Loading...
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 - ~