The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1998-08-04 Support Documentation Town Council Evening Session VAIL TOWN COUNCIL EVENING MEETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1998 7:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS REVISED AGENDA NOTE: Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time Council wiN consider an item. 1 • CITIZEN PARTICIPATION. (5 mins.) 2. CONSENT AGENDA: (5 mins.) A. Approve the Minutes from the meetings of June 30th, July 7th and 21 st, 1998. 3 Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1998, second reading of an Ordinance Dominic Mauriello Amending the Official Zoning Map for the Town of Vail in Accordance with Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Chapter 5, Zoning Map; Applying Zone District Designation to a Portion of Unzoned Property Previously Owned by the United States Forest Service and Transferred to the Town of Vail Pursuant to the Land Ownership Adjustment Agreement to Primary/ secondary Residential District for Property Located at Rockledge Road/portions of United States Forest Service Lot 3, Based upon the Proposed Final Plat (Not Yet Recorded) of Rockledge Forest Subdivision Prepared by Dennis Shelhorn as Job No. 0332-002 Dated February 25, 1998. (5 mins.) ' ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve/Modify/Deny Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1998 on second reading. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The PEC, at its July 13, 1998 meeting, made a recommendation of approval of the proposed ordinance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department recommends approval of Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1998, on second reading. 4• Report on Common Ground Litigation. (30 mins.) Tom Moorhead 5. Adjournment - 7:45 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 REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 8/11/98, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE FOLLOWING VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 8/18/98, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. . - +i~~• i v:-.~~ ~ vrrt~ %.vurvwL KC~aULHK tVtIVING MEE7ING WILL BE ON'TUESDAY, 8/18/98, BEGINNING,AT 7:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. I I I I I I I Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2332 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information. C:WGENDA.TC PUBLIC NOTICE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING Monda Au ust 3 1998 A joint Vail Town Council and Avon Town Council dinner will be held at Alpenrose Restaurant at 6:00 p.m. to discuss regional marketing district as well as other issues of mutual interest. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2332 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information. COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOW-UP SOLUTIONS - ~ - F 1998 5/19/98 EAST VAIL LIGHTS LARRY: 2 of the 6 East Vail lights are still out. What is the The repair request has been forwarded to CDOT District one maintenance Kevin Foley status? region. They have no firm date at this Jme that they can get to this repair. 6/9/98 DANCING BEAR CHECK TODD 0: Since we're almost ready to sign off on the W. Vail We're purchasing a Bench and a wood carved Bear to be placed near the Bob Armour roundabout landscaping, what are we doing w/the $1,100+ Dancing Bear to recognize their contribation and cooperation for the check we received from the Dancing Bear? Let's see a project. There will also be a plaque placed outlining their contribution. plaque or a bench or something installed to commemorate this donation. 6l9/98 BETTY NEAL COMPUTER TRAINING Anne: Please contact Betty to arrange a training session for Betty is on vacation until August 24th. `Ne will schedule a class when she Kevin Foley interested Council members. returns. The class will most likely be hE ld from 12:30 to 1:30 at CMC. Please contact Anne with any interest in attending this class. 7/21198 VAIL PASS CLEAN UP LARRY: Please write thank you to CDOT for responding to I have personally thanked Michael Dod;,on, and Kandi Claybrook who is Kevin Foley the cfean up for the bicycle ride. Also, please ask what the the maintenance supervisor, for the cle; in up for the courage classic and status on completion of the Vail Pass rest area is? It appears triple bypass cycle rides over Vail Pass. to have been under construction for two summers Regarding the rest area, construction siill continues and the project will be finished this fall. There was a compreh(insive article in the Vail Valley Times on Tue that outlines the scope ar,d duration of the project if council needs more s ecific info. Please see aitached article. Ju(y 31,1998, P ige 1 7l21198 ENTRANCE TO VTRC, LARRY: Considering the 4-6 lanes of traffic by the entry, is The "boulevard" concept for the S froniage road to the entrance of the Ludi Kurz there a way to make the entrance more attractive/ parking structure was originally part of he remodel in 1989. It was appealing through landscaping, islands, channeling traffic, removed because of budget constraint;;. The concept was then put on the addressing safety issues, etc.? Can we spruce up our Capital Improvement list subsequent to that and remained there until 1994 ' primary entrance to the Village? when it was removed. The concept is still viable and like all ot ier capital improvements can be added to the CIP list and compete for approval and dollars, if the council desires to proceed with this project. 7121l98 VMS LARRY: Although you hatl talked about another colorl Public Works is exploring several optioris to reduce the visual impacts. Mike Arnett , treatment for the VMSs (something other than orange), Mike One action after the summer season is to repaint them to a brown or has provided a drawing showing a rock retainer walllshield, green. They are also looking at other icleas i.e. skirting, etc. There will as well. Any way to make this look more attractive? continue to be a requirement to place the orange reflective cones around the sign since they wili continue to be a safety hazard in the traveled way on the street. 7/28/98 CHAPEL BRIDGE RAILS LARRY: The railing across the bridge appears to be rusty. Public Works will place this on the maintenance list and they will be Sybill Navas Can this be stained/painted or is this the naturally cured repainted by the end of September. appearance? 7128198 CROSSWALK TO STREAM PATH LARRY: The appearance of the stamped and stained We will investigate the cost to have asp ialt stamping and coloring done. Kevin Foley asphalt at the top of Blue Cow Chute is very attractive + Once the cost and availability of a contr3ctor to do this work has been helpful to visitors. Can this also be done between the established, we will complete this request. southeast exit of the UTRC and the streamwalk over into Ford Park? July 31, 1998, Page 2 7/28198 LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT RUSSELL/DOMINIC: Concern has been expressed about Clarification will be made in Communit) Newsletter as well as an update to Kevin Foley outcomes from Council work sessions and how they are the Lionshead mailing list. covered in the COUNCIL HIGHLIGHTS. As an example; the perception that the 82 foot height has already been approved, voted upon by Council appeared to be reinforced through our wording of the HIGHLIGHTS. Additional concern was expressed by a member of the audience that participants from the community are feeling excluded from the "process" when they are not aliowed to speak at ' afternoon work sessions. 7/28/98 MUD LOT (LOT A ADJACENT TO RUSSELUANNIEIVRD/TOMIPAM: Kaye Ferry expressed THE HOSPITAL AND LIBRARY) concern that the lot reserved for VRD, library personnel, and Council hospital staff is underutilized, after experiencing difficulties herself in dropping off an injured person and securing a parking space. It was suggested original agreements w/the hospital be revisited re: the parking lot west of the hospital, as well as the parking structure to the east. Staff will return to Council wltheir findings. July 31, 1998, P~:ge 3 - . ~ ~I ~ . p, ~ • Bulk Rete 14, U.S. Postege ~Rtn . , ~ ' PAID kT' ~ ~ fE fD /p ~ J•l.'~fd~ :~r.~~s d h:fl ~r ~:F ~ ~ r~~.~~ ~p ~ N di i ar dnl: ~ t Fr . ~ ' ~ r f rmN No. B ~ ~'1 ~ Fj ~ ~ 1 7 J iP f l ~:I~~J ' 1 r ~ ~ ~ i ~ Awn, Co IN% v~~~° " r~ • p0~~~~ O ]'i ~ ~C Number . ~ ' ~ ; . I ' • ' 'D ~ 0~'°~.~'~' "As long as you're going to think anyway-ypu might as well think big." -Donald Trump ti ~4 .~0 Pass • ~ ~ ~ R V r 1 kil est area. 2 16yOO O e i he* a 0 so -or'g By f Thompaon different treatment environment. Water taken from nearby Americans with Disabiliti es Act were aubsequently nmes sml Manager Ten Mile Creek required special treatment using alum. discovered, he said. 0~~ ~ For Flushed through the system over the years, it created big '"fhat area certainly has (treatment) problems,..mainly st travellers, the rest area atop Vail Pass is a trouble. „ „ welcome : i ht and site. because of the rnld environ.nent, he said. I have more ,A g By last summer, the alum had plugged the leach field than enough crap to deal wid i," he laughed. ~ ry There i ou have a grand view, a chance to stretch your and the effluent was escaping to the surface. CDOT closed Marschel was the engineer in charge of the highway p~~~ legs and a chance to use one of the.half dozen roilets which the rest stop and installed portable toilets, construction over Uail Pass in the rqid-'70s. now carry a $1.3 million price tag. It is not the- Colorado CDOT resident engineer Ron Tq assist CDOT in correc:ing what Marschel calls.the ~ Departme it of Ttansponation's best success story. But in O . . ~ ~ Marschel is overseeing the rebuild "Frank Lloyd Wrong" Association's desi n defe~cts, it has time, it m, y be. with somedmes gdm hurnot hired the Boulder•area firm of Roth Tamborini arfd - Wihkor, Probleris at the rest area actually began'in 1976 when ~~It'~' ~ s a regular Dilbert project. a firm which specializes in waste treatment, i the rest ai ea was built at the same time that Interstate 70 We have to deal with these special projects and they always That firm has engineered a new 12,000 allon- er•da scaled VaSi Pass. It was designed as a solar operated facili see 8 P Y ty m to be a problem for us. We have trouble with rest sequencing batch reactor slucge treatment plant built in a by the Ar mk Lloyd Wdght Association. It contained an areas almost anywhere they are." he said. "They are not separate building next to the rest stop. It was built last 5 g b ; 8,000 gal on•per•day pre•manufactured water treatment our specialiry." M~~ and weste Nater treatment faciliry that was designed for a Then other problems with accessibility and the 1 See 5216,000, Next to Last Poge Vail breaking ground 0618 - ~ affordable units i~ in ~lf led Sandstone area MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: August 4, 1998 SUBJECT: An appeal of a Design Review Board decision conditionally approving the Raether new single-family residence, located at 278 Rockledge Road/Lot 15, Block 7, Vail Village 1 st. Appellants: Paul Raether, represented by Noel Rollins of Resort Design Collaborative International Planner: George Ruther 1. SUBJECT PROPERTY Raether residence, located at 278 Rockledge Road/Lot 15, Block 7, Vail Village 1 st. II. STANDING OF APPELLANT The appellant has standing to file this appeal, as he is the owner of the subject property. (II. BACKGROUND The appellant, Paul Raether, represented by Noel Rollins of Resort Design Collaborative International, is proposing to construct a new single-family residence. The new residence will replace an existing residence on the property. On July 15, 1998, the appellant's representative appeared before the Town of Vail Design Review Board for a final review. Following a site visit to the appellant's property and a public hearing discussion, the Design Review Board voted unanimously to approve the new single-family residence with conditions. One of the conditions required that the appellant save a 40-50 foot tall spruce tree on the property. In order to save the tree, the location of the new residence has had to be changed. The appellant was intending to remove the tree and mitigate the loss by replanting specimen trees on the property. IV. NATURE OF THE APPEAL The appellant believes that there are benefits that can be achieved by removing and replanting specimen trees that outweigh saving the existing tree. 1 V. REQUIRED ACTION Uphold/Overturn/Modify the Design Review Board's conditional approval of the Raether residence proposal. The Town Council is required to make findings of fact in accordance with the Town of Vail Municipal Code. The following finding is proposed: Findinq: The Town Council finds that the Design Review Board's decision to approve with conditions the proposed Raether residence was proper and in accordance with the provisions of Title 12, Zoning Regulations and that the tree shoutd be saved. VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Town Council uphold the Design Review Board's conditional approval of the Raether residence, subject to the finding above. 2 4 ANTLER AT ~klL Preliminary Development Summarv - "Antlers 2000" Demolish existing parking structure (this includes entry foyer, lobby, some offices and all meeting facilities) Rebuild parking structure with 114 spaces (currently 70 spaces) Construct new lobby/reception area, offices and all conference facilities Construct 24 new condominiums (for sale) Construct 7 units of employee housing (for rent) Replace all siding and railings on existing building to match exterior of new construction Fire sprinkler for entire existing building (in addition to new construction) Allowable under Existing Proposed current zonin Parking ? 70 spaces 114 spaces 106 covered Dwellin units 26 72 96 EHU'S 0 (two existing 7 employee units are not deed restricted GRFA 36,000 55,638 87,088 (not countin 3,500 EHU Maximum 48 feet 80 feet Unchanged Hei ht Common Area N/A 10,000 (approximate) 14,520 Elevators N/A 1 2 Fire sprinkler N/A None Full Sidin Not T-111 T-111 Stucco Benefits to the Town of Vail Seven additional units of employee housing - on site Eliminate parking lot "eyesore" - parking goes underground Improved appearance from Lionshead Place Improved exterior finish of existing building from all directions Increased "live" beds Upgraded conference facilities 680 West Lionshead Place Vail, Colorado 81657 (970) 476-2471 FAx (970) 476-4146 antlersQcsn.net 4 ANTLER AT ~klL MEMORANDUM To: Town of Vail DRB From: Robert LeVine, General Manager Date: 712/98 Subject: Antlers 2000 / Design Considerations Friends, Like the Town of Vail, we desperately want to improve the aesthetics in our little corner of Lionshead. One of our initial motivations for the whole Antlers 2000 project was simply to dress up the building. We have wrestled with the desire to move as architecturally far away from our existing building as possible (for obvious reasons), yet the hope that the end result would not appear as two separate properties. We welcome the fact that whatever exterior finish goes on the new structure (stucco & stone?) will be retrofitted over the existing building as well. The prospect of ridding ourselves of T-111 forever is a joyous one we knew you'd like that too. In addition to the existing T-111, the rest of the current exterior is made up of exposed aggregate. Since that cannot functionally be changed, our hope is to match its color and incorporate the texture of the round rocks, albeit much larger, with a river rock facia similar to that found on the new gondola building. We realize that our proposed roof pitch is less than that suggested by the Lionshead masterplan, but our intentions to make the new structure "fit" with the old one directed us to match the existing 2/12 pitch. Eliminating our parking lot "front door" is clearly a huge improvement, and we have tried to incorporate the "entry gate" theme from the masterplan recommendations. As you approach the building driving south on Lionshead Circle, the new structure will (happily) almost completely hide the existing building behind it. However, since the existing building is still about nine feet taller than the new construction, the skyline will not be changed until you get pretty close to the Antlers. Thanks very much for your time, we're looking forward to working with you through the process and coming up with a product that will be a huge improvement for us as well as for Lionshead and the town. 680 West Lionshead Place Vail, Colorado 81657 (970) 476-2471 Fax (970) 476-4146 antlers@csn.net ~ a { E~i~ ~ k ~ . . . . m <•„em..~:~.vq ~ ~ . . . . ~ . i • ~ . ~ ~ . . ~ r i . ~ . - - ~p- ~ ~~~9 ~ "~S~ ~ " ,•~~eM ,~g ^w ~ '~a ~ " ~e~~k d , ' " 8 ~ ~ °~y9Ary rz~.: t ~ , P C NS4 ~ u ~ -1.z~ m, 8 ,~~r~ir~ r°? pa•M. _ ~ ~ , A+" ~ • M aR dJn"b. . , n~ i ~ ~ k . V'~, n a . ' re~ . ~ 'n,~~ .x , , ' ~ ~a ~ } ~ ~ ~ A~• ~ ~ A ~ ~ : ~ ` ~n ...k~,.a. " 1 N~,;y,1 ~"~r•i ' , ! - ~ ~r`. ~ I:/ ~ ,m,,., Zm Ss• be d , t ~ ~ r. . . . , ~ ~ . ~ ;I Lw, •rw' ' +q i ~y ' ° ~ r' ~y' yP ~ sx ~ • lV , ' 4 . ~ ~"R 't~• .":s.,i;'~ C~~ "T?a . r~~~ , ~ t~. ..'~,~~'~„~t3,; ~ ,,a d g~i"+,°CA•~N ~r~s . ~ + + , <.w.~ ~ ~ .'~;s a.~ : . ' ~ , t'; ` r ~ ~a,• . , r . ~ a,.`",~. .i . I.~,~~co~~"' . . , ~~r~una«..;~~5,..;.a~=. ,~is, r~~",'.~'. •r ' ~`re";~ ' ~ ':s~ °;~4•~ . , : ~ ~i ~ , ' • r~i ° ~ , , ~ p~ 3',r~ ~ A~ ~a ~a . yp _ ; ~~,,~.."~r:'~ ~ ,V-•. w ~ i~~. . . . ~ q ,a w~~-,~. ~ ~ • 9~ , . i ,w, ab ~ dw • . , . . , , . ;~~#.~1"~~;~~.. . •'t_, . ~ ~ ' ' ~ e ~ ~ ~a~~(?w Antlers 2000 N Elevation.jpg ~ j-. ' ~ ~ ~ I _ ii~ ~ ?,~~r,• ~I,n!~' . "'•'i . ' 4- ~d,"" : ".ir,... , g ~~~y,~~°A . . a,,, ~ , ,a„~..._, , Y • ~ . i ~~~~~::r6n .a ~ r~ ry~ , -ti u, ~ . . , 'ti'µ.~ re , , a'm d ~ ~ , ~ • ~ Nw.,,, , Antlers 2000 NW Elevation.jpg ~ „ s; ' a,~ ~,~s ~ • . ~ ~ - ~ . . . a, ra„ ~ , ~ 1 ~ . , , . . ' ~ ~ • ~ ~ , . . y . r, , •~f ~w~, • a . , " ' `~rt. ? . ~-w+ , • ` ~ r ' ~ , :.k+ ~ ~ ~ , , ~r . ~ v '9 • , ~ . . 44. t•t' ~i - • , i , ~ . . ' . , , ~ ~ _ . • . Antlers 2000 S Elevation.jpg SITE AND GRADING PLAN ~ BC.AI.L~ 1' ~ 60'-C ° NORTFi ADDITION/REDEVELOPMENT e~mm?i: 0ocupuc~ cs~ Conrtivetlm f7P. 1 IR Pli~i GLIiiGE: fhvnP 8-3. ~2n7PO ira ~ DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Z 0 e (6) 2Br. nnts. Typ. a+. e LIoc sr.•riw sr. O u (12) E&. 11W,11" 40 L300 3T..232A0 Bl. Q ~ keim.~ d~c :soavc (2) P&. lL4,1TP~ B, 0 1,100 JI..E,800 3.T. ~ 1~ 4 rr. nsa, T.~re c. 0 ieso aY.-s,eW SY. ~ ~ P~TIp ~ • ~ M tamLow, fype 0.0 1990 97.d,A6i Sl. 0 I 4~ m~ V e C Dul 74 t16f CONDO iR7R9 . ~ ~ ~ ll eim DRMd ~ x~s w 50 E00 SY. 7 Z=*Jee 1LL 0 600 9.T ~ 5,600 9.T. v t Bl. ~ ~ _ ' w ~+l ^ t m~a4 7 Bdioom idi fo 019db * 140 H.T-1.t90 T071L 9CPIOyTC/p,jpAxsWN ~ 4,E90 9l. ~ i~ ;E a'~ e `naarnl TQ[61 NC? RESIDffi7171L ARRe . 94,950 9l. ~ t- xow Ban9uet Raom . 2,140 3T. lwn ~i~r DM! OR ~ ~ Ner ffikhen - 700 9l. ~ z ~ NowBar/stmo om . ~ s:xs.:~tc it Ct ~ &7 ~/kbhR ~ 700 9l. ~ . ~Q~ Loaap llbnTf/Aty- 860 3.P. h•4 /0S ~ ~ pt rs' ~ ~ ~ P~abl.k 9Gh+/merator(0925 3J.-1,i60 9.~. Z v ' ~~LN , Ypt LR W I ~ I Ce.zld~n~ Eta . l.a6 SY. CO]WON9/80~11YS1'f! 166A-4,066 3!. ~ W 1\~s'~• R~r~ ~ ! Iter Cellert/Becapyoy/OlRcer .1,800 Sl. m_j orr oma./~+v. Aaear~ (a. iie.s) .4aa s.r. GN IXt mim ~ 1~' Ri• /°i ~ ~*aie e/Yecbsalcel • 910 S]. m~e auv o DRAN ` LW LL IR maudenan"shop~OClea ~ 1,900 92. ~ W a+, ~ x a. o m a : l ~ s o i j ~ ~ an soru, rmma~sutar/srorece Aae, . 6,455 SY. O„ - l l\ ~ T O L L N M WN9fRIICDON 1RL= 49d70 SY. T 1- I w u~ 301 euubnrc . 65.000 SY. ~..i Q }\~,MaA ceM Tmn, eUDna+c u+u . 114,470 sY. L0= CABlG6 (9IJH ON G%DE).14.600 5]. ~ CL dTb. 302 UPPER 6A&CE (P.T. 9fiH) 1E440 SF. ~ _ ~~~P~6IDmIC/ (PZ 5738) -16,006 SJ. F+¦~ O ID9lQiG BWLDING 7E Uaib Ua . ~ P80PCfMM 11L7ri14N_..._,........._ 81 Un1ts z . TOYIL CDNDDI@UOY SiNRS._.»..._ 109 ?ntb ~ ~ 81Y 911 930 80i 90B °,a'7 . 90E sm ~ > PAR~fC CAR6GB.._._.. 108 cw ~ g~ 69 FUIJ. 98 CD][PiCl. 6~YP1Cf 5'~ PARKWG TOT1L PltO@7G..-._..W_...~._ 114 Speca ~ 0 Ki SHEET INDEX ° ' "°r n° r.- 1 A1 STfE PLAN "8100- e100 A2 i,OWEER Lr7vr~t,. FAFUDG GAB9Gd A3 UPPER LEYEL 9R G9RlGE ~ ` A4 rIAOR PMItG _ AS FIAOR 4 ADDTfION ,"'M;'=;.,~`' ~I ~ _ - . _ i • ~ 1 ~~°~M ~ . AB FLOOR 5 ADDTTION cREEr A7 FIAOR 6 ADDT170N w" siz/ee AB FLOOR 7 ADDTI90N ~ r.so-v , • yk,;.,• . ' . ~ orwx ~ ~ - ~ ~,g / • / ' li: . A9 AEST/;~IORTH ELEVATtONS ~ rx ~ ~ ~ ~ r~~„ ` • ~ ~ ~ E~~ ~i • ~ ,r ~ • . ~ ~ ~ d10 1~ES9' CO'JRTYARD/EASf ELSVATIO ANfD~ Zooo~ ~ Ail SOUTH/NORTH CRrYD, E[EPATi0N5 A12 4ES7' COUP.1'YAFX EI,. ~JEfRL~S j~, -AW A B C D ~ E F PLNNi~ C N J K 1 e i t O i' Ya\ Il~ ~ Y '26*-0'a • / ~ . lf ~ . . ' a lk'JLj ITION 4v ' ~ BjRE~AiC0U1` RiL ~ , 1~ m~s ~.-0 II. 8127.4 24'-7' ~ ~ ,:is ~ I ~ Z O 'T~' ~ • O Q ~ r 5 • FJiG1 ~ (~1/ ~ ' ~a 1310 \ ~l ~ 9~ EI17A IGb 5f. 15°%1B~ IS°X1~ \ \ IZU I Q~ t~tt I~a sr. M Y~. F~~1 0 ~ i rarK~ aaao er. SPOR -8° '0'~'0 TYPE B s ee o ~ i" cuza a o~„~ ~ ~s~ r~ .1R j ' AJ 20' I ID.. ~ ~ O 9i 8 I~' k.o 5~E FKE i ~ , e'z PIN o° ~ • i°ztf VESf. A NM6 ~ G~ Jf"/~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ wr,tl iiin ~°1'. ` - - x ' ~ ~ ~ ~2~i4 ~i~'~ . 1 i . M~ W 1100 5P. EK•t1 / LIV M DR nhns' 41 bDi.f 5f 15°xis° ~O n15°%IS° Z b4 o e. eNse =.u", Sr. i n i p~,~ .~i 5. ~'2 TYPE Ai_ _ a~ dll' p,y,y ~ c»NN bz O ' ~ TYPE A2 I~I TO 6AR~6E N 7'- D'-4, a. n.~ Z C) i DIN p2 ~ bR DIN ' o~X,~ ' J ,o~x~o' ' 907(It~ 9lX10~ ~ p L~Y 0-4 . ~ , ZLW Qnvr,s a.oac L ? ~ J erw F,~?v1pRME, S" POST ~ rn e TEN61R~ Pl~.Rm GONG. V ' I W M pR : '6LJ45 0 St.RFAGE PARKWC. M. CR LN 1p'M/ z W a lsyx~s° GUZA UNE 51DEwN.lcS. PLANrte is°zls° Q ' Ms~ ~ FLMTNEv ra. w r~o 127.4 TYPE A1 1 E A1 ' - 7°ae° Q ~`Q~ RMRER pN DW ehtid s'xio' Q PRAN ~cwrnri ~ , L ' ~ > 2 iu 'iuo 1~ - ~ TYPB I LN MU'T9t DR ~ u0 to'x~to' + ~ f'~1 Li- I ts°xi~° iihn4' = 12&5~7 nAr 500 SY 0 ~ TYPE A+ L, NZ ~ ' 0. wH1 t156T ' ~-o-a. ~ ~ I E-4~ pR ins gy ~ 0 ~ • e7'xipo° s5cIiN 9~i4° • - . ~ ~ ~'ti~ , ~~ti 127. 1 'OPE WAY I pIN DR o -r '~tst' s'zlt ~ 9~%14~ ~ sitco ftANtN~ n s ~ 6 1, ~ ~ 7°y26° ~ C14 _ - -•~4 ~ I TYPE A ,ile ti.~M1~IP, - 3rs~Y~es_s ~ 901 ~ ' LIy A4A5TtR LR ~3€~ T ~6TfQiG/CAII,~tY is°z»° 114XI4' ASST 1lANAGER i i A~C tio° 1[AN. ' 1369• ~ IUtR W DRYIYIIL a19lNf r r STAt SfAt • I 011F 5/2/98 I I 3 0 e0A - 2!do 5F. PAVNS ~ RESIItVATIONS , P I ~ r.m-e 1 i 0 ea. s.~~o sSr~. ~ LP ep,~Da 302 Tx I I O 0 ~ TOP C4wp&m W,q_L fmi. EXMMG ANTLM CONDONDUM , A4 ~ r~wae~ ~ac ~ . WEST ELEVATION 1'=20'-0 nx a m. 810.9.4 9. 6154.1 Z 0 C, r, r, Fl EXfBJ510N ST' 6~. D645A WEST O TGP A' SfAIR TA'vM---- F~~1 O r, r, r, i i, ~ e~36.4 A o rLn. a ` t4EW SrH& ~Bd~Mla.~ ~_TAMN6 WNL 6~gEyAT10N LL__U'dI.L r~ fl1141 t ~ _'6 ~ 6R~DE Z v EYµJST,'6 RETAININ6 ~T- - - - A;gITGM 01' DCST'6 FT6T- ~ J 6... SI04A' n ! n V A NORTH ELEVATION Zw i•=zo*-o' ~ Q ~ Q.81T24 LL ~ ~ . . ~ , D(ISTIN6 AML@Z5 CEYQW ~ FLOOR 9 . t a eiro.~ Al' . . ~ ` noox e E--4 Z ' ' . . , „ ` ~ a e154.4 ( . . . ' ~ N ~ : . . . ' t O 3 nUM 5A ~ ttooR 4 ¢ e136a ~ - : ~ l7AOH 9 . . . . . E u. ain_4 . . . . _ _ rt y~sY;` 123 MI N. ~e0eo"~'°"`ata~ 1?AS ~ , ~ I 21 - _ ~ 'RQ R 5~ Ct__'~ ==t --RR B_ 51165 i, ~~,i N~LbR~~tAI 5~1 ~ 1R B.. Ilbd 15 _PLR. M' k':•~. SCALE 5/2/9e ~ 5 -1'------T'~- ~ - - $ - i .mr-v ___~"2_ - - ~ ~ ~ - g L ~ c~ourm nx 109.4 I °R4m sx 12 I ~i~v1AM5. R~f. +oe wrtuvs c b. ~ SHM 101 ._.100.3. - A9 ~ ~,Z~ i'NORTH: CUuhi rAn,J bLbutil-L~J-Ls ME F MWLOYM UNM MoND i"a$0'=0" , , . ~~OV~ ' . ' . . 818 41 ANP ~ ~q~AL ROGrlNC~• ~ i Q !!UP ~ • . ~ ~ ~ ~ I 8154.4~ O 0 ' I ~ • . / / • .I/,Y ~ , ' ~ !YP& ~ ~ El 0 i ~ z ' J ~ q ~ , 77771 rn. ~ i aIn4 GLNTAM .1 123- I 8118.41 ~ ~ _ _ ~ Y"'''"•' ~s "~j I Q W~ ' .S r: • ~ . . . _ , . , ' ~ a • ~ _ i~ ~ e ~z.4 ~J U ~ ~S'~buA3~0Y ~ ~ ` R M~ DJVJN ~ r efOA.{ F.~~ PRAIN I~ ~ _ o' STAIR5 DGM?d O~ - - 6 LONF-R LEVF_ w SOUTH COURTYARD ELEVATION 0 . J 1"=20'-0" U Q > 172.4 / V L ~LL - ~ ~ ~ ~ FF.4 I q-p a~p a p ~ E--4 Z ~ 154.4 - / / ~y ~ q~? q~p °p ~ ~ ~ , TYPEA ~o ~ 1~5.4 . . F71 p p(-1 Trea , ,1 4 1 . - - - TYPE A+ ~ 127.4 `d ~ ~ ~d ~ / \ F. : • , bIRD~R . . . . , 'u+ wic`aim ~ I 1 ~q~q DEYGM l18.4 BUOY n1w.r satE f.m~f ~ DC IN6 6f1. IGAL i_ ~ °R'" Tx ios.a - - PM85 ~ wnLERs I ~ ~5 ~ ~ ,M~ , - - - ~ ~ ~ vRaiN A11 1o,. ar 12 ams SITE AND GRA.DING PLAN 7~ibAL • - - ~E: iw ~ aO~-W NORTH kDDITION/REDEVELOPMENT . : , RLBIDSN'1ZAI.. ~ctica?~Typsp a-F.R. ' PBIiKtNG G6Re1GE: 8acu~nnc~ Ca~oup S-3. Cons~ruction T~pe i F.R. DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY ~ 0 (8) 2 Br. Flsts. '1}pe A+? Q 1.190 S.F.=7140 3.F. (12) 2 Br. FLate, T7Pe L. O 1,100 3.1r.=13200 3.F. A`~ (2) x sT.,rAts, rype B, e 1,100.s.F.=21200 s.F. _ (2) 4 Br. FJnts. 1;rpe ,C, O 1830 3F.s3,88Q 3.F. (2) 4Dr. zowAhoose. 'rrne n, o iaso s.r.-W U. 0 24 xff cormo vrurs 1.= 30,260 S.F. /l 7 EmploTae F1ab Q 600 9.F... 3,50 3Y. v 7 Bs&+oom M& to Ol IInits • 170 S.1ti1.190 83. TO'!AL BYPLOYE'E/EIPANSION. 4,690 S.F. ^ !'0?AL NE1f R89ID81iZ`IAL 1lRBA' ¢ ,94.950 3.F. , ; New Haaquet Room = 2.140 8F. r z Nqw Kitchan ' = 700 9.F. Nm? Hax'I8t4ra$e = 850 9.F ~ /~,,,~~y~,,t a S.F. . ~,sN+r~a,a+a/aw+ ~bb'ROOBI . ~ ~ B.F. aa Loua;e.Lbrar7jl~lEaess ~ 9 sta~e (d. 115.4) - eoo s.~. . s~nc~n~u $ o~s s,~.-i.9ao s.~. z (s) ~ st~/~~ sa ~traas CorfBara. EYa. 1.425 SF. TO?I!L C0M1[ON3/HOSP1TJ1iM A88A=9,085 3.F. No. oa/ort~ ` -1,800 s.~. ~ J Offloe/~9tor~ege e~wddltSoa (EL. 475 S.F. Yisc. Gerage 3tora~e/l[echanict~l = 910 S.F. Lnuadr~/Nonselaeepiag/Otricee. = 1.900 S.F. s .818 8F. ' yarde~Op 110 3F. w Amouat/34es OfBca + 550 3.1r. • TOlAL 1lDYIN131RATiON/BTOxAiGB AREA ~ 6.455 5.~. ~ J - TOTAL NEII CON9TRIICTION '/?REA= 49.470 S.F. EXI31DNG HUII.UING = 65.000 S.F. 'j. . GRUM 70?AI. 8[7fMIIdG I?RSA s 114.470 3.'. . t~ LOWEB GAxAGL (3LAB ON GRADE)=14.500 3.F. U"sR GMcE (p.T. sIAB) : =1e.540 sY. ~ ~ , , WAIMB.~P E/M(G/ (P.T. MItB) -18.000 8.1r. , ~ FlQSI'INQ HiTII.DIIdG................ 72 Unils PROFCLED ADDMQN 31 Unfts. z _ TaTAL' CONDOI@ZIUI[ I1NIT3»»......,.. 109 Unib . -4 > PARMG GARAGB..:::......................:.. 108 g~,ees 69 FZTI~i.. 38 CO1PAC1'. b$G~JC:OYPAC!' 3PACE4 O , PARIIG :lIJRFACE . . 8 3pe~ew • TOTAL PARXIiG 114 Spsces ~.7. FtEL1 3 tNDL'tX. . Al' SITE PLAN lq2 LOnER I.E'v'EI. FARiflNG GARAGE A3 UPPER LEVFL P9RKING GARAGE L A4! _r`IA01~ 3 AI7DITION wwEKOSr+#Ssoc. A5 - - FLOOR 4 ADDITION i lT"':'~. ' „:co so= A6 FIAOR 5 ADDITION ~ ",-1/2• A7 FIAOR 6 ADDITION - DA1E 5/2/911 scAU ,-=~•-o- A8 FIAOR 7 ADDITION DPA" A9 WES'f/;3ORTH ELEVATIONS T.K. . JW Anrn.Uts ` A10 , : . .11EST COUR'rYARD/EAST ELEVATION SHMT . Ail SOUTH/NORTH CRTYD. ELEVATIONS : Alw V. ES CQURTYARD EL. DET~ILS Al.: . . . oF 1zSHEETS ! . ~ i~ TOWN OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road Yail, Colorado 81657 970-479-21 DO FAX 970-479-2157 August 20, 1997 Mr. Peter M. Abuisi Headmaster Vail Mountain School 3160 Katsos Ranch Road Vail, CO 81657 Dear Peter: It is a pleasure to begin accepting applications for the annual Town of Vail Youth Recognition Award, an award created in 1995 by the Vail Town Council, to recognize and reward two outstanding students, one each from Battle Mountain High School and from Vail Mountain School. The concept of this award is to provide these outstanding students with a chance to greatly broaden and enhance their educational processes by facilitating their participation in an "internship" type experience in a resort community in another country and/or hemisphere. _ These students will be selected by the administration/faculty of each school and submitted to the Vail Town Council. The Town of Vail will then approve those recommendations and facilitate the arrangements for the students to be accepted in an internship program in a Sister City community (St. Moritz, Switzerland) or a ski community involved in exchange programs with Vail Associates (Mt. Buller, Australia). This award will be presented to the student during school awards ceremonies in the spring of that student's junior year (l lth grade). The students should be appraised of selection by February of that year so that arrangements for the summer experience can be approached from a realistic time line. The Town of Vail will provide funds for the students' travel expenses and will be open to consider room and board expenses, if those are required. Such an experience could cover a 6 to 10 week time frame. The Vail Town Council will implement this experience through the Vail Valley Exchange program, Merv Lapin, President, and Karen Phillips, Director. RECYCLED PA PER r 1 Attached to this letter of introduction is a memorandum outlining the purpose, organization, criteria, process, and award for the Youth Recognition Award. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 479-1860, and I will be happy to respond to those questions. Again, we look forward to this opportunity to enhance and create new experiences for some of our finest young men and women in this valley. Sincerely, . TOWN OF VAIL Kul R. Johnston ' . Council Member PRJ/aw xc: Vail Town Council Pam Brandmeyer Suzanne Silverthorn r ~ i TOWN OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road Yail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2100 FAX 970-479-2157 MEMORANDUM TO: Applicants FROM: Paul Johnston DATE: August 20, 1997 RE: Youth Recognition Award The Town of Vail has created an annual Youth Recognition Award to be given to a recipient, one each from Battle Mountain High School and Vail Mountain School. Listed below are the basic components for this awazd: 1. Purpose II. Organization III. Criteria IV. Process V. Award 1. PURPOSE: The purpose of the award is to recognize and reinforce outstanding achievement by youths of the Upper Eagle Valley, both for their individual achievements and as role models for their peers. The Vail Town Council created this awazd to acknowledge and reward students from our community schools. II. ORGANIZATION: The Town of Vail will solicit recipients from the administration/ faculty of both Battle Mountain and Vail Mountain schools. The school should be personally aware of the nominated student's achievements and citizenship efforts (one student per school). The recipient must then be accepted by the Vail Town Council. III. CRITERIA: It is extremely important the school selecting the candidates have no doubt that each candidate has fulfilled all the criteria to the highest degree. The Council feels this is a special award and the criteria will be strongly adhered to in the review process. It is important the nominee have enough life experience to have distinction in all azeas, not just one or two. All Council members must be in agreement the candidate fulfills all criteria. Therefore, the more RECYCLED PAPER ~ , ? information submitted, especially supplemental information such as newspaper clippings, copies of awards, statements from other people, and so on, the better, a. The applicant must be a resident of the Eagle County School District and a currently enrolled junior (llth grade) at either Battle Mountain or Vail Mountain as a full-time student. b• The applicant shall have accomplished something special either through . . academics, athletics, civic activities, fine or the performing arts. C. The applicant must exemplify ideals which set standazds for other students in all facets of their lives. D. The applicant cannot be older than nineteen (19) years of age. IV. PROCESS: Candidate nominations must be received for the 1998 award by November 21, 1997. The Council will then review the candidates and grand final approval. Applications may be mailed or hand-delivered to: Pam Brandmeyer Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 V. AWARD: Awards will consist of a silver cup bearing the recipient's names to be placed on permanent display at each school, a plaque that will hang in the Vail Municipal Building bearing the names of the annual winners, plus winners' expenses necessary for a recipient to travel to, work in, and experience the tourism industry in a foreign country that has ties to Vail. The location, length of such work/visit, and living accommodations will have to be arranged by the end of March through the Sister CitieslVail Va11ey Exchange and the Award recipient. The Award will be presented to the recipients by the Vail Mayor or a Council member at the recipients' annual school awards ceremonies. PRJ/aw ~ Toivn Council Special Meeting Co on Grounds June 30, 1998 7:0 P.M. A s ecial meeting of the Vail Town Council was held in the Town Council Chambers on Tu sday, June 30, 1998. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. COLJNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Rob Ford, Mayor Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Pro-Tem Bob Armour Michael Arnett Kevin Foley Michael Jewett Sybill Navas STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer, Asst Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Th first item on the agenda was the Welcome and Overview of the facilitation process by Judi An erson-Wright. Jud explained the facilitation process for this evenings special meeting. The time limits for eac person to speak will be limited to four minutes, three minutes for comments and one minute for ap up. She also requested that as each person sign in and speak clearly so everyone can be he d. The second item on the agenda was a historical perspective by Mayor Rob Ford. Ma or Rob Ford thanked the audience for coming to tonight's meeting. He said this issue and deb te is not new and has been around far many years. He explained the many years these con erns have been around, the projects involved, concerns and issues on past housing projects, and outcomes. He xplained that at the last Town Council retreat the most important, critical issue to agreed upo by Council to address was the affordable housing issue. To be fair, open, honest and to rea the community has been the Council's goals. He expressed that Vail must remain co etitive or it will die. Vail's tax increases are less than Gypsum's. The Real Estate Transfer Tax (RETT) funds used for this process will be from the Vail Golfcourse funds. He also stated the ense of community has diminished. 1 4 The third item on the agenda was the review of the Common Ground process and recommendation by Andy Knudtsen and Russell Forrest. Andy Knndtsen, town planner, explained the Vail Tomorrow process and the Common Crround process which proceeded over the past few months. He stated how the specific uses and sites were chosen through the process and how the Town of Vail survey stated the issue of housing was listed as the number one issue facing the Town. He also explained the meetings that were held for Common Ground in April and June. He also took pictures of each site and placed them upon the walls in the Council Chambers for public view. Russ Forrest, Community Development Director, explained the funding process, and used survey results to explain what community needs and desires were for housing and also the Common Ground meeting results. He also spoke about open space and park uses in the process. He explained where funds could be used for housing and how funds could be generated and preferred funding packages. Andy went through the themes that came from the workshops (orange sheet attached) and explained there were four other themes that were recent additions to the nine themes. The next steps would be to acquire open space and be kept as dedicated open space, park sites would be designed, Phase I housing sites would go through the development review process. The fourth item on the agenda was community comments with Judy Anderson-Wright, facilitating. Judy reiterated to newcomers to the meeting the ground rules and time limits for the presentation. In addition a request was made that if the speakers were employers in Vail, to please state how many employees they have and how many units they provide for their employees. Kate Carey said Council was doing a great job in moving this issue forward. She is in favor of affordable housing, has been a resident since 1985 and feels Town of Vail needs additional housing. Flo Steinberg stated it's very importa.nt with so many people at the meeting that everyone identify themselves. She feels those who live in Vail should have a say in the process. She said it feels like deja vu that some people stated they were not involved with Vail Commons and didn't have a stay and now it's happening again. She is in favor of Common Grounds to maintain the community. Chas Bernhardt, a resident representing the Intermountain Homeowners Association and Citizens for Controlled Growth said the Association stands in firm opposition of using open space property for housing and they are ready to go to legal resources to uphold this stand. He also stated that a low response of the survey by the community shouldn't be used to sacrifice open space and they want this issue to go to the vote of the people. He personally contacted 232 2 pe ple in the neighborhood and only two people were proponents of housing in the Int rmountain neighborhood. There are other options and open space should be used as open sp ce. Co cil member Mike Jewett stated that the Homeowner Association representatives should ha e eight minutes to speak. Ju y reiterated that the group had voted to have a limtt of four minutes. Another vote was taken. Th group came to consensus that representatives of associations had an additional three minutes to peak. Ch s Bernhardt continued and read from newspaper articles regarding open space. M Lorimer, a West Vail resident since 1972 said having a housing problem doesn't mean it is a go ernment problem. She does not feel it is a given that government should do something about ho sing. Fr McKibben, President of Vail Board of Realtors (over 500 members) and representing the Bo d of Realtors. The Board of Realtors have an overwhelming mandate to Council that neither RE T funds nor open space should be used for employee housing. This does not mean they are ag nst employee housing. If there was a vote of the people to use funds, they would support it. Ro LeVine, representing Lions Square Lodge, has 25 employees. In 1989 he ran for Town Co cil, lack of affordable housing was major issue then and it is now, it will not go away. How m y acres of open space does the Town of Vail own? Sta f reported that the Town of Vail owns 1,200 acres of open space. Ro asked how many acres would be used for housing? Sta f said a total of 19 acres would be used for housing. Ro stated that it was clearly appropriate to allocate 19 acres of open space for housing. Da e Schnegiburger, stated he was not a NIMBY. He has been an owner since 1961 in East Vai . He would like every employee housing issue and open space issue go to a vote of the peo le, piece by piece. He has a real problem with social engineering and for sale housing is soc al engineering. He also stated that the Town shouldn't give things to people just because the live here and doesn't think tax dollars should be used to give people a piece of the Vail pie. Kir ch Sanders, a resident for 32 years and owns several Matterhorn units. She said her renters 3 are not seasonal employees, her average rent is s$415/bedroom, and she has 46 bedrooms. Matterhorn is one of the few genuine areas with affordable homes. She was told Donovan Park would be open space when West Vail was annexed into the Town. Paul Rondeau, a resident of Vail and also owns rental property. He wants to come up with a "middle ground" idea, take all the proposals and break it down by area and parcel. Would like the density of the lower bench of Donovan Park lower and TimberRidge have an additional 160 units. The town should have a specific methodology to score each neighborhood and area. Ghigui Hoffinan, a resident for 22 years and property owner. She stated that turn-over is high for , her businesses. If there is to be economic diversity, there is a need for seasonal employees and there is a need for seasonal housing. She urges Council to vote yes on Housing. Jan Strauch, lives in Intermountain, stated Chas Bernhardt didn't speak for him as an Intermountain Resident. He was not represented or approached and applauds Council in their efforts and is supportive of Resolution No. 9. He stated every hard decision ever made ends up just like this and listed the past big issues the Town of Vail Council's have had to deal with. He stated 53% of the taxpayers are not represented here, they are the tourists. The Town needs services for them to come back to Vail. He said this was a town charter issue and it does not need to go to a vote of the people. He wants Council to vote yes. Richard Leslie, second homeowner, congratulated the people at the meeting interested in making the town better. He also supported Council's efforts to meet and tackle the affordable housing issue. He also stated the community should congratulate itself for using the process. He stated this is a unique process. He is in favor of the Council to vote for this, and now. Dawes Wilson, has been in Vai124 years, and is a beneficiary of "social engineering". He bought a Vail Commons unit and stated if he hadn't been able to buy this, he would have had to move. Without the affordable housing he would have had to move away. He supports the decision to press forward and. enable other locals to stay here. Chuck Ogilby, owns 13 rental units and is a Vail Housing task force member. He stated two active Vail Housing task force members are gone because they couldn't afford to live here anymore. He applauded Paul Rondeau for coming up with a fresh idea. He stated the task force came up with other ideas such as inclusionary housing. These ideas need support and he is in favor of the plan since other ideas have not been supported. Jeff Gorsuch, local resident and business owner, participated in the Common Grounds process. He feels that the issue is the expedited process and not enlisting the community for site specific recommendations for this process. He is in support of employee housing and said the Bald Mountain area residents are in a corner and wants a two-way dialogue. He also wants acceptance and consensus for housing, but not at all costs. He wants Council to keep the process and dialogue going. 4 Sue Mason, lives in East Vail. She acknowledges she will have some employee housing in her backyard. She is a member of guest services and they are very short of employees. She is in favor of neighborhoods having input on density. If there are no employees, there will not be any guests. No guests, no mountain, then we all have to leave too. Kent Rose, a Vail resident, wants more affordable housing. He wants the process ta move forward and doesn't feel 19 acres out of 1,200 acres is not a sacrifice. He said the funding of sales tax is not fair. The most fair is dipping into RETT funds and said this should not go to a vote of the people. Council should make up their own minds and vote on the issue for themselves. Jim Morter, local resident and business owner (26 year resident), said Council should move forward with Common Grounds vote. Council should take the effort of participants of Common Grounds and move forward and is not in favor of the Town Charter being changed. (He also wished Pam a happy birthday.) Dave Cole, a resident since 1972, is not an opponent of affordable housing, but doesn't know if this process is the way to go. There was no mandate in the past for employee housing. His opinion is that this study should be slowed down and look at other sites in Town. He is against using RETT funds or lands unless it's put to a vote of the people. Wants the Council to look at funding from other sources, look at the business community and set up a special tax district for business and commercial areas. He thinks it is unreasonable to put the burden on residential property owners. Kerry Donovan, a resident for 19 years, stated she does not want to use open lands for employee housing. Paul Johnston, a resident and recovering council member, said the Council can do something about housing and open space. Council needs to step up, take the heat and move ahead with - Common Grounds. He said Mike Jewett was voted in to make decisions, and he needed to make them. Council member Mike Jewett felt the last comment was a personal attack. Paul Johnston didn't feel it was a personal attack. Joe Joyce, owner of two businesses, and has been in the Vail Valley since 1989. He currently lives in Eagle-Vail. He said he wants Council to move forward on this issue, Vail has to move in the right direction. He has seen a drastic change in the last year and if we don't move now, this issue will be discussed a 100 years from now. He said 97% of Eagle County is open space, while 3% is developable land. He encouraged the Council to vote yes. 5 Michael Staughton, a resident since 1974, has 75 employees, and owns 5 different units. He agreed with Kent Rose, and urges the Council to move forward with vote. Pat Barrett, a 14 year resident in Matterhorn, says he is not against employee housing but feels the process has been rushed and was done during the off-season. He feels that extreme amoltnts of seasonal housing is disproportionate in the Matterhorn area versus other areas of Vail. Greg Amsden, is an Intermountain resident. He said densities are swayed, 55-75% is proposed to be located in West Vail and wants council to table issue until densities are looked at more closely. He wants the same scrutiny for town parcels as private developments and supports employee housing. He said RETT should not be used for employee housing and felt public trust would be blown if this is done. There are still existing ways to use the RETT funds for open space and parks and until that is exhausted, RETT should not be used. Kathy Langenwalter, a 22 year resident, said we don't agree all the time and it was good to disagree. She felt the density is too high. Marianne Malloy, a second home owner since 1980. She said she would hate to see a "TimberRidge" in other areas of Vail. She is in favor of other employee housing but not the high density. Look into possible planned communities, where they don't own the land but own the building, is in favor of owner occupied units. Lower ponovan might be a mixed use neighborhood. Valerie Fauland, a resident for 18 years. She has a deed-restricted unit with their home. The renter they had didn't meet the required hours. She came to the town for help, but didn't get help on this problem. She said homeowners deserve Donovan Park and it should be kept a park. Cindy Burkes, an Intermountain resident since 1983. Says the residents were promised a certain amount of open space and a quality of life. There needs to be lower density. Bigger is not better. Compromise is needed. Open space and parks should have safe access, it is important to protect the children. She feels parks and open space very important, and feels employee housing is necessary. Charmayne Berhhardt, a resident of West Vail for 22 years, stated it is not good to take public land for private uses. Darwin McCutcheon, a business owner, said most of his employees had to work several jobs and had more jobs open than employees to fill them. He said Vail needs affordable housing and said service to guests is being sacrificed because of the lack of housing. Employees living down valley want to stay down valley. He is in support of moving forward and felt there was plenty of opportunities for the community to get involved in the process. Vail is running out of time to compete with other resorts. He urged the Council to go ahead. 6 ! Farrow Hitt, a Matterhorn resident, stated that a lot of hard work has gone into this process. He is opposed to parts of the plan, is not against employee housing, and is supportive of Council. He opposes Donovan Park being used for housing and opposes 480 seasonal employee housing units at Donovan Park. Other recommended areas of Matterhorn haven't been heard. Alice Parsons, a Matterhorn resident for 27 years and has had rental housing for 26 years, said no one has addressed the type of housing employees want. Employees really want a one bedroom or studio. She has told the Planning Department this in the past and would like to reinstate . employees in lodging facilities as in the past. Gena Whitten, a 10 year resident, wants Council to keep open space and parks and does not support using RETT funds for housing. She feel the quality of service has gone down and there is an employee housing problem. Wants Council to look at other funding sources. Sally Jackle, is a resident of Matterhorn. She asked Council to table the plan unless three changes are made; reduce the number of units (particularly rental units), fairiy allocate units around town and don't use Donovan Park for employee housing. She also requested that if this is a phased development, there needs to be a mechanism so this is not waylaid during the process or more density is added at the end of phases if the need has changed. Judi Anderson-Wright announced that Council has decided to table the density segment of this resolution tonight. Dennis Linn, an owner in Bald Mountain, feared that 5 or 10 years from now the bigger the business, more employees. When does growth of businesses stop? How much bigger and grander are we going to be. A question from the audience was, "What will be addressed tonight if density is not in the resolution?" Russ Forrest stated the funding is what is being voted on tonight. Flo Habernicht, a resident of Vail, stated Apollo Park was employee housing at one time and now it is a time share project. She said TimberRidge is not a good place to live and does not want this type of housing in Matterhorn. Matterhorn units have quite a few employee housing units already. Jeb Jennings, a Realtor and 20 year resident of the Vail Valley, said time and consideration is necessary for open space and parks to stay that way. RETT should be used for open space and not housing. He questioned if there is there a housing crisis when Vail Commons was not filled on the first lottery. He wants this to go to a vote. 7 Jerry Sibley, a resident and landowner since 1968, wants to see the town progress. RETT has always been for open space and it needs to restricted for open space and open space needs to be protected. Acknowledges the need for employees but feels the issue needs to be solved without using open space. Wants to see some kind of trust started so that in the future open space cannot be messed with by future Town Councils. He said the Lower Bench of Donovan Park is a concern. This type of construction would not be acceptable in any other area of Town. There is a need to even things out in Town as far as number of units spread throughout town. He re- emphasized the need for a trust for open space. _ Paul Hymers, a resident of Glen Lyon for 8 years, is opposed to the resolution as it stand-s now. When Council zones land it creates a trust to the community and when you change the zoning, it impacts the community and their trust. He attended Common Ground meetings and was involved in the Vail Tomorrow process. Cautioned the Council in taking a shortcut to the conclusion and feels there was a rushed judgement to this process. He is agairist using RETT funds and the type of housing should be changed. James Johnson, an Eagle County Commissioner, stated the Council needs to go forward on the housing issue. He stated most families are moving down valley and Vail needs to keep its sense of community. He asked Council to move more slowly and involve the neighborhoods in decisions of housing in their neighborhoods. Dick Cleveland, a west Vail resident, supports affordable housing and supports appropriate structures that fit the neighborhood and zoning. His concern is density, and leaving density out of the resolution. If you do that there is no basis for the financial part of the resolution without the density. He is opposed to seasonal housing and thinks it is a private sector issue. Vail Associates shows supply and demand requires them to address that issue. He wants neighbors that are year-round residents. Stan Cope, a manager of several businesses in Town and a property owner has been involved in the public process. He wants a community where people want to live and raise a familX, he needs more housing for his employees. TimberRidge is here but it is outdated and needs to be brought up to par for employee housing. Holly Cole, a Vail Commons resident, has lived in Vail for 24 years, said if you could build more low density units like Vail Commons it would be great. Ron Mitchell, has lived in the area since 1981. He rented for 16 years, and became a one bedroom condominium owner because of assistance programs. He is not excited about additional housing, and says he found over 100 units available in February in the newspaper. He wants open space to stay open space. 8 , v Judy Snow, a resident since 1966 asked why Vail Associates can't use land on the mountain for seasonal housing and use buildings that are already in place for adding studios, apartments, etc. Mary Jo Bernato, a representive for the Glen Lyon area residents, stated the residents are concerned about using open space and parks for housing, the density, and the time needed to review proposals. She said if you take the density issues to the community, then take the funding sources to the community too. She asked that the Council table the whole process since the density was tabled and take it to a vote of the community. She stated that as it stands the Council is taking away the opportunity for community input. Pete Feistmann, a resident of Buffehr Creek, stated that the Council has received extensive public input through the Common Ground and Vail Tomorrow process. He said the primary responsibility is with employers. He asked what additional housing responsibility will employers have in the future. He said do not take open space away far employee housing. Let employers be responsible for uses of sites. He supports taking this to a public vote. Suzanne Sibley-Mueller, a Matterhorn resident and in the Vail area since 1976. She said she has raised her children here, owns several businesses and has employee housing. She said government does not belong in their business. She would like to share living in Vail with others but wants the promise of keeping open space enforced and keep them open spaces. Diana Donovan, a Vail resident and business owner since 1965. She said she has employees, and has problems keeping employees that want to work 40-hour weeks, and will always have employee problems. She wants to keep Donovan Park a park. The Council made a promise to the community when they became a council member to uphold the codes, regulations and plans of the Town. The Open Lands Plan is one of the plans adopted by the Town. She read from the Open Lands Plan which stated that Donovan Park is designated open space. She stated the trust of the community will be broken if this resolution is passed. Karen Scheidigger, a resident since 1969, stated she collected and submitted a petition with over 100 signatures opposing housing at the Town of Vail manager property and Hud-Wirth property. She wants Council to honor the zoning of these spaces. The Town should not be involved in the development of the last properties in Vail and opposed RETT funds to be used for this process. Ginny Culp, a resident for 19 years, said she doesn't believe the Town can pass the resolution for funding without a process of what to do with it and density is an issue. Art Kleimer, a 22 year resident, said the "Dream" is being shattered. He said Cquncil's breaking of promises has brought the community together. No one is opposed to affordable housing but feels the burden should be properly shared with the entire county. There needs to be a united solution throughout the county to solve this issue. He felt the timing is inappropriate and several significant players not here to participate. 9 r Ronald Jones, a West Vail resident, said the proposal affects him so much that he had to speak out. He feels there are many opportunities to buy existing property. He asked the Council when is enough growth enough? Kaye Ferry, a business owner and resident, and President of the Vail Village Merchant Association. Said she supports the Council and wants the Council to adopt the resolution. She said process has been ongoing for two years, through the Vail Tomorrow and Common Ground process. She said everyone had a chance to participate. She urged the town council to remember why they were elected - for housing issues. , Ann Essen, a property owner since the 1980's in East Vail. She wants to help others be able to afford to live in Vail and wants other homeowners to help support housing. There is very little land left and RETT is losing it's purpose. She said RETT is becoming a park's budget. She expressed that if Vail loses its quality service reputation, ratings will go down, and so will housing values. She asked Council to act now and is supportive of the resolution. Josef Staufer, resident and owner, has been here since the first winter of 1963. He said housing has always been an issue. He is in support of housing in his neighborhood, he has worked all his life and it hasn't affected neighborhood values. He feels it is important that we go on with the process. He said open space is not the right way to go but doesn't feel that residents coming in at the eleventh hour is appropriate when the process has been going on for two years. He also stated the Council can only respond to those who have voted and responded to the survey. He wished private enterprise could solve the problem but doesn't feel this will happen now. He doesn't support this issue going to the vote of the community. Dave Corbin, a resident of Edwards, does a lot of business in Vail. He has participated in the Vail Tomorrow process and other processes. The housing issue does not end in Vail. He feels the attacks on Council and staff are unfair. He reminded Council that this process has been going on for 2 years and this decision is only a part of the process. There will be many opportunities to make more decisions in the future. He said density and other decisions should be done on a site- by-site situation. This resolution is just a beginning. An additional 129 acres of open space will be acquired through this process. He commended Council and staff for this resolution. Hermann Staufer, a business owner, and resident since 1964. He said he understands the concerns of West Vail residents. He said Vail is not number one any more, if you can't provide the services, we will continue to drop in the ratings even further. He urged Council to support the resolution, take the heat and do what they were voted in to do and to take a stand that employee housing will be solved. 10 ~ a Mike Wasmer, came to Vail in 1982, and owned a unit in Vail in 1984 and he works in Vail everyday. He admires the courage of the Council to make a difficult decision. He asked what do we want the community to be about and stated Vail has one of the highest ratios of open space in the country. The town needs to balance open space and smart growth. He requested the Town Council to move forward in their commitment to affordable housing. A question was asked of how many people took part in the Common Ground and Vail Tomorrow process. A show of hands showed most of people in room had participated. Judy asked if there was any further comments. There was a second round of speakers addressing the Council. Jeff Gorsuch addressed the Council again and stated the issue is not necessarily affordable housing. He felt there is a need to get other Eagle County residents and communities involved and feels the concerns are that people that care about the community have a right to last minute opinions. He urged the Council to table the resolution. Ghigui Hoffman said the Vail Valley Centre near Avon may become a problem with 4,000 jobs added to the valley housing issues. Jerry Sibley asked if anyone is interested in getting a"trust" started for open space to meet with him after the meeting. Ginny Culp stated that if the Town is obtaining 129 acres of open space, use those acres for housing units and said that Tract C may be where housing should be built. James Johnson, Eagle County Commissioner, said this issue should be addressed valley-wide and that Vail issues are being pushed on the down valley communities. Housing is being forced down valley and if you can't solve the employee issues here, it will go down valley. Judy acknowledged and thanked the group for adhering to the ground rules and for attending the meeting. Andy Knudtsen addressed the issue of taking density out of the resolution should this be tabled. He stated the siting and uses would be addressed with the resolution. Funding could be broken down. He also explained that lowering densities will not affect funding. The fifth item on the agenda was Council discussion and decision. Council member Mike Arnett addressed the issues. He expressed that this is a county-wide problem but we cannot shuffle it down valley any longer and need to address it now. Council realizes that densities need to be and will be evaluated on a site-by-site basis. The funding source is necessary now. He stated RETT funds being used would be the portion for paying off 11 ~ . the Vail Golfcourse. He explained there are six open spaces to be included in Phase I. The town has 1,100 acres of open space and will use less than 2% of open space to solve a housing issue. Everyone in the room is committed to help. Council member Sybill Navas asked Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney about covenants in ~ neighborhoods. Tom Moorhead stated covenants to Tract A, have municipal services on this tract. Tract A may be dedicated by owner for public uses. Tract A was conveyed without restrictions and does not limit development on Tract A. Andy Knudtsen stated that the additional 130 acres to be purchased will complete the open lands plan and that there are currently 385 dedicated open spaces in Town which does not include Ford Park or the Vail Golfcourse. Council member Bob Armour stated he was involved in the Vail Tomorrow process and stated that everyone was concerned with housing, the community survey conveys the same concern. He also commented the Vail Tomorrow process won a Governor's Smart Growth award. There were lots of people involved in the process. The process is not perfect and it isn't easy. He understands that density and open space are issues. He also acknowledges that some of the housing will be ok and some will not be ok, that density needs to be refined and addressed neighborhood by neighborhood. As for funding, he said the RETT funds limited to the golfcourse amount is appropriate and there are good starts in other funding areas. If we have private partners, we could limit Town of Vail funds. No housing at all is not an acceptable solution. He explained that with this resolution in place it will be a beginning. Council member Sybill Navas, stated she has been wrestling with this issue for a long time. She acknowledged that almost everyone has been supportive of housing but other issues are a concern. She agrees that housing is a problem, the community survey supports this issue, the lack of employees is an issue, quality of services and creating an environment that people choose to live, are all issues. She stated we need to commit to work together to solve the issue. The citizens Vail has do care. She is asking the community to put aside personal issues to see the bigger picture. The resolution will allow the ability to pursue funding, and maintain the integrity of individual neighborhoods. She said the RETT funds of $340,000 be used, which is balance of the Vail Golf course funds and should be used as a last resort. Mayor Rob Ford thanked everyone for attending the meeting. He expressed that the community should leave the meeting with an understanding that government has to go on. He said one part of the process was to be fair, open, and honest with community and the Council embarked upon the best process to get the community involved. He stated he wants continued community participation and he heard everyone's concerns on the density issue. The density will be solved on a local neighborhood level. The is not the end all, this process will continue. He acknowledged that open space and dedicated open space should be in a trust program. 12 ~ Council member Mike Jewett made a presentation to Council. He thanked everyone for their participation in process. He stated the issue was not housing. He said the real issue is the commitment to the process. He said the Council cannot approve the resolution without all the facts. His goal was to stall or slow the process and wants to table the resolution for at least a month. He explained that he didn't feel the Town included organizations or associations in the process. He said the Council needed to work with more groups, and there needs to be a vote by the people on any change of RETT, and allow a vote on the final plan. He wants to form a Town , Charter review commission. There are too many conflicting issues and groups have a right to due process. He explained reasons why he wanted a charter review commission. He is in support of housing, but wants this to go to a vote of the people. He is opposed to a taxing district, there needs to be smaller units and lower density. He wants to continue the process and said funding from employers is critical. He is voting against approving the resolution.. Ginnie Culp asked if the decisions were predetermined before the meeting. Council member Ludwig Kurz stated the presumption of the outcome by Council member Mike Jewett is his supposition. He said the issue is housing not the process. He thanked everyone for their commitment in being at the meeting. He stated that most other resort communities are talking about the same issue of housing. This community is at a crossroads of remaining or being the best. He acknowledged there are other issues that need to be addressed in the process. The ability to provide world class service is key in retaining good employees and to be short- sighted would be detrimental to the economic vitality of this community. In regard to comments made about the promise to solve the housing issue; the promise to address the housing issue was the promise. The Town needs to wark with the business community to help solve this issue. The process did not come out of nowhere it is not a railroad job. This is not the case. He reiterated that the process has been on going for quite a while and working with the neighborhoods and community will help solve some of the issues and benefit everyone in the long run. Council member Kevin Foley stated this is the highest turnout of community members the . Council has ever had in the room and that stayed in the room. He thanked the Council and staff for their hard work as well as the members in the audience. He said there is a lot of work to be done, there are a lot of concerns, especially density. He would like to see Vail set an example for other communities in Eagle County that we can work this out. Council member Sybill Navas made a motion to approve Resolution No. 9, with the recommendation to prioritize RETT funding., ranking funds to be used only if absolutely necessary and not to exceed $340,000. The motion was seconded by Council member Bob Armour. Council member Sybill Navas commented on the remark of the Council making up their minds ahead of time. She said the Council should be respected for the time put in to this issue and process. The meeting tonight was to look to the communiTy to help make a decision and that the Council was listening to the community comments and concerns. 13 . A vote was taken, and the resolution passed, 6-1, Council member Mike Jewett opposed. The meeting adjourned at 11:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Ludwig Kurz Mayor Pro-Tem ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson Town Clerk 14 r ~ VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 7, 1998 7:00 P.M. A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, July 7, 1998, at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building. The meeting was called to order at approximately 7:00 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Rob Ford, Mayor Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Pro-Tem Bob Armour Sybill Navas Michael Arnett Michael Jewett MEMBERS ABSENT: Kevin Foley TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager The first item on the agenda was citizen participation. Jack Curtin, Village business owner, praised Larry Pardee, Town of Vail Construction Inspector, for his exemplary work in mitigating issues between the Village merchants and the construction contractors during this summer's construction in Vail Village and asked if the village merchants could do something special for him. Pam Brandmeyer explained no substantial gratuities could be given to employees but that Larry should be recognized as an exemplary employee of the Town. Jack also said the Town should review the Free after Three program during the upcoming budget process. He said the Art in Public Places (AIPP) program should be eliminated until the funding of other areas of concern such as the Free After Three program are taken care of, then reinstate the AIPP program. He said the Council could help subsidize the parking fees by looking at other- areas of Town of Vail funding. Paul Rondeau, a Vail resident, stated he felt the Common Grounds worksession went well with the time limits set and the use of a facilitator. He suggested the town consider following the "Record of Decision" method the U.S. Forest Service used for the Category III proposal in the Common Ground process. He conveyed the importance of compromise as necessary in the process and also suggested the plan be put to a public vote. He is also concerned about the continued preservation of open space as the plan is implemented. Mayor Rob Ford stated the Council should accelerate the designated open space program and put more town-owned vacant land into the designated open space program. Then land cannot be removed from this designated open space program without a vote of the people. , , Dick Peterson, a Vail Resident, expressed his concern and requested the Council look into increased enforcement of a handicapped parking space at the Vail Commons development (near City Market). He stated he has brought this to the Town's attention in the past and has had no response and would like Council to remedy this situation. Council member Sybill Navas stated Bob McLaurin, Town Manager will address this issue. Cindy Jacobson, a Forest Road resident, said she was involved in the Lionshead Master Plan process and was told during the process the tennis courts would not be involved in the Lionshead Master Plan. She requested the Council remove the Forest Road tennis courts from the Lionshead Master Plan and stated the property is unplatted and zoned agricultural open space. She also stated she is upset about the height of the buildings and the close proximity of ' the buildings to the creek in the master plan. Tom Jacobson, a Forest Road resident since 1964, addressed the Council regarding the snow cat operations on Forest Road. This has been an ongoing problem since he built his home in 1966. He wants Council to live up to their promises and get the snow cats off the street before moving forward on the Lionshead Master Plan. He said he is tired of fighting Vail Associates and the Town on this issue and would like to see twenty feet of land used for the snow cats. Jody Lindvall, representing a property owner on Beaver Dam Road, stated the owner is very concerned about the status of the tennis-court property on Forest Road as it is applied to the Lionshead Master Plan. The owner is concerned that density is too high in Lionshead area and doesn't want open space to be desecrated. The owner also wants the tennis courts to be removed from the Lionshead Master Plan. The second item on the agenda was the consent agenda, approving the Minutes from the meetings of June 2nd and 16th, 1998. Council member Bob Armour made a motion to approved the minutes from the meetings of June 2 and 16, 1998, the motion was seconded by Council member Mike Arnett. A vote was taken and was unanimously approved, 6-0. The third item on -the agenda was the first reading of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1998, repealing and re-enacting Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1991, to provide changes to Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, that concern the number of lots, the lot sizes, the corresponding development standards and the architectural guidelines; and setting forth details in regard thereto. George Ruther, Town Planner, reiterated the changes Council discussed at the worksession and stated the staff had made the requested changes to the ordinance. This ordinance allows for a reconfiguration of the Grand Traverse Speciaf Development District to change the total lots from 24 to 22 lots. It also increased the size of the employee housing units. He reyiewed the changes and said the town staff and the Planning and Environmental Commission recommend approval of the ordinance. Council member Bob Armour clarified the changes for the public and said the approval of the ordinance reduces the number of units and increases the size of the employee housing unit from 500 square feet to 800 square feet and reduces the garage space from 1,200 to 900 square feet. Council member Bob Armour made a motion to approve on first reading, Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1998, and the motion was seconded by Council member Sybill Navas. A vofie was taken, and was passed by unanimous approval, 6-0. The fourth item on the agenda was first reading of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1998, an . Ordinance Amending Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Chapter 11, Design Review, Section 12-1~9- 5: Design Guidelines; Adding a Provision Allowing Legal Nonconforming Single-family, Two- family, and Primary/secondary Residential Dwelling Units to Be Expanded by 500 Sq. Ft. or less Without Requiring Structures and Sites to Be Fully Compliant with the Design Guidelines; Amending Chapter 16, Conditional Use Permits, and Creating a New Section 12-16-7: Use Specific Criteria and Standards. - - Dominic Mauriello, Town Planner, stated this ordinance was reviewed by Council two weeks ago and the ordinance would allow residential housing units to expand up to 500 sq. ft. without causing the design review standards to be set in motion requiring further upgrades such as paved driveways or undergrounding utilities. This ordinance clarifies the conditional use section of code, and consolidated the criteria so it's in one section of code instead of several places. Dominic stated the square footage can be utilized in multifamily dwelling interior not exterior. Most multi family are maxed out on exterior GRFA. Mike Arnett said when he was working on revising this ordinance, he wanted to make the regulations easier for residents to repair or add to their homes without making it a hardship to do so. Council member Mike Arnett made a motion to delete Sections 2-5 of the ordinance. No second was made and the motion died. Jim Lamont, East Village Home Owners Association (EVHOA) representative, stated the homeowners are asking for parity for all zone districts. He stated the 250 ordinance discriminates against multi-family dwelling units. He also said multi-family units have not been able to use 250 ordinance and there are basic inequities in to the code right now. He would like Council to address the conversion and multi-family issues in the code and wants Sections 2-5 be removed from the ordinance and the homeowners support Section 1 of the ordinance. Council member Mike Jewett made a motion to table this ordinance. There was no second motion and the motion died. Council member Bob Armour made a motion to approve on first reading, Ordinance 10, Series of 1998, deleting Sections 2, 3, 4 and 5. The motion was seconded by Council member Sybill Navas. Further discussion ensued. A vote was taken, and the motion was approved unanimously, 6-0. ~ ~ The fifth item on the agenda was a Vail Valley Marketing Board (WMB) Summer Marketing Update. Ross Boyle, chairman of the Vail Valley Marketing Board (WMB), made a presentation to the Council and reminded the Council the WMB was created because many merchants were concerned about the seasonal nature of the resort area. The focus of the marketing board has been to try to get peopte to come to Vail from the end of April through the end of October. He recapped the marketing strategy presently used and stated the focus was on how to get guests to come in the summer. Front range visitors are linked to special events. Some of the tools used are advertising, direct mail, marketing trips for groups, and now the Internet. There is a high percentage of people who order the summer guide on Internet that come #o Vail in Summer. The role of the WMB was to attract first time guests, 70% of the people who visit Vail say they wiff return. Ross stated he also wanted to address where the funding will come from for future summer marketing. Due to competing requests from Vail 1 st, he requested the Council to consider funding the WMB for another one to two years while efforts to create a regional lodging tax for marketing are put into place. He credited the WMB volunteers for maximizing the WMB resources. A ballot measure could be ready for the November election, but if it didn't go on this November election the lodging tax proposal will be placed on the ballot the following year in an effort to provide a permanent funding source for regional marketing. David Reece, of Reece and Associates, stated a study shows that since 1992, Colorado's share of the summer market has declined by 30% in six years. Since 1993, Colorado went from a#1 ranking and has not made the top 10 list since 1993. He stated there are thousands of other choices of where to vacation in place of going to Colorado. A summer destination is not on the top ten list but is in the top ten for winter destination lists. He stated that approximately 30% of the summer visitors are from within Colorado, 55% come from 18 states, 12% from the remaining stated and 5% are international visitors. Pat Peeples, WMB member, reiterated the tools used by the WMB and said the data base has been updated and now has 6,000 names on the list and there has bee a half a million hits on the Internef. Mayor Rob Ford thanked Ross, Dave and Pat for their presentation. The sixth item on the agenda was the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. The work session and evening meeting are intended to continue the discussion of building height scenarios, development standards, and economic/revenue impacts of building height scenarios. Stan Bernstein will be presenting the Town of Vail revenue benefits of the different building height scenarios. The master plan team will also be presenting a revised density proposal for the Lionshead area. Mayor Rob Ford stated the council has received several comments and issues regarding this proposal. The Forest Road tennis courts are one issue. For several reasons the Council is not . prepared to move forward on this item, so this presentation is for information purposes only and no decisions will be made this evening. ~ ~ • Dominic Mauriello, staff planner introduced Ethan Moore of Design Workshop. Ethan Moore, of Design Workshop, explained the development standards and the various height scenarios of the Lionshead Master Plan. He also explained the height zones (there are 5 height zones). Dominic explained the proposed development standards and recapped the visual implications, economic benefits, aesthetic improvements, increased ability to compete as a resort, carrying capacity, etc. R. C. Stephenson, of Dunn & Abplanalp, representing homeowners in the Lionshead area, addressed concerns that there had not been any concern expressed at an earlier worksession regarding development near the tennis courts. This area is zoned agricultural open space and at the past meeting was told it would not be included in Lionshead Master Plan. He expressed other concerns of homeowners regarding building height, rezoning, development and open space. Mayor Rob Ford assured the public that Council would never circumvent rezoning of the tennis court area. This would go through the appropriate channels for rezoning of this property. The purpose of inclusion of the tennis courts were to outline the increases in density not to redevelop the tennis courts. Council member Mike Jewett said if this property is not to be rezoned, delete it from the master plan. Council Member Sybill Navas stated this property is privately owned and that is why it was included in the master plan. Council member Sybill Navas made a motion to remove the Forest Road tennis courts from Zone A to Zone B. Council member Bob Armour reiterated this removal does not preclude the owners to apply for a zone change. Council member Ludwig Kurz commented the plan as proposed, and the area included was appropriate for the design staff to review these areas in the plan even when they are not a part of the Lionshead Master Plan. David Corbin, representing Vail Associates and owner of the tennis court property, reminded Council that redevelopment of the Lionshead Master Plan study extended beyond the Lionshead area. An effort was made to look at the Lionshead core and how it effected perimeter properties. He said that Vail Associates is aware it will have to go through a rezoning and replatting process for this piece of property to become residential zoning. Vail Associates is proposing to change this property to residential zoning or CCII zoning at a later date. He stated the change to Primary/Secondary Zoning fits with the surrounding area. He encouraged the Council to keep all topics on the table. Jim Lamont, EVHOA, stated he had a historical perspective on this property. In 1974, the Council came to realize there was no park site or open space for this area. The town made a deal that this area would be used for tennis courts. Environmental sensitivity was an issue ~ R regarding wetlands. He said this is the only area for open space in Lionshead and wants to see this property kept as open space. A motion was made by Council member Sybill Navas to remove the tennis courts from Zone A and place it in Zone B, the motion was seconded by Council member Mike Jewett. A vote was taken, and passed with unanimous approval, 6-0. Rob LeVine, a Lionshead merchant, stated the worst thing that could happen would be to not revitalize the Lionshead area. He is concerned that no action will be taken. He stated the need , to incentivize owners so they will redevelopment. Create conditions to make it easy to redevelop and get other needs met during the process (i.e. employee housing, additional - - parking, etc.). He read a letter to Council signed by various Lionshead merchants, owners and " stakeholders expressing support. Dennis Cohlburn, suggested the need for beer gardens, street entertainment activities. Jim Lamont, EVHOA, stated the association has been in support of the master plan changes and asked that additional work be done to the master plan so the Town knows what capital improvements will have to be made on their part to add to the master plan improvements. Bob Lazier, Lionshead business owner, would like to see Council provide incentives that will make redevelopment more economically feasible within Lionshead. Owners in Lionshead are looking for ways to improve their buildings and are supportive of the work staff has done so far. Russ recommended that staff and Council reconvene at the next Council worksession. The seventh item on the agenda was the Town Manager Report. Bob McLaurin, Town Manager, reiterated the Town had a great 4th of July celebration weekend. Pam Brandmeyer invited the Council to attend the play "Annie", sponsored in part by the Vail Public Library. She aVso stated that the third annual community photograph was scheduled for Tuesday, July 28 during the Hot Summer Nights concert. As there was no further business, Council member Bob Armour made a motion to adjourn, Council member Mike Arnett seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0. The meeting adjourned 10:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Robert E. Ford Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson Town Clerk ! r VAIL TOWN COUNCIL - MINUTES TUESDAY, JULY 21, 1998 7:00 P.M. The regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held in the Town Council Chambers on Tuesday, July 21, 1998. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Rob Ford, Mayor Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Pro-Tem , Bob Armour - Michael Arnett - Kevin Foley Michael Jewett Sybill Navas STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob McLaurin, Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer, Asst Town Manager Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney The first item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Josef Staufer, a Vail resident, continued his support of the Common Ground housing initiative and requested the Town could appease neighbors by scaling down the density of the projects. He also stated the community should consider raising the Real Estate Transfer Tax by'h% to pay for the plan. He also stated that business and hotel owners should contribute and pay a portion of development costs to pay for affordable housing, employers that create a need for seasonal housing should pay for it. The second item on the agenda was a presentation/slide/lecture by Professor Erika Doss regarding Art In Public Places. Nancy Sweeney, Art in Public Places Coordinator introduced Professor Erika Doss, history professor and author. Erika Doss presented a slide show to Council and made a presentation on the importance of public art, civic identity and involvement in the arts. Public art traditionally meant memorials and it also is meant to beautify the area. She gave many exampfes of public art. The public art controversy stems from political posturing, cultural democracy, etc. She said democratic expression can be a revitalization of cities and civic debate helps to involve the community and creates ownership. Council member Bob Armour thanked Erika Doss for her presentation and stated public art moves people and asked if there was a key or common theme in getting people involved in public art. Erika stated there was a great need to be proactive and getting the community involved early on in the art project process. She also stated there needs to be compromise and willingness to take risks, and vision and imagination lead to public ownership. Mayor Rob Ford thanked Erika for her time and presentation. 0 . The third item on the agenda was the current Audit Report for 1997. Steve Thompson, Finance Director, introduced Jerry McMahan. Jerry McMahan, of McMahan and Associates, audited the Town of Vail financial records and stated the Town of Vail is in compliance with all rules and regulations. The auditors did not have to make any substantial corrections. The audit was made in compliance with the Town Charter. He also stated the Town operated well within the budget and stated there is a lot of good information in the town audit report and in the footnotes. He gave the town a"clean opinion", the highest rating possible for an audit. Council member Ludwig Kurz asked if the suggestions made by the auditors was in the report. Jerry stated it was in the report and Steve Thompson had copies. Council member Bob Armour made a motion to accept the 1997 Audit Report and the motion was seconded by Council member Mike Arnett. A vote was taken and was passed unanimousfy, 7-0. The fourth item on the agenda was first reading of Ordinance No. 11, Series of 1998, an ordinance Amending the Official Zoning Map for the Town of Vail in Accordance with Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Chapter 5, Zoning Map; Applying Zone District Designation to a Portion of Unzoned Property Previously Owned by the United States Forest Service and Transferred to the Town of Vail Pursuant to the Land Ownership Adjustment Agreement to Primary/ secondary Residential District for Property Located at Rockledge Road/portions of United States Forest Service Lot 3, Based upon the Proposed Final Plat (Not Yet Recorded) of Rockledge Forest Subdivision Prepared by Dennis Shelhorn as Job No. 0332-002 Dated February 25, 1998. Dominic Mauriello, Town Planner, explained the property was acquired by the Town of Vail and staff was applying zoning to it so it could be sold at a later date to adjoining property owners to resolve encroachment problems. He also stated the zoning is compatible with the neighborhood. Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney, stated the property was changed to accommodate a neighbor and the land was acquired as part of the Land Ownership Adjustment Agreement with the U.S. Forest Service. The property is in the Town of Vail and the Planning and Environmental Commission is recommending the zoning change. Mayor Rob Ford clarified the background information of the change and stated the Town was acting as an intermediary so that the forest service and the neighbor could complete the exchange. Discussion ensued for clarification purposes. Council member Bob Armour made a motion to approve on first reading, Ordinance 11, Series of 1998, the motion was seconded by Council member Ludwig Kurz. A vote was taken and was passed unanimously, 7-0. , , ~ The fifth item on the agenda was the second reading of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1998, an ordinance repealing and re-enacting Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1991, to provide changes to Special Development District No. 22, Grand Traverse, that concern the number of lots, the lot sizes, the corresponding development standards and the architectural guidelines; and setting forth details in regard thereto. George Ruther, Town Planner, explained this was the second reading of the ordinance and included the minor modifications requested by Council. The Planning and Environmental . Commission and staff recommend approval and requests Council approval for the major amendment and major subdivision request eliminating two lots. . Council member Bob Armour made a motion to approve on second reading, Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1998, the motion was seconded by Council member Sybill Navas. A vote was taken and the motiorr passed unanimously, 7-0. The sixth item on the agenda was second reading of Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1998, an Ordinance amending Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Chapter 11, Design Review, Section 12-11- 5: Design Guidelines; Adding a provision allowing legal nonconforming single-family, two-family, and primary/secondary residential dwelling units to be expanded by 500 sq. ft. or less without requiring structures and sites to be fully compliant with the design guidelines; and amending Chapter 16, Conditional Use Permits, and creating a new Section 12-16-7: Use Specific Criteria and Standards. Dominic Mauriello, Town Planner, explained this was the second reading of this ordinance and this was what Council approved on first reading. Mayor Rob Ford asked if this applies to single family, primary/secondary and duplex residential units only. Dominic stated multi-family residents will be addressed separately and this would affect multi- families differently. • Council member Mike Arnett said he wanted multi-family dwellings to be addressed separately. Additional discussion ensued. Mayor Rob Ford asked the Council to direct staff to move forward on multi-family changes on GRFA quickly. Council member Sybill Navas stated there are two issues that have not been resolved, can the GRFA be pooled and will 500 sq. ft. additions be allowed. Mayor Rob Ford requested this issue be brought to a work session so the community could contribute to the discussions. Russ Forrest, Community Development Director, stated staff would appreciate the opportunity to enter into a discussion with the community, Council and Planning and Environmental Commission with regard to changes for multi-family units. r r ~ Web Atwell, a builder and homeowner asked about the time frame of how long this will take to be approved. Mayor Rob Ford explained it make take longer than anyone expects because Council won't circumvent the process of getting community input. Council member Mike Arnett said it will move faster once there is consensus. , Further discussion ensueci. John Railton, an architect, addressed the council and stated that he was frustrated that this was split into 2 parts and did not include multi-family. He said the current ordinance without addressing multi-family units is inconvenient. Jim Lamont, representing the East Village Home Owners Association, appreciated the Counci{ reviewing this in a comprehensive manner. Suzanne Sibley, a Matterhorn resident, stated the ordinance will help them add another employee apartment to their residence. Council member Mike Arnett made a motion to approve on second reading, Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1998 and was seconded by Council member Kevin Foley. A vote was taken and was passed unanimously, 7-0. The seventh item on the agenda was the Town Manager Report. Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager, reminded the Council of the growth management workshop sponsored by Eagle County next week. She.asked if Council was in favor of hosting the Colorado Municipal League (CML) conference in Vail next year and requested $5,000 be budgeted for this event in 1999. - Counci{ member Sybi11 Navas made a motion to approve $5,000 in the 1999 budget to host the CML conference in Vail in June of 1999, Council member Ludwig Kurz seconded the motion. A vote was taken and was passed unanimously, 7-0. Pam stated space vacated by the Vail Recreation District in the lower portion of the Vail Public Library is unoccupied and the Vail Valley Foundation has requested this space be used to distribute uniforms during the 1999 World Alpine Championships. All Council members are in favor of the use and authorized the Vail Valley Foundation to use the space. . , The sixth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. There was no further information to report. As there was no further business, a motion was made by Council member Mike Arnett to adjourn the meeting and was seconded by Council member Mike Jewett. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 7-0. _ The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 P.M. " - Respectfully submitted, Robert E. Ford Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson Town Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 11 Series of 1998 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE TOWN OF VAlL IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 12, ZONING REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 5, 20NING MAP; APPLYING ZONE DISTRICT DESIGNATION TO A PORTION OF UNZONED PROPERTY PREVIOUSLY OWNED BY THE UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE AND TRANSFERRED TO THE TOWN OF VAIL PURSUANT TO THE LAND OWNERSHIP ADJUSTMENT AGREEMENT TO PRIMARY/SECONDARY REStDENTIAL DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT ROCKLEDGE ROAD/PORTIONS OF UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE. LOT 3, BASED UPON THE PROPOSED FINAL PLAT (NOT YET RECORDED) OF ROCKLEDGE FOREST SUBDIVISION PREPARED BY DENNIS SHELHORN AS JOB NO. 0332-002 DATED FEBRUARY 25, 1998. WHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to implement the Land Ownership Adjustment Agreement with the United States Forest Service by zoning property acquired by the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds that this zone designation is compatible with and suitable to adjacent uses, is consistent with the Town's Land Use Plan and Zoning Regulations, and is appropriate for the area; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has recommended approval-of this zoning map amendment at its July 13, 1998 meeting; and VVHEREAS, the Town Councit considers it in the interest of the public health, safety, and welfare to amend the official Town of Vail Zoning Map. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. The Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail is hereby amended as follows: The western portion, identified on the attached Exhibit A as Lot 1, Block 1, immediately adjacent to Lot 13, Block 7, Vail Village First Filing, of previously unzoned property owned by the United States Forest Service and transferred to the Town of Vail pursuant to the Land Ownership Adjustment Agreement shall be included in the Primary / Secondary Residential District for property located at Rockledge Road/portions of United States Forest Service Lot 3, based upon the proposed Final Plat (not yet recorded) of Rocktedge Forest Subdivision prepared by Dennis Shelhorn as Job No. 0332-002 dated February 25, 1998 (see Exhibit A attached). Section 2. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the valirl;tv nf shA I vil iQll III ly NUI uu115 or inis orainance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 3. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Ordinance No. 11 , Series of 1998 ~ ; Section 4. The amendment of any provision of the Vail Municipal Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any viofation 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 amenrled. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 5. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shatl , not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resofution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 21st day of July, 1998, and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 4th day of August, 1998, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Robert E. Ford, Mayor Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 4th day of August, 1998. Ludwig Kurz, Mayor Pro-Tem Attest: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 11 , Series of 1998 2 ~ PROPERTY AESCRIP'fiON Au v JL W-0 g rv A" *,.A w. m ~ . ~ JL A Parcel of land situatad in Govarnment La. 3, Section 7, Towns~ h'p . S TO" OF VAIL9 South, Range 80 West of COUT the Sixth Pnncipal Mendian, County of Eaf,le, State of Colorado, being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the B.L.M. brass cap at Comei 2 of said Lot 3; Thence along the North line of said Lot 3, T orth 89041'00" East, a distance of 206,61 feet; Thence South 59°12'40" East, a distance of26.74 feet; Thence North 88°58'20" West, a dislance o:''229.76 feet to the West line of said Lat 3; Thence North 00°00'00" East, a distance of 8.42 feek to the Point of Beginning. Containing 2394 sq. ft, more or less. ~ • I ' I I I ( rt ~ ~I {:.e I µix~.r~:: Iri7~'~.~~ • '.l..k•e_v..y:~...~ 7 > I ` ` 11 I . ~i.~L u ' . \ I I ~ %r f~ i:"'~1:~~:+1: ~ \ \ • ~ I ~ ! i i 7 ~ \ . 1 ~ ~ A.P. 2 J~,1::~.~8~ - - - , ' , N00'00'1?'~E- Ei 42 b 1 44 7~,.... ~ . w y ,,e8.59 20"n` ° LOT ~ ALOCK 1 LoT r ~ `1 , 229. 76 L01" I cv 3 3 oc N88'58'20"W ? 79.57' BI.OCft 2 ~ ,LOT 2 1R.0.w. 1 S f So, C1 ~y 918;> -------T1RACY'-A ` N88'S9'42" W 173.35' ~ 7 rI^rG 20 ' 0! A.P. 5 Q ~ i-,:r,• :V7(9•58,51 TV- - ~,.t. .a- • ~r, / AP fi ~.V ~..1/1(.r a~..J, ~.•:`.Y~',~'',i.r~'_.... 1.i.~~~. .a Jh A' LI i: ~4! y; i;.' •';1~ i I ' ~ .1 :1:..,.. . ' u ~y TOWN OF VAIL ~ Office of the Town Manager . 75 South Frontage Road Yail, Colorado 81657 . 970-479-2105/Fax 970-479-2157 TM MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Anne Wright DATE: July 31, 1998 SUBJECT: No Town Manager's Report Due to the Town Manager being out of Town for the past week and a half, there will be no Town Manager's report on the 8/4 evening agenda. RWM/aw RECYCLED PAPER ~ 1~1 TOWN OF VAIL ~ . ~ Department of Community Development 75 South Frontage Road Yail, Colorado 81657 • • • 970-479-2138 ,M FAX 970-479-2452 TO: Vaii Town Council FROM: Russ Fonest DATE: July 30, 1998 SUBJECT: Update on process for Lionshead Master Plan and Common Ground I just wanted to take this opportunity to review the proposed schedules for both the Lionshead Master Planning project and the next steps for Common Ground. Lionshead Master Planninq Process: At the meeting on July 14th the Town Council directed staff to develop a number of height and design altematives utilizing 82.5 feet as a target number for height. There was interest in explonng height altematives that would allow a hotel on the core site to exceed 82.5 feet. There was also interest in developing altematives that would utilize various percentages with 82.5 ft. used as the point of reference {i.e. 60% of the ridge line at 82.5 and 40% at 71 feet}. Staff has developed 4 different altematives and is working with Zehren Associates to prepare illustrations and design guidelines to clearly show how design standards (such as step backs) could be used in conjunction with altemative height standards. In addition, a slide show is being prepared that will show examples of buildings that would be consistent with the design and height standards we are discussing for Lionshead. Staff will be reviewing height altematives on August 11'" at the Council Work session. At that meeting, staff would like to ask for direction on which altemative Council would like to pursue. The next proposed step in the Lionshead Master Plan process, after direction on height has been given to staff, is to prepare the draft plan so that all components of the plan can be reviewed in cantext. Common Ground: Staff will be completing a schedule for the process the Town Council created on July 14th. There are five steps for each property identified for a housing or park action in the Common Ground process. These steps include: Step 1: Two bus tours at different times and days for each site. Where parks are being proposed in conjunction with housing, both land uses will be discussed in the tours and meetings outlined in Steps 2-5. Step 2: One or finro neighborhood meetings to discuss input from the bus tours. ? REC,7CLED PAPER r Step 3: Staff wiil then work with a consultant to synthesize the public input and develop preliminary concepts to be used in a request for proposals , Step 4: Week long open house for neighborhoods and community to review and comment on the proposed RFP parameters. There will be one evening neighborhood meeting during the week of the open house Step 5) Council review and approve RFP parameters After Step 5, an RFP would be issued and the formal development review process could begin. The formal development review process could include, depending on the site, public hearings on rezonings, changes in master plans, conditional use permit reviews, and Design Review Board hearings. A evening public meeting has been scheduled for August 18ih to review this process. An invitation to the August 18'h meeting will be mailed out on August 5th to al{ common grour?d participants through direct mail and the community at large through newspaper- announcements. This invitation will include a summary of the proposed steps mentioned above. As Council directed, staff would take the following phase I projects through the proposed 5-step process in the following order: West Vail site, Lionshead parking structure, Donovan Park, and Tract C(east of the Mountain School). It is anticipated that this five-step process would not begin for ponovan Park or Tract C until late fall or early winter. Within the next two months, the Town Attomey will begin working on the acquisition of Timber Ridge and Hud Wurth and Community Development Staff will pursue buy_ down opportunities. In addition, Community Development will begin immediately working on the open space and park actions identified in the plan. In regard to community facilities, staff is identifying critical stakeholders that will need to participate in a needs assessment. Active discussion are occurring with Community Task Force and the VRD representatives on how to create a process for community facilities. If you have any questions or concems regarding the proposed next steps for Lionshead or Common Ground please call me at 479-2146. Thank you very much for your consideration. ~V Town of Vall 5ales Tax Worksheet 7/29/98 x cnenye x cnenya 19ea Huagel Kom mom Month 1aB7 1D88 1DBD fYDO 1991 1992 1893 1994 1885 1996 1997 BudyM CoHscfbru Vnlanw 1997 Budgat •::..~::•>:•.::::;i•<::.•z..s.::;~:;:;,,..:::.::..•:r~••:••:.;:..r:•;::;:...:.:>rt•... .........v..............: . •::i.... r..~.O.r .~:...~:.;:.iiY•:iii:i.~•;•{y.}}y~:.y;•..yy...... i: ~:.::::ti: r.r.. . r.{i..~...~~~ . i•i:•}:~ r: v::•:::. r .l:~•:y:.. :~.....v.~:::::::v..v....n ii:~i~:': ~ ~ : .rv.v~: ~~•x: . . . . . . ~::i :::.v: r.:~:: !vx . . . .....1. . ~~.r.... . . . r/. . . . . . :.:::::.•r........ l.... . ~.f.......~.....~ . . ../...~J..~JI . frl. ~r 1. :v:: C. . i.. . , i „ . • ?y.. ~ . . , . . ..i i...,. f : / . r . , r: . • : • :t•:::::~:: :~:.:....:..:<.:s::::::.. , . , r 1 , . , r~~r :.;.~..y:::.::.............,...... / f. .i . .........,.l..a.., . .t . . . . , . ,.,..r: : r.r.//.,,. . .............t.. . . . . . . . . . .................:.:::..::.~::::.....................:,..::.w:,::::. ....»~...f........~~::o,:~//..:, ..,......~,,:/.~.:..r/...,..1........ .1,../.~,i.. , /.i /i./.,~. . , , ..i....:.... . . . . i.'. ~ :;;:i:;:~:::t:•::::~z:•:: ~ »;:a:.;i:.r::~;:•::.;:~:;;:•::~: ~::~;:r:~:~i;:.<:;yit:;:::~;:~;:;~::•;::•;::.;;;:.;:•;:r.~;:~;;:.;:<~.::•::.;.;;:.;~::•;:~:~::~;:~;:,::.r.'•::•;::.;:~:>;::•r:•':•;;:<::. : Janua 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 2,052,569 2,076,931 2,112,628 35,697 2.93% 1.72% Februa 1,135,7861,205,101 1,561,286 1,695,850 1,737,343 1,780,568 1,828,766 1,814,495 1,816,107 1,993,389 2,089,673 2,121,757 2,149,900 28,143 2.88% 1.33% Merch 1,378,782 1,591,705 1,939,758 1,897,718 2,051,820 1,977,995 1,988,090 2,250,656 2,139,298 2,240,865 2,580,992 21614,841 2,360,440 (254,401) -8.55% -9,73/ A ril 425,961 550,205 567,684 634,174 616,648 691,163 864,303 794,668 791,092 966,993 874,427 881,575 1,103,831 222,256 26.23% 25,21 / Ma 245,518 170,567 215,548 236,359 250,809 268,000 257,248 287,315 324,681 318,920 329,783 328,723 379,333 50,610 15.03 / 15.40 % June 331,581 329,039 393,470 448,227 468,948 468,598 475,161 548,820 590,685 594,907 630,366 642,504 592,311 50,193) -6.04 % -7.81/ ~ >::>:;~;::;;;;;:;>::>;:;;::.;;;;::~:<•;:~;:;:< ( . Total 4,580 824 4,973,113 6,143,616 ~ 6,511,451 6,838,659 6,895,978 7,268,932 7,501,661 7,556,460 8,050,856 8,557,810 8,666,331 8,698,443 32,112 1.64 % ~ «<.:««a;z:<a«<zz; . 0.37/ July 479,201 559,683 649,139 665,094 737,288 742,750 811,538 892,830 893,483 963,717 1,043,637 1,060,879 August 536,904 575,887 668,119 678,071 761,992 767,257 825,954 891,566 867,125 990,650 1,073,430 1,090,762 Se tember 442,402 422,502 469,032 482,328 491,684 485,954 560,535 725,205 645,902 630,453 637,831 642,504 October 273,951 291,204 335,740 364,002 324,802 367,578 400,525 408,405 461,791 413,573 472,836 478,142 November 386,270 376,235 430,820 438,731 428,086 497,907 553,681 594,491 611,147 601,208 707,166 717,214 December 1,245,612 1,455,948 1,615,278 1,625,219 1,691,775 1,846,223 1,974,553 1,992,855 1,994,540 2,068,851 2,254,709 2,286,119 Total 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 14,747,419 14,941,951 8,698,443 32,112 7-28-1998 1:03PM FROM BERNHARDT-AT_VAIL 970 476 7651 P_1 i c . C~.~..~..~, o Vail Daity FAX 949-7094 V ail Trail FAX 949-0199 Eagle Valley Enterprise FAX 328-6393 Vail Valley Times FAX 845-7204 Town of Vail Manager and Council members FAX 479-2157 Housing Option #31 On May 19, 1998, the Vail Town Council was given a list of 30 proposals for employee housing options rather than sa.crificing open space or park lands. Even Mayor Rob Ford said that it is despicable to use park land for housing. Here is option #31. I was told that Whistler utilizes a high rise type of building for it's employees. Following that example, the Mt. Bell site is very large, and it could house thousands of employees in a beautiful project stepped back into the hillside. The lower ievel could house a 6000 sq. ft. day care center. The proximity to the vi,llage would eliminate the need for cars, and worst case scenario, if there were not enough employees to fill the rooms, it could be rented out to travelers. The hillside location would be perfect for underground parking. Financing would be done by the merchant's association. They could pool their money, similar to a REIT, and all would have a chance to participate. Since it would be set up like a mutual fund, new businesses coming into town could join, and old participants could sell their shares, or keep them for future investment potential. If theze was a desire ta attract outside investors, tha.t could be done aLso. Sincerely: Chas Bernhardt l' t'_. t i_..~L•.,. 2 9 19~ - `1 7/18/98 Dear Sir. or Madam: I greet you as a property owner at Park Meadows Lodge. Also as a tax payer in Vail I feel I should be heard in regards to your plans for employee housing on Matterhorn Road. I realize employee housing is needed, but such a high density in this local area is terribly unacceptable. When we purchased here we assured that Donavon Park would be an asset to our investment. What happened to our citizens park? Every time a property is sold I have noticed you raise taxes on all the properties in the complex based on the last sa1e. I have also noticed that the rents we need to charge to rent our property cannot increase, because of buyer resistance. I hope you notice an economic pattern here, I do. It eventually results in a slum lord neighborhood. I hope you have not dedicated West Va1e to this fate. I am sure you would not let it happen in your own living areas. I am convinced that bus service can be extended to an area that can accommodate the employee housing without destroying our property values. Lowering values of course would require multiple reassessments to lower our taxes which in a long run will require other sources of tax income to be established. It is beyond me why you would want to destroy a piece of this beautiful town to meet a need that can more easily be satisfied elsewhere. Eugene S..ho11 3B Park Meadows Lodge ~ • u ~y TOWN OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado $1657 ~ 970-479-2100 FAX 970-479-2157 TM MEDIA ADVISORY • July 29, 1998 Contact: Suzanne Silverthorn Community Information Office VAIL TOWN COUNCIL HIGHLIGHTS FOR JULY 28 Work Session Briefs Councilmembers present: Armour, Arnett, Foley, Jewett, Kurz, Navas --Appeal of Design Review Board Decision The Council voted 3-2 (Foley, Jewett against) to uphold the Juiy 1 Design Review Board (DRB) decision that denied a request for a building separation to construct a detached garage with an employee housing unit above. The property at 1694 Matterhorn Circle is owned by Harry Gray who has proposed to build a 270 sq. ft. detached garage and housing unit. In upholding the DRB decision, the 3 councilmembers (Armour, Arnett and Kurz) said they could not find significant site constraints on the property that would warrant a separation of the structure as required by the zoning regulations. --Northwest Colorado Council af Governments-Qua(ity/Quantity Comm'l±tee The Council heard an annual update on activities of the Water Quality/Quantity Committee from staff members Taylor Hawes and Lane Wyatt. The Town of Vail is among about 35 dues paying members of the QQ. The organization serves ta monitor water development activities and legislative initiatives that affect water quality or quantity in the region. Councilmember Sybill Navas represents the town on the QQ's executive board. --Update on Local Marketing District After hearing a status report on efforts to create a 1.5% lodging tax from East Vail to Wolcott (to be used to fund regional marketing), Counci!members asked Frank Johnson of the Vail Valley Tourism and Convention Bureau and Ross Boyle of the Vail Valley Marketing Board to do all it can to place the issue on the upcoming November ballot--so long as the Town of Avon is included in the district. Otherwise, Councilmembers appeared willing to defer the election to November 1999. Discussions with Avon are complicated in that Avon already has a 4% lodging tax (while Vail does not), necessitating the need to create an equitable distribution for regional marketing, Johnson and Boyle said. In addition, annexation negotiations in Avon further complicate the matter, since developers of those parcels are asking for a portion of the existing lodging tax be used for infrastructure. Johnson and Boyle said the timetable for a November 98 election required resolving the issues in Avon within two weeks. Still, the issue may not pass come November, they said. A recent teiephone poll showed about 40% in support, 35% against and 25% in the middle. He said political consultants sugges; taking issues to the ballot only when there is 60% support. Councilmembers, meanwhile, said they thought the issue had momentum and that a November 1998 election would be preferable. If the election fails-- (more) RECYCLED PAPER 1 Add 1/TOV Councii Highlights/7-28-98 whether it be this year or next-- Johnson and Boyle said the regional marketing program would then be dissolved with no efforts to resurrect the Vail Valley Marketing Board. Meanwhile, both indicated they'd be back to ask the Town Council to continue funding the marketing board's 1999 and 2000 program if the ballot issue passes in 1998 or is deferred to 1999. Councilmembers then clarified a question posed by Kay Ferry of the Vail Village Merchant Association. They said they would consider the interim funding requests by the Vail Valley Marketing Board during the budget process which is currently underway. Ferry, also representing a group called "Vail 1 st," has suggested the Vail business license fees currently used to fund the regional marketing program be set aside to market Vail exclusivety instead. ' --PEC Review During a review of Monday's Planning and Environmental Commission meeting, Councilmembers learned of the status of the Vail Interfaith Chapel expansion. The project, which includes a two-story structure that will house clergy offices and meeting rooms, was reviewed during Monday's PEC meeting. Next steps include a final hearing in front of the Planning Commission for a conditional use permit. --Multiple-Family Dwelling Units-250 Ordinance The Council directed staff to begin moving forward with a provision to allow interior conversions (without a cap on square footage) within multi-family units, similar to the provisions allowed for single family homes. This will enable crawl spaces, unfinished basements, vaulted ceilings and other spaces to be converted into living space without additional restriction or intervention by the Town of Vail (other than approval of a building permit). A more complicated issue for multi- family units is the possibility of allowing exterior expansions of up to 250 sq. ft. Councilmembers expressed interest in pursuing several concepts, including allowing consideration of the additional density in designated zone districts and creating a review mechanism for the entire property rather than individual units. Although intrigued by the concept of "pooling" 250s, Councilmembers acknowledged the difficulties of implementation. For more information, contact Dominic Mauriello in the Community Development Department at 479-2148. --Village Construction Update Public Works/Transportation Director Larry Grafel reported the following: at Seibert Circle, the - placement of granite and cobblestones continues, with installation of an irrigation system to follow; snowmelt installation is underway at Slifer Plaza; the Transportation Center snowmelt project will include demolition of the central stairs, as well as concrete pours on the top deck at the bus terminal. In addition, Grafel said the chip and slurry seal sireet maintenance projects have been completed in East and West Vail, while work continues at the tunnel entrance to the Public Works shop area. During discussion, Councilman Michael Jewett asked why the town hadn't considered use of an asphalt overlay on the East Vail streets instead of the chip seal application. Grafel responded by saying the chip seal was considered to be a"bandaid" untif the East Vail streets are reconstructed. Grafel said the more expensive asphatt overlay would have been wasteful because of the crumbling condition of the road base. --Other Sybill Navas inquired about the rails at Chapel Bridge which appeared to be rusted and in need of paint. Kevin Foley inquired about a crosswalk near the Vail Athletic Club. Michael Jewett inquired about the status of a guardrail installation near the Ruins on South Frontage Road (scheduled for fall by CDOT), as well as the status of construction of an I-70 (more) Add 2/TOV Council Highlights/7-28-98 eastbound bypass lane for vehicles heading west on South Frontage Rd. at ihe Main Vail roundabout (scheduled for fall). . Foley also expressed concern that the Council Highlights summarizing the July 14 discussiQn on building height in Lionshead may have suggested the Council took a vote on building height: ,It did not. ~ Jim Lamont of the East Village Homeowners Assn. said the Council may want to consider scheduling time to hear public comment on the building height topic before moving forward with the draft plan. On another topic, Foley, inquired about the various "critical" job categories that would qualify - TOV employees to enter the lottery for the Red Sandstone housing. In addition, Foley asked if agencies had been notified of the town's grant applicant schedule (deadline is July 31); and inquired about the cost of the Vail 99 flagpole project (cost to TOV is $10,000 for installation of 52 poles, plus curb and gutter; cost to Vail Valley Foundation is $35,000 tor materials). --Information Update Announcements included: community photograph to be taken later in the day at the Hot Summer Nights Concert (it was later canceled due to the rain); and the joint meeting between the Vail Town Council and Vail Recreation District has been tentatively rescheduled to the Sept. 15 Council meeting. --Council Reports Sybill Navas shared comments from several constituents who were unhappy about the paid parking program at Ford Park. The constituents suggested that short-term parking be free when accessing the Vail Recreation District offices. Assistant Town Manager Pam Brandmeyer asked councilmembers to direct those complaints to her so additional adjustments can be made to the managed parking program. Navas also suggested that Council schedule a dinner with the Avon Town Council to discuss the lodging tax issue. In addition to Navas, Bob Armour, Kevin Foley and Ludwig Kurz expressed interest in attending, while Michael Jewett said he had no interest in discussing the topic with elected officials in Avon. Ludwig Kurz reported on the ground breaking which had occurred earlier in the day at Red Sandstone. Responding to a constituent complaint, Michael Jewett made a motion to allow free parking for people using the handicapped parking spaces during managed parking events at Ford Park. The Council voted 1-4 (Foley, Kurz, Navas and Armour against) on the motion, leaving the paid parking policy for handicapped spaces in tact. Kevin Foley thanked Larry Grafel, public works/transportation director, and Greg Morrison, police chief, for authorizing creation of some extra employee parking spaces at Ford Park. --Citizen Comment Kaye Ferry inquired about the status of the town-owned parking lot adjacent to the entrance to Vail Valley Medical Center, after experiencing difficulties finding a parking spot during a recent visit. Rather than being used for TOV library employees, Ferry suggested the lot be used for hospital patrons. (more) 1 Add 3/TOV Council Highlights/7-28-98 UPCOMING DISCUSSION TOPICS August 4 Work Session Request by the Antlers for Conceptual Review Appeal of DRB decision by Paul Raether . , August 4 Evening Meeting . - Second Reading, Ordinance # 11, TOV Rezoning August 11 Work Session • Revenue Recovery Group, authorize to enter contract for audit services PEC/DRB Review Lionshead Discussion Discussion of Employee Generation Ordinarice August 18 Work Session . Red Sandstone Lottery VRD Request to Proceed through the Process August 18 Evening Meeting First Reading, Model Traffic Code Tree Ordinance Review Common Ground Process for Next Steps Discussion of Business License Fee by "Vail FirsY" # # # r xC: ~.vw~et,t. RECEIVED JUL 3 0 1A " - - R~.ssut United States Forest White River Holy Cross Ranger District Department of Service National P.O. Box 190 Agriculture Forest MYnturn, Colorado 81645~ (970)827-5715 v TTY (970)945-3255 FAX (970)827-9343 Reply to: 2720/5410 Date: July 27,. 1998 Dear Znterested Party: This letter is to update you on activities which are proposed at the Vail NFountain Wireless Communication site on the White River National Forest and to seek your comments on issues which should be addressed in an environmental analysis. Presently, the site is managed and occupied by Mountain Communications & Electronics, Inc. Recently, some wireless communications providers have expressed interest in utilizing this site; which would require adding on to the existing building and installing a new tower. These proposed facilities are fully contained on National Forest System lands, therefore no land use permits are required from other jurisdictions. In the March 29, 1996 Federal Register Notice, the General Services Administration (GSA) published Government-wicie procedures for the placement of commercial antennas on Federal properties. Those procedures were developed pursuant to direction in an August 10, 1995 Executive Memorandum entitled _"Facilitating Access to Federal Property for the Siting of Mobile Service Antennas", and are consistent with direction in Section 704 (c) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-104). A copy of Section 704 (c) of the Act, the Conference Committee Report, the Executive Memorandum, and the GSA procedures are enclosed for your information. In essence what this direction tells the Forest Service is that where National Forest System land is requested for the use of mobile service antennas, we are obligated to ailow the use unless it directly conflicts with the department's or agency's mission, or the current or planned use of the property, rights-of- way, and easements in question. Page 2 With this direction in mind, and with pending applications to site antennas on Vail Mountain, we determined we had three choices: 1- allow expanded use of the existing site; 2- designate alternative sites in the area for the new applicants and have additional permanent sites, or; 3- designate alternative sites in the area and make them the permanent sites for all the providers. The site manager and industry providers have worked together and have given us site plans of how they propose to jointly use the existing site. By sharing , buildings and towers, it is conceivable that all currently FCC-licensed companies can occupy the site with a minimum of visual and grourid-disturbing impact. . Implementing either of the other two alternatives would require tower placement and building construction, as well as additional road access, power, and phone line connection. In addition, these alternatives would result in the disturbance of currently undeveloped areas and new visual impacts in the area. I would appreciate your reply by August 14, 1998 on issues that need to be evaluated and considered in making this decision. If you would like to review the plans or discuss the alternatives further, please contact Rich Schwarzmann at 827-5715. Si erely, . ti 0- 0" WILLIAM A. WOOD District Ranger Enclosures . . ",.,,~,.....a,s;.,........,.... a:..~.,._ . . . v:a.+mava.a¢._.,...u..:.ro._+u~.o_, . . _ . . . .s, , .a._ ~ •IInited Statea Forast Rocky P.O. Boz 25127 Department of Service Mountain Lakewood, CO 80225-0127 Agriculture Ragion Dalivery: 740 Simms St. Golden, CO 80401 File Code: 2720 Date: JUN 1 7 1995 Route To: rorest La-nds Staff - Subject: Communication Uses - Implementing Section 704(c)•of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-104) and General Services Administration (GSA) Antenna Siting Requirements - To: Forest Supervisors Enclosed is a package from the.Washington Office related to implementing Section 704 (c) of the TelecoR¢nunications Act of 1996. This was first discussed with the President by members of the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association in August of 1995. The President issued a memorandum for the heads of Departmerits and Agencies on August 11, 1995. He directed the Administrator of GSA to draft instructions for its implementation. Additionally, when the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was passed earlier this year, Section 704 basically repeated the directive from tlze President. In March of 1996, GSA issued their instructions. , We have been discussir_g the contents of the Presidential Memorandum at the training sessions for communication site fee imolementation. We may not have discussed it at the session in Montrose on April 24 but we did at a11 the others. The GSA instruction recuires a response to an apolicant within 60 days. We take the position that such a response could be approval of their application or a statement that we need additional time to analyze the proposal. As the Washingtan office memo says, an applicant is not automatically assured of receiving an authorization. Our position is that there must be substantial reason to deny an application. A].i applications will be subject to our standard NEPA and other analyses. The important thing is that they will be given some priority for a decision. The Washington Office memo states that a11 Forest officers responsible for processing applications and issuance of special use authorizations for the use of Forest Service buildings, antennas, or lands are expected to support the Presidents direction. ' The implementation of this directive is effective immediately. Refer questions to Larry Gash at 303-275-5375. i PAUL ZI RMAN Acting Director of Physical Resources R E C EIVE D Enclosures SEP - 8 1991 cc: John Gavin w/enclosure CLEAR t;HEEK RANGEA DISTAICT LDG/gml Csring for the Land and Serving Peopie . . , . ~ ~ IInited States Forest Washington 14th & Independence SW „ Department of Service Office P.O. Box 96090 Agriculture Washington, DC 20090-6090 File Coda: 2720 Date: MAY L 2 1996 Subject: Communications Uses - T_mplementing Section 704(c) of the Telecommunications Act o= 1996 (P.L. 104-104) ar.d General Services Administration (GSA) Anter.na Siting Requirements To: Regional For=sters In a March 29, 1996, Federal Register Notice, the General Services Administration (GSA) published Government-wide procedures for the placement of commercial antennas on Federal properties. Those procedures were develooed pursuant to direction in an August 10, 1995, Executive Memorandum entitled "Facilitating Access to Federal Prooerty for the Siting of Mobi12 Services Antennas", and are consistent with direction in Section 704(c) of the Telecommunications Act o= 1996 (P.L. 104-104). A copy of Section 704(c) of the Act, the Corference Committee Report, the Executive Memorandum, and the GSA procedures are enclosed for your review. The intent of the direction by the Administration and Congress is to expedite . processing requests by the telecommunications industry, particuZarly the persor.al wireless services segment, for new antenna sites on Federal oroperty (buildings or land). However, the Conference Report accocRpanying the Act explains tnat provisior.s relating to telecommunications facilities in Section 704(c) are not limited to personal wireless services, but include commercial mobi'_e radio licensees, and other licensed wireless common carriers such as point-to-point microwave. All Forest officers responsible for processing applications and issuance of special use authorizations for communications sites must be made aware of the nrocedures and support the Administration's direction_ However, we still must ' follow existing laws when considering and authorizing these uses. This means that parties requesting antenna si.tes and citing the provisions of the Telecommt:nications Act are not automatically assured of receiving an authorization. We are required to give the application prompC attention. The direction in Enclosure 1 is for use in considering, processing, and aporoving communication uses on National Forest System lands. Implement this direction immediately. Appropriate changes to FSH 2709.11, section 48.1, are currer_tly being nrocessed. ~ 2L~`~i ) Z L ~ < ~~ILU . / ~ G Y F. REYNOLDS eputy Chief, NFS Hnclosures ~ Caring for the Land and Serving People ,Is ~ ~ , t • ' Enclosure 1 ANTENNA SITING ON NATIOIQAL FOREST SYSTEM LANDS ZMPLEIrLNTZNG PROCEDURES Purnose. Itrrolement procedures for responding to proposals to place commercial antennas on National r^orest System lands in accordance with Section 704(c) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and Government-wide procedures outlined by the General Services Admiaistration (61 FR 14101, Mar. 29, 1996). Initial screeninQ. Upon receiving a proposal for antenna siting, the authorized of£icer should encourage the proponent to co-locate with existing•, yfacilities.. Under the new comnunications policy, the proponent-would.not need-' , an, agency approval • and could, - after-securing-.pertnission from the facility owner _ar facility manager, immediately locate.its equipment and groceed with operations. Where it is not possible to co-locate with existing cocrununications facilities, the authorized officer shall, within 60 davs of receipt of a reQiiest, 'review the proposal and advise the prooonent on whether the proposal will be accepted for processing and a decision on issuance of a s.pecial use authorization. The following rrcinimum requirements must be met for a proposal to be accepted as an application: i. The prooosal is consistent with the laws, regulations, orders, and policies establishing or governing National'Forest System lands, with other applicable Federal law, and with aoplicable State and 1oca1 health and sanitation laws. 2_ The prooosal is consistent with the direction and guidelines of the applicable approved Natior.al Forest land and resource manacement plan or other approved management nlan for the area or can be made consistent with the current pian by modification of the proposed use or through amendment of the plan (FSH 2709.11, sec. 48.1(6)). 3. The.propos4l wi11 not create a serious and substantial risk to public health or safety: 4. The request will not unreasonably conflict or interfere with. administrative use by the Forest Service,-other4scheduled or-authorized „ existing uses..of the National Forest System, or use of adjacent non-National Forest System land_• ' IIpon meeting the above minimum zequirements, a oroposal will be accepted for evaluation and processing. Proposals that do not meet all oi the above minimum requirements will not be subject to further evaluation and orocessing and the proponent shall be notified in writing. A proposal becomes an application upon its acceptance for evaluation and processing. Processincr Applications. Propoeals•-that appear to-meet-aZl of the-above• minimum requirements will be acknowledged in writing to the applicant. This notification should inform the applicant: 1. That receipt o= the application does not constitute approval for the applicant to move forward with the proposal. ~ ~ • . ; 2. That additional information (studies, surveys, environmer.tal anaZyses, etc.) may/will be needed in order for the authorized officer to render a final decision concerning the nrooosed use. ~ 3. The estimated timeframe when a final decision will be made on the ~ application. 4. That the applicant may be reguired to pay some or all of the costs of processing.the application. " Decisions on Applications. The authorized officer may decide•to-approve the proposecLuse, approve the proposed use--with modifications;-,or-deny_the...proposed use: App-licants wi11 be notified in writing of approved aoplications. The authorizing document (lease or permit) should be provided to the applicant at this time. The applicar.t has 60 days in which to return the signed authorization. Applications that are denied are to be returned to the applicant with a written explanation for the denial. Rental Fees. 1. Use the new communications site fee schedule and policy wnen applicable (FSH 2709.21, secs. 36.21 and 48). 2_ For uses not covered underathe new policy and schedule, such_as Private Communications.Services (PCS) ar_d other emerging technologies, use guidance contained in FSH 2709_11, cnapter 30, to determine the fair market value for the use. ~ - 1 u~. rr tllt lvu~\. . Officc of the Press Sccrctary For Immediate Release Augusc 10, 199 August 10. 1995 Mcmorandum For Thc Hcads Of Dcpartmcnts And A;cncics SUBIECT: Facilitatinlc, Acccss to Fcdcral Propcm- for the Sitin; of Mobilc Scn-iccs ?Lntcnnas Rcccnt advanccmcnts liz mabilc tclccommunications tcchnolog5' . prescnt an opportunitv for the rapid construction of the Nation's «irclcss communications infrastructurc. As a mattcr of polia•, the Fcdcrals Govcmmcnt shall cncouragc the cfficicnt and timclv implcmcntarion of such ncw tcchnologiQs and the concomitant infrastructurc buildout as a mcans of stimulating cconomic gro«th and crcating ncw jabs. Thc rcccnt auctioning and impcnding liccnsing of radio frcqucncics for mobilc pcrsonal communications scn-iccs prescnts the Fcdcral Govcrnrncnt «-ith the oppomuuty to fostcr ncw tcchnologics and to cncouragc the dcvclopmcnt of communications inf7astructurc by mal.zng Fcdcral propcm• availablc for thc siting of mobilc scn•iccs antcnnas. Thcrcforc, to the cxtcat p,nittcd bv laNv. I hcrcbv dircct the Administrator of Gcncral Scn-iccs. Nt-ithin 90 davs. in . consultation «ith the Sccrctarics of Agriculturc, Intcrior. Dcfcnsc, and the hcads of such othcr agcncics as the Administrator mav dctcminc, to dcvclop proccdures ncccssa~--v to facilitatc appropriatc acccss to Fcdcral propcrty for the siting of mobilc scn-iccs antcnnas. Thc proccdures should bc dcvclopcci in accordancc vvzth thc follo«incl: 1. (a) Upon rcqucst, and to the cxtcnt pcrmittcd bY laNv . , and NN-hcrc practicablc, cxccutivc dcpartmcnts and agcncics shall mal:c availablc Fcdcral Govcmmcnt buildings and lands for the siting of mabitc scn-icc antcnnas. This should bc donc in accordancc «ith Fcdcral, Statc, and local laNvs and regulatinns, and consistcnt NI"ith national sccurity conccrns (includin; minimizing mutual clcctromagnctic intcractions). public hcalth and safcty conccrns, cnvironmcntal and acsthctic concc,-ns, prescrvation of histonc buildings and monumcnts, protcction of natural and cultural resourccs, protcction of national park and «zldcrncss valucs, protcction of National Wildlifc Rcfugc s-,-stcros, and subjcct to anv Fcdcral ' rcquircmcnts promulgatcd bv the agcncy managing the facility and the Fcdcral Communica[ions Commission. the Fcdcral AN-ia[ion Administration, National T'clccommunications and Information Administration. and othcr rclcvant dcpartmcnts and agcncics. more ~ . • , ~ . , (b) Antcnnas on Fcdcral buildings or (and ma • not concain any advcrtising. (c) Fcdcral propcm• docs not inc(udc lands hc d bv thc Unitcd Statcs in crust for individual or NatiVc Arncrican tribal govctnmcnts. (d) Agcncics shall rctain discrction to rcjcct inappropriatc siting rcqucsts, and assurc adcquatc protcction of public propcrty and timcly rcmoval of cquipmcnt and structures at thc cnd of scrvzcc. 2. A11 proccdures and mcchanisms adoptcd regarding acccss ta Fcdcral propcrty shali bc clcar and simplc so as to facilitatc thc cfficicnt and rapid buildout of thc national wirclcss communicanons infrastructv.rc. 3. Unlcss othcrwisc prahibitcd by or inconsistcnt «zth Fcdcral law, agcncics shall chargc fccs bascd on markct valuc for siting antcnnas on Fcdcral propcm•, and may usc compctitivc proccdures if not all applicants can ~ bc accommodatcd. This mcmorandum docs not givc thc siting af mobilc scn-iccs antcnnas priority orcr othcr authorizcd uscs of Fcdcral• buildings or land. All indcpcndcnt rcgulatory commissions and agcncics arc rcqucst:.d to compls• VVith thc provisians of this mcmorandum. Ihis mcmorandum is not intcndcd to crcatc anv right, bcnctit or trust responsibility, substanrivc or proccdural, cnforccablc at law or cquitt• by a par-ty a;ainst thc Uaitcd Statcs, its agcncics or instrumcntalitics, its officcrs, or anv othcr person. This mcmorandum shall bc publishcd in thc FcdcraI Rceistcr. tiVilliam J. Clinton '1 11 '1 T T ' <l lW> ' --center> <HR> <p> <A HREF="http://N,,.«~•.«-hitchousc.goN•AVH/Wclcomc-plain.html"> Rctum to thc main pagcc'A> -00- . ~ P . . Cp~/F-EX~14,-~~cX i /0 S~ - 1s~ ~ 209 " The limitations on the role and powers of the Commission under this subparagraph relate to 1oca1 land use regulatioas and are not intended to limit or affect the Commission's general author- ity over radio telecommunicatior_s, including the auchority to regu- late the construction, modification and operation of radio facilities. . The conferees intend that the court to wh.ich `a party appeals a decision under section 332(cX7XBXv) may be the Federal district court in which the facilities are located or s State court of com- - - petent jurisdiction, at the option of the party making the appeal, ' and that the courts act ezpeditiously in deciding such cases. The term "final action" of that new subparagraph means final adminis- trative action at the State or 1oca1 government level so that a party can commence actioa under the subpara..graph rather than waiting ' for the ea.haustion of any independent State court remedy other- wise required. • With respect to the availahility of Federal property for the use of wireless telecommun.ications infrastructure sites under section 704(c), the conferees generally adopt the House provisions, but sub- - stitute the President or his designee for the Commission. It should be noted that the provisians relati.ng to telecommuni- cations facilities are not limited to com.mercial mobile radio licens- ees, but also will inciude other Comm.ission licensed wireless com- . mon carriers such as point to point microwave in the eztremely high frequency portion of the electromagnetic spectrum which rely on line of sight for tra.nsmitting communication services. . SECTION 705-tiiOBILE SERViCE DIRECT ACCESS TO LONG DISTA:YCE CARRIERS Senate bi11 Suhsection (b) of section 221 of the Senate bill, as passed, states that notwithstanding the MFJ or any other consent decree, no CIMS provider will be required by court order or otherwise to . provide long distance equal access. The Commission may only order equal access if a ChiS provider is subject to the interconnection ob- . ' ligations of section 251 and if the Commission finds that such a re- quirement is in the public interest. CNiS providers shall ensure that its subscribers can obtain unblocked access to the interexcha.nge carrier of their choice thrnugh the use of interexchange carrier identification codes, except that the unblocking requirement shall not apply to mobile satellite services unless the Commission finds it is in the public interest. _ House amendment Under section 109 of the House amendment, Che Commission ' shall require providers of two-way sw•itched N•oice CMS to allow - their subscribers to access the telephone toll services Qrovider of cheir choice through the use of car*-rier identification codes. The ~ Commission rules will supersede the equal access, balloting and prescription requirements imposed by the `iF'J and the AT&T- \icCaw consenc decree. The Commission may esempt carriers or cIasses of carriers from the requirements of this section if it is con- sistent with the public interest, convenience, and necessity, and the ~ 141VU rederai KegisteG ",VOi. til, No. tiL / rriday, March 'L9, W'5 ! Notices . aooRESS: Direct all comments ro proposal also involves the acquisition of Directar. Bank Holdinq Company) 101 ` Docochy Conway, Fcdcral a nonbanking company, the review also Markct Strcct. San Francisco, California Communications, Room 234, 1919 M includes whether the acquisition of the 94105: St.. NW.. Washington, DC 20554 or via nonbanking company complics with the i. Central Coast Baricorp, Salinas, internet to dconway@fcc.gov. standards in section 4 of the BHC Act. California: to acquire 100 percent of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATiON CON7ACT: FOf including whcthcr the acquisition of the voting shares of Cypress Coast Bank. eciclilional itifortrrelion or cypies uC lfie nonbanking eorrpany can "reasonably Seasida California. information collections contact Dorothy be expected to produce benefits to the guard uf Cuvemurs uf ttie Fecieral Reserve Conway aC 202-418-0217 or via internet public. such as greater convenience, cystem. March 25, 1996. at dconway@fcc.gov. increased competition, or gains in Jennifer )ohnson. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: efriCieflCy, that outweigh passible DP~~ny .SPr.retary nfthr. Rnarrl. OMB Appmval Number. 3060-0003. adverse effecLS, such as undue [FR Doc. 96-7660 Ftled 3-28-96: 8:45 am] concen[~~ation uf resources, dea-eased ur Title: Application for Amateur unfair cornpetition, conflicts of BILLMO COOE C210-01~ Operator/Primary Station License. Form No.: FCC 6 10_ interests, or unsound banking practices" ' Type ofReview: Ectension of a (12 U.S.C. 1843). Any request for Sunshine Meeting currenciy approved collection. a hearing must be accorripanied by a RPSnpnndPnt.s: Tn(iividiiaiS or sta[emen[ of the reasons a written TlME AND DATE: 10:00 d.t71., Wednesday, households. presentation would not suff'ice in lieu of April 3, 1996. Number of Respondents:.93,000. a heazing, ideniifying specif`ically any PLAcE: Marriner S. Eccles Federal b;stimated '!'ime I'er Xesponse: 10 questions of fact that are in dispute. Reserve Board Building, C Street minutes. sumrnarizing the evidence [hat wouId ztltrance between 20th and 21st Streets Total Annual Burden: 15,438 hours. bc prescntcd at a hcaring, and indicating NW., tNashington, D.C. 20551. Needs and Uses: PCC Rules require how the party commenting would be STATUS: ClOSed. that appiicants file the FCC 610 to apply aggrieved by approval of the proposal. Cor a new,renewed or rrodif`ied license. Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking MATTERS TO BE CONSIDEr'tED: The form is required by the activities will be conducted lhtoughout I, personnel ac[ions (appointments. Communicaiions Act of 1934, as the United States. promocions, assignments. amended: International Treaties and Unless otherwise iioted. CDt11i1K't1I5 reassignments, and salary actions) FCC Rules - 47 CFR 97.17, 97.19, rcgarding cach of thcsc applications involving individual Federat Reserve • 97.511, aric1 97.519. must be received at the Re~erve Bank Sysletli ernpluyees. ' indicated or the off`ices of the Board of 2. nny items carried forward from a F'ederal C;ommuruca[ions C;ommission. Governors not later than A cil 22. 1996. William F. Cacon, p previously announced meeting. A. Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATTON: AcringSecrerary. Qohn J. Wixted. Jr., Vice President) 1455 (FR Doc. 96-7810 Filed 3-28-96; 8:45 amj East Sixth SU-eet, Cleveland. Ohio ur. Joseph R. Coyne, Assistant to the etLLro cooE c712-01-F 44101: Board: (202) 952-3204. You may call 1. Pennwnnd Rancnrp, (nc., (202) 452-3207, beginning at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: to become a approximately 5 p.m. [wo business days FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM bank holding company by acquiring 100 before this meeting, for a recorded percent of the voting shares of announcement af bank and bank Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Pennwood Savings Bank. Pittsburgh, holding company applications fviergers of Bank Holding Companies Peniisylvania. sc:heduled for the meeting. B. Fcdcral Rcscrvc Bank of Atlanta Daccd: March 27, 1946. The companies listed in this notice (Zane R. Kelley. Vice President) 104 Jennifer J. )ohnson. fiave applied to the Board For approval. Marietta Street. N.W.. Atlanta. Ceorgia pepury SeQecary efthe Board. pursuant to the Fiank Holding Company 30303: Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) 1. The Co/onial BancCroup, Inc.. IFR Doc. 96-7826 Filed 3-2T-96; 11:18 arn1. (BIIC Act), Regulation Y(12 CFR part ;v(ontgomery. Alabama; ro merge with gILLNO CODE 6210-01-P 225), and all other applicable statutes Commercial Bancorp of Georgia, inc., and regtilations to become a bank Lawrcnccvitlc. Ccorgia, and thcrcby holding company and/or to acquire ttie indirectly acquire Commercial Bank of GENERAL SERVICES assets or the ownership of, control of, or Ceorgia. Lawrencevilie, Georgia. ADMINISTRATION the power to vote shares of a bank or C. Federal Res2rve Bank of Dallas p(acement of Commercial Antennas on bank }iolding company and all of the (Cenie D. Short. Vice President) 2200 Federai Property banks ancl iwnLanking cocnpanies North Peacl Street, Dallas. Texas 7520 t- owncd by the bank holding company. 2272; AGEIVCY: Ceneral SefNices including the companies listed betow. 1. ;Llarlin Noldings, Ltd., N4ariin, Adminisiration. The applications lisied beIow, as well Texas: to become a bank holding acttoN: IVotice. as othec related filings required by the company by retaining 67.93 percent of Board, are available for immediate the voting shares of Central Financial suMMaRY: On August 10, 1995. Inspcction at the Fcdcral Rcscrvc $ank (3ancorp. Inc., Lorena, Texas; and President Clinton signed an Executive • Indicatcd. Oncc the application has thereby indirectly retain shares of Memorandum dirccting the hcads of all bccn acccptcd Cor proccssing, it will also Central Delawaze Financial Bancorp, departmcnts and agcncics to facilitatc ' be available for inspection at the ofl'ices Dover, De(aware: Lorena State Bank, acccss to Fcdcral propcrty for the oC the Board of Covernors. Interested Lorena. Texas: and Bank of Troy. Troy, purpose of siting mobile services persons may express their views in Texas. antennas. The General Services writing on the standards cnumcratcd in D. Fcdcral Rcscrvc Bank oFSan Administration, in coordination with the BHC Act (]2 U.S.C. ]842(c)). If the Francisco (Kenneth R. Binning, other Covernment departments and . . . r'ederai Kegiste~ VoL Eil, No. bL / rriday, March 'Gy, ~ ti / Notices 141U1 agcncics as wcll as wirclcss (nformation ndministntion, and othcr consistcnt with thc dcgrcc of comptcxity tclccommvnications industry rcicvant dcpartmcnts and agcncics. of thc casc. representatives. has developed the 3. Antennas on Federal buildings or S. Pirrrs and individuals interested in following procedures in Attachment A. land may not contain any advcrtising. placing commercial mobile services The President's memorandum and these 4. FPdPral proparty cioes nnt inrliicie antennas on Federal propecties should procedures imptement the requirements Iands held by che United States in crust contact the department or agency which oPsection 704(c) oFthe for individual or Native American tribal has custody and control of the property. Telecommunications Act of 1996. P.L. governments. (Cenerally, Federal buildings and 104-104. 5. Agencies shall retain discrecion to courthouses are controlled by the FoR FURTHER INFORMA71oN cONTACT: reject inappropriate siting requests. and (;enera! Services Adminisiration: assure adequate protection of public rnilitary posts and bases, by the James Herbert, Of~`ice of Property prope.rty and timely removal of . Department of Defense: Veterans' Acquisition and Realty Services. Public equipment and structures at the end of hospitaLs and clinics, by the Department - Buildings Service. General Services service. of Veteran's Affairs: and. National Parks. Acircunislraliun, 18th & F Streets. MV., 6. Aii procedures and mechanisrrss by the Department of InteriorJ Washington, DC 20405, telephone 202- adopted regarding access to Federal Below is a comprehensive listing of, • 501-0376. property shall be clear and simple so as the offices in [he headquarters of each Dated: March 25, 1996. to facilitate the eff`icient and npid build property holding department and David Batram, oiit of the national wireless agency. Individuals and firms interested .4dtng.4dmtnistrator ofGeneral Services communications infrasUVCture. Ul Placing antennas on specific 7. Unless otherwise prohibited by or FederalIy-owned properties should Attachment A-Gove rnment- Wide • inconsistent with Federal law. agencies Procedures for Placing Commercial shall charge fees based on market value contact the appropriate off'ice in writing Antennas on Federal PcopeRies for siting antennas on Federal property indicating their interesLS, iden[ify the property, and providing specific 1n accordance with section 704 (c) of and may use competitive procedures if ~formation on their proposai. These the Telecommunications Act of 1996. not all applicants can be off'ices will advise appticants on specific Pubiic Law 104-104, and President accommodated. application procedures/criteria, as well 8. The siting of moblle s2rvices Clinton's Au~ust 10, 1995, antennas should no[ be given priority ~ appcals proccsscs and refcr thcm to memorandum entitled "Facilitating (ocal site managers to make Access to Federa! Property for the Siting over other authorized uses of Federal determinations on suitability and other . of Mobile Services Anlennas" the bui.ld'uigs or land. arrangements for leases, licenses, _ following procedures shalI be followed 9• Al1 independenf regulatory permits or other legal instruments for by Executive departments and agencies: commissions and agencies are requested the siting of commercial antennas. to comply with these pcocedures. Guiding Principles In the irutances where the identity of Implcmcn[ing ilcUons the department or agency which has 1. Requests for the use of property. 1. Each Executive department and custody and control of a propeRy is righ[s-of-way, and easements by duly agency which operates and concrols reai unknown, individuals and firms may authorized providers should be granted Propcrty undcr spccif"ic statutory cnniaC.i IIIP. C~.P.f1P.fAI SP.Nt('P.S absent uaavoidable direct conflict with authority is ces.ponsible individually Eor Administration's Off'ice of Real the department's or agency's mission, or determining the programmatic impact of Property. This off'ice maintains a listing the current or planned use of the placing commercially owned antennas of all properties owned by the Federal property, righLs-of-way, and easements on their properties. Covernment world-wide and will refer in question. 2. Each department and agency inyuirers to lfie apprupriale c]epartrrtenl 2. Upon request, and to the extent sl~ould review tl~eir rules, policies. atid cr agencv. Contact can be made by permitted by law and where practicable, procedures for allowing commercial use ~vriting the OCf'ice of Rea1 Property (MP). executive departments and agencies of their properties acid modify them as Room 1300. General Services shall make available Federal necessary to assure they fuliy support Administration. 18th & F Streets. NW.. Government buildings and lands for the the siting of commercial antennas as Washington. DC 20405 or by telephone siting of mobile services antennas. This provided in these procedures. at (202) 501-0176. To assist in should be done in accordance wich 3. Each department and agency identifying the appropriate department Federal, State and local Iaws and shuulcl aa}ure lhal appropriale u(T`icials or agency inquirers should provide the regulatiorLS, and consistent with within local, regional, and national state, cicy/county, building/property national securi[y concerns (including off`ices who are responsibie for the siting name and mailing address of the minimizing mutual electromagnetic of commercial mobile services antennas property in question. interactions), public health and safety are aware of and support the President's qgency Point of Concact for the concerns, environmental and aesthetic directives on facilitating access to Placement oFAntennas on Federal concerns, preservation of historic Eederal property. Buitdings buildings and monuments, protection of 4. Preliminary decisions on the natural and cultural resources. acceptability of proposed sitings should Federat Communications Commission. protection of nattonal park and be rendered as soon as possible but no Uperations Management and Services wilderness values, protection of later than 60 days after receipt of a Division-1110B. Room 404. 1919 ht Natlona( Wildlife Refuge systerrs, and request. Denials of requests should Street. NW.. Washington, DC 20554, subJect to any Pederal requirements provide the applicant with an (202) 418-1950 promulgated by the agency managing expianation of the reasons for denial. National Aeronautics & Space the facility and the Eederal Preliminary approvals should cite all Administration, Facilities Engineering Communications Commisslon, the conditions which must be met to render Division. NASA Headquarters, Code Fcdcrsl nviation Administration, final approval. Final dccisions should J;C. 300 E Strcct. SW.. Washington. DC ;Vatlona! Telecommuntcatlons and be rendered in a timely manner 20546-0001. (202) 358-1090 K 141UL rederai Kegist-` Vol. til, No. tiL / rriday, March Ly, iti /!Votices Nacional Archivcs & Rccords Placc Building, Washington. DC SuMMARY: Thc Dcpartmcnt of Hcalth and ~ Administration. Management Services 20004, (202) 514-2318 Hu n Services (HHS) is (a) providing Division. Room 2320, 8601 Adelphi U.S. Department of Labor, OCf'ice of not ee of the second meecing of the Road, Callege Park. MD 20740-6001. Facility Management, Room S 1521/ Comission on Dietary Supptement (301) 713-6470 OFM. 200 Constitution Avenue.,NW•. La ,els, and (b) soliciting oral and National Science Foundation, Property Washington. DC 20210. (202) 210- written comments. AdminisVator. Room 295, 4201 6434 DATES: (1) The Conuiussion will meet Wiison Boulevard. Arlington, VA U.S. DeQartment of State, Off`ice of Real APri{ 26, 1936. Crom 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 22230. (703) 306-1123 PropertY, Room 1878. 2201 C Street. P.m. Pacific Standard Time at [he Tennessee Valley Authocity, Facilities NW.. Washington, DC 20520, (202) Holiday Inn Fisherman's Wharf. 1,,300 Services-Asset Management. 1101 647-2810 Columbus Avenue, San Francisco; Market Street. Chattanooga, TN U.S. Department of TranspoRation, ~alifornia 94133; (2) Written comments 37402-Z801. (423) 751-2127 OfFice of the Secretary, Headquarters on the scope and intent of ehe U.S. Army Coips of Engineers. Spacc Managc.mcn[ Staff. 400 lth Commission's objectives may be Management and nitpn.zal nivi5ion in Street, SW.. Washington. DC 20590, submitted up to 5:00. p.m E.S.T. on June the Real Estate Directora[e. Room (202) 366-2472 30, 1996. 4224. 20 Massachusetts Avenue. NW.. U.S. Department of Treasury, OfFice of FOR FURTHER IkFpR,,tAT10N CONTACT: - Washington. DC 20314-1000, (202) Real and Personal Propetty KennPth i). Fither, Ph.n., F.XP.Ct1f1VP. 761--0511 Management. OfFice of che Deputy Duector, Commission on Dietary U.S. Departmen[ of Agriculture. Assisiant Secc-etary for Depai'trnental Supplement Labels, Office of Disease Property Management Division. .Ag Financial and Management. Room prevention and Health Promo[ion. Room Rox 9840, Wa.shingtnn, nC: 20250, 6140-ANX. 1500 Pennsylvania 738G, Hubert H. Humphrey Building, (202) 72Q-5225 Avenue, NW.. Washington, DC 20220. ZOQ Independeilce Ave., SW.. U.S. Department of Commerce. Real (202) 622-0910 Washington. D.C. 20201. (202) 205- Estate and Management Support U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, 5968. Division. Room 1323. 14th and Land Management Service-0234(;, Constitution Avenue, NW.. 810 Vermont Avenue, NW. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Washington. DC 20230, (202) 432- Washington. DC 20420, (202) 565- Commission's Task 3580 5026 public Law 103-417, Section 12. U.S. Department of DeCense. II.S. F.nvirnnrr~nral Protxtion AgPnr.y, authorized [he establishmert[ of a (Commercial com{~anies who wish to Architecture. Engineering and Real Commissiori on Dietary Supplement place antennas on DOD property Fstate Branch. Facilities'Managemen[ Labels whose seven members have been should first contact that property's and Services Division (3204), 401 M inted h the President. The Inslallaliun Cuuunacicler. If unkuowri, Street, SW.. Washington. DC 20460, aPPo Y please contact the Following office.) (202) 260-2160 appointments to the Commission by che Deputy Assistant Secretary o#' DeFense U.S. General Services Adminisuation. President and the establishment of the (Installations). Attention: Director. Off'ice of Property Acquisition and Commission by the Secretary of Heal[h Installations Management, 3300 Realty Services-PE, Room 2340. 18th and Human Services reflect the Defense Pentagon, Washington. DC & F Streets. NW., Washington. DC commitment of the President and the 20301-3340. (703) 604-4616 20405. (202) 501-1025 Secre[ary to the development of a sound U.S. Departctient uC Eclucaliun. OCCice ui U.S. Government Pricitirig Office. Office and consistent regulatory policy on the Assistant Secretary for of Admiiiistrative Support. Stup OA. labcling of dictary supplcmcnts. Management. Room 216. 600 Washington. DC 20401-0501. (202) T1ie Commission is charged with Independence Ave.. SW.. Washington. 512-1650 conduccing a study and providing DC 20202 U.S. Information Agency, The OCf"ice of recornrnendatibns for regulation of label U.S. Department of Energy, Office oF Administration-(B/A). Cohen claims and statements for dietary Field Managemen[-FM20. 1000 Building, 330 Independence Avenue, supplements, including the use of Independence Avenue, SW.. SW., Washington. UC 'L0547, (ZU'L) suppletnental litecature iii cuiinec[iuTi Washington. DC 20585. (202) 536- 619-3988 with thcir salc and, in addition. 1191 U.S. Pustal Service. Realty Asset proccdures for cvaluation of labcl U.S. Department of Health and Human Managernent. 475 L'Enfant Plaza claims. The Commission is expected ro Services. Division of Special Programs West. SW.. Washington. DC 20260- evaluate how best to provide truthfui. ,Coordination. Room 4700, 300 6433 (202) 268-5765 scientifically valid, and non-misleading Inde endence Avenue, SW., information to consumers in ocder that Washington. DC 'LU'LU1, ('LU'L) 61y- [FR Doc. 96-7666 Filed 3-ZS-96: 8:45 aml they may make informed health care 0426 aiuMO cooE ceso-n-++ choices for themselves and their U.S. Department of Interior. Bureau of Camilies. The Commission s study report Land 144anagement. Room 1040 L.S.. may inctude recommendations on 1849 C. Screet, NW., Washington, DC OEPARTMENT OF HEALTN ANd legislation. if appropriate and necessary. 20240-9998, (202) 452-7777 HUMAN SERVICES Announcement of Meeting U.S. Department of Interior, 1Vational Dieta Su lement Labels The Commission's second meeting Park Service. Radio Frequency ry PP er. Denver Service Center. Commission; Meetings wilt be March 8. 1996, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 Manag 12795 W. Alameda Parkway, P.O. Box Ac~cY: Utlice ot' Uisease t'revention p•m. Cen[ral Time. The meeting will be 25237, Denver, CO 80225-0237, (303) and Healch Promocion, HHS. held at the Radisson Hotel Salt Lake 969-2084 AcTtorv: Comtn.ission on Dietary City AirpoR Coventary Room (Utafi). U.S. Department of Justice. Justice The agenda wi11 inciude (a) oral Buildings Services. Suite 1060. 1331 Supplement Labels: Notice of ~vteeting comments from interested pareies and 43; Opportunity ro Providc Commcnes. Penrsylvania Avenue, NW., Nacional the general Public. (b) identiF'ication of xe: - CML RECEIVED JUL 2 2 igi lmilil.~~ 1660 Lincoln Street, Suite 2100 *Denver, Colorado 802642101 • Phone (303)831-6411, Fax (303)860-8175 e T0: Mayors of CML Member Municipalities ; Managers (or Clerks in Municipalities Which Have No Manager) of CML Member Municipalities FROM: Bill Ray, CML President and Cortez City Manager SUBJECT: 1999 Colorado Municipal League Member Dues DATE: July 20, 1998 In order to assist you in preparing your 1999 municipal budget, we are providing you with your 1999 dues figure - please consult the attached tables. For those officials interested in the details, an explanation of the factors and data used in computing municipal dues for 1999 is on the back of this page. Statements will be sent in September or October 1996, but municipalities may pay before statements are issued if they so desire. I trust that your municipality and its officials have benefitted significantly from the many services and collective representation of municipal interests which the League has provided over the years. CML continues to work towards representing the collective interests of municipalities across Colorado in the best manner possible. When you consider the array of services provided by CML, I think you will agree that the benefits justify the dues you pay. The services provided by CML include information and inquiry assistance throughout the year, training workshops, annual conference, district meetings, a broad range of technical publications, state legislative advocacy and policy development, amicus briefs in appellate cases, and review and advocacy regarding various rules and regulations promulgated by state and federal agencies. A priority carried out since 1992 and planned for 1999 is assisting municipalities with implementation of the TABOR Amendment. Since passage of TABOR, CML has written technical publications, sponsored numerous workshops, answered hundred of inquiries, participated in several court actions interpreting the Amendment, and lobbied various implementing legislation. In the last several years we have added a number of new services and benefits for our member municipalities. Included among these are the Elected Officials' Training Certificate ' and a Civics Curriculum Program to facilitate teaching of civics in public schools. In 1998 CML Scheduled spring outreach meetings throughout the state enabling municipal officials ~ and CML staff to discuss municipal topics and issues and CML services without municipal officials having to travel long distances. We plan to continue these outreach meetings next year. These new programs were achieved without adding any additional staff. . In terms of hard dollars, CML has played an instrumental role in increasing the revenues received by municipalities across Colorado. Examples of these include lottery funds and increased revenues for local transportation. In addition, CML has opposed federal and state mandates which impose additional costs on local governments and their taxpayers. Recent C:ZA\DUES.MEM (over) examples of activity where CIVIL has played a major role include: defeating legislation which would have restricted municipal land use powers, defeating legislation which would have restricted municipal condemnation authority, amending and defeating legislation which would have dramatically increased governmental liability, helping to pass comprehensive workers' compensation reform legislation which eliminated the need for rate increases, and passing municipal powers legislation which enhanced the authority of municipalities. Proactive objectives which the CIVIL Executive Board identified for 1998 included electric and natural gas deregulation, transportation financing, land use, tax reform, lottery extension and housing. The coming year will be another important one for Colorado's cities and towns. The League will continue to push for beneficial state and federal policies and oppose measures detrimental to cities and towns. And, while it is impossible to predict all of the issues affecting municipalities which will arise in the upcoming year, League efforts will continue to reduce or avoid federal and state mandated costs, protect the revenue base of municipalities to enable provision of local services, and protect the authority of municipalities to address local needs. Should you have any questions regarding your dues or League services, please contact Ken Bueche, executive director, or Katy Priest, office manager. Explanation of 1999 Municipal Dues Computations The dues factors for 1999 are the same which were applicable for 1998. The data on which factors are measured have been updated. The factors and data approved by the Executive Board for 1999 include: Population (using Department of Local Affairs estimates as of July 1, 19961: Population basis: 1 - 50,000 .1575 per capita 50,001 - 100,000 .1365 100,001 - 150,000 .1155 150,001 - 200,000 .0945 200,001 - 250,000 .0735 250,001 - 300,000 .0525 300,001 + .0105 Assessed valuation: 22 thousandths of a mill for the first $1 billion in assessed valuation, and 11 thousandths of a mill for over $1 billion in assessed valuation. (The figures are based on assessed valuation as of January 1, 1997, from the Division of Property Taxation.) State sales tax collections: 75.4 cents per thousand for the first $5 million of state sales tax collections within the municipality, and 37.52 cents per thousand for over $5 million. (These figures are based on state sales tax collections for calendar 1997 per Colorado Department of Revenue.) The sales tax basis is "0" for municipalities for which the state does not disclose sales tax collection figures. Base membership fee: $185.00. No member municipality's dues may be increased annually more than 20 percent or $4,000, whichever is less. I/10/98 1999 DOES BEGISTEB Page 1 $185 Base Pee Incladed in Totals. PQPDLATION ASSBSSBD VALOATION SALES TAg C01bECTED TOTAb 1948 1949 . M08ICIPAbITY BASIS AflQDIT BASIS AdOUNT BASIS ANOOIT BBFOflE CAP DOES DOES Agnilar 614 41.44 1490.95 32.86 41.05 30.45 346.25 333.53 f 346.25 I Akron 1,161 211,36 5446.31 119.82 352.21 265.51 841.14 826.17 = 841.14 Alamosa 8,482 1335.41 35151.35 186.66 3143.12 2822.16 5130.34 4956.68 ; 5,136.34 Alia 201 31.66 1810.31 39.83 26,13 14.10 216.14 256.98 = 276,19 Antonito 916 144.21 1649.31 31.39 101.15 16.21 442.92 439.65 $ 442.92 Artiba 260 40.95 103.53 15.48 53.86 40.61 282.04 251,30 s 282.04 Arvada 41,415 14415.46 546195.84 13116.31 18314.04 8161.32 36484.63 34541.73 $ 36,484.03 Aspen 5,524 810,03 462204.16 10168.50 10280.33 5151.18 16914.11 15625.61 f 16,914,11 Ault 1,245 203.46 6065.41 132.12 109,01 82.24 663.32 554.13 $ 603.32 Aaroca 246,039 28583.81 1509447.11 21603.92 66034.55 26612,04 83044.83 18010.06 $ 82,610.06 Avon 2,166 426.14 95534.55 2101.16 4044.12 3649.21 5762.22 3646.80 f 4,316.16 Basalt 1,921 281.15 46054.43 1013.20 1366.64 1030.65 2516.40 1112.34 f 2,126.81 9ayfield 1,551 244.28 10249.84 226.51 313.12 281.33 931.14 818.40 ~ 931.14 Bennett 1,463 309.11 7051.62 155.14 146,12 110.63 159.94 144.01 ; 159.94 9erthoad 3,859 601,14 26494.26 582.81 611.17 460.82 1836.44 1664.14 S 1,836.49 Bethnne 119 28.14 434.34 9.56 3.62 2.28 225.03 222.90 f 225.03 Black Hawk 251 39.53 12422,71 1664.36 354.60 266.92 2095.15 151.30 S 908.16 Blanca 292 45.49 1440.51 31.69 23.40 17.64 280.33 215.39 ~ 280.33 Blae fliver 545 93.11 11144.61 391.58 12.62 9.52 614.81 617.32 ~ 679.81 Bonanza City 18 2.93 113.65 3.82 261.88 191,66 384.11 216.08 ; 331.29 Boone 357 56.23 110.15 15.64 4.41 3.10 260.51 254.16 ; 260.57 ' 8oaldec 91,816 13591.01 1352404.18 25816.45 45301.03 18893.20 58545.12 56189.01 ~ 58,545.12 ` Bow flar 908 143.61 9982.65 219.62 6.60 0.66 541.63 549.95 f 541.63 9tanson 56 8.82 195.36 4.30 0.00 0.00 198.12 194,65 f 199.12 Breckenridge 1,120 210.90 156141.26 3304.21 5662.13 3496.14 7756.25 1043.21 ; 1,156.25 Brighton 15,835 2444.01 91324.21 2141.24 5716.13 4035.13 8858,98 8253.16 ~ 8,858.98 Brookside 222 34.91 688.23 15.14 0.06 0.66 235.11 232.55 ~ 235.11 ~ 1/10/98 1949 DOES BEGISTEB Page 2 Z185 Base Fee Incladed in Totals. POPUTATI6N ASSESSED VALDATIOM SAbES TA% CQLIECTED TOTAb 1998 1999 dOYICIPAbITY BASIS AM009T BASIS Ad00IT BASIS AHODYT BEPQBE CAP OOES DUES Brooefield 32,634 5134.86 211342.69 5969.54 6861.91 4448.33 15142.12 14346.46 ; 15,142.12 Brash 4,999 781.34 32363.10 111.49 987.03 144.22 2428.55 2364.18 ~ 2,428.55 ~ Bnena Vista 2,141 331.21 21389.84 410.58 940.23 708.93 1701.12 1446.51 ~ 1,701.12 9arlington 3,054 481.00 12138.12 280.24 1388.51 1046.94 1993.18 1819.62 ; 1,993,18 Calhan 649 102.22 3582.28 18.81 355.36 261,44 633.41 561.11 ~ 662.13 Caspo 119 18.14 168,46 3.12 4.84 3.64 211.15 211.35 : 211.15 Canon City 15,419 2431.44 69406.64 1537.45 4211.15 3224.91 1385.86 1638.20 $ 1,385.86 Carbondale 4,214 663.11 42156.48 921.44 1446.12 1090.83 2866.91 2320.45 $ 2,185.14 Castle flock 14,230 2241.22 140394.06 3088.61 1868.36 4846.21 10361.1Q 8944.51 ~ 14,361.10 Cedaredge 1,192 282.24 9422,36 201.29 268.51 202.46 816.99 192,88 ; 816,99 Center 2,345 369.34 6961.04 153.21 306.30 230.45 438.56 952.31 $ 438.56 Central City 314 59.69 47913.11 1055,42 320.48 241,64 1541.76 1124.84 = 1,349.51 CheraW 214 43.16 445.61 9.86 29.95 22.58 260.54 263.68 ; 266.54 Chetry Hills 9illage 6,201 416,66 138588.05 3048.94 182.93 131.93 4348.52 4116.18 ; 4,348,52 Cheyenne Wells 1,126 111.34 3116.19 68.56 201.20 151.10 582.61 613.02 = 582.61 Coal Cteek 191 30.09 504.64 11,21 0.00 0.00 226.30 223.42 f 226.30 Cokedale 129 20.32 254.89 5.61 0.00 0.00 216.43 209.31 ; 210.43 Collbran 583 91.82 1190.36 26,19 69.37 52.30 355.32 305.26 S 355.32 Colorado Springs 329,002 31504.52 2193481.19 41133.81 116015.13 45445.39 119168.18 101516.13 f 105,516.13 Colnabine Valley 1,181 186.95 16528.11 363.62 78.19 54,41 194.48 151.43 ~ 194,98 Coo`erce Citp 11,211 2110.13 186101.10 3415.42 11463.81 6112.11 13043.81 12213.44 ; 13,043.91 Cortez 8,129 1280.32 46381.91 1020.40 3836.99 2888.51 5374,29 5133.25 ; 5,314.29 Craig 8,101 1311.39 34362.61 154.66 2831.44 2135.32 4446.33 4214.44 ; 4,446.33 • Crapford 267 42.05 1303.09 28.61 26.24 19.18 215.51 266.66 f 215.51 Creede 408 64.26 2588.61 56.45 128.03 96.53 402.15 383.77 ; 402.15 Crested Bntte 1,067 168.05 34634.15 162.06 1016.18 811.89 1927.01 1850.78 f 1,927.01 Crestone 68 10.11 291.36 6.41 28.19 21.26 223.38 211.64 ~ 223.38 1/10/49 1994 DOES flEGISTEfl Page 3 =185 Base Fee Inclnded in Totals. POPDLATIOA ASSESS6? VALOATIOV SALES TA% COLbECYED TOPAb 1998 1999 BUBICIPAbITY BASIS AflQDIT BASIS AK00?T BASIS ANQDIT BEF68E CAP DOES DOES Cripple Creek 1,014 164.94 54684.50 1203.06 538.62 406.12 1964.12 1401.15 # 1,681.38 Crook 141 22.21 332.05 1.31 28.18 21.25 235.16 238.41 ~ 235.16 Crouley 252 39.69 316.44 6.83 6.61 4.98 236.50 231.00 s 236.50 Dacono 2,345 369.34 1069.51 155.53 115.81 132.56 842,43 810.40 ; 842.43 De Beque 330 51.48 1246.09 21.41 10.58 1.48 212.31 259.48 : 212.31 Deer Trail 509 80.11 1363,92 30.01 19.61 14.14 309.46 305.59 = 309.96 Del Yorte 1,149 283.19 4040.52 88.89 241.41 186.55 143.62 155.21 ; 143.62 Delta 4,108 141.51 24206.70 532.55 2294.02 1733.46 3192,52 2911.63 f 3,192.52 Denver 441,001 33568.51 5024633.63 66325.41 236466.44 90616.21 196695.15 122111.60 ; 126,111.00 Dillon 698 109.94 30871.08 619,16 832.26 621.52 1601.62 1344.63 ~ 1,601.62 Dinosaar 340 53.55 676.34 14.88 56.95 42.94 246.31 281.63 ~ 246.31 Dolores 1,034 162.85 5303.12 116,68 111.63 129,41 593.45 514.44 f 593.95 llove Creek 640 168.61 2684.20 54.16 161.31 126.15 418.99 459.69 s 418.44 ?arango 13,991 2203,58 114388.06 3836.54 9855.21 9591.61 11816.19 10890.14 ; 11,816.19 Eads 834 131.36 1483.68 32.63 99.18 14.48 423.46 432.34 f 423.46 Eagle 2,194 345.56 31421,91 102,41 1386.11 1045,11 2218.14 1101.76 S 2,049,31 Eaton 2,344 311.06 14204.47 312.50 444.64 335.30 1209.85 1041.63 ; 1,209.85 Eckley 218 34.34 531.18 11.69 11.01 8.35 239.31 240.14 S 239.31 Edgewater 4,660 133.45 23415.92 516.41 1113.66 839.10 2215.12 2241.91 f 2,215.12 Elizabeth 1,116 185.22 8080,13 111.16 325.96 245.17 193.76 683.62 ~ 193.16 It 6tpire 431 61.88 1962.61 43.18 46.68 30.61 326.13 320.71 = 326.13 Englewood 31,092 4896.49 305188.38 6127.34 44181.21 18698.16 30501.50 28035,34 ~ 30,501.50 Erie 1,166 218.14 17093.43 316.66 210.44 158.61 491.87 908.00 ; 991.81 Estes Park 4,291 615,20 74359.51 1635.91 3220.87 2428.54 4924.65 4499.51 ; 4,924.65 Evans 1,088 1116.36 32386.48 112.51 1056.43 746.55 2810.42 2661.94 f 2,810.42 Fairplay 531 83.63 5650.27 124.31 116.39 133,00 525.94 456.04 s 525.44 Pederal Heights 9,554 1504.15 32146.13 126.43 2954.07 2231.14 4641.32 4558.88 ~ 4,641.32 7/10/98 1999 DOES flEGISTEfl Page 4 =185 Base Fee Inclnded in Totals. P6POLATION ASSESSEO VALOATIOY SALES TAl COLLECTED TOTAL 1449 1949 BONICIPALITY 9ASIS AtiUUNT BASIS Atl009T BASIS Ati00?T BEFOBE CAP DOES DUES , Firestone 1,563 246.11 6302,31 138.65 53.15 40.53 610.35 563.66 f 610.35 Flagler 511 90.88 1951.56 42,93 110.33 83.19 402.00 342,11 S 402.00 Fleiing 408 64.26 845.16 19.71 10.11 8.12 211.04 211.94 f 211.09 Florence 3,932 619.29 13215.44 240,14 388.98 293.29 1388.32 1285.55 f 1,388.32 Fort Collins 163,433 15154.26 882869.42 19423.13 41431.34 11439,04 52201.43 45469.39 ; 52,261.43 Fort Lapton 5,112 899.64 64503.49 1419,08 1431.32 1083,74 3581.46 3268.40 ; 3,587.46 Fort tlorgan 10,511 1656.43 16116.61 1614.51 2816.11 2123.80 5639.14 5204.14 s 5,634.14 Foantain 13,333 2049,45 65410.97 1516.04 2084.52 1511.13 5312.12 4811.93 ; 5,312,12 Fowler 1,181 186.01 2980.10 65.56 113.66 55.10 522.21 514.53 = 522.21 Fogfield 513 90.25 1575.86 166.61 38.13 29.20 411.12 451.33 ~ 411.12 Fraser 687 168.10 10269.00 224.66 418.03 366.43 818.24 716.43 f e7e.24 Frederick 1,498 235.94 14043.24 308.45 292.30 220.39 950.28 711,89 f 861,41 Frisco 2,564 403.83 69806.77 1535.15 3312.96 2491.43 4622.51 4090.14 ~ 4,622.51 Fruita 4,683 131.51 20143.81 456.36 613.82 508,06 1881.00 1619.31 ; 1,981.06 Carden Citp 266 41.40 3022.43 66.49 689.04 514.54 812.42 144.91 ~ 812.42 Genoa 148 31.18 419.91 9.24 5.45 4.11 229.53 228.93 ; 229.53 Georgetown 976 153.12 4164.50 214.82 211.05 204.31 151.41 140.44 ; 151.41 Gilcrest 1,162 183.01 3152.61 69.36 13.61 55.55 492,42 415.58 ; 492.42 Glendale 2,944 463.68 92637.44 2038.04 5148.31 4050.19 6737.50 5992.63 ; 6,731.50 C1enWOOd Springs 1,138 1218.14 101151.41 2215.46 9041.01 5288,46 8911.66 8235.80 ; 8,411.66 Golden 15,418 2428.34 157506.15 3465.02 8516.10 5111.15 11190.10 4930.03 ; 11,190.10 , Granada 536 94.42 180,03 17.16 31.18 25.49 315.01 304.04 s 315.01 Granby 1,161 192.56 9846.56 216.62 523.86 394.49 419.47 891.45 ; 979.41 Grand Jnnction 40,542 6385.36 316014.29 6953.63 28691.13 12433.19 25951.19 23110.88 f 25,451•19 Grand lage 303 41.72 16925.36 312.36 404.67 305.12 910.20 794.69 = 916.20 Greelep 61,410 10251.41 408033.55 8916.14 21204.11 4850.01 29263.21 26997.20 $ 29,263.21 Green Honntain Falls 800 126.00 5401.49 129.83 46.64 35.20 476.04 449.40 ; 476.04 1/10J98 1949 DDBS flBGISTEB Page S :185 Base Fee Incladed in Totals. P6POLATIOX ASSESSED VALDATIOY SALES TAI C01b@CTED TOTAL 1498 1999 HUYICIPALITY BASIS ANQOYT BASIS Afl00gT BASIS Atl60NT BEFOflE CAP DOBS DDES - Greenwood Village 11,912 1885.59 530430.41 11669.48 12143.08 6450.08 26140.15 18236.58 $ 20,140.15 Grover 142 22.36 294.33 6,48 3.00 2.26 216.10 214,41 ; 216.10 Gunaison 5,155 811.91 34521.92 864.61 2516.82 1442.42 3804.45 3450.26 ; 3,804.45 Gypsni 2,368 312.96 33624.83 139,15 316.12 283.59 1581.30 1192.61 ; 1,431.13 Hartian 112 11.64 120.04 2.64 0.00 0.00 205.28 204.58 : 205.28 HasWell 83 13,01 223.01 4.91 1.22 5.44 208.42 205.89 s 208.42 Hagtan 1,011 160.19 3455.63 16.02 202.08 152.31 573.57 544.60 s 513.51 Hayden 1,605 252.79 1760.89 110.14 343.89 254.29 867.81 120.91 ~ 865.16 Hillrose 260 40.95 662.50 14.58 1.03 .78 241.30 226.43 s 241.36 Holly 894 141.54 1844.09 40.51 114.41 86.31 453.41 441,34 ; 453.41 Holyoke 2,092 329.49 8025.71 116.57 503.20 314.41 1010,41 491.43 S 1,616.41 Hooper 122 19,21 191.80 6.42 1.30 ,98 211,61 208.11 ~ 211.61 Hot Salphar Springs 418 65.84 2836.54 62.40 40.97 36.89 344,13 323.00 ~ 344.13 flotchkiss 884 139.23 3460.08 85.80 281.21 212.08 622.11 915.13 ; 622.11 Hndson 1,642 111.44 4845.41 106.61 122.85 92.63 556.23 504.19 s 556,23 Hngo 197 125.53 2192,14 48.24 118.49 99,34 449.11 432,65 s 448.11 Idaho Springs 2,043 321.11 15033.51 330.14 134.55 553.85 1391.36 1282.61 ~ 1,391.36 Ignacio 167 120.80 3342.14 13.53 146.58 110.52 489.85 456.94 S 489.85 Iliff 146 30.81 452.19 9.96 10.56 1.46 233.14 221.93 s 233.19 Jatestown 211 43.63 2159,35 41.51 16.04 1.61 283.14 211.54 ; 283,14 JohnstoWn 2,133 335.45 12616.11 218.89 242.84 183.10 452.94 143.46 ; 592.15 Jnlesbarg 1,214 201.44 4292.64 94.44 315.92 283,44 164.33 149.34 ; 164,33 Keenesbnrg 675 106.31 3041.89 61.05 105,44 14.54 431.91 404.29 f 431.91 Kersey 1,011 169,63 4856.02 106.83 65.15 49.12 510.58 451.21 ~ 516.58 Ki` 18 12.24 113.40 3.83 2.46 2.23 203.34 202.31 ~ 203.34 Riowa 420 66.15 2532.91 55.12 112.29 129.91 436.18 400,45 ~ 436.15 Kit Carson 293 46.15 851.98 18.88 29.02 21.88 211.90 211.93 = 211.90 7/10/98 1944 DUES BBGISTEfl Page 6 ;185 Base Fee Incladed in Totals. POPOLATION ASSESSEU VAbDATION SALBS TA% CObbECTEO TOTAb 1948 1999 BUYICIPAIITY BASIS Afl00YT BASIS AtlQOBT BASIS AflOUBT BEFOBE CAP DOES DUES Krei,ling 1,403 220.91 8208.48 180.59 218.54 210.62 146.58 645.22 ~ 146.58 ba Jara 166 120.64 1206.45 48.54 88.13 66.40 421.09 420,58 ; 421.04 ~ La Janta 8,014 1211.65 23945.13 526.81 2458.61 1853.84 3831.30 3694.68 ~ 3,831.30 ba Salle 1,864 293.58 8059.16 111.30 347.62 262.11 911.49 861,12 S 911.99 1a Veta BOS 127.26 5861.45 129.04 149.48 112.11 554.06 495.58 ; 554.66 bafapette 18,855 2469.66 122724.43 2100.05 3400.92 2564.29 8419.60 1482.64 ; 8,419.00 Lake City 343 54.62 9043.65 116.46 114.04 131.23 541.21 465.32 s 547.21 bakeside 11 1.73 1814.01 113.23 1085.15 818.20 1178.11 1326,71 f 1,118.11 Lakewood 131,681 14052.85 1044246.66 22451.26 48210.82 19962.10 61101.81 51161.46 ; 61,101.81 lavar 8,563 1348.67 24023.12 528.51 2419.48 1824.29 3886.41 3153.20 S 3,886.41 Larkspnr 419 15.44 2161.86 41.56 114.46 131.54 434.55 403.21 ; 439.55 Las Ani`as 2,812 442.89 3932.96 96,53 276.78 208.69 923.11 892.54 f 923.11 Leadville 3,262 513.76 14610.18 309.56 518.50 340.95 1399.21 1210.51 ~ 1,399.21 limon 2,269 351.31 10431.03 229.61 899.88 678.51 1450.49 1391.59 ; 1,450,49 Littleton 38,988 6140.61 322089.54 7D85.91 25846.13 11591.41 25403.05 22843.19 Z 25,003.05 Lochbnie 1,230 143,12 3043.49 66.91 36.53 21.54 473.24 461,01 ; 413,24 Log Lane Village 936 131.61 1265.36 21.84 22.08 16.65 361.16 361,42 f 361.16 Lone Tree 4,028 634.41 65050.84 1431.12 3144.09 2408.34 4658,81 1164.40 ~ 2,123.29 bongaont 58,592 9041.81 499333.22 16485.33 11140.93 8325.28 28543.42 25484.25 s 28,543.42 Louisville 17,751 2196.13 234142.00 5164.32 5424.11 3929.31 12015.43 10509.11 s 12,015,43 boveland 44,461 1603.55 360165.65 1423.64 14367.83 1284.81 22341.01 20363.54 ; 22,391.01 Lyons 1,432 225.54 11615,64 243.61 379.24 255.99 940.15 841.02 ; 940.15 tlanassa 1,024 161.28 1453.04 31.41 28.23 21.24 399.53 341.43 f 349.53 ~ Mancos 994 156.56 5599.44 123.19 110.28 128,39 543.13 550.43 S 593.13 tlaniton Springs 5,165 813.44 35524.44 781.66 1015.43 165.63 2545.18 2301.84 ; 2,545.18 Manzanola 453 11.35 662.42 14.51 19.64 14.85 285.11 290.03 ~ 285,17 tlarble 78 12.24 1630.92 35.88 8.85 6.67 234.84 230.75 ~ 234.84 l/10J98 1994 DUES RBGISTEB Page 1 ;185 8ase Fee Inclnded in Totals. POPUbATION ASSESSBD VAb0ATI08 SAbES TAi COLbECTED TOTAb 1998 1449 MOYICIPAIITY BASIS A86DNT BASIS AtlOUIT BASIS AflQONT 8BF6flE CAP QDES DOES ~ dead 818 128.84 12849.25 283.18 41.41 68.92 666.54 475.56 ; 574.27 deeker 2,406 318.94 8804.94 193.11 381,13 292.35 1050.00 968.89 = 1,050.00 tlerino 236 36.23 820.11 18.04 22.15 16.10 255.41 248.21 ~ 255.91 gilliken 1,190 281.93 6326.44 134.18 59.30 44.11 650.82 601,86 : 650.82 Hintarn 1,099 113.04 10751.42 236.54 366.19 216.56 871.19 792.41 = 811.19 doffat 116 18.21 220,27 4.85 3.02 2.28 210,34 210.10 $ 210,34 8onte Vista 4,662 134.26 13813,12 303.90 916.14 690.81 1413.91 1982.22 S 1,413.41 Nontezaia 12 11.34 121,32 15.81 2.08 1.51 213.78 209.30 f 213.18 Montrose 11,816 1560.61 41344.13 2141.57 6112.11 4412.61 8549.25 1895.51 s 8,599.25 Monntent 1,241 196.40 19955.64 439.02 1068.00 805.27 1625.10 1361.21 ~ 1,625.10 Morrison 533 83.45 5221.11 114.88 302.16 228.28 612.11 566.26 f 612.11 goantain View 556 81.57 3310,93 12.84 148.56 112.01 451.42 440.89 ; 457.42 8oantain Village 554 88.04 100696.56 2262.12 525.11 346.43 2871.60 2163.62 s 2,546.35 flt. Crested Bntte 361 56.86 38416,41 856.16 800.48 603.56 1101.58 1690.54 ; 1,101,58 Yatnrita 418 15.28 1215.02 50.05 122.25 42.18 402.51 350.83 ; 402.51 Nederland 1,261 198.61 12756.22 280.64 322,30 243.01 901.26 826,15 ; 401.26 Bew Castle 1,446 221.14 11213.94 248.03 214.18 161.44 822.72 633.27 f 154.42 Northglenn 28,664 4514.58 142618.13 3131.60 6174.62 4210.12 12041.40 11948.14 $ 12,041.90 8orwood 518 91.63 2909.91 64.01 108.16 81.55 421.61 426.40 = 421.61 Nacla 129 114.82 2118.45 46.61 120.65 90,91 431.39 425.99 ~ 431.34 Nann 362 51.02 1116.64 31.11 24.80 18.10 298.48 219.93 f 248.48 6ak Creek 114 122.69 3851.96 84.14 44.00 10.88 463.31 430.75 ~ 463,31 6lathe 1,524 240.03 6811.41 144.85 132.98 100.21 615.15 618.69 Z 615.15 Qlney Springs 382 60.16 491.52 10.95 3.54 2.61 258.18 256.59 f 258.18 Ophir 161 16.55 2444.16 53.11 0.60 0.00 255.62 241.55 Z 255.62 Qrchard City 2,104 425.88 10645.19 234.19 22.51 11.02 862.09 821.48 S 862,09 6rdway 1,151 181.28 2259.44 49.11 183.34 138.24 554.23 540.40 s 554.23 1110/98 1449 DUES flBGISTEB Page 9 s185 Base Fee Inclnded in Totals. POPDbATION ASSESSBD VALDATION SA1ES TA% COLLECTED TOTAL 1498 1999 BUYICIPAIITY BASIS AN6DNT BASIS AflUUBT BASIS ABQDNT BEFO&E CAP DDES QUES , Qtis 502 19.06 1258.19 21.68 134.14 101,18 342.92 313.24 : 392.92 Ourap 938 131,99 16680.50 353.11 511.68 385.81 1056.56 960.95 f 1,056.56 Oeid 343 54.62 408,96 20.00 14.50 10.93 269.95 261.24 f 269.45 Pagosa Springs 1,646 259.25 11913.01 344,09 1621.39 1222.53 2060.86 1110.16 ; 2,052.19 Palisade 2,213 358.00 4156.42 202.11 262.62 198.02 943.13 813.96 s 943.13 Paltec Lake 1,116 219,12 12831.42 282.29 95.86 12.28 814.29 745.02 ; 819,24 Paoli' 48 7.56 605.66 13.32 0.00 0.00 265.88 201.63 ; 205.58 Paonia 1,691 266.33 6682.84 141.02 280.94 211,93 810.18 151.68 ~ 810.18 Parachute 1,100 173.25 4105.06 90.31 208,54 151.24 605.80 536.94 E 605.86 Parker 13,231 2083,88 123101.68 2121.57 4311.18 3245.81 8286.32 2064.99 s 2,483.98 Peetz 178 25.64 534.64 11.86 1.56 5.70 130.54 226.96 Z 230.59 Pierce 847 141.28 3158.01 82.68 40.33 30,41 439.36 418.63 f 439.36 Pitkin 264 32.13 1809.11 39.86 13.98 10.54 267.41 254.81 ; 261.47 Platteville 1,937 305.08 8639.83 190.08 231.21 114,33 854.49 194,31 f 854.49 Poncha Springs 292 45.94 4640,12 102.10 124,50 41.64 436.13 411.32 ~ 430,13 Pritchett 150 23.62 300.59 6.61 1,01 .16 216.00 211.54 ; 216.00 Pneblo 101,402 14861.93 424464.13 4448.22 29305.54 12584.46 31384.61 34875.31 S 31,384.61 Raeah 102 16.07 331.55 1.43 0100 0.00 208.49 201.11 ; 205.44 flangely 2,666 419.54 8623.30 184.11 314.06 240.51 1035.18 1030.43 s 1,035.18 flaymer lOS 11.01 225.89 4.47 4.48 3.15 210.13 209.77 ~ 210.13 Bed Cliff 241 46.18 1418.13 31.20 10.69 8.06 211.04 262.11 ; 211.04 Eico 152 23.94 5611.11 123.58 20.98 15.82 348.34 306,82 ; 348.34 Eidgway 588 42.61 12310.04 212.14 255.60 142.12 142.47 615.60 f 138.12 flifle 5,841 420.40 38814.49 855.24 1481.23 1116,85 3071,94 2891,19 ; 3,611.94 flockvale 376 59.22 710.44 16.45 0.06 0.00 261.17 259.26 ; 261.17 8ocky Pord 4,356 686.01 8914.06 197.54 563.82 425.12 1493.13 1381,95 ~ 1,493.13 Romeo 381 60.01 420,23 9.25 13.40 10.10 264.36 263.19 ; 264,36 1/10/48 1999 UUES BEGISTEfl Page 9 $185 Base Fee Included in Totals. POPOLATIOA ASSESSE? VAb0ATI0N SA1ES TA% CQLLECTED TOTAb 1998 1999 80YICIPA1ITY BASIS AMQOIT BASIS ABQUUT BASIS AflOUIiT BEFOBE CAP DUES DUES ~ Fpe 168 26.46 733.19 16.13 20.34 15.31 242.46 239.61 ; 242.96 Sagnache 613 106.00 1225.15 26,45 32,55 24.54 342,44 343.12 s 342.44 Salida 5,696 891.12 41570.24 414.55 2014.64 1519.04 3515.16 3258.35 f 3,515.76 San Lais 864 136.08 1141.01 26,33 52.02 34,22 386.64 354.10 f 386.64 Sanford 181 123.01 912.12 21.46 6.94 5.23 334.64 324.29 ~ 334.64 Sawpit' 44 6.93 351.54 1.13 0.00 0.00 149.66 191.71 f 199.66 Sedgwick 182 28.66 295.34 6.56 5.85 4.41 224.51 226.11 ; 224.51 Seibert 181 28,51 884.12 19.46 41.12 35,53 268.50 265.56 = 268,50 Severance 238 31.48 2011.23 44.25 33.49 25.63 292.36 250.36 3 292.36 Sheridan 5,262 828.16 49411.41 1081,18 2591.52 1954.01 4054,46 3611.26 f 4,054.96 Sheridan Lake 106 15.15 315.61 6.93 19.71 14.86 222.54 218.01 ~ 222,54 Silt 1,283 202.01 6630.81 145.88 148.18 112.18 645.13 556.18 ~ 645.13 Silver Cliff 441 69.46 2921.62 64.41 16.93 58.01 316.51 340.41 ~ 316.51 Silver Plnme 188 29.61 1634.29 35.95 26.03 15.10 265.61 260.21 s 265.61 Silverthorne 2,441 464.15 58171.13 1219.16 4613.30 3523.61 5452.59 4110.21 f 5,452.94 Silvetton 536 84.42 10441.20 229.84 241,35 186.50 685.16 636.54 f 685,16 Sitla 621 48,75 1861,28 40.45 98.62 14.36 344.06 352.12 f 399.06 Snowoass Village 1,561 245.86 223398.31 4914.16 2449.50 2223,92 1569.54 6585.35 s 1,564.54 Soath Fork 436 68.61 9149,01 201.25 292.62 220.64 615.58 581.14 ~ 675.58 Springfield 1,459 229,19 3526.35 84.18 309.11 233.01 132,04 111,15 ~ 132.04 Starkaille 101 15.41 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.60 206.91 260.15 f 200.91 . Steaoboat Spriags 8,400 1323.00 214123.46 4123.42 1384.63 4664,11 10896.63 9829,04 s 10,846,63 Sterling 11,366 1190.14 57612.12 1261.10 4821.48 3639.42 6982.16 6410.21 ~ 6,882.76 Stratton 659 103.19 2291.45 50.41 181.65 136.46 416.11 481.11 = 416,11 Sugar City 280 44.16 546.94 12.03 1.48 1.12 242.25 240.46 f 242.25 Saperior 3,961 623.86 34465.15 158.31 15.15 51.12 1624.29 697.13 f 836.56 Swink 623 48.12 1644.13 36.18 11,34 8.59 321.99 318.31 ~ 327.89 1/10/98 1999 DDES flEGISTEB Page 10 $185 Base Fee Included in Totals. POPUbATION ASSESSED YAb0ATI0N SAbES TA% CObLECTED TOTAb 1498 1994 gOYICIPALITY BASIS Afl0U8T BASIS AM6DNT BASIS AN008T 9EF6flE CAP DOES DUES ~ Tellaride 1,861 293.11 163022.15 2266.49 2240.83 1689.59 4434.18 3951.86 f 4,434.18 Thornton 65,183 10029.35 380136.12 8362.44 19043.53 9039.13 21616.51 25081.34 s 21,616.51 Titnath 224 35.28 1346.42 24.49 133.53 100.68 350.45 312.46 s 350.45 Trinidad 9,108 1529.01 31192.12 699.43 1153.18 1321.90 3135.33 3553.28 ; 3,135,33 Two Battes 60 4.45 366.91 6.75 0.60 0.00 261.26 260.51 f 201.26 Vail 4,312 688.59 448552.12 4668.16 4658.56 5511.89 16259.64 14632.53 ~ 16,259,64 Yictor 430 61.13 2581.28 56.19 31.64 23.84 333.41 401.21 ; 333.41 Pilas 104 16.38 115.21 2.53 0,00 0100 203.91 203.51 f 203.91 Vona 106 16.10 158.26 3.48 3.69 2.18 201.46 201,41 S 201.96 Walden 935 141.26 2109.36 59.61 183.96 138,11 530.51 512.39 S 530.51 Walsenbnrg 3,858 661.63 12333.88 211.35 521.19 392.48 1456.96 1316.80 f 1,456.46 Walsh 711 112.93 1446,30 31.82 109.92 82.89 412.63 390.46 ~ 412,63 Aard 166 26.14 814.39 18.03 11.34 8.59 231.16 232.58 f 231.16 Wellington 1,550 244,12 8414.61 186,44 144.46 108.92 724.44 659.64 ; 124.49 Westcliffe 428 61,41 4624.61 101.14 253.51 191.19 545.34 516.34 f 545.34 Westoinster 92,910 13133.58 632369.41 13912.14 26148.24 11948.70 39119.42 36664.10 ; 39,719.42 Wheat Bidge 36,808 4852.26 258344.48 5683.10 13491.66 6456.05 11611.61 16654.38 f 11,611.01 Wiggins 613 106.00 2812.55 63.20 188.54 142.16 496.35 464.45 ; 496.35 Wilep 416 65.52 114.14 15.82 96.03 61.88 334.22 331.10 ~ 334.22 Williaasbarg 808 121.26 1625.21 35.16 0.06 0160 348.02 333.01 ~ 348.02 Windsor 1,026 1166.60 48310.88 1062.84 815.54 614.42 2969.35 2424.62 s 2,915,55 r Winter Park 596 93.81 31339.06 689.46 1639.36 1236.08 2204,41 1433.20 = 2,204.41 Woodland Park 6,510 1025.33 48115.12 1013.05 1419.43 1010.25 3353.63 2444.91 ; 3,353.63 ' Wrap 2,083 328.01 1265.43 159.84 859,23 641.96 1320.17 1013.34 ; 1,288.06 Yaapa 366 51.64 2112.11 46.48 15.88 14.24 303.36 294,98 ~ 303.36 Ynika 2,971 461.93 10904.46 239.90 1146.53 864.48 1197.31 1651.48 ; 1,751,31 r~ JUI.. 31. 1998 11;18AM NG. 0741 P, 1/4 . • ; . Vai1 Associates, Inc. . FOR IlVIMEDIA,TE RELEASE ~ ~ Niedia Contacts: • . Paul Witt, 970-845-5720, paulw@vailresvrts,com , Kelly Ladyga, 970-845-5722, kIadYga@vaiIresorts.com - VAIL ASSOCIATES ANNpUNCES M.ANAGEMENT PROMOTIONS . ; VAIL, Colo. - JuIy 22, 1998 - Paul Testvvuide, Chisf Operating Officet of Vail and Beaver Cresk sId areas today annoutxced the pzomotions of several key management staff , within Vail Associates. The promnotions, in both Mountain Operations and Sports and Recreation Services, complete the reorganization that began when Testvvuide was named • Chief Operating Officer in June. "I am very pleased to make these annotuicements," commented Testwuide. "We have , many extremely talented people in this organizafion, and I am glad to be able to sc"w recognize this group in the reorganization.,, Npa,e+~mr ' • "rhe caliber of staffhas alvvays been a defining asset of Vail and Beaver Creek," Testwuide noted. "Mese people have been with the company for years, and their p;roven 'track records make each of them key players in our continued success." The operations promotions announced wete: : • Brian McCarcaey to Seniox Maaaging Director of Moimtain Operations. In this rote, • he vvill assume the management of Vail Lift Opexations arnd the VaiUBeaver Creek Lift Technical Maintenance Department; Vail/,geaver Creek Fleet and $uilding Maintenance; Vail Mountain Operations; Vail Guest Services; aad Vail Security. -more- • PO eox 7 • vail, Colorado • 87 658 • phone 970 845 5720 • fax 970 845 57Z8 • e-mait:vailprH+vail.net iri JUL.31.1998 11:19AM N0.0?41 P. 2/4--~i vA Announces Promotions Z-2-2 • Mike Beckley to iYlanaging Dircctoz of Mountain Operarioas at Bearrer Creek. In addition to continuing to ovmee all aspects of Heaver Creek Mountain pperations, BeckIeY wi11 expaad his focus and responsibilities in Iiaisioning with the Beaver Creek Resort Company, Beaver Creek homeowners, area metro districts and the planning and development of future proj ects. • Bob Savage to birector of Finance for Vail and Beaver Creek operabions. Savage will be responsible for the budgeting and financial.reporting of Sports and Recreational Services, Mountain pperatians and Food Service, working directly with Testwuide. • Franlc McNeill to D'uector of'VaiI Guest Services. • Jeff Babb to Mazzager of Vail Base A,rea and Attraction Maintenance. • Julie Rust to Va,il Ski Patrol Supervisor. Additionally, Testwuide announced pzvmotions withiia Sports azid Reareational Servxces. "Our business is changing rapidly, and what was once a ski school simply promoting slding has become a new organization called Sports and iZecreatioaai Services," Testwuide exp1ained, "MS departrnent now pzomotes and operates a v„ide rauge of new activities including snowboarding, tubing, snowmobiling and ice skating as well as tr'aditionai ska school programs. To be responsive to these new needs, we were able to reorgaaize but srill keep the tearn together that has made us successful in the past." Promotions in Sports and Recreational Services announced were: • Susie Tjossem to Senior Managing pirector for Vai1 and $eavec Creek Sports and Recreational Services. In this role, Tjossem wi11 be resporzsible for all aspects ofthe dePartment, including the Ski and Snowboazd SchooLs, Children's pI.ograrns' Adventure Ridge, the Activities Desks, Ticket Operations, gcanning, Summer Mauntain Activities and new program developmenL -more- a JUI,, 31. 1996 11:19AM N0, 0741 P. 3/4 VA Annouuces Promotions 3-3-3 ~ Mike Porter to Managing Director of the Vail and Beaver Creek Ski and Snowboard Schools, generally considered to be the Iargest and rnost successfut sld school in the world. Porter wiIl be directly responsible for all adult and child operations, including alPine, snewboazd, and IVordic skung. In commeuting on the restructuring, Tjossem annouuced additional promotions in Spozts and Recreational Services. "The incredtble grovvth and coatinued success of the dePartment have led us to furthcr restructuring," said Tjossem. "We are fortunate to have people in-house with the abilities to take on these expanded roles," T,he addiUional promotions announced were: • Booie Alward to Directar for Vail and Beaver Creek Adult Sla and Snowboard School. Alward will be responsible for ovmeeing upgrades and improvements made tO ~e adult Programs and will continue to manage the adult programs at Golden Peak during the ski season. • Susan Baca to birector for Vail and Beaver Creek Children's Ski and Snowboard School. Baca wzll be responsible for ovecseeing a11 aspects of the Children's Ski School and will continue to manage the chiidren's programs at Beavet Creek duriing the ski season. • Deb Stansell to Duector of VaiI Ticket Operacions, Stanse]I will oversee all ticket/pass offices, Scanning, Sld SchooI azxd Chiidren's Centec sales, Adventure _ Ridge sales, as well as becoming the technical trainer and Iiaison with Information Systems, -more- F 1UI..31.1998 11:19AM N0.0741-P. 4/4- ~--r~ vA Almounces Promotions 4-44 • Cazoline Sheahan to Director of Beaver Creek Ticket Opentions. Sheahan wi1l oversee all ticket/pass offices, scanning, Ski School and ChiIdren's Center saies, and Beaver Creek Club ticket sales. • Susan Johnson to Duector o,f Business Administration for Sports and Recreational S ervices, coordinating all aspects o fadm;nigtration for Sid School and Ticket OP'tions and future business development, • A,my Johnson to Manager of Marketing attd Human Resources for Vaia and Beaver Creek Ski and Snowboard Schools_ • Lric Simon to Manager of Beaver Creek Lift TickedScanning Operations. ~ Ca t hy p'Conner to Manager of Beaver Creek Ski School Sales off,ice. "T,he strength of thxs new team is exciting and the energy and experience are exceptional,'? Testwuide said. "We as a company are moviag into a new stage. With the talent that we have, and with the focus on the guest, empioyee and coznmunity, R,e,,,,ill definitelY keep Vail and $eaver Creek the preznier resorts in North America.,, -30- RECEIVEO JUL 2 7 19~ ~ Department of Transportation ary ~y re on ~ Transportation Building 1ohnA Kitzhaber, M.D., Govemor Shcem, OR 97310 FILE CODE: July 24, 1998 r~ Bob McLaurin, Town Manager ~ oc~'~ . v Town of Vail / 1 75 S. Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 Dear Bob: We would like to express our appreciation for the help we received from your Traffic Engineer, Greg Hall. The Oregon Department of Transportation is currently developing guidelines for the design and operation of roundabouts. Greg was able to give us many insights into the construction and operation of the two roundabout interchanges you have in your town. He answered a great deal of questions and put us in contact with your maintenance people and the town fire department. This will be of great value to ODOT as we continue to develop guidelines and design recommendations. Again, we would like to thank the town of Vail and especially your Traffic Engineer, Greg Hall for his helpfulness. Sincerely, , Mark Johnson Allan Troyer ~ Senior Desi ne Senior Transportation perations Specialist ~ ~J Freli mary Design Unit Traffic Management Section Technical Services Branch Oregon Department of Transportation MJ/AT: pld Form 734-3122(5/97) - 1672 Matterhorn Circle Vail, CO 81657 476-2956 August 2, 1998 Rob Ford Mayor Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road - Vail, CO 81657 Deaz Mr. Ford: ` We live in the Donovan Pazk neighborhood and would like to offer at le a partial explanation for the fury that has been unleashed in our neighborhood by the Town of Vail's~'ordable housing plan, as expressed in the Town's June 25 open house and June 30 Council resolution. First, the Town's plan is outrageously harmful and unfair to our neighborhood. The plan calls for building 480 beds of low income seasonal rental housing and 60 beds of low income for-sale housing in Donovan Park. The result of this plan is that up to 43% of all of the Town's new public housing would be built in Donovan Pazk, that 15 of the 19 acres of open space which would be taken for public housing would be taken from Donovan Pazk and that the Donovan Park neighborhood would be the only residential neighborhood where any seasonal rental public housing would be built. Although the actual numbers of housing units proposed for ponovan Pazk and other public housing sites were removed at the last minute from the Town Council's June 30 resolution, the costs of building those numbers of units remained a part of the resolution, suggesring little or no change in actual intent. The Town's plan calls for this excessive amount of low income housing to be built on land which we were all given to believe would always be used as parks or open space, and which was purchased with tax funds designated solely for that purpose. And, informarion revealed at the open house and on the drawing boards of the Town's planning staff shows that the low income sEasonal rental housing pla'nned for ponovan Park is to be in the form of high-rise dormitory-stykViettos, in which residents would be stacked together like cordwood (a retrograde approach to public housing reminiscent of the blunders of the eazlier part of this century). Second, the "Common Ground" process.that produced this harmful and unfair housing plan was hopelessly flawed. In the Town Council's June 30 resolution, the Council cites the Common Ground process as a"well-reasoned basis" for its housing plan. Those of us who attended the Common Ground work sessions recognize this as a bogus claim. First, the overazching premise of the work sessions was that the solution to the "affordable housing crisis" in Vail was for the Town to .build as much public housing as possible on any parcels of vacant buildable land which were already owned or could be acquired by the Town. Any alternative solutions were not allowed to be discussed. Second, anyone who happened to live anywhere on planet earth was every bit as welcome to participate and make crirical decisions about the fate of Vail's neighborhoods as were the neighborhoods' residents, carrying "openness" to the point of absurdity. Third, the participants in the Common Ground sessions were a very small and setf-selected group who were able to attend the sessions--which were held in the off=season--and they were nothing close to a random statistical sample of the community. We have no way of knowing the makeup of this group which the Town cites as being rkponsible for its decisions, but we suspect that it was heavily tilted toward Vail business owners who wanted the government to subsidize their businesses. Fourth, the work groups themselves were subject to domination by loud people who claimed to be more knowledgeable about the proposed public housing sites than the average participant, who, generally, was either familiar only with his or her own neighborhood or not Page 2 familiar with any of Vail's neighborhoods, because he or she did not live in Vail. Fifth, and probably worst of all, after the work sessions were over, the Town staff was completely free to sort, analyze and interpret the data so as to conform to their preconceived ideas of siting, density and housing iype. Such massaging of data does not necessarily involve malicious intent. Anyone who has spent time analyzing and interpreting data knows that a person approaching data with a strong bias toward a desired outcome will almost certainly reach that outcome. This is particu(arly true when the raw data is as nebulous as the maps and notes that constituted the output of the Common Ground work sessions. In essence, the planning staff (who has told us that they were given a mandate by the Council to prnvide as much affordable housing as possible) was given carte blanche in deciding the final outcome of the Common Ground process. . These two factors--the flawed nature of the Common Ground decision-making process and the outrageous results of that process-- are the spark that have set off such strong opposirion to the Town's public housing plan that we and many others in ow Donovan Park neighborhood felt that we have had no choice but to take legal acrion against the Town. We have heard that some Council members have developed such an emotional attachment to the Town's current housing plan that they may be unable to consider any approach other than plunging forward down a wrongheaded path. We hope this is untrue and that the Council can step back and reassess its decisions and start anew on a path that we can all be proud of in years to come. Sin erely, Guy Ayr y J ` e cc All Other Vail Town Council Members Russell Fonest and Andy Knudtsen, Community Development Department Vail Daily, Vail Trail, Vail Va11ey Times , r : „ TOWN OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 ~ 970-479-2100 FAX 970-479-2157 . . 7M FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE August 3, 1998 Contact: Tom Moorhead, 479-2107 Town Attorney TOWN OF VAIL PREVAILS IN DEFENDING 1983 APPROVAL OF INTERNATIONAL WING WITH RECENT COURT OF APPEALS DECISION • (Vail)--The Colorado Court of Appeais has ruled in favor of the Town of Vail and Lodge Properties, Inc., for the 1983 approval of the International Wing. The wing, a 65,000 sq. ft. addition to the Lodge Tower building at the base of Vail Mountain, features 24 new hotel rooms and 7,500 sq. ft. of conference space. Construction began in 1996 and was completed earlier this summer despite a lawsuit which was filed to block the development. The lawsuit, filed by two adjacent property owners in December 1995, contested the town's approval process on several matters ancl alleged the Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) approvai in 1983 had expired. The neighbors, Luanne Wells and Anita Saltz, faced the loss of private views and access to open space as a result of the development. At issue was enactment of a 1993 ordinance that invalidates PEC approvals of exterior alterations after two years, unless the applicant obtains a building permit and begins construction on the approved project. In the case of the International Wing, 13 years lapsed between PEC approval and construction. But the town had maintained that project approvals prior to enactment of the 1993 ordinance, such as the International Wing; were not affected. Following a trial in Eagle County District Court, Judge William L. Jones ruled in favor of the Town of Vail and Lodge Property, Inc. In his February 1997 opinion, Judge Jones found no (more) ~,5~ RECYCLEDPAPBR ~ Add 1/International Wing Court of Appeals basis for setting aside the Town of Vail approval process or that the Planning and Environmental Commission approval had lapsed. ~ The District Court ruling was appealed by one of the plaintiffs, Luanne Wells, and just last 'month, the Colorado Court of Appeals issued an opinion which affirmed the decision reached by Judge Jones which was in favor of the Town of Vail and Lodge Property; Inc. The July 23 court decision held that the ordinance being challenged as causing the lapsing of the Planning and Environmental Commission approval was "clear and unambiguous" and did not cause the approval to lapse. For a copy of the 10-page decision, contact the Town of Vail Community Information Office at 479-2115. # # # , ~y TOWN OF YAIL 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 ' 970-479-2100 FAX 970-479-2157 • ' • ' [t9EDIA ADVlSORY TM August 3, 1998 Contact: Suzanne Silverthorn, 479-211 5 Community Information Of'l"Ice TOWN OF VA1L VOICE-MA!L SYSTElUI TEMPORARILY OUT-OF-SERVICE Incoming telephone cails to the Town of Vail affices are beirg hampered today, due to an interruption in the ?own's veice-maii system. l-I-,a system wer,fi down over the weekend and is temporari(y out or' service today. Repairs are being made as quickly as possible. The malfunction is causing phones to continue rirging rather than being routed to the automated voice-mail system. Customers are askeci to re-dial 'Loday when attempting to contact the town. Please note that 9-1-1 emergency dispatch operatiers for the Eagle County area are not impacted by today's voice-mail malfunction. # # RECYCLED PAPER ~ ; . . ~ ~ ~ ~"'RER Td 8?~ S~T c.a~hnotA (A4z ouN D "T44 t~AMT:S Dear • Re: Common Ground Community Involvement Process Please join us as we move into the next Common Ground phase - we've outlined a series of upcoming meetings which will be opportunities for you to describe the types of housing and park development that will work (or wont work) with existing neighborhoods. Before we begin with these neighborhood discussions, we need to hear your thoughts about the process. Please come to the August 18`'' Town Council meeting, 7:00 pm in Council Chambers, to continue the open, honest and fair process for the next phase of Common Ground. As you recall, the Town Council approved the siting package on June 30`h, but deferred the decision on density until additional public input could be received. While the Council is interested in moving forward with open space and community facilities, Council members have slowed the next phase of the process as it relates to housing and parks. We want to enable community participants to focus on one site at a time and ensure that all ideas are discussed thoroughly. This letter includes: 1. An overview of the four elements of the Common Ground plan; 2. An list of eight opportunities for community involvement in the proposed next phase of Common Ground; 3. A list of the proposed ground rules, clarifying the assumptions for all who are involved in the next phase of the process. The key elements of the next phase of the Common Ground process include: Element Action 1. Open Space Reconvene open space committee to evaluate the 130 acres identified in the Common Ground process and make recommendation to Town Council as to the parcels appropriate for dedication, per the Charter ordinance. 1 e 2. Community Facilities Establish process to prioritize community needs and desires, as they related to potential community facilities. Look for details about this separate process in August. 3. Housing Move forward with Timber Ridge and Hud Wirth sites, working with current owners to explore options to acquire and/or develop the sites. Break down the Phase I housing sites, focusing on Lionshead and West Vail this summer and Tract C and the three benches of Donovan Park this fall (see specifics below). Initiate buy-down process; deed restricting existing housing stock to sell to owner-occupants. - 4. Parks Develop park plans in conjunction with housing sites, specifically West Vail and two or three benches of Donavon park during Phase I. As the Lionshead and West Vail sites are the first for consideration, the Town has developed a proposed process for community involvement, focusing on each one individually. Once we have completed community discussions with these first two sites, we'll start on the next two, which involve the benches of Donovan Park and the privately held Tract C, near the Mountain School. The scoop on the first two sites is listed on the attached sheet. We look forward to your contribution to the process please call us if you have suggestions that would make the process better. We are available to talk with you: Andy Knudtsen 479-2440 Suzanne Silverthom 479-2115 Russ Forrest 479-2146 We also look forward to seeing you at the August 181h Council meeting to receive your input on tbe next steps for Common Ground. Sincerely, Andy Knudtsen Senior Housing Policy Planner ' 2 ~ ~ ~ Opportunity for involvement VVest Vail Lionshead #1 Bus Tour - Purpose of ineeting is to review a range of Monday, August 31 Monday, September 7 site planning and architectural prototypes, tour 5:00 - 7:00 pm 5:00 - 7:00 pm developments of differing densities and see examples of existing affordable housing deuelopments. Tuesday, September 1 Tuesday, September 8 Two buses, holding 20 passengers each, will be available. 10:00 - noon 10:00 - noon Additional bus trips will be provided, if there is the demand. Meet at the Dancing Bear Meet at the Dancing'heaz #2 Community Dialogue - Purpose of ineeting is to Wednesday, September 2 Wednesday, September ~ debrief from the bus tour and graphically record ideas about 5:00 - 7:00 pm 5:00 - 7:00 pm each housing or park development site. , , Inn at West Vail (Use Dancing Inn at West Vail (LJse Dancing . Bear entrance) , Bear entrance) Staff Analysis - Will evaluate options and provide detailed September 7-18 September 14 -25 analysis as to economic viability, compatibility with neighborhood, summaries of themes expressed during the previous two meetings, etc. #3 Open House Purpose of open house will be to Week af September 21 - 25 Week of September 28 - Oct. 2 comxnunicate all ideas generated in previous two meetings. pPen M- F 10:00 am to 8:00 pm Open M- F 10:00 am to 8:00 pm Self-guided tour of material will be on display for the entire week. Vail Library Atrium Vail Library Atrium #4 Community Meeting Purpose is to take one evening Thursday, September 24 Thursday, October 1 during the week of the open house and listen to responses 5:00 - 7:00 pm 5:00 - 7:00 pm from community members. This will be an opportunity for you to focus on specific issues, ask detailed questions about Vail Library Community Room Vail Library Community Room rationale and express additional suggestions or solutions. #5 Council Meeting -Purpose is to take into account all Tuesday, October 6 Tuesday, October 20 information generated up to this point in the Common 7;00 pm 7:00 pm Ground process and approve specific development parameters for the site. These parameters will constitute the Vail Town Council Chambers Vail Town Council Chambers core of the Request for Proposals which will follow. Draft RFP October 1998 October 1998 Issue RFP November 1998 ' November 1998 #6 Review Developer Proposals - A set of the proposals Nov/Dec 1998 Nov/Dec 1998 will be available for the community to review. Give us your thoughts on the range of development teams who respond to the RFP. #7 Select Developer Team The Town Council will December 1998 December 1998 confirm a development team selection at a regularly scheduled meeting. Please bring your comxnents and communicate them to the Council at the Tuesday aftemoon - worksession. #8 Development Review Process There will be several January/February/March 99 January/February/March 99 opportunities to participate in the Development Review Process, as the designs progress through the standard order of public hearings, including Planning and Environmental Commission as needed - Design Review Board, and Town Cauncil. Complete Design for Construction April/May 99 ApriUMay 99 Issue building permit and begin construction June 99 June 99 Complete construction April 2000 April 2000 3 i i Process Ground Rules Each of the bulleted items listed below help clarify expectations by all involved. ? Community involvement wili be proactively sought to further refine all identified action sites included in the Common Ground plan approved June 30, 1998. Parks, community facilities, housing and open space actions will be planned with community input. ? The Town recognizes Common Ground as an evolving process. Each housing project will be evaluated based on the success (an/or failure) of previous projects. ' ? The Town will take into account future changes in the needs of the community and will consider them prior to moving ahead with any individual housing development. ? The final product to be generated by this phase of the Common Ground community - involvement process are specific development parameters for each housing and park site. These will be listed in the Request for Proposals ( RFPs) the Town will use to hire development teams for each site. These development parameters will maintain the integrity of each neighborhood. ? The Town will use but not be limited to the following criteria to determine appropriate density of future housing projects: compatibility to the density of adjacent development, traffic and parking constraints, impacts to neighborhood services, and the ability to cost effectively achieve the Town's housing goals. ? Although participants in the Common Ground workshops held in April and June of 1998 indicated that a relatively large number of affordable housing beds be constructed, more recent comments have expressed concern about that level of density. In response, the Town Council has committed to reducing density while still making significant strides towards solving the housing problem. ? The Town Council has the final responsibility and decision making authority for the development parameters. . : ? Participation in this phase is open to all who wish to become involved - ? The Town will pursue "buy-downs" as part of the solution to the housing issue. As a facilitator in creating seasonal housing solutions, the Town will look to the local business community as a financial resource. ? Decisions about the sites and uses have been made and will not be a part of the deliberations in this next phase. ? Final project design will go through the required development approval process, and be acted on by the Design Review Board, the Planning and Environmental Commission (as needed) and the Town Council, 5