HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-08-16 Support Documentation Town Council Evening Session
VAIL TOWIV COUIVCIL
EVENING MEETING
TUESDAY, AUGIJST 16, 1994
7:30 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAAABERS
IEXPANDED AGEIVDA
7:30 P.M. 1. Citizen Participation.
7:35 P.M. 2. Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1994, 2nd Reading - Supplemental Appropriation to
Steve Thompson Purchase Trapper's Run.
Action Requested of Council: Approval.
Backqround Rationale: A supplemental appropriation is required to appropriate
funds to purchase Trapper's Run.
7:50 P.M. 3. Ordinance IVo. 17, Series of 1994, ist Reading, an Ordinance amending Section
Andy Knudtsen 18.04.130, Floor Area Gross Residential (GRFA), allowing area within multi-family
buildings to be used for employee housing.
Action Requested of Council: Approve/Deny/Modify Ordinance No. 17, Series of
1994 on first reading.
Backqround Rationale: One of the areas of success that the Town has had
regarding employee housing is to create incentives for the private sector to
develop housing. This is another incentive which will allow the developer to use
common area within multi-family or commercial projects for employee housing.
. Common area is currently allowed to be used for lobbies, hallways, recreation
areas, mechanical areas and convention space. The amount of common area
available for multi-familv proiects will not increase. Please see the attached PEC
memo for a detailed analysis of the proposaf. On July 25, 1994 the PEC voted 7-0,
recommending approval of the proposed changes.
Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance fVo. 17, Series of 1994, on first
seading.
8:05 P.M. 4. Ordinance IVo. 18, Series of 1994, an ordinance vacating the utility and drainage
Greg Hall easement on Lot 6, Bighorn Estates, Town of Vail, Colorado.
' Action Reauested of Council: Approve, deny or modify Ordinance.
Background Rationale: This easement has been replaced and is no longer
necessary.
Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance.
8:20 P.M. 5. Ordinance fVo. 19, Series of 1994, an Ordinance vacating a right of way and sewer
Greg Hall easement, and creating pedestrian and right of way easement, water line
easement, public access, drainage and utility easement by plat.
Action Requested of Council: Approve, deny or modify Ordinance.
Backqround Rationale: This vacating and granting of easements is pursuant to
S.D.D.
Staff Recommendation: Pass Ordinance.
8:35 P.M. 6. Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1994, an Ordinance creating a utility easement for the
Greg Hall Covered Bridge Building.
Action Requested of Council: Approve, deny or modify Ordinance.
Backqround Rationale: This matter was discussed at the Councif ineeting of
August 2, 1994 at which time need for easement w?as discussed and council
approved granting of easement.
Staff Recommendation: Approve Ordinance.
8:50 P.M. 7. Resolution No. 19, Series of 1994, a Resolution authorizing the Town Manager to
Greg Hall negotiate a contract to refurbish/reconstruct the Covered Bridge.
Action Requested of Council: Approve, deny or modify Resolution.
Backqround Rationale: . At. the evening meeting of August 2, 1994 the Council
granted authority to the Town Manager to negotiate a contract for the
refurbishing/reconstructing of the Covered Bridge.
Staff Recommendation: Pass Resolution.
9:05 P.M. 8. DRB Appeal/Gustafson. The applicant, Mr. Dick Gustafson, is appealing the paved
Ken Wentvuorth paricing condition of approval placed upon his proposed, residential exterior
alteration and interior remodel by the Design Review Board (DRB) at the August
3, 1994 meeting. Mr. Gustafson will be represented at the meeting by his architect,
Mr. Ken Wentworth. Action Requested of Council: A decision by the Town Council to either uphold or
overturn the conditional approval made by the DRB with regard to Mr. Gustafson.
Backqround Rationale: In a memo prepared by the Town planning staff dated
iVovember 5, 1992, a staff policy was created to provide direction in the future on
site improvement as they relate to interior remodels, additions, and exterior
alterations. At that time, it was determined that the property owner proposing such
changes must bring their property up to current zoning standards (i.e. paved
driveway, replace plywood siding, underground overhead utilities) if the proposed
development is an expansion of the building in terms of gross residential floor
area. Changes such as exterior repaints, reroofs, skylights, etc. would not require
the properry to be brought up to current zoning code. In Mr. Gustafson's situation specrfically, he is proposing additional floor area.
Therefore, the DRB on August 3, 1994 has, through a- conditional approval,
required that the existing gravel driveway and parking area be paved as well as
the T-111 siding currently on the building be replaced and that the overhead
electrical lines be placed underground. It is the condition of approval requiring the
drive to be paved that Mr. Gustafson and his representative are appealing since
future additions are proposed in the area of the existing driveway.
9:35 P.M. 9. Information Update.
9:40 P.M. 11. Council Reports.
9:45 P.M. 12. Other.
9:50 P.M. 13. Adjournment.
NOTE l9PCOAAING MEE7'ING START TIAIiES BEL01A/:
(ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE)
T~E NEXT !/AIL TOWN COUBdCIL FiEGULAR WORK SESSION
Vl/BLL BE ON TUESDAY, 8/23/94, BEGINIViNG AT 2:00 P.M. BN TOV COUNCIL CHAnABERS.
Y9iE FOLLOVI/9NCa VAIL TOWtt9 COUNCIL REGIJLAR 1flIORK SESS90N
!fl/ILL BE ON TUESDE4Y, 9/7/94, BEGINNIPIG A7 2:00 P.M. IIV TO!/ COUIVC9L. CHAMBEF3S.
T9-oE GdE1CT VAIL TOWIV COUINCIL REG4JLAFi EVEPIING HIIEE3'lIV(a
1fV9LL BE ON TUESDAY, 9/7/94, BEGINIVING A7' 7:30 P.M. BP! TOV COlJ6VC9L CHAAABERS.
~ ~ ~ ! • ! ~
CA,4GENDA.TCE
~~~l Associa~~~~ Ine.
Q-eac,ra and Opmrars of v$il nd 8eavct Czee1' Re-oFts
Axw 14x 1994
Mrs. Tbea J. Rttmfard
625 Foreg Road `laal, CaloradQ $$07
-
Icax- Tbca:
The purpose of this letter is tn updaie Xou on VaiI AmciaWs` prog'ess an devising alteraate
ffieam of access io ihe slk~ mountam and midgating hapacts of coufim=d use of W. Fozr.st Road
by over-snoov vehieles antil apeamaneni solution is fczund.
' As }ou kntrw, iasd €ai€ vm deveioped•anti ftngknm#~ a wh= mamgetnent plan fog cxzg aver-
srww vehkle5 usmg W_ Fvrest Rvad darug t1e sti seasou- As part of die pini„ we relocated
our snowmobile traff'ic 40 a new Iocation aloai,g the north bank of epre Cxeek, along the bike
path. Also, we ample~~ severai strategies to reduce the imparA to ihe neighborhtod fram
swwcat4 using Fo~t Road. These efforts incl_uKed, but wem noe lYmiked to-; v_rducing Tearis>
reducing r.p.m.s. Yusning c~ff son= of ft l%ghts at night, atad V3ci1tg c~ui the fieei oa ft mad
when &bff* changes occan-ed. D3ring Y~ winter, seveW mee#W tm%k glam involving Vai4
Assciciafts, Inc., the Town of VaiI Ctwrtcil, arA neIghb0'IftoOd represeItaE16e5 t0 dI5Cf155 hE36tr
the ab(3ve efft3iu wen woflw~g, we$l as t! 1tif4riII fhe iielg$bodmd Legarding Di.1C 1mi,g-tttm
efforts to fit$d an altcrnatirre route for aur overasnoev vetaicles.
L= f811 wc deve~ a pmiqrttinma &stgn foi a potentia1 attana#iXe muft from 0u7C ShDp,
aczcfss Gax-e Cxeek axd up ft hiilsW to comtect to ft exiaft Westian Ho Skiway. In
coqjuDcticm with theso efiforts, we actam-ed vari _aw oonntr2ctors #.o perfom ft fo~ivv±mg
addieiotal easkss xeeded for Ghe planning efttc;
* Surveyors to perform topographic surveys of the proposed alignmecnt.
a Geotechni.cal experts to perform eore driIling in the arms vvbere the bridge f.boters would
be placed, and.to adris~ us w~r the praposed altmmme rom could te built.
* Planners were retained to produce a ffiastec.r Qlan for the pmpo..aed altexnate 'rouie.
llr- mVs, plam and rtporU produced to date are availabic for your rcview, iY desirrd.
Obvimsly, Vail Assmzatm has inveaM harci doil.m in this effort to d&*e_
P(m pf4'sce Box 7 0 Vail, C4lorado 81658 0 USA- (303) 476-5601
.
Mrs. Thea J. Rumforai
.Yune 14y 1774
Page Two
We have met with the Town of Vail staff to researcln the approval process for this project amd
related ism. Because of ft face that the proposed aligmnent involves shrae different zone
d.istricts, five pmperty oeners, and t6ree governmental eatities, it wi11 require ac4uisition of
rights of evay, easements, and/or possible lani umdes. The staff has advised the apgroval
process will be diffictalt an& time consumitig. We believe the staff has discussed ihese matters
ffurtber with tM Z'own Crnancil. Obviousiy, Vaii Associates canaot get this altemate route
a.pproved evithout the cooperation of the T'own of Vail, other political ernities, and pmperty
owners ovex wham vde have no conliol. Furdcrmore, the financial costs of this project,
assuming we can get appruval, are an important consicleration for a.li involved. Finally, Vait
_~emiates wifll taave tR havc iron clad acsEir.an:e af perraanent leaal- a: cess en the prrop~,?s=d
aleernate route before we ean proceeci.
Next steps:
• Obtain details froffi the Toevn of Vai1 on the approval paocess.
• Obtain dimction ffrom the Town of `7ai1 on how they wish to atldress the land ownership
essues.
• lEiave fina.l designs done .
• Prepare a deYailed construction budget for the necessary Hmprovemezats, i.e, bridge,
access road, 1and accguisidon and identify fu.nding saxrces.
• Obtaiffi building pernits, etc.
Ouur goal is to have the IIeajority of this due diligence oompleted this fall and to be able to begin
the approwal process with the Town at that time.
'I'o date, we lave fourAd nnthing to lead nc to belieee that the pwqjec*. cannot be deae. 140wpuer,
please do not conme this letter as cxar assuranUe or firm cammiUmemt to develap this projecg.
It es our intention to pYOCeed witb exploring the feasibility of this project. Because we cannot
control the 'E'owmm of Vail, otber governffiental entities, property ovvners, and otber factors
presently unknown, off legal, financaal, eechnical, enviranmeental, or other nawre, we annot
project the completion dave at this time.
Sincerely,
VAIL ASS A , IATC.
.
I
Chris Ryman
3enior ~ice President, Moun6ain Operaaions
MEMORANDUM
r
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROfVI: Community Development Department
DATE: July 26, 1993
SUBJECT: A reques4 for a conditional use permit 4o allow for the expansion of the
shopMehicle maintenance building at the Vail Associates, Inc., service yard
located on an unplatted parcel of property, 243 South Frontage Road West.
Applicant: Vail Associates/Tim Kehoe and Jack Hunn
Planner: Jim Cumutte -
0. DESCRIPTION OF TFIE RE(?IJEST
Tim Kehoe and Jack Hunn, on behalf of Vail Associates, Inc., are requesting a conditional use
permit to expand the eastemmost building at the Vail Associates, Inc. service yard, 243 South
Frontage Road 1lVest. The Vaif Associates, Inc. service yard is located within the Arterial
Business (AB) Zone District. Within the AB district, a service yard requires a conditional use
permit and any expansion of the yard requires review and approval by the PEC under the
conditional use section of 4he Vail Municipal Code.
The proposed building addition, which will be constructed in two phases, will be approximately
6,850 square feet in size, bringing the total floor area of the eastemmost building to
approximately 15,500 square feet. There are no planned additions to the two other buildings
on the property which are used mainly for storage. The eastemmost building, and the space
in the proposed addition will be used primarily for vehicle maintenance, including passenger
vehicles, buses, snowcats and snowmobiles. Additional uses in Yhe facility will include radio
dispatch, offices for facility personnel, employee meeting space, locker rooms, restrooms and
tool and parts storage.
9I. BACKGROUND/HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY
oThe Vail ,4ssociates, Inc. service yard property was zoned Heavy SeNice (HS) District in May
of 1969, when the Touvn of !/ail established its original comprehensive zoning regulations. At
the time, warehouses, motor vehicle repair shops, maintenance facilities and contractor's
yards were all "uses by right" in the HS district.
oIn August of 9971, a building permit was issued for the 8,650 square foot shop/vehicle
maintenance facili4y, which is now proposed fior expansion.
oThe 106 #004 x 30 foo4 (3,180 square feet) lift maintenance building was buil4 in August of
1973 and the 120 foot x 70 foot (9,260 square feet, including a subsequenY 20 foot x 43 foot
addition) warehouse was built sometime in 1978 after receiving a building bulk control
variance in June of 1978.
GRFA: 609'0 or 84,840 sq. R. -0- -0-
Floor Area Ratio: 759'0 or 106,050 sq. ft. 159'e or 21,062 sq. it. 200% or 27,967 sq. ft.
Required Parking:°' To be determined 85 spaces 129 spaces
by the PEC
" See Page 10, Section IV, Factor it6 - Parking Requirements, for a more deteiled explanation of the paricing requirement
for this property.
8V. 0ITERIA AND FBNDINGS
Upon review of the cri4eria and findings of Section 18.62.060 of the Vail Municipal Code, the
Vail Community Development Department recommends appravao of the conditional use permit
based on the 9ollowing fiactors:
A. Consideration of Factors:
1. Rela4ionship and 'ampact of the use on development objectives of
the 4own.
The development objectides of this zone district can be found in Section
18.29.010, the purpose section of the Arterial Business Dis4rict. As stated in
the zoning code, the ,4rterial Business District is intended to:
"provide sites for office, public utilities, service
stations, limited light industry having no adverse
environmental impacts that provide significant on-
site tourist amenities and limited shopping and
commercial facilities serving the Town and Upper
Eagle Valley residents and guests. Multiple family
dwellings for use as employee housing will be
appropriate under specific circumstances. The
Arterial Business District is intended to insure
adequate light, air, open space and other
amenities appropriate to permitted and conditional
4ypes of buildings and uses, and to maintain a
convenient (limited) shopping, business, senrice
and residential environment."
Staff believes that the proposed building addition will serve to upgrade the
quality and appearance of the property through building matenal upgrades as
well as other site improvements and will maintain a convenient business and
service environment.
2. The tgfec4 of the use on Oigh4 and air, d6s4ribution of population,
BPansportation faciBities, utilities, schoois, parks and recreation
facilities, and other public facilities needs.
3
currently located in the shop/vehicle maintenance building, but will be
moved to the Lionshead offices. T'hose employees (approximately five) -
who currently show up for work at the service yard would then park in
the west day lot.
The applicant has provided a summary chart of the number of tracked vehicle
round trips made on West Forest Road in an average 24 hour period (see
attached). The chart provides figures for the 9992/93 ski season versus the
proposed schedule for the 5993/94 season. This chart indicates that the
average number of vehicle round trips made on West Forest Road, in an
average finren4y-fiour hour period will be reduced from 4hat which occurred
during the 9992/1993 season by 6.9 trips.
,4lthough s4aff feels that the applicant has provided sufficien4 evidence 4o show
4ha4 the proposed shop/vehicle maintenance building expansion will not have an
incremental detrimental effect on traffic congestion, automotive and pedestrian
safety and convenience, 4raffic flow and control, access, maneuverability and
removal of snow from street and parking areas, we are unaware of any
authorizations granted by either the Vail Town Manager or the Vail Town
Council authorizing the historic, and proposed continued use, of VVest Forest
Road by snowcats and skimobiles.
Staff recommends that Vail ,4ssociates, Inc. formally request that the Town
authorize the continued use of the street for the use of the above-mentioned
equipment. If the Town Council should grant the Vail Associates, Inc. request,
they may then address certain conditions ihat would help alleviate the concems
raised by the properry owners along West Forest Road and the Town Engineer,
(i.e. possible limitations on hours of usage of the road, the special imposition of
speed limits specific to skimobiles, a joint maintenance agreement between Vail
Associates, Inc. and the Town of Vail specific to VNest Forest Road, etc.).
4. Effec4 upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is
4o be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in
Pela4ion 8o starrounding uses.
Improvements associated with PhasinQ Plan
The Vail Associates, Inc. service yard is surrounded on the east by a
vacant l04 owned by Woly Cross Electric Association, on the south by the
Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Water and Sanitation District
Headquarters and on the north by the I-70 right-of-way and on the east
by the Vail Spa Condominium Project. In addition to the proposed
building upgrades related to the expansion of the shop/vehicle
maintenance building, Vail Associates, Inc. is proposing a number of
irriprovements to the service yard property intended to improve and
soften i4s effect upon the character of the area. These improvements
are de4ailed in their proposed phasing schedule, which is as follows:
6
.y 1 1E?-iT IOI'-: Z'LiW'N COUNC1 L!
Fiease! please! review this packet of letters from the
homeownerc an West Farest Raad. Mast of the letters wPre
addressed to the Flar.ning and Er,vironmental Commission for
i t to consi der d!.ar i ng the recent hezr i ng on the p 1 arned
expansion of the Vehicie Iyiaintenance Faci l ity for Vai i
Ass«ciates. `:he r.ornmission total ly ciisregarded the ietters
anci rubber stampeci the proposai b}' Vail Associates. We were
?iLectively told that our concerr,s were none of their
business and if we didr't like it we should appeal to ihe
::ol,nci 1 of t.he t.awr ai tia.i 1. What a st.range interpretat ier
of the situation by a com;;,ission which cal ls itself
'PjaT: ni Il U n. nd E i! `J 1 C L7 i7 IT! P!; L ci l .
The residents of West ForesL h:0aC7 o.re the ones most impacteti
by an e:•;pans i on af ac t, i•a i ty by heavy veh i c 1 es mo4• i na i r ar,c:
au ; of he mal il LeilaflCe sheds. Last spr i nc seme cr: us became
aware of a possible eXpdP.Sion or the maintenanr_.e iaci 1 i ty
a;;c; a_ =.ea `Ja. i i Assoc i ates to consu'; t 4: it'r: us i f i ndeed 'che:
dYcideG tc dc i`. This request was iarared. we were rot
~s- ~ ~~~~E ~ r
CG , U!+ ~t~_i ci~~rirg trle pi ~d:l ii'iC p,ia,., of tI'll~ et:pai';S10i. _;1
:ac* t.Fnse o= uC whc: wece not i i i ed of t he hear i na, nr, p i ans
t}lat ha:: PsSerit 1 a il',' beei: T. n_=' .zeC.. We,: E Or: ly gl `v'eR Cr:e
week to respord. hiany in the are_a di;a not even recieve z
ro: ire! The residents of 41ect Fores't road a.ce not
u'lr?asoi"iable peOp l e. OUC" gr i eva'"iCeS dCe 1°gi tiP,l•3i2 o^C We
de5erve to be hea.rd.
; h ea ar; F reci Rurr: ior ci
675 Forest RoaU
= a_ ; , =i 81657
r 6- 5i 1 2
~tFb
ft1A'g'gONAL FOO'I'BAg.g.. ][.EAGLJIE
Neil R. Austr-ian
Presicient
July 22, 1993
NIA FAX
Planning and Environmental Commission
Town of Vail
PNunicipal Building
75 South Frontage Road Nail, CO 81657
Attention: Jim CurnuttP
Dear PNr. Curnutte:
Thea Rumford, a neighbor and friend on Forest Road, called me at home
in Connecticut to inform me that she had recently learned of a proposal by
Vail Associates to expand their maintenance facility on South Frontage
Road. Evidently, there is a meeting scheduled for Monday, July 26, before
the Pianninq and Endironmental Commission to consider this proposal. To
date, I have not received any information from the town nor from Vail
Associates regarding this proposal.
We have been coming to Vail for 21 ,years and have been homeowners for
almost 15 years. Certainly, we knew about the "cats" using the road for
mountain maintenance when we first bought our home on Forest Road. What we
did not know about was the amount of traffic, the noise, the 24-hour usage,
and the high speed traffic of the skidoos. The pianned increase in the
maintenance facility, coupled with the planned increase of snow cats, will
clearly tend to increase the traffic on aresidential street.
I spoke with Andy Daiy about the situation, and while he was
sympathetic9 he didn't have any specific ideas about how to relocate the
maintenance facility from Frontage Road on to the mountain. I understood
P.ndy to believa thvt a new gcndola mn;gh-116- be necessary t,el'are daii
Associates could seriousl,y consider relocating the cats. How does Copper
Mountain have their cats on mountain without a gondola at all? Is there a
plan fov° their relocation that we as homeowners might even look toward?
As a skier, I enjoy the fact that Vail takes better care of its
mountain than most slci arease I enjoy being able to ski groomed runs when
the urge hitse Isn't there a way to have it both ways? Surely there has
to be away to get the cats up the mountain other than by use of a
residential street< My latest increase in property taxes didn't reflect
the noise, etc., that is inherent on my side of the mountain. I am certain
that the recent purchasers of property there vaere not informed of the "cat
problem."
410 ParkAvenue, New York, New lork IlM)'>'? (212) 758-1500 FAX (212) 758-1742
Planning and Endironmental Commission
July 22n 1993
Page Two
I have asked my local attorney, Bruce Chapman, to attend the meeting
on the 26th, since Iwill be out of the country on business. You can be
sure that I would be there in person to voice my concerns if I could be.
Thank you for your consideration of the issues. Most of the resiaenis
would like to work out a resolution that is beneficial to both parties.
Sincerelyn
0 ,
NEIL AUS RIAN
NRA:dcm
cc: Andy Daly - dail Associates
Merd Lapin
Tom and Cindy Jacobson
Fred and Thea Rumfiord
Bruce Chapman, Esquire
.
~
47-
ea
.
~ . -
41:17
~ ~ ! ' •
~ sd' .0-T,- tg~~ .
7Z~
~..y~y a~ ~ . Excenrled PaSe
Z7~
. ~..y. ~ '~.6
_ ~JEL-26-' 93 013: 39 I D: Cr EFEMlER I NFL I U`HT TEL ltO:?03- r' - ~ tt659
~ .
. .
~ •
~ 7e"
` . .
s~-~c._.cs~ ~..,ct~~.~ •
~
;
;
~
~ a,,e Cxtmncy~d ~~ye
,
. . ,
' ' ak~~ ~~fr ( t 3
~
44/
~
~.t-~;,~.;
U
-V 6 7
'FROBt ; MCI?#~{I~#t~?"~T#~CEH9P?=tNi PH7KE hEi. : 3fJ3 476 7170 Aag. O9 1393 28:O5i'P1 P2
MeDAM~EL #IAIlUA6EMENT
QUAL17Y 9ER11lCE FI3,9 O:.lAtti`Y HOMEM
,Avagan~C 1Q; 1993
~wan of
Vail Tevn Ceun¢il
75 S. Froaagag¢ Rd. ~aiZ, Colorada $1657
Re: 63est ]g'a3cust Road Hoaeowners
Prmtese sgs3-ost Vail Associates
Aiai.ntuuArLce Faiililty
xown of Vai1p
Mebaaiel Nanagment maaagee tva nxopegtiee on Forest Rawd, 585 E,IZ a.:,d 596 Wfz.
We have beeu aakred by oug ovmers to roue+ent an the 4iail Aesvcintaa reqsuese ro
enlarge their VehicLe Matntemancs Faaiaiiy an ttr.s S. FruntaSe Road aad ti-ce3r usa
of Fox&sC Rcad ta accg,at, the ski mo"t4in.
$afet~ Eihou].d be the paacamnunt concern. Th3s Inclades safety of the ski vehifile
operatarg ns well as g17e ski, faot, and veh3aalar zra€ilG utiiiziug Foxdct Road.
AU oth.sr aozwiderstion.s are eeeondary.
I, ie acces$ Forest Rrad fYOia the MafnteuteesCe Fscil4.ty it is aecassary
Go cxoss the boAviay tsafficad S. Fro?zga,ge xaed. The lnteraect3on
2s aot slanmlized nog da the ancroRCat aperarers hsae persoaaeY digace-
ing traific wben ehey atterugt to crusa. The crpexsror e3s?gly 1ooku fot
& hreak 2n 2ratf tc astd iussbsrs across. 3[t ia enl.y a mattar ag tinae
befoee an Insxgaxieace3 aueoar.bilb dsiver 3n goDr vimibility snd poar
road eamditfoae p1aw* 4nto a snasae8to T'he sffioe fs true fmr ttLe scaow-
mabfles but iu t3sefx came it is nr?t slowmess but a difficulty for the
augoaebib.e driveg 1Co gee e6sam 3n ecpndir.ioas of y-or vis?biAitgr.
2. Tfne sncswcat is extremely w1de sn cuntrast co Forest Road. Nhen the
snwcat ao oxa rarest Road it becomeim one- wey with the 6AC6w-R1L" 6sufutk .
the 'rigtat of aayt0 nnt by rui.a ar regulatian bue uy shear sise and
bu1k. T¢ ynu ddr,4t imak.e a tisaly exit tnto m drgvevsy or oatu a
snors cov&red 6houlder, yaur vehiocle fs in h8Y°eGas wsy-
3. SnowEabile tsa££ic, ae a9.1 baure. of the day snd nUheo ruas at ane speed - £vll mut "d gener.aAly in the naiddle of the rosd. 1t's nmly
sgmteeQ of ti-me befnre eitaaa a sk3,gt vr pt&tstxiaa ae mmed d~u.
On tha athes h$fld St°a only a 3tatter of cime before a vehir7.e plows
fnto the saoumbi? e.
(C9Atlaaaed tko nett jtag*s)
4057 li3P1h1E DR'JE V@dl., CC1L464AD0 b'1ffi57 303-478.7970. OMICL 3i1.'~~~5$-8&1~. PA[i''cfi
FROt4 : MCI04IEl.1V1*4PaEME?4T#COhfPAW PW-tE NQ. :33Z 4'7E~ 7172 Aug. W--1 1993 O3:013-T1 P3
~~ge t-~io af ~
The iacouvenienGes mf cvwaers and sezvice poople for acceea to their properries
Che nuise azal i?raell of the snosacsts awd envreaiobiles, tbe weer an8 eear of Poresr
Aaad are tA.nar cQnsidesatiaris ta the aafety of ali concstned. Tt seerns that
there shauYd be agr a2ter-c,ati-ve to the eantirnoe<3 use of Foaeet Road - either
gut the Ka.in~~nance Facility Gn the rnnuntain aa prepare a raad especia11y foz
Sheae vehieles wfLth C~tSer an eenderRraaand csoga&a% ee the S. PrvsetaRe CtvRdl or
Sl e17
,
7-7
-
ry . M;:Da.,~a el
a.io41fl R. MoDaAiel
UQZ p'61 JLtL Z.s 'Zo.)
. ~ ~
~
~ C,5
. ~
r
8 ,
~ n .
r 1 ~
a
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
!
. ~
o P
. ~
i
e ,
? ~
~j f -
1
1-303-476-9141 L:ONSHF-AD 848 P02 J't&_ 23 '93 12=48
_ c
~ P
s ° -I
IOL eQ
. ~
~
r
. Q
B
tf?
~
r
~
1
Tcr
. e A ~q
~ ~ ? 9 SdYZ~
ac--
9
CNI
0
0
' 1-303-476-9141 LIONSHEAD 048 P03 JUL 23 193 12:49
. ~
. ~ . ,
~ e .
<
~
O ~ • -
O
.
~
. .
. ~ . ,
- - ~ AA7., ~ ~
~ do~"
JU'_ 21 193 11:43 FROM DnNIELS nFlD nSSOC. PnGE.002
. _ . °
• 'Lrarp CWerWd fl Pb.Do
~ ~~~TAPM
Ou Lkftcw 1aw
bgkw" Cdarsb 80110
00) 91~4=
Julp 20, I
Mr Ctamulte.
f was no4iffW today of Vail Aswciacm' plar,a tO OxPand ft mairttenanCO todlrty In
Lk)ttghead. AWv-Wh tgm fr:O-a*ad w~d dasap;3oBnted by 3his psoposal trom ft
perspective ot a homeDwrr?er on UVost Fored Road (736 vVEST vNrr) wno cau?not
sEeep in rrty hosr~~ bwause of the rolso itorn the wowmooiles ansf @rvoacats.
M1i19t lEtl'idwspe pP breath 98811y bamse of the dh@R11C84 pOlllltidn $I°Oli°1 the
veNcfes, and wh~ fears tor the SWety of my young chikiren and Quees, i am
W"iy more Surprimd a4 ft s'fo+lsipP#edre,&s of th{s plan on Vlti!'s paPt. The
9ega6 fiabiiity adone of running such an operation on a nesideRtial street is mind
iing: 4Fto sorry welooerie that the faCitity pives Va+i vI31bars fr0m ttw VNeW artci uY
towt artd the i»m that the anoweats rrtake an the mountaln fn a wery visible
Watlon UndW the goetdola wouid aIl seem tG rtlandate for abetter sofutivn.
W1i has attempted fn various ways o -w many yes?Ta to serve fteff by wing 11Yesi
For" Road cw It tit wft littie or no regard 8or ft rqidents. !4 4hey did ndt
wW1 housqu:ng on t.hat street they fttqdn "t have scld a"d profd?Sv from the BaE~ ~f
the tots 6or resi8omial ute. OnCB tPmy eoW mem Bnd invited prvwth they
undo;took sr~ obilgation to mainfain a Iivebie ertvirortment. At ttis pcaint the danper
from the pot!ut8on arod physicaf presenm ot the vshlcles end the loas of We9p due
$o iighs, mvise and inoPedbie dibration atc beyorvd my tolafenco. The noMOn of
wpansion i~ absurdlf9{
thas lef~ in m9 absence 8S a 9orme1 proiest to thiS expattsaon plan,
Sincerely:
Caryn Doevy
~r TGTPL PA3E.Oe2
L'u-~~~ Y i hU'M b.1'1 hHj`iDt:L~fi`~:i II:' lLl'LibU.)4I1G FUII~/Il~f,,'
BARRYG. .~~~REWS
4421 AGPtES
GORPUS CHIFtt5T1. YEXAS 78g05
July 26, 1993
To Whom Tt May Concern:
Re: Pubiic Motice Item 10
Public Hearing scheduled for 7/26/93
I woald like to express my ohjection to the subject being discussed
at the above referenced hearing. My objections to doubling the
site of the maintenance facility and the addition of mountain
vehicles on Forest Roaci are as follows:
No one was properly notified of this hearing. Our management
company only found out due to a neighbor faxing the information.
Rdditional mountai.n vehicles on this road will catase more naise and
congestion, and wi].1 without a doubt hra.ng down aur property
values.
Rgain, I can°t stress enough how much I objer_t to the way this
meetinq is be.ing handled. Every single homeowner on this road
should have been notified days pricar ta this.
SincVely,
~ar Andrews
- JUL 26 192 12:13 t;El•IESIS F'. 2
J ] IorgAn Smith
Sui+, 700
Cl.-Ipu5 Cky~St,, T*"s 78401
Ju1y 26, 1993
Tcren of vail
&ttentivae: J3m. cusm~tte, Plaaner
Planraiaag & Envigommutal commi.soi.art
vaiZ Afireicipal. Bldg o iTsil, CO 81653
. . Re: zxpan$ion of vehic2e
&taintenance Facility
. Derar &+ard caisnutte:
This ~~~tor is in seegards tio thie groposes3 :dditiaa af five (5) graomers axid
exxpaasian of the maaa facilitiss. g am not in favor of this.proposal. This
additian vould Gxeate a great deal af noise aad congestioa, and depreciate the
value af nry propserty. werall, thia expansian would be a detrime8t to the
neighbarhood, and take ativay fram the gaaat aeathetic value af vail.
Z BincereZy hope that you will take theee facts i,nto consideration whea
decidisug oit this matter.
YousB truly,
: j. xaxgan smath
,7m: mc . ,
vsil A+cidreso: 586 W. Foraeti Rd.
EXEC-U1=F1CES TE L I•d?. i 4 10 FjL.. 39-r'., ep U...~i„ 49 F'.[12
goo O1d Court Rcmd
Pikeswiklan, MaF'pjaaetr3l `a.'.!::6W
{R~bi:v~ •"~a.4i6i=:°r&:L i
(,-SA~) 653-3076
Septebmer 3, 1993
VgA FAX #Q3031 47"1V $
Mrs. T6t~~ Rumfortl
Fmres4 Road
Vaii, Colvracio 81657
Dear Thea:
As you ao'e aware, we vuill not bae able to attend the September 74h eneeting
cancerning 4ransit of moueotain matntenance vehlcEes on For-est Ftaad.
As you are aware from otsr previaus posltlon on 4h15 rna4ter, we are in whoie hearted
accard with the res4 of our neighbors in their attempt to have liaii Associaies omitigate
4heir use of Forest RoaaD for qhis purposee 1t seems 40 me Vail Associates shoulr9 be more
sens9tlve to the verY Pe°P3e uvho are most suF,portuve of Vai1. Bhose og us wha hava spent
substantiaf amounts of rvtortey purchasing d?omes [n 11ai1, nat orely pay high reat estate
8axes, bu4 afso baay rnor-e ski tickets, ski rncare oftere and spend more money in Vail thars
Rhe average touriste goth the Town of Vail snd Vail Assoc6ates should recegnlae that
the CO(15faRL 4rans3i Gf F6idi'i1#on'aeScc 4ehiCleS .r`.r, FoYes: RQad 41Q4 Of!ly bld5 a S9g!11fiG81?t
negatove iur,pac# an our real estate values, but tFre noise ceeated has a Ser!QL15 effect
nn uur abillity to gelt agaM rEgh±'s s'eep.
B arr? certain wieh gomdwill evidenced on al9 sirles tha8 a satisfactory accommodatian
can be worked out.
3hank you fior oepr^es$ntIng us at thIs Pneeting.
Best persona!'re rds,
~
~9 ! ~ `
l,w . i tilv V„1--l .~ZIr O JU 1 Ll ~ 7J 14• 1J r. VL
Su~~-e 3~~~, at~as Q)~d Ccm~t Road
Pikcxv°sofc!, Meuau0a~lul 21208
Q490I 4110-;3100
(4e0) 053-307e9
Fax 397s
July 21. 9993
VIA FAX 1(303) 479°2452
Jim GurntatBe
. IUWN UV VA1L
Planning and Environmen4al Commission
'tiail ANunlcipal Bailding
!%ail, ColoPado 81659
REa P11BL9C NOTICE - UTEAA tiO
PUBLlC HEAR9NG SCI-IEbULED ON 7/26i93 RT 2:00 P.AA.
DQaf Mr. CUPf1utYe: .
Please be advised 4ha4 as property owners a4 596 W. Fnrpct Roacl, we arere naQ
pPre-oprly nn4ifip-i nf 4he abcive weferenced rnee4ing. We received our notice yesterday
by fatt from a neigFbor at 675 FoPes4 Road.
7hi6 is to no4ify yoEa 4ha4 ave objGct to t6e request being made for 4he ¢oilowing
reasons:
9> Wc ctid eto4 rccclvc propcr r1o41f1W41on of the mee4ing.
2. Any expansion of the enaln4onanee shop avtll, in elt Qikelihoed, rerult In
additional traffic by mountain veiiicle5 on Forebt Roada
AS ii iti, vu~ reel thaL tlw. uw uP Furest Ruad by rnountain vehictes 1s already
overwhelming. Any addttlonal trafflc vuould not be acceptablee
uneil I have been appPi$ed of Bhe extent of this ehange and the impaet it wouJu
have on Forest Road, e join wi4h aII my neighbors in vigorously mpposinq thls agplicationo
Ve 4ruly~a,rs y~
e
Jack L. Baylin
JLB/t4
cc: Thea and Fred Rumfowd
67g Fores4 Raad
va'l, colorada 81657
, 21~15a6"?~ 11-ITEF?STPTE RflT-tRI ES F-617 i-103
.
9702 HfflvLk~ t
~~..;Dallas, `Fe,xas. 75231 ~
y~4
. .x~' ~
Aupst 11, 1993
Mr. Jam i urnutte
Towzi of Va.i3 '
Pta¢~nW & EnvirortrrientaJ C4mn-assaun
Z/ail, Coloradc+ 81657
Dear lVflu. Cunititte:
!t has been birought to xny attenEiaii that there was. a meeting of the Vail AsSOCiation on
1dt1y 26 mga,i'tling the use cef Farcst Rosd as a main traffac w3y fOr sni?w pluws and other
heavy equipmenE. I was noi able io BtYend 2hat n-ieeting, but would like to vaice my
opinion as to liow I feel abouc ctiis persisEent probleni.
Beit'?g a 19popea'ty owner on Fc>teSt Road I am verg concerned about the safeey of xny
family, gTandchildren, caxetaic.er, guestfi artd Wizr akieis; aa well as ttic an.-noyance of a
the heatry equipment .rumnnng ttp and down the road causing ~~cesslve noiae, vibration,
pollution and strcet damage. As you well know, ihese are alp vaolatians against the catv
I
Ipuichased thss hurnz do get awuy from the hect€c life of 41'EC city, which tncludes a Ictt of
dazager, sra£fic, noise an(i potlutiop, With ihhC conditians as they are, my put3pose. is rracast
de4initely dess than i desueci, and with the premnt plans "on the dzawiog boe.rd" ie
appears it will get even worse. HeIpY
Ii is my desire that ycs?a find a solution t.o t}ais problem fog us and our neighbors.
'
Thanking you in advarac:e for your c:ooperatibn im this matrer.
Sincereiy
f I
{
PdU#'t'rtan B. Mfjt8r
~~M/nQ
Mr, and Mrso James W. Parsons
P.C. 3ox 497
Edw•ards9 Co $1532-0497
August 69 1953
Vail Town Council
75 So Frontage Road West
Vail9 CG 83557
Dear Vail Tawn Counci3.:
This letter~-;is in response to the request Vai3.
Associates submitted fox the use of additional
packers 4n Vail Mquntain via West Farest Raad.
We feel.that Vail Assaciates sroul.d find another
~o-atc c~ther thc'ail WeSt rGt est T'cuaCi tp Vail MpL1Iita1n
from their starage lot an Highw-ay 6fl Tn fact9 this
should have I:ieen dane years aga o
The noise and pollution are very rlisturbing tQ
_.reszdents residing on Forest Road rxot t.o men.tion
the danger present when skiers are wal.kir_g an
Forest Road to aa:d from the ski runs o
TYiis is our second letter of protest regarding
this issue. T?ae first one was directed to the
Vail Planning Gadrmzsszoiz for the meetzng of
July 26, 1993.
Sineerelya
.
Co tm r l C~ ~
7--
~
('s ~j o i tv
{
f u ~
N6D( i r) Utz
(V) m \/ti
Of
AU 71-1 ~ - - -
-
7C4 ~
. 10
~c.i R4'm 76v U)i hIrtZ..
UoLo 76k
~
.
V 0 no ~
hc
~
~
~
a~
~ LJ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~'j j ~1~ ~ ; :
~
(F
or ti
August 24, 1993
Vail Tawn Council ' -
vail municipal Building
Vail, CQ
To Wham It May Concern: i am writing regarding aur concern ovc---r the traffic
and noise caused by the snowmabiles and other
equzpment on the Forest Road. Our home is at
616 Forest Roade Unfortu::ate? y I wi? l raot be uble to Y:e ir. Y'ail cn
September 7, however Itl:ink thiy meeting is an
excellent idea. At the present time I find vail
Associates vPry coogerative with protlems arising,
and I am certaa.n this one can be worked vut
to the mutual satisfaction of aIi ga rties.
It wcu]:d seem ta me if Vail wduld
limit the use of equipment on the road to day3ight
hvurs? this would he a major step i.n solvar.g the
dil.emma.
i acn sure we are all laoking towards the same
goal, namely, ta have the best skiing zn Coiorado,
and at the same time making life pleasant for
alI rQsidents.
Sincereiy.
Geor n 46~h&
GRt:: sk
I
I
I
I
sENr BY: ; a-24-93 ;?.g8AX ~
af, TFIXWSIONq C.
, s Y./i Btl01i 6w . 4~+•rs0.~ 6 wmww '~{1d V i .
~ Gii69 f0"Pd d ,
Fugast 17g 1993 .
TCWI coumll 09 vaiY. . . •
4Pbantaing and Bm?ucomwntal ' xsioaa
Vail m,inlmig,al gn.ildsag
Va51, CoIoradEo 01 557 ReQ s6p"L . r 7p 2993 Neat.3..Ag COnCetYting Ye1iCle mai3'8°
tozzwe SbtopS M I ~4 NW I /4 $ecti6n 7 8IId $he SY1
SW 1l4 Section Sp Tow"hip 5 Sotath Range 80 ~
~f tht 59th P. Ma /Vail Asscciat.em
&udie~ and Gentlemea o .
~ag; Te1.evs.sioa, me.,is the aNaer og prapastq 71mated
at695 Fogest Ro~ Ea,atp Va..lo Re amld 1iie ta ~cpreas our
cab~~tion to the =opomW estpm.nricrn of the 0a.i.1 Asaac.i.ates
Vie3a£c3e m~~~~~~~ acalityo
~e beiieve this expensic,n wil3: akdverseI.~ eL#fect aar
. neicsTabc?rha~d by n.~aing ths level of zztivit~? mf ~3,a~ta-
lidlnem aup+A ~ ~twr lagaa 4~Yv 9 r 7 ~e = j~'si anxzvaa'~1,v oY'1 ,
jey aL qt7.iet,
peaC*$ul exili$enCe ag thi~ lQCatt1oYlo ThiS e7Cxi3teA4@ mOtllil be
effective1.p a3~trapeai by the aperation nf snvovcats and ot.har
x~e equl tduring the daptime and the rii,.g}tttie bot=sm
The ape..~~ an af th.i.s eqaipmmt vottld aleo be i.u vivl.atiaa of
, our noise o,r ~e and vuld creait.e umacaasary pnlivt~_an in
tba areed
~~se such eapmsion ~f this faQilityo
Sincmraagyv
~ Aa
Vixm $r6aidSL1t
CBiief ra.~~ciaZ Qfticer .
JAGoME
~:~~as~Jcqr • . .
. ~
GENERAl. CQI1NNiiJNE+C61TIDNS, lNC,
lO0 GARFIEf1) S'l-?iEET
UkN V Efi. {:JCJLGJFiAIIU GIYdV6
TELEPHt7tdE (303) 322$400
TELeFa7c (308) 322-0627
August 17 , 1993
Town Counc i 1
The Town of Vail
V2a3.1, Colorada
Re: Residence at 756 Forest Road
Dear Sir vr Madame
T aiu writing to stxongly and urgently protest the
use of Forest Rosd by the Sndw Cats at night during the ski
season. The machines came down the mountain and pass by my home
in the wee hours awakening anyone trying to sleepo 6de rent our
home occasionally duxing the ski season anci have had cajuplaints
from guests abaut the noise.
I request that you find an alternative route that will nat
disturb people visiting those propertieso Tk,e value of real
estate has climbed recently in that area, and we do not need
additional aauisancas hurting us fsom increased Snow Cat traffic.
Property values have suffered a long time during the 1980's, so
we need as much help for them as possible now. If this problem
worsens, our property value wall clecliaae, dlamaging us
f iraanc ia l ly q
T am cartaip,lv .hopefu1 that we can resoiue this xaatter to
our mutual satisfactione
very truly yours..
A. EEmet Stephensosa, Jr.
AES/jw
. . F44,--t A-d - U~
w4t,
~
~
- ~
Z,.e,' gi~ d~7
J
Pd J_
~
6~ ~ ~ • //K/c-~v+.;L' f
!
~
~ .
. ° ~Q ~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ - ~
~
- -
. . . . . . . . _ . . . . . f"~. "
~ ` . ` P
" _ " " _ _ " " ' . .
. . . _ . . . . , " /i~ ~
~
. . . . - . . . . _ ' ' . . . .
C/V ~
. . . . ~
.
~ ' S.~- - - " ' . _ .
r~.~~...._._....."... ~ _ .
e ~ ` ' _ _
~
~
~ - . _
~G~
9~ Gz~~i~- ~ ~ `~'~J ~ ;
~
~ -
i;~~
L~~2~`C.- ~i°~ L~ 6G~
_ . _ ~ .
/
~ - ~ - - - - . '
~
~
tF~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -
To: Planning and Environmenta] Commission oi the Town of
Vaii
From: Thea and Fred Rumford, residents and owners of 675
Forest Road, Vail Colorado
Re: Proposed expansio;, of the Vail Associates
vEhir_.le maintenance shop. Item # 10 pubiic hearing
schedu l ed on 7i 26,%93 at 2: 00 P. M.
We are oppased to the expansion of the vehicle maintenance
shop. We are very much alarmed by this proposai to nearly
double t.he size of the building(s). This can only mean that
as th? Vail ski area cantinues to grow csuper Vail etc.> the
re=,identiQl area known as West Forest Road will be sub.iected
`c: more and more heavy equ i pment runn i ng n i ght and clay p:3sr
nur heuses. The sit.u.af.ior now is intalerable and this w;ll
a i + 1rr~rL•-
m:a..k ~ ~ . .
We reyuest `hat the application be denied and that Vail
.
Assoc:a;es be reques:ed to rethink the whole ISSIJe cf access
to the mountain bZ the snowg:oomir;g machines. We know of no
OtI'lEr" sk 1 dCea 41PPCF tC?Fse Ti3Ch! tlE'J pajs ;llpht l3i:cs d= r,
thraugh a residential area. It is cur understandirg tha`
the mGchines in Copper Mouritain, for e>;ampie, are s;ored and
refueled on the mount.ain. Areas tha: we are familiar with
in Eurcpe also store ar;d refuei on mountain.
These mountain vehic]es have not always been a part of life
ur; t4'e:,*, Foces; ::oar. We bcught our lct fram Vail Assoc:a'tes
ir 1965 and at that time the road deadencied at a point
acros_, GoiF creek fror;i the ma:r:tFnancP shap. tvo ski rur
bi sect e_r, Forest Road then, as the Born Free run does now.
Wr were *nid that such a run was a possibi l ity in the iuturE-
ard that access to our area would be preserved by placing a
tunne; undcf the ski rt?r. inste_nd a hridge was buiir acc-oss
Gore Creek. To begin with the bridge was smail as were the
mountain vehicles and there was no reason to object, even
though they were, and are, clearly in violation of Town
ordinances. When the bridge was enlarged and the size and
number of machines increased several residents of the
neiqhborhood expressed their concern to Vail Associates from
time ta time. Unfartunately we were nat a coordinated group
.a.nd nur appeals wPre icxnored. It is Qur hape that the
pi anr, i r:g comm i ss! on, the Tawn of Va I l} Va i l Assac i ates and
the residPnt° of West Forest Road can work together to
devr i opr a p 1.xr; wh i ch wi 1 i dramat i ca 1 1 y reduce the use af
West Forest Road as an access point for snawgrooming
machines to Vail Mountain.
U9;20/~3 16:50 V314 889 OYII APEX 0]L IZ, 001
Jtlly 20, 1993
Mr> J1m CtllrYIYdt$e
TowTl Of Vai1
Paanning and Enviog-nmental Coarmassion
Vaia Aiunicipal Buildanq
Vailo C~ $1659
Demx' p4go Cugsaiztte>
g taave ju~t received the Public Notace for the eacpamicn
cf thhe Vail Rsscaciates ve3aic2e maantenance facilityo
I have vwned ~prope~y at 666 Faz~t Itd. aince 1979 ancl
~ vea°~ conve~~~~ cuL tAe pra~sed expansicne The sesi.dents
of eug street already arcd?zre t~~ activity the maintena-L-a tnn4 l; ry
g~rovides and Ifeel $&lat fl.Yrther expansxort will ezniy incsecae
that raoise and acitivity.
Nany of ~~~~ies hsve sma12 children and grand-
c:hildren. zncreasei traffic in the area, especially that af
16. :-.cy-ti.pm~,''nrL wil.1 ~nly p€~ss adf$kt19Y18l sSf@ty haza8'dS.
1Ti1j1St Gljteiiiati>Gs hG6tiTe beenk lnVepitga(,ed? I wo46lf~
~p-'-pCiate any i;~~ormation ycu can providee My address
is 6182 XelYyle'tT1d Avg., C'li3yt0Y1, NQ 63105.
.~ha:uk ~ou for your cv*asfderation in this matter.
Si6lCeb e8yl
` a j ` A. N I
.
~
U i.
f993
I f)~ ~ ~ < ' . ~ • .
~
f...c~'..~z.._...
~J
I( d G s ~ r ~ 1• I • - , - ~c_.C..<:Z~v. .1'
G ?
i .
~ _.l~:~i't,~~_. (.IC..I, 1.~~11.I.~.lyyi_~,.1~~..t<..,(_: fr•.. Gr.,.{ . ~~t,(1til . ,`r'~
/r.~ ,p, ~ ~
.
. .~j r~~ IJ~.~L../" t~~.~~.. ~(.I~~:~_ (..~'~'ri.t.r,Cl:•1~•/~ I.I/~'f.C~.t;/~,,~.{ ~_.C~•'ZJ~i'~
i~ ~',":`..C~ (,~~~:2.;~%1_1 iJ.) , , ~f/ ~'[..f~._ I'1.-5. A..i (rQ _ ;j''~
~C_ • ~j J !J
YA.. 4. ~ ~.i tc:a . y`.~..~,,.~ ~._;•'y'1 .t_ ~ ~C.f';~i ~.I,:~.t--' ~.i,•!
. . c. (
/7 Q •
~,1...1!,.,.~,.~. _ ~ !?ti•.i r. . f ~ t ~2 . r.. r.. c'~ t . „
. ~lf .C_ 1'-~il.•:~,_ ~i<_~..•F.( d ~ ~ f'r~.r, ..1.•,:i.i ~:t~
t ..,r : C~% z~='u ,~f ~C ( ~l• vl ' .1.
~ ~ . .
' f' ~ rG <.c,~~~~ ~~-ti'7~ (;'L (1. . ~~..r~ : r: . ~ 't . ~ ~ , r. _
Q ~d~.~~,e~G~
~ ~t~p `~,~~z,vr~, G• ~%~u:-~, '-~-~t- ~~c U~i.~.~
i
, ,
~ (~.r~a.t~-r~-~"
V (,{.1~(, f ~ ~ Y: a~-'~~ _ . I I
J ` . > •K_
A~..C~~.(..(if
~ ' , ~c I~.6~. . •~::..'~.-f,~.l.~.,_,~ L ..~h.:/'
J:"
JULY 21, 1993
T0: 4'OIA' OF VAI:.
ATT: JIFq CGIMME
PIANR1IAiG AhTD ENNTR(10dMRWAL COK4I§SIoN
VAZL PMIGIPA. SUIIsDTNG
VAIL, COL(7RAITO ~1 ~57
SUBJELCT: T'T".N tn, PC',BLaC AtOfiICE, MMI?dG .ruLX Z6, 1993.
REQUEST F4R P, GOIoDITI0NA1, USB PE'RMIT ANA LAbIDSC,APLNG
VARZANCE Ta RI°i.O,t EXPAAT3TON OF VAIL A3SOC, ATES
MAIR1TE.^1AIdCE SN4P.
AS A?tESZDHNT QF THE WEST EO OF POREST RaADn 6r'E 3OIN dVR
KRICH$ORS TId PA:9T&;TZAIG AP1Y PFS,MIT Ok VAFtIA:tICE DEi1I::A'!'.N:U '1'U 'i'HE
EXPI?Al5IDP1 OF '[?iE VAIL ASSOCIATES MAIISTENAtJCE SBoP.
OiIR PRvT'S3T IS BASED 4fJ ANY INCCRR.A.SF IAT THE PRESZNT RnUh'D T(:E
CLCK L`SE QP FOF.ES t ROAB BY VAII. AssUCIA.'ip:5 FOR MOVEMENT O.r
VM1C1.E` T3{,AFFiC TC AN'L7 FR044 TfE I"lOLJNTAIN. FRESW:F' USg EY SN'(?V;
^a Stel-?w MDFIiaHS 16 YaQISY, 5I.SU DISR'JPTPIE,
L1liTY, A:-~J+' Ul}~AFF. ~I RACa UP A11'Z} DWY 2 'SR~",'+
Jl;"
Mf1R7-t_F9 . TC iY ~i?$daA~En A!~ D[FRII~G~Gti SN()i~PBR1ODS,v.
T!~"iv = r, ~
..v .a~eci:• iiw t~ktv L Ll41.C PTC SLL7 L V SiOF 1°7.1LLd G.'~~T Bt~'
THE 814Vw CA`i'S TO PA,SS. AS FAR AS THE. LANF3S(:IiPE YAii.iti:dGri Tu' VAli.
F.R E +°'i iii IT'C'TT.L" 84' t7t7Si[AS,L.^ r~nn.s+ar
. . . .i4.: _E:.c:
GHA,ACi'ING A VA.RIANC.E '?'F?n' a:
iSr KNE! i,FftviJSi:lii$
VA.rL INS.?iSTS UPOt1i YRC+f
THEM1RESID~ TAKPANM.,
SIAICE 1990, F.11GLE C;1LN7Y A53P:S50RS HAVE ZACC~~4 5-,;_._ .._.7 C =
°r.T'-:.' ~."ds.$.Ur,TIdDa3 TRAT idY-ST FJREST
RCAD IS NOW PRE~4IUNi PRGPERTI'. IP WE ARE Gt3i:ii"
R-O""ER 1 A . =_~'3 L~'~: ~~'f AP i'i~'FATED AS A R.BSIDHNTI.AL
yTtiEET A-PiD A1UT AS A MAINTE+1ACE tF"".tiiGLu
RESPECTNSLY,
CLDaTON G, i Mi~ES
DORIS M_ AlqES
. rBORGE J. PRIISSIN
RIctiARD T o sANTULLa
$5 CHhSd`KM RIDGS ROAU -
MOM'I'VAIaEo NEW JSRSEY 07645
201*°307-3040 _
,7TT3,Y 26, 1993
VIA F'AX - 303°479-2452
TL+WN OF? VAIL
pLANAHIRiG P,1+dD ffidVI'RONMMTAI, COMMI9SION
VAIL MUPiZCIPAL BLTILDIRTG
VAI L, COIARADt3 81657
AT7iE232I4he JIM CUPNU'!"TE
AS THE OW IdERB OF Fs HOME LOCl.TED AT 556 F'oBEST ROAD, 6dE ARE UPSET BY
T:*rS ?_R9POsED &LEQ43EST FOdt 1N BXPRNSZQid Or 'I'fIE VAIIr ASSOCIA`i-ES Q
VEHICL~ ~INTENANCE SxQP F:XFpiYdSION. W$ F$EL iHA`F `I'H3S WIL?L G2mauY
"r'Ecr ovx PRoPERTY. "
ItiS 1~ F.KA$ ENT rl'IMLy ~~~O TI1B 9EASQNi THE RnAD YN a itVP 1 a BnCcl
AND THE SN'I`IRE EF?ST SIDE OF OIIR HOME IS SQ&YECTSD Ta AN ENORMOIIS
AMOUdT QF DIO1tiNE A2dI} POLLUTaON FROM THE CQIdS'i'ANT XOWKENT OF TU
SNOWCATS AldD SNOW'MdBILES GOING TO AND FRO]M Z'k1E SKI FttT1IS o ZAM
E3NDLR 1`HE IMPRESSiCFN Tf~`aAT T:'W i'OFdN 03~ ~~IL HAS A NOISE C_()AF'I'ROL
ORDIAIANCE, BLJT IT DOESM ° T SEF.M TU APPLY TO OR BE Er1FOI2CED ON THE
8HOR`3.' NEST FORESb RdAD o
I RP2 ASKI2dG THE PY.Ad1dIATG AdD 4iYdNIRONMEIdTd?I. COKNIu3ZON TO DENX THgS
PROP4SAI. AidD StJ('sGEST o 1 e VAII, ASSOCIATBS THINK SERIOi7SLY ABAUT
2d~7 W~S ~'O G~ '~N%I2 EQUI~IEYd'i' ON THE MbI]1~PT1,II~d a 2•
ASSOCIATES STA`I'IOIa THEIR EQUIFMENT ON MOLTNTTAIH YiF:RR THE SKI RU';~
PMMK£NT'LY a 3. OtdI,Y MAJOR ItEPAIRS Bti1NG THE REASf}id rOR SItINGINC
THE SNOWCATS OFF THE N!0[INTAINo
~~9C a J"ftt.~
j~laC t p
GEo-RGE J. pRossa~fRIcHARD T. sANTULLz
iCL- 14u. JU1 16,95 11:11 No,003 ?.42
. ' ri +ioliCrt GonlioWIid 0.LD.
Idetvyn H. KkOK M.D.
scrrroy L woiar.014 an.11.
~
Ca9orado Kldney
A"oCoi*1> P.C. C;)
JuRy 20, Jim Cugnotte
Vail Planraing and Environmtratal Cemmia+~~on
PAxD. 383-479-2452
Ge ntI emena
I gepresent the owner8hip graup of 736 foL^est Fcba6r
E~~t Un$td We have re~etitly become awate of a petition
by lfafl Assoclates to esagarge the facility Pcr mainteaance
opegatians in the Lfonshead agea. TPtfo facility
has a daPect Impact on our progertg sincg numerous
iAeces oi machinery uae West Forest Road as the
aecoas go vai3 mountaino 9rhe noise generated by
gAe constant parade of meehani xed rehicie8, both
sno-d cate and 5novoobiles, is oftQn ir?tolesablee
The hotars of operation izateriere with sleep patterna
mf tce$ade*ats at our home. Ifl a6ditfon ~o the noise
end the traff3c cseated by thi,a equipment, there
Is a definite deterioration ir, air epuality i.n our
r.e~oh.borhoccla
When ae purchaeed our hoa?e, we vere coQnimant of
the pges@r?ce of the afore mentaoned facility. Increasing
' f:hp af za! nf P_h# n faci ] f ty eratsld b~ u»fair P.n thoAe
homenwners in the Weat I.ionshea8 areae Iwauld
4+opie the enwn ef Vail and Vai1 knsvn.r.iptpa r.ou7d
fiaa~ an alternate facility or perhags use an a2ternate
routo to th~ niour,taifl. I t98 be23eve fsirness uhauld
ee:teb s.n4:a the formula og whege this facility is
paaead.
Sin a2y,P- ~ / .
MaF.wyra o iKYofrsi F3,D_
Ii9@9F~C/dlen3
4ao; r.a:i mm &er,ue • yunc 150
{?a nvf I ~ Cv!w ~Ockv gL1'l2n
(1jD.9) 321) t38Y I
Faxsaz-f- e~
~ r"f `AF"~° (,~b6~'`t,
_
- ; -1 J ~ ` J~i=~` . -
~L
9 R t - ~ L`1°
Gu
1 l
L~
o,--- 1,5r reo_aN-~- -
r
. ~ 9
~ ~ 't r rt+C_-_~.~ ~!~•1'"~t~A ~ _ ..dl~ - -
~
~
_A
~ .
, . -
-
. 7! ,F /
~
, - 7- -
~ ~ ~ ` - - - -
.
-----a~- - R? - ~~~~~._n~.Y
~ ~
- - - ~ - ~ - . - - - - -
- J - - _ _
_ . -
Caryn Ostergard Deevy, I'h.D.
PUDIOL(X;ICAL CONSUi.TANTS
525 Foresc Screec
Denvrr, Culoradu 80220
(301) 322-0777
September 25, 1989
Vail 'I'own Council:
It has come to our attention that the Vai1 Town Council claims to have never received a
complaint about the snowcat and snowmobile traffic on West Forest Road. As a new
resident, I find that almost impossible to believe unless things changed drastically in 1989
when vve purchased our property at 736 Forest Road.° Vde ciosed in November and spent our
first evening there sometime that month. We were shocked by the first snowcat the
combination of the vibration, .nuise and flashing lights gives one the impression that you
have aHeliport on your patio. The snbwmobiles are even worse in terms of noise level and
speed of travel. At a shift change, the vehicles may come 10 in a row, _and there is rarely
a 15 minute interval in any 24 hour period that a snowcat or a snowmobile does not roar
by. Aesthetics aside, the worst problem is that you cannot sleep. Our baby was 6 months
old when we moved in, and he woke up screaming every time a snowcat or a snowmobile
went by during the night. IVeedless to.say,:our first night in our "dream vacation home"
was one of many tears and no sleep. .
The issue of safety is another problem. I believe you run the snowcats all night to have
less chance of an accident with a skieron the slopes during the day. But what about auto
and pedestrian traffic on F'orest Road?. A tragic vehicle/pedestrian accident is a very
foreseea'Dle hazard, given tne volume of snow vehicles and skiers, taurists; and child:en on
the street both day and night. Of course Vail Associates would bear the brunt of the
expense and bad publicity of such a suit, but the tragedy would be on everyone's
conscience. . ,
: So, we have a ski resort property that cannot be enjoyed by us nor rented during the
winter months because of aesthetic, economic and legal liability reasons. But wait, we
are getting out of the city and its pollution, aren't we? Vdhat's -all this complaining about a
little lost sleep and fear of_children being crushed by multi=ton vehicles traveling on a
narrow street? Well, it seeits that the diesel exhaust that these vehicles are blowing into
Vail Town Council
September 25, 1989
Page Two
my living room 24 hours a day, 7 months a year, is seriously compromising my family's
health. 'Y'alk about SVdAIVIP LAND IIV FLORIDA!!!
'I'here is another dimension to this issue that is worthy of your consideration. I don't have
to tell you what a mess these vehicles make on the street and at the point of entry to the
mountain under the gondola. T'his is the first area seen by new skiers riding the gondola
and by visitors to I.ionshead shops and restaurants. It's not a pretty postcard! Remember,
you don't get a seconci cnance to make a iirst impression. When we purchased our home,
we had intended to immediately make improvements to the outside appearance of the
structure and to do considerable landscaping. These projects have been deferred indefinitely
as we have come to realize that we couldn't give this property away now that everyone is
becoming aware of the noise and pollution problems (the diesel exhaust is also very hard on
new landscaping). It occurred to me that other residents have made similar decisions to
pass on improvements. 1VIy point is that I don't think Vail can afford to create a Ghetto in
such a visible portion of her real estate.
VVe have been advised to sue the selling agent for lack of disclosure and Vai1 Associates for
loss of rights to "quiet enjoyment" of and SAF'E access to our home. Such things are
costly, time consuming and involve a lot of bad publicity. I still find it hard to believe the
problem exists at all and there isn't a more logical place for these vehicles to be.
Our newly-formed Homeowner's Association looks forward to hearing from you and welcomes
an opportunity to speak to the council. I also extend an invitation to anyone who would
like to spend a winter evening sitting in my noisy living room to see for themselves what
we are talking about.
Sincerely,
Caryn and Brian Deevy
cc: Vail Associates
Eagle County and Denver Assessors Offices
Forest Road Homeowner's Association
Public Vdorks: Mr. Pete Burnett
Town 1Vlanager: IV[r. Ron F'hillips
~ Caryn Ostergard Deevy9 Ph.I3.
AUDIOLOGICAL CANSULTANTS 325 Furesc Screec
- , Dcm•er, Culundn 3O220 •
(303) 322-0777
June 3, 1989
Re: 736 Forest Road
Schedule # 008713
Property # 2101 07211 018
Tax Assessore
4de purchased this property on iVovember 1, 1988 for $347,500 with '
P9argaret Booth acting as our agente Had we realized at the time
that snowcats and snowmobiles would be making about 100 very noisy
passes day and night making sleep impossible and creating a
dangerous situation for children and other pedestrians, we would
never have paid that pricee As a matter of fact,' several sales
~ have fallen through in recent months on this block because of the
_ a
noise problemo No doubt this mountain maintainance scheme made
sense When there was less mountain, less maintainance and few, if
any residences e. The activities of Vail Associates have greatly
devalued these properties and create a terrible nuisance for the
current residents in the way of noise, air and aesthetic pollutione
Zf anything, this block is entitle3 to a tax credit, r.ot a tax
gouge : 1 .
6de own three proper*.ies in Denver and are thus familiar with the
assessment processe Each of these properties was assessed at values
consistant with a fair market pricep what someone might pay for the
propertyo Since we paid $347,500 that would seem a more realistic
value than $574,790-for this Vail propertye It seems simple enough,
properties adjacent fio a public nuisance-airport, Indianapolis
speedway- pay lovaer taxes than those in nice neighborhoodse
Thankyou for your consideration of this mattero
Sincere:
~9
Caryn n2 y. cc;Vail Associates
Caryn Oscergard DeeNy, Ph.D. .
AL'D10LOGICAL CONSULTANTS
525 Furesi Screec
• ~ Dem-er, Cul. ;idu 80'20
(301) 323-0777
June 29, 1989
Vail Assessor°s Offices
I am preparing my appeal as your system leaves me no choice but to file regardless of what,I ultimately hear from youo Since you
don°t have to mail your response until June 30 and I must send mine
no later than July 10, (an interesting block of time that includes
only 8 work days so that I wouldn°t expect to see your response
until long after my appeal window has closed- how do you get away
~
ewith that sort of thing? ) I have to send in an appeal without
knowing your response to my first protest, if in fact you sent onee
- I'have-attached the same letter I sent you last timee Nothing has
change4e T have however heard some very interesting stories about
. .
who you:.had making these assessments and what you were'basing them
one Iwould hope that you plan to remedy the gross misconduct cnthis first round rather that pushing it furfiher than is reasonablee
If,however,you plan to drag your feet I can assure you that I am
not going to go awayo . .
Sincerelys
Caryn Ostergard Deevy
~_..-j ccaVail Associates
\ 7
% _ .
•
4- ~q
~
I _rJ
~v J J •
r
d
~V
It9s Not EvelrY CoupIe ``ihaL Hears ~
Bells Ring VVhen They Go to Bed
By Dinr`e TxacY months or so and they'il get used to it,"
~ SIG,fJ RPpOf(eT OJ THE WALL STREET JUL'RNAL says the Carnalls' attorney, W. Michael
All that Richard and Pamela Carnall Ryan.
want, they cl:iim, is a good night's sleep. But there are a few notable exceptions
But the HatfiPld, Mass., couple probably when the bell has been silent, like last Au-
never dreamed they'd have to go to court gust, w•hen the Carnalls bought their home.
to get one. The bell, which before being electrified in
The Carn;ills, who moved to Hatfield I96E required wznding, had been shut dowii
~ last year from neighboring Nonhampton, earlier in the year for repairs to its tirning
live 50 feet frum the church that houses the mechanism.
_ town clock and bell-a tiell that rings ev- In court papers, the Carnalls claim they
ery hour on the hour, 24 hours a day. didn't know when they bought the house
T'ekiag 8 Heavy Toll that "the town clock was in the church or
The couple, claiming that the nighUy that the clock was programmed to ring the
chiming is causing sleep deprivation, not hour 24 hours a day." So, needless to say,
~ to mentlon "stress, anxiety, irritability and a'hen the bell started ringing again last
a low frustration level," asked a court for December, they were a bit surprised.
a preliminary injunction to silence the bell A Familiar Ring
/ at night. In order to render a decision on the in•
But the town says it's a tradition and junction request-possibly as early as
has asked ttie court to deny the request. today-the judge has decided to hear for
J~ t?~ ~ i "As best atiyone has been able to deter• himself just how loud the ringing is, says
mine," says town counsel William J. Mr. 0'Neil, the town counsel.
; 0'Neil, "tliey've been ringing on the hour Mr. Ryan, who also lives in Hatfield, is
since 1898." surprised by some of the tow-nspeoplP's re-
,~~1~ Besides, the town maintains, silencing action tu his clients' request to silence the
the bell b-fore the case goes to tria; would bel]. "In my personal opinion," he says, if ~
'~u deny the couple the opportunity to adjust the tou~n turned the bell off at night "With-
. li V to the noises in their emironment. "The out telling anyone, they probably wouldn't
town physician :'is to give them qi> notice for a couple of years."
~ ?
1 ~
~
~ 17 v ~
~
V11
, N
.
tv
V
736 Forest Road
Vail, CO 81657
1 Littleridge Lane
Englewood, CO 80110
F'ebruary 5, 1990
Mr. Rondall Phillips.
Town of Vail
7550 Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Mr. Phillips:
~
I thank you for your response to my letter, since it was the only one I received. It also was
most amusing that you consider the "thoughtless residential building along Forest Road,
without regard to V.A.'s need to use this strategic location for its mountain maintenance"
to be the cnix of the problem. A moment's thought should reveal that VA was "thoughtless"
and I daresay greedy in selling residential lots along their strategic corridor. Because they
sold and profited from the sale of these lots for residential purposes, they are obligated to
maintain a reasonable level of activity allowing peaceful and healthful enjoyment of these
homes. Oops, I guess the immediate profit was too tempting to resist, since reasonable
expectations of mountain growth and associated increased maintenance would have certainly
caatraindicated the use of this road for residences. I guess they figured that someone else
would have to cross that bridge when it became a problem. Well, now it's a problem, and
it isn't the fault of the people who purchased these residential lots and had the audacity to
put residences on them! Nice tryI
'I'he fact that VA does a lot of the maintenance throughout the night in order to reduce
their legal liability at the expense of our sleep adds further insult to injury. And, finally,
again from your letter, snowmobiles roaring by your bedroom hourly through the night,
every night is not an "inconvenience inherent in resort living"!
Mr. Rondall Phillips
February 5, 1990
Page Two
There are many terms to describe what VA did double dipping, profiting from both ends
of a deal eventually you get trapped in the middle. Eventually is now. I believe the
Forest Road Homeowners have the body of law on their side. Certainly there is a better
way to resolve this, given the obviousness of the problem and the culprits and the negative
impact on the entire town of this visible location for mountairi maintenance.
Sincerely,
CJ'~ ` Z
Caryn and Brian eevy
cc: Forest Road Homeowners Association
Vai1 Associates: Cieorge Gillette
Peter Jamar Associates
r
~ - - - - .
hettoralgarton/kesada6i
reai estate sales and development
June 26, 1989
West Forest koaci Homeownzrs As sOciai.ion
cJo Mrs. Cindy jacobson
765 Fore st F.aad
Vail, CO' 81557
Dear Cindy:
To reiterate Oll?- telephone conver5ation ear3ier today,
I was describing the situat-,on I four_d when showirig ~.:rd
trying te sell the Caldzaell hause at 636 Forest Rcad. i
believe rny customer would have purchased +.nz P=u1'-_= `-I
had the snowcats traveileti another route to the sxi
first.
t,~ Purcnaser looked at the prop~tY
moun~ain. T---
in 1937 • He can back several times du~i cg as'Lhe ed s 'he sho6ev-
.A ~
of 1988-89. NP sLated he woulci have p .
the 3mpunt ;t is now undercontract far if he kne-vi t?:c `'uyi
Associates snnwcats, skida's, and vehicles wouid nct ;tiaxe
him during the nigrt. He felt the snocat activity and
their noise was too g-eat; tnereiore, aite*° a yea= o=
CnnCtPr71ptlOI1, he refused to make an offer.
Zl v ~_u ..~i ..a.. ~ C`' Yt :7
~~-o~°, my e;cperience, I estim3~e trat prop:_t-
West Forest Rcad have nct appreciatea fron last Fall, nor_
have they kept pace with the market activity~~ ~lirM``PSaine
principally to the winter traffic accessing
from the Vail Associates Maintenance barn.
Id15CLSS°d ±'}"ie t/A 8:'lOwCdt %,Oi:: Shlf:'S T:."i±Fl Nfi. :`R~rri_r
Grav. Ne was very fri-endiy and co-operative. t:nfnrtur.a`ely,
there was na quick and easy solution to my situa`ior or the
Caldwell's.
I feel that more than a haphazard "noise abate~uespingyour
by VA is necessary to enhance future property va
neighborhood. I wish you good luck with your endeavours.
Please let me ;:now if I can help in the future.
Sincerely,
~
` 1~nn C. Mar~is
ACM/ s
_........r.., ~.~_-.-cI caNt~NF ;303i -rE 2-166
oRDaNANcE No. 16
SERIES OF 1994
AN ORDBNANCE M14K9NG Sl1PPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS
FROM TF9E 11'OVUBV OF VAIL GEIVERAL FUND,
REAL ESTATC~ ~~ANSFER TAX FUIVD, AND CAPITAL PRO.?ECT'S FU1VD
O~ THE 1994 BUDGET AIVD TFBE FONANC8AL PLAN
FOR Ttl-1E TOYtlN OF V/'llLy `6?OLORKDoy .
6+1otlD AY.UTWORIZIC`9G THE EXPGNDITiJRGJ ~F SMID APPROPRIA& ION~
AS SGT FORA 6l HETIGINy
AND SETTONG FOF3TH DETAILS 8N REGAR~ THERETOe
1NHEREAS, contingencies have arisen during the fiscal year 1994 which could not have
been reasonably foreseen or anticipated by the Town Council at the time it enacted Ordinance
iVo. 26, Series of 9993, adopting the 1994 Budget and Financial Plan for the Town of Vail,
Colorado; and,
WHEREAS, the Town has received certain revenues not budgeted for previously; and,
VVHEREAS, the Town Manager has certified to the Town Council that sufficient funds are
available to discharge the appropriations referred to herein, not othervvise reflected in the Budget,
in accordance with Section 9.10(a) of the Charter of the Town of Vail; and,
1IVHEREAS, in order to accomplish the foregoing, the Town Council finds that it should
make certain supplemental appropriations as set forth herein.
NOUV, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, BY THE TOWfV COUNCIL OF THE TOWPV OF
VAIL, COLORADO that:
1. Pursuant to Section 9.10(a) of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado, the Town
Council hereby makes the following supplemental appropriations for the 1994 Budget and
Financial Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado, and authorizes the expenditure of said
appropriations as follows:
FUiVD AMOUNT
General Fund $ 703,000
Capital Projects Fund 1,872,000
Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund 1,872,000
4,447,000
2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for
any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions
of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and
each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any
one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is
necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants
thereof.
4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code
of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any
duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution
commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the
provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not
revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated
herein.
1
Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1994
5. All bylavvs, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent
herewith are repealed to the extend only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be
construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore
, repealed.
IiVTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL OiV
FIRST READING this 3rd day of August, 1994, and a public hearing shall be held on this
Ordinance on the 16th day of August, 1994, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail
fViunicipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
• Margaret A. Osterfoss, nAayor
ATTEST:
Hol1y L. McCuthceon, Tow+n Clerk
,
' READ AND APPROVED OIV SECOND READIIVG AiVD ORDERED PUBLISHED in full this
day of , 1994.
Niargaret A. Osterfoss, AAayor
ATTEST:
Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk
Y
' C:10RD94.16
2
Ordinence No. 18, 3erise of 1994
. . . , . ,
rt
~
a
ORDINANCE NO. 17
Series of 1994
AN ORDINANCE AMEfdDING SECTION 18.04.130, FLOOR AREA GROSS RESIDEPdTIAL
(GFiFA), ALLOUVING COMMOPV AREA WITHIPd AflULTI-FAAAILY BUILDIMGS TO BE USED
FOFi EAAPLOVEE HOUSIMG AFID SETTING FORTH DETAtLS IN REGARD THERE70.
WHEREAS, the availability of housing plays a critical role in creating quality living and
working conditions for the community's work force; and,
WHEREAS, the Town Council believes that -the following amendments wAI make the
definition of GRFA and the'ability to use common area within multi-family buildings more
flexible; and,
WHEREAS, the flexibility allowed under the proposed language will provide another
incentive for the private sector to provide employee housing; 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 to the Town Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT:
Section 1
18.04.130 Floor area, gross residential (GRFA)* Gross residential floor area (GRFA) means the total square footage of all levels of a
building, as measured at the inside face of the exterior walls (i.e. not including furring,
sheetrock, plaster and other similar wall finishes). GRFA shall include, but not be limited to,
. elevator shafts and stairwells at each level, lofts, fireplaces, bay windows, mechanicat chases,
vents, and storage areas. Attics, crawl spaces and roofed or covered decks, porches,
- terraces or patios shali also be included in GRFA, unless they meet the provisions of
subsections A. or B. below.
A. Within buildings containing two or fewer dwelling units, the following areas shall be
exctuded from calculation as GRFA:
1. Enclosed garages of up to three hundred square feet per vehicle space not
exceeding a maximum of two spaces for each allowable dwelling unit permitted
by the zoning code.
1
. ~
~
2. Attic space with a ceiling height of five feet or less, as measured from the top
side oi the structural members of the floor to the underside of the structural
members of the roof directly above. Attic area created by construction of a roof
with truss-type members will be excluded from calculation as GRFA provided
the trusses are spaced no greater than thirty inches apart.
3. Crawl spaces accessible through an opening not greater than twelve square ~
feet in area, with five feet or less of ceiling height, as measured from the
surface of the earth to the underside of structural floor members of the
flooriceiling assembly above.
4. Roofed or covered deck, porches, terraces, patios or similar features or spaces
with no more than three exterior walis and a minimum opening of not less than
twenty-five percent of the tineal perimeter of the area of said deck, porch,
, terrace, patio, or similar feature or space provided the opening is contiguous
and fully open from floor to ceiling with an allowance for a railing of up to three
feet in height.
. GRFA shall be calculated by measuring the total square footage of a building set forth
in Section 18.04.130 above. Excluded areas as set forth in subsection A, shall then be '
deducted from total square footage.
B. Within buildings containing more than iwo allowable dwellings or accommodation units,
the following additional areas shall be excluded from calculation as GRFA:
1. Enclosed garages to accommodate on-site parking requirements.
2. All or part of the following spaces, provided such spaces are common spaces
and that the total square footage of all the following spaces shall not exceed
thirty-five percent of the allowable GRFA permitted on the lot.
- a. Common hallways, stairways, elevator shafts and airlocks;
b. Common lobby areas;
c. Common enclosed recreation facilities;
d. Common heating,_cooling or ventilation systems, solar rock storage
~ areas. or other mechanical systems. Square footage excluded from
calculation as GRFA shall be the minimum square footage required to
allow for the maintenance and operation of such mechanical systems;
2
r
a
e. Common closet and storage areas, providing access to such areas is
from common hallways only;
, f. Meeting and convention facilities;
g. Office space, provided such space is used exclusively for the
management and operation of on-site faciliiies.
h. Floor area to be used in a Type III or a Type IV Employee Housing Unit
(EHU) as defined and restricted by Chapter 18.57, provided said EF4U
fioor area shall not exceed 60% of the 35% common area allowance
defined by Section 18.04.130b.2. above. Any square footage for the
Type III or Type IV EHU's which exceeds the 60% maximum of allowed
common area shail be included in the calcufaiion of GRFA. If a
property aumor:allocates catnmon ares for 4he; purpose of
employee housing, and subsequently requests a common area
variance, the Toarn.shall require that the housing area be converted
back to common uses end'that:fhe empiayes housing units be
replaced on-site or off-site.
Any square footage which exceeds the thirty-five percent maximum shall be
inciuded in the calculation of GRFA.
3. AII or part of an airlock within an accommodation or dwelling unit not exceeding
a maximum of twenty-five square feet, providing such unit has direct access to
the outdoors.
4. Overlapping stairways within an accommodation unit or dwelling unit shall only
be counted at the lowest level.
5. Attic space with a ceiling height of five feet or less, as measured from the top
_ side of the structural members of the floor to the underside of the structural
members of the roof directly above. Attic areas created by construction of a
roof with truss-type members will be excluded from calculation as GRFA
provided the trusses are spaced no greater than thirty inches apart.
6. Crawl spaces accessible through an opening not greater than twelve square
feet in area, with five feet or less of ceiling height, as measured from the
surface of the earth to the underside of structural floor members of the
flooNceiling assembly above.
3
h~
7. Roofed or covered decks, porches, terraces, patios or similar features or '
spaces with no more than three exterior walls and a minimum opening of not
less than twenty-five percent of the lineal perimeter of the area of said deck, porch, terrace, patio, or similar feature or space provided the opening is
contiguous and fully open from floor to ceiling, with an allowance for a raiiing of
up to three feet in height.
• GRFA shall be caiculated by measuring the total square footage of a building as set
forth in Section 18.04.130 above. Excluded afeas as set forth in subsection B. shall then be
deducted from the total square footage.
(Ord. 15 (1991) §1: Ord. 37 (1990) §1: Ord. 41 (1982) § 1A: Ord. 37(1980) § 1(part).)
"EDITOR'S NOTE: The provisions of this section shall not be effective for any application
for development which has been submitted to the department of
community development, and accepted by the same, on or before July
~ 1, 1991, unless agreed to by the applicant submitting the application
~
before July 1, 1991.
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 effect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance: and the 7own 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 fi'nds, 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 Vail Municipal Code
4
1
a
as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed.
any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor
any other action or proceeding as commenced under of by virtue of the provision repealed or
repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or
any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein.
Section 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 ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED OIVCE IN FULL, this _ day of . 1994. A public hearing shall be
held hereon on the _ day of , 1994, at the regutar meeting of the Town
Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, in the Municipal Building of the Town.
Ivlargaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor '
ATTEST:
Holly McCutcheon, Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
this _ day of , 1994.
Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor
ATTEST: "
_ Holly McCutcheon. Town Clerk
~ 5
a
0
tlYAEMoR/"iNDUItl0
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: July 25, 1994
SUBJECT: A request for an amendment to Section 18.57 of the Town of Vail Municipal
Code, Employee Housing, to allow for common area to be used for employee.
housing. ,
Applicant: Jay Peterson
Planner: Andy Knudtsen
1. BAC6CGROUND ON THE fREQIBEST
Jay Peterson, the developer of 44 Willow Place, is proposing changes to the Zoning Code
regarding employee housing units. When his project was originally designed, he included
three employee housing units. He had used all of the GRFA in the project for the three
dwelling units and had proposed using common area for the employee housing units. At the
time, the Code did not allow this to be done.
The options Jay presented to the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) at the time
of approval included:
1. Delete the employee housing units and turn the area into common storage;
2. Propose an SDD to allow the employee housing units; or,
3. Propose a Code change to allow a certain percentage of allowed common area
in a multi-family building to be used for employee housing units.
The applicant and the PEC agreed that the third option was the best. At this time, Jay has
pursued the third option and is proposing the language listed below.
I0. DESCRIPT90N OF THE PROPOSED CODE CHANGES
The proposed code changes are shown below in shade and ayeFs#F+ke.
98.04.130 Floor area, gross residential (GRFA)*
Gross residential floor area (GRFA) means the total square footage of all levels of a
building, as measured at the inside face of the exterior walls (i.e. not including furring,
sheetrock, plaster and other similar wall finishes). GRFA shall include, but not be limited to,
elevator shafts and stairwells at each level, lofts, fireplaces, bay, wr:indaurs, mechanical chases,
vents, and storage areas. Attics, crawl spaces and roofed or covered decks, porches,
terraces or patios shall also be included in GRFA, unless they meet the provisions of
subsections A. or B. below. _
1
1
~
A. Within buildings containing two or fewer dwelling units, the following areas shall be
excluded from calculation as GRFA: 1. Enclosed garages of up fo three hundred square feet per vehicle space not
exceeding a maximum of two spaces for each allowable dwelling unit permitted
by the zoning code.
2. Attic space with a ceiling height of five feet or less, as measured from the top
side of the structural members of the floor to the underside of the structural
members of the roof directly above. Attic area created by construction of a roof,
with truss-type members will be excluded from calculation as GRFA provided
the trusses are spaced no greater than thirty inches apart.
3. Crawl spaces accessible through an opening not greater than twelve square
feet in area, with five feet or less of ceiling height, as measured from the
surface of the earth to the underside of structural floor members of the
floor/ceiling assembly above.
4. Roofed or covered deck, porches, terraces, patios or similar features or spaces
with no more than three exterior walls and a minimum opening of not less than
twenty-five percent of the lineal perimeter of the area of said deck, porch,
terrace, patio, or similar feature or space provided the opening is contiguous
and fully open from floor to ceiling with an allowance for a railing of up to three
feet in height.
~
GRFA shall be calculated by measuring the total square footage of a building set forth
in Section 18.04.130 above. Excluded areas as set forth in subsection A, shall tiien be
deducted from total square footage.
B. Within buildings containing more than two allowable dwellings or accommodation units,
the following additional areas shall be excluded from calculation as GRFA:
1. Enclosed garages to accommodate on-site parking requirements.
2. All or part of the following spaces, provided such spaces are common spaces
and that #he total square footage of all the following spaces shall not exceed
thirty-five percent of the allowable GRFA permitted on the lot.
a. Common hallways, stairways, elevator shafts and airlocks;
b. Common lobby areas;
c. Common enclosed recreation facilities;
d. Common heating, cooling or ventilation systems, solar rock storage
areas, or other mechanical systems. Square footage excluded from
calculation as GRFA shall be the minimum square footage required to
allow for the maintenance and operation of such mechanical systems;
2
a
e. Common closet and storage areas, providing access to such areas is
from common hallways only;
f. Meeting and convention facilities;
g. Office space, provided such space'is used exclusively for the
management and operation of on-site facilities.
h: Floor area tc~;be used ~ri a Type;; III or a Type lU Employee Housang Unif
_ (EHU):as defined;and restncted::by Chapter 18 57protded said EHU
fkaor ar.ea shall not'exceed 6(l%.of' fhe: 35°lo::common area allo~rance
cfefnecJ by Section 18 04:130b.2 aboe Atiy squar& fo;q#age>f.or the:
Type ll l vr Type l1l 'EHU's whEch 0xceetls the 60% maximum of allo~we~
common area 5hafl'be included; in ihe 'calculatron of .~RFA`
Any square footage which exceeds the thirty-five percent maximum shall be
included in the calculation of GRFA.
3: All or part of an airlock within an accommodation or dwelling unit not exceeding
a maximum of twenty-five square feet, providing such unit has direct access to
the outdoors.
4. Overlapping stairways within an accommodation unit or dwelling unit shall only
be counted at the lowest level.
5. Attic space with a ceiling height of five feet or less, as measured from the top
side of the structural members of the floor to the underside of the structural
members of the roof directly above. Attic areas created by construction of a
roof with truss-type members will be excluded from calculation as GRFA
provided the trusses are spaced no greater than thirty inches apart•.
6. Crawl spaces accessible through an opening not greater than twelve square feet in area, with five feet or less of ceiling height, as measured from the
surface of the earth to the underside of structural floor members of the
floor/ceiling assembly above.
7. Roofed or covered decks, porches, terraces, patios or similar features or
spaces with no more than three exterior walls and a minimum opening of not
less than twenty-five percent of the lineal perimeter of the area of said deck,
porch, terrace, patio, or similar feature or space provided the opening is
contiguous and fully open from floor to ceiling, with an allowance for a railing of
up to three feet in height.
GRFA shall be calculated by measuring the total square footage of a building as set
forth in Section 18.04.130 above. Excluded areas as set forth in subsection B. shall then be
deducted from the total square footage.
(Ord. 15 (1991) §1: Ord. 37 (1990) §1: Ord. 41 (1982) § 1A: Ord. 37(1980) § 1(part).)
3
. ,
.
`EDITOR'S NOTE: The provisions of this section shall not be effective for any application
for development which has been submitted to the department of
community development, and accepted by the same, on or before July
1, 1991, unless agreed to liy the applicant submitting the application
before July 1, 1991.
III. STAFF ANALYSIS -
Staff believes that the proposed changes will be beneficial for providing employee housing.
We believe that there are enough checks and balances within the Zoning Code that this
section will not be used to generate excess mass and bulk or excess units on any particular
site. The common area square footage is already allowed by the Code. This amendment
adds one additional way in which common area may be used. The important points to
understand include the following:
1. The common area can only be used for Type Ilf or Type IV employee housing
units.
2. Type III and Type IV employee housing units are allowed only as conditional
uses. They are allowed in the following zone districts: Residential Cluster, Low
Density Multi-Family, Medium Density Multi-Family, High Density Multi-Family,
Public Accommodation, Commercial Core I, Corrimercial Core II, Commercial
Core 1.11, Commercial Service Center, Arterial Business District, Public Parking
District; Public Use District and Ski Base Recreation District.
3. There is no net increase in floor area. The amendment allows for allowed
common area to be used not only for standard common area uses (hallways,
stairways, lobbies, etc.) but also broadens the use to include Type III and Type
IV units. The total allowed common area remains the same.
4. Though the ordinance will allow the use of common area as GRFA, it does not
allow any additional density for dwelling units on-site beyond what is allowed
under the property's zoning. .
5. All other zoning standards will be in effect. Standards for height, site coverage,
setbacks, parking, etc. could not be amended without a variance. More
, importantly, the applicant will have to provide all parking required for the units
on-site.
6. The concept of the proposed changes is one that staff believes is consistent
with the Town's Employee Housing Ordinance, Land Use Plan, and with the
Town's effort to add to the employee housing supply. Specifically, the following
goals of the Land Use Plan call for the additional supply of Employee Housing:
"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.
4
i
J
5.5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and
upgraded. Additional employee housing needs should be
accommodated at varied sites throughout the community."
Determining the appropriate amount of common area that can be allocated for
employee housing has been difficult for staff to calculate. At this time, staff is
recommending 60%. At the end of this memo, there is a chart showing what
percentage of floor area has been allocated to common area and what area
could be used for employee housing units for a variety of projects in the Town,
Staff has shown each project under three different scenarios of common area. ,
We calculated the allowable square footage of common area for employee
housing units at 60%, 50%, and 30%. Staff befieves that the 60% works the
best. VVe believe that it is important to retain some common area for typical
common area uses, such as lobbies, hallways and front offices. However, we
do not want to limit the amount of employee housing that could be located on-
site as we are trying to encourage units and disperse employee housing
throughout the community. Though the research staff has done does not
clearly indicate that a certain percentage is better than others, we believe that
60% of allowed common area is a reasonable standard as it will allow flexibility,
yet reserve some of the allocated common area for traditional common area
purposes. Please see the chart at the end of the memo.
Because the numbers can get confusing, staff has provided an example below
to show how the proposed changes could be used in a hypothetical situation.
Lot Size: 1/2 acre or 21,780 square feet
Zone District: Public Accommodation
GRFA Allowed: (21,780)(.80) = 17,424 square feet
Units Allowed: (.5 acre)(25 dwelling units/acre) = 12.5
dwelling units
Common Area Allowed: (.35)(17,424) = 6,098.4 square feet -
Maximum Area Allowed
to be used for EHU's: (6,098.4)(.60) = 3,659 square feet
Maximum Area Allowed
to be used for standard
Common Area Uses: 6,098.4 - 3,659 = 2,439 square feet
V. CHANCE TO GRFA DEFBEV9TO0N
One of the other changes that staff is proposing at this time that is unrelated to housing is to
include the phrase "bay windows" in our definition of GRFA. We have counted all bay
windows as GRFA since our definition was changed in 1990. We would like to clarify the
Code so that it references bay windows in the definition. We believe that it will help architects
and developers as they prepare site plans to have the definition be more complete. There will
be no chanqe in the way staff has been enforcing the Code.
5
,f
ti
VI. CONCLUSION
Staff believes that the proposed changes add flexibility to the Zoning Code that will help
provide additional employee housing. We believe that it is a reasonable amount of flexibility
as all other zoning standards will still be in effect and any proposal for a Type III or Type IV
unit will be reviewed by the PEC as a conditional use. During the staff and PEC review of the
Type Ill,or Type IV unit, staff recommends that applicants be required to explain their current
and future common area needs so that future common area variances are discouraged.
Based on the proposed language and its compliance with Town of Vail planning. documents,
staff recommends approval of the requested code changes.
c:\pec\me m os\e h uj ay.725
~ 6
CHART A
Zoning Allowed Existing Allowed GRFA Allowed Common Ezisting Difference 60% of Allowed 50% of Allowed 30 % of Allowed Proposed
Dwelling . Dwelling (35°k) Common Common Common Common floor area
Units Units for EHU's
Sonnenalp PA 50 90 au 70,532.4 sq. ft. 24.686.3 sq. ft. 50,523.1 sq. ft. (25,836 8 sq. ft.) 14,811.8 sq. ft. 12,343.15 sq. ft. 7,405.9.sq. ft.
Bavaria or 35 %
House
Manor Vail HDMF 136 123 du 131,938.2 sq. ft. 46,178.4 sq. ft. 38,821.9 sq. ft. 7,356.5 sq. ft. 27,707 sq. ft. 23,089.2 sq. ft. 13,853.5 sq. ft.
or 35 %
Garden of SDD 12 15 au 17,594 sq. ft. 6,157.9 sq. ft. 5,772 sq. fL 385.9 sq. ft. 3,694J sq. ft. 3,078.9 sq. fL 1,847.4 sq. ft.
the Gods 6 du or 35 %
The HDMF 7 28 du 8,258 sq. ft. 2,890.3 sq. ft. 1,818 sq. ft. 1,072.3 sq, ft. 1,734 sq. ft. 1,445 sq. ft. 867.1 sq. ft.
Willows or 35 %
Tivoli PA 10 46 au 14,165.7 sq. ft. 4,958 sq. ft. 3,052.8 sq. ft. 1,905.2 sq. ft. 2,974.8 sq. ft. 3,924 sq. ft. 2,354.5 sq. ft.
1 du or 35 %
44 Willow HDMF 7 3 du plus 7,553 sq. ft. 2,643 sq. ft. 1,919 sq. ft. under 724 sq, ft. 1,585 sq. ft. 1,321 sq. ft. 793 sq. ft. 1,445 sq. ft.
Place 3 EHU's or 35 % construction. 54.6 % of
Includes 474 sq. ft. common
of common
area
mechanical and
proposed EHU's.
7
v R I
ORDINAPICE NO. 1 8
SERIES OF 1994
AN OFiD@NANCE !lACATIIVC THE UTIL9TY AND DRAINAfaE EASEMEtV°P
OOtl ILOT 6y ~IG9-AOR9C1 ESTe1 AESy YOVYDtl OF tlf1ILy ENG66~E CoVltl 0 ll y'mSo6OA"OM~O
WHEREAS, the utility and drainage easement on the recorded plat of Lot 6, Bighorn
Estates, more fully described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference
(the "Easement"), is currently encumbering a certain parcel of real estate (the "Property") more
fully described as followrs:
Lot 6, Bighorn Estates
Town of Vail, County of Eagle, Colorado, and
WHEREAS, the Easement allows the Easement User the use thereof for the construction,
maintenance, and reconstruction of transmission or distribution or systems to provide services by
the utility and drainage; and
1NHEREAS, the Easement is not presently used for such construction, maintenance, and
reconstruction of actual services and systems; and
VVHEREAS, neither the ouvner nor the Easement User realize any beneficial use in
allowing the Easement to remain; and
VIIHEREAS, the Owner accepts and ratifies the vacation, abandonment, release,
termination and grant of the Easement.
NOlAI, THEREFORE, in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00), the mutual covenants and
promises contained herein and ather good and vafuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency
of which is hereby acknowledged by the parties thereto, the easement user and the owner
covenant and agree and the Town Council for the Easement User ordains as follows:
1) The Easement User, on behalf of itself, its successors and assigns, by this
instrument hereby forever abandons, vacates, releases and terminates the Easement and hereby
conveys all the right, title, interest in and to the Easement to the Owner.
2) This vacation shall be binding upon and enure to the benefit of the Easement User
and the Ouvner and their respective successors and assigns.
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.
1
Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1994
4) The Tovun Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is
necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Towrn of Vail and the inhabitants
thereof.
5) The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code
of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any
duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution
commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the
provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not
revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated
herein.
6) All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent
herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be
construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore
repealed.
IiVTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL O(V
FIRST READING this day of , 1994, and a public hearing shall be held on this
Ordinance on the _ day of , 1994, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail
fViunicipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor
ATTEST:
Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk .
READ AIVD APPROVED OiV SECOfVD READIfVG AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
this day of , 1994.
ATTEST: Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor
Holly L. McCutcheon, Tovun Clerk
C:\ORD94.18
2
Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1994
EXHIBIT "A"
A strip of land 12 feet in width located in Lot 6, Bighorn Estates, Town of Vail, Eagle County,
Colorado, being more particularly described as follows: "
The west 12 feet and the south 12 feet except the east 5 feet of said Lot 6.
Said strip of land contains 2527 square fee or 0.058 acres, more or less.
ORDIFIe4FICE NO. 19
SERIES OF 1994
ABCI ORDIItlA6tl`LOG VFi6oB`9 9 fNG P'0 A"i1'41Y-1 EOF 9V/'9lf /'1l9D SEYtlGI"9 fG/'9SE1Y1Gltl A y
AND CREA1'@R9G PEDESTFiEAN AND RIGIiT OF WAY EASEMENT,
VM/1 tlEGL 15'ItlE El1SGItl9GNTy PVBLIV P'1VVGJS, D1"1K'itllllAG KAtlD
UTI6.I0 II E6S85EAtltlENT BY PtLAT OR SEPARA0 G IIVJ ARVIYIG@tl tl WHEREAS, the sewer easement on the Waterford site, now know as Liftside, more fully
described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (the "Easement"),
is currently encumbering a certain parcel of real estate (the "Property") more fully described on
Exhibit "A"; and
WHEREAS, the Easement allows the Town of Vail (the "Easement User") the use thereof
for the construction, maintenance, and reconstruction of a sewer; and
WHEREAS, this Easement is to be replaced by a new public access, drainage and utility
easement to be created by plat or separate instrument; and
WHEREAS, the right of way for the chord segment of UUesthaven Drive, more fully
described on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, is being replaced
by a pedestrian and right of way easement to be created by plat or separate instrument; and WHEREAS, the owner accepts and ratifies the vacation, abandonment, release,
termination and grant of the easements; and
WHEREAS, the vacation of the sewer easement and right of way easements to be
replaced by easements created by the final plat, Liftside/Cornerstone or by separate instrument
are provided for in S.D.D. No. 4.
iV0lN, THEREFORE, in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00), the mutual covenants and
promises contained herein and other good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency
of which is hereby acknowledged by the parties thereto, the Easement User and the owner
covenant and agree and the Touvn Council ORDAIIVS AS FOLLOVI/S:
1) The Easement user, on behalf of itself, its successors and assigns, by this
instrument hereby forever abandons, vacates, releases and terminates the easements as more
fully described on Exhibits "A" and "B" and hereby conveys all the right, title, interest in and to
the Easement to the owner.
2) This vacation shall be binding upon and enure to the benefit of the Easement User
and the owner and their respective successors and assigns.
1
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1994
3) Shall be created by the final plat, Liftside/Cornerstone or by separate instrument
a pedestrian and right of way easement, a water line easement, a public access easement, and
a public access, drainage and utility easement.
4) If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for
any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions
of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and
each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any
one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
5) The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is
necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants
thereof.
6) The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code
of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any
duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution
commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the
provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not
revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated
herein.
7) All bylawrs, 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.
IfVTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AIVD ORDERED PUBLISHED OiVCE IN FULL O(V
FIRST READIfVG this day of , 1994, and a public hearing shall be held on this
Ordinance on the _ day of , 1994, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail
Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor
ATTEST:
Holly L. McCutcheo'n, Town Clerk
2
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1994
READ AfVD APPROVED OfV SECOIVD READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
this day of , 1994.
Nlargaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor
ATTEST:
Holly L. McCutcheon, Tovun. Clerk
C:\ORD94.19
3
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1994
EXHIBIT "A"
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
That part of a sanitary sewer easement recorded in Book 469 at
Page 713 in the office of the Eagle County, Colorado, Clerk and
Recorder, said strip being 20 feet wide and lying 10 feet on each
side of the following described centerline:
Beginning at a point whence an iron pin with plastic cap marking
the cznter af Section 12, Township 5 South, Range 81 West of the
Sixth Principal Meridian bears S49°55"32"W 1353.85 feet; thence
N16°54'45"E 82.39 feet; thenc.e N01°24'47"W 121.53 feet; thence
N00°30'54"W 52.54 feet; thence N11°11'09"E 90.03 feet; thence
N30055'11"E 210.82 feet to the point of terminus on the north
line of the SW1/4 NE1/4 of said Section 12, whence the center of
said Section 12 bears S40°18'34"W 1827.57 feet.
The side lines of the strip are shortened or lengthened to
terminate at property lines.
Date :
- Stan Ho ldt
Colorado P_L.S_ 26598
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1994
EXHIBIT
PROFERTY DESCRIPTION -
That part of the SW1/4 NE1/4 Section 12, Township 5 South, Range
81 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Town of Vail, Eagle
County, Colorado, described as follows:
Seginning at a. point on the southerly right-of-way line of a
parcel known as Westhaven Drzve Addition whence an -iron pin with
plastic cag marking the center of said Section 12 bears
S44°50'18"W 1317_53 feet; thence, departing said right-of-way
line, N52°43'41"E 68_59 feet to said right-of-way line; thence,
along said line, 74.05 feet along the arc of a non-tangent curve
to the right, having a radius of 55_00 feet, a central angle of
77°08'43", and a chord that bears S52°43"41"W 68.59 feet to the
Point Of Beginning; containing 561.9 square feet, more or less_
Date _
Stan Ho i
. Col.oradp 1~qt ~,S_ Y2~~~`8
_ CvJq~ " y =
_c~:
~n ; .
~ ~n~ e• , ~ ~
` `
t% ~ 'r' '
. / • ` ~ " ' '
i5ti w \,nOrdinance No. 19, Series of 1994
ORD9NANCE NO. 20
SERIES OF 1934
AN ORDCNANCE CREATIIVG A UT9L9TY EASEIIAENT
FOR T9iE GOVERED BFtIDGE B111LDIIVG
UVHEREAS, it is necessary to create an easement for the construction, maintenance, and
reconstruction of transmission or distribution or systems to provide services by utility to the
Covered Bridge Building; and
VVHEREAS, it is necessary to locate the nonexclusive easement across property owned
by the Town of Vail; and
VVHEREAS, the easement is more fully described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference.
fVOUV, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAIiVED BY THE TOWiV COUNCIL, THE TOUVfV OF VAIL,
COLORADO that:
1) A utility easement, more fully described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference, is created which allows the easement user the use thereof for
the construction, maintenance, and reconstruction of transmission or distribution or systems to
provide services by utility.
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 uvould have passed this ordinance, and
each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any
one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
3) The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is
necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants
thereof.
4) The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code
of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any
duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution
commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the
provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not
revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated
herein.
1
Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1994
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.
IiVTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED OIVCE IIV FULL OIV
FIRST READIfVG this day of , 1994, and a public hearing shall be held on this .
Ordinance on the _ day of , 1994, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail
fVlunicipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor
ATTEST:
Hofly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED OIV SECOND READIIVG AfVD ORDERED PUBLISHED
this day of , 1994.
Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor
ATTEST:
Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk
C:\ORD9420
2
Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1994
EXHIBIT "A"
TO BE PROVIDED.
RESOL&DTIOfV IVOe 19
SERIES OF 1994
A RESOLUT00N AUTFiOFtIZ9NG T9iE TOVVIV IUIIA?NA(aER 7'O
NE(aOTOATE A C0NTRACT TO REFURBISI-1/RECONSTRUCT
TOiE COVERED BRIDGE
VVHEREAS, the Towrn Council recognizes that under certain circumstances it is clearly
within the Town's best interest to negotiate a contract to construct a local improvement rather
than to be let after public advertisement; and
VIIHEREAS, those circumstances apply to the refurbishing of the Covered Bridge.
NOVV, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Towrn of Vail,
Colorado, that:
1. The Town Manager is authorized to enter into negotiations for a contract to
refurbish/reconstruct the Covered Bridge without submitting the same for bid.
2. After completion of that negotiation, the proposed terms shall be submitted to the
Council for its approval.
3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this resolution is
necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants
thereof.
4. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage.
IIVTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AfVD ADOPTED this day of ,1994.
Margaret A. Osterfoss, Mayor
ATTEST:
Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk
C:\RESOLU94.19
Resolution No. 19, Series of 1994
p
Kenneth So Wentworth
Architect P.O. Box 5542
Vaii, Colorado 81658
August 10, 1994 (303) 845-8503
" U' ~
Vail 1'own Council
75 South Frontage Road-West - . ~16 1 1 7~5~ ~i
Vail CO. 81657
s '
iV~F
~ V : ~ .
D~ DEPT
a
Re: Gustafson renovations
Lot 36, Vail Village VVest, Filing 1
Dear Council Members:
On August 3, 1994 vve received approval, with conditions, from the 1"ovvn of
Vail Design Review Board on the above referenced project. VVe appeal the
condition that necessitates the paving of required parking for this renovation,
and request that this appeal be scheduled for the earliest reasonable council
meeting. ~
Thank you for your consideration,
- ~0 °
Kenneth S. V!lenfinrorth .
for Richard Gustafson
ls
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Staff
FRONiI: . Andy 6Cnudtsen
DATE: November 13, y 990/Revised November 5, 1992
xv.vsiN.vnvnnv++inw!t+'T.;'^^.'!';;C^^{"^.l%?!...^'^-0^'f!y~F.;~.wnw;v.•vHV,.~^!h.:. ti,wv,.w: r{.r,wnwn}:..x,m,v,y};n,v,.vn,w.y. ,vwn,y..yry,~i:Hixnv,vnv.w
+..r . r.au. : ...rrx . .v.vwv.x.'?!'iy^^}:?!4:`~Y•x;{.}ynv,.~,w.•~{.w:.;.v{t;: ti•:;n}}w.;n}.:.x.yviv{nw.v
v....::: v.~::v.....~.~. .
' Si'r'rri.. ..n::..::. .::ry: :•w:::: r~r...::~..:.::....:.
rnW'i?:G:iiti•i:•:r:iriii%~r.../.r.vY'r~r{.Yi.•'r'N'l+'.l..~irN...•r},n.v~/xi%-:.{:•n::::: ~.•f.::A:~iiii:•ii};: ..r:: ~i
. . . r....... . s ..~:......rr:x::x.:~ ::•:.......r......~.... .........trf...~r~: :!....r................:n...vx: •.y..;r.; x}•::: :r:.i:~ ••n:.i::.r.
• ~ Fr.+.-: /.v: v::: ~.v: .,v,..'f'.• r:: ,-v~. : wx: u: nw:. r::: x ~~.:v. ~ v :?w: /.•n{•• y: nuw::::::::: +l
~:xr: nr. . . . » . ..vmnvv.w::::.v.w::::::.~v}:....~..... ..v4.?•:Li:<i<ti:iii~ii:v..................
:w :::::...........:r::: :y,• r: :i:: .h {Lii. . .............r.x.r......... "}:r.4i:?4i:?i`:{d4.ii:>.•riiM?~vr:x:: v: . .v.....................t... ~
y: : ....l. . ~ n...... r.... .r.....w: v................ . n•.~:: . ......l.w: v: ::v::::x.v.~::::::::::::.:::::::}i5ii}•:{r:.};f •
..v.~v: v:i::'~.:: ti:{•;•.,:::n :..::r............~.........................................r.v:n...
....v.......~ :n.; .~rl.Li. _rr...; .,-v~ .....n:x:::::::::::.~ ?•fi>iiiii:ai}ii:ii:iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii}i:ivi::if•iiiii'v.....n.s.
1... . ..n.: s... ;.a. ;;.,-n.....r~.{..n ..............r.......n........~...t.......::::.~::.~:r:::m
r}:^:ti?•i:iti+titr::::::::r: r....n ;.,-.'.{_{~i: .r.;xi.; +y,;..,s..:'F :::{n~;.,-v..p..i:.w::i.v.w::::.~:?.w ...................~r.......r..x....n..s:e.~......./...:rxn......:~~~n~s .
. v: v: ...n x: : n :•.~:::::n....y: w: ...N.:4:: :.v.::: ::h::f.w:::::::::::.:~:::.:~:::.~::.~:::::I:::: :w:)'t
~ .
v~v~i.viwr!«vNM4+.v ywvU:h,••••A/tiy.••..••ww~..:vm+w• Si.~.v..vAiwYwm~wW, viliiw:wilAWhWii4'i.$J,fi4%xv.+Vi:Li4tiwR'v:4i:AGXi'viF:4iSii'v'w~NY++N:iiri4iSi~.LiiTi;I~JYJ~Gwy.wxi:iY.VJwi:
Recentiy there was some confusion from the DRB members regardirg site improvement
requiremenfs. Earlier in the summer, the Town approved an expansion to the Johnsorr
residence (Lot 99, Btock 3, bighorn 5th Filing). The Town required 4hat the overhead electrical
be placed underground as a condition ofi DRB approval. Larry was consuited before this
condition was applied and Kristan explained 4o the Board that if was appropriate.
In cases where the DRB application is for a repaint, reroof, a new skylight, efc. and does not
involve the addition ofi any GRFA, staff has decided that the design guidelines will be used to
evaluate that specific proposal and that other issues pertaining 4o the rest ofi the house or the
site will nof be evaluated. For projects avhere there is an expansion of the building, staff has
decided thaf all of the developmen4 standards apply. Unpaved driveways will be required 40
be paved and overhead utilities will be required to be underground, etc. These requirements
will nof anly be applied to these types of additions, but also to 250 requests.
~
andyVnemosldrbin4er
\
Id e~
TOWN OF VAIL
75 South Frontage Road Office of the Town Manager
vail, Colorado 81657
303-479-21051FAX 479-2157
MEMORAfVDUfVi
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Robert W. McLaurintL--
Touun Manager
DATE: August 12, 1994
SUBJECT: Town of Vail Purchasing Policies
As you are aware, we are conducting an internal investigation to determine compliance with the
Town purchasing policies. This investigation was triggered by the recent revelation of handgun
sales to members of the Towrn of Vail Staff. Jerry McMahan of McMahan & Associates is
assisting in this investigation and will draft the report for the Council. It is our intention at this time
to allocate time at the Cauncil meeting for Jerry to make a report to the Council.
I have also scheduled an Executive Session prior to the VVork Session to discuss this matter
privately. Following this report we uvill be clarifying and changing policies on this issue.
~
l~
~
RU1lM/aw ,
C:\Towncoun.l
C
MEMORANDUIVi
TO: Vail Town Councii ,
FROM: Robert W. McLaurinrL-
Town Manager /
DATE: August 12, 1994
SUBJECT: Town Manager's Report
CAST Meetinq
The Colorado Association of Ski Touvns (CAST) wi{I hold its quarterly meeting in Breckenridge on
August 18 and 19, 1994. For your information I have attached a copy of the agenda. Please
advise Anne 1lVright if you wish to attend. I wrill be attending and if you wish to ride with me
please let me know. Afso, if you want the full agenda packet for this meeting please let me know
and I will provide it for you.
Dismount Zone Discussion
Several weeks ago we discussed the feasibility of implementing a dismount zone in the Vail
Village. At that time the Council directed me to proceed as I deemed appropriate. We conducted
a random nonscientific survey of the merchants in the Vail Village and there appears to be
support for this concept. However before we make changes in this area, I believe it would be
appropriate for the Council to hold a public hearing and to take comments on this matter. This
is because these regulations not only affect the merchants of the Village, but also affect bike
rental shops, rollerblade rental merchants, biking enthusiasts as well as rollerblade enthusiasts.
Although I am not adverse to proceeding as previously directed, I feel that this is a policy matter
that would be more appropriately handled by the Town Council.
If you are in agreement uve wrill schedule a public discussion on this matter in the near future.
Thank you for your consideration.
. ~
Vail Commons Update.
The Vail Commons Task Force held a public hearing last week to being preparing the plan for
the Vail Commons property. Approximately 50 people, primarily from the West Vail area attended
this meeting to express concerns and identify issues that need to addressed in the development
of this property. For your information I have attached a copy of the Minutes from this meeting.
During the next three weeks the consulting team will be analyzing and preparing some of the
initial pro-formas necessary to help the Council make the policy decisions necessary to move
forvvard on this projecfi. I vuill keep you advised as this project progresses.
R1hlM/aw
cATownrrgr.rpt
COLORADO ASSOCIATION OF SKI TOWIVS
MEETI1NG
ALIGUST 18 AND 19, 1994
BRECKE1VItIDGE, COLORADO
AGEIVDA
Thtanrsday, Aangaast llS:
5:00 - 6:30 Cocktails at the Adams Crill Restaurant, 10 W. Adams Ave.
6:30 - Dinner at Poirrer's Cajun Cafe, 224 South Niaiai St
Y~day, August 19:
8:00 - 8:30 Continental Breakfast: Breckenridge Town Hall Auditorium
150 Ski Hill Rd
8:30 - Cail to Order CAST Business Meeting (Rachel Richards)
8:35 1) Approval of June 23 Minutes
8:44 2) Fiscal Report and Suggestion to Change Administrative Items
8:50 3) Overview and Discussion of Survey Results
9:15 4) Consensus of CAST priorities
10:00 5) Discussion and Consensus on I,egislative T'our and selection of
Legislative Tour location (if necessary)
10:30 6) Overview of Forest Service policy on ski area expansion and
offsite unpacts (speaker to be announced)
11:00 7) Questions and Discussion on LJSFS Policy
11:30 8) Discussion of next meeting's agenda on housing
11:45 9) Other Agenda items
12:00 Adjourn
. ~
NoTEs FRoM vAiL coMnnoNs PuBLic MEETiNG
- - - - -
- August 9, 1994-
Peqqy Osterfoss (Introduction)
Council purposes in purchasing the land: housing for locals; improved commercial-services;
possible location for other municipal/community services (nothing specific in mind; perhaps a
fire station, park 'n ride, day care)
Council gaal: to use a good quality project on the Commons site to encourage the
redevelopment of as much of the general West Vail area as possible.
. Public Comments
Micky Gart very interested in participafing in redevelopment of their site (West Vail Mall) and
cooperating with Safeway in some joint improvements.
Neighbors very strongly advocate a fire station in West Vail; thought this was the carrot for the
reannexation of West Vail.
This site presents a great opportunity for good quality housing to retain long-term residents in
Vail. Its commercial attributes are an opportunity to subsidize the construction of affordable
housing. Sales tax retention doesn't mean a thing to him. Quality of the development is very
important. (Wilto) ~
. West Vail [and this project] needs a purpose, a mission statement. (D'Alessio)
Neighborhood needs beautification ("broom and shovel" - D'Alessio; an "ugly scene" -
Goodell) and tighter enforcement of zoning provisions against non-conforming uses on
property (used car sales at Phillips station, derelict parked cars, boat storage on vacant lot).
West Vail has the highest percentage of permanent residents in Vail but had the lowest return
rate on citizen sunreys. Residents would like to see a stronger sense of neighborhood and
neighborliness.
Current retail needs improvement, not more space. How will development of the Commons
site cause overall improvement in West Vail?
Many residents feel a larger grocery.store is not needed but agree that the existing Safeway
is understaffed and is not serving them adequately. Safeway "megastore" isn't necessary
(some residents disagreed, associating higher quality with more space, but wondered why
Safeway couldn't expand on its present site.) Are we making the housing crunch worse by -
letting Safeway expand the number of people it employs?
The real cause of sales tax revenues leaking to Avon is locals moving downvalley to avoid
Town's restrictive building regulations, high cost of living, lack of space, and noise from I-70.
Should the site be rezoned a P.U.D.? (Armour) CC3 zoning may be flexible enough to
accommodate all potential uses. (Mollica)
Don't rush into building a project on the site. Don't want anything built within the next year;
rather, do it in stages. A park 'n ride, for example, could be in an early phase, then moved
later.
Uses residents would like to consider on the site:
1. Community center, like Avon's: recreation, social, seniors '
2. Other community uses: day care, arts center, new town hall, swimming pool, bowling.
/ .
_ Vail Commons, First Public_Meeting,_8/9/94,. page 2
3. Satellite parking lot? Only if additional traffic can be accommodated. Safeway parking lot is
_ being used as a park 'n ride now.
4. Under-21 night spot (although an in-town location would be more attractive to them).
Housinq
1. How much need for additional housing in the upper valley really exists? (Lake Creek Village
cited as an example of insufficient market.)
2. Evaluate the feasibility of TOV buying Timber Ridge when the project goes market-rate.
3. Permanent residents need more space„ bigger units.
4. Important to see owner-occupied homes that strengthen the neighborhood (McCarthy).
5. Covenants restricting the number of people allowed in rental units should be established.
6. Need'noise barriers frorn I-70 (Moser).
7. This project is an, opportunity to make a difference in the quality of the whole neighborhood:
No Timber Ridge-like units; housing above commercial OK; Nothing taller than Vail das
Schone; condos priced at $125,000 to $180,000 or $200,000 OK. (Liotta)
8. Living above a Safeway store is not a good situation for families, who need 2-3 bedrooms
and outdoor space. Consider smaller units for singles. (Moser)
9. Merv Lapin: Town might put land into the deal and just finance the buildings. Could also
offer mortgages. Land would back up bonds to fund mortgages. -Land ownership
would be retained by TOV.
10. Combination of for-sale and rental units. Concerns about rentals: number of cars, number
of tenants in each unit.
11. Permanent residents want units larger than 700 SF.
Circulation
1. More commercial activity means more cars. Chamonix cannot be used as access for
commercial or residential uses on the Commons site (McCarthy and others).
2. Frontage Road needs more lanes and more capacity.
3. Chamonix is dangerous: blind curves, high speed drivers. Pedestrians have to walk in the
street. Turn at Buffehr Cr. Rd is too narrow. Needs speed restraints, lights, sidewalks,
pedestrian overpass over I-70.
4. New commercial uses should be the kind that create low traffic and low turnover volumes.
5. Need sidewalks, bus stops and bus shelters that are better located, bike paths.
6. Bus service to the neighborhood is OK now.
7. Major priority: make pedestrian and bike traffic on Chamonix safer.
8. Need accel/decel lanes on Frontage Road by Safeway.
9. Improve the 4-way stop at the West Vail interchange. Stop sign at West Vail interchange
5th highest accident rate in state; excessive traffic volume. Will only get worse with
increased density.
10. Chamonix Lane should be a nice parkway, not a speedway.
11. Combine parking areas so that access between shops in adjacent commercial complexes
is easier.
Desiqn
1. Three stories are too high.
2. Improve the "gateway" to Vail from the west.
3. Make it easier to get from one commercial center to another on foot or in a car.
4. There should be a relationship in the architectural character of all the commercial
complexes. 5. Make the view of the commercial row more attractive from the north, where residences look
down on the back of the buildings.
~ECEiV~D h:~~, ~ 2 199#
(da4ional 1301 PennsyNania Avenue N.W. pprycers
League Washington, D.C.
of 20004 Snarpe iwm
Cl4ies (202) 626-3000 NewarK Now 'w-y
Fax: (202) 626-3043 F"'~ ~
CaroM+ lnrg sanks
~-at-I.mga. Aftng Cmgia
secoe0 Vir.g Rmd"
Hal COrklei
MaYor. Sa1%e Bftma, Caldorrea
frroredgg pgy p~p
G~ E. Fbod
MaYa. OrWndo. Fbrida
July 25, 1994 Eweaftm Onctor
Donatl J. BaW
10'AJC.1VdORt8NDL1Vll TO: 1Vlayors of Dire Member Cities
FROM: Don Bo
~
SUBJECT: Ma dates Advisory
To keep you updated on the latest developments on unfunded federal mandates and mandates relief
legislation, I have enclosed a copy of our most recent "1Vlandates Advisory. " I hope you will find it
informative and useful in your grassroots lobbying efforts on mandates issues. If you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to contact Mary-1Vlargaret Larmouth in our Office of Policy and
Federal Relations at (202) 626-3025.
Thank you for your continued efforts.
InAmi
~ NATI NAL L AGl1E F ITIE
~ MANDATEADVISORY
~
~PR~~~~ YIJuNE
CURRENT e4NDATE
Safe Dr6nkUng Water Acg
The nation's cities and towns leaped the first hurdle in attaining major revisions to
the Safe Drinking V1/ater Act when the Senate completed action on and adopted S.
2019 in mid-May. The next hurdle--approval by both the House Energy and
Commerce Subcommittee on Health and the Environment (Henry Waxman, D-C,4,
Chrmn.) and the full committee (John Dingell, D-NII, .Chrmn.)--is higher and more
difficult The -last hurdle,=a Presidential signature, is'all but-a foregone conclusion
should the`measure:reacthewWhite`I-louse. _ . . - . . • : . 1"he Senate success was largely-engineered~through:the efforts,of;Senators Bob Kerrey (~-NE>,IVlark~Ha#fieldylR4Rete~DornenicE (R.fVIVI } The :measure~~
~ . : .
.
.,...;,y . ; £ . s . ).%sz.~,
vvould ~amend't~he standard setting process4allowing `EPA'to take com:pliance costs
and health riskreduction bene#its-into,account for all contaminants. IVew -
contaminants to`be regrtulated Wouldbe selected from occurrence data gathered by .
" municipal Water supply ,systems,{thus-.assuring'that regulations reflect
contaminants of public `health concern that actually occur in drinking water
supplies. In addition, States would be authorized to develop alternative monitoring
programs, and required to implement viability and operator certification programs.
The bill also establishes'a drinking water state revolving fund to assist communities
in meeting federal drinking water sYandards.
Negotiations with the state and local coalition, environmental activists, EPA, and
both full and subcommittee staff in the House are currently underway. fVlajor
issues remaining to be resolved include revisions to the current standard setting
process and hovv to assure adequate revenues are available to finance state primacy activities.
RELIEF FROM FUTVRE MANDATES
Mandates Relief Action in the Senate
Out of the over 30 mandates relief bills introduced in this session, one bill has
taken the lead. S.993 was jointly drafted by Sen. Glenn, Sen. Kempthorne, and
organizations representing state and local governments and incorporates what the negotiating parties deemed the best aspects of all other mandates relief legislation.
Although the bifl number is the same as the original Kempthorne bill, S.993 is now •
a much stronger bill that is supported by.the: ad,ministration and.the Senate-
Democratic leadership.
By unanimous consent, S 993 was marked up by the Senate Governmental Affairs
. -`Cornmittee+fior: fu11,~.:5enate=coiisideration~:on ,JuneoWdreomeebefore the
full Senate as early as July. The purpose of S.993 is "to end the imposition, in the
absence of full consideration by Congress, of Federal mandates on States, local govemments, and tribal governments without adequate,Federal :f,unding, in a_,
manner that may displace other essential:~_governmental pcionties " - ,
t . . . . _ . . .
Under the legislation, as of October 1, 1.995, Congressional rules would prohibit
consideration of legislative proposals by any committee unless:
9 the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) had provided an analysis of the mandates
in the bill that identified and estimated direct costs and benefits to state and local
governments; and/or
0 the direct costs of all federal mandates to state and local governments included
in the bill or joint resolution were estimated to be less than $50 million in aggregate
annually; and/or .
m the legislation specifically indicates how the mandates that total $50 million or
more to state and local governments will be paid for.
These points of order could be waived in the Senate by a majority vote or by the
unanimous consent of the Senate.
Overall, the bill approved by the committee is consistent with iVLC's objectives.
However, two key fVLC-opposed amendments were adopted which could dilute and
undercut the bill:
m a Dorgan (D-iVD) amendment which would extend the C60 mandate-cost
analysis to the private sector; and
0 a Levin (D-Nll) amendment which would sunset the bill after three years, or
sunset it in any year in which Congress failed to appropriate enough money for the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to estimate the costs of mandates to state and
local governments and to the private sector. Therefore, under this amendment, the
bill would be killed effective immediately in any year that CBO received insufficient
funding. NLC strongly supports S.993, but will push to strike the amendments
- approved by the committee that counteract the objectives of the fegislation.
state and local governments. There is no evidence that OSHA is better than
the existing state and local worker safety programs not enforced by federally
approved state OSHA plans. Implementation would be costly to cities in
training, lost worktime, administration and fines with no funding provided.
NLC opposes this legislation as an unfunded mandate.
o S.4FE DRlIVKIIVG VV.4 TER: Should the Safe Drinking V1/ater Act be amended -
. to redirect scarce local resources at real public health concerns in
contaminant selection, regulation and monitoring? The Senate approved S.
2019, a compromise agreement which will revise current law provisions on
each of these issues. While these amendments will not neces$arily result in
immediate cost savings for municipalities, in the long term the revised bill
could save billions of dollars. The revisions to the process by which
contaminants are selected for regulation would use data collected by
municipal water systems indicating what contaminants actually occur in
drinking water. The law would thus move toward regulating contaminants
of real public health concern in drinking water supplies as opposed to an
esoteric list of chemicals that may or may not be found at levels of public
health concern. In setting standards, EPA would have more authority to take
risk reduction benefits and cost into account for all contaminants to. be
regulated. The measure would also provide primacy states with greater
flexibility in designing monitoring programs which. could also result in
significant cost savings for municipal water systems. iVegotiations are
currently underway ,with both, the House Energy and Commerce sta_ff and
the,Assistant Admin~sxrator3tfor W~ater,Bob Perciaseppe atxEP~A
'IVLC strongly.supports tegistation to reauthorize the Safe Drinking - V1/ater:,programtto reduce costs and ensure.greater local flexibility;~to
use j local taxesiandl eesitofocus.~ovn prior~ity
~Y `publtclhealth concerns ~ r
~ Z ~ ' 77
:
y„~ ~
. : , ,
- . . . Y ~k,. `'.t .x ' . e . • . . . _ - . . . . .
_ . . ~ . . _ . _ . _ . . ' '
~ - -
' , . ..aCn . . . 'k-.. 1S'J ..'U.. - .v' . _ . • r. r'. .
t~%,qTER `Che Senate Enviconmen.t and Pu.b.lic-UVorks+Committee has
a
.4completed action on aY 600, age bill (S ~ 11:1.:4) amending the -.Cleanater
; , ; - .
Act. The ll includes mandatory fees on permitsfor wastewater treatment
pl.ants, new enforcement authorities against municipalities, and. uniform
national beach closure standards. The bill also includes reasonable reliefi
provisions on the sYormvvater management program, delaying cequirements
to meet numeric effluent limifis until 2005. V1/hile the chairman of the House
F'ublic Works and Transportation Committee has also introduced a bill (H.R.
3948), he has been unable to muster sufficient support to move it through committee. A bi-partisan alternative proposal, based largely on_ a measure
developed by the Governors, was, along With the iVlineta bill, the subject of
hearings in late May. To date, neither measure hasgarnered the necessary
support to move forward.
IVLC supports reauthorization of the Clean Water Act to eliminate the
pending stormwater mandates, to address combined sewer overflow
costs and issues, and to authorize funding to help pay some of the
costs to comply with federal requirements.
E) SUPERFUIVD: Should municipalities be eligible for an expedited settlement process with a limit on their liability to pay response costs for cleanup at a
site? Pending House and Senate bills, H.R.3800 and S.1834, would limit
municipal liability by allowing generators and transporters of municipal solid
waste to participate in an expedited settlement process with liability limited
in the aggregate to not more than 10 percent of the total cost of cleanup at
the site. Municipal owners and operators could also participate in an
expedited settlement process with limits on liability if the municipality could demonstrate that financial constraints limit its ability to pay response costs.
The House Energy and Commerce Committee voted 44-0 to approve H.R.
3800. The House. Committee on Public W.orks and Transportation continues
to hold hearings on the bill. In the Senate, the Environment and Public
Works Subcommittee on Superfund, Recycling and Solid Waste Management
voted 6-4 to approve S. 1834. The full committee is expected to markup
the bill after the July recess. NLC believes that the municipal liability provisions set forth in H.R.3800 and
S.1834 are a good first step to limiting municipal liability incurred during
activities undertaken in an effort to fulfill a municipality's obligation to
protect the public health and welfare of its citizens.
~ UNFUNDED MANDATES RELIEF: Should the federal government be
accountable and pay for mandates imposed on local governments? Over 30
bills have been introduced this session that aim to relieve cities and towns
from future unfunded federal 'mandates. On June 17th the Senate
Governmental Affairs Committee [chaired by Sen. Glenn (D-OH)]
unanimously marked up a mandates relief bill for full Senate consideration.
Sen. Glenn and Sen. Kempthorne (R-ID) worked with IVLC and the other
state and local government representative organizations, as well as staff
from other Senators, to incorporate the best elements of pending mandates
relief legislation into one bill. S.993 has received the support of all state and
local government representative organizations, the Administration, and the .
Senate-Democratic leadership. NLC supports all pending legislation that offers relief from unfunded
mandates to cities and towns. NLC strongly supports S.993.
n oN~"NDED i4ND TE REP RT i4
As part of ftILC's effort to inform the public about the detrimental effects of
unfiunded mandates during iVational Unfunded Mandates V1/eek (Oct.23-29), NLC is
compiling "Unfunded Mandates Report Cards." The report cards track the votes of
each individual Member of Congress on legislation related to unfunded mandates.
During NUM VNeek, NLC will give out the final grades to Members ofi Congress
rating their performance on unfunded mandates issues over the course of this
session of Congress
. . s,-a,:'S r 1 ~ } 5k~"P #r ~ 54 = t{ c t 'J "5i': ~7G' .,+*'r '.tLc i ~,{F`+{.'r ~X'- z ` i i' •t
-41
; • . ry : ~ 4 1 R i~` L\3 ~ . ~ 6 }
. 3 ~ ' s
. The mandates issuesf Congress will be graded on will mclude
. , • - . i M: .
~ . ,
~ . Z d E.. Si.. .
• EPA COST BENEFlT~ ~ L YS/S ~ Should the~Environmental~Protection A lenc = r ~~~e
:._.o.ti' . a .!t?~ ~.~.93~`~~-•.eiV,4;k'. ~'t~.~,...zis .~n„~.+'".r~,s,-;,
_ (EPA) berequiretl:to~undertakerva-°cos~ benef~ analys,is~befo?.+re imposing`any
1>., F,,,, xz . ~ . . . ' - .
new Environmental regulations on cities: and~~towns?'~ The'House' Rules ~Committee rejected consideration of such an amendment for consideration
- - r
.,,;..by the House :as an. ~am~ndment to the PresXtlen"t`s Pro[ ~osal4t,o¢elevate
.
EPA'to cabinet level-status and `red~esignate it the Departmentof
Env'ironmental Protection. As a result,- the "voteof the House~ on the rule was,
in effect, a vote for or against the use of cost-benefit analysis by the EPA.
The rule on the bill was defeated by a vote of 227-191. In the Senate, a
similar amendment was included by a vote of 95-3, and the bill (S.171) was
passed. NLC supported the cost-benefit analysis amendments offered in the House
and the Senate. NLC opposed the rule in the House because it did not
include the 3mendment.
o OSHA REVISIOIV: Should the federal government extend and mandate
Occupational Safety and Health Act coverage to all state and local
governments? Under pending House and Senate bills, H.R.1280 and S.575,
local governments would be subject to all current OSHA regulations as well
as the new provisions in the pend-ing legislation. These provisions would
create new liability for public officials, and require establishment of
employee-employer safety committees at every worksite with 11 or more
workers. The legislation has been marked -up by the House Education and
Labor Committee and could be marked up by the Senate Labor and Human
Resources Committee before the August recess. Although there is great
pressure to pass OSHA reform legislation in this session, it is difficult to predict when it will hit the House floor.
_ Neither the Congressional Budget Office nor the President's Office of
fVlanagement and Budget has provided an estimate of the unfunded cost to
Mandates ReDief Action in the House
Just as one mandates relief bill has emerged from the Senate (S.993), there are
two bills in the House that_lead the pack--H.R. 140, sponsored by Rep. Condit (D-
CA) [the companion bill to the original S.993 offered by Sen. Kempthorne (R-ID)] .
and H.R.1295, sponsored by Rep. Moran (D-VA).
The Condit bill makes any federal requirementthat.a, state or local government
conduct an activity applicable only if all funds necessary to pay the direct costs
incurred by the state or local government in conducting the activity are provided by
the federal. government:~ The legislation woul_d._only.:applyito pr.ospective mandates{,~..~~
_ The most significant difference between the Condatbill (H.R.140) and the
Kempthorne/Glenn compromise bill (S 993), is, ha,H R 140 la ks the enforcement
5. ~r a :.:s.x-i '_-x~~~n~'~'`~~'~<h"~k.a'.4`'snrp ~.~~Fa~.•
• w-mechanism of=;p"o~nt,s~of.order-that-hold s%
accountable~forfrts'~actions dTh~''~~;F~:~-~.~~,
Condit bill currently has 225 co-sponsors.
. ,
The Moran bill_(H R.129.5)~reqwres~CBO to prepare an economic,impact ana~ysis of;;
. . t. £
.
th~;~t
. ~-ar,~s.r, ro . f~`L~',Y,~1+s~-~
" e. effect~on utilizationYof publicand private resources.. Such;'analysis must be"
7.7
included in the committee report-onlegislation reportedtfor floor consideration\.in
either House. The bill requires federal agencies to perform an assessment of the
economic impact of the proposed rule or action and seek public comment on the
- assessment. The bill also stipulates that whenever more than one option is .
available to fulfill an agency's statutory obtigations, the agency must adopt the
option with the least economic impact or provide reasons why the agency's failure
to do so is consistent with the purposes of H.R.1295, is in the public interest, or is
precluded by another law. H.R.1295 would be enforced by a point of order. against
further consideration of the legislation.
The main thrust of H.R.1295 is fiscal noting, which is also incorporated in S.993,
but H.R.1295 does not include S.993's point order requiring Members to identify
how mandates will be funded. Moran's mandates relief.bill has earned a great deal
of support (244 co-sponsors). Both Condit and Moran have become frustrated by the lack of action on mandates
relief legislation in the House Committee on Government.Operations. It is possible _ that if a mark up does not look likely before the middle of July, that both Condit
and. Moran will file discharge petitions that would bypass the committee process
and bring the bills directly to the House floor forco'nsideration.
P1 dJ n't a6'~' 1o -Yhe ho~ s~~~ c iu+r J~ sT fi'o w~ul,e you c-se (ve s -Fee I g~oel . .
T~~ ~vsi~ss aor~v e a~ un e rv, p 1 oy rn en-F prv b I-em . 5'~'~~ ?medd ~~~,i
M/eek of August 5-9, ] 994 3 -
~ .
8 0 0 ~ ~ .
ve bullt lt but ~ ~rlll the-wr o co ~ . .
m .
Early completion of the -
0
Lake Creek Village
~
units celebrated, but ~ ~ a.. '
private disappointment w: - ~;~r~. 'I'~~~??,, . : , ;
;
that only a third of the r*'
affordableI units are
;
now occupied
A By John Calhoun Times StaffWriter
Never mind that only a third of the OE_
apartments at the Lake Creek employee
h o u s i n g c o m p l e x w e r e o c c u p i e d w h e n
;
EaSle Coun officials held their rand
, S
opemng - it was titne to celebrate.
Time to celebrate a 34 building, 270-
unit project that seemed to burst out of
the ground ovemight. Time ro celebrate
the installadon and resoluuon of a little
plumbing valve that nearly brought the
whole thing to a grinding halt. And time
i,to celebrate a much-needed addaeon to
employee housing in this valley.
. Granted, you and your housemate are going to need pretty good jobs to ao,~ n
live [here, as the rents have beez -
descnbed as "not cheap." But hey, these ° , x ~r~r~' y ~ ~ ~ ~ `~J . cozy units are brand new, and in this r~s
~ pJ
Gr valley it's almost worth extra bucks for
j that new, a-cat-has•never•lived•here NOW FINISHED: The controversy about the plumbing was still ahead when this photo was iaken last winter. Now ofs~S~
\0~ smell. finished, the 270 unfts are oniy one-third occupied. rmes/F;ie Pnoto ~
So under a blazmg Edwards sun,
count_v_officials, constructiqn_superin- Several of the buildings have been inside. And the ]ocaeon along the banks within walkiag distance of City Market Z ~(,I
tendents..~nd.,taprESentatives_of..the open and oecupied since January, ofthe Eagle River is ideal." and Ann's Food and Deli, Lake Crzex is &re''
devP~,,.IODers hung..outnext to the rolling According to Jamie Fitzpatrick, exec• But the upbeat speech was followed hell and gone from a market. Further, p~ \
~ Ea le River and raised_champagne utive vice president of Corum, the by private tones of disappointment that there is no comfortable bike path into
: es to the collecuv_e effort. project is 33 percent leased and is people have not shown gteater interest Edwards, so kids are, for the most part, C-
Corum Rea] Estate Group, the expecced ro be fully leased by year's in the units. Tfiere-are-4-7d-brand-neuJ project-locked. ~
project's Denver•based developer, end. ,~n:e~vo;,and.t.hree-bedroom-apart- Second, no pets are allowed. ~~`0~ '
hosted tours of the units as repre• "We are extremely pleased with the mentsiinnccun.P~this valley.-0f-na Officials voiced concern regarding 5~ (5
, sentatives of Shaw Construcbon took fina1 product," Fitzpatrick told the some 4
p,using. What's going on here? the lack of interest in the pricey three- pats on the back for the neaz super• 40 people who gathered for the nbbon- Privately, officials believe there are bedroom units, but seemed to conclude SobS~ I
human effort to finish the job several cutting ceremony. "The apamnents are several reasons. First is the location. that by the time a family needs three kv )rK~rovP. "
months before it was scheduled ro be a~'acdvely designed with open, bright Whereas the very successful Eaglebend q,~ ~ 1
done, interiors [o bring the area's beaury employee hoasing complex in Avon is D See LAKE CREEK, Nextpage 5°~.~
9 ,
~ RECLbVE-_ D A
+,7~Iail.
~ o
V¢~~~ s~lates9 Inco `~v bYLl~
Creators and Operators of Vail and Beaver Creek' Resorts
August 10, 1994
Ms. Peggy Osterfoss •
Town of Vail
75 Seuth Frontage Rd.
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Peggy,
This week, the last of this summer's American Airlines flights from Dallas/Ft. Worth made the
round trip to VaillEagle County Airport, and I am pleased to report that the summer flight
program, which many of you supported, was the most successful inaugural.service ever into our
community. Though we anticipate paying the majority of our $650,000 community-wide pledge
to guarantee the flights, we realize that this is money spent to generate future business. In fact", no
inaugural flight has ever done so well and flight guarantees are becoming the norm in resort
communities.
Overall, more than half (50.5 percent) of the seats were booked, and many of the flights were completely or near-completely sold out. For those of you who took advantage of the service, or
had friends and relatives visit by flying American through Dallas/Ft. Worth, I want to take this
opportunity to thank you personally. Summer service could not and cannot be successful without
the support of the community.
In fact, recent announcements that Continental Airlines will reduce or eliminate flights into other
ski resorts in Colorado have only maue oUr e~oits to maintain and strengthen service into
Vail/Eagle County Airport that much more critical. A number of areas that have taken air service
for granted are now scrambling just to secure winter/summer service. I feel very positive about
the Vail Vailey's position for this coming winter due to the fact there will be an additional 35,000
seats available into EGE. The long term goal is year-round air access to the county and we need
your support to continue that effort.
Your support for the program will help secure service again next summer, probably for an
extended summer season and will also increase your travel alternatives during the winter. If you
have the opportunity, I would appreciate a letter of support for the flight program sent to the
editors of any or all of the three local newspapers, highlighting:
Post Office Box 70 Vail, Colorado 81658 o USA -(303) 476-5601
Summer Air'Program
Page 2.
o'I'he economic importance of summer and winter flights to the community;
o The fact that air service even in winter cannot be taken for granted;
o'The need for continued community-wide support to ensure the continuation of the summer
flight program in 1995; and
o The air program is a wondecful marketing niche which will set the Vail Valley apart from
others in future years.
Such letters should be sent to any of the following:
Letters to the Editor We Get Letters Letters to the Editor
Vail Daily Vail Trail Vai1 Valley Times
P.O. Box 81 Drawer 6200 P.O. Box 5210
Vail, CO 81658 Vail, CO 81658 Avon, CO 81620
Fax 303-476-5268 Fax 303-949-0199 Fax 303-845-7204
Thanks again for your assistance.
Sincerely,
VAIL A SOCIATES, INC. -
~
~
Kent 1Vlyers ~ Sr. Vice President
RECEIV~~ ~U-u
X 6~
Pq E M O R A A1 D U-M
August 9, 1994 TOe EAGLE R%VF.12 ASSEflIBLY
F'ROMa DICK GtTSTAF'SON SII~~~CTs AUGIIST 31 NEET%NG o VA%&,
The next meeting of the Eagle River Assembly will be on August
31 from 9 0 00 am to approximately 3 a 00 pmo We will again be meeting
•at the Westira in west Vail, beginning with a continental breakfast
for those arriwing between 8e30 and 9o00e
As you recall there were several concerns with the original
Draft Asseably Reporto Accordingly, Enartec, our consultant, and
the technical committee are reviewing and revising the reporto A
new draft will be mailed to you prior to the August 31 meetinge
One of the recommended changes from the original draft is
inclusion og a conclusion that additional water supplies (storage)
are reqtairecl to ensure the long term health and use of the Eagle
Rivere As the Assembly previously agreed not to reach any
conclusions in the report, this and other changes will be critical
discussion items on the 31sta
6dith a very dry summer and water rationing in the Upper Eagle
Basin, we have an improved opportunity to raise public
consciousness regarding water issues and trade-offs facing the
basino P.t this meeting we hope to finalize the draft report and
decide how to address public input as the next step in the processo
Please indicate your attendance so we can properly plan lunch,
by contacting Shelley at the River District (800) 626-3479e In the
meantime, if you have any questions, please contact me (303) 476-
' 6006 or Eric or Chris at the River District.
Lemania House TEL N0.303 476-1058 Aug 12,94 9:55 P.01
r~-~-
C~
Vaif, Augusf 12, 1994
Ms. Peg9Y OsYerfoss
Mayor
Tpvun Mafl
7` e Town of Vaii
Dear Mayor,
in January of this year I wrote you a letter cpncernirrg the then missing
Venezuelan flag an Iniernat+onal E3ridge.
Today -the last of a beautiful summer vat:ation- ! am sending yau this note just
to express my appreclatfpn and tharik you, as well rxs the Vail authorrtit:s, far having
braugh# Balivar's colors back. Many thanks indF:c:cl. 1NIth my bes4 regards, ypurs sincerely,
i
~
Phiiippe: y Susanci Lrard
Quinta La TraFapistine, GUIIc NunCr• Ponte, l ornas dol IVliradOr, CaroQps
cpr+Oo I rnaiL c/o cjorlmon ~AC:n, opnrtc,,r.3a 3k`A, C'arc~ca5 lOlO~A, Veneauelca
tolefonos J 1elephones; oficlrici / alfit:v: '58 2.20165,02; Gpso / horne: 58-2-9'1,78.41
iax: oficina / office: 68-2-203.57A7; casa / hpme: 55-2-993.48.01
. .
.
,
.
I
j~ yer at the New York firm Davis Polk Fs'
Thii Lonie Bondsman Theory W~dwell, Lynch has painted himsel£into a
f; strange corner. He is defending Kidder in
investigations into the Jett affair by the SEC,
i, the U.S. attorney and the New York Stock
f' Scandalso Kidder Peabody blames the trader Exchange, and he is representing Kidder in
;
its arbitration claim against Jett. Not exactly
the stuff of objectivity when it comes to
; I xo rs 7osErx J~-i? iF You sELiEVE Since JetYs dismissal in April, big heads writing a report on the scandal. Does Lynch
W Kidder Peabody, where Jett pros- have rolled: Kidder chairman and CEO Mi- himself catch a whiff of conflict of interest?
~pered as a superstar bond trader un- chael Carpenter and JetYs boss Edward "No. Absolutely not," he insists. "If we'd
j; til his sudden fall from grace, he is Charles Cerullo, both of whom "resigned," accord- deternuned that there were others whdd
~Ponzi reincarnated. An internal company ing to the company; Melvin Mullin, a man- participated in this scheme, we'd pursue
investigation last week accused Jett of acting aging director, was "terminated" last week. them as well." Lynch similarly dismisses the
; j alone in a plot to generate hun- broader conspiracy theory at
dreds of millions of dollars in Kidder. "You'd have to assume
phantom profits in order to puff that nearly everyone who spoke
up his own annual bonus. to us made up their story," he
"We're talldng about a fraudu- says. Kidder will pay for those
i lent scheme that Jett perpetrat- t-I stories, picldng up the legal ex-
; ed over a two-year period," says penses of every executive -
~ Gary Lynch, former enforce- fired or otherwise-who comes
~ ment chief at the Securities and under investigation.
F.xchange Commission, who 7t~ J « Tied hands: Eccept for Jett.
I wrote the report. Tallc to Jett, His assets are frozen in two Kid-
~ and the picture changes-into OSEP ' der accounts. He has no access
~ an aggrieved Oliver North. "If I eonetime " ' ''er CEO to the records of his securities
have done something with the ' " ' ' e ' ' ' ' transactions. "You can pro-
~ approval of my superiors," he ow , he, says. 'I have regne' 'e nounce someone guilty, but to tie
i told NEwswEEx, "then I can't ' ' ' ' ' ' ' e ' " ' ' " their hands in their attemgts to
I see how anyone can accuse me prove their innocence, I find this .
of having done anything untoward. I left Jett considers hnnself a scapegoat. Lynch deplorable," says Jett, who has the occasional
, with a clear conscience; I have one now " finds that ironic: "He deserves to take the habit of discussinghis case in the thud person
It's a bizarre case, even by the elastic fall. This was Joe Jett's trading account," plural. He vehemendy insists he has done
'i ethics of Wall Street. The Kidder report resulting in a$210 million loss. nothing wrong. But Jett sometimes equates
~ rebukes senior executives for various sins What comes ne7ct? JetYs attornev may innocence with questionable, if rampant,
i of omission, citing "lax oversight, as well as want to look at Lynch's role. IYs been more trading practices. "A lot of things sirnilar to
poor judgments and missed opportunities" than five years since Lynch left the SEC, this episode are occurring on Wall Street,"
to supervise Jett's trades and take appropri- where he built a reputation as a giant slayer. he adds inysteriously. "One day, I hope, it
' ate action. But it absolves all higher-ups of His tough probe of insider trading helped will come out." When it does, it's unlikely to
any conscious wrongdoing-a conclusion bring down both Ivan Boesky andjunk-bond paint a pretty picture of either side.
that squazes oddly with recent events. king Michael Milken. Now a securities law- 'roM PosT
;
r ~
f ~
Is:so sP~w~g, airl~n69
~~wDeii~erm f~~ight I-Ias ~een~ De~ayecl Port
~ ~ ~"~~E~ ~ ~ ~ ':j f~.~h~ 1+, • . ' fic~als fear that a manual sys
T wnsAI srr isxE n ruxcx "derground track, gtuded al course;. baggage claun tem may be unworkakily slow
I ~ dnink_fighter.~throwing m most.inagically'to their desta ,'.Denver's troubles aren t Our customers don t,want to ;
~ `~,~,'the>towel Dem~er Intema nation by morethan 100 over .yet..Its biggest camer , ; wait 50 minutes for ttieir slas
r;
. honal'Airporthasbeen Eouted computers. No fuss, no wait at United Airlines, can niic the ; says a,United,spokesman not 7;,
,,as one, of the woild s most . baggage claun. In reality, Den LL latest plan. The huge new, a.uing that the wait m most aur
technologicallyadvanced ~ ver's space-age system doesn t • ports is 20 minutes t r rv~
i Yet there was MayovWelluig meiely carry your luggage ity I t~u s t:` doeS no f wor k'::. T he attpor f f Urute d;as ke d t he ci ty T~,
j~ ton~Welab,sstanding,.before eats"it as wellas flings, CTl1Sll ~C SANDER-GAMMA-LIAISON xfor 30 days to:recom
~ fihe television cameras and es and misd.irects it. The hou ` mend its;own soluhon r~`'~;
I~ kakconfessuigthat ~'~it~ust does bles.havebeen-so severe that headds;6utno -Thera
I` ~not~work'~, Denyer hasrdelayed.opeiung` son, said..Webb. spend
~4 ,;Wis4the auport's bX now the:new airport foui times > 3Z ing $50 m~ion is a lot ,~I
C ~',uifamous $260 :m~llion auto- since Octobei:= Rather tlian ~ cheaper than pg $33 ~
mated baggage system m postpone once again, Webb million a_month in in
I~ ~~jconcegtion' a miiacle ofstrav ' last week annouriced a lower terest and other ex r~ 4~
I ~ r~ e l e r s c' o n v e m e n c e P a s e n _ t e c h " s o l u t i o n:" G i v e u p, f o r . .j. penses on the $4 b~on b x
~i k~. ~;gers were supposed torstep off. now;;and build;a:$50 milIion ,,~;auport dies and gen ~;'a
' rythe~ flight and let technology conventional'.system=com ' t`tlemen your fl i g ht is de
~~d,take~over Bags would be: - plete.with:conveyor-belts hu , layed delayed ; I
~MICHAEL MEYER k~
A~„wlusked along 22es of un- man luggage tiatidlers and, of ,
60 NEWSWEES nucvsT 15, iggq
l,l?FTTO IiIGHMM:\RC LiRS':\N-IIHOWN, AIICHAELO'NEILL-OUTLING. FRANCESCO RUGCERI
G\Ci• l'v`~.Wwl.
"t) •
4 v..X.. .J .
, TOWN OF VAgL X C: awuZA
Input/Inquiry Response Record
The attached comments were recendy received by the Town of Vail. We encourage Vail
residents and guests to give us such input and we strive for timely responses. PLEASE
ADDRESS THESE CONCERNS WTTHIN FIVE WORKIING DAYS AND RETURIV THIS
COMPLETID FORIVI TO PA1vI BRANDMEYER.
. DEPARTMEiNT TO HANDLE INQUIRY INDIVIDUAL TO HANDLE INQUIlZY
DATE TOV RECEIVID IlVPUT/IlVQUIKY
TYPE OF INPUT / INOUIRY:
PHONE CALL (indicate date)
LETTER (attached) (G'Y~,{ : CQiVL 4mi- ~ft4 &~j P~W- 'tu ku-
RESPONSE CARD (attached)
TYPE OF RESPONSE (check one).:
LETTER (attach copy)
PHONE CALL (indicate date)
. BRIEF SUMMARY OF RESPONSE OR ANSWER TO IlVOUIRY:
DATE OF RESl'ONSE FORM RETURNID BY DEPARTMENT TO PAM BRANDMEYER:
A copy of this inquiry and form will remain on file at the TOV Community Relations office. As soon as this form is returned to Pam
Brandmeyer, this inquiry will be mnsidered closed.
'tHANK YOU FOR YOUR TIMELY HANDLING OF THIS ISSUE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUFSI70NS, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CONTAC?
PAM BRANDMEYER AT 479-2113.
f
11S
l Peter B. Dunning
2560 Delaware Avenue
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55118
p "'I
AUG
i
z
V~;
o"I E-7
{1 11111„,1,11It fill 111,1
q a1 ,
1994
August 8, 1994
Mayor Peggy Osterfoss & Town Council
Town of vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Mayor & Council Members,
I understand that you are in the process of negotiating a license
renewal with TCI Cablevision of the Rockies.
I wish to question whether a momopoly under public license has the
right to simply discontinue service without notice to the subscriber.
Like most of your property owners I do not live in Vail, but come as
often as I can.
On July 19th TCI put a notice on my door at 1461 Greenhill Court
asking me to call regarding my account. At the same time they
discontinued service. They sent a bill on July 31st to St. Paul
closing the account. On July 27th I arrived at Vail only to discover
that the service was disconnected. I immediately called and was told
that I had not paid June and July's bill. I checked my checkbook and
agreed. I also insisted that I had not received a bill and that I
had never been late for a payment before. I was told rudely that
they do not ever make mistakes; I should consult the Post Office
about any failures to receive their bill; and that it was my
obligation to notice that their bill had not arrived and to bring
the matter to their attention and to remit the proper amount.
When I asked about their attempts to notify me verbally of any
problem, I was told that they tried my Vail telephone number but that
I did not answer. Furthermore it was not their policy to ever make a
long distance call.
They did not call my Vail telephone number unless they decided
not to leave a message on the telephone answering machine that was
working. And I do not have the time to check up on whether they send
a bill or not - I simply pay them when they arrive.
Of course they denied my request to immediately rehook_up my
service, but did see fit to assess me $23.23 as a reconnection fee.
I think Vail is entitled to better, more polite, and more reasonable
service from any providor empowered with a monopoly by this Council.
If not I suggest that you find a competitor to TCI and award the
license to them.
i
, ~1...
Si er
~
Peter B. Dunning
2560 Delaware Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55118
r
,
~
~FmvF-nAiRr-', 1
NORTHWEST COLORADO
N)rccC COUNCIL OF GOvERN ENTS
Post Office Box 2308 " Silverthorne, Colorado 80498 ' 303 468-0295 ' FAX 303 468-1208
MEMORANDUM
~
~ -
TO: County Board of Corrunissioners, Chairman
County Council on Aging, Chairman ,
County Nursing Service `
County Seniar Coo:dinator
NWCLSP - '
County Departments of Social Services
- State Legal Services Developer
Towns in Region XII .
FROM: Linda Venturoni, Director
Skyline Six Area Agency on Aging
RE: Public Meeting
DATE: August 9, 1994
Enclosed is a notice for the Public Meeting of the Skyline Six Area Agency on Aging's Four _
Year Plan for Aging Services (1995-1998) and the 1995 Annual Update. Please note the time.
and place on your calendar and plan to attend.
The News Release should appear in your local papers the week of August 15, 1994. We
wou;d appreciate it if you would post the enc:oset! notice in a prominent place for public
display. -
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. If you should have any questions, please call
me at 468-0295 x109. _
Enclosure .
Eagle County: Avon, Basalt, Eagle, Gypsum, Minturn, Red Cliff, Vail, " Grand County: Fraser, Granby, Grand Lake, Hot Sulphur
Springs, Kremmling, Winter Park, ' Jackson County: Walden, ' Pitkin County: Aspen, Snowmass Viliage, ` Routt County:
Hayden, Oak Creek, Steamboat Springs, Yampa, ' Summit County: Blue River, Breckenridge, Diilon, Frisco, Montezuma,
Silverthorne
i
~
Pcc ~1ORT~9WE5T COLORA~~
~~~N0L OF GOl.lERNMENTS
Post Office Box 2308 " Silverthorne, Colorado 80498 ' 303 468-0295 ' FAX 303 468-1208 ~ • PLEASE POST
CONTACT PERSON: Linda Venturoni, Director
Skyline Six Area Agency on Aging
A Public Meeting concerning the Skyline Six Area Agency on Aging's Four Year Plan for Aging Services and the 1995 Annual Update will be held at 10:00 AM, Wednesday,
September 14, 1994 at the Granby Community Center, 3rd and Jasper, Granby, CO.
The purpose of the meeting is to provide local governments and the general public an
opportunity to comment on the Skyline Six Area Agency on Aging's Four Year Plan for
Aging Services and the 1995 Annual Update. Skyline Six Area Agency on Aging provides
services to senior citizens in Eagle, Grand, Jackson, Pitkin, Routt and Summit Counties.
Information will be presented on the funds budgeted for 1995 services, advocacy,
coordination and program development, the proposed targeting plan, direct service provision,
support service categories and any transfers of funds.
Summaries of the Skyline Six Area Agency on Aging's Four Year Plan for Aging.
Services and the 1995 Annual Update can be obtained by contacting the Skyline Six Area
Agency on Aging after Aua st 31 st. Written comments and inquires concerning the Skyline
Six Area Agency on Aging's Four Year Plan for Aging Services and the 1995 Annual Update
can be submutted to the Northwest Colcrado Cour,cil of Covernments office, P. O. BcY 2308,
Sitverthorne, CO 80498 by September 13, 1994.
c: phprsris.sam
Eagle County: Avon, Basalt, Eagle, Gypsum, Minturn, Red Cliff, Vail, ' Grand County: Fraser, Granby; Grand Lake, Hot Sulphur
Springs, Kremmiing, Winter Park, ' Jackson County: Watden, ' Pitkin County: Aspen, Snowmass Village, " Rout# County:
Hayden, Oak Creek, Steamboat Springs, Yampa, " Summit County: Blue River, Breckenridge, Diilon, Frisco, Montezuma,
Silverthorne
~ AUG 12 194 16:20 GARFINKLE-PALMER-ATT 123 P04 xd:Ceu~
nLAw QFFICFs oF
G L, PAX.wrMaz & UENIMO'g°TI
FOsta Y.AVro~VALB OFMCH g••"o OrrYCn
NATj8N39ANP 9UI4PIN0 YwE 9NMMi4 7oweia
ONe WINANGIAL PLAL4 0$UFTB ZIII I000 SUMMIT TOWER BOULEVARD a 9UITE 780
• rOp7 LauOERDALF. RLCpioa 73394 oRUan00, FLdRIDA WBlp
(300) y23 -L'440 (4107) a?n-3400
. OR4qfd60 (4071 35it•5566 REPLY TQ: FOFT IAUDEROA4E FAX (407) 575 -0730
P,4x (395) 99'1•0037
sA4nA9 CVrdiR SIMrST
JN.CbTi:r o bd.iO s7SiStli e
f7 L' 3tl8/ a. V a° 714V /V {r~14
.A.T FAX NO :
FROMP 1zW11-46
IlZE a
NUMBER OF ~AGESa ~ (Inc1uc13.ng this page )
, MA`.b'[JRE (71i' FAXED g'I°EM 0
SPECIAI, INSTltttCTIBNSo
~
v*if grou encourater any ci3.fficu].t3eso pgease call back as soon as
possible at (305) 523=2440e
Our k'aCsi..mi].e Number is (305 ) 523-0037
~
!
i .
~
AUG 12 194 16:21 GARFINKLE-PALMER-ATT 123 P05
A ~
i
LAw QF-FiCE6 OF
Q gy PAA MMIS ~ GEX~OrEW11
CWj.s.z4n0 0a-Os~
ryq7lqNSeANK BUILDINC THE SUMMIT TQINER
ONE FINANGIA6 PLPYA + BUITE 21" ISOO 9UMMIT 1'OWER BOULEyARp - SUITE 7450
POF7 WUOL''RDAI.E F4QRIDA 33394 ORLANOD. FLORIDA 32810
(308) 683•2440 (407) 875-3409
pfiLANOO (407) 382-3388 REPLY TO: FORT lAU6EROpLE RAX (4071979'0739
PA7t (305) 523 - 0037
A12gus$ 12d 1994
via Fa¢:Sima.le
MSe gTogly I, o MCCutCh.eOn
TOwL CLark
'Vown of Vail
75 SoutYa Froa?tage Etcaad
~ai1, Colorad.o 81657
17esr Hollyo
Pgaase allow tfings letter to ~onfirm our Augtast 12, 1994 telephone
caxtferencee
I have read Pam Brandmeyeg' s August 5a 1994 mema to Joel and can
happaly aay tb:at we hawm taken a1.1 steps possible to alleviate ansr
noa.Be problems in our location o We have cancelled all bands and
lowered ouzc ffiusic levelso In fact p gesterday I apoke ta 1Kr e
Bgtaquio Cartinag the President of our aandaminium associatRan, who
stated that he was eexy p].eased aritY~ our effart and foresees no
pgoblems isa the futureo
Zn response to y+aur Augast 12, 1994 faxed corresQonder?cee Wha,fstler
wd5 experbeaacbng this exact problem abaut twa years aga p Th.e
ffiunicipality initially attempted to all.eviate the nosse pxablem by
checking ttae decibel level ot each bas and issuing warnings and
eventual.ly ticketso This continued ta aao avail for several weeks
and eventuaY].y tlae municipalitp zealized that citations weren°t
getting to the aore of the problema whiah was t]ne competitian
betwaern the bars and the pressure to make a profito
Each of the bars were having pgice wars and basically givirag away
thea.r praduct in an attempt to get people a.nta their lacati$n o
This worked at f irst, but once the other baxs ffiet the low prices,
they again r~~~~ ~t an even paro mhe orily way at tlaat point to get
an edge over the compe'Gition was to get lauder bands and increas~
the intexior and exters.or amplif ieci saundo Since each bar seras
ma}cing so agttge peg airbailsa t,hey had to take $riy and all steps ta
increa~se the wolume of tirgnks sald in ardex to potentially ffiake a
!
>
i
~
3
;
f
~
AUG 12 194 16:21 GARFINKLE-PALMER-ATT 123 P06
q ~
• ; .
Xse I$o~.l3Y Ya e ~iG'(,.°.4`h@fi~$
a~t~gusti 12p 1994
Page Tva
prof ate In my opingon this is the cpre of the problem and th3.s is
what neecls ta be dddressedo
Bar owners and gnaaaagera feel extrente and constant pressaxre to turn
a pro£it. Saaace pasice vaars severalYr limit unit profitabl.lityP they
look to increase their volume and take almost any eteps do soo
Ttaat i$ wh~ there WAS a noise prob].em 1.n Whistler and IS a moise
problean 3.n Vail, Realizing this, the City Manager af Whist].er
ca.11ed a mee~ing for al1 owners and manaqers of the anajor bars in
the viglage. A1l dgreed to end price 6aaxs and raise th.e aainimus~
~rice d~ a drink to $2.50, Ue S e No ane was to drop be1ow that
numbera By doing thiso the bara mexe, in factr realizimg a profit
oxn eaeh drink as?d it dicln°t nped the volume that it needed beforee
If they weaca gaakiag $ 0 25 per drink befare and raaw they are making
$1o25 per dri.nko you could see where the preasurre drivi.mg those in
charge is alleviatedo Bgr a1].eviatxxtg the pressure of the maaaagers
and awners, they wil.l freely con£orm to the rules. Thia is what
. happened in Uihis-tler and has tsorked weYb for the past two yearso
Eaah of the bars are mal€ing enough af aprofit where they do not
sieed tm pus12 the rales to 4nc3 beyand the li.mit and Gerta3nly po;cefer
tte present set-up to that of the ~rice wars of the past a
Ttias set up anust be dene in a zroluntary and well thauqht-aut m7niler
so it does abot rra.olate any adllusion l.awse Tam suace Tom Moor.head
]salou8 a 1ot ffiore about that aLrea of Yaod than myself and can set anp
~Bystem that is vaeYl w.ithin the bouYids of the Iawe
The abave cargectaon of liquor prices also made an extreme impact
on the number of disorderly cpnduct arYd vandalism incidents
occuxrinc~ in the MtaniCipality of Whistlmr. I am sure there is a
eorreYatian betweesx ths pxiCe of a drink anrl the number of drisiks
one buys and additaQaaailgr I am sure there a.s a correlaticrra between
the number of driraks gomeone has and the amount of vandalism ancl
loaad behaviar that takes placea
Than& you vergr anaxch for asking my opinionv and if yoaa have any
questa.oseso please feeg free to call tt?e undegsignecio
Very truly yours p
'4r' MITC D O G&RFINKET,
r~
DC/~
cc o V'ail Towra Counail
Robert W. HoLaura.n
ia o TYaomas Moorhead p Esqo
PaaYtela A. Brancdmearer
'K I a3 Hucrhev
k
; .
WJ a•1m- 7't
RECEiVEEJ QUO ~ 1994
° STATE OF COLORADO
DEPARTAflENT OF 7RANSPORTATION
4201 East Arkansas Avenue MT
Denver, Colorado 80222
(303) 757-9011
3102
July 18, 1994
The Honorable Peggy Osterfoss
Mayor, Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Mayor Osterfoss:
The Colorado Department of Transportation has received and
evaluated your application for Section 18 funds from the Federal
Transit Administration (FTA). I regret to inform you that your
project has not been included in the program of projects which the
Department has announced and has submitted to FTA for approval.
As in the past, the amount of funding requested far exceeded the
amount available. In fact, requests for Section 18 funds totaled
over $3.5 million, while available funding amounted to $1,289,000.
The application by the Town received a passing score, but the
Department did not allocate any of the limited Section 18 funds to capital projects. Consequently the Department has not recommended
funding for your automatic bus wash, but it does recognizes the
important service your transportation department offers to the
Town. Our recommendation should in no way be considered a negative
reflection on your agency. In the final analysis however, the
Department believed the operating requests of other providers
across the state demonstrated more urgent needs.
All decisions of the Department are subject to the continued
availability of federal funds and to the State's appeal process,
which is conducted according to the provisions of the State of
Colorado Administrative Procedures Act. If a hearing is requested,
it will be held before an administrative law judge. The request
for a hearing must be made within 60 calendar days after an
applicant is notified of the denial of its application.
Please let us know if there is any way we can be of further
assistance.
Very truly yours,
1 .
;
12
a ey . chi on; 7DDirreector
Di
vision o Transportion Development
cc: Mike Rose
a
0
FTA GRdNT AHARDS FOR CALENDaR YEAR 1995
GRANTEE NAME APIOUNT 1995 1995 1995 1995 9995 1993 1992
GRAMTED SAP SECT 18 SECT 18 SECT 18 SECT 16 SECT 16 SECT 16
Admin Oper Capital Capital
eaca County $31,500 SO • SO SO $O $31,500 $O $O
Care-A-Van $109,900 $40,689 $44,800 $65,100 $O $O $0 $O
City of Durango $194,900 $11,610 S27,600 $87,300 $O SO $O $O
City of La Junta $62,900 S17,559 $16,700 $33,200 SO $93,000 $O $O
City of Stmbt Spgs $59,500 $6,253 $23,700 827,800 SO SO ffi0 $O
Colo F1tn College $29,769 SO SO $O $O $29,769 $0 $O
Develop Opportunity $69,600 824,882 S7,700 $27,400 $O $34,500 s0 gp
ECCOG 879,000 $9,804 815,200 823,800 $O $32,000 $O s0
Fountain Valley $33,000 SO $O $O $O $33,000 $O $O
H-LA COG $49,600 $92,260 $8,900 $26,700 $O $14,000 $0 $O
' Metro Mobility $239,400 $98,459 $7,300 $52,100 $O $180,000 $O $O
NECTA $164,200 $35,887 $48,200 $68,200 $O 847,800 $O $O
RFTA 885,400 $18,489 SO $85,400 $O $O $O $O
SLV DRG $O $O $O $0 $0 $0 $0 $O
SRC $114,900 $18,054 $9,200 $25,200 $O $80,500 $O $O
Silver Key $43,369 SO $O $O $O $36,000 EO $7,369
SEA7s $63,100 $9,571 $5,000 $23,100 $0 $35,000 $O $O
STS $156,282 $30,653 $23,700 894,200 s0 SO $38,382 SO
SRDA $32,500 $O EO $O $O 832,500 $O SO
Simimit Co 829,255 $5,274 $O 829,255 $O $O $O $O
Teller Co $54,700 $10,274 $90,200 59,500 SO $35,000 $O $O
Town of Crstd eutte $30,600 81,067 86,200 824,400 $0 SO SO $O
ueld Co 835,700 $27,043 $2,000 $33,700 SO SO s0 $O
7oTAls $1,673,075 $297,827 $256,400 $736,355 $O $634,569 $38,382 $7,369
:
9
d
LISTING BY SCORE
APPLICANT F1P1AL SERVCE FIbL
SCORE COORD JUST JUST
SEATS 2.53 2.83 2.50 2.97
H-LA COG 2.52 2.67 2.67 2.97
S7S 2.42 2.67 2.50 2.00
Metro Ptobility 2.38 2.33, 2.67 2.17
Baca County 2.33 2.33 2.50 2.97
Neld Co 2.32 2.67 2.97 2.00
City of la Junta 2.30 2.50 2.33 2.00
SRC 2.28 2.33 2.50 2.00 .
-G.ity of Durango 2.23 2.33 2.33 2.00
Care-A-Van 2.23 2.33 2.33 2.00
Park Co 2.22 2.97 2.97 2.33
Town of Crstd Butte 2.20 2.50 2.97 9.83
Fountain Valley 2.97 2.97 2.33 2.00
Develop Opportunity 2.97 2.97 2.17 2.97
RF7A 2.93 2.33 2.33 9.67
Silver Key 2.10 2.00 2.33 2.00
SLV DRG 2.08 9.83 2.00 2.50
NECTA 2.03 9.83 2.97 2.97
Teller Co 2.00 2.00 2.97 1.83
ECCOG - 2.00. 2.00 2.00 2.00
SRDA 1.98 9.83 2.17 2.00
Colo pitn College 9.98 1.83 2.97 2.00
City of.stmbt Spgs 1.95 2.00 2.00 9.83
7own of Vail 9.83 1.83 2.97 9.50
Simmit Co 9.75 2.00 2.00 1.97
Toan of Telluride 1.42 1.67 9.97 1.33
Town of Avon 1.42 1.67 9.33 1.97
FINAL SCORE = HEIGHTED AVERAGE OF THREE CATEGORIES.
COORDINATIOtd = 40%; SERVICE JUSTIFICATIQN = 30%;
FINANCIAL JUSTIFICAT[ON = 30%