to be a popular and exciting attraction. ° liTordic Ski Races (Saturday and Sunday): No winter celebration would be complete without a Nordic ski race, and Winter Carnival features two. Held at the Vail Nordic Center, these athletic events will feature competitions in Sk, lOk ,Sprint, Skating and other categories. ° Chili Cook ®ff (Sunday, February 28): This culinary competition will highlight Vail area restaurants. The final awards presentation will occur in conjunction with the Scott Hamilton Ice Show. ° Childrens' Activities (All Weekend): iVIairy of the above even4 components will be enhanced by creative childrens' programs designed to make the weekend fun for the entire family. ° Free Sleighrides (All Weekend): Donated by Steve Jones Sleighrides, families will be treated to complimentary sleighrides on the Vail Golf Course. 1. ~aniaing Entity la. The Vail Recreation District, formed in 1966, has a long history of planning and implementing high quality special events. In rnmmunity special events alone, the VRD has responsibility for organising large celebrations for Christmas In Vail, Alemorial Day, July Fourth, Labor Day, and VailFest. Recent highlights of the Vail Recreation District's efforts include the Symphony of Sports Spectacular on ABC's Wide World of Snorts, The Champion International Whitewater Series held since 1989, The Vail Hill Climb and many other events in all seasons of the year. 2 Budget 2c. The proposed budget for Winter Carniva11993 is as follows: ]Revenues (.SoumeD ~ Amcnmt Town of Vail Funding: Winter Carnival $5,000 Ice Show Ticket Sales $27,000 'II'®TAL S $ 32,000 L=..vr..~ ~ Amount Printing $500 Adveetising $1,200 Ice Show Talent $20,000 Production $5,000 Saute $3,500 Lodging $2,500 Operating Expenses Ski Joring $1,500 Ice Sculpting $1,500 Chili Cook-Off $250 Childress' Activities $250 . Tent Rental $800 Sound System $1,200 Prizes /Awards $1,000 Hospitality $58p TOTAL EXPENSES $ 39,700 FdET I1~TC®A~ 6L®SSD Q$7,70oD 2d. Extensive effort has been made to gain corporate sponsorship of Winter Carniva11993. AT%T held title sponsorship of the event in 1992 and just recentty discontinued their involvement due to commitments in Vail to the International Brotherhood of Skiers convention January 22-24,1993. 2g. Funding is sought from the Special Events Commission to provide overall enhancement of Winter Carnival 1993. If funding is not granted, the Vail Recreation District will remain committed to implementing a high quality winter celebration In that instance, reduction in scope of some of the event components will be required to mi_nimi~e operating losses. 2h Efforts to solicit corporate sponsorship for Winter Carnival are ongoing. For 1993, such efforts have been unsuccessful. However, should sponsorship be gained for future Winter Carnival events, the VRD will reconsider its approach to requesting funding from the Special events Commission. 4. ®perations Plan 4a. 1. Staffing: The Vail Recreation District has a professional staff of full-time employees dedicated to special events such as Winter Carnival. The entire Wintee Carnival celebration will feature the cooperation of several VRD branches. In addition, volunteer assistance has historically been required for several of the event components. 2. Ticke4 Sales: Only one event (Scott Hamilton Ice Show) is ticketed. Tickets will be sold at several local stores in addition to Dobson box offices on the night of the event. 3.Oaerations Set-UD and Tear Down: All event components will be professionally implemented through the use of paid, contract and volunteer staff. In some cases, the assistance of Town of Vail Police and Public Works departments will be requested. Such request will be made through established TOV procedures. 4. Environmental /Safety: All environmental and safety issues will be addressed by established event protocol. In some cases, professional security staff will be hired, in others the VPD will be contacted. Clean up will be handled in a thorough manner at all events. 5. Marketing Plan 5a,g. Marketing for Winter Carnival 1993 is directed specifically at potential guests in Front Range and regional markets. The focus of Winter Carnival is to provide a focal event for attracting visitors to the Vail Valley. Our comprehensive even4 marketing plan includes: ° Newspaper advertisements and PSA's; front range, regional and local ° Radio spots and PSA'a on local and regional stations ° Printed items; posters, flyers, etc. ° Television spots and interviews on local stations Winter Carnival 1993 also presents outstanding opportunities to cross-market summer Vail . 6. ti$ene~its to the Vail Valley It is well established that resort community festivals mean bottom line profits for area hotels, restaurants and businesses. Almost every winter resort community holds a winter celebration of some sort. Current examples can be seen in Steamboat Springs, Colorado, Winter Park, Colorado, Stowe, Vermont, and Edmonton, Alberta. It is therefore, advisable for the Vail community to offer a winter celebration worthy of its stature as the leading ski resort in North America. By offering Winter Carnival 1993 to the visiting public, our guests are provided with an enhanced vacation experience, spectators are drawn into key azeas during prime tunes for eating, shopping, etc., and will be encouraged to visit Vail during the same time next year. The Vail Recreation Distrito is committed to expanding Winter Carnival to become the leading winter celebration in the Rocky Mountain resort community. Our hope is that Winter Carnival will grow to become a 10 day to 2 week event featuring many spectator and participant activities. 9. Contid.~,~.cy Planning 7b. As the proposed budget for Winter Carnival shows, the Vail Recreation District expects to absorb an operating loss for Winter Carnival 1993. ga. Winter Carnival 1992 As stated, 1993 will be the second year for Winter Carnival. 1992 featured many of the event components detailed above. The Scott Hamilton Ice Show is the most exciting addition to the event. Results for 1992 were exceptional. All accounts reveal the Winter Carnival is a worthwile endeavor for our communiiy and dot. gyring of support. ?L Q . S'~ ~ ~ ri~~ ~ c~~~~ nfi~ ° Q~ S~vn,~e8~ ~ ~ ~n,,~i U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o~ ~ s ~~-~,v ~ m ~ Wit, , s ~ ~tyty i t5r ~ l=.t-1CiL.t; ~;vuN 1 r 1-LL-u;~ ; ~ ~ u l ;~U;~3Li37ZU7-' ; ~ 1 ~ 1 I 7anuary 22, 1993 - 8:35 I _ EAuIF COUNTY (illll.DING OP I 551 6ROAPWAY `'a P.O. [30}( 850 BOARD OF [C7MMI~SION[RS ~ EAIiLE. LCJLORADQ S1B31 (303) 328.860 - ~ FAX: (3031 328.7147 ~ .r EAGLE BOUNTY, ~OL~RADO ' i A~E~ I i BQA OF COUNTY COMMISSI~NBRS i . PLANNING MEETINCx DAY JANUARY 26, 1993 i I 09:{10 - 10:YS ZS-324-1ORY LAKE DIRT, INC. t~c~ cnrnvrpROOn~ Paul Clarkson, PJatuaeC, Community Devel.,Yu~ttt i ACTION: Consider t~te application ttlat alXows the applicant to excavate attd~sell silted up topsail that has accumulated i i ~ within the historical boundaries of Dry Lake for I rec:a*I'.tian aav'h.^ds~lrtlg pu-~3es.. I 14:15 - 10:30 PL~iT SIG1~t ING F.rlGIECO[INIYRDOM Mary Hessler, Off1CE Manager, Community ~ Development ~ • Plant: - PD-1Q8-92-AF3- ~ Y CREEK RANCH Lt)T 21, BLOCK 1~ FII.ING 4 ! - SM-845-92_'TFiE RF,~~~tcVE, BUILDING B ~ . . 10:3U - 10:45 ROARING 1~'ORK AtJGREGAT~,, INC. Eacr~ covlvrrRao~ James R. l~ritze, County Attorney A~. r rUN: Table Frarn February 1, 1993 at ]:45 p:m. To February 2, ~ 1993 at ].:45 p.m.. • I • 10:45 -12:00 WORK SESSION - WECMRA ar~'otuurroil'c~ossROV,~ Tom Metsa, Recreation Director i I 12:00 - 01:3 LUNCH i I 01:3Q - j 'WORK SESSION REGARDING FINANCIAL ~ M7'ojdu SaLY ~OS4 ROUII! UPI9ATI; ~ Allen Sartin, Accounting Director THa NB2LT MESI'ING OF THt3 EAGLE COUNTY COMMCSS[ONER9 WILL BH HELD ON FEBRUARY 2,1993 I Tffi3 AGBNbA l5 PROS Burr. FOR INr+ORMAYIONAL PURr wnv ONLY • ALL TI11~E$ ARE APP80XIMATF. THE BOARD WIIB IPI 3&4SION MAY G4NSIDER OTI313x Ir&M3 THAT ARS BROUQHT BEFORE R. I I ;:~-:;y.. ,'~r~:'<iiy'3+;~7i.'4>}i`=' _ _ _ ~ }~r;Y~:i'i'r' e~+~*[' Spt.vz 2;,- - s :•_c;:-~: - w. _ <e}`.: . - ,w_tFir^: ,.e., r.t=` ~'1~[-^t 5: , ...>~~t t+.:y . i ;as;y` A,s:~': r_Y-'. ' 1 ~~-;'i+~ t;.« Y. ?y: a.2~•-; wF:. ~:?1 ~•;Vi.F/ .r:~: :•i•''i~ ..'•-:i::Y ,J v.1'~ •'l. :e3:"-~ w~. ..w ~ _ L... Y+.Ij ~y..Y:'- E~.`~-~.r .1,.11 ~:;r~ \•::-;•i..1;::: C~'. :.i'~?°. - - Y)..• ry:'. .P,~: :'i:a •(Fx.:.,: ti-•,. ,/'r 't.: r-: r. %th": it"•" ia~' - o-~$ iz='` tea.. _'::7~ ,kr`' -.,;mod ;r,~~.,' ; P; _ - '.-Y.. .?>F-inc.. - i'" ..y~ r;t:; .,~j+y; :',Y pit. - tx-~•... , r`=x4,~f ~t .S..tt:`:;,' -':'{-t,...c4ri,'S-.' -.a~, r.Cw.i _ ~r r . x - ~}F .Y~ ~~'':r. ~o ,a °a'--:• '1: - :.'u:. '~F='!~.5:._ rr. - Si .v' A~tiA' +a ~.t' ~~;~''k~ cq':. >f:. 1; _ ~i >•.T:- °i::- .r~r.':~'-'y'z-: t,,•~i'rf._ iVE-l:i'•i~'.• ~•.J~ ~ry °.ii r=: .'T ' a.T.. :.Tr I:.Ci,:~ ~1 ~~;:Ci i _ X.' Ai .j~~':3 .w.^~~•-. .Y',: 'i~_a _ i;.' '.t.' (,Y.••`,7•.. g. CY_.• t;r •-7.. .+;>E.~ ..:ia: ^:v-. br r~35`+ ,i• •'y3w. .Y; v~fFY •Y-, v4' Y ~-s~h: 1 Ti l> ( _ .4 !t- ry_ti?%'.f ,^i.-..,r ' 1. ' ~.`'-~i d `r ~ 'fie _ .5h. - ~ :.cir., v ''t~ [ .g _ # ,e 'v; . -r }t.. - . 'N.!~ ~ ,_y.S' { M:Y' -w.. Y• ..M `'~+Y-~ P!' .'_.T Jam`( •14.'-"s'','a ' ..~~JJ.. -'~'y''L. -M, ^.1._-A. try Y~~'~ . •..f: ynJ. i•eT '.,J aJr .~r_ w..{' T,•'^tr 1'~~~ y. a a'4i^ 'lj.~~'Y: f'.~° Y}:. '::-4-.`, •''V3.^5>,_ ...i. - ..r~ -';e:,,~,I wv.;~y} r y> .-9y, 't,~. 5"~,' .r .XEw,~ 'cra4,:• ;S, k 1~ _:a'.S.li- .~:y,-- •15.. 52'N~r` °:':,W .-Y•- dd ~;a'~'~ 2 `E' 41`i '~'`'~~S ~Z{r~~~l u':.:~ ~air';.ku...ofy~.~<~ •.7:taF `~F _Y ~ '-F` _ .SaI~.,'i,.t°i^ ' ' •Y.:' ~ Y~ I M t j~s r~ X: ':•1... ~'n ^'a~"1'f C~ - `:Ca: ' :h'=; < - '~'i•-^.~'~•` .t~~ `3:~r... .t::,~.dt qs~.~-".• `2- - ~S,T cr.,~aa' 'j:~•-~~~ a~4'• _ _ :.t?~z.a~G~^^33 _r~;:='•'-'~~"~],~~i_,.~..~~.,t; day -.s- i '_.T~:3:}'c'rs -f:1 .s't _F,7,..Yrp - - '.,F~.:. - '.0.:` :,i~rwc':?..k-r: •'.`r iaf:~.% - L 1 ~JA .r~'ia .r.. >;..t',;-::'y. l,5 :t - f.t i, 5. ~4.' ~ :z,. .;c-%:.:si:~!r'alr~• -!~>~?r J; :"y'r.aY}' C'?~q?.Kyr., ~ti_ fE.;_ ~J•',',,.._ i'~.e-• r'• fit:' •r. ~.#'-~''~''fC~Y:. ;.'S >4 r'r. _ ti:.:.,y _ r<.?~,:F. r }.'sa-),~`~,» - :,d:.^k t+a~G. us 'x y..: ..~J:;'i`~.::.~EJ .i._ ::i'.c~,.. r:` .i-~ t r - .~t: rr.:l :i°~ ra.. :-hA_. ,•"h-. ".e~: ~::5~: ~ 4. - - f,. ! • - ~r~' Y:- ~ ".R:. / •r a ~w-•iKa.i v . '•l.n.. i -0.. - ~-S!i:~ ~:.v.~^ L: _ ;~P• 4E, ?~4 ~ _ AS Y _ - a_'k Alb _ art: a1 '4.r > ='n'~ . eta,: - s: .ht" '~.~r~'~. - `h , F ~t ~e:+ : • , F^_-ire =r' u~F,,' _ . a: wt-i~:.lr iy J. .4 '-L'~' Y.T..'w r. W ' - - q 2 r ,a . . fi:': .c; :,:.,t: +t , ,v~.:....c - 3'~rf~~ `w~+':. :~*r.;,: -.-R .yi.i i.,'. e( ':y~~ - .5: }s _ L-. I. rs..'. .r~:::~.a :lztl.. L.i .a;• . 4,.+: :7 .t w F1, y - - .Ia r _ to r 7' t::i' ~3 ~•n _ a'+.. o.. .ya.., .y~. •^=-r _ f,>:.. _ ~ ~'k, 9 ; _ v~•. 33 C6- - `i::r ? ~i :ire ~ P • 4 - K~~ v - r'- d ) r .h J . a "T: - Y• '-t ' - + ~ ~~4- K" •h rt .r: r'y - - - .t;: - . - , i- . t S4 ' E _ - } --A r ie, . - - P - .i x L ~t- - - A a _ ~ - .~i ~r - - ~ :fJ ^'a - • - Y ::.7 - - V' L`SO1\ a •'.T~,~i:~;~°:.~ f: .a 1.~sr,t.. e0' -r +;r~ •:x - `AMEN . „i'. - .7. . ti. . , t ;K - ; ~ r :,P ~ - ••:ra: - f - - +'S : - c;., x. '6=~ B~, :i:' x.~r-i:. ..''-tF'i; ^r,e :i. - Wit,- - •P. _ y~.,,~. COVENRNT a - t;i=~': OTECTIVE: 2 ,ya...•;~:r _ _ -O Sa'~. ..J L~ _ . ti s _ may, _ ~0 .,i..,;.... ':jT..:: . ' =Z•_ , .O ..F' ~ ~.Y.. '1~ _ tea, . r I •S • . ~~a~ - 11 : ~ ~:P' y w~ r. FEt- S Vii: 3~ 3, i -..r.. . ari' %,ORADO;f. ':ti >.-C.r. a~,,~ rj;, ~-•:v'- `JJ. .7. >.v VNb b~•,~ - .-{t~=~~C: ,T..~ "~6: i.. ' .r . f. >f _ ' - • 1 ,r 54 ~+s: : J aN C i - 5 ~F: ~ : ; : sir' ::k.';:•r,:; .•i ~ .a. r: ~ a 5. x... 4:'. ~ y= - ' - 'Cr'y ~ 1'e` o;' V,. • 'r t, , - O r. O ,OY- , 4, rad Io P - .•r - CO ~ a n - 'C AJ+ r - - y.$ . - - e - }~~>7a at a - so As l :o'i - a d s -r - V -e e n ,L S x lLLK1 - e HE v f ;,f-'. . W -r - , ;r=~ ter': - i of e r 1 h r» ~an bed:: : ' r.,,~_ s` ri > e ' d - _ • the'. q r:' a of . g~~ •f • O - _'y! - ~ ~~yt-: 'tC _ -y"-;' of :f; 'e Land) - - 'W;.l '<e.-. '~+:p,. e~::~~:. ag:.sub) • ss a r e J - - ! - - - t: '.:iota;: ~ q~ •r - v ..J. y. / - •J: . .Z:: .r!,~ 1 ~ 1 e s r 'r ' - - . Y a l : ..a ~ j%' ~B x - .44' -~~i t' _ - - - tti. • - - _ r..' - - 'r ( - ~ ) ~t,'+ : --V i~L -~r. q~p a ra - ~T r~ ~nd , . ' ; ~":~.4 SECOND ~ F% Y _ f. . ~T$ ,rt.N:.... .;a.'.: -.rt:' - - &Ct' fi, /LIONSHEADr' •;a 't~l~l``°of`~ VAIL VAIL/LYONS ~REiT~;:..,:<:`;~.'1',;:r::~: , - _ {f.. HEAD Y_ :F ~~ir.~~:r . . `~Y-,:-'57.., - _ */G and all ~ Of TraCt~ B~0'~_.. ,a~. ti THIRD FZLI. ~ _ a ed is=: b i a : scr d ~ e c. - o tt t : i e x -s- P G - N - LI P • b" `FI ,.1 r'; ~BQt~ 3" Nti;. - on the Northerly, i - t~-~ -~'-x:. innin at a point _ .at^ Bey g Cornar=.of`'i%:~,:,,,.. .;;r •..,R-:>~ - '=:.°~4~`~` ch:.ie the Southeast- 's= n ~-,~i-;.,a d First Filingo whi " _ ,-r;;:; - motif"- s''K. - Vail/%ionstlea o ~ 5 W 301,79' foot: _ _ _ a;_ i;.~:. th a nc e ~ S 8 4 0 6 0 = :a'1 ubclivitsiono _ _ .Tract° D of: said S 7°17' 56" b: 43.66= fe®~'`to'=' `y JP::~~- :~F, line thonco S 2 =~+s'~}.=~ ~~;°:;~:'i;~~~:~~:~~=s~. along-.said ,torthorly t thence along:`~aiiid~_:;:~~. ,..c ~~~b~~r~° -;'.;r,t;:s<: on the Southerly line of said Tract F3J. - a point < our cours3s s' (1) N 83° 35' 00.":` 59. _ ,d ~ in' on the .ollowing f o , - _ ;~i ~t..;-~:,w. Southerly 1 p 3 N 54 34 00.E 89'400~'~~ _ _ r~.,••f-`' -*.~"•t'~ - 8°13'30 E 158.00 feett ( ) o , - _ - - `50. feet; (2) S 7 p thence 5 B4 37 32.-:qtr,;-:-.;t:.:':.~:.:_;;_`,4 Spa; _.~a•:=" - ° 153.50 feett ,,i': ''~'°"~'`°w::~ feed. and .(43 N 11 02'30 E ' ' :~~;~,,.~'-tij°- _ : i`_" containing 37 °47.1.29'sguar3 <:A. ~L•~• F, :;y b e innin , ' ~n~-y. i-ynr_~~ 6@.55 feet to tho point of g 9 ':~:':-•=:,,.~:;"y - - y~ :.f~.j;F~~: a: or less t - _ _ E~~~x,• rj': ,itir.; 0.8602 acres more a 1® County ;,•z,_ :°}~:•:ti~~~'~-'r,"~~~.: - feet'or a Town of .Vail, E g +'~i~h"~'.' ~.~;~'•'?.:x~'~+~rttcf,.,'s: all' of these parcels being in th 19.2483'°acrc o. • - ~~r~'~~~'~'"`•^"~°':; - inain 838°460.23 squar®; fo®t .or. - , r,: S:, ,.~.t~b~;~. Colorado and cont g ;.:;,.Y..-.' • _ x~. ::}?t'3' ::L': a ' 4.Y 888 • - "l~, - ° - car 1 - r~ - s'= - nd - =g~'' : 'A" `LYON. }1 p:t•~x•',;~,f{-w r.t;~`~'~~^=i. OF°.GORE CREEKS ;:VAY~/ a:>.:..: ` Parcal I! 2 UNP., REA~ SOUTH~~ ~ '~`.{A{.J,~N4"~rJ1:14.(:.:'S^~:~.li.f,'S"~~'-'-:<_~,<;..: _ ATTED 11 :j,. _ - ,=;=1,:. n~ ?-:-y~,;,~_`;.... '+!:?i~:~~.F 1.Y. .-F.1 n':- ::4G '.1~ - - _ Alt1+~~1 - ~~~,~~E'S "5.' tl a~:i a3" rt. .E"~r~':- E•g.~~.$OU t.~~~' xY':::i::. ,~-~:as~c~:~oJs' .-+'f`~ , z•:~ of Sectiosi ,7 Township.`- ~~~r'F~ ~.i'°~`''` - eel of lsnd in the North half o• Q w~• '~'<a~~,a,f A par idian Town of'Vail;-EA~1 _ `r"~--~~• - ~a~•`•.i;: West of the 6th Principal Mar , n'=.~~ zij,=- ;:,.:Range 80 Lions Head,': Thi=d_;= •F~-~' - ~ - - ~.:~~`:~'s~.~' _ of Tract B, . Vail/ ,r,=:. y g ouch . _ . _ _ . ~ j - ,,i~';#~r~'" _ •.q'~~• c'.ounty°. Colorado 1 in S in and North•'of~r~'~``',=`~_:;'.' - :~'~;.'=~t~ "'""'~~~{Y~" Filin and Tract B, Vail/Lions Head, Second Fil g - ~ ~~~~w;~ ~ ' g V i l Villa e, Third Filin 'described~'_' ~ ~ t„' ~ d~ "a •-a Sixth Filin and a 9 g`' - _ ,r. ~5; ~ Vail. Villa e; 4 ~ ' . ~ K~ a - _ _ - ts., =iw - ti'1 'SS 7. - S a - t.. ' ' , ; - ' Y - ii+ :.~r i~-` - - ~the.`5outher Y ; x: , ~,;cJ~: ~ - - . Be innin at a point on . ::>1 ; Y ;:f:. .,rtr°y~:t: - g g e Northeast;:Corner ~~:'r _ ~ ~ - v lin which point: is th - _ • ~--s ..~;ti 4Head Third i g.' a$ .t~~~s~,-,~;~~: ,~J.rr,n, laid/Lion- .thence along::`said;~:•~,;:;~::'s°'<:•' ''"~r~r„°=~J"=~'~'r~~ Block' 2 ,Vail Village° Sixth Filing,, _ _ f~. °•3~. -~~~°-`~.:t~.¢;, ~r::,~~» of-Lot 2,. , Vail sHead~'` y'. ,sy,, line and .t utherl lin®, of Tract B /Lion r_~~a~ r; ,~a,~ ".r?.[ -.~>•'•,ti:: - - ,r.' Southerly h6 SO Y ` 11° ' -r y"s:~r.=;,.:;~' . fifteen coursess (13.~N' 24JF18. t;<':~;':~;:, n the following' f _ ,r.+. .'.>~E:,1:t1~,..,X, -;;3-,.~~:'v:;~,J,~~;. Sacond Filingo ~ 69°23'40p"".• - - ~YYt.I'~;tiak9~~~-: ° ° 11.03 feats (3).•,N" ;.~~,,x:..°.. 8 feet 4,: -~a;'' `;s°e''~'s>:=sY;E ai' w:69.3 t (2) N 61 27.30 E e' ° "Y; ~2~45`~00; =f~~~t.`'~:; ~=~..-r;,~:=~3'`.=:.>..`. o ° p '55,00' feetY~':~(5) N 63 24 00,;.'E> <.~'x'.r'>:.:::'? cs>n.~'r#~.~~aa~:l,f::..-.. E.~234.53. feett' (4)' N.4 35.58 W. • :.~i.~,fa~~-::~rf:,_.:.,.a~.i'a;`~;~_°; . o ~ a 54°34'00" E 72.00:~'feetj'=:.._`,":4-;.,~~<. - ':~~-r:~~::'?-:?r~;,•';~r;,.:,,.~';:; - feet[ (6) N 82 24 00. b, 148.00 feet[ (7e. ° p. .:=:.J_.:_;,r.'•:~'~==~"_" ) 22.00 E 95.OO.feet ~ •.c' N 11° 34' 00" E 252.00 feet[- (9 N':: 64 x~~,,, -'1"~?'':Y_ r:ti`;~ I ~ p . S 73.36 00 E. 188.0O.~.feet::,;:_~-`'t`r:'.` :~:='t'~:''~:~: ~~;.:a a.;~•,;~a,=~.~>.~~ =+5':`' (20). tt 88 OS 00 E 125000` feet[.'. (11);, , y~'rll~i"^3'_',~5:-r ;~5,8 o ~ A~ 50.00~~ feet8 ` (13) S~ 49°.36°00"~. E~ 235000~'~feet~t~~~~-`-~~, ::.1"e~;~;y..~''~',y!,':~,t;..:~~7,;~:~,'~:.'' • (12) N 90 00 00 E 1 _ ..,_~,r•.}-'~.,..,_ '>:;.:r~• . _ :a::~„ti~-?. .;t 6'48' 2" E 179<90 feet[ ( ° ' ° 181'e5T_fcet;~,. . _ (l4) S 8 ~ and 15). g. 19 52 38 W _ ~:t::`;•::--: .x"} ; ~':>~y.:a>,, s;;.. Of . Vi l lagei . --,+~t`'~~'s; ~ ear 6. :~.:_._,,.y..::'....•.•;,..' mor less to a Point on the Northerly line Vail 'Y"'c~• -.,,~a}•'`,:;.~; ilin which oin4: is the Northeast Corner of hot. ;~.elock;=i:.~:.;.:.::,~=:1,:`'.`' .Third f go P ?a=?~2ra=... -.~.'=:~:;:~,~~.~,x herl lines on'..;two~ _ -:r .,;k x'~~ .?=.a'~a;~= 3'.of'said subdivisions' thence along said. Nort y ;*,;~,s~ <':"~•,:~~-'tif:' ° ~ p 5 00 feet[ and (2) S 36°11~4'a"''W ny... Y:u•. ,§`>•~,'~~~~~L cou.-ses. (1) N.72 14 00. W 57 . ( • . . - ,4 - . ` ' . :i ~r,. ° . , t' - :'$:~~t .'r . ' f, ''a'° ~ A ~ :Ka Ir'n'`'`Q`~ ST'i~-• `•`~~'~#J~~ _ . : t. 4•' . r. y. -i;'.' •'LS'Et :x. ia.>i~ :_k. -_•,~.t~e„ -a x. .'~'n`~`~LAe +7,y :eat•r~:_p~ ;j•~Jpo .,~_`s :mss ~.^,'a...~: ..1.... r~>.$ .c+ e ~ •J':;:f: i. ~'l:. ,•o•y+-. ~'~+•.J~ t~ ~ tP '1 .:4° !ficc~.: .J--~`i~.::;t.~% 'i"=~-~' - •i`:>-^J ':1 = ~•i'tif~''. Y,; '•;~4• ,t~v~,r~-•_ i~17'' :lt,"bf D.~'• r.•.iS:' '-r. .l ti.; rt:.'v.,:~, '4p « '-'a'%: ` - 's' .q`~.~. ~`~'y''1. J• ~9' _ h: t,. tft~`: * ' `c• `~:~.c`.'~S r' -`:43k*~;~_ yJ,, , +i~ ~ T ' Syr i:, f •n,t' F:i' '`i:rr-:.: 6:tRZ . ry'• .f. ~7. ~y ".'iF ,5,~. ^:°l,~n' ~ e - _'rz.~t=~ •.?,1:~ 1.: - .tip .'r::2'n • `-'~i•ky :,i' .:~^1 4-y~•L ;Y~~.~~Fr d^„~' r~, ~'SV C:, t <a.~'"„-..:"j:r t..: c: -Y t, M: -r~.~ - .a `.~M: ~ ,}it -a ar •ft: '•y,r t~r~ ..!n4 r~ °-y'i:!~~J'f1G`i t.'•'r ~i~i ,'a- w,._ '':i^' .i. y~. ~',::.t. j-'~'r!. 2 -.Y, r .?~q~+; ••i.~ '~'i 1,~yjM~.~'(~~. .Y'q9~ - .t3'~t. 7[a y.:S'tt::','_~' :.r. {`2.r•~.' •s~'i .i. •:'.l •;1.•n.l-~._..~1r~r3:,...R'trty.tkC:~<~r4~~ aSJ~-it-~ _~~!;~~.`.'+`'f.~WR''?'' gat ~ -'l.'.~~ `1.T - ~~4'f+,E; 3 ,.,tC'~ .-:G,.:~-_.:.3~ .ir•c-a._ ,t~,:t... . • ~ - + ~ ;Y~~Tb -..:c 1X ' f.~f``-' - f>, x'f'~S~'~.z-. ,>y. _ - - .sgrL""'-°a r d ri'' - _ r.r t }t` M r~ _K~. 3"t~r r sr~'FL ~ y. c~,Yt A,r{,t~^l~. x~ , y 3 s wit ~~id~. K, ~43y~''.s t~ ~ r° ~ . a (....r ~.1' h .y yr d~Fr V~~t -F~r ut 3'-2i ~+-~i.,,i. 9 r S,+ ~ j' fix. "';tt ' - 3 .tF Tc}x.7 cc ~ + t. ~ ~~i . ..z'k4. ~ ~ , y.~- ' > i ~ .rr ~ :x t... 4~ v r ;r F nY 4.~. p~x ~i,f Sr,~r•~~Ci~E'ry 7 Q ti t . ! }'7''~~.n 1{i~ ~ ~ ~:L ':r. ~v' ~i'~ 'j~.S'yx'-F... ~~...a~-J,~}a:7y,wa ~4 r 5~4 r'~~ 1h1..,- ~ F 1 i. - Y ~7'r f. ~}.t- ~ a_'tt ~~C"'~'yst~`.E~kt' ~~H ~+'~r f'~.", r f < ~ r 1:, zap. r ~~s 3~:T a S",::c.,'~~`g'- `R~t ~t~~ `'1c'+ '.:t}~`'-3xo~~~ tl i ~.~:.L ~ i i . ~i~ Y. t 72 ~l ~ ~ i~R.~ ~.'X ~4~.1R'i.~ - 7^~., A';'t,k ~ <~r ~,°."''i~ ,#:-fir ~t sa~ .'t.. s M~ r ..i~i~ d -~Jy]•z Y - .4,.,,- - t~~ ,f?: l~~i•'.~~ r } ,t ~ •,fk ~ 7. y F ' ` ..>s 4.9' i z'ia ~~~'~'Y~~~.F~ c~~4' ~ ~-'~f`1 ~~y t~-~'~"'' : - ryy - ~ .*4tt «:f~ i y t}.4 .~i t. , ~ +4 rp _ , ~~s ~r k T ~r<o ~ S Y` ~s~' ~r.•~' Vii- c ~ ~ ;r"s'y~'x : ~ ~ <.~~rt' "3~ Z l if 9Y ~ i ~ r : f - l yqs % z - ;,iy7T p•--•a ~ ~ - r _ Trsl $yy~ ',,.r ~t µ ~y-,~{-r+~ ~ V S' J 1~~F `+a~t` i ~t ~ r `~r4a-y~ ,ate' ~~Sj~~~ I Z t i Y y, _ - ~'~~t i'~~,v~ I ,.-f ar ~^ss y- ~".'"~w1~r r ~s .}~fi'is~ z t 5 iy, ~w ~{..y.{~f f~ 3 z u.~ A3°aU: rte.. L' ~v%`~ ?fC<Xt . 7r ~ . V. tiT'krc- ~ - ~ : 3~ ~P. ~ ,fie ~ "tr' ~ y. r. •t ~ _ ~S .f t'`...-> f~- y ~ ~ ~ ~ . S J '`s +r x. ti~ :~'-~'.'Y.~r hy_',N -a ,ufti r~v~ sv~L.ya ~ eft i ~T •ariS t j ~b y'~•~~,~"~ }a/ ~~~,~.5~-~?i~ ,r . i~ ~ - ~ ~'•f+~~~K ~ ~TF.-1 t-;S r,'~.dilt-4.vrYal A!E ~T bt y ~ r'`L as7~i~~~'xt ~ ~ ttt ti "413- ~ ~`i a :yfi~ifi~ 1{~~,f tx ~'O~ x- .f 'r°.<~r~`'V' 1t~~~` r++,~{ sq'•..~p r -iar. A,~' ry.r.("3 P ~4 ~ ~ s <`~r, .reg. ~.,.~f--.WU" c ~ . ~ ~~t •t ~;j d r r ~ ~ ,i Lt_ r ~ • }r :i ~ ~ ° a. t tt a i t r, '1 s ~ i t ~t , _ z N-i n .r. .et ~ ~ 3•~-' ~ 1~ r r .T ~ i r. i S., ,x t -ri rt ~ v Y tr r3 '+1~. l ir~. z ~G~xj - ~ ~ a a.'. i ~ ,,yT_~~~i _ t :6 t .~Z ,U ti , r ~ : ; c ~ ~~CS t • 's,.i,~i-*,y y d,.i~i qrqr~ ti C t;S~ 3/ f f o s ~'~a. ~ ,'Y Yf. Y fi'. Z Y : k ~ ~ F t, s u LE'I ~ jc r ~ 1~ r '=fi~ i it s~ r - ~~t 'r ~ N2~~ yt~l Tt aa~, - f ti ^4y ~ ° y ~ -r qa-f.'.. ~ r r0. , v ~ $ l.`i .r- c n i ~~+fiS. .rte ~ r k Sr +p~.. - ~ ; : i , ~ . 4 :7" j , j~ S tom- +Y Z 1~ l rn -l ~,t .J 1 rr ~ l3 ~ u , ; , ~ -.673,; 40 £eeQ to ~ a point on .the Nogttiegly l'9:n®' oY~- Vai1:~ Vi11'a7®v : ;~.,'a~~-~ a',~ - t ` r K t<` k ' J ~ ` _ R",;:Si~cth .Filingr which point is;.th®°tnost North®gl Corner oP°: Trot: 1°,,, , , ~ Block 2 .of'_said aubdivisionP .thens®24°23g°45piW~a59~20~f~®1:imore~ y-~,~~`+-~`~~ ~ ''~x ` s -~~.T~ ' ~~t=the;::.following seven courses y:, (1),. ~YYk~ r ,5 ~,T ~'"~or'less <to"} a point nn: a 125.:foot radius: curve ;which' is°:.on' ~e~644o 13 ~~i' ~ _ rt ti s s ay 'North lirie~:of Tract A of said:ssbdivieiotiY`~.' (2)`Northwesterly~ ~ {feet. along the arc of said curve to.: the•`•left whose: central:' atigl® 4~,; J ~ y'~rt4" S:~ f.. g~~~~-~ `is.~29°23'45". and whoso long chord bears+ 2v=80°18'07:5"< W63.43:,feet~ ~~f ~ 2j ! Y ' y r, . 3 - ~ ~ to=~a paint ,of tanflfantt (3) -S 85°00' 00" 19;.200•.00 -f3aet mo.ra ors leas s,, 3 r t ~ r~ ~ ~to,=th3~ Northwest Corner oP said Tract Av -which ia~ also. thn East r',~,¢r'~' } ? +lincs of Forest Roads (4) N 5°00'00"- W 50a00.Qeat,to'a.:goinb on a<,,+~ry _ ^c t 275„ faot.,radius curvo which: is on the North:lin® of Format' Roads ~ s, < st ` - 'k r (5)':+ North°wo®torly 129.59 fcet along the arc oP ~aidrycurvo. ;to tho~r r - ' E ff ~ i ~ right whoso central angle is 27°00'.00" and' whoa®~ lon chord boar®'" ~ `If'" _r r H i, r { g ' _:~,~ra'r; j,: i r •;N~:81°30'00" W.12B.39 feet to a point of rangentP'.f° (6) N 68t~Road"to{z, ` ~f a ,,`:U r~,,'. ' =W :270.00 feet more or less along said North. line of Frder> i ~ ~ ~ ~ ° _the Southeast Corner of said Lot 2, I31ock 2, 'Vail VillagF:, Sixth ~f i c ,,r •4 r Filings.and (7)'N 22°00'00".E 130.00 feet aloncontainintA580,520.83~' Y S . x. ~r - _ -line of said Lot 2 to the point of beginningv g ~~`{S~ - ~ square. feet or 13,3269 acres, more or lease 't:.. - _ ~ t ~ f 4~~>,`~~`s ' hereinafter 6o~netitnes ' , , ` ~~~i E ~ h'HF.REA3, Vail Associates, Inc..o t ~ > r4•yi~tt.i ~ ~roferredh®oTractn~,eUlocka andcLotseofgth®rVail/LionsHead,tFirst i :r " f k ~ ; 'h ,~v"~ L,~., 59. -use of t y~ f,, ~g,;~U 'Filing for the benefit of the Cnaner, and its respective grantees, ~,,r 3x ,fi' ~i`~ a =successors and assigns, said restrictions being filed of record inf' ~ ~ is s. ~ ,,~rU - 's:tha Eaglcs County, Colorado records at book, numb®r 31°Y and at ' ' ; ; f `rfG~3,:t + ;=.Page number 675. si.zo ~ _ ~~i,~-~ - r' r r { lace certain additional ~ t ' ' WHEREAS, Owner desires top f 3L` _ -`restrictions on the use of the Subject Land .for the benefit of ~ s ~-ak~ka x~_ ` :,;_,the Owner and its respective grantees, 0uccessora an8 assigns, in n; :t*, 7} ~ ~ h s ;jpt 'Lr}7SH3AD ,r:`'ordor to further establish and maintain the character and value 4 F _ a~ ,,.,(,+~z ~;of real .estate in the vicinity of the Town .of Vail. ~ d, L , ;.3 xz , ,,3th, , ~ remises,' Vail"•~,i•':, } -~`_cto i NOW: THEREFORE, in consideration of the.p < ~ ~ ~t~ssociates, Inc., for itself and its aranteee, ,successorrs and ; _ ~ , l "I}~- ~ ~ ; , } a ; i; ~ ;iassigns,. does hereby impos9, es .abl. 'tLv. publish, ' acknowledge,':, t ~ t ~ -~H~t+s~ ibed r t=3eclare and agree with, to.; and Yor the benefit of,,all-p:~rsons t , u, S~3i.r- 3~, ' :;who may hereafter' purchase or tease and from tim®::to time; so own ~K' • :°~'r - s a_.or hold the Subject Land in Vail/LionsHead, First Filir~g,.-.that it? ,tic ` ~Y`d rM r~ s•;pyrng and holds all of the Sub ect Land in. Vail/LrioneHe~ad, First +=r : c ~ 4 t: t y ~ i { y °t{F~Ccx~,rir ~ =`'Filing, subject to the following 'sestrictions,~,covenants,•' and r4 r~, ~i, f ~#i;l*t~ sta~.l:: +~'conditions, all. of which shall be: deemed to, run with'`th®'- land and ~ ' ;,wh;:; ~%3, - `~~to inure to the benefit of and be ;binding upon3t}te Ow'nerw its,: ~,4 , , ~ ~ ~ i 2 "f ~~~~respective grantees , .succeb sera and assigns s r - , ~y4~ > n~;; < 1 1''~J '~1~ CO '~i~. ) LAND,USE• .fi r4~~ ~ r _ a v t-- 1.1 No use of the Subject Land.shall'~-conflict with`- < or violate any provision. of the ,"Protectiv®`Covenants ~ ~'~~*,,~R ~ ! t - Ea le , .County, Colorado" • ` ~ - t fi~~~~,~Y4t, r of Vail/LionsHead,. First~Filing, g _ as recorded in 3?ook 217- at; page ,_675 of the records of ~1. ~ y , Jed t.,....~.i ~E.'~t fi.; ~ ~ r - rj~ ~~4.;~~ye:/,-~ 3 the Clerk at.d Recorder of-Eagle County, ~,loradc+i ; r ~~~~,v~`~,.o ~ 1.2 Tho Subject Land shall'be used,`held and main~° ~ ~:y r .~f t,t: ' : tamed in good order anal nondition by the Town of .Vail 3 , y - y1 { f. j t~ t ' :a(t f trok rN'-c 7 , Y i x~~ ~~yg..,~~~,, ~ C L~ii}. `fF..'('. ,tom.;; ~ ~yp+ rte-S{cy,q~.~x ~'7i,~~i:a y9~-5c}'~~F° ix~ S` ~ _ ~ t fr., rR~~.,~,;~ia~.n ~>'tt3-~ytS ~'~S ~~.I.;~F:r Y^~~."'f 6l'i~~4Y~'vR2['.. ~ .~.,e ~`~~3 a~~.:'^.y..,..,^^C•'r.i~=`%•~{'n6-4-~''~~!~l .i,.., +,""'li 'i.~ +t , ..r - ~q,.a....i..a'..: ;:lrtiT•; r'c -:X~.~iK :rt-K Y`+a'.. ~yl"I ..r,:" Y~~~s T: F'''-;,~ ~'?'y~;~\.rr_. a,r , . ..-rA r'{r. - ,„erg .~.'>_t:.,~%"li.~~ '~:9,>• .f'~,•-''~~..-'_'<hrT .C ~{"~7 ~`y :.~1'•7 L:'~~~~.. '-w i•r... ..5~. (".'-~:a~?; ~p•.v. . ~:-4f?-n: f= ~:~:+1~~'`ts,-~ ~':r';ii 1:, et. r.. ~,t y ..a.P •`r~E: :;jr%" '~3'~': ra~,c`~~3. fie: - >.F-F: 1+.~ . >ti:. - ``va., - t': ' k - •.i a_ 'i.4 ~ ~s -~J .yam t~3~ i'.~ •P _ ,t.r _ `4~ -:-St v" d::r:~ ~y r.. _ •.'u - _ CAF .:I~,. ..y%' - ai "R" _ `4~ tt - ,•4 .'4: - - - ~0 - : - ` ^S _':v.a.'- - s`: %c. ..w '[kt'", ~i.~'`i,. is '~~S `:c ^~4'.',tts~', .~r~:::~. su ;.5, _ l,''i. isZ?.= ":`4,_:~ S-`*4':.`: _ ~[~>,!ao-~ r' '-.tr:~~, - xs!'-. ,.~zr73~. «fC'i[: .:.Is~;:~":%::~r.. ,..i':;,2_ - .•,l~- - -~;}Y ;:9~Xr,Y ..;t'~hk ri,' a/S- .51`.:%'-'L r ~Yt 4'~. Lf+:t r;.. :'-1.'..u y'F,,~ _ - axF''~~ Y..,rsr. S,_ '+,~u 2S,' ,r.l; t J;ft~c~ - - :$v ,a x> to •S'' fi`7 yp;.:.:.;.,.:a.~''• _ - . !.s fnaS: '.4`Z > <.,K,. y o>7 :`lr. Xr' ~i r. _ ~4_. 1 .:F r~ r,. } . F~ ~ ~ .A sL s 6. _ r F 'k~ F:>,• _:t. i`..•',:, .Y'- ~.y. GY.... 3'. _ .a r :-5.:" s...+~ia-i :2:.:~ 7~'~. •'.t' '.:P'€-_','F}e`,~`:-^: ~~rr t.. ,:~%vt:~y, ^z:+, .ate„ .d ..t'e'a-0tw -Y•, - ':i: ,<.g'•:.~`: r~,>t: ,rig` .S~' - ~4i..~•.'•~•~ .R' `a: _ _ .<ar-.1 _ ~'.±,,~c::.:'»- •q~y.. rh :>~•,."g'< A.Y.1^s1:~ F3 r r n:{>t~ .r~i. ~.1 _ "r cK""iL~a'~..>,s.°..-.. e_:.... e. ..3~'; :~.x - e: ~*<~'~,I n'Hq ~,C'^':~.: r,. ,..i.. ;`~i', +;i~ - .yaF-F ..3._~ ~ Sy • ~ i'a'~•,~yy K7 rv q~.~~.. - i~i~:' i.:fit ~'r.+ - - +i5'': •i..f '4. :x 3+~ r, ~~tict n.,.. 'fF.^~':'~p~''`:ii .}a: ::n='.ti - ,_yri ~~j~- _S ~-~pi vt.~ ~a'tY. is S ~,`pSy' n - _ rj~- ~'nfr,r9.L;- :•1, l., - - ~'I" 'd'~':. `G~ 4 .f'~• 3' .~Lr: •~'S.. _3 91"` . Yy~ 'nY: 3 - , _ _ -_,y:;:'' ' ~'4'F`.. F,a'k. -.%l r: ;,~1i'`''' t .'•1K;~T ' - . i rr:.. - ( ~ :j ~ , - `~f~ _ - . _ .;Fib.." :;r I x~7;'.!.- $r `'a°.~ir'LSt.c-.':d'fJrz:~ -5.. _ f.~ _ - -I:', 'y•, _n ':ai(' ~=`~:.i:~%- :t` 'T' if•'-~°'• Y,iS~z~n:°.`,di..;SLaKiJ~ _ _ - ~.9.`.' -:t r ! n: , r~F'::e :-t-~f'i. ~ _ _ _ `c;r: tiy't4~~x'I+~:,..:F.f..>gyx. ~i?i:` ''Xo-:.j... ~ - .ot,~ -y{: r.. L- i.~:r~< ,t :~a+r.'r-~ ':2?°;' r~-„ Y. f;`f''~''i~} t .t`~-.•'':ri~o-;y. '::v:~= .;1. ;''S'`' ~r is?..•..: k ?S- ^}.:r ppjj ,.aw .;k~{r~ r^iy +.t`a:. ~Y'.:: ~<'a. .:e. - :%~~j ~..r.~ .P.:~ Y. ~h,.d'~~r.:~~Xb.T. .1.. "r :?.>-:.ca_.:.s w:t>:. - .r, a ;i - t~ - - max: _ .1 ^ _ h" .o". '.'Z rat':'': is F^C: y..,,• - r. i?+'~: e*'.r.i.S-tt.. 2.~„ _ :y~ Y~i j _ . III, Y 1 r=: - s. r r= i% < tit' E 4 .t~ _ y - - ~ti a. , " 1. e''za' c . . rj _ =k _ _ "'ice - - "f. - Y ~ •'t-' i r,.. _ s3 ~ - f~ fi._ t ti~>~ f - 0: y~ :r}'~ -'t - - - 4 t "+'u e~ rt. . . ...r r,M.. .r,y,q~r. t' 5~ - ..y ~ ~ - .a,_, ~.4F--~ - ..S-.. "~C• r . r.! g~ , , f. S. 3 ' to , _ nf'f-,i'..'-' y.lr: .k•. Y trkk 5 'S, g~ r f ^r :3 '-,tom'- ' . _.J rYd l., . i..t ..4.., is 1: 1.µ. T'Ikt=~y{ .c w S'.(` pe 11 Y ~ [~~y- ~ ' ~ t t ~ - .n-..... ~ .-z.. •.~c` - fanc~:'uszdi~ wa.~ _ se' a!~ all: ti4i?®a~a~~~;',v~c®nti"~'~ t ,e~?~'}_~~...•.:.., V r - ~ ~ =x~= - - _ o- 'd i t ib~ ' : No:,- ~ ti~tsc tiara - ~ ~~i- tr: na .tara~l': cbn o'" ~,,t.'.,f,_.,., •a~~-'{ ,r-..;,f:~. ,y kind'' og'btti~..aa~ 5~y~ d:~ ='F 4. - em®Ylt+`~1~~:~~n~9 ~:'i;('•\;r:,~. ;F~,.., i1 _G: _-.'Y':t• pi l:r`, .::..tt '~"r:" ~`i'~ ui ~d inry o~' imf~r8v l.:i. } 4 .t.,: --r•., err ~:i:~'' r.- - ~ b D C . ~ , K . _ _ _ ~ ~i4.t_.-,,~n frt. +S, ^ti:>.. ::.e.,e'` .,ly.- '-aY:.::" 1 t~C , r -„e: is +r':~:" ~is:t - p ~~pq yp~ <•b~r~f~Ct~s~'•~L'...~6:., .:f.-b -t a cr ®6M>ee1,®ntp'i'~~: ..4. ..f ~{r 'rl ~v'L ~r 5<` ~'s:a 'i i'.`. _ y®th®r:~ t®m ~r r Q. { •S..'._ - .:;ry t.r:: r.~:~4,. +i~: t.. Vie. ~ wh P Y~ !r." :'r• J<. '.k':"~.?~>: ~ _ .a: is ,:i~: "Y . A,. 't>.,. . t : . ad th t - - " . _ ~ ':5:, is h' 4 . ...t. r', L A r.~ , 4~' x 3~: i' 1. . - ~ - - ~n•' ':3~ ~e tt3' . fi 'Y •'tv A'.•-3: - - :t a ={.i:_ 'r:'i'• . .-r-. l a 3'' Ym rovement Y o' t' - ®r tion°.:.an8 main!~~nanc n~, ~.:4~::,.;.~ .S - - ~ pore th® construction o oP a ~ .:f:..~`. ar~ - :f. a or. o~~:;her ~neascbr lan s- - it servic®s to adjac r.t , _ u'".:;ts~r:-.:~-.~:: iitil - - - OU h' OIC-'Sl2:C±gr:th@~.•~°...r.,x,..r~_Y',:. y.. . . - ~1~ - 3 and maintained thr g ..t~~` - be `constructs - . r•~;: rovemen ~a,• shah.=•.: ~~i~-~ i _ ~~a° rovided that said :imp r:== :,a:: .,r - 4~~::3-_,_ cr - -v Sub act Landy p ,'L:- "r. .L:r.. ...~::<<4. _ - - 'alt®rataon~-to the'.. ~.1n •'s~ '~~~~'•f _ anent di~ru tiori'or'. ~-,r.,.:.,. - ~ - -t`' not cau~® p@rm p _ , . - _ i. - 'ice - 1,: f'v. Y j{'r:M1::: ,t_ e',' _ t. _ _ ' •f % @Ct a of'. t :ti y~-.r:~ - ~ V:. - -.F•. - ii ,(:F :~;A:-~:r~.,:.: - x. b pct .-Y.~n9 ~de~crib~d'~~~ - - ~,:--.~~s-:-- ho~~a t1 ortion of j - - -`t; - - sad afl a ®it®.or ®ita..°for:p®d -A;f~~`r~~',t: p.'a above may bo u _ - , es ski lifts _and. tsamw.zYs l., ,'r. .bridges, skier i ridg v ,y.,4°, it`'= - - d maintained, and<xap~iroa:;®r~~< - ~'x: bo constructed, operate . - ~ . T ~,r•= r';= _ :'s ~M'ner and it61 DuCsC.@88®r~1o' _ i T3'<-..~~':-tt`:`;i~'.._ c.:.... .:.~=.°;'l:;s-:.~.,-~., - oito or aitca .by - - a_ s~;~:-~;' p Land,®hall b®~~~.~ed tor:'` - at the f~ub c,ct pic°,:;;,=i~;~~-~~.• _ ~.;Y>' ,~z;-:~~~ - 1.,, Na part j ,E~~->:,a',.~;;:.. -~:~:Yf: - or csvernl ht sta ®i,y any ~J®rflOn Or.~.~. _ ,r .t:. `:'i'~"r':1Lir..:' _ nicking, camping 9 Y _ _ ,y _ .>~_~w'• - - o bo urmittacl'aithin P or. u one::~~::;•,.r..,:: ~v:;::`. persona, Nor uhall thor p _„r_.•..- - h ec Land an informal or organic®c~ p ' _ _ . r-~~ - _ - n oth$sr act b an ;§"•=f::::. _ rivets' athorln ar a y y Y parson or-'-; :y'~t='.'-•„ ""~:;=~'1,t,.. - o ud mint oQ' Owner anc9 the - ~:':>7•._>~~,.- _ - r':, -.~a. - ergona, which in th ~ g . =~r.,,i-:...,.;..,.~:." ~~;i;,~`. - - ale oP the Town of Vail'may daf~ecb _,._y:._s;, - a ropriat® ofYici, P;;:': or lama a th® landsoapinq vog®tation~ or:-:;~:~:;.-~j~`,~: - ale®rf destroy 9 _ :~:_,:~..t~:~,.;< +•-f :'R''. t°.~S'`r .i'` .1~'- - •f ::t••j ' - q .G~?%..'Y~:. :~.:iY.R,ie.~,,..: ® ttietio valu® of 4.hm Subject Lang or litr®r it®. ,~£t,. surf c f' - - _ an kind oie~: ~~f~~. - i ular traffic or arking Y - r'<.>~ .fi. ;S.c throe h .th .2.'::e:= - - - mined u n aoroea 9 t'. - . • ~ i':'=,:; ~ ~naturca shall be ur 1~ o 'a~ - ...::_,.,-.....•::....•'...z,:`. pct Land. _ ~ Sub j a: y~ 'a'. 1 ,r •r ~ ~ _ i - - ..r-<,iT:~r2 - . Iii ..f-. , ,.2. 4 ~sy> y r.', w i :SY .r. - ,p.' ter,.:±:x. - ,`ia ra®menta"- :.~J'y:'i'<;L'::-' ` ~ conditions restrictions, stipulati n v. g • ~~~~~=r~:>= - Qin'shall not b® ~raivod..:rz=;-: . •.:_,.'r~;.;f_.~;.. 1- - an8 covenants contained hor o s'=;~.'~;..a;•. x~>:~.s.:_1.;~:;~~: r; _ ~ e!i axes t b -'written;='cori •.~;L,.,k:~ °`r=~- ~ " - b ndoned t~srminated or amend P Y. - seist Vail Associates,: Inc. and the Town•of: Vail~~to';`':' :a,.~'..r':.f,~:.~~-.- - of both ~ y-=:~:- . -ors;-~''` .S. the office~of the-'Clerk`and''RecarBer:>:o;.:~-?+~,E.r,,. ~4'. be filed of record in :;;;.•i;. - - =+i r . .:r:' ' , :a - .r.+ lo adoo _ Co _ e Co ,~J, ~r . n t u E 1 i5=: a I o f': `F ' • - t. ~:r=::- , ' ,f - - = .x . - - - 3,: _ - - ~197 - ~ ;~f~" , - - .r„ Execu,.ed this Y . - - _ . . .hi( asociateg Ynca'a._ °,`'7~7' `ail' ~ 0' :y'..'~'` .aa -Attest ~ - - - Colorado CogF - - _ %.y f >'i.,.': _ mac... p x. - '1 •.r• r ~ k' -,t. - LL~ - z` ; l: - - tit;;: - . - .ta ~J}' '=e. •v ~S , .x:{~ _ :F- , ;hs; ~ t ' Y - e ax icnar . P®teraon,...Yrvn e`r, , ~r~';-y+'.;F~ r . q n :+!t - - - - - ..;`c _ 'try%:l<f~r. = ~ ~ ~Ayu~ a tiri, :%'4,y~ ~ .Vc->~:%1!~iFty ~v ~a•'§'~,{°7t"'-Y ~.~4d~.'~i•~?`,,°j7 i.i-~•'~''~1 ''r!', ",'7G^ • ~ :3 -.F~ ,..g ~ S ~'F _'ti'. [-t~?.r '•t:. r! t •'1` ..:.-.t .i.... `:.yarE~yr Q..•ra~ vr.•- v.b ..;'°s~ _ .<~k:~ ;.r.°1Y..?; y. -'asY1 i-~~, T'~4•~r'•:.•X v:.=':i~_ "lr rR~. x. a=~,~S'~;tgd'?.~.r=3;- !c13`;' 'Vi=i ~•,yL~ ~'"~i: -'~~z"" '"~3 !~l_ .~p .s'_+~ti~Y~F - = i'.r. , .F2.L~~'' ~'a^ -ji, :~~r T.kr. -~i_7.~'ti~r:~4~•`.~L~"'• ;s'd'._*'.{xf. 't+`;.° .rr>`rv~-±:-+ ,.r.. .r1 ,e ~'k?. o'.~~,., ~Y Y'+;•_ A 'ijp:,., .J . F.~ ~ F ^~'-b Ds . 'Q: •,ty''Skn:,, ' T-'t , ~tY -~~k;~ .V •~t ~ '~a: .r `Fe:. . • .a1. ~ C .j.~~~ ti~i:~1~T':~• 4 }i 'w, _ '~}l+t .+r,:y r. 'Yj ~ .~1.t ~f•"~j~`. 1'+;c ~ F.:..l': :.if-. F,'._ ~.;~r ~ ,41i~'` `:;'s`~';a:;}:~. .arl..4.~.L~{ .r,• _ f Sv"'~~ „~t, ^,ta?.Ti...~;:~. rt~t,R~?` Fr+. - ,,q;:.ti>~ _ _2.~ ~•ar - c>S-Y-E'.L.. 'J; h.Y `'~.r+ '~t ~t )3 SF'~•'l"f n~~' b2'_~ irn.:t ~"C-:~?-.I`~t;'~ eaa..,,. •r~':;_ .f~'_~r r.'K 3~_.':llr"..>.-1'e4- -.tL._l~x_~7 `tr., ~.,~1.'V.^`.Ttl. t@:;r.~~1:.• .,~4y~1:. ~k~~•.-• .rt _„~+1 :'Z'. ~N~~~~ N®~~CIE ~Al[~. T® C~I~TNC~. li~ETIN~ SCI~I)YI~.~E, (as of 10/28/93) 1~7 ®tY 1~al0aD~e~y ~~9¢D In an attempt to respond to scheduled meeting demands, as well as adhere to mandated ordinance and charter requirements, Council meetings are scheduled at the following times: E~IEl~N~ I~ll1~11+:T}[NQ~S~ Evening meetings will continue to be held on the first and third Tuesday evenings of each month, starting at 7:30 P.1Vi[. These meetings will provide a forum for citizen participation and public audience for conducting regular Council business. W®Y~,l[~ SES~Y®NS V~Tork sessions, which are. primarily scheduled for Council debate and understanding of issues before the Council, will now be scheduled to begin at 2:00 P.1dI. (unless otherwise noted) on every Tuesday afternoon. Tk~E 1~,EETI{SE~ N®~IEIER4 1993< ~AgL T®WliT C®lUNCIL 1VIEET~NG ~CI~I)IJ~, )LS A~ F®LL®®V~: Tuesday, November 2, 1993 ~fl±~, Se6E4~ii ~n nn U.lilf, ~i~ ~iffi~-dek~~mih~ s Evening meeting 07:30 P.Illi. Tuesday, November 9, 1993 Work session 04:30 P.1~/I. (starting time determined by length of agenda) Tuesday, November 16. 1993 Work session 02:00 P.l~l. (starting time determined by length of agenda) Evening meeting 07:30 P.M. Tuesday, November 23, 1993 (®rganizational meeting for new Town Council) Work session 02:00 P.1Vl. (starting time determined by length of agenda) T®WN OF MAIL Pamela A. Brandmeyer Assistant to the Town 1Vlanager SENT ]3Y~EAGLE COUNTY ;11- 1-93 ; 12 21 3033287207 3034792157;# 1/ 2 Y': IVavember 193 - '1 ~:4~i FAC;IF Ct)uNly RtlgAUVG SS I RRt7AUVVAY OFFICE DF THE P.O. ROY dSu BOAR[) OF CAh1MIS510NEi~5 ~ EAGLE. COL4RAD0 8! 63 (303) 37ti-8605 ',`,;;,t;;{` ,,;:;i. rAX: (303) 328.7201 R.~ rr~~ ~pp~99 s/ap~~yy}7n~ ~ •~p~yy tnp ~p~p u tl~~~~~~~ ~p i? R A 3 ik 9F 9E 1E i? # # iF ~F iS dr $ 9E 8 ~ ib ~ $ st' !a iY # •3P 42 ~DF iE iF 9f Q i} $ iF ~ ~ 4J~~:~l/iJ/ ~ ~®:J\Y NH ~tlIYd 4F~~i~I~0~7 VII ~IC It@6.II W~I'~CYd-~1~~ not of Eno Noiy cross Roarri Jack i~. Lewis, County ManatJer 'll'e :i'~~ - 1 ~fE~~9~~9 - ~~8~1~9t~fs Li~'IIGA~'QD~ iwC of tho Holy Crasa ftotarr James R. 1=PItZe, County Attarney - QD9:~~ ~.IJI~IC~! - fi=L[~C'~IE<[m ~~FOCQ~afl~ iVtt of tho Holy Cross Fiaam Eagle CauniV Room Items al q routma and nor?-aontroV6reiel nature ~e Placed on the eotment extender to oUaw tlta Ooterd of County Oa.*vr~icaionera to epertd ita timo and energy on more important items on a lotegthy spends. Any Camntissioner maY request that on item 60 "RFMOV C:U" from the ctarsmrt calonder end conssidered separately. Any tne+ydter of the puhlin may "RC-aUE$T° mty item ba "RE3VI4V[f3° from the CmtBent Agenda. 'fl . I$BL~. ~~VUf~~s Linda Fankuch, Accounting Mark Silvl;rthorn, Controller ~iC1l"Q~i~1: Approval subject to review by the County Manager. I Jack C7. Lewis, County Manager ~CTI~G~: Approval subject to review by the CtDUnty flAanager. c:twpsi ~oocs~nlovFOS.ACe SENT SY~EAGLE COUNTY ;II- 1-93 12 22 30332872071 3034792157;# 21 2 (Q/~'~?flpp~~~A®giry!-!~'aE/'~'~`SR~j~(pE~tq$~ tiilpQEgii~lp~tp:~t$ 4'~~pfO1'ttE~y 1~q~~~O ~~elYl~C~ 4.v'~dCYI 11 t~tiP 6 PIW P tl Hll EB.P~A1H9 ~r~AIB~ 0 ~1d~1.V~t~1~ip A1G~A. tarry tVlet[erniek, Engineer ~C~fl~l~a Consider approval. 4~. IGt-B~NCE DRDER f~t~t~tBEt3 "fl THE 9~9~ Cs=~l'il'I`RLflf~E 6~~RI(tl~Cv CD~13'HA~C~' ~IVl~'fl-t S~'RlJPE 4~fl3t~!-!'~ tarry fVletterni~k, Ingineer A~~'IDi~Y: Cc>'nsicter approval. 6~i@NQ.PTE~ D~ ~ER~'EMI3~R ~IHI~~l.84~F1 ~CYd'~~Ir~i ~ '9 ~9~ Sara Fisher, Clerk and Recorder AC~'9~3~1: COnsider approval. ' S~. ~"ii'~~'g ~fl~H~'~~ ~CCES~ RERMfl~' FDR Cd3FlDlt.lt+~A tarry Mletternick, Engineer AC'I<'flD~: Consider approval. ~~:~5 - ~~:~~t t~. Gcti~~L ~I~ u i LEi~IEN~' ~VflTVM ~~'RtJ~E Vilt3tGt-fl~ I~g~ count„ ~oan~ Larry Nietternick, t=na~lneer e~C~H'flDN: Conslder approval. E. FINAL S~ ~ a ~.E~lEhril' ~fl~t$ Et_J4li~ Ct~t~S~"RUC~fl®Itl. IBC. tarry IVlezterniek, Engineer ~CTICG~: C~Insider approval, C. U~ES~L~OTtCli9 At~I~RC~/It~~ ~,I~I A~lIENC9RflEN~ ~C ~fli~'tCfl.E flflfl, ~ECTfdDf~ 'I ~F ~'~E ~~'B.A~lS; D~ t.AtCE ~REElE A(~F~RD~RLE !-6®t8~fl~9C CDRt'~I~A'~"tDl~l Jack l.evvis, Co~rnty ~anacJer AC'~IQiV~: Consider approval. d~~:®t<D - ~~0'8~ [%lQ~UDt~ llBCE~I~G FtE~?Rli~(~ - Eegib Cvun9y Room fl~dAi~I~CER CH~IV~fle - SE,4V>rR CRI~EIC FOOD ~EFIl~ICES, ItUC. dt7a IiVIU a4T BEAVER CREEK iVlary .9o Berenato, Deputy County Attorney ~~tlIDf~: Consider approval, ~ ~ - 44:4-~ t<D~E~1 i~IEE~~H~9~ Eagle Gvunty Ravm YHE F1IXT MEETING OF THE EAr_,l F COUNTY COMMISSiONER3 WILL BEHELD ON NUVEMBER 8, 7993 THIS AGE1dDA IS PROVIDED FOR INFQRMATIONAL PuIiPOSES ONLY - A1.L TIME$ ARE N}pRp~(1MATE. THE BOARD VtM1LE IN sESS1UN MAY C(INSIDER OTHER ITEM5 TFIRT AAE BRt}UGhIT BEFORE iT- C:IWPC 11DOCS~N OVEOe.AGE