HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-10-21 Support Documentation Town Council Evening Session
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
EVENING MEETING
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1997
' 7:30 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA .
NOTE: Times of items are approximate, 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: (5 mins.)
A. Appoint Election Judges.
B. Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1997, second reading of an
ordinance Approving the General Planning Document for the 1999
World Alpine Ski Championships, and Setting Forth a Special
Review Process to Allow for Staff Approvals for Temporary Signs,
Structures, Street Decor, and Other Temporary Improvements for
the World Alpine Ski Championships of 1999.
3• Presentation of Eagle County Land Use Regulations for the Town
Ellie Caryl Council's Information and Feedback. (30 mins.)
Keith Montag
4. Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1997, first reading of an ordinance amending
Bob McLaurin Section 18.52.160B.(7) Exemptions, under Off-Street Parking and
Tom Moorhead Loading, of the Town of Vail Code. (15 mins.)
- ACTION REQUESTED OF COl1NCIL: Approve, modify, deny Ordinance
No. 19, Series of 1997 on first reading.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The Town Council has previously, upon
request by the Town Manager, agreed to extending the period of time
within which the payment of a parking fee can be made to up to ten years.
The Code presently provides for a five year period of repayment which
may not be feasible or adequate at the current level of payment required
for parking pay-in-lieu. It is appropriate that any agreement to pay the
parking pay-in-lieu fee in the future be secured adequately by both
personal and corporate guarantees as well as deeds of trust on the
subject property and any other real property that can be offered as
security.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1997
on first reading,
5• Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1997, first reading of an Annual
Steve Thompson Appropriation Ordinance: Adopting a Budget and Financial Plan and "
Bob McLaurin Making Appropriations to Pay the Costs, Expenses, and Liabilities of the
Town of Vail, Colorado, for its Fiscal Year January 1, 1998, Through
December 31, 1998, and Providing for the Levy Assessment and
Collection of Town Ad Valorem Property Taxes Due for the 1997 Tax
Year and Payable in the 1998 Fiscal Year. (15 mins.)
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, modify, deny Ordinance
No. 20, Series of 1997 on first reading.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Ordinance No. 20, Series of
1997, which includes the 1998 budget as presented at the October 7th
work session.
6. Ordinance No. 17, Series of 1997, second reading of an Ordinance to
Tom Moorhead Amend Section 10.08.010, Parking to Obstruct Traffic, and to Enact
Greg Morrison Section 10.08.130, Parking Emergency, of the Municipal Code of the
Buck Allen Town of Vail, Colorado. (15 mins.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, modify, deny Ordinance
. No. 17, Series of 1997 on second reading..
BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The present penalty assessment for all
parking violations is $16.00. This fine is inadequate for the Commercial
Core and in those circumstances where illegal parking blocks
maintenance and snow plowing. By providing different violations for
those circumstances, the Municipal Court Judge will have a reasonable
basis for providing an enhanced penalty assessment for those
aggravated parking violations.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Ordinance No. 17, Series of 1997
on second reading.
7. Town Manager Report. (10 mins.)
8. Adjournment - 9:05 p.m.
NOTE UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW:
(ALL TiMES 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, 10/28/97, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
THE FOLLOWING VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 11/4/97, BEGtNNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 11/4197, BEG1NN1NG AT 7:30 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
II.IIIII -
~ Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2332 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information.
QWGENDA.TC
I
Vail Village Loading & Delivery
Proposed Schedule for Short-and Long-Term Solutions
Step 1 October
Define Problem Elements & Brainstorm Solution Ideas for
Short-term and Long-term Improvements.
¦ Merchant meeting (10-21) -
¦ One-on-One meetings with affected interests (10-21 to 10-31) 'Step 2 November
Review and Select Preferred Alternative Solution(s) for Short-term
Improvements.
¦ Merchant meeting (11-12)
¦ Commercial property owners meeting (11-13)
¦ Public workshop (11-13)
¦ Vail Town Council Update (11-18)
Step 3 Late November-December
Select Final Alternative Solution(s) for Short-term Improvements.
¦ Vail Town Council meeting (11-25)
¦ Notification of affected interests of approval of short-term management
improvements and implementation date (12-1)
¦ First Reading of Ordinances, if Required (12-2)
¦ Second Reading of Ordinances, if Required (12-16)
Step 4 December-January
Review and Analyze Alternative Solution(s) for Long-term
Improvements.
¦ Public Workshops (1-13, 1-14)
¦ Public Meetings (3)
Step 5 February-March
Select Preferred Alternative Solution(s) for Long-term Improvements.
¦ Public Workshops (2) ¦ Public Meetings (2)
Step 6 March
Select Final Alternative Solution(s) for Long-term Improvements.
¦ Public Meetings (3)
Step 7 April-May
Begin Implementation Steps for Long-term Improvements.
~f
Vail Village Loading & Delivery
Working Problem Statement
Over the years, trucks--particularly large trucks--have become an irritation in Vail Village as •
, these vehicles use Vail's "front door" pedestrian space to provide "back door" deliveries. This
, conflict occurs because Vail lacks alleyways and other alternative methods that would provide
these essential services more discretely. This results in two problems: 1) the guest experience is
not what we intend and; 2) business visibility and access is diminished. Instead of fully enjoying
the resort's natural beauty and ambiance that attracted them in the first place, our visitors--
especially those who come to enjoy our family-owned lodges--find themselves experiencing the
, sights and sounds of an urban environment. For businesses, Vail's ambiance is further impacted
when trucks, while providing essential behind-the-scenes support for the benefit of all
businesses, block and obstruct selected storefronts all too frequently and for intolerable periods
of time.
With large trucks, in particular, the community Has identified the following issues and concerns:
• size
• unsightliness
• noise
• pollution
• safety risk for pedestrians
• frequency of deliveries
• length of time spent blocking businesses
• congestion
• loss of tourism, revenue
- If, in fact, the presence of trucks in the pedestrian areas causes a negative impact on our visitor
enjoyment and the success of our businesses, the town must immediately address the loading and
delivery issue through infrastructure management and other techniques to improve the
community's overall economic viability as a world class resort.
0
Vail Village Loading and Delivery
Process Ground Rules
• Tlie study area will be bounded on the east by the west boundary of Ford Park, on the
- west by Vail Road, on the north by the South Frontage Road, and on the south by the
_ municipal boundary. -
• All ideas for solutions (short-term and long-term) will be considered; recurring preferences will be strongly considered.
• Solution ideas may extend beyond the study area boundary.
• Solutions must not compromise pedestrian safety, nor emergency access.
• Solutions must be financially feasible, operationally sound and legally responsible.
• The Vail Town Council will have final decision-making authority.
•P
VAIL VILLAGE LOADING & DELIVERY
¦ FOCUS GROUP CONCLUSIONS (35 participants/Apri197)
AGREEMENTS The Problem
• This is a big problem for residents, lodging guests and for a small number of
businesses directlv impacted by large, trucks which park in front of their properties .
(noise nuisance, visibility problems, etc.). _
. • The problem is less significant for the majority af businesses, restaurants and the
delivery companies who service the area who are only indii-ecth) impacted..
Problem Components
- • The current system is much improved, but still needs more tweaking.
• Noise is a significant year-round factor for lodge guests within the study area.
Causes of noise are garbage trucks, snow removal, leaving motors running, use of
air brakes, pulling the ramps in and out of the trucks.
• Garbage truck noise causes the most complaints.
• UPS, Fed-Ex-size trucks are tolerable, so long as they aren't blocking "critical
corridors"; larger trucks are not.
• Some trucks and vehicles are moving too fast for pedestrian conditions.
Village Corridor PhilosophX
• Some "front door" deliveries are OK, such as guest shuttle service.
• The area will never be completely free of vehicles.
How to Approach the Issue
• Improve management of existing infrastructure by tweaking the current system,
which is working better than before.
• Need clarification of current policies on Hansen Ranch Road.
• Village solution should be compatible with Lionshead solution.
• Let's make sure study area doesn't limit our options for a solution outside the
study area.
. • Heating streets is worth looking into. -
- DISAGREEMENTS Magnitude of the Problem
Wil1 the problem get worse in the future if we do notning?
• Do guests (other than lodging guests) perceive this as a problem?
• Is this a safety issue?
• Hard to offer or react to a solution until cost is known.
• Who will pay?
Other
• What part of the problem triggers large dollar expenditures by the government?
• VVhich interests are we trying to please? (overnight lodging guest? business
owner? lodge owner? residential community? restaurant owner? pedestrians?
vendors?)
• Does one interest take precedent over another?
• Does the Town Council make the final decision?
• Who's problem is it? The town government? Private sector?
• Will reducing the size of trucks simply increase congestion with more little
trucks?
1
page 2/Vail Village Loading & Delivery
• Is a central delivery facility the infrastructure solution?
• Liquor delivery issue must be treated separately.
• Do we "reach for the moon?"
¦ ' COMMUNITY SURVEY
Following the group discussions, we asked respondents of.the 1997 TOV Citizen Survey .
_ to share their thoughts. On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being "very satisfied" in the manner -
in which loading and delivery is handled, ratings are generally neutral with the following..-
scores:
Vail Village Mean (average)
Local Residents (overall) 2.9
Second Homeowners (overall) 3.1
Vail Village Resident 2.7
Business Owner 2,7
Lionshead Mean (averag)
Local Residents (overall) 3.1
Second Homeowners (overall) 3.4
Lionshead Resident 2.9
Business Owner 3.0
For comparison purposes, the extent to which the West Vail interchange is a problem
received a 1.6 rating on a scale of 1 to 5 with 5 being "very satisfied" in last year's
Community Survey. This rating, among other considerations, prompted the Vail Town
Council to move forward with construction of roundabouts in West Vail.
Written comments from the community survey on the loading and delivery question are
- attached.
TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1997 ,
.
Comments about Loading and Delivery in Town
• Noisy, smelly, dirty trucks-get them out
• A much better system could be used with electric flat bed carts to bring goods from
delivery areas
• A tough nut to crack; don't envy you
Always a truck in town; ugly
• Big noisy trucks
• Big trucks parked east end of Marriott hotel all day
. • Bite the bullet, tunnel under village streets and get ALL trucks out of Village! _ • Blocked roads are very dissatisfying • Can't they turn the trucks off when loading _ -
• Constant blocking and illegal parking on Wllow Bridge
• Deliveries seem to take place in the morning and not all'day which is good
• Delivery is not a problem; the whiners are being stupid
• Delivery trucks are a necessity; I have no solution
• Delivery trucks in V.V. is not very eye pleasing
• Delivery trucks in Village make walking undesirable
• Diesel exhaust from delivery trucks goes into hospital vent ducts
• Diesel fuel odor!
• Don't allow parking on pathway between Sunbird and Montanero's
• Don't hassle the trucks working to "keep it all going"
• Don't like the way any one can drive from Hanson Ranch Rd to Sciber Cr. and on
• From early morning until noon Gore Creek Dr. is terrible; the exhaust fumes are
intolerable
• Get a central staging area
• Get the trucks off the streets; create a warehouse and use smaller vehicles
• Give the drivers a break
• Hours too restrictive
• I don't enjoy all the trucks up and down Gore Creek Dr. but don't see too many viable
alternatives
• I don't know a better way; it just stinks
• I drive a shuttle and trucks and cars are parked all over the street
• I nevet.saw a problem with previous deliveries; these businesses need convenient drop .
offs
• In from of Red-Lion building on Hansen, Ranch garbage pick up time bad-needs to be
earlier .
• In winter, should schedule midday when people are skiing; other times, should be much
earlier (5 AM)
• Isn't early AM snow removal an even bigger problem and bigger irritation to guests?
• It has always been a problem; poor planning
• It should not be on streets at all during 8 am to 6 P.M.
• IYs a nuisance and noisy
• It's been great on Bridge St. not to have the trucks; would like all vehicles to turn off
engines when stopped
• IYs early, loud and unpicturesque in what is supposed to be a pedestrian village
• It's fine; quit caving in to Pepi and Sheika; there are other problems •
• Large delivery trucks are in both area 24 hours a day
• Large trucks crowd pedestrian areas and leave engines idting emitting fumes
0 Let them in at designated hours
, . TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1997
.
Comments about Loading and Delivery in Town
• LH needs more 5 min drop-off areas for business-not skiers
• Little or less is better
• Loading area in front of bus stop is a problem
Make it easier for deliveries; to sell the product you must have product
• Need a central delivery system
• Need a receiving center with small delivery vehicles
• Need hidden facility at Lodge property
• Need to get trucks off street to central location
- . • Need to keep delivery trucks off LH Mall and Vail Village streets -
_ • Need to re-do LH bus stop/loading zone by subway • Needs to be addressed in LH Master Plan and in V.V. also; central location would be
best
• No control in my area unless too late
• No positive suggestions; it's a tough problem
• No trucks should be allowed in pedestrian areas
• Noise around 5AM in Village
• Not a very flexible attitude; instead of negotiating every time, issue permits like BC
• Over regulation problem for business
• Really should develop central underground facility
• Seems to have improved but Vail Village is not a great place to be at 8 am
• Should be walk in only; restrict to early am
• Should have planned better and have been underground
• Smelly trucks blocking walk ways
• The answer has to be a central loading area
The business entities who are affected need to do the most to rectify their own issues
• The delivery trucks in Lionshead aren't nearly as courteous
• The huge truck traffic and parking make our town look like a loading dock to visitors
• The merchants need to help out more; open earlier or stay open later
• This is a necessary part of doing business; consider everybody, not just Pepi and Paul
Johnston
• Those trucks block the road and obstruct view
Those tr-ucks should.be able to deliver all day not just early am
Too many delivery trucks parked for deliveries; poor access • Too many trucks . • Too many trucks in the city
• Too many trucks parked on street
• Too much congestion - open up delivery time from 7 AM to 4 PM - more time, less
trucks in there at one time. One truck on Bridge St. is OK, six is too much.
• Too much traffic in town
• Too much; too loud
• Too visible and noisy
• Town look, sounds and smells bad until 11 AM
• Town should have stipulated Gold Peak structure bottom level allocated for all core area
delivery and merchants pay for electric car delivery service
• Truck fumes are obnoxious!
• Trucks all over
• Trucks parked on Gore Creek Dr. until noon
TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1997
:
Comments about Loading and Delivery in Town
• Trucks should NOT be allowed to Park on Gore Creek Drive in front of Lodge EVER!
There are more suitable spots.
• Trucks should park along curb not in the middle of Gore Creek Drive and Hanson Ranch
Road .
• Turn off the diesels when delivering
~ Unsightly, noisy, disruptive
• Vail Village deliveries interfere with bus service especially between Vail AC and Vail
Village
, • Village still has too many trucks.in a pedestrian village _ • We are not Disneyland; real towns have deliveries • We businesses must have easy access to deliver
• We have a shop in V.V. with only available loading under threat of parking tickets
• We need to have a common warehouse and "cart" delivery
• We should be a pedestrian (like) town
• When they built the town they left half of it out; solution: turn Bridge St. into Emptoyee
housing
• Who cares; it's OK to park if your a truck but a citizen can't
• Why does W have so many more problems than LH? There area always trucks in the
Village and rarely in LH.
• Would you pay $500+ per night and put up with the noise and inconvenience
• Wouldn't a central pick-up center still create a lot of traffic to individual stores? IYs the
store owners hauling instead of UPS, FedEx, etc.
v '
TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1997
~
Use of the Commercial Core (other)
• 9-12 PM only
• Allow deliveries
• Allow vehicles through
• Bike lanes/paths
• Bridge Street always pedestrian only; stricter Gore Creek Drive
• Bridge Street pedestrian only
• Drop zones with electric carts
• Even cars to do a quick pick-up :
• Just fine the way it is
• Leave it • Mostly pedestrian, but some traffic must be allowed when necessary
• No change
• No restrictions
• None of the above, vehicle traffic is already to restricted -there is only one through street
from the roundabout west on the south side of I-70 and it is overloaded
• Open it up
• Shuttle delivery
• Small vehicles all the time; diesel and large at specific times
• Status Quo
• Things are fine
• Underground delivery access or re-zone it "employee housing"; all the merchants are
going west anyway
• Very few obey posted signs
~
TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1997 .
~
Comments about the Use of the Commercial Core
• . 7-9 AM
• A pedestrian only area is the answer (look at Aspen)
• A.m. hours for deliveries for all businesses to their door .
• Access with electric car or train (little trolley on street)
• Allow biking at reasonable speed
• Allow horse drawn carriage
~ Allow independents to shuttle via electric carts; no noise or vehicles -
• Am a delivery driver; restrictions would cause major delivery time issues
. • An overall streetscape should take preference; smaller golf cart like deliveries should be
allowed at specific times
• Balance of village (other than Bridge St.) auto access based on time of day and property
owner/renter need
• Before 10 am
• Central location for deliveries, to be picked up by individual businesses
• Completely restricted if possible; need a way for deliveries
• Deliveries are hard; they need to get close but lots of condo owners/shop owners are
driving on Bridge St. too much
• Deliveries before 11:00
• Deliveries done before business starts-not after or during
• Deliveries early before 8 am
• Deliveries early or late
• Deliveries need to be made
• Deliveries need to be made; morning seems to be a good time
• Deliveries should be brought in via hand carts
• Delivery only before 8 am
• Early am all or small vehicles to make deliveries
• Early am hours are fine
• Early am hours OK for all vehicles to load and unload-before 8 am
• Early am only
• Early morning deliveries; medium sized trucks
• Early morning loading; max. small trucks
• Early mornings (midday)-no deliveries after like 5 P.M. (big deliveries)
• Fine the way it is ,
- • For the convenience of the shops there in the village, guests could walk around trucks- no big deal
• Get rid of in town shuttle buses
• Gore Creek Dr. to 8 am, Hansen Ranch Rd turn around restricted to delivery vehicles
only
• Have fun picking the hours
• Have golf cart shuttles for people and luggage to hotels and condos
• Hours for the trucks should be very early and very late
• How could businesses run without delivery? You can't even consider pedestrian-only.
• How wonderFul but is it possible? Maybe during summer months; easier deliveries
• I favor restricting delivery to trucks no larger than the UPS/FedEx variety
• I have had to deliver flowers in the core and police are understanding
• I think to allow business to prosper (which is in all our best interests) we have to allow
loading and delivery to those businesses
• I think too many cars and trucks get into the core
J
TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1997
i
Comments about the Use of the Commercial Core
• I work for a restaurant; restrictions are nice but sometimes are more detrimental than
help
• If the greed heads want stuff for their shops they shouldn't bitch about delivery
• It doesn't seem possible to restrict it 100% of the time
• It is unrealistic to not allow businesses delivery services; they should be allowed delivery
in the morning .
• It seems practical and necessary that loading be allowed but should be controlled
• It's fine; quit caving in to Pepi and Sheika; there are other problems
; • Keep all cars and trucks out, period! . • Keep cars and trucks our during normal business hours _
• Keep out locals and visitors without real business • Larger vehicles need to be accommodated; good luck on how to
• Leave it as it is
• Limit hours further
• Load and unload in front of businesses; stores and bars at lowest peak hour .
• Loading and delivery only very early morning; would be too difficult for merchants if not
allowed at all
• Loading/delivery in early morning hours
• Make deliveries with golf carts, ATVs
• Merchants require delivery of products
• Must allow some time for vehicles to deliver!
• No matter what you do you can not please every one
• Nb parking in village - Pepi's lot should be closed
• Only small delivery vehicles (golf cart size)
• Pedestrian
• Pedestrian only area from 7:30 AM to 5 PM - high skier traffic
• Pedestrian only from 11 to 5
• Pedestrian only ideal but impossible; delivery early in am or late P.M.
• Pedestrian only would be lovely but not realistic
• Remember Octoberfest? the Village felt and was alive
• Remote parking lots with slectric carts to transfer people and goods
Restrict delivery vehicles from noon to 6 PM, allow transportation vehicles at all times
~ Street closed between 12 and 2
• The same as it is now • The tourists arrive at all hours of the day and iYs nice that they can be dropped off at their hotels in the Village
• Too small of an area for deliveries; need alternative solution
• Underground tunnel
• Up to 10 am for 5 ton and smaller vehicles
• Use electric vehicles like in Zermatt
Use little carts like the Sonnenalp has
• Use real estate transfer tax to provide distribution center by Christinia
• Vail Village's design doesn't allow for alley delivery; don't penalize retailers because of it;
iYs hard enough for delivery people now!
• Vehicle deliveries 10-11:30 AM and 1-3 PM only
• Vehicles only form 10 P.M. to 6 am
• Very user unfriendly; don't antagonize the delivery trucks and make them miserable so
that they raise the prices to deliver
~
TOWN OF VAIL COMMUNITY SURVEY 1997 `
c
Comments about the Use of the Commercial Core
• We need to let some vehicles through especially delivery vehicles
• Why make life difficuit; we need supplies
• Why should Bridge St. receive special treatment
~ wnter: before 8 or after 4; summer: more flexible hours
With the exception of emergency vehicles
• Without alleys there is a problem; delivery men can onty do so much
• Would like to see a central loading and unloading with small delivery vehicles
. • You have to get the goods into the stores
• You must make the Village easy to access for locals shopping and drop-offs and for
deliveries
• Zermatt does it; our business owners whine about everything
..~r .
Agenda last revised 10/15 5 pm
DESIGN REVOEW BOARD AGENDA
Wednesday, October 15, 1997
3:00 P.M.
PROJECT ORIENTATION / NO LUPVCH - Community Development Department 2:15 pm
MEMBERS PRESFNT MEMBERS ABSENT
Brent Alm ClarkBrittain
Ted Hingst Ann Bishop (PEC)
Bill Pierce
SiTE VISITS 2;30 Rm
1. Loclge Properties - 162 Gore Creek Drive
Driver: Dominic
k~-
PUBLIC HEARING - YOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3:00
1. Linn - Final review of a new single family residence. Lauren
1350 Greenhill Court/ Lot 14, Glen lyoun Filing.
Applicants: Robert & Alexandra Palmer Linn, represented by Urban Architects
MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Ted Hingst VOTE: 3-0
APPRQVED WITH 2 CONDITIONS:
1. That a minimum of three aspens be added to the landscaping of the driveway area.
2. That the railing detail be provided to staff.
2. Lodge Properties, Inc. (Lodge at Vail) - Loading dock alterations, Dominic
deck replacement, chimney addition.
174 E. Gore Creek Dr./Lot A,B,C, Block 5-C, Vail Village 1 st Filing,
Applicant: Lodge Properties Inc., represented by Tim Losa2ehren Associates
MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Ted Hingst VOTE: 3-0
CONSENT APPROVED WITH 1 CONDITION:
1. The area around the loading dock needs to be cleaned up. Garage doors, trim and electrical
meters/boxes and conduit need to be addressed and improved. The exhaust vents on the
mechanical building must be incorporated into chimneys. This condition must be met to ihe
satisfication of staff.
1
,
1Y1 WN OF I' "
.
,
3. Vail Associates - A request for approval for an awning at Single Track Sports/ Lauren
Vail Snowboard Supply.
600 Lionshead Mall/Lot 4, Block 1, Vail Lionshead 1 st Filing.
Applicant: Vail Associates, Iric.
MOTION: Ted Hingst SECOND: Bill Pierce VOTE:3-0
APPROVED WITH 5 CONDITIONS:
1. That fascia be added as shown on the plan.
2. That the scalloped edging be removed.
3. That a cap be added to the base of the posts to hide the bolts.
4. That the columns must be wood trimmed.
5. That the awning attachments be colored to match the existing building.
Staff Approvals
Lipton - Add new door. Dominic
162 Gore Creek Drive/Lots A,B,C, Block 5, Vail Village 1 st.
Applicant: Philippe Courtois
Cornice Building - Interior conversion. Mike
362 Vail Valley Drive/A part of Tract B, Vail Village 1 st.
Applicant: Daniel Heard, dba the John H. Carter Company
Orthodontics Associates of Greeley - New doors and windows. Lauren
2355 Bald Mountain Road/Lot 25, Block 2, Vail Village 13th Filing.
Applicant: Orthodontics Associates of Greeley
Off Piste Sports - New sign. Laurcri
230 Bridge Street/Lot B, Block 5, Vail Vi?lage 1st Filing.
Applicant: Mike Grant
Belleville - Addition of boiler for heated driveway. Lauren
4440 Glen Falls Lane/Lot 14, Forest Glen.
Applicant: Walter and Linda Belleville
Lodges at Timber Creek - Revised site plan and building footprint for D19 &D20. Dominic
2897 Timber Creek Drive #19 and #20/1-odges at Timber Creek.
Applicant: Stan Cole and Chuck Ogilby
Katz/Dauphinais-Moseley - Landscape modification. George
1890 Lionsridge Loop/Lots 27, Block 2, Lionsridge Filing # 2.
Applicant: Lot 27 LLC, Steve Katz
Creekside Candy - New awning sign. Dominic
183 Gore Creek Drive/A part of Block 56, Vail Village Filing #1.
Applicant: Derek Freedman
Monfort - Door addition. Dominic
284 Gore Creek Drive/Lots D&E, Block 5C,Unit 2A, Bridge St. Condo.
Applicant: Christine Monfort
Suverkropp - Interior 250 and window addition. Lauren
1660 Sunburst Drive #12/1-ot 1 Sunburst 3rd Filing.
Applicant: G.H.J. Suverkropp
2
' .
McDonalds Restaurant - Repaint, soffit lighting, addition of No Parking signs. Dominic
2171 N. Frontage Road/Lot 213, Vail das Schone #3.
Applicant: George Greenwald
Gray - Interior conversion. Dominic
2672 Kinnickinnick Court/Lot 6, Block 2, Vail Intermountain.
Applicant: Harry Gray
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.
3
~
~
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: October 13, 1997
_ SUBJECT: An appeal of three staff interpretations: 1) The staff's classifiGation of the third and
, fourth floors as "eating and drinking establishments"; 2) Section 18.52.100 C, -
Parking-Requirements Schedule (Eating & Drinking Establishments) and Section
18.52.160, Exemptions (parking pay-in-lieu) - appellant disputes the calculation of
the number of parking spaces required; and 3) The requirement that the
applicant sign the pay-in-lieu promissory note personally and that a Deed of Trust
be filed on the property; located at The Vail Village Club, 333 Bridge Street, Lot C,
Block 2, Vail Village 1 st Filing.
Appellant: Riva Ridge Partners LLC - Glenn M. Heelan; Margretta B. Parks
Staff: Mike Mollica/Tom Moorhead
1. SUBJECT PROPERTY
The Vail Village Club is located at 333 Bridge Street, Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village 1 st
Filing. This property was formerly referred to as Cyrano's.
II. PLANNING and ENVIRONMENTAL COMMiSSION JURISDICTION
Pursuant to Section 18.66.030 6,1 - Appeal of Administrative Actions; Authority, the
Planning and Environmental Commission has the authority to hear and decide appeals
_ from any decision, determination or interpretation by any Town of Vail administrative
_ official with respect to the provisions of the Zoning Code.
III. PROCEDURAL CRITERIA FOR APPEALS
Pursuant to Sections 18.66.030 B, 2 and 3- Appeal of Administrative Actions; initiation
and Procedures, there are three basic criteria for an adequate appeal: standing of the
appellant; adequacy of the notice of appeal; and timeliness of ihe notice of appeal.
A. Standing of the Appellant
The appellant has standing to appeal the staff's decisions related to the
construction of the Vail Village Club. Riva Ridge Partners LLC is the developer of
the building and the lessee. The owner of the property is Margretta B. Parks. B. Adequacy of the Notice of Appeal
The application for this appeal was filed by Glenn Heelan (Riva Ridge Partners
1
rowxos ~n1~'''
s
. >
LLC) on September 15, 1997. The application has been determined to be
complete by the Department of Community Development.
C. Timeliness of the Notice of Appeal
The Administration Section of the Town's Zoning Code (18.66.030 B, 3-
, Procedures) states the following:
"A written notice of appeal must be filed with the Director of Community
Development or with the department rendering the decision, determination
_ or interpretation within ten calendar days of the decision becoming final. If -the last day for filing an appeal falls on a Saturday, Sunday or a Town of
Vail observed holiday, the last day for filing an appeal shall be extended to
the next business day. The Administrator's decision shall become final at
the next Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) meeting,
following the Administrator's decision, unless the decision is called-up and
modified by the Board or Commission."
As indicated in Tom Moorhead's memorandum to the Planning and Environmental
Commission dated October 2, 1997 (attached as Exhibit A), it is the staff's
. position that this appeal is not timely. The staff's initial calculations for the
parking pay-in-lieu requirement, as well as the use classification of the third and
fourth floors of the building, were determined during March of 1996, utilizing the
drawings submitted by Semple Brown Roberts, Architects, dated March 18, 1996.
Additionally, a June 21, 1996 letter from Glenn Heelan to Mike Moliica, Assistant
Director of Community Development (attached as Exhibit B) states:
"Pursuant to our previous conversations, it is my understanding and
agreement that the parking pay-in-lieu fees currently estimated at
$457,334.64 as established by Community Development, in accordance
with the plans and specifications submitted by Riva Ridge Partners, LLC,
that indicate completion of the third and fourth floors as a quasi-public
club, will be paid over five years with the first payment due and payable at
the time a Temporary of Certificate of Occupancy is issued."
Because the appeal was not timely filed, the procedural criteria for an appeal
have not been met, and ttie appeal should not be heard.
IV. SUBSTANTIVE BACKGROUND
• On September 21, 1995, Jim Curnutte, then Senior Planner for the Town, wrote the
following to Mr. Glenn Heelan:
"As you know, a"private club" is not listed as a permitted or conditional use in the
Commercial Core 1 Zone District. Staff has determined, however, that your
proposed use is "similar" to two of the "eating and drinking establishments" listed
as conditional uses (above the second floor) in the CC1 Zone District. These
uses are "cocktail lounges and bars" and "restaurants." For your information,
2
.
,
these will also be the categories used to determine the parking requirement
for the club." (emphasis added)
A copy of this letter is attached to this memorandum as Exhibit C. • On November 27, 1995, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a
. request for a conditional use permit to allow for a"quasi-public club" in the Commercial
- Core 1 Zone District. The club was proposed to be located on the third and fourth floors -
. of the Cyrano's Building. It should be noted that the staff inemorandum to the Planning -
- and Environmental Commission contained language identical to that contained in the
September 21, 1995 letter from Jim Curnutte to Glenn Heelan. A copy of this staff
memorandum is included as Exhibit D.
• On March 26, 1996, an application for a building permit to construct the Vail Village Club
was made to the Town of Vail's Department of Community Development.
• On July 24, 1996, a building permit was issued for the construction of the Vail Village
Club. This building permit included 13 conditions. Condition #3, which is relevant to this
appeal, reads as follows:
"The parking pay-in-lieu fee shall be paid to the Town prior to the issuance of a
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. See Glenn Heelan's letter of June 21, 1996
to Mike Mollica, [Exhibit B] for details."
• On September 15, 1997, Glenn Heelan (Riva Ridge Partners LLC) and Margretta B.
Parks submitted a formal appeal to the Town of Vail Department of Community
Development. The nature of the appeals are generally described below, and a copy of
the Appeal Form is attached as Exhibit E.
V. NATURE OF THE APPEALS
The appellant is appealing the following three staff interpretations:
1) The staff's classification of-the third and fourth floors as "eating and drinking
- establishments"; . 2) Section 18.52.100 C, Parking-Requirements Schedule (Eating & Drinking
Establishments) and Section 18.52.160, Exemptions (parking pay-in-lieu) - appellant
disputes the calculation of the number of parking spaces required; and
3) The requirement that the applicant sign the pay-in-lieu promissory note personally and
that a Deed of Trust be filed on the property located at The Vail Village Club, 333 Bridge
Street, Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village 1st Filing.
The appellanYs statements as to the specific nature of the appeals are attached as Exhibit F, and
include two letters from Mr. Glenn Heelan to Mr. Mike Mollica (dated September 15, 1997 and
July 1, 1997) and a letter dated July 30, 1997 from Mr. Eric Torgersen, with Holley, Albertson &
Polk, P. C to Mr. Mike Mollica.
. 3 -
~
.
VI. REDUIRED ACTION
Uphold/Overturn/Modify the three staff interpretations.
According to Section 18.66.030 B, 5 Appeal of Administrative Actions - Findings, "the Planning
and Environmental Commission 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."
_The appellant is requesting that the Planning and Environmental Commission review the following three staff interpretations:
1) The staff's classification of the third and fourth floors as "eating and drinking
establishments".
Staff Response:
The determination or classification of use for the third and fourth floors of the Vail Village
Club was made as early as September 1995. Further, during the staff and the PEC's
review of the conditional use permit for the "quasi-public club" (November 1995) both the
staff and the PEC determined that the quasi-public club was similar in nature to "eating
and drinking establ'ishments," as identified in Section 18.52.100 C, 5 of the Town Zoning
Code.
The staff continues to believe that "eating and drinking establishmenY" is the appropriate
designation for the quasi-public club use.
2) Section 18.52.100 C, Parkin g-Req ui rements Schedule (specifically, Eating & Drinking
Establishments) and Section 18.52.160, Exemptions (parking pay-in-lieu) - appellant
disputes the calculation of the number of parking spaces required;
Staff Response• _
According to Section 18.52.100 C(Parking-Requirements Schedule), the uses in the Vail
Village Club include retail stores (assessed at 1.0 space per each 300 square feet of net
floor area), other professional and business offices (assessed at 1.0 space per each 250
square feet of net floor area) and eating and drinking establishments (assessed at 1.0
space per each eight seats, based on seating capacity or Building Code occupancy
standards, whichever is more restrictive). Due to the level of detail involved in the staff's
parking analysis, the staff will provide the 114" = 1' floor plans for the Planning and
Environmental Commission's review at the hearing. In summary, the staff's calculations
are as follows:
4
Retail = 3,594 sq. ft. = 11.98 parking spaces
Office = 94 sq. ft. = 0.376 parking spaces
RestauranUClub = 5,717 sq. ft. = 47.64 qarkina spaces
. Total = 59.996 parking spaces
-27 (arandfathered sqaces)*
Grand Total = 32.996 parking spaces pay-in-lieu ,
`Note: The 27 "grandfathered spaces" are those spaces which are considered
pre-existing, based upon the uses in the old Cyrano's Building.
Therefore, 32.996 parking spaces x$16,333.38 results in a total parking pay-in-lieu
fee of $538,936.20. It should also be noted that the $16,333.38 fee per parking space is
the 1996 pay-in-lieu rate. Although the pay-in-lieu fee has not yet been paid for the Vail
Village Club, the Town has agreed to apply the 1996 rate to the project. The 1997 rate is
$16,905.05.
The appellant had requested that the staff calculate the parking requirement based upon
the Uniform Building Code's determination of occupant load. Although this is not the
staff's "normal" procedure for determining a structure's parking requirement, we did
complete that analysis. An independent analysis was completed by Mr. Art Hoagland,
ICBO Certified Building Official. Mr. Hoagland has determined that the occupant load for
the Vail Village Club is 483 persons. This figure does not include the additional 10%
allowance per Section 25.114, B of the Uniform Fire Code. This 10% allowance can be
approved by the Fire Chief, when additional exit facilities are provided.
Per the Town's parking requirement of 1.0 space per each 8 seats, 483 persons divided
by 8= 60.375 parking spaces. This is 0.379 spaces more than the staff calculation.
Further, upon review of the Town's building permit file for the Vail Village Club, staff has
'located an occupant load determination provided by the appellanYs architect, Semple Brown Roberts (Denver, Colorado). This analysis indicates an occupant load of 484
- persons. The Semple Brown Roberts analysis is attached as Exhibit G.
3) The requirement that the applicant sign the pay-in-lieu promissory note personally and
that a Deed of Trust be filed on the property.
Staff Response:
This issue will be addressed by Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney, at the Planning and
Environmental Commission public hearing.
5
VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The staff recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission make two separate
motions on this application.
A. The staff's position is that the appellant, Riva Ridge Partners LLC and Margretta B. Parks did
not file a timely appeal. Therefore, we believe that the appeal has no basis. The staff
recommends that that the Planning and Environmental Commision reject the appellants appeal
. and that the PEC find that the appeal was not filed in a timely manFler, as required by Section
_ 18.66.030 B, 3- Appeal of Administrative Actions; Procedures. •
B. In order to provide the appellant with clear direction as. to the staff's interpretations of the Municipal Code, staff recommends that the PEC make a motion on the substance of the appeal,
as well.
Staff recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission uphold the three staff
interpretations that the appellant is contesting. In accordance with the information presented in
this memorandum, and the exhibits attached hereto, staff recommends that the Planning and
Environmental Commission make the following findings:
1. That the Community Development Department staff, and the Planning and
Environmental Commission, have appropriately classified the quasi-public club,
located on the third and fourth floors of the Vail Village Club, as an "eating and
drinking establishmenY";
2. That the Community Development Department staff has appropriately applied
Section 18.52.100 C, Parking-Requirement Schedule and Section 18.52.160,
Exemptions (parking pay-in-lieu) during their review of the building permit floor
plans for the Vail Village Club; and
3. That the Town Attorney has appropriately required the applicant to sign the
parking pay-in-lieu promissory note personally and that a Deed of Trust be filed on
_ the property.
F:\EVERYONE\PEC\MEMOS\97\VVCLU B.013
6
, EXHIBIT A - 2 pages
u
TOWN OF VAIL
~
Office of the Town Manager
75 South Frontage Road Yail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2105/Fax 970-479-2157
TM
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning & Environmental Commission
FROM: R. Thomas Moorhead (L~
DATE: October 2, 1997 RE: Glenn Heelan/Vail Village Club Appeal of Administrative Action
On September 17, 1997 Glenn Heelan appealed administrative action of Mike Mollica, Assistant
Director of Community Development. Based upon the Town of Vail Code and prior agreements
made by Mr. Heelan I believe that this appeal is not timely. Attached is correspondence from Mr.
Heelan dated June 21, 1996 in which he agrees to the method, manner and procedure to establish
the amount of the parking pay-in-lieu fee and he further agrees that the parking pay-in-lieu will be
paid at the time a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy is issued.
Additionally, Mr. Heelan indicates on the face of his appeal that he is appealing the decision of Mike
Mollica of June 17, 1997. Section 18.66.030, Appeals in subsection 3 requires that any such action
must-be appealed within ten calendar days of the decision becoming final. The decision becomes
final at the next Planning and Environmental Commission meeting after June 17, 1997. Therefore,
. any right to appeal such decision has lapsed.
I understand that Mr. Mollica will be providing to the. Planning and Environmental Commission a
memorandum which deals with the substantive issues of calculation of the parking pay-in-lieu fee
in this particular instance. Based on the procedural issues of the lasping of the time within which
a matter can be appealed; the previous agreement by Mr. Heelan that the parking pay-in-lieu fee
would be paid at the time of the issuing of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy; and, finally, for
the substantive calculation performed by Community Development, this appeal should be
overruled.
Thank you.
RTM/aw .
xc: Robert W. McLaurin
Mike Mollica
C:\pec.mem
ta~ KECYCLb'UPAPER
( :.i,`r.: . . . . ~ '
4 ; :i " • ,
~ • +
~ Iune 21, 1996
• •
.j ,
~ Mr. Mike Mollica
Asaistant Diroctor of Community Devdopment
A . . ' Tovm of Vail
. .
. • Dear M'i]cey
Pursuant to our previous convqsationa, it is my undersYanding and agreemcnt that the " parking pay-in-lieu fas currontly estim$tcd at 5457,334,64 tts establishcd by Community . Developmerrt in accordance with the plaas and specifications submitted by Riva Ridge
' Partner4 I.L.C that indicate completion of the third and FouRh floors as tt Quasi-pubGc
3., Club, will be p8id over five yean with the first paymeni due and payable dt the timc a
~Temparary Catificata of Oecupancy is issued. As we fiuther discussod. the Tovrm of V&il
- Building Deparement has requosted a ctilistg from ICBO with respxt to certain aspWsof the third floor design. It is my undustanding that earlier today, Dan Stanek received - -
;
'infonnation 8rom ICHO that rcquires a chango of design to the third floor. I would like to
request that if the design alternatives warrant a reduction in the parking requirements that
. these reductions be reflected in the agtaed upon parking pay-in-lieu fee.
;
It is also my understanding thai in the event Riva Ridge Partners LLC revises the currtnt
aubmission and changes the third and fourth floors to a residential aad office use" the
applicab]e parking puy.in.lieu fee is wrretstty $179,667.18. It is also my understsnding
_ that thia fee, if applicable, would be paid over five years with the first payment due at the
time of the Temporary Cestificate of Occupancy.
~ . . -
~
Finatly, in a discussion esrfles todsy with Bob McLaurin, I requested that in the evtnt the
Town Couacit revises the pay-in.lieu fees or terms of payment such that the chariges
: woutd be bene8cisl to The Vail V'iUage Club, thet ws bo included in the changes for the
; purposes of calculating the appropriate fee andJor payment achedulo at the time the
Temporary Ce.rtiScate of Occupancy is issued. As I discussed with'Mr. McLaurin, we
believe 'that the lorig term economic banelits ta the Town of VaiI vis a v;s the cornirnuag
sales taxes generated by a commercia! use of the third and fourth floors geatly outweig6
. a residential use of the same space, yet the "penalties" unposed by the greater perking
; requiraneats and fees of commeraal uae may ultimate}y be the "£nnl straw" that forces us
to uae the epaca aa s resideatial condominium. I am hopeful that the Tovm Council also .
sees the long tam benefits of wch an .
approach and chooscs to include us in aay
impMvemea ta to t h e current p a r l a n8 PaY-in-lieu ordinance. • .
! : • , - .
•If p'de any fuRher assistance, I can be reached at 949-6277.
S ,
; , . .
lenn M. Heel$n
~
~
; .
.
. .
~ .
~i ••'~•:V•
EXHIBIT B - 1 page
~ June 21, 1996
.7 Mr. Mike Mollica
f•=..~ Assistant Director of Community Development Town of Vail
' Dear Mik
. Pursuant to our previous conversations, it is my understanding and agreement that the
parking pay-in-lieu fees currently estimated at $457,334.64 as established by Community
Development in accordance with the plans and specifications submitted by Riva Ridge
. Partners, LLC that indicate completion of the third and fourth floors as a Quasi-Public
Club, will be paid over five years with the first payment due and payable at the time a
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy is issued. 'scus , To o ~l
Buildin epartment has requested a ruling fr CBO with respect to certain aspects of
d flo ' n. t is my u andi that earlier today, Dan Stanek received
information from ICBO t a requires a change of design to the third floor. I would like to
request that if the design alternatives warrant a reduction in the parking requirements that
these reductions be reflected in the agreed upon parking pay-in-Iieu fee.
It is also my understanding that in the event R.iva Ridge Partners LLC revises the current
submission and changes the third and fourth floors to a residential and office use" the
applicable parking pay-in-lieu fee is currently $179,667. ] 8. It is also my understanding
. that this fee, if applicable, would be paid over five years with the first payment due at the
~.time of the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy.
Finally, in a discussion earlier today with Bob McLaurin, I requested that in the event the
Town Council revises the pay-in-lieu fees or terms of payment such that the changes
would be beneficial to The Vail Village Club, that we be included in the changes for the
- , purposes of calculating the appropriate fee and/or payment schedule at the time the
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy is issued. As I discussed with Mr. McLaurin, we
believe that the long term economic benefits to the Town of Vail vis a vis the continuing •
sales taxes generated by a commercial use of the third and fourth floors greatly outweigh
_ a residential use of the same space, yet the "penalties" imposed by the greater parking
requirements and fees of commercial use may ultimately be the "final straw" that forces us
to use the space as a residential condominium. I am hopeful that the Town Council also .
sees the long term benefits of such an approach and chooses to include us in any
improvements to the current parking pay-in-lieu ordinance.
If an pl vid
Y , at 949-6277.
S ncer , e an further assistance I can be reached
-
lenn M. Heelan
' EXHIBIT C - 2 PAGES
u
h~y
TOWN OF YAIL ~
75 South Frontage Road Department of Con:munity Developn:erit
Yail, Colorado 81657
970-479-21381479-2139
FAX 970-479-2452
September 21, 1995 Mr, Glenn M. Heelan
P.O. Box 5770
Avon, CO 81620
RE: Application for a Conditional Use Permit for the Serrano's
Huilding, Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village 1st Filing
Dear Mr. Heelan:
I have completed a review of your recently submitted conditional
use permit application to operate a private club on the third and
fourth floors of the Serrano's Building, Lot C, Block 2, Vail
village 1st filing. Additional information must be provided in
. order for staff to ade revi equest. Ple respor.d
l-o L-h o ' g:
- As you know, a"Priva~4e Cltib" is not listed as a permitted
or conditional use in the Commercial Core •I (CCI) zone
district. Staff has determined, however, that your proposed
use, is - -,,similar,, to two of the "eating and drinking
establistiments" listed as conditional uses (above the second
floor) in the CCI zone district. These uses are 11 Cocktail
lounges and bars" and "restaurants". For your information,
these caill also be the categories used to determine the
parking requirement for the club.
ij~
n to t e pa i cts o y pose use,
and as required in Sec n III (3) of the Conditional Use
Permit application reruirements, please provide detailedfloor
plans which indicate the layout.of all proposed uses on the
third and fourth floors of the building.
- Your application states that no exterior changes will be
made to the building. However, denending on'the scope of the
food service element of your proposal, it would appear that
additional mechanical equipment may be necessary. Please
provide a dei:ailed description of how private dinner parties,
meeting/dining rooms, additional food prep. areas, bars,
kitchens, etc. will be handled.
~`S~ RECYCLED PMER
i
Mr. Glenn M. Heelan
Page 2 - In the Commercial Core I Zane District "meeting rooms" may
. be approved, as a conditional use germit, only in the basement
or garden level and on the second levei of a building. They
are not allowed, as a permitted or conditional use, on the
first floor or street level or on any level of a building •
above tha second fl-oor. It would appear from your application
description that the meeting/dining rooms will be used solely by club members, and therefore considered as accessory to the
functions of the club. However, we must receive a more
detailed explanation of their intended use. The club members,
as a group, cannot rent the rooms to the general public.
- How will the area on the second floor of the building,
currently labeled "The Private Club", be affected by your
proposed use?
- Please provide a more detailed description of the "office
space for building and club operations" as described in your
application.
As mentioned previously, staff believes that additional information
is necessary in order to fully understand all possible impacts
associated with your proposed conditional use. In order to stay on
schedule for the October 9, 1995, PEC meeting, please provide the
above requested information no later than 5:00 p.m., Monday, September 25, 1995.
Sincerely,
Jim Curnutte
Senior Planner
cc: Mike Mollica
Andy Knudtsen
-f-rl e
EXHIBIT D - 7 pages
MEMORANDUM PLE COPY
TO: Pianning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development aepartment.
DATE: November 27, 1995
SUBJECT: A request far a Conditional Use Permit to allow for a"quasi-public club" in the
, Commercial Core I Zone District to be located on the 3rd and 4th flbors of the
, Serrano's Building located at 298 Hansen Ranch Road/Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village
1 st Filing. .
Applicant: Margaretta B. Parks, represented by Glen Heelan
Planner: Jim Curnutte
1. BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF THE REGIUEST
Glen Heelan, on behalf of the building owner, has requested PEC approval of a Conditional Use
Permit in order to construct a"quasi-public club" in the Commercial Core I(CCI) Zone District, to
be located on the 3rd and 4th floors of the recently approved new Serrano's Building, located at
298 Hansen Ranch Road. The Town of Vail Municipal Code defines a quasi-public use
differently from a use that is entirely private or public. For the PEC's information, the code
defines these uses as follo.ws:
- Private - "Private" means a use, area, property or facility which is not public. (Ord.
21(1994), § 5.)
- Public - "Public" means a use, area, properry or facility which: A. Is owned and operated by a governmental entity, and
functions or is available for use by all persons whether with
or without charge; or
. . . B. Is owned or operated by a person or entity other than a
governmental entity, and functions or is available for use by ,
. . all persons without charge. (Ord. 21(1994) § 6.) - Quasi-Public -"Quasi-public" means a use which is characterized by its availabillty to
the public, with or without cost, but which is conducted by an entity,
organizatio erso ' not a go rnmental entity. (Ord. 21 94)
. § . 0.
A"quasi-public club" is not specifically listed as a permitted or conditional use in the CCI Zone
District. Near the end of the list of conditional uses, however, is a statement which allows for
additional uses determined to be similar to thepermitted and conditional uses described above."
Staff has determined that the proposed quasi-public club is "similar" to two of the eating and
drinking establishments listed as conditional uses (above the 2nd floor) in the CCI Zone District. These uses are "cocktail lounges and bars" and "restaurants." Since staff has determined that
these uses are similar to the proposed quasi-public club, the applicant has proceeded to apply
for a Conditional Use Permit. Additionally, staff will use these categories in order to determine
the parking requirement for the club.
f:\everyone\pec\memos\serranos.n27 1
YqMqQt'j~ ldn more detail in Sec i
Heelan, recently received PEC a t oval (Marchr13nd) of this memo, the project developer; Glen
Building and replace it with a new structure. The approved ses on heh3rd floor oS he new
building include hnro offices and a portioil of a residential condominium. The remainder of the
condominium would be located on the fourth floor of the building. The new concept is to use the
3rd and 4th floors exclusively for a quasi-public club. The ctub owners will be offering their
members not only the traditional ski storage (in the basement), but also areas of comfort and
relaxation together with an array of services. The applicant has indicated that club members
would have the ability to ski down to the base.of the mountain, give their skiis to the ski valet,
and enter the club. Here they would have the luxury of taking off their boots, sitting down by the
fireplace in a quiet atmosphere to relax in the comfort of their "mountain living room." They might
enjoy the refreshment of their choice, make a couple of phone calls, check the stock market,
send a fax, hold a meeting or host a dinner party for their family, friends, or business associates.
It is anticipated that the 3rd floor of the building would be used for: A. Personal lockers, steam room and showers (similar to a private golf club where .
bags are stored elsewhere);
B. Office space for building and club operations; ,
C. Lounge area where members could have a drink, make a call, send a fax; and
D. Up to three meeting and/or dining rooms. '
. The 4th floor is anticipated to be the "living room on the mountain." This is an area where
members could sit by the fire and relax, meet with friends and family, have an appetizer and a
drink.
This Conditional Use Permit request does not involve ~n exterior changes to the previously
approved building.
The original approval of the Serrano's redevelopment included a restaurant and a"private club"
on the 2nd tloor of the building. The applicant has indicated that that portion of the 2nd floor
currently labeled as private club, will be used as additional dining for the 2nd floor restaurant.
Since this entire area was calculated as a restaurant for parking purposes, there will be no
- additional-iinPacts associated with the proposed change in use.
II. BACKGROUND On March 13, 1995, Glen Heelan, the project developer, received PEC approval to demolish the
existing Serrano's Building and replace it with a new structure. (Please see attachment #1, site
plan, elevation drawings and floor plans of the approved building). The building program
included: • Commercial uses and a potential nightclub in the basement.
• Retail uses on the 1 st floor.
• Restaurant uses on the 2nd floor.
• Two offices and a portion of a condominium on the 3rd floor.
• The remainder of the condominium on the 4th floor.
f:\everyone\Dec\memos\serranos.n27 2
In addition to these uses, waikway and landscape improvements on the north, east and south
sides of the building were approved, as well as a 2nd floor outdoor dining deck over the Hansen
Ranch Road right-of-way.
To accomplish the above desciibed proposal, a CCI Major Exterior Alteration and the fotlowing
variances were required:
- 1. A setback variance for an 11-foot encroachment into the 30-foot stream setback for Mill Creek (for the basement floor only); '
2. A variance for common area of 78.9% (35% is allowed by zoning).
AIso4 the following two conditional use permits were required:
1. An outdoor dining deck on the second floor; and
2. Office space on the third floor.
The project was reviewed and ultimately approved by the Vail Town Council and the Design
Review Board in the Spring of 1995.
Although the applicant had intended to demolish the existing structure and begin construction of
the new building in the spring of 1995, he was not able to adhere to that schedule and
• demolition/construction has been delayed until the spring of 1996. In the meantime, the
applicant has reconsidered the previously approved uses of the 3rd and 4th floors of the building.
On October 9, 1995, a worksession was held with the PEC to discuss this Conditional Use
Permit request. At that time, the applicant had intended to have the club be a"private" club. The
PEC was not receptive to the idea of a private club in the Village and the negative precedent that
may set and directed the applicant to explore other options. In response to that direction, the
applicant has amended the intended operations of the club so that the club would now be open
to the public (see attachment #2 for floor plans of the club). The applicant has indicated that the
public would be able to avail themselves of a number of options related to club services. For
- example, the public could.rent ski lockers in the club on a seasonal basis; pay a daily, weekly or.
_ monthly access fee to use all, or a portion of, the club amenities, or pay a full membership fee .
and accompanying annual dues. The applicant has also pointed out that the liquor license
associated with this club will be the same as those granted to public restaurants and will not be a
private liquor license. .
On November 13, 1995, the PEC tabled this application and requested that the Town Attorney
provide a written opinion on the applicant's right to apply for the requested Conditional Use
Permit. See attached copy of the Town Attorney's response to the PEC request.
III. CR(TERIA TO BE USED IN EVALUATING THIS PROPOSAL
Upon review of Section 18.60 - Conditional Use Permits, the Community Development
Department recommends approval of the conditional use permit based upon the following
factors:
f:\everyone\pec\memos\serranos.n27 3
A. Consideration of Fa *~rc•
1. Relationsiiip and impact of the use on the development objectives of
the Town.
Staff's Res nse - Staff is in support of the proposed use of ihe 3rd and
4th floors of the Serrano's Building as a quasi-public club. It would appear
that the club has the potential to provide more activity and interest in the
Village than would be provided by one residential dwelling unit and two
: office spaces. _ • Additionally, staff believes that the proposed Conditional Use Permit
request would serve to carry out the following goals, policies and
objectives of the Vail Village Master Plan:
2.4 Objective: Encourage the development of a variety of a new
commercial activity where compatible with existing
land uses.
2.4,1 Policy; Commercial in-fill development consistent with
established horizontal zoning regulations shall be
encouraged to provide activiry generators,
accessible greenspaces, public plazas, and
• ' streetscape improvements to the pedestrian
network throughout the Village.
2.4.2 Policy: Activity that provides night life and evening
entertainrnent for both the guests 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.
(n the CCI Zone District-, "meeting rooms" may be approved, as a.
Conditional Use, only in the basement or garden level and on the 2nd level -
of a building. They are not allowed, as a permitted or conditional use, on
the 1 st floor or street level or any level of a building above the 2nd floor.
Since the applicant's request includes the proposed use of a portion of the
3rd floor for meeting and/or dining rooms, staff was concerned with
authorizing a use which is specifically prohibited on this level of a building
in the CCI Zone District. The applicant has responded to staff's concern
by committing that the meeting rooms will be used solely by club
members, and therefore, can be considered as accessory to the functions
of the quasi-public club. The club members, as a group, will not rent the .
rooms to the general public.
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.
f:\everyona\pnc\memos\earranos.n27 4
Staff Res onse - Staff believes that the proposed change in use from
residential and office use to a quasi-public club will have no negative effect
on any of the above listed criteria.
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.
Staff Res onse - Staff believes that the proposed change in use from
residential and office use to a quasi-public club will have no negative effect
on any of the above listed criteria.
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.
Staff Res onse - As mentioned previously, there will be no external
changes made in conjunction with this proposed change in approved uses
of the 3rd and 4th floors of the Serrano's Building. Therefore, there will be
no changes in the scale and bulk of the building previously reviewed and
approved by the PEC, Town Council and Design Review Board. With
regard to the change in use and its effect on the character of the area,
• staff believes that the proposed change from one large residential
condominium unit and two small office spaces, to a quasi-public club,
could have the effect of providing more activity and therefore a livelier feel
to the Village, which is a goal of the Town.
B. Fin in
The PlanninQ and Environmentat Commission shall make the following findings
betore granting a conditional use p rmit•
1. •.That the proposed location of the use is in accord with ihe purposes of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code and the purposes of the
• district in which the site is located. 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 the conditional use permit section of the zoning code.
C. Additional Criteria for consideration of Conditional Use Permit applications in
the CCI Zone District
In addition to the standard Conditional Use Permit Criteria and Findings listed in
f:\everyone\pec\memos\serranos.n27 5
paragraphs A and B above, applications for a Conditional Use Permit within the
CC I Zone District must address the following additional development factors:
1. Effects of vehicular traffic on Commercial Core I District;
Staff Resmnag - The proposed change of approved uses on the 3rd and
4th floors of the Serrano's Building, from a dwelling unit and office space
• to a quasi-public club, would not appear to have a negative effect on
vehicular traffic in the CC I Zone District. The loading and delivery traffic
. associated with the club will be accommodated by the same loading and •
delivery vehicles associated with the restaurant already approved on the
second level of the building and should not resutt in additional traffic impacts.
2. Reduction of vehicular traffic in Commercial Core 1 District;
51aff Re3 nse - The proposed change in use would not appear to cause
a reduction, or increase, in vehicular traffic in the CCI Zone District.
' 3. Reduction of nonessential off-street parking;
Staff Res nse - The proposed change in use would not reduce, or
increase non-essential off-street parking. There is currently no off-street
parking associated with this property.
4. Control of delivery, pick-up and service vehicles;
Staff Res ns As mentioned in staff's response to criteria #1 above,
staff believes that there will be no increase in the number of delivery, pick-
up or service vehicles associated with the proposed club. '
The food and beverage elements associated with the club appear to be
minimal and can be accommodated through the deliveries that would
already occur in relation to the restaurant on the 2nd level.
. 5: _ Development of public spaces for use by pedestrians; -Staff Res ns The praposed quasi-public club will have no effect,
positive or negative, on public spaces for use by pedestrians.
6. Continuance of the various commercial, residential, and public uses in
Commercial Core I District so as to maintain the existing character of the
area;
Staff Res nse - Staff believes that the proposed quasi-public club use
would continue the various commercial and public uses in the CC I Zone
District. Approval of the club would displace the previously approved
dwelling unit from the property, however, since the Serrano's Building
does not currently have a dwelling unit in it, (only an approval for one large
condominium to be built), the proposed club will not change the xi in
character of the area. In staff's opinion, the replacement of the approved
condominium unit with a club is a positive change, as it would appear to
, • offer the opportunity to provide a more active and lively feel to the Village,
and to provide additional services and amenities for the Town's guests.
f:\everyone\pec\memos\serranos.n27 6
7. Contrvl quality of construction, architectural design, and landscape design
in Commercial Core 1 District so as.to maintain the existing character of
the area;
Staff Res onse - The applicant has stated that no exterior changes will be
made to the building in association with the proposed club. Staff was
concerned however, that depending on the scope of the food senrice
element of the private club, it may be necessary to add additional
' mechanical equipment related to any new or expanded kitchen area. In
response to this concern, the applicant has assured staff that all food
preparation activities. associated with the club will be handled in the
' kitchen of the restaurant, located on the 2nd floor of the building. -
. 8. Effects of noise, odor, dust, smoke, and other factors on the environment
of Commercial Core I District.
Staff Re_ nse - Staff believes that none of the elements listed above will
be a concern related to the proposed club use of the 3rd and 4th floor, with
the possible exception of noise. This issue was a concern during the initial
discussion of the building's redevelopment, related to the possible bar use
. in the building. The solution to that discussion was that noise levels will
be adequately addressed through the Town's existing noise ordinances,
and staff believes those measures are appropriate for the proposed club
as well.
IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Upon review of the Criteria and Findings outlined for review of Conditional Use Permit
applications in the CCI Zone District, staff recommends approval of the applicant's request
for a quasi-public club on the 3rd and 4th levels of the Serrano's Building. Staff
recommends that the following conditions be attached to the conditional use permit approval of
the club:
1. As mentioned previously, the original approval of the Serrano's redevelopment
application included a Conditional Use Permit for two office spaces on the 3rd
floor. With the club's Conditional Use Permit application, the only office use
occurring on the 3r.d or 4th flaors will be offices_ used by employees and staff. for
"tiuilding and club operations."
The applicant has stated that this office space will not be rented to outside
parties. The staff recommends that since the office Conditional Use Permit
granted in the sprin of 19915js-jaQ longer sary it shall be consider ull
a voi o e ap al of the n " lub" C ition Us er '
2. Once final floor plan drawings are provided for staff review, a parking analysis will
be performed in order to determine if there is an incremental parking demand
associated with the proposed quasi-public club, as compared to the previously
approved commercial office and residential uses on the 3rd and 4th levels of the building. Upon completion of the parking analysis, a parking pay-in-lieu fee may
be determined. This fee must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit for
the project.
Please note that, un ection 18.60.080 (Permit Approva ~ffect) e Town of Vail
Municipal Code, the approval shall lapse if construction is not commenced within two years of the
date of issuance and diligently pursued until completion, or if the use for which the permit is
granted is not commenced within two years.
f:\evezyone\pec\memos\serranos.nl3 7
~ Exhibit E - 3 Pages ' ~~,~-F
TowNi oF yArL
APPEALS
_ ~ FORM
;
REQUIRED FOR FILING AN APPEAL OF A STAFF, DESIGN 1'tEVIEW BOARD OR
_ PLANNING AND EIVVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION .ACTION A. ACTION/DECISION BEING APPEALED: A. The interpretation of Ordinance 18 52 100 and
_the subsequent calculation of the Parking Pay in Lieu Fees of $571,341.68 being
assessed against The Vail Village Club Building at 333 Bridge Street, Vail, Colorado.
B. The requirement that the Applicant sign the promissory note personal a
Deed of Trust be filed on the property. C. The classfication of the 3rd/4th floors
Club facilities as eating and drinking establishments.
B. DATE OF ACTION/DECIS[ON: June 17, 1997 (per Mike Mollica's letter)
C. NAME OF BOARD OR PERSON RENDERING THE DECIS[ONrT'AfCING ACTION; Mike Mollica,
Ass't Director of Community Development; Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney
D. NAME OF APPELLANT(S): Riva Ridge Partners LLC; Glenn rt Heelan; Margretta B. Parks
MAILING ADDRESS: P. 0. Box 5770, Avon, CO 81620
PHYSICAL ADDRESS IN VAIL: 333 Bridge Street PHONE: 949-6277
LEGAL DESCRIPTIO OF APPELLANT'S PROPERTY IN VAIL: Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village
lst Filin
E. SIGNA ~
TURE(S):
Page 1 of 2
.
F. Does this appeal involve a specific parcel of land? vP G If yes, please provide the following information:
aze you an adjacent properry owner? Yes no X
If no, give a detailed ,;;planarion of how you are an "aggrieved or adversely affected_person." "Aggieved or
adversely affected person" means any person who will suffer an adverse effect to an interest protected or
furthered by this title. The alleged adverse interest may be shared in common with other members of the
~ community at lazge, but shall exceed in degree the general interest in community good shazed by all persons.
Glenn M. Heelan is the Applicant for the exterior alterations.
. Riva Rid e Partners LLC is the develo er of the buildin and the Lessee
_ of the property from Margretta B. Parks under the Amended and Restated
Lease Agreement.
Mar retta B. Parks is the owner of the ro ert .
G. Provide the names and addresses (both person's mailing address and property's physical address in Vail) of all
owners of property which are the subjeqt of the appeal and all adjacent property owners (including properties
- - separated by a right-of way, stream; or other intervening bamers). Also 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 sections having
relevance to the action being appealed.
1. FEE: $0.00
Page 2 of 2
COPY
PLE
TOlVN OF VAIL ~
75 South Fro?itnge Road Depar.tr»ciit of Cortiituinity Devclopmclit
Vnil, Colorado 81657
970-479-21381479-2139
FAX 970-479-2452
,func 17, 1997
Glcnn Hcclan. .
Charlcs Davison c/o Riva Ridgc Partncrs, LLC
P.O. Box 5770
Avon. CO fi 1620 ,
Rf;: Vail Villagc Club - Parkinb Analysis
Dcar Glcnn and Charlic:
TI1i111I: y0U fOC SUhlllll[IIIg tI1C flllill fl00f pIaI1ti/tiCallllb pIans for thc Vail Villabc Club. I3ascd upon lhcsc
drawinbs, I havc rccalculatcd thc parkinb ray-in-licu fec as follows:
1. Rctitaurant/Cluh = 5,936 sq. t't. = 49.47 parking spaccs
2. Rctail - 3,704 tiq. ft. = 12.35 parkinb snaccs
3. Officc = 39 sq. ft. = (1.16 narkine snaccs
61.98 narking spaccs
- 2 Trn ic fatl~crc~l
Grand 'f otal 34.98 parking spaccs
Pcr your agrccmcnt with ,I3qb McTaurin, I-own Managcr, parkinb spaccs will bc asscsscd at a ratc of
S 16,333.38 pcr spacc (1996 nay-in-licu figurc). Thcrcforc, thc grind total for thc Vail Villagc Club is $571,34 1.63. ns prcviously agrccd to by I3ob McLaurin, a tcn-ycar rcpaynicnt pcriod will bc acccptablc to thc Town.
Should this bc your dcsircd coursc of action, plcasc Ict us know so that wc can finalizc thc papcrwork.
AS always, should you havc any qucstions, or commcnt5 rcgarding any of the abovc, plcasc fccl frec to
contact mc directly at 479-2144.
Sinccrcly,
,
Mikc Moll~ca
Assistant Dircctor of Community Devclopmcnt •
MMljr
xc: I3ob McLaurin !
Tom Mooncead
Stcvc Thompson
RECYCLED PAI'ER
f-
" EXHIBIT F - 6 pages
,
.
~ J.
~ September 15, 1997 `~F~ 13, ~*f7 'L
Mr. Mike Motlica
Assistant Director of Community Development DEV aEP
Town of Vail
, - 75 S. Frontage Road . . a, Vail, Colorado 81657 '
r. .
RE: The Appeal of Staff s Interpretation of Ordinance 18.52.100 and the
subsequent calculation of the Parking Pay in Lieu fees of $571,341.68
'rA
Dear Mr. Mollica,
Enclosed please find the completed appeals form required for filing an appeal of a
staff action. In reference to paragraph H of the appeals form we submit the
following:
Riva Ridge Partners LLC, Glenn M. Heelan, and Margretta B. Parks are appealing
staffs interpretation and subsequent calculation of code section 18.52.100 and
18.52.160. Staffs interpretations have resulted in classifying the 3rd and 4th
Floors of The Vail Village Club Building located at 333 Bridge Street as a public
,
eating and drinking establishment, with an accompanying assessment for pay in
. lieu parking fees in the amount of $571,341.68. In addition, staff has determined
that in order to defer payment of the pay in lieu fees by the use of a promissory
note, they will require that R.iva Ridge Pa.rtners LLC (the developer) and one of it's
managers guarantee the -promissory note, and that a Deed of Trust be filed on the
pr.operty.
As addressed in the attached correspondence, the applicant disputes the calculation
of the number of arkin s aces bein assessed a ainst the rope
P g P g g p rty, the
requirement that he sign personally and a Deed of Trust be filed on the property,
and questions whether in fact, the 3rd and 4th Floors that have a conditional use of
a quasi-public Club be classified as eating and drinking establishments.
3
Pl se feel free to call with any questions or additional requirements you may
~h ve, ~
Si rely,
enn M. Heelan
..y
''s•'v
~Y
;;^y
July 1, 1997
Mr: Mike Mollica
Assistant Director of Community Development
Town of Vail
. • Sent Via Facsimile
Dear Mike, . In our meeting yesterday, we discussed our confusion pertaining to the language of the zoning code relating to Off-Street Parking and Loading; specifically
"18.52.100 Section C. Other Uses #5" as it relates to Eating and drinking
establishments. As I stated, we interpret the secdon to read how many actual seats
we have, as opposed to the building code occupancy standards which are.measured
by occupant load factors per square foot. At your suggestion I will ask Tom
Moorehead and my attorney to clarify the section.
If, after further clarification, it is agreed that the number of seats and the resulting
parking fees are determined by the square footage of the various uses; then, we
still have questions regarding the actual number of square feet being calculated,
mostly as it pertains to the bar on the first floor, and the Club areas on the third
and fou.rth floors. Therefore, we would appreciate the opportunity to revisit the
parking requirements as soon as we are able to obtain the clarification from our
respective attorneys. At that time, we will also provide the final "remarked"
drawings that represent what is actually being built in the building.
_ I look d to hearing from Mr. Moorehead and bringing this issue to a close as
soo s po ible.
- Sin ,
enn M. Heelan
cc: Charles W. Davison
;
Ic . . ~ .
• HOLLEY, ALBERTSON & POLK, P.C.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
DEvvEe Wesr OMce PAwc
$UITE 100, BUILDMG 19
I667 COLE BLVD.
GOLDfN, COLORADO HOaOI
GEORGE ALAN HOLLEY PHONE (303) 233-7838
SCOTT D. ALBERTSON FAX (303) 233-2860
DEiYMS B. POLK
ERIC E. TORGERSEN . THOMAS A. NVALSH • ' •
. HOWARD R. STONE
July 30, 1997
BY TELECOPIER AND FIRST-CI.ASS MAIL
Mr. Mike Mollica
Assistant Director of Community Development
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road .
Vail, Colorado 81657 '
Re: The Vail Village Club, 298 Hanson Ranch
Road, Vail, Colorado (the "Property")
Dear Mr. Mollica:
This firm represents Riva Ridge Partners LLC in connection'
with the above-referenced matter. We are in receipt of a copy of
your June 17, 1997, letter concerning the payment of fees in lieu
of parking for the redevelopment of The Vail Village Club. The
purpose of this letter is to set forth our client's position with
regard to those fees in lieu of parking. It is our client's
position, based upon Chapter 18.52 of the Town of Vail Zoning
Ordinance, that the Town has calculated an excessive fee in lieu of.
parking for the re-development of The,Vail Village Club. Our
- analysis is based upon the following: •
1. It is our understanding that the Property was previously
allocated 27 parking spaces, as computed pursuant to the Zoning
Ordinance. It is our further understanding that our client would
receive credit for these pre-existing parking spaces in connection
with the re-development of the Property, and would be obligated to
pay only the difference between the number of parking spaces as
determined for The Vail Village Club and the original (in this
instance 27) parking spaces attributable to the Property. Based
upon our review of your June 17, 1997, letter, the Town has
followed this analysis as well. Thus, although this letter will
not discuss our client's position on whether the Town is entitled
to collect any fees in lieu of parking, or the amount per space of
that fee, our client's primary position in this letter is that the
Town has computed an excessive fee based upon the number of parking
spaces attributable to The Vail Village Club as re-developed.
.
Mr. Mike Mollica
July 30, 1997
Page 2.
2. It appears that the fees in lieu of parking for The Vail
ViTlaqe Club are set forth in § 18.52.160.B, which provides in
. relevant part:
. In Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II property -
owners or applicants shall be required to contribute to
. the Town Parking Fund, hereby established, for thepurpose of ineeting the demand and requirements for
vehicle parking. At such time as any property owner or
other applicant proposes to develop or redevelop a parcel
of property within an exempt area which would require
parking and/or loading areas, the owner or applicant
shall pay to the Town the parking fee hereinafter
required.
2. The parking.fee to be paid by any owner or applicant -
shall be determined by the Town Council.
5. The parking fee to be paid by any owner or applicant
is hereby determined to be fifteen thousand dollars
($15,000.00) per space. This fee shall be automatically
increased annually by the percentage the Consumer Price
Index of the City of Denver has increased over each .
successive year.
6. For additions or enlargements of any existing
- _build-ing or change of use-that would increase'the total
number of parking spaces required, an additional parking -
fee will be required only for such addition, enlargement
or change and not for the entire building or use.
Zoning Ordinance § 18.52.160.B.
It is our understanding that The Vail Village Club is situated
within the Commercial Core I area of the Town of Vail, and
according to the Zoning Ordinance must contribute to the Town
Parking Fund. It does not appear that § 18.52.160.B fixes the
number of parking spaces which would be attributable to a re-
development. Therefore, we assume that the number of parking
spaces (used to determine the pay in lieu fee) is determined from
the specific parking requirement schedule set forth in § 18.52.100.
It is our understanding that The Vail Village Club will be confined
to some retail, personal service and repair shops, and some
restaurant/club, and a small portion (under 100 square feet)
! 1 '
•
Mr. Mike Mollica
July 30, 1997
Page 3.
dedicated to office. According to § 18.52.100, parking spaces for
those uses are determined as follows:
C. Other Uses.
4. Retain Store, Personal 1.0 apace per each 300
Services and Repair Shopa feet of net floor space _
5: Eating and Drinking Establishmenta 1.0 space per each 8 seats,
based on seating capacity or
buildinq code occupancy
. star.darda, whichever is more
restrictive
§ 18.52.100.C (emphasis added).
Under § 18.52.100.C., parking spaces required for retail use
are determined based upon one space per 300 square feet of net.
f loor space. For eating and drinking establishments, such as the.
club portion of The Vail Village Club, the parking requirement is
1.0 space per each 8 seats, based on seating capacity or building .
code occupancy standards, whichever is more restrictive; however,
it does not appear that this provision permits the determination of .
parking requirements based upon square feet of net floor space, as
done for retail establishments.. This parking requirement appears
to be consistent with the intent of the ordinance to require off
street parking in the amount actually needed by the development.
This would explain why the Zoning Ordinance determines necessary
parking for a retail establishment based on net floor space, while
a restaurant use is based upon seating capacity. Base.d upon our review, it appears that the fee-in-lieu of
parking must be determined based upon the number of off street
parking spaces which the Town could require-pursuant to § 18.52.100
of the zoning ordinance. It is our understanding that The Vail
Village Club and restaurants will have a maximum of 210 seats,
which is less than the maximum number permitted under the
applicable building code. Therefore, it would appear that the
number of off-street parking spaces which could be required for the
restaurant/club would be 26.25, i.e., 210 divided by 8, rather than
49.47 as calculated by the Town based upon net floor space. It is
our client's position that the Zoning Ordinance limits the fees in
lieu of parking to an amount equal to the per space fee multiplied
by the number of parking spaces which could be required under §
18.52.100. Assuming the accuracy of the Town's net floor space
calculations, it is our client's position that the number of
parking spaces should be determined as follows:
• _ , _ . . _ _
~ . • ,
Mr. Mike Mollica
July 30, 1997
Page 4.
l. Restaurant/Club ~ 210 Seats = 26.25 Parking Spacea .
2. Retail = 3,704 Square Feet = 12.35 Parking Spaces
3. ' Office = 39 Square Feet = 0.16 Parkina Spaces
_ TOTAL 38.76 Parking Spaces - •
Minus 27 (Grandfathered) • •
Net Total 11.76
Finally, it is our client's position that assuming a parking
fee of $16,333.38 per space, the parking fee for The Vail Village
Club should be $192,080.55.
Our client requests that the Town reconsider its computation
of the fees in lieu of parking and advise our client as to whether the Town will change its position from your June 17, 1997, letter,`
that the parking fee for The Vail Village Club is $571,341.63,:'rather than $192,080.55, as our client suggests. In this regard,:-
our client would be available to discuss this matter with you atgreater length, if that would serve to clarify their position on
the fees in lieu of parking.
Thank you for your attention to this matter and your
professional courtesies in this regard.
Sincerely,
_ HOLLEY, ALBERTSO.N"-& POLK,~,P. C.
Eric E. Torgersen
EET/db
cc: Glenn M. Heelan
.
I s E M P L : EXHIBIT G- 1 page
• i
i
' 3 R O W N
F O B E R T 5
ECT / NO. .}~"A1L V I LLA.GE GLIlS
PFifJJ ~SEMENT = 4ij~-~ oJ~o~ S.~r.
Aq!~o 11 3,023 ne~ s.~.
oArE . ~ rneclr+n; C~aI %le.c.~r; c.al e 380 300 = 2
i laGkers /showers 0.2,643 s.-P 50 53
5ul7t0ta0 occuPaI+!~- 55 .
TELECON ? ~ , -
, )=1 JZST P oIZ = 3, S 6~1 9 ~oss ~.t
CONFER ? 2,944 rw-~ `•r•
MEMo area.. e 90o
bar qr'e0. & 90C5.-P. . !5 =
IrvFO ? ~ SUbtofa/ OCCItpan-7'5
~ ~ 28
:~-S = 3, 662 s.P, ,g ross
2,45(o net sA
PARTICIPANTS ~ k;~~hen ~ back ~r : 200 = 5
- lOS
d;n;n /
9 620 = 15
subfo+a) occU,-jants - I 13
~)~2D ~tAOR - 3~~~!!o gros-5 sA
210 !o !o n.e-f'
272 5,-P . loo
d~ n%n9 / laurt5e 1,7'?~ s.~'. -~5 - 120
~ 54~t'oi-ar occuj~an't's ~z~
~OU2 H r C.OD~ = )1 5 la4- ~ross s.T.
q 74- nef sA
I ! O U oe' 1749.'f' ,
COPY: ~ Q u 'FS '
PARTICIPANTS ?
Prt. G ToTA L:0 OF GZ.C- uP,4N?s - 484
.
ORIG.TO CENTRAL
FIL.E ? i
1 .
i
~
~
1406 Larimer Square, Suite 200 Phone 303-571-4137
i A Professronc! Corporatior
Denver, Colorado 80:02 ~ o(Architetu and Designers Fax 303-571-0403
I
TOTHL P.03 ,
,
t 06 116-q4• y11 3 u• S3`'?
4 i . V--,VY4 ~ S
Zne Vail. Village Cluh
. .
P o. BaS77o
Avon, Colorado 81620
(970) 949-6277 -
. Fax: (970) 949-7045
-
Ff1X TRANSNiISSI4N COVER SHEET
. Date: June 3, 1996
To: Tnm Moorehtad
Fax: 479-21 S7
Re: 7he Yail Village Club-pusking and agrermrnts f'or o'sitt i»iprnvemerrts
Sender: Glenn M. 1Yeelan
YOU SHOULD RECEIVE PAGE(S), tNCLU.taING THIS COVER 5'FaL7; IF
YOUDOIVOTRECF,IVEALI, THE- pAGES, P1,EASECALL (970) 949-6277.
Tom,
1t seems that we are approaching the date for a building permit and thCre ue two
issues we have discussed in the past-parking and offsite improvements. It is my
rccollection that in our last meeting you told me that the offsite improvement's
agrecment that you are dtafting wi]j not hoId up the building pcrmit. CQU1d you
please let me (or M;ke Mollica) know if this is stiIl the case?
Additionally; in a recent meeting w;th jim Curnutte. and our architect, Bobb Thomas
~ of Sernple, Brdwn, and Roberes, the possibility of defcrring the parking fees until a
Temporary Certificate of Occupanty was issucd was disettssed. I obvious(y wou]d
encourage this approach as it answcrs our questions on the inttrim interest, ailoti,ys alI
of us the time to see how the building is going to be completed so t.hat parking
requireiYtcnts can be dcterntined, the pay in lieu fee calculattd, and how it is going to
bc_ paid.
C:ouid you please give me a call at yow convenience so that we can assure ourselves 1
that the building pcrmit will be issucd when needed?
Thanks f y ur condttucd ftelp and supportl
:jtY..• . . .r
, : .
rune 21, 1996 . .
1 .
,j • .
Mr. Mike Mollica
Assistant Dircctor of Community Development
A ' Tovm of Vail
. . .
' . Dear MYc,
. Plif5U8flt tp pUr p[CVtOl23 COf1Vq'Sat10118, it i9 my understanding and agreement that the
parking pay-in-lieu fas aurrently estirnatcd at S4571334,64 ds cstablished by Commurrity
~ Dtvelopmetrt in accordance with the plaas atid specifictttiotis submiKed by Riva Ridge "
' Pertnara. LLC that indicate completion of the third and fourth floors as a Quasi-Public
s._ Club, will be paid over five years with the first payment due and payable et the timc a
Tcmporary Certificato of Occupancy is issued. As we further discussed, the Town of Vaii
- Building Uepsrtmant has roquasted a ivling from ICBO with respect to certain aspeqs-of the third floor desiga. It is my understanding that carlier today, Dan Stanek received 'information Srom ICBO that requires a change af design to the third floor. I would like to
request that if the design alternatives warrant a reduction in the parking requircments that
theae reductions be rcflected in the agraed upon par{dng pey-in-lieu fee.
It is also my understanding thai in the event Riva Ridge Partners LLC revises the current
. submission and changes the third and foeuth floors to a residential aad affice use" the
applicahle parkin8 Pay-isi-Gcu fce is wrrently 5279,667.18. It is aiso my undustanding
that thia fee, if applicable, would be paid over five years with the first paymeat due at the
time of the Tanporary Catificate of Occupancy.
Finatly, in a discussion eartiet today with Bob McLaurin, I requested that in the evern the
~ .
. Tawn Cauacil revises the pay-in-Ueu fces or terms of payment such tbat the changes
: would be beneScial to T3e Vail V'age CSub, that we bo included in the chmges fot the
; purposes of calculating the appropriate fee and/or payment schedulo at the time the
. Temporary CertiScate ofOccupaacy is issued. As I discussed with'Mr. McLaurin, we
believo that the long tarm economic bamfits to the Town of Vait vis a vis the cozrtinuing
sales taxes generated by a comneraal use of the third and fourth floors greatly outweigb
a residemiat use of the same space, yet the "penalties" imposed by the greater parking
requirements and fees of commercial ute may ultimately be the "FuW straw" that forces us
to use the spaca aa a reaidential condominium. Iam hopeful thnt the Town Council also
sces the long tertn benefits of such an appraack end chooscs to incbde us in atry :.:2 . improvemaats to the aurent parlan8 PnY-in•lieu ordinance. • .
~ . . " '
If p'de any further assistance, I can be reached at 949-6277.
; - . , .
S .
~ , . .
J •
Ienn M. Heelan
~
i
i ! •
~ .
~
July 29, 1996
Mr. Rabert McLaurin
Mr. Thomas Moorhesd
Town of Vail
Sent Via Facaimile
Gendemen: .
Since we last met to disci,ss the parlcing requirements for The Vail V'~llage Club we have
confirmed by letter to M'ike MoUica (copy enclosed) that the pay-in-lieu fees cucrendy in
~ existence pertaining to the propaty are S 1 79,667.18 if the top iwo floors of the buildmg
are compieted 8s residential condominiums, and $457. 334.64 ifcompieted as a 4uasi- - -
public ctub. It is our understanding thst these fees can be paid over five years. ----•-w---
Since our last mooting, Ihttve also requested that in the event the Town Council mafces the
decision to modify the existing pay-in-lieu fees ar terms of payment such thai the changes
: wauld be btneficial to The Vail V'illage Ctub; that we be iacluded in the chsnges for the •purposes of calculating the appropriaie fee and/or payment schedule at the time the
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy is issued. While I was told by both M'ike Mollica and
Bob McLaurin there are no guatntttees as to the inclusion of the project in any changca
adopted by the Town Council; we would encourage the incleisioa of The Vail Villago
Club in any beneficial modificarions as the parking fees may end up being the final
determiaate as to whether wa build "Tha Club" or finish the space as n residential
condominium. We believe that it is in the best interests of the Town of Vail for this
projoci to be completed as a'quasi•public" ciub with commercial uses. Wtule there ate
many intangibie benefrts, I beiieve that the sales taxes generated by commercial vs
residcntial use are substamisl economic motivation.
As a fallow up to our last meeting in wbich Tom stiggesied that I propose an alternate "ideas", I would submit the following observations and suggestions:
A. First, I would suggest that the pay-in-Gw fees be towered. It wasn't too long .
in the distant past that the fee was closer to $3,000 aad ii was only two years ago that the
fee was $8,000. Has the cosc ofthe pxrking sttucture increased 500%. To request $16,333 for each parjdng space certainly discourages any form oFsignificant
redeveiopment, especially commeraal. ;
B. It would be helpfut if the Town of Vai1 weuld concider in their evaluation of
revisioas to the current pay-in lieu fees a longer pay out period_ To that cnd, I would
encoarage ai least ten years. I would also suggest that the interest ratc should be that
attached to the actual bond rate Daid by the Town of Vail. . '
.
.
~
TOWN OF VAIL
75 South Frontnge Road Office of the Town Manager
Yail, Cotorado 81657
970-479 2105/Fax 970-479-2157
' . v ~ S
~U .J
November 18, 1996
VIA TELECOPIER
Mr. Glen Heelan
Post Office Box 5770
Avon, Co 81620
Deaz Glen:
I wanted to take a moment to confirm our conversation of November 11, 1996. There were four
issues concerning the Serrano's project. ~.epaiation'ef_ati easementfory-improvementi
. . - .
• ~ _ _::.v..... .
along the,Town of Vail stream tract to the e~?Se%anads, the payment of the parking fee which
is required with this construction, a review of the staff decision disallowing a rebate from the Town
of Vail recreation fee, and the appropriateness of Serrano's to provide one CSO to handle traffic and
delivery at the area of Senano's and Hanson Ranch Road.
_ In, regard to the easement, it was agreed by Tom Moorhead that he would draft the necessary
easement and present it.to you for your approval. This easement will be consistent with other
easements that have been entered into in the Village, i.e., the Covered Bridge Building.
In regard to the pazking fee, the Town Council has agreed to allow the Town Manager to enter into
a security agreement for the payment of the parking fee over a period of time in excess of the five
year period presently stated in 18.52.160B.7. This will be presented to Council as an Amendment
to the present ordinance. As I stated at the meeting, I believe it would be appropriate to enter into
a payment period of ten years. With respect to modifying the interest rate, I currently do not have
the authority to modify the rate. This action would require a specific authorization from the Town
Council.
I will review with the Community Development staff the decision to disallow your request for a
rebate of the recreational fee. You indicated that you would fax a copy of the documentation to me
to facilitate our review.
RECYCLEDPAPER
r
Finally, you indicated that funding the entire CSO position was unduly burdensome. You felt that
your funding responsibilities should be limited to the hours in which deliveries would be allowed.
We aze concerned not only about the hours ttiat deliveries will be allowed but also those hours afrer
the time for deliveries. I have discussed this matter with Larry Grafel and because of our concerns
we believe it appropriate that you fund this position in its entirety.
I hope this answers your questions. If you need fi.uther assistance please do not hesitate to call me
at 479-2105.
Sincerely,
TOWN OF VAIL
Robert W. McLaurin
Town Manager
RWM/aw
x.: Vail Town Council
Larry Grafel
Dan Stanek
R. Thomas Moorhead
.
/y
`J
TOWN OF VAIL
75 Soritlt Fraitage Road Depart»rent of Contmunity Developrneiit
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-21381479-2139
FAX 970-479-2452
Junc 17, 1997
- Glcnn Hcclan
- Charics Davison .
c/o Riva Ridgc Partncrs, LLC
P.O. Box 5770
Avon, CO 81620
RE: Vail Vifiagc Club - Parking Analysi5
Dc*ar Glcnn and Charlic:
Thank you for submitting thc final floor plans/scatinb plans fnr thc Vail Villagc Club. Bascd upun thcsc
drawings, } havc rccalculatcd thc parking pay-in-licu fcc as follows:
I. Rcstaurant/Club = 5,936 sq. tt. = 49.47 parkinb spaccs
2. Rctail = 3,704 sq. fl. = 12.35 parking spaccs
3. Officc = 39 sq. tt. = U. Ib narking snaccs
61.98 parkinb spaccs
- 27 r• ndfathcrcc~
Grand Total 34.9$ parking spaccs
_ Pcr your abrccmcflt with Fiob McL,auriij, Town Managcr, Parkinb spaccs will bc asscsscd at a ratc of
S 16;333::i8 pcr spacc (1996 pay-in-licu figurc). Thcrcforc, thc grand total for thc Vail V.illagc Club is
S571:341.63. • -
As prcviously agrccd to by Bob McLaurin, a tcn-ycar repaymcnt pcriod will bc acccptablc to tlic Town.
Should this bc your dcsircd coursc of action, plcasc let us know so that wc can finalizc thc papcrwork.
As always, should you havc any questions, or comments rcgarding any of the above, please feel free to
contact mc directly at 479-2144.
Sinccrcly,
.
Mike Mollica
Assistant Dircctor of Community Dcvclopmcnt
MM/jr
xc: Bob McLaurin !
Tom Mooncead ?
Stcvc Thompsoji
RECYCLED PAPER
`
A1
T'OWN OF VAIL
~
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road ~
I!aii, Colorado 81657
970-479-2 f38
FAX 970-479-2452 TM
Scptcmbcr 15, 1997
Glcnn Hcclan
Charlcs Davison
c/o Riva Ridgc Partncrs, LLC
P.O. Iiox 5770
Avon, CO 81620
RE: Vail Villagc Club - Parking Analysis
Dcar Cilcnn and Charlic:
As wc agrccd at our mccting of August 8, 1997, I havc rccalculatcd the parking rcquircmcnt fur thc Vail
Viliagc Club. Bascd unon our un~lcr,tandiug and abrccmcnt a[ thc August ~ith mccting, thc parking pay-in-
licu fcc is calculatcd as follows:
I. Rcstaurant/Club = 5,717 sq. ft. = 47.64 parking spaccs
2. Rctail = 3,704 sq. ft. = 12.35 parkin(y spaccs
3. Officc = 133 sq. ft. = 0.53 narkine til2accs
60.52 parking spaccs
- 27 1-7randtathcrcdl
Grand Total 33.52 parkinb spaces
Pcr your agrecmcnt with Bob McI.aurin, Town Manager, parkins spaces will be atisessed at a rate of
S 16,333.38 pcr spacc (1996 pay-in-licu figurc). Thereforc, thc grand total for thc Vail Villagc Club is
5547,494.99.
f'Icasc feel frce to contact me dircctly at 479-2144, sliould you have any questions, or comment,s rcgarding
anv of thc aUovc.
Sinccrcly,
Mike Mollica
Assistant llircctor of Community Dcvclapmcnt
M iV1/j r
xc: Bob McLaurin
Tom Moorhead
Stcve Thompson
C~ RECYCLED PA PER
r
S
TOWN OF YAIL
~
Office of the Town Attorney
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2107/Fax 970-479-2157
. . TM
October l, 1997
VIA TELECOPIER 949-7045 and U.S. MAIL
Mr. Glenn Heelan
Post Office BoY 5770
Avon, Co 81620
Dear Glenn:
We have concluded a review of all issues raised by you at the walk-through on the property on
Friday. September 19, 1997. Additionally, we have had Art Hoagland, an expert in reaard to
building code issues, determine the occupancy load for the building. ~
The theory presented by you that there should be four foot corridors on each floor which is deducted
from the calculation of the parking requirement was reviewed by Community Development, the Fire
Department, and the Building Department. Afrer thorou-gh review, it is clear that there is no
reasonable basis for makina such a deduction. Under the calculation of occupancy loads there has
, . never been a reduction in occupancy load due to the existence of such "corridors".
A'complete recalculafion based upon a new review of the as built plans and our recent walk-throujh
of the structure results in the following calculations for the parking requirement:
59.996 spaces
-27.000 grandfathered spaces
=32.996 spaces required
Therefore, 32.996 spaces :c $16,333.38 results in a total parkiniz fee of $538,936.20.
For vour information the occupant load for the entire structure has been determined to be 483
persons. This does not include the additional ten percent allowance permitted by Section 25.1 44(b)
of the Uniform Fire Code.
L~ RE('YCLEDPAPER
~
•
I hope that this information is helpful to you. I'm certain that we will have additional discussions
before this issue is resolved. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you may
have.
Very truly yours,
TOWN OF VAIL
R. Thomas Moorhead Town Attorney
RTM/aw
xc: Robert W. McLaurin
Mike ivlollica
Mike McGee
Charlie Davis
~
The Vail Village Club
1
1 Building
~ Aaaeal of Parkina Pav-in-Lieu
~
1
~
1
1
t
~
~
1
1
' October 21, 1997
~ Prepared for Vail Town Council
by Glenn Heelan and Charles Dav:ison
~ 333 Bridge Street
r Vail, Colorado 81657
~
~
~
¦ TheUail VillageClub
~
~ 333 Bridge Sveet 017ail, CO 81657 0(970)949 6277 *Fax: (970)949-7045
~
MEMORANDUM
~
~ TO: The Vail Town Councii
~ FROM: Riva Ridge Partners LLC
(Glenn M. Heelan/Charles W. Davison, Managers)
Margretta B. Parks (represented by Bill Whiteford) Landowner
~ DATE: October 21, 1997
SUBJECT: Appeal of staff's interpretations pertaining to the parking-pay-in-lieu
requirements of The Vail Village Club Building located at 333 Bridge
Street, Vail, Colorado
~
Ladies and Gentlemen,
~ Riva Ridge Partners LLC (Glenn M. Heelan, Charles W. Davison, Managers) and Bill
Whiteford (representing Margretta B. Parks, Landowner) are grateful for the opportunity to
~ discuss the appeal of staff's interpretations pertaining to the parking pay-in-lieu fee that
has been presented to the Planning and Environmental Commission and subsequently
called up for review by the Town Council. Mr. Heelan and Mr. Davison have been
~ discussing the fee with various members of staff, both in meetings, and by
correspondence, for the past several months. We hope you will take the time to review
the enclosed and request that you grant us the opportunity to make a presentation
~ pertaining to our appeal.
Enclosed you will find information relevant to the numerous issues that have been
~ discussed with staff as well as correspondence pertaining to each of the issues. There
are six different issues that Riva Ridge Partners would like to discuss.
~
~
~
~ 1
Vall TOWII COUIlC 1
Page 2
~ October2l, 1997
~
They are:
~ I. STAFF CONTENDS THAT A FINAL DETERMINATiON OF THE PARKING PAY-IN-LIEU FEES
WAS REACHED BY LETTER FROM GLENN M. HEELAN TO MIKE MOLLICA DATED JUNE 21,
~ 1996. (COPY ENCLOSED)
RIVA RIDGE PARTNERS BELIEVES THAT NO FINAL DECISION HAS
~ BEEN REACHED AT THIS TIME AND THAT IT IS APPROPRIATE FOR
THE TOWN COUNCIL TO DETERMINE THE FEE ACCORDING TO
SECTION 18.52.160 B.2 -OF THE CODE.
~
I I. STAFF HAS CALCULATED THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO SECTION
~ 18.52.100. C. FOUR DIFFERENT TIMES VARYING AS MUCH AS $121,000.
RIVA RIDGE PARTNERS BELIEVES THAT STAFF'S
~ INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 18.52.100 C. 5. IS INCORRECT
AND THAT THE PARKING REQUIREMENT CALCULATION FOR THE
EATING AND DRINKING ESTABLISHMENT SPACES SHOULD BE
BASED ON THE SEATING CAPACITY.
I I I. RIVA RIDGE PARTNERS LLC REQUESTS THAT ANY DECISION PERTAINING TO THE
PARKING PAY-IN LIEU FEES BEING ASSESSED TO THE VAIL VILLAGE CLUB BUILDING BE
DEFERRED UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE STAFF COMPLETES THEIR REVIEW OF THE
EXISTING ORDINANCE AND THAT THE VAIL VILLAGE CLUB BUILDING SHOULD BE
~ INCLUDED IN ANY IMPROVEMENTS TO THE EXISTING ORDINANCE MADE BY THE TOWN
COUNCIL.
~ IV. RIVA RIDGE PARTNERS BELIEVES IT SHOULD BE ISSUED A TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF
OCCUPANCY AND BE ALLOWED TO OPEN THE VAIL VILLAGE CLUB BUILDING.
~
V. RIVA RIDGE PARTNERS BELIEVES THAT IT IS INAPPROPRIATE FOR STAFF TO REDUIRE
~ PERSONAL GUARANTEES ON THE PROMISSORY NOTE AND FOR STAFF TO REQUIRE A
DEED OF TRUST BE FILED ON THE PROPERTY.
~ RIVA RIDGE SHOULD BE GOVERNED BY THE ORDINANCE IN
EXISTENCE AT THE TIME OF THE APPLICATION UNLESS THE
TOWN AND RIVA RIDGE MUTUALLY AGREE OTHERWISE.
~
~
~
~ Vail Town Council
Page 3
~ October 21, 1997
~ -
VI. RIVA RIDGE PARTNERS DISPUTES STAFF'S CLASSIFICATION OF VARIOUS AREAS ON THE
~ THIRD FLOOR AS °EATING ANO DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS".
Thank you for the opportunity to present the issues of our appeal. We are hopeful that
~ we can resalve the various issues involved and look fonNard to opening The Vail Village
Club building.
~ Sincerely,
~ Glenn M. Heelan Charles W. Davison
Manager Manager
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
OCTOBER 21, 1997
I. STAFF CONTENDS THAT A FINAL DETERMINATION OF THE PARKING PAY-IN-LIEU FEES WAS
REACHED BY LETTER FROM GLENN M. HEELAN TO MIKE MOLLICA DATED JUNE 21, 1996. (coPY
~ ENCLOSED).
RIVA RIDGE PARTNERS BELIEVES THAT NO FINAL DECISION HAS BEEN
~ REACHED AT THIS TIME.
This is supported by the enclosed letters from Mike Mollica and Tom Moorhead dated
~ June 17, 1997, September 15, 1997, and October 1, 1997 that reflect three additional
changes to the proposed fee and vary by as much as $121,000 from the original
eStllllated a1110Uf1t. RIVA RIDGE BELIEVES THAT THE JUNE 21, 1996 LETTER SPEAKS TO AN
ESTIMATE THAT WAS DONE AT THE TIME OF THE LETTER WHICH WAS SUBJECT TO CHANGE AND
EVEN ANTICIPATED CHANGE 1N THAT"IF THE DESIGN ALTERNATIVES WARRANT A REDUCTION IN
THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS THAT THESE REDUCTIONS BE REFLECTED IN THE AGREED UPON
i PAY IN LIEU FEE".
, Riva Ridge believes that the letter states that while we understood the estimate the
only agreement was that the fee would be paid over five years with the first payment
due and payable at the time a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy was issued.
~Additionally, Riva Ridge would like to point out that the concept of deferring the fee
until the time of the TCO was discussed in a meeting which neither Mr. Heelan nor Mr.
~ Davison attended. We were approached with the concept by Bobby Thomas (our
architect) at a later date. As stated in the June 3, 1996 facsimile to Tom Moorhead
(copy enclosed); " I OBVIOUSLY WOULD ENCOURAGE THIS APPROACH... TO ALLOW ALL OF US
~ THE TIME TO SEE HOW THE BUILDING WAS GOING TO BE COMPLETED SO THE PARKING FEES
CAN BE DETERMINED THE PAY IN LIEU FEE CALCULATED AND HOW IT IS GOING TO BE PAID"-
~ RIVA RIDGE PARTNERS LLC DOES NOT BELIEVE A FINAL FEE HAS BEEN DETERMINED AND
BELIEVES IT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE TOWN COUNCIL TO DETERMINE THE FEE ACCORDING TO
SECTION 18.52.160 EXEMPTIONS SECTION B. 2. WHICH STATES "THE PARKING FEE TO BE PAID
BY ANY OWNER OR APPLICANT SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL".
~
~
~
~
~
l:j .~1.;
a~
j
~
JvAe 21, 1996
~ i
W. Nfike MoUica !
Assistant D'uector of Community Dcvclopmcnt
Town of Vail
Dcar Mke,
~ Ptusuant to our previous conversations, it is my understanding and agreement that the
parking pay-in-lieu fees estimgg 334.64 as established by Community
Development iw accordance with the pIans an speci ca ion bmitted hy Riva Ridge
~ Partners, LLC that indicate completion of the third arid fourth floors as a Quasi-Public
~ Club, will be aid ovet five years with the first payment due and payable at the time a
. 1 Tem Ce cate of Occu an is isw . Ais we iu-ttEer iscusse , e own of Vail
j. . ugding Department has requested a niIing from ICBO with respect to certain aspects of
. the third floor design, I2 is my understanding that earEer today, Dan Stanek received
information from ICBO that requirrs a chaage of design to the third floor. I would like to
, request that if the design alternatives wasrant a reduction ia the parldng requirements that
these reductioas be reIIected in the agrced upon parldng pay-in-licu fee.
~ It is also my under3tanding that in the event Riva Ridge Partners LLC revises the current
svbmission and changas the third and fourth $oors to a residential and office use" the
~ . ' . applicable parlang pay-in-lieu foe is cunendy $179,667.18. It is also my understand'wg that this fet, if applicabley would be paid ovet five years with the first payment due at the
- tune of the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy.
.
F'mally, in a disaission earlier today with Bob McI.aurin, I requested that in the event the
Town CouacH revises the pay-in-lieu fces or terms of payment such that the changes
would be beneficial to The Vail village Ctub, that wa be included in the changes for the
pwposes of calcuSating the appropriata fee andJor payment schedule at the time the
~ . • • ' 't'S• i•`j
Temporary CeitiScate of Occupancy is issued. As I discussed witb Mr. McLaurin, we
believe that the long term economic benefits to the Town of Vail vis a vis the wntinuing
sales taxes generated by a commerciat use ofthe third and fourth floors geatly outweigb
~ a residential use of the same spac.e, yct the "penaltics" imposed by the greater parking
; requiremeats and fees ofcommercial use may ulrimately be the "final straw" that forces us
to use the space as a residential condomiium. I am 6opefuI that the Town Council aIso .
• .
st,es the long tenn benefits of such an approach and chooses to include us in any
improvamcnts to the current parking pay-in-lieu ordinance.
• jfenn provide any further azsistance, I can be react~ed at 949-6277.
CCf M. HeeIan
r
' . '~'-t~ww-~.T~: r•v_•~. . • . . . . . , , . :
1
~ 4VAIL
TOi~ OF 75 South Frontage Road Departnient of Com»iunity Development
~ Vail, Colorado 81657
970- 4 79- 213 8/4 79- 213 9
FAX 970-479-2452
' Junc 17, 1997
Glcnn Heclan
~ Charlcs Davison
c/o Riva Ridge Partners, LLC
P.O. Box 5770
Avon, CO 81620
~
_ RE: Vail Village Club - Parking Analysis
~ Dcar Glcnn and Charlic:
Thank you for submitting the final floor plans/scating plans for the Vail-Village Club. Based upon thcse
~ drawings, 1 have recalculated the parking pay-in-lieu fee as follows:
1. Restaurant/Club = 5,936 sq. ft. = 49.47 parking spaccs
' 2. Retail = 3,704 sq. ft. = 12.35 parking spaccs
3. Office = 39 sq. ft. - 0.16 narkine snaccs
~ 61.98 Parking sPaces
- 27 (grandfathercd)
~ Grand Total 34.98 parking spaces
~ Per your agreement with Bob McLaurin, Town Manager, parking spaccs will be assessed at a rate of
$16,333.38 per space (1996 pay-in-lieu fgure). Therefore, the grand total for the Vail Village Club is
$571,341.63.
~ As previously agrccd to by Bob McLavrin, a ten-year repaymcnt period will be acceptab!e to tl:c Town.
Should this be your desired cowse of action, plcase let us know so that we can finalize the paperwork.
As always, should you have any questions, or commcnts regarding any of the above, please feel free to
contact me directly at 479-2144.
~ Sincercly,
.~U4ollicaM
M ike M
~
Assistant Dircctor of Community Devclopmcnt
' MM/jr
xc: Bob McLaurin
Tom Moonccad
~ Stcvc Thompson
~4WW~ RECY'CLED PAPER
~
~ •1: `
u
~ TOWN OF VAIL
~
~ Department of Communiry Development . .
75 South Frontage Road
Yail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2138
~ FAX 970-479-2452
September 15. ] 997
~ Gleiui Heelan
Charles Davison
~ cio Riva Ridgc Partncrs. LLC
P.O. GOx S?i0
Avon, CO 81620
, RE: Vail Viilage Club - Parking Analysis
Dcar Glenn and C'harlic:
~ As wc agrecd at our meeting of August 8. 1997, T havc recalculated the parking requircment for the Vail
Village Club. Based tipon our under,tanduig and agreetlicnt at thc August 8th n;eeting, thc pzrking pay-in-
, lieu fec is calculated as folloH•s:
1. RestaurantiClvb = 5,717 sq. ft. = 47.64 pari:ing spaces
~ 2. Retail = 3,704 sq. ft. = 12.35 parking spaces
~ 3. Officc = 133 sq. ft. = 0.53 oarkine snaces
6().52 parking spaccs
- 27._(,grandfat~rcdl
~ Grand Total 33.52 parking spaces
~ Per your -agrecmer.t with 3oh It'(cLaiirir. Town Man?~,cr, narkin, snaccs Nvill bc 3ssessed at a rate of
$16,333.38 per space (1996 pay-in-lieu figure). Therefore, tlic grand total for tiie Vail Village Club is
$547,494.89.
~ Plcase feel frce to contact me directly at 479-2144, should you have any questions, or comments regarding
anv of thc abovc.
~ Sinccrcly,
KJ, 1 ' `r`
Mike Mollica
'Assistatit 17ircctor of Community UcvcloPmcnt
~ MM/jr
xc: Bob McLaurin
~ Tom Mooncead
Stcve Thompson
~ RECYCLED PAPER
r
. . . . . . .
. . _ . I
4IR
N OF ,
TO W
• ~
~ Office of the Town Attorney
75 South Frontage Road
vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2107/Fax 970-479-2157
~ TM
~ October 1, 1997
~ VIA TELECOPIER 949-7045 and U.S. MAIL
, Mr. Glenn Heelan
Post Office Box 5770
Avon, Co 81620
~ Dear Glenn:
~ We have concluded a review of all issues raised by you at the walk-tlu-ough on the property on
Friday, September 19, 1997. Additionally, we have had Art Hoagland, an expert in regard to
building code issues, determine the occupancy load for the building.
~ The theory presented by you that there should be four foot corridors on each floor wluch is deducted
from the calculation of the parking requirement was reviewed by Community Development, the Fire
~ Department, and the Building Department. After thorough review, it is clear that there is no
reasonable basis for making such a deduction. Under the calculation of occupancy loads there has
never been a reduction in occupancy load due to the existence of such "corridors".
~ A complete recalculation based uPon a new review of the as built plans and our recent walk-through
of the structure results in the follo«-ing calculations for tl:e parking requirement:
59.996 spaces
~ -27.000 grandfathered spaces
=32.996 spaces required
~ Therefore, 32.996 spaces x$16,333.38 results in a total parking fee of $538,936.20.
~ For your information the occupant load for the entire structure lias been determined to be 483
persons. This does not include the additional ten percent allowance pernlitted by Sectioii 25.144(b)
of the Uniform Fire Code.
~
~
RECYCLED PAPER
l
~ y
~ I hope that this information is helpful to you. I'm certain that ,N-e NNill have additional discussions before this issue is resolved. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or conunents you may
have.
~ Very truly yours,
~ TOWN OF VAIL
~ R. Thomas Moorhead
~ Town Attorney
RTM/aw
ac: Robert W. McLaurin
' Mike Mollica
Mike McGee
~ Charlie Davis
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~ , .
~ •
The Vail Village Club
~ P. O. Box 5770
~ Avon, Colorado 81620
(970) 949-6277
Fax: (970) 949-7045
~ FAX TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET
~ Date: June 3, 1996
To: Tom Moorehead
~ Fax: 479-2157
~ Re: The Vail Village Club-parking and agreements for o.,~'site improvemeizts
Sender: Glenn M. Heelay:
~
YOU SHOULD RECEIVE PAGE(S), INCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET. IF
~ YOUDO NOT RECEIVEALL THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL (970) 949-6277.
Tom,
It seems that we are approaching the date for a building permit and there are tNvo
~ issues we have discussed in the past-parking and offsite improvements. It is my
~ recollection that in our last meeting you told me that the offsite improvement's
agreement that you are drafting will not hold up the building permit. Could you
please let me (or Mike Mollica) know if this is still the case? w
~
~ Additionally, in a recent meeting with Jim Curnutte and our architect, Bobby Thomas
of Semple, Brown, and Roberts, the possibility of deferring the parking fees until a
~ Temporary Certificate of Occupancy was issued was discussed. I obviously would
encourage this approach as it ans-vvers our questions on the interim interest, allows all
of us the time to see how the building is going to be completed so that parking
~ requirements can be determined, the pay in lieu fee calculated, and hoNv it is going to
be paid.
~ Could you please give me a call at your convenience so that,%ve can assure ourselves
that the building permit will be issued when needed?
~ Thanks f y ur continued help and support!
~
~
~.~sw~ ~aJS
~ f~3.52.1b0
~
OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING
~ for a system for distribution and pickup of goods;
and for financing, operating and maintaining such
facilities; and that such parking, loadin' s, and distri-
~ bution facilities shall be fully adequate to meet the
existing and projected needs generated by all uses in
the area to be exempted.
B. In Commercial Core I and Commercial Core II property
~ owners or applicants shall be required to contribute to the
Town Parking Fund, hereby established, for the purpose
of ineeting the demand and requirements for vehicle
~ parking. At such time as any property owner or other
applicant proposes to develop or redevelop a parcel of
property within an exempt area which would require
~ parking and/or loading areas, the owner or applican[ shall
pay to the Town the parking fee hereinafter required.
1. The Parking Fund established in this Section shall
~ receive and disburse funds for the purpose of con-
ducting parking studies or evaluations, construction
of arkin facilit' he maintenance o
~ 1 , t e yment er indebted-
ness for parking facilities, and administrative servic-
es relating to parking.
2. Tne parking fee to be paid by any owner or appli-
~ cant shall be deternuned by the Town Council.
3. (Reserved)
a a ccor e
with this Section and if subsequent thereto a special
~ or general improvement district is formed and as- sessments levied for the purpose of paying for park- ing improvements, the payor shall be credited against
~ . the assessment with the arrount previously paid. .
5. The parking fee to be paid by any owner or appli-
cant is hereby determined to be fifteen thousand
~ dollars ($15,000.00) per space. This fce shall be
automatically increased annually by the percentage
~
~ 443 (v1;i 4-95)
~
~
~ Vail Town Council
" October 21, 1997
~ II. RIVA RIDGE PARTNERS BELIEVES THAT STAFF HAS INTERPRETED SECTIONS 18.52.100 C.
PARKING REQUIREMENTS-SCHEDULE AND 18.52.160 EXEMPTIONS (PARKING PAY-IN-LIEU)
~ INCORRECTLY.
Section 18.52.100 Parking Requirements-Schedule states "Off-street parking _
~ requirements shall be determined in accordance with the following schedule:
C. Other Uses
~ 5. Eating and drinking establishments.
1.0 space per each 8 seats, based on seating capacity or building
code occupancy standards, whichever is more restrictive.
~ Riva Rid e Partners LLC believes that the calculation for the eatin and drinkin
g 9 9
~ establishment spaces should be based on the seating capacity. Riva Ridge has
stated by letter from its counsel, Eric E. Torgersen of Holley, Albertson & Polk, dated
July 30, 1997 (copy enclosed) that it will have a maximum of 210 seats which is
~ more restrictive than the maximum number permitted under the applicable
building code. Therefore, it would appear that the number of off-street parking spaces
which could be required for the eating and drinking establishment space would be
~ 26.25, i.e. 210 divided by 8, rather than 493P as calculated by staff s interpretation of
the building code occupancy standards.'4,7 '(o4
~ RIVA RIDGE PARTNERS REQUESTS THAT THE TOWN COUNCIL DIRECT STAFF TO
A. CALCULATE THE PARKING PAY-IN-LIEU FEE BASED ON THE NUMBER OF SEATS IN THE EATING
~ AND DRINKING ESTABLISHMENT PORTIONS OF THE BUILDING AND
~ B. CALCULATE THE PARKING PAY-IN-LIEU FEE BASED ON THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF NET FLOOR
AREA IN OTHER USES OF THE BUILDING AS STATED IN SECTION 18.52.100 OF THE CODE.
~
i
t
1
1
~
we, ~ C~~ mV~~.~~~rh?"~
~ ~ $ . 5 z • to~ `
i , . : . .
OFF-STREET PARKI, ~G AI~D LOADI:~G .
~ Use PArking Re9uirements ~ . • .
. .
A. Dwelling Unit If gross residential floor area is 500 square feet or lcss: 1.5 spaccs
per dwelling unit
If gross residential i]oor area is .
over 500 square feet up to 2,000 _ ~ square fcet: 2 spaces pcrdwclling unit .
If gross residential floor area is ~ 2,000 square feet or more per
dwelling unit: 2.5 spaccs per dwel-
• ling unit . .
B. Accommodation Unit 0.4 space per accommodation . . .
~ 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 f7oor area ~ 3. Banks and financial 1.0 space per each 200 square :
institutions (i.e. feet of net floor area
savings an n • : .
res, p rsonal 1. per quare - . ~ • services and repair feet. of net floor area... _ . _ . :
shops . .
5. Eating and drinking 1.0 space per each 8 seats, based • . ~ establishments onseating capacit), or building .
code occupancy standards,
w,hichever is more restrictive • 6. Theaters, meeting 1.0 space per each 8 seats, based • _ . ; .
~ ny ' n n seatin capaci ' . facilities o cy ards, whichever :
is more restrictive
~ ' . . •
i ~ . ~
• 393
' .
• ,
~ •
~ • .
Oct-06-97 09: 5bA 11ULLtY, HLtStK 1 JUIV h h'IJLIt JUJtL.JJTLOCJV r_ ~c
. <
HOLLEY, At.aemon & PoLx, P.C.
Arrowxsra Ar [A..
~ DEmven WE3r Ovnca Pwt
$uIn 100. Btia.onrr, 19
1667 Cou BLm
~ GoLva, Cowuoo Soaol
rmnal:C. AIaN Hni.1.F.Y PHONE f3031233-?1t7f1
SCO'rr D. ALBER7SON FAX (303) 273-2960
~ DFNNIS B. POLK .
ERIC E. TORGERSEN
~ rerotius A. wwiss
HOWAItDRS70NE July 30, 1997
BY TSLECOPrER AND FIRS'7'-CLASS XAIL .
~
~ Xr. Mike Mollica
Assfstant Director of Cammunity Development
Town of Vail
75 South Frontaqe Road .
~ Vail, Calorado 81657 .
Re: The Vail Village Club, 298 Hanson Ranch
~ Road, Vail, Colarado (the ^Property") -
, Dear Mr. Mollica:
This firm represents Riva Ridge Partnex-s LLC in connection
with the abave-referenced matter. We are in receipt of a copy of
your June 17, 1997, letter concerning the payment of fees in lieu
~ of parking fdr the redevelopment of The Vail Village Club. The
purpose of this letter is to set forth our clientfs position with
regard to those fees in lieu of parking. It is our clientfs
position, based upon Chapter 18.52 of the Town of Vail Zoninq
~ Ordinance, that the Towri has calculated an excessive fee in lieu of
parking for the re-development of The vail Village club. our
analysis is based upon the Pollowing:
~ 2. It is our understanding that the Property Lras previously
1 allocated 27 parkinq spaces, as computed pursuant to the Zoning
Ordinann_ rt . 7t i a n»r PiirthAr »nriaratandi n? that rnir c-l iant wniil rl
~ receiva credit for these pre-existing parlcing spaces in connection
with the re-development of the Property, and would be obliqated to
pay only the difference between the number of parking spaces as
~ determined for The Vail Village Club and the original (in this
instance 27) parkinq spaces'attributable to the Property. Hased
, upon our review of your June 17, 1997, letter, the Tcwn has
followed this analysis as well. Thus, although this letter will
~ not discuss our client's position on whether the Town is entitled
to collect any Pees in lieu of parking, Qr the amount per space of
that fee, our client's primary positivn in this letter is that the
Town has computed an excessive fee based upon the number of parkinq
~ spaces attributable to The Vail Village Club as re-developed.
~
06t-06-97 09:56A NOLLtY, HLt:$tKIJUrv b YULh, JVJTLJJTLV~v
~
~ Mr. Mike Mollica
Jt11y 30, 2997
~ Page 2.
2. It appears that the fees in lieu of parking for The Vail
~ pillage Club are set forth in S 18.52.160.B, vhich provides in
relevant part:
Zn Comaercial Core I and Commercial Core II property
owners or applicants shaZl be required to contribute to
the Town Parking Fund, hereby established, for the
purpcse of ineeting the demand and requirements for
~ vehicle parking. At such time as any property owrter or
other applicartt proposes to develop or redevelop a parcel
of property within an exempt area which would require
parking and/or loadinq areas, the owner or applicant
shall pay to the Town the parkinq fee hereinafter
• required.
,
2. The pazkinq fee to be paid by any owner or applicant :
shall be determined by the Town Council. ~
' .
~ S. The parkinq fee to be paid by any owner or applicant
is hereby determined to be fifteen thousand dollars
($15,000.00) per space. This Pee shall be automatically
inereased annually by the percentage the Consumer Price
Index oP the City of Denver has increased over each
successive year.
~ 6. For additions or en].argements pf any existinq
buildinq or change of use that would increase the total
~ number of parking spaces required, an additional parking
fee will be required only far such addition, enlargement
~ or change and not foz the entire building or use.
Zoninq Ordinance $ 18.52.160.8_
~ It is our understanding that The Vail Village Club is situated
i ~ within the Commercial Core I area of the Town oP Vail, and
~ according to the Zvning Ordinance must contribute to the Town
Parking Fund. It does not appear that s I8.52.160.8 fixes the
number of parking spaces which vould be attributable to a re--
development. 2herefore, we assume that the number of parking
spaces (used to determine the pay in lieu fee) is detenained from
thu cpcoific parkinq roquiresaasst cchedula cot forth in s _1R.K7.Ynn_
. Tt is our understanding that The Vail Village Club will be confined
to some retail, personal service and repair shops, and some
restaurant/club, and a small portion (under 100 square Peet)
'
~ , .
~
Qct-06-97 09:56A HOLLEY, ALBERT50N & POLK, 303+Z33tZ~bU r.u4
~ .
Kr. riike Mollica
July 30, 1997
' Paqe 3.
dedicated to oPf ice_ Accordinq to S 1R.52_ 7 nn, i,arki ng cj,ar.PC tnr
~ those uses are determined as failows:
C. Other Uses.
~ 4. Retain Store, Parsonal 2.0 npace per each 300
serviceo and Repair Shope feet of net flcor apace
5. 8atl..riq and Drinktng Satabliehmenta 1.0 space per each 8 seat9,
~ banQd on sQatinq Capacity or
buildiaq code occupancy
ataildardoi whirhever is more
re9trictive
~ S 18.52.100.C (emphasis added).
Under g 18.52.100.C., parking spaces required for retail use
~ are detezmined based upvn one space per 300 square feet of net
floor space. For eating and drinking establishments, such as the .
club portion of The Va1I Village Club, the parking requirement is_
~ 1.0 space per each 8 seats, based on seating capacity or building
code occupancy standards, whichever is more restrictive; however,
it does not appear that this prcvisidn permits the determination of
~ parking requirements based upon square feet of net floor space, as
done for retail establishments. This parking requirement appears
to be consistent with the intent of the ordinance to require off
street parking in the amount actually needed by the development.
~ This would explain why the Zoning ordinance determines necessary
parking for a retail establishment based on net floor space, while
a restaurant use is based upon seatinq capacity.
~ t Based npon our review, it appears that the fee-in-lieu of
parking must be determined based upon the number of off street
parking spaces which the Town could require pu.rsuant to S 18.52.100
~ of the zoning ordinance. It is our understandinq that The Vail
Village Club and restaurants wil7, have a maximum of 210 seats,
which is less than the maximum number permitted under the
applicable buildinq code. Therefore, it would appear that the
~ number Qf dff-street parking spaces which could be required for the
restaurant/club would be 26.25, i.e., 210 divided by 8, rather thari
49.47 as calculated by the Town based upon net floar space. xt is
~ our clientfs position that the Zoning Ordinance Zimits the fees in
lieu af parking td an amount equal to the per space Pee multiplied
by the number of parking spaces whzch could be required under S
18.52.100. Assumfng the accuracy of the Tawn's net floor space
~ calculations, it is dur client's position that the number of
parking spaces sheuld be determined as follows:
~
~
dct-06-97 09:56A HOLLEY. ALBERT50N & POLK, 303+233t2860 P.05
~ Mr. Mike Mollica July 30, 1997
~ Paqe 4.
1. Aeetsurant/club ~ 210 soata = 26.25 Parking spacns
~ 2. Aetail = 3,704 Square Feet - 12.35 Parking Spacee
3. pffice ~ 39 3quarQ Feet n 0.16 Parkinc Soacea
~ TOTAL 38.76 Parking Spacee
Kinue 27 (Grandtathered)
~ pet Total 11.76
Finally, it is our cl.ient's position that assuming a parkinq
~ fee of $16,333.38 per space, the parking fee for The Vail Village
Club should be $192,080.55.
our client requests that the Tcwn reconsider its computation
~ ot the fees in lieu af parking and advise our client ds ta whether
the Town will change its positidn from your June 17, 1997, Ietter,
that the parking fee`fcr The Vail Village Club is $571,341.63,'~ rather than $192,080.55, as our client suqgests. In this regard, -
our client would be available to discuss this matter with you atgreater Ienqth, if that would serve to clarify their poSiti4n on
the fees in lieu of parking.
~ Thank you for your attenticn to this matter and your
professional courtesies in this regard.
~ Sincerely, .
HOLLE,Y, ALBERTSON'~ POLK, P.C.
Eric E. Torgersen EET/db
cc: Glenn M_ Heelan
~
~
~ .
r .
~
, Vail Town Council
October 21, 1997
~
~ I I I. RIVA RIDGE PARTNERS LLC REQUESTS THAT ANY DECISION PERTAINING TO THE PARKING
PAY-IN-LIEU FEES BEING ASSESSED TO THE VAIL VILLAGE CLUB BUILDING BE DEFERRED UNTI L
SUCH TI ME AS THE STAFF COMPLETES THEIR REVIEW OF THE EXISTING ORDINANCE AND TNAT
~ THE VAIL VILLAGE CLUB BUILDING SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN ANY IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
EXISTING ORDINANCE MADE BY THE TOWN COUNCIL.
Since the time we first commenced discussion of the parking pay in lieu fee and in the ,N~3G
~ 21, 1996 letter from Glenn M. Heelan to Mike Mollica we requested that "in the event
the Town Council revises the pay-in-lieu fees or terms of payment such that the
~ changes would be beneficial to The Vail Village Club, that we be included in the
changes for the purposes of calculating the appropriate fee and/or payment schedule at
the time the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy is issued.
, The Vail DailY has quoted "Vail Town Council members have a9reed to chan9e the
~ pay-in-lieu parking program, but what those changes will be is not yet decided"
Council directed staff to look at a number of options, including lowering the parking
~ space fee.
Bob Armour is quoted as "It's enough to break the camel's back. I'm concerned that it's
1 gone too far. I think we're pricing ourselves out of business. The concept is good, I'm
just concerned about the price." (copy enclosed)
~ SINCE THE ISSUE OF A CHANGE TO THE EXISTING PAY-IN-LIEU ORDINANCE HAS BEEN DISCUSSED
BY THE TOWN COUNCIL FOR OVER A YEAR, RIVA RIDGE PARTNERS LLC BELIEVES THAT IN THE
ISSUE OF FAIRNESS, IT WOULD BE REASONABLE FOR THE TOWN COUNCIL TO DEFER THE FINAL
, DECtSION PERTAINING TO PARKING FEES BEING ASSESSED AGAINST THE VAIL VILLAGE CLUB
UNTIL SUCH TIME AS ANY REVISIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE EXISTING ORDINANCE ARE
COMPLETED.
~
~
i
1
1
~
~
t
i
t
hanges
c
iTown eplores
Ao pay-in-lieu ordinance
' Parking space fee - ~ discouraffes new "I'IIl concerned
zn
businesses in Vail chat it'S oone too
far. I think we're
By Heidi Rice ' pricin~ oursel~~es
Daily Staff i~'riter
~ out of business."
VAIL - Vail To„n Council
I members have aa-reed to cliange the _ Bob Ar»tour
pay-in-lieu parking program, but Vail mayor
what those changes will be is not
` yet decided. .
~ At a work session Tuesday after-
~ noon, council directed town staff to
~ look at a number of options to the The fee per space was originally
' current pay-in-lieu ordinance, set at S1.000, but rapidly rose over
= including lowering the parkina the years, jumping from $8,000 per
` space fee, allowing businesses to space in 1991 to $15,000 in 1994.
, apply for an exemption to paying The number of spaces a business
the fee if they can provide parking is required to pay for is determined
~ elsewhere, differing the rates for by the size and the use of the busi-
~ commercial and residential sites, ness, but can run into hundreds of
adjusting the five-year maximum thousands of dollars.
payment plan or waiving the fee as The pay-in-lieu parl:ing fee is
an incentive if the business pro- still lower than what it would cost
vides another community benefit businesses to construct their own .
such as architectural redevelop- structured parking spaces, which
ment. town staff estimates would be about
Vail Mayor Bob Armour said t he $15.000 to $30,000 per space
~ current $16,333 per parking space excluding land costs.
fee had gotten too high and dis- Vail Town Manazer Bob
couraged new businesses from McLaurin said council had to
coming to the town. decide if it wanted to subsidize
, "It's enough to break the camePs Parkinc, and, if so, at w•hat amount.
back," Armour said. "I'm con- "This is an obstacle that makes
cerned that it's gone too far. I think
we're pricing ourselves out of busi- redevelopment more difficult, and
~ ness. The concept is good, I'm just I'm not sure what the payment rate
concerned about the price.' should be;" McLaurin said.
The pay-in-lieu parkinQ ordi- If the rate should be lo~;~ered,
nance was first adopted by the town Armour would not support a rebate
, in 1978 so that private deNrelopment to those currently payins on a fve-
would contribute to par}:ing in Vail year plan at past rates. ~
Village and Lionshead while pre- "They`ve already incorporated
serving the pedestrian precinct. the cost into their construction and
' The money is used for parkins lease costs," Armour said. "Those
studies, construction and mainte- are contractual (ajeements)."
nance of parking facilities, admin- Town staff wil] eaplore the dif-
istrative and debt services related to ferent options and repon to council
, parking. at a future meetins.
~
~
~ By Rob McCallum
Date: 6/5
r Head: Vail Town Council agrees to further study parking pay-in-lieu
requirement
'
VAIL - The Vail Town Council weighed the merits of the town's parking
~ pay-in-lieu program Tuesday. After hearing from a couple of business
owners and a representative for Vail Associates, the council agreed to further
study the program's requirements.
~ "It's proven to be a burden to redevelopment in town right now. We need
to look at it and make some adjustments," Councilman Kevin Foley said,
~ adding that the program should not be done away with. The rest of the
councilmembers agreed with Foley that the program should not be scuttled.
The town adopted the parking pay-in-lieu program in 1978. The concept
~ behind the plan is that new or expanded developments could pay into the
parking fund rather than provide adequate on-site parking.
~ Since 1979, $1,245,648 has been paid into the fund and the town estimates
that 157 parking spaces have been purchased since the program's inception.
For 1997, the parking fee per space approached $17,000.
' "How much should the town subsidize parking?," questioned town manager
Bob McLaurin. "The last council felt very strongly that we shouldn't
subsidize any of it and that's why the fees are very, very high."
~ Chris Chantler, co-owner of the Daily Grind, said the coffee shop was
considering removing a 10-foot by 10-foot storage freezer, which would
~ a11ow for additional seating in the Grind, but the shop would have to pay
between $16,000 and $50,000 into the parking fund.
Chantler said the Daily Grind's situation highlights a philosophical problem
~ with the program because people don't come to Vail, park their vehicle in the
structure and walk up Bridge Street for a cup of coffee.
, "I think that with the current plan you have in place, it's kind of archaic," he
said.
~ David Corbin, of Vail Resorts Development Co., said the town must conduct
a demand analysis before any steps can be taken because the parking stock
has already been created and the requirement is a non-incentive for people to
upgrade their businesses.
, "From my point of view, as an obvious self-interested developer, we see it
as an enormous cost... for a demand that isn't really there," Corbin said.
, Kaye Ferry, co-owner of the Daily Grind, said a line should be drawn
between new developments and redevelopments. Ferry also said the problem
of not enough parking is not the fault of the restauranteurs and merchants. It
~ is compounded by Vail Associates' growth.
,
~
1 "The problem happens, quite honestly, when we have skier days," Ferry
said. "It's a VA problem they haven't put anything new in since day one.
~ "It seems to me that is a considerable source of revenue that should be
looked at," she said.
' Mayor Bob Armour said something should be done with the requirement to
encourage redevelopment.
"I think the Daily Grind is a perfect example of this," Armour said. "I think
~ there is a difference between minor redevelopment and major
redevelopment."
~ While the council threw around ideas ranging from giving folks a credit for
six to 10 spaces to lowering the pay-in-lieu fees, McLaunn suggested the
town hire a traffic engineer to research the timing and cost necessary to make
~ any changes to the program.
The council agreed to McLaurin's proposal, and should again review the
issue in two or three weeks, or when more information becomes available.
I BACK TO FRONT
'
,
'
r
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~ Town Council
October 21, 1997
~
IV. RIVA RIDGE PARTNERS BELIEVES IT SHOULD BE ISSUED A TEMPORARY CERTIFICATE OF
~ OCCUPANCY AND BE ALLOWED TO OPEN THE VAIL VILLAGE CLUB BUILDING IMMEDIATELY.
Riva Ridge and the people of the Town of Vail are being penalized inappropriately due
~ to lost revenues and sales taxes that could be generated if Riva Ridge had been
allowed to open the 1st and 2nd floors on September 2, 1997 when all of the remaining
requirements for a TCO for those floors were satisfied.
,
On September 5, 1997, Riva Ridge submitted a cashier's check in the amount of
$57,341.63 representing 10% of the estimated parking pay-in-lieu fee of $571,341.63
~ under protest (copy enclosed).
~ On September 11, 1997, Riva Ridge Partners LLC (copy enclosed) requested a partial
TCO for the 1 st and 2nd floors. This letter pointed out that even based on staff s own
calculations of 24.538 parking spaces, which Riva Ridge disputes, there should be
~ no fees due on the 1st and 2nd floors because this is less than the 27 space
attributable to the original Serrano's Cantina building. The Vail Village Club is entitled
to an offset in calculating the parking fee in the amount of the "grandfathered" 27
spaces, leaving a credit against the fee for the project of 2.462 spaces.
Staff refused to issue a TCO and allow Riva Ridge to open the facilities until all issues
~ are resolved (copy of Tom Moorhead's letter to Glenn Heelan dated September 12,
1997 enclosed).
~ On September 16, 1997, Riva Ridge Partners LLC by letter from its counsel, Eric E.
Torgersen of Holley, Albertson & Polk (copy enclosed), reiterated its request that the
partial TCO be issued because there was no parking fee due which was attributable to
~the 1 st and 2nd floors even assuming the Department of Community Development's
determination of the fee was correct.
~ IF FOR ANY REASON A FINAL DETERMINATION OF THE PAY-IN-LIEU FEES IS DELAYED BEYOND
OCTOBER 21, 1997, RIVA RIDGE PARTNERS LLC BELIEVES IT SHOULD BE ISSUED A TCO AND
ALLOWED TO OPEN THE VAIL VILLAGE CLUB BUILDING IMMEDIATELY.
PA r,
~
i~
1 li
~
r~.
September 05, 1997
Mr. Mike Mollica
Assistant Director of Corrununity Development
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657 . HAND DELIVERED
~
Re: The Vail Village Club Building, 333 Bridge Street, Vail, Colorado
PAYIYIENT OF PARKING FEES UNDER PROTEST
~ Dear Mr. Mollica:
Enclosed please find a 1stBank of Avon check in the amount of $57,341.63
~ representing 10% of the parking fee of $571,341.63 as deternuned by the
Department of Community Development, pursuant to your June 17, 19971etter.
PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT RIVA RIDGE PARTNERS LLC IS PAYING
~ THIS Al110UNT UNDER PROTEST AND RESERVES ALL RIGHTS TO
DISPUTE THE AMOUNT OF THE PARKING FEES ASSESSED AGAINST
THE VAIL VILLAGE CLUB BUILDING. Riva Ridge Partners LLC is paying
this amount under protest solely for the purpose of satisfying one of the specific
conditions imposed by the Deparnnent of Community Development on the
issuance of a temporary Certificate of Occupancy for The Vail Village Club
~ building, i.e. payment of the parking fees as set forth in Chapter 18.52 of the
Zoning Ordinance.
Therefore, Riva Ridge Partners LLC reserves all rights to contest and
protest the validity and amount of this parking fee before the Planning and
- Environmental Commission and before the Town Council for the Town of Vail, as
well as in any appropriate litigation.
~ While we may disagree with whether the Town of Vail has the right to
exact parking fees in excess of $15,000.00 per theoretical parking space for
properties within Commercial Core I, we recognize that Chapter 18.52 of the
Zoning Ordinance expressly authorizes assessment and collection of this parking
fee. Our primary disagreement is with the Department of Community
~ Development's determination of the amount of that fee, which we believe is
excessive and is not supported by Chapter 18.52 of the Zoning Ordinance. Over
the last several weeks, we have attempted to settle and compromise this dispute
~ with representatives of t}le Town of Vail, including you and Thomas Moor}iead,
the Town Attorney. In an effort to resolve this matter, we met with you and Mr.
~ Moorhead on separate occasions in order to address the outstanding parking issue.
'
1' .
~ . . . . . .
<
~
Mike Mollica
~ September 5, 1997 ,
Page 2
Our legal counsel, Holley, Albertson and Polk, P. C., also furnished you,,vith a
letter articulating the basis of our disagreement with staffs deternlination of the
~ parking fee. A copy of that letter is attached for your convenient reference.
We assume that the Town of Vail enacted Chapter 18.52 of the Zoning
Ordinance and imposed parking fees in order to generate revenue to offset the
costs of parking being borne by the Town of Vail. However, we believe that
~ demand for parking in the Town of Vail is not primarily driven by the amount of
developed space within the Town, but rather the use of that space. For example,
for restaurant space, the square foot area of a restaurant might permit more seating
~ than is actually utilized, as in the case of The Vail Village Club. Therefore, we
- believe, that according to section 18.52.100.C of the Zoning Ordinance, the
parking fee for The Vail Village Club should be deternuned by the actual number
~ of seats within the restaurant area, rather than the square footage of floor space
utilized by the Department of Community Development, as set forth in your June
f 17, 19971etter. In addition, although we disagree with the measurement of space
as the means to deternune the parking fee, we also believe that the square foot area
calculations made by the Department of Community Development are significantly
~ overinclusive, and do not accurately deternune the square foot area utilized for the
_ restaurant space.
~ We recognized that the Town of Vail has recently acknowledged that
parking fees are discouraging redevelopment, and that Town Council is reviewing
~ the entire parking fee system. In addition, we would like to point out that while
we were having preliminary meetings with the Department of Community
Development and within two months of our application for eh-terior alteration was
submitted, the parking fee was increased from approximately $8,500 per space to
$15,000 per space. Presently, that fee is in excess of $16,000 per space. Thus, in
combination with the actual deternunation of the number of parking spaces (which
. as you know is the basis for calculating the fee), the increased parking fee per
space which is applicable to The Vail Village Club building has increased the
parking fee for the project by an excessive, perhaps exorbitant, amount.
~
As a final matter, we believe that Riva Ridge Partners LLC is entitled to a
~ hearing before Town Council as to the final detennination of the parking fee for
The Vail Village Club building. By payment of this installment of the parking fee
under protest, we do iiot intend to relinquisli our riglit to request such a fiilal
~ detennination and hearing or any subsequent judicial review of the fee or the
~
. . : - ` : . . . . . . : , ,
~ -
~
Mike Mollica
~ September 5, 1997 .
Page 3
~ propriety of the entire parking fee system.
~ Sincerely, .
Riva Ridge Partners LLC
~
Glenn M. Heelan Charles W. Davison
Manager Manager
cc: Margretta B. Parks
Bill Whiteford
~ Mayor Robert Armour
Robert McLaurin
Thomas Moorhead
~ William Post, Esq.
Mark Welch, Esq.
~ Eric Torgersen, Esq.
~
~
~
~
~
~
1 . .
September 11, 1997
Mr. Thomas hloorhead
Tow-n Attorney
To~Nm of Vail
~ 75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657 -
~Re: The Vail VilJage Club, 333 Bridge Street,
Vail, Colorado--Application for Partial
~ TO on Floors 1 and 2
Dear Mr. Moorhead,
The purpose of this letter is to request that the Town of Vail issue a Partial
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy ("TO") on Floors 1 and 2 of The Vail Village
~Club Building, Vail, Colorado, without requiring further payment of fees in lieu of
parking dedicadon (or the execution of a promissory note and collateral security
~ agreement) at this time.
,
We believe that the Town of Vail should issue a partial TO for Floors 1 and
' 2 without contemporaneous payment of the parking fee (other than the
` approximately $57,000 amount which has been paid under protest) because there
is no parking fee attributable to Floors 1 and 2, even if the Community
~ Development Department's own calcutations are used. While we may not agree
with the Department's calculations and reserve the right to contest those
calculations before Planning Commission and Town Council, we believe that the
~ Department's own computations for Floors 1 and 2 required a total of 24.538
parking spaces. This is less than the 27 parking spaces attributable to the original
Serrano's Cantina building. It is our understanding that The Vail Village Club is
entitled to an offset in calculating the parking fee in the amount of the
"grandfathered" 27 spaces, leaving a credit against the fee for the project of 2.462
spaces.
We believe this solution is a fair means by which the restaurant and bar on
the premises can open for business, begin generating sales tax revenue and allow
employees to earn wages, while Riva Ridge Partrners LLC pursues its appeal of the
~ Community Development Department's parking fee calculation. As we have
advised you, the restaurant and bar operations on the first rivo floors are ready to
open, employees have been hired and are on the payroll, supplies and inventory
~ have been delivered and the only condition remaining to opening the business is
. the issuance of this partial TO.
.•c...,r.~• .c- • ~-r.r •r,r • ~.L~ . . ai. . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . .
a. .
..5:• .ii
1"
C.
K
. l'• '
, .
. , .C'•
. . . .tt+'•:='
'
~ . . . . .'i~.
. . . . . - .s
, . . . . . 5,5.,~;~,~....._ .c..,. , . i....1`',•i±6. .
~ Thomas Moorhead, Esq.
Page 2
~ Further, we exPect that the ToNvn will require that the parking fee be paid
before the TO can be issued for the balance of the building; however, by that
~ time, we expect to have a decision by the Town Council on the amount of the
parking fee, after giving Riva Ridge Partners LLC an opportunity to be heard. In
the meantime, however, the restaurant businesson the premises would not be
damaged by the delay which will inevitably occur in bringing this question in front
of To«m Council. ~ We believe the Tow-n should seriouslY consider our proposal to resolve this
impasse. R.iva Ridge Partners LLC has paid approximately $57,000.00 toward the
~ parking fee to be determined for The Vail Village Club Building. Even if the
Town issues a partial TO for Floors 1 and 2, the application for the rest of the
building will still be pending, and issuance of the TO can be conditioned on .
~ payment of the fee at that time. Riva Ridge Partners LLC plans to file its appeal
by September 15, 1997, so that hearing can be scheduled in front of Planning and
~ Environmental Commission and Town Council at the earliest possible dates.
,
Finally, under our cover letter dated September 5, 1997 R.iva Ridge
Partners LLC paid to the Town the sum of $57,341.63, under protest, as the initial
installment of the parking fee for the project. We paid that first installment under
~ protest because we disagree with the amount of the fee determined by the
Community Development Deparfinent of $571,341.63, for the reasons set forth in
our letter, a copy of which is attached for your convenient reference. Since the
~ time that amount was paid, you have advised us that the Town of Vail will require
a promissory note executed not only by the applicant, Riva Ridge Partners LLC,
but by its managers, Mr. Davison and myself, personally, and that the ToNvn
~ requires that this promissory note be secured by a lien against The Vail Village
Club property as well. It is our further recollecdon that you advised us that the
~ Town of Vail would honor the parking fee computation of $457,334.64,
established by the Community Development Department in 1996, only if that
amount was paid in full in cash. We believe that Chapter 18.52 of the Town of
~ Vail Zoning Ordinance does permit the parking fee to be paid by the applicant in
installments, with the unpaid balance reflected in an unsecured promissory note
executed onIy by the applicant. R.iva Ridge Partners LLC has determined that
~ because the parking fee is being paid under protest, Riva Ridge Partners LLC will
not agree to execute either a promissory note or a security agreement or other
instrument creating a lien against The Vail Village Club property in order to obtain
~ the partial TO on Floors 1 and 2.
~
~
, ,s~~ . . . = . . . . . _ - ,F. ..;...''•t. i,:': .
~.:'I:hi•.t~. ,
. ^c; `ai:., . , v . „ , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . ' . . . . . i . .
~ Thomas Nloorhead, Esq.
Page 3
~ As we have advised you previously and in this letter, the restaurant and bar
is prepared to open for business immediately upon issuance of the partial TO.
Please ad,,rise us of the Town's response as soon as possible.
~ Sincerely, '
R.iva Ridge Partners LLC
~ Glenn M. Heelan, ManaSer Charles W. Davison, Manager
~ cc: Margretta B. Parks
Bill Whiteford
Mayor Robert Aimour
~ Robert McLaurin
William Post, Esq. .
~ Eric Torgersen, Esq.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~;;,T•:es`,-~: - -R;~.; : : . ~ . . ~ . . _ . . . ~ . ~ . • . . . ' . ~ . :
. 55
Yt. 1 .:6 ',ivfw'. ' f-~ ' ' . ~ .
. ...'~3, .•Z~. . . :7,_ . :i•. • • . • - . • . ,
` e .-.a-o. .
~
*VAIML
1~OFY1V 73 saruli Finntag.ltoad off ic` °f L4" 7bwn Abtr'"y
~ Mg Color&do 816s7
970.47!P.2107/FRx 97Q479-2157
~
~ Sqiember 12. 1997
~ yjA TEL-EAMM 449-7045
Mr. Glen Hedan
~ post OB'lce Box 5770
Avozti Co 81620
~ Desr Glcn: Eaclosed is a Promissory Notc establishirng aa RF=mcat to P"Y thc ouratanft balanoe of 5514,400
with ktereg at the rata of te.n pwaant ova tM aM taa yeM. Upou execvtion of thia Agrevmeat ead
~ a Dood of ?rust sxwring this Na% a Temporaty Catificata of Occupaacry wlll issw.
'ilVhile tbe Towq at yota requrst, qmed to edead tbe psyarut of this fee beyoud the isstv,ng of the
buildin8 pertnit, thece is ao iatema ia waiving the oondition that the parkiag fce must bc paid prior
to the isstzbag of a Z'cmporuy C.artificabe nf Occupaaoy.
~ If you bave say qutstiaw or co,armcna Ftcsa feel fiee to umtact me. ~ Very trLdy youn, TQ'GVN OF VA1L
. ~
- R. Thomas Moorhced
~ Town Attoascy
R'Y`MlBw
~ Enctosun
~
~ I
~ aecrcl=n+nW
~
~
OG1 lU J I 1 VL U 1' JL 1 11 11VLLL 1 iILLLII l LJViI 1 vL.tl uiiv. vvv~..v~._ • _ _
.
HoLLEY, Ai.sERrsox & PoLK, P.C.
~ ArrosrxYS AT [.tw
Dsrrvss wrsr Orrcx PARx
SUtzt 100, Ei!q,nmc 19
1667 CocE $txa
~ Goc-ev. COt.oswno 8001
GEQRGE ALAIV HOLLEY ~O~ ~
SC02'T D. AI.SF%I'SON
DENh1S B POLS FAX (300) Z33-?,860
.
F.RIC E. TORGERSEN
~ TSOMAS A. WAISH
goWAR,v L sroxE September 16, 1997
VIg TBLBCDPI.$R AND PIRST CLA.SS XAIL
~ R. Thomas Moorhead, Esq.
Town of Vail
75 South Frontaqe Road
Vail, Coloradp 81657
Re: The Vail Village Club, 333 Bridge Street,
~ Vail, Colorado--Application for Temporary
Certificate of Occupancy
Dear Mr. Moorhead:
~ Our client is in receipt of your September 12, 1997, letter
and accompanying draft promissory note. Our client is also in
~ receipt of a form promissory note dated September 15, 1997 (a copy
of which is attached), along with a letter frotu Mike Mollica once
again revising the pay-in-Iieu parkinq fee caiculation for The Vail
Village Club, which reduces the fee determined by the Department of
~ Community Development to $547,494.89.
First, vur client wishes to reiterate its request that the
~ paxtial Temporary Gertificate of occupancy for Floors 1 and 2 be
issued without eontemporaneous payment vf the parking pay-in-lieu
fee. Our client disagrees with the statement in your letter that
our client is seelcinq a waiyer of payment of the fee as a condition
~ to the issuance of the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy.
Instead, our client believes that no parking fee is attributable to
the lst and 2nd floors of The Vail Village Club, even asswning that
~ the Department of Commuriity Development,'s determination of the fee
is correct. Mr. Mollicafs September 15, 1997, letter to Mr. Heelan
indicates that The Vail Village Club is entitled to a credit equal
ta the fee attributable to 27 parking spaces. However, the
redeveiopment of Floors 1 arid 2, again assuming that the pepartmex1t
of Community Develvpment calcuiations are correGt, contemplates a
. fee based upon approximateiy 24.6 parking spaces, leaving a net
credit of approximately 2.4 parkinq spaces to be credited against
~ the final calculation for the entire project, includinq Floors 3
and 4- our client is not seeking to have this fee waived, but ,
~
.7Gf-10-01 lUG U1'JJ 111 11vLLLl nLUi..1110v17 1vt.0,
.
~ R. Thomas Moorhead, Esq.
September 16, 1997
Page 2.
,
merely paid at the time a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy is
issued for the Basement and Floors 3 and 4. In the meantime, our
client has submitted and will prxess an appeal to t,he Towri Council
with respect to the amount of the pay-in-lieu parking fee
~ determined by the Department af Community Development. As our
client indiCated in its September 11, 1997, letter, the restautant
and bar has employed staff; purchased inventory and is waiting to
open for business peridi.ng the issuance of a Temporary Certificate
of Occupancy. Therefore, vur client urqes the Towm to issue a
partial Temporary Certificate af Occupancy far Floozs 1 and 2 and
defer collection of the parking fee unti], the issuance of a
Temporary Cextificate of Oceupancy for the balance of the building.
Second, our client has reviewed the draft form o
f Promissory
Note which yvu prepared and submitted to our client along with your
~ September 12, 1997, letter. It is our client's understanding that
the Town Manager requires a deed of trust be executed and delivered
by the property owner, Mrs. Parks, in erder ta secure the
~ pramissory note which provides a 10 year repayment schedule. It is
our clientfs further understanding that a deed of tsust is not
available to secure this obligation. However, the applicant for
the redevelopment, Mx. Heelan, is prepared to execute an
~ appropriate unsecured promissary note providinq for repayment of
the unpaid portion of the parking pay-in-lieu fee over a peziod of
5 years as contemplated by Sectian 18.52.160.B(7) of the Zoning
1 Ordinance. It is our client's position that consistent with the
express provisions af Section 28.52.160.8(7), the promissory note
should be unsecured and should be executed by the applicant. Tn
this case, the applicant for the exterior alteration and the
~ canditional use permit is Gleru2 M. Heelan. Our client recoqnizes
that in addition to executiort of a 5 year note the Town will
require an initial payment of 20$ of the parking pay-in-lieu fee
~ assessed by the Department of Community Development, equal to
$109,489.98. Our clierit has already paid the swa of $57,341.63,
leavinq an amount due and oWinq (according to the Department of
CvuQnunity Development) of $52,148.35, which would be paid and
~ tendered under protest pending the disposition of aur client,s
appeal af the parking pay-in-lieu fee.
Our ciient is a.menable to executing a promissory note in the
form attached, with the followirig revisions that will reflect that
the note is being paid under protest and is unsecured:
1. Section 8 from the note form, cvncerninq the deed of
txust, should be deleted in its entirety. It is our client's
position that neither Sectien 1$.52.160 nor the Town's previous
standard form of promissory note contemplated or required the
execution of a deea of trust to secure that promisspry note. Our
~ -
~
. „ , . . _ . •
~ .
~ R. Thoicas IKoorhead, Esq.
September 16, 1997
Paqe 3.
,
client therefore believes that na deed of trust is required in
conneCtion with a 5 year promissory note in thxs instance.
.
2. A new Paragraph 8 should be added to the promissory note
which provides as follows:
~ 8. The Town and Debtor agree that this Note has been
executed and delivered under protest, and that the amount
~ of the pay-in-lieu parkireg fee assessed by the Department
of Community Deveiopment in the amount of $547,494.89
(the ^Assessed Parking Fee") is the subject of an appeal
to the Town Council. If the Assessed Parking Fee is
` reduced by acticn of the Town Council or by any court of
competent jurisdiotion, this Note shall be amended such
that the oriqinal principal balance of this Note shall be
~ reduced to an amourit equal to the Assessed Parking Fee as
reduced by the Tawn Council or a court of competent
jurisdiction Iess the sum of $109,489.98 (the "Reduced
Principal Amount"), and the amount of each installment
~ shall be redeterlained based upon the Reduced Prinaipal
Amount. All payments made ari this Note after the date
herecf and before the Assessed Parking Fee has been
~ modified by Town Couneil or a court of competent
jurisdiction shall be redetermined as if the principal
amount of this Note was originally the Reduced Principal
Ata4unt, and Debtor shali be given credit for payments
~ made pursuant to the terms of this Note before such
amendpnent. Any payments made by Debtor in excess of the
redetermined installment payment amount shall be credited
against the unpaid portion of the Reduced Principal
Amount.
3. The promissory note should be prepared for execution by
~ Glenn M. Heelan, the appliCant, individually.
Our client has determined to tender payment of 20$ of the
~ parking pay-irt-lieu fee assessed by the Department of Community
Development, alonq with the 5 year promissory note for the balance
of that assessed fee under prvtest and solely for the purpose af
mitigating its losses due to its inability to cpen for business
~ withaut the prepayment of the parking pay-in-Iieu fee, which is the
subject of appeal. Our client does not conGede that the amount of
the parking pay-in-Iieu fee determined by the Department of
~ Community Development is correct, arld by tendering payment or
executing a promissory note will not be deemed to have waived any
, of its rights to dispute the amount or validity oP the parking fee
assessed agai.nst The Vail Villaqe Club. However, our client zisks
~ suffering substantial eGanomic hardship if the project canndt be
opened for business ttritil the dispute conceraing this fee has been
~ ~
?:~..1 iV JI lVl,. V1•J'2 /11 IIVLLLI !1L?..t\{vvv......
~ • .
~ R. Thomas Moorhead, Esq.
September 16, 1997
~ Page 4.
resolved and is forced by the TownJ's actions, to mitigate its
~ continuing Iosses.
In this reqard, our client vould appreciate your prompt
response to this letter. With your unequivocal assurance that the
~ Town Kanager wi7.1 accept payment of 20$ of the parking pay-in-lieu
(as determined by the Department of Community Development in its
September 15, 1997, letter) and tender of t.be promissary note
~ (including the revisions suggested herein) in exchange for issuance
of the partial Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for Floors i and
2, our client will arrange for delivery of the funds and the
promissory note as soon as possible.
~ Thank you for your attention to this matter and your
professional courtesies in this regard.
~ Sincerely,
HOLLFY, ALBERT~N & POLK, P.C.
~ L~ / ~~r•~l~~ar~`~
~ Eric E. Torgersen
~~/db
~ cc: Glercn M. Heelan
(via telecopier)
1
~
~
~ .
~
~ .
~ ~
~
~ Vail Town Council
October 21, 1997
~
V. RIVA RIDGE PARTNERS BELIEVES THAT IT IS INAPPROPRIATE FOR STAFF TO REQUIRE
~ PERSONAL GUARANTEES ON THE PROMISSORY NOTE AND FOR STAFF TO REQUIRE THAT A DEED
OF TRUST BE FILED ON THE PROPERTY.
~ Code Section 18.52.160 Exemptions Section B. 7. states:
"The owner or applicant has the option of paying the total parking fee at the time of
~ building permit or paying over a five (5) year period"
Further it states in paragraph 2
~ "If the owner or applicant does choose to pay the fee over a period of time, he or she
shall be required to sign a promissory note which describes the total fee due, the
~ schedule of payments, and the interest due. Promissory note forms are available at the
offices of Community development .
, Riva Ridge Partners obtained the authorized form of the promissory note from
Community Development (copy enclosed) which does not require personal guarantees
nor a deed of trust.
Staff and applicant did discuss a proposed ten year payment in various meeting and
~ letters (copies enclosed) however;
RIVA RIDGE AND STAFF HAVE NOT REACHED AGREEMENT ON THIS ISSUE AND RIVA RIDGE
~ BELIEVES IT SHOULD BE GOVERNED BY THE ORDINANCE IN EXISTENCE AT THE TIME OF THE
APPLICATION, UNLESS THE TOWN AND RIVA RIDGE MUTUALLY AGREE OTHERWISE.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
i S. 5Z. lCoo Cttc~ T~~1S
5~c~ o~ ~ •
~
1 -
ZONI\G
~ the Consumer Price Index of the City of Der.ver has '
increased over each success;ve ~,ear=.
, 6. For additions or enlarce:^.:er.ts of any exisung build-
in(y or change of use that -would increase the total
number of parkin' cy spaces required, an additional
~ parkina fee will be requi:ed only for Such add•,tion,
e4or -W e c a or entire build-
us .\'o unds ;ill be e p by ti own ;
the applicant or owner.
7. The owner or applicant has the option of pa}'inc, the
total parkin~ fee at the time of building pem~it or .
payinc, over a five (5) }'ear period. If the latter
i course is taken, the first payment shall be paid an or
before the date the bui!ding permit is issued. Four
(4) more anr.ual payments xill be due to the Town
~ on the anniversary of the buildinc, permit. Interest of
ten percent (10cl'c) per annum shall be, paid by the
applicant on the ungaid balance.
~ If the owner or applicant does cheose to pay the ,
fee over a period of time, he or she shall be required
to sign a pronussory note which describes the total
fee due, the schedule of payments, and the interest
~ due. Promissory note forms are available at the offic-
es of Community Development.
' When actional ber of aces re e :
atio e req ement .,c edule (Section
18.52.I00), the parking fee will be calculated using
. that fraction. This applies only to the calculation of
~ the parking fee and not for on-site requirements. .
(Ord. 10(1994) § 1: Ord. 6(1991) § 1: Ord. 30(1932)
§ l: Ord. 47(1979) § 1: Ord. 8(1973) § 14.800.)
~ .
This Ordinance 10(1994) shall apply to all develo?ment applica;ion submitted
fcr Desien Rer:ew Board and Plann:ng ar.d Environrne-ital Cocr.mission
' revicw aitcr July 27, 1994. All applications suomitted prior to this data shall
be assured a parking fee of 53,594.40 per space.
(Vai1 4-95) 444
~ -
~ r ,
.
~ '
PROMISSORY NOTE
~
PROPERTY PROJECT.
~ DATE Vail, Colorado
TOTAL PARKING FEE $
~ In installments after date, for value received, I promise to pay
~ to the order of the Town of Vail at the Office of the Finance
Director, Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado,
~
Total Parking Fee Dollars
~ Down Payment $ with interest of ten percent per annum
on the unpaid balance, payable in yearly installments as follows:
~ First installment of $ due and payable on
Second installment of $ due and payable on
~ Third installment of $ due and payable on
Fourth installment of $ due and payable on
~
It is agreed that if this note is not paid when due or declared
~due hereunder, the principal and accrued interest thereon shall .
draw interest at the rate of 18 percent per annum, and that
failure to make any payment of principal or interest when due or
. any default under any encumbrance or agreement securing this note shall cause the whole note to become due at once, or the interest
to be counted as principlal, at the option of the holder of the
note. The makers and endorsers hereof severally waive
~ presentment for payment, protest, notice on nonpayment and of
protest, and agree to any extension of time of payment and
partial payments before, at, or after maturity, and if this note
or interest thereon is not paid when due, or suit is brought,
~ agree to pay all reasonable costs of collection, including
reasonable attorney's fees.
, Date
By: .
~
~ Date
By:
~ .
~ 1 . F,.~__~~. ~~'!~a, . y .t,~±~. . . ' " . . . . . .
• •
:+`.`'~.t:'? 7~'..1k.~.n ~ v_ i~ r~ V' f r,.•f'"`•. i.. `T' ..."r}'s~~~~^ik~.. • . ~ ~~'~n~.~+'[a'~tl, h . J~_ , ±yf, v.~".'~"l;`.+"'3''~"~'~";z.."~'•~I~~'••T+.•'~'r--,~ . -•r
~J
~
~
i .
The Vail Village Club
P. O. Box 5770
~ Avoyt, Colorado 81620
(970) 949-6277
Fax: (970) 949-7045
, FAX TRANSMISSION COVER SHEET
~ Date: September 9, 1997
~ To: . Tom Moorhead
Fax. 479 2157
' Re: Enclosed Promissory Note
Sender: Glenn M. Heelan
r
YOU SHOULD RECEIVE 2 PAGE(S), XNCLUDING THIS COVER SHEET. IF
~ YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL (970) 949-6277.
~ Dear Tom,
Pursuant to our discussion this morning, enclosed please find a copy of the
~ promissory note that was given to us by the Town of Vail. It is our understanding
that this note will be executed by Riva Ridge Partners LLC, developers and operators
of TheVail Village Club.
~
As I mentioned this morning, -,ve have been ready to open since last Friday when I
~ delivered the checlc in the amount of $57,341.73 to Mike Mollica. We are anxious
to open the facility and begin generating revenues for ourselves and therefore, sales
taxes the Town of Vail. Anything you can do to expedite the enclosed i~vill be
~ app eciated.
Sin rely,
1? 1~,._
.
~ lenn M. Heelan
~
~
~ .
a~y
~ TOWN OF YAIL 75 South Frontage Road Office of the Town Manager
~ Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2105/Fax 970-479-2157
~
~ November 18,1996 -
' VIA TELECOPIER
~ Mr. Glen Heelan
Post Office Box 5770
Avon, Co 81620
~
Dear Glen:
' I wanted to take a moment to confirm our conversation of November 11, 1996. There were four
issues concerning the Senano's project. They were prepazation of an easement for improvements
' along the Town of Vail stream tract to the east of Serrano's, the payment of the parking fee which
is required with this construction, a review of the staff decision disallowing a rebate from the Town
' of Vail recreation fee, and the appropriateness of Senano's to provide one CSO to handle traffic and
delivery at the area of Serrano's and Hanson Ranch Road.
~ In regard to the easement, it was agreed by Tom Moorhead that he would draft the necessary
easement arid present it to you for your approval. This easement will be consistent with other
easements that have been entered into in the Village, i.e., the Covered Bridge Building.
~ In regazd to the parking fee, the Town Council has agreed to allow the Town Manager to enter into
a security agreement for the payment of the parking fee over a period of time in excess of the five
~ yeaz period presently stated in 18.52.160B.7. This will be presented to Council as an Amendment
to the present ordinance. As I stated at the meeting, I believe it would be appropriate to enter into
a payment period of ten years. With respect to modifying the interest rate, I currently do not have
~ the authority to modify the rate. This action would require a specific authorization from the Town
Council.
~ I will review with the Community Development staff the decision to disallow your request for a
rebate of the recreational fee. You indicated that you would fax a copy of the documentation to me
to facilitate our review.
,
~
14M~ R6CY'CLED PAPER
~ `
. '
>
~
~ Finally, you indicated that funding the entire CSO position was unduly burdensome. You felt that
your funding responsibilities should be limited to the hours in which deliveries «Tould be allowed.
We are concerned not only about the hours that deliveries will be allowed but also those hours after
, the time for deliveries. I have discussed this matter with Larry Grafel and because of our concerns
we believe it appropriate that you fund this position in its entirety.
~ I hope this answers your questions. If you need further assistance please do not hesitate to call me
at 479-2105.
~ Sincerely,
~ TOWN OF VAIL
Q~~v
~ Robert W. McLaurin
Town Manager
~ RWM/aw
x.: Vail Town Council
~ Larry Grafel
Dan Stanek
R. Thomas Moorhead
,
'
~
i
r
~
~
~
r ,
'
t Vail Town Council
October 21, 1997
~ VI. RIVA RIDGE PARTNERS LLC DISPUTES STAFF'S CLASSIFICATION OF VARIOUS AREAS ON THE
~ THIRD FLOOR AS "EATING AND DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS".
Riva Ridge Partners believes that certain areas of the third floor should be classified as
' either office spaces or personal service areas and any subsequent calculations of the
parking requirement be determined by the square footage of the net floor area as
stated in Code section 18.52.100 C. 2. of the Parking-Requirements Schedule.
, The design of the Quasi-Public Club calls for certain areas to be used as either
"business offices" or as "personal services areas" and not as "eating an drinking
~ establishment" areas. These should include the fax rooms, the kid's office, the
concierge desk and the business office all on the third floor.
~
'
'
,
' hc102197pkg
'
'
~
,
'
1
~
MEMORANDUM
TO: TOWN COUNCIL
~
FROM: LORI AKE , ACTING TOWN CLERK
DATE: OCTOBER 1, 1997
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT OF REGULAR MUNICIPAL ELECTION JUDGES
It is my pleasure to suggest the following four prospective appointees as judges for the Regular
Municipal Election to be held Tuesday, November 18, 1996:
Karen Morter
2985 Booth Creek Drive, P.O. Box 308
Vail, CO 81657
476-5105-W 476-2406-H
Jeannie Tilkmeier •
5016 Main Gore Drive
Vail, CO 81657
476-5801 - H
Holiday M. Cole
2084 Zermatt Lane, P.O. Box 741
Vail, CO 81658
476-4444-W 476-1546-H
Mary Jo Allen
1956 Cabin Circle, PO Box 861
Vail, CO 81657
476-5894 - H & W
F:\TWNCLERK\WPFILES\ELECTION\JUDGES.APP '
.
h' r
ORDINANCE NO. 18
Series of 1997
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE GENERAL PLANNING DOCUMENT FOR THE 1999
WORLD ALPINE SKI CHAMPIONSHIP$, AND SETTING FORTH A SPECIAL REVIEW
PROCESS TO ALLOW FOR STAFF APPROVALS FOR TEMPORARY SIGNS,
STRUCTURES, STREET DECOR, AND OTHER TEMPORARY IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE
WORLD ALPINE SKI CHAMPIONSHIPS OF 1999.
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail shall be hosting the 1999 World Alpine Ski Championships
from January 31 st through February 14th, 1999; and
WHEREAS, said event is the major international ski competition in non-Olympic years;
and
WHEREAS, said event is a major undertaking requiring temporary structures, signs,
street decor, and other temporary improvements in order to be properly staged; and
WHEREAS, said event is determined to be of major importance to the Town for
economic, cultural, and social reasons; and
WHEREAS, in order to facilitate the preparation necessary for such an event, the Town
Council has determined that in the areas of temporary signs, structures, and street decor, it is
necessary to exempt the Vail Valley Foundation, which is the sponsoring organization of the
_ World Championships, from complying with all the Town's zoning, Design Review Board, and
sign code requirements, and in their stead to set forth a special process to handle such
temporary signs, structures, street decor, and other temporary improvements for the event.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
VAIL, COLORADO:
Section 1
The Town Council hereby endorses the general planning document for the 1999 World Alpine "
Ski Championships.
Section 2
It is understood that in order to facilitate the 1999 World Alpine Ski Championships, certain
temporary improvements shall be utilized by the Vail Valley Foundation, and that these
improvements shall include, but may not be limited to, the following:
A. Flags and banners B. Temporary structures
C. Lighting
D. Snow and ice sculptures
E. Entertainment and hospitality 1
•
r
Y
~ .1~.
F. Parades
G. Opening and awards ceremonies
H. Race finish stadium
. I. Opening ceremonies stadium
J. Food, trade, and festival centers _
K. Media centers _
L. Temporary signs and transportation
In order to facilitate the construction of the temporary improvements set forth above
which are necessary for the conduct of the 1999 World Alpine Ski Championships, the following
process shall be substituted for the customary review process for zoning, design review, and
sign review as set froth in the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail.
A. All temporary signs, structures, and street decor, and other temporary
improvements necessary and desirable for the conduct of the 1999 World Alpine Ski
Championships shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review a
reasonable time prior to their construction or placement within the Town.
B. The Town staff will review the requested structures, signs, or improvements in
cooperation with representatives of the Vail Valley Foundation. The Vail Valley Foundation and
- the Town staff shall work closely on an ongoing basis to facilitate the approval process and to
implement the general planning document. If the temporary signs, structures, or other temporary
improvements meet the approval of the Town staff, they may be implemented by the Foundation.
C. If the Vail Valley Foundation and the Town staff disagree on the approval of any
temporary signs, structures, street decor, or other temporary improvements, a final decision shall
be made by the Town Manager, a representative of the Design Review Board, and a
representative of the Town Planning and Environmental Commission. If said three individuals
are unable to reach a decision or should they feel Town Council input is necessary, the issue
shall be presented to the Town Council for their review.
D. The Vail Valley Foundation or a Town of Vail staff representative shall report to
the Town Council on a monthly basis to update them on the planning process for the 1999
World Alpine Ski Championships at a regularly scheduled Town Council Work Session.
2
~
~
~r
Section 3
Nothing in this ordinance shall relieve the Vail Valley Foundation from the obligation to conform
with all Town building and construction codes., including the Uniform Building Code, the Uniform
Fire Code, and the National Electric Code. Nothing herein shall be deemed to relieve the Vail
Valley Foundation from complying with any and all applicable ordinances, laws, and regulations •
relating to life, health, and safety. The Vail Valley Foundation shall obtain all required permits -
and be subject to all required building inspections for the construction of any temporary
structures.
Section 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 effect 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 5.
The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and
proper for the health, safety and weffare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof.
Section 6
The repeal or the repeal and enactment 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.
3
s
.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
ONCE IN FULL, this 7th day of October, 1997. A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held
at the regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, on the 21 st day of
October, 1997, in the Municipal Building of the Town.
Ro ert W. Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lori Aker, Acting Town Clerk
INTRODUCED, READ, ADOPTED AND ENACTED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED (IN FULL) (BY TITLE ONLY) THIS 21st DAY OF OCTOBER, 1997.
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lori Aker, Acting Town Clerk f:\ord97.18
Ordinance No. 1, Series of 1997 4
- SENT BY: 10-16-97 ; 19:54 ;CommunityDevelopment- 3034792157;# 1/ 4
~f' f~c-s
MEMOIZANDUM
Date: Oclvber 16, 1997
'I'o: Pam Hrandmcyer or Ann ,
. ~
.
Trom: Me Garyl, Eagle County Planning llivision Co-Manager
RE: OG"I'UBER 21 Eskgle County Rcvised Land Usc Regulations Presentation lu
tLe Vail Town Coaucil
The attmched informatian is back-up for the above meeting per nur discussion in carly -
Sep.tember. .
My notes state that we will be on the COuneils agencia around 7:30 p.m, this coming Tuesday evening. You may have noticed we have included our town meeting schedule in thc ads und
press releases that have been in the papers rcgarding this land use regulations revision project. !f
the a,genda time is signifcantly changed, please lel me know al your earti.est convcnience and we
will notify all pertinent pazties (press, etc.). Again, we onty anticipate needing about d half an
hour all told. If the Council wants to spend more time on questions and cotnments, that will be up to them. We are able to stay as long as necessaty.
If possible we would like lo have a copy of the agenaa for the meeting (fax is 328-7185). If you
have any qucstions, I can be ceached at 328-8749. Thank you for setting this up for us - we
apprec;iate your time!
- SENT BY: 10-16-97 ; 19:54 ;CommunityDevelopment- 3034792157;# 2/ 4
" Octaber 21,1997 presentation to
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
on the
EAGLE COUNTY REVISEp I.,ANp I,TSE REGULATIONS
by Ellie Caryl and Keith Montag of Eagle Coanty Community Llevelopment
Age.-ada 1- Why we are before the Town Council - Keith M.ontag .
2. Backgrourtd of R.evised L;ind Use Regulations Process - Keith Montag
3. Nezt Steps - EIlie Cary!
4. Overview of revised E.C. Land Use Itegulations content (please see
attached table of contents) , Keith Montag/Ellie Caryl ,
5. Comments and Questions from Towrn Council, staff aad public
- SENT BY: 10-16-97 ; 19:55 ;CommunityDevelopment- 3034792157;# 3/ 4
GOALS FOR REVISiQNS TO
EAGLE CUIINTY LAND USE REG[JLA170NS
1. CONSOLIDAI'ION - Crcate a consolidated and organized
document.
2• PREDICTA$ILiTY - Provide a road map through the County
development review process.
3. EFFICIENCY - Create an efficient and understandabYe
development revicw process.
4. CLARIFICATIQN - Provide clear and understandable
language and graphics for users.
5. IMPLEMENTAT10N - Create Regulations that implement the
policYes of the Eagie Caunty Master Plans
•SMT BY: 10-16-97 ; 19:55 ;CnmmunityDevelopment- 3434792157;# 4/ 4
EAGLE COUNTY REVISED LAND USE REGULATIONS
Table of Contents
A LF TI. TGE
1 GEhiERAL PROVISIONS
Z DEFINMONS
3 ZONE DISTItICTS
• General
• Putposes of Zone Districts
~ Use snd Uimensivnal Standatds
4 SITE DEVELQPMENT STANDARDS
• Off-street Parking and Loading Standards
' Landscaping and Illumination 5tandards • • Sign Regulations
• Natural Resource Protection Standards
• Witdlifc
• R;parian
• Ridgeline
• Geologic Hazards
• Wildfire
• WOOd Bilftllng
• EnvironmentalIrnpact
• CommerciaUIndu,strial Perfoimanee Standardq
• Improvernents Standards
• Impact Pces and Land Dedicafion Standards
5 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BObrES Aivn PROCEDURFS
• Duties and Responsibilities of Decision Making, Admitistrative and
Advi.sory $pdies
. • Common Yrocedures
6 NONCONFORMITIES
7 ENFORCEMF,NT
Appendix A- Finciings in Suppori of the Nutural Resourec protectiun Uverlays
Appendix B- Finai Plat Recordat;on Specifications and Ce.rtification Form.ats
U*4u 10 3
GOALS FOR REVISIONS TO
EAGLE COUNTY LAND USE REGULATIONS
1. CONSOLIDATION - Create a consolidated and organized
document.
2. PREDICTABILITY - Provide a road map through the County
development review process.
3. EFFICIENCY - Create an efficient and understandable
development review process.
4. CLARIFICATION - Provide clear and understandable
language and graphics for users.
5. IMPLEMENTATION - Create Regulations that implement the
policies of the Eagle County Master Plans
.
8
. L
: . . .
>
. CATEGORIZATION:;OF.:'PAItTICIPAIdT`: C.OHCERNB
Issue Staft BOCC/ Code
P&Z 1-Users
_ . . . _ . - . . . . . . , .
.
.
,
A._.:::Re ato
rg. Concerns:; Pr.a.cedurea :
1. Administration of the review process XX X XX
2. Streamline review process/delegation xx XX XX
of approval authority 3. Consolidate Regulations; reorganize X O X
and illustrate document
4. Clarify application submission xIX X XX
contents and review standards 5. Interpretation of the Regulations X O X
, . .
. _ . .
.
AeguYa.tozY. ...Conceraa:::: - Buba:tanae:-;
1. PUD/Subdivision XX X X
2. Refine zone district use tables and XX X XX
dimensional limitations .
3. Design review guidelines XX O XX
4. Nonconf ormities X. X XX
5. Variances/Special uses ~ X X X
6. Impact mitigationjaffordable housing XX O X
7. Expiration/sunset of approvals X XX O ~
8. Enforcement X XX X ~
C. Maater: Plan ...Coacerne:: :
1. Update and specify Plan policies, XX XX XX
implement policies in Regulations
2. Conduct existing conditions analysis X XX O
3. Create vision to guide future uses XX XX XX
4. Continue sub area planning X X X
Rey• .
XX: Issue mentioned frequently' during discussions or stated as
high priority concern. X: Issue mentioned during discussions and stated as a concern.
0: Issue not mentioned during discussion or stated as a concern. .
Summary of Issue Scoping Process - Eagle Courtty - January, 1993 Page 6
•
~
USER' S GUIDE TO THE
REVISED EAGLE COUNTY LAND USE REGULATIONS
The Land Use Regulations provide, in a single location, those standards and procedures applicable
to development and the use of land within unincorporated Eagle County. These Regulations
implement the Eagle County Master Plan, which is the long term guide to the development of the
community. It is recommended that persons intending to undertake development become familiar
with the Master Plan's policies, recommended actions and Future Land Use Map (FLUM).
The Land Use Regulations are organized into seven (7) articles. While relatively complex forms
of development may require the user to become familiar with many or all of these articles, simpler
activities will require the user to consult more limited portions of the Regulations. This is because
the document has been organized to consolidate topics within particular articles or divisions. For
example, all zone district standards are found in Article 3, while all natural resource protection
standards are found in Division 4 of Article 4.
This user's guide is intended to provide the first time user with a basic road map through the Land
Use Regulations, to simplify its use. It is not a substitute for a full understanding of the
Regulations. It is recommended that a person proposing development in unincorporated Eagle
County also consult with the Community Development Department, to receive further guidance
on the applicable provisions of these Regulations, to obtain copies of other relevant documents,
such as the County Master Plan, application forms, fee schedules and other relevant chapters of
the County's Regulations, and to find out if any amendments to these Regulations have been
adopted, but have not yet been codified.
The seven (7) articles of these Land Use Regulations can be described as follows:
Article 1, General Provisions, contains the basic administrative provisions of the Land Use
Regulations, including rules for how terms contained in the document are to be understood. The
common user of the Regulations should not have to consult this article frequently. Article 1 does,
however, contain provisions describing how these Regulations apply to the continuing review and
. development of projects submitted or approved under the County's prior Land Use Regulations.
Applicants who have applications pending as of the effective date of these Regulations, or who
have received approvals prior to the effective date of these Land Use Regulations, should refer
to Section 1-150, Exemptions, and should consult with the Community Development Depariment.
Article 2, Definitions, contains all of the definitions of technical terms found in these Land Use
Regulations. The definitions are arranged alphabetically. Certain definitions, such as dwelling
unit, lot line, sign and yard, have sub-sections to define specific types of dwellings, lot lines, signs
and yards. Other definitions use graphics to explain their meaning.
Article 3, Zone Districts, contains standards applicable to development within particular zone
Users Guide to the Eagle County Land Use Regulations Page 1
~
distric . This is what differentiates it from Article 4, which contains standards applicable to all
development. re,gardless of the zone district in which it is located. The standards found in Articles
3 and 4 apply to developments that must obtain some type of development permit, pursuant to
Article 5, Development Review Bodies and Procedures, and to all other uses of land within
unincorporated Eagle County.
Article 3 lists all of the County's zone districts and zone district overlays and their purposes and
incorporates the Official Zoning Map into the Regulations. It contains three (3) key tables, these
being Table 3-300, which establishes the schedule of uses for the County's residential, agricultural
. and resourcezone districts, Table 3-330 which establishes the schedule of uses for the County's
commercial and industrial zone districts, and Table 3-340, which establishes the dimensional
standards for all of the County's zone districts.
Article 3 also provides review standards applicable to particular uses. The uses that are subject
to such standards are identified in the "Standards" column of Table 3-300 and Table 3-330. This
column refers the reader to the sub-section that provides these standards, which would be applied
as part of the County's special review process or its limited review process. Limited review is
a new process created within these Regulations, authorizing the staff, rather than the Planning
Commission or County Commissioners, to review and approve certain uses.
Article 4, Site Development Standards, contains six (6) divisions, providing the. County's
standards for parking, landscaping, illumination, signs, natural resource protection,
commercial/industrial performance and improvements, respectively, that are applicable to all
developments. As such, it identifies the substantive standards that developments must meet, above
and beyond the zone district standards of Article 3. It is crucial that the user check the
applicability provisions of each division of this Article, to determine whether the subject standards
apply to the particular type of development being contemplated. Article 5, Development Review Bodies and Procedures, contains two (2) divisions. The first
division describes the duties and responsibilities of the Board of County Commissioners, Planning
Commission, Zoning Board of Adjustment, Hearing Officer and County staff with respect to these
Regulations. The second division describes the procedures by which the County reviews and
approves land, development applications, including the general procedures applicable to all
applications and the specific procedures applicable to each type of land development application
authorized by these Regulations.
Users are advised to become very familiar with the contents of Sections 5-200 and 5-210. Section
5-200 contains a table that provides an overview of all application types, the bodies responsible
for their review and whether or not the application requires a pre-application conference or a
public hearing. This section also contains a flow chart outlining the steps an applicant must follow
to obtain any land development approval in Eagle County.
Users Guide to the Eagle County Land Use Regulations Page 2
.
~
Section 5-210 builds upon the table and figure, by describing the provisions which apply to all
types of developments, such as how public notice is provided, when to attend a pre-application
conference, how applications are received and reviewed by staff, and how a decision-making body
acts on an application.
The remaining sections of Article 5 address each of the particular legislative and administrative
land development application types authorized by these Regulations. It describes the steps an
applicant must follow to obtain an interpretation, zone district map or text amendment, subdivision
or PUD approval, special use or variance permit or other County development permit.
Applicants intending to submit a development application should first review the procedures and
review standards for the particular type of development application they intend to submit. As
additional detail is needed, the user should also consult the general provisions of Sections 5-200
and 5-210.
Article 6, Nonconformities, contains provisions addressing maintenance, expansion, relocation,
change in use, discontinuance and restoration of nonconforming uses and structures, and
provisions addressing nonconforming lots of record and nonconformities created by eminent
domain proceedings. Uses, structures and lots of record that do not meet the standards of Articles
3 or 4, as applicable, are nonconforming, and must comply with the provisions of Article 6,
Nonconformities.
Article 7, Enforcement, contains provisions by which the County is authorized to abate, enjoin,
restrain and prosecute violations of these Land Use Regulations. It includes penalties and other
remedies for such violations and describes the enforcement procedures the County will follow.
Users Guide to the Eagle County Land Use Regulations Page 3
2
ORDINANCE NO. 19
Series of 1997
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 18.52.160B.(7) EXEMPTIONS, UNDER OFF-
STREET PARKING AND LOADING, OF THE TOWN OF VAIL CODE.
WHEREAS, Section 18.52.106 of the Town of Vail Code currently provides for payment
of the parking pay-in-lieu fee over a period of five years; and
WHEREAS, it has come to the Town Council's attention, through the Town Manager,
that it would be appropriate to allow an extended period of time up to ten (10) years within which .
this fee could be paid.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF VAIL, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS:
l. Section 18.52.160 B.(7).
T7_ ~ o:;o-?i ~ r
i nr
~nnl;r~ant l~w.a tl-~~. nr~t'
er F?r c~
rr lllt VtJl1V11 Vr 1 1.lLL~'lllg 1.1L lll t y 1 1' F 1
bttilditig e~filive (5) J""` YGTIe.] 71t1-- l-`t- ~
,
ttnpaid e~
,
FlH-si}e shsl~l be-mmzi ' b L.. __'~_:_7_ '1 .l
'1 Y ,
' _
ruy ui~.uw, cuiu c1ie IiliLj' Tl...,.v _ _ _ _ r
The owner or applicant lias fihe option of paying'tlie #otal parking~fee at the time of
building;permit or.xhay apply to the Town 1Vlanager to:pay theAotal parkirigxfee over
a period of years. The Town Manager, in his discretion, cari.permit payment over a
ten (10) year period:of time; wifh the first payment being paid on or before the"date
the building permit :is issued. Nine,(9) more -annual,payments -will be due to the
Towri on ihe anriiversary, of the'building perrriit. Interest .of ten-;percent (10%) per
annum, and penalties for failure to make timely payments shall be paid by the owner
or applicant on the unpaid balance. If the Town Manager agrees to permit the fee to
be paid over a period of°time, the Town Manager shall require the owner, applicant
~
.
and/or any otherEindividual with;a vested interest: in°the subject property to provide
adequate security.to ;assure timely payment. `That may inelude, but is not `be limited
. tQcorporate guarantee, personal. promissory riotes-and.guarantees,:and:deeds :of trust
on'ifhe subject or other real proper'ty. A promissory; riote,4ill be requirecl which
describes the:total fee due, the schedule ofpaymerits, the,iriterest;due~and any.other
security'required. Promissory note.forms are avaiiable at,.the offices of Community
Develqprnent~as.approved by"tYie Town Marlager.
3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is
necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants
thereof:
4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Vail Municipal Code
as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any
violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other
action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and
reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance
previously repealed or superseded unless expressly- stated herein.
5. 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith
are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise
any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL, this 7th day of October, 1997. A public hearing shall be held hereon
on the this 21 st day of October, 1997 at the regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of
Vail, Colorado, in the Municipal Building of the Town.
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lori Aker, Acting Town Clerk
.
d
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED in full
this 21 st day of October, 1997.
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
• . ATTEST: Lori Aker, Acting Town Clerk
Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1997 .
.
ORDINANCE NO. 20
SERIES OF 1997
ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE: ADOPTING A BUDGET AND
FINANCIAL PLAN AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS TO PAY THE COSTS,
EXPENSES, AND LIABILITIES OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, FOR ITS
FYSCAL YEAR JANUARY 1,1998, THROUGH DECEMBER 31,1998, AND
PROVIDING FOR THE LEVY ASSESSMENT AND GOLLECTION OF TOWN AD =
VALOREM PROPERTY TAXES DUE FOR THE 1997 TAX YEAR AND PAYABLE IN
- THE 1998 FISCAL YEAR.
WHEREAS, in accordance with Article IX of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado,
the Town Manager prepared and submitted to the Town Council a proposed long-range capital
program for the Town and a proposed budget and financial plan for all Town funds and activities
for the 1998 fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, notice of public hearing on the proposed Town budget and capital program
was published on the 21 st day of October, 1997, more than seven (7) days prior to the hearing
held on the 4th day of November, 1997, pursuant to Section 9.5 of the Charter; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary for the Town Council to adopt a budget and financial plan for
the 1998 fiscal year, to make appropriations for the amounts specified in the budget, and to
provide for the levy, assessment and collection of Town ad valorem property taxes due for the
1997 year and payable in the 1998 fiscal year.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado,
. - that: - •
1. The procedures prescribed in Article IX of the Charter of the Town of Vail, Colorado,
for the enactment hereof have been fulfilled.
2. Pursuant to Article IX of the Charter, the Town Council hereby makes the following
annual appropriations for the Town of Vail, Colorado, for its fiscal year beginning on the first
day of January, 1998, and ending on the 31 st day of December, 1998:
FUND AMOUNT
General Fund $16,244,631
Capital Projects Fund 8,116,686
Real Estate Transfer Tax 2,290,438
Parking Structure Enterprise Fund 2,218,771
Heavy Equipment Fund 1,600,941
Police Confiscation Fund 74,481
Debt Service Fund 2,395,643
Health Insurance Fund 929,500
Vail Marketing Fund 341,500
Booth Creek Debt Service Fund 17,875
Vail Housing Fund 77,715
Facility Maintenance Fund 1,763.221
Total: $36,071,402
Less Interfund Transfers: < 7,471.777>
Net Budget $28.599.625
~ Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1997
,
~
.
3. The Town Council hereby adopts the full and complete Budget and Financial Plan
for the 1998 fiscal year for the Town of Vail, Colorado, which are incorporated by reference
herein and made part hereof, and copies of said public records shall be made available to the
public in the Municipal Building of the Town.
4. For the purpose of defraying part of the operating and capital expenses.of the
Town of Vail, Colorado, during its 1998 fiscal year, the Town Council hereby levies a property,
tax of 4.32 mills upon each dollar of the total assessed valuation of $449,462,770 for the 1997 tax year of all taxable property within the Town, which will result in a gross tax levy of
$1,941,679, calculated as follows:
Base mill levy 4.69 $2,107,980
Abatement mill levy .7 166.301
Total mill levy 4.32 1 941 679
Said assessment shall be duly made by the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, as directed by the
Colorado Revised Statutes (1973 as amended), and as otherwise required by law.
5. This Ordinance shall take effect five (5) days after publication following the final
passage hereof.
6. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for
any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions
of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance,
and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact.that
- any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
7. The Town Council hereby .finds, determines, and declares that this ordinance is
necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants
thereof.
8. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Municipal Code
of the Town of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued,
any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution
commenced, nor any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the
provision repealed or repealed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive
any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein.
9. All bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent
herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be
construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution, or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore
repealed.
2 Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1997
7
~
l
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL, this 21 st day of October, 1997. A public hearing shall be held
hereon on the 4th day of November, 1997, at the regular meeting of the Town Council of the
Town of Vail, Colorado, in the Municipal Building of the Town. ' Robert W. Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lori Aker, Acting Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED in
full this 4th day of November, 1997.
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lori Aker, Acting Town Clerk
3 Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1997
1
v
;
ORDINANCE NO. 17
Series of 1997
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 10.08.010, PARKING TO OBSTRUCT TRAFFIC,
AND TO ENACT SECTION 10.08.130, PARKING EMERGENCY, OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLOR.ADO.
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail Code presently provides for various traffic violations
when any person shall park illegally; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that it is necessary to delineate additional
circumstances which are considered more serious parking violations when such parking
violations occur in the commercial core and areas immediately adjacent thereto which are most
accessible to the mountain lift system and occur in such a manner to cause disruption of street
maintenance including the plowing of snow; and
WHEREAS, this would provide a reasonable basis for a higher penalty assessment for
' these more serious parking violations; and
WHEREAS, under certain conditions it is appropriate and beneficial to allow on street
parking.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF VAIL, COLOR.ADO, AS FOLLOWS:
1. Section 10.08.010 shall be amended to add the following subsections:
B. No person shall park any vehicle upon a street or at any other place within the
commercial cores and areas immediately adjacent thereto of this municipality as such
areas are depicted on a map maintained in the office of the Town Clerk at any place
where official signs prohibit or regulate parking or stopping.
C. No person shall park any vehicle upon a street or at any other place within
this municipality in such a manner or under such conditions as to cause interference
of proper street or highway maintenance including the removal of snow at a time that
such maintenance is actually underway.
2. Section 10.08.130, Parking Emergency shall be enacted as follows:
The Town Manager, the Chief of Police, or their designee has the authority to declare
a parking emergency and thereby suspend the prohibition of on-street parking in
designated areas.
~
J'
I
3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is
necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants
thereof.
- 4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued; any duty imposed, any
violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other
action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or repealed and
reenacted. The repeal of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance
previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein.
5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith
are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise
any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL, this 16th day of September, 1997. A public hearing shall be held
hereon on the this 7th day of October, 1997 at the regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town
. of Vail, Colorado, in the Municipal Building of the Town. .
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lori Aker, Acting Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
this 7th day of October, 1997.
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lori Aker, Acting Town Clerk
' Ordinance No. 17, Series of 1997
-l 4-~L±!_+~t~ b'ddb , . • , ,
0 0 0
~ 0(
,~looo~ oo,~ „9xg4? 5;..
~0~o d ~
• ao . ooo~o o ~ uo~, VAIL POTATO FATCH
ooo\ o2oo ~ ° SECOND FILING
~80° r'` ' TOWN OF.V,41L BOUNDARY
, ,
Q 000Q0 1 ~V „ ,I~•`
; „
~ . . ~~4•.~~ry~~
~ „n~lyl~y F. i
e1/
000 o
; u
Q ~V.
!R
m o8o0
r.~
0
.u,
0
t
0
~
0
0
0
0
0
1
0~0
0
~
L ~t.. ee..~•' ~ ~ ~a'~„ w
4 1 4 ~F '.;E
.
• , . , ~
•1NW.Y
. :,w, .
'
~
1 ~
T
i/
~
~
4
. , ,
• Ili+l',
r. 1`
1 1
`•~I! ~
~
/
A1 J
~ T
/
I
~ ' 4 ? ~ R 4 ! . f . ` V~ .
~ i INTERS7ATE
IONQF~QLL ',a. .'SRRaD REEK
LLIONSHEAD 2nd FILING PA~ ~4A'.
SUN VAIL
CONDOS , • .aR.. .
~ rpurun e J s W T a~ S DD-23
~ .
n • ri` a c b
; ~ + ° ~ I 1y4. . . ~ • ~ ESSlBDJ.YISIQNLQF PART OF , • _
-'-'-'-'~J• /~j IATD,VAILVILLAGE 2ndFILING 1 '
_ 7 • • • • ' - - - ~ i '
F ^~r~,;~e r cie ~ , a~; • TKAcTe
ii ~ .
cil ' ~~u~'~~:~• ~~h ~
~y7R.cT . • •
,I.
SDD1 . ~ '~N~ •:'j~~"~<'",~•,~+,~5,,
7
,,i~. v.. .aie °V:'. ` ~ 1.1~.~, ~,il ~~i:•'•~~ ~i1' I
oPE A SDD`6
i
i ~
wFSi
DR RNICE
, iiiNiii~ ~uiiuuiiiiiiii • p\ ,~11 s t: {„~4~t~"•' I
I ,i •,i,,,i.., oo A ~U v,;t~ I TYROLEAN
. iiiniiii 0 •riliiii/iii , l Gat;~.~
~
~ ~ iiiuiii a$~p4 •.iiiiiii ' ~i ~ _I i DOS ~
AJL 9
-'v
NG
r • „ „ ~ p o ,p 0 0 . , „ . a5 MEAO~«
0 0 0 0 0
0 Y A Q i,. ~
O 0 a
00 b p O 0Q0
0
0 P~ J`I/
/J 0 P~0 0 0 O 0 0 ~ 0~ 0 0( ~
p o a r
ooc,,u,,
a~ '~idlClia'" ~y "'....~.~,.i....i.i.i..~o°a o 000 0 0 0 0000 0000 0 0 oo 0o0
0 o a o o~,o 1
0 0 0 ~~v~." ii~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii' 0~0~0 O~G po p ~ ,L .,r~ M1• + ~ l TRP~T'A ~
o°o C) r o° ~ °o°o o,o o~~ o000 ocooo~~dcrc 4< :i: l~
uoO''o°'.~a.~~~ o o~o o°u`-o"pn~oaY, ~ ~ , at ~ ~
, d bS -_.c_.,$o° a g>-o o~o o c o ~ o 0 3 o a U o q~ .C: ~•'j~•:: ~ ~
00 a ooa o 0 00000 o 00 0o p 0 °o a0
qo
060606 ODp 0~0o ga o~o ~oo aooo ~ t•,~ , ~AE ~ ' "
~ oQ ~O OQ QO OQOp 0 q iiiiiiu p
0 0 D d 0 0 0 0 0 0~0 ~0~0 0~ 00~~0 Op0 0 W ~ pb
) a~pQOpaQ pptlp00po~o~o~po o a ~o pGOG o~a ogoo go O~o o~o 000 60, ~o~ oa oQ wt •.~a'::.'.~. ~ ?7' " t 1
~0000 000 00p0 OCo Oaoo o ~o o r o°~O ~t ~ • r },r
0 0 0 o a d o 0 0 0 o P a ~ d o a o o R~ o o
ppOpPp0o00 p0Op40000d00 ~0a0~00000 0 0 OQ DO a O 0 TB T A ooo ~0 0 0 0 0 0 p ~ 0 DOp q0 wl:'::;*~ ' t
oooo~oo 00
p 00 00o no ob o a a o 00 00 o I. c~+" ~
go~o ogggo ~oam 0 0 ap~~a~opo~o o00 o~o~~;,,,,, o 0 0 0 0 0 00
0 0 0 0° 000 0 oQao o~a°~~o oo o° ~~0 o o~a -~a aRbg~ o°m~°a ~o ' ~ ,~a~..
~ o o~o~o~ o~o~o~ o~a o~a ' o IDa a~~o a~o o g~o aa 0
o ooo
00 0 0 0~o 0 0 a~o o~ ~a ~ba o~a~ 20 a~o o?o 9o ~9a o0 000o a o a a::~:: ;;;;;:Y~~:~!~;,~: ~ T~' • a~ 4
~ 0 0 .~0o ~C~_ _0.. ^ x.u. ^ r• ~ ~ ~
, n ~ti,4'~'.x,~i,' Y.cL+~L.{`...}~..~~•~.y~h.~ ~r~~'~.,C~ y,. .a: Q p`V
IRDIVI I_. VAILLIONSHEAD ' ~ " ~ . ` r ~•'p••, pp
ORf I IC cl
Ist. FI ING, Ist. ADD.
WHITE RIVER NATIONAL FOREST~ Y hPEVIS10N~•
' I EaGLf,V.1lLEY EN31p'.C~.. i 9 SIiRVf.°Rli IPIC, i
WtL.dC!OA]CO 476-4d73
0
0
. , . • ~ ~FCk p~O~~Q 0 ,
N
I o i
. . _ , f= 3 0 O o0 o ,
0n~0.n'0,.0
a ' . . . ~ . . ' .
o . '
~ ?i~\
~y
TOWN OF VAIL
~
Office of the Town Manager
75 South Frontage Road •
Yail, Colorado 81657
.
970-479-2105/Fax 970-479-2157
TM
MEMORANDUM.
. TO: Vail Town Council -
FROM: Robert W. McLaurin, Town Manager
DATE: October 17, 1997
SUBJECT: Town Manager's Report
CAST Meetin~
The November CAST meeting will be held in Vail. The dates for this meeting are November 6 and
7. A reception will be held at 6:00 p.m. at the Ore House. Dinner will be served at 7:00 p.m. The
CAST meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. on Friday, November 7th and will be held at the meeting room
in the basement of the Christiana. I will pass out the agenda for this meeting on Tuesday. If you
would like to attend either (or both) of these events, please RSVP to Anne.
1999 World Alpine ChamDion_ shins
As we have discussed previously, the Vail Valley Foundation will be utilizing the Vail
Transportation Center as the headquarters for the World Alpine Ski Championships. The TRC will
be used for registration and accreditation of athletes, FIS officials, visitors and guests. The
Foundation intends to make some minor modifications to the building for this event. Attached to
this memorandum are two sketches showing. the proposed changes to the facility. Please note that
- the Foundation will restore the TRC to its original condition following this event. _
As you are aware, the Opening Ceremonies will be held at the lower bench of Ford Park. We are
continuing to work with the Organizing Committee and members of the Foundation staff to
coordinate this event. The Celebrations Committee will be erecting bleachers to seat approximately
5,000 people for the opening ceremonies. As with the TRC, this area will be restored to its original
condition by the Foundation following the Championships.
Citv Market Noise Issue
We have been working with officials from City Market and Engineering Dynamics, a noise
consulting firm, on the noise complaints we have been receiving from the City Market cooling
system. The engineer has prepared a recommendation which would reduce the noise by 10 db, which
RECYCLEDPAPER
c
would cut the impact to the residents by approximately 50%. This proposal involves installing a
baffle over each of the three sets of louvers on the cooling facility.
The cost of this construction is estimated to be $10,000.00. City Market is willing to pay half of this
cost if the Town is willing to pay the other half. City Market will handle the installation. Please
advise me on.how you wish to proceed with this matter. As you may recall the current noise does
not exceed any ordinances currently in effect for the Town of Vail. If you wish to expend $5,000.00
on this project it will be necessary to include this in the 1997 Supplemental Budget Appropriation.
Corridor Alliance For Rapid Transit Solutions (CARTS) , Attached to this memorandum is a letter from the Corridor Alliance for Rapid Transit Solutions. As
indicated in the letter, CARTS has been formed by concerned residents, business owners, and elected
officials along the I-70 corridor. These elected officials oppose the widening of I-70 and are working
to implement a transit solution to resolve long-term traffic solutions along I-70.
This week I met with Miller Hudson, the Executive Director or CARTS, concerning this issue. Mr.
Hudson is interested in coming to a Council meeting in the near future to discuss CARTS and their
proposed work plan for the upcoming year. At this point he has been scheduled for December 2nd.
RWM/aw
attachments
E~~ED SEP 2 ~
~ REC
September 10, 1997
Idaho Springs Colorado
Dear I-70 Corridor Elected Official:
The Corridor Alliance for a Rapid Transit Solution (CARTS) has been fonned by concerned
residents, business owners and elected officials from Clear Creek, Summit and Eagle Counties
who oppose the widening of Interstate 70 to six or more lanes. Those of you who have followed
; this issue for nearly a decade know that the time has come to 'act. The Alliance does not believe .
- that additional highway lanes can resolve the peak period traffic congestion problems which have
developed along I-70. To the contrary, the Alliance supports the construction of r i transit as
the correct "50 year solurion" for increasing traffic capacity. The Alliance has been organized to
accomplish two goals: (1) in the short run, CARTS seeks to insure that rapid transit emerges as
the preferred alternative for traffic relief recommended by the I-70 Major Investment Study (MIS)
which concludes early next year, and (2) over the longer term, CARTS supports the formation of
a Rural Transportation Authority encompassing the appropriate local jurisdictions and charged
with responsibility for organizing, financing, planning, desigriing and constructing a rapid transit
solution for the I-70 corridor. The Alliance believes establishment of an RTA should be refened
to voters in November of 1998 so that work may begin as soon as possible in forging the unique
public/private partnerships which will be required if rapid transit is to move from wish to reality.
CARTS is registered with the Colorado Secretary of State's office as a non-profit corporation
dedicated to providing public information, educational materials and research results regarding
traffic conditions, technologies and ridership forecasts for the I-70 comdor. An application for
federal 501(c)3 tax exempt status is pending. If an inter-governmental agreement is drafted next
year providing for the formation of a corridor RTA, it is anticipated that a separate "campaign
committee" would be organized at that time to directly encourage political support for approval of
the RTA. In the meantime, CARTS will serve in the role of public advocate on behalf of a rapid
transit solution for the I-70 corridor informing residents, the media and local elected officials
regarding decisions which must be made and the options available for consideration.
In order to achieve these goals financial support will be required for staffing, dissemination of
informational materials, newspaper notices and legal work that supports the goal of launching an
RTA and identifying a suitable technology for the corridor. The Alliance has been intentionally
formed as a non=profit in order to enable local governments with a stake in seeking a rapid transit
solution for the corridor to fmancially support its efforts. The attached schedule provides a list of
"one time" suggested assessments which, together with business support, should enable CARTS
to operate through the end of 1998 when it is expected that the organization would dissolve. If
an RTA question is refened to voters next year, local governments cannot contribute directly to
such a campaign under Colorado law. At that rime we would expect to turn to the private sector
for financial support. We are seeldng your commitment at this time because we recognize that
for many of our smaller communities, this expense may need to be included in your fiscal 1998
budget process. Naturally, we would welcome even larger contributions, if possible, and sooner
rather than later, if that also were possible. CARTS would be happy to make a more detailed
presentation in support of these requests to each community at your regular public meetings.
(For additional information or to schedule a meeting, please call Miller Hudson at 303-480-1105)
We ap ec' your consideration,
/ y
d Rapp ` Miller Hudson
Chairman Executive Director
SUGGESTED SUPPORT GUDELINES FOR CARTS•
CLEAR CREEK COUNTY $ 2,000
IDAHO SPRINGS 1,000
GEORGETOWN 500 . SUMMIT COUNTY $ 7,500
BRECKENRIDGE 5,000
SILVERTHORNE 3,000
FRISCO 2,000
DILLON 2,000
EAGLE COUNTY $ 9,000
VAI- 7,000
AVON 2,500
EAGLE 1,500
GARFIELD COUNTY $ 2,000
GLENWOOD SPRINGS 1,500
JEFFERSON COUNTY $ 5,000
GOLDEN 1,000
TOTAI.: $ 52,500
~
u~w?~-~ ~~rt
~ ~ -
~
~
tX94
~
~ .
y i•~ r~
Q~j~r~ w A ~ ir~
. / v
LS
~
~ .
.
4
O~Qae V
\ ~ TL
\ II
. ~ .
\ ( `~OV~ l t
~
` J
~
.
41 cT 4~~ ~~y(~ s t 6G0~
m ~ •
t-' prsr~Ze " ~ 1
ake+r&AN~
r~j~,~j`Q?,' ~;~j,t~i j~:v ,~fS~ .civrt~?- ~ 4
r- ~I • . ~ ~d!?!'^' ~ ~ '
( ` ~ 1 caYnl~v ~br bx. c..~o.b•-~/q~
~
U -I°
ocd wlcA
1*w prA,14- '
1
apwlpl,-~
~
~w i ~~1~ ~ 1 /
d"r.
*ws (i
^ q J s O
I o ~ ~°~=1 0 0 ,
~ ~ Q ° - - - - - - - ~YNA'YGQ~'i~??ts? v ~ ~
I
u
~y
TOWN OF VAIL
~
Office of the Town Manager
75 South Frontage Road
Yail, Colorado 81657 MEMORANDUM • • •
970-479-2105/Fax 970-479-2157
TM
TO: Vail Town Council
Robert W. McLaurin
Suzanne Silverthorn
FROM: Pamela A. Brandme er ssistant Town Manager
DATE: October 17, 1997
RE: TCI Payment
Roxanne returned a call to Chris Anderson yesterday afternoon stating they are doing a check to the
Town of Vail this week for the 2nd quarter franchise fee. Chris then left a message for Jennifer at
Channel 5, telling her we'd send her check as soon as we received the TCI payment. This will
probably occur the week of the 20th.
PAB/aw
b
RECYCLEDPAPER
~w
10-17-1997 11: 53AM FROM TIVOLI LODGE VAIL C0.! ` TO 4792157 P.02 X -t-L
~r,o~ vn
~ ~
~
• ~r'•'•••I
~ I
~
:6;CEPTIONAI. LpDGING A7 THE BASE OF VAIL MOUNTAIN
r • . ~
~ I I I ,
i ~ .
~ Jctob~,-
~ 177 199'7 , ; .
~ .
~
I J' LAWni
Bok 238 i j .
I V~ail, ~O S165k I I
i ~Jink
I i
T hank ~rou :For taboo.. fax
; ~r" ct~e ~xoposed
valct ~
arldng setvice. I bave discassed the sitoation wirh
p I~
o~
! ~b L~zier, owne'r the Tivbli, ancl we agree that i~cm.a~d traffiC on both Hansoa Ranch Road a~td Vail
` Vollcy i Drive wiil ca~se a~o~le~a for the East Vi~e azea
~ I
~ Gure1y~t~ , Nat~sott ~nCh Road ha5 sign~s tt~at prottibit most pativng and drop~of skiqs. We, as many
~ I,;l~ave obsenvEhaf th~se oodes ane not vrell enforoed. 7~c~e a~ne frequenfl3~ many vehicles, botb
~ oqmmerr.ial tn~clca abd i pLssen~cr c~ts, pazlung on Ra~tsatt Rawh Road tha~ at times, cause haffic
I cdngestioa. If we :h~ve a~em now, imagine wBat Ehe area witl )ook like with 50 vehiClCS waitiAg foX
~ sdmeoee to nio've ltiem to th~ socner t'yclds?
~ I
i VjLile fhe implemcolation ofi vaiet pptiaing service may inctease the peroeived scrvice Jevels of Vail, we
i feFl that the unppCt qf this servicC on eadsfing buSii~ as weR as pedestrian,s, ia tbe ar+ea will be
013,~ivie. This valet ~Service 4vill pNuNy be used tty a very sma2l perccnsage of Vail's gtuests. However,
( t irnpan of cnis se ,mce will be seen by mauy mm. Any valet service should bc routea chrwg,h we rcw
f den Peak area.; Efob ha~s p+oposed that t~e tr~iC be diiecrtied to GoMen P~eak via a~vv bridge east of
~ t Foc~d ~c tennis K~~s. 1JVe feel that utilizing Chis area for s16er drop off enW valei set'viCe wilt benefit
~ aIl pardes which have an inteirest in preserving and'increasing the quality of the Vail Viltage expeaence.
< S~,
~ • I
~ . ~
; ~
~
, .
Ea Moul[on
ManagCr
~ I
~ <_,.I.. - .
I
i oc~ Topvn of Vail I I I I I ~ ~
64i 6-DIqhE LA21~N / s80 NwIv50N IANCH RD, yA1L, COLQf:pDO 87657 / PMONE (303) 476.W,$15
r2ESERVq710NiS / 1.d00-457-47aR
FAX 203.478•6607
TOTAL P.02
EAST VILI.AGT HOMFOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.
~ . ~ H
Officers: President - Bob Galvin Secretary - Gretta Parks Treasurer - Palrick Gramm
pS~,b
D'uectors - Judith Berkowitz - Dolph Bridgewater - Ellie Caulidns - Ron Langley - Bill Morton - Connie Ridder
To: Mayor Bob Armour and Town Council Members
From: Jim Lamont, Executive Director
Date: October 17, 1997
RE: Valet Parking Service
The Homeowners Association is supportive of the need for improvements in customer ser-
vices. The Association recognizes the potential benefits and advantages to the valet parking pro-
posal. However, there are concerns over some aspects of the operation of the service. Generally,
these concerns are the problems and impacts created by conducting a commercial activity on a
public right-of-way in a residential neighborhood
It is the long standing position of the Association that there should be no uses allowed in
the neighborhood that would cause a net increase of vehicular iraffic on Vail Valley Drive or in
adjoining residential neighborhoods. The Association favors uses that would cause a net decrease
in traffic volume on Vail Valley Drive. The Association does not favor any activity within resi-
dential neighborhoods that provides a service to an adjacent commercial area that causes traffic
congestion or adjunct conditions that diminishes the residential quality of the affected
neighborhoods.
The following are concerns that have been raised by Association members subsequent to
the distribution of a memorandum informing adjacent property owners of the intent of the Town
Council to allow a valet service to operate in the East Village.
1. Increase in Traffic Volume Possible: The distance between the drop-off/pick-up
location at the Christiania Lodge and tiie storage area at the Soccer Field Parking Lot does not ap-
pear to allow the valet drivers to return from the storage area on foot. As a consequence, it ap-
pears that valet drivers must return to the drop-off/pick-up point in a vehicle. As a result, it
appears that the valet service could double the number of trips, over present conditions, of vehicles
going to the soccer field parking lot during peak traffic hours on Vail Valley.
The historical use of the soccer field parking lot causes it to fill-to-capacity prior to the
peak traffic hours. T'he Association acknowledges that the closure of the Soccer Field Parking
Lot to public parking, with proper notification of the general public, could reduce the number of
vehicles seeking to find public parking, thus causing a reduction of traffic volume on Vail Valley
Drive. However, with valet parking any reduction from no public parking at the Soccer Field
would be lost to the need to shuttle valet drivers. The net result being a reduction of traffic in
non-peak hours and an increase in volume during the peak trafFic hours. This circumstance does
not meet the Association's position of no-net increase in traffic volume on Vail Valley Drive.
2. Golden Peak Ski Base: There is a distinct advantage to locating the primary drop-
off/pick-up in the Golden Peak North Parking Lot. The North Parking Lot was designed to be
able to accommodate drop-off/pick-up traffic without adversely affecting traffic flow on Vail
Valley Drive.
Post Office Box 238 Vail, Colorado 81658
Telephone: (970) 827-5680 Message/FAX: (970)
TOV/TCBVHA: Valet Parking Service 10/17/1997
The Golden Peak location could greatly increase the efficiencies of the valet service be-
cause of its near proarimity to the Soccer Field Parking Lot. Furthermore, because the Golden
Peak drop-off/pick-up location is within a reasonable walking distance of the storage parking lot
at the Soccer Field it would eliminate the return shuttle trip by vehicle for the valet driver. This
would yield a no net increase or perhaps a decrease of traffic on Vail Valley Drive during peak
traffic hours.
According to sources at Vail Associates, there is concern that the proposed traffic control
and parking system for the Golden Peak Ski Base be fully test under high demand conditions be
fore considering adding additional customers services that could operate from the Golden Peak
North Parking Lot. Concern has been expressed that if there are problems with the operation of
the drop-of~/pick-up function at the Christiania location that result in impeding of traf~ic on Vail
Valley Drive, the resulting negative image will adversely affect public and neighborhood property
owners attitudes towards the operation of the Golden Peak Ski Base. Discussions regarding valet
parking, held between neighborhood property owners and Vail Associates during the planning
phase of the Golden Peak Ski Base, indicated that there were several on-site logistical difficulties
that were not able to be overcome with the result that the valet parking concept was dismissed.
3. Drop-off and Pick-up Location: The Christiania Lodge as a primary drop-off/pick-up
location could adversely affect traffic flows on Hanson Ranch Road and Gore Creek Drive.
There are cuirently significant problems at this location during the prime public drop-off/pick-up
and truck delivery periods. In the initial stages of the valet service there may be considerable
conflicts between drivers accustomed to using the location as a public drop-off/pick-up or truck
delivery access into Vail Village.
There is concern with the adequacy of a sufficient number of parking spaces at the Christi-
ania location to accommodate demand during peak use periods. The feared result is an increase in
traffic congestion. Additionally, there is concern with the viability and implication of operating
the valet service during the evening hours from the Christiania Lodge location.
Approaumately 15-20 parking spaces on Hanson 'Ranch Road and Gore Creek Drive can
be used for staging the valet service at the Christiania location. There are an estimated 65-85
spaces in the Soccer Field Parking Lot, The peak demand time frame is estimated to be an hour
and one half in midmorning and late afternoon. The highest demand period during the season
will be holidays and weekends.
4. Vail VaIley Drive: Concerns have been raised that there could be traffic blockages on
Vail Valley Drive because of the time necessary for valet personnel to dissuade non-eligible ve-
hicles from attempting to enter Hanson Ranch Road or when demand for valet parking service ex-
ceeds capacity.
5. Relocation of Truck Parking and Public Drop-off/Pick-up Function: There is con-
cern with the lack of discussion or information provided that indicates where the current truck
parking demand will be relocated. The Association is opposed to any increase traffic volume or
the redistribution of the parking of inedium and large trucks to the north side of the P-3 & J sites.
The surrounding residential neighborhood should not be adversely affected by the implementation
of the valet service. There has been general dissatisfaction over the last several years with the
Town's enforcement of parking at the P-3 & J and Mill Creek Court Building locations.
2
TOV/TC/EVHA: Valet Parking Service 10/17/1997
6. Enforcement: There is concern over the lack of discussion as to the Town of Vail's
role in iraffic enforcement with regard to the valet service operation. Additionally, there is con-
cern over the potential for an increase in bandit parking and drop-off/pick-up in the Gore Creek
and Mill Creek Circle neighborhoods.
II. Operational Concerns and Conditions: The following issues have not been suffi-
ciently addressed in order for the Association to be assured that operational and enforcement as-
pects of the proposed valet service are viable. The Association requests that the following items
and required conditions-of-operation be addressed in suff'icient detail prior to the Town Council
approving the management agreement with the service provider.
1. Calculations should be provided that give evidence that the vehicle dwell and shuttle
cycle times are sufficient to accommodate projected peak demand periods at the Christiania and
Soccer Field Parking Lot locations.
2. Documentation needs to be provided that there will be sufficient valet personnel to
cycle sufficient vehicles quickly enough to avoid the stacking up of un-shuttled vehicles. If back-
ing up onto Vail Valley Drive occurs the service should be terminated.
3. The designation of the parking sites and sirategies to be used for relocating the public
drop-off/pick-up and iruck delivery functions that presently occurs at the Christiania Lodge loca-
tion. Truck deliveries being made by hand cart to the upper end of Bridge Street from the P-3 &
J site location should be relocated to loading areas in front of the businesses receiving deliveries.
Currently, truck parking and deliveries are not allowed on Hanson Ranch Road at the upper end
of Bridge Street. No medium or large truck parking should occur on the north side of the P-3 and
J site on Gore Creek Drive.
4. Remediation provisions should be made for circumstances and conditions when de-
mand exceeds storage capacity. The method of notification and contend of signage used to notify
customers that valet parking lot is operating or full should be articulated.
5. The method to be used to contral illegal parking at or near the Soccer Field Parking
Lot and to notify the public that the parking lot is closed to public use should be articulated.
6. The availability and commitment to provide sufficient resources to increased enforce-
ment of parking and drop-off/pick-up on the public right-of-way in affected neighborhoods should
be articulated.
7. Documentation of the compatibility of the proposed service with the appropriate provi-
sions of the Golden Peak and Ford Park Management Plans should be articulated.
The Homeowners Association requests that enforcement provisions of sufficient maQni-
tude to remediate problems that may arise from the operation of the valet service be included in
the management agreement. Furthermore, that ifproblems arise that are not able to remediate to
the satisfaction of the affected neighborhoods that unon the conduct of a public hearing the Town
Council reserves the right to immediately terminate the service for iust cause.
3
IL
'
_ ~.tLG ~
I
f,~6
TO THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL:
FR: Gilda and Werner Kaplan
SUBJECT: Elimination of parking at th soccer field
We are not impacted by the conversion of the TOV soccer field to a valet parlang lot and therefor this memo
has no personal agenda.
Given the information we have received (and feel free to correct us if it is false information) we have the
following objections.
. this is TOV (our) property and why should it be used for private enterprise at the expense of the employees
who have for many years parked there
. the Golden Peak pazking has been eliminated for employees and now they have been deprived of the soccer
parking, which will necessitate a long walk in boots from Ford Park.
. if we expect our employees to take care of our guests, we think these employees should be taken care of
and given consideration
. if four people (unrelated) in one car valet park, the cost will be $20 or $5 each / a real cheap deal / isn't
there a way to determine how many used the soccer fields in previous years and allocate those spaces to
employees/ and ?ive what's left over to valet
. many employees have other jobs they must drive to, as well as errands that must be done after work / this is
sending a message to the employees that Vail cares more about the buck than they do about the people / this
is not what VAIL TObiORROW is all about!
. as supporters of this current council, a council that has sent the message to the people that their concems
will be addressed, we ask you to thoroughly review the impact of this decision and not act in haste / private
enterprise does not belong on TOV property if it severely impacts and inconveniences the employees that
enable Vail to function as a resort
. except on special event week-ends we ask whether the two existing structures are filled to capacity / we
support private enterprise and being entrepreneurial, but it is our opinion that the negative impact outweighs
our support for this venture
Niuch as we might want to be Deer Valley with valet parking and employees carrying guests' sids, we are not
Deer Valley nor are we Beaver Creek which is owned by Vail Resorts and can funcrion under private
ownership / we support talang good care of the guest but at what expense to the employee
HOWEVER not to be totally negative and perhaps come to a compromise:
. does the town intend to run a bus over to Golden Peak from the Ford Park parldng?
. what are we getting in the way of financial compensation for the use of the soccer fields?
. is this property on a lease basis to the valet company / who carries the insurance since it is on TOV land
and do we have any potential liability ?
Printed by Anne Wright 10/15/97 8:28am ~-c
From: Anne Wright
To: Anne Wright
Subject: Invitation for Town Council
Rick Sackbaer called to invite the Town
Council to a cocktail party to meet the
employees from Delatite Shire,
Australia who will be working in Vail
with the Vail Valley Exchange Program.
It will be held on December 15th from
6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. at the Colorado
Ski Museum.
-
Page: 1
10/15/1997 12:13 9142735689 DANSCOTT ENTERPRISES PAGE 01
Xc ; TL? . .
s~
~ ~ Ic~ h1
c_.
. . Mrs. L,itzda Sage
14 Evergteen Row
Armank, NY I0504
9 14/273-3967
Letter to the Editor, Dwnon Arhos
Vail Trail
Fax: 970-949-0199
Who ZVeeds it? You told us beautification of Livnshead, you ziever mentioned congestion!
I for one believe that if it isn't broken don't fix it. However, when someone tells
me tbat they wamt to make an already wondezful placc mare wonderftil, wliy not? Well
now that Z'm heazing the details of the proposals put forth, I say let's forget it. You rmy
actually take a wondertiul place and ruin i.t, in your es'vrts to improve it. Just take a]onk at
what over-develbpment did to Beaver Creek; it's incredibly congested. Let nne be specific
here aboiit a couple of suggestions presently being proposed.
A hotel with mre beds for Lionshead--why7 We have a condominium in
I,ionshead that is never sold out all winter except Christmas week. In addition, we've izad .
friends get reservations even the last rrinute at the Westin (it's called svmthing else now)
amd the Matriott, and tltey are not sold out either. So why do we need moxe bcds in
Lionshead? Also, there is already one tall building, the Lan,dmark, in Lionshead, why putt a
tall hotel opposite.zt, that would make (even with brealcs in the build'ungs being proposed),
a darker corridor than eMists now? And, how about the cozgestxon that would be created
with cars and trucks servicing the hotel?
Secon,d af al(, a bus ttamugh Lionshead--why? One of the charms of Lionshead is
the plaza ax'ea wbere there are no cars. Why wauld you want to do that? I've heard it mid,
it's because, they fouzid that most people being dropped offat the bus stop to use the
Gotidola don't uake it up to the other end of Lionshead to use the retail shops there. Fiorst
of all, there ace not a whole lot of retail shops there to begin with, anci zzauy of them duplicate shopa in the Vail Village (even the General Store is awned by th.e folics who awn
the Ruckb,aus). A+tore importenitly, siince there are many more `live beds,' as they say, in
Lionshead, compared to Vail Village, most peaple are not taking the bus at all and
therefore are very awfue of the retQ shops already.
Were the,re uherior motcves to tbus proposai to beautify Lionshead to begin with?
That old expression: "Beware of inen bearing gi,fts" mught have a lot of validity here!
Linda Sage, a Lionshead Lover, one
day hopefWly a pennanent msident
cc: Mayor of Yail
Vail Council Mennbers
To: Bob McLaurin Date: 10/15197 Time: 12:41:36 PM Page 1 of 1
His Royal Highness Luitpold, Prince of Bavaria
his brewmasters and staff
invite you to a reception to introduce the
Kaltenberg Castle Royal Bavarian Brewhouse
22 October 1997
5:00-7:00 pm
Old Lionshead Gondola terminal building - Trail's End
Bavarian hors d'oeuvres and a selection of Royal Bavarian beers will be served.
Brewery and menu information, as well as renderings of the
interior design will be shared.
RSVP - 970/479-1050
10-15-1997 12=32PM FROM EXECUTIVE SVCS OF VV 970 524 7342 P_1
Post-iC Fax Note 7671 Dale JC~/S = pe~e~ /
T°~ ix r F`°m ~ ~~erzn ~ c~~S s
CA.1Uept C°-
Pn«,e r Prwrm
Ocwber 15. 199'7 Fax k ~ fs Fax w ~
~
Mayor Robert Armour
. Town of Vail
75 S. Frontage Roaci Wcst
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Mr, Arnlour,
Last weck I rcccivc:d a copy of a tetter scnt to you fro?u Mr. Gillie, responding, ! presume to my suspicions
that lte is using information gleaned hom Ilic Vail Tomorrow .pzocess and/or the W"Y'CB to solicit
business. 1 assure you I:un not paranoid, and liave a solid reputalion in the valley for mo.re than 20 ycars as
a prafessional administrator and manager, i doubt that you would have tb,c time to verify my inteoty,
howcvcr, my professional and personal inlegriry can be verified by somc of the valley's "finest", fram Rod
' Slifer to Ross Bowkcr to John Horau-Kates and Elaine Kelton
While monc of us has the tune to get iunto a long drawn out argument, witb you in the middle, let it suffice to
sa,y that Y liave had moxie of my frars allayed either by M. Gillic, the towtt WTCB or Viul Toinorrow. 1
would tbink llmt if Mr. Gillie is as viMons a,a hc claims, he would providc mc with the information I
roquested, i.e. the respanses from Scorpio owners to the LQ] " he refecred to in his comerwtions and
correspondencc with me. As the naanager of the building, apd iio the interest oC lodging quali .ry
iuiprovements, I sbould bc provided with my owaers' responses_ 1 certainly do not want to havc to bodicr
my hozneowncrS with this request. I bave ask¢d ipr these, but they have not becn provided to me. If there
is a reason they cannot be sbared with me, l'd like to hear it, beceuso 1 thoughc the goal here was to assist
second homeowncrs in improving their propexties (which is pazt of my job).
T do not pretcnd to know the details of town finaneing, but am I wrong .in concluding ihat the Vail
Tornorrow prooess and the resulting LQ1 are paid for by taxpaycrs? lsn't the W'1'CB partly fundel
through 4vccs andlor licenses?
I bave obviously struck a nerve with Ivfr. Ginie and ao noc wish co deal with biun direcay. Can you please
assign someone to make sure that, in fact, publicly funded do.llars are not being used for private businc;ss
gain? And also, can someone please send me the responses from Scorpio owners referencud in Mr. Gi11ie's
original oonespondence to ine?
When I rcxx;ive that inforniation, I will let this inau.er drop as I am way too busy lo continue to pursue it. 1.
tn,st that my havin,g wxved a fldg will at least alert the town and WTCB to the potential for a conflict oC
- CSL
1 would enjoy the opportunity to discuss this witb you if you tt?ink it would be of inezit 71anks for your
consideration.
Sincerely, .
Eileen F. J ~
•
LAW OFFICES
MARCE & INGRASSIA
(a professional corporation)
?S111t6 210
1314 North Third Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85004 rv%^
Telephoae: 602/257-1100
Facsimile: 602/257-1685
October 10, 1997
Town of Vail Council
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Re: Lionshead Re-development
Ladies and Gentlemen:
My wife and I are owners at the Westwind, in Lionshead. We
have recently received some materials outlining various plans
that are underway for the "re-development" of Lionshead.
- I want to particularly voice our strong disappointment that
the Town is even considering a redevelopment plan which would
allow any vehicle traffic (even if it is only town buses) to cut
through the Lionshead Mall south of the Lifthouse or between the
Landmark and the Sunbird Lodge. We are equally disappointed that
the Town may be considering allowing Vail Associates to redevelop
the Sunbird and Gondola Building properties in a way that
encroaches into the Lionshead mall area.
My wife and I selected Vail as our second home after
visiting several ski areas in Colorado, Utah and California. We
selected Vail and the Lionshead area in particular because we
were comfortable with the secure community atmosphere that it
provided for our young children. An important factor in our
consideration was the secure ambiance of the vehicle-free
Lionshead mall area. Even before we became owners at the
Westwind, when we were simply visitors, we felt comfortable that
our children could go out to play or just to walk around the
Lionshead mall area and be safe and secure.
The fact that we, our children and other guests could go
from the Westwind to the lifts without crossing any streets was
also a major factor in our choice of Lionshead.
Putting a street through the mall even if it is limited
to Town of Vail buses or allowing Vail Associates to encroach
into the presently-open area with new hotel or condominium
buildings will destroy much of what brought us to Vail in the
first place.
Town of Vail Council
October 10, 1997
Page 2
And let's face it, nothing you can do will limit traffic to
Town of Vail buses. How many times ever day are there
unauthorized vehicles often lost tourists, who are too busy
gawking to watch where they are going on sections of Meadow
Drive that are supposed to be limited to buses.
We appreciate the concerns of the Lionshead merchants, and
we appreciate that Vail Associates' need to redevelop the
property presently occupied by the Sunbird Lodge and the Gondola
Building. Surely, however, their needs can be met without being
harmful to everyone else. Surely, their needs can be met without
destroying the ambiance that makes Lionshead special to owners
and visitors.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Rger R. Mr'arce
RRM:par
i' ~rA:\WE5TFIIND\LETTERS\TNVAIL1.009
~
TOWN OF VAIL
75 South Frontage Road
Yail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2100
FAX 970-479-2157
MEDIA ADVISORY October 15, 1997
Contact: Suzanne Silverthorn, 479-2115
Community Information Office
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL HIGHLIGHTS
Work Session Briefs
Council members present: Foley, Ford, Jewett, Johnston Kurz, Navas
--25 Year Anniversary
Robert Riggle, a heavy equipment operator II in the Public Works Department, was honored for
25 years of service. Riggle received a check for $3,000 from the town and a standing ovation
from the Town Council and his co-workers. Riggle is one of only three employees to hit the 25
year mark. Yesterday, Riggle was noted for his dedication to his job and his compassion for
helping others. (Bob has an uncanny passion for feeding hummingbirds at his Brush Creek
home; he can tell you how many pounds of sugar he goes through each week. You'll be
amazed.)
--Bright Horizons, Vail Commons Day Care Facility
Debbie Martin, director of the new day care facility at Vail Commons in West Vail, introduced
herself to the Town Council and presented a brief overview about the operation. The facility,
operated by Bright Horizons (a national chain with 150 centers across the U.S.), has an
anticipated opening of Nov. 10, she said. The center is licensed for 30 preschoolers and 10
infants. Also, the facility will operate from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. on a Monday-through-Friday schedule
. and will consider the addition of a weekend operation if there's a demand: That prompted a
comment from Councilman Paul Johnston who said he thought a 7-day-a-week operation had
been negotiated with the center's landlord, City Market, during approval of the Vail Commons development. Neither Tom Moorhead, town attorney, nor Andy Knudtsen, the town's project
manager, could recall such an agreement. Johnston also took the opportunity to criticize the
town for not expanding its offices to a 7-day-a-week schedule. During approval of the Vail
Commons project two years ago, City Market agreed to lease the space to a day care operator
for the cost of operating the building (taxes, insurance, maintenance and utilifies) with the rental
rate reviewed every five years. The agreement also enables the Town of Vail to purchase the
building for the cost of construction (any rents in excess of the cost of operation are to be used
to offset the town's cost). Also yesterday, Councilman Michael Jewett said he'd heard from
constituents that prices are too high at Bright Horizons. In response, Martin said Bright Horizons
was willing to help lower the price for individuals by working with employers to subsidize spots
for their employees.
--PEC Review
During a review of Monday's meeting of the Planning and Environmental Commission, the Town
Council voted 6-0 to call-up a PEC decision regarding an appeal of parking-pay-in-lieu
calculations for the Vail Village Club. The PEC had ruled the appeal to be invalid, finding that it,
hadn't been filed in a timely manner. The Council will hear the case at next week's work
session. (more)
L~ RECYCLEDPAPER
k
.~.,f
TOV Council Highlights/Add 1
Also yesterday, Councilman Kevin Foley shared an update he received from the Community
Development Department regarding a code violation. Foley said Single Track Sports in
Lionshead had not received town approval for installation of a storefront awning. The business
has been scheduled to appear before the Design Review Board this week to receive town
approval. Foley asked if the remedy was standard procedure for the town or if the Vail
Associates-operated business was receiving special treatment. In response, Mike Mollica,
assistant director of the Community Development Department, stated the department's policy is
to send those who are in violation through the process to expedite approvals rather than cite -
them to district court.
--Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan
The Council voted 4-2 (Navas, Jewett against) to approve an expanded schedule for the current
phase (Stage 3) of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. The expanded schedule adds
several additional opportunities for public discussions and information-gathering on the various
topics between now and Dec. 16 to allow for more analysis and community dialogue during
Stage 3, which establishes the master plan framework. The expanded schedule includes a
presentation on financing alternatives at the Oct. 28 Council work session; a cost-benefit
analysis of the proposed "bold stroke" circulation solutions (central spine transit corridor and
realignment of the South Frontage Road) at the Nov. 11 Council work session; and a tour of
Keystone's River Run development at the Nov. 25 work session. In voting against the expanded
schedule, Navas and Jewett both said they supported a slow-down of the process, but favored
having the.more critical discussions on financing and circulation afterthe Nov. 18 elections to
allow for better continuity on the Council. In response, those who voted in favor of the motion,
said it was their hope that all Council candidates would be attending the Lionshead meetings
between now and the elections.
Prior to Council approval of the revised schedule, Susan Connelly, project manager and director
of the Community Development Department, briefed the Council on 14 decision points that have
been identified in the Stage 3 process. The Council also received a summary of Monday's
review by the Planning and Environmental Commission in which 11 of the 14 decision points
were forwarded to the Town Council for future consideration. During discussion yesterday,
Councilmembers expressed particular interest and concern on the topics of loading and delivery,
view corridors, height, density, parking, signage, circulation, property ownership and existing
devefopment rights.
Also during the meeting, Ross Davis, a Lionshead business owner, called the master planning
process "meaningVess" because Vail Associates hadn't "shown its hand." As a result, he
predicted a"firestorm" will occur in the future due to community opposition. In response, Bob
McLaurin, town manager, said the town is intentionally keeping the master planning process
separate from a Vail Associates redevelopment proposal for the core site so as not to influence
the outcome of the master plan. He referred to one of the 8 master plan process ground rules,
which says "the master plan ultimately recommended may or may not reflect development
approaches currently being explored by VA." David Corbin of Vail Associates also took issue
with Davis' comments, noting that VA is very willing to share its redevelopment ideas with
anyone who asks. Councilmember Sybill Navas talked of the need for increased trust within the
community. Her comments were followed by a testimonial from Jim Lamont of the East Village
Homeowners Association regarding numerous neighborhood successes achieved through
collaborative discussions with Vail Associates and the town during the Golden Peak ski base
redevelopment approval process. Lamont encouraged Davis and others to actively engage in
the dialogue rather than let cynicism control their reactions. Councilmember Ludwig Kurz called
Lionshead the biggest issue the Council will address in the next 20 years and as such,
community dialogue is essential. Councilman Rob Ford agreed and encouraged as many
people as possible to participate in development of the far-reaching master plan. For a cop.y of
(more)
~
TOV Council Highlights/Add 2
the presentation materia{s, please caH Suzanne Silverthorn at 479-2115.
--Turn it Up! Vail 97 Funding
The Council agreed to allocate up to $19,000 out of its 1997 Councif contingency fund to assist
with sponsorship of the Turn It Up! Vail program with the following conditions: 1) that a firm
budget/program be submitted; and 2) that additional emphasis be placed on education. A
. $5,000 grant previously granted by the Council from the 1998 contributian fund was withdrawn
for consideration of the following: that the $5,000 be matched with other contribution funds for a
total ofi $10,000 to be used for a project specific to Vail, such as a shopping guide through a _
• coordinated effort by both merchant's associations and the Vail Valley Tourism & Conventian
Bureau. Pam Brandmeyer, assistant town manager, said the effort could help to keep the
regional marketing funds in place for another year, while providing additional funding for Vail-
specific projects proposed by the Vail Village Merchants Association. Previously, the merchants
had asked that a portion of the regional marketing funds be redirected to Vail-specific projects.
However, by reallocating monies from the contribution fund rather than the marketingfund,
Councilmembers agreed that both objectives could be achieved.
Final funding and project decisions by the Council are scheduled for the Oct. 28 work session,
--RETT Budget
This discussion was postponed to the Oct. 21 work session due to a miscue in advance
distribution of the.list.
--Information Update
Pam Brandmeyer, assistant town manager, announced a fund-raising campaign for Holly
McCutcheon, the former TOV town clerk, who's battling breast cancer. A flu shot drive earlier in
the day netted $625 from employees, she said. Also, $5,000 has been contributed by the Vail
Valley Charitable Fund, and a communitywide "Holly-ween" party and silent auction is planned
for Nov. 1. A fund-raising goal of $30,000 has been established to cover costs associated with a
trip to Hanover, Germany, where Holly will undergo experimental treatment. Holly is scheduled
to leave for Germany next month. Tax deductible contributions are being collected by the Vail
Valley Charitable Fund (re: Holly McCutcheon), P.O. Box 6134, Vail, Colo., 81658. For details,
contact Brandmeyer at 479-2113. .
Council meKnbers were reminded of the first-ever Vail Tombrrow Corrrmunity Mixer scheduled for
Friday from 4:30 to 6:30 p.m. at the Hubcap Brewery & Kitchen.
Larry Grafel, public works/transportation director, reported on the status of the West Vail
roundabouts. He said the south circle will be opened to traffic within 24 hours, while final paving
is scheduled for this coming Friday, Saturday and Sunday. He said the project is on target to
finish Nov. 7.
Regarding the Vai1 Valley Drive project near the Vail Athletic Club, Grafel said the road would be
closed from 8 a.m, to noon next Monday to allow for additional bridge work. That project, he
said, should be wrapped up by Thanksgiving.
--Council Reports • •
Kevin Foley reported concerns expressed by the Vail Recreation District regarding the
displacement of 450 skaters during the Worldwide Church of God convention. Foley said the
concerns were raised in response to declining attendance at the convention, which has dropped
from 3,000 people to just under 1,000.
(more)
~
TOV Council Highlights/Add 3
Also, Foley said the Regional Transportation Authority would be hosting its next meeting in
Basalt.
During an update on a recent meeting of the Northwest Regional Council of Governments, Sybill
Navas commented on a study currently underway in Pitkin County that tracks the correlation
between the demand for employees and the tax base growth generated by second homes.
Navas said the study indicates the demand for employees, is growing faster than the tax base.
She said the information may be of use to the town. Also, Navas, on behalf of the Vail Valley Community Television Board, inquired about the timing of a quarterly franchise fee payment and reviewed possible negotiating options regarding the franchise agreement with TCI Cablevision.
--Other
On behalf of his constituents, Councifman Michaef Jewett inquired about the possibility of
creating an ordinance that would restrict the use of outdoor barbeque grills. He also asked if
snow removal on Fall Line Drive could be improved. A third idea posed by Jewett was to make
Council agendas avaiiable to the Town Council candidates. (Friday is the filing deadline.)
Paul Johnston asked staff to review audio tapes from previous council meetings regarding the
Vail Commons discussions to review and confirm agreements between the town and City Market
regarding operation of the day care center (7 day-a-week schedule, infant care, etc.).
Kevin Foley asked staff to fo!!ow up with the removal of what appear to be temporary signs at
City Market.
At the invitation of Ludwig Kurz, Councilmembers will tour Beaver Creek Resort beginning at
10:45 a.m. Oct. 28. The tour will include a look at the new performing arts facility as well as
other infrastructure improvements.
UPCOMING DISCUSSION TOPICS
Qctober 21 Work Session .
- DRB Review Site Visit & Discussion re: Loading and Delivery
Russell's Restaurant Request to Proceed Through the Process
October 21 Evening Meeting
Appoint Election Judges
First Reading, 1998 Budget
First Reading, Pay-In-Lieu Parking
Second Reading, Parking Fines
Second Reading, 1999 World Alpine Ski Championships
Presentation of Proposed and Revised Eagle County Land Use Regulations for TOV Information
and Feedback
October 28 Work Session
PEC Review
Contribution Requests, Business License Fee
Booth Falls Rockfall Mitigation/Joint Work Session with PEC 8 Site Visit
Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan/Discussion of Financing Alternatives
(more)
tl
~
TOV Council HighlightslAdd 4
November 4 Work Session
Housing Strategic Plan Overview
November 4 Evening Meeting
Second Reading, 1998 Budget
_ Second Reading, Pay-in-Lieu Parking .
Lionshead Master Plan Stage 3
# # #
. .
. ~
111
„
TOWN OF VAIL
~
Office of the Town Manager
75 South Frontage Road
Yail, Colorado 81657 MEMORANDUM
.
970-479-2105/Fax 970-479-2157
TM
TO: Vail Town Council
Robert W. McLaurin
FROM: Pamela A. Brandmej
DATE: October 16, 1997
RE: World Wide Church of God
On the reverse side of this memo you will find an article that appeared in the Vail Daily on October
15, 1997. Timing is everything! Kevin had been asked at our work session on Tuesday to carry
forward a question from the VRD. The question was: Because of the reduced numbers of
participants in the World Wide Church of God celebration in Vail, does it now make sense for the
Town Council to continue to commit arena days at the expense of 450 skaters who lose access to the
arena during this festival? •
Ted Johnston, Coordinator for the World Wide Church of God, indicated to me this afternoon he
thought that was a fair question, and probably one, only the Council, the retailers, and the lodging
community can answer. He indicated numbers have diminished for World Wide Church of God, in
. fact, have been reduced by half over the past two years. However, it would appear this type of
business at this time of year remains an important asset to our reta'il and lodging community.
PAB/aw
Attachment
L~ RBCYCLEDPAPER
• ~
• • • c~~-
~~Tor Wide Church O God. Y1S1tS Va.l
' ~ l~
.
Annual fall festival nificant boost for merchants in Vail. gift shops tend to attract members the United States, each year. Nation- the tourism and convention buteau,
The church specifically comes dur- more than a high-end jewelry store, al festival attendance is estimated at said the church has an ongoing con-
fills offseason lull ing the offseason because of bed for example. 16,000 members. tract witti the town for pobson Are- b
availability and as a way to give "The church has a contract until The church's annual fall festival na..
By Whitney Childers merchants a lift in October. 2000. Their festival provides a sig- takes place during the time of the "A wood ftoor is buitt on top of .
"About 280 units, or condomini- nificant boost to Vail, and we want Feast of the Tabemacles, the fall cel- the ice for stairs and staging. They
Daily Saff Writer ums, are utilized by members of the to see them continue to have their ebration of the biblical nation of have a contract for the arena through
VAIL - For the next eight days, festival, which generates $140,000 festival here," Clarke said. Israel. The event gives Christians an 1999," Jacob said. "The arena is
more than 1,000 Worldwide Church just forrooms revenue," Clarke said. The Worldwide Church of God opportunity to celebrate Jesus Christ used because it's one of the largest ~
of God members will visit the Vail "Revenue to the valley is that we plans ta continue celebrating its fall in praise and worship through fel- apd most accessible gathering places ~t~
community for their annual fall fes- estimate that for every dollar they . festival in Vail. lowship and preaching. in the valley." -
tival. spend on lodging, they probably "Vail has been one of the most The theme of this year's festival • The public is welcome to visit ~
The church has been coming to spend $1.50 in the village." popular of our, regional festival is "Celebrating the Kingdo"tn. of , any, • of the worship services and
Vail during [he offseason for the past Clazke said the festival bringssites," said Ted Johnston, festival God." Sermons, workshops and a workshops, which cover a variet y of
15 yeai s a n d o f fi c i a l s a t t he Vai l a bou t $ 3 5 0, 0 0 0 tota l.to Vai l. coordinator for the Worldwide variety of activities and social events topics related to Christian faith and ~Jl
Valley, Tourism and Convention While some merchants do ve 'ry Church of God. "Not only have we have been planned in conjunction livihg. The church's "Celebrating
Bureau are expecting another good: well financially, specifically high- enjoyed the outstanding beauty of with the theme. • ' the Kingdom of God" festival begins
w
rnout. end stores or restaurants do not pros-, the Vail Valley, we've also gready The majority of the sessions will at 7:30 p.m. today at Dobson.
Matthew Clarke, sales manager per as mucti, he said: Tfiis is due to - - -appreciated the warm hospitality of take place at the John A. Dobson For more information regarding
for fhe specialty market of the the fact that members stay,. in condo- • the Vail community." , Arena, where public skating will not dates, times, workshops and sermon
tourism.and convention bureau, said miniums and shop at grocery stores` : Vail is one of 14 regional festival take place during the festival. Emily topics, call Johnston at (303) 497-~ _Z _1%
the church's festival is always a sig- , and cook theicown food. Lower-end sites, which take place throughout : Jacob, communications manager for, 71$8.
. , . . x _ . ,
, irlir . . , . ~ -
OCT-16-1997 16:28 VAIL RECREATION DIST. 303 479 2197 P.01
.
i
MINUTES
REGIILAR MEETIlVG
VAIL PARK AND RECREATiON DISTRICT
d/bla VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
. 9:00 A.M.
Tuesday, September 9, 1997
Krueger Room, Golf Clubhouse, Seasons at t}ie Green Restaurant
1778 Vail Valley Drive
Called tn Order at 9:00 am.
11dEMBERS Hermana Staufer, Bart Cuomo, Ross Davis, Kir1c Hansen, Steve Simunett.
PRESENI'
oTHERs
PRESEr1'I' Piet Pieters, Bob Trautz, Kevin Foley, Rob Ford, Jun Heber, Drew
Ekstrom, Emie Bender, Susan Chardoul, Phil Haversten, Debbie Webster
Patti
APPRQV,AL OF
AUGUST I2,1997
MEETING NflNUTES Davis made a motion to approve the August 12 meeting miautes.
Simonett se,conded Passed unanimously.
PUBLIC INPUT
ON ITEMS NOT
ON AGENDA None.
GOLF PASSHOLDER
FEEDBACK Pieters met with a group of gassholders, mostly non club members to
discuss the importance of guest play and the tax base from which our
funding comes fibm. They have a l,ndemrm~,.ng of the fee schedule and a
greater appreciation of their rates. He will be putting together a package of
suggestions they made which he thought some of them might be adopted
for next year.
• Post-4t° Fax Note 7671 pol 60
To ~ p~ • S` .
~ ry01dC~
c° Co.
Phorie ,
Fax i ,c Fa,c a
OCT-16-1997 16:29 VAIL RECREATION DIST. 3e3 479 2197 P.02
,
CART PATH
IlVIPROVENNiEIVNT
$ID $100,000 earrnarked in this year's budget for capital improvements will
not be able to be done (Dobson's vestibule, Ford Park urigatioq and the
batting cages). Pieters proposed some of that money be used instead for
the $83,000 bid for cart paths, and to get that project started soon. The
consensus among the boatd members was to get bids from other asphatt
contractors as well as concrete bids as that reportedly lasts longer. They
also wanted to contact other goif courses to see if they had any problems
with the type of paths they haci.
SEASONS ON THE
GRF.EN REQtTEST In view of the fact the Board felt not enough inforrn,ation was available at
this time, they requested a business plan be made available for their
. review. It was also suggested a consultant be brought in before any
changes or improvements be made.
ICE TIME USAGE
AT DOBSON The issue of time scheduled between the Vail Jutuor Hockey Club and the
Figure Skating Club bas been raised. The time ia question is between 5
and 630 p.m. on Thursdays. Each party stating they need that specific
hour and a half.. Since the Board does not luww the deisils, they
suggested the two pazties work with Jim in working towards a solution.
Jim Heber has suggested that time period be split between them, each
getting 45 mi.nutes. 'The time not used when AAA Hockey is traveling be
offered to figure skating (Frida.ys betwcen 3& 6:00.)
BOARD MEIVIBER
INpUT Kirk inquired as to what plans are in the works far # 16 since several ftees
have had to been cut due to beede ldll. Tiansplanting from another am of
the course and planting new spruce or aspen were suggested. He ogered a
suggestian w post a sign as ta when the driving range was closed for
maintenance so Board members wouldn't keep gettuig calls on it
Steve thought the rangers or cart guys could seed areas on their travels on
the course. Also there isn't always sand in the bottles of the carts. He
inquired into the fall mainteaance schedule and wanted a notice posted for
aIl maintenance work and winter Qrepamtions.
Bart thought the implementaCion of a different system where people could
pay as they play instead of a flat rate pass might be beneficial. It might
curb those wha play an excessive amount and open up tee times for otheis.
OCT-16-1997 16:29 VAIL RECREATION DIST. 303 479 2197 P.03
,
EXECLI'ITVE SESSION At I0:55 Kirk made a motion to go into executive session. Rnss seconded.
Passed unarumously.
. Regular meeting resumed at 11: 15
CNANGEIN
LEADERSHIP At this time, Hermarni stated his desire to step ciown from being the
chairman of the Board of I7irectors. It was accepted. Steve nominated
Ross to be Chahmnan, and Kirk to be Vice-Chairmen.
Bart seconded. Passed unanimously.
ADJOLfRNMENT Kirk made a motion for the meeting to adjourn. Stcve saconded Pas9ed
unanimously.
Nfeeting adjoumed at 11:30 a.m.
sazc cuwm , secretary xnonda Efir-kman, aamin. Assistant P87bodf9-9wm
OCT-16-1997 16:30 VAIL RECREATION DIST. 303 479 2197 P.04
NIII11t.1'I'ES
WORK SESSION
VAIL PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT
d/b/a VAII.. RECREATION DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
9:00 A.M.
Tuesday, Septiember 23,1997
Knieger Room, Golf Clubhouse, Seasons at the Crreen Restaurant
1778 Vail Valley I3rive
Called to Qtder at 9:04 am.
MEMBERS
PRESENT Ross Davis, Hermann StaLffer, Kirk Hansen, aad Bart Guomu.
MEMBERS
ABSETVT Steve Simonett.
OTHERS
PRESENT Piet Pieters, Bob Trautz, Rob Ford, Kevin Foley, Frnie Bender, Tim
Sanders, Drew Ekstrom, Diane Johnson, Jim Heber, and Rhonda Hickman.
' PUBLIC INPUT
ON ITEMS NOT
ON AGINDA Diane Johnson thanked the Board Members for being so easy to work with
in conjunction with the skate board park. Amund 200 attended the grand
opening last weekend, and it hag been used almost continuovsly since.
FINANCIAL
VARIANCE REPORT The total bottom line for the bistrict shows a favorable variaace of
$275,000. Crolf show°s a positive $10,000 over last year at this time even
with this stunmer's bad weather.
BOO'1'Ei CRRF.K
TENNIS COURTS Jim Sanders and Piet Pieters reported the roots have ancroached on the
upper courts maldng them unusable: It was suggested tv earmark monies
to te-do the courts, aad let home owners in the area lnow of the intent-to
convert them to clay courts, but keep them on un-active stocage if the lease
at Lionshead caurts is not renewed.
OCT-16-1997 16:30 VAIL RECREATION DIST. 303 479 2197 P.05
,
CART PATH C7PDATfi Emie Beader contacted Great Divide and Elam regarding paving the cart
paths. They both are not interested in giving us a bid due to their heavy
schedules. B& B will be able to start on # 17 now and work on others as
their schedule and the weather permits. He went over the changes to the
paths on #17 8c 18. The Board recommends cantinuing the prep work
even if B 8t B can't get to any other areas until spring.
HF,A.D PROFFSSIONAL
POSYTION Piet has put together a description of the position pnd a value for a pay
scale with a comparison of other golf couises in the area. Each being
unique to itself. He would like ta have the Pro more involved in VRD
operations instead of an independeut contractor or figure head. He
suggests keeping Drew on as a Supervisor with a yeazly salary of $35,004
instead of just far the goif season. He would keep the medica!/health
benefits, have the pro shop and lessans, and pay rent for the shop of
$12,600. He would have a 3 year contract with a termination cIause and be
subject to reviews and goaLs as the ather Supervisors. This would start in
January. Between now and then4 he would be training the new Manager.
GOLF MANAGER
POSITION After discussing the Golf Manager position, the Board decided it was not
an issue far them to be involved in, but a management issue. They would
endorse the decision af the Director. A seasonal bookkeeper position is
needed due to the high volwne of work during the golf season to assvre the
high level af customer service by not remaving staffin order to perform
administrative/bookkeeping duties.
SEASONS ON THE
GrRF.E,T( LEASE Not having the information requested by this meeting, the ordy cliscussion
concerning this issue was of the conchtions of the current lease and
comparisons of other restaurants/golf clubs. It was noted the rent has gone
up only $200 in 12 years, plus VRD pays the utilities.
L7QBSON ARENA
SPECIAL EVENTS In setring the schedule for next year's events calendar, guidaace from the
Directors is being requested. Conflict betuveen the liability issue and
revenue has eume up. The number of special events would increase by
about 10 for next year if resolved. The Board needs tv see in advance, a
calendar of events but would agree to continue in the same direction if
discredon is used ia booking these events. The issue of the concession
lease which will be up for renewal soon shouid be put on the agenda for
. the next regular meeting.
OCT-16-1997 16=31 UAIL RECREATION DIST. 303 479 219? P.06
BOARD MEMBER INPLIT Bari wanted to Inow what happened to the new golf cowxe sign that was
discnssed last year. Piet stated work has been done in geiting public works
to put a directional sign for the golf course on the &+ontage road.
Hermann oommerftd if inembers of the Board are invvived in a liquor
license of their own, they can't be corrtpensated by V12D for meetings.
Bob will look into this matter.
Meeting adjouraed at 10:50 a.m.
Bart Cuomo, tary Rhonda Hickman, Admin, Assisiant
tt/9710ar9-23n1in
TOTAL P.06
Calorado Association of Ski Towns
'V'ail
AGENDA
- Thursday, November 6 .
Ore House Restaurant -
6:00 PM CocktAils
7:00 PM Dinner
Fridav, November 7
Clerlsttana
9 A.M. to Noon
1. Bob Armouc Presidcnt• Opening remarks II. Approval af Scptember 26 Minutes
III. Financial Report - Coordinatar
IV. Updates - Coardinator .
V. Miller Hudson: Executive Director of CARTS (Colorado
Alliance for a Rapid Transit Solution)
Thls rrlllrtnce of residents, buslness owners and elected officlals fronr Clear
Creek, Summtt and EttgCe Coknties believe there are preferred Qtternadves
to wtdeRing I-7'0.
VI. Paut Johnston: Catholic Charities Westcrn Slopc Cothotic Gharities:ls orgacnizing to identtfy critical sactal needs and avoid
- duplication of service la lhe mountctiir conrmunities. Vtr. Tom 1-(atler: Lee & Burgess Associates
Toni wi11 discuss the chaUenges faci?rg nrountQin conununlttes Iit the
recruitment and retentlon of employees Tom curreatly works with many `
neountatn commanlUes to address com,pensatiiorr/employn?ent conrerns
VYll. Uther Business ~
AbJOURN
~
L/Z 'd 95b8 LZ6 OL6 'ON Xd9 1,Stl3 N(d LE:Z NOW L641-130
REcEVvED nr°r I Q 1Q47
D E S T I N A T I O N R E S O R T S
610 WEST LIONSHEAD CIRCLE
VAIL, COLORADO 81657-5293
TELEPHONE (970) 476-1350
FAX (970) 476-1617
October 17, 1997
Mr. Robert McLaurin
Town of Vail
75 S. Frontage Rd.
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Bob,
This week at the PEC meeting and the Council meeting I heard the Town was going to discontinue the
village bus service to the western properties of Lionshead. The ideal of not including the Marriott and
Concert Hall stops on the village route seems to be in direct violation of the current planning process which
is trying to make these western properkies more connected to the rest of Lionshead and feel like a core
component of Vail.
My company manages the Enzian Condominiums. I know my guests would be terribly upset if they had to
connect with another bus at the Transportation Center to get to Golden Peak or some of the other Village
locations. I also know that if the frequency of the bus service were to decrease and pickups were only
scheduled every 15-20 minutes as opposed to the current 8-10 minutes, there would be many times during
poor weather or other times when the wait for a bus could exceed 30 minutes. This would hardly make our
guests feel like a part of core Vail. If the Village bus route does not service western Lionshead you are
sending the message to these guests they are staying at properties that aze not a part of Vail.
Today I have spoke with Larry Graffle and he assured me that no decision bas yet been made. He also
assured me that the properties in this area would be contacted for their input if this oprion is pursued.
I have spoken with Mark Hoffman of the Marriott, who is recovering from back surgery. He asked me to
convey his total agreement with these concerns as I would imagine many of the other properties would also
feel. I can understand the tremendous challenges of operating an efficient, functional transportarion
system. But, I ask that you take a very hard look at other alternatives before you consider such a drastic
measure.
Sincerely,
, J
ey t
General Manager
Destination Resort Management, Inc.
cc: Perry Snavely, Enzian
Mark Hoffman, Marriott
Vail Council Members ~
A Lowe Enterprises Company
HPB ID: OC'T 20'97 15:03 No.014 P.02'
. ~
rt c
-JRB INC. JRRBYiNC
8ea 7t, pvEIYuC
NEU1 YORH. NEI,U YOHK 10106
(YlY) 582-3363
. Uctober 20, 1997
'1'own of V Ail
Town Council
75 South Fronlagc Road
Vail, GO 91657
Cientlemen; T am very concerned that thc 8ast Village Valet parking proposal
will precipitate an unwelcome rise in traffic on Vail Valley Drive.
In addition, it is unclear that we have enough ciuta te) know
whcthcr there will be suf'fieient valet personnel to avoid a pile-up
of unshuttlecl vehii:les. Tlus problcm could lead ta a majar backup
onto Vail Valley Drive. FurthermUre, if cntaru:ment azid signagc
, are not a ptut of the pmposed paclcage, any abuses will quickly
esc;alate inlo vehicular nightmares in the affected neighbnrhoods.
Wliile we all favar improved customer service in the area, it should
not he ai ihe expensc of the neighborhonds. I am surc that, with the
proper controls, wc can solvc some of the vehiculnr problems pla.guing
t.he tuea; but iti we create a whole ncw logjam, no anc will benefit.
Sinc;erely,
1
•
udy Bcrl?owitz
cc: Jim Lamoni L'VHA
. r~bRLRTYN LODGE TEL N0.303 479 0102 Apr 12,1: 9:45 P.01
FAX Ac : rL.
FRO M
The' Gafatyn Lodige at Vail
. .
~
ro: ~ nATE 1 ~ ao C6~~' 01.t ,
r-bliller iME
FRors: A -A ~Dn=JA
TOTAL N['MBEK UF t'ACES 1\CLU01NG Cpti'ER 5HEET ~
YLE:ASk: C.a1.L 1F1'CyU UO TOT RECE117E ALL PAGES.
MESS:ICE:
,
&Vtt 6q OAC- • ~J ~ ~X,a
~
~0 (1,A, t
Tf-te Gafatyn Lodge
UCTOASR 20, 1997
J'IM LAMONT
P.O. DOX 238 '
VAIL, CC? 81650
DEAR JIM,
IN RESPONSE TO THE INFORMA'7"fON RLGARDING TEIE VALET
DnAKTN(: SEttVICB. TO WHICH I HAVE GIVEN SgRI0U5 THOiTGHT,
" f~I••WOULD T,IKS TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING POINTS:
1. I FEEL PFsRMITTING ONE $USINSSS THE EXCLiTSIVE AAIUY
US$ OF THE SOCCBR FIELD FOR ITS OWN PROFIT IS UNFAIR
(AND QUITTs P05Sx8LY TMPROPBR) USS OF THIS I.A1JD SPACE.
2. THIS WILL INCRBAS$ TRAFFIC SUB6TANTIALLY ON VAYL VALLEY
DRIVE, HANSON RANCH ROAD AND GORB CRSBK DRIVB, WRICH
ARN ALREADY OVSRLOADBD- (VAIL VAI.LSY DRYVE WAS A DIS-
ASTER EVEN BEFORB THE GOLDBN PBAR RSDEVRLOPA'1$NT AND
CAN aNLY BE WORST WITH THAT B$INQ COMPLBTED THIS YEAIt)
AND, XT WIY.L YNCRF.ASB TRAFFIC AT THE PEAK TR.AFFZC TXMRS,
WHERBAS THE TRAFFIG TO AA1D FROM THE SOCCBR FIELD FOR
"LOCAL/EMPLQYBS PARKING" WAS AT OFF-PBAK HOURS.
3. HANSON RANCH ROAD, IN THE pROPOSED VALBT bROP AREA,
.
IS ALRPsADY FAR T00 CONGESTED.
9. MAKTNG A LEFT TURN FROM GORS CRBBK DRIVE ONTO VAIL
VALLEY DRIVB HAS BEEN DIFPICULT 14NV DANG£ROUS AT PEAK
HOURS FOR A LUNG TIM$ AND THIS SIT[1ATION WILL ALSO BE
MAUE WORSE BY ADDITIONAL VAIL VALI,BY DRIVE TRAFFIC.
5. EVERY CAR THAT COM$S IN TO VALBT PARK WILL RBSULT IN
FOUR TR.IPS MINIMUM DOWN '1'HBSS STRSETS-ONE FOR THE CAR
TO DRIVE TO THE DROP Y>OINT,THBN ARODND THE BLOCK AGAIN
(ONE WAY STRBSTS) TO THE SOCCBR FIBLD, TH13N FROM THE
SOCCER FIFsLD BACK TO THE PICK UP POINT, THEN BACK oUT
AGATN WzTH THE OWN$R AND ADD TO TIiI$ THE SHUTTLING OF
THE VALE'1` DRZVERS, AS WSLI..
6. ALL OF THIS IN THE NAME OF "SBRVICB"? THIS Sn1ILL ONLY
"SERVICE" A FBW OF OUR MORB $LITB GUESTS AND WILL CAUSE
;ili:) Vai1 Y,illi:y !)rivc (470) 479•2418
VC?il, (:olur.tdu tilffil p y.~ Rn(I•y43-732:?
galatyi) c4'vail.i1el 1$U~Wtl~K~ 2 B Fax (970) 479•0102
i
,
r%VEN MORFs "DISSgRVICB" TO 13VRSXO $IGL~~pHRESIDFN'~S
DESTINATTON GLTgSTS, DAY SKYB ,
pND pTHER LOCALS AS WBLL. rF THE TOWN IS RMLX CONCERNED
ABOUT SERVICE, IT NEBDS Z'4 FOCUS ON THE "FRONTLINR" AND EMPLOYFBS THROUG$OFOR THE USCDR~VSRS 3H~CLBRKSNILO~ ~D
SERVICE ATTITUDE .
RESTAUFiANT PBRSONNBL, ETC. WHO ARS FRSQUBNTLY SURLY,
UNHBLpFUL, PObRLLY INFO
NEBD TO ADD GAND IMPROVE S RVICE. ~IS
I S W I- Y B R E WE R B A L
7. WHATEVER HAPPEMV~ $Y'DRIjI$?pIWH~YSPUT YN ~T BET DGHTSG LI,
TR31F~' I C ON VA
SXDEWALKS AND BRIDGBS FOR PSDBS'I'RxANS+ (WHxCH ACTUALLY
NARROWED VAIL~V~ALLE pISCOURAGFSP$~PL~ FROMWALK ~GaSE
VFHICULAR TRA
S. HAS ANY coNSIDERATION BEEN
QAR~NG~ TBHTTER HB 't'OWNTSHLITTLE STOPS
GOLF COURSE CI~~
RIGHT THERE AND IT COULD BE A GRBAT PARKZNG ALTBRNATZVE.
IN CLOSiNG, I GLTBSS YOU CAN TgLL TAM NOT IN FAVOR OF THE
VAI,ET PARKING PROGRAM AS CURRgNTLY STRUCTIIR$b • ZAM WILLING TO
CONSIDER IT IF ZT~~FICALLX ANDIMOSTg4FRU~NTG~NERP'L ~S ON
''IiE NEIGHBORHOOD S
SINCLRFUY,
J~~„' ` ~d.CiC?GS~-~""
CARQL ALLEMAN
GgNFSRAL MANAGLR
10/20/97 HON 15:03 FAZ Z002
T c--
~
vjxcma J. nUNCAN
2A00 SOlll'M TOYVER 600 17TM $THEET
DEMIEfl, COLORA00 WZQl ~
(303) 623-4158
October 20, 1997
Town of Vail
Town Council
75 South Frontage Ytoad
Vail, CO 81657
Gentlemen:
My xesidence in Vail is 1418 Vail V'a).ley Drive. T also belong to East Village
Homeowners Association, Ina The Assuciation is dving its work by informing
members of developments that effect the neighborhood.
To be oa record coneerning theValet Parking Service, I wish to ezpress agreement
the curr.ent attitude of the Hvmeowners Association.
Vail Associates should take care of their own business and not impase on public
roads and local homeowners.
Very truly yours,
- '.Vincent J. Duaca
FROM : CONNIE KNIGHT (970) 476 3615 PHONE N0. : 970 476 3615 Oct. 16 1997 09:30AM P01
~
o~-
te
~-r ~.,~,~.c~ , _ _ ~ ~ k..,w..~,
I N
-
~
_ ~ . . ~ ~1,..,C,, ?M• \t,~.,, ~ ly ~S _
~ ~"h~-~ 1~~•~ .
siTE visi-r
itn tne .
.
V~?f~ TC)VI/N CC~U_ ~CI L
~
:40 - 3:30 p.m. Tuesday, act. 21
~Meet at the Red Lion (Back Raom)
~:?z.~.~: ,
I ~ A
ome share your "tweaking" ideas for the
~ 997-98 ski season, including a.proposal ta ban
1?~
~ elive b lar e trucks.
rY Y 9
¦ View a street demonstration on alternative delivery corcepts, prosGnted by the beverage distributars.
¦ Also, help develop a list of long-term solutions.
. The list wiil be analyzed for feasibility by
Centennial Engineering.
For more information, contact Suzanne Silverthorn in the
Town of Vai{ Community Information Office at 479-2115. ~
- TOWN OF YA1L
ronri oi ~a¦ao
. 10/21/1997 08:31 19794762789 HONEYWAGON/DONOVAN PAGE 81
~C • ~i'~
October 21, 1997
~
RE: Valet Parlcing
Dear Council:
Theze is a lot of misiufornnation being circulated about this subject and there are maay
unlrnowns ;regarding how ttaffic will function at Golden Peak. -
The Soccer Field lot has recernly fimcdoned as a first come 5rst served lot with the town doinmg the plowiuqg. Prior to that it was plowed and mnnitored by VA,. The lot is full long
before the mountsin even opens. Mairy aze VA employees but there are aaso otlaer
employees. It is an easy walk to Golden Pea1c No specital buses are nui. T'here are few if
anq+ skiers parked there. There are always over 100 cars parked on the pavement and I
. bave counted over 120 when the berms are used. (I counted vchicles last wiater becmLse T
was concerned with the mmaber of spaces being reported hy the Atpiue Gardens aW the
poten.tial loss of spaces.) nhxre are more if vehicles are blocked in which is how valet
Parldng is tiaditionalEy done.
It is clear that the proponeirt is not ffiniliar with the tralffic at Golden Peak. I drive Fast to
the frontage road, iua the wintear, to avoid the traffic at Gokien Peak and the resulting
waits. It is equelly clear that the East Village Homeowners Association is wrong in their
asswowtion tb.at the tzaffic is caused by people trying ta park at the socccx field. The Golf
Cowrse bus still has no puU off aud blocks traffiffic. ?
The distance to the east end of Ford Park may be slightly longer but the congestion is
nnich lm. HavC you.cotsidezed the west end which could easidy by roped oO.
I was told the town is now looking at iighting and plowing a path frnm Ford Pazk to
Golden Peak. It is wrong to incur that expense to accommot3ate this plan. Is the bus
secvice to the TRC or Golden Peak? Do the buses nm early enough to accomodate thesc -
eu'ly. arriving empioyees? Has the towh considered using the TRC fvx the valet parking7
'11te TRC should be wkae this use is accovnmdated rather then competmg wrtb mrcks
and pedestrians in au alreadY congested area. Tbe existing uses on Hansom itanch Road
have na whex+e to go.
As an aside, I resent accomnnodatiuag a pri.vate business on pubUic property while I, 8s a
residem taxpayer, am not allowed to drop off a car load of slders in the same location.
This proposal will not work as proposed but is cm,ating a Iot of bad blood. It can be
reSutled to Serve a need without being a negative to evexyome not usmg it.
Please call Wyou haw questions. Thete are additional isswes but I have just meationad the
ones I am most fauWiar with.
ka ~~a-.,J
~ - v G
~ •!l,;, f,
P. ItWHqC{V 13A[111R
4 ~
; J 168 HnaT 74-rEi S-rKUU•r 1
! Ntiw YoRx, NRW Y4KK 1 W21
'october 20, 1997
~y .
Mr. Paul Johnston
' Christiaaia at Vail ~ • `+r
356 E. Hanson R '
~ anch Road ~~;t.
Vai 1 , CO 81657 Dear Paul ; r '`•r:„,.;;~_,'A
Many thanks for exglaininq some of the facets of the
; prop0sed valet parking sygtem in Vai1 Villaqe. As the •'~N~~;;< -
manaqi,ng aqent of our condominium associati4n, Villa
Valhal la, and as a Town Counci lman, you are in a unique
posi tion to uriderstand and represent aux intere9ts.
; . . ~ : ' ; ,
; The Town Counci 1should be commended for conaidertng •;!;;!k~iN,;;, ~
ideas and concepts that may be bene#icial both to skiere
's and local businesses, pn its faae, valet
parkinq wauld ~ ..1, H,~;~•:.,. ,
: aeem to be one suvh possibility Qven thouqh the area on
Hanson Ranch Road to be used for this purposs previously
haa been posted "No Skier Dropoff" for several years.
~ Will Mill Creek Chute and the eastarn portion of Hanaon
Ranch Road be widened to handle additional traffic? As
you know, these are favorite pedestrian walkways. v~
:I I was surprised to learn that only ei,qhty parking
spacsa wi 11 be avai 1 abl e£or val et parkinq in the soccer
field and/or lot P3. If your estimate of an average of
two 8kiers per car holds true, this system would benefxt
~ only about 160 skiers, or approximately l% - 2% of the ;'•.;,;1~~~;`` :
total number of skiera on Vail mountain on a buay dalr.
The estimate of fifteen minutes or more for the average elapsed time for a round trip from the dropwoff
i •;a:~s
area to the soacer field and 'return seem9 reasonable. If ~:~~~e•:;the drd p--off rate reached one car per minute at its geak,
the compan
y providing valet parkinq would need a fair •4•,~~':<'±.~.'•,:;;....
number of drivers tv keeg the drop-off axea clear, ~'~~~~~i
esp@cial l y when any holding spaces became fi 1 i ed . How a>;~~t~`:' .
many drivers do they plan to employ and for what hours? ~
If the e9timatsd elapsed round trip time is . :
accurate, does this mean the system contemplates that a
user will have to wait fifteen minutes or more to get his ?'•:::::t~;:':~~:iti:,
or her car delivered? Would this time increase if, for instance, a heavy snowfall covexed all parked cars making ;,?•,~~a;;;;;~.identifiCation difficult and drivinq slower?
~ .
y : .
^ Z :isd LS: 6B L6/TZ/BT 6tJ<-bd H3f1dH Hd bT88 886 ZTZ : fiq }uas xe3
, ~•~r l''
~ Mr. Paul Johnston
~ October 20, 1997
Paqe 2
; ~z,. ;I
, : ~1" "yrl,•^' .
zf valet parking ia important to Vail, has
44444444
aonsideration been given to;dedicating 100 dr so parking
: spaces in the TOV parking struCture for this sezvice?
Consider some of the advantages pt using the 8arkin 9
~ structure. First, it is much cloaer to the dr4p--off
area thereby reducinq the round trip elaipsed time and
; increasinq operational efficiency. Second, as a result
of better proximity, tha service company would need fewex ~
' drivers which wduld lower i:ts costs and thereby increa$e
rev@nues to the Town. Third, thexe would be no probl~am ` fit'~' ~
locating specific caxs on showy days. Fourth, waiting
~ time for returned cars cauld be cut in haI£ or better.
Fifth, traffic bn Vail Valley Road would be confined and `
reduced, especially in the ~rea of dolden Peak. ;
4.In addition to the Hanaon Ranch Road drop-off area,
~ or as an alternative, why not havp a drog off area near
Check Point Chaxlie? This xs right in the heart af the
~ retail district in Vai1 - m~ch closer to more businesses than the intersection of Hafison Ranch Road and Mi ll Creek
Chute. From there, cars coUld be driven to the Vail
Vfllage and/or Lion's Head arkinq structure. This would Y;yJ.RI
be consistent with part of he rationale for valet
i.~ parking - increase retai 1 h 9iness in Vai 1.
R,~~~ '?F
Xt strikes me tihat two; funciamental questions n~ed to ~
be addressed: (1) dves Vai really need a valet parking ; :.~Y~{.;;;r•~;
' '
system that aaaommodates on y about 200 geapl e dai 1 y
while probably uysetting an: almost equa'l number of
r A'i .
cesidents, queats and pedes~rians; and (2) does the system proposed make sense pgerationally? '
~ . r~,: ii.;•:~Cf;:;.
i t woul d p l ease me very much i t you and the Vaf 1
Tawn Councit would conaider~these thoughts. Thank you.
~ Sincexel y,
p. Richard Bauer ;
;l,y~rlti '
cc: Vail Town Council ~ 4'; ,
:J ! •i
I ~
~ ,
~
. .
~
E: Ed LS: 613 L6/TZ/8T 1PtJ<-W H3f1tfH tid i,188 886 ZZZ : fiQ }uas ze3
. ~ yr- .
Oa .-n
Tv-ri
BORRELLI
2 74 WEST WESLEY ROAD
ATLANTA, GEORGi,a 30305
TeLePHONe (404) 355-6655
FncsiMiLE (404) 352-9520
October 15, 1997
Town of Vail Council
The Planning & Environmental Commission
75 S. Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Sirs:
As a property owner in Lionshead, I am writing concerning your plans for Lionshead
Village. While I have agreed with the premises for the new development of Lionshead, I
am afraid that I have found the most recent proposals to be of concern.
The combination of the proposed circulation corridor and increased density of buildings,
while improving access through Lionshead would be destroy an ambiance that Lionshead
currently has because of:
1. the increase in noise from increased levels of traffic passing through the corridor,
especially cars and buses;
2. the increased size of building development alongside the corridor will create "a
canyon" environment which may work in Manhatten but will not fit within the existing
peaceful environment in Vail and Lionshead;
3. the canyon will further exacerbate the noise level through the town as sounds rise up
between the buildings;
4. the loss of sunlight from the throughfares of Lionshead will make the village cold and
unappealing other than during midday;
5. allowing taller buildings on the south side of Lionshead will reduce any views of the
mountain from the street;
6. the corridor and increased density creates are environment far more concentrated than
anything in the Vail Village, further reducing Lionshead's appeal.
In redeveloping Lionshead, I believe that the Commission Village must keep in mind the
following: -
r • -
1. any improvement in circulation of traffic through the center of Lionshead, while
positive should be limited to pedestrians and essential traffic, not buses and cars.
Buses and cars can still use Frontage Road, as they do now;
2. any new construction should be limited in height so as to allow views of the mountain
from the streets and restaurants in Lionshead village;
3. the plans for the redevelopment should maintain the same feelings of space, openness;
and ambiance that exists within Vail village, not create a canyon of concrete from the
bottom of which no views of the mountains can be seen or sunlight can enter.
Yours sincerely,
~C ~ •
Marc Borrelli
cc: Geoff Wright, Destination Resorts
OCT 21 '97 14:17 FR 3012860240 TO 89704792157 P.02
DaT.,
. . n'?,.ZG,,,, n..
October 21; 1997
Vail Town Council ~
Town of Vail
Vail, Colorado 81657
Dear Council Members:
Where's the integrity? We have been £vllowing the Lionshead Master Plan process and are
appalled by the emerging results and the process_ We have been involved in public planning
and developmerrt activities in the Washington D.C. Metropolitan Area for over 34 years, have
skied at Vail for 23 years, and own property in the Landmark far S years. We believe the
record of Vail Associates in developing on-mountain facilities has been excellent and in
keeping with the public interest. Howevcr, the participation by partial funding and other
influence that Vail Associates has in your present planning process would not be allvwed in
modern-day town and city plannins elsewhere.
Your planning objectives ascribe to improving the "aesthetic character" and making a
"warmer, more vibrant environment". However, the emerging plans are clearly driven by the
. commerciai interests of Vail Associates in creating a high density, high-rise urban environment
in the Lionshead cvre. Evidence for this is: 1} the non-publie plans of Vail Associates for
high-density, high-rise buildings with narrow corridors in the center af Lionshead (see
enclosure) and 2) the proposed "bold-stroke" bus-traffie route directly throuoh the center of
Lionshead. These actions would create a Wall Street environment that should have no place in
the Town of Vail. Why were these plans for the core not unveiled by Vail Associates during
the "wish list" phase along with other public comments?
The idea af a bus-comdar through the center of Lionshead is so repugnant we can undecstand
why it is called the "bold stroke". What could be less aesthetically desirable? It would also
require about $20 million ar more to acquire the property rights and build (presumably fram
public funds?). Interestingly, an alternate route that would connect Lionshead Circle through
the old gondola building to Lianshead Place would destroy less property and deliver people
closer to the new gondola for skier convenience_ However, this alternate wouid obviously
conflict with Vaii Associate's high-density, high-rise development plans and with the desire to
encourage more "shopping" in the Lionshead core via pedestrian walk thoughs.
What is a"public view corridor" in your plans; a euphemism for places to view the mountain
between walls of high-rise buildings? The current broad public view shouldn't be reduced to
"corridors
What should be done? First, the present Lionshead Plaza, remiriiscent of a European piazza,
shauld not be destroyed. The P1aza is the focal point for activities such as President Gerald
Fard's annual lighting of Christmas tree, the strolling musician in lederhosen, and the display of
sled dogs_ These activities give the existing Lionshead a"desirable aesthetic character and
vibrant atmosphere", which your planners apparently have not noticed. Implanting large
OCT 21 '97 14:17 FR 3012860240 TO 89704792157 P.03
Beaver Creek-like structures would nat.
Second, encourage the rebuiiding of existing buildings such as Sunbird Lodge and the gondola
building within their current height limits. Allow higher rise buildings only along the I-70
corridor, so the building heights wauld slope downward toward the mountain maintaining the
aesthetics of a rnountain environment while shielding the view of I-70. Yn contrast, the plan of
Vail Associates would have building heights sloping upward toward the mountain_
Third, maintain the frontage road as the transportation corridor, with spoked pedestrian access
. to Lionshead Plaza via four entties: the Circle, Concert Hall Plaza, the ncw proposed drop off
on the Nocth side of the Landmark tower, and Lionshead Place. The new drop uff could be
developed as an underground facility with pedestrian access to the plaza through an attractive
portal design. Buses will always be large, obtrusive, and incompatible with a village-piazza
environment and pedestrian streets_
In summary, we believe that the present Master Plan process is driven by the hidden goals of
Vail Associates in developing high-rise and high-density that is not permitted by current codes.
The Master plan should be canceted, or at least pvstpuned until its desirability is more clearly
and directly articulated. In particular, tbe planning process needs to be separated frarn the
funding and undue influence of Vail Associates in order to give it credibility and unquestioned
integrity_
We believe the Cauncil should fiTst review the ideas presented by the community of citizens
and property owners, and consider how the goals of improving the aesthetic environment of
Lionshead can be accomplished within existing codes and plans_ In particular, the plans of Vail
Associates for their development in Lionshead should be exposed to the public view in a
straight forward manner, rather than under cldak of a Master Plan.
Sincerely,
. *vv. H..D.
roAnn M. Zwaily, A.SID Interior Designer
1214 Tucker Lane .
Ashton, MD 20861
cc: The Vail Trail
The Vail Daily
Landmark Condominium Association
' ' . ~ . . . . , . . . ' ' ' . . ,i - ...i. :i~ ,i~. ~ ' . - ",1;;'t+;:+'.~~r;
. , . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . • - • . . :~t: -.i' . 'J'~.y~}Z:+~
. . . . . • . . . ' , . ' ' •I • ~,~l~' i ~ • , . . _ . . ~ _ . .T. iY'~
- " . _ . . . _ ~ . , . . ' , • _ _ . ~ . " ' ' . _ - ~ ,
• ' . . ~ ' ' ' ~ . . . . _ ~ . __v.~.._:...:.:J~.~.-e_.'" •~~•-•~•`',c"
HEAD COR6 DEYEL4PMFNS ~
LTn, 1G Si W
. Land[nark • ~ Lifthouse
~ N
~ F.
r--'--^----
I \
Lionshead A
~ ' F---~---- Arcade co
Mv taneros
.
~ •
i '
f i
a~--- -
. ~ i
asw. •
W
1--`
Lionshead m
- •
Center m
A
ur m
eui
Lion are o
Lodge rth
~ m
, • lD
- . Li on ' • ~ ~ ro
' : ' ~ . {„urgI 36 Plaor Plan (A
' Square
* ; _ ~ o.tc I/w., seuc r•.c
* Lodge _ . • ' •
oolas .~r
~ _ • taamnu
YI/~YLL~W~~~Y m
. r3,
A
-0
D
G7 .
m . . .
m Vail Associates Propose Development Plan . - ,
* i20=Room Hotel Four condominium buildings - ~