Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-08-10 Support Documentation Town Council Work Session i VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, AUGUST 10, 1999 2:00 P.M. AT TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS AGENDA NOTE: Time of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item. 1 • PEC/DRB Report. (15 mins.) George Ruther 2. Discussion of Newly Formed Vail Chamber of Commerce. Joe Staufer (20 mins.) 3. Employee Generation. (20 mins.) Nina Timm ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review and provide input to staff on agenda for meetings with the business community to discuss employee generation. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On July 20, 1999 Council directed staff to create an agenda for meetings with the business community to discuss Employee Generation. Staff will be presenting a power point presentation to Council as if the meeting was being held with the business community. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: There is no staff recommendation at this time. 4. PA Text Amendments (30 mins.) George Ruther 5. Review Staff Recommendations for Improving the Commercial Russell Forrest and Multi-family Development Review Process. (30 mins.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review and provide input to staff on the recommendations. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The purpose of this review of the commercial and the multi-family review process is to clearly delineate the current process for large scale commercial and multi family development and to identify opportunities to improve the process. Staff would like to recommend several actions, primarily administrative in nature, to improve the process for the community and the applicant. Staff has discussed these recommendations with both the PEC and DRB and they have indicated that they support these administrative changes. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the staff recommendations for improving the commercial and multi-family development process. 6. A work session meeting to continue to discuss a proposal to George Ruther amend the Town's Public Accommodation Zone District (Chapter Tom Braun 7). The purpose of this meeting is to further inform the Council of the progress of the amendment process to date, to educate the Council on the proposed text amendments, to continue discussions on the amendments and address the questions of the Council identified on July 13 and July 27th. (30 mins.) th ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Engage in a discussion with the applicant, community and staff with regard to the proposal and provide any further direction the Council may have prior to staff preparing an amending ordinance. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On December 14, 1998, the applicant first appeared before the Planning & Environmental Commission with a request to amend the text of the Town's Public Accommodation Zone District. Since the first meeting, the applicant has participated in 8 additional meetings with the Commission and/or the Town Council. Over the course of these nine meetings numerous revisions and compromises were made to the original proposal. Many of the revisions were made in direct response to issues and concerns expressed during the work session meetings. On June 28, 1999, the Planning & Environmental Commission held a public hearing for a final review of the proposed amendments. Upon review of the proposal, the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the text amendments to the Town Council. On July 13, 1999, the Council held a work session to begin discussions on the proposed text amendments. During the course of the discussions several questions were raised by the Council. These questions were discussed in greater detail in the staff memorandum to the Council dated July 27, 1999. On July 27, 1999, the Council again held a work session meeting to discuss the proposed amendments to the land use regulations for the Public Accommodation Zone District. A summary of the meeting is outlined in the staff memorandum to the Council dated August 10, 1999. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department will provide a recommendation at the time of a final review on the proposed amendments to the Public Accommodation Zone District. 7. Information Update. (10 mins.) 8. Council Reports. (10 mins.) 9. Other. (10 mins.) 10. Adjournment - 5:05 p.m. NOTE UPCOMING MEETING START TIMES BELOW: (ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE) THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 8/17199, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE FOLLOWING VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 8124199, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 8/17/99, BEGINNING AT 7:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. 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 1999 7/6/99 FORD PARK SIGNS GREG H./LARRY P./CHARLIE T.: The change in the bus Additional signs will be provided after entrances to direct people to the Kevin Foley service/pick up seems to be having a positive effect as far as pick up at Slifer Fountain. adding to convenience and ease of access (although the ridership numbers are about the same); however, we need additional signs in the parking structure directing guests to the correct exit to pick up service. 716/99 WEST VAIL ROUNDABOUT TRAFFIC GREGS H. AND M.: Drivers exiting 1-70 east are making it Joe Russell spoke at length w/ Mr Larson. Joe confirmed Larson's Eric Larson, resident of Intermountain very dangerous for drivers trying to get to Intermountain on concern was traveling from the north southbound into the South Frontage the South Frontage Road (apparently not expecting the Rd Roundabout. As the driver approaches the roundabout, those exiting Intermountain drivers to continue "around" the circle on eastbound from 1-70 have a tendency to not drive as cautiously or South Frontage Road, but more likely, that they would head "yieldingly" as would be appropriate. Joe stated he would request that north toward the Phillips 66 station). Is there additional officers pay more specific attention to this area, as well as inquire about warning signing we could provide? It sounded as if there engineering options or additional signs we could use/install. was a further problem w/drivers heading north to south into the roundabout and the tight right hand turn. 7/20/99 COLLECTIVE COUNCIL VOICEMAIL PAM/BOB/RON BRADEN: Concerns were expressed re: the Ron Braden has changed the initial collective voicemail introduction for Armour/Navas/Jewett current collective Council voicemail option. Until USWest Council. Please let Pam know if there are additional changes/additions changeover is completed in January 2000, please implement you would like to see. the following changes. In the introductory voice message for Council, indicate there is: - a three minute limit - leave your name/phone # if you would like your call returned - state opinion/issue August 6, 1999, Page 1 7/20/99 BIKE TOUR OF IN TOWN BIKE GREG H./TODD 0.: Kevin forgot to mention this under Scheduled for August 24th. PATHS "other" today, however he would like to request the Foley scheduling of a "rubber meets the road" (e.g., we're ON our bicycles) to look over the town's bike paths. This ties in very closely w/our current efforts at stepping up WAY FINDING. Please schedule a two hour segment at an upcoming work session for this tour. 7/20/99 ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONAL MIKE ROSE`. Dan has suggested some maps to provide This will be looked at as part of the way finding study. Consultants MAPS AT EXITS FROM THE VTRC specific village mapping information as to distance to stores, scheduled for the week of August 16th. Foley/Dan Telleen restaurants, etc., at the exits. 7/20/99 ERIC BAUMANN/TOASTED BOB/LORELEI/BRENT WILSON: Eric has asked for two Letter sent to Eric Bauman with list of specific event dates and organizers. ALMOND CART BY NOEL things - Town regulations be relaxed from now through He may participate, but he has to contact the special event organizers Eric Baumann Oktoberfest to allow merchants to display outdoor goods, himself to approve participation in the Vail Village. regardless of whether they're connected to a special events permit; and additionally, to have the regulations currently precluding his outdoor sale of roasted nuts modified. V August 6, 1999, Page 2 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULE Monday, August 9, 1999 FINAL AGENDA Project Orientation / PEC LUNCH - Community Development Department 12:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT John Schofield Brent Wilson Galen Aasland Allison Ochs Diane Golden Judy Rodriguez Brian Doyon Tom Weber Chas Bernhardt Doug Cahill Site Visits : 1:00 P.M. 1. Joe's Famous Deli - 240 Wall Street 2. Lauterbach - 4355 Bighorn Road 3. Park @ Garmisch - 2497, 2485, 2487 Garmisch Driver: Brent NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board will break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 p.m. Public Hearing - Town Council Chambers 2:00 p.m. 1. A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for the establishment of an outdoor patio dining area, located at 244 Wall Street / "One Vail Place," a portion of Block 5C, Vail Village First Filing. Applicant: Joe Joyce / Joe's Famous Deli Planner: Allison Ochs MOTION: Brian Doyon SECOND: Tom Weber VOTE: 7-0 APPROVED WITH 1 CONDITION: 1. The outdoor dining patio is subject to design review by staff and/or the Design Review Board. All furniture (i.e. chairs, tables, and umbrellas) must meet the Town Code, as approved through the Design Review application and that the condional use permit for up to six tables be reviewed by staff after one year. 7V WN OF VAIL ~ 1 - 2. A request for a variance from Section 12-2-2, Town of Vail Code to allow for the construction of a single-family residence on a slope in excess of 40% within the Residential Cluster zone district, located. at 4355 Bighorn Road / Lot 3, Block 3, Bighorn Third Addition. Applicant: Michael J. Lauterbach Planner: Brent Wilson MOTION: Tom Weber SECOND: Doug Cahill VOTE: 7-0 APPROVED WITH 1 CONDITION: 1. In order to avoid more impact to the site than is necessary to achieve development objectives, development should be restricted to the area below the 8470' contour line, as determined by the Design Review Board and as depicted on the enclosed site plan and survey. 3. A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for the creation of a public park, located at Lots 1,2 & 3, Block H, Vail das Schone/2497, 2485, 2487 Garmisch and the unplatted portion of the SE '/4, SE 1/4, SE 1/4, SW 1/4 of Section 11, Township 5, Range 81 West. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Todd Oppenheimer Planner: Allison Ochs MOTION: Brian Doyon SECOND:Chas Bernhardt VOTE: 5-2 (Chas Bernhardt and Brian Doyon voted against) APPROVED WITH 1 CONDITION: 1. That the new design have a total of four "head in" parking spaces on Garmisch and one handicapped space in the parking for the employee housing. 4. A request for a worksession for amendments to Title 12, Zoning with respect to Employee Housing Unit Standards, Minimum Lot Size Requirement in the Primary/Secondary and Two-Family Residential Zone Districts and Site Coverage Standards. Also, a proposal for a new zone district entitled Affordable Housing (AH) District. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Dominic Mauriello/George Ruther TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 23, 1999 5. A request for a minor subdivision, to vacate common lot lines to create anew lot, located at 2477, 2485, 2487, 2497 Garmisch Drive/ Lots 1-4, Block H, Vail Das Schone #2. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Nina Timm Planner: Allison Ochs TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 23, 1999 6. Information Update 7. Approval of July 26, 1999 minutes. The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479-2138 for information. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. 2 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULE Monday, August 9, 1999 AGENDA Project Orientation / PEC LUNCH - Community Development Department 12:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Site Visits : 1:00 P.M. 1. Joe's Famous Deli - 240 Wall Street 2. Lauterbach - 4355 Bighorn Road 3. Park @ Garmisch - 2497, 2485, 2487 Garmisch Driver: Brent NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m,., the board will break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 p.m. Public Hearing - Town Council Chambers 2:00 p.m. 1. A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for the establishment of an outdoor patio dining area, located at 240 Wall Street / "One Vail Place," a portion of Block 5C, Vail Village First Filing. Applicant: Joe Joyce / Joe's Famous Deli Planner: Allison Ochs 2. A request for a variance from Section 12-2-2, Town of Vail Code to allow for the construction of a single-family residence on a slope in excess of 40% within the Residential Cluster zone district, located at 4355 Bighorn Road / Lot 3, Block 3, Bighorn Third Addition: Applicant: Michael J. Lauterbach Planner: Brent Wilson 3. A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for the creation of a public park, located at Lots 1,2 & 3, Block H, Vail das Schone/2497, 2485, 2487 Garmisch and the unplatted portion of the SE 1/4, SE 1/4, SE 1/4, SW'/4 of Section 11, Township 5, Range 81 West. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Todd Oppenheimer Planner: Allison Ochs TOWN OF PAIL 1 4. A request for a worksession for amendments to Title 12, Zoning with respect to Employee Housing Unit Standards, Minimum Lot Size Requirement in the Primary/Secondary and Two-Family Residential Zone Districts and Site Coverage Standards. Also, a proposal,for a new zone district entitled Affordable Housing (AH) District. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Dominic Mauriello/George Ruther TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 23, 1999 5. A request for a minor subdivision, to vacate common lot lines to create a new lot, located at 2477, 2485, 2487, 2497 Garmisch Drive/ Lots 1-4, Block H, Vail Das Schone #2. Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Nina Timm Planner: Allison Ochs TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 23, 1999 6. Information Update 7. Approval of July 26, 1999 minutes. The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479-2138 for information. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. Community Development Department Published August 6, 1999 in the Vail Trail J 2 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD FINAL AGENDA Wednesday, August 4, 1999 3:00 P.M. PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULE PROJECT ORIENTATION / NO LUNCH - Community Development Department 1:30 pm MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Clark Brittain Bill Pierce Hans Woldrich Melissa Greenauer Chas Bernhardt (PEC rep) SITE VISITS 2:00 pm 1. Freeman residence -1220 Westhaven Lane 2. McKibben - 5095 Main Gore Drive 5 3. Arosa/Garmisch Park - 2497, 2485, & 2487 Garmisch. Driver: Brent PUBLIC HEARING - TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3:00 pm 1. Freeman - Conceptual review of a new Primary/Secondary residence with EHU. Allison 1220 Westhaven Lane/ Lot 42, Glen Lyon Subdivision. Applicant: Michael Freeman, represented by Fritzlen, Pierce, Smith CONCEPTUAL - NO VOTE 2. McKibben residence - Final review of a proposed residential addition. Brent 5095 Main Gore, Lot 28, Parcel B, Vail Meadows 1St. Applicant: RKD MOTION: Hans Woldrich SECOND: Melissa Greenauer VOTE: 4-1 (Bill Pierce against) APPROVED WITH 1 CONDITION: 1. That the materials and colors match the existing residence. 3. Town of Vail Arosa/Garmisch Park - Final review of a proposed park. Allison 2497, 2485, & 2487 Garmisch/Lots 1,2,3. Block H, Vail das Schone & the unplatted portion of the SE 1/4, SE 1/4, SE 1/4, SW 1/4 of. Section 11, Township 5. Range 81 West. Applicant: Town of Vail MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Melissa Greenauer . VOTE: 5-0 APPROVED WITH 3 CONDITIONS: ?A TOWN OF PAIL 1 1. That the conditional use permit be approved by the PEC. 2. That a DRB review be required of the pavillion, sign and equipment. 3. That either parallel or front-end parking is acceptable. Staff Approvals Rojas residence - Dormer addition. Brent 100. E. Meadow Dr., Bldg. 10, Unit #331 Nail Village Inn. Applicant: Red Sand Corporation Everett/Edgren duplex - Re-roof. Brent 2355 Bald Mountain Road/Lot 25, Vail Village 13th Filing. Applicant: Kent Everett Lion Square North - New awning sign. Dominic 635 West Lionshead Circle/Lot 8, Vail Lionshead 1s' Filing. Applicant: Lion Square North Condo Association Atwell residence - Interior conversion with stair and window addition. Brent 1390 Buffehr Creek, Unit I/Briar Patch. Applicant: Web Atwell McEachron/Hagans residence - Deck extension. Brent 2447 Chamonix Lane/Lot 23, Block A, Vail Ridge. Applicant: Julie McEachron Maher residence -100 sq. ft. addition. Allison 725 Forest Road/Lot 6, Block 2, Vail Village 6in Applicant: Gerry & Joan Maher Brown residence - 250 addition and new deck. Allison 324 Beaver Dam/Lot 19, Block 7, Vail Village 1St Applicant: Bill and Clare Brown May residence - Addition. Brent 5137 Black Gore Drive/Lot 16, Block 2, Gore Creek Subdivision. ApplicantL: Brice May Phillips residence - Enclose space below garage. Dominic 2696 Davos Trail/Lot 6, Block C, Vail Ridge. Applicant: Michael and Carol Phillips Herman residence - Change to driveway. Allison 343 Beaver Dam/Lot 1, Block 3, Vail Village 3~d Applicant: Michael and Karen Herman The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's office, located at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479-2138 for information. Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479- 2356,Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information. 2 Kc~ Vail Community Chamber 0~, ws Q~Ptw The aim of the Vail Community Chamber is to re-focus Vail's promotional efforts to serve the Vail business community and thereby stimulate the growth of.sales tax for the Town of Vail. The Vail Community Chamber now represents nearly 100 businesses who pay business license fees to the Town of Vail (this is a requirement for membership in the organization). The Vail Community Chamber, although said by a few detractors to be divisive, is already serving to unify the Vail business community. We seek to further unite this community behind a strategic business plan for Vail. This is thought by many within our membership to have been neglected for far too long. It is important to keep in mind that we in no way intend to take away from any existing efforts, but to add our energy to improving the short and long term business climate within the Town of Vail. The Vail Community Chamber seeks to use Vail's resources to improve Vail's economy. At this time, we are proposing the following: Management of the Town of Vail's visitors' centers. The visitors' centers are owned and financially supported by the Town of Vail and should therefore be operated strictly for the benefit of Town of Vail tax payers. In order to do away with any potential favoritism, as has been known to occur in the past, we intend to install technology that will allow the potential guest to make direct contact with the business of his or her choice. Website and online reservations We are in the process of developing an internet website that will enable the potential guest to easily obtain information and make on-line bookings with the lodge of his or her choice, and also access privately owned local travel specialists. Town of Vail funds distributed for marketing should be used only for Vail-specific programs For far too long, major Town of Vail tax funds have been used to support valley-wide marketing to the detriment of Town of Vail business owners. We believe that any moneys that are collected through taxation of Town of Vail businesses should be spent to promote Town of Vail businesses, rather than their increasingly exuberant down-valley competition. Expansion of Marketing Efforts Freeing the funds that have been allocated for valley-wide marketing will allow Vail to pursue year-round marketing programs. We hope that these efforts will be supported by Vail Resorts, and to work with them in reversing the downward trend that has been evident during the past few winter seasons. Further, it is our experience that past marketing efforts have relied too heavily on the price-sensitive Front Range market and that in order to secure our long term viability, efforts must be focused on marketing Vail as what it is: A year,-round destination resort community. Community Education We have already begun a project to educate the local consumer of the importance of supporting locally owned businesses, and the return that this provides to the community. Long Range Business Development Plan We are currently taking input in the development of a long-term business development plan for the Town of Vail. At our first Annual meeting, to be held this fall, we will submit a draft of this plan to the membership for input and comment. 100 East Meadow Df ive, #31, Vail, Colorado 81657 Memorandum To: Town Council From: Nina Timm Date: August 10, 1999 Subject: Discussions with the business community about Employee Generation 1. Introduction On July 20, 1999 Council asked staff to prepare an outline for the meetings to be held with the business community regarding employee generation. A power point presentation has been created to provide information about what an employee generation ordinance would provide and what an employee generation ordinance would potentially mean to expanding or new businesses. Before the meetings begin staff would like to acknowledge that Eagle County is moving forward with a county-wide process. On Monday, August 2, 1999, the County Commissioners asked David Carter to begin moving forward on a county-wide employee generation requirement. The first step is that David will be making a decision on a consultant team from the short list that has already been created. The county task force, which Town staff have been invited to participate on, will also begin meeting to discuss employee generation. Based on the progress that the County is making the Town may decide at this point in time to coordinate the Town's efforts with the County's. II. Recommended Next Steps Staff would like to engage a consultant to assist with the business group meetings. This is anticipated to take approximately two to three weeks. The business community meetings will then be held during the second week in September. The meetings will be based on business type - General Retail, Bars and Restaurants, Hotels, and Property Management and Real Estate offices. Included in this last group are property managers for second homeowners that could be affected by this policy. After these meetings staff will spend approximately one week synthesizing the feedback that was received from the business community. This feedback will then be brought to Council for their input and direction for the next meeting with the whole business community. At this point in time if the County is moving forward the Town could then share the information that it has gathered from the Vail business community regarding an Employee Generation Ordinance. If the County has not moved forward, the consultants that the Town has engaged along with staff will begin creating recommendations on the key policy questions that have been discussed. Council would then review the recommendations and make policy decisions about an Employee Generation Ordinance. If the County does move forward we could potentially use their consultants for the business group meetings and then funnel the input from these meetings into a county- wide process. M. Next Steps Consultants will be interviewed and selected to provide assistance with the meetings and formulating recommendations for a Town of Vail Employee Generation Ordinance. After Council input on the power point presentation that will be presented at the business group meetings staff will move forward with scheduling times for the meetings. Staff will move forward on a Town of Vail Employee Generation Ordinance while periodically checking with the County to make sure that the efforts are not being duplicated. IV. Issues for Council - Does Council approve of the process - Will the Council authorize staff to use approximately $20,000 from the housing fund (money that is available from the Arosa/Garmisch project) Is the content of the power point presentation acceptable to Council Memorandum To: Town Council From: Russ Forrest Dominic Mauriello Subject: Suggested Improvements in the Commercial/Multifamily Development Review Process Date: August 10, 1999 1. Purpose The purpose of this work session is to summarize the current process for large scale commercial and multi family development projects and to identify opportunities to improve the process. Staff has met with the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Design Review Board to discuss improvements in the development review process. Significant issues around roles of the various boards and of Council were identified along with how to improve communication between the boards during the application process. Attached is a summary of the roles and responsibilities of the various boards based on the current code. Staff would like to recommend several actions, primarily administrative in nature, to improve the process for the community and future applicants. 2. Goals for the Development Review Process • Achieve the development goals identified in applicable master plans and fairly apply the Town Code in developing staff recommendations. • Create as efficient and fair of a process as is possible, which results in the highest quality development consistent with the Town's vision of being the premier ski resort community. • Give clear direction to applicants on the process and the applicable regulations • Treat applicants and the public, as customers with the public being our primary customer. The Town must: be impartial and fair; be responsive to requests; allow affected parties the opportunity to communicate their opinions to the boards during public hearings; and clearly communicate the applicant's, staff's, and board's responsibilities in the process. 3. Challenges • The Special Development District (SDD) process asks staff and the boards to make a recommendation on whether the benefits of a project outweigh the costs. • Currently an applicant can work with the DRB and the PEC for up to 6-8 months, make numerous revisions, receive a favorable recommendation, and then receive significantly new or different direction from the Town Council. • The review of a project by the boards tends to overlap. For example, both the PEC and the DRB will make recommendations on massing to the Council on a SDD application. 1 • There is limited time to accurately communicate complex information to the Town Council. 4. Current Process Special Development Districts: Step 1: Initial Review by Staff to identify major issues Step 2: Joint Worksession with Council and PEC Step 3: Two to Six Worksessions with PEC and DRB Step 4: Staff develops recommendation Step 5 PEC and DRB develop a recommendation for the Town Council Step 5: Council reviews project during worksessions (1-2 worksession) Step 6: Council Considers 2 readings of an ordinance for an SDD (Code has time requirements for Council taking action after a PEC hearing on certain types of applications) Step 7: Final DRB review Maior Exterior Alterations: Step 1: Staff reviews project to identify major issues Step 2: PEC and DRB worksessions to review project Step 3: Staff develops recommendation Step 4: PEC approves, disapproves, or approves with conditions a major exterior alternation. Step 5: Final DRB review 5. Summary of Issues and Actions Issue Action Follow-up Sequence of Obtain Council input on the broad parameters Discuss with Board Review of a project earlier in the process: Steps PEC, DRB and with an SDD would include: Council 1) Staff review to identify critical issues 2) PEC review to identify critical issues If there were a 3) Council has 1-3 worksessions to review formal sketch the conceptual plans and vote on the plan approval - broad parameters for the project - height, then the code uses, general benefits of the project would need to be outweigh the potential costs of deviating modified. from the underlying zoning. Is there a justification for supporting an SDD? 4) DRB & PEC develop recommendations 5) Council reviews final plans and considers an ordinance for an SDD 6 Final DRB review 2 Clarify Roles Staff has summarized the roles of the Discuss and Council, PEC, DRB, and staff in the obtain agreement attachment. This summary indicates several on the roles of conflicts where roles are overlapping between each entity. This the two boards. Staff would recommend that may require a the PEC not review specific design issues. code change. Communication Have at least 1 joint work session early in the This is an between DRB process between the DRB & PEC to clearly administrative and PEC communicate how massing issues will be action that has addressed. occurred in the past. Create Design On complex projects staff will develop a Build off of what Review Board checklist for design review to aide in the was done for the Checklist decision making process for the DRB. DRB for the Marriott project Engage the Using the checklist mentioned above, have This is an services of an an independent reviewer with significant administrative independent design experience review a project for action that designer to compliance. This information would be Community provide an forwarded to the DRB to further aide in the Development has independent design review process taken in the past. review of design Require image Require large-scale commercial and Simply require processing residential applicants to use image this for submittal- processing to simulate how a proposed Visual analysis building will look from various points around already required. the building. This should also include a distant/landscape view from the interstate or other viewing point (ski mountain) Staff Memo/ Focus on improving the verbal presentation to Administrative Presentations Council Action In the memo summarize the pros/cons & implications of a project up front in the memo. Ensure all critical issues are resolved or resolvable before giving a staff approval for a recommendation. Adequate time Commercial development review is complex. Ensure there is for presentations Staff needs adequate time to responsibly adequate time on communicate the critical issues and the Council implications to the Council so that they can agenda make an informed decision. Scoping before a Request that applicants notify adjacent This is an submittal property owners prior to a submittal to review administrative the plan action that can happen immediate) 3 6. Action Requested of Council Staff would request the following from the Town Council: • Would you like to create a preliminary approval process (sketch plan) for the Town Council on SDD applications? • Would the Council like to clarify the conflicts in the code where PEC is reviewing design issues? • Is the Council comfortable with the other administrative recommendations that staff is recommending above? 4 Attachment 1 Roles and Responsibilities Of the Town of Vail Boards and Staff Revised on July 16, 1999 Purpose: The purpose of this document is to clarify the responsibilities of the Design Review Board, Planning and Environmental Commission, Town Council and staff on various applications reviewed by these agencies Summary of general distinctions between the DRB and the PEC on development Applications: Planning and Environmental Commission: Design Review Board: The PEC's review of most applications is focused The DRB's review of applications is focused on on large-scale issues such as appropriateness of the only those issues contained in the design guidelines use, impacts of the development on the development such as ultimate bulk, mass, and articulation of objectives of the Town, economic impacts of structures, roof pitch, proposed materials, color, proposed uses, impacts on neighborhood, traffic landscaping, etc. impacts, pedestrian access, general environmental impacts, general impacts of bulk and mass on The DRB is not responsible for issues related to the neighboring sites, and the like. economics impacts of a development, the proposed use, off-site traffic impacts, mitigation of The PEC is not responsible for such things as development impacts on public infrastructure, etc. architectural details, roof pitch, materials, fagade treatments, landscaping, etc., as this is the responsibility of the DRB. The PEC shall: The DRB shall: • Ensure plan meets the technical requirements of • Review the proposal for compliance with the Zoning Regulations (setbacks, GRFA, Chapter 11 Design Guidelines, Vail Village density, building height, site coverage) Urban Design Considerations, Lionshead. Redevelopment Master Plan Architectural • Evaluate the impacts of the development on Design Guidelines, Streetscape Master Plan adopted TOV policies (Land use plan, Vail Village Master Plan, Lionshead Redevelopment • Evaluate site layout and on-site circulation Master Plan, Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan) • Evaluate building architecture including detailed bulk and mass review based on design • Evaluate the impacts of a development on the guidelines neighborhood, traffic, air and light and general bulk and mass (potential off-site impacts) Evaluate all structure materials, colors, etc. • Evaluate a development's impact on the natural • Evaluate tree and vegetation impacts and environment proposed landscape plans • Evaluate impact of the proposed use or • Evaluate grading plans structure on the community, traffic, etc. • Evaluate lighting and signage plans -1- Division of Responsibilities For Specific Application Types Town Council/PEC/DRB/Staff Design Review Application (DRB only) Planning and Environmental Commission: Action: The PEC has NO review authority on a DRB application. but must review any accompanying PEC application as prescribed herein. Design Review Board: Action: The DRB is responsible for final approva!/denial of a DRB application.. The DRB is responsible for evaluating the proposal for: - Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings - Fitting buildings into landscape - Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography - Removal/Preservation of trees and native vegetation - Adequate provision for snow storage on-site - Acceptability of building materials and colors - Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms - Provision of landscape and drainage - Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures - Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distances - Location and design of satellite dishes - Provision of outdoor lighting - The design of parks - Compliance with the architectural design guidelines of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, the Vail Village Design Considerations, the Vail Streetscape Master Plan Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines. Staff may also approve DRB applications of minimal complexity as defined in the Zoning Regulations. Town Council: Actions of DRB or PEC maybe appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town Council evaluates whether or not the PEC or DRB erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with modifications, or overturn the board's decision. -2- 250 proposals Planning and Environmental Commission: Action: The PEC has NO review authority on a 250 application.. Design Review Board: Action: The DRB is responsible for final approvaUdenial of a 250 application.. The DRB is responsible for evaluating the proposal for: - Compliance with the minimum landscaping and site development standards required (i.e., landscaping, paved parking, underground utilities, removal of disallowed building materials, compliance with light standards, etc.) - Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings - Fitting buildings into landscape - Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography - Removal/Preservation of trees and native vegetation - Adequate provision for snow storage on-site - Acceptability of building materials and colors - Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms - Provision of landscape and drainage - Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures - Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distances Location and design of satellite dishes - Provision of outdoor lighting The design of parks - Compliance with the design Guidelines of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan, the Vail Village Design Considerations, the Vail Streetscape Master Plan Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines. Staff may also approve DRB applications of minimal complexity as defined in the Zoning Regulations. Town Council: Actions of DRB or PEC maybe appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town Council evaluates whether or not the PEC or DRB erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with modifications, or overturn the board's decision. -3- Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Order of Review: Generally, applications will be reviewed first by the PECfor acceptability ofuse and then by the DRB for compliance ofproposed buildings and site planning. Planning and Environmental Commission: Action: The PEC is responsible for final approval/denial of CUP. The PEC is responsible for evaluating a proposal for: 1. Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of the Town. 2. Effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public facilities and public facilities needs. 3. Effect upon traffic, with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the streets and parking areas. 4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses. 5. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the proposed use. 6. The environmental impact report concerning the proposed use, if an environmental impact report is required by Chapter 12 of this Title. Conformance with development standards of zone district - Lot area - Setbacks - Building Height - Density - GRFA - Site coverage - Landscape area - Parking and loading - Mitigation of development impacts Design Review Board: Action: The DRB has NO review authority on a CUP, but must review any accompanying DRB application. The DRB is responsible for evaluating the DRB proposal for: - Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings - Fitting buildings into landscape - Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography - Removal/Preservation of trees and native vegetation - Adequate provision for snow storage on-site - Acceptability of building materials and colors - Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms - Provision of landscape and drainage - Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures - Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distances - Location and design of satellite dishes - Provision of outdoor lighting - The design of parks -4- Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines. Staff provides a staff memo containing background on the property and provides a staff evaluation of the project with respect to the required criteria and findings, and a recommendation on approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Staff also facilitates the review process. Town Council: Actions of DRB or PEC maybe appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town Council evaluates whether or not the PEC or DRB erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with modifications, or overturn the board's decision. -5- Variance Order of Revie?v: Generally, applications will be reviewed first by the PECfor impacts of the proposed variance and then by the DRB for compliance ofproposed buildings and site planning.. Planning and Environmental Commission: Action: The PEC is responsible for final approval/denial of a variance. The PEC is responsible for evaluating a proposal for: 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. 2. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this Title without grant of special privilege. 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. 4. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the proposed variance. Design Review Board: Action: The DRB has NO review authority on a variance, but must review any accompanying DRB application. The DRB is responsible for evaluating the DRB proposal for: - Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings - Fitting buildings into landscape - Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography - Removal/Preservation of trees and native vegetation - Adequate provision for snow storage on-site - Acceptability of building materials and colors - Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms - Provision of landscape and drainage - Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures - Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distances - Location and design of satellite dishes - Provision of outdoor lighting - The design of parks Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines. Staff provides a staff memo containing background on the property and provides a staff evaluation of the project with respect to the required criteria and findings, and a recommendation on approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Staff also facilitates the review process. Town Council: Actions of DRB or PEC maybe appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town Council evaluates whether or not the PEC or DRB erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with modifications, or overturn the board's decision. -6- Major Exterior Alteration (LMU-1 and LMU-2) Order of Review: Generally. applications will be revieived first by the PECfor impacts of use/development and then by the DRBfor compliance ofproposed buildings and site planning. Planning and Environmental Commission: Action: The PEC is responsible for final approvaUdenial of a Major Exterior Alteration. The PEC shall review the proposal for: - Conformance with development standards of zone district - Lot area - Setbacks - Building Height - Density - GRFA - Site coverage - Landscape area - Parking and loading - Mitigation of development impacts - Compliance with the goals and requirements of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan (except design guidelines) Design Review Board: Action: The DRB has NO review authority on a Major Exterior Alteration. but must review any accompanying DRB application. The DRB is responsible for evaluating the proposal for: - Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings - Fitting buildings into landscape - Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography - Removal/Preservation of trees and native vegetation - Adequate provision for snow storage on-site - Acceptability of building materials and colors - Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms - Provision of landscape and drainage - Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures - Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distances - Location and design of satellite dishes - Provision of outdoor lighting - Compliance with the architectural design guidelines of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines. Staff provides a staff memo containing background on the property and provides a staff evaluation of the project with respect to the required criteria and findings, and a recommendation on approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Staff also facilitates the review process. Town Council: Actions of DRB or PEC maybe appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town Council evaluates whether or not the PEC or DRB erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with modifications, or overturn the board's decision. -7- w Major Exterior Alteration (CC1 and CC2) and Minor Exterior alteration (CC1 and CC2) Order of Review: Generally, applications will be reviewed first by the PECfor impacts of use/development and then by the DRB for compliance ofproposed buildings and site planning. Planning and Environmental Commission: Action: The PEC is responsible for final approval/de7tial of a MajorlVfinor EYterior Alteration. The PEC shall review the proposal for: - Conformance with development standards of zone district - Lot area - Setbacks- - Building Height - Density - GRFA - Site coverage - Landscape area - Parking and loading - Compliance with the goals and requirements of the Vail Village Master Plan, the Streetscape Master Plan, and the Vail Comprehensive Plan - Compliance with the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Vail Village Design Considerations with respect to the following: - Pedestrianization - Vehicular penetration - Streetscape framework - Street enclosure - Street edge - Building height - Views - Service/delivery - Sun/shade analysis - The PEC's approval "shall constitute approval of the basic form and location of improvements including siting, building setbacks, height, building bulk and mass, site improvements and landscaping." Design Review Board: Action: The DRB has NO review authority on a Major or Minor Erterior Alteration, but must review any accompanying DRB application. The DRB is responsible for evaluating the proposal for: - Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings - Fitting buildings into landscape - Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography - Removal/Preservation of trees and native vegetation - Adequate provision for snow storage on-site - Acceptability of building materials and colors - Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms - Provision of landscape and drainage - Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures - Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distances - Location and design of satellite dishes - Provision of outdoor lighting - Compliance with the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and design considerations -8- Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines. Staff provides a staff memo containing background on the property and provides a staff evaluation of the project with respect to the required criteria and findings, and a recommendation on approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Staff also facilitates the review process. Town Council: Actions of DRB or PEC maybe appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town Council evaluates whether or not the PEC or DRB erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with modifications, or overturn the board's decision. -9- Special Development District and Major Amendment Order of Review: Generally, applications will be reviewed first by the PEC for impacts of use/development, then by the DRB for compliance ofproposed buildings and site planning, and final approval by the Town Council. Planning and Environmental Commission: Action: The PEC is advisory to the Town Council. The PEC shall review the proposal for and make a recommendation to the Town Council on the following: • Permitted, accessory, and conditional uses • Evaluation of design criteria as follows (as applicable): A. Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. B. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. C. Parking And Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 10 of this Title. D. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town policies and urban design plans. E. Natural and/or Geologic Hazard: Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is proposed. F. Design Features: Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. G. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. H. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. 1. Workable Plan: Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. - Recommendation on development standards including, lot area, site dimensions, setbacks, height, density control, site coverages, landscaping and parking Design Review Board: Action: The DRB has NO review authority on a SDD proposal, but must review any accompanying DRB application The DRB review of an SDD prior to Town Council approval is purely advisory in nature. The DRB is responsible for evaluating the DRB proposal: - Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings - Fitting buildings into landscape - Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography - Remova I /Preservation of trees and native vegetation - Adequate provision for snow storage on-site -10- r' Acceptability of building materials and colors - Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms Provision of landscape and drainage Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures - Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distances Location and design of satellite dishes Provision of outdoor lighting Compliance with the architectural design guidelines of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines. Staff provides a staff memo containing background on the property and provides a staff evaluation of the project with respect to the required criteria and findings, and a recommendation on approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Staff also facilitates the review process. Town Council: Action: The Town Coctncil is responsible for final approval/denial of an SDD. The Town Council shall review the proposal for the following: • Permitted, accessory, and conditional uses • Evaluation of design criteria as follows (as applicable): A. Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. B. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. C. Parking And Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 10 of this Title. D. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town policies and urban design plans. E. Natural and/or Geologic Hazard: Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is proposed. F. Design Features: Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. G. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. H. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. 1. Workable Plan: Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. - Approval of development standards including, lot area, site dimensions, setbacks, height, density control, site coverages, landscaping and parking -11- Special Development District Minor Amendment Staff: Action: The staffshall review and approve. approve ?vith conditions, or deny the proposal and then report decision to the PEC. Evaluation of design criteria as follows (as applicable): A. Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. B. Relationship: Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. C. Parking And Loading: Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 10 of this Title. D. Comprehensive Plan: Conformity with applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town policies and urban design plans. E. Natural and/or Geologic Hazard: Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property on which the special development district is proposed. F. Design Features: Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. G. Traffic: A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. H. Landscaping: Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. 1. Workable Plan: Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. Design Review Board: Action: The DRB has NO review authority on a SDD proposal, but must review any accompanying DRB application. The DRB is responsible for evaluating the DRB proposal based on the following: - Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings - Fitting buildings into landscape - Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography - Removal/Preservation of trees and native vegetation - Adequate provision for snow storage on-site - Acceptability of building materials and colors - Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms - Provision of landscape and drainage - Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures - Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distances - Location and design of satellite dishes - Provision of outdoor lighting - Compliance with the design Guidelines of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan -12- Plannin! and Environmental Commission: The PEC is informed of the staff approval and may call-up item as it deems necessary. Town Council: Actions of DRB or PEC maybe appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town Council evaluates whether or not the PEC or DRB erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with modifications, or overturn the board's decision. -13- W Development Plan (General Use District) Order of Review: Generally, applications will be reviewed first by the PECfor impacts of use/development and then by the DRB for compliance ofproposed buildings and site planning Planning and Environmental Commission: Action: The PEC is responsible for final approval/denial of a development plan in a GU district.. The PEC is responsible for prescribing the following development standards: 1. Lot area and site dimensions. 2. Setbacks. 3. Building height. 4. Density control. 5. Site coverage. 6. Landscaping and site development. 7. Parking and loading. Design Review Board: Action: The DRB has NO review authority on a development plan in a GU district, but must review any accompanying DRB application. The DRB is responsible for evaluating the proposal for: - Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings - Fitting buildings into landscape - Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography - Removal/Preservation of trees and native vegetation - Adequate provision for snow storage on-site - Acceptability of building materials and colors - Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms - Provision of landscape and drainage - Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures - Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distances - Location and design of satellite dishes - Provision of outdoor lighting - The design of parks Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines. Staff provides a staff memo containing background on the property and provides a staff evaluation of the project with respect to the required criteria and findings, and a recommendation on approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Staff also facilitates the review process. Town Council: Actions of DRB or PEC maybe appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. Town Council evaluates whether or not the PEC or DRB erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with modifications, or overturn the board's decision. -14- N., W dco-yg xt: Ko-' PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE PA ZONE DISTRICT 1/4/1999, rev. 3/20, 7/25 - Dwelling Common Rest., Retail, Site Building Land- Site Area Units GRFA Area Recreation Coveraae Setbacks ei scape Allowable 251ac 80% 35% of GRFA 10% of GRFA 55% 20120120 45748' 30% Summary of Seven Re-Developed Vail Village PA Properties o ' 0 Austria Haus .55 ac 56/ac 666 /0 16 /o 'a Bavaria Hau s 2.02 2 ac 2.2 65 /0 12 /o >>>4(~:<fo:::>::>~ n/a 56 '>.t. a€>>> 0 hri Christiania .38 ac stiania .38 ac 35.5/ac 48/0 8/o 0 -1 441 0 Gala ` o;>>>>> - t n Lodge 50 ac 23/ac 21 Y 9/0 0 /o }2 8 47 > >t'> 0 Ramshorn 67 ac 23% n/a 0' ° - / ~<.a>:<::::<:;:: 7 10 42i !glut>>>< Tivoli Lode ° .40 ac 60/a c _ n 6 16' 47 o 0 Vail Athletic Club 69 ac 48. k 5/aC :::`62 /0 102 /o >>Q:::;:»:<::<:: 0 -2 59 /67 12. Averages 39.5/ac 94% 52% 46% 25% Other Vail Village PA-Zoned Properties 0 9 Vail Road .65 ac .41 /ac 1>0$>::::»::>: 35 - ~a /0 0/o <<:4.5Iv~2 18 51 Talisman .509 ac 31.4/ac n/a 0 /o 0'-20- n/a 0 First Bank .48 ac 12.5/ac 21 0/o 3::% °8 -19 29 0191 Swiss Chalet 78 53% 0 ac 32/ac _ n/a 0 Mountain Haus .49 ac 153/ac n/a 25 82' Villa V fl; ahal a I .31 _ » 2 a 38.4/ac c Holiday Inn 2.1 ac 28 /ac na n/a n/a n/a >><nla>> 0 Vail Village Inn 3.4 ac 34.7/ac 39/o ...8.~.f~....... Averages 51.3/ac 157% 41% 49% Note: All statistics are from the Vail Village Master Plan and TOV Community Development staff memos. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE PA ZONE DISTRICT 1/4/1999, rev. 3/20, 7/25 Dwelling Common Rest., Retail, Site Building Land- Site Area Units GRFA Area Recreation Coverage Setbacks Height c e Allowable 251ac 80% 35% of GRFA 10% of GRFA 55% 20120120 45%48' 30% Summary of Seven Re-D v Inged Vail Village PA Pro 'es Austria Haus .55 ac 56/ac o 16% 48 Bavaria °o Haus 2.02 ac o 22.2/ac o 12/o n/a 56 Christiania o 38 ac ° 35.5/ac 0'- 151 44' Ga t la n Lodge .50 Y ac o 23/a , o 0/o _ Ra C orn .67 ac 23% 681 n/a o 230 71-10' 42 Tivoli Lodge .40 ac o o 60/ac n/a 0/o - Vail Athletic Club 62% 69 02 /o ac 0 48.5/ac 1 Averages 39.5/ac 94% 52% 46% 25% Other Vail Village PA-Zoned Properties 9 Vail Road o .65 ac 41 /ac 35% o .4 2' 511 ><1:. : Talisman .509 a o c 31.4/ac n/a 0/0 0'-20' n/a First Bank .48 ac 12.5/ac 0 Swiss Chalet .78 o -91 ac 32/ac ° 53 /0 29 /o Mountain a Haus 49 ac ° 01 153/ac n/a 25 82 Villa V ahaII 312 ac 38.4/ac a.::.. n/a n/a _ n/a Holiday Inn 2 .1 ac 28 /ac a n/a n/a n/a Vail illa a Inn 3.4 ac % g 7/ c 34.7/ ~.f v 39 Averages 51.3/ac 157% 41% 49% Note: All statistics are from the Vail Village Master Plan and TOV Community Development staff memos. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE PA ZONE DISTRICT 114/1999, rev. 3/20,7/25 Dwelling Common Rest., Retail, Site Building Land- Site Area Units GRFA Area Recreation Coverage Setbacks Helght scape Allowable 251ac 80% 35% of GRFA 10% of GRFA 55% 20120120 45%48' 30% rnmarv of Seven -Re-Developed Vail Vill-age PA Properties Austria Haus a : o .55 ac 56/ac Bavaria Haus 2.02 ac 22.2/ac ° 12% Cl:fn/a 56 Christiania .38 ac 35.5/ac o ° 01 44' Ga latY Lode o .50 a ° c 23/ac 9 /0 0/o 21-81 amshorn .67 0 ac 23/o 0 _ n/a 0/o 7' 10' Tivoli Lodge .40 ac 60/ac n/a 0 47 /o ° Vai I Athletic a Club 69 a o c 48.5/ac ...a...... 62/0 102 /o 0 -2 59767' Averages 39.5/ac 94% 52% 46% 25% Other Vail Village PA-Zoned PLQperties 9 Vail Road o 65 ac o 41 /ac 35/0 0/o 2' 18 51 Talisman .5 0 , 09 ac 31.4/ac 0/o rst Bank .48 ac 12.5/ac 0 29' 2 Fi-191 81 Swiss Chalet o ac 32/ac .78 29% 53 9 n/a Mountain Haus .49 ac 153/ac 90:1Q<:>::::: n/a 25% Villa V a hall ~ ~<<< a .312 ac 38.4/ac n/a n/a q.::.::. 8 n/a Holiday Inn 2 .1 ac 28/ac n.a r. is Vi Village Inn 3.4 a C 34.7/ac ..a. 39% Averages 51.3/ac 157% 41% 49% Note: All statistics are from the Vail Village Master Plan and TOV Community Development staff memos. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE PA ZONE DISTRICT 1/4/1999, rev. 3/20, 7/25 Dwelling Common Rest., Retail, Site Building Land- Site Area Units GRFA Area Recreation Coverage -Setbacks Height scaae Allowable 251ac 80% 35% of GRFA 10% of GRFA 55% 20120120 45748' 30% Summary of Seven Re-D veloped Vail Village PA Pro rtiea Austria Haus c <«<;;; 66% 55 ac 56/ac o 2'- 19' 481 Bavaria Haus 2.02 0 0 ac 22.2/ac /0 12 /o n/a 56 Christiania 48% 38 0 ac 35.5/ac G ala tYo Lode .50 0 0 ac 23/ac 9 2 8 mshorn .67 ac 230 n/a o Lodge .40 a o Tivoli 61-16, c 60/ac n/a 0 /o 47% Vail Athletic a'<»:> Club .69 ac 48.5/ac o 0 102 /o 0 -2 59 767 2.°f.,c,;'';;;.> Averages 39.5/ac 94% 52% 46% 25% Other Vail Village PA-Zoned Properties 9 Vail Road .65 ac 41 /ac 35% ` o 1..8;...:<. 2'- 18' 511 Talisman 50 0 9a c 31.4/ac 0-20 n/a ' First Bank .48 a o c 12.5/ac 21 0 .4 ..1 291 8-19 Swiss Chalet .7 0 8 0 , ac Mountain 32 a' /0 29/o _ Haus .49 ac o 153/ac n/a 25 82' Villa Vahall ' `.:`o <<>< a .312 ac 38 n/a n/a .......:~a.:.:.::. 7 18 n/a Holiday Inn 2 .1 ac 28/ac Vail Q>°:<>>> Vi lla a Inn 3 .4 g 7 ac o 34.7 39 /ac 0 Averages 51.3/ac 157% 41% 49% Note: All statistics are from the Vail Village Master Plan and TOV Community Development staff memos. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE PA ZONE DISTRICT 1/4/1999, rev. 3/20, 7/25 Dwelling Common Rest., Retail, Site Building Land- Site Area Units GRFA Area Recreation Coverage Setbacks Height "pe Allowable 251ac 80% 35% of GRFA 10% of GRFA 55% 20120120 45%48' 30% Summarv of Seven Re-Developed Vail Village PA Properties Austria Haus <«< 55 ac 56/ac 66% 16% 2'- 19' .3% 48 Haus 2. ° 02 a c Bavaria n/a 22.2/ac 65 12% 56 Chris' 3 0 8 ac nia 48% 35.5/ac Gal at Lode .50 a o Y c 23/ac ° 0/o 2'-8' 47' amshorn .67 ac 23/o 0 n/a 0 Tivoli y Lodge .40 a o c 60/ac n/a 0/o 6 _ 16 47 /o Vai I Athletic Club .69 ac o 48.5/ac o 1 0 02 /o '-2- 59767, Averages 39.5/ac 94% 52% 46% 25% Other Vail Village PA-Zoned Properties 9 Vail Road 65 ac 41 /ac 35% o .45./ 2' 511 Talisman .509 a c 0 , 31.4/ac /a First Bank .48 ac o 12.5/ac Swiss Chalet .78 ac 32/ac o 29% 9 n/a Mountain Haus .49 ac 153/ac n/a 25% Villa V °<>< ahalla .312 ac 38 n/a n/a 71-181 n/a Holiday Inn 2 .1 ac 28/ac a.. n/a n/a Vail Villa e Inn 3.4 c 34. g 7/ ac 39% la Averages 51.3/ac 157% 41% 49:% Note: All statistics are from the Vail Village Master Plan and TOV Community Development staff memos. W5 d•~o•4y u.{ux~~ L ME 'WIL Viti.AGF URBAN-. DESIGN. GUIDE PLAN June 11, 1980 THE GUIDE PLAN. This Guide Plan represents collective ideas about functional and aesthetic objectives for Vail Village. It has been developed-over months of time, through a series of public workshops, by Vail residents, merchants, public officials and consultants. Diagrammatic in nature, the Guide Plan is intended to suggest the nature of.the improvements desired. It is based on a number of urban design criteria, established by the workshop participants as particularly appropriate principles for guiding change in Vail Village. As such, the Guide Plan is a response to current issues and perceived problems, and intended to be a guide for current planning in both the public and private sectors. It is anticipated that perceptions of the problems will change over time and that adjustments will be made to the Guide Plan. Those adjustments will be considered on an annual basis, through a process. similar to that which generated the Guide Plan, and based on urban design criteria appropriate to Vail. Companions to the Guide Plan-are three other documents which should be consulted prior to any detailed planning or design: The Framework Plan Architectural Guidelines Goals and Policies The above establish the general objectives and-assumptions underlying the specific recommendations in'the Guide Plan. VAIL VILLAGE KEY TO THE GUIDE PLAN GRAPHIC SYMBOLS Gore Creek Pedestrian 11 HIH Feature area - • Path ,pavement treatment Auto/Truck - Open Focal point access (direction existing or of flow) proposed Auto/Truck- Limited' Infill expansion access, two lane opportunity -within (unloading,passing) festablished constraints Auto/Truck-Limited Service & remote de- access, , one lane livery parking 1. Landscape framework, Separated pedestrian • deciduous/coniferous way trees Annual color planting 4= Key to site-specific (color accent to re- = 7. .-considerations inforce movement) Shuttle bus route;- Existing configuration _two lane (each direction ,r . Shuttle bus route Facade improvements - one 1 ane recommended SUB-AREA CONCEPTS GORE • CREEK DRIVE/BRIDGE STREET 1. Gore Creek walking path (Vail traii). Foot-path from Ford Park to LionsHead along the bank of Gore Creek. Path alternates.from north to south side of creek due to: Corridor width, privacy encro achments, views and sun. Separate sections near Athletic-Club and Creeksi'de- -building may require elevated boardwalks. Final linkage to Ford Park to stay on north side of creek as per criteria mentioned. 2. One-way traffic loop on Hanson Ranch Road and Gore Creek Drive re'in- forced by curb penninsula. Signage to indicate dead-end, service access only to Mill Creek alley (behind Gorsuch Ltd. building). 3. Future remote parking for service/delivery vehicles. Private site with long term parking commitments. Topography, however, favorable to two level structure, lower level accessible from Gore Creek Drive. 4. Remote service/delivery zone. 5. Landscape feature area to reinforce entry to Core. Pocket park potential, enhancement of Mill Creek. T:O.V. parcel. 6. Entry "gateway" to Village Core. Road narrows to one lane exit to - _ discourage counter-flow.-traffic. . "Mill Creek bridge" image, is mechanism.for narrowi•ng.- reinforces gateway sense, emphasizes creek, and provides pedestrian path separate from roadway (by bridge railings) to further tie Mill. Creek Court into pedestrian loop. r. 7. Mill Creek enhancement. Tree planting along creek to increase- visibility and screen building backs to improve enclosure of Mill Creek Court.;,.Tree/shrub-clusters near roadway further reinforce 'gateway' to core and Mill Creek as the boundary. 8. Mill Creek walking path, West side Mill Creek. Path completes linkage from pirate ship and mountain path to Gore Creek Drive. 9. Commercial expansion (around floor).-not_to"exceed 10 feet in depth, possible arcade: To improve pedestrian scale at base of tall building, and-.for--greater transparency as an activity generator..::.-: ' on Seibert Circle. 10.. Seibert -Circle. Feature' area paving treatment.-. Relocate focal...point 1(potentialffountain)..to north for better sun:exposure (fall/spring), creates increased plaza area and are the backdrop for activities.-__; Separated path on north sides for unimpeded pedestrian-route.-during del i very_ periods. 10A. Mountain gateway improvements. Landscaping screen, minor plaza, pedestrian connection loop to Wall Street. 11. Limited building expansion/improvements. Increase facade transparency on south side to strengthen pedestrian activity, with entry to street. Potential expansion of building to south property line. Additional vertical expansion may be considered on south end of building to improve street enclosure proportions but must respect designated Hill street - Gore Range view corridors.. Potential second level open balcony deck (sun pocket) to restore activity to street lost from ground floor terrace. 12. Future mid-block connection to further tie Mill Creek Court to core area. Entry reinforced by pocket park created on Bridge Street. 13A. Raised sidewalk may become major pedestrian route during delivery periods. Slight widening warranted. Potential for open arcade for snow protection-over wooden walk. Landscape improvements include: new consolidated stairs, tie retaining walls replaced with masonry, upgraded planting. 13B. Mid-block connection (covered) from Bridge Street to Village Plaza. 14. Village Plaza. Feature area paving treatment, central focal point visible from Gore Creek Drive. Major land form/planting in N.W. for quiet corner, with evergreen screen planting to define west edge. Wall street stairs, with mid-level jog landing, opens entry area to Lazier Arcade shops. 15. Facade improvements. EvEsores removed, increased facade transparency, entries simplified and oriented to intersection. 16. Key intersection in-Village-Core. Feature area paving treatment. 17. Street access opened. = 18. Facade improvements. Increased ground floor transparency. 19. .Feature area paving entry to core area: 20. Commercial expansion potential - 1 story (from plaza level) would improve enclosure proportions,-and complete third side'of plaza. Sun-pocket terrace potential at first or second level. Large existing evergreen to be preserved. 21. Future arcade section (by remodel) to continue south side walkway uninterrupted to Wall Street. (Building corner barrier currently). 22. Pocket park. Screen fence to close off alleyway (gate required) and continue streetscape. Pocket park with benches, planter; snow storage in winter. Service vehicle zone optional. 23. Pedestrian walkway defined (by paving, planters, lighting, benches; etc.) to,-avoid traffic conflicts and unify diverse, disconnected building facades. Increased attraction to reinforce lodge arcade, west end of Core Area. 24. Service/delivery/trash zone (screened). Potential for multi-use as pocket park. . 25. Commercial expansion - 1 story to provide active facade to pedestrian street,.help reinforce connection of Gore'Creek Drive to. Willow Bridge Road. . 26. Basement delivery corridor (foot) to Gore Creek Plaza building, to be preserved, extended east when possible. 27. Service/delivery parking zone. 28A. Pedestrian connection from Checkpoint Charlie to Willow Place. 288. Residential building expansion potential under existing zoning. Building mass should be stepped back to the south to preserve and F v.n mn ,4n..~n ~lln.e ri ...,.e. ee .anrin..~tn~ in the view nnnrid- man uup uu...i"~rui.c,y vicr..a, "Z' ucJA~1..u.,cu .v 61, 1 1~11 ~.J..._. I uf+. Infill of parcel will help enclosure of Checkpoint Charlie Circle. ~29. Access to Gore Creek. Gentle bank terracing (grass) and natural boulder placement for creekside sitting, wading etc. Shrub/tree infill along mid point of sidewalk to define, gently molded meadow edges for increased i-llusion of space. 30. Bank improvements. Rip-rap, reduced slope, re-seeding and shrub/tree planting for reinforcement of creek as visual feature of the Village. 31. Future bridge improvements.. Second major entry to core area warrants increased imageability - such as with covered bridge (to become standard structure for pedestrian crossings. Bridge structure gives partial enclosure of creekside meadow area, a visible attraction from Crossroads. Reinforce entry further with paving treatment and planting near bridge. 32A. Narrow Willow Bridge roadway to one-lane allow development of pedestrian passage way. Upgrade bridge image.- railings,..lights,,pavement treat- ment, etc. T32B. Existing walkway (separated) connection to;Crossroads area. SUB-AREA CONCEPTS ' EAST MEADOW DRIVE 1. Short-term improvements, to upgrade entry appearance and narrow Vail Road to divert traffic east or west along the Frontage Road. Improve- ments include: - planting bed expansions to fill voids, unify entries - island to narrow Vail Road - tree planting to further restrict views down Vail Road 2. Future study area. Long-term assessment of entry improvements in conjunction with south frontage road improvements and Phase IV & V of Vail Village Inn. 3. Traffic circle turn-around to limit penetration of lost traffic. Convey a "dead-end" road closure appearance from the Frontage Road, and at the same time create a major landscape focal point for west end of E. Meadow Drive as linkage to LionsHead. Traffic south of circle reduced by clear sign directives. Location of circle dependent on long-range plans for Ski Museum (see #5). l 4. Landscape island to enclose circle, screen Bank parking, and make visual linkage to LionsHead. Bank ownership, coordination required. Potential loss of four parking spaces. 5. Ski Museum site improvements. Outdoor display area framed by tree planting. Raised paving surface with.planters on front (circle) side for low-maintenance entry. Pedestrian walk continues around to west. Long-term expansion potential limited.. Further study needed to determine site suitability. 6._ Pedestrian walk, separated from roadway, reinforced by tree planting, continues on north side of E. Meadow Drive to LionsHead. 7. Landscaped open space, approved element of-Vail Village Inn special development district. Pedestrian path connection to Frontage Road and ,Town Hall. 8. Pedestrian walk, separated to Gore Creek path.. 9. Further..study needed. Potential commercial infill .-.I story. Further study-to address size and placement of:.built-structures, parking, and access considerations. Within specified,.constraints,,.by infill development could: - complete E..Meadow. Drive, - to i is natural Vail Road terminus, as an attractive pedestrian street with a variety of landscaped open spaces and pedestrian scale shops - effectively extending the character of the core, to Vail Road - complete the framing of the Vail Road intersection as a defined open space, giving loose order to a presently non-descript area - preserve the views of Vail-Mountain and Gold Peak, screening out the parking lot impact. - - due to topography, allow for below-grade parking under the infill building, with rear-access service. 10. Plaza linkage across E. Meadow Drive uniting commercial area. Feature area paving, planters, kiosks,-benches, etc. Further study needed, integral to infill development in #9. 11. Bus shelter. 12. Separate pedestrian walk by reducing E. Meadow Drive to single bus lane. Upgrade by paving, benches, moveable planter, lighting. Bus passing/waiting at either end adjacent to bus shelters. 13. Existing berm/planting preserved. Color, vegetation, views, and openness preserve the variety of pedestrian experience along E. Meadow Drive. 14. Plaza linkage across E. Meadow Drive to tie commercial uses for mutual. reinforcement, and to maintain rhythm of open space nodes. Feature area paving, planters, benches, etc. Tree planting to frame and soften plaza and roadway. -Landscaped corner near Talisman as quiet sun-pocket sitting area. 15. Required service/patron access points. 16A Separated pedestrian walk, due to bus/auto traffic, continues east to Crossroads and parking structure. 16B Future study. Crossroads circulation plan to identify potential to simplify circulation, reduce conflicts, and integrate with traffic control objectives: 17. Mixed-use traffic area. Triangular central planter expanded to direct traffic-movement.: : West side primarily for pedestrian connection, also must permit traffic turn-around. Traffic patterns directed by signage. Intersection given feature area paving to denote pedestrian priority/ slow traffic zone.' 18. Existing walk lowered slightly to become major'separated-south side pedestrian route (barrier.-free, ramps). Landscape planting buffer along roadway...:... 19:`Village'Road traffic circle. -Improvements to.order.traffic_flows in/out of=the structure,-and to.reduce lost-traffic.penetration into the Village,-:include: - narrowing Frontage Road before intersection to eliminate right- turn lane-which funnels:traffic into Village-Road L - extend center island north to reduce opening C _ close island gaps to force all (but rental) traffic into a single quene for the sequence of entries - narrow entry to E. Meadow Drive from the circle to suggest entry gap to Crossroads; likewise, with access to Sonnenalp move traffic barricade arm closer to circle for visible deterrence to travel east on E. Meadow Drive. - traffic circle with 45 foot.-radius minimum to accomodate all but largest trucks or buses (presumably deterred at Frontage Road). Reconstructed circle elevated 2 feet or more to decrease gradient starting up Village Road. 20. Separation of 2-lane bus route from traffic circle, by means of earth- form buffer to reduce bus/auto conflicts at peak traffic periods. Private land encroachment necessary. 21. Limited commercial expansion - 1 story. Infill commercial possibility to draw pedestrians both east and west along E. Meadow Drive, which with other improvements helps complete the pedestrian loop to the Village Core. Low building, in foreground of taller building to south- west, will not encroach into view corridor. Facades/entries on north and northeast sides. 22. Roof-top park/focal point over parking garage. Dense planting bed as backdrop for low-maintenance feature area paved open space. Benches, lighting, portable planters, and focal point serve as foreground to mountain views, and open space node on pedestrian path. 23. Separated pedestrian walk in public R.O.W. (by narrowing bus lane), with border planting to screen parking and make attractive connection to Covered Bridge Plaza. 24. Future study of potential, and desirability, of below-grade parking with open space and/or building expansion above to further reinforce pedestrian connection. C VAIL VILLAGE DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS Original Date June 11, 1980 Revised January 15, 1993 INTRODUCTION Background These Design Considerations are an integral part of the Vail Village Urban Design Plan. The Plan as a whole is the culmination of many month's effort by residents, merchants, Town staff, and consultants to develop a mechanism to manage physical change in the Village. It is an attempt to identify aspects of the physical character of the Village and to assure as far as possible that future changes will be consistent with the established character, and will make positive con- tributions to the quality of life. Vail was originally conceived as a mountain resort in the pattern of quaint European alpine village. It remains fairly faithful to that image today, because of the commitment of its early founders to that concept. However, recent rapid growth, both in size and popularity, has introduced new. pressures for development, which many feel threaten the unique qualities from which that success has been derived. There are rapidly increasing land values and resulting pressures to expand existing buildings, infill parcels, and even totally re- develop parcels less than 15 years old. This pressure for growth has brought with it the potential for significant change. New materials, new architectural styles, the premium on land usage, and sheer numbers of people and cars all have potentially major impacts on the character and function of Vail. That is not to imply that all growth and change in Vail is negative. There are many areas that are underdeveloped. The actual area of Vail that gives it its unique character is but a small area of the Village. There are definitely opportunities to extend the character of the Core beyond its current limits. These Design Considerations, and the Urban Design Plan as a whole, are intended to guide growth and change in ways that will enhance and preserve the essential qualities of Vail Village. This character, while inspired to a degree by European models, has evolved into a distinctly local interpretation. Any standards, in the end, must be based upon Vail's own unique characteristics. and potential now. To preserve this character, care must be taken to avoid both new architectural prototypes, and historical ones, local or foreign, which do not share the same design vocabulary. These Design-Considerations are a recognition that there is a distinctive design character to the Village and that this character is important to preserve. The Design Considerations The characteristics identified herein, are first of all, descriptions of the primary form-giving physical features of the Village. They are not exhaustive. They are a description of those key elements without which the image of Vail would be noticeably different. They are divided into two major categories: i Urban Design Considerations General, large-scale land use planning issues, as well as form considerations which affect more than one property (or even whole areas). These considerations are primarily the purview of the Planning and Environmental Commission. This Commission also has review responsibilities for additional zoning code compliance such as density control, parking, etc. Architecture/Landscape Considerations Detail, details, style and overall appropriateness of a design for a given site. These considerations are reviewed primarily by the Design Review Board (DRB). Below is a general checklist of major issues and concerns which the applicant must address in the course of the review process. Each of the following items should be addressed at least briefly in any application hearing or submittal: Urban Design Considerations Architectural/Landscape Considerations 1. Pedestrianization 1. "GOES 2. Vehicle Penetration Form 3. Streetscape Framework Pitch 4. Street Enclosure Overhangs 5. Street Edge Composition 6. Building Height Stepped Roofs 7. Views Materials Construction Zoning Code Items 2. FA.*Acts Materials 1. Density Control Color , 2. Landscape Area Reduction Transparency 3. Parking Windows 4. Doors 5. Trim 6. 3. BALCONIES Colon Size Mass Materials Construction 4. DECKS I PATIOS. 5. ACCENT ELEMENTS 6. LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS Plant Materials Paving Retaining Walls Lighting Signage 7. SERVICE Materials Construction ii Secondly, the design considerations are intended to serve-as guideline design parameters. They are not seen as rigid rules, or "cookbook design elements" to bring about a homogeneous appearance in Vail. Rather, they are a statement of .interpretation, subscribed to by the Town Planning/Environmental Commission and Review Board, as to the present physical character and objectives of the Village. They are intended to enable the Town staff and citizen review boards to more clearly communicate to property owners planning and design objectives, and allow .property owners in town to respond in general conformance or to clearly demonstrate why departures are warranted. Finally, these guidelines are intended to help influence the form and design of buildings, not to establish minimum building volumes. Often more than one criteria applies to a given situation e.g. Building Height, Enclosure, Views and Sun/Shade - all are concerns applicable to building height and massing - and they may be mutually conflicting if judged on equal terms. It is the role of the review boards, together with the applicant, to determine the relative importance of each consideration for a given situation. They then must apply those considerations to assure that a balance is achieved between the rights of the public and private sectors. iii UMMAN UtbIUN CONSIDERATIONS A. PEDESTRIANIZATION All new or expansion construction should anticipate the appropriate level of pedestrianization adjacent to the site. A major objective for Vail Village is to encourage pedestrian circulation through an interconnected network of safe, pleasant pedestrian ways. Many of the improvements recognized in the Urban.Design Guide Plans, and accompanying Design Considerations, are to reinforce and expand the quality to pedestrian walkways throughout the Village. Since vehicular traffic cannot be removed from certain streets (bus .routes, delivery access) a totally car-free pedestrian system is not achieveable throughout the entire _ Village. Therefore several levels of pedestrianization are proposed: 1• 'pedestrian-only streets Yi I I - - I wid~l~ vprtB6 i 77- ,r 2'. pedestrian streets with limited deli very traffic- Falk ~d55 ~a Walk with sufficient width for unimpeded pedestrian j walking ~~fo1G~ 2Z~ $ ~0 r 3. separated pedestrian walks where street width and traffic volume (trucks, shuttle bus, etc) preclude } Q joint vehicle/pedestrian use of the roadway 00 O LZ' I 4. primary vehicular routes- minimal pedestrian development confined to wide shoulder, sidewalk, or separate pathway. :The Framework Circulation Plan, and 'sub-area Guide Plans designate the specific type of street develop- ment. desired for major streets in Vail Village. 2 B. VEHICLE PENETRATION To the maximum extent possible.all non-resident traffic should be routed along the Frontage Road to Vail Village/ Vail LionsHead parking structures. 1 In conjunction with pedestrianization `5~nage dn~ tt~r~ --objectives, major emphasis is focussed 444hctroa - - upon reducing auto penetration into the center of the Village. Vail Road fb and Vail Valley Drive will continue - -o serve as the major routes for service and resident access to the l Village. Road constrictions, traffic circles. ~Taf~ic6ircJ~,•~igna$e ~j signage, and other measures are rpn<,tri~f,bns iv indicated in The Guide Plans to r8~?tr'aGt ate; {a visually and physically discourage whJenk a+ndtan? e Q all but essential vehicle penetration only O beyond the Frontage Road. Alternative access points and private parking ~rZZ r5l t_"~ relocation, where feasible, should be considered to further reduce traffic conflicts in the Village. C. STREETSCAPE FRAMEWORK To'improve the quality of the walking experience and give continuity to the pedestrian ways, as a continuous system, two general types'of improve- ments adjacent to the walkways are considered: 1. Open space & landscaping - berms, grass, flowers and tree planting as a soft, colorful framework linkage - alowg -edestrian routes; - r_ and 10azas and park green - spaces-as open nodes and focal..points along those _ routes. 2. Infill commercial storefronts - r expansion_of existing buildings, or new infill development to create new commercial activity generators to give street life and visual interest, as attrac- tions at key locations along pedestrian routes. 3 It is not intended to enclose all i Village streets with buildings, as in the Core Area. Nor is it desireable to leave pedestrian streets in the open - And somewhat undefined condition evident in many other areas of Vail.. Rather, it is desired to have a variety of open and enclosed spaces, both built and landscaped which create a sung framework for pedestrian walks as well as visual interest and activity. D. STREET ENCLOSURE While building facade heights should not be uniform from building to building, they should provide a to enclosure for the street. err ' Pedestrian streets are outdoor rooms whose walls are formed by the buildings. The shape and feel of these 'rooms' are created by the variety of heights and massing (three-dimensional vari- ations) which give much of the visual interest and pedestrian scale unique to Vail. Very general rules, about the-perception of exterior spaces have been developed (empirically) by designers, based on the characteristics of human vision. They suggest that: an external enclosure is most comfortable where its walls are approximately 3-2 as high as the width of the space enclosed; • if the ratio falls to or less, the space'seems unenclosed; and if the height is greater than the width, it comes to, resemble a canyon. 4 In actual application, facades are seldom uniform in height on both sides pf the street, nor is this desired. Thus, some latitude is appropriate , - ' In the application of this - to - 1 - ' ratio. Using the average facade height y z of both sides will generally still be a guide to the "comfortableness" _ of the enclosirre being created. x _ f 4x io . 6X 'In some instances, the 'canyon' effect - - is acceptable and even desirable - for example, as a short-connecting linkage between larger spaces - to v give variet to the walkin °V Y g experience. : f For sun/shade reasons, it is often - advantageous to orient any longer . segments in a north-south direction. `~d~ Long canyon streets in an east-west D direction should generally be _ discouraged. When exceptions to the general height Oc criteria occur, special design con- offer ~bUb sideration should be given to creating _ a well-defined ground floor pedestrian emphasis to overcome the canyon effect. ~4alf Canopies, awnings, arcade and building extensions can all create a pedestrian focus and divert pr,~n attention from upper building Gxfan~on heights and 'canyon' effect. area araa (.ano~,~• For other considerations on building massing see: Building Height Sun*/Shade Views Street Edge -r 5 E. STREET EDGE Buildings in the Village Core should form a strong but irregular edge to the street. ti Unlike many American towns there are no standard setback requirements for buildings in Vail Village. Consistent with the desire for intimate pedestrian scale, placement of.portions of a building.at or near the property line is allowed and encouraged to give strong definition to the pedestrian _ streets. b~v• This is not to imply continuous = building frontage along the property line. A strong street edge is important for continuity, but perfectly aligned facades over too, long a distance tends to be monotonous. With only a few exceptions in the Village, slightly irregular facade lines, building jogs, and landscape areas, give 0 j life to the street and visual interest for pedestrian travel. - - Cu~ud~near yfrcef~ Where buildings jog to create activity pockets, other bul~G{ir elements can be used to con- line job tinue the street edge: b~$• ac~wiFy . - low planter walls - arcades area " - tree planting - raised decks - raised sidewalks - texture changes 1 fit' I ' in ground surface 6 Plazas, patios; green areas are im- portant focal points for: gathering, resting, orienting and should be distributed throughout the Village with due consideration to: - spacing - sun access - opportunities for views - pedestrian activity See also: Sun/Shade Building Height Street Enclosure Views F. BUILDING HEIGHT Basically,.the Village Core is perceived as a mix of two and three story facades,.althounh there are also four and five story buildings. The mix of building heights gives variety to the street--which is desirable. The height criteria are intended to encourage height and gassing variety and to discourage uniform building heights along the street. The definition of height shall be as it is in the Vail Municipal Code. Building height restrictions in Conn. erciai Core I shall be as follows: 1. Up to 600 -of the building (building coverage area) Tray be built to a height of 33 feet or less. 2. No more than 40'. of the building (building coverage area) may be higher than 33 feet, but not higher than 43 feet. 3. Towers, spires, cupolas, chimneys. flagpoles, and similar architectural features not useable as Gross Residential Floor Area may extend above the height limit a distance of not more than twenty-five percent of the height limit nor more than fifteen feet. 4. The above heights are based on an assumed 3 feet in 12 feet or 4 feet in 12 feet roof pitches. To accommodate and encourage steeper roof pitches (up to 6 feet in 12 feet), slight, proportionate height increases could be granted so long as the height of building side walls is not increased (see diagram following). r 7 #40 00, A 00 Height of side wall does not 'increase , . 8 G. VIEWS AND FOCAL POINTS Vail's mountain/valley setting is a. fundamental part of its identity. Views of the mountains, ski slopes, creeks and other natural features are reminders of the mountain environment and, by repeated visibility, are orientation reference points. Certain building features also provide important orientation references and visual focal points. The most significant -view corridors have been adopted as part of Chapter 18.73 of the Vail Municipal Code. The view corridors adopted should not be considered exhaustive. When evaluating a development proposal, priority should be given to an analysis of the impact of the project on views. Views that should be preserved originate from either major pedestrian areas or public spaces, and include views of the ski mountain, the Gore Range, the Clock Tower, the Rucksack Tower and other important man-made and - natural elements that contribute to _ = - the sense of place associated with Vail. These views, which have been adopted by ordinance, were chosen due to their significance, not only from an aesthetic standpoint, but also as orientation reference points for pedestrians. Development in Vail Village shall not encroach into any adopted view corridor unless approved under Chapter 18.73. Adopted corridors- are*Atted in Chapter 18.73 of the Vail Municipal Code. Whether affecting adopted 9 P ted view corridors or PAGE 8A n.:.a ~utiaa not, the impact of proposed development on views from pedestrian ways and public spaces must be identified and considered where appropriate. The Vail Land Use Plan, Town Policies, the Urban Design Guide Plans, and other adopted master plans, shall be used blacks view , of bfx~c vi~~ to help determine which views may Garr~oc- G~~ri~~' by affected, and how they should be addressed. (Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1992) 13 .Db C; 9ij I PAGE 9 N. SERVICE AND DELIVERY Any building expansion should preserve the functions of existing service alleys. The few service alleys that exist in the Village are extremely important to minimizing vehicle congestion on pedestrian ways. The use of, and vehicular access to, those alleys should not be eliminated except where functional, alternatives are provided. In all new and remodeled construction, delivery which avoids or reduces impacts on pedestrian ways should be explored; and adopted whenever practical, for immediate or future usage. Rear access, basement, and below- ground delivery corridors reduce congestion. Weather protection Increases delivery efficiency substantially. Below grade delivery corridors are found in a few.buildings in Vail Village (Sbmark/Gore Creek Plaza, . Village Cehter, Vail Village Inn). Consideration should be given to. extending these corridors where, feasible and the creation of new ones. As buildings are constructed or remodeled, the opportunity may exist to develop segments of a future system. PAGE 10 ur:.e vaisoa SUN/SHADE Due to Vail's alpine climate, sun is~ lut+af ' an important comfort factor, especially in winter, fall andsPrin not ,XISf~ 9 Shade areas have ambient temperatures substantially below those of adjacent direct sunlit areas. son aide, BXly~~i1 On all but the warmest of summer days shade can easily lower btd. temperatures below comfortable levels and thereby negatively impact uses of those areas. All new or expanded buildings - - • _ should not substantially increase the ' - - spring and fall shadow pattern (March 21 through September 23) on adjacent properties or the public 23 or R.O.W.• P ydA 21 In all building construction, shade SUn arya ~ shall be considered in massing and 1 overall height consideration. hppq Notwithstanding, sun/shade considerations are not intended to restrict building height allowances, but rather to influence the massing ~clyfing«~. of buildings. Limited height exceptions may be granted to meet this criteria Additions to existing buildings may 1 be created in several ways to avoid - extending shadow patterns. . ~ 'SUn:nN.X soil rn , ~~a(( 1 r~2! cr ! spr+lg /Fill awl s~nie-5J° S r SAL , PAGE 11 - GBSt , ARCHITECTURE/LANDSCAPE CONSIDERATIONS ROOFS Where visible, roofs are often one of the most donvinant architectural elements in any built environment. In the Village roof form, color and texture are visibly dorinant, and generally consistent, which tends to unify the building diversity to a great degree. The current expression, and objective, for roofs in the Village is to form a consistently unifying backdrop for the architecture and pedestrian streetscape, and to avoid roofs which tend to stand out individually or distract visually from the overall character. Roof Forms Roofs within the Village are typically gable in form and of moderate-to-low pitch. Shed roofs are frequently used for small additions to larger L buildings. Free-standing shed roofs, butterfly roofs and flat . roofs, can be found in the Village but they are-generally considered to be out of character and-inapprop- riate. Hip roofs likewise are rare and generally inconsistent with the character of the Core Area. Towers are exceptions, in both form and pitch, to the general. criteria, but do have an established local veinacular style which should be respected. • A%RM~ ~otN~ 12 Pitch Roof slopes in the VI.ilage typically range from 3/12 to 6/12, with slightly steeper pitches in limited applications. Again, for visual consistency this general 3/12-6/12 range should be g/jZ ~lz 4bf~ preserved. (See Construction below.) Overhangs Generous roof overhangs are also an established architectural feature in the Village - a traditional expression of shelter in alpine environments. Roof overhangs typically range from 3 to 6 feet on all edges. Specific design consideration should be given to protection of pedestrian ways adjacent to buildings. Tee falls, snow slides, and runoff hazards can be reduced by roof orientation, gutters, arcades, etc. Overhang details are treated with varying degrees of ornamentation. Structural elements such as roof beams _ are.expressed beneath the overhangs, simply or decoratively carved. The roof fascia is thick and wide, giving J6" a substantial edge to the roof. eyos~d Compositions The intricate roofscape of the Village as a whole is the result of many in- dividual simple roof configurations. For any single building a varied but simple composition of roof planes is preferred to either a single or a complex arrangement of many roofs. As individual roofs become more complex far~c 5'nyferz~fPt ~r~he~?lir~ the roof attracts visual attention away from the streetscape and the total: roofscape tends toward "busyness" rather than a backdrop composition. r Pl,~s 13 Stepped Roofs As buildings are stepped to reflect :existing grade changes, resulting roof steps should be made where the height change will be visually significant. Variations-which are too subtle appear to be more stylistic than functional, and out of character with the more straight-forward roof design typical in the Village. Yana ~i./)O Materials Wood-shakes, wood shingles, and built- up tow and gravel are almost exclutivel3 used as roof materials in the Village. (See Construction below.) For visual consistency any other materials should have the appearance of the above. • _ Construction Common roof problems and design con- siderations in this climate include: - snowslides onto pedestrian walks - gutters freezing - roof dams and water infiltration -.heavy snow loads Careful attention to these functional details is recommended, as well as familiarity with the local building code, proven construction details, and town ordinances. For built-up roofs, pitches of 4/12 or steeper do not hold gravel well. For shingle roofs, pitches of 4/12 or shallower often result in ice dams and backflow leakage under the shingles. • 14 Cold-roof construction is strongly prefefired, unless warm-roof benefits 3~r Yenf for a specific application can be 2r *we demonstrated. Cold-roofs are double- roofs which insulate and prevent snow ~1Yu melt from internal building heat. By retaining snow on the roof, many of the problems listed can be reduced. Periodic snow removal will be required and should be anticipated in the ~o,st design. VON IrKU(af~ar+ a t4 jLe Roof gutters tend to ice-in completely tub F rafte! am air and become ineffective in the Vail kea'fs ursrdrs Me~fr climate, especially in shaded north- 30enav 0 °40M side locations. Heating the interior S circumference with heat-tape elements or other devices is generally nec- essary to assure adequate runoff control in colder months. 15 FACADES Materials Stucco, brick, wood (and glass) are the primary building materials found in the Village. While not wishing to restrict design freedom over-much, existing conditions show that within this small range of materials-such variation and individuality are possible while pre- serving a basic harmony. Too many diverse materials weaken the continuity and repetition which unifies the street- scape. Of the above materials,stucco is the most consistently used material. Most of the buildings in the Village exhibit some stucco, and there are .virtually no areas where stucco is .entirely absent. It is intended to preserve the dominance of stucco-by its use in portions, at least, of all new facades, and by assuring that other materials are not used to the exclusion of stucco in any sub-area within the Village. Color There is greater latitude in the use of color in the Village, but still a discernible consistency within a general range of colors. For wood surfaces, trim or siding, darker color tones are preferred - browns, greys, blue-greys, dark olive, slate-greens, etc. Stucco colors are generally light - white, beige, pale-gold, or other light pastels. Other light colors could be appropriate, as considered on a case-by-case basis. Bright colors (red, orange, blues, maroon, etc.) should be avoided for major wall planes, but can be used effectively (with restraint) for decorative trim, wall raphics, and other accent elements 7see E. Accent Elements) 16 Generally, to avoid both "busyness", and weak visual interest, the variety of. major wall colors (and materials xcludin9 glass) should not exceed four ~ e nor be less than two. A color/material change between the ~ ground floor and upper floors is a common and effective reinforcement of the pedestrian scale of the street. Transparency Pedestrian scale is created in many ways,. but a major factor is the openness, attractiveness, and generally public character of the ground floor facade of adjacent buildings. Transparent store fronts are "people attractors", opaque or solid walls are more private, imply "do not approach". On pedestrian-oriented streets such as uppper la~~s p?c~lc~n~naM~7 in the Village, ground floor commercial ~dpaque w/w,.+; ir facades are proportionately more trans- wa s. parent than upper floors. Upper floors are typcially more residential, private - and thus less open. •~r~,Kd ~(ur's prultr+an'r3fc~Y OW.4 "yowall pv.•cwJ414 of opzq~e ~r,afenals. ae 17 As a measure of transparency, the most characteristic and successful ground floor facades range from 55% to 70% q } of the total length of the commercial. e~C~ =t37~~a facade. Upper floors are often the converse 30%-45% transparent. . Examples of transparency (lineal -feet of glass to lineal feet I~~b~s~<< of facade) on ground level.. - Covered Bridge Bldg. 58% - Pepi's Sports 71% - Gasthof Gramshammer 48% - The Lodge 66% - Golden Peak House 62% - Casino Building 30% - Gorsuch Building 51% Windows In addition to the general degree of transparency, window details are an important source of pedestrian scale- giving elements. The size and shape of windows are often a response to the function of the street adjacent. For close-up, casual pedestrian .viewing windows are typically sized to 00 human-sized dimensions and characteristics of human vision. (large glass-wall store- fronts suggest uninterrupted viewing, as from a moving car. The sense of intimate +8" pedestrian scale is diminished.) Ground floor display windows are typically raised slightly 18 feet f and do not . extend much over 8 feet above the walk- 'way level. Ground floors which are noticeably above or below grade are exceptions. ?a 17A The articulation of the window itself Iitd~v~Udl is still another element in giving trc vlar pedestrian scale (.human-related dimensions). ~cna Glass areas are usually subdivided to express individual window elements - and are ieMZII f ~ yfical MFOrGu further subdivided by mullions into small panes - which is responsible for much of the old-world charm of the Village. Similarly, windows are most often clustered'in banks, juxtaposed with plain wall surfaces to give a pleasing rhythm. Horizontal repetition of single window elements, especially over long l distances, should be avoided. J-\ Large single pane windows occur in the Village, and provide some contrast, as aU&J IN5 'p,4140cur' 64"4 arm long as they are generally consistent • •f:: in form with other windows. Long `:i:;ti;;~;::::f:;:•.;.;•'•:;~f;.;;;:'::::.;;:::::: continuous glass is out of character. :;;~'':ria;:::%' •f%~'~:.:r'::::;:•:. Bay, bow and box windows are common window details, which further variety and massing to facades - and are encouraged. bow 1'F hoX . Reflective glass, plastic panes, and aluminum or other metal frames are not consistent in the Village and should be avoided. Metal-clad or plastic clad wood frames, having the appearance of painted wood have been used success- fully and are acceptable. Doors ' Like windows, doors are important to character and scale-giving architectural elements. They should also be somewhat transparent (on retail commercial facades) and consistent in detailing with windows and other facade elements. Doors with glass contribute to overall facade transparency. Due to 'the ~a~~im visibility of people and merchandise q} l ,t tcfzSta~ inside, windowed doors are somewhat more effective in drawing people inside :•;o arfxulateJ5OKa-Z to retail commercial facades. Although great variations exist, 25-30% t transparency is felt to be a minimum transparency objective. Private residences, lodges, restaurants, and other non-retail establishments have different visibility and character needs, and doors should be designed accordingly. Sidelight windows are also a means of introducing door- transparency as a complement or sub- stitute for door windows. 19 Articulated doors have the decorative quality desired for Vail. Flush doors, light aluminum frames, plastic applique ?,n,dark 86-96 elements all are considered inappropriate. ~a l frame one D D e? DD Pao dark c~?llX3~wC du+.:L? ~laor aV0 ~ alur~n~n l~::: i NOTE: Security is an important design consideration in Vail. Dead- bolt locks are encouraged. Locks, door handles and glass should all be designed to discourage break-ins. Security-design discussions with the Town police staff are encouraged. As an expression of entry, and sheltered welcome, protected entry- ways are encouraged. Doorways may be recessed, extended, or covered. rid e cien~ed Covered . 20 Trim Prominent wood trim is also a unifying feature in the Village. Particularly at ground floor levels, doors and windows have strong, contrasting + i I (see Color-Facades) framing elements, which tie the various elements 0 together in one composition. Windows and doors are treated as strong visual features. Glass-wall detailing for either is typically avoided. 21 v ' DECKS AND PATIOS Dining decks and patios, when properly designed and sited, bring people to the streets, opportunities to look and be looked at, and generally contribute to the liveliness of a busy street- making a richer pedestrian experience .than if those streets were empty. A review of successful decks/patios in Vail reveals several common char- acteristics: ~b61,zny or b~,?. ~VAL~aw~ .fD encl,E ope direct sunlight from 11:00 - 3:00 increases use by many days/year ~Vmnr~l3 ~r~f~;~r~1e~r and protects from wind 4~r dolor awd y~.-Ie elevated feet'to give views ~LarJ4 °x e11 c4ure~ into the.pedestrian walk (and not the reverse) - physical separation from pedestrian walk of to (planter better than c r cl~n;n ,hr's a wall) 0 0 - overhang gives pedestrian scale/ i shelter. c J 41 0 , Decks and patios should be sited and designed with due consideration to: - sun - views 5?t 10P 4v f~ r T. - wind - pedestrian activity . 22. BALCONIES Balconies occur on almost all buildings in the Village which have at least a second level facade wall. As strong repetitive features they: - give scale to buildings t - give life to the street (when used) t - add variety to building forms - provide shelter to pathways below. ' The promi nance of balcony -forms is due to several fairly common characteristics: Color They contrast in color (dark) with the 4*r PA building, typically matching the trim dark ;,,t , ; rn li kf build? colors (see Facade-Color). ~ 9' t _ Size i ~ii•/. bdl~ary pr;~rcdes foam bvrt~rR~ They extend far enough from the building to cast a prominent shadow pattern. Balconies in Vail are functional as well as decorative. As such, they should be of useable size and located to encourage use. Balconies less than six feet deep are seldom used, nor are those always in shade, not oriented to views or street life. Mass - ; :-El~?reK~S ;a be They are commonly massive yet semi-trans- heaucoive r d parent, distinctive from the building, - lot, ~ i~I yet allowing the building to be somewhat visible behind. Solid balconies are ti is found occasionally, and tend to be too / ~m~D~fa+st dominant obscuring the building.archi- %M tecture. Light balconies lack the M' visual impact which ties the Village together. r, f~ ~aL10 Too Lrviaj. Materials Wood balconies are by far the most pa?+dls common. Vertical structural members e, are the most dominant visually, often I decoratively sculpted. Decorative wrought iron balconies are also consistent visually where the vertical members are close enough to create semi-transparency. Pipe rails, and plastic, canvas or glass panels should be avoided. Construction Cantilevered beams, beams extended to support the balcony, are most often visibly exposed on the underside of balconies. As such they are an expression of structure and tie the balconies to the building visually. ~~'l~fitc~9 of ~fr[l~fttre~ 24 ACCENT ELEMENTS The fife, and festive quality of the Village is.given by judicious use of accent elements which give color, movement and contrast to the Village. Colorful accent elements consistent with existing character are encouraged, such as: Awnings and canopies - canvas, bright color or stripes of two colors. Flags, banners - hanging from buildings, poles, and even across streets for special occasions. Umbrellas - over tables on outdoor patios. Annual color flowers - in beds or in planters. Accent lighting - buildings, plazas, windows, trees (even Christmas lights all winter).- Painted wall graphics - coats of arms, symbols, accent compositions, etc. Fountains - sculptural, with both winter and summer character. 25 LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS Landscape considerations include, but go beyond, the placement of appropriate plant materials. Landscape considerations include: - plant materials - paving - retaining walls - street furniture (benches, kiosks, trash, etc.) - lighting - signage - Plant Materials Opportunities for planting are not extensive in the Viliage,'which places a premium on the plant selection and design of the sites that do exist. Framework planting of trees and shrubs should include both deciduous and evergreen species for year round continuity and interest. Native plants are somewhat limited in variety, but are clearly best able to withstand the harsh winter climate, and to tie the Village visually with its mountain setting. Some typical local plant materials include: Trees Narrow-leaf cottonwood Balsam poplar Aspen Lodgepole pine Colorado spruce Subalpine fir, Shrubs ]ii 11 ow Dogwood Serviceberry Alpine currant Chokecherry Mugho pine. Potenti 1.1 a Buffaloberry 26 Paving The freeze/thaw cycle at this altitude virtually eliminates common site-cast concrete as a paving surface (concrete spail). High-strength concrete may work in selected conditions. Asphalt brick (on concrete or on sand), and concrete block appear to be best suited to the area. In general, paving treatments should be coordinated with that of the public R.O.W: adjacent: The Town uses the following materials for al-1 new construction: - asphalt - general use pedestrian streets - brick on concrete - feature areas (plazas, intersections, fountains, etc.) Retaining Walls Retaining walls to raise planting area often protects the landscape from pedestrians and snowplows, and should provide seating opportunities: Two types of material are already well- established in the village and should be utilized for continuity. - split-face moss rock reneer - Village Core pedestrian streets (typical) - rounded cobble hidden mortar - in open space areas if above type - not already established nearby. (example: Town of Vail entry wall) Wood retaining walls are strongly dis- couraged due to deterioration caused by the harsh climate. They may be effectively used with appropriate detailing to resist rot and express crafted joint conditions. 27 . t Lighting light standards should be coordinated with those used by the Town in'the public R.O.W. Signactee Refer to Town of Vail Signage Ordinance. Colorful annuals are used in key locations throughout the Village to accent pedestrian areas, highlight building entries, and as plaza focii. These color accents can be provided in: - retained planting beds - flower boxes - hanging pots, baskets - ground beds 28 SERVICE Trash handling is extremely sensitive in'a pedestrian environment. Trash collection is primarily made in off- - - ' peak hours. It is the building _ owners responsibility to assure that existing trash storage problems are corrected and future ones avoided. - - - Aqi ot,/rt~7ca~a du*?ps,r minted ~w SKI ~ncn.trtclcn~a~euuacr~ e~'lc~t'G {ar?~ Ga~?~i,,'eu#' w~ ~rdjacc~t puilQiv~ Garbage, especially from food service establishments must be carefully considered, including: - quantities generated _ - pick-up frequency/access - container sizes - enclosure location/design - visual, odor impacts Garbage collection boxes or dumpsters must be readily accessible for'col- lection at all times yet fully screened from public view - pedes- trians as well as upper level windows in the vicinity. Materials Exterior materials for garbage en- -rc" fyw ed. dam~c W closures should be consistent with oraclj.rmiXeM Qllgeooonl-1) that of adjacent buildings. Construction ~w a ~I Durability of the structure and oper- U=A-ijW ability of doors in all weather are prime concerns. Metal frames and posts behind the preferred exterior materials should be considered to withstand the inevitable abuse these structures suffer. 29 UD Review 9(4), 1986 THE VAIL VILLAGE URBAN DESIGN GUIDE PLAN: A Framework For Guiding Development Thomas A. Braun and Jeffery T. Winston One of the nation's first ski-area "new towns," Vail, how it may affect the fabric of the Village. Buildings that, Colorado grew up around the base of Vail Mountain in the at one time, had design features such as landscaped early 1960's. Over the next quarter century, an area that setbacks and a pleasant variety of roof pitches, were had once seen only sheep ranching and logging was being replaced by structures built to their maximum site transformed into one of the nation's premiere resort coverage and height limitation. communities. Today the town of Vail stretches for eight miles along a narrow valley and has a permanent Standard zoning regulations had been in place since 1967, population of 5,000 that can swell to over 30,000 during but during a time of low intensity development, they had peak periods. not had a significant effect on the shape of development. Only The area that would become '`~?^+q I with increased pressure ~to build to the allowed limits known as Vail Village was, - _ was it recognized that the initially, little more than a - Town's zoning controls were small cluster of shops and too rigid to encourage lodges at the base of Vail/ sensitive design solutions Mountain. With the increasing and, in fact, produced an popularity of the ski urban form different from the mountain, the Village expand traditional Vail Village. After ed far beyond the original declaring a moratorium on vision of its founders. Though] building, a need was soon the Town of Vail has grown to identified for the Town to include a number of other create a better development activity centers as well as review process to guide new numerous shopping areas construction in the Village. and residential neighbor- 1 _ The goal was to guide growth hoods, Vail Village remains - - - and change in ways that the central focus of the could enhance and preserve community the essential qualities of the Village. Originally, Vail Village was _ pallerned alter a composite DEALING WITH TOO of Swiss alpine villages. MUCH OF A GOOD Subsequent development THING amplified this theme evolving The Town's planning staff a fairly consistent arch i_ began to work with ari urban itectural style, irregular street design consultant in 1978 to patterns, and low buildings of -~'y-"'" !°`A~'•.; address the design and two to four stories. A very F~ development issues facing successful activity center Vail Village. After an with mixed commercial and residential character, Vail extensive process of field analysis of existing conditions, Village became pedestrianized with restrictions placed on during which it was found that the Village's character was vehicle access. Public plazas, interconnecting established by the overall built enviroment rather than any pedestrianways, and outdoor dining decks all added to the dominant individual structures, a series of public Village ambiance that along with the consistent workshops was held. Billed as "roll up your sieves" .architectural character is largely responsible for Vail's sessions, they sought to identify community goals for attraction and success today. physical improvement goals to be included in a plan to guide development and redevelopment in the Village. The development of the ski area occurred at a time when the entire ski industry was experiencing considerable The product of these efforts, the Vail Village Urban Design growth and by the mid-1970's, a community that only a Guide Plan, not only sets architectural guidelines, but also decade earlier had strongly encouraged development identifies physical improvements desired in the Village. It suddenly found itself facing new building permit was the goal of the Plan to ensure that future changes in applications almost daily. Increasing land costs led to the Village would be consistent with its established buildings being constructed with an emphasis upon character and result in positive contributions to the built maximizing square footage with little or no attention paid to environment. 12 UD Review 9(4), 1986 THE VAIL VILLAGE URBAN DESIGN GUIDE STREET ENCLOSURE Desired ratios of building PLAN height to street width that determine the comfort of The Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan consists of two outdoor urban spaces; distinct elements: the Guide Plan and the Design Considerations. Together, they establish the criteria and STREET EDGE Preservation of a strong but review process for development and improvements in Vail irregular edge to the street; Village. Each serves a different purpose, but both work toward creating the desired physical form of the Village. BUILDING HEIGHT Regulations that not only The Guide Plan establish limits, but also maintain the variety The Guide Plan describes specific functional and characteristic of the village and aesthetic Improvements as identified by the public VIEWS Identification of key views in the Village workshop participants and is updated regularly by the and appropriate design response. Town Council and the Planning Commission, it responds to current issues and perceived problems and guides Architectural/Landscape Design After a planning in both the public and private sectors. project receives Urban Design approval, it is reviewed according to detailed guidelines related to issues Diagramatic in nature, the Guide Plan is intended only to such as balconies, building materials, colors, and suggest the nature of desired improvements and presents other specific design elements. The design them in maps of specific sub-areas throughout the Village, considerations dealt with during this second level These Sub-Area Concepts include locations for pocket review include: parks and public plazas, circulation and pedestrianization ROOFS Pitches materials, composition; improvements and they also identify locations of desired poshion; commercial infill on private land. FACADES transparency (window/wall ratio) Design Considerations materials, trim ,doors; Analysis of Vail Village revealed that, while inspired to a BALCONIES styles, materials, effect upon degree by European models, it has evolved into a building character; distinctly local interpretation. The Design Considerations nurture this unique character through a set of guidelines DECKS AND PATIOS elevations, shelter, sun for architecture and site planning in the Village. They exposure, separation from street; require that care be taken to preserve this character by avoiding both new and historic architectural types that do ACCENT ELEMENTS trim, flowers, water features, not share the same design vocabulary. awnings; Specifically,-the Design Considerations address only the LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS plant materials, primary, form-giving, physical features that, taken decorative walls, paving treatments and together, determine the image of Vail. These elements are divided Into two categories Urban Design and SERVICE trash removal considerations. Architecture/Landscape Design: THE URBAN DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS Urban Design Considerations In general, As outlined above, the Plan sets forth the criteria to be these considerations address large scale site used by the staff, Planning and Environmental planning and urban form considerations. These Commission, and Design Review Board in reviewing criteria are used in a first level of review to evaluate a development proposals. The following outlines how the project's impact on the streetscape and its Guide Plan is used: relationship to surrounding structures. The Urban Design Considerations include: Planning Staff Review Because of the sensitive nature of the Village and the PEDESTRIANIZATION The degree to which the detailed review process involved; the staff has been project reinforces the pedestrian character of the sucessful in holding pre-development conferences area; with developers prior to any significant design work being done. At this meeting, the staff outlines the VEHICULAR PENETRATION Project compliance review process and, more importantly, identifies with restricted vehicle requirements in certain issues that may be critical to the proposed areas, and other requirements to reduce vehicular development. Given the subjective nature of design dependence; criteria, this initial exchange is considered STREETSCAPE FRAMEWORK Preserving the particularly important. continuity of the built or landscaped setting of the Throughout the design process, the planning staff Village's walking experience; often holds discussions and negotiations with the . .'f3 CHILDREN'S L~..j FOUNTAIN j ~ 'r.f:ic control neck <:-ten llancscwagi i , G Pb n A. onwev tre:nc on -ansen • ' - - - aenan sa. Gets sent mey ngmrtd. GR K OR;vE ORF CgFFK DRIVE 2 OgE lnterswtion itnpfav en+en is - _ sale Featured pavinq to MnJp o • - : "'0••° this key intersw'... i ' Hnor foeJl ootnt. imerovementf • -:aii:=~"'•• ~ _ 1 to e>ttstno Daddtnp to create ftrettq • _ corner to Balance intersection. ~ • \ '•'~C"tt[ Desoedtoeatien lersanicelddieery puking . to earn east end of Village. Tapopeephy . - i.:::::::•..:.:::: sugrystssl pnwadevjlopmopmennt t "ryesloaerieyeiteith r"-: `i:-:...:.. inn`, I lo, f, lam-' •1~~'" !wn ` , : ` • i • •'1:°: iii::;.. ~a.l' • ti • ~ • . .ter i~ ' , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ MII Creek velkinq deih. Path canntCS motu~tain, { ! rev 1~Q - \ Pire4$nq prey ue e, to Gant Cne. S~J6EE~T~ ~q0• ) ConmucW e>mensmn to f~prete eegestnen "W otullbWo.np•.ndtotnptotetrmspv ncy ~•'•.~.r~..• t ..G~e 1 1;, .i~^- \ \ ~i eegMVOenerotor en S4geR CrUa. ~ ~ i •:+'~':`.•-'.1 :•i: r c~ From The Vail Village Urban. - , •`~lt ..c,e Daaiyo Guide Plan UD Review 9(4), 1986 _ project designer concerning the proposal's FROM THE PLAN... compatibility with the Guide Plan. In addition, an interdepartmental review is conducted to receive input from the Public Works, Fire, and Police Departments. Once an agreement is reached, the staff plays a proactive role in the public review process by making recommendations to the review t' boards on each project proposal. Following approval of a project, the planning staff _ k*k}" remains involved by reviewing construction drawings s ' r:,. zq4 y; and conducting on-she inspections. This stage in the r ^a . " review process is critical to ensure that the detailed f!. design elements of a project are carried out. Planning and Environmental Commission The Planning and Environmental Commission (PEC) is the most prominent review board involved in this process. The Commission is charged with first level Strong, Irregular Street Edge review of a development project as it relates to the Guide Plan's Sub-Area Concepts and the general Urban Design Considerations. Approval at this level is of aspects of project's general form such as its footprint structure, height, mass, and other factors related to the "large scale" Urban Design Considerations. This process is designed so that without an inordinate investment of design time, a developer will know that, if approved at this level, he or she `has a project.' Design Review Board Following approval by the PEC and additional design by the applicant, The Design Review Board (DRB) reviews a project with respect to detailed design considerations, architectural style, and landscape 011 ii,pgp7t!I~!~!'~'i`{~ ' elements. The DRB acknowledges that the basic jHj(~1~~(y form of the structure has been approved and focuses its review upon the aesthetic detail established in the Guide Plan. d IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PLAN t It was recognized early in the analysis of Vail that j standard zoning regulations were not adequately , preserving the character of the Village. Therefore, once the Guide Plan was developed, steps were taken to integrate zoning regulations with the Plan's Design Considerations. The following are several examples of how zoning regulations were modified to facilitate the implementation of the Guide Plan. Building Setbacks Building Jogs Create Activity Areas and Interest All required setbacks in the Village have been eliminated. Building setbacks are now reviewed on a site specific basis to determine a project's compatibility with Urban Design Considerations such as streetscape framework, street enclosure, and street edge. This allows the project designer and the Town planners flexibility in establishing a building's footprint while ensuring sensitivity to the street in their design process. 16 UD Review 9(4), 1986 Horizontal Zoning and Density Control Under the horizontal zoning of permitted uses adopted in Vail Village street level commercial space _-Y• ..:.y - y~ is reserved for retail uses only. These zoning INFILL /ERE yv ppp regulations do not allow professional offices and - FRAUES VIEW., MAJM V ,r.., personal services at street level. Even more significant, however, was the removal of all limitations on the amount of retail floor area in the Village. This r' places maximum reliance upon the Guide Plan criteria for evaluating a proposed project's impact upon the street and surrounding areas. Rather than being t bound by uniform and arbitrary floor area ratios, zoning in the Village allows for any retail development that satisfies the seven Urban Design Considerations. Density limitations have been maintained for residential uses. Building Height - Previous zoning regulations did not recognize the ' Village's characteristic variation of roof heights. By stipulating the percent of building that must fall in Filling vs. Framing Views varying height ranges, the Urban Design Considerations encourage the design of structures with a variety of roof heights. Zoning regulations have been ammended to recognize this ratio in calculating a building's height. In practice, this modification has been successful in obtaining a variation of roof heights for all new structures in the Village. Service Vehicle Access The pedestrian nature of the Village is a vital element of its success. However, loading and delivery functions are necessary to its smooth operation. To minimize potential conflicts belwen service vehicles and pedestrians, "time zoning' was adopted to regulate deliveries to specific daytime hours when pedestrian traffic is at a minimum. Delivery vehicles are prohibited from the Village's pedestrianized area ' during `pedestrian rush-hours" ( mornings and _ afternoons---the time when most skiiers are arriving at or leaving the ski mountain). Deliveries are also ft~ restricted during the noon hour so as to minimize iMA11 negative impacts on the many outdoor dining decks o throughout the Village. - The importance of having integrated Urban Design Considerations with the zoning regulatory process cannot \~t be overstated. Traditional zoning controls provided the needed mechanism to achieve the subjective design goals of the Guide. Plan. By strengthening the urban design View Corridor fabric of the Village, zoning modifications proved to be an essential element of the Plan. THE PRODUCTS AND PITFALLS OF THE URBAN DESIGN PROCESS The Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan is generally regarded as the most successful planning and design document the town of Vail has ever had. This success can be attributed to a number of factors. First of all, the extensive public process that went into the development of the Plan gave members of the community a sense 17 UD Review 9(4), 1986 of ownership in the plan and provided solid, long-term on the merits of a project as it relates to the Plan's Design direction for Its use. In addition, the Guide Plan Is Considerations. It is not uncommon for Planning proactive in anticipating and identifying desired physical Commission decisions to be appealed to the Town Council improvements in the Village in a comprehensive manner. over these interpretative matters. Relying on these Another key element of the plan is the review process it subjective criteria is an inherent liability of foregoing establishes for development of the Village. standard zoning requirements for this type of review. Nonetheless, it is the feeling that these trade-offs have A way of measuring the success of the Plan is to consider been worthwhile, and the benefits of the design plan have the physical improvements completed since its adoption. far outweighed the previous limitations imposed by more Thirty of the sixty-one sub-area concepts proposed in the traditional zoning and development review. Guide Plan have been completed and four others have been approved but remain unbuilt. Over half of the completed projects were improvements to public spaces including the development of plazas and pocket parks, Thomas A. Braun is a Senior Planner wuth the and improvements to pedestrian walkways. A majority of Department of Community Development in Vail, Colorado. these improvements to public spaces have been Mr. Braun is presently project manager in the development completed in conjunction with private sector development. of the Vail Village Master Plan. He holds a B.A. in Many of the private sector improvements have involved Geography from Gustavus Adolphus College and received building expansions and facade improvements. Atypical of a Masters degree in Planning and Community Development government regulations, the Urban Design Guide Plan from the University of Colorado-Denver in 1983. identified infill projects not allowed by previous zoning and thereby stimulated much of this development. Jeffrey T. Winston is the principle of Winston and Associates, a Boulder, Colorado firm specializing in While the Urban Design Guide Plan has been successful, planning, urban design and landscape architecture. Mr. its implementation has not been without problems. Winston is the current president of the Colorado Chapter of Probably the most difficult aspect has been the varying the American Society of Landscape Architects. A interpretation of what constitutes adequate compliance graduate of the University of Utah (B.A. Economics), Mr. with the Design Considerations outlined in the Plan. In an Winston holds Masters in both Architecture and environment where every square foot of developable Landscape Architecture from the University of space is of great value, disagreements can arise between Pennsylvania. the staff, developers, and even the Planning Commission 18 • 21 7 7 -1- - I wm4 0; v^i • ~ I ~ ~ v.:+. I tom. • , f s . ~ I , ~ I: 1 ~ - ~ ~ ~ R. !:111 I K. CIw_ C • i v ~ l~ ~ , • 17 ~ ~ ~ TM ON~ DRIVE 15~ s 4 "Tim w w a / S ti ~j-+~- ~ ~ t+~ d'S' p L " l~ vI Q104 'j,• `r r 0 . ~ ] if v,.y I , ~.i Q s , 00 W-k , ni. y DeWtm, ~ ~r~*. rtEVJaioJJa . I . 1- ^,4 a • • COVE-RED • • • , BRIDGE • , • • • • • • • • • • X36 \ 32 iwW 33 r1••ro• C i 4 - ' CHtIOREN'Sr.I FOUNTAIN - i 28 Cb ' 17 a Rfi OREEK y - % A 4 Ili GORE OGEE G DRI E ' 2 17 VJJvv -t. En ~ , ~ O - ~ ~ n~' tea. ~ ~ ~ cat, l>"'e a ~ All • . 8 c n ~ 41 S-IBER - coze 08/06/99 FR1 10:36 FAX 9709499227 SHAMROCK ..y Town Council Mem IA001 o `1jrVMA MEETING tj WE DNESDAY, AUGUST 11, 1999 8:15AM! I "OLORADO SKI MUSEUM AGENDA • TOWN COUNC [L SEATS • VOTER REGIS":'RATION • TIU r • ROTARY DU-I-'.' RACE • WESTFEST •VAIL VALLEY I' OUNDATION Winter Concert Si .ides Bravo AI L VA LLEY Music FESTIVAL JOHN W. GIOVANDO Evecative Director August 6, 1999 EUGENIA ZUKERMAN rlrtartic Director BOARD OF TRUSTEES Ms. Pamela Brandmeyer Dick Swank Town of Vail Chairman 75 S. Frontage Road Roger Behler Vail, Colorado 81657 Vice Chair Jan Seem Dear Pam, Tirr:.-ru•rr Karin Weber Secreto,y Many sincere thanks for your contribution to the 12th Season of the Bravo! Jude Alexander Vail Valley Music Festival. The series was an unqualified success, with record Paul Becker attendance of over 40,000. Beautiful programs celebrating "As the Centuries Kay Chester Turn: Music from 1790-1810-1890-1910 and 1990 to the Present" were presented Gern• Engle Julie Esrey throughout the season. Performances by three world-class orchestras were Sallie Fawcett tremendously popular, and the chamber concerts were recorded for broadcast on Rob Ford National Public Radio's "Performance Today." A wonderful show with Arlo Joan Francis John Galvin Guthrie served to further extend the Festival's appeal. Laura Garbe Warren Garbe John Garnsey Plans are well underway for Season Thirteen in 2000. Scheduled for June Donna Giordano 28 through August 6, the Bravo! Festival will once again feature classical chamber Linda Hart and orchestral music at various venues throughout the Vail Valley. The Rochester Beckv Mary Hesburghh Philharmonic and Colorado Symphony Orchestras return as the Festival's resident Karen Loewenstern guest orchestras and the Dallas Symphony Orchestra with Music Director Andrew Gail Molloy Patricia O'Neill Litton travels to the Vail Valley for its second season as resident orchestra. Richard Rogel Rob Shay There is no doubt that the continued success of the Vail Valley Music Cathy Stone Dennis Wentz Festival is due in large part to the contributions of people like yourselves. Bravo! Betsy Wieners is indeed very fortunate to have friends and patrons like you, and we sincerely thank you. Kindest regards, NAILING ADDRESS: Post 0171ce Box 2270 Dick Swank Vail. Colorado 31655 John . Giovando Je ne Reid Executive Director (D* ector of Development Chairman PHYSICAL ADDRESS: ~ 201 Main Street tK s Minturn. Colorado 31645 970.327.5,700 Toll Free: 1.577.327.57 00 Fax 970.327.5707 E-mail bravoCa ail.net http://.•~« ..'aiLnct/bravo AUG. 6. 1999 9:32AM NO. 7280 P. 1/1 VAIL RE4~ORTS FOR Rvi EDIATE RELEASE Media Contact: Paul Witt, (970) 845-5720, pauby@vailresorts.com Kristin Yantis, (970) 479-3001, kristingy ilresorts.com GOLDEN PEAK RESTAURANT TO REOPEN Wl TH NEW TENANT VAIL, Colo. - Aug. 5, 1999 - Vail Resorts today annoi raced that it has entered into an agreement with local restaurateur Thomas Salanunovith to open a new restaurant in the space previously occupied by Bella Riva Restaurant in the Golden Peak base lodge. The new restaurant, to be called Larkspur, is scheduled to be open by Thanksgiving and will feature classic American cuisine. Salamunovich also A ill take over the space from the Bella Riva Bakery, located in the lobby of the base lodge, and reopen it as Larkspur Market, featuring everything from fresh-baked breads to roti= Ze chickens. "We are extremely pleased to have someone as talented and well-known as Thomas move into this space," said Paul Testwuide, chief operating office of Vail. "He has been in the valley for years and has always added a fresh perspective to the rE staurant scene." Testwuide noted that while Vail Resorts will have an interest in the business, Salamunovich has made a significant investment in the restaurant and will have full independence and authority for the day-today operational management, "This will be a wonderful opportunity for me," commented Salamunovich. "It's a big challenge to open a new restaurant in Vail and make it i listinctive, but we're starting with a great space in a perfect location. I am really looking fo ward to it." Salamunovich is a nationally acclaimed chef and restau •ant manager and is well-known in the Vail Valley. Most recently, he was the Executive Chef and General Manager of Sweet Basil in Vail. Prior to that, Salamunovich planned and opened tie successful Zino's restaurant in Edwards. He has trained in both San Francisco and Paris. ~*A-, VAIL BEAVER CREEI'• BRECKENRI DGE • REYSTONr -AUG. 4. 1999 3:09PM ! NO. 7251 P. 112 Vail Associates, Inc. FOR DAI%MDIATE RELEASE m Media Contacts: Paul Witt, (970) 845-5720, paulw@vailresorts.co n BECKLEY TO LEAVE BEAVER CREEK FX1R NEW POSMON VAIL, Colo. - Aug. 4, 1999 Mike Beckley, maliaging director of mountain operations at Beaver Creek, has resigned from Vail Associates to take a new position outside of the Vail Valley, Andy Daly, president of Vail Associates, announced today. Beckley has accepted the position of president anll general manager of the Catamount Ranch and Club outside of Steamboat Springs. "Mike's contributions to the success of Vail and heaver Creek over the last 23 years have been enormous," commented Daly. "His work on. both the 1989 and 1999 World Alpine Ski Championships helped make both of those events tremendously successful, and his n IlnhC dedication to Beaver Creek has been instntmenltal m making it the premier resort that it is wawaoss today. We are always sorry to see someone with 11is talents leave the company and the valley, but we wish him all the best in this new venture." Beckley joined Vail Associates in 1976 and has h,'dd many positions in the company, including ski school instructor, ski patroller, snow'cat operator and special events manager. He was the manager of mountain opera -ions at Vail and director of mountain operations at Beaver Creek before being promoted to his current position as managing director. Beckley also serves on the board of dira.-tors of the Beaver Creek Resort Company. -more- PO Box? • Vail, Colorado • 81658 • phone 970 845 5720 • fax 970 845 5728 • e-mail-vaiipr0vail•net 6'"J AUG. 4.1999 3:09PM NO.7251 P. 2/2 I BECKLEY RESIGNS FROM BEAVER CREEK 2-2-2 "I have enjoyed every day that I've worked in thi: valley and for Vail Associates," Beckley said. "I've made a lot of good friends in this community and it will be tough to leave. But opportunities like the one at Catamour t Ranch and Club don't come along every day, and I felt it was time for me to try som:thing new." "Mike's enthusiasm for skiing, and for Beaver Cr.:ek Resort, will certainly be missed," commented John Grarnsey, chief operating officer bf Beaver Creek_ "We have worked together on a number of projects and events over the years, and I have always admired his dedication and his contributions." Daly noted that Beckley's resignation will be effe;tive at the end of August. A search for a successor is currently underway. -30- To: Rob Ford From: United Airlnes P1aneFax 00-05-99 11.24PM p. 1 • • UNITED AIRLINES The Plane Fax is a periodic newsletter : THEPLANEFA from Roger Gibson, • • vice president • SPECIAL EDITION August 1999 • mountain region, to UNITED CUSTOMERS GET ADDED LEGROOM help keep community : IN NEW ECONOMY PLUS SEATING • leaders like you inforrned.about United • 4(;P= Whet steps is United Airlines Customers who are traveling on a full fare • taking to enhance service for frequent economy booking class can also receive a tilers? pre-assigned seat in Economy Plus. Also Airlines' operations in , ualifying are all Star Alliance Gold and Star • Alliance Slhrer travelers. Denver. If you would A . United Airlines is happy to The number of seats in Economy Plus will Pike to respond or have . announce that it Is reconfiguring the first six to vary from 36 to 89, depending on the type of • 11 rows (depending on the type of aircraft) of aircraft. Reconfigured aircraft will include additional questions its United Economy class aircraft cabins to United's fleet of 727's, 737's (excluding United create an Economy Plus product that provides Shuttle), 767's, A319's, A320's, and two-cabin about United Airlines, : the most loyal customers with significantly 767-300's and 777A's. United is launching an • more legroom. Economy Plus seating will aggressive effort to reconfigure approximately • have 35 to 36 inches of legroom compared to 450 aircraft and expects the project to be please contact • the standard 31 inches. United is the first U.S. completed by April 2000. Economy Plus seat airline to offer this unique product for U.S. pitch will be 36 Inches in Airbus A320s and Roger Gibson at ; domestic customers. Boeing 757s; and 35 inches in all other • (303) 790-6568. • According to United Airlines President Rono reconfigured aircraft types. • Dutta, United's decision to develop Economy The number of seats in Economy Plus, by • Plus was driven by customer input and aircraft: United's commitment to enhance customer service. Since most frequent flyers travel in Economy, United conducted in-depth research • to determine what steps should be taken to provide those customers with a more 767 so 32% comfortable product. 727 so 479 As part of United's ongoing commitment to -300 ss x7% • improve customer satisfaction, we listened to T s9 x79c 7TtA • the needs of travelers who fly frequently in 7T20 89 29% • Economy. They've told us they want more space and recognition for their loyalty, and 737-300 46 29% we're delivering that with this innovative new - 737.500 36 38% + product - a first for any U.S. airline.' Dutta A319 40 36x • said. • Advance assignment of Economy Plus seating 737-291 49 4a% • will be available on a first-come, first-served basis to United Airlines' Mileage Plus "Economy Plus marks the most unique members who have Premier status or above. onboard innovation for our customers since • Premier status is achieved when Mileage Plus the introduction of United Business," Dutta members travel 25,000 paid miles on United said. "It will boost our customer satisfaction or other Star Alliance member airlines, or 30 and clearly differentiate United from our or more segments in one calendar year. competitors." TOTAL P.02 JL U 2001 WORLD MOUNTAIN BIKE CHAMPIONSHIPS PROPOSED SCHEDULE Saturday, September 8 Friday, September 14 10:00 am- 2:00 pm Downhill Course Inspection Junior Croee Country World Champconebipe 10:00 am-5:00 pm Cross Country Training 9:30 am- 11:00 am Junior Women 11:30 am- 1:30 pm Junior Men 2:00 pm- 4:30 pm Men under 23 S 5:00 pm- 5:30 pm Awards Ceremony Sunday, September 9 :00 pm- 6:00 pm Dual Training 10:00 am- 4:00 pm Downhill Training 5 6:30 pm- 7:30 pm Dual World Championships 10:00 am-5:00 pm Cross Country Training 7:30 pm- 7:45 pm Awards Ceremony Monday, September 10 Saturday, September 15 10:00 am- 4:00 pm Downhill Training 10:30 am- 4:00 pm Downhill World Championships 10:00 am-5:00 pm Cross Country Training 4:15 pm- 4:45 pm Awards Ceremony 10:00 pm- 5:00 pm Cross Country Training Tuesday, September 11 10:00 am- 4:00 pm Downhill Training 10:00 am-5:00 pm Cross Country Training Sunday, September 16 Elite Croee Country World Champio whip., 10:00 am- 12:30 pm Elite Women Wednesday, September 12 1:30 pm- 4:30 pm Elite Men 8:00 am-12:00 pm Cross Country Training 4:30 pm- 5:00 pm Awards Ceremony 12:00 pm- 6:00 pm Downhill Training 5:15 pm- 5:30 pm Closing Ceremonies 1:00 pm- 3:30 pm Team Relay World Championhips 4:00 pm Awards Ceremony-Relay 6:00 pm- 8:00 pm Opening Ceremonies Thursday, September 13 8:00 am- 12:00 pm Downhill Training 8:00 am- 4:00 pm Cross Country Training 1:00 pm- 4:00 pm Downhill Seeding Run 4:00 pm- 5:45 pm Dual Training 6:00 pm- 7:30 pm Dual Qualification ~ r ^w:?'-`•-`z "'".-";~,r,..r-" `w'^" we..~-...--9---^..<...,...f': ' :,-..-----~--~--:~'x-•-rw-.--saw. SAW Summlt Dal Ron Thursday August 5 1999 moo L {r' S!thorn of e:light.5 spud - WXAste i ; d town: of c s t. y 1 .c.•~t TtY ,,9 d.. F v y. Y st : k' ~ . i}.!~:', ;iG} ! n • ( ,,;.ter t 1 n"1-~.c. { ~ ?4 \ i •_,.c k /t iJrb `i renewal fOr Summit S 4:. uailyl cws,StaffWri P-aCe Shopping S Center. postponed afteF $27,000 blight study Thorne °spent- .'9}QQO for a Sump discussions about urban renewal study ;i r ti r . nut P1 ce S1ioplnng b -w-blight t~u3yhaveexpedited thiiiprocess "My, feeling: is that -without study but cpwi ino "When~vye started the stud doin .anyt' the P~nt situ- ' - ' °1' A YngF 3 • i dwtirbdtt renewal there a V there was nobody ut th 9;1" g . ation is going to go downhill," he 41, " " s ket building;"Dawson said. said: "We're not doing anything ~x rNev~rtheless;~ ' Silverthortie l;s) ....primary concern to make good on the gap that was senior directbr.ILchard D f awstn ,was, ``Ne. want'a good ten- left by City Market. Some people says Mth e mon didtiyt' gq y ~`'tni ere' y~tsupving forward, are saying, 'Lets see what Office w • $ tenant . That doesn't Max will do.' I don't think thats 1 + ' ' i "It the r e got a'gooti N' M a they (Ciiy : Market) • good 'enough. r ' ant az o king ~uilslt F wvor g Qn ~i at, all, biit : I ll look-th:th~'s when I see : ` Dawsod,~'artd I;thii'tk thet41 facfttl'iat we ea up with a ~tlie raverisand the vultures begin the by est rehun we little stio er:`~ lan ` r gg could have ng guage .than c~rcli rig tclck at,the•careass'" lie ad !k hciped for`:" before eertai y got them to' move added. ' S' ' ' :Last l~ebruary,; tlxe'' Sever;. °^geiicklY. "lie 'added.. "We :can't Dawson believes 'the study ' t r~ YAi'~ r lnn t f thorn un, c;~l„v~ted tg~n, rS 1' rove it one way or the other, but pointedto some concerns that the ; an an4renow lan Sumpe eiriye di`d'get a_ P' goo 6en- current.. -de`lopPr .0 f~`alure m}t~Place Shopping. Center the ant: And erc the:mhants up.there shopping center owner could use r idea for the plan!was'triggereii'by3 'seem happy.,' to remodel the area. x ; J a ii br`than year-long absence of ` , . Now.that a tenant As in place;, : • '(The blight study) also identi a tin C_'ih'' Market's former `the urban renewal Pu sh has lost -fled some shortcomings," Daw- ,;r S ' t~Place 'site the some-of its impetus.. g -,son added. "We got all the a r • town s 'powers of ui an renewal, . Council felt it was probably 'property owners up there inter- FREE undl' could have opted to con- • . not in the communityJs best inter- ested in working toward a more Y . demn the City. Market. building est to go forward at this.'time;; stable outcome. And City Market DINNER FOR TVV~ ` R+` '.r and pursue another grocer. Dawson said. "There was not'an and (shopping center owner) Because City Market owns the overwhelming abundance of Irwin Kornfeld agreed to work Grand Visi~ Timber lodge, Colorado's 1 :building,. it is not likely to allow ion own support from the merchants or with us on the parkway so we can x; . , ; another grocer there., _ owners of Summit Place, Urban landscape that front entrance. So Earlier in February; City 'Mar renewal is not meant to be nega= I think the tool was worth its ort. Wke Grand T mber lodge, we'll give Y" ket :announced that • Office Max tive. It should be positive.".. value." t • 6 t 100 dinner t over had signed a lease to take about : Mayor Lou DelPiccolo, how- Issues cited within the study B . 60 percent of their former space, evgr, feels council should 'have include concerns about. access, Returants, Put Dawson thinks the town's . taken some action based on. the pedestrian flow and parking. New Silverthore Office Max shoots for October opening 453=8883 , 4~ tsars Offlce' Max,from 1V Dow Jones Real Estate Index Vacation Home Prices Market Snapshot Recent average sale prices Washington D.C. in areas popular with 450 vacationers and second- ~D1u 1990.100 _ 350 oMasootl Ydea home buyers. ' -W,shla~torr 250 TOWN OR AREA AVERAGE SALE 50 Sena, Ariz. $349,891 50 Santa Barbara, Calif. 475,100 1994 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 Palm Desert, can 265,559 Source: First American RES/MRAC Lake Tahoe, Calif. 417,234 Jumbo Mortgage Rates a s -Average rates on July 29 for amounts greater than $240,000, Litchfield County, Conn. 856,964 based on "I point" loan fee and Rettaboth Beady Dal. 343,375, 20% down payment. Destin, Fla. 263,005 30-YUR S/1-TEAR MARKETS FUZED AN Key West, Fla. 828,537 Cat7fanla &CQ5% 7.23%: Naples, Fla. 311,150 Florida 8.05 7.01 Savannah, Ga. 181,550 Millis 7.91 7.20 Maui, Hawaii 344,814 Massachusetts 8.06 7.04 Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 244,327 WNW 8.03 725 Kennebunkport, Maine 705,555 New Jersey 8.00 7.05 Pennsylvania 8.05 7.02 j Cape Cod, Mass. 229,445 Texas 8-12 7.14 Natchez, Miss. 145,900 New York {metre} 8.16 72(3 Big Shy, Moabna 324,000 Washington (metro) 8.10 7.13 Pinehurst, N.C. 286,718 NATIONAL AVERAGE 8.06 7.13 Hamptca, H.H.' 269,900 Conforming Stone Harbor. NJ. 408,161 Mortgage Rates Taos, NA. 227,252; National average for loans up Southampton, N.Y. 1.4 million to $240,000 THIS LAST MONTH WEEK WEEK AGO Hilton Head, S .C, 459,563 30=rear fixed ` 7.79% 7.561.4, 7.721 Paris City, Utah 580,000 15-year fixed 7.37 7.2 0 7,36 Virginia Beach, Va. 214,248 1-year ARM 6.24 6.16 6.25 Source: The Prudential Real Estate Affiliates, Inc. Source: bankrate.com READING THE REAL ESTATE INDEX VACATION HOME PRICES: shows recent owners, for their proximity to major metro- average sale prices for more desirable politan areas and for geographic diversity. properties in a selection of popular vaca- tion and second-home areas. The figures MARKET SNAPSHOT: graphically are averages ofthe uppertwo-thirds of highlights a metropolitan area and sales handled and reported by Prudential indicates how all home values there have real-estate affiliates. The locations were performed over five years when compared selected for their popularity among various to national prices and the Dow Jones types of vacationers and second-home Industrial Average. r ~i~ To strengthen and promote Ones as centers of opportunity, leadership, and - governance. July 20, 1999 National League of Cities MEMORANDUM 1301 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. To: City Clerks of Direct Member Cities Washington, D.C. 20004-1763 Executive Directors of State Municip eagues 202-626-3000 Fax: 202-626-3043 From: Donald J. Borut, Executive Dire or r Internet: www.nlc.org 19% icers Subject: Opportunity to Present Pro ed Amendments to the National President Municipal Policy and Separate Resolutions Clarence E. Anthony Mayor, South Bay, Florida First Vice President Bob Knight Mayor, Wichita, Kansas 999 Second Vice President FRIDAY, DUE DATE: AUGUST 13, 1 Dennis W. Archer Mayor, Detroit, Michigan Immediate Past President Brian J. O'Neill NLC's direct member cities and state municipal leagues are invited to submit policy councilman, Philadelphia. Pennsylvania proposals and resolutions by Friday, August 13> 1999> for maximum consideration Executiveoirector before NLC's Congress of Cities in Los Angeles, California. Procedures for Donald J. Borut submitting such proposals are described in this mailing. Please disseminate this information to your mayor, all members of the city council, and the city manager. If you have questions about this form, call Lesley-Ann Rennie at (202) 626-3176 or E-mail her at rennie@nlc.org. 1~ - 191 Tcj~ GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF POLICY PROPOSALS The National Municipal Policy is the comprehensive policy statement of the National League of Cities. It is subject to amendment at each annual business meeting of NLC. Please submit proposed amendments or resolutions to the National Municipal Policy using the format outlined on the enclosed inserts. The National League of Cities' Board of Directors established the following guidelines for policy proposals to be considered for adoption at the Congress of Cities: Pest Presidents Glenda E Hood, Mawr, Orlando Florida • Sharpe James, Mayor, Newark, New Jerry • Gregory Lashutln, Maya, Columbus. Ohio • Cadq Reynolds, City Council Resident, Denver, Colorado • Dimeosr Arnie Adamsen, Councilman. Las Vegas, Nevada • Kenneth A. Alderaoo, Executive Director. Illinois Municipal League • E H. Alexander, Commissioner, Red Springs. North Carolina • John B. Andrews, Executive Director, New Hampshire Municipal Association • tarry A. Bakken, Council Member. Golden Valley, Minnesota • James T. Benham, Councilman, Bator Rouge, Louisiana • George B. Blackwood, Jr, Maya Pro Tem. Kansas City, Missouri • George A. Bmwn. Jr, Carcilmemher, Lexingmn- tayene. Kentucky • Maxine Childress Brown, Councilwoman, Rochester, New York • John P. Bound, Councilman, Pontiac, Michigan • Michael CaMey; Alderman. Senatohia, Mississippi • Frank Clinton, Mayor, Paris, Illinois • Ral Daub, Mawr. Omaha. Nebraska • Sue Donaldson, City Council President, Seattle, Washington • Francis H. Duebay, Mayor, Cambridge, Massachusetts • Ron Gallegos, Councilman, Longmont. Colorado • John A. Gamer, Jr. ErEci tive Directs. Pennsvlvania League of Cities and Municipalities • Heil G. Giuliano, Mawr, Tempe, Arizona • Thomas J. Gandy, Executive Director. Nevada League of Cities and Municipalities • Becky L Haskin, Council Member. Fart Worth. Texas • Patty Jo Hilliard, Mayo. East Point. Georgia • Michael Keck Vice Mawr, lm!e Rock. Arkansas • Jack Lynch. Chief Executive, Butte, Montana • Harriet Miller, Maya. Santa Barbara, California • Jams F. Miller, Executive Director. League of Minnesota Cities • Linda A. Morton, Mayor. Lakewood, Colorado • William A. Moyer, Executive Director, Oklahoma Municipal League • Jim Naugle, Mawr, Fort Lauderdale, Florida • Lau.Dgden, Maya, Tualatin. Oregon • Jersey Oropeom Councilmenrher, Long Beach, California • Willie J. Pit, Council Member, Wilson. North Carolina • Mary C. Poss. Mayo Pro Tem. Dallas, Texas • Rebeeea J. Ravine, Council President Fat Wayne, Indiana • Johnny Robimoa, Cotmcilmember, College Park Georgia • Michael Sittig, Executive Director, Florida League of Cities • Leon Smith, Mawr, Oxford, Alabama • Daniel M. Speer, Maya. Pulaski, Tennessee • Connie Spryrrerynatylk, Executive Director, North Dakota League of Cities • Evelyn Recycled Paoei Wright Tuner, Councilor, Columbus. Georgia • Jerrilyn S. Well, Council President Evanston, Wyoming 1. All policy proposals, whether amendments to the National Municipal Policy or separate resolutions: a. shall - in their subject matter - concern shared policy and program needs, issues or problems of the nation's municipal governments; b. shall be concerned with federal government policy'and, therefore, be addressed to federal government policy makers; C. shall neither contradict nor duplicate existing NLC policy statements, except where they are intended to amend or repeal such policy; d. shall not compromise the independence or integrity of individual member cities to pursue any course of action adopted by appropriate municipal policy-making bodies; and e. shall not compromise the budget making, program determining, or priority setting role of the NLC Board. 2. Proposed amendments to the National Municipal Policy should specify city positions on federal roles and responsibilities, policy goals, purposes, principles and/or program characteristics within the broad subject areas. They should not refer to proposed Congressional legislation by title, sponsor's name, or bill number. 3. Resolutions should be restricted to those action-specific items of short-term utility addressed to the Congress or the President. In separate resolutions, specific reference to proposed legislation by title, sponsor's name, or bill number is appropriate. 4. Resolutions shall be considered only when they do not conflict with or contradict the existing National Municipal Policy. DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION All proposals received in NLC's offices by the close of business on August 13, 1999, will be assigned to one of NLC's seven steering committees for preliminary review at their fall meetings. All proposals will be reviewed by the full policy committees when they meet on Wednesday, December 1, in Los Angeles. Members submitting proposals will be notified of the committee to which their proposal is referred and the time and place of the policy committee meeting. In order for a proposal to be considered, the sponsor or a representative must appear before the policy committee in Los Angeles to defend it. All advance proposals to amend the NLC National Municipal Policy and advance separate resolutions must be submitted to: Debra Johnson, Manager Policy Analysis and Development National League of Cities 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., 5`h Floor Washington, D.C. 20004 Members are encouraged to submit their proposals by August 13 to allow for a thorough review of the issues. Submitting a proposed amendment or alternative after the deadline does not foreclose or in any way jeopardize your opportunity for consideration. Proposals may be submitted at the policy committee meeting on December 1. But submitting your proposal before the August 13 deadline gives your city the greatest chance for full consideration. To do so, it will be best to work with the policy committee delegation from your state. Contact NLC's Policy Office for more information on this alternative procedure. Further information regarding the NLC policy process may be secured prior to the Congress of Cities from Debra Johnson (202 626-3027 or send an E-mail to djohnson@nlc.org. nmp99.coc "SAMPLE ONLY** PROPOSED RESOLUTION NATIONAL MUNICIPAL YOUTH COUNCIL WEEK WHEREAS, frustration with the political process :and attitudes regarding the political process can be formed and informed in the early years; and WHEREAS, involvement of our youth in our governmental process will provide them with a better understanding of their civic obligations; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the National League of Cities should support U.S. congressional legislation that establishes a National Municipal Youth Council Week. Such councils shall be designated to take youth people through the process of raising grievances, debating issues and developing hypothetical programmatic solutions to these problems. TYPING INSTRUCTIONS We distribute your submission to NLC's membership exactly as you submit it to us. It would help if you could follow these guidelines. • Under the words "Proposed Resolution," type a one-line title. • Make sure to type in the resolution's sponsor (individual, city or state municipal league). NOTE: Please submit a 3 1/2 inch disk, marked with the name of the software and a typed copy. Microsoft Word documents are preferred. E-mails are also welcomed: djohnson@nlc.org. Submitted by: (MUST BE COMPLETED) Date Received: (LEAVE BLANK) Referred to: (LEAVE BLANK) ~c,~rrie,uteQ.. 8.3•~~ ~f»St U G fi t t, • Wd4 t • V JA ' U oti, j0pr "-U MU"X UAX 4444 1+ f~'~l~ O~b-JttiJ AUG- 3-99 TUE 13:28 000000000000000000000000 9709494385 P.01 The ; CHAMBER. Qf Qommer e FOR. IMMEDIATE RELEASE - 'Contact.;. Jen Brown, (970) 949-5189 Clamber welcomo.New Membersfiip Director Heather rgirki~ AVON < (AVON, CO, August 3, 1999)... The Chamber` of Commerce is pleased to announce the addition of Heather Markin ps the new full-time Membership Director, Originally ' from Brig6water, Long Island, Heather has been in the valley since ~ 991. She brings ARROwrfeAD to her hew position strong sales'and markets' experience. ~ Prior to joining the Chamber, Heather'worked for` the Flying Cat Clgthing Company, BEAVER CREEK a direct mail catalog business, Destination Resorts Management,as the Sales ! Markyting Manager and the Vail Valley Tourism'. & Convention Bureau as a sales. ` supervisor. CQRDILLERA I amp extremely excited to have this opportunity to work with The Chamber of Commerce. I look forward' to working with our members and becoming more. involved, with corn muja4," • she comments. Heather is available at the Chamber ' -vAtL Monday ihrough Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m: ' ~DWARDS MINTURN VAU. i / WOIJW1T Parr OFF1(-B BOX 1437 - 1 ' AvoN, COLORADO 81620 i (970) 949-5189 - FAX (970) 94"385 E-Mail: chamber@vall.net 4 htly //www.vaiLnet/chamber AUG- 3-99 TUE 13:29 000000000000000000000000 9709494385 P.03 ,7 l CliAMB r - E R Of Comtner.ce FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact; Jen Brown, (970)"949-5189 ` ' M#rk Your Calendar for "Employgr Immigration Issues" Presentation AVON (AVON. CO, August 3, 1999)..,Do you have a labor shortage in your bi siness? Have ' you been fiEbtitig to find legal`employees to fill your positions? On Widriesday, August 18, The Cha141ber, of Commerc6, and High Country Human Resources ARROW] IEAb Association invite inembers and interested community participaz>ts to a discussion on Employer Immigr4ttion'Issues from 10:30 a.m. to noon at the Chamber ttonference &,Training Room in Avon, , BEAVER CREEK. Congressman Scott McInnis, INS District Director Joe Greene, Immigration Attorney Phil Alterman and Division Representative of the Labor Certificption, Unlit for the C'kPI .LERA Depa iMpilt of Labor Jim Shaalada will b6 in attendance to hear your input. Phil Alterman will outline'the sfe s emPtoYIers have to 8o through for.hirin illegal P 8 iS. EACLE-vA1L aliens, as WeU as reviewing the H26B Visa prpces~. Attendees are encouraged to bring , ;ideas and brainstorm on hoW the go~crneaent g"~nlassist with your is'sues_ This special presentat'i'on is free to members `and the eor~imunity, To provide adequate seati>ag, EnWAROS RSVP to the Chamber at 949-51$9 Eby Tuesday, August 17th. ` ' NflNTURN 1 , VAIL r WOLCOTT 1.-,,:,,, Pon OM6 Box 1437 AVON, COt.ORA00.81620 • (970) 949-5189 • FAx (970) 949-4385, )rMul"1: chambSrOvail•net • http: //wwwva;l.net/chamber AUG- 3-99 TUE 13:30 000000000000000000000000 9709494385 P.04 4 The CHAMBER, Of 'C aM'm'e'r'c e , FOtt IMMEDIATE RELEASE' ` Contact: Jen Browne, (970) 949-5189 ; Chgii ber Valley Business Forum'Drealdast topics "Couttecting to the Internet" ' / ! • / AVON, (AVON, CO, August 3, 1999)... Join VailNet's president John Uhley for the August " . Chamber Valley Business Forum Breakfast Series on Tuesday, August 24, frorR 7-,30- 9:00 a.rri. at the Chamber Cod6rence, & Trairiing Room. John will provide an easy to ARROW14E4kD understand overview of the, types of Internet cognecti' s available for your business. Whether your • i4sinesk is--just starting to'use'the Internet, or bas been using it for AVER CREEK scveral years, you probabl~ ~ 4ven't had a chance to examine if yqur connection tp the Intehiet is the 'bcst connection for you. Fiord out, about' better, 'and In many cases, lovyer cost and higher speed Intertiet solutions that caxi save your business money and cOKnlLCEaA time, i RSVP for the O reakfast by calling 949-5189 by Friday, August 20th. Thp Valley ' Business Forum Breakfasts are spade possible through the sponsorship of Alpine EAGLE-varL , -Bailie, Columbine Bakery, KT UN-The Eaglc, The Comfort Inn and Starbueks Coffee. EDWARDS i MIN'RJRN ' VAIL i WOLCOTT POST 0MC2 Box 1437 AVON, COLORADO 81620 (970) 9495189,- FAXWO) 949-4385 h-Mail!'chamber"net 0 ~ ttp; //www•vail.net/chamber AUG- 3-99 TUE 13:29 000000000000000000000000 9709494385 P.02 • . The CHAMBER O,f Commerce' I'OR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Jen Brown, (970) 949-5189 CHAMBE]i N~W 11E9IDVNT NYFLCOME ' INVITES VALLEY NEWCOMERS AVOr4 . (,AVON, CO, Xugust 3, 1999). , .The Chamber o(' Commerce fhvitei all new residents ' of the Vail )(alley to aft~nd our'free monthly "New Resident Welcome" on Friday,, ARROW? D' August 27th from 4:00-5.00 p.m. at the Chamber of Commerce Visitor Information Center in Avon. Visitor's Center staff will be on hand tp answer questions- and provide •information'on anything from' utilities td'daycare •and schools to how to I $F.AVER CREEK become more involved in the community_ Light snacks upd beverages will be served. For more information, please call the ` Chamber at 949-5189. i CORDILLERA . I EAGLE-VAII kI1WAJOS M2nURN VAIL \ WOL COTT V i 1 Post CFA Box 1437 ' \ AVON. COLORADO 81620 (970) 949-5189 • Fix (970) 9494385 \ 1 E-Mail: 6amberOvail.net • http:/ /www.vai}.net/Chamber THE DENVER POST INC I A ~f o n 1 1 n,e ` www.denverpost.com PERS P~7~ T :1VE unday, August 1, 1999 SECTION H THE DENVER POST M-,,. OVING ON UP MonorailY Fy x HOV toll would relieve' lanes hold strain on 1-70 the answer by Sally Hopper and Bill Tolbert By Steve Mueller s Colorado enters,a new centu- fay few AaS'e called it "vision~•" ry, both its prosperity and its Abest For most taxpayers, however, citizens are dependent on a vast the "Rail to Vail" proposal Is. etwork of tax-financed public described as "wasteful and roadways. Since nearly everyone drives, useless." It will eat up trillions of our tax traffic management is one of the few dollars and provide literally no benefits public-policy arenas where strong opin- to most Coloradans. ions are readily expressed. Elected offs- Anyone who has driven I-70 Into the cials have learned that discussions of mountains knows that traffic congestion whether, when and how government Is a problem at certain times, and that should spend transportation dollars pre- the problem is getting worse. The issue is dictably result in heated debates. how to solve the . problem in the most . IIighway partisans argue that the dom- cost-effective manner. inance of the automobile reflects a free- There are better, proven technologies market preference for the flexibility and to solve traffic congestion on I-70, The personal autonomy offered by privately last unproven technology, we bought was operated vehicles. the DIA baggage Transit advocates Steve Mueller Is a se- system, 'and now nior fellow specializ- Sally Hopper was a complain that no ing in transportation some people want three-term state sena- other industry in Issues at the Indepen- to build one that for who serves F American Bence Institute In you can stick people Chairman or the cI • history Golden. is reside. Bill Tolbert has enjoyed the into them and launch is president Trans- over the Coo- Port Ventures. . massive public sub- sidies lavished on tinental Divide! the family car. In If you don't care about the costs, about recent years major investment studies how much you already pay in taxes, you (MIS) have been required prior to the ap- may want to support the "Rail to Vail" proval of new transportation projects. In plan. If you think that everyone else will order to bring a rough demgcracy to this get out of their cars in order to take a process, each MIS includes a series of Disney-like monorail system Into the public hearings where comments regard- i mountains, this plan is for you. Ing alternative solutions are invited. On the other hand, if you think that Because no two congestion problems most people who go to the mountains are are identical; an MIS Is intended to gauge a little more free-apirited, that they like the preferences of those who will actually to wander off the beaten paths and enjoy be affected by any decision. In 1997, the 1 the natural beauty that Colorado offers, Colorado Department of Transportation you will know that the train just won't considered alternative strategies for im• attract enough people to have any impact proving traffic capacity ilong 1-70 from - whatsoever on the traffit-congestion Golden through the s ate's central moun- 6 : problem. n.. tain resorts, to the wood Canyon. A _ It mdymake ii stop here and theit-bdr'~ rare consensus ewer In the'final,:MISms zi orals Beta to ~o1J; butlt~gq,What do-y%,-- report, recommending ahigh-speed,'ale- :1 doT Hoti do yon get to the remote; people+`! vated fixed-guideway system as the pre-' Art free destinations from the train station?.. ferred "long-term" vision alternative for If you are rich, this Isn't a problem the corridor. This was balanced by a $600 but It isn't right to use our tax dollars as ` million-$800 million program of "near- welfare for the rich. If you are poor or term" roadway improvements, including ' IIN middle class, you will NEED your car to additional climbing lanes and reconfi- F1, Wow get near to your final destination. gured interchanges. This was the -first Photos and re hic by TransPort Ventures For most Coloradans, the train won't time that an MIS examining a rural seg- g P be an option on their mountain journey. ment of the .Interstate highway system Top, computer enhancement shows What about the skiers? If you want to rejected an end-to-end widening, or six- the proposed monorail at Denver take a train to go skiing, call the Ski lining of the roadway. Union Station. Below right, the Train For i40 per person round trip, you It became apparent to all participants, monorail and I-beam with the Gore can avoid the I-70 Hassles. even stakeholders who usually support Range in the background. Above, a This is a private operation - not subsi. roadway expansions, that the unique cross-section shows how the car dized by tax dollars - and it has existed characteristics of the I-70 mountain cor- would clamp onto the rail, for 60 years. The Ski Train carries about pdor make highway widening both im- 750 passengers each Saturday and Sunday practical and indefensibly expensive. The from December thru April. If it runs full, cost to extend the existing six-lane por- it will generate about $30,000 per day for tion of I-70 from Floyd Hill west to Glen- r 40 days per year. wood Canyon is $3.5 billion, or $32 million With extra trips during Christmas and dollars per mile. Existing railroad tech- a summers, the Ski Train might generate as nology, even French and Japanese bullet much as $2 million per year for the Den. trains, are unable to climb grades greater n z ver & Rio Grande Railroad. At that rate, than 2 percent, requiring even more bil- the $4.4 billion dollar "Rail to Vail" plan lions of dollars for tunnels. Consequently, 5 would break even in 2,200 yearsl I-70 stakeholders unanimously discarded For the price of the 3-mile test section these options in favor of a fixed-guideway .:r ($100 million), we could operate an addi- monorail system.. tlonal Ski Train for the next 5o years. In 1998 the Colorado Legislature creat- , Will the 'Ball to Vail" solve traffic _ ed the Colorado Intermountain Fixed l a congestion on I-707 Clearly not. The pro. ques- Guideway Authority (CIFGA) to identify, ponents freely admit say: "thisWe have when to do select, test and then demonstrate asuit- tioned. They just ~ able monorail technology. By 2003 the au- somethingThey will tell you that widening the for the is con required to develop a proposal highway Is the most expensive option, es- rail for the parallelling 1-70 from miles Denver of mono. Interne o- pecieily because of the need for an addi- tional t I to the from tlonal bore at the Eisenho;ver/Johnson Airport t Eagle County Air. - tunnels - but they won't easily tell you " ~'r`a~~+ww•sr~e'' n'°aa"w't Please see HOV on 6H - +k it+• - _ - fr - . T •7 L.ii 2_ - s 14, t7 qps" ' -r - ...:,._i. _ .yam _ r r. L r . 6l! . THE DENVER POST Sunday - Monorail could ease I-70 crush IQNORAIL from Page 1 H traffic on 1-70 to pay its own way. Weekend traffic on I-70 is growing at near Gypsum. t 15 percent annually, doubling every five phis coming January CIFGA must years. Some corridor residents are un- s~umit a plan to the Legislature to test derstandably concerned that a monorail a• . fixed-guideway technology and con- may produce still more negative im- strect a demonstration project. This pacts to Colorado's mountains. To the monorail proposal will be referred to contrary, with proper local transporta- Mrado voters for their approval in tion planning, a monorail system will November of 2000. CIFGA has devoted significantly reduce the number of cars year to an.extensive evaluation Hopper . Tolbert enering our fragile high country. A gh-speed monorail technologies ca- one of several stations in the Denver monorail carrying 400 people replaces r i pable of moving thousands of passen- metro area and arrive in less than one 230 cars. Attempting to throttle access gem per hour under the severe condi- hour. Snowstorms, jack-knifed trucks by accepting a 24-hour-a-day traffic is that exist in the I-70 mountain . and traffic jams will not interfere with jam along I-70 is not an environmental- ' the monorail. If I-70 closes, the mono- ly sound alternative. Artard-winning system rail will still be running. Travelers visiting Colorado for a ski Voters have say 7WGA has selected an award-win- vacation will be able to fly into DIA or n9` high-speed monorail system devel- the Eagle County airport and change The construction of a high speed ning WRI in the late 1980s - a technology "fights" by transferring to the mono- monorail serving Colorado's mountain j 4$ won the European Union's presti. rail for a direct connection to their re. resort communities represents a funda. sort destination. Passengers will sink in. mental rethinking of our travel habits. ' !ice"Lillehammer" award in 1995 as a to first-class seating and ride at s We live in a state whose natural beauty • friendly high-speed transportation. A in excess of 125 mph through Colorado's will attract 10 -million residents by the S'sh prototype of this system operat- spectacular Rocky Mountains. A high- middle of the next century. Even if we t speeds as high as 125 mph. The speed monorail will not feel like a roll- wanted to, we could never lay enough T y-mion of this system proposed for I-70 er-coaster ride. The monorail will be asphalt to guarantee access to mountain - will be powered by the Seraphim linear banked and speed controlled to prevent recreation for these future generations. in'luction motor (LIM) developed at the uncomfortable lateral forces. Only a recognition that new circum- per- Wdia National Laboratories. LIMs, . stances demand new solutions will per Faster and cheaper, mit us to protect Colorado's mountain , W which are in use throughout the world, Y on magnetic propulsion and brak- Six-laning I-70 will disrupt traffic for wonders for our children and their chit- " . fain place of conventional axle driven decades, and, when completed, the high- dren' wheels. LIM monorails can easily climb way will still be badly congested Trans- CIFGA will ask voters to take the CKrcent grades at high speeds and are Port Ventures estimates its monorail first step toward the development of a itllpervious to weather conditions. The system can be built for $22 million per 21st-century transportation system by system's wrap-around-the-beam design mile, including stations. and vehicles, approving a $100 million demonstration is extraordinarily safe, stable and fast. -just two-thirds. the cost of highway-ex-- --.project in November 2000. Colorado has -CIFGA has entered into a technology pansion. It can be completed in five a unique opportunity to lead the nation Bering agreement with TransPort years and will provide additional capac- in creating a transportation system that Computer-enhanced photo shows proposed monorail with Vail in the backg Ventures, an international consortium ity equivalent to eight new highway. preserves those qualities which make oransportation companies based in lanes. CIFGA and TV intend to raise a our state an attractive place to raise a Ubver, to develop a test program and majority of construction funds for the family. The monorail demonstration demonstration project proposal for the system from federal and private sector project will operate for several years so eorado Legislature. The size of sched- sources before they approach Colorado that taxpayers can view it, ride it and Wed trains can be as short as two vehi- taxpayers: This will be new money not judge its reliability. Then, and only then, etes carrying 60 passengers, or as much currently available to fund highway voters will be asked to authorize a 00 cars moving 600 passengers. When projects. The monorail will not require build-out of the full system - a billion- Wnt Range residents head for the permanent public subsidies for its oper- dollar decision that would reshape Colo. Mountains to play golf, ski or shop for ation. The guideway only needs to cap- rado's future by providing reliable two ti;day, they will be able to leave from ture a third of the projected increase in way service on I-70 by 2008. HOV toll lanes less wasteful HOV from Page 1 H so we need to deal with the pricing in creases, so does the price of the toll. As order to restore efficiency on our high- prices rise, fewer people decide to use Lew few people will actually ride the ways without a Russian revolution. the toll lanes, thus assuring congestion- Xbposed train. The technology to solve traffic con- free driving for carpools and buses. This ; =low do we solve traffic congestion on gestion has already been implemented Iec corridor can easily be applied to the Vail. IRO? The answer lies in bringing the and proven on SR 91 and I-15 in Califor- i rw market back into our transporta- nia. In the last legislative session, Colo- , Yes, there are details to be worked ' system. When demand exceeds sup-' rado embraced this technology, and has out, but if skiers and hikers know they there are two ways to handle the ordered CDOT to test it here within will. have to pay a-toll during peak trav- three queues or pricing. If the de- Years. It is called "HOT Lanes" or, ' el times, they may decide to carpool, ' 4&d is much higher than supply, and `High Occupancy Toll Lanes. take a bus or maybe ride the private Ski the queues (lines of people waiting) can The idea is to use a carpool lane more Train. As long as people know that the become quite large. Russians experi- effectively by allowing single-occupant tolls will be dedicated to adding addi- 4ed this trying to get bread; Ameri- cars to use the speedier HOV lanes for a tional highway capacity to alleviate fu. cans experience this on their highways. toll. The technology involves variable ture traffic congestion, most Coloradans lankly, everyone is tired of the lines = priced tolling. As traffic congestion in- will be willing to pay reasonable tolls. s, TOWN OF VAIL MEMORANDUM TO: Robert McLaurin Council Members FROM: Judy Popeck r DATE: August 10, 1999 RE: Investment Report Enclosed is the investment report with balances as of June 30, 1999. The estimated average yield for the capital projects fund was 4.550% and 4.770 % for the pooled cash fund. Currently the yield curve for 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year are 4.61%, 4.84%, and 4.82% respectively: Please call me if you have any questions. Town of Vail, Colorado Investment Report Summary of Accounts and Investments For the Month Ending 06/30/99 Balances Percentage 06/30/99 of Total Money Market Accounts (see page 3) Commercial Banks $2,352,806 11.80% Colorado Investment Pools $11,232,846. 56.32% Money Market Funds $71,404 .0.36% Total $13,657,056 68.48% Commercial Savings Banks & Loans Certificates of Deposit (see page 4) Eagle County Institutions $2,000,000 $2,000,000 10.03% Total $2,000,000 $2,000,000 10.03% Percentage of Portfolio in Savings & Loans 0.00% U.S. Government Securities (see page 5) FEDERAL AGENCY DISCOUNT NOTES & BONDS $2,963,140 _ 14.86% FNMA'S, ARM'S & SBA'S $1,325,163 6.64% Total - $4,288 303 .21.50% Total Portfolio 19 9,45 359 100.00% Maturing Within 12 Months $4,081,715 20.46% Maturing Within 24 Months $984,300 4.93% Maturing After 24 Months $14,879,344 74.60% X191945,359 100.00% 06/30/99 Page 2 Money Market Accounts as of 06/30/99 --For the Month of Jun-99 Institution Balances Type of Accounts High Low Average_ _ 06/30/99 COMMERCIAL BANK ACCOUNTS First Bank of Vail - Operating Interest 4.580% 4.390% 4.470% $3,017,255 $2,286,452 $2,631,507 Balance , $2,351.,689 US Bank Super Now Account Interest 2.710% General Operating Account Balance $1,117 Total Commercial Bank Accounts $2,352,806 LOCAL GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT POOLS Colotrust General Fund Interest 4.540% Balance $11,232,846 Total Local Government Investment Pools Accounts $11,232,846 MONEY MARKET FUNDS Bank One Money Market Fund - Dana Investments Interest 4.290% Balance $42,757 Fidelity Investment Government Money Market Accounts Interest 4.550% Bond Issue Reserve Account Balance $28,647 Total Money Market Funds $71,404 Total all accounts $13,657 056 06/30/99 Page 3 Certificates of Deposit as of 06/30/99 Bank Name, Location Days to Rates Purchase Maturity Maturity Maturity Ins Coupon Yield Date Date at Purchase Value Weststar Bank, Vail Colorado FDIC 5.900% 5.900% 28-Jan-98 28-Jan-2000 730 $1,000,000 Alpine Bank, Vail Colorado FDIC 4.650% 4.650% 21-May-99 31-Dec-99 224 $1,000,000 Avg-Yield 5.253% ___$2,000,000 06/30/99 Page 4 Government Securities as of 06/30/99 ***Federal Agency Discount Notes & Bonds*** Days/Years Interest Rate Purchase Maturity to Maturity Book Original Agency Fund Coupon Yield Date Date at Purchase Value_ Cost FNMA Pooled 4.972% 03-Mar-99 19-Nov-99 261.0 $981,340 $965,418 FFC Pooled 5.000% 5.000% 01-Apr-99 03-Apr-2000 1.0 $997,500 $1,000,000 _ FNMA Pooled 4.390% 5.270% 19-May-99 13-Oct-2000 1.4 $984,300. $992,616 Average Yield 5.08% x,963,140 ____$2,958,034 ***FNMA'S, ARM'S & SBA'S*** Days/Years _ Interest Rate Purchase Maturity to Maturity Book Original Agency Fund Coupon Yield Date Date at Purchase Value _Cost FNMA Pooled - Dana 9.050% 11-Jun-98 10-Apr-2000 1.8 $102,875 $105,875 SBA Pooled - Dana 8.975% 29-Jun-94 25-Feb-2008 13.7 $23,420 $82,749 SBA Pooled - Dana 8.475% 26-May-94 25-Mar-2008 13.8 $50,492 $109,734 SBA Pooled - Dana 8.975% 18-Aug-94 25-Jul-2008 13.9 $32,291 $109,875 SBA Pooled - Dana 8.520% 18-Aug-98 25-Feb-2011 12.5 $79,179 $94,503 SBA Pooled - Dana 7.625% 31-Oct-96 25-Jan-2013 16.2 $17,678 $65,558 SBA Pooled - Dana 8.225% 29-Jun-94 25-Jun-2019 25.0 $50,357 $108,523 SBA Pooled - Dana 8.475% 12-Jul-94 25-Jun-2019 25.0 $22,938 $108,744 SBA Pooled - Dana 8.225% 08-May-95 25-Dec-2019 24.6 $74,928 $99,391 SBA Pooled - Dana 8.000% 26-Feb-99 25-Feb-2024 25.0 $70,679 $82,542 GNMA Pooled - Dana 6.125% 25-Jan-99 20-Oct-2018 19.7 $73,614 $78,087 GNMA Pooled - Dana 6.625% 12-Aug-97 20-Sep-2025 28.1 $38,294 $76,141 GNMA Pooled - Dana 6.125% 24-Nov-97 20-Oct-2025 27.9 $41,036 $83,701 GNMA Pooled - Dana 6.875% 27-Apr-98 20-Jan-2026 27.8 $32,528 $76,509 FNMA Pooled - Dana 7.237% 21-Nov-96 01-Jan-2021 24.1 $67,409 $91,486 FNMA Pooled - Dana 7.200% 30-Oct-98 01-Apr-2024 25.4 $62,399 $97,048 FNMA Pooled - Dana 6.753% 01-Jul-96 01-May-2026 29.9 $18,319 $55,304 FNMA Pooled - Dana 6.504% 28-Jun-99 01-May-2029 29.9 $99,567 $100,047 FNMA Pooled - Dana 6.939% 27-May-94 01-May-2020 25.9 $47,298 $100,577 FNMA Pooled - Dana 6.774% 24-Jun-99 01-Aug-2022 23.1 $101,617 $102,043 FHLMC Pooled - Dana 8.053% 23-Jun-98 01-Aug-2025 27.1 $47,282 $79,539 FHLMC Pooled - Dana 7.490% 28-Mar-96 01-Mar-2026 29.9 $528 $9,323 FHLMC Pooled - Dana 8.542% 28-Aug-94 01-Aug-2018 23.9 $38,144 $74,245 FHLMC Pooled - Dana 8.409% 28-Jun-94 01-Mar-2019 24.7 $25,226 $66,355 FHLMC Pooled - Dana 6.896% 22-May-96 01-Feb-2036 39.7 $22,850 $60,461 NAVOT Pooled - Dana 6.750% 06-Apr-98 15-Mar-2002 3.9 ___$841215 $101,519 Average Yield 6.02% $1,325 163 __$2,219,879 Total $4,288,303 06/30/99 Page 5 August 9, 1999 NatioM; Cities Weekly Communication Tips for City Council TV by Gndie Ryan and Heather Moms jacket or anything else over the and comprehensive. In conver- dering, etc. or slides. The control room staff backofyour chaie-on camera, it sation, ask questions, listen to needs time to bring down the i The purpose of cablecasting will look like the jacket is "grow- answers, and follow-up. Help speakers be heard. lights and the council mikes. w~ city council meetings is to ing'out of your head. Speakers at council meetings Bring up the sound, then switch A I, improve communication with Always be yourself often forget it) talk into the mike. the video on the air. An abrupt ' the community. When residents Makeup tips. For This is the most important thing Hearing speakers at the lectern "Heres the video," will result in the ' are well informed, they can par- women, the natural look doesn't to achieve, and, surprisingly, can is generally not much of a prob- 20-30 seconds of uncomfortable natior ' ticipate more effectively in their work well on camera. Television be the most difficult. Get to lem. But if you notice the mike is silence in the chambers. are exl • . ' government and make better fights have a tendency to wash know and like the person you see off to the side, or the speaker has Features of the automatic and ect decisions on matters impacting out any complexion, creating a in the mirror. Be willing to be turned away or wandered off, slide system are semi-outdated. Howeve. ' their families. tired, apathetic appearance. introspective and to change please redirect the person back to For example, it is not easy to cities are The tips and suggestions for Makeup that is slightly heavier what can be changed. Accept the the mike. This may cause a reverse the projector to get back reports tl city councilpersons below are than normal is best. Always rest. momentary interruption, but it's to a specific slide without some Housing a lest ed to reduce obstacles are check your makeup, particularly preferable to not being heard. Developme 6'n prior notice. Slides have to be clear, accurate communication your lipstick, before going on the Be - or learn to be - an changed manually. Since projec- annual Slat air, otherwise your facial fea- optimist. Look for the positive Presentations at the report relent b ' etween councilperaons and tors often arc located in a projec- their citizen audience. tares will "disappear." You side of the person to whom center mike are the most prob- tion room behind the council compilation . , should not be concerned with you're speaking. Be positive lematic. If the mike is too low, chambers, it is difficult to, do this echoes the f Camm pfCSellre glamour, but you want the audi- about matters and issues you simply raise it yourself. Typically, quickly. Also for the same rea- City Fiscal ence to focus on what you are are confronting. Share upbeat a staff member will do this, but son, inform staff and the city reporting goo • The camera sees all. saying, not an how you look. attitudes with others. sometimes he or she doesn't get a clerk of any changes in the order for many witl • • 1 good "offai'"opportunity to do so. challenges for of assume that you are on Other tips for TV. Stay ,•,,,,I,,,",,, of the agenda. camera, and behave accordingly. alert physically, even when ~~`"'11""^^""''~"' Citizen-speakers tend to The report And in fact, you might be. You you're not talking. Don't watch Ha d~ On-A, ~ V" Pmb mf appear in a "wide shot" or Assume your micro- Just start talking without paying additional fie might the monitor. Ignore cameras and phone is always on. The micro attention to the mike. They turn • Older s- a 'wo shot" even when you are people moving in the studio. phones on the council dais are around to direct comments to the Use humor and stay characterist' not speaking. The camera accen- Lean forward slightly in your very sensitive. Every tsk, sigh, council. Sometimes they even calm. On major video and slide challenges ii,;1~•' - tuates every mannerism-good chair. Don't swivel about. Rest cough, sneeze, and whispered walk to the dais to pass out t- presentations, conduct run- in jobs, pope i or bad. hands naturally in your lap or on comment will be heard. When shirts, ribbons or hats. If they are throughs and take great care to investment, t the desk. applauding, move your hands to speaking during any of these ensure a smooth presentation. suburban ci ,'•i' • Sit up straight. Good your side so you're not clapping times, the home audience cannot Still, this is "live television" and growth-rele posture not only projects confi- Gim mlCwnmuoitafionsTips directly into the microphone. If hear them. You can get them occasional sound and/or video sprawl. dente, but also puts you in prop- you use your mute button, back to the mike by gently problems will happen once you • The er position for speaking into the Limit the points you try remember to turn it off when Putting your hand on the small of are "on the air." Staff will resolve among I ' microphone. Some council to make. As a general rule, con- you begin to speak. their back and guiding them these problems and you should benefil chamber chairs have a tendency fine your comments to two major back. continue the meeting as normal. betwe ' to make one naturally slouch or items. Keep your thoughts and Always speak into the ¦ suburl, lean back, se you have to make a presentation concise. Don't ram- microphone. Position yourself Don't ask questions once Repc t conscious effort to maintain good ble. Think before you speak. about 8-12 inches from the dais people have left the lectern and Details: Cindie Ryan is cam- economi posture. microphone and speak directly gone bark to their seats. Ask munications and marketing unempi • ' , Be aware of the way you into it. Speak in your normal speakers to return to the micro- manager for the city of Brea, increas' ' ' • _ ; • Wardrobe tips. In gen- sound. Often the way we say manner at a moderate sound lev- phone, then ask your question. Calif., and Heather Mortis is the he eov era;, avoid checks, stripes and something comes off more el. Remember, if you are not " Remember: even though you and city's public information officer. crime r: -',;'•I' other busy patterns. These tend strongly than the message. miked," the home audience can- the rest of the chamber audience For more information, contact report to "vibrate" on television. Stay Avoid monotone. Learn how to not hear you-even if the cham- can hear, that, doesn't mean the Ryan at 714-990-7673 or cindi- challe away from horizontal stripes analyze the way you sound to ber audience can hear you. sound is reaching the home audi- er@ci.brea.ca.us. This article espea and dark muted colors. Clean, others. Listen to council replays Therefore, avoid speaking as you ence, excerpted and reprinted with Per- i simple colors work well. Try to without watching. turn around to point to a display mission from the newsletter of unerr avoid wearing suits or dresses behind you; or as you turn to Y&m and Skk Pleserdalioos 3CMA, the City-County Comma- rates aver: that match the color of the coon- • Use simple and easily direct your comments to another mentions and Marketing Associa- cil chamber chairs because it understood language. Avoid jar- coun©bnember. Grab a wireless • Give warning. Please tion. For more information on decli creates a "floating head" look on gon, clever twists and industry mike ifyou want to leave the dais remember to do a little bit of an 3C H MA call 703-707-0830; fax, w camera. Don't drape your blazer, language. Be precise, concise to comment on a map, slide, ren- intro before "calling" for the video 703-707-0867; www.3cma.org. POP , uc AUG. 9. 1999 5:49PM NO. 7308 P. 1/1 Vail Associates Inc.` FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ` Media Contacts: Paul Witt, (970) 845-5720, paulw@vailresorts_con L Porter Wharton III, (970) 845-2557, pwharton@vailresorts.com TENTH CIRCUIT COURT RULES IN F.AVOII OF VAEL'S CATEGORY n1 VAIL, Colo. - Aug. 9, 1999 - The Tenth Circuit C ourt of Appeals in Denver today ruled unanimously in favor of the U.S. Forest Service and Vail Associates regarding Vail's Category III expansion. The lengthy decision repE atedly affirmed that the Forest Service properly analyzed and addressed the projected imf acts that Category III may have on the Canada Lynx; and that the Forest Service also properly followed the process for review and approval of the entire project, in denying the appeal by a coalition of environmental groups and individuals, the Court characterized the opponents' arguments as puzzlin g, lacking both logic and support. sercu.vrn~ "This is a complete vindication of the work done t y both the U.S. Forest Service and us," .Worm oma said Andy Daly, president of Vail Associates. "Category III has now been approved twice by the Tenth Circuit Court, as well as by the U.S. District Court, two Forest Supervisors, the Deputy Regional Forester, the Ar my Corps of Engineers, Eagle County, the Town of Vail, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Colorado Division of Wildlife." "The decision once again reaffirms Category III w an environmentally viable project that should go ahead," continued Daly. "It's time to pi it these legal wranglings behind us and move forward. We welcome the opportunity to h(>lp channel the opponents considerable energy into making better projects in the future rasher than continuing to fight what has been ruled time and time again to be a sound expansion." -30- PO Box 7 - Vail,Colorado • 81658 - phone 970 845 5720 • fax 970 845 5728 • e-mail:vailprouil.net co u TOWN OF PAIL 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2100 FAX 970-479-2157 MEDIA ADVISORY August 10, 1999 Contact: Nina Timm, 479-2144 TOV Housing Coordinator VAIL HOUSING PROGRAM CONTINUES TO FACILITATE AFFORDABLE OWNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES (Vail)--The Town of Vail Housing Division is currently facilitating ownership opportunities for three affordable housing properties in Vail. They are: Pitkin Creek Unit 5-F $110,000 This East Vail unit was just purchased by the Town of Vail as part of its buy-down program. The second of its kind in Vail, the town purchased the unit on the open market for $129,500. Officials will now deed restrict the unit and sell it to a qualified buyer for a subsidized price of $110,000. The unit is a 1-bedroom, 1-bath, with fireplace and 2 parking spaces. Lottery applications are now available from the Community Development Department and are due by noon Aug. 20. To qualify, applicants must: currently own no other residential real estate in Eagle County; use the residence as an owner-occupied primary home; work in Eagle County a minimum of 30 hours per week over the course of a year and plan to continue working that same amount until the sale of the property or retirement; and agree to a re-sale cap of 3 percent annual appreciation. This unit will be shown at an open house from 4 to 6 p.m. Aug. 11 and again on Aug. 18. Vail Commons Unit C-8 $118,262.63 Following the application process for this Vail Commons resale unit (2 bedrooms, 1.5 bath), the 21 applicants have been placed in tier groupings (see below) based on the number of years working or living within Eagle County. Those with the most longevity are given priority in the lottery. Because only one applicant, Lisa Salley, is in the top tier, the unit will be awarded to Salley. A reserve list drawing will be held on Aug. 10. The reserve list is used in the event the lottery winner is unable to move forward with the purchase. The tiers are as follows with applicants within the tiers listed in alphabetical order: Tier 1 Lisa Salley Tier 2 Dirk Johnson Tier 3 Sharon Bell John Heisdorf Scott McClarrinon Irene Meador Eugene Mitchell (more) RECYCLED PAPER Add 1 /TOV Housing Lotteries Tier 4 Brian Doyon Candace Robinson Ken Tannenbaum Brian Taylor Tier 5 Alicia Doughty Tyra Fessler Todd Hughes Gordon Lewis Eric Lohman Amy Reffkin James Yurcak Tier 6 Allen Best Debbie Cudd Steven Scollo Vail Commons Unit C-12 $117,459.72 A public lottery drawing for this resale unit (2 bedroom, 1.5 bath) will be held at 5:30 p.m. Aug. 19 in the Town of Vail Council Chambers. The 15 applicants have been placed in tier groupings (see below) based on the number of years working or living within Eagle County. Those with the most longevity are given priority in the lottery. The tiers are as follows with applicants within the tiers listed in alphabetical order: Tier 1 30-40 points Sharon Bell Scott McClarrinon Irene Meador Eugene Mitchell Patricia Riggin Tier 4 20-29 points Brian Doyon Candace Robinson Ken Tannenbaum Brian Taylor Tier 5 12-18 points Alicia Doughty Todd Hughes Gordon Lewis Eric Lohman Amy Reffkin James Yurcak Please note: All applicants in the first tier must be present at the start of the lottery to be entered in the drawing. All persons in the second and third tiers are welcome, but not required to attend. Since 1995, the Town of Vail housing program has facilitated ownership opportunities for 78 buyers in Vail. For more information, contact Nina Timm, Vail housing coordinator, at 479-2144, or Kris Widlak, housing assistant, at 479-2454. ~y TOWN OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2100 FAX 970-479-2157 MEDIA ADVISORY August 9, 1999 Contact: Acting Fire Chief John Gulick, 479-2253 VAIL & AVON FIRE DEPARTMENTS ADD PRESENCE . TO NEVADA WILDFIRE RESPONSE (Vail)--Two student residents from the Vail Fire Department, as well as an engine and an operator from Avon's Fire Department, have been dispatched to help battle wildfires near Carlin, Nevada. Vail Acting Fire Chief John Gulick says the action marks the first time Vail has participated in an interagency out-of-state emergency. The two student residents are Scott Bridges and Ryan Ocepek from Vail's Station Two. The operator from Avon is Battalion Chief Mike Long. They've been assigned to a location called the Sadler Complex, 45 miles south of Elko, Nevada. Gulick says the fire is estimated to be 180,000 acres in size with 516 firefighters staffing 14 hand crews, 28 engines and 3 helicopters. The U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management will pay expenses for the Colorado crew members. Gulick says the Nevada-bound students may rotate with others in the Vail program to allow as many student residents as possible to gain valuable experience in wildfire management. For more information, contact Gulick at 479-2253. RECYCLEDPAPER THE DENVER POST nda , August 8, 1999' Z6A ~r uZ W housing needs... - r Thistle o v n Boulder r ws alo g gwith By Sheba R. Wheeler ing and the city of Longmont as- Denver Post staff writer Public-pnvate partnership helps nonprofit add 76 affordable units silted with the Parkville , tion by providing a grant and and BOULDER - At a time when low-interest loan. affordable housing in Boulder three of its existing rental proper- Richtel, Thistle Community Hous- bonds with Norwest Investment ties working together toward a :a County seems about as reachable ties: Laguna, Sage Court and the ing Board president. "We've suc- Management Inc. common goal," said Bill Jackson, Thistle also is constructing the. : as the lost city of Atlantis, one non- Terry Apartments in Boulder cessfully brought together public, managing director of Norwest In- profit organization dedicated to County. The funding also was used private and nonprofit partners to "Because housing in Boulder vestment Management. Buena Vista community in Bouldei at 17th Street and Yarmouth Ave- making housing available for to buy the 76-unit Parkville Apart- provide permanently affordable County is expensive, especially for working families seems to be mak- ments in Longmont. and, safe quality homes for working low-wage working families, we see Wells Capital Management pur- nue. Buena Vista will offer 49 per-. ing strides. families in our community." this as a unique financial partner- chased a significant portion of the manently affordable family-owned- Boulder County-based Thistle Meeting a need ship with private and public enti- bonds. The State Division of Hous- homes. Community Housing announced County pitches in last week the addition of 76 hous- Already one of the largest pri- ing units to its program, thanks to vate nonprofit developers in Boul- Bonds issued by Boulder County a sizable financial partnership be- der County, Thistle has grown to made the financial package possi- tween Thistle, local government include more than 200 permanent- ble. Kutak Rock served as bond and the private sector. ly affordable rental units and 70 counsel and Kirkpatrick Pettis of ! A new, $5.76 million public-pri- family-owned homes. Denver, an investment banking vate financial arrangement al- "The citizens of Boulder County arm of Mutual of Omaha Insur- loed Thistle to refinance loans on should be very proud," said Judy ance, served as underwriter for the .,I , - - The Dally, Statdey. August 8, 1999-4xage AS - - - - YC: e ou County wrestles with home rule By Geraldine Haldner ouy son Wrker EAGLE COUNTY - The pros ns t? and cons of changing Eagle County's h statutory government to home rule r+ were last studied by a blue-ribbon committee back in 1983. The cons won out Now, 16 years later, home rule might deserve a second look, said one Eagle County Commissioner. On Monday, commissioner James Johnson suggested that the county consider forming another home-nile commission to see if a.diffetent gov- erming style could benefit its residents in the new millennium. To find out how people feel about stamtory versus home rule, the coun- ty will host a work session, tentative- ly scheduled for Sept 7, to find out if + there is public interest in home nde. a In simple terms, statutory counties are an extension of the state oven- ' ment. Statutory counties provide' localized government on behalf of the state, providing a required set of ser- vices under the leadership of three commissioners. Under the Colorado Constitution, municipalities have had the choice between the statutory and home-rule forms of governance since 1876, when the constitution was rati- Vail Dairy/Quentin Huttstad lied. In the case of municipalities, A countywide taxed recreation district - Including towns and existing recreation districts - reflect- home rule is more popular, as reflect- could be one of the advantages for a County ed residents under a home-rule charter. that operate under a home-rule char- ter (in 1995, only 17 were statutory County Attorney Jim Fritze. Fritze towns). was a legal staffer to a committee The reason home title is the gov- designated to recommend whether to No place like home eming style of choice for most ask the voters to elect a full-fledged municipalities lies in the greater free- home-rule commission, which is dom and autonomy the state gives needed to draft a home-rule charter. ¦ Of Colorado's 63 counties only two (Weld and Pitkin) currently incorporated towns, said David . 'They felt that the potential disad- are home-nde counties. Broadwell, staff attorney for the Col- vantages outweighed the advan. ¦ Operating under a voter-approved, locally-tailored charter is much orado Municipal League. In fact, tages: said Fritze, who prepared a more popular with municipalities. Of Colorado's 269 municipalities, 250 laws set forth in municipal home-rule 27-page statute-by-statute compari- are home rule, according to the Colorado Municipal League. charters supersede the state constim- son between the two forms of gov- ¦ Of Eagle County's seven incorporated towns, Vail, Mintum, Avon lion and legislative actions within a ernment for the committee. and Gypsum are home-rule. Red Cliff, Eagle and Basalt are statutory local boundary. The final vote, cast sometime in towns. "Home rule for a municipality is 1984, was 8-5 for abandoning the ¦ The City and County of Denver has been a home-rule combined functional home role, which means effort, Fritze said. government since 1902. In 2000 it will be joined by the newly-formed they have full authority over matters The comparison showed that in City and County of Broomfield of local concern - anything from many respects there was little change ¦ The United States Constitution makes no mention of cities or coun- animal control to smoking orli. between statutory and home-rule ties. It recognizes only two levels of government: national and stare. nances; they don't depend on the government, he said Local governments derive their power from the state and have to abide state," Broadwell said. Home-rule counties can have by state statutes. When it comes to counties and some advantages, such as the power Where the Colorado Constitution is silent on powers and duties of home rule, the odds are stacked in to levy taxes for public concerts or local governments, the state legislature steps in. If there is any doubt favor of state control, marketing and parks. regarding the constitutionality of a legislative law, the courts review it "For counties, it's limited to stntc- Broader powers, such as on incur- N While the Colorado Constitution regards county governments as rural home rule, which means they ring debts, have been negated by the an extension of the state, it gives incorporated municipalities the free- can be flexible in how they want to Taxpayers' Bill of Rights (TABOR) dom to govern themselves above the reach of the state constitution and structure themselves. They can have amendment, Fritze said. without legislative interference when it comes to municipal affairs. five instead of three commissioners However, a home-rule county ¦ A county is created to serve the purposes of the state as a political and appoint formerly elected offi- may include in its charter the power subdivision of the state. In that capacity it is obligated to perform ser- cials," Broadwell said to form a countywide, taxed recre- vices ranging from public safety to record-keeping. A county can levy rt Other than administrative authori- ation district, which Johnson men- taxes and pay county bills. ty, however, there isn't much that tioned as one possible advantage for 0 A 1972 amendment to the Colorado Constitution permits counties cuts the ties with the state, Broadwell Eagle County, which has an to adopt home-rule charters in part to accommodate counties of various said estranged relationship with residents sizes and needs. Home rule, however does not mean a county is free to z 'There is the referendum and peti- in El Jebel and Basalt alter its services and duties. It merely enables a county to adopt a home- f lion powers for the residents, which Jacque Whitsitta one-time corn- rule charter to redesign its internal structure, change the makeup of its ' the charter can procedurally allow, misstoner candidate and Basalt Town leadership, and add petition and referendum powers for its residents. but that is basically all you get," he Board member, said she supports For example, home-rule counties may abandon an elective office, 'said home rule because "it tends to be L. Since a 1972 constitutional more citizen-enfranchised," but she such as the assessor or coroner, and replace them with appointed per- amendment allowed for the forma- cautioned that five, rather than throe sonnel. Counties can expand their board of county commissioners from r . f. lion of home-rule counties, only two commissioners would not make three to five, allow their citizens to second-guess them on adopted poll- - and Pitkin - out of Col- Basalt residents feel better-represent- ties via a referendum and fora them to consider measures via petitions. Weld Geraldine 63 counties have succeeded ed in the distant county seat of Eagle. -Haldner ii rk at adopting home-rule charters (in "We don't have any contiguity," addition to the home-rule City and she said. "Without contiguity, it is not } County of Denver and the newly- going to make us more a part of the "I don't have a prediction. I don't now," Fritze said. "But there are still formed City and County of Broom- county" want to jump' out front," he said. "I some awkward things with home field). A petition to ask Basalt and El think if the board desires, we have to rule. With an elected (home-rule) Residents of other counties have Jebel inhabitants about possible go look at it again." commission, you might draw some tried and failed to formulate home- secession from Eagle to Pitkin Coun- Time might have changed how special interests that voters will get rule charters that voters lilted Among ty currently is in the works, Whitsitt residents feel about their government, scared by." them are El Paso, La Plata and Sum- said. he said Geraldine Haldner covers Eagle min counties. Fritze said only careful analysis of 'The population has grown, the County, the sheriB's office and the When Eagle County last gave the pros and cons will reveal to vot- size of county government has combined courts of Eagle County. { home rule a look in 1983, it didn't ers what type of goverrmPnt is -a bet- grown. the county budgets have She can be reached at (970) 328- seem to be a good deal, said Eagle ter fit for Eagle County. grown, sure things are different 4950. ' • _ - - T r• RECEIVE Ur~JG d 1~ ; wiz.. ~m n.,.,.. ~ • cr OL11.~-Q.~.. 1n~ ._.n e i Lot Aa R-4.k _Uy\ *-a& ' f i k Ck, tar .F , . ~CN„~._~~-ti ix ~'~:at:1,~+t~!.':S:%L~:•+Li."'.~..:z.;.'."~::1riw..'1.-r:.:,L..°.•,..r..~...~.:~:b.x...;.:x~'....:. t.--~~~.3!.:.., yrs...'. i • . , ~ - Janice Cummings 2109 Chamonix Ln. Vail, CO' 81657 w 9 M V w - - 7S Gti.Q. C I ~O S 7 6 Printed by Pam Brandmeyer 8/09/99 1:40pm From: Larry Pardee lNwp~CL~- To: EVERYONE GROUP , Subject: Construction update for the week of August 9-13, 1999 ===NOTE====------=====8/08/99==6:40pm=====__________________________________ The Town of Vail has one capital street project which will be slurry seal and one capital rec. path project which is asphalt overlays, happening this week. STREET PROJECT: (Tentative schedule) Mon. - Matterhorn Circle, Sierra Trail, Alpine Drive, Snowberry Drive, Larkspur Lane and Larkspur Court Tue. - West Gore Creek Drive, Shasta Place, Alta Court, Geneva Drive, Fairway Drive, Fairway Court, Ptarmigan Road, and Basingdale Blvd. -Wed.-- Kinnickinnick Court, Upper Matterhorn Circle, Eagle Nest Circle, Homestake Circle, Cabin Circle, Hornsilver Circle and Vail Valley Drive starting from golf course bridge to Sunburst Drive and Sunburst Drive to the end. Thu.Fri.Sat. are makeup dates if needed because of weather REC. PATH PROJECT: (Tentative schedule) Mon. - Lions Ridge Loop to Red sandstone school Tue. - Skiers bridge in Lionshead to pedestrian bridge behind Sewer Plant on Forest Road Wed. - Children s ski center to Vail Valley Drive on east side of Ski Club Vail. Thu.Fri.Sat. are makeup dates if needed If you have questions please call or E-mail me. 479-2165 or 390-1807 Page: 1 AUG. 6. 1999 1:54PM NO. 7288 P. 1/1 Vail. NEws RELE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Media Contacts: Kristin Yantis, (970) 479-3001, kristin@vailresorts.com Adam Palmer, (970) 479-3048 VOLUNTEERS NEEDED FOR WETLAND RE ORATION PROJECT IN LIONSIIEAD VAIL, Colo. - Aug. 6, 1999 - Vail Associates, the Vail R otary Club and the Town of Vail are organizing a wetland restoration project Friday, Aug. 13, 6rom 9 a.m. to noon in Lionshead. Volunteers are needed to help restore the area across the Iedestrian bridge next to the miniature golf course - the area has been degraded by bicycle use acid by the infiltration of noxious weeds. Volunteers will focus on removing noxious weeds, revegf-tating weed-choked areas and closed trails with native wetland plant species, and protecting muddy portions of trails from additional damage. A representative from Rocky Mountain Native Plants will be on site to educate volunteers on the wetland function, noxious weeds and the identification of many of the native plant species currently existing in the area, which include wild orchids Ind six species of willows. Volunteers are asked to meet at 9 am. at the pedestrian bi idge east of the Eagle Bahn Gondola. Free lunch will be provided to volunteers at Eagle's Nest it noon. Tools will be provided, but volunteers are asked to bring their own gloves and waterproof boots, and to dress appropriately for the weather. For more information or to sign up to volunteer, call Adam Palmer at 479-3048. Post Office Box 7 • Vail, Colorado 81658 ? 137 Benchmark Road ? Avon, Co 81620 VA I L R r -S 0 R T.-.