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