Loading...
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%