Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-12-17 Support Documentation Town Council Evening Session VAIL TOWN COUNCIL EVENING MEETING TUESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1996 7:30 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS AGENDA NOTE: Times of items are approzimate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item: 1 . CITIZEN PARTICIPATION. (5 mins.) 2. CONSENT AGENDA: A. Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1996, second reading of an Ordinance Making Supplemental Appropriations from the Town of Vail General Fund, Parking Structure Fund, Police Confiscation Fund, Booih Creek Debt Se?vice Fund, Debt Service Fund, and Housing Fund, of the 1996 Budget and the Financial Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado; and Authorizing the Expenditures of Said Appropriations as Set Forth Herein; and Setting Forth Details in Regard Thereto. B. Resolution No. 22, Series of 1996, a Resolution authorizing the Town Manager to enter into an Animal Control Services Contract. (10 mins.) 3. Appointment of Marketing Board Members. (5 mins.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Appoint two members for terms of four years each to the Marketing Board. 4. Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1996, first reading of an ordinance amending . George Ruther Section 18.22.030, Conditional Uses, to allow time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units as conditional uses in the Public Accommodation Zone District, and to establish Section 18.22.035, conditional uses-factors applicable in the Public Accommodation Zone District. Gordon Pierce, representing Sonnenalp Properties, lnc. (1 hr, 30 mins.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve/modify/deny Ordinance Na 22, Series of 1996 on first reading. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: Please see the attached memorandum from the Community Development Department staff to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated November 25, 1996. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1996 on first reading. . 5. Resolution No. 23, Series of 1996, a Resolution Directing the Town Tom Moorhead Manager to execute the Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Vail and Vail Valley Consolidated Water District as modified. (Jrdinacace 24, Series 1996, second reading of an crdinance providing for Aiidy Knudtsen the establishment of Special Development District No. 33, Red Sandstone; adopting a development plan for Special Development District No. 33 in accordance with Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code; and setting forth details in regard thereto; and Ordinance 20, Series 1996, second reading of an ordinance rezoning three tracts from General Use Section 18.36 to Medium Density Multi-Family Residential, Section 18.18 generally located at 945 Red Sandstone Road. Applicants: Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, Town of Vail, United States Forest Service. (30 mins.) I ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve/Deny/Modify Resolution No. 23, Series of 1996 and Ordinances 20 and 24, Series 1996. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: Please see Council packets. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Resolution No. 23, Series of 1996 and Ordinances 20 and 24, Series 1996. _ 6. An appeal of a variance denial made by the Planning and Environmental Dominic Mauriello Commission on September 23, 1996. The appellants were denied a site coverage variance to allow an additional one-car garage to be constructed at 742-B Sandy Lane/Unit B, Lot 3, Vail/Potato Patch, Second Filing. Appellants: Charles and Geri Campisi, represented by Kerry Wallace. (1 hr.) The Town Council tabled this appeal at the November 19, 1996, Council meeting. The item was tabled until December 17, 1996, at the request of John Goodman, attorney for the Campisi's. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Uphold / modify / overturn the PEC's denial of the variance request. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: See the attached staff memo and other materials for a comprehensive overview of the appeal. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Town Council uphold the Planning and Environmental Commission's denial of a 260.8 sq. ft. site coverage variance and recommends that the Town Council make the following findings 1. That the standards and conditions imposed by the requirements of Title 18 (Zoning) have not been met. 2. That the granting of the variance will constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. 3. There are no exceptions, extraordinary circumstances, or conditions that are applicable to this site that apply generally to other properties in the Primary/Secondary Residential zone. In addition, any hardships which have been presented, have been self imposed. 4. The strict interpretation, or enforcement of the specified regulation does not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by owners of other properties in the Primary/Secondary Residential district. 7. Town Manager's Report. (10 mins.) Adjournment - 11:00 p.m. NOTE UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW: (ALL T1MES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE) I I I I I I I THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL SPECIAL WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 1/7/97, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE FOLLOWING VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 1/14/97, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 117197, BEGINNING AT 7:30 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. I I I I I I I Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2332 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information. C:WGENDA.TC PUBLIC NOTICE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE (as of 12/13/96) January, 1997 In an attempt to respond to scheduled meeting demands, as weil as adhere to mandated ordinance and charter requirements, Council meetings are scheduled at the following times: EVENING MEETINGS Evening meetings will continue to be held on the firs and third Tuesday evenings of each month, starting at 7:30 P.M. These meetings will provide a forum for citizen participation and public audience for conducting regular Council business. WORK SESSIONS Work sessions, which are primarily scheduled for Council debate and understanding of issues before the Council, will now be scheduled to begin at 2:00 P.M. (unless otherwise noted) on everv Tuesday afternoon. THE lANIIARY. 1997, VAIL TOWN COllNCIL MEETING SCHEDIJLE IS AS FOLLOWS: Tuesday,]anua[y, 7, 1997 Work session............ 02:00 P.M. (starting time determined by length of agenda) Evening meeting......... 07:30 P.M. Tuesday, ]anuary 14, 1997 Work session............ 02:00 P.M. (starting time determined by length of agenda) Tuesday, ]anuary 21, 1997 Work session............ 2:00 P.M. (starting time determined by I'ength of agenda) Evening meeting......... 07:30 P.M. Tuesday, ]anuary 28, 1997 Work session............ 02:00 P.M. (starting time determined by length of agenda) TOWN OF VAIL Pamela A. Brandmeyer Assistant Town Manager Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2332 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information. r PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Monday, December 16, 1996 FINAL AGENDA Project Orientation / CHR/STMAS LUNCH - Communi.ly Develoament Department 11:30 am MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Gene Uselton John Schofield Greg Amsden Diane Golden Greg Moffet Galen Aasiand Henry Pratt Site Visits : Please bring adequate footwear for a snowy site visit 12:30 pm 1. Water District - unplatted parcel in East Vail 2. Bresnahan - 4532 Streamside Circie East 3. Austrian - 666 and 696 Forest Road . 4. Hunter - 2339 Chamonix Lane Driver: George NOTE: If the PEC hearing extertds unti16:00 p.m., ihe board will break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 p.m. Public Hearing -Town Council Chambers 2:00 p.m. 1. A request for a minor subdivision to relocate the common property line between Lots 7 and 8, located at 666 and 696 Forest Road/Lots 7 and 8, Block 1, Vail Village 6th Filing. Applicant: Neil and Nancy Austrian . Planner: Lauren Waterton VOTE: 7-0 TABLED, PER APPLICANT'S REQUEST, TO JANUARY 13,1997 MEETING 2. A request for a minor subdivision to create two primary/secondary lots and a request for a variance from the 30' minimum street frontage requirement, located at 2339 Chamonix Lane/Tract A, Vail Heights, Filing 1. Applicant: Robert Hunter (AKA Schmetzko), represented by Rick Rosen Planner: George Ruther VOTE: 6-0-1 (Amsden abstained) APPROVED WITH THREE CONDITIONS (PER MEMO): 1) That the TOV Public Works Department review and approve the proposed conceptual driveway and grading plan submitted by the applicant. 2) That the applicant add the following note to the final plat: "Future development on the two lots shall be restricted to the area within the , platted building envelopes. This srestriction shall include all decks, roof eavelines, etc. The only development permitted outside the platted building envelopes shall be landscaping, at grade patios, driveways, and retaining walls associated with driveway construction." 3) That the applicant make the following changes on the final plat prior to recordation: * Remove the "TRACT A" IabeL Change GRFA numbers to 5,766.1 sq. ft. for Lot 1 and to 5,314.4 sq.ft. for Lot 2. " Change BLM to U.S. Forest Service, as it relates to property ownership. 3. A request for a side setback variance to allow for the construction of a two-car garage, located at 4532 Streamside Circle EasULot 15, Bighorn 4th Addition. Appticant: Lillian and William Bresnahan, represented by Kathy Langenwalter Planner: Lauren Waterton VOTE: 6-0 TABLED TO JANUARY 13,1997 MEETING 4. A request for a review of a new water storage tank, located on an unplatted parcel of land in East Vail, generally located southeast of 5004 Snowshoe Lane. Applicant: Eagle River Water and Sanitation District Planner: Russell Forrest VOTE: 6-0 APPROVED WITH SIX CONDITIONS: 1) Keep existing tank but mitigate hazard, repaint and plant trees to buffer. 2) That a more specific revegetation plan be prepared that identifies the exact seed mix that will be used and the planting of Aspens downhill from the tank. 3) That no lighting will occur on the site. 4) That the access road be realigned on the property to be obtained through the land exchange. The removal of the old tank may facilitate the ability to keep the road entirely on the exchange property. 5) Add gate to block access. 6) Do not pave road. No hard surface. 5. A request for a worksession to discuss establishing a Special Development District overlay to the Austria Haus, located at 242 East Meadow Drive/on part of Tract C, Block 5-D, Vail Village 1 st Filing. Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., represented by Gordon Pierce Planner: George Ruther Worksession - No Vote , . 6. A request tor an amendment to a condition of approval for the Town of Vai! Public Works shops expansion, pertaining to employee housing, located at 1309 Vaii Valley Drive/on an unplatted parcel, north of Vail Village, 8th Filing. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Andy Knudtsen VOTE: 6-0 APPROVED WITH CONDITION 7. A request to amend Sections 18.27.030, 18.29.030, and 18.30.030 of the Zoning Code to allow van storage/transportation-related businesses in the Commercial Core 3, Arterial Business, and Heavy Service Zone Districts as a conditional use and add Sections 18.04.415 and 18.04.385 providing definitions for vehicle storage yard and transportation business. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Dominic Mauriello VOTE: 6-0 RECOMMEND APPROVAL 8. A request for a variance from Section 18.58.320, Satellite Dish Antennas, D1, 3, 4, 6, to allow two satellite dishes to be installed at the northwest corner of the Vail Commons property, located at 2099 N. Frontage Road West/ Vail Commons. Applicant; KTUN Radio Planner: Tammie Williamson TABLED UNTIL JANUARY 13, 1997 9. A request to amend the Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan and adopt the Gerald R. Ford Park Management Plan. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Larry Grafel, Pam Brandmeyer, Todd Oppenheimer. Planner: George Ruther TABLED UNTIL JANUARY 13, 1997 10. A request to amend section 16.20.020 and to add section 16.04.065 of the Sign Code to allow for electronic signs as Public Information Signs. Applicant: Vail Associates, Inc., represented by Joe Macy Planner: Dirk Mason TABLED UNTIL JANUARY 13, 1997 11. Information Update: *Appointment of one PEC representative to the Art in Public Places Board (AIPP). This Board meets twice a month (2nd & 4th Thursdays) from 8:30am to . approximately 10:30am. The duration of the term would be consistent with the member's PEC term duration. TABLED TO JANUARY 13,1997 MEETING 12. Approval of November 11, 1996, November 25, 1996 and December 9, 1996 minutes. APPROVED 6-0 The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2114 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information. Community Development Department Published December 13, 1996 in the Vail Trail. . Agenda last revised 12/12/96 4pm PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION Monday, D~ce-mber 16, 1996 AGENDA Project Orientation / CHRISTMAS LUNCH C'~mmu~itv Development Department 11:30 am MEMBERS PRESENT MENJ~~R~ Site Visits : Please bring ad~jquatg forrear for.~ PnowY site visit 12:30 pm ; 1. Water District - unplatted parce( 1e~ ~.aSt ~ai~ 2. Bresnahan - 4532 Streamside Cir 3. Austrian - 666 and 696 Forest Rp~d 4. Hunter - 2339 Chamonix Lane Driver: George e NOTE: If the PEC hearing extands ~t~~.~ ~#Q p rr~ , tFfe l~ssard;w311 k far dnn~r frcttit 6 Qf~ :6:30 p.m. Public Hearina - Town 2:00 p.m. 1. A request for a r~ar~Q~ ~U~?~ri~i~pr~ta raf~~~€~ th~:cQr~m6n ~3~~Q~r~ lEn6 b.etween Lots 7 and 8, located at 666: and A6&F~re~t R6ad/1-66ts e ~Sth Filing. Applicant: N~il ~~t~ P~~ncy Aus~riar~ Planner: 1410 ~!fat~r~pn 2. A request for a r~~~~~ bdivi;si~rr~ t~ ~re~ate ta prrrn~ryf~e~o~id~y ~n~i ~~~q~uest for a variance fr~~:~i~ f ~'e~~t1r, ~~~~d monix Lane/Tract A, V;i~t ~IEIng 1<; Appl~cant; ~t~er~ ~t~U~#er ~Al~~ ~chm~tz~v)~ ~'~p~`e~C~fi~d; k~~ ~i~l~ t~Q~e?1 Planner, ~ R~t.~r 3. A requ~st fo --~ii sEde tetbkk ;.Var~ance #IQWA~ir the ~~~.tr'ction IocAt~d 45~~ Gir6C6:ta~~f~ot 15, ofn ~tM Additi~r~. Ahtj UIfiwn ,nd Wr[I~~rn 1'~ by Kathy ~ri 0 nw ~'laIner ; ~auren'~ater~o~ , < ; ' 4. Arequest for 6~ted 4r~ an U~~~Atted parcel of land in East Vail, generaily ~ac~tecl sou~~4~t ~f;5~4~E ~r~v~~~?oe Lan~: Applicant: Eagle River Water and Sariittti~:~Jistrict Planner: Russell Forrest ~ ~ Agenda last revised 12/12/96 4pm 5. A request for a worksession to discuss establishing a Special Development District overtay to the Austria Haus, located at 242 East Meadow Drive/on part of Tract C, Block 5-D, Vail Village 1 st Filing. Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., represented by Gordon Pierce Planner: George Ruther 6. A request for an amendment to a condition of approval for the Town of Vail Public Works shops expansion, pertaining to employee housing, Iocated at 1309 Vait Valley Drive/on an unplatted parcel, north of Vail Village, 8th Filing. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Andy Knudtsen 7. A request to amend Sections 18.27.030, 18.29.030, and 18.30.030 of the Zoning Code to allow van storage/transportation-related businesses in the Commerciat Core 3, Arterial Bus+ness, and Heavy Service Zone Districts as a conditional use and add Sections 18.04.415 and 18.04.385 providing definitions for vehicle storage yard and transportation business. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Dominic Mauriello 8. A request for a variance from Section 18.58.320, Satellite Dish Antennas, D1, 3, 4, 6, to allow two satellite dishes to be installed at the northwest corner of the Vail Commons property, located at 2099 N. Frontage Road West/ Vail Commons. Applicant: KTUN Radio Planner: Tammie Wilfiamson TABLED UNTIL JANUQRY 13, 1997 9. A request to amend the Gerald R. Ford Park Master Plan and adopt the Gerald R. Ford Park Management Plan. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Larry Grafel, Pam Brandmeyer, Todd Oppenheimer. Planner: George Ruther TQBLED UNTIL JANUARY 13,1997 10. A request to amend section 16.20.020 and to add section 16.04.065 of the Sign Code to allow for electronic signs as Public Information Signs. Applicant: Vail Associates, Inc., represented by Joe Macy P(anner: Dirk Mason TABLED UNTIL JANUARY 13,1997 r , Agenda last revised 12/12/96 4pm 11. Information Update: *Appointment of one PEC representative to the Art in Public Places Board (AIPP). This Board meets twice a month (2nd & 4th Thursdays) from 8:30am to approximately 10:30am. The duration of the term would be consistent with the member's PEC term duration. 12. Approval of November 11, 1996, November 25, 1996 and December 9, 1996 minutes. The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2114 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information. Community Development Department Published December 13, 1996 in the Vail Trail. ~ e Si if er Designs Slifer Designs, Inc. 132 Avon Road P.0 Boxg54o, Avon, Colorado &620 • 970.949.i62r Far970.949.1122 December 5, 1996 Ms. Holly McCutcheon Town Clerk of Vaii 75 S. Frontage Road West Vail, CO 81657 Dear Holly: This is to confirm that I hope to be reappointed to the Vail Valley Marketing Board. I filled a vacated seat and have served for approximately one year. Please call and leave a message when you know what time I should be available on December 17th for the Council to interview me. Best regards, Beth Slifer President BS/aef DEC-11-1996 07:40 VAIL CASCADE HOTEL 8 CLUB 303 479 ?025 P.02i03 17J9/96 llear Town Councit Memhets, Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to apply for the Vail Marketing Roard position. Attached please find a copy of my resume, which I am ennfident you will agrec provides the necessary experience needed W be an effective Board Member_ Complemeilt thi$ with my rc:sponsibilities as the Direelar of Marketinb for the Vail Cascade Hotel & Club, which includes control and implementation ofa; million marketing budget, publie rclations campaign, e-xtensive advertising campaign to the 1'mnt Range, National and intentational markets, and commitments t have made to the group seb commitlee and you truly have someone who cares about the Vail Valley and its business community,l look forward to discussing this opportunity with you soon. tf I caii answer any questions plcase contact me al 479-7029_ I lappy H~lid.~yys , ~ / % r .r' f ~ ~ Andre ' r DFC-11-19% 07:40 VAIL CASCADE I-IOTEL 8 CLUB 303 479 7025 P.03i03 ANDR6 J. FOURNIER . 77439 N. 55th Street (602) 493-7221 Scottsdate AZ 85254 tellular phone: (602) 377-7844 SUMMARY Excm oF 1 I years executing succcssful salcs and mukeung ta association, wrporue and inccntive salrs within the resort and hotel environment. Proftcicnt in dcvcloping and implementing stracegiea, caccits and ncw acwunts. Ablc to escablish a quatiry working rapporr with key busineas figures and cmployees_ Strengths are rccruiticg, craining and mocivacing salcs ccam co cxcecd budgeted goxls. . PROFESSIDNAL OI'ERIINCE Y'ioe Piesident Sales Dawson Companies Febiuary 1994 - Presenc Dcvclopcd and implemenced scratcgirs and auion plans for the Scptcsdaie PL~za Rcsort. Arizona Arrangers ancf Dawson mcctings management. R=ruit, train and morivatc a staff of 20 sales and aooount managcrs to ooceed rcvenut quota. Grew iesort nwcnues from 1991 co 1995 by 130%. Achieved this success by increasing the ADR from 1991 co 1995 by 14446 and group food and beverage wntribution by 17196. Dicutvr of Sales Scotuue I'hza Aasort, Scottsdale, Arizons Deormber 1989-Fcbruary 1994 A Four-Diamond, Four-Star RFSOrt R,esponsible for rccruiting, cnining, morivacing 12 Salcs Managcrs and G Markct Resarchcrs while maintzining a petsonal salcs quota of 1,200 room nights a month. Dcvc(oped aud implemented mategics toachicvc revenue goals. National Sales Maaager Keystoae gtsorc Keystonc Coloradn Oetobcr 1988 - Dacember 1989 A Five-Diamond, Four-Star Rcsorc Soliciced and maintained Fortune 500 Corpoeatio»s and Acsociations in the Northeasc cegion. Exceeded room night goals by 2096. NadorW Cozporite Sheratoa Denver Tcch Cenur Denver Colorado attd SMERF Mwager MP1 "Proptrty of the YcarT.1989 Dtcxmbcr 1987 - August 19$$ Responsiblc for solicitation and maintaining the SMERT mackets_ Achieved and cxcaaicd quotas in meional and state associations and corporate mxtkecs. Stles Managcr of the Quamr, Augusc 1988, Corporate Salzs MAaagcr poublenee 14ote1 Aurora Colorado July 1986 - I)ecembtr 1987 Increascd hotel pmfits eHtough room night prodqcEion and food and beverage produaion for a 254 room suburban first dass luxury hotel. Successfully inscituted spccial promorions and events; aaively involved in markecing PCOPertf'• Cntpornte Sz[es Manager poubletree Hotel Scottscalc 1lrizona ]une 1984 - July 1986 Employee of rhe Year, 1986 EDUCATTON Arizoxa Statc Universiq, Tcmpc Arizona, B9chelor of Scienae in Marketing, May 1986 Pmfessional Selling Skills I and II, 1987; ProFessional Shcing Skills III and N, 1991 PROFESSIONAL QItGANIZATIONS A.mcrican Markecing Associ.uian, Sunbclt Chapter MPI (Board of Dircctors 1992-1993), Phi Delta Thcta Social Fraacrniry TOTAL P.03 Robert Charles Batchelor P.O. Box 2543 Vail, Colorado 81658 Holly McCutcheon , Vail Valley Marketing Board 75 S. Frontage Rd. Vait, Co. 81657 Deaz Holly: This letter is in regards to your position with the Vail Valley Marketing Board. I have recently returned to the Vail Valley for opportunities and a higher quality of life. In the two years I Iived here previously, I came to realize what the old adage, "we came for the winter, we stayed for the summer" really means. As the enclosed resume indicates, I am currently with the Beaver Creek Resort Concierge. I beleive my broad knowledge of the Valley's vast activities, hotels, shops, and special events will a11ow for valuable input towards the goals of the V. V.M.B. Also, my past experience in marketing and managing small businesses in a tourism environment enables me to analyze the marketing plan from the small businesses perspective, which I feel is a vital resource to the Valley. As a volunteer I can be relied on to not orily attend the bi-monthly meetings, but to dedicate myself and assist in whatever way possible. I would be honored to serve on the board and to help promote Vail's summers to make them just as exciting and successful as the winters. I canbe contacted via mail at the above 4ddress or by phone a± 476-8449_ Asai7 Holly, I am excited about the opportunity and look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Robert C. Batchelor - . TM Holly McCutcheon Vail Valley Marketing Board 75 S. Frontage Rd. Vail, Co. 81657 Dear Holly: This letter is to introduce Robert Batchelor. Robert has been a welcome addition to our staff since joining us in early November. In a short time he has proven to be knowledgeable, dedicated, and driven. His attention to detail and commitment to guest service gives me the confidence that our home owners and guest will benefit from his expertise and assistance. Robert has shared with me his goals in becoming involved in the community and sharing the Valley's treasures with our guest. I feel confident in recommending Robert for your position on the Vail Valley Marketing Board. Please give him your consideration. Sincerely, Krista Sagon Manager Under The Red Awning 119 Beaver Creek Plaza ? Avon, Colorado 81620-5390 •(970) 845 9090 ? Fax (970) 845 5232 ro ROBERT CHARLES BATCHELOR ~ P.O. Box 2543 Vail, Colorado 81658 (970) 476-8449 Profile: * Problem Solver/Team Player with Proven Leadership Qualities * Superior Interpersonal Skills & Human Relation Skills Education: B.S. Business Administration - Marketing Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia 1992 Fxperience: Nov. 1996- BEAVER CREEK RESORT CONCIERGE, Concierge Avon, Co. Present Plan and coordinate vacation needs fo* guest and homeowners utilizing extensive knowledge of Beaver Creek and tiie Z/ail Vailey. Strong communication and organizational skills a must to be effective in this fast pace environment. June 1995- CLUB NAUTICO OF BAHIA MAR, Manager Ft. Lauderdale, Ff. Sept.1996 Oversaw the daily operations and supervised four employees. Responsible for customer service and public relations thoughout the Ft. Lauderdale area. Successfully developed marketing campaign that resulted in a 20% increase in revenue over prior yeaz. Nov.1994- AAA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, Marketing Director Ft. Lauderdale, Fl. May 1995 Utilized selling and closing techniques to market mortgage savings program for a company recognized in Entrepreneur Magazine's Top 500. Contributed to daily sales training meetings. Dec. 1992- SONNENALP HOTEL, Waiter Vail, Ca Aug. 1994 Employment provided funds required to finance exploration of the westem U.S., including San Diego, Ca., Fairbanks, Ak. and much of the wildemess between. Funded college tuition through the following: 1989-1992 THE FINEST DETAIL, Sole Proprietor Norfolk, Va. and Vienna, Va. Operated auto detailing business part time while full-time student. Business operated full time during summer and following graduation. Solicited clients through direct.marketing, flyers, and personal selling. 1988-1992 Waiter, Various Locations Norfolk, Va. - Developed interpersonal skills and an appreciation for customer service in dealing with the varied personalities represented by the general public. College Acxivities: OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY LACROSSE CLUB President 1991-1992, Vice President 1990, Secretary 1989, Player 1988-1992 Liaison to Recreational Sports Department. During presidency, doubled team's budget, orchestrated and became a charter member of the National College Lacrosse League. Board Member of the Budget Committee. AMERICAN MARKETING ASSOCIATION Vice President 1991-1992 Headed membership committee, print and edited all communications, ensuring ai] deadlines were met. FROM : BERND TISCHER > LUCHT INC PFUNE N0. : 803 886 6334 Dec. 12 1996 08:56PM P1 aang aceW wamalAo. ums oac, ~sme ~e- 3(Si'S1 le=.'~ ~wra p~~ ~ amms :saa rs.~ ~ae mzvm. ~d ¦a ac imm m~e =0°s 1001 6BB 9a7 slag a9mmBV meo e! ~so' ~ a~ee~ m m Nms~I MARKE'I'IIVG & DESIGN, xNC_ Advgnising / Sffies Promotlon PubliC Reletions December 13,1996 Holly MtCutcheon The Tow'n of Vail 75 S. Frontage Rd. Vail, CO 81657 Dear Ms. McCutcheon: Tlnis leaer will scate my intent to parcicipace in the search far. WMB board members. For the Iast fifteen years, I owned and optraud a full service advertaising agency in the Batimore Washingcon Comdor. Threc years ago I sold che agency and semi-xetired. Markecing and Promotioias are my love. I miss doing that a lot. X fcel this vvould be an excellent opportuniry for mt to get baclc into the creative world. Y look £ozward co hearing from the Search Committee Sincereiy, ~ ~ Lai Tischez 0463B Deer Blvd. PO Box 3128 Avon, CO 81620 Tet: 970.845-9465 Fag: 970-949-5441 7050 oakts~d Mine Rd., Satce 220 Coh=hia. Mnrilend 21096 Salt. (301) 381-0606 Waah. (301) 996-2722 FAX (301) 381-3611 Media Safari 'A' 970 926-2781 M12/16196 09:56 AM p 1/1 ]~/~ei . • 1?'1 a Sa f aYZ Post Office Box 4022 Vail, Colorado 81658 media • planNng • services Howard Leavitt December 15,1996 Town of Vail c / o Holly McCutcheon 75 So. Frontage Rd. West Vail, CO 81567 To Whom it May Concern: I would like to submit my name for consideration as a member of the Vail Valley Marketing Board. As a resident of the Valley for over twenty years I have been witness to much of the area's development as a world class ski and summer resort. I have been involved in many aspects of the resort business including restaurant, retail, activity and specialty publishing. I now have my own company, Media Safari Planning Services, a media consulting and planning service, geared toward smaller businesses in the Vail area. For the five years before that I was Vice President of national and regional sales for Pocket Guide Publications. The Pocket Guide is a multi-area visitors guide geared to winter and summer resorts with a total circulation of over one million at its peak. I would be honored to be part of the process by which we drive and create new and excifing business for the Vail Valley. I feel I could bring not just my media experience but the experience of my tenure in the Valley as we seek to fulfill the vision of becoming a year round resort that will create stability for those that have dedicated and committed themselves to creating a life here. I look forward to the opportunity to work together. Sincerely, Howard Leavitt 9 c, ~ kA~ ~ S~ J J ~(`c~Q.c~.1~-c ~ ~ 'L~ c~ ~ S, ~('c..l~¢.,~, (`c~,-{ke~k•~ s Oe` er`, aS ; c.are- F ~ L ~ ~j ~ cv\,C,:~Kcrn r,^ Y"%w C-r wVc-+ c-c.~3--- f, i Pwcryn , C,-...) ~Y1Ce~'Q~, ~ , - J ; A" a t ( ~ ~ ~ I ~ . i I . . . . . . ` ~ a.~...~..~.., X C; rd • r7~6 g Cog GaCCe vAIL Marketing Board Vail, Colo. 81657 This is a request to be considered by the vail Marketing Board ; for a position on the board this coming year. I have been in business ~ in vail for t w e n t y y e a r s. I o w n t h e S q u a s h B l o s s o m i n t h e Lo d g e Promenade and Cogswell Callery in the Creekside building. I was instrumental in forming the vaPl Gallery Association and have been , on the board of Bravo. In my business and with these boards I have ; handted advertising and promotions. I have a degree from Boston ~ University from the School of Public Communications. As a member of the Retail Association I have been asked to apply for this position. I fee! I can be an asset to the group and appreciate your time in considering me for this position. ~ ' SincerelyJ .1ohn G. Cogswell ~ 223 Gore Creek Dr. • Vail, Colorado 81657 • 970/476-1769 . ~~r• y ~•~t~ COgSweCC GaCCery VAIL Marketing Board Vail, Colo. 81657 This is a request to be considered by the vail Marketing Board for a position on the board this coming year. i have been in business in vail for twenty years. 1 own the Squash Blossom in the Lodge Promenade and Cogswell Gallery in the Creekside building. 1 was instrumental in forming the vail Gallery Association and have been on the board of Bravo . ln my business and w+th these boards I have handled advertising and promotions. I have a degree from Boston University from the School of Public Communications. As a member of the Retail Association i have been asked to apply for this position. I feel I can be an asset to the group and appreciate your time in considering me for this position. Sincerely, .1ohn G. Cogswell 223 Gore Creek Dr. • Vail, Colorado 81657 • 970J476-1769 ~ PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION VS. FRACTIONAL COMPARISON P.A. FRACTIONAL OWNER ACCOMMODATIONS Rents Co-Owns ENTRY PRICE Rack rate High VESTED INTEREST/ No Yes RETURN COMMITMENT LOYALTY Questionable High USE Single Visit Multiple Visits/Seasons RESORT REFERRALS Maybe Yes AVERAGE YEAR-ROUND 67% 80-90% OCCUPANCY ADDITIONAL SPENDING Standard Standard + 20% IN COMMIJNITY MAINTENANCE RESERVE Discretionary Fully Escrowed 12/17/96 I " MEMORANDUM FILE COPY TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Department of Community Devefopment DATE: November 25, 1996 SUBJECT: A request to amend Section 18.22.030, Conditional Uses, of the Vail Municipal Code to add "time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units" as a conditional use in the Public Accommodation Zone District and " - establishing additional conditional use factors for time-share estate units, fractional fee units and/or time-share license units in the Public Accommodation Zone District. Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., represented by Gordon Pierce Planner: George Ruther 1. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., represented by Gordon Pierce, is requesting to amend the Town of Vail Municipal Code. The applicant is proposing that Section 18.22.030 of the Municipal Code be amended to allow time-share estate units, ftactional fee units and time- share license units as conditional uses in the Public Accommodation Zone District and to create Section 18.22.035, Conditional Uses - Factors applicable. The time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units would be allowed subject to the issuance oi a conditional use permit, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 18.60 of the Municipal Code. 11. BACKGROUND The applicanYs request relates to a future proposal to redevelop the Austria Haus property. The Austria Haus is located at 242 East Meadow Drive. The Austria Haus was originally constructed in the mid-1960's as an inn to accommodate destination skiers. In 1979, the Austria Haus was purchased by the Faessler family who planned to redevelop the property into the Sonnenalp Hotel. In 1984, Ordinance #8 was approved by the Vail Town Council establishing Special Development District #12. Special Development District #12 adopted an approved development plan for the redevelopment of the Austria Haus. The approved development pfan was never implemented, and has since expired, but instead, the Austria Haus underwent a remodel. Since the completion of the remodel, the Austria Haus has served as an annex to the Sonnenatp Bavaria Haus located at 20 Vail Road. The Austria Haus has 37 hotel rooms (accommodation units) with approximately "75 pillows" and is operated approximately eight months each year by the Sonnenalp Hotel. There is a small restaurant and bar in the Austria Haus that serves its guests and a retail outlet on the east end of 1 , the building. The hotel rooms are marginal in size (300 sq. ft. average) and lack certain " amenities, by today's accommodation standards. The current proposal to redevelop the property intends to provide considerably more "pillows" over a twelve month period, as well as create approximately 10,000 square feet of new commercial space. The applicant has proposed that a percentage of the project be offered as time-share interval ownership units. The applicant has also proposed to accommodate a portion of the required parking and loading/delivery in an underground parking structure. According to the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail, the applicanYs property is currently zoned Public Accommodation. The Public Accommodation Zone District is intended to provide sites for {odges and residential accommodations for visitors, together with such pub{ic and semi- public facilities and limited professional offices, medical facilities, private recreation, and related visitor oriented uses as may be located in the same district. The Public Accommodation District is intended to provide sites for lodging units to densities not to exceed 25 dwelling units per acre. The Public Accommodation Zone District does not permit time-share interval units. Interval ownership is currently allowed only in the High Density Multi-Family Zone District pursuant to Ordinance #8, Series of 1981. There is no vacant property in the High Density Multi- Family Zone District. All properties currently zoned High Density Multi-Family are developed. In order for a time-share project to be constructed in the High Density Multi-Family Zone District, a developer would either have to convert an existing condominium or hotel project, or undergo an entire redevelopment of the property. A third possible alternative for the construction of a time- share project in the Town of Vail, would be to rezone an existing parcel of properry from its current zoning to High Density Multi-Family. Chapter 18.04 of the municipal code provides definitions of time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units. According to Sections 18.04.420, 18.04.430 and 18.04.440, time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units are defined as foliows: Time-share estate units: Means either an interval estate or a timespan estate. A timespan estate is a combination of an undivided interest in a present estate in fee simple in a unit, the magnitude of the interest having been established by the time of the creation of the timespan estate either by the project instruments or by the deed conveying the timespan estate; and an exclusive right to possession and occupancy of the unit during an annually recurring period of time defined and established by a recorded schedule set forth or referred to in the deed conveying the timespan estate. Additionally, an interval estate is an estate for four years terminating on a date certain, during which years titled to a timeshare unit circulates among the interval owners in accordance with a fixed schedule, vesting in each such interval owner in turn for a period of time established by the said schedule, with the series thus established recurring annually until the arrival of the date certain. Fractional fee units: Is defined as a tenancy in common interest in improved real property, including condominiums, created or held by persons, partnerships, corporations, or joint ventures or similar entities, wherein the tenants in common have formerly arranged by oral or written agreement or understanding, either recorded or unrecorded allowing for the use and occupancy of the property by one or more co-tenants to the exclusion of one or more co-tenants during any period, whether annually reoccurring or not which is binding upon any assignee or future owner of a fractionaf fee interest or if said agreement 2 y . continues to be in any way binding or affective upon any co-tenant for the sale of any interest in the property. Time-share license units: Shall be defined as a contractual right to exclusive occupancy of specified premises. Provided that the occupancy of the premise is divided into five or more separate time periods extending over a term of more than two years. The premises may consist of one parcel, unit or dwelling, or any of several parcels, units or dwellings identified at the time the license is created to be identified later. No timeshare is a timeshare license if it meefs the definition of interval estate, timeshare or timespan estate. 111. CONFORMITY WITH THE TOWN'S RELEVANT PLANNING DOCUMENTS In considering the proposed text amendment to the Zoning Code, to allow time-share in the Public Accommodation Zone District as a conditional use, staff reviewed several relevant pianning documents. Specifically, staff reviewed the Municipal Code, the Goals and Objectiyes stated in the Vail Land Use Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan. VAIL MUNICIPAL CODE Section 18.22.010 of the Vail Municipal Code, identifies the purpose of the Public Accommodation Zone District. According to the purpose statement, " The Public Accommodation Zone District is intended to provide sites for lodges and residential accommodations for visitors, together with public and semi-public facilities and limited professional offices, medical facilities, private recreation, and related visitor-oriented uses as may appropriately located in the same district. The Public Accommodation District is intended to insure adequate light, air, open space and other amenities commensurate with lodge uses, and to maintain the desirable resort qualities of the district by establishing appropriate site development standards. Additional non-residential uses are permitted as conditional uses which enhance the nature of Vail as a winter and summer recreation and vacation community, and where permitted, are intended to function compatibly with the high density lodging character of the district. The Public Accommodation Zone District is intended to provide sites for lodging units at dehsities not to exceed 25 dwelling units per acre." According to Section 18.22.020, of the Town of Vail Municipal Code, the following uses shall be permitted in the Public Accommodation Zone District: a) Ladges, including accessory eating, drinking, recreational or retail establishments located within the principal use and not occupying more than 10% of the total Gross Residential Floor Area of the main structure or structures on the site; b) Additional accessory dining areas may be located on an outdaor deck, porch or terrace. 3 Chapter 18.60 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code provides a framework for making decisions on requests for conditional use permits within the Town of Vail. Section 18.60.010 identifies the purpose and limitations of a conditional use permit. According to the Purpose Statement, "!n order to provide the flexibility necessary to achieve the objectives of the Zoning Code, specified uses are permitted in certain zone districts subject to the granting of a conditional use permit. Because of their unusual or special characteristics, conditional uses require review and evaluation so that they may be located properly with respect to the purposes of the Zoning Code and with respect to their effects on surrounding properties. The review process prescribed in Chapter 18.60 is intended to assure " compatibility and harmonious development between conditional uses and surrounding properties and the Town of Vail at large. Uses listed as conditional uses in the various zone districts may be permitted subject to such conditions and limitations as the Town of Vail may prescribe to insure that the location and operation of the conditional uses will be in accordance with development objectives of the Town and will not be detrimental to other uses or properties. Where conditions cannot be devised to achieve these objectives, applications for conditionat use permits shall be devised." Section 18.60.060, Criteria-Findings, identifies the Criteria and Findings which the Planning Commission shall consider with respect to the proposed use before acting upon a conditional use permit application. A. The following Criteria-Findings shall be considered by the Planning and Environmental Commission when acting upon a request for a conditional use permit: 1. Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of the Town; 2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public facilities needs; 3. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the street and parking areas; 4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses; 5. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the proposed use; 6. The Environmental Impact Report concerning the proposed use, if an Environmental Impact Report is required by Chapter 18.56; 7. Prior to the approval of a conditional use permit for a time-share estate, fractional fee or time-share license proposal, the applicant shall submit to the Town a list of all owners of existing units within the project or building; and written statements from 100% of the owners of existing units indicating their approval, without condition, 4 -y 4 r of the proposed time-share, fractional fee, or time-share license. No - written approval shall be valid if it is signed by the owner more than 60 days prior to the date of filing the application for a conditional use. Alt buildings which presentiy contain time-share units, would be exempt from this provision. B. The Planning Commission shall make the following findings before granting a conditional use permit: 1. That the proposed location of the use in accordance with the purposes of this Ordinance and the purposes of the zone district in which the site is Iocated; 2. That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; 3. That the proposed use would comply with each of the applicable provisionS of this title. VAIL LAND USE PLAN Chapter II of the Vail Land Use Plan identifies goals and policies for land use within the Town of Vail. The goals articulated by the Vail Land Use Plan reflect the desires of the citizenry. The goals are to be used as adopted policy guidelines in the review process for new development proposals. Staff has identified the following goals (listed below), as being relevant to the applicanYs proposaL• 1. General Growth / Development 1~1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 1_3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1_4 The original theme of the old Village core should be carried into new development in the Village core through continued implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan. 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 2. Skier / Tourist Cortcerns 2_1 The community should emphasize its role as a destination resort while accommodating day skiers. 5 - J 2.2 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders ` ~ should work together closely to make existing facilities and the Town function more efficiently. 2_4 The community should improve summer recreational and cultural opportunities to encourage summer tourism. 3. Commercial . 3.1 The hotel bedbase should be preserved and used more efficiently. 3_,2 The Village and Lionshead areas are the best location for hotels to serve the future needs of destination skiers. 3_4 Commercial growth should be concentrated in existing commercial areas to accommodate both local and visitor needs. 4. Village Core / Lionshead 4_2 Increased density in the core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is preserved through the implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail _ Village Master Plan. 5. Residential 5_2 Quality time-share units shou/d be accommodated to he/p keep occupancy rates up. 6. Additional goals related to other elements of the comprehensive plan. Economic Development The Town of Vail should consider developing some type of inechanism to controt tenant mix, so that a batance between tourist and convenient type of commercial uses is maintained. VAIL VILLAGE MASTER PLAN: On January 16, 1990, the Vail Town Council adopted the Vail Village Master Plan. The plan is intended to guide the Town in developing land use laws and policies for coordinating development by the public and private sectors in the Vail Village area and in implementing community goals for public improvements. It is intended to result in ordinances and policies that will preserve and improve the unified and attractive appearance of Vail Village. Most importantly, the Master Plan shall serve as a guide to the staff, review boards, and Town Council in analyzing future proposals for development in Vail Village and in legislating effective ordinances to deal with such development. For the citizens and guests of Vail, the Master P1an provides a clearly defined set of goals and objectives outlining how the Village will grow in the future. The Vail Village Master Plan is intended to be consistent with the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan, and along with the Guide Plan it underscores the importance of the relationship between the built environment and public spaces. The Vail Village Master Plan has been adopted as an element of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. 6 i Goals for Vail Village are summarized in six major goaf statements. The goal statements are designed to establish a framework, or direction, for the future growth of the Village. A series of objectives outlines specific steps that can be taken towards achieving each stated goal. Policy statements have been developed to guide the Town's decision making in achieving each of the stated objectives, whether it be through the review of private sector development proposals or in implementing capital improvement projects. Goal #1 Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving the unique architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity. 12 Objective:. Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities. 1.2.1 Policy: Additiona( development may be aNowed as identified by the action plan as is consistent with the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban Design Guide Plan. Gaal #2 To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year-round economic health and viability for the Village and for the community as a whole. 2.1 Objective: Recognize the variety of land uses found in the 10 sub- areas throughout the Village and allow for development that is compatible with these established land use patterns. 2.1.1 Policy: The Zoning Code and development review criteria shall be consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the Vail Village Master Plan. 2.3 Objective: Increase the number of residential units available for short- term, overnight accommodations. 2.3.1 Policy: The development of short-term accommodation - units is strongly encouraged. Residential units that are developed above existing density levels-are required to be designed or managed in a manner that makes them available for short-term overnight rentaL 2.4 Objective: Encourage the development of a variery of new commercial activiry where compatible with existing land uses. 2.4.1 Policy: Commercial infill development consistent with established horizontal zoning regulations shall be encouraged to provide activiry generators, accessible green spaces, public plazas, and streetscape improvements to the pedestrian network throughout the Village. 7- 3 2.4.2 Policy: Activity that provides nightlife and evening entertainment for both the guest and the community shall be encouraged. 2.5 Objective: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to better serve the needs of our guests. 2.6 Objective: Encourage the development of affordable housing units through the efforts of the private sector. 2.6.1 Policy: Employee housing units may be required as part of ' any new or redeveloped project requesting density over that allowed by existing zoning. 2.6.2 Policy: Employee housing shall be developed with appropriate restrictions so as to insure their availability and affordability to the local work force. Goal #3 To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking experience throughout the Village. 3.1 Objective: Physicaify improve the existing pedestrian ways by landscaping and other improvements. 3.1.1 Policy: Private development projects shall incorporate streetscape improvements (such as paver treatments, landscaping, lighting and seating areas), along adjacent pedestrian ways. 3.2 Objective: Minimize the amount of vehicular traffic in the Village to the greatest extent possible. 3.2.1 Policy: Vehicular traffic will be eliminated or reduced to absolutely minimal necessary levels in the pedestrianized areas of the Village. 3.3 Objective: Encourage a wide variety of activities, evenis and street life along pedestrian ways and plazas. 3.4 Objective: Develop additional sidewalks, pedestrian-only walkways and accessible green space areas, including pocket parks and stream access. 3.4.2 Policy: Private development projects shall be required to incorporate new sidewalks along streets adjacent to the project as designated in the Vail Village Master Plan and/or Recreation Trails Master Plan. 8 Goal #4 To preserve existing green space areas and expand green space opportunities. 4.1 Objective: Improve existing open space areas and create new plazas with green space and pocket parks. Recognize the different roles of each type of open space in forming the ' overall fabric of the Village. 4.1.2 Policy: The development of new pubtic plazas, and . improvements to existing plazas (public art, streetscape features, seating areas, etc.), shall be encouraged to reinforce their roles as attractive people places. Goal #5 Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency and aesthetics of the transportation and circulation system throughout the Village. 5.1 Objective: Meet parking demands with public and private parking facilities. 5.1.1 Policy: For new development that is located outside of the Commercial Core 1 Zone District, on-site parking shall be provided (rather than paying into the parking fund) to meet any additional parking demand as required by the Zoning Code. 5.1.5 Policy: Redevelopment projects shall be strongly encouraged to provide underground or visually concealed parking. Goal #6 To insure the continued improvement of the vital operational elements of the Village. 6.1 Objective: Provide service and delivery facilities for existing and new development. Sub-Area #1-8 Sonnenalp(Austria Haus)/Slifer Square Commercial infill along East Meadow Drive, to provide stronger edge ta street and commercial activity generators to reinforce the pedestrian loop throughout the Village. Focus of infill is to provide improvements to pedestrian cireulation with a separated walkway, including buffer, along East Meadow Drive. Accommodating on-site parking and maintaining the bus route along Meadow Drive, are two significant constraints that must be addressed. One additional floor of residential/lodging may also be accommodated on this site. 9 IV. PROPOSED TEXT CHANGES As stated previously, the applicant is proposing to add "time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units" as conditional uses to Section 18.22.030, Conditional Uses and staff is proposing to create Section 18.22.035, establishing additional conditional use factors to consider when reviewing a request for a conditional use permit for a time-share estate, fractional fee and/or time-share license unit in the Public Accommodation Zone District. The proposed changes to Section 18.22.030 are shown as shadetl below: Chapter 18.22 Public Accommodation 18.22.030 Conditional uses The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the Public Accommodation Zone District, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60: A. Professional and business offices; B. Hospitals, medical and dental clinics, and medical centers; C. Private clubs and civic, cultural and fraternal organizations; D. Ski lifts and tows; E. Theaters, meeting rooms, and convention facilities; " F. Public or commercial parking facilities or structures; G. Public transportation terminals; H. Public utility and public service uses; 1. Public buildings, grounds and facilities; J. Public or private schools, K. Public parks and recreational facilities; L. Churches; M. Eating, drinking, recreational, or retail establishments not occupying more than 10% of the total Gross Residential Floor Area of a main structure or structures located on the site in a non-conforming multi-family dwelling; N, Major arcade, so long as it does not have any exterior frontage on any public way, street, walkway, or mall area; 0. Bed and Breakfast as further regulated by Section 18.58.310; P. Type IIJ EHU as defined in Section 18.57.060; 0. Type IV EHU as defined in Section 18.57.70; R. Time-share estates uniis, fractionaE fee:units and tirne-share licenss units as _ f _ urt . h _ er regulated by Sec#ion >y 8.22:t}35. ADDITIONAL CONDITIONAL USE FACTORS Staff is proposing to establish additional conditional use factors to be used in the consideration of a conditional use permit request for time-share projects in the Public Accornmodation Zone District. According to discussions with the applicant and Planning and Environmental Commission, staff believes that time-share projects could be compatible with the existing permitted, conditional and accessory uses allowed in the Public Accommodation Zone District given that certain factors are met. A similar approach is currently used in the Commercial Core 1 Zone District to address conditional uses. 10 Staff proposes that the following additional conditional use factors be established through the creation of a new section in Chapter 1822. The proposal is as follows: 18.22.035 Conditional Uses - Factors applicable. In addition to the criteria found in Chapter 18.60, an application for a conditional use permit for a time-share estate unit, fractional fee unit, and/or a time-share license unit in the Public Accommodation Zone District shall be evaluated subject to the following review criteria: A. A proposed time-share project shall have no adverse effects upon the hotel bed base (i.e., overnight accommodations) in the Town of Vail. In determining the effects of a time-share project on the hotel bed_base, consideration shall be given to the proposed on-site relationship and ratio of time-share units to accommodation units, the availability of lock-offs units and the short-term rental opportunities of tirne-share units when not in use by the owner(s). The cumulative effects of the proposed time-share project and other existing time-share projects shall also be considered. B. A proposed time-share project shaD have no adverse effects upon the gross square footage of existing accommodation units in the Town of Vail. Consideration shall be given to allowing for the inclusion of the proposed lock-off square footage as accommodation unit square footage. C. A proposed time-share project shall have no adverse impacts upon adjacent properties. Adverse impacts to consider may include, but are not limited to, impacts to traffic, parking, noise, the character of the area, load i ng/delivery and trash facilities. D. A proposed time-share project shall have no adverse effects upon the nature of Vail as a world-class resort offering winter and summer recreation and vacation opportunities. The cumulative effects of the proposed time-share project and other existing time-share projects shall also be considered. E. The proposed time-share projecYs ability to provide accommodation -and recreation amenities to its guests and the Town of Vail. Amenities to consider include, but are not limited to, proximity of the project to public transportation, availability of conference/meeting room space, availability of hotel-type services, proximity of the project to retail shops and eating/drinking establishments, on-site recreation facilities and proximity to community recreation facilities. F. The applicanYs ability to guarantee the future adequacy, stability and continuiry of a high-level of management and maintenance of the time- share project. G. Whether an office of the managing agent is located locally, or on the site of the time-share project. H. Whether a front desk operation, operating 24 hours a day and seven days a week, with reservation/registration capabilitie.s, exists within the proposed time-share project. 11 r I. The effects of a proposed time-share project upon the goals, objectives and policies prescribed in the adopted Town of Vail Comprehensive Plan Elements and the proposal's compliance with the Municipal Code. J. A proposed time-share project shall have no adverse effects upon the present and future supply of Town services, including, but not limited to, loss of tax revenue and increased demand on municipal facilities. The cumulative effect of the proposed time-share project and other existing time-share projects shall also be considered. K. The proposed duration of time-share intervals. L. Whether the developer of the time-share project plans to offer resale assistance and/or exchange program affiliation to time-share interval purchasers. M. Prior to the approval of a conditional use permit for a time-share estate, fraction fee or time-share license unit proposal, the applicant shall submit to the Town a list of all owners of existing units within the project or building; and written statements from 100% of the owners of existing units indicating their approval, without condition, of the proposed time-share, fractional fee, and/or time-share license. No written approval shall be valid if it is signed by the owner more than 60 days prior to the date of filing the application for a conditional use. All buildings which presently contain time-share interval units, are exempt from this provision. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department staff recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission recommend approval to the Town Council of the applicant's request to amend Section 18.22.030, Public Accommodation, Conditional Uses, of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. Staff recommends that the PEC make the finding that adding this conditional use, with the additional review criteria to those uses listed in the Public Accommodation (PA) Zone District, wi11 continue to ensure compatibility with other uses in the PA Zone District. The staff's recommendation of approval is conditioned upon the approval of the proposed Additional Conditional Use factors listed in Section IV of this memorandum. f:\everyone\pec\memos\sonnenalp.n25 12 ~ MEMORANDUM AIL- TO: Plannmg and EnvironmentaI Commission FROM: Department of Community Development DATE: November 11, 1996 SUBJECT: A worksession to discuss a request to amend Section 18.22.030, Conditivnal Uses, of the Vai! Municipal Code to add "time-share estate units, fractionaf fee units and time-share license units" as a conditional use in the Public . Accommodation Zone District. Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., represented by Gordon Pierce Planner: George Ruther 1. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., represented by Gordon Pierce, is requesting a worksession to discuss amending the Town of Vail Municipal Code. The applicant is proposing that Section 18.22.030 of the Municipal Code be amended to allow time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units as conditional uses in the Public Accommodation Zone District. The time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units would be allowed subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 18.60 of the Municipal Code. The areas of Town most affected by the proposed amendment are illustrated on Attachment 1. II. BACKGROUND The applicant's request relates to a future proposal to redevelop the Austria Haus property. The Austria Haus is located at 242 East Meadow Drive. The Austria Haus was originally constructed in the mid-1960's as an inn to accommodate destination skiers. In 1979, the Austria Haus was purchased by the Faessler family who planned to redevelop the property into the Sonnenalp Hotel. In 1984, Ordinance #8 was approved by the Vail Town Council establishing Special Development District #12. Special Developrnent District #12 adopted an approved development plan for the redevelopment of the Austria Haus. The approved development plan was never implemented, and has since expired, but instead, the Austria Haus underwent a remodel. Since the completion of the remodel, the Austria Haus has served as an annex to the Sonnenalp Bavaria Haus located at 20 Vail Road. The Austria Haus has 37 hotel rooms (accommodation units) with approximately "75 pillows" and is operated approximately eight months each- year by the Sonnenalp Hotel. There is a small restaurant and bar in the Austria Haus that serves its guests and a retail outlet on the east end of the building. The hotel rooms are marginal in size (300 sq. ft. average) and lack certain amenities, by today's accommodation standards. 1 - ' The current proposal to redevelop the property intends to provide considerably more "pillows" over a twelve month period, as well as create approximately 10,000 square feet of new commercial space. The applicant has proposed that a percentage of the project be offered as time=share interval ownership units. The applicant has also proposed to accommodate a portion of the required parking and loading/delivery in an underground parking structure. According to the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail, the applicanYs property is currently zoned Public Accommodation. The Public Accommodation Zone District is intended to provide sites for lodges and residential accommodations for visitors, together with such public and semi- public facilities and limited professional offices, medical facilities, private recreation, and related visitor oriented uses as may be located in the same district. The Public Accommodation bistrict is intended to provide sites for lodging units to densities not to exceed 25 dwelling units per acre. The Public Accommodation Zone District does not permit time-share interval units. Interval ownership is currently allowed only in the High Density Multi-Family Zone District pursuant to Ordinance #8, Series of 1981. There is no vacant property in the High Density Multi- Family Zone District. All properties currently zoned High Density Multi-Family are developed. In order for a time-share project to be constructed in the High Density Multi-Family Zone District, a developer would either have to convert an existing condominium or hotel project, or undergo an entire redevelopment of the property. A third possible alternative for the construction of a time- share project in the Town of Vail, would be to rezone an existing parcel of properry from its current zoning to High Density Multi-Family. Chapter 18.04 of the municipal code provides definitions of time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units. According to Sections 18.04.420, 18.04.430 and 18.04.440, time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units are defined as follows: Time-share estate units: Means either an interval estate or a timespan estate. A timespan estate is a combination of an undivided interest in a present estate in fee simple in a unit, the magnitude of the interest having been established by the time of the creation of the timespan estate either by the project instruments or by the deed conveying the timespan estate; and an exclusive right to possession and occupancy of the unit during an annually recurring period of time defined and established by a recorded schedule set forth or referred to in the deed conveying the timespan estate. Additionally, an interval estate is an estate for four years terminating on a date certain, during which years titled to a timeshare unit circulates among the interval owners in accordance with a fixed schedule, vesting in each such interval owner in turn for a period of time established by the said schedule, with the series thus established recurring annually until the arrival of the date certain. Fractional fee units: Is defined as a tenancy in common interest in improved real property, including condominiums, created or held by persons, partnerships, corporations, or joint ventures or similar entities, wherein ihe tenants in common have formerly arranged by oral or written agreement or understanding, either recorded or unrecorded allowing for the use and occupancy of the property by one or more co-tenants to the exclusion of one or more co-tenants during any period, whether annually reoccurring or not which is binding upon any assignee or future owner of a fractional fee interest or if said agreement continues to be in any way binding or affective upon any co-tenant for the sale of any interest in the property. 2 Time-share license units: Shall be defined as a contractual right to exclusive occupancy of specified premises. Provided that the occupancy of the premise is divided into five or more separate time periods extending over a term of more than two years. The premises may consist of one parcel, unit or dwelling, or any of several parcels, units or dwellings identified at the time the license is created to be identified later. No timeshare is a timeshare license if it meets the definition of interval estate, timeshare or timespan estate. III. HISTORY OF TIME-SHARING IN VAIL The State of Colorado has adopted regulations regulating the sale of time-shares. For the most part, the regulations adopted by the State of Colorado are concerned with financial disclosures, regulation of sales practices and disclosures, regulation of sales practices and classification of time-sharing as a subdivision of property. The regulations adopted by the State of Colorado are intended more to protect the consumer, than as regulations designed to have impacts on the community level. The State has granted the authority for local governments to adopt ordinances intended to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the community, which includes time- share projects. On July 15, 1980, the Vail Town Council adopted five ordinances to regulate time-sharing projects in the Town of Vail. A summary of each of the ordinances is listed beiow: • Ordinance # 25, Series of 1980, an ordinance amending Chapter 17 (Subdivision Regulations) of the Town of Vail Municipal Code, providing a new definition for the term subdivision; and setting forth prohibited and unlawful acts and remedies for violations of this ordinance, and amending the procedure for appealing a decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission to the Town Council. In the opinion of the then Vail Town Council, the present subdivision regulations were not sufficient to deal with the problem presented by time-sharing projects and therefore, the procedure for subdividing property associated with time-sharing projects should be amended. Ordinance #25 further went on to require that time-sharing projects go through the subdivision review process. Prior to the adoption of Ordinance #25, Series of 1980, the Town of Vail did not have any regulations requiring that time-sharing projects be reviewed through the subdivision process. • Ordinance # 26, Series of 1980, providing for the addition of new conditional uses in certain zone districts. Ordinance #26 was esta6lished to protect the balance between accommodations for visitors to the Town, Vail residents and seasonal employees from the unregulated development of time-sharing projects. It was the opinion of the then Vail Town Council that the zoning regulations in place in 1980 did not sufficiently address the problems presented by time-sharing. The ordinance amended Title 18 of the Municipal Code allowing time-share estate units, fractionai fee units and time-share license units in the High Density Multi-Family, Public Accommodation, Commercial Core 1 and Commercial Core 2 Zone Districts, subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit. • Ordinance # 27, Series of 1980, an ordinance providing for certain disclosure requirements for time-sharing projects; providing for public offering statements and setting forth requirements for such offering statements: for the escrowing of deposits or reservations of a time-share unit; and setting forth remedies for violations of said 3 ordinance. According to the minutes of the July 15, 1980 Vail Town Council meeting, the Council had determined that the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the Town of Vail would best be served by requiring the disclosure of certain facts and information relating to time-sharing projects, and to the perspective purchasers of time-share units. The amendment established disclosure requirements when offering time-share project sales and established a minimum amount of information that the developer must disclose in a public offering statement. • Ordinance # 28, Series of 1980, an ordinance providing for registration of time-share projects with the Department of Community Development of the Town of Vail; the requirements for applications for registration of said units; remedies for violation of this . ordinance and standards for the revocation of such registration. The Vail Town Council adopted Ordinance # 28 resolving that the Council had determined that the existing ordinances and regulations of the Town were insufficient to cope with the problems presented by time-sharing and that the registration of time-sharing units is necessary to protect and preserve the public health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the community. • Ordinance # 29, Series of 1980, an ordinance defining time-share broker and time-share salesman: providing that any person, firm, partnership, association or corporation that engages in the business or capacity of time-share broker or time-share salesman, must obtain a license from the Town Clerk; setting forth the requirements for the application for such license; providing for the display of such license, license fees and setting forth standards and procedures for the suspension or revocation of such license. Similar to the other ordinances relating to time-sharing projects in the Town of Vail, the then Town Council found that these additional regulations were deemed necessary to protect and preserve the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the Town of Vail and that time-share brokers and time-share salesrnan be licensed by the Town of Vail. • On February 3, 1981, the Vail Town Council adopted Ordinance #8, Series of 1981, amending Ordinance #26, Series of 1980, providing for the removal of time-sharing from the conditional use section of the Public Accommodation, Commercial Core 1 and Commercial Core 2 Zone Districts. It was the then Vail Town Council's opinion that permitting the conversion and development of time-sharing projects in said zone districts would upset the balance between accommodations for visitors, Vail residents and seasonal employees and that the amendment was necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the community. IV. CONFORMITY WITH THE TOWN'S RELEVANT PLANNING DOCUMENTS In considering the proposed text amendment to the Zoning Code, to allow time-share in the Public Accommodation Zone District as a conditional use, staff reviewed several relevant planning documents. Specifically, staff reviewed the Municipal Code, the Goals and Objectives stated in the Vai1 Land Use Plan and ihe Vail Village Master Plan. VAIL MUNICIPAL CODE ~ Section 18.22.010 of the Vail Municipal Code, identifies the purpose of the Public Accommodation Zone District. According to the purpose statement, " The Public Accommodation Zone District is intended to provide sites for lodges and residential accommodations for visitors, together with public and semi-public facilities and limited professional offices, medical facilities, private recreation, and related visitor-oriented uses as may appropriately located in the same district. 4 ~ The Public Accommodation District is intended to insure adequate light, air, open _ space and other amenities commensurate with lodge uses, and to maintain the desirable resort qualities of the district by establishing appropriate site development standards. Additional non-residential uses are permitted as conditional uses which enhance the nature of Vail as a winter and summer recreation and vacation community, and where permitted, are intended to function compatibly with the high density lodging character of the district. The Public Accommodation Zone Disirict is intended to provide sites for lodging units at densities not to exceed 25 dwelling units per acre." According to Section 18.22.020, of the Town of Vail Municipal Code, the following uses shall be permitted in the Public Accommodation Zone District: a) Lodges, including accessory eating, drinking, recreational or retail establishments located within the principal use and not occupying more than 10% of the total Gross Residential Floor Area of the main structure or structures on the site; b) Additional accessory dining areas may be located on an outdoor deck, porch or terrace. VAIL LAND USE PLAN Chapter II of the Vail Land Use Plan identifies goals and policies for land use within the Town of Vail. The goals articulated by the Vail Land Use Plan reflect the desires of the citizenry. The goals are to be used as adopted policy guidelines in the review process for new development proposals. Staff has identified the following goals (listed below), as being relevant to the applicanYs proposal: 1. General Growth / Development 1_1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 1_3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1_4 The original theme of the old Village core should be carried into new development in the Village core through continued implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan. 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 2. Skier / Tourist Concerns 2_1 The community should emphasize its role as a destination resort while accommodating day skiers. 2_2 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders should work together closely to make existing facilities and the Town function more efficiently. 5 2_4 The community should improve summer recreational and culturai opportunities to encourage summer tourism. 3. Commercial 3.1 The hotel bedbase should be preserved and used more efficiently. 3_2 The Village and Lionshead areas are the best location for hotels to • serve the future needs of destination skiers. 3.4 Commercial growth should be concentrated in existing commercial areas to accommodate both local and visitor needs. 4. Village Core / Lionshead 4_2 Increased density in the core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is preserved through the implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan. 5. Residential 5.2 Quality time-share units should be accommodated to he/p keep occupancy rates up. 6. Additional goals related to other elements of the comprehensive plan. Economic Development The Town of Vail should consider developing some type of inechanism to control tenant mix, so that a balance between tourist and convenient type of commercial uses is maintained. VAIL VILLAGE MASTER PLAN: On January 16, 1990, the Vail Town Council adopted the Vail Village Master Plan. The plan is intended to guide the Town in developing land use laws and policies for coordinating development by the public and private sectors in the Vail Village area and in implementing community goals for public improvements. It is intended to result in ordinances and policies that will preserve and improve the unified and attractive appearance of Vail Village. Most importantly, the Master Plan shall serve as a guide to the staff, review boards, and Town Council in analyzing future proposals for development in Vail Village and in legislating effective ordinances to deal with such development. For the citizens and guests of Vail, the Master Plan provides a clearly defined set of goals and objectives outlining how the Village will grow in the future. The Vail Village Master Plan is intended to be consistent with the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan, and along with the Guide Plan it underscores the importance of the relationship between the built environment and public spaces. The Vail Village Master Plan has been adopted as an element of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. 6 Goals for Vail Village are summarized in six major goai statements. The goal statements are designed to establish a framework, or direction, for the future growth of the Vitlage. A series of objectives outlines specific steps that can be taken towards achieving each stated goal. Policy statements have been developed to guide the Town's decision making in achieving each of the stated objectives, whether it be through the review of private sector development proposals or in implementing capital improvement projects. Goal #1 Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving the unique architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity. 1.2 Objective: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities. 1.2.1 Policy: Additional development may be allowed as identified by the action plan as is consistent with the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban Design Guide Plan. Goal #2 To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year-round economic health and viability for the Village and for the community as a whole. 2.1 Objective: Recognize the variety of land uses found in the 10 sub- areas throughout the Village and allow for development that is compatible with these established land use patterns. 2.1.1 Policy: The Zoning Code and development review criteria shall be consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the Vail Village Master Plan. 2.3 Object'rve: Increase the number of residential units available for short- term, overnight accommodations. 2.3.1 Policy: The development of short-term accommodation units is strongly encouraged. Residential units that are developed above existing density levels are required to be designed or managed in a manner that makes them available for short-term overnight . rentaL 2.4 Objective: Encourage the development of a variety of new commercial activity where compatible with existing land uses. 2.4.1 Policy: Commercial infill development consistent with established horizontal zoning regulations shall be encouraged to provide activity generators, accessible green spaces, public plazas, and streetscape improvements to the pedestrian network throughout the Village. 7 2.4.2 Palicy: Activity that provides nightlife and evening - entertainment for both the guest and the community shall be encouraged. 2.5 Objective: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to . better serve the needs of our guests. 2.6 Objective: Encourage the development of affordable housing units through the efforts of the private sector. 2.6.1 Policy: Employee housing units may be required as part of any new or redeveloped project requesting density over that allowed by existing zoning. 2.6.2 Poiicy: Employee housing shall be developed with appropriate restrictions so as to insure their availabiliry and affordability to the local work force. Goal #3 To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking experience throughout the Village. 3.1 Objective: Physically improve the existing pedestrian ways by landscaping and other improvements. 3.1.1 Policy: Private development projects shall incorporate streetscape improvements (such as paver treatments, landscaping, lighting and seating areas), along adjacent pedestrian ways. 3.2 Objective: Minimize the amount of vehicular traffic in the Village to the greatest extent possible. 3.2.1 Policy: Vehicular traffic will be eliminated or reduced to absolutely minimal necessary levels in the pedestrianized areas of the Village. 3.3 Objective: Encourage a wide variety of activities, events and street life along pedestrian ways and plazas. 3.4 Objective: Develop additional sidewalks, pedestrian-only walkways and accessible green space areas, inctuding pocket parks and stream access. 3.4.2 Policy: Private development projects shali be required to incorporate new sidewalks along streets adjacent to , the project as designated in the Vail Village Master Plan and/or Recreation Trails Master Plan. 8 , ~ Goal #4 To preserve existing green space areas and expand green space opportunities. 4.1 Objective: Improve existing open space areas and create new plazas with green space and pocket parks. Recognize the different roles of each type of open space in forming the overaU fabric of the Village. 4.1.2 Policy: The development of new public plazas, and . improvements to existing plazas (public art, " streetscape features, seating areas, etc.), shall be encouraged to reinforce their roles as attractive people places. Goal #5 increase and improve the capacity, efficiency and aesthetics of the transportation and circulation system throughout the Village. 5.1 Objective: Meet parking demands with public and private parking facilities. 5.1.1 Policy: For new development that is located outside of the Commercial Core 1 Zone District, on-site parking shall be provided (rather than paying into the parking fund) to meet any additional parking demand as required by the Zoning Code. 5.1.5 Policy: Redevelopment projects shall be strongly encouraged to provide underground or visually concealed parking. Goal #6 To insure the continued improvement of the vital operationai elements of the Village. 6.1 Objective: Provide service and delivery facilities for existing and new development Sub-Area #1-8 Sonnenalp(Austria Haus)/Slifer Square Commercial infill along East Meadow Drive, to provide stronger edge to street and commercial activity generators to reinforce the pedestrian loop throughout the Village. Focus of infill is to provide improvements to pedestrian circulation with a separated walkway, including buffer, along East Meadow Drive. Accommodating on-site parking and maintaining the bus route along Meadow Drive, are iwo significant constraints that must be addressed. One additional floor of residential/lodging may also be accommodated on this site. 9 V. PROPOSED TEXT CHANGES ; As stated previously, the applicant is proposing to add "time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units" as conditional uses to Section 18.26.040, Conditional Uses- Generally. These uses would be subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit. The proposed changes are shown as shaded' below: Chapter 18.22 Public Accommodation 18.22.030 Conditional uses The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the Public Accommodation Zone District, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60: A. Professional and business offices, B. Hospitals, medical and dental clinics, and medical centers; C. Private clubs and civic, cultural and fraternal organizations; D. Ski lifts and tows; E. Theaters, meeting rooms, and convention facilities, _ F. Public or commercial parking facilities or structures; G. Public transportation terminals, H. Public utility and public service uses, 1. Public buildings, grounds and facilities; J. Public or private schools; K. Public parks and recreational facilities; L. Churches; M. Eating, drinking, recreational, or retail establishments not occupying more than 10% of . the total Gross Residential Floor Area of a main structure or structures located on the site in a non-conforming multi-family dwelling; N, Major arcade, so iong as it does not have any exterior frontage on any public way, street, walkway, or mall area; 0. Bed and Breakfast as further regulated by Section 18.58.310; P. Type I II EHU as defined in Section 18.57.060; Q. Type -IV EHU as defined in Section 18.57 70; R: Ttme-share e~ urrrts; tr.ad#ional #eemnits and tim+e shar~ Iicense un6: VI. SUMMARY of DISCUSSION ISSUES At the October 28, 1996 Planning and Environmental Commission meeting, a worksession was held to discuss the applicanYs proposal to amend the Zoning Code to allow "timeshare" as a conditional use in the Commercial Core 2 Zone District. As the discussion was a worksession, staff did not evaluate the proposal, nor provide a formal recommendation. Staff did, however, identify issues which were discussed with the Planning and Environmental Commission and the applicant. Each of the issues is described below and a summary of the discussion has been provided. 1. PROPERTY MAINTENANCE ISSUES. ISSUE: The cost of maintenance may be higher on a time-share project than on wholly-owned units in a 10 condominium building. It has been reported that furniture, carpeting, appliances and other furnishings must be replaced more often in time-share units. This is especially applicable to time-share units which are sold on shorter intervals. The implication is that a higher levef of maintenance and management services must be available on an on-going basis for time-share projects to insure a high level of quality. In addition to the additional needs for maintenance on time-share projects, there is also a need to reserve adequate time when maintenance can occur. Problems potentially occur, when time- share intervals are sold on a one week basis. By selling fifty-two (52), one week intervals during the year, there is little or no time for the proper maintenance of a time-share project. STAFF CONCERN: Staff has questioned, how time-shares in the Town of Vail could be regulated to insure adequate and proper maintenance of the project. Staff would not support a proposed time-share project which utilizes a 52-week interval approach. SUMMARY: The State of Colorado has passed legislation which, in part, regulates the maintenance and upkeep of time-share projects. The regulations were passed to protect consumers from extremely high maintenance costs of time-share projects. The state regulations require that a developer of a time-share project establish an escrow account providing a cash reserve for maintenance and upkeep of the time-share project. 2. AVAILABILITY OF LOCK-OFF UNITS IN A MANAGED RENTAL PROGRAM. ISSUE: Time-share units can be designed to accommodate lock-off units. Lock-off units provide the community benefit of additional "pillows," and they also provide an additional return on an investment opportunity for time-share owners. If a time-share owner purchases an interest in a multiple bedroom unit, and does not desire to utilize all the bedrooms, they can then have the opportunity of returning the unused bedrooms (lock-offs) to a rental program. STAFF CONCERN: Staff would recommend that lock-off units be required as a part of every individual time-share unit. Additionally, staff recommends that each lock-off unit be managed through a rental program when not in use. Staff feels that by providing lock-off units, and managing the availability of the lock-off units in a rental program when noi in use, a time-share project can significantly increase the availability of accommodation units in the Town of Vail. SUMMARY: Staff continues to recommend that lock-off units be required as a part of every individual time- share unit. Some of the Planning and Environmental Commission members felt that it is important to maintain a quality "bed base" in the Town to accommodate guests and visitors. Concerns were expressed by certain members that such a requirement may impede a developer's ability to construct a time-share project as each development site is different and requires different mixtures of uses to make a project successful. No consensus was reached. 3. MINIMUM NUMBER OF BEDROOMS AND SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL LOCK-OFF UNITS ASSOCIATED WITH TIME-SHARE UNITS. ISSUE: In discussing the development of time-share units, staff believes it is important that any time- share unit proposed in the Town of Vail be a'multiple bedroom unit with a minimum square footage requirement. 11 J" STAFF CONCERN: Staff's desire to see multiple bedroom time-share units with a minimum square footage requirement should increase the availabiliry of lock-off accommodation-type units, thus increasing the Town's bed base. SUMMARY: Staff continues to believe it is important that any new time-share unit in the Town of Vait be a multiple bedroom unit with a minimum square footage and/or bedroom requirement for lock-off units. The applicant has stated that one reason the existing Austria Haus is not as successful as it could be is because the accommodation units are under-sized and outdated. The applicant has indicated that according to industry standards, an accommodation unit must be at least 375 - 450 square feet in size. Several Planning and Environmental Commission members felt that it • was important for all time-share units to be multiple bedroom units with lock-off type units attached. These members believed that such units improve the quality of the accommodations and provide possible incentives for owners to make unused lock-off units available as overnight accommodations, thus increasing the potential "bed base". 4. RATIO OF TIME-SHARE UNITS TO ACCOMMODATION UNITS ISSUE: The availability of accommodation units has always been a goal of the community. The Public Accommodation Zone District encourages the construction of accommodation units. Accommodation units are allowed uses. At this time, the Zoning Code does not restrict the maximum number of time-share units allowed on a property. Since time-share units are considered dwelling units, a project with all time-share units could be a possibility. STAFF CONCERN: Staff would like to discuss with the Planning and Environmental Commission the merits of requiring a ratio of accommodation units to time-share units. Specifically, staff is recommending that there be a ratio of accommodation units to time-share units established. This would insure that accommodation-type units woutd remain available to visitors of the Town of Vail and not become only time-share units. Staff believes tiiat it is possible to draft review criteria which address the need for a mix of accommodation units and time-share units on a broad basis. SUMMARY: The Planning and Environmental Commission discussed the issue as to whether a ratio of time- share units to accommodation units should be established. After a lengthy discussion on the issue, the members felt that such a requirement is not necessary, and in fact, impedes developers from constructing the best project possible for any given site. The Commission members further felt that such a ratio would be difficult to establish and would be best determined when reviewed on a case-by case basis. The members felt that any standard created must be flexible to accommodate changing trends and needs. 5. REQUIREMENT THAT ALL TIME-SHARE UNITS BE OFFERED THROUGH A RENTAL PROGRAM WHEN NOT IN USE. ISSUE: . Like unused lock-off units, a community benefit can be realized through the availability of time- share units when they are not occupied by the owner. The developer or managing agent of a time-share project and the time-share unit owner, can realize additional profits through the rental of time-share units as overnight accommodations. 12 r STAFF CONCERN: Staff believes that unused time-share units should be offered and made available through a rental program. Specifically, staff would like to discuss the merits of requiring that all time-share units, when not in use, be made available to the general public. Again, this requirement helps attain the goal of maintaining a strong bed base whenever possible. SUMMARY: Staff continues to believe that a rental program should be established to offer time-share units to the general public, when not in use. Several Planning and Environmental Commission members expressed their desire to see the same. It was determined that in order for a rental program to be successful, the time-share building must include facilities to support the program. For instance, a front desk, reservation services and other amenities generally associated with hotel- type accommodations. 6. INTEGRATION OF TIMESHARE OWNERSHIP WITH WHOLLY-OWNED CONDOMINIUMS THE CONVERSION OF EXISTING WHOLLY-OWNED CONDOM(NIUMS TO TIMESHARE OWNERSHIP. ISSUE: As discussed above, the integration of time-share ownership with wholly-owned condominiums can result in conflicts of use. As mentioned earlier, the type of use associated with time-share units combined in close proximity with less intensively used, wholly-owned condominiums, may not be desirable and could possibly pose problems. Again, time-sharing is a vacation-type of use, whereas condominiums are usually a residential use, or at ieast, less intensive vacation- type of use. Other resort communities in the country have experienced the conversion of wholly-owned condominium projects to time-share ownership. For example, in the State of Hawaii, numerous wholly-owned condominium projects have been converted into interval ownership. In Fiawaii, as a result of the conversion of wholly-owned condominium projects into time-share ownership, local ordinances have been adopted requiring 100% of the condominium owners to approve of the proposed conversion to time-share units. This does two things. First, it insures that 100% of the condominium ownership agrees to the conversion of any or all of the condominium units to time-share units. Numerous examples of conflicts arising between wholly-owned and time-share interval ownership have been documented. Specifically, the more intensive vacationing-type of use of time-share ownership may conflict with the more residential condominium uses. Conflicts arise out of complaints concerning long hours af "partying, noise and disregard for the qualiry of the premises." Secondly, conflicts have arisen over the management and maintenance of the property. While time-share owners have a sense of ownership and pride in the property they purchased, they may not be as heavily tied to their investment as a condominium owner. Therefore, conflicts resulting from management and quality upkeep of property result. STAFF CONCERN: Staff would like to discuss with the Planning and Environmental Commission and the applicant, the potential negative impacts associated with the integration of time-share ownership and wholly-owned condominiums. SUMMARY: The applicant is not proposing to integrate time-share units with whotly-owned condominiums. Staff's concern is related more to other possible projects developed in Town. The Planning and Environmental Commission felt that under certain circumstances, time-share units and condominiums could be integrated. The members believed that integration could occur if a buffer between uses were proposed. In general, integration of residential uses was not considered to be desirable by the Commission. 13 r7. MANAGEMENT OF TIMESHARE PROJECTS ~ ISSUE: The management of a quality time-share project is ciosely reiated to the high fevef of maintenance required for time share. It is in the best interest of the community to insure that time-share projects are maintained at a high level and in a professional manner. In staff's opinion, this is most easily accomplished through quality, long-term management of the entire project. A high quality management program is necessary as the large number of interval owners involved in a single, time-share project can be extensive. Without proper management, the overwhelming number of owners of the property could result in future conflicts. Discussions with a branch broker of a local time-share project, indicate that the most common form of management of interval ownership projects is a form of Board of Directors. The Board of Directors functions very similar to a Homeowner's Association or Condominium Association. The Board, in most instances, is aided by a management company to help in the maintenance and management of day-to-day operations. As with any association governed by a Board of Directors, the Directors are eiected or appointed by the ownership and represent and are responsible to the ownership as a whole. The Board of Directors would be responsible for the overall maintenance and management decisions of the time-share project. STAFF CONCERN Staff recommends that in the case of the Austria Haus specifically, the applicant discuss their proposed management scheme for the project, as the developers are proposing that there would be a mixture of accommodation units and time-share units. A Board of Directors or management agency needs to be responsible for the management of both the accommodation units and the time-share units. Staff believes that conflicts arise when the management of the time-share units differ from the management of the accommodation units. SUMMARY: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc. will be the manager of the commercial and hotel accommodation units at the Austria Haus. It is the applicanYs desire to manage the time-share element as well. The owners association will be set up initially by the developers, to be managed by Sonnenalp Properties, Inc. The owners association reserves the right to ultimately determine who manages the time-share element. The Planning and Environmental Commission felt that it was important that any project be maintained and operated at a high level and in a professional manner. The Commission also felt it is equally important that whomever manages the time-share element must also manage the accommodation units. This is especially important to ensure that unused time-share units and/or lock-off units are made available to the general public when not in use. 8. THE C NVER ION F THE 7 EXI TIN AC OMM DATION NIT AT THE AUSTRIA HAUS TO 20 TIME-SHARE UNITS / LOCK-OFF UNITS AND 23 ACCOMMODATION UNITS. ISSUE There are currently 37 accommodation units within the Austria Haus. At this time, the developer is proposing to redevelop the Austria Haus to include 20 time-share units sold on a five-week interval basis, with 20 attached one-bedroom lock-off units and an additional 23 hotel-type accommodation units. STAFF CONCERN: Staff would like to discuss the impacts associated with the reduction in accommodation units currently existing on the Austria Haus property. While it is possible that 43 of the units in the new 14 ` Austria Haus could be utilized as accommodation units (includes lock-off units), it is very unlikely that all 20 lock-off units would be made available. The staff is concerned as to whether this results in a negative impact that should be mitigated by the developer of the time=share project. SUMMARY: This issue was not discussed at great lengths. The Planning and Environmental Commission members agreed that accommodation units are an important component with regard to Vail's economic future. The Commission members reserved specific comment on this issue until a more thorough review of the proposed redevelopment project takes place. 9. POSSIBLE POSITNE AND NEGATIVE IMPACTS OF TIME SHARE OWNERSHIP IN THE TOWN OF VAIL. Positive Impacts of Time-Sharing: • Activity during the "shoulder seasons" tends to increase due to an increase in year-round occupancy. • The attraction of revenue-generating tourists. • Efficient utilization of resources. This is the "warm beds" concept. • More pride of ownership with time-share units than with accommodation units. ' • Increased levels of occupancy. • Increased resort exposure due to the extensive number of interval owners. Negative Impacts of Time-Sharing: • Some resort areas have experienced poor, distasteful sales practices of sales agents trying to sell time-share weeks. Because of the number of buyers needed to sell out a project, an intensive and costly sales program must be developed. The problems associated with sales generally comes in the area of solicitation of sales on streets, at the ski base areas, shopping malls, and the use of high-pressure sales tactics. • Possible conflicts between wholly-owned condominium owners and time-share interval owners. • Possible loss of true accommodation units. • Possible difficulty in collection of property taxes due to the extensive number of owners. Sources Report: Results of Research on Time-Sharinq Aegu/ations, P. Patten, Comm. Dev. Dept., 1980 The 1995 Worldwide Resort Time-Share /ndustry Time-Share Ownership Benefits: RPSults from a Nationwide Survey of Time-Share Owners, 1995 15 . VII. DISCUSSION ISSUES As a result of the worksession meeting with the Planning and Environmental Commission held on Monday, October 28, 1996, the staff has identified additional issues which we would like to discuss with the Planning and Environmental Commission and the applicant. As this is a worksession to discuss the applicant's proposal to amended the conditional use section of the Public Accommodation Zone District, rather than the Commercial Core 2 Zone District, staff will not be providing a formal recommendation at this time. Each of the newly identified issues of the applicant's amended proposal are identified below: 1. Additional Conditional Use Factors ISSUE: Staff has considered establishing additional conditional use factors to be used in the consideration of a proposed conditional use permit request for time-share projects in the Public Accommodation Zone District. According to discussions with the applicant and Planning and Environmental Commission, it was felt that time-share projects could be compatible with the permitted, conditional and accessory uses allowed in the Public Accommodation Zone District given that certain factors are met. This approach is currently used in the Commercial Core 1 Zone District. STAFF CONCERN: Staff has evaluated the idea and would propose the following: 18.22.035 Conditional Uses - Factors applicable. • In considering, in accordance with Chapter 18.60, an application for a conditional use permit for a time-share estate unit, fractional fee unit, and/or a time-share license unit in the Public Accommodation Zone District, the following development factors shall be applicable: 0tPP;C0*W c A. CEffects of the proposal on the hotel bed base in the core areas; ffects of the proposal on the 4*we needs of the community as a year- round resort; IAtC,ov~rnepr4~tio•J4. C. Effects of the proposal of noise, traffic, maintenance, etc, upon adjacent properties, The enhancement of the proposal on the nature of Vail as a winter and summer recreation and vacation community. Ameyy; kft. FiRurr -'D~~K I.ocl~. 2. Calr.~~latic~n of Lock-off Units in'(erms o ensi , and Gross Residential Floor Area. ISSUE: The Town of Vail Municipal Code defines a"dwelling uniY', "any room or group of rooms in a two-family or multiple-family building with kitchen facilities designed for or used by one family as an independent housekeeping unit. A dwelling unit in a multiple-family building may include one attached accommodation unit (lock-off) no larger than one-third (113) of the total floor area of the dwelling. According to this definition, the staff has interpreted that a time-share estate unit, fractional fee unit and/or time-share license unit, which includes kitchen facilities, shaA be classified as a dwelling unit. Staff's interpretation is based upon the fact that, in the case of the Austria Haus proposal, each interval unit will be designed with kitchen facilities for use as an independent housekeeping unit. According to this interpretation, each time-share unit would be entitled to one 16 lock-off unit. =F .50, 5o- The Town of Vail Municipal Code also provides a definition of an accommodat/n~unit. According to the definition section of the code, an "accommodation unit" is defined as, "Any room or group of rooms without kitchen facilities designed for or adapted to occupancy by guests and accessible from common corridors, walks, or balconies without passing ihrough another accommodation unit or dwelling unit. Each accommodation unit shall be counted as one-half (112) of a dwe/ling unit tor purposes of calculating "allowable units per acre STAFF CONCERN: Staff would like to discuss with the Planning and Environmental Commission and the applicant the merits of applying the existing definitions to a time-share project. Staff feels that the existing definitions and interpretations provide the necessary controls on density and square footage for - development in the Public Accommodation Zone District. Staff further believes that the existing language provides density incentives for developers to incorporate lock-off units into time-share projects without impacting a developer's ability to design a project that is sensitive to the site and is flexible to the demands of each particular development. The existing definitions also allow for developers and the Town to maintain and enhance the hotel bed base within the community (a goal identified in numerous planning documents adopted by the Town of Vail). 3. Subdivision Review Process and Reaistration Requirernents for Time-share Proiects ISSUE: At the October 28, worksession meeting, a question was raised as to the procedure for establishing a time-share project in accordance with the Town's adopted regulations. Chapter 17.22 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code outlines the procedure for subdividing a time- share project. A time-share project is subdivided according to the Condominium and Townhouse Plat procedure. A condominium and townhouse plat is approved by the Zoning Administrator following the review by the Public Works Department. The plat shalt be reviewed under two general criteria: A. The Zoning Administrator will check to make sure the buildings and other improvements were built as per plans approved by the Design Review Board; B. The Town Engineer will review the survey data for compliance with requirements found in Section 17.16.130C (finat plat requirements/procedures). Chapters 5.01 and 5.02 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code provide regulations applicable to time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units. Chapter 5.01 establishes disclosure requirements for the public offering of time-share projects. The requirements are intended to protect the consumer from inaccurate or fraudulent representations of time-share developers. Chapter 5.02 of the Municipal Code establishes the procedures for registering a time-share project with the Town of Vail Department of Community Development. Pursuant to Ordinance # 28, Series of 1980, all time-share projects constructed and operated in the Town of Vail must be registered. The intended purpose of the registration requirement is to insure that any time-share project offered for sale in the Town of Vail is in compliance with the Town's adopted codes and policies. 17 . 4. A roximate Number of Units in the Town of Vail Directly Imoacted bv the Pronosed Amendment. ISSUE: At the October 28, worksession meeting a question was raised as to how many units in the Town of Vail would be directly impacted by the proposed amendment. Staff reviewed all the properties in the Town currently zoned Public Accommodation, or was a Special Development District with Public Accommodation as the underlying zoning. According to our research, approximately 736 units could be impacted in 15 buildings. It is important to note that it is not entirely likely that all 736 would be approved to be converted to time-share. Vtll. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Since this is a worksession to discuss the proposed text amendments to Section 18.22.030 of the Municipal Code, and not a request for a formal recommendation from the Planning and Environmental Commission to the Town Council, staff will not be providing a recommendation at this time. Staff will, however, provide a recommendation on the applicanYs proposal at the time of final review. Currently, the applicant is scheduled to reappear before the Planning and Environmental Commission for final review on Monday, November 25, 1996. f:\everyone\pec\memos\cc2exta.o28 18 APPENDIX A The information in Appendix A is derived from timeshare industry materials submitted by the applicant to the Community Development Department. The information is intended to provide a basic understanding of the socio-economic impacts of the timeshare industry as reported by tMe American Resort Development Association (ARDA). Complete copies of the source materials have been attached for reference. • A recent study which examined industry performance from 1980-1994 revealed that sales in 1994 reflected an increase of 870% over the $490 mi!lion in world-wide sales reported in 1980. In addition, the 560,000 vacation intervals sold in 1994, reflected a jump of 460% over the interval sales reported in 1980, which were approximately 100,000. At year end 1994, roughly 4.9 million vacation intervals had been purchased since 1980, resulting in sales volume of over $36 billion during the 15-year period. • The U.S. is the leader in the worldwide vacation ownership resort market, with 1,546, or 37.3%, of the resorts, 1,538,000 or 48.9%, of the "owners owning in the area," and 1,648,000, or 52.4% of the owners of the "owners residing in the area." • A recent study revealed that 75.3% of the U.S. vacation owners are satisfied with their vacation purchases, with 76.6% of study participants responding that their expectations at the time of purchase have been "matched or exceeded," and 75.4% reporting that they recommend vacation ownership to others. Of the more than 2,000 owners surveyed, 67.5% responded that vacation ownership has had a positive impact on their lives. • Most important among the motivation faetors sited by the owners surveyed in their decision to purchase vacations were the high standards of the resorts at which they own and exchange, followed by the flexibility offered through vacation exchange opportunities, and the value of vacation ownership. Of those surveyed, 83.1% responded that the "certainty of quality accommodations" was a"very importanY' factor in their vacation ownership purchase. Other motivational factors included good vatue, location of the resort, company credibility and savings of dollars on vacation costs. • Rccording to a February, 1995 telephone survey of 1,000 U.S. households not owning recreational property, 60.3% of the Americans believed they have a chance of purchasing recreational prope[ry of some type during the next 10 years. The survey results revealed that over 1/3 of Americans rate their chance of purchasing during the next 10 years as "about 50/50 or better," compared to 15.5% in 1990 and 25.5% in 1993. • Americans interested in purchasing recreational property prefer the standard 2-bedroom unit, sleeping 6, over any other single unit size, by more than a 2:1 margin (45.7%). , • The average vacation owner has purchased 1.7 weeks of vacation ownership. Although nearly 2/3 (58.8%) of vacation owners own a single week of time-share, the number of weeks owned increases the longer the average respondent is involved with vacation ownership. • The vast majority of vacation owners (73.9%) initiaiiy purchase just one interval. However, more than 1/4 (26.1 of those who first purchase between 1992 and 1994, now own more than one time-share interval, indicating that many first time purchasers are purchasing more than one interval at the time of initial purchase. f:\everyone\pec\memos\cc2exta.o28 19 r . While in the local resort area, the average time-share visitor party spends- considerably - more than the traditional traveler, averaging expenditures of $1,130.00 during the course of the entire stay. • According to more than 2,000 U.S. vacation owners surveyed in 1995, the largest single category of expenditure while in the resort area is for food and drink consumed in restaurants, bars and other hospitality establishments. • Vacation owners surveyed in 1995 average 6.9 nights in the resort area during their most recent time-share vacation. • Vacation owners often extend their stay in the local resort area, by spending additional nights in another form of accommodation. Of those surveyed in 1995, the average owner spends an additional 4.7 nights in the local resort area during hislher most recent time- share vacation by staying in a hotel, with friends or relatives, or elsewhere. • U.S. owners surveyed in 1994 reported that they anticipate returning to the resort where their time-share interval is located an average of 6.4 times during the next 10 years. By contrast, those same owners responded that, had they not purchased a time-share in the resort area, they would have returned to the resort area an average of only 3.2 times. • Compared to all households in the United States, vacation owners have higher incomes, are older, and have higher levels of formal education than those of the average American consumer. As an aggregate profile, the typical vacation owner is an upper middle- income, middle-age, well educated couple. • A recent study revealed that the average household income of vacation owners is over $63,000, having risen dramatically from 1978 when the average income was $23,000. Over 1/2 of all vacation owners have household incomes between $15,000 and $100,000. • 86.5% of all vacation owners are couples, and 13.5% are single individuals. • As of December 31, 1994, 1,648,000 U.S. households owned a vacation. The top three states in terms of total number of vacation owners are California, New York and Florida. Sources: The 1995 Wor/dwide Resort Time-Share Industry Time-Share Purchasers: Who They Are. Whv They Buv, 1995 Edition. Time-Share Ownership Benefits: Resulis from a Nationwide SurvPy of Time-Share Owners, 1995 The American Recreationa/ Property Survey: 1995 f:\everyone\pec\memoslcc2exta.o28 20 MEMORANDUM . TO: Planning and Environmental Commission ~ FROM: Department of Community Development DATE: October 28, 1996 SUBJECT: A worksession to discuss a request to amend Section 18.26.040, Conditional Uses, of the Vail Municipal Code to add "time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units" as a conditional use the Commercial Core 2 Zone District. Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., represented by Gordon Pierce Planner. George Ruther 1. DESCRIPTION OF TNE REQUEST The appJicant, Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., represented by Gordon Pierce, is requesting a worksession to discuss amending the Town of Vail Municipal Code. The applicant is proposing that Section 18.26.040 of the Municipal Code be amended to allow time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units as conditional uses in the Commercial Core 2 Zone District. In general, the areas of Town most affected by the proposed amendment include Lionshead and the Village Center Building, as each of these areas is zoned Commercial Core 2. The time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units would be allowed subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 18.60 of the Municipal Code. II. BACKGROUND The applicanYs request relates to a future proposal to redevelop the Austria Haus property. The Austria Haus is located at 242 East Meadow Drive. The Austria Haus was originally constructed in the mid-1960's as an inn to accommodate destination skiers. In 1979, the Austria Haus was purchased by the Faessler family who planned to redevelop the property into the Sonnenalp Hotel. Y In 1984, Ordinance #8 was approved by the Vail Town Council establishing Special Development District #12. Special Development District #12 adopted an approved development plan for the redevelopment of the Austria Haus. The approved development plan was never implemented, and instead, the Austria Haus underwent a remodel. Since the completion of the remodel, the Austria Haus has served as an annex to the Sonnenalp Bavaria Haus located at 20 Vail Road. The Austria Haus has 37 hotel rooms (accommodation units) with approximately "75 pillows" and is operated approximately eight months each year by the Sonnenalp Hotel. There is a small restaurant and bar in the Austria Haus that serves its guests and a retail outlet on the east end of the building. The hotel rooms are marginal in size ( 300 sq. ft. average) and lack certain amenities, by today's accommodation standards. 1 The current proposai to redevelop the property intends to provide considerabiy more "piilows" over a twelve month period, as well as create approximately 10,000 square feet of new commercial space. The applicant has proposed that a percentage of the project be offered as timeshare interval ownership units. The applicant has also proposed to accommodate a portion of the required parking and loading/delivery in an underground parking structure. According to the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail, the applicanYs property is currently zoned Public Accommodation. The Public Accommodation Zone District is intended to provide sites for lodges and residential accommodations for visitors, together with such public and semi- public facilities and limited professional offices, medical facilities, private recreation, and related visitor oriented uses as may be located in the same district. The Public Accommodation District is intended to provide sites for lodging units to densities not to exceed 25 dwelling units per acre. The Public Accommodation Zone District does not permit time-share interval units. Interval ownership is currently allowed only in the High Density Multi-Family Zone District pursuant to Ordinance #8, Series of 1981. There is no vacant property in the High Density Multi- Family Zone District. All properties currently zoned High Density Multi-Family are developed. In order for a time-sharing project to be constructed in the High Density Multi-Family Zone District, a developer would either have to convert an existing condaminium or hotel project, or undergo an entire redevelopment of the property. A third possible alternative for the construetion of a time- sharing project in the Town of Vail, would be to rezone an existing parcel of property from its current zoning to High Density Multi-Family Chapter 18.04 of the municipal code provides definitions of time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units. According to Sections 18.04.420, 18.04.430 and 18.04.440, time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units are defined as follows: Time-share estate units: Means either an interval estate or a timespan estate. A timespan estate is a combination of an undivided interest in a present estate in fee simple in a unit, the magnitude of the interest having been established by the time of the creation of the timespan estate either by the project instruments or by the deed conveying the timespan estate; and an exclusive right to possession and occupancy of the unit during an annually recurring period of time defined and established by a recorded schedule set forth or , referred to in the deed conveying the timespan estate. Additionally, an interval estate is an estate for four years terminating on a date certain, during which years titled to a timeshare unit circulates among the interval owners in accordance with a fixed schedule, vesting in each such interval owner in turn for a period of time established by the said schedule, with the series thus established recurring annually until the arrival of the date certain. Fractional fee units: Is defined as a tenancy in common interest in improved real property, including condominiums, created or held by persons, partnerships, corporations, or joint ventures or similar entities, wherein the tenants in common have formerly arranged by oral or written agreement or understanding, either recorded or unrecorded allowing for the use and occupancy of the property by one or more co-tenants to the exclusion of one or more co-tenants during any period, whether annuatly reoccurring or not which is binding upon any assignee or future owner of a fractional fee interest or if said agreement continues to be in any way binding or affective upon any co-tenant for the sale of any interest in the property. ~ Time-share license units: Shall be defined as a contractual right to exclusive occupancy of specified premises. Provided that the occupancy of the premise is divided into five or more separate time periods extending over a term of more than two years. The premises may consist of one parcel, unit or dwelling, or any of several parcels, units or dwellings identified at the time the license is created to be identified later. No timeshare is a timeshare license if it meets the definition of interval estate, timeshare or timespan estate. 111. HISTORY OF TIME-SHARING IN VAIL The State of Colorado has adopted regulations regulating the sale of time-shares. For the most part, the regulations adopted by the State of Colorado are concerned with financial disclosures, regulation of sales practices and disclosures, regulation of sales practices and classification of time-sharing as a subdivision of properry. The regulations adopted by the State of Colorado are intended more to protect the consumer, than as regulations designed to have impacts on the community level. The State has granted the authority for local governments to adopt ordinances intended to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the community, which includes time- share projects. On July 15, 1980, the Vail Town Council adopted five ordinances to regulate time-sharing projects in the Town of Vail. A summary of each of the ordinances is listed below: • Ordinance # 25, Series of 1980, an ordinance amending Chapter 17 (Subdivision Regulations) of the Town of Vail Municipal Code, providing a new definition for the term subdivision; and setting forth prohibited and unlawful acts and remedies for violations of this ordinance, and amending the procedure for appealing a decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission to the Town Council. In the opinion of the then Vail Town Council, the present subdivision regulations were not sufficient to deal with the problem presented by time-sharing projects and therefore, the procedure for subdividing property associated with time-sharing projects should be amended. Ordinance #25 further went on to require that time-sharing projects go through the subdivision review process. Prior to the adoption of Ordinance #25, Series of 1980, the Town of Vail did not have any regulations requiring that time-sharing projects be reviewed through the subdivision process. • Ordinance # 26, Series of 1980, providing for the addition of new conditional uses in certain zone districts. Ordinance #26 was established to protect the balance between accommodations for visitors to the Town, Vail residents and seasonal employees from the unregulated development of time-sharing projects. It was the opinion of the then Vail Town Council that the zoning regulations in place in 1980 did not sufficiently address the problems presented by time-sharing. The ordinance amended Title 18 of the Municipal Code allowing time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units in the High Density Multi-Family, Public Accommodation, Commercial Core 1 and Commercial Core 2 Zone Districts, subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit. • Ordinance # 27, Series of 1980, an ordinance providing for certain disclosure requirements for time-sharing projects; providing for public offering statements and setting forth requirements for such offering statements: for the escrowing of deposits or reservations of a time-share unit; and setting forth remedies for violations of said ordinance. According to the minutes of the July 15, 1980 Vail Town Council meeting, the 3- 9Councii had determined that the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the Town of Vail would best be served by requiring the disciosure of certain facts and information relating to time-sharing projects, and to the perspective purchasers of time-share units. The amendment established disclosure requirements when offering time-share project sales and established a minimum amount of information that the developer must disclose in a public offering statement. • Ordinance # 28, Series of 1980, an ordinance providing for registration of time-share projects with the Department of Community Development of the Town of Vail; the requirements for applications for registration of said units; remedies for violation of this ordinance and standards for the revocation of such registration. The Vail Town Council adopted Ordinance # 28 resolving that the Council had determined that the existing ordinances and regulations of the Town were insufficient to cope with the problems presented by time-sharing and that the registration of time-sharing units is necessary to protect and preserve the public health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the community. • Ordinance # 29, Series of 1980, an ordinance defining time-share broker and time-share salesman: providing that any person, firm, partnership, association or corporation that engages in the business or capacity of time-share broker or time-share salesman, must obtain a license from the Town Clerk; setting forth the requirernents for the application for such license; providing for the display of such license, license fees and setting forth standards and procedures for the suspension or revocation of such license. Similar to the other ordinances relating to time-sharing projects in the Town of Vail, the then Town Council found that these additional regulations were deemed necessary to protect and preserve the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the Town of Vail and that time-share brokers and time-share salesman be licensed by the Town of Vail. • On February 3, 1981, the Vail Town Council adopted Ordinance #8, Series of 1981, amending Ordinance #26, Series of 1980, providing for the removal of time-sharing from the conditional use section of the Public Accommodation, Commercial Core 1 and Commercial Core 2 Zone Districts. It was the then Vail Town CounciPs opinion that permitting the conversion and development of time-sharing projects in said zone districts would upset the balance between accommodations for visitors, Vail residents and seasonal employees and that the amendment was necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the community. IV. CONFORMITY WRH THE TOWN'S RELEVANT PLANNING DOCUMENTS In considering the proposed text amendment to the Zoning Code, to allow time-share in Commercial Core 2 as a conditional use, staff reviewed several relevant planning documents. Specifically, staff reviewed the Municipal Code, the Goals and Objectives stated in the Vail Land Use Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan. VAIL MUNICIPAL CODE Section 18.26.010 of the Vail Municipal Code, identifies the purpose of the Commercial Core 2 Zone District. According to the purpose statement, "The Commercial Core 2 Zone District is intended to provide sites for a mixture of multiple dweliings, lodges and commercial establishments in a clustered, unified development. Commercial Core 2 District in accordance with the Vail Lionshead Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations is intended to insure 4 ~ adequate light, air, open space and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of buildings and uses and to maintain the desirable qualities of the district by establishing appropriate site development standards. (Ordinance 21(1980) (2) (Part).)„ VAIL LAND USE PLAN Chapter II of the Vail Land Use Plan identifies goals and policies for land use within the Town of Vail. The goals articulated by the Vail Land Use Plan reflect the desires of the citizenry. The goals are to be used as adopted policy guidelines in the review process for new development proposals. Staff has identified the following goals (listed below), as being relevant to the applicanYs proposaL• 1. General Growth / Development 1_1 Vail should conUnue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. ~1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1_4 The original theme of the ald Village core should be carried into new development in the Village core through continued implernentation of the Urban Design Guide Plan. 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 2. Skier / Tourist Concerns 2.1 The community should emphasize its role as a destination resort while accommodating day skiers. 2_2 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders should work together closely to make existing facilities and the Town function more efficiently. 2.4 The community should improve summer recreational and cultural opportunities to encourage summer tourism. 3. Commercial 3.1 The hotel bedbase should be preserved and used more efficiently. 3.2 The Village and Lionshead areas are the best location for hotets to serve the future needs of destination skiers. 3.4 Commercial growth should be concentrated in existing commercial areas to accommodate both local and visitor needs. 5 4. Village Core / Lionshead 4_2 Increased density in the core areas is acceptable so long as the existing character of each area is preserved through the implementation of the Urban Design Guide Plan and the Vail Village Master Plan. 5. Residential Quality time-share units should be accommodated io he/p keep occupancy rates up. 6. Additional goals related to other elements of the comprehensive plan. Economic Development The Town of Vail should consider developing some type of inechanism to control tenant mix, so that a balance between tourist and convenient type of commercial uses is maintained. VAIL VILLAGE MASTER PLAN: On January 16, 1990, the Vail Town Council adopted the Vail Village Master Plan. The plan is intended to guide the Town in developing land use laws and policies for coordinating development by the public and private sectors in the Vail Village area and in implementing community goals for public improvements. It is intended to result in ordinances and policies that will preserve and improve the unified and attractive appearance of Vail Village. Most importantly, the Master Plan shall serve as a guide to the staff, review boards, and Town Council in analy2ing future proposals for development in Vail Village and in legislating effective ordinances to deal with such development. For the citizens and guests of Vail, the Master Plan provides a clearly defined set of goals and objectives outlining how the Village will grow in the future. The Vail Village Master Plan is intended to be consistent with the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan, and along with the Guide Plan it underscores the importance of the relationship beiween the built environment and public spaces. The Vail Village Master Plan has been adopted as an element of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. Goals for Vail Village are summarized in six major goal statements. The goal statements are designed to establish a framework, or direction, for the future growth of the Village. A series of objectives outlines specific steps that can be taken towards achieving each stated goal. Po{icy statements have been developed to guide the Town's decision making in achieving each of the stated objectives, whether it be through the review of private sector development proposals or in implementing capital improvement projects. Goal #1 Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving the unique architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity. 1.2 Objective: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential and commercial facilities. 6 t 1.2.1 Policy: Additional development may be allowed as identified by the action plan as is consistent with the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban Design Guide Plan. Goal #2 To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year-round economic health and viability for the Village and for the community as a whole. 2.1 Objective: Recognize the variety of land uses found in the 10 sub- areas throughout the Village and allow for development that , is compatible with these established land use patterns. 2.1.1 Policy: The Zoning Code and development review criteria shall be consistent with the overall goals and objectives of the Vail Village Master Plan. ' 2.3 Objective: Increase the number of residential units available for short- term, overnight accommodations. 2.3.1 Policy: The development of short-term accommodation units is strongly encouraged. Residential units that are developed above existing density levels are required to be designed or managed in a manner that makes them available for short-term overnight rentaL 2.5 Objective: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to better serve the needs of our guests. V. PROPOSED TEXT CHANGES As stated previously, the applicant is proposing to add "time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units" as conditional uses to Section 18.26.040, Conditional Uses- Generally. These uses would be subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit. The proposed changes are shown as sh.ded below: Chapter 18.26 Commerciat Core 2 18.26.040 Conditional uses-Generally The following conditional uses shall be permitted, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60: A. Ski lifts and tows; B. Public utility and pub(ic service uses; C. Public buildings, grounds, and facilities; D. Public park and recreation facilities; E. Theaters, meeting rooms and convention facilities; F. Coin-operated laundries; 7 l G. Commercial storage-as long as it is at basement level and does not have any exterior frontage on any public way, street, walkway or mall area; H. Bed and breakfast as further regulated by Section 18.58.310. 1. Television stations-as long as the production room/studio is visible from the street or pedestrian mall and that the television station be "cable-cast" only, requiring no additional antennaS J. T~me-sha~e est at~ un~..;fr~r~al. fe~ i~~ ~n~d. ti~0sf1~e id~~se:::an (Ord.23(1990) § 1: Ord. 31(1989) § 9: Ord. 21(1983) § 1: Ord. 8(1981) § 2(part): Ord: 50(1978) § 8: Ord. 8(1973) § 9.400.) VI. DISCUSSION ISSUES As this a worksession to discuss the applicanYs proposal, staff will not evaluate the proposal at this time. Staff has, however, identified issues which we would like to discuss with the Planning and Environmental Commission and the applicant. Each of the issues is described below. 1. PROPERTY MAINTENANCE ISSUES. The cost of maintenance may be higher on a time-sharing project than on wholly-owned units in a condominium building. It has been reported that furniture, carpeting, appliances and other furnishings must be replaced more often in time-sharing units. This is especially applicable to time-share units which are sold on shorter intervals. The implication is that a higher level of maintenance and management services must be available on an on-going basis for time-sharing projects to insure a high level of quality. In addition to the additional needs for maintenance on time-sharing projects, there is also a need to reserve adequate time when maintenance can occur. Problems potentially occur, when time- share intervals are sold on a one week basis. By selling fifty-two (52), one week intervals during the year, there is little or no time for the proper maintenance of a time-share project. Staff would like to discuss with the Planning and Environmental Commission and the applicant, how time-shares in the Town of Vail could be regulated to insure adequate and proper maintenance of the project. 2. AVAILABILITY OF LOCK-OFF UNITS IN A MANAGED RENTAL PROGRAM. Time-share units can be designed to accommodate lock-off units. Staff would recommend that lock-offtinits be required as a part of every individual time-share unit. Additionally, staff recommends that each lock-off unit be managed through a rental program when not in use. Staff feels that by providing lock-off units, and managing the availability of the lock-off units in a rental program when not in use, can significantly increase the availability of accommodation units in the Town of Vail. While lock-off units provide the community benefit of additional "pillows," they also provide an additional return on an investment opportunity for time-share owners. If a time-share owner purchases an interest in a multiple bedroom unit, and does not desire to utilize all the bedrooms, they can then have the opportuniry of returning the unused bedrooms (lock-offs) to a rental program. 8 : - , 3. MINIMUM NUMBER OF BEDROOMS AND SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL LOCK OFF UNITS ASSOCIATED WITH TIME-SHARE UNIT . In discussing the development of time-share units, staff thought it was important that any time- share unit proposed in the Town of Vail be a multiple bedroom unit with a minimum square footage requirement. Staff's desire to see multiple bedroom time-share units with a minimum square footage requirement increases the availability of lock-off accommodation-type units, thus increasing the Town's bed base. 4. RATIO OF TIME SHARE UNITS TO ACCOMMODATION UNITS / LOCK-OFFS. The availability of accommodation units has always been a goal of the community. The Commercial Core 2 Zone District encourages either, by right, or subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit, the construction of accornmodation units. Accommodation units are allowed uses on all floor levels in the Commercial Core 2 Zone District, with the exception of the garden level. Staff would like to discuss with the Planning and Environmental Commission the merits of requiring a ratio of accommodation units/lock-off units IQ tirne-share units. Specifically, staff is recommending that there be a ratio of accommodation units/lock-off units IQ time-share units established. This would insure that accommodation-type units would remain available to visitors of the Town of Vail and not become only time-share units. 5. REQUIREMENT THAT ALL TIME-SHARE UNITS SE OFFERED THROUGH A RENTAL PROGRAM WHEN NOT IN USE. Like unused lock-off units, staff believes that unused tirne-share units should be offered and made available through a rental program. Specifically, staff would like to discuss the merits of requiring that all time-share units, when not in use, be made available to the general public. Again, this requiremeni helps attain the goal of maintaining a strong bed base whenever possible. A true community benefit can be realized through the additional availability of units, and again, the developer or managing agent of a time-share project realizes additional profits through the rental of time-share units as overnight accommodations. 6. THE CONVERSION OF THE 37 EXISTING ACCOMMODATION UNITS AT THE AUSTRIA HAUS TO 20 TIME-SHARE UNITS / LOCK-OFF UNITS AND 23 ACCOMMODATION UNITS. There are currently 37 accommodation units within the Austria Haus. At this time, the developer is proposing to redevelop the Austria Haus to possibly include 20 time-share units sold on an interval basis, with 20 attached one-bedroom lock-off units and an additional 23 hotel-type accommodation units. Staff would like to discuss the impacts associated with the reduction in accommodation units currently existing on the Austria Haus property. While it is possible that 43 of the units in the new Austria Haus could be utilized as accommodation units (includes lock-off units), it is very unlikely that all 20 lock-off units would be made available. The staff is concerned as to whether this results in a negative impact that should be mitigated by the developer of the time-share project. 9 ~ 7. THE CONVERSION OF EXISTING WHOLLY-OWNED CONDOMINIUMS TO TIMESHARE OWNERSHIP. Other resort communities in the country have experienced the conversion of wholiy-owned condominium projects to time-share ownership. For example, in the state of Hawaii, numerous wholly-owned condominium projects have been converted into interval ownership. In Hawaii, as a result of the conversion of wholly-owned condominium projects into time-share ownership, local ordinances have been adopted requiring 100% of the condominium owners approve of the proposed conversion to time-share units. This does two things. First, it insures that 100% of the condominium ownership agrees to the conversion of any or all of the condominium units to time- share units. Numerous examples of conflicts arising between wholly-owned and time-share interval ownership have been documented. Specifically, the more intensive vacationing-type of use of time-share ownership may conflict with the more residential condominium uses. Conflicts arise out of complaints concerning long hours of "parrying, noise and disregard for the quality of the premises." Secondly, conflicts have arisen over the management and maintenance of the property. While time-share owners have a sense of ownership and pride in the property they purchased, they may not be as heavily tied to their investment as a condominium owner. Therefore, conflicts resulting from management and quality upkeep of property result. 8. INTEGRATION OF TIMESHARE OWNERSHIP WITH WHOLLY-OWNED CONDOMINIUMS. As discussed above, the integration of time-share ownership with wholly-owned condominiums can result in conflicts of use. As mentioned earlier, the type of use associated with time-share combined in close proximity with less intensively used, wholly-owned condominiums, may not be desirable and could possibly pose problems. Again, time-sharing is a vacation-type of use, whereas condominiums are usually a residential use, or at least, less intensive vacation-type of use. Again, staff would like to discuss with the Planning and Environmental Commission and the applicant, the potential negative impacts associated with the integration of time-share ownership and wholly-owned condominiums. 9. MANAGEMENT OF TIMESHARE PROJECTS The management of a quality time-share project is closely related to the high level of maintenance required for time share. It is in the best interest of the community to insure that time-share projects are maintained at a high level and in a professional manner. In staff's opinion, this is most easily accomplished through quality, long-term management of the entire project. A high quality management program is necessary as the large number of interval ownersinvolved in a single, time-share project can be extensive. Without proper management, #he overvvhelming number of owners of the property could result in future conflicts. Discussions with a branch broker of a local time-share project, indicate that the most common form of management of interval ownership projects is a form of Board of Directors. The Board of Directors functions very similar to a Homeowner's Association or Condominium Association. The Board, in most instances, is aided by a management company to help in the maintenance and management of day-to-day operations. As with any association governed by a Board of Directors, the Directors are elected or appointed by the ownership and represent and are responsible to the ownership as a whole. The Board of Directors would be responsible for the overall maintenance and management decisions of the time-share project. 10 ti Staff recomrnends that in the case of the Austria Haus specifically, the applicant discuss their proposed management scheme for the project. In the case of a project like the proposed Austria Haus, there would be a mixture of accommodation units and time-share units. A Board of Directors or management agency needs to be responsible for the management of both the . accommodation units and the tirne-share units. Staff believes that conf(icts arise when the management of the time-share units differ from the management of the accommodation units. 11. POSSIBLE POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE IMPACTS OF TIME SHARE OWNERSHIP IN THE TOWN OF VAIL. Positive Impacts of Time-Sharing: . • Activity during the "shoulder seasons" tends to increase due to an increase in year-round occupancy. • The attraction of revenue-generating tourists. • Efficient utilization of resources. This is the "warm beds° concept. • More pride of ownership with timeshare units than with accommodation units. • Increased levels of occupancy. • Increased resort exposure due to the extensive number of interval owners. Negative Impacts of Time-Sharing: • Some resort areas have experienced poor, distasteful sales practices of sales agents trying to sefl time-share weeks. Because of the number of buyers needed to sell out a project, an intensive and costly sales program rnust be developed. The problems associated with sales generally comes in the area of soficitation of saies on streets, at the ski base areas, shopping malls, and the use of high-pressure sales tactics. • - Possible conflicts between wholly-owned condominium owners and time-share interval owners. • Possible loss of true accommodation units. • Possible difficulty in colleciion of property taxes due to the extensive number of owners. Sources: Report: Results of Research on Time-SharinQ Regulations, P. Patien, Comm. Dev. Dept., 1980 The 1995 Wor/dwide Resort Time-Share Industrv Time-Share Ownership Benefits: Results from a Nationwide Survgv of Time-Share Owners, 1995 VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Since this is a worksession to discuss the proposed text amendments to Section 18.26.040 of the Municipal Code, and not a request for a formal recommendation from the Planning Commission to the Town Council, staff will not be providing a recommendation at this time. Staff will, however, provide a recommendation on the applicant's proposal at the time of final review. Currently, the applicant is scheduled to reappear before the Planning and Environmentat Commission for final review on Monday, November 11, 1996. 11 " i ~ APPENDIX A . The information in Appendix A is derived from timeshare industry materials submitted by the applicant to the Community Development Department. The information is intended to provide a basic understanding of the socio-economic impacts of the timeshare industry as reported by the American Resort Development Association (ARDA). Complete copies of the source materials have been attached for reference. - • A recent study which examined industry performance from 1980-1994 revealed that sales in 1994 reflected an increase of 870% over the $490 million in world-wide sales reported in 1980. In addition, the 560,000 vacation intervals sold in 1994, reflected a jump of 460% over the interval sales reported in 1980, which were approximately 100,000. At year end 1994, roughly 4.9 million vacation intervals had been purchased since 1980, resulting in sales volume of over $36 billion during the 15-year period. • The U.S. is the leader in the worldwide vacation ownership resort market, with 1,546, or 37.3%, of the resorts, 1,538,000 or 48.9%, of the "owners owning in the area," and 1,648,000, or 52.4% of the owners of the "owners residing in the area." • A recent study revealed that 75.3% of the U.S. vacation owners are satisfied with their vacation purchases, with 76.6°ta of study participants responding that their expectatians at the time of purchase have been "matched or exceeded," and 75.4% reporting that they recommend vacation ownership to others. Of the more than 2,000 owners surveyed, 67.5% responded that vacation ownership has had a positive impact on their lives. • Most important among the motivation factors sited by the owners surveyed in their decision to purchase vacations were the high standards of the resorts at which they own and exchange, followed by the flexibility offered through vacation exchange opportunities, and the value of vacation ownership. Of those surveyed, 83.1 % responded that the "certainty of quality accommodations" was a"very importanY' factor in their vacation ownership purchase. Other motivational factors included good value, location of the resort, company credibility and savings of dollars on vacation costs. • According to a February, 1995 telephone survey of 1,000 U.S. households not owning recreational property, 60.3% of the Americans believed they have a chance of purchasing recreational property of some type during the next 10 years. The survey results revealed that over 1/3 of Americans rate their chance of purchasing during the next 10 years as ',about 50/50 or better," compared to 15.5% in 1990 and 25.5% in 1993. • Americans interested in purchasing recreational property prefer the standard 2-bedroom unit, sleeping 6, over any other single unit size, by more than a 2:1 margin (45.7%). • The average vacation owner has purchased 1.7 weeks of vacation ownership. Although nearly 2/3 (58.8%) of vacation owners own a single week af time-share, the number of weeks owned increases the longer the average respondent is involved with vacation ownership. • The vast majority of vacation owners (73.9%) initially purchase just one interval. However, more than 1/4 (26.1%) of those who first purchase between 1992 and 1994, now own more than one time-share interval, indicating that many first time purchasers are purchasing more than one interval at the time of initial purchase. f:\everyone\pec\memos\cc2exta.o28 12 , • While in the local resort area, the average time-share visitor party spends considerably more than the traditional traveler, averaging expenditures of $1,130.00 during the course of the entire stay. • According to more than 2,000 U.S. vacation owners surveyed in 1995, the largest single. category of expenditure while in the resort area is for food and drink consumed in restaurants, bars and other hospitality establishments. • Vacation owners surveyed in 1995 average 6.9 nights in the resort area during their most recent time-share vacation. • Vacation owners often extend their stay in the local resort area, by spending additional nights in another form of accommodation. Of those surveyed in 1995, the average owner spends an additional 4.7 nights in the local resort area during his/her most recent time- share vacation by staying in a hotel, with friends or relatives, or elsewhere. • U.S. owners surveyed in 1994 reported that they anticipate returning to the resort where their time-share interval is located an average of 6.4 times during the next 10 years. By contrast, those same owners responded that, had they not purchased a time-share in the resort area, they would have returned to the resort area an average of only 3.2 times. • Compared to all households in the United States, vacation owners have higher incornes, are older, and have higher levels of formal education than those of the average American consumer. As an aggregate profile, the typical vacation owner is an upper middle- income, middle-age, well educated couple. • A recent study revealed that the average household income of vacation owners is over $63,000, having risen dramatically from 1978 when the average income was $23,000. Over 1/2 of all vacation owners have household incomes between $15,000 and $100,000. ~ 86.5% of all vacation owners are couples, and 13.5% are single individuals. • As of December 31, 1994, 1,648,000 U.S. households owned a vacation. The top three states in terms of total number of vacation owners are California, New York and Florida. Sources The 1995 Wor/dwide Resort Time-Share Indusfrv Time-Share Purchasers: Who They Are. Why The4Buy, 1995 Edition. Time-Share Ownership Benefits: Resulis from a Nationwide Survey of Time-Share Owners, 1995 The American Recreationa/ Property Survey: 1995 f:\everyone\pecMemos\cc2exta.o28 13 . TIMESHARE INFORMATION SHEET Existing Timeshare PrQjects in Vail 1. Apollo Park 2. The Wren 3. Vail Run Existing Timeshare Projgcts in Eaizle Countv 1. St. James Place 2. Post Montane 3. Park Plaza 4. Christie Lodge (Avon) 5. Streamside at Vail Existing Projects Zoned HDMF 1. Evergreen Lodge 11. Riverhouse 2. Marriot Vail Mountain Resort 12. Edelweiss 3. Lodge at Lionshead 13. Riva Ridge North & South 4. Vail Spa 14. All Seasons 5. Solar Vail Condominiums 15. Booth Creek Townhomes 6. Vail Intemational 16. The Wren 7. Skaal House 17. Apollo Park 8. Scorpio 18. (Any SDD w/HDMF Zoning) 9. Alphorn 10. Meadow Vail Place Exisitng Projects Zoned CC2 1. Enzian/L'Ostello 8. Vantage Point 2. Antler's 9. Lion's Pride 3. Lion's Square Lodge 10. Lifthouse Lodge 4. Lion's Square North 11. Vai121 . 5. Montaneros 12. Lionshead Center fi. Landmark Lodge 13. Treetops Condominiums 7. West Winds Condominiums 14. Village Center Condominiums - AUSTRIA HAUS CLUB OVERVIEW 1. What is the Austria Haus Club? The Austria Haus Club will be a member-owned resort club comprised of spacious two and three bedroom residences and associated club facilities. These Club facilities are planned to include lobby, front desk and concierge areas, library/lounge room, exercise and function rooms, ski equipment storage facilities, outdoor sitting area with Jacuzzi, and on-site underground parking. Additionally, access to the Sonnenalp Country Club and Spa facilities will be included along with other membership benefits. II. How will membership in the Club be evidenced? Membership will be evidenced by a real estate deed which is recorded and is guaranteed by a title insurance policy. Each member owns an undivided interest (UDI) in one of the Club's residence units and the associated club facilities and common areas. IIL How many members will be allowed to join? An undivided deeded interest to a portion of the Club units and a commensurate portion of the common areas will be conveyed to a total of nine members for each Club residence. The total number of inemberships will be dependent upon the final number t~z= of permitted club units. Each membership will carry with it the right to priority use of lodging times. In total, 45 weeks of the year will be dedicated to priority use by Club members; the remaining weeks will be available for rental to the general public and for maintenance of the residences. Priority lodging nights not used by members will also be available for rental to the general public. IV. How often can owners use their Club? Each member will have full access throughout the year to all Club facilities and all residences of their type category, subject to established reservation policies. V. How will an owner reserve usage? Members reserve their winter vacations in the fall and their summer vacations in the spring. Short-notice stays can be reserved on a"space-available" basis. t ` AUSTRIA HAUS CLUB OVERVIEW VI. Will an owner alwavs occupy the same unit? No. Members have equal access to all Club residences of their membership type. Members may request a specific residence unit and this request will be granted if possible, based on established reservation policies and priorities. VII.How will the rental rogram work? All residence units not reserved by a member will be made available for nightly rental to the general public. This includes full residence units as well as non-utilized lock-off portions of inember reserved residences. VIII.How will the memberships be sold? The Club resort marketing programs will be similar in content and character to those utilized in selling high end condominiums in Vail. IX. Is the Austria Haus Club a timeshare develo ment? No. Resort club membership is very similar to membership in a prestigious equity golf country club, except members reserve lodging rather than tee times. Resort club membership differs markedly from traditional timeshare or interval ownership where large numbers of prospective buyers must be generated to produce the sale of a specific week of vacation time in a specific lodging unit, or the right to use a specific lodging unit for a set number of years. Resort club memberships are very limited, are sold to an exclusive number of upscale buyers, and offer as a primary benefit the prestige and privilege of inembership. High-end resort clubs represent a separate and distinct market segment from what are commonly known as vacation timeshare properties. Although both represent a form of interval ownership, resort clubs merge the benefits of second home ownership with traditional membership club benefits. A limited number of inembers are invited to make a substantially larger investment in a facility that includes all the features, amenities, services, and benefits of a resort club. They are owners in a single club property in which they have a vested interest in the value, the upkeep, and the financial health and viability. 2 . AUSTRIA HAUS CLUB OVERVIEVv X. Are there UDI clubs at other resort areas? Yes. Club resorts are becoming an increasingly popular form of resort hotel structure. Existing club resorts include the highly acclaimed Deer Valley Club at Deer Valley Resort in Utah, Franz Klammer Lodge in Telluride, Ships Watch in Duck, NC, The Melrose Club near Hilton Head, SC, as well as a growing number of new properties throughout the United States. Each of these clubs is organized somewhat differently and their bylaws permit varying types of usage. XI. Why was the concept developed? Club resorts are one of the few economically viable methods currently available to finance, construct, and, over time, maintain a high-quality new mountain hotel property. Membership club services and amenities combined with first class resort accommodations are also a logical product for the luxury resort market: the blended product meets the demands of the sophisticated leisure traveler/second home owner and at the same time addresses the needs and concerns of the community in which it operates. The Austria Haus Club concept is designed to: • Provide more convenience, services, and amenities than are provided by an equally luxurious condominium development; • Provide an economically feasible means of financing the rejuvenation and maintenance of the guest accommodation inventory on the East Meadow Drive property; • Make available significantly more accommodations in the heart of Vail by replacing 37 very small existing guest accommodation units with a new combined total of 68; • Ensure the highest year-round occupancy by providing room rental opportunities during times when owners are not making full use of the Club; • Add quality commercial property, aesthetic public space, and underground parking in the Vail village core; 3 ~ ~i ORDINANCE NO. 22 SERIES of 1996 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 18.22.030, CONDITIONAL USES, TO ALLOW TIME- SHARE ESTATE UNITS, FRACTIONAL FEE UNITS AND TIME-SHARE LICENSE UNITS AS CONDITIONAL USES IN THE PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION ZONE DISTRICT, AND TO ESTABUSH SECTION 18.22.035, CONDlTlONAL USES-FACTORS APPLICABLE !N THE PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION ZONE DISTRICT. WHEREAS, an application has been submitted to amend Section 18.22.030 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code and to establish Section 18.22.035 in order to allow interval ownership as a conditional use in the Public Accommodation Zone District and to provide criteria and factors to consider when reviewing a request for a time-share project in Vail; and WHEREAS, all notices as required by Section 18.66.080 have been sent to the appropriate parties; and WHEREAS, on November 25, 1996, in accordance with Section 18.66.140 the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendments and unanimously recommends approval of the amendments to the Town Council; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council believes that quality time-share estate units, fractional fee units and time-share license units are an appropriate means of keeping occupancy rates up and to diversifying the resort lodging market within the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council considers that it is reasonable, appropriate, and beneficial to the Town of Vail and its citizens, inhabitants and visitors to adopt Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1996; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council believes the proposed amendments are consistent with the goals, objectives and policies adopted by the Council for the Town of Vail. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: SECTION 1 Section 18.22.030 - Public Accommodation-Conditional Uses - of the Town of Vail Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: (The proposed change to Section 18.22.030 are shown as shaded) 18.22.030 Conditional uses The following conditional uses shall be permitted in the Public Accommodation Zone District, subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.60: A. Professional and business offices; B. Hospitals, medical and dental clinics, and medical centers; C. Private clubs and civic, cultural and fratemal organizations, D. Ski lifts and tows E. Theaters, meeting rooms, and convention facilities, F. Public or commercial parking facilities or structures; G. Public transportation terminals; H. Public utility and public service uses, 1. Public buildings, grounds and facilities; J. Public or private schools; K. Public parks and recreational facilities; L. Ghurches; M. Eating, drinking, recreational, or retail establishments not occupying more than 10% of the total Gross Residential Floor Area of a main structure or structures located on the site in a non-conforming multi-family dwelling; r N. Major arcade, so long as it does not have any exterior frontage on any public way, street, walkway, or mall area; 0. Bed and Breakfast as further regulated by Section 18.58.310; P. Type Iil EHU as defined in Section 18.57.060; Q. Type IV EHU as defined in Section 18.57.70; R. Time'=share-esta#es'units, fractionai fee units;and time-shore license units as fiurkher regulafied by;:Section 18.22r035. , SECTION 2 Section 18.22.035 - Conditional Uses-Factors applicable - of the Town of Vail Municipal Code is hereby established and shall read as follows: 18.22.035 Conditional Uses - Factors applicable. In addition to the criteria found in Chapter 18.60, an application for a conditional use permit for a time-share estate unit, fractional fee unit, and/or a time-share license unit (herein after, "the proposed projecY") in the Public Accommodation Zone District shall be evaluated subject to the following review criteria and factors. An applicant for such a use shall provide documentation addressing each of the criteria and factors, and establish that the proposal meets the stated criteria and factors. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall apply the criteria and factors, and evaluate the documentation submitted by the applicant, before approving or denying such a conditional use permit. The criteria and factors are as follows: A. A proposed project shall positively effect the hotel bed base (i.e., overnight accommodations) in the Town of Vail. In determining the effects of such a project on the hotel bed base, consideration shall be given to the proposed on-site relationship and ratio of time-share estate units, fractional fee units, and/or a time-share license units to quality accommodation units, the availability of lock-offs units and the short-term rental opportunities of time-share estate units, fractional fee units, and/or a time-share license units when not in use by the owner(s). The cumulative effects of the proposed project and other existing time-share estate projects, fractional fee projects, and/or a time-share license projects shall also be considered. B. A proposed project shall positively effect the gross square footage of existing accommodation units in the Town of Vail. Consideration shall be given to allowing the inclusion of the proposed lock-off square footage as accommodation unit square footage. C. A proposed project shall not have material adverse impacts upon adjacent properties. Adverse impacts may include, but are not limited to, impacts to traffic, parking, noise, the character of the area, loading/delivery and trash facilities. The proposed project must affirmatively establish that such potential impacts have been addressed and mitigation measures are included within the proposal. D. A proposed project shall positively effect the nature of Vail as a world- class resort offering winter and summer recreation and vacation opportunities. The cumulative effects of the proposed project and other existing time-share estate projects, fractional fee projects, and/or a time- share license projects shall also be considered. E. The ability of the proposed project to provide accommodation and recreation amenities to its guests and the Town of Vail. Amenities to consider include, but are not limited to, proximity of the project to public transportation, availability of conference/meeting room space, availability of hotel-type services, proximity of the project to retail shops and eating/drinking establishments, on-site recreation facilities and proximity to community recreation facilities. . * ~ ~ F. The ability of the proposed project to ensure long-term adequacy, stability and continuity of a high-level of management and maintenance. G. The provision of local management or on-site management shall be evaluated in the review of a proposed project. H. The provision of a front desk operation within a proposed project, operating 24 hours a day and seven days a week, with reservation/registration capabilities, shafl be evaluated. 1. The effects of a proposed project upon the goals, objectives and policies prescribed in the adopted Town of Vail Comprehensive Plan Elements and the proposal's compliance with the Municipal Code, shall be evaluated. J. The proposed project shall positively effect the present and future supply of Town services, including, but not limited to, gain/loss of tax revenue and decreased/increased demand on municipal facilities. The cumulative effect of the proposed project and other existing time-share estate projects, fractional fee projects, and/or a time-share license projects shall also be considered. K. The proposed duration of ownership intervals shall be considered. L. Prior to the approval of a conditional use permit for a time-share estate, fraction fee or time-share license unit proposal, the applicant shall submit to the Town a list of all owners of existing units within the project or building; and written statements from 100% of the owners of existing units indicating their approval, without condition, of the proposed time- share, fractional fee, and/or time-share license. No written approval shall be valid if it is signed by the owner more than 60 days prior to the date of filing the application for a conditional use. All buildings which presently contain time-share interval units, are exempt from this provision. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 17th day of December, 1996, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the 7th day of January, 1997, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Robert W. Armour, Mayor ATTEST: Holly McCutcheon, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ, ADOPTED AND ENACTED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED (IN FULL) (BY TITLE ONLY) THIS DAY OF JANUARY, 1997. Robert W. Armour, Mayor ATTEST: Holly McCutcheon, Town Clerk ~ - r ~ ~ ~ ' ' ~ ~ APPEAL OF PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION ACTION REGARDING SITE COVERAGE VARIANCE FOR CHARLES AND GERI CAMPISI FOR 742 B SANDY LANE, VAIL, COLORADO ~ 81657 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ INDEX OF DOCUMENTS ~ 1. TOWN CODE OF VAIL ZONING TITLE, SITE COVERAGE VARIANCES ~ SECTIONS 18.62.010 AND 18.62.060 2. TOWN CODE OF VAIL, ZONING TITLE, OFF STREET PARKING AND LOADING SECTION 18.52.101-18.52.110 ~ 3. MEMORANDUM FROM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION DATED MARCH 13, 1995 ~ RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF SITE COVERAGE VARIANCE FOR RICCI RESIDENCE AT 2576 DAVOS TRAIL, VAIL, COLORADO FOR PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING GARAGE ~ 4. MEMORANDUM FROM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION DATED MARCH 24, 1993 ' RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A SITE COVERAGE VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE AT THE TAYLOR RESIDENCE AT 2409 CHAMONIX ROAD, VAIL, COLORADO ~ 5. MEMORANDUM FROM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION DATED APRIL 27, 1992 FOR ~ WILHELM RESIDENCE AT 4289 NUGGET LANE, WEST UNIT, VAIL, COLORADO RECOMMENDING SET BACK AND SITE COVERAGE VARIANCE FOR KITCHEN EXPANSION AND STORAGE AREAS ~ 6. AFFIDAVIT OF BARBARA RAGAN , 7. AFFIDAVIT OF BETTY GUFFEY ~ 8. LETTER FROM OSCAR RIZK 9. TESTIMONY OF JOSEF STAUFER AT PLANNING AND ~ ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION HEARING, ITEM NO. 3, SEPTEMBER 23, 1996 ~ 10. TRANSCRIPT OF ITEM NO. 3 OF THE PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION OF SEPTEMBER 23, 1996 ~ ~ ~ ~ VARIANICES ~ 18.60.090 Conf7icting provisions. ~ In addition to the conditions which may be prescribed pursuant to this chapter, a conditional use shall also be subject to all other ~ procedures, permits, and.requirements of this and other applicable ordinances and regulations of the town. In event of any conflict between the provisions of a conditional use permit and any other ~ permit or requirement, the more restrictive provision shall prevail. (Ord. 8(1973) § 18.900.) ~ ~ Chapter 18.62 ( VARIANCES ~ Sections: 18.62.010 Purpose. 18.62.020 Application-Information required. 18.62.030 Fee. ~ 18.62.040 Hearing. 18.62.050 Planning commission action. 18.62.060 Criteria and findings. 18.62.070 Appeal to the town counciL ~ 18.62.080 Permit approval and effect. 18.62.090 Related permits and requirements. ~ 18.62.010 Purpose. A. In order to prevent or to lessen such practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the objectives ~ of this title as would result from strict or literal interpretation and enforcement, variances from certain regulations may be granted. A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship ~ may result from the size, shape, or dimensions of a site or the Iocation of existing structures thereon; from topographic or physical conditions on the site or in the imrnediate vicinity; or from other physical limitations, street locations or traffic condi- tions in the immediate vicinity. Cost or inconvenience to the ~ ~ 4 79 (vail 4-7-92) ~ t ZONING ~ applicant of strict or literal compliance with a regulation shall not be a reason for granting a variance. B. Variances may be granted only with respect to the ~ development standards prescribed for each district, includulg lot area and site dunens2ons, setbacks, distances between buildinbs, height, density control, building bulk . ~ control, site coverage, useable open space, landscaping and site development, and parkiniz and loading requirements; or with respect to the provisions of Chapter 18.52, governing ~ physical development on a site. C. The power to grant variances does not extend to the use ~ regulations prescribed for each ciistrict because the ` flexibility necessary to avoid results inconsistent with the objectives of this title is provided by Chapter 18.60, ~ conditional use permits, and by Sections 18.66.100 through 18.66.160, am-endments. ~ (Ord. 8(1973) § 19.100.) 18.62.020 Application--Information required. ~ Application for a variance shall be made upon a form provi de d by t he zoning a dminis tra tor. T he app lica tion s h a ll be ~ supported by documents, maps, plans, and other material containing the following information: A. Name and address of the owner and/or applicant and a ~ statement that the applicant, if not the owner, has the _ permission of the owner to make application and act as agent for the owner; B. Legal description, street address, and other identifying data concerning the site; ~ C. A statement of the precise nature of the variance requested, the regulation involved, and the practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the ~ objectives of this title that would result from strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation; ~ D. A site plan showing all existing and proposed features on the site, and on adjoining sites if necessary, pertinent to the variance requested, including site boundaries, required ~ setbacks, building locations and heiahts, topography and physical features, and similar data; ~ 480 ~ (Vai.t 4-7-92) ZON'INIG ~ 18.62.050 Planning commission action. ~ Within twenty days of the closing of a public hearing on a variance application, the planning cummission shall act on tlie ~ application. The commission may approve the application as submitted or may approve t}ie application subject to such modifications or 'conditions as it deems necessary to accomplish ~ the purposes of this title, or the commission may deny the application. A varianc;e may be revocable, may be granted for a limited time period, or may be granted subject to such other ~ conditions as the commission may prescribe. (Ord. 8(1973) § 19.500.) 18.62.060 Criteria and findings. A. Before acting on a variance application, the planning ~ commission shall consider the following faetors with respect to the requested variance: l. The relationship of the requested variance to other ~ existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity; 2. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal ~ interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatability and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or to attain the ~ objectives of this title without grant of special privilege; 3. The effect of the requested variance on light aild air, i/ distribution of population, transportatjon and traffic ~ facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety; 4. Such other factors and critzria as the commission deems , applicable to the proposed variance. B. The planning commission shall make the following findings ~ before granting a variance: 1. That the granting of -the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the , limitations on other properties classified in the same district; 2. That the grantinc, of the variance will not be detrimental ~ to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; ~ ~ 482 (Vail 4-7-92) ~ I VARIANCES ~ 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the . ~ following reasons: a. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical ~ difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship incon- sistent with the objectives of this title, ~ b. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances - or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. c. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement ~ of the specif ed regulation would deprive the appli- cant of pnvileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. ~ (Ord. 8(1973) § 19.600.) 18.62.070 Appeal to the tovm council. ~ A. An appeal to the town council may be made by the appli- cant, adjacent property owner, or by the town manager. ~ The town council can also call up matters by a majority vote of those council members present. - B. For all appeals, the appeal must be filed in writing within ~ ten days following the decision or must be called up by the town council at their next regularly scheduled meeting. ~ C. The council shall hear the appeaj within thirty days of its being filed or called up, with a possible thirty-day exten- sion if the council finds that there is insufficient informa- ~ tion. (Ord. 37(1980) § 1 l (part).) r 18.62.080 Permit approval and effect. Approval of the variance shall lapse and become void if a building permit is not obtained and construction not commenced ~ and diligentlY.Pursued toward comPletion within two Years from when the approval becomes final. (Ord. 48 (1991) § 2: Ord. 16 ~ (1978) § 5(c).) ~ ~ 483 (Vail 4-7-92) ~ ZONING Chapter 18.52 OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING ~ Sections: . 18.52.010 Purpose. ~ 18.52.020 Applicability. 18.52.030 Exisiting facilities. . ~ 18.52.040 Additions or changes. 18.52.050 Construction and maintenance. 18.52.060 Parking-Off-site and joint facilities. ~ 18.52.070 Standards. ` 18.52.080 Parking-Standards. 18.52.090 Loading-Standards. ~ 18.52.100 Parking-Requirements schedule. 18.52.110 Parking-Schedule applicability. , 18.52.120 Credit for multiple use parking facitities. 18.52.130 Loading-Requirements schedule. 18.52.140 Loading-Schedule applicability. ~ 18.52.150 Credit for multiple-use loading facilities. 18.52.160 Exemptions. ~ 18.52.170 Leasing of parking spaces. 18.52.180 Variances. 18.52.010 Purpose. In order to alleviate proaressivelv or to prevent traffic , congestion and shortage of on-street parking areas, off-street parking and loading facilities shall be provided incidental to new ~ structures, eniargements of existing structures or a conversion to a new use which requires additional parking under this chapter. The number of parking spaces and loading berths prescribed in ~ this chapter shall be in proportion to the need for such facilities created by the particular type of use. Off-street parking and ~ loading areas are to be designed, maintained and operated in a manner that will ensure their usefulness, protect the public safety, ~ 388 (Vail 4-7-92) ~ 1 OFF-STREET PARk1NG A1D LOADlNG ~ and, where appropriate, insulate surrounding land uses from t ~ their impact. In certain districts, all or a portion of the parking spaces prescribed by this chapter are required to be within the ~ main building in order to avoid or to minimize the adverse visual impact of large concentrations or exposed parking and of separate garage or carport structures. (Ord. 26(1982) § 1: Ord. ~ 19(1976) § 1?(part): Ord. 8(1973) § 14.100.) ~ 18.52.020 Applicability. Off-street parking and loading space shall be provided for ~ any new building, for any addition or enlargement of an existing building or for anv conversion of uses which requires additional parking under this section. (Ord. 26(1982) § 2: Ord. 19(1976) § 12 I (part): Ord. 8(1973) § 14.200.) ~ 18.52.0 30 Existing facilities. Off-street parking and loading facilities used for off-street ~ parking and loading on the effective date of the ordinance codified in this title shall not be reduced in capacit}~ to less than 1 the number of spaces prescribed in this chapter, or reduced in area or number to less than the minimum standards prescribed in this chapter. (Ord. 26(1982) § 3: Ord. 19(1976) § 12 (part): Ord. ~ 8(1973) § 14.201.) - , 18.52.040 Additions or changes. For additions or enlargements of any existing building or , change of use that would increase the total number of parking spaces required, the additional parking shall be required only for such addition, enlargement or change and not for the entire ~ building or use. {Ord. 19(1976) § 12 (part): Ord. 8(1973) § 14.202.) ~ 18.52.050 Construction and maintenance. All off-street parking and loading facilities required by this ~ chapter shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the minimum standards for such farilities prescribed by this chapter, and shail be maintained free of accumulated snow or ~ 389 (Vail I-4-83) ~ ZONING ~ other materials preventing full use and occupancy of the ~ facilities in accordance with the intent of this chapter, except for temporary periods of short duration in event of heary or ~ unusual snowfall. (Ord. 8(1973) § 14.300.) ~ 18.52.060 Parking-Off-site and joint facilities. All parking and loading facilities required by ttlis cliapter ~ shall be located on the same site as the use for which they are required, provided that the town council may permit off-site or jointly used parking facilities if located within three hundred ~ feet of the use served. Authority to pennit off-site or joint parking facilities shall not extend to parking spaces required by this title to be located within the main building on a site, but ~ may extend to parking spaces permitted to be vnenclosed. Prior to permitting off-site or joint parking facilities, the council shall ~ determine that the proposed location of the parking facilities and the prospective operation and maintenance of the facilities will fulfill t;le purposes of this chapter, will be as useable and r convenient as parking facilities located on the site of the use, and will not cause traffic congestion or an unsightly ~ conceniration of parked cars. The council may require such legal instruments as it deems necessary to ensure unified operation and control of joint parking facilities or to ensure the ~ continuation of such facilities, including evidence of ownership, long-term lease, or easement. (Ord. 8(1973) § 14.400.) ' 18,52.070 Standards. ~ The standards set out in Sections 18.52.080 through 18.52.100 shall govern the design and construction of all off-street parking and toading facilities, whet}ier required by ~ this chapter or provided in addition to the requirements of this chapter. Minor adjustments of the dimensions prescribed in this chapter may be authorizeci by the zoning administrator if ~ consistent with generally recognized design standards for off-street parking and loading facilities. (Ord. 8(1973) § ~ 14.500.) ~ iV„l 1."3, 390 ~ ~ t T OFF-STREET PARKI?~G A?~D LOADI?~G ~ 18.52.080 Parking-Standards. Standards for off-street parking shall be as follows: A. Location and Design. Parking spaces, aisles and turning areas shall be entirely within lot lines and shall not encroach on any ~ public right-of-way. No parked vehicle shall overhang any public right-of-way. Except for parking facilities serving , single-family or two-family residential dwellings, or parking facilities accommodating less than four cars, off-street parking areas shall be designed so that it will not be necessary ~ for vehicles to back into any street or public right-of-way. B. Size of Space. Each off-street parking space shall be not less ~ than nine feet wide by nineteen feet long, and if enclosed and . or covered, not less than seven feet high. An exception to the size of space shall be allowed for compact spaces in lots ' with more than fifteen spaces. ln this case, up to twenty-five percent of the spaces may be eight by sixteen and the compact spaces shall be clearly marked as such. ~ C. Accessways. Unobstructed and direct accessways not less than ten feet nor more than twenty feet in width shall be ' provided from off-street parking to a street or alley. D. Aisles. Aisles of adequate width for convenient and easy access to each parking space shall be provided, affording ~ unobstructed vehicular passage between each parking space and one or more accessways. This requirement may be waived only during such times as valet par~ing is operated in lieu of ~ self-parking. E. Surfacing. All parking areas shall be paved and provided with ¦ adequate drainage facilities. ¦ F. Landscaping. Not less than ten percent of the interior surface area of unenclosed off-street parking areas containing fifteen , or more parking spaces shall be devoted to landscaping. ln addition, landscaped borders not less than ten feet-in depth ' shall be provided at all edges of parking lots containing more than fifteen parking spaces. Landscaped borders not less than fifteen feet in depth shall be provided at al] edges of parking ~ lots containing more than thirty~ parking spaces. A landscaped berm, wall or fence not less than four feet in height of the same architectural style as the building may be substituted for the , landscaped border, subject to design review approval. ~ 391 ,v 1-44 3, i ~ ( Eh ZONING ~ G. Svrface Runoff Control. Adequate measures for the control ~ of surface runoff shall be provided. Such measures may include, but are not limited to: infiltration galleries, detention ' and settling ponds, sandtraps, grassed waterways. The com- munity development department shall estabiish and maintain a list of such control measures. Where required by subsection ~ A8c of Section 18.54.050, evidence of an approved NPDES discharge permit, or in lieu thereof, a no discharge plan shall be presented. , (Ord. 26(1982) § 4: Ord. 37(1980) § 8: Ord. 19(1976) § 12 (part): Ord. 8(1973) § 14.501.) ~ 18.52.090 Loading-Stsindards. ~ Standards for off:street toading shall be as follows: A. Location. All off-street loading berths shall be located on the same lot as the use served, but not in the reyuirrd front ' setback. Off-street loading berths shall -be provided in addi- tion to required off-street parking and shall not be located ' within accessways. B. Size. Each required loading berth shall be not less than twelve feet wide, twenty-five feet long, and if enclosed and i or ~ covered, fourteen feet high. Adequate turning and maneuver- ing space shall be provided within the lot lines. ~ C. Access. Accessways not less than ten feet or more than twenty feet in width shall connect all loading berths to a street or alley. Such accessways may coincide with accessways to ' parking facilities. (Ord. 26(1982) § 5: Ord. 8(1973) § 14.50-1.) i 18.52.100 Parking-Requirements schedule. ' Off-street parking requirements shall be determined in accordance with the following schedule: ~ , ' 392 ~ OFF-STREET PARKii~G AND LOADING ' Use Parking Requirements A. Dwelling Unit If gross residential floor arca is ~ 500 square feet or less: 1.5 spaccs per dwelling unit If gross residential floor area is over 500 square feet up to 2,000 square feet: 2 spaces per dwelling , unit If gross residential floor area is 2,000 square feet or more per ' . dwelling unit: 2.5 spaces per dwel- ling unit B. Accommodation Unit 0.4 space per accommodation ~ s unit, plus 0.1 space per each 100 square feet of gross residential ~ floor area, with a maximum of 1.0 space per unit C. Other Uses. ~ 1. Medical and dental 1.0 space per each 200 square offices feet of net floor area ' 2. Other professional 1.0 space per each 250 square and business offices feet of net floor area 3. Banks and financial 1.0 space per each 200 square ~ institutions (i.e. feet of net floor area savings and ]oan) 4. Retail stores, personal 1.0 space per each 300 square , services and repair feet of net floor area - shops ' S. Eating and drinking 1.0 space per each 8 seats, based establishments on seat?ng capacity or building code occupancy standards, i ' whichever is more restrictive 6. Theaters, meeting 1.0 space per each 8 seats, based ~ rooms, convention on seating capacity or building facilities occupancy standards, whichever . is more restrictive ~ ' ~ 393 (%a,~ 1-44~) ~ ZONING , Use Parking Requirements ~ 7. Quick-service food/ 1.0 space per each 200 square convenience stores feet of net floor area for the first 1000 square feet of net floor ' area: 1.0 space per 300 square feet for net floor area above 1000 , square feet 8. Recreational facilities, Parking shall be required. public or private Amount to be determined by the ' planning commission 9. Hospitals 1.0 space per patient bed plus l space per 150 square feet of net ~ floor area 10. Warehousing 1.0 space per each 1000 square ' feet of net floor area 11. Any use not listed Parking requirement to be de_ terrriined by the planning com- ~ mission. (Ord. 26(1982) § 6: Ord. 8(1973) § 14.601.) ' 18.52.110 Parking-Schedule applicability. , Where fractional requirements result from application of the schedule, the fraction shall be raised to the next whole number. (Ord. 50(1978) § 10 (part).) ' ~ ~ , (V„l 1-443) 394 ~ ' 4VAIL TOW1V " 75 South Frontage Road ' Yail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2100 FAX 970-479-2157 , ' ' CERTIFICQTION , STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ssf ' COUNTY OF EAGLE ) ~ The undersigned hereby certifies the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of a Planning and Environmental Commission Memorandum datedMarch 13, 1995, as maintained in the office of Community Development. ' Da#ed December 5, 1996 ~ ).°/V d0&0 49&)(- , Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk ' STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. , COUNTY OF EAGLE ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this 5th day of December, 1996, by Holly L. ~ McCutcheon, Town Clerk, Town of VaiL ~ N ota . blic i Anne E. Wright, ";otary ?ublir. 1%1, ^;~.,;ru_sixi Ex;ries 6-17-1999 My commi>sion expires: L • KECYCLEDPAP6R ' r ~ . MEMORANDUM , TO: Planning and Environmental Commission ~ ~ FROM: Community Development Department DATE: March 13, 1995 ' SUBJECT: A request for a site coverage variance to ailow for an addition to the Ricci Residence located at 2576 Davos Trail/Lot 5, Block E, Vail Das Schone 1 st , Filing. Applicants Tom and Nancy Ricci, represented by Galen Aasland Planner: Andy Knudtsen ' , I. DESCRIPTION OF THE REGIUEST The appticants, Tom and Nancy Ricci, are proposing to demolish their existing detached one- 1 car garage and replace it with an attached two-car garage, a second story family room, and an entrance to their home. A variance is required because the additions exceed the site coverage allowance in the Primary/Secondary Residential zone district. Since the previous , hearinq with the Planninq and Environmental Commission (PEC) on Februarv 27, 1995, the applicant has reduced the size of the qaraqe to 521.5 sq. ft. The allowed site coverage is 2,248.4 square feet (or 20%), the existing site coverage is 2,319.4 square feet (or 20.6%), and the proposed site coverage is 2,682 square feet (or 23.9%). The additional 433.6 ' square feet of site coverage requires a variance. They are also requesting to expand their living room by approximately 66 square feet, as well as raise the roof ridge over the living room by 8 feet. The living room addition will be located over an existing lower level and does , not count as new site coverage. Other changes that will be involved with the proposal include removing the T-1 11 /plywood , siding that currently is in place above and below the windows on the residence. The applicant is proposing to cover the trim and plywood with a stucco finish. Landscaping will be changed, ~ as four large aspens will be removed as a result of this proposal. The app(icant is proposing ' to replace these with four 2-inch caliper aspen. The driveway grades do not change as the proposed two-car garage will be located in approximately the same place as the existing one- ~ car garage. II. HISTORY OF LOT 5 , On FebruarY 26, 1990, the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) approved a variance request for a setback encroachment. In order to construct a new master bedroom on ~ the lower level, the applicant proposed to encroach 3.5 feet into the 15-foot rear setback. The Design Review Board (DRB) approved the proposal on March 21, 1990. In addition to the setback variance to allow for the master bedroom expansion, the applicant also proposed ~ expansions to the kitchen and a second floor deck which did not require variances. On June 3, 1992, the DRB approved a 250. Though the 250 was granted, the addition was ' never constructed. The current proposal includes 64.3 square feet of the 250. The applicant has submitted the 250 request and it will be scheduled for a DRB review if the variance is ~ 1 ' • granted. Section 18.71.020 requires that variances be approved by PEC prior to the DRB ' reviewing the project, when both approvals are needed for one project. 185.7 square feet of , floor area will remain for future expansions, assuming the variance is granted by the PEC and ~ the 250 is granted by the DRB. III. BACKGROUND ~ The staff has researched projects in which similar requests were made, and has summarized them below: ~ Dean/Rousch Residence 2942 Bellflower (JuIY 1993): ' At the Dean/Rousch residence, the appiicants requested a 3.56% site coverage variance (287 square feet), a setback variance (4 feet.into a 20-foot setback), and a wali height variance. The request for site coverage and wall height variances were approved by the PEC, but the setback variance for GRFA was denied. It shoufd be noted that the staff recommended denial ~ of the variance, but the PEC approved it. The interior dimensions of the garage were 22.5 by 22.5 feet, and the area of the garage calculated for site coverage was 576 square feet. ' Tavlor Residence 2409 Chamonix Road (Mav 1993): _ At the Taylor residence, the appficant requested and was granted a site coverage variance for ~ 1.3% (122 square feet) in order to construct a garage and building connection on the property. It should be noted that the allowed site coverage on this lot is 20% (not 15%), and the applicant was also granted a variance to construct the garage in the front setback (the slope ' on this lot did not exceed 30%). The approved interior dimensions of the two-car garage were 21 feet by 20 feet, for a total interior area of 420 square feet. The garage contributed 462 • square feet toward site coverage. , Donna Mumma Residence 1886 West Gore Creek Drive (Februarv 1993): , At the Mumma residence, the applicant requested and was gra„nted a 1% site coverage variance in order to construct a garage addition on a lot that exceeds 30% slope. The 1% overage on site coverage amounted to approximately 99 square feet. The interior dimensions , of the approved garage measure 20 feet by 20 feet, for a total interior area of 400 square feet. The garage contributed 442 square feet toward site coverage. ' Smail Residence 4238 Nuqqet Lane (September 19921: At the Smail residence, the applicant requested and was granted side and front setback variances in order to construct a garage and GRFA addition. The interior dimensions of the ~ approved garage measure 22 feet 8-inches by 22 feet 3-inches (504 square feet). Please note that a site coverage variance was not necessary as a part of this request. ~ Testwuide Residence 898 Red Sandstone Circle (Auqust 1992): At the Testwuide residence, the applicant requested and was granted side and front setback , variances in order to construct a garage addition to the existing residence. The approved garage had interior dimensions of 21.5 feet by 24 feet, with a total interior area of 516 square feet. Please note that a site coverage variance was not necessary as part of this ' request. ' 2 ' Ricci Residence For cumparison purposes, the proposed variance is for 3.9% (433.6 square feet). The garage contributes 557 square feet towards site coverage. The interior dimensions are 21.75 by 24.0 ' feet (with a small angle cut out of one side). The total interior area of the garage is 521.5 square feet. IV. ZONING STATISTICS ' ' Lot Size: 11,242 square feet Zoning: Primary/Secondary Residential , Allowed Proposed 33 feet Height: 33 feet GRFA: 2,810.5 + 425 + 250 = 3,485.5 sq. ft. 3,3299.8 sq. ft. , Setbacks: Front: 20' Front: 21' ' Sides: 15/15' Sides: N/A 15, Rear: 23.5' Rear: + ft. ' Site Coverage: 20% or 2,248.4 sq. ft. 23.9% or 2,682 sq. 60% min..or 6,745.2 sq. ft. 6,598 sq. ft. - soft (58.7%) Landscaping: 191 sq. ft. - hard ~ 6,789 sq. ft. - Total(60.4%) Retaining Wall Heights: 6 feet 6 feet ' Parkin9: 3 spaces required 4 spaces proposed ' V. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS Upon review of Criteria and Findings, Section 18.62.060 of the Vail Municipal Code, the ' Community Development Department recommends approval of the requested variance based on the following factors: , ' A. Consideration of Factors: 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. ' Staff believes that the proposed addition will be compatible with the surrounding devetopment. We believe that the additional mass and bulk associated with the ' proposal is similar to the mass and bulk of surrounding homes. Staff would like to point out that the site has significant evergreen landscaping around the perimeter of the home, and that the addition will be buffered by the existing ' landscaping. ' ' 3 ' 2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation , and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity , or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege. ' Staff has traditionally supported site coverage variance requests and setback variance requests when it involves constructing garages, and when the ' variances do not negatively impact adjacent properties. Staff believes that it is beneficial to the community to allow individuals to construct garages, as it typically improves the appearance of a site. In this case, the applicant will be , demolishing a one-car garage and replacing it with a two-car garage. In addition to site coverage variance requests for garages, staff has supported requests for connections between the residence and the garage. This is true in all three of the examples provided in the background section of this memo, which required site coverage variances. In each case, stafif has worked with the applicant and the architect to minimize the amount of variance needed. In , the past, staff believes that each final variance request has been for the minimum amount of site coverage necessary. ' Staff believes that the reduction in the size of the garage since the previous PEC hearing, to 521.5 sq. ft. brings the proposal within the scope of what has been approved in the past. Staff believes it meets this criteria as the variance ' would not be a grant of special privilege, since other variances have been approved for similar situations in the past. Furthermore, staff believes that the location and size of the existing building are physical hardships which make the ' expansion impossible without a variance. We think that the size of the two-car garage which is proposed is reasonable and should be supported. ' 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and ~ utilities, and public safety. Staff does not believe that there will be any negative impacts on the above- , referenced criteria if the proposal is constructed. B. The Planninq and Environmental Commission shall make the followinQ findinqs ' before qrantinq a variahce: 1. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in ' the same district. ' 4 ' ' , 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimentai to the public health, safety or weifare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. , 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: ~ a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficuity or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title. ' ' b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. ' c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners ' of othd'r properties in the same district. VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION ' Staff recommends approval of the variance. We believe it meets the criteria, as discussed above, as well as the findings. Specifically finding 61 is met, and staff's opinion, as the ' variance will not a grant of special privilege as this type of request has been approved several times in the past. Finding 62 is met, in staff's opinion, as there will be no impacts to the public health, safety or welfare. Finding 63c is met as a strict enforcement of the site . ' coverage regulation would deprive this applicant from constructing an addition to his home that has been granted to other individuals with similar situations. Therefore staff recommends approval with the following conditions: ' 1. That the variance approval is contingent upon the Design Review Board (DRB) making the necessary findings and granting the "250" to this applicant. If the ' DRB does nof grant the "250", this variance approval shall be void. 2. Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall agree to plant four 2- inch caliper aspen adjacent to the entry to mitigate the loss of the four existing ' aspen trees. 3. Prior to submittal to the DRB, the applicant shall amend the elevation drawings ' of the residence to show the specific exterior treatment that shall be used to replace the existing T-111 plywood finish. ' F:EVERYONE\PECWEMOSWICCI.313 , 5 , ' ~ ~ . . ~ / ` ~ • ~ ~ . . . . . ~ . ~ ~r .:t.L -.~':1,. , ~ . . ~ ~ . . r , w..s . 46,611 LI-I('' ~ . - . ~ ~ ~ . L i i , ~ - ~ ENTRY LEVEL + • ~ ~ - - - ~ ~ , r ~ / \ ~ ~ ~ ~ . . \ ~ 1 ~ ~ \ ~ . \ . ; ~ ~ , ~ . ~ ~ - - ~ / ~ r-- r---, _ _ 1 ~ ~cd I ~ . ~ I / ~ i ! 1 , Q~ _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ y~. *r_ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I ~ ~ ' ~ ' i ~-r f - I-1 I - 4--------~ ~ ,--L-?--------~ ~ _ I . , i_-- - _ ; ~ ~ - . ~ , ~ . i ~--4 ....n..~a..l.~~~.. I . . . ~ ~f ~ I. ~ i . • i I ~ 1-----~ R1?Q~rLIW ' ~ - . -St1o: ~ ~ ' ..~=s.~. - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f ~ . • / I I \ I I ' 1 I • ~ ' - . ~ ~ , - - _ ~ - - - - _ _ _ ` , _ ~ - . , ~ _NOR7HWESZELEVA71pNL._ . ' ' - ~ - - - - - ,,,r~ n,~ . I ~ ( ~ 11' • -o«. a.~r.~ ~ / . _ • / I ~ ~ ' . . . . ' . ' -rJ.: • ~ ~ F- ~ V ~ • - --.___---f"J~'- ' - _ ' s , ° ~ ' ~ l ~ I - - J ~ 1-1 E _ . . 1-1 F] - . ' ~ ~ ~ - - ~ - ~ SOUTH ELEVATION • ~-..w.~. , l'.ra _ . . ...a.~- w... Mt ~ ~ ' , 0 , wESr_ELEvAs,oH_ . _ . ~ , d a I . ~ f~! I_~' ' I . J . _NORTtEAsz~v~r ~ r - . ~ ,m.~ - i _ . . ~ . ~ . , N I \ ~ R.f ; L - / \ . \1'• - , ~ s: Q a ~i i, . ~ ~ . J U'PM lFVEl ~ . ~.7-D ; ~ ; ~ % ~ J• j ~ ~ j J ! / / \ i ~ ~ ' 1 Al ~ . 1~` '%~~~'J ~w~.. F- ~ ~ v , . ~ / ,~'L'~~' ' . / ~ / . f SITE PUN _ I. •U~~ . • K f ~h.r. i .na w, ~w}e /.w~~f ' TOWN OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road ' Vail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2100 ' FAX 970-479-2157 ~ CERTIFICATION i , STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. ~ COUNTY OF EAGLE ) ~ The undersigned hereby certifies the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of a Planning and Environmental Commission Memorandum dated May 24, 1993, as maintained in the office of Community Development. Dated Uecember 5, 1996 or~~'I e~tca~~l~ ~ Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk ~ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. ~ COUNTY OF EAGLE ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this 5th day of December, 1996, by Holly L. ~ McCutcheon, Town Clerk, Town of VaiL C~ ~ Notaty Public Anne E. Wright, Notary Publir_ U1y Commis;ion Expires 617-1999 My commission expires: 75 s. Frontano P,csd ~ HFCY'CLEDPAYEk ~ ~ MEMORANDUM ' TO: Planning and Environmentai Commission ~ FROM: Community Development Department ~ DATE: May 24, 1993 SUBJECT: A request for a setback and site coverage variance to ailow for the construction ~ of an addition and a garage located at 2409 Chamonix Road/Lot 19, Block A, Vail das Schone Filing No. 1. (Please note changes are In bo/d ifallcs.) Applicant: Anneliese Taylor f Planner. Shelly Mello . ~ . ~.r.:-: o-::•.r.+r.?: :y;•.;.'?:~ r,.,•.:%.'4.°r.=Y'f.::!•:?:!i:i:~.'•::i:%!^:,::.^•.:'/.G.':>.`.?.i';~:;:3.^,.;:;:%:5 . . u.....; C3Y., . . :f ~ ..,f.,. Y::`•:: ~ >;:::::;2::::::::;::i:ti::i::::;:::;;:; ';;:::':':::::':~::~:"':~::Y ~%.:::.;:i:i;~:::::':' ~:::~:5~:::;;::2%.: ~::;:<<:•`::;:;:::2::'ii:;:i~ }:;::'i:::5i::•.''~;:i:5: i:r:•.'.::v:.':';t:~::::; '.;::',•`~::i.:•.'::.,...,....,.,.,..,...,.,...,.. I. DESCRIPTION OF THE REGIUEST , ~ The applicant is requesting site coverage and setback variances in order to construct a two- car garage and building addition to an existing residence located on a PrimarylSecondary lot which is less than 15,000 square feet in size. There is an existing employee restricted 1 dwelling unit on this site located in the lower level of the project. Currently, the property has a covered carport to meet the requirement for enclosed parking for ~ a primary unit with a restricted employee dwelling unit. Under current zoning, the property would require four on-site parking spaces with at least one space covered. The site currently has three on-site parking spaces and one partially on-site space. At the time this carport was ~ approved, the carport was considered enclosed parking, but did not contribute to site coverage using the definition in place at the time. ~ Under the current site coverage definition, the carport is counted as site coverage. The property currentfy allows for 1,784 sq. ft. of site coverage or 20% of the lot size and with the existing carport has a total of 1,635 sq. ft. of site coverage. As proposed the project would , ~ have 1,906 sq. ft. of site coverage or 21.3%. A variance is required for the 1.3% site coverage or 122 square feet. The proposed garage is approximately 17 feet 6 inches into the 20 foot front setback which ~ will leave a 2 foot 6 inches setback from the south property. There will be a 2 foot encroachment into the 15 foot side yard setback. A 13 foot setback will remain along the west property line. Variances are needed for the 17 foot 6 inch and 2 foot encroachments. ~ II. BACKGROUND ~ In 1989, the applicant received a variance to locate a carport in the front setback. This was in response to the requirement for enclosed parking when a restricted secondary unit is provided. Prior to the 1989 application, a variance from the parking standards was requested ' in order to add secondary unit without providing the required enclosed parking. This was denied and the applicant was directed to construct a garage. r ~ ' . In April and May of this year, the PEC reviewed this application at worksessions. The applicant was directed by the PEC to minimize the overage on site coverage, but that some ~ overage would be acceptabie because of the addition of enclosed garage space. The ~ applicant has revised the application by decreasing the width of the garage and the stairway leading to the house which decreases the amount of site coverage necessary to complete this ~ project. At the time of the review the staff a(so discussed the removal of the closet area to the north of the main entry in order to further come into compliance with the site coverage regulations. The applicant has selected not to eliminate this area therefore it remains a part ~ of the request At the PEC revlew In May, the appilcant was agaln directed fo delete the closet portlon ~ of the request. The staff suggested thaf approxlmately 68 feet of slte coverage could be deleted. The appllcant has responded by deleting a portlon of the closet whlch contrlbuted approximately 40 square feet of slte coverage. ~ Iil, ZONING ANALYSIS ~ Total Size Area: 0.2048 acres or 8,921 square feet Zoning: Primary/Secondary Residential ~ Allowed Density: One Primary with one restricted employee unit Existing Density: One Primary with one restricted employee unit ~ GRFA: ~ Allowed: 3,080 square feet Existing: 2,814 square feet Proposed. 3,019 square feet ~ Site Coverage: Allowed: 1,784 square feet (20%) Existing: 1,225 (Building) + 410 (Carport) ~ = 1,635 total square feet Proposed: 1,225 (Building) + 471 (Garage) 190 (Addition) - 1,906 tofa! (21.391o) ~ Parking Proposed: Enclosed: 2 spaces ~ Surface: 2 spaces (completely on-site) ` 'In order to allow for a garage in the front setback, the average slope beneath the garage and ' the dwelling unit must exceed 30% slope. In a previous application, the staff determined that this site did not qualify to allow the garage to encroach into the front setback due to excessive site grades. While historically this site may have qualified for this allowance, it was determined that because the existing on-site parking area is virtually flat, this site would not ~ qualify for the allowance. If it had qualified, site coverage would have been restricted further , 2 ~ ~ to 15% and the existing project would be non-conforming to site coverage requiremenis. IV. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS ~ Upon review of Criteria and Findings, Section 18.62.060 of the Vail Municipal Code, the Community Development Department recommends approval of the requested variance based ~ on the following factors: A. Consideration of Factors: ~ 1. The relationshlp of the requested variance to other exlsting or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. ~ The proposed garage encroaches a maximum of 17 feet 6 inches into the 20 foot front yard setback leaving a 2 foot 6 inch setback from the front property tine. There will be 2 foot encroachment into the 15 foot side yard setback ~ leaving a 13 foot setback from the western property line. The roof is pitched, however there is no proposed floor area within the lofted area of the garage. Materials are proposed to match the existing residence. ~ The applicant has minimized the size of the proposed garage in order to maintain the maximum setback possible from the south properry line. ~ The applicant has also minimized the amount of site coverage overage for the proposed garage. However, the staff feels that it is possible to further decrease the site coverage generated by the addition and garage. The staff feels that , the connection between the garage and the building is important because it furthers the compliance of this project with the Design Review Guidelines, which specifies that the buildings should be connected, but feel that the ' connection could be minimized. The appllcant has reduced the proposed slte coverage by 40 square feet from 21.8% to 21.3% by decreasing the slze of the entry and closet area per the staff and PEC requests. ~ In addition, the staff would like to see additional landscaping added to the project to minimize the impacts of the garage, especially on the south (adjacent ~ to retaining walls) and west (adjacent to the garage) elevations. The applicant ~ is proposing to remove a portion of the existing stairs leading from the parking area to the building. In order to meet the wall height standards, the applicant has stepped the new portions of wall which exceed the standards. The staff ' asks that landscaped steps also be added to the existing portions of exposed timber walls which exceed 3 feet in height in the front setback and 6 feet in height on the remaining portions of the property. ~ 2. The degree to which rellef from the strlct and literal Interpretat(on and enforcement of a specified regulation Is necessary to achieve ' compatibillty and uniformity of treatment among sites (n the vlcinity ar to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege. ~ 3 , ~ ~ ~ The staff recognizes that the siting of the existing building does constitute a • physical hardship. Because of the existing location of the house, as well as the ~ topography of the site, it is difficult to improve the property without obtaining variances. The staff feels that the addition of the enclosed parking is beneficiai and that the proposed location wiil have minimal impact on the adjacent ' properties. The staff feels that the granting of the requested setback variances for this garage wiil not be a grant of special privilege. The staff also supports the overage on site coverage in order to add the garage , as weli as the building connection. We feel that the bullding connectlon is an important etement of the appiication whlch has been decreased In slte as much as posslble and that it furthers the compliance of this project with the ~ Design Review Guidelines. We do not feel that a granting of a site coverage variance would be a grant of special privilege if it were minimized, as discussed above. 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distributlon of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilltfes and ~ utilities, and publlc safety. The addition of the enclosed garage will improve the existing parking problems ~ for this property. The applicant will be able to obtain four parking spaces entirely on the property and meet the parking requirement. Currently, there are 3-1/2 spaces located on the property. The staff feels that additions of this type 1 on non-conforming properties are important because they decrease the need for on-street parking. , This proposal does not impact any of the other criteria listed above. B. The Planninq and Environmental Commission shall make the following flndlnqs before qrantinq a variance: ~ .r 1. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in ~ the same district. 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public ~ health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. ~ 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified ' regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title. ~ b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not 4 ~ ~ apply generally to other properties7n the same zone. c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation ~ would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. ' V. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS The staff supports the garage portion of the request as well as the building connection, including the necessary setback variances with the following conditions: ~ 1. Additional landscaPin9 be added to the south and west elevations to screen the garage and building addition; and ~ 2. Additional landscapin9 stePs be added to the existing retaining waiis. , We find that this request, will not be a grant of special privilege and meets the criteria set out in Section IV B, 1, 2, 3, a, and c of this memo. ~ ~ The staff feels that this application is a positive improvement. We feel that the garage addition has been minimized to decrease site coverage. Due to the location of the existing unit, as well as the topography of the site, we recognize that some additional site coverage is ~ needed to provide for the garage and the connection between the units and the garage. The staff finds that it would not be possible to incorporate any portion of the garage into the existing building. We believe the proposed building connection to be a positive improvement , because it brings the structure more into conformance with the Design Guidelines. The applicant has worked with the staff to obtain a proposed plan for this garage and addition ~ that the staff can support. In the past, the staff has supported site coverage and setback variances when they are attributed to the provision of additional enclosed garage spaces. ~ , ' 1 5 ~ ~ ' . ~ F • . - - : - . ~ ; ~ • . ` . . , . ' ~f ' Q . • . - w . •r . . •a. . , F4 ~ m . • • . . . J A •W I \ I' /O ~ . 111 . ~ y l r ~/rY ~ ~ ~I~? ~ i ~y k. . 5'k ~ ~ 0 \ wr++~? ' j V - x ~ l ~ _ EaTFY ' ~ ~ ~ ' - ooR~ i ~F - N ta ~ . .'k y ••f . • ~ . - , -Tr+~:i~/ ~ ~ ~ • . ' \ I r • N . ) ~ ~ `~mr Z~~ ~ w .e~,~ ^ ~ ' ' 1~a /'fl.9.~ ° ~ ? I _ y~w , ....C'{ '~'~4, y„ k«. ~ . 1rt`_\ . , ' ~ ..~~~i #i~'~ t.h~'~ °J , . " ~ .-~'~FW '-t`Z,~O.~~C~ C t.Rg FORCE ,/I 1, . i •.}-"~+.'~-a }r, i~'31s'}'' Y~L~"~ r' . . ` NQ~CiRPORT' BE~tEA1QyE • °''~x: -U `'r. ~ j.F! \ ASPHA LT 1~71s r , ~ . r • ` . ` k~'"; l ~ ' ~ ` ~ , \ ' n ~ ~ _ ~ - - - . • ~ ktY~ i r ~ ~ , ~ ~ . , ; - J-- - ~ ~ , . - -T - - - ~ t;~~ . ~ • ~ ( . " _ _ : j •I F _ L . ~ ~ ; PROPOSED ENCLOSED STAIRWAY , . ' EXTERI.OR.MqTERIAlS TO MATCH EXISTING. .;~REINFORCED CONCRETEY)- ~ . T i • , ; SOUTH. ELEVATION ~ . ~ - - 1 ~ EXI STjNGl'HOUSE ~ . . - 9~L ~ i xS f '1`J95•5 _ . :~~_L - - L '1i?.C. PROPOSEO GARAGE 'rP, n~oR.~ EAST ELEVATION , ' Bachrach VIP LTD ' PO Box 2236 ' Avon, CO 81620 303/949-9408 FAX 949-0629 ~ May 14, 1993 ' ' TO: Planning and Environment Commission Town of Vail, Colorado ~ FROM: Erwin Bachrach on behalf of Anneliese Taylor , Subject: A request for a set back and site coverage variance to allow for the construction of an addition and a garage located at ' 2409 Chamonix Road Lot 19, Block A, Vail das Schone Filing No. 1. ' Dear Commission and Staff Members: Considering the discussions before the Planning and Environment , Commission work session on April 12, 1993, the Community Development Department memorandum dated May 10, 1993 and the tabled discussion before the Planning and Environment Commission, ' also on May 10 we are herewith submitting a°revised application having addressed concerns as follows: r I. Subsequent to the work session we have: ' 1. Reduced the garage dimensions by 2'-4" 2. Lowered the garage roof pitch from 12/10 to 12I8 3. By the combination of items 1&2 we have lowered the ' garage roof ridge by approximately 3`-0" 4. Made the stairs & stair enclosure narrower by 6" 5. Added terracing with landscaping along the retaining ' walls to the north of the proposed garage. ' ~ ' ~ ' • ' Ii. Subsequent to the hearing (now tabled) before the Pianning and ~ Environment Commission on May 10 we have: 1. Added a North elevation to the concept drawing for ' clearer presentation of the building connection. 2. Added more terracing 3. Added more landscaping materials; 5 Aspen, 1 Blue ' Spruce 4. Deleted the entire bench area and exit aisle, ' reducing the site coverage by an additional 50 square feet. We are however retaining a 2'-0" deep closet, adjoining (as close as possible) the existing ~ entry door. The closet is an essential feature for the owner and the key to the entire remodel effort. Retaining the closet wifl have no impact on the ' visual appearance of the building connection, interfere with no one's views, has no bearing on light, air, distribution of population, transportation , and traffic facilities, utilities and public safety. Will be entirely within the set-back lines and in an ' area presently occupied by the existing deck. It is very unfortunate that previous government agencies allowed , developers to subdivide into now non-conforming lots, especially on difficult terrain. ~ We are not asking for any special privilege; we are asking for a closet. It will not be to the detriment of the neighborhood, of the , ~ Town of Vail, or anyone. It is unfair that present day homeowners must depend on granting of ~ variances for permission to modify their homes to bring them to reasonable standards and even comply to Design guidelines. , Fortunately it is within the province of this commission to right a wrong by granting this variance applied for here. The site coverage increase is only from 20% to 21.2%. ' Respectfully, ' Erwin Bachrach ' ~ ~ 4VAIL ' TOWN O 75 South Frontage Road ~ Yail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2100 FAX 970-479-2157 , , ~ CERTIFICATION I STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. ~ COUNTY OF EAGLE ) ' The undersigned hereby certifies the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of a Planning and Environmental Commission Memorandum dated April 27, 1992, as , maintained in the office of Community Development. , Dated December 5, 1996 Fmw oP iu o km4wx ~ Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk I STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. ' COUNTY OF EAGLE ) Subscribed and swom to before me this 5th day of December, 1996, by Holly L. ' McCutcheon, Town Clerk, Town of VaiL NQtar, y Public ' ' Anne E. v,t•irtht, 'No±arj P, jylir_ 6-17-1990 fJly com;r,ission expires: 75 S. Fro^ta32 .r,ad ' ~ 4F*~ RFr'YCLEDPAPER , ' - MEMORANDUM ~ TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department ' DATE: April 27, 1992 ' SUBJECT: A request for front and side setback and site coverage variances for the Wilhelm Residence, 4289 Nugget Lane, West Unit/Lot 5, Bighorn Estates, ~ Resubdivision of Lots 10 and 11, Bighorn Estates. Applicant: Robert and Kazen Wilhelm Planner: Jill Kammerer ..:,<„«.«~;•<:<:::.;:.>;:.:<.:n:<.::..;>;:.;;,; a::::::::;:z::::.~::::: ::~::::::zz . ;::~:z;`;:::G:i;i:»:~:~;: ~:~:;~;:;:~~iS:'::t;:::~ii:: :~:~::=<:=;:~;;:;:~::::x-i:"i:2•':~i:::::`::$::;~;::::;:;;~:%~:`':~::~::~::~:~:::s:::'::::::;i:::;;:i:~'::r:;:::~:i;:%;~:~;:::::;::;;:;;~;;::-`:;:Y:~::;:~;::;:;:~':::::2;:;;;::::~:~;;:4: ~ ~ I. DESCRIPTION OF THE VARIANCES REQUESTED ~ The applicant proposes to remodel an existing duplex unit. Under the redevelopment proposed, an additional 191 sq. ft. of GRFA will be added to the residence. Chapter 18.71 - , Additional Gross Residential Floor Area ("250 Ordinance") will be utilized in order to allow the addition to be constructed. Under this redevelopment proposal, site coverage will be increased by 177 sq. ft. In order to construct the modificarions to the residence as proposed, ' the applicant must obtain site coverage, and east side, west side and front setback variance approvals. In conjunction with the redevelopment of this unit, the applicant will be installing 3 additional aspens along the western property line adjacent to the street. Further, the ~ applicant will be converting one exisring woodburning fireplace to.two gas fireplaces. , A. Front Setback Variance , 1. Kitchen Exwansion/Sla Storage (South Elevati•n ~ The applicant proposes to expand the exisring kitchen and construct a ski storage area on the first floor. The existing structure encroaches 3'-5" into the ' required 20-foot front setback. The kitchen expansion/ski storage addition will encroach 2'-9" further into the front setback. Therefore, a 5'-9" setback variance is required in order to allow this kitchen expansion/ski storage azea to ' be constructed, resulting in a 14'-3" front setback. (Please note this area also requires an east side setback variance described in IC.) ~ 1 ' ' ' ' 2. Dining Room Bav Window The applicant proposes to remove an existing dining room window and replace , it with a bay window. The existing structure encroaches 3'-11" into the front setback in this area. The new bay window will encroach an additional 9 inches ~ into the required 20-foot front setback. Therefore, a 4'-8" setback variance is required to allow this bay window to be constructed, resulting in a 15'-4" front setback. (Please note the kitchen expansion/ski storage addition will encroach , into the front setback to a greater extent than will this proposed bay window.) B. West Side Setback Variance ¦ 1. First and Second Floor Bay Windows (North Elevarion) ~ The applicant proposes to change existing first and second floor windows to bay windows. The existing structure encroaches 6'-1" into the required 15-foot side setback. Therefore, a 6'1" setback variance is reQUired, resulring in a ~ 8'11" side setback. Although these proposed windows will not encroach into the side setback to a greater extent than does the existing building, because the proposed construction would increase the amount of GRFA within the required ~ setback, a side setback variance is required. 2. West Side Storage Area , The applicant proposes to construct a 5' x 10' exterior storage area on the west side of the existing structure. The existing structure encroaches 5 feet to 3'-6" , into the required 15-foot side setback in this location. This 46 sq. ft. storage area would encroach a maximum of an additional 5'-3" into the required 15- foot side setback. lfierefore, a 10'-3" setback variance is reQuired to allow this ' storage area to be constructed, resultinQ in a 4'-9" side.setback. C. East Side Setback Variance ~ 1. Kitchen Exnansion/Ski Storage Area ' The existing east side setback is 0. The building is built on the eastern property line. This new kitchen expansion/ski storage area will also encroach ' 15 feet into the required 15-foot side setback. Therefore, a 15-foot setback variance is required to allow the kitchen expansion/ski storage azea to be constructed. The proposed addition will encroach to no greater extent than ' does the existing structure. ' - 2 ' ~ ~ ~ 2. Rear Exterior Storage Area ' The applicant proposes to conswct a new exterior storage area on the rear of ~ the building under an existing deck and stair. Please note the existing east side setback is 0. The building is built on the eastern property line. This new exterior storage area will also encroach 15 feet into the required 15-foot side ~ setback. Therefore a 15-foot setback variance is reQUired to allow this exterior storage area to be constructed. The proposed addition will encroach to no greater extent than does the existing structure. ~ 3. Loft Exvansion ~ The applicant proposes to expand an existing loft by 39 sq. ft. of GRFA. This new second floor azea will not encroach further into the required 15-foot side ~ setback than the 15 feet the existing structure encroaches. However, beeause the proposed construction would increase the amount of development within the required side setback, a side setback variance is required. (Please note all variances are calculated to the building footprint. The eave is not included ~ which is approximately one foot in certain areas.) ~ D. Site Coverage Variance Site coverage allowed on this lot is 20% of the lot size (106 acres, or 4,617 ' sq. ft.). Therefore, the allowed site coverage is 923 sq. ft. The existing site coverage is 995 sq. ft. (21.5%). The addition will increase the site coverage by 177 sq. ft., for a total of 1,172 sq. ft. (25%) of site coverage. A site coverage ~ variance is needed for the additional 177 square feet of GRFA 1. Kitchen Expansion/Ski StoraQe Area ~ This ro osed addition will result in an additional 53 s. ft. of' P P q site coverage. , 2. West Side Exterior Storage Area The proposed 5' x 10' storage area would increase site coverage by 51 sq. ft. ~ Therefore, a site coverage variance is required in order to allow this exterior storage area to be constructed. ~ 3. Reaz Exterior Storage The applicant proposes to construct an exterior storage area under an existing ~ deck/stair. This exterior storage area will result in an addirional 49 sq. ft. of GRFA and 65 sq. ft. of site coverage. Therefore, a site coverage variance is ' required in order to allow this exterior storage area to be constructed. 3 ~ 1 ~ II. BACKGROUND ~ The zoning for this property is duplex. Bighorn Estates, Lots 10 and 11 were subdivided into townhomes, which were later divided into small lots, numbered 1-7. This subdivision created i~ legal, non-conforming lots of a lot size smaller than that which would be allowed under present zoning. ~ III. ZONING CONSIDERATIONS ~ Zoning: Two-Family Site Area: 0.106 acres/4,617 sq. ft. ~ GRFA: Allowed: 1,579 sq. ft. Existing: 2,337 sq. ft. Proposed: 2,512 sq. ft. Increase*: 191 sq. ft. ~ 250 GRFA Remaining: 59 sq. ft. Increase in GRFA is possible under 250 Ordinance Site Coverage ~ (20% of Site Area): Allowed: 923 sq. ft. Existing: 995 sq. ft. (21.5%) ~ Proposed: 1,172 sq. ft. (25°Io) Increase: 177 sq. ft. ~ ~ Height: No Change Setbacks: ~ Front: Required: 20 feet Existing: 16'-9" ~ Proposed: 14'-3" West Side: ~ Required: 15 feet Existing: 89-9" Proposed: 4'-9" ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ East Side: " Required: 15 feet . Existing: 0 feet ~ Proposed: 0 feet Rear: Required: 15 feet Existing: 15 feet Proposed: 15 feet ~ IV. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS ~Upon review of Criteria and Findings, Section 18.62.060 of the Vail Municipal Code, the ~ Community Development Department recommends approval of the front, east and west side setback variances in order to allow the construction of the exterior storage area under the deck/stairs and the bay windows on the first and second stories on the north elevation; the kitchen/ski storage expansion, and dining room bay window on the south elevation. Staff ~ further recommends approval of the requested site coverage variance requests associated with these additions. Staff recommends denial of the west side setback variance and site coverage variance requests required to allow the construction of the 5' x 10' exterior storage area. These recommendations are based on the following factors: ~ A. Consideration of Factors: 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or ~ potential uses and structures in the vicinity. a. Setback Variances ~ In general, the setback variances requested will have no negative , impacts on adjacent properties, excluding the west storage area. ~ Staff believes the west side storage addirion will negarively impact the property owner to the west. The resulting side setback would be 4'-9". If the adjacent property owner were ~ also to pursue such an addition, the accessway to the reaz yard between the two duplexes would be very narrow. Staff believes the addition of the west side storage area reduces, to a great ~ degree, the already small amount of open space which presently exists between this dwelling and the adjacent residence. ~ ~ 5 ~ ~ ~ b. Site Coverage Variance Due to the unusual subdivision of the lot, staff believes it is ~ reasonable to allow some flexibility concerning site coverage. This expansion, excluding the west storage area, will result in ~ additional site coverage of 125 sq. ft. Staff further believes these additions will have no negative impacts on existing or potential uses or structures in the vicinity. 1fie staff dces not ~ believe the additional site coverage for the west storage area is appropriate. ~ 2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and ent'orcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of ~ treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege. ~ a. Setback Variances ~ The duplex lots which were created under the resubdivision of Lots 10 and 11 of Bighorn Estates have lot configurarions which make it almost impossible to modify the units without variances. ~ As previously stated, the existing units already encroach into the required front and side setbacks. These encroachments aze due to the fact the lots are very narrow and small. Instead of a ~ minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet, this lot is 4,617 square feet. Staff believes there are extraordinary circumstances due to the original lot layout of these duplex lots. ~ t Other duplexes in this resubdivision have received similar setback variance requests. In November, 1988, Lot 3, obtained ~ approval of front, side, and site coverage variances in order to construct a trash enciosure and to enlarge a kitchen. As previously stated, the duplex lots associated with the ~ resubdivision of Lots 10 and 11 of Bighorn Estates are all substandard in size. For this proposal, staff believes it is reasonable to consider the existing residence's location in the ~ front, east and west side setbacks to be a practical difficulty warranting setback variances for the additions supported by the staff. This degree of relief from the strict and literal ~ interpretation of the code is appropriate, and has been granted to other property owners with similar circumstances. ~ ~ 6 ~ ~ , ~ Staff does not believe, however, tnere is a practical difficulty warranting the construcrion of the 5' x 10' exterior storage area on the west side of the property. The degree of relief from the ~ setback for this request is not appropriate. b. Site Coverage Variance ~ Because of the small lots, exisring site coverage of all lots in the vicinity is over the allowed. Staff feels that adding 125 sq. ft. of ~ site coverage to accommodate the exterior rear storage area, the bay windows and the kitchen expansion/ski storage add.irions dces not increase to any great extent the existing site coverage. ~ 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of ~ population, transportation and traffic facilities, pubiic facilities and utilities, and public safety. ~ a. Setback Variances and Site Coverage Variance The staff finds that the requested variance will have no significant effect upon any of the above considerations. As previously stated under this redevelopment proposal, the ~ applicant will be installing two additional aspen trees along the western property line adjacent to the roadway. In addition to installing these aspens, the applicant will eliminate an existing ~ woodburning fireplace and install two gas fireplaces. Staff believes, with the exception of the proposed 5' x 10' proposed storage area on the west side of the building, this proposal will ~ have no negative impacts on the factors listed above. With ~ regazd to the proposed 5' x 10' exterior storage area, staff believes the construction of such a storage area will limit access ~ to the rear of the property from the east side of the building, which could negatively impact public safety. ~ B. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings before granting a variance: ~ 1. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified ~ in the same district. ~ 7 ~ ~ ~ 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public . health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or ~ improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: ~ a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would result in pracdcal difficulty or unnecessary ~ physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title. b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or ~ conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. ~ c. The strict interpretadon or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. ~ V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION ~ Upon review of Criteria and Findings, Secrion 18.62.060 of the Vail Municipal Code, the Community Development Department recommends approval of the front, east and west side ~ setback variances in order to allow the construction of the exterior storage area under the deck/stairs and the bay windows on the first and second stories on the north elevation; the kitchen/ski storage expansion, and dining room bay window on the south elevation. Staff ~ further recommends approval of the requested site coverage variance requests associated with these add.itions. Staff recommends denial of the west side setback variance and site coverage ~ variance requests required to allow the construcrion of the 5' x 10' exterior storage area. r Staff believes the variances which are recommended for approval meet the criteria and - findings for a variance. Staff does not believe approval of these variances would be a grant ~ of special privilege, because variance applications have been approved for similar requests. The proposal is not potentially injurious to the public health, safety and welfare. Lasdy, the staff finds the location of the lot lines to be an extraordinary circumstance that is not typically found in the Two-Family zone district, and that other property owners in the same development have received variances from the strict interpretarion of the zoning code for ~ similar types of requests when there were no negative impacts from the requests. Please note that, under Section 18.62.080 of the Town of Vail Zoning Code, the approval shall lapse if construction is not commenced within two years of the date of issuance and ~ diligently pursued to complerion. c:\QecNrnemos\wi1helm.427 g ~ ~ ~ I M 2~1e ol ~un on~ formol~ y M M M 'M i he,eby certily thol nprvvemenl Locotion CerLiTCale was q - , " boseC upa+ the aloremmtio~.. ~lat an oALTA Titie wcoa•ed tor T.8.0., LanO TUe Cuarantee Co. ond the FirstDO~k Commltmenl, ADDli[oUon No. V18250, DroviOed Dy Eogle Counly A r~^ ' • 'i; , up7 THIS IS NOT A LAND SURVEY PUi OF 14PROVEMENl Tllle Co. ~ • . SURVEy PLAT, and [hal I[ ie not to Ge rel,ed upon for Z~R • tle eslaDlishment of lm[e, bu7dinq, or other ir^Dro-emen t lines. 3) improvemenls ond deed lmes ore bosed uDon monumMts found r\~ ' i lurtner certily thot the Improvemmta on tne aDOve Oocribed porcN on lhls dale. Februory 24, 1992, ercepl utility connec- ot Lol S, Bighom Estetea. tlons, oro enCvdy witnin thc boundario ot the parcel, except 4} Accordinq to the Flood I"uronce Rote llop Community-POnd ~ os sno.n, thol the, e ore no entroachments upon the deeUibed No. 080054 0004 B. reviseC Jonuory .25, 1983 the improvemenis p r e m i e t e b y i m p r o v e m e n t s o n a n y a d' p~ n i n q D~ u^~~~~• ~YCe pt oa s hown here o n o r e l o c a l e d i n Z o n e C; o n o r e o o t m i n i m o l ~ . / intlkateC, ond t~at there ie no FPPnREN1 eviCence or sign ol ony 7 ~ emement crossing or burdeninq any part o1 soid porcel, ercept oe tiooaing. noitd. \\141111111111lIl1///// 2 / \ V+~ `,.o~`~~pe R r•~SlF•., ~ar : tz- A ner~c_, 2 . lT Dole SteVen K. Stoltf P 0695 Senlor Vice PrB4h3Sl ~~~~C~ Jehnson. KunM~~~sa `~nG-iJE- ~~_J'/"•/OZI~r`C~_~i~ LOT ? ` ~ /'%•,~OoNuiL u um ~4\\`a ~ ; ~i . Lors 0 0.106 ACRES .r~ U7 ~ ' jand ` ~ ~'A L~ ' / / ~ ~~~L 2no F/~ / \ • ~ ~ ~ y . V~~ ~ \ s c~ , • - ~e0 ~ ~ / _ ~ \cz 'P~ ~ / ?'LS ~ ~ / / i5 / ~ , S ~c,op DECK i 1~'2 STORr ' OEpc ~O~ FRAUE \ u • \ 4289 NUG~fi LOT 6 l?ME ~ . ' / • j27 'L ` . . Be~? S~ ~ . ur.de/ , ` - loi~ ~ • ,SfA/i5 ~G \ ~ \ . ~ •Q ~ / • , ~ \ . ECK ~ • , ~ \ ASPHALT ?,O J . . ' ; PARTY • . s \ . wAIL . ~ 0 \ . ' ~ ~ 5 . ~/~1 . . . ~ PARKING C . , o ~ . . . 17 / ~ ~ \ ~ . •n NOTE: The locotion of the southerly limitt \ \ \ ~ P of Me 100 yeor 11000 plain is LpT 7 APPROXIMATE bme0 on lhe F.E.M.A. sludy Derlormetl in this oreu, os ro- ~ tened to ln Item ? of the Surveyor's Z \ ' • ~ G \ . ~ Noles as snown hereon. cc, s0, . • X O q • Sc y~ • . 0/~//~J Z~vi'": yq . pi Noncc .eeaa~a 1o edaeee w. >w uus ~w.m.~~. e~r ~•aw eeue~ j . oo.« - -r d,- „ U,. uMy NOTE' The proDe.ty shown hereon MAY Ce so0jett to a ~y a-..w o<nw eo..e uoo~ . Hoiy Cross Electric eosement recoroea in Book 221 i t 9 ~ K »a+ aom U< • at Poqe 939. , MO. DA TF DESCRIPTION BY ~ REu'D 'APR ? 1 1992 . ~ , I ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ i; , - - - , - - . ~ . . ; ; , . ; ~ . • • ~ . I I i i ' i i ~ ~ , . ~ . A(ZauN LcvcL ~ ~iU?~c,~,~M -~K. ~ wY~+- ~1--~ f-z,- ~I~~v-j S`oP5-~-. I)owN G.11`~• oWq2D t3f1C1~ ~ /p dGG/E G,2 T K..J'I r~ ~s r~ ~.i w¦. = ~ ~ ~ - - - - - - ~ r'_-~_: I r 1 I I 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i • , , . , I + I ; j; ~ ,I LLA I - - - - -~-1 - - I ~ I - I I ~ - - . - - ' I ~ - ~ ~xY'y rJi ?ji:;,oi/j . ' - T~ ~ ~~J 1-~ • I • : , . . • • ~ r R~SING i,J r14~ ; . , . , ' ; • ~ ~ ; f~d{!~ k~11.Jf~~~ • ' ~ , ~ I ~ • ' ' ~ ' , ; . ' . . - _ _ - - . - ' ~ _ . _ i --r--~----- ---------r-- ~vJ . I I I • ; ~ t:, '61 ~ ~ i • ' . ? ~ 4 , 41 c . ; ; . . Li i I . ~_____....1---•--'_"" ~ ~ WEST ELEVArION. . av ? _ - -r ::i-...~-7:s^v~•-csW . .a): ~ : .v.`""`~ "rovement_ I1nes.x ~l aR -re n liahma~ ~of,;sfence,-.bu0ding, or,otfi~eC; 1mP '~=_t improveme- ~{u~~ie~rtily'th at the improvementa on the above deacnbe64?11 ot Lot 3, : ~parcel .on,thia dotc, February 24, 1992, except utility connec- tiona; ore entirely within the boundcries of the porcd, except ~v~ , 4) According ` os shown, thoi there aro no cncroochments upon the descrt'bed ~.i,u f,: - P No. OSOC~ ~ remises bY imProvements on anY od1'oinin9 Premi9e3, eYCept oa. ;;-~t,-•,?tindicated, ond that there is no APPARETIT evidence or sign;of eny shown hyr< flooding. easement crossing 'or burde-iing any part of soid porc\\`\`\3 n o t e d. ~~~~~~~QQ RE- ~ . ^ _ 199 o r Dote ' Steven K. Scot~ P 0 j~ r' , Senlor Vice Pres~it~~V~95~ :a~ Johnson, Kunke~Qt,~'ssoclo/es, inc.0c~ ~ ~ ~~~'~'~Q~•J~LOT. 4 F ~ . - ~ . ~ '~""'~t c ~ . _ ~ > ° ~~NN~~ C • - ' . . , ~~..4'# d~~, '•f " ;~,.~,rr ~~'-~''„y~//~NAL LANO\\K , S ~ y~ _ •32 ~i 'f^.-' ' ~~y r :~z:. r 1: -~~:5,, -i d'-'~ . . . . ~ - ..M~. f~{c, . . ~..r._ • . . - . . . ~ r W ~ , • - ~ t~ ~ ~ - - ?.rL_. "f `~G~. ~7 _`t'a~ . . ~r , - . . . 4A • 9, ~ ~ E~ZG (z~-S ~ ~ o ~ _ . . . 0 tS,P „ ~ Ct . ~ ' • . ' ~ . . - , ~ ~ ~ . . . "S4y.. t~ <r . . ~ .p~'s ~ , - . . - ~ ~~p r~'~ ~~'S q; • - - V• ir - ~ ~ , n -,e•'~ ~ Y~~ D, ~ . ' :C . 9 _ \ . L~" ~1,- • ~~ilii:. '~J.aI. ra `~a • . Sl~ • "P ~ ' f+ ~ • 1 1/2 STC FRAME ` ,~1~ y' ~ ` ~ ^ ti~NG~ •Y ~ . . x ~ 4289 NUGGET 0 LANE ~ . • / . i' \ ~ ~ . i ~ DECK ASPNALT ~ PARKiNG ~ 141/ ~ i ~ , • ~ ~ \ i ~ ~ C)~ O. ~A ~ • , NoneL Aeeoroiny to Co+oroeo ww ym uust c.ort+m.nu ony 1.0 ocuor, . Dosed uPon any dahet h thb wrvey wtthh tlrw )%On1 atter you z~ T=•. w.,.a .e-.----A ....4. M no weni 'nov enr octbn Dorod uoon ' ~ ~ ~ AFFIDAVIT OF BARBARA RAGAN REGARDING PROPOSED SITE COVERAGE VARIANCE FROM TOWN OF VAIL FOR CONSTRUCTION ~ OF SINGLE CAR GARAGE ~ The Affiant, being of lawful age, being duly sworn under oath and having personal knowledge of the following facts do hereby testify as follows: ~ l. That I am the owner of real ProPertY located at 744 Sandy Lane, Vail, Colorado. ~ 2. That my residence at 744 Sandy Lane, Vail, Colorado is located next door to the East of the property owned by Charles and Geri Campisi at 742 Sandy Lane, Vail, Colorado. , , 3. That Mr. and Mrs. Campisi have made substantial improvements to the residence at 742 Sandy Lane, Vail, Colorado to the extent that the neighbors in the area, including myself, ~ are very appreciative of their efforts in improving the property. 4. That the improvements made by Mr. and Mrs. Campisi upon their property at 742 Sandy Lane, Vail, Colorado to date have been extremely beneficial not only to their property ~ but also to surrounding properties as it has improved the real property at 742 Sandy Lane, Vail, Colorado substantially from its previous condition. , 5. That it is my opinion that the construction of an additional one car garage upon the Campisis property would benefit the residence at 742 Sandy Lane, Vail, Colorado in that it would visually create a finished look to that side of the house. At the present time, that side of ~ the house appears to be unfinished and it would be appropriate and beneficial to construct a garage in that area. ~ 6. That there is absolutely no negative impact which will occur to my property at 744 Sandy Lane, Vail, Colorado or to any other neighboring property that I know of with regard to ~ the construction of a single car garage upon the Campisis' property at 742 Sandy Lane, Vail, Colorado and a granting of a site coverage variance for that purpose. ~ 7. That to construct a carport upon the property, I feel, would be visually intrusive and create an eye sore. It is my preference that a enclosed garage be constructed on that area. ~ 8. That as an adjacent homeowner to Mr. and Mrs. Campisis' property at 744 Sandy Lane, Vail, Colorado I have no objections to the construction of a single car garage or any variances necessary to allow such construetion. In fact, I would encourage approval of any ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ action needed, including granting of a site coverage variance, for the purpose of allowing the garage to be constructed. ~ Further the Affiant sayeth naught. ~ eLBA RAGAN ~ ~ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. EAGLE COUNTY ) ~ Subscribed and sworn to before me this 1 day of December, 1996, by Barbara Ragan. ~ ~ Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: , Notary Public G: \CAMPISI\BARBARA. OTH ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~FFII)A\ IT OI- I3ETTI' GLFFFI: C0MES \UW, the _lfiiant. I3etty Gtiffe\. ha\inL perSOna] }~no~~ied~~e of t11e follo" l ~ ~ ~~,~~~rnt.,.~er ~ath her,eb} testifies as follo~,;.s in t~ : facTS an~ z~no _ du'.~ 1. That I ann the o~,,,-ner of real property located iil the Town of Vail. Count)' of Eagle, ~ te ~~f Colc~rado l~n S«o\~.n as 7 -12--A Sandy Lane, Vail, Colorado. ' That I am a member of the Condominium Association for Lot \,'ail, Potato Patch, Second Filina Condominium. Tow» of Vail, County of Ea°1z;,Condominium Aa ociation")S comprised of Unit 7=~?-A and 7-~2-B Sandy Lane, Vail, Colorado ( That the Condominium Association is comprised of my unit and unit 742-B Sandy ~ 3. Lane. '\'ail, Colorado which is owne~i by Charles Campisi and Geri Campisi (hereinafter refened ~ to as the "Campisi's"). 4. That Nvith m} exprzss permission and im'olvement the Campisi's have requested a , variance from the To«m of Vail for the purpose of constructinQ a sinQle car garaQe addition to their unit. The construction of said sinQle car aaraae will not in any way neaatively impact upon otlZer strucrures in che vicinicN as mo-st structures are residential homes, includina condominium ~ units with Earaaes. 5. That the aaraQe addition chat the Campisi's have requested a variance for from the ~ To%I, n of ail is necessarv for a nuillber of reasons: A. There is sianificant drainaae problem upon the property in that the area in ~ w hich the new aarage ~~'ill be located slopes to«~ard the residence and ~vater flo«'s directly into a major wall of the buildina. The consti~uction of the aaraQe ill resolve this drainaRe problem while at the same time siQnificantly improving the property. ' B. That at the present time with the current confiQuration of the residence %vithout ihe requested LaraRe addition. there exists a sianificant security problem Nvith reQard to my unit. ~ The aeneral public currently has access to an emeraency earess door which leads directly lnto my master bedroom and bath area. Unfortunately, due to the current confiauration of the building the aeneral public often utilizes mvemeraency earess doo~ as oppos for to conmy, cern iford m becau_ e ~ ~e it is the onl~' door readily ~~isible from the street. T11ls . because I cannot see \~ho is at the emergeney e°ress door until I am riaht before the door. This is not the case wi~'n mv main entrance door as I can see the person at. the door throu~h ~~indo~~~s ~ ~i~~;o o~eniii~ d~~oi. In addition packages and tlo~~er c~eli\eries are often left mistakell;\, E-rr r ~ ~,n"Cr~~l~~~ door an~ a~ I~o not utilize that door 1 do not locate the items ~~f[e~~ or nll3TChiiCC1, M1- Bl)l P;erIe Ot I-Illl1!n 11IcfCt Bi-111eC Atc'. tSSUcC. [I1E Of lllc! pUbl1C ~1l,CesS ill MA E']1leCLeIICA • l] i~ ..1.: ~}ILi:I` A~,1~ LIILIC1lRi~~:~jC ;li:~ ~~~'1r . _ ~t t. ~ . _ . ..ii: t.~ ll C()Il,;ilil~ :1liC i ~ ~ 0~'lt)Il5 ~rlz IO 1.,~. ~ CThat in the W'inter months the Town of sno«~ rer?moval puchzc cno,,v onto t},e ~:,za t}-Ie new smQle c2r 2.ji-aLe will be constructed thus r»alKina such ai-ea unusablz particularly :~~-~r par}:in; purposes. 1-here is insufficient parl:ing in Ihe area and ttie sinale car , oara'-:'e \~ill nT-o\~ide a covered parking area year round. 6. F=or ihe foregoinQ reasons ttie o\\'ners of ihe property at 741 Sandy Lane consticuted ~ of myselT and the Campisi's will cuffer a hardship if the Variance is not 2ranted allowinR for construction of Ihe proposed sinale car aaraae. Further the Affiant sayeth naught. , ? T1~ FF ` , ~STATE OF COLOR-~DO ? j ss. EAGLE COUNTY ) Subscribed and sworn to before me dnis ~ dav of September, 1996. b)' ~ ~ BETTY GliFFEY. ~ ;n,-ss mN~ t~iand and oTti,~I'al sea'_ Mv commission expires: ' J r t ~ ~ ~ 10!dBi? gG~. , 3: 0Qt 24-2 5 REDES Y SISI_..tAS TEL ~ ' 61 . FAX~Lna~~~~2,SaaH FAX ~ ~ OSCAR RIZlC AZIZ a r q u i t e c t o ~ ~ TO / PARA: 6etty Gufiy FAX # (970) 476 6717 FRONI / DE: Oscar Rizk Aziz ~ SUBJECT / ASUNTO: Town of Vail appfication DATE / FECHA: October $th. 1996 , ~ PAGES ! PAGtNAS: 2 Including this 'page. ' COMMENTS / COMEMTARIOS: Dear Sstty: ~ Ifi you need any additlortal help, pfeage do noi hesitate #o caH me. Be ' st riooarcls ~ _ - scar ' ~ r R. Kipling 11315. Compfejo Intlustrial Chihuahua. Chihuahua, Chih M6xICO. 31109 - Tel/Phone: 011 52 14 81 35 99 Fax: 011 52 14 81 02 47 ~ ~ ~ t a c~ Ob~ t ~tt b 1.-: 6@ 1 4-2 ~9 _ REDES Y SISi ~^'1,45 TEL PF1GE 02 ~ Oscar Rizk Aziz ~ arquitecto ~ ` Mrs. Betty Guffy and Ms. Gsri Campisi 742 A and 742 Sandy Ln. ~ Vai1 Colotado. Dear Betty: ~ Mr. Karl Fou1and my house keeper sent me a copy of your appiicaiian with iha tovyn of Vail to bu+ld e new addition in,yOUr house. (garage). ' The purpose ot this letter is fo Ist you know that as your n@ighboor from 740 B, t do nat have any problem wiih your pr4ject. ?t does not 8ffect my view whatsoever. f hope you get this approved by the tawn af Vail. ~ I hope we will see you arround christmas and get tagether to have a drink. ~ Sincerely ~ ~ Oscar Rizk ; 740 8 Sandy Ln_ ~ Chihuahua , Chih. Mexico. Ociobsr $th. 1996 , ~ ' Rud ard Ki li No. 11315 Com Ie'o Industriaf Chihuahua Tei. (14) 81-35-98, Fax (14) 81-02-47 Y R R9 p~ aPcto. Poste; z- 1565 Chihuahua, Cnlh., MAxico 31109 ~ , ~y ~ TOWN`OF VAIL ~ 75 South Frontage Road ' Yail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2100 ~ FAX 970-479-2157 CERTIFICATION ~ STATE OF COLORADO ) ~ ) ss. COUNTY OF EAGLE ) ~ The undersigned hereby certifies the foregoing is a full, true and correct transcription of Item No.3 of the Planning and Environmental Commission of September 23, 1996, as it t appears in the original records of the Town of Vail, Department of Community Development. ~ Dated December 5, 1996 ' Mary A. Caster, Deputy Town Clerk Administrative Services STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. ~ COUNTY OF EAGLE ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this5th day of December, 1996, by Mary A. Caster, ' Deputy Town Clerk, Town o#--,V41. , +i G ~ r ^Y -d~, 1 Notary Public My commission expires "'J.~ ~~•5~ . , ~ ~ 4rW~ REC1'CLEDPAPER , ~Joe Staufer: My name is Joe Staufer, I live at 746 Sandy Lane and maybe I shouldn't be here because where they want to build, thaYs where ' my dogs go every night at 10:00. I like to address a couple of things that I start finding, and number one is it's not, the neighborhood may not negatively impact it and then it says iYs a ~ negative effect on light, air and on the neighboring properties, weil, I can't see how that little addition of that building is negative to anybody and I live up there so it certainly doesn't affect me and I'm ' sure it wouldn't affect anybody else to give them that variance. The other is that it says safety, welfare and health. Well, I think security is another area where you have every right if you wish to ' do so to grant this variance. We are living in a dark neighborhood. When I'm out of town, this lady is the only one on the block. And for her to be able to drive into the garage and from the garage a ' secure (inaudible) going to her unit is certainly a safety factor and I ; think that, you know, we are here to address those things and I think that granting a variance that in fact is, if I read it right, one , half of one percent over or under the site coverage, allowable site coverage, for one and a half percent, I don't know how bureaucratic we want to become. I feel very strongly that this ~ variance helps somebody in terms of safety, security and a better place to live in. And I can't see any conceivable reason that would ' hurt somebody else. So, why not grant it? Thank you. Greg Moffit: Thank you. Is there any additional public comment? Dominic. ~ Dominic Mauriello: I just wanted to follow up on something that was said earlier about the closet and storage space. We have DRB plans that were ' approved right now for the additionsfor the work that they're doing right now. There used to be a storage space, kind of below that area below Ms. Guffey's area, that was converted to living space, ~ so while their argument, yea, that we need more storage space, this prior approval actually eliminated that storage and created a living area out of it. I just wanted to point that out. ~ Gre9 Moffit: Thank You. Come on back uP. ' Betty Guffey: The neighbor in the lovely half to the right of mine, (inaudible), had to go to physical therapy at this hour and she let me video tape her , a few minutes before this, but we don't have a video, and she's in approval of granting this to us also. ~ Greg Moffit: Okay, thank you. Let's go to the commission. Galen, comments, questions? , Galen Aasland: I do have~one question of Dominic or for the applicant. How big is 5 ~ ! 4VAIL TOWN O' 75 South Frontage Road Yail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2100 ~ FAX 970-479-2157 CERTIFICATION ~ STATE OF COLORADO ) ~ ) ss. COUNTY OF EAGLE ) ~ The undersigned hereby certifies the foregoing is a full, true and correct transcription of ~ Item No.3 of the Planning and Environmental Commission of September 23, 1996, as it appears in the original records of the Town of Vail, Department of Community Development. ~ Dated December 5, 1996 ~ Q• ! Mary A. Caster, Deputy Town Clerk Administrative Services ~ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. ' ~ COUNTY OF EAGLE ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this5th day of December, 1996, by Mary A. Caster, ~ Deputy Town Clerk, Town~o#<~ilr~ Afa~•a~R ay; ' ~ ~ l • a • S . 2s dm b ~ ' ~~f . ~i Notary Public t;%~~~a S:~y~.g,~~iq$1~ ~f'y>; . My commission exRires: ¢ _ ~ ' ~ ~ RECYCLED PAPER . ! . ~ TRANSCRIPT OF JERI CAMPISI REQUEST FOR SITE EOVERAGE VARIANCE AT PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEETING, MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1996: ~ Greg Moffit: Third item is the Jeri Campisi ~ request, Dominic . ~ Dominic Mauriello: The applicants have requested a site coverage variance in order to construct a one-car garage of approximately 300 square feet, ~ making the request approximately 260.8 square feet. The allowable site coverage for the site is approximately 3403 square feet, which is 20% of the lot area, and they're proposing 3664, ~ which is approximately 21.5%. This duplex, when it was originally approved in 1980, contained 3763 square feet of GRFA. The way that is calculated today, they contain, they have 4502.8 square ~ feet, and that's also due to a, in 1988 they received 500 square feet of GRFA under the 250 ordinance. So with today's finro 250's, the site is permitted up to 4451 square feet, and therefore the site ~ is over on GRFA by approximately 50 square feet. The structure also currently encroaches on the site setbacks on both sides. It's a pre-existing non-conforming condition and it's really not ~ aggravated by this request. Attached you will find some justification provided by the applicant and I've also passed out to you today two affidavits from owners of the property stating some ~ other issues and hardships that they have. Staff believes that the request will increase the building's bulk and mass beyond that enjoyed by other properties in the district. Staff believes that while ~ the proposal may not negatively impact neighboring properties, and while other structures in the have two and three-car garages, they have enjoyed that within the limitations of the site coverage , limitations, and they also have two and three-car garages built within those limitations. Staff does believe that this would be a y special privilege, as other structures in the zone district have been ~ able to construct within these limitations and enjoy the fact that they have a two-car garage. Staff is recommending denial of the variance request, subject to the three findings that you find on ~ page 3, and that's alf I have for you today. ~ Greg Moffit: Thank you, Dominic. Does the applicant have any comments? Kerry Wallace: Hi, I'm Kerry Wallace, my daughter gave me her cold, so if I sound ~ like a swallowed a box of cotton balls, thaYs why. I'm here on behalf of the Campisi's. They would have liked to have been here today, but there was a medical emergency in the fami{y that ~ required them in New York. I'm their attorney, with Stovall Goodman Wallace. Their offices are in Avon and we assisted them in preparing the variance application. Obviously, as ~ 1 ~ ! ~ you've seen from the affidavits that are attached, the Campisi's, in addition, the owner of the other half of the duplex, Betty Guffy, who is also present, I understand has some comments to make today. I ` feel that there a number of issues which daes make this a hardship issue as opposed to, say, a special privilege. A major issue for the ~ Campisi's is a lack of storage. Obviously, this was a property that was constructed some time ago and it does have a fairly odd floor plan in the way it's designed. The Campisi's have informed me ~ that there is little or no closet space within their residence and so it makes it very difficult for them to store items in the house, in particular, you know, as anyone who lives in Vail, you have a lot of ~ recreational goods, such as skis and golf clubs, those types of items. They have no where to put them in the house and so their having additional garage space would be of assistance. Right now , the two-car garage that they have which is not oversized is used to park both of their vehicles, so there's not a lot of additionai storage space. There's also a problem with parking, especially in the ~ winter months. They do have a lot of guests that come out, they have family members that like to come out and visit and there's a problem with parking, particularly in the winter when the plows , need to come through and it needs to be a open area. An area where there is now, even say if you were going to put a parking ~ pad there, from what I understand the Town of Vail, when they plow the snow, it piles up on that spot, so it's really not a usable parking spot in the winter, so they'd like to be able to have an ~ additional car to aflow guests and any other person to be able to park in an enclosed area during the winter months. The Campisi's, and I think Ms. Guffey will substantiate this, have significantly improved the property since purchasing it with, you know, I think ` it's been a real benefit to the general area. The garage will essentially be an improvement to the property, not a detriment, it , ~ will increase the value which is a positive thing for the neighborhood. IYs my understanding that the space, and I know that you've had a site visit, is not really usable as is. And that the ~ garage would be good use of that space. I was informed by the architect that the post garage, is as small as they can possibly make it and still park a regular size car in it. It's not made for, say, ~ a 4x4 or an over-sized car, so he made it as small as possible, keeping in mind the variance issue. And it's also my understanding in talking to the architect, i.e., I don't look at plans ~ and analyze them, but he did inform me that it was not going to encroach on any of the setbacks. There's also the issue of a serious drainage problem right in the area where the garage would ~ be constructed. It's my understanding that it slopes and so drainage from Sandy Lane hooks right into a major wall of the building. This has to be corrected one way or the other. It's my ~ 2 ~ ' ~ understanding that Betty Guffey can-substantiate this. She's taiked with some contractors. It will be substantially expensive to fix the 1 drainage by having to fix the grade or do something of that nature. The garage, by raising up the front of the grade, will take care of the drainage problem while at the same time being a benefit to the ~ property. And I know that a major issue doesn't necessarily affect my client, but it does affect Ms. Guffey and she can tell you more about that as a security issue in that it's my understanding that ~ there's access to a private door. It's a door she has to have in her unit for egress purposes, in case of fire or some kind of emergency. But there's public access to this door. It leads right ~ into her bathroom and her bedroom. She says people use it all the time - knock on the door and, you know, you open the door and you might be in your bathrobe. She's concerned with regard to 1 security issues on that. She can see from her main door out the window and see who's at the door and have a little bit more control than when someone knocks on this other door. She's got some ~ pretty serious concerns about that. So, you know, there's a number of issues that they feel do create, you kr?ow, hardship in this case. And, like I said, it is the minimum amount that they could ` possibly do to put in a garage, and I know Ms. Guffey has landscape plans. They're planning on doing some further ~ improvements to the property and, you know, beautifying the area. It is my understanding that the unit was a bit of an eyesore for a while. You know, until all of the changes that Campisi's have done. So, for those reasons, I know the Campisi's would really like to you ~ to consider, you know, approving the variance. I think that in the area there are a number of places with two and three-car garages, ~ so this is not something out of the ordinary or out of place. I don't think any of the adjacent units will be negatively impacted. IYs not going to be a high garage, so it shouldn't impact views or light to , , other units or that type of thing and we would like you to take those things into consideration when making your decision. ~ Greg Moffit: Thank you. Kerry Wallace: Thank you. ~ Greg Moffit: AnY other aPPlicant comments? ~ Betty Guffey:: I'd just like to reiterate what Greg Moffit: First, you have to tell us who you are. ~ BettY GuffeY:: Oh, I'm BettY GuffeY, and ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ Greg Moffit: Thank you. - ~ Betty Guffey: for five years I've owned the upper half of the house, or the upper third of the house known of "A", 742A, and I've been waiting on waiting on somebody like the Campisi's for five years, to come ~ along and help me redo the outside. I refuse to allow the previous owners to paint it. It takes both of our approvals to do anything. And I didn't want it painted blue gray again. I wanted stucco or ~ some rock or something put on it and the Campisi's also fit the mold that they didn't want to subdivide it, make a little loft here and a little kitchen here and rent it out part time. They plan to live in it ~ with their grandchildren visiting them and that was the perfect person to buy it. The only problem was I didn't sell it to them, another realtor, but they, we agreed on doing this stucco, which is , a great improvement, over $60,000 for that, and I have to pay my share of that and when it comes down to repairing the drainage problem, and doing something with that area, I was very happy that ~ they agreed to have an architect design a space that's small, that doesn't exceed the lot lines, will solve my problem about the emergency egress door, will open onto a deck that looks like the ~ house to me from the front, looks like it always should have gone around that corner with the deck. And I have some videos, but I ~ found out you didn't have, I have a video of when I bought it five years ago and my son was ready to put me in a nursing home because that was the ugliest house he had ever seen. So I had videos of it and I put up with a lot in the five years that I've had, oh, ~ the propane tank that was there. The Campisi's have removed that and are going to put a garden in its place. The propane tank was / to heat the hot tub. They brought in gas. The propane tank was right underneath my bedroom window and some of the renters said they've had short term downstairs before the Campisi's bought it, y ~ left the propane tank in my driveway for several weeks. I had to get the Fire Department to come out and move them. And one of my neighbors, Joe Staufer, is here to tell you too, that we had snow ~ mobilers coming in at 2:00 in the morning, 3:00, shaking that garage underneath my bedroom. And if the Campisi's want a garage there for storage, I'm so happy to try to help them get it. It ~ will help me too. It will have a deck of 300 square feet that they're willing to put in. And, I've stated that the security is the biggest concern and the biggest hardship I have. And I live there alone and ~ I would, I definitely like these plans more than anything else, but it seems like 50 square feet overage is a really minor problem compared to the expense and the lack of security for me. 1 Gre9 Moffit: Thank You. Is there anY Public comment? Come on uP! ~ 4 ~ ' , Joe Staufer: My name is Joe Staufer, f live at 746-Sandy Lane and maybe I shouldn't be here because where they want to build, thaYs where my dogs go every night at 10:00. 1 like to address a coupie of ' things that I start finding, and number one is it's not, the neighborhood may not negatively impact it and then it says it's a ~ negative effect on light, air and on the neighboring properties, well, I can't see how that little addition of that building is negative to anybody and I live up there so it certainly doesn't affect me and I'm ~ sure it wouldn't affect anybody else to give them that variance. The other is that it says safety, welfare and health. Well, I think security is another area where you have every right if you wish to ' do so to grant this variance. We are living in a dark neighborhood. When I'm out of town, this lady is the only one on the block. And for her to be able to drive into the garage and from the garage a ~ secure (inaudible) going to her unit is certainly a safety factor and I think that, you know, we are here to address those things and I think that granting a variance that in fact is, if I read it right, one ' half of one percent over or under the site coverage, allowable site coverage, for one and a half percent, I don't know how bureaucratic we want to become. I feel very strongly that this ~ variance helps somebody in terms of safety, security and a better place to live in. And I can't see any conceivable reason that would hurt somebody else. So, why not grant it? Thank you. ~ Greg Moffit: Tha'nk y o u. Is itionaI p u blic c omment? Dominic. t e r e a n y a d d ~ Dominic Mauriello: I just wanted to follow up on something that was said earlier about the closet and storage space. We have DRB plans that were ~ approved right now for the additions for the work that they're doing right now. There used to be a storage space, kind of below that area below Ms. Guffey's area, that was converted to living space, , ~ so while their argument, yea, that we need more storage space, this prior approval actually eliminated that storage and created a living area out of it. I just wanted to point that out. i Greg Moffit: Thank you. Come on back up. ' Betty Guffey: The neighbor in the lovely half to the right of mine, (inaudible), had to go to physical therapy at this hour and she let me video tape her a few minutes before this, but we don't have a video, and she's in ~ approval of granting this to us also. Greg Moffit: Okay, thank you. LeYs go to the commission. Galen, comments, ` questions? Galen Aasland: I do have one question of Dominic or for the applicant. How big is ~ 5 ~ i ' existing two-car garage? - ' Dominic Mauriello: The existing two-car garage? I think they're each about 300 square feet, each of those garage spaces, so you're looking at 600 square feet existing now. ~ Galen Aasland: Is that, do you concur with that? ~ Dominic Mauriello: IYs at least that. (Cannot understand comment from audience) ~ Galen Aasland: OkaY. So, under this application, it's like the garage that is being built, would that go to your unit or would it go to the Campisi's? ) (Cannot understand resPonse from audience ' ' Galen Aasland: So they have access from their current garage inside? And it won't change the access into your house? ' Betty Guffey: No. (Garbled comment). Galen Aasland: Okay. On the south side. Okay. Alright. Actually, in ways for site ~ coverage variance, I have some kind of unusual sympathy. I think in certain cases there's some good grounds for it, especially on smaller lots. If this lot was under 15,000 square feet, I would feel ~ much more strongly about it. I think the lot's under 15,000 square feet have a particular problem once they get over that they have 1 less and less a problem, although this is not that much larger than.... I do have some concerns about it though, is that the building seems to be already pushing the envelope of developmeN ~ under of different grounds already, and this would obviously make it push things further beyond what the zoning is consistent with the neighborhood. I think the deck that you're talking about could be ~ built without a variance, in fact, I know it could off of your unit in terms of getting rid of the door. And so, well it's nice that that can be there. That's already an allowed use and it's not that you can't ' build a deck and you can't do certain things, iYs just that, in this particular case, happens to make this more convenient. I'm somewhat bothered by the argument that the Campisi's don't have ' storage because they're doing this big remodel on the house right now and obviously they've gotten rid of storage, so I really don't think that there's really any argument from that particular ' standpoint. I would be interested if there's an opportunity because there is existing site coverage left whether the existing garage could be added to within what the allowed zoning to add storage ~ 6 ~ ' ' on to that, so i do have a fair amount of sympathy for the site coverage, but ! also see that there's some problems with it that you `ve really done a remodei, that the owners have done a remodei i and they really, they're creating some of their own conditions. ' Greg Moffit: Thank you, Galen. Diane? Diane Golden: If the garage is not put in, do you have to leave that staircase ~ coming out of your bathroom? How did that get put in and when was that put there? ' Betty Guffey: It had a prior staircase (inaudible) and was buried in snow. Diane Golden: So how long has that staircase been there? 1 Betty Guffey: Five years that I've lived there. Stormshed and garage door (inaudible) short term rental (inaudible) , Diane Golden: And from your garage, so have to step outside and then go to your front door? ~ BG: (Inaudible) ~ Diane Golden: But It's covered? Okay. ' Diane Golden: Where will the snow be put if the garage is there? Greg Moffit: Would you come up to the microphone so we can, we're being recorded believe it nor not. ~ ~ Diane Goldlen: Where will the snow be put if the garage is put in . y ' Dominic Mauriello: I mean, that's the owner's option. The fact that there's snow on their site, I mean, that's their own snow removal issue. As far as ~ the door going in upstairs, I mean, I'm sure there's a variety of architectural solutions for that, not just having the stairs there. I'm sure that either of the architects on the board could tell you there's ' probably ten different ways to address that egress. Betty Guffey: Well, Bill Pierce worked with me to, we ran up a bill of $1600 to try / to design a garage and an entrance around that. One plan was to ~ enter my house in front of my fireplace, which I don't think is acceptable, and another was to put a rock stairway to the north ~ corner and that exceeded the setback, so we scratched that, so it didn't make any sense to spend $70,000 and still have an ugly entry. You know, and to have that door that now goes down with ~ 7 ' ' this plan, with Jeri's, or Campisi's gaxage, then I don't have to get access from it and my stairway can go up. Bill Pierce's architectural plan was to have a stairway, not from a garage there, ' to go up and around and enter where my laundry room is now and that was terribty expensive and this is just the best plan that I've seen that, from the front of the house it looks like it was meant to ' be that way instead of looking like a double-wide trailer, it will look like a house with a nice sized deck that usable. I don't have a deck ' on the house thaYs usable. And if, one of your plans was to build a deck up here, that still leaves the drainage problem, which is very expensive to repair. The drainage problem has been there for a ' long time, creating problems for the other side of the house and it seems silly to me to spend $28,000 to repair the drainage problem when, well, it would have been a little bit easier if they'd left the ' snowmobile garage there. Probably would have been cheaper to repair that, but I am so happy to have that out of there, and people running under my bedroom with gasoline and engines, so if they ' gave up the storage to build a room there, I guess I should be willing to sacrifice and pay for the drainage. But it just seems logical that, I think it does, to we're only exceeding 50 square feet ' that for the expense involved and somebody willing to make the place look better and more functional. About the question about the snow coming in. It would just be the front part of our driveway , that would have to be plowed. It's piled back in there and buries any car that parks in that space there, that's there now and in the ' stairway, ugly as it is, is buried in snow also. Diane Golden: I have no further comment right now. i Greg Moffit: Thank you, Diane. Henry? h ' Henry Pratt: I guess first I'd like to say that I think that you're extremely lucky to have new neighbors like the Campisi's who are willing to come in and address all wrongs and spend the money and take some pride ~ in their ownership. In terms of this application, I'm hearing a lot of things being put forth as hardships that I don't think really are. I think you're security issue is more an architectura{ issue of ' identifying where the front door is, the drainage issue is something that should have been corrected when the current remodel was designed or laid out. On the other hand, I think that, like everyone ' else in town, you are entitled to 600 square feet of garage, but as the staff inemo points out, you should be able to do it without asking for a site coverage variance because everybody else is held ~ to those rules. During our pre-meeting and during the site visit, we've talked about, well if you just took away some GRFA or moved it somewhere else, then you'd have that site coverage for a ' S , ~ , garage. At this point I think that's impracticai, given the way you've got horizontal condominium type zoning on this thing. So I guess ' even though I don't want it be considered as a precedent, this garage has no impact on any neighbors in terms of light, air, mass and bulk and guess I'd be in favor of granting the variance in this , case, even though I do not really find adequate grounds for a hardship. And that's a tough one for me. , Greg Moffit : Thank you, Henry. John. John Scofield: I would have to agree very much with Henry in all aspects. You , are lucky to have a neighbor that's willing to spend the money to upgrade and I think we should do everything we can as a town to encourage that. I agree that the drain is something that really is , not a hardship. It could be fixed with or without the garage. I've had similar problems, I understand what you're working with. Likewise, ithink the door, it's a downright lousy location, but it , could also, I think, be fixed in other aspects. I think what we have to look, at as a board is perhaps balancing the issues of site coverage and whaYs really going to sit on that site and no matter ' what we do, you're probably going to have a car sitting in that corner. So I would tend to agree with Henry that perhaps the ' hardship of getting parking tickets when you park out in the street would be something that I would look at and say that I could support this type of thing because I really don't think it's going to ' affect the neighbors at all and I think it would perhaps be an improvement over having a car sitting out there looking ugly all the time. i Greg Moffit: Thanks, John. Greg? 5 , Greg Amsden: This application, and I'm leaning more to what Galen said, is that a lot of these are self imposed problems that have occurred here. The drainage situation at one time that house did not have a ~ structure underneath your apartment. And there was no drainage problem whatsoever with that site. I was here when the house was constructed in the beginning. I know the whole history of the ' house. In fact, our real estate company marketed that house when it was first built. So I don't, I mean, the drainage problem has occurred when the house was expanded into that area and it still , can be cured by proper treatment of the expansion, in which it has not been done, so the storage argument just doesn't hold water because they've removed the storage space and even the garage ' that they're suggesting buifding is only the size of one car. It would be filled with a car and there would not be much storage in it anyway. So, again, they're left with no storage. They've got their ' 9 ' ' variance in a garage and yet they haven't solved at least trying to justify this variance with. The safety concern, I believe you can put either a small or a large deck off that door. I would definitely , remove what's there. I don't know if there's really, and it was mentioned but I don't even know if that is there for a fire purpose, ' does the staff know? I mean, no one knows if that's even an ingress/egress... Betty Guffey: That's an emergency egress. I don't have another way out of the ' house, out of the master.... ' Greg Amsden: Yea, but we don't know if that's why that stairway's there or even if it was there in the beginning and no one's even brought that point up or whether it has to be there or not, so if it doesn't have to be ' there, a deck would be a good treatment off that door. Betty Guffey: I've tried tg find another access, or egress, and I don't have one. ' All the windows are on the second floor and they don't open large enough to get out. ' Greg Amsden: But I mean, in looking at this application, I have a hard time just because it does set a precedent. When you grant a variance ~ without substantial hardship or reasons for that, and I don't find these to be justifiable reasons for granting a variance, I think that we open up, I mean we have a very hard time for the next guy that , comes in and says, "Hey, I want to go over my site coverage because of this, this and this." I mean, literally they can associate their causes with what's mentioned here that I don't think, I think ~ they're self imposed situations. And it sounds like the Campisi's want a second garage. My solution would be, it's a design driven problem. You have to fit that garage within existing structure. , ' Without increasing that site coverage to go over that site coverage limit. And they need to take a hard look at that. I believe it's doable where their family room is. And where they've enclosed ~ and that house has been expanded. In fact, in the memo by the staff, the 500 square feet, two 250's that was granted that site were all put on the large side of that home. Why, I don't know. I do ' know that it was under one ownership. The Platners at that time. And that's probably why it occurred. Sut, that's the case and that's what is in existence. ' Greg Moffit: Basically in a reement with Gre on this one. What we've 9 9 got here is kind of a classic zoning dilemma. You've got a unit, we've got a ' unit that is maxed. We've got as much square footage as permitted, we've got about as much site coverage as permitted, ' and now we want to add more despite the fact that there's a lot of 10 ~ ' ' square footage inside the existing bLAk and mass that could have been designed to hoid cars or to store kayaks or to put a ski locker, ' or whatever. Without going into reiterating all of what Greg said, I think the storage issue is one of self creation and I am very concerned about the slippery slope aspect of it. Yes, Joe, in ' response to your comment that the 50 feet is maybe one and a half percent, but the next application may be an 8000 foot house. ' Dominic Mauriello: It's 260 square feet, it's 50 square feet over on GRFA, so what we're talking about is 260 square feet. ' Greg Moffit: Okay. And if it's an 8000 foot house, that starts to look like a pretty big bubble. I don't see how granting this variance isn't a grant of special privilege - hardship or not. It just strikes me as a grant of ' special privilege. My guess is that we're going to have to split votes. , Greg Moffit: What's the area of the garage that's being proposed? , Dominic Maureillo: 300 square feet. Greg Moffit: So, essentially the site coverage is maxed before you add this. ' Dominic Maureillo: It's 40 square feet - less than 40. , Greg Moffit: Yea, I just wish I could find something to hang my hat on here. Greg Moffit: If there are no further comments from the applicant, or the public, ' then somebody gets to make a motion. Greg Amsden: Mr. Chairman, I move that the request for a site coverage variance, ' to allow for a one-car garage located at 742 Sandy Lane, Lot 3, Vail Potato Patch, Second Filing, being denied, per the staff memo and that granting the variance will constitute a grant of special i privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified the same district. There are no exceptions or , extraordinary circumstances in conditions applicable to this site that apply generally to other properties in primary/secondary residentiaf zone district. And I might add that least, I believe that ' the hardships that have been presented by the applicant, many of them are self imposed by the handling of the expansion of the livable area in the large side of that duplex and that, finally, the ' strict interpretation or enforcement of this specific regulation does not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the primary/secondary residential d'+strict. ' ll ' , ' Greg Moffit: Motion by Greg. Do we have a second? ' Galen Aasland: I'll second that. Greg Moffit: Seconded by Galen. Any further discussion? ' Galen Aasland: I would also like to add, if this lot was under 15,000 square feet, I think my vote would be different on this. But the fact that it's over ' 15,000 is one of the deciding factors in my vote. Greg Moffit: Okay, thank you Galen. I uess I have a uestion for he r g q t boa d and staff. Does anybody ~ see any opportunity to possibly table this and let them find a way to get the site coverage down or is the garage 1 don't thin~ that there's any other way to do it. 1 mean, they've , hired people to look at it themselves and I don't know if they've, they haven't presented any alternatives to us, but I would guess , that there's _Yea, let me ask a question. If the deck, if they put a deck out of ' that door, that's not site coverage, correct. Dominic Maureillo: Correct , _And they could Put a hard deck ' Dominic Maureillo: That's correct. outside that door. Now granted, you haven't got a heated garage,, r but what you've got is covered parking - a carport. The rules are screwy, but unfortunately, we got appointed to enforce them. That creates an interesting scenario in light of what Henry suggested. ' We've got a motion on the table first, Henry. That's strictly a DRB or staff approval type of issue - it doesn't ` involve Planning. Greg Moffit: Okay. So we have a motion on the floor. Is there any further , discussion? All those in favor? ' Aye Greg Moffit: Opposed? , ]2 ' ' ' . . No response. ~ Greg Moffit: I am also in favor. Motion passes unanimously. The application is denied. I'm sorry - the rules are tough on this one. ' ' ~ , ' ' ' ~ ' h ' ' ' , ' ' 13 West Vail Roundabout Design Alternative and Landscaping Questionnaire The following questionnaire was designed to take public comment about the possible landscape designs of the West Vail roundabouts. The questionnaire was handed out at the November 7th Open House. 18 responses were received. Design and landsc ingson ptc: Should each of the three entry points for Vail have similaz character and detailing so that a visitor always lrnows they've arrived in Vail. Or, should each of the three entries have a unique identity. There aze three concepts being considered for the design of the West Vail roundabouts please choose one of the following: Mirror Main Vail 2 Similar in character to Main Vail with distinctive new elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Distinctivein character 2 Recommendation: Similar character as Main Vail with new details/elements. Bik a h ogtionc; Keep bike path at grade (alongside roundabout traffic) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Separate bike path (either under Marriot bridge or on sepazate bike bridge) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Recommendation: Keep bike path at grade due to costs and wetland impacts. Pedectrian li~hting op~tions: Low level lighting (42" to 60" high) steel bollard lighting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 (16' to 20' high) lighting along pedestrian path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Recommendation: Will use 16' to 20' "Village" fixtures. Landscaped walls: Stone faced walls may be selected for use in the landscaping of the West Vail roundabouts. Because there are a number of distinctive stone fascias, we are asking for your input on the type of stone faced wall that best exemplifies the character of West Vail or which you would like to see used in the landscape. Please rank the derent typed of wall face, 1 being your most preferred: lsi 2nd 3rd 4th m No or ign=d "Vail Wall" used at Main Vail 8.5 1 1 2 - - Rounded cobble wall with large boulders 4.5 5 2 1 - - Large boulder wall 1 2 2 4 1 - Stucco with rock base - 1 1 - 5 4 Rubbie wall 2 1 4 2 1 1 Recommendation: Use "Vaii Wall" stone fascia for landscape walls. Construction Phasing: c~,~,~ l'~~cl~ r`~,~,ps Close access between north and south frontageJ.esd"s for several days, forcing all traffic to utilize the Main Vail exit thereby minimizing the overall construction time. : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Keep interchange open and functioning between north and south frontage roads, with intermittent lane closures, for all traffic in a limited capacity. This would not minimize overall construction time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i either/or . . . . . 1 no reply . . . . . . 1 Recommendation: Working with CDOT for approval to close the Frontage Road at key points during construction. r , MATERiAL.S AND FINISHF.4 OPTIONS Your input will help the Design Team setect and emphasize the materials and finishes which best define West Vail's character. Select materials/finishes you would most like to see used in the roundabout based on the following scenario: • You have a fixed budget to upgrade the materials and finishes for ihe roundabout. Please "purchase" the upgrades which you would most like to see included. Please note that in this scenario there is not enough money available to purchase all of the upgrades, so select those you would most like to see used. • You do not need to spend all of the budget. Keeping the "basic level of fmish" for nay or all option sis an acceptable option. Total Budget Available for Upgrades $100 Minimum Level of Finish Potential Upgrade Upgrade Your Votes Votes Cost Choices Concrete Sidewalk Concrete Unit Paver Sidewalks • Standard concrete sidewalk 12 • Sidewalks made up of precast concrete $40 buff tint 2 paving units. Generally available in grey, red, brown and buff colors. 3 Scored and Tinted Goncrete Anrons Concrete Unit Paver A rp ons $22 • Concrete aprons with a color tint and • Aprons made up of precast concrete paving stamped or scored texture. Color tint units. Generally available in grey, red, generally available in grey, red, brown, brown, and buff colors. 5 and buff cotors. . . 6 Scored and Tinted ConGlete Retaining Walls R, aining Wallc Faced with Stone $45 • Concrete retaining walls with a color tint • Stone facia for the retaining walls at the on and scored texture. Color tint generally and off ramps. (Please note the type and available in grey, tan, and buff colors. color of stone to be used is discussed at . . . . . . 6 another station.). . . . . 11 Concr x . urb and . utter Tinted Concrete C rrb and T utter . . . . . 2 $6 • Standard concrete curb and gutter 15 • Concrete curb and gutter with a color tint. 40' Light Poles 6 LeSiestrian L.evel Lighting with 40' L.ig Polec $22 • A minimum level of lighting is required to • 16' to 20' tall lights or bollard liahts (see safely light the roundabout roadway. This Board 3) along bike/pedestrian paths to give is provided by 40' light poles like those a more "human scale" to the roundabout used in the Main Vail Roundabout. lighting. 11 8' to 12' Evergreen Trees 12' ' Eyetgrejen Trees $10 • A minimum size range for evergreen trees • Evergreen trees in a larger size range for an . . . . . 9 immediate impact. • • • . • 8 1yfll,andscane Walls L.andsc pe W31Ls $16 • Design the landscape so as to reduce the • create opportunities for landscape walls to need for landscape walls and retaining define planting beds and enhance the theme. wails. 9 8 Recommendations: • Concrete sidewalks. Considering a concrete tint if budget allows. • Stamped scored tinted concrete aprons. • Stone faced retaining walls. • Standard curb and gutter. • "Village" tixtures used in conjunction with the 40' lights for the north roundabout only. I • The size of the evergreen trees to be determined by available funds (8' - 12' minimum). • Landscape walls to be used in key locations, especially on the north side. Annual/Perenniai Flower displavs: Agree Neutral Disagree 1 2 3 Would you include large areas of annuaUperennial displays at a level comparable to the Main Vail Roundabout? (Be aware that in addition to the yeazly cost for plant material, up to two seasonal mainTenance workers and additional equipment would be needed for a total cost of $35,000 to 6 4 7 $45,000/year. This would put demands on the Town's operational budget which could result in an increase in taxes or a reduction in other services. Recommendation: No clear direction from the public. Will employ limited use annuaUperennial beds in the roundabouts. Traditional L.andccane versLC Native/L.ow Water Use Agree Neutral Disagree 1 2 3 (Board #4): The landscape for West Vail should utilize a traditional bluegrass/formal planting concept like that used on the 9 1 5 south side of the Main Vail Roundabout. Native/low water use grasses and plantings similar to the north side of the Main Vail Roundabout are more 10 ~ appropriate for West Vail. Unsure 1 Recommendations: No clear direction from the public. The landscape for the north roundabout witl be more traditional and the south'side more native. Other Suggestiam: Please list any other elements which capture West Vail's Chazacter that are not yet listed above. See attached summary h L West Vail Roundabout Design Alternative and Landscaping Questionnaire Other Suggestions/Comments Feedback (consecutive comments means suggestions by same respondent) Q-1 I would like it (i.e the entry point) to look nice like main Vail roundabout, but would like some sort of uansition to that type of look, especially after driving past sheer rock cliffs coming out of Dowd junction Q-2 Traffic into stream side is light. May not warrant putting bike path below bridge Q-3 Bollard would help lead way thru roundabout Q-4 Use some large boulder wall as transition coming out of Dowd Junction cliffs in conjunction with perhaps Vail wall as tie into Main Vail. This is a tough question. They all look nice!! Q-5 Either or - am in favor of closing access, but depends on for how long and how much it speeds process up. (All above answers came from the same respondent) Q--6 2 people requested a concrete sidewalk with suggestion of it being tinted buff Qthersngge&tiQns Break up retaining walls Would like the landscaping to be of a low profile nature that will keep view corridors open South roundabout exit onto S. Frontage road is only 1 lane wide All traffic from the West - to a new LionsHead ski portal Keep bike path/sidewalks on all sides of roads W.V. is commercial entry/neighborhood not main town Match stream side bridge to other retaining walls in roundabout area Keep it simpler and functional, be concerned with long term maintenance costs Work on this project with 2 overlap shifts, work done as soon as possible If we have scored and tinted retaining walls - please step and landscape Center piece year round made up of something we could light (one tall - some small) Down from center piece - low lying bushes expostilla - yellow bush Then to the curb with annuals - that do well in Vail - petunias - marigolds Check out my garden - Richard Strauss, 1916 W Gore Creek, Tel: 476 3757 (would like to show you photos of his garden) ; ° '.'West Vail Interchange Preliminary Construction Cast Estimate Item Item Cost Roadway $8359400 Retaining Walls $4759000 Bridge $8559000 Drainage & Utilities $4309000 Surveying, Design & Permits $3759000 Landscaping $7509000 Lighting/Signing & Striping $3309000 Construction Management & Testing $5459000 , Construction Traffic Control $2509000 Mobilization & Contingencies $6739000 Right-of-Way $309000 Project T'otal 7$59550900011 ~ DEPARTMENT of PUBLIC WORKS & TRANSPORTATION WEST VAIL INTERCHANGE CONSTRUCTION PLAN GROUND RULES o PUBLIC INVOLVEMEN The Town of Vail will involve the public in the creation and evaluation of a construction plan. o SAFETY Safety and emergency vehicle acess will not be compromised during construction. 0 - There will be inconveniences. - Construction will span from March to November with additional work possible in the following Spring. - Work will occur simultaneously on the north and south sides of the intersection. - Vehicular trafffic will likely be reduced during construction and will impact West Vail businesses accordingly. - Access to the lntermountain neighborhood, Streamside, and West Vail businesses will be maintained in some form during construction. - Detours on Chamonix Road and other roadways will be necessary. - There will be closures of specified roads on specified days. - Other area roadway improvements will occur simultaneously, such as North Frontage Road turn lanes, Highway 6 widening at Dowd Junction, roundabouts in Avon, 1-70 overlay befinreen ~and Vail, Frontage Road overlay in Vail. o DEC/S/ON MAKERS Construction re/ated decisions will be made by the Town of Vail with approval by the Colorado Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Army Corpos of Engineers, and Co%rado Division of Wildlife. i . DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS & TRANSPORTATION WEST VAIL INTERCHANGE CONSTRUCTION PLANS PUBLIC INPUT REQUESTED o Hours of Construction o Nigh t Work o Traffic Control o Length of delays o Construction/business signing o B us Service ~ o Pedestrian and bicyo*e sa o Detours o Neighborhood access o Commercial loading and delivery o Commercial visibility o Construction staging sites o Holiday scheduling (4th of July, Memorial day, Labor day) f r DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS & TRANSPORTATION WEST VAIL INTERCHANGE CONSTRUCTION PLAN IsCHEDULE Dec 16 - Develop survey on construction issues. Dec 17 - VTC approval of process & givens. Dec 26 - Distribute WVI newsletter outlining process. Jan 2- Open house at Streamside to outline process. Jan3-10 - Distribute, collect and tabulate surveys. Jan 16-& 23 - Community roundtable to REV/EW survey input, IDENTIFY concerns, issues and possible alternatives and other information for decision making. Jan 28 Alternative presented to Town Council for review,. Feb 4 modification and approval. Feb 18 - Final decision for final approval to proceed by Town Council. April- Public Education/awareness on Construction Plan. May - Community Roundtables to address concerns. Nov MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council • FROM: Community Development Department DATE: December 17, 1996 SUBJECT: An appeal of a variance denial made by the Planning and Environmental Commission on September 23, 1996. The appellants were denied a site coverage . variance to allow an additional one-car garage to be constructed at 742-B Sandy Lane/Unit B, Lot 3, Vail/Potato Patch, Second Filing. Appellants: Charles and Geri Campisi, represented by Kerry Wallace Planner: Dominic Mauriello 1. SUBJECT PROPERTY Campisi project. Located at 742-B Sandy Lane/Unit B, Lot 3, Vail/ Potato Patch, Second Filing. II. STANDING OF APPELLANT Staff believes the appellants have standing to file an appeal in this case as they are the owners of ihe subject property. III. BACKGROUND The Town Council tabfed this appeai at the November 19, 1996 Council meeting. The item was tabled until December 17, 1996 at the request of John Goodman, attorney for the Campisi's. The appellants requested a site coverage variance of 260.8 sq. ft. in order to construct a 300 sq. ft. one-car garage on the subject property. This duplex currently contains 2 enclosed garage spaces and this request would add a third. The allowable site coverage for this site is 3,403.8 sq. ft. (20%) and the proposal is for 3,664.6 sq. ft. (21.5%) of site coverage. The Planning and Environmental Commission, at their September 23, 1996 meeting, unanimously denied the site coverage variance and made the following findings (see attached minutes): 1. That the granting of the variance will constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. 2. There are no exceptions, extraordinary circumstances, or conditions that are applicable to this site that apply generally to other properties in the Primary/Secondary Residential zone. In addition, any hardships which have been presented, have been self imposed [the PEC specifically added this provision to the findings recommended by staff]. 3. The strict interpretation, or enforcement of the specified regulation does not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by owners of other properties in the Primary/Secondary Residential district. 1 This duplex was approved by the DRB in 1979 and constructed in 1980. The dupiex, as originaily approved, contained 3,763 sq. ft. of GRFA (as calculated in 1979). This site is allowed 3,951.9 sq. ft of GRFA. On March 3, 1979, a density variance for a 40 sq. ft. addition was denied by the PEC based on a finding that no hardship existed to justify the request. On September 21, 1988, a request for 500 sq. ft. of GRFA was approved under the 250 Ordinance. The structure now contains 4,502.8 sq. ft. of GRFA as calculated today. With two 250's, the site is permitted up to 4,451.9 sq ft. of GRFA. Therefore the site is 50.9 sq. ft. over on GRFA and is considered a legal nonconforming structure with respect to GRFA. This structure also currently encroaches into both side setbacks. This is a pre-existing nonconforming condition and is not affected by the proposal. IV. NATURE OF THE APPEAL The appellants are appealing the PEC decision denying the site coverage variance. The appellants have provided additional justification for the variance which is attached. The appellants have atso provided additional justification of how they will suffer practical difficulties and/or unnecessary physical hardships if the site coverage variance is not granted (provided in attached materials). Staff has summarized their statements below: a. The appellants will have insufficient parking for parking their own vehicles and for guests. The house will be restricted to one 300 sq. ft. garage for a 3,366 sq. ft. house. The Zoning Code allows up to 600 sq. ft. of garage space per unit. There is insufficient parking for the house, and snow storage in the winter months precludes parking in the driveway. Staff response: The driveway, as it currently exists, has the capability of storing 7 cars in addition ta the 2 existing garage spaces, for a total of 9 parking spaces. The proposed garage does not add any additional parking to the site as it will be constructed upon the existing paved driveway. The appellants have mis-stated the square footage of the home and the existing garage space. The entire home (both dwellings) contains 4,502.8 sq. ft. of GRFA and there are 2 existing 300 sq. ft. garages (one per unit). This duplex is required 5 total parking spaces. Snow storage is the responsibility of the homeowner and snow can be stored or removed from the site in a variety of ways in order to maintain parking on-site. b. The construction of the garage will correct a serious drainage problem on the property. Staff re$ponse: While this proposed garage may correct this drainage problem, there are numerous solutions to the drainage problem which do not involve constructing a garage. 2 c. The garage will provide additional needed storage as there currently exists very little storage area within the residence, particularly for storage of recreational equipment. Staff response: In July of 1996, the appellants received approvals to perform a major remodel to the exterior and interior of this duplex. No attempt was made in this remodel to provide additional storage space. On September 12, 1988, a DRB approval was given in conjunction with a 250 request to construct a storage area, labeted "Bike Storage" on the first level of this structure (see attached elevation and floor plan). The storage area was 250 sq. ft. As part of the 1996 DRB approvals, this storage area was eliminated and converted to living area. It appears that the lack of storage area on this property is a self imposed situation. d. The variance would correct the serious securiry problem which exists for the owner of Unit A. Staff response: The owner of Unit A has a staircase and a door on the east elevation of the home. This door opens to a bathroom in the unit. The door is perceived as the front entry to the home and according to the owner, people often come to this door. The staff understands the security issue with this doorway. However, ihe proposed garage addition is not the only solution to correct this problem. For example, a deck without stairs to the ground could be constructed which would prevent persons from approaching the door; or the stairs could be removed and the door replaced with an egress window, thus preventing access. There are a number of other solutions which could correct this problem. The stairs that exist now do not meet tne Building Code requirements. The Building Code requires a landing at the top of the stairs as well as hand rails. Staff and the PEC can find no justification for the hardship based on the Zoning Code criteria for granting a variance. V. REQUIRED ACTION Uphold/Overturn/Modify the Planning and Environmental Commission's denial of a 260.8 sq. ft. site coverage variance. The Town Council is required to make findings of fact in accordance with Section 18.66.030 (5) shown below: 5. Findings. The Town Council shall on all appeals make specific findings of fact based directly on the particular evidence presented to it. These findings of fact must support conclusions that the standards and conditions imposed by the requirements of this title have or have not been met. Further, if the Town Council chooses to overturn or modify the PEC denial of this variance, the Town Council shall consider the following factors and make the following findings related to the granting of a variance: A. Consideration of Factors 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. 3 2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege. 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facitities and utilities, and public safety. B. The Town Council shall make the following findings before granting a variance: 1. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title. b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council uphold the Planning and Environmental Commission's denial of a 260.8 sq. ft. site coverage variance and recommends that the Town Council make the following findings: 1. That the standards and conditions imposed by the requirements of Title 18 (Zoning) have not been met. - 2. That the granting of the variance will constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. 3. There are no exceptions, extraordinary circumstances, or conditions that are applicable to this site that apply generally to other properties in the Primary/Secondary Residential zone. In addition, any hardships which have been presented, have been self imposed. 4. The strict interpretation, or enforcement of the specified regulation does not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by owners of other properties in the Primary/Secondary Residential district. F:\everyone\pec\memolcam pisi. d 17 4 Chariie Alexander said that this was a permanent structure. Charlie also said that Vail Associates owned the land and if they determined that the land could be better used, then that's what would happen. He also mentioned that this condition was in his lease. Dirk Mason suggested an additional condition be placed on the approval, which would allow for the conditional use permit to be called-up, if the Lionshead Master Plan suggested an alternative use. Galen Aasland said it was a great use and agreed with Dirk's proposal. Diane Golden said it will be made more attractive than it is now. tt was a nice addition to Lionshead and also gave the youth of our Town something to do. Henry Pratt stated that it was a good location. Henry addressed the complaints from Units #206 and #306 and said that Garfinkel's Bar and Restaurant poses a much greater threat on their privacy than this use. Henry said in fairness to Charlie and the bank, as long as the PEC can call-up this application, he was in favor of a longer term. Greg Moffet was in favor of this use. The units that complained had trees to screen them from this operation. Greg was in favor of a longer term, to give Charlie an incentive to spend more money on the site to enhance the properry. Henry Pratt made a motion for approval, in accordance with the staff's memo, with the addition of a second condition that if the Lionshead Master Plan required or suggested a different use, the approval could be subject to a call-up. Greg Moffet asked Henry to indicate in his motion, the term length of the conditional use permit. Henry Pratt amended the motion to include a 3-year period of time. Diane Golden asked the applicant if the 3-year period of time would work. Charlie Alexander said, yes. The motion was seconded by John Schofield. It passed by a vote of 5-0. (Greg Amsden was not present for this item). 3. A request for a site coverage variance to allow for the construction of a one-car garage, located at 742 Sandy Lane/Lot 3, Vail Potato Patch 2nd Filing. Applicant: Jeri Campisi Planner: Dominic Mauriello Dominic Mauriel(o gave an overview of ihis request and stated that staff was recommending denial, because the request does not meet the code criteria for a variance. Although it may not negatively impact other properties in the area, it would be a grant of special privilege. Greg Moffet asked if the applicant had any comments. Planning and Environmental Commission Minutes September 23, 1996 3 Kerry Wailace, the attorney on behalf of Jeri Campisi, stated that the owner of the other half of the duplex, Betty Guffy, was here. Kerry stated that the lack of storage and the odd floor plan, with littie or no closet space within the residence presented a hardship, in particular, in relation to ihe storage of recreational goods. The present iwo-car garage is not enough. She stated that the applicant had a problem with parking in the winter, as she had a lot of guests. Kerry went on to state that the Campisi's have significantly improved the property since purchasing it and that the new garage would further improve the site. The proposed garage was as small as the architect could possibly make it and the architect assured them that it would not encroach into . any of the setbacks. Right now there existed a drainage problem and by raising up the front of the new proposed garage, this drainage problem would be corrected. There was also an existing security issue for Betty Guffy, since the door to her unit went past the bathroom. This security issue was a serious concern. Kerry Wallace went on to state that this property was an eyesore, until the Campisis made some changes. There are a number of 2 and 3-car garages in the area, so this request was not asking anything out of the ordinary. Greg Moffet asked for any public comments. Betty Guffy stated that she has owned the other half of the duplex for 5 years, which is the upper third of the house. Betty stated that the Campisis are the perfect neighbors and have certainly fit the mold as neighbors that she would have chosen to jointly improve the property. Both neighbors agreed on the stucco improvements. The architect could solve the drainage problem with this new proposed addition. When the Campisis unit was rented short term, there were a number of problems. Betty stated that she lived alone and security was a problem. Betty stated that 50 sq. ft. over the altowed site coverage is a minor overage. Greg Moffet asked for any other public comments. Joe Staufer stated that he lived at 746 Sandy Lane. Joe was in favor of this request and said that it would not negatively affect any property owners. Under the safety, welfare and health finding, Joe stated that the security issue was the reason and the right to grant this variance. It was a dark neighborhood, which presented a safety factor. Joe stated that when he was gone, Betty Guffy was all alone on the block. He stated that granting this variance would give someone a better place to live. Joe said he saw no conceivable reason not to grant this variance. Dominic Mauriello stated that he had reviewed recent DRB plans. Dominic stated that the applicant had just removed the former storage space, which was used to store snowmobiles, and had created living area out of it, so therefore, the result was a lack of storage. Betty Guffy stated ihat her neighbor to the right of her, was in favor of approving this request. Galen Aasland asked how big the existing 2-car garage was. Dominic Mauriello said 600 sq. ft. and that it had one garage space for each owner. Galen Aasland asked if the new garage would be the Campisis? Since the lot is over 15,000 sq. ft., Galen doesn't think the size of the lot was the problem and therefore there was no justification for a site coverage variance. The deck could be built without a variance to correct the security issue. Galen was somewhat bothered by the argument that the Campisis didn't have enough storage, when in fact, the remodel that was happening right now, did away with the storage. He stated that the owners, with the remodel, have created some of their own conditions and hardships. Planning and Environmental Comtnission Minutes September 23, 1996 4 Betty Guffy said that any staircase would be buried in snow. She stated that both sides of the house were short on closets. BeCty stated that she uses part of the garage for storage for her off-season clothes. She also stated that the existing entry door was ugly. Diane Goiden asked where the snow will be put? . Dominic Mauriello stated that snow storage was up to the owner and there were a variety of solutions for the door. . 8etty Guffy said that architect 8ill Pierce said that this garage and entrance was the best plan and from the front of the house, this looks like the way it was meant to be. It seems silly to pay $28,000.00 to just correct the drainage and not do the addition. Henry Pratt told Betty Guffy that she was extremely lucky to have owners like the Campisis who take pride in their ownership. Henry felt that identifying where the front door was less important than the security issue. He stated that they are entitled to a garage, but without the variance. This garage had no impact on the neighbors and so Henry would be in favor of such a variance, if there was a hardship. John Schofield agreed with Henry. John stated that the door was in a lousy location. John tended to agree with Henry, that the hardship would be getting a parking ticket, while parked out in the streeL Greg Amsden said that these were self imposed problems. There was no drainage problem when the house was first built; it happened with the expansion. The lack of storage doesn't hold an argument. A small deck would justify the safety concern. There were no justifiable reasons to go over site coverages. Greg Moffet was in agreernent with Greg Amsden. What you have here was a unit that was maxed-out over what was permitted. There was a lot of square footage in the mass and bulk that could have been used for storage. The storage problem has been self-created. Greg said he doesn't see how this was not a grant of special privilege. Henry Pratt asked what the area of the garage was? Dominic Mauriello said each garage was 300 sq. ft. Greg Moffet asked for any more comments from the public. There was none. Greg Amsden made a motion for denial, per the staff memo and he added that ihe hardships were self-imposed. Galen Aasland seconded the motion. Galen Aasland said the lot was over 15,000 sq. ft. If it was under that size, it might be different. Henry Pratt asked if this should be tabled until the applicant came back with a better design. Dominic Mauriello said that he did not believe tabling would produce alternative designs, since it would still involve a site coverage issue. Planning and Emironmental Commission Minutes September 23, 1996 5 ~ Greg Moffet asked staff if a carport was proposed, wouid it then not be GRFA? Mike Mollica said that could possibly be a staff approval, and it may not be GRFA, depending on how the carport was designed. The motion for denial passed unanimously by a vote of 6-0. 4. A request for an exterior addition to a master bedroom and bathroom and adding a 3rd floor, utilizing the 250 Ordinance, located at 8026 Potato Patch/Lot 4, Block 1, Vail Potato Patch. Applicants: Padraic Deighan and Birgit Toome Planner: Dominic Mauriello TABLED UNTIL OCTOBER 14, 1996 5. A request for a minor exterior alteration to allow for the construction of a walk-in freezer, located at 536 West Lionshead Mall/Lot 5, Block 1, Vail Lionshead 1 st Filing. Applicant: Mitch Garfinkel Planner: George Ruther WITHDRAWN 6. Information Update Mike Mollica had no information update. 7. Approvai of September 9, 1996 minutes Mike Mollica suggested tabling the minutes, as there were more corrections on item #5 in the minutes. Galen Aasland had two changes for the minutes of 9/9/96. Diane Golden made a motion to table item #4 and the 9/9/96 minutes. The motion was seconded by Galen Aasland. The motion passed unanimousty by a vote of 6-0. Greg Amsden made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Galen Aasland seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by a vote of 6-0. The meeting adjourned at 3:00 p.m. Planning and Environmental Commission Minutes September 23, 1996 6 u At TOWN OF ~AIL 75 South Frontage Road Yail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2100 FAX 970-479-2157 CERTIFICATION STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF EAGLE ) The undersigned hereby certifies the foregoing is a full, true and correct transcription of Item No.3 of the Planning and Environmental Commission of September 23, 1996, as it appears in the original records of the Town of Vail, Department of Community Development. Dated December 5, 1996 ~~~~~~.u~ Mary A. Caster, Deputy Town Clerk Administrative Services STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF EAGLE ) Subscribed and sworn to before me this5th day of December, 1996, by Mary A. Caster, Deputy Town Clerk, Town Q€-Vait V /~L ` ••p ~ eAa9 b u ~ Y(,' . tJ:i Notary Public •S'k'e~¢ t~~a`~`':"` My commission expires ~,5~ RECYCLEDPAPER TRANSCRIPT OF JERI CAMPISI REQUEST FOR SITE COVERAGE VARIANCE AT PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEETING, MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1996: Greg Moffit: Third item is the Jeri Campisi request, Dominic? Dominic Mauriello: The applicants have requested a site coverage variance in order to construct a one-car garage of approximately 300 square feet, making the request approximately 260.8 square feet. The . altowable site coverage for the site is approximately 3403 square feet, which is 20% of the lot area, and they're proposing 3664, which is approximately 21.5%. This duplex, when it was originally approved in 1980, contained 3763 square feet of GRFA. The way that is calculated today, they contain, they have 4502.8 square feet, and that's also due to a, in 1988 they received 500 square feet of GRFA under the 250 ordinance. So with today's two 250's, the site is permitted up to 4451 square feet, and therefore the site is over on GRFA by approximately 50 square feet. The structure also currently encroaches on the site setbacks on both sides. It's a pre-existing non-conforming condition and it's really not aggravated by this request. Attached you will find some justification provided by the applicant and I've also passed out to you today two affidavits from owners of the property stating some other issues and hardships that they have. Staff believes that the request will increase the building's bulk and mass beyond that enjoyed by other properties in the district. Staff betieves that while the proposal may not negatively impact neighboring properties, and while other structures in the have two and three-car garages, they have enjoyed that within the limitations of the site coverage limitations, and they also have two and three-car garages built within those limitations. Staff does believe that this would be a special privilege, as other structures in the zone district have been able to construct within these limitations and enjoy the fact that they have a two-car garage. Staff is recommending denial of the variance request, subject to the three findings that you find on page 3, and that's all I have for you today. Greg Moffit: Thank you, Dominic. Does the applicant have any comments? Kerry Watlace: Hi, I'm Kerry Wallace, my daughter gave me her cold, so if I sound like a swallowed a box of cotton balls, that's why. I'm here on behalf of the Campisi's. They would have liked to have been here today, but there was a medical emergency in the family that required them in New York. 1'm their attorney, with Stovall Goodman Wallace. Their offices are in Avon and we assisted them in preparing the variance application. Obviously, as 1 you've seen from the affidavits that are attached, the Campisi's, in addition, the owner of the other half of the duplex, Betty Guffy, who is also present, I understand has some comments to make today. I feel that there a number of issues which does make this a hardship issue as opposed to, say, a special privilege. A major issue for the Campisi's is a lack of storage. Obviously, this was a property that was constructed some time ago and it does have a fairly odd floor plan in the way iYs designed. The Campisi's have informed me that there is little or no closet space within their residence and so it makes it very difficult for them to store items in the house, in particular, you know, as anyone who lives in Vail, you have a lot of recreational goods, such as skis and golf clubs, those types of items. They have no where to put them in the house and so their having additional garage space would be of assistance. Right now the two-car garage that they have which is not oversized is used to park both of their vehicles, so there's not a lot of additional storage space. There's also a problem with parking, especially in the winter months. They do have a lot of guests that come out, they have family members that like to come out and visit and there's a problem with parking, particularly in the winter when the plows need to come through and it needs to be a open area. An area where there is now, even say if you were going to put a parking pad there, from what I understand the Town of Vail, when they plow the snow, it piles up on that spot, so iYs really not a usable parking spot in the winter, so they'd like to be able to have an additional car to allow guests and any other person to be able to park in an enclosed area during the winter months. The Campisi's, and I think Ms. Guffey will substantiate this, have significantly improved the property since purchasing it with, you know, I think iYs been a real benefit to the general area. The garage will essentially be an improvement to the property, not a detriment, it will increase the value which is a positive thing for the neighborhood. IYs my understanding that the space, and I know that you've had a site visit, is not really usable as is. And that the garage would be good use of that space. I was informed by the architect that the post garage, is as small as they can possibly make it and still park a regular size car in it. It's not made for, say, a 4x4 or an over-sized car, so he made it as small as possible, keeping in mind the variance issue. And it's also my understanding in talking to the architect, i.e., I don't look at plans and analyze them, but he did inform me that it was not going to encroach on any of the setbacks. There's also the issue of a serious drainage problem right in the area where the garage would be constructed. It's my understanding that it slopes and so drainage from Sandy Lane hooks right into a major wall of the building. This has to be corrected one way or the other. It's my 2 understanding that Betty Guffey can substantiate this. She's talked with some contractors. It will be substantially expensive to fix the drainage by having to fix the grade or do something of that nature. The garage, by raising up the front of the grade, witl take care of the drainage problem while at the same time being a benefit to the property. And I know that a major issue doesn't necessarily affect my client, but it does affect Ms. Guffey and she can tell you more about that as a security issue in that iYs my understanding that there's access to a private door. It's a door she has to have in her unit for egress purposes, in case of fire or some kind of emergency. But there's public access to this door. It leads right into her bathroom and her bedroom. She says people use it all the time - knock on the door and, you know, you open the door and you might be in your bathrobe. She's concerned with regard to security issues on that. She can see from her main door out the window and see who's at the door and have a little bit more control than when someone knocks on this other door. She's got some pretty serious concerns about that. So, you know, there's a number of issues that they feel do create, you know, hardship in this case. And, like I said, it is the minimum amount that they could possibly do to put in a garage, and I know Ms. Guffey has landscape plans. They're planning on doing some further improvements to the property and, you know, beautifying the area. It is my understanding that the unit was a bit of an eyesore for a while. You know, until all of the changes that Campisi's have done. So, for those reasons, I know the Campisi's would really like to you to consider, you know, approving the variance. I think that in the area there are a number of places with two and three-car garages, so this is not something out of the ordinary or out of place. I don't " think any of the adjacent units will be negatively impacted. IYs not going to be a high garage, so it shouldn't impact views or light to other units or that type of thing and we would like you to take those things into consideration when making your decision. Greg Moffit: Thank you. Kerry Wallace: Thank you. Greg Moffit: Any other applicant comments? , Betty Guffey:: I'd just like to reiterate what Greg Moffit: First, you have to tell us who you are. Betty Guffey:: Oh, I'm Betty Guffey, and 3 Greg Moffit: Thank you. Betty Guffey: for five years I've owned the upper half of the house, or the upper third of the house known of "A", 742A, and I've been waiting on . waiting on somebody like the Campisi's for five years, to come along and help me redo the outside. I refuse to allow the previous owners to paint it. It takes both of our approvals to do anything. . And I didn't want it painted blue gray again. Iwanted stucco or -some rock or something put on it and the Campisi's also fit the mold that they didn't want to subdivide it, make a little loft here and a little kitchen here and rent it out part time. They plan to live in it with their grandchildren visiting them and that was the perfect person to buy it. The only problem was I didn't sell it to them, another realtor, but they, we agreed on doing this stucco, which is a great improvement, over $60,000 for that, and 1 have to pay my share of that and when it comes down to repairing the drainage problem, and doing something with that area, I was very happy that they agreed to have an architect design a space that's small, that doesn't exceed the lot lines, will solve my problem about the emergency egress door, will open onto a deck that looks like the house to me from the front, looks like it always should have gone around that corner with the deck. And I have some yideos, but I found out you didn't have, I have a video of when I bought it five years ago and my son was ready to put me in a nursing home because that was the ugliest house he had ever seen. So I had videos of it and I put up with a lot in the five years that I've had, oh, the propane tank that was there. The Campisi's have removed that and are going to put a garden in its place. The propane tank was to heat the hot tub. They brought in gas. The propane tank was right underneath my bedroom window and some of the renters said they've had short term downstairs before the Campisi's bought it, left the propane tank in my driveway for several weeks. I had to get the Fire Department to come out and move them. And one of my neighbors, Joe Staufer, is here to tell you too, that we had snow mobilers coming in at 2:00 in the morning, 3:00, shaking that garage underneath my bedroom. And if the Campisi's want a garage there for storage, I'm so happy to try to help them get it. It will help me too. It will have a deck of 300 square feet that they're willing to put in. And, I've stated that the security is the biggest concern and the biggest hardship I have. And I live there alone and I would, I definitely like these plans more than anything else, but it seems like 50 square feet overage is a really minor problem compared to the expense and the lack of security for me. Greg Moffit: Thank you. Is there any public comment? Come on up! 4 Joe Staufer: My name is Joe Staufer, I live at 746 Sandy Lane and maybe I shouldn't be here because where they want to build, that's where my dogs go every night at 10:00. I like to address a couple of things that I start finding, and number one is it's not, the neighborhood may not negatively impact it and then it says it's anegative effect on light, air and on the neighboring properties, well, I can't see how that little addition of that building is negative to anybody and I live up there so it certainly doesn't affect me and I'm - sure it wouldn't affect anybody else to give them that variance. The other is that it says safety, welfare and health. Well, I think security is another area where-you have every right if you wish to do so to grant this variance. We are living in a dark neighborhood. When I'm out of town, this lady is the only one on the block. And for her to be able to drive into the garage and from the garage a secure (inaudible) going to her unit is certainly a safety factor and I think that, you know, we are here to address those things and I think that granting a variance that in fact is, if I read it right, one half of one percent over or under the site coverage, allowable site coverage, for one and a half percent, I don't know how bureaucratic we want to become. I feel very strongly that this variance helps somebody in terms of safety, security and a better place to live in. And I can't see any conceivable reason that would hurt somebody else. So, why not grant it? Thank you. Greg Moffit: Thank you. Is there any additional public comment? Dominic. Dominic Mauriello: I just wanted to follow up on something that was said earlier about the closet and storage space. We have DRB plans that were approved right now for the additions for the work that they're doing right now. There used to be a storage space, kind of below that area below Ms. Guffey's area, that was converted to living space, so while their argument, yea, that we need more storage space, this prior approval actually eliminated that storage and created a living area out of it. I just wanted to point that out. Greg Moffit: Thank you. Come on back up. Betty Guffey: The neighbor in the lovely half to the right of mine, (inaudible), had to go to physical therapy at this hour and she let me video tape her a few minutes before this, but we don't have a video, and she's in approval of granting this to us also. Greg Moffit: Okay, thank you. Let's go to the commission. Galen, comments, questions? Galen Aasland: I do have one question of Dominic or for the applicant. How big is 5 existing two-car garage? Dominic Mauriello: The existing two-car garage? I think they're each about 300 square feet, each of those garage spaces, so you're looking at 600 square feet existing now. Galen Aasland: Is that, do you concur with that? Dominic Mauriello: It's at least that. (Cannot understand comment from audience) Galen Aasland: Okay. So, under this application, iYs like the garage that is being built, would that go to your unit or would it go to the Campisi's? (Cannot understand response from audience) Galen Aasland: So they have access from their current garage inside? And it won't change the access into your house? Betty Guffey: No. (Garbled comment). Galen Aasland: Okay. On the south side. Okay. Alright. Actually, in ways for site coverage variance, I have some kind of unusual sympathy. I think in certain cases there's some good grounds for it, especially on smaller lots. If this lot was under 15,000 square feet, I would feel much more strongty about it. I think the lot's under 15,000 square feet have a particular problem once they get over that they have less and less a problem, although this is not that much larger than.... I do have some concerns about it though, is that the building seems to be already pushing the envelope of development under of different grounds already, and this would obviously make it push things further beyond what the zoning is consistent with the neighborhood. I think the deck that you're talking about could be built without a variance, in fact, I know it could off of your unit in terms of getting rid of the door. And so, well it's nice that that can be there. That's already an allowed use and iYs not that you can't build a deck and you can't do certain things, it's just that, in this particular case, happens to make this more convenient. I'm somewhat bothered by the argument that the Campisi's don't have storage because they're doing this big remodel on the house right now and obviously they've gotten rid of storage, so I really don't think that there's really any argument from that particular standpoint. I would be interested if there's an opportunity because there is existing site coverage left whether the existing garage could be added to within what the allowed zoning to add storage 6 on to that, so I do have a fair amount of sympathy for the site coverage, bui I also see that there's some problems with it that you `ve really done a remodel, that the owners have done a remodel and they really, they're creating some of their own conditions. Greg Moffit: Thank you, Galen. Diane? Diane Golden: If the garage is not put in, do you have to leave that staircase coming out of your bathroom? How did that get put in and when was that put there? Betty Guffey: It had a prior staircase (inaudible) and was buried in snow. Diane Golden: So how long has that staircase been there? Betty Guffey: Five years that I've lived there. Stormshed and garage door (inaudible) short term rental (inaudible) Diane Golden: And from your garage, so have to step outside and then go to your front door? BG: (Inaudible) Diane Golden: But IYs covered? Okay. Diane Golden: Where will the snow be put if the garage is there? Greg Moffit: Would you come up to the microphone so we can, we're being recorded believe it nor not. Diane Goldlen: Where will the snow be put if the garage is put in? Dominic Mauriello: I mean, that's the owner's option. The fact that there's snow on their site, I mean, thaYs their own snow removal issue. As far as the door going in upstairs, 1 mean, I'm sure there's a variety of architectural solutions for that, not just having the stairs there. I'm sure that either of the architects on the board could tell you there's probably ten different ways to address that egress. Betty Guffey: Well, Bill Pierce worked with me to, we ran up a bill of $1600 to try to design a garage and an entrance around that. One plan was to enter my house in front of my fireplace, which I don't think is acceptable, and another was to put a rock stairway to the north corner and that exceeded the setback, so we scratched that, so it didn't make any sense to spend $70,000 and still have an ugly entry. You know, and to have that door that now goes down with 7 this plan, with Jeri's, or Campisi's garage, then I don't have to get access from it and my stairway can go up. Bill Pierce's architectural plan was to have a stairway, not from a garage there, to go up and around and enter where my laundry room is now and that was terribly expensive and this is just the best plan that I've seen that, from the front of the house it looks like it was meant to be that way instead of looking like a double-wide trailer, it will look like a house with a nice sized deck that usable. I don't have a deck on the house that's usable. And if, one of your plans was to build a deck up here, that still leaves the drainage problem, which is very expensive to repair. The drainage problem has been there for a long time, creating problems for the other side of the house and it seems silly to me to spend $28,000 to repair the drainage problem when, well, it would have been a little bit easier if they'd left the snowmobile garage there. Probably would have been cheaper to repair that, but I am so happy to have that out of there, and people running under my bedroom with gasoline and engines, so if they gave up the storage to build a room there, I guess I should be willing to sacrifice and pay for the drainage. But it just seems logical that, I think it does, to we're only exceeding 50 square feet that for the expense involved and somebody willing to make the place look better and more functional. About the question about the snow coming in. It would just be the front part of our driveway that would have to be plowed. It's piled back in there and buries any car that parks in that space there, that's there now and in the stairway, ugly as it is, is buried in snow also. Diane Golden: I have no further comment right now. Greg Moffit: Thank you, Diane. Henry? Henry Pratt: I guess first I'd like to say that I think that you're extremely lucky to have new neighbors like the Campisi's who are willing to come in and address all wrongs and spend the money and take some pride in their ownership. In terms of this application, I'm hearing a lot of things being put forth as hardships that I don't think really are. I think you're security issue is more an architectural issue of identifying where the front door is, the drainage issue is something that should have been corrected when the current remodel was designed or laid out. On the other hand, I think that, like everyone else in town, you are entitled to 600 square feet of garage, but as the staff inemo points out, you should be able to do it without asking for a site coverage variance because everybody else is held to those rules. During our pre-meeting and during the site visit, we've talked about, well if you just took away some GRFA or moved it somewhere else, then you'd have that site coverage for a , 8 garage. At this point I think that's impractical, given the way you've got horizontal condominium type zoning on this thing. So I guess even though I don't want it be considered as a precedent, this garage has no impact on any neighbors in terms of light, air, mass and bulk and guess I'd be in favor of granting the variance in this case, even though I do not really find adequate grounds for a hardship. And that's a tough one for me. Greg Moffit : Thank you, Henry. John. John Scofield: I would have to agree very much with Henry in all aspects. You are lucky to have a neighbor that's willing to spend the money to upgrade and I think we should do everything we can as a town to encourage that. I agree that the drain is something that really is not a hardship. It could be fixed with or without the garage. I've had similar problems, I understand what you're working with. Likewise, I think the door, iYs a downright lousy tocation, but it could also, I think, be fixed in other aspects. I think what we have to look, at as a board is perhaps balancing the issues of site coverage and whaYs really going to sit on that site and no matter what we do, you're probably going to have a car sitting in that corner. So I would tend to agree with Henry that perhaps the hardship of getting parking tickets when you park out in the street would be something that I would look at and say that I could support this type of thing because I really don't think it's going to affect the neighbors at all and I think it would perhaps be an improvement over having a car sitting out there looking ugly all the time. Greg Moffit: Thanks, John. Greg? Greg Amsden: This application, and I'm leaning more to what Galen said, is that a lot of these are self i mposed problems that have occurred here. The drainage situation at one time that house did not have a structure underneath your apartment. And there was no drainage problem whatsoever with that site. I was here when the house was constructed in the beginning. I know the whole history of the house. In fact, our real estate company marketed that house when it was first built. So I don't, I mean, the drainage problem has occurred when the house was expanded into that area and it still can be cured by proper treatment of the expansion, in which it has not been done, so the storage argument just doesn't hold water because they've removed the storage space and even the garage that they're suggesting building is only the size of one car. It would be filled with a car and there would not be much storage in it anyway. So, again, they're left with no storage. They've got their 9 variance in a garage and yet they haven't solved at least trying to justify this variance with. The safety concern, I believe you can put either a small or a large deck off that door. I would definitely remove whaYs there. I don't know if there's really, and it was . mentioned but I don't even know if that is there for a fire purpose, does the staff know? I mean, no one knows if thaYs even an ingress/egress... Betty Guffey: ThaYs an emergency egress. I don't have another way out of the house, out of the master.... Greg Amsden: Yea, but we don't know if that's why that stairway's there or even if it was there in the beginning and no one's even brought that point up or whether it has to be there or not, so if it doesn't have to be there, a deck would be a good treatment off that door. Betty Guffey: I've tried to find another access, or egress, and I don't have one. All the windows are on the second floor and they don't open large enough to get out. Greg Amsden: But I mean, in looking at this application, I have a hard time just because it does set a precedent. When you grant a variance without substantial hardship or reasons for that, and I don't find these to be justifiable reasons for granting a variance, 1 think that we open up, I mean we have a very hard time for the next guy that comes in and says, "Hey, I want to go over my site coverage because of this, this and this." I mean, literally they can associate their causes with whaYs mentioned here that I don't think, I think they're self imposed situations. And it sounds like the Campisi's want a second garage. My solution would be, it's a design driven problem. You have to fit that garage within existing structure. Without increasing that site coverage to go over that site coverage limit. And they need to take a hard Jook at that. I believe it's doable where their family room is. And where they've enclosed and that house has been expanded. In fact, in the memo by the staff, the 500 square feet, two 250's that was granted that site were all put on the large side of that home. Why, I don't know. I do know that it was under one ownership. The Platners at that time. And thaYs probably why it occurred. But, thaYs the case and thaYs what is in existence. Greg Moffit: Basically in agreement with Greg on this one. What we've got here is kind of a classic zoning dilemma. You've got a unit, we've got a unit that is maxed. We've got as much square footage as permitted, we've got about as much site coverage as permitted, and now we want to add more despite the fact that there's a lot of 10 square footage inside the existing buik and mass that could have been designed to hold cars or to store kayaks or to put a ski locker, or whatever. Without going into reiterating all of what Greg said, I think the storage issue is one of self creation and I am very concerned about the slippery slope aspect of it. Yes, Joe, in response to your comment that the 50 feet is maybe one and a half percent, but the next application may be an 8000 foot house. - Dominic Mauriello: It's 260 square feet, it's 50 square feet over on GRFA, so what we're talking.about is 260 square feet. Greg Moffit: Okay. And if it's an 8000 foot house, that starts to look like a pretty big bubble. I don't see how granting this variance isn't a grant of special privilege - hardship or not. It just strikes me as a grant of special privilege. My guess is that we're going to have to split votes. Greg Moffit: What's the area of the garage thaYs being proposed? Dominic Maureillo: 300 square feet. Greg Moffit: So, essentially the site coverage is maxed before you add this. Dominic Maureillo: It's 40 square feet - less than 40. Greg Moffit: Yea, I just wish I could find something to hang my hat on here. Greg Moffit: If there are no further comments from the applicant, or the public, then somebody gets to make a motion. Greg Amsden: Mr. Chairman, I move that the request for a site coverage variance to allow for a one-car garage located at 742 Sandy Lane, Lot 3, Vail Potato Patch, Second Filing, being denied, per the staff inemo and that granting the variance will constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified the same district. There are no exceptions or extraordinary circumstances in conditions applicable to this site that apply generally to other properties in primary/secondary residential zone district. And I might add that least, I believe that the hardships that have been presented by the applicant, many of them are self imposed by the handling of the expansion of the livable area in the large side of that duplex and that, finally, the strict interpretation or enforcement of this specific regulation does not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the primary/secondary residential district. I1 Greg Moffit: Motion by Greg. Do we have a second? Galen Aasland: I'll second that. Greg Moffit: Seconded by Galen. Any further discussion? Galen Aasland: I would also like to add, if this lot was under 15,000 square feet, I think my vote would be different on this. But the fact that it's over 15,000 is one of the deciding factors in my vote. Greg Moffit: Okay, thank you Galen. _ I guess I have a question for the board and staff. Does anybody see any opportunity to possibly table this and let them find a way to get the site coverage down or is the garage I don't think that there's any other way to do it. I mean, they've hired people to look at it themselves and I don't know if they've, they haven't presented any alternatives to us, but I would guess that there's Yea, let me ask a question. If the deck, if they put a deck out of that door, thaYs not site coverage, correct. Dominic Maureillo: Correct. ; And they could put a hard deck Dominic Maureillo: That's correct. outside that door. Now granted, you haven't got a heated garage, but what you've got is covered parking - a carport. The rules are screwy, but unfortunately, we got appointed to enforce them. That creates an interesting scenario in light of what Henry suggested. We've got a motion on the table first, Henry. That's strictly a DRB or staff approval type of issue - it doesn't involve Planning. Greg Moffit: Okay. So we have a. motion on the floor. Is there any further discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Greg Moffit: Opposed? 12 No response. Greg Moffit: I am also in favor. Motion passes unanimously. The application is denied. I'm sorry - the rules are tough on this one. 13 _ w f r MEMORANDUM FALE COP T0: Pianning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: September 23, 1996 SUBJECT: A request for a site coverage variance to allow for a one-car garage, located at 742 Sandy Lane/Lot 3, Vail Potato Patch 2nd Filing. Applicant: Jeri Campisi Planner: Dominic Mauriello 1. BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant is requesting a site coverage variance of 260.8 sq. ft. in order to construct a 300 sq. ft. one-car garage on the subject property. This duplex currently contains 2 enclosed garage spaces and this request would add a third. The allowabie site coverage for ihis site is 3,403.8 sq. ft. (20%) and the proposal is for 3,664.6 sq. ft. (21.5%). This duplex was approved by the DRB in 1979 and constructed in 1980. The duplex, as originally approved, contained 3,783 sq. ft. of GRFA (as calculated in 1979). This site is allowed 3,951.9 sq. ft of GRFA. On March 3, 1979, a density variance for a 40 sq. ft. addition was denied by the PEC based on a finding that no hardship existed to justify the request. On September 21, 1988, a request for 500 sq. ft. of GRFA was approved under the 250 Ordinance. The structure now contains 4,502.8 sq. ft. of GRFA as calculated today. With finro 250's, the site is permitted up to 4,451.9 sq .ft. of GRFA. Therefore the site is 50.9 sq. ft. over on GRFA and is considered a legal nonconforming structure with respect to GRFA. This structure also currently encroaches into both side setbacks. This is a pre-existing nonconforming condition and is not affected by the proposaL The applicanYs justification for the site coverage variance request is that this addition will not negatively affect adjacent properties, as adjacent properties have two and three car garages. See attached letter for greater detail. 1 II. ZONING ANALYSIS Zoning: Primary/Secondary Residential Use: Duplex residence Lot Size: 17,019 sq. ft. (entire site) Standard Aliowed Existin Proposed Site Coverage: 3,403.8 sq. ft. (209'0) 3,366.6 sq. it (19.8%) 3,664.6 sq. ft. (21.5%) Landscape area: 10,211.4 sq. ft. (60%) 11,330.4 sq. ft. (66.5%) n/c GRFA: 3,951.9 sq. ft. 4,502.8 sq. ft. n/c w/two 250's: 4,451.9 sq. ft. 4,502.8 sq. ft. n/c Setbacks: Front: 20' 30' n/c Sides: 15' 10' & 13.58' nlc Rear: 15' 36' n/c Parking: 5 required 6(2 enclosed) 6(3 enclosed) III. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS Upon review of Section 18.62.060, Criteria and Findings, of the Town of Vail Municipal Code, the Communiry Development Department recommends denial of the requested site coverage variance. The recommendation for denial is based on the following factors: A. Consideration of Factors 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. The proposal will increase the building's bulk and mass beyond that enjoyed by other properties in the same zone district. Staff believes that while the proposal may not negatively impact neighboring properties and while other structures in the area have two and three car garages, there has been no indication of any physical hardship which would justify approving the requested variance. Other structures in area have two and three car garages and still comply wiih the site coverage requirements. Essentially, this owner enjoys a larger house at the expense of reduced garage area. Staff believes the grant of this variance would be a grant of special privilege. 2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege. Staff believes that the granting of this variance would be a grant of special privilege not enjoyed by other lots in the area or this zone district. Other . sites in the area were constructed within the site coverage requirements. f:\everyone\pecVnemoslcampisi,923 2 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. Staff believes that requested variance will increase the buik and mass of the building which may have a negative effect on ihe light and air of neighboring properties. B. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the followina findinos - before granting a variance: 1. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in.the viciniry. 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more ofthe following reasons: a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulry or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title. b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Communiry Development Department staff recommends denial of the applicanYs variance request subject to the following findings: 1. That the granting of the variance will constitute a grani of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. 2. There are no exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to this site that apply generally to other properties in the Primary/Secondary Residential zone. 3. The sVict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation does not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the Primary/Secondary Residential district. f:\everyone\peclmemoslcampisi.923 3 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION IH ~ • jiti o~''~~ .,i • ° ~ ~ H 0y . .OT . W SANDY UNE ( 30' ) O ~ \ \ /1~•, ~ / ~-1 'rEb O 1 / ~ ~ ~ _ I+nil , 8305 r~ • ~ CA cn ' M UNPL„TTEo 8300 Lo, z , , 1s. ~ 3= ~ a r ~ ~ ~ ~ - 7RAC1 C ou . inr mr T1[ SUIIYCKD MONAMM MMX1 1! s.YD OI bYIN MOIIY~IION P ~ .+ianotu s. ua[ r.ku, +uPv[nno - 8nn. n.s wrt ..aw~noi Si1e n Ictanorn ow ua[ vNLr wI.cnwy nwrro wt fu~r o•rtn 7/0iM 14 tn~nm ro txt taw a rA~ Plan Al f ~ N Cm ~ NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ifil kJ . . . . _ ~ _ . a n ~,~iteL. e0eItl ~?wnoN . IU ~ _ • rl CA 1 ' ~M ~ . ~ [Y • V~. . ' . ~ ~ ~ -1A IN CIL .wrwr ~ , r----- -i, ! - - - • 111 ....w ~ ~ ~ ~•~..~..r~.. ~ ~ 1~~ - - ~ ~ ~ sot?r A- Mr e~aec~ ~....,.~.~,.....~..w. mev~ons t1J . . ~ k " . - . . ~ . ~ . - . . . . . ~ . . ~'.:'Y . . . . . . _ . . l!-~. " . " _ . . • . , _ . . . . ~ T'v".. . . . . . - . . . . . . ' " ~ ~ ~ -e . . , - . ~ . " . . . . ' . ~ . ~ ~ ~ . . ~ ~ . . , I . ' _ . ' . _ ~ . - ~ - - - - o ~ - ~ - , . : ~ . . ~ ~ N 1 un Fr~lY tt..~Y ;~7Sft : Z 3 . ~~r: . o~ ~ ~ . ; _ : . . - l Y_ - i ~ • • • . - ~ ? p~, }.~~y..~.~]j~ , • _w ~ . I ~ - _ . ~di : _ ~ . . - - - .r : _ . _ . . _ . _Y , , . . ~ ~ t~~s . ~ ~ ? •1~G - ~ a` ; S , . _ . _ _ _ _ - : _ . ~ - ~ ~ ~ Q.~_------ ~ . ~ ~ws ~ ~n - . ~ . ~ . w - , , ;~j / r' _ % ` - 1 y'i C L r' r. - : : - QC1 0 2 1996 ~i ~.~~~~#~i OP'l ~,EPr , C 0 {~',:ti~ OF 1'~IL .aPPE.aLS FOR11 REQUIRED FOR FILING aN APPEAL OF A STAFF, DESIGN REVIEVV BOARD OR PLANNING AND ENVIRO\MENTAL CO:~ZMISSION .aCTION A. ACTION/DECISION BEING APPEALED: Denial of request for a site coverage variance to allow for a one-car garage located at 742 Sandy Lane/ Lot 3, Vail, Potato Patc n filing. The specific regulation a variance was requested of is Section . e Town of Vail Building Code regarding site coverage which provides that a residence is not to exceed twenty percent (20%) of a total site area. The_requested site coverage variance was for 260.8 sq, ft. for construction of the garage. B. DATE OF ACTION/DECISION: September 23, 1996. C. NAME OF BOARD OR PERSON REivDERING THE DECISION/T'AKIIvG ACTION: Planning and Environmental Coranission D. NAME OF APPELLANT(S): Cnarles P. Canpisi and Geri Campisi MAILING ADDRESS: 1146 Sandstone Drive, Vail, CO 81657 PHYSICAL ADDRESS IN VAIL742-B Sandy Lane, Vail, CO i 476-5586 PHOI~ E: LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF APPELLAM'S PROPERTY IN VAIL: Unit B, Lot 3, Vail/Potato Patch, Second Filing, Condominiums accordine., to the Condominium *;an recarded *iarch 4, 1980 in Book 299 at Page 597 and as defined in theCondominium Declaration recorded *`_arch 4, 1980 in Book 299 at Page 596_ t.2- e of Colorado. E. SIGNATURE(S): Kerry H. Walla a Attorney and epresentative of Charles an eri ampisi ptsvaj x 3g6aanAvonla8o: 81620 (970) 949-4200 ~ PaQe 1 of 2 F. Docs this appeal involve a specific parcel of land? Yes If N•es, picase provide thc foflowin` informanon: arc vou an adjacent properry oivner'' l'es no _y If no, give a detailed explanadon of how you are an "ag~ie~~ed or adversely affected person." "Ags~ievcd or adversely affected person" means any person who will suffer an adverse effect to an interest protected or funhered by this title. The alleged adverse interest may be shared in common with other members of the communiry at large, but shall exceed in degree the general interest in communiry good s6ared by all persons. The appellants are aggrieved or adversely affected persons as they are the owners of the property in question and the persons requesting the site coverage variance which was denied. The strict interpretation of the specified regulation in this ~ case will result in a practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship to the appellants as at the present time there is available only one 300 sq. ft. single car garage space for the appellants'3,366.6 sq. ft. residence. There is insuff- icient parking space for the appellants' ou-n vehicles without taking into consideration visiting friends and famil . Parkin is not available upon the street or surrounding areas There is also insufficient storage area particularly as the single cae garage is fu11v utilized for parking purposes. There also exists a drainage problem in that the area in which the new garage would be located slones toward the residence and uater flows directly into a ma'or wall of the SEE ATTACHED SHEET G. Pro-,zde the names and addresses (both person's mailing address and property's physical address in Vail) of all owners of properry wtuch are the subject of the appeal and all adjacent properry owners (including properties separated by a right-of-way, stream, or other intervening barriers). AIso provide addressed and stamped envelopes for each property owner on the list. H. On separate sheets of paper, specify the precise nature of the appeal. Please cite specific code secrions having relevance to the action being appealed. 1 FEE: S0.00 - ' Page 2 of 2 Continuation of Section F of Appeal of Denial of Site Coverage Variance for Charles and Geri Campisi building. The drainage problem will be expensive to fix and the proposed garage will correct the drainage problem while at the same time significantly improving the property. In addition, the owner of 742-A Sandy Lane, Vail, CO currently experiences a serious security problem in that the general public has access to her emergency egress which leads to her master bedroom and bathroom. The proposed garage will correct this problem for the owner of 742-A Sandy Lane who is Betty Guffey. ACCOMPANYING 1NFORMATION FOR APPEAL OF PLANNING AND ENVIROrtMENTAL COMNIISSION ACTION REGARDING SITE COVERAGE VARIANCE FOR CHAR~.F4 AND GERI CAMPISI FOR 742B SAl\'DY LANE, VAIL, COLORADO 81657 SECTION H NATURE OF APPEAL I. Background Information . The Appellants, Charles and Geri Campisi, filed a request for a site coverage variance for the purposes of constructing a single car garage addition. The specific regulation which the Appellants are seeking a variance of B section 18.13.090 of the Town of Vail Building Code regarding site coverage. Said section of the Code provides that a residence is not to exceed 20% of the total site area. The Campisi's are requesting a minimal variance of the regulation in order to allow them to construct a single car garage addition. Tfie site coverage variance would be 260.8 square feet for the purposes of constructing a 300 square foot one car :garage upon the property. The allowable site coverage for the site is 3,403.8 square feet (20°!0) and the proposed variance would allow for 3664.6 square feet (21.5%). , The property is a duplex which currently contains two enclosed garage spaces and the Appellants requested variance would add a third garage space. Cunently each side of the duplex has use of one 300 square foot garage space. As such, the Appellants currently have a 300 square foot single car garage space for a 3,366.6 square foot residence. The Appellants' request for a site coverage variance was presented to the Planning and Environmental Commission on September 23, 1996 and based upon the recommendations of the Community Development Department, the request for the variance was denied. II. F'inding of the Planning and Environmental Commiccion The Planning and Environmental Commission at the September 23, 1996 meeting denied the Appellants' request for a site coverage variance in order to construct a 300 square foot single car garage addition based on the following findings: 1. That the granting of the variance will constitute a grant of a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district; 2. There are no exceptions, extraordinary circumstances, or conditions that . are applicable to this site that apply generally to other properties in the primary/secondary residential zone. In addition, any hardships which have been presented, have been self-imposed; and 3. The strict interpretadon, or enforcement of the specified regulation does not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by owners of other property in the primary/secondary residential district. III. It is Appellants Position that Granting of the Variance will not Constitute a grant of a Special Privilege and that there are Practical Difficulties and/or Hardships which the Appellants will Suffer if the Variance is not Granted. The specific regulation that the Appellants are seeldng a site coverage variance of is § 18. 62.050 of Title 18 of the Town Code of Vail also known as the "Zoning Title. 18.62.060 specifically provides that before acting on a variance application the Planning Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to the requested variance: Section A. l. The reladonship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinides; 2. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compadbility and uniformity of treatment of sites in the vicinity, or to obtain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege; 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation, and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety; and 4. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the proposed variance. The Planning Commission is also to make the following findings before granting a variance: Section B. 1. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district; 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and cAcA.~stuccoMP.noc -2- 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reascros: a. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this Tide; b. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone; c. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges. enjoyed by owners of other properties in the same district." The Appellants shall initially address the requirements of Secdon "A" of the Zoning Title §18.62.060: 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential use.s and structures in the vicinity. It is the Appellants posidon that the proposed site coverage variance requested by the Appellants for the purpose of constructing a single car garage addition to their property will not have any negative impact upon the other structures in t,'ie vicinity as such structures are all residential homes with two to three car garages and/or condominium structures in the Potato Patch area. The garage addition will not block any views and fits in with other duplexes in the area, many of which have three car garages or a close equivalent. The recommendations of the Planning Staff specifically stated that the Proposal may not negatively impact neighboring properties and that other structures in the area have two to three car garages. In addition, at the Planning and Environmental Commission hearing on September 23, 1996 an owner of an adjacent neighboring property, Jce Stauffer, testified stating that the garage would be a welcome addition to the neighborhood and would not in any way negadvely impact any of the neighboring properties. There is no evidence that the proposed site coverage variance will negatively impact neighboring properties. 2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and : uniformity of treatment upon sites in the vicinity or to obtain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege. The grant of the minimal site coverage variance requested by the Appellants is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity and to attain the objectives of this tide and dces not constitute a grant of special privilege. The Zoning Tide § 18.04.130 addresses gross residential floor area ("GRFA") and addresses how GRFA is c:tcAMMsnUccoMEnoc -3- calculated and the amount of GRFA that is allowed per site. §18.04.130A(1) specifically provides, "Within buildings containing two or fewer dwelling units, the following area shall be excluded from calculation as GRFA: 1. Enclosed garages from up to 300 square feet per vehicle space not exceeding a maximum of two spaces for each allowable dwelling unit permitted by the zoning code." The Zoning Title also has an entire section dedicated to parking requirements in particular off street parking. The purpose of this dde is to alleviate progressiveiy or to prevent traffic congesdon and shortage of on street parking areas, off street parldng, and loading facilities. Chapter 18.52 of the Zoning Title requires a certain amount of off street parking for all new facilities. 1$.52.100 requires that off street parldng be determined in accordance with the following schedule "A": if gross residential floor area is two`thousand (2000') square feet or more per dwelling unit: 2.5 spaces per dwelling unit. The Appellants' property, which is 3,336 square feet, has only a single car 300 square foot garage space. Thus, the Appellants only have available one parking space for their dwelling unit. This is not in compliance with 18.52.100 which requires 2.5 spaces per dwelling unit that are 2,000 square feet or more. There currendy exists insufficient off street parking for the Appellants to park their two vehicles without taking into consideration guests and visiting family members. If the Appellants were to merely pave the area upon which they are requesting the variance to build the single car garage it would not provide for year round parking for the Appellants. The Town of Vail snowplows during the winter months pile snow from the street onto the area where the garage would be built thus maldng that area unusable for parking purposes during the winter months. In addition, a concrete parking slab in the area in which the single car garage addition is proposed would be unattractive to the property and thus unattractive to neighboring residences. Though other sites in the area may have been constructed within the site coverage requirement, the only possibility for the Appellants' property to have sufficient parldng in compliance with the code will be to allow the requested minimal site coverage variance for construction of the 300 square foot single car garage addition. The possibility of on street parldng is not available to the Appellants as it is illegal to park upon the streets in the Potato Patch area particularly during the winter months when the snowplows need full access to the streets in order to sufficiently clear them of snow build up. The requested site coverage will help achieve compatibility with the objectives of the Zoning Title. 3. The effect of the requested variance of light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities and public safety. It is the ApF,ellants position that the variance will have no effect on light and air, distribution of populadon, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. In fact the Appellant proposes that the requested variance will actually have a positive affect upon these factors as it will allow for additional off street parking so that vehicles cAcAMNsnAccoM.noc -4- will not be parked upon the street causing potentially dangerous traffic situations. There was no evidence presented to support a different finding on this issue. For the foregoing reasons it is the Appellants' posidon that the variance should be granted for the following reasons: 1. The granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitadons of other properties classified in the same district; 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare, or materially injurious to properties or impmvements in the vicinities; and 3. The variance is warranted for the following reasons: a. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Zoning Title; b. The strict or literat interpretation and enfarcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of the privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. The Appellants will suffer the following practical difficulties and/or unnecessary pfiysical hardships if the site coverage variance is not granted. a. They will be restricted to a 300 square foot garage for a 3,366 square foot residence. The Appellants will have insufficient parldng for the parking of their own vehicles and/or parldng for their guests and family members. This is a practical difficulty and/or an unnecessary physical hardship in particular as there if no in particular as there is no available on street parking. The Town of Vail Code specifically requires that sufficient off site street parldng be provided for each residence. In particular 18.52.100(A) requires that a 2000 square foot or larger dwelling unit have 2.5 off street parldng spaces per dwelling unit. The Appellants have insufficient parldng particularly in the winter months and would be subject to dcketing by the Town of Vail for parking on the street. In addition the Town of Vail Code specifically provides that enclosed garages of up to 300 square feet per vehicle, not to excced a maximum of two parldng spaces for each allowable dwelling unit, permitted by the Zoning Code are not included in the GRFA for a residence. It is consistent with the objectives of the Zoning Tide to provide a 3,366 square foot residence to have the capability of having at least 600 square feet of parking space, which is the amount which will be provided to the Appellants' should be proposed variance be granted. cAcAMPIsnAccoNMnoc -5- b. The construction of the proposed garage addition will correct a serious drainage problem upon the property which will need to be corrected regardless of whether the variance B granted. The garage addition will be a positive resolution of the drainage problem and will benefit neighboring properties in the area because it will increase the value of the property. c. The garage will provide additional needed storage as there currently exists very little storage area within the residence particularly for storage of recreational equipment. d. The variance would also correct the serious security problem that exists for the owner of the other half of the duplex, 742-A Sandy Lane, Vail, Colorado, who is Betty Guffey. Please see the attached Affidavit of Betty Guffey. b. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the speciried regulation would deprive the applicant of the privileges eqjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. Owners of other properties in the same district are typically allowed at least 600 square . feet of enclosed garage space per dwelling unit. While some of these structures have been constructed within the site coverage requirements, it dces not alleviate the fact that the Appellants' property is adversely affected by the lack of parking space. The Appellants should be able to construct an additional 300 square foot enclosed parldng space upon their property to allow for off street paridng. c:IcAnPcsnAccoMP.noc -6- , AFFID:-kVIT OF BETT1' GL:FFEI' C0MES NOW, the Aiiiant, Betty Guffey, havina personal l:nowledRe of the followina facts and beinQ duly sworn under oath hereby testifies as follows: 1. That I am the o%vner of reai property tocated in the Town of Vail. Count}, of Eacle, State of Colorado l:nov.-n as 712-A Sandy Lane, Vail, Colorado. 2. That I am a member of the Condominium Association for Lot 3, Vail, Potato Patch, Second FilinQ Condominium. Town of Vail, County of Eaale, State of Colorado which is comprised of Unit 742-A and 742-B Sandy Lane, Vail, Colorado ("Condominium Association"). 3. That the Condominium Association is comprised of my unit and unit 742-B Sandy Lane. Vail. Colorado which is owned by Charles Campisi and Geri Campisi (hereinafter referred to as the "Campisi's"). 4. That «lith my express permission and involvement the Campisi's have requested a variance from the Town of V~ ail for the purpose of constructina a sinale car aarage addition to their unit. The construction of said sinale car Qarace will not in any way negatively impact upon other strucrures in The vi:.irlity as most strucrures are residential homes, includinQ condominium units with E!ara2es. 5. That the 2araze addition that The Campisi's have requested a variance for from the Town of N'ail is necessan, fcr a number of reasons: A. There is siRnificant drainaQe problem upon the properry in that the area in which the new aaraae will be located slopes toward the residence and water flows directly into a major wail 02 the builjinR. Tilz construction of the 2ara2e will resolve this drainage problem while at the same time sianificantly improvina the propert}r. B. That at the present time with the current confiauration of the residence without the requested QaraRe adcition. there exists a sianificant securiry prablem with reQard to my unit. The Qeneral public current]}' has access to an emergency earess door which leads directly into my master bedroom and bath area. linfortunately, due to the current confiauration of the buildina the general public ofLen utilizes my emergency eQress door as opposed to my main door because it is the or.ly door re:.dily visible from the street. This is a cause for concern for me because I cannot see who is at the emerRency eQress door until I am rioht before the door. This is not the case with my main entrance door as I can see the person at the door throuQh windows prior to openina the door. In addition packaoes and flower delix-eries are often left mistakenly at my emeraencv e2ress door and as I do not utilize that door l do not locate the items often for davs. I hav~e retained an architect, Mr. Bill Pierce of Fritzlen Pierce Briner Architects in Vail. to address. amenQ other issu:s. the issue of the public access to iziy emeraency earess door so that I cou!d he provided vvi;h securitv. It was ultimat2ly determined bv tiir. Pie:ce that there ":.s ^o to provide ~r.e cLch securiey due co design conscraincs thus the propored garaae iis an excellent colution to nav security probiem. As such. I feel that th- zrantina of tiie t%ariance to allow the construction of che sinale car 2ara2e is necessary to provide me with adequate . security at my residence and I%t•ill suffzr a hardship if the Variance is not granted as no other options are available to me. C. That in the Winter months the Town of Vai( sno«- removal pushes snow onto the area where the new sinale car Qarasie will be constructed thus makinQ such area unusable particularly for parkina purposes. There is insufficient parking in the area and the single car Qaraze will provide a covered parking area N-ear round. . 6. For the foregoina reasons the owners of the property at 742) Sandy Lane constituted of myself and the Campisi's will suffer a hardship if the Variance is not granted allowina for construction of the proposed sinale car aarage. Further the Affiant sa}°eth nauQht. , TY, FF ' / STATE OF COLOR-kDO ) ) ss. EAGLE COUNTY ) ~/1~ Subscribed and s«~orn to before me ~nis dav of September, 1996, o\BETTY GliFFEY. Wimess mv nand ar.d otticial se:.'.. My commission expires: O ~'22 , AFFIDAVIT 0 F G ERI C.-!i.\ 1PISI C0'MES NOW, the Affiant, beine duly sworn under oath and having personal }:no,~vledQe of the followinQ facts hereby testifies as follow°s: 1. That I am the o«-ner of real property located in the Town of Vai1, Counry of EaQle, State of Colorado l:nown as 742-B Sanuy Lrne, Vail, Colorado. 2. That I am a member of the Cendominium Association for Lot 3, Vail, Potato Patch, Second FilinLy, Condominium, County of Fz2le, Scate of Colorado which is constimted of unit . i42-A and 742-B Sandy Lane, Vail, Celorado (the "Condo Association"). 3. That the Condominium Association is comprised of my unit and 742 :A Sandy Lane, Vail, Colorado which is o«'ned by Betty Guffey. 4. That my husband, Charles Camgisi and myself have requested a Variance from the Town of Vail for the purpose of constructing a single car garaQe addition to our unit. The cor-qtruction of such sinzle car aarage will not in any way neQatirely impact upon other ctructures in the vicinitv as most structures zre residential homes, includins~ condominium units, «•ith 23i'2E25. 5. That the QaraRe addition that «'e 2re requestina a Variance from the To«•n ot Vail for is necessary for a number of ;easons: A. There is a sianificant dninage problem upon the property in that the area in which the new Qaraoe will be located slopes toward the residence and water flows directly into a major wall of the buildinQ. This drainage problem needs to be corrected in some manner 2nd could be N-erv expensive to iLX pursuant to bids that have been receiti•ed. The construction of lih.- Qaraoe will resolve this drainaQe problean while at the same time significantly inproving the property. B. That therz exists very little storaQe area within our residence and the existlina M*o (2) car Qaraee is fully utilized for the parking of our two (2) automobiles. As such, Nve currer.tly do not have any s?orage space particularly for our recreational equipnent such a bic}}cles, Rolf clubs and ski equipment. This creates a sianificant hardship for us in that there are no closets in the house to store the equipment, no space in the existing, garage as it is used for parkin; our automobiles and it would be inappropriate to store said items ouuide as they could be stolen and it would detracc from the area to store goods in that manner. C. That we are unable to park an automobile on the street or elsewhere on the lot in order to make storage space available in the existin-e garase as parking is not allowed upon the street, particularly in the Winter months, and the area in which the new aaraQe will be constructed is cunently umssable for parkinQ purposes durina the winter months as the To"'n of . 79120196 FRI lo:fls rA.T Vail snow removai plows lar;e 2Mounu of snow upon the space. Ia addition. ii u prcferable to have our car in covered parking durinS the tivintcr mor.:hs. D. That we also ha1e frequent guesu, including numerous farnilY m^mbl-n, and are unabie to provide a parIcing, sp2ce for them when thcy arc visiting. T'his poses a difficult problem again in the wintcr months whcn the snow plows nctd the sIIeetS cleat of parktd vehitles to adequately plow the :trcets. b. That the proposed single car gange will address all of the above referenced haxdslilps that ~ in that it will provide far the additional storage. it woutd provide a coYCtcd parldnS `-e ~ will be usable all ycar rnund and it will be a posicive u:c of currendy uausabie space. I ` 7. That the proposed single car gaiage will constitute an improvesnent to the pmpertY ~ th2t a'i11 incrcase the valuc of the residence and thus would be a positive effect upon the • nei ;hborheod in general. i 3. For the foregoing reasons the o-wnzrs of the pTopercy at 742 Sandy Lane which is constituted of myself, my hLSband, Char!es Cmpisi, a;,d Bctty Guffey will suffer a;iardshiP if .e Variance is noi granted fer the consttvction of the p:oposed sirgle car gzrage. Fur'11er the Affiant sa}•ctn naught. • ' , 1 ~ ' r GERI CAMPISI ~ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. EAGLE COUti?Y ~ . Subscnt+ed and sa•crn to befo-,e me this dey of September, 1996, by GERI CAMPISL Wimess ray hand and officizl seal. - t:iy comnission expires: , LVA ~ G:\CAMP151\GfiRI.4FF.0'C14 1 ~ A 5TOVALL GOODMAN WALLACE PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Auorneys & Coruiselors at Law JAMES Wbt. STOVALL 202 BENCHMARK PLAZA BU[LDING TELEPHONE: (970) 949-4200 70HN D. GOODMAN 48 EAST BEAVER CREEK BOULEVARD FncsitvttLE: (970) 949-6843 KEwtY H. WALLACE P.O. DRnWER 5860 GILLIAN COOLEY MORRISON AVON, COLORADO 81620 October 10, 1996 Town of Vail ATTN: Dominic S. Mauriello, A.I.C.P. Department of Community Development 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 REFERENCE: Site Coverage Variance Request for 742 Sandy Lane/Lot 3, Vail Potato Patch, Second Filing, for Charles and Jeri Campisi Dear Mr. Mauriello: The purpose of this letter is to formally request a continuance of the appeals hearing that was initially scheduled before the Vail Town Council for November 5, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. with regard to Charles and Jeri Campisi's appeal of the Planning and Environmental Commissions' denial of a site coverage variance for 742 B Sandy Lane. I will be in trial the week of November 4, 1996 and as such would be unavailable for the hearing befare the Vail Town Counsel on November 5, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. It is my understanding that the hearing before the Vail Town Council initially scheduled for November 5, 1996 has been moved pursuant to my request to November 19, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. I appreciate your cooperation in regard to this matter and please do not hesitate to contact me if you require anything further. Very truly yours, STOVA OODMAN WA AC, P. K Y H. WALLACE KHW : tak cc: Charles and Jeri Campisi G:\CAMPISI\VAIL.LET a ~ ORDINANCE NO. 25 SERIES OF 1996 AN ORDINANCE MAKING SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FROM THE TOWN OF VAIL GENERAL FUND, PARKING STRUCTURE FUND, POLICE CONFISCATION FUND, BOOTH CREEK DEBT SERVICE FUND, DEBT SERVICE FUND, AND HOUSING FUND, OF THE 1996 BUDGET AND THE FINANCIAL PLAN FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO: AND AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURES OF SAID APPROPRIATIONS AS SET FORTH HEREIN; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WF-IEREAS, contingencies have arisen during the fiscal year 1996 which could not have been reasonably foreseen or anticipated by the Town Council at the time it enacted Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1995, adopting the 1996 Budget and Financial Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado; and, WHEREAS, the Town has received certain revenues not budgeted for previously; and, WHEREAS, the Town Manager has certified to the Town Council that suff`icient funds are available to dischazge the appropriations referred to herein, not otherwise reflected in the Budget, in accordance with Section 9.10(a) of the Charter of the Town of Vail; and, WHEREAS, in order to accomplish the foregoing, the Town Council finds that it should make certain supplemental appropriations as set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN 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 1996 Budget and Financial Plan for the Town of Vail, Colorado, and authorizes the expenditure of said appropriations as follows: F ND AMOUNT General Fund $1,158,074 Parking Structure Fund 22,898 Police Confiscation Fund 8,016 Booth Creek Debt Service Fund 6,500 Debt Service Fund 2,400 Housing Fund 7,700 $1,205,588 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 welfaze of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. 4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith aze 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. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 3rd day of December, 1996, and a public hearing shall be held on this Ordinance on the 17th day of December, 1996, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Robert W. Armour, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED in full this 17th day of December, 1996. Robert W. Armour, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk C.:brinanee9525 . . MEMO To: Town Council Members From: Steve Thompson Subject: Supplemental Appropriarion Date: November 27, 1996 T'he following list of supplemental appropriations accounts for 1996 transactions that have not been budgeted in 1996. The reason for the $1,183,588 supplemental appropriation and the cocresponding amount is as follows: $310,956 unexpected expenditures, include snow removal, Vail Tomorrow and the 911 dictaphone; $10,300 use of department savings to purchase new library materials and finish recodification of the Town municipal code; $112,332 in pass through revenue and reimbursements, including Gypsum/Eagle bus route, Library grants and transfer of Vail Commons building fees to the Housing Fund; and $750,000 is a transfer from the General Fund balance to the Capital Projects Fund for 1997 projects. We do anticipate that a portion of the $310,956 in unexpected expenditures will be offset by savings generated by benefit costs, police salaries, and bus operations. However, at this time it is difficult to estimate the amount of savings that will offset this supplemental appropriation. We will discuss this at the December 3rd, work session. The $185,000 supplemental for Vail tomorrow combines with the 1 st supplemental done in June for $50,000; bringing that project to $235,000. Funding for the project includes $130,000 from: Vail Associates $50,000; Vail Valley Foundation $5,000; and currently we are trying to raise $75,000 from the private sector. The Town funded the balance by reailocating $100,000 from land use planning project that was budgeted far completion in 1996. TOWN OF VAIL , SCHEDULE OF REQUIRED 1996 SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATfONS FUND ADDITIONAL DEPARTMENT 1996 EXPENDITURE OR PROJECT EXPENDITURES GENERAL FUND: . Town Officials Research on Bond Refinancing 728 Engineering Study for Snow Cats on Forest Road Access 2,500 Attorney's Fees Reimbursed 1 76 Vait Tomorrow project 185,000 Vail's 30th B Day 2,230 Advanced Community Training 3,000 Organizational Development 12,000 Administrative Senrices Banking Fees 2,000 Advertising - Reimbursement 1,000 Codification 2,000 Attorney's Fees Reimbursed 700 Police Equipment Refund 1,500 911 Dictaphone 38,500 Public Works Snow Removal 45,000 Transit ' Gypsum/Eagle Bus Route 30,940 Library Additional Library Materials 8,300 Library Grants 30,000 Transfer to other Funds Vail Commons Building Fees to Housing Fund 31,500 Transfer to Capital Projects Fund ( for 1997 projects) 750,000 Employee Benefits Longevity Pay 25 year employee 2,000 1,149,074 4QTRFIN6.WK4 11 /27/'96 PARKING STRUCTURE FUND: Debit Card Software 8 Equipment 9,898 DEBT SERVICE FUND: Publication Fees 2,400 HOUSING FUND: Repairs and Special Assessment 7,700 POLICE CONFISCATION FUND: Seizure Pass Through 8,016 BOOTH CREEK DEBT SERVICE FUND: ' Frincipal & Interest on Bonds 6,500 Total Supplemental Appropriation 1.1 g3 588 40TRFIN6.WK4 11 /27/96 ~ . RESOLUTION NO. 22 SERIES OF 1996 A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE TOWN MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES WITH EAGLE COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL. WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Vail believes that it is in the community's best interest to contract for animal control services with Eagle County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, that: 1. The Town Manager is hereby authorized to enter into the Intergovernmental Agreement, as attached hereto as Exhibit A, with Eagle County to provide animal control services for the Town of VaiL 2. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of December, 1996. Robert W. Armour, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk Resolulion No. 22, Series of 1996 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO AND THE TOWN OF VAIL This Agreement made this day of 1996 by and ' between the Town of Vail (the "Town") and the CountY of Ea le, "County"). 9 State of Colorado (the WHEREAS, the Town desires to contract with the County for the performance of the hereinafter described Animal Control Services on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; and WHEREAS, the County is agreeable to rendering such Animal Control Services on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; and WHEREAS, this Intergovernmental Agreement is authorized pursuant to Section 18, Article XIV, of the Colorado Constitution; C.R.S. 29-1-201, et. seq. and C.R.S. 30- 15-101. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants, conditions and promises contained herein, the parties hereto agree hereby as follows: SECTION 1. TERRITORY COVERED. The territory . covered by this Agreement is all of that certain property legally described as the Town of Vail SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS. Emergencv on Call services is defined as emergency calls received by the County for which County assistance is required because of the unavailability of Town employees to respond. Shelter means The Eagle County Animal Shelter located at 23798 Highway 24, in Minturn, Colorado, and any other shelter facility operated or designated by County. Unclaimed Dav is defined as a calendar day or any part thereof during which an unclaimed animal is confined in Shelter on behalf of the Town. Exhibit A ~ SECTION 3. SCOPE OF SERVICES. The County agrees to provide general Animal Control Services within the Town of VaiL The County shall provide: A) 600 randomly-scheduled patrols, consisting of inspection tours looking for violations or responding to complaints. ' B) Twenty-four hours per day Emergency On Call service through Colorado State Patrol Dispatch. C) Administration and enforcement of the current Title 6, Animals of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail presently in effect and as may be subsequently amended as applied within the Town of Vail. D) The County shall provide the Town with quarterly reports and an annual report of services provided pursuant to this Agreement. Such, reports shall include the number of calls for service, number of animals sheltered, number of Unclaimed Days, and number of citations issued. E) Emergency On Call service will be provided during the period when an Eagle County Animal Controf Officer is not on duty. In the event that an Eagle County Animal Control Officer is not immediately available to respond to an incident or emergency, the Town of Vail will provide personnel to "secure" the scene and administer control of the situation until the Eagle County Animal Control Officer arrives to resolve said incident. F) Animal sheltering services for animals attributable to the Town, of the nature and quafity customarily provided at the Shelter. Animals attributable to the Town are animals impounded within the Town of Vail . and animals owned by persons dwelling, permanently or temporarily, in the Town of VaiL SECTION 4. OFFICIAL STATUS. For the purpose of performing the Animal Control Services and functions set forth in this agreement, Eagle County Animal Control shall enforce, as the Town's agent, the Municipal Ordinances relating to animals now in effect and as amended from time to time. SECTION 5. EQUIPMENT. The County shall furnish and supply, at its sole expense, all necessary labor, supervision, equipment, motor vehicles, office space, and operating and office supplies necessary to provide the services to be rendered hereunder. SECTION 6. COMPENSATION. The Town of uail agrees to pay the County, monthly, the sum of $ 1975.30 based on estimated patrols and on estimated sheltering requirements of (on average) 145 dog Unclaimed Days and 150 cat Unclaimed Days. , The Town of Vail agrees to pay the County, on or before the fifteenth of each month, for services rendered the previous month plus any additional billing received for Response to On Call Emergencies. Responding to On Call Emergencies: $25.00/incident. All fees and expenses recovered at or for the Shelter will remain with the County. All court fines and costs will remain with the court of venue. The County shall administer the County's Dog Tag Program for the Town. Monies collected from residerts of the Town shall be applied in a 60-40% relationship with the Town receiving 60% of those fees collected for pog Tags from residents of the Town of Vail. SECTION 7. PERSONNEL. The Eagle County Animal Control Officer shall have full cooperation from the Town of Vail, its public works, its police officers and/or their respective officers, agents, and employees, so as to facilitate the performance of this Agreement. The rendition of Animal Control Services provided for herein, the standards of performance, the discipline of officers, and other matters incident to the performance of such services and the control of personnel so employed, shall remain in the County. All persons employed in the performance of such Animal Control Services for the Vail pursuant to this agreement, shall be County employees, exceot for Town personnel used to "secure" the scene as described in Section 3, above, and except for employees of Animal Hospital of Vail Valley, Inc. or other operator of the Shelter. 3- • " . ..SECTION 8. LIABILITY AND INSURANCE. _ A. The County, its officers and empioyees, shall not be deemed to assume any liability for intentional or negligent acts, errors, or omissions of the = Town or of any officer or employee thereof. Likewise, the Town, its officers and employees, shall not be deemed to assume any liability for intentional or negligent acts, errors or omissions of the County or by any . officer or employee thereof. B. The County agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless to the extent allowed by law, the Town, its respective agents, officers, servants and employees of and from any and all loss, costs, damage, injury, liability, claims, liens, demands, action and causes of action whatsoever, arising out of or related to the County's intentional or negligent acts, errors or omissions or that of its agents, officers, servants, and employees, whether contractual or otherwise. Likewise, the Town agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless to the extent allowed by law, the County, its respective agents, officers, servants and employees of and from any and all loss, costs, damage, injury, liability, claims, liens, demands, action and causes of action whatsoever arising out of or related to the Town's intentional or negligent acts, errors or omissions or that of it's agents officers, servants and employees, whether contractual or otherwise. C. The County and the Town shall respectively provide its own public liability, property damage, and errors and omissions insurance coverage as each party may deem adequate and necessary for any potential liability arising from this Agreement. Further, the County-and the Town, respectively, shall name, subject to the approval of each respective party's insurance carriers, the other respective party as a co-insured under such insurance policies to the extent of any potential liability arising under this Agreement and, upon reasonable written request, shall furnish evidence of the same to the other respective party. 4 . SECTION 9. TERM AND TERMINATION. This Agreement is effective January 1, 1997, and shall end on the 31st day of December, 1997. Either party shall have the right to terminate this Agreement with or without cause at any time by giving the other party thirty days' prior written notice of termination. Upon termination, the County shall be entitled to compensation for services performed prior to such termination, and both parties shall be relieved of any and all other duties and obligations under this Agreement. Obligations of the Town of Vail and the County, respectively, after the current fiscal year, are contingent upon funds for the purpose set forth in this Agreement being appropriated, budgeted and otherwise made available. SECTION 10. GENERAL PROVISIONS. A. All notices, requests, consents, approvals, written instructions, reports or other communication by the Town of Vail and the County, under this Agreement, shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been given or served, if delivered or if mailed by certified mail, postage prepaid or hand delivered to the parties as follows: Town of Vail: Town Attorney Town of Vail 75 S Frontage Rd Vail, Colorado 81657 County of Eagle: Eagle County Attorney ` P.O. Box 850 Eagle, CO 81631 Either Party may change the address to which notices, requests, consents, approvals, written instructions, reports or other communications are to be given by a notice of change of address given in the manner set forth in this paragraph A. 6. This agreement does not and shall not be deemed to confer upon or grant to any third party any right to claim damages or to bring any lawsuit, action or other proceedings against either the Town or the County because of any breach hereof or because of any terms, covenants, agreements or conditions contained herein. 5 r f, C. No modification or waiver of this Agreement or of any covenant, condition, or provision herein contained shall be valid uniess in writing and duly executed by the party to be charged therewith. D. This written Agreement embodies the whole agreement befinreen the parties hereto and there are no inducements, promises, terms, conditions, or obligations made or entered into either by the County or the Town other . than those contained herein. E. This Agreement shall be binding upon the respective parties hereto, their successors or assigns and may not be assigned by anyone without the prior written consent of the other respective party hereto. F. All agreements and covenants herein are severable, and in the event that any of them shall be held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, this Agreement shall be interpreted as if such invalid Agreement or covenant were not contained herein. G. The Town has represented to the County and, likewise, the County has represented to the Town, that it possesses the legal abifity to enter into this Agreement. In the event that a court of competent jurisdiction determines that either of the parties hereto did not possess the legal ability to enter into this Agreement, this Agreement shall be considered null and void as of the date of such Court determination. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement the day and year first above written. COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, By and Through Its BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: By: BY: Clerk to the Board of George A. Gates, Chairman County Commissioners ATTEST : TOWN OF VAIL BY: BY: Town Clerk Robert W. McLaurin, Manager 6 RESOtUTION NO. 23 SERIES OF 1996 A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE TOWN MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF VAIL AND VAIL VALLEY CONSOLIDATED WATER DISTRICT. WHEREAS, the Town of Vail and Vail Valley Consolidated Water District have entered into a partnership to construct affordable housing within the Town of Vail. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, that: 1. The Town Manager is hereby authorized to execute the Intergovernmental Agreement with Vail Valley Consolidated Water District as attached hereto as Exhibit A. 2. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of December, 1996. Robert W. Armour, Mayor ATTEST: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk Resolution No. 23, Series of 1996 . INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT This Intergovernmental Agreement ("Agreement") is made and entered this 29th rlay of May, 1996, between VAIL VALLEY CONSOLIDATED WATER DISTRICT ("WCWD') and TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO ("Town"), collectively referred to as "Parties". WHEREAS, VVCWD is the coordinating entity and developer of a proposed multi-unit housing project to be used primarily for the benefit of employees in the Eagle County region . ("Project"); and WHEREAS, Town wishes to participate in the Project, and is willing to contribute an adjacent parcel of property owned or to be acquired by Town toward the Project; and VVHEREAS, WCWD has determined that the addition of the Town properry contributed by Town would benefit the Project by maximizing the number of housing units that could be made available; and . WHEREAS, WCWD and Town have both determined that the provision of housing for the benefit of local employees is an appropriate, necessary and valid public purpose; and : WHEREAS, Parties wish to allow for Town's participation in the Project pursuant to the . terms and conditions of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the sufficiency of which is mutually acknowledged, Parties agree as follows: ~ 1. Convevance of Town Prol2erty. Town shall diligently pursue the acquisition of a parcel of real property presently owned by USFS, and more particulazly described on Exhibit A which is attached and incorporated by this reference ("Town Property"). This Agreement is expressly contingent upon Town's acquisition of the Town Properry from USFS. If Town is unable : to acquire the Town Properry, this Agreement shall be of no force and effect. Upon Town's acquisition of the Town Property, it shall contribute the Town Property to the Project, via special warranty deed, prior to the issuance of Certificates of Occupancy on the Project. 2. Rezoniniz of Town Prop=. WCWD shall be pursuing the rezoning of the real • property that will be the primary pazcel of land used in the affordable locals' employee housing project. Concurrently with WCWD's rezoning efforts, Town shall initiate rezoning of the Town Property. Town's efforts to rezone the Town Property shall be initiated even prior to the Town's conveyance of the Town Property to the VVCWD, if necessary. WCWD shall assume the role of the primary ' proponent for the concurrent rezonings, and Town sha11 cooperate with WCWD. , Exhibit A NOTE: This is Agreement as presently constituted. It will be subject to discussion and amendment as agreed between town Council and Vail Valley Consolidated Water District at 12/17/96 work session. I 3. Town ParticiDation in Joint Affordable Locals' Housing Effort. In exchange for Town's conveyance of the Town Property to the Project, Town shall have the opportunity to participate in the Project. In addition to its conveyance of the Town Property to the Project, Town shall provide a cash contribution as funds are expended on the Project. WCWD shalT maintain sole control over the design and development of the Project, and shall, in its sole discretion, establish the policies and procedures under which units in the Project are leased or sold, subject to the following general guidelines: ~a. A minimum of 75% of the total units constructed as part of the Project _ (including units constructed on the Town Property) shall be occupied by individuals who aze employed in Eagle County and their families. WCWD and Town may, in their sole discretion, offer up to 25% of the total number ' of the constructed units as "free mazkeY' units for the purpose of reducing the cost of the remairung units equaily throujhout the Project on a cost per square footage basis. b. Upon completion of the Project, Town shall be entitled to purchase, at cost, an ownership interest in up to twenty-five percent (25%) of the unitg constructed. For example, if 16 units are constructed and Town provides 25% of the Project costs, Town would receive title to 4 units upon completion of the Project. The units to be owned by Town upon completion of the Project shall be referred to as "Town Units." The interim cash contributions made by Town shall be applied to the purchase of Town Units. c. For thase units reserved for occupancy by local employees, WCWD and Town will establish and implement a maximum cap on appreciation for re- sales in order to ensure the long term affordability of the local employee housing units. All units shall have a deed restriction identical to the restrictions attached as Exhibit B. " d• WCWD or its designee shall have the right of first refusai on aII unit resales, ~ except Town Units. If WCWD does not exercise this right of first refusal, the uni*_s shall be made available for sale to the public through a system which could be similar to the Town's "lottery" system. Town or its designee . shall have an equivalent right of first refusal for all Town Units. 4• Miscellaneous. This Agreement represents the full understanding of Parties and supersedes any prior understandings, discussions or agreement as regards the subject matter. This Agreement may not be assigned without the written consent of the non-assigning party. This Agreement cannot be amended or modified, unless in writing executed by both Parties. ' 2 ~ • . IN WITNESS WHEREOF Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the day and year first above written. VAIL VALLEY CONSOLIDATED WATER DISTRICT . Fred 'ck P. Sackbauer, N, Chairman ATTEST: By D. Brown, Secretary STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF EAGLE ) The foregoing Intergovernmental Agreement was acknowledged before me this 2q~day of M&jLj , 1996, by Frederick P. Sackbauer, IV as Chairman and Byron D. Bro as Secretary of Vail Valley Consolidated Water District. Witness my hand and official seal. , Notary lic My commission expires: 3 _ ~ IN WITNESS WHEREOF Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the day and year first above written. TOWN OF VAII, , ~ B (iN~ Pamela A. Brandmeyer . Z'ltle Acting Town Manager ATTEST: . By ~ Title: STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF EAGLE ) The foregoing Intergovernmental Agreement was acknowledged before me this 9th day p f July , 1996, by Pamela A. Brandmeyer as Actin Town Mana er and as - of Town of Vail, Colorado. . Witness my hand and official seal. .~L • . Nota6 Public 41 PmE, VYrgk potary pubGc ~ ~ge P•oad 1999 * My commission expires: 4 . EXHIBIT A. . . . . . . * PROPERTY DESCRIPTION A parcel of land within the NE1/4 SE1/4 Section 1, Township 5 South, Range 81 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, Eagle County, Colorado, described as follows: Beginning at n point on the southerly tine of said NE1/4 SE1/4 Section 1, said point also being the northwesterty corner of Btock D, Lton's Ridge Subdiviston, according to the Map thereof recorded in Book 215 ot Page 648 in the office of the Eagle _ County, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder; thence, departing satd southerly line, N22'33'00'W 84.13 feet; thence N49'45'28'E 55,05 feet; thence 53,85 feet along.the arc of a curve to the right, having a radius of 200.00 feet, a central angle of 15°2S'35' and a chord that bears N57•28'16'E 53.69 feet; thence 41,90 feet atong the arc of a curve to the right, having a radius of 27,0'0 feet, n central angle of 88•54'26', and a chord that bears S70'21'44'E 37.82 feet; thence S25'54'31'E 137,47 feet to the. said southerly line of the NE 1/4 SE 1/4 Section 1, said line also being the northerly ti ne of sai d Btock D; thence, atong said line, S87°48'35'W 150,82 feet to the Point Of Beginning, containing 0.3964 acres, More or less. The bear;ngs of the above described parcel nre based on a bearing of N87'48'35'E on the southerly Cine of the NE1/4 SEl/4 Section 1, TSS, R81W, per the plat of Lion's Ridge Subdivision. Date _3~~~sG--- ~ - - Stan Hogfe . Colorndo P.L.S. 26598 EDCE OF ROAD d, i-eaPss*z1r \ Rw27.00 • ~L-41.90 9 / ~~i• -13'25'3'.~ T•20.49 \ Z~ • ti Rw200.00 L-53.85 CB-570'21'44~ ~ tJ~~ . ~ sa:ee °~F SCALE: 1" = 50' . ~ CB-N57*28'16'E ~0 0.3964 AGRES ~ ~ \ . m~ \ N.E. COR. S.E. 1/4 S.E. 1/4 ' SEC. 1 P.0.8 587`48'3~W \ P.O.S. S.E. 1/76 COR. SEC. 1 \1 ' BL= D ~ MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Andy Knudtsen Susan Connelly SUBJECT: Red Sandstone Locals Housing Development DATE: December 17, 1996 Below is the staff analysis pertaining to the four remaining issues. 1. Rezoning and Special Development District. Please see the attached memo to Town Council dated November 19, 1996, summarizing the recommendation for approval for both the rezoning and SDD requests. The memo to PEC dated October 28, 1996, has also been included for your information. - H. Concems about potential limitations by the Land Ownership Adjustment Agreement (LOAA) between the Town of Vail and the United States Forest Service. Please see the attached letter from William Wood, District Ranger Holy Cross Ranger District, clarifying that the proposed use of the site does not jeopardize the ageement with the Forest Service, nor is it in conflict with the LOAA. III. Distributions of the dwelling units. Please see the memo from Tom Braun dated December 9, 1996, outlining the Water District's current thinking. Concerning the Town's five units, Council has previously agreed that three be dedicated to life-safely employees and two be open for all TOV employees. Life- safety would include fire fighters, dispatch, police officers, code enforcement officers, and snow plow drivers. There would be two lottery drawings, one for each group. Given the number of available units (three and two, respectively) and the number of interested employees (currently 22), staff believes that the simplest lottery process makes the most sense. When the life-safely pool is exhausted, life- safety employees may join in the second lottery open to all TOV employees. The minimum requirement for submitting one's name into the lottery will be providing a mortgage pre-qualification. Owning residential property in Eagle County will disqualify a potential participant from either pool. If three life-safety employees do not choose to purchase these homes, the Town will purchase the homes and make them available to TOV life-safety employees who may rent them. IV. Free Market Dwelling Units. Please see the Tom Braun memo dated December 5, 1996, describing several scenarios for the development, including if free market units are included. f:\everyone\andy\96 memos\redsand.dl7 . Memorandum TO: Town Council FROM: Andy Knudtsen, Senior Housing Policy Planner Susan Connelly, Community Development Director DATE: November 19, 1996 SUBJECT: Summary of issues concerning the Red Sandstone Employee Housing development Three KeX Decision Points L Is the proposed zone district appropriate? * Compatible with surrounding densities? * Consistent with Land Use Plan? * Neighborhood opposition at PEC? * Meets rezoning criteria, as discussed in staff inemo? II. Is the requested Special Development District appropriate? * Achieves purpose of an SDD, i.e. flexibility and documentarion? * Proposed development falls below allowed maximums of the Medium Density Multi-Family zone district? * SDD documents the details of the future development now, prior to approval of the "up-zoning" provides certainty? III. How important are the architectural details, relative to achievement of the objective of locals housing? * The two Planning commission members who voted against the project did so based on concerns about the architecture, not based on the overall merits of the project. One person attended the PEC meeting to express concern about the project, but -primarily focused on policy issues, not architectural elements. Alreadv decided 1. On November 12, 1996, the Council concluded that the 5 units which the Town controls will be sold to employees who work for the Town-- three critical and two non-critical employees. F:everyoneW ndy\96_memosUedsand.nl9 MEMORANDUIVI TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: October 28, 1996 SUBJECT: A request for a rezoning from General Use to Medium Density Multi-family, and a request for the establishment of a Special Development District to allow for the development of 17 EHU's, located on an unplatted parcel on a portion of Parcel A and part of Block D, Lionsridge Filing # 1. Applicants: Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, the United States Forest Service and the Town of Vail Planner: Andy Knudtsen 1. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUESTS The properiy, located at 845 Red Sandstone Road, is under consideration for a rezoning and a Special Development District. The current zoning is General Use District. The proposed zoning is Medium Density Multi-Family (MDMF). The new zoning would increase the development potential, as the existing zoning limits the uses to public types of uses. The applicants include the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District (the District), the United States Forest Service and the Town of Vail. The District owns approximately three-quarters of the land area under consideration. The Forest Service currently owns one-quarter of the land area. The Town and Forest Service are currently in negotiations to transfer their portion to the Town, as part of the Land Ownership Adjustment Agreement (LOAA). The site is currently vacant, as the former water treatment and storage plant has been removed recently. If the request is approved, the applicants will construct seventeen condominiums. The dwelling units will be located in four buildings, located along the Red Sandstone Creek. There 'will be 7 one-bedroom, 5 two-bedroom, and 5 three-bedroom dwelling units. Each dwelling unit will have its own one-car garage, with the exception of one three-bedroom unit, which will have a two-car garage. The primary reason the applicants are proposing an SDD at this time is to provide a detailed record of the future development potential, which will eliminate questions about future development potential of the property. The SDD is a helpful tool to obtain answers to questions about the potential development impacts from the rezoning of the property. In addition to that primary purpose, there is one deviation from the Zoning Code, which would either require a variance or be allowed via the SDD approvaL 1 F:\everyone\pec\memosW ndstone.o2R The applicant is proposing a 4-foot high retaining wall between the edge of Red Sandstone Road and the interior driveway. Due to the fact that this area is located in the front setback, the Town Zoning Code limits the height to three feet. The wall exceeds that allowable height by 1 foot and this is a deviation from the code. Upon completion of the LOAA, the Town will have title to the northern-most portion of the development site. The Town and the District will hold the land until a Homeowner's Association (HOA) can be created. Upon establishment of an HOA, the Town and the District will transfer ownership of all the land to the Association. There is no developer profit anticipated for the project. The sales price of the condominiums will be based on the cost of construction. In the development agreement between the District and the Town, there is an allowance for up to 25% of the units to be sold as free-market dwelling units (i.e. no deed restrictions). The purpose for this is to defray the costs and lower the purchase price for the future homeowners. At this time, it is anticipated that 100% of the units will be deed restricted. The deed restriction will be similar to that used for Vail Commons, which restricts the sale to local employees. After construction, it is anticipated that most of the homes will be owner occupied. The Town and the District will make the homes available to their employees. While the Town anticipates selling the dwelling units to its employees, the District will both sell and retain ownership of some of its units to rent to its employees. More discussion of the proposed unit ownership will be provided later in the memo. 2 F:\everyone\pec\memos\sandstone.o28 II. ZONING ANALYSIS Staff has provided a Zoning Analysis of the proposed project, as it compares to the MDMF standards: Zoning: General Use District (GU) Proposed Zoning: Medium-Density/Multiple Family (MDMF) w/ Special Development District (SDD) Lot Size: 1.60 acres or 69,887.66 sq. ft. Buildable lot area: 54, 140 sq. ft. Ailowed/TNIDMF Proposed Density 22 d.u.s U d.u.s Heighr 35` 35' GRFA: 18,449 sq. ft. 16,275 sq. ft. Setbacks: Front: 20' 20' Side/Side 20' 20' Rear: 20' 20' Site Coverage: 31,449 sq. ft. 12,029 sq. ft. or 45 "/o or 17"/0 Required Proposed Landscaping: 20.966 sq. ft. 36,450 sq. ft. or 30% oC _52 "/o Parking: 34 spaces 44 spaces required pruposed Percent enclosed: 50% of 53% enclosed required parking ' . (17) (18) III. SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION FROM PEC WORKSESSION ON SEPTEMBER 9.1996 Below are the list of questions raised at the previous PEC worksession. Staff has grouped them into categories of general issues and specific items relating to the proj ect. 1. Is the SDD the appropriate tool to use far the review of this proposal? • Staffbelieves that the SDD is the most appropriate process to use in this case, because it requires the specific design to be provided simultaneously with the request for a change in zoning. For clarification, the proposed development densities fall below those allowed under the MDMF 3 zoning. The proposed lcvels of density will become the new cap and any future request for expansions will trigger a major SDD amendment. A major SDD amendment must be approved by ~ Town Council with two readings, after a recommcndation by PEG Though the SDD proeess allows requests which excced the limits of the underlying zoning, the standards are referenced and used as a"yard stick" to ensure that proposals are consistent with surroundmg properties. Furthermore, the process is such that intcrested parties and adjacent property owners will have ample opportunity to give input on the requests. 2. Is affordable housing an appropriate use of the land? Is it appropriate to transfcr land from the United States Forest Service to the Town of Vail for affordable housing? The Land Ownership Adjustment Agreement (LOAA) provides for a comprehensive transfer of land between the Town of Vail and the Forest Service. Land on the perimeter of the Town overlaps into the jurisdiction of both entities. The LOAA is an effort to exchange different properties between the two entities to create a win-win situation. As part of this effort, several parameters were laid out for the use of the lands under consideration. Some of these include: 1. That there will be no National Forest Service lands within the municipal limits of the Town of Vail. 2. That the Forest Service survey, identify, and maintain a common boundary of the Town of Vail and the Forest Service and that both agencies share in the enforcement of regulations pertaining to the boundaries. The boundary has been simplified where possible, irregularities have been reduced or eliminated. 3. That all lands acquired by the Town of Vail are used for public purposes, such as open space, employee housing (per the Town of Vail employee housing ordinance), recreation or for the resolution of unauthorized uses." The LO-AA was approved by the Town Council on May 17, 1994. Staff relies on it as the most authoritative document concerning the transfer of land from the Forest Service to the Town of Vail. The third paragraph above clearly calls for employee housing as a recommended use for LOAA parcels, such as the one under consideration. 3. Should the development be targeted for the rental market or the ownership market? Staff has identified three sectors of the residential market, which the Town is trying to serve based on needs of the community: the permanent resident, the year-round renter, and the seasonal renter. The size, scale, and location of this site lends itself best to the permanent resident looking 4 purchasc a homc. One of the concerns is that the "affordability" could be lost, after the first sale. A deed restriction, similar to that used with the Vaii Commons development, will also be used with this development and the restriction will limit the resale value to an appreciation of three percent per year. In addition to the three percent per year which individuals can realize at time of resale, other costs can be added to the resale price. For example, if the Homeowner's Association assesses each unit owner for reroofing, residing, additional landscaping, paving, etc., one hundred percent of the assessment can be added to the resale price, allowing the owner to recoup costs attributed to maintenance. The deed restrictions have been written in such a way to preserve the affordable purchase price, while allowing residents to invest in the upkeep of their homes. The deed restrictions run in perpetuity, eliminating any risk of losing the initial subsidy to a future homeowner. 4. Should the dwelling units be made available to the residents throughout the community? Yes, staff believes that all residents should be able to participate in a lottery according to criteria which reflects the needs of the community. Staff recommends that there be three tiers: • Critical employees working for the Town/District (to be determined by each organization); • Other employees working for the Town/District (to be allocated as determined by each organization); and • Other community residents/employees (to be allocated by Town of Vail / District). In response to the point made about Town employees having an unfair advantage over other community residents, there are two issues to consider: the Town provides a service to the community and staffing the Town enables the delivery of services to the community. It is not an us/them issue, we are in this together. Secondly, the Town and District are trying to lead by example by creating affordable housing for their employees, to encourage other employers to do the same. 5. How can the Town and District ensure that the units are used by employees of the Town and District in the future? Staff believes it is primarily an issue of priority-- we would like to see critical employees of the two organizations housed as the top priority. With that goal in mind, the Town and District will establish reciprocal 1 st and 2nd rights of refusal for all 17 dwelling units in the development. This will allow the employees at the top of the lottery criteria list to be housed. However, if other employees own the units, we have still accomplished the goal of providing employee housing. As indicated in the lottery criteria list, other residents of the community will have an opportunity to buy homes in this development, if the supply is not exhausted by employees in the higher priority categories. Staff believes it would be heavy-handed to require a sale and then evict a local who chooses to work for a different employer in the valley. Regardless of employment location, the deed restrictions require that residents work an average of 30 hours per week at businesses which are located in Eagle County. 5 6. What has been the precedent for roads which cross private property'? Staff researched two other properties where this situation has occurred. At the time of redevelopment, the Town required easements to accommodate the existing alignment of the pavement, but did not require dedication of that portion of the site as right-of-way. As the land continued to be held as private property, the Town allowed the arca in the easement to be used in the calculation of GRFA and other dcvelopment standards. This is also consistent with the way the Town treats other easements (such as utility and drainage easements), conceming the calculation of development standards. Specific items relating to the development proposal. 1. Insure that any wetlands to be disturbed are mitigated adequately. After walking the site with Russ Fonest, the Town Environmental Planner and Nicole Ripley, a wetland consultant, staff understands that the Corps of Engineers must be notified of the activity on-site. The consultant will assess the wetland qualities of the site, review the development plans, and determine the potential area of disturbance to jurisdictional wetlands. The consultant has recommended that an area equivalent to that of the disturbance be replanted on the north and south ends of the site, as mitigation for areas being impacted. The applicant understands that the northern and southern ends of the site must be planted with nursery grown stock, matching the willow species currently on-site. The specific area of revegetation has yet to be detertnined, but will be determined prior to the first reading of the ordinance by Town Council. Neither the consultant or the Town's environmental planner believe that the characteristics of the site, or the magnitude of the proposed development, will wa.rrant other mitigation requirements than those described above. 2. Architecture -1n the discussions about the architecture at the previous PEC warksession, the PEC and DRB members were roughly split as to the appropriateness of flat roofs. After reviewing the colored renderings, the Board mernbers had a greater appreciation for the quality of the proposed development, specifically the amount of variety within the massing, or as described in the hearing, the "wedding cake effect." Staff believes that from the range of comments on the flat roofs, the best analysis of them is summarized as follows: flat roofs can be the most efficient and are appreciated by design professionals. Designs which incorporate flat roofs can be very high quality (and in fact are better than the design of Vail Commons). However, the public will not appreciate the good architecture and will perceive the project as a stack of boxes. Furthermore, this image will convey "public housing." 6 The applicable criteria in the Zoning Code is found in the Design Review Section and the SDD criteria. The SDD calls for compatibility with the surrounding properties. In this case, the surrounding properties have either pitched roofs or a combination of flat with shed roofs. The DRB criteria are more specific and state that: • The majority of roof forms within Vail are gable roofs with a pitch of at least four feet in twelve feet. However, other roof forms are allowed. Consideration of environmental and climatic determinants such as snow shedding, cirainage, and solar exposure should be integral to the roof design. • Deep eaves, overhangs, canopies, and other building features that provide shelter from the elements are encouraged. • The guidelines also call far snow shedding to be minimized in pedestrian areas. It should also be noted that although flat roofs may be appreciated for their simplicity, flat roofs are an often cited attribute of Lionshead which the community is trying to move away from. Another issue raised by the PEC was the need to break-up the siding material with areas of stucco. Both the flat roof issue and the stucco issue have not been addressed since the previous PEC/DRB worksession. 3. Consolidate curb cuts. The project has been re-engineered so that both Brooktree, Sandstone Park and the proposed project are served by one curbcut. The applicants are willing to provide permanent access easements for the neighboring developments. 4. Add a staircase to the north end of the site to access the Town of Vail bus stop. The applicant has been concerned that providing a staircase from the development to the bus stop across the street could be seen as a discriminatory act, against disabled individuals. Staff has 'researched the issue with the Town attorney, as well as with Vail Associates staff who deal with ADA issues regularly. Since the elevation difference at this comer of the site is approximately 16 feet, a ramp connecting the development to the upper road would be over 200 feet long. Given the tough requirements of the topography and the law, a connection at this location cannot be provided. 5. Add landscaping along Red Sandstone Road. The Town has a sight-distance standard for intersections between driveways and roads, such as Red Sandstone Road. The area falling within a triangle of 10 feet by 250 feet must remain free of vegetation which could block the sight of oncoming traffic. Notwithstanding this requirement, staff believes that additional landscaping must be planted along Red Sandstone Road. Previously, 7 there were 8 spruce and 8 shrubs in this area. Since the worksession, the applicant has added plant material so that there is now a total of 13 spruce, 3 cottonwoods and 8 shrubs in the area. However, staff believes that additional buffering is needed. Staff recommends adding 4 spruce and 5 shrubs in the area that extends south from the largest group of landscaping. The applicant has agreed to plant this area, as long as the finished grade is such that landscaping can be planted in the arca. 6. Provide a sidewalk along Red sandstone Road. There is not sufficient room, given the retaining required, for a sidewalk. At the end of the worksession on September 9, 1996, the PEC concluded that given the site constraints, additional landscaping was a higher priority than a sidewalk. 7. Provide a streamwalk. After studying the site, staff believes that the connection from a potential streamwalk to the road above is not workable. As discussed above, the elevation difference at the base of the upper road is significantly higher than the stream. Given the relatively short length of walkway and the steep climb required around the creek culverts, a streamwalk does not appear to be a component that could readily be included in the development. A compromise solution may be to have the applicant provide a pedestrian/fisherman's easement along the creek. This would allow creek access, without requiring a walkway to be constructed that would not be workable. 8. Provide additional snow storage. The snow storage areas are now 30% of the total pavement area. Staff believes the increase in this area, which has been made since the worksession, adequately provides for storage areas. 9. Parking for the three bedroom units. Increasing the size of the garages for the three bedroom units would require a redesign of the whole project. However, in order to address the concerns of the PEC and to ensure that the three bedroom units are adequately served, the applicant has suggested that a guest space be reserved for each three bedroom unit. 10. Pedestrian access from within the garages. Pedestrian doors have been added to the garages which have some portion of exterior wall. In several cases, the way the buildings have bcen notched, provided just enough of an exterior wall 8 I _ to include a door. However, one garage in each building does not have adequate exterior exposure to add a pedestrian door. 11. Overhead utilities. The applicant has committed to removing the existing overhead utilities. For clarification purposes, staff understands that the existing two poles on site will be removed and the existing service will terminate at the pole located immediately north of the Sandstone Park building. 12. Details. The dumpster will be enclosed, to improve the quality of the entrance area of the development. . The sod areas between the buildings have been expanded, to provide additional turf area for the residents to use. The sod will be easier to maintain than "native vegetarion," particularly since the new areas between the buildings will connect the sod from the front and back. IV. EVALUATION OF THE REZONING REQUEST The criteria, the Town has used in the past, to evaluate rezoning requests are listed below: A. Is the request in conformity with the Land Use Plan? The Town of Vail Land Use Plan designates these parcels as Medium Density Residential (MDR), which translates to a density of 3- 14 dwelling units per buildable acre. Page 32 of the Land Use Plan calls for the following type of developments in areas with this designarion: G6The medium density residenrial category includes housing which would typically be designed as attached units with commons walls. Densities in this category would range from 3 to 14 dwelling units per buildable acre." The buildable area of the combined sites is 1.24 acres. As the proposed development will consist of 17 dwelling units, the resulting density will be 13.71 - d.u./ac. which is less than what the Land Use Plan prescribes. Please note that - this calculation is based on buildable site area, not total site area. Additionally, the requested zoning of Medium Density Multi-Family Residential allows for up to 18 dwelling units per buildable acre. B. Have circumstances changed since the original zoning was placed on the property? The District has used the facility in the past for water treatment and storage. It is no longer needed by the District. The site is surrounded by rights-of-way and roads, utilities, infrastructure, and residential condominium and townhouse developments. Staff believes that because the area has developed over time as a residential neighborhood, that it is reasonable to rezone this site to allow residential development, in order to be compatible with adjacent land uses. 9 C. Does the proposed zoning provide for the growth of an orderly and viable community? Staff believes that the development of this site as affordable housing will increase the viability of our community. Affordable housing has been listed in the Town's annual community survey as a top priority, for reasons of economic stability as well as the desire to increase the sense of community. Though interest runs high, locating sites which can accommodate affordable housing is difficult. Housing at this location addresses the priorities of the community and enhances the viability of the Town. D. Does the proposed zoning present a convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal objectives? The land uses on the surrounding properties are similar to the uses of the proposed development. The applicant has prepared an analysis of the densities of the surrounding properties, which is shown below: Project Zone DistricU Parcel Units Gross Densitv Permitted Densitv Size du/ac Potato Patch Club RC, 6/ac + 10 acres 44 4.4 Sandstone Pask LDMF, 9/ac 1.54 16 10.3 Brookuee MDMF, 18/ac 1.23 acres 48 22.0 Cotton wood Park LDMF, 9/ac .69 acres 7 10.1 tlspen tree MDMF, 18/ac .49 acres 15 30.6 Sandstone Creek Club LDMF, 9/ac 5.9 acres 84 14.2 Sun Vail MDMF, 18/ac 4.91 acres 60 122 Breakaway West MDMF, 18/ac 1.87 acres 54 28.8 SnowLion/SnowFox MDMF, 18/ac 1.36 acres 42 30.8 Telemark MDMF, 18/ac .96 acres 18 18.7 Homestake MDMF, 18/ac 1.36 acres 66 48.5 Lionsmane MDMF, 18/ac 1.04 acres 37 35.5 Vail Village 9th 2-Family 3.39 acres 24 (potential) 7.0 . ~ Parcel A General Use 5.7 acres 0 0 The gross density of the proposed development is 10.6 dwelling units per acre. (17 units/ 1.6044 gross acres = 10.6 du/ac) As such, it is well within the range of the densities in the area. E. Suitability of the proposed zoning. Staff believes that the proposed zoning is suitable for this site. The development allowed by the rezoning will allow the community to move towards its goals regarding the supply of affordably priced homes. The development will be in line with surrounding projects, concerning uses and density. 10 V. EVALUATION OF THE SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT REOUEST Below are the nine criteria used to evaluate Special Developmcnt District proposals: A. Design comparibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties, relative to the architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, idcntity, character, visual integrity and orientation. Staff believes that the architectural scale, bulk and building height are all successful. However, staff is concerned about the identity and the character of the project. Specifically, staff is concerned about the flat roofs. The surrounding developments in the Sandstone area range in age and quality, and none exclusively have flat roofs. Many have a combination of flat and pitched roofs. For example, Sandstone Park has steeply pitched sheds and gables in conjunction with flat roofs. Brooktree has a combination of a mansard-type roof with a flat roof. Aspentree and Potato Patch Club both have built-up gravel roofs, which are pitched at relativeiy shallow slopes. Staff believes that one of the significant elements in each of the surrounding properties is the roof eave overhang. We believe that this gives architectural character to the development, as it creates a shadow line, breaks up the mass and bulk, and creates a character that is appreciated by the general public. Staff does not want to discount the overall quality of the proposed design. However, we believe that the character should be modified by adding pitched roofs to the flat roofs in a way similar to Sandstone Park, immediately adjacent to the project to the west. Of particular concern to staff is the height of the flat roofs relative to the road elevation surrounding the project. We believe that the roof areas will be highly visible from the surrounding area. The elevation at the corner of Red Sandstone Road and Potato Patch Drive is approximately 2- 3 feet higher than the elevation of the second story roofs. Since pedestrians and drivers on the road will be higher than the roof elevation, the flat roofs will have greater exposure. B. Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. Staff believes that the uses, activity and density will be compatible with the surrounding development. As discussed above, under the evaluation of the rezoning request, the proposed density is consistent with the Town's Land Use Plan and will be lower than the surrounding developments in the area. C. Compliance with parking and loading requirements, as outlined in Chapter 18.52. The proposed development exceeds the Zoning Code requirement regarding the total supply of parking spaces, as well as the supply of enclosed parking spaces. ll Each of the condominiums will have its own oversized garage. D. Conformity with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town policies and Urban Design Plan. The Vail Comprehensivc Plan (Land Use Plan) calls for a density on this site ranging from 3-14 dwelling units per acre. The proposed development, at 13.1 dwelling units per buildable acre, is consistent with the Land Use Plan. A thorough analysis of the consistency with the Land Use Plan is provided above, under the rezoning discussion. E. Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property on which this Special Development District is proposed. The only hazard affecring this site is the 100-year floodplain. All improvements, grading, and disturbance will be located outside of the floodplain. F. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development, responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of community. The site plan and building design have been developed to take full advantage of the open space area along Red Sandstone Creek. Each of the dwelling units will abut this corridor, which will increase the quality of life of the residents of this development. In the site planning development, the 30' stream centerline setback standard of the Town has been respected, providing a buffer between the riparian corridor and the development. There is one location where some of the existing vegetation will be removed. Tom Braun, the representative for the development, has stated that the District will transplant vegetation during the construction process or will replace it with new plant material, matching the existing species. G. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. Driveways have been aligned so that the Red Sandstone, Brooktree, and Sandstone Park developments will all be sharing the same access onto Red Sandstone Road. Easements will be provided to maintain this access in the future. The point of intersection with Red Sandstone Road has been located at a point where visibility is the greatest, as Red Sandstone Road winds its way up to Potato Patch. Concerning pedestrian circulation, staff has requested that the existing sidewalk along Red Sandstone Road be continued up to the entrance to this development. 12 Originally, staff and the PEC requestcd that a pedestrian connection be provided from this project up"to Red Sandstone Road, above the development. Unfortunately, the ADA laws are such that providing a staircase without a second accessible route cannot be done. An important detail relating to circulation is the areas for snow storage. Snow will be stored along the driveway, on the east side as well as at the northem end of the drive. Snow storage areas have been increased, as discussed above. H. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space, in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. Staff requests that the applicant buffer the project more from adjacent properties, particularly along Red Sandstone Road. Staff understands that there is a very steep stope in this area, plus retaining walls, which limits the plantable area. However, staff believes more trees and shrubs should be added, per the comments made earlier in the memo. Staff also requests that the existing vegetation be preserved. The large spruce (24 inch caliper) on the north west corner of the site is proposed to be preserved. 1. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of this Special Development District. At this time, it is anticipated that the development would be completed in a single phase. 1f for any reason, the Forest Service and the Town cannot complete the transfer of ownership of the northernmost part of the state, the District will proceed ahead with construction of the first three buildings. A condition of approval will be to have the District resubdivide all the parcels into ~ one lot. Though the zoning code definition allows parcels adjacent to one another to be considered as one lot, ultimately the development area must be replatted as a condominium map. As part of that process, the land will eventually be platted as a single lot. As part of the initial phase, staff understands that the existing overhead utility lines will be buried. Staff understa,nds that two poles will be removed and the existing overhead lines eliminated back to the existing pole adjacent to the Sandstone Park Condominium Building. 13 VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the requested Special Development District and Rezoning with two conditions. We believe the applicant has been responsive to a majority of the issues and has designed a quality product which will help meet the community's housing needs. However, staff believes that the architectural character, and landscape screening, of the project could meet the SDD criteria better than the current design. As a result, staff recommends approval of the project with the following conditions: 1) That the applicant modify the architectural character of the project by incoYporating a mixture of flat roofs and shed roofs into the design, prior to first reading of the ordinance at Town CounciL 2) That the applicant add additional trees and shrubs (4 spruce and 5 shrubs) to the area of the site adjacent to Red Sandstone Road, prior to first reading of the ordinance at Town Council. 14 ID: DEC 11'96 16:11 No.006 P,02 ' Unkad Statas Forest White Rhrer Holy Cron Rahger Dlstrict Depanmant of Sonrtce Natlonal 247,47 Us HW1r 24, P.O. 80X 180 Aqrlcuituro Forast MlNTURN, COLORADO 61646 (e70) e27-571e Fax 821.9343 ; Reply te: 2720 i t Date: December 11, 1998 Bob Armour, Mayor ' and Members of the 7own Council 76 South Frontago Road Vall, CO 81,657 Ooar pob and CounciL 1 understand that questions have been raised about the Tcwn of Vail Landownership Adjuatmarrt Analysls (Vall LOAA) and its impact on the Red Sandstana locals hausing devefopment. l wouid like to ciartry the purpose of the LOAA. It fs a planning document tor the Farest Servtce to use in identifyittg ; lands which we would like to either acqufre or convey, A July 1990 letter from the Forest Supervisor xtated, In pwt: 'Ttio princ:ipai Wutpvsv uf tttc landvwndrahip adjustrrtOnt tinalysfs ;s to achleve the , optlmum tandownershlp pattarn for the Forest.~ i ~ The Vaii LOAA was unique in that it was recognlzed eariy in the process that the Tov?m of Val couid ' ptay a ma)or role In the rearrangement of landownecship to acnieve goais ot batn tne Forest service and the Town. Town ptannsrs assisted the Forest 9ervice in Idontitying specitic parcets ef land that ; shouid be 6xCtlengetl, resutthg in a much more tletailetl anatysis tnan the Forest Servtoe typlcaliy ~ requlres. Ta further clarlly the purpose of the LOAA, ft is not to make ariy declslons about the future manage- ment of lands onoo they are acquired by the Forest Service or convayed ta other ownership, Deed-restrlcted tocals houslna w free market housing are poteritial uses of land once it Is exchanged, that would not coMlict wish the Vafl LOAA. In fact there are no actlons the Town cauld take to )eopardize the Vail LOAA, stnce it is slmpty a plarining dooumerrt for us to use in making initial determinatlons about tha desirability of a praposed land exchange. Pubflc lands, managecl by the Forest Service ot the Bureau of Land Management have been Idernffled by many local, state and Federal officfals as havfnA the potentiai to cantribute to the sduhan of a Iack of housing near resort communRies. We are pleased to be a partner in the tearn creating saludans ~ for locals housing. Please contact KathY Hardy shouid you have any further questians. Sincerely. ~ ~ iI.UAM A. D ; istrtci Ranger t ~ I ~ Caring for the Land and Serving the Peoplr M ~ BA 1/ B~~A~1~.1 A~SSOCIATES. INC. PLnNNINC ..nd COMMUNITv pFVELOPMEN' MEMORANDUM TO: Andy Knudts$a FROM: Tom Braun DATE: De=ber 9, 1996 GC_'.: Pat DauPhinait RE: Red Sandstone L,oca1'c Homing Pmlect I want to thank you and the rest of the staff for your input regarding the thtee outstariding issues raiscd by the Council last week relativa to the Red Sandstone Local's Housittg Praject. Pat and I believe that the ERWSD and the (;auncil s,hare the common goal af making ibis the best project possiblc and givcn this common goal wc tur, confident that eaeh of these issues osn be resolved ia order to allow for second reading approval on the 17th. In this regard, the following summarizes thc Doard's posiuon relative to thesc thrcc issucs; _ i ) "Muclified Restricted" Units The Board fee15 Stzongly ilid[ tht u"x)rtuciit,y w uiuoiuc;e "modifted-restcicted" units into the project be mauatained in order to reduce the sale price of restricted units. We also believe that a truxture of modified-nestricted and restricteci units wuld alsu bo a tcimL't !'ul the pzoject. Previausly referrcd to as free-mazket wuts, a mpdi8ed-re.stricted uait is a unit that zs sold to a local employee at market value wich no restrictions, i.e. appreciation cap (see below). As we have discussed, the need to iutxoduce modified-re,stncted units wiIl not . be known until more intormation is avauable regarding our constraction costs. As such, the ER.WSD/T4V Agreernent should be rcvised as follows to estabIish the garameters under which the ERWSD may iniroduce moditied-restneted units into the project: • A maximum of 25% (four units) of the units may be sold as modified-restricted units. • The ERWSD shall, at their discretion, have the opportunit.v to intnd.ace modified- restricted units into the project if construction costs exceed $125 per gross square foot Con.struction costs will be determi.ned based on qualified bids fdr the construction of the project and on other project cosis incured by the ERWSD. Modified-restricted units will have na restricticxis (i.e. appreciation cap) other than the sale of modified-restricted uaits will be limited to locals who demonstraze compliance wiih the Towu's enapZoyment zequirements. Limitixig the sale of modified-restricted units to workiag Iocal's will last from the time marketing of the units is initiated to a period 60 days from the daie final certificates of occupancy are issued for the modified-restricted uaits. • The ERWSD and Town will maintai.n a first and second ri.ght of refusal. respectively, on modified-restricted tuuts. Mintunm Ironworks Building . Phone _ ~ 827-SM 701 MAin Str".t. 7nci Flmr 1-2x _~11V5507 ' Pbst Office Box 776 Plinturn, Colorado 01645 2 ) Aistcibution of Unlts The Board's position zegdreliziy ttzc cliNtributiou uf units is unchangcd from the ERWSw1'Uv Agreement. As ,you know, this agreement stipulates that the ERWSD will obtain ownezsJup/control of 75% of the units (12.75) and the Tawn will obtain owncrshipkontrol of 251-70 of the units (4Z5). This clibtribuuvii ib t,sx:il ou thz miiouut of "buitdablc laad" . pravided by thc ERWSD and the Town. The following is a probable scenario for how these units wifl be distribute,d: 5 i Jnits Tc)wr, n vail (units distributed to the Town are r+ouuded up from 4 to 5) 4 Units EoMntial free-market units (with the modified restriction described above wtuch wiU initially targe,r the r.ale of thm unitr to lcx:als, these units will Iikcly raid up :n clae Town-wide lottery system) _ 2 Units MQun,tain Valley Co~oration (the ERWSD has an agree,me.nt to se.Il ttp ta two nnita _ to this cxganiaauon) 6 Units WS (the Boatd anticipa#es maintainiag ownership of 2-3 units and providing 3-4 units for sale to Disaict employees) A,s indieated by the sceaario above, the ERWSD could be left with as few as six units iu order to meet thE currcnt and Iong tcrm nccds of its cmployces and as many as tea units if no mod.ified restricted units are introduced into the project. The ERWSD's position is that it needs to have conaol ovcr all units othtr than tho five T4V umts and thc four gotential aiodificd-restrietod units. As Pat Dauphinais has stated publiciy on nnmeraus occasions, the ERWSD will distribute wuts to tlic-'1'vwu-widC luttery poul iS a.ad wheit the fioard detcrmincs that auch units may bc 2tvailabla 3) United States k orest Service It is our understanding that the USFS is comFo;ttable with aIl aspects of the groject as proposed and that the Town wi11 be obtaining a letter froui BiII WOOd 5tatfn8 SuCti. Z hope ttus helps you understand the Boazd's posifion relative to these issues. 1 will loolc Zorward to working with you and Tom Moorehead regarding moditications tD the hKWSl)I!Vv ,A,greement as descnbed above, we will need to have this agreement revised by Thursday in order to allow the ERWSD's counsel aza ogportunity for review. Please let me know if I can provide you with any additional infoffiation. TOTAL I'. 0c . ~A I/ BRA~.IN ASSOCNATES. INC. PLANNING and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Andy Knudtsen - FROM: Tom Braun DATE: December 5, 1996 RE: Red Sandstone Local's Housing Project As we discussed, I have prepared the following hypothetical examples of how the introduction of free-market units could be utilized to reduce the sale price of the remaining restricted units. For the sake of this exercise, let's assume the cost to deliver the seventeen units is $140 per square foot (hard and sofr costs). Based on this assumption, the unit grices would be approximately: 774 sq. ft. 1 Bedroom $108,360 996 sq. ft. 2 Bedroom $139,440 1,518 sq. ft. 3 Bedroom $212,520 . Scenario #1 - Assume that the cost to deliver the seventeen units increases to $160.00 per square foot. Based on $160.00 per square foot, the unit prices would increase to approximately: 774 sq. ft. 1 Bedroom $123,840 996 sq. ft. 2 Bedroom $159,360 1,518 sq. ft. 3 Bedroom $242,880 . The sale price of these units at $160 per square foot is probably not attainable, or certainly less attainable, by most working locals. The concept of introducting free-market units is very simple - we sell four units (25% of 17 is 4.25) at market value and take the "proceeds" from these sales to reduce the sale price of remaining 13 restricted units. Let's assume we sell four free market units: one 3-bedroom, two 2-bedrooms and one 1-bedroom _ at $200 per square foot: Cost to construct 4 free-market units $685,440 (4,284 sq. ft. at $160/ft.) Cost to construct 13 restricted units $2.165.120 (13,532 sq. ft. at $160/ft.) Total project cost $2,850,560 Revenue from sale of 4 free-market units $856,800 (4,284 sq. ft. at $200/ft.) Cost to construct 4 free-market units 85 440 (4,284 sq. ft. at $160/ft.) Proceeds to reduce cost of remaining units $171,360 Minturn Ironworks Building Phone - 970.827.5797 201 Main Street 2nd Floor Fax - 970.827.5507 Post Office Box 776 Minturn, Colorado 81645 . - • Y _ Cost to construct 13 restricted units $2,165,120 (13,532 sq. ft. at $1601ft.) Proceeds to reduce cost of remaining units $171,360 Reduced cost of remaining 13 units $1,993,760 Reduced cost per sq. ft. for restricted units $147 (13,532 sq. ft./$1,993,760) 774 sq. ft. 1 Bedroom $113,778 996 sq. ft. 2 Bedroom $146,412 1,518 sq. ft. 3 Bedroom $223,126 ' . Scenario #2 The District's goal, and I assume this goal is shared by the Town, is to deliver a quality product at the lowest price possible. In this regard, I have run the same analysis incorporating four free- market units assuming that construction cost come in at the hypothetical $140 per squaze foot: Cost to construct 4 free-market units $599,760 (4,284 sq. ft. at $140/ft.) Cost to construct 13 restricted units $1.894.480 (13,532 sq. ft. at $140/ft.) Total project cost $2,494,240 _ Revenue from sale of 4 free-market units $856,800 (4,284 sq.-ft. at $~QO/ft) Cost to construct 4 free-market units 599 760 (4,284 sq. ft. at $140/ft.) Proceeds to reduce cost of remainin' units $257,040 Cost to construct 13 restricted units $1,894,480 (13,532 sq. ft. at $140/ft.) Proceeds to reduce cost of remauung units 257 760 Reduced cost of remainina 13 units $1,636,720 Reduced cost per sq. ft. for restricted units $121 (13,532 sq. ft./$1,636,720) 774 sq. ft. 1 Bedroom $93,654 996 sq. ft. 2 Bedroom $120,516 1,518 sq. ft. 3 Bedroam $183,678 I hope this is helpful. Remember that these numbers aze speculative. However, they do ' demonstrate how the introduction of free-market units could result in restricted units that are more attainable to more people. Pat and I believe that maintaining the flexibility to introduce free-market units is-critical to providing the best possible project for the District, the Town and the community. Please do not hesitate to call with any questions you may have. ~ U ~ N N ~O CIO b N n N C/D Y ~ x XO U, ~ d J ,r N ~ CRAPHIC SCALE P \n, ~ ~ miw[ a SMr • ~ \ ~ ~ 7 Q i'• . (r~sr) „••~in'wan,c,rto ~ F-1 O 1 mR °i ~ • . t I-h . m n i ' ' ~ . --r- • . ~ . ~ rmo[ a O ieci~ O ai ~ ~ j _ ' . \ ( i"c (rm) ~ •i ~ 4 ~ n I ~ ~r \ '1 i i' ' L~ ~I , Nln m ~ ~ GR ; ~ ,5 \ ~c~ ~SONE ~ = , . % ~ , ~ ~ z ~ , _ _ ~ /j~ i ` . - . . . _ . . SP~10 1 \ ` \ W ~ a , - _ ' ^ ~ ~~I, ` _RE~ _ 'i ~ ,,~~1'~ ~ w m° ~ \ mR~y~ ~ I~.r~~4=~,~.~~ j~ / iK4~' ~~•~~.~~~.i~~i!-__~;~ ( - i l ~ ,1~, ~a°m,, m npi zsa'~Qea'~~j./ BLDG. ~Q . ! ~ - . ~..1 ~QI~1U , Y?S~P PART '~~._Y~,yJ. I ~ ` ~ ~ I / I 1 1 ( 1Rf4 I 1\ , i 11~Cf1~ • l Lr) ~ eLoc. 9-73-96 . C , ~ 1 _ - 1 ~ \ ~2 - ' - . - BtDC. i . 1 •1' ~ JOB# 96462 ~ ~ RwT Ui' C' 1-0 o I! ~ DRWN: ML}A r. ~ ~m 1~~»o~ ENG : I~Lf~ 1 ro'~~J~ FILE: 96462 ~ I amac . ~ ^ ?1 ~ ~ ~ . ~'^a ~ ` ~ \ ~ I j j I ~ + ~o~ ~E~ . r ~ , i i', / cni 0o aw ~ wira l \ ~ ~ ~ I I ~ _ _ O / f ~ / rc wro oosnw wa 3x 5, ~ f a~wc 4.u ~ roo~rt ~y N / , W R, ~ _ _ ~i ~ 5~, t~ alY,~ , ; ~ 'k~Z ~ - _ - i ~ I 5?'~-r ~ O ~ , ~ ~ CENERAL NOTF~ LES~~ 0~.7 . ~„M1s aistwc s. carrae , m [xisnac iG taNTwA S ~ c!] a iY rtc UiSnNC SPor p1A0E d r.• ! N M~~M4r~Mr ~.nl nrot w sa~..,i~ ~n,et m,.tnxtbn n FiprM~ ~ Q19 MLT PROPOSCD Y fANTOUR F~'` ~ rO~y IQ' CK ppp'OKD 10' CONTqJp W;! 1+~ . M /1~ We1~M bMr.m ne1 ead-r0 11 iMw doH sW a~ ~ V • ~ PRt~QS[D $POT GIID( ~ -r . . M now0 a~e~n~ Nrol m. tm~,«.m - Q~ J. S-l aa rran ~co~ nai e~ wnri.e a m.p te.n oi rW q.~: q~~m a . . ? 00 4, fra~k 4u~lra ew~lr~relan 4 nal rou~wd h ~~.w pma sW M 1M N TES (t ~ ~•w~.WM~ d M eo~we~r. Tronk w~rd ib^- MN M wnNt.a aM Q p~ ~yprmy . e~ Mr ypenrleN -e oad 1a ey 1. A1qKY GROMDEp B7 EA U . 5. ~i ~.c~.>r P•,,n~ „a w pwn.a m• a.~~ ma/a rn~va~w LLf vAl1FY SURA»NC. a+ O vv Io IM ~iar~ d oevirvct,m. DA1L Oi ${JRV['f: 9117191. Ad [~7 9A45 Of CItvAMN: 1w-I58-5E0-063 6, b ro"'R w...ino ~t1nw a ~«.wa lo w f0u 0190.6 ~ W~ • ~w.._l f F~ a ..,,,.we, mv ene.1 W m. ~ ~;,w,••. u~,~w~~b R•o ~a. ~d n ~ 4 rqw~.M n~ of ~n : f0UU0A11W PUM yCt AvA0.ABl! !pi BU4DµC du(H4WS Z . Z 'OoOGRAPHr a rtE0 SuN05T Q 7. Co~v«~a +a' na Ta. n.a ~ . pN( nOM ~tEPVIX1TC0 m0u 0 ~ fn V~w1~o~1tM VP~~Ilim4 ~w1nq4on~ a 10 Nw b~^W~ N e+y• ~oi w w~«oo~ueuy e~ m. o.~.~ny.~... EARBT wtaEC'. }~y •odnau rovoo+,s„ ,,,LK„ roR caeA; unun b Yls Manl af ia.na. iaa a eaoa oaAocz aa iaAna. .No y . . ~M a inFY~vn el ~ww d t4s1 m0 ~ e~ n..p~lolq n a Im~~ manw . 6 R0o0 RAN Awµr9S I+y s oo~.vM dOilm Gn4xlv ~ a .~.slFy m. ~ao~ia. ~ rql M rwDa~lb koe wE nY s w 1MkotN P, 5. rBBNCNAIEU R000 RAsN ANA1YSS 10 8C PER(ORym I~f1EN a ~ 0 G.i SUtKY wiptuAnG~ 081ArIEp. Z . . w/s w .ao.. Md nol ua.e 7 bYm1d ~rl b I bol .~tba, . . 6, $EE DNNNAGE NEPORI fpi BA9M µD 04$U11Rf;( NKppyAIIW. . ~o. taw~na nv.p m e. v.aT.e e' * c-we t-..a cr- . . ~ U. PG, ~ c I i , Plant Key ~R _ '.~Common-Narlif. &ientihc Nam~ size QIYL ` ; ~ u , . ~ Cd-do Sprutt Pices pung~ A' hl .ve. +9 C~ Iknota Snow $lonEe Arca . ? O ` c x QudinBAsprn Pupulus tnmuluidn 2•21/: uL a < . . Lancrk.ICommwp,d Pnpulusuumintla 7112'cnl. c * . ~ P+ilry's U~gwn~~ Comus vrirr~'fl~lleyi 45 • x :7 ~ ONap. CubaPFk M+Im'llup2'W. 3 ¢i ~ ' bada* Paentill. Potmrilla huititvu 'pondike' #5 27 . . 0 c r N.eve/Wildllorer keG K. y ? AII D"wurbed Aew C~ Nueg.a Sod ' . . . 591.9 s.L Wildllower SreJ 510s 1 ' . O' 14bnkd 9wbs From Siu • ~ Note: l. For+rduhctural and Sire Plan infornudon mfer ro Morter ArthilMi dmwings. • . 2. Fnt gnding inlomufion, rc(er ro Engineerins Dmi6nworki, Ina ~ Edge of Stream 3. Plant laatioru an prcllntirury and wiU be suked bY Owner's RpKSentative I ~ prior ro final i,uwu,uon. P.dgtl^ESMbe bbe~ 0 V-4 f / \ \ ExisNng Cottunwiwd Tree to be Removed ' Ed.d~sy.~foiteauu \ /~--ExieHng Shcube to be Tnneplanlcd Qwnhhol uanepLmabk JuuM m ti ~ ( \ 1 ~"t ' ~ ~ ~ demmu~eJ ~rciu a~ vtr O~~~urTu~n ~ i• ~ 3Sa^d~t,r~. \ y . I f / _ ` \ -4J~- - ~ ~ / ~ • ~e A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ P~~ / ~ •1"~ ~ ~L~ / y / , \ _ ~ P~ ~ , ~ . I 1 ~ `1 \ ` ~ f~ / , M1m ~ t o s~ r.~ 9uildin8 " , Paeo P~oo ~ _ ~ ~ A o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ $w'rding "C' U • r 1// 1 ~ Buildili / ~ i , ' r~l - I ~ /~~i~~ 1 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ? ~•j ~ U Exufing Cottonwcwd Tree to be Removed v U ~ a ~ ~ `N OD r P d i I ~ ~ i~ ~ o ~S w > R ~ •~i~ „ - > o ~ a d ~ ~ ~ . ~ 1 ~ tw.ta,4or,.m p . Pftp.My LAr « : y.. ~ ?x ah=1 c ' / ~'•'A'~ ~ I ` b++q Shni.r?.R,..,qW ~ o ~ % ~ i ~ ro W ~p Edz~ Slwbs b b. Mnoyed Ider WJI R - - - - - _ ~ . . ~ ~ WJ!/7 bou 1P1 O y ' ~-1 aWa ~ "~L r.aav = ~I7. E i ~ snrr~ L-1 ~ ( ~ I ] ` . ' • ' . - . • _ I _ . ~ r O U ' • n 50UTH ELEVATION 1NESTv ELEVATION sca,.,.. ,~au . 0 2 SCaL_. 8" . , ~ F- U ' I N Q O Z Q Z Qz ~ (noQ 1- > n C~ wzt- . ~ Q L Q ~ p ~ 30 U - - Z ~ UJ ui tJ J ~ . - . _ C~j > Q . ~ . C31 w - - - - _ - - , - W ~ - ? . . WNutT rtuN Reacw _ ~ - - i ~ =.-r . . DAi[ sCfT 75, IN1 . . . . . KnSIOK n NORTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION SCALC: 1/B" . 1'•0"~ ~ ex+cwia c~[v.rio~s scA~e: r-a. Y[LT MMM ~ A2.3 ~ , , _ - - ~ - - - . ~ NORTH EL°VAT1C'J ~ ~ \J scn~ e ~ ~ WEST EL°VATiON ~J scn e e f- , u ~ N ~ °oo UQOo a2S ~ `Y- u cfl14Qo 0) i af-> In N O V ~ zCQ llQ-27 Z N a O 3:~U Lij - of Qo! w - ~ Z > ~ _ ctl ~ ~ a - - - J 0 i - - . ' - - - r - - - - _ - ~ _ _ _ _ ~ ~ ' _ M~RMNMI = _ - _ - - ~ _ - CONCLIT ~ RE„rw - - - CJ ~ ' oAtF. scrt 25, ¦.e ~ensiws n SOUTH ELEVATION sta e t~e i o~ n EAST ELEVATION exR.iac~r~.~~~ , . , SLALL: 1/8" • 1'-0" wrct wu~cre A2,2 ~ ~ ~ _ = _ = _ - - - - - _ - - - - ~ - - _ ~ - - _ - _ = - - - - - - - - ,o : -r- - - - rl ' _ - _ ^ i - - ~ _ ~ ` . ~ U Q ~ I ~ U1 NORTH ELEVAT[ON _ ~ o ~ WEST ELEVATION ~ o U ~p 2 I Q, Cl O I- 4 J 1 O O F- (Y U f Q Z J > o Q Q Z `t N O O U W 1 (r [C W • LL1 1 C~j > (9 ' Q : . J ~u . - _ un - Q T - - _ - _ - = - - _ _ - - • ` - - = - - - ti[L14INART _ n - ~ t - ~ _ - _ COMC[/ r nin Rrn[w . - - - J - L - 7 DAi[SVi 17, ~IM . . . . . k[vISIDMS~ OUTH ELEVATION cXR~o, t~YA*,o.,S ~ EAST ELC-VATION ~T v r . ..p . . ~ . . ~ir r ~ . A2," ~ ~ uar o+ nae ecaoow uar n tra eeoRow rormrt. 0" san. i \ xa ~ DeCK i I j Lrvr" ROOM UYMi AOOK OMIW AOpI ~ MAbRA Elq00y ' ~ OINpi It00y 1•. . -?Cf?O~OF 1 T ~ - - ~ ~ i iPMC' - - roRa~ i ~ i ~ 1 - • ~ xntooq 7 xoiewu i ~ I . F PLAN 0__ROOr SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ° c, o' 00 ~ ~rrU f L W J uNir a ac ecn.aou UIR G MX Ef9n00Y ~ Q Z 7ri 64 R. U) ~ Q m w rt. 1_ > -ri N - . ~ - LJ I~ Q Z I occK 1 N ~ 1 - Q O LmNa Row ~ 5 ~ U z a: no: W ~ LL1 J uAlRA E[OROw INMi It004 Q F J (Y- W I ~ W . MA7R1 XOROMI ~ J I omiNO Row co C~ la Q W j , IV DMMB ROON . ~ . ' ..':f..`!..n.:~... ~ ~ . ' Mi1CN ~ N ~ ~ . - /D _ - ~ RKLININMT I . . . . CoK4Y1 KIN R[vlCw PpRpH 4MqRA !lplppy I ~ _CLDKTI I' I " ~ _ _ I I OAILKPI('1k(A )6, ?N ~ I IL ezrzx1oe ALI ort LL AOOV~ ~ i 7! p, ~ ~ ~ i/RAO[ 6MAC[ ~ ~ . . I L i U, UP . . . . . . I . . . ' ' . ~1W1 RAM9 M[1 MM[1 0___:11.'RD LEVEL FLOOR P!AN °JRST L°VEL °LOOR °LAN ~ , "....a. . a ~ . . ~ ~ . - • ~ ~ . . . . ~ . , _ i uNir e.1: rwo eCortOM UNIT 154; THRr-r- DGOROOM ~ , , I ; , ~ j xa u"w ieoay uniw ieooy ~wmi x R ~ DfMIIN 11ppy .I ~ Dlalp ±a te ; - - - „ 4 • ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • 1 _ ' , I I - ~ POW' - _ = G. ~ w oN I I I I w ' + beD*00„ bmftoou 2 ero.uw i • ~ • ~-Jf I ~ RoaP am - - . I _ ~ ~ ~ _ f- 4 ROOF PLAN / SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ~ 12 Ud-~ ° IM v! p ' o UN1T 61: ON U Q O O C DrDROOM UN1T 61: - 776 SQ. PT, ON~ 6~DROOM 776 SQ, FT. ' I it1 . i U1OQ xa m~Z . tmrH eow Q . o~ ,m Q ~ S Q LmNa Roou --1 ~ - u l . y,vtiwefDIpW lif W ~ iu -i 7 > cD be cD -D i- a w . . DIaMp IlOpy IL I J a° ~ oiPuw - - - . ~ Q r...• ~ oru _ . ' W ~ wm(I.' ..1.:: flMQI - V I pmcm ;~k:~~-.~ ~ . - ~ ttoxT ~ uNnti~ xapoow reunnwm - - - - cwxrt nui a~ew n _ ~ 4ye Mc ~ I . ~ ; . B4 DI I~ ~ . . CIfiL1101 W yt iNAy[ DARL[IfLMOM 25, IIN erT.ia N ; Rcv:610.c eNGa! Ch4ot . . . _ , UP 4p ; n TNIRD LEVEL FLOOR pLAN MtCT MiuDtl ' F.RSr '-EbEL FLOOR PLAN ~ ~ A 1, 2 1 ALI UNIT A3: TWO DCDROOM UNIT A4: THRrC Dr-DROOM UNIT A5: TWO DCOROOM 1001 5Q. PT, 1518 S0. PT. 906 54. PT. r--------~ I , Ottrz ; oem UNW 110011 LfNA0 IlOpl . . . ~ YM7M AlOROOY ~ YAi7t11 ![0110011. . DINMO ROOII ~ u%lka Rwu ~ - ; UI DtMM It00i1 " . ~ . :~.1 DMMB ItDON _ _ ~ . ~ 1 - _ r°"a I - OeCK ~ ; - ' ' , - a; - - A ~ . 5CD.OOQ - eeo.oor i ~ xoewu i I ~ eroeoou t ~ ~ . . . . i . . . ~ U O Q C] Z `t i O O O 4 ROOF PLAN ~ SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN d u ,m.,p z z w Nti4 IIMIT AI: TMtC[ ![DA0041 UIR AL• dl[ D[OR004 .d N>' p4 f4 rT. Til 1Q rT. . C~ Q Z ' W Q Z QNO z (Y- (y tll oN °eaK D= W n > (9 _ uwwo iroou Q llJ l1YpN AOd1 ~ NAiT[II ![NlNM WfRYI ltDA00M ~ J . ~ I M D bCDROOQ I 0.0KT +J lAtN DIMMC A004 ~ aaer i e.TM aoxr L HALL =r.:-• ; ~ ==t'~.`~ I rmnnnun _ ::1 ? - - - car,crr ni,i ahcw weaH Q uASmi x • t ai 7 ~ - - - ~ a~tflz; I eeo"ww 2 - - • Al N i-- I t I4 _ _ ( I iMGi! iYJ.V! 0llUit~ ~ 76, 4N . i ~K _ ' ' •CYIF'VR I CIfiMIM w ~ I AA u ~ ~ - C-_ Oua.c cuux ~ UP crtna eUv.nas v 1 vee~+wea j -N:RD L°VEL FLOOR °LAN ~ °:RST L°V°L FLOOR PLAN ~°'''r i~ ~ , U N ~ C-0 oo ao in n , ~r, (o a ~ m^ ^ o ~ ~ m0 " U LO ~ O O u1 a J ~ ~ ~ ~ ,,,~.R C7 ° CRAPHIC SCAIE W."'."`us.""m `,tn1tl (Lxwnoi ro a aaswm) \ w n ~ wniod~A ~DtwMU (Zw( o f+tw Wvfi1WRD`' OISPMC =vfll YMM0.E ( 0m R[f ) .4I4 c:) ; em v / I I.c? . 20 M1 ma V SnW1 ~ 00 ifl ~ U [nSMG 0 I AMt6ff L!f \ \ F~. ~ ~ ~i5ro A ry N 00 , 1 " • - _ p ~Z ` tosW#c uM / ' ' P~0 ~ w n ~ b.~ ,.,nc~l~ m~ ~ ~ Qo m ~ I ` ~ ~ - 'L • ' ~ , ~ ~ q ~.t,v-- . _ \ / a m r~ ~ o.c~~anu~(*Mm. \ l B.DG. .s+.¢..mA Lnt °0 xLa • ~ o u~o~o ona[c~ ' I Jr IIAfa1101 D+SnC 1, O i ' . ~ \ ~ o • . .,,,i,°P;'o 'y.i ' / . :,e ~ I ro.a oac ~ il : ~ r. ~ ~ a wiw~m ~4 vi ~ ~1 1 ~a~ nno ? ~ PNtT l naµ ro . vusi e.aw ~TM4 r c"rt vuK I .---_°w- ~ ~ arsro' . rArt¢L x.o.o.m. roa~w,m 1 1 R~c"~°``' 1 I 9-23-96 L0U"b1 ~ BLDC. ~"R , 9lDG. tucnnc ~..~s ~1 A. ~ ~ ~~I ~ I PNtT ~ .C. I ° ~~:i JOB# 96462 mcwan I I IP+FCIL1 mc+oon ' / •s K~a~ ma ~ arc ' / ~ ~ ~RWN: ML~1 ~vsi~oa ro e•.e.a• rtc ~ I aIDC. ENG ; ~ILM +.ust aou~ `must aou ~ qso q°",oos~nurt ~KA ~B' a FILE: 96462 . awm e.a-j ` Pnaa ~ ro x nw nc .w a m¢ ~ ~ 7 \ ~ I \I~ / i~ t rrorosm us f""~ r w \ ~ / ro a co.acrto ,o u r~.oa~aa v :oa, w.mza~ swsro[ ro v«a=c~n •S \.r\ p1Ul~0n~¢C 1i0src.Rr p ~ . R REY0~w lM. Il!' BUQ s' a" a.• wsn+c , 4ICn+G n RIIM1~M[ 1-C9rTf RNO (60, ~ ~ 1~ - ~ E, ~ ` ` ~ x. I 5 ~ W . ~ `~`^yc- v.-a-------+*~°-~--~ . . \Z - LEGE.Q - - EMisnNC 2. CWtWn . . . . . ~ , . i i ~ ~ #traT raE ~ - EKiSni+C io' CaiOUR nrr) . E%iSnNC SvOT GRrDE ~ . . . [UC. w~»q~A _ _ _ _ _.rI PROPOSFD I' CONiOUR . firol pppppgDlO'CONiOIMt. u . VRCPOSEL SPOT GRME . xi ~ NOT S . i. Sunvfr W+O~ BY EeGtE veuFr SuAVEnNG U 75 ~ . . p~iE Of SURVEY: 9/I3/94. . . Ba95 Of EIFVA110N: uN-15E-5E0-063 Ru E1906 J mv. 817e.i o. .a W r cW«DAnpN p,AN waT /.vuu8lf rON BuitDIMC o,uE'+4b+s. 3 rovoeaAP"r a a[o se40s,ae RoAo Mm+oae¢n rna+ Z . . A NE/JtBY VaO,ECi. J N~ . App110HAl tOpOfAMN7 iS NQJEU (OR ACNFATE U71UlY : ia.nw. ioa a eMoa a+ADEs. cuc LaAnON. --c ~ zoao vLAM u4urss. . S. ABBpENAIED rlOOD PLNN ANKYSIS TO BE PCRfORMCD AFIER SUNKY Wp14APON 081u04m. Q! . 6. SEf OpAINAG[ REVORi i0R BAyN AMD DISCNNPCE INfORUAi1W , . . . ~ ~ Cill ~ F€ W PG. C2- ` ~ ~ ~ 'vPROX IOCATIGM t~{eM[N1 l AMROMIMITG LOCATION A!Lrr[CTI1noMi1CwuAre LMNO WTUn[ TCI ~ ~0~ OI «I[bAnoH OORTR[C MI~TJIq I[W[R YµMOI! 1[D & Vs WtfT I oerve [DG[ 0P SIR[- ~ti r ~ - ^d uer~~:;r• % e1:- toae a, I,.~,.-~~;. ~ ~ • % -e.uc• . ,1 1i I t~ ..l cr~~. - ~ ~ -...~r i . ' . , . ` r o00 ~ ' • ~ \ ' ` 1 ~ i I ~ M /T ~ ~ .~0?i'T'.~n! 1~ .~p. ` I- ,,i' '~r`~ ~ , i---------- : i . rt•.i to ae 1 ~ f , 9L~G ~ ^ ' • . - . _ . y~ ~ i irv ~ ~ ~:..._._t"._„~'~ ~ . ' , \ ~ ` I- ~ I \ UK~TI04 ~ ~ ~ ~ ` . ~"'-'-'•~,w''~~ ~ ~ i 10.o .t eoa Jo• r.ee~ ~e'er.ca c~ ~cre.u ~eo, ,0~'0 11 I-4-ia.a~ cac ~ ~ / • ` ' 3"~w~ ~ ~~Cia I!T lIM1[ C, % ~ rw. ~aw B:GG FE}~J ~ l ~ 1 i ~ 7 Q ?NI~A1 1 OVilfll a wte 11 il ~ i / ~`•a ~ 9~DG. ° ? ? 1,. ` I ; 1~1 ` 'f ~ \ CIlu~bT[ . rto A u~n ~aar ~ow ~ ~ 1 . ~ Q 0 C~t J ~»>e r~• \ o.oc cuK rw e~tr ~ 0 0 [o-~ ~ona ~ivy,a, I tl ~ PIII[ e.o'eu~. BLDG. • o"~ ae f (Y U i aOre ~ I ' uBu i u o I X. e au.eo e.a-""*~ So --A ~ •n i, . nao~ U) O Q • ~ ~ ~ ' . .I~rr ~onv / > d:tr; ~.e rnoeJ/ cu•e .ho cuTTU W p N i ` e+ooareo ~ e oene ~ u< . ~ w e~o cu.e Q_ f~ w •it Yr ~o auriNO o..oc a ~ u+.c, ro W J rurc o ~ ru i i t : ~ (u~oi+wc' ~iar wir ~r~at~ I J t~ ~n.o e.~nr W iiecec°.H.rv~u i'ioNCeere ~~d^,e I~ ~oo•~ j% Q Tn SqNOgroN ~eoir-o.o L ueLe 0 - , ~ rx~? ra : a~- )CC` =G 160, RQ u,~ i 1t, ~ \ - ~G°' e~~ rui e~m~ ~ I ~y ~O r+tunrwr yp.~ . • ~ ween rvH avaw / ~ - ' 1 i j . LEGEND _:iC :I:STIAC i L'JYTO,R 1 Wwat :M:STIAU t7:GnT0UR t f 'M:ST;MG SPyT S.A'JE DAR. KIT )I, MN w:NT?fl . ' . ~ a~C°:S'p r' :Oh'^.J, I[VISIOMS~ tiCl'FC . . • trKno.ioto e• ewt u..e• , o.•e v wrt, v..rr.c ann. w:t o~ ntv.ria u..,Weww: S1TE PLAN " IPRELIMINARY? 'w : t' 1 u,e,,,,, 2 rr.nr ~ . . . .a•, . , . :o,. o, _ . . ~ rtY. s+te c •a. +eu.wn u.ou..;.a ~a ~e.w,..r. wttr w~eta . . . • m-~ See• C. LAD:'K . +r.i.~... ..n;^ , ~ A0,1 , ORDINANCE NO. 20 SERIES OF 1996 AN ORDINANCE REZONING THREE TRACTS FROM GENERAL USE SECTION 18.36 TO MEDIUM DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, SECTION 18.18 GENERALLY LOCATED AT 945 RED SANDSTONE ROAD MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBITS "A" AND "B" OF THIS ORDINANCE. WHEREAS, an application has been submitted to rezone the three parcels from General Use to Medium Density Multi-Family Residential; and WHEREAS, while the current zoning, General Use, allows employee housing as a conditional use, the proposed medium density multi-family residential zone district provides an opportunity for more effective development of the land for local's housing; and WHEREAS, the rezoning effort is consistent with the surrounding and immediate adjacent properties; 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; and WHEREAS, concurrent with the request for rezoning, the applicant has made a request for a Special Development District to control the future development of the site; and WHEREAS, all notices required by Section 18.66.080 have been sent to the appropriate parties; WHEREAS, the Town Council has held a public hearing as required by Chapter 18.66 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail; WHEREAS, the United States Forest Service, as the present owner of the property described on Exhibit B, has consented to including its property in this rezoning process conditioned upon final approval becoming effective when the ownership of the land is transferred to the Town of Vail pursuant to the Land Owncrship Adjustment Agreement; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL 4F THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO THAT: Section L The Town Council finds that the procedures for the provision of rezoning property in the Town of Vail have been fulfilled, and the Town Council hereby received the report of recommendation from the Planning and Environmental Commission recommending the rezoning of said property. Section 2. The Town Council finds this proposed zoning action is in compliance with the Town of Vail Land Use Plan which is the master plan for guiding development within the Town of Vail. Section 3. The Town Council further finds since the Water District no longer uses the property which is the subject of the zoning proposal for water treatment and storage, this change in the condition of the neighborhood further supports the zoning change. Ordinance No. 20 ~ Series of 1996 ection 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. Sec ion . The Town Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Section 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 and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. ection 7. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED IN FULL ON FIRST READING this l 9th day of November, 1996, and a public hearing shall be held on the 3rd day of December, 1996, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Robert W. Armour, Mayor Attest: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY IN FULL this 3rd day of December, 1996. Robert W. Armour, Mayar Attest: Hnlly I. McCutcheon, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 20 2 Series of 1996 ~ Exhibit A A PARCEL OF LAND WHICH IS PART OF BLOCK "D" OF THE LION'S RIDGE SUBDIVISION, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO, SITUATED IN SECTION l, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 81 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL, WHICH CORNER IS COINCIDENT WITH THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 81 WEST, 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 04 MINUTES 45 SECONDS WEST 84.35 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 18 DEGREES 26 MINUTES 14 SECONDS WEST 86.06 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 85 DEGREES 24 MINUTES 11 SECONDS WEST 153.30 FEET, THENCE NORTH 22 DEGREES 16 MINUTES 35 SECONDS EAST 35.97 FEET, THENCE NORTH 04 DEGREES Ol MINUTES 23 SECONDS WEST 79.80 FEET THENCE NORTH 22 DEGREES 33 MINUTES 00 SECONDS WEST 62.68 FEET, THENCE NORTH 87 DEGREES 48 MINUTES 35 SECONDS EAST 196.28 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. AND A PARCEL OF LAND IN BLOCK D, LION'S RIDGE SUBDIVISION, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE 1/4 SE 1/4) OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 81 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERiDIAN SEARS NORTH 33 DEGREES 38 MINUTES 59 SECONDS EAST 207.88 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 85 DEGREES 24 MINUTES 11 SECONDS WEST 65.15 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 22 DEGREES 16 MINUTES 35 SECONDS WEST 61.37 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 26 DEGREES 44 MINUTES 34 SECONDS EAST 93.63 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 11 DEGREES 27 MiNUTES 55 SECONDS WEST 129.64 FEET; THENCE SOUTN 57 DEGREES 33 MINUTES 16 SECONDS EAST.90 FEET THENCE NORTH 17 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 49 SECONDS EAST 51.99 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 16 DEGREES 58 MINUTES 11 SECONDS EAST 87.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 07 DEGREES 19 MINUTES 29 SECONDS EAST 86.95 FEET; THENCE NORTH 27 DEGREES 19 MINUTES 49 SECONDS EAST 190.91 FEET; THENCE NORTH 18 DEGREES 26 MINUTES 14 SECONDS EAST 61.52 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 85 DEGREES 24 MINUTES 11 SECONDS WEST 88.15 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. Ordinance No. 20 3 Series of 1996 Exhibit B A PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE NE 1/4 SE 1/4 SECTION l, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 81 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRTNCIPAL MERIDIAN, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID NE 1(4 SE 1/4 SECTION 1, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF BLOCK D, LION'S RIDGE SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE MAP THEREOF RECORDED 1N BOOK 215 AT PAGE 648 IN THE OFFICE OF THE EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO, CLERK AND RECORDER; THENCE, DEPARTING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE, N22°33'00"W 84.13 FEET; THENCE N49°45'28" E 55.05 FEET; THENCE 53.85 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15°25'35" AND A CHORD THAT BEARS N57028'16" E 53.69 FEET; THENCE 41.90 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 27.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 88°54'26", AND A CHORD THAT BEARS S70°21'44" E 37.82 FEET; THENCE S25°54'31" E 137.47 FEET TO THE SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE NE 1/4 SE 1/4 SECTION 1, SAID LINE ALSO BEING THE NORTHERLY LiNE OF SAiD BLOCK D; THENCE, ALONG SAID L1NE, S87°4R'35" W 150.82 FEET TO THE PO1NT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 0.3964 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. THE BEARINGS OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL ARE BASED ON A BEARING OF N87°48'35"E ON THE SOUTHERLY LiNE OF THE NE 1/4 SE 1/4 SECTION 1, TSS, R81 W, PER THE PLAT OF LION'S RIDGE SUBDIVISION. Ordinance No. 20 4 Series of 1996 4 ORDINANCE NO. 24 Series of 1996 AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 33, RED SANDSTONE; ADOPTING A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 33 IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 18.40 OF THE VAIL MUNICIPAL CODE; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code authorizes special development districts within the Town in order to encourage flexibility in the development of land; and WHEREAS, the applicants, the Upper Eagle Valley Water & Sanitation District, the Town of Vail, and the United States Forest Service, or the successors in interest, have submitted an application for the establishment of Special Development District (SDD) No. 33, for a certain parcel of property within the Town, legally described in the attached Exhibits A and B, and commonly referred to as the Red Sandstone affordable housing development Special Development District Na 33; and WHEREAS, the United States Forest Service, as the present owner of the property described on Exhibit B, has consented to including its property in this Special Development District process conditioned upon final approval becoming effective when the ownership of the land is transferred to the Town of Vail pursuant to the Land Owncrship Adjustment Agreement WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 18.66.140, the Planning and Environmental Commission, on October 28, 1996, held a public hearing on the establishment of an SDD, and has submitted its recommendation to the Town Council; and WHEREAS, all notices as required by Section 18.66.0$0 have been sent to the appropriate parties; and WHEREAS, the Town Council considers that it is reasonable, appropriate, and beneficial to the Town and its citizens, inhabitants, and visitars to establish SDD No. 33; and WHEREAS, the Town Council has held a public hearing as required by Chapter 1$.66 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Ordinance 24, 1 Series oF 1996 J SECTION l The Town Council finds that all the procedures set forth for Special Development Districts in Chapter 18.40 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail have been fully satisfied. SECTION 2 Special Development District No. 33 is established to ensure comprehensive development and use of an area in a manner that will be harmonious with the general character of the Town, provide adequate landscaping, open space, employee housing, and other amenities, and promote the objectives of the Town's Zoning ordinance. The development is regarded as complementary to the Town by the Town Council and the Planning and Environmental Commission. SECTION 3 - Special Development District No. 33 is established for the development on a parcel of land comprising of 69,887.66 square feet more or less; Special Development District No. 33 and said 69,887.66 square feet may be referrcd to as "SDD No. 33". SECT10N 4 The Town Council finds that the development plan for SDD. No. 33 meets each of the . standards set farth in Section 18.40.080 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail or demonstrates that either one or more of them is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved. In accordance with Section 18.40.040, the development plan for SDD No. 33 is approved. The development plan is compriscd of those plans submitted by Morter Architects, and consists of the following documents: 1. Sheet No. A0.1, Morter Architects, dated September 25, 1996 (Site Plan). 2. Sheet No. L-1, Fieldscape, dated September 23, 1996 (Landscape Plan). 3. Sheet No. A2.1, Morter Architects, dated September 25, 1996 (Elevations-Building A). 4. Sheet No. A2.2, Morter Architects, dated September 25, 1996 (Elevations-Buildings B and C). 5. Sheet No. A2.3, Morter Architects, dated September 25, 1996 (Elevations-Building D). 6. Sheet No. A1.1, Morter Architects, dated September 25, 1996 (Floor Plan-Building A). 7. Sheet No. A1.2, Morter Architects, dated September 25, 1996 (Floor Plan-Buildings B and C). 8. Sheet No. A1.3, Morter Architects, dated September 25, 1996 (Floor Plan-Building D). 9. Sheets No. C1 and C2, Engineering Design Works, dated November 11, 1996, (Engineering Drawings). Ordinance 24. 2 Series of 1996> 10. Other general submittal documents that define the development standards of the Special Development District. SECTION 5 In addition to the Approved Development Plan described in Section 4 above, the following development standards have been submitted to the Planning and Environmental Commission far its consideration and recommendation and are hercby approved by the Town Council; these standards are incorporated in the Approved Development Ptan to protect the integrity of the development of SDD No. 33; the following are the development standards for SDD No. 33; A. Lot Area - The lot area shall consist of approximately 69,887.66 square feet. Presently 52,620 square feet is currently owned by the Water District, 17,267 square feet is owned by the Forest Service and subject to the Land Ownership Adjustment Agreement. B. Setbacks - The required setbacks shall be 20' for each setback, per Medium Density Multi-Family (MDMF) zoning standards and as indicated on the approved development plan. C. Height - The maximum height of the development shall not exceed 35 feet per MDMF zoning standards and as indicated on the approved development plan.. D. Density Controt - The maximum development of the site shall not exceed 16,275 square feet of GRFA and/or seventeen dwelling units. This figure is the maximum GRFA and dwelling units to be allowed on the lot. E. Site Coverage - The maximum site coverage for this Special Development District shall not exceed 12,029 square feet, or 17% of the lot area, as indicated on Approved Development Plans. F. Landscaping - The minimum landscaped area for this Special Development District shall not be less than 36,450 square feet, or 52% of the lot area, as indicated on the Approved Development Plans. G. Stream Setback - The minimum stream setback for this Special Development District shall not be less than 30 feet from the center of Red Sandstone Creek, as indicated on the Approved Development Plans. SECTiON 6 The developer, jointly and severally, agrees with the following requirements, which are a part of the Town's approval of the establishment of this SDD No. 33: Ordinance 24, 3 Series oF 1996 A. Prior to issuance of building permits for any structure on the property, the applicant shall document how the overhead utility lines will be removed. The two poles on-site will be eliminated and the applicant will work with Holy Cross electric to determine how the existing service will terminate on the Sandstone Park site. B. Prior to recording the condominium map, the applicant shall provide the following easements on the map, which will take effect immediately upon recording at the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder: 1) A public access easement for the Brooktree/Sandstone park residents; 2) A public access easement for the portion of Red Sandstone roadway which crosses the subject property; and 3) A drainage easement for the storm drain crossing the site. 4) A public access easement across the property described in Exhibit A to serve future developmcnt in conformance with this approval located on the property described in Exhibit B. C. The final condominium map shall abandon all interior lot lines of the property, D. Prior to first reading, the applicant shall add 4 additional spruce and 5 additional shrubs to the landscape plan, locating the additional plant matcrial immediately south from the largest group of landscaping, located adjacent to the Red Sandstone Road right-of-way. SECTION 7 This approval shall take effect immediately as it pertains to the land described in Exhibit A and, as to that land described in Exhibit B, this approval shall become effective upon the transfer of title from the United States Forest Service to the Town of Vail. SECTION 8 Amendments to the approved development plan shall be reviewed pursuant to Section 18.40.100 of the Vail Municipal Code. SECTION 9 The developer must begin construction of the Special Development District within three (3) years from the time of its fmal approval, and continue diligently toward completion of the project. iThe developer must meet the requirements of Section 18.40.120 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail. Ordinence 24, 4 series 4t t996 . ~ SECTION 10 If any part, section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be - inv-alid, such deci*hall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, _ sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid. SECTION l l The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and its inhabitants thereo£ SECTION 12 The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effectivc date hereof: any prosecution commenced, nar any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provisions or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless stated herein. 1NTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON F1RST READING this day of November, 1996, and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance on the day of December, 1996, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorada _ Rabert W. Armour, Mayor Attest: Holly L.1V[cCutcheon, Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED IN FLILL this aay of , 1996. Robert W. Armour,lVlayor A±test: Holly L. McCutcheon, Town Clerk Ordinance 24, 5 Series of 1996 r Exhibit A A PARCEL OF LAND WHICH IS PART OF BLOCK "D" OF THE LION'S RIDGE SUBDIVISION, EAGLE COLJNTY, COLORADO, SITUATED IN SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 81 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL, WHICH CORNER IS COINCIDENT WITH THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION l, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 81 WEST, 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 04 MINUTES 45 SECONDS WEST 84.35 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 18 DEGREES 26 MINUTES 14 SECONDS WEST 86.06 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 85 DEGREES 24 MINLTTES 11 SECONDS WEST 15330 FEET, THENCE NORTH 22 DEGREES 16 MINUTES 35 SECONDS EAST 35.97 FEET, THENCE NORTH 04 DEGREES O 1 MINUTES 23 SECONDS WEST 79.80 FEET THENCE NORTH 22 DEGREES 33 MINUTES 00 SECONDS WEST 62.68 FEET, THENCE NORTH 87 DEGREES 48 MINUTES 35 SECONDS EAST 196.28 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. AND A PARCEL OF LAND IN BLOCK D, LION'S R1DGE SUBDIVISION, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT WHENCE THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE 1/4 SE 1/4) OF SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP S SOiJTH, RANGE 81 WEST OF THE 6TH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN BEARS NORTH 33 DEGREES 38 MINUTES 59 SECONDS EAST 207.88 FEET; THENCE SOLJTH 85 DEGREES 24 MINUTES 11 SECONDS WEST 65.15 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 22 DEGREES 16 MINUTES 35 SECONDS WEST 61.37 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 26 DEGREES 44 MINUTES 34 SECONDS EAST 93.63 FEET; THENCE SOUTH I 1 DEGREES 27 }VIINUTES 55 SECONDS WEST 129.64 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 57 DEGREES 33 MINUTES 16 SECONDS EAST.90 FEET THENCE NORTH 17 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 49 SECONDS EAST 51.99 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 16 DEGREES 58 MINUTES 1 l SECONDS EAST 87.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 07 DEGREES 19 MINUTES 29 SECONDS EAST 86.95 FEET; THENCE NORTH 27 DEGREES 19 MINUTES 49 SECONDS EAST 190.91 FEET; THENCE NORTH 18 DEGREES 26 MiNUTES 14 SECONDS EAST 61.52 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 85 DEGREES 24 MINUTES 11 SECONDS WEST 88.15 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. Ordinance 24, 6 series or 1996 ~ . Exhibit B A PARCEL OF LAND WITHIN THE NE 1/4 SE 1/4 SECTION 1, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE $1 WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY L1NE OF SAID NE 1/4 SE 1/4 SECTION 1, SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF BLOCK D, LION'S RIDGE SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE MAP THEREOF RECORDED IN BOOK 215 AT PAGE 648 IN THE OFFICE OF THE EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO, CLERK AND RECORDER; THENCE, DEPARTING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE, N22°33'00"W 84.13 FEET; THENCE N49°45'28" E 55.05 FEET; THENCE 53.85 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 200.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 15°25'35" AND A CHORD THAT BEARS N57°28'16" E 53.69 FEET; THENCE 41.90 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 27.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 88 054'26", AND A CHORD THAT BEARS S70021'44" E 37.82 FEET; THENCE S25°54'31" E 137.47 FEET TO THE SAID SOUTHERLY LINE OF THE NE 114 SE 1/4 SECTION l, SAID LINE ALSO BEING THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID BLOCK D; THENCE, ALONG SAID LINE, S87°48'35" W 150.82 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 0.3964 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. THE BEARINGS OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL ARE SASED ON A BEARING OF N87°48'35"E ON THE SOUTHERLY LiNE OF THE NE 1/4 SE 1/4 SECTION 1, TSS, R8l W, PER THE PLAT OF LION'S RIDGE SUBDIVISION. ordinance 24, 7 Series ot 1996 - u ~y TOWN OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road Office of the Town Manager Vail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2105/Fax 970-479-2157 MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council . FROM: Robert W. McLaurin Town Manager DATE: December 13, 1996 SUBJECT: Town Manager's Report Vail Village Popcorn Wagon Last week I met with Bob Schuitz concerning the Vail Village Popcorn Wagon. As many of you are aware, Mr. Schultz has a lease with the Town of Vail through December 31, 1997 for a space in Founders Plaza. Mr. Schultz has operated the Popcorn Wagon since about 1988 and is interested in selling this business. He has requested that the Town extend the lease. After reviewing the situation, it is my feeling that the Town should not extend this lease. We should, early next spring, develop a procedure to lease this space at that time. Mr. Schultz could then apply and receive the new lease. However, this would provide the Council with an opportunity to reevaluate the rent we are receiving and to also look at other factors concerning the operational aspects of this matter. For your information, I have attached a copy of my draft letter to Mr. Schultz. West Vail Interchange Update On October 1, 1996 you endorsed the concept of constructing two roundabouts in West Vail. Subsequent to this decision we have begun the construction design and preparation of the construction documents. We have scheduled this item for your consideration on the 17th. The purpose of this session is to update you on the progress of this project and to receive your direction for completing the design. In order to keep the project on schedule, the design needs to be essentially complete by January 17th. At this point the design is approximately 30% complete. The current schedule for this project is as follows Construction: February 14th - construction design complete project out to bid March 4th - bid opening March 11 th - award bid March 31st - commence construction November 1st - substantial completion tow4i BECYCLEDPAPER The construction design is essentially the same as the Council saw in the conceptual plans last spring with one exception. The conceptual proposal showed a grade separation of the West Vail bike path. Specifically, the design showed the bike path going beneath the road and along side Gore Creek. We believe that construction of this alternative would cost approximately $500,000. For approximately 200 lineal feet of bike path. While we are concerned with the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists, we do not believe that this is a prudent expenditure. However, if you feel strongly that we should construct this alternative please let us know on Tuesday and we will revise the design accordingly. Please be advised that should we pursue this alternative, that the $5.5 million figure may no longer be valid. We are continuing to pursue funding alternatives. However, it is unlikely we will have a definitive answer on funding until early 1997. We look forward to reviewing this project with you. Legislative Traininq The regular session of the 61 st Colorado General Assembly will begin on Wednesday, January 8, 1997. It is likely that the session will be dominated by welfare reform, transportation, finance, budget surpluses, and tax relief. As in previous years the Colorado Municipal League (CML) will be at the forefront helping to manage these issues on behalf of Colorado cities and towns. CML will be sponsoring a legislative workshop on January 30, 1997. The purpose of this workshop is to help municipal officials understand pending state legislation. It is a day long workshop and will focus on the key municipal issues that will likely come before the 1997 General Assembly. It is an excellent opportunity for you to learn about the state legislative process. If you are interested in attending please let Anne Wright know so she can make arrangements to register you for this workshop. Loadina and Delivery Update We are continuing to work to address the loading and delivery issue. Last week we met with many of the major companies who deliver goods into the Vail Village. This meeting was an attempt to develop a scenario which would improve this situation. Using scale maps and a series of overlays, we worked through a number of scenarios for loading and delivery. An important part of this discussion involved the categorization of trucks into three sizes small, medium, and large, based on length of truck. An important component of the scenario discussed was the segregation of loading sites by truck size. A revised loading and delivery plan developed by this group is attached to this memo. This is a modification to the current plan. It is our intention to monitor this through December 31, 1996. In the interim we will be meeting with other people affected by loading and delivery. Specifically, we will be meeting with the East Village Homeowners on December 26th and with the Vail Village Merchants Association on January 8th. Following this additional evaluation and meetings we will bring this issue back to the Council in mid January for additional discussion. RWM/aw C ,~.f~ u` iJ December 13, 1996 Mr. Robert D. Schultz, Jr. 4112 Spruce Way Vail, CO 81657 Re: Town of Vail/Village Popcorn Wagon Lease Dear Bob: Thank you for taking the time to visit with me concerning the Vail Village Popcorn Wagon Lease earlier this week. Subsequent to our discussions, I have had a change to review the lease agreement. As we discussed, your lease with the Town of Vail is valid through December 31, 1997. After reviewing the documents and much thought and deliberation, it is my feeling the Town should not extend the lease prior to the termination. It will be my recommendation to the Council that in June, 1997, we reassess the lease on this parcel and develop a procedure for selecting a tenant. I realize this does not satisfy your wishes, and could potentially affect the sale of the lease. However as we discussed, as a fiduciary for the Town I have an obligation to look at a broader perspective on this issue. If the Council chooses to extend the lease, we will prepare the necessary agreements. However it will be my recommendation that the lease not be extended at this point in time. Thank you for your time. If you have questions or need additional information please do not hesitate to call me. Very truly yours, Robert W. McLaurin Town Manager RTM/aw xc: Vail Town Council R. Thomas Moorhead ~y TOWN OF VAIL P.O. Box 567 Department of Police Yail, Colorado 81658 970-479-2200 VAIL VILLAGE LOADING AND DELIVERY POLICY December 13,1996 • Effective 12-13-96 delivery trucks are allowed into Vail Village before 7 a.m. if the trucks use "silent mode": no use of air brakes, no refrigeration units running and engines must be turned off while the truck is parked. Any violation of "silent mode" will result in the revocation of an early morning parking permit. Noise complaints may also result in revocation of early morning parking permits. • On mornings when any fresh snow has accumulated overnight, "silent mode" trucks must move out of the Village from 6 to 6:30 a.m. to allow for snowplowing. Trucks may return at 6:30 and park in areas already plowed. • Effective 12-13-96, from 7 a.m. to 12 noonY all sizes of trucks are allowed to park on Gore Creek Drive except in designated fire lanes. Engines and refrigeration units should be turned off as much as possible to reduce noise. • Effective 12-13-96 all sizes of trucks not utilizing "silent mode" are allowed on Bridge St. from 7:00 a.m. to 8:30 a.m.. All trucks must be off Bridge St. by 8:30 a.m. • Effective 12-20-96 15 minute Merchant permits are valid on Bridge St. and Gore Creek Dr. from 6:30 a.m. until 8:30 a.m. for the delivery of large, bulky or heavy items only. • Effective 12-20-96 Trash trucks are only allowed in the Village from 7 a.m. to 9 a.m., except on Bridge St., where they are allowed from 7 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. Trash trucks have the right of way over delivery trucks and merchant vehicles from 7:30 a.m. to 8:30 am. • Effective 12-20-96 "Large trucks" (36 ft. must be out of the Village by noon. Large trucks are not allowed to park anywhere in the Village Core after noon. At 12 noon, "Medium trucks" (19 to 35 ft.) must leave Gore Creek Drive but are allowed to park in the permitted spaces in front of the Mill Creek Court Building or near the International Bridge until6 p.m.. "Small Trucks" and vans ( 18 ft. or less) must leave the Village Core at noon but are allowed to park after noon in the permitted parking spaces on Hanson Ranch Road, below the P3 and J Lot on Gore Creek Dr. and near Check Point Charlie until6 p.m.. • Effective 12-13-96 Airborne Express, DAC, Federal Express, United Parcel Service, and U.S. Postal Service trucks are allowed on Gore Creek Drive from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. These hours will be in effect through December 31, 1996. On January 1, 1997, the 12 noon closure of Gore Creek Drive will be moved back to 11:30 a.m. " U LOADING AND DELIVERY Problem Statement The pedestrian design and mixed land uses in the Vail Village creates impediments for vehicle based services including to the delivery of goods and removal of garbage and snow. The lack of alleys or underground passages necessitates delivery of goods and removal of trash be conducted on routes shared by pedestrians. During the winter months, delivery and garbage removal conflict with town snow removal operations, exacerbate this problem. This situation creates four specific problems: * first and most importantly, pedestrian safety is jeopardized due to the movement of vehicles in the pedestrian corridor * the presence of large delivery trucks adversely impact the ambiance of the Vail Village * the presence of large trucks block visibility of businesses in the loading areas and adversely impact these businesses * the noise associated with each of these operations disturb guests staying in the lodges in the Village; The Town of Vail would be irresponsible to allow this situation continue given the threat posed by the mix of pedestrian and vehicles. On Going Winter Activities Public Skating at Dobson Ice Arena Daily sessions. Ca11479-2270 for schedule updates. 20 Below - Vail's Coolest Youth Club. Youth Center featuring pool, foosball, Sega channel games, video and CD selection and snack bar. Open to ages 6- 20 from 3 to 6 pm. Ages 13 - 20 only after 6 pm. Open until 10 pm weeknights and midnight on Friday and Saturday. Winter Interpretive Snowshoe Tours. Join a local naturalistlguide for one of several different snowshoe tours along the trails at the Vail Nordic Center or out into the Colorado backcountry. Snowshoe rentals are available. Ca11479-2264 for schedule information. Outdoor Skating Rink at the Vail Golf Club/Nordic Center. Open daily weather permitting from early December through mid March. Skating is free. Rental skates aze available. Kidzone Unlimited Before and After School Program. Monday - Friday, 7:30 - 9 am & 3:40 - 6 pm at Red Sandstone Elementary School for elementary school aged children. Quality time in the morning to help kids wake up and get ready for school and fun and games after school to help them wind down. Ca11479-2292 for registration information. Red Sandstone Gymnasium Open Gym Winter Sports Leagues On Going Summer Activities Public Skating at Dobson Ice Arena Daily sessions. Ca11479-22 70 for schedule updates. 20 Below - Vail's Coolest Youth Club Youth Center featuring pool, foosball, Sega channel games, video and CD selection and snack bar. Open to ages 6- 20 from 3 to 6 pm. Ages 13 - 20 only after 6 pm. Open until 10 pm weeknights and midnight on Friday and Saturday. Vail Nature Center Weekly Programs Join a local naturalisdguide for a hike into the Colorado back country ar visit the Nature Center's natural history museum. Special youth and family programs are also offered throughout the summer. Ca11479- 2291 for weekly schedule information. Camp Vail and Pre-Kamp Vail , Camp Vail is no ordinary camp experience. Kids will return with ear to ear smiles after a day of mountain style camp. Open from June 16 - August 22, camp meets Monday thorugh Friday at the Golden Peak Children's Center. Saturday Camp will be offered this summer from July 5 to August 16. Ca11479-2292 for further information on Camp Vail and Pre-Kamp Vail. Red Sandstone Summer Open Gym Drop in to sharpen your basketball skills at Red Sandstone Gym. Open Gym is open to players ages 18 and up on Tuesday and Thursday evenings from 6- 9 pm. A$3 per player drop in fee is assessed. Vail Tennis Center Weekly Programs The Vail Tennis Center comes alive with weekly Men's, Ladies and Doubles play and Youth Clinics. Call 479-2294 for weekly information. Vail Golf Club Weekly Programs The Vail Golf Club offers weekly Ladies Day, Men's League and Youth Leagues. In addition adult and Junior Clinics are available throughout the season. Ca11479-2260 for weekly upadtes and tee times. Weekly Youth Services Schedule of Programs From art programs to silly string wars, Vail Youth Services has got a summer full of fun for your young ones. Ca11479-2292 for schedule information. On Going Fall Activities Public Skating at Dobson Ice Arena Daily sessions. Call 479-2270 for schedule updates. 20 Below - Vail's Coolest Youth Club. Youth Center featuring pool, foosball, Sega channel games, video and CD selection and snack bar. Open to ages 6- 20 from 3 to 6 pm. Ages 13 - 20 only after 6 pm. Open until 10 pm weeknights and midnight on Friday and Saturday. Kidzone Unlimited Before and After School Program. Monday - Friday, 7:30 - 9 am & 3:40 - 6 pm at Red Sandstone Elementary School for elementary school aged children. Quality time in the morning to help kids wake up and get ready for school and fun and games after school to help them wind down. Cal1479-2292 for registration information. Red Sandstone Open Gym Fall Sports Leagues Calendar of Events, con't December 14 Shopping Frenzy Mall Trip Open to Middle School aged youth. Get in that last minute Holiday Shopping with a van load of friends! Ca11479-2292 for registration information. December 19 Holiday Pre-K Art Program Held in the Youth Activities Room next to Subway in the Lionshead Parking Structure. Open to ages 2.5 - 5, the program will create wearable and edible holiday art projects and will mix in a healthy dose of movement. Ca11479-2292 for registration. December 23, 24, 26, 27, 30, January 2, 3 Kidzone School's Out for the Holidays Join the rest of the gang for local in out-of-town field trips to fill the before and after Christmas days with fun. Indoor and outdoor games, arts and crafts and special guests will make Kidzone School's Out days the best of the season. December 26 T'was the Night After Christmas Skating Show Presented by and featuring the Skating Club of Vail 2 shows - 5 pm and 8 pm. Tickets: $10/on ice. $4/children, $6/adult general admission. Tickets available by calling Dobson Arena at 479-2271. December 27 Big Head Todd Concert Dobson Ice Arena. Ca11479-2271 for ticket information.. December 31 Rave in the New Year Youth New Year's Eve Celebration. Open to ages 13 - 20. Casino style gaming with funny money, huge screen music videos, prize give-a-ways, midnight balloon drop and more! Held at Dobson Arena from 8 pm - 1 am. Call Vail Youth Services at 479-2292 for ticket information. January 1- 2 Vail Figure Skating Festival Call Dobson Arena at 479-2271 for ticket information. January 2- 3 Kidzone Camp - School's Out Program Open to grades K- 5. Participants will enjoy great days of in and out of town adventures. Ca11479-2292 for availability. January 5 Soloman Nordic Race at the Vail Nordic Center January 5 - March 28 Winter League Basketball, Volleyball and Soccer Red Sandstone Gymnasium. Registration begins November 11, 1996. Call 479-2280 to register your team. January 7 - Apri15 Winter Open Gym Red Sandstone Gymnasium Open Gym Tuesday & Saturday - Basketball Friday - Volleyball Each session runs from 6:30 - 9:30 pm. Coast is $3 per visit. Ca11479-2280 for further information. Calendar of Events, con't January 10 Middie School Roadtrip to Denver Nugget's vs. Indiana Pacers Game Open to Middle School aged youth only. Enjoy transportation to and from the game and a great evening of basketball fun. Limited to 13 kids. Please call 479-2292 to reserve your space. January 17 Middle School Movie Night at 20 Below Open to middle school aged kids from 6- 10 pm January 17 Bush in concert at Dobson Arena January 17, 20 Kidzone School's Out Program Open to grades K- 5. Participants will enjoy great days of in and out of town adventures. Ca11479-2292 for availability. January 18 Bravo! Colorado Moonlight Snowshoe Tour at the Vail Nordic Center January 19 Think Tank 1- 5 pm at the Youth Services Youth Activities Room Open to grades 1 to 5. Cost covers all materials and instruction January 22 - February 26 Beginning Youth Rock Climbing at the Vail Athletic Club Climbing Wall. Six Wednesdays of class from 3:30 - 5:15 pm. Ca11479-2292 for registration information. January 26 Super Bowl Party at 20 Below Open to middle school and high school aged youth from 4- 9 pm. February 4 - Apri129 Lasting Impressions Advanced Art Projects Each Tuesday from 4- 5:30 pm at the Youth Activities Room. Open to ages 8- 13. February 7 8-Ball Pool Tournament at 20 Below Open to ages 13 - 20. See who is the best pool shark in town! Win cash prizes! Ca11479-2292 for further information. February 8 Free Throw Contest Open to grades 1- 8 at Red Sandstone Elementary School beginning at 5 pm. February 8 Magic Tournament at 20 Below Open to ages 11 - 17 years. Beginning at 1 pm. Ca11479-2292 for information. February 11 - April 8 Learn to Skate at Dobson Arena - Session III Tuesdays from 10:30 - 11:15 am for Parent-Tot Classes. Tuesdays from 4:30 - 5:15 pm for Youth Classes. Fees include ice time, skate rental and instruction. Ca11479-2271 for further information. Calendar of Events, con't February 14 & 16Detroit Red Wings Alumni Games At Dobson Arena beginning at 7:45 pm. See some of hockey's greatest players. Call Dobson Arena at 479-2271 far ticket information. February 14 Valentine's Day Pre-K Art Program Open to ages 2.5 - 5, little ones will create Valentines for all the ones they love. February 13 - 14 Littie Cupids Rose Delivery Participants in the Kidzone program will be out delivery hugs and kisses and tissue roses. Watch out for these little cupids! February 16 Think Tank 1- 5 pm at the Youth Services Youth Activities Room Open to grades 1 to 5. Cost covers all materials and instruction February 17 Kidzone School's Out Program Open to grades K- 5. Participants will enjoy great days of in and out of town adventures. Call 479-2292 for availability. February 21 Middle School Night at 20 Below Ca11479-2292 for event details. March 1 Colorado Avalanche Hockey Game See the Chicago Blackhawks take on the Avalanch. Open to Middle School aged youth. Ca11479-2292 for registration. March 1 Jeep King of the Mountain Concert (artist TBA - Kenny Loggins?) Dobson Arena. ca11479-2271 for ticket information. March 1 Coaching Effectiveness Clinic 9 am - Noon for all interested in coaching an youth sports throughout the summer. Call 479-2280 for registration information. March 3 Special Olympics Winter Events Call Dobson Ice Arena at 479-2271 for further information. March 8 Coaching Effectiveness Clinic 9 am - Noon for all interested in coaching an youth sports throughout the summer. Call 479-2280 for registration information. March 11 Ziggy Marley in concert at Dobson Arena Call 479-2271 for ticket information. March 14 Middle School Night at 20 Below Call 479-2292 for event information. March 15 Coaching Effectiveness Clinic 9 am - Noon for all interested in coaching an youth sports throughout the summer. Ca11479-2280 for registration information. Calendar of Events, con't March 16 Greening of the Green Snowshoe Event At the Vail Nordic Center beginning at 11 am. Join fellow snowshoers in welcoming the spring to the Vail Valley. Try the course and then enjoy a green brew. Call 479-2264. March 17 St. Patrick's Day Pre-K Art Party Open to ages 2.5 - 5 years. 1- 230 pm in the Youth Activities Room. March 21, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 Kidzone School's Out Program Open to grades K- 5. Participants will enjoy great days of in and out of town adventures. Ca11479-2292 for availability. March 22 Multi-Band Spring Break Concert (artists TBA) Dobson Ice Arena. Ca11479-2271 for ticket information. March 22 Coaching Effectiveness Ctinic 9 am - Noon for all interested in coaching an youth sports throughout the summer. Call 479-2280 for registration information. March 24 - 25 Safesitters Babysitting Classes Open to ages 11 - 13, the program introduces youth to situations which may arise during babysitting and ways to handle emergency situations. Suggested activities and the business side of babysitting are also introduced. Call 479-2292 for registration information. March 26 Middle School Road Trip to Funplex Ca11479-2292 for registration information. March 27 - 29 Unveiled Concerts at Dobson Arena. March 28 Middle School Shopping Frenzy Road Trip Ca11479-2292 for registration information. March 29 Coaching Effectiveness Clinic 9 am - Noon for all interested in coaching an youth sports throughout the summer. Call 479-2280 for registration information. March 29 FREE Easter Egg Hunt Open to ages 2- 10. Held in Lionshead beginning at 10 am. Kids will seek out over 500 prize filled eggs! March 30 Easter Snowshoe Tour to Shrine Ridge Ca11479-2264 for registration information. Apri12 Intermediate Youth Rock Climbing at the Vail Athletic Club Climbing Wall. Six Wednesdays of class from 3:30 - 5:15 pm. Call 479-2292 for registration information Apri14 8-Ball Pool Tournament at 20 Below Open to ages 13 - 20. See who is the best pool shark in town! Win cash prizes! Ca11479-2292 for further information. Calendar of Events, con't April 5 2nd Annual Eagle County Super Ripathon Youth snowboard half pipe challenge open to all Eagle County students. Call 479-2292. April 5- May 10 High Country Hoops Youth Basketball Program for kids in grades 1- 6. Teaches the fundamentals of the sports as well as team skills. Ca11479-2280 for registration information. Apri16 Think Tank 1- 5 pm at the Youth Services Youth Activities Room Open to grades 1 to 5. Cost covers all materials and instruction Apri19 - 13 Vail International Hockey Tournament Dobson Ice Arena. Teams from Russia, China and other countries converge on Vail for spectacular hockey action. Ca11479-2271 for schedule information. April 14 - 18 Philadelphia Flyers Fantasy Camp Week Dobson Ice Arena. Ca11479-2271 for registration information. April 14 - 25 Sports Spectacular A great way for kids to "try on" several different sports over the course of a week. Call 479-2280 for information. April 18 Middle School Night at 20 Below Ca11479-2292 for schedule information. April 19 - 22 FBLA at Dobson Arena Apri121 - 26 Sports Spectacular A great way for kids to "try on" several different sports over the course of a week. Call 479-2280 for information. Apri125 Hispanic Concert at Dobson Arena Live music directly from Mexico. May 12 Vail Valley Youth Baseball Team Tryouts & Draft From 6- 9 pm. Ca11479-2280 for information. May 12 Dobson Arena Closes for yearly maintenance May 12 Vail Valley Youth Baseball League play begins May 12 aud runs through July 12. May 14 Vail Nature Center Opens for summer May 14 Slo Pitch Softball League Play begins May 19 and runs through August 15 Calendar of Events, con't May 17 Kidzone Camp Roadtrip Join the crew as they head to Elitch's for a day of fun in the sun. Call 479-2292. May 18 & 19 Vail Golf Course aerification of greens May 23 Olympic Track Meet May 24 Spike Challenge Youth volleyball challenge. 11 am - 4 pm, open to grades 9- 12. Ca11479-2292. May 26, 27, 29, 30 Adult Golf Clinic - Session I Vail Golf Club Adult Clinics feature instruction from PGA Professional Steve Satterstrom. Beginner clinics begin at 5:30 pm while intermediate clinics meet at 6:30 pm. Please ca11479-2260 for registration information. May 28 Men's and Women's Golf League The Vai1 Golf Club hosts its Mens and Ladies Leagues each Wednesday of the summer through October 7. June 2- July 12 Vail Valley Youth Baseball June 2, 3, 5, 6 Adult Golf Clinic - Session II Vail Golf Club Adult Clinics feature instruction from PGA Professional Steve Satterstrom. Beginner clinics begin at 5:30 pm while intermediate clinics meet at 630 pm. Please ca11479-2260 for registration information. June 5 Tom Whitehead Junior Golf Tournament June 6 Beginning Fly Fishing Offered at the Vail Nature Center. Ca11479-2291 for registration information. June 7 Pass Holder Golf Clinic Open to Vail Golf Club passholders only, this new clinic will cover various areas of difficulty. Call the Vail Golf Club at 479-2260 for further information. June 9- 13 Youth Baseball Camp Ca11479-2280 for registration information. June 11 - 13 Safesitters Babysitting Classes Open to ages 11 - 13, the program introduces youth to situations which may arise during babysitting and ways to handle emergency situations. Suggested activities and the business side of babysitting are also introduced. Call 479-2292 for registration information. June 14 Rockies Baseball Skills Challenge Test your batting, catching and throwing abilities and maybe earn a trip to a Colorado Rockies game! Ca11479-2280 for registration information. June 13 - 15 Vail Golf Club Adult Golf School Three days of intensive training for golfers of all ability level. Ca11479-2260 to register for the Vail Golf School. Calendar of Events, con't June 14 Pass Hoider Golf Clinic Open to Vail Golf Club passholdezs only, this new clinic will cover various areas of difficulty. Call the Vail Go1f Club at 479-2260 for further information. June 16, 17, 19, 20 Adult Golf Clinic - Session III Vail Golf Club Adult Clinics feature instruction from PGA Professional Steve Satterstrom. Beginner clinics begin at 5:30 pm while intermediate clinics meet at 6:30 pm. Please ca11479-2260 for registration information. June 16 - 20 Craig Norwich Hockey Camp June 16 Camp Vail Starts June 16 Summer Youth Programs Start June 17, 19 Junior Golf CIinic Junior Golf Clinics offer basic golf instruction for youth on the Vail Golf Club Driving Range. Ca11479-2260 for registration information. June 18 - 20 Stephan Popa Goaltending Camp June 19 - August 28 Tom Whitehead Junior Golf League Meets Thursdays at 2 pm throughout the summer. Ca11479-2260 for registration information. June 21 Pass Holder Golf Clinic Open to Vail Golf Club passholders only, this new clinic will cover various areas of difficulty. Call the Vail Golf Club at 479-2260 for further information. June 21 - 22 King of the Mountain Doubtes Volleyball Tournament June 22 - 29 Bob Johnson Hockey Camp Dobson Ice Arena. June 23, 24, 26, 27 Adult Golf Clinic - Session N Vail Golf Club Adult Clinics feature instruction from PGA Professional Steve Satterstrom. Beginner clinics begin at 530 pm while intermediate clinics meet at 6:30 pm. Please call 479-2260 for registration information. June 23 - 26 Nature's Discover's Day Camp Open to ages 5- 8. Call the Vail Nature Center at 479-2291 for registration. June 23 - 27 Basketball Camp June 25, 26 Men's Golf Club Member/Guest Tournament at the Vail Golf Club Calendar of Events, con't June 27 Camp Vail Night Hike Ca11479-2292 for registration information. June 28 Pass Holder Golf Clinic Open to Vail Golf Club passholders only, this new clinic will cover various areas of difficulty. Call the Vail Golf Club at 479-2260 for further information. June 28 - July 6 Vait Lacrosse Shootout One of the largest lacrosse events in the country, the tournament draws team from around the world to compete and enjoy the Fourth of July festivities. Ca11479-2280 for schedule information. A free youth lacrosse clinic will be held on Friday, July 4. June 30 - August 21 Summer Skating School at Dobson Arena Ca114'79-2271 for schedule information. June 30 - July 3 Nature's Discovers Day Camp Open to ages 5- 8. Call the Vail Nature Center at 479-2291 for registration. June 30 Pre-Kamp Vaii Starts July 3 Fourth of July Parade Prep Program Decorate your bike or wagon and be in the Vail America Days Parade! Ca11479-2292. July 4 Beginning Fly Fishing Offered at the Vail Nature Center. Ca11479-2291 for registration information. July 4 Youth Lacrosse Shootout FREE Ciinic Open to ages 8- 13, the clinic will eb conducted by some of the top players in the sport who are in toen for the shootout. The clinic will run from 4 to 6 at the Ford Park Athletic Field. July 4 Vail America Days Parade July 5 Camp Vail Saturdays program starts July 5 Hotiday Ice Show at Dobson Ice Arena Call 479-2271 for ticket information. July 6 Vail HillClimb One of the state's most grueling climbs, the Vail Hi1lClimb starts in Vail Village and makes it's way to Eagle's Nest gaining 2,200 vertical feet over a 7.5 mile course. Call 479-2280 for a registration packet. July 7, 8, 10, 11 Adult Golf Clinic - Session V Vail Golf Club Adult Clinics feature instruction from PGA Professional Steve Satterstrom. Beginner clinics begin at 5:30 pm while intermediate clinics meet at 6:30 pm. Please ca11479-2260 for registration information. July 7- 10 Earth Caretakers Day Camp Open to ages 7- 12, the Vail Nature Center hosts a week of discovery and adventure. Ca11479-2291 for registration information. Calendar of Events, con't July 8, 10 Junior Golf Clinic Junior Golf Clinics offer basic golf instruction far youth on the Vail Golf Club Driving Range. Ca11479-2260 for registration information. July 9 Oldsmobile Scramble Golf Tournament 1:30 pm Shotgun July 11 Camp Vail Movie Night July 14, 15, 17, 18 Adult Golf Clinic - Session II Vail Golf Club Adult Clinics feature instruction from PGA Professional Steve Satterstrom. Beginner clinics begin at 5:30 pm while intermediate clinics meet at 6:30 pm. Please ca11479-2260 for registration information. July 14 - 18 Youth Volleyball Camp July 14 - August 15 Youth Lacrosse League July 14 - 18 Volieyball Camp July 15 - 20 Vail Invitational Skating Competition July 16 - 18 Safesitters Babysitting Class Open to ages 11 - 13, the program introduces youth to situations which may arise during babysitting and ways to handle emergency situations. Suggested activities and the business side of babysitting are also introduced. Ca11479-2292 for registration information. July 19 Beginning Fly Fishing Offered at the Vail Nature Center. Ca11479-2291 for registration information. July 19 Camp Vail Overnight July 21 - 24 Earth Caretakers Day Camp Open to ages 7- 12, the Vail Nature Center hosts a week of discovery and adventure. Ca11479-2291 for registration information. July 21 - 25 Kirk Bast Youth Soccer Camp July 22, 24 Junior Golf Clinic Junior Golf Clinics offer basic golf instruction for youth on the Vail Golf Club Driving Range. Call 479-2260 for registration information. July 24 Vail Nature Center Overnight Campout The perfect follow up to a week at the Earth Caretakers Day Camp. Ca11479-2292 far registration information. July 25 Camp Vail Nighthike and Movie Night Calendar of Events, con't July 27 Vail Half Marathon to Piney Lake The Vail Half Marathon features a mixture of challenge and scenery that is unmatched. • Climb 1500 feet in the trek from Dobson Arena to Piney River Ranch. Eleven plus miles of dirt roads lead to the bottom of the Gore Range and Piney Lake. Start time is at 9 am at Dobson Ice Arena. Ca11479-2280 for registration materials. July 27 - 28 Ford Cup Golf Tournament July 28 - 31 Adventure Camp Four days of fun and adventure with the staff of the Vail Nature Center. Ca11479-2291. July 28 - August 1 Camp Jeep Concerts at Dobson Arena July 29 & 31 Vail Golf Club Video Golf Clinic August 1 Beginning Fly Fishing Offered at the Vail Nature Center. Ca11479-2291 for registration information. August 1 Camp Vail Backpacking Overnight August 1- 3 Vail Invitational Soccer Tournament August 4, 5, 7, 8 Adult Golf Clinic - Session II Vail Golf Club Adult Clinics feature instruction from PGA Professional Steve Satterstrom. Beginner clinics begin at 5:30 pm while intermediate clinics meet at 6:30 pm. Please ca11479-2260 for registration information. August 4- 7 Outdoor Adventure Camp Four days of fun and adventure with the staff of the Vail Nature Center. Ca11479-2291 August 7 Vail Nature Center Overnight Campout The perfect follow up to a week at the Outdoor Adventure Camp. Ca11479-2292 for registration information. August 8 Camp Vail Movie Night August 9 Kids Triathlon Swim, bike and run your way to victory in the area's most challenging youth event. Call 479-2280 for registration information. August 9- 10 Precision Skating Camp at Dobson Arena Ca11479-2271 for registration information. August 9 Kids Triathlon August 11 - 20 Craig Norwich Hockey Camp August 11 - October 6 8 on 8 Soccer League Calendar of Events, con't August 12, 14 Junior Golf Clinic Junior Golf Clinics offer basic golf instruction for youth on the Vail Golf Club Driving Range. Ca11479-2260 for registration information. August 15 Camp Vait Nighthike August 18 - October 17 Youth Soccer League August 18 - October 3 Fall Co-Ed Softball League August 24 Vail Athletic Club & Spa 8K at 8,000 FEET Can you keep the pace at this elevation? The 8K at 8,000 feet is a quick run on a flat, paved course with views of the Grand Traverse and Gare Creek. Start at Vail Athletic Club and Spa at 9:30 am. Ca11479-2280 for registration materials. August 25 - 29 NHL Players Training Camp Dobson Arena hosts various players from across the NHL for a pre-season shape-up. August 29 Beginning Fly Fishing Offered at the Vail Nature Center. Ca11479-2291 for registration information. August 30 - September 1 Labor Day Softball Tournament August 30 Holiday Ice Show at Dobson Arena August 31 Vail's Labor Day Rubber Duck Race September 2, 3 Men's Gotf Ciub Masters Tournament September 5- 7 Lisa Webster Dance Weekend Dobson Arena. September 7 Labor Day Rubber Duck Race September 7 - October 12 Fall Flag Football September 20 Punt, Pass & Kick September 23, 24 Men's Golf Club Championships September 21 Vail Trailrun lOK This run through the golden aspen glades is demanding and technical with steep uphill and downhill sections. The course covers three miles of dirt roads and three miles of single track trails offering beautiful views of the Vail Valley. Start at Alfalfa's Market in Crossroads at 10 am. Ca11479-2280 for registration materials. October 4 Vail Nature Center closes for season Calendar of Events, con't November 1 Middle School Halloween Party at 20 Below From 3- 10 pm. Call 479-2292 far details. November 7- 9 Vail Sportsmanship Tournament November 14-16 Vail Sportsmanship Tournament November 23 Think Tank 1- 5 pm at the Youth Services Youth Activities Room Open to grades 1 to 5. Cost covers all materials and instruction November 24 Pre-K Thanksgiving Workshop Open to ages 2.5 to 4 years. Ca11479-2292 for registration information. November 26-30 Triple A Hockey Tournament At Dobson Arena. December 7 Pedal Power Snowshoe Race At the Vail Nordic Center. December 7 NBA and McDonalds 2 Ball Tournament December 13 Shopping Frenzy December 18 Pre-K Holiday Workshop December 22-23 Vail Figure Skating Festival December 22-24 & 26, 29 - 30 Kidzone Camp ' December 31 Rave in the New Year ~ 12/10/96 T[JE 14:09 FAX 970 476 6499 Pradential-Vail XV Q002 86k a • . ~~e~Sn nO~' ' 2 (,vn~-+tt~ ~~nn~ o.. 12-II December 10, 1996 ?l.rAl ?0`9u5s 'Oint, hof prl Town of Vail Council Members ~ ~ Suzanne Silverthorn A,~, T~,J VAs ser,ns ol IL Community Information Officer ca}-al s F • Tawn of Vail -b ~t Rs{~, ~ t•r~...~ . 75 S. Frontag;e RAad Z- ~k~ t~Q. i~ tx s,,t,-e j- ?,,.t~ ?1k ~ Vail, CO 81657 P. u,ts 4, LI4. Dear SuZSnna, Sle ~a~s Go.4..t-A41e wiiti, ?..I UerSa rrsOoe,se, 4Kf J,- ,N17 L,.At 4° -NA~ yue, I rec:eived your Decennber 2letter regarding the Lionshead redevelopment focus uJ well, l groups. Pd lik.e to pass along, to you and to the Town Council, my dismay that the TOV Counal authorized $300,000 to study VA s proposal which includes a Iarge Z0" ~ hotel and oonsTention center. I think $300,000 is A LOT of money. Here are my ooncerns: • The TOV has also spent many thousands of dollars to initiate and implement the Vail Tomorrow process. In that process, the TOV (if they are paying attention) should have gleaned that the large hotel and convention center does not fit in with what participants want fDr our town (I'm hesitant to say "communi.ty'). The goals chosen as needing i.mmediate attention are not addressed by anything about this impending redevelopment. ~ It wiIl deZete actual open space as well as visual open space. It will put additional stress on our limited resources in the valley. Having conventioneers in. town will do nothing to add to a sense of community ....we'll get to sit next to more strangers everywhere. And we'll have more people in town who don't know, or care. about our fragile environment. They will make demands on our infrastructure that we possiblp cannot meet. But we'll sure try, won't we! They will have their nice three or four day convention, complete with every amenity, and go home...we will get to deal with the after effects of trying to meet those demands. (I.ike affordable housing, day care facilities, transportation within the valley, transportation from DIA, air pollution, resentment among locals because they can't get into anything.,.too many conventioneers, etc.). ~ Affordable housing rumor has it that VA has offired to build some emplayee units (more open space gone?) or build employee rental housing in Vail (more open space gone?). Whatever it is, it will be a token and certainly not "enough". • page 1 12/10/96 TUE 14:09 FA% 970 476 6499 Prtidential-Vail 9003 ' December 8, 1996 U Sense of community..uh-uh. Vail will become the throw-away community for locals. They'll avoid it more than they do now. Sharing restaurants, traffic, cultural events, etc. with conventioneers is not what prompted any of us to move here. I don't think that just providing more jobs will do _ the trick for creating a sense of community. There are plenty of jobs around now. " b It doesn't seem that thi.s proposal does anything to promote regionalism either. Providing jobs again??? That seems to be a much-touted advantage of any commercial growth. HoteUconvention jobs are more of the same, thereby not solving any of our current problems, but rather, adding to them. • When VA and the TOV got in bed together it was over the expansion into Category III. At that time, VA said it was not their intention to add to the sluers on the mountain at peak times but rather to enhance the experience for the skiers who were already here. Are they closing down the hotel and their time share during busy times of the year? Or is this a"second thoughe on their part? A time share is also being proposed in the renovatian of the Sonnenalp's property neaz the Covered Bridge. It doesn't sound as though we are trying to "simply improve" the skiing experience for the amount of slflers we already have_ As part of this redevelopment in Lionshead, VA wants to build a time share condominium project at the base of the gondala. Sense of community.... I think not. Cash cow selling off the time share units indeed! Help our environment..uh-uh. Regionalism? Maybe it would give same of the Lionsheadl retailers more money to cariy to their homes down-valley. More money to spend there. • A convention center has been voted down two ti.mes by local voters. Doesn't that tell town council members something? Aren't they representing the residents? Ies really interesting that these days, when something isn't economically feasible in the free/private market... then it must be the government's job to provide some/all of it. Having a convention center in Lionshead would be great for local businesses there. It would certainly be tQrrific for VA to have a large hotel there, wouldn't it? However, when those people c;ame to Vail, they knew it was a resort market. They knew it was seasonaL I don't think it is ok to change an entire area for the sake of making more money. Pd guess that more than three-fourths of the world's population woutd think that any one who lived in the Vail Valley made plenty of money! How can almost 2 billion people be wrong? • I also think it is interesting that VA wants to take space that is owned by Vail taxpayers and put a hoteUconvention center on it and then develop their 2 ~ 12/10/96 T[JE 14:10 FAX 970 476 6499 Przdential-Vail ~ 004 . December 8, 1996 real estate, with a ti.me share project? I know.....their land isn't economically feasible for hotels. So what? Has anyone noticed that VA is competing more directly these days with local merchants? (Piney River Ranch, VA property management, ski hardware and software retailing, soft goods of all kinds, restaurants, etc.) I feel certain this redevelopment will allow them to dominate/own some of the best retail spaces in Lionshead and hence, line their coffers even mare than might seem readily apparent. How come the TOV gets to kick in land for the hoteUconvention center (that most people don't want) and VA gets to sell the crap out of their privately owned real estate in the form of ti.me share? The economic carrot for TOV will be increased sales tax revenue and transfer tax incame on sales. However, if we tbink that will pay for the increased infrastructure demands, Pd guess someone is being naive. It seems to me that TOV is caught in a revolving door where the Town Council can't find the way out. Puil back the covers and get out of bed? Just say NO! As more and more development is approved, the infrastructure and services that locals and visitors expect from the TOV mount. So, we need to keep approving development so we can have more sales tax revenue. so, there will be more demands... so, more tax revenue needed.....do you get it? It seems so apparent to me that the TOV and its citizens are the losers in this relationship with VA Please, step back and look at what is happening. It is reallv hard to undo these big developments. And I think that Vail Tomorrow results show us that this isn't what citazens want. It's ti.me Vail started taking care of the people who are here, bath locals and guests, rather than buying into the `Bigger Is Better And We're Going To Be The Best" mentality. Always looking for "more, more, more". It is a bit disgvsting when you think about the rest of the world. So, I think the TOV ought to stop payment on their check for $300,000. I suspect that, if the study is done in the same manner as the focus groups, the results will lead us down a path that won't benefit us or the mountains we call home. I was extremely disappointed in the focus groups. The Steven Covey graduates who put them together certainly started with the end in m.i.nd. I could go on and on.... but I already have! PLEASE do not spend tons of money studying a project that doesn't meet our goals. Remember that World Class Resort and Economic Diversity goals were near the end of the lists. And I'm not sure this proposal reflects what most of us would call a"world class" resort. 3 12/10/96 TUE 14:11 FAZ 970 476 6999 Prudential-Vail 9005 i . December 8, 1996 There is certainly no economic diversity here either. I can certainly understand why VA is proposing it...what a windfa7l. The Town Council needs to think in terms of the citizens and the environment. Take care of what we have. Protect it from those who would take it away because they could make more money. Best Regards, ~ Ginny p 2960B Marm.s Ranch Road Vail, CO 81657 y -7~ . Zt( ~ 2 eXF. l Z . 4 u ~y TOWN OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road Office of the Town Attorney Yail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2107/Fax 970-479-2157 MEMORANDUM TO: • Vail Town Council FROM: ' R. Thomas Moorhead, Town Attorney 'C l DATE: December 12, 1996 RE: Red Sandstone Local Housing I am providing the following information in response to legal issues that were raised by Jim Lamont, Executive Director of East Village Homeowner's Association, Inc. by letter to the Town Council dated December 2, 1996. At the Council work session on December 2, 1996, I reviewed in detail the discussion that occurred in Town Council sessions on March 19, 1996 and July 9, 1996. I believe it is unnecessary to restate in detail the content of those meetings. If anyone has any questions regarding those discussions, I would be pleased to respond to such an inquiry. Land Ownership Adjustment Agreement: There is no provision in the agreement which restricts the property from the change in zoning that is being considered or the development as presented with or without free market units. The Town of Vail is conveying to the Forest Service the parcel of land known as Trapper's Run. This land is presently zoned hillside residential, is located within the Town of Vail and was being proposed for extensive development of approximately 31 dwelling units. This property, which is appraised at approximately $3.6 million for the purposes of the exchange, will be deeded to the Forest Service without restriction. It has been agreed that upon conveyance to the Forest Service this property will be de-annexed from the Town of Vail. Likewise, the property that is being received by the Town of Vail, and the Red Sandstone site in particular, is not being received with any restrictions. The zone change that is being suggested for the property will, as previously discussed in Council, provide for a more acceptable development consistent with the neighborhood where it is located. This site was identified in the 1994 Comprehensive Open Lands Plan as appropriate for employee housing. The medium density multi-family zoning is consistent with the Town of Vail's 1984 Land Use Plan. RECYCLEDPAPER ~ ~ . The housing that is being contemplated in the Red Sandstone proposal is not described in Chapter 18.57 Employee Housing. This is also true with the housing that the Town of Vail has developed in the Vail Commons project. There is no requirement in the LOAA nor in any other Town of Vail regulation that requires a size limitation on the housing developed on this or any other parcel which comes into Town of Vail ownership as a result of the LOAA. At all times during the discussion of this development, we have worked very closely with the Forest Service and have had their approval for the development that is being proposed. Additionally, there is no restriction in the LOAA that inhibits or restricts the transfer of ownership from the Town of Vail to private parties. In fact, it has been contemplated throughout the discussion of the LOAA that properties would be transferred into private ownership. Deed Restriction on Water District Propertv: There was a deed restriction on the Water District property that has been properly removed by the Eagle County Commissioners. The Town of Vail was not a party to this deed restriction. The Town of Vail does not, nor does it have the authority to, enforce private deed restrictions or covenants. The removal of this deed restriction was the obligation of the Water District and it has been accomplished by the Water District as reflected in the permanent records of the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder. Zoning Amendment: The Town of Vail, through the Community Development Department, and in conjunction with the Water District as a co-applicant, has met the requirements of the Town of Vail ordinances for the zoning amendment being requested. State law requires that any zoning change must either be in compliance with the Master Plan, which this requested amendment is, or there must be some change in the conditions of the neighborhood to support the zoning change. It has been discussed and evidence has been presented that the project in question conforms to the conditions of the neighborhood. It has been suggested that the action taken by Council in this instance constitutes contract zoning. There is no Colorado case which raises contract zoning as an issue or has held any municipal action as invalid based upon contract zoning. King's Mill Homeowners Association vs. City of Westminster, 557 P2d 1186 (1976). I will be happy to respond to any additional issues on which Council needs additional information. Thanks. RTM/aw r S u ~y TOWN OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road Yail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2100 FAX 970-479-2157 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE December 17, 1996 Contact: Bob McLaurin, 479-2105 Vail Town Manager TOWN OF VAIL ANNOUNCES EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION AWARDS FOR 1996 (Vail)--Town of Vail employees have selected a Public Works administrator and two employee work teams to receive the town's top employee recognition awards for 1996. Susie Hervert, general services administrator for the Public Works Department, was named employee of the year, while the town's custodian crew and dispatchers in the Police Department tied for top honors in a new team category. Awards were presented at the tdwn's holiday party Dec. 14. Winners were selected by their coworkers for outstanding performance and for exemplifying the town's values. In the individual employee category, Hervert was recognized for setting up a cost accounting system in the Public Works Department, for taking on additional responsibilities as the project manager for the $3.2 million remodel of the Public Works shops and for her active participation in long-range budget discussions. Hervert has worked for the town since 1985. "What I enjoy most about working for the town is its people," she said. "We are a close-knit group. It's great to work for an organization that believes in its employees and encourages growth and participation." Hervert and her husband Jim, a heavy equipment operator for the town, have three children, Clint, 5; Cody, 4; and Haley, 1. Hervert was nominated for the award by Steve Thompson, (more) RECYCLED PAPER ~ TOV Awards/Add 1 finance director. The custodial team of Rudolfo Beltran, Preston Isom, Reuben Lujan, Abel Medina, Tito Montoya, Enwei "Anna" Tarn, Liz Webster and Jeanne Wilson, was honored for pulling together under adverse conditions the past year. With several positions unfilled, the team utilized a cross-training approach to help fill in the gaps caused by the vacancies. "These men and women take pride in what they do," said John Gallegos, facilities maintenance manager who nominated the team. "They are always looking for methods for improving the quality of their work." The Vail dispatch team--Julie Anderson, Kim Coleman, Tom Collins, Becky Comroe, Don Elterman, Charlie Erickson, Lori Gravelle, Audrey Gulick, Rose Marie Kiesel, Mary Palicki, Kelly Ryan, Miranda Steber and Carey True--was selected for its excellence in communications. The dispatchers provide emergency communications for three fire departments, five police agencies, and two emergency medical services from the top of Vail Pass to Wolcott. They were nominated for the award by John Gulick, Vail's assistant fire chief. The winners each received $100 from Town Manager Bob McLaurin. Other 1996 nominees included: Susan Connelly, Community Development director; Russell Forrest, senior environmental policy planner; Jim Hoza, street superintendent; Jim Jones, firefighter; Andy Knudtsen, senior housing policy planner; Suzanne Silverthorn, Community Information Officer; the Community Development Department team; the Community Development permit counter team (Lauren Waterton and Charlie Davis); the Fire Department team; firefighters Craig Davis and Mark Mobley; the Finance team (Jacque Lovato, Sally Lorton, Judy Popeck Reatha Schmidt, and Sandy (more) 8 ~ TOV Awards/Add 2 Yost); the roundabout team (Larry Grafel, Greg Hall, Jim Hoza, Todd Oppenheimer); the Vail Tomorrow team (Bob Armour, Susan Connelly, Annette McCorkle, Bob McLaurin, Suzanne Silverthorn and Kris Widlak); and the Development Review . . Improvement Process team (Jeff Atencio, Susan Connelly, Russell Forrest, Greg Hall, Terry Martinez, Dominic Mauriello, Mike McGee, Mike Mollica, Larry Pardee, George Ruther and Dan Stanek). # # # REc~~V~7a P"C a ~ , United States Forest White River Holy Cross Ranger District Department of Service Nationaf 24747 US HWY 24, P.O. BOX 190 Agriculture Forest MINTURN, COLORADO 81645 (970) 827-5715 FAX 827-9343 Reply to: 2720 Date: December 11, 1 96 1~ L~ : ~ ~ Bob Armour, Mayor and Members of the Town Council 75 South Frontage Road Vaii, CO 81657 Dear Bob and CounciL ~ I understand that questions have been raised about the Town of Vail Landownership Adjustment Analysis (Vail LOAA) and its impact on the Red Sandstone locals housing development. I would like to clarify the purpose of the LOAA. It is a planning document for the Forest Service to use in identifying lands which we would like to either acquire or convey. A July 1990 letter from the Forest Supervisor . stated, in part: "The principal purpose of the landownership adjustment analysis is to achieve the optimum landownership pattern for the Forest.° The Vail LOAA was unique in that it was recognized early in the process that the Town of Vail could play a major role in the rearrangement of landownership to achieve goats of both the Forest Service and the Town. Town planners assisted the Forest Service in identifying specific parcels of land that should be exchanged, resulting in a much more detailed analysis than the Forest Service typically requires. To further clarify the purpose of the LOAA, it is noT to make any decisions about the future manage- ment of lands once they are acquired by the Forest Service or conveyed to other ownership. Deed-restricted locals housing or free market housing are potential uses of land once it is exchanged, that would not conflict with the Vail LOAA. In fact there are no actions the Town could take to jeopardize the Vail LOAA, since it is simply a planning document for us to use in making initial d,eterminations about the desirability of a proposed land exchange. Public lands managed by the Forest Service or the Bureau of Land Management have been identified by many local, state and Federal officials as having the potential to contribute to the solution of a lack of housing near resort communities. We are pleased to be a partner in the team creating solutions for locals housing. Please contact Kathy Hardy should you have any further questions. Sincerely, ~ . ~ ~ i ? i ! ~f•J ~ M!/ILLIAM A. lA,OOD `'District Ranger wn~"`kc . . U-~ Caring for the Land and Serving the People iIK-y'~ y+L~I^4K"Y *A~ kiE , v . f~'z~..'4~` ~ r F '~x ~r'~ a~•wz-jsMy~ -7 . -.a, e, 3 ~,Q . * 4 ~ ti'ir s_~ ~,y-,' .w~~. , . ~ x.'3' > yc.""'* '-x3`r .,p-F°yy. ,_~a,-'~"ea - -'y~'~ _7~J-_ ° _:A '~~,~3 ' . : . - . r - _ . - - -e. • ,T F l V H q Y _ . . ' :~.~r;.~$a . ~ #~4~'~t ~r$"~S'~ , ~ ~ , ~ i.+ z . s y' z~ , _ rY'~` r ~ { ~w~~~~~~, ,.y s. T ~w4 i ~ z , # ~ m M~ ` 1 ~ ? & - GeYaYaT~P ~~~y ~ .-h,~ ~ ~ Y•~•a. ~ 5F1, w A ~u~vey o~°m~r~a~~~ Mayors and County:fxecutives: . _ . G. . _ . \ U _ - - F _ p a: R a ~ • A ~ f~nduefed b~? = ~ ~ s ~ ~ t ~ _ . - ~ ..,:~-x~ ta - ~.a~:- . - ~ a'~s~-•,-:it - 'k ~ + y~--%. a " ' .f~,..-~# ~ Frr ,.w"~'°;•w .`t. ~,s ~.'t~'- hTn$ fiobert M. La Follette ~1nstituteofP6bli~ Affafls t3ntvsrsrtytzfWsccjnsin Mac#isort ? ~ and N~ _ ? ' . ~ -~Thd'HaneY GroWD, 4 ~ f , _ - ~ ~ . ~ . -•,~y z -Ar +h .Navemt~r ~ ,r , - ~ ~ • ~ k-.. J ~ i y.J3~. . ' K~ ~ ( Y' t 4 ~ , t1~ ~ !w ~ Ih c ' ~ C KaS- i wd .r. ' " . _ Y . r~ . . _ ' . , . , The Robert M. La Follette Institute of Public Affairs University of Wisconsin-Madison November, 1996 Dear Colleague: Devolution promises to be the driving force in domestic politics for the remainder of this century - and well into the next. Welfare reform, among other policy changes, marks a watershed in the relationships among the federal, state, and local governments. Local governments, in particular, face stark challenges in meeting rising expectations with resources that are not keeping pace. With this report we present the results of a survey of local govemment officials. The survey was sent to nearly 3,800 mayors and county executives nationwide; officials from all 50 states responded. The survey is not a scientific one but rather, a descriptive snapshot of the challenges local governments foresee. The survey is a joint project of The Robert M. La Follette Institute of Public Affairs at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and The Haney Group. It is an extension of a series of collaborations befinreen the University and The Haney Group, which date from 1977 and have tracked consumer and small-business trends. The La Follette Institute does not take positions on public policy issues; we present the material to stimulate public debate. I want especially to thank the officials who took the time to participate. And I want to commend this report to everyone interested in local government affairs. Its findings are fascinating and, in some cases, surprising. Most of all, the survey charts the challenges with which local govemments will be wrestling in the years to come. Sincerely, J ic- Donald F. Kettl, Ph. D. Director The Robert M. La Follette Institute of Public Affairs University of Wisconsin-Madison University of Wisconsin-Madison ¦ 1225 Observatory Drive ¦ Madison, Wisconsin 53706 - , LOCAL PRIORITIES AT THE END OF THE GENTURY Executive Summary ? Locai officials rank Economic Development and Infrastructure as the two most important challenges facing their communities. They are much less likely to rank the Environmenf, as well as Welfare and Socia/ Services, as one of the top challenges. ? They believe that their communities are likely to spend most heavily on Infrastructure and Education during the next four years, and less heavily on the Environment and Housing and Community Development ? Local officials expect they will be devoting the most time to Economic Development and lnfrastructure over the next four years. They expect Education and the Environment to occupy less time. ? Investments in Economic Development and Infrastructure, they believe, are likely to be more productive, while Welfare and Social Services and the Environment are expected to be less productive. ? Local officials expect that the state and federal governments will wield the most influence in shaping policies on Welfare and Social Services and the Environment. They expect other levels of government witt wield less influence on Housing and Community Deve%pment, Public Safety, and Economic Development. ? State government bests takes into account local government interests and resources, local officials believed, in Economic Development and Education and that they take local government interests and resources into account less well in the Environment. ? Meanwhile, they believed, the federal government best takes into account local government interests and resources in Welfare and Socia/ Services and Public Safety. The federal government took local interests and resources into account less well in the Environment. ? Local officials believe that they most need greater flexibility in the Environment. ? What promises to provide local officials the most important tools in coping with new challenges over the next four years? They believe Regu/atory Reform and /nformation Techno%gy will be most important. They expected that Enterprise Zones, Civi/ Service Reform, and Privatization would be less important. PAGE 4 LOCAL PRIORITIES AT THE END OF THE CENTURY About This Survev Objectives The primary objective of the study was to identify the most important challenges mayors and county executives believe they face in their communities, and the role those officials expect the state and federal governments to play in meeting those challenges. Participants Participants in this survey are mayors or equivalent top executive officials from small, medium, and large cities, plus county executives or equivalent lead county administrative officials, from all 50 states. Methodo/ogy Researchers sent a two-page survey with a single-page cover letter via fax to 3,785 mayors and county executives from all areas of the country in early September, 1996. The cover letter indicated that individual responses to the survey would remain confidential, and that only aggregate data would be shared publicly. The participants were asked to complete the survey, provide identifying information, and fax the survey back to a toll-free fax number. The Haney Group gathered and compiled the data. A total of 715 officials from all 50 states, or 18.9 percent, responded to the survey. Researchers The survey is a joint project of the Robert M. La Follette Institute of Public Affairs at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and The Haney Group. The Robert M. La Follette Institute of Public Affairs The Robert M. La Follette Institute of Public Affairs at the University of Wisconsin- Madison conducts research in a wide range of policy areas, with a focus on state and local government issues. The Institute publishes a wide variety of policy- related materials, including The La Follette Policy Report, La Fo/lette lssues Papers, and La Follette Working Papers. The Haney Group The Haney Group for more than two decades has been conducting surveys that help constituencies share their perspectives with policy makers. The firm's joint "Consumer Agenda" surveys with the University of Wisconsin School of Human Ecology have attracted national attention, and The Haney Group is also known for its surveys of small business leaders. PAGE 5 LOCAL PRIORITIES AT THE END OF THE CENTURY Survev Results: Questions and Responses Note: Respondents were asked to rank the top five categories, with #1 as "most important." All figures are percentaqe of respondents rankinq the cateqorv as #1. Tota/s may not add to 100 percent due to rounding. 1. In your opinion, what are the most important chal/enges facing your community over the next four years? Economic development 38.2% Infrastructure and transportation 22•4% Welfare and social services 4.0% Housing and community $.O% development Public safety 10.5% Environment 2,0% Education 10.7% Other 4.3% 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 2. On which of these challenges is your community likely to expend the most resources over the next four years? Economic development 10.9% Infrastructure and transportation 34.6% Welfare and social services 5.5% Housing and community development 3•7% Public safety 19.5% Environment 2.0% Education 22.5% Other 1.3°l0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 PAG E 6 + LOCAL PRIORITIES AT THE END OF THE CENTURY ~ 3. On which of these challenges are you likely to find yourself whether you agree it is a high priority or not spending the most time personally? Economic development 31.1% Infrastructure and transportation 28.2% Welfare and social services 7.2% Housing and community development 5.9% Public safety 14.7% Environment 4.5% Education 3.5% Other 4.8% 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 qp 45 4. In which of these areas do you believe that your community's investment is likely to be most productive over the next four years? Economic development 37.0% Infrastructure and transportation 28,soa . Welfare and social senrices 1.7% Housing and community development 6.1% Public safety 9_9% Environment 2.7% Education 11.$% Other 2,3% 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 qp 45 PAGE 7 LOCAL PRIORITIES AT THE END OF THE CENTURY 5. In which areas do you think that the state and federal governments will wield the most influence whether you agree with them or not in determining how your community deais with issues over the next four years? Economic development s,$% Infrastructure and transportation 11.8% Welfare and social services 40.2% Fiousing and community development 3.3% Public safety 5.4% Environment 19.4% Education 11.9% other 1.3% 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 6. In which areas do you think that the state and federal governments best take into account local government interests and resources? Sfate: Economic development 22.9% Public safety 15.5% Infrastructure and 17.5% transportation Environment 5.4% Welfare and social services 9.4% Education 22.9% Housing and community 6,4% development 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 PAGE 8 LOCAL PRIORITIES AT THE END OF THE CENTURY Federal: Economic development 10.9% Public safety 19.4% ' Infrastructure and 15.7% transportation ; Environment 7.7% Welfare and social services 21,2% Education 10.$% Housing and community development 14.4% 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 7. In which areas do you think local governments need greater flexibility in how they respond to state and federal policies over the next four years? State: Economic development _ 12.8% Public safety 7,4% Infrastructure and transportation 17.5% Environment 22.7% Welfare and social services 17.6% Education 17.3% Housing and community development 4,5% 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 PAGE 9 LOCAL PRIORITIES AT THE END OF THE CENTURY Federal: Economic development 11.0% Public safety 6,2% Infrastructure and 14.~% transportation . Environment 27.5% Welfare and social services 21.6% Education 12,$% Housing and community 6.6% development 0 5 10 15 20 ZS 30 35 40 45 8. Which tools do you think will prove most important in helping your community cope with new challenges over the next four years? Information technology 21.6% Privatization 6.9% Customer service 8.2% Civil service reform 3.2% Regu{atory reform 29.6% Enterprise zones 4,2% Quality management 13.$% Land use planning 12.5% 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 PAGE 10 LOCAL PRIORITIES AT THE END OF THE CENTURY 9. Consider the issues you ranked as the "most imporfant cha//enges" in question 1. Why do you think these will prove most important? A tota/ of 537 respondents offered their comments for this question. Representative responses include: °Economic development makes all other issues possibie. A good business climate ' creates jobs for citizens and sales taxes, increased business incomes provide income for people and govemment services." "If our infrastructure and services can't keep up with the growth, environmental degradation, public safety concerns and a'corridor mentality' will result." "For small cities the economic development effort remains the most important challenge. Along with this, the infrastructure and environment issues will continue to burden the small cities due to increasing costs." "In reality, state and federal governments do not support local government needs. (Revenue sharing has shrunk or disappeared.) We must create our own sound economic base to help fund needed programs and projects at the local level." "Each locality is different; however, we are bfanketed by state and federal guidelines. Sometimes federal policy hinders local governments in such areas as job creation, especially when dealing with environmental issues." Unfunded mandates and irresponsible regulatory burdens drive our deliberations and actions at the local level. Federal and state ov basic economic development, housing, and afety~i su s~lo abgo ernment may know best what its constituents need!° "With all the environmental regulations being mandated (i.e., clean water, wellhead protection) the costs of the programs will put a strain on small city and town budgets." "We need regulatory reform in order to allow us to deal effectively with our own priorities, , not with the priorities set by someone in Washington who neither knows or cares about our needs. We welcome the challenge, all we ask is for the state and federal governments to get out of the way. They don't have to give us money, just flexibility." "Maintaining a healthy, economically viable community is essential to provide residents with jobs, affordable housing, and affordable goods and services. Removing the regulatory juggernaut at the federal and state levels will allow local governments to utilize cutting-edge technologies to solve their individual problems and eliminate the barriers which hinder businesses and families from prospering and advancing." - PAGE 11 . LOCAL PRIORITIES AT THE END OF THE CENTURY Complete Survey Results 1. In your opinion, what are the most important challenges facing your community over the next four years? Please rank the top five, with 1 for "most important." #1 #2 #3 #q #5 Not Cate o No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % Ranked Economic development 269 381 134 ;49 3 111 i6 '1, 85 42 +l 36 5 4 75 Infrastructure and transportation 158 22 A 193 ,8 124 '[8 0' 80 4,7 70 85 Welfare and social services 28 4.:0 38 40 ~?;8 62 102 3437 Housing and community development 56 8 0 74 :'ItI 8 103 44 91 130 4$ 0 114 17 Q 233 Public safety 74 it3.5 122 :4~ S 134 't9 a 109 46 €1 103 15 168 Environment 14 ~.0 32 65 86 C 142 2'I!.2 370 Education 75 '~E} 7 89 .''13 $ 106 'E5 4: 127 90 223 Other 30 13 740:15 13 1.9 643 2. On which of these challenges is your community likely to expend the most resources over the next four years? Please rank the top five, with 1 for "most resources." #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 Not Cate o No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % Ranked Economic development 77 10:9 92. 93 2: 127 18;5 150 6 122 1:$ $ 143 Infrastructure and transportation 244 344 164 23 vt 133 19:4; 61 9#; 33 76 Welfare and social services 39 ..5.:5: 45 8,4..; 60 73 4Q ~ 92 'I4 2; 401 Housing and community development 26 3.7 62 8 9 90 11 1 118 97 7! 158 243 256 Public safety 138 191 218 3'# *2 130 19;Q! 80 42, Q 51 94 Environment 14 2.0 25 3 H 65 95' 96 #4 4 124 1:~ 1;: 387 Education 159 225 82 9~ 7 72 'I0:5 83 '#2 4; 59 <8,'1 255 Other 9 1.3 11 '€.6 9'1.3 7 1.t~ 10 !1.~ 665 3. On which of these challenges are you likely to find yourself whether you agree it is a high priority or not spending the most time personally/? Please rank the top five, with 1 for "most time.° #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 Not Category No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % Ranked Economic development 220 31.1 152 144 Za 7; 69 10 3 54 874 Infrastructure and transportation 200 28.2 191 27:3128 18 4: 74 1# 0' 46 74 Welfare and social services 51 > 7.2 42 &(3: 47 66 91 11$ 416 Housing and communily development 42 91 13;0 111 1S t!' 150 :12 3. 94 225 ir-a Public safety 104 14.7 123 17;6! 145 2a 9. 143 .~1 2; 79 12:q1 119 Environment 32 5: 52 7:4 65 9 4 95 14 1< 157 2~,312 Education 25 s 3.6 40 47 67 1 Q t3' 131 403 Other 34 4.8 8'f:.1' 8 9.2 9:: ~.3 8 1:;2' 646 PAGE 12 e i LOCAL PRIORITIES AT THE END OF THE CENTURY ~ 4. In which of these areas do you believe that your community's investment is like/y to be most productive over the next four years? Please rank the top five, with 1 for "most productive." #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 Not Cate o No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % Ranked Economic development 262 37.tJ 170 ::24~ 103 14:8: 58 &6 46 7.0 73 Infrastructure and transportation 203 20 A 191 27.,3 123 171 . 88 43 1.` 39 ~9 68 Wetfare and social services 12 '1 9 23 3 3 38 57 98 14 0 484 Housing and community development 43 80 112 134 44. 4 116 '17 6: 227 Public safe tY 70 ~ 132 163 ~3~. ` 136 20>2 9 5 115 19;.: Enviro nment 2.27 `<58 < : 107 ?i~~ ~I. 154 ~3;:4 347 Education 84 11 8 77 88 88 100 275 Other 16 9 1~3 4~,6 11 7-:7: 667 5. In which areas do you think that the state and federal governments will wield the most influence whether you agree with them or not in determining how your community deals with issues over the next four years? Please rank the top five, with 1 for "wield - the most influence." #1 #2 93 #4 #5 Nof Cate o No. % No. % No. o No. % No. % Ranked _ Economic development 48 62 49 89 .3,€( 115 ......2 350 Infrastructure and transportation 83 1118 , 88 12 5_ 99 142. 128 7 124 16:F 191 Welfare and social services 284 40 2i 118 16 8 97 13 9 45 ; E 6 33 4>9 136 Housing and community development 23 100 14': 124 17 $ 127 18 ~ 110 18i6 229 Public safetY 38 75 ''!€I -7 91 13; IJ 122 ;~7 8 130 ii!il. 257 Environment 137 131 'l87 130 18 6 79 11 5 65 171 Education 84 '!1 9 124 177 103 14 $ 92 4' 86 42224 Other 9 1 3 4: t1.6 5 f3.7 3:: D 4 5 03 686 6. In which areas do you think that the state and federal governments. best take into account local government interests and resources? Please rank the top five, with 1 for "best take into account local government interests and resources." State: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 Not Cate o No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % Ranked Economic development 153 22;$: 94 14 1; 114 1? ~ 87 13 5; 88 ~3 $ 165 Public safety 104 #S;~ 136 20 5; 90 1;3.$ 88 13 7 83 '~3;2 200 Infrastructure and transportation 117 47;5. 116 17 4: 117 17;9: 94 .1i.4,fi 77 42;2 180 ErnironmeM 36 5- 4 64 67 94;3: 108 91 14,4 335 Welfare and social services 63 9<4I 81 '12,l 73 112 95 14,8 84 4:13 305 Education 153 22:9 114 .171 94 94;4: 81 12.5 92 44 6 166 Housin and communit develo ment 43 B<4' 60 9:0 97 94:~ 90 14;0 116 4 293 PAGE 13 ~ LOCAL PRIORITIES AT THE END OF THE CENTURY Federal: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 Not Cate o No. % No % No. % No % No. % Ranked Economic development 71 4*04. 59 B 1i 79 'E2 6 91 1~ 9 93 304 Public safety 126 4 128 19 H; 90 79 196 232 Infrastructure and transportation 102 '#5 7 99 '15 3 113 79 1 3 0 72 ;42 0 iII" Environment 50 7 7; 81 1^~& 81 90 148: 112 V 283 Welfare and sacial services 138 2T 2 82 !Z7: 78 '!2 A 82 13 A. 53 264 Education 70 89 'l3 8 87 ;'~S~4 97 45".9; 105 ~6 249 Housin and communit development 94[1 4 4 107 I~>a 99 AS.—. 92 15 :t; 85 '~4 2 220 7. In which areas do you think loca/ governments need greater flexibility in how they respond to state and federal policies over the next four years? Please rank the top five, with 1 for "most need greater flexibility." State: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 Not Cate o No % No % No % No % No. % Ranked Economic development 88 '31. 8 78 11 ~ 91 A ~ 77 119 6 255 Public safety 51 7A 87 12'~ 101 ~i 105 '15:$ 112 252 Infrastructure and transportation 120 175 116 17 t? 102 :4 103 't5'S 85 J33 182 Environment 156 ~i 7; 89 13 Lt 98 14 1 99 'li75 44 7 191 Welfare and socia . 76 76 >:1 63 260 I services 121 112 A Education 119 <~73 128 114 t&? 76 169 €£I~ 202 Housin and communit develo ment 31 73 it?:7i 101 1b 8: 127 1:9;2 116 48 2 260 Federal: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 Not Cate o No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % Ranked Economic development 75 56 8:3', 84 12?: 74 1'1 5108 309 Public safety 42 2: 75 90 j3 o 106 16 5' 113 280 Infrastructure and transportation 96 <#4 1; 127 18:9; 102 1&4; 103 't6 Q 94 451; 185 Environment 187 27 ~ 99 °{4>fi: 89 95 '14 8! 64 '#tI ~ 173 Welfare and social services 147 2'# ~ 127 1H;8i 94 44 2. 65 1.D 47 227 Education 87 ''#Z $ 110 107 85 13 2: 77 1 2 3 241 Housin and communit deveto ment 45 ~;6 82 1~:1 96 94 S: 114 121 '#249 8. Which tools do you think will prove most importanf in helping your community cope with new challenges over the next four years? Please rank the top five, with 1 as "most important." it1 #2 #3 #kq #5 Not Cate o No % No. % No. % No. % No. % Ranked Information technology 148 23:E`i 127 18 ;6: 135 2II ~ 109 77U7 ; 65 S 122 Privatization 47 6<9 62 9:'I74 75 11 7, 90 358 Customer service 56 ~;2 92 1~>5! 93 102 15 87 276 Civil service reform 22 3:2 51 7'.5 42 ~i 3: 39 ~ ~ 54 498 Regulatory reform 203 fi; 119 1?:4. 76 't1 4; 78 'E2'1 80 110, 150 Enterprise zones 29 40 5 8 47 ?52 81; 67 '1#3 9: 471 Quality management 95 '1is 94 13;?: 97 108 'tf 8 82 230 = Land use lannin 86 . 92!~ 99 14;5 101 15:2 SO '[2A 90 "#4:.6 249 PncE 14 t - PEGEIVEI) oEC 2 o State Representative * U Vice Chairman House District 56 ,wI876 ' Business Affairs and JACK TAYLOR Labor Commfttee Box 5656 COLORADO Member Steamboat Springs, Coiorado 80477 Agricuiture, Livestock and Natural Home: (303) 879-1880 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Resources Committee Business: (303) 879-3600 STATE CAPITOL Capitol: (303) 866-2949 DENVER 80203 December 10, 1996 Dear Bob and Bob: For a"starter package" on Retail Wheeling of Electricity this is a pretty big bunch of infarmation. Hawever, if you stick wi.th it for a while it will give you a pretty good picture of what it is all about, and what is going on at both the Federal and State levels. Most CO-OPs are oppased to it, but I'm encouraging them to not stone-wall it but to go ta the table and get involved. Be a player. Have a say it what will affect them. Holy Cross has an open mind on the issue, and even see potential in it. I feel there are a lot of:unanswered questions that need to be answered before Retail Wheeling is put into effect---ie what will happen to our relatively low rates here in Colorado, who pays for the stranded eosts, will our rates go up, will the big users such as ski areas that are cherry-picked for their volume pay for the use of the C0-0P (Holy Cross) lines or will it be borne by the residential and smaller consumers---lots of unanswered questions. That is why one school of thought is to open the issue for study until these questions are answered. I will be interested in your thoughts on the subject. Sincerely, Jack Taylor ! ~ /~~-c~~~- t,,r~ C.t~ - ~ . ~ Colorado Legislative Council ISSUE1BRIEV, Staff Number 96-9 A Legislative Council Publication November 22, 1996 ELECTRIC INDUSTRY RESTRUCTURINGy._^ (INCLUDING RETAIL W}EELING OF ELECTRICITY) by Neil Krauss For the second time in as many years, the 1997 Is Utility Restructuring a Nationwide Movement? Colorado General Assembly will be faced with deciding if residential and business customers may In 1996, Rep.. Dan Schaefer (R-CO) introduced purchase electricity in a competitive market. Now, the legislation in Congress that would have required . Public Utilities Commission (PUC) grants territorial restructuring of the electric utility industry to create monopolies to electric utilities. Business and retail wheeling nationally. Wholesale wheeling was residential customers must purchase electricity from allowed nationally by the federal Energy Policy Act of the company that has the monopoly in their area. 1992. In early August 1996, Rhode Island became the Allowing customers to purchase electricity in an open first state to enact an electric restructuring bill. Then . market, instead of from a monopoly provider, occurs in late August, California's legislature unanimously - through a process lmown as retail wheeling. created a new electric industry structure. Massachusetts and New Hampshire created retail wheeling pilot programs, and at leasf 30 other states What is Retail Wheeling ? are studying the issue. Wheeling is a term used in the utility industry to describe the delivery of electricity from a generator to -Retail- wheeling is intended to provide a utility company over the lines of a third utility. electric customers with d'u•ect access to Wheeiing is used by utility companies to buy and sell power suppliers other than the local electric electric power wholesale to each other. Retai[ utility monopoly. wheeling means the delivery of electricity purchased direcdy from a third party competitive generator to a residential or business customer over the transmission or distribution lines of a local utility. For example, What's Happening in Colorado? retail wheeling would allow a Denver resident to purchase power from the Cotorado Springs utility Two bills dealing with electric industry company, which would be shipped to the residence by restructuring and ietail wheeling were considered by Public Service Company of Colorado. Retail wheeling the General Assembly in 1996. Both measures were is intended to provide electric customers with direct defeated in committee. House Bill 96-1234 would access to power suppliers other than the local electric have allowed residential and business customers to buy utility monopoly. As a result, retail wheeling promises electric power direcdy from competing utili6es and to increase competition in the electric industry. independent producers or through marketers. However, electricity still would have been transmitted and distributed over power lines to residential and business customers by the local utility with the The Legislative Council is the research arm of the Colorado General Assembly. The Council provides non-partisan information services and staff support to the Colorado Legislature. monopoly in the area. House Joint Resolution 96- will reduce rates to every customer. Opponents 1030 sought a legislative study on the issue. disagree. Their comern is that retail competition Similar measures are expected to be introduced in will result in rate discrimination, whereby the 1997 General Assembly. industrial customers receive lower rates, while costs aze transfened to residential and small business customers. What is the Impetus for Change? ? Sp•mtded costs. Under the existing regulatory Aside from the general trend toward ftamework, utilities' investments are recovered deregulation, one~ e drivin~ factors behind the from ratepayers. In a competitive market, the movement has been the relativelv hi ra s for price of electricity may fall below the leve ~W ~ residential and industrial electricity in_California required by utilities to recoYef these mvestments. ` and on the Facr ('o~. A 1993 federal government Customers may also leave the utility in order to reporno electricity rates, estimated in dollars per purchase electricity from another supplier resulting million Btu, illustrates the disparity (see Table I in unrecovered costs. Utility costs that cannot be beiow). reeovered in a cempetitive market are referred to as stranded costs. Therefore, utilities that operate Table I•' 1993 Electricity Rate Estimates in the regulated market face financial losses in a `(pallars per Moa BM) ~~ntive market because they might not be able ' to recoup their investment costs. Whether and srare Resi1enrra[ commercial Indusrrial how stranded costs are recouped may be a matter ~ of legislative or regulawry policy.'( New York $38.61 $32.87 $19.53 .~~~Q~-~ d California 33.12 29.27 ziso ? Technical and reliabr~uy rssues. A number of technical issues, including congestion on existing `~,~D ~Washington 13.a~ 12.~~ ~•02 transmission lines, generation and transmission F~ coloraao 21.21 17.36 13.27 forecasting and planning, and the way electric current flows, raise questions about the reliability National 24.40 22.40 14.22 of electricity in an open-market system. How will Source: 'nergy Info tion Administration these issues be dealt with and bX whom? ~UnTJ~~ ~ " ~p ~t w•' l ~ 'J~ l!~ 1`~ ? Access and equity issues. Under the existing As the table indicates, Colorado customerspay regulated system, utilities have had an obligation to less for electrici th York serve all customers. In turn, utilities have been and Cnia. On average, Colorado's granted guaranteed markets. In an open market, residential electric rates are 13 percent below the how will customers be guaranteed access to national average. The commercial rates are 22.5 electric power? In addition, will programs percent below the national average; industrial rates continue to ensure low-income residents access? are 6.7 percent below. JY-R- ? Munie#al nevenue stt'eam• The possibility of a reduced customer base for power supplied by What are P ible Legislative Issues? local utilities might reduce tax xevenues to , ~ ~ municipalities. Beyond the initial piulosopivcal change of introducing market competition into the electric ? Renewable energy. Alternative energy utility arena, proponents and opponents have programs have been encouraged under the existing raised a number of issues for legislative regulatory framework. The change to a consideration. These issues include the following: deregulated market raises questions about the continuation of such programs. ? Impact on consumers. One of the selling points of retail wheeling has been that competition Room 029, State Capitol, Denver, CO 80203-1784 •(303) 866-3521 • FAX: 866-3855 • TDD 866-3472 t12i.u.:'u.au: LL,~.Vl41it lV lL1l.JIUILY: . '.I ' . ' . . . . . . . " 5ourca: uhbry Ueta insutute U. About 45 percent of operation ZC : ~ Outlook For Federal Retail Wheelin Is Uncertain : C ~ IR By Wallace Tillraan : noting particularly his concern that : legislation on the industry to act at ; n : rural areas be treated fairly. ~ this time. Sheridan said that few j'~ T he outlook for federal retail : Any successful retail wheeling ~ are against competition. But she wheeling legislation seems : legislation would need bipartisan ; also noted that there is no crisis in uncertain, at least based on ~ support, Glick noted, because of : the electric industry, unlike the sit- ~ a recent briefing given by key the complexities of such legisla- € uation that preceded the passage House and Senate staffers to the : tion, and it would be difficult to € of the 1996 telecommunications National Association of Regulatory : predict passage any earlier than in ~ legislation, where the industry was Utility Commissioners on Nov. 17. ~ a couple of years. : being "run from the bench." : Co The briefing preceded the associa- Cathy Van Way, who was speak- Sheridan predicted that if legis- : of ` tion's annual meeting in San : ing on behalf of Rep. Dan : lation supported by Democrats : SP, Francisco. : Schaefer, R-Colo., told the group : were passed, it would be compre- :sai, Howard Useem, counsei to the that Reps. Schaefer and Thomas ~ hensive. Such legislation would Senace Energy and Natural : Bliley, R-Va., want electricity ~ have to address stranded benefits Resources Committee, said that : restructuring to be the highest pri- : and costs, shareholder issues, and a: s Sen. Frank Murkowski, R-Alaska, ~ ority of the House Commerce grab bag" of other issues, such as a € 77 chairman of the Committee, sup- Committee. : level playing field. Rep. Dingell, ports customer choice, but later Van Way noted how successful ~ Sheridan said, supports experimen- , said that he believed the senator : deregulation has been for other : tation by states regarding retail would not support a definite date : industries and predicted similar : wheeling. ar, ' for implementing retail wheeling ~ benefits for the electric industry. During the question period, :cr, in any legislation. : She argued that large end users are ~ some commissioners raised the Rich Glick, legislative director : already making discount rate deals : issue of customer protections to for Sen. Dale Bumpers, D-Ark., said : with utilities, and that legislation is : ensure the truth of marketers' that the senator is considering the ~ necessary for all customer classes : claims, such as their selling of :efj inaodnction of a retail wheeling ~ to get lower rates. green power." It was also noted bill and would include a definite Finally, Sue Sheridan, counsel to : that electricity is the most impor- date for implementing retail wheel- ~ the Minority Staff for the House : tant infrastructure industry and ing. The date would be later than ' Commerce Committee, said that : that the consequences of chaos the one set for Rep. Schaefer's bill ~ Rep. Dingell is open-minded but € could be devastating. As a result, € Aci (sometime in 2001), but would be dubious about retail wheeling Iegis- ' one commissioner questioned the (H before 2010. Glick also said that 's lation. Rep. Dingell believes that : wisdom of a set date for retail no! Sen. Bumpers has a special interest : Congress doesn't know enough : wheeling. ? • in the issue of universal service, ~ about the potential effects of such . . v uc.ia uc> > aiiu OvZY aiiu , timetable involved% : suppliers of their choice. : RE'Str'UCtUI1Ilg • '"'hat steps, if any, has each Ar'eas served bv Niagara Mohawk . respecti~~e uulitv taken in anticipa- ' Power Corporation, New York State : ReSOlUt10Il IIICIUdeS tion of FERC's recent orders (888 ~ Electric and Gas Corporation, : Rural COIISUIYleI'S ~ and 889) to enhance the level of ~ Rochester Gas and Electric ' competitiveness of the wholesale : Corporation, Cenual Hudson Gas The National Association of electricity market; ' and Electric Corporation and ~ Regulatory litility Commissioners • What will the probable impacts ~ Orange and Rockland Ucilities Inc. : recentlv approved an amendment : ~ Co-ops WeH-Represented At : News Media t Restructuring Hearin : Pollution He~ g r~t C-1 By Kevin Cullather : chose coal have spent millions of ~ Bv Marie Guerrero dollars on environmental control E lectric co-ops were well reIr ~ equipment, a cost that would not ress reports are being circu- ' resented at the Department : have been incurred had the lated that overemphasize the of Energy's third regional : Congress not prohibited the use of : effects of particulate matter : and ozone on public health. roundtable on restructuring of the : gas for the generation of electricity electric utility industry Nov. 15 in in the first place, Fletcher said. ; Nitrogen oxides and sulphur diox- Chicago. Co-op participants Fletcher also graphically ide air emissions from coal-fired expressed their concerns about ~ described the need for the Energy : electric generating facilities con- + reliability, stranded cost recovery ~ Department and the North : tribute both ta atmospheric ozone ! and market power issues. ~ American Electric Reliability : and fine particulate concentrations. ~ According to Stanley Lewan- Council to ensure that the reliabili- ~ An article in USA TODAYon ~ dowski, general manager of ; ty of the electric grid is not further € Nov. 22, for example, alleged that ~ Intermountain REA in Sedalia, : threatened by a move to a competi- ; 40 percent of Americans suffer res- ; Colo., it's clear that interest in tive marketplace. According to : piratory problems because of air ~ retail wheelinLr is greatest in states : Fletcher, when power was restored : polluuon. The Environmental with hiLrh-cost power and among : to his distribution system from its : Protection Agency's own docu- ' industrial customers. Lewandowski ~ transmission provider on March 29, ments, however (notably, "Air ' said, `°The Department of Energy 1996, the power surge caused light : Quality Criteria for Particulate ~ must look towards 100 percent : bulbs to shatter and wall recepta- "s Matter"), indicate that less than 10 stran ded cost recovery," through an : cles to burst into flames. The dam- ; percent of the American population exit fee or another mechanism, so : age done to the co-op's 3,400 con- ' suffers from chronic respiratory dis- that existing customers are not ~ sumers' computers, televisions and : ease or asthma from all causes. harmed by departing customers. ' other appliances totaled more than : According to the Utility Air This sentiment was echoed by ~$93,000. The utility responsible for : Regulatory Group, of which NRECA ~ Michael Fletcher, the general man- ~ the surge has refused to pay for the ~ is a member, the 40 percent num- ager of Columbus Electric Co-op, ` consumers' damages, leaving the : ber cited in the article reflects an Deming, N.M., who stated, "If large co-op to make reparations. In light approximation of the total popula- indusuial customers can use their : of this real-life experience, Fletcher : don living in non-attainment coun- clout to get out of a plant that was : urged that the agency consider ; ties, that is, areas where ozone and built for their load, the small resi- ` who should pay this bill in a com- : pardculate matter concentrations dential and commercial customers ~ petitive market. : exceed health standards. Not all res- will be stuck paying off the debt of ; Finally, Rick Lancaster of : idents of those counties, however, these facilities." According to : Cooperative Power in Eden Prairie, ' would be expected to be exposed to Fletcher, during the 1970s, federal ~ Minn. argued that the current legal ' air pollution levels that wonld cause law prohibited utilities from build- : framework for determining market : concern to the agency. In addition, ing gas-fired plants, so they were : share is inadequate and urged that ~ not all of those exposed would forced to build either nuclear or : someone "define what market ; experience respiratory disease. The coal-fired facilities to meet cus- ~ share is too much." ? : air group also says that the agency's tomer loads. The utilities that . own scientific advisors concluded , . News : Z; Electric Co-op 1ODAY• News • November 22, 1996 • • . . Vzew OZ~ S . : Industr Restructuring? Thejury's Still Out. y By Hobson Waits € what changes, if aiiy, wotild be made : of the best public utility laws in the experience, in : in state laws and regulations. : nation, asstiring that all its citizens ; addition to other • , eadlines in newspapers Meanwhile, odd groups-most ; are offered quality electric service at : considerations, across Mississippi are pro- representing large power user11y- : reasonable rates. Its level of excel- : will occupy state Hclainiing that lower rates : travel about promoting retail wheel- :lence in serving the public interest : legislators and for elecU-ic service are just around ; ing. But the terms that are bandied : must be preserved and maintained. : regulators in the the corner. News articles are already : about-deregtzlation, competition, Fairness and opportunity are : coming rnonths promoting the so-called "deregula-: stranded investment and retail what rural electric co-ops fought for : and years as they tion" of the electric industry and ~ wheeling-need to be further €in the 1930s. We fought for fairness : study, examine, how competition will drive utility- : defined. : and opportunity because we were ~ and engage in Hobson Waits bills down. Well, it's not that simple. : We are not against restructuring : denied light and power-why? Be- ; public dialogue. "Reliable and affordable electric ' the electric utility industry-never ; cause our population densities were : Our hope is they will make correct poruer fm- all people in order that ~ have been, never will be. We are : too low for the companies' high :and fairdccisions, IIigh-quality, they may enjoy a healthy econom- ~ not-for-profit cooperatives, owned ; profits. As a market we were "uneco- : high-reliabili .ty electric service has ic and social lifestyle. and controlled by the members we : nomic." Today, as sole consideration : become such a vital part of our lives : serve. We answer only to them. : for the bottom line increasingly par- ; and our livelihoods that there will This was, and remains, the goal : Mississippi's co-ops take seriously ~ allels that earlier era, it is possible : be little room for error. ? of those who led the organization of ; their responsibility to look out for € there could be a regression to those electric power associations in ; all dasses of consumers-big and Dirty Thirties" days when electricity ~ Mississippi more than 50 years ago. ; small. We ivill not stand by if it ; in remote areas was not only unaf- ; Hnbson Waits is Pxecutizie iticeprPSirteral Today, it is with this same mission : develops that the industry is being i fordable, but unattainable. : of the F,lectric Pozu~r Associatiora n/ ,r that we serve more tha?i orie and ; reinven.ted only to enrich the pow- Before we react to a major issue ; Mississipfii. one-half million Mississippians. € erful few. There must be maximum such as restructuring the entire elec- : To those who have been asking benefit for all users. And price is not tric industry, we would do well to "viewpoiiies" pronides a forum fur Ihe about the position of the electric the only determining factor. We will review some hard lessons learned eXChange ~~r v;ewN among NRI?(J1's m~~mb~•iti :w associations in Mississi d olhcr mcmbcrs uf Uic coii~~ f:unily. 'Ihc Power pp1 OTl need to be vigilant to assure that fr-om the so-called ` ,deregulated articies prese„ted in °vie.,~~ints" maq [,ot the restrt?cturing issue, the answer is standards of quality, reliability and industries" and particularly, the repre.sent tvttFCn porry o~ necet,.,rily that the jury is still out. As it stands ; safety are not comprornised in "the ; harsll effects of their abandoned reflect the views of a majority of Ihe from here, it is still unclear as to : bargain.° Mississippi already has one services to rural areas. That sad . ~OC1a~o~•' m~be~. . T0DAY1 N B RI E F... ~based utility serving the mines and n : ietcr rc idcrs Kevin Harris, Carroll . farnni(F nlantc nn News : Z; Electric Co-op tWAY• IUews • De~ember 6, 1996 • • . Zew oin S :`The Future Of The Regtdatory Compact' . Py Tom_J- : were wrong. While stockholders ~ and (4) exercise of a state's power : tion, a whole set I ' were gratified, rural areas went : of eminent domain to obtain prop- € of questions to $ A s we continue to learn more : unelectrified. To protect consumers ~ erty necessary for providing service. ; resolve concern- about competition and : as well as the broad public interest, ; Public utilities felt they could not € ing the fiiture of 'deregulation in the electric ~ stale and fecleral governments ; justify stringing lines to rural people ~ the compact and industr}', it may be useful to under- : placed obligations on the utilities. : withotit charges that were prohibi- :the protections stand how the business came to be : To balance those obligations, the : tive. But leaders in the Congress ; and privileges it the regulated monopoly it is today. : utilities were given special privi- ; and the White House acted, creat- : pi-ovides. If the Since its formative years in the leges in return. These agreements : ing the rural electrification pro- : compact as we early 1880s, the industry has : came to be called tht- regulatory : g ram. The rural electric co-o ps : have known i t i s 7om Jones require d a lot o f capita l to f inance : compact. : made universal service a reality in ; disintegrating, a and build generation, transmission The regulatory compact essen- : this country. They completed the : new sort of "balance wheel" must be and disU-ibution facilities. The ' tially contained these requirements: ; compact. ~ created to continue its concepts of moguls who formed and later con- ;(1) public utilities must supply ser- Most of the discussion about ; universal service, the "bbligation to solidated the great electric utility : vice to all who request it-the con- : bringing competition to the electric € serve" and to affirm utilities' com- empires got their capital by selling : cept of "the obligation to serve;" (2) ; industry has centered around ~ mitment to power reliability, quatity stock in their companies to investors ; prices charged by utilities must be ; defined service territories and the ; and safety. These are protections and who received an annual return on : fair and reasonable; (3) the concept : natural monopolies they create. If ; guarantees the nation's electric con- their investment. They understood ; of universal service-no discrimina- : these boundaries are to be removed : sumers have always enjoyed-and the relationship of intensive capital : tion of one group over another- ; and full retail competition is ; they have every right to expect that formation to costs, rates and the : must be maintained; and (4) elec- : allowed, private companies will ; these assurances will continue. ? number of consumers on their sys- : tric service must be safe and ade- ~ choose the large commercial and tems. Some understood it well ; quate. : industrial loads that provide the : 7omJones is executive vicepi-esident nf enough to monkey with the system In exchange for meeting these : most profit. It is not clear who will : the Anzona statezuide, Grand Canyon by price-gouging their consumers. ~ obligations, the following privileges : serve the others-low-income and ~ State F,lectric Coofieralive Assorantion. This broughi about the need for ; have been provided utilities: (1) : rural customers-as the race gains regulation of piiblic utilities. granting of exclusive service territo- in intensity for the large loads. "Viewpoints" provides a fonam for Uie Supporters of regiilation believed ries, minimizing competition; (2) a Neither is it clear how electric excnan ge or~ews a„ong rvxFC ~'s,,,~,,,b~,,~ that universal electric service was an fair return to stockholders on their utilities are to be held accountable ~d olher members of Ihe co-op family. "Ilic azticles presented in "V'iewpoints" may not achievable goal; they also believed investments; (3) fair and reasonable : to the obligations inherent in the ~p~nt NRECA policy or necessarily attempts by some electric compa- : restrictions on utility services, such : regulatory compact. We have, tFleT'C- ; retlect the views of a majority of ihe nies to make unreasonable profits ; as disconnection for non-payment; ; fore, in this new crucible of competi- ;~ociadods members. a. - : News . Electric Co-op TODAY• /Vews • November 22, 1996 : 5 ~ ? ' •esence Felt ~ English Stands with Virgmia ~ . ;t1011S ~ CEO Compliments Regulators, Legislators : Dick Chrysler (R), a co-sponsor of ~~01'v ~'O1~am ' a House resolution to privatize the RECA Chief Execurive any- : nation's power marketing adminis- Officer Glenn English com- ~ ~ns a ' trations. "We made a point of sup- Nplimented Virginia regula- ,n ; porting his opponent," Whelan ~ tors and legislators last week on their ~ . cation : said, adding that Stabenow was `"thorough, commonsense" approach : `I(rya e ; well-informed and receptive to co- to electric industry restructuring. "ff ,,oice ~ op issues. 9 ` it ain't broke, don't fix it," he told a: ~ Overall, ACRE-supported candi- ~ crowd of more than 150 at the politi- ~ dates won 28 of 39 open seats in the 'Virginia Eiectricity Forum in 000- : House. In the Senate, ACRE sup- : Charlottesville, Va. early : ported 27 winners of the 34 races The Virginia State Corporation ~ ;(which included a special election ' Commission issued an order on Nov. : .1996 : to fill the seat vacated by unsuccess- 12 calling for a slow, considered eval- ; Glenn English :trator ~ ful presidendal candidate Bob ; uation of whether the electric indus- : ttee ~ Dole), including 9 of 13 open seats. : try should be restructured in : able electric power should not be ions But even as the 1995-1996 elec- : Vrginia, where consumers pay mod- : sacrificed in a rush to change just ; who : tion cycle ended on Nov. 5, the 1997- ~ erate rates for electricity and where ~ for the sake of change." tar- : 98 fundraising cycle began Nov. 6. there has been litde enthusiasm for Representatives of Allegheny o-op : Subscribing to the political adage ~ retail wheeling. : Power System and industrial con- to that "a dollar raised in Jan uary is The Virginia Commission's order : sumers were the only vocal advocates -iouse : worrh five dollars in November," implements many of the recommen- : of retail wheeling at the three-day .tees. : Wlician said many officeholders have : dations included in a staff report. 's conference. Virginia Power's Chief at saw : already solicited ACRE for funds to Investor-owned utilities operating in : Executive Officer James Rhodes and iin : retire campaign debt and to build Virginia must submit information ~ Greg White, vice president of the d of£ : campaign ivar chests. that describes the potential costs of : Virginia, Marvland, and Delaware 1 After all, the 1998 elections are restructuring, induding possible : rlssociation of Elecu-ic Cooperatives, ,ep, : just around the corner. ? stranded costs and expenses of sepa- : supported Virginia's approach of ' radng generation, transmission, and ~ carefully evaluating experiences of ' distribution functions. The imestor- other states before upsetdng a sys- 1 = owned utilities may also propose : tem "that has served Virginians 1 ~ alternative forms of regulauon. The : well." ~ commission will consider this infor- Former North Carolina Public ~ mation and experience gained in ~ Service Commissioner Julius Wright other staces by late 1997 before : reminded the audience that retail deciding whether any further action : wheeling so far is concentrated in is justified. : states with the highest prices in the ~ `°The re-regulation of the electric : country. "Virginia didn't follow those industrv would create winners and : states when they made decisions that losers," English said. "We believe that : caused their rates to be the highest residential and small commercial ~ in the country," Wright said. "So, ~ consumers are most at risk, and : why should Virginia follow those v v . could see significandy higher prices same states in restructuring the if retail wheeling is implemented. € industry so that rates for Virginians : The security of reliable and afford- : would go up%" ? ~ • ~ . • j Gain New Leadership Lab To Aug^ment Expertise : . . . , . . , ,,c. ,c : ! r,~,,.~ -rl„, ~ _ i ftpay lan now or 1 General manager's later Y/1eSSQge Electric utilities could soon be faced with a new challenge - competing with one another for the same customer, no matter where that customer 3 The extraordinary emu: lives or works. If proponents are successful in Gi b1f"df01' QlI SeRSOYIS passing proposed restructuring laws, retail wheel- ing - open competition - could become an industry reality. 9 Lineman's rodeo: It's true that restructuring our industry could ~ kilowatt cowboys change the way we do business, but competition showcase their cra~' isn't new to us. We've shown that we have what it takes to successfully promote electricity as the cleaner, more reliable and safer choice over 13 "HZghef edUC6itlOY! " propane, wood and natural gas. Among other things, Tri-State is using the makes the grade deliberations of its strategic competition commit- tee - made up of Tri-State directors, mernber sys- 14 Tri-State board tem directors and managers - for establishing hZgjlllghZ'S priorities and direction for future competition and related issues. I have no doubt that we can prevaIl in serving our customer base well, but we urgently need new marketing tactics and skills. Our competitors would be selling the same commodity we do, and Network is a l°'y De"'A 'tPR the market winner will be the organization that can Assistanr Grnnal Managn/ inspire loyalty and recognition in the hearts and quarterly magazine E--lAffain desi Iim Van Somerrn minds of the consumers. Sned and Communications Managa Marketing experts agree that "branding," published for Char'ie p°weu Communications Edrtm which creates a broad and far-reaching image that Tri-State employees, SharonAithaus consumers will instandy recognize, is a vital tool B.ad nunevirz member systems Lo,; Eppew„ when honing a competitive edge. In the same way and constituents. Communicatinns Spaialists that consumers rely on a well-known supplier for AndyHarrclson, CREC Communications Coordinator foods or cars, our brand would denote quality elec- Its putpose is to ~~°n Panm tric products and services along with concern for the community. The closest rural electrics have inform, educate, RogR Wh;tacre Drnvtr fredance photographer had to a brand in the past was the acronym REA, entertain and commonly used as a term for the local power generate new ideas. company. Nenwo.k u However, as a united national body, the rural printed on ~ electric network serves 25 million consumers and r"y`kd p°p"' is the largest utility system in America. From this - strength we can build a brand image that will span the boundaries of service territories and state lines. Together, we can dispel any vestige of the David and Goliath comparison some apply to their local Cover: A lineman is strapped in at the seventh rural electric company vs. a large investor-owned annual Colorado Lineman's Rodeo. or municipal utility serving a million or more con- sumers. 1 The National Rural Electric Cooperative indicate that rural electric systems' value, reliability Association, our national trade association based and superior service have yielded a more positive in Arlington, Va., is rallying all rural electrics to a customer perception than that of investor-owned united, fast-track effort to prepare for competition. or municipal utilities. We have an unrivaled close- If we don't act now to define our market position, ness to our customers, thanks to community rela- it could be defined for us by our rivals. tionships through our local boards of directors and ~ NRECA is pulling together a pilot group of employees, and we are seen as much more about 12 generation and transmission cooperatives approachable and accessible. along with one each of their distribution systems The pilot committee will strive to highlight to create a clean, simple, reality-based, customer- these strengths and to evaluate excellent ideas to focused marketing approach - one that is easily update and streamline rural electric operations. communicated, sends a strong message and is wor- It will assess the advantages of forging strategic thy of all rural electric systems' support. Tri-State business alliances,listening and responding to , will be a part of this pilot group. consumer demands for products and services, ` Dawn Sweeney, NRECA's director of market developing stronger quality service benchmarks development, is spearheading the creation of a and sharing resources. Frank Knutson General Manager . : 1 have no doubt thatwe can prevail ~LL ~ ~ in serving our customer base well, but we • . urgently need ~ new marketing tactics and skills. cooperative image that will be recognized across The bottom line is we need to talk about who the nation. We at Tri-State agree that this should we are, make decisions to direct our future, and now be one of our highest priorities - we can't maintain the flexibility we will need to perform in afford not to get involved. a marketplace that is still taking shape. We also By the end of 1996, the group's goal is to col- must seize our present opportunity to influence lect competitive intelligence and to test broad mar- regulators and legislators and to help write restruc- keting positioning options. In the first months of turing rules that will give rural electrics a fair 1997, it will define target markets, draft a plan of shake. attack, design creative materials and develop ser- A tough assignment? Yes! But if we don't vice guarantees we can offer to our customers. The implement a proactive plan now, we will face an results will be presented to NRECA's entire mem- even harder job of playing catch-up if the restruc- bership at the March annual meeting. Field testing tured electric utility market takes off. will begin in April. Fortunately, we have many outstanding Frank Knutson premises on which to build a dynamic marketing program. Study results obtained by NRECA 2 I PUC PUBLIC MEETINGS September-October 1996 . oF C pL ~ 0~ ~ O - ~ - " ~ O V' ~f ~ SI1VE U11L~~ 1CrN ~ V ~ TI LITI~~ RETAIL EELING REGULATORY OvERSIGHT E 'ITY JURISDICTI4N Investor-owned Utilities PUC/FERC Rural Electric Cooperatives . Members Municipal City Council : Cogenerators FERC Self-Generation None Power Marketing Agencies DOE/FERC TRENDS IN OTHER INDUSTRIES Competition has been introduced into other regulated industries, both nationally and in Colorado. TELECOMM[UNICATIONS: • Competition for long-distance serviees. • Colorado passed local exchange competition in 1995. • Federal Telecommunications Act, February 1996. TRANSPORTATION: • Federal preemption of property transportation. • Coiorado passengers: regulated competition. NATURAL GAS • FERC 636: Unbundling of gas sales and transportation. • Gas Transportation common for Colorado industrial customers. - THREE SEPARATE ELECTRIC SYSTEMS "WESTERN" "EASTERN" : ;s,°,•;'r.::....,:4:;;~k:rtf ::?t;p,+.4::kii•:i•;: ff)'•,~. . ` "TEXAS" ONLY LIMITED POWER TRANSFERS CONNECTING THEM THE WESTERN ELECTRIC SYSTEM ROCKY MOUNTAIN POWER AREA ~ : : ' / r" . i T... . I 1 ::'>I ::::>`:<::»<:>>:> 1 1;»;' > :>I I « ; <:ii > `;:;;';:><;<:; > ;.1 ' ` . • Interconnected system allows power transfers and greater reliability • System capabilities on eastern side of , the loop significantly less than on the western side • Southern California imports 12,000 MW and exports 700 MW • Rocky Mountain Area imports 500 MW and exports 1,600 MW COLORADO TRANSMISSION COLORADO Continenfal Divide • Power line overloads lead to instability and black out problems , • Appears to have physical limitations on importing power to the front range WHAT ARE WE REALLY TALKING ABOUT? • Industry Restructuring • Retail Wheeling Retail Wheelin~ Retail Wheeling allows a11 customers to buy electricity directly from any electric generation company and have it delivered by the local utility. ' Wholesale Wheeling Wholesale Wheeling allows utilities to buy electricity from a variety of bulk electricity suppliers thus lowering the price of electricity for all utility customers. Traditional Vertically Integrated Utili ty . Utl ` ~io~. : . . . . ; . . . ~ . . , . , . . ; _ . . . , : . . . : . . . , . _ . . . , . , . , - . . . . . . + . . : . I ~ . . . . . ' ' ` ~ 1 Il Indus r a t~nlmer~ial ; Li til i~~' ' . : . . ; . . , . . . . . : . . . . _ . . . . . . : . _ . : . . i . . . : . _ . , ~ . . . ' : . . . : , . ? ; . E ti . . . . , : : . y j y . , . . ~ . . ' . t . ~ . ' 't t' ''00 . ~ Consumer choices Retall Wheeling Structure ~ Supplier A ~ Supplier B Supplier C 2 . . J'ii . : . . . . . . . : : . : i 2 1 . . . . ' LbUti lity . , . . . m1s,St.on' ~ . . . , ; . : , . . . ~ . ' : . , ~i . _ . : . . ~ GtO~ . . ? . . ' , r : , i i ; t S 2 2 ' t = _ 1j = f : k ' . ;2 ~ . . :ji N~ bb~l 000000 ~ov/ ie~ Fq RETAIL VYHEELING: WHY NOW • Technical Reasons: - Advancement in smaller, modular generation units - Significant drop in natural gas prices • Rate Reasons: - Greater domestic and international competition - Differences in electric prices • Electric Industry has excess regional generating capacity • Society generally prefers competition to regulation - Initiatives in telecommunications and natural gas - Federal Policy: PURPA and Epact - FERC Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Electricity Prices per KWH $0.100 $0.090 - $0.080 t 3 ~ $0.070 ~ 0 U $0.060 $0.050 - $0.040 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Year -0-CO -41-US -*-CA RETAIL WHEELING ISSUES • Impact on rates • Impact on Reliability • Stranded Investments • Stranded Benefits • Provider of Last Resort • Economic Development • Environmental Quality Activitv Summarv • Industry Restructuring • Federal Rulemaking - Wholesale Competition - Stranded Costs • Federal Legislative Initiatives • C olorado Legislative Initiatives UStk 1990 POPULATION DENSITY BY COUNTY I d ~ r u ( i ~ ~ U S WEST TERRITORY . PEOPLE PER SaUARE MIIE 0 p _..-16.0 , 16.1 - 38A 03/17/94 38.1 - 94A w USA67' A ~ 94.1 + s c ~ u~icl~~~n LWA , c • , ~ COLORADO 1990 POPULATIO N DENSITY , BY COUNTY MOFFAT SEpGyyIC JACKSON ~~N , ROIITT pH/LLIPS RID BLANCO ORANO yUMA ~ ~~~E WqSHINcaT~ON PEOPLE PER ' OARFlELO n~ SQUARE MILE KR GqRSON [l o - 16.0 pR'KIN LqK pqRK 16.1 - 38.0 OUNN/SON CHAFFE UNCOuy CHE1'E'NNE ~II I iII~~ ~ 38.1 - 94.0 94.1 + , MONTROSE 'K/OWA RDYVLEY ' ~ SAN MIQUEL URA H~NSDAL 3AOUACHE CUSTER 6ENT pOLOAES , AN JV PROWERS ' M/NERA f{UERrANO ~ Rr0 QRAND EZUMA ~NO?V'f Lqg AN/MAS COS'f1LLA BACA ARCHULETA CONEJOS I IiIIII I~~ ~ ~ I 12/28/91~ • ~ M ~ i ~ LwA c i ijl „~~i, ,..•~ss:~ , • Combined Monthly Telephone, Gas and Electric Utility Bills A 1996 Survey of 26 U.S. Cities LARGE COMMERCIAL (~-~°y5 NEW YORK CITY • , , ~ . . °OD~ _ $2,662.5 BOSTON • ~ ~ • • $2,197.90 ~ PHILADELPHIA $2,074.08 ; V1/ASHINGTON, D.C. • • : ~ : : • $2,070.15 ; ~ CLEVELAND ~ • • ; $2,026.08 i DETROIT ~ ~ • ~ , : ~ - a ~ ! $1,993.68 i LOS ANGELES -0 ' 11 ~ i ~ ~1,924.80 ~ BALTIMORE ~ • ~ : ~ $04~ $1,881.74 ~ i NASHVILLE ' ~ : • $1,755.94 ~ COLUMBUS ' • • : ~ $1,695.92 ; 'MEMPHIS ~ ~ • ~ : • $1,690.~5 i ~ NEW ORLEANS $1,686.79 ! , JACKSONVILLE • • ~ • ~ 41 38 . $1,664.94 ~ ; SAN JOSE ' • ~ ~ $2:~ - $1,664.60 ; SAN FRANCISCO ;852.,. $1,664.60 MILWAUKEE • • b64' $1,644.27 ' - . ~ ~ DALLAS $1,626.57 I SAN DIEGO ' • ~ : : . , ~ ~ F $1,584.89 EL PASO ' • ~ ~ • • ~ ' v~3' $1,549.78 ! 'i i I INDIANAPOLIS • ' ~ ~ • ' - $1,518.73 1 ' ~ I MHMMM AUSTIN • _~$1,514.46~ ~ CHICAGO ' ~ ~ • ~ • ` $1,471.42, i 0 ELECTRIC HOUSTON ~ ~ ~ : • 6 • • 01,465.00 i 0 GAS ~ ~ ~ ¦TELEPHONE SEATfLE • ~ ~ • • w$345~0. $1,438.32 ' SAN ANTONIO I' I I $1,'c96.85 : *DENVER • . ~ : . a1,263.24 $0.00 $500.00 $1,000.00 $1,500.00 $2,000.00 $2,500.00 $3,000.00 Combined Monthly Telephone, Gas and Electric Utility Bills A 1996 Survey of 26 U.S. Cities SMALL COMMERCIAL~~ NEW YORK CITY • : . . 5'~~'". ,-i,,~~~ 618.05 BOSTON • ~ ~ : ' 3~3 ~ ^ $494.26 NEW ORLEANS • - ~ : ~ $467.49 ; INDIANAPOLIS • • ~ ' . • ~ ' 460.94 ' i WASHINGTON, D.C. • : ~ : .r.., ' ' - $458.02 LOS ANGELES ~ : • . _ ~ $447.66 ' DETROIT §~=,fl17 430.63 I PHILADELPHIA ~ ~ ' $424.50 ~ CLEVELAND ! 000$424.16 ~ _ I NASHVILLE : ~ • ~ . g - ~ ; $418.70 MEMPHIS : ~ . , ~ ' 407.66 ' - - MILWAUKEE : ~ ;~Q5:`9D:-.' ' 401.00 ! n.•:„ , , BALTIMORE , : - , b'~ . $398.74 I SAN DIEGO • ~ ~ - 9~395.04 I I EL PASO ' ' • ' ~ 20178__ 387.00 JACKSONVILLE ~ ~ ~ ~ • • ~ ' $373.29 ~ COLUMBUS 5373.08 , --0,DENVER . • . : o~~ $3701.57 ; - ; ; , SAN JOSE • ~ • ~ ~ • 6- $366.53 SAN FRANCISCO ~ : ~;s qg~;,p0 . $366.53 I DALLAS $366.00 j. ~ "f''~"~"-•~ , , ' HOUSTON ~ ~ ~ $357.34 ~ SEATTLE ~ ~ . $339.451 i; p ELECTRIC CHICAGO • • : ~ T-. C) GAS $328.46 ' ¦ TELEPHONE SAN ANTONIO . • • • • 9 312.42 ' : - ~ AUSTIN • g . " ' , ~ $306.64 $0.00 $100.00 $200.00 $300.00 $400.00 $500.00 $600.00 • Combined Monthly Telephone, Gas and Electric Utility Bills ' eo A 1996 Survey of 26 U.S. Cities ~V"'RESIDENTIAL NEW YORK CITY 5216.83 BOSTON S208.67 WASHINGTON, D.C. ~ S181.49 ; PHILADELPHIA $172.12 SAN JOSE " D S170.99 ! ~ LOS ANGELES S1e4.72 ~ I SAN DIEGO ~ K $163.69 j i JACKSONVILLE E156.71 ! i SAN FRANCISCO 5153.84 i BALTIMORE S147.53 ' i CLEVELAND • • `~8• 01 5139.15 I ; CHICAGO ~ ~ • • $187.72 i ~ COLUMBUS ~ ~ f. ~ . . . E1 X70 ~ NEW ORLEANS ~ '-.,~`S37tZ8- ` S131:35 i i DALLAS $127.24 i MILWAUKEE $123.53 NASHVILLE - : ~W- S122. i ~ ; MEMPHIS 5120.59 ,.tTA • ,t' i j . INDIANAPOUS 5119.58 ~ I DETROIT 41• =:,,546 02: $117.52 I j p ELECTRIC . ' ! SAN ANTONIO jGGAS $115.12 ' j 0 TELEPHONE' HOUSTON 5113.90 AUSTIN 31'67~E108.37'jO- , DENVER a104.47 EL PASO • a104.15 ' SEATTLE i 3se.s7 $0.00 $50.00 $100.00 $150.00 $200.00 $250.00 AVERAGE UTILITY BILLS Combined Monthly Telephone, Gas and Electric Utility Bills A 1996 Survey of 26 U.S. Cities INDUSTRIAL ,JEW YORK CITY . - . ~ $94,900.53 BOSTON ' - ~ $80,558.69 ! PHILADELPHIA ' $64,332.56I ' OEM- NEW ORLEANS ' ~$58,966.43 CLEVELAND $56,538.26 _ i JACKSONVILLE $55,653.66 DETROIT $55,478.03 ' AUSTIN $52,904.68 i i LOS ANGELES ' $52, ~ 72.66 ' BALTIMORE $51,410.99 ~ EL PASO - $50,542.10 HOUSTON ~ - $49, 997.95 ~ MEMPHIS . ~ $49,678.49 CHICAGO $49,385.85 ~I ; COLUMBUS _ $48,371.q8 ` OELECTRIC i` SAN ANTONIO ' $47,246.68 i ~ GAS SAN JOSE ~~._•_r . $46,889186 ' OTELEPHONE 'i SAN FRANCISCO $46,889.86 , MILWAUKEE $46,823.33 DALLAS ~ $44,458.61' SAN DIEGO $42,121.61 I ' NASHVtLLE $40,692.95 '-OoDENVER . $409576.00 INDIANAPOLIS $39,645.16 SEATTLE $34,427.83 , WASH D.C. ~ $0.00 $20,000.00 $40,000.00 $60,000.00 $80,000.00 $100,000.00 $120,000.00 Average Revenue per kWh - ' Total Industry - 1994 ~ 9. . 9. 1 10.3 ~ 10.1 1 • 1 Il 0.2 . 9.8 10.3 ) 6.8 / . oQ p 0 op 10.? ~ 3 to 5 cents ~ 9.7 . O 5 to 7 cents 0 0 o ¦ 7 to 9 cents 0o d, ~ 9 to 11 cents ~ ~ - - • ~ ' . rd•rv•9~'~` ~ At 6;m Sm 2392 14 - 13 • 4(0 Vad, 04" 81658-2342 970.926.9~04 .6" 10, 1996 gwm q v~ Lun mveti" 75 &A 3W4 Gad `Ucd, Co. 81657 &n, ~=n: 3 hap& pa au IL viU nuA&n t& w4nd. hd3v,dxuj, 3 U 1~ p f& 06m,on,. At 2:00pm, 3 JWU Jwwel 5 a?id dww, um& n& mudim ~ a#y laac,d4M. 3 da?,. CaU & cmr" 7+ OpMdlwt& cV&& I& iei L aMmtt "ad UPML. itdtd ,wt ffwjioln gwi 3-70 wa& &a (wm Ut~ il U cum " sb= 1o:oom). k, j bfl Vau1 V,~ ai 2:15 «,?zd dAm* &wjA L wo,,d-a-W, ~ ~ ~ ~ YUKUy u," cl~o~d. 3 b,med & w.da "im SMann, - a.f.~ 3 jat u,ae, dafic. a~an~ " m ~mat cl& c,~~~~~~~&d I& pA& amcwwku. ecm ~mdU m a;,m.a.t~~~~L qooc~orpwbd I& uop,,,? we, havol u u" " a" ?a& amd 3 -7 0 6 tun ~Im " A4. 31 j& &n,Mdjm da.t um, wrnnnuncica1,2, im, a4an manvnan,. L" 7 6D" ~ ~ ti u TOWN OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road Yail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2100 FAX 970-479-2157 December 11, 1996 . Larry Peterson P.O. Box 2392 Vail, CO 81658 Larry: Thanks for taking the time to write to expfain your frustration during last Friday's closure of Vail Pass. We're extremely sorry you were inconvenienced unnecessarily and for our lack in utilizing our full complement of information resources, including Channel 5 and the AM 530 station. We have learned from Friday's incident and are committed to making substantial improvements in our notification. In Channel 5's case, our dispatch center was unable to break into regular programming because the capability had been dismantled for the day to allow for live coverage of the World Cup ski races. TCI restored our connection later that afternoon (4:45 p.m.) in time to alert viewers of I-70's reopening. Unfortunately, that wasn't of any help to you in your situation. But we are learning from our mistakes. I have since asked both TCI and Channel 5 management to prepare a back-up plan that will enable us to break into the station's regular programming at anv time under any circumstances. I feel confident this system of notification will be 100% efficient in the future. As for the AM 530 radio station, we are taking similar action to ensure the station's viability and credibility as an information source. We encountered technical problems and manpower problems which caused the system to become unreliable when you tried it out on Friday afternoon. We believe we have resolved this problem, also. In addition to Channel 5 and the AM 530 radio station, there are several other systems of notification, including the road phone number at 479-2226 and local media outlets (please see enclosed news release). We're also working with Vail Associates on the possibility of variable message signs for Vail Village and Lionshead. Your suggestion for including an estimate on the length of the road closure is a good one. However, in most cases, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) is unable to make that prediction. Our role in the communication process is to pass along messages we receive from CDOT as quickly as we can. ~,5.• RECYCLEDPAPER r I agree that we weren't as efficient in communicating the pass closure last week as we should have been and would appreciate your continued feedback in the future as we make improvements. Larry, thanks again for bringing this to our attention. I feel confident our systems are much improved from Friday and I again apologize for the difficulties this caused for you. If you have additional ideas for improvement, please contact me at 479-2115. Sincerely, an e ilverthorn Community Information Office Enc. cc: Tom ColJins, Vail Police Department Brendan Gallagher, Channel 5 Fred Lutz, TCI _ Roclqt Sun., Nov. 17,1906 . SKI SO-CH4ICE . . ~ . _ _ - - ~ ~ VaiPs new Eagle's Nest Activibr Center Vail Wrns mountaintop- , into an am.usement parh The folks at Vail there's not that much for kids." Resorts boast they 'We're teaching those kids the spent $30 million wrong lesson by turning a moun- this year on moun- tain into an amusement park. If tain projects, but Vail wants to offer ice skating, some of the "im- tubing and sledding, do. it down provements" look valley. But that might defeat ttte more like damages real purpose of the activity cen- to those of us who ter: stealing business from restau JOhn really love the rants in town. Eagles Nest, we ar Meyer mountains. told, will have "five unique dinin€ rm teginning to options." ~ wonder if this re- . Some might argue: If you want sort, so long an industry leader, is . a wilderness experience, go'in th becoming a threat to the sport backcountry. That's a good point, that built it. because it brings up an interest- - Vail press releases this fall bub- ing experience I had last March. bled with excitement over a new We were climbing and skring "amenity," the Eagle's Nest Ac- peaks near the Fowler-Hilliard tivity Centez Located near the - hut, and moments after we top of the mountain at 10,350 feet, reached the 12,100-foot summit c the four-acre development will in- ptarmigan Hill, a Vait SnaCat ful clude two half-pipes, a snowboard of "powder skiers" came chug- terrain garden, a sledding area, a ging up the backside. This was tubing hill and an ice skating rink. nearly 8 miles from the Vail ski It will be lit at night, served by a azea, mind you, in the backcoun- new heated, lighted gondola. try between Copper Mountaia "What we've done at Eagle's and Camp Hale. Nest is unprecedented in the in- What's wrong with this picturf dustry," said Chris Ryman, senior When George Gillett controlle vice president "We will basically Vail, he spent lavishly but always have an amusement park on snow did things with class. By compari with a full menu of winter activi- son, the Eagle's Nest Activity ties for guests of all ages, skiers Center seems garish, even vulga and non-skiers alike." Maybe iYs because the man now My reaction: Where's the running Vail, corporate takeover roller-coaster and Ferris wheel? ffartist Leon Black, has a different Disney buys Vail - something attitude toward skiing. often speculated within the indus- "Gillett at least was interestec try - will they build a fake Mat- and excited and a participant in terhorn, too? the ski industry," says one indus If you believe the mountains tiy insideL "Leon Black, what I are sacred, as I do, this is sacrile- see is a guy interested in the dol . gious. ~ 1ars, petiod. He's a money guy. F I don t think amusement parks isn't gouig to ski around the ought to be built on mountaintops. mountain in a Santa Claus suit, And the U.S. Forest Service, givmg away dollar bills to chil- which administers the public land dren." Gillett did. where this ":r:.Fr;,ver.ient" svill be Granted,tne Eagle's Nest "im made, shouldn't have approved it. provement" is not an environme: "I can understand that point of tal catastrophe. It might be lrid- view, but I don't agree with it," eous, but it's not heinous. said Bill Wood, ranger for the What bothers me is the attituc Holy Cross District. "When we that nothing is inappropriate on issue a 40-year pernut, we're that mountain if Vail wants to basically saying this is a mountain build it That smacks of arro- devoted to four-season developed gance, and sends a bad message recreation. It's not the backcoun- to those of us who love the mou: try, it's not the wilderness, iYs a tainS. piece of national forest that is lrighly developed for intense ' recreation puxposes. _ "One of the things they're , . . - . thinking is that in Vail, in the . eveaings, there's really nothing far 1tiatLo: do.~There are restau- razifs'and bars an$ inghtlife, but . The Resort Collection Shop at The Cceur d'Alene Resort, Idaho. . J~~ ~ n`1 , r . _ ~ . _ _ ~ ~ e. _ uccessful resorts go hand in hand with a strong retail component Resort Reta• l• ¦ ¦ ~ lin 9 Finding Holght mix M I C K M A T H E U S I K ecent U.S. Travel Data Center surveys reveal that as challenge currently faced by resort and tourist com- many as 88 percent of internarional travelers rank munity developers, planners, and retailers worldwide. shopping as their number one activity. According to the National Travel Monitor, shopping has been rated Creating the Right Mix as a more important vacation amibute than "getting To create enticing public places, resort and tourist exercise" and "staying at the best hotels or resorts." At villages must continually reinvent themselves. And well-established resorts and communities such as Vail, developers must understand the difference between Colorado, and Whistler, British Columbia, shopping resordtourist retail and traditional retail, as well as and dining have become increasingly popular, often the market forces affecting the indusiry today. surpassing traditional recreational activities connect- Unlike uaditional shopping centers, successful ed with the natural environment. tourist-based retail often has the following charac- Europe amacts nearly 60 percent of the world's teristics: foreign visitors because of the way in which its vaca- • It is heavily geared to visitors and unable to sur- rion places combine natural, historical, cultural, and vive on local traffic alone; social resources with manufactured attractions such as • offers an intimate scale with a distinct ambience retail, recreation, and entertainment facilities. Main- and a strong pedestrian character; taining the right mix of these key elements in a dynam- • creates an "experience," increasing the lifestyle ap- ic consumer climate is perhaps the most significant peal of the community or resort; • presents a distincdve and consistent architectural homogenous than that for traditional shopping centers. design and merchandise that conveys a unifying theme; Patrons may include overnight visitors such as sight- • offers a variety of restaurants, bars, and other en- seers, skiers, golfers, or hikers; local residents; and teittainment faciliues that funcuon as key tenanu regional residents living within a day's drive-day- and,help create a social ambience; trippers, resort employees, and corporate and meet- • lac~cs traditional anchor tenants; ings or conference visitors. • may have logo shops and, depending on market Successful tourist villages cater to the current profile, higher-end merchandise shops with com- trends and values of the market-including those of memorative or iconic appeal; and the all-important family, mature travel, and educa- • offers an ongoing program of special events and t?onal and business segments. Attracring a wider activiries designed to entertain, inform, and amuse. range of visitors to resorts works synergisrically; over- Tourist villages tend to be more loosely defined coming seasonality through higher year-round visi- than other forms of retail development. Leisure, the tation creates new retail and business opportunities. . outdoors, socialization, and entertainment form the In addition to building conference centers and basis for an informal environment. Nevertheless, cre- offering almost every imaginable sporring activity, aung the right mix is not a matter to be taken light- many European resorts now provide educational, ly, because tourism and retail are highly susceprible cultural, and health and fimess facilities and host to changing consumer, economic, and social trends. special events throughout the year. Principles for Success In Chamonix, France, market diversification has been significant. Today only 50 percent of winter The developers, planners, and operators of a pros- visitors are skiers. Similarly, by providing the right perous resort retail environment will identify the mix of new facilities and amenities-including a services, facilities, and tenants most appropriate to conference center and two championship golf cours- the market. While there is no one formula for creat- es-the resort in Whisder, British Columbia, has ing a successful resort or tourist retail village, six key evolved into a full four-season destination with non- principles can be identified. skier visitation now almost matching that of skiers. Milieu. Resort and tourist villages depend on Town Center Hub. Clustering town center the milieu created by the special attributes of their funcrions in one central area increases their appeal locations. These include spectacular mountain val- and drawing power. In addition to retail shops, a Rothenburg ob der leys, waterfront settings, and other features such as town center should offer services such as a visitor in- Tauber along Ger hot springs or historic characteristics. The unique- formarion booth, post office, library, medical center, mnys RomaMic ness of the seming and the way in which the resort banks, offices, recreation center, and conference or Road exhibits dis- or village evolves arouna the natural environment meeung faciliries. These services create spin-off tinctive architecturaf rovide a baseline ambience. design. Mamr signs P traffic for retail shops while building a sense of com- and storeironts are In Aspen, Colorado, a small waterway twists its munity. Anchoring major people generators such as themselves artistic way through the pedestrian core of the town. At lift facilities, skating rinks, and conference centers in works. Mount Tremblant in Quebec, the resort developer, Intrawest Cor- ~ poration, has made the preserva- . ' uon of historical buildings a prior- ity, thus achieving a completely unified Canadian theme that re- flects the heritage, culture, and ` lifestyle of Quebec. Multiactivity Environments. Many resorts and tourist commu- nities wishing to become year- round desrinatioris have invested in conference centers, tennis cam- puses, golf courses, sports insti- tutes, and indoor activity centers, -thereby creating multiacrivity en- vironments. A wider market ap- peal makes more exciting and di- verse retail villages viable. The market for multiacrivi resorts and tourist retail districts is more complicated and less r ~ ~ Streetscaping, flower- years. Stores such as The Body Shop, CYarden Botanika, pots, signage, and ~ and Chanel have become popular tenanrs at mature well-displayed store- tourist precincts throughout North America. Spa fa- - iro?ts corney a unihr- ~ ing ffieme in the vil- cilities already exist at Coeur d'Alene and are pianned lage of Vail, Colorado. for Whisder and Mount Tremblant. ' Gourmet food markets and shops such as Alfalfa's Natural Food Stores in Colorado, Starbucks, Haagen- Dazs, and Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory sell very high-quality products. The small indulgences offered by these stores are particularly appealing to people on vacation. Other specialty stores enjoying success in the resort environment include outdoor- ~ accessory stores such as Sunglass Hut, which offers top-quality sunglasses; Right Fit, selling custom in- soles for ski boots; Swatch, offering novelty and un- usual watches; and Roots and Bennetton, featuring ~ lifesryle apparel and accessories. Equally important is the application of the small- indulgence trend to the family market-indulging L, the children. Hence the popularity of Gap Kids, Gymboree, and Kids Are Worth It!. In the upscale Swiss resort of St. Moritz, Giorgio Armani has es- tablished an Armani Kids store alongside an exten- sive collection of branded fashion stores. The high sales of retailers like Endangered Species at Whalers the village core, with parking on the perimeter, en- Village in Kaanapali on Mani demonstrate that fami- courages a pedestrian-oriented atmosphere and helps lies feel a need to learn about and appreciate the en- to manage traffic flow. Vail, Whisder, and Chamonix `'lronment. A desire for laughter is being fulfilled by are prime examples of this clustering. The Plaza at cinemas and comedy club/dinner theaters such as the Coeur d'Alene Resort in Idaho amacted new pa- t'e Cinema E~cposirion Theater, Family Entertain- ment Center, and the Alpine Museum in Chamonix, tronage by placing a tourist informarion booth in a France. In addition, retailers such as the Warner suategic location within the shopping area. Bros. store, The Sharper Image, and F.A.O. Schwarz Character through Tenant Mix. The single most Provide fun and enjoyment for people of all ages. important distinguishing amibute of any resort ar As tourist villages mature, national and interna- tourist community is the distinctiveness of the village. tional branded retailers and restaurants are increasing- While the activities available at the location set the ly seeking tenancy. Recently, Hard Rock Cafe, Eddie stage, a creative and collecrive mix of tenanu, their Bauer, and Guess have appeared in the Whisder Vil- merchandising, and the ambience they create is the lage Center. While some resorts do not allow inter- real performance that visitors come to experience.. An national fast-food operators into their villages, others appropriate mix of retail, restaurant, and entertain- control their entry through rigid design requirements. ment tenants takes into account the needs and inter- New technologies are taking shape in Whisder ests of each market segment as well as its potenrial where Larco Invesunents, Ltd., and Mountain World contriburion to overall sales. The diverse retail ten- Entertainment Corporation are planning to create ant mixes of today's multiactivity resorts move well large interactive entertainment centers. The Larco ~ beyond basic T-shirt, souvenir, and fast-food outlets. project, which will be situated at one of the central Tenant mixes comprise specialry food and merchan- plaza areas of the old village, is planned as an inte- dise stores, including cheese and liquor or wines, skin grated retail, entertainment, and theme restaurant ~ and health care, perfumeries, jewelers, lifestyle appar- complex. Mountain World will be located within the ~ el, sports and outdoor equipment, novelry gifts, an- existing conference center next to the movie theater € dques, home accessories, theme restaurants, cultural and will feature adventures in virtual reality and t faciliues, and high-tech interactive entertainment. sports simulators for golf, downhill ski racing, The Right Retailers. Proactive resorts are de- paragliding, and mountain bike riding. veloping tenant mixes that capitalize on the tremen- Design, Merchandising, and Animation. Dis- ' dous amacuveness of health, wellness, and other tinct neighborhoods or merchandising districts with services and products designed to make people feel strong themes create a cohesive image for the resort good. This emphasis has made European resorts like and provide a backdrop for animation. Design and Baden-Baden in Germany famous for hundreds of architectural guidelines further strengthen the re- ' . • " - sort's identiry by ensuring consistency in signage, Le Shack restaurant shopfronu, and the merchandising approaches of in- and bar at tlie base dividual retailers. of Mount TremblaM This ambience is enhanced by features such as replicates the theme • landscaping; of a historical maple • building volumetrics and massing; syruP oPe?ation, re- flecting the heritage • continuous pedestrian-oriented environments; of Quebec. • signs and icons including art, sculpture, water features, and historic points of interest; • mobile kiosks selling local crafts, fruits, and sea- sonal items, • colorful storefronu, window and vendor displays with inviting entranceways, awnings, umbrellas, ~4 . banners, and signage; and, • outdoor entertainment and special evenu such as concerts, srreet bnskers, craftspeople at work, and public or sidewalk markets. Excellent examples of design, merchandising, and animation working together to create a unified theme are furnished by the medieval towns of Ger- many's "Romanuc Road," especially the famous Rothenburg ob der Tauber. Lessons for the future Many of -dhe European resorts provide instructive ~ examples of mature multidimensional tourist villages. Ensure that the iniual tenant mix includes conve- In North America, the potential of resort retailing nience items and integrates value-oriented offerings has barely been tapped. Sea Pines at Hilton Head in with lifestyle merchandise. Also, encourage street South Carolina is a North American pioneer, with its Pricing. As with the previous point, this may require intimately scaled European fishing village at Harbor- local zoning bylaws or building covenants. Appreciate that if the goal is to maintain control of town. Disney's tourist villages combine animation the tenant mix and overall resort experience, the re- mastery with Main-Street, pedestrian-style retailing tail and entertainment component5 may need to be as in the replica of a traditional small American town parrially subsidized or viewed as a"loss leader" dur- at Celebration Village in Orlando, Florida. ing the early phases. The challenge warldwide is to match tried and • Develop a consistent marketing theme and a story proven principles to rapidly changing economic forces, line that create ambience, atmosphere, and sensory values, and retail trends. Planners also must ensure impact. that the retail environment does not appear to be • Add cultural and educational elements to stimulate too commercial, too glitzy, or too similar to urban the experience of discovery. shopping experiences. With the ri ght mix of desuna- • Work with the resort's tenants to program amao- tion and convenience stimulating impulse shopping, tions, with methods such as attention-drawing signs ' visitors will shop-many even purchasing items that and window displays followed through with animat- they could buy at home but do not due to lack of ume. ed and interactive in-store merchandising. The highly competitive field of resort and tourist • Emphasize the environment through art and de- retailing requires that developers and operators take sign by harmonizing signage and lighring with nat- the following measures: ural features such as water and landscape. • Recognize that shopping is not merely a purchas- Regardless of whether the setting is original, has ing activiry but also an opportunity to encounter been newly built, or simulates a genuine setting, the new experiences and excitement. resort and tourist experience is capable of drawing • Ensure that the scale and tenants of each develop- large numbers of visitors. But the creators must un- ment phase are realisricalIy matched to market ex- aerstand that visitors want the elcperience of being pectations-and monitor changing consumer trends there, and for that experience to be both enjoyable on a regular basis. and memorable, it must be staged with the utmost • Stick to tenant mix principles, generate a commer- care and attention to every detail. cial plan that creates synergy, and update it re larl ± ~ Y Mick Matheusik is a principal with Thomas Consultanu, to ensure that all tenants fit the vision. Inc., in ilancouver, British Columbia. Reprinted with permission from Urban Land, August 1996, published by ULI-the Urban Land Institute, : 625 IndianaAvenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20004-2930. ~ „ , • W ' 'a` . ~ V V V lw i. s I / MICHAEL ATKINS0N GALLERY Black, Bob Boomer, Lisa Danielle. John GaLeway Plaza E " DeMott. Doub Erion, Travis Erion, LuKe 12 S. FronCage Road Frazier, Jim Gilmore, Richard Heichberger, Vail, CO 81657 Buffalo Kaplinski, Ramon Kelley. Jack 970/479- 604] "LLEY Kreutzer, Ralph Oberg,Daniel Pinkham, Dori Hours: Open Daily Prechtel, lloward Rogers, Scott Rogers, GALLERY Sharles, A. D. Shaw, Karl Thomas, Dee Featuring original contemporar,y watercol- Toscano, Skip Whitcomb, Fritz White CA, ors and figurative sculpCure by Michael ASSOCIATION Hollis Williford. E.C. Wynne, Uene Zesch and Atkinson, contemporary abstract and floral others. paintings by Mary Jane Schmidt, more tradi- ~ tional figurative soulpture by Roberta The d en• Gbals: GATE117AY GALLERY Baskin Shefrin, pastels by Albert Handel, port aesthetics Gatewa,y Plaza large turnecl-vessels by Ted Knight, carved Vail. Colorado 81657 wood sculpture b,y J. Chester Armstrong, 970/476-1661 metal wall sculpture by Thom Wheeler and o ha'a ' iolitical vo° Hours: Open Daily and Evenings hand-craftetl jewelry by Darby Winterhalten. on b'. i• visual arts. IN lo e inarket o, 4, m Q Gateway Gallery features an imaginative BADER/MELNICK GALLERY array of paintings and graphics by interna- B 6~° tional artists including Alvar. Boulanger,Thomas 141 E. Meaclow Drive Vail. Colorado 81657 Pradzynki and Luis Sottil, as well as classical 970/476-0600 Fax 970/476-OJ50 still lifes by James Jensen and sculpture by Hours: Open Daily rrederick Hart, Chester Fieltls antl Doug Hyde. Also featurecl is an extensive Sherry Sander, UlennSwanson, Bill Girard, SouthwesCern collection, incluciing major Original painCings and sculpture represent- Robert Deurloo, Lee SLark, Steve LeBlanc and paintings and shows by Earl Biss. B.C. Nowlin ing emerging and established artists from Carol Cunningham. Paiiitecl gourd sculp- and Frank Howell. around the country are featured at this tures by Robert Rivera, turn-of the-century gallery. Artists representsd inolucle Edward photo,;raph,y by Eclwartl S. Curtis, weavings KARATS Aldrich, Laszlo Dus. Jean Claude-Gaugy. by Gine of the Spirit, llavid Marsh furniture, Village Center Davitl Rie~tlel, Robert Orduno, Ann La Rose~, and stcel sculpture by Myers/Massie Stuclio Robert Refvem and Bill Worrell. create a wontlerful variety of high-quality 122 East Meadow Drive unique art. Vail, Colorado 81657 CLAGGETT/REY GALLERY 970/476-4760 Village tnn Plara J. COTTER GALGERY Hours: 10 to 10 Seven Days 100 Fast Meadow Drive , 234 E. w all Street The work of lon t~me Vail welr tlesi Vail. Colorado 81657 Vail. Colorado 81657 ~ je ~ gner 970/476-9350 Fax 970/476-0495 970/476-3131 Dan '1'elleen is featured here. You'll find Hours 10-9 Mon-Sat;10-6 Sun unique designs thaC rriarry ~,old and silve~r Hours ]0-6 Sun-Wed;10-9 Thurs-Sat with meteorites. Ppssils, antique seals, semi- Features tratlitional and western paintings precious stones, diamonds and even snake and sculpture and represents an exciting Foundetl in 1,~ ~7Q thc J. Cotter Uallery is an vertebrae. Artisls represented include antl versatile selectio? of works by ~nternationally-recognized gallery of con painter Jim Dyer, and sculptors Tony painl,er/sculptor Joe Beeler as well as bronze temporary designer je~welry which features Hoohstetler, MarK Leichliter and Ste~ve sculptors Jane De~Decker, llave MeGary, Dan WorK by leadin~ art,ists from the United Kestral, NAWA. Ostermiller and Herb Mignery. Painters on Statesancll+,urope.'I'hegallery,whosepremise exhibit inolucle Bill Berra. Steve Elliott. David ?s that jeweliy be considered an art form, LEAPINGOTIS FINE ART GALLERY Halbach. Paul Mullally. Jim Re,y, Roy Anderson exhibits designers that have tleveloped their 227 Bridge Street, and Robert Pummill, R. S. Ridtlick. Wayne own vocabulary, and whose work is distine- Vail. Colorado 81607 Wolfe and others. tive. Jim Cotter, owner oP the gallery, is an 970/476-8474 inCernation ally Known creator of unique jew- COGSWELL GALLERY elry antl sculpture. Hours: Open Daily 223 Gore Creek Drive Le~apingotis Fine Art Gallery introtluces an Vail. Coloratlo 81607 DEMOTT GALLCRY at Vail eXCiting cross-section of fine art from tradi- 970/476-1769 Vail Gateway Plaza tional to contemporary. Paintings, sculp- Hours: 10-9 Sun-Wed:10-10'rhurs Sat 12 S. Frontage Road #10 tures and other original works oF art by Vail. Coloratlo 81657 national and rebional artists are featured. Shows a distinctive collection of Southwesterrl 970/476-8948 Artists include Edward Avila. Chase, Steve andWesternAmerieanart.Thegalleryfeatures Hours:OpenDaily Graber, Judy Haas. Sua Heitlerer, Siri a unique combination of renowmed fine art Hollander, Ted Larsen, Al Losletter. Mike that inclutles paintings by WaIC Wooten, Featwring an abundant arra,y of paintings Natale. Gail P'olwell, Linda Prokop, Peggi Barbara Laring. Jean Richartlson, Frank and sculpture by some of America's most Kroll-Roberts, Ray Roberts, Richard LaLumia. Roger Williams, Ed Larson. Tom ?'enowned artists. Uallery artisls inelucle: Segalman, Russ Vogt, Madeline Wiener and Owen and Kirby Sattler. Sculptors include Clyde Aspevig, Carol,yn Barlock, Cliff I3arries, others. Phil Beck, John Beaker. Jim Biggers, Judy vait art Page 1 ~ ~ MARILYN MALLET - ART BROKER ly American craftspeople or "folk" of the last Masters both oltl and new and American 970/926-3680 two hundred years. artists. Both galleries feature Behrens, Hours by Appointment Chagall, Csoka, Dali, Dalva Duarte, Robert THE SQU[1SH BLOSSOM Hagan, Erte, the Makk Family, Mark King, Marilyn Mallet discovers and commissions 198 Gore Creek Drive Miro,Matisse, Picasso, Pissarro, Vasallo, ~ contemporary and abstract art, featuring Vail, Colorado 81657 Jacquie Vaux and many more. Sculptures by works produced in oil, watercolor, fiber, 970/476-3129 Dee Clements, Walt Horton,Aly Metthews, monoprints and raKu. Finding the artist and Hours: Open Daily Blair Muhlestein, Ken Bjor$e, GeofPrey Smith, ' work best suitetl to you is her specialty. If Ta,ylor-Geb]er aod Rie McClain. Openings for ! you are interested in art that offers the Established in 1972, the Squash Blossom regional artists are heltl monthly. opportunity to share the artist's interpreta- features arts oP diverse cultures, such as International brokerage is conducted on tions of the inner and outer lantlscape, maKe selected historic American Inclian jewelry larger old master's artworks. ~ an appointment to view the works of Gary and artifacts, contemporary jewelry byJ.J. VAIG VALLEY ARTS COUNCIL Collins, Emilio Labato, Lynn Heitler. John ' Collins, Sue Mullins Witkin, Richard Carter, Marco and Nora F ierson. Hopi-inspired Offices: Nancy Koenigsberg and Lewis Knauss. paintings and dolls by Gregory Lomayesva, Minturn, Color~do 8]645 as well as the finest works of contemporary P.O. Box 1153 Native American [ndian jewelers Ray Tracey, Vail Colorado 81658 OLLA PODRIDA Ben Nighthorse Campbell, and Evenstar and ~299 Fax 970/827 5393 l00 East Meadow Drive 970/827, Raoul Sosa. Also exhibited are historic and Vail, Colorado 81657 contemporary weavings. pottery, baskets 970/476-69~9 The Vail Valley Arts Council is a nonprofit and beadwork. organization dedicated to providing oppor- Open by Appointment tunities for the entire community Go The uncommon charm of this colorful gallery VAIL FINE ART GALLERYexperience the visual arts. The VVAC hosts is the appealing combination of fine contem- BEAVER CREEK FINE ART GALLERF the Vail and Beaver CreeK arts lectures, ~ porary art with antique American folk art. 141 East Meadow Drive St. James Place exhibitions, workshops and supports art ~ Artists represented include Vail Vail, Colorado 81657 Beaver Creek, CO education in the schools. The Council will ' painter/printmaker Marguerite Bernet, `~70/47G-2900 970/845-8500 conduct Art Walks on selected evenings. ~ abstract expressionist painter Walter Piehl, Hours: 10 to 10 Daily impressionist Henry Isaacs, folk and fine ~ artist Susie Neely, and the unnamed, unique- Specializing in International [mpressionist 1. Michel Atkinson Gallery 10. The Squash Blossom Art wa]]ZS 2. Bader/Melnick Gallery 11. Vail Fine Art 3. Claggett/Rey Gallery Not Pictured $PpWSPPS aIld SEPlOUS aCT, C0118CtOCS ' 4. Cogswell Gallery In Vail: SOUTH ~ 5. J. Cotter Gallery Olla Podrida Gallery dI'e IIIVILC-d LO a1,[elld OUI' ACL 6. DeMott Gallery In Edwards: Marilyn Mallet Wc7lkS, Wl]1Ch aT'e he1C1 0? SeleCted 7. Gateway Gallery In Beaver Creek 'I'hllCSday 2Ild FI'Iday 0VeI11IIgS ~ 8. Karats Beaver Creek ~ glllpwjx~ [hI'pUghOUL Lhe SCaS01]. (PIe1Se See ; 9. Leapingotis Fine Art Fine Art l1St Of 0peT11C1gS baCk page.) : . Artists' receptions and openings VAIL a • are featured during these tours. VILLAGE ? o We look forward to seeing you, and hope you enjoy your stay. • ~ 4 GOG.,lz ppl- . ~a ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ 2 ' ~ . 'V . ~ 11 1 Toi_iOV,tn \u rr~~°rr;~izrFh.rn~~aiz~~ ~ ~ NORTH Vai1 llvt magazine is published by Hose Advertising Photography, Arvada, CO (303) 456-1700 Vail Art Page 2 I i ~ Galleries in Vail have always provided The gallery's walls are enlivened by tne visitors with man,y opportunities to view and MICHAEL selection of acrylic paintings by Coloratlo artist ~ purchase art which is typically Western in content, ATKASO Mary Jane Schmidt. Whether in her abstraot h or at Lhe extreme, sophisticated though eXtremely series, or her vibrant floral paintings, ~ contemporary. Now, thanks to Santa Fe masCer G Ms. Schmidt's works introduce imaginative and ; art,ist and sculptor !Vlichael Atkinson, Vail's artistic dimensions of color, contrast, vitality ' diverse and sophisticated visitors have the and brilliance. The evolution of shapes and opportunity to also view the exceptional art of colors on her canvases progresses in a way ~ five distinetive artists who represent the which allows the vicwer to partake in his own Atkinson collection. rendition of the composiLion. ~ 'Vlichael's watercolors and acrylic paintings Texture and abundance of color in the I reflect, his dramatie use of color along with Schmidt paintings arc complementecl by the larger-than-life subject,s. The unmistakable smooth, cool white marble sculptures of Atkinson touch couples Lhe attention to detail ne embraces Kattileen Caricof. Carved from large pieces of yule marble ~ from Ylis background in architecture, with the creative forces fromMarble,Colorado, the sculptures are almost luminous. ' of his imagination. This results in visions which combine both contrasted with subtle golcl veining. , the real and the imagined, to yield uneXplored and mesmeriz- NaLure and creativity come togethcr in Che large, solid ' ing landscapes. wood vessels of master turner, Ted Knight. Beginning with a The Atkinson bronze collection focuses on Native log of almosi, 500 pounds, Knight turns and sculpts, creating a i American women and athletic Yigures. MichaePs participation very large vessel of up to 22" in diameter while weighing as ~ in workshops of both Glenna Goodacre and George Lundean, little as 8 pounds. The vessels provicle their audience with a produced in Michael's sculpting style a visually attractive view of the intricate patterns inside the original lob. ' blending of the differing methods of Goodacre and Luncleen. Emotion and energy resonate in the female sculpture figures of Roberta Baskin Shefrin. Woman is the dominant E theme in Ms. Shefrin's work, whether she be sad assertivE, tired or playfuL One has the impression that VIs. Shefrin chooses patinas to complement the moods of her subjects! The light and luminositY of the landscape paintings of New Mexico artist Albert Handell feels as if it is inviting the , - ~ I viewer into the painting. Working on a white ground, both in O'fk his oil painGings and pastels, Handell has mastered the use ~ of light and very bright colors which have fasoinated him ; sinc childhood. Mich el Atkinson gallerY welcomes visitors seven days a woek at Vail Galewa,y Plaza. 12. S. Frontage Road. . . . . _ . ,r ; ~ i•`~' . 5tory cretlit: Cracc inn \Mno ~ , , _ ~ . . . •s. ~s, ~ ~V4"~~, r,`• , i ' , , t: ~ ~ - - 1lichael ALkinson hisiY]g SCorm,. I ^ R~ ~ VVaterCi~~or. 40 X3O ~ • l eLY~. ; ~ t•~„q~,t 4~.. 1 ~ 'fcci Knight -wood Turoed Vessels Photo credit: Clive Dyson I ~ Nare s ~ ~ I y~.,.. MIC~~EL ATKINSON GAzzERY Vail Gateway I'Iaza 12 S. Frontage Road, Suiie 5 Vail, CO 89657 Ptlpne: 970-479-6041 ~ . a±77p r 'fop IcFt: . '4fary ,IrinvSk,hmidt. a Acr,y liC. 64" x=11i' `i 'Pnrr ri;;hl: \Ilx•rl I landel "Iknrouar Falls" . r , : , . 11a,1eI, 111.5' z 10.;5° f ' [iottom Irfl; Kathlcx n (:aricof "7'he Klrs" I Marble, 42" tali , liOom righL• Mk~haal A4klnso?t IksYdreams" 5'~ BIYliim.lIfes17,H r ~ h es, ~y , ~ NI q ~rd4 rY r ~ ~ . . . - . , . ~ . . . . . . 1 • r 1 In any play of opposites, the more dramatic ~ ' the difference, the more balance or skill is need- j~ . ` ed to integrate the whole. So, within the p, e r , „~~,,,J • chiaroscuro style of painting light and shadow, it ~ is by plaving skillfully with opposites that the e, ed , 0_ %W integrity of the painting emerges. David Riedel feels at home in this Old Masters Tradition, ~ +yr exploring how darkness supports light and how light becomes shadow. David strives to explore ~space within the Yield of light and dark where ALLER light is the main focus, indeed is the very reason -to exist. In following the style of Rembrandt and ~ Valasquez, David Riedel searches for simplicity, a refinement of an on-going learning that never ends regardless oP tech- nique. Each day David hopes to fine-tune his awareness and David ~ perception just enough to see something he diddt before. He Riedel in his believes that creating fine art is not solely a result of acquiring studio and refining technical skills, but of the larger practice oP a eomplete and unified awareness in life. "Painting is a clarifica- Most of David Riedel's paintings are of still liYe arrange- tion process - it is an evolution of who I am." ments often including the beautiYul objecLs collected during According to David, real training as an artist began wiCh his travels in Asia. "Many of the objects I choose to paint have his attendanee at the Art Students League in New York City a powerful meaning for me personally. The chain of antique during 1986-91. It was here that Riedel met and first studied Tibetan bells, the conch, the Shiva statue or even the bone-liKe with internationally acclaimed artist, David Leffel, whose quality of a living white onion are very beautiful, yet they also influence is evident in RiedePs oils. have great symbolie value for me. This awareness subtly works with me while I paint - this is a very personal search for meaning and there is no intent to `say' anything to the viewer - but this meaning changes me as a painter and so becomes a 5 ~ - part of the painting.,, "l?„", 1' 4yAll of David Riedel's liPe is fooused on art. During 1993-94 David Riedel lived For six months inlnclia, Nepal and Tibet. Riedel found the spontaneous portraits done in tea shops, amidst roadside landscapes and in the busLling monasteries ,h I to be the most exciting and rewarding usage of his skill as an ~artist. He hopes someday to return to Tibet and wander, ~ ,;doing portraits as a eounter point to the very quiet, contem- ~ plative time he spends in the studio. David eurrently lives • : ,77 with his wife and baby daughter in New Mexico. i LBader/Melnick Gallery in Vail is excited to offer original , paintings by Davitl RiedeL ~ . , , , • I r, , , . . . ~ I i "Bluc Bcans° Oil 12" x 14" ~ l ail :1 rl i Page 5 ' t ~ I ~R Y DAVID RIEDEL Mastcr Paiiitcr Yi 1 . ~ F,• ~,y,~'," ,r~. ~ . . ~ y, ; * : F , • . +r,... . . r lr y~~, ~ . ~ O7~ 24" X 30" y~ ~ ~ ~ ~MV~bP 9 ~ 1 -5 _ , . O K~ ~ ' I~Po , Bader/Melnick G A L L E R Y ; . . CROSSROADS SHOPPING CENTER 141 EAST MEADOW DRIVE VAIL, CQLORADO 81657 Phone: 970-476-0600 : 1-800-291-0950 r F • ,q~ ~ ' i~k~~+OW~.., ~1. ~ . . . ~~4 ~ • . , . ~ . ,~Floral Vaye anii Or~7nges° Oil 20" x ?.1„ `I'he Claggett/Rey gallery is Vaifs finest- never been influenced by a school or style in the destination for art, where traditional anci CLAGGETT history of art," Rey continues. "Whether it is the western American paintings and sculpture are Macchiaioli school of the late 19th century, the REY displayed in a warm Coloraclo seLting. masterful sculptors of Europe, the famed artists The ballery's basic foundaGion of painters and ALLER oY America's Old West, or the traditional rcalist sculptors, highlighted by extensive uniqueness in 11 painters of wildliFe, there is always a reflection subject matter arid style, allows a"something- oY these inEluences." for-everyone" quality that is emphasized to The Claggett/Rey Gallery feels strongly enlighten, educate and promote the enjoyment about selling work based on its own merit. They of art. emphasire purchasing art for enjoyment aiid Whether revcaling the story behind a bronze eclucating the collector about a particular piece or painting by Joe Beeler, or the sophisticated of arL. The gallery staff believes that the work combination of f ine line antl composition depicted must be one that can become a part of the in one of Dan Ostermiller's animal sculpLures, the gallery's collcetor's everyday lifestyle. staff is prepared to share why or how a specific artist createci "We c1o not expect each individual to respond to every piece a particular piece. in our gallery.° aclds Rey," but we strive to convey Che "What crcates a unique worK of art is that the artist goes increclible amount of time and effort involved in every work oE one step furLher by adciing his or her own emotion, subject and art. If each individual leaves our gallery with an enthusiasm creativity," says owner/director Bill Rey. "We strive to and appreciation Yor what they've just experienced, our goal educate every individual who steps into our gallery." has been achieved." "In today's world, it is ciifficult to say that an artist has Claggett/Re,y Gallery is located in the Vail Village Inn Plara in Vail. ~ - ~ o„ ,,,n, ,~,•1~~1 - " „I , ~ ~ ~ r,~ ~ • ,ql~' u ~ ,•J" Jy '~M q ~ v ~ '1k . I ,ry~ I'~1' lu. ~ ~ ~ ,'•!1 L~, . P ~,'x^ ~ ~ r"~ . ?t ;,'~c}~~~.'~ . "'t6~~ ~ ~ i~ n ~ ~ ,'T ~;lu ~ 0 i4" ~ Y. r+~E' ' ~ y~..' ..a 4 . n... ~ r . k ~ VAqu9 1~.J.dA ra: .t7~ c' . M, :u . e~, ~ ~9~~ 5 I~~..,ur 1°~p~p '1. ,'kn,~ ~~y~q3j` } i~ 6 y~ . ~ M G1. swwL r IIIII N01'L0? l'heRaiding oil. 24° x 30„ l ;ai/ I rl Page 7 w~ 40 , ~ r: _1.~!,r..~- ~ k.. II $ 1 , 44 ~ - . ~ ~ , y , . ~ ~ , . ,a, ~ ~15rw ~ ' . ~ .yrwrw. - L • ' r •q~ r - ~ i .x V 414 ~ ^ I I~. . _ , ~ * ¦ ~ Rqpr('sciltirlg: Cary Ennis Gazy N$Iett, CA Loren Entz, ca Jim Nokon, CA Gordon Allen Walt Gonske Dan Cstermfller C L A G G E T T/ R E Y Roy Andersen, CA David Halbach, ca Bill Owen, CA a A L L E A v Joe Beeler, CA Dwayne Harty Robert Pumrnill, cA FINE TRAI?ITIONAL AMERTCAN ART Tracy Beeler-Holgate jam:es Kramer Jim Rey Bill Berra Mehl Lawson, CA ames Re olds, CA v;11~ge inn Plara J ~ 100 East Meadow Drive Dan D'Arnico Walter Matia R.S. Riddick va;1, Coio,-ado 5 i6-)7 Jane DeDecker Dave McGary Matt Smith Stephen Elliotfi Eric Michaels Ray Swanson, CA Phone: (970) 476-9350 • 1-(800) 252-4438 Ray Ellis Herb Mignery, ca Wayne Wolfe e-mail: rey@vail.net. Rich colors. A certain quietness and sercnity. A to enjoy the bounding sense of humor. He has Seriousness punctuated occasionally by small WOOTEN painted [ndians in the I,ouvre in Paris. He has impish twists in subject matter. These are sornc featumd put them in the uniforms of cavalrymen. He oF the things you may notice when eXperiencing inserlecl 1930's versions of the now-tlefunct a painting by Walt Wootcn, perhaps because they Indian motorcycle into his paintings. He enjoys are parts oP the man himself. COGSWELL painting small dogs in the corners of pairitings Walt Wooten knows what he wants to do, and with their heads cocKed sideways, listening. Yet why he does it,. That is probably where the quiet- GALLERY other paintings have beautifully simple themes, ness comes from. Nine years ago he leFt a high- such as a woman with her child, or carrying paying job in the compeLitive world of advertis- wood, or two Indians rowing a canoe across a ing in Chicago, t,o move to Santa Fe and paint. lake. As they say, you dodt know a thing until Walt paints Nat,ivc Americans with an intimacy you know it's opposite. Maybe that is why the grown from ctlildhood stories tolci to him by his fun parLs of WaIt Wooten's paintings are more mother, whose Father was a Pull-blooded Choctaw lndian. He fun, and the serious parts more serious. [t is a wonderful spent much of his enildhood drawing scenes from the West - contemporary balance. pictures inspired from his mother's stories. pictures of Painting in oils, his work has been described as a"stylized horses, and sadcllcs copied Yrom eatalogs. Subsequently, realism," and commended for "a great sense of anatomy.° He studies at Lhe Chicago Art Institute, and years of work as an often works on five or more canvases at once, exploring varia- arL director, give his work a contidence ancl sense of ease I hat tions on his theme oF the moment. Citing artistic influences many notice immediatcl,y. He typically uses a palette with a such as John Singer Sargent for overall style and brush witle, rioh, and varied range of colors, yet which always hangs strokes, and Fritz Scholder for "touching the [ndian in me," magically together. Wooten is in good company. Come see for yourself. Observe enough of his worK, and you start to notice the Wooteds worK can be seen at the Cogswell Gallery in Vail impish twists. just as talKing with him long enough, you sLart, Village, ciown the stairs from the Childreds I'ountain. Artist Walt Wooten "Winler Stream" -Oil. 40" x 28" b,y Walt Wootcn , , . . . , 4 , ~ - w - . • ~ " ~$4 1. tl L , 171l '11'l Page 9 n . U~ flt 1 ' ~ ~ . . ~ ...f ~.%a~~. . 223 Gore Creek l)rivc Vail. GO 81fi57 Nhone: 970-476-1769 ~ Own Aaif,Y ~ \ t, Walt WooLen will bc here for a show a nd reception I'rom 5-9 p.rn. on Februar,y 20t,h. /'lcFlse join 115. ~ ip. i,"T* "Earl,y Morning ftidf+rs" O11.68" x 00" ~ _ i~... , , ` "19381ndien MoWrcyclc_ . Oil, -{O" x 2f3° { I t'~ r t I i ~w~ ~~~~'sV, • + ~ t ' W' . ~ r ~~w • ' ~ p ~ ~ ~ ~ i t ~ ~ F t. n t ~ . . 1?- ~ ~ ~ . ~ , " rY~ : , . s, ~a,, a 7" Come cxplore the enchanting world of fiue art, supplying the gallery with the absoluLc beslin at De'_Vlott Gallery at Vail. Representing the tinesl DeMOTT quality and selection. To help fulfill this goal, in traditional American art, DeMott Gallery is the staff pursue a"family-like" relationship with sure to entice art lovers from across the U.S. and AtiliER the artists. This relationship gives the staff an abroad with an array of sCyle and subject matLer opportunity to provide the collector with a better to choose from. understanding of each artists' background. "I've The DeMott's, along with over thirty of been in the business a long time and have found America's most celebrated artists, pass along Chat its important to communicate with your twenty years of experience to ensure that your artists on a personal as well as a professional visit is a memorable one. Whether it be an level," says gallery owner Cindy DeMott. "ICs entrancing landscape by Clyde Aspevig, a historic nice when you can share a personal story about depiction of Che Old West by John DeMott, or the one of your artists." dynamic award winning sculpture of Fritz White, To experience the friendly ambiance and ~ you're certain to find that special something that will provide world-Gass art of DeMott Gallery at Vail, visit them at the Vail i you with a lifetime of enjoyment. Gateway Plaza. ~ DeMott Gallery at Vail strives to preserve the dignity of its i artists. You can rest assured knowing that the artists are I i. ~ . . . . , ~ - ~ ~ ~ p • y„ qt ~ ~r ~wry I ~ w ^ v . 1 I k) ~ 9',~ .f a+ Ar"`~ . . ~`~r•~ ~ I p FClt'!, whIL( ~ "Urandmother's Joy" Bronze, ed.16 35"hx105'wx19'tl tail - l rl Nal-c II ~y . JOHN DEMOTT `Freedom on the Run" :48" x 72" oi1 t r N •'riy ~ r ~ ,a ' ~ ' ~ v~4Qrt ~i I ~ ~^~"'M~"~4~~,~r~F~~7~"n r r ; . . i ~ " ` ~'a~1~p . • I f'. . , - . „ . . _ . . , . , . . ' -HIgh nt?Ofl" 30* X 40" OI~ DEM T Representing the Finest in Traditional American Art Vail Gateway Plaza - 12 S. Prontage Rd., #1'4 • Vail, Colorado 81657 • 970-476-8948 • Fax: 970-476-6964 ; The Yirsl time you meel 1~lanel /\noro you MANEL Two keys unlocK a full appreciation of the think, where did his provocative colors come ANORO aetist and his work. One is understancling that from? He stands very still in understated clothing lnoro is very much an extension of that most that matches a serious, self-contained manner. ' ' Catalan city, Barcelona. Second is realizing that He shakes your hand politely but holds back a littlc. his paintinbs continue a dialogue with the great preoccupied behind his glasses. You converse a A . masters of fauvism. bit and discover the artist is aphilosopher. Ilis Certainly their work speaks to'_Vlanel Anoro diction is precise, his gaze steady. Some morc ALLER and his to them. As a modern painter, Anoro has discussion reveals that he is very funny, witty, revitalized the spirit of fauvism with a unique, sharp and ironical. Catalan entrenched vision. His vibrant blues, Who is Manel Anoro, and how did he become greens, purples, crimsons, oranges and yellows sueh a successful painter since beginning his startle yet combine exquisite, pleasurable career only fifteen years ago at the age of thirty harmony. His paintings celebrate and share the five? How are such shimmering, pleasurable paintings f huberance oF painting. Anoro's work, maybe more than any- produced by a man who spent thirty years in the leaden shadow thing else, enchants. of the Spanish dictator Francisco Franco? A boy who grew up His studio is tucked in a small villaga perched at the edge in a poor, drab barrio of Barcelona? A young man who spenL of the Costa Brava, the coast north of Barcelona that seems more than a decade in a sterile offiee raGher than living his haunted by the spirit of surrealism. Here Anoro basKs in the dream of becoming a painter? sensuality of the place and drinks Yrom an entlless well of inspiration. His images are ripe and voluptuous. You can taste the sweetness of the fruit and wine on a table, hear the surf of the Mediterranean through an open window, feel an afternoon ~ breeze rustle the air oP a languid nude. Yet the paintings do more than explore sensuality. Each is an attempt by Anoro to - rectefine the classical definition of aesthetic beauty. Anoro's worK is represented throughout the year by the ~ k i~, ~ • ~ Gateway Gallery. (Acknnwlcdgement 6o Go,s Colores del !ilyditerreanco by Cfaudia Gioscffi) . _ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ : 114 M* ~ ~f ,l'p . . f ~ ~ f ~y w..f d°" % 1 ,i, y? T r r , jdE ~ . ri ~ , ~ u , "k . . , . V_ 41 ~ , 1~~ d ~ . ~ . ' . . ~ , ~ • ' ? ,~+~r ` . . ~ . , , „ . , . ~ainbi uca' ~ . . !._).,i _ x 35.. • V<inel Anoro ~ bail Art Page 13 t ~ ~ MANEL ANORO F e . J +.-~n Nd J ~ ~ ~w,~ ? ° § a ' f . . ~ . , ^ . ~ t~N~ai y~ 1 6 pv . u x ~ d~ II r' A L 44 4& . „ .~.e.," a • ~ ; ~ ~ P~;,Tt' ~o a'~? ~Y~ ; ~ k ~ 41WIV:~„ ~ ' . . . ~ ~ ~ . , . ~w~ ~ ~ , a i „ ......1 _ ~ ~ ~ . . . , ~ . 4, .i ~ ~ . .y,~:.x.,. ~ ~ ~ - . S'i_.n.w:=:_._...._.. . . ~ . . . C)il, 32" x 39„ GATEwAy GALLERY Vail Gateway Plaza - 12 S. Frontage Road - Vail, Colorado 81657 970/476-1661 PAINTINGS - GRAPHICS - SCULPTURE Contempor-ary and Trciditional Art for the Collector Open Daily and Evening Hours r ~ Australian Aboriginal le{;end says "God t,ook D precious opal which has an ironstone host rock ~ the colors down Erom the rainbow and put them TELLEEN Porming naturally as part of the gem. in a stone." "Opal derives its name from `Opalus' which ~ That stone? OpaL featured means `to see a change in color'," says Dan. "'I'o "Precious opals are powerYul voodoa They wear opal, to give opal, is to embrace color, to ~ have been used in t,he crowns of kings, the crown embrace change. It's the light of the future thaC i jewels of France and the crowns of Holy Roman xvc see in an opal. That's why we're so fascinatecl ~ Emperors," says Telleen, whose Vail Village KARATS with it." ~ gallery, Karats, is always filled with jewelry rich Wnat gives opal its alluring play of color atul ~ in folklore. "History regards opals as the stone of CALLERY remarKable variety? Packed arrays of minulo good fortune: some call it the `Cupid Stone.' Even spheres of silica, myriads of them. The spheres Shakespeare described the opal as `that miracle are so arranged that they diffract light into a and queen of gems magniPicent smorgasbord of fiery color. The diverse work exhibited at Karats is Pertile in iLs So appeLizing is this array of color that Dan Telleen is not ( connections with the past. Dads passion is to mix fossils, alone in his love of the gem. meteorites, antique beads, stones, rare gems, and ancient The people of ancient Greece believec] thaL opal possessed ~ seals with gold and silver to create a fresh, enchanting blend properties of foresight and prophesy. Romans saw the gem as ! of history, art and jewelry. a symbol of hope and purity. And eastern cultures believed it OpaPs fiery allure shows up as early as the 1st century A.D. prevented disease. The Roman philosopher Pliny wrote: "For in them you shall see Opal is hypnotic to look at. And Dan's designs combined the living fire of ruby, the glorious purple of the amethyst, the with the precious gem are indeed, powerful voodoo. sea-green of the emerald, all glittering together in an incredi- It is not inconceivable that iP Napoleon were alive today he ble mixture of light. would shop at Karats to aecent the magniPicent opal, The No gemstone displays all Lhe colors of the spectrum in Burning of Troy, that he presented to his Empress Josephine. such an epic variety of shades, patterns antl brilliance. For a truly magnificent experience, clodt miss Dan Dicl you know it takes five million years Por an opal to Eorm Telleeds gallery, haraGs, located in the Village Center on F,ast one centimeter thick? Or that the boulder opal Dan uses is Meadow Drive in Vail Village. exclusive to Quecnsland, Australia? Boulder is a variet,y of x y . , Tn~ , , : ~ . . ~ ~ \ 4 k 7777 r^r r ~ ,y ~ J lr -Y I . . . . r , : . 4. ` I ~ / • r 'rk, d y , ~ " ,.P l'ail.9rt Page lo _ L ~ .m , ~ h i ! a 4 ~ ' ' 'j:`M I e , ~ r~ r ~ P r , ~ , Drive . Vail 'f \ olo 81657 • 1 . ' .1 , RA ~ ~ :\s a child. MiKe .'Vatale dabble~d in drawinq; B Cen Ler College of Design in Pasaclena. California. and oil painting. He continued to enjoy art b,y aiid Roberts felt his art efforts were a description ol' frequent visits to art museums. Those visits inten visaal objects rathcr than an expression. sified his dream of becoming an artist. MIKE After many years in the commercial tie(d. Finally in 1983, after pursuing a career as a Roberts, like Natale, decided to pursue painting NATALE graphic designer, NatalE decided it was time lo as e life style. His love of the outdoors naturall,y seriously begin painting. He moved to Colorado, led him to choose lanclscapes as his Pavoritc returned to art school and began his liFe as a full subject matter. time painter. LEAPINGOTIS Color, light, mood or capturing a memory arc Natale's classical still IiPe's, figures and lanti l.hc components of a Roberts' lanclscapc. A ~ scapes exhibit an uncanny grace and sensualil ~ heavy application of paint is his expressive tool. I Although a rcpresentational painter, his subjert "Painting added a purpose to my life," says f matter is not his primary concern. Roberts. "It has allowed me to participate in the ~ "I work with three main elements when painting: color. tcxturo world and, because oY this, I feel more important. Painting not ~ and atmosphere," Natale says. "I believe these elements ceeate an only eontributes to my life, it is a contribution to others." ~ emotional response in the viewer which is, to me, the most Both 1Vlike Natale and Ray Roberts have successfully i important response." accomplishecl their personal goals and are painting full-time. ~ "It is tnose elements that help create a bridge - allowing They are excited and enthusiastic about their growth as ~ the viewer to transcend the physical world into the world oE painters and Ghe new opportunities they have been able to ~ emotion," he adds. pursue. ~ i Emotion also describes Ray Roberts' paintings. Originally Leapingotis Fine Art Gallery is located in the new Covered ' educated and trained as an illusCrator at the prestigious Art Bridge Building on Bridge SCreet in Vail Village. e ~ ~ n v.'rh 4ev~ia~ . 11 , N~;`e!c' F ; a y + • k ~ ; , ,w.,° " r a ~ ~ - h . . , . •w `w..w , Ray RoberLS . , l ~ lEU:ti1ileRanoe.. Oil on Boarcl. . 12" x 16" r ~ ^~N~~ •.~C~. ~ -+u. - ,3r- ' . , a aI ; . . r : . Mike Natalt "Afternoon Te;il Pasici ar 28" h 2!) Vail Art Page 17 RAY ROBERTS ~ ~ y ~ , ~ ~,a_ , . ~ - ~ ~ ~ . . s , ~ = i ; ~ .r~ v: ' ` . ,,,a , ~ . . ~ . . 5..\ . ( . . ~ 5 # k' 7" , . . . . ' 4; , ~ •mni ~,~~,--.~u. ~r.- .+...,~ecA ~S.'~"~ ~ ~ ~ ~Y~, . , . . , . . . . k . , t. . ~ . ~aa . . . ~ . . _ . _ . 4 . _ , "+14G Yu~ ~ . . . i~ ' ~~u . ,~nw.w • ` ~ . 4 ~ , .rr...i . ;.x . . . . ~ , • : , + ~ k l t Y~: . ' .~wna... ~V~'M'h~~ • ~PY m ;k4 r. ~ . ~ . , ..°Y~ C. u' , ..-.+~Piw.~~+;:. - '-wfe~. r..~~ t.r•,,..-,,..+.wM+.,,,,u`Mm`~~r~~ .n ;ts,.yrys~k, A ma; . v,. . . . . , . ; ~ . C,.. 'Z .re.,_.~,. ~ . ~ ~ . . F..~ : ,J. ~ . r n,.. . , x' : ' . ~ . . ~,~ur.,., . . . . . . . .'~5w . . . , w ~ i~ ~ , 4 `V ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ t . Y + Kay Kobeets °Animms IZi\ cr, C0" oil un cama;.3U" x -+U" ~ L I I N G 0 T I S F i n e A r t G a I I e r y 227 BRIDGE ST, VAIL, COLORADO 81657 970-416-8474 888-476-8627 Leapingotis is a crysial clear creek fhat feetls abundant wiltllife in Sweetwaier Canyon, Colorado - R ~ ~ Since its inccption over six ycars a~;~~. Oll(i i 1'odrida Gallery has offered a distincti\e- ~ f6~ MEG contemporary voice to VaiPs art scene. Several ~ ~ artists Prom aeross the country are represented, BERNET but two artists have set Lhe gallery's tone from the beginning: expressionist landscape artist Henry Isaacs and contemporary painter/print maker Meg Bernet. Both exhibit distinc tivel,y ~ , PODRIDA different styles, subjecCs and techniques whilf ~using strikingly similar palettes. t.~~'"'`'~~ Wz Vermont ]andscape artisL Henry Isaacs ~ chanced upon Coloraclo's spectacular scenery during a family trip and has been under its spcll ..First Silow in ~ever sinee. Rapidly changing weather and skies, clrar, dry air E5tes Park," and high altitude light offer Isaacs a ohallenging difference Pastel, 27' x 34" from the lush hills and woocls of Vermontand thc dramatie by Hen[,y Isaacs coasL of Maine. He visits Coloraclo several times a year where and Vail resident - a ctiallenging combination. Yet she and her he hiKes, skis or snowshoes to remarkable vistas. Ile then sets art have flourished. VaiPs knowledgeable and sophistioated art up his easel in thc plein aire tradition; he paints or draws wnaL clienLele have proven to be the perfect audience For BerneC's is in Pront of tiim in all seasons, all weather. His medium is bold enlblematic canvases, richly colored abstract paintings clay-bascd pastel, the most pigment rich metlium of all. on paper and deLailed linoleum cuts. Her artistic range is vast -"I build from a general composition lightly defined by line, and always growing. "My goal is to carry directly 6o the picture adding the darKest darks and tlie brightest highlights, maKing those specific things that are oecurring to me at the these darker and brighter than anything possible. The soften- ing and subtletics come later. The selections of detail, texCure, moment my prints and paintings are about drawing... uL~lin ~ and distillin movement, shape and Form are often glued together with the p~ g niY personal iconography so that some them as light I observe. I want people who sec these pictures to under- ` images picture perPorm phrases' like and ` letters visual in an sentences'," alphabet and says I use Bernet. Her stand a little of what I felt while 1 was there." explains Isaacs. vibrant, beautiful worK speaks volumes about this woman's And we do - he succeeds beautifully in evokin~ a sei~se of place, in sharing kiis glowing visions of Colorado. talent, skill and passion. Working on paper anci canvas, Ohio native Meg Bernet has Isaacs and Bernet are just two of the artists represented spent the better part of her adult life as a professional artist by Olla Yodrida Gallery. Please call 970/476-6919 for an appointment. e , . . ii M 1 r ~ ;M1 . ~ . r . , . r . w w r~ ,~i~^ u;~r`P • ~ . , L~ lbstracts bv Wo Bernel. 6ail ArG Page 19 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ y . ~ A4 y.:. . .z a~ g ,y K f ;'p P ~I50 f r r p~~ . ~ ~ ~},~y? ~y _ ~ r' r' ~ , r . , . ~ v /7~i Y~~ ~ p ~ ; r `~tk„ . Y ~ ~ a h i + ~ v ~ fi~'^ ~~r',~ % t a- l,; ~ ~ ~ ~ ? ~ : Op c l B ? } ~ ~ .Y'~ , r~'.~.r ~ r : • ~Y~ ~ ~ . ~ • : . ~ 7'he J. J. Marco line is an cxciting new addition MARCO iiiodcr? ic« ckjmagazinc. Additionally, the for The Squash Blossom this year. The 18 karal World Uold Council sponsors a crend book every earrings, rings, and necklaces, which draw oii two years, showing outstanding jewelers and diverse cultural influences, are the work of thc global trends. Mark was the American chosen award-winning designer Mark Cohen. as one oP fourteen designers from around Ghe A second generation jewelry designer, '.Vlark world to go to Italy ancl create a number of Cohen has been creating exceptionally fine work pieccs for the book. for more than a decade. In apprenticeship and SQtJASII The Squash Blossom is earrying J J. Marco's 18 later partnership with his father, Mark special karat rings, earrings, and necKlaces, often ~ ized in creating paiiistaking reproductions oi' BLOSSOM with pearls and diamonds. His business partner, anlique jewelry. This experience helped him do marketing director, and liPe partner. Julianne simildr work wiLh the Metropolitan Museum of Jaffe, points out that the designs allow a Art in New York. customer to build a jewelry wardrobe, sines the The history of ciesign, as well as design elements from var- pieces all relate to each other, and Chat they ean be worn with ious world cultures, continue to Yascinate him. Through travel, any type of clothing. visits Lo librarics and museums around the world, and study The J. J. iVlarco line represents a shift for The Squash ~ at the Pratt lnstitute, MarK is aware of jewelr,y design from Blossom toward jewelry inspired by many cultures. However, ancient, oivilizations to breaking global trends. You never you can still find Yine aontemporary jewelry inspired by know when a building ornament here, a painting or picture Native American traditions as well, sucli as the ouLstanding frame Lhere, or some other ancient artifact could have been work by Ben Nighthorse Campbell and Ray Tracey. the beginning of a new design. The result is timeless contem- The Squash Blossom is located in Vail Village. near the porar,y work inspired by other cultures. Children's Fountain. Mark is well recognized within his industry. He won the Jewelers oF America Diamond Anniversary Award. Mark has won the Bu,yer's Choice Award four years i? a row from y °Old C~fSI{,'IlS Of Jeweler Mark Cohen and 18k h , J.J. Marro Julianne Jaffe ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N, K~°~ . . . • S ~ T Y~ I i]il.l r/ Pa}ne 21 ~ ~ . . . 1,1, 1~1 ~ RC• ~ hF ~ ~ ' ~ _ . r , ~ - ~ ~ ~ Z ~ 4 ~ . ~ 3. „ y ¦ I ~ ~~g / . r ~ . Y` V T H E SQUASH BLOSSOM GALLERY . FINE ART OF THE AMERICAS ~i 198 GORE CREEK DRIVE, VAIL, CO 81657 (970) 476-3129 ~ ~ rv ~ ~ r'ti ~ ,~F ~ GOLD Nothing makes ~Ty 4 gt. f MEGtIAN The eleganl sculplure of Douglas and Me,;han & °Kristi YarnagLichi's JuliN," an eclition of LwenLy TaylorUebler, hasband and wife sculpting partner5. DOUGLA to benePit building an Olympio-size indoor ice is a treat to Lhe eyes and the senses. Their arl ~ area. They are also worKing on a 1/2 lifesize of reflects a combination of their sensitivity t.o thc AYLOR Kristi calletl "Maleguena Gold" in remembrance sport of ice skating and their sculpting prowess. of the 1992 Olympics. She will be capLured doing This is what has made the Taylor-Gebler name so GEBLER a kick, complete with the costume she wore during well known in luminary ice sKating and the aet her performance. world. Having sculpted the delicate forms of In order for pouglas and Meghan to do these dancers and the athletic physiques of gymnasts. "ILFINE special commission pieces, they nlust travel to currently they are specializing in the grace and ART set up a sculpting studio aG the skater's practice beauty of the worlcl's best skaters. rink, and collaborate with the athlete and their "Wylic's Jun7p" is an amazing example of coaches for weeKs aL a time. While most artists their ability to seize a fragmentary momenL. Paul might opt for poetic license. these artists demand Wylie. Worlcl and Olympic champion, has been eaplurcct in exact tlel,ail in their work. With the addition of a rotating mitl-air doing one of his "signature moves." The 'I'aylor- mechanism engineered into the bronzcs. Lhe element of Geblcr's goal is to document a gesture or an action that is motion is aclded. 'I'he 360-degree rot,ation of the sculpture eXecuted by a particular skater; a nlove Lhat melds with the allows the skaters to come Lo life and enables you to touch and athlete's identity. turn and interact with the art. The Taylor-Geblers are currently working on a skating You too can experience the art oP the 'I'aylor-Gebler's by portrait of Kristi Yamaguchi commissioned by the Incline Icc visiting Vail Fine Art Gallery at ttie Crossroads Shopping Foundation at LaKe Tahoe. The Foundation teamed up with the Center in Vail Village. Uoltl Medalist and the sculptors to create a piecc entitled: ~ Fa ~4 4, A y i' LI 1 a . k;Y~S ° fm~. . ~ - -•w ~ ey n V ~ k t 'k v.: ~ ~+t . . ~ 4 ~ r N ~ I ~ , ' y f7,;+ ~ M ~Y~a~4~a "Wylietilump ~ ;fedlin mg P iul 14'Ylic i, OlVmpic and worItl Champion Hell I ile Sizc Bi unzc 8 Stsef TolalSCUlpLueehcight8' RtliLion of 9 Figure wrns above base 3(60° T , •,,:a~, . Photographce: John Ha,ynes bail ; I rt I'agt 23 ~ o. _ . „ ~ , ~ . . i n. ~sc'p, m 4.....,., , _ t ~ il r~~~ ~ ~ ` . 4 ry ~ . „ 't , . ~ i ~ 7 ' ^ . , ~ , . l~ Y K Photu h I "o titil«" - 1 hi° \ oll C"ahzloeue~ ~ 44 VAIL FINE ADIN, IT~ GALLERY, INC.~ AND BEAVEK CREEK FINE ART GALLFRY Ulk ~Vail F~ine Ari Gai(ery Inc. ~ Vail~Viflaqe~ Crossroads Center ~ 141 East Meadaw Driva Vai(,Colorado~ - 970!476-2900 E3eaver~Ci-eek Fine Ar#~Gallery ~ St. James Place - Beaver~Greek, Co{orado • 9701845-8500~ ~Open 10 a.m,~ta 10 p:rti~. ~ ~ Aisner-Por#er Csoka Hagan Kramer ~ Miro Rressclorf Behrens Da{i Naire Loewenkamp Muhlesfein Simbari Boschet Duarte Hessam Makk Okorokov Stravrowsky Jaseph Brown G+nsburg Horton Matisse Picassn Taylor-Gebler Chagall Gisson M. Jordan A. Matthews Pissarro Vasallo " Glements Greg Todd Mark King McClain Renoir Vaux ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r . . . . . ~ . The Vail Vallcy Arts Council is much morc THE " Artist Jim Dine, and Richard Francis, ChieP than the two outdoor arts FesLivals, although Curator of the Museum of Contemporary Art in "LLEY Vail Arts F'estival in ,July and the Beaver Creek Chicago, and Charles Stuckey of the Nlinneapolis Arts Festiva] in August are why many locals and 'R Institute of Arts will speak as a part of the 1997 visitors know t,he organization. For over a program. The series will be expanded with the decade, the Festivals have transFormed COUNCIL Sotheby's Auction Adventure, a re-creation of the Lionsheacl and Beaver Creek into color celebrations i nternational auction house here in the Vail of the visual arts with artists from throughout Valley, where guests will be able to experience the the United States. The events have grown, excitement of thc sales floor. receiving national recognition and over 35,000 Although the Council has been proviciing enthusiastic supporters of the arts in attendance exhibition programs to the Vail Valley community, for the summer of 1996. this role will be expanded with the opening of the In realit,y the VVAC is much, much more. gallery in the ncw Beaver Creek for the Arts in Since 1993 the VVAC has operated VISION photographic work 1997. Over the years the Council has provided support for arts shoUs, a series of intensive hands-on photographic education programs in eonjunction with the schools as well as experiences which blend instruction and outdoor adventure expanding the scholarship Eor graduating high school seniors. into a learning vacation with masters of outdoor photography. Opportunities for local artists eontinue to remain a priority. ln 1997, the VISION concept was expanded to include other art We welcome support from enthusiastic patrons and media with a monotype workshop by Amado Petia and now sponsors to continue the tradition oY excellence and eneourage three nationally known artists. l,he entire community to experience the visual arts. The _Arts Lecture Series has featured noted artists, museum direotors and other expcrts from the visual arts. I 4, ~ ~ . ..~.1 . . . n " - , R1 k 1M ~ r l~ ` • ~ f- / '•.yya," s " ~ ~ yh i o ~ : v e t r' . . . . p .1 . ..I " e :'l .....r ~ 4 ` '1 ~ . 4 , _ ~ l Itilll\ ~tiork5hop5 Nith . 9mado Pena and F171 ~ John Fielder ~ . . ° . ~w _ . • ~<< ~ x i Yhotography by Vfichael Rawlings antl Ylarilyn VlcCrap Fa W 41 ` . , - 71/:I PI PagP 25 ~ ~ ~ ~ I~'~ y,~~r?' ~I~I ~ n , - ~ . , • ; ~ . , . ' ~ ' ~ ~ • ...,'trtrt' , ` ~ . , a ~ . ~ ~ ~V~ ~ ~ ~ ~I , = t w ~A . 4011 11114 12c\13 ~ . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . ; R " \ilgUtiC 19Nt) % " cr t,rccl. ` Art tL }'ht)t()-'l'ilptll 7 UI k "flfl$)", ~ ~ ~,r~ Y~ A V A L L E Y~ . nars cmuwcI L ~ a , , . , , e o. „ ~ p TO,' 827, ,5291) ~)%{}~~ii~~/,J,it~),ik'l\ ~ . , . , 8~~~ g. BILL WORRELL Classic Interpretatians of Primitive Native American Art , Edition of 50 88" ]ligll ~ ~ , ~ ~ r ; „ ~ . ~q { a ~ i~ k \J Ili ~ j a , = 4: "DifEused Light" Edition of 50 20" above stone Please join us for the Annual Artist Show Opening Reception for the Artist Saturciay, February 15,1997 5,00 pm - 9:00 pm Please a111 lur additii>nol int"i,l,matiun. Bader/Melnick G A L L E R Y CROSSROADS SHOPPING CENTER • 141 EAST MEADOW DRIVE VAIL., CQLORADO 81657 970-476-0600 1 800 291 095C) Sterltrcg Siluer. by Zina ~ Zina's love affair with design ~ began when she was just twelve years old, working for her father in his I`lew York jewelry factory. ' i In 1973 she began involving herself with the new movement of emerging young designers who recognized the limitless possibilities of working in sterling silver. Her sense of style and fine ability to contribute to the future of modern women, enabled her . to develop a remarkable collection of innovative and sophisticated pieces. One can immediately recognize the signature style of Zina, by its r' exquisite and architec- tural grace and glamour. _ The successful interplay - ~ of semi-precious stones and enamel, with surfaces and textures contrasting against the ~ ~ • ` ~ smooth planes of silver, is what makes her work so unique. She is determined to introduce jewelry that ~ can truly be carried over "from the boardroom to the ballroom." Cogsweff CFaffay _ ',;I Fl.l I+i; GI C V!',R . 223 Gore Creek Drive - Vail, CO 81657 • 970/476-1769 Open Daily We will h~wF• ~j Irtenk. ,h(Ak! 0 74r1,s'; jo',n~i~liv Edward S.Curtis. Photographcr, cthnograph EADWARD I[e calleci his work T6c Nor(h American Indian. er, advenLurcr. An avid admirer of native Starting in ttie 1890s, Curtis published 20 volumes Americans. Curtis' whole life was consumed bv as they were completed. A single set included all the Knowledge that with every passing moment. 20 matching volumes and portfolios. Culled Erom another [nciian face, custom. and ceremony varr some 40,000 imagcs, each set included 2,222 pho- ished. togravures. Photogravure, now a lost art, was the Working aL the turn of the century, he made it finest techniquc for reproducing photographs. It his life's work to preserve forever the people, cus- involved using the original glass plate negative, toms, and lives of over 80 native Indian tribes, along wiLh an acid burn process, to etch the image both in pholographs and prinLed text. This monLr onto copper plates. Then each image was hand- mental effort resultetl in spiritual, inspiring, antl printed individually. Partly funded by J.P. Morgan, haunLing photographs thaL seem to touch ever,ythe high cosl of craftsmanship antl the large scope one who sces them. His original work has onlv of Curtia' project made the seLs afPordable only to recently become accessible to a wicler audience. presentin{; a the wealthiest individuals and the mosL afPluent institutions. unique opportunity for viewers and collectors aliKe. Only 287 were ever produeed. In 1906. Presicicnt Roosevelt captured the essence of Ontil the 1960's, most Curtis seLs wcre hidden away in Curtis' accomplishmcnt: "He has caught glimpses into thaL public ancl private rere book collsetions. Then with a strange spiril,ual and mental life of theirs trom whose inner- resurgence of inLerest in the American Indian, and individual most recesses all whiLe men are forever barred. Curtis has imeges from t~he sets becoming available. Curtis clone what no other man cver has done, what no other man photogravures came into demand worldwidc, from galleries could do." Curtis livecl on intimate terms with the tribes. As to Sothebys' anc1 Christies' auctions. According to John they hunted, traveled, marehed, and camped, he was there. Cugster, a major Curtis collector, the marKet for Curtis Consequently, the Inciians, the unsung heroes oP his images, photogravures seriously established iGselP in the past fifteen trusted him enough Lo express ancl share l,hemselves for his years. Even now, seeing Curtis originals is rare. Eugster says camera. Geronimo. Chief Joseph, Retl Cloucl. Slow [3u11, he knew Lhat in another Fiftecn years, there will be Pew images of them all. They called CurLis "Shadow Catcher." His subjects consequenoe availablc, much like important works by were medicine men, old people, chiefs, warriors, sorcerers, Audubon, Bodmer. and Catlin have disappeared from the market. young men and maideris, some noble and proud, some sad The Cogswell GaIlery currentl,y has a wide selection of and spiritual. original vintage Curtis photogravures, antl is located in Vail Village, down the steps Prom the Children's Fountain. , .r ' ~..i. . .i . P 1 ~ : Y ` • } :.v:._ r..v_:z.. . . . rvir."n• -~o- - ~ ~ y q?~ ~ . . 0. y 7 i W. `r ~s _ t . r~ ~ f ~ • o '"~Y' ~ ~ a , ti ~ - . r , . _ . ~ ~t~:.: . . te~':•' : . ~ Roof r Williama A I a Plaln.llexico."Oit ~r{~{ ~ li;"\ 20" Coqsweff Gatfay ~ 223 Gare Creek Drive ~ S Vail, CO 81657 ~ c b + ~ , ~ Phon~.. 9701476-1769 ~ rr ~ ~l ~ ~k , , ~ ~ / \ ^wF, ~ ~ K a e ~ Y Y 4 Lt~ d < , w, r:.altl~ . rr . , rOI ~ ~ r y • ~ ~ ~ro? ~ ~ , i ' . ~ ~ . . _ . _ y 4y y / l~/ai,lll{I~~ff"~i~y.~~~P~~ii ~ : ~ - ..FiisL l,oti°e... kronzc 12..x 12"x6" • ; ; ~ I)cIGi"-,c \1~~\crs ,a °Warrior5ocicty' ~ \liaed mc<lia on hourd , ~ ~ , y 'm• ~ ~ ~ i ~ , . N~v ~ ~ W~ ~ > > .,s ~ , • . T ~ „ - e. . ~ x . • . . . . _ . ~ l"ouldcrk9uui7toin.l)iL3t)"40" k a<~ ~b . ~ s , . . 11 ~ d N.: f 4 ^ • ~ 7 r ~ ~'r q ~ t ~ ' • ~ ~ ~4~~~r ~ ~ Ur'tr nf~1lw I"'nr•m,+ Vrm~ lli,^, florsr" 1>11,11. ulU CR CLAGGETT/REY Q A L L E R Y Fine'I'rcjditioncal American ArL 900 l;ast Mf;adow Urive • Vail, CO 81657 •(970) 476-9350• 1-(800)252-4438 c-mail:reyQvaiLneL CR .w CLAG'GETT/REY G A L L E R Y F'ine'I`raditional American Art 100 East Meatiow Drive • Vail, CO $1657 (970) 476-9350 • 1-(800)252-4438 e- I ail.rey@vail.net H I ~tr~~~~ ~~r~ a fi#a~M. ' r • t. Wayne Wolfe ' ~ ,:ap • , ~ ~y ~ ~ > r¦ A1'M 1 , J............. ~ Dan Ostermiller 6b'tivnc itirolln, "h7ount ul't~lte HvI;Y (;roxs" (Benrhir?ark), [)Il, 44" x32'. ~ ~ k y F ~ E ~ a f V I k,5 ~i I i+;eri t?"lrrrrli(!rr (:lrrslcr lhw l;;lt. tihul,~~ ll" ltruilic. 1-d. ul;fU CR ~a CLAGGETT/REY G A L L E R Y Fine 7:°raditional American Art ~ ]OU East Mesdow Drive - V'ail, Ca 81857 ; •ti ~ { ' (97~1) 47~?-9350 • 1-(8Q0)252-4438 r = r ~ , e-mail:rey@vail.net ~ . 4 „ i Tterb Migne ry - ~~.,.a - fi w~~• ~i d ~ Herh h1igner,y "'1'ha l';rrrlen" l3rrinze. ed. al'30 James Rei~i¦olds V . . „q , ~ . h" .'I 7 ~ ~ p ~4 ? r ~ . , , ~ . . . ~ . ~r t : ~ ,w~nFJ.,~, ~ H~irw•:~~ ..~nnmd~,~~rti,4f~rarm~qP.. , M~I~f p: a~,- dl James Kvt'nalds °(,)uiO lirl'Ieclinnx° Oi1, 18 " ~2-1 CR ~ Y,. C L A G G E T T/ R E Y (a A L L E R Y F'ine Traciitional American Art ~ 100 East !Vleaclow Drive • X'ail. CO 81657 (970) 476-9350 • 1-l8001252-4438 e-mail:rey@N,all.net „ i; Jane DeDecker J<"urc f)~~/1~•~~Arr '~P"ith (:ahe dtroriar. vrL ul:fl ~ , i. .4' ' ~ . . -k~ ~M 7•k ~~~p ~.l~1. ~.r!.. Walt Gonske , . : : y~~ • ~ i _ ~ . TED LARSEN ~ . , , : . ~ . . . , : . ~ , , . ~ . ~ _ . . , . _ _ . _ _ . . . d~" ! ~ ,.n ' . . s^ T , J F _ _ ' w • ; ,,r~,~.;' . - . , 4ywyf ~ ...~4 . . . ' . _ . , ~ . , c ~.rs a--.~.r. ; ~ : ~ . . ~ . • ,i . . . ' ~ . . ~ a ~y a!. y,. r . . * ni Vr. . ~ ~ ...s. s c„r~.•- : , . . _ : . _ . . . . . ~ ~ , M1 . . . . , . . . . . , ~ . t . • . 3t. . - r..~. . . . . . . " . ~ _ . . ~'v . - . . . . - z>..r~. . '1'ed Larsen "'1'wo IZed Oues" k'aste1. 32° a4U- Artist's Reception M a r c h 13th,1997 L A P I N G 0 T I S F i n e A r t G a I I e r y 227 BAIDGE ST. VAIL, COLORADO 81657 910-476-8414 888-476-8627 Leapingotis is a crystal clear creek that feeds abundant wildlife in Sweelwater Canyon, Colorado A GALLERY FOR THE BRAVE AT HEART ~ ' ~ ~ V B r. i iT^ 'RI -r~. v k4~ ~i ~ i q~ 1• hj7m.~ ,Y I d A i .u -n, 1~ ~ "~1•,~~ ~~'T ~ a • ~~~~"~~q~, ; ~ . 'O J ~ ~J U ~ OLLA PODRIDA GALLERY 100 E. Meadow Drive, Vail, CO 81657 ' Please call for appointment 970/476-6919 or Meg Bernet S~rudio ar 970/47 76- 3S'? ~ r. { ` p/~ } ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ''4, M~'[ ~Ml~. Y , Yy~`~~~ ~ , ~ ~ _ ry ~ ~1 I . y ,y;~ ~1~ d. ~ ' ~~S" ~ ~ ~ , , . ~ V ~ yk ~Ri,~• , ~ y ~i. rR,f cW~l ~r,~,F~ «R , y ~ti" ~ ,1~ N ~ *.~~.i~, . ~ . ~~1 ~ 4~• 1 ~ ii ~ ' ~ a g ~ ~ ~ ~A.•~~~1~ ~'m Y .,}..w~,'? ~ f , +wa~~ ~ ~ , t . ~ _ ~ . '°ii~ '8 ,~r~~ ~ ~~~,.,,~I~l~ iti~. .3~ ~ r ~ ~~r~i~~;, -"~,~R, - ~ ~5.'~',. ~,r . , 'M~ ~ a~~~;~ A"ti~~i'S rYt . o q • ~ ~~^yy 1 ~ x ~ C1 e'~d }'i . ~ , ~ if?S Y.~, ~ ~ ~ * . ! r ~r; ~4~7~ ~ , r~ . a~y " ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t~~ ~ M~ ~~P"S1~"~ ,~r ~ ~t~..~ ~ ~ ~ ~T~` ~ . , . . ~ ; ~ . . . ~ . s ~ • ~ ? k - , . , • , . . • . . . _ ~ ~ ~ "\r~ " ,xI ~ M ~ . , • ~~'r ,x M~`~' ~ . ~ t . ~ ti,; . ~ ~t; ~ • Taf + ~ ~ ti. ~ ~,,,~w+"e~~~~y.,x~~~ r~ ) 'ki1 4'~ ~ 0 { ~ . ~ ~'A ~\+3.xy~ ~~'A~V~ ~ ~ • ~.1. t I~4~, ~ , . ~ ~..y~~ ~~ly,~.. 1A 1 t , ? 1 . 2 v'~k*~ ~'.n, . ~ . ~ , ~ ~~~~•pn , ` . . .'.k~~M~r~' *t ~ e ~ • ~ ` ~ i ~~w,'+ ~ M , V, w~ ~ ,1~ "'~~,~~~4~+ ~tiy ~ ~ J~~: 4 ~ (S . ..y a ~ f ~h'~'~~ .~j'4~~ ~ ~ A'a'4 ' * e1 +~.,,V ~ ~ ~ • w. . ~;,~*'T ~ - .~ry * ? i ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ $ "p ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y' ~i".'~.~ xaFa3. y ~y 4ti.,~aa + ° a~~' '1~+ ~ - • ~~\~'t~+Q~r~e , ¢ ' ~ 1 't ~~~~~~iia,,~• . ~ V - . ~ \ 4 +n~~ : ~ r . A f 4 ; ~ ~ ~ ' h~ ti ~ ~ v 1 ?~ti q . ~ 1p ? e~' 1 a ~w~ 3~~,~r~"~'~~~ ~ k \1 , 1+~'? 1.1`~~ey1\. r~ `'`~,i~ t ~ x ~ \ h ~ ~ ~'t Z'~* Zy~ 'a ~ $ ~y ~ r I~ ~ ~ l "4 j 1k: ,1 t r;F ~ NN64f,'"411 ' ` `~~e ` +~y.~; ~ ;~c~,~'.~~~~ ~ i•, , Designs in 18 karat gold jewelry T H E ~ SQUASH BLOSSOM GALLERY FINE ART OF THE AMENICAS 198 GQRE CREEK DRIVE • VAIL, COLORADO 81657 - PHONE 970-476-3129 y - ~ RAY TRACEY . , . . . . . . . , . ~ - ~.w.. ~ ~ . ' ~ . .(~T . . . ' ~ ~ Desagner Ray Tracey began making jewelry at the age of nine. . Raised on the Navajo reseruation in At'izcrna; Tracey is now eonsidered tme af the mast outstanding among ow ~ . : Native American jewelers. 1'racey inlays vibrant stones such , as sugilite, lapis, corals and ~ ~ ~ ~ . turquaise ian#o steriing silver and 14k gvtd. Ray Tracey will be here #ar an eveT~ ' show and recePtion February 20th and 21st. ; ~ . ~ -'~1. Please join us. . r ~ • ! ' : . . , . . . ~ . . . . ~ . . ~ . ~ . 1 ~ . . . . . . . ,.~a. . . . . ' ,A ~ ~ . • , . . . ~ ~ ~ . . . . . , - _ - ~ . . ~ . ~ . . _ ~ . . . i ~.;,~,i~'° '~,~n . . . . , ' _ ~ , . . _ . .P . . ~ 6 . . . . . . . , , TH~ 5 QU/~J~ ~Jlr' • ~ ,j i~l r ~ ~ rb ~y ~ ';.k•,~.. ~ ,p~y ,.7:''~ . . . . ~ ~ ~4 FINE ART OF TNE AMERICAS _ 198 Gore Creek I?rive Vail, Colorado 81657 970/476-3129 ~ ~i ~ November 29th DeMott Gallery: Michael Atkiiison Gallery: THE ~ ~ "7'tie Power o~'r,tie P~~srel': Si~;nificant~ Yi~int show featuring:l7ichael Atkinson. new worKs by Romon Kcllcy & ~ lloug Atwill, Albert Handell. Mary Jane ~ ~ Dee Toscano, Artists' Reception ~ SahmiclL. Suzanna Spann ~ Gateway Gallery: Bader/Melnick Gallery: ~ OCIATIO t~lvar. Barcelona - Major Painting Show. Nc~lda Pieper: Ori~in~l ~ortraits on canvas ~ Artist in Attenciance (20th & 21s1) ~ I Cogswell Gallery: H'rank LaLumia - Show ed Karats: i Oil ancl Watercolor Paintings. Dwain Winter 16 1 'l'ony I[ochslcller: ArList, Reception ~ Freeman - Wooci ancl Stone SculpturP ~ De'.Vlott Gallery: "Rock,y Moimtain Leapingotis Fine Art: ~ S Sale" January 23rd Chase - Pain6er: ArtiSt's Keception Hollday.Vliniaturc Stiow FeaLuring small works by some of MiChacl Atkinson Gallery: Amerlca's most celebrated artists. Two artistshow: Albert Handell and The Squash BlOSSOm: Ray Tracey - i Opening Reception 5-9 pm Roberta Baskin Shefrin Contemporary Navajo Jeweler ~ . F Many artists in attenclance Bader/Melnick Gallery: Vail Fine Art: Makk Famil,y ~ Gateway Galler Vlark DicKson - Kobert RePvem - Wildlife~ and Figurative~ Master lmpressionists y: ~ Bronze Soulpture: Edward Aldrich - Paintings, Artist iil attendance Original Wildlife Oil PainLings March 13th Michael Atkinson Gallery: The Squash Blossom: Gregory Cogswell Gallery: Glenn Swanson - ~ Loma,yesva - Paintingand Sculpture Bronze Sculpture. Ed~,~t , , Two artist show featurin~ ~ s d S. Curtia - J. Cnestcr Armstrong and Ted Knight Vail Fine Art: Robcrt Haga Vintage lndian Photograph,y (1900-1930) ~ n - , Australian Komantio Impressionist DeMott Gallery: Coloracio gader/Melnick Gallery: ~ llavid Kiedel - Olci Masters St,yle SLill Life ~ Landscapes, 'I'he art of Clyde Aspevig, and Portraits on Canvas DeCember 27th Ralph Oberg & Skip Whitcomb: ~ Michael Atkinson Gallery: Artists' Reception Cogswell Gallery: ~ Three art,ists show :Kathleen Caricof Steve Devenyns - Oil Paintings ~ Mar,y Jane Schmidt anc] Doug Scott Gateway Gallery: Kirby Sattler - Acrylic Paintings Frank Howell, Paintings, Drawings: ~ Bader/Melnick Gallery: Artist in Attendance (23rd and 24th) DeMott Gallery: ~ Kenneth W,yatt - Romantic Western Oil ~ Paintings The Squash Blossom: °Art oF the amerioa? WesC' ~ Andy Kirk - Pueblo Indian,leweler The art of John lleMott: Artist Reception i Cogswell Gallery: Zina Sterling Silver - Gateway Gallery: " Trunk Show. New Work by Gallery Artists Vail Fine Art: Mario Kon~ny - ~ Unique Marble Dust Impressionism Luis Sottil. Paintings, DeMott Gallery: Grand Opening Artist in Attendance (13th & 14th) ~Celebration, Artists' Reception February 13-14th Leapingotis Fine Art: ~ Gatewa,y Gallery: Gateway Gallery: Ted Larsen - Pastels Mancl Anoro. Paint,ings. Serigraphs, James Jensen, Still Liles in Pastel, ~ "l,os Colores del Medit,erraneo" Artist in Att,endance The Squash Blossom: Evenstar and Raou] Sosa - Award I The Squash Blossom: February 20th winning designers of fantastic gems ~Historic Amcrican Indian Beaded Michael Atkinson Gallery: ~ Moccasins antl Carved Animal I'etishes Featuring YIichael 'ALkinson Vall Fi11e Art: MiGch CasLer of the Pueblo lnclians Tiallcrinas on Staga F Bader/Melnick Gallery: ~ Leapingotis Fine Art: Steve Graber - Bill Worrell -['oices ['rom Gtle Caves, April 3rd ~ Charcoal llraw ings. Linda Prokop F3ronze Sculptt~re and Original Paintings Michael Atkinson Gallery: ~ - F3ronzc Sculptur es, Artist's RecepCion All gallcry floral show Co ~ gswell Gallery: i Walt Wooten - Oil Paintings Co well Galler ~ Vail Fine Art: ArtisYs ReceUtion gS y: WaliHorLon - T3ronze Sculptures Line of the SpiriL - Wool Weavings & Rugs f