HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-11-04 Support Documentation Town Council Evening Session
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL
EVENING MEETING
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 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. Approve the Minutes from the October 7 and 21, 1997 meetings.
3. TOPIC/ITEM:
Dominic Mauriello Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1997, first reading of an Ordinance
requesting a major amendment to SDD #4 (Cascade Village), to allow
modifications to allowable GRFA and building height limitations, located
at 1150 Westhaven Lane/Lots 39-1 & 39-2, Glen Lyon Subdivision.
Applicant: Timothy Pennington, represented by Diane Larsen
. Planner: Dominic Mauriello
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL:
Approve/Modify/Deny Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1997, on first .
reading.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE:
The Planning and Environmental Commission, at its October 27, 1997
meeting, recommended approval (unanimously) of the proposed
amendments to SDD #4 (Cascade Village, Development Area C). See
the October 27, 1997 PEC memo for a complete description of the
request.
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997, amends Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1995,
which regulates development in SDD #4 (Cascade Village). Area C(Glen
Lyon residential lots) is being amended as it relates only to Lots 39-1 and
39-2, Glen Lyon Subdivision. The proposed text changes are highlighted
in the ordinance.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Department recommends approval of
Ordinance No. 21, Series of 1997, on first reading. (45 mins.)
4. ITEM/TOPIC: Revisions to the 1998 Budget Ordinance.
Steve Thompson
Bob McLaurin
ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, modify, deny Ordinance
No. 20, Series of 1997 on second reading.
BACKGROUND RATIONALE: Staff requests that the 1998 budget be
modified by $65,000. This includes $20,000. For Art in Public Places an
$45,000 for special events in 1998. Please see the Town Manager
Report for further details. (10 mins.)
5. Town Manager Report. (10 mins.)
6. Adjournment - 8:50 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, 11/11197, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
THE FOLLOWING VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 11/18/97, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING
WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 11/18/97, BEGINNING AT 7:30 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
I I I I I I I
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2332 voice
or 479-2356 TDD for information.
C:WGENDA.TC
f f
Table of Contents I Introduction
Pirrpose, Philosophical Basis,
Objective
II. Background
Historical tr-ack r•ecor-d of past efforts
III. Identification of Today's Need
Documenting the need for local's
hozrsing
, IV. Inventory of Opportunities
Land, funcls, r•egulatory r•equir•ements,
incentives
V. Problem Statement,
Objectives, and Guidelines
Conclusion r•egar•ding the need, with
policies to guide the future decisions
& actions of the Town
VI. Implementation
Road ma for making the vision a
realiry
1 f•\everyone\andyU7 admin\stratp1n.901
updated 10/30 9 am
~ I. INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
The purpose of the Town of Vail 1997 Comprehensive
Housing Strategic Plan is to document the need for
adequate housing and to establish a framework for
action. It articulates in a comprehensive manner )yhy
adequate housing for local employees is an issue for
Vail and how to address the problem of creating
affordable housing for the diverse local Vail
community. This strategic plan :
0 identifies the multiple resources available to the
community and how they can be combined in
ways that will be effective,
and
~ provides a framework for decision-making,
which can be relied upon by developers,
community members, and elected officials.
B. Philosophical Basis for the Strategic Plan
The philosophical basis for the Strategic Plan is the
_ compelling need to address two critical issues facing .
the Vail community:
~ Maintaining Vail's economic viability,
and
0 Enhancing Vail's sense of community.
Economic viability
The lack of affordable housing for employees within the
Town of Vail affects our status as a world-class resort.
Our economic vitality is threatened as necessary jobs go
unfilled or are filled with unmotivated workers.
f:\everyone\andyU7 admin\stratpln.901
2 updated 10/30 9 am
I
a Competition for employees is no longer just between
ski areas or between regions, but has now become an
issue within the Vail Valley. Employees who find
housing down valley are likely to find jobs there, too.
This problem has directly impacted many employers in
Vail, including the Town of Vail, in efforts to
appropriately fill employment positions.
Sense of Community
Much of Vail is made up of homes which house part-
time residents. Approximately 70 percent of the
Town's housing stock is being used by this segment of
our community. Although ab(e to make a unique
contribution to the Town, part-time residents are not
able to engage in local activities on a day-to-day basis.
As long-time locals are dcawn down valley, more
homes in Vail's neighborhoods are occupied by part-
time residents and are vacant most of the year, thus
negatively impacting the sense of community in Vail.
There is a strong economic incentive for full time
' residents to sell their homes in Vail and move down
valley. The trend results in an underutilized housing
stock in Vail.
C. Objective of the Strategic Plan:
The fundamental objective ofthe Housing Strategic
Plan is to maximize the creation and presetvation of
housing for local employees and to maximize the
opportunities to leverage existing resources.
D. Nature of the Strategic Plan:
Focus
The focus of the plan is on the why, who, what, how
and when of affordable housing in Vail. It is a
pragmatic approach, focusing on the practical and
available resources. Past studies and the data currently
available indicate that the problem warrants serious
attention. Rather than replicating previous studies to
assess the need, the plan focuses on specific
implementable solutions that address previous
recommendations.
f
3 \everyone\andy\97 admin\stratp1n.901
updated 10/30 9 am
1 1
Benefits of the Plart
This plan makes decision-making easier for all parties
interested in affordable housing, including elected
officials, employers, developers, and future residents.
It brings together in one document the various ideas
and opportunities for solving the problem of the lack of
affordable housing for locals.
Documenting the various ideas in a plan such as this
will enable us to move past discussions and on to
implementation. It will also clarify the role of the
Town to all those who participate in the housing arena.
Long-Term Outlook
The plan is intended to be used over the next five to ten
years by the Town of Vail leadership. One of the goals
of the plan is to enable future Town Councils to build
on the ground work laid by previous councils.
Consistent application over time will lead to the most
' successful results.
Geogr•aphical Scope
The plan acknowledges that solutions to Vail's housing
problem cannot be completel,y addressed within the
town limits of Vail. Because land and other resources
are limited, Vail will have to continue to work with the
other players in the Vail Valley where and when
appropriate. However, locating housing east of Dowd
Junction is seen as a necessary priority in ocder to
effectively address the economic and community
impacts associated with the lack of housing for locals in
Vail.
Commirnizy Collaboration ,
The plan emphasizes the need for community
collaboration in the decision-making on each housing
action when development is proposed.
f:\everyone\andyV7 admin\stratp1n.901
4 updated 10/30 9 am
+ ,t
II. BACKGROUND
Past efforts to develop affordable housing in the Town of Vail
demonstrate that affordable housing for local employees has
been a pressing need since the inception of the community.
The purpose of the oveiview provided below is to highlight the
successes, as well as the failures, of the various past attempts
to address the housing problem in Vail. It documents the role
of both the public and private sectors over the years. With this
infoimation, the appropriate role for each entity will be
clarified.
A. Early Efforts the 1970s
Affordability and availability have been at the root of Vail's
housing problem since the Town's beginning. In the 1970s, the
housing problem was most pressing during the ski season, but
eased each spring. For those individuals interested and able to
maintain employment over the summer, there were numerous
housing options available.
Some of the early efforts to specifically address employee
housing included Apollo Park, Sandstone 70, and Vail Village
9th Filing (Red Sandstone Circle).
1. Apollo Park was built in the early 1970s by local
developers on land provided by Vail Associates under a
long term lease. Originally, it included four buildings
and 98 dwelling units. Aspects affecting viability of the
development included land costs, construction costs,
and year-round occupancy rates. Vail Associates
. „ ' ~"i`\\\\.•, t\ ~a.:.:::•
subsidized the develoPment bY Providing a low cost
. v.S:r::?:j:z.: .~..:.`.`~,•`.,,:>.>\:ti::i:`>.E>`
•.c.s::!::::t.::..:`i:`:<,•::`;?:~::::::':.::;;;::'tt::
land lease, conditioning the lease rate with a
requirement that the land must be used for employee housing. VA provided an option to the developer to
purchase the larid for uses other than employee
housing, but disincentivised the conversion with a hi h t.. 'a
g r>•: (
i • \ti•:•}:::;'• ~ l?~,:,
purchase price. However' due to the lower than
estimated revenue generated by employee rentals, and
the potential for greater revenue from other uses, the Apollo Park
developers purchased the land from VA after
approximately 5 years and converted half of the project
into time-share condominiums and the other half to
short-term accommodations. This conversion was of
great concern to the community at the time.
f:\everyone\ar?dy\97 admin\stratpin.901
5 updated 10/30 9 am
11
2 Vail village 9th Filing is a single family subdivision
located at the intersection of the North Frontage Road
and Red Sandstone Road. It includes 12 lots, which
Vail Associates sold to VA employees, enabling them
to build homes for themselves. Some of the original
employees who bought these parcels remain as VA
employees and continue to live in these homes.
~
.
However, without a cap on appreciation, the lots were ~~\;;~::;:M.r~:>>: k
•ly\\~\\~~4\: . 4v`..\\~~~'.\+l~N'~~~~~. .
affordable for only the original purchasers, and in one
case the buyer left VA immediately after acquiring the
lot. ~w::;:. ` ~?c. ::\Yti;;`;`'\v:••c\>.•'~.
~Y . U hAY•:v..
3. Sandstone 70 is a collection of duplexes and fourplexes
....h.:<h. . . ~
,
. . ~
located immediately west of the 9th Filing. The
developer of this project addressed a market niche for Sinb?e Fainily xon,c tn vail viuage 9t1a
entry level ownership housing with this development.
At the time, it was located on the outskirts of Town,
making it affordable relative to locations closer to the
center of Town. It continues to hold its original
position in the market, as 53 of the 67 units are
• • ~
' occupied by locals and have been for many years.
t ;>,:~c~w\:5., ~~r~... :;;•`'f .
In conclusion, the first employee housing efforts in Vail were
based in the Private sector. The imPetus for develoPment of
employee housing appcars to have primarily been that of filling •:3~;i;}
a market niche that was undei•-seived, due to a lack of housing ~;.;•..~t:.~~ :
options for locals. A significant hurdle was the cost of land, `solved in one instance by a long-term lease from VA. From the
~ , f o r- s a l e Pr oJe c t s w e re m o r e v i a b l e t h a n r e n t a l '~'•,~~"''~;i;:i~:~:~ > ,~a.
c a s e h i s t o~Y
projects. The one rental project (Apollo Pat-k) was not viable
over time, because of poor occupancy rates due to the sai,d;ioi,c 70
seasonal nature of the housing demand.
B. Growing Town Involvement 1980s
Two projects, Pitkin Creek Park and Timber Ridge, came
on-line in the early 1980s. Both were significantly larger and
more complex than earlier efforts. It appears private sector's
motivation to enter the housing market had not changed from
the previous decade. However, this period shows the
increasing role of the Town of Vail, specifically with financing
and deed restrictions.
f:\everyone\andy\97_admin\stratp1n.901
6 updated 10/30 9 am
1. Pith-in Creek Park was one of the first opportunities for
the Town to play a greater role in addressing the
housirrg problem. Fi•om its inception in the late 1970s,
the project was based on municipal rate financing (vs. market rate, which was higher), for both the
construction phase and the end-user buy-out phase.
This method of financing provided lower cost funds for MI
construction and provided individual mortgaQes for
{`i~i
home buyers at significantly lower rates than the then-
rr
cu ent
conv nti
e onal mark
et r
atefinnci
a n
Th
e
g•
fnancin was rovided via the Town,s abili to sec
g P ty w'e
allocations from the State of Colorado foc Industrial
Revenue Bonds (IRBs) and Private Activity Bonds
(PABs). As a result of its participation, the Town
required the devetoper to deed-restrict the 156
•
condominium units with stipulations that the home buyers be employed in the Upper Eagle Valley and that
resale prices be capped at an annual rate of 1.5 of the P~tkii, Creek Park
Consumer Price Index (CPI). The Town requested that
the restrictions run in petpetuity. However, the
' developer could not sell the bonds with this condition
and the Town, developer, and bond purchasers
ultimately compromised on a restiiction lasting seven
years.
2. Tirnber Ridge was developed concun-cntly with Pitkin
Creek Park. In that project, the developcr proposed a
Special Development Distiict and requcsted to triPle
<::~.;<>:
the number of dwelling units above the permitted ~;:<w;;~;~;_,
zoning to allow for 198 units. The Town approved the R
. .:A request, with the condition that the developer deed
restrict the prope?-ty, limiting residents to those
em lo ed at business located in the U er Ea le Valle . ~ `~'V
P Y PP- g Y
and requiring lease periods be written for no less than
. . .
30 days. The restrictions placed on the deed expire 20
. ;;:,.,.,u.::.;~..
years from the completion of the roJ'ect) which is
}";~.~C~~•:~~~~:;~`^'\i\i~~i~;}i;`:;:~j}`iV:::'•\~:~'\\,`.`.'+i??i~'ti:\C~ ~\\;:jiyic;
November 30> 2001. In 1987> the 1?roJ'ect went i
nto ~~~~.~3S.~n\ .~•:ii~:ti`\¢<:,:3.~:~>~~:;:.>:k:~,<.~~.w
foreclosure. Causes for the foreclosure were primarily Timber Ridge
due to the seasonal fluctuation of the revenue stream,
which is significant, as it highlights the challenge
associated with rental developments targeted at the
seasonal market. For the 1997-98 season, 9 1 % of the
project has been master leased to local corporations,
with Vail Associates reserving approximately 60% of
f:\everyone\andy\97_admin\stratp1n.901
7 updated 10/30 9 am
the total project for its seasonal employees. The exact
breakdown is as follows:
VA 117 59.1%
Lodge at Vail 17 8.6%
Marriott 16 8.1 %
Vail Cascade 10 5.1%
McDonalds 8 4.0%
TOV 6 3.0%
Holiday Inn 5 2.5%
Wendy's 2 1.0%
Individuals 17 8.6%
In conclusion, the Town became more active in the housing
• arena duting the 1980s, facilitating financing, approving bonus
density, and taking measures to prevent housing from being
quickly converted into other uses with deed restrictions. The
impetus for private sector development of housing for local
employees continued to be the financial return provided by
targeting this under-served niche in the market. The scale of
the projects grew from 12 - 100 units in the 1970s to 150 -•200
units during the 1980s.
Although the introduction of deed restiictions helped maintain
availability and affordability more than had occurred
previously, the deed restrictions of these projects were
relatively short in length. After seven years, Pitkin Creek Park
units were sold on the free market and many have been
purchased by second home owners. Today, of the 156 units at
Pitkin Creek, 67 are owner-occupied and 55 are used as long-
term local rentals. Since the expiration of the deed restriction,
34 units have been converted to second home ownership. The
deed restriction on Timber Ridge expires in 2001, enabling the
owner to consider other uses for the property at that time.
f:\everyone\andy\97 admin\stratp1n.901
8 updated 10/30 9 am
C. Recent Efforts the 1990s
After the two previously discussed developments were brought
on-line in the early 1980s, real estate piices fell significantly
due to the oil and gas recession. Housing costs dropped and
development slowed. The 1989 World Alpine Ski
Championships coincided with an upward trend in the real
estate market. The desire of the community to provide world-
class setvices, and the need for the employees to do that
emphasized the need for affocdable housing. In 1990, the
Town of Vail commissioned a housing needs assessment,
which was completed by RRC Associates, a research and
consulting firm. One of the recommendations stated that "An
additional 800 to 1,000 units would be absorbed by the Eagle
County winter market over the next two to three years." It
also identified between 3,000 to 3,800 persons requiring some
level of assistance to secure affordable housing. The study
recommended multiple steps the Town of Vail could take to
address the problem. Many of the recommendations were in
' fact, implemented by the Town, including:
1
. Z '
0
Cvde Ae
n ndrne
ncng r
nts
Am
ong the
stePs ke~ n '
ta n r
esPonse to th
e
e studY, t h
Town adopted amendments to the zoning code to
create incentives for the development of caretaker units <,...and similar dced restricted units throughout the
community. As of October 1997, there are 106
employee units dispersed throughout Town, with
varying degrees of restriction. (Early caretaker
X~
restrictions di
d not specify that the units had to be
occupied by emp(oyees; only units approved since Ma
Y
.
.
E;:??:i:i:::::::::;;:::::>':f:E#fEE?:EEEEEEE:':'::>i;i::::Er::::::;....
1994 have that requirement. Thus, while many of the ' Duplex with Employee Housin(Y
Unit
units are used consistently with the spirit of the deed
t•estriction, only 24 of the total of 106 units are required
to be occupied.)
2. Housing Author-ity
In 1991, the Town established a Housing Authority to
develop affordable housing, appointing five community
members to the board from a field of 25 interested
applicants. Although the Town Council did not
support proposed rezonings associated with the
projects proposed by the Authority, the increased
awareness of the need motivated the Council to become
proactive in solving the problem. Council assumed a
stronger role in the affordable housing effort by
f \everyone\andy\97 admin\stratp1n.901
9 updated 10/30 9 am
purchasing a parcel of land, referred to as Vail
Commons, which could accommodate housing without
requiring any rezoning requests, f
3. Vail Cornmons `
The Town purchased a 6-plus acre site located on the
North Frontage Road in 1993, earmarking it for ~
housing. In 1994, the Town initiated a process to
f:> . :;::;•::F_
develop the site. In addition to the residential use, it
became aPParent that a commercial comPonent would
make the develoPment economicallY feasible and
, "N;~i`''''i,$;':iii:i~~ii:;ii;''r,'.ii;:::i<:<i'v.:•':A;>`::''i>i
deliver affordable units without direct subsidy fromthe
Town. After testing the capacity of the site for various ~~,b~~c wor~:s scaso~,ai Ho~~;~~,~;s~~e
densities, target markets, and uses, the Town held a
national competition for developers to build a mixed-
use program of commercial buildings and local's
housing units.
~ ~ . {
After some debate on the best Program for the site, the
Town selected a developer who then constructed 71 `
' pcipetual ly deed-restricted units and 70,000 square feet
.
of commercial area. The project includes 53 W.;.;
townhouses and condominiums, sold through a lottery :
,
to individuals and families who wanted to purchase real
r i•x. k~~~~fr S estate and put roots down in the community. The units
were occupied immediately after certificates of Vt11I C,<1I111110115
occupancy were issued and the project was 100%
complete by July, 1997. The deed restrictions require
that owners be employed in Eagle County, that the
homes be owner-occupied, and that the resale prices be
capped at a 3% annual rate of appreciation. In addition
to the 53 owner-occupied units, there are 18 rental
units for the employees of the commercial business on-
site. Many of the components of the development were
precedent setting, including the clear need for
community dialogue concerning affordable housing
proposals.
The three efforts discussed above stem from the 1990 Housing
Study. Other efforts occurring during this period are described
below.
4. Public Works Seasonal Housing
With the Vail Commons development underway, the
f:\e veryone\andy\97_admin\stratpln.901
10 updated 10/30 9 am
Town Council approved plans for a 24-unit seasonal
employees development at the Town's Public Works
site, slated for completion in April of 1998.
5. Down vallev Activitv
It is important to note that as the down valley market
has grown, other private sector and governmental .
agencies have taken an active role in providing
affordable housing. Two large housing developments
have been constiucted down valley, beginning with
EagleBend in Avon (240 units built in 1991), and Lake Creek Village located just west of Edwards (270 units
built in 1993). Avon completed a 17-unit ownership
project in Wildridge in 1991. In 1997, Vail Resorts
broke ground on RiverEdge, a 104 unit development
located in Avon. Each of the three projects required
public sector participation; two were provided with tax-
fi-ee financing via a non-profit local government
sponsored corporation (63/20 corporation), and one
was provided assistance with financing.
6. Unsuccessferl Private Sectot• Efforts in Vail
In the eai-ly 1990s, a dcveloper teamcd with a Vail
architectural firm and proposed 250 employee housing
units on three sites in Town-- onc located in
Inteimountain, onc located in Wcst Vail, and one
located at the Town-owncd Mountain Bell site near the
main Vail roundabout. Each of the three sites required
rczonings; one site was owned by thc Town. Even
after scaling the magnitude of the proposal down to
180 units, the community still opposed the rezonings
and the developei- did not pursue his application.
During the 1990s, there was a significantly larger effort made
by both the private and public sectors than had been made in
previous yeai•s. The demand for housing grew and the
seasonality of vacancy rates diminished. (This is evidenced by
the low year-round vacancy rates over multiple years for the
large employee housing developments.) Opportunities in Vail
have become limited, due to the lack of available sites, the need
for rezoning for additional density, and the need for subsidies.
The Town recognized the positive impacts of long term deed
restrictions and moved from requiring seven and 20-year
restrictions to restrictions that run in-perpetuity:• Enforcement
f \everyone\andy\97_admin\stratp1n.901
11 updated 10/30 9 am
is a key follow up actiqn which the Town staff will provide to
insure the units are used consistently with the restrictions.
The total number of approved deed restricted units occupied or
under construction in the Town of Vail as of October, 1997 is
as follows:
Dispersed 106
Vail Commons 71
Public Works 24
Timber Ridge 198
Total 399
D. Lessons Learned
The efforts from the past are described above to show what
issues have prevented the Town from reaching its goals in the
affordable housing arena. Below is a summary of the lessons
learned to date.
1. Land availability and cost continue to be the most
difficult hurdles to clear.
2. Every affordable housing development is a political
challenge. While six sites proposed for housing
between 1990 and 1995 have been stopped by
community opposition, the two more recent efforts
(1995 - 1997) have been successful.
3. Deed restrictions are necessary to preserve availability
and affordability for future generations of residents and
to protect the initial public investment (financing, land,
subsidy, etc.)
4. Partnerships, are key. In the early 1990s several
projects initiated by both the private and public sectors
were not successful. However, the public-private
partnership projects developed down valley and most
recently with Vail Commons have been successful and
provide opportunities to leverage public resources.
f:\everyone\andy\97 admin\stratpln.901
12 updated 10/30 9 am
5. The historically seasonal nature of rental demand has
become less of a problem over time, but the cyclical
nature of the seasonal demand that remains makes
seasonal rental housing the most difficult product to
provide.
III. IDENTIFICATION OF TODAY'S NEED
The local's housing problem is frequently identified as one of
the primaiy issues facing the community, and many individuals
have personal stories about the difficulties encountered in
finding affordable housing in Vail. The statistics shown below
regarding the home ownership market and the rental market in
Vail document the need. They show the trends since 1990 and
benchmark Vail's current status.
. A. The Home Ownership Housing Market
For the purposes of tracking historical housing data, two types
of housing have been selected to cepresent the real estate
market: "condominiums" and "half-duptexes." These housing
types are commonly found in Town and are less expensive then
the close counteiparts of "single family" and "townhouse," and
therefore, are deemed to be more affordable for locals.
Since 1990, wages in Eagle County have increased at a rate of
3.8 This compares to a housing cost increase of 8.7% in
real estate sales. Clearly, wages have not keptpace with
housin costs. (See charts and sources listed below.) There is
a perception that wages in resort areas are higher than in non-
resort mountain communities and compensate for the higher
costs of living, specifically housing costs. However, when
Eagle County wages are compared to that of the state or
national averages, the local wages lag behind due to the fact
that the high paying sectors, such as manufacturing, are under
represented in this area and the low paying sectors, such as
retail services, are over represented.
f:\everyone\andy\97_admin\stratp1n.901
13 updated 10/30 9 am
Table 1: Avera e Annual Wa es for Ea le Coun :
Annual Wages Hourly Wages
1990 $18,814 $9.05
1991 $19,741 $9.49
1992 $21,505 $10.34
1993 $22,083 $10.61
1994 $22,263 $10.70
1995 $23,367 $11.23
Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis
Table 2: Median Sales Prices for Residential Real Estate in Vail:
Condominium Half-Duplex
1990 $130,000 S315,000
1991 5130,000 S236,000
1992 $155,000 $333,000
1993 $166,000 S436,000
1994 $187,250 $405,000
1995 $212,000 S462,500
1996 S210,000 $530,000
Source: Eagle County Assessor's OFfice
Table 3: Percent Chan e Since 1990:
Wages 3.8%
Condominium Costs 8.3%
Half-Duplex Costs 9.1°/a
rAverage Housing Cost $.7%
f:\everyone\andy\97_admin\stratp1n.901
14 updated 10/30 9 am
j
Wages vs. Sales Prices of Condos
Annual Rates of Increase
$250,000
$200,000 '
i
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$0
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
Wages - - Sales Prices
Note that wage data represents all of Eagle County, not just
Vail. Assumptions about the relationship between Vail and
Eagle County would need to be made to break the data down
' to represent just the Town of Vail. This has not been done as
it would diminish the accuracy without clarifying the analysis.
Home sales prices reflect the real estate transactions completed
within the municipal boundaries of the Town of Vail. For
these purposes, sales prices shown are the median price, as that
is a better reflection of the market than the mean price.
A moi•e effective mcthod of evaluating the wages vs. housing
issue is to compare the number of average paying jobs needed
to purchase the average condominium or half-duplex.
Table 5: Number of jobs required to purchase a home in Vail:
Com arison of Table 1 and Table 2)
Condominium Half-Duplex
1990 2.6 6.3
1991 23 43
1992 2.3 5.0
1993 2.2 5.9
1994 2.6 5.6
1995 2.9 6.3
f:\everyone\ar?dyU7 admin\stratp1n.901
15 updated 10/30 9 am
The assumptions made for the analysis above include a down
payment of 10% of the purchase price, a mortgage rate
reflecting the average rate for the calendar year, private
mortgage insurance of .075% of the loan amount, insurance
rates based on local providers estimates, and the tax rate for
East Vail, which falls in the middle of a relatively tight range of
mill levies for the various pai-ts of the Town of Vail. (See Exhibit A.)
As the data shows, housing located in Vail is becoming less
and less attainable for local employees. Some may suggest that
the housing market for Vail workers logically includes all of
the Vail Valley, and that the less expensive homes down valley
adequately meet the housing needs of Vail employees. That
argument merits two additional considecations. '
First, locating housing outside Vail, or encouraging locals to
seek housing outside Vail, defeats the two primary goals of
' Vail's strategy. It does not bolster the sense of community,
nor does it maintain the economic viability, given the job
competition down valley. Secondly, down valley housing
costs, although statistically lower than Vail, are still
unattainable for many residents and demonstrate similar, and in
some cases steeper, growth rates. -
B. The Rental Housing Market
The tables below show the housing costs and typical wages for
seasonal employees in Vail. The jobs shown reflect those
which would be filled by entiy-level seasonal workers, and the
housing rental rates are the averages of available apartments in
the fall of each year, as found in the Vail Daily classified
section.
Table 6: Contract Rents
1990 1994 1997
one bedroom $670/mo $700/mo $790/mo
two bedroom $ 1,100/mo $1,3 60/mo $1,400/mo
three bedroom $1360/mo $1,555/mo $1,750/mo
ave/bdrm $521/mo $602/mo $662/mo
Source: The Vail Daily
f:\everyone\andy\97 admin\stratp1n.901
16 updated 10/30 9 am
Table 7: Wa es
1990 1994 1997
lift operator $6.00/hr $6.50/hr $7.75/hr
busdriver $7.50/hr $8.75/hr $10.25/hr
ski patrol $6.50/hr S6.50/hr $8.00/hr
Sources: Town of Vail and Vail Associates, Inc. Human Resource Offices
Table 8: Com arison of WaQe and Housin Rates of Growth
Average Wage Increase 3.3%
Average Rent Increase 2.78%
The financial industry iule of thumb is that housing costs
should not exceed 30% of gross income. In the case of entry-
level seasonal workers, the average portions spent on housing
is much higher.
Table 9: Percentage of monthly income required to be spent on housing,
based on avei-a e rental rates of individual bedrooms
1990 1994 1997
IiR operator 54.3% 57.8% 53.4%
bus drivcr 43.4% 43% 40.4%
ski patrol 50% 57.8% 51.7%
C. Implications for the Town's Goal of Maintaining
Economic Viability
Filling available job openings with qualified, motivated workers
is a primary concern for local business owners, including the
Town of Vail itself. Vacancy rates and turnover rates increase
costs, as training and overtime budgets are strained. Tale 10
lists major employers in the Valley. Although some are located
outside of the Town, the group reflects the top ten largest
employers in the County, and is intended to document the
needs of a majority of the employment positions in the Valley.
1,~ f:\everyone\andyU7 admin\stratp1n.901
updated 10/30 9 am
Table 10: Em lo ee shorta e and turnover estimated b lar e em lo ers in the County
Business Total number Shortage of Employee
of employees employees in 96/97 Tumover
summer / winter winter season each season
Vail Associates, Inc. 2000 / 4000 150 50%
Cordillera 650 / 375 30 15%
Eagle County School District 600 4 7.5%
City Market (4 stores) 504 41 91 %
Vail Valley Medical Center 500 25 30%
Hyatt Beaver Creek 300 / 450 50 80%
Sonnenalp 340 / 370 20 30%
Eagle County 300 0 9%
Marriot 250 / 275 5- 12 40%
Town of Vail 216 / 251 9 12.5%
D. Implications for the Town's Goal of Enhancing the
Sense of Community
The cost of housing is directly related to the supply//availabi(ity
of housing. The percentage of homes in Vail used by part-time
residents has remained in the 70% range for the last several
years. Vail's high proportion of home which stand vacant
much of the year affects not only housing costs, but also the
goal of enhancing Vail's sense of community. Increasing the
percentage of full-time resident is an important'goal of this
plan.
In conversations with many second home owners conducted
during the Vail Tomorrow process, as well as the responses in
the community survey, there appears to be a trend of part-time
residents making Vail their home. In the 1996 community
- survey, 11 percent of the part-time residents reported they
were "very likely" to make Vail their primary residence in the
next five to ten years, with another 12 percent indicating a
moderately high level of likelihood. It is important to note that
the demographics of the community may change as a result of
this trend.
f \everyone\andy\97 admin\stratp1n.901
1 g updated 10/30 9 am
Table 11: Percent of local home ownershi
Percent of homes
occupied by locals
1990 27.53%
1991 26.61%
1992 26.72%
1993 27.14%
1994 30.47%
1995 29.78%
1996 29.56%
Sources: 1991-1996 Colorado Demography Service
1990 U.S. Census
E. Quality of Life Issues
n Building code compliance
n Maximum occupancy requirements
' 0 Slum landlords problem
0 Licensing/tenant protection
f:\everyone\andy\97_admin\stratp1n.901
19 updated 10/30 9 am
Town qf Vuil
o
P~ .
Town of Vail Open Lands Inventory
TOWN Of VAIL VAIL,COLORADO
t+7,
II !~1 I~I '--.JCW.iNEWN1TUlA'. x Sfff;.•,NALKN4TUiL
'OCKEf PAI% IM&: .:Shf PAKK
CORE AREA ENLARC#MENT
eoam r~
reaa~ao
POTATOPATCH
- BOOTH FALIS
\ ~
~
_NN19 ~
9AND9TONEPAflH/
TOTIOT 71
IION'S RIOGE
I T,
SPAAWIECAEIX/NI'JOLECEX
-aAtiEAO _ FORD PA(iN
, i ~r~ .~.--T-r.-•~-.~ - ~ _
~ F.. , r~~ -.~'a••. . , ..--.FOflOAMPNITHEAIEH
F= NT.KINLAKE
NaruFFr,l HrEFl ~ i rantnEao
- ~2FE
B ~OAJ~ cEK
` .
suverw eae EAST VAIL
meluEt0 ~0
PEN9PACE
UUiEHfl I(AT905hANCHOPENSP~ICE
~OffCOUfiSE
VAILHEIGHTS
VAILDAS VNLNLLAGE 'I F?
gC1i0NE OoN70U
5{FqD ROGEA9TAUBPARK
L7Ipµgi I ~ ~ - 810FA9RNPAAN
1 ~
CONLjn~79 MEDL~NDELL KI ~ ,,..~/0.0.~~~~~.
- . TPACT E
1 ~ .
VAIL PoDGE - ~ ` ~ ~ I_.. ~ ~ OONOVAN GoitE
CflEEN `
I UE~ULIEmEi':
_ r
P"fl" I
W . Aa a'v
L ` ' ` ~ - OONOVANPAflNI . PIN)MMALt
. . WILLO LEGEND
r I -CEMEfEflY PAflK
a
-y t - MATTERHORN , . , EXISTING SYSTEM ;r r::•~ / qtinn.;:r
TOV OWNED LANDS
-vnu.rasi
I oa E , . PUBtJC USE raati
I_
itJTEBMOUMAIN OE4ELOPED PARKS > r~
i ocrcer i nR
K .,~eFn.nxmvu..raxn ,
TOWNOFVAILOWNEDIANDS
; OPEN SPACE USE
?
SIEPHEN9 PAHN
j: UNDEVELOPEDPARCEL(OPENSPACEZONIN4)
~ ..,..a.,....... \
~ ~ - UNDE4ELAPED PARCEL(ZONING VARIESry
INTERMOUNTAIN
FOflESTSERVICEOWNEDIANOS
TOWN OF VAIL EXCHANGE WNDS
~ EI(ISTINqTRAIL
~ PROP06EDTNAIL
~ EXISfINf3TflAIL4EAD
PROPOSED iRNL4EAD
IV. INVENTORY OF OPPORTUNITIES:
A. Land
1. "Hidden Resource " Par•cels
2. Under-utilized Par•cels
3. Privatelv Held Yacant Parcels
4. Publiclv Held Vacant Parcels
5. Potential Land Trades with the Forest Service
B. Funds
C. Potential Regulatory Requirements
1. Growth Management.
2. Ernployee Generatiort..
3. Inclusionary Zoning.
D. PotentialIncentives
V. POLICIES ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF
HOUSING
A. Problem Statement
B. Objectives:
C. Guidelines
VI. TOOLS FOR IMPLEMENTATION
A. Community Decision Making
B. Problem Statement
C. Establishing Givens
VIIT. Conclusion
f leveryone\PEC\memos\971stratplan.o27
19 updated 10/23 6:30 pm
` (,t9S c l .q.9 7 V;4e42.
Memorandum
To: Town Council
From: Andy Knudtsen, Senior Housing Policy Planner
Subject: Construction of dwelling units
Date: November 4, 1997
1. Red Sandstone Housing Opportunity
H. Projections for construction
The Vail Tomorrow Affordable Housing Team set of goal to provide Vail housing for 62% of the
employees who work in Vail. This compares to Aspen's goal of 60% and Vail's current level of
3 8%.
Number of jobs in Vail: 7000
Desired number of employees working in Vail who live in Vail (62%) 4340
Current number of employees working in Vail who live in Vail (38%) 2660
Additiorral residerlt employees needed to irrrn it at-oirrad 1680
Council member Rob Ford has projected a goal of housing 50% of the local work force in Vail,
which modifies the Vail Tomorrow projections as follows:
Number of jobs in Vail: 7000
Desired number of employees working in Vail who live in Vail (50%) 3500
Current number of employees working in Vail who live in Vail (38%) 2660
Additional resident employees needed to meet goal 1240
Assuming 2.5 persons per household, there is a need for 672 dwelling units to meet the Vail
Tomorrow goal or 496 dwelling units to meet Council Member Ford's goal. Additionally, by
building 50 units per year, it would take 10 years to meet the goal.
III. Review of Vacant Land in Vail
Considerations: Lack of large parcels, need to evaluate the use of Town lands, under
utilized parcels or hidden resources may become more important, look for ways to
incentivise the inclusion of housing on the remaining parcels, look to the existing housing
stock as a resource.
Single Family 6
Primary/Secondary 80
Duplex 26
Residential Cluster 20
Other 3
Total 135
IV. Review of Strategic Plan
3
MINUTES
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 7, 1997
7:30 P.M.
The regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, October 7, 1997, at 7:30
P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Armour, Mayor
- Sybill Navas, Mayor Pro-Tem Rob Ford - -
Michael Jewett
Paut Johnston
Ludwig Kurz
MEMBERS ABSENT: Kevin Foley
TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager
Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager
The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Jeff Bowen, representing Trees for Vail,
thanked the Council and the Town of Vail for their support for the Trees For Vail program over
last 6 years. Mr. Bowen stated that this year's planting resulted in 100 large trees being planted
in 3 hrs 45 min in the Booth Falls area. Bowen acknowledged staff inembers Mike Mollica and
Todd Oppenheimer for their key roles in the success of this program.
Carol Duddy, local realtor, asked the Council not to complete their discussions on GRFA (gross
residential floor area). She suggested directing the staff to continue discussions regarding new
construction. Duddy felt a problem with illegal units may continue if discussions were not
continued and the same problem would exist. Mayor Armour stated the council had decided not
to pursue this matter any further, and thanked Ms. Duddy for her concern.
Julie Chapman, a resident in East Vail, addressed the council in relation to adding an additional
bus in the village that would depart after 2:30 a.m. She stated that an additional bus had been
_ added to the-West Vail-Intermountain area last season. Town Manager McLaurin stated he
. , would research the cost of adding an additional run for this increased service. -
Eifeen Connors, addressed the Council again on environmental issues, criticizing the Town for
not making process with a solid waste plan. She stated the Town was approaching a crisis
stage on the recycling issues, stating the land fill was overused and approaching capacity. She
also expressed her frustration in the Town's and Vail Associates' lack of support in cooperating in
airing her concerns on the local media regarding the environment and Category III.
Josef Staufer, local Vail businessman, spoke in support of the Vail Village Merchants Association
regarding redirecting a portion of the business license fees to be used for Vail-specific projects,
as opposed to spreading the money valley wide. He suggested the Council match all down
valley funds raised for marketing. He also was concerned about a petition being circulated out of
the Vail Tomorrow conference supporting regional marketing, as he was not sure this was the
feeling of the entire Vail marketing community.
The second item on the agenda was the consent agenda approving the Minutes from the
September 2 and 16, 1997, Council meetings and Ordinance No. 17, Series of 1997, second
reading of 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, Colorado.
Assistant Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer advised the council that Ordinance No. 17, Series of
1997, had been pulled from the agenda for additional work and would be heard at the October
21, 1977, evening meeting. Councilmember Johnston made a motion to approve the September
2 and 16, 1997, minutes and Councilmember Navas seconded the motion. A vote was taken
and the motion passed unanimously.
The third item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1997, first 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. Assistant Town Manager Brandmeyer presented the
ordinance to the council, stating that a similar ordinance had been inacted prior to the 1989
Championships, stating the ordinance would provide for many unusual special events requests
of this magnitude. Councilmember Sybill Navas made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 18,
Series of 1997, and Councilmember Ludwig Kurz seconded the motion. A vote was taken and
the motion passed unanimously and was ordered published in full on first reading.
I
~
I
The fourth item on the agenda was the first reading of Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1997, an
ordinance amending Section 18.52.1606.(7) Exemptions, under Off-Street Parking and Loading,
of the Town of Vail Code. Town Manager McLaurin presented the ordinance to the council,
stating that the main purpose of this action was two-fold: to assure the Town of collecting the pay-in-lieu fees owed to the town, and to allow the merchant time and a financial tool with which
to pay the amount due. McLaurin stated the deed of trust gave the town an avenue of assurance .
in collecting these fees. Glen Heelan, representing the Vail Village Club, addressed the council
expressing his opposition to such an ordinance. Heelan stated the deed of trust was too -
stringenf and would discourage future development and limit business opportunities in Vail. He _
stated this was a short term decision that would have long term implications on the town.
Heelan stated this may affect a property owner's ability to sell his property.
Councilmember Rob Ford stated the Town Council was volunteering to act as a bank to help
peopfe that have to sign personal guarantees or deeds of trust. Ford stated this does not release
the business owner from the debt, stating he did not feel the town should do anything different
than a bank would do for money owed. Ford stated the Town has lost money in the past, and
this program would be the same as lending money just like a bank. Mr. Heelan stated he felt
this would deter business growth by putting a heavy burden on personal development.
There was much discussion following regarding the town's position on the collection of pay-in-
lieu fees. Town Manager Bob McLaurin stated the council could table the ordinance until Town
Attorney Tom Moorhead was back or Council could pass it on first reading and get Moorhead's
input prior to second reading. Town Manager McLaurin stated he felt the Town needed to take a
stronger position on guarantees and it was not his preference to be in the banking business.
McLaurin stated the town needs to be more responsible than it has in the past. Mr. Heelan
posed several scenarios relating to businesses requesting construction loans, moving their
business out of the building or out of the area, making it difficult for the landlord or the lessee to
acquire financing.
: Councilmember Michael Jewett stated the ordinance said nothing about prepayment penalties
and felt this should be included in the verbiage. Councilmember Jewett then made a motion to
table Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1997, until Town Attorney Moorhead had a chance to review
the Council's and the public's input and revise the ordinance. Councilmember Rob Ford
seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 4-2, Paul Johnston and Bob
, Armour opposing, feelirrg that the issue could be resolved between first.and second reading.
~ The fifth item on the agenda was a TCI information update. Fred Lutz, from TCI, gave an overview regarding a proposal to modify TCI's agreement with the town. The plan currently
proposed is to build out its cable plant from 270 megahertz to 400 megahertz. The original
agreement was to buitd out to 500 megahertz. The current franchise calls for a complete build
out of the cable system with fiber optic cable providing up to 78 analog channels to be completed
by January 1998. Council requested a list of channels that would be available as well as a
customer rate sheet. The Council has also hired an independent consulting firm to evaluate
TCI's current proposal and will report back to the Council to review their findings.
The sixth item on the agenda was the Town Manager Report. Town Manager McLaurin stated
that per his report, the West Vail Roundabout should be completed by October 17th. The
potential of a bonus is a possibility, with the completion being done on time. The Council
concurred with McLaurin that the contractor has done a very good job on the overall project.
As there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:10 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Robert W. Armour
Mayor
ATTEST:
Lori Aker
Acting Town Clerk
(Minu[es taken by Mary Caster)
.
r
MINUTES
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1997
7:30 P.M.
The regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, October 21, 1997, at 7:30
P.-M. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Sybill Navas, Mayor Pro-Tem ,
Rob Ford
Michael Jewett -
Paul Johnston
Kevin Foley
Ludwig Kurz
MEMBERS ABSENT: Bob Armour, Mayor
TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager
Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager
Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney
The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Jim Lamont, representing the East
Village Homeowner's Association, stated they are in favor of the concept of valet parking.
However, he expressed that neighborhood property owners have concerns regarding the ability
to change or broaden the pickup and drop off areas. Jim urged the Town Council to include a
provision in the management agreement to have "bailout" procedures if the valet parking
doesn't work and to continue to work on it.
Eileen Connors, a resident of Vail, addressed the Council again on environmental issues. She
stated she was in front of Council before and has not received any phone calls or response
from the Council regarding her concerns. She criticized the Council for not taking a stronger
stance on environmental issues. The second item on the agenda was the consent agenda to approve two items. The first is the
appointment of the election judges for the Regular Municipal Election to be held Tuesday,
November 18, 1997. The appointees as judges are Karen Morter, Jeanne Tilkmeier, Holiday M.
Cole and Mary Jo Allen. The next item on the consent agenda was to approve 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.
Councilmember Rob Ford made a motion to approve both items and the motion was seconded
by Councilmember Paul Johnston. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
The third item on the agenda was a presentation of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations for
the Town Council's information and feedback. Keith Montag, Director of Community
Development for Eagle County and Ellie Caryl, Senior Planner for Eagle County, made the
presentation. Keith explained the background of the Revised Land Use Regulations and stated
he wanted the Council to review and become familiar with the Eagle County Land Use
Regulations and give Eagle County feedback on the regulations. He stated that the comment
deadline date is November 7, 1997. Keith gave an overview of the contents of the Eagle
County Land Use Regulations. '
Ellie Caryl explained the time line and next steps for the review process. She stated that the
County is in the review process of the second draft of the Eagle County Land Use Regulations.
After the November 7, 1997 comment deadline, the task force will meet in December, prepare a
final draft and make a presentation to the Board of County Commissioners near the end of
December 1997. Once the Board of County Commissioners reviews the documents there wifl
be time allowed for a second public review.
Keith stated the final draft of the regulations may go to public hearing in January or February of
1998, with adoption of the regulations in early 1998.
1
f
Y
1Keith thanked the Council for their time and consideration.
Councilmembers then asked questions of Keith and Ellie for clarification purposes. Sybil stated
the goals are similar to the Town of Vail's goals. The fourth item on the agenda was the first reading of Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1997, first _
reading of an ordinance amending Section 18.52.1606.(7) Exemptions, under Off-Street
Parking and Loading, of the Town of Vail Code.
Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney, stated the ordinance was brought to Council to extend the
period of time up to ten years within which the payment of a parking fee can be made. 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-tieu 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. Tom addressed issues Council raised at a
prior meeting.
There was much discussion following regarding the Town's position on the collection of pay-in-
lieu.
Jim Lamont, representing the Vail Village Homeowner's Association, stated he talked to several
property owners. They want to have input from a banker and don't feel the Town of Vail has
the background available to be bankers. There needs to be clarity regarding parking pay-in-lieu
through education. Can property owners get a rebate if parking is provided at a later date.
There needs to be well-defined procedures for this issue.
Bill Whiteford, representing Gretta Parks, stated there should be a feasible goal so smaller
entrepreneurs and business owners can afford the parking pay-in-lieu fees. The ordinance as
currently proposed will interfere with business. He suggested this ordinance be tabled.
There was additional discussion and the Council requested the staff obtain further information
_ from other government entities and bankers. .
Councilmember Ludwig Kurz made a motion to table Ordinance No. 19, Series of 1997, and
Councilmember Rob Ford seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed 5-1,
with Councilmember Mike Jewett opposed.
The fifth item on the agenda was the first reading of Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1997, first
reading of an 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 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. Bob McLaurin discussed the budget process and .
what the budget included for 1998. He stated the two-year budget process is working. He
stated that the budget is difficult to prepare and gave Steve Thompson credit for putting the
budget together.
Additional discussion followed regarding the budget for 1998.
Steve Thompson stated the wording in Ordinance 20, Series of 1997, Page 2, Section 4, should
be changed from "Abatement mill levy" to "Mill levy credit".
Councilmember Paul Johnston made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1997,
with Councilmember Ludwig Kurz seconding the motion. A vote was taken and the motion was
passed unanimousty, 6-0.
There was additional discussion regarding the wording change from abatement mill levy to mill
levy credit.
Councilmember Ludwig Kurz made a motion to revise his motion to include changing the
wording in Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1997, Page 2, Section 4, from "Abatement mill levy" to
"Mill levy credit", Councilmember Paul Johnston seconded the motion. A vote was taken and
2
~ .
the motion was passed unanimously, 6-0.
The sixth item on the agenda was the second reading of Ordinance No. 17, Series of 1997,
second reading of 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,
Colorado.
Tom Moorhead stated the present penatty 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.
Greg Morrison, Police Chief, stated that presently the cost of a parking fine is about the same
as one day of parking. This ordinance allows for the Town Manager and the Police Chief to
declare emergency areas that would allow for special parking.
Councilmember Rob Ford made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 17, Series of 1997, and
was seconded by Councilmember Mike Jewett.
There was additional discussion regarding what the fees will be and how the public will know
what that amount will be.
Sybill Navas, Mayor Pro-tem stated that Paragraph 1 b needs clarification. She expressed that
the idea is not to hand out more parking tickets but to make it clear that parking is prohibited in
certain areas.
Tom Moorhead stated a map with the details of where parking is prohibited will be in Town
Clerk's office for the public to review and that there will be signs in the areas prohibiting parking.
Greg Morrison stated public works has improved signs. He also said public works could add a
small sign,.with the amount of the fine, to signs already there. .
- Jim Lamont, representing the East Village Horneowner's Association, stated more signs at
strategic locations should be added and that this ordinance is a good one.
Councilmember Ludwig Kurz requested that at the beginning of the ski season the Town
publish the map in the newspapers.
Buck Allen, Municipal Judge, stated the cost of the parking fines would increase to $26.00.
Tom Moorhead stated the wording for Item No. 1 B, on Page 1, Section 10.08.010 could be
amended to read:
"B. No person shall park any vehicle upon a street or at any other pface within the
commercial cores and areas immediately adjacent thereto of this municipality at
any place where official signs prohibit or regulate parking or stopping as such
areas are depicted on a map maintained in the office of the Town Clerk."
Councilmember Rob Ford made a motion to approve Ordinance No. 17, Series of 1997, with
the wording change as stated by Tom Moorhead, and was seconded by Councitmember Mike
Jewett. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
The seventh item on the agenda was the Town Manager Report. Town Manager McLaurin
introduced Lorelei Donaldson as the new Town Clerk. He also invited the Council the next
CAST meeting. He also explained he had exptored the complaints at City Market on the
ventilation system issue. The town hired a consultant, Howard McGregor of Engineering
Dynamics, to analyze the noise problem. The City Market ventilation system currently complies
with the Town noise ordinance. The consultant came up with an alternative plan that costs
$10,000 that would bring the noise levels down another 10 decibels. City Market is willing to
split the costs, half and half, with the Town.
Councilmember MikeJewett stated the Town should not pay any of the costs and that he feels
this is a City Market issue. Any business has an obligation to take care of their own problems.
3
~
~
He stated it is inappropriate for the Town to pay. The burden should be with City Market.
Tom Moorhead stated the Town is the landowner and that City Market is not in viotation of the
noise ordinance.
There was additional discussion regarding the reduction of the noise levels and how the fee
would be paid.
Sybill stated she would be inclined to do it, that the Town is the landowner, and the Town is
perceived as part of project.
Councilmember Rob Ford made motion to use a supplemental appropriation of $5,000 to pay
for half of this bill, and was seconded by Councilmember Ludwig Kurz. After more discussion, a
vote was taken and the motion was passed 4-2, with Councilmembers Mike Jewett and Kevin
Foley opposed.
There was a discussion regarding the proposal for loading and delivery.
Councilmember Kevin Foley explained Town of Vail employees will be hosting a garage sale to
benefit Holly McCutcheon this Saturday, October 25, and all were invited to participate.
As there was no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Robert W. Armour
Mayor
ATTEST:
Lorelei Donaldson
Town Clerk
e
4
ORDINANCE NO. 21
SERIES OF 1997
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 8, SERIES OF 1995, REVISING GROSS
RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA (GRFA), BUILDING HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS, AND EMPLOYEE
HOUSING PROVISIONS FOR LOTS 39-1 AND 39-2, GLEfV LYON SUBDIVISION,
DEVELOPMENT AREA C, SDD NO. 4(CASCADE VILLAGE); REPEALING RESOLUTION NO.
1'0, SERIES OF 1982, WHICH PROVIDES SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR LOTS 39-1 AND 39-2,
GLEN LYON SUBDIVISION; AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO.
WHEREAS, Hagopian and Pennington, LLC, has requested an amendment to the
existing Special Development District No. 4, Development Area C, Lots 39-1 and 39-2, Glen Lyon
Subdivision; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission has unanimously
recommended approval of the proposed building height, GRFA, and Employee Housing Unit
restrictions for Lots 39-1 and 39-2; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council considers that it is reasonable, appropriate, and beneficial
to the Town and its citizens, inhabitants, and visitors to amend Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1995
and repeal Resolution No. 10, Series of 1982 to provide for such changes in Special
Development District No. 4, Cascade Village.
Note: Text which is s~i9d.6d::is being added and which is s#rieken is being deleted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
VAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
Ordinance No. 8, Series of 1995, is hereby amended as follows:
Section 1.
>i :?`.i ::::..5:.: z: i;: ~
, esal~ativr~ ~ioi Q; Ser~~s o€ ,;;.:~ere~y repeal~t:
Section 2. Amendment Procedures Fulfilled, Planning Commission Report.
The approval procedures described in Chapter 18.40 of the Vail Municipal Code have been fulfilled,
and the Town Council has received the recommendations of the Planning and Environmental
Commission for an amendment to the development plan for Special Development District No. 4.
Section 3. Special Development District No. 4
Special Development District No. 4 and the development plans therefore, are hereby approved for
the development of Special Development District No. 4 within the Town of Vail.
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 ~
Section 4. Chapter 18.46 Special Development District No. 4, Cascade Village, is hereby
amended to read as follows:
18.46.010 Purpose
. Special Development District No. 4 is established to ensure comprehensive development and
, use of an area in a manner that will be harmonious with the general character of the Town,
. provide adequate open space and recreational amenities, and promote the objectives of the.
Town of Vail Comprehensive Plan. Special Development District No. 4 is created to ensure
that the development density will be relatively low and suitable for the area and the vicinity
in which it is situated, the development is regarded as complementary to the Town by the
Town Council and the Planning Commission, and because there are significant aspects of
the Special Development District which cannot be satisfied through the imposition of
standard zoning districts on the area.
18.46.020 Definitions
For the purposes of this chapter, the following definitions shall apply:
A. "Special attraction" shall be defined as a museum, seminar or research center or
performing arts theater or cultural center.
B. "Transient residential dwelling unit or restricted dwelling unit" shall be defined as a
. dwelling unit located in a multi-family dwelling that is managed as a short term rental in which
all such units are operated under a single management providing the occupants thereof
customary hotel services and facilities. A short term rental shall be deemed to be a rental
for a period of time not to exceed 31 days. Each unit shall not exceed 645 square feet of
GRFA which shall include a kitchen having a maximum of 35 square feet. The kitchen shall
be designed so that it may be locked and separated from the rest of the unit in a closet. A
transient dwetling unit shall be accessible from common corridors, walks, or balconies
without passing through another accommodation unit, dwelling unit, or a transient residential
dwelling unit. Should such units be developed as condominiums, they shall be restricted as
set forth in Chapter 17.26 Condominiums and Condominium Conversions. The unit shall not
be used as a permanent residence. Fractional fee ownership shall not be allowed to be
applied to transient dwelling units. For the purposes of determining allowable density per
acre, transient residential dwelling units shall be counted as one half of a dwelling unit. The
transient residential dwelling unit parkirig requirement shall be 0.4 space per unit plus 0.1
space per each 100 square feet of GRFA with a maximum of 1.0 space per unit.
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 2
18.46.030 Established
A. Special Development District No. 4 is established for the development on a parcel
of land comprising 97.955 acres as more particularly described in the attached Exhibit A. .
Special Development District No. 4 and the 97.955 acres may be referred to as "SDD No.
4.,,
B. The district shall consist of four separate development areas, as identified in this _
ordinance consisting of the following approximate sizes: '
Area Known As Development Area ~
Cascade Village A 17.955
Coldstream Condominiums B 4.000
Glen L Prir~i : <,<;:;,;,,.< <.:<>:;
Yon ~x. ~ry~~eG >~o:.:~dar~+ ;n~# ~~ngl~ F~rn~l~r C 29.100
Glen Lyon Commercial Site D 1.800
Dedicated Open Space 40.400
Roads 4.700
TOTAL 97.955
18.46.040 Development Plan--Required--Approval Procedure
A. Each development area with the exception of Development Areas A and D shall be
subject to a single development plan. Development Area A shall be allowed to have two
development plans for the Cascade Club site as approved by the Town Council. The
Waterford and Cornerstone sites shall be allowed one development plan each. Development
Area D shall be allowed to develop per the approved phasing plans as approved by the Town
Council. The developer shall have the right to proceed with the development plans or
scenarios as defined in Section 18.46.103, 1-4.
B. Amendments to SDD No. 4 shall comply with the procedures outlined in Section
18.40.
C. Each phase of development shall require, prior to issuance of building permits,
approval of the Design Review Board in accordance with applicable provisions of Chapter
18.52.
18.46.050 Permitted Uses
A. Area A. Cascade Village
1. First floor commercial uses shall be limited to uses listed in 18.24.030 A-C. '
The "first floor" or "street level" shall be defined as that floor of the building that is located at
grade or street level;
2. All other floor levels besides first floor street level may include retail, theater,
restaurant, and office except that no professional or business office shall be located on street
level or first floor (as defined in Section 18.24.030 A of the Town of Vail zoning code in Area
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 3
A) unless it is clearly accessory to a lodge or educational institution except for an office
space having a maximum square footage of 925 square feet located on the first floor on the
northwest corner of the Plaza Conference Center building;
3. Lodge;
4. Multi-family dwelling; .
5. Single Family dwelling;
6. T-vve-Fami+q :!Pirirnrytl J_r~;tl~:;dwelling;
7. Transient residential dwelling unit;
8. Employee dwelling as defined in Section 18.46.220;
9. Cascade Club addition of a lap pool or gymnasium.
B. Area B, Coldstream Condominiums
1. Two-family dwelling;
2. Multi-family dwelling.
C. Area C, Glen L pri~1~': ~~tNtI ~::'::::~~d::Si :`''1~:~~~t`~i:`: Lots
Yon D~x ~ ~Y
1. Single family dwelling;
2. Two-family dwelling.
D. Area D. Glen Lyon Commercial Site
1. . Business and professional offices;
2. Employee dwelling as defined in Section 18.46.220.
18.46.060 Conditional Uses
Conditional uses shall be reviewed per the procedures as outlined in Chapter 18.60 of the
Town of Vail zoning code.
A. Area A, Cascade Village
1. Cascade Club addition of a wellness center not to exceed 4,500 square feet.
2. Fractional fee ownership as defined in the Town of Vail Municipal Code,
Section 18.04.135 shall be a conditional use for dwelling units in the Westhaven
multi-family dwellings. Fractional fee ownership shall not be applied to restricted
employee dwelling units or transient residential dwelling units. Ownership intervals
shall not be less than five weeks.
3. Special attraction;
4. Ski lifts; 5. Public park and recreational facilities;
6. Major arcades with no frontage on any public way, street, walkway or mall
area.
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 4
y
B. Area B, Coldstream Condominiums
1. Public park and recreational facilities;
2. Ski lifts.
C. Area C, Glen Lyon D i::'`:I.;
...:::..Pti~i~ : ~y.~d~~ i~p Lots
1. Public park and recreational facilities;
' 2. Ski liftsj . ,
<:.;::>< > : :.:..;:.:<.;:~<.;:;::<:. _
< i~ ; . :
~p Y... . U&:::.~: l~n~~?r~:~,5t,tn~c[p~I
D. Area D, Glen Lyon Commercial Site
1. Micro-brewery as defined in Town of Vail Municipal code, Section 18.04.253.
18.46.070 Accessory Uses
A. Area A. Cascade Village
1. Minor arcade.
2. Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in
accordance with the provisions of Sections 18.58.130 through 18.58.190.
3. Attached garages or carports, private greenhouses, swimming pools, tennis
courts, patios, or other recreational facilities customarily incidental to permitted
residenfral uses.
4. Ofher uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional
uses, and necessary for the operation thereof.
5. Swimming pools, tennis courts, patios or other recreational facilities
customarily incidental to permitted or conditional uses, and necessary to the
operation thereof.
B. Area B, Coldstream Condominiums
1. Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in
accordance with the provisions of Sections 18.58.130 through 18.58.190.
2. Attached garages or carports, private greenhouses, swimming pools, tennis
courts, patios, or other recreational facilities customarily incidental to permitted
residential uses.
3. Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to perrnitted or conditional
uses, and necessary for the operation thereof.
4. Swimming pools, tennis courts, patios or other recreational facilities
customarily incidental to permitted or conditional uses, and necessary to the
operation thereof.
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 5
r
C. Area C, Glen Lyon ~ Pr~~i l~~
Ct:::~`` ` »F "iriii' ' Y Lots
~ ........~'I!.... ~Y............
1. Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in
accordance with the provisions of Sections 18.58.130 through 18.58.190.
2. Attached garages or ca?ports, private greenhouses, swimming pools, tennis
courts, patios, or other recreational facilities customarily incidental to permitted
_ residential uses.
3. Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional
uses, and necessary for the operation thereof.
D. Area D, Glen Lyon Commercial Site
1. Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in
accordance with the provisions of Sections 18.58.130 through 18.58.190.
2. Attached garages or carports, private greenhouses, swimming pools, tennis
courts, patios, or other recreational facilities customarily incidental to permitted
residential uses.
3. Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional
uses, and necessary for the operation thereof.
4. Minor arcade.
18.46.080 - Locativn of Business Activity A. All offices, businesses, and services permitted by Sections 18.46.050 thr.ough
18.46.070 shall be operated and conducted entirely within a building, except for permitted
unenclosed parking or loading areas, and the outdoor display of goods.
B. The area to be used for outdoor display must be located directly in front of the
establishment displaying the goods and entirely upon the establishment's own properry.
Sidewalks, building entrances and exits, driveways and streets shall not be obstructed by
outdoor display.
18.46.090 Density--Dwelling Units
The number of dwelling units shall not exceed the following:
A. Area A, Cascade Village
In Area A, a minimum of three hundred fifty-two (352) accommodation or transient
dwelling units and a maximum of ninety-four dwelling units as defined by the tables in
Section 18.46.103 for a total density of #wo hundred sevenry (270) dwelling units.
B. Area B, Coldstream Condominiums
Sixty-five (65) dwelling units
C. Area C, Glen L on Prit~':: :Ii'~ti`:`:;: <:::ar~ Fii::: Lots
Y ~x .....::..~.......:::::....::..~Y
.
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 6
One-hundred four (104) dwelling units.
D. Area D, Glen Lyon Commercial Site
4. Three dwelling units, two of which shall be employee dwelling units as defined by.the
. table in Section 18.46.103F.
18.46.100 Density-Floor Area -
A. Area A, Cascade Village
The gross residential floor area (GRFA) for all buildings shall not exceed 289,145
square feet.
B. Area B, Coldstream Condominiums
Sixty-five thousand square feet (65,000 s.f.) GRFA.
C. Area C, Glen Lyon Dupfe~ ~`:'.rid: r~;
........................~.....:...:::j.i
r~gl~.:::: .Lots
GRFA shall be calculated for each lot per Section 18.13.080 (Density Control) for the
Primary/Secondary district of the Town of Vail municipal code.
D. Area D, Glen Lyon Commercial Site .
The gross residential floor area for the two employee dwelling units shall be 795
square feet and 900 square feet respectively. The gross residential floor area for the free
market dwelling unit shall be 1,630 square feet.
18.46.102 Commercial Square Footage
: A. Area A, Cascade Village -
Area A shall not exceed 35,698 square feet of commercial area. Commercial uses
include retail, office, theater, restaurant, uses listed in Section 18.46.050 A-1, and the special
attraction use.
B. Area D, Glen Lyon Commercial Site
Area D shall not exceed 16,730 square feet of office for Phase I, IA & II or 15,584
square feet of office for Phase III per the approved development plans. The micro-brewery
and associated uses shall be constructed per the approved development plan.
18.46.103 Development Statistics for Area A. Cascade Village, and Area D, Glen Lyon
Commercial Site
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 7
,
CHART 1: Area A Completed Projects
Retail/ Square On-Site Cascade Strudure
AUs DUs GRFA Commercial Foot Parking Parking
MILLRACE I. 16 20,000 20 0.00
~ ti.41~\tk t\4. k 4\ 4\ ~I 4+~4 4 \ ?
~\v \
ME
MILLRACE II 14 17,534 25 0.00
' ~w ~~+nw '~i~.~'t~~.~~4~~;: ~ , ~ - .
MILLRACE IV -
Units"` 6 10,450 19 0.00
~k•..:::~'w`~':zuM1+.\+.+'^+.4\+~kC..\ \ti~\\ . . ~ 'C k~+.
W ESTIN 148 55,457 0.00 115
Alfredo's 104 Seats
Cafe 74 Seats
Little Shop 1250
Pepi Sports 2,491
W& H Smith, Vaurnot 900
\ \ '4\\k~:•~~:;+:kk. `ti\\:'. . `~~L~ ~ 44\ \ . w ' \
•4+.\+\\•~~h\4•~.\"'\\•+'+ \'v'~1•. ~ \ \ 4 \ ` ~ ~
~ ,y.w f ~:•~ib:~::~~':;.1•.<.~'. w :.;i ? ~ ~
CMC BUILDING
Cascade Wing 8 15,870 0.00 16
Clancy's 1,600 0.00 13.3
Theater 4,220 28
College Classrooms 0.00 40
College Office 0.00 4
Theater/Meeting Room 2J 1,387 0.00 11.5
I\ , I*
. \~•4i \ ~`K\Sj~:?;{,'~ ~;ii N~~4~~~~\ Qti~ XIN
TEARACE WING
Rooms 120 58,069 0.00 105
Retail 5,856 0.00 20
§1'h\~4\\~i\<.'~''~.`~~\t~~:~~ ~h\~~ \ \ Q\ \
PLAZA 1
Rooms 20 7,205 0.00 16
Retail 1,099 0.00 4
:ti~'+c~fi, »*kk:,•.\vti~ ~w. r • k k•, • ~ ~ tik• .Y~\ \ k ti ?
\\.c.w~\\\\~ti;\\kkt,;:.\^C~ ~ ? ' `~4:h.~k\k~ ~ti ? \k~ \ k ~ ~ ?
\\'?:h\\\•\\\\\\\\h\~i. +.1\.4\\\11 \\\\~k \\\<?.\M\4`4\4 \ \\\4 \~h \ 4t C~\ \ ' \ \\A \\4 h
:C`.~..`:,'S.`0`...\`•.~:~\::\ ~~:..4 ~\'Q.~\~; . v ~ ~ ~t,. \ ~."4.\'~ ~ \ ti
PLAZA II
Conference 0.00 35
Retail 925 0.00 3
kIN~~\\ ~ ' ~ ~ ,
4 Y.'\ \ 4v
CASCADE CLUB
Retail 300 0.00 1
Bar & Restaurant 252 0.00 3.5
Office in CMC 828 0.00 3
Wellness Center 1,386 0.00 7
Office in Club 420 0.00 1.4
• ti:~~'.•t:.'f::a•.:~,:...r, k~,~ • waw: .r•• . . ~ 110 ~ ~~~1\
:~~:.+r>w4~\;`.;~•.ak••:o~~~~~'.~~ti~ti. ~,n ~:n,• ~,.<~wti•~w~~;w w~~ ~w'~ ~ ~ ~w ~ ~ rn. k•.
\\.v.\'+v\ ~:•\\\\vl \~.\4\4 4+\\ •h\4 ~h\\~~ `~1:~ `Q~A\\v. \ \1\\1 \ \ \~1 +h ?
TOTALS 288 AU 44 DU 184,585 19,173 72 426.7
"'For the purposes of calculating GRFA for the Cosgriff parcel (Millrace IV), no credils shall be given except for 300 s.f. to be allowed for
each enclosed parking space, per Section 13.46.210(c)(5)0)
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 8
't
CHART 2:
PROPOSED PROJECTS
Cascade
Square On•site Structured
1: CORNERSTONE AU or TR DU GRFA Commercial Feet Parking Parking
, Units 64 TR 28,110 53
Employee Units' 3 1,800 11,100 3
Retail 11,100
37
TOTALS 64 TR 28,110 11,100 93
4 44 ti'i y 4~ ~
t \ y4\4\4~ti~4\; \*4~\~ ~~nh\~~k., \7T\~~~~.+44 tiy \+4 Y\~\ ~ \ • ~ ~~1 y \4 : ` ~ \ ~
~\t k •,~u, ~~v,: ti:\ ~ F~~ ~ kti •.w~ ' ` \ . ~w. ~ ~ \
%
2. WATERFORD
Units 27
56
Employee Units 2 1,100 p
TOTALS 27 47,500 sg
4.~:i.
•;~k~C2::.,\\"~~''',_~_',\\....:w"~ti\''~.\w~','.•`.'.•'<a ".v :k \~eo:4\. .~\:w:;' E ' ~ p" ' ?
\..4\\\\\Q\ A4\ µA~\4k\ ~+k~\~\ 4444~~ ~,Uh\\\\ t~\\4^\4\1~\~\~ , .
ii.1+n+Yi•?::T~1\\\\\\vxi},yv~. + 4444 ^ 4\~~U. \^.1+}\ ~ \ \ v i~ ~ ~ ,
v x~..., 1•nvil \..i~{4 ~v~~' ~liti\' \h ~ vvv y~x~x~ . ±Y4~ . \
. l~+ ~
3. WESTHAVEN
CONDOMINIUMS
Units 20 22,500 40
Employee Units (Max 10 6,400 20
TOTALS 20 22,500 60
' y~•~itifi: ` \4w.\1';'i~~\k,\\\\' .'~ti~ , \ \i ' \ ~ \
+h4~~:.\\~i 'O\\~\l \ ~\\Q 4\ \ \ p\ ~~a \ ~ tiq 1 \ ` \ v
v: .Yti..:\1 i~.: ~}\~+::v+,v, •.~\~44~T4\~ \\~\4 ~ . 4 ~\1~+ i~~ \\ti~ ;\ti h~~\ ` ?
._.;,,....\.U41...,\~:.^.,~:.M1~•ct•?;a.`:.43>\h. i~;N~\tititi4~: ~ ti~}w, tti \ti`ti r~ .
4. Millrace III
Units 3 6,450 7
TOTALS 3 6,450 7
? ~4't+\k. ~ .
*\4 `~~\4}k•\\~~•i\~.~}Y~~~\\A\\\'..~\ ' t4 k~ti ~
~i:~~. . . .
.vt4 ~ 14\ \ %v4}•E 4\\ ~.\„}~4\\\444\\~^\.+., ~1\;.,i V ~T\\\\ tiv \ 4\\~, • 1 k`\ ~ \ v \ \
. • ~w. ~ 4 w'44 \ 4
5. Cascade Club Addition
Scenario 1(Wellness Center) 4,500 22.5
or
Scenario 2 (Gymnasium) 4,500 0
TOTALS
Scenario 1 4,500
Scenario 2 4,500
`\4~~;~~kki~``4~~~~\;1\U~'\~4~ti4'n~ •t~41'4~\~~t~ \4 k.~`\\4~?~41~\y ih4\~`~,~~~~~µ4~~\ \~\~^ft ~ 4 ~ ~ 4 \
6. Plaza Office" 925 r••
\."~4h.4\~~\J4 }:+\\}h}\~\\4k+y~E~, i~44.+.\\~~k .4 . 4\\'~vvih.~v} ~:v:G~\`h44~}}}~\l \x}. \ 4 \ !4\ \ \ 4
?\\?.~.1\\\\\+;\\}\4U~4~:\\\:,~,\1\\;\\\\ titivy\4\ \.~1\ \\44~y:~.\\;?..V\ l;\\~,x~}}.;n\
<~'ti~<`:::::.t~';'.•;t•ti ~5.., p,:; ~ k,. 4 .
..a,,;.,-\\~:....-..`4x;,. ..x.,,.,\~,.,.A :'~,:\v:.}d.~...av} •''44'i•:.ti•'{ v..v.\\'~i;~. ::;.4 ~'~.h\.;:'•,•~:. ~ . \
\\LV.\.~.4iv\:•::i::i::t~Ri);.h\vv~«~xi\?hZ:....o:,•:. '::R\\~,:..w.~kkk~.. •tir+:\C:`..:..••:~~V' `•:~~\~i~.:\\~~,r,::.o;% w'~.`+4~ ':;.'t,a,;\.,`~ ti>\ `.ti,\.• ~ ~ , 4~.
.+.\,.a:'•. +.•,ati:,v..\ \;k\~• \~h~:. \.5~. k
TOTAL MAXIMUMS"' 64 TR 50 104,560 16,525 4,500 218 23.2
"Employee Units shall not count toward density or GRFA for the purpose of this SDD
'•Plaza space has already been counted for a retail parking requirement. The new parking requirement is based on the difference between the retail
and office parking requirements.
"'Total figures represent highest density and commercial space scenarios.
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 9
,
CHART 3: AREA A
REQUIRED PARKING
Parking for Completed Projects per Chart 1 in Parking Spaces
Cascade Parking Structure 426.7
Proposed Projects w/ req. parking in the .
Cascade Parking Structure: -
Scenario 1- Wellness Center 22.5
OR
Scenario 2 - Gymnasium 0.0
Plaza Office .07
Subtotal 449.9
Less 17.5% Mixed-Use Credit -78.7
Total Required Parking at Build-Out of Area A
in Cascade Structure 371.2
Existing Parking in Cascade Structure 421.0
Required Parking in Cascade Structure at
Build-Out of Area A
With 17.5% mixed-use credit 371.2
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 10
.
18.46.104 Development Plans
Site specific development plans are approved for Area A and Area D. The development
plans for Area A are comprised of those plans submitted by Vail Ventures, Ltd. and other
developers. The development plans for Area D are comprised of those plans submitted
by the. Glen Lyon Office Building, a Colorado Partnership. The following documents
comprise the development plan for the SDD as a whole, Waterford, Cornerstone,
. Cascade Club Addition Scenario 1 and 2, Millrace IV, and Area D-Glen Lyon Commercial
. Site and is not all inclusive:
1. Waterford, Sheet #L-2, dated 11-12-92, Landscape Plan, Dennis Anderson.
2. Waterford, Sheet #1.1, dated 11-13-92, Site/Grading Plan Gwathmey, Pratt,
Schultz.
3. Waterford, Sheet #2.1, dated 11-13-92, Plan Level 38/43' 3", Gwathmey, Pratt,
Schultz.
4. Waterford, Sheet #2.2, dated 11-13-92, Plan Level 48'-6"/53'-0", Gwathmey, Pratt,
Schultz.
5. Waterford, Sheet #2.3, dated 11-13-92 Plan Level 59'-0:/64'-3" by Gwathmey,
Pratt, Schultz.
6. Waterford, Sheet #2.4, dated 11-4-92, Plan Level 69'-6"/74'-9", Gwathmey, Pratt,
Schultz.
7. Waterford, Sheet #2.5, dated 11-13-92, Plan Level 80'-0"/85'-3" Gwathmey, Pratt,
Schultz.
" 8. Waterford, Sheet #2.6, dated 11-13-92, Plan Level 90'-6" Gwathmey, Pratt,
Schultz.
9. - Waterford, Sheet #2.7, dated 11-13-92, Plan Level 101'-0" Gwathmey, Pratt,
Schultz. - 10. Waterford, Sheet #2.8, dated 11-13-92, Plan Level 111'-6" Gwathmey, Pratt,
Schultz.
11. Waterford, Sheet #2.9, dated 11-13-92, Plan Level 122'-0" Gwathmey, Pratt,
Schultz.
12. Waterford, Sheet #2.10, dated 12-14-92, Roof Plan All Levels Gwathmey, Pratt,
Schultz.
13. Waterford, Sheet #3.1, dated 11-13-92, Elevations Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz. .
14. Waterford, Sheet #3.2, dated 11-13-92, Elevations, Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz.
15. Waterford, Sheet #4.1, dated 11-4-92, Sections Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz.
16. Watertord, Sheet #4.2, dated 11-4-92, Sections, Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz.
17. Watertord, Sheet #4.3, dated 11-4-92, Sections, Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz.
18. Waterford, Sheet #9.1, dated 10-20-92, Unit Plans Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz.
19. Waterford, Sheet #9.2, dated 10-20-92, Unit Plans, Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz.
20. Waterford, Sheet #9.3, dated 10-20-92, Unit Plans Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz.
21. Waterford, Sheet #9.4, dated 10-20-92, Unit Plans, Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz.
22. Waterford, Sheet #9.5, dated 10-20-92, Unit Plans Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz.
23. Cornerstone, Sheet #L-1, dated 11-13-92, Landscape Plan Dennis Anderson.
24. Cornerstone, Sheet #1, dated 12-21-92, Cascade Village Master Plan Gwathmey,
Pratt, Schultz.
25. Cornerstone, Sheet #2, dated 12-29-92, Floor Plans Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz.
26. Cornerstone, Sheet #3, dated 12-29-92, Floor Plans, Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz.
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 11
.
SChultz.
27. Cornerstone, Sheet #4, dated 12-21-92, Elevations Gwathmey, Pratt, Schultz.
28. Cornerstone, Sheet #5, dated 11-13.-92, Site Plan/Grading Plan, Gwathmey, Pratt,
Schultz.
29. Cascade Club Addition Site Plan, Roma, 10/10/88.
30. Cascade Club Floor Plan, Roma, 10/10/88.
31. Millrace III, Sheet #1, dated 5/6/93, Site Plan; Steven James Riden. - 32. Millrace III, Sheet #2, dated 4/13/93, Floor Plans for Single Family Residence, . Steven James Riden.
33. Millrace III, Sheet #3, dated 5/6/93, Elevations for Single Family Residence,
Steven James Riden.
34. Millrace III, Sheets #4 and #5, dated 3/20/93, Floor Plans for Duplex Building,
Steven James Riden.
35. Millrace III, Sheets #6 and #7, dated 5/6/93, Elevations for Duplex Building,
Steven James Riden.
36. Millrace III, Sheet L1, dated 5/6/93, Site/Landscape Plan, Steven James Riden.
37. Millrace IV, Scenario I, a/k/a Cosgriff Parcel, Site Plan, Arnold Gwathmey Pratt,
10/28/91.
38. Millrace IV, Scenario I, a/k/a Cosgriff Parcel, Elevations Arnold Gwathmey Pratt,
10/22/91.
39. Millrace IV, Scenario I, a/k/a Cosgriff Parcel, Floor Plans Arnold Gwathmey Pratt,
10/23/91.
40. , Millrace IV, Scenario I, a/k/a Cosgriff Parcel, Landscape Plan, Dennis Anderson
- _ ' - - Associates. . . ' _
- 41. Cosgriff Parcel, Survey, Alpine Engineering, Inc., 10/31/91 stamped.
42. Survey, a part of Cascade Village, Eagle Valley Engineering, Leland Lechner,
6/8/87.
43. Site Coverage Analysis, Eagle Valley Engineering, 10/10/88.
44. Cascade Village Special Development District Amendment and Environmental
Impact Report: Peter Jamar Associates, Inc., revised 11 /22/88.
45. The Ruins, site plan, Kathy Langenwalter, AIA, 1/16/95.
46. The Ruins, basement and first floor plans, Kathy Langenwalter, AIA 1/16/95.
47. The Ruins, second and third floor plans, Kathy Langenwalter, AIA 1/16/95.
48. The Ruins, elevations and fourth floor ptan, Kathy Langenwalter, AIA 1/16/95.
49. The Ruins, elevations, Kathy Langenwalter, AIA, 1/16/95.
50. The Ruins, Survey, Duane Feheinger, 12/1/94.
51. The Ruins, Landscape Plan, Land Designs by Ellison, 2/2/95.
" A maximum of 1000 sq. ft. of common area, in addition to the approved plans, may be
added to the Waterford project to allow for compliance with the Uniform Building Code,
Uniform Fire Code and American Disabilities Act. The staff shall review all such additions
to ensure that they are required by such codes.
. . ; ; ; : : : :
a> :<G~~n <4 an:::t?~ma.; ~Secc~nda en~::::r~ ~~:::F~~n~~: >>ots
~ ...........................~;;...............Y......................J.................................
<:>:; . ;:.;:.;::;;<:<.;:.;...;:;: <; . .:;:.;:.;:.;;:<::;;:<.>:.::-;::.: ;
; k:.: . , .
1: 8uI l~rn EMv~lo .t:. h :~et:<r:.~ are~:::: ::>t3e~~. r~
. t.:p.::::
~'IC.~<'~1r"It~::::~:2'~~~ :
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 12
Area D, Glen Lyon Commercial Site
1. Area D Master Site Plan; Geodesign by Sherry Dorward, 2/22/90.
2. Landscape Plan for Area D; Geodesign by Sherry Dorward, 2/22/90. .
3. Area D elevations, Geodesign by Sherry Dorward, 2/9/90.
4. Vail Micro-brewery, Seracuse, Lawler, and Partners, Denver, CO., sheets A2.1,
- A2.2, A2.3, A3.1, A3.2, A4.1, A4.2, dated 1/8/90 and sheet A2.4 dated 12/13/89. -
5. Vail Brewery Roof Study, Frank Freyer, 1/8/90. 6. Glen Lyon Parking Garage Floor Plans and Site Plan, Roma, 11/28/88.
7. Glen Lyon Parking Garage Sections/Elevations, Roma, 11/28/88.
8. Glen Lyon Condominium, Roma, 11/28/88.
9. Glen Lyon Condominium East Building, Roma, 11/28/88.
10. Deck Enclosure (Phase IA) to Glen Lyon Office Building, Pierce, Segerberg and
Spaeh, dated 9/20/90.
11. Landscape Plan, Phase IA Deck Enclosure, Pierce, Segerberg and Spaeh, dated
8/19/91.
12. Office Addition to Glen Lyon Office Building, Buff Arnold/Ned Gwathmey
Architects August 25, 1989 Sheets A1 through A4.
13. Cascade Village Special Development District Amendment and Environmental
Impact Report: Peter Jamar Associates, Inc., Revised 11/22/88. Letter from
Peter Jamar Associates, Inc., dated January 16, 1990.
14. Deceleration lane design for South Frontage Road, RBD, October 18, 1988 as
approved by Co. Div. of Hgwys.
15. A resubdivision of Lot 54 amended plat Glen Lyon Sub-division, Eagle Valley
Surveying Inc. as approved by TOV
- 16. VaiJ Brewery Parking Analysis, TDA Colorado, Inc.; August 10, 1988 and Vail Brewery Parking Analysis Update, TDA Colorado, Inc., January 16, 1990 pages 1-
8.
18.46.110 Development Standards
The development standards set out in Sections 18.46.120 through 18.46.180 are
approved by the Town Council. These standards shall be incorporated into the approved
development plan pertinent to each development area to protect the integrity of the
development of SDD No. 4. They are minimum development standards and shall apply
unless more restrictive standards are incorporated in the approved development plan
which is adopted by the Town Council.
18.46.120 Setbacks
A. Area A, Cascade Village
Required setbacks shall be as indicated in each development plan with a
minimum setback on the periphery of the property of not less than twenty feet, with the
exception that the setback requirement adjacent to the existing Cascade parking
structure/athletic club building shall be two feet as approved on February 8, 1982, by the
Planning and Environmental Commission. All buildings shall maintain a 50 foot stream
setback from Gore Creek. The Waterford building shall maintain a minimum 20 foot I
setback from the north edge of the recreational path along Gore Creek.
B. Area B, Coldstream Condominiums
Required setbacks shall be as indicated on the development plan.
C. Area C, Glen Lyon F'rii~:`:l~;
~1~ :.......:..:..!Y::.:: 1p Lots
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 13
Required setbacks shall be governed by Section 18.13.060 Setbacks of the
Primary/Secondary zone district of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. iiif3fn41, Y"
.::.;:.;.:.:r~.:;:.;:.:
~::~t~ 3~-:1:~~ : ! . ; . . ` : >
. r~~.. . .:.t.~lt',~.#f'+..:~'±~!w~t~:~!!~E<+~t1~~~~~~ 1l?d.iS
~U*k~ieci;;:f~ <~~e: f~tlavvirg;;
~i1:[:f~ure::~O~r ; M6 , : ; : : ~ : »
el~prtt w~ll b eresea~e~ w~fi~~ tri~ bu~ld~n~; e~u~topes.
• ~
e c~r3l~ d~v~lapment..i~t~i ctt~Ic~e ~i~.b~~~ing e~ve[o~~ s~$11 ~
Iand~eapi~; s~mr~vrray~. ~~,~~~~>:~dg~~ ~~€c~ ret~ii~g w~tts asso~~~ted w~tt~
;.::;.:>;:.:;:.>;:<:.:<:;::>;:;.;::;;::::>:«.;
dr~~r~w~:.::>~ons~r~~#~!on;:>::::At<: e:: s:. ~:w~tl~~h:: : ~
-
:::~:n.: ~n
Y
: < ««;:<:<.:><.: :<.>;::;<;;:.:.:
g adP~<w~l{ :~rrr~itt~ti i~~~~ct beyQ~d.~t.er~~~r~lflp~:~~::€nbre:~r?
ter~;:fe~t:;1:#3':::nQr::r~~tl~a~;~~e::i~a~e:tli stan ~ ~e
t.....,~ . . . . . ~e~~ t#~ ~.b~
< ..:<;><. :::<>:< t h < <><.;,:
;
. .
e ~lo~e rty ~iy.~~~~~~~ nQt.~~re. a~ ~v~ #...e..:nt..r
.<:;.,:.:»:>.;:.:;;><::::<:.::.::.;:.;;:::::;:
.
rr~o~e:fik.a~::~~~ft~ui~:~1 :fihm~~nur~r : u~r l:: . c ~ . . . ' : ; - ~ ;
eq ~ns~art:~ei~e~n.;b€~~~I
D. Area D. Glen Lyon Commercial Site
Required setbacks shall be as indicated on the approved devetopment plans.
18.46.140 Height
A. For the purposes of SDD No. 4 calculations of height, height shall mean the
distance measured vertically from the existing grade or finished grade (whichever is more
restrictive), at any given point to the top of a flat roof, or mansard roof, or to the highest
ridge line of a sloping roof unless otherwise specified in approved development plan
drawings.
B. Area A, Cascade Village
1. The maximum height for the Westin Hotel, CMC Learning Center, Terrace
_ Wing, Plaza Conference Building and Cascade Parking Structure/Athletic Club is
- 71 feet. ~
2. Cornerstone Building: Maximum height of 71 feet.
3. Waterford Building: Maximum height of feet as measured from finished
grade to any portion of the roof along the north elevation shall be 55' (South
Frontage Road), 56' along the west elevation Westhaven Drive, and 65 feet along
the south and east elevation as measured from finished grade.
4. Westhaven Building: A maximum of 55 feet.
5. Millrace III: A maximum of 36 feet.
6. Millrace IV: A maximum of 36 feet.
7. Cascade Club Addition: A maximum of 26 feet.
8. Cascade Entry Tower: A maximum of 36 feet.
9. The remainder of buildings in Area A shall have a maximum height of 48
feet.
C. Area B. Coldstream Condominiums
The maximum height shall be 48 feet.
D. Area C. Glen LYon Prit~a:: f~~r~ci':"":'<:~fl,#::i:'::: 'le:=F~~i~:; Lots
~ ~ . : . ~ _ . Y
The maximum height shall be 33 feet for a sloping roof and 30 feet for a flat or
mansard roof.
E. Area D. Glen Lyon Commercial Site
51 % of the roof shall have a height between 32 and 40 feet. 49% of the roof area
shall have a height under 32 feet. On the perimeter of the building for Area D, height is
measured from finished grade up to any point of the roof. On the interior area of any
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 14
.
building, height is measured from existing grade up to the highest point of the roof.
Development plan drawings shall constitute the height allowances for Area D.
18.46.160. Site Coverage
Areas A& B: No more than 35% of the total site area shall be covered by buildings,
provided, if any portion of the area is developed as an institutional or
educational center, 45% of the area may be covered unless otherwise
indicated on the site specific development plans.
Area C: No more than 25% of the total site area shall be covered by buildings, unless the more restrictive standards of Chapter 18.69 of the Vail Municipal Code apply.
Area D: No more than 37% of the total site area shall be covered by buildings and
the parking structure.
18.46.170 Landscaping
At least the following percentages of the total development area shall be landscaped as
provided in the development plan. This shall include retention of natural landscape, if
appropriate. Areas A and B, fifty percent, and in Areas C and D, sixty percent, of the area
shall be landscaped unless otherwise indicated on the site specific development plans.
18.46.180 Parking and Loading
A. Area A, Cascade Village
' 1. Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 18.52,
except that 75% of the required parking in Area A shall be located within a parking
structure or buildings with the exception of Millrace IV, Scenario I, where 66.6% of
required parking shall be enclosed in a building. If the development table in
Section 18.46.103 is amended, the parking'requirements shall be amended
accordingly. - 2. There shall be a total of 421- spaces in the main Cascade Club parking
structure. A 17.5 percent mixed-use credit per the Town of Vail parking code,
Section 18.52.20 has been applied to the total number of required parking spaces
in the Cascade structure.
. 3. There shall be a total of 58 on-site parking spaces on the Waterford
building site with a minimum of 75% of the required space located below grade.
No mixed use credit shall be applied to this site.
4. There shall be a minimum of 93 enclosed parking spaces located within
the Cornerstone building with 37 of the required spaces available to the public for
short-term parking. No mixed use credit has been applied to this lot.
5. The"third floor of the Cascade parking structure shall not be used to meet
any parking requirements for accommodation units, transient residential dwelling
units, employee dwelling units or dwelling units.
6. Phasing: All required parking for Cornerstone and Waterford shall be
located on their respective sites. All required parking for the Cascade Club
Wellness Center Addition Scenario 1 shall be provided in the Cascade parking
structure.
7. Seventy-five percent of the required parking shall be located within the
main building or buildings and hidden from public view from adjoining properties
within a landscaped berm for Westhaven Condominiums, and Millrace III.
8. All loading and delivery shall be located within buildings or as approved in
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 15
the development plan.
B. Area B. Coldstream Condominiums
Fifty percent of the required parking shall be located within the main building or
buildings and hidden from public view from adjoining properties within a
landscaped berm.
C. Area C Glen L Pi*~i''':':arid>5i t~Fai~'i Lots
, Yon .
. Off-street parking shall be provided in accor.dance with Chapter 18.52.
D. Area D, Glen Lyon Commercial Site .7. Once the parking structure is constructed, the parking and access to Area
D shall be managed per the TDA Parking Report, Parking Management Section,
pages 6 and 7, August 10, 1988, and TDA Report, Vail Brewery Parking Analysis
Update, dated January 16, 1990,. both written by Mr. David Leahy.
8. No loading or delivery of goods shall be allowed on the public right-of-way
along the South Frontage Road adjacent to the Area D development.
9. The owner of the property and brewery management shall prohibit
semi-truck and trailer truck traffic to the Glen Lyon Commercial site. The only
truck loading that shall be allowed to the site shall be vans having a maximum
length of 22 feet.
18.46.190 Recreation Amenities Tax Assessed
The recreational amenities tax due for the development within SDD No. 4 under Chapter
3.20 shall be assessed at a rate not to exceed twenty-five cents per square foot of the
floor area in Development Area A; and at a rate not to exceed fifty cents per square foot
of GRFA in Development Area B; and at a rate not to exceed fifteen cents per square foot
of GRFA in Development Area C; and at a rate not to exceed seventy-five cents per
square foot of floor area in Development Area D; and shall be paid in conjunction with
each construction phase prior to the issuance of building permits.
18.46.200 Conservafion and Pollution Controls
A. The developer's drainage plan shall include a provision for prevention of pollution
from surface runoff.
B. The developer shall include in the building construction, energy and water .
conservation controls as general technology exists at the time of construction.
C. The number of fireplaces permitted shall be as set forth in Section 8.28 of the
Town of Vail Municipal as amended.
D. If fireplaces are provided within the development, they must be heat efficient
through the use of glass enclosures and heat circulating devices as technology exists at
the time of development.
E. All water features within Development Area A shall have overflow storm drains per
the recommendation of the Environmental Impact Report by Jamar Associates on Page
34.
F. All parking structures shall have pollution control devices to prevent oil and dirt
from draining into Gore Creek. .
G. In Area D, a manhole on the brewery service line shall be provided so that the
Upper Eagle Valley Consolidated Sanitation District may monitor BOD strength.
H. In Area D, the brewery management shall not operate the brewery process during
:mperature inversions. It shall be the brewery owner's responsibility to monitor
fnversions.
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 16
I
I. All trash compactors and trash storage areas shall be completely enclosed within
Special Development District 4.
J. Protective measures shall be used during construction to prevent soil erosion into
Gore Creek, particularly when construction occurs in Areas A and D.
K. The two employee dwelling units in Area D shall only be allowed to have gas
fireplaces that meet the Town of Vail ordinances governing fireplaces.
. 18.46.210 Additional Amenities and Approval Agreements for Special Development
, District No. 4. • - .
. A. The developer shall provide or work with the Town to provide adequate private
transportation services to the owners and guests so as to transport them from the
development to the Village Core area and Lionshead area as outlined in the approved
development plan.
B. Developer shall provide in its approved development plan a bus shelter of a
design and location mutually agreeable to developer and Town Council. Said shelter to
serve the area generally.
C. Area A, Cascade Village
1. The developer shall be responsible for providing a break-away botlard for
the emergency access road between Eagle Pointe/Park Meadows, 1472
Matterhorn Circle, and Westhaven Drive. The design of the bollard shall he
mutually acceptable to the developer and Town of Vail. This improvement shall
be constructed when a building permit is requested for the Cornerstone, Millrace
III, Millrace IV, Westhaven Condominiums, Waterford buildings, or Cascade Club
- addition. The bollard shall be included in the permit plans. The bollard shall be
constructed subsequent_to the issuance of a building permit and prior to the
issuance-of a temporary certificate of occupancy for the Cornerstone, Millrace III,
Millrace IV, Westhaven Condominiums, Waterford buitdings, or Cascade Club
addition.
2. The developer shall construct a sidewalk that begins at the entrance to the
Cascade Club along Westhaven Drive and extends to the west in front of the
Westhaven building to connect with the recreational path to Donovan Park. The
walk shall be constructed when a building permit is requested for Westhaven
Condominiums. The sidewalk shall be part of the building permit plans. The .
sidewalk shall be constructed subsequent to the issuance of a building permit and
prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy for Westhaven
Condominiums.
3. The developer shall provide 100-year floodplain information for the area
adjacent to the Waterford and Cornerstone buildings to the Town of Vail
Community Development Department before building permits are released for
either project.
4. The conditions for Area A in Sections 18.46.020 B, 18.46.180 A. 1-7,
18.46.200 A- F, I, J, 18.46.210 ,C, 1-3, and 18.46.220 shall be set forth in
restrictive covenants subject to the approval of the Town Attorney and once so
approved shall be recorded on the land records of Eagle County. The developer
shall be responsible for submitting the written conditions to the Town Attorney for
approval before a building permit is requested for the Cornerstone, or Millrace III,
or Millrace IV, Westhaven Condominiums, or Waterford buildings, or Cascade
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 17
.
Ciub Addition.
5. Westhaven Drive
The Town acknowledges that it has been paid the sum of $97,500.00 from
other sources to be used by the Town for the repair and reconstruction of
Westhaven Drive. The Town further acknowledges that the title of Westhaven
Drive has been transferred to the Town. The date for tFie commencement of the
repair and reconstruction of the right-of-way improvements shall be entirely at the -
discretion of the Town. Should the Town not require the entire amount of the -
$97,500.00 for the repair and the reconstruction of Westhaven Drive, the Town
will forward any amount remaining after all construction related costs have been
paid in full to the parties originally contributing the $97,500.00 who shall refund
such amount pro-rata to the parties originally contributing the $97,500.00.
6. Millrace IV, Scenario I.
a. The developer shall obtain an easement from the owners of the property
adjacent to the eastern boundary of the property commonly called the Cosgriff
Parcel, which is more specifically defined in Exhibit A, attached to this ordinance
and incorporated herein by reference. The easements shall be sufficient to permit
the construction, maintenance and replacement of retaining walls for the purposes
of grading and boulder retention all along the western property line of said
adjacent property. The easement shall be in a form acceptable to the Town
Attorney, shall run with the land, and shall be recorded on the land records of
Eagle County prior to Design Review Board review.
b. The developer shall provide the Community Development Department of
the Town with written consent_from the Upper Eagle Valley'Water and Sanitation
District permitting the encroachment of certain decks specified in the development
plan for the Millrace IV condominiums, as set forth in Section 18.46.140(18) of this
ordinance into their sewer easement recorded in Book 217, Page 428 of the land
records of Eagle County. This consent shall be submitted prior to Design Review
Board review.
c. The developer shall receive final approval of the site grading plan for the
construction of Millrace IV, Scenario I, from the Town Engineer prior to Design
Review Board review.
d. The Millrace Condominium Map, recorded at Book 326, page 257, of the
land records of Eagle County shall be amended so that the access easement
shown thereon shall align with the present location of the roadway on the western
properry line of the Cosgriff Parcel, and the amendment shall be recorded on the
land records of Eagle County.
e. The developer shall install 15 (6'-10') evergreens south of the South
Frontage Road adjacent to the Cascade Club building, and 5(6'-10') evergreens
to the south of the Westhaven Apartment foundations and north of Westhaven
Drive. The developer shall obtain the written approval of the Colorado
Department of Highways (CDOH) permitting the installation of these trees along
the South Frontage Road prior to said installation. If CDOH approval cannot be
obtained, then a minimum of 10 (6'-10') evergreens shall be installed adjacent to
~ the Westhaven Apartments.
f. The developer shall apply for and complete the minor subdivision process
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 18
for the Cosgriff Parcel and a subdivision plat signed by the Town of Vail shall be
recorded on the tand records of Eagle County prior to the release of any building
permits for the construction of any structure on the Cosgriff Parcel. .
g. Landscaping along the south and west property lines of the Cosgriff Parcel
shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board to insure a suitable buffer area
_ between it and the other properties along said property lines. -
. h. The Design Review Board shall review the architecture and landscape plan further for compatibility with the surrounding area.
i. The developer and the adjacent property owners shall submit a landscape
plan for the area north of the Cosgriff property to the Design Review Board for
review.
j. For purposes of calculating Gross Residentiat Floor Area permitted on the
Cosgriff Parcel, no credits of any kind (overlapping stairs, mechanical, etc.),
except for 300 sq. ft. to be allowed for each enclosed parking space, shall be
given.
7. Cornerstone
a. Before the building permit is released for the project, the developer shall
permanently restrict three employee housing units in accordance with Section
18.46.220 of this ordinance.
b. The landscape plan set forth in the development plan for Cornerstone between
the Terrace Wing and Cornerstone building shall be revised prior to the review of
the project by the DRB in the following ways:
1. For emergency services, an access lane shall be provided from the
western Courtyard to the sKi lift.
2. If deemed necessary by the developer and the Community _
Development Department staff, the water feature on the landscape plan may be
removed or revised. The landscaping in this area shall be part of the Cornerstone
development, and, therefore, it is the Cornerstone developer's responsibility to
complete this portion of the project prior to the release of a final Certificate of
Occupancy for the project. These plans shall be included in the building permit for
the Cornerstone development.
c. After the Town of Vail has title to Westhaven Drive, it shall convey title to the
developer for the area of Westhaven Drive under which parking is located for the
Cornerstone project. The amended minor subdivision plat shall be submitted by
the developer before a building permit is released for the Cornerstone site. The
developer shall dedicate an access easement to the Town over this portion of
Westhaven Drive.
d. All fireplaces shall be gas appliances pursuant to Section 8.28 of the Vail
Municipal Code.
e. Those spaces allocated to commercial areas as short term public parking shall
be permanently restricted for the use of the Cornerstone project. All required
parking associated with the uses shall not be conveyed, used or leased separately
from the uses. Public parking on the Westhaven Drive level of the Cornerstone
project shall be made available to the public for short term parking.
8. Waterford
a. The developer shall permanently restrict the two employee housing units
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 19
provided in the Waterford Development Plan in accordance with Section
18.46.220 of this ordinance.
b. A minor subdivision plat shall be completed and recorded prior to the
release of any building permits for either the Cornerstone or Waterford .
developments. `
c. The recreation path shall be relocated as set forth on the development
. plan and shall be amended on the minor subdivision plat for. the Waterford and
` Cornerstone lots to correspand to the new location. .
d. The DRB will review the landscaping in the areas of the retaining walls on
the west and east ends of the site. The DRB will review the north elevations
architectural details. The applicant shall review the possibility of etiminating the
skier access on the east end of the project. However, if the applicant can
significantly decrease the retaining walls necessary to build the access, the skier
access may remain.
e. All fireplaces shall be gas logs permitted pursuant to Section 8.28 of the
Vail Municipal Code.
9. The Ruins / Westhaven Condominiums
a. All construction shall conform to the development presented to the Planning and
Environmental Commission on February 27, 1995, and to the drawings identified
in Section 18.46.140 (development plans) numbered 45-51.
b. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall sign Type III EHU
Deed restrictions for the 17 employee housing units. The deed restrictions shall
be modified to allow floor area requirements to be less than 450 sq. ft. In addition
to the restrictions included in the Type III EHU deed restriction, the applicant
agrees, to future restrictions that the Town will adopt that pertain to deed restricted
employee housing, including, but not limited to, a three percent cap on resale
price, requirements that employee housing units have a reduced homeowners
association fee relative to free market units; and requirements pertaining to resale
procedures .
c. Prior to issuance of the building permit, civil engineering plans for road
improvements must be reviewed and approved by the Town of Vail Engineer.
Road improvements shall include curb and gutter from the eastern edge of the
bike path to the western edge of the curb cut servicing this property.
d. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall dedicate an
easement for the bike path that crosses this property.
e. Prior to an issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy (TCO) the applicant
shall regrade and revegetate the berm adjacent to this site, in the Colorado
Department of Transportation (CDOT) right-of-way, so that its northern slope does
not exceed 2:1. Prior to the issuance of a TCO, the applicant shall remove the
two utility poles in the CDOT right-of-way and shall bury the utility line to the third
utility pole west of this property.,
f. Prior to the issuance of a TCO, a sidewalk shall be constructed that begins at the
entrance to the Cascade Club along Westhaven Drive and extends to the west in
front of the Westhaven Building to connect with the recreational path to Donovan
Park
g. The entire building, including the garage, must be sprinkled.
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 20
~
D. Area D, Glen Lyon Commercial Site.
1. The developer shall agree to construct a bus lane per Town of Vail
standards in the area of the porte-cochere of the Micro-brewery in Area D. The
specific location for the bus lane shall be mutually agreed to by the Area D owner
and/or developer, Colorado Division of Highways, and Town of Vail. The bus
lane shall be constructed subsequent to the issuance of a building permit and
prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy for either the brewery
addition office expansion. excluding Phase IA, east office building, or parking - - structure. The developer and/or owners of area D shall be responsible for maintaining the new bus lane, including snow removal. If the lane is not
maintained properly or snow removal is not adequate, the Town will not provide
bus service to the site.
2.. The developer shall relocate the existing bike path on Area D and provide
a new bike path easement across the Glen Lyon property and CDOH properry per
the development plan for Area D. The bike path shall be constructed per Town of
Vail. standards. The bike path shall be constructed subsequent to the issuance of
a building permit and prior to the issuance of a ternporary certificate of occupancy
for either the brewery addition, office expansion excluding Phase IA, east office
building, or parking structure. Such temporary certificate of occupancies shall be
conditional upon construction of the bike path provided for herein. The bike path
easement shall be replatted and approval obtained from the Town Council prior to
the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy for either the Brewery
addition, office expansion excluding Phase IA, east office building or parking
structure. 3. The developer shall underground the electrical utilities along the north side
of the Glen Lyon property from the northwest corner of the property to the
northeast corner of the property. This utility work shall be constructed subsequent
to the issuance of a building permit and prior to the issuance of a temporary
certificate of occupancy for either the Brewery addition, office expansion.
excluding Phase IA east office building or parking structure.
4. The developer shall be responsible for relocating the 20 foot utility
easement on the western portion of Development Area D as well as obtaining
approval fram the Town of Vail for the relocated utility easement before a building
permit is released for the micro-brewery addition.
5. The developer of the Glen Lyon Office property shall not file any
remonstrance or protest against the formation of a local improvement district of
other financing mechanism approved by the Vail Town Council which may be
established for the purpose of building road improvements for the South Frontage
Road.
6. The developer shall provide a fire hydrant per Town of Vai! Fire
Department requirements on the northwest portion of the property. The specific
location for the fire hydrant shall be approved by the Vail Fire Department. The
fire hydrant shall be provided subsequent to the issuance of a building permit and
prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy for the brewery
addition, office expansion, excluding Phase IA, east office building, or parking
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 21
. ~
structure.
7. The Developer shall construct a deceleration lane along South Frontage
Road per the CDOH access permit. The developer shall submit plans for the
South Frontage Road improvements to the Town of Vail Engineer for review and
approval before a submittal building permit is released for either Phase I excluding
Phase IA, II, or III construction.
8. The conditions for Area D in Sections 18.46.180 D, 18.46.200 A, B, F- K, ,
18.46.210 D, 1-7, and 18.46.220 shall be set forth in restrictive covenants subject to the approval of the Town Attorney and once so approved shall be recorded on
the land records of Eagle County. The developer shall be responsible for
submitting the written conditions to the Town Attorney for approval before a
building permit shall be issued for the Micro-brewery, office expansion excluding
Phase IA, east office building, or parking structure.
9. The minor subdivision for Area D shall be developed per the following
conditions:
a. The development of parcels A, B, C, and D, shall be limited to the
SDD No. 4 development plan and governed by the SDD No. 4 ordinance
as approved by the Town of Vail and on file with the Department of
Community Development or as amended and approved by the Community
Development Department, Planning and Environmental Commission,
and/or the Vail Town Council.
b. The minor subdivision plat shall include a statement that
development of the four parcels shall be governed by the approved SDD 4
" development plan for area D and governing ordinances.
c. The Community Development Department and Town of Vail
Attorney shall have the right to review and require changes in any
"Agreements of Tenants in Common", "Conveyance of Easement and
Party wall Agreements", and any other easement or ownership
agreements related to the development of parcels A, B, C, and D to
ensure that the four parcels are developed per the approved development
plan in SDD No. 4 Ordinance.
d. The developer shall be responsible for replatting the 20 foot utility
easement on the western portion of development Area D as well as
obtaining approval from the Town of Vail for the new utility easement
before the minor subdivision plat is recorded. Any modifications or
amendments to the minor subdivision conditions of approval agreement
shall be reviewed as a major amendment under the procedures outlined in
Section 18.40 of the Town of Vail Zoning Code.
e. The conditions for the minor subdivision in Section 18.46.210 (D9)
A, B, C, and E, shall be set forth in restrictive covenants subject'fo the approval of the Town Attorney and once so approved shall be recorded on
the land records of Eagle County. The developer shall be responsible for
submitting the written conditions to the Town Attorney before the minor
subdivision is recorded on the land records of Eagle County.
9. The entire Glen Lyon Office Building and Brewery Building shall be
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 22
.
sprinklered and have a fire alarm detection system. Town of Vail Fire Department
approval of the sprinkler and fire alarm systems shall be required before a building
permit is released. for Phase I excluding Phase IA or II.
10. The developer shall submit a set of amended plans to the Colorado
Division of Highways for review and approval. The improvements on CHOT
property proposed by the developer must receive CDOH approval before Phase t,
excluding IA, II, and III are presented to the Town of Vail Design Review Board for
. final approval.
12. The east building including the two employee dwelling units shall be
constructed when the parking structure is built to ensure that the employee
units are built.
18.46.220 Emp/oyee Housing
The development of SDD No. 4 will have impacts on available employee housing within
the Upper Eagle Valley area. In order to help meet this additional employee housing
need, the developer(s) of Areas A and D shall provide employee housing on site. The
developer(s) of Area A shall build a minimum of 17 employee dwelling units within Area A
Westhaven Condominium building, 3 within the Cornerstone Building and 2 within the
Waterford Building. Each employee dwelling unit in the Westhaven Condominium
Building shall be deed restricted as a Type III EHU. Each employee unit in the
Cornerstone Building shall have a minimum square footage of 600 square feet. There
shall be a total of 2 employee dwelling units in the Waterford Building. One shall be a
minimum of 300 square feet and the other a minimum of 800 square feet.
_ The developer of Area D shall build 2 employee dwelling units in the Area D east building
per the approved plan for the East Building. In Area D one employee dwelling unit shall
have a minimum GRFA of 795 square feet and the second employee dwelling unit shall
have a minimum GRFA of 900 square feet. The GRFA and number of employee units
shall not be counted toward allowable density or GRFA for SDD No. 4. All Employee
Housing Units shall be deed restricted per Section 18.57, as amended, of the Vail
Municipal Code prior to issuance of building permits for the respective project.
18.46.230 Time Requirements
SDD No. 4 shall be governed by the procedures outlined in Section 18.40.120 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code.
Section 5.
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.
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 23
I
Section 6.
The repeal or the repeal and re-enactment of any provisions 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.
Section 7.
All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof,
inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. The repealer
shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof,
heretofore repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 4th day of November, 1997, and a public
hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 18th day of November, 1997, in the
Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
- - Robert W. Armour, Mayor
Attest:
Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED IN FULL
this 18th day of November, 1997.
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk
Ordinance 21, Series of 1997 24
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: November 11, 1996
SUBJECT: A request for a major amendment to SDD #4 (Cascade Village), to allow -
modifications to allowable GRFA and building height limitations, located at 1150
, Westhaven Lane/Lots 39-1 & 39-2, Glen Lyon Subdivision. -
Applicant: Timothy Pennington, represented by Diane Larsen
Planner: Dominic Mauriello
1. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The applicant is requesting a major amendment to SDD #4 (Cascade Village, Development Area
C) to Lots 39-1 and 39-2 (single-family residential lots) located in the Glen Lyon Subdivision. The
applicant is requesting the following:
1. That the lots be subject to the Primary/Secondary Residential zone district
calculation for Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA)(Section 18.13.080 of the
Zoning Code) which is consistent with all of the other residential lots in the Glen
Lyon Subdivision. Currently, each lot is limited to 3,100 sq. ft. of GRFA per
Resolution No. 10, Series of 1982. Under the proposed calculation, Lot 39-1
• would be entitled to 6,446.65 sq. ft. of GRFA and Lot 39-2 would be entitled to
. 6,834.34 sq. ft. of GRFA.
2. That the lots be subject to the height limitations of the Primary/Secondary
. Residential zone district (Section 18.13.075 of the Zoning Code) which is
consistent with all of the other residential lots in the Glen Lyon Subdivision.
. Cu'rrently, the building height for these lots is restricted to 25' per. Resolution No. 10, Series of 1982. llnder this proposal, building heights would be restricted to
- 30' for flat roof structures and 33' for sloping roof structures.
3. That each lot be entitled to a Type II EHU (which requires conditional use
approval). All other lots have been allowed to go through the Conditional Use
review process for the establishment of Type II EHU's in this subdivision. The
current ordinance is silent on the EHU issue and is proposed to be amended to
clarify this issue. The actual number of EHU's allowed will also be limited based
on the access to the site. The skier bridge was approved at a width that will only
allow three dwelling units including EHU's on these two sites.
The applicant is proposing building envelopes on the property which will prevent the removal of
any existing trees and prevents development on slopes greater than 30% (see attached survey).
The envelopes are more restrictive than the typical setbacks for a Primary' /Secondary Residential
zoned lot.
1
- / ~
~
Please note that the applicanYs original request proposed to calculate the GRFA for these two
lots according to the Single-Family Residential (SFR) zone district but has amended their
application at the request of staff. The SFR calculation results in GRFA for Lot 39-1 of 6,843.3
sq. ft. and Lot 39-2 of 7,618.7 sq. ft. Please see applicanYs statements attached. .
II. BACKGROUND
The Glen Lyon Subdivision, when originally planned in 1978, under SDD #4, contained a .
provision that "no residential lot shall contain more than 4,200 square feet of GRFA." This
provision was also included in the restrictive covenants for this subdivision, which the Town is a
party to. At that time, Lots 39-1 and 39-2 were one large duplex lot, Lot 39 (2.4853 acres).
On February 16, 1982, Resolution No. 10, Series of 1982, was adopted allowing an amendment
to SDD #4 to allow Lot 39 to be divided into Lots 39-1 (1.043 acres) and 39-2 (1.221 acres). The
lots were restricted as single-family residential lots, therefore not increasing the overall density of
the development. The proposal resulted in 0.2213 acres being dedicated to the Town as part of
the stream tract. The resolution restricted each lot to a maximum of 3,100 sq. ft. of GRFA and
25' in building height. 'See attached Resolution No. 10, Series of 1982 and the staff
memorandum dated February 1, 1982.
On July 3, 1990, SDD #4 was amended by Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1990, which removed the
4,200 sq. ft. of GRFA restriction for all "duplex" lots within the Glen Lyon Subdivision. The
amendment allowed the tots to be calculated under the Primary/Secondary Residential zone
district for GRFA. Lots 39-1 and 39-2 were specifically not amended by this change as these lots
were single-family residential lots (see Ordinance No. 20, Series of 1990 and the staff
memorandum dated June 11, 1990).
In July of this year, a minor amendment to this SDD was approved allowing the development of a
driveway and bridge to access the site via an easement across Lots 40 and 41. The bridge
provides access for skiers to travel beneath the driveway. The applicant worked closely with the
owners of Lot 40 in order to develop a plan that was acceptable to all parties impacted by the
development.
2
III. ZONING ANALYSIS
Listed below is the zoning analysis for Lot 39-1 and Lot 39-2. In addition, an analysis of Lot 40.
and Lot 41, which are located nearest the site, have been included for comparison.
Zoning: SDD, #4 (with no underlying zoning)
Standard Existing Standard Proposed Standard
Lot 39-1 Lot size: 45,433.08 sq. ft. n/a • -
' Allowable GRFA: 3,100 sq. ft. 6,446.65 sq. ft. (includes 425 sq. ft. credit)
. Allowable Building Height: 25' 30' fIaU33' sloping
Allowable Garage Credit: 600 sq. ft. 600 sq. ft.
Allowable dwelling units: 1 du 1 du + 1 Type II EHU
Lot 39-2
Lot size: 53,186.76 sq. ft. n/a
Allowable GRFA: 3,100 sq. ft. 6,834.34 sq. ft. (includes 425 sq. ft. credit)
Allowable Building Height: 25' 30' fIaU33' sloping
Allowable Garage Credit: 600 sq. ft. 600 sq. ft.
Allowable dwelling units: 1 1 du + 1 Type II EHU
For comparison: Current Standard
Lot 40
Lot size: 37,392.6 sq. ft.
Allowable GRFA: 6,469.63 sq. ft.`
Allowable Building Height: 30' fIaU33' sloping
Allowable Garage Credit: 1,200 sq. ft.
Allowable dwelling units: 2
Lot 41
Lot size: 45,713 sq. ft.
Allowable GRFA: 6,885.65 sq. ft.'
Allowable Building Height: 30' fIaV33' sloping
Allowable Garage Credit: 1,200 sq. ft.
Allowable dwelling units: 2
Note: Lois 40.and 41 include'an additional 425 sq. fl. of GRFA for the second dwelling unit and are allowed an additional 600 sq: ft.
- for lhe sewnd dwelling unit.
IV. CRITERIA TO BE USED IN EVALUATING THIS PROPOSAL
As stated in the zoning code, the purpose of the special development district is to:
encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land in order to
promote its most appropriate use; to improve the design character and quality of
new development within the town; to facilitate the adequate and economical
provision of streets and utilities; to preserve the natural and scenic features of
open space areas; and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in
the Vail Comprehensive Plan. An approved development plan for a special -
development district, in conjunction with a property's underlying zone district, shall
establish the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included
in the special development district."
3
, At.
The following are the nine special development district criteria to be utilized by the Planning and
Environmental Commission when evaluating SDD amendment proposals:
A. Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment,
neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale,
bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and
orientation.
, No specific building or design is being requested by this amendment. Any proposed
development will be reviewed in accordance with the SDD #4 ordinance and the Town's
Design Guidelines. With this requested amendment, development Qn these lots will be .
. consistent with development allowances on neighboring lots and with this subdivision as .
a whole. While homes on these lots will be. quite large, impacts to the site and
neighboring properties will only be minimally impacted. Single-family structures will be
oriented within building envelopes on the properties and will be generally low on the site.
There is adequate room for buffering development on these lots from neighboring lots.
This property is mostly adjacent to Forest Senrice property and is only marginally adjacent
to neighboring duptex lots.
The applicant is providing building envelopes which protect all existing trees and prevents
development on slopes greater than 30%.
Staff believes the proposed modifications to the development standards will provide equal
treatment to similarly situated residential lots and will not negatively effect the surrounding
properties or the environment.
B. Uses, activity and density which provide a compatibte, efficient and workable
relationship with surrounding uses and activity.
The proposal does not change the approved uses for the property. These lots will
continue to support development of single-family homes. The potential intensity of
development will be similar to that of adjoining lots. Staff believes that the proposal is
compatible with adjacent development and provides for an efficient and workable
relationship with surrounding uses.
C._ Compliance with the parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 18.52.
The applicant is not proposing to change the parking requirements as they relate to these
lots. Development on these lots will continue to be required 3 parking spaces, assuming
development of structures of greater than 2,000 sq. ft. in size.
D. Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town
policies and Urban Design Plans.
1. This area has been platted and zoned under SDD #4 for residential
development. The proposed changes do not change the use of the
property. The Town of Vail Open Lands Plan, adopted by the Town,
identifies these lots as private development sites. The use prescribed by
zoning for these lots is consistent with the Open Lands Plan.
. 4
2. The following are the applicable Land Use Plan goals and policies which
relate to this prop.osal:
Goal 1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled .
. environment, maintaining a balance between .
residential, commercial and recreational uses to
serve both the visitor and permanent resident.
- Goal 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional
growth in existing developed areas (in-fill areas).
Goal 5.1 Additional residential growth should continue to
occur primarily in existing, platted areas and as
appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not
exist.
Goal 5.4 Residential growth should keep pace with the
market place demands for a full range of housing
types.
The staff believes that the proposed amendment to the approved development
plan is in compliance with the Town's Land Use Plan.
E. Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the
property on which the special development district is proposed.
The property is not located in an area of natural or geologic hazard.
F. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed
to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural
features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community.
The proposed application allows the same type of development currently allowed on the
. site. The applicant has proposed building envelopes which respect existing trees, steep
slopes, and-setbacks. The property, when divided into two lots in 1982, included the
provision of land dedication for open space and stream tract. Any development proposals for the property will be reviewed by the Design Review Board and will be subject to the
Town's Design Review Guidelines. Staff believes the proposal is sensitive to
environmental features of the site to a greater extent than exists under the current
allowances.
G. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing
on and off-site traffic circulation.
The applicant is not proposing to change or affect this criterion with this proposal.
5
H. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize
and preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions.
The applicant has proposed building envelopes which respect existing trees, steep
slopes, and setbacks. The property, when divided into two lots in 1982, included the
provision of.land dedication for open space and stream tract. Any development proposals
for the property will be reviewed by the Design Review Board and will be subject to the
design review guidelines. The building envelopes provide adequate buffer area on the
site. Staff believe.s the proposal is sensitive to environmental features of the site to a
greater extent than exists under the current allowances. I. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and
efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development
district.
This criterion is not applicable to this development.
V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends that the PEC recommend approval of
the applicant's request to the Town Council for a.major amendment to Special Development
District No. 4, subject to the following finding:
1. That the proposed amendments to Lots 39-1 and 39-2, Glen Lyon Subdivision,
within SDD #4 are consistent with the nine development criteria contained herein
and are consistent with the development standards allowed on the other
residential lots within this SDD.
The recommendation of approval is also subject to the following conditions:
1. That the following language be placed on the development plan and included in
the .ordinance for these lots:
All future development will be restricted to the area within the building
envelopes. The only development permitted outside the building
envelopes shall be landscaping, driveways (access bridge) and retaining
walls associated with driveway construction. At-grade patios (those within
5' of existing or finished grade) will be permitted to project beyond the
buitding envelopes not more than ten feet (10') nor more than one-half (1/2)
the distance between the building envelope and the property line, or may
project not more than five feet (5) nor more than one-fourth (1/4) the
minimum required dimension between buildings.
F:\EVERYONE\PECUIIEMOS\97\PENNING.027 6
i
59,
"W J 2~1. ~9 2B
G R t _ . •
_S 62'07'0154
96' TRACT K
SMADING INDICATES / ~ 8~ ~ ` 562,5i8
T SQ p,
RAC7 PREVIW$LY
COHVEYED TO • 8.3223 AC,
' TOWN OF VAII.'OODO
~ 39
y • r~r Ioe,f,e s~~. / i
•~,°aOOUNlIty • ~emsnt 2483J nG
5 71°37' Si"p S~ LwwrN 0 1 1 / i~•
54.20' gry =O ~ ~ ne.oo'
_ 866.90' d%
Nes'~S 37"E
138.93' N 88•43'57~E 1,384.90'
51p°15* 11`W 0• I NE CORNER SWt NE} M
94.3:' ~ SU R VE YO
. ~ . Accns ond Ufillly Eo~~m~n
S1e°18'75"w I ' I, KI:4~CTI1 L. GLk:NY. DO III;RCti1' CI:k7'
S4.Od 1 ' I,ll'f:NSCD UNDfR TIIE LAWS OF TIIC STA7'I
QA ~z CUNRI:C'P AND COMPLET6 PLAT OF TI16 (~1.1
B.L.M. UCDICATGD AND SIIOWN IIF.REOY, TIIAT tiW
h UF' SAID PROPERTY DY MC ANp UNDIiR M1'
o g40 _APPROVAL OF PLAT LCiCATION AND bIMENSIUNS OF' TIIE LOTS, _
e. ~7,J926 Sp.h. ~ UIVIUIUN, AS TIIE ::AMt AR[: STAKI:D U{'(
A e5e4Ac. MANSFIELD CORPORATION AS BENEFICIARY OF A DE[:D OF OP' VAIL RI:CULATIONS CoVI:RNING TIII: Si
o Ix !Q TRUST RECORDED IN BOOK •'LYO AT PAGE 299 ,
I~ ~r BY ITS SIGNATURE BELOW, APPROVES AND CONSENTS TO IN WI'fNESS WIIEREUF I IIAVE SET M1' IIA'.
rN 9°4 !'il~w ~ • THE CLEN LYON SUBDIVISION AND TfiIS PI.AT. J"y,vG ,A.U., 1970i
n 2 r 'ISl 31 -
S04'52'37'W EXECUTED TI{lg DAY 0F- ,A.D.,
284.06' o /I i 19 7i_.
" ll ' •
BY~ ~ q 04
d
~ Ir- e R.M. RWALTE A. KOE BE , p~ ~
n• oo;~ 41 ASSISTANT_ SECRETARY PRESIDENT APPROVAL 8Y rl
4s,7~3 sa ar.
v i o n`~' 1.04 94 AC, (/A{- • TlIIS PL APPROVED BY T11E TONN F VP
~ N` 7W DAY OF ,A.D.. 197 ~
~ •~WI ' ~ GORE CREEK ASSOCIATES AS BENEFICIARY OF A DEED OF
IP/A" TAUST RECORDED IN BOOK *71 AT PAGEd/1Jc BY ITS T(%JN O
w~ SIGNATURE BELOW, AppgpVES AND CONSENTS TO THE CL
Neg*43'11"W tpo I LYON SUBDIVISION AND THI3 PLAT. EXECUTED TH29 9. ~
. I 90.00 ~ 103.0E ; DAY OF 't~'''
'
~ ~t[~ A , 19
~~.~~c--. . B
~ FREDEKICK S. 6TT0 ~
/ 43 ± p•' 42 o ~ AS ATTORNEY IN FACT FOR DATED s
{ t~
t~'b ~ N EASTLINE SW~ N[; GORE CREEK ASSOCIATES
• /0.l7WAC. o ZI~O6SQit.
a .4 fN At ~ STATE OF COLORADO ATTEST:
' ) • ~q--~
COUNTY OF
~ ~l N
v
EAGSE ~ APPROV14L Of PI
WElTMAVEN.CiRtLE THE FOREGOING APPROVAL OF PLAT WA3 ACRNOWLEDGED
1 ! ~ f 46 . BEFORE ME THIS~DAY OF ~/~i~ y ,A.D,, ~ ~I
44 • 19 7? BY WALTER A. KOELBEL A'F ESIDEN OF THE THIS PLAT OF GLEN LYON SUSOIViSfOr I
4 s MANSFIELD CORPORATION; A COIARADO CORPORATIONr AND' OF THE TOWN OP VAIL ANO DEDICATION 0
li + `j' ~,,N,^' 3 s0 FREDF.RICK S. OTTO AS ATTORNEY IN FACT, FOR GORE ~gHOWN HEREON HEREBY ACCEPTED BY TH
• 4e CREEK ASSOCIATES, A RHODE ISLAND LIMITED P11RTNfiRSHIP.
YAith LI . [E aM[[ ~ 0 2 MY COMh1ISSION EXPIRES 5 . TIIE
1
TRACT J WITNESS MY HAND AND 8
• e,oea e*?a / .
.1160 Ao. • ' Ay-
~ MA
. NOTARY FppiB - , • .
.,..e... . . ~ DATEDt_^_
~OwN Of V4tL BOUNOARV .
~TO`NN OF ~A~L STREAM TRACTI
,\P sai a.„/cov 2j2.31 s.l ain/cov ~
, . L 5 16827 p L 5 16827
g80°54'57 W ~ y E seioas'a3.. N
' 96.50 NI~~S ~4 56 Sz. E
, $82°07~57~`?~ TRACT M 14600
o 187 oc.
(LO SO Pin/COD S pp"E . '
P'(~ 0 L.S.76027
. JNQ~ O\ ~29 . N69e 434`6 qq ~
NB3°0049"E 101.41 jp2 ' N
N ~
.0 ~
~
J
TRAC7
e0~y PN~J/ LOT 39-2
~y0 `GEgs ' 1221 oc o .
c°° / \ . lOT 39-1 r
\ 1.043 oc
r
\ W O1/ O
-Nepa 60.61' $ `j Q O
W yyoZ,.~ •N / o
o y I ~SKIWAY EASEMENT Q. ?O' / O
~ o (BOOY 595, Page 935) . N Z
0
Z oo J p~0/ SKIWAT EASEMENT
y ~ (BooM 195, Page 935)
UTIUTY EASEMEN7 (PLATTEO) 5et Pin/CaD
96~-- 1. 4 82.00 621fi i15 84'- ' .L.5.16827
-72.. N88°45'57"E 519.00'
I NE 1/16 Cor. Section 12 O
TSS, RBIW, 61h FM. ~
Sel Pin/Ca0 L.S. 16827
I io UNPLATTED
M
a Thls resubdivlsion aubject Co res[rletlons on [he Development Plen for
I F U.S. FOREST SERVICE [hls property on record vlth the Department oE Communlty Development, ~
Town of Vail, Eagle Coun[y, Coloredo.
I 20' ACCE55 AND UTILITY EASEMENT "
~i BooM 273, Page 611
~
3 BooM 282, Page 883
I p~ 8004 273, Page 981
R Book 405, Page 580
i0
C"
i ' `
~ ~ ~ ~.i• ~U•I~1r.Y
~~o o~ v~~, s'~ ~ro~
, uNQ .~pWN
l ~ ( 1
.
cl~~ --$o§o
0091- ~
;~6~?"
TRAC~f . 00~
Im /
~00'
~
ud
W
e ' I ~ ' j
: ; ~ i-•jI lof ~-1 ~ ' ' ~ /
^ / „ /CY • w. ~..w~
-
. . , -~r ~ - ~ ~
~ ~ LY011
M~N~¦
O LAT N
~ _
,
pmmw~
o m Q ~ ~ ~ ~ / ( \ , ~ 1
'
LARSEN & KOVACEVICH, P.C. Counselors at Law
953 S. Frontage Road West, Suite 105
Vail, Colorado 81657
Diane R. Larsen Tel: (970) 476-8711
Jill E. Kovacevich Fax: (970) 476-8672
• October 22, 1997
. VIA HAND DELIVERY Dominic F. .Mauriello
AICP Town Planner
Town of Vail
75 S. Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Re: Amendment to Application for Amendment to SDD No. 4 on behalf of Hagopian
& Pennington LLC
Dear pominic:
This letter is in response to your letter dated October 17, 1997. As we discussed over
the telephone, you do not believe that staff would support an amendment to SDD#4 that would
allow Lots 39-1 and 39-2 a GRFA calculation based on two dwelling units per lot, because this
would change the density of the SDD. You indicated the amount of allowable GRFA proposed
in your October 17, 1997 letter is the maximum staff could reasonably support.
After discussing the alternatives with Mr. Pennington, he has decided to accept your
proposed changes to his application, in orcler to expedite the approval process by having staff _support of the amendment as it will- be presented to PEC. - .
Enclosed please find two full size surveys of the Lots showing existing trees and
setbacks, and an 8 1/2 x 11 copy of same, as you requested.
My client's agreement to amend the Application as set forth in your letter is conditioned
upon GRFA and building height being calCUlated exactly as set forth therein, and the Building
Envelopes being as depicted in the enclosed survey. As we discussed on the telephone, he
would also. like staff support of a Type II EHU for each of the lots, and he would like you to
specifically provide in the ordinance that the bridge and driveway may be constructed outside
the building envelope and within the setbacks.
LARSEN & KOVACEVICH, P.C.
Dominic F. Mauriello
Town of Vail
October 22, 1997
Page 2
Please call me if you have any questions. Also please let me know the time that we will
be on the agenda for the PEC hearing on October 27, 1997.
Very truly yours,
LARSEN & KOVACEVICH, P.C.
~
CA4
1
Diane R. Larsen
DRL/kes
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Tim Pennington
STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION
FOR APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT
TO SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 4
I.. INTRODUCTION Lots 39-1 and 39-2 (sometimes referred to herein as the "Lots") are Single Family Lots
in Glen Lyon Subdivision that are treated significantly differently than other Single Family Lots .
in the Town with respect to Gross Residential Floor Area ("GRFA") and building height
limitation. Applicant, Hagopian & Pennington LLC, seeks equal treatment with other Town of
Vail Single Family Lots. Applicant is requesting approval of an amendment to SDD No. 4 to
provide that GRFA and building height limitations for Lots 39-1 and 39-2 be calculated pursuant
to the requirements of the Single Family (SFR) Zone District, Sections 18.10.080 and 18.10.090
of the Town of Vail Zoning Code.
II. BACKGROUND OF EXISTING GRFA AND HEIGHT LIMITATIONS
The protective covenants for Glen Lyon Subdivision were recorded in April, 1978. At
that time, Lots 39-1 and 39-2 were combined in a single lot, designated Lot 39. Lot 39
consisted of 2.4853 acres and was the largest residential lot in Glen Lyon. From the inception,
the protective Covenants of Glen Lyon (the "Glen Lyon Covenants") contained the following
restriction: "No residential lot shall conta'in more than 4200 square feet of GRFA. " Andy
Norris, the developer of Glen Lyon Subdivision, explains in a letter to Dominic Mauriello dated
September 9, 1997, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, that when he developed
Glen Lyon Subdivision, "there was considerable looseness in the Town's definition of GRFA. "
He voluntarily restricted each lot to 4200 square feet of GRFA, even though the ordinance
governing SDD No. 4 provided that allowable GRFA on any lot in Glen Lyon was governed by
a formula based on lot size, which would have allowed more GRFA in many cases. SDD No.
_ 4 was thereafter amended to match the more restrictive 4200 square foot GRFA restriction of
the Cilen Lyon Covenants.
In 1982, Mr. Norris applied for an amendment to SDD No. 4 to resubdivide Lot 39 into
two Single Family Lots. Resolution Number 10, Series of 1982 ("Resolution No. 10"),
subdividing Lot 39 into two Single Family Lots, was approved by Town Council on February
16, 1982. Resolution No. 10 provides the maximum height for buildings on the two Lots is
limited to 25 feet and the maximum allowable GRFA is 3,100 square feet for each Lot.
Resolution No. 10 states in the "Recitals" that the lot "possesses characteristics making it
appropriate for two single family structures of a high quality, low rise nature" and that "the
owner of Lot 39 and the developer of Glen Lyon Subdivision agreed to the conditions and
limitations placed upon the division of Lot 39 into two separate lots." Except for the statement .
that the developer of Glen Lyon agreed to the conditions and limitations, there is no explanation
in Resolution No. 10 which gives insight to the reasons for such conditions and limitations.
Therefore, Applicant researched the Town files and consulted with Mr. Norris to see if there
was a legitimate reason to restrict GRFA and height.
The Town's files on SDD No. 4 provides helpful information regarding the history of
the subdivision of Lot 39 into two lots and the reason for the severe restrictions on GRFA and
height set forth in Resolution No. 10. .A staff inemorandum to PEC dated February 1, 1982,
shortly before Resolution No. 10 was passed, states that Mr. Norris proposed the limitations. .
Mr. Norris' letter confirms that the GRFA limitation of 3100 square feet on each of the
resubdivided lots was established bv him in consultation with Town staff "to be consistent with
the existing more restrictive Glen Lyon CC&R's. " Minutes from the PEC hearing of February
, 8, 1982 show that Mr. Nonis requested 3100 square feet of GRFA, and that the limitation on
GRFA was not a Town-imposed restriction. Mr. Norris- also voluntarily proposed an extensive landscaping plan to aid in screening the Lots from view, which has been implemented by the
present owner. .
In May, 1990, the Glen Lyon Covenants were amended by the written consent of more
than 75 % of the owners of the Glen Lyon Subdivision, as required under such covenants. The
sole purpose of the 1990 amendment to the Glen Lyon Covenants (the "Amendment") was to
delete the more restrictive Glen Lyon GRFA restriction, thus allowing the then more-liberal
Town of Vail GRFA restrictions to govem all lots within Glen Lyon Subdivision. In fact, Lots
39-1 and 39-2 (then designated 39 (A) and 39 (B)) are specifically identified in the Amendment
as lots to which the GRFA increase applies. Thus, the Glen Lyon home owners' intent to
increase the GRFA allowable to Lots 39-1 and 39-2 is clear.
In May, 1990, shortly after the Glen Lyon Covenants were amended, property owners
who had voted to pass the Covenants Amendment proposed an amendment to the ordinance
governing SDD No. 4 to delete the more restrictive Glen Lyon GRFA restriction that was still
reflected in said ordinance. A letter in the Town's files dated May 11, 1990 which was
submitted with the application to amend SDD No. 4 explains that as a result of the Town of
Vail's adoption of the GRFA standards in the Glen Lyon Covenants, Glen Lyon property owners
were negatively impacted in relation to other similarly situated property owners in Vail. The
property owners were requesting parity in the Glen Lyon GRFA standards with the rest of the
Town.
A staff inemorandum to the -Planning and Environmental Commission dated June 11,
1990 confirms the GRFA restriction was initiated by the developer, with unintended negative
effects on Glen Lyon lots. It provides in pertinent part:
...At the time that SDD #4 was adopted, the GRFA definition was in the process
of revision. By putting a maximum GRFA in the density requirement for the
SDD, the developer's intent was to lock in a specified GRFA allowed for the lots.
This was intended to protect against future changes in the interpretations of
GRFA. The ceiling, however, became a restriction for the Glen Lyon property
owners, as the GRFA requirements did not become more restrictive (as the
developer had anticipated). Jim Rubin, the Community Development Department
director at the time of the original adoption, confirms that the GRFA maximum
was initiated by the developer to guarantee the GRFA for Glen Lyon lots...
2
Thus, the Town's files on SDD No. 4 show that Mr. Norris proposed the GRFA
maxunum, but that the unanticipated effect was not fair to Glen Lyon residents compared to
other Town of Vail property owners. The Glen Lyon homeowners' proposed amendment to
SDD No.4 was passed by Town Council on July 3, 1990, as Ordinance No. 20, Series of.1990 ("Ordinance No. 20") eliminating the Glen Lyon GRFA covenant as to duplex lots, but without
mention of Lots 39-1 and 39-2.
Since there is nothing in the Town's file to justify treating Lots 39-1 and 39-2 differently -
thanother lots zoned Single Family, why was the allowable GRFA on Lots 39-1 and 39-2 not
specifically amended in 1990 to be govemed by Town standards, as the other Glen Lyon
residential lots were? Mr. Norris' letter is helpful in answering this question. His letter states
there were several issues unique to Lots 39-1 and 39-2, but unrelated to GRFA or building .
height, that the Town staff wanted resolved before the Lots would be brought into conformity
with Town of Vail SFR Zone District requirements. For example, portions of the access road
to Lots 39-1 and 39-2 encroached on Forest Service land, Vail Associates had raised concerns
about an on-grade skier crossing that intersected the proposed driveway, and certain utiliry
easements needed to be vacated. The Town staff requested that all these matters be resolved
before the GRFA applicable to Lots 39-1 and 39-2 be amended. Applicant has recently
completed resolution of all these matters, the last one being the approval by the Town of the
construction of a skier underpass. Applicant now requests that SDD No. 4 be amended to treat
Lots 39-1 and 39-2 the same as all other lots in the Town of Vail zoned Single Family.
Applicant and Mr. Norris believe that the process that was begun in 1990 to have all Glen Lyon
lots treated the same as other similarly-zoned lots within the Town, should be automatic; based
on the recent resolution of the issues formerly affecting Lots 39-1 and 39-2. Nonetheless, if the
Town desires to re-examine the GRFA and height limitations, the facts that support the change
in GRFA and height to match the Town Zoning Code, are compelling.
Presently, Lots 39-1 and 39-2 are 1.043 and 1.221 acres, respectively. (Lot 39 as
originally platted consisted of 2.4853 acres, but a portion of Lot 39 along Gore Creek was
deeded to the Town when Lot 39 was resubdivided into Lots 39-1 and 39-2.) They are still the
two largest lots in Glen Lyon, and are therefore large enough to support additional GRFA, as
_ calculated under Section 18.10.090 of the Zoning Code: The marginal increases in GRFA, -
when compared to neighboring structures such as Liftside Condominiums and Glen Lyon Office
Building, are insignificant. Lots 39-1 and 39-2 are a significant distance from South Frontage
Road, compared to both Liftside Condominiums and Glen Lyon Office Building, which are
directly on South Frontage Road. Many Spruce and Lodge Pole Pine trees were planted by
Applicant, which have already grown to significant heights, and will continue to grow and screen
more fully any residence to be built on the Lots. The limitations to low-rise, 3100 square foot
residences on each lot is simply not justifiable considering the neighboring structures, the size
of the Lots, the landscaping and the current Town Code governing Single Family homes.
3
III. LEGAL JUSTIFICATION FOR AMENDMENT
Town Code Section 18.40.090 governing Special Development Districts provides:
...before the Town Council approves development standards that deviate from the
underlying zone district, it should be determined that such deviation provides
benefits to the Town that outweigh the adverse effects of such deviation. This
. determination is to be made based on evaluation of the proposed. Special
Development District's compliance with the design criteria outlined in Section
18.40.080.
The basic premise of Section 18.40.090 is that development standards for a lot in a Special
Development District should comply with the underlying zone district and that any deviation
therefrom should not be taken lightly. It follows that since Lots 39-1 and 39-2 are Single Family
Lots, they should be treated the same as other Single Family Lots.
Among the criteria in Section 18.40.080 that must be considered in determining the
appropriate standards to apply to Lots 39-1 and 39-2 are "design compatibility and sensitivity
to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural
design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and
orientation. " Applicant contends that any residence to be built on Lots 39-1 or 39-2 that
complies with the square footage calculation under Town SFR Zone District requirements will
be compatible with the immediate neighborhood and adjacent properties. As discussed above,
neighboring property owners who were required to be notified of this application for amendment
include Liftside Condominiums, a relatively recent addition to SDD No. 4, and Glen Lyon
Office Building. Both are large structures and are located closer to South Frontage Road than
would be any residences to be built on Lots 39-1 and 39-2. The visual impact of any residence
to be built on Lots.39-1 and 39-2 under SFR Zone district requirements will be substantially less
than the visual iixlpact of such existing structures, especially with the large trees already growing
on L;ots 39-1 and 39-2. Furthermore, any residence proposed,to be built on either lot will also
be subject to Design Keview Board sciutiny, which is sufficient to ensure quality, site-
appropriate residences.
Under Colorado law, the PEC and Town Council must not act arbitrarily or capriciously
in exercising their discretion in evaluating the criteria set forth in the Zoning Code. See Sellon
v. Manitou Springs, 745 P.2d 229 (Colo. 1987). With no rational basis in the file for
discriminating against Lots 39-1 and 39-2 when compared to other Single Family Lots within
the Town, to deny this application would seem to be arbitrary and capricious, and, therefore,
void under Colorado law.
4
IV. CONCLUSION
Lots 39-1 and 39-2 have different GRFA and height restrictions applied to them than
other Single Family Lots within the Town of Vail for reasons that are no longer justifiable. In .
1990, the Glen Lyon Homeowners requested that the lots within Glen Lyon be treated the same
as all other lots within the Town, which request was granted by Town Council with regard to
all Glen Lyon lots except Lots 39-1 and 39-2. Due to other issues unique to those two lots,
GRFA and height limitations for the Lots have continued to be governed by Resolutiorx 10 from
1982, which were self-imposed by the developer of Glen Lyon and the then-owner of the Lots.
Town files indicate the restrictions were proposed by Mr. Norris, and have not been removed ' due to other issues unrelated to GRFA and height. With the resolution of the issues concerning the access road and the vacation of easements, and, most recently, the approval by the Town of
a skier unde=pass separating vehicles from skiers, there is no rational basis for continuing the
restrictions in Resolution No. 10. Town Code requires that development standards not deviate
from the underlying Zone District unless the deviation provides benefits to the Town that
outweigh the adverse effects of the deviation. There appear to be no benefits to the Town that
outweigh the adverse effects of continuing the severe GRFA and height restrictions now imposed
on the Lots. Lots 39-1 and 39-2 are two of the largest lots in Glen Lyon, are zoned Single
Family, and are located near two very large structures, Liftside Condominiums and Glen Lyon
Office Building. The visual impact of Single Family residences built in compliance with SFR
Zone District GRFA and height standards will be negligible compared to the visual impact of
those two neighboring structures. Applicant's Single Family Lots should be treated the same
as other Single Family Lots in tYie Town, and should be governed by Sections 18.10.080 and
18.10.090 of the Town Code with regard to GRFA and building height. To deny this
application to remove unnecessary restrictions on the Lots in order to treat them the same as
other Single Family Lots would be arbitrary and capricious.
5
Andrew D. Norris 196 la Vereda Road
Sanfia Barbara; California 93108 ~
September 9, 1997
Dominic F. Mauriello, AICP
Depa.rtment of Community Development
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657
Re: Glen Lyon Subdivision - Lots 39-1/39-2
Dear pominic;
I was the developer of the Glen Lyon Subdivision and was therefore responsible for the
project's planning, permitting, construction and sales. Development controls for the
project were established by the recorded plat and the Conditions, Covenants and
Restrictions (CC&R's). An important element of the CC&Rs were limitations on the
amount of Gross Residential F1oor Area (GRFA), as defined by the Town of Vail zoning
reguladons, that could be constructed on each loL At the time it was considered
.important to establish GRFA standards because there was considerable "looseness" in the
Town's definition of GRFA. Glen Lyon's CC&R's were more restrictive.
In 1989, the Town approved the division of Lot 39 into two lots. The approval
established Lot 39-1 and 39-2 as a minor development plan. Each lot was limited to a
single family home and the GRFA limitations were established by me in consultation with
Town staff to be consistent with the existina Glen Lyon CC&R's. A minor development
plan was developed that included establishing building envelopes and a landscape plan.
Following the Town's approval, significant components of the landscape plan were
implemented by the owner. These included earthwork and tree planting for screening.
In 1990, the Town made refinements and clarifications to its definition of GRFA. Town
council was interested in creating a uniform standard for all residential lots. The Glen
Lyon property owners supported this proposal and requested that I conduct an election by
Glen Lyon property owners to seek approval to amend the CC&R's to bring Glen Lyon's
. GRFA standards into compliance with the Town's standards. The amendment passed and
EXHIBIT A
Dominic F. Mauriello, AICP .
Department of Community Development
Town of Vail
September 9, 1997
Paae 2
the GREA revision approved. The amendment applied to all Glen Lyon lots, including
Lots 39-1 and39-2. However, since Glen Lyon Subdivision is in Special Development
- District No. 4, Town approval was required for any change in GREA. .
A proposed amendment to SDD No. 4 was submitted to the Town to provide that Town
GREA standards would apply [o all Glen Lyon lots. By this time it had been discovered
that portions of the access road to Lots 39-1 and 39-2 encroached on Forest Service land
and that the planned on-grade skier crossing with the driveway would be unacceptable to
Vail ?.svO^i1GleS. •ail AJSVC1aleS ir.sisted that a separaied grade crossing be Consnxtepd.
Also, utility easements across Lot 39 needed to be vacated. Town staff requested that no
change be made in the GREA standards applicable to Lots 39-1 and 39-2 until all such
issues surrounding the Lots were resolved.
It has required several years to resolve all of these requirements, the final one being
approval of the skier undecpass. It has always been my understanding and agreement with
the Town that once all the issues suROUnding Lots 39-1 and 39-2 had been resolved, the
lo[s would be brougtit into conformity with the Town of Vail's then current development
standards for residential lots.
If I can provide you with addidonal information, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
Andrew . Norris - - -
ADN:sg
bc: Diane Larson
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION r10
(Series of 1982)
A RESOLUTIOi1 OF TIiE TOClN COUNCIL
A11ENDING SPECTAL DEVELOP?.IENT DISTRICT
"N0, 4 TO PROVIUE THAT LOT 39 OF THE
GLEN LYON SUrDIVIS70N ,1fAY BE DIVIDED
INTO TIVO (2) S INGLE FA,tiII LY LOTS ; PRO-
VIDING A h13STER DErELOP1fENT PLAN THEREFORE ;
• SETTING I'OR;.H A T}yENTY FIVE (25) FOOT HEIGHT "
LI1fITATION AND THIRTY OVE HUNDRL•D (3100)
SQUARE I'OOT MAnIbfUli GP,OSS RESIDENTI9L FLOOR
. AREA (GRFA) LIAfITATION; avD SETTI\'G FORTH
DETAILS RELATING THERETO. '
1YHERE9S, the Town Council has previously approved Special
, Development District 4, commonl
~ y known as Glen Lyon Subdivision,
to insure its planned and coordinated development in a manner
suitable for the area in which it is situated; and
_ tiYHEREAS, the Town Council was of the opinion that the
existing Lot 39 of Glen Lyon Subdivsion possesses characteristics
making it appropriate for two (2) single family structures of a
high quality, low-rise nature; and, '
59HEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission has
• reviewed said amendment to Special Development District 4 and
recommended its approval; and
j1`HEREAS, the owner of Lot 39 and the developer of the Glen
Lyon Subdivision have agreed to the'conditions and limitations
placed upon tlie division of saitl lot into two (2) separate lots;
and, NO{Y, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOIYN COUNCIL OF THE
- TOjYN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1. Lot 39 of the Glen Lyon Subdivision, a part of
• Special Development District 41 shall be divided into Lwo (2)
residential lots in accordance with the iliaster Plan thereof.
Section The blaster Development Plan for Lot 39 and the
division thereof is herebY a
. • pproved and the development of said
divided Lot 39 shall be in accordance with the within a
PProved .
::;.;•z::.,,•.::;". biaster Developmen Plan and conditions herein imposed.
r. •
.
J `
Section 3. !The rnaximum height of buildings on Lots 39 (A)
and 39 (B) of the Glen Lyon Subdivision, as herein approved, shall
,
be.twenty five (25) feet as determined.in accordance with the
applicable provisions of the Vail Zoning Code.
- Sect.ion 4. The maximum allowable gross residential floor
area (GRFA) on Lots 39 (A) and 39 (B) of the Glen Lycn Subiiivision
as herein approved, shall be thirty one hundred (3100) square feet
each.
INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND 9DOPTED THIS 16TH DAY OF
FEBRUARY, 1982.
Rodney E. ~Slifer, r yor ~
ATTEST:
Colleen Kline, Town Clerk
. -1,
htGhiORANDUM
T0: Planning and Environmental Commission ,
FRObt: Department of Community Development/Peter Patten
DATE: February 1., 1982
SUBJECT: Two amendment requests for Special Development District 4-- •
Cascade Viilage/Glen Lyon. Applicant: Andy Norris
Andy Norris is requesting two amendments to Special Development District 4.
One is,for area A of the District-Cascade Village, to allow the parking structure/
athletic club building to encroach into the exterior property line setback.
I'he second request is to allow Lot 39 of Glen Lyon Subdivision (Area C), an
existing 2.48 acre primary/secondary lot to be resubdivided.into two single
family lots.
I. AMCNDbiENT REGARDING PARKING STRUCTURC SETBACK
A. TI-fE REQUES'I'
1'he request is to allow the relaxation of Sectioiis 18.46.100 Setbacks
Wlt}1 rebard only to this building and 18,46.170 Parking of SDD4 so that
the builcli.ng contailiing the parking structure and athletic club cati
be constructed to within 2 feet of the norttiern property line, abuttiiig
the Sotitll Frontage Road, rat}ier t}lan the required 20 feet. The Parking
section dictates that no parking shall be located in any front setback
area. T'lie proposal is for wlderground parking to be so located. The
reason for this request at this time is an earlier oversight in the
original Master Plan for Cascade Village. ~
_ B. . BACKGROUND
T}i.e original-Master Plan was approyed as a basic guide for p.lacement
bf each structure, but was not a detailed design for each individual
building. Indeed, minor adjustments in the placing of eac}i structure
naturally has occurred at the Design Review Board level. In terms of
the parking garage and athletic club, the master plan simply did not
allow for adequate room for a full size viable tennis court facility
with regard to the north-south dimensions as restricted by the existing
road. As the Cascade Village project progresses according to the adopted
Master Plan and regulations contained in SDD4, each building site is
restricted by such givens as buildings both existing and planned, roads,
utility locations, etc. This piece of the "puzzle"--the parking structure
and athletic club--has simply been squeezed into the exterior property setback by some of these restrictions, a situation not envisioned, of
course., in the 1979 Master Plan.
Cascadc Villabc -2- 211182
•
C. IMPACTS Or TI-fE PROPOSAL
Tlle building is proposed to be located SO feet f.rom the existing pavemcnt
of tlie South Frolitage Road, except where the new right turn lane will
be located, the structure will be 45 feet away from the pavement. As
one travels west on the road the grade changes so that one experiences
less and less of the building impact the further west oile gets. I'he
building is 12 feet high at eave line oil the north elevation wrt}i approxi-, .
mately a 6 in 12 roof pitch. The roof material proposed is a gray metal
similar to the Millrace Condominium roofs. No unsolvable problems exist
with regard to utility locations. A substantial landscaping proposal -
with a large amount of evergreen trees is proposed for the area between
the buildiilg and the South Frontage Road. It is hig}ily unlikely that
_ the South Frontage Road will be expanded to four lanes due to physical
(grade on the side of the road) and traffic amount factors.
TIZe conclusion from the above facts indicate no significaitt negative
factors in moving the building close to the property line. Maintaining
50 feet from the road is a sufficient "breatliing" distance for snow
removal, minor road improvements (widen shoulders) and visual proximity.
A physical hardship exists in the givens of mandatory design criteria
(tennis courts) and the existing road aiid adjacent buildinbs.
RLCObMENDA1'I ON
, T}ie Uepartment of Community Development recommeilds approval of the amendment
to Sdd4 allowing the parking structure/athletic club to encroac}i 18 feet
into the north property setback and to qualify the requirement of no parking
in the front setback to apply to parking other than entirely undergrowid.
The staff feels that there are minimum impacts of this amendment due to
the large distance to the road surfa,ce. The building is designed to mitigate
visual impacts on the nort}i side, and the landscaping should provide a visual
screen, further improving the aesthetics of the site"development. tiVe akree
that the setUack exceptioti should be made only for this building, with the
provision that other underground parkiiig could be located within required
exterior setUack areas, subject to Design Review Board approval.
II. 'DIVZSION OF LOT 39,.GLEN LYON SUBDIVISION - .
A. Tf-iE. REQUEST
Lot 39 of Glen Lyon Subdivision (Area;.C of SDD4) was created with the
original appxoval of SDD 4. The duplex lots are developed basically
in accordance with primary/secondary development regulations. The lot
currently contains 2.48 acres of total site area., and the proposed division
would easily meet the requirement in the Single Family District of contain-
ing 12,500 square feet of buildable site area. Proposed is to have
two lots, one of .888 acre and one of 1.48 acres, while dedicating
to the town .115 acre of land along Gore Creek. The stream tract proposed
to be dedicated is adjacent to property already owned by the town through
a previous dedication.
' Cascadc Villagc -3- 2/1/52
Mr. Norris is proposing and will commit to a master plan for t}ie develop-
ment on these two lots. He proposes two low-rise (1 to 2 story) luxury'
single family homes with exten.sive landscaping_ and water features. 1-Ie
requests that each house be allowed 3100 square feet of Gross Residential
. Floor Area and will restrict the houses to a 25 foot height limitation.
B, IMPACTS OF REQUEST
Currently, the lot could be developed into a duplex with a maximum floor
area of 4200 square feet. This is the covenant restriction of w}iich
the town is a co-signator, and consequently, enforcer. The proposal
Would increase the allowable GRFA by 2000 square feet to 6200 square
`ffeet total. Visually, the site is quite open and contains only one tree, a large
evergreen lying very close to the proposed common lot line of the two
new lots. Thus, any development on the site will be readily seen by
passersby on the South Frontage Road and I-70. Dividing the lot and
accepting the developmeTit plan allows two separated structures of a
' low profile nature, but covering more of the site than under present
restrictions. Thc 25 foot height limitation reduces by approximately
ten feet the allowable height of thc structures which could be built
under current regulations. Tlie development plan reflects a very high
quality design of structures arid their surroundinb grounds, and would
assure such high quality if the amendment is approved.
Access for the new easterly lot would be provided by an access easement
on the northern side of lot 1. I'he access drive would be heavily planted
on the north side to reduce the visual impact from the north.
In summary, the result-of approval of the requested amendment is that
- development of a Targer portion of the site would occur, but the development -
would be of a guaranteed high quality with minimal negative visual impact.
C . ,,'RECOh1MENDATION
The Department of.Community Development recommends approval of the proposed
division of Lot 39 into two single family lots with the condition that
each residence be restricted to 2100 square feet of GRFA. {Ve feel positive
about the development plan proposed, but we consider an increase of
GRFA of 2000 square feet to be excessive and a grant of special privilege.
There is no special circumstance or hardship involved in the request
for the extra GRFA, and we feel that we must be consistent in judging
such requests. Thus, we recommend approval of the amendment requested
with a revised development plan reflecting a maximum GRFA for each
residence of 2100 square feet,
~
ORDINANCE N0.20 _
Series of 1990
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 10, SERIES OF 1990,
SPECIAL DEVEIAPMENT DISTRICT NO. 9,
SECTION 18.46.100 C, DENSITY FLOOR AREA, 11F2EA C
GLEN LYON DUPLEX LOTS TO PROVIDi FOR GROSS RESIDENTIAL
FLOOR AREA TO BE CALCULATED PER THE REQUIRE!•fENT .
•OF THE PRIMARY/SECONDARY ZONE DISTRICT SECTION 18.13.080
DEPISITY CONTROL; AND SETTING FORTFi DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO.
' WHEREAS, Chapter 18.40 of the Vail 24unicipal Code authorizes .
Special Development Districts within the Town; and
S4HEREAS, the Town Council approved Ordinance No. 10, Series
of 1990 Special Development District No. 4 Cascade Village; and
WHEREAS, a majority of the property owners within Area C,
Glen Lyon Subdivision of Special Developnent District No. 4 have
requested to amend Section 18.46.100C of Special Develop;ent
District No. 4; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission has
recommended that the Gross Residential Floor Area for Duplex lots
within the Glen Lyon subdivision be calculated per Section
18.13.080 of the Vail Municipal Code; and
o-~
WHEREAS, the Town Council considers that it is reasonab e,
appropriate, and beneficial to the Town and its citizens,
inhabitants, and'visitors to amend Ordinance No. 10, Series of
1990 to provide for this change in Special Development District
No. 4, Cascade Village, Area C Glen Lyon Dupler. Subdivision.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOS•:N OF VAIL, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS :
SeCt10T1 1.
All the procedures required for a Major amendment to an SDD as
set forth in Section 18.40.100 have been conplied orith.
Section 2.
Section 18.46.100 Paragraph C, Density Floor Area, Area C, Glen
Lyon duplex lots is hereby amended by the deletion of the
following sentence:
"No residential lot shall contaiz more than 4200 sq.
ft. of GRFA per the Glen Lyon subdivision covenants."
Section 3.
If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of
this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such •
decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions
of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would
have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection,
sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that
any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses
or phrases by declared invalid.
1
.
Section 4. '
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 inhabitants thereof.
Section 5.
The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provisions of .
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.
Section 6.
All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof,
inconsistent herewith are hereby 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, heretofore repealed.
INTP0DUCED, READ AND PASSED ON FIRST READING THIS 3rd day of
_.Tuly , 1990, and a public hearing shall be held on this
• ordinance on the 3rd day of July 1990 at 7•30
, . p.m. ,
in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. '
Ordered published in full this 3rd day of _ July
, 1990.
. • J ~
ATTEST:
Kent R. Rose, ay r C~-_`=~~'>?L.Gli.~~•
Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk
INTRODUCED, READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND. READING AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED _ hv rirla nnly__ this 17th day of Tuly , 1990.
2,Mayor
ATTEST: Kent . Ros~.~.~y , .
~t~yyX.~~l
Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk
2
TO: Planning and Environmental_Commission
FROM: Department of Community Development
. DATE: June 11, 1990
SUBJECT:A major amendment to Special Development District No.
' 4-Cascade Village, Area C, Section 18.46.100, Paragraph
C: deletion of the following sentence "No residential lot shall contain more than 4200 square feet of GRFA '
per the Glen Lyon subdivision covenants", which amends
the GRFA requirement to conform to the
Primary/Secondary zone district, Section 18.13.080,
. Density Control.
Applicant: Greg Amsden for 75% of the property owners.
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE RE4UEST
The applicant is requesting a major amendment to Special
Development District No. 4, Cascade Village. The request is
to delete the requirement which states "No residential Lot
shall contain more than 4200 sq. ft. of GRFA per the Glen
Lyon Subdivision covenants." The amended code will read
"GRFA shall be calculated for each lot per Section
18.13.080, Density Control A and B for the primary/secondary
district of the Town of Vail Municipal Code. ;With the
~ delP-~nn nf this restriction the-dQnsitv controls or
duplex Lots 1-38 and 40-52 of Area C will be qoverned by
Section 18.13.080 of the Vail Municipal Code. Because of
the lot sizes, the amendment will allow 40 of the 51 duplex
lots to increase their GRFA over what is currently allowed
by the SDD No. 4 density requirements. However, these lots
will not be granted more than what is allowed under the
Town's density control for Primary/Secondary lots. The
_ applicant is not requesting any other changes to the
development standards. -
II. BACKGROUND At the time that SDD #4 was adopted, the GRFA definition was
in the process of revision. By putting a maximum GRFA in
the density requirement for the SDD, the developer's intent
was to lock in a specified GRFA allowed for the lots. This
was intended to protect against future changes in the
interpretations of GRFA. The ceiling, however, became a
restriction for the Glen Lyon property owners, as the GRFA
requirements did not become more restrictive (as the
developer had anticipated). Jim Rubin, the Community
Development Department director at the time of the original
adoption, confirms that the GRFA maximum was initiated by
the developer to guarantee the GRFA for Glen Lyon lots.
1
,
The applicant has received signatures from 76.07% of the
property owners approving the change in the GRFA
requirement.
The amendment will not include Lot 53 (Coldstream). The
amendment will only affect duplex lots located in this Area
C. _ ~Also the amendmen wi li no ; ne4i 1.do T.nt-q 191 and 3911,.
Under resolutiom- #i0,- Series of 1982, these lots~aer.e -
~ subdivided and zoned Sinale Family.ResidPnt,ial~w;.th-a-heiqht
restriction of 25 feet and a maximum -GRFA of 3100 ;squar•e'- -
' feet per lot.
III. SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT CRITERIA
Section 18.40.080 of the zoning code sets forth the
following design criteria to be used in evaluating the
merits of a Special Development District. It.is the burden
of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and
the proposed development plan comply with each of the
following standards or demonstrate that one or more are not
applicable or that a practical solution consistent with the
public interest has been achieved.
A. DesiQn compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate
environment, neighborhood and adiacent properties
relative to architectural desian scale bulk buildinq
heiqht, buffer zones, identity, character, visual
inteqrity and orientation.
The granting of the request will allow for an increase
of the allowable GRFA for many of the duplex lots
located in the Glen Lyon Subdivision. Currently the
lots are regulated by the density requirements for
Primary/Secondary zoning with a maximum allowable GRFA
_-of 4200 square feet. 40 lots in Glen Lyon are
restricted by this maximum. It,is.important to
recognize that by deleting the maximum for GRFA, they
will only be allowed to build what is allowed under
Section 18.13.080 which regulates the GRFA on all
Primary/Secondary lots. The mass and bulk of the
buildings will increase in comparison to what would be
allowed with the 4200 sq. ft. of GRFA maximum due to
the increase in allowable GRFA.
B. Uses, activitv and density which provide a compatible
efficient and workable relationship with surrounding
uses and activity. _
The request will have no effect on the uses or
activities of the area. The application will have no
effect on the number of units in the subdivision. It
2
will increase the mass and bulk of the buildings
because the allowable GRFA will be increased.
The following is a chart depicting the range of
. additional GRFA that would be allowed for a number of
lots:
# of Lots Additional GRFA
11 . 0 " 18 1-250 sq. ft.
. 10 250-500 sq. ft. - -
5 500-750 sq. ft. 6 750+ sq. ft.
C., Compliance with parkinq and loadina requirements as
outlined in Chapter 18.52.
_ Off-street parking shall be provided as stated in the
SDD Ordinance. This would require dwelling units with
_ up to 2,000 square feet of GRFA to provide 2 parking
spaces, and dwelling units over 2,000 square feet to
provide 2.5 spaces per unit. These are the standard
Town of Vail parking requirements.
D. Conformitv with applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. Town policies and Urban Desian
Plans. The application does not request any additional GRFA
other than that which is allowed on other comparable
Primary/Secondary lots in the Town of Vail. There are
no planning studies that relate directly to this
request.
E.- Identification and mitigation of natural and/or
qeoloctic hazarcls that affect the property on which the
special development district is proposed.
Geologic hazards will be identified and mitigated as
required by Section 18.69 Hazard Regulations of the
Town of Vail Municipal Code.
F. Site plan, buildinQ design and location and open space
provisions designed to produce a functional development
responsive and sensitive to natural features,
vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the
community.
The only element of the above criteria that will be
affected by this request is building design. By
3
ti
~
deleting the 4200 square foot maximum, the mass and
bulk will be increased over what is currently allowed
in the subdivision. However, the mass and bulk of the
structures will be no more than what is allowed on
other comparable Primary/Secondary lots in other areas.
of Vail.
' G. A circulation system desiqned for both vehicles and
pedetrians addressing on and off-site traffic
circulation.
There will be no change to the circulation system.
Since there will be no increase in density, there are
. no expected increases in use that would require a
change to the circulation system.
H. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in
order to optimize and preserve natural features
recreation, views and functions.
There will be no change to the existing landscaping and
open space plan. Individual lots will be required to
landscape 60% of lots as per the Section 18.46.170 -
Landscaping of SDD #4.
I. Phasina plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a
workable, functional and efficient relationship
throuahout the development of the special development
district.
There will be no effect on the phasing or subdivision
plan. 23 of the 50 lots involved have either existing
homes or are under construction. No additional lots
are proposed with this application.
. IV. ' DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
All devel'opment standards for SDD# 4 are very site specific. For Area C, development standards including height,
setbacks, site coverage, parking and landscaping are in
accordance with the requirements for the Primary/Secondary
zone district. This request would allow the Area C density
control (GRFA) to be in accordance with Section 18.13.080 of
the Vail Municipal Code.
4
M
4
V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the request to delete the
statement that "No residential lot shall contain more than
4200 square feet of GRFA per the Glen Lyon Subdivision
covenants" as stated in Section 18.76.100 of SDD #4
Ordinance #10, Series of 1990 as applicable to Lots 1-38 and
40-52. The staff feels that this restriction was used as a
means of guaranteeing GRFA to the Glen Lyon lots and
instead, the maximum became a restriction. We feel that the -
deletion of the maximum will have no negative impacts on the
surrounding properties. The amendment will allow the above
lots to be controlled under the density requirements that
are used for all other Primary/Secondary lots. There will
be no chan e in the densit re irements for Lots 39I an
~ 39II hich are aentrollad bv Reso u ion No. 10, Series of
1982.
5
~y ~ ~ 1iL11 1 ...llLr` \ -
~ 2
54
G
! ` . TRACT K
\
VALLI 39 s~ GLEN L N SUBDIVISION
H I
ao
I ~'f° _ n~'i (a R G?1- -t~t~,t- Yv`u~.~ ~?G '
• . - GtGIl,1.Q.CL. J . -
PARKING
~ . CASCADE STRUCTURE \ I4P:b
~ VILLAGE MANSFIELD
~ CONDOMINfUMS
43 42
74 IG i ,
LJ. L.1 Y 1.
l . P~,P~ C. M_C. , 44 r
MT-Y / MILLRACE
MILLR ~ PHASE II • CASCADE
~ LaDGE 45
` i 7+
38 ~
MILLRACE 46
PHASE I SCALE, 1°- 200'
COLDSTREAM PLA 47 o iod 200
53 • .
. „
- f.l%,'~ - . . _ . .
~
48 36
.
' 3~
, .
.
' . ~ 49 '
50 35a~~y .i 31
52 51~~..~,~
=AGLE COU TY~ 34 , ,j UNPLATTED UNPLATTE 33 ~ 3O
I ~ TRACT 8 W/A
G~` 9
~ tx
~j
/ 'y Jn(hn`n
weS:7r*NAVEry
W 6~
` 2~' 26 • Q
z
cr 1 7c4
= h/i
0 Z O
I~~' ~ ~9 ~D~ \y ~6.-1 M
co L.LJ
y~ I
Cbr~•t
\ /f
. `o o lL
O
Z
~
F~-
~
r
~
May 11, ?990
Town ofVail Planning Department
Attn: Shelley Mello
75 So. Frontage Rd. . Vail, Colorado 81657
Dear Shelley,
In accordance with Paragraph #18 of the Protective Covenants of
Glen Lyon Subdivision, 75% of the property owners of the
privately-owned land included within the boundaries of Glen Lyon
have given their written consent to amend the said Covenants
(Recorded 5/2/90 in Book 528, Page 154. A copy of recorded
document is attached). The amendment deletes Paragraph #17 of
the covenants. This paragraph establis~ed a ceiling of 4200
square feet on each lot within the subdzvision.
It was the developer's intent at time of recording the original
covenants to "lock in" a specified amount of GRFA to protect
agains-t any future downward trends in interpretations of GRFA.
As it turned out, this limitation actually had a negative effect
on allowable GRFA in relation to other property ocaners within the
Vail Valley. The implementation of this ceiling on GRFA into the
Speci-al Development District and Town of Vail Ordinances was done
to accomodate the Protective Covenants and pyoperty ocvners of
Glen Lyon.
The applicant asks the Planning and Environmental Commission and
Town Council to consider and approve the following admendment to
the existing Special Development District No. 4, Area C, as
. defi-'n-ed in Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1990, Secti.on 18.46.100,
Paragraph C: Deletion of the following sentence: "No residential lot
shall contain more than 4200 square feet of GRFA per the
Glen Lyon subdivision covenants".
If any members of the Planning and Environment Commission or the
Town Council have any questions regarding the proposed amendment,
please contact Greg Amsden at 476-7990 or Andy Norris at 476-
6602. Thank you for your consideration and cooperation in this
matt r.
Sin er y
~ G Amsden
GA/meb
r
P
Glen Lyon - Lot Sizes and GRFA
GRFA Under
Existing New Additional
Size GRFA Amendment GRFA Available Status of
Lot (Acres). (sq. ft.) (Sq. ft.) with amendment Lot
1 0.4272 4111 4111 unchanged
2 0.4026 4004 4004 unchanged Built
3 0.4827 4200 4353 153 -
4 0.5131 4200 4485 285 Built
• 5 0.4607 4200 4256 56 Built
6 0.4574 4200 4242 42
7 0.4684 4200 4290 90 Built
B 0.4628 4200 4266 66 '
, 9 0.5381 4200__ 4594 394 Built , . '
10 0.7851 4200 5210 1010 Built
11 0.7056 4200 5037 837 Built
12 0.7698 4200 5177 977
13 0.8085 4200 5261 61
14 0.7418 4200 5116 916
15 0.5626 4200 4701 501 Built
16 0.5123 4200 4482 282 Built
17 0.5448 4200 4623 423
18 0.4536 4200 4226 26 Built
19 0.4730 4200 4310 110 Built
20 0.4920 4200 4393 193 Built
21 0.5011 4200 4432 232
22 0.5092 4200 4468 268 Built
23 0.5175 4200 4504 304
24 0.4374 4155 4155 unchanged
25 0.4634 4200 4269 69
26 0.7087 4200 5044 844
27 0.5244 4200 4534 334
. 28 0.6598 4200 4935 735
29 0.6171 4200 4844 644 Built
30 0.6237 4200 4858 658 Built
31 0.5770 4200 4757 557
32 0.5078 4200 4462 262
33 0.4289 4118 4118 unchanged
34 0.4250 4101 4101 unchanged Built
35 0.4416 4174 4174 unchanged Built
36 0.4467 4196 4196 unchanged
37 0.4268 4109 4109 unchanged
*38 0.4609 4200 4258 58
*39A 1.2353 3100 n/a n/a
B 1.2500 3100 n/a n/a
. 40 0,8584 4200. 5370 1170 Built
41 1.0494 4200 5786 1586
42 0.4914 4200 4391 191
43 0.5706: 4200 4474 274
44 0.4111 4040 4040 unchanged
45 0.4761 4200 4324 124 Built 46 0.4350 4200 4225 25 Built
47 0.4534 4200 4205 5 Built
48 0.4489 4200 4200 unchanged
49 0.5105 4200 4736 536 Built
50 0.5009 4200 4431 231
51 0.4474 4199 4199 unchanged
52 0.4826 4200 4352 152 Built
**53 4.2121 n/a n/a n/a
***54 1.7477 n/a n/a n/a
35.9192
* Single Family Residence Lots not included in amendment.
**Coldstream
***Glen Lyon Commercial Building
*NOTE*: Built means built or under construction.
. l, , . . .
` ' .
ORDII111NCE NO. 5
Series of 197- ATI OFDINArICE ESTABLISHING SPECIAL DEVELOP!•IENT
DISTRICT 4 AND AMErIDING Tfli, 'LONIiJG ORDINANCE
AND TIfE OF'I'ICIAL 20NING MAP,
IIHEItEAS, nrticle 1, Section 1.201, of the Zoning
Ordinance, Ordinance No. 8, Serics of 1973, of the Totvn of
; Vail, Colorado, as amended, established thirteen zoning dis-
, tricts for the nunicipality, one of cahich is the Special
DevcloPment District;
tVHEREAS, Mansfield Corporation ar.d Gore Creek Associates,
limited
/partnership, submitted as owners applications requesting t,iat
the Town establish Special Devclopment District 4, hereinafter
referred to as "SD4", for the development on its parcel of land
comprising 97,52 acres in the portion of the Lions Ridge area,
County of Eagle, State of Colorado, which was annexed to the
Town effective on the 16th day of December, 1975;
; WHEREAS, the establishment of the reguested SD4 will
~ ensure unified and coordinated developmcnt.and usc of a critical
; L sitc as a whole and in a manner suitablc for the area in which
; it is situated; and
LVHEItEAS, the Town Council. consic;crs that it is
; reasonable, appropriate, and beneficial to thc To~;,n and its
I~
citizens, inhabitants, and visitors to establish said SD4;
i; , NOSV, TIiEItEFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY TIIE TOWN COUNCIL
I,
I; OF THE T0V,TN OF VAIL, COLORADO, AS FOLLOj4S :
I~ Section 1. Title.
F
This ordinance shall be known as the "Ordinance
Establishing Special Development District 4".
t~
Sect_on 2• Amendment Procedures Fuliilled; Planning
Commission Report.
~
The amendment procedures prescribed in Section 21.500
~i of the Zoning Ordinance have been fully complied with and the Town
r,
Council has received the report of the Planning Commission recommending
~
' } 1
t" ~
. \
t;ie enactment of this ordinance.
h Section 3. Soecial Develonment District 4Established;
1Vnendments to Zoning Ordinance and Official Zonir,, :Iap.
Pursuant to ttle provisions of lrticles 1, 13, and 21
of the Zoning Ordinance, Ordinance Dlo. 3, Series of 1973, of the
Town of Vail, Colorado, as amended, Special Development District
- 4
' (SD4), a special development zoning district, is hereby established
; for the development on a certain narcel of land comnrising 97.52
acres in the Lions Ridge area of the Town, and the Zoning Ordinance
' and the Of_°icial Zoning hfap are liereby amended by the addition of
the following provisions which shall becone the i•ourth Chapter
of Article i.), the caption of which sliall be "Soecial Development
~ District 4", and a map which shall become an aldition to the
Official Zoning Map:
A. Purposes.
• Special Develooment District 9 is established to
ensure comorehensive development and use of an area in a manner
that will be harmonious with the general character of the Town,
~ provide adequate open space and recreational amenities, and
/
promote the objectives of the Zoning Ordinancc; Soecial Develop-
ment District 4 is created to ensure that thc development density
will be relatively low and suitable for the area and the vicinity
lin which it is situated, the develooment is regarded as complementary
to the Town by the Town Council and.the Planning Commission, and '
there are significant aspects of the special c;evelopment which
cannot be satisfied through the imposition of standard zoning
districts on the area.
B. Special Development District 4Established.
(1) Special Development District 4 is established '
for the development on a parcel of land comprising 97.52 acres as
more particularly described in Exhibit A Legal Description attached
~ hereto and made a part hereof; Special Development District 4 and said
97.52 acres may be referred to as "SD4".
i (2) The District shall consist of four separate
~
. ~ _ I
~
development areas, as identified on ttle attached map consisting '
of the following approximate size:
~ Di;VrLOPhIENT AREA ACCtLAGr
~ n .
16.82
B 90 +
~ c 57 +
;
ll 3 +
llevelopment Area A is now ou•ned by the hianslicld
Corporation, iiominee. Development Areas B, C, and D are :iow
owned by Gorc Creelc Associates, a limited partnersilip organized
under the la%vs of the State of Colorado.
C. Development Pla.n Required.
(1) Before the oivner commences site preparation,
building construction or other improvmentS i4'11:I11I1 SD4, there shall
be an Approved Developmcnt Plan for SD4. Development oi SD4 may
be phased by Development tlrea and within Devclopment Area but a
suificient amount of information shall Uc supplied ivith respect
to all Development llreas in order to alloiv i:hc Planning Commission
~ and Town Council to ensure the compatability of any Proposed
Development P1a? with the remainder of SD4.
(2) Each Development Area shall Uc subject to a sinble
Development Plan. Development Plans for a portion of Development
Area must comply with the provisions, terms, and conciitions oi' the
Development Plan for the Development Area.
O (3) A Proposed Developmeirt Plan for SD4 shall be sub-
mitted to the Zoning Administrator tivho shall refer the Devclopment
Plan to the Planning Commission and to the Design P,evieiv Board,
which shall consider the plan at a regularly scheduled meeting, and
a report of the Planning Commission setting forth its findings and
recommendations sha11 be transmitted to the Town Council in ac-
cordance tivitli the applicable provisions of Article 21 hereof.
~
~ ~
, .
~ - ~
~ (1) Upon receipt of tllc Proposed Dcvclopment Plan and Planning Commission report, the Town Council sliall determine
ivliettier thc plan is accePtable to the Town in accordance with the
applicable provisions of Sections 21.505 and 21.506 liereof. This
determination by the Town Council shall Ue made througli its enactment
of an ordinance amending the provisions or SD4 to incorporate the
Development Plan as an amendment thereto, and shall become the
npproved Development Plan.
(5) The Approved Development Plan shall be used as
the principal guide for all development ivithin SD4. Elmendemnts to
an Approved Development Pla.n ivhich do not change its substance and
~ which are duly recommended in a report of the Planning Commission
J
may be approved Uy tlie Town Council by resolution. Eacli phase
of development shall require, prior to issuznce of building permits,
approval of the Design Review Board in accordance ivith applicable
provisions of Article 15 hereof.
D. Contents ot' Proposed Development Plans.
, (1) Before any site prepa.ration, building construction
` or improvements of any area within SD4, the developer shall submit
to the Zoning Administrator an overzll Environmental Impact Report
for SD4 in accordance with the applicable provisions of Article 16
t~ hereof; provided that such overall Environmental Impact Report shall
~
be supplemented with respect to each DeveTopment Area as hereinafter
provided.
(2) A Proposed Development Plan shall include, but
is not limited to the following data: •
1. The complete Environmental Impact Report • together with a Supplemental Environmental
Impact Report which brings the original
Report to a current sta.tus, supplementing
such report with respect to the Develop-
ment Area or Development Areas involved
and is acceptable to the Zoning Administrator.
2. Etiisting contours having contour intervals
of not more than five (5) feet if
' the average slope of the site is 20 per I
cent or less tivitli contour intervals or not
~ more than ten (10) feet if tlie average slope
of the site is greater that 20 per cent.
Existing and proposed contours after grading °
for each phase. i
;
r.
Town ;Cl erk •
r .
3. A conceptual site plan, at a scalc not t.
smaller tliat one (1) incli =40 1'eet, R,
shotiving thc locations and dimensions of
all buildings and structures, uscs therein, and all principal site dcvelopment teatures,
such as landscaped ureas recreational
facilitics, pedcstriul plZiza.s and i:,alklvays,
service eniries, drivcways, and off-
street pzrl:inb and li>ading ai•eas.
~
4• A preliminary laiidscape plan, at a
scale not smaller th:i;i one (1) inch =
40 feet, showing exisLinb landscape •
features to be retained or removed, and
showinb, proposed landscaping and
landscaped site development leatures,
such as an outdoor recreational facilities,
bicycle paths, trails, pedestrian
plazas and wall:ways, water features and
other elements fOZ' CaCI1 development area.
5. Preliminary buildin6 elevations, sections,
and floor plans, at a scale not smaller
than 1/8 inch = 1 Soot, in sufficient
detail to detei•mine iloor area, gross
residential floor area, interior circulation,
location or uses ivithin buildings, and
thc general scale and appearance of the
proposed development !or each development area.
6• A Aroposed plan of plrl:ing, loading,
traific circulation, acid transit facilii:ies;
and a proposcd progi•ain for satisfying
traffic and transpori;ation needs generated
by the developmeclt Sor each development area.
.
7. A volumetric model o.C the site and the
proposed development, at a scale not
smaller than 1 incli = 100 fcet, portraying
the scale and relationships of the proposed
development to the site acid illustrating
the form and mass o'I tlie proposed buildings
for each developmeni:~area.
8• An architectural model of each proposed -
building at a. scale deemed appropriats to
the development by the Zoning Administrator •
• portraying design details for each phase.
9. A proposed program indicating order of
construction phases, transportation facilities,
and recreational amenities.
10. A proposal regarding the dedication to the Toivn
or private ownership and maintenance of that
portion of the Development Area ivithin the 100-
year floor plain of Gore Creelc. In the event the
100-year flood plain is not dedicated to the Town
such lands shall be subject to a ri;ht of public
• access to Gore Creek, and the right to use a
portion of such lands for a.bicycle path, and
~ for parl: purposes provided that the location and
use of such facilities and access shall be deter-
mined by mutual agreement betiveen the Town and
the owner of the development areas involved.
~ E. Permitted Uses.
Single-family residential dwellings, two-family
~
, .
~ l.
residential dwellinb and residential clustci• du•ellings slia.ll be permitted uses in Development Areas A, B, and C. Tu•o family •
dwellings, residential cluster dwellings, and multiple family ~
dwellings stiall be permitted'uses in Development tlrea.s A&. B. . ~
Professional offices and business offices, with a total
gross floor area not to exceed ten thousand (10,000) square feet,
shall Ue a permitted use in Development Area D.
F. Conditional Uses.
The following conditional uses shall be permitted
s.ubj.ect tothe issuance of a Conditional Use Perrnit in accordance
with the provisions of Article 18 of this ordinance, ior the
various Development Areas as herein specified:
CONDITIONAL USES DEVrLOP11ENT ARrA-A B C D
Private clubs, civic, cultural
and fraternal organizations x
Public utility and public services Xx X X
Public buildings, grounds and facilities 1,l' X X
Public parlc and recreation facilities .l" :C 1 Y
- Ski lifts and tows y 1 1
~ Institutional or educational center: provided
that iS said center is constructed, tllen the
following shall be conditional uses in
conjunction therewith: lodges including
accessory eating, drinking or recreational
establishments--not occupying more than 20no
oi the total gross floor area of the lodge to
which it is accessory; 1x
Public or commercial parking facilities; 1x
Professional oSfices, business offices and 1 Y
studios.
The term "Institutional or Educational Center" shall
mean a public or private institution for, learning, instruction or
continuing education. Such facilities may be utilized for seminars
or educationa.l programs a.nd may include conference and meeting rooms,
audio-visual facilities and necessary accessory useage such as
dining rooms and efficiency dwelling units. The phrase "efficiency
C dtivelling units" shall mean any room or group of rooms without full
kitchen facilities, but which may include a refrigerator, sink and
cook top of no more than two heating units, designed for or adapted
.81~ . ~ ,
Town,
Fl erk
1
t •
to occupancy by individuals attending the Institutional oi• Educational
Center; the efficienty dwelling units shall Ue accessiblc lrom
common corridors, wallcs or Ualconics tivithout passing tlirough another
efficiency dwelling unit, accommodation unit or dwellina unit and each
said unit shall not esceed 400 square feet, and sha,ll be considered in
, determining thc total GRP'A :.allowed :for each c(cvelopment area.
G. Accessory Uses.
The following accessory uses shall be permitted in
Development Areas A, II, Sc C.
1. Fiome occupations, subject to issuance of a, home
occupations permit in a.ccord with the provisions
of Section 17.300 Uercuf.
2. Other uses customarily incidental and accessory
, to permitted or conditiona,l uses, and necessary
for the operation t-hereof.
Thc following accessory uses shall be pcrmitt•ed in
' Development Area C only. ;
1. Attached garages or carports, private greenhouses,
swimming pools, tennis courts, patios, or other
recrea.tional facilities custo.nurily incidental
to permitted residential uses.
~
In addition the following accessory uses sliall be permitted in
~
Development Areas A and B.
1. Swimming pools, tennis courts, patios, or
other recreational facilities customarily
incidental to permitted•or conditional uses,
and necessary for the operation thereof.
~ H. Density Control. .
1. The number of dwelling units shall not etceed
the following:
Development Area t1 - 252 units
Development Area B- 240 units
Development Area C- 171 units
I. Development Standards.
The following development standards are liereby
` approved by the Town Council; these standards shall be incorporated
into the Approved Development Plan pertinent to each Development
Area to protect the integrity of the development of SD4; the following
are minimum development standards and shall apply unless more
~ restrictive standards are incorporated in the Approved Development Plan
. _
N'h1CE1 1S 'lflnn+nrl 1•.. +1... m_-----
t ; :
• 1. Setbacks. Required setb.Lcks sh111 Ue as indicated •
in elch Development Plan with a minimum setUaclc on the periphery
of the property of not less than 20 feet.
2. Distance Between Buildings. The minimum distances
between all Uuildings shall be as indicated on each Development
Plan with a minimum of 15 feet, provided that one foot of additional
separation between buildings shall be required Sor cach 2 feet of
building height over 15 feet, calculated on the basis of the average
height of the two buildings
3. Height. The maximum heibht of a Uuildinb in Area '
A shall Ue 45 feet. The maximum height of Uuildinbs in Areas B,
C and D stial l be 35 f eet .
~ 4. Density Control. The gross residential floor
area Qf all buildings in each development area shall not exceed
.35 GRI'A in Area A, . 30. GRI'A in Area B, zn .25 GRI'A in Area C.
5. Site Coverage. In Areas A and B, no more than 35% of the total site area shall be covered Uy buildinbs, provided,
if any portion of said arcas is developed as an institutional or
j educational center, 450 of the area may Ue covered. In Areas C
\ and D, no more that 250 oT the total site arca, shall Ue covered
by Uuildings.
6. Useable Open Space. UseaUle open space shall be
as indicated on the Development Plaus but in no ckse sliall the
same be less than 250 square feet eticlusive of required front set-
Uack areas shall be provided at ground level for each dwelling
unit. UseaUle open space may be common space accessiUle to more
than one dwelling unit, or may be private space accessible to
separate dwelling units, or a combination thereof. At least 50
per cent of the required ground level useable open space shall
be common space. The minimum dimension of any area qualifying as
ground level useable open space shall be ten (10) feet.
~ •
r
~
.
( A\
~
To%an,Cl erk
~
~ 7. Landscapinfi. At least the Iollowing proportions
of the total Development Area shall be landscapcd as providcd in
tlie Devclopment Plzn (this shall 'includc rcCention of natural
landscape, if aPPloPiiatc). Arcas A and B, 50;0 and tlrcas C and
D, 60 0. Ir any porti.on or Areas r1 and D is Qcvcloped as an institutional
~ or educational centei•, tliese limitations m;ty pe modilic:a in accordance
with lmendment procedures specilied in Section 21.500 of the
Zoninb Ordinance.
S.' Parking. Offstreet pa.rl:ing shall be provided in
accordance with Article 14 of the Zoning Ordinance excent that
75 0 of the required parl:ing in Area !1 shall be located within
the main building or buildings. In Areas B and D, 500 oy the
required parl:ing shall be located witiiin thc main Uuildino or
buildings. On-sit-e parl:ing shall be provided for common carriers
providing charter service to the development; said bus parl;ing shall
be indicated on the Development Plan. No parl:ing or loading area
shall be located in any required front setbacl: area. If any
~ portion of Areas A and B is developed as an institutioiial or educational
~
center, these limitations may be moditied in accorda.nce i,:ith amend-
ment procedures specified in Section 21.500 of t}ie Zoning Ordinance.
J. Recreation Amenities Tax. The recreational anienities
tax due for the development with SD4 under Ordinance No. 2, Series
of 1974, of the Town of Vail, Colorado, shall be assessed at a
rate not to exceed $0.25 per squa,re foot of the floor area in clevelop-
ment Areas A, B, and C, and at a rate not to exceed $0.75 per
square foot in Development Area D; and shall be paid in conjunction
with each construction phase prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
K. Conservation and Pollution Controls.
(1) Developer's drainage plan shall include
C provision for prevention of pollution from surface run-off.
(2) Developer shall include in the building
construction energy and water conservation controls as general
technology exists at the time of construction.
C. . ~ .
I L. [:ecreational Amenities.
.
(1) The approved Development Plan sliall include the
followins recreational amenities:
(a) Bil:e and ~+edcstrian path traversing property
from east property line to west property line shall be provided by
' developcr with exact locltion to be mutually acceptaUle to developcr
~
and Town Council.
Additional Amenities.
p= ivatc
• (1) Developer shall provide adequate /transportation
services to the owners and guests of the developmcnt so as to transport
them from the development to Village Core area and Lionshead area as
. outlined in the approved Development Plan.
(2) Developer shall provide in its approved
Development Plan a bus shelter oi a desibn and location mutually a.greeaUle
to developer and Town Council. Saicl shelter to serve the area generally.
. N. Limitation on Existence of Specizl Development ,
District 4.
Prior to the adoption of the Approved Development Plan,
r~
the Town Council reserves to the Toivn the riglit to aUrogate or modify
SD4 for good cause through the enactment of an ordinance; provided,
however, that in the event the Town Council finds it to be a.ppropriate
to consider whether to abrogate or modify SD4 the proceclures shall
.
be as provided in Section 21.500 of the Zoning Ordinance pertainin;
to amendments.
0. Addition to Officia.l Zoning Map.
Special Development District 4 shal.l be indicated
on a map which amends and shall become an addition to the Official
Zoning Map. -
~
Town i,Cl erk
. . . ( -
; . .
Section 4. Effective Date.
This ordinance shall talce eftect in accordance with the
provisions of the Charter of the Totivn of Vail.
~
INTRODUCED, READ ON P'IRST REi1DING, APPROVED, and
ORDERED PUBLISfED ONCE IN I'ULL, this lOth day o:f I'cbruai•y, 1976,
~
and a public hearing on this ordinance shall bc held at the rebula,r
meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Vail, Colorado, on the
2nd day of hiarcli, 1976, at 7:30 P.M., in the hlunicipal Building
of the Town.
TOIYN 01'~,, AI
~
BY :
~ J n A. Dobson, biayor •
, •
ATTEST :
~ ~ •
Town Clerk
INTRODUCED, READ, ADOPTED and ORDL•'RED PUBLISHED
.in full this 2nd day ot Ma.rcil, 1976.
TOtiVN 0V L
BY :
J n A. DoUson, Mzyor
•y±'- ATTEST:: , . / .
Town' Clerk ~
~ ~l
. _ ....r.. . ' '
E:CHIIIIT "rl"
KOELIIEL PROPERTY
, DEVELOPidENT AREA A
Vail-Rose 12.370 acres
: A part of the SW 1/4 NG 1/4 of Section 12,
, Township 5 South, Range 81 LVest oF the 6th n.bi., described as
follows:
Beginning at a point on the I9est line of said ST9 1/4
\ NE 1/4 from which the North one-quarter corner ot said Section
; bears North 0015' East 2269.48 feet; thence tdorth 0015' East,
, along said [9est Line, 152.36.feet to a point on tne Southeasterly
right of way line of U.S. Iiighway DIO. G; thence, along said
Southeasterly right of way line, as follows:
North 52027' East, 102.31 feet;
North 49020' East, 519.57;feet; and
~ North 48013' East, 549.09 feet, more or less, to a point
on the North line of said S61 1/4 NE 1/4; thence North 83033'
East, along the North line of said SW 1/4 NE, 363 feet, nore or
less, to a point on the centerline of Gore Creck; thence, along the
centerline of Gore Creek, as follows:
South 36049' West, 101.04 feet;
South 18021' West, 54.08 feet;
South 1024' Lqest, 205.02 feet;
South 12010' West, 110.25 feet; and
' South 2II041' West, 242.35 feet, thence South 75015'
West, 1064.10 fcet to the point of beginning.
Rose Parcel 3.190 acres
; A tract of land situated in the SS•1;NE; of Section 12,
~ TP 5 S., R. 81 LJ., of the 6th P.h1., lying Southerly of that certain
j tract of land described in IIoo.}: 199, Page 197, Northerly and
I9esterly of the center line of Gore Creek, and lying Northerly and
Easterly of those certain tracts described in Book 211 at Page 106,
Book 211 at Page 108 and IIook 215 at Page 365, described as
follows:
, IIeginning at a point on the.North-South center line
of said Section 12 whence the North quarter corner of said Section
12 bears N. 00015' E. 2269.48 feet;
thence N. 75015' E. 346.26 fecL- to the true point of
beginning, said point being on the South line of that tract described
in Book 199, Page 197 and which bears S. 08026' E. 2205.34 feet
from the North quarter corner of said Section 12;
thence N. 75015' E. 717.84 feet along the Southerly
line of that tract described in Book 199, Page 197 to the center
of Gore Creek;
thence S. 28041' w. 130.61 feet along.the center line
of said Creek;
thence S. 05024130" E. 104.50 feet along the center
line of said Creek;
~ thence S. 49°29' W. 95.50 feet along the center line
of said Creek;
. thence S. 22034' W. 124.47 feet along the center line
; of said Creek;
thence S. 54000' W. 119.34 feet along the center line
of said Creek; to the Southeast corner of that certain tract of
% land described in Book 211, Page 108;
L thence N. 33°16'30" W. 140.12 feet along the Easterly
line of that tract described in Book 211 at page 108;
thence N. 57042'30" W. 169.88 feet along the
Northeasterly line of that tract described in Book 211 at page 108;
; thence N. 86002'30" W. 162,92 feet along the Northerly
line of those tracts described in Book 211 at Page 108 I3ook 211
at Page 106 to a point;
' thence N. 32057'30" W. 76.08 feet along the ~ v
Northeasterly line of that tract described in Book 215 at Page
169.
~
--'x j ..p~,~ ;;3~;~~ ~ - ~li~ ,~c~ t~~
ytir:..': ` l ~
f=;';~' ;
Parcel A- Ordinance 7, 1980
~ ~..a . cf~ect~..o ari:: .•i:
z.ia~eo (seeenlargemei ~ ~,~~"~,~"~~^'~'':.`.-•tf
v'~•
j: ' ~ .
r
Parcel A - Ordinance 7, 1980
' ~i..
Q {2C~IVG 2'13•00 • , ' ~ _ .:1:;,:_tiJ-' . _ .f~ - _
't.:7
. C
• 'l ~'1
. i:-'`•^`J: ~c p~• :s =
N_T
A5PF RF
' i . ` . • • ~ . - . - t
~ ~ . ! , : LIDtd S RIDGE~;;';~: ' A :4 f) .
='FIUNG N0. 4 '
~ZZ' C • . l : i . ~ . .
` ` Wt-{'rE RIVER Ordinance 7, 1970
e
_ , ,f..~~~ ~ ' Cr% : erft~ 5-2-70
Nl~TIONAL ` _ ' c" - s'' ~ FF
FORES T ' ` ~ ^ ` • ~ ~ t•~t%.: f^ SANDSTONE.?.4
's.r . • 4'i a• Li {21DGE
ING 0.1
Ordinancc 9, 1987 ~ . . • . ~i.:. i
f'ARCLL A ~ `~CASOI.(1RNAI~;~_~:'_.~ . ~
effrc~t,c I~Lt D7 i. n~•. .
(_ION':; ItIUf ~I: f IUNG NO. 2 n id;~
r~ I n0 A3.L[rN'
I-OWN or- VniL BouNDnRY ~~A , ' n nr. no i
\ . - • .
VAIL RUN
RIUGE
~•.~5::.'r - ~ • _ .;rz . ~i ~ v"L~ AI' VAIL' '~~~e- _ ~ . . .
. . - ~ • - . ~.~i, : ~ ...,.c~u 's-- - ~ , ~ . .
SItdBA - . .~n
' , _ . . . . . , j
THEjV~t'I_F
• ' ~ ~ CUFFSIDE. '
.T'~, ' ~ ~ . ~ •/um ~ . ::~i~~~~r / " . e,_'
~ ' ' . . . ej~~~ ' ' ' r. J~:. 1 ` . •
,10 ~ : 'r . . ~ • , - _ • "~F' . '
i . VALLI EyS~P GLEN L
~ . . ~ LIOfJS RIDGE FILING NO.~ 3,. ' HI
n c.c. d..•~~~ n
u rni+r u" o~. uvi s w~Y.[ n,er, z p• ~
- . • Ordinance 26, 1975
PART OF. ION'S-.' ' . effccfi'~c ~2~1o~7s J m
RI[X'i FILING NO. ~ = w
- CASCADE
. . ~ ~ O ' VILLAGE
rdinance 8, 1986
~ rn , . \ ~ • r ~r'~ eCfec+;,.c 4-9~ 3
~ „ \ - O
~ v~ . .n tl~ ~ w\: \ ` j<] ¢
~ ' • 'i~``~-r, /:e . . ~i:/ , ~ ~3 ~ -
~ r - -:s/,~' i J \ , ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ;
. ' ~
c ;
~ MfiTG1UHE
SCE :MCET 4
. :1~. , ;~~~~Ty. . ~ 1 ~ f, ~ SrIEEi 5
r
rv ; .
_ 'Li ,'~.~,~eg'~~,.d~``" ,+2:.cisa. - - - ~ ~ . . ~ . . , . • ~ . _
y'. . ~~x.::.... . • - • - , ;;;a.~ • .~v ~
- ~
; .
rOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH) TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH ,
RANGE 80 WEST RANGE 79 WEST.
12 7 N89°53'24" W 370.90' NE CORMER,N
13 18 ' Zy~'~p O _ ~40_00~ I 126.00' 9~.90~ ` 327.20* 345 35~ SEC. IB,TSS,
~2i d}'.
~
sti ~yWqr
3 N 4 N' S ^j q ~ Ea~s'so?S2q,,
n~ 2 " E al ''Ea 'yO
• 6 -
7
o ,9 eo.
iiF.l0'
r'~r 3 0 00
i i a
O ~t9, 14 i'02'.E .OO' 2 'O\~
o i / MAIN ~ • n~~ ,
' , : z ~a , , - • ~ , '°6
~°o 28.29. 160.00, G 0R E DRIVE m •oo. .
p
° o ~9 ' N 21.99' Vy`„~ 1 ~-5 ea ~N20°3•~~3G~~(
oa.~ /3 • 'BO 40. G U'
Po
/O
-S4 ~o:
rX~,'' Q '31 0~y~• O~ 6goJ~,2 _ 2 '9J.6 „h\~~95' ~ N61° 25 f•lV.
'brp
A:.~
.i..:~ '=~u: • / ,h q . ~O ~Jy 2 ~Oe, F1O 9S0'00 ~o 12
~
7.VL)i /A 9 ,3 2.i2 f C O
+-~D. ~O1YY h ~,,I , op • • s ~o
~O~ • O., ~ ~ ~JJ~ ~ QB.~i. s. b 2p 9~.~2• `f ,
T O Oi •
cG"''p v 21'
{..$6°OOlOO~~ W ~ . ~ .d° • ~~~oo ~ w ~9 6 - lLP
.00.
~ ~ ` e p ^ti JJT ~GR . ~lp lT o .O . Q s. ~ .
OO B
Z
LO ~2p. > . ~ y I l,~I . .
~ O
16
~"i"-•i4 - ~ ~$?5 5, 10 i m - B~ s ~ • ~4 0
ae b ' o o
~j M '00• 99.73' o M r~o.
o ~ 0,0a~Eo dP o oo
s ~ . 'G N61°,a Ol I
=.w q O O l`° N O io'bt'
;rc~.~ . a fl t~ x N •p `c~ \ ~ 0 3' oo • y . -
- - ~r .
s . 10
o •u~VO eq~>y~ ` ` ~hyfs e m° _ ?`w -i<i.oo, o o m _ . ~ 2
. 35 2,.~~ 4SEMP, ~2p (j0'~Jp~ - y~ 5 40'
i I p~p,~py~ee 0 S j4 0 0, p~ i . ~ ~ ~ //'~~y'r~ .3 y ' oo' R T • ' o I -
Zo ~ ~ 9G s ~
P 3 ,
~ ' JPM (n .
~E 9' a° . p I
0, p
i N `o 7 i
~ # SgS° c0.99 Q ~0 : ~\M O
7.00' . 2 00 ~i.; p I(~F,• ,~00.: \ O
Od~ IF 9 \ O O ~2v C .2)' 02' D.•. ti.i o 7
N 90°00'00W . ~ 90. fy.r-. . e , URyE ? `•N~ • o ~ - ~
190 °O0Oo"w - ' ~ . . ~ . • ' ~ \~4,y ~ ie O . ~ J I j ~~`W ~ ' ~ :
,,S
, tzi.oo2' ' E
: I ~ • ~ V G' S . ~~ess :o . oo.oo. _ ,c q
p s •oo, 2 ry . . . ` .
~••~,"i1 . ..L'.t.'t~'3r`~,,,..;'~3 , I. ~ ~ ~ L~ O~O, IO r
~ . .eM.. . • .
V 1 ~w r'rl c1~ L~~"ld
~
o~.
L
_ ~ , . ~7
~ . ~ . . - ~ ~ . . . S °
StlB°4a'J?-w
Q7' I 99!
3.79" 55
~ ~ . . _ . . _ . . ~3 N90ICO LO E . .
~-W
~ • • ~ 30 A7' ~q.
A.
N34°14'00'E~ ~ II
~ /22.30'
~~2t2 GYJ' TFACT B .
~ g 3.750 Ac. . 33~ E N LK'J7 ~S7 "E .
. . : . . . _ ~C Enrr.b~ p 1 o 36
179.50'
66 I4''6
II V
° 40*ACCESS B UT/C/TYlll"s •1 IE J I
EAS£A/EH7- 19 5: /
9 N6~55'91 ~
/S 'SEWER "t / ~ .....y
Ci~ l Y 12. /9 , 398 At S / EASEMENT
40
o ~ j10 ~ p4- ~Nm / 69° 9 p~~ n~ 6 rl /
.sasaa 727.ac i ~
~ 066 a 39 Z 1I0 04 N •n ° O 0S 42-i3 SB' Y /O
6 15.C~t7~ ,Yo .392Ac 0\ g
BB N
~ k
~ . a79Ac.
236. ~ o q
.a99 Ac. try ~ r ~
Ny~~J6 61BB 5 ~ qa. oa6~, 'b• ~ ~ 86 ~.,r ro P~ .7 %
11 s/x~ ~i
85.IX7 N .472Ac.
~ ' a q ~ r m , j0 ~ ` ~~•o,~. 's ~ , ~ ~ NJ/S// ~0ti, ~ \
q U • TYV iisc. , 1I0 509 Ae. b \ '~n 6o y
0 397Ac. ~ i ~ \
ta ' 1$ ~ 8 \ ~
p v~ .4/JAe 1^ ioremsni
110.~ 1''j11E5
/ .474Aa
.587AC. ry' . ~ E - A j / A ti ~ \
n, .77 Ac. , 'E ..itOac h
~ 110 SEWER 6
015,00 Js~.~ I 1 5 0 o T aiNAGE FASEMENI
.r 5 jRA~ J f v p~ ~ 1"\Z - k.,.~4+.E ' pZ~ (~P
Jo 9,~ ~ Os~ iJ,rJ . 2 ~ /~'•'{`~~~r cfl 'Sap`'t ~ 3
il ~p P. 9
` , N 42113 ,59 ~~W t~ot r C/.bsS ;
"~,z . ~ •p, ~jP ~19 2 - ,O' urIun EjSf.vE.•.
~ cP
/ 6, 28 BO, IJ'ELFC7aiC^ !conr ~
. Z 9 / ' s. ~ ~ `f, • ' ~
\A EASEMENI ~77 2 S'Y p . \
i/•i n•r~er siy S~' ~ /`•'r. 0. N20°G2~~GYJ~~E /1424 ' 2339J. Si•dpurd rea .
•c~•~,. - .>s,~. .ry q0 2~ 5/43' JIeM' 2J4 56' / / c90.09' aa 'raos'
9iw, <,ir r,~r S 88°/7 49 W /?BT.
opb \Subjec/ /o .dtte+r B U/i/i/r
a~ ~I saremeni recar0i0 J/iB/BO t;.95t7.:.9,Y
/
dwx JLYJ, Poys 790. ~
vs o A6 G• / C 2 ~ 3
~ Y Sa1. ,v,ac.,: cr sa;r_ - /
.J ~ /5 °35 69~ , /
/7 = 1,45. 3/
L ' S0. 62 '
r•r = N39 Pa'2d'w ~ . ~
50.46'
,
_
r v,
. . . . . . . . . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _
" _ ( . • _ . . _ _ _ '
- •Y~ _ -
Sub' ' '
ac! ,
. - - . / - '
. . . . . . . ..~.=ti.' . * ~ ' ' - - , ~
Ji/ . . . - . . ~
a . +
. - . . . .
l ~ ~ , .
~ I . .
A-se\ &KNje, LC;,-V-ve_ - "-~Qi -,ej S FPI .
I I LofS.
~ s
LOT SUMMARY CHART.(Nurobers shown are In square feet)
Parcel Area MaxlMUm Maxlmum Slte Zone Dlstrlct/Land Use
GRFA Covernge
Lot 1 87499 f 7333 6483 HlllsI de Residentlal
Lot 2 48146 6524 5674 Hlllslde Resldentlal
Lot 3 88619 8548 7698 Hlllslde Resldentlal
a Lot 4 85250 7016 6166 Hillslde Residentlal
Lot 5 61082 6827 5977 Hlllslde Resldentlal
Lot 6 82050 8220 7370 Hlllside Residentlal
Lot 7 43833 6309 5459 Hlllslde Residentlal
Lot 8 31873 5711 4781 Hlllslde Resldentlal
Lot 9 63044 7269 6419 HlllsI de Resldentlal
1^ Lot 10 32296 5732 4844 Hlllslde Resldential
Lot 11 71419 7688 6838 Hlllslde Resldentlal
Lot 12 96213 8928 8078 Hlllside Resldentlal
Lot 14 286022 [5397 4330 10000 Hlllslde Resldentlal
Lot 15 25596 3839 Hlllslde Resldentlal
Tract A 337222 - - Greenbelt and Natural Open Space
Tract B 5151 - - Greenbelt and Natural Open Space ~
Tract C 47279 - - Greenbelt and Natural Open Space
Tract D 152918 - - Prlvate Road
Tract E 6231 - - Public Road Right-of-Way
Tract F 68762 - - Public Road Right-of-wny
Tract G 2394 - - Publlc Road Rlght-of-Wny
NoTES, f4 ~Z
~
1> The lots In thls subdlvlslon where the average slope of the site
beneath the proposed structure and parking o,rea is in excess of
thlrty percent are subject to Sectlon 18,69.050 (A-D, F-I, K and
L) of the Town of Vall Munlclpal Code,
2) A maxlMUm of an additlonal 1200 square feet of bullding wll( be
allowed for a gnrage on each lot of thls subdlvlslon In excess
of the GRFA shown In the Lot Summary Chart above,
3) The constructlon for each lot wlll occur wlthin the platted
bullding envelopes wlth the following exceptlons, Drlveways,
sldewalks, garages that meet the requlrements of Section
18.69,050CA-D, F-J, K and L> of the Town of Vall Municipal Code,
retalning walls, surface parking and grading, as long as Town of
Val( Deslgn Revlew Board approvat Is.recelved and Impacts on
topography and vegetatlon are MInIMaI,
4) Three caretaker un I ts, each hav I ng o, mo,x I muM of 1200 square feet
and a mInIMUM of 500 square feet, shall be provlded wlthin the
subdivlslon. The units wlll be permanently restrlcted per
Sectlon 18,13,080 C10> (A-D) of the Town of Va,ll Munlclpal Code,
Three lots wlll be deslgnated In the Protectlve Covenants for
thls subdlvlslon on whlch caretaker unlts wlll be bullt, If lots
other than those lots orlglna(ly deslgnated provlde caretaker
unlts, the covenant restrlctlon will be llfted. The developer
May change deslgnated lots as long as there are three lots
deslgnated at att tlmes, Further Town of Vall revlew of the
deslgnatlons will not be requlred if the caretaker requlrement
Is Moved to another lot,
S) Date of Surveyi DeceMber 1982 & NoveMber 1992
6) Basls of Bearings Is a llne connecting the exlsting brass cap
monuMents marking the easterly llne of the SE 1/4 SV 1/4,
Sectlon 5, Townshlp 5 South, Range 80 Vest of the Slxth
Prlnclpal Merldlan, Town of Vall, Eagle County, Colorado being
S00'11'12'E <see drawing>,
7> MonuMentatlon as shown hereon.
h
~
ORDINANCE NO. 20
SERIES OF 1997
ANNUAL APPROPRIATION ORDINANCE: ADOPTING A BUDGET AND
FINANCIAL PLAN AND MAKING APPROPRIATIONS TO PAY THE GOSTS,
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.
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 yeaz.
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 $16,309,631
Capital Projects Fund 8,116,686
Real Estate Transfer Tax 2,290,438
Parking Structure Enterprise Fund 2,218,771
Heavy Equipment Fund 1,600941
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: $36,136,402
Less Interfund Transfers: < 7.471.777>
Net Budget 28 664 625
1 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
Mill levy credit .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
!
r
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL, this 21st 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.
Sybill Navas, Mayor-Pro Tem
AT-TEST:
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
u
~y
TOWN OF VAIL
Office of the Town Manager
75 South Frontage Road
Yail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2105/Fax 970-479-2157 MEMORANDUM
TM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Bob McLaurin
Town Manager
DATE: October 31, 1997
RE: Town Manager's Report
1998 Budget
At your October 21 st Council meeting, you approved the 1998 budget on first reading. Since
then, there have been two changes proposed to the general fund. All of the proposed additional
funding would be taken from the 1998 fund balance.
The first change involves increasing the funding of special events by $45,000, an action you
authorized at the October 28th work session. This expenditure will fund the two additional
special events; AVP Pro Tour and the Triple Crown Sports 3-on-3 Soccer Shootout, as
previously proposed by the VVTCB and the Vail Village Merchant Association.
The second modification to the general fund involves increasing the Art In Public Places budget
by $20,000. Ten thousand would be used to support ongoing maintenance of existing public art
(e.g., Children's Fountain) . The second half of this appropriation would be used to fund public
education and several AIPP programs. These funds were requested by the AIPP coordinator and
AIPP board, but I neglected to include them in the original budget. I believe these efforts are
important to the town public art program and feel they should be funded. I apologize for not
including them in the original budget.
We have scheduled some time at Tuesday's work session to review these proposed changes to
the budget prior to the second reading. If you have questions prior to the meeting, please give
me a call.
There is one additional item which will need to be addressed at the Council Retreat following our
municipal election November 18th, but this has not been included in the 1998 budget. This
issue is the funding of our ongoing efforts to attract and retain world-class employees who ,
exceed customer expectations. As Tony O'Rourke discussed last week, continual improvement
of an organization's employees is critical to our success as a resort community.
Cow01 RECYCLED PAPER
As you recall several months ago, the Council authorized an additional $30,000. expenditure
from the manager's contingency to fund organizational development training. We are currently
conducting these training sessions with all full time TOV employees. Although we will give you
a complete update in the next few weeks, the crux of this effort is to improve the personal and
professional effectiveness of each of our employees and to improve the effectiveness of the town
organization overall. A significant portion of the work-to-date focuses on the power of personal
choice. Some employee testimonials are attached to illustrate the powerful impact the training
has already had.
Because this work is so important to our future success, I will be asking you to adopt this effort
as a critical strategy during our upcoming retreat. From there, I will propose we develop an
action plan and implementation plan for 1998.
Pathways to Performance
TOV Employee Reaction
(Excerpts fi°om the November Talk of the Town)
Many of us believe we do an exceptional job in serving our external customers. However, most
of us have said there's room for improvement with our internal functions, including
communication, teamwork, decision-making, accountability and recognition. But don't look for
any immediate improvement in these areas--unless you, as an employee, are willing to become
involved.
Involvement in this case, means using the tools and resources provided to us through the
"Pathways to Performance" personal development training with Scott Spann. As of Oct. 17,
more than 40 employees-- the executive team and division heads--had completed the sessions.
On Nov. 6-7, Nov. 10-11 and Nov. 13-14, the remainder of our full-time employees are
scheduled to share the same experiences.
Will it make a difference? Looks like it already has. Here's what some of us are saying about
the training's impact:
• "My eyes have been opened wider with the issue of respect for individuals. I've already
noticed a greater amount of respect among the group." Sally Lorton
• "It helped clarify where we are at and where we want to go as an organization. The
training helped me see that other TOV departments are dealing with many of the same
issues and problems as my department. It helped build relationships with managers from
other departments." Jim Applegate
• "The training helped clarify my professional mission and helped me focus on why I want
to come to work every day." Steve Thompson
• "The training put me back in touch with the notion that WE have the ability to choose
how we react to any stimulus." Jeff Layman
• "It has helped me recognize my personal and professional purpose in life. In clearly
identifying these life defining goals, it assists in giving clarity to how I perform on a day-
to-day basis. For me, it is important to recognize what stands in the way of achieving my
goals and how I have control over removing these roadblocks." Tom Moorhead
• "Going through the training confirmed my belief that there is very little difference in how
we handle our work life and personal life. Having the same basic human values in
everything we do, whether work or play, is essential. I also kept with me the fact that I
can make a difference, whether it's just in my attitude or the attitudes of the people I
come in contact with--not accepting cynicism because as a whole we do have a good
organization with wonderful people who care. I also realize that not everyone will agree
with my comments, but it's their choice how they spend their time here. I choose to make
the most of it." Susie Hervert
• "I have already seen an improvement in communication." Bert Hauser
COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP
TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOW-UP SOLUTIONS
1997 BOB/MIKE MlDOMINIC: Research the following: 1) Develop 1) Staff has maps showing potential exclusions from parking pay-in-lieu,
06104 PAY IN LIEU PARKING a list of properties in CCI and CCII that have access to public (i.e., properties with access); 2) Staff is analyzing the overall parking
ROW, to potentially exclude their eligibility for pay-in-lieu requirements per the zoning code. Staff has met with Ed Del Duca who
parking; 2) Analysis of the TOV's current parking has developed a computer-based "shared parking model" which analyzes
requirements (compare CCI, CCII and West Vail); and 3) parking requirements based upon use and time of demand. Staff has
Discuss parking analysis with Ed Del Duca. entered into a contract with Ed to utilize his shared parking model; 3) Staff
is considering using Lionshead as the model for the shared parking
analysis, specifically as it relates to the Lionshead Master Plan. This
information would also be applicable to Vail Village and West Vail.
10/31 LOADINGlDELIVERY INFRA- SUZANNE/BOBlLARRY/GREGITOM: Council requested to A process to improve loading and delivery management for the short-term
STRUCTURE MANAGEMENT PLAN exclude large delivery trucks and semi's from the Village and is underway with plans for implementation of Council-approved actions in
Lionshead. December. In addition to the short-term review, Centennial Engineering
also has been retained to work with the community in evaluating long-term
solutions with the schedule calling for a final decision by Council in March.
Following a site visit in the Village on Oct. 21 in which more than a dozen
solutions were brain stormed, a series of public meetings will be held Nov.
12 and 13 to review and select preferred short-term improvements. This
feedback will be shared with Council at the Nov. 18 work session. A final
decision on short-term improvements by the Council is scheduled for the
Nov. 25 work session. The work will then shift to evaluation of long-term
solutions, includin feasibilit and costs.
October 31,1997, Page 1
RECEIUED OCT 2 3 1997
C~pRSUC~.
LT D
•Skicr's TrrJitionTuesday, October 21, 1997
Vail Town Council
Town of Vail
75 S Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
To the Vail Town Council,
The purpose of this letter is to make clear that Gorsuch Ltd. is not in support of
the position of the Vail Village Merchant Associations proposal to reallocate a portion
($109,000) of the funds collected from the business license fee's to itself instead of going to
the Vail Valley Marketing Board.
The intention of the Vail Village Merchant Association is to use these funds to
promote the Vail Village exclusively through special events, marketing brochures,
training seminars etc. Philosophically we don't agree that the merchant association has
the expertise to perform this function. These funds have gone to the Marketing board
for the purpose of promoting valley wide tourism. If we start to cut back on the funds to
promote the vail valley, we can have all the special events in the world but no one to
come to them. We need to continue to support and work with the Vail Valley Tourism &
Convention Bureau as well as the Marketing Board, who have the expertise, and lobby
our concerns regarding the promotion of the Vail Village. To be at opposing ends is not
the way to accomplish this.
Sincere
Jeff Gorsuch
263 E. Gore Creek Drive, Vail Colorado 81657 970/476-2880 Fax 970/476-4323
Printed by Pam Brandmeyer 10/30/97 8:33am
------------------------------~XJw'" /
From: Pam Brandmeyer
To: EVERYONE GROUP
Subject: HOLLY UPDATE
---------------------------------------L~~v
===NOTE====------=====10/30/97==8:30am=
Holly had an elective surgery last
night (went in at 7:30 P.M.) to remove
her thyroid + 1(of 4) parathyroid
glands. I was fortunate to be in
Denver for an eye appointment yesterday
afternoon and was able to track her
down at St. Anthony's. She was her
"usual" heroic self - and that attitude
and perseverence is what will
EVENTUALLY get Holly throuqh all this
ugliness. The surgery was expected to
take up to 3 hours but took just an
hour and 15 minutes. Good news. The
cancer was completely contained within
those two glands - additional good
news. Her physician, Dr. Mosea, who
also performed the double mastectomy a
couple years ago, believes he got
everything and that this tumor had been
there at least as long as the tumor in
her lung. She had a good night last
night and when I called this A.M. - was
consuming that orange Kool-aid stuff to
prepare for a CAT scan around 10 this
morning.
Holly is doing well - I know this is
discouraging and may be seen as a major
setback for those of you who have
recently seen or talked w/Holly and
have believed she was getting
healthier. She is and will be. But
she still has one heck of a fight on
her hands. With our event this coming
Saturday evening, I want to let you
know you I believe you should in no way
hesitate to let Holly's supporters know
that she's had an additional surgery.
Her doctor believes she will be well
enough to travel to Germany on the 18th
- but I will also keep you up-to-speed
on what today's pictures reveal.
Should there be revelations of a
negative nature - I believe Holly has
already indicated she would re-consider
the protocol she wishes to pursue,
e.g., the stem cell rescue at the
University of Colorado Medical Center.
We'll see what the day brings - pray
for Holly.
Page: 1
r
~ Now one carci.
, . ~
offers savi~-igs w CoLORAno
N iour of Colorado's cA x Q
a beSt t"eSOI"rS. 1097-98 uft 'llcket Rates .
?G!i/BEAVEB [REf[t
>'4z:~ caonuo wo uK aro"~ ?y
susN utru waa a?w no
~ VA1L ~ Opan-11/26 544 Y496 SYO
'
11/71-11/L4 S39 2196 SID
onac ls never cC„°;o11/30_12/25 S77 31% sto
euo?tgh. Vail Mounlt,iin
, .r.: :
11tc l.irbtzl itnd most 17/28-1/3 • $53 596 SiD
; .
liopuhir ski resort in 1/9-2113 S79 76lG Si0
1Ka Ilti Nrierica, is . 2/14 •4/S S39 3Dy# $24 twcaminN men twitc:r. ~~lhm 4/6 -Oox S32 41%
N1iik1 S14m1lUun in ~8
iticw resort lmprove
iix:nts this scason. Vuil %vill fus»urc BaECiIfMRIDGE/KEYSfOHE
ini>>nwu! ~;ruaming,ll~c luxucf(jus I:ii~;Ic I ~ u~a
= R.
naltin-Wanclaluimci I0highspoccl quaut qpen•11/28 S21 ip% $12 ;iz=:.*
Lt.tlrlifrs. Venturc; inln vi1ll's l.ege:ndar),
L;,ick [tanlls'" for an cxpcxlcncc af a 11/77-11/Z9 US u%
lilc:iirnV. nnci lhis yc:ar, snowlmarvlers %n,Ul E1/30 -12/23 S24 499d
unjuy morc hcaripouncfuig atlr.u:Wn5 12J26-1/3 $44 lox SlI
Eltan evcf ucfore. 1/4-2/13 S74 21% St2 a
,,.a.~ 2110•4/S SIS 1g9G $lt
9J6-342 S7S 47% s12
§o 0 13EAVLiZ C:RF_EK°
k2 ESORT 'C6ilmn opr ill.Clil,.. 4 ond lina. IM rw..
~ Za
1'hreo valleys entl Nvc shar~. f3ea?~cr gccwi.ne a Coloredo Cord meml~cr and
Crcx;A. Caluracio's meost elegarn wd e,rjoy acsevir;gs and re-tvurda wheu you '
Iniimaic rc;sort. is uttidcrg~ altt ? txciiin •
K eki or snowboard Ihia sc,asatL Call
vImpruvcmcMs. To cnhancc hs unlrluc
Yillagc4oVillaKOll skllng .i nc;w r,ign(303) 504-5870 ~r Q
~ spccxl quacl chairtifi will hc .icActc:cl 'o'he cir l'ISIt OIIC OI fIlL' t'aAltT SPUlfl3
tiviilitgG oc:rilcr will be wm}ilc;tui.ihis yc:ar, - •7A
Iocallons UsIe:d on thc back,
• inctt+ciiitk Itie new Vilar C:e:rtlct !or lhe
nmi Q~ nris, a ricw icx; arcitia, rnnre shoppintf,
ancl iwo ncw basc; arc:a reslauranis. CilE1[Y TB~$ ~ ~.=%'rt
'I'hcsc improvemciits are piurlrg ihc: Aruil 42or
lu«chcs un ilc.°uvcrt'rcx:k.
ox~i~v'riMU m ~mutxn
' . , x~a
. .
~ VA I L Y our season pass has more value than
Once is Never Enough. ever before...with more terrain, more
ail Hountain, with Colorado's best terrain, is already ' improvements and more resorts. Now you
Vthe largest and most popular ski resort in North car? ski all four resorts with just one pass.
America. With $14 million in improvements this season, Or, choose from a variety of pass types th:=
Vail will feature even better grooming, ski schools, dining wi11 best 6t you and your family's
and activities. Plus, Vail offers easy access to downhill needs. With a season pass, you'll
excitement with 10 high-speed quads. Start the day in the have added convenience and new resort charge privileges ~ °Legend:iry Back Bow1sT"' boasting 2,734 acres of deep at all four resorts. Plus, this season, these.passes are valid im
powder, wide-open runs and unbelievable beauty for both for skung at Arapahoe Basin.
skiers ;uid snowboarders. Then, you can finish off your
day in charming, pedestrian-only Vail Yillage. ' ' e Basin
Five Resort Futl Adult • . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a 1,39~
B E AV E R C R E E K five xeson value Aduict • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . $t,o9~.
ThPCC V111eYS aIld F1VC $IaPS. Keystone & Breckenridge Full AdulN -
On or before I1/21/97 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . $ 756
~ eaver Creek is Colorado's most intimate and elegant . pfcer 11/21/97 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 95Cl
resort, and Eeatures European-style Village-to-V'illage Five Resort fLll Young Adult (19-22) onlv mibble umit 11aU97' E 495
skiingT~" High-speed quads link Beaver Creek, Bachelor Five Resort fiull Teen (13-18)• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 395
Gu1chTM and Arrowhead. Aher the day's activities, relax Five Resort Full Child (5-12)' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 195
and enjoy gourmet dining on or off the mountain. Five Resort Access Plus• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 60
Finishing touches to the village for this season include Five Resort Access• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 55
Market Square with retail shops and amenities for the Keystone & Breckenridge Full Senior (65-69)• • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a 595
entire famiiy, including a year-round ice-skating rink Five Resort Full Senior (65-69)" . . . • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a 895
which is built above the 530-seat Vilar Center for the Five Resort Full Senior (70+)• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . # 30
Performing Arts. Keystone & Breckenridge Family Program Only availabfe undl i IR 1/97°
K E Y S T 0 N E Parent (1 g+) up to two • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 695
Child (5-18) with each paid parent pass' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FREE
The Nature of the Rockies.
olorado's premier family resort encompasses three pass Arapahoe B
C spectacular peaks. Great groomed and lighted runs, a Vail & Beaver Creek Value Senior (65-69)t' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a 745
twentv acre snowboard garden, a state-of-the-art lift
IIe[WOTk IRC1UdIIIg IWO g0I1d013S, Ii131t2 fOt llI1SllPp8SSed _ ~ Pnces and benefits are subject to chu~ge withou[ nod6cation. You must be present to purchace.
day and night skiing. This year'S ~ 1 ~ fI111~10II lil . ~ Specified pass npcc will auromaiic2lly be credited with 8,000 Peakc points with the purchase of
the pass.
improvemenu will make Keystone even more excitinng, t wuses are not valid u vail and eemr Creek wtil l t/30i97. Restricted dates az vail and Beaver
including a new high-speed quad at the base of River Run Creek aze 12l26/97•1/3/98; I/17/98-1/t8l98; 2114/98-v15r98.
_ providing access direcdy to the summit of Keystone ' Proof of age required.
Mountain. A short six miles from Keystone is The Legend, '~~cess and dccess Plus put holders must have a pertnanent disabiliN thaz significanUy a6ects the
person's abihty ro Func[ion in daily life or who cannoc sld independenUy or safely without adaptive
:~rapahoe Basin. As the condnent's highest slci area, sld devices or techniques.
. A-B1S1I1 1S 1CIlOWI1 fOf I}le deePQS[ SIIOW 3lld S(eQpQSI ~ To receive the Family Progrem rates. you must purchaze a minimum of one Adul[ and one Child oi
tenain in the region and often stays open into July. Teen ros. Resu+ctions appiv.
. ' • Children 4 and under ski free u'all Eour resons; visit any lift ucke[ office (or details.
B R E l^ , K E N R I D G E Reysrone & Breckenridge•only pass holders can sld Vail and Beaver Creek for just E20.00 per day or
CiAld RllSjl TOWII. PUI'e RUS}1 MOUIItiL1II. a[the Colorado Cant rate during the resvicted dates.t Vail & BeaverCreek Value Seniorpass holder.
_ can ski Keystone and Breckrnridge for only $20.00 per day. Value season pass holders on purchue
A g31I1SI [hQ b3Ckdl'Op Of 3 t11S[OI'IC VICtOI'lan Rl1R1Ilg li(t tickecs ai the Colorado Card rete dunng restricted da[es.
town, Breckenridge is one of Colorado's most entlcing
mountain resorts. Why? Some sayit's the character: true N~W RESORT CHARGE PRIVILEGES
small-town charm amidst the abundant cafes and shops of
a chamung Main Street. Others say it's the slopes: four O ur new resort charge privilege is an exclusive feature that allows
interconnected peaks that offer espansive terrain to host you to use your season pass to charge dining at on-mountain
both skiers and snowboarders. This season's most restaurants. And at Vail and Beaver Creek, you can also use your pass
ambidous capital improvement plan in Breckenridge's to charge ski school lessons and retail and rental equipment
36-year history also means new high-speed lihs, increased purchases up to $100. Simply complete the credit card information
guest amenities, and improved teaching areas for slciers and authorizadon on your application and your credit card of choice
and snowboarders. will be charged.
e `
/~f .
V~
. COLORADO MOUNTAIN COLLEGE
SUMMARY OF
COMMUNITY CONVERSATIONS
COLLEGEWIDE
1996-1997
'
COM CONVERSATION SUMMARY
CENTER FOR EXCELLENCE IN THE ARTS: Rif1e Campus
-CMC could assist the local theater groups --Art, painting, and ceramics needs to be expanded in Parachute --A chamber music series couid be brought to Rifle and west Gar6eld County
-A forum is needed to show more student art
-CMC could partner with the Book Cliff Arts Council to bring arts events to thc area
-CMC could assist the local school districts in expanding their arts program
-Create a home for summer stock in west Garfield County assisted by Denver area groups
-Partner with the schools for artist-in-residence programs - -
-Showcase folklore and local history through storytelling and exhibits
-Create a fitm series/art cinema series in the area
-There is a need to coordinate efforts and provide a facility such as a Center, for bringing arts
efforts together
VaiVEagle Campus
-Include horticulturaVenvironmental components in the arts
-Explore enhanced collaboration with the Eagle County Schoal District regarding arts classes for
high school students and using school facilities and art instructors for CMC arts courses
-Explore an artists in residence program at Cordillera
-Broaden collaboration with existing arts efforts in the area
-Partner with proposed and existing performing arts centers in the valley
-Coordinate publicizing arts events in the valley to a widespread audience
-Keep the corporate community informed of CMC's arts efforts so duplication does not occur and.
resources are best utilized; i.e., synergy Carbondale Center
-Draw upon local, international and nationally known artists' expertise to acknowledge the high
quality of local art/artists
= "Touch base" with these artists ,
-Connect with Aspen aRists as well
-RecognizeJadvertise CMC instructors who have national representatives
-Recognize arts as "center" -"vocational," life get greater through art
-Fine arts "emphasis area?"
-Clarify the "pay-ff' for study in the arts - what is the loss is we do not?
August I, 1997 1
.
Alpine Campus
-The community needs more facilities for the arts in order to enhance the arts at CMC (CMC is
loolcing to remodel the old dorms for arts programs usage) .
-CMC to explore hiring a full-time faailty member to lead the curriculum for the arts
-CMC could help coordinate various arts initiatives/events in the valley which are numerous and
somewhat uncoordinated
. -CMC could offer employable people to industry due to their connectiveness/exposure tQ the arts-
. -creative, well rounded, culturally appreciative (develops better employees/students) . -A potential new progam could be teaching arts as a business (an "incubator) - -
-CMC could pursue new resident progams in the. arts during the summer (artists in residence) -CMC could assess commutity needs in the arts
CENTER FOR EXCELLENCE IN TECHNOLOGY:
Ritle Campus
. -Local businesses are worlcing on a technology center. Rifle needs to attract more businesses and
then train people to work in those businesses to keep the work force at home
-CMC could offer more baccalaureate and graduate progams via technology to the area
-CMC could host an information session to inform businesses and local community members of
the technological opportunities offered through the college
-Rifle Campus could host an open house to demonstrate the interactive video system
• -In order to entice industry to the area, CMC could partner with govemment to attract them
through the development of a training center to educate the work force. Example - the electrical
trades being taught utilizing the technology
-The ParachutelBattlement Mesa area has a myriad of talented people CMC and the local area can
draw upon
-Programs could be developed to assist people to get over "techno phobia" - -
-Teaching students working in technology how to work in teams is needed
--CMC shotild continue worlcing with the high schools to bring NS to'their locations so high
school students have access to upper level courses
-Industry is looking for a sophisticated level of technology before moving in; CMC may not be
able to provide such a high level as major universities can; the town cannot support it without a
major airport. Start-up industries and smaller industries would be attracted, however
-CMC could provide more outreach to the area's young citizens who are having to commute to
work
-The Internet could be utilized more for outreach to students. This needs to be balanced with
social skills training
-The cost of operating technology is expensive; businesses could be resource for the technology
and education could oker the educational aspect; i.e., school-to-career .
August 1, 1997 3
-Create weekend opportunities for specialized goups on the NS in I.eadville, Buena Visa, Salida,
etc.
Funds and grants need to be found for Chaffee County access to the NS; no district taxes;
. students want it
-Grow business through technology; i.e., Internet commerce?
-CMC can become an "anchor tenant" for regional and local "shopping center" for technology
-Coordinate lobbying efforts; i.e., PUC -CMC lends clout to initiatives with utilities such as US West
-CMC needs to make sure students, community, part-time and alternative students, and adult learners have access to the Intemet - '-Professors need to be up to speed
-Dial up capabilities to the Internet could be offered -K-12 linkage is strengthening due to the technology
-Increase leaming ability and make the hardware connectivity easier
-CMC could become a technology incubator/consultant, technology support, co-op technology
services
Summit County
-Keep information access and technology access from being elitist
-Harness. ideas for quality planning to implement technology; pool resources so it serves diverse
interests and businesses
-The emphasis on arts is not needed; emphasis on trade and technology is! (This is also under
"ArtS")
-Use local technology to enhance CMC offerings
-Use the technology for financial linkages and partnerships
-Use CMC's technology for conferencing as a revenue generating source (capacity issue;
weekend use)
-Address the speed of new technology and collaboration possibilities
- Be an "anchor tenam" for_technology
-Respond - continue talcing NS -and Internet training to SkiCo and schools
-Get private sector (US West, TCI, Summit Telecom, etc) to fund infrastructure
Aspen Campus
-CMC could share resources with K-12 systems (CMC is perceived as having access to a lot)
-Continue to collaborate with business, etc. (CMC is doing a good job); CMC is the right
organization
-Avoid duplication
-Through technology, CMC can help local non-profits reach larger audiences and enhance their fundraising profile
August 1, 1997 5
-CMC could work with the school-to-career initiative and career counselors so that high school
students make CMC their first choice
-There is a nced to collaborate with other entities to stretch the limited resources
Carbondale Center -Create an urternship system for students (related to business and leadership), reference school-ta
career, include service clubs; CMC can provide mertoring worlcshops (This is also under
"I.eadership")
Spring Valley Campus
-Offer business training at affordable costs
-Have business people apprentice young students (school-to-career program)
-Job skills training is needed in K-12 Timberline Campus .
-Link students with business partners
-Rent NS time to local businesses
-Use NS in small business development
Summit Campus
-How do we build the right links for career training7
-Bring access to businesses to get skilled employees and to serve potential employees (school-to-
career)
-Reduce costs to local businesses to accessing high bandwidth
-Increase the K=121ink
-Offer trade and technical courses (certificates, hands-on instruction)
-Create partnerships to provide trade instruction -Create linkages to bring business and community together for training
-Conduct a public relations campaign with the business community to inform them about
technological opportunities
Aspen Campus
Nothing under business
Alpine Campus .
-CMC could conduct needs assessment of local businesses
-CMC could provide a Small Business Development Center "salesperson" to call on local
businesses to assess their needs and set up customized training
August 1, 1997 . 7
• . .
-CMC could proyide a training ground for leaders m the valley
-CMC needs to increase its visibility in the valley
-Develop more partnerships with the schools; i.e., the learning community concept
-CMC could assist in assessing existing building issues
-Explore a"time share" concept for building usage for the community, CMC, the schools, and
other organizations; i.e., a"one stop shop"
-Involve high school students in leadership education
-Cordillera is willing to be a partner in regional problem-solving processes _
. -CMC could assist in getting major employers to the table to implement solutions to regional
- problems in an expedient time frame -CMC could utilize and collaborate with existing leadership/problem-solving organizations such
as Vail Tomorrow
Carbondale Center
-Enhance leadership institute efforts (include H'ispanic community), collaborate with other
agencies such as a"leadership Carbondale"
-Collaboration is needed; determine what groups are doing what, clarify leadership roles. CMC
has a role and can be the initiator, convener and facilitator. CMC could be a"clearing house" for
commutity issues
-Create an internship system for students (related to business and leadership), reference school-to-
career, include service clubs; CMC can provide mentoring workshops (This is also under
"Business")
-CMC can support a county-wide regional focus on problems, perhaps via the leadership center;
CMC can provide the forum for discussion/conflict resolution (relate to Aspen Board for conflict
resolution)
Spring Valley Campus
---Interact with K-12 in new ways; i.e., field trips . ; -K-12 and CMC can cooperate and build a community-wide approach to resource sharing _
-Develop a 'community curriculum together
-CMC and K-12 can work together to move high school students to college - students need to be
aware of CMC options
-Help students who may not think of themselves as "college bound" learn more about CMC
options
-Utilize teaching resources to support K-12
-CMC could facilitate city/county government cooperation
=`How can we help" phone call - can we facilitate this conversation using CMC resources?
-Small city govemment might need the service of facilitation
-CMC could coordinate public forums
-Start quietly and deliberately in facilitating public interestlforums
-Develop faculty-to-faculty connections between K-12 and CMC
-Enhance the school, college, community relationship
August 1, 1997 9
. .
~
-Leadership to solve problems long-term would be a major goal of the leadership institute
-Making arts and leadership resources available to CMC students (This is also under "Arts")
Alpine Campus .
-CMC could bring the Aspen Institute seminar on leadership to Steamboat
-CMC could facilitate monthly meetings between key businesslcommunity leaders to create a
- networking opportunity on a regular basis -CMC can lead the way in bringing higher level leaders together to solve regional problems
-CMC can become involved with school-to-career initiatives in the community and in bringing a
leadership program to the students (in the curriculum)
-H'igh school students need more availability to technical training - CMC could supply this
=CMC could explore volunteerism as an aspect of leadership training
-CMC could help people get connected with volunteering and in training businesses in how to use
volunteers
-CMC can assist ensuring there is communication between groups to avoid duplication
-CMC could ensure the church community is involved in community issues and communications
Miscellaneous Comments
-Help establish local organizations, either NPO's or business or government
-Reach out to the Spanish speaking community
-Be sure to keep a broad perspective - all of the Roaring Fork Valley, all of CMC, etc.
-Look at what Carbondale will look like in 10 years, especially related to gowth and development
-Individual one-on-one is the prime motivator of students
-Communication needs to be prime focus because without communication none of these initiatives
can work
-Link all the pieces of CMC to unify CMC -Compete for students - share CMC expertise
-Assess educational delivery without brick and mortar (e.g., Western Governor's Uruversity)
. -Maxiiriize time saving benefits
_ -CMC needs to tell non-profits what they need - to work together, share speakers (the Aspen
Institute cari provide C-SPAN lectures) -CMC can prepare for the future - integrate%ducate Hispanics
-Giving scholarships to needy people ,
August 1, 1997 11
, x c Catiu~c,~.e.
. 6 .
~Town of Vail
Sales Tax Estimation Worksheet
10/28/97
, Y CAange % Chang¢
1997 euaget ?rom /rpm
onth 19W 1907 >aes 1e89 1e90
1941 1992 1993 1094 isas 1946 eudeer Esumsra vanence
1996 . Budpef
. ~ : •.:.::.;:.::.;:::.:;::.r.::.;..r.;•:.;::::::
Janua 890,585 1,063,196 1,126,496 1,465,870 1,599,123 1,713,091 1,709,654 1,855,364 1,805,707 1,894,597 1,935,782 2,016,779 2,051,123 34,344 5.96% 1.709'0
Februa 946,552 1,135,786 1,205,101 1,561,286 1,695,850 1,737,343 1,780,568 1,828,766 1,814,495 1,816,107 1,993,389 2,059,387 2,088,228 28,841 4.76% 1.409'0
March 1,316,652 1,378,7821,591,705 1,939,758 1,897,718 2,051;820 1,977,995 1,988,090 2,250,656 2,139,298 2,240,865 2,315,035 2,579,724 264,689 15.12% 11.43%
Aprll 430,877 425,961 550,205 567,684 634,174 616,648 691,163 864,303 794,668 791,092 966,993 1,008,389 872,820 (135,469) -9.73% -13.43%
May 244,987 245,518 170,567 215,548 236,359 250,809 268,000 257,248 287,315 324,681 318,920 326,661 328,325 1,664 2:95% 0.51%
June 361,627 331,581 329,039 393,470 448,227 " 468,948 468,598 475,161 548,820 590,685 594,907 610,715 628,909 18,194 5.72% 2.98%
JuIY 479,507 479,201 559,683 649,139 665,094 737,288 742,750 811,538 892,830 893,483 963,717 994,187 1,038,535 44,348 7.76% . 4.46%
August 512,513 536,904 575,887 668,119 678,071 761,992 767,257 825,954 891,566 867,125 990,650 1,022,592 1,065,211 42,619 7.53% ~
4.17 /o
Se tember 374,060 442,402 422,502 469,032 482,328 491,684 485,954 560,535 725,205 645,902 630,453 653,323 629,055
(24,268) -0.22% -3.71%
. ~ ~:>:;:;.::.;:.;:.;;:.:.:;.;:;<:;;:;.:<;:;;
Total 5,557,360 6,039,331 6,531,185 7,929,906 8,336,944 8,829,623 8,891,939 9,466,959 10,011,262 9,962,970 10,635,676 11,007,068 11,282,03 a
~
0 274962 6.08/0 2.50
, ~0
. : :
October 237,504 273,951 291,204 335,740 364,002 324,802 367,578 400,525 408,405 461,791 413,573 426,080
November 376,657 386,270 376,235 430,820 438,731 428,086 497,907 553,681 594,491 611,147 601,208 624,917
December 1,167,2801,245,6121,455,948 1,615,278 1,625,219 1,691,775 1,846,223 1,974,553 1,992,855 1,994,540 2,068,851 2,144603
. . . . ;•.;:.;•:::.:;.:;<:.:>:;;:.;:.;::;:::.:><::;;:;;:::;<.::.;;:.;:;:::<:>::>::>::::::»:::
Total 7,338,801 7,945,164 8,654,572 10,311,744 10,764,896 11,274,286 11,603,647 12,395,718 13,007,013 13,030,448 13,719,308 14,202,668 11,282,030 274,962
A
cr. . .
?
~ . RECEIVED OCT 3 0 1997
OFFICE OF THE ' BOARP OF COMMISSIONERS
(970)328-8605
FAX (970) 326-7207
TDD (970) 328-8797 JUHNNETTE PHILLJPS
Email: Eagleco@vail.net JAMES E. JOHNSON, JFI.
t+uup://www.e4e-wuntr.com EAGLE CQl.1NTY, COLORADO GEORGE A. "BUp° GATES
October 29, 1997 - 8:17
. AGENDA
BOARD QF COIJNTY CQMMISSIQNERS
REGULAR MEETlNG DAY
NOVEMBER 3; 1997
Y W W fitdr i ik~lririlk**fi'k*f tYrR*tfltltfr*~ tklr~ktklk'r fY tk /ti
1. 8:30 - 9:15 WORK SESSION - ATTQRNEY'S UPDATE
eoCC Conf. Room James R. Fritze, County Attorney
2. 9:15 -10_OQ UVQRK SESSION -1NEEKLY UPDATE
Bocc conf. Row+, Jim Hartmann, County Administrator
10:00 -10:75 RREAK
. 10:15 OIV THE RECORD
ftyle Countl Room
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Itcros of a routine and rmn-cantroversial nature are plaead on the canfient agende iv albw tha Board of Caurdy Commisslonars to spend
Its tlme 0nd en9lyy on more IrtlxxUnf items on e lenethy ependa. My CnmmiRsiruwr mAy re%srW that an Po9M be "REMOVED" fian the
consent apenda and cbnsidered separately. My mamhar ot the puhlic may'REQUEST arry item be "REMOVED" from the oonsent
agenda.
A. APPRQVAI. QF BILL PAYING FOR TFiE WEEKS OF
NOVEMBER 3, AND NOVEMBER 10, 1987 (SUBJECT
TO REVIEW BY THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR)
Mark Silverthom, Finance Department
B. APPROVAL OF PAYRdLL FOR NOVEMBER 6,1997
(SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THE COUNTY
ADMINISTRATOR)
Mark Silverthorn, Finance Department
Eagle Councy Building, 500 Broadvray, P.O. Box 850, Eagle, Colorado 8163 1-0850
i
Eagle Board of County Commissioners
Agenda, November 3, 1997
Page Two
C. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES QF THE EAGLE
BQARD QF COUNTY CQIIAIWISSIONERS MEETtNGS
FOR QCTOBER 27, 1997
Sara Fisher, County Clerk and Recorder
D. AGREEMENT BETWEEN EAGLE GOUNTY, STATE
OF COLORADO AND THE CQLQRAhO AVALANCHE
INFQRMATION CENTER TQ PROVIDE AVALANGHE
INFORMATIOPI AND EDUCATION FOR THE
BENEFIT OF 7HE RESIDENTS QF EAGLE COUNTY
Attarney's Office Designee
. E. CHANGE QRpER NO.1 FOR THE 1997 GUARDRpIL
CONTRACT BETWEEN F-AGLE COUNTY, STAI'E OF
COLORADO ANb GONZALES CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY, INC.
Peter Sulmeisters, Engineering Department
F. CHANGE ORDER NO., 1 TQ THE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN EAGLE COUNTY, 5TATE QF COLC?RADO
AND MOTOROLA, [NC. FOR THE MICRQWAVE
ECC,ZUIPli1fENT (TABLED FROM 10120/87)
A.J. Johnsan, County SherifF
G. RESOLUTIQN AND POWER QF ATTORNEY
CONFERRlNG AUTHORITY ON THE AT"i'ORNEY'S
OFFICE T4 DRAW ON LETTER QF CREDIT FOR
VAIUQRROWHEAD, INC. LETTER QF CREDIT NO.
6086 FRBN! GdLORADO NATIONAL BANK IN TFIE
AMOUNT OF $2379119.63 Tb EXPIRE NOVEMpER
15, 1997
. Attorney's Office Designee .
H. RESOLUTION AND I'OWER OF ATTORNEY
CONFERRING AUTHQRITY ON ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE TO DRAW ON LETTER OF CRF-bIT FOR
THE SANCTUARY LE7TER OF CREpiT NO. 959-
8723 IN THE AMOUNT OF $267,414.00 TO EXPIRE
NOVEMBER 75, 1997
Attomey's Office Designee
4. PLA7' AND RESOLUTION SIGNING
Scot Hunn, Community Development
~
,
Eagle Board of County Commissioners /lgenda, November 3, 1997
Page Three 5. 70:45 -11;15 WQRK SESSION - CQLORADO DEPARTMENT OF
carden Lwal ciaaaroom TRAN$PORTATION PROJECT PRIORITY
PROGRAMMING PRpGESS
Bob Mosten, CDpT Regional Transportation
Director
' 11:15 -14:30 BREAK
6. 11:30 -11:45 WORK SESSION - RECIONAL TRANSPORTATIQw
Gardon Level Claasroom PARTNERSHIP$ PROJECT UPDATE
Colin Laird, Healthy Mt. Communities
Coordinator 11:45 -1:00 LUNCH
7. 1:00 -1:05 SE-00009 DIAMOND PROPERTY REQUEST FOR
Eaals county Room EXEMPTION FROM THE EAGLE COUNTY
SUBDIVIStON REGULATIONS (TABLED FR4M
10114187)
Scot Hunn, Community Development
8. 1:05 - 7:30 AFP-00026'BEAVER CREEK, FILENG S. LQT 12,
Eanle ~ounty Rom TRACT H(TABLED FROIdI 9122197)
Paul Clarkson, Community Development
9. 1:30 - 2:00 INTERGpVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN
EAglecountp Room F.AGLE COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO AND THE
TOWN OF AVON, STATE QF CbLORADO
REGARDlNG CONSULTATION ON PLANNING
James R. Fritze, County Attqmey
10. 2:00 - 2:30 WQRK SESSION - RECOMMENDATIONS FROM rHE
Eagle County Room HUMAN RESdURCE COUNCIL FOR FUNDING 1998
HUMAN SERVICE GlZANTS
Kathleen Forinash, Health and Human Services
11. 6:00 - 7:00 WORK SESSION - GYPSUM TOWN COUNCIL Oyasum Flre 9Wtlon
7HE NE)cT IwEEnNG qF 7HE E,qGLE COUNTY COMMissioNERS WILL BE MELD ON NOVEMeER 17,1997
ALL MEETINGS IMLL BE HELD IN THE EAGI.E COUNIY tlUILDING - 500 BROADWAY, EAGLE- OR OTHF-Ft1MSE NQTED.
TMIS AGENDA IS pROVIOED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES dNLY - ALL TIMES ARE APPROXiAAA7E.
THE BOARD WNILE IM SESSION MAY CONSIOER OTHER ITEMS 7HAT ARE 9(iOUGHT BEFORE IT.
RECEIVED OCT , g 1997
SKI CLUB
~
October 15, 1997
Vail Town Council
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Dear Council Members,
The decision to convert the soccer field free public parking lot to "high end clientele"
valet parking is one more step towards displacing the Valley's valued employees.
As an employer of 35 people, many of whom live in the western reaches of our valley,
and have parked in the soccer field for years, I am discouraged that your decision ignores
these very people who make our community and our resort work so well.
The community and the Resort Company rely on its work force. We have all seen the
devastating effect that a shortage of labor can cause, yet your plan pushes hundreds of
village employees further from their jobs and makes getting to work even more
inconvenient.
Isn't it time we realize that our high end customers won't continue to visit Vail if we
don't have a friendly, willing work force to provide services for them? It is personally
disappointing that a 33-year-old, not-for-profit, community based, kids organization like
ours will likely lose experienced and valued employees who are tired of being perceived
as second class citizens.
I urge you to reconsider your decision on this matter.
Sincerely, _
Chip Woods
Executive Director
Ski Club Vail
598 Vail Valley Drive • Vail, Colorado 81657 •(970) 476-5119 •(970) 476-7287 (Fax)
r .
. ~
V A I L V A L L E Y A R T S C O U N C I L
, - Vail Valley Arts Council
Strategic Planning Sessions Summary
A. " PROCESS;
Key representatives of community groups were identified and sent written invitations to
participate in the Vail Valley Arts Council (WAC) Strategic Planning Process. 95 packets of
information went out to the community with information on the WAC history, current programs
and future goals. Five morning or evening sessions were held, each two hours, at which facilitator
P.O. aoX 1153 Frances Chaves led members of the Vail Valley community through a discussion of key issues
Vail, Colorado impacting eh future of the Vail Valley, an assessment of the Arts Council's strengths, public
perception of the council, future challenges facing, the council and resources for meeting these
31058-1153 challenges. At least one representative of the Council's board was present at each session.
1. Comments:
970.827.5299
970.827.5393 fax Care was taken to include representatives of the following community groups:
government/civic, business, arts administrators, arts patrons, media, travel and tourism.
Representatives of the second homeowners group declined to attend. Educators were not
"°n°`a`Y B°a`a fftd?dded due to extensive meetings with the WAC before this strategic planning process. I
Morgan ooL,glaswould suggest two follow-up luncheons: the first with representative second homeowners, the
Arne Hansen second with educators. Participants also requested follow-up on the results of the strategic planning process and annual review.
iUlrs. Cortlandt Hill Sessions were well attended and discussion was lively.
Rosie Wilt '
Fitzhugh Scott B SLTMMARY OF OPIlVIONS SHARED BY PLANNING PROCESS PARTICIPANTS::
1. Friend raising:
Advisory Board Members
Bill Charney The Strategic Planning Process gave the WAC a much needed opportunity to carry its
franczs Chavez message to key members of its community, first through written materials, then through the
discussion sessions. All who attended voiced their approval of the process and that they were
Carol Dickfnson flattered to have been included. A majority expressed their willingness to assist VVAC in meeting
Suzanne FarverltS gOa1S fOr th8 fL1tL1Te.
"Ugl, "'ideslev II The Arts in Vail Vallev:
Wil Hokin . ,
Lyn Segal 1. The arts make Vail Valley a year-round world class resort and place to live: the WAC
has an important role to play in making the arts even stronger.
r '
2. Vail Valley has the private resources to support world class arts.
3. The continuing growth in the number of non-skiing tourists and the size of the year-round
community present a great opportunity for the visual arts.
IIL yail Vallev Arts Council Pro ams:
1. The Arts Festivals are the best known of WAC programs and are perceived to be the
best, or most successful of the WAC's programs. All Program Participants ha.d personal
experience of the festivals. It is important to the community that these festivals are free to
participants. .
2. The Vail Marketing Board approves of the national appeal of the Photography
Workshops. Programs that bring national recognition and audiences to the Valley are perceived
to be gaod for the community.
3. VISION Photography Workshops are admired however are perceived to be too expensive
for locals.
4. Events: Program participants report that they and their friends love the cocktail parties
and events where they get to rub shoulders with "art celebrities" like Francoise Gilot, Jim Dine
and John Wa1sh (of the Getty).. These events are perceived to bring real value to the
community's saciaUintellectual life, bringing the greater world to Vail and putting Vail on the map
as an important center of cultural life.
N. The Vilar Center for the ArtsBea.ver Creek•
l. With expansion into Beaver Creek, an important issue to many community members is
how to maintain a presence (programmatically) in Vail and Eagle County. There is trepidation
about Vail and Eagle County getting left behind.
2. Participants would like to see a balance in programming of "big" and "little" events; for
example people would like to see blockbuster exhibitions coming to the Vail Va.lley but others
want to certain that community artists will still have access to exhibitions. A key message was
that the mission of the Vitar Center's gallery space needs to be clearly articulated and publicized.
While programs should be broad, eoncern was expressed that excellence be maintained to reflect
the world class nature of the resort and community as a whole..
3. Beaver Creek is perceived as "unfriendly" to local audiences. A plan must be articulated
and publicized regarding plans to build diversity into the Center's audiences and to include locals
as well as tourists.
4. The Center is seen as an important new resource for non-skiing visitors and an
enhancement to Vail Va11ey as a full-service resort.
I •
- who is the audience for the VVAC's programs: locals, second homeowners, tourists?
- is the WVAC's mission to support local artists or artists of national reputation?
2. How can the VVAC prove its economic impact int he Valley and thus its economic
importance (ie. Create a sense of return on investment for the business community and local
government)?
3. How to build and manage a strong volunteer base in the community with traveling second
homeowners and a majority of the full-time residents emptoyed full time?
4. How to manage and finance sudden growth with the new Vilar Center for the Arts and
also maintain excellence of programming.
5. Clearly define diversity within the Vail Valley; is it racial or economic? Define goals and
targets.
6. There is across the board concern with educating young people, getting them into the new
space and into education programs. The challenge is to define what is the WAC role in the
public school system given the roll back of arts education there.
7. What are appropriate perks for donors to the WAC?
8. Bravo! Colorado music programs and the Vail Valley Foundation programs are better
known, and more widely attended than visual arts program. How to build a similar profile for the
WAC?
9. Articulate a plan to bring the community from "T shirt art" to great art; how to get the
knuckle busters involved.
10. The WAC has grown from an advocacy group for local artists to an organization
presenting nationalIy significant programming; what is the organization's responsibility today to
its local audiences.
11. Create a plan for maximizing income generating activities to avoid over reliance for
donated income.
12. Even with the greatly increased amount of press coverage WAC receives, people say
they do not know the organization. Analyze current media coverage; create a concerted
marketing and PR campaign to address issues raised by this study.
13. Determine with Board VVAC stand on public art controversy and whether WAC should
take leadership role (opinions varied 100% on this issue).
.
5. Participants voiced concern in every session about the parking situation at the Cerner;
publicity about the Center should clearly articulate the current plans for parking and access by
public transportation.
6. It was made clear that a program to bring young people into the Center is very important
to the community; it was clear that young people comfortable with visiting the Center would bring
their parents.
7. Diversity in the programming of the gallery would help build a sense of diversity in the
community
V. Fundraising:
1. All participants agreed that with the growth of the arts in the Valley comes stiffer
cor:lpetition for available dollars. Suggestions for making WAC competitive in this arena
included:
- create unique events (ie. Cultural apres ski functions).
- provide opportunities to get close to art stars.
- create a plan for raising endowment funds to ensure VVAC's future.
- create programs for the Valley's young people and their parents will support VVAC.
- build closer relationships with local businesses.
- continue seeking national sponsors.
- create a more personal connection with your donors (ie. personalized thank you notes).
2. WAC mailings stand out; they are so attractive one participant said she sent in a check
because she liked the way the brochure looked as opposed to other mailings she had received
Continue striving to create a unique look that distinguishes your mailings and reflects the
excellence of your programming. You are, after all, a visual arts organization. Your visual
presentation is very important.
VI. New Ideas:
1. There was excitement at the idea of the Vail Valley as a center for artists, both commercial
and experimental. This was seen as an enhancement of the quality of life in the Valley and as a
way to affect public perception of the Valley as more than just a jock resort.
2. Enter into a relationship with an arts oriented university so that the Vail Valley becomes
the location for a summer arts campus for students and faculty.
.
- ~
;
3. Public Art is a hot button for the community; the VVAC Board should articulate its policy
on Public Art now to avoid future conflict.
4. One participant suggested a further step to the Strategic Planning Process: studying the
status of the arts in other similar communities in order to evaluate the strength of the arts in the
Vail Valley.
VII. Community Resources:
l. WAC can only benefit by forming stronger alliances with community art teachers and the
School Board.
2. The Chamber of Commerce will keep its ongoing relationship with the WAC strong and
is willing to serve as a bridge to local businesses.
3. Bob will share research with 'MariIyn that is helpful to the development of a statement on
the impact of the arts on the local economy which is a necessary tool for successful fundraising
from businesses and local government.
4. Build on your close relationship with the Denver Art Museum to share exhibitions and
programs.
5. Work with Vail Tomorrow to integrate the visual arts into the overall plan for the
community and to position WAC as a community leader.
6. Work on cooperating not competing with local communities and organizations.
VII. Mana ement:
l. The Executive Director, Marilyn 1VIcCray, has given the WAC a high profile in the
community: one of responsiveness to the community and quality programs.
2. The Executive Director is perceived to have made the VVAC a more professional
organization.
C. SUIVINIARY OF CHALLENGES FACING TI-E VVAC IN MEETING THESE GOALS
1. Does the current WAC mission and name accurately reflect your goals and current
programs.
- does the mission define expanding tourism as a goal?
- what geographic area does the VVAC serve (define Vail Valley).
DONOR MEMBERSHIP LEVELS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Artist/ Student/ Educator ($25)*
Friend ($50)
Supporting ($100)
Sustaining ($250)
Benefactor ($500)
Sponsor ($1,000)
Guarantor ($1,001-$2,500)
Donor ($5,000+)
BENEFITS
1. Great art, lectures and more! 9. Invitati ons to all openings and lectures
2. Free entry to The May Gallery (opening '98) 10. Free Arts Festival or VISION T-shirts
3. The WAC quarterly newsletter 11. Invitations to special cocktail receptions with visiting lecturers & curators.
4. Acknowledgement in Winter Newsletter 12. Free admission to all VVAC events
5. 10% discounts on Arts Festival or VISION T-shirts 13. Private dinners with visiting artists and speakers
6. Advanced announcement of special art excursions 14. Opportunity to host welcome dinners for visiting lecturers & curators.
7. Invitations to select events, openings and lectures 15. Opportunity to host an opening event in The May Gallery.
8. Invitation to donor only workshops, programs and lectures 16. We would like your suggestions...
* Special Benefit for Artists, Students and Educntors - Promotional and administrative assistance for exhibits and special programs.
~
RECEIVED OCT 2 g 1997
SKI CLUB
~
. October 15, 1997
Vail Town .Council - Town of Vail . . '
75 South Frontage Road . . Vail, CO 81657
Dear Council Members,
The decision to convert the soccer field free public parking lot to "high end clientele"
valet parking is one more step towards displacing the Valley's valued employees.
As an employer of 35 people, many of whom live in the western reaches of our valley,
and have parked in the soccer field for years, I am discouraged that your decision ignores
these very people who make our community and our resort work so well.
The community and the Resort Company rely on its work force. We have all seen the
devastating effect that a shortage of labor can cause, yet your plan pushes hundreds of
village employees further from their jobs and makes getting to work even more
inconvenient.
Isn't it time we realize that our high end customers won't continue to visit Vail if we
don't have a friendly, willing work force to provide services for them? It is personally
disappointing that a 33-year-old, not-for-profit, community based, kids organization like
. ours will likely lose experienced and valued employees who are tired of being perceived
- as second class citizens.
I urge you to reconsider your decision on this matter.
Sincerely, .
Chip Woods
Executive Director
Ski Club Vail
598 Vail Valley Drive • Vail, Colorado 81657 •(970) 476-5119 •(970) 476-7287 (Fax)
.
! • `
. RECEIVED CCT 3 0 1991
OFFKE OF THE
BOARP OF GOMMISSIONERS
(970) 328-8605
FAX (970) 328-7207
TDD (970) 378-8797 )UHNNETTE PHILUPS
Email: Fagleco@rail.net JAMES E. JOHNSON, JR.
hup: //www.eagle-wunq.com EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO GEoRCE A. „suO' GATES
October 29, 1997 - 8:17
AGErvaA -
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETlNG DAY
NOVEMBER 3; 1997
s rr,rwt •,r,r~ra~kt~r~F#tit* r** *tr • t~**~rr,t,r,r,r,r,rf
8:30 - 9:15 WORK SESSION - AT'f'QRNEY'S UPDATE
eocc conf. Room James R. Fritze, County Attorney
2_ 9:15 -10:00 WQRK SESSION - WEEKLY UPDATE
socc ca,r. Row„ Jim Hartmann, County Administrator
10:00 -10:15 SREAK
10:15 ON THE RECORD
Eayle Counqr Room
3• CONSENT qGENDA
Items of a routine and non-caihoveraial nature are placM on the oonsent pgerwfa yo albw tha Board oi Canty Cammissioners to spend
1fS tlm9 and ef19r0y dl mon9 4rporfant it9mc on e lenelhy apende. My Commimainiwr mAy rKqu!SI Utat an Hem be "REMOVED' from the
consent apenda and cansideied separately. My mam6ar of the puhlic mey •REpUESl' srryr itam be "REMOV@D" from the oonsent
agenda.
A. APPROVAI.OF BlLL PAYING FOR TNE wEEKS oF
NOVEMBER 3, AND NOVEMBER 10, 1987 (SUBJECT
TO REVIEW BY THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR)
Maric Silverthom, Finance Department
B. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL FOR NbvEMeER 6,1997
(SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THE COUNTY
ADMINISTRATOR)
Mark Silverthorn, Finance Department
Eagle Counry Building, 500 9rozdway, P.O. Box 850, Eagle, Colorado 81631-0850
,
~
Eagle Board of County Commissioners
Agenda, November 3, 1997
Page Two
C. APPROVAL OF TNE MINUTES OF THE EAGLE
' BOARD OF COUNTY CQMAMISSIONERS IIMEETINGS
. FOR QCTOBER 27, 1.997 .
, Sara Fisher, County Clerk and Recorder D. AGREEMENT BETWEEN EAGLE COUNTY, STATE
OF COLORADO AND THE CQLORADO AVALANCHE
INFQRMA710N CENTER TO PR4VIDE AVALANCHE
INFORMATIOPI AND EDI,lCAT10N FOR THE
BENEFIT OF 7HE RESIDENTS QF F-14GLE COUNTY
Attumey's Office Designee .
E. CHANGE QRDER N0.1 FOR THE 1997 GUARDRpIL
CONTRACT BETINEEN EAGLE CQUNTY, STAT'E OF
CQLORADO AND GbNZALES CON57'RUCTION
CQMPANY, INC.
Peter Sulmeisters, Engineering Department
F. CHANGE bRDER NO. -1 TQ THE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN EAGLE COUNTY, STATE QF COLDIZADO
AND MOTOROLA, [NC. FOR THE MICRQIAlAVE
EQUIPMENT (TABLED FROM 10I20197)
A.J. Johnson, County Sheriff
G. RESOLUTION AND POWER QF ATTORNEY
- , CONFERRING AUTHORlTY ON THE A770RNEY'S
OFFICE TO DRAW ON LETTER QF CREDIT FOR
VAIUARROWHEAD, INC. LETTER QF CREDIT NO.
6088 FROM COLORADO NATIONAL BANK IN THE
AMOUNT OF $237,719.63 TO EXPIRE NOVEMBER
15,1997
Attorney's Office Designee .
H. RESOLUTION AND POWER OF ATTORNEY
CONFERRING AUTHpRITY ON ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE TO DRAw oN LETTER OF CREDIr Fc3R
THE SANCTUARY LE7TER OF CREpiT NO. 959-
8723 IN THE AMOUNT OF 3267,414.00 TO EXPIRE
NOVEMBER 15, 1997
Attomey's Office Designee
4. PLA7 AND RESOLUTION SIGNING
Scot Hunn, Community Development
I
~
~
Eagle Board of County Commissioners
Agenda, November 3, 1997
Page Three 5. 10:45 -11;15 WORK SESSION - COLORADO DEPAR7MENT OF
' Garden Level clasaroom TRAN$PORTATION PROJECT PRIORlTY
. PROGRAMMING PRQGESS _
. Bob Mosten, CDOT Regional Transportation Director - ' 11:15 -11:30 BREAK
6. 11:30 -11:45 WORK SESSION - RECIONAL TRANSPORTATIQN
Garden Level claasroom PARTNERSHIP$ PROJECT UPDATE
Colin Laird, Healthy Mt. Communities
. Caordinator 11:45 -1:00 LUNCH
7. 1:00 -1:05 SE-00009 DIAMOND PROPERTY REQUEST FOR
Esgle county Room EXEMPTION FROM THE EAGLE COUNTY
SUBDIVISroN REGULATIONS (TABLED FROM
10/14197)
. Scot Hunn, Community Development
8. 1:05 - 7:30 AFP-00026 BEAVER CREEK, FILlNG 5, LOT 12,
E.,gle courny? Room TRACT H(TABLED FROMI 8122197)
Paul Clarkson, Community Development
9. 1:30 - 2:00 _INTERGQVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN
. Eaaia county Rcm, EAGLE COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO AND THE
TOIAIN OP AVON, STATE QF COLORADO
REGARDlNG CONSULTATION ON PLANNING
James R. Fritze, County Attomey
10. 2:00 - 2:30 wORK SESStON - RECOMMENDATIONS FROM 7HE
EapleCounh?Room HUMAN RESOURCE COUNCIL FOR FUNDING 1998 HUMAN SERVICE GRANTS
Kathleen Forinash, Health and Human ServiCes
11. 6:00 - 7:00 , WORK SESSION - GYPSUM TOWN COUNCIL
Oypsum FIrv $Wtlon
7HE NEXT MEETiNG QF 7HE EqGLE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS NALL 8E HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1997
ALl MEETINGS WILL eE HELo IN 7HE EAGI.E COUNIY HuILaNG - 500 eROADWAY, EAGLE- OR OTWEit1MSE Np7ED.
THIS AGENDA IS pROVIDED FOR INFORMH110NAL PURPOSES ONLY - ALL TIMES ARE APPROXiMATE.
THE BOARD WHILE IM SESSION MAY CONSfOER OTHER ITEMS 7HAT ARE eROUGHT BEFORE IT.
L04j~*IHG
~ ~ 1
UPDATE
91Y
October 1997
Thank you for your participation at the October 21 st Vail Town Council Site Visit on Vail Village
loading and delivery. A list of the brainstormed solutions as well as a map of the current parking zones
is included for your information in this update.
Public Input • Re ug l~,r Sta provide more control at Check
Point Charlie and better enforcement.
The Town of Vail has begun a public process to • Gated Entrv put a limited access automatic gate
solicit the ideas, thoughts, and comments for those at Check Point Charlie.
who are impacted by the complexities of loading • Deliverv Hours
and delivery in Vail Village. allow deliveries at the upper end of Bridge
Street past 8:30 am.
MK Centennial Engineering has been hired to work all deliveries made earlier--before 9 am.
with the Town of Vail to develop and analyze short- ~
term management solutions as well as infrastructure ~ Expand Parkin Zg ones allowing deliveries
improvements for the long-term. The work schedule ' closer to delivery site would cut down on
includes implementation of short-term adjustments delivery time.
by December with selection of long-term solutions
in March. We need your continued input to refine Long-term solutions
the alternative solutions and assist in the selection of • Underground delivery tunnels.
preferred alternatives. • Truck loadin fg acility.
• Central Distribution Larger deliveries can be
made to a Central Distribution Center,
Alternative Solutions Suggested by the Public containing self storage. Smaller trucks,
smaller than a UPS truck, to distribute in Vail
Short-term solutions Village.
• Limit Trucks only one truck from each • Cooperative effort Vail Village and Lionshead
company should be allowed in Vail Village at may be able to make a cooperative effort
any time. utilizing the same centralized distribution
• Truck Length Restriction any truck over 35' center.
should not be permitted in Vail Village. •.Stora e facility for non-perishables.
• Restrict Deliveries to: • Manage the few allevs Vail Village has better.
. one per week • Do Nothiniz.
• three days per week
. Mon., Wed., and Fri., for food deliveries Other solutions and recornmendations
and Tues., Thurs., and Sat. for beverage • Ad Hoc Committee a consolidated committee
deliveries consisting of retailers, bar and restaurants,
. weekdays only truckers, and suppliers.
• Monday through Friday only • Garbage Trucks pick-up between 8 am and
• special deliveries, not fitting new schedules, 9 am is ideal, any pick-ups outside this
should be made outside of Vail Village. time slot is annoying.
. night time only • Trash compactors these may be used to reduce
frequency of pick-ups.
Next Steps
• One-on-one meeting with affected interests (October, 1997 to November 7, 1997). If you
would like to be consulted ca11 Jennifer Linden at 1-800-783-1382
• Public Workshop at the Red Lion (November 13, 1997 at 4:30 pm).
LEGEND: Vail Village Loading and Delivery Time Zones
X No Parking ~ Cars and Small Trucks (up to 18'.)
V Until 8:30 am ~ Medium Trucks (19' to 35') I
? Until 11:30 am ~ Large Trucks (36' or more) -J L
• Until Noon VLoad • Check Point r i
* Until 6:00 pm Hansp~ at~~ Charlie '
?
Note: Symbols represenl block xxxaoaa '
loading and delivery time ~ Wi~~XXX
zones and not indivi(lual
~`,~,~i?~
stalls.
~ , A~~~ ~ <eeK <`Je o GteeK Go<e G ~ Gote. v
eZn
~ • Children's A ~
~ Fountain ~
*X~ 11 0
d
.304 Gore y
Creek Drive n
Gore Creek ¦ •
EastMeaa~W ~r~ve Trash 1rucks Must Exit by 9:00 am I
• , (8:30 am on Bridge Street)
Courier Services Must Exit by 6:00 pm ~
(8:30 am on Bridge Street)
yllage Parking Structure . u
South Frontage Road
Bridge St. Gore Creek Dr. Mill Creek Bldg. 304 Gore Creek Hanson Ranch Rd. Willow Bridge Rd. Check Point Charlie
Cars and Trucks (up to 18') Unlil 8:30 am Until 11:30 am Unti16:00 pm Until 6:00 pm Unti16:00 pm Unti16:00 pm Unti16:00 pm
Medium 'Ilrucks (19' to 35') Until 8:30 am Until 1 I:30 am Unti16:00 pm Not Allowed Until 11:30 am Unti16:00 pm Unti16:00 pm
Large Trucks (36' or more) Until 8:30 am Until 11:30 am Until 12:00 Noon Not Allowed Until 11:30 am Until 12:00 Noon Until I2:00 Noon
Trash Trucks Until 8:30 am Until 9:00 am Until 9:00 am Unli19:00 am Unti19:00 am Unti19:00 am Unti19:00 am
Courier Services Until 8:30 am Until 6:00 pm Unti16:00 pm Until 6:00 pm Until 6:00 pm UnW 6:00 pm UnGI 6:00 pm
~
r
"
~y
TOWN OF VAIL
Office of the Town Attbrney
75 Sauth Frontage Road
Vail, Colarado 81657
.
970-479-2107/Fax 970-479-2157
TM
November 3, 1997
' Robert A. And Faye Donley Scott
5075 Ute Lane
Vail, CO 81657
Re: Parking of Recreational Vehicles Within the Town of Vail
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Scott:
Thank you for the correspondence with the photographs attached, concerning the proliferation of
vehicles parked in various neighborhoods throughout the Town.
I have met with members of our Code Enforcement Department and reviewed the present
circumstances as pertained in the Town. Their previous efforts to have such items removed from
plain view have been unsuccessful due to the lack of any Town regulation requiring removal of these
. items.
We are presently acquiring copies of regulations in surrounding communities to determine what has
been most effective.
We will, vvith Town Council approval, schedule this matter for a work sessioii in December once all
information has been acquired. This would be the first step:in establishing legislation that would
_lead to an orziinance to regulate the parking and removal of such items from private property. You
will be notified of the date of Town Council's consideration.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments.
Very truly ours,
,
/ i ~
R. 'Thomas Moorhead Town Attorney
RTM/aw
xc: Town Council
Robert W. McLaurin, Town Manager
Greg Morrison, Chief of Police
RECYCLEDPAPER
- -
.
,
• - • - -
: ~ • • '
7iv, . TOLYN'pF VAIL ~ .
• Input/Inguiry pesponse Rerord .
T^ne attached comuients'were recently received by the Town af yag. We eacoura y•
. . residents artd guests to give tts such input and we sttive for
y responses. PLF~E
~DRFSS TFY~SE CONCEFtNS N~FIVE W9RKIrJGDAYS AND R;ErUgNTIM .
COMPLET'ID FORM I'O PAM BRANDMEyFA
:
DEPAK 1T'0 HANDLE IlVQUgZY ' t6(U1.(r ~ ' .
.
I\i7IVIDliAL TO HAINDLE INQUgZY
• DAr rovrLrcavm zm-r/nvQuxY -0 • .q7 , . . F F i /TX 7O T'rZY• .
C?:Z.1. (Indicate eate) ~ ' . .
. L:._1G (at:ac:ned) ~6b
! =~rO~iSc G~ ~D (attac:7ed)
QF RF~pi~~c (cnec~C orrel- ' .
(attach copy) - - . ,
. PHQ LN14-t C.LL (ittdicate date)
. B~^ 57~~A -71 OF R=ONTSF rcur~ T., T,? • • :
. C7R A ~ `rnr rrfl ~
,
1 LiZ~rDBYDE'AIZTi1v~,TT0 PA~MB~Y~yEyt-,L
' A c-vy ai .4is inevirr sad fan:i wi11 r-rrfain ~t F.Ie at ~4e a~7 V
arartC:-teyec. thia C~zstunity 4elatioas a~ As aoon at tlsit faeat is rtlueZ
• inectieysviiI be ensidettd e'ased. .
ed tr P~s
T~
~
September 22, 1997 Qo
~
Mr. Rob Ford cr~ ~
Town of Vail Council
75 South Frontage Road .
, Vail, CO 81657
Dear Mr. Ford: .
As full-time residents and property owners in Vail, we are requesting your help in
addressing a matter of great concern to us and a number of citizens of Vail.
Since early last summer, we began noticing a proliferation of vehicles parked in various
neighborhoods which have a very negative impact on the appearance of our town.
Specifically, motor homes, campers, flat-bed trailers, abandoned cars and the like have
begun not only to appear but to stay for long periods of time. These vehicles are parked
in driveways, on side yards, in fields, in adjacent lots, and on town easement setbacks.
Enclosed are a series of photographs which provide samples of the problem. Motor
homes as large as fortv feet in length have been parked in East Vail for over a year.
Efforts to have some of these vehicles removed, just as a matter of neighborly decency
and consideration, have proved fruitless. If this problem goes unchecked, we can all
probably expect the number of these often large and sometimes unsightly vehicles to grow,
ruining the mountain atmosphere most of us want to preserve. Residents of surrounding
communities where such vehicles are prohibited could actually bring them into Vail!
Other than the blight on the landscape these vehicles cause, it is a fact that property
owners will experience a degradation of their property values. None of us in Vail can
afford to let that happen.
A Town of Vail Code Enforcement officer advised us that surrounding communities
_ (Eagle Vail, Wildridge, Singletree, as examples) have placed restrictions on these types of
vehicles. It seemed; inconceivable to us that Vail proper did not, but our research has
produced no evidence of a town-wide code restriction.
We are requesting your urgent attention to this matter. We would like to meet with you in
person to deternune the process of establishing a town-wide ordinance or regulation to
deal with this problem before it gets out of control and gives Vail less than the "world
class" appearance for which we all work so hard. We will contact you within the next few
days, and we look forward to working with you on this matter.
Sincerely,
4 Sc~
Robert A. Scott and Faye IIonley Scot
5075 Ute Lane ~
Vail, CO 81657 - Phone 476-6734
. ~c b.G.
COLORADC~~CUVED `,jl ov 3 7
TRAVEL & TOUR[SM AUTHORITY 199.
P.O. BOX 3524 • ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO 80155
COLORADO TRAVEL & TOURISM AUTHORITY NEWSLETTER
October,1997
1998 Officia[ State Vacation Guide Report Production and Advertising Sales
Production and advertising sales of the 1998 edition of the Official State Yacation Guide are in full swing!
The Colorado Travel and Tourism Authority will print 500,000 copies of the Guide, which is the only
fulfillment piece sent to all requesters of information through 1-800-COLORADO. Included in the Guide
will be CTTA member listings for Level I and above members. Only CTTA members are entitled to listings
- w~ithin the--Guide.
For information regarding advertising rates within the Guide, please call Publication Representatives West at
303/534-3078.
' Membership Renewals
Renewal notices have been sent to a11 members with a renewai date in November or December 1997 as we
are currently in the process of collecting listing information for the 1998 edition of the Official State
Vacation Guide. All level I and above CTTA members with a renewal date which falls between January
1,1998 and December 31,1998 are entitled to a listing within the 1998 Guide, including company name,
phone number, 800-number, FAX number, address, website address, and e-mail address, as well as a 25-,
50-, or 75-word description of their business (depending upon level of inembership). Please renew as soon
as possible to ensure inclusion of your listing within the Guide.
Should you have questions regarding your membership status, please call the CTTA office at 303/296-3384,
ext. 2.
Member Listi.ngs Deadline Approaches
Listing forms have been sent to all current Level I and above members. These forms request member
information to be printed in the 1998 Official State Yacation Guide, in addition to being presented on the
CTTA website, colorado.com. Please respond as quickly as possible with your listing information to help us
avoid last-nunute changes and proofing:
As member listings aze received at the CTTA office, the data is entered and a copy retumed to the member
for proofing to assure correctness.
The deadline for receipt of the listing forms by CTTA is November 15,1997. If you have not returned your
listing form, please do so now to avoid late minute changes. For additional listing forms, please call the
CTTA office.
CTTA, P 0 BOX 3524, Eng/ewood, CO 80155 Phone: 3031296-3384 Fax: 3031296-2015 httpJ/www colorado com
;
WEBSITE LINKS FROM colorado. com TO YOUR SITE A VAILABLE
Website links from the CTTA website, colorado. com, are available to all Level I and above members for an
annual fee. This website link is included in the price of inembership for Level II members. CTTA is now
offering links to those members investing as a Level I member. With an average of over 300,000 pages
viewed per month on colorado. com, why not take the opportunity to link directly to your site from the CTTA
website?
For information on linking to your website from colorado.com, contact the CTTA office at 303/296-3384,
ext. 2.
CTTA TO HOLD ANNUAL ELECTION FOR BOARD OF DIRECTOR POSITIONS
Ballots will be mailed in mid-November to fill seven seats on the Board of Directors of the Colorado Travel
and Tourism Authority. One seat is avail?ble in each of the fave businvss categories ccmprising
Accommodations, Attractions, Food and Beverage, Recreation and Transportation; two- at-large positions
will also be filled. All positions are for a three-year term.
Please exercise your right to vote in this election by completing and returning your ballot. All ballots must
_ be received at the CTTA office by Friday, December Sth.
1997 REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION
1997 requests for Colorado travel information received through 1-800-COLORADO, mail, Internet, and
reader service:
January 20,871
February 25,443
Mazch 29,419
_ April 30,977
May 27,992
June 26,428
July 25,077
August 16,902 .
September 15.220
YTD 218,329
WE'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM YOU!
Please contact the CTTA office if you have questions or comments, or need additional information regazding CTTA programs, benefits and opportunities. Write, phone or fax using the information at the bottom of this
page, or e-mail us at:
ctta@sni.net
CTTA, P 0 BOX 3524, Englewood, CO 80155 Phone: 3031296-3384 Fax: 3031296-2015 http://www.colorado.com
S~
NEW CTTA MEMBERS-SEPTEMBER 1997
CTTA welcomed the following new businesses during September 1997:
Alpine Chalet Country Inn Colorado Springs
Authentic Inns of the Pikes Peak Region Colorado Springs
HearthSide Bed & Breakfast Inn Estes Park
Laramie River Guest Ranch Jelm, WY
Blue Skies Bed & Breakfast Manitou Springs
Pitkin Mesa Bed & Breakfast Paonia
Focus Ranch Slater
RENEWAL MEMBERSHIPS-SEPTEMBER 1997
The following businesses renewed their CTTA memberships during September 1997:
Lazy H Guest Ranch Allenspark
Rainbow Trout Ranch Antonito .
Boulder Hotel & Motel Association Boulder
The Adobe Inn Buena Vista
Trout City Berth & Breakfast Buena Vista
Harvey's Wagon Wheel Hotel & Casino Central City
Branson's Drive In Collbran
Academy Riding Stables Colorado Springs
Garden of the Gods Visitor Center Colorado Springs
Anasazi Motor Inn Cortez
Airport Services Inc. Denver
Charlie's Denver
Denver Metro Convention & Visitor's Bureau Denver
Denver Museum of Natural History Denver
Wir.gs Over the Rockies Air & Space Museum Denver
Apple Orchard Inn Durango
Durango Travelodge Durango
Gateway Durango Durango
Glenn's Mountain Vista Acre Bed & Breakfast Estes Pazk
Ponderosa Lodge Estes Pazk
Riverwood on Fall River Estes Pazk
C Lazy U Ranch Granby
Drowsy Water Ranch Granby
Shadow Mountain Guest Ranch Granby
CTTA, P 0 BOX 3524, Englewood, CO 80155 Phone: 3031296-3384 Fax: 3031296-2015 http •//www colorado com
;
Lois' Place Grand Junction
Tumbling River Ranch Grant
Farrell's Restaurant Gunnison
KOA Kampgrounds Gunnison
Lost Canyon Resort Gunnison
Mesa'Campground Gunnison
Country Peddler Holly
Laramie River Guest Ranch Jelm, WY
Texan Resort Lake City
11 Mile Motel Lake George
Ski Cooper Leadville
Fireside Junction Limon
Apple Avenue Bed & Breakfast Loveland
Garden of the Gods Trading. Post Manitou Springs
Super 8 Motel Manitou Springs
Villa Motel Manitou Springs
4J+1+1 Trailer Park Ouray
Garden House Bed & Breakfast Palisade
Aspen Canyon Ranch Parshall
Bar Lazy J Guest Ranch Parshall
Whitewater Voyageurs Poncha Springs
San Juan Ranch Ridgway
Chattanooga Cafe Silverton
Snowmass Resort Association Snowmass Village
City of Steamboat Springs Steamboat Springs
Inn at Steamboat Steamboat Springs
Elk Echo Ranch Stoneham
Town of Stratton Stratton
Vail Cascade Hotel & Club Vail
Raintree Inn Winter Pazk
CTTA, P 0 80X 3524, Englewood, CO 80155 Phone: 3031196-3384 Fax: 3031296-2015 http://www.colorado.com
RECEIVED NOV 3 1997
,
- - F.MOR AI~T M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION M
Division of Transportation Development O7'
4201 East Arkansas Ave., Room 225
Denver, Colorado 80222
(303) 757-9266
(303) 757-9727 fax ~
EPA YE OF THA POFIrp7pq
DATE: October 28, 1997
TO: County Commissioners, Mayors, City Council Members, Intermountain
Regional Planning Commission Members, and Interested Citizens
~
FROM: Phil.~~ e on, CDOT
SUBJECT: November 14,1997 Intermountain Regional Planning Commission Meeting
Councilman Lou Trapani, Chairman of the Intermountain Regional Planning Commission (RPC),
has scheduled a meeting of the RPC for November 14,1997 from 10:00 A.M.42:00 P.M. The
meeting will be held in the Conference Room of the Glenwood Springs city building, 806 Copper
Avenue, Glenwood Springs.
This meeting, and others like it in the other RPC's, will focus on those State Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP) eligible projects identified in each of the RPC's for inclusion in the
fiscally constrained CDOT region wide component of the 1999-2004 STIP, that will go into effect
on July 1, 1998. CDOT regional transportation allocations will be used to determine how many
projects vcrill be advanced in the 2003-2004 yeazs of the 1999-2004 STIP. This determination will be
based on the availability of funds after on going projects and the allocations to the Strategic
Transportarion Project Investment Program have been made and CDOT regional priorities have been
detemvned The will be an opportunity to amend both the Regional and State Plans; if necessary, ±o
make projects STIP eligible. However, please be aware of the Guidelines for Regional and State
Plan Amendment Process when conternplating an amendment. I have attached a copy of the
Guidelines for your use.
If you have any questions relating to the meeting, please contact me at (303) 757-9817.
.
_ Guidelines for Regional and State Plan Amendment Process
i July 15, 1996
,
Ae Guide/ines are not intended fo rep/ace or dup/icate compalib/e amendment processes currenf/y in p/ace, nor are
they infended !o rep/ace or inferfere wifh the responsibi/ily ofinetropo/itan p/anning organizations under federa/ ru/es.
When amending either fhe regiona/ or sfate transportation p/an, CDOT and Transportation P/anning Regions sha//
joinl/y fo/%w these sfeps:
1. Evaluate the need for the proposed amendment based on these criteria:
A. New Project
B. Significant Change in Scope
C. Change in Priority from Long Range Needs to Priority Plan [or] to Regionally Approved/State Significant
Comdor Projects
D. Outcome from Major Investment Study or other study
II. Review and comply with state rules, regulations, and guidelines for regional plan amendments in conjunction
with any regionally adopted amendmerrt processes
III. Coordinate with other appropriate entities, including, but not limited #o:
A. Other affected TPRs
B. State agencies such as Air Pollution Control Division (Colorado Department of Health) C. Federal agencies such as Federal HighwayAdministration, Federal Transit Administration, and the
Environmerrtal Protection Agency
N. Assess and documeM impacts of proposed amendment(s)
A. Documerrt reason for the amendmenrt
B. Analyze the social, environmental, economic, and energy impacts
C. Evaluate compatibifity with state plan
D. Develop financial component and impact on state plan funding requirements
V. Determine if proposed amendment affects RegionallyAgreed Upon PrioMies (as defined on page 114 of
Colorado's 20 Year Transportation Plan)
A No - Proceed to Step V!.
B. Yes -
1. Identify new funding source [or]
2. Remove project(s) of equivalent value from consVained plan
VI. Ensure appropriate public participation
A Minimum one public meeting in each applicable TPR [or)
6• Other formal opportunify for comment
VII. Regional Planninp Commission, or authoruzed policy body, adopfs Resoiution amendin Re ional
Plan 9 g Transportation
VIII. Determine if amendmerrt to state plan is required
A No - ..Process complete
8. Yes - Submit request to Director, Division of Transportation Development to amend state plan per
Statewide Transportation Planning Rules and Regulations
IX. CDOT evaluates adequacy/completeness of TPR submittal
A. CDOT will advise TPRs of pending plan amendments
X. Determine level of impact amendment has on state plan
A PrefeRed Flan
1. Advise STAC and Transportation Commission and incorporate in state plan
B. Priority Plan (includes RegionallyAgreed Upon Priorities)- Proceed Through Review and Approval Process
1• Review and comment by STAC
2• Review and recommendation by CDOT '
3• Action by Transportation Commission
RECEIVEDNOV 3~~ ~
1997
1CHILDCARE (LIPS
Created by The Childcare Resource & Referrail of Eagle cYc Garfield Counties
A program of The Resource Center of Eagle Counry
November & Deccmber 1997 Volwne 1, lssue 4
`Pecrce o» E, ai•th Begins crt Honze "
I)ear f'a.rent5 a1.v1.c~ Got~r,,iM,t4vcit
~ ~ Please contact your local Childcare Resource &
~'tein~ers, Referral at 9701949-7097 or write to us at: P.O.
Box 2558/Avon, CO 81620. We can send you a
. list of possible national, state, or local organiza-
The Childcare Resource & Referral would tions you may want to learn more about, or be-
like to introduce ourselves to you. We are a pro- come involved with. Don't forget, we can al-
gram of The Resource Center of Eagle County, a ways use some help at the Resource & Referral!
non-profit organization. Some of you have come
to us seeking childcare assistance, and in a county
that does not have an abundance of licensed child-
care, we have tried to accommodate your unique
situations as best we can.
We recognize the frustration and reserva-
tions parents have when they are finally con- TI~E IMPORTANCE OF
fronted with having to leave their children in LICENSED CHILDCARE
somebody else's care. Eagle County is lucky to
have licensed centers, family childcare homes, and by Jodi Dennis
preschools that are committed to giving the chil- As the Childcare Resource & Referral
dren of this community the best available care Program grows, so has parents awareness on the
outside of the home. These licensed facilities importance of choosing licensed childcare. When
should be commended for creating loving, educa- we first began publicizing our program, we re-
tional, and stimulating environments. ceived about twelve calls per month from parents
Due to the population growth of the Eagle looking for care for their children. We now re-
Valley, it is imperative that the community under- ceive an average of twenty-two calls each month
stands that the supply and demand of childcare is from parents looking for licerlsed childcare.
extremely unbalanced. Since May 1997 the Chiid- This increase in calls is tremendous. Most
care Resource & Referral has received an abun- parents ca11 because they are desperately search-
dance of calls regarding care for children under ing for childcare. Many parents call for informa-
the age of 2. The total capacity for children un- tion on how to be sure they have chosen the right
der the age of 2 for the Eagle Valiey is limited care, or how they can obtain information on other
due to licensing laws and the low number of li- childcare issues. We will gladly heip parents with
censed providers. any of these issues! .
Our main objective is to help parents, The Resource & Referral also gathers and
childcare providers and the community work to- maintains statistics, so we are aware of the mini-
gether to create the best environment for our chil- mal vacancies in childcare. We ask providers to
dren. We look to you, as community members, to
bring this issue to the forefront and to help rem- Childcare licensing Coril'd orr page 2
edy th i childcare situation in Eagle County.
' j Chzldcar•e licensing Cont 'cIl frnm page 1
F'~zrr~~~,yr r~ to contact us when they have opentngs, otherwise we update their va-
i
c ce
ans Dn
a e b
a qurtrlY
asis.
.
>
Y~;;;: Our program is also trYing to gain rric3inentum in promotjng li-
. .
Are censed ehildcare. Colorado law requires that a facilitY caring for chil-
t~~est~l tn cl~tlt~~ar~ tssue~ e~' dren for more than one famity to be licensed. Licensing includes finger-
f~~ct~ng EGcaunt~ yoU ~ print and background checks, health evaluations for providers, fire and
w=t.;to ~eet ot~ec c~t~u~it~;~ safety checks of the providers home or facility and much more. You can
M= ~In~~~Wi;!~it, check to see if your provider is licensed by calling the Resource & Re-
dren? ~f ~au d y~ Ao !a~~ ferral or the Division of Childcare in Denver at: 1-840/799-5876. The
th~ aboz~e, you tt ~an~ €a Division of Childcare atso provides parents access to licensed childcare
X.X
~ie~ay in b~ec~tnit~g:a ~er~b~:r
~ home and facility files. If your provider happens ro be unlicensed, please
fl~~. suggest that they become licensed! If you or anyone you know is inter-
A~soct~ticari; ested in becoming a licensed ehildcare provider please contaet our office
Th~ Q~~~~ at 949-7097. We have information on the licensing procedure, and the
7n befQre tha.s fa~l;~v~ held ar~ actual licensinb applications on hand.
Parents, thank y-ou for y4ur support of our pr4gram! We appre-
exc1~~~ ~e A a ciate at~y comments or st~ggestions!
vc~1~±~d, rn~~ deci~ta.zs a~rc~ ~
sfiee~ fi~~ assoc~at~o~ ~z t~e c~~ From:
Vai~ '
~~ll~e~ S
~ ~he ~r~~t~uu#~ s~~s 1t: ~ "Small Helpings"
t0 gThe<l~st ~np~t~;~~~1 , by Annabel Karrr;el Ch1ldCare; High
a~ oct. ber zsr~ ~6di Demand, Low 5upp,Y
WINi ER FR~~T U ti ~hc~a~ng the ?ssaC1?.f6n The Chiidcare Resource &
c~f~'ic~rs~ ulaUa's ~c~ Referral received calls from parents
th~ £oilo. ing memb~F.S
~ looking for chiidcare for more than
,~ar~~t; S~hra~~ld (Pi~~stt~ei~t- _ . 1 Ii2 cups mixed dried fruits 100 children since May 1997-
~
P~~m~~~er Pr~~i - o;/4 cup unsweeiened apple or October 1997. 53 percer?t of #he
>d~nt:;:« > . :
grape juice children needing care were under
-S~~ ' • 314 cup water the age of two! Z? % were between
ta~S')> • r a p pte, peeled, cored and cut 2 a n d 4 y e a r s o l d, w h ile 1 9% w e r e
~1~Qia ~a:~d ~~tat~ Repi'e~et~ < into slices o v e r t h e age o f 5.
2 oranges, pee l e d and cut into The need for infant care in
segments with the pith removed this community is tremendous! The
be ka~l~ at #he ~a,~le i~t. 4 ptums, peeted, pitted and cut total capacity for childca.re for chil-
66 Nrtm
at ? into slices or 1 large pear, dren under 2 in family childcare
~ peeleci and cut into slices homes is 30%. Only 3 childcare cen-
E3e ~1-oll, th~ i banana, peeied and cut into ters in the valley take infants. The
~auy
slices low capacity for infants has to do
Decern~er's r~e~t?~rg
with safety in the licensing laws, and
d&.e ~rtMb.e;annou.r~d`t ~h~;,;Simmer the dried fruits in the fruit
also the shortage of licensed facili-
b3 h juice arjd water for about 10 min-
ties!
Darnim 'uvtll gtve aWDrks~;o~ ; utes. Then add the prepared fresh
on PrvfieSsl~na
l~5m fruit and simmer for another 3 to 4
.............the bottom line.........
~~e. as.t cJet minutes. WE NEED MO#ZE CHILDCARE!
.fr~rh;er
~ pc,be 2
.
~ November .
.
1997
Sasn Aloft Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 Z 3 4 5Eagle Couiity Faznily nay- 6 7 Eagle County O
Pre&Post Natal Fit for Motilerltood carz Association ktezting Fit for Motherhood Child Flnd Program
CO17d1t10lllrig C11SS Avon Rec. Center Eagle Piiblic L,ibrary Avon Rec. Cetiter FREE bavalopmental
10:30-11:30 Guest Speakcr: Sharoh Croll 10:30-I 1:30 Scrzaning 0-5 1/2 yix.
7:00 pm Public Health Ofylcz iti
Playgl'bUp 9:00 AIVI . Eaglz
Qrypsum Fire Statipn Sitccessh~l Parzntmg Call Sharon 77~ompsrni for .
R4otion Tots details: 970/845-5999
_ Pre&Post I`ratal Pluygroups/Ed~vards
Cohditioning
`
9 lb 12 Recobnizing & 13 Potential 14 15
Pre&Post Natal Fit for Motherhood Reporting Child Provider Orientaion Playgroups:
Conoitioning Class Abuse &Neglect Avon Pub1iG Library EawaTds 1'rinity Baptist
Playgrbqp 9:00 AiVI Frisco Towti Hall 7:00-8:00 PM 9:30
$right llorizbns Gypsutp Fire Statipn 8:30-12:30 1030 Spanish Speaking
cau 970i6680442 Call Jodi at 949-7097
Open to Chitdren
Call Debbie Martin at s`ice`S`fi`t P"rz"t`°g
Fit for Motherhood
970/479-6680 Motion Tots Pre&Post Natal
Conditioning
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Pre&Post Natal Fit for Motherltood S«°czssfiil raretit;iig
Pla~ groups: HOkd~y Fait'
MOtion Tots Edw'ards 7'rirt'tty Baptist '
Conditioning Class Prz&post ~;aial Fit for Motherhood 9:30 The Mariott i~i Vail
Playgroup 9:00 AM Conditioning , 10:30 Spailiski Spaaking Call: 970/949-7097
Ci}psum Fire Station
23 24 25 26 27;;C%,,'28 29
Pre&Post Natal Fit for Motherhood SuccessFul Parznting
Conditioning Class Pla~~group 900 AM Aiot;on Tots
Prz&Post t~atal
Thanks 1V111
Gypsum Fire Station Conditionin ~ g
•
~ ~
ecem
.,i
1997
Sctri Mon Tue N'ed Tltu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 S Eagle Cowity Cliild 6
Pre&Post Natal Fit for Motherhood Successful Parenting Fit for Motherhood Fuid Prograin
Conditioning Avoti Rea Centar MOt10ri TOtS Avon Rzc. Centar FREE Developinental
10:30-11:30 10:30-11:30 Screaning 0-5 1/2
Pre&,poSt N1t81 Public Health Oftice
Conditioning ;t' a°°"
playgroup 9:00 l~M Cal( Sharpn Thompson:
Uypsum Fite Station 970/845-5999
Pln • rou s-Edwards
. 8 9 10 11 12 13 -
Pre&Post Natal Fit for Motherhopd Successfiil Parenting Fit for Motherjiopd Playgroups: Conditloning Motion Tots Edwards Trinity Baptist ' Playgroup 900 AM PrecPost Natal 9:30
C3ypsuqi f'ire Sttttiph 10:30 Spa~iish Speakitig
Conditibning
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Pre&Post Natal Fit for Motherhopd SucGessful Parenting Fit for Mother hQOd Playgroups:
Conditioning Pre&Post Natal Edwards Trinity Baptisi
playgroup 9:00 AM Conditioning 9:30
10:30 Spanish Speaking
Gypsurli Fire Station
' ~
21 22 23 24 15 26 27
Pre&Post Natal
Conditioning
Chanukah Begins Christmas Day
28 29 30 31 -
0
New Years Eve!
~ . " ' .
.
..i:i.::i;:i;,.i;';:;i:::::f:[::
WH1TF HaUS~ O~1FF
~ RE~01 CE
. . ~ : : ~
~
Olvl
CH -
1LDCARE
.
j:y~{j,;:
:'.~:~:~i:::`:
[\4 . /~k~':.~~'1~L #7.:::::
The Presi ~
i
de 1 r
s. 1~
t and lY1 o
C u~on 1iave takeii ai1 in~
rtwt sieP to
care
bring child
to th
e forefrontof domestic po . Ii
cv. n
O October 23, 1997, . > . : : ~.i~!lo. ~ . .
;
th
Whit
e H
e
ou -
se hosted a conference deciicated to cliildcare issues. ExPert
r >
from ar
ound th
ec
ountrY atten
ded th
c confercn '
ee, in cluding Gai} Wilson
,
the Exec~utive Director of the Colorado Office of Re
source & Referral
.
A encies. Mrs. Wiison believes the conference was a si rn of h h
~ t c can in 4..
~ ~ ~ <»::;:`:>:;?'';
tim ~n
cs iAmcfican fan1il ~ics todaY, "P c Ic w1
o derstand cl ~il
o-
dcarc is an cc
~
:
iat mu ::>:<:;s:>:::`
,
n
i
omi
c ssu
e t1
st ~ ~ ork for parents _ a qualiTy issue That inust work for. ~:~x Gt~saornt~+v~
,
dren »
chil
: :
: b..
.
,
T
0
cs on affor
dabili
t li i
t d saf
Pi q uay al et} were addressed thrrnigli-
out the Conference. The President ro osed tl~at 300 million of f ~ :.ee:::io<~a~t#i~ :
P P $ ederal ! r~l$:::. :~.::<~esm1>e.~'.;:
.
omcs fund h
~
m
sc olarship programs to improve the traii~mg and salaries af <:><:~FtE
the r ~
ovi er
d . Th
so su 1 ~
est tl at in
eY al
stcad of a 1arg
e
scaIe fcderal r
1~ o-
~
~
~
ramh ,
clPing f ~
amili
cs av for ch~
i 1
dcarc c
lo1ers
ai1d busine
g sse
s hel
P ~ _ P
mak
> ?
e oYees, chil
e mP1
dcar mor
e ea I
ccessi
beand affordab1
e.
~ G~urt
, : : :
:
;:_c
, -
In hz ~
s State of th
e nion
U Addrcss in
.~anuan, Pr ~
_
csideiit
Clir
~ton will
l~ l~ eced :<:=::::;:<:<'
di
scu hi
ss s
;
1aii to ii i ~
r
ove chil
dcar
e as a Nti~l~o1e. This issue i~r
as ivc
~ M~?..: ~?e,~:;:$~
national attenTion. It is time that local leaders and communitv metnbers rec-
V~::;:::::::
o nizc th ~
at the Vail Va1Iy n
c ~ust addre
ss qualits quanti acc ~
~ cssibil
i
~
and affor
d
abili
t f li
cen
scd chil
v o dcarc.
SpOTLVAAT. . ;
.
;
~
7
u y 64"n
, .
~~a~2rr
~
Ju
deen, a former
dY E
m
ath teacher
fron ~
Minn
esot
a, h as been
IZZ:LH>~t1;::::a';::>:::<'::>:>i:::'s
fami U
a l
chil
dcare h
ovider i
ome Pr
n
E le
CountY f
or t
h
Y e Past 17 `
4i~lii::<>c:~k#;: ;`;.ss~:sv:<.::::
~
~i~
;
r
ea
s. Sh
eh ~
ovided for other
as Pr
children while raisin
Y
four of her
~
. t.. :
~
own kids
. Her chiIdren range fr0m 1
1
to 20 Year
sof age
.
ng,
ctive.
JudY is verY a
She enJ'
o s hikin
swimmi
ng, readi
Y g, A~t~£ GOGiN;t'~!..Gfikt~D f tNo
su~n t • • 7~
the net and skim.
Sheorim
oved h
allY m
~
ere and work
~ ed as
~ ~
...a ski instructor. Some of her favorite actavities with the children in '.i~ririf,~r~#i~ati,
, , :
er care
are painting and building. Judy aiso introduces children to p.... .?±1s~ce~;;
basic Spanish using audio tapes. Thank you Judy, for your hard work ac# Sha~o~? ;
,
~
an
d dedication to the childcare field.
>::::m~?so±~ .~t;;~~s::,~~~l,~9:;<::
~ /~,,<;`;:«:•,,r:~ `~t:;~.;";~
yA
'~<:y:`',~:~::y~w,~:''.!:
~~:.i:....4 •1'~1~ .~..i~~„~.~ ! Y71 w+
~
>
T
he B
uddies P
r
o m i h
~rd 5 te
; . a i~
>:::>'~;O~s?~: ~T . .
~~outh mentoring program of Thc . ;
4i:Io:'51044:;::::'::
Itesource Center. If vou+ or anv
rvu . .
o r cfiil
f `
ren a
d re ,
?ntere5tecl in
~<':::;:::><:'>:':
1',1'
bccoming a part of thES Eirogram, _
.
cxll Megan or Ulan-a at 949-7097.
: 6~ .
e 3
Pn8
: ('%J ~_LunchWagonl$90~ `
....y^°~"~.....,~f ~n 'r 23USAe.~''
The Resource Center . •,r' ~ i ~
Childcare Resource & Referrnl
P.O. Box 2558
Avon, CO 81620
~ CbLt Vt ~t ~
Ug~l CD
~
in this issue
The Importance of Liceflsed Childcare
The Whitehause Confprence an Childcare
Provider Spotlight...Tudy Edeen
Calendor of Events
The Eagle County Falrti/y Daycare Association
New Childcare Centgr Opens: BRIGHT HORIZONS
~ .
. .
. Oappy u.
~~das
~
2'he esource ~'enter o EagCe Count
. f y
lear Tarents,
The Resource Cent-erflf Eagk County serves ourcommunity in rrcany ca-
pacities. Our programs lliclucfe Ths Chifdcare Resource a~ ReferraC, The Bud
dies ftogram (youth mentoiing), TheAc{vflcates (24 hour crisis Cine), and
Cour-twutc(. We are here to hQlp individuafs ancffamiCies. Tou can coiztact
our office 6y calling 949-7497, ardy zr>riting.• T.O. Bo,-1~2SS8/Avon, CO
81620. The 24 hour crrsis ~ine num6er is 949-7,986.
Wishingyou~-a safe ancfhappy YfoCiday Season,
The Resource CenterStaff c~ Board JVLem6ers .
• .i
_ 1.
w . ,
RECEIVED OCj 2 7 1997
. XC ; ~tu~
October 21, 1997 Y44,d-V--`
~
Vail Town Council
Town of Vail
Vail, Colorado 81657
Dear Council Members:
Where's the integrity? We have been following the Lionshead Master Plan process and are
appalled by the emerging results and the process. We have been involved in public planning
and development activities in the Washington D.C. Metropolitan Area for over 30 years, have
skied at Vail for 23 years, and own property in the Landmark for 5 years. We believe the
record of Vail Associates in developing on-mountain facilities has been excellent and in
keeping with the public interest. However, the participation by partial funding and other
influence that Vail Associates has in your present planning process would not be aitowed in
modern-day town and city planning 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
commercial interests of Vail Associates in creating a high density, high-rise urban environment
in the Lionshead core. Evidence for this is: 1) the non-public plans of Vail Associates for
high-density, high-rise buildings with narrow corridors in the center of Lionshead (see
enclosure) and 2) the proposed "bold-stroke" bus-traffic route directly through 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 of a bus-corridor through the center of Lionshead is so repugnant we can understand
why it is called the "bold stroke". What could be less aesthetically desirable? It would also
require about $20 million or more to acquire the property rights and build (presumably from
public funds?). Interestingly, an alternate route that would connect Lionshead Circle through
the old gondola building to Lionshead Place would destroy less property and deliver people
closer to the new gondola for skier convenience. However, this alternate would obviously
conflict with Vail Associate's high-density, high-rise development plans and with the desire to
encourage more "shopping" in the Lionsfiead 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, reminiscent of a European piazza,
should not be destroyed. The Plaza is the focal point for activities such as President Gerald
Ford'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
r •
Beaver Creek-like structures would not.
Second, encourage the rebuilding 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 comdor, so the building heights would slope downward toward the mountain maintaining the
aesthetics of a mountain environment while shielding the view of I-70. In 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 entries: the Circle, Concert Hall Plaza, the new proposed drop off
on the North side of the Landmark tower, and Lionshead Place. The new drop off 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 iudderi goa;s of
Vail Associates in developing high-rise and high-density that is not permitted by current codes.
The Master Plan should be canceled, or at least postponed until its desirability is more clearly
and directly articulated. In particular, the planning process needs to be separated from the
funding and undue influence of Vail Associates in order to give it credibility and unquestioned
integrity.
We believe the Council should first 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 cloak of a Master Plan.
Sincerely,
~
H. ay Zwally, Ph.D.
JoAnn M. Zwally, ASID Interior Designer
1214 Tucker Lane
Ashton, MD 20861
cc: The Vail Trail
The Vail Daily
Landmark Condominium Association
.
, . .
.
. , • .
. . . , . , . :.k. , ~~ti: .
' ' " _ . . ~ , . • _ ' ' ~:~P.' ' . ~ _ • ;t",~:"y`'~.`~~t.
, . . ~ . . .
_ . . . ~ . . _ . _ . . . . . . " . . . . . . . • _ . _._..._.,.:~:n:._.~:Y,:
LIONSHEAD CORE DEVELOPM°.NT
_ ~ r r.u, to~o..ae
Landmark Lifthouse
. ~
~
~
~ r-'
-
, . .
- - • - •
i -_o
~ Lionshead
F l Arcade
Mo taneros , _
D6lG ~l tl•~ 4/u~ ,
/ 4 •
~ Gtu~
~ b
1
ar..w..r
or.a
nw~ca b-
•`9
i
. I
~
~
. Lionshead
C e n t e r
~ ~ -
-
Lion are ~
Lodge rth ~
- ~,.e..a.: . .
r ,
e ~
- Lion ,mR , o a
I ~ I Level 36 Floor Plan
, Square
Lodge ~ oAre e/2e/97 sute 1'-40'
. ~ dB~OoTrIz
, / / ~ I Mse~ m•
~
\ -
~ • ~
` - Vail Associates Propose~Development..:-Plan
.
~ 120 Room Hotel Four condominium buildings
RECEIVED OCT 2 7 1997
THE WESTWIND X C~.~
October 22, 1997 ~
Town Counsel
Town of Vaii
75 S. Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Re: Renovation of Lionshead
To Whom It May Concern:
. The Westwind condominium building is located in Lionshead. The building was the first to be built in
Lionshead. The location and views of the mountain are an enormous benefit to the building and are
major factors in the building's value.
. The Westwind owners are spending a significant amount of money (in excess of $1 million dollars)
this year and next renovating the interior and exterior of the building. The owners agree that the
Lionshead area needs renovation. We at The Westwind are doing our part by significantly
renovating our building.
. The potential loss of mountain views and increased noise congestion around our building are a
significant concern to The Westwind owners.
We believe any renovation project in the Lionshead area which is taller than the clock tower will have
_a significant.negative effect on existing buildings in the area.
. A building higher than the clock tower would not help to develop the Lionshead area. In fact, it
. would most likely have a negative effect on the existing Lionshead buildings and make it much more
difficult for the existing building owners to have the desire to invest money (as The Westwind owners
have) into their buildings.
. The clock tower is tall enough. Any benefit received by some small number of condominiums or
hotel rooms built taller than the clock tower could not possibly be worth the negative effect it would
surely have on existing Lionshead buildings.
. In addition, the current "Lionshead Mall" area appears too small for a traffic corridor. It is only two to
three blocks from the East Lionshead bus stop to the West Lionshead Concert Hall Plaza bus stop.
if you eniarge ine mali area, it wuuid stili ue only iwu to lhree biocks wiue - irardly wicie enuuyl-i iar a
traffic corridor.
. We have asked Geoff Wright of Destination Resorts to monitor this situation and to keep us
informed.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me at 312.347.5903 or my assistant, Betsi Farrell
at 312.347.5937.
Si cerely,
James F. Beedie
President, tfie Westwind Homeowners' Association '
. . , _ . . . . . . . ,
cc: The Westwind Board of Directors Chris Ryman - Vail Associates
The Westwind Homeowners Mike Porter - Vail Associates
Town of Vail - Planning and Environmental Committee Geoff Wright - Destination Resort .
Town of Vail - Design and Review Board
Lionsliead Redevelopment Plan XC- . .-~f,
0~4,
94
Subject: Lionshead Redevelopment Plan
Date: 01 Nov 97 1 1:05:13 -0500
From: Chuck Curtis <chuck.curtis@mail.valrad.com>
To: Suzanne Silverthorn <ssilver@vail.net>
Subject: Time: 10:48 AM
OFFICE MEMO Lionshead Redevelopment Plan Date: 11/1/97
Dear Suzanne:
Thank you for sending the updated proposals for the Lionshead Redevelopment Pia-:. I
found them very interesting, and spent several hours looking at the drawings th=ough
a magnifying glass.
First, I would appreciate it if you would pass along my thanks to a11 of the people
who have contributed their ideas to this massive project. There's not enough mczey
in the world to pay for the enthusiasm and creativity that have gone into these
plans. Clearly the people who are leading this process have a great love and
passion for Vail/Lionshead. As a part-time homeowner in Lionshead, my wife ard I
feel deeply indebted to everyone who has invested so much time in this project.
Second, we want to also thank you for the openness'of the project. I have never
seen a greater public outreach effort for any endeavor. Everyone on the city
council, design committee, zoning have set a new standard in public outreach and
debate.
'Finally, I would like to endorse the plans and recommendations that have been
developed thus far. The plans are exciting and far-reaching. In particular, I saant
ro endorse the higner-density zoning that may be necessary to bring these plans to
fruition. I realize that not all of my neighbors share this view, and I respect
their concerns. Personally, my wife and i find the higher-density of a Beaver
Creek-like community to offer more advantages than disadvantages. It appears tr?ese
raised density standards will be necessary to finance the design improvements we all
want.
Noise pollution standards are one area where I would ask for higher standards. Bus
noise and crowd noise currently can cause problems. As we move to higher density, I
would ask the committee to review noise standards and set levels that will create a
relaxing atmosphere for the greater number of beds planned for this area. As we
route buses through Lionshead itself, it's important that this issue be addressed.
I would be greatly pleased to see the diesel buses exchanged for electric-driven
vehicles as older vehicles are taken out of use.
Once again, please extend my appreciation to a11 those who have worked so hard =or a
new Lionshead.
Sincerely,
Chuck Curtis
1 of 1 11/3/97 8:53 AM
XC: Cdt~~
October 20, 1997
~~yESj`NG IN rR A J~` T?
LY'1RNO1V S
A JAUNT THROUGH THE ALPS' FINEST RESORTS
• ? ~ .
Skiing in Sty-le
_ nent's best sld resort can create a remazkably heated discussion, especially af-
ter a round of schnapps and Camembert. Yet certain names crop up again and
again. ltvo of them are Verbier and Chamonix, resorts that have long been
.'.41{ ~ praised for their slopes, and are highly rated on that score alone. Still, neither
acores highly as all-round reaorts, in part because most visitora atay in chalets
and apartrnents, and so there is a rather noticeable lack of truly outstanding
y•~ hotels or restaurants.
A better pick for a top resort in FY'ance is Courchevel, a sophisticated spot
that was once the winter home of Brigitte Bazdot and the St I"ropez jet set
Courchevel is the linchpin of the l4'ois Vallees, a network of sld resorts, lifts
and runs that ranks as one of the best all-round sld areas anywhere. There are,
strictly spealang, three Courchevels, each identified with its altitude in meters
' after the name. Courchevel 1850, the highest of the three, has nearly 70 lifts
, that take slders to some 400 miles of trails, maldng this one of the most exten-
sive sld areas in the world.
_ ;---T?~~,~_ "Courchevel boasts some four-star hotels to pamper its wealthy guests, in-
I'. cluding the well-known and ultra-luxurious Byblos des Neiges, which has spas,
indoor swinuning pools and, from some rooms, the best mountain scenery avail-
able. Such luxury dcesn't come cheap: At peak season, mom rates can easily
approach $1,000 a night, and suites cost more, much more.
~ ~__7 , The village of Courchevel has good eating too; starting with Le Bateau Ivre,
a two-star Michelin restaurant run by mast.ax chef Jean Jacobs and his son,
Jean-Pierre. Gourmet magazine praised the place for its sunple yet artistic
presentation. An evening meal runs nearly $100 a head, excluding wine.
~ I Somewhat less glitzy, but certainly a contender among France's best sld re-
_
sorts, is Megeve, a relatively small town about 60 minutes south of Geneva. One
of about a dozen resorts in the Mont $lanc region, Megeve has been scorned
' by hard-charging skiers for its lack of challenging slopes artd its sometimes un-
" reliable snow levels, but the place remains highly popular as a family resort be-
The joys of Alpine living are almost enough cause it offers awiae variety of long, relatively easy runsbuilt around some
world-class hotels.
to make you forget the price tag There are two hotel standouis in Megeve: the recently refurbished Les Fer-
mes de Marie on the outsldrts of town and the spectacular Chalet du Mont
B Y J A Y P A L M E R d'Arbois, set as its name suggests on Mont d'Arbois, overlooking the town. The
chalet was founded by Baroness Maurice de Rothschild in an attempt to start
a resort to equal Switzerland's SL Moritz. It hasn't quite measured up to that
hen it comes to skiing, there is nothing level. Still, the Chalet u difficult to faulL It boasts huge rooms, vaulted pine ceil-
quite like the Alps. It's the only place in ings and individual terraces with mountain views, not to mention a reataurant
the world where you can find so many good with few peers.
slopes, and so much good living, in such a Should you want to stray from the hotel for dinner, and most Folks won't,
small area. This storied European mountain you might try Michel Gaudin in the center of town, a rather small restaurdnt
range is spread across a region not much larger than Colorado, where Chef Michel cooks in the back and Madame Gaudin nms the &onw The
yet it contains more than 3,000 sld resorts scattered across France, menu changea seasonally and according to what's locally available at any mo-
Switzerland, Germany, Austria and Italy. Some cater to the jet set, ment. Given that the Gaudins are from Brittany, lamb is a regular, popular and
others attract a family crowd. The sheer variety of the deGcious offering. If you are really hungry, try the tasting
Alpine experience can be great for the repeat visitor be- menu, which offers a little portion of many different dishes. The
cause there is always something different to try next time a~ green apple sorbet with Calvados is an excellent way to cleanse
different slope, a different hotel, a different restaurant, a differ the palat.e.
ent town or even a different country. But for first-time visitors, In Switzerland, there are so many excellent ski resorts that
this plethora of options can be downright intimidating. With that it's difficult to pick the best few. Crans-Montana is a favorite,
in mind, we have prepared lists of what we feel are the top hotels, though its low altitude and fairly easy skring rate a demerit or
restaurants and ski slopes in the Alps. two, as dces its lack of a world-class hotel. A bit farther east,
Asking a group of European sldera to agree on the Conti- Klosters, and to some degree neighboring Davos, have bene-
' fited from frequent visits by Britain's Prince Charles. But the
Far apres :k, st Mo.ia, aewe, i: in actzu yy itsen. negeve, r;g,c n b,ow„ . two Swiss resorts that atand head and shoulders above the rest
ror ron8 vaii:, grwt noceis. _ are Zermatt and SL Moritz. Zermatt is a car-less town of nar-
_ y),
T8 BARRON'S Inv.esting in Travel Occober20, 1997
the mock gothic Badrutt's downhill slopes in the immediate vicinity,
. Palace downtown and mov- plus 700 miles of slding at 43 sld centers
ing out to the more sedate in 12 neighboring valleys. Cortina, notes
butequally grand Suvretta the Good Skiing l'ruide, ranks with St
House a mile or so out of Moritz as one of the worid's best all-round
town. In both cases, a sin- ski resorts. ` `rv gle room can easily run up Cortina's hotels include a number of
to $1,000 a night. Gooci excellent establishments, starting with
restaurants are plentaful the Miramonti Majestic, located about a
but pricey, very pricey, mile out of town. Almost as well known is
. Again, $100 per person the Hotel de la Poste, in town, but the
, seems to be the minimmn place seems a bit rough around the edges,.
at good places. considering its vaonted reputation.
Austria has its upscale What helps make Cortina a world-class
k;•' . sld resorts, though they resort is its restaurants, which for the -
tend to be more family ori- -
" tL ented than Y , h Q 07128 171 T O P T E N R A N K I N G 5 Switzerland or France.
Among Austria's besc are: ? Hotels
the villages of Lech and un ~
Zurs, which together with Suvrem House Sc Moriu
St. Christoph and St. An- gyblos des Neiges Courchevel
ton make up the Arlberg Chalet du Mont d'Arbois Megeve
region. This is where Di- Les Fermes de Marie Megeve
ana, Princess of Wales, Zertnatterhof Zermatt
tried to eacape photogta- Miramonci Majesac Cortina
phers with her.-sons and Gasrhof Posc Lech
where, tvith much less fan-
fate, myal families &rom ~drutt's Palace Sc Moria
the Netherlanda, Jordan Arlberg-Hospiz Sc Ghriscoph
and Spain regularly vaca- Auberge du Bois Prin Chamonix
x t t tion. Princeas Caroline of
Monm is also a repeac X Restaurants
visitor. " c,,,,
One of the attractions of
Le Baceau Ivre Courchevel
alding here is the ticketing Tivoli Cortina
system, whieh allows you Roland Pierroz Verbier
to ski an of fonr nei hbor-
y g Chaletdu Montd'Arbois Megeve
idy's Cord~u d' Ampeao offers samning views, great zkring and relaeve bargains. lng resorts, opening up 80- ahn's Talvo Sc Moria
odd miles of groomed Walserhof Klosters
, row lanes, wooden barns and rather opu- The second of Switzerland's top-notch alopes on three mountains. It's moatly in- Michel Gaudin ' Megeve
lent hotela aet right underneath the in- resorts is St Moritz, the place where win- termediate slding: of the very highest
spiring Matterhorn. If you're not suffi- ter aports were invented and where the quality. Lift lines, though once a horror, Le Gourmec Zernua
ciently inapired, go to the small cemetery Winter Olympica have been held twice. are now unlmown, thanks to a. new elec- Arlberg-Hospiz Sc Christoph
in the center of the village and scan more 1'he sknng is pretty good, though the lift tronic system that stops daily ticket sales Julen Hotel Zermatt
than 100 years of climbing fatalities. lines are ]mown for their length and the after a certain point Though the slopes are excellent for ad- various alopes are widely dispersed. Apartrnenis and chaleffi are not espe- ~ Ski Slopes
vanced and intermediate skiers, cially common in Lech. Moat viaitors stay
Zermatt is hurt by its inadequate in one of the many comfortable and ex- yerbier Swiuerland
beginnera' ruiis and what's been /0° ' c E R M A N Y pens1VQ MQtQIB,'a list headed by the smart LechRun Ausvia.
called the worst sld school in w five-star Gasthof Poat, a 40-room estab-
- Mmiirh' SL MOrIII Swiaerland
Switzerland. What keeps people . lishment that is rated one of the best in
b ~ ~ ` ' Courchevel France
eoming ack, thouBh, ~s the apec- Austna. If you want peak aeason, though,
tacular mountain acenery, and u S you may have to book a year in advance. Chamonix France
some of Europe's very longest ~ • p~, ~di2urs T R/ Room rates, including full board at the Davos Swiaerland
runs. S W I T Z E R L A N D' _ highly regarded restaurant, approach Ze?matt Swiaerland
Then, too, there are Zermatt's Maritz caina $5,000 a week for two people. Corvna d'Ampeao laly
hotels, starting with the venerable 4,•H, cna~a' °~'~P~O A few miles out of Lech, and rather Megeve France
Zermatterhof, a grand hotel in the ""'g', v`e,nw ' isolated at the top of the mountain pasa to Saas-Fee Swiaerland
, z ~wn
center of town. Jacket and de are cwrd •M;~- WWI~
St. Anton, stands another great hotel, the
required in the restaurant, and a I T A L y Arlberg-Hoapiz at St. Christoph, where
room for two in peak season nuis ~ the high quality of the food is only most part are significantly cheaper than
between $500 and $1,000 a night. matched by the quality of the wine cellar, othera in the Alps, thanks to the weak-
The ahops in Zermatt, like those in Slders flcek to the world-famous Cresta one of Austria's finest Wealthy viaitora nesa of the lira Every one we tried was
Courchevel, are enough to shrink most Run, still closed to women, which remains can aip a 1928 Chatesu D'Yquem for superb, and we don't use that word
wallets rather quickly. the ultimate teat of foolhardy male $1,100 a bottle or a 1933 Lafite Rothschild lightly. Top scorer in our book ia Tivoli, a
Zermatt's reataurants (more than 100, machismo. at $900 a bottle. Othera may prefer a fine emall restaurant set high on the hilla over-
by one account) have a deservedly high For apres ald, St Moritz is in a class 1986 Chateau Lynch Bages for a little looking Cortina with one Michelin star al- .
reputation for qnatity. Visitors ahould try by itaelf. Long a haven for Gennan and over $100. ready in ita book and, we contidently pre-
the one-atar Le Gowrmet, where wild Italian ariatocracy, the resort also at- • dict, others yet to come. For anyone m
game dominates the menu. But be pre- tracted the likes of Greta Garbo and Ncel ~!c Cortina, this place ia a must visit'hy the
pared for prices that run $150 a peraon, Coward. It once had a repntation for pasta with venison and muahrooms. Alao before wine. More fun and a lot lesa ex- pulling in less prestigioua visitors, includ- rated tughly is another small family-run
pensive ia the intimate restaurant in the ing what an author once described as "the I1°S GENERALLY AGREED that Ital- restaiuwt, Da Beppe Sello, where the un-
basement of the Hotel Julen. The spe- hangeis-on of the rich, the jewel thieves, ian sld resorts don't come close to match- uaual but wonderful specialty ia ravioli
cialty of the house is lamb, from the own- the professional backgammon players and ing the excellent slriing or the opulence of with beet.
ers' own flock, in fact. Low ceilings, wood general layabouts." That deacription France, Switzerland or Auatria. But there Every aluer will put a different amount
beams and friendly aervice make for a seeans a bit outdated, but certainly the ho- is one exception: Cortina d'Ampezzo, host of emphasis on the importance of the
great evening under any circiunstances. tels of St Moritz offer this ]dnd of 1930s to the '56 Winter Olympics and home to alopes veraus the need for a top hotel and
But the lamb chopa here, grilled on an ambiance. Not even in Courchevel or Zer- Italy's smart aet Literally siurounded by fine dining. That's why most of the reaorts
open fire in the corner of the room, are matt do you have quite so many expensive apectacular, jagged mountain peaks, on our Top 10 list combine all three. No
simply the beaL shops or such upscale hotels, starting with Cortina offers more than 60 miles of slder lives for slding aloneA
~ .D i scov¢ r tL.e._ r..¢?~~?~~d s
.^Ic
~
SLO ~ td,
you rop, .
Invest in your community
~ and earn purchasing
power to bid on
fabulous merchandise
, , €
s
~
Y.
A .
>;~`~Ys~ ~
~ '••a,~,g ,r:c.
~ .y...;\ ` .tt.... .
. ..c ..::r.. ,
. k x:<,... ...~;~.;.r.':.~
. . ~ .....>.'~':'j; i;' ~i
u. a.
' 's~'„<.. , < z .a a..._,~. .,^~k, `.T ~ ~,~.~y~'~ ,:.~!s
. y
r
r-: ~ . e
, x ~c~.. h.
, ~ . u . s~~. .i2.~'..,. y, •~sn
. . t . . ..,n.'a . : +..,r...<...u ;9.i;.;...^i..::i'~n .64 n„v . . ....~~<~..a„•.r~3,ro.:;~..,ry. . ,..ir': ~~.a;:':;,.::'.:....C,~ .g
~a:~rr .,>s:.~~
~"'~r/~, > i , ~ ~ ~ . . s;;n•'~.',a,re>~.az~y- s~ <~>.tl <<~' ;r ~.:7!s~'r
N.~' '~.'...~.!";'.~lt<:::•.'*~ ..~w.T....Y~,,;>~:.:::n.,..n~r~eS~..fiip~.~::4:%<:~.~jt.v' .DM'i:'y .Y k;r..07
..:3J.~ h
. , n . . r
..~yy
Kin ~'is~ ~t~1'~t 1'1
~:{~,~~nber~mixer
~ . , . . . . A.. . . . . .
. . .,sn WY . a9 , . . y~,~v.sr~ .n.i5..~:?~ ~i.%~.; / :
9 Swi 2e df.
~y>,y,~. 3~',,Fr.~',n. ;L~c., ~ ~ ~s~g, . ~y ~~'Qwr,~s;: ~.3. , r=• ~ m ~
y y y :.y : m
,~~p a" ' . ~Y" t V a
~
.fY" ~.,.7.1~,4,'xrk : >~'v~ l,<~,c S~•~!,~~"~.
~ ~sj~ ~ _ , / Y a t~~.~
F
> ~,~t
~.iaY~f~ av,1
~ a......:~• nr~y:~,: j¢~~
G,.~, ~gM~?M~..,.,.~.~`. .>z~txA.~a.;•,
• ...f31~ . ....t.,..i ,~.a„ . ~ .~.>r;.•:.,3u'..:.f,2Y,-, ~t,:•>:~ ..~F.:. .>`!z~
r..: ','~..,r,•S;:'T~.
a: ?~.:_.~f.t ...,/'a.~ s. .,,:<-<,:::. {
~~~;.~~~~.,t3,<.~::„
,:..;E?i..;a~;>:~Fm",:^~::W,f.....~,..
v.
.~.s' e' 'r1:4:/Na~,•..,~~z,..._,'~?, <...:s.r .,,a:r....,, 1 .a , . .::s_sC,.;ia'irE,:Cr~,.r :a3J.,: ~,'Y~R~,?`.~.3.s, 3~:.:.'..%,' ,!;g,~;r:~~!'
,.r,.'?..
: . > , y, , . . ~ ° . ' . 3. • W~J°:h:'::<:`~~3~~~~~;j,r;~
~~~r~sent. ~r . ss ort.when,. ~ n ,~orm. disee°°
. F.,a.
..~w~ :~a,,.. . d... . . ~r:.t>,,. , .....:ae., .h. r~.:~s:'x §-:r~
.a ~~3..,... . . ~ a.... , . ..r,:~;,^~;
,s,~
~}r ~'y'~ ~..i{
£~N~1?G~ JOSL~ i l l i
e°',~< a~s
c
passpc~rtt the}Chamb~r3~y Dec ='lb to~ be'eli a~~tEE dr~wm~ C~R
.'Tum irs your gibl6fca~
;
,N•,~;sr , . . .
n;I~ ; : >v ~,y . „ j r~'~iti 3~';~~' s ' ~ ..t; ~t; a t ~''„,r;~~te:'~. r:.~na•.~ ry- sm.. ;'x.. ar~, ,~s<s„ ~;,,.:,.;s'~ ~ s - ;s' ~
•"~,i~ .'k a a
<<;
.,e
t y. ,
;t~j 4 .p.,. : , , .
n
< . r. . , : , z ;~g~:x,. ~~.,c',,Ss; ,-.f..'.<.,t..
~ . . b ~
. . . .
as5
U
..i.:?~ 4 X . 1:{....
.s...a , ,,,.,_,..:.....a
. ..a. a.. a....> . .x~'N.,..a
..t . . „ .
_ . . . . r . . ~x,~ . 4,. ~.~.Y":.'.:;,,,.
.
. . . . ~ . . ~4 . . . . « . .n ..1 , ...N.c. . . rr....,-Y°< < i'v~.i: ~.F:~.
< :r,
wn~.i ,.s.~ Mr..._ . i,. 6 ~ E`'ne . ..'is 4 .~Xn.~.....f.~~s ..n.f .Y6... >e,.,a....w .:f 'o~ ' i.:':~.~:: ~~'~'~i: :.uy":'..; `a:~a:.s:ay"~';ye• ~f';w' ~:.2•.~
: ~ v...q...?~e. : A . 1 3.u:~. 5.,t.t . ,...r. ..;3~ , , , .,k >
1 ;e r....~~, %.~c,
, , . ,
: ~
.~:<ACa.~ o:#f5t~>: m~
C r ixe~:aty c: ~t
m : ~.tse.
17
. : . . . .Ft . . ~ „ a,. ~er~ r~a ~ , n .
.
. Y
~ . 4
.~c•a~x~._.~,.:.<~„z..~,:~:z:...>>•?~. .~°tpi.'r~
. e~4. . .
,.q..:e.~;::,.;>•>:..:..,:~:~::c>,
Y^?~a`~':Sao..,.sxkati ~c....4rx.., ~ • ~ 1,~'~.° i~.;:x.~:~. ~ ,
. ,~.t..,....,~~,;;..; c
, E s' t "w,,y•;.>,,; ~z, ~ ~s~i-~< s s ra• rs:-,ft
on~px~zQS d6r6t&l t
< t
.,~..-.r. ~',.::.R?-s•d~.~ .x.~,,&.....t~i` ~t%,.1at ;z,.~;t z,>,:;~,x '~a. ,a:::' oy..y
r
. . ..:i. ~.r... ,,,,~sc;,.5~g,3,r...,.,.,,r..:~ ~:~~:~:"..s.~.ir~, .:s,3F ,.~.sa~~-.~'.~;,,~~.::. ~ ~';,rc~'«. '.3:>t':;~",f~•t~ ~ ~.~':.:^k nlt<t. ~
. x:, t;..~
:•~.,~".....a~..en ~:v£.;:.,. .;:,:S.sx•. ,..,.h ,r~,:. :.,L,'..;,.. k.~,yN.:.>'' ,S^3':% ~~r:i,`~q., s.1~~-.~f ,ts.
. . ..<.,~..i.'<:.... i`:5.:. F.,..
. , . . . . . f a < ..:.,i~r'D,'~,~',.Y:,^n,i.: ~:Vf... ~?y3.y.:«xw,r~:,;?,'e:;:
~ .T.~,.v .n..,...`i'.<,.. a,: . 9...,.<.r~y....~.~.,.....~1::..y,s.~...,....,,f~;',:'.?~..
i.
,,e>'~
- . ,;.:~..,.....,.a.,..... . .
.x..>......
......,:.~..~~.q.~~~:. .~:~~:?`~";~x:~:~,
: x•,;.:......~.....r,..~.~ ..r , . . ~ ~ . ,..~,,F~~~ , ~ :
e.,• ,.x :.n,~i.e.s ,,;...,ae..h¢.:..,o,,..:Frb.,..;., .~r'.ii.:'. ...Lz . 3>. (.„.r.i,~~<.a~.a,~,,,,~M'E~'"s3>.~kl< ..Y. c_.:q:r°:,w~~<.''.4i "^'ic.: .ec.?.: ..~~,rs.a..;;:::;<;~a.`::a;t
~~~C" a.. . . .s .......yr:<,,....~,r'.:~..,. .K, ..:...,.~4.~:. ;~+.°'u~..>'"k .S.
Check the Steamboat Pilot and Today weekly and listen to KBCR, KFMU, KIDN; or TCI
ChanneB 10 for more information on the more than 150 participating businesses.
Sl•oppitq lochily L&s ihcvqr boma so r4w&rdi1%7.
After the mixer you can find additional passports & information regarding the
1997 Shop Steamboat campaign at Community First Bank,
First National Bank,Norwest Bank, Steamboat Springs Chamber Resort,
Safeway and participating merchants.
Shop wh¢r¢ your 1? is
I NVEST I N STEAMBOAT SPRI NGS
Sponsored by the
Steamboat Springs Chamber Resort Association