Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-09-12 Support Documentation Town Council Work Session VAIL TOWN COUNCIL WORK SESSION TUESDAY, September 12, 2000 2:00 P.M. AT TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS NOTE: Time of items is approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied) upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item. 1. Local Marketing District Board of Directors Quarterly Ross Boyle Meeting. (30 mins.) 2. Town Council call-up of the Design Review Board's denial of Allison Ochs a deck expansion, located at 333 Hanson Ranch Road (Vista Bahn Building)/Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village 1st Filing. (40 mins.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Uphold, overturn, or overturn with conditions the Design Review Board's denial of the deck expansion at the Tap Room. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: Please refer to the staff memorandum STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department recommends that the Town Council uphold the Design Review Board's denial of the proposed deck expansion subject to the following findings: That the addition does not meet the intent of the guidelines as established by Section 12-11-5 (Design Guidelines) of the Town Code as outlined in the staff memorandum. That the deck addition does not meet the intent of the guidelines as established by the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan as outlined in the staff memorandum. 3. Parking Discussion. (1 hr.) Greg Hall Arnie Ullevig ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Continue to provide direction to the parking discussion items based on policies that the parking plan should meet. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: Vail Resorts Inc. and the merchants discussed long-term needs with regard to parking. The town is currently short up to 1000 spaces. We have identified policies that the overall parking plan should meet. Enclosed is a parking plan to meet those policies as prepared by the town's consultant. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Participate in discussions, determine what additional information is needed, and what further options are required to bring back for review of the overall parking policies. 4. Executive Session - White Water Park Litigation. (30 mins.) Tom Moorhead 5. Contribution Requests. (45 mins.) Steve Thompson BACKGROUND RATIONAL: In your packet are the actual requests for Y2001 contributions plus a spreadsheet for you to enter the amount you would like to grant the various groups. Please turn these into Pam first thing Tuesday afternoon so that averages of all the Councilmembers can be tabulated. Also included on this spreadsheet is the Town Manager's recommendation for funding. In regard to the request for funding from the Vail Valley Tourist and Convention Bureau (VVTCB), please note there is not a "manager's recommendation." Staff needs to further understand items in this request before a recommendation can be made from staff. Therefore, this item will be slated for later discussion. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Complete the contribution funding spreadsheet and return to Pam at the beginning of Tuesday's work session. 6. Appointment of 501(c)3 and 501(c)4 Committee Members Russell Forrest for the White River Institute's Hub Site Efforts. (5 mins.) BACKGROUND RATIONAL: At the special Council meeting on Thursday, September 7th, Council members indicated preferences to serve on either the 501(c)3 or 501(c)4 committee in regard to the White River Institute's efforts for the Hub Site. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Vote for two members for EACH of these committees. Turn ballots into Pam at the beginning of the work session this coming Tuesday. 7. DRB Report/PEC Agenda and Report. (5 mins.) Allison Ochs Brent Wilson 8. Information Update. (10 mins.) 9. Council Reports. (10 mins.) 10. Other. (10 mins.) 11. Adjournment. (6:05 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, 9119/00, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE FOLLOWING VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR WORK SESSION WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 9/26/00, BEGINNING AT 2:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING WILL BE ON TUESDAY, 9/19/00, BEGINNING AT 7:00 P.M. IN TOV COUNCIL CHAMBERS. e MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: September 12, 2000 SUBJECT: A Town Council call-up of the Design Review Board's denial of a deck expansion, located at 333 Hanson Ranch Road (Vista Bahn Building)/Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village 1" Filing. Applicant: Remonov and Company, represented by Knight Planning Services Planner: Allison Ochs 1. BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST According to the Town of Vail Development Standards Handbook the Design Review Board is: The body responsible for reviewing development proposals in the Town of Vail. The Design Review Board focuses on evaluating projects based on the Town Code, Master Plans and the Design Standards as set forth in the Town Code, including architectural design, site planning, landscaping, site disturbance, etc. On May 15, 2000, an application was received for a conditional use permit to allow for the addition of a deck to the Tap Room, located at 333 Hanson Ranch Rd. An outdoor dining deck is a conditional use in the CC1 Zone District. The deck extended beyond the property. line of the Vista Bahn Building, onto Vail Associates property zoned Agriculture and Open,Space. Vail Associates allowed the encroachment through an easement. The deck also extended onto the Town of Vail stream tract. On June 12, the Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed the Conditional Use Permit. The Planning and Environmental Commission had concerns about the effect of the use on adjacent residential uses and its proximity to an adjacent private deck. The request was tabled, with direction from the Planning and Environmental Commission to investigate providing more of a buffer to adjacent properties and to go to the Design Review Board for a conceptual review on the design of the deck. On June 21, 2000, the Design Review Board conceptually reviewed the deck expansion. The following were their major concerns: 1. The deck will create a dark and uninviting space for the pedestrian flow that was intended with the original building design. 2. The board generally felt that the angles of the deck were out of character with the existing building. Instead, the board felt that they would be more TOWN OF VAIL' 1 supportive of expanding the existing decks and opening up the restaurant more to the outside. 3. The board felt that the deck would create a dark, wet entrance to the ski lockers. They also felt that the proposed head height created would not be conducive to people carrying skis. 4. The board felt that using up all of the available space was not an elegant solution. The proposed deck introduced a vocabulary unfamiliar to the existing building. 5. The board also expressed concerns about the proximity of the deck to the adjacent residential use. These concerns were forwarded to the Planning and Environmental Commission at the July 10, 2000 meeting. At the July 10, 2000, Planning and Environmental Commission hearing, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved the Conditional Use Permit for the outdoor dining deck with the condition that the deck would go no further than the western portion of the stucco pilaster (see attached plan). The Planning and Environmental Commission also noted that the Design Review Board would review the architectural elements of the application, as the Planning and Environmental Commission's role was to focus on the use. The staff memorandum and minutes of the Planning and Environmental Commission meeting have been attached for reference. When the applicant returned to the Design Review Board meeting on August 2, 2000, the applicant had not addressed any of the concerns of the Design Review Board that had been discussed at the conceptual review. A motion was made to approve the deck addition, and a tie vote resulted. A tie vote is equivalent to a denial. The denial was then called-up by the Town Council. Though the call-up was originally scheduled for September 5th, the item was tabled to the September 12th Town Council meeting. Following the Town Council call-up, the applicant submitted an appeal of the Design Review Board decision. Their statement of appeal is attached for reference. II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends that the Town Council uphold the Design Review Board's denial of the proposed deck expansion subject to the following findings: 1. That the addition does not meet the intent of the guidelines as established by Section 12-11-5 (Design Guidelines) of the Town Code and outlined in Section III of this memorandum. 2. That the deck addition does not meet the intent of the guidelines as established by the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and as outlined in Section III of this memorandum. 2 III. APPLICABLE DESIGN GUIDELINES Design Guidelines: 1. Structures shall be compatible with existing structures, their surroundings, and with Vail's environment. It is not to be inferred that buildings must look alike to be compatible. Compatibility can be achieved through the proper consideration of scale, proportions, site planning, landscaping, materials and colors, and compliance with the guidelines herein contained. Staff Response: The Design Review Board and staff believe that the proposed deck is out of context with the existing structure. The deck is out of scale with the existing decks and balconies. The Design Review Board specifically felt that the angles of the deck were out of character with the existing building. The proposal does not meet the intent of the Design Guidelines. Urban Design Guide Plan: 1. Pedestrianization - A major objective for Vail Village is to encourage pedestrian circulation through an interconnected network of safe, pleasant, pedestrian ways. Staff Response: The Design Review Board and staff believe that the deck creates an uninviting pedestrian space. The deck creates a very dark entrance to the ski lockers, and fails to maintain the openness of the pedestrian path around the east side of the building. The proposal does not meet the intent of the Urban Design Guide Plan with regards to pedestrianization. 2. 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. Decks and patios should be sited and designed with due consideration to: sun, wind, views, pedestrian activities. Staff Response: The Design Review Board and staff believe that while this is an appropriate location for a deck, the deck must also be properly designed and sited. The current proposal is out ofcontext with the architecture of the existing building, creates an uninviting pedestrian experience, and severely darkens and spoils the entrance to the ski lockers. The head height created by the deck makes it difficult for pedestrians carrying skis to pass through. The proposal does not meet the intent of the Urban Design Guide Plan with regards to decks and patios. Vail Village Master Plan Goal 1: Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving the unique architectural scale of the village in order to sustain its sense of community and identity. Staff Resoonse: The Design Review Board and staff believe that the deck is out of character with the existing architecture of the Vista Bahn Building. The proposal does not meet the intent of Goal 1 of the Vail Village Master Plan. Goal 2: To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year-around economic health and viability for the Village and for the community as a whole. 3 2.4 Encourage the development of a variety of new commercial activity where compatible with existing land uses. 2.4.1 Commercial infill development consistent with established horizontal zoning regulations shall be encouraged to provide activity generators, accessible greenspaces, public plazas, and streetscape improvements to the pedestrian network throughout the village. 2.4.2 Activity that provides night life and evening entertainment for both the guest and the community shall be encouraged. Staff Response: While staff believes that the use of the deck meets the above objectives and policies of Goal 2, staff does not believe that these over-ride the importance of the architectural considerations of the Vail Village Master Plan as stated in the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan. Goal 3: To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking experience throughout the Village 3.3 Encourage a wide variety of activities, events, and street life along pedestrian ways and plazas. 3.3.2 Outdoor dining is an important streetscape feature and shall be encouraged in commercial infill or redevelopment projects. 3.4 Develop additional sidewalks, pedestrian-only walkways, and accessible green space areas, including pocket parks and stream access. 3.4.1 Physical improvements to property adjacent to stream tracts shall not further restrict public access. Staff Response: While staff believes that the above objectives and priorities are applicable to the proposed deck addition, staff believes that proper siting and design are integral to any development. The Design Review Board and staff feel that the current proposal does not meet the intent of Goal 3 of the Vail Village Master Plan. Intent of original design (from the original application to the Town of Vail) "The creation and enhancement of the Mill Creek area as an important connector link will alleviate skier congestion at peak hours on the west side of the Golden Peak House. The opportunities to direct pedestrians along the Mill Creek improvements will assist in improving the aesthetics in these strategic areas." Staff Response: As part of the original design concept of the Vista Bahn Building, the architect described the importance of the pedestrian link from the ski yard, around the eastern portion of the building along Mill Creek. The Design Review Board and staff believe that the deck is in direct contrast to the original design concept as specified by the original architects of the building. The proposal does not meet the intent of the original design, as specified by the architects. 4 1 u1 ' +1 Y'G~1 -UJ Tj~ ` -17 4,3 i f w , 4 141?:I•h!j ~t j, { NTEFt c7F FUdT BiplDCsk` -Y MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 12, 2000 SUBJECT: A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for the establishment of outdoor patio dining and seating, located at 333 Hanson Ranch Road (Vista Bahn Building)/Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village 1St Filing. Applicant: Remonov and Company Planner: Allison Ochs 1. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The Vistsa Bahn Building is proposing an outdoor dining deck to be located at 333 Hanson Ranch Rd. / Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village 1St. The establishment of outdoor patio dining is a conditional use in the CCI Zone District. The deck addition will allow for outdoor seating for the Tap Room Restaurant. The deck addition will be reviewed by the Design Review Board for compliance with the Vail Village Urban Design Considerations. II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of the conditional use permit to allow for the establishment of an outdoor patio dining deck, based on the following findings and the criteria outlined in this memo: 1. That the proposed location of the use is in accordance with the purposes of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. 2. That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use would comply with each of the applicable provisions of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code. I TOWN OF PAIL "i 1 Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this conditional use permit, staff recommends the following condition: 1. That the proposed deck encroachment is entirely removed from the Town of Vail Stream Tract or resolved with the Town Attorney prior to Design Review Board approval. Ill. ROLES OF THE REVIEWING BOARDS Plannina and Environmental Commission: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for evaluating this conditional use permit application 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. 7. Conformance with development standards of zone district Design Review Board: The Design Review Board is responsible for evaluating the Design Review application fora 1. Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings 2. Fitting buildings into landscape 3. Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography 4. Removal/Preservation of trees and native vegetation 5. Adequate provision for snow storage on-site 6. Acceptability of building materials and colors 7. Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms 8. Provision of landscape and drainage 9. Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures 10. Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distances 11. Location and design of satellite dishes 12. Provision of outdoor lighting 13. The design of parks IV. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Upon review of Chapter 16 of the Zoning Regulations, the Community Development Department recommends approval of the conditional use permit request to allow for the establishment of the outdoor dining deck at the Vista Bahn Building based on the following factors: 2 A. CONSIDERATION OF FACTORS: 1. Relationship and impact of the use on the development objectives of the Town. Staff believes the applicant's proposal is in concert with the Town's development objectives and will have minimal impacts on existing or potential uses in the surrounding area. The following development objectives of the Town are listed in the Vail Village Master Plan and staff believes are relevant to this proposal: 2.1 Recognize the variety of land uses found throughout the Village and allow for development that is compatible with these established land use patterns. 3.3 Encourage a wide variety of activities, events, and street life along pedestrian ways and plazas 3.3.2 Outdoor dining is an important streetscape feature and shall be encouraged in commercial infill or redevelopment projects. 2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public facilities needs. Staff believes that the proposal will have minimal, if any, negative impacts on the above-described criteria. 3. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the street and parking areas. Staff believes there will be minimal, if any, negative impacts on the above-described criteria 4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses. Staff believes that the proposal has many positive aspects and that the character of the area will be enhanced as a result of the proposed improvements. Los Amigos has an outdoor dining deck similar to the proposed Tap Room deck. As this site is adjacent to the ski yard, staff believes this will be an amenity to the public. However, staff recognizes that there are residential uses adjacent to the proposed outdoor dining deck. All Town of Vail noise ordinances are applicable to this site. As a conditional use permit, the Planning and Environmental Commission has the ability to revisit the conditions imposed upon it, should any conflicts arise between adjacent uses. 3 B. FINDINGS The Plannina and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings before arantina a conditional use hermit: 1. That the proposed location of the use is in accordance with the purposes of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. 2. That the, proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use would comply with each of the applicable provisions of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code. 4 r Description & Compatibility The proposed project consists of an exterior deck extension on the south side of the second floor of the Vista Bahn Building. The purpose is to provide outside seating for the Tap Room Restaurant. This addition meets development objectives of the Town of Vail by providing outside restaurant and bar area thereby increasing existing commercial use in properly zoned areas. The design of the deck has been carefully done to be compatible with features of the existing building. For example the deck rail will be identical to that which currently exists on the building. Also the deck is designed to respect the existing stairways, walkways and first floor patio. Landscape materials consisting of two trees and some small shrubs will be relocated on site. In addition to the physical compatibility efforts, the compatibility of the proposed use will be assured. There are some residential uses adjacent to and above the proposed deck. Our team is contacting owners to resolve any issues. Positive impacts are anticipated. An increase in food and beverage service at the base of the ski mountain will be a public benefit. As this is limited to outside space, increase in the times of use will be limited. No additional parking will be needed. Also pedestrian and vehicular traffic will not be impacted. i U Q ~ BRIDG£ BiRFFT LODGE o 1 7 ~ m I ~ sovy ur w ~ o csau anmsn\V' IIf~' LMtlE ~a-aTe ^ ~ ue I arcs wr roeT V' ® uwr omen n TRACT E \ w U 'r- ~ ® nrowm , aQwN~ t~+eacndT ero~w,a 7' W nccu I~ ~ ~ ,,A f ~wuw.~e . U U ~~tO rxMe ~ ~l ~J11~ MATERIALS: 11rrI!! } ~Jf ul CQ PECK. LL a_ TOUN OF YAIL O TO MATCH EXICZKC7MTE 0 LLLL~a.`"~~L1..71I tl+' R / RAIL Z EEXIOTMGTO MATCH } Q ISNPTOG NEW RAIL,, ?O MATCH ExIOTNG J ° W ~~981m otoa 14 A?RD_ 00 I ~nruTme+ 1 f I I I i 1 nor SECOND LEVEL EXTERIOR DECK CONSTRUCTION PLAN _ 10 r slirzo i lul rig °f t , ~15 I 712 1 ' t Z M.4 I b~ ,~j; ~ Syr` ~ r~~'' x r'f~' 3~-Z~,~,•. k ,C;'~' ~ ~ ~.~N['! r . ~ `f~~1 ; L.~' J S~ t STONF'WALL STONE WALL BLCK TO BE SUPPORTED SIGN FOR RESTAURANT " 7AP RUO}11" BY STONE- WALL (V.LF. BEIGNT OF w'ALL) Approved June 26, 2000 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION June 12, 2000 Minutes MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Galen Aasland John Schofield George Ruther Chas Bernhardt Diane Golden Brent Wilson Brian Doyon Allison Ochs Doug Cahill Ann Kjerulf Tom Weber Judy Rodriguez Todd Oppenheimer Public Hearina 2:00 p.m. Galen Aasland called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. 1. Swearing in of PEC member Tom Weber - Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk. Galen Aasland mentioned that item #5 had been withdrawn. 2. A request for a conditional use permit to construct a Type II Employee Housing Unit, located at 2490 Bald Mountain Road/Lot 17, Block 2, Vail Village 13`h Filing. Applicants: Mary & Sonny Caster, represented by Ben Aguilar Planner: Ann Kjerulf Ann Kjerulf gave an overview of the staff memo. Galen Aasland asked if the applicant had anything to add. The applicant had nothing to add. Galen Aasland asked if the public had any comments. There were no public comments. Doug Cahill asked if there was an exit door from the garage to the EHU. Ben Aguilar said you would have to exit the garage and go outside to get to the EHU. Doug Cahill suggested an access door from the garage to the EHU. Tom Weber had no comments. Brian Doyon said he was concerned with Condition #2, reducing the curbcut. Ben Aguilar explained that the cut was reduced by 20'. Ann Kjerulf said the DRB made the condition part of their approval. Chas Bernhardt had no further comments. Galen Aasland asked if rents would be removed from the deed restriction. Planning and Environmental Commission 1 Minutes June 12, 2000 Approved June 26, 2000 Brent Wilson said the Town of Vail has no cap on rents. Brian Doyon made a motion for approval, in accordance with the staff memo. Doug Cahill seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 5-0. 3. A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for the installation of wireless telecommunications rooftop antennas & a public service use within the Brandess Building, located at 2077 N. Frontage Road (Brandess Building)/Lot 39, Buffehr Creek. Applicant: Jayne Brandess Revocable Trust Planner: Brent Wilson Brent Wilson gave an overview of the staff memo. Galen Aasland asked if the applicant had anything to add. The applicant was not present. He then asked if there were any public comments. Charlie Clark, a resident of 29 Zermatt Lane, Unit H, stated that he didn't want the antennas to be huge. Brent Wilson explained the antennas and said they were 4' tall and quite small. He said the Design Review Board would address the aesthetics. Tom Weber said his only concern was that they should be concealed behind a louver and it should be part of the PEC approval. Galen Aasland asked how past applications were required to screen. Brent Wilson said we would have to be consistent with the Design Guidelines and we could forward that as a suggestion or condition. Brian Doyon agreed with enclosing the dumpster and the cupola, but said he was not in favor of bumping out and suggested re-angling with brackets painted to match. Chas Bernhardt asked staff who the applicant was. Brent Wilson said the applicant was the Brandess Building. Doug Cahill said he agreed on the screening and dumpster enclosure. Galen Aasland said the application was appropriate and complies with Town Zoning. Brian Doyon made a motion for approval, in accordance with the staff memo. Doug Cahill seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 5-0. Chas Bernhardt asked if we shouldn't recommend the.wingwall change to the DRB. Brian Doyon said we don't need more bulk and mass. Planning and Environmental Commission 2 Minutes June 12, 2000 Approved June 26, 2000 Brent Wilson said the PEC should suggest the bulk and mass be minimal and we should leave the screening to the DRB. 4. A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for the establishment of outdoor patio dining and seating, located at 333 Hanson Ranch Road (Vista Bahn Building)/Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village 1s` Filing. Applicant: Remonov and Company Planner: Allison Ochs Galen Aasland mentioned receiving a letter from Mr. Hughes that had been fedexed to the Town. He the disclosed, for the record, that while on a site visit, the applicant just showed him directions without influencing him. Allison Ochs gave an overview of the staff memo. Galen Aasland asked if the applicant had anything to add. Tom Bonnie, from Knight Planning Services, said he became aware of the encroachment of the deck on some land and wanted to work out with the Town Attorney on an easement agreement. He then explained a rendering of the deck and the importance of the deck expansion. He said he was pleased with the interaction with the Town of Vail staff. Galen Aasland asked if there was any public comment. There were no public comments. Tom Moorhead said he was prepared to answer any questions about stream tract land. He said that the land was given to the Town of Vail within the last 3-4 years and was very restrictive. He said there was a provision for any improvements saying that Vail Resorts had to be a party to those improvements or they would take back the land and so Vail Resorts would decide the appropriateness . He said dining decks were an appropriate amenity and there were dining decks adjacent to private residences, but there were sound ordinances in place if it became disruptive. He then said anyone who owns residential property in CC1 should anticipate this activity. George Ruther gave the list of planning documents that encouraged the mix of lodges, commercial uses, etc. Tom Moorhead said various dining decks in the Town do have residential in the building or adjacent to them. Brian Doyon asked if a decision on the conditional use would affect the agreement with Vail Resorts. Tom Moorhead said the applicant was willing to work with Vail Resorts. Doug Cahill said that there was an issue with a neighbor, having a private deck next to this adjoining deck. He said he would like the deck to be pulled back and suggested a solid screen. Tom Bonnie said he would like to put up a screen between the decks. Doug Cahill asked about the Tap Room bar activities. Planning and Environmental Commission 3 Minutes June 12, 2000 Approved June 26, 2000 Tom Bonnie said the Tap Room was moving into lunches everyday outside and hor's deurves into the evening until it was too cold outside. Doug Cahill said he could see the adjacent's concern with an overflow of a noisy bar, but not with dining. He said the stairs could be moved to the door on the west end. Tom Bonnie said they had tried to maximize the deck and still be within code and said they would love to move to the east closer to the residential unit on that side. Doug Cahill said to move the stair to line up with the door to the west making the existing deck come out to the property line. Tom Bonnie said there were main gas lines coming through and mentioned that the rise to run gets steeper and there would not be enough horizontal distance for the rise. Tom Weber said it was an appropriate spot for a deck. He said he was concerned with covering up the entrance and said, from an architectural standpoint, that he would rather see that deck move over than have a screen there. He said if there could be an agreement with the Town on Tract H, given that that tract was for recreational purposes, there would be an argument that this was the best place for the deck. He then suggested that the deck be pulled in a couple of feet from the neighboring deck. Brian Doyon said this was an appropriate use. He would like the pine trees to the east cut down for more sun. Chas Bernhardt said it was appropriate for the zone district. He said the adjacents were stuck with the use and he liked the idea of moving the deck away, but since it would cut the size of the deck down, he liked the idea of moving the staircase, which would give more usable space on the deck. He suggested set hours of 7a.m. to 7p.m., so there would not be late-night drinking hours. Tom Bonnie asked if it would be possible to extend the hours until 9:30 p.m. Chas Bernhardt said the applicant would need something to appease the neighbors and would like to see the deck moved with the stairway investigated. Tom Bonnie said he would like to figure out how to be good neighbors. Galen Aasland said this met the intent of the Town, but he recognized the conflict between the adjacent neighbor. He said he would like to see a reasonable buffer and as part of the condition of approval, there should be a reasonable separation. He stated that residential properties in the CC1 should recognize that a conditional use deck might go in. Brian Doyon made a motion for approval, in accordance with the staff memo. The motion failed for lack of a second. Tom Weber said he would like to set a minimum distance between decks. Discussion ensued between Brian Doyon and Tom Weber. Galen Aasland said we needed to set some kind of reasonable separation and the F'EC was entitled to ask for a reasonable buffer. Planning and Environmental.Commission a Minutes June 12, 2000 Approved June 26, 2000 Tom Bonnie asked if there were any guidelines for this separation, rather than being arbitrary. Galen Aasland said this was a conditional use permit, with conflicting interests. Tom Moorhead said Galen correctly defined it. Allison Ochs said the PEC could table this and propose a separation distance, or the PEC could set a separation distance. Brian Doyon said the DRB should take care of this and that the applicant should provide this to the DRB. Tom Weber said that one of the criteria for the PEC to address was light and air. Chas Bernhardt said the width of the staircase might be an adequate buffer. Doug Cahill agreed that if would be a substantial buffer. Rick Mueller said tabling this would not be advantageous to the applicant, as they wanted to catch some of the summer traffic. Tom Weber said it was the responsibility of the applicant to come up with a buffer. He said he would be more comfortable with tabling this, to let the applicant come up with a separation suggestion. George Ruther suggested tabling this and have the applicant propose some sound and visual design alternatives. He said the applicant could then go to the DRB meeting for a conceptual review and then come back to the PEC. Galen Aasland suggested tabling this and coming back in two weeks. Tom Bonnie explained the site with the gas lines, power lines, etc. He said he didn't want a $30,000 deck to become a $100,000deck. Chas Bernhardt said tabling would only set the process back one week. Galen Aasland said the use was appropriate, but the buffer was important. George Ruther summarized the PEC's comments. He said the PEC was agreeable to the use, but the PEC needed some alternatives to the buffering. Tom Weber said there were other ways to do this with a screen, rather than pulling the deck back. Brian Doyon said he supported this the way it was. Doug Cahill said he supported it with conditions of numbers and operating hours. Tom Moorhead said it was within the PEC's authority to require operation times, when considering adjacent properties and said this was not unusual for operational-type issues. Galen Aasland asked for this to be tabled, so staff could research other properties to Planning and Environmental Commission 5 Minutes June 12, 2000 Approved June 26, 2000 treat everyone fairly. Doug Cahill made a motion to table this to the June 26, 2000 meeting. Chas Bernhardt seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 4-1, with Brian Doyon opposed. 5. A request for a building height variance from Section 12-6D-7 Vail Town Code, located at 1755 West Gore Creek Drive/Lot 6, Vail Village West 2nd Filing. Applicant: Daniel and Karen B. Forey Planner: Allison Ochs WITHDRAWN 6. A request for a conditional use permit, to add a Type II Employee Housing Unit to an existing primary unit, located at 375 Forest Road/Lot 3, Block 2, Vail Village 3rd Filing. Applicant: Greg Vickers, represented by Gwathmey Pratt Schultz Planner: Allison Ochs TABLED UNTIL JUNE 26, 2000 7. A worksession to discuss a proposed zoning code amendment to Section 12-713- 18 (Location of Business Activity), which would allow for mobile information dissemination within the CCI Zone District on public property. Applicant: VVTCB Planner: Allison Ochs WITHDRAWN 8. SELECTION OF PEC REPRESENTATIVE AT DRB FOR 2000- Doug Cahill - Jan-Apr. 5, '00 Chas Bernhardt - Apr 19, '00 Galen Aasland - May 3, '00 Brian Doyon - May 17, '00 - Jun 7, '00 Tom Weber - June 21, 00 Diane Golden - Jul-Sep '00 John Schofield - Oct-Dec '00 George Ruther suggested reducing the impact by scheduling PEC reps for two months at a time and that he had tried to get Council to do away with this altogether. Brian Doyon said it was not up to the PEC to make quorum. Tom Weber said he was in favor of 1 month intervals. 9. Information Update Planning and Environmental Commission 6 Minutes June 12, 2000 Approved June 26, 2000 Russ Forrest mentioned the Wednesday night ComFac meeting at Red Sandstone at 5p.m. He mentioned the next step would be reviewing the 4 alternative concepts and on the 18th they would be asking Council to narrow down the alternatives. He then gave a Donovan Park update and said the VRD would operate, but not pay for recreational updates. Galen Aasland said he felt that PEC worksessions should be in a public forum and thought the pre-meeting should be held in the Council Chambers. 10. Approval of May 8, 2000 minutes. Chas Bernhardt made a motion to approve the amended minutes. Doug Cahill seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 4-0 with Tom Weber abstaining. Chas Bernhardt made a motion to adjourn. Doug Cahill seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 3:40 p.m. Planning and Environmental Commission 7 Minutes June 12, 2000 H. After reviewing the goals of the Town of Vail and after discussions with the Community Development staff an application was made to increase the size of the deck at the Vista Bahn Building located at 333 Bridge Street. The purpose was to increase the size of the exterior deck to provide outside seating space to compliment and expand the Tap Room Restaurant service area. It was made clear that this was a desirable addition for the Town. Applications for a Conditional Use Permit and design approval were properly submitted and processed. We met with the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Design Review Board on two occasions each. While the PEC approved and highly supported the deck use, its direction to us was counter to that of the Design Review Board. Plans were amended several times in order to accommodate conflicting direction given by the two Boards. We have attempted to resolve the stated desires of Board members in an open manner. It is our goal to be cooperative in meeting public goals as well as providing a practical design. Application was originally made to construct a deck to extend southward from the existing restaurant in the configuration as described on Exhibit A. Subsequent to and in response to suggestions by various Design Review Board members, the plan was modified as shown on Exhibit B. Principally, the deck area was reduced above the stairwell to improve headroom and to increase natural light to the area below. Additionally, a planter was proposed at the northwest corner of the deck to increase noise protection for the neighbor to the west and was stepped-down to assure maintenance of their existing views. One of the suggestions of the Design Review Board was to reduce the deck to a parallel line with the building, north of the bottom of the stairwell. This made the addition impractical from a cost and use point of view. However, a revised design was submitted for review by the Planning and Environmental Commission as shown on Exhibit C. This was the minimum area for a useful deck. The Planning and Environmental Commission approved the "use of the deck, but restricted it's westward extent to a specific point on the building in order to lessen potential impacts to adjacent properties. The Board fiurther stated that greater extension eastward to make the addition practical was preferred. Upon revising the plan and again meeting with the Design Review Board, the plan was formally not approved. The plan as revised and review by the Design Review Board is included as Exhibit D. i e e ' ~',v TOWN OF UAIL Department of Communit-v Development 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2138 FAX 970-479-2452 wivw.ci.vail.co.us June 22. 2000 Terrill Knight Knight Planning Services, Inc. P.O. Box 974 Eagle, CO 81631 RE: Addition of the Vista Bahn Building deck for outdoor dining at the Tap Room Dear Terrill, The Design Review Board conceptually reviewed the deck addition at the Vista Bahn Building at their June 21, 2000 meeting. The following were their comments and concerns: 1. The deck will create a dark and uninviting space for the pedestrian flow that was intended with the original building design. 2. The board generally felt that the angles of the deck were out of characterwith the existing building. Instead, the board felt that they would be more supportive of expanding the existing decks and opening up the restaurant more to the outside. 3. The board felt that the deck would create a dark, wet entrance to the ski lockers. The also felt that the head height created would not be conducive to people carrying skis. 4. The board felt that using up all of the availabie space was not an elegant solution. The proposed deck introduced a vocabulary unfamiliar to the existing building. 5. The board also expressed concerns about the proximity of the deck to the adjacent residential use. The Planning and Environmental Commission hearing on the conditional use permit for the outdoor dining deck has been tabled to the July 10, 2000, meeting to allow you adequate time to integrate the Design Review Board's comments into the proposal. Please submit new plans to me no later than July 3`d. Once plans are submitted, I will schedule the deck for final design approval. Should you have additional questions,. please do not hesitate to contact me at 479-2369. Sincerely, &,~,&~4 . Allison Ochs Planner II Town of Vail CC: Planning and Environmental Commission RECYCLED PAPER MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: July 10, 2000 SUBJECT: A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for the establishment of outdoor patio dining and seating, located at 333 Hanson Ranch Road (Vista Bahn Building)/Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village 1" Filing. Applicant: Remonov and Company Planner: Allison Ochs 1. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The Vistsa Bahn Building is proposing an outdoor dining deck to be located at 333 Hanson Ranch Rd. / Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village 1St. The establishment of outdoor patio dining is a conditional use in the CCI Zone District. The deck addition will allow for outdoor seating for the Tap Room Restaurant. The deck addition will be reviewed by the Design Review Board for compliance with the Vail Village Urban Design Considerations. 11. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending approval of the conditional use permit to allow for the establishment of an outdoor patio dining deck, based on the following findings and the criteria outlined in this memo: 1. That the proposed location of the use is in accordance with the purposes of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. 2. That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use would comply with each of the applicable provisions of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code. TOWN OF VAIL ~i 1 Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose, to approve this conditional use permit, staff recommends the following condition: 1. That the deck is shortened in compliance with the Design Review Board's conceptual review of June 21, 2000 (see plan). III. ROLES OF THE REVIEWING BOARDS Plannina and Environmental Commission: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for evaluating this conditional use permit application 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. 7. Conformance with development standards of zone district Design Review Board. The Design Review Board is responsible for evaluating the Design Review application for. 1. Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings 2. Fitting buildings into landscape 3. Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography 4. Removal/Preservation of trees and native vegetation 5. Adequate provision for snow storage on-site 6. Acceptability of building materials and colors 7. Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms 8. Provision of landscape and drainage 9. Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures 10. Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distances 11. Location and design of satellite dishes 12. Provision of outdoor lighting 13. The design of parks IV. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Upon review of Chapter 16 of the Zoning Regulations, the Community Development Department recommends approval of the conditional use permit request to allow for the establishment of the outdoor dining deck at the Vista Bahn Building based on the following factors: 2 A. CONSIDERATION OF FACTORS: 1. Relationship and impact of the use on the development objectives of the Town. Staff believes the applicant's proposal is in concert with the Town's development objectives and will have minimal impacts on existing or potential uses in the surrounding area. The following development objectives of the Town are listed in the Vail Village Master Plan and staff believes are relevant to this proposal: 2.1 Recognize the variety of land uses found throughout the Village and allow for development that is compatible with. these established land use patterns. 3.3 Encourage a wide variety of activities, events, and street life along pedestrian ways and plazas 3.3.2 Outdoor dining is an important streetscape feature and shall be encouraged in commercial infill or redevelopment projects. 2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public facilities needs. Staff believes that the proposal will have minimal, if any, negative impacts on the above-described criteria. 3. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the street and parking areas. Staff believes there will be minimal, if any, negative impacts on the above-described criteria 4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses. Staff believes that the proposal has many positive aspects and that the character of the area will be enhanced as a result of the proposed improvements. Los Amigos has an outdoor dining deck similar to the proposed Tap Room deck. As this site is adjacent to the ski yard, staff believes this will be an amenity to the public. However, staff recognizes that there are residential uses adjacent to the proposed outdoor dining deck. All Town of Vail noise ordinances are applicable to this site. As a conditional use permit, the Planning and Environmental Commission has the ability to revisit the conditions imposed upon it, should any conflicts arise between adjacent uses. 3 S. FINDINGS The Plannina and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings before arantina a conditional use permit: 1. That the proposed location of the use is in accordance with the purposes of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. 2. That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed use would comply with each of the applicable provisions of -the conditional use permit section of the zoning code. 4 - _ _ nn'cxe GRZCf 40FOH -¢rxak c~-vm rurinl:aa hnklea ~ Rw~'dt~ iA dC >C >r.r rs•:.-~"n`ame w vc~w_ e't a rcrca rxreecrt -~^"1' { ; r~ . / rasa. rzIr•'t=r uoea ~ I' ,0 11 ~ ~ .I BSpR 6'fl"C Yrt~+xe>Y2'0 Y~A~'."~..~ "l.. 1'. ,i~ ` ~~1~~~'-_• ~ ..-1 Illt -MN nM~FCj-fir" o st' ~ l . j _ 'IQ r r -1 ~ J I. l n.r' ~ti ~ St 11 -ll S n - N. _ ~`---I~ - I i. 3a r q-b 1.\•\ ~ n rH A„ 7Te,nr.r N _ _ 7ealrl t ---'--`DECK: r 5Ti IFJ~P ccmcr 'r 'rP PIATGN G:N811MG F',41L ^ ` 7tCF • _ ( \1•lELI Rb.ll INn i'n MAt.•,r ee..rnmi. APPROVED 7/24/00 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION July 10, 2000 Minutes MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Galen Aasland John Schofield George Ruther Chas Bernhardt Tom Weber Brent Wilson Diane Golden Doug Cahill Allison Ochs Brian Doyon Judy Rodriguez Public Hearina 2:00 p.m. Galen Aasland called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. 1. A request for a sign variance, from Section 11-4B-19 (13)(4), to allow for a third business identification sign, located at 458 Vail Valley Drive (Larkspur Restaurant)/Tract F, Vail Village 5th Filing. Applicant: Larkspur Restaurant & Bar Planner: Brent Wilson Brian Doyon made a motion to table this item until the next meeting. Chas Bernhardt seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 4-0. 2. A request for a major CC1 exterior alteration and a variance from Section 12-713-12 (height), to allow for a dormer addition, located at 183 Gore Creek Drive (Sitzmark Lodge)/Lot A, Block 5B, Vail Village 1" Filing. Applicant: Sitzmark Condominium Association Planner: Brent Wilson Brent Wilson gave an overview of the staff memo. Galen Aasland said that Slifers, Pepi's, Lodge at Vail, Vista Bahn Building and the Bridge Street Lodge had requested height variances in the past. He said he wanted to know their outcomes, in order to be fair to the applicant. George Ruther explained the height variances that had been requested and granted in the past. Galen Aasland asked if there was any applicant comment. Bob Fritch said his proposal was consistent with the master plan and said that the dormer would break up the roofline making it more interesting. He said that they were consistent with the building next door with relation to height and that no view would be blocked. Galen Aasland asked if there was any public comment. Galen Aasland stated that the PEC would now take a minute to review the Slifer and Gasthof Gramshammer prior variance requests. 1 Planning and Environmental Commission Minutes APPROVED 7/24/00 Brian Doyon asked if the applicant had any GRFA left. Brent Wilson said they had 1100 sq. ft. of GRFA left. Brian Doyon stated that the existing building was the hardship. He said if the applicant wanted to use up the allowable GRFA, he would have to go up, since he was surrounded by buildings. I can see granting this using the existing building as the hardship. Bob Fritch said there were 35 lodge rooms and 1 residential unit. Brian boyon explained since they couldn't go out the sides, he could see giving a height variance. Galen Aasland clarified the different uses in the building. He said the hotel units were seen differently than the condo units. Chas Bernhardt said the Sitzmark was built prior to the current zoning, and so it was not a grant of special privilege. Diane Golden agreed with Chas. Galen Aasland said the Slifers were approved in 1989 and denied in 1998 because they were asking for density. He said it appeared that the Slifers were given an approval in '89 because they weren't asking for density. He said the building was built before zoning and the height would not be affecting anyone. He said however, that if this was in the front row like Cyrano's, he wouldn't vote for it. Brent Wilson suggested making two separate motions with this request. Brian Doyon said he would like the DRB or staff to make sure it did not exceed 8'. Bob Fritch said the gable was up to 9' from the slab and less than a foot and a half on the sides. Galen Aasland said they were comfortable with 52 1/2'. Brian Doyon made a motion to approve the major CC1 Alteration, subject to the finding on page 2. Diane Golden seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 4-0. Brian Doyon made a motion to approve the variance with required findings on page 7 & 8. Chas Bernhardt seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 4-0. 3. A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for the establishment of outdoor patio dining and seating, located at 333 Hanson Ranch Road (Vista Bahn Building)/Lot C, Block 2, Vail Village 1St Filing. Applicant: Remonov and Company Planner: Allison Ochs Allison Ochs gave an overview of the staff memo. Galen Aasland asked if the applicant had anything to add. 2 Planning and Environmental Commission Minutes APPROVED 7/24/00 Terrill Knight explained his rendering,to the PEC and said he still had to go back to the DRB and address the access below. Galen Aasland asked if there was any public comment. He said, for the record, that Tom Moorhead said residents in the CC1 Zone District could expect a restaurant use. He said the PEC would weigh the impacts of this proposal to protect the adjacent's property: He mentioned that the neighbor was providing some of the 4' separation from the neighbor's deck. Diane Golden said a server station in that location would be worse than a table there. Galen Aasland asked if the planter was 1' wide. Allison Ochs said it would come out 9 sq. ft. from the wall and there would be 707 sq. ft. of deck area. Diane Golden stated that they were close to the neighbor, but mentioned that nobody had heard from the neighbor either way and also outdoor dining decks were encouraged. Brian Doyon said he was in favor of this. He said he disagreed with the DRB and still thinks it should go out from the eastern side and should pull back and said he encouraged an irregular deck. Chas Bernhardt agreed with Brian, specifically with regards to pulling away from the other deck some more. He said if the deck started just east of the copper roof, then it would have adequate separation from the unit next door and wouldn't infringe on the light and air below. He said he also liked an irregular deck. Terrill Knight said the DRB was thinking smaller. Diane Golden said she read a letter of opposition from the Bridge Street Lodge. Allison Ochs said staff would recommend approval if the deck was made smaller. Brian Doyon said if the two squares were taken off that run perpendicular to the building than it would provide the buffer that was needed. Allison Ochs said the PEC needed to focus on the use and impacts and let the DRB review the architectural details. Galen Aasland said tables would look into the adjacent property owner's living room and so what the PEC was asking for was a reasonable buffer. He said if more space was added to the east he would be fine with that space, but a 1' landscape buffer was not sufficient. He said his choice would be to have the juncture be stucco. George Ruth er clarified that the point east of the door was the approximate location where the deck would terminate and summarized that the PEC wanted nothing further west of the stucco pillar. Brian Doyon made a motion for approval, in accordance with the staff memo, with the condition that the deck be shortened to the west end of the stucco pilaster. Chas Bernhardt seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 4-0. 3 Planning and Environmental Commission Minutes APPROVED 7/24/00 4. A request for a variance from Section 12-6F-6, to allow for a garage addition, located at 4718 Meadow Drive/Tract B, Bighorn Townhomes Subdivision. Applicant: Bill Bernardo, represented by Gwathmey Pratt Schultz Planner: Allison Ochs TABLED UNTIL JULY 24, 2000 Chas Bernhardt made a motion to table the above item. Diane Golden seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 4-0. 5. Information Update Russ Forrest gave an update on the Community Facilities, in terms of the three developed uses on the site and encouraged the PEC to participate. Russ gave an update on an administrative change to DRB applications. He said effective May 1st, both signatures would be required on an application for Parcel C lots. He said he would like to discuss with the PEC having the same requirement for parcels just A and B lots. Tom Moorhead said property rights would be a concern with A and B parcels, as far as GRFA and it was not within our rights to determine property rights and available GRFA. Brian Doyon said a lot of work won't get done since a lot of neighbors don't like each other. He said the PEC was not here to pass judgement and until they resolve their problems, he didn't want to see them. Tom Moorhead said since it was a tremendous time allocation on our resources, he would like to come up with a procedure to bring the parties together. Brent Wilson said, for the record, that he had received 144 emails from the Ferry/Repetti situation. Brian Doyon suggested getting the signature of the neighbor before coming in, as it was wasting staff and the PEC's time. Chas Bernhardt agreed that it had to be settled before coming in. Galen Aasland summarized that it was very appropriate on an ABC property, however AB properties may have individual property rights, so it may be overstepping the Town's right to do this. However if it was to be adopted, it should be a fair due process with written notice. 6. SELECTION OF PEC REPRESENTATIVE AT DRB FOR 2000- Doug Cahill - Jan-Apr. 5, '00 Chas Bernhardt - Apr 19, '00 Galen Aasland - May 3, `00 Brian Doyon - May 17,'00 No Rep - Jun 7, '00 Tom Weber - Jun 21, '00 John Schofield - Jul 5, '00 - Jul 19, '00 4 Planning and Environmental Commission Minutes • APPROVED 7/24/00 Aug 2, '00 Aug 16, '00 Sep 6, '00 Sep 20, '00 John Schofield - Oct-Dec '00 Chas Bernhardt volunteered to be the PEC rep for DRB for July 19`h 7. Approval of June 26, 2000 minutes. Brian Doyon made a motion to approve the amended minutes. Chas Bernhardt seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 4-0. Diane Golden made a motion to adjourn. Brian Doyon seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 4-0. The meeting adjourned at 3:35 p.m. 5 Planning and Environmental Commission Minutes Va# Parking Study POTENTIAL PARKING SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS BASIS FOR DEVELOPING A MODIFIED COMPREHENSIVE PARKING PROGRAM FOR VAIL 1 :UC moires - _ _ v y..y !a•' f• - . mF >B~H.... ~ . - ._M1,.. r~!` . ted~''~•::'.o $k~•;.^.=.~.;Y•.• 1. Provide a ..."Perception of Develop a Revised Parking fee schedule which value for skiers." incorporates a $10 maximum daily charge. 2. "Encourage shopping and dining Maintain 90 minute free parking and free from down valley." evening parking. 3. Adopt..."Yield management Develop a peak day parking free schedule i.e., supply and demand, which incorporates a S 12 to t 15 maximum optimize use of parking daily charge and increments at $2/hour. structure." Consider summertime parking fees (e.g., Y2 fixed price, pay on entry). 4. Provide... 'Product variety for Provide 1) premier valet parking; 2) covered multiple customer needs." structural parking; 3) reduced rate frontage road parking; 4) free remote parking at Ford Park and along frontage road; and 5) provide bus service accordingly. 5. Provide... "Employee options/ Maintain debit card discount; focus upon considerations." employee user group; price according to value of parking and cost of transit service. Match 6. "Make transportation/parking transit service to employee schedules. work for employees." 7. "What can we give away? Recognize competing objectives (e.g_, value What can we afford To give pricing based upon demand versus need for low away?" cost parking for certain user groups). 8. Maintain..."Consistency - no "Smooth" jumps in parking fee schedule. surprises." Balance 1) peak demand management; 2) revenue generation; and 3) parking facility utilization. Eliminate pay in lieu program. Establish parking program for entire season (year) with no changes mid-term. 1-0 FELSDURG - - - - - ® PI O L T & ULLEVIG d Contribution Request Spreadsheet COUNCIL MEMBER NAME_ 2000 2,001 2,001 2001 Managers Council Members `TOWN OF xr, FUNDING REQUEaY In-Kind 2000 2000 Cash In-Kind In-Kind Recommendation Recommendation 1 GENERAL FUND Contributions: Description Request Contribution j Request Request Description Cash In Kind Cash In-Kind ECONOMIC: (..._._...,.,.m. 1 Bravo! Colorado/John Giovando 30,000 25,000 30,000 25,000 1 Bravo! Colorado/John Giovando ' Parking @ Ford Park Granted 2 The Chamber of Commerce/Jen Brown 6,000 4,000 I ( 25,000 4,000 2 The Chamber of Commerce/Jen Brown 1 Day of Ice Granted 1 Day of Ice Granted ! 3 Eagle Co Down Payment Assistance Committee-Christie Banowetz 15,000 0 4 VV Merchants-Block Parties/Kaye Ferry 20,000 15,000 ( 20,000 10,000 5 LH/VV Merchants Assoc-The Guide/Kaye Ferry 15,000 10,0001 15,000 7,500 6 Vail Community Chamber-Josef Staufer (Note 1) 70,000 5,000 7 Vail Jazz Foundation/Howard Stone 15,000 7,000 10,000 10,000 8 Vail Valley Foundation/Rick Beveridge or Ceil Folz: 8 American Ski Classic j 30,000 17,000 j 30,000 20,000 8 World Mountain Bike Championships 50,000 50,000 j 50,000 20,000 Pub Wks & Police 50,000 20,000 8 American Cycle Classic 20,000 0 ; 0 8 Winter Concert Series 10,000 0i 20,000 6,000 Pub Wks & Police 10,000 6,000 8 Parking +460 Parking Debits 2,300 2,3001 1 2,300 1460 Parking Debits 2,300 8 Vail International Dance Festival 12,500 11,5001 12,500 12,500 8 Gerald R. Ford Ampitheater (Hot Summer Nights) 5,000 5,0001 10,000 10,000 Subtotal - VVF 129,800 85,800 j 122,500 28,300 102,500 28,300 TOTAL ECONOMIC 215,800 146,900' 307,500 ~ 28,300; 164,0001 28,300 ~ Cont01 1 09/08/2000 d Contribution Request Spreadsheet COUNCIL MEMBER NAME 2000 2,001 2,001 2001 Managers Council Members TOI~`N OF VAIN, FUNDING IBEQUESY In-Kind 2000 2000 Cash In Kind In kind Recommendation Recommendation E GENERAL FUND Contributions: Description Request Contribution Request Request Description ? Cash In Kind ; Cash In-Kind _ 0 EDUCATIONAL: ! 9 The Buddies of EagleCounry/Rhonda Atencio 10,000 10 Environmental Educator-Eileen Connors 0 0 € 0 0 11 Gore Range Natural Science School/Kim Langmaid 10,000 0 3,000 ? 0 12 Learning Tree/Moe Mulrooney 6501 0 ` f 4,500 0 13 Meet the Wildemess/Thomas McCalden 5,000 { 0 5,000 0 14 Snowboard Outreach Society-Am Menconi 1,250 0 15 SOS Wildlife Rehabilitation-Rich Ranieri 0 0 16 Vail-Eagle Valley Rotary Club-Susan Pollack 525 Parking Pass 525 _ 17 The Vail Symposium/Ebby Pinson 2,000 0 500 500 _ 24 Vail Valley Comm. TV/Ch5 10,000 0 TOTAL EDUCATIONAL 0' 34,250 `25X00 525, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES: 1,500 I 0 2,500 0 18 The Heuga Center/Brian Hutchinson 19 Vail Mountain Rescue Group/Bob Armour 2,000 2,000 2,000 1,000 TOTAL HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES -1,500 2,004 4,500` D ~ 1,000 ~ 0 ~ ContOl 2 09/08/2000 4 Contribution Request Spreadsheet COUNCIL MEMBER NAME_ 2000 2,001 2,001 2001 Managers Council Members ' TOWN OF VAIL FUNDING REQUEST In-Kind 2000 2000 } Cash In-Kind In-Kind Recommendation Recommendation GENERAL FUND Contributions: Description Request Contribution Request Request Description Cash In -Kind Cash In-Kind w..:, , RECREATION: 20 The Resource Center of Eagle County-Bev Christiansan 15,000 5,000 21 Skating Club of Vail-Shawn Boris 8 Days of Ice Granted 22 Ski Club Vail/Susan Dooley 4 Days @ Dobson 0 4 Days 4 Days of Ice Granted 22 Ski Club Vail/Susan Dooley 525 Parking Pass 525 23 Snowshoe Shuffle-Sarah Ladd 3,500 700 Debits 3,500 TOTAL RECREATION 0 0 1 ~ ow 1 4,0251 5.000 4 02i SUB'1r0TAL-Ceti A R_IBUTIONS' 236,950 ; 148,800 361,250 I 32.850 it 1 0,500 + U ARRANGEMENTS and AGREEMENTS: 24 Vail Valley Comm. TV/Ch5 (40% of franchise fee)/Terrie Perez ;(Note 3) 44,880 44,880 = 57,120 _ 57,120 Vail Valley Exchange 6,300 6,300 1 1 I Berry Creek 5th - operating expenses ;(Note 2) 20,000 N/A Vail Valley Athlete Commission 5,000 5,000 5,000 25 Vail Valley Tourism & Convention Bureau/Frank Johnson: 25 Events & Information Staff ?7 Blue Passes 1 3,675 3,675 5,775 111 Parking Passes Pending) Marketing 183,500 3 25 Information Booths 155,800 155,800 208,300 Pending) 25 Special Events 332,000 332,000 456,500 Pendingi 25 Vail 50 25 Parking Permits 10,625 10,625 13,125 125 Parking Passes 13,125 Lodging Quality Initiative 105,984 1 f Total VVTCB 791,584 502,100 664,800 I 1 13,125 1 0 0 SUB TOTAL - ARRANGEMENTS and AGREEMENTS ~ 867,764] 558,290 721,920 - 18,900;1 75,245 GRAND TOTAL General Fund 110417/4 707,080 1-083,170 51,754 245,745 0 Cont01 3 09/08/2000 .a Contribution Request Spreadsheet COUNCIL MEMBER NAME 2000 i 2,001 2,001 2001 ' ~Alanagers i Council Members TbWfq 00 VAILFUNDING REQUtST In-Kind 2000 2000 Cash In-Kind In-Kind ~ Recommendation Recommendation GENERAL FUND Contributions: Description Request Contribution Request Request Description Cash In-Kind I Cash In-Kind Real Estate Transfer Tax Fund: 26 Vail Alpine Garden Foundation/Ry Southard F20 Parking Passes 0 ' 1 g 26 Vail Alpine Garden Foundation/Ry Southard 38,500 38,500 38,500 38,500 j NOTES: 1. Funded out of Council Contingency in 2000, $20,000 2. No longer required entity disowned 3. Required based on franchise agreement 40% of Revenue Cont01 q 09/08!2000 n w DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AGENDA Wednesday, September 6, 2000 3:00 P.M. MEETING RESULTS PROJECT ORIENTATION / LUNCH - Community Development Department 11:30 pm MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Clark Brittain Bill Pierce Hans Woldrich Melissa Greenauer Tom Weber (PEC) SITE VISITS 1:30 pm 1. Coldstream Condos - 1476 Westhaven Circle 2. Vestlandet Condos - 1746/1756 W. Gore Creek Drive 3. Axelrod residence - 1977 Circle Drive 4. Young residence - 1452 Lionsridge Loop 5. Sandstone 70 - 903 Red Sandstone Road 6. Vail Mountain Adventure Center - 254 Bridge Street Driver: Ann PUBLIC HEARING - TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 3:00 pm 1. Vestlandet Condos - Final review of changes to approved plans for remodel. Ann 1746/1756 W. Gore Creek Drive/Lots 1 &2, Vail Village West Filing #1. Applicant: Vestlandet Condominium Association, represented by Richard Stampp MOTION: Hans Woldrich SECOND: Tom Weber VOTE: 5-0 CONSENT APPROVED 2. Geneva 1 Project - Final review of proposed single-family residence. Brent 4355 Bighorn Road/Lot 3, Block 3, Bighorn 3`d Addition. Applicant: Bill Bolden, represented by Robert Nikkei CONCEPTUAL - NO VOTE 3. Vail Mountain Adventure Center - Final review of proposed awning. Brent 254 Bridge Street/Lot L, Block 5C, Vail Village 1" Filing. Applicant: VMAC, represented by Teak Simonton MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Tom Weber VOTE: 5-0 APPROVED WITH 4 CONDITIONS: TO ' N OF i 1. The awning shall have a shed roof form to match the existing awning roof. . 2. The top and bottom levels of the awning shall match the top and bottom members of the wall railing pickets and the awning will conform to the surface of the wall where it is mounted 3. The awning may extend as far as legally possible but must remain cantilevered (no support posts). 4. Any outstanding fire code issues must be resolved. 4. Gerald R. Ford/Vilar Pavilion - Final review of a revised front entry feature. Brent 841 Vail Valley Drive/Unplatted, Vail Village 7'h Applicant: Morter Aker Architects MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Melissa GreenauerVOTE: 5-0 APPROVED AS SUBMITTED 5. Sandstone 70 - Final review of proposed removal of 4 cottonwood trees. Bill 903 Red Sandstone Road/Lot 15, Tract C, Sandstone 70. Applicant: Jim Cooper, Resident Manager MOTION: Melissa Greenauer SECOND: Bill Pierce VOTE: 5-0 DENIED 6. Vail Junior Hockey Ice Rink - conceptual DRB review. Brent 1778 Vail Valley Drive / Lot 3, Sunburst Filing 3. Applicant: Vail Junior Hockey Association, Vail Recreation District, Town of Vail CONCEPTUAL - NO VOTE 7. Coldstream Condos - final review of a proposed residential "250" addition. Brent 1476 Westhaven Circle, Unit 9 / Coldstream Condominiums, Glen Lyon Subdivision Applicant: Coldstream Condominium Association / Osoro Ltd. MOTION: Hans Woldrich SECOND: Tom Weber VOTE: 4-0-1 (Pierce recused) CONSENT APPROVED 8. Axelrod residence - final review of a revised landscape plan. Brent 1977 Circle Drive / Lot 25, Resubdivision of Buffehr Creek Applicant: Art & Judith Axelrod, represented by Peel/Langenwalter Architects MOTION: Hans Woldrich SECOND: Tom Weber VOTE: 5-0 TABLED 9. Young residence - Conceptual review of a proposed driveway alignment. Brent 1452 Lionsridge Loop/Lot 4, Ridge at Vail. Applicant: Mike Young MOTION: Hans Woldrich SECOND: Tom Weber VOTE: 5-0 TABLED 10. Skaal Haus - Final review of proposed remodel. Bill 141 West Meadow Drive/Lot D2, Vail Village 2" d Filing. Applicant: Skaal Haus Condominium Association, represented by Phillipe Courtois MOTION: Bill Pierce SECOND: Melissa GreenauerVOTE: 5-0 TABLED INDEFINITELY AT REQUEST OF APPLICANT 2 a: Staff Approvals Huffard residence - Relocation of window, window addition, interior conversion. Allison 2990 Booth Creek Drive/Lot 3, Block 3, Vail Village 11th Filing. Applicant: Jay and Kirk Huffard Chateau Tremonte - Repaint of Units B and C. Bill 1860 Lionsridge Loop/Lot 27, Block 2, Lionsridge 3d Filing. Applicant: Dan McNeil Stern residence - Replace windows. Allison 1517 Vail Valley Drive Unit 1/Lot 12, Block 3, Vail Valley 3`d Filing. Applicant: Ronald and Ann Stern Vail Spa Condominiums - Replace sod and siding. Bill 710 W. Lionshead Circle/Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Lionshead Filing 3. Applicant: Vail Spa Condo Association Arosa/Garmisch Employee Housing - Window change. Allison 2477, 2485, 2487, 2497 Garmisch/Lots 1-4, Block H, Vail das Schone 2°d Filing. Applicant: Town of Vail Creekside Building - Repaint. Allison 223 E. Gore Creek Drive/Creekside Building. Applicant: Vail Management Vail Golf Club - 15th Tee Box retaining wall. Bill Vail Golf Course/Unplatted parcel. Applicant: Vail Recreation District Vail Heights Condos - Deck addition and drainage pipe installation. Bill 2079 Chamonix Lane #7/Lot 15, Vail Heights Filing 1. Applicant: Vail Heights Condo Association Williamson residence - Window replacement. Bill 434 Gore Creek Drive/Lot B, Block 3, Vail Village 5th Filing. Applicant: Cille Williamson Gardiner residence - Replace bathroom window & vent. Bill 288 Bridge Street #R-1/Rucksack Building, Vail Village 1St Filing. Applicant: Bill Gardiner Kivland residence - New deck, door addition and window enlargement. Bill 1738 Golf Lane #61, Vail Golfcourse Townhomes/Sunburst Filing 3. Applicant: Robert and Elizabeth Kivland Klawiter residence - Deck addition. Bill 4768 Meadow Drive/Kit 1, Block 7, Bighorn Subdivision 5th Addition. Applicant: Wolfram Lkawiter Johnson residence - Construction of sand volleyball court. Allison 5165 Main Gore Drive/Lot 19, Vail Meadows 1St Applicant: Frank Johnson 3 Illingworth residence - Change to secondary unit elevation and window trim color. Allison 5112 Grouse Lane/Lot 8, Vail Meadows 1st Filing. Applicant: Don Illingworth The Wren - Addition of two hot tubs. Bill. 500 S. Frontage Rd./Tract D, Vail Village 1S' Filing. Applicant: Clear Water Spa & Patio Town Manager's Residence - Exterior remodel. Ann 2507 Arosa Drive/Lot 5, Block D, Vail das Schone Filing #1. Applicant: Town of Vail Wren House - Re-roof, new gutters, skylights. Bill 5024 Main Gore Drive/Lot 7, Block 3, Vail Village 1St Filing. Applicant: The Wren Home Owner Association Dore residence - Change to approved plans. Ann 100 Vail Road/Lot 35, Block 7, Vail Village 1St Applicant: Bill Dore Town of Vail - Weather station installed north of the Com-Dev Building. Bill 75 South Frontage Road/Unplatted, Lionshead 2nd Applicant: Town of Vail Hilliard/Chapman residence - Reroof and exterior painting. Bill 1801 Sunburst, Units A&B/Lot 2, Vail Village 3`d Applicant: R. Glenn Hilliard and Lee S. Chapman Shane / O'Connell residence - Deck modifications, window, siding, trim replacement. Bill 2945 Booth Creek Drive/Lot 3, Block 2, Vail Village 11th Filing. Applicant: John & Beverly Shane & Bonnie & Derek O'Connell Oilily - Outdoor display. Judy 278 Hanson Ranch Road/Block 5C, Vail Village 1S' Filing. Applicant: Ron Riley Miller residence - Interior conversion. Brent 1415 Westhaven Drive/Lot 52 Glen Lyon Subdivision. Applicant: Gary Miller 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. 4 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULE Monday, September 11, 2000 PROJECT ORIENTATION / - Community Development Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME 12:00 pm MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Site Visits : 1:00 pm 1. O'Brien residence - 2992 A Bellflower Drive 2. Selby residence - 1467 Aspen Grove Lane 3. Hockey rink - 1778 Vail Valley Drive Driver: George NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 p.m. Public Hearing - Town Council Chambers 2:00 p.m. 1. A worksession for a major subdivision and variance from Section 12-66-5 (Minimum Lot Frontage) of the Town Code, to allow for the subdivision of Lot 8 into Lots 8A & 8B,, located at 1467 Aspen Grove Lane/Lot 8, Block 2, Lion's Ridge Subdivision Filing 4. Applicant: Robert Selby, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: Allison Ochs 2. A request for a variance from Section 12-6D-6 of the Town Code, to allow for the addition of a garage and GRFA in the side setback, located at 2992 A Bellflower Drive/Lot 10, Block 6, Vail Intermountain. Applicant: J.P. O'Brien Planner: Ann Kjerulf 3. A request for a rezoning (from Outdoor Recreation to General Use), a minor subdivision and a conditional use permit, to allow for the construction of a seasonal ice hockey rink at the Vail Golf Course, located at 1778 Vail Valley Drive / Lot 3, Sunburst Filing 3. Applicant: Vail Junior Hockey Association, Vail Recreation District, Town of Vail Planner: Brent Wilson 4. A request for a final review for a minor subdivision to allow for the reconfiguration and replatting of two existing lots and the rezoning of Lot 16, Bighorn 2nd Addition, from Agricultural & Open Space to Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential, and the rezoning of Tract A to Natural Area Preservation District, located at 3886/3896 Lupine Drive/Lots 15 & 16, Bighorn 2nd Addition. Applicant: Wilson Family Trust, represented by Jay Tschirner, First Land Development, LLC Planner: George Ruther TABLED UNTIL SEPTEMBER 25, 2000 1 TOWN OF Y.4A 5. Information Update 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 September 8, 2000 in the Vail Trail 2 COUNCIL FOLLOW-UP [_TOPIC QUESTIONS FOLLOWUP 2000 07/25/00 DOBSON ICE ARENA PAM: Inc. 500 organizers have expressed negative Pam and Lorelei will be meeting with Kathy Fort Carty from feedback re: the approval process for the use of Destination Services. Destination Services personnel are currently Rod Slifer Dobson Arena. preparing a written follow up summary. I- ~ 08/08/00 MOTORIZED SCOOTERS ON Greg M: Are we at a point where we need to be more Prohibiting scooters will require a dismount zone. Bob will prepare a BIKE PATHS AND IN VILLAGE pro-active about educating users, enforcing guidelines, letter to the rental shops. possibly revising our rules for use in pedestrian and bus Kevin Foley lane areas? (See Ron Byrne letter) Greg: Follow up with letter to rental shops. September 8, 2000, Page 1 At the special Council meeting on Thursday, September 7th, the following Councilmembers indicated preferences to serve on either the 501(c)3 or 501(c)4 committe in regard to the White River Institute's efforts for the Hub Site: Rod 501(c)3 Chuck 501(c)3 Ludwig 501(c)3 Sybill 501(c)3 Greg EITHER Kevin NEITHER Diana NEITHER PLEASE VOTE FOR TWO FOR EACH OF THESE COMMITTEES: 501(c)3 501(c)4 0 D 4i dd 1, TOWN OF VAIL ° D Office of the Town Attorney e 75 South Frontage Road ! r 'r 555 1 Vail, Colorado 81657 2W - 970-479-2107/Fax 970-479-2157 TM MEMORADUM TO: Vail Town Council -~f FR: Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney f o'" RE: Vacation, October 2 - October 20, 2000 DT: September 8, 2000 I am planning to be away on a wonderful trip trekking in Nepal from October 2nd until October 20tH For approximately the last three weeks we have had the assistance of Lynda Van Norman as a paralegal for approximately 20 hrs. per week. She will be available during the period of time that I am gone to manage in coming mail, messages and items that require immediate attention. I will also make arrangements to have an attorney available to address that unexpected emergency. Thank you t?~~ RECYCLED PAPER Village Center Association v. The Town of Vail, et al. Case NO. 00 CV 322 UNACCEPTABLE 1. For a period of twenty-five (25) years from the date of this Agreement, the Town, as owner of the property on which the whitewater park will be located, agrees that no paved or unpaved public road, drive, trail, viewing area, bicycle path, pedestrian walkway or "stream walk" will be constructed or otherwise permitted on Town property on the north side of Gore Creek adjacent to the Association's property. 2. The Town commits that such landscaping shall be designed, installed and maintained consistent with the terms of the Agreement, in a manner which is compatible with existing landscaping on the Association's property, and which does not materially interfere with Association member's views of Gore Creek. 3. The Town agrees that the public property and stream edge along the north side of Gore Creek adjacent to the Association's property shall be designed, constructed, maintained and managed to prohibit public use or access during special events. Use of Town property on the north side of Gore Creek adjacent to the Association's property for ingress or egress by whitewater park stream users (kayakers, tubers, etc.) shall be prohibited. 4. ....."in its sole discretion," 6. ....."be permitted to ..."temporary" 7. ....."located between the Pedestrian Bridge and the International Bridge." 8. ....."or during any special event held at the facility" 10. Special events, including demonstrations, which utilize the whitewater park facility shall be limited to three (3) events, no longer than two (2) days in duration for each event, per calendar years, and no such events shall be scheduled to occur after June 30th of each calendar year. Facilities to host such events will be erected immediately before and removed immediately after each event. 11. ...."or temporarily" 12. ...."or temporary" 13. ....."temporary or" 14. Loud speakers for special events associated with the whitewater park shall only be placed on the south side of Gore Creek and speaker sound shall be directed away from the Association's property. Use of loud speakers for such events is prohibited before 10:00 a.m. and after 6:00 p.m. daily. Music and event commentator use of such speakers shall not be continuous during special events. Such use shall be limited by permit to twenty (20) minutes per hour on average. 15. Temporary generators, refrigerator trucks and other similar mechanical devices used for special events, and which emit noise and fumes shall not be located on Willow Bridge Road, or on Town property on the north side of Gore Creek adjacent to the Association's property. 16. The Town shall provide the Association with advance written notification of all special event permit requests related to use of the whitewater park. The Town shall give the Association an opportunity to comment on the issuance of such permits, including conditions of approval, as well as the formulation of special event management plans. 17. All permits and management plans approved by the Town of special events related to the whitewater park facility shall include provision which place each permittee on notice of all relevant terms and conditions of this Agreement. 18. ......"specifically including crowd management for special events consistent with the provisions of the Agreement concerning public access." 19. ...."deemed to be proprietary in nature" 20. Any damage to the Association's property caused by flooding or ground water saturation due to obstructions related to installation of the whitewater park structures shall be the sole responsibility of the Town. The Town shall hereby waive any claim of governmental immunity for such damages. 21. The Town shall pay to the Association the sum of thirty-five thousand dollars ($35,000.00) to cover Association expenses incurred inconjunction with the settlement of Case No. 00-CV-322. dd n4 TOWN OF VAIL Office of the Mayor 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2100 FAX 970-479-2157 www. ci. vail. co, us September 8, 2000 Mr. Thom Norton Executive Director Colorado Department of Transportation 4201 E Arkansas Avenue Denver CO 80222 RE: Draft 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan Dear Mr. Norton: The Town of Vail has the following concerns and comments regarding the draft 2020 Statewide Transportation Plan. The comments relate to the fiscally constrained Project Appendix. We believe these issues need to be addressed. When the Intermountain Regional Planning Commission (RPC) prepared the plan, certain projects within the Intermountain RPC region, after being rated against all of the planning region's projects (see enclosed ranking), were placed within either the Highway 82 or 1- 70 Major Investment Study (MIS) fund designation. These projects were never brought forward to rank in our planning region's other regional priorities because they competed for different pots of money. They also were not taken to the Region 3 ranking meeting, which encompasses four Transportation Planning Regions (TPRs), because the money in these pots is not eligible to the other three TPRs. These projects subsequently have not shown up in the statewide plan. This ranking was done with CDOT personnel at tile RPC meetings. We had no direction from CDOT that these projects would not be eligible for 7th pot money when we ranked them. If we had known, we would have included them into the overall ranking and these projects would have rated higher than some of the approved statewide regional priorities which are shown in the plan. Specifically with regard to Vail: we have had in the last Statewide Transportation Plan and the Town of Vail's Master Transportation Plan, and at one time even stipped for design, the Simba Run Underpass. This project is a vehicular underpass of I-70 between RECYCLEDPAPER Mr. Tom Norton September 8, 2000 Page 2 Main Vail and West Vail interchanges. This project is needed for the safety of pedestrians and bicycles crossing 1-70 in this vicinity. It provides for an alternative route for emergency vehicles to get from one side of the interstate to the other. It also provides additional capacity to both the Main Vail and West Vail interchanges due to the fact over 35% of the traffic through these two intersections is making a trip from one side of the interstate to the other. Removing these trips from these intersections provides additional capacity to the interchanges and prevents cars from backing up onto the main line of I-70. It further frees up movements along the most congested portions of our frontage roads and discourages people from using 1-70 between these two interchanges as a way to avoid the congestion, thus reducing the demand on this stretch of the 1-70 mainline. The town is currently using local funds to further the design of this project through the Washington Infrastructure Group to provide an alternative analysis for this project. The second project in the Town of Vail was the LionsHead intermodel site. This is specifically mentioned in the 1-70 MIS as the Vail intermodel site. We have been working with the private sector to secure a site which would work for this project. This public private partnership is a project we are very interested in completing. The addition of the regional transportation tax for the Eagle County Bus System in 1997, has put tremendous pressure on our current bus terminal. With increased ridership of the regional system projected to go from 600,000 riders per year in Vail to 1,800,000 riders, plus the over 1,000,000 riders in private shuttles and the over 3,000,000 riders on the Town of Vail bus system, we must make these improvements. This project just came out of a 2 year master planning process of the LionsHead area with strong public support. This project is in a preliminary design phase. The third project that seems to be mislabeled is the water quality improvements to Black Gore Creek on the west side of Vail Pass. This project is showing up as Straight Creek improvements in Clear Creek County. The addition of Straight Creek was not discussed in the TPR, which does include Summit County. However, if Straight Creek is to be included, the dollar amount shown was the estimate for Black Gore Creek and should be adjusted appropriately to include both projects. The last project that was submitted was noise barriers in Vail. The previous statewide plan states there is a noise barrier program for the next 20 years and the Intermountain Transportation Plan had identified these in 1995. The Intermountain RPC did not identify them specifically in 2000, because we were told not to break out CDOT programs such as noise barrier projects, safety projects, resurfacing projects etc. The current draft plan states the Noise Barrier program is only funded through 2002. We strongly disagree with this policy and believe it will need to be funded throughout the 20 years. High priority projects such as those identified in Vail have never been dealt with. The Town of Vail is Mr. Tom Norton September 8, 2000 Page 3 preparing a complete noise contour map of the Town of Vail to identify the worst of these problem areas and to determine what additional areas are impacted but not previously identified. Dealing with the effects of I-70 noise is one of six major strategic goals of our current council. The final project is the need to acquire the Union Pacific railroad right-of-way from Sage to Leadville, if not all the way to Canon City. The preservation of this right-of- way is critical to the overall transportation solution within the twenty year plan. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely Ludwig Kurz Mayor of Vail xc: Owen Leonard, Region 3 Regional Transportation Director Doug Aden,. Transportation Commissioner District 7 Mick Ireland, Chairman of Intermountain Regional Planning Commission Vail Town Council Bob McLaurin, Vail Town Manager George Ventura, CDOT Table IX-1 Intermountain Realnn Hlah Priority Prolects - - - Fundmq Source Proleot State Project - Total SH 82 Corridor 1.70 Corridor FTA CDOT Raglan Local Type of ID Hlahwav Coumv Docarlotlon Booainlna Location Endlna Location Sawa L-M Cost Protect 37.001 82 Region Roaring Fork Valley Commuter Transit Glenwood Springs Buttemdlk as $158,000,000 $158,000,000 Transit 37.002 Region Carpool Matching Service as $360,000 $360,000 TDM 37.003 70 Garfield Commuter Ra$ Service Veil Glenwood Springs 07 $213,000,000 $213,000.000 Transit 37.004 70 Eagle New IraerOmnge Eagle County Airport 86 $25.000,000 $25,000,000 Interchange 37.005 02 Piddn Entrance to Aspen Road Improvements Bu6emilk Aspen Be 2 $38,700,000 $38,700,000 Geo. a Writhe Grodo Separation, ' A4alr1 Votl Irrorclwng~...q Eoot Val trderrlherhgs . 83 _ 0.1 $10.000:000- * - SBJ)00 000 _ _ ,.sr 2A00 000 Grow SqQ n Edverde 'Spur Road. n+kvtaa~...e..~.. - . 37.007 70 Eagle pedestrian Improvements 1-70 use 81 $2,680,000 $2.580,000 Cap. .OOBiak:;, Eaglo... VaO Uanahdatl bdor7tiod0l Car a.;.. -c:~r_t:.-: a.-'.i. 81 _.,__..515.000.000 :¦.,LDa::;?":: T 37.009 Piddn Snowiness Village Mall Transit Canter 77 $6,150,000 V $6,150,000 Transit 37.010 62 PIaJn Entrance to Aspen Transit Buttermilk Aspen 75 2 $54,400,000 $54,400,000 Transit 37.011 8 Eagle Capacity Improvements Arrowhead Skl Area Squaw Creek Road 74 $3.000,000 $3,000.000 Cap. 37.012 70 Eagle FrontageRood Improvements Wool Vail East Veil Interchange 74 $18500,000 $8,500,000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000 Cep. 37.013 t k 24 Lake Geometric Improvements Bottom of Tennessee Pass N LeadNlle City Umit 74 6.9 $3,507,615 $3.507.615 q Geo. 37.014 8 Eagle Replace Railroad Bridge In Oyaurn over USe 74 N/A $3,116,000 53.116.000 q Cap. 37-015 24 Lako Climbing Lars Eagto-Lake County Una So. side of Torn. Pass 74 32 $1280,000 51260.000 Geo. 37-018 ~0 24 Eagle Geometric fmprovemento Jet 1.70 • Dowd Jet S Minrtrm City Limit 74 2A $3,080,000 $3,080,000 Geo. 37.017 'L I> 82 PI6dn Midland Extension Underpass Midland Avenue Extension South Business Park 74 $6,000.000 $5,000,000 .7 Cap. 37-018 I (A 70 Eagle Pedestrian Overpass at Cascade Village 74 $3,000.000 $3,000,000 Bike/Pod 37.020 (ij 62 Garfield Intersection at MP 3.70 74 $4,000,000 $4.000,000 Cap. 37.021 I ? . _6 Eagle Capedry Improvements v, Eby Creek Road E_ e-de Town Um1ts 74 $1,000,000 _ 31.000,000 Cap. _ - 37.022 j, L, 24 Eagle Geometric Improvements S Red Cliff City Lint Bottom of Tem. Paso 73 ~9.e $4.080.160 $4,880,160 j Goo, 37.023 20 24 Eagle Geometric Improvements White River NF Entrance S Red Cliff City Limit 73 72 $3838,320 $3,838,320 j j Geo. 37-024 j®j % 24 Eagle Climbing Larro Eagle-Lake County Uro No. aide of Tem. Pass 73 3.4 $1,785,000 $1.785,000 j, Geo. 37.025 70 Eagle Half-diamond Interchange US 8 (Eagle-Vail) 73 0.1 $2,100,000 $2,100,000 Interchange 37.027 Eagle Avon Transit Transfer Center 73 $2.250,000 - $2.250.000 Transit 37-028 91 Surnrnlt Geometric Improvements Bottom of Fremont Pass Jet 1-70 (Copper Mt.) 72 2.9 $1,474,215 $1.474,215 Geo. 37-029 Summit Summit County Park and Ride Lots 72 $7,800,000 $7,800,000 Transit 37.030 6 Eagle Capacity Improvements EegdeNall Arrowhead Ski Area 72 527,000,000 $27,000,000 Cep. 37.031 82 Garfield Carbondale Park-and-Ride 71 $1,500,000 31,500,000 Intermodal 37.032 Garfield Glenwood Springs Park-and-Ride 71 51,500,000 31,500,000 Inlertnodal 045-001 Eagle Eagle County Park-and-Ride lots Variouslocations 71 $835,000 5835,000 Intermodal 046-002 Eagle El Jebel Park and Ride 71 $1,500,000 51,500,000 Intennodal 45.003 Garfield RFTA Rife service, capital 60 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Transit 045-004 6 Eagle Oak Ridge Drive Pedestrian Underpass 86 N/A $270.000 5270,000 Pad. 45.005 9 Summit Capacity Improvements Brackenridge Frisco 62 331,000,000 $31,000,000 Cep. 045-008 6 Eagle Replace Bridge over Gypsum Croak 59 N/A $1,802,000 31.902.000 Cap. 045-007 24 Eagle Pedestrian Safety Improvements North of downtown Minlum USFS lot 55 2A $302,000 $302,000 Pad. 045-000 8 Eagle Signalize Ihme Intersections In Gypsum 55 N/A $1,950,000 31,850,000 Signals 85-001 70 Summit US 6 Erosion Control, Straight Crook Eisenhower Tunnel 54 $6,607,000 $6,807,000 Envlron. 85-002 131 Eagle Shoulder widening, realignment Jet US 8 (Wolcott) 5 miles N of Jet US B 49 5.0 $2,789,250 $2.789,250 Geo. 65-003 133 Garfield Capacity Improvements Carbondale, MP 66.6 MP 88.8 47 22 $4,700,000 54,700,000 Geo. 87.001 82 Garfield RFTA Bus Stop Enhancements Venous locations 47 $250,000 $250,000 Transit 97.002 ;j 24 Lake Geometric Improvements S Leadvills City Unit Jet SH 300 (Malta) 45 2.9 $1,474,215 $1,474,215 O Gas. Blade Gore Croak Erosion Control and Water 97-003 70 Eagle Quality Vail Pass East Veil 45 $10,000,000 $10,000,000 Envlron. 87.005 Eeglo Eagle Transit Satsllle Maintenance Facility 42 $2,000,000 52.000,000 Transit 117.001 8 Garfield 1-70 Access at Interchange 105 Traffic Control 40 $180,000 $180,000 Geo. 117-002 02 Eagle New TraMe Signal 0.5 miles w/o MP 21 0.5 miles w/o MP 21 40 $100,000 $100,000 Signals 117.003 6 Eagle Capacity Improvements Town of Eagle V70. Gypsum 34 $25.000.000 $25,000.000 Cap. 117.004 70 Eagle Capacity Improvements, Eby Crook Road V70 US 6 34 S3200~000 BB•001 24 Lako Goomolric Improvements Jet 9H 300 (Molls) Lake-Chadoo County l.hw 25 12.8 56,506,880 $6,506,880 am Total Cost 5720,447,855 $38,700,000 $92,580,000 $395,885,000 $133,542,855 $81,760,000 F COLORADOREGIONAL TRANSPORTATIONPLANS : INTERMOUNTAIN Financially Constrained Plan Representatives of the Intermountain TPR met with CDOT Regions 1 and 3 and representatives of other TPRs within the CDOT Regions during May 1999 to establish region-wide priorities from the TPR preferred plans within the framework of fiscal constraint. Revenue projections were provided by CDOT. The meeting resulted in the fiscally constrained element of the long-range plan. Projects in this element are eligible to move into the implementation phase. The financially constrained plan for the Intermountain TPR totals $1,158,771 including Transit Scenario B. See the table below for the project listings for the fiscally constrained plan. Illifte . r 2020 Constrained Plan fthousands; of year 000 dollars Project # I Description I Cost 387ISH 82 - Maroon Creek Roundabout I 4,800 26 Summit County Park and Ride Lots 8,221 17 SH 82 - Intersection at MP 3.70 I 2,108 35 SH 9 - Breckenridge to Frisco 32,674 12 US 6 - Eby Creek Road to Eagle 1,000 18 US 24 - Bottom of Tennessee Pass to Leadville 6,324 20 SH 82 - Midland Extension Grade Separation 2,108 39 1-70 - US 6 Erosion Control, Straight Creek to Eisenhower Tunnel I 6,964 15 US 24 - Jct 1-70 - Dowd Jct to Minturn City Limit 1 3,246 19J US 24 - Eagle/Lake County Line to Bottom of Tennessee P 1 6,324 1411-70 - West Vail Frontage Rd. to East Vail Interchange 12,121 16 Pedestrian Overpass at Cascade Village 3,162 23~US 24 - Eagle/Lake County Line to Bottom of Tennessee P 6,324 t7"'~Ea )b"Cbufi~J~A New9nterchanE. I 0 61 US 6 - 1-70 to Keystone 27,404 55ISH 9 - Bottom of Hoosier Pass to Breckenridge I 3,315 681SH 9 - Silverthome to Ute Pass I 9,110 392ITransit Scenario B - Operating I 751,538 393ITransit Scenario B - Capital 272,028 Total ($1,158,771 NOTE: This table summarizes information contained in the regional transportation plan. For more specific project information, please reference the source plan or contact CDOT. .H: Page 121 FEBRUARY 1995 DRAFT 't'able 19 (Continued) CDOT Transportation Region 3 High Priority Highway Projects PROJECT TPR PROJECT DESCRIPTION COST TYPE (OOOS) 11 Geometrics US 6 - Dowd Junction to 1-70 (Eagle/Vail) 1,750 11 Intersection SH 82 - Independence Pass TSM 599 11 Capacity SH 82 Basalt to Tiehack Ski Area 105,000 11~ Grade'Sep. 170 'Grade Sep Betwh West Vail Vail 3;300 11 Geometrics SH 13-Rifle to Garfield/Rio Blanco County Line I 10,500 11 Capacity SH 82 - Tiehack Ski Area to Aspen 30,000 12 Intersection US 40 - US 40 Intersections in Steamboat 200 12 Bridge SH 13 - 20.13 MI N/O Craig (A-06-B/A-06-C) 1,500 12 Geometrics US 40 - Steamboat Springs to Rabbit Ears Pass 2,200 12 Capacity US 40-S End Winter Pk to N End Winter Pk 5,200 12 Geometrics US 40 - Hot Sulphur Springs to Granby 7,400 12 Drainage US 40 - Hayden Drainage Improvements 1,200 12 Geometrics SH 131 - US 40 South 1,900 12 Reconst. US 40 - West of Muddy Pass 2,500 12 Geometrics US 40 - West of Steamboat Springs 2,768 12 Geometrics SH 13-SH 64 to Rio Blanco/Garfield County Line 10,500 TOTAL $310,320 COLOR.4D0's 20 YF-4R Tk-L SPORTATIONPL-W Page 83 t `TECHNICAL MEMORANDOWN0 d~ r r K 5 I 1fn'' N°If~.° M i. PLANNING REGION , "ENVIRONMENTAL OCIAL , ECONOMIC s Y _ i 0s. kN eA M~ "OD f ra• FINAL REPORT ~t ~5h s" lit, 1 t t r :it r .1L 1 ! y/ • , ."i T7`e U: I X11` - yti0 !r ;t: Pre ared b, Ip~y. l~ INTEL-M®UN°A 9N REGINA,, 5 PLANNING GM 8SS1N L t ^ ,p/,f 7 ykt ,yi2j~ 21 ng Neveber l tk`~{r r ~ ~ y~jhr r i Inter-Mountain Transportation Planning Region Table II-8 Known Noise Barrier Locations State Estimate Highway Construction Number City/County Description Costs 1-70 Vail/Eagle Vail, E& W of $292,500 Buff ehr Crk. Rd. i-70 Vail/Eagle Vail Post Office $936,000 East 1-70 Vail/Eagle Vail, at Bald $180,000 Townhomes 1=70 ValllEagle East of Golf $30U,000 C urSB.:SOUtfI;:SidiL' 1-70 Glenwood Spgs./ Hatchery Rd. $300,000 Garfield North Side f=70' Frisco/Summtfi Betwreen Interchanges, $562,500 Southeast Side II-27 a ;PR ROUTE DESCRIPTION PLAN COST PROJECT TYPE TOTAL REG PRIOR *NW Transit Center Steamboat Springs °1,500 Transit . 1,500 ° GJ2 340A Add TWLTL and additional thru lanes as warranted 5,000 Capacity/Add Lanes 6,500 1 GV2 135A Gunnison to East River - reconst., shoulders, turn lanes 9,500 Geometrics Safety 16,000 2 -IM 082A Maroon Crk. Roundabout 4,800 Capacity/Add Lanes 22,000 3 NW5 0138 MP 111 to Colorado/Wyoming state line 11,000 Reconstruction 33,000 4 GV3 050A Montrose to Sargents/reconst. various locations 11,000 Reconstruction 44,000 5 IM17 082A Intersection at MP 3.70 2,000 Capacity/Add Lanes 46,000 6 NW6 1318 CR 14 to CR 18 . 5,876 Reconstruction 51,876 7 GJ3 070B Reconstruction to add turn lanes and aux. lanes 3,000 Geometrics Safety 54,876 8 IM12 006E Eby Creek Road 1,000 Capacity/Add Lanes 55,876 9 NW7 1318 CR 14 to Oak Creek 11,000 Reconstruction 66,876 10 GJ4 340A Add TWLTL and additional thru lanes as warranted 5,000 Capacity/Add Lanes 71,876 11 GV4 092A Austin to Hotchkiss shoulder widening/passing lanes/ove 13,521 Reconstruction 85,397 12 NW8 040A Entrance to Snow Mountain Ranch, YMCA o/t Rockies 1,000 Improve Intersection 86,397 13 GJ5 006 Intersection improvements within GJ Metro Area Study 8,000 Geometrics Safety 94,397 14 GV5 133A Hotchkiss to Paonia shlders/passing lanes/overlay 15,000 Reconstruction 109,397 15 IM18 024A Bottom of Tenngssee Pass 10,000 Geometrics Safety 119,397 16 GJ6 006A Reconstruction to add shoulders and turn lanes 6,000 Geometrics Safety 125,397 17 GV6 135A Reconstruct SH 135/61h and 6th/Elk 1,000 Improve Intersection 126,397 18 IM20 082A Midland Extension 2,000 Improve Interchange 128,397 19 NW9 013A Rio Blanco/G3rtiield County line to SH 64 16,625 Geometrics Safety 145,022 20 GJ7 070A Upgrade existing 1-70 interchanges in Grand Junction/Mesa 10,000 Improve Interchange 155,022 21 GV10 065A Center turn lane for SH 65 at city limits 200 Geometrics Safety 155,222 22 IM15 024A Dowd Jct to Minturn 3,080 Safety Improvements 158,302 23 NW10 040A Kremmling to Muddy Pass 20,000 Geometrics Safety 178,302 24 IM19 024A Eagle-Lake County Line 6,000 Passing Lanes 184,302 25 NW11 009 Kremmling South to Grand County Line 7,000 Realign and Pave Shl 191,302 26 GJ8 330A Reconstruction to add shoulders 14,000 Geometrics Safety 205,302 27 GV11 050A Intersection w/63.00 Rd - Signalizalion 8 TSM 200 Improve Intersection 205,502 28 NW12 040A Granby 6th and US 40 1,252 Improve Intersection 206,754 29 GJ9 139A Reconstruction to add shoulders, Loma to Highline Canal 8,000 Geometrics Safety 214,754 30 GV15 149A Center turn lane 1,000 Geometrics Safety 215,754 31 IM14 070A West Vail Frontage Rd Improvement to East Vail 11,500 Improve Interchange 227,254 32 GJ10 141A Shoulders and safety improvements north of Cactus Park 7,000 Geometrics Safety 234,254 33 GV17 050A Truck bypass/RR Xing/emergency access 150 Corridor Study 234,404 34 IM16 070A Pedestrian Overpass at Cascade Village 3,000 Bike Facilities/Program 237,404 35 NW13 040A Within Steamboat Springs 1,800 Improve Intersection 239,204 36 GV18 050A Intersection Study 150 Improve Intersection 239,354 37 IM23 024A Eagle-Lake County Line 6,000 Passing Lanes 245,354 38 NW14 040A Fraser to Winter Park 5,000 Geometrics Safety 250,354 39 GJ11 340A Reconstruction to add shoulders and turn lanes as warranted 10,000 Geometrics Safety 260,354 40 NW15 040A Tabernash to Fraser 6,886 Geometrics Safety 267,240 41 GJ13 006A Reconstruction to add shoulders and turn lanes (Scenic 6,000 Geometrics Safety 273,240 42 GJ12 070A Potential new interchanges for Grand Junction metro area 6,000 New Interchange 279,240 43 IM21 024A White River NF Entrance 3,838 Geometrics Safety 283,078 44 1M22 024A S Red Cliff City Limit 4,880 Geometrics Safety 287,958 45 NW16040A Granby toTabernash 21,056 Reconstruction 309,014 46 IM44 024A Leadville City Limit 1,474 Geometrics Safety 310,488 47 ° This project was prioritized as number one in Region 3 by all four of the TPRs, with the understanding, this project does not quality for Other Region Priorities without the approval of the Transportation Commission. This project was inserted and prioritized by the Intermountain TPR as their #1 priority.. Only the Intermountain projects were adjusted in this list to compensate for this project insertion. all the projects for the remaining TPRs were retained as prioritized at the May 13th meeting. This action is requested by the Intermountain because this proj s initially thought to a 7th pot project. TPR Chairperson signature required for concurrence 7 qVA11L TOWN 75 South Frontaye Road Vail. Colorado 81657 970-479-2100 FAX 970-479-2157 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ~ertember 11, 2000 Contact: Suzanne Silverthorn, 479-2115 Community Information Officer KEVIN FOLEY ISSUES RESIGNATION LETTER TO VAIL COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY (Vail)-Vail Town Councilman Kevin Foley has issued a resignation letter to the Vail Council and Vail community to protest the manner in which his brother's family has been treated by officers from the Vail Police Department and the Eagle County Sheriffs Office. Fcley, who is out of town due to the death of his father, issued a three-page yard-written resignation letter to Mayor Ludwig Kurz on Saturday (9-9), saying that he has 'lost faith in town government" as a result of the Sept. 8 incident in which a stolen vehicle was retrieved from Foley's brother, who had purchased the vehicle unknowingly. ;The letter is transcribed below.) Foley was first elected to the Vail Town Council in 1995, in which he won a four-year :ecm as the top vote-getter with 540 votes. His 510 votes in 1999 won him re-election to a two-year term, finishing fourth, which expires in November 2001. While concerned over Foley's actions, Mayor Ludwig Kurz says the town's first focus is to cffer condolences to Foley and his family upon the death of his father. Kurz says the Council remains hopeful that Foley will reconsider the resignation upon his return to Vail. (The following is a transcription of a handwritten note delivered to Mayor Ludwig Kurz on Sept. 9) Sept. 10, 2000 Dear Council Members & Vail Neighbors-- As saddened as I was at the news of our father's death yesterday, I am even more saddened by the actions of the Vail Police Department and the Eagle County Sheriffs last night. My brother Dennis and my sister-in-law Betsey purchased a min-van from Alpine Bank & Leo Lala, a gentleman currently in the (more) RECYCLED PAPER Add 1/Foley Resignation Eagle Co. jail for allegedly selling vehicles fraudulently. My family was aware of the investigation and co-operated with the Vail P.D. At 4:20 p.m. on Friday, Officer John Ferguson of the Vail Police P.D. left a message asking Dennis and Betsey to bring the vehicle to the Vail P.D. On the advice of their lawyer, they did not return the call. At 7:30 p.m., Officer Ferguson and an Eagle Co. Sheriff knocked on their door and asked for the van. My sister-in-law asked for a warrant; when that was not available she was informed that she and my brother could be charged with theft by receiving. They acknowledged that fact and thanked Officer Ferguson for his diligence. At 10:30 p.m., nine uniformed Vail and Eagle Co. Sheriffs personnel served a warrant on Dennis and Betsey. I was surprised that this many officers were necessary. Being hardened criminals, I'm surprised the SWAT team wasn't there. The van was turned over. While I sincerely appreciate the police have a tough job and the law is the law, I can't help but wonder how important it was to have this vehicle sit on an impound lot immediately and indefinitely. To have been notified and allowed to make arrangements for alternative transportation would have been nice. Compassion doesn't seem to be in the Vail P.D.'s dictionary. As a council member in Vail, I serve my neighbors to the best of my ability. Having my family treated this way has caused me to lose my faith in town government. As I can no longer serve my friends in Vail with the desire they deserve, I would ask that you accept this letter as my formal notice to resign from the Vail Town Council effective today, Sept. 10th in the year 2000. It has been an educational experience serving on the council the last four plus years. The good times and great people I have met far outweigh the negative moments. The time spent working for busses and trails will be the happiest memories. To all the wonderful people that are Vail -the bus drivers, the bartenders, the child-care providers, the teachers, the firefighters, the waitresses, the managers, all the folks at VRD and the golf course, the ski techs and the bike techs, the shop owners, the clergy, the builders and realtors, the cooks-all the working folks in general-my thanks to all of you for making my family welcome. To all my friends in Vail and Eagle Co., please remember-the next door they knock on could be yours. Love, Kevin Foley FROM : MUELLER'S SERVICE'S PHONE NO. : 970 476+4539 Sep. 12 2000 09:43AM P1 l2 vo 0 ?o V Cot) A)c s 4n-2157 FRon' l JoL/= ru cl LEI<" pl-~vNc y- X76 p S6 gE iivC©URA 5-D 710 IYl 76M-r.- r ~ IJ2) Dom 17- 7` 1~6 ova O7 Ur/A)6SS ,Or20/2/ 7 -S TO IYAA)y a50Liv'77 01/S ~5Xl S % a Po /2 4 JC- ~fpt t1o1jy m6DS OF D I r-f4ieZavr )06116 AIS /A) 45v2oA V/ Eki , 7169 ~RoPvs J v ®>'r~~~Vr" e).V I Locv~r2 CLo S C &Jo UC M 70 rIW6 r-R oA)97- C E R 7-0 eA)V< J®wsU IWC A1or S 14 . TOWfV COUNCIL SUMiViIT, September 6-7, 2000 CRITICAL ACTIORI STEPS 14 MONTH GOALS - COMPLETE BY 11/01 (REFER TO VISIORI STATEMERIT IiV ALL FUTURE DISCUSSIONS) 1) Ruins a. Appraisal and report to Council on condemnation by 9/19/00 2) Hub Site a. Financing in place b. Complete buy-in to architecture - ready for election 11/01 c. No perception of foot-dragging 3) Donovan Park IN PROCESS 4) I-70 Rloise IN PROCESS 5) In-town Transportation a. Kevin to transportation conference September 24-28, 2000 b. Greg Hall to report out by 11/15/00 re: alternatives c. Presentations by vendors betvueen 11/15/00 and end of January 2001 d. Prepare 5 year capital budget e. Explore possible "sugar daddies" in re: to demo-type project 6) South Side of VTRC a. Add $15,000 to current supplemental appropriation to draft engineering study (second reading 9/19/00) - this feasibility study will take approximately 2 months b. Council to determine prioritized uses and mix c. Draft RFP w/Council approval 7) RSES Athletic Field a. Bob will re-explore RE50J's financial commitment for this joint partnership b. Kevin and Diana will get the ball rolling w/various partners c. Staff will assess site access/viability/possible inclusion of old Carnie lot 8) Berry Creek 5th Filing Housing a. Before Auerbach contract can be signed, and IGA between the TOV and the County must be drafted/signed 9) Consolidated Information Booths a. Bob to contact Morter/Aker Architects for site assessment b. Review alternative sites c. Undertake/complete political groundwork 10) Special Events a. Educate Council (prior to January 2001) from a first-time promoter's perspective b. Solicit input from local event organizers: - VVTCB - VVF - Commission on Special Events - Destination Services - Etc. c. Appoint Councilmember to "shadow" Sybill at Commission on Special Events meetings 11) Fire/Building/and "Other" Codes a. Set work session to discuss what Council CAN and CANNOT legislate, to include: Gary Goodell, John Gulick, Tom Moorhead, Greg Morrison, Russell Forrest - Clarify what is "black and white" vs. what is open to interpretation - Discuss relative merit of adoption of each code and liability without - Set work session prior to 12/19/00 12) Parking Pay-in-Lieu a. Discussion scheduled 9/26/00 TOWN COUNCIL SUMMIT, September 6-7, 2000 CRITICAL ACTION STEPS 6-MONTH GOALS - COMPLETE BY 4/15/01 (REFER TO VISION STATEMENT IN ALL FUTURE DISCUSSIONS!) 1) Community alignment and partnerships a. Post banner in Council Chambers by Tuesday, 9/12/00 b. Define/clarify legal and political leverage w/VRI c. Notify VRI immediately of Council's intent d. Begin report out to community at "Peer Resort" meeting, 8:00 A.M., Friday, 9/8/00 e. Reinvent Community Task Force as a tool f. Set Breckenridge-type Council/VRI retreat g. Define desired outcome by creating a vivid visual description for 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020 2) Hubsite a. Appoint two members each to the 501(c)3 and 501(c)4 Hubsite/White River Institute effort b. Staff to coordinate current calendar to new "marching orders" c. Provide "marching orders" to design team in October/November 3) Donovan Park a. Schedule RETT discussion (2 hours) for September - desired outcome: 7-0 unanimity b. October 3 - provide clear direction/timetable/construction calendar so bid process is completed and contract signed by April 15, 2001 4) 1-70 Noise a. Complete contour noise map by October to identify degree of problem/sites b. Identify options/study how and where to apply CONCURRENTLY - due 10/3/00 c. Identify available funding sources 5) TimberRidge a. Written report re: "partners" to Council by 11/7/00 b. Re-zoning action to commence immediately thereafter depending on report 6) Maintain environment, both natural and infrastructure a. Discuss weekly Council "lunch" location under OTHER at 9/12/00 work session - create schedule and publish location - combine w/walkabout b. Obtain Disney standards - Russell c. Turn It Up - incorporate stewardship theme d. Reinstitute "Adopt-a-Path/Street" e. Discuss budget to make it happen and allocate dollars 7) Wayfinding a. Prepare schedule re: timing (within 8-12 weeks) b. Approve shop drawings c. Install upon arrival (before Christmas) d. Trail identifiers installed by 4/15/01 8) Communicate w/County Commissioners a. Employee Generation PROs and CONs memo to Council b. Set evening meeting w/County Commissioner candidates prior to the start of "early voting" (10/23/00) c. Draft/discuss a model employee generation ordinance which would be valid for both the town and county-wide that can then be discussed w/the County Commissioners following the 11/7/00 general election 9) Public Improvements Financing a. Define WHAT the public improvements are exactly and estimate COST b. Draft memo re: all reasonable options for financing by 10/17/00 u d~ T'00WN OF VA IL I ti Department of Community Development 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 970-479-2138 FAX 970-479-2452 September 11, 2000 Ms. Cheryl Rondeau 1613 Matterhorn Circle Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Ms. Rondeau, Thank you for your letter dated August 29"', 2000. The Vail Town Council received copies of it as well as Russell Forrest, Director of Community Development. When the lottery process for the Town of Vail housing program was created the Vail Town Council felt that it was important to reward people who have lived and worked within the Town of Vail for the longest period of time. With that goal in mind the point system rewarding longevity was created. In order to remove some of the tension from the process the "lottery system" was also created. Council believed that this system rewards individuals for longevity in the community, by placing them in the top tier, while still placing an element of "lottery chance" in the process. The Garmisch Lofts project is a unique situation for the Town of Vail. The Town is neither the owner nor the developer of the project. As a condition of Town Council approval of the project, the developer was required to work with the Town to line up purchasers for the deed-restricted units, who qualify under the Employee Housing Guidelines. This process is being used in order to ensure that qualified individuals and businesses are purchasing the units. Finally, the owner/developer is also compensating the Town for its time and efforts through a 2% charge on the units that are sold. The changes that have taken place in the design of the units have been based upon feedback that the owner/developer has received from people expressing interest in the project. To date, the largest change has been the inclusion of 14 two-bedroom units that will be deed-restricted. Information from the Eagle County Housing Needs Assessment shows that the need and demand for one-bedroom units is the most underserved. With this information the owner/developer believed that this would be the strongest product to sell. Input received after the initial building design was complete showed that the inclusion of larger units would increase demand for the units. If you have further RECYCLED PAPER Gregory M. Amsden 2702 Larkspur Court Vail, Colorado 81657 September 25, 2000 Open Lands Committee C/o Town of Vail Community Development Dept. 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO. 81657 RE: Proposal to Purchase Lots 1-4, Vail Meadows Filing 2 Dear Committee Members: I am writing you as owner of Lot 4, Block 1, Gore Creek Subdivision (5166 Black Gore Drive) and as representative for Robert A. Rymer. The above referenced lots (East Vail) were recently listed for sale by Mountain West Real Estate. Lots 1 and 2 (21,763 sq.ft.) are listed for $135,000 and Lots 3 and 4 (26,560 sq.ft.) are available for $110,000. All four lots are listed as priority acquisition sites in the Town of Vail Open Lands Plan. The Town of Vail acquired Lots 5 through 12, Vail Meadows Filing 2 in 1992 and subsequently overlaid Natural Area Preservation zoning ("NAP") on these sites. The purchase of Lots 1-4, Vail Meadows by the Town of Vail represents a very strategic and beneficial opportunity. 1. These lots are surrounded by Town of Vail owned, NAP lands that abut National Forest Lands on the east and south. The lots are located at the confluence of Gore Creek and Black Gore Creek with impressive views of Bald Mountain. 2. There is a roadway easement in place that would allow for a pedestrian bridge (similar to the bridge in place at Stephen's Park in Intermountain) to be constructed. This creek crossing would allow residents in East Vail (especially children) to access the beautiful forests just beyond these lots. This "walk-to" access point could be utilized year round by local residents as well as visitors. 3. The neighborhood residents have shown strong opposition to any residential development on. these sites in the past. The goodwill gained by a well publicized, public purchase of these lots by the Town of Vail would be substantial. Voice (970)-479-0337 Fax (970)-479-5278 My client, Rob Rymer, has recently contracted to purchase Lots 1 and 2, Vail Meadows Filing 2 for $130,000 cash with an April 4. 2001 closing date. His intent is two-fold. First, he wants give the Town of Vail the option to purchase these lots (by assigning his contract rights to the Town of Vail with no price increase). The Town of Vail would have to commit to the following actions: 1. Purchase Lots 3 and 4, Vail Meadows Filing 2. 2. Change the current Agriculture/Open Space zoning to Natural Area Preservation. 3. Deed restrict all of Vail Meadows Filing 2 Subdivision to prevent any residential development or structural improvements from being constructed on said parcel. Lots 1-4, Vail Meadows Filing 2 comprise 1.11 acres. Given the contract price of $130,000 on Lots 1 and 2, and the list price of $110.000 (which might be negotiated in the $80,000 to $100,000 price point) on Lots 3 and 4, the value of the total acquisition is approximately $210,000 to $230,000. There are very few sites (especially properties which offer public use benefits) available to purchase within the Town of Vail at this price. In the event the Town of Vail does not initiate action on this purchase proposal within thirty days of the date of this letter, Mr. Rymer shall pursue development opportunities on Lots 1 and 2. I will refer Mr. Rymer to a professional planner and advise him to also contact legal counsel to aid in determining appropriate zoning on these lots. If you have any additional questions, feel free to contact me at 476-8610. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Sindetely, f .1 G~'. 6ry 1V. Amsden Q n.r I "•1\` '•11~• 1,,, .~11ti w.'Qr.°•••,u. o, ,Ir.... ,.ur.. of". .•r.. -.r l..,l. • ei=••.. ~ fee a..o- ~ ~ '•ry~\`•' 'MC 'ry\ .A°.. „•h.. 'u" ~'•N ,'`4. .,r•. . db.,• .v. ..e. , x•„11• •plr. ,a. .,b. ..~r.. .w.. ay A•. . , ..1•,, !4. f .11,. . w• ,a e. .a!~.. .v.. .ur, ,r • j~. p /•le A•. ..k I •4 ,°4. .1., .1.. ,r,••. a f" Ago, a 1 1,., .,•a•. ` da :uh' la• .e,, ~,u•, N•. ,.u..~ A4 .u,, y,•0 .r1~ ~••°w•0I ~ G~~ •y•b,,ll•.. •'•r, •L, dib .r.1 r,, ',',1,. !{r 4.. ,d - • y sk. ® ~ d0., t0, :•1...•~~4d~f1 ~f'.~~ . p B ..L'1...:'AIJ o ° oo .\~/r,. !1 , lI• ,\1r, .M. ~y ur' •4 ,,1I.• ,u., ..•11... 1a 1M, 'N r,, , .1. ' UO o ,011, • Al. p® o ° o o S , Aly a. e 0 0 0 .1•. ~4. , HOUS .01` 0ooo °.e oo Q-40 e e ° . 1. FI L • 2 ~ ~ o °o e ° ° o e 0 e ° a u o ° .•4 ' A/. ah. .N. h . A.. .!4 e e o • A' GCE L1RLt~ •,:,1.. p~ R p, 1 -p° TOW1~1p~HC OAR °o e ° • oo ° o ° ° ° ° o ° ° o a o°e T ~~a ; • Ay ,!tred ~•~...I V 0 Uo• 8 - R,. ° d x4N • u °~pO OO° °o° 000°• ~e s° RE°/~ EA U ER OF VAIL. ° • o A y'~°°oo °Q~~°FFtltlff°D~°o eoo o e ~ ! / ° o • ° t~° ° • / 44 ST NA` I.. Foeg • :0 1 0 0 °°°pOOOe° O~'•00 °°•O°e°°°•° r•'••I 1 11~/ 1/ VAr~e Ytl1 0-'1®1J~~ 7 ®(5O Q 00 ° 00 °OO L' ° e A K L-GAR LN. O O O FILING pO.'E«a U 6 O 00 0~0 t; 0 000 000 °O O OnL` ° 00 0 00 0 ° 00°° • ~ (112 / .311 b. 1••. , .,rry ..r,. O 0 00 _ _ = 11 _ 6\ 1~ ~r, \~r,, / ,il•,ir,.: 141 O O ~o00 V) ,,trr d o 0 ° 0 00 0 0 0 Oo~OO 0 _ II o i' % ,,1~~ - r,•, ' ° 0000 O°"~° O - Q ° O O O O~oO O 0®0 GpR ..r N F q i / r.. .,1,, 0000 OO ° O O °O° w //Z / - 000 O N; 11 0 C` O O l it Z43 i\y4- NZ, 0 O 0 (0)0 O O O Y-0 0- 0 00 0 0 'GO 01" ar,• 1 0 000 RE CREEK 0 FILING NO. 1:.. r.... •v,, era. ,r,, r,, ol/ .,11, .,rf,' .,of .f. .1 L. ,I. y _ TOWN. VAIL. ZONING LEGEN®._... _ VXX4 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT I = N I TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT V V V' TWO FAMILY PRIMARY/ SECONDARY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL CLUSTER DISTRICT LOW DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY DISTRICT (1-F+1! MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY DISTRICT HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY DISTRICT PUBLIC ACCOMODATION DISTRICT SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT t1~llJJ GENERAL USE Dl5TRLCT COMMERCIAL CORE I DISTRICT ® COMMERCIAL CORE 2 DISTRICT UIJ-' -4 COMMERCIAL CORE 3 DISTRICT ~V l COMMERCIAL SERVICE CENTER DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL 81 OPEN SPACE DISTRICT mmumL AREA PRESERVA710t HEAVY SERVICE DISTRICT DISTRICT PARKING DISTRICT ARTERIAL BUSINESS DISTRICT SKI BASE RECREATION DISTRICT HILLSIDE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT I 4 I OUTDOOR RECREATION NS-TIC-T NOTE: ANY LAND , LOT, OR SITE WITHIN THE TOWN OF VAIL MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY WHICH, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP DOES NOT HAVE A DESIGNATED ZONE DISTRICT, SHALL BE DESIGNATED GREEN BELT AND NATURAL OPEN SPACE ZONE DISTRICT Town 8oundary~ .a \Y/ ~ tt3 7 z 5 19 W3. ] I 501 5 `9]N 5033 1 599: 5101 5111 E aH51 t 1 1 /T ' / _ :955 5915 $936 39 81 a 11]1 alA ~ 5137 1 a0i6 68.5 98t ~ ,.~MpS aG dT6'~ 1087 \ ^ 14 w 3 a 39 + 1 OR NORTH SW 13 48TG 6907 Cj.3-- a 5W GO 7 19 / P 591r 19 t _ _ 2 s,sl 4776 f,99 5956 5"B 511E J 17 It Sumom 4619 a 6911 PMASGa a 51l6 GOTE 5181 3 6916 5999 17 `M1 2 ~fl4 9 •1 n CEDAR Po" ai8] 1-0 ` +A a IT , IIYJ) 5917 5119 5 5166 6158 1 5 1931 t $ gDly tSl AT m 5,77 i 791 49/6 y+ 5086 HO J 1a y2 5119 ~j APtAT 8 .1 6959 4957 4951 2 5917 2 5159 5 5 4616 ~ 4911 1 9a J GRC[F 5169 16 4t97 O 0 4997 1sL f936 "NIP 1 5110 ^ 6161 6819 "N W70 D a 3 a ,H4o seW K M UVVQ 5,28 s CEDAR I 5916 , 1697 OO ® p 6919 7 O 59006 5141 6 'Z 1946 a 1 5166 7 50M H9 1 510H 6197 69 1 0 +4 66 9 Ma9 5113 3 It 1Bt] 6618 3 4VH5 S VNBB 9 5115 B ,1560 ~ 1 5121 t2 / TR4FT A 5,98 in SI27 13 9 13 m a IT 5179 W 1699 t1 10 W ~l4 SODa 5119 N 1.4 t0 609 5155 $177 s HEATHER 6969 D T Bp_ c s+er ya / aH11 "a6 '7 ' z 3 EHlouse $ BDIVI ON 'p +5 1.5 C t1 6939 - 2 t 7 SISS 175 5191 "Si $ION AD ON 501. B 5,11 5,0- 81 H BD sn3 e IT is 19 5 3 6 F VAI 511J 5197 s- 51- 95 HER (1GR 12 a97d 48 ,H 98 1 4 4062 / is 5019 SOflT 3 f u,P1,ATTEO 3 1889 11 30 1 e- 1 5 5186 "5706 aaiz 166] ,6 4910 ` ' 5935 9,6 5916 3 (q 1 5196 5,76 5+48 ~ . l It 106 S 5915 .OBa 511.1 $122 e ~3 4H 5 5176 IT 13 ' 5666 W74 B 5017 5111 9 5]01 9. 6 51N 31 Gy 5011 ~ ~y/ 50fl1 ~~V C 9 5709 J '075 OP4G Sta 5,N q y~~y 3+ zs o? 5702 52to M 5021 w~ 19 VI/ 2 r - S• V 5U2 d ~ dr~~~ 5H36 3 27 5111 SW5 tl PSlif S 5,16 6 O 25 5651 V l) 1 4• 11 S033 FILIN 72 52 r - Y+ S ld 1 5971 is. o SH(SFiOtiW 1 sleat5 m .,p sls. ~ ti ? 5,55 / 14 NOT 22 11 " 9. ~C~HK t'C?I TJOWM 5188 5197 J 8 TRACT A 5188 1-4 ' 5177 ' S SS 1-5 5187 8A 175 EATHEROOD TOWN 5135 5197 8 17 5137 3'(65 8 78 se HER F VAIL ulc -;r 130,603 5 1 2 3 5166 5 76 103 5146 5206 ~ .~.~c.......:.~~ .......~~..W... _.~..~.Ne:~swas=.:ar•_... , .,.%s~xA~ss.~r~crrr 6 7 2 ,t 14 5122 5206 6 3 5128 5207 12 9 e U.S.FS. 5134 5207 9 5138 10 t 4 5142 ;.y V Y I,.~ ? E~ .l.10~ 4 13 5164 EMLE 5184 14 MAP, 5174 To 00jeD ciao = ~~J 16 5194 ~.1 acre 2.4o,030 l nom, an I..o~s 3 Co~.~~~w?~ ~u 1 Q ~ 17 18 5195 5195 XC A0 - Winter 593,740 _ Summer (est.) 487,000 ~ 084' 12 TOTAL 1,000,740 "M 80- z 6 a. 40- FREE 20- I I I ' I ~ I .I ~1 0 ` ~w w C etc a FELSBURG C] HOLT & ULLEVIG oh #1 Vail Parking Study Update 00.062 918100 Water ParM q Duna on and Revenue Summary (Combined VTC and Luonshead Structures) Duration Fee QED Transactions Revenue (Hours) ~ Vehicles Actual ~ Potential 0 - 0.5 0.00 135,730 0 0 0.5-1.0 0.00 80,254 0 0 1.0-1.5 0.00 85,631 0 0 1.5 - 2 2.00 34,139 60,708 68,278 2-3 6.00 33,106 158,192 198,636 3-4 7.00 15,340 94,623 107,380 4-5 8.00 23,732 167,948 189,856 5-6 9.00 40,804 306,769 367,236 6-7 10.00 29,583 245,658 295,830 7-8 11.00 11,899 93,950 130,889 8-9 12.00 11,002 89,582 132,024 9-10 13.00 2,987 26,926 38,831 10-11 13.00 2,986 26,926 38,818 11-12 14.00 371 3,793 5,194 12-131 14.00 371 3,793 5,194 13-141 14.00 370 3,792 5,180 14-151 14.00 370 3,792 5,180 15 - 24 1 15.001 1,832 23,686 27,480 24 - 48 1 14.941 2,556 38,181 38,181 48+1 45.351 677 30,705 30,705 Total 513,7401 1,379,023 9,884,892 Actual Revenue as Percent of Potential Revenue 81.8% AMID MEVIMMME2 T a~tQ s P3D74 Free A,765 (59% Pa1d 12D125 (41 Revenue per Transaction $2068 VTC $2,48 Lionshead 3003 Revenue per Paid Transaction 6®50 Ow FELSBURG rq HOLT & ULLEVIG oh #3 Vail Parking Study Update 00-062 918100 DDRAK TAIRIKENG DIEHARDS VTC Filled s o f Days Further Action 1 Days Lions head Filled i Days Frontage Case P FELSBURG O H O L T & ULLEVIG oh #4 Vail Parking Study Update 00-062 917100 1 1 0HUAGIE ROAD TARKHM(G NEWAHIS AY / DATE FRONTAGE ® BUSIEST PARKING SWER AY RANK Sat. / Feb. 69 418 ~ 2nd Sato / air. A9 387 3rd Sat. / Feb. 26 328 4th Sato / Mar. 4 325 7th Sun. / Feb. 2 213 1 st Tues. / Mar. 2 197 76th Sato / Apr*[R 1 p 173 41 st Frio / Feb. 18 146 12th Sat. / Mar. 18 106 13th Sato / Mara 25 6 27th FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG oh #5 Vail Parking Study Update 00.061 917100 0 00 0~ X00 O OO~I00 O 0 COMMIMMUHOM2 anuafl Dpeg~,adan Maintenance ~a T Annualized Investment Cost $C25 Q25 O spaces at 25,000 peir space owetr 50 yeair gaffe, ima unteires r assumedD Typical Minima Annum Revenue Expectation $2,25 M FELSBURG a HOLT & ULLEVIG oh #6 Vail Parking Study Update 00.061 9/7100 Vail Parking Study POTENTIAL PARKING SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS BASIS FOR DEVELOPING A MODIFIED COMPREHENSIVE PARKING PROGRAM FOR VAIL 1~_ Council Policy Direction/Input Suggested Response 1. Provide a_ ..."Perception of Develop a Revised Parking fee schedule which value for skiers." incorporates a $10 maximum daily charge. 2. "Encourage shopping and dining Maintain 90 minute free parking and free from down valley." evening parking. 3. Adopt..."Yield management Develop a peak day parking fee schedule which i.e., supply and demand, incorporates a $12 to $15 maximum daily optimize use of parking charge and increments at $2/hour. structure." Consider summertime parking fees (e.g., $2 fixed price, pay on entry). 4. Provide... "Product variety for Provide 1) premier valet parking; 2) covered multiple customer needs." structural parking; 3) reduced rate frontage road parking; 4) free remote parking at Ford Park and along frontage road; and 5) provide bus service accordingly. 5. Provide..." Employee options/ Maintain debit card discount; focus upon considerations." employee user group; price according to value of parking and cost of transit service. Match 6. "Make transportation/parking transit service to employee schedules. work for employees." 7. "What can we give away? Recognize competing objectives (e.g., value What can we afford to give pricing based upon demand versus need for low away?" cost parking for certain user groups). 8. Maintain... "Consistency - no "Smooth" jumps in parking fee schedule. surprises." Balance 1) peak demand management; 2) revenue generation; and 3) parking facility utilization. Eliminate pay in lieu program. Establish parking program for entire season (year) with no changes mid-term. FELSBURG ® HOLT & ULLEVIG R/W R/W 63' I 11' 4' 11' 11' 8' Parking PARKING OMIE g SEADIE NFf® MEq I P BAN R/W R/W 82' 4 f~d~ p~ EE F~ 1 u"flf 6~ ; 7' 2' 18' 14' 11' 11' 8' 2' IPARKB~pG ONE SHOES ° ED? t3~F1M I 1 1 Parking L% .,Zf TYPICAL SEGMENT ° PLAN VIEW it jig it 11K ila 1LtJig its 111 ] i~ ,IK 11~~J a FELSBURG s Q HOLT & ULLEVIG oh #8a Vail Parking Study Update 00-061 9/8100 IOo O 0X00 000 000000000 COH(Mpu OU ` IOM [EXISTING Off-MAIUMI®WEIK PIEAK/WEEKIEND gHOURSD 4-3 1 5-6 9 1® 12 6-7 1 t 14 7 11 1® 1s 8 e 9 12 1 1s 11 13 to 1s 11=1s 14 1® 1 15 a 24 1s to 15 a FELSBURG Q HOLT & ULLEVIG oh #9 Vail Parking Study Update 00.061 918100 Revenue pei° Potential Estimated Transaction, EXISTING $1,684,812 S9,379,023 $2o68 MODIFIED CONCEPT Winter Peak $ 9D37 70 2 $1,VA27P883 $403 Winter Off-Pe 77SDSS5 $634,806 $ a47 Summer $974,000 7D ® $1.64 TOTAL $3,129,257 $2,559,689 $2056 FELSBURG (Po MOLT ULLEVIG , oh #10 Vail Parking Study Update 00-061 918100 Vag Parking Study POTENTIAL PARKING SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS BASIS FOR DEVELOPING A MODIFIED COMPREHENSIVE PARKING PROGRAM FOR VAIL r. '.•'.'..:-wniw~.i vim,^. .Ir. ::r.-: .,I.rv:~u:. ~.ll.rru .,1 gene - o~lrii ?h Pd4ti' H ..-M 1,.... • ;~'s' . d„",,.'o' ~e;•,.: sue.......,.... 1. Provide a ..."Perception of Develop a Revised Parking fee schedule which value for skiers." incorporates a $10 maximum daily charge. 2. "Encourage shopping and dining Maintain 90 minute free parking and free from down valley." evening parking. 3. Adopt..."Yield management Develop a peak day parking free schedule i.e., supply and demand, which incorporates a $12 to t 15 maximum optimize use of parking daily charge and increments at $2/hour. structure." Consider summertime parking fees (e.g., Y2 fixed price, pay on entry). 4. Provide...'Product variety for Provide 1) premier valet parking; 2) covered multiple customer needs." structural parking; 3) reduced rate frontage road parking; 4) free remote parking at Ford Park and along frontage road; and 5) provide bus service accordingly. 5. Provide... "Employee options/ Maintain debit card discount; focus upon considerations." employee user group; price according to value of parking and cost of transit service. Match 6. "Make transportation/parking transit service to employee schedules. work for employees." 7. "What can we give away? Recognize competing objectives (e.g-, value What can we afford to give pricing based upon demand versus need for low away?" cost parking for certain user groups). 8. Maintain..." Consistency - no "Smooth" jumps in parking fee schedule. surprises." Balance 1) peak demand management; 2) revenue generation; and 3) parking facility utilization. Eliminate pay in lieu program. Establish parking program for entire season (year) with no changes mid-term. FELSDURG HOLT ULLEViG SUS 9-d6•00 WeA~3 [PL%M, ILM, r D PRAM Q)B3JECUHWa2 Provide Range of Product Types Value for Skiers Encourage Shopping Dinin ® Charge for Value Provided Yield Management ® Increase Physical Parking Supply Product Vane Employee Options ® Simplify Management Process Consistency Affordability of Discounts FELSBURG HOLT & ULLEVIG Vail Parking Study Update 00-061 9122100 p End of Skn Season MemorlaW Day Free Parking Memorial ay I Start Ski Season Summer Parking Fees (New) Throughout Ski Season Winter Parking Fees (Revised) I-N FELSBURG ro HOLT & ULLEVIG Vail Parking Study Update 00-062 9121100 q 2 UII1 Ml M RUE VCHEEDMIE S2 on PEAK DAYS DU . TROM OFF-PRAK Qsee BeROWD QHOURSD QED QED 0-®o3 0.5- 9 ® 2 9 o floc ® 4 im3 e 2 2 4 2-3 4 3-4 6 8 4-S a 1 S-24 to 12 DECEMBER JANUARY 1 a 8 3 3 1, I. I. I: 1 , I: I.• 18 14 . I, 10 I 1 4 I. I, 1 10 1 I~° ° i" I 1 14 16 ° 1" 20 111 a 1° 17 1 I it ° I 17 1 L, L. la. In I I E1 I,a n In ~n I" 27 f 19 19 24 I I 19 I.. I" ~n n I 24 FELS13uRG 120 I'•27I 29 I"29 39I I29 In In I.. I 281° In I,. I I26 In I„ I" I" 131 1 HOLT & 31 I I 71 U L L E V IG Vail Parking Study Update 00-062 9121100 b ' 21PECH&I IPROWMHOH2~ Walet Pairki ng Wonten° Season o Peak Dayz o $20 C 226 5pace§ Go9dI Paw Unl iregmIctedl Pamkonng ffa<r S 000 Guan°allnteedl Space QMay Valet on Peak Day§D Blue PaT)z domoted to Wall imployee§ Only Restricted) Parking ff®n° $500 gRed cedl ateD Eliminate / Refund Debit Card Free Parking VTC 226 (Except Peak DaysD Ei®nshead 3 (Except Peak DaysD Ford Park 185 (Except Summer Managed Days) Soccer Field Lot 65 (Except Summer Managed DaysD Free All Evenings After 6o00pm FELSBURG a HOLT & ULLEVIG Vail Parking Study Update 00-062 9/11100 o OLUO O MH(GM10(GmT2 Free Parking Supply 25 to M4 Spaces prox mQ j 264 Spaces Close In Evenings Dining/S®p In Off Peak Days 9 Minutes Peak Days 30 Minutes (46% of 90 Min. Parkers) ® Premier Parking 226 Spaces at Village ® Maximum states Reduced Off Peak Days 5000 Encourage Dining/Shopping Peak Days 3000 Encourage Transit Use W FELSBURG ~a HOLT & ULLEVIG Vail Parking Study Update 00-061 9122100 W5 94&-60 Qtt* * d UPDATE Presentation to Vail Town Council September 26, 2000 by Roy Mask, Leader and Supervisory Entomologist Gunnison Service Center USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Region Forest Health Management Background Mountain pine beetle (MP6) populations have been expanding in the Vail Valley and surrounding areas since 1996. In early 1997, the USDA Forest Service, Colorado State Forest Service and the Town of Vail initiated a cooperative effort to assess the mountain pine beetle situation. In May of 1997, Gunnison Service Center completed an assessment of the Vail Valley area that included two key components: 1) identification of the areas of ongoing mountain pine beetle activity; and 2) the susceptibility of lodgepole pine stands to mountain pine beetle infestation. Results of the assessment revealed about 200 acres of beetle activity as of 1996. More significant though, was the fact that approximately 98% of the lodgepole pine stands in the assessment area were identified as moderate or high in regard to potential for MPB infestation. Once such stands become infested, models predict substantial amounts of tree mortality. Since 1997, management efforts have included: annual aerial survey of the Valley to document areas of beetle activity; annual on-the-ground assessments following the aerial survey to validate and refine impacted areas and to identify current year's beetle activity; direct control efforts (tarping and commercial and non-commercial removals of VA infested trees); preventive spraying of individual trees; a bark beetle behavioral chemical (pheromone) trial; continual information sharing via the media; public meetings and an informative field day. Current Situation The year 2000 marks the fifth consecutive year of significant mountain pine beetle activity in and around Vail. Federal, state, municipal and private lands are being impacted. An aerial survey of the Vail Valley was completed during the summer of 2000 (see attached map). The map documents areas of fading trees that were infested in 1999. The Colorado State Forest Service (Granby office) is currently engaged in assessing beetle activity from the summer of 2000. The mountain pine beetle is part of Colorado's forested ecosystems, as are the people. The challenge now and in the future is to meet the needs of the latter, given the disturbance/change "nature" of the former. When impacts from mountain pine beetle activity are deemed, "unacceptable" in certain settings, management options are available to forest resource managers and private property owners. Among the primary concerns at present, are the degradation of aesthetics and property values and the increased possibilities of wildland-urban interface disturbances such as wildfire and avalanche. As a result, several MPB-impacted sites around the valley are currently being evaluated for possible treatment of mountain pine beetle and stand conditions. a Websites for more information on MPB... USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Forest Health Management www.fs.fed.us/r2/f Colorado State Forest Service www.coilostate.edu/Depts/CSFS/csfsmgmt a USDA Forest Service Gunnison Service Center 216 N. Colorado Gunnison, CO 81230 Phone (970)641-0471 e-mail rmask@fs.fed.us ,n VaiI Val?ey PB pctiv?ty aerial suvvey) _ 'data from annual _ . 1 20000 till, 18000 ` T 4 16000 14000-~ # of dying trees 10000 a000 6000 y 4000 1996 2000 1997 YEAR 0 199b v ?r,\1 ~ ~ : ..IrYN.I .!'1i~5 dYl4.rlC - k~ ~ - _ t~ -~•M 1 I r•I i ~/'V..~ .t'_'' MbQhi ?t .f i,l i., l-:. 1.1- -1 ,r'. _ ^it ,fy - _ + ti'A~' ,f - i+...-ry,'f ~'1Y "'c..,- r .\L.-\;t.~~ ,'r - ~f ` -?x._.-~`'~ j'.~% C' , ~ 'rf~.~ a f 9 r~ ~ ~ a`. y r.~~f ~/t~ ar % _ j ,f } 4 .r. 7 .r' i- ~.S•°, .i 1 ~ •.I ~ri, rrj d? ~a _ t ~ i f l ' L ~;rt•Gay ,f• t ~d,~ l f ~ JJ G; 1 rsrn -if ,'z;,d'* ,Ii, ~ , l i\. -J qi - ~r~,:. - e r { t,,'F ~1., a f. f r ~~rCr. rr' - ° ! .C2Y~'•? ~,r'_•h 3'~t It ~ r ` Y3. Yt,l, ~ ~ ~'.'t j.,~ s - \ .~I ? r jig ~ ,.r d ' 1r ~'rP y ,f "~I ' "~Sla f r ~ , F _ _ +.~1 t ~ I r ~ ~ ~ , •~y, "Jj 1 3 •'t e'rt I 7 fA' / -~j ~ ~ f l t r` , 'Y.'~ S ~ ' r qi _ 11•r) I ~ 1 - y1 1 g'. y rj / f ' t 40 sv t as ,_w,'fs 's!1 ,~s r{~~,°yrl'FC f` ~a ~ ~ I\? -ry ~_--,-i ~r5- ~ 1 1---L• ~ -1~.'i - ~ + 44 f irLtylx F`S fi ~ .X :fr ` it Ti , xxr ` ~I r.~~ - ,.1 + t, ~y .,-zi ?r. -.;~~t'#. .,-r to__ , 7 _ y' ,f ir7 L _ Y 'fi`r yt-1 F,~'s~ ~ f~~~ ~ r~~~ "[~.y ~ ~d- t~, - c.• 1' r'/ ~l „9sgt-~ r~; , . ,l l ^.5, 'G,' -t i. .•S ~ ~I' t _jjti..- .t Va`~ ~.;.f - , I ~ 5 P ~ )yt ~ ~ ~ i. ~ ~ V \ r S '(i Wit.. t4l ~ r - r e , , 1~~ t~, ~ i ~ ~ t I = ~ J rvl~ :1 ~ I' ~"f_1.. r' r J, r. 8 1 F~,~ 'i~ 1F ` i!? : •~S T - r~ ,?y' .r F`w?`-'' -i'4~-II+' .y..,-.1~ .'.4~j~j~ 'i-.}~~ - -'-a'~~ --.r _ _ ! = 4.~ 1~,~, f {~li' 1 r i ~ , ;Q LY 'R O R N ! t y S ip \I: j. _ ~t~ I t ~ , r r, : ~ w, :.F ' ' t t • . r~i " r t 2000 Aerial Survey WRNF Vail Valle t.: _ , T,i' ; .y_: rt rte; x k , - ' ~ - ~ C'Gir • 71 corwowt Era .t'1 5 _ _ ? •I ?"r •7 l~{ f ,`.i- ~ '^S"';:,~~u~iti ~ r r _ _ 1