The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2005-06-21 Support Documentation Town Council Evening Session TOWN COUNCIL EVENING SESSION AGENDA 6:00 P.M. TUESDAY, JUNE 21, 2005 VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 75 S. Frontage Road W. Vail, CO 81657 NOTE: • Times of items are approximate, subject to change, and cannot be relied upon to determine at what time Council will consider an item. 1. ITEM/TOPIC: Citizen Input (10 min.) 2. Pam Brandmeyer ITEMITOPIC: Vail Local Housing Authority (VLHA) Appointments. . (5 min.) , ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Appoint one applicant to the VLHA to fill a vacancy for a term of 5 years, ending June 30, 2010. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: There is currently one vacancy on the VLHA. The Town received finro (2) applications for the vacancy. The Council needs to interview each applicant at the work session and then appointment one applicant to the Vail Local Housing Authority at the evening meeting. The applicants are as follows: Barbara May Steve Lindstrom 3. Greg Hall ITEM/TOPIC: Construction Update. (5 min.) 4. Matt Mire ITEM/TOPIC: Discussion regarding-the Conference Center ballot Dee Wisor question for the November 2005 election. (30 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review the DRAFT ballot question contained in the Council packets, discuss any desired changes to the DRAFT question, and provide direction to staff with regard to preparation of a final draft of the ballot question for approval by Council. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: At the regular meeting of June 7, 2005, the Council directed the staff to bring a draft ballot question to the Council Meeting on June 21, 2005, for discussion. The Council further directed the staff to bring forward a question tha1: contemplated an "all or nothing" decision by the electorate. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Discuss the draft ballot question„ . receive public comment on the same and provide direction to staff, via motion, with regard to any desired changes to the question. 5. Chris Cares ITEM/TOPIC: 2005 Town of Vail Community Survey Results. (30 Suzanne Silverthorn min.) BACKGROUND: The 2005 Town of Vail Community Survey wa:> conducted by telephone during a two week period, March 26 to April 8. Responses were obtained from 302 year-round residents and 102 part-time residents. An additional 34 responses werE: returned by mail. The purpose of the survey is to evaluatE: satisfaction levels with respect to a full range of municipal services and to gather opinions on selected issues currently facing the Vail community. Key findings of the survey will be presented by Chris Cares, principal of RRC Associates, an independent researcfi , firm. 6. Warren Campbell ITEM/TOPIC: First Reading of Ordinance No. #1, Series of 2005, an ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (2 hrs.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. #1, Series of 2005. . BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On April 25, 2005, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on a request to establish Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads. The purpose of the new Special Development District is to facilitate the redevelopment of Crossroads, located at 141 and 143 Meadow Drive. Upon review of the request, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted 7-0-0 to forward a recommendation of approval of the request to establish Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, to the Vail Town Council. Please refer to the staff memorandum to the Vail Town Council dated June 21, 2005, for further details (attached). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department recommends that the Vail Town Council approves Ordinance No. #1, Series of 2005, on first reading. 7. Warren Campbell ITEM/TOPIC: First Reading Ordinance No. #16, Series of 2005, an ordinance amending Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to amend the Commercial Service Center (CSC) District i:o add "bowling alley" as a conditional use to the District and to add a definition of a"bowling alley" to the Vail Town Code, and settirig forth details in regard thereto. (30 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. #16, Series of 2005 on first reading. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On April 25, 2005, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission voted 6-0-0 (Gunion absent) to forward a recommendation of approval for a proposed text amendment to the Commercial Service Center (CSC) District to add "bowling alley" as a conditional use and to add a definition for a"bowling alley" to the Vail Town Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department recommends that the. Vail Town Council approves Ordinance No. #16, Series of 2005, on first reading. 8. Warren Campbell ITEM/TOPIC: Second Reading of Ordinance No. #14, Series of 2005, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance #24, Series of 2004 establishing Special Development Distract No. #38, Manor Vail Lodge, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (10 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2005. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On December 7, 2004, the Town Council at a public hearing approved the second reading of Ordinance #24, Series of 2004 by unanimous vote to establish Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge. The purpose of the new Special Development District is to facilitate the redevelopment of the Manor Vail Lodge, located.at 595 Vail Valley Drive. In the time since this approval, a discrepancy was discovered in the lot area of the Manor Vail development site which has rendered many of the zoning statistics reported in Ordinance 24, Series of 2004 inaccurate. In addition there was a typographical error found regarding the number of attached accommodation units to be constructed. Ordinance 14, Series of 2005 corrects these items. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department recommends that the Vail Town Council approves Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2005, on second reading. 9. George Ruther ITEM/TOPIC: Second reading of Ordinance No. #17, Series of 2004, an ordinance amending Special Development District #4, Cascade Village, to allow for the creation of Development Area E, located at Tract K, Glen Lyon Subdivision, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (5 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Approve, approve with modifications, deny, or table the second reading of Ordinance No. #17, Series of 2004. The applicant is requesting that the Town Council table the second reading of Ordinance No. #17, Series of 2004, to August 2, 2005. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: On July 12, 2004 the Town of Vail . Planning and Environmental Commission voted 4-2 to forward a recommendation of approval, with conditions, for the proposed amendments to Special Development District #4, Cascade Village:. On August 3, 2004 by a vote of 7-0 the Town Council approved the first reading of Ordinance No. #17, Series of 2004, with ~a condition that the applicant, Vail Resorts, resolve any issues related to the Protective Covenants of Glen Lyon Subdivisiori, prior to the second reading of this ordinance. On August 17, 2004; October 5, 2004; January 4, 2005; and May 3, 2005; the Town Council tabled the second reading of Ordinance No. #17, Series of 2004, to allow the applicant additional time to resolve issues related to the protective covenants. The outstanding protective covenant issues have not yet been resolved; therefore, Vail Resorts is requesting that the second reading of Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2004, again be tabled to a future Town Council meeting. STAFF RE.COMMENDATION: Table the second reading of Ordinance No. 17, Series of 2004, to August 2, 2005. 10. Pam Brandmeyer ITEM/TOPIC: Resolution No. #10, Series of 2005. Tribute to Betty Ford. (5 min.) 11. TRAHC Board ITEM/TOPIC: Timber Ridge Affordable Housing Corporation (TRAHC) Board update. (10 min.) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review rnaterials provided in your packet and information presented at the Council meeting. Provide feedback and comments to TRAHC Board. BACKGROUND RATIONALE: The "Agreement Regarding Reporting and Financial Disclosures" between the TRAHC Board and the Town of Vaii sets forth certain reporting requirements,. TRAHC is providing Council with financial and operating information per these requirements. TRAHC's bond counsel has drafted documents for the $700,000 loan approved by Council on June 7, 2005. This information is also provided for Council comment. Council also requested updates concerning progress toward remediation and sale or redevelopment of the property. This update will be provided by the TRAHC Chairman. , STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Provide comments on information presented. 12. Stan Zemler ITEM/TOPIC: Town Manager's Report (10 min.) ? Clean Up Day Wrap Up (see attachment) ? Mid-Cycle Funding Requests During the discussion on mid-cycle funding request on June 7, council advised staff to include the question of why this funding request was not part of the regular cycle an the mid- cycle criteria. We have added this question to the mid-cycle funding request criteria. Also, during this discussion, council requested staff to come up with a recommendation for a doflar amount for discretionary spending on mid-cycle funding requests. Staff recommends bringing any requests over. $5000.00 to council for approval. Budgeting for in-kind services will be looked at by staff during the 2006 budget process. ? Seibert Circle Update 13. ITEM/TOPIC: Adjournment (10:15 p.m.) NOTE UPCOMING MEETING ART TIMES BELOW: (ALL TIMES ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE) THE NEXT VAIL TOWN COUNCIL REGULAR EVENING MEETING WILL BEGIN AT 6 P.M. TUESDAY, JULY 5, 2005, IN VAIL TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call 479-2106 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information DRAFT CONFERENCE CENTER BALLOT QUESTION 1. All Encompassing Debt Question. This question eliminates the 2002 sunset and voids the 2002 election if this one fails. QUESTION NO. 2A: SHALL TOWN OF VAIL DEBT BE INCREASED $[this number will be $50,060,000 . plus the additional amount required to finance the center] WITH A REPAYMEINT COST OF $[this number will be $95,610,000 plus the additional amount required to firaance the center] AND SHALL TOWN TAXES BE INCREASED $[this number will be the first year collection amount for incremental tax] ANNUALLY AND BY WHATEVER ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS AS ARE RAISED ANNUALLY THEREAFTER FROM THE LEVY OF THE ADDITIONAL LODGING TAX DESCRIBED HEREIN FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATI0N OF A CONFERENCE CENTER SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING LIMITS OR CONDITIONS: • THE TAX INCREASE SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED BY AN INCREASE IN THE RATE OF THE TOWN LODGING TAX FROM 1.50% TO • THE INCREASED TAX RATE MAY BE IMPLEMENTED AND THE RATE ADJUSTED UP OR DOWN (SO LONG AS IT DOES NOT EXCEED WHEN DETERMINED NECESSARY BY THE TOWN COUNCIL FOR CONFERENCE CENTER PURPOSES; • THE LODGING TAX SHALL BE LEVIED ON THE PRICE PAID FOR THE RENTING OR LEASING OF LODGING FOR LESS THAN THIRTY CONSECUTIVE DAYS; • SUCH DEBT SHALL BE EVIDENCED BY THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BOND5 PAYABLE FROM THE LODGING TAX AUTHORIZED BY THIS QUESTION AND THE LODGING TAX AND SALES TAX AUTHORIZED IN QUESTION 2B APPROVED BY THE TOWN VOTERS ON NOVEMBER 5, 2002, [AND OTHER TOWN REVENUES AS THE COUNCIL MAY DETERMINE]; SUCH BONDS TO BE SOLD 1N ONE OR MORE SERIES ON TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND WITH SUCH MATURITIES AS PERMITTED BY LAW AND AS THE TOWN COUNCIL MAY DETERMINE, 1NCLUDING PROVISIONS FOR REDEMPTION OF THE BONDS PRIOR TO MATURITY WITH OIZ WITHOUT PAYMENT OF A PREMIUM OF NOT MORE THAN THItEE PERCENT OF THE AMOUNT SO REDEEMED; • THE PROC,EEDS OF SUCH DEBT AND TAXES AND ANY EARNINGS FROM THE 1NVESTMENT OF SUCH PROCEEDS AND REVENUES BE COLLECTED AND SPENT AS A VOTER APPROVEI) REVENUE CHANGE UNDER ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION; • IF THIS QUESTION IS.APPROVED BY THE TOWN VOTERS, THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE DEBT PURSUANT TO 2002 QUESTION 2B SHALL TERMINATE IMMEDIATELY AND THE LODGING TAX AND SALES TAX LEVIED PURSUANT TO SUCH QUESTION 2B AND THE LODGING TAX LEVIED PURSUANT TO THIS QUESTION SHALL NOT TERMINATE UNTIL TERMINATED BY LEGISLATIVE ACTION BY THE TOWN; AND • IF THIS QUESTION IS NOT APPROVED BY THE TOWN VOTERS, THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE DEBT PURSUANT TO 2002 QUESTION 2B SHALL TERMINATE IMME]DIATELY AND THE AUTHORITY TO LEVY TAXES PURSiJANT TO 2002 QUESTION 2B SHALL TERMINATE EFFECTNE , 200 AND THE TOWN COUNCIL SHALL EITHER REFUND ANY REUENUES FROM SUCH TAXES REMAINING AFTER PAYING COSTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE CONFERENCE CENTER INCURRED PRIOR TO THIS ELECTION I'URSUANT TO SUCH REFUND METHODOLGY AS TfIE TOWN COUNCIL DETERlu1INES OR SUBMIT A QUESTION TO TOWN VOTERS ON HOW SUCH REVENUES SHAL,L BE. USED? MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Stan Zemler, Town Manager Suzanne Silverthorn, Community Information Officer DATE: June 21, 2005 SUBJECT: 2005 Town of Vail Community Survey Results Attached are results from the 2005 Town of Vail Community Survey prepared by the independent research firm, RRC Associates. The attachment includes an executive summary, the survey focm, plus an appendix listing open-ended comments. The survey was conducted by telephone during a finro week period, March 26 to April 8, 2005. Responses were obtained from 302 year-round residents and 102 part-time residents. An additional 34 responses were returned by mail. Results have a margin of error of plus or minus 4.9 percentage points at the 95 percent confidence level. The purpose of the survey is to evaluate satisfaction levels with respect to a fufl range of municipal services and to gather opinions on selected issues currently facing the Vail community. A similar survey had been conducted by the Town for 16 consecutive years prior to and including the year 2003. The community survey project was modified in 2004 to an every-other-year cycle for added efficiency. Key findings of the survey will be presented by Chris Cares, principal of RRC Associates. The findings indicate attitudes toward Town government and the direction of the community are generally positive. When compared to previous TOV community surveys conducted over the past decade, the results are relatively positive overall, and on a number of specific questions that have been asked in the same way over a number of years, the results are higher than in the past. MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Stan Zemler, Town Manager Suzanne Silverthorn, Community Information Officer DATE: June 21, 2005 SUBJECT: 2005 Town of Vail Community Survey Results Attached are results from the 2005 Town of Vail Community Survey prepared by the independent research firm, RRC Associates. The attachment includes an executive summary, the survey form, plus an appendix listing open-ended comments. The survey was conducted by telephone during a two week period, March 26 to April 8, 2005. Responses. were obtained from 302 year-round residents and 102 part-time residents. An additionai 34 responses were returned by mail. Results have a margin of error of plus or minus 4.9 percentage points at the 95 percent confidence level. The purpose of the survey is to evaluate satisfaction levels with respect to a full range of municipal services and to gather opinions on selected issues currently facing the Vail community. A similar survey had been conducted by the Town for 16 consecutive years prior to and including the year 2003. The community survey project was modified in 2004 to an every-other-year cycle for added efficiency. Key findings of the survey will be presented by Chris Cares, principal of RRC Associates. The findings indicate attitudes toward Town government and the direction of the community are generally positive. When compared to previous TOV community surveys conducted over the past decade, the results are relatively positive overall, and on a number of specific questions that have been asked in the same way over a number of years, the results are higher than in the past. ~ . ` , TOWN OF jTAIL CO MMUNITY SUgZVEY 2005 RESEARCH i june 2005 PREPARED FOR Town of Vail PREPARED BY RRC Associates 4940 Pearl East Circle, Suite 103 Boulder, Colorado 80301 303.449,6558 ~ . . ~ I I i , Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 Introduction This spring, the Town of Vail conducted a survey of Town residents, absentee property owners and business owners to evaluate opinions on a variety of issues. The purpose of the survey was to evaluate respondents' level of satisfaction with respect to a full range of community services and to gather opinions on selected issues currently facing the Vail community. A similar survey had been conducted by the Town for 16 years prior to and including the year 2003. The community survey project was modified in 2004 to an every-other-year cycle. ~ . E Identical to the methods used in 2002 and 2003, the Vail Community Survey was conducted i primarily by telephone this year. Copies of the survey were also made availabls at Town Hall ~ and the Vail Library to those who were not called and wanted to participate. The mailback , technique resulted in about twice the response this season (34 total returned) than in 2002 and 2003 (less than 15 each year). These results were tabulated, and open-ended comments are included in the reported results, but the quantitative data were not merged with the telephone sample because these self-selected participants would influence the validity of the randomly generated telephone respondents. A random sampling of 404 households' received calls during a two-week period between March 26`h and April 8th. Responses were obtained from 302 year-round resicfents of Vail and 102 second home owners. These quotas were identical to those used in 2002 and 2003, permitting direct comparison with 2005 for identical questions. While comparisons to other past surveys may also be made, keep in mind that in earlier years a variety of data collection methods, including mail surveys and the Intemet, were also used. Setected Observations- and Key Findings The 2005 survey results indicate that attitudes toward Town government and* the direction of the! community are generally positive. When compared to various community surveys conducted over the past decade the results are relatively positive overall, and on a number of specific questions that have been asked in the same way over a number of years, the results are higher than in the past. As in past surveys, second home owners-continue #o-be_more positive than full time residents iri virtually all categories of questions that involve ratings. This finding is important to understanding overall community sentiment and it helps to explain some of the opinions and comments that are obtained when public opinion is solicited. Further, there are some consisterit differences among local residents based upon tiie length of time they have lived in the Town. In general, long-time residents are somewhat more negative than newcomers. Responses to the following questions in particular provide a general assessment of overall community direction: ; 4For the total sample size of 404 there is a margin of error is 4.9 percentage points attfie 95% confidence level. 2 ~ . 1 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 ~ When asked if the Town is on the "right track" 70 percent responded favorably (up sharply from 57 percent in 2003), with 19 percent saying "wrong track." • Respondents were asked to provide, in order of priority, the "finro biggest issues facing the Town." This is a question that has been asked periodically over the years in Vail in an "open ended" format allowing respondents to identify issues in their own words. This year, the largest percentage of respondents identified parking (20 percent) over any other category, with similar response from residents and second homeowners. Further, over twice as many respondents mentioned parking as an important issue than any other single category. After , parking, the second tier of identified issues, all receiving about 8 to 10 percent of responses, included the Conference Center, redevelopment, affordable housing and I-70 noise/pollution, Responses since 1999 to this question show that affordable housing has been becoming less of a priority in recent years compared to other issues, with parking.and redevelopment issues/initiatives moving ahead of housing as areas of importance. These comments are presented verbatim in the Appendix to this report. • In a new question this year, respondents were asked, "Thinking about the vision for the new Vail, and all the improvements that are occurring, how would you describe your attitude?" About half the respondents (47 percent) were "very excited" and only 10 percent were "not excited." These results, perhaps more than any others from the survey, portray the generally optimistic and upbeat mood expressed by the Vail community in the spring of 2005. Two new follow-up questions provide additional insight into respondents' satisfaction with new development. In general, residents and second home owners are satisfied with the management and communications° regarding new development (45 percent rated their satisfaction 4 or 5 on the 5-point scale). In addition, respondents are generally satisfied with the "quality of new development over the past 3 years,° with 55 pe-rcent rating their satisfaction a 4 or 5. In both of these categories, anly 5 percent of respondents were "not at all satisfied." • Ratings of the °sense of community" also showed some positive change this year from the past several years. The percentage that said things had "improved" stayed about the same as in 2003 at 17 percenf; but-the percentage saying things had "gotten worse" declined to 21 percent from 31 percent. • The ratings of satisfaction with Town staff are relatively high (3.7 on average on a five point scale) and have remained stable over the past four years. Ratings of the Town Council have remained consistently lower than ratings of Town staff; however, the past several years (from 3.3 in 2000 to 3.0 in 2003), ratings showed som~te mprovement over this year (3.2 average), with 38 percent rating Council a"4" or "5 - Very Satisfed." Despite this, 23 percent of respondents were generally not satisfied with Council (rated a"1 - Not at a{I Satisfied" or "2°). . - ~ i I 3 ~ Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 . The open-ended comments are generally more positive than those obtained in past years. While some express frustrations and concerns, there is also positive praise given for Vail as a community and a place to live and recreate. . Parking problems are a recurring theme once again in this year's community survey as indicated by the ratings responses on parking, the "issues" questions and open-ended comments. These results are similar to, but in some cases more specific in terms of complaints and frustrations, than those obtained in 2003. Overall, there is sentiment that parking remains a problem and that residents and second home owners alike wish to see it addressed. . The Community Survey also included a new series of questions designed to assess . community satisfaction with current efforts for each of five major initiatives that Council is committed to undertaking. The survey results show that over one-half of respondents are more than satisfied (rated "4" or "5 - Very satisfied") with efforts at adding to Vail's appeal as a great place to live, work and play (average rating of 3.6) and with efforts ta facilitate Vail's redevelopment (3.5 average). Responses were relatively divided on °elevate commun.ity leadership," with about one-third each indicating they are either satisfied,, not satisfied or neutral. Finally, satisfaction declined somewhat with "improve the local economy" (2.9 average rating) and "address issues proactively" (2.8 average rating). This suggests that there is some satisfaction within the community, but that there is room for improvement in the areas of leadership, improving the economy, and addressing issues proactively. . In a new series of questions, recreation programs were evaluated. The provision of these services is a topic that has received some local attention in the past year. In general, satisfaction ratings with programming and facilities is high, with average ratings between 3.8 (the lowest rated category, "Adult programs and activities") and 4.2 (the highest rated "Vail Nature Center"). . In another new question respondents were asked, "What doesn't Vail have that you would like to see provided?" Only about half (54 percent) of res.pondents identified an . improvement. When the open ended suggestions are quantified the large majority of suggestions fall in the area of recreation (a recreation center) or swimming pool (77 responses; 25 percent of respondents), followed by better or affordable parking (32 responses; 10 percent), a conference center (8 percent) and entertainment and activities for kids/teens (7 percent). While one of the goals of this question was to probe whether there were 6ig new ideas on the-minds of-the-community (i.e. suggestions_that had not been _ discussed or considered), in general the majority of responses fell into categories that have been discussed at various times in the past. ! . . 4 ~ ~ Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 Survey Overview General State of Vail Vail's "Sense of Direction." Respondents were asked whether they feit the Town of Vail was going in the right direction or heading on the wrong track. This question was asked for the first time in 2003 and shows signifcant positive change in responses this year. As shown below, about 70 percent of respondents this year felt that the Town of Vail is "going in the right direction"; 13 percentage points hPgher than in 2003. Further, only 19 percent of respondents this year felt Vail was "on the wrong track," compared to 28 percent in 2003. This indicates respondents are generally positive regarding the Town of Vail's direction, particularly when compared to responses in 2003. . Also noted in the 2003 report was the large difference in responses from resident business owners versus other respondents. In 2003, resident business owners were much less positive regarding the Town's direction (36 percent "right direction" and 46 percent "wrong track") than respondents ove2all (57 percent "right direction" and 28 percent "wrong track"). This year, business owners were about as likely as other respondents to feel Vail is going in the "right direction" (73 percent) or on the "wrong track" (19 percent), noting a significant positive shift in business owner attitudes about Vail's direction. WOULD YOU SAY THAT THINGS IN THE TOWN OF VAIL ARE GOING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, OR HAVE THEY GOTTEN OFF ON THE WRONG TRACK Right Direction 70.30 .3% : ar 3 Wrong Track 02005 28.3%: ~ - i 02003.. .r , Don't Know '14.5% , 3 , 0%- 20%. 40%,. o ' . 60 /0 80% Percentage. of Respondents 2 In 2005, 75 responses received were from Vail resident-6usinesS-owners, compared to 60 in 2003: This is a lar e enough.segment to permit the opinion of this group to be probed in some detail. 9 ' 5 Town of Vaii Community Survey 2005 Sense of Communitv. Respondents were asked whether they feel the sense of community in the Town of Vail has improved, gotten worse or stayed the same over the past two years. This question has been asked over the past several survey periods and, as shown below, shows significant decline in the percentage of responses saying Vail has "gotten worse" this year compared to 2002 and 2003. The percentage reporting that the sense of community has improved is comparable to other years (17 percent); however, the percentage reporting that the sense of community has gotten worse declined to 21 percent this year from 31 percent in prior ~ years. The percentage reporting that the sense of community has stayed the same is higher , than in any other year (54 percent).. ~ As noted in 2003, resident business owners were the most likely of other respondents to feel the . sense of community had gotten worse (47 percent). This year, business owner responses were in line with other respondents, with only 23 percent selecting "gotten worse" and 19 percent choosing "improved." OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS, HAS THE SENSE OF COMMUNITY IN THE TOWN IMPROVED, GOTTEN WORSE, OR STAYED THE SAME 1 4.8% i ~ 2005 Improved '1$.4% 8.6% I 02003 ' i.132002 ; Gotten worse ~ ' b 31.10 53.5 0 Stayed the same : 4 •9% ~ - ..41:3%~. . , • • ; o Don't know/no ; opinion 5.~00 ~9.5% . 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% ; 50%, 60% Percentage of Respondents Issues. of Importance ' The Most Important Issues--Open Ended Comments. Respondents were asked to provide whaf they feel are the two biggest issues facing the Town of Vail, which was similarly asked in 2003 and 2002. Evaluating open-ended comments with regard to the most important issues in Vail this year, the largesfi percentage of respondents identified parking (20 percent) over any other category; witli similar response received from residenfs and second homeowners. Further, over twice as many respondents- mentioned parking as an important issue than any ; other single category Other issues.of importance: included ttie Conference Center, ~ redevelopment, affordable housing and 140 noise pollufion, where between about 8 and 11 ~ percent of_respondents identified`each of these issues..: Compared to responses received in ; ; r ! , , . . . . . 6 .i ' ~ . ~ Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 prior years, affordable housing has.been slipping from the most important issue in 1999 and 2002, to second most important (behind parking) in 2003, to fourth this year (behind parking, the Conference Center and redevelopment of the Town). Other issues mentioned include growth, devetopmenUoverdevelopment, tourism, cost of living and business issues. WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE ARE THE TWO BIGGEST ISSUES, IN ORDER OF PRIORITY, FACING THE TOWN OF VAIL? - TOP TEN IN 2005 ISSUE SECOND TOTAL RESIDENT HOMEOWNER Parking 21 % 20% 25% Conference Center 11 % 13% 4% Redevelopment 10% 9% 13% Affordable housin 10% 10% 11% I 70/Noise pollution 9,0 7% GroWth 8% 8% g% DevelopmenUOverdevelopment 7% 5% 11 % Tourlsm 9% Cost of living 9% Businesses in town suffennq/rent too high 4% 3% 6% "Areas of Focus." A new question was asked this year, requesting respondents to indicate their level of satisfaction with current efforts in five "areas of focus" that were identified by the Vail Town Council and staff in 2004. Respondents were most favorable toward efforts at adding to Vail's appeal as a great place to live, work and play (average rating of 3.6), with 57 percent rating this a 4 or S. Respondents were also largely satisfied with efforts to facilitate Vail's redevelopment (3.5 average; 55 percent rated 4 or 5). Satisfaction declined with the remaining three categories, including: • E/evate community leadership, including efforts to work in partnership and cooperation with the business comm(inity, Vail Resorts, the Recreafion District, etc. Responses were relatively divided, with a similar percentage of respondents indicating they were satisfied (33 percent rated 4 or 5), not satisfied (29 percent rated 1 or 2) or neutral (35 percent) regarding efforts to address community leadership; • Improve the /oca/ economy, focusing on reversing trends such as flat sa/es tax, regional competition, etc. Only 25 percent of respondents were satisfied with efforts toward this focus (rated 4 or 5), compared to 33 percent responding 1 or 2(generally not satisfied); and • Address issues proactively, continuing to pursue reso/ution on important projects such as the West Vail fire station p/anning, construction of the Vail Gymnastics Center, 1-70 noise mitigation, etc. About 37 percent of respondents were generally not 'satisfied with efforts at addressing issues proactively (rated 1 or 2), compareci to only 27 percent that were satisfied (rated 4 or 5), for a below-average rating of 2.8. 7 ~ Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 IN 2004 THE VAIL TOWN COUNCIL AND STAFF IDENTIFIED FIVE."AREAS OF FOCUS." HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH CURRENT EFFORTS IN THE FOLLOWING FIVE AREAS? FIVE "AREAS OF Responding and 'S - Ectremely Satisfied' FOCUS" i13% Responding'1 - Not at ali satisfied' and 2 Add To Vail's Appeal 57 0 as a Place To Live ~;s~~; •M 16% Etc.(3.6) , , , _ . . . . Facilitate Vail's 55% wtn`,~~~ ; . 16% Redevelopment (3.5) , . , Elevate Community 33% ~ • Leadership(3.1) =29% I • Improve The Local ` _25% , Economy (2.9) ~33% ~ . N , , Address Issues 27% ~ Proactively (2.8) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Percent of Respondents ; . , Parking Issues and Rat~ngs.; Parkin4 PassNalue Card. About 28 percent of respondents this year indicated that they own a Parking Pass oc Vatue Card. The vast majority.of these respondents own a Value Card (70 percent). These results are very similar to those_ received in 2003. Respondents were asked to rate,their level of.satisfaction.with their Parking Pass or Value Card on a scale of "1- Nof at aIl.Safisfied" to "5- Very Satisfied.° The mean rating this year was 3.0; however, responses varied significantly by tyqe of pass owned. Respondents holding a Value Card rated the benefits 2.8 on average; compared-to an average rating of 3.5-byrespondents holding other types of parking passes. Respondents were able to provide open-ended comments to elaborate upon their level of satisfaction with the pass. All comments are located in the Appendix to this report; the prima .ry complaint among unsatisfed respondents is in regard fo tlie limited amount of parking available and construction vehicles occupying too many spaces. Limited parking.is.also mentioned by some respondents tfiat are "very satisfied" with their pass. With the expense of the; card, : respondents are frustrated when they cannot f nd spaces to park. White many respondents like and'use the shopper parking, those that need'full time packing find tt;ie space allocated to . shopping excessive: It's a,delicate balance. Additional issues include requests for more pay terminals a_nd improved bus" service to the. lots~ ` _ , , _ S ~ 1 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 Parkin4 Ratings. Similar to previous years, ratings for parking vary significantly by issue, from an average rating of 4.5 for "availability of parking in summer" to a low of 2.5 for the "availability of parking in winter." Showing significant improvement from 2003 are ratings for the limited shopper's parking, which was rated 3.2 in 2003 and 3.8 this year. Parking fees/pricing structure also improve this year (3.0 average) from 2.7 in 2003, but remains below the rating in 2002 (3.2 average). PLEASE RATE YOUR SATISFACTION WITH PUBLIC PARKING SERVICES IN VAIL 2005 Versus 2003 and 2002 Availability of parking in summer Booth attendant courtesy Three-hour metered shopper parking Cleanliness of parking structures Overall parking fees/pricing structure Availability of parking in winter 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 Mean Satisfaction Rating Parkins Enforcement. Respondents were asked to rate the priority they would like to see given to parking enforcement both on Vail's streets and in the parking structures on a scale of "1-Very low priority" to "5- Very high priority." Over one-half of respondents rated enforcement both on Vail's streets (54 percent) and in the parking structures (53 percent) a 4 or 5, generally indicating high priority. The average .rating for each area of enforcement was 3.5. Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 WHAT PRIORITY WOULD YOU. LIKE TO SEE GIVEN TO PARKING ENFORCEMENT? Vail Community Survey 2005 . T.O.V. PARKING ENFORCEMENT Priority of Parking Enforcement In Vail's Parking Structures (3.5) Priority of Parking Enforcement On Vail's Streets (3.5) ~ ^% Responding'4' and '5 -Very High Priority ~ O%Responding'1 -Very Low Priority' and 2 53% ~. .. 54% ~ 21% ,, 0% 10°k 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Ratings of Satisfaction Similar to previous years, respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction with a variety of aspects of the Town of Vail, including Town boards and administration, the.Community Development Department, the Public Works Department, police and fire services, bus service, library services, information services, and parking;::. Recreational services and amenities were rated for the first time. Ratings occurred on a scale of "1-Not at all Satisfied" to "5- Very Satisfied," The,following, table shows the top rated categories (average rating of 4.4 or Higher) and the bottom `rated categories (average .rating of 3.O~gr lower) of all ratings questions. As . shown, fire employees grid response time; bus dependability, frequency and driver courtesy; summer parking availability; and library story hour received the highest average ratings. On the other end of the scale are parking passNalue Card benefits; parking fees/pricing structure; building permit reviews and inspections through the Community Development Department; the Design Review Board; and winter parking availability:- THe large. discrepancy between, summer and winter parking availability, emphasizes the difficulty in addressing the peak ski season activity in T-own:. These ratings are discussed in more detail below. 10 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 ~ . RATE YOUR SATISFACTION WITH THE FOLLOWING: CATEGORY Average Rating FIRE: Courtesy & Helpfulness Of Firefighters HIGH BUS: Dependability Of Bus Service 4.5 PARKING: Summer Pkg Availability 4.5 FIRE: Fire/Emergency Medical Response Time 4.5 4 4 LIBRARY: Library Story Hour . BUS: Freq. Of In-Town Shuttle 4.4 BUS: Bus Driver Courtes 4.4 4.4 CATEGORY Average Rating PASS: Benefits Of Your Pass LOW PARKING: Parking Fees/ Pricing Structure 3.0 CMTY DEV: Building Permit Review & Ins ections p 3.0 GOVT: Design. Review Board (DRB) 2 9 PARKING: Winter Pk Availabili 2~7 2.5 Town of Vail Staff Boards and Elected Officials. Most of the Town functions showed some improvement this year compared to survey results in 2003: • Town of Vail staff continued to receive a very favorable rating of 3.7 on average; the highest of surveyed Government functions. The percentage of respondents rating staff a 4 or 5 increased about ten percentage points this year (65 percent) from ratings in 2003 (54 percent); . • Town Council ratings improved this year, averaging 3.2 versus 3.O in 2003. The percents e of 4 and 5 ratings also increased about 12 percentage points, from 26 percent in 2003 to 38 percent this year, whereas the percentage of 1 and 2 ratings was largely similar with 2003 (23 percent in 2005.vs. 21 Percent in 2003). • ~ Although,the Planning and Environmental Commission average rating remained unchan ed 9 this-year (3..1 average),. the percentage of 4 and 5 ratings increased 12 percentage`points, from 25 pe~cerif in 2003 to 37 percent`in 2U05. However, also increased about & percentage points; from-18 percenthn 2003 t 26 percent n 2005 9s indicating some increased division in opinion this. year. • The only governmental function to receive a lower average rating this year was the Desi n Review Board, averaging 2:7, versus 2.8 in 2003.. This is largely a result of a higher g percentage of 1 and 2 ratings,(41 percent) than in_2003 (32 percent) and a similar percentage of 4 and 5 ratings between the two years (25 percent in 2005 vs. 21' percent in 2003). 11 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 SAtISFACTION WITH TOWN OF VAIL GOVERNMENT, FUNCTIONS j ^ % Responding'4' or'S -Very Satisfied' O% Responding'1 -Not at all satisfied' or 2 •Average rating 0 5 100% . ~°~ Town of Vail Staff _ ___ ____ Planning 8~ Env Town Council -- e; Board ev i Design ` 4.5 Commission(PEC) _ ________________. C ff B __ -- 4.0 • • • • 3.3 3 ~ 3.5 m 70% 4 3.2 ' 3.1 3.1 3.0 3.0 • • 3.0 a " ' ' ,, .. .: - ' - ~ . W. , .. - ----- -- -------------- 2.5 50% -. - -- -- - ------ L° c 2.0 a °D 40% r: 30% ~" ~ _ _ ------ ----- '~} 1.0 20% t- -- - - - 10% 4- ~ - --.-- ~ ~.Q 2005 2003. 2001 2000 2005 2003 2001 2000 2005 2003 2001 2000 2005 2003 2001 2000 Year of Survey Community Development. A slightly higher percentage of respondents had used the services of the Community Development Qepartment.withintha past year in 2005 (26 percent) than in 2003 (22 percent): The ratings of'the courtesy -and attitude of the Community Development:. Department and overall;:service and efficiency were largely consistent with those in 2003. Environmental quality~declined somewhat,this year to an average rating of 3'.6 from 3 8 in 2003, despite 60 percent of~i=esparidents rating it a 4 or=5 Building permit review and inspections also declined°slightly, from. 3:0 average in 2003 to 2 9 this year, arid_ had a higherperceritage-of 1 and 2 ratings .(34 percent) than 4 and 5 ratings (31 percent)° .. Public Works, Ratings for Public Works remained high this year, ranging from 3.8'~for "appearance and condifion of Town-owned buildings" ug to 4 3 for "snow removal" on roads." At least 70percent of respondents rated each Public Works service a "4° or "5 =Very.; Satisfied." The.most significant^ehange this year comparedfo 2003 occurred for."cleanline"ss of public restrooms," which.increasedfro an average rating of 3 7 in 2003 to 3 9 this year Fire Services. Similar to past years, fire services received among the highest ratirigs of any departmerit overall,, with little change in ratings_over time (for comparable categories). Over 85 . percent of respondents;rated overall quality of~services,.response time and; courtesy. and helpfulness of firefighters a.u4" or "5 Very Satisfied:" Only the fire programs (plan: review/preventionlinspection and: education) received average'ratirig-s below 4 0; but were still very:favorable at a respective 3.9`and 3 8': About 1.8 percent of respondents ihdicated that they had' used fire' service within. the past 12 months: Police Services Police services also received high ratings, ranging.. from an average ofi4~.2' for overalFfeelingsof safety and=security to 3.8 far visibdlty,of police patrol However, ratngs this:.. year were slightly below those in~2003 declining; 0 2 points for.feeling of safety, friendliness and approachability. of'employees and overall qualityof servlce. and decliriing,01 points for visibility t- ,. z _ - ,. ~. . - - .. ~.2 ~. ~ r ~. ~: ,. =-. Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 of police patrol. Open-ended comments, which are listed in full in the Appendix, provide some additional insight into the police ratings. A set of questions regarding I-70 speed enforcement were also asked this year. Based on these questions, about 78 percent of respondents were aware of the Town of Vail's efforts to enforce the speed limit on I-70; and 44 percent indicated that the enforcement program has affected the way they drive through Vail on I-70. Bus service. Respondents are largely satisfied with Town of Vail bus service, with over 80 percent of respondents rating bus cleanliness, driver courtesy, in-town shuttle frequency and dependability of'service a "4" or "5-Very Satisfied." The frequency of outlying service received an average rating of 3.9 this year, up from 3.7 in 2003, showing improvement. Finally, in a new question, respondents were largely satisfied with the level of crowding on buses (3.6 average), with 60 percent rating this a 4 or 5. Lib. rarv. Library ratings covered new categories this year,compared to prior survey periods. Ratings for all categories averaged 4.1 or higher, with at least 78 percent of respondents rating each category a 4 or 5, indicating generally high satisfaction with these services. In descending order of average ratings were "Library story hour" (4.4), "Library collection (magazines, books, etc.)" (4.2), "Unlimited Adventure Speaker Series" (4.2), "Summer Youth Festival" (4.2) and "friendliness/courtesy of library staff' (4.1). Reflective of the ratings, there were many positive comments regarding the library, such as "it's a fine library," "it's a beautiful place" and "it is a well stocked library," with second home owners providing more positive,comments on the whole than resident respondents. However, there were also several comments and suggestions for improvement. These included comments about approachability and helpfulness and issues related to locational/residency restrictions. Recreational FroQrammina and Facilities: Anew set of ratings was asked this year regarding the level of satisfaction with Town of Vail recreation programming and facilities. Average ratings were lar el g y positive, ranging from 3.8 for "adult programs and activities" up to 4.2 for "Vail Nature Center." At least 66 percent ofrespondents rated each category a "4" or "5 -Very Satisfied" and ratings of "1 -Not of all Satisfied" and ."2" were received by at most 10 percent of respondents for any one category. In descending order of satisfaction, recreation ratings were: "Vail Nature Cenieri' (4.2); "recreational leagues and teams" (4.0); "recreational facilities (fields, Dobson Arena, etc.)" (4.0); "recreational programming° (3.9); "recreational facilities" (3.9); "youth programs.and activities" (3.9) and."adult.programs_and..activities".(3.8)... _ _ Website and Internet Connectivi ~. Respondents were asked to rate their level of satisfaction with the Town of Vail website as a timely and convenient resource for government information. About 67 percent of respondents rated their satisfaction a "4" or "5- Very Satisfied," resulting in an average rating of 3.9 -the same as in 2003. In a new question asked this year, respondents. were asked how important they feel it is to add wireless iriternet connectivity for visitors arid guests, as has been done in many towns. This was seen as important for visitors and guests (4.0 average; 72 percent rated "4" or "5- Very important")and less important to the respondent personally (3.1 average; 46 percent rated 4 or 5). 13 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 Construction Activities. Respondents were asked how satisfied they are with recent construction and redevelopment activities in the Town of Vail. Specifically, about 50 percent of respondents were "Very Satisfied" (rated 4 or 5) with the Town of Vail's management and communications concerning construction going on in Town (rated 3.5 on average). Also, about 60 percent of respondents were"Very Satisfied" (rated 4 or 5) with the quality of new development and redevelopment over the past three years (3.6 on average). Year-round residents and seasonal residents were about equally as satisfied with communication regarding development from the Town of Vail (average ratings of 3.5 year-round and 3.4 seasonal). However, seasonal residents were somewhat more satisfied than year- round residents with the quality of development over the past 3 years (average rating of 3.8 seasonal vs. 3.5 year-round). Conference Center A few questions this year probed respondent perceptions on the Conference Center, including how informed they are, what additional information (if any) they desire and whether they have any general comments regarding the Center: In summary: The questionnaire asked, "How well informed would you say you are on the development of a new conference center for Vail?" Results showed: Not at all informed 17% Somewhat informed 56% Very, informed 27% ` .~ , 100% Not surprisingly, year-round residents are much better informed (34 percent "very informed" and 57 percent "somewhat informed") than seasonal residents (13 percent "very informed" and 31 percent "not at all informed"). Long, time tesidentslowners are also much better. informed, than those that have only been in the town,foc a few years. For example, those thathave been in.Vail more than 15 years are very likely to feel informed on this issue (85 percent "very.or somewhat informed") versus _ ._ .. _ .._. -- -- -- - - those that have been in town five years or less (about 25 -percent "uninformed):-- - - - - - In an important finding,. the survey shows strong awareness by respondents that are registered.to vote.. Only 8 percent of the registered voters said they are "not at all informed" and- 35 percent called themselves "very informed." These results have clear implications for Vail as the Town looks to an election on the Conference facility. While the survey did not ask directly for an opinion, or a likely voting, position on the Conference- Center, it did ask about mfo`mation and the survey suggests that the voting, population is generally quite well informed. - Respondents-were also. asked if there was specific information that they., would. like; but have not yet receivedatiout tlie,conference centerr:; The' predominant comment from resident ; respondents include information on the economic viability of tte project,- including project Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 demand and prospects for success, financial impact on the town, cost of construction and impact~on tax payers. Others are interested in knowing more specifics of the project itself, including.when and where it is to be built and what the final plans look like. Some respondents also called for another vote. Second home owners were more likely to indicate that they had not received any information, but were also not as likely to request more information. A few interested second home owners did request more information, which, similar to resident requests, primarily focused on the financial aspects of the project. Respondents were also given the opportunity to provide additional comments regarding the center if they desired. About 160 comments were given and generally show that there is still much division in the community regarding whether to proceed with the Center or not. Again, financing issues and self-sustainability of the project was called into question. Also, .many reported that they were not happy with the current proposed design. Future Direction A few questions with specific regard to Vail's future were asked. The first asked respondents "What doesn't Vail have that you would like to see provided?" Only about half (54 percent) of respondents identified an improvement. When the open ended suggestions are quantified, the large majority of suggestions fall in the area of recreation (a recreation center) or swimming pool (77 responses; 25 percent of respondents), followed by better or affordable parking (32 responses; 10 percent), a conference center (8 percent) and entertainment and activities for kids/teens (7 percent). While one of the goals of this question was to probe whether there were big new ideas on the minds of the community (i.e. suggestions that had not been discussed or considered), in general the majority of responses fell into categories that have been discussed at various times in the past. Complete responses are located in the Appendix to this report. Second, respondents were asked about their attitude regarding the improvements that are occurring in Vail given the "vision" for the new Vail -whether they are not at all excited, somewhat excited or very excited. Responses to this question were very positive, with 47 percent (riearly half) indicating they are "very excited" and another 41 percent selecting "somewhat excited." Only 10 percent were "not at all excited." Also positive is that these results were similar for both second home owners and year-round residents, indicating the improvements that are occurring hold comparable excitement for locals and part-time visitors alike, which is often difficult to achieve. Comments from those that are "not at all excited" are generally concerned that renovations will make the Town mope expensive and further out of reach for many, along with reservations about general plan and design concerns and in keeping with the current Town character. Those that are "very excited" generally indicate that the town should move forward and complete projects as soon as possible, keeping improvements in perspective of the existing Town, of course. These comments are located in the appendix to this report. Finally, in an open-ended question, respondents were asked what they feel the two or three biggest challenges will be for Vail within the next three years. A total of 397 responses were received (300 from residents; 97 from second homeowners). Responses to this question were similar to those received for the "two biggest issues" question reviewed earlier in this report. 15 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 The following table. shows_the categories that were_most frequently mentioned by respondents and the estimated frequency of response. As shown., parking (primarily availability and price) tops the list, being mentioned by about 24 percent of respondents. Economic development issues, including diversifying and retaining businesses, promoting tourism and downvalley competition, were mentioned by about 22 percent of respondents. Third, redevelopment initiatives (including general redevelopment and beautification of Vail, as well, as specific mention of support for moving forward with Lionshead) was mentioned by about 19 percent of respondents. Of interest were related concerns regarding construction activity -being able to manage the multiple projects in Town and complete them in a timely manner with minimal disr_upUonto tourist expenences and locals....,- and fscal responsbihty;(agam related, to the multiple protects and proper manage and exlc ted iabout redevelopmentltopportun t s~n Vall, but respondents were largely supports also recognize the challenges involved in constructing, financing, prioritizing and. maintaining the multiple projects. LOOKING AHEAD TO THE NEXT THREE YEARS. IN.VAIL, WHAT DO YOU-THINK THE TWO.OR THREE BIGGEST CHALLENGES. WILL BE? - 2005 ,, Year-Round Second _ Resident Homeowner Total Economic development - retainlatfract businesses, promote 19% 31 % 22% tourismMsdors drversi econom , downvalle coin etition Redevelopment inrttati5es (general redevelopment; make Vail-more 17"/0 25% 19% attractive, Lionshead' _ 13% 26°h' 16°k Growth mana emend ulationlover develo meet' 14%. 10%' 13°h -70 Horse, s"eedin ;araffic , Affo~dablelEm to ee housin .°: 11%' 20%~ 13°ki• . :_ 9 ~ ' Aburd`ant construction activities timely, completion, scheduhn and management of projects, coricem aver potential drsruption;to tourist' 11 % 4% 9% ez enencelresrdentsdunn rocesss 9%: 9%:.... 9%; Fiscal responsrbrlr~i`(taxes budget altocatiorfoffunds) ~ g% 3% 7°~u Retain commun (small town,feelllocals_ 'NOTE the, Conference Center,is not included rn the "redeVelopmenY tasty because, whereas about,ll percent of respondents .. . mentioned the Conference Centerspecifically responses were)argely divided on whether the Town should or should not move forward. ,. _ with_this. ro'ed ,.. .: P ..1 . .. .; ~: , _ Among=less frequently mentioned- challenges,; but still_apparent, include:- Town _overnmen .. (with respect to leadership, transparency/information, and. quality); environment (water supply, water/river quality, global warming/snowfall, open space, pollution); and infrastructure improvements/service maintenance/aging, facilities: Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 APPENDIX A -RATINGS GRAPHS Town of Vail Community Survey, 2004 TOWN OF VAIL RATINGS -Figure 1 of 3 TOWN of VAIL GOVERNMENT , , ' I ' t , ' ' i I I I T.O.V. Staff (3.7) +;-- p° 65% ' ' M17 ~ ~ , ' I Current Town Council (3.2) 38% ; Planning 8 Environmental Commission (PEC) (3.1) 37% 2 % ' ' Design Review Board (DRB) (2.7) 25'% 41%' i i ~. . , ' I I ' I , , I ~ I ' i i T.O.V. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ~ ~ ' ' I I ~ ~ I I Environmental Quality In The T.O.V (Air, Water, Etc.) (3.6) 60% ,1 I , Courtesy 8 Attitude (3.6) 63°~ ° ~ I ' Overall Service & Efficiency (3.4) 4i7% Building Permit Review 8 Inspections (2.9) o ~ 31% I ~ I I , , ; I I , , 1 t ,, , I T.O.V. PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES ' I I ~ , I I ' ' ~ I I Snow Removal On Roads (4.3) 85% '5 ~ ~ , Park Maintenance (4.3) 90% Cleanliness of Pedestrian Villages (4.2) 85% ' ' ' I I Friendliness & Courtesy of Public Works Emps (4.1) g1 - , ,.: , ~ T.O.V. Road/St. Maintenance (3.9) 73°~p ;7. ' ! - ~ .. Cleanliness of Public Restrooms (3.9) 7go~ ' ' ~ I Appearance 8 Condition of Town-Owned Bldgs (3.8) a 70% ' ° ~ , i i , - 0% `_10%' 20% : 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% ~°h Responding'1 -Not at all satisfied' and 2 ^°~ Responding'4' and'S -Very Satisfied' 17 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 Town of Vail Community, Survey, 2004 TOWN OF VAIL RATINGS -Figure 2 of 3 T.O.V. FIRE SERVICE , ~ ~~ ' , . ~o Courtesy 8. Helpfulness of Firefighters (4:5) ~ ' 90% FirelEmergency Medical Response Time (4.4) ~ ~ ~ ~ Overall quality of Fire Dept Services (4.2) ~~..4; ' 69°~ , Plan Review/Fire Prevention-Insp. Programs (3.9) t; ~°~ Public Fire Educ. Programs (3,8) ;,~,~,rr - - ~ ' ~ , ~ - , , ~ , , ~ T.O.V. POLICE SERVICE ~ ~ , , ~• ~ ' ' 80% ~ Feeling of Safety & Security (4.2) -- - 74% ~ Friendliness & Approachability of Vail Police Dept Emps (4) ~, -•, 74% ~ Overall Quality of Service (3.9) , ,; •.;,_ .: ; ,; ! . :~ 63°~ ~ Visibility of Police Patrol (3.8) ~ , ° , V;t..; ~ ~~ ~ , , T.O.V. BUS SERVICE ~";. ; , , ~ .. ~ . 92% Dependability of Bus Service (4.5) a,_,,, , , ~ ' 8'~°h Freq. of In-Town Shuttle (4 4) ~ ,> ~ ~ ' 87% Bus Driver Courtesy (4.4) - 4;i; .:.-i.. ;, . ~ ' 84°!° - Cleanliness of Buses (4.2) .. , .. . ~, - , • ~ :. ' ` , Freq. of Outlying Service (3 9) ~ ~;; ~ ' ~ ' ' 60% ' Crowding On Buses (3.6) - ~. , ;- ,. BENEFITS OF YOUR PARKING PASS ~ ~ •~ ~ , ~ ', ' , ~ ' Benefits of Your Pass (3) 4496 ' a~ , , ~.~ ~ PUBLIC PARKING SERVICES V T O ~ , . . . 90% -- - = - Summer Parking-Availability (4.5)= ° _-, -=-; r=-:.-= = -== '= - - ~ ' - - 78% i Booth Attendant Courtesy (4.1) s ~ -~~' ~ ~ ' , Three Hour Limited Shopper Parking (3.8) , 55°.6 , <,, Parking Structure Cleanliness (3.5) -- -; ~ ~ ' ''~ 3 3~°(o i ' ~ ' ) ;,,~_ .Parking Fees/ Pricing Structure ( % Winter Parking Availability (2.5) - , %- i ~ „~,_ . ~~~} s~::~;:~ 54% 0% 10'k'. 20°ti' 30% 40% 5096 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% i p% Responding'.1:-Not at all satisfied' and 2 ~°~ Responding '4' and'5 -Very Satisfied' J 18 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 Town of Vail Community Survey, 2004 TOWN OF VAIL RATINGS -Figure 3 of 3 T.O.V. LIBRARY SERVICE Library Story Hour (4. Library Collection (Mags, Books, Audio & Visual Media) (4. Unlimited Adventure Speaker Series (4. Summer Youth Festival (4. Friendliness/ Courtesy of Library Staff (4. T.O.V. RECREATIONAL PROGRAMMING AND FACILITIE Vail Nature Center (4.; Recreational Leagues & Teams (~ Recreational Facils (Fields, Dobson Arena, Etc.) (~ Recreational Programming (3.E Recreational Facilities (3.9 Youth Programs & Activities (3.9 Adult Programs & Activities (3.8 T.O.V. WEBSITE T.O.V's Website as a Govt. Info. Resource (3.9; WIRELESS INTERNET CONNECTIVITY For Visitors 8 Guests (4) For You Personally (3.1) T.O.V. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES Quality of New / Re-Development (Past 3 Yrs) (3.6) T.O.V.'s Mgt. ~ Communication of In-Town Construction (3.5~) _ U'% ' 10% 20% ~ 30°10 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% ~~% Responding '1 - Not at all satisfied' and-2 ~q° Responding '4' and'5 -Very Satisfied' *NOTE: Wireless {nternet Connectivi is on a scale of "1-Not at ali important" to "5- Very important." 9 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 APPENDIX B -SURVEY FORM ... :. Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 First, a few questions about the general state of Vail.... 1. Would you say that things in the Town of Vail are going in the right direction, or have they pretty seriously gottE:n off on the wrong track? 2005 2003 (n=404} _ (n=400) . :.: 709'0:._ 57~° R:ght`d:rection ... ~.. > - , . < . . 19 28 Wrong track 10 15 Don't know 1 -- Refused 2. In a word or two, what do you believe are the two biggest issues, in order of priority, facing the Town of Vail? ., 3. In 2004 the Vail Town Council and staff identified five "Areas of Focus." How satisfied would you say you are with current efforts m the following fnie areas?' Use a'scaie from 1 to 5 where 1 i$ "not at al(satisfied" and 5 is "extrernety satisfied" NOT AT ALL EXTREMELY SATISFIED SATISFIED DK mean N Facilitate Vail's Redevebpment 5% 11 28 35 18 3 3.5 392 Address Issues.Proactively conhnwng to.pursue resolution on important projects such as the West Vaii fire station planning; construction of the Vai! Gymnastics Center,1-70 noise mitigation, etc. 11% ' 24 33 .. 20. 6` 7-- 2.8. 377 ;, Elevate Community Leadership', including efforts to wori(in partnership and cooperation with the business community, Vai! Resorts, the Recreation District, etc.'. ~ 8%. , 19: 35: 21' 8. 9 3.0 369 Improve the Local Economy, focusing on reversing trends such ~ flat sales tax regional competition, etc: ,7% - 23 ` 38 -, 19: 4.:. 9 2..9, 366;.; Add to Vail's Appeal as a greatplace to live, work and play.:: 4% 12 27 `' ` 34 ` 22 ` 1 .3.6 399: __ _ _ (Interviewer. if asked, this effort includes developing a housing master plan,_,being a,mod_el for envlronmental_quality; continuing... -~-- - to fried a variety of activities in the town for all age groups, etc.} Do you have any comments on.tl~ese Areas of Focus or the general.direction of the town? Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 ' 4. How satisfied are youwith-the following functions " of the Town of Vail government? U means not at all satisfied" and 5 means "very satisfied" Opinion) as appropriate. se a scale from 1 to 5 where 1 to rate each of the following items. Please use DK (Don't Know/No NOT AT ALL ,- sAnsF~D VERY 2 IED 3 4 2005 2003 2005 2003 5 2005 2003 DK mean N 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 Z00 2003 Current Town Counal 5% 8 14 13 34 38 27 21 5 ~ . Planning and Environmental 5°k 8 15 10 5 29 37 24 15 13 3.1 3.0. 344 347 Commission (also ImaWm as the PEC) 18 5 7 23 18 3.1 3.1 310 327 Design Review Board (a.ka. as the oRe) 14% 15 22 17 29 30 17 14 5 7 Town of Vail staff 2°!° 5„ 5 .... 5,. ; . 22.; , 25 :: 42. 34 14 20 ' 13 17 2.7 2.8 352 333 . . 14 11 3.7 3.7 346: 358 The Communi>hr Development Deparbnent provides planning, design review, environmental programs, and building and restaurant services. 5. Have you used the Community Development Department with the past 12 months? 2008::: 2003 (n=404) (n=401). 26% 22°~ Yes 73 77 No 1 Don't know 6. Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of the Community Development Department Use the same 1 to 5 scale as before. Overalf service and efficiency Building permit review and inspections Environmental qualityr in the Town of Vail (arr,. water, etc.) Courtesy and attitude: . NOTATALL SATISFIED. ' _: 2: 2005 2003 2005 2003 8 15 14 15 17 22 ~ 15 10 7 5" 7 11 10~ 3 VERY ' SA71 IED 3- ` 4 ~ - 5 DK`-: mean N 2005 2003 .2005- 2003 2005 2003 20052003 2005' 2003 2005" 2003 33. 23 32 24. 12 23 1 1 3.3 3.3 106 87 26 20. 16 17 7 18 20' 13 2.8 3.0 86 77 6~ 23 27 33 33 28 28' 1' 16 17 10 50 27 17 34 g 1 3.8 3.8 87 87 2 3.6 3.6 86 86 21 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 The Public Works Department provides maintenance of public areas including parks, buildings, roads and village areas. 7. Rate your satisfaction with Public Worksservices in the Town of Vail¢ NOT AT ALL ~~ SATISFIED 1 2 3 4 SATISFIED. 5 DK mean _ N 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2~5 2003 2005 2003 Snow removal on roads 1 1 3 2 10 . 6 37 39 41 51 1 1 4.3 4.4 401 397 Road and strieet maintenance by the 2 1 5 6 19 20 45 42 28 30 1 1 3.9 3.9 401 398 Town of Vail _ Overall park maintenance 0 ~~ 0 2 2 8" 10 ~ 46 ~ 44 41 4Z . 4 2 4.3 4.3 387 392 Appearance and condition oftown- 1 0 4 6 23 25 48 41 20 22 4 4 3.8 3.8 389' ~ 383 owned buildings Friendliness and courteous attihide of ~ 1 3 3 12 15 38 38 . 33 36 12 8 4.1 . 4.11 355 369 Public Works employees Cleanliness of pedestrian villages 1 2 3 4 11 14 47 44 37 35 1 2 4.2 4.11 398 394 Cleanliness of public restrooms 1 2 2 5 18 24 40 34 17 17 21 18 3.9 3.i~ 319 330 8: Rate the overall quality of fire department services in the Town of Vail: NOT AT ALL VERY SATISFIED SATISFIED 1 2 3 4 5 DK mean N 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 4% 1 1 1 8 8 25 27 36 39 28 23 4.2 4.3 29~t 309 9. Have you utilized Vail Fire for any service, inspection or 9:1.1 emergency with in the past 12 months? 2005 2003 (n=404) (n=401) 18% 13% Yes 81 85 No 0 - Don't know 0 -- Refused 10: Please rate your satisfaction=with the following aspects of Fire~Services in the Town of Vail:- - - NOT AT ALL ~~ SATISFED SATISFIED N 1 2 3 4 5 DK mean _ 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2(103 2005 2003 Fire/emergency medical response 0 0 2 1 2 5 13 20 25 27 58 46 4.4 4~.3 . 170 215 time Courtesy and helpfulness of O 0 0 1 3 6 16 15 34 38 47 39 , 4.5 4~.5 216 245 . firefighters Plan reviewlFireprevention-inspection 2 1 1 3 8 16 12 19 14 13 63 48 3.9 3..8 150 208 prc9~ Public Fire Education programs. . 1 - 2 - 8 -- 10 - 10 ~ 69 •• 3.8 - 124 - 22 Town of Vail 2005 11 • Please rate your satisfaction with the following aspects of Police Servi i ces NOT AT ALL n the Town of Vail. SATISFIED VERY 1 3 ^- 2 4 sAnsFlEn 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 Overall feeling of safety and security 1 ---5_ 2005 2003 DK 2005 2003 _ 2005 ?003 N 20 1 4 V'~sibility of police foot/vehide patrol 2 15 8 37 29 2 3 7 41 57 3 3 4 2 4 4 05 2003 391 6 25 23 32 32 Friendliness and approachability of V 27 32 5. 4 . 3.8 . 3.9 390 383 386 ail police department employees 3 2 6 3 14 12 33 29 Overall quality of service 2 2 6 3 15 33 44 11 9 4.0 4.2 360 363 14 37 36 28 35 11 10 3.9 4.1 359 362 12. Are you aware of the Town of Vail's efforts to enforce the speed limit on I.70 78% Yes ? n=404 20 No (GO TO Q. 14) 2 Uncertain (GO TO Q 14) 13. Has the enforcement program affected the way you drive the Interstate through Vail? n=317 44% Yes 55 No 1 Don't know 14. Do you have any comments or suggestions on police services in the town? 15. How many times per month do you use TOV bus service? 2003. Mean=.10.9 times per month, N=391 2005. Mean=11.6 times per month, N=386 16. Please rate your satisfaction with b us service. NOTATALL SATI~'F _D VERY 1 2 3 4 sansFlEo Frequency of In-town shuttle 2005 2003 0 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 K2003 2005 e a2003 2005 N 200 requency of outtying service 1 2 2 4 9 9 28 27 46 48 14 11 4.4 4.3 347 3 358 Bus driver courtesy 5 1 1 5 7 14 18 23 22 25 24 30 24 3.9 3.7 281 305 Dependability of bus service 0 0 2 1 9 11 30 30 46 46 12 10 4.3 4.3 355 359 Cleanliness of buses .. 0 1 1 8 9 26 31 55 49 12 9 4.5 . 4 357 365 Level of crowding on buses 3 2 3 12 13 38 37 35 36 12 10 d.2 4. 2 354 359 ° 8 _ 22 -- _ 34 _ -- _ 17 - 16 .. 3.6 -. 341 .. 17. Do you own a parking pass or value card this season? 2005 2003 (n=404) 72% 71% NO 28 29 Yes (IF YES) Which one? 2005 2003 (n=115) 2% 1°k Gold pass 3 3 Blue pass 1 2 Green pass 1 2' Pink- pass.. 20 18 Value card 2' •- Don't know 23 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 18. How satisfied are you with the benefits of your pass this year?~Y NO.T AT ALL SATISFIED SATISFIED 1 2 3 4 5_ DK mean N 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 24% 20 15 17 16 24 23 13 19 25 3 2 3.0 3.1 112 904 Any comments on your response? Please rate your satisfaction,wittl public parking services in Vail. 19 . t~T AT ALL ~~ gp,Tl IED snn IED 2 3 4 5 DK -mean N 1 _ 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005 2003, 2005 2003 2005 2003 2005. 2003 Overall parking feeslpricing structure 13 19 14 19 24 29 18 15 10 9 22 8 3.0 2. i' 315 367 Three-hour time limited shopper parking 5 14 5 10 14 19 20 15 29 21 26 21 3.8 3..! 300 316 2 2 12 14 29 32 28 39 2Z 11 4.1 4S! 294 356 Booth attendant courtesy 2 1 . :. Parking structure cleanliness 2 4 8 9 27 26 29 33 16 20 18 7 3.6 3.1i 331. 371 Parking availabil'dy during winter periods 22 25 21 25 20 22 13 16 4 6 20 6 2.4 2.~5 323 376 Parking availabil'~ty during summer periods 1 2 1 1 5 9 22 22 51 57 20 8 4.5 4:4 323 369 20- What priority would you like to see given to parking enforcement in Vail's parking structures? (Interviewer Note: " 3" Means "Neither Low Priority Nor High Priority")mean=3.5, n=333 VERY IOW' VERY;NIGH; ; PRIORITY PRIORITY DK 10°!0' 7 22 21 18 18 21. What priority,; would you like to see given, to parking enforcement on Vail's s~ H mean=3.5, n=349 VERY LOW PRIORITY` DK PRIORITY' , 9 g 22 Z1 ~ 26 14 Do you have any comments or suggestions concerning parking?_ _ _ ° 22. Do you hold a library card in the Town of Vail? 2005 2003' (n=404) (n=401) 65% 60% Yes 35 39 No 0 -- Don't know i i 24 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 24. Please rate your satisfaction with the following: NOT AT ALL 2 3 SATI~IED 4. VERY DK mean SATISFIED Library collection (induding magazines, 0 gooks, audio arui visual media) 1 9 31 28 30 4.2 Library Story Hour Unlimited Adventure Speaker Series Summer Youth Festival Friendlin~s/courtesy of library staff •- 3 0 1 5 4 4 4 4 .8 Do you have any comments or suggestions concerning the library?, 281 8 12 79 4.4 86 13 16 65 4.2 141 8 8 79 4.2 85 ~ 34 28 4.1 289 25. Overall, how satisfied are you with the level of recreational programmin and f iliti NOT AT ALL g ac es available in the Town of Vail? Programming SATISFIED VERY SATISFIED DK Mean N Fadlities 1 5 18 34 ~ 20 3.9 325 1 5 18 40 25 11 3.9 361 26. More specifically, howsatisfied are you with: NOT AT ALL SATISFIED VERY Youth programs and activities SATISFlED DK .Mean N Adult programs and activfies 1 4 10 18 14 54 3.9 186 Vail Nature Center 2 4 16 28 15 34 3.8 267 Recreational le" ues and teams 0 2 9 30 27 . 30 4.2 281 Recreational facilities including fields, tennis courts 0 1 3 11 22 15 ~ 4.0 206 , Dobson Arena, etc. 3 20 39 25 12 3.9 354 Do you have any comments or suggestions conce rning recreational programs/fac ilRies ? 27. How would you rate the Town of Veil's website as a timely and convenient resource for government information? (www.vailaov_coml (Use "DK" if Don't Know/Never Used.).. _ ._ . _ NOT AT ALL VERY SATISFIED SATISFlED DK Mean N 0 3 14 22 13 47 3.8 213 28. Many towns are adding wireless fnternet connectivity for residents and guests. How important do you feel this service is? NOT AT ALL VERY IMPORTANT -MPORTANT ~ Wean N For you personally 26 9. 15 15' 28' 5 3.4 382 For visitors and guests 7 4 15 24 43 7 4.0 376 25 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 _ 29. Over the past two years has the sense of community within the Town improved, gotten worse or stayed the same'? 2005 2003- (n=404) (n=395).. _.. 17% 16% Improved 21 31 Gotten worse 53 46 Stayed the same 8 8 Don't knowlna opinion 0 •• Refused Do you have any comments or suggestions on your response? 30. What doesn't Vail have (facilities and amenities) that~you would•like to see provided? Are there specific infrastructure or programs you would like to see added to serve Vail in the next five years? n=404 54% Yes (what are they?) 46 No 31. How well informed would you say you are on the development of a new conference center for Vail? n=404 17% Not at all informed 56 Somewhat informed 27 Very informed 0 Don't know Is there any specific information you are looking for concerning the conference center that you haven't received? Do you have any additional comments on this topic? 32 Thinkmg;about the vision for the new Vail, and all the improvements that are occurring, how would.you describe your attitude?'fn=a0a ~10%0'' Not at all excited 41 Somewhat excited 47 Very excited 1 Refused. 0' Don't`know Do you have any comments on your response? _ _ _ 33. Rate your satisfaction with the Town of Vail's management and communications concerning consfrucfon going on in town. NOT AT ALL VERY SATISFIED SATISFIED DK Mean N 5 10 31: 28. 17 9 3.5 368 34. Rate yourJsatisfaction vrith the quality of new development and redevelopment over the past three year's: NOT A7 ALL VERY . • SATISFIED SATISFIED DK Mean N . 5 9 23'' 37 ' 18 7 3.1i 376' .:.:. - 26. Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 Please provide the following demographic information. ,Please remember that all responses remain sbictty confidential and are reported onty in group format 35. Where is your residence within the Town of Vail located? 2005 2003 (n=404) (n=401) 27°/a 30% East Vatl 2 1 Booth Falls and Bald Mountain Road areas 1 1 Booth Creek/Aspen Lane 3 4 Golf Course 8 8 Vail Village 7 8 Lionsfiead 11 9 Potato Patch, Sandstone 4 2 Buffehr Creek, Lionsridge, the Valley 1 1 Vail Commons/Safeway area 23 23 West Vail (north of I-70) 2 4 Matterhorn, Glen Lyon 5 3 Intermountain 1 Located just outside Town of Vail 3 4 Other 2 •• Refused 36. Do you own or rent your residence? 2005 2003 (n=404) (n=401) 84% 78% OHm 14 20 Rent 1 1 Other (specify) 1 Refused 37. How long have you lived within the Town of Vail (or owned property if anon-resident)? 2005 2003 (n=404) (n=401) 4% 6% Less than 1 year 23 21 1-5 years 30 33 6-15 years 42 39 More than 15 years 1 .. Rcfi ~m.l 38. Which of the following t 2005 2003 (n=404) (n=401) 5% 5% ti3 g7 31 37 0 1 .. lest descrif~es you? Non-resident owner ofbusiness/commercial property (GO TO Q. 40) Year-round resident (12 months/year) Seasonal resident Don't know Refused 27 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 39. (IF RESIDENT) Do you own or operate a business within the Town of Vail? 2005 2003 (n=377) (n=377) 20% 19% Yes 80 81 No 40. Are you a registered voter in Vail? 2005 2003 (n=404) (n=401) 57% 51 Yes 41 48 No 0 - Don't know 1 - Refused 41. Which of these categories best describes your marital status? 2005 2003 (n=404) (n=401) , 25°h 31°k Single, no children 20' 16 Couple, no children 22 20 Household with children 32 31 Empty-nester, chiid~en no longer at home 2 •• Refused INTERVIEWER: ENTER GENDER OF RESPONDENT n=404 52% Male 48 Female 42. Looking ahead to the next three years in Vail, what do you think the two or three biggest challenges will be? ~~ 1 ;s 1 ,, 28 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 APPENDIX C -OPEN-ENDED COMMENTS What do ou believe are the two bi est issues facin the Town of Vail? resident type comment • Resident ANEW CONFERENCE CENTER AND MORE PROMOT IONS FOR TOURISTS. • Resident AFFORDABILITY OF HOUSING • Resident . AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND OPEN SPACE • Resident . AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND PARKING • Resident . AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND TRAFFIC PROBLEMS • Resident . AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR WORKERS. AND TRAFFIC AND , PARKING. • Resident AFFORDABLE HOUSING REDEVELOPMENT • Resident . AFFORDABLE HOUSING UTILITIES • Resident , . AFFORDABLE HOUSING • Resident . AFFORDABLE HOUSING • Resident • Resident . AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THE CONVENTION CENTER. • Resident AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THE DECLINE OF THE COMMUNITY . AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THE PROPOSED CONVENTION CENTER. • Resident AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THERE'S NO MONEY TO BE MADE HERE. • Resident ATTRACTING NEW OR YOUNGER VISITORS. AMENITIES FOR THE LOCALS. • Resident • Resident ATTRACTING VISITORS AND THE CONFERENCE CENTER. BALANCING REVENUES WITH CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT NEED • Resident TO BE DONE IN THE FUTURE. RESERVING OPEN SPACES: BETTER ALLOCATIONS OF TAX REVENUES. POOR OVERALL MUNICIPAL SERVICES • Resident . BUS SERVICE IS LOUSY AND WE NEED MORE REC • Resident • Resident CENTERS. BUSINESS AS A SKI RESORT. ECONOMY. LOCAL HOUSING . BUSINESSES IN TOWN ARE SUFFERING •.Resident . COMPETITION WITH COMMUNITIES DOWN VALLEY . RETAINING YEAR-ROUND RESIDENTS • Resident . CONFERENCE CENTER (WE DON'T NEED IT) AND VAIL REC. DISTRICT COMBININ - G WITH THE TOWN OF VAIL. IT SHOULDN'T HAPPEN. • Resident CONSTRUCTION. THE FACELIFT OF THE AREA. THERE'S A SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH BUSINESSES AND BEI NG ABLE TO PAY LEASES. NEW BUSINESSES CAN BARELY SURVIVE BECAUS E THEIR LEASE IS SO HIGH • Resident . CONTROLLING GROWTH THROUGH PROPER RE NOVATION. CONTINUING TO INVEST IN SKI RESORTS • Resident . CONVENTION CENTER AND INCREASING TAXE$ FOR BETTER QUALITY OF PRODUCT. LIKE RECREATION STREETS AND , SERVICES. • Resident CONVENTION CENTER PARKING • Resident , . CONVENTION CENTER •. Resident . CROSSROADS AND THE CONVENTION CENTER. 29 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident ~ DECIDING ON..THE REC CENTER AND FINDING SOME HAPPY MEDIUM. • Resident DECREASING THE USE OF MEDCOLIDE. KEEP UP WITH THE RESORTS. • Resident DEVELOPMENT IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. GROWTH. • Resident DEVELOPMENT OF SERVICES. • Resident DEVELOPMENT, NOISE POLLUTION AND GROWTH. • Resident DO THE RIGHT THINGS TO MAKE SURE IT STAYS AN UPSCALE RESORT TOWN. IF WE DON'T DO THAT, THERE IS NO MORE VAIL. . • Resident ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND I-70. • Resident ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. • Resident ECONOMICS AND ALSO HOUSING. • Resident EMPLOYEE HOUSING AND THE COST OF LIVING. • Resident EMPLOYEE HOUSING. ~ RECREATION. • Resident ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES. LIMITING THE NUMBER OF SKIERS. • Resident ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES. VAIL ISN'T MOVING QUICKLY ENOUGH FOR STABILITY.: THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF PEOPLE MOVING IN AND OUT OF VAIL. • Resident FINANCIAL PROBLEMS WITH THE RAPID GROWTH. • Resident FIND A WAY TO KEEP THE BUSINESSES IN VAIL. • Resident FINDING A TOWN COUNCIL THAT CAN DEVELOP AN IDEA OF WHAT THEY WANT THE TOWN TO BE AND THEN PURSUE IT AND .GET PRIVATE SECTOR tNVOLVEDTO MAKE IT WORK IN TERMS OF FINANCING. • Resident FINISHING DEVELOPMENT AND EXPANDING REAL ESTATE. • Resident FIRST IS MAINTAINING A WORLD CLASS SKI TOWN BY OFFERING - MORE VARIETY. IN SHOPS AND ESTABLISHMENTS TO SUPPORT THE TOWN: • Resident FIRST, PROPERTIES NEED TO UPDATE THEMSELVES, ESPECIALLY DAY OR WEEKLY RENTALS. OTHER SKI RESORTS . HAVE BETTER RENTALS. NOT KEEPING PACE WITH EVEN WINTER PARK: BUSINESSES NEED TO BE MORE ATTRACTIVE AND LESS OUTDATED. • Resident FUNDING THE VAIL NEW DAWN PROJECT. SUSTAINING BUSINESSES IN TOWN: - • Resident -GAS-PRIGES:-REDUCING THE ECHO BUS FEE. • Resident GETTING ENOUGH TOURISTS IN TO PAY FOR EVERYTHING. • Resident GETTING TOURISTS TO RETURN TO THE VILLAGE. • Resident GOOD STORES, 2 OR 3'GOOD STORES. THERE'S NO GOOD LATE NIGHT ENTERTAINMENT FOR THE 40 YR PLUS CROWD. • Resident GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR. LACK OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE LOCALS. • Resident GOVERNMENT~SPENDING AND NEW BUILDING APPROVALS. • Resident GROWTH AND PARKING.. - • Resident GROWTH ISSUES: • Resident GROWTH. • Resident GROWTH. THE CONFERENCE CENTER. • Resident GROWTH. THE CONVENTION CENTER. KEEPING PEOPLE s~o Town. of Vail Community Survey 2005 INFORMED. • Resident GROWTH. TRYING TO RETAIN PRICES IN REAL ESTAT • Resident E. HANDLING GROWTW AND I-70 NOISE • Resident . HANDLING GROWTH. WEALTH BEING DIRECTED TOWARD THE • Resident WRONG PLACES. • Resident HIGHWAY AND THE ENVIRONMENT. HIGHWAYS AND PARKING • Resident ~ . HOUSING AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT • Resident . HOUSING IS TOO DARN EXPENSIVE. NO ONE WANTS TO LIVE • Resident HERE. HIGHWAY NOISE IS TOO LOUD. HOUSING. • Resident HOUSING. I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE • Resident . HOW THEY'RE HANDLING THEIR MONEY AND WHERE T • HEY PUT IT. THEY THINK THEIR VISION IS WHAT EVERYONE W Resident • Resident ANTS. HOW TO HANDLE THE GROWTH. AFFORDABLE HOUSING ' . I CAN T THINK OF ANYTHING EXCEPT HOW MONEY IS SPENT . SOME IS SPENT UNWISELY SUCH AS PLANTING ANNUALS THEN RIPPING THEM UP. IT'S FOOLISH TO HEAT THE STREETS . THERE NEED TO BE BETTER HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MORE • Resident BRIDGES. I DON'T KNOW. • Resident I DON`T KNOW • Resident . I DON'T KNOW • Resident . I DON'T KNOW. • Resident I DON'T KNOW • Resident . I HAVE NO OPINION • Resident . I THINK CROSSROADS SHOULD BE DONE. THEY NEEb A DAY • Resident LODGE AT THE END OF BRIDGE STREET. I THINK IT IS GROWTH. HOW THEY ARE. GOING TO HANDLE THE NEW HOME OWNERS WATER, THAT PART OF THE GROWTH IS • Resident . THERE GOING TO BE ENOUGH? • Resident I THINK THE CONVE,IVTION CENTER. THE CROSSROADS: • Resident I THINK THE I-70 NOISE LEVEL. • Resident I THINK THE WATER ISSUES. • Resident _ I THINK WE NEED MORE SNOW. CHEAPER LIFT TICKETS. I WOULD SAY ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION AND THE • Resident DECAYING INFRASTRUCTURE. ITS OLD. I WOULD SAY NUMBER ONE IS PARKING AND_THE SECOND ONE IS TRYING SO HARD TO BE VAIL THAT THEY'RE NOT EMBRACING THE REST OF THE VALLEY • Resident . I-70 NOISE. • Resident • Resident I-70 TRAFFIC AND NOISE. DOGS RUNNING LOOSE. • Resident I-70 WIDENING. THE NEW RESORT IN MINTURN. IMPROVING THE BUS SYSTEM 6Y ENLARGING THE ROUTES • Resident . HIGHWAY NOISES. I SEE NO SOLUTION. IMPROVING THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND LOCAL SERVICES. 31 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident INCREASING SALES-TAX REVENUES AND GETTING THE CONFERENCE CENTER BUILT. • Resident INCREASING TOURISM. THE PINE BEETLE THING AS WELL. • Resident IT'S EXPENSIVE LIVING HERE. DOG POLLUTION.. • Resident IT'S HARD FOR RETAILERS TO SURVIVE HERE AND THE RISING COST OF HOUSING.:. • Resident ITS LOSING ITS SENSE OF COMMUNITY. • Resident ITS LOSING ITS SMALL TOWN CHARACTER AND DRIVING THE LOCAL POPULATIONS OUT TO DOWN VALLEY. • Resident ITS OVERGROVIIDED}Ql1E TO THE NUMBER OF SKIERS. • Resident IT'S SUCCESS. AND TFiE PROBLEMS THAT SUCCESS HAS ' S BROUGHT. IT USED TO BE A SMALL SKI TOWN, AND NOW IT TURNING INTO A METROPOLIS: • Resident TOO OVER DEVELOPED AND, TO EXPENSIVE TO LIVE HERE ITS . ANY MORE. IT HAS GONE IN THE VERY WRONG DIRECTION. THINGS~HERE COST TO MUCH .TV, SKIING, ECT. • Resident KEEPING BUSINESSES IN TOWN: MAKING.tT LOCAL FRIENDLY. • Resident KEEPING GUESTS COMING IN. THE BOARD ISN'T DOING A GREAT JOB. • Resident KEEPING IT AFFORDABLE, FRIENDLY AND FUN. • Resident KEEPING LOCALS AND MAKING IT FRIENDLY FOR TOURISTS. . KEEPING LOCALS AS RESIDENTS WITHIN THE TOWN LIMITS AND • Resident ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: • Resident KEEPING RETAIL BUSINESSES. • Resident KEEPING.THE RESIDENTS IN VAIL. • Resident LIFT OPERATIONS AND ACCESSIBILITY. ~ Resident' LOWER RENT. • Resident' LOWERING THE RENT ON MERCHANTS SPAGE.. GETTING AWAY . ,., .. FROM:A SMALL T01NN'FEEL, • Resident MAKING IT A TOWN FOR RESIDENTS THAT IS AFFORDABLE FOR THOSE THAT LIVE HERE KEEPING THE. RENT DOWN. • Resident MANAGE:GROWTH, REDOING HEBERT CIRCLE. . • Residenti. MANAGING THE IMPACT OF CONSTRUCTION. ENFORCEMENT OF STREE , ING AND NOISE:,:. T LAWS THINGS LIKE PARK • Resident MANAGING THE REDEVELOPMENT AND GETTING SOME -GROWTH. • Resident MARKETING (BRING VAIL MORE UP TO DATE NO • Resident MORE DIVERSITY ON,THE TOWN COUNCIL, MORE PROGRESSIVE PEOPLE ARE NEEDED:. ENCOURAGE FAMILIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN TO STAY IN VAIL: • Resident ~ MORE MARKETING FOR THESLiMMER. • Resident MORE SUMMER EVENTS AND.MORE FAMILY ACTIVITIES. • Resident- NO COMMENTS AT THIS TIME'. ,, .;. • Residenf Nb COMMENTS:. ` • Resident~> NO: CONFERENCE CENTER, IT WILL BANKRUPT TH.E T,,OWN: THERE ARE PARKING PROBLEMS FOR THE~RESIDENTS. • Resident:.:_ NO IDEA. • Resident,.:.... NONE. : - .. ... , . 3,z ,. Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident OCCASIONALLY THERE ARE PARKING PROBLEMS • Resident . IMPROVEMENT OF THE CITY IS DIFFICULT. OPEN SPACE AND CONVENTION CENTER • Resident • Resident . ORGANIZED GROWTH. TRANSPORTATION. OVER DEVELOPMENT AND KEEPING THE COMMERCIAL CORE VIABLE. • Resident • R OVER DEVELOPMENT AND TOO MANY PEOPLE esident . OVER DEVELOPMENT • Resident . OVER DEVELOPMENT. SELLING TOO MANY TICKETS FOR THE • Resident SKI RESORTS AND CAUSING THEM TO BE TOO CROWDED . OVER DEVELOPMENT. THE GROWTH. AND, THE BUILDINGS ARE RUN DOWN • Resident . OVERALL DEVELOPMENT AND THE BASIC COST OF LIVING IN Resident THE CITY. Resident OVERGROWTH, HOUSING AND SUMMER TOURISM. • Resident OVERGROWTH. • Resident PARKING AND PARKING. • Resident PARKING AND AFFORDABILITY FOR LOCAL PEOPLE • Resident . PARKING AND CONSTRUCTION INTERRUPTING TRAFFIC FLOW • Resident . PARKING AND CONSTRUCTION. • Resident PARKING AND EMERGENCY ISSUES SUCH AS 911 • Resident . PARKING AND HIGHWAY NOISE. • Resident PARKING AND NOISE ON I-70. PARKING AND NOT ENOUGH BUSINESSES. THE BUSINESSES AREN'T HIGH END ENOUGH • Resident . PARKING AND PARKING • Resident . PARKING AND PRICES • Resident • Resident . PARKING AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION. • Resident PARKING AND THE COST OF LIVING. • PARKING AND THE LACK OF TOURISTS Resident . PARKING AND THE LIBRARY • Resident • Resident . PARKING AND THE NEED FORA FIREHOUSE IN WEST VAIL . PARKING AND THINGS HAVE JUST GOTTEN OUT OF HAND AND TOO EXPENSIVE • Resident • Resident . PARKING AND TOO MANY PEOPLE ON THE SKI MOUNTAIN • Resident . PARKING AND WATER AVAILABILITY. PARKING DURING THE WINTER. I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHAT THE SECOND ONE IS • Resident . PARKING FOR LOCALS • Resident • Resident . PARKING FOR THE LOCALS VS THE SKIERS. • Resident PARKING IS LACKING. REDUCING THE SPEED ON 1-70 . PARKING IS NUMBER ONE AND HAS BEEN FOR YEARS. GROWTH AND HOW TO DO IT WELL • Resident • Resident . PARKING, ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING • Resident . PARKING, TRAFFIC AND NOISE FROM THE HIGHWAY. PARKING WE NEED MORE , . OVERBUILDING, KEEP FROM DOING IT. 33 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident PARKING. ° ' • Resident PARKING. • Resident PARKING. INVOLVEMENT IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING. OVER PARKING • Resident . DEVELOPMENT. • Resident PARKING. THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PLACES TO PARK CARS. • Resident PARKING. TRYING TO DEAL WITH THE BUILDING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT IN VAIL. • Resident POOR LEADERSHIP FROM THE TOWN COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: • Resident POPULATION INCREASES AND BUDDY PASSES. • Resident PRESERVING OPEN SPACE. THE ECONOMY. • Resident PUBLIC SAFETY AND THE CONVENTION CENTER. • Resident PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.AND THE TAX CODE. • Resident RECONSTRUCTION. GETTING MORE BEDS. GREATER SUPPORT OF THE EAGLE COUNTY AIRPORT. • Resident RECREATION BOARD IS A BUNCH OF BOZOS. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT AND CONCERNS ABOUT EMPLOYEE HOUSING. REDEVELOPMENT AND KEEPING FULL-TIME FAMILIES LIVING IN • Resident VAIL: • Resident REDEVELOPMENT AND PARTICIPATION WITH TOWN GOVERNMENT. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT AND THE LACK OF SPEED OF THE REDEVELOPMENT. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT ISSUES. CROSSROADS AND MINES DEPLETING SALES TAX INCOME. "FIGURE OUT IF THE TREND IS GOING TO CONTINUE SO THEY ARE NOT RELYING ON INCOME TAX. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT OF LIONSHEAD AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT, CONFERENCE CENTER. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT, THE CONVENTION CENTER. . • Resident ~ REDEVELOPMENT. • Resident REJUVENATION AND, CLEANLINESS. • Resident REMODELING IS GOOD. BETTER LEADERSHIP. • Resident- - REMOVING-THE GOLF-. COURSE-FROM.LEASE TO INDEPENDENT. • Resident RENEWAL OF PARKING. • Resident RENOVATION. FINISHING NEW DAWN. STOPPING GEN IN MIDTERMS. ' • Resident RENT IS VERY NIGH. • Resident RE-REVITALIZATION DOWNTOWN. TRANSPORTATION. • Resident RETAIL SALES IS LAGGING AND GOING DOWN. THE AGING INFRASTRUCTURE. • Resident REVENUE AND HOUSING. • Resident REVENUES, DECLINING SALES TAX AND THE COST OF RUNNING ~ IS RISING.. THE DETERIORATING THE GOVERNMENT INFRASTRUCTURE. IT'S,40 YEAR$ OLD AND IN NEED OF REPAII~. THE STREETS.T ' - • Resident REVITALIZATION OF THE DOWNTOWN AREA. 3~~ Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident REVITALIZATION. INCREASE VISITATION DURING L.OW SEASON . BRINGING CONFERENCES • Resident . ROAD MAINTENANCE AND PARKING • Resident . SAFEWAY PARKING. KEEP IT CLEAN, IT LOOKS RUNDOWN`AND DINGY AND EFFECTS HOW THE WHOLE AREA LOOKS T ' . HAT S THE LOCAL SAFEWAY IN WEST VAIL • Resident . SALES TAX REVENUES. I REALLY CAN'T GIVE MUCH OTHER THAN THAT BECAUSE, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE EVERYTHING • Resident , SEEMS TO BE RUNNING QUITE WELL. BUT, I DON'T KNOW. SCHEDULE SUMMER BUS SERVICE. THEY STILL CHARGE FOR PARKING AND NO BUS SERVICE KEEPS TOURISTS AW Y • Resident . A SKIER NUMBERS AND FIRE AND WATER PROBLEMS : OUR LACK • Resident . OF WATER COULD BE A PROBLEM IF WE HAVE A FIRE. SPACE CAPACITY, PARKING, ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES LIKE USING UP RESOURCES • Resident . SPENDING TOO MUCH ON BIG PROJECTS LIKE HOUSING AND • Resident THE CONVENTION CENTER. SURVIVING THE REBUILD. KEEPING BUSINESS ALIVE. STAYING FOCUSED ON THE CITIZENS • Resident . PARKING. TAKE CARE OF RESIDENTS BEFORE TOURISTS • Resident . TAKING CARE OF THE EMPLOYEES AND MAKING SURE THERE IS A LOW INCOME.WORKFORCE THAT IS AVAILABLE FOR THE COMMUNITY. VACANT HOMEOWNERS THAT DON'T PUT ~ Resident ENOUGH INTO THE COMMUNITY. • Resident TAX REVENUE. UPDATING THE VILLAGE. TAX REVENUES AND THE CONVENTION CENTER IT' . S NOT A GOOD ISSUE. IT'S GOING TO COST MONEY AND NOT GIVE ANY • Resident BACK: TAXES AND REVENUE • Resident . THE AGING INFRASTRUCTURE • Resident . THE AMOUNT OF GROWTH AND THE PARKING • Resident . THE AMOUNT OF REDEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION GOING ON IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS. THE BUILDING OF THE NEW CONFERENCE CENTER • Resident . THE ANTI-TRUST VIOLATIONS WHERE SLIFER IS PART OWNER OF.THE VAIL RESORTS AND IS OWNER OF A NUMBER OF BUSINESS INTERESTS IN CONFLICT. THE DESIGN AND REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS ALSO WORK WITH SLIFER • Resident . THE CORRUPTION AND MISUSE OF POWER BY THE TOWN GOVERNMENT'. THE- BUDGET AND CONVENTION CENTER. COLLECTION OF TAXES. THE CONVENTION CENTER IS A PRIVATE S I SUE NOT A GOVERNMENT- ISSUE. IT SHOULD BE FUNDED PRIVATELY THE . WIRELESS SYSTEM, PDAS ARE A GOOD CHANGE THEY TELL • Resident . PEOPLE WHERE TO GO TO SKI AND SPEND MONEY. • Resident THE CONFERENCE CENTER AND BUSINESS MIX: . THE CONFERENCE CENTER AND NEW DAWN RENOVATION OF • Resident LIONSHEAD: THE CONFERENCE CENTER AND STREETSCAPE • Resident . THE,CONFERENCE CENTER AND THE HIGHWAY. 35 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident THE CONFERENCE CENTER AND THE OTHER BILLION DOLLAR PROJECTS GOING ON. • Resident THE CONFERENCE CENTER. • Resident THE CONFERENCE CENTER. HIGHWAY NOISE. PARKING. • Resident THE CONFERENCE CENTER. 1 AM AGAINST THE ISSUE: PARKING. WE NEED TO CREATE MORE PARKING. • Resident THE CONVENTION CENTER AND THE I-70 NOISE. • Resident THE.CONVENTION CENTER AND TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT. • Resident THE CONVENTION CENTER PROPOSAL AND RETAIL STORES/BUSINESSES. WE'RE- LOSING BUSINESSES AND STORES TO THE VALLEY. • Resident THE CONVENTION CENTER. I DON'T HAVE A SECOND ONE. • Resident THE CONVENTION CENTER. I'M WONDERING IF THEY EVEN NEED TO BUILD IT AT ALL. AND, THE ATHLETIC PROGRAM. I FEEL THAT THEY ARE INDEPENDENT BUT I FEEL THEY NEED TO GO BACK UNDER THE UMBRELLA OF THE TOWN OF VAIL DUE TO THE SIZE OF VAIL NOW: + Resident THE CONVENTION CENTER. REMODELING AND BUILDING OF BUILDINGS. THEY ARE TOO BIG. • Resident THE CONVENTION CENTER. THE ENERGY BEING SPENT ON SOMETHING THAT WILL BENEFIT A SMALL GROUP. A FEW INDIVIDUALS HARASSING,THE TOWN COUNCIL TO PUSH THEIR OWN AGENDA. THEY LISTEN TO THEM RATHER THAN THEIR CONSTITUENTS, JUST 70 GET THEM OFF THEIR BACK. • Resident THE COST OF LIVING AND THE COLORS OF ALL THE BUILDINGS. • Resident THE COST OF LIVING: PARKING, ITS GETTING A LITTLE OUT OF HAND. THE EXTRA TAXES THAT WE BEAR. NOT ENOUGH PARKING. ITS OVERLY`CONGESTED BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH. IT'S HARD FOR THE PEOPLE WHO WORK DOWNTOWN TO GET~A PLACE TO PARK. • Resident THE ECONOMY. IF THE ECONOMY STAYS HEALTHY, THEN WE'RE ALRIGHT. JUST KEEP THE PEOPLE INFORMED OF WHAT'S GOING ON. I DON'T KNOW HOW THE SOUTH FRONTAGE: ROAD WILL HANDLE ALL THE INCREASED TRAFFIC. ALL YOU GOT IS A TWO LANE ROAD..; ~, • Resident THE ECONOMY. IMPROVING THE ENVIRONMENT FOR TOURISTS. • Resident - ~`- - - - THE EFFECT GROWTH-IS HAVING-ON THE LOCALS. DAY CARE AND EDUCATIONAL ISSUES FOR LOCAL RESIDENTS AS WELL. • Resident THE ENVIRONMENT AND OVER DEVELOPMENT. • Resident THE LACK OF A LONG-TERM STRATEGIC PLAN AND THE. ATTITUDE OF THE POLICE FORCE. • Resident THE LACK OF CLUBS,FOR ADULTS 2. PARKING. THERE ISN'T ENOUGH PARKING~AND,ITS.ALSO TOO EXPENSIVE. • Resident THE;LACK OF COMMERCIAL GROWTH AND UNNECESSARY GOVERNMENT SPENpING: • Resident THE LACK OF LAW;ENFORCEMENT. • Resident THE LACK OF LEADERSHIP OF THE ELECTED OFFICIALS. THE LACK OF VISION"LOOKING'10 OR MORE YEARS OUT. • Resident THE LACK OF PARKING= I DON'T HAVE ANOTHER ONE. 3fi Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident THE LACK OF PARKING.. THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE PARKING AVAILABLE. I'M NOT SURE OF THE ANSWER THE . INFRASTRUCTURE LIKE MORE PUBLIC BATHROOMS AND OTHER ACCOMMODATIONS. • Resident THE LIBRARY SERVICES. THE WEST VAIL FIRE SYSTEM. THE BUS SYSTEM. • Resident THE NEED FOR THE CONFERENCE CENTER. RECREATION . HOCKEY AND GOLF NEEDS TO BE FIXED • Resident • Resident . THE NEW CONSTRUCTION. AND LAND ISSUES UP VALLEY . THE NEW DAWN PROJECT, PUTTING IT IN RIGHT NOISE . MITIGATION. • Resident THE ONGOING REDEVELOPMENT. THE TAX BASE, THE INCOME IS DECLINING IN THE SALES TAX • Resident . THE POPULATION HAS GOTTEN WAY OUT OF HAND AND THE PARKING SUCKS, • Resident THE RECONSTRUCTION OF TOWN NEEDS TO BE REDUCED • Resident . AND, NOT BUILDING THE CONFERENCE CENTER. • Resident THE REDO OF VAIL. PROBABLY; THE CONFERENCE CENTER. THE RENOVATION OF LIONSHEAD. THE CONVENTION CENTER WILL BRING BUSINESS IN SO HURRY WITH IT • Resident . THE SCHOOL SYSTEM AND 1-70 PROJECTS • Resident . THE SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND I'M WORRIED ABOUT OVER • Resident DEVELOPMENT IF ALL THE APPROVED PROJECTS ARE BUILT. THE SEVERE PARKING PROBLEMS AND MORE AF FORDABLE HOUSING. • Resident THE TOWN LEADERS NEED TO GET IN TOUCH WITH REALITY . THEY SEEM TO BE OLD SCHOOL AND NOT THE NEW. THEY DO A LOT THINGS TO GIVE BUSINESSES A HARD TIME INSTEAD OF SUPPORTING THEM. _ THE TOWN NEEDS A-GOOD LEADER • Resident , 5OMEONE WITH A VISION. • Resident THE TRANSIT SYSTEM IS A PROBLEM. ACCESS FOR CARS • Resident .. THE UPCOMING CONSTRUCTION. I-70 TRAFFIC. THE WATER PROBLEM. THE NEED MORE TELEPHONE • Resident COMPANIES: • THE WAY THEY SPEND TAXPAYERS MONEY WITHOUT A LOT OF THOUGHT. I WOULD LIKE THEM TO KEEP THE LAND THEY BUY • Resident AS-OPEN SPACE AND NOT BUILD ON IT. THEFT AND SEXUAL ASSAULT. 1 WAS- ON THE MOUNTAIN WALKING ONE DAY AND SOMEONE ALMOST SE XUALLY ASSAULTED AAE 4 OR 5 YEARS AGO. THAT DIDN'T USED TO HAPPEN. A LOT OF PEOPLES SNOW BOARDS H • Resident AVE BEEN STOLEN. WE NEVER HAD TO WORRY ABOUT THAT BEFORE • Resident . THERE ARE NO REAL PROBLEMS. • Resident THERE ARE NONE. THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF COUNTERFEITING GO • Resident ING ON AND IT NEEDS TO STOP; CRIME HAS BEEN UP IN THE LAST MONTH • Resident . THERE ISN'T ENOUGH MONEY AND.. CONTROL. THERE°WA$TING,A LOT OF MONEY. THEY SHOULD.NOT BUILD A CONVENTION CENTER: INSTEAD, BUILD A FIREHOUSE. 37 Town of Vait Community Survey 2005 • Resident - '~ THERE'S' ENOUGH°1NCOME-COMING IN BUT THERE AREN'T MANY SMALL BUSINESSES HERE: THERE'S TOO MUCH MONEY GOING DOWN,VALLEY. • Resident AX TO.SUPPOR~" THE' THERE'S NOT`ENOUGH SALES T _ DEVELOPMENT IN PROGRESS. • Resident THERE'S TOO MUCH HOUSING.. OVERBUILDING. • Resident THERE'S. TOO MUCH NOISE ON-THE HIGHWAY. MAKE IT MORE AFFORDABLE FOR PEOPLE TO.LIVE HERE. • Resident THEY HAVE ABIG- BUDGET AND THEY SPEND IT PRETTY. FREELY. ~.IF WE DONT1` GET SNOW, WE HURT.. CLIMATE IS A BIG ISSUE. I-70 NOISE POLLUTION: TO GO AHEAD OR NOT TO GO AHEAD WITHTHE'CONVENTION"CENTER, OTHER INDUSTRIES COVER.THAT MARKET'ALREADY' • Resident THEY NEED.TO GET. RID OF DEBT BEFORE TAKING ON A NEW PROJECT.. ' • Resident THEY NEEDTO HAVE AN INDOOR PLACE TO HAVE BIRTHDAY _PARTIES... ,, ., . , • Resident THEY NEED TO MAKE WAGES HIGHER AND QUIT FEEDING: PEOPLE WITH LOW WAGES. ,PAY MORE ATTENTION TO THE ONES WHO LIVE HERE'` • Resident THEY NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE NEW DEVELOPMENT - THE TO IMPROVE THE TOWN. THE LOOKS OF THE TOWN AND TOWN'S FINANCES. • Resident THEY NEEp TO; REHAB THE WHOLE TOWN. THE TOWN IS GETTING' SEEDY: ' • Resident THEY SEEM TO BE ADDRESSING-THINGS THAT NEED TO BE DONE LIKE A SWIMMING POOL. ,THEY NEED ONE.- •=Resident THINGS:ARE TOO NOISY AND BUSY.' THERE'S TOO MANY: ACCIDENTS ANR TOO,MUCH'TRAFFIC. • Resident ~ TO ACT AS A BALANCE TO THE CORPORATE ENTITY OF VAIL RESORTS. FISCAL PRUDENCE. • Resident TO CLEAN OF THE RIVER BELOW THE SANITATION PLANT: ,- ,,,,- PARKING:.. '.:, - • Resident ., TO GET THE CONFERENCE~CENTER UNDERWAY. PARKING. ,.: .. • Resident . TARE INVENT ITSELF AS FAR AS BARS, HOTELS, ETC. • Resident TOO GREAT OF DENSITY OF BUILDINGS CAUSING A LOSS OF MAN SCALE IN~THE PAST VAIL HAS. BEEN LIKE A BAVARIAN SI<t VILLAGE. TRYING TO BE AN UPSCALE. Tl(PICA RESORT VERSES BEING ALL THINGS TO ALL PEOPLE AND TRYING,TO APPEAL.TO EVERYONE. . _ • Resident ,°,..; .,. TOURISM:AND PARKING. • Resident , :,: T,QURISM; AND THE REDEVELOPMENT. • Resident _ TRAFFIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS SUCH AS RECYCLING. • Resident ~ .. TRAFFIC'AND PARKING: AND GORE CREEK WATER QUALITY: - • Resident ~ : ~ TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND PARKING: • Resident TRAFFIC SIGNAGE-FOR PARKING AT TRAIL HEADS AND PARKING CIRCLESn • Resident .:' TRAFFIC..,1 DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE: • Resident ~ - TRYING.TO BRING SOMETHING NEW TO VAIL. LIKE`A-.FILM Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 FESTIVAL. MORE PUBLICITY, MORE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AND , BIGGER STARS. BUS SERVICE ALSO NEEDS TO GET MODERNIZED AS FAR AS FUEL EFFICIENCY • Resident . TRYING TO KEEP PEOPLE COMING TO VAIL AND ENJOYING IT . MANAGING THINGS SO THAT THE TOWN FLOURISHES • Resident ECONOMICALLY. UPGRADING THE INFRASTRUCTURE, HEATING STREETS, REMODELING OLD BUILDINGS • Resident . UPGRADING.THE TOWN. OFFERING MORE SERVICES TO • Resident VISITORS. VAIL RESORT AND THE INTERSTATE • Resident . VAIL RESORTS NEED TO GET THEIR ACT TOGETHER THEY . . SHOULD HAVE SALES TAX UP ON THE MOUNTAINS WE NEED . BETTER MANAGEMENT INSTEAD OF COUNTRY FOLKS RUNNING THE TOWN. EMPLOYEE HOUSING IS HORRIBLY UGLY . WHOEVER MADE THAT SHOULD BE SHOT • Resident . VAIL'S PARKING • Resident . WASTING MONEY ON A CONVENTION CENTER SPENDING . MONEY ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THEY ARE COMPETING WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND THAT'S BAD • Resident . WASTING MONEY, THE-OUTRAGEOUS BIDS ON THINGS WE . NEED TO IMPROVE PARKS WITH BETTER EQUIPMENT AND HAVE MORE PARKS. • Resident WE ARE RUNNING OUT OF MONEY AND WE ARE • , WASTING MONEY. THE CONVENTION CENTER ISN'T RIGHT Resident . WE CAN'T KEEP RETAIL TENANTS AROUND. BUSINESSES ARE EMPTY AND THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING AND THE COST IS TOO HIGH. • Resident WE NEED A CROSS SECTION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING DO A . BETTER JOB ON ROADS. WE NEED BETTER MAINTENANCE OF OPEN SPACE. • Resident WE NEED MORE FULL-TIME RESIDENTS • Resident • Resident . WHERE TO PUT THE EMPLOYEES. EMPLOYEE HOUSING. WISE DEVELOPMENT, KEEPING OUR POSITION AS THE NUMBER • Second home owner ONE RESORT. A CAP ON PRICES FOR LIFT TICKETS AND CHILDR ' EN S ACTIVITIES. • Second home owner • Second home o ACCOMMODATIONS. I DON'T KNOW OF ANY OTHER wner . AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND CONSERVATION TO MAKE SURE VAIL DOESN'T PRICE ITSELF OUT OF THE REACH OF MIDDLE CLASS VACATIONERS • Second home owner • Second home . AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND GENERAL RENOVATIONS owner • Second home owner . AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND GROWTH IN THE VALLEY. AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND KEEPING RETAIL BUSINESS • Second home owner AFLOAT. ECONOMIC WELL BEING. ATTRACTING VISITORS AND KEEPING RESORT E • Second home owner MPLOYEES. BUSINESS AND REAL ESTATE • Second home owner . CONFLICT WITH REDEVELOPMENT VERSUS SP ACE AVAILABLE VS THE POPULATION • Second home owner - . CONGESTION, TRAFFIC, AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 39 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner CONTINUED RENOVATION OF.THE OLD VILLAGE. • Second home owner CONTINUING TO BE A TOURIST ATTRACTION. PARKING. KEEPING IT ATTRACTIVE FOR THE VISITORS. • Second home owner CONTINUING TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO STAY ON TOP OF THE PACK AND BE VIBRANT AND HAVE ECONOMIC GROWTH AS WELL AS QUALITY OF LIFE. • Second homeowner CONTROL OF DEVELOPMENT. THE I-70 NOISE. • Second home owner CRIME IS GOING UP. • Second home owner DEVELOPMENT. EMPLOYEE HOUSING. • Second home owner DOLLARS. REVENUE AND PARKING. • Second home owner EMPLOYEE HOUSING. CONTROLLING DEVELOPMENT. • Second home owner EMPLOYEE HOUSING. WE NEED TO BE MORE CONCERNED WITH THE AVERAGE SKIER AND VACATIONER RATHER THAN THOSE THAT ARE GOING TO BUY MINK COATS. MAKE IT MORE AFFORDABLE TO LIVE HERE. • Second home owner EXPENSE AND THE PRICE OF EVERYTHING. THE LACK OF PARKING. • Second home owner GETTING THE WORK DONE IN A MORE TIMELY FASHION. 1 THINK. MR. PADO WAS GIVEN TOO MUCH LEEWAY TIMEWISE TO BEGIN DEMOLITION: • Second home owner GROWTH AND NOISE FROM I-70. • Second home owner HIGH RENTS FOFi BUSINESSES AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOFt WORKERS. • Second.. home owner HOW TO HOUSE THE TOV STAFF PEOPLE WITHOUT CONSUMING THE AREA FOFt THE CUSTOMERS. PARKING SOMETIMES ITS FULL AND ITS INCONVENIENT • Second home owner I AM VERY HAPPY WITH THE TOWN OF VAIL.EXCEPT MAYBE THE: SHOPPING, THERE'S NO SHOPPING AIVD PARKING: , INTEFtEST.ING SHOPS TO SHOP IN, A MORE.INTERESTING MIX Of= SHOPS. ABOUT THE PARKING, NOT MUCH THEY CAN AS WE ARE MOUNTAIN LOCKED, MAYBE REDUCE PARKING PRICES • Second home owner I DON'T HAVE AN OPINION: " . • Second home owner i DON'T KNOW.' " • Second home owner I HAVE NO ISSUES. • Second home owner I'M NOT HAPPY WITH, AMOUNT OF PEOPLE ON THE MOUNTAIN DURING PEAK TIMES. THEY SELL VERY CHEAP TICKETS TO PEOPLE WHO DO NOT SPEND MONEY IN VAIL. THE RETAIL MIX _ NEEDS TO BE IN BETTER SHAPE ITEMS-ARE~TOO EXPENSIVE, $1,000 DOLLAR JEANS TO $40 SWEATSHIRTS. • Second-home owner 1'M NOT SURE. " • Second home owner IMPROVEMENTS TO REMAIN COMPETITIVE. DEALING WITH ' PARKING STRUCTURES BEING OVERLOADED: • Second home owner INCOME FOR THE CITY AND LIONSHEAD NEEDS TO BE FIXED. • Second homeowner KEEPING COSTS DOWN WEATHER ITS RENTAL COSTS OR BUSINESS COSTS: THAT PRETTY MUCH ENCOMPASSES IT.. • Second home owner, .LOW COST HOUSING AND ADEQUATE SNOW. • Second home owner MAINTAINING THE ENVIRONMENT/ECOLOGY ANp CONTROLLING DEVEL_ OPMENT SO THE VALLEY D.OESN'T BECOME NEW YORK CITY: " 4b Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner MANAGING CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AND ATTRA CTING YEAR ROUND TOURISTS • Second home owner . MARKETING. ITS IMPORTANT TO US TO KEEP IT A PRIME SPOT FOR PEOPLE ALL OVER THE COUNTRY c Second home owner . MODERNIZATION, MORE SHOPS • Second home owner . NO COMMENTS. • Second home owner NOISE ON I-70 AND GROWTH. BURY THE FREEWAY FROM EXIT 180 TO A POINT WEST OF EXIT OF 176 ABOUT , A THREE MILE SECTION. • Second home owner NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO GROWTH. SUPERFICIALITY , GENUINE PEOPLE WHO HAVE LIVED HERE FOREV ER ARE BEING LEFT OUT WHILE THE WEALTHY PART TIME OWN , ERS ARE GIVEN MORE ATTENTION • Second home owner . OVER CROWDING AND LACK OF PARKING • Second home owner • . OVER DEVELOPMENT AND THE LACK OF PARKIN Second home owner • Second home ow G. OVER DEVELOPMENT. UPDATING THE VILLAGE ITSELF ner • Second home . OVERBUILDING. SKIING IS GETTING TOO EXPENSIVE owner • Second home owner . PARKING AND UPGRADING LIONSHEAD. KEEPING TAXES LOW . PARKING AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING • Second home owner . . PARKING AND HOUSING • Second home owner . PARKING AND OVER POPULATION • Second home owner . PARKING AND THE COST OF SKIING • Second home owner . PARKING, MORE SKI TRAILS AND SKI LIFTS ' • . THERE S NOT ENOUGH PARKING SPACES ESPECIALLY IN WIN Second home owner • , TER. PARKING, THERE ISN'T ENOUGH PARKING FOR Second home owner EVERYBODY. PARKING. • Second home owner PARKING. • Second home owner • Second home o PARKING. PRESERVING THE ENVIRONMENT. wner PARKING. THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE TRANSPORTATION TO AND FROM THE PARKING INSTEAD OF BUILDING MORE PARKING IN TOWN. LIFT SERVICES. THE RENOVATION OF THE VISTA BAHN • Second home owner • Second hom . PEOPLE IN THE VALLEY. THE ANTIQUATED TAX SYSTEM e owner • . PLANNED EXPANSION, GROWTH AND EMPLOY Second home owner EE HOUSING. POLLUTION AND TRAFFIC • Second home owner . _ PROPERTY TAX AND OVER DEVELOPMENT • Second home owner . QUALITY GROWTH • Second home owner . REDEVELOPMENT AND MAINTAINING THE QUALITY OF THE • Second home owner • SLOPES. REDEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION Second home owner • Second home o . REMAINING ATTRACTIVE TO VISITORS. EMPLOYEE HOUSING wner • Second home owner . RENOVATION. AFFORDABLE HOUSING. • Second home owner RENOVATION. NOISE LEVELS ON BRIDGE STREET. • Second home owner RENOVATION. VAIL NEEDS TO BE UPDATED. MORE PARKING. RESORTS RUN EVERYTHIN G. THE BUILDING.OF ARENSDALE (LIONHEAD) SKI RESORT WITH LOTS OF CONST RUCTION GOING ON. 41 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner - REVITALIZING THE VAIL VILLAGE AND ITS ECONOMY. NOT BUILDING THE CONVENTION-CENTER. • Second home owner SOMETHING SHOULD BE DONE WITH THE GOLF CLUB. • Second home owner TAXATION AND BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT. • Second home owner TAXES AND WHO IS BENEFITING FROM THE TAXES, COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES OR RESIDENTS. • Second home owner THE APPEARANCE OE THE TOWN. ABETTER APPROACH TO T,OURISM:; • Second home owner THE CONVENTION CENTER. THE CONSTITUTION OF THE CITY - COUNCIL.: . • Second home owner THE CONVENTION CENTER. THE PRICE OF LIFT TICKETS FOR SKI RESORTS. • Second home owner THE COST OF LIVING. THE INTERSTATE NOISE POLLUTION. • Second home owner THE COST OF SKIING AND PARTICIPATING AT THE RESORT. RAPID GROWTH AND CONGESTION. LACK OF PARKING AT PEAK TIMES. • Second home owner THE DECLINING.SKI POPULATION AND THE HIGH PRICES IN VAIL. • Second home owner THE ECONOMY. I .DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SECOND WOULD BE, MAYBE PARKING. • Second home owner THE I-70 CORRIDOR 13 TOO NOISY AND BUSY GOING THROUGH TOWN: THE LACK OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING IS PRETTY BAD. • Second home owner THE LACK OF AFFORDABILITY AND IT'S TOO CROWDED. ,. • Second home owner THE LACK OF PARKING. • Second home owner THE LACK OF PARKING. IT'S TOO CROWDED. • Second home owner THE LACK OF SIDEWALKS AND LIGHTING BETWEEN THE VILLAGE AND LIONSHEAD. THE INCREASING PRICES OF SKI LIFT TICKETS: THE POOR LIGHTING, ITS UNSAFE TO WALK FROM THE VILLAGE. TO LION$HEAD:: ` • Second home owner. THE LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT. THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THATS BEING SPENT IF IT'S GOING TO BE COMPLETED. WOULD BE MY CONCERN. _... • Second'home owner THE NOISE ON I-70. THE CONVENTION COMPLEX DECISIONS. • .Second home owner THE OVERALL LOOK. HAVING THE SAME KIND OF LOOK THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE VILLAGE. • Second home owner THE SKI TOURISM INDUSTRY. LIFT TICKET PRICES. • Second home owner THERE.ARE.TOO MANY::TEE-$HIRT~PLACES: SMALL PLACES LIKE - - - - - - - -THAT MAKE iT---TACKY: THE OTHER-IS-TO HAVE MORE -_ RESTAURANTS WITH-THE MEDIUM PRICED MEALS. - • Second home owner THERE IS NO VARIETY FOR VISITORS, FOR TOURIST AND FOR SHOPPING. THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING. • Second home owner THEY NEED MORE REASONABLE RETAIL RENT. - • Second home owner THEY NEED TO PRESERVE THE NATURAL ASPECT OF THE MOUNTAINS. NO MORE OVER-BUILDING. • Second home owner ~ THEY NEED TO UPDATE EVERYTHING INCLUDING LODGING. THE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS SOME WORK. • Second home owner THEY OU6HTT0 BUILD LIONSHEAD AND GET IT FINISHED. SEPARATE THE SNOWBOARDERS FROM SKIERS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.. • Second home owner...::. TOO MUCH BUILDING. PRICES ON THE MOUNTAIN ARE TOO HIGH: . 4;> Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner • Second home TOO MUCH GROWTH. TOO HIGH OF PRICES. owner • Second home TOURIST REVENUE VERSUS CHANGES THAT ARE TOO DRASTIC owner . TRAFFIC IN THE VILLAGE. PEOPLE THAT HAVE SECOND HOMES IN VAIL DON'T FEEL THEY ARE REPRESENTED • Second. home owner . UP-KEEP OF TOURISM. THEY ARE TOO AMBITIOUS ON THE • Second home owner FREEWAYS. WE ARE THERE SO INFREQUENTLY THAT I HAVE NO COMMENTS AT THIS TIME. • Second home owner WE NEED MUCH BETTER ARCHITECTURE, THAT'S MY ONLY • Second home owner COMPLAINT. WE NEED TO UPGRADE THE OLDER BUILDINGS AND REDUCE COSTS TO THE RETAILERS FOR RENTAL RATES • Mail Surve y . AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WEST VAIL FIRE DEPT • Mail Surve • Mail Surve . BETTER RETAIL EXPERIENCE -PARKING y • Mail Survey CONFERENCE CENTER, PARKING - • Mail Survey CONSTRUCTION NOISE, PARKING • Mail Survey CONVENTION CENTER, PARKING • Mail Surve DEVELOPING AYEAR-AROUND POINT OF DESTINATION y ECONOMIC DIVERSITY - NO EMPTY STOREFRONTS -VARIETY OF BUSINESSES. AFFORDABILITY OF SERVICES: HIGH RENT = HIGH PRICE OF GOODS AND SERVICES • Mail Survey • Mail Survey . EXPANSION MANAGEMENT, REASONABLE STORE SPACE RENTS • Mail Survey FAMILY SERVICES, EMPTY STOREFRONTS IN VILLAGE ' • Mail Survey GETTING OUR SOUL BACK' KEEPING THE TOURISTS COMING IN LARGE NUMBERS WITHOUT OVERTAXING THE SERVICE EMPLOYEES -SERVICE SUFFERS WHEN EMPLOYEES ARE EXHAUSTED • Mail Survey LACK OF BUSINESSES IN LIONSHEAD -DUE TO HIGH RENT , AREA LOOKS BARE AND UNINVITING. I-70 NOISE. CHILDCARE ESP. FOR INFANTS. ONLY FACILITY IS VAIL CHILD CARE AND • Mail Survey THEY HAVE AN EXTENSIVE LIST -NOT JUST A VAIL PROBLEM • Mail Surve . LACK OF ORIGINALITY, CONSTRUCTION y MAINTAINING ECONOMIC VITALITY DURING REDEVELOPMENT • Mail Survey . FIRE DANGER/DEAD TREES/DROUGHT. • Mail Survey NOISE, POLLUTION PARKING, ANCIENT BUILDINGS IN LIONSHEAD • Mail Survey PARKING, ARROGANCE • Mail Survey PARKING, DEVELOPMENT • Mail Survey PARKING, TOO MUCH GROWTH • Mail Survey • Mail Surve PARKING/COMM DEV TOO MUCH DEAD WEIGHT y • Mail Survey REDEVELOPMENT AND BUDGET • Mail Surve REDEVELOPMENT, I-70 NOISE MITIGATION y REDUCED SALES TAX POSSIBLE -TOO MANY RETAIL SALES BUSINESSES AFFECTED BY THEIR BUILDING BE ING TORN DOWN OR CONSTRUCTION TOO CLOSE. CONE. CENTER INDECISION. 43 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Mail Survey. SALES 1'AX: LACK_OF QUALITY STORES-IN-VILLAGE AND- LIONSHEAD. THERE IS LITTLE TO PURCHASE BESIDES T SHIRTS. CONFERENCE CENTER -TOO MUCH MONEY BEING SPENT. IF OTHER CONF CENTERS ARE LOSING MONEY, WHAT WOULD POSSIBLY BE THE REASON FOR BUILDING ONE HERE. • Mail Survey STREET ESCAPE • Mail Survey .SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF REDEVELOPMENT OF VILLAGE AND LIONSHEAD, COMMUNITY CONSENSUS FOR CONVENTION CENTER • Mail Survey "BILLION DOLLAR RENAISSANCE" IS GREAT, BUT LET'S NOT THE' . FORGET-THE INTANGIBLES'- PERSONAL SERVICE, KEEPING IT "AFFORDABLE," NO.T FORGETTING THE "WORKERS" • Mail Survey TRANSPORTATION; POOR QUALITY TREATMENT OF LOCAL EMPLOYEES • Mail Survey RADE 1'HE GENERAL BUSINESS ATMOSPHERE, DON'T BUILD UFG , THE CONFERENCE CENTER UNLESS OPERATING DEFICITS ARE KEPtT OUT;OF THE TOWN BUDGET • Mail Survey YOU ARE MAKING VAIL VILLAGE:A WONDERFUL PLACE TO BUT A DIFFICULT PLACE TO LIVE. ITS NOISY AND PARTY, . TRi4FFIC AND PARKING ARE ABOMINABLE. WE NEED A DECENT GROCERY STORE`-YOU ARE NOT DOING ANYTHING TO ACHIEVE THAT. _. ` ,, - _. 44G- .. ~: f _ Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 vv ou nave an comments on these Areas of Focus or the eneral direction of the town? resident type • Resident comment ALL THE GOALS ARE OUTSTANDING BUT I DON'T THINK THE • Resident TOWN COUNCIL IS SUFFICIENTLY COMMITTED TO THEM. AS FAR AS THE LOCAL BUSINESSES, THERE'S A LOT OF RED TAPE TO GET PROJECTS OFF THE GROUND • Resident . BUS SERVICE. • Resident BUSINESS OWNERS IN VAIL LACKING A BASIC SUPPORT OF PEOPLE WHO OWN BUSINESSES HERE. AFFORDABLE ~ LIFESTYLE FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE AND WORK IN • Resident • Resident VAIL. DISAPPOINTED IN PROGRAMS, NOT PRACTICAL. ' DON T GET BOGGED DOWN POLITICALLY AT TOWN COUNCIL MEETINGS. • Resident DON'T LIKE WHAT HAS BEEN DONE WITH THE MONEY ISSUE ABOUT THE PAY FOR THE HIGHWAY PATROL AND ABOUT THE OVER POPULATION • Resident • Resident . DON'T USE ANY KIND OF SURVEYS. EVERYONE I KNOW IS LEAVING TOWN SO SOMETHING IS NOT EXACTLY RIGHT • Resident . EVERYTHING IS ALRIGHT. THE SERVICES OFFERED ARE IN • Resident THE CORRECT PLACE. FOR THE TOWN GOVERNMENT TO REMAIN AS A TOWN GOVERNMENT, AND NOT COMPETE OR INTERFERE WITH • Resident PRIVATE ENTERPRISE. • Resident GET A LONG RANGE PLAN AND STICK TO IT. GET IN AND GET OUT, SO THEY CAN FINALLY START DIGGING FOR THE STRUCTURES THAT NEED TO BE BU ILT. IF THEY FOLLOW THROUGH SO FAR WITH THE DISPLAYS AND MEETINGS EVERYTHING IN MY OPINION IS A FIRST CLASS • Resident OPERATION. IF THEY DON'T IT WILL FLOP. GET RID OF BIG CORPORATIONS AND A BECOM E MORE PRIVATIZED • Resident . HEATING THE STREETS OF VAIL TO MELT THE SNOW I THINK ' • Resident , THAT S A WASTE. I AM IN FAVOR OF MANY OF THE LARGE PROJECTS AND NOT CONCERNED WITH HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS • Resident . WE NEED TO BRING PEOPLE INTO THE TOWN. I DISAGREE WITH BUILDING THE CONFERENCE CENTER AND I THINK THE SCALE NEEDS TO BE SMALLER O • Resident N THE RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT. I DONT KNOW HOW THE NEW CONFERENCE CENTER WILL BENEFIT THE TOWN BECAUSE THE TOWN WILL HAVE TO PAY UP KEEP. • Resident • I DON'T KNOW WHY VAIL IS BUILDING A GYMNASTICS CENTER THAT WILL BE USED PRIMARILY BY DOWN V Resident ALLEY PEOPLE. I DON? THINK SO • Resident . I DON'T THINK THAT THEY ARE DOING ENOUGH TO NAVIGATE • Resident THE NOTICE. I DON'T THINK THEY CAN EVER.TAKE CARE OF THE NOISE ON 45 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 I-70. I DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD TAKE CREDIT FOR THE SALES • Resident TAX IMPROVEMENT. THAT IS A RESULT OF THE IMPROVED ECONOMY. • Resident I HATE TO SEE THEM TAKE OVER THE RECREATION DISTRICT. VAIL RESORTS tS ACTUALLY THE GOVERNMENT BECAUSE OF SLIFER. DEED RESTRICTED HOUSING IS GRUESOME AND UNFAIR. 3% PER YEAR IS OUTRAGEOUS. • Resident I HAVE NOTHING TO ADD. I HAVEN'T LIVED HERE LONG. I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH AT THIS • Resident TIME. • Resident I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY PLANS FOR I-70 NOTICE REDUCTION. • Resident I HAVEN'T SEEN NOTICEABLE IMPROVEMENT. • Resident I HOPE THE CROSSROADS PLAN GETS APPROVED. I HOPE THERE WILL BE IMPROVEMENTS. WE'RE GOING • Resident THOUGHT A SEVERE TRANSITIONAL PHASE. I HOPE THINGS IMPROVE. I HOPE VAIL WONT BECOME A BEAVER CREEK HAVING • Resident PEOPLE INVOLVED IN TOWN GOVERNMENT WHO OWN A LOT OF THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION. DEVELOPMENT IS NOT IN THE TOWNS BEST INTEREST. I JUST THINK THE TOWN COUNCIL IS TOO STRICT AND TRIES • Resident TO CONTROL INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENT. CHANGING THE COLOR OF MY ROOF MUST MEET THEIR APPROVAL. BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING. • Resident I JUST WISH THEY'D GET THROUGH THEM QUICKER. ESPECIALLY BEFORE SUMMER HITS. • Resident I LIKE THE GYMNASTICS. I THINK THAT WAS A GREAT MOVE AND I THINK THEY DID A GOOD JOB OF THAT. I STILL THINK THEY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH PARKING AND A PROBLEM WITH ATTITUDE. • Resident I LIVE IN WEST VAIL. LEAVE OPEN SPACE BY THE FIRE STATION, NOT TOO MANY HOUSES. • Resident I SHAKE MY HEAD. SINCE 1971, MY FIRST CONSCIOUS AWARENESS WAS LACK OF EMPLOYEE HOUSING. • Resident I THINK I'M GOOD. I THINK ONE OF THE PROBLEMS I$ THAT IT'S A VERY ELITIST • Resident TOWN. THEY WANT FAMILIES TO LIVE IN DOWN VALLEY. • Resident I THINK REDEVELOPMENT IS A JOKE IN THE TOWN OF VAIL. THERE ARE SERIOUS ISSUES WITH REAL ESTATE. I THINK SOME OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND STAFF ARE A • Resident LITTLE OUT OF TOUCH WITH THE TOWN AND WHAT'S GOING ON AROUND THEMO. • Resident THINK THE LEADERSHIP IS TERRIBLE. THEY NEVER LISTEN I . TO PEOPLE ABOUT THE CONFERENCE CENTER OR NOT GETTING THE FIRE HOUSE IN WESTFIELD. I THINK THE' TOWN GENERALLY HAS THE DESIRE TO GO IN • Resident THE RIGHT DIRECTION AND THE COUNCIL HAS THE DESIRE. THE QUESTION IS WHEN THE EMPHASIS SHOULD BE APPLIED AND WHERE AND HOW. 46 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident I THINK THE TOWN ISGOING TO GROW • Resident . I THINK THE TOWN RECOGNIZES THE ISSUES BUT IS NOT MOVING. TO RESOLVE THEM IN AN EFFICIENT ENOUGH • Resident MANNER. I THINK THEY ARE FOCUSING ON THE TOURIS T ECONOMY MORE THAN ON THE LOCALS. THEY EXPECT LOCALS TO PUT • Resident UP AND SHUT UP. I THINK THEY SHOULD GET PEOPLE ON THE COUNCIL WHO HAVE SOME TRAINING • Resident . I THINK THEY SHOULD TAKEOVER MANAGEMENT OF THE RECREATIONAL DISTRICT. THEY NEED TO HAVE A BETTER OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR DOWNTO • Resident WN REDEVELOPMENT. • I THINK THEY'RE VERY LIMITED AND THEIR NOT LOOKING AT THE LONGER PICTURE 10 YEARS DOWN THE Resident LINE. I THINK WE ARE BEING VERY SHORT SIGHTED I N OUR OUTLOOK. I THINK THAT THE COUNCIL IS TAKING A • Resident REACTIONARY OUTLOOK INSTEAD OF BEING PRO-ACTIVE. I THINK WE NEED AN OUTDOOR PARKING WITH BUS SERVICE TO IT. I QUESTION THE VALIDITY OF THE CONVENTION CENTER. THE RESORTS AND HOTELS SHOULD BE CATERING TO THE DESTINATION TOURIST NOT THE F , RONT RANGE OF DENVER. • Resident • Resident I WANT TO SEE REDEVELOPMENT FINISHED . I WAS REALLY DISAPPOINTED TO HEAR THAT THERE WASN'T ADEQUATE PARKING FOR THE NEW EMPLOY EE HOUSING PROJECTS. • Resident I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE FOCUS ON ROAD • Resident NOISE. IF FRISCO CAN DO IT SO CAN VAIL. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT IN MEETINGS, SOME OF THE ISSUES BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION LIKE OPI NIONS OTHER THAN THE COUNCIL'S. THING SUCH AS BUSINESS PEOPLE AND • Resident HOMEOWNERS SAY. • R i I-70 NOISE IS A VERY BIG ISSUE FOR ME BECAUSE I LIVE NEARBY. ALSO, PARKING IS A BIG ISSUE IN TOW es dent N. I'D LIKE THEM TO BE COURAGEOUS AND GO AHEAD WITH THE CONFERENCE CENTER • Resident . I'D LIKE TO SEE A BETTER TRAFFIC FLOW AND MORE • Resident POLICING OF ERRANT DRIVERS. ' I D LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING LIKE THE AVON RECREATION CENTER. THATS AFFORDABLE AND SOMETH • Resident ING FAMILY ORIENTED AND INDOORS FOR THE LOCAL PEOPLE ' • Resident . I D RATHER KEEP SOME OF THE OLDER BUILDINGS. IF THEY COULD HELP WITH THE NOTICE ,.THAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL • Resident . I'M EXITED TO SEE THE REDEVELOPMENT EFFORT I'M • R . WORRIED ABOUT POSITIVELY ATTRACTING RETAILERS AND KEEPING THE:. COMMUNITY RESORT FEELI esident NG. I'M. LEANING TOWARDS THE CONVENTION CENTER NOT BEING BUILT BUT I'M NOT SURE BECAUSE I ALSO WANT TO HELP MERCHANTS. 47 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident _ _. , I'M`NOT SATISFIED WITM'THE TOWN COUNCIL. ~. , • Resident . I'M REALLY DISAPPOINTED HOW THEY ARE HANDLING THE CONFERENCE CENTER BY SHOVING ISSUES DOWN OUR THROAT. AND. WITH. NOISE MITIGATION, WHY CAN'T THEY DO IN WESTVAIL WHAT THEY DID,IN EAST VAIL. I'M UNHAPPY THAT 1T IS AIMED`AT ONLY RICH PEOPLE THAT • Resident ARE HERE FOR ONLY A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME AND NOT.. DOING ENOUGH FOR. THE WORKING PEOPLE AND FOR AVERAGE; MIDDLE CLASS PEOPLE. • Resident " - ~ ~ ~ ~ IMPORTANT TO. BE OPEN MINDED ABOUT THE FUTURE. , IT SEEMS LIKE THE FOCUS CHANGES WITH THE TOWN • Resident COUNCIL. LE: THE CONFERENCE CENTER BEING A COME ' AND GO ISSUE. • Resident IT'S COSING ITS SENSE OF COMMUNITY... .. ~ • Resident .. , - IT'S TAKING A LONG TIME. THERE,SEEMS TO BE A MAJOR, ` TIME DELAY ISSUE. • Resident JUST FOCUS ON THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE"MERE INSTEAD OF' JUST THE TOURISTS. • Resident: . ~ ~ JUST INVEST A LOT OF MONEY IN THE NEW RENOVATION: I THINK THEY'RE STARTING Tt~ REALIZE.THAT THEY'RE GOING - TO HAVE TO UPDATE THING$ IN ORDER TO KEEP THEIR ~~ REIGN ON THE TOP AS FAR AS SKI`RESORTS GO: • Resident KEEP THEIR HQNDS.OF.F THE:VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT... . .. .." . • Resident _ . LIKE I SAID,.THEGENERAL MUNICIPAL SERVICES NEED TQ BE , IMPROVED INCLUDING TRANSPORTATION, POLICE SERVICES. ' AND THE SALES TAX, PARKING MAYBE:WE NEED MORE SURVEYS; A LITTLE MORE OPEN ; .` - , -, • Resident . . MEETING IDEAS TO,GET US BACK WHERE IT IS GOING IN THE RIGHT QIRECTION:, HAVE A SURVEY IN THE NEWSPAPER.. --. "' POSSIBLY " - :. TOWN COUNCIL AND IT'S MONEY BUYS IT'S WAY INTO;THE • Resident . COMPLETELY CORRUPT:, DIANA DONAVAN IS ONLY NON ,.. . CORRUPT EMPLOYEE:: .Resident ~ ,' MY SECOND THING FOR THE FIRST: QUESTION IS PARKING. ~. .. Resident , NO COMMENT: ` ."Resident ... ,.. ~: NO COMMENT... ~ ; ;, - --.- • Resident ,- - - -' ~ -. NO COMMENTS ON THESE ISSUES.- ` - --._ .- _ __ - _ _.. _~ _~_.,__ .. • Resident ~ NO COMMENTS ON THIS QUESTION. • Resident - . - ; " NO.COMMENTS TO ADD AT THIS TIME. • Resident ° °, . - NO COMMENTS. - • Resident ~ ~ ~ ` ' NO COMMENTS. , " :., ~ - . • Resident ' ` NO COMMENTS. - .. - ~: • Residenfi ' ". -.- _ NO COMMERCIAL OR HOME BUILRING $HOULD,BE OVER 35 BUILDINGS,SHOULD NOT BE BUBLT IN SUCH A~- FEET HIGH: .. : WAY THE YOU.CANNOT. SEE'THESURROUNDING MOUNTAINS. - ~ PARKING SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED ON:THE FRONTAGE .. ' ROADS DUE TO SAFETY. A`LIMIT SHOULD 8E PUT ON SKIERS. _ .. .Resident .. ~ , "~ NO NOT REALLY. . . . - ` .Resident `_ ` NO NOT REALLY. , , •. I V' " " 4~9 Town of. Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident- NO, I THINK THEY NEED TO WORK FASTER WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT PLANNING. • Resident NO, I'M QUITE SATISFIED WITH THE TOWN. I'VE BEEN THERE OVER 20 YEARS. • Resident NO. (80) • Resident NOISE ABATEMENT IS A WASTE OF TIME. THERE ARE MORE IMPORTANT ISSUES THAN THAT. • Resident NOISE IS ALWAYS AN ISSUE. • Resident NOISE. EASE THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC AND PUT UP TREES INSTEAD OF WALLS. • Resident NONE. (38) • Resident NOT AT THE MOMENT. • Resident NOT AT THIS TIME. • Resident NOT AT THIS TIME. • Resident NOT REALLY. • Resident NOT REALLY. • Resident NOTHING REALLY. • Resident NOTHING SPECIFIC. • Resident ONE OF THE FOCUSES IS TO ADD IS AFFORDABILITY OF HOUSING FOR LOCAL RESIDENTS AND WORKERS. ALSO, RELATIVE TO:THE QUALITY OF SERVICE BY WORKERS IN LOCAL BUSINESS, TUNE IT UP. VAIL IS NOT THE ANSWER • Resident . PARTS OF THE TOWN ARE WORKING WELL BUT THEY ARE TAKING TOO LONG TO COMPLETE PROJECTS: • Resident PERSONALLY, I THINK THAT. THEY ARE DOING ALL THEY CAN • Resident . PUT UP MORE.DOG BAGS FO.R PEOPLE,W,tTH DOGS ON THE PATHS' AROUND VAIL ~:.: • Resident REDEVELOPMENT. THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNSEL, SHOULD WORK TOGETHER FOR A PLAN. THERE SHOULD BE MORE COMMUNICATION AND COOPERATION • Resident . REORGANIZATION AND CLEANING THE HOUSE WITHIN THE COMMUNITI' DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. BETTER RAPPORT WITH. LOCALS, TRYING TO IMPROVE THEIR PROPERTY. • Resident SAME AS THE PREVIOUS COMMENTS: • Resident - . SKI RESORTS ARE GETTING OVERCROWDED AND: COMPROMISE THE RESORT EXPERIENCE. • Resident SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE ABOUT THE HIGHWAY NOISE • Resident . SUPPORT THE LOCAL COMMUNITY. THEY DECIDED TO CHOOSE AND OUT-OF-STATE £OMPANY FOR THEIR CONFERENCE CENTER. THEY ALSO SPEND TOO MUCN MONEY ON PLANNING BUT NEVER~ON THE EXECUTION OF THE. PLANS:' + Resident TAKE BACK THE RECREATION DISTRICT MANAGEMENT • Resident . TAKE BACK THE VAIL RECREATION. DISTRICT: ;: • Resident ; ., THAT THE TOWN COUNCIL AND~LEADERS NEED TO. FOCUS , MORE ON THE OPINIONS OF"THEYEAR-ROUND LOCAL. . . RESIDENTS AND LESS,:ON A TOURIST TRADE,. THAT WILL TAKE ~ CARE OF ITSELF:. . . ,. Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident t Resident Resident. THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY AND THE INCREASE OF THE TAXES. WE NEED TO HAVE SOMETHING DONE WITH THE CHARGE FOR THREE OR BEFORE. THE CONFERENCE CENTER COSTS AND I-70 NOISE. THE COUNCIL SHOULD TAKE OVER. THE RECREATION DISTRICT SHOULD BE DISBANDED. THE CROSSROADS REDEVELOPMENT NEEDS TO BE IMPROVED. THE DIRECTION OF THE TOWN MISSED ON THE MIDDLE TOWN HOUSING, THE. LOCATION IS TERRIBLE AND THE BUILDING IS .AWFUL:" THE LEADERSHIP AND DIRECTION IS LETHARGIC. THE GYM NEEDS TO BE FINISHED. NOISE ISSUES NEED TO BE ADDRESSED:. THE LEADERSHIP HAS TOO MUCH ON THEIR PLATE. THEY NEED-TO MAKE DECISIONS FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE FOR YEARS. AND YEARS TO COME. WE'RE TEETERING ON THE EDGE,OF DISASTER. THE LOCALS ARE GETTING SCREWED. THE FOCUS IS ON OUT-OF-TOWNERS. VAIL IS THE ONLY SKI RESORT WHO CHARGES FOR PARKING. THE MAIN PROBLEM 1S THE TOWN IS BLOATED. THERE'S TOO MANY EMPLOYEES. THE NOISE. fSSUE REALLY BOTHERS ME. WE NEED PRO ACTIVE DIRECTION. THE. NOISE, ON 1-70 IS AWFUL AND SO IS THE PARKING PREFERENCE FOR VAIL RESORTS. THERE'S A NEGATIVE FEELING ABOUT TH.E VAIL RESORT TAKING OVER THE BUSINESSES. ,ALL. THEY WANT IS MONEY. THE PROPOSED:' CONVENTION. CENTER IS. UNNECESSARY AS A MEANS OF DEVELOPING THE ECONOMY: THE REACM,QF EDUCATION::. I -THINK THAT THEY AREN'T DOING~A REAL, GOOD:JOB OR SPENpING ENOUGH MONEY. I THINK THEY ARE GOING TO DROP THE BALL ON THIS CONVENTION. CENTER: THEY ARE WASTING MONEY ON THE MONORAIL SYSTEM <,.,: THEiTOWN IS PRETTY WELL.RUN: THE TOWN NEEDS TO UPDATEJTSELF TO BE IN COMPETITION KITH OTHER SKI-RESORT TOWNS. VAIL WILL GROW ZFreorir coc , THE TOWN-SHOULD. REALIZE. THAT IT NEEDS TO PROVIDE- MOREAFFORDABLE HOUSING: THE=TOWNS DOWN VALLEY ARE DOING A BETTER JOB THAN VALE AND NONE QF THE- LOCALS ARE COMING BACK TO VALE INSTEAD-THEY`ARE STAYING DOWN VALLEY: THE VAIL.RESORTS ARE.OVER~:TAKING FROM.THE TOWN OF VAILt THE WEST FIRE STATION; LOOK.AT THE COST AND: .REZONING:: THE WESTVAIL FIRE STATION_THING'IS~A BIG' CONCERN FOR• ME. NO FIRE STATION YET, SO IT'S A BAD THING: Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident THERE_ARE A.FEW SMALL..GROUP,S_TtiAT GET-'THE TOWN COUNCIL TO DO TOO MUCM THUS IGNORING THE NEEDS OF THE GREATER POPULATION IN ORDER TO SATISFY SMALL GROUPS SUCH AS CONVENTION CENTER SUPPORTERS. SPENDING MY MONEY FOR A HOTEL WITH NO ECONOMIC BENEFIT FOR 90%. • Resident THERE IS NO FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY IN THE TOWN COUNCIL. THE PLANNING BOARD HAS BEEN BOUGHT OFF AS EVIDENCED BY THE NEW "AFFORDABLE HOUSING." EXIT 176 LOOKS LIKE A FEDERAL PRISON. THEY ARE IGNORING YEAR . . . ROUND.TAXPAYERS NEEDS. • Resident THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE PARKING AND MORE THINGS FOR THE KIDS,AND TEENAGERS TO DO. • Resident THERE.SHOULD BE;.GREATER PARTICIPATION BY THE TOWN, LESS RED TAPE AND MORE COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT. • Resident TMERE.SHOULD 8E MORE ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY EMPLOYEE HOUSING`AND LOCAL FAMILY HOUSING. • Resident THERE SHOULD BE MORE SECURITY IN VAIL: PARKING GARAGES.. THERE:WA$ A SEXUAL ASSAULT IN ONE OF THEM ABOUT.A MONTH AGO. • Resident THERE'S A LACK OF LEADERSHIP ON THE TOWN COUNCIL. THEY ARE NOT UVILLING TO TAKE RISKS: THEY WANT TO STUDY TOO MUCH AND`NOT TRUST IN THEIR GUT FEELING. • Resident THERE'S A LOT GOING-ON; A LOT OF OPTIONS BUT MY INTERESTS AREN.'T BEING SERVED. THEY TEND TO FOCUS MORE ON THE' RESORT AND'CLIENTELE DON'T SPEND MONEY ON PROGRAP/IS FOR PEOPLE LIVING IN,THE COMMUNITY OR ON RUBiIC FACILITIES t=OR fNDOOR RECREATION:. • Re§iderit. - THERE'S A TOTAL LACK OF LEADERSHIP. EVERYONE IS` ,; ` ._ .; AFRAID OF MAKING A MISTAKE. IF.THE OLD GUARD DOES NOT WANT SOMETHING, IT DOESNOT HAPPEN, • Resident THEY ARE.DOING NOTHING: COMMITTEE AFTER COMMITTEE AND THEY DO NOTHING. THEY HAVE DONE NOTHING.' • Resident THEY ARE FOCUSING ON THE WRONG:AREA3 WITH THE' ..CONVENTION CENTER TO BRING-MORE PEOPLE INTO TOWN. THEY NEED TO PAY ATTENTION TO 1"HE RESIDENTS, NOT VISITORS ONLY: • Resident - _- THEY ARE.OVER DEVELOPING. EVEN-THE WILD LIFE IS= MOVING, OUT. THING$ ARE„ GROWING ANp GETTING OUT OF HAND:. ITS TOO EXPENSIVE TO BE HERE ANYMORE • Resident THEY'ARE WORRYING TOO MUCH;'ABOUT TOURISM. AND NOT r.. . TAKING~CARE'OF THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE.HERE; LIKE THE GOLF GOURSE.: IT COSTS TOO MUCH AND=THERE ARE LESS TEE TIMES FOR THE LOCAL$.' ALSO, I SEE NO CHANGE IN . DECREASING THE NOISE ON 1-70: • Resident. THEY BETTER GET THE FIRE STATION IN-NOW: tTS ABOUT TIME:' 15-20 YEARS IS A LITTLE LATE. + Resident. THEY BUILD NEW HOUSING AND PEOPLE STILL COMPLAIN: .THEY PUSH THE MIDDLE CLASS OUT OF TOWN THEN ,:- ;,,..: -. _ . - ,WONDER WHY PEOPLE WON'T SPEND MONEY HERE IT'S , , : ,. ,_ -, . _ .. CHEAPER TO BUY FROM AVON AND WAL`-MART THAN CITY` `` _. , , . - . >. .. 51'.. Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 MARKETlSAFEWAY. EVEN IF ITS ONLY 10-20 CENTS I GO THERE. • Resident THEY DON'T REALLY APPLY TO ME AT ALL • Resident . THEY GET A 'ONE' ON WEST VAIL FIRE STATION BECAUSE IT , HAS BEEN TALKED ABOUT FOREVER AND NOTHING HAS BEEN • Resident DONE. NOTHING BUILT, JUST TALK. THEY HAVE. MADE AN EFFORT TO MAKE CHANGES OR TO . TURN IN.THE'RIGHT DIRECTION: • Resident ~ THEY HAVE NOT MADE A MOVE ON THE FIRE STATION OR THE CONFERENCE CENTER. THEY ARE NOT IN TOUCH WITH THE • Resident IDEAS OF THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE. THEY HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING YET, THEY JUST KEEP TALKING ABOUT IT. • Resident THEY NEED A FIRE STATION IN WEST VAIL • Resident . THEY NEED MORE.FUN THINGS AND MORE HOUSING FOR THE • Resident VILLAGE WORKERS. • Resident THEY NEED MORE.PARKING. THEY NEED TO BE MORE AGGRESSIVE ABOUT NOISE • Resident POLLUTION ON I-70. " THEY NEED TO DO MORE FOR PEOPLE THAT LIVE HER E YEAR AROUND. • Resident THEY NEED TO DO SOME SORT OF RENT CONTROL TO ATTRACT MORE BUSINESSES, MORE VARIETY OF • Resident BUSINESSES: THEY NEED~TO. GET BUSINESS MINDED PEOPLE; ON: THEIR : . BOARD ;.-IT'S CRAZY TO"LISTEN TO PEOPLE WHO DONT KNOW AS; MUCH AS PEOPLE.THE WHO ARE TRYING TO GET STUFF DONE:,:.:THERE SHOULD.BE HIGHER STANDARDS FOR THOSE • Resident POSITIONS,,THATS.CLEAR, BE MORE PROFESSIONAL. THEY NEED TO. GET THEIR ACT TOGETHER. THEY'RE LETTING .THE VAIL,RESORTS BULLY THEM AROUNDc • Resident • Resident . .. THEY NEED TO INCREASE THE LOCAL USE OF THE TOWN. ~ THEY NEED TO LISTEN TO THE`LOCAL RESIDENTS ON THESE • Resident- - .- ISSUES. _ . _.. ~ ~:_ _ THEYNEED TO LIVE WITHIN THEIR MEANS AND~GET MORE • Resident INVOLVED WITH THE BUSINESSES COMMUNITY. THEY SHOULD WATCH THE WAY THEY SPEND MONEY THEY . NEED Td THINK.MORE LONG TERM. I'M VERY UPSET ABOUT THE DONAVON PAVILION: THEY SCRAPPED $250 MILLION OF ARCHITECTURAL PLAN,NIN,G BECAUSE.THEY DIDN'T THINK • Resident AHEAD:_" , THEY SHOULD WORK TOGETHER : • Resident . ,..,, ,, ,..;.:.:. THEY SPEND TOO'MUCH TIME.TALKING: THEY NEED TO GO AHEAD AND DO AN OYERALL.T.OWN VOTE ABOUT IF' IT IS' GOOD 1=0R'THE TOWN TO DO IT' • Resident: THEY WAKE UP IN. THE: MORNING AND HAVE TO BE RETRAINED , -. _ 52. Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident THEY'RE GOING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION WITH THE CONVENTION CENTER. I THINK IT IS A LOSER. • Resident THEY'RE TOO HUNG UP IN NITPICKING AND DON'T SEE THE BIG PICTURE. • Resident THEY'RE WASTING TOO MUCH MONEY. • Resident TRAFFIC ON I-70 IS A BIG PROBLEM AND IS GETTING WORSE. THE SPEED LIMIT SHOULD BE LOWERED BETWEEN EXIT 180 AND EXIT 168. • Resident WE DON'T HAVE AS MANY VISITORS AS WE USED TO. THE. TOWN OF VAIL JUST IS NQT AS FRIENDLY AS IT USED TO BE. • Resident WE HAVE QUALIFIED PEOPLE ON THE COUNCIL WHO WORK HARD. • Resident WE HAVE THE BEST SKIING. OTHER THAN THAT, IT'S THE HARDEST PLACE TO LIVE. IT'S MOST FRUSTRATING. • Resident WE HAVE TO ADDRESS I-70 TRAFFIC. • Resident WE NEED THE WESTFIELD FIRE STATION TO PROCEED. • Resident WE NEED TO FIND SOME WAY TO KEEP MORE OF THE ECONOMY IN VAIL. • Resident WE NEED TO FOCUS ON THE CHILDREN. WE HAVE SOME PROBLEMS WITH THE KIDS BECAUSE ALL THEIR PARENTS WORK. WE NEED TO KEEP THEM AWAY FROM DRUGS AND CRIME. • Resident WE NEED TO GO AHEAD WITH THE CROSSROADS. AND, THE TOWN COUNCIL IS VERY SELF SERVING. • Resident WE NEED TO REEVALUATE THE CONFERENCE CENTER. • Resident WE SEEM TO BE GOING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. • Resident WHERE IS THE FIRE STATION WE'VE WANTED IT FOR 20 YEARS NOW? . • Resident WHERE IS THE VISION 10 OR 20 YEARS PUT: WE NEED NOT BE A LITTLE AUSTRIAN VILLAGE. WE NEED TO BE MORE A TOWN THAT IS ATTRACTIVE TO BUSINESSES OTHER THAN WHAT'S HERE NOW, E.G. ASPEN. • Resident WOULD LIKE SOME LAND BRIDGES FOR THE ANIMALS ACROSS THE HIGHWAY. DO NOT NEED ANOTHER FIRE STATION: • Second home owner AS OWNERS OF CONDOS WE THINK THAT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN TOO FORCEFUL IN REQUIRING SPRINKL-ER SYSTEMS. - -- --~ - --~ - • Second home owner CONSTRUCTION. • Second home owner DO A BETTER JOB OF INTEGRATING ALL ASPECTS OF THE LOCAL LIFE. SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE MOVED FROM OTHER COUNTRIES. THERE'S A LOT OF DIVERSITY AND THEY'RE NOT MAKING IT COHESIVE. PEOPLE DONT REALIZE ALL THE THINGS OFFERED BESIDES THE RESORTS. • Second home owner EMPLOYEE HOUSING HAS BEEN A PROBLEM. HOPEFULLY SOMETHING CAN. IMPROVE. • Second home owner I AGREE WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENTS THEY'VE TARGETED: 53 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner I AM PLEASED WITH ALL THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE GOING ON NOW. I LIKE THE FACT THAT A LOT OF BUILDINGS • Second home owner ARE BEING REDONE. I LIKE THE NEW LIONSHEAD PLAN. I DO NOT HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT FOR PEOPLE ON TH E TOWN COUNCIL AND THE DECISIONS THEY MAKE OR THE FUSS OVER THE PLAN FOR THE CONVENTION CENTER THEIR , SIMPLE. MINDS AND THEIR FAILURE TO LISTEN TO THE • Second home owner EXPERTS. I DON'T THINK THEY'RE CONCERNED WITH THE EVERYDA Y PERSON HERE. l THINK THEY'RE MORE CONCERNED WITH . THE TOURISTS COMING IN AND SPENDING MONEY • Second home owner . I• GUESS I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM LOOSING UP A LITT LE BIT ON BUILDING ON THE INTERIOR OF YOUR OWN HOME ON • Second home owne , BEING ABLE TO BUILD IN YOUR HOME A LITTLE MORE. r I HAVE A CONDO IN A BUILDING THAT IS NOT ALLOWED TO GROW OR REBUILD. I THINK ITS UNFAIR. IT TAKES SO MUCH MONEY TO GET THE ZONING LAWS CHANGED • Second home owner . I JUST FEEL THAT THERE ARE SO MANY PEOPLE WITH SO . MANY PEOPLE IN THE MIX IT TAKES SO LONG TO GET THINGS DONE. THEY HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THESE THINKS SO • Second home owne LONG AND NOTHING HAPPENS VERY QUICKLY. r I THINK IT'S A GOOD MOVE. THEY'RE TRYING TO MAKE IT LOOK MORE EUROPEAN AND THE ZONING THEY'VE W ORKED ON MAKES IT SO WE CAN INCREASE OUR ACREAGE I THINK • Second home owner .. THEIR DOING THAT SO PEOPLE CAN UPDATE THEIR HOUSES. • Second home owner I THINK ITS PROGRESSING. I THINK THAT'S ABOUT IT I THINK THE CONVENTION CENTER IS A REAL WAST E OF MONEY. • Second home owner I THINK THE FOCUS IS TO KEEP MODERNIZING AND • Second home owner UPDATING. I THINK THE TOWN HAS DEVELOPED AS A SERVICE BUSINESS AND WE SHOULD FOCUS ON THE CUSTOMER THE PEOPLE • Second home owner , WHO VISIT. I THINK THEIR PRICES ARE EXTREMELY HIGH AND T HAT THEY SHOULD LOWER THEM FOR THE VAIL RESORTS • Second home owner . I THINK THEY HAVE A REAL PROBLEM, BECAUSE THERE - - ARE.N'T ANY RETAIL STORES AND TOO MANY RESTAURANTS • Second home owner HAVE CLOSED. I THINK THEY NEED TO GET OFF THEIR DUFFS A ND COME TO SOME"CONCLUSIONS. YOU CAN DO A MILLION STUDIES BUT • Second home owner MEANWHILE THINGS JUST GET WORSE. I THINK THEY NEED TO IMPROVE THEIR SERVICES T . HEY NEED A HIGH SPEED CHAIR LIFT OUT OF THE BOWLS AND THEY NEED TO IMPROVE THE CLARK MARKET PLAN FOR • Second home owner REDEVELOPMENT. I THINK THEY STILL NEED TO DO A LITTLE PLANNIN ' G. I M REALLY EXCITED ABOUT NEW THINGS, BUT iT JUST DOESN'T FIT WITH THE THEME OF GREATER CONTINUITY TOWARDS THE ALPINE THEME.. Town of Vaii Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner f WOULD LIKE TO SEE-THEM CLEAN°UP~THE VILLAGES MAKE IT MORE MODERN AND MAKE IT HANDICAP ACCESSIBLE. • Second home owner I'D LIKE TO HAVE MORE SAY IN REDEVELOPMENT. • Second home owner I'M GLAD TO SEE THEM DOING SOMETHING WITH LIONSHEAD. • Second home owner I'M HAPPY NOW TO SEE MOVEMENT. THEY ARE DOING SOMETHING TO FINALLY ADDRESS ISSUES NOT JUST TALK ABOUT THEM. • Second home owner I'M VERY PLEASED WITH iT, REALLY PLEASED. • Second home owner IT'S GETTING TOO PRICEY. . _„ - •Second homeowner . ~ `` I VE LNED 1`HERE FOR 30-YEARS-: IFS DIFFICULT TO MAINTAIN THE BEAUTY WITH THE EXPANDING POPULATION. • Second home owner JUST CONTINUE TO TRY TO GET STRONG LEADERSHIP WITH VISION. • Second home owner NO COMMENTS AT THIS TIME. • Second.home owner NO~CQMMENTS. • Second home owner NOCOMMENTS. • Second home owner NO COMMENTS. • Second home owner NO COMMENTS. + Second home owner NO I DON'T. • Second home owner NO. NOT REALLY. • Second home owner NO NOT REALLY. I'M A SEASONAL RESIDENT. • Second home owner NO: (31). • Second home. owner NO. IT: WILL JUST BE NICE'WHEN THE RENOVATION IS DONE. • Second home owner NON.E., (6) . • Second home owner NOT REALLY, I STILL LIKE IT REAL WELL. • Second -home owner NOT REALLY:: ;,:: • Second home owner> : NOT REALLY: • Second home' owner NOTHING. • Second home owner ONCE AGAIN, WE DONT GIVE A LOT OF TIME-AND ATTENTION TO THE'.PARTICULARS IN THE, VAIL AREA. • Secorid-home owner. . PRICES ARE GETTING TOO HIGH IN>:RESTAURANTS ANQ THE ,; , , .. . ,. -COST OF LIFT TICKETS, FOR EXAMPLE, HAS PREVENTED; G HERE:. SOME OF MY FRIENDS FROM_LIVIN • Second home owrier RUBLIC TRANSPORTAIION~ISSUESARE MORE IMPORTANT. -.:_ _ _ ._ _. THE TOWN COUNCIL IS TOO. CONSERVATIVE TOO MUCH. IS_ -- - SPENT ON THE ECONOMY:. `THE TOWN COUNCIL WANTS TO KEER BUSINESSES HAPPY.;. . • Second home owner TAXATION. THE TOWN PUTS. UP A FRONT OF LISTENING TO PROPERTY OWNERS;THAT`DONT LIVE THERE FULL TIME THEN DOES. WHAT IT WANTS ANYWAY. • Second home owner TAXES ARE EXTREMELY HIGH: THE. Y NEED T® DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE TAX-STRUCTURE:. ' • Second home owner: IS GOOD ESPECIALLY ADDRESSING TAX THE DIRECTION ISSUES-BUT NOT I -70 NOISE: ' :, ., . •Second home owner THE FIRST FOUR AREAS AREMAIN MY CONCERNS • Second home owner THE GAP IS STILL CONTINUING TO;WIDEN BE7INEEN PEOPLE '_ WHO CAN AFFORD TO'ACCESS VAIL RESORTS AND-THOSE: ' .. WHO CANNOT." 55;_ .. _ . Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner THE GENERAL DIRECTION IS GOOD. + Second homeowner THE GROWTH HAS BEEN EXCEPTIONALLY STRONG. I FEEL THAT UNFORTUNATELY, SOME PEOPLE CAN NO LONGER PARTICIPATE IN WHAT VAIL HAS TO OFFER BECAUSE OF THE COST OF SKIING AND SPORTS. • Second home owner THE NOISE ABATEMENT IS A CONCERN ON I-70. • Second home owner THE TOWN IS GROWING. • Second home owner THE TOWN IS TRYING ITS HARDEST AT NOT MEETING ITS OWN AGENDA. THE TOWN OF VEIL OWNS TOO MUCH REAL ESTATE AND THAT CAUSES CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. • Second home owner THE TOWN LOVES TO SPEND MONEY. IT DOESN'T HAVE AND CREATE FOLLIES, THE CLASSIC CASE BEING DONOVAN PARK. THE CONVENTION CENTER I THE STUPIDEST EVER. • Second home owner THE TOWN USED TO WORK BETTER WITH BUSINESS OWNERS TO THE ADVANTAGE OF BOTH THE TOWN AND THE BUSINESS. • Second home owner THEY NEED TO BE A LITTLE MORE PROACTIVE AND, THE TOWN OF VAIL AND THE TOWN MERCHANTS NEED TO GET ON THE SAME PAGE AND WORK TOGETHER MORE. • Second home owner THEY NEED TO BE SURE TO INCLUDE NOT JUST THE BUSINESSES BUT ALSO THE RESIDENTS IN PLANNING. • Second home owner THEY NEVER MENTIONED THE CONVENTION CENTER WHICH IS GOING TO BE THE BIGGEST TAX BURDEN. • Second home owner TOO OFTEN ONE PERSON CAN STAND IN THE WAY OF A MAJOR PROJECT FOR A RELATIVELY MINOR REASON. • Second home owner WE NEED A NEW TOWN COUNCIL. THEY COULD WORK WITH PART TIME RESIDENTS, INVOLVE PART TIME RESIDENT IN COMMUNITY DECISIONS. • Second home owner WE NEED MORE PARKING AT REASONABLE RATES. A REASONABLE RATE IS $5.A DAY. HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT SHOULD REGULATE FREEWAY NOISE. PUT MORE BARRIERS UP WITH FUNDS FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. • Second home owner WE'VE BEEN GOING TO VAIL FOR THE PAST 12 YEARS. WE'VE BEEN PLEASED WITH OUR RENTAL PROPERTY RETURNS. WE RAN INTO SOME PROBLEMS WITH THE CROSSROADS PROJECT BUT IT'S FINALLY HAPPENING. • Second home owner YOU_NEED TO. BE SYMPATHETIC TO-THOSE WORKING ON THE CROSSROADS REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND GET IT DONE. • Mail Survey DOING A GREAT JOB WITH FACILITATING REDEVELOPMENT • Mail Survey - HOW DARE THEY CHANGE THE BUS SCHEDULE 2 WEEKS BEFORE THE END OF THE SEASON IN ORDER TO SAVE MONEY! • Mail Survey I REALIZE YOU HAVE TO MAKE THE TOWN ECONOMICALLY VIABLE; BUT YOU MUST BALANCE THAT AGAINST THE QUALITY OF LIFE HERE. NONE OF THE ABOVE 5 AREAS ADDRESS THAT. • Mail Surrey IMPROVE AND SUPPORT INFORMATION VISITOR CENTERS, • Mail Surve RELOCATE TO MORE CENTRAL POSITION y KEEP THE CONFERENCE CENTER ON TARGET 56 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Mail Survey- ~ = °~ SLOW DOWN`THE-GROWTH, RESTRICT VAIL RESORTS - DEVELOPMENT, IF NOT EVEN STOP IT FORA WHILE-- • Mail,Survey: SUPPORT ALL OF THE ABOVE- • Mail Survey. THE LOCALS HAVE BEEN FORGOTTEN -DON'T FORGET WHO IT'$ AT GOT THE TOWN WHERE • Mail Survey , THE TOWN IS LOSING IT'S BUSINESS TO DOWN VALLEY COMPETITION. THE TOWN NEEDS TO ACCEPT IT IS A RESORT AND NOT A COMMUNITY AND START BASING DECISIONS ON THAT REALITY. . -" T - • Mail Survey - , -. _; - " .THE T01NN,IS NOT CATERING TO FRONT RANGE PEOPLE AND ' , ' BE MORE AWARE. OF ITS ~ LOCALS: THE VRD SHOULD _ . CLIENTLE.~ • Mail Survey ~ TOV COULD HELP, LOCAL BUSINESSES BY TAKING OVER INFO CENTER. EITEHR CHAMBER FAVOR ONLY THEIR. ~MEMBERSHIP:~NOTALL'TOV BUSINESSES MENTIONED IN - - :'VALLEY CHAMBER BROCHURES. STAFF DO NQT KNOW TOV BUSINESSES,-TOURISTS TELL US THEY HAVE TO ASK"OTHER - " BUSWESSES. • Mail Survey .. VAIL HAS A LARGE PARKING PROBLEM THAT WILL GET. . WORSE.:-.ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION SHOULD HAVE A PUBLIC PARKING COMPONENT: , • Mail Survey" ~ VAIL IS,DIRTY, NOISY (BUSES; CONSTRUCTION): (ILLEGIBLE) ' ~ A GREAT PLACETO LIVE. IT IS ALSO BE~ VAIL-.COULD EXPENSIVE; GASOLINE, RESTAURANTS ETC:.... Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 Do you ,have any comments or suaaestions on police service in the town? resident type comment • Resident a AN ERRATIC DRIVER IS NOT NECESSARILY DRUNK THEY COULD BE , INJURED. • Resident AN OVERVIEW SITE FOR THE POLICE WOULD BE A GOOD ADDITION TO HELP MONITOR TRAFFIC. • Resident AT FIRST YOU WOULD SEE MORE POLICE ON I-70. WE NEED MORE POLICE TO PATROL I-70 ESPECIALLY TRUCKS AND JAKE BRAKES • Resident . AT PUBLIC SERVICES, OFTEN TIMES I THINK THEY ARE OVERLY AGGRESSIVE. LIKE AT FUNERALS THEY BLOCK OFF THE ROAD AND I THINK THAT IT ISN'T NECESSARY. THAT'S JUST ONE EXAMPLE I . THINK THE WHOLE THING IS REALLY RUDE: • Resident BE FRIENDLIER. • Resident CHANGE BACK TO MORE ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY CARS • Resident . CHECK THE SPEED OF PEOPLE IN INTERMOUNTAIN • Resident . CRACK DOWN ON NOISE AND THE SPEED LIMITS • Resident . DON'T BE SO RIDGED ON PARKING. • Resident ENFORCE SPEED LIMIT ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD • Resident . ENFORCE THE SPEED LIMIT ON I-70 FOR SEMI TRUCKS . THEY ARE THE ONES MAKING THE NOISE. THE SPEED LIMIT ON MAIN GORE IS 15 MPH AND PEOPLE REGULARLY DRIVE OVER 50 MPH. AROUND 8 AM WOULD BE A GOOD TIME TO PATROL THERE. • Resident ENFORCE THE SPEED LIMIT ON RESIDENTIAL STREETS •. Resident . ENFORCEMENT ON I-70 IS POOR. ADDITIONAL ENFORCEMENTS ARE REQUIRED. PEOPLE STILL STOPPED FOR GOING OVER 100 • Resident . EVERYBODY IS HELPFUL. • Resident FOCUS MORE ON IN-TOWN NOT THE HIGHWAY. THERE'S MORE PEOPLE SPEEDING IN TOWN THAN ON THE FREEWAY • Resident . ,FOCUS MORE ON SPEEDERS AND LESSON PARKING VIOLATIONS . OTHERWISE, THEY'RE FINE. ~. • Resident FOCUS MORE ON THE TOWN AND LESS ON I-70 • Resident . GET OFF 1-70 AND DO WHAT YOU NEED TO DO IN TOWN . AND, TO SPEND $900 ON A PATSY WHITE BLOW UP COP IS STUPID •..Resident_ . _ _ __ _GET RiD OF THAT-ONE. WOMAN, SHE WANTS TO ARREST • Resident . EVERYONE. GET RID OF THE CODE POLICE. THEY GIVE TICKETS OUT LIKE CANDY • Resident . HIDING DOWNTOWN VS SETTING UP DUMMIES TO MONITOR TRAFFIC NOT TOO GOOD OF SERVICE. • Resident I DIDN'T GET A TICKET BECAUSE I WAS LISTENING TO JIMMY BUFFET • Resident . I DO VOLUNTEER WORK AND I GIVE THEM HIGH MARKS • Resident . I .DON'T KNOW OF ANY. • Resident I DON'T KNOW. • Resident I DON'T LIKE THE SIGNS THEY PUT UP • Resident . I DON'T THINK ITS NECESSARY THAT THEY PATROL I-70 IT'S UN- . WELCOMING: 58 Town of Vail Community-Survey 2005 • Resident I FEEL THAT THE FRONTAGE ROAD AREA IN-THE MAIN, VAIL PARKING STRUCTURE IS UNDER MONITORED. THERE IS NOT ENOUGH- EDUCATION ON THE ROUND-ABOUTS. PEOPLE DON'T KNOW HOW TO DRIVE THEM. • Resident I KNOW THE CHIEF OF POLICE. HE LIVES DOWN THE STREET. I THINK. THEY DO FINE. • Resident I THINK ITS A WASTE FOR THE LOCAL POLICE TO PATROL I-70. • Resident I THINK THAT THEY HAVE SPEED LIMIT SIGNS THAT ARE ACTUALLY SPEED TRAPS. • Resident" I THINK THAT THEY SHOULD ACTIVELY ENFORCE THE SPEED LIMIT ON 1=70 AND HIGHWAY 6: • Resident I THINK THAT THEY SHOULD TICKET THINGS MORE CONSISTENTLY, NOT ALL THESE WARNINGS. • Resident I THINK THAT THEY'RE WASTING THEIR TIME ON I-70. • Resident I THINK THAT WE NEED TO GET PEOPLE IN TOWN AND PAY THEM ENOUGH TO STAY. • Resident I THINK THE DUMMIES IN THE POLICE CARS ARE PRETTY USELESS. • Resident I THINK THE EFFORTS TO CONTROL SPEED ON THE INTERSTATE ARE A GOOD. THING: • Resident I THINK THE POLICE ARE WAY TOO STRICT ABOUT PICKING UP AND DROPPING SKIERS OFF IN THE WINTER WHEN.THE ECONOMY IS BASED ON SKIER TRAFFIC. • Resident I THINK THE PRIORITY SHOULD BE TOWARDS CRIME AND LESS TOWARDS HARASSMENT OF TOURISTS AND CITIZENS. t THINK THE I- 70 PATROL IS A`MISTAKE: t THINK iT CAUSES SAFETY HAZARDS FOR OFFICERS AND DRIVERS'. A VAIL OFFICER WAS KILLED 5 YEARS AGO. • Resident I THINIE~THE WOMAN ACT LIKE THEY NEEp TO PROVE SOMETHING AND SEEM LIKE THEY HAVE A CHIP ON THEIR SHOULDER. • Resident I THINK THEY ARE RUDE. • Resident b THINK THEY DO A GOOD JOB, GIVEN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THAT'S A TOUGH JOB: , ; " • Resident ~ I THINK THEY DO A GREAT JOB.. ` . • Resident I THINK THEY DO A GREAT JOB. • Resident I THINK THEY DO A PRETTY GOOD JOB. , . • Resident I THINK THEY HAVE BEEN TOO AGGRESSIVE. THE OFFICERS ARE NOT _..::_ _:_-_ . . -. ..-- -.- -VERY~FRIENIDLY WHEN'HANDL1NCrASITUATION`UNTIL AFTER-FINDING . OUT THAT I HAVE LIVED° HERE OVER 20 YEARS AND OWNED A BUSINESS THEY CHANGED.THEIR ATTITUDE: • Resident I THINK THEY NEED MORE VISIBILITY IN THE TOWN AT ALL HOURS OF THE DAY AND NIGHT: • Resident' I THINKTHEY:SHOULD BE MORE HELPFUL RATHER THAN WRITING TICKETS. ~ , • Resident I THINK.THEY SHOULD SPEND MORE:TIME TAKING CARE OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES INSTEAD OF GIVING TICKETS. = • Resident . I USED TO DRIVE BUS.FOR VAIL. WE'D CALL DISPATCH.AND THEY WOULD:SAY CALL US BACK LATER IF THE PROBLEM STILL EXISTS. THEY DEFINITELY ALLOW CERTAIN CARS TO PARK ILLEGALLY . REPEATEDLY. SPECIFICALLY AT THE CONCERT HALL PLAZA OR WEST 59 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 LIONSHEAD BUS STOP. • Resident l WAS PRETTY SATISFIED WITH THE CHILDREN'S PROGRAM. • Resident I WISH THERE WOULD BE MORE DONE WITH THE I-70. • Resident I-70 SHOULDN'T REALLY BE THE TOWN'S CONCERN. THAT'S STATE POLICE WORK. • Resident I'D LIKE TO SEE MORE ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY CARS. I LIKE THE FOOT PATROLS. SIGNS ON PARKING POLICY ARE NOT CLEAR TO VISITORS. • Resident I'D LIKE TO SEE MORE FOOT PATROLS THOUGH THE PARKING STRUCTURE AND SOME THROUGH THE VILLAGE AND THE ROUND ABOUT. • Resident I'D LIKE TO SEE THEM SPEND MORE TIME PATROLLING THE FRONTAGE ROAD AND INNER CITY THAN'THE INTERSTATE. • Resident I'D LOVE TO MAKE A COMMENT ABOUT THE DUMMY. I GUESS THAT'S A GOOD THING. • Resident KEEP IT UP. THEY NEED TO DO SOMETHING FOR THE GOLDPEAK THROUGH SKI SEASON. LET THE PEOPLE USE THE PASS. • Resident KEEP THAT ENFORCEMENT GOING IN SANDSTONE. • Resident KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. • Resident LESS TIME SPENT ON APPREHENDING SPEEDERS ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD AND MORE TIME KEEPING RESIDENCE SAFE. • Resident LIGHTEN UP A LITTLE BIT. • Resident MIKE MCGEE IS A DETRIMENT TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. HE CAUSES MORE PROBLEMS THAN HE SOLVES. THEY SHOULD TRY HARDER TO MAKE THINGS WORK BETTER FOR EVERYONE. • Resident MORE EFFORTS ON WEST VAIL FIRE STATION. INVESTIGATING AND INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES ARE CRUDE. • Resident MORE FOOT PATROLS, MORE VISIBILITY AND MORE ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAWS. • Resident MORE SPEED ENFORCEMENT NEEDED IN: NEIGHBORHOODS AND ON THE FREEWAY. NO ONE PAYS ANY ATTENTION TO 15 TO 25 MILES PER HOUR SPEED LIMITS NEED MORE ATTENTION IN LOCAL NEIGHBORHOODS_ . ALSO, CODE ENFORCEMENT_ OFFICERS GET MY - LOWEST MARKS." • Resident MORE VISIBILITY. • Resident NEED TO SEE THEM MORE OFTEN. • Resident NO COMMENTS AT THIS TIME. • Resident NO COMMENTS AT THIS TIME. • Resident NO COMMENTS CONCERNING THE POLICE SERVICES. • Resident NO COMMENTS, NO COMPLAINTS. • Resident NO COMMENTS. (9} • Resident NO I THINK IT'S ALL GOOD. • Resident NO I THINK THEY ARE DOING A GOOD JOB. • Resident NO I THINK THEY:DO A GOOD JOB. . • Resident- NO NOT REALLY. 60 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 " • Resident NO,~I. THINK THEY'RE=DOING~VERY-000D:: GET THE REDEVELOPMENT- PROJECT GOING. DON'T STOP UNTIL ITS FINISHED. • Resident NO, THE COPS HERE DO A GREAT JOB. • Resident NO, THEY ARE DOING A FINE JOB. • Resident NO; THEY REALLY DO A GREAT JOB. • Resident NO; THEY SEEM TO BE OK. • Resident ~ NO, THEY'RE DOING A GOOD JOB. • Resident . NO, THEY'RE PRETTY GOOD. I FEEL SAFE ALL THE TIME. .. - , • Resident,: NO. (90) " . •"Resident " ~ NO NO I DO NOT: • Resident NO. THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ARE THE BEST PEOPLE IN TOWN AND PROVIDE THE. BEST SERVICE.,. • Resident NONE REALLY. IT'S PRETTY G90D FOR THEMCq$T PART. .: :: • Resident , NONE, EXCEPT WE,DON'T NEED ANOTHER FIRE~$TATION: • Resident NONE. (40) • Resident NONE. I THINK.THEY DO`A GOOD JOB: ` • Resident . - HOPE: . :: • Resident- .. HOPE.- . ; ~, , • Resident NOT REALLY. • Resident NOTHING REALLY:'" • Resident OTHER THAN I T .RINK THEY'RE` MORE VISIBLE ON I-70 THAN THE REST, , OF THE TOWN; THEY'RE TOO:000UPIED DOING WHAT THEY'RE DOING: SPEED ISSUES ARE MORE CAREFULLY WATCHEp ON THE FRONTAGE AND SIDEROADS IN THE PAST~OR:IT APPEARS.THAT WAY. • Resident " ` '' PAY- MORE ATTENTION. ON THE STREETS, AND'LESS` TO THE ' ~ INTERSTATE.. , . . .. .;,, ~ ,, Resident PLEASESEND MORE POLICE SERVICES TO EAST VAIL AND STOP THE'. :., SPEEDERS. • Resident POLICE DID NOT ACTON THE NOISE PROBLEM WHERE I LIVE. FINING . ,: -. DOG POLLUTION,-STRICTER ON THE:NOISE:PROBLEM. _: . ~ Resident POLICE SHOULD CONCENTRATE ON IMPORTANT ITEMS AND NOT SO`: . MUCH ON PEOPLE WHO; HAVE HAD A DRINK`OR TWO. `• Resident PROVIDE BETTER CONTROL OF SPEEDING iN THE TOWN OF VAIL ,, - ,. PARTICULARLY ON FRONTAGE ROADS. CRACK DOWN ON SPEEDING` ~,,,.: .-' - S. THERE IS'ALSO TOO MUCHv .___,., _. -___.___..:: AND POOR PARKING PRACTICE - " ' ` `"-- - - - ~- . _ . DRUNKENNESS AFTER TEN AT NIGHT. • Resident PROVIDE MORE ROLICE PROTECTION FOR THE PARKING -. STRUCTURES IN TOWN. - •Resident PUT A POLICEMEN IN THE OFFICE.: THE ONLY TIME I WENT IN, NO ONE . :, . .. . . WAS THERE. • Resident ; PUT IN A 55 MPH SPEED. LIMIT THROUGH VAIL ON 1=70:. , Resident F:THE GUYS ARE GREAT, COULDN'T.BE BETTFR._TNERE ARE A SOME O `': FEW THAT ARE AWFUL.' GET RID OF THE BAD ONES. ~ . `• Resident SPEED NEEDS TO BE REGULATED AND WATCHED iN RESIDENTIAL AREAS,'AS WELL AS THE HIGHWAY.`' • Resident STEP UP CODE ENFORCEMENT ATTITUDE.,..!. DON'T THINKTHE POLICE:, ~~ ` DUMMY IS EFFECTIVE. READILY AVAILABLE FOR BUSINESS OWNERS: ' _ 61'= . Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident TH.ATS A SORE SPOT WITH ME. I DON'T WANT TO DISCUSS THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. • Resident THE 15 MILE AN HOUR SPEED LIMIT GOING TO FALLRIDGE CONDO'S IS TOO LOW. IT'S RIDICULOUS. • Resident • Resident THE DUMMY IS A GOOD DETERRENT AND FUNNY AS HELL . THE ENFORCEMENT OF MINOR DRIVING INFRACTIONS. WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, ITS UNFAIR TO MOST DRIVERS • Resident .. THE POLICE ARE SOMETIMES NITPICKY. SOMETIMES LOSE FOCUS, SO BIGGER THINGS HAPPEN • Resident . THE POLICE HERE ARE EXCELLENT. I LOVE THEM. THEY DO A GOOD JOB AND SO DOES THE FIRE DEPARTMENT • Resident . THE POLICE SERVICE AND ALSO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ARE WONDERFUL BUT SOME OF THE FEMALE POL ICE OFFICERS CAN BE UNFRIENDLY. BUT, I LOVE THE FIRE FIGHTERS. I CONSIDER FIRE FIGHTERS. HEROES • Resident . THE RESPONSE TIME NEEDS IMPROVEMENT AND THEY NEED TO KNOW THE STREET ADDRESS LOCATIONS BE • Resident TTER. THE ROADS IN WEST VAIL BESIDES FRONTAGE ROAD, THE ROADS ABOVE NORTH FRONTAGE ROAD PEOPLE , ARE GOING 20 MILES OVER THE SPEED LIMIT ON GRAMISCH LANE, CHAMONIX LANE • Resident • Resident . THE SPEED LIMIT ENFORCEMENT IS A WASTE OF TIME . • Resident . THE SPEED SHOULD BE LIMITED TO 55 MILES PER HOUR . THE TOWN COUNCIL IS SHORT-SIGHTED IN ITS VIEWS. THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE DESIRES OF THE PEOP LE WHO LIVE IN VAIL. THEY LACK VISION, SCOPE AND COURAGE • Resident . THE TOWN SHOULD NOT BE ENFORCING SPEED LIMITS ON I-70. THEY SHOULD PUT THEIR EFFORTS INTO CO E F D EN ORCEMENT IN THE TOWN , • Resident • Resident THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH SKIER DROP-OFF/PICK-UP LOCATIONS. THERE SHOULD BE NO CURFEW ON THE FO • Resident RTH OF JULY. THERE'S STILL NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE BEING PULLED OVER FOR S • Resident PEEDING. THERE'S TOO MANY POLICEMEN EFFECTIN G THE BUDGET VS THE SERVICES PROVIDED. • Resident THERE'S TOO MANY SEXUAL ASSAULTS IN PARKING STRUCTURES. IT MAKES ME AFRAID. • Resident - .~-._--.•- .. _...__ ._ ._ ~. THERE'S WAY TO MUCH PATROLLING, WAY TO MUCH POLICE PRESENCE. • Resident • Resident THEY ARE BORED. f DON'T LIKE A POLICEMEN RIGHT ON MY BUMPER. THEY ARE CONCERNED WITH LITTLE THI NGS WHEN THERE ARE LARGER ISSUES. • Resident • Resident .THEY ARE OVERSTAFFED. CUT BACK ONE POLICEMEN . THEY ARE TOO TOUGH ON THE TEENAGERS. NOTHING TO DO IN TOWN FOR THE TEENAGERS. • Resident THEY COULD'USE SOME BICYCLE PATROLS AS WELL AS THE FOOT AND REGULAR VEHICLE PATROL ESPECfAL LY AROUND THE SKI RESORTS • Resident THEY DO A GOOD JOB ON BANK ROBBERIES • Resident . THEY DO A GOOD' JOB., 62 . Town of.Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident -THEY DO SHOW UP AT THE BOTTOM OF EAST VAIL. I DO SEE THEM - DOWN THERE. I LIVE ON FRONTAGE ROAD SO I HEAR THEM SCREAMING BY MY HOUSE ALL THE TIME. THEY SHOULD BE LENIENT WITH TOURISTS. THE PARKING STRUCTURES ARE FILTHY AND THAT'S THE FIRST THING THEY SEE. • Resident THEY DO WELL. • Resident THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH TO DO. • Resident THEY DON'T SEEM FRIENDLY TO LOCALS.. • Resident THEY HAVE BECOME MUCH MORE FRIENDLY IN RECENTYEARS. CONTINUE ON THE SAME PATH. , • Resident THEY HAVE THE DUMMY IN THE PARKED CAR. THEY SHOULD MOVE HIM EVERY ONCE IN AWHILE. I THINK PEOPLE NOW KNOW IT'S A DUMMY. • Resident THEY NEED MORE FOOT TRAFFIC, PATROLS, TO HELP CONTROL THE DOG POOP AND HAVE MORE. BICYCLE PATROLS. • Resident THEY NEED NOT BE ON A TASK FORCE. • Resident THEY NEED TO BE A LITTLE MORE VISIBLE IN TOWN WITH FOOT PATROLS. • Resident THEY NEED TO BE MORE VISIBLE AT THE TIMES NEEDED LIKE SATURDAY SKI ISSUES. • Resident THEY NEED TO BE MORE VISIBLE IN THE VILLAGES. • Resident THEY NEED TO BE MORE VISIBLE, CONSISTENT, AND FRIENDLIER. • Resident THEY NEED TO PAY MORE ATTENTION TO THE FRONTAGE ROAD. • Resident THEY NEED TO SLOW DOWN SOME OF THE TRUCKS GOING THROUGH THE INTERSTATE. • Resident THEY NEED TO UNDERSTAND THEY ARE 'RENT-A-COPS.' THEY OVERSTEP THEIR,BOUNDS, REAL POLICE DOESN'T MOVE TO VAIL. THEY ARE NOT,THE SMARTEST. -THEY ARE NOT REASONABLE. INSTEAD OF~MAKING SURE EVERYBODY IS SAFE, THEY USE TOO MUCH OF THEIR POWER. • Resident THEY SHOULD BE.MORE VISIBLE ON FRIDAY AND SATURDAY NIGHTS IN THE VILLAGE. • Resident THEY SHOULD. HAVE POLICE AT THE ROUNDABOUTS AT RUSH HOUR ESPECIALLY THE MAIN ROUNDABOUT. • Resident ' THEY SHOULD POLICE EAST VAIL MORE EFFECTIVELY FOR TRUCK NOISE. • Resident- THEY SHOULD PULC-OVER PEOPLE OTHER THAN JUST`THE LOCALS. PARKING THE CAR WITH A DUMMY INSIDE DOESN'T REALLY DO ANY GOOD. • Resident THEY'RE DOING A GOOD JOB. • Resident THEY'RE OKAY. • Resident THEY'RE TOO LAID BACK. • Resident THEY'RE VERY FRIENDLY. • Resident THINK THEY. SHOULD REPLACE THE CHIEF. • Resident TWO OF THE OFFICERS. TAKE THEIR AUTHORITY IN THE WRONG. WAY. • Resident USE MORE DUIuIMIES IN POLICE, CARS: • Resident WE DEFINITELY HAVE SOME PARKING ISSUES. . ,: , .. _ _ _ ,. .:.. 63 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident WE NEED MORE PATROLLING AND SPEED LIMIT ENFORCEMENT IN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORS, ESPECIALLY ON BIG HORN ROAD • Resident . WE NEED POLICEMEN ON THE STREET IN THE VILLAGE • Resident . WE NEED SLOW DOWN SIGNS. • Resident WE NEED THE SAME ENFORCEMENT IN THE EAST VAIL NEIGHBORHOOD WHICH IS INCREDIBLY IGNORED IT'S IN A MUCH . MORE DANGEROUS PLACE THAN I-70. THE SPEED LIMIT SPECIFICALLY, THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS. THAT'S THE EAST VAIL NEIGHBORHOOD. • Resident WITH THE BUSSES; THEY NEED TO STOP FOR PEOPLE THAT WANT TO GET ON. • Resident WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE OF A PRESENCE. THEY'RE NOT SEEN VERY OFTEN. • Second home owner CONTINUE WHAT THEY ARE DOING WITHIN THE VILLAGE TO CONTROL THE TEENAGE DRINKING. WHAT THEY ARE DOING SEEMS TO BE WORKING. • Second home owner ENFORCE THE SPEED LIMITS IN THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS • Second home owner . FOR MANY YEARS WE FELT COMFORTABLE HAVING OUR SON RIDE THE SHUTTLE TO AND FROM THE SKI SLOPES • Second home owner . I AM IN WEST VAIL AND I DON'T SEE MANY PATROLS DOWN THERE . WE HAVE PARKING ISSUES WITH OTHER OFFICERS • Second home owner . I DON'T THINK THAT THEY ENFORCE THE PUBLIC PARKING ISSUE VERY WELL. A LOT OF PEOPLE PARK WHERE THEY AREN'T SUPPOSED TO AND THEN STAY THERE FOR A WHILE • Second home owner I_ DRIVE MUCH SLOWER. I'VE NOT HAD A NEED FOR DIRECT SERVICES . FROM THE POLICE. DEPARTMENT. I'VE MADE NO CALLS IN THE LAST YEAR. • Second home owner I FOUND THEM TO BE VERY HELPFUL ON OCCASION: • Second home owner . I HAD ONE BAD INCIDENT WITH. CHECK POINT CHARLIE PEOPLE I ' . DON T THINK THEY DO A GOOD JOB • Second home owner • Second hom . I ONLY USED THEM ONCE AND MY EXPERIENCE WAS VERY GOOD R e owner . I EALLY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING • Second home owner . I THINK ONE OF THE ISSUES IS NOT ENOUGH STREETLIGHTS WHICH CAN LEAD TO VANDALISM AND ROBBERIES • Second home owner • Second home . I THINK THE ENFORCEMENT ON THE I-70 IS TOO STRONG. owner lS THIS FOR SAFETY OF THE TOWN? • Second home owner IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE POLICE BE MORE COURTEOUS TO THE VISITORS AND TOURISTS IN VAIL AND BE MORE POLITE • Second home owner . JUST NOT BE RUDE TO PEOPLE • Second home owner . KEEP IN MIND THAT ITS A TOURIST TOWN AND PEOPLE ARE HERE TO HAVE A GOOD TIME, NOT TO BE HASSLED BY TH • Second home owner. E POLICE. KEEP THE NOISE LEVEL DOWN IN THE VILLAGE • Second home owner . MORE VISIBILITY IS NEEDED • Second home owner . NEED MORE ALTERNATE ROUTES TO ADDRESS THE 1-70 CROWDING O . VER DEVELOPMENT CREATES THIS PROBLEM • Second homeowner . NEED MORE. POLICE IN THE TRANSPORTATION CENTER AND MORE W • Second hom ALKINGAROUND. THEY NEED MORE CAMERAS. e owner NO COMMENTS AT THIS TIME, I THINK THEY WORK. 64 Tawn of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner NO COMMENTS. (4) - • Second home owner NO, NONE. • Second home owner NO, NOT REALLY. • Second home owner NO. (55) • Second home owner NONE. (9) • Second home owner HOPE. • Second home owner OUT IN EAST VAIL WE RARELY SEE A POLICE VEHICLE. • Second home owner POLICE SERVICES ARE EXCELLENT. ner • Second home ow ..PUT POLICE OUTSIDE OF THE VEHICLES. SEE THEM IN PERSON AND _ NOT IN ACAR.- THAT MAKES YOU FEEL SAFER AND MAY BE A DETERRENT FOR SOMETHING. • Second home owner .RESORT ATTENDANTS NEED TO WEAR SMILES. THE TOWN DOES A GOOD JOB OF CLEARING STREETS. • Second home owner THE I-70 SPEED LIMIT FROM EXIT 180 THROUGH DOWD JUNCTION SHOULD BE A MAXIMUM OF 55 MPH. SPEED HAS A DIRECT EFFECT ON THE NOISE LEVEL. • Second home owner THE ONLY EXPERIENCE WE'VE HAD IS WITH ABREAK-IN AND THEY DID WHAT THEY NEEDED TO DO. ALSO, THERE'S TOO MANY SPEEDING TICKETS. • Second home owner THE SPEED LIMIT ON THE I-70 SHOULD BE LEFT UP TO THE HIGHWAY PATROL. IT MIGHT MAKE THE VISITORS LESS AMENABLE. • Second home owner THEY SPEND TOO MUCH MONEY ON THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. • Second home owner WE'VE EXPERIENCED NO REAL ISSUES WITH THE POLICE SERVICES IN VAIL. • Second home owner WHY IS THE ENFORCEMENT ON CARS ON I-70? THE NOISE FROM TRUCKS IS THE REAL PROBLEM THERE. • Mail Survey BE MORE VISIBLE (WALKING). IN THE VILLAGE AND CIONSHEAD • Mail Survey BE MORE VISIBLE NEAR RETAIL SHOPS -WOULD BE LESS SKATEBOARDING, SPEEDING BIKES` • Mail Survey . CODE ENFORCEMENT IS GOOD. REGULAR POLICE ARE UNAVAILABLE. • Mail Survey GREAT COMM. PROGRAMS. DON'T FEEL LIKE I SEE VAIL. PD OFTEN, BUT I DON'T FEEL UNSAFE. HAVEN'T NOTICED MORE'GARAGE PATROLS SINCE ATTEMPTED ASSAULT IN ,GARAGE. • Mail Survey HAVEPOLICE DRIVE THROUGH PARKING STRUCTURE REGULARLY • Mail Survey LATE AT NIGHT, WHEN BARS: CLOSE, POLICE_ MEN SHOUL_,.D. BE VISIBLE. - (CROSSROADS AREA) STREETS. ALSO POLICE SHOULD FINE PELLE WHO (ILLEGIBLE) OUT OF CARS AND TRUCKS AND LET THE ENGINE RUNNING. (SIC) • Mail Survey LESS.SWAT LIKE • Mail Survey MORE DISIPLINE, STOP INTERNAL REVIEW OF OFFICERS OUT-OF-LINE, FIND-A REVIEW PROCESS THAT IS UNBIASED. • Mail Survey MORE LIGHTING AND PATROLLING IN.STRUCTURES AT NIGHT. (I ,THOUGHT,THIS.;BEFORE THE.ALLEGED RAPE - IT IS NOT A REACTION TO ONE`INCIDENT) • Mail Survey MORE WALK-ABOUTS!WALK THROUGS.: - • Mail Survey SLOW SPEEDERS ALL.-DAY - -- . - 65 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Mail Survey TELL CODE. ENFORCEMENT OFFICER WE KNOW THEY HAVE A TOUGH JOB -BUT PLEASE KEEP .BEING CORDIAL AS YOU TELL PEOPLE TO MOVE ALONG OR GET OUT OF LOADING ZONES . JACKIE O DOES THIS . VERY WELL! • Mail Survey THEY NEVER ARE THEIR WHEN TOWN IS BUSSIE YOU HAVE TO CALL THEM • Mail Survey VAIL IS BECOMING A POLICE STATE -HALF THE NUMBER OF POLICE WOULD BE FINE! • Mail Survey WE NEED MORE ENFORCEMENT OF THE SPEED LIMIT THROUGH TOWN. THE MANNEQUIN IN THE POLICE CAR IS A JOKE. IN THE PAST 3 YEARS-THE DEPT:-HAS BECOME MORE POLITICAL AND LESS PROFESSIONAL. MORE CONCERNED WITH MANAGING IT'S IMAGE THAN ENFORCING THE LAWS • Mail Survey . WHATS THE DUMMY'S NAME? • Mail Survey WHY AREN'T TRAFFIC VIOLATORS PROSECUTED SPEEDERS STOP • Mail Surve , , SIGN RUNNERS? A POLICE FORCE UNWILLING TO USE ITS TEETH! y WHY NOT CONCENTRATE ON THE TRUCKERS WITH JAKE BRAKES IN DOWD JUNCTION AREA ... 66 ., Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 How satisfied are you with the benefits of your parking pass this year? (1.- Not at all Satisfied to 5 -Very Satisted) . Type of Satisfaction Comment Parking Pass Rating • Gold Pass 1 ALL OF THE SPOTS ARE BEING TAKEN BY ALL OF THE CONSTRUCTION TRUCKS. THEY ARE EXPERIMENTING WITH THE PASS BUT REDEVELOPMENT HAS • Gold Pass y NEGATED THE EFFECTIVENESS. UPPER LEVEL PARKING IS THE. PROBLEM. • Gold Pass 5 - IT'S A GOOD SETUP: • Gold Pass 5 NO: ' • Gold Pass 5 NONE. ~ THE PARKING STRUCTURE ITSELF IS BAD. THE DOORS ARE BLOCKED, AND • Gold Pass 5 CARS ARE PARKING CRAZILY, ETC: • Gold Pass 5 THEY NEED TO USE BETTER QUALITY MATERIAL SO THE TICKETS DON'T TEi~R. ITS TOO EXPENSIVE FOR LOCALS AND HOME OWNERS AND THE CARD DOESN'T • Blue Pass 1 ALWAYS WORK. EVEN DURING BUSY TIMES, THERE SHOULD BEAN EXPRE:iS LINE. • Blue Pass 1 NONE. • Blue Pass 1 NONE. • Blue Pass 1 THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING SPACES ESPECIALLY ON WEEKENDS. • Blue Pass 3 NONE. CERTAIN MACHINES AT.THE LH PARKING STRUCTURE ALWAYS MESS UP ThIE • Blue Pass 4 MAGNETIC STRIP - I JUST NEVER GET IN THAT LINE • Blue Pass 4 NONE. PARKING ON THE ROADS IS NOT SAFE. f SEE IT EVERY DAY AS A BUSINES:t • Blue Pass q OWNER. • Blue Pass 5 MINIMAL PROBLEMS • Blue Pass 5 NO. • Blue Pass 5 NO. • . Blue Pass 5 NO. • Blue Pass 5 NO. THEY NEED TO CREATE MORE PARKING BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO IT. THE • Blue Pass 5 PRESENT PLANS MAY NOT BE GOOD ENOUGH. IF I PAY TO PARKIN THE STRUCTURES, THERE SHOULD BE SPACE FOR ME TO Green Pass ~ PARK ON MONDAY THROUGH THURSDAY AND FREQUENTLY THERE IS NO :iPACE. Green Pass • 3 NO. IN GREEN LOT BY THE MARRIOTT THERE ARE NO DEFINED PARKING SPACI.S. • Green Pass 4 PEOPLE DOUBLE PARK AND I GOT A TICKET. THE PARKING ATTENDANTS ARE VERY RUDE. P 4 THEY NEED A MORE UNDERSTANDABLE SCHEDULE FOR FORD PARK. ass • Green • Green Pass 5 NO. INCREASE THE BUS SERVICE TO THE LOTS WE ARE REQUIRED TO PARK ICI. THE EARLY AND LATE SEASON BUS SCHEDULE IS UNUSABLE WHICH IS WHY I HAVE • Pink Pass ~ TO BUY A PARKING PASS. t WANT THEM TO HAVE THE FULL WINTER SCHEDULE THE ENTIRE WINTER, OTHERWISE FREE PARKING. THERE'S NO POLICING OF THE SOCCER FIELD PARKING LOT. PEOPLE ARE: • Pink Pass 3 PARKING THERE THAT SHOULD NOT BE. MORE POLICING NEEDSTO BE DONE IN THE PARKING AREAS. 67 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 4 THEY NEED TO STAY ON THE WINTER SCALE ALL WINTER AND START THE • Pink Pass . 4 SCHEDULE WHEN PAY PARKING STARTS AND END IT WHEN PAY PARKING ENDS . I HAD TO BUY A PINK PASS BECAUSE I WOULD HAVE TO BE 45 MINUTES EARLY OTHERWISE. • Pink Pass 5 ITS AN OUTSTANDING SERVICE FOR A PARKING GARAGE AND MY PASS. Value Card ET 1 O T D U 0 BE (SPLAYED FAR AWAY TO GET PARKING FREE AFTER 3 AND $4 WHEN ENTERING 1 MINUTE BEFORE 3 AND FIRST 1.5 HR FREE DONT' MAKE SENSE. • Value Card ~ CONSTRUCTION TRUCKS PACK ALL VALUE CARD SPACES AND SOME TAKE UP TWO SPACES. • Value Card ~ I CAN'T PARK IN THE PARKING STRUCTURE OVER NIGHT. I HAVE TO GO TO LIONSHEAD TO PARK OVER NIGHT AND MY CONDO IS IN THE VILLAGE. • Value Card IDIOTS RULE. YOU PAY FOR PARKING TIME THEN THEY TRACK THE TIME. THEY 1 HAVE FACILITIES TO TRACK TIME AF R . TE 3 HOURS GIVE THEM A TICKET! IT'S VERY STUPID! I GOT 7 PARKING TICKETS! • Value Card 1 NONE. • Value Card ~ RESTRICT VALUE CARD TO VAIL RESIDENTS. NO EAGLE COUNTY VALUE CARDS, PEOPLE FROM OUT OF TOWN PARK THERE AND LOC AL PEOPLE CANNOT GET IN. • Value Card 1 RIDICULOUS SYSTEM • Value Card ~ THE BUS SERVICE IS BETTER. THERE'S TOO MANY CONSTRUCTION PEOPLE PARKING IN THE VALUE CARD SPACES. • Value Card 1 THE NEW VOUCHER SYSTEM IS TERRIBLE AND INCONVENIENT. • Value Card ~ THE PARKING LOT IS ALWAYS FULL WHEN I WANT TO USE MY PASS SO ITS NOT MUCH GOOD. ' THE PAY AND DISPLAY IS JUST FOR THE PEOPLE WHO WORK AT THE • Value Card ~ STRUCTURE. IT IS A HUGE IMPOSITION ON THE DRIVERS. ITS BETTER THAN NOTHING BUT COULD BE IMPROVED UP N O . THERE SHOULD BE MORE PAY TERMINALS, FOR EXAMPLE. • Value Card ~ THE TICKETING SYSTEM IS INAPPROPRIATE. THEY CAN FIND A MUCH BETTER SYSTEM FOR TRACKING. • Value Card ~ THEIR ARE TOO DARN FEW PARKING PLACES AND IF YOU DOIV'T GET A SPOT YOUR OUT OF LUCK. • Value Card 1 THERE IS NO PARKING, ITS ALL CONSTRUCTION • Value Card . 1 THERE ISN'T ENOUGH PARKING FOR VALUE CARD HOLDERS. • Value Card ~ THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING SPACE. THERE'S WAY TOO FEW OF SPACES. INCREASE THE CAPACITY. WE NEED MORE MACHINES CLOSER TO CARS • Value Card , 1 THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING SPACES. • Value Card THEY NEED A PLACE FOR CONSTRUCTION WORKERS. TOO MANY SPACES ARE ~ SET ASIDE FOR SHOPPING. ALL THE SPACES ARE TOO FREQUENTLY FILLED BY THE CONSTRUCTION WORKERS. THEY KEEP ADDING SHOPPING SPACES. THEY NEED TO ADD MORE MACHINES TO ACCEPT CARDS. • Value Card 1 THEY NEED MORE PARKING IN LIONSHEAD. • Value Card ~ TOP LEVEL OF STRUCTURE IS A MESS WITH ALL THE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES - TOURISTS ARE SERIOUSLY INCONVENIENCED • Value Card WE HAVE COMPLAINED TO THE COMMISSION ABOUT THE PRICE OF THE CARD 1 AND THAT THERE'S NO PLACE TO PARK . THEY SHOULD LIMIT THE CONTRACTORS A5 FAR PARKING WHERE THEY WANT. • Value Card 1 WE NEED MORE PARKING SPACE. 68 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 - I THINK THAT: HAVING TO GO-TO=THE MACHINE AND HAVING TO.GO.BACK TO. Value Card 2 YOUR CAR JUST TO PUT THE RECElF'T IN TAKES TOO LONG AND IS IRRITATING. I WISH THEY WOULD LOWER THE COST OF PARKING ON THE WEEKENDS. • Value Card y THERE'S NOT ENOUGH SHOPPING SPACE PARKING FOR VALUE CARD HOLDERS. • Value Card 2 IT'S HARD TO FINQ PARKING WITH A VALUE CARD. ITS MORE COMPLICATED THAN IT USED TO. BE. OLD SYSTEM WAS BETTER. • Value Card 2 SPACE~iS TOO LIMITED FOR OPTIMUM USE. THE MACHINE IS bIFFICULT FOR'. VISITORS ESPECIALLY. Value Card 2~ 1T'S TOO EXPENSIVE ON THE. WEEKENDS: •, Value Card , , 2;; , . ,MORE PLACESNEEDED FOR LOCAL PROPERTY OWNERS • Value Card - 2 NEVER ANY PLACE TO PARK ON UPPER LEVEL. ALWAYS FULL. • Value. Card 2 NO: „ „ Value Gard 2 NOT ENOUGH SPACES: - °" ` YOU'PUT THE VALUE:CARD.PARKING ON THE "SECOND" FLOOR THERE ONClE . HA$ GENERALLY NOT BEEN ENOUGH AVAILABLE. CONSTRUCTION WORKEF23 • Value Card Z USE1T SO AS NEW & BIGGER CONSTRUCTION DOMES ON LINE IT WILL BE EVEN MORE PROBLEM. WHEN-THE VALUE AREA IS FILLED WE GO HOME.: . • Value.Card ~ 2 THE LOT IS ALWAYS FULL OF CONSTRUCTION' WORKERS. • Value Card 2 THE UNAVAILABILITY. `` .,-: Value Card< ~ _2, . THE VALUE-PASS IS A GOODPROGRAM BUT ITS IMPLEMENTED IN A .BAD WAY. THERE AREN:T ENOUGH PARKlNGPLACES AND I DON'T LIKE GOING TO THE • Value Card " 2' MACHINE AND BACK TO THE`CAR: I pONT THINK IT'S ENFORCED ENOUGH. THE CONSTRUCTION. USESA LOT OF PARKING SPACE. • Value Card. 2 THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING. • Value Card.:. 2. THEY ARE CHANGING IT ALL' THETIME I BOUGHT A PARKING SPOT NOW. PLACES TO PARK FO,R PEOPLE WITH-THE VALUE THEY DON'T MAKE ENOUGH Value Card ; . y '.CARD: ` :; ~ • Value.Card ' . :. 2 UPSTAIRS PARKING IS FILLED UP TOO EARLY. IT DOESN'T MEET THE NEED~$. WORKMEN TOOK ALL VALUE:PARKING. RESIDENT CANNOT GET.INTO VILLAGE - • Value Card y TO EAT/SHOP. CONSTRUCTION CREWS~TAKE UP LOTS OF° SKIERS AND RESIDENTS PARKIDJG • Value Card 3 SPOTS:. • Value Card 3 - I DISAGREE ABOUT CHARGING DOUBLE ON FRIDAY, SATURDAY AND SUNDAY: , ._ = ~.: ' I DON'T LIKE TO HAVETO GET-THE TICKET AND GET.THE TICKET VALIDATED. • Value Cards 3 THEN PUT IT IN THEN-CAR. iTS-RIDICULOUS AND THEY CHARGE WAY TOO MUCH _ ~ ,_, ~ __ - FOR PARKING. THEY SHOULDN T CHARGE ANYTHING FOR PARKING - - _.. •>. • Value Card; 3 I HAVE'`A PARKING SPOT~AT'WORK SO I DONT USE THE VALUE CARD MUCH. . I PAY TO MUCH FOR.THE,VALUE CARD AND:THEN. THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PLACES • Value Card ~ 3. _ TO PARK:- THERE'S NO,PARKING ALLOWED ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD AND II'M - ' ` ` -' ` GIVE A WARNING FIRST. ~ .TIRED OF THE PARKING T.ICKET$: THEY SHOULD - ,:: - METERS SOMETIMES PRINT RECEIRTS AND SOMETIMES DON'T.. YOU HAVE TO GET OUT.OFYOUR CAR EITHER WAY TO LEAVE THE TICKET WINpOW TO PROVE'. ` . '~ Value' Card- 3 YOU~PAID-FOR YOUR SPOT. THEY ARE NOT A VERY BIG SPOTS. ESPECIALILY ON . ~ . WEEKENDS, ITS FULL.. ._ _ , , .:: ' . Value Card .< 3`. .° NONE - _ . . 69.. Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 PARKING 15 AN ISSUE. THE TOWN COULD BE MORE FORGIWWG IN TERMS OF • Value Card 3 THE LOW SEASON: THE LOCALS DESERVE A BETTER BREAK IN TERMS OF THE PRICE OF THE PASSES DURING THE LOW SEASON THAN DOUBLING OF THE PRICE FROM 5 TO 10 DOLLARS. Value Card 3 THEY CHANGE THE SYSTEM EVERY YEAR, IT IS FRUSTRATING • Value Card 3 . THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PARKING PLACES FOR VALUE CARDS. THIS YEAR THEY PUT TWO TICKET MACHINES {N THE PARKING AREA NOW IT IS A • Value Card 3 LONG WALK FROM.MOST PARKING SPACES TO GET THE TICKETS AND GO BACK . LAST YEAR IT WAS DONE ELECTRONICALLY AND THERE WAS NO NEED FOR A LONG WALK. Value Card 3 TOO EXPENSIVE AND THEN NOT ENOUGH PARK Value Card 3 ING. WE NEED THE WEST VAIL FIRE STATION'. • Value Card 3 YOU MIGHT AS WELL NOT SPEND THE MONEY FOR A CARD BECAUSE THE COST IS HIGH AND THEN THERE IS NO PLACE TO PARK. • Value Card 4 FORD PARK WAS A GOOD ADDITION THEY SHOULD LEAVE IT AS AN EMPLOYEE PARKING LOT. • Value Card 4 HAVE ONE CHARGE FOR EVERYBODY - $10 A DAY: fT WOULD DO AWAY WITH ALL CARDS AND THEIR SOMETIMES FRUSTRATION. • Value Card 4 .HAVING TO PUT THE RECEIPT IN THE WINDOW IS A PAIN • Value Gard 4 . I DON'T USE THE BUS ENOUGH TO HAVE ANY • Value Card 4 SUGGESTIONS. I WISH THERE WAS MORE PARKING AT LIONSHEAD MORE SPAC • Value Card 4 , ES. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE VALUE CARD MEMBERS HAVE ACCESS AFTER VALUE CARD SPACES ARE FULL TO PARK IN THE REGULAR SPACES • Value Card 4 . I'M VERY SATISFIED WITH THE VALUE FOR WHAT YOU PAY. • Value Card 4 INCLUDE AT LEAST FRIDAY SERVICES. I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY NOT SATURDAY AND SUNDAYS. • Value Card 4 ITS IMPORTANT FOR LOCALS AND WORKERS IN THE VILLAGE. • Value Card 4 .. ITS INCONVENIENT TO GO BACK TO THE CAR TO GET THE RECEIPT ON THE D ASH.: • Value Card 4 NO. • Value Card 4 NO. • Value Card 4 NO. . • Value Card 4 NO. • Value Card 4 NO. • Value Card 4 NO. • Value Card 4 NONE. • _ Value Card _._.. - _ . 4 _. _ NONE._ _ _ -- • alue Card 4 _ _ _ - NONE.. • Value Card 4 THE TEN DOLLAR CHARGE ISN'T LIKED. • Value Card 4 THERE'S NOT ENOUGH SPACES. Value Card 4 THEY NEED TO PUT IN MORE PARKING PLACES BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES WHEN I COULDN'T PARK. • Value Card 5 I LIKE SHOPPER PARKING. I USE IT A LOT. • Value Card 5 I THINK iT IS VERY CONVENIENT TO JUST PRESENT A CARD FOR A MEAL OR A SKI PASS. • Value Card 5 IT SHOULD BE NON RESTRICTED. • Value' Card. 5 NO. • Value Card 5 NO. • Value. Card 5 NO. _ .. _ 7d Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Value Card 5 NONE _ :. _~ ,_, . ~ . _ • Value Card 5 THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING: • Value Card 5 THEY DO A GOOD JOB. EXPAND THE PARKING. THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE FOR THE LOCALS WHC) USE • Don't Know ~ THE DISCOUNT CARD. • Don't Know 1 YOU CAN'T FINDING PARKING ANYWHERE. ITS TERRIBLE. I DON'T GET TO USE IT BECAUSE ALL THE AVAILABLE SPOTS ARE TAKEN UP • Don't Know y EARLY. THEY CHARGE TOO MUCH: IT SEEMS THAT THE WAY THEY KEEP THE PRICE DOWN, THEY RAISE IT FOR. THE OLDER PEOPLE. THEY USED TO HAVE A DISCOUNT. 20 OR 80, YOU'RE PAYING • Don't Know 3 THE SAME PRICE. SO YEARS OLD, THEY CAN'T COMPETE PAYING THE SAME: PRICE AS YOUNG SKIERS WHO SKI MORNING TILL NIGHT. . • Don't Know 4 NO. • Don't Know 5 NO: ... .. .. . ., ~ ., . -.. ,:: ,, ,, 71 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 Do you have any comments or suggestions concerning parkin T resrdent type • Resident comment A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL GO FLYING THE WRONG WAY • Resident AROUND THINGS SO THAT THEY CAN GET SOMEWHERE FASTER. ADD ON TO EXISTING STRUCTURES SO SKIERS DON'T HAVE TO WALK TWO MILES TO SKI • Resident . ADDRESS THE PROBLEMS. FIND WAY TO SOLVE IT AND BE MORE RELAXED ABOUT GIVING OUT TICKETS • Resident . BUILD A BETTER PARKING STRUCTURE • Resident . BUILD ANOTHER LEVEL • Resident . BUILD ANOTHER PARKING STRUCTURE AND LOWER THE • Resident PRICES. BUILD ANOTHER PARKING STRUCTURE OVER BY GOLDEN • Resident PEAK. BUILD ANOTHER PARKING STRUCTURE. ALLOW PARKING ON THE STREET AND ON THE FRONTAGE ROADS ON OVERFLOW WEEKENDS. • Resident BUILD BIGGER CAR PARKS • Resident . BUILD MORE PUBLIC PARKING FACILITIES. EMPLOYEES HAVE • Resident A HARD TIME AFFORDING PUBLIC PARKING. CHANGE THE PRICE FOR VAIL EMPLOYEES • Resident • Resident . COME UP WITH SOLUTIONS TO PARKING PROBLEMS . CONTINUE "FREE-AFTER-3"AND FREE DURING THE SUMMER . I WISH WE HAD SOME KIND OF AUXILIARY FREE LOT ALL THE TIME. I WISH WE HAD SOME MORE 30 MIN OR 1 HR PARKING DURING THE WINTER TO BE ABLE TO RUN IN AND DO • Resident ERRANDS. DURING THE WINTER IT GETS HECTIC AND CROWDED BUT I ' • Resident DON T WANT PARKING STRUCTURES ALL OVER. EMPLOYEES SHOULD GET TO PARK FOR FREE OR AT LEAST AT GREATLY REDUCED RATES • Resident • . ENFORCE THE HANDICAPPED PARKING MORE Resident . EVERYONE SHOULD USE THE BUS • Resident . EXPAND PARKING SO PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TO PARK ON ROADS.. • Resident - EXPAND THE PARKING. • Resident FOR SKI PASSES AND SATURDAY AND SUNDAYS THEY NEED • Resident MORE CONTROL OF PARKING: • Resident FRONTAGE ROAD PARKING SHOULD BE FREE ON WEEKENDS . GET MORE. WE NEED ANOTHER PARKING STRUCTURE • Resident BEFORE ANYTHING ELSE IS DONE. GET~RID OF PARKING ATTENDANTS AND AUTOMAT THE • Resident WHOLE STRUCTURE LIKE IN EUROPE. GET THE SIGNS UP AROUND THE TRAILHEADS GET PEOPLE • Resident . , TOWED. THEY PARK IN MY YARD. GIVE LOCALS MORE LEEWAY. PROPERTY TAX PAYERS SHOULD BE GIVEN MgRE PARKING P RIVILEGES. 72 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident GIVE PEOPLE A LOT AND A WARNING FIRST SO VISITORS DON'T HAVE A BAD EXRERiENCE: • Resident HAVE MORE AGGRESSIVE ENFORCEMENT IN THE RESIDENTIAL AREA DURING THE SUMMER AND IN. THE LOCATION OF THE TRAIL HEAD AREA. • Resident HAVE MORE ENFORCEMENT OF PEOPLE DOUBLE PARKING OR TAKING TWO SPOTS. THE FEE STRUCTURE IS HIGH. • Resident HAVE MORE FREE PARKING IN OUTLYING AREAS. • Resident HAVE MORE FREE PARKING IN THE WINTER AND FREE PARKING SHO,ULO MIRROR~THE BUS SCHEDULE. • Resident I AM NOT A MERCHANT, BUT THEY NEED TO MAKE ALLOWANCES FOR PEOPLE WHO SHOP IN VAIL. 1-1/2 HOURS FREE PARKING IS NOT ENOUGH TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO STAY. THEY NEED A VALIDATION PROGRAM SO PEOPLE WILL STAY AND SPEND MONEY. IT'S A MUST DURING SKI SEASON. • Resident I DO NOT LIKE TO PAY $16 A DAY TO PARK TO SKI. I THINK ITS TOO MUCH MONEY. $8-$1,0 WOULD BE REASONABLE. VAIL'S AN UPSCALE TOWN SO IT COSTS MONEY BUT I JUST LOOK AT 16 BUCKS AND THINK IT'S NUTS. I PAY IT, BUT I DON'T LIKE IT. • Resident I DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL WORK BUT REDO DONOVAN PARK INTO A THREE TIRED PARKING GARAGE. • Resident I DON'T KNOW. • Resident I DON'T KNOW. • Resident I HAD AN ISSUE WITH THE PARKING ATTENDANT AT THE VALUE,CARD PARKING OFFICE. HE ISSUED TICKETS FOR INVALID REASONS. • Resident I HAVE A PROBLEM. WITH THE AMOUNT OF ABANDONED PARKED'CARS'IN WEST VAIR, THAT OR THEY JUST LEFT THEIR CARS. THEY DON'T MOVE: • Resident I NOTHING TO ADD AT THIS TIME. • Resident I SEE PEOPLE TAKING UP TWO SPACES FREQUENTLY: • Resident I THINK AS FAR<AS DOINNTOINN VAIL, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT DURING WEEKENDS'1N WINTER. • Resident I THINK IT'S A MAJOR` PROBLEMS AND SOMETHING.NEEDS TO BE DONE I THINK ITS: DANGEROUS;:INITH ALL THE CARS ON THE.SIDE OF TIE ROAD: I THINK THAT SOMEONE MAY BE INJURED OR K_ILLED_ THE TgURIStS CAN'_LCOME_INIO..TOWN, _ .. _ _ _ . IT'S TOO.HARD TO FIND.A SPOT TO PARK. • Resident. I THINK THAT IF THEY SAY. YOU SHOULD HAVE A PLACE TO PARK,. THEN-YOU. SHOULD: IT SHOULDN'T BE GIVEN TO CONSTRUCTION WORKERS: • Resident I THINK.THAT WITH REGARD TO THE PARKING, THERE SHOULD BE A NE1N CONCEPT IN THE WAY THE PARKING STRUCTURE IS SETlJP. PEOPLE NEED TO.BE ABLE TQ GET GOOD PARKING ~ • Residenfi /2 PARKING SHOULD BE APPLIED TO THE I THINK THE 1-1 .TOTAL HOURS OF.YOUR STAY -. • Resident: ' -i THINK THE PARKING GARAGE SHOULD 8E FREE TO INCREASE SKIERREVENUE AND TOURISM: • Residenfi' ,. _, - ,. I~THINK THERE OUGHT TO BE MORE ACCESS; FOR• DROP OFFS. AND PICK UPS:` 73. Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident ` Y THINK-iNE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH. WE HAVE TOO MANY LOTS FOR PASSES. WE NEED A FREE LOT FOR TOURISTS. THEY'LL GO TO THE STRUCTURE WHEN THE FREE ONE FILLS • Resident UP, BUT THEY WANT THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A FREE LOT. I THINK WE NEED TO SOLVE THE FRONTAGE ROAD ISSUES • Resident WITH THE DAY SKIERS. I WANT THE TOWN TO UNDERSTAND THE LIABILITY OF SOMEONE POSSIBLY BEING HIT IF THERE'S NO PARKING PAY • Resident . THE STRUCTURE OFF. I WISH IT WASN'T-AS,MESSY AS IT IS AND MORE ECONOMICAL • Resident . IN THE WINTER TIME lTS NOT FEASIBLE TO PARK. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM COVER THE SOCCER FIELD WITH SOME KIND OF METALLIC MESH AND USE IT FOR PARKING THEN USE ANY REVENUE TO, REPAIR WHATEVER DAMAGE IS • Resident DONE IF THEY'RE MAKING:AN EFFORT TO ENFORCE PAR • Resident KING, THEY NEED TO DO IT EVENLY NOT RANDOMLY. ' I M ALARMED AT THE AMOUNT OF BUILDING GOING ON IN SPITE OF THE PARKING AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PLANS • Resident ARE FOR THAT: W`CROSSROADS YOU CAN ONLY PARK 5 MINUTE S WITHOUT PAYING: THE FEE STRUCTURE SHOULD BE RE-DONE HOW . DO YOU PICK UP A PIZZA AT PAZZOS? TO RUN TO THE VILLAGE AND SPEND MONEY I WOULD RATHER GO TO LIQNSHEAD THAN PARK UNDERGROUND. IT NEEDS MORE SECURITY: • Resident IN THE CORE THEY NEED-TO BE MORE STRICT IN ENFORCING • Resident PARKINGANDACCESS.TQ_THOSEAREAS ::;.:. ;. . IN ,THE PARKING GARAGE; CARS THAT TAKE UP TWO SPACES SHOULD BE TICKETED::: ' • Resident IN THE PARKING STRUCTURE PEOPLE SHOULD NOT USE MORE THAN ONE SPACE AND IF THEY DO THEY SH®IJLD BE •Resident TICKETED AND FINED "' _ `. INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF SPACES : : THEY NEED MORE PEOPLE'ENFORCING PARKING:. SOMETIMES PEOPLE INHb „r. ARE SKIING PARK AT THEBOTTOM OF NORTH TRAIL SO - -- - - - . THERE IS:NO PLACE FOR HIKERS: THEYNEED MORE _ ENFORCEMENT SO THAT IT.'S-ONLY-USERS.OF-THE fVORTH • Resident ~ - - - TRAIL ' . INSTALL A MONORAIL TO DENVER. THERE WOULD BE LESS • Resident NEED FOR;PARKING THAT WAY: IT CANNOT BE VERY SAFE FOR PEOPLE ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD. THEY SHO;ULD~DO SOMETHING • Resident . : IT HAS TO"BE DONE TO''1300ST THE PARKIN A G ND. CUT DOWN.: ON FEES CHARGED • Resident. . IT IS`GREAT THAT'THEY DO NOT CHARGE FOR PARKING ` s -. AFTER 3:00`IN THE PARKING STRUCTt1RES 1T MIGHT BRING ~ P P • Resident , : EO LE OUT WHO WOULD NORMALLY STAYNOME: ,, TUNATE THERE I&IVOT MORE PARKING SPOTS ; FOR;UALUOE CARDS. THEY NEED MORE PARKING KEY • , KIOSHES IN DIFFERENTAREAS' ..~ .... = .. _. ..... u e :: - . - ` - ~: ; 4 7 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 - • Resident - - IT IS-VERY FRUSTRATING. WHEN YO.U. HAVE, PEOPLE AND . - _._. CHILDREN,WHO GO.TO THE; LIBRARY AND ICE SKATING AT _ DOBSON AND CANNOT FIND PARKING. • Resident IT MAKES IT HARD, F,.OR PEOPLE TO COME BECAUSE OF THE :. . : . . PARKING`: , . ;- ~: • Resident ; ° , IT NEEDS::TO BE MORE ACCESSIBLE AND MAYBE HAVE SOME MORE SHORTTERM AREAS. . • Resident IT WOULD BE NICE FOR THE-LOCALS TO BE ABLE TO PARK. THERE SHOULD. BE MORE:AVAILABILITY AND FAIRER PARKING PRICES FOR THE LOGALS.DURING-THE HIGH SEASON. _. • Resident IT WOULD BE NICE FOR THEM TQ TRY TQ ALLEVIATE} " " ' PROBLEMS. ACCIDENTS ARE JUST SATURDAY PARKING WAITING TO-HAPPEN..:, ,, • Resident ;: IT WOULD BE NICE.TO PARK:OUTSIDE ON THE STREET WHEN PEOPLE ARE AVER VISITING.US ,:. • Resident ITS A.CHALLENGE BUT BASICALLY THEY'RE DOING A GOOD ' JOB WITH LlMITED`SFACE AND TOQ MANY VEHICLES:.: • Resident- . IT'S:A HUGE PROBLEM AND:I THINK PAID PARKING IS NOT A SOLUTION': THERE SHOULD`BE MORE PARKING AND FREE `PARKING FOR,TAX PAYING CITIZENS. THERE'S A MONOPOLY ON THE PARKING STRUCTURE IN WINTER. SUMMER ISN'T A _ _-.`-; ; .°.°:` . ' ~ PROBLEM BUT WINTER'IS:. • Resident„ IT'S A MAJOR ISSUE. THE SOLUTION WOULD BE TO BUILD " ANOTHER:STRUCTURE. • Resident;; ', ' - - IT'S A NEVER ENDWG PROBLEM: + Resident ITS DANGEROUS. FLIVE ON THE.STREET WHERE THEY PARK ,.~ ' AND ITS=VERY. DANGEROUS. • Resident ` IT'S.OBVIOUS~THAT THE FRONTAGE ROAD IS CROWDED FORM . . ' ~ ',THE TENNIS COURTS. TO EAST VAIL. IT'S,A WONDER MORE ;. ,_ . PEOPLE HAVEN'T BEEN,INJURED GATHERING THEIR -- EQUIPMENT' AND: CROSSING THE ROAD. ` • Resident ITS OUT OF CONTROL. ` • Resident :.. IT'S .THE WAY THE-TOWN WA$:ORIGINALLY BUILT. THEY.CAN'T, .:. < DO MUCH ABOUT IT. -MAYBE THE NEW ST,RUCTIJ.RE THEY,:. ~ „ r., . '~ BUILT WILL ALLEVIATE SOME OF:]°HE PROBLEMS. • Resident ` : ITS TOO EXPENSIVE AND THERE SHOULD 8E„MORE EMPLOYEEPARKiNG: ~ . . -- - - - -- -~ ~T ~ ~-Resid-ent-' ' ~ ww.._ __.._. _- - ~ '" JUST PROVIDE MORE ENFORCEMENT. • Resident JUST TICKET TN'EM`IF THEY VIOLATE LAWS, NO WARNINGS. ~ • Re§idenY: JUST TO KEEP`SOLICITING.IDEAS ABOUT OUTSIDE PARKING... _ , - ..:.FACILITIES AND BUILD A RAMP FOR LOCALS, :. . Resident .. KEEP PEOPLE FROM RARKING~IN FRONT OF THE'DOOR$ AND: , ,_ ,, ~ .. TRY TO KEEP LITTERING,DOWN IN THE STRUCTURES. ' .. Residenf " ` LOCALS NEED SPACES~DURING SKLSEASON. BAN EAGLE" ... COUNTY PARKING CARDS. • Resident. - MAKE'tT SO ANY NEIN CONSTRUCTION°HAS TO HAVE UNDER' - ` GROUND PARKING UR A,PARKING GARAGE THAT'S NOT ., -VISIBLE. . • Resident - MAKE MORE PARKING AVAILABLE SO ITDOESN'T GETCRAZI( .. ti.. ' ' _ ._ ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD. IT MAKES EVERY'1"HING LOOK " Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 CONGESTED. • Resident MAKE MORE PARKING AVAILABLE • Resident . MAKE VAIL RESORT KICK IN SOME BIG MONEY TO PAY THEIR SHARE.. • Resident MORE BELOW GROUND PARKING STRUCTURES WITH LARGE HEAD ROOM, NOT ENOUGH OF THOSE STRUCTURES AROUND . THE TOWN SPENDS MORE TIME CHASING PARKING THAN CRIMINALS. • Resident MORE OF IT IS NEEDED • Resident . NEW BUILDING PLANS SHOULD INCLUDE PARKING PLANS • Resident . NO COMMENT. • Resident NO COMMENTS. (6) • Resident NO COMMENTS. I HAVE SPOKEN MY PIECE. WE NEED MORE SPACE BUT LAND ISN'T AVAILABLE AT THIS POINT • Resident . NO COMMENTS. WE DON'T USE PARKING IN VAIL MUCH AT ALL. • Resident NO EXCEPT WE NEED MORE • Resident . NO, BUT OUTLYING BUS SERVICE IN THE WINTER IS EXCELLENT AND IN THE SUMMER IS TERRIBLE. THE PARKING • Resident PLAN WITH THE CONVENTION CENTER IS A GOOD IDEA. NO, I THINK THE MORE CARS WE HAVE ON THE STREET THE MORE IT ENCOURAGES PEOPLE TO COME TO VAIL • Resident . NO, IT'S A TERRIBLE PROBLEM, BUT I HAVE NO IDEA HOW TO SOLVE IT. • Resident NO, JUST WHAT I SAID BEFORE • Resident . NO, NOT REALLY OTHER THAN THERE'S NOT ENOUGH OF IT FOR EMPLOYEES • Resident NO. {65) • Resident NONE THAT I CAN THINK OF • Resident . NONE. (33) • Resident NOT REALLY. • Resident NOT REALLY. • Resident OBVIOUSLY SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE ABOUT PARKING ' ON THE WEEKENDS. ON THE FRONTAGE THE TOWN HAS TO - - MAINTAIN AND DEAL WITH IT. THE TIME AND EFFORT • Resident BENEFITS THE SKIERS INSTEAD OF THE TOWN OF VAIL. ON THE OCCASIONS WHEN PARKING STRUCTURES ARE FULL , THE PARKING ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD SHOULD BE PAID PARKING. • Resident OUTLYING BUS SERVICE IN WINTER IS EXCELLENT AND IN THE SUMMER IS VERY BAD. IT SHOULD BE EVERY 15 MINUTES INSTEAD OF EVERY HOUR • Resident . PARKING IS A PROBLEM.- THE THREE HOUR LIMIT IS NOT ENOUGH FOR SHOPPERS. PARKING IS A PROBLEM IN WINTER. I TH{NK THAT'S WHY PEOPLE ARE GOING DOWN VALLEY TO SHOP AND LUNCH • Resident .. PARKING IS NOT THAT SERIOUS OF A CRIME. 76 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident PARKING SHOULD BE FREE WHEN BUS SERVICE IS CURTAILED. IT'S OBVIOUSLY INADEQUATE. FINALLY, THE FREE PARKING SHOULD BE REINSTATED AT THE SOCCER FIELDS AND FORD PARK. • Resident PARKING SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED FOR SKIERS ON THE FRONTAGE ROADS FOR SAFETY PURPOSES. • Resident PARKING STRUCTURES ARE NOT MARKED WELL. • Resident PEOPLE NEED TO BE LENIENT ABOUT THE PARKING. FOR - .EXAMPLE, IF YOU NEEDED TO RUN AN ERRAND, BE LENIENT ABOUT IT.` IFS YOU'RE GOING TO THE BANK, BE REASONABLE. • Resident PEOPLE SHOULD BE ABLE TO PARK ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD. THERE IS NOT ENOUGH PARKING. • Resident PEOPLE TAKE UP TWO SPACES AND NEVER RECEIVE - TICKETS: THIS'YEAR THEY HAD COUPON BOOKS AND THREE WEDNESDAYSIN MARCH FOR RESTRICTED PARKING: IT COULD HAVE BEEN: LESS BUT° IT IS A NICE BENEFIT. • Resident PEOPLE TAKING UP TWO SPACES SHOULD BE TICKETED. • Resident PEOPLE THAT PARK AND TAKE UP TWO SPACES SHOULD BE TICKETED. HEAVILY FOR THAT DISCOURTESY. THERE A NUMBER OF TIMES THAT TWO CARS ARE PARKING WHERE THREE:COULD PARK IF THEY,PARKED PROPERLY. $50 TO $100 FINES FOR THAT WOULD.., BE EFFECTIVE. • Resident .POSSIBLY BUILD ANOTHER STRUCTURE.. • Resident PRICES SHOULD BE LOWER IN THE PARKING STRUCTURES FOR LOCALS: THERESHOULD BE MORE FREE TIME. START THE FREE TIME AT 2 PM: ~. • Resident PROVIDE CLOSER PARKING: , • Resident PUT OFFICERS ON~THE STREETS ALL THE TIMEI • Resident RESIDENTS SHOULD HAVE SOMEWHERE TO PARK SO THEY CAN GO TO TOWN'. IT 1S VERY DIFFICULT TO GO TO TOWN. • Resident RETHINK OR REDO THE ART WORK ON THE STRUCTURES AND THE CLEANLINESS OF THE STRUCTURE CONCERNING LIONSHEAD: • Resident SOMEONE IS GOING TO GET KILLED SOONER OR LATER.., • Resident SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE: I THINK THE PLANS FOR NEW UNDERGROUND PARKING' WIL' L HELP A LOT. • .Resident .- .-_~- .. - .- - _-- -- - - ~- -- STOP-REDUCING THE PARKING TICKETS TO $3:00:' 1T fS DEMORALIZING TO THE ST'i4FF. • Resident TAKE A`SERIOUS`LOOK AT'IT: COME UP WITH BETTER IDEAS. • Resident- - THE FREE PARKING SCHEDULES SHOULD BE AVAILABLE WHENEVER THE FULL WINTER BUS SCHEDULE IS NOT. I LIVE IN A VERY EXPENSIVE PLACE SO I CAN USE THE BUS. THEN THEY CHARGES' ME $20 A DAY TO PARK. KEEP THE BUSES RUNNING. _ - , .. ~,_, .. • Resident . - THE LIONSHEAD STRUCTURE IS FILTHY. AND, IT'S IMPORTANT ' ~ ~ ,: . TO KEEP THE FRONTAGE;ROAD SAFE FOR PARKING. • Resident THE METERING SYSTEM FQR 1`HE. THREE HOUR PARKING IS VERY COMPLEX: Il' IS~NOT VERY GOOD. NOT A LQT OF, PEOPLE NOIN HOW TO`USE IT AND ITS NOT EFFICIENT TO WALK SO MANY TIMES BACK AND FORTH: rte.. ,_ 77 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident THE MOLESTATION. THEY HAD A SUSPECT. I READ IT IN THE NEWSPAPER. THEY SHOULD HAVE TIGHTER • Resident SECURITY. THE PARKING STRUCTURE NEEDS TO BE CLEANER AND THE MARKING OF PARKING AND DIRECTIONS NEED TO BE • Resident REDONE. THE REAL SENSE IS THAT THINGS ADDITIONAL P , ARKING IN SMALL PARKS, IS NOT BEING USED BY SKIERS DON'T . NECESSARILY IMPROVING OVERALL PARKING BUT THEY NEED TO DO SOMETHING MAJOR TO IMPROVE PARK + Resident ING SUCH AS ADDING NEW LEVELS OR BIGGER PARKING AREAS. • Resident THERE IS NOT ENOUGH AND ITS TOO EXPENSIVE . THERE ISN'T ENOUGH OF IT AND IT IS VERY INCONVENIENT TO PARK IN DOWNTOWN VAIL . IF YOU ARE GOING DOWN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE DAY, IT IS VERY INCONVENIENT . WE NEED MORE PARKING FACILITIES FOR SKIERS THAT IS LOCATED • Resident CLOSER TO THE MOUNTAINS. • THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE OF IT AND FOR A BETTER PRICE FOR PEOPLE WHO LIVE AND WORK HERE Resident. + Resident . THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE OF IT. . THERE NEEDS TO,BE MORE PARKING IN GENERAL • Resident , ESPECIALLY IN THE WINTER TIME. • Resident THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE PARKING. THERE SHOULD BE FREE PARK-AND-RIDE • Resident . THERE' SHOULD BE MORE AVAILABLE FOR LOCAL PEOPLE • Resident . THE PARKING SHOULD NOT BE SO EXPENSIVE. THERE SHOULD BE MORE PARKING. IF LIVE IN TOWN THERE SHOULD BEAT LEAST 50% MORE • Resident . THERE SHOULD, BE MORE SPACES FOR 3 HOUR PARKING. A LOT OF SKIERS USE THESE SPOTS • Resident • Resident . THERE'S A LOT OF ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT. THERE'S NOT ENOUGH OF IT. WE NEED TO USE THE FRONTAGE ROAD • Resident . THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING BECAUSE THE CONTRACTORS TAKE ALL THE SPACES. THEY NEED AN OFF"SITE PARKING SPOT AND THEN TO BUS • Resident THEM IN. BRING THE CONTRACTORS IN BY GROUPS. _ _ THERE'S_NOT ENOUGH PARKING IN THE WINTER AND THE RATES ARE TOO HIGH ALSO • Resident • Resident . THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING. THERE'S TOO LITTLE OF IT AND IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE BUT I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY CHOICE ' • Resident . DON T PUT THE CONVENTION CENTER BY THE PARKING STRUCTURE. THEY ALLOW PARKING ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD AT FORD PARK EVENTS BUT NOT SOFTBALL OR RE • Resident CREATION ACTIVITIES. THEY LACK BEING CONSISTENT. • Resident THEY ALWAYS NEED MORE. THEY ARE A VERY UNFRIENDLY STAFF T , HE PARKING GESTAPO.. 78. Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident THEY DON'T ALLOW-LOCALS TO PARK IN THE WINTER AT A REDUCED RATE. SINCE WE SUPPORT THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY, THERE SHOULD BE DISCOUNTED PARKING FOR LOCALS. Resident • Resident THEY DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO THE PEOPLE THAT PARK IN THE NO PARKING ZONES. THEY NEED MORE AND BETTER PARKING AND THEY NEED TO ENFORCE THE PARKING ON THE STREET BEFORE SOMEONE GETS HURT FROM RUNNING OUT BETWEEN CARS LIKE A CHILD FOR INSTANCE. • Resident • Resident THEY- NEED MORE PARKING fOR TOURISTS. ' THEY NEED MORE PARKING. THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PARKING.SPACES. • Resident • Resident • Resident THEY NEED MORE. THEY NEED TO'ATTEND-TO THE SAFETYOF PEOPLE IN THE PARKING STRUCTURES. THEY NEED TO BE TICKETING- PEOPLE WHO SPILL OVER INTO OTHER SPACES. IT HAPPENS ENOUGH THAT I'T'S REALLY • Resident • Resident ANNOYING: - TMEY NEED:TO BUILD MORE PARKING IN THE PARKING STRUCTURES. -THEY NEED TO FORCE DEVELOPERS TO BUILD MORE PARKING. • Resident THEY NEEDTO-GET RID OF THE CARS THAT DON'T MOVE IN THE STRUCTURES IN THE WINTER. THOSE THAT ARE OBVIOUSLY PARKED THERE FOR THE WHOLE SEASON. • Resident THEY NEED, TO GO BACK.TO, A LOCAL'S PASS. THEY NEED VAIL. RESORTTO CONTRIBUTE TO THE PARKING SOLUTIONS. • Resident THEY NEED, TO HAVE MORE. PARKING GARAGES AND.: . ENFORCE THE SAME RULES FOR EVERYBODY. 'KEEP ORDER IN "THE AREA: WE HAVE CERTAIN NO GO AREAS AND WHEN CARS DRIVE THRU THERE, COPS IGNORE THEM. TO BE • Resident SPECIFIC, AT THE-FIRST BANK ON VAIL ROAD: THEY NEED TO LOOK AT THE RESIDENCES. PEOPLE HAVE MANY CARS''THEY,NEED TO GET RID OF JUNK AND TOO , ENFORCE THE TWO CAR RULE. • Resident -. • Resident- - - - THEY NEED TO MAKE MORE UNDERGROUND PARKING. ~--- THE--Y-=SHOUL=D=BUILD AN-ADDITIONAL.PARKING STRUCTURE _ UNDER I-70 LINKED TO THE CURRENT STRUCTURE IN VAIL • Resident. • Resident VILLAGE.: .. _ THEY SHOULD BUILD ANOTHER PARKING GARAGE. .THEY SHOULD CHARGE FOR PEOPLE PARKING ON FRONTAGE ROADS WITH BOXES,OR TENANTS BECAUSE THEY LOSE A LOT' • Resident OF MONEY: " THEY SHOULD LET; PEOPLE, PARK ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD BEFORE THEY REACH THEIR QUOTA.. • Resident THEYTOOK AWAX T.HE,VALUE PARKING.. IF THEY MADE IT _ EASIER TO TAKE A LOCAL.BUS INTO TOWN: MORE PEOPLE ' WOULD`RIDE"IT: IF I DROVE HERE I WOULD GO TO BEAVERCREEK. THEY HAVE SHUTTLES EVERY FIVE MINUTES AND FREE PARKING`. THATS HOW CLAPPER GETS BUSINESS. .: ,. .. 79 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident THEY'RE TOO OVERZEALOUS ABOUT THE PARKING ENFORCEMENT. GET SOME OF THE FUNDS AVAILABLE AND MAKE IT MORE LIKE A CITY.. USE METERS ON THE FRONTAGE ROADS. • Resident TICKET DOUBLE PARKING. • Resident TICKET PEOPLE WHO TAKE UP TWO SPACES IN THE PARKING LOT. • Resident TICKET. PEOPLE WHO TAKE UP TWO SPACES IN THE STRUCTURES. • Resident TICKET THOSE WHO TAKE UP MORE THAN ONE SPACE WITHIN THE STRUCTURES.. . • Resident USE MORE BOOTS WHEN PEOPLE PARK IN THE WRONG SPOT . TOW VIOLATORS. HAVE MORE POLICING. • Resident VAIL COULD USE SOME MORE PARKING AREAS FOR PEAK TIMES IN WINTER BUT DO A GOOD JOB UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES. • Resident VAIL VIEW DRIVE PARALLEL PARKING IS PROHIBITED DURING THE SUMMER WHICH IS NOT NECESSARY. • Resident WE NEED A NEW PARKING STRUCTURE IN ADDIT ION TO THE TWO WE HAVE. • Resident WE NEED MORE FREE PARKING. • Resident ~ WE NEED MORE OF IT. • Resident WE NEED MORE OF IT. • Resident WE NEED MORE PARKING OPTIONS. PART TIME EMPLOYEES ARE VERY LIMITED DURING BUSY HOLIDAY PERIODS. COULD WE LOOK INTO SOMETHING MORE LIKE PARK-AND-RIDE POSSIBILITIES FROM OUTLYING AREAS? • Resident WE.~NEED.MORE:PARKWG SPACES AND THE.POLICE SHOULD ` ISSUE UVARNING TICKETS, FIRST ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE GUESTS AND NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE PARKING SITUATION • Resident . WE NEED MORE PARKING. SPOTS FOR VALUE CARD OWNERS • Resident . . WE NEED MORE PARKING STRUCTURES FOR LOCALS • Resident . WE NEED MORE PARKING:' • Resident 1NE NEED MORE PARKING. • Resident WE NEED MORE PUBLIC PARKING. • Resident - - WE NEED MORE SPACES FOR RESIDENTS. w _ • Resident. _ ._ ~`;-•---------- -------- WE NEED MORE UNDERGROUND PARKING. • Resident WE'NEED MORE. • Resident WE~ NEED SOME MORE. IF VAIL RESORTS HAD SUGGESTED COVERING I-70 THROUGH THE TOWN OF VAIL AS SUGGESTED , THERE.WOULD BE PLENTY, OF PARKING Resident . WHEN-THEY START GHi4RGING FOR PARKING THEY SHOULD PUSH THE BUSES FULLTIME. • Resident WINTER SKIERS TAKE TOO MUCH OF PARKING FROM THE . LOCALS THERE SHOULD BE ASSIGNED AREAS SO BOTH- FACTIONS HAVETHE CONVENIENGE;_ • Resident . WITH THE RENOVATION' OF LIONSHEAD, THEY°Ni4VE'GOT TO ADDRESS~THE PARKING ISSUE. THERE IS NQT ENQIJGH . PARKING...:. . ;~ .. -,,. ._ . , -_ ° an,, Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 ° ° ~ "" -` YES; WE~NEED.MORE~UNDERGROUND_PARKING,,..THE.LAND IS ° - ~ . - • Resident ~~. _ " ` '' :. - JUST SG1rVALUABLE<THAT. PARKING IS ATROCIOUS: WHAT , THEY'RE DOING NOW' SHOULD HAVE DONE 20 YEARS AGO, UNDERGROUND PARKING;:; THE POPULATION EXPLOSION IS EFFECTING THE PARKING,SITUATION: ° • Second home owner A£OUPLE OF YEARS AGO THERE WAS A DISCOUNT FOR HAVING MORE THEN FOUR PEOPLE IN YOUR CAR. THAT WAS A`GOOD WAY TO ENCOURAGE CARPOOLING. • Second home owner BUILD A ANOTHER PARKING STRUCTURE SOMEWHERE BUT ~. ~" ° . "NOT IN THE VILLAGE. YOU DON'T USE PRIME RESORT , ,. " PROPERTY FOR A PARKING'STRUCTURE. - r DO WE NEED. MORE PUBLIC PARKING IN THE 5 TO 7 YEAR • Second home owne .PLAN? •. Secohd.home.owner - DURING CONCERTS, VAIL VAL-LEY DRIVE IS ALMOST -" ' ,.., . ': IMPOSSIBLE TO,GET THROUGH. ' • Second Home owner EXPAND PARKING. THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH.PARKING: ` KEEP PARKING AFTER 3 PM FREE, IT HELPS RETAIL STORES. PEOPLE WILL GO SHOP ELSEWHERE IF NOT er , FOR PEOPLE THAT OWN PROPERTY IN THE VILLAGE, THEY` • Second home own - NEED TO HAVE OVER NIGHT PARKING THAT IS A REASONABLE ' RATE. THE VALUE CARD SHOULD BE GOOD FOR 24 HOURS NOT JUST 20. VALUE CARD CUSTOMERS'.SHOULD.,BE ABLE:TO PARK IN`THE STRUCTURE NOT JUST ON THE ROOF ,;, , e FRONTAGE ROAD PARKING RULES COULD BE MORE CLEAR.:. r- • Second homeown . WHEN YOU CAN AND CAN'T PARK'ON THE FRONTAGE-.ROAD IS ' CONFUSING. • Second home-owner GET MORE VALUE PASS SPACES AND POLICE IT BETTER. ~~ Second home owner GET PLENTY OF IT AND KEEP IT, AVAILABLE. • Second home ownee GIVE A DISCOUNT TO HOMEOWNERS. ` • Second home owner HAVE: MORE AND CHEAPER PARKING. - • Second .home. owner HAVE MORE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS AROUND:; ,..,. ` DURING,BUSY TIMES ESPECIALLY IN MILLCREEK CIRCLE. k '., • Second home owner: HAVE MORE ON PEAK WINTER PARKING DAYS. - • Second home owner r i DON'T LIKE THEM PARKINGIN MY'CONDO'S LOT. : . I ONLY USE THE PARKING DURING.=ONE SEASON OF THE YEAR • Second home owne AS A'RULE. ._ : _.- -- _ - - ~ ..Second home owner _ . ___ --- ~-.. _.. L RESIDE IN WEST UAIL. IT'S: THE END OF -THE: FRONTAGE =-= - ~ - ` `ROAD AND`PEOPLE ARE TICKETED FOR PARKING ON THE ° ROAD. THERE ISN'T ENOUGH GUEST PARKING.,: ' : ~ r ~ (:THINK FREE PARKING AT NIGHT AND IN-THE SUMMER 1S „ "-- • - • Second home owne ..VERY GOOD. • Second home owner ~ ~ 1 THINK PEOPLE SHOULD ONLY PARKIN DESIGNATEQ SPOTS . ' AND IT SHOULQ BE ENFORCED. THAT WHEN THE GARAGE IS FULL DURING THE f;THINK '~ Second home owner ; 1NINTER IS A REAL BUMMER: I'M NOT SURE HOW TO REMEDY"' . :THE PROBLEM. MAYEiE ENLp,RGE CURRENT STRUCTURES AND BUILD ANEW STRUCTURE AT.GOLDEN PEAK. ' Second home owner. ' ~ - .. ! THINK'.TNE FACILITIES ARE INADEQUATE Ali TIMES. ESPECIALLY IN MAIN VILLAGE THERE'S AN OVERFLOW .ONTO ' THE STREETS: ' ~_ : 1 _. ~ ': 8.1 ' , ;, ;. Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner I THINK THEY ARE ALREADY PLANNING ON DOING SOME THINGS. I THINK THEY NEED MORE PARKING IN OUTLYING AREAS WHERE YOU GET BUSED IN, APARK-AND-RIDE AREA. I WISH THERE WERE MORE PARKING SPACES IN VAIL. IN TOWN, INCREASE THE COMPLIMENTARY PARKING LIMIT AND PROVIDE MORE AVAILABLE PARKING. ITS A DIFFICULT PROBLEM. WE NEED MORE PARKING. IT'S A PAIN AND ALWAYS FULL. BUSY TIME IT'S A MESS. DURING CERTAIN TIMES OF DAY ITS A NIGHTMARE, PARTICULARLY WEEKENDS. BUILD MORE PARKING. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SUGGEST. IT'S DIFFICULT TO PARK IN THE VILLAGE. IT'S INADEQUATE. BUILD A NEW GARAGE AND PARK CARS DIAGONAL ON FRONTAGE ROAD. JUST CHANGE THE SYSTEM WITH THE VALUE CARDS AND ALL THAT. MAKE AN EFFORT AT CROWD CONTROL ON WEEKENDS. NO ANSWER. NO COMMENTS. NO COMMENTS. NO, EXCEPT BUILD MORE BUT I DON'T KNOW WHERE. NO, I DON'T USE IT. NO. (35) NO. FROM WHAT I'VE OBSERVED, EVERYTHING SEEMS TO BE GOING PRETTY GOOD. NONE I CAN THINK OF. NONE. NONE. NONE. NONE. NONE. NOPE. NOT REALLY. PARKING IS A PROBLEM EVERYWHERE. IT DEPENDS ON THE USAGE AND THE SEASON, LOCALS VS RESIDENTS. MAKE WORKERS PARK AWAY FROM THE DOWNTOWN AREAS AND USE A SHUTTLES AS THE ALTERNATIVE. PARKING SHOULD BE FREE FOR ANYONE USING VAIL AND WE NEED TO BUILD EXTENSIVE UNDERGROUND PARKING FOR THAT PURPOSE. PLEASE KEEP THE THREE HOUR FREE PARKING, THAT'S GOOD. THERE IS NOT ENOUGH OF IT FOR EVERYONE. THERE SHOULD BE MORE PUBLIC PARKING AT A CHEAPER RATE. THERE SHOULD BE REMOTE PARKING WITH SHUTTLE BUSES AND THERE SHOULD BE BUS SERVICE TO THE AIRPORT. 82 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner THERE'S JUST NOT ENOUGH SPAG€. WE NEED MORE . ESPECIALLY DURING EVENTS. ENOUGH OF IT AND ITS TOO EXPENSIVE IN VAIL ' • Second home owner S NOT THERE ITSELF . THERE'S TOO MUCH PARKING ON THE STREETS IN WINTER • Second home owner TIME. r THEY ARE A VERY COURTEOUS PARKING STAFF. MY • Second home owne EXPERIENCE IS LIMITED. THEY DO A GOOD JOB WITH WHAT IS AVAILABLE. • Second home owner THEY'NEED A PARKING STRUCTURE. • Second home owner SRE C • Second home owner NED FOR BIISE OUTL NED PARKING THAT S OUTLI • Second home owner THEY NEED MORE PARKING. • Second home owner THEY NEED MORE. • Second- home owner THEY NEED MORE. Y NEED SECURITY IN THE PARKING STRUCTURES. • Second home owner THE TURN DOWN THE RADIO MUSIC ON THE BUSES. • Second home owner WE NEED IMPROVE TO SAFETY IN THE PARKING • Second home owner STRUCTURES.. • Second home owner WE NEED MORE PARKING. I'D LIKE TO SEE A TRAIN FROM THE DENVER AIRPORT. WHY DOESN'T THE CITY CHARGE FOR PARKING IN THE • Second home owner SUMMER, EVEN A NOMINAL AMOUNT? PEOPLE WOULD STILL BE WILLING TO PAY. THEY NEED TO WATCH THE PARKING, PATROL THE • Second home owner YES, PARKING. THE: LOCAL:3 LOT IS A MYTH. THE SYSTEM IS YOU LIED • Second home owner , HORRIBLY BROKEN ~. SUGGEST 2 HOURS FREE IS NOT LONG ENOUGH- • Mail Survey . 90 MINUTES AS WE INCREASE THE DENSITY OF THE COMMERCIAL CORES • Mail Survey WE NEED TO INCREASE.THE NUMBER OF PUBLIC SPACES. ' THE POLICE NEED TO INCREASE THEIR PATROLS AND ENFORCEMENT IN THE STRUCTURES. BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF PARKING IN THE VALLEY, TOV • Mail Survey NEEDS`TO ADDRESS ADDITIONAL PARKING STRUCTURES AND ' ON-STREET SPACES I O O N • Mail-Survey SE LD BE $ PER ENTRY AND U S OU SUMM R PARK NG 24 7 METERED LOT DAILY USE • Mail Survey CONTINUE TO: PERSUE ADDITIONAL WINTER PARKING SPOTS. STRUCTURESRRE FULL, IT PREVENTS PEOPLE WHEN . ACCESSING VILLAGE BUSINESSES: DANGEROUS FOR DRIVERS AND PEDESTRIANS • Mail Survey - EMPLOYEES' WORKING IN' VAIL SHOULD PARK FOR FREE IN Mail Survey • PARKING STRUCTURES FREE PARKING AVAILABLE AS AN OPTION ON OUTSKIRTS • Mail Survey WITH ~BUS-SERVICE`'' HAVE ONE PRICEfTYPE OF PARKING, CHARGE TO PARK ON • Mail Survey THE STREETS WHEN STRUCTURES ARE FULL _ .._ _ 8<! Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Mail Survey IF VAIL ASSOC LOWERS PRICES DRASTICALLY THE LAST 2 WEEKS OF SEASON, WHY CAN'T TOV EITEHR LOWER PARKING OR MAKE IT FREE THOSE LAST 2 WEEKS, TO GET' PEOPLE INTO TOWN TO SHOP. • Mail Survey LET PEOPLE PARK ON THE FRONTAGE ROAD • Mail Survey MAKE IT FAIR • Mail Survey MONORAIL • Mail Survey MORE ENFORCMENT ON REPEAT PARKING VIOLATORS • Mail Survey NEED BETTER DROPOFF FOR LH, ESP. LIBRARY DOBSON , , YOUTH:..THIS IS WHERE CEO JUST NEEDS TO BE PATIENT - SOMETIMES STRUCTURE IS FULL BUT YOU STILL HAVE TO GET YOUR KIDS TO THESE PLACES. HOPEFULLY THIS IS PART OF THE BIG PLAN FOR LH. + Mail Survey OFF STREET SHOULD BE ENFORCED. NO ARBITRARY • Mail Survey TICKITING. DO IT OR DON'T. RE THE ARK @VAIL ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE • Mail Survey ... PARK ALL CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES AT DONOVAN PAVILLION • Mail Survey AND BUS THEM INTO VAIL PARKING SHOULD BE BASED ON MERCHANDISE CREDIT . MORE SPENT -LESS PARKING PAID • Mail Survey . PARKING STRUCTURES NEED TO BE LARGER -TOO MUCH FRONTAGE ROAD PARKING • Mail Survey PEOPLE ARE ABUSING THE SYSTEM DURING WEEKENDS . CONTINUE TO PARK ON ROAD WHEN SPOTS AVAILABLE IN STRUCTURE AFTER NOON. PAY A FEE FOR PARKING ON THE ROAD-WORD IS DON'T ARRIVE TOO EARLY OR YOU'LL HAVE TO PAY. • Mail Survey PROMOTE CARPOOLING WITH REDUCED RATES •. Mail Survey REMOTE PARKING IS EXCELLENT • Mail Survey THE LOCALS CAN'T PARK IN STRUCTURE BUT WE FIAVE TO HITCHHIKE TO WORK THE LAST 2 WEEKS OF SEASON BECAUSE THE BUS SCHEDULE CHANGES. EVERYONE IS MAD ABOUT IT! 84 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 Do you have any comments or suggestions concerning the library? resident type comment • Resident A LITTLE STRICT. • Resident A LOT OF PEOPLE USE LIBRARY FOR INTERNET ACCESS. IT IS AWFULLY LIMITED. OTHER THAN THAT, I LIKE THE LIBRARY A LOT. • Resident AGREE WITH THE POLICY OF ELIMINATING ACCESS TO DOWN VALLEY RESIDENTS. • Resident AMAZING LIBRARY. `' " " • Resident BE MORE OPEN TO EAGLE COUNTY RESIDENTS. • Resident CAN'T CHECK OUT BOOKS EASILY. TO BE SO EVASIVE TO CHECK OUT BOOKS. JUST USE A TRACKING THING. • Resident DO A GREAT JOB: • Resident DOING A GOOD JOB: • Resident DON'T KNOW. . • Resident EVERYBODY SAYS IT'S IMPORTANT BUT I JUST THINK THE LIBRARY IS AN OLD SYSTEM. IT'S CHANGING AND PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO HOLD ONTO THE PAST. THERE'S A LOT OF . WAYS TO GET INFO, YOU"OUGHT TO CUT BACK MORE AND MORE ON THE LIBRARY, GO TO OTHER SOURCES. • Resident EXCELLENT SERVICES. • Resident EXPLORE LIBRARY BECOMING PART OF EAGLE RIVER DISTRICT. TOO STRONG OF RULES. • Resident GET A DIFFERENT PARKING PLAN OR LIBRARY PARKING VALIDATIONS. • Resident GET. MORE BOOKS. ,. • Resident GET MORE CONSERVATIVE' BOOKS. • Resident GET RID.OF THE LIBRARIAN: NIGHT AND DAY DIFFERENCE IN " AVON:, THEY ARE NICE AND RESPECTFUL, BUT NOT IN OUR TOWN: THE: STAFF CANNOT BE BOTHERED. • Resident HOLD THE UNLIMITED ADVENTURE SPEAKER SERIES IN A LARGER AREA:. MORE QUALITY BOOKS ON TAPE. • Resident I DO. (=1ND IT DIFFICULT. I'VE HAD TO GET A NEW CARD TWICE THIS 1(EAR. MY RESIDENCE,. THEY DIDN'T BELIEVE ME. METICULOUS ABOUT RENTING BOOK, WHO-THEY--LET RENT. • Resident I DO NOT. • Resident I DON'T HAVE A CARD, AND I HAVE NEVER.EVEN BEEN TO THE LIBRARY. • Resident I GO ELSEWHERE, BECAUSE I LIKE STRANGE BOOKS. I CAN UNDERSTAND A SMALL TOWN LIBRARY CAN'" HAVE A HALF A MILLION BOOKS IN IT, BUT THEY'RE AFFILIATED WITH COLORADO LIBRARIES AND SHARING PROGRAM, SO WHY CAN'T THEY GET IT? THEY SHOULD HAVE ACCESS: • Resident I HATE THE INTERIOR PLAN OR FLOOR PLAN: ,IT'S VERY CROWDEQ AND THEY DID DESTROY THE LOVELINESS. WELCOMING DESK IS NOT WARM':. IT'S GOTTEN COLD, • Resident I'HAVE,NO COMMENTS. I. DON'T USE THE VAIL'LIBRARY. • Resident I JUST THINK THE PEOPLE THERE ARE VERY RUDE:. .. 85 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident I THINK ITS A GREAT LIBRARY AND SERVICE • Resident . I THINK IT'S AWESOME • Resident . I THINK IT'S PRETTY WELL RUN AND HAS A GOOD SELECTION • Resident . THEY HAVE A VERY GOOD CHILDREN'S ROOM. I THINK ITS WONDERFUL, GOT GREATATMOSPHERE I USE ` • Resident . THE INTERNET THERE. I SOMETIMES SIT AND READ THERE . I THINK LIBRARIES ARE BECOMING OBSOLETE AND I THINK , THEY NEED TO REVISIT JUST WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO PROVIDE AND DIVERSIFY FOR THE FUTURE IN TERMS OF THE BOOKS THEY MAKE AVAILABLE AND ALL THE OTHER • Resident RESOURCES THAT THEY COULD OFFER. I THINK THE LIBRARY SHOULD INCORPORATE WITH THE • Resident COUNTY LIBRARIES. I THINK THE SUSPENSION FOR OVER DUE BOOKS IS A LITTLE BIT OUT OF HAND. I DONATE AND THESE PEOPLE CANCELLED MY CARD FOR CHILDREN'S BOOKS BECAUSE MY CHILD TORE • Resident A PAGE. I HAD TO REAPPLY. IT IS RIDICULOUS. • Resident I THINK THEY ARE DOING A GOOD JOB FROM WHAT I KNOW. I THINK WE'RE GOING UP THE WRONG ROAD BY PRESSING SO HARD TO BE VAIL ONLY. WE'RE SAYING DON'T COME TO OUR LIBRARY UNLESS YOU LIVE IN VAIL ' • Resident . I THINK WE RE COMING OFF TOO MUCH LIKE SEPARATISTS. IT'S CAUSING ANIMOSITY. I TOLD THEM I RUINED A BOOK. I ASKED THEM TO SEND ME A BILL. THEY HAVE NOT SENT ME A BILL ' • Resident . SO, I 11A FRUSTRATED. INCREASE THE HOURS • Resident . INDIVIDUALS OUTSIDE THE TOWN OF VAIL SHOULD • Resident BE ABLE TO CHECK OUT BOOKS AND VIDEOS. • Resident IT COULD BE MORE USER FRIENDLY. • Resident IT tS GREAT. IT IS TOO DIFFICULT FOR COMMON PEOPLE TO GET A LIBRARY CARD. THE STAFF IS RUDE TO PEOPLE WHO WANT TO GET A LIBRARY CARD. LIBRARIES SHOULD BE FOR THE GREATER • Resident GOOD OF THE PUBLIC. IT SHOULD BE TIED INTO NATIONAL RESEARCH MATERIALS . AND PERIODICALS • Resident . IT'S,A FINE LIBRARY • Resident _ . IT'S DIFFICULT TO PARK • Resident . IT'S EXCELLENT • Resident . IT'S GREAT. • Resident IT'S HARD TO USE BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR PARKING N • Resident A D WALK AS WELL.. ' • Resident IT S OUTSTANDING. IT'S TOO BUSY DURING THE SKI SEASON AND , THE 20 MINUTE TIME LIMIT IS TOO SHORT. THEY NEED TO HAVE MORE COMPUTERS AND A LONGER TIME LIMIT. THEY SHOULD MOVE THE COMPUTERS OUT OF THE ROOM THEY ARE CURRENTLY IN. • Resident IT'S VERY NICE • Resident .. KEEP GETTING NEW DVD'S. 86 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident. ..KEEP IT-GOING=AS-IS NOW."- .. ........... .... . • Resident KEEP THE;FUNDING FOR THE LIBRARY. • Resident LET OUTSIDERS USE 17, PEOPLE WHO LIVE OUTSIDE OF VAIL. • Resident LIBRARY lS A'GREAT PLACE. I VISIT THE LIBRARY A LOT. LOTS OF BOOKS AND VIDEOS. • Resident LIBRARY°IS FANTASTIC:° A MONTH AGO THEY ORDERED A . BOOK FOR ME AND HAD IT WITHIN 6 DAYS. • Resident LITTLE UNFRIENDLY.' •- Resident. ~ ,, . LOVE THE LIBRARY, BUT COULD BE NICER TO THE DOWN VALLEY PEOPLE. _ • Resident MAGAZINES SHOULD BE AVAILABLE TO CHECK OUT. • Resident- MAYBE RENTING SOME VIDEOS AS WELL AS SOME GOOD MUSIC`COLLECTIONS. • Resident MAYBE~THEY COULD HAVE,MORE COMPUTERS WITH THE " INTERNET ACCESS.:'- • Resident MORE BOOKS ON TOP ROPING AND CLIMBING. • Resident MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS THE LIMITED HOURS THAT THEY'RE> ~" ` OPEN, ESPECIALLY ON WEEKENDS. • Resident ~ . MY DAUGHTER LOST A VIDEO AND WE FOUND IT, BUT IT ' ~'DIDN'T.HAVE THE BOX: THEY SAID :WE CANCELLED ALL OF .. .: " YOUR CARDS` AND 1 WAITED'-TWO MONTHS TV' GET CARDS <> FOR ALL OF MY KID$: ~ THEY SHOULD HAVE. CALLED TO TELL ME THEY CANCELLED THE CARD AND THE SITUATION:"' _, • Resident : ., ~, NEED MORE OF EVERYTHING MENTIONED. • Resident NEEDS TO EXPAND. -; : , ' • Resident NEVER EXPERIENCED.. ~ ::. • Resident. USE. , ' ' -, _ ., NEVER; . . ` • Resident:.' , .. . NEVER USE. • Resident NO COMMENTS AF THIS TIME: - !.Resident- •, NO COMMENTS AT THIS TIME. ' • Resident NO COMMENTS; OTHER THAN THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE :. .. STAFF'S ATTITUD6~ ` . .Resident NO COMMENTS. (8) , • Resident - - NO PLACE CLOSE TO PARK: ITS A HAS3LE:TO GET TO IT, AND USE THE AVON LIBRARY MORE THAN THE VAIL LIBRARY, - -• Resident- - . ~~- ~~ ~~ - ~ ~ - NO, LUKE THE LIBRARY. • Resident: NO, I THINKIT'S VERY GOOD. • Resident- .. , _. NO, I THINK THEY'RE DOING A VERY GOOD JUB: , • Resident_ NO; I'M-HAPPY WITH iT . ~ . • Resident" :' NO, JUST THAT THE LIBRARY IS VERY GOOD. • Resident. _NO, THEY HAVE A GREAT PROGRAM. • Resident.. ,_ ` _ NO. (11,8) - ; • Resident `' ' - ;= NONE.. (51) ,.:.. • Resident ~ NOT REALLY, I-THINK ITS REAL GOOD`: ` ''• Resident ~-:. .:. . NOT REALLY... :. . .:. • Resident- .;.. ONCE AGAIN, I DON'T USE THE LIBRARY ENOUGH TO.TRULY . ., . ` ADD ANY COMMENTS. ,. ., -: , 87 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident PARKING PROBLEM. Bl' LIBRARY, SO I DO NOT GU TOO OFTEN • Resident . PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT FROM VAIL SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET LIBRARY CARDS. • Resident PROBABLY MORE COMPUTERS • Resident . SHOULD BE OPEN ALL DAY SUNDAYS • Resident . SHOULD JOIN THE EAGLE VALLEY LIBRARY DISTRICT • Resident . SUPPLY MORE VIDEOS LIKE STORY BOOK VIDEOS • Resident . THE ATTITUDE OF THE STAFF NEEDS TRAINING FOR IMPROVEMENT. • Resident THE LIBRARIANS ARE CURRENTLY ATTACKED FOR NOT BEING FRIENDLY. I HAVE ONLY HAD POSITIVE EXPERIENCE • Resident . THE LIBRARY IS GOOD AS IT IS • Resident . THE LIBRARY IS GOOD HERE • Resident- . THE LIBRARY IS GREAT. • Resident THE LIBRARY IS VERY GOOD. • Resident , THE LIBRARYNS WONDERFUL. • Resident THE LIBRARY STAFF tS VERY RUDE AND NOT HELPFUL A . CHANGE,OF LEADERSHIP IS NEEDED • Resident . THE -STAFF ARE INHOSPITABLE • Resident . THE STAFF NEEDS HEL` P IN HOW TO DEAL WITH PUBLIC IF . THEY DON'T LIKE DEALING WITH PEOPLE, THEY SHOULD NOT WORK.THERE. • Resident THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE OF IT AND CHEAPER • Resident . THEY ARE'DOING A'GREAT JOB, NOTHING TO ADD • Resident. . THEY ARE PROBABLY DOING A GOOD JOB. IT SHOULD BE EASIER TOGET ACARD. - • Resident THEY DO A GOOD JOB.:-°r • Resident _ THEY DO A GREAT JOB. • Resident THEY JUST NEED TO BE FRIENDLIER • Resident . THEY NEED A BETTER ATTI7'U.DE ABOUT LOCALS USING THE LIBRARY. THEY SHOULD HAVE THE SAME ATTITUDE AS THE AVON LIBRARYr* : - . • Resident. THEY NEED MORE COMPUTERS: THEY NEED A NEWSPAPER ARCHIVE. • Resident THEY NEED TOALLOW-ALL LOCALS, GUESTS -AND RESIDENTS , USE THE'LIBRARY ' _ ~ - , -__ _.. _ - _ __ • Resident • Resid nt THEY NEED TO BE NICER TO PEOPLE. e THEY NEED TO BRING BACK ANN, THE FORMER HEAD OF THE LIBRARY.: THE PERSON DOING IT NOW IS DOING A TERRIBLE JOB. • Resident THEY NEED TO CHANGE fiHE`SET UP. AGE SHOULD BE A FACTOR IN GETTING q.LIBRARY CARD. THERE SHOULDN'T BE - SUCH A LONG WAIT AND: IT SHOULDN'T BE TEMPORARY FOR' SENIORS. IF YOU HAVE AN AVON CARD, WHY CAN'T IT BE APPLICABLE TO THE VAIL`LIBRARY?' • Resident THEY NEED TO CLEAN UP-THEIR ACT OVER THERE • Resident :. THEY NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB IN CUSTOMER SER1/ICE , ANp NOT BE RUDE AND PREOCCUPIED: THEY NEED TO HARDEN THEIR.-HORIZON. . ,.. 88 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident _ .. THEY NEED TO START CARRYING DIRECT RESEARCH MATERIALS AND THINGS LIKE=THAT. I WENT TO LOOK FOR SOME CLASSIC BOOKS-LIKE BEOWULF, AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE IT.. IT'S MORE ANCIENT STUFF AND DEVELOPMENT. • Resident THEY SHOULD,START OVER WITH THE PEOPLE. GET SOMEONE FRIENDLY. AND DON'T REQUIRE SO MANY CREDENTIALS TO GET A LIBRARY CARD. • Resident THEY'VE TAKEN AWAY THE RIGHTS OF PEOPLE IN DIFFERENT AREAS TO USE THE AREA. • Resident ~ UPSET TO HEAR THAT:YOU CAN~CHECK QUT A BOOK IF.YOU"- ARE FROM,AVON, OR ELSEWHERE. • Resident VERY GOOD.. • Resident VERY PLEASED WITH AMBIENCE AND OVERALL FACILITY. • Resident ' VERY PLEASED WITH°THE LIBRARY STAFF AND THE WAY THEY ,- TREAT YOU. THE LIBRARY;HAS EXCELLENT SERVICE...:..- • Resident WE HAVE. A PROBLEM WITH PEOPLE HERE PART TIME WITH NO ': ADDRESS.' THEY WANT TO COME IN AND USE THE FACILITIES, : ~ AND IT_ I$ FROWNEDUPON. THERE SHOULD BE MORE . . . AVAILABILITY~Tb THEM. - • Resident WE~'LIKE. THE LIBRARY.. WE'RE GRANDPARENTS. WE ONLY USE IT WHEN OUR CHILDREN'AND GRANDCHILDREN ARE; . HERE. . • Resident WHEN THEY HAVE THE BOOK RESALE, THEY NEED TO HAVE IT ON SATURDAY MORNINGS OR SOME TIME NOT IN THE WEEK .DURING. WORK; HOURS..- - • Resident ~ WONDERFUL PLACE. HAD AL-L HAPPY EXPERIENCES: • Resident ~ ' ~ . 1NORKS FINE FOR ME. ,. ; Resident KING, EVEN ;., , WOULD BE NICE:TO FIND CLOSER PAR HANDICAPPED PARKING: • Resident WOULD LIKE TO SEE ALL LIBRARIES COMBINED`, EAGLE, AVON, 1 ANDVAIL. . _ __ ,: , . • Second home owner' , BEST LIBRARY I"HAVE SEEN: • Second home owner; DON'T KNOW ANYTHING. ABOUT.IT. • Second home ownec• ~ DON'T USE THE LIBRARY'OFTEN ENOUGH TO HAVE AN' . ~ OPINION. - ` " • Secorid,home owner ,. _. _ _ _ EXCELLENT SERVICE AND: BEYOND EXCELLENT; T.HE BEST , :,. - THING. IN VAIL. • Second home owner I LIKE THEIR HONOR SYSTEM, ESPECIALLY FOR VISITORS. • Second home owner - AT HAVING=A'GREAT LIBRARY FILLED WITH BOOKS' I~:THINK:TH _ , IS:VERYiMPORTANT TO VAIL, AND I THINK THEY SHOULD FUND IT`AND"'KEEP IT UP TQ DATE: • Second.home owner ,..,: I THINK THE'LIBRARY IS JUST WONDERFUL. • Second home owner - . ' ~ " I THINK THEY DO A BEAUTIFUL JOB'. - • Second home ovvner., • ; I THINK THEY HAVE A GREATSELECTION OF BOOKS AND - . _ _ MOVIES. _. , . .. • Second home owner I THfNKS IT'S FINE. • Second homeowner . IT IS THERE WHEN I NEED IT: ; . • Second Home owner ~ IT'S A BEAUTIFUL PL,4CE.. °= ` ,.. , , Second home owner IT'S A NICE RE$OURGETO-HAVE 1NHILE WE'RE THERE::` - 89 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • -Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Mail Survey • Mail Survey • Mail Survey • Mail Survey • Mail Survey • Mail Survey • Mail Survey • Mail Survey . ITS A WELL STOCKED LIBRARY. ITS WONDERFUL. I'VE NEVER USED IT. KEEP UP GOOD WORK. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK. LET OUT OF STATE RESIDENTS HAVE A CARD. LIKE SCULPTURES, BOOKS, PROGRAMS, AND ART WORK. MAKE IT MORE USER FRIENDLY. NEED MORE INTERNET CONNECTION TERMINALS. NEVER USED IT. NO COMMENTS,. NO COMPLAINTS. NO COMMENTS. NO COMMENTS. NO COMMENTS. I DO NOT USE THE LIBRARY. NO I DON'T. BUT I DON'T USE THEM MUCH. NO, I REALLY DON'T. NO, I THINK IT IS GOOD. NO, I'VE NEVER BEEN TO THE LIBRARY. NO, THEY DO A WONDERFUL JOB, AND THE FACILITY IS WONDERFUL, INVITING. NO. (51) NO. THERE SHOULD BE MORE BOOK STORES. NONE. (8) NOPE. (3) NOT REALLY. NOT REALLY. MY GRANDCHILDREN REALLY ENJOY IT. THEY ARE UNCREATIVE IN FINDING SOLUTIONS TO PROBLEMS. I LOST MY CARD ONE TIME AND THEY CAUSED A BIG PROBLEM. JUST LOOK ME UP IN THE PHONE BOOK TO SEE THAT I AM A RESIDENT. THEY GAVE MEAN UNNECESSARY HASSLE. THEY NEED A BIGGER SPACE. VERY HELPFUL. WOULD LIKE TO VOLUNTEER THERE AFTER RETIREMENT. ENLARGE THE DVD SELECTION. HEARD GOOD THINGS AT STORY HOUR. KIDS ROOM FEELS DISORGANIZED WHEN SEARCHING FOR A TITLE. NOT A KNOWLEDGEABLE KIDS LIBRARIAN. " LET THEM SPANK UNRULY CUSTOMERS WITH A RULER LIBRARY AND STAFF ARE GREAT - "TIPSLINE BE DAMNED" LIBRARY STAFF IS EXCELLENT, THEY DO A FABULOUS JOB! LIGHTEN UP MORE FUNDING NEEDS MORE FRENCH MOVIES (NEW ONES), SWISS MOVIES, FOREIGN MOVIES, EUROPEAN' MAGAZINES OUTSTANDING SERVICES. MUST IMPROVE PHONE SERVICES Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Mail Survey PROBABLY THE MOST BEAUTIFUL BUILDING INSIDE, BUT NASTY PERSONNEL MAKE MANY FEEL UNWELCOME -THEY TREAT PEOPLE LIKE CRIMINALS • Mail Survey TOO MUCH JUNK IN TIPSLINE! SOME STAFF ARE A BIT ICY - BUTTHEY DON'T DESERVE ALL THAT. • Mail Survey VERY HARD WORKING, ALWAYS HELPFUL AND COURTEOUS • Mail Survey VIOLATION OF NORMAL LIBRARY FUNCTION: REFUSAL TO GET BOOKS ON INTER-LIBRARY LOAN -VERY BAD! STAFF ARE MIXED -MOST VERY NICE. • Mail Survey VISITORS AND ANYONE SHOULD BE ABLE TO CHECK OUT BOOKS ETC. 91 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 Do you have any comments or suggestions concerning recreational programs/facilities? resident type • Resident comment ADEQUATE. • Resident ALL PROGRAMS ARE OF VALUE. GOLF IN VAIL IS OVERRATED , TOO MUCH OF THE RECREATION FUND ON GOLF FACILITIES ' . IT S EXPENSIVE AND RELATIVELY LOW PARTICIPATION COMPARED TO OTHER RECREATION DISTRICT OFFERINGS • Resident . 80% ON GOLF IS NOT A GOOD INVESTMENT. BETTER COMMUNICATION OF WHAT'S OFFERED CLEAR . PARAMETERS OF THE PROGRAM AND INFORMATION TIMES • Resident , AND DEADLINES FOR SIGN-UP, THAT SORT OF THING. • Resident CANNOT GET TO THEM VERY WELL BECAUSE OF PARKING . CANNOT THINK OF ANYTHING THEY ARE NOT ALREADY DOING. GOLF FEES ARE GETTING TOO HIGH. GOLF PRO HAS RAISED FEES. • Resident COULD IMPROVE THE ADMINISTRATION OF INTRAMURAL SPORTS. SOMETIMES NO REFEREE SHOW UP • Resident . DO MORE ADULT RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES • Resident . ENCOURAGE SOMETHING FOR 30 TO 40 YEAR OL • Resident • Resident DS. .EXCELLENT, MAYBE TOO MANY RATHER THAN TOO FEW. EXCEPT THAT THE VAIL MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE IS VERY • Resident EXPENSIVE FOR A VERY AVERAGE GOLF EXPERIENCE . FACILITIES ARE UNDER PAR IN CLEANLINESS AND QUALITY FOR A RESORT LIKE VAIL. A LOT OF WASTED TIME AND RESOURCES. • Resident FIX THE VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT. TOO MUCH POLITICS • Resident INVOLVED. GET THE LOCAL PRICE ON GOLF DOWN • Resident . GYM SHOULD BE FINISHED SOON • Resident . I AM VERY UPSET OVER THE GOLF COURSE. THEY HAVE TOO . MANY TEE TIMES. THE PRICE HAS GOTTEN TOO HIGH FOR RESIDENTS, AND I HOPE THAT NOW THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE BUBBLE THAT THEY'LL HAVE A LONGER SEASON. IT'S NO LONGER MANAGED LIKE A CITY COURSE • Resident . I BELONG TO THE AVON REC CENTER • Resident • Resident . I DON'T WANfiTO SEETHE SOFTBALL FIELD GO. I LIKE THE NORTH TRAIL SYSTEM BUILT WITH FOREST • Resident SERVICE. I THINK THAT THEY DO A PRETTY GOOD JOB • Resident . I THINK THAT VAIL'S OLD ENOUGH TO HAVE THEIR OWN REC BUILDING. RIGHT NOW WE HAVE TO GO TO AVON TO USE A • Resident REC FACILITY. I THINK THATS WHAT WE NEED. I THINK THE TOWN OF VAIL SHOULD TAKE OVE R THE REC CENTER/ RECREATIONAL DISTRICT • Resident . I THINK THE VAIL GOLF COURSE BUILDING SHOULD BE IMPROVED. ONLY ONE THERE,AND IT NEEDS TO BE UPDATED OR REMODELED, OR CLEANED UP. 92 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 - • Resident ~ I THINK THEY ARE CHARGING 1NAY T00 MUCH FOR A GOLF - PASS. IT~IS SUPPOSED'TO BE A:BENEFIT FOR PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE AND ITS RIDICULOUSLY EXPENSIVE. • Resident I WANT A REC CENTER;LIKE AVON. • Resident I WISH THEY. WOULD DO A BETTER JOB GROOMING THE . , , CROSS, COUNTRY TRACK AT-THE VAIL .GOLF COURSE DURING ' WLNTER -, _ ,-., • Resident I WONDER IF TH(S COULD BE MERGED WITH THE TOWN AS . ; ~ ~ ONE ENTITY FOR BETTER COMMUNICATION. I JUST WONDER .; R L • Resident OU'T AREA, LIKE CENTER WITH A WORK A REC WOULD LO E AVON: .= _ _ . , • Resident I WOULD'°LIKE TO COMMENT THAT KAIGPARK IS EXCELLENT. • Resident • I WOULD,LI,KE--TQ SEETH6GOLF COURSE CLUB HOUSE'S .. ' :., .: L:OCKER.ROOM:OPENED TO~T..HE NORDIC SKIERS IN THE . WINTER;: • Resident I'D; LIKE TO SEE A COMMUNITY REC CENTER LIKE WHAT'THEY HAVE IN'AVON, A LOW COST ACTIVITY CENTER.. • Resident I'D_LIKE TO SEE A FAMILY RECREATIONAL PLACE INDOORS WITH A POOL THAT Y-OU CAN; GET A PASS.TO FORA , . ~: REASONABLE: PRICE. • Resident IF THE KIDS COULD USE THE ICE SKATING RINK. • Resident _ I'M"'AWARE, PEOPLE WHO GO SEEM TO BE SATISFIED. I .DON'T JOIN IN BUT IT"SEEMS; TO WORK OUT OK: I DON'T USE A LOT . OF THAT STUFF. • Resident - IMPROVE THE GROOMING AT THE_NORDIG CENTER: • Resident IN REGARD TCQ.GOLF,;IT NEEDS.TO BE CAREFUL TO KEEP IT ` RECREATIONAL. RATHER THAN A BUSINESS, FOR COMMERCE. ,. ., . • Resident INCORPORATE~THE NATURE CENTER WITH THE GORE- :` ' _" NATURAL SCIENCE SCHOOL. • Resident IT`SHOULD BE EASIER TO FIND AND JOW THE VARIOUS:: :_. LEAGUES. Resident . '. IT WOULD BE NICE IF THEY HAD A PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL: ;. , , , • Resident ; : ; , ~ ,,. . - ;-. JUST GET MOREACTIVITIES FOR THE ELDERLY, CHILDREN, _ - " ~ ,: - ..- . ,_ ._ _ -`~ AND'TEENQGERS, .ti. ~ ,,. „ •.Resident - - - JUST LOOKING=FOR~$OME.IMPRQVEMENTS IN THE YOUTH- _ .~ _. _ -_ _ _ _ _ _.... - - - .._ - . -- - PROGRAMS: ESPECIALLY FOR TEENAGERS:-- ~° " __. " • Resident -•, - _ ~ "~ JUSTTRY TO KEEP THE GOLF COURSE PRICE DOWN. ~ - , • Resident _ . ~ KEEP. MAINTAINING THE TENNIS COURTS: • Resident - ' `KEEP THE PRICES.LQW ON GOLF,CLUBS. , , • Resident :_ LESS FOEUSON GOLF,,MORE FOCUS ON MOUNTAIN BIKING AND TRAIL PROGRAMS AND:RACES: • Resident MAKE GOLF COURSE,MORE AVAILABLE TO THE. LOCALS. , ' ' DECREASING THE-SUMMER FEES~FOR,LOCAL$ AND NOT : RESTRICTING THEIR TEE TIMES AS MUCH. • Resident MAYBE JUST MORE OF THEM. • Resident - , -MAYBE THEY COULD SEND BROCHURES BY MAfL, SO,PEOPLE _ WOULD; GET MORE INFORMED. OR, LEAVE THEM BY THE VAIL HERALD'.. -: :. . ., ~ ~ , ;- >93 .: ,_ Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident MORE"ADbERTISING. • Resident MORE EFFORTS SHOULD BE DONE TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF YOUTH AT PLAY, HOCKEY OR FIGURE SKATE . THERE SHOULD BE A SET TIME OF 1 1/2 HOURS FOR PUBLIC SKATING FROM. 8:00 - 9:30 PM EVERY DAY • Resident . MORE. HOURS. IN THE WEEK SO YOU COULD ATTEND MORE . THEY DO A FAIRLY GOOD JOB AT KEEPING PEOPLE INFORMED OF DATES AND TIMES. • Resident MORE SERVICES AND PROGRAMS FOR VERY SMALL CHILDREN AROUND 4 YEARS OF AGE. THEY SHOULD HAVE A DROP-OFF, PLAY TIME; DROP=IN. THEY HAVE THEM tN DENVER, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE THEM IN VAIL • Resident . MORE THINGS FOR OLDER CITIZENS • Resident . NEED A FACELIFT FOR TENNIS COURTS AND SOFTBALL FIELD . GOLF COURSE COULD USE SOME IMPROVEMENT • Resident . NEED A PUBLIC. POOL THAT ISN'T EXPENSIVE. NEED RESIDENT DISCOUNTS FOR RECREATION • Resident . NEED ANOTHER ICE RINK • Resident . NEED BETTER CROSS COUNTRY SKIING AND TRAILS ,~ • Resident . NEED MORE ACTIVITIES~FOR TEENAGERS TO HELP KEEP THEM OUTOF:TROUBLE • Resident . , NEEDS MORE AFFORDABLE,REC CENTER, AND DON'T JACK THE PRICE UP FOR VISITORS • Resident . NEEDS NEW-GOLF COURSE; CLUB HOUSE, AND NEW RECREATION CENTER , • Resident . NEW GYMNASTIC CENTER IS~FANTASTIC • Resident . NICE" TO HAVE A COMMUNITY SWIMMING POOL LOCATED IN • Resident WEST VAIL AREA'.. PRICE OF LAND, TOO MUCH AT FORD PARK. " NICE TO INTEGRATE"NATURAL SCIENCE SCHOOL WITH THE TOWN OF VAIL, $OME OF THE THINGS GORE RANGE DOES SHOULD BE IN TOWN'. • Resident , NO COMMENTS FOR THIS AREA OF QUESTIONING • Resident . NO COMMENTS.. (7) . • Resident • Resident NO COMMENTS. HAVEN'T USED IN ABOUT A YEAR OR SO. • Resident NO COMMENTS'. I AM IN A DIFFERENT PHASE OF MY LIFE. • Resident - - - " - NO COMMENTS: F HAVE NO_CHILDREN. _ - .:. _ _ _ , " • Resident NO EXTRi4THOUGHTS,° -,~ - - - - - NO, I'M,VERY SATISFIED: • Resident NO, PRETTY GOOD I'LIKE THE SOCCER FIELD • Resident: . NO. (119)- ~ Resident NONE: (51) " " • Resident NORDIC CENTER) VERY. MUCH APPRECIATE AND THE TRAILS `` . THE ONLY THING .I WOULD LIKE IS A RECREATIONAL CENTER . LIKE. - .::.. THEY HAVE IN AVON • Resident ' . NOT ENOUGH ACTIVITIES.FOR THE YOUTH OR THE OLDER . PEOPLE. YOU HAVE TO GO OUT OF TOWN A LOT IF YOU WANT - TO`HAVE fUN: • Resident IVOTREALLY: • Resident` NOT REALLY. . 94 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident NOT REALLY. NEED SOMETHING IN VAIL. • Resident NOT TO LOSE ANY MORE TENNIS COURTS. • Resident POSITIVE ASPECT IS THE CROSS COUNTRY CENTER IN THE GOLF COURSE. THEY NEED_MORE PROGRAMS FOR THE CHILDREN. I WAS DISAPPOINTED. • Resident PRETTY HAPPY ALL AROUND. • Resident PRICE OF GOLF SHOULD BE MUCH LOWER FOR RESIDENTS. • Resident PROMOTE REC PROGRAMS MORE EFFICIENTLY, SO PEOPLE KNOW WHAT. THEY ARE., • Resident SEPARATE FROM THE TOWN. 'I THINK THAT THE RECREATION DISTRICT DOESN'T DO THE BEST JOB WITH THEIR ACTIVITIES AND FACILITIES. • Resident SHOULD BE TAKEN OVER BY THE TOWN INSTEAD OF A SEPARATE DISTRICT. • Resident SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE TO THE GOLF COURSE, AND CLUB HOUSE NEEDS TO BE REMODELED. • Resident STOP. TRYING TO SPEND OUR MONEY TO ATTRACT DOWN VALL' EY RECREATION. • Resident STREET BEATS. MORE RECREATIONAL SERVICES. • Resident STRONG OPINION ABOUT LACK OF NORDIC PROGRAMS. POOR MANAGEMENT AND`UTILIZATION OF FUNDS. THEY HAVE AN EXTREMELY BIASED BOARD. MEMBERS ARE SELF- INTERESTED. • Resident THE BOARD MEMBERS NEED TO WAKE UP. THEY KEEP DENYING, BUT THEY NEED TO REALIZE WHAT'S GOING ON. • Resident THE GOLF COURSE IS GOOD. WE PAY ENOUGH TAXES, SO DON'T BUILD A LOT MORE STUFF. • Resident THE GOLF COURSE NEED$ TO BE CHEAPER FOR RESIDENTS. • Resident THE ICE RINK IS UNDERUSED AND SHOULD BE SOLD. • Resident ~ THE TOWN SHOULD RUN THE RECREATIONAL CENTER. • Resident THE VAIL NATURE CENTER NEEDS SPRUCING UP. NEEDS TO BE UPGRADED: • Resident THE VRD IS DOING A GOOD JOB IN SPITE OF THEIR CHALLENGES FROM THE PAST. • Resident THE WOMAN WHO TOOK OVER:THE AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM, IS MORE WORRIED ABOUT HER.J.OB._THAN. BEWG KIND TO PEOPLE. I'VE SPENT A LOT OF MONEY ON MY KIpS AND ONE DAY I WENT TO PICK THEM UP ONE MINUTE AFTER SIX,. AND SHE THREW A F,IT. SHE SCREAMED $15, $15! • Resident THERE ARE TOO MANY KIDS. THEY SHOULD ENFORCE BIRTH CONTROL AND QUIT HAVING KIDS. • Resident THERE. MUST BE ADDITIONAL ICE RINKS IN THE AREA TO SERVICE THE. HOCKEY AND SKATING COMMUNITY. • Resident THERE SHOULD BE MORE FREE FACILITIES, GOLF, TENNIS, .; . SWIMMING.. . • Resident , , ~ THERE SHOULDN'T: BE A PROPERTY TAX REQUIREMENT FOR PEOPLE TO QUALIFY FOR RESIDENT FEES AT RECREATIONAL FACILITIES. • Resident THEY ARE DOING A GREAT,JOB WITH THE KIDS' PROGRAMS _ _. _. _ _ 95 Town of Vail Community Survey"2005 • Resident THEY ARE GREAT TOO. • Resident THEY NEED A SWIMMING POOL AND A RECREATION CENTER . SOME ACTIVITIES FOR YOUNG ADULTS OR ADVERTISE MORE ABOUT THEM IF THERE ARE ANY. I HAD AN 18 YEAR OLD HERE AND COULD NOT FIND ANYTHING FOR THEM TO DO • Resident . THEY NEED A WORKOUT PLACE FOR LOCALS • Resident . THEY NEED MORE THINGS FOR FUN LIKE SWIMMING POOLS AND MORE THINGS FOR KIDS AND THE ELDERLY TO DO SO , YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO OUT OF TOWN. AND THE THINGS IN VAIL ARE TOO EXPENSIVE, SO FAMILIES ARE MOVING OUT • Resident . THEY NEED TO ADD EVERY PARK THEY HAVE INCLUDING , THOSE ON THE NORTH FRONTAGE, BASKETBALL HOOPS . THESE PARKS ARE, NOT UTILIZED AND WITH HOOPS THEY WOULD BE PACKED. . • Resident THEY NEED TO BUILD A BIG AFFORDABLE REC CENTER • Resident . THEY NEED TO DISSOLVE THE VAIL RECREATIONAL DISTRICT . THEY ARE TWO SEPARATE MUNICIPALITIES, THE CURRENT SYSTEM IS INEFFICIENT. A FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE NEEDS TO OCCUR. • Resident THEY NEED TO FOCUS, GET A MISSION • Resident . THEY SHOULD CHANGE THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS TO MAKE IT MORE STREAMLINED. • Resident THEY SHOULD HAVE A SWIMMING POOL FOR RECREATIONAL USE. • Resident ' . TOO MUCH FOR' THE SIZE OF THE TOWN • Resident . TOWN COUNCIL NEEDS TO REALIZE THAT THE TOWN HAS A PERMANENT BASE WITH CHILDREN. NEED MORE ACTIVITIES AND PROGRAMS FOR CHILDREN BESIDES SKIING • Resident . TRY TO INCORPORATE MORE LARGE GROUPS VIA THE SPECIAL EVENTS COMMITTEE • Resident . UPDATE. THE GOLF. COURSE, IMPROVE THE GREENS • Resident . UPGRADE.THE GOLF COURSE AND THE CLUB HOUSE IT IS . NOT COMPETITIVE ANYMORE. • Resident UPGRADE THE GOLF COURSE • Resident . USE A SWIMMING POOL. • Resident VAIL REC DISTRICT NEEDS TO GET THEIR. ACT TOGETHER . MANAGEMENT OF GOLF AND ADMINISTRATION OF ADULT LEAGUES. • Resident WE DON'T.HAVE A PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL • Residert . WE NEED A LOCAL PLACE, CENTER WHERE EVERYONE CAN JOIN. YOU DON'T NEED TO BE RICH • Resident . WE NEED A SWIMMING POOL. FIX UP THE GOLF COURSE AND CLUB HOUSE. ;. • Resident WE NEED AN INDOOR RECREATIONAL CENTER THAT' IS AFFORDABLE. • Resident WE NEED ANOTHER SHEET OF ICE TO SKATE ON FOR MIXED USE. • Resident WE WOULD;LIKE.TO SEE SOME LOCAL RESTAURANTS AND BETTER ONES IIV TOWN INSTEAD OF ALL THE FAST FOOD 96 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 PLACES. _. • Resident WE'D LIKE MORE HOURS OPEN FOR PUBLIC PLAY ON THE GOLF COURSE. • Resident WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE MOUNTAIN ENVIRONMENT PROMOTIONS AS OPPOSED TO TRADITIONAL ORGANIZED SPORTS. • Resident ~ YOU DON'T HEAR MUCH ABOUT THEM. REALLY HAVE TO LOOK TO FIND OUT ABOUT THEM. • Second home owner DURING THE SUMMER,: THEY D,ON'T USE THE NATURE CENTER FOR ART PROGRAMS AN,D CRAFT WORKSHOPS. THERE IS NOTHING TO DO DURING THE SUMMER THAT 1S CRAFT ORIENTED, AND I THINK THEY ARE WASTING THE SPACE. • Second home owner FINISH THE BIKE PATH. • Second home owner I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S AVAILABLE, SO I REALLY CAN'T COMMENT.. . • Second home owner I LIKE FORD PARK AND DOBSON ARENA MEETING BUILDING. • Second home owner I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE IN SUMMER FOR KIDS 4 TO 9 YEARS OF AGE. - • Second home owner ,. bT.HINK THEY SHOULD HAVE MORE AVAILABILITY ON TENNIS • COURTS:, • • Second home owner I'D LIKE TO SEE ACCESSIBLE PUBLIC TENNIS COURTS AROUND.LIONSHEAD, BECAUSE THEY TOOK THEM OUT AND I USED TO USE THEM. • Second home owner IT ALL SEEMS FINE. • Second home owner IT IS IMPORTANT. TO HAVE PROGRAMS AND BE CREATIVE FOR NEW AND ADDITIONAL PROGRAMS. KEEP HAVINGTHEM FOR • >.. THE LONG-TERM WELFARE OF VAIL: I LIKE THE PROGRAMS - HAVE BEEN YO • Second home owner. JUST THE GOLF CLUB. THE BUILDING IS FALLING APART, NOT TOO BAD; BUT~COULD BE,A LOT BETTER. • Second home owner LIKE THEM TO PUBLICIZE THE'YOUTH PROGRAMS MORE. • Second home owner MAINTAIN_DISCOUNTS FOR~PROPERTY OWNERS:: • Second homeowner MAINTAIN.THE,TWO CONCRETE.TENNIS COURTS BETTER. THE COURTS BY THE TENNIS CENTER ARE WONDERFUL. • Second home owner MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR.RESIDENTS TO PARTICIPATE IN , . , .SKATING: , _ _ _ .._ _ _ _ - -. . • Second home owner NEED MORE BOOK CLUBS, AND AS PART TIME RESIDENTS, WE WOULD ENJOY MORE SOCIAL ACTIVITIES FOR MEETING PEOPLE.. RECREATION IS FINE; MAYBE NEED A WALK OR` , >HIKING GROUP: • Second home owner NO COMMENTS (4) ' " • Second home owner NO EXRERIENCE: • Second home owner NO, I DO NOT USE THEM MY$ELF AND AM NOT ABLE TO DOA. . LOT-OF WALKING: • Second home owner NO, I DO NOT. _ . , • Second~home owner , _ _. NO,"NOT REALLY. •' • • Second.home owner. NO, NOT REALLY..,.. • Second-home owner , . NO, THEY'RE PRETTY GOOQ: 97 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second_home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second .home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Mail. Survey • Mail Survey • Mail Survey • Mail Survey. • Maif Survey • MaiF Survey. , • Mail Survey • Mail Survey • Mail Survey • Mail Survey, . • Mail Survey • Mail Survey • Mail Survey • Mail Survey.;. NO. (56) NONE. (8) NOPE. NOT AT THE MOMENT. PRICE OF THE NEW HOUSING WOULD CREATE GATED COMMUNITIES. LACK OF DIVERSITY, EXCLUSIVELY DESIGNED FOR THE RICH. SKIING IS WHAT I'M CONCENTRATED ON. SO WE SHOULDN'T SPEND A LOT OF TIME, AND.. MONEY ON, MATTERS NOT CONCERNING SKIING. THE DOBSON ARENA SHOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR SKATING AND MORE. THE INFLATABLE ICE ARENA REMOVAL WAS A GOOD IDEA. THE NATURE CENTER NEEDS TO BE UPDATED. THE NATURE WAtK'NEEDS TO BE MAINTAINED AS FAR AS SIGNAGE, KIDS WANT TO SEE THIS .INFORMATION, THE LACK OF IT' IS DISAPPOINTING. THE ONE I'M FAMILIAR WITH IS THE TENNIS CENTER, AND I THINK THAT THEY DO A GREAT JOB. THERE SHOULD BE A. PUBLIC FITNESS FACILITY. THEY NEED TO MAKE US MORE AWARE OF THE SERVICES . THAT ARE AVAILABLE. THEY SHOULD PAY FOR THEMSELVS INSTEAD OF GETTING TAX PAYERS TO. PAY. WE'DON'T HAVE ANY EXPERIENCE IN THIS AREA. WE'RE OLDER. DISTRICI,$ WOES APPEAR TO BE SELF INFLICTED GET RID OF THE,COALITION ; IT'S GREAT HAVING GYMNASTICS BACK IN VAIL!_ MY KIDS LOVE THE LH PROGRAMS,. PLUS SUMMER DAY CAMPS. YOUTH SERVICES.-HAS. A GREAT STAFF. KEEP TAKING CARE OF THE LOCALS KEEP THE TOWN COUNCIL OUT OF RECREATION PLEASE REACT TO RECENT FUNDING ERROR SWIMMING POOL .- _._._. _.._~~ _. THE_RECREATION.BOARD.NEEDS.TO BE.IMPROVED. THE. MEMBERS OF "THE COALITION" HAVE DONE A POOR JOB. TO MANY PARKS OVERKILL VRD'pOES GOOD:THINGS%PROGRAMS, BUT NEED HELP WITH FACILITIES. AND (ILLEGIBLE) VRq~ NEEDS MORE ACCOUNTABICITY~ WINTER THINGS FOR AFTER SKIING'- BOWLING, NICE MOVIES NOITRASITY LIKE CROSSROADS WOULD LIKE MORE PUBLIC SKATING SESSIONS AT DOBSON DURING OFF SEASONS YOUTH SERVICES NEEDS A NEW FACILITY Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 Over the past two years has the sense of community within the Town of Vail improved, gotten worse or stayed the same? resident type comment • Resident ACLIQUE OFOLD-TIMERS ON THE TOWN COUNCIL ARE NOT VERY OPEN. • Resident A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE MOVING OUT BECAUSE PRICING IS TO HIGH FOR JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING. • Resident A LOT OF THE POPULATION IS MOVING DOWN VALLEY. THE CORE GROUP OF YEAR ROUND OWNERS IS DWINDLING. THE TOURISTS ARE RUINING EVERYTHING. • Resident A LOT OF THE STABLE PART OF THE COMMUNITY IS LEAVING TOWN AND GOING WEST. THEY HAVE NO SENSE OF HISTORY AT ALL. • Resident A MAJORITY OF THE PAST POPULATION MOVED ABOUT 5-10 MILES AWAY. • Resident AGAIN, I'M WAITING FOR THIS EXPANSION TO TAKE PLACE. THERE'S A LOT OF PAPERWORK TO TAKE PLACE FIRST BUT WHERE THE AVERAGE PERSON STANDS THERE IS VERY LITTLE. WE'LL WAIT AND SEE. • Resident ALL THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST IS VERY BAD. THEY ARE TRYING TO GET PEOPLE OUTSIDE OF VAIL TO CONTRIBUTE MONTHLY TO TAKING LAND OUT OF USE FOR OPEN SPACE PROGRAMS. TAKING PUBLIC MONEY TO PURCHASE THESE LANDS ONLY TO PROTECT VAIL RESORTS IS IMMORAL. • Resident BASED ON WHAT I'VE HEARD, AS A COMMUNITY GROWS, IT BECOME LESS PERSONAL. THERE'S A LOWER SENSE OF COMMUNITY. • Resident BASIC COMMUNITY SERVICES. • Resident CLEAN UP COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. • Resident CONFLICT CONTINUES WITH THE TOWN COUNCIL OVER THE SAME THINGS; IT COULD BE MORE COHESIVE. • Resident DEALING. WITH THE PUBLIC IS NEVER EASY BUT I SEE EFFORTS TO IMPROVE. I ATTENDED PICNIC WHERE YOU COULD MEET THE COUNCIL PERSON AND I BROUGHT UP t-70 NOISE AND WAS BLASTED FOR BEING A TROUBLE MAKER. • Resident FRONT RANGE BASE SKIERS AND EVEN NATIONAL ELECTIONS HAVE POLARIZED SOME OF THE TOWN. • Resident HAVING CHILDREN HAS CONNECTED ME TO WHAT'S AVAILABLE AND HAS CONNECTED ME WITH MY NEIGHBORS AND I'VE OPENED UP TO WHAT'S OUT THERE. • Resident HOUSING IS EXPENSIVE AND THE YOUNGER PEOPLE ARE MOVING OUT. THERE IS JUST NOT ENOUGH ACTIVITIES FOR PEOPLE. • Resident I DON'T HAVE A FEELING THAT IT'S GOTTEN ANY BETTER. • Resident I FEEL AS IF THE TOWN OF VAIL IS LOSING ITS LOCAL AND YEAR ROUND RESIDENTS: MORE AND MORE OF. THE TOWN IS BEING MADE UP OF TOURISTS SO-THERE ISN'T A SENSE OF REAL COMMUNITY. IT'S JUST LIKE. A SKI RESORT. • Resident I HAPPEN TO THINK IT'S PRETTY HIGH LEVEL. IN THE PAST IT WAS HIGH LEVEL AND. IT'5 STILL HIGH LEVEL COMPARED TO OTHER TOWNS AND COMMUNITIES: 99 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident I HAVE A FEELING THAT THINGS ARE THE SAME AS THEY WERE. I HAVE FRIENDS CHECK IN TO FACILITIES THEMSELVES. I HAVE NOT NOTICED ANY DIFFERENCE IN THE LAST 10 YEARS, IT'S STAYED THE SAME. I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY SENSE OF COMMUNITY. I JUST THINK THEY ARE IN A LOW RIGHT NOW BUT ON THE RIGHT TRACK TO COME OUT OF IT. t NEVER REALLY GET A FEELING OF TRUE COMMUNITY. NO ONE REALLY KNOWS EACH OTHER, WE HAVE NO REAL NEIGHBORHOODS SO MUCH OF THE PROPERTY IS RENTAL. WE NEED MORE COMMUNITY VOLUNTEER PROJECTS FOR THE RESIDENTS LIKE THE NEIGHBORHOOD BARBEQUES. I THINK A LOT OF LOCAL PEOPLE HAVE MOVED DOWN VALLEY. I THINK GOVERNMENT LACKS THE LEADERSHIP TO MAKE THE SENSE OF COMMUNITY BETTER. I THINK IF YOU READ THE NEWSPAPER AND TRACK WHAT'S HAPPENING, PEOPLE HERE ARE GENERALLY SATISFIED: I THINK THE TOWN OF VAIL 1S WONDERFUL. MY RECOMMENDATIONS ARE FOR THE LIBRARY AND THE REC CENTER AND FOR A MAYOR WHO HAS NO FINANCIAL CONNECTION TO HIS JOB. IT SHOULD BE A~PERSON THAT IS NON-PARTIAL AND NOT IN THE REAL ESTATE BUSINESS. I THINK THEY HAVEN'T SOLVED ENOUGH PROBLEMS YET. I THINK THEY SHOULD DO MORE LOCAL APPRECIATION ACTIVITIES. IF THERE WERE ACTIVITIES THAT.INCLUDED THE WHOLE TOWN, IT WOULD IMPROVE THE FEELING OF COMMUNITY. WE ARE DIVIDED SO SHARPLY BETWEEN THE PEOPLE WHO COME FOR RECREATION AND THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE. IF THEY WOULD TREAT THEIR LOCAL WORKING CLASSES BETTER THE COMMUNITY WOULD BE BETTER. I'M AWARE OF PEOPLE TRYING TO DO NEW AND DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE CROSSROADS AND VAIL VILLAGE INN BUT A LOT OF PEOPLE PREVENT NEW PROJECTS FROM GETTING DONE SO PEOPLE GET FRUSTRATED AND GIVE UP. THAT DOESN'T PROMOTE COMMUNITY BUT A LOT OF ANIMOSITY. I'M HAPPY THAT THINGS ARE CHANGING. I'M NOT SURE. IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE FORTHCOMING ARE BASICALLY TAKING A LONG TIME TO GET GOING. IT APPEARS THE SUMMER CREWS KEEP AWAY FROM THE TOURISTS BUT IN THE WINTER IT IS A BIG MESS. IT CAN BE UNFRIENDLY AT TIMES FOR VISITORS AND THAT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED. WE NEED TO BE MORE FRIENDLY TO VISITORS AND GUESTS IN A RESORT COMMUNITY. IT HAS GONE WAY DOWN HILL EVERY YEAR. BRING BACK MORE COMMUNITY AND PARTIES. THINGS LIKE THE GREAT RACE. WE ALL USE TO GET TOGETHER AND, PARTY BUT NOW THE TOWN FEELS LIKE A CORPORATION INSTEAD OF A SMALL TOWN: 100 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident IT HAS NOT CHANGED AT ALL IN TWO YEARS. • Resident IT HAS NOT CHANGED. • Resident IT IS TOO SPREAD OUT. • Resident IT WOULD BE NICE.IF ONE YEAR OUR TOWN COUNCIL LISTENS TO THEIR CONSTITUENCY. • Resident IT'S A DIFFICULT TOWN. IT'S AS GOOD AS IT CAN GET. • Resident IT'S AMAZING WHAT THE ECONOMIC CLIMATE DOES. • Resident ITS BECAUSE OF DOWN VALLEY MIGRATION. • Resident IT'S BECOME THE RICHER RICH AND THE POORER POOR. • Resident IT'S DRIFTED A LITTLE, GOTTEN WORSE. PEOPLE ARE MOVING DOWN VALLEY. IT MUST SAY SOMETHING FOR THE TOWN OF VAIL OR TO THE TOWN OF VAIL. • Resident IT'S GETTING BIGGER. • Resident IT'S HARD TO BE A COMMUNITY WHEN YOU HAVE SEASONAL EMPLOYEES. • Resident IT'S HARD TO BUILD A SENSE OF COMMUNITY WITH SEASONAL EMPLOYEES. THEY SHOULD TRY TO INCLUDE SEASONAL RESIDENTS IN COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES. • Resident IT'S HARD TO HAVE A SENSE OF COMMUNITY WHEN THERE'S NO TOWN CENTER. • Resident IT'S- JUST A LACK OF CARING. IT SEEMS LIKE PEOPLE JUST DON'T CARE. • Resident IT'S LOSING THE SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND TOWN SPIRIT, THE TOGETHERNESS OF TOWN. • Resident IT'S MORE DISTANT. IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THE COMMUNITY HAS GROWN FURTHER AND FURTHER APART AND DISTANT. • Resident ITS NOT GREAT. • Resident ITS TIED INTQ THE ECONOMICS AND THE COST OF HOUSING. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO-GET FAMILIES HERE BUT THATS WHAT WE NEED. • Resident I'VE BEEN HERE FOR TWENTY YEARS. IT'S EXPANDING AND THE CREEK IS EXPANDING. IT'S A.TURN-OVER TIME. ALL THE OLD PEOPLE ARE TURNING THEIR CONDOS OVER TO THE KIDS'AND THEY'RE, NOT SO EXCITED ABOUT. • Resident JUST BECAUSE NOT EVERYONE IS AT THE SAME PLACE WITH ALL THE CHANGES. • Resident JUST THAT WHY I SAY IT HAS GOTTEN WORSE IS THE VERY Pf206LEM. THE GOLF COURSE SUPPOSEDLY-PAYS FOR ITSELF AND IT SCARES ME. I WANT TO SEE A SEPARATION THERE. • Resident JUST THE GENERAL DOWN VALLEY MOVEMENT OF LONG TERM LOCALS DEGRADES THE COMMUNITY OF VAiL. • Resident MAKE IT POSSIBLE FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE AND WORK IN TOWN YEAR ROUND. WE NEED OFFICE SPACE, A DRUG STORE AND MORE RESIDENT HOUSING OR EVERYONE'S GOING TO GO DOWN VALLEY. • Resident MANY LOCALS HAVE MORE COMMUNITY DOWN THE VALLEY. • Resident MAYBE THEY COULD DO A LITTLE MORE WITH "GOOD MORNING VAIL". • Resident MORE AND MORE YEAR ROUND RESIDENTS'ARE MOVING INTO THE ~. ; ~ 'VALLEY:" THERE'S NOT A$ MANY PEOPLE TO, INTERACT WITH. • Resident MOST OF THE LONG TERM PEOPLE HAVE MOVED DOWN VALLEY.. ,.. _ 101 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident MY ONLY THING tS THAT THEIR TARGET MARKET IS STILL TOO OLD THEY . NEED TO BE MARKETING A YOUNGER CROWD • Resident . NO COMMENTS. (5) • Resident NO, YOU SEEM TO KNOW ALL THE FAULTS • Resident . NO. (116) • Resident NONE EXCEPT FOR OVER POPULATION • Resident . NONE. (39) • Resident NOPE. (3) • Resident NOT ENOUGH IS BEING DONE TO KEEP PEOPLE WHO MAKE UP THE COMMUNITY HERE. • Resident NOT REALLY, ITS JUST PEOPLES ATTITUDES • Resident . NOT THAT I CAN THINK OF. • Resident NOTHING. • Resident PARKING IS A BIG PROBLEM FOR LOCALS AND THEY NEED MORE VARIETY . THEY ALL GO TO EDWARDS AND THEY VERY PROUD. THERE IS NOTHING TO DRAW THEM IN LIKE A LOCALS PASS G • Resident . IVE LOCALS A DEAL. PEOPLE HAVE ACCEPTED THAT IT IS NOT A MOUNT IN A RESORT. i4 MICROTROPOLIS IS WHAT THE CENSUS BUREAU CALLED IT • Resident . THE BARBECUES AND GET TOGETHER ARE GOOD. SEEING PUBLIC WORKS EMPLOYEES IN THE .NEIGHBORHOODS IS GOOD • Resident . THE COUNCIL SHOULD LISTEN TO THE PUBLIC INSTEAD OF HAVING THEIR OWN SEPARATE AGENDA. • Resident THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD NEEDS TO.CONSIDER ENVIRONMENTAL WATER ISSUES WHEN FORCING PEOPLE TO PLANT TREES WE WERE • Resident . FORCED TO PLANT 300 TREES AND OUR WATER BILL TRIPLED. THE GROWTH OVER THE LAST 10 YEARS HASN'T THE AFFECTED THE SENSE OF COMMUNITY. • Resident THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS SO TRANSIENT • Resident . THE NEW DAWN PROGRAM HAS CREATED ANIMOSITY • Resident . THE SENSE OF COMMUNITY HAS MOVED pOWN VALLEY: • Resident THE TOWN COUNCIL COULD PUT ASIDE PERSONAL AGENDAS AND DO WHATS BEST FOR THE WHOLE TOWN • Resident . THE TOWN COUNCIL NEEDS MORE TIME TALKING TO RESIDENTS ABOUT ISSUES ONE-ON-ONE. • Resident • Resident THE TOWN COUNCIL NEEDS TO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY MORE. THE TOWN COUNSEL SHOULD MIND THEIR OWN BUSINESS ABOUT RECREATION AND SHUT THEIR MOUTHS • Resident . THE TOWN DOES SOME GOOD THINGS ALREADY. PUT FOCUS INTO RENOVATION TO GET IT FINISHED • Resident . THE TOWN HAS NOT HELPED ANY RECENTLY. I THINK THE TOWN IS LOSING ITS SENSE OF COMMUNITY • Resident . THE TOWN IS FOCUSING TOO MUCH OF THEIR ENERGY ON A FEW SMALL GROUPS INCLUDING- THE. VERY RICH ANp THE HOTEL . . . AND BUSINESS COMMUNITY, TOURISM,. CONVENTIONS AND VAIL RE SORTS. THE.TWO. . WORST RUN ARE THE TOURIST AND~CONVENTION AND VAIL RESORTS. 102 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident THE TOWN IS WELL MANAGED • Resident THE TOWN NEEDS TO DO MUCH MORE TO BUILD A SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND DEAL WITH THE LACK OF AFFORDABILITY FOR LOCALS. YOU CAN'T HAVE A SENSE OF COMMUNITY IF LOCALS CANNOT AFFORD TO LIVE HERE. THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO ME PERSONALLY. • Resident THE TOWN NEEDS TO PAY MORE ATTENTION TO THE PEOPLE WHO OWN MOST OF THE TOWN. THAT IS THE NON-RESIDENTS. • Resident THE TOWN OF VAIL AND ITS GOVERNMENT IS INTERESTED IN WEALTHY PEOPLE NOT THE MIDDLE CLASS WORKING PEOPLE. • Resident THERE ARE TOO FEW PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THE DECISIONS. • Resident THERE IS TOO MANY PART TIME PROPERTY OWNERS AND NOT ENOUGH LOCALS TO MAINTAIN A "SENSE OF COMMUNITY". • Resident THERE WOULD BE MORE IF VAIL COULD ATTRACT MORE YEAR ROUND FAMILIES. • Resident THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD PEOPLE AFTER THE BIG BOOM. • Resident THERE'S NO REAL MOVEMENT IN ANY DIRECTION. • Resident THERE'S NOT MUCH IMPROVEMENT EXCEPT FOR TOURISTS. • Resident THERE'S NOTHING NEW AND IMPROVED TO SPEAK OF AT THIS POINT IN THE TO1NN OF VAIL. NOTHING SEEMS TO BE COMPLETED. • Resident THERE'S TOO MANY SECOND HOMEOWNERS AND IT IS TOUGH TO GET A SENSE OF COMMUNITY. PROPERTIES AND PROPERTY TAXES ARE TOO HIGH AND EVERYONE IS MOVING DOWN VALLEY. • Resident THERE'S TOO MANY THINGS AT ISSUE THAT TOO MANY PEOPLE DON'T AGREE WITH LIKE CONVENTION CENTER. I THINK THE TOWN HAS • Resident BECOME DIVIDED. THERE`S TOO MUCH CONSTRUCTION AT THE SAME TIME IN THE MIDDLE OF TOWN, REDOING OF ROADS TOO.. IT DO.ESN'T MAKE THE TOWN LOOK NICE'. • Resident THERE'S TOO MUCH EMPHASIS ON 2ND HOMEOWNERS PRIORITIES. • Resident THEY CATER TO THE PEOPLE WITH THE MONEY. • Resident THEY DON'T REACH OUT TO PART TIME RESIDENTS. • Resident THEY HAVE DONE A GOOD JOB BUT THERE IS NOT ENOUGH INPUT FROM PEOPLE IN A VAIL TOWN MEETINGS. • Resident . THEY`VE DONE AN EXCELLENT JOS KEEPING UP WITH THE GROWTH. • Resident THEY'VE GOT TO LOWER HOUSING COSTS. WE ALL PAY THIS ASSOCIATION TAX AND IT'S STUPID. • Resident THEY'VE MADE A HIGH PRIORITY TO MAKE SURE AND KEEP THE TOWN IN GOOD SHAPE: • Resident THINGS SUCH AS OVER POPULATION AND PARKING ARE PROBLEMS. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SEE ,MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THOSE WHO NEED IT MOST. • Resident VAIL DOES A GOOD JOB.AT POLARIZING THE COMMUNITY WHICH I THINK IS NOT VERY NICE. • Resident VAIL'S BECOMING LESS OF A COMMUNITY. OUT-OF-TOWNER'S ARE G.UP THE PROPERTY, LOCALS ARE MOVING MORE TO THE WEST BUYIN . , AND THE PRICE OF HOUSING IS BECOMING LESS AFFORDABLE. • Resident WE ARE .ESS OF A TOWN AND MORE OF A RESORT: 103 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident WE DON'T HAVE AS MANY VISITORS AS WE USED TO. IT SEEMS LIKE THEY GO ELSE WHERE. I DON'T THINK VAIL IS A FUN PLACE TO VISIT ANYMORE. ITS GOTTEN TOO EXPENSIVE. • Resident WE FIND IT A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE AND HAVE LIVED HERE A LONG TIME. IT HAS IMPROVED SINCE MORE PEOPLE ARE LIVING HERE. • Resident WE MUST LOOK AT REAL ESTATE VALUES. MOST RESIDENTS WANT TO STAY IN VAIL BUT IT IS BECOMING MORE AND MORE DIFFICULT AND DESIRABLE TO STAY. • Resident WE NEED A NEW BREED OF LEADERSHIP IN THE TOWN OF VAIL. • Resident WE NEED MORE OFF SEASON BUSINESS AND THEY NEED TO GO AFTER THAT ON THE INTERNET AND TRAVEL AGENCIES FOR THE SUMMER, SPRING AND FALL. THEY SHOULD ADVERTISE IN MAJOR NEWSPAPERS IN NEW YORK, LA AND CHICAGO. • Resident WE'RE NOT GETTING AS MANY OUT-OF-TOWNER'S ANY MORE. I THINK IT'S BECAUSE THINGS ARE TOO CROWDED AND HAVE GOTTEN TOO EXPENSIVE. • Second home owner A LOT OF PEOPLE USE THE INTERNET TO SEE WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE TOWN. I HAVE A SON WHO USES IT ALL THE TIME BUT I DON'T UTILIZE IT VERY OFTEN. I FORGET ABOUT IT BECAUSE I'M NOT A COMPUTER PERSON. • Second home owner BECAUSE I REALLY LIVE IN DENVER AND COME UP TO VAIL, I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON. I DON'T GET AS INVOLVED AS I DO IN DENVER BUT I WOULD LIKE TO GET INVOLVED. Second home owner BECAUSE OF REDEVELOPMENT AT LIONSHEAD THERE ARE SOME UNSETTLED FEELINGS AMONG BUSINESSES AND LANDOWNERS. • Second home owner EVERYONE HAS THEIR OWN AGENDA. THERE'S A LOT OF DISCUSSION AND NO RESULTS.. THE POWER STRUCTURE IS THE ISSUE. ITS ALL TALK AND NO ACTION AS A RULE. • Second home owner FROM WHAT I CAN SEE, IT'S A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE. I CAN'T WAIT UNTIL I RETIRE AND MOVE OUT THERE. • Second home owner I CAN'T ADD ANYTHING. • Second home owner I DON'T KNOW. • Second home owner I JUST HAVEN'T SEEN ANY CHANGE. • Second home owner I THINK ALL,OF THE RECONSTRUCTION ON LIONSHEAD HAS CAUSED A LOT OF CONFLICTS AND I'M NOT SURE HOW THEY'RE GOING TO COME OUT.. • Second home owner I THINK THE DIFFERENT THINGS THEY'RE DOING ARE AVAILABLE TO EVERYONE. _ • Second home owner I THINK THE FIRE MARSHALL SHOULD BE MORE CAREFUL WHEN REQUIRING EXPENSIVE RENOVATIONS.THAT WOULD PROBABLY HAVE NO EFFECT IN A SEVERE EMERGENCY. • Second home owner I THINK WHAT THEY ARE DOING NOW WILL HELP. THE PROJECTS GOING ON IN THE LIONSHEAD AREA AND NEW BUILDING WILL HELP. • Second home owner I WOULD SAY IT GOES BACK TO BECOMING TOO ACCESSIBLE FOR ONLY THE RICH.. THE. COMMUNITY SUFFERS WHEN THERE IS LESS DIVERSITY AND ACCESSIBILITY ONLY TO THE RICH.. • Second. home owner I'M NOT OUT THERE THAT MUCH SO I HAVEN`T SEEN ANY REAL ' " DIFFERENCE: " `' ' 104 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner IT APPEARS THE COUNCIL IS NOT SO DIVIDED AND IS TRYING TO COMMUNICATE WITH RESIDENTS BOTH IN-TOWN AND OUT-OF-TOWN. • Second home owner IT IS GOOD. • Second home owner ITS BECOMING AN EXPENSIVE BIG CITY. • Second home owner JUST THAT THE WATER DEPARTMENT STINKS. • Second home owner JUST TRY TO KEEP THE CRIME DOWN. • Second home owner NO COMMENTS. • Second home owner NO COMMENTS. • Second home owner NO I DON'T. • Second home owner NO, NOT AT ALL. • Second home owner NO. (42) • Second home owner NONE. (7) • Second.home owner NOPE. • Second home owner NOT AT THIS TIME: • Second home owner NOT REALLY. • Second home owner PEOPLE ARE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE NEED TO UPGRADE THINGS AND THEY ARE IMPROVING. • Second home owner SENSE OF COMMUNITY IS A GOOD IDEA. PEOPLE WHO COME TO VAIL AS TOURISTS HAVE LOTS AVAILABLE TO THEM. PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN VAIL HAVE SERVICES AVAILABLE. 2ND HOMEOWNERS ARE ORPHANS. WE PAY A LOT OF TAXES WITH NOT ENOUGH OPPORTUNITIES FOR US. • Second home owner THAT'S WHAT IT SEEMS LIKE TO ME BUT I'M NOT THERE ALL THE TIME. • Second home owner THE INTERACTION WITHIN THE LOCAL COMMUNITY HAS IMPROVED, THE PERSONAL INTERACTIONS. • Second home owner THE SENSE OF COMMUNITY IS REFLECTED IN BOTH COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL AREAS. THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF EMPTY RETAIL SPACES BECAUSE THE ONLY ONES WHO CAN AFFORD THE RENT ARE T- SHIRTS SHOPS: • Second home owner THE TOWN IS DOING A BETTER JOB COMMUNICATING. • Second home owner THE TOWN IS UNDERGOING A LOT OF CHANGES. THE RETAILERS ARE VERY UNHAPPY BECAUSE IT MAKES SHOPPING BAD. • Second home owner THERE'S NO MORE COHESION JUST TRANSIENT PEOPLE IN AND OUT. • Second home owner WE ARE SEEING MORE ACTION. THEY ARE FINALLY DOING THINGS. • Second home owner WE NEED NEW IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE ENTIRE TOWN AND MORE MIDDLE INCOME ACCOMMODATIONS. • Second home owner WHY DIDN'T THEY MENTION THE CONVENTION CENTER IN THIS? . • Mail Survey I LIKE COMMUNITY MEETINGS, E.G. SUMMER PICNICS, STATE OF THE TOWN REPORTS, CLEAN-UP DAY, ETC. • Mail Survey ITS A VERY COLD' TOWN • Mail Survey KNOW FEW PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE, DOWN VALLEY HAS MORE OF THE "LOCAL." FEEL • Mail Survey REGARDLESS OF TOWN.PROGRAMS, HOUSING PRICES DRIVE FAMILIES DOWN, VALLEY. THIS SHIFT SHOULD BE REFLECTED IN THE TOWN'S POLICIES ANp CAPITAL INVESTMENTS.,VAIL IS TRENDING TOWARD A RESORT OR RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, NOT A FAMILY COMMUNITY. • Mail Survey SERVICE EMPLOYEES AND PROGRAMS GET OVERWHELMED DURING SKI SEASON, TOO MANY PEOPLE TO MAINTAIN HIGH STANDARDS 105 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Mail. Survey. THE TOWN DOES NOT PAY ATTENTION TO IMMEDIATE NEEDS AND CONCERNS... • Mail Survey THERE'S SO MUCH AROUND SCHOOL BUT ITS IMPORTANT TO KEEP FAMILY/YOUTH ACTIVITIES IN VAIL. WILD WEST DAYS IS IN WOLCOTT BC , SUBSIDIZES FESTIVALS AND ATTRACTS FAMILY...DOES VAIL WANT THE LOCAL COMMUNITY TO GATHER HERE, OR JUST VISITORS-CHILI FEST , OKTOBER • Mail Survey TRIER IS NO SENSE OF COMMUNITY IN VAIL, YOU ASK PEOPLE IF THEY EVEN KNOW TRIER NIEGHBOR • Mail Survey TO BIG • Mail Survey • M il S TOO MUCH SMALL GROUP SPECIAL INTEREST (KAYE FERRY JIM LAMONT) a urvey , VRD YOUTH SERVICES AND THE GYMNASTICS CENTER PROVIDE THE " MOST COMMUNITY FEEL" • Mail Survey WE CONTINUALLY MAKE. IT HARDER FOR INDIVIDUALS AND YOUNG FAMILIES,.TO .GET ESTABLISHED,I.E. WAGES/SALARIES COMPARED TO LIVING EXPENSES • Mail Survey WE NEED HELP, FOLLOW-UP, SUGGESTIONS SHOULD BE. LISTENED BETTER. TOWN SHOULD LISTEN (SIC) • Mail Survey WILL ALWAYS BE SOME GRIDLOCK DUE TO DIFFERENT GOALS OF INDIVIDUALS • Mail Survey WORKER HOUSING IS A SUCCESS A 106 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 Are there specific infrastructure or programs you would like to see added to serve Vail in the next five years? resident type comment • Resident ADDITIONAL PARKING, MORE MIXED RETAIL. • Resident ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES, CLINICS, AND PROBABLY A' HOSPITAL SOON. • Resident ANOTHER PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE IN WEST VAIL. • Resident BETTER PARKING AND MORE OF IT. • Resident BETTER PARKING, MORE OF IT. AFFORDABLE HOUSING. • Resident BETTER PARKING. ANOTHER STRUCTURE. GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO BE MORE TRANSPARENT. RECREATION DISTRICT NEEDS TO BE ABOLISHED. DID NOT DO ITS JOB. NEEDS TO BE PART OF VAIL GOVERNMENT. • Resident BETTER PARKING. TOWN PARKING AND BETTER BUS SERVICE, MEANING MORE FREQUENT SERVICE DURING SKI SEASON. • Resident BETTER SHOPPING FOR POORER PEOPLE. • Resident. BOWLING ALLEY.. • Resident BOWLING ALLEY. • Resident CELL PHONE RECEPTION IS NOT GOOD. VAIL NEEDS TO ENHANCE ITS MEETING SPACE FACILITIES. MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. CURBSIDE RECYCLING. ADDITIONAL SKATING FACILITIES. • Resident CHANGE THE BUS ROUTE, MOVE FARTHER WEST FROM WHERE THEY COME UP NOW. • Resident CHANGES IN THE VILLAGE AND BUILDING SHOULD BE EASIER TO MAKE. THERE SHOULD BE MORE COOPERATION ON THE PART OF THE TOWN TO FACILITATE IMPROVEMENTS: • Resident CLEAN UP THE RIVER. • Resident COMMUNITY POOL. • Resident COMMUNITY REC CENTER. • Resident COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER. • Resident CONFERENCE CENTER AND WEST VAIL FIRE STATION. • Resident CONFERENCE CENTER. LARGER MULTI FUNCTION CENTER VS WHAT'S CURRENTLY PLANNED. • Resident CONVENTION CENTER WOULD BE GOOD. WE NEED A RECREATIONAL AREA LIKE AVON HAS WITH A SWIMMING POOL AND STUFF LIKE THAT. I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT. • Resident CONVENTION CENTER, SKATE PARK FOR THE YOUTH, A MORE PERMANENT STRUCTURE. INCLUDE A SKATE PARK AT LIONSHEAD, THEN IN THE SUMMER THERE'S SOMETHING FOR KIDS. THERE'S MOUNTAIN BIKING, BUT THAT'S IT: IT WOULD GIVE THE PARENTS A t_ITTLE FREEDOM. • Resident CONVENTION CENTER. ADDITIONAL PARKING. • Resident CONVENTION CENTER. HEATED STREETS. REDOING CIBERT CIRCLE. • Resident CROSSROADS, FOUR SCREENS, ARCADE., ETC.. I WANT THE FOUR ARCADE, BOWLING ALLEY AND SWIMMING POOL. A YOUTH SCREENS , CENTER TO GET DUMB PUNKS OFF THE STREET. • Resident DO MORE INTERNATIONAL AND NATIONAL SKI EVENTS, AND WORLD CUP QUALIFIERS. 107 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident EAST VAIL, EAST MEADOW DRIVE NEEDS A PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY FIRE STATION IN WEST VAIL. • Resident EDUCATION IS A HUGE ISSUE IN VAIL. MAKE SURE THEY'RE ABLE TO COMPETE IN TERMS OF THE QUALITY OF STUDENTS. BETTER SCHOOL PROGRAMS AND REDUCE OVERCROWDING. • Resident FAMILY AND KIDS FACILITIES. • Resident FENCED IN DOG PARK. • Resident FIRE STATION. • Resident FRISBEE GOLF COURSE. _ • Resident _ _ GYM OR SWIMMING POOL. • Resident GYMNASIUM FOR BASKETBALL, ETC. • Resident I AM FOR THE CONVENTION CENTER. • Resident I HOPE THE CONFERENCE CENTER IS DONE SOON • Resident . I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME IMPROVEMENTS AT VAIL AND THE PARKING WHICH YOU'VE ALREADY COVERED. • Resident I THINK THEY SHOULD HAVE A CENTER WITH YOGA AND EXERCISE A , HEALTH FACILITY. A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE CAN CONGREGATE • Resident . I WISH WE HAD A REC CENTER LIKE THE AVON REC CENTER • Resident . I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AN INSIDE;,SWIMMING POOL AND REC CENTER • Resident . I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE COMMERCIAL AREA OF THE VILLAGE AREA PAINTED IN BRIGHT BEAUTIFUL,COLORS. THE PAINT NOW IS OLD AND UNINTERESTING I LOVE STREET BEAT. • Resident ~ I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A RECREATION CENTER, NEED AN INDOOR POOL • Resident . I WOULD REALLY LIKE AN ART MUSEUM. • Resident ICE RINK_.; GOLF COURSE IS OUTRAGEOUS.. IRISH FESTIVAL GREAT , CROWD BRINGER: • Resident ICE SCULPTURE EVENTS AND BANDS GOING AROUND TOWN MORE . ENTERTAINMENT IN THE SUMMER TIME.. NOT LOUD BANDS • Resident . ICE SKATING RINK. • Resident I'D LIKE A SWIMMING POOL, A LIBRARY WE COULD USE MORE EASILY A , RECREATION CENTER.:. • Resident I'D LIKE TO SEE AN IMAX THEATRE AND MORE PROGRAMS FOR THE KIDS • Resident . . I'D LOVE TO SEE A RE_ CREATION CENTER THE WAY AVON HAS WITH A , SWIMMING POOL. • Resident I'D LOVE TO SEE A RECREATIONAL WORKOUT AREA FOR EXERCISE I'D . LIKE TO SEE MORE DISCOUNTS FOR LOCALS, FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN. HERE FOR MORE THAN, SAY FIVE YEARS • Resident . I'M VERY UNHAPPY WITH THE PLANNING AND DESIGN. GRFA PROGRAM IS HORRIBLE. THEY HAVE NO BUSINESS TELLING ME WHAT I CAN DO: WITH MY OWN HOME. TH{S IS TOO_INTRUSIVE AND RESTRICTIVE IN TERMS OF EXPANSION. • Resident iN ALL PARKING AREAS; THEY SHOULD HAVE AN AREA-WHERE THE GUEST AND VISITOR CAN CHANGE INTO SKI. CCO,THING AND STORE EQUIPMENT . WHERE ITS WARM.: THAT'$ ALWAYS BEEN SOMETHING I'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT AND SHOULD BE A LARGE PRIORITY. ~ ' . 108 Town of Vail Community • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident: • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident° • Resident' • Resident. • Resident • Resident Resident. • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident + Resident 2005 .,, r, INCUBATOR OFFICE SPACE FOR START-UP COMPANIES THAT ARE NOT TOURIST RELATED. WE MUST HAVE A CONFERENCE CENTER. MORE PROGRAMMING FACILITIES THAT ARE LIKE DONOVAN, WITH FLEXIBILITY. BETTER MAINTAINED SIDEWALKS. INDOOR PERFORMING ARTS CENTER WITH QUALITY ACOUSTICS. INDOOR SKATE PARK, SKATEBOARDING AND ANOTHER ICE SKATING RINK. INEXPENSIVE PAVILION, BETTER PARKING AND INEXPENSIVE RESTAURANTS. LIGHT RAIL FOR THE VALLEY. IT WOULD CUT DOWN ON THE NEED FOR PARKING STRUCTURES AND REDUCE TRAFFIC PROBLEMS, NOISE, CONGESTION, ETC. LIKE TO SEE THE.FREEWAY BURIED: HAVE IT UNDERGROUND IN A TUNNEL. . LIKE TO SEE THEM FINISH STEVENS PARK AND PUT IN A BOWLING ALLEY. THEY NEED ONE. LOCAL REC CENTER: MAN THE INFORMATION BOOTHS AT THE LIONSHEAD BUS STOP. ,., . MORE ACTIVITIES'DESIGNED FOR PEOPLE OVER 50 AND BETTER VARIETY OF STORES THAT OFFER A REASON TO COME BACK TO VAIL AND SHOP. MORE ACTIVITIES FOR TEENAGERS. MORE ADULT EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES. MORE INTELLECTUAL THINGS. MORE AFFORDABLE PARKING. MORE BOWLING ACTIVITIES, MORE ROUNDED TOWN THAN IT IS. MORE CHILDREN'S PROGRAMS. MORE CONCERTS AND FREE PROGRAMS FOR THE.PUBLIC. MORE COMMUNITY TOGETHERNESS: THE RESIDENTS GET PUSHED ASIDE. MORE ENVIRONMENTAL.AWARENE$S PROGRAM. MORE FESTIVALS. MORE FOR TEENAGERS. , MORE FUN THINGS'FOR THE TEENAGER TO DO. THINGS LIKE HORSE BACK RIDINGAND-MORE RESTAURANTS THAT ARE NOT T'00 EXPENSIVE. MORE ICE-SKATING: MORE IN A FIELD THAI' YOU WOULD-WANT TO HAVE. THERE IS TOO MANY BARS, NOT ENOUGH ACTIVITY FOR CHILDREN.: MORE OF THE THINGS THAT NORMAL PEOPLE, NOT TOURIST, CAN DO. 'MOVIES, BOWLING, ETC. KEEP ECONOMY HERE. MORE OUTDOOR ORIENTED SCHOOL PROGRAMS. MORE PARKING EVERYWHERE: MORE PARKING, AND, IMPROVED GOLF COURSE. AND ALSO A CONVENTION CENTER IF ECONOMICALLY VIABLE. MORE PARKING.., MORE SHOPPING O.R COMMERC,IAL ENDEAVORS. MORE PARKING: THEY NEED TO BURY THE INTERSTATE, ALTHOUGH I DONT~THINK THEY£AN DO IT IN FIVE YEARS: MORE PROGRAMS FOR JUNIOR_GOLF AND JUNIOR TENNIS FOR LOWER RATES.. `; ~ , .. • Resident • Resident • Resident 109 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident " - _ .. . MORE,PUBLIC' BATHROOMS THAT ARE ACCESSIBLE AND VISIBLE. OUR KIOSK IS NOT PROPERLY DESIGNED TO BE INFORMATIVE. WE NEED MORE TRAINING FOR THE STAFF, SO THAT THEY'RE MORE HELPFUL . MORE EVENTS BEING HELD. MORE ACTIVITIES FOR-.THE TEENS • Resident . MORE REASONABLE SHOPPING, LESS T-SHIRT SHOPS • Resident . MORE RECREATIONAL PUBLIC SWIMMING POOLS, MAYBE TRACK AND FIELD. • Resident MORE SHOPPING, SPECIFICALLY MALLS. POSSIBLY MORE CULTURAL ACTIVITIES. • Resident MORE SHOPPING • Resident MORE SKIING, CROSS COUNTRY. • Resident MOVIE THEATRE PARKING, NIGHT TIME ENTERTAINMENT FOR TEENAGERS. BOWLING ALLEY. • Resident NEED,A BETTER PROGRAM FOR NON-SKIERS. THE VISITORS • Resident , . NEED GOOD THEATERS. • Resident NEED MORE.F000S ON CHILDREN IN SCHOOLS. • Resident NEED TO GET THE HOTELS BUILT AND APPROVED IN A MORE TIMELY FASHION:.. . • Resident NEEDS BETTER ORGANIZATION ON THESE ROADS. IF.YOU WORK IN TOWN, IT'S A BIG PAIN IN THE BUTT TO GET IN TOWN AND PARK NIGHT . AND DAY IT'S A REAL HEMORRHOID. THEY HAVE TO FIGURE IT OUT . BETTER. I KNOW THEY CAN. " • Resident NEEDS TO BE MORE RESTAURANTS AND MORE ACTIVITIES • Resident . ~ NEIGHBORHOODS TO GET TOGETHER AND LOCAL ACTIVITIES IN THE SUMMER ARE REALLY NICE. NEED MORE OF THIS.. •. Resident. NICE TO. HAVE ,A REC .CENTER WITH. A P,OOL.. • Resident NIGHT SKIING."~ ' • Resident NO. (126) • Resident ONCE THE TOWN IS RECONSTRUCTED AND RECONFIGURED THERE , SHOULD BE MORE STREET MUSICIANS AND PERFORMANCE • Resident. . PARKING IS THE NUMBER ONE PROBLEM, BUT COULD DO MORE IN NATURE SCHOOLS. EVEN ONE TO FIVE DAYS SUCH AS BIRD IDENTITY , . NATURE. WALKS, WILD PLANT OR FLOWER IDENTIFICATION WE- HAVE ' , , SUCH A BEAUTIFUL.PLACE: ' " • Resident _ PARKING SPACES FOR VALUE PASSES.- ,~: • Resident ._ . ; PARKING, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, MORE FUN THINGS TO DO WITHOUT HAVING TO TRAVEL.OUTSIDE OF VAII . • Resident . . . .. PARKING, LESS PARKING TICKETS, MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING • Resident . PARKING; MORE OF IT. • Resident PRICE OF LEARNING.. AND LESSONS FOR YOUNG PEOPLE IS TOO HIGH . NEED SOME ACTIVITIES THAT ARE LESS EXPENSIV E • Resident _ . PUBLIC GYMNASIUM; INDOOR; POOL; ETC. • Resident PUBLIC INDOOR.SWIMMING FACILITY AND A REC CENTER • Resident . . . PUBLIC MEETING SPACE FOR: LOCAL GROUPS AT A NOMINAL FEE B . ETTER TRANSPORTATION, SERVICE FROM; OUTLYING AREAS: . ~ • Resident . . RUBLIC POOL AND NO CONVENTION CENTER -y • Resident , PUBLIC REC CENTER:. ;., 110 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL AND CEMETERY; IMPROVE THE GOLF COURSE AND NEW LEVELS TO THE PARKING STRUCTURES. • Resident PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL IN VAIL. • Resident PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL, ONE THAT'S MORE ACCESSIBLE. • Resident PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL. • Resident PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL. • Resident REAL PUSH FOR RESIDENTS BEING INVOLVEMENT IN EVERYTHING. GET TOGETHER, MEET YOUR NEIGHBORS, FREE RESIDENT SKI DAY. • Resident REC CENTER AND CHEAPER PARKING. • Resident REC CENTER SWIMMING POOL OWNED BY THE TOWN CONVENTION CENTER NEEDS TO GET DONE. • Resident REC CENTER WITH A WORKOUT AREA LIKE AVON. • Resident REC CENTER WITHIN THE TOWN LIMITS. • Resident REG CENTER, AQUATIC" CENTER, PROGRAMS DIRECTLY FOR SENIORS. • Resident REC CENTER. • Resident RECREATION CENTER SPECIFICALLY FOR THE FULL-TIME RESIDENTS OF VAIL. SIMILAR TO THE AVON REC CENTER. • Resident RECREATION CENTER WITH A POOL, WORK-OUT CENTER, ETC. • Resident RECREATION CENTER WITH A SWIMMING POOL. • Resident RECREATION CENTER.WITH CHEAPER AND MORE ADULT ACTIVITIES. • Resident RECREATION CENTER. • Resident RECREATION CENTER. • Resident RECREATION CENTER. • Resident RECREATION CENTER., • Resident RECREATION CENTER. LACK OF LOCATIONS TO REGREA'TE OTHER THAN . ICE HOCKEY'AND SKIING. LACK OF YOUTH AND ADULT PROGRAMS. • Resident RECREATIONAL CENTER LIKE AVON HAS. ` • Resident SCHOOL IS LACKING. DEVELOP COMMUNITY AWARENESS IN THE : " . SCHOOLS. ' • Resident SEE A TRAIN TO OUTLINE ALL THE COMMUNITIES. • Resident SENSE OF DIRECTION. SOMETHING IS BUILT AND THEN REBUILT. LIONSHEAD HAS`BEEN REBUILT TOO MANY. TIMES: DO IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME. OTHER RESORTS HAVE A DEFINITE IDENTITY LIKE ASPEN. CONFERENCE CENTER HAS NO RELATION TO ANYTHING ELSE. • Resident SOME NIGHER-END TYPE~OF ENTERTAfNMENT FACILITY FOR YOUNGER PEOPLE AND ADULTS OTHER THAN OUTDOOR AND GOING TO THE BAR. • Resident SOMETHING FOR' THE KIDS AGES 13 TO 21 TO DO. • Resident SOMETHING TO BRING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY. FOR FAMILIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN. • Resident STAFF HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WHO WORK AT THE RESORTS. • Resident STOP ALCOHOLISM AND SMOKING. ,THERE ARE SO MANY PEOPLE THAT ` ARE STRUNGOUT ON BOOZE: THAT'S~RIDICULOUS.' • Resident SWIMMING FACfL-ITIES. ~ ' • Resident SWIMMING POOC;AND RECREATION CENTER. SOME GOOD OUTLET FOR YOUNG PEOPLE IS; REALLY MISSING., ,, _ ,, • Resident - .: .,. SWIMMING.FOOL IN WEST VAIL. , • Resident SWIMMING POOL INDOOR OR OUTDOOR. 111 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident SWIMMING POOL: • Resident SWIMMING POOL. • Resident SWIMMING POOL. • Resident SWIMMING POOL. BETTER TEEN CENTER. THERE ISN'T ANYTHING FOR PEOPLE UNDER THE AGE OF 21. BOWLING OR SOMETHING WOULD BE GOOD. SOME KIND OF CHILDREN'S ENTERTAINMENT CENTER. • Resident SWIMMING POOL. HOW ABOUT IN THE SOFTBALL FIELD AREA? THE RETURN OF THE GREAT RAVE. • Resident THE CONFERENCE CENTER. • Resident THE`CONFERENCE CENTER. FIRST ONE THING IS MORE PARKING. I'D SAY THOSE ARE THE TWO. • Resident THE CONFERENCE CENTER. MORE YOUTH STUFF, LIKE A BOWLING ALLEY OR MOVIE THEATERS. • Resident THE DEVELOPMENT OF CROSSROADS IS CRITICAL. THERE ISN'T ENOUGH FOR KIDS TO DO. THE CONFERENCE CENTER DESIGN IS HIDEOUS. • Resident THERE IS A LACK OF DAYCARE SERVICES. • Resident THERE NEEDS TO BE A GREAT DEAL MORE OF ADULT ACTIVITIES OTHER THAN JUST DINING. IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE A PLACE TO SIT AND LISTEN TO LIVE MUSIC BUT NOT NECESSARILY JUST 20 AND 30 YEAR OLDS, BUT OTHER.PEOPLE TOO. • Resident THEY DON'T HAVE ADEQUATE RECYCLING FACILITIES. • Resident .THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH RECREATION OPTIONS FOR ADULTS. LIKE LEAGUES AND THE AVAILABILITY OF THAT. • Resident THEY JUST, NEED MORE ACTIVITIES SO THE RESIDENTS HAVE NO NEED TO TRAVEL OUT OF TOWN TO HAVE FUN. • Resident THEY NEED A REC CENTER WITH A SWIMMING POOL. • Resident THEY NEED A SWIMMING POOL AND CHEAPER GOLF. • Resident THEY NEED A WEST VAIL FIRE STATION. IT WOULD BE ADVISABLE TO BUILD A NEW TOWN HALL. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE GREATER STEPS TAKEN TO DIMINISH THE HIGHWAY NOISE. • Resident THEY NEED BIG FACILITIES LIKE A BAR OR RESTAURANT AT THE BASE OF EACH LIFT AREA. • Resident THEY NEED MORE RECREATION FOR LOCALS, REASONABLY PRICED, PUT IN OR IMPROVE SIDEWALKS IN NEIGHBORHOODS. MAINTAIN WEED . CONTROL. • Resident THEY SHOULD DO MORE RECREATIONAL FOR ADULT, LIKE A HOCKEY LEAGUE. HOW ABOUT EARLY LIFT ACCESS FOR LOCALS? • Resident THEY SHOULD GET TOUGHER ON TRAFFIC. THEY SHOULD ALL START WORKING TOGETHER. • Resident THINGS FOR SENIOR CITIZENS. • Resident TUNNEL FROM EAST VAIL TO WEST VAIL. THEN -COULD DEVELOP THE LAND I-70 IS CURRENTLY ON. WOULD HELP WITH NOISE LEVEL. • Resident WE NEED AN ASSISTEDLIVING FACILITY SOMEWHERE IN THIS VAIL VALLEY, BECAUSE WE NEED SOMEONE TO TAKE CARE OF US OLD PEOPLE. • Resident WE NEED MORE FOR. KIDS AND FAMILIES.. A BIGGER MOVIE THEATER, BOWLING ALLY, ARCADE, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 112 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident WE-NEED SOMETHING TO GIVE IT- MORE.OF>A TOWN.LIEE, INSTEAD..OF.._ ,.....-- ... .- BEING JUST A RESORT AREA. I AM NOT SURE:WHAT IT IS, BUT SOMETHING DOES NOT MAKE US PART OF A TOWN: WE ARE JUST A SKl RESORT. • Resident . WEST VAIL FIRE STATION. • Resident WEST VAIL. FIRE STATION, • Resident WEST VAIL FIRE STATION. • Resident WITH ALL THIS IMPROVEMENT IT'S GOING TO BRING PEOPLE. WE'RE GOING.TO HAVE.TO GET THE~PARKING,$ITUATION; STRAIGHTENED. . 1NHETHER THEY CET THEM GO UP OR DOWN, ITS GOT TO HAQPEN,;.. . • Resident WITH ANOTHER RINK IN LIONSHEAD IT WOULD BE NICE IF THE ONE IN DOBSON WAS RESERVED JUST FOR HOCKEY. • Resident WORKOUT FACILITY. FOR LOCALS. GOOD;SIZE CONVENTION. CENTER. • Resident,. WOULD-.LIKE TO SEE A SWIMMING,POOL:.. ,. • Resident. YOUTH PROGRAMS, ENTERTAINMENT AROUND HOLIDAYS. • Second home owner. A LITTLE MORE LIVELY NIGHT LIFE TO ATTRACT,MORE.PEOPLE. LIVE BANDS-AND MORE VARIETYIN THE STYLE OF ENTERTAINMENT. • Second~home owner AFFORDABLE EMPLOYEE HOUSING • Second-home owner gUS SERVICES IN 1NEST VAIL NEED TO IMPROVE AND SAME WITH BUS STOPS: • Second home owner. CONVENTION CENTER; CONCERT VENUE. • Second home owner CONVENTION CENTER. • Second home owner CONVENTION CENTER. ~. . • Second home owner::~RAFT AND PHOTOGRAPHY PROGRAMS: WE NEED.AN ART CENTER FOR ,. ALL THOSE TYPES OF ACTIVITIES. IT WOULD ALSO NEED TO' BE FINANCIALLY ACCESSIBLE,TO ALE_ PEOPLE. . r .., •-Second home owner EXCELLENT SHOPPING IN THE Vf~LAGE ITSELF; UPSCALE BOUTIQUES OR -WHATEVER, EXCEPT T-SHIRTS. ` • Second home owner GET CONVENTION CENTER FINISHED. • Second home owner GLENWOOD SPRINGS HAS DONE LANDSCAPING AROUND THE :,. . '; ` INTERSTATE: I THINK THAT. SOME LANDSCAPING ON THE INTERSTATE TQ, HELP.WITH THE NOISE. • Second home owner HAVE MORE ACTIVITIES FOR THE ELDERLY. GEARED TOO MUCH TOWARD _.;., , THE TOURISTS OR CLIQUES. ,. •~Second home: owner I WOULD LIKE'TO SEE SOME MORE ADULT COURSES: _ ____ ._. _.._.__ _ .. . _ _ _.. --- - -_ • Second homeowner ICE ARENA, OUTDOOR FIREPLACE, LIKE IN BEAVER CREEK. ,THEY NEED ' TO IMPROVETHE LIGHTING WITH MORE HISTORICALLY CORRECT -- LIGHTING ON' THE MAIN STREETS: THE ORANGE LIGHTS OR GA$.L-IGHTS: .. • Second,home: owner ICE SKATING RINK. Second home owner I'D LIKE TO SEE EASIER ACCESS TO MOUNTAIN`LAKES FOR CANOEING?; ... AND KAYAKING. MAYBE A SHUTTLE AND ACCESSIBILITY TO,CANOES.AND STUFF. • Second home owner IF THERE WERE CLOSE ACCESS TO HORSEBACK RIDDING.. ~.:•fSecond home owner.- IN FAVOR OF RENOVATION OF LIONSHEAD AND VAIL VILLAGE • Second home owner `INCREASE THE RECREATION DEPARTMENT. • Second home owner IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE A PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL, BOTH INDOOR - . ,:. AND OUTDOOR. • Second home owner: JUST THE FITNESS CENTER. `_113 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner LESS T-SHIRT"SHOPS AND MORE BOUTIQUES. • Second home owner MORE ACTIVITIES FOR KIDS AND TEENS. MORE AFTER SKIING. • Second home owner MORE AFFORDABLE SERVICES LIKE MANICURES, BABYSITTING. I DO NOT WANT VAIL TO PRICE ITSELF OUT OF THE MARKET, SO TO SPEAK, AND BECOME TOO ELITIST. ALSO HAIR SALONS AND LESS EXPENSIVE, FAMILY ORIENTED RESTAURANTS. • Second home owner MORE CLOSELY RELATED TO VAIL, HOT AIR BALLOON RIDES IN SUMMER. • Second home owner N0. (60) • Second home owner PALM TREES AND NO BOATS. _ • Second home owner PARKING. • Second home owner PUBLIC SKATING THAT'S AVAILABLE ALL DAY, MORE PUBLIC PARKS, MORE PICNIC AREAS. • Second home owner PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL. • Second home owner REASONABLY PRICED VAIL VILLAGE SUPERMARKET. • Second home owner SKEET AND TRAP CLUB. • Second home owner SKI TRAIN TO. HELP ELIMINATE TRAFFIC. • Second home owner SPORTS FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS FOR SENIORS. • Second home owner SWIMMING POOL. • Second home owner THE LOCAL CINEMA COULD DEFINITELY BE IMPROVED AND ENLARGED, ANYTHING APPEALING TO FAMILIES AND CHILDREN WOULD BE GREAT. Second home owner THE MOST HELPFUL WOULD BE TRANSPORTATION BETWEEN DENVER AND VAIL. • Second home owner THE NOISE AND SPEED ON I-70. • Second home owner THE SHOPPING EXPERIENCE IN VAIL IS ABYSMAL. YOU CAN BUY T-SHIRTS OR SKI PARAPHERNALIA. • Second home owner THEY ARE REALLY,- REALLY, SHORT ON PARKING IN`TOWN. ESPECIALLY ON WEEKENDS WHEN PEOPLE FROM DENVER COME UP TO SKI. • Second home owner THEY JUST NEED TO UPDATE IN GENERAL. IN ORDER TO STAY NO. 1 AS A SKI TOWN, THEY NEED TO UPDATE EVERYTHING. • Second home owner THEY NEED A MUCH BETTER MOVIE COMPLEX. EVENING RECREATION FOR.TFIE KIDS LIKE BOWLING ALLEYS, VIDEO ARCADE THAT IS CHAPERONED. • Second home owner THEY NEED TO LOOK AT SECOND HOME OWNERS AS A HUGE PART OF THE ECONOMY; IN VAIL, AND I DO NOT SEE AVAILABILITY THE SAME AS - - - - - - -- RESIDEIyTSRND-TOURISTS HAVE.-_ - - _. _... .._- • Second home owner YOU COULD TAKE THE NEW AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND REMOVE. • Mail Survey A COMMUNITY LOUNGE • Mail Survey ADDITIONAL PARKING • Mail Survey AFFORDABLE GOLF, MORE ACCESS FOR LOCALS • Mail Survey ANOTHER SKATING RINK • Mail Survey BETTER RECYCLE PROGRAM • Mail Survey BOWLING ALLEY, REASONABLE SIT DOWN RESTAURANTS, CLEAN .THEATERS • Mail Survey. CONFERENCE CENTER THAT I VOTED FOR Mail Survey CONFERENCE CENTER, OUTDOOR SKATING RINK - LIONSHEAD CROSSROADS,. • Mail Survey CONVENTION CENTER 114 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Mail Survey CONVENTION/MEETING CENTER AS PLANNED • Mail Survey DON'T CHANGE THE BUS SCHEDULE TILL THE VERY END OF SEASON • Mail Survey INDOOR PLAY PLACE -AFFORDABLE, OPEN A LOT, DROP IN •Mail Survey MORE HIKING TRAILS • Mail Survey NO (6) • Mail Survey PARKING • Mail Survey PERFORMING ARTS CENTER • Mail Survey POOL,. BOWLING ALLEY, ETC. • Mail Survey REC CENTER LIKE AVON (POOL) INSTEAD OF CONE. CENTER • Mail Survey RECYLING PROGRAM IS A MESS! NEEDS TO BE RETOOLED. EITHER EDUCATE PUBLIC BETTER OR MAN THE FACILITY WITH VOLUNTEERS WHO CAN ACCEPTIREJECT MATERIALS. • Mail Survey WEST VAIL FIRE STATION • Mail Survey YOUTH SERVICES FACILITY 115 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 Is there any sepcific information you are looking for concerning the conference center that you haven't receivedT resident type comment • Resident A LOT OF CONTROVERSY ABOUT IT. SO MAYBE THERE SHOLILD BE MORE STUDY TO SEE IF IT IS SOMETHING THAT THE TOWN NEEDS • Resident . ACCURATE FINANCIAL NUMBERS. I DON'T BELIEVE THE NUMBERS OUT THERE ARE REALISTIC. • Resident ACCURATE NUMBERS OF WHAT IT WOULD COST THE TOWN EVERY YEAR • Resident . ALL THE LOCALS ARE PROTESTING IT, SO I WANT TO KNOW THE NEGATIVES. • Resident AN ANALYSIS OF THE DEMAND FOR A CONFERENCE CENTER AND WHY SHOULD THE GOVERNMENT RUN SUCH AN ENTERPRISE INSTE AD OF PRIVATE? • Resident BETTER STUDY ON FINANCIAL IMPACT AND THE COST • Resident . BUDGET WE HAVE NOT YET RECEIVED CONSTRUCTION COST B , IDS. NO REALISTIC ESTIMATES OF OPERATING OR DEFICITS. WE DON'T KNOW IF AN OPERATOR IS WILLING TO PUT A MAXIMUM LOSS PER YEAR IN AN . OPERATING AGREEMENT. WE NEED A CAP FOR THAT • Resident . CHANGE THE DESIGN. • Resident CONSISTENCY. • Resident COST REQUIREMENTS. COST OF RUNNING FACILITY COST OF , CONSTRUCTION. • Resident DOESNOT SEEM LIKE A GOOD IDEA • Resident . DON'T KNOW. • Resident DON'T KNOW. • Resident ECONOMIC VIABILITY. • Resident ECONOMIC VIABILITY. THERE ARE SOME CONCERNS • Resident . ECONOMICS, FEES. • Resident EVENTS THAT'LL BE THERE. WHAT WILL BE DONE WITH IT? • Resident FINANCES. WILL IT MAKE MONEY OR LOSE MONEY? THAT IS CRITICAL TO VAIL. • Resident FINANCIAL LIABILITY OF THE CONFERENCE CENTER IT IS NOT . FINANCIALLY VIABLE. • Resident FULL DISCLOSURE-AND A RE-VOTE • Resident . HONEST ASSESSMENT OF HOW MUCH IT IS GOING TO COST THE TAX PAYERS. • Resident HOW AND WHAT DECISIONS ARE BEING MADE AND WHO I S MAKING THOSE DECISIONS. • Resident HOW IT'S GOING TO BE OPERATED REGARDING OPERATI , ONAL COSTS AND WHAT MANAGEMENT fS' GOING TO BE IN PLACE I DON'T . UNDERSTAND HOW THEY'RE GOING TO TIE IN THE TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING STRUCTURE. • Resident HOW MUCH HAS IT PUT US IN THE RED? SPENT 1'/4 OF A MILLION DOLLARS ON A CONSULTANT. FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY THE . CONFERENCE CENTER.IS NOT.WHERE IT WAS VOTED ON TO BE • Resident . I BELIEVE THAT'I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE ON THE BUSINESS PLAN , HOW IT IS GOING TO MAKE MONEY. ~ - . 116 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHERE IT IS. • Resident. I DON'T' ftNOW WHERE IT IS GOING TO GO AND WHAT IT IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE AND WHERE IT WOULD BE. • Resident l DON'T NECESSARILY SUPPORT IT. • Resident I GET EMAILS ALL THE TIME. • Resident I GOT THE INFORMATION, I JUST DON'T LIKE IT. THAT'S IT • Resident I HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANYTHING BY MAIL: I'D JUST LIKE TO GET SOME OF THE PROS AND CONS OF HAVING THE CONFERENCE CENTER. • Resident I HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY INFORMATION ON THE CONFERENCE CENTER. • Resident I HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANYTHING. I JUST HAVE READ ABOUT IT IN THE PAPER. I WOULD IMAGINE IT IS GOING TO BE LIKE MOST CONFERENCE CENTERS IN MOST CITIES. THERE IS NOTHING SPECIFIC I NEED TO READ UP ON. • Resident I JUST VOTE AGAINST IT. I AM NOT FOR IT. • Resident I RECEIVED THE INFORMATION. I FEEL ALRIGHT ABOUT IT. • Resident I THINK IT IS A GOOD IDEA. • Resident I THINK IT WILL WORK OUT GOOD. • Resident I THINK THE DESIGN IS HIDEOUS: IN FACT LAUGHABLE. 11' LOOKS LIKE SOME SPACESHIP INSTEAD OF IN KEEPING WITH THE MOUNTAIN SCENERY OR THE CHALET STYLE. IT LOOKS LIKE AN UGLY RED MUSHROOM. • Resident I THINK THEY'VE INFORMED US JUST AS MUCH AS THE PROJECT IS BEING TALKED ABOUT NOW. THEY'VE PICKED A SPOT. I GUESS IT'S GOING TO BE THE FINANCING AND AGAIN THE.PARKING. WHY WOULD YOU TALK ABOUT IT WITHOUT THE SPACE FOR PEOPLE TO PARK? • Resident I WOULD LIKE SOMEONE TO IDENTIFY THE GROUP THAT ARE GOING TO COME THERE. • Resident I WOULD LIKE THEM TO GET ON WITH IT. • Resident I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHERE IT WILL BE, HOW LARGE IT WOULD BE, AND WHEN IT WOULD BE BUILT. AND, WOULD IT INCLUDE PARKING? • Resident I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHO IS PAYING FOR IT AND MORE ALL AROUND `1NF0'ON IT... • Resident 1 WOULD LIKE. TO SEE IT PUT TO A VOTE AGAIN. TOO, MANY NEW QUESTIONS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN ANSWERED. THE ORIGINAL VOTE WITHI 50 OR 60 DID NOT GIVE A TRUE PICTURE. • Resident I'D LIKE TO KNOW MORE.ABOUT THE VIABILITY OF THE FACILITY. • Resident I'D LIKE TO SEE IT STOPPED. • Resident I'M NOT THAT FAMILIAR WITH IT.. • Resident I'M OPPOSED TO IT. • Resident I'M WAITING TO SEE WHAT IT ENDS UP. • Resident' IS IT VALID TO PUT UP A CONFERENCE CENTER NOW? I WANT MORE SURILEYS.TO SEE 1NHAT CONFERENCE CENTERS ARE DOING IN OTHER ,: . . . . PLACES. ` • Resident w . , ,, IT IS IN EVOLUTION. - • Resident ~ ITS KIND OF CONFUSING`BECAUSE t DON'T' SEE A DIFFERENCE FOR IT. • Resident , ; , .IT'S UP TO THEM TO FIGURE IT,OUT IF IT KEEPS LOSING MONEY LIKE THEY' PREDICTED FOR THE NEXT THREE. YEARS: WHO'S GOING TO PAY FOR IT, THE TAX PAYERS? WHO WOULD;.,WANT.TO COME,, HERE IN MUD SEASON? 117 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident I'VE HEARD TALK, HAVEN'T REALLY SEEN"ANY REAL~INFORMATION YOU . MIGHT NEED TO MEDIA BLITZ TO GET PEOPLE'S ATTENTION • Resident . I'VE RECEIVED iT. • Resident I'VE SEEN A LOT OF THAT. • Resident JUST BUILD IT AND GET IT OVER WITH. • Resident JUST DIGESTING THE WHOLE THING. HOW IT WILL AFFECT PARKING , TAXES, DO WE REALLY NEED THAT? • Resident JUST MORE TAX INFORMATION. • Resident LACK OF INTEREST. • Resident LIKE TO KNOW THE TRUTH ABOUT IT. PROJECTIONS AND INFORMATION AVAILABLE CONFLICT WITH WHAT IS BEING DONE OR STATED AS TO THE RESULTS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLANS CONCERNING VAIL • Resident . LOCATION. WHAT'S GOING TO BE IN IT ETC? • Residert , MONEY AND HOW IT WILL WORKOUT LIKE T E S Z , H I E AND HOW MUCH IT WILL COST THE TAX PAYERS. • Resident MORE FINANCIi4L DATA. • Resident ,MORE NEWSPAPER, TV OR RADIO INFO UPDATES OR MEDIA UPDATES - ABOUT ON GOING PROGRESS: • Resident MORE ON DE31GN. WHO IS MAKING DECISIONS? • Resident MORE SPECIFICS ON HOW IT WILL BE DIFFERENT AND/OR BETTER THAN WHAT WE HAVE NOW. • Resident MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS WHETHER IT IS FINANCIALLY VIABLE AND WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE RELIABLE INFO ON THAT • Resident . NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON THIS ISSUE • Resident . . NO ADDITIONAL INFO REQUIRED. THE NEWSPAPER DOES THE JOB FOR NOW. • Resident • Resident NO COMMENTS AT THIS.TIME NEED TO WAIT AND SEE WHAT DEVELOPS. N O COMMENTS (4) • Resident NO COMMENTS. NEWSPAPER SEEMS TO BE THE ONLY MEDIUM AND I MAY HAVE MISSED READING IT: • Resident NO INFO RECEIVED.... _ • Resident NO INFORMATION RECEIVED: CURRENTLY.THERE'S APETITION GOING ` AROUND FOR A REVOTE FOR THE CONFERENCE CENTER • Resident . NO, BUT I HAVE RECEIVED THAT INFO BECAUSE I WAS SEEKING IT NO - - -- - - --- _ , T - - - BECAUSE-iT.WASP-ROVIDED::TO ME. LT IS-A-HORRIBLE-MISTAKE. THE_ CURRENT DESIGN IS HORRIBLE AND THE INITIAL CONSENSUS WAS A ' ' REFLECTION OF POOR MANAGEMENT OF THE TOWN STAFF • Resident . NO, JUST HAVEN'T SOUGHT IT. ' • Resident NO. (134) . • Resident NONE AT THIS TIME. I FEEL SATISFIED WITH THEQ INFORMA . TION THAT I HAVE GOTTEN.' • Resident- ~ __ , ; ~ ..., ~ , . NONE OTHER THAN PROSPECTIVE BUSINESS: HOW MANY LEADS AND WHO IS IN CHARGE OF MARKETING.THIS? • Resident - NONE;1' JUST WANT IT BUILT. • Resident, :... . NONE, (47) .. . • Residenf° ~ NOPE. Resid • ent NOTE: ; 118 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident + Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident • Resident NOT AT THIS TIME. NOT REALLY. NOT REALLY. DOES NOT AFFECT ME. NOT WELL THOUGHT OUT. NOTHING I CAN THINK OF. NOTHING. NOTHING. OPERATING COSTS DO NOT THINK THEY DID A LONG ENOUGH STUDY. DESIGN IS UGLY. PAPER IS GOOD, UP TO DATE. PAPER IS FREE. . PLAN THAT LOOKS ACCEPTABLE. POST THE PROGRESS OF THE CENTER. SEE WHAT THE NEW DESIGN IS. THE OLD DESIGN WAS NOT VERY GOOD. SPECIFICATIONS ON THE BUILDING AND COSTS TO BRING GROUPS TO THE CONFERENCE CENTER. TAKE CARE OF THE OTHER THINGS HERE FIRST BEFORE STARTING ANYTHING ELSE. PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO VISIT US ANY MORE. WE'VE GOTTEN TOO EXPENSIVE FOR. PEOPLE TO VISIT. THE COST OF SOME THINGS. THE FINAL COST. THE FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS, THE BUDGET. PROJECTED REVENUES AND EXPENSES OVER NEXT TEN YEARS. THE TOWN DOES SEND OUT FLYERS ON PROGRESS. THE TOWN VOTED 2 YEARS AGO TO BUILD IT, BUT THE PUBLIC WASN'T TOO INFORMED. SOME PEOPLE WOULD LIKE A REVOTE. I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA. THEY DO AN EXCELLENT JOB OF PUTTING IT OUT THERE. THEY HAVEN'T DONE A VERY GOOD PUBl1C JOB. THEY NEED A REGULAR ARCHITECT. THEY.DON'T NEED 1'O WORRY ABOUT THE OUTSIDE APPEARANCE OR SPEND A LOT OF MONEY WHEN ONLY THE INSIDE WILL BE USED. THEY PUT IT IN THE. VAIL DAILY, BUT YOU NEVER HEAR IF IT HAPPENS OR NOT. I DON'T KNOW WHY THE CONVENTION CENTER FELL THROUGH, OR IF THEY'RE STILL WORKING ON IT: IT'S A BASE STRUCTURE THAT LARGE CORPS-CAN COME UP"HERE 1N THE SUMMER: - - -° TIME FRAME. WHAT IS IT GOING TO COST ME AS A TAXPAYER?,.THE ONES PROFITING FROM IT SHOULD FOOT THE BILL, NOT THE TAXPAYERS. WHAT THE LOSSES WILL BE, WHO 1S GOING TO RENT IT? WHAT THEY PLAN ON PUTTING UP AND FINALIZING. WHAT WILL THE, FINAL SITE, COST, AND DESIGN. BE? WHY ARE WE BUILDING'IT? WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO CANCEL IT? . , WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO START BUILDING IT, AND WHAT ARE THEY . GOING TO DO WITH THE MONEY THEY ALREADY COLLECTED, AND WHEN IS THAT TAX ACTUALLY GOING TO STOP? WHEN IS IT GONG TO HAPPEN? 119 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident - WHEN IT GOING TO GET GOING. VOTERS APPROVED IT 2 YEARS"AGO AND NOTHING MUCH IS HAPPENING. • Resident WHEN THEY ARE ACTUALLY PLANNING ON BUILDING AND HOW THEY PLAN ON KEEPING WITHIN BUDGET FOR THE DESIGN THAT'S BEEN APPROVED. • Resident WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO PUT IT? • Resident WHY DOES IT MAKE ECONOMIC SENSE? • Resident WHY THE TOWN OF VAIL HAS TO PAY FOR IT. ITS A TOWN ISSUE BUT A PRIVATE CONCERN. LET THEM BUILD IT. DON'T USE MY TAXES FOR IT. STRATEGICALLY PLACE FIRE HOUSES, 1O YEARS WE WERE SUPPOSED TO GET A FIRE HOUSE IN WEST VAIL, NEVER GOT IT.' • Second home owner DATE FOR A FINAL PLAN AND THE FUNDING .FOR THE FINAL PLAN. • Second home owner GENERAL OUTLINE. • Second home owner HOW ARE THEY GOING TO PAY FOR IT AND WHO THOUGHT OF THE DESIGN? • Second home owner I AM ALL FOR IT. I BELIEVE VAIL WOULD BENEFIT FROM IT. • Second home owner I DON'T RECEIVE ANY INFORMATION FROM THEM. • Second home owner f WOULD LIKE GENERAL INFO. • Second home owner I'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT THE AVERAGES (ECONOMIC) FOR CONFERENCE CENTERS AREa • Second home owner I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF IT. f1NOULD RATHER SEE THE HOTELS TAKE CARE OF THE SPACE,FOR THESE CONFERENCES. • Second home owner I'M NOT THAT INTERESTED IN IT. • Second home owner IN GENERAL, MORE INFORMATION. • Second home owner ITS ONE MORE GIMMICK TO GET PEOPLE TO ATTEND. LAND VS THE POPULATION ISSUES: • Second home owner LENGT'M OF TIME IT-WILL TAKE TO COMPLETE WORK ON LIONSHEAD AND WILL 1T AFFECT.MY.TAXES2 • Second home owner LIKE TO BE MORE INFORMED ON DEVELOPMENT. • Second home owner MY HUSBAND DOES LOTS OF BUSINESS MEETINGS, SO HE MIGHT BE MORE INTERESTED IN THAT THAN I AM. I'M A SCHOOL TEACHER. • Second home owner NEVER GAVE 17' MUCH THOUGHT. • Second. home owner NO COMMENTS. • Second home owner NO COMMENTS: • Second home owner NO COMMENTS: NOT PARTICULARLY INTERESTED. - •-SecondLLhome owner-NO INFORMATION:--- - - - _ • Second home owner NO. (64) • Second home owner NONE. (6) • Second homeowner NOT REALLY CONCERNED WITH IT. • Second home owner NOT REALLY. • Second home owner NOT REALLY. • Second home owner NOT REALLY. • Second home owner NOT REALLY. I JUST KNOW THAT IT IS AN IMPORTANT THING. I'M ALL FOR IT. • Second home owner NOTHING. • Second home owner NOTHING. • Second home-owner ONLY BECAUSE'I READ VAIL DAILY. • Second home owner THE CAPACITY, .THE SIZE, SQUARE FOOTAGE. ... 120: Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner THEY ARE NOT BEING VERY OPEN ABOUT IT. THEY DON'T' TELL PART TIME RESIDENTS THEY ARE NOT INCLUDED. • Second home owner THEY KEEP CHANGING THE RULES OR THE DESIGNS OF THE CONFERENCE CENTER. • Second home owner TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE CONFERENCE CENTER SUPPORT PROGRAM IS GOING TO BE. WHO IS PROMOTING CONFERENCE CENTER? HOW ARE YOU GOING TO GET PEOPLE TO COME TO THE CONFERENCE CENTER AND WHAT IS THE COST? WHAT ORGANIZATION? • Second,home owner WHEN IS-IT GOING, TO BANKRUPT THE TOWN? • Mail Survey A DECISION • Mail Survey ACTUAL COST, WHO'S PAYING FOR IT • Mail Survey ASSURANCE THAT VAIL TAXPAYERS WON'T END UP SUPPORTING IT • Mail Survey ECONOMIC STUDIES • Mail Survey FINANCIAL ANALYSIS • Mail Survey HOW THE CENTER WILL COVER IT'S OPERATING COSTS. WHO WILL COVER ANY DEFICITS. • Mail Survey ONCE COSTS OF FINAL PROJECT ARE GATHERED - PROCEED AS INDICATED • Mail Survey PLANNED CAPACITY, MEETING FACILITIES • Mail Survey THE TRUTH, THE REAL COST, THE WAIST (SIC) • Mail Survey WHAT IS GOING TO BE DONE TO BLOCK THE REVOTE 121 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 Do ou have an additional comments re ardin the conference center? resident type comment • Resident ARCHITECTURE OR STYLE DOES NOT FIT WITH THE AREA . COULD SPEND TAX PAYER MONEY MORE WISELY. NOT A PRIORITY. • Resident BUILD IT. • Resident CONFERENCE CENTERS ARE STATISTICALLY UNPROFITABLE . MAY NOT BE A GOOD IDEA • Resident . CONSIDERING ALL THE CONFERENCE CENTERS ARE GOING DOWN THE TOILET. • Resident COUNCIL IS TRYING TO GET TOO MUCH INFORMATION BEFORE GOING AHEAD WITH PROJECT • Resident . DESIGNS ARE VERY UGLY AND THE YABA DABA DOO CENTE • Resident R IS STUPID. IT DOESN'T FIT THE COMMUNITY: • Resident DO NOT THINK WE NEED IT. IT WILL BE VERY COSTLY. ' DON T BUILD THE CONFERENCE CENTER. IT'S A WASTE OF MONEY. • Resident • Resident DON'T DO 1T. IT'S A WASTE OF MONEY. ' DON T KNOW. • Resident DON'T KNOW. • Resident DON'T THINK THERE HAS BEEN ENOUGH CONCERN GIVEN TO THE COST TO THE TOWN • Resident . DOWNSIDE IS THAT IT WILL TAKE AWAY BUSINESS FROM DOWNTOWN HOTELS AND CONFERENCE CENTERS IT MAY . NOT BE ANY BIGGER THAN WHAT IS ALREADY GOING TO LOCAL CONFERENCE CENTERS AND WILL NOT BRING LARGER CONVENTIONS TO TOWN • Resident . FREE USE OF DONOVAN PAVILION • Resident . GET IT BUILT. • Resident. GET ON WITH ITI' • Resident GIVEN THE OTHER FACILITIES AND NEEDS OF THE • Resident COMMUNITY, IT IS DEFINITELY NOT A PRIORITY AT THIS POINT. GROUP IS NOT BEING FAIR. THEY DON'T SEEM TO CARE ABOUT THE VOTERS' OPINIONS • Resident . .. HOPE THEY- MAKE SURE THAT IT CAN RUN WITHOUT BEING ANOTHER BURDEN ON TAX PAYERS. MUST BE SUCCESSFUL WITHOUT REDUX OF TAX REVENUES. AFFORDABLE PROGRAMMING, NEED FOR COMMUNITY PROGRAMS SO IT'S NOT EXCLUSIVELY USED BY CONVENTIONS • Resident . HOPEFULLY THEY'LL COME UP WITH A PLAN • Resident . . HOW WOULD IT BE PAID FOR? • Resident HURRY! • Resident • Resident I AM ALL FOR IT. WANT TO SEE THE RESULTS. I AM;FOR.IT, BUT I THINK IT NEEDS TO HAVE AMULTI-USE FUNCTION. • Resident I AM>JUST QUESTIONING WHETHER IT IS NEEDED RIG HT NOW WITH ALL THE BIG HOTELS GOING IN • Resident . I AM OPPOSED TO THE CONFERENCE CENTER. 122 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident I DID NOT SUPPORT IT. I DON'T THINK THEY HAVE PROVEN THAT IT WILL BE EFFECTIVE. • Resident I DID NOT VOTE FOR THE DESIGN SO FAR, THERE WILL BE MAINTENANCE ISSUES AND CONSTRUCTION ISSUES THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED. IN THE LONG RUN WILL IT BE VIABLE? • Resident I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S A GOOD IDEA. ITS PURPOSE SEEMS TO BE TO DRAW YEAR ROUND TOURISM,.BUT THERE'S NOTHING TO DO IN LATE FALL, EARLY WINTER, AND EARLY SPRING. I DON'T THINK ITS FAIR TO VISITORS AND I DON'T THINK THEY'D COME MORE THAN ONE TIME'. • Resident I DON'T THINK THEY NEED ONE. I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY. • Resident I FEEL A ROOF OVER THE ENTRANCES IS IMPORTANT, AT BOTH THE BOTTOM OR TOP OF THE CENTER. • Resident I FEEL THE CONFERENCE CENTER WILL BE A GREAT EXPENSE THAT THE TOWN DOES NOT NEED. • Resident I HATE THE IDEA OF A CONFERENCE CENTER AND THINK IT IS AN ABSOLUTE WASTE. • Resident I HOPE THE CURRENT MOVE TO PETITION FOR A RE-VOTE IS SUCCESSFUL. I WILL VOTE AGAINST IT. • Resident I LIKE THE DESIGN THAT THEY CAME UP WITH. • Resident I QUESTION THE NEED FORiT. IT'S LIKE VERY EXPENSIVE. • Resident I REALLY THINK THEY NEED TO DO MORE ONE--ON-ONE SO OF THE VOTING PUBLIC TO FIND OUT THAT THEY REACH MORE , HOW-THEY FEEL ABOUT THIS AND GET THEIR OPINION. • Resident I THINK i4 BIG HOTEL SHOULD COME IN AND BUILD A CONFERENCE. CENTER.'. • Resident I THINK A CENTER WOULD BRING MORE YEAR ROUND USAGE, AND I AM VERY SUPPORTIVE OF IT. • Resident I THINK IT IS GOING TO HELP THE TOWN. ,_ • Resident ,. I THINK IT'S A PIPE DREAM AND IT WILL BE,A FINANCIAL BURDEN`ON ALL OF US. • Resident I, THINK ITS IMPORTANT THAT THEY KEEP US UP ON WHAT'S GOINGON WITH WHETHER THEY'VE DECIDED TO GO AHEAD WITH IT. • Resident- I`TMINK`TWAT AS PROPOSED IT WOULD BE A MISTAKE TO BUILD THE CONFERENCE CENTER AT THE COST THAT IS ANTICIPATED. • Resident f THINK THAT ITS A GREAT IDEA. THAT YOU ARE DOING A SURVEY TO FIND MORE ABOUT IT. • Resident I THINK THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE IT. • Resident 1 THINK THAT WE SHOULD NOT GO FORWARD WITH lT. IT IS IDIOTIC. WE CAN'T AFFORD IT, AND WE ARE GOING TO LOSE MONEY ON IT. • Resident I TF-11NK THE DESIGNS ARE RIDICULOUS. THEY SHOULD GO FOR A TIMELESS LOGIC, NOT AN INTERESTING LOOK. • Resident L;THINK THEY NEED TO REDIRECT THE- MAINTENANCE ON THE THINGS THEY HAVE-FIRST BEFORE ADDING ANYTHING ELSE. 123 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident , ... _ .... _ ,. I THINK THEY SHOULD LOOK INTO WHETHER OR NOT IT CAN CARRY ITSELF FINANCIALLY. I DONT PARTICULARLY LIKE THE DESIGN. • Resident I THINK WE SHOULD DO A REVOTE ON IT • Resident . I WISH WE COULD VOTE AGAIN, SO I COULD DEFEAT IT THE . PROPOSED DESIGNS ARE REALLY UGLY AND EMBARRASSING • Resident . I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME PROGRESS MADE. THEY HAVE BEEN COLLECTING OUR TAX MONEY, BUT NOT DOING ANYTHING CONCRETE YET. • Resident I WOULD NOT GO TOO FAR OUT ON THAT DESIGN. THE MUSHROOM WAS KIND OF TOO PROGRESSIVE. THE NEW DESIGN DOES. NOT LOOK MUCH BETTER. FIND A HAPPY MEDIUM.. • Resident I WOULDN'T LIKE TO SEE IT TOO ELABORATE OR LARGE • Resident . ~ I WOULDN'T LIKE TO SEE TkiE TOWN MAKE A FOOL OF TPiEMSELVES BY BUILDING THE WHITE ELEPHANT • Resident ' . IF IT CANNOT SUSTAIN ITSELF, WE SHOULDN'T HAVE IT IT . SHOULDN'T BE SUBSIDIZED BY TAX PAYERS • Resident . IF ITS TO BE BUILT, IT NEEDS TO BE SENSITIVE TO THE LODGING COMMUNITY"IN VAIL. AND, IT NEEDS TO HAVE A BUSINESS MANAGER FROMTHE. HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY • Resident . I'M.DOUBTFUL THAT WE REALLY NEED IT • Resident . I'M~,INTERESTED TO SEE HOW IT'S GOING TO WORK WITH VAIL NOT BEING ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THOSE PEOPLE SUCH . AS NOT ENOUGH HOTELS AND PRODUCTS TO ACCOMMODATE THOSE PEOPLE, • Resident I'M~fLOOKING FORWARD TO IT • Resident . I'M ;OPPOSED TO IT. ~ • Resident I'M 'OPPO$ED TO IT. • Resident I'M SKEPTICAL...: • Resident IMPROVE,THINGS WE HAVE NOW INSTEAD OF FOCUSING ON OTHER THINGS, ESPECIALLY THINGS THAT ARE NOT NEEDED RIGHT AWAY. • Resident IN GENERAL, ITS A LOSING PROPOSITION • Resident . INSTINCTS SAY THERE'S-A GREAT OPPORTUNITY BUT SINCE , WE pON'T KNOW 7HE COST AND IF WE CAN CAP THE LOSSES _ .. _ , WE`SHOULD WAIT: TIMING>IS CRITICAL BECAUSE THE LONGER WE~UVAIT THE MORE LIKELY INTEREST RATES WILL RI SE AND MAKE PROJECT LESS FEASIBLE • Resident . IT APPEARS'TO BE A LITTLE SMALL FOR 81GGER CONFERENCES. HOW.MANY PEOPLE IS IT SUPPOSED TO .. . " HOLD? • Resident IT iS NEEDED AND THE TOWN WILL BENEFIT FROM IT • Resident . IT NEEDS~TO BE A PROPERLY FISCALLY RUN ENTITY • Resident , " tT SEEMS: TO BE PRICED VERY HIGH IN TERMS OF TH E,. DEVELOPMENT COSTS. • Resident -, • Res dent IT SMOULD,BE ABANDONED. IT'S A WASTE OF MONEY. i . ~ IT SHOULDN'T BE BUILT • ResidenfT . IT WOUl:D AFFECT MY 8t1SINESS GREATLY, SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT ACCOMPLISHED: .~ __,_ " -, '. 124 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident IT'S' A BAD°IDEA~ IT SHOULD NEVER BE BUILT. I~T WILL JUST ADD TO THE PROBLEMS WE HAVE. • Resident IT'S A BAD IDEA. • Resident IT'S A WASTE OF TAX PAYERS' MONEY. • Resident IT'S BEEN TWO YEARS, AND THEY NEED TO GET BUILT OR GIVE THE MONEY BACK. • Resident JUST BUILD IT. • Resident JUST PULL THE TOWN BACK TOGETHER AGAIN, SO IT'S A FUN PLACE TO LIVE AGAIN. • Resident JUST THAT I HOPE IT GOES AHEAD. • Resident JUST THAT I'D LIKE TO SEE IT GET BUILT. I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT WE'VE JUST HAD A SMALL GROUP LEGALLY CHALLENGE IT, BUT I'M FOR IT. • Resident LARGE GROUPS ARE NOT GOING TO COME THAT FAR FOR MEETINGS IN THE COLDER MONTHS. ALL I HAVE GOT IS COMPLAINTS FOR THE LARGE GROUPS. • Resident LENGTH OF TIME TO STUDY AND PROCESS INFO IS GETTING TOO LONG. JUST NEED TO GET IT DONE. • Resident ~ MAKE SURE THAT IT'S GOING TO PAY FOR ITSELF. AND THAT IT WILL BE USED A LOT. • Resident MAYBE GET INFO FROM AN OBJECTIVE SOURCE. • Resident MAYBE IN WINTER TIME. THE TOWN IS IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE. WASTE OF MONEY. • Resident MORE TRADITIONAL DESIGN. • Resident NEED TO PUT IN MORE THAN ADEQUATE PARKING. • Resident NEEDS TO BE PLANNED WELL. • Resident NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AT THIS TIME. • Resident NO COMMENTS. (9} . • Resident NO ONE CAN.MAKE A DECISION ABOUT ANYTHING " CONCERNING THE CONFERENCE CENTER. • Resident NO, BUT A GOOD IDEA. • Resident NO: (133} • Resident NONE, OTHER THAN SOME CONFLICTING THINGS GOING ON. • Resident - NONE. (33) •_ R.esident._ ... NOT A BELIEVER IN IT .- - - - -. - • Resident NOT A TRUE REVENUE SOURCE. IT COULD COST US MONEY. • Resident NOT AT THIS TIME. • Resident NOT COMFORTABLE WITH COST CONTROLS. TOO MANY PROS AND CONS AT THIS TIME. • Resident NOT NEEDED. IT WILL BEAN ECONOMIC LOSS. • Resident NOT SURE IF IT IS A GOOD IDEA. • Resident NOTHING MORE TO ADD: • Resident NOTHING MORE: • Resident NOW THAT WE KNOW THE TRUE COSTS OF RIINNING THE CENTER AND; 7HE MOST LIKELY GROUP THAT WILL BE DOING THAT, WE SHOULD SUBMIT TFIE ENTIRE PROJECT TO A VOTE AGAIN:.THIS-.VOTE WAS HELD ON THE BASIS OF INADEQUATE _ - 125 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 INFORMATION. • Resident QUESTION OF ACCURACY OF ECONOMIC FORECASTS • Resident RELATING TO THE FACILITY. READ A FEW ARTICLES BUT DON'T KNOW ENOUGH TO • Resident ANSWER. READ ABOUT IT IN THE PAPER, I THINK THEY SHOULD GO FOR A REALLY MODERN:DESIGN • Resident • Resident . SECOND ICE RINK? ARE THEY STILL DOING THIS? SHOULD NOT BE BUILT. LOSSES THAT WILL BE ACCRUED BY THE FACILITY. • Resident • Resident SOMETHING THAT THEY REALLY NEED. • Resident THE CONFERENCE CENTER IS UGLY. • Resident THE MUSHROOM BUILDING. • Resident THE PLANS ARE A BIT UGLY FOR THE BUILDING. • Resident THE TOWN WANTS IT. MONEY IS THERE, SO GET IT BUILT. THERE IS NO NEED FOR A CONFERENCE CENT ER. AS THE ONE THAT IS PLANNED IS MAINLY A FOOD OPERATION FOR LARGE GROUPS. VAIL DOES NOT NEED TO CATER TO LARGE GROUPS OVER 700 PEOPLE . IF THERE WAS A STRONG ECONOMIC NEED FOR THIS IT WOULp HAVE BEEN BUILT BEFOR • Resident E. . THEY HAD BETTER BE HIRING LOCAL PEOPLE TO RUN IT . BECAUSE I THINK THAT THE LOCALS HAVE THE EXPERIENCE TO HANDLE JT • Resident . THEY LOSE BUSINESS IF THEY DON'T SPEND THE MONEY FOR PEOPLE TO COME HERE:, I'D RATHER BE IN MEXICO OR CAL' IFORNIA ON THE BEACH ' . THERE S NOTHING IN THE TOWN TO MAKf? IT A DESTINATION RESORT YEAR ROUN • Resident D. THE MARRIOTT IS SO CROWDED, THEY CAN'T FIT EVERYONE . THEY. NEED TO BE CAREFUL ON PUBLIC LAND. IT SHOULD REMAIN AS IT IS AND SHOULD NOT BE A CONF ERENCE CENTER. • Resident TOO OVERBLOWN • Resident . VAIL IS 10 MILES LONG. ORIGINAL IS AT THE 1 MILE MARKER ANOTHER AT 2, BUT NONE FROM 5 TO 10 . IT HAS NOT BEEN A CRITICAL PROBLEM BUT THERE ARE MORE HOUSES AND BUSINESSES IN WEST VAIL. IT COULD LEAD TO A SERIOUS PROBLEM DOWN THE ROAD • Resident • Resident . VOTERS VOTED FOR IT. GET ON WITH IT. • Resident WE DON'T NEED A CONFERENCE CENTER AT ALL. WE HAVE ALREADY VOTED ON THIS MATTER AND THE • Resident , . CONFERENCE CENTER SHOULD BE BUILT. • Resident WE VOTED IT IN. IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN. WHY THE DELAY? WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO PUT ALL THE CA ' RS? THERE S NO PARKING. • Resident WHQ WILL PAY FOR THE.LOSS OF REVENUE WH EN 1T OCCURS AND: C.AN THIS LOSS BE COMPENSATED BY THE REVENUE THIS CONVENTION CENTER WILL GENERATE? HOW WILL RT 126 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident • Resident • Resident • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second-homeowner - • Second home_..owner • Second homeowner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second home owner • Second:home owner' • Second home owner • Second dome owner • Second home owner COMPENSATE FOR~THE~LOSS.OF REVENUE? WILL IT ACTUALLY HAPPEN? WOULD BE A GOOD ADDITION TO THE TOWN. WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE CHAIN RESTAURANTS COME HERE. BENEGANS WOULD BE WONDERFUL TO NAVE. BUSES ARE SOMETIMES FULL, SOMETIMES EMPTY, DEPENDING ON THE SEASON. SO ITS HARD TO SAY IF THEY'RE OVERCR0INDED~OR NOT: ` - CONFERENCE CENTER IS A STUPID IDEA. COST SHOULD BE FREE AND BE PAID BY HOTELS. ENCOURAGE THE CONTINUING OF THE CONCEPT AND TO DO IT WELL. I DON'T THINKJT'S NECESSARY. I DON'T WANT. THE. CONFERENCE CENTER IN VAIL. I LIKE GOOD ARCHITECTURE, AND THE ARCHITECTS ARE TRYING TO DO A GOOD JOB.. BUT, THE TOWN COUNCILS ARE BEING IDIOTS ABOUT IT. LET ARTISTS BE ARTISTS. LIKE THE DOBSON RECREATION CENTER WAS A MESS. IT'S A MESS FOR EXACTLY THE SAME REASONS: LEARN FROM IT. THINK I HAVE SPOKEN MY PEACE. I THINK IT'SA GOOD MOVE. I AM IN FAVOR OF IT. I THINKTHE CONFERENCE CENTER IS VERY IMPORTANT. IF IT WILL BE USED: - I'M NOT IMPRESSED WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL PLAN THAT HAS BEEN SELECTED. IT.IS A GOOD. IDEA.. IT'S A BAD IDEA. tT CAN ONLY BE USED IN OFF SEASON, AND YOU ARE NOT GOING TO GET PEOPLE IN VAIL OFF SEASON. ITS A STILLBORN IDEA THAT OUGHT TO BE ENDED NOW. IT'S NOT ECONOMICALLY VIABLE. ITS BEEN GONG ON FOR YEARS. ITS NOT NECESSARY.. ` MORE ABOUT FINANCIAL PLAN FOR CONFERENCE CENTER. NEEDING-MORE FOR.WEDDINGS AND FAMILY REUNIONS. NO ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. NO COMMENTS.- (3) NO' KNOWLEDGE OTHER THAN HAVING HEARD OF IT. THE NEWSPAPERS, VAIL DAILY, THAT'S IT. NO:~ (60) NO::-:I JUSTDO NOT WANT IT. NOT GOOD FOR VAIL. NOT MUCH IN~~FAVOR°OF IT. .NOT REALLY. NOT SURE WHAT ALL THE CONCERN IS ABOUT. DO NOT SEE IT A$ A BIG ISSUE. PUBLIC MONEY BEING SPENT,,1 OPPOSE IT. ,. ~, ~ .. 127 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner THE CONFERENCE BUSINESS IS VERY BUSY. AND THE PEOPLE WHO COME TO CONFERENCES HERE ARE MORE INTERESTED IN SKIING THAN.CONFERENCING • Second home owner . WE WOULD PREFER IF THE BUS STOP AT LION SHEAD REMAIN WHERE IT IS: I WOULDNT WANT THE BUS SCHEDULE TAMPERED WITH. • Second home owner WOULD BE NICE IF IT WOULD PAY FOR ITSELF. I THINK IT'S NEEDED. • Mail Survey AREA FOR PEOPLE WHO DO NOT SKI TO HANG OUT • Mail Survey DO WE NEED A CONFERENCE CENTER? • Mail Survey DO WE NEED ONE? HOW MUCH IS THIS GOING RAISE TAX'S , HOW WILL THIS BENEFIT LOCAL'S • Mail Survey DOES THE AVAILABLE LODGING MEET THE PLANNED CAPACITY OF THE CONF. CENTER?- • Mail Survey GO WITH IT - • Mail Survey I DONT THINK THE TOWN NEEDS TO COMPETE WITH THE HOTELS . • Mail Survey I THINK THE DESIGN IS EXTREMELY UGLY THE . ROOF LOOKS LIKE A WAVY PANCAKE AND THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH WINDOWS. I WOULDN'T WANT TO SPEND TIME INSIDE OR OUTSIDE.SUCH A BUILDING • Mail Survey . IT IS NOW OR NEVER AS INTEREST RATES ARE UP MUCH HAS , ALREADY BEEN DONE/SPEND, VAIL IS A MEGA ATTRACTION FOR BOTH NEW AND RETURN VISITORS • Mail Survey JUST WORRIED IT WILL.LOST MONEY AND NOT BE BOOKED • Mail Survey MAKE IT A LOG STRUCTURE -BLENDS EASIER • Mail Survey. RUNNING COSTS/OPERATIONAL DEFICITS DONTADD UP! , • Mail Survey THE~TOWN SHOULD NOT BUILD THE CENTER. THE CURRENT PROJECT WAS APPROVED ASSUMING THAT VRI WOULD PROVIDE THE LAND AND THE CENTER WOULD MAKE $ OR • Mail Surve BREAK EVEN. NEITHER OF THOSE. PREMISES IS BEING MET. y THINK IT SHOULD GO BACK TO,VOTERS WITH ALL THE NEW - FACTS " • Mail Survey .. ~ TOO , ; .. BAD ITS JUST~A CONFERENCE CENTER - IT FEELS LIKE .THERE COULD BE MORE PUBLIC FACILITIES ON THAT SITE • (Mail Survey ~- - - -- ~ VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS CONCEPT • Mail Suive y - - _. - --- - -__~- - --- WHERE IS IT._? _,._ .. 128 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 Thinking about the vision for the new Vail, and all the improvements that are occuring, how would ou describe our attitude? resident type comment - • Resident ALL THE BUILDING IS NECESSARY. • Resident AS A 35 YEAR RESIDENT OF VAIL, I FEEL THE TIME HAS COME FOR THE TRANSFORMATION OF LIONSHEAD BY INCORPORATING IT INTO THE TOWN OF VAIL. • Resident BECAUSE VAIL STAGNATED, THIS WILL EXCEED PAR AS A INTERNATIONAL DESTINATION. • Resident BUILD THE CONFERENCE CENTER. • Resident CONSTRUCTION DRIVES ME NUTS BUT I ACCEPT IT. • Resident DEVELOPMENT AND UPGRADING IS ALWAYS EXCITING TO SEE. WE HAVE TO KEEP UP AS A TOWN OR COMMUNITY. • Resident FOR 17 YEARS, THE IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN ON GOING WHICH IS A GOOD THING. • Resident FROM THE DRAWINGS THAT WE HAVE SEEN OF THE DEVELOPMENTS I'M VERY POSITIVE. • Resident GET IT DONE QUICK.. • Resident GETTING THE TRUCKS OUT OF THE VILLAGE IS IMPORTANT. • Resident GROWTH IS GOOD BUT THEN AGAIN IT'S NOT. • Resident HURRY. • Resident I AM CONCERNED WITH THE GROWTH OF THE CITY, THE GROWTH DEVELOPMENT. • Resident I AM CYNICAL. • Resident I AM WORRIED THAT EVERYTHING WILL BE TO BIG AND TOO TALL AND OUT OF SCALE: • Resident I DON'T REALLY HAVE AN INTEREST IN WHAT'S GOING ON. • Resident 1 ENJOY SEEING THE GROWTH. • Resident I FEEL LIKE IT'S MORE OF THE SAME. PEOPLE HERE DON'T THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX AS FAR AS PROBLEM SOLVING. • Resident I HAVE ISSUES IN TERMS OF THE LACK OF THE NUMBER OF OFFICERS OR THE LACK OF SERVICE OF THE OFFICERS IN THE VAIL • Resident I HAVE NO CHOICE. I THINK THEY SHOULD PUT BLEACHERS UP SO PEOPLE CAN~WATCH THE DEMOLITION.: - •Resident I HOPE IT DOESN'T TAKE TOO LONG BECAUSE WE'LL LOSE BUSINESS. • Resident I HOPE THAT IT DOESN'T LOSE ITS ORIGINAL CHARM BY MAKING EVERYTHING MORE EXPENSIVE. THERE NEEDS TO BE A VALUE TO THE HISTORY. • Resident I HOPE THE RETAIL ECONOMY MAKES US APPROVE OF THE RESULTS. • Resident I HOPE THEY FOLLOW THROUGH. • Resident I I DON'T KNOW. IT SEEMS LIKE THE WHOLE IDEA OF RENEWING VAIL IS KIND OF OLD BUT I'M EXCITED FOR DEVELOPMENT AND MORE SKI RESORTS. • Resident I JUST DON'T THINK THINGS ARE GOING WELL IN VAIL RIGHT NOW. THERE'S TO MUCH CROWDING ANDOVER POPULATION: 129 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident f JUST THINK THAT ALL THE IMPROVEMENTS OF 7HE NEW DEVELOPMENT ARE NEEDED AND LONG OVERDUE. • Resident I JUST THINK THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE LODGES AND THE STREETSCAPE PROGRAMS AND ALL THE CONSTRUCTION IS JUST TERRIFIC. • Resident I LIKE THE PROSPECT OF A NEW ARCHITECTURE AND THE RENEWAL OF A TOWN THAT'S NEARLY 40 YEARS OLD AND THE PROSPECT OF ATTRACTING PEOPLE THAT WILL SUPPORT OUR BUSINESSES • Resident . I PREFERRED. THE MORE NATURAL.LOOKING:OONFERENCE CENTER `; ; , DESIGN: • Resident I REALLY THINK IT'S REQUIRED TO KEEP THE TOWN OF VAIL GOING • Resident . I REALLY THINK WE HAD A LOT OF FACILITIES THAT NEEDED TO BE UPGRADED AND THAT'S FINALLY HAPPENING. WE WERE LOSING THAT ASPECT OF BEING A RESORT TOWN THAT PEOPLE LIKE COMING TO • Resident . I THINK ALL THE CHANGES ARE VERY IMPORTANT. IT'S GOOD IN THE LONG RUN AND CONSTRUCTION IS HARD TO LIVE WITH • Resident . I THINK IMPROVEMENTS ARE MUCH NEEDED: ` • Resident I THINK IT IS,GREAT. I JUST HOPE THE BUBBLE DOESN'T BURST THAT THERE'S NO THE REAL ESTATE BUBBLE THE NE . W EMPLOYEE HOUSING GETS A ONE AND ALL OTHER DEVELOPMENTS GET A FOUR •. Resident . I THINK IT WILL REJUVENATE THE TOWN ANDBRING MORE YEAR ROUND BUSINESS. ' • Resident I THINK ITS EXTREMELY SAD THAT THEY WILL MAKE IT LOOK LIKE AUSTRIAN VILLAGE. IT NEEDS AN `AMERICAN DESIGN NOT ONE LIKE BEAVER CREEK'S PSEUDO AUSTRIAN VILLAGE. - • Resident 1 THINK IT'STIME VAIL HAD A FACE LIFT. ' = .'` • Resident I THINK SOME OF THE TOWN-13 AGING,AND THIS WILL HELP BRING IT UP AND Al?RACT~ MORE TOURISTS AND MAKE IT MORE"CONVENIENT Resident` .. I THINK THAT BUILDING HEIGHTS. $HOULR BE KEPT LOW LIKE A VILLAGE . OTHERWISE, IT'LL BECOME A DARK CANYON LIKE BEAVER CREEK • Resident . I THINK THAT LIONSHEAD NEEDS`TO GET REDEVELOPED • Resident ~ . ~ I THINK THAT THE LIONS HEAD REDEVELOPMENT 1S GOING TO LOOK LIKE BEAVERCREEK AND ITS NOT GOING TO HAVE ITS OWN IDENTITY • Resident . I THINK THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE GOING UP ARE GOING TO BE ASSETS _ _ _ ~. TO THE TOWN~OF VAIL' AND THE PEOPLE:WHO LIVE HERE. I THINK WHATS - HAPPENING WITH THE RESORTSAND-LIONSHEAD'IS ALL VERY EXCITING • Resident . 1 THINK THEIM'RROVEMENT$ WILL BRING MORE BUSINESS Resident . I THINK THEY ARE IDIOTS SELLING THEIR SOUL TO THE DEVIL • Resident . . 1 THINK THEY ARE TRYING TO IMPROVE THE IMAGE OF THE TOWN .. SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE DONE ABOUT EMPTY STORE FRONTS • Resident . , I THINK THEY'RE BRINGING ABOUT IMPROVEMENT THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE. • Resident.. I THINK THEY'RE DOING A GREAT JOB SO FAR: • Resident; _ - _ ; I THINK-VAIL IS;A WORLp CLASS RESORT AND IT REMAINS ON THE FOREFRONT QF-THAT WAVE: • Resident,-, - . . I THINK VAIL WAS OLD AND IT NEEDED TO t3E UPGRADED AND WE'RE . DOING THAT NOW. ~ . - . - ;: . 130 Town of Vail Community Survey 2Q05 • Resident I THINK WE BECAME DATED BUT NOW THE UPGRADES AS FAR AS EATING ESTABLISHMENTS ARE CONCERNED IS GOOD. WE.HAVE HAD INTERNATIONAL COMPLIANCE CONCERNING OUR RESTAURANTS. • Resident I WANT TO SEE A CHANGE IN VAIL TO MAKE IT LOOK BETTER. • Resident I WOULD LOOK FORWARD TO THE LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT. • Resident IF IT GETS DONE I'LL BE HAPPY: • Resident IF IT IS DONE WELL I THINK IT IS A GOOD IDEA. • Resident I'M ALL FOR IT AS. LONG AS WE ARE MODERATE AND DON'T GO TOO FAST. • Resident I'M EXCITED ABOUT SEEING A NEW CENTER FOR THE TOWN AND A NEW CORE OF PEOPLE. • Resident I'M EXCITED ABOUT THE REDEVELOPMENT OF LIONSHEAD. •Resident I'M EXCITED ABOUT WHAT IS COMING. • Resident I'M EXCITED THE SKI COMPANIES HAVE: COMMITTED TO KEEPING THE TOWN IN THE TOP ECHELON OF RESORTS NATIONWIDE. • Resident I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT IT'S TAKING PLACE. • Resident PM HOPING THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO ATTRACT VISITORS DURING THE_ SUMMER. • Resident I'M IN BETWEEN EXCITED AND I'M, LOOKING FORWARD TO WHAT'S GOING ' ' ON.. • Resident I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVING IT COMPLETED. • Resident I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE CONSTRUCTION GETTING UNDER WAY. • Resident I'M NOT CLEAR. WHAT THE FINAL PICTURE WILL LOOK LIKE. ' • Resident. I'M NOT EXCITED ABOUT THE BEGINNING PHA$E BUT OVERALL IT WILL BE GOOD. ~ Resident I'M VERY ANTL-CONFERENCE.CENTER AND ANTI-DEFICIT AND IRRESPONSIBLE SPENDING ON THE WRONG'THINGS AND ABOUT "IGNORING WHAT,THEVOTERS WANT. _ , • Resident UT AFRAID THE CONFERENCE CENTER IS NOT IN I'M VERY EXCITED B , THAT SAME REALM OF DESIGN AND WILL LOOK OUT OF PLACE. • Resident I'M VERY HAPPY ABOUT REDEVELOPMENT.Y ... • Resident IT ADDRESSES MULTI-MILLIONAIRES NOT ME. , • Resident ~ IT CONCERNS ME THAT TAXES WILL BE RAISED: ° >: " • Resident IT IS VERY; NECESSARY.:,. , • Residenf IT,LQOK$ LIKE IT WILL BE A GOOD. IDEA TO BUILD IT. • Resident- ... IT MAKES THE TOWN LESS.A T01NN~AND,MARE A COMMERCIAL ENGINE FOR VISITORS WHICH MAYBE WHAT IT NEEDS TO DO TO SURVIVE. _BUT, ' ITS'NOT A COMMUNITY: I'M VERY OPPOSED: THE DESIGN FOR CROSSROADS. • Resident '' IT WILL BE REALLY NICE WHEN THEY'RE FINISHED. • Resident IT WILL GIVE A WHOLE FRESH LOOK TO LIONSHEAD AND VAIL. • Resident IT WILL MAKE"THE'TOWN`OF VAIL NICE: ` • Resident IT WILL MAKE; VAIL A BETTER COMMUNITY TO VISIT AND LIVE IN. •Resident IT'S 100% FOCUSED ON RICH PEOPLE AND DOES NOT IN ANY WAY . ;. IMPROVE THE LOT OF' 90%°;OF THE PEQPLE WHO t_IVE:HERE. IN FACT; IT MAKES IT HARDER: PARKING AND TOWNSERVICES WILL COST MORE BUT ..MY PAY, WILL STAY THE SAME AND.HEALTH~INSURANCE WILL BE HARDER TO GET. • Resident IT'S. A MUCH NEEDED UPLIFT IN AESTHETICS. . _ _. 131-" Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident 'IT'S ALL BOILING DOWN NOW TO IF THEY FOLLOW THROUGH WITH WHAT THEY TELL US IT WILL BE GOOD. BUT, IT WAS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN MANY YEARS AGO AND IT NEVER DID. • Resident IT'S ALL VERY POSITIVE 8UT THE TOWN COUNCIL IS SOMETIMES TOO CAUTIOUS. • Resident ITS DEFINITELY GOING TO BE AN IMPROVEMENT AND A GOOD THING • Resident . IT'S GOING iN THE RIGHT DIRECTION BUT IT WILL TAKE A WHILE • Resident . IT'S GOING TO BE A FINE LINE BALANCING THE GROWTH FACTOR • Resident- . IT'S,GOING TO 6E A HARD ROAD:.WITH A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION FOR THE NEXT COUPLE YEARS. • Resident IT'S GOOD TO UPDATE. IT HELPS IN INCREASING THE ECONOMY IT , FACILITATES BUSINESS GROWTH AND IT'S A GOOD THING. HOWEVER IT , WILL TAX THE ENVIRONMENT. • Resident IT'S HIGHLY NEEDED AND OVERDUE. • Resident IT'S LONG OVER DUE. • Resident IT'S LONG OVERDUE AND THE FIRST STEP OF A CONTINUED GROWTH AND CHANGE PROCESS. • Resident IT'S NOT AIMED AT PEOPLE LIKE ME, MIDDLE CLASS PEOPLE WHO.HAVE LIVED'HERE A LONG TIME. THERE'S NO AFFORDABLE MEDICAL CARE AND NOT ENOUGH ASSISTED LIVING. • Resident IT'S NOT ALL GOING TO GET COMPLETED SO STOP TRYING TO MAKE US INTO AN EASTERN CITY. • Resident IT'S REALLY-GOOD TO SEE INVESTMENT, REVITALIZATION AND AFFORDABILITY: • Resident IT'S SELF CENTERED AND ITS ECONOMICALLY MOTIVATED. I'D LIKE TO SEE.SOMETHING DONE FOR THE YOUTH OF THE VALLEY Res • ident . ITS TIME FORA FACE LIFT. PEOPLE SHOULD GET MORE FOR THE MONEY THEY HAVE TOPAY. • Resident IT'S TIME FOR-NAIL TO REINVENT. • Resident IT'S TIME TO UPDATE THE SKI AREA. • Resident IT'S WAY TOO EXPENSIVE. ALL..THE RULES IN THE AREA MAKE IT WAY TOO EXPENSIVE. THE PEOPLE 1N THE AREA ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PUT UP WITH THE INCONVENIENCE UNTIL ITS BUILT. • Resident I'VE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME $O IMPROVEMENT OF ANY KIND OS AN ~ EXCITING.ISSUE. UPGRADING iS:A G0017:THING: • Resident JUST THAT I'M GLAD WE ARE FINALLY GETTING UPDATED • Resident . LIONSHEAD NEEDED UPGRADING. ;;IT IS TIME.FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH `T P P . O KEE U AS A WORLD CLASS RESORT IT'S NEEDED • Resident . LOOK OUT FOR TRAFFIC FLOW AND KEEP PEDESTRIAN WALKWAYS SEPARATE FROM ROADWAYS. • Resident ,.- <,: MY WORRY IS THAT WE WILL APPROVE.OF TOO MUCH DENSITY' AND NOT " `~ . HAVE ENOUGH INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT IT: ALSO I'M WORRIED - , THAT THE TOWN WILL BECOME TOO MUCH LIKE BEAVER CREEK • Resident . NO COMMENT. - . • Resident NO COMMENTS • Resident NO COMMENTS: • Resident NO COMMENTS. ' 132 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Residenf • Resident • Resident • Resident NO,1'M JUST WAITING. NO. (108) NONE. (34) ON THE PLAN FOR THE NEW DAM THEY SHOULD GIVE THE FIRST OPPORTUNITY TO GET INTO THAT BUILDING TO THE PEOPLE WHO WERE THERE:DURING THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS ALSO THOSE SMALL BUSINESSES. • Resident OVERALL, THE TOWN AND RESORT ARE DOING THINGS TO MAINTAIN ..:. -THEMSELVES FOR THE,NEXT:10-15 YRS. -SINCE WE OWN A HOUSE, HERE THINK THATS GOOD. ASPEN CONSTANTLY FIGHTS BETWEEN RESORT TOWN AND REAL TOWN. VAIL HAS DONE THE RIGHT THINGS TO BE PROGRESSIVE: . , • Resident° REAL ESTATE-WISE IT WILL.ADD VALUE BUT WE NEED TO KEEP AS MUCH CHARACTER ABOUT TOWN. AS WE CAN. ;. .,. • Resident RECONSTRUCTION KEEPS BEING POSTPONED WITH ALL THE FIGHTING AND ADVERSE COMMENTS BACK AND FORTH.. IT'S GOTTEN TO THE POINT OF WHO CARES? (CARE BUT THERE'S.TOQ MUCH ACRIMONY. STOP FIGHTING AND FIGURE OUT WHAT HAS TO BE DONE.. • Resident ` ~ SOME OF THE THINGS I'VE SEEN SO FAR ARE NICE. ~ Resident SOME THINGS ARE JUST TO BRING-VAIL INTO THE 20TH CENTURY AND OTHERS ARE.NEW AMENITIES AND. A NEW OUTLOOI<:TO CREATE MORE A ` OF TOWN FEEL. • Resident SOMETIME 1T SHOULD BE CONSIDERED THAT THE BUSES SHOULD BE- PAID FOR'AND NOT. CARRIED BY THE TAX, PAYERS 1N THIS TOWN. • Resident SUPPORT THE. BUSINESSES. • Resident THE APPROVED IMPENDING PROJECTS. SHOULD NOT BE OVER 35. FEET. : THE ARCHITECTURE IS NOT IN KEEPING WITH,THE EUROPEAN` _, . ATMOSPHERE. THE BUILDINGS ARE TOO LARGE. • Resident THE COBBLESTONES ON BRIDGE STREET ARE A PAIN.:; • Resident THE FACELIFT IS IMPORTANT BUT KEEP THE GOOD SERVICE. THE PRICE IS:NOT.SO OUTRAGEOU3,F.OR.LOCALS TO USE`THE`FACILITIES. LOCAL. MERCHANT SPACE'COSTS MAY QRIVE SOME;OUT~01= BUSINESS AND THAT WOULD BE SAD AND WRONG:.. WIE. MAY. GET TWO FANCY AND COSTLY . . FOR PEOPLE;. • Resident UE 1'M EXCITED.ABOUT NEW V / D O ' - DUE OV R ARE WAY THAT REN OAT ONS • Resident THE MESS, THEY ARE MAKING WHILETHEY CONSTRUCT IS DISTURBING. PERS WHERE THEY ARE BUILDING. WE COULD USE MORE STREETSWEE , • Resident THE ONLY BAD PART IS THE:SUMMER.MESS WHILE RENOVATION IS GOING ON. • Resident S ARE TOO, HIGH AND IT WILL BECOME A PLACE I ES. ONLY FOR BSL ONA R • Resident - THERE IS GOING TO BE A CONSTRUCTION ZONE,ALL SUMMER LONG.. , • Resident THERE'S A LOT OF~ BUILDINGS IN TOWN;THAT ARE,WORN DOWN AND.. SHOULD BE BETTER MAINTAINED.. ITS GOOD TO SEE MORE MARKET` - PRODUCTS:.- `- _, , • Resident ~ , LONG OVERDUE CHANGES NEED,TO HAPPEN.. THE TOWN OF VAIL: THESE , NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED'IN:THISAND-THE QLD BUILDINGS NEED TO GO; . 133 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident THESES ARE MAJOR IMPROVEMENTS. • Resident THEY ARE TRYING TO DO TOO MUCH AT THE SAME TIME WITH THE BUILDINGS, ROADS AND REMODELING. • Resident THEY BUILD HOUSING FOR EMP. LOYEES THAT LOOKS LIKE A GHETTO • Resident . THEY JUST INVESTED TOO MUCH MONEY IN IT, ALTHOUGH IT'S A GOOD IDEA. THEY'RE PUTTING MORE CONDOS IN AND STUFF THAT CATERS MORE TO THE, WEALTHY VS THE ALL AMERICAN FAMILY • Resident . THEY NEED TO ADD LIFT ACCESS FROM EAST VAIL. ITS VERY IMPORTANT. • Resident THEY NEED.TO LISTEN TO THE PUBLIC INSTEAD OF THE TOWN COUNCIL • Resident . THEY'RE GOING TO PRICE THEMSELVES OUT SO NO BODY CAN PAY • Resident . THEY'RE HEADING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THEY HAVE TO MAKE SURE THEY DON'T OVERLOOK. THEY NEED TO FOCUS ON GENERATING A BETTER SHOPPING EXPERIENCE FOR PEOPLE. BUSINESS INCENTIVES MAYBE NECESSARY • Resident . THEY'RE MAKING AS LITTLE IMPACT ON GUESTS AS THEY CAN • Resident . THEY'RE TOO FOCUSED ON TOURISM. THERE'S NO COMBINED ZONING FOR YEAR ROUND OFFICES AND BUSINESSES: • Resident THIS SORT OF.HOLDING ONTO THE DREAM IS STRANGE. WHAT SEEMS TO ME TO BE HAPPENING IS VAIL IS PUTTING UP ALL OF THIS OPPRESSIVE BAVARIAN LOOK, AND NOT LETTING IT GROW NATURALLY BY KEEPING SOME OF THE OLD STUFF AND ADDING TO IT. • Resident THIS TOWN IS GETTING OLD, THE BUILDINGS ARE SUCH THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF,PEOPt:E,NOT COMING... • Resident UPDATING DOES NEED TO OCCUR IN THE AREAS WHERE IT IS NEEDED • Resident . VAIL HAS TO SPRUCE UP ITS SHOPPING.' THE TV STATION IS QUITE GOOD IN RELATION TO OTHER TOURIST SPOTS. • Resident VAIL IS LOSING THE "OLD CHARM.". CHANGE IS NOT ALWAYS GOOD • Resident . VAIL NEEDS TO STAY. IN THE FOREFRONT, STAY COMPETITIVE IN THE SKI RESORT INDUSTRY AND KEEP UP WITH THE TIMES • Resident . VAIL SHOULD TRY TO GET HIGHER IN THE MARKET • Resident . WE JUST NEED TO BE PATIENT. . • Resident WE MAY BE REACHING TOO HIGH AND MAKING THINGS EVEN MORE EXPENSIVE, MAKING THINGS TOO ELITIST • Resident . WE NEED A CHANGE. •Resident __ -.,.~ __ , ....._ ...... .. _ . WE NEED CHANGE, CHANGE IS GOOD. • Resident WE NEED:NEW.BUILDINGS. WE NEED.NEW STOREFRONTS AND ACTIVITIES. I LIKE THE IDEAS THAT HAVE BEEN PROMOTED • Resident . WE NEED TO UPGRADE THE TOWN OF VAIL AND ARE ON OUR WAY TO . DOING THIS. • Resident WE SHOULD NEVER LEAVE THE CHARM OF A SMALL VILLAGE WE ALSO . SHOULD MAINTAIN THE SKI AREA. WE NEED MORE AND DIFFERENT ACTIVITIES FOR THE CHILDREN AND THE ELDERLY - •Resident WE WILL SET THE BENCHMARK FOR ALL SKI RESORTS. CONSUMERS ' WANT A HIGH LEVEL OF QUALITY. ~; ~• • Resident WHAT I AM HEARING ABOUT THE FUTURE IS VERY GOOD. 134 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident WHY DID THEY BUILD THE GYMNASTIC CENTER AND TAKE THE SWIMMING POOL AWAY? I THINK A LOT OF US WOULD RATHER HAVE THE POOL ' INSTEAD. • Resident YES, THE NEW LIONSHEAD THING IS TAKING-AWAY FROM A LOT OF PERKS FOR THE EMPLOYEES. • Second home owner AGAIN, WE NEED TO GET BACK TO CONTROLLED DEVELOPMENT. • • Second home owner I AM ALWAYS EXCITED WHEN A COMMUNITY TRIES TO IMPROVE ITSELF AND- ITS LONG PAST DUE. IT IS IMPORTANT TO IMPROVE APPEARANCE AND INFRASTRUCTURE. • Second home owner I AM NOT INFORMED ENOUGH ABOUT A LOT OF THINGS: • Second home owner I AM NOT SURE EVERYTHING IS NECESSARY. • Second home owner I DON'T WANT TO SEE THE VIEW OF THE MOUNTAIN BLOCKED AS IT IS FROM THE.PLAZAS IN BEAVER CREEK.. • Second home owner I HOPE IT GETS STARTED THIS YEAR`AND FINISHES (]UICKLY. • Second home owner I JUST THINK THAT IT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY NEED TO DO AND I THINK IT WILL HELP THE TOWN A LOT. ~ ~. • Second home owner I LIKE.THE LIONSHEAD DEVELOPMENT MOST. • Second home owner I LIKE VAIL AND I WANT TO SEE IT CONTINUE TO THRIVE. • Second home owner. I LOVE THE OLD VAIL. I LOVE THE EUROPEAN-.VILLAGE ASPECT. • Second home owner I THINK IT IS A GOOD PLAN: - •Second home owner I THINK IT'S GOING TO BRING SOME-NEW BUSINESS INTO TOWN WHICH THE TOWN NEEDS. IT WILL BRING MORE SHOPPING VARIETY FOR ` PEOPLE AND WILL "PULL PEOPLE IN." • Second home owner I THINK IT'S.GOING TQHELI? THE WHOLE ECONOMY. lT SURE HELPED REAL ESTATE PRICES. • Second home owner I THINK IT'S GREAT THAT THEY ARE IMPROVING THAT PART OF VAIL BUT I. THINK THEY NEED TO PAY ATTENTION TO ZONING FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE ALREADY THERE: • Second home owner I THINK ITS SOMETHING THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE A LONG TIME AGO. VAIL HAS LET THE VILLAGE FALL WAY BELOW AVERAGE SKI RESORT STANDARDS. ~ , • Second home owner I THINK THE LIONSHEAD AREA WILL BE NICE ONCE UPGRADED: • Second home owner f THINK THE-VAIL ASSOCIATIONIS TAKING OVER THE TOWN: • Second home owner I THINKTHEY ARE DOING'A REALLY GOOD JOB': Second_liome.owner._I-THINK-THEY ARE HEADING THE RIGHT DIRECTION. BUT-IT NEEDS TO~ - - - - - _. SPEED UP. • Second home owner I'THINK WE'RE HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. • Second.home owner I THINK WE'RE INTERESTED IN THE LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT. WE'RE SORRY THAT THEY'RE TEARING DOWN THE CASTLE BUT WE'RE HAPPY THAT THEY'RE PUTTING A SKATING RINK IN.THE CENTER. • Second home owner I'M A SENIOR SO MY USE OF MANY FACILITIES IS SOMEWHAT LIMITED. MY MAIN CONCERN IS THE-COST OF THE FACILITIES TO'I'ATRONS. - • Second home owner I'M CONCERNED IT MIGHT GET TOO BIG:- WE NEED MORE PARKING. • Second home owner I'M' JUST EXCITED TO SEE VAIL~GROW BUT THE COST_ IS A BIG CONCERN TO TAX PAYERS.: -_ _ • Second home owner I'M NOT SURE. SO MUCH`MONEY NEEDSTO~BE SPENT TO MAKE THINGS BETTER BUT I, AM EXCITED TO SEE THE. FUTURE. 135.` Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner IT tS IMPORTANT TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR WORKERS • Second home owner . IT NEEDS TO BE MOVED FORWARD AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. ' • Second home owner IT WILL BE NICE TO HAVE A NEW UPDATED LIONS HEAD BUT A LOT OF IT IS A WASTE OF MONEY. HEATED STREETS ARE SILLY. • Second home owner IT'S A MEANS OF UPDATING THE TOWN ESPECIALLY LIONSHEAD. IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE WHEN IT'S ALL FINISHED. • Second home owner IT'S ABOUT TIME. • Second home owner ITS ABOUT TIME. • Second home owner IT'S ABOUT TIME. VAIL WAS STARTING TO LOOK OLD AND SHABBY. WE NEED MORE MASS TRANSIT IN THE FORM OF RAIL, ANY KIND OF TRAIN • Second home owner . IT'S GOOD TO SEE THE PLANNING FINALLY TAKING SHAPE. THE ACTION THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF TALK AND FINALLY THEY ARE DOING SOMETHING. • Second home owner IT'S TIME FOR THE UPGRADES AND REDEVELOPMENT. • Second home owner IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE. • Second home owner JUST DO SOMETHING WITH THE CROSSROADS LIKE AN OUTDOOR ICE ARENA. • Second home owner NO COMMENT. • Second home owner NO COMMENT. • Second home owner NO. (42) • Second home owner NONE. (5) • Second home owner NOPE. • Second home owner NOPE. • Second home owner NOT REALLY. • Second home owner SEE TO IT. VAIL IS OPEN TO MORE PEOPLE AND HAVE A LITTLE MORE CONTROL OF YOUNG PEOPLE DRINKING TOO MUCH. THAT COULD '. DESTROY THEIR LIVES. • Second home owner THE APPEARANCE OF THE VAIL AREA IS DATED: I WANT AN ICE SKATING RINK. THEY MAY SPEND TOO MUCH ON THINGS THAT PEOPLE WILL NOT USE. • Second home owner THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE NICE BUT ITS ELIMINATING A LOT OF RESIDENTS. • Second home owner THE REASON FOR BEING SOMEWHAT EXCITED IS THE WE NEED TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS IN VAIL AND LIONSHEAD" BUT I HATE TO SEE THINGS GET _ _.. _ _ SO_PRICEY THAI THE_AVERAGE CITIZEN. CAN'T AFFORD IT. • Second home owner THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF EXPENSIVE CONDO CONSTRUCTION. • Second home owner THEY SPENT TOO MUCH MONEY ON PR INSTEAD OF THE EFFORT OF REFURBISHING AND FIXING THINGS. THEY SHOULD PUT LESS EFFORT INTO SURVEYS, ETC. • Second home owner THEY'RE TURNING US INTO A DISNEYLAND CLONE. • Second home owner VAIL IS STARTING TO SHOW ITS AGE AND I THINK WHAT THEY'RE DOING IS JUST VERY EXCITING AND WILL CREATE INTEREST IN VAIL. YOU CAN ALWAYS IMPROVE ON PERFECTION. •. Second home owner WE ARE RIGHTON THE BORDERLINE. LIONSHEAD WAS IN EXTREME NEED OF REFURBISHMENT. 136 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner~WE-LOOKED AT THEN-IONSHEAD PL"ANBAND THEY.WERE VERY EXCITING. AND AS FAR AS THE CROSSROADS, WE'LL-JUST HAVE TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS WITH THAT. • Second home owner WHAT.THEY'RE DOING IS GOING TO IMPROVE THE OVERALL EXPERIENCE OF VAIL. I THINK THE LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO BE CHARMING. • Second home owner YOU HAVE TO UPGRADE TO KEEP UP WITH CURRENT TIMES AND THE ECONOMY SO UPGRADING IS A NECESSARY CONDITION TO PARTAKE OF. • -Mail Survey ADD MORE PARKING, BUSES TOO CROWDED : : • Mail- Survey . . CONSTRUCTION BRINGS NOISE; POLLUTION MORE DIRTY STREETS. . • Mail Survey DIDN'T THINK WE NEEDED SNOW FREE STREETS IN TOV -TOO MUCH $ • Mail Survey DO IT AND STOP CHANGING THEIR MINDS • Mail Survey DON'T PAY FOR IT ON`TME BACK$:OF EMPLOYEES • Mail Survey DON?WANT LH TO BECOME LIKE BC -RITZY, STERILE AND ONLY VIBRANT - WHEN SOMETHING IS PLANNED: • Mail Survey GOOK FOR THOSE BUSINESSES THAT CAN~STAY BUT:.O.URS HAS TO ,; . LEAVE • Mail Survey I AM CONCERNED. THAT.VAIL WILL LOST ITS UNIQUE. CHARM AND BECOME MORE LIKE BEAVER. 'CREEK • Mail Survey JUST WATCHING AND LISTENING • Mail Survey LIOIVSHEAD DESIGN IS TOO DENSE -LOOKS LIKE BEAVER CREEK. AFRAID SAME, WILL HAPPENTO VAIL VILLAGE. ~. .,: Mail Survey PARKING PROBLEMS!. • Mait Survey THE NOISE:- QUIET; LEISURELY VAIL? _ • Mail, Survey TOO MUCH CONSTRUCTION; . t Mail Survey VUHAT'A WONQERFUL TOWN THIS IS GOING TO BE •.Ma~I:Survey ': .WHAT IS BEING, DONE FOR FAMILIES ,LOCAL AND VISITING? Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 Looking ahead to the next three years in Vail, what do you think the two or three biggest challenges will be? resident type comment • Resident ACCOMMODATING. GUESTS WITH ALL THIS CONSTRUCTIONS AND REDUCING NOISE ON I-70. MAKE VAIL ATTRACTIVE. TO ALL THE RESIDENTS. • Resident AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND MANAGING THE REDEVELOPMENT • Resident . AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AFFORDABLE PARKING CONGESTION ON I , -70, I THINK THE MONORAIL IS RIDICULOUS: • Resident AFFORDABLE HOUSING, PARKING PROBLEMS, AND HELPING CONTROL THE POPULATION. • Resident AFFORDABLE HOUSING. • Resident. AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I-70 NORTH THE NOISE • Resident , . AFFORDABLE HOUSING: RECREATION FACILITIES. AND PARKING PROBLEM.. THE PARKING HAS TO BE ABLE TO ADEQUATELY PARK VEHICLES ON WEEKENDS DURING THE WINTER TIME • Resident . AFFORDABLE HOUSING. TOO MUCH BUILDING ATONE TIME • Resident . AFFORDABLE REAL ESTATE. THAT'LL NEVER HAPPEN • Resident . ALL THE CONSTRUCTION.. • Resident ALL THE LOCALS ARE MOVING DOWN VALLEY. THE BIGGEST CHALLENGE IS TO KEEP THE SENSE OF COMMUNITY WHILE STAYING ECONOMICALLY VIABLE. • Resident BASICALLY ALL THE REDEVELOPMENT AND STILL KEEP THE TOWN OPEN _FOR BUSINESS DURING DEVELOPMENT. CONTINUE-TO PROMOTE ITSELF, NEW PEOPLE CHOOSE TO COME HERE INSTEAD OF OTHER PL ACES. THE RIGHT DECISIONS HAVE BEEN MADE ITS GROWN BETTER A L • Resident , , L AROUND. BECOMING TOO 2ND HOMEOWNER. FOCUSED. LOSS OF YEAR-ROUND BUSINESSES: CONFERENCE CENTER SHOULD BE A GREAT OPPORTUNITY •.Resident . BRINGING BUSINESS BACK TO VAIL • Resident . BUILDING THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO MATCH THE GROWTH KEEPING THE . , SCHOOL QUALITY~UP TO MATCH THE GROWTH • Resident . CHILD EDUCATION PROGRAMS, ACCESSIBILITY. WE CAN'T SKI IF IIVE CAN'T PARK. OVERCROWDING AND ALREADY OVERCROWDED BUSINESS ~~ DISTRICT. • Resident CLEANING THE,-RIVER; PARKING, BETTER OPTION FOR LOCALS AND EVERYTHING ELSE SEEMS FINE. ~ "" • Resident • Resident CLEANLINESS, BRINGING IN BUSINESSES, LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT. • Resident COMPETING WITH DOWN VALLEY, SO MORE PEOPLE WILL~BE IN VAIL. COMPLETE A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION UVITHOUT ALIENATING A LOT OF VISITORS: KEEP A SMALL TOWN FEEL • Resident . COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE OF THE CONFERENCE CENER . FIND LONG TERM SOLUTION FOR PARKING ISSUES • Resident . COMPLETING ALL..THE CONSTRUCTION IN LIONSHEAD AND T . HE VILLAGE. ~ SOLVING THE PARKING PROBLEMS. • Resident COMPLETING: ALL THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS ON,TAP BY THE TOWN AND. PRIVATE DEVELOPERS.; - • Resident- , : _ , COMPLETING CONSTRUCTION IN A TIMELY MANNER. 138 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident COMPLETING LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT. • Resident COMPLETING RENOVATIONS AND KEEPING COSTS UNDER CONTROL. AFFORDABLE HOUSING. CONTINUING TO ATTRACT VISITORS. • Resident COMPLETING THE BIG PROJECTS. • Resident CONFERENCE CENTER AND PARKING AND OR VILLAGE CONGESTION. • Resident CONFERENCE CENTER AND SAVING MONEY. • Resident CONFERENCE CENTER AND WEST VAIL FIRE STATION, AND HIGHWAY NOISE. • Resident CONFERENCE CENTER IS NOT A GOOD IDEA. THIS I BELIEVE IS A MAJOR CONCERN. I THINK ITS A BAD IDEA. • Resident CONGESTED TRAFFIC ON I-70. ANOTHER PROBLEM IS PEOPLE NOT CLEANING UP AFTER THEIR DOGS. THE PEOPLE ARE THE PROBLEM, NOT THE DOGS. • Resident CONSTRUCTION AND ITS IMPACT ON TRAFFIC AND PARKING. AND MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. • Resident CONSTRUCTION GOING ON. CONTROVERSY ABOUT THE CONVENTION CENTER. • Resident CONSTRUCTION ON 1-70. • Resident CONSTRUCTION, COST OF HOUSING, POPULATION. • Resident CONSTRUCTION, KEEPING THINGS FLOWING. • Resident CONTINUE TO ATTRACT SKIERS FROM DESTINATIONS BOTH INTERNATIONAL AND DOMESTIC LOCATIONS. HOUSING FOR EMPLOYEES. FIND ENOUGH EMPLOYEES TO STAFF VAIL. • Resident CONTINUING.TO ATTRACT VISITORS. ' • Resident CONTROL OF TRAFFIC, PARKING SPACES MADE AVAILABLE WITH THE NEW DEVELOPMENT. • Resident CONTROLLING GROWTH, ADD PARKING SPACES. • Resident CONTROLLING GROWTH, INCREASING QUALITY EXPERIENCE WITH . OUTSIDERS. • Resident CONVENTION CENTER AND CONSTRUCTION. • Resident COORDINATE ALL OF THE CONSTRUCTION ANTICIPATED IN THE NEXT THREE YEARS, KEEP THE FLAVOR OF VAIL AS A VILLAGE. SAFETY ON THE MOUNTAIN. • Resident COPING WITH THE CONSTRUCTION AND STILL MAKING VISITORS HAPPY. • Resident DEALING WITH CHANGING DEMOGRAPHIC. HAVING MORE FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE LEADERS. • Resident DEALING WITH CONSTRUCTION INCONVENIENCE. • Resident DEALING WITH CONSTRUCTION. FILLING RETAIL SPACES. • Resident ~ DEALING WITH I-70 NOISE.. REDEVELOPMENT OF LIONSHEAD. OVERPOPULATION. • Resident . DEALING WITH ONGOING CONSTRUCTION. HOW TO FIND YOUR WAY AROUND. DEALING WITH ANGRY LOCALS. • Resident DEALING WITH THE CONSTRUCTION. PARKING, MORE OF IT AND MAKE IT FREE. AND ALSO MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND PLEASE HELP WITH THE OVER POPULATION. • Resident DEFEATING THE CONFERENCE CENTER, RESIDENT PARKING, ALL PRICES OF EVERYTHING, NOT JUST VERY EXPENSIVE GOODS AND SERVICES. 139 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident pEVELOPING A POST REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AND REPRIORITIZATION OF SERVICES. BY THAT, I MEAN TAKE BETTER CARE OF THE ROADS AND HAVE BETTER SERVICES FOR THE COMMUNITY. AND ALSO A CONTINUED ATTRACTION OF HIGH QUALITY PEOPLE TO GOVERNMENT • Resident . DEVELOPMENT CONTROL. • Resident DEVELOPMENT OF THE BUILDINGS, GETTING THROUGH THE . CONSTRUCTION. MAKING THE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS MORE TENANT FRIENDLY. • Resident DEVELOPMENT; I AM NOT WELL ENOUGH INFORMED TO KNOW REALLY • Resident . DEVELOPMENT. MAINTAINING A FAMILY FRIENDLY VAIL. KEEPING HIGH EXPECTATIONS FOR OUR VISITORS. • Resident DOING ALL THE BUILDING WITH SKI SEASON GOING ON • Resident . , DON'T KNOW. • Resident DON'T KNOW. • Resident DON'T KNOW. COMPETITION WITH EDWARDS. THE. YOUTH ARE MOVING , TO EDWARDS. TOURISTS ARE ALSO GOING THERE INSTEAD OF VAIL IT IS . CHEAPER. THE RESTAURANTS AND COFFEE SHOPS ARE MUCH MORE CENTRALIZED: GAP BETWEEN RICH AND POOR. BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING. • Resident ECONOMIC GROWTH. SOMETHING WITH THE I-70 CORRIDOR • Resident . ECONOMY GOING IN VAIL VILLAGE. MAKE IT MORE CUSTOMER FRIENDLY . INCLUDE THE HOSPITAL IN THE PLANNING TO MAKE IT BETTER • Resident . ECONOMY, GROWTH. • Resident ECONOMY. • Resident EDUCATION, HOUSING, CONFERENCE CENTER • Resident . EMPLOYEE HOUSING AND ALSO MORE ACTIVITIES FOR THE CHILDREN ~ AND THE ELDERLY. • Resident EMPLOYEE HOUSING. NO PLACE FOR EMPLOYEES TO LIVE: TOO EXPENSIVE.' • Resident EMPLOYMENT AND RENOVATION OF PROPERTIES AND APARTMENTS • Resident . FAKE ID ISSUES AND UNDER AGE ISSUES AS FAR AS ADULT ACTIVITIES ARE CONCERNED. • Resident FINDING SOMEONE INTELLIGENT ENOUGH TO WORK ON THE TOWN COUNCIL THAT HAS ENOUGH SENSE TO PUT THE TOWN BACK ON TRACK • Resident . _ _. -FINISH ONGOING-PROJECTS:- LOWER-SPEED ON 1-70: MAINTAIN THE- QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE LOCAL RESIDENTS DURING THE CHANGE • Resident . FINISHING CONSTRUCTION ON TIME • Resident . FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY. REDEVELOPMENT • Resident . FIX THE PARKING PROBLEM= CONTINUE TO IMPROVE THE LIONSHEAD AND . THE VILLAGE. GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO BE MORE TRANSPARENT • Resident . GET THE CONFERENCE CENTER MOVING. THINK THE RENOVATIONS - - THROUGH~CAREFULL•Y: • Resident GET THROUGH THE CONSTRUCTION AND GET THE PLACE CLE ANED UP. GET THE FINANCES ON"SOLID GROUND • • Resident . GETTING A FOCUS. . 140 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident .GETTING AROUND IN LIONSHEAD, THAT WOULD BE THE BIGGEST. I'M WORRIED ABOUT HOW AND WHAT IS GOING TO BLOCKED OFF, WHAT ARE THE AVENUES AND HOW ARE YOU GOING TO GET ABOUT WITH A WHOLE AND THEN A STRUCTURE, CONSTRUCTION, GETTING TO THE GONDOLA. • Resident GETTING CONSTRUCTION DONE BEFORE WINTER. KEEPING ACCIDENT RATE DOWN. KEEPING SPEED LIMIT ON HIGHWAYS DOWN. • Resident GETTING ENOUGH SNOW. . • Resident GETTING FOUR SEASONS HOTEL IN THE TOWN OF VAIL. GETTING THE LANDSCAPING FINISHED. AND ART AND.STATUES. • Resident GETTING OVER THE CLOSED. MINDEDNESS. PARKING IN GENERAL. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC. • Resident GETTING PEOPLE TO AGREE ON WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE AND WHAT DOESN'T. THE NEW EMPLOYEE HOUSING AT THE MAIN ENTRANCE OF VAIL MAKES ME VERY HAPPY. • Resident GETTING THE CONSTRUCTION DONE. • Resident GETTING THE CONSTRUCTION DONE. SOLVE THE REC DISTRICT PROBLEMS. • Resident GETTING THE CONSTRUCTION TIED UP IN A FASHION THAT DOESN'T PRESENT A PROBLEM TO THOSE WHO WANT TO USE THE SERVICES. • Resident GETTING THE ECONOMY UP. REALISTIC REDEVELOPMENT. • Resident GETTING THE LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT DONE. AND GETTING THE CONFERENCE CENTER FINISHED. • Resident GETTING THE LOCALS BACK IN TOWN. GETTING THE FIVE SIX HOLES COMPLETED. • Resident GETTING THROUGH ALL THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITHOUT HURTING THE TOURISM. • Resident GETTING THROUGH THE CONSTRUCTION AND APPROVING THE CONSTRUCTION. • Resident GETTING THROUGH THE CONSTRUCTION IN A WAY THAT DOESN'T HARM BUSINESS. BEING PREPARED FOR LARGE POPULATION GROWTH. • Resident GETTING WORKING HOTELS COMPETING WITH OTHER SKI RESORTS. KEEPING A HIGH LEVEL OF PEOPLE COMING. • Resident GLOBAL WARMING. THE SNOW LEVELS ARE DECREASING. • Resident GOOD SERVICES AND MAKING SURE VISITORS HAVE AGOOD EXPERIENCE. • Resident GROWTH IS A BIG CHALLENGE. PARKING, REDEVELOPMENT. • Resident GROWTH. ALL THE PEOPLE COMING IN CAN BE HANDLED. NOISE LEVEL. • Resident GROWTH. HOW TO MANAGE GROWTH AND TRAFFIC, AND THE NOISE. PARKING, HOW TO MANAGE'IT AND HOW TO DEAL WITH THE PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING TO TOWN RESTAURANT. • Resident HANDLING GROWTH WITHOUT A LOSS OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND CHARACTER: • Resident HANDLING GROWTH, THE HIGHWAY, PARKING, AND THE EXPENSE OF IT ALL. • Resident HANDLING THE CONSTRUCTION THAT TAKES PLACE. HANDLING THE INCREASE OF TRAFFIC. KEEPING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY. 141 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident - ' ' HAVING WAGES MATCH COST OF LIVING CHANGES FOR HARD WORKING LOCALS. TOWN YIELDING TO SMALL SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS LIKE CONVENTION CENTER SUPPORTERS. TRANSPORTATION, MAKE IT EASIER TO MOVE TOURISTS AND LOCALS AROUND. • Resident HEALTHY GROWTH. SOLID GROWTH OF POPULATION, NOT OVER POPULATED. AND ENVIRONMENT. KEEPING IT AT STEADY PASSE OF DEVELOPMENT AND KEEP THE SERENITY OF SMALL MOUNTAIN TOWN. • Resident HIGHWAY NOISE RECREATION CENTER. WE DON'T HAVE ONE. • Resident HIGHWAY NOISE, HIGHWAY NOISE; AND HIGHWAY NOISE! • Resident HIGHWAY NOISE, PARKING. AND CONTROLLED GROWTH. • Resident HOUSING AND TRAFFIC. • Resident , HOW TO KEEP VAIL A INTERESTING PLACE TO COME TO. IT'S SLIGHTLY NARROW. IT NEEDS~TO BROADEN IT. • Resident HOW~TO LIMIT THE SPENDING AND BETTER CONTROL OF VAIL VALLEY TOURISM AND CONVENTION BUREAU AND VAIL RESORTS. • Resident I DON'T KNOW.: (5) • Resident I REALLY COUIDNT GIVE YOU ANY. I HAVE NO IDEA. • Resident I REALLY DON'T KNOW: • Resident I THINK ITS PROBABLY HOUSING. KEEPING LEASES DOWN SO PEOPLE CAN RUN BUSINESSES. JUST THE OVERALL COST, THE COST OF LIVING IN VAIL IS RIDICULOUS,. THE PRICE FIXING ON GAS IS RIDICULOUS. OVERALL COST OF LIVING IS MY BIGGEST CONCERN. • Resident I THINK THE BIGGEST CHALLENGE IS GOING TO BE MAINTAINING THE LEVEL OF SERVICES AVAILABLE.. ALSO CAPITAL PROJECTS ADDRESSED AS WELL. • Resident I THINK THE BIGGEST THING WOULD BE TO KEEP A HAPPY LOCAL WORKFORCE.;:, , • Resident I THINK TFiE CONFERENCE CENTER WILL BE A BIG CHALLENGE. PARKING WILL STILL BE A CHALLENGE, AND GETTING PEOPLE TO COME TO VAIL FOR THE COST OF SKIING, AND THE'COST OF THE MANY LOW-GRADE CONDOS: • Resident I THINK WITH AL' L THE NEW BUILDING, THERE WILL BE MORE PEOPLE AND THE CHALLENGE WILL BE IN SERVICING THEM. NOT TO MESS IT UP COMPLETELY AS FAR AS GROWING PROPERLY. • Resident I-70:AND THE NOISE.. KEEP THE TOURISTS COMING AND KEEPING NATURE ___ --- BEAUTIFUL.--- --- . . • Resident I-70 NOISE. PARKING AND GETTING THROUGH THE RENOVATIONS. • Resident I-70 NOISE. PARKING. CITY PROVIDED AFFORDABLE HOUSING INFRINGES ON MY OWN RENTAL PROPERTIES: • Resident I-70, WATER, PARKING. , • Resident I-70. ITS TOTALLY OUT OF CONTROL. GET THE ILLEGAL ALIENS OUT OF HERE. EMPLOYEES AND LOCALS NEED HIGHERPAY, AND JOB SECURITY . NEEDS TO IMPROVE. • Resident I-70. WATER. ECONOMY. • Resident IF IT KEEPS GOING A$ IT IS, NOBODY BUT THE LOCALS RENTING HERE WILL BE THE RESIDENTS. REMOVING THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST BETVUEEN'.VAIL RESORTS AND TOWN GOVERNMENT. • Resident I"M NOT SURE. WE'RE PROBABLY MOVING. ' ,. 142 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident IMPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FROM HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE. GETTING MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. • Resident INCREASE TOURISM. • Resident INCREASING OUR BUDGET. KEEPING OF YEAR-ROUND RESIDENTS. IMPROVING AFFORDABILITY OF LIFESTYLE. • Resident INTEGRATION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT. • Resident JUST OVERSEEING ALL THE DEVELOPMENT. PARKING. • Resident KEEP EVERYBODY COMING. • Resident KEEP UP WITH THE RESORTS. • Resident KEEPING A SMALL TOWN FEEL, NOT GOING OVERBOARD IN SIZE. KEEPING RENT REASONABLE FOR BUSINESSES. • Resident KEEPING ACCESS TO THE TOWN. • Resident KEEPING BUSINESS OWNERS HAPPY ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION. • Resident KEEPING CONSTRUCTION UNDER CONTROL, SO IT DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH THE TOURISTS SO MUCH. Resident KEEPING INFRASTRUCTURE MODERN AND EFFICIENT, NOT INCURRING A HUGE DEBT AND TAX INCREASES, MAINTAINING PROPERTY VALUES. • Resident KEEPING RESIDENTS IN VAIL. THE LIBRARY, THE CONFERENCE CENTER. • Resident KEEPING SNOW. KEEPING GUESTS IN SUMMER TIME. AFFORDABLE HOUSING. • Resident KEEPING THE LOCAL FEELING. KEEPING THE COST DOWN SO LOCALS CAN STAY HERE; AND KEEP COST DOWN SO IT WILL STILL BRING IN THE TOURISTS. WE MAY BE PRICING OURSELVES OUT OF THE MARKET FOR TOURISTS AND MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR THE LOCALS. • Resident KEEPING THE MESS DOWN DURING THE CONSTRUCTION. • Resident KEEPING THE PRICES DOWN ON, THE MOUNTAINS. AND FOR LOCAL BUSINESSES TO GET AFFORDABLE OFFICE SPACE. • Resident KEEPING THE RETAIL BUSINESSES ALIVE. AND KEEPING THE SENSE OF COMMUNITY HERE. • Resident KEEPING THING CLEAN AND NOT NOISY WITH CONSTRUCTION, AND KEEP THE PUBLICITY UP AND GOING SO WE STILL GET VISITORS. OFFERING THEM DISCOUNTS TO KEEP COMING. • Resident KEEPING THINGS AFFORDABLE. • Resident KEEPING VIABLE WITHOUT DESTRUCTION GOING ON. WELL, I GUESS BUILDING A FIRE STATION IN WEST VAIL MIGHT BE A GOOD ONE, AND MAKE A DECISION ON THE CONFERENCE CENTER. • Resident KEEPING YOUNG FAMILIES IN TOWN AND SUPPORTING LOCAL BUSINESSES. WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SEE MORE ACTIVITIES FOR YOUNG FAMILIES. • Resident LACK OF AVAILABLE BUILDING, LAND. • Resident LACK OF LEApERSHIP TO GET THE PROJECTS DONE THAT ARE SCHEDULED TO BE DONE. THOSE THINGS SHOULD COME TO FRUITION IN A TIMELY MANNER. • Resident LOOK AHEAD AND APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENTS THAT WILL ADD TO THE COMMUNITY RATHER THAN LISTEN TO THOSE WHO WANT TO STAY WHERE.INE ARE.. ' _ 143 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident LOW COST HOUSING FOR LOCALS. LIFT LINES AT THE BOTTOM OF MOUNTAIN. TRAFFIC PROBLEMS IN THE VILLAGE. • Resident MAINTAIN TOURISM. MAINTAINING A RESIDENT WORKFORCE. • Resident MAINTAINING A SENSE.OF COMMUNITY. THE FLUCTUATION OF MARKETING DOLLARS AS FAR AS PLACEMENT IS CONCERNED. NEED TO KEEP HOUSING AFFORDABLE, DONT DISCARD THE LOCALS. • Resident MAINTAINING A SMALL TOWN FEEL. SERVICES FOR FAMILIES. • Resident MAINTAINING DESTINATION RESORT. GETTING THROUGH CONSTRUCTION TO GET TO THE SUMMER FESTIVALS. ENVIRONMENT. • Resident MAINTAINING ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, DOING THE LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPING, PROPERLY EXECUTING THE PLAN. • Resident MAINTAINING FAMILY ENVIRONMENT FOR PEOPLE COMING HERE • Resident . MAINTAINING QUALITY OF LIFE DURING CONSTRUCTION. • Resident MAINTAINING THE RESIDENT POPULATION. CREATING A SENSE OF COMMUNITY AND TRUST IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT. MAINTAINING THE NEW AND IMPROVED INFRASTRUCTURE. • Resident MAINTAINING THE SMALL TOWN FEEL ALIVE AND VIABLE. KEEPING THE LOCAL POPULATION HERE, NOT ALL 2ND HOMEOWNERS AND OVER DEVELOPMENT. • Resident MANAGED GROWTH. SUSTAINABLE WORKFORCE FOR ENTRY LEVEL POSITIONS. • Resident MANAGING ALL THE CONSTRUCTION. PROVIDING MORE PARKING • Resident . MANAGING CHANGES. COMMUNICATIONS LOGISTICS • Resident . MANAGING CONSTRUCTION AND BALANCING WITH TOURISM • Resident . MANAGING GROWTH OF CITY CORE. • Resident MANAGING GROWTH. • Resident MANAGING REDEVELOPMENT. IMPROVING SALES TAX AND IMPROVING INFRASTRUCTURE. MIDDLE CREEK IS A GREAT PROJECT FOR LOCALS ' AND ITS DISGUSTINGLY UGLY. CHANGE THE COLORS. • Resident MANAGING THE BUDGET AND DOING THE DEVELOPMENT ON TIME AND WITHIN BUDGET. • Resident MANAGING THE BUDGET IN THE FACE OF FLAT SALES REVENUE. PAYING FOR A CONFERENCE CENTER~THAT'LL-LOSE MONEY. MAINTAINING OUR STATUS AS A WORLD CLASS RESORT. •.Resident MANAGING THE DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINING-THE QUALITY OF GUEST VISITATION. CONTINUE TO MANAGE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WHILE COMMUNITY SHIFTS DOWN VALLEY.. • Resident MANAGING THE TRAFFIC FLOW. STAYING COMPETITIVE WITH OTHER RESORTS. AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS • Resident . MEETING THE DEMANDS OF THE VISITORS. INCREASING RETAIL SPACE AND RETAIL QUALITY. FISCAL ACCOUNTABILITY ON THE. PART OF THE ' GOVERNMENT: • Resident MORE PARKING. SHORTER SURVEY, 5 MINUTES MAXIMUM • Resident . MOUNTAIN ACCESS IN LIONSHEAD.. AMOUNT OF DUST CREATED WITH REDEVELOPMENT. ~ - 44 ~ v Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident NEED CONTROLLED GROWTH AND AFFORDABLE GROWTH. NEED TO STOP THINKING THAT EVERYONE CAN AFFORD THE HOUSING AND NEED BETTER DOG CONTROL. DON'T LIKE DOG POOP ON.THE GROUND. • Resident .NEW DAWN RENOVATION. CONVENTION CENTER. PARKING WILL BE A HUGE PROBLEM. • Resident NEXT WINTER:. OVERALL TRAVELING ISSUE, GETTING FROM POINT A TO POINT B DURING THE NEXT WINTER: • Resident NO COMMENTS. • Resident NO COMMENTS. ~ ` . • Resident NO CONFERENCE CENTER. FOCUS ON THE KIDS. • Resident NO IDEA: . • Resident NO OPINION': • Resident NO OPINION:,.:. • Resident NOISE FROM I-70. KEEPING THOSE THAT GREW UP AND GRADUATED HEREIN THE VALLEY. BETTER ATTITUDE OF THE FIRE MARSHALL. HE'S A LITTLE HITLER. • Resident- NOISE ON THE HIGHWAY NEEDS TO BE IMPROVED:. • Resident NOISE, LITIGATION, PARKING.. ._ • Resident NONE. • Resident NONE:' " • Resident NONE. • Resident OPEN SPACE AND TRAFFIC: • Resident OVERCROWDING; HOUSING; LACK OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. • Resident :. OVERCROWDING, MODERATE INCOME HOUSING. OPEN SPACE. • Resident, OVERDEVELOPMENT. ALLOWING THE MATURE VEGETATION.TO BE . MAINTAINED ON EXISTING RESIDENTIAL LOTS.-` - + Resident PARKING AND CONFERENCE CENTER. • Resident. PARKING AND THE CHILDREN. THERE ARE TOO MANY KIDS. • Resident . PARKING CONTROL. REDUCED SALES AS A RESULT`OF HIGH SALES TAX. CONGESTION. • Resident PARKING QUALITY AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING: • Resident PARKING STRUCTURE, ROAD MAINTENANCE, A.ND MANAGING THE NEW CONSTRUCTION. • Resident PARKING, BETTER AND AFFORDABLE`HOUSING. • Resident ~ _ "PARKING; GCOBALI7~-TION, KEEPING~CORPORATIONS OUT OF VAIL. • Resident PARKING, GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND MAINTAINING A FIRST CLASS, WORLD SKI.RESORT. • Resident MAKING IT MORE OF A YEAR-ROUND RESORT. GETTING PEOPLE PARKING , INTO THE CONFERENCE CENTER: WE DON'T WANT CURBS AND GUTTERS, THOUGH THEY ARE PLANNING ON PUTTING THEM IN. • Resident PARKING, MORE ACTIVITIES, MAINTAINING THE ENVIRONMENT. " Resident PARKING, MORE OF IT PLEASE! KEEPING VAIL AFFORDABLE. FOR THE SKIING WHETHER VISITORS OR RESIDENTS. • Resident PARKING, NEED. MORE.OF IT: CONSTRUCTION 1NILL BE COSTLY. ~ Resident ` PARKING, NEED: MORE: =CONGESTION FROM CONSTRUCTION. • Resident PARKING; NOISE POLLUTION; AND JUVENILE DISCIPLINE:. POLICE OR FAMILY ENFQRCEMENT OF CHILDREN. ~: ..,~,.. _ _ 145 " Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident PARKING, OVERCROWDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING; MAINTAINING WHAT WE HAVE NOW INSTEAD OF WORRYING ABOUT THE THINGS WE DON'T NEED. • Resident. PARKING, PARKING, SERVICE. • Resident PARKING, POLICE ENFORCEMENT. WEST VAIL FIRE STATION • Resident . PARKING, REDEVELOPMENT. • Resident PARKING, SATISFYING LOCALS AND TOURISTS, AND HAVING A BETTER RAPPORT WITH THE VALLEY. • Resident PARKING, THEY NEED PARKING. NEW.CONSTRUCTION. THEY WILL HAVE PARKING PROBLEMS WITH ALL .THE NEW CONSTRUCTION • Resident . PARKING, TRAFFIC AND NOISE ON I-70. • Resident PARKING, TRANSPORTATION, PUTTING A TUNNEL FOR I-70 AND BURYING TO GET RID OF THE ROAD NOISE. • Resident PARKING. • Resident PARKING. CONSTRUCTION WILL CAUSE MORE PARKING PROBLEMS: HOUSING MORE PEOPLE COMING TO THE AREA. • Resident PARKING. GETTING A WEST VAIL FIRE STATION. NOT OVER-DEVELOPING • Resident . PARKING. MAINTAINING AYEAR-ROUND SENSE OF COMMUNITY. PRICING FOR FAMILY WORKERS. • Resident PARKING. REDEVELOPMENT. AFFORDABLE HOUSING. • Resident PARKING. TURNING IT BACK INTO A FRIENDLY PLACE • Resident . PAYING FOR IMPROVEMENTS, BALANCING THE BUDGET • Resident . POPULATION GROWTH. CONSTRUCTION DELAYS. TAXATION • Resident . PROBABLY THE CONFERENCE CENTER. THE 'NEW VAIL' AND THE BUDGET • Resident . PROBABLY TRAFFIC. • Resident PROBABLY UPGRADING SOME OF THE. PROPERTIES THAT ARE LOOKING OUTDATED: • Resident PROMOTING VAIL AS AYEAR-ROUND DESTINATION. THE SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF THE CONSTRUCTION TAKING PLACE WITHOUT HAVING THE VILLAGE AS SUCH A CONSTRUCTION ZONE. • Resident PROPER RENOVATION OF THE TOWN, INVESTMENT IN-THE MOUNTAIN • Resident . PROVIDING DESCENT,STAFF. COST OF HOUSING AND VISITOR NUMBERS. • Resident ~ RAISING CHILDREN HERE, AFFORDING. • Resident. , RAISING REVENUE. • Resident REAL ESTATE. PRICES.. THE. CONVENTION CENTER AND THE . REDISTRICTING OF THE REC DISTRICT. GET IT UNDER THE TOWN'S CONTROL. • Resident REALLY HARD WITH REDEVELOPMENT. IF A BUSINESSES OWNER I , WOULD BE A LITTLE WORRIED. TO CONTINUE BUSINESSES WILL BE A HUGE CHALLENGE. • Resident RECONSTRUCTION OF LIONSHEAD. KEEPING THE LOCAL HERE • Resident . RECONSTRUCTION OF LIONSHEAD.. MORE PARKING: ECONOMIC STABILITY. - • Resident RECONSTRUCTION OF LIONSHEAD. THE PROBLEM WITH THE WATER . TAKE CARE OF THE HIGHWAY TO PREVENT ACCIDENTS, SAFETY IN THE HIGHWAY: - • Resident REDEVELOPING CROSSROADS, GETTING. CONFERENCE CENTER STARTED. 146 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident REDEVELOPMENT AND GETTING IT FINISHED AND MAKING EVERYONE - HAPPY WITH THAT. PROVIDING A LIVABLE COMMUNITY FOR PEOPLE WHO. WORK AND LIVE IN VAIL. • Resident .REDEVELOPMENT AND HOW IT TURNS OUT. WILL BUSINESSES SURVIVE THE REBUILDING AND DISRUPTION OF THEIR BUSINESS? SOLVE THE CONVENTION CENTER PROBLEM. IS IT VIABLE? • Resident REDEVELOPMENT AND THE PARKING PROBLEMS. AND NOISE CONTROL. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT IN LIONSHEAD AND CONTROLLING GROWTH. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT OF LIONSHEAD AND THE CONFERENCE CENTER. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT OF THE I-70 CORRIDOR: THE NEW RESORT IN MINTURN. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT OF THE TOWN. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT OF TOWN AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: KEEPING GOOD QUALITY AND DIVERSITY OF RETAIL EXPERIENCES. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT. COMING UP WITH BETTER PARKING. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT. INCONVENIENCE WITH CONSTRUCTION. BUILD UP AS A_YEAR-ROUND RESORT. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT. NOT BUILDING THE CONFERENCE CENTER. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT. PROMOTING BUSINESS AND PARKING. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT. PROVIDING HOUSING FOR WORKING PEOPLE. • Resident REDEVELOPMENT. THE ABILITY TO MAXIMIZE OUR BED BASE. • Resident REMODELING OF OLD BUILDINGS AND REDEVELOPMENT. BUILDING NEW HOTELS. - • Resident REMODELING THE NEW VAIL AND NEW CONSTRUCTION, MAKING VAIL A YEAR-ROUND ECONOMY. CONTINUE.TO SUPPORT SKIING. • Resident RETAIN OU.R CLIENTS' LOYALTY, NOT DRIVING OUT.BUSINESS COMMUNICATION, COMMUNICATION, COMMUNICATION! NOT JUST IN THE VALLEY BUT OUTSIDE OF THE VALLEY AS WELL: • Resident SALES REVENUE NEEDS TO GO UP, AND THEY NEED TO GET PEOPLE BACK IN TOWN: • Resident ~ SIGNAGE AND GETTING THESE ROADS CLEARED UP. THERE WAS A SINKHOLE, AND THEY. LET IT GO AND LEFT A LITTLE BITTY ACCESS ROAD. • Resident SLIDING SALES TAX REVENUE. KEEPING YEAR-ROUND RESIDENTS IN - VAIL:- CLOSE MONITORING OF SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS. RULES AND REGULATIONS MIGHT NEED TO BE MODERNIZED. • Resident SPACE CONTROL, POPULATION CONTROL, TRAFFIC ISSUES AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES. THE TAXING OF THE AVAILABLE RESOURCES. • Resident STOPPING PEOPLE FROM MOVING OUT OF VAIL-THAT CAN'T AFFORD HOUSING AND KEEPING THE ENVIRONMENT HEALTHY TO LIVE IN. KEEP THE'LONG TERM IN MIND. - • Resident SURVIVAL OF THE ECONOMY IS 1, 2, AND 3. • Resident TAKE CARE OF WHAT WE HAVE NOW BEFORE ADDING OR BUILDING ANYTHING ELSE. - • Resident TAKING CARE OF OVER POPULATION AND PARKING. - • Resident. THE BUILDING WORK... - 147 a Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident - - THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS ARE NOT VISIBLE ENOUGH. THEY HAVE TO COME OUT OF CHARLIE'S CHECK POINT AND WALK IN TOWN TO FINE DRIVERS AND TRUCK DRIVERS, SHUTTLES ETC. WHO LET RUN THEIR ENGINE WHEN PARKED. THERE ARE NO SIGNS IN THE STREETS OR PARKINGS TO INFORM THE DRIVERS THERRE IS A LAW TO SHUT OFF YOUR, ENGINE. TOWN EMPLOYEES INCLUDED HONEY WAGON HAS ANNOYING BEEPER WHEN THEY MOVE BACK. WHY? IS IT ALLOWED? SOME BUSES HAVE NOISY BREAKS - DO SOMETHING. THEY PLOW THEY STREETS TOO EARLY: HEAVY MACHINERY TOO NOISY. USE A SMALLER ONE AND . WITHOUT THE BEEPER. ARE WE IN A QUIET ENVIRONMENT? NO. NOT ANY MORE. • Resident THE CONVENTION CENTER AND I-70 NOISE. • Resident THE COST OF HOUSING AND ALSO BRINGING FUN BACK INTO THE COMMUNITY. - . • Resident THE HIGHWAY NOISE. THE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY OF RUNNING THE TOWN. • Resident THE NEW DAWN. OPEN SPACE AND RESIDENT SATISFACTION • Resident . THE NOT BUILDING OF THE CONFERENCE CENTER. THE ATHLETIC PROGRAM. THE AVAILABILITY OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING • Resident . THE SCHOOLS. SCHOOLS WILL HAVE PROBLEMS: CONGESTION MEANING THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF PEOPLE. • Resident THE TOWN LEADERS NEED TO VISIT OTHER CITIES. THEY DON'T HAVE TO REINVENT THE WHEEL. SEE WHAT THE COMPETITORS ARE DOING . THAT'S HOW YOU GET THE BUSINESS BACK. THOS, TELLURIDE ATTRACT SUPERSTARS. NO MARKET HERE FOR PROFESSIONAL SKIERS • Resident . THEY NEED MORE PARKING AND MORE ACTIVITIES FOR THE CHILDREN AND THE ELDERLY. • Resident THROUGH CONSTRUCTION KEEP BUSINESSES GOING. PARKING MORE , OF IT. • Resident TO CONTINUE TO CREATE A SENSE OF COMMUNITY, BALANCED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT. • Resident TO DECIDE WEATHER OR NOT WHAT EFFECTS THE COMMOTION OF THE CONFERENCE CENTER WILL BE: PARKING:` . .. • Resident TO DO A GOOD JOB WITH. REDEVELOPMENT, TRAFFIC RECREATION • Resident ' , . TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF SERVICE, MANAGING GROWTH PARKING -• Resident , . TO MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF THIS ALPINE VILLAGE - - • Resident . TO MAKE CROSSROADS HAPPEN, WORK TOGETHER, DO NOT MAKE THE CONVENTION CENTER WASTE OF MONEY. • Resident ~ TO MANAGE THE REDEVELOPMENT SO WE DON'T SCARE OFF OUR PAYING GUESTS. PROPERTY OWNERS OR RENTERS. BEING ABLE TO COMPETE . AS AN INTERNATIONAL. RESORT. DEALING WITH I-70 NOISE , PARTICULARLY TRUCK TRAFFIC. - • Resident TO SURVIVE THE -ROADS OF EAST VAIL THAT PROBABLY WON'T BE FIXED - FOR FIVE YEARS.. " . - • Resident TO TRY AND ,RECOV,ER A REPUTATION FOR BEING A FIRST CLASS RESORT , FINDING. ADEQUATE PARKING. • Resident TOURISM, PARKING, AND UPGRADING THE TOWN: - • Resident TRAFFIC, PINE NEEDLE, UPGRADING OF THE TOWN. 148 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Resident TRAFFIC. KEEPING THE TOWN FRIENDLY AND ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO COME BACK. • Resident TRANSPORTATION FROM DENVER. PARKING, COMMERCE IN TOWN. • Resident TRAPPING PEOPLE WITH CONSTRUCTION. GETTING GOD TO MAKE IT SNOW MORE. • Resident TWO OF MY MAIN CONCERNS ARE PARKING AND THE ROAD. THE .FRONTAGE ROAD. THE FRONTAGE ROAD IS ONE AND NUMBER TWO IS PARKING. YOU'VE GOT TO PROVIDE MORE PARKING. ONCE YOU GET INTO SKI SEASON WHERE DO YOU PUT THE CARS? • Resident UPDATING ALL THE BUILDINGS. CREATING MORE KID PROGRAMS. DEALING WITH FINANCIAL RESTRAINTS. • Resident UPDATING THE STREETS AND SIDEWALKS IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND NOISE ON I-70. • Resident WE NEED TO TAKE CONTROL OF THINGS HERE AGAIN. THING ARE OUT OF. HAND. GET THINGS WE NEED AND CAN USE INSTEAD OF WASTING MONEY ON THE THINGS WE DON'T NEED. EVERYONE HERE IS NOT RICH AND ONCE AGAIN MORE AFFORDABLE RESTAURANTS OVER DEVELOPMENT MONEY. • Resident WEST VAIL FIRE STATION, LIONSHEAD REDEVELOPMENT. CONFERENCE CENTER. • Resident WEST VAIL FIRE STATION. CONFERENCE CENTER AND ACTIVELY PURSUING LIONSHEAD AND VAIL REBIRTH. • Resident WISE DEVELOPMENT AND USE OF RESOURCES. GOOD ECONOMIC PROJECTIONS. • Resident WITH ALL THE CONSTRUCTION GOING ON, HAVING ALL THE VISITORS BE COMFORTABLE AND STILL WANT TO COME HERE, THE TOWN HAS SEVERAL PROJECTS THAT ITS INVOLVED IN THAT I HOPE GET FINISHED. • Resident WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEM COME UP WITH MEETING ALL THE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES. THE NEW FIRE STATION IN WEST VAIL IS NEEDED. • Second home owner AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR EMPLOYEES: • Second home owner AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I GUESS.OVERCHARGING FOR SKI PASSES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. • Second home owner BALANCE FOR THE TOWN COUNCIL. THE NOISE FACTOR ON I-70. THE CONTROLLED GROWTH ON HOUSING: • Second home owner BASICALLY THE POPULATION IS AGING AND THE YOUNGER PEOPLE CAN'T AFFORD TO LIVE THERE. THE PRICES ARE TOO HIGH. • Second home owner BRINGING IN NEW BUSINESSES. • Second.home owner BRINGING THEIR OLD BUILDING UP TO CODE AND ALLOWING THEM TO REDEVELOP PROPERLY. MINIMIZING TRAFFIC IN THE VILLAGE. CREATING ACTIVITIES BESIDES SKIING THAT WILL BRING PEOPLE INTO THE CITY. • Second home owner BUDGET CONTROL. I AM A SECOND CLASS PROPERTY OWNER, I FEEL I AM NOT IMPORTANT. • Second home owner BUILDING AFFORDABLE STORES. AND STOP RAISING THE PRICES ON SKIING AND THINGS LIKE THAT. • Second home owner BUILDING, CHANGING CONDO CONSTRUCTION. • Second home owner BUSINESS AND REAL ESTATE. ` 149 Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner COMPETING WITH OTHER NEWER DEVELOPMENTS. THE AMOUNT OF TIME IT TAKES TO DRIVE FROM DENVER TO VAIL; TRAFFIC. ALWAYS COMPETING WITH NEWER FACILITIES AND AMENITIES. I LIKE THE IMPROVEMENT, BUT SOME PLACES JUST NEED TO BE TORN DOWN. • Second home owner COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION. PROVIDE EMPLOYEE HOUSING AND DEAL WITH THE PARKING ISSUE. • Second home owner COMPLETING ALL THEIR DREAMS. • Second home owner COMPLETING CONSTRUCTIONS ALL AROUND THE VALLEY WITHOUT DISRUPTING ACTIVITIES: • Second home owner COMPLETION OF DEVELOPMENT, OVERCROWDING, AND PARKING. • Second home owner COMPLETION OF THE VILLAGE. • Second home owner CONSTRUCTION, GETTING IT ALL DONE. • Second home owner CONSTRUCTION. • Second home owner CONSTRUCTION. PARKING. TWO CROWDED. • Second home owner CONTINUAL RECONSTRUCTION. PARKING. STIMULATION OF LOCAL ECONOMY. • Second home owner CONTROL THE GROWTH. WITH PROPER CARE FOR THE COMMUNITY, TRY TO KEEP THE EXPANSION IN CONTROL. • Second home owner CROWD CONTROL. • Second home owner CUTTING DOWN ON CRIME AND MORE SPECIAL EVENTS FOR OLDER PEOPLE. • Second home owner DEAL WITH THE INCREASE IN THE POPULATION VS THE AVAILABLE LAND SPACE. LOCAL VS RESORT USE ALLOCATION OF THE LAND. • Second home owner PEALING WITH CONSTRUCTION. MAINTAINING THE AMBIENCE OF VAIL WHILE RECONSTRUCTING: • Second home. owner DOLLAR REVENUE. PARKING AND SENSIBLE REDEVELOPMENT. • Second home owner DON'T KNOW: • Second home owner DON'T KNOW. • Second home owner FINDING EMPLOYEES. FINDING PLACES FOR THEM TO LIVE. PARKING. • Second home owner FRIENDLINESS TO VISITORS AND REASONABLE FEES. FOR PARKING. RENTAL UNITS AND HOTEL SPACE. POLICE [DEPARTMENT NEEDS TO BE BEAT: ,..VOLUNTEER PROGRAMS. PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTER AND CLOSE TO CENTER OF TOWN.. • Second home owner GETTING ALL OF THIS IMPROVEMENT DONE AND GETTING THEM ALL TO AGREE ON-A-GAME-KLAN WIL-L BE-THE-HARDEST T-RING. - - - - - - • Second home owner GETTING ALL THE CONSTRUCTION DONE AND STILL MAINTAINING QUALITY IN THE TOWN FOR VISITORS. YOU DON'T WANT TO LOSE THE SKI VACATIONERS BECAUSE OF THE CONSTRUCTION. • Second home owner GETTING COMMUNICATIONS OUT TO VISITORS. • Second home owner GETTING CONSTRUCTION DONE.. . • Second home owner GETTINGLIONSHEAD REBUILT RIGHT. INCREASING INCOME FOR THE CITY WITHOUT RAISING TAXES: - .. _° • Second homeowner GETTING LIQNSHEAD;.RENOVATED. KEEPING TAXES DOWN AND CONTINUING THE QUALITY Of LIFE FOR THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE PART TIME. .. , . i50 ~ V Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 • Second home owner GETTING "MORE TOURISTS TO COME TO TOWN: THERE ARE $O MANY SKI AREAS AROUND; AND THINGS NEED TO BE UPDATED SO VAIL CAN BE MORE COMPETITIVE. • Second:home owner GETTING-RID OF ALL THE PLANS FOR THE CONVENTION CENTER. DOING SOMETHING ABOUT BARKING. FIXING UP LIONSHEAD: • Second home owner GETTING THE TOWN CENTERS° BACK ON TRACK ECONOMICALLY. ANIMAL CONTROL, RACCOONS SPECIFICALLY. • Second homeowner GETTING THROUGH ALL OF THE REDEVELOPMENT: _, • Second home owner. GETTING THROUGH THE;CONSTRUCTION;AND KEEPING lIP SKIER VISIT .. - . -:, ,, - ~ r •Second home owner GETTING THROUGH THE CONSTRUCTION IN A TIMELY FASHION. MAKING SURE THE QUALITY IS GQOD, :. .' •Second homeowner GROWTH, COST OF FACILITIES.. ' = =• ". _ • Second home owner HAVING AvCHAMPIONSHIP SKIING'.:' •Second home owner I .HAVE. NO THOUGHTS ON THAT. - • Second home owner' t REALLY CAN'T EVEN COMMENT: • Second home owner:: -THINK IT'S BALANCING. GROWTH WITH A PLEASING ENVIRONMENT. • Second home owner I THINK IT'S TAKING A~POLL WHICH LOOKS` INWARD AT THE GOVERNMENT AND NOT OUTWARD`AT THE VISIT.ORS..-MORE OF A FOCUS ON SKIING, . MORE OF A VARIETY OF ENTERTAINMENT IN. THE. TOWN. ` • Second home owner 1-70, PARKING AND .EMPLOYEE HOUSING. •Second home owner IMPROVING SALES TAX. BASE;~FINDING MONEY TO DO IMPROVEMENT' WITHOUT RAISING TAXES TOO MUCH. .: ` . - • Second home owner KEEP.. IMPROVEMENTS MOVING.. NEED:TO IMPROVE.THE SALES TAX BASE. •Second home owner, KEEPING CRIME DOWN, PROVIDING ENOUGH RECREATIONAL FACILITIES., -, , "FOR PEOPLE COMING; IN WITHOUT GETTING TOO BIG.`.` MARE PARKING. •Second home ownec:KEEPING-PR{CES DOWN WHITE ALLTHIS-MONEY IS BEING~PUMPED IN FOR .. REVITALIZATION. , ".Y , • Second.home owner; KEEPING PRICING OF DEVELOPMENT FROM-GOING THROLIGH,THE ROOF. • Second home owner KEEPING PROPERTY PRICES AFFORDABLE. FIXING THE' I-70 NOISE PROBLEM. _ , _ ,. •Second_ home. owner KEEPING THEIR LEVEL OF- RESORT SERVICES. KEEPING A RESORT FEELING IN THE MIDST OF TREMENDOl1S GROWTH 1N-.THE VALLEY: _. ATTRACTING,EN000H,RESORTEMPLOYEES ...: _ ~ . „ - - •Second-home owner KEEPING UP WITH THEGOMPETINGTOURIST'AREAS. -- ,. .. •Second home owner. LIFT TICKET PRICE'`AND.AIR,PQLLUTION:AND:TRAFFIC NOISE ON i-70. • Second home owner .LOW COST HOUSING. - ~.,. ... ,. _ •Second home owner MAINTAINING INFRASTRUCTURE TO SERVE THE NEW STRUCTURES: • Second homeowner _.,< ,. MAINTAINING REASONABLE: COST OF LIVING: NEEDi MORE :.. , ; OPPORTUNITIES.FOR SOCIAL ACTIVITIES, MORE SOCIAL INTERACTION-, _.- '' : ' MORE'SENSE;.OF BRINGING'IN YOUNG, SINGLE~PROFESSIONALS. • Second homeowner MAKE VAIL MORE UPDATED AND APPLICABLE TO STAY. Second home owner MAKING IT=A GOOD VALUE WITH`ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION: MAKE'SURE " VAIL STAYS AFFORDABLE. KEEPING RESORT AFFORDABLE:. " •Second home owner MAKING SURE THEY BRING.W PEOPLE TO ENJOY THE-RESORT. MAKING., RESORT ATTRACTIVE AND AFFORDABLE IN-.SUMMER::" . ... _ 151. V 4' Town of Vail Community Survev 2005 • Second home owner MANAGEMENT OF TRAFFIC AND PARKING IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. IMPROVE FACILITIES. GROWTH, MAKE SURE. THE ARCHITECTURE CONFORMS. • Second home owner MANAGING GROWTH, KEEPING COSTS DOWN. • Second home owner MANAGING GROWTH. EXPAND ON MOUNTAIN AMENITIES. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ON THE WATERWAYS AND VALLEYS. • Second home owner NO COMMENTS. • Second home owner NO IDEA. • Second home owner NOISE ABATEMENT ON I-70. • Second home owner NOISE AND TRAFFIC, AND PARKING ON THE STREETS. • Second home owner NOISE ISSUE AND REMAINING COMPETITIVE AND ATTRACTING GUESTS DURING CONSTRUCTION. • Second home owner NONE. (5) • Second home owner NONE. I HAVEN'T THOUGHT MUCH ABOUT THAT. • Second home owner NOT LETTING DOWNTOWN DIE. • Second home owner NOT LETTING THE CONSTRUCTION IMPACT VISITORS. PARKING. • Second home owner OPERATION DURING THE EXCESSIVE CONSTRUCTION, SO THAT WE DON'T LOSE TOURISM. PARKING AND TRAFFIC. • Second home owner OVERDEVELOPMENT. UPDATING THE VILLAGE. IMPROVING SUMMER TOURISM. • Second home owner PARKING, EMPLOYEE HOUSING, CONSTRUCTION, • Second home owner PARKING, I-70 NOISE. • Second home owner PARKING, KEEPING PRICES IN A MARKETABLE RANGE. OLD BUILDINGS AND THEIR DETERIORATIONS. • Second home owner PARKING, PARKING, PARKING! • Second home owner PARKING. • Second home owner pgYING FOR SOME OF THINGS THEY WANT TO DO. TAX RATES. • Second home owner PERPETIUATWG THE SKNWDUSOTRY, WORKING THE ECONOMY AND TOURISM. • Second home owner PLAN FOR RENOVATION OF LlONSHEAD. LONG TERM CUSTOMERS AND TOURISTS. • Second home owner REBUILD GOLF COURSE. IT NEEDS NEW UPGRADES. • Second home owner RENAISSANCE OF VAIL AND GETTING AROUND DURING CONSTRUCTION. MAKING DUE WITH LESS REVENUE GENERATED. • Second home owner RENOVATION OF BUILDINGS, LIVING THROUGH THE RENOVATION OF CORE SITES. • Second home owner SURVIVING FINANCIALLY WITH ALL THE CONSTRUCTION. • Second home owner THE UPGRADING OF FACILITIES, CONTROL OF PARKING. • Second home owner TO MAINTAIN THE TAX BASE. MAKING VAIL A DESIROUS PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO VISIT. MAINTAIN ABSOLUTELY TOP QUALITY SERVICES. I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT PRICING EXCLUSIVITY OF VAIL. IT IS VERY EXPENSIVE FOR MOST PEOPLE. • Second home owner TRAFFIC GETTING TO VAIL FROM DENVER. PRICE, COST OF BEING IN VAIL IS A LITTLE EXPENSIVE. • Second home owner TRAFFIC ON I-70. KEEPING AS MANY FLIGHTS COMING INTO EAGLE AS POSSIBLE AND KEEPING COSTS DOWN. 152 i ,. ,r Town of Vail Community Survey 2005 _-., • Second home owner TRAFFIC, THE ENVIRONMENT, PARKIN -- -- •Second home owner TRYING TO CONTRO OWTH UNDER CONTROLTSO WE DON'll"IDESTROY THE • Second home owner TRYING TO KEEP GR MOUNTAIN AMBIANCE... • Second home owner UPWERDNG THE RATE SO WE CAN KEEP HEMIFU PACE WHICH INCLUDES LO ES • Mail Survey S AND ACTIVIDTE SEIN SHOUOLDER SEASONSAIANYAC , I UING EVENT CONT N CHANCE AT FAMILY EVENTS? BRINGING BACK THE TOURISTS. KEEPING THE LOCALS INTERESTED IN • Mail Survey WORKING IN VAIL. PROVIDE BETTER PARKING, MORE ERENCE CENTER • Mail Survey , SUiLDING THE CONF AFFORDABLE HOUSING GROWING PAINS WIALL.THE NEW STUFF & MAKING SURE EVERYONE FF • Mail Survey KNOWS WHAT'S HAPPENING NEXT, ETC. WHERE WILL ALL THE STA HOTEUSERVICE?THE REST ESP A . CES - COME FROM FOR ALL THESE PL LIKE A DUMP COMPARED TO NEW AND SHINY. HOW TO OF LH LOOKING INTEGRATE IT ALL HIGH COST OF LIVING,•ATTRACTING NEW CITIZENS, DEALING WITH • Mail Survey REDEVELOPMENT (ALL) VAIL IS AGING KEEPING GORE CREEK CLEAN AND BEAUTIFUL • Mail Survey • Mail Survey MAINTAINING ECONOMIC VITALITY DURING RECONSTRUCTION, NOISE), REDUCING FIRE CONGESTION , IMPROVING I-70 ISSUES ( DANGERIDEAD TREESlDROUGHT I.E. VAIL VILLAGE, LIONSHEAD. CLOSE- ESORT CENTERS • Mail Survey , MODERNIZING R EMPLOYEE HOUSING. IN • Mail Survey . NOISE-HIGHWAY,. BEETLE KILL, CONFERENCE CENTER GETTING SERVICE INDUSTRY TOO CROWDED • Mail Survey , PARKING AREAS, BUSES LARGER TO HELP UaRGE CROWDS, WEST VAIL FIRE STATION SHOULD BE BUILT': • Mait Survey PARKING! PARKING! PARKING! . AFFORDABLE RENTS', HOUSING PARKING • Mail Survey • Mail Survey , PARKING, CONVENTION CENTER • Mail Survey PARKING, COVER OVER--PARTS OF I-7U ` PER FRIENDLY IN VILLAGE (LE. LESS FUR AND O • Mail Survey P _ .. . - PARKING, MORE SH . ' . ' : JEWELRYSHOPS!) TRANSPORTATION, BETTER T PARKING `' P O • Mail Survey- , RENTS OYEES HELTER FOR EM PROVIDING YEAR ROUND ACTIVITIES, S • Mail Survey DOWN FOR BUSINESSES • Mail Survey RETURN THE POLICE DEPT TO A PROFESSIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BtIC RELATIONS DRIVEN ENTITY. ONLY BUILD AGENCY RATHER THAN A PU tF IT IS PROFITABLE OR HAVE THE PRIVATE TE R - A CONFERENCE CEN SECTOR BUILD, POWN AND' OPERATE. ° ;.. • Mail Survey STOP THE GROWTH. IT IS TOO LATE ANYWAY. TOO MANY PEOPLE LIVE.IIV NOT VAIL V USED TO-KNOW~ NO ONE DtD fS THE VALLEY: IT _ . VAIL AND PROTECTyAIL,.CITY COUNCIL INCLUDED. ~ . ~ • Mail Survey ` THE,PROBLEM WITH PARKING ON, CONSTRUCTION=TO MUCH OF, FUNDING T • Mail Survey I TRANSPORTA MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 21, 2005 SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2005, an ordinance amending Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to amend the Commercial Service Center (CSC) District to add "bowling alley" as a conditional use and to add a definition of a "bowling alley" to the Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regard thereto. On April 25, 2005, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission voted 6-0-0 (Gunion absent) to forward a recommendation of approval for a proposed text amendment to the Commercial Service Center (CSC) District to add "bowling alley" as a conditional use to the District and to add a definition fora "bowling alley" to the Vail Town Code. Attached to this memorandum is a copy of Ordinance 16, Series of 2005. Text which is to be added is indicated as bold italics. The Town Council can vote to approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2005: The Community Development Department recommends that the Vail Town Council approves Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2005, on first reading. ORDINANCE NO. 16 Series of 2005 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 12-2-2, DEFINITIONS OF WORDS AND TERMS, V'AIL TOWN CODE, TO CREATE A DEFINITION FORA "BOWLING ALLEY" AND SECTION 12-7E-4, CONDITIONAL USES, VAIL TOWN CODE, TO ALLOW FOR THE ADDITION OF A "BOWLING ALLEY" AS A CONDITIONAL USE WITHIN THE COMMERCIAL SERVICE CENTER DISTRICT AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has hel~~ public hearings on the proposed amendments in accordance with the provisions of the Town Code of the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds that the proposed amendments further the development objectives of the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has recommended approval of this text amendment by a vote of 6-0-0 (Gunion at~sent) at its April 25, 2005, meeting, and has submitted its recommendation to the Town Council; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that the amendments are consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the Town; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that the amendments further the general ~~nd specific purposes of the Zoning Regulations; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that the amendments promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the Town and promote the coordinated and harmoniou:> development of the Town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN C-F Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2005 VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. Section 12-2-2 (Definitions) of the Vail Town Code shall hereby be amended as follows: (Text which is to be added is indicated as bold italics.) BOWLING ALLEY: A recreation and entertainment facility where the sport of bowling takes place. A bowling alley may also includes accessory entertainment facilities and uses such as eating and drinking facilities, retail shops, night clubs, arcade facilities, billiards, ping gong, darts, meeting rooms, and similar uses. Section 2. Section 12-7H-4 (Conditional Uses) of the Vail Town Code shall hereby be amended as follows: (Text which is to be added is indicated as bold italics.) Bowling Alley Section 3. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one'or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 4. The Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2005 2 Section 5. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code as provided in this; ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other actions or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 6. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer sh<~II not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 21St day of June, 2005, and a public hearing at 6:00 p.m. for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 5th day.of July, 2005, in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. Rod Slifer, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2005 3 READ AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 5`h day of July, 2005. Rod Slifer, Mayor ATTEST: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 16, Series of 2005 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 21, 2005 SUBJECT: Second Reading of Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2005, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance 24, Series of 2004 establishing Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge, and setting forth details in regard thereto. On June 7, 2005, the Town Council approved the first reading of Ordinance 14, Series of 2005, an ordinance repealing and reenacting Ordinance 24, Series of 2004 establishing Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge by a vote of 5-0-0 On December 7, 2004; the Town Council unanimously approved the second reading of Ordinance 24, Series of 2004 to establish Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge. The purpose of the new Special Development District is to facilitate the redevelopment of the Manor Vail Lodge, located at 595 Vail Valley Drive. In the time since the December 7, 2004, approval, a discrepancy was discovered in the lot area of the Manor Vail development site which has rendered many of the zoning statistics reported in Ordinance 24, Series of 2004 inaccurate. Ordinance 14, Series of 2005 corrects these items. Attached to this memorandum is a copy of Ordinance 14, Series of 2005. The Town Council can vote to approve, approve with modifications, or deny Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2005. The Community Development Department recommends that the Vail Town Council approves Ordinance No. 14, Series of 2005, on second reading. ORDINANCE NO. 14 Series of 2005 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REENACTING ORDINANCE 24, SERIES OF 2004;; AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 38, MANOR VAIL LODGE, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE A, SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT (SDD) DISTRICT, CHAPTER 9, TITLE 12, ZONING TITLE, TOWN CODE OF VAIL, AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, Title 12, Zoning Title, Chapter 9, Article A, Special Development (SDD) District, Town Code of Vail establishes a procedure for establishing special development districts; and WHEREAS, Manor Vail Lodge has submitted an application to the Town of Vail Community Development Department to establish Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge, to facilitate the redevelopment of an existing lodge; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail held a public hearing on September 13, 2004, on the application to establish Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge, in accordance with the provisions of the Town Code of Vail; and WHEREAS, upon due consideration, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail finds that the request complies with the design criteria prescribed in the Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, and furthers the development objectives of the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has forwarded a recommendation of approval by a vote of 6-0 (Gunion recused) of this request to the Vail Town Council; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that that the request to establish Special Ordinance No. 14, Series 2005 Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge, complies with the design criteria prescribed in the Title 12, Zoning Title, Town Code of Vail; and provides a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development objectives; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council considers it in the interest of the public health, safety, and welfare to adopt Ordinance No. 24, Series of 2004, and establish a new special development district in the Town of Vail. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. District Established Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge, is established for development on one parcel of land, legally described as Lots A,.Manor Vail Subdivision, which comprise a total of 236,681 square feet (5.43 acres) in the Vail Village area of the Town of Vail. Said parcels may be referred to as "SDD No. 38". Special Development District No 38 shall be reflected as such on the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail. The underlying zoning for Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge, shall be High Density Multiple-Family (HDMF) District. Section 2. Special Development District No..38, Manor Vail Lodge, Approved Development Plan An approved development plan is the principal document in guiding the development, uses and activities of a special development district. The Vail Town Council finds that the Approved Development Plan for Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge, complies with each of the requirements set forth in Sections 12-9A-5 and 12-9A-6 of the Town Code.of Vail. •The Approved Development Plan for Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge, shall be comprised of materials submitted in accordance with Ordinance No. 14, Series 2005 2 Section 12-9A-5 of the Town Code of Vail and those plans prepared by Zehren and Associates, entitled "Manor Vail Condominiums, Studio, and Manor House Addition/Renovation", dated October 19, 2004. Section 3. Development Standards In conjunction with the Approved Development Plan described in Section 2 herein, the following development standards are hereby approved by the Vail Town Council. ThE;se standards are incorporated in the Approved Development Plan to protect the integrit~~ of the development of Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge. The development standards for Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge are described below: A. Permitted, Conditional, and Accessory Uses: The permitted, conditional, and accessory uses allowed in Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge, shall be those uses listed in Sections 12-6H-2, 12-E~H- 3, and 12-6H-4 of the Town Code of Vail, as may be amended. B. Lot Area: The minimum lot area for Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge, shall be 236,681 square feet (5.43 acres). C. Setbacks: The minimum setbacks for Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge, shall be as indicated on the Manor Vail Lodge Approved Development Plan, described in Section 2 herein. D. Height: The maximum allowable building height for Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge shall be fifty-seven and four tenths (57.4'), and as indicated on the Manor Vail Lodge Approved Development Plan, described in Section 2 herein. E. Density Control: The maximum allowable Gross Residential Floor Area Ordinance No. 14, Series 2005 3 (GRFA) for Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge, shall be 164,321 square feet and the maximum allowable density shall be one hundred forty (140) dwelling units, twenty (20) attached accommodation units, and one (1) Type III Employee Housing Unit, and as indicated on the Manor Vail Lodge Approved Development Plan, dated October 19, 2004. Said Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) shall be allocated as follows: • Dwelling Unit (140) - 164,321.0 square feet • Type III Employee Housing Unit (1) - 615.0 square feet Total 164,936.0 square feet F. Site Coverage: The maximum allowable site coverage shall be forty and six tenths percent (40.6%) or 96,096 square feet of the total lot area, and as indicated on the Manor Vail Lodge Approved Development Plan, described in Section 2 herein. G. Landscaping and Site Development: At least forty and six tenths percent (40.6%) or 95,979 square feet of the total lot area shall be landscaped. In no instance shall the hardscaped areas of the development site exceed twenty percent (20%) of the minimum landscaped area. The landscaping and site development shall be as indicated on the Manor Vail Lodge Approved Development Plan, described in Section 2 herein. H. Parking and Loading: The minimum number of off-street parking spaces shall be two hundred fifty-one (251) of which thirty-two (32) will be include in a private parking club and the minimum number of loading and delivery bays shall be two (2), and as indicated on the Manor. Vail Lodge Approved Ordinance No. 14, Series 2005 4 Development Plan, described in Section 2 herein. Section 4. Conditions of Approval The Applicant and Developer, agrees to comply to the following conditions of approval, which shall be part of the Town's approval of the establishment of Special Development District No. 38, Manor Vail Lodge: Prior to Second Reading of Ordinance 1. That the developer meets with the Town staff and prepares a memorandum of understanding outlining the responsibilities and requirements of the required ofiF-site improvements, prior to second reading of the ordinance approving the establishment of Special Development District No 38, Manor Vail Lodge. This memorandum of understanding shall include, but not be limited to, all streetscape improvements along Vail Valley Drive and Hanson Ranch Road, details for the improvement o~F Mill Creek, and details for funding and establishment of a Town of Vail St[eetsc:ape Master Plan for Gore Creek Drive east of Vail Valley Drive and Chalet Road. The Developer Improvement Agreement shall be signed by all parties prior to issuance of a building permit. Prior to Final DRB Review 2. That the developer submits a final exterior building materials list, typical wall seci:ion, architectural specifications, and a complete color rendering for review and approval of the Design Review Board, prior to submittal of an application for a building permit. 3. That the developer submits a rooftop mechanical equipment plan for review and approval by the Design Review Board prior to the issuance of a building permit. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be incorporated into the overall design of the lodge and enclosed and visually screened from public view. Ordinance No. 14, Series 2005 5 Prior to Submitting for a Building Permit 4. That the developer shall provide detailed .civil plans, profiles, details, limits of disturbance and construction fence for review and civil approval by the Department of Public Works, prior to submittal of a building permit. 5. That the developer addresses the written final comments of the Town of Vail Public Works Department outlined in the memorandum from the Town of Vail Public Works Department, dated September 2, 2004, prior to submitting an application to the Town of Vail Community Department for the issuance of a building permit for this project. 6. That the approval of the conditional use permits is not valid unless an ordinance approving the associated special development district amendment request is approved on second reading. 7. That the developer shall be assessed an impact fee of $5,000 for the net increase in p.m. traffic generation as determined by the Town of Vail Public Works Department, as addressed in Attachment E of the September 13, 2004, memorandum. The applicant acknowledges and agrees that the Manor Vail Lodge Redevelopment will generate seventeen (17) additional peak trips and agrees to pay the Town a Traffic Impact Fee of $5,000 per peak generated trip, for a total of $85,000. The applicants further acknowledge and agree that the payment by East West to the Town of the entire amount of the Traffic Impact Fee ($85,000) shall be a condition to the issuance of a building permit for the Manor Vail Redevelopment. This fee shall be used to pay for public traffic improvements on the South Frontage Road, Vail Valley Drive, Chalet Road, and East Gore Creek Drive as deemed necessary to alleviate traffic impacts.. 8. The applicant agrees to contribute $100,000 to the construction of streetscape improvement along Gore Creek Drive and Chalet Road. The Town and the applicant agree that the $100,000 contribution shall be deposited in an escrow account with instructions to restrict use of these funds to the streetscape improvement project in Ordinance No. 14, Series 2005 6 the above-referenced locations. Escrow instructions will also dictate that any portion of the $100,000 remaining in the account the day after the 10-year anniversary of the initial contribution shall be refunded to the applicant. The Parties acknowledge that the Town will be responsible for leading and coordinating all aspects of the streetscape improvement project and that the applicant's role in the streetscape project is strictly limited to the contributions outlined above. The 'town acknowledges that the streetscape improvement plan must be reviewed b;y the neighboring homeowners associations and that the Town will reasonably incorporate feedback from these associations and the applicant into the. final plan. The entire amount of the streetscape Improvements to Gore Creek Drive and Chalet Road fee ($100,000) shall be paid by the applicant prior to the issuance of a building perrr~itfor the Manor Vail Redevelopment. Prior to Requesting a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy 9. The applicant, with the input of staff, shall design and construct an extension to the existing sidewalk located in the vicinity of the existing bus stop along Vail Valley Drive. The new sidewalk shall extend onto the 430 square foot parcel which will be deeded to the Town from Manor Vail on the southeast corner of the property. The design of the sidewalk shall be depicted on the building permit set of drawing;. 10. .That the developer posts a bond to provide financial security for 125% of the total cost of the required off-site public improvements. The bond shall be in place with the Town prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy. This includes but is not limited to the proposed raised pedestrian walkways across Vail Valley Drive, resurfacing of the tennis courts if granted permission to stage upon them, and Ford Park pedestrian pathway reconstruction. 11. That the developer shall prepare and submit all applicable roadway and drainage easements for dedication to the Town for review and approval by the Town Attorney. All easements shall be recorded with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's Office prior to issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. This includes but is not Ordinance No. 14, Series 2005 7 limited to the easement required for the relocated Ford Park pedestrian pathway. 12. That the developer provides deed-restricted housing that complies with the Town of Vail Employee Housing requirements (Chapter 12-13) for a minimum of four (4) employees on the Manor Vail Lodge development site, and that said deed-restricted employee housing shall be made available for occupancy, and that the deed restrictions shall be recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder, prior to issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Manor Vail Lodge. The required Type III deed-restricted employee housing units shall not be eligible for resale and ,that the units be owned and operated by the hotel and that said ownership shall transfer with the deed to the hotel property. 13. That the developer receives an easement from the Town for those improvements which would be located within Town of Vail property on the rear of Building C. 14. That the parking club be limited to 32 spaces to allow for the elimination to the two parallel parking spaces to the north of Building A and the one parking space in the loading delivery area at the rear of Building B. That the sale of the parking spaces within the club occur as outlined in the proposal. 15. That the developer shall commence initial construction of the Manor Vail Lodge improvements within three years from the time of its final approval at second reading of the ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 38, and continue diligently toward the completion of the project. If the developer does not begin and diligently work toward the completion of the special development district or any stage of the special development district within the time limits imposed, the approval of said special development district shall be void. The Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council shall review the special development district upon submittal of an application to reestablish the special development district following the procedures outlined in Section 12-9A-4, Vail Town Code. Ordinance No. 14, Series 2005 Remain in place after occupancy is Granted 16. The Manor Vail Condominium Association will maintain a working front desk fix the purpose of conducting hotel like operations for a period of no less then teri (10) years from the date of this SDD approval, which will facilitate the continuance of the rental program at Manor Vail Lodge. This condition helps to achieve the municipal objective of insuring tax generation by establishing an active rental program for a condominium project. Section 5. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall nat effect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Vail Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Section 6. The Vail Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that,this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. The Council's finding, determination and declaration is based upon the review of the criteria prescribed by the Town Code of Vail and the evidence and testimony presented in consideration of this ordinance. Section 7. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Ordinance No. 14, Series 2005 9 Section 8. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 7~' day of June, 2005 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 215` day of June, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. ATTEST: Dick Cleveland, Mayor.Pro-Tem Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk READ AND.APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED this 215` dayof June, 2005. ATTEST: Rodney Slifer, Mayor Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 14, Series 2005 ~ ~ RESOLUTION NO. #10 Series of 2005 A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RESPECT AND ADMIRATION FOR THE HARD WORK BETTY FORD HAS CONTRIBUTED TO THE TOWN OF VAIL. Whereas, Betty Ford was the First Lady of the United States at a time of great crisis for our country. Whereas, Betty Ford is the recipient of many awards and honors including the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Whereas, President and Mrs. Ford made one of their homes in, first Vail, and then Beaver Creek, thereby bringing great attention and publicity to our valley. Whereas, Betty Ford worked diligently with many locals to make women more aware of the dangers of breast cancer and the need for periodic check-ups. Whereas, Betty Ford was instrumental in establishing the Vail International Dance Festival as a premier attraction in our community. Whereas, Betty Ford worked tirelessly to help people suffering from alcohol and drug addiction. Whereas, Betty Ford was Vail's extraordinary hostess for heads of state and visiting dignitaries from around the world at the World Forum. Whereas, Betty Ford was instrumental in launching the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, the world's highest alpine garden, which protects and displays over 3,000 varieties of rare and endangered flora to visitors from around the world. Whereas, .Betty Ford has been our dear friend and open hearted neighbor for many years. It is therefore a privilege and honor to pass Resolution #10, Series of 2005, in recognition of her numerous contributions to The Town of Vail. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of June, 2005. ATTEST: Rodney Slifer, Mayor, Town of Vail Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk, Town of Vail MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Timber Ridge Affordable Housing Corporation ("TRAHC") DATE: June 21, 2005 SUBJECT: Town of Vail loan to Timber Ridge Village Apartments Attached please find the loan documents for the $700,000 loan that TRAHC requested at Town Council's May 17, 2005 meeting. The terms of this loan match the terms of the initial loan that the Town of Vail made when the property was purchased. The loan documents have been prepared by attorneys at Sherman & Howard. Upon Town Council's approval of the loan documents the funds will be released to the Corporation. The funds will be used to cover operating shortfalls, bring Letter of Credit payments to US Bank current, and cover the cost of remediating 44 additional units that will be leased by Vail Associates, Inc. TIMBER RIDGE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT 2005 PROJECT AGREEMENT THIS 2005 PROJECT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is made as of June 1, 2005, by and between TIMBER RIDGE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CORPORATION, a Colorado nonprofit corporation (the "Corporation") and the TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO (the "Town"). RECITALS: A. The Corporation has been organized under the Colorado Revised Nonprofit Corporations Act to acquire property in order to provide affordable housing facilities, for the benefit of the Town and its inhabitants. B. The Corporation and the Town have previously entered into a Project Agreement dated as of July 1, 2003 (the "Original Project Agreement") which, among other matters,. provided for a loan to the Corporation to fund a portion of the Corporation's cost of acquiring Timber Ridge Apartmerits located within the Town (the "Project") on the property described in Exhibit A hereto, to provide dwelling accommodations for employees living and working within the Town and within Eagle County, Colorado. C. The balance of the cost of acquisition of the Project was financed by the Corporation with the proceeds of its Timber Ridge Affordable Housing Corporation Adjustable Rate Housing Facilities Revenue Bonds, Series 2003A (the "Series 2003A Bonds") and its Timber Ridge Affordable Housing Corporation Subordinate Housing Facilities Revenue Bonds, Series 2003B (the "Series 2003B Bonds," and together with the Series 2003A Bonds, the "Bonds"). D. The Corporation has requested and the Town Council of the Town (the "Town Council") has determined to loan certain additional funds to the Corporation in order to assist in payment of certain operating costs and capital impresvements to the Project, all for the public purpose of preserving and improving the Project as an affordable housing resource for the community. D. Repayment of such loan shall be governed by the terms of~ this Agreement and a promissory note the form of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B (the "Note") to be executed by the Corporation for the benefit of the Town. E. The Series 2003A Bonds have been issued pursuant to an Indenture of Trust dated as of July 1, 2003 (the "Series 2003A Indenture") between the Corporation and U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee (the "Series 2003A Trustee"). pubfin\project agreement 2005 (142306_1)_1 F. The Series 2003B Bonds have been issued pursuant to an Indenture of Trust dated as of July 1, 2003 (the "Series 2003B Indenture," and together with the Series 2003A Indenture, the "Indentures") between the Corporation and U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee (the "Series 2003B Trustee"). G. The Series 2003A Bonds, the Series 2003B Bonds and any Addit Tonal Bonds issued under the Indentures are referred to hereinafter as the "Bonds." All capitalized terms used herein, unless otherwise defined, shall have the meanings ascribed thereto in the Series 2003A Indenture. TERMS For good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Town and the Corporation, on behalf of themselves and their respective successors and assigns, agree as follows: Section 1. Project Operation. The Corporation hereby covenants and agrees to operate the Project at standards required to provide decent, safe, and sanitary housing facilities at reasonable rental rates, in a sound and economical manner. Nothing herein or in any resolutions of the Town shall be interpreted to require the Town to undertake responsibility for operation of the Project. The Corporation shall comply with all Environmental Laws in connection with the operation and use of the Project. No Hazardous Materials are or will be discharged from. the Project, directly or indirectly, except as authorized by any applicable governmental laws. "Environmental Laws" means the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1976 (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 9601 et sec.; the Hazardous Substances Transportation Act, 49 U.S.C. §§ 5101 et se .; the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 2601 et sec.; the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended., 42 U.S.C. §§ 6901 et sec .; the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1251 et sec .; the Clean Air Act;. 42 U.S.C.-§§ 7401 et se~C.; the Colorado Hazardous Waste Act, 11A C.R.S. § 25-15-101 et se ;the Colorado Radiation C ontrol Act, 11A C .R.S. § 25-I 1-101 et set; the Colorado Underground Storage Tanks Act, 11A C.R.S. § 25-18-101 et sec; the Colorado Air Quality Control Act, 11A C.R.S. § 25-7-101 et sec.; the Colorado Water Quality Control Act, 11A C.R.S. § 25-8-1011 et sec .; any other federal or state statutes or city or county ordinances regulating the generation, storage, containment or disposal of any Hazardous Material or providing for the protection, preservation or enhancement of the natural environment; any rules or regulations promulgated pursuant to any of the foregoing statutes or ordinances; and any amendments, modifications or supplements of any such statutes, ordinances, rules or regulations. "Hazardous Materials" means any substances defined as "hazardous substance;s," "pollutants," "contaminants," "hazardous materials," hazardous wastes," or "hazardous or toxic substances" in any Environmental Law. pubfin\project agreement `2005 X192306_1)_1 The Corporation hereby agrees to pay, defend, indemnify and save the Town, the members.of the Town Council, its mayor, officers, attorneys, employees, agents, accountants and staff, and the Series 2003A Trustee and the Series 2003B Trustee (collectively, the "Indemnified Parties") harmless from and against all liabilities, losses, damages, costs, expenses (including attorneys' fees), causes of action (whether in contract, tort or otherwise), suits, claims, demands and judgments of every kind, character and nature whatsoever arising out of or related to the Corporation's operation, improvement or maintenance of the Project and during such period as the Corporation shall utilize the Project (collectively referred to herein as the "Liabilities"), including, without limitation, (1) any injury to or death of any person or damage to property in or upon the Project or growing out of or connected with the use, nonuse; condition or occupancy of the Project or any part thereof; or (2) violation by the Corporation of any law, ordinance or regulation affecting the Project or any part thereof or the utilization, occupancy or use thereof. The provisions of this paragraph shall not be available to any Indemni-feed Person who personally causes or contributes to any such Liabilities by reason of his or her own gross negligence or willful misconduct. Section 2. Project Loan. The Town hereby agrees to lend to the Corporation $700,000 to assist in the payment of certain cost of operating and improving the Project (the "Project Loan") and the Corporation hereby agrees to borrow such amount for such purpose. The Project Loan shall be evidenced by the Note, which Note shall bear interest at the rate of 1.5% per annum. Payment of principal of and interest on the Project Loan shall be payable solely from Project revenues and such payments shall be subordinate to the Corporation's obligation to pay the principal of and interest on the Series 2003A Bonds and on the Series 2003B Bonds as the same shall come due. Payments on the Project Loan shall be made no more frequently than semi-annually on the business day next succeeding the payment of the principal, if any, and interest on the Series 2003B Bonds as the same shall come due. Section 4. .Town Benefit. The Corporation coveriants and agrees that all activities of the Corporation shall be undertaken for the benefit of the Town. Section 5. Right to Acquire. The Town is hereby granted the right to obtain, at any time, fee title and exclusive possession of all the Project financed by the Bonds free from liens and encumbrances created by the Corporation related to fhe Bonds, but subject to Permitted Exceptions (as defined below), and any additions to such property, by (i) placing into escrow an amount sufficient to defease the Bonds and any obligations then owing the Bank or the Alternate Bank under the Credit Agreement, (ii) paying the reasonable costs incident to the defeasance, and (iii) complying with all other requirements of the Indentures. Section 6. Unencumbered Title. The Corporation hereby agrees that during any period amounts are owed to the Town hereunder it shall not permit any encumbrance of the Project other than "Permitted Exceptions" as defined in the Deed of Trust, Financing Statement and Assignment of Rents and Revenues made by the Corporation for the Benefit of the Credit Bank, without the prior written consent of the Town. pub5n\pr°ject agreement 2005 (142306_1)_1 Section 7. Default Rights. If pursuant to Article VII of the aeries 2003A Indenture, the Series 2003A Trustee declares the principal of any Series 2003A Bonds then outstanding to be due and payable and any foreclosure proceeding or other action is commenced under the Credit Agreement which could lead to the sale or other disposition of the property pledged thereunder, the Town is hereby granted an exclusive option to purchase all such property (including the Project), for the amount of the outstanding Bonds and any additional amounts owing under the Credit Agreement and accrued interest to the date of default. The Town shall have not less than 90 days from the date it is notified by the Trustee of such action in which to exercise the option, and not less than 90 days from the date it exercises the opti~~n to purchase the property. The Bank or Alternate Bank or other parties responsible for commencing any such foreclosure proceeding or other action shall be required to take any action necessary, including submission of requests for continuance of foreclosure to the Public Trustee of Nagle County, Colorado, in order to ensure that the Town has the full 90 day period referred to herein to exercise its option (which option shall be exercised by giving written notice of such exercise to the Trustee and the Corporation) and purchase the Project and such other property, including ensuring that the foreclosure sale does not occur prior to the expiration of the 90 day pf;riod refeiTed to herein. Nothing herein shall be construed to create any obligation of the Town to cure any Event of Default. In the event that the Bank or Alternate Bank's loan documents recorded in the records of the Clerk and Recorder of Eagle County, Colorado prior to this Agreement (or any replacement thereof), is foreclosed; either through public trustee's sale or judicial foreclosure, then upon compliance with the provisions of this Section 7 and expiration of all cure and redemption periods provided for under this Agreement or by statute, (i) this Agreement :hall terminate and be of no further force or effect; (ii) neither the Town nor -the Corporation ;hall have any right, title o r int Brest in a nd t o t he P roject a rising o ut o f t his Agreement; (iii) any provisions of this Agreement permitting the Town to acquire title to the Project shall be void and of no force or effect; and (iv) the purchaser of title to the Project shall take title free and clear of this Agreement. Section 8. Indenture Rights; Approval of Town. The Corporation hereby covenants and agrees that the provisions of the Indentures granting any rights to the Town shall not be amended or modified without the consent of the Town. By execution hereof, the Town hereby consents to the provisions of the Indentures relating to the rights of the Town. Section 9. Consolidation or Merger. The Corporation hereby covenants and agrees that during the term of this Agreement it will maintain its corporate existence, will continue to be a nonprofit corporation duly qualified to do business in the State of Colorado, will not merge or consolidate with any person unless it first obtains the written consent of the Towl1. Section I0. Prohibition on Transfer. Tlie Corporation hereby covenants and agrees that during the term of this Agreement it shall not sell, transfer, assign. or lease (other than leases in the ordinary course of business for a period not greater than 24 months) all or any portion of the Project without the prior written consent of the Town. pubfin\project agreement `100:1 (1 d'L30G_1)_1 Section 11. Performance of Covenants. T he C orporation he reby a grew t o execute, acknowledge and deliver such documents as are reasonably requested by the Town to evidence any loan made hereunder and to execute, acknowledge and deliver or cause to be done, executed, acknowledged and delivered such instruments as the Town may reasonably require for the better assuring, transferring, pledging and hypothecating unto the Town all its rights and benefits hereunder. Section 12. Term. This Agreement shall terminate on the date upon which the Town Loan and any other advances hereunder have been paid an on which date no Bonds remain outstanding under the Indentures. Section 13. Burden on Property. This Agreement is a burden upon and runs with the property described in Exhibit A hereto and is binding upon the Corporation and upon all persons or entities with any right, title or interest to such property or any part thereof. pub£n\project agreement 2005 (14`L30G_1)_1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have hereunto set their hand as of the day and year first mentioned above. TOWN OF VALL, COLORADO By: Mayor [SEAL] ATTEST: Town Clerk TIMBER RIDGE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CORPORATION By: President [SEAL] ATTEST: Assistant Secretary IN CONSIDERATION OF THE TOWN'S LOAN MADE HEREUNDER TO THE CORPORATION, U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION HEREBY CONSENTS A.ND AGREES TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT, INCLUDING WITHC>UT LIMITATION THOSE RIGHTS SET FORTH IN SECTIONS 5 AND 7 HEREOF. U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION Title: pubfin\project agreement 2005 (14230G_1)_1 STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. TOWN OF VAIL ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of June, 2005 by , as President, on behalf of TIMBER RIDGE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CORPORATION, a Colorado nonprofit corporation. WITNESS my hand and oifcial seal. My Commission expires: [SEAL] Notary Public pubfin\project agreement 200ti (14230G_1)_1 STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. TOWN OF VAIL ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of June, 2005 by as Assistant Secretary, on behalf of TIMBER RIDGE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CORPORATION, a Colorado nonprofit corporation. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My Commission expires: [SEAL] Notary Public pubfin\project agreement 2005 (1~I230G_I)_1 STATE OF COLORADO ss. TOWN OF VAII., ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of June, 2005 by as Mayor, on behalf of the TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My Commission expires: [SEAL] Notary Public pubfin\project agreement 2005 (19'L:306_1)_1 STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. TOWN OF VAIL ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of June, 2005 by as Town Clerk, on behalf of the TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My Commission expires: [SEAL] Notary Public pubfin\project agreement 2005 (14230G_1)_1 EXHIBIT A Description of Timber Ride Proiect Site The following real property and all buildings and improvements, and fixtures or appurtenances, now or hereafter erected thereon: pubfin\project agreement 2005 (14230G_1)_1 EXHIBIT B Form of Promissory Note PROMISSORY NOTE June , 2005 Timber Ridge Affordable Housing Corporation, (the "Corporation"), for value received, promises to pay to Town of Vail, Colorado (the "Town") the principal sum of Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($700,000.00) ,plus interest on the unpaid balance from the date hereof of such sum or sums then owing from time to time. at orie and one-half percent (1.50%) per annum due December 1, 2032. Amounts payable hereunder shall be payable solely from revenues of the Corporation's Timber Ridge Apartments, including any additions thereto (the "Project"), and from no other revenues or income of the Corporation. The obligations hereunder shall be subordinate to~ those obligations of the Corporation to the owners of the Timber Ridge Affordable Housing Corporation, Adjustable Rate Housing Facilities Revenue Bonds Series 2003A and the Timber Ridge Affordable Housing Corporation, Subordinate Housing Facilities Revenue Bonds Se-ries 2003B as the same shall be outstanding from time to time. This Note has been executed and delivered in consideration of the Town's loan to the Corporation to finance a portion of the cost of operating and improving the Project. This Notre is intended to be a cash flow note, payable only to the extent the Corporation has determined that excess net revenues of the Project, after provision for any necessary operating or capital reser/es, have been accumulated semi-annually on the business day next succeeding the payment of the principal, if any, and interest on the Series 2003B Bonds as the same come due. Unpaid interest hereon shall not compound but shall be payable as accumulated cash flow becomes available. All receipts upon this note shall first be applied to interest then due and owing and then to the payment of principal hereof. This Note shall bepre-payable in whole or in part from time to time by the Corporatior.~. All payments shall be payable in lawful money of the United States of America; in immediately available funds, and shall be made to the Town at its offices for the account of the Town. The obligation of the Corporation to make the payments required hereunder shall be absolute and unconditional and the Corporation shall make such payments without abatement, diminution or deduction regardless of any cause or circumstances whatsoever including, without pubfin\project agreement 2005 ~14230G_1)_1 limitation, any defense, set-off, recoupment or counterclaim which the Corporation may have or assert against the Town or any other person. This Note shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has signed this Note as of the date first above written. TIMBER RIDGE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CORPORATION By Chairman pubfin\project agreement 2005 (14230G_1)_1 Timber Ridge Village Weekly Report March 25, 2005 Overview: Occupancy and released overview: Total # of Units 200 Total # Occupied 113 Total # Vacant 87 Total # Vacant Preleased/Applications (incl. transfers) 0 Total # ofNotice to Vacates (incl. transfers) 0 , Total # of Leases Expiring this Month 0 Total # of Expirations that gave Notice 0 Total # of Wait List Applications 0 Total #. of units available to lease 87 Leasing Report Summary Current occupancy is 99% of 114 units. There are 113 units occupied out of 114 units that. have been made available to be leased. The occupancy rate for the units occupied compared to the units that are available for rent is 100% Occupancy based on the entire 200 units is 61 %. Marketing Issues (concessions, traJjic trends, new marketing tools) Timber Ridge Village advertisement in the Vail Daily has been canceled. Ralph and Teresa would like a new ad. COMPANIES CONTACTED FOR POSSIBLE MASTER LEASES: Pazzos Pizza Greg 476-9026 Lodge Tower Cav 476-9530. Property Management Issues (incidents, major problems) Gl is vacant. We have offered a $100.00 rent credit to any tenant who refers a one year leaser for that unit. We will put an ad in the paper. We had a problem with the fire alarm in the G and H buildings. We had a fire watch from Monday until Friday morning. The problem is fixed. Collection Issues Total Outstanding = $1,553.52 1. $1500.00 is employee rent that has not been credited 2. $1,178.52 is unpaid rent and late fees. ~ Timber Ridge Village Weekly Report April 08, 2005 Overview: Occupancy and released overview Total # of Units 200 Total # Occupied 113 Total # Vacant 87 Total # Vacant Preleased/Applications (incl. transfers) 0 Total # of Notice to Vacates (incl. transfers) 0 Total # of Leases Expiring this Month 0 Total # of Expirations that gave Notice 0 Total # of Wait List Applications 0 Total # of units available to lease 87 Leasing Report Summary Current occupancy is 99% of 1 14 units. There are 113 units occupied out of 114 units that have been made available to be leased. The occupancy rate for the units occupied compared to the units that are available for rent is 100%Occupancy based on the entire 200 units is 61%. Marketin;? Issues (concessions, traffic trends, new tnarketing tools) Timber Ridge Village is now advertising in the Vail Daily. COMPANIES CONTACTED FOR POSSIBLE MASTER LEASES: Pinyon Builders Pam 328-5793 Beck Building Co. Bruce 949-1800 Property Management Issues (i~tcider:rs,,najorproblents) G I is vacant. We have offered a $100.00 rent credit to any tenant who refers a one year leaser for that unit. We have put an ad in the paper. Windal Rahorst stopped by, and will have the reports for 8 unremediated units next week Walk through completed with Joe Costa in unoccupied units Collection Issues Total Outstanding = $6,583.52 1. $1500.00 is employee rent that has not been credited 2. $5,083.52 is unpaid rent and late fees. ~ Timber Ridge Village Weekly Report April 15, 2005 Overview: Occupancy and released overview: Total # of Units 200 Total # Occupied 113 . Total # Vacant 87 Total # Vacant Preleased/Applications (incl. transfers) 0 Total # of Notice to Vacates (incl. transfers) 0 , ,, , Total # of Leases Expiring this Month 0 Total # of Expirations that gave Notice 0 Total # of Wait List Applications 0 Total # of units available to lease 87 Leasin>? Report Summary Current occupancy is 99% of 114 units. There are 113 units occupied out of 114 units that have been made available to be leased. The occupancy rate for the units occupied compared to the units that are available for rent is 100% Occupancy based on the entire 200 units is 61 %. Marketing Issues (concessio~:s, trafJrc trends, new marketing tools) Timber Ridge Village is now advertising in the Vail Daily. COMPANIES CONTACTED FOR POSSIBLE MASTER LEASES: Vail McDonalds Sally 476-1966 Saltire Development Inc. Pete 949-0660 Property Mana;?ement Issues (incidents, major problems) G 1 is vacant.. We have offered a $100.00 rent credit to any tenant who refers a one year leaser for that unit. We have put an ad in the paper Rex, Ralph, Joe and Nina Timm all came over to find units to remediate. We all agree that buildings J and H would be the most cost effective buildings. We will start preparing for remediation by stripping all of the units of anything that would get in the way of the remediation team, i.e. carpet, cabinets, and appliances. The tenants in L and D had big parties and caused significant damage. Jonathan Katz from Vail Beavercreek Housing was notified. We are keeping track of time and materials, a bill will be sent to Jonathan for all expenses. We are waiting for Nina to get approval to hire a structural engineer to look at some of the roof issues in the possible remediated units. Collection Issues Total Outstanding = $6,583.52 1. $1500.00 is employee rent that has not been credited 2. $5,083.52 is unpaid rent and late fees. Timber Ridge Village Weekly Report April 22, 2005 Overview Occupancy and released overview Total # of Units 200 Total # Occupied 113 Total # Vacant 87 Total # Vacant Preleased/Applications (incl. transfers) 0 Total # of Notice to Vacates (incl. transfers) 0 Total # of Leases Expiring this Month 0 Total # of Expirations that gave Notice 0 Total # of Wait List Applications 0 Total # of units available to lease 87 Leasin;? Report Summary Current occupancy is 99% of I l4 units. There are 113 units occupied out of 114 units that have been made available to be leased. The occupancy rate for the units occupied compared to the units that are available for rent is 99% Occupancy based on the entire 200 units is 6]%. Marketln;? ISSUCS (concessions, traffic trends, new marketing tools) Timber Ridge Village is now advertising in the Vail Daily. COMPANIES CONTACTED FOR POSSIBLE MASTER LEASES: Pinyon Builders Roberta 328-5793 Bedrock Construction of Colorado Fred 328-2015 Property Management Issues (incidents, major problems) G1 is vacant. We have offered a $100 rent credit to any resident who refers someone. We have put an ad in the paper.-_ Replaced and Refilled tired extinguishers from A and L buildings. The bill from L was sent to Jonathan Katz . Replaced twenty safety slates at L and D buildings Collection Issues Total Outstanding = $3,896.02 1. $1500.00 is employee rent that has not been credited 2. $2,396.02 is unpaid rent and late fees. Timber Ridge Village Weekly Report April 29, 2005 Overview Occupancy and released overview: Total # of Units 200 Total # Occupied 114 Total # Vacant 86 Total # Vacant Preleased/Applications (incl. transfers) 0 Total # of Notice to Vacates (incl. transfers) 1 ,, Total # of Leases Expiring this Month 0 Total # of Expirations that gave Notice 0 Total # of Wait List Applications 0 Total # of units available to lease 86 Leasing Report Summary Current occupancy is 100% of 114 units. There are 114 units occupied out of 114 units that have been made available to be leased. The occupancy rate for the units occupied compared to the units that are available for rent is 100% Occupancy based on the entire 200 units is 57%. Marketln~ Issues (concessions, traffic trends, new marketing tools) Timber Ridge Village is now advertising in the Vail Daily. COMPANLES CONTACTED FOR POSSIBLE MASTER LEASES: R. A Nelson Rick 949-5152 Beck Building Company Bruce 949-1800 Property Mana>?ement Issues (incidents, major problems) G 1 has been rented. L 12 had a small kitchen fire, resulting in the unit being unrentable. Cost of repair is estimated at $35,000 which is covered by insurance. Vandalism occurred at B and D buildings Vail Police department called I.R # 20051188 Bill will be sent to Jonathan Katz @ Vail / BC Housing Collection Issues Total Outstanding = $646.02 1. $1500.00 is employee rent that has not been credited MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council FROM: Timber Ridge Affordable Housing Corporation DATE: June 21, 2005 SUBJECT: Monthly Reporting Requirements Attached please find the April, 2005 Timber Ridge Village Income Statement, Variance Report, Balance Sheet, and Projected Cash Flow report. This is provided to Town Council per the reporting requirements agreement that the Town of Vail entered into with the Timber Ridge Affordable Housing Corporation on April 15, 2005. This information will be updated and provided to Town Council on a monthly basis. Basis: Accrual TIMBER RIDGE VILLAGE Income Statement For the Month Ending Apri130 2005 ACCT MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY YTD YTD YTD ANNUAL # DESCRIPTION ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE BUDGET pa~,e l OPERATWG INCOME 4001 4005 Gross Potential Rent Vacancies 127,875.00 (3,250.00) MONTHLY RENT 124,625.00 4070 Laundry Income 2,680.08 4085 Miscellaneous Income 871.34 4090 Late Fees/NSF Check Fees 0.00 4120 Rent Concessions 0.00 4125 Employee Apartments/Garage 0.00 4140 Relet Fees 0.00 TOTAL INCOME ~ 128,176.42 129,909 (3,450) (2,034) 200 501,258.79 (3,250.00) 519,636 (3,450) 126,459 (1,834) 498,008.79 516,186 1,480 1,200 11,569.45 5,920 108 763 1,624.50 432 75 (75) 25.00 300 0 0 (3,225.00) 0 (575) 575 0.00 (2,300) 0 0 0.00 0 127,547 ~ 629 508,002.74 520,538 (18,377) 1,558,908 200 (18,400) (18,177) 1,540,508 5,649 17,760 1,193 1,296 (275) 900 (3,225) 0 2,300 (6,900) 0 1,100 (12,535) 1,554,664 Basis: Accrual ACCT # DESI OPERATING EXPENSES ADMINISTRATIVE 5110 Advertising/Promotion 5120 Auto Expense 5121 Meals 5122 Lodging 5125 Marketing Expense . 5130 Credit Checks 5135 Management Fee 5140 Office Expense 5145 Printing/Copying 5150 Postage 5165 Phone/Fax 5170 Dues/Subscriptions 5175 Banking Fees TIMBER RIDGE VILLAGE Income Statement For the Month Ending Apri130 2005 MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY YTU ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE ACTUE YTD YTD ANNUAL BUDGET VARIANCE BUDGET page 2 360.74 150 (211) 1,098.62 600 (499) 1,800 691.81 285 (407) 1,451.71 1,140 (312) 3,420 291.96 0 (292) 377.17 0 (377) 0 0.00 0 0 21.53 0 (22) 0 165.93 100 (66) 688.55 400 (289) 1,200 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0 350 6,052.28 6,377 325 23,505.38 26,027 2,522 77,734 199.59 350 150 1,490.03 1,400 (90) 4,200 0.00 250 250 600.30 1,000 400 3,000 76.49 125 49 288.41 500 212 1,500 955.83 495 (461) 2,168.99 1,980 .(189) 5,940 . 510.98 0 ~ (511) 1,028.96 250 (779) ~ 1,150 16.30 30 14 76.50 120 44 360 TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE 9,321.91 8,162 (1,160) 32,796.15 33,417 621 100,654 PAYROLL 5220 Wages Administrative 6,133.74 6,250 116 27,596.73 26,995 (602) 76,995 5230 Wages Maintenance 8,097.11 7,953 (144) 34,714.75 43,201 8,486 106,823 5250 Wages Landscaping 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0 7,350 '1'OTALPAYROLL 14,230.85 14,203 (28) 62,311.48 70,196 7,885 191,168 Basis: Accrual TIMBER RIDGE VILLAGE Income Statement For the Month Ending Apri130 2005 ACCT MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY YTll YTD YTD ANNUAL # DESCRIPTION ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE BUDGET cus= REPAIR & MAINTENANCE HVAC/PLUMBING 5315 HVAC -Repairs 0.00 500 500 0.00 2,000 2,000 6,000 5320 HVAC -Supplies 0.00 100 100 0.00 400 400 1,200 5345 Plumbing Repairs 213.75 525 311 999.33 2,100 1,101 6,300 5350 Plumbing Supplies 0.00 300 300 512.72 1,200 687 3,600 TOTAL HVAC/PLUMBING 213.75 1,425 1,211 1,512.05 5,700 4,188 17,100 GROUNDS 5620 Trasb Removal 922.61 660 (263) 3,283.28 2,640 (643) 7,920 5625 Snow Removal ~ 3,240.00 925 (2,315) 10,481.57 6,475 (4,007) 9,250 5645 Pest Control 0.00 0 0 85.50 0 (86) 0 5655 Grounds Equipment 0.00 175 175 0.00 175 175 1,250 TOTAL GROUNDS 4,162.61 1,760 (2,403) 13,850.35 9,290 (4,560) 18,420 GENERAL REPAIRIMAINTENANCE 5325 Electrical -Repairs 0.00 50 50 0.00 200 200 600 5330 Electrical -Supplies 0.00 50 50 92.50 200 108 600 5365 Maintenance/Repair Supply 104.66 200 95 104.66 800 695 2,400 5367 Door/Window Repair/Maintenance 0.00 100 100 107.83 400 292 1,200 5370 Miscellaneous Repairs and Maintenar 1,575.00 75 (1,500) 1.,635.87 300 (1,336) 900 5380 Painting Supplies 0.00 125 125 132.24 500 368 1,500 5395 Uniforms 0.00 0 0 0.00 400 400 800 5720 Locks 23.90 0 (24) 152.35 300 148 900 5760 Other Fire & Life Safety 479.16 0 (479) 595.16 140 (455) 1,570 TOTAL GENERAL REPAIR/MAIN' 2,182.72 600 (1,583) 2,820.61 3,240 419 10,470 UTILITIES Basis: Accrual ACCT # DESCRIPTION 5410 Electricity -Common Area 5450 Water/Sewer TIMBER RIDGE VILLAGE Income Statement For the Month Ending April 30 2005 MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY YTI) YTD YTD ANNUAL ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE BUDGET page 4 4,048.57 7,938 3,889 12,591.14 33,552 20,961 85,026 5,496.36 4,968 (528) 24,311.95 19,872 (4,440) 62,116 TOTAL UTILITIES 9,544.93 12,906 3,361 36,903.09 53,424 16,521 147,142 ,LANITORIAL 5510 Janitorial -Labor/Contract 5520 Janitorial - Supplies 5530 Carpet/Drape Cleaning (400.00) 0 400 (400.00) 0 400 0 56.70 125 68 106.01 500 394 1,500 0.00 0 0 558.30 0 (558) 2,100 (~ TOTAL JANITORIAL (343.30) 125 468 264.31 500 236 3,600 OTHER EXPENSES 5830 Property Insurance 5,380.30 5,295 (85) 21,521.20 21,180 (341) 63,540 TOTAL OTHER EXPENSES 5,380.30 5,295 (85) 21,521.20 21,180 (341) 63,540 TOTAL EXPENSES 44,693.77 44,476 (218) 171,979.24 196,947 24,968 552,094 NET OPERATING INCOME 83,482.65 83,071 412 336,023.50 323,591 12,433 1,002,570 OWNER EXPENSES 6110 Accounting/Audit 6151 Remediation 1,500.00 2,900 0.00 0 1,400 5,000.00 5,900 900 5,900 0 1,023.67 0 (1,024) 0 TOTAL OWNER EXPENSES 1,500.00 2,900 1,400 6,023.67 5,900 (124) 5,900 INTEREST & MISCELLANEOUS INCOME Basis: Accrual TIMBER RIDGE VILLAGE Income Statement For the Month Ending Apri130 2005 ACCT MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY YTll YTD YTD ANNUAL # DESCRIPTION ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE BUDGET 8105 Interest Income -Miscellaneous 469.10 360 109 1,594.25. 1,440 .154 4,320 TOTAL 1[NT & A4ISC INCOME 469.10 360 109 1,594.25 1,440 154 4,320 CASH FLOW AVAILABLE FORDF 82,451.75 80,531 1,921 331,594.08 319,131 12,463 1,000,990 INTEREST EXPENSE 6165 Letter of Credit Fees 6170 Financing Fees 6202 MISC Interest Expense 6205 Interest Expense -Series A 6210 Interest Expense -Series B 60,690.15 61,023 333 120,713.37 122,046 1,333 244,092 5,945.31 5,945 0 15,840.31 11,890 (3,950) 23,780 1,250.00 1,250 0 5,000.00 5,000 0 15,000 47,651.10 31,708 (15,943) 172,061.29 126,832 (45,229) 380,496 7,578.00 7,578 0 30,312.00 30,312 0 90,259 TOTAL INTEREST EXPENSE 123,114.56 107,504 (15,611) 343,926.97 296,080 (47,847) 753,627 INCOME BEFORE DEPR AND AMA (40,662.81) (26,973) (13,690) (12,332.89) 23,051 (35,384) 247,363 AMORTIZATION AND DEPRECIATION 6470 Amortization 3,586.50 3,587 6480 Depreciation Expense 43,787.17 43,787 1 14,346.00 14,348 0 175,148.68 175,148 2 43,044 (1) 525,444 TOTAL AM012T AND DEPR 47,373.67 47,374 0 189,494.68 189,496 1 568,488 NET INCOME/(LOSS) (88,036.48) (74,347) (13,689) (201,827.57) (166,445) (35,383) (321,125) TIMBER RIDGE VILLAGE Income Statement Basis: Accrual For the Month Ending April 30 2005 " ACCT MONTHLY MONTHLY MONTHLY YTD YTD YTD ANNUAL # DESCRIPTION ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE BUDGET pave 6 CASHFLOW ADJUSTMENTS -CHANGES IN: FIXED ASSETS DEPR. & AMORT. Depr. & Amort. 47,373.67 DEBT SERVICE PYMTS / ESCROWS 1040 Replacement Reserve Fund (41.10) 1050 Series B Bond Fund 0.00 1120 Debt Service Reserve Fund (27.63) 1121 Debt Service Reserve - B (353.21) 2080 Bonds Payable - B 0.00 RECEIVABLES AND OTHER ASSETS 1300 Accounts Receivable ~ (2,306.21) OTHER LIABILITIES 2010 Accounts Payable 18,261.91 2035 Other Accruals (667.00) 2050 Accrued Interest Payable 9,745.35 2055 Prepaid Rent (102,125.00) Security Deposits (751.63) DISTRH3UTIONS /CONTRIBUTIONS 47,374 0 189,494.68 189,496 0 (41) (139.08) 0 0 0 (0.02) 0 0 (28) (93.92) 0 0 (353) (1,200.53) 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 (2,306) (8,417.50) 0 0 18,262 (1,916.06) 0 0 (667) (2,668.00) 0 0 9,745 39,734.44 0 0 (102,125) (22,168.11) 0 0 (752) (756.05) 0 (1) 568,488 (139) 0 0 0 (94) 0 (1,201) 0 0 (130,000) (8,418) ~ 0 (1,916) 0 (2,668) 0 39,734 0 (22,168) 0 (756) 0 TOTAL CASI-IFLOW ADJUSTMEN (30,890.85) 47,374 (78,265) 191,869.85 189,496 2,374 438,488 NET CASHFLOW (118,927.33) (26,973) (91,954) (9,957.72) 23,051 (33,009) 117,363 TIMBER RIDGE VILLAGE APARTMENTS APRIL, 2005 VARIANCE REPORT OPERATING INCOME: Monthly Rent Laundry Income GROUNDS 5625 Snow Removal REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE 5370 Misc Repairs and Maint UTILITIES 5410 Electricity Common Area Monthly Rent is under budget $2,034 due to people skipping and this is our slow rental time. Laundry income is over budget $1,200 due to higher than expected laundry use. Snow removal has a negative variance of $2,315 due to the timing of the invoice. Repairs has a negative variance of $1,500 because of damage done by vandalism. We will recapture the expense from Vail Resorts. Electricity common area is under budget $3,889 due to a lower occupancy because of the mold problem. YEAR TO DATE TOTAL EXPENSES ARE UNDER BUDGET $24,968 YEAR TO DATE NET OPERATING INCOME IS UNDER BUDGET $12,433 Owners Expense Interest Expense 6110 Accounting/Audit Accounting and audit is under budget $1400 due to the timing of the expense. 6205 Interest expense - series A Interest Expense Series - A is over budget $15,943 due to reclassification of financing fees in the budget. Page 1 Database: CORUM_MRI BALANCE SHEET Page: 1 ENTITY: TBR Corum Real Estate Group Date: 6/2/2005 TIMBER RIDGE VILLAGE Time: 12:59 PM Accrual Apr 2005 ASSETS Current Assets Cash 4,844.18 Restricted Cash-Security Deposits 17,947.37 CASH TRUSTEE ACCOUNTS Replacement Reserve Fund 90,951.35 Series A Bond Fund 0.48 Series B Bond Fund 0.02 Debt Service Reserve Fund 17,569.56 Debt Service Reserve - B 224,582.97 Accounts Receivable 11,762.59 Prepaid Insurance 5,380.30 Total Current Assets 373,038.82 Investment in Real Estate Land Costs 4,399,500.00 Building 15,578,000.00 Computer & Equipment 30,897.00 Less: Accum Depreciation (941,423.21) Total Investment in Real Estate 19,066,973.79 Intangibles Bond Cost 825,897.55 Accum Amort Bond Cost (76,414.00) Total Intangibles 749,483.55 TOTAL ASSETS 20,189,496.16 ~:- Database: CORUM_MRI BALANCE SHEET Page: 2 ENTITY: TBR Corum Real Estate Group Date: 6/2/2005 'T'IMBER RIDGE VILLAGE Time: 12:59 PM Accrual Apr 2005 LIABILITIES & SHAREHOLDER'S EQUITY Current Liabilities Accounts Payable 112,824.07 Security Deposit Payable 17,552.50 Other Accruals 5,995.00 Accrued Interest Payable 109,176.45 Total Current Liabilities 245,548.02 Other Current Liabilities Prepaid Rent 1,327.50 Total Other Current Liabilities 1,327.50 Long Term Debt Bonds Payable - A 19,025,000.00 Bonds Payable - B 1,455,000.00 Notes Payable-Townof Vail 1,000,000.00 Total Long Term Debt 21,480,000.00 SHAREHOLDER'S EQUITY Equity (1,335,551.79) Current Year Profit (Loss) (201,827.57) Total Shareholder's Equity (1,537,379.36) TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY 20,189,496.16 TIMBER RIDGE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CORPORATION OJECTED CASH FLOW NUARY 2005 THROUGH DECEMBER 2005 Actual Jan-05 INCOME Unrestricted Cash Balance S 14,801 Updated 5127105 Actual Actual Feb-05 Mar-05 Actual Aor-05 Mav-05 Jun-05 Jul•05 Aug-05 Seo-05 Oct-05 Nov05 Dec-05 51,235 57,679 521,647 54,644 536,173 (S49,539) (5100,379) (576,756) (553,133) (S90,044) (568,037) Rental Income 123,945 126,988 122,249 124,898 118,341 118,945 120,945 123,945 123,945 123,945 123,945 123,945 Insurance reimb kitchen fire (expense paid) 21,145 (14,057) Credits for 6 Units not occupied by Vail (22,107) TOTAL CASH AVAILABLE 5138 746 5128 223 5107,821 5146,545 5144,329 5155,118 557,349 523,566 547,189 S70,812 533,901 555,908 EXPENSES OperatinglOwner Expenses 29,906 68,026 46,744 34,944 60,505 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 47,000 LC Fees - Qtrly US Bank 60,690 0 0 60,023 0 60,690 60,690 0 0 60,690 0 0 Mold Remediation 6,925 11,033 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Debt Service: Avg 2.5% Avg 2.6°k Avg 2.7% Avg 2.9% Avg 3,1 °k Avg 3.2% Est 3.2% Est 3.3% Est 3.3% Est 3.4% Est 3.4°k Est 3.5°k Series A Interest-Monthly 39,989 41,485 39,431 46,734 47,651 51,498 50,038 53,322 53,322 53,166 54,938 54,729 Series B Interest -Semi Annual 0 0 0 0 0 45,469 0 0 0 0 0 45,469 Series BPrincipal -Annual 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 130,000 TOTAL EXPENSES AND DEBT SERVICE 137,510 120,544 86,175 141,701 108,156 204,657 157,728 100,322 100,322 160,856 101,938 277,198 MONTHLY CASHFLOWI (DEFICIT/ (13,5651 6,444 13,967 116,8031 31,330 185,712) 150,8401 23,623 23,623 (36,9111 22,007 (153,253) FUNDING /DISTRIBUTIONS) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ENDING CASH BALANCE 1 235 7 679 21 647 4,844 36,173 (49,539) (100,379) (76,7561 153,1331 190,044) (68,037) (221,2901 US Bank Fee Date 10115-1!15105 1115-4/15/05 4115-7115105 7115-10115105 10115.1115106 NOTE: US Bank quarterly pymts are due in the first month of the quarter. Currenty we owe 560,690 for 411 5-711 510 5 and it should have been paid in April 2005. In April, Corum invoices of $8,165 for 411-4115 payroll and March reimbursables were held and paid the first of May. insurance settlement for kitchen fire in L•12 for 521,145 -payout for restoration 514,057 TRAHC has not funded the US Bank Repl. Reserve, Rate Cap Escrow or the Bond Reserve Fund since inception. These are required fundings that have not happened due to TRAHC cashflow and are not listed above. Memorandum To: Vail Town Council From: Community Development -William T. Carlson Date: June 6, 2005 Subject: Town Clean-Up Day 2005 I. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this memo is to provide the Town Council with an update on the annual clean-up day that was held on May 14, 2005. The annual clean-up day has been occurring for approximately 28 years in the Town of Vail. The purpose of this event is to clean the Town after the spring melt. Since 2000, the Town has offered a $25 donation to a local charity or group in the name of each volunteer that participates in the Town clean- up. This is done to help support local non-profit organizations willing to help the Town in the annual event. The Town Clean-Up Day is made possible by generous donations of food and other resources from local businesses and restaurants. The event also promotes greater community involvement. II. EVENT OVERVIEW • Total participation: 105 volunteers • Estimated amount of garbage collected: 5.9 tons • Clean-Up Day Chefs: Ernst Larese (Swiss Hot Dog Co.), Mike Fernandez and Ben Gilbert (Hoe's BBQ) • Clean-Up Day Team: Russ Forrest, Sean Koenig, Bill Carlson, Ernest Chavez, and a crew of 8 front Public Works • Contributors:, Moe's BBQ, Swiss Hot Dog, Cascade Resort (Chaps Restaurant), Ace Hardware, Bully Ranch Restaurant, Safeway Market, City Market, Westside Cafe, Marriott Hotel, Gasthause Grammshammer, NobeUSysco, West Vail Liquor, Conoco Gas Station, KNUT, KDKE, and JACK Radio Stations, Vail Daily, Town of Vail Public Works, Vail Recreation District, Gourmet Cowboy, Donovan Pavilion, and Eagle County Landfill • Total Event Budget: $5800.00 • Total Event Cost: $4,337.50; $2,625.00 -contributions, $1,312.50- T-shirts, Newspaper Ads are Free -Radio Ads $400.00 *** All Food and Drink was donated by the above sponsors *** • 2005 Contributions made by the Town of Vail: • $275 to Battle Mountain High School Boys Basketball Team; Box 249, Minturn 81645 • $225 to Battle Mountain High School Girls Basketball Team; Box 5477, Vail 8165 ;~ • $175 to Vail Mountain Rescue Group; Box 1597, Vail, 81657 • $50 to Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, 183 Gore Creek, Vail 81657 • $700 to Battle Mountain High School Volleyball Team, Box 70 S. Frontage Rd., Vail • $25 to Literacy Project; Box 608, Minturn 81645 • $25 to Boy Scout Troop 231; 1803 Shasta Place, Vai181657 • $200 to Girl Scout Troop 154; Box 1405, Vail 81657 • $50 to Eagle County Humane Society; Box 4105, Eagle 81631 • $75 to Eagle Valley Christian Academy; 39209 Hwy 6, Avon 81629 • $50 to Eco Trail; Box 1070 Gypsum, 81637 • $125 to EVAS, Box 4923, Vail, Colorado 81657 • $25 to Gore Range Natural Science School; Box 250, Red Cliff, CO .81649 • $250 to Battle Mountain High School Dance Team; send to Alpine Bank 10 W Beaver Creek Blvd. PO Box 7330, Avon, CO 81620 Attn: Andrea Glass • $25 to Eagle River Watershed Council at PO Box 10, Red Cliff, CO 81649 . • $25 to Vail Library; Meadow Dr., Vail • $25 to American Cancer Society; 2754 Compass Dr., Ste 328, Grand Junction, CO 81506 • $100 to Vail Child Care Center; 2109 N Frontage Rd., Vail • $50 to Edwards Elementary School; 0112 Meile Ln, Edwards, CO • $25 to Bnai Vail; 19 Vail Rd. Vail, CO 81657 • $25 to Battle Mountain High School Football Team; Box 249, Minturn, CO 81645 • $75 to Salvation Army; 0090 Lariat Loop, Edwards, CO 81632 • $25 to Battle Mountain National Honor Society; 0750 Eagle Rd., Avon 81620 105 people @ $25.00/person Organization Athletic Teams Scouting Troops Non-profit organizations TOTALS $2625 Total Number & Percentage 59 56% 9 9% 37 35% 105 100% Charity &Non-Profit Contribution A Vail resident has suggested businesses and/or individuals "match" the Town of Vail's $25.00 charity or non-profit group contribution. The Community Development Department recommends the Town Council discuss this idea and if so desired, consider changing the direction of the charity contribution aspect of the clean up day event. VAIL VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. President -Alan Kosloff Secretary -Ellie Caulkins Treasurer -Patrick Gramm Executive Director -Jim Lamont Directors: Judith Berkowitz -Dolph Bridgewater -Bob Galvin -Ron Langley -Bill Morton - Gretta Parks -Richard Conn To: Mayor Rod Slifer and Town Council From: Jim Lamont Date: June 15, 2005 RE: VVHA-Crossroads Redevelopment Report, Town Council Public Hearing June 21, 2005 Introduction: The community has not, as yet, made up its mind about the redevelopment of the Crossroads at Vail. There are several interests, which vigorously differ with several aspects of the proposal. There are others, with opposing views, which just as vigorously, argue their issues of "community need." The community is in transition; no one faction can have its sway. Therefore, compromise is necessary. What should that compromise be? The community is literally at a crossroads. The Crossroads project; whatever its final form will be a compromise. This report explores the potential grounds for a compromise that will allow for redevelopment of the Crossroads at the Vail site. The Vail Village Homeowners Association is participating in the public process addressing the redevelopment of the Crossroads Shopping Center in Vail Village. This report is a reflection of our participation. The reader now shares the issues put to the Association's Board of Directors for their consideration. The project has been reviewed with the Association's "principles of good governance." It is the Association's principle that property owners in similar circumstances should share common rights of property and zoning. The Association's principles include a belief that the grants of "special privilege" should not be given, whereby one property owner diminishes the rights of his neighbor or others in the community. Further, it is the Association's position that the Special Development District as applied in the Town of Vail is and continues to be an abusive grant of special privilege. The Association recognizes that there arises from time to time, the need to rectify deficiencies, physical and otherwise, in a neighborhood and the community. Development can be a worthy end to accomplish public benefit. However, there is the potential for misunderstanding over what constitutes a "worthy development" or "developer." The Board of Directors holds the position that this property should be rebuilt, because of its age and condition. However, the rebuilding, should it occur, is to avoid significantly altering the appearance or fabric of the community. The allocation of "developer provided benefits," because of the lack of definition about what is a "public benefit," makes the process prone to abuse. The determination of "public benefit" requires the closest public scrutiny. To avoid difficulties about what are appropriate "public benefits," the debate must be transparent, open, and available to the public. A clear distinction must be drawn between property owner improvements, which are required to reasonably do business and those that more directly benefit the "practical needs" of the public interest, such as roadway improvements. The responsibility to provide "public benefit" improvements belongs to the developer. In return, it is the responsibility of the public to make "necessary and practical" improvements, which have a direct relationship (nexus) to the impacts associated with the project. The proposal is being judged from two perspectives, the relative size of this proposal to its immediate predecessors in the zoning process and adjacent neighbors. The second, the breaking-of-new-ground on which future precedents will be set. The Town Council has the final say on this matter. Homeowner Association Position: The Homeowners Association has approached this application from the perspective that the Crossroads Center, as it currently exists, is in need of being rebuilt. The manner in which it will be rebuilt is the subject of public debate and consideration by the Vail Town Council and the broader community. The Homeowners Association has prepared this report, not as a final recommendation, but as informational advisory, representing the perspectives of it constituencies. Conclusion: The author remains to be convinced that the Crossroads at Vail proiect has fully represented it impacts. The zoning deviations appear to benefit the developer more than the public. It is su~~ested that the Board of Directors either individually or as the Board forward their recommendation with respect to the proposed compromise and an oy ther position of which then are desirous. The reader's conclusions should be communic_a_ted to the Vail Town Council in the form of an email FAX or standard letter. Communications with Town Council Recommended: Contact Vail Town Council: Email: towncouncil(a,vailgov.com; Voicemail: 970-479-].860; Fax: 970-479- 2157; US mail: 75 South Frontage Road West, Vail, CO 81657. Contact Vail Village Homeowners Association: In order of priority: Email; wha(a,vail.net, web site; www.vailhomeowners.com, Voice MaiVFAX; (970) 827-5856, Post Office Box 238, Vail, Colorado 81658 Crossroads Issues of Controversy: The factors being decided must consider circumstances as they presently exist or as they may reasonably exist in the future. The specific issues that remain controversial are as follows. 1. Height: Is the building too tall in comparison with its surroundings? 2. Building Bulk and Mass: Is the apparent size of the building too large in comparison with its surroundings 3. Public Benefits -Zoning Deviations verses Public Benefits: Is there ample restitution for extraordinary costs to the public infrastructure and other relevant matters resulting from the development, as compared to the zoning concessions being required by the developer? a. If public benefits are not sufficient how much should the density and height be reduced or should the payment for public costs be increased? 4. Architectural Style and Design: Does the architectural style of the proposal have a compatible aesthetic relationship to the adjacent properties, neighborhood, and the community-at-large? 2 5. Special Development District: Should the project be approved under the provisions of the Special Development District or remain as, Commercial Service Center, its standard (underlying) zone district designation? 6. No Hotel Rooms: How many hotel rooms should be provided in the project? 7. Additional Conditions of Approval: Are there additional conditions that should be attached to approval of the project? The recommendation by the Planning Commission and Town Staff are appended to this report. Link: PEC Public Hear Summary with Conditions of Approval 4/25/05 Link: Crossroads Town of Vail Staff Report Apri125 2005 8. Legal Issues: a. SDD/Special Privilege: Is it a grant of "special privilege" and does the Town of Vail have the legal authority to modify zoning regulations through the application of Special Development Districts, whereby zoning standards are altered for a particular property in exchange for financial or other types of compensation or restitution paid by the developer to the town? b. Master Plan Compliance: To what degree is the Town of Vail bound to comply with adopted master plans and what is the process for master plan adoption and amendment? niscucsinn~ Legal Issues: The zoning for the project is proposed as a Special Development District. The history of Special Development Districts in Vail has a stormy legal legacy. The District Court has rejected at least two court challenges against the Special Development District. The most recent conflict resulted in a punitive financial judgment against the plaintiffs, who were adjacent property owners. However, it is the opinion of some legal authorities that the judgment had no bearing on the validity of the Special Development District as a valid method of zoning. The court's remedy, should flaws have been found with any Special Development District, is to remand the matter back to the Town of Vail for rehearing so that the flaws maybe corrected. This could mean that only a portion of the process would have to be cured, or in the extreme, that the deficient application would have to be filed again, as a new application, and the matter reheard by the reviewing bodies in the Town of Vail. Special Development District must prove Public Benefit: The developer is using the Special Development District zoning classification so he can obtain deviations from the development standard of the underlying zoning district. The determination of deviation is based on a set of criteria, which must be satisfied before approval can be granted. One of those criteria requires proof of public benefits. Proof of public benefits has come to mean a sum of money or resources that offset the cost to necessary public infrastructure and quality-of- life facilities. SDD Review Process Flawed: The Special Development District approval process allows the avoidance of public scrutiny through the application of "contract negotiation" procedures. The approval process for a Special Development District (SDD) is a negotiation between the Town and the developer. It is a bargaining for "public benefits" in exchange for "deviations" from the zoning regulation. The zoning designation for a SDD site is known as the "underlying zone district." The negotiation usually results in increased density and the exceeding of other zoning standards of the "underlying zone district," such as height, setbacks, parking, etc. 3 The Town considers its deliberation about "public benefits" to be contract negotiations and therefore, subject to executive privilege. The Council holds its substantive deliberations about public benefits in executive session. The Town Staff are the "gatekeepers" of the negotiation process. They make recommendation directly to the Town Council in executive session. The staff maintains an exclusive franchise over the negotiation be enforcing a condition that "ex parte" contact between public officials and their constituents on matter is prohibited. The public is "frozen out" of the negotiations process. "Ex parte" contact typically applies to the deliberation of judges and juries. The Town Staff enforcement of "ex parte" contact, allows written communication to occur. Personal contact can be made but the Councilperson is subject to legal challenge, if they take a public position "for" or "against" the proposal, prior to officially taking public testimony. The Town staff conducts pre-meetings briefing with the planning commission and other authorities that discusses arguments in favor or against a SDD proposal. Tactical strategies are also discussed in these sessions. Official minutes or a report are not kept of the pre-meetings. The time and location of the pre-meeting is included in the published agenda of the Commission or Board. Point of Compromise: Residents, citizens, and property owners have the right to directly discuss the proposal with members of Commissions, Boards, and the Town Council. All discussions regarding terms of contract will be held in public meetings at which the public can attend. The meetings must be electronically tape recorded for the public record. The details of discussions between two or more Council members must be reported electronically on the public record within 24 hours. Developer Claimed Public Benefits: Central Plaza: The Crossroads developer is proposing as one of his public benefits, the creation of a large central plaza. The density that could have been built on the footprint of the plaza has been replaced on to the residential wings, causing them to be higher than the allowed 38' building height for its underlying zone district. Point of Compromise: The relocation of density above height limitations of the underlying zone shall not be considered a public benefit. Relocation of density above height limitations shall be subject to proof of public benefit and restitution. Commercial Uses: the developer is claiming commercial uses, such as the movie theaters, bowling alley, and other commercial use as public benefits. Many believe that these are not public benefits, but are necessary costs associated with attracting guests and customers. Many interests believe that the proposal does not meet the required test of having sufficient public benefit. Point of Compromise: The building must contain one floor of commercial uses. Point of Compromise: Cultural and recreational amenities, available to the general public, including community use, should be considered a "partial" public benefit. Other Claimed Public Benefits: There are other claimed public benefits that are identified in the Town of Vail staff memorandum, a copy of which resides on the Homeowners Association's web site. The following are other points of compromise by category that should be considered by the Council. 4 Point of Compromise: Higher priority should be required for public benefits, which improve "necessary" public infrastructure and safety. Affordable Housing: Point of Compromise: An equivalent of at least one floor of the building must contain a mix of affordable housing, which provides domestic living units for full-time residences, who are multi-aged, including those needing elder or special care, which will house, families, children, couples, and single persons. Environmental: Point of Compromise: The building must be build to LEEDS certified "green" building standards. Mass Transportation: Point of Compromise: The building owners must participate in the future construction of utilities and infrastructure improvements, such as a mass transit system and roadway improvements. Parking: Point of Compromise: Developer provided parking spaces, available to the general public and community use, should be considered a "partial" public benefit. Point of Compromise: Subterranean interconnection of parking structures is considered a public benefit for reasons of traffic and life safety. No Hotel Rooms in the Proposal: The residential portion of the Crossroads will, according to the developer, operate as a condominium hotel, having traditional hotel guest services, like a front deck, restaurants, etc. The Town of Vail has not legal power to require condominium units to be made available for short-term occupancy, like a hotel room. The Vail Plaza and Fours Seasons Special Development Districts both are required to provide hotel rooms. In these developments it was considered a "public benefit" to provide hotel rooms in the development. The amount of hotel rooms over an above that required by the underlying zone district should be considered a public benefit. Point of Compromise: The building must contain one floor of hotel. Point of Compromise: Relocation of density for hotel rooms above the 38"height limitations shall be subject to the proof of public benefit and restitution. Height, Setbacks, and Density are Public Benefit/Political Decisions: The height, setbacks, and density of the development is a political decision made by the Town Council. The costs, associated with public benefit improvements can be compensated for by increasing the height of the building, reducing building setbacks, and increasing the allowable density. The relative height of the proposed Crossroads project is similar to the Special Development Districts for the Vail Plaza Hotel, now under construction, and the Four Seasons scheduled to begin this autumn. Other factors are variable among the three projects. There is no foolproof guarantee that these projects will accomplish their economic intent. Historically, shifts in national and international markets can readily deflate anticipated demand in a local real estate market. An approval, for a project that has not gone into construction, having a development program that is "out-of- demand," could be more of a hindrance than anticipated. One of the arguments being made by the Crossroad's developer is that the relocation of density from the area he is proposing to be a plaza, should then qualify as a public benefit. The proposed plaza is being built, on land scheduled to be built upon, in according with the Town of Vail's master plan. The developer in the process of relocating the density allocated to one part of the site to another comes into conflict with the height requirement. The height limitation established for the proposed Four Seasons and Vail Plaza Hotel, have similar provisions. Limitations identified by the Town's Master Plan have been overturned. The developer is claiming that by retaining the density and providing a plaza he is doubling the public benefit. He does not recognize that he is merely displacing the impact from one locale to another. He maybe exacerbating the impacts because he is creating ahigh-rise development that places different and greater impacts upon the public infrastructure. The developer is claiming the right to increase the density on any portion of the site, even though it violates the height restriction or setback requirements. He chooses to believe that ill-formed density is a public benefit. Relocating density merely displaces impacts from one location to another. Point of Compromise: Reduce further the height, bulk, and mass of the project. Point of Compromise: There is no substantive public benefit when density is relocated from one portion of a site to another, if in its relocation it violates other zoning standards. Point of Compromise: The relocation of density allocated to the plaza area cannot be located above the 38' height limitations of the underlying zone. Point of Compromise: The relocation of density above height limitations of the underlying zone district shall not be considered a public benefit. Traffic Considerations: Traffic is one of the most important considerations that must be decided. Traffic engineers have analyzed the intersection of the South Frontage Road and Crossroads Chute (Village Center Drive). The additional traffic generated by the Crossroads redevelopment will push the traffic capacity to near unsafe conditions at the intersection. The South Frontage Road adjacent to the pro op sed project is one of the busiest and most important stretches of road in the entire community .~ ____ ,? t =.. s ,,...s !1M ~ h t ~ > - - __ _ _ - ~.___,~ y,~ - ~' `y-;';'~~`~,-'- ~4~.:xi1~=;:'~f :s~.~ a ."ic.wiFfl ~~ ~r ~++Y~~?~?°y~K,..,, - ---<- .' ~, v~~~., f .` . ~,. ^j ..~ y, ~ .~ v +.-~"2iil~t~"'-_-_._ Y+tiG~a~i-tit'icRTwF R a; ~ _ r ~ ~. ` ;; F~ ~ S. ~ 'f ~-, ~~ J~~ rat ~.~•~ ~+ ~' ~i`K _IL~8 ._ F ,Y - 1 . ~ ~ - ,~ t~ ~ ~t ''~~ '~` Proposed Vail Boulevard (South Frontage Road): Main Roundabout east to Blue Cow Chute illustrates proposed roundabout at the Crossroads Chute (Village Center Drive). Link: View graphic of proposed Vail Boulevard in greater detail 6 One of the routes that is necessary for the dispersed loading and delivery system requires an un-congested flow of traffic along the length of Vail Road, Willow Bridge Road, to East Meadow Drive and Crossroads Chute and its intersection with the South Front Road. Studies conducted for the Vail Front Door Project indicated a traffic stress point at Vail Road and Meadow Drive, which could have a deteriorating ripple effect, not only at this intersection, but the Main Vail Roundabout, as well. Gridlock could quickly appear. Major investment must be made to ensure that the entire downtown is as free as possible from gridlock. The proposed Crossroad's roundabout would provide an alternative route to disperse traffic should an unforeseen problem arise. The Crossroads roundabout insures the continuation and usefulness of a "limited access" traffic route between Check Point Charlie and the Crossroads Chute over the International Bridge. The Crossroads developer has agreed that he will finance a quarter of a roundabout for the Crossroads Chute and South Frontage Road. Traffic engineers agreed that a roundabout intersection would increase traffic flow and reduce safety problems associated with the Frontage Road. The cost of the intersection is estimated at $2 million. The Crossroad roundabout intersection improvement must follow on as one of the first phases of the project. The completion of the roundabout is critical to reducing the truck traffic, which uses the new streetscape improvements that are now being installed on Gore Creek Drive, Bridge Street and throughout the immediate neighborhood. The specific location for the roundabout remains under study, as it must be designed to handle bus traffic entering the adjacent bus station. It may require a substantial retaining wall on its north side. These and other public infrastructure items have been laid on the project's budget. Point of Compromise: The project causes the traffic safety of the intersection between the Crossroads Chute (Village Center Road) and South Frontage Road to become jeopardized, therefore, the Crossroads developer is to pay the full cost of the Crossroad's Chute roundabout and fix a date certain for its completion, which is to be within 12 months of the approval of this pending application. Loading and Delivery System: Crossroads, has agreed that it will use its enclosed truck-loading terminal as a member of the "dispersed terminal system." The purpose of the "dispersed terminal" system is to distribute goods throughout the commercial establishments in the Vail Village neighborhood. Point of Compromise: The building owners must agree to participate in the dispersed terminal loading and delivery system. The Cost of Public Benefits Determines the Building's Height and Size• The developer, in obtaining his permission from the Planning Commission to proceed for Council review, reduced the size of the building both above and below ground. The reduction underground, removed a substantial number of for sale or leased parking spaces, and the family entertainment center from the plan. What remains are the movie theaters and bowling alley. Above ground, the developer has made an attempt to reduce the height of building to be more compatible with it neighbors. As public benefits are attached to the project, the bigger the building becomes. Existing Site: 7 ~ y;,,,`:°_" x~... ~_4~w~:,.«;.,.x'.;.:A;~=:~y :"~",~~'°"~R•~r~~r .a.,w~,",~in,°A?"~,"~" . ;,~z t •>5~, ~'s~c~a .4•~0;,:"s.": • : =i~ ;r ;+i.l.,~,~~~, . ~(~'':d~g:J~~,;, b~ATe...;.~ ~~'~'J9~sy': ~.ax ~ ' •.q%«' ;,mJ:;'..:'., 5 j,; , ~;~a,; ~.w.. .;;~R' . , ,r„<s° ' -'~n:~, ~ m•,. se,.~;~'l.~: ^ k .J1D;' '~i ~ y,•' , ~ • ~:?a'?4;v:;;:': ~ ~ u~ ~~/H&~}~~,~4. • a.•,~' ; r"~4~' • Q_^ay :,y~a ,~y, . ~ ~`,~'jy,~,~~'~': <b, ~ r",' ^D. ~"T ~ 4 , ~ ~~Ty,~ • t g yt@ "~y ~,~.y`j~•%F,~ * ..M1 4? ,.N~.F , , . ~°°"a.~ „~,uw..,,. y 4 't Y•r 14 . . , . ~ =`~F~ ~'.ar~~ ~`q °PP~ ~ ~'~b ~ !.l . Yw ~ 7, ' yy .$r ~ ~ ~ Aerial Photo: Existing Site Architecture Style: Point of Compromise: Buitding architecture should be of a traditional or romanticized alpine theme. b ~y.Yb q~ 0.~ '3., ~ ~ 4 . ~ ~ :44 ~:,.Y ..k.... sq. t . ura .va"` p`~•: ~,r..' ~ ' .F .ff'i~ ~:e s~N~, _ o-,f °"X' £ ~ ' v'~ s ~ - ~ Mxg~L'.g1 '-:e ~ 2i u A `~t'"`,, s,:, d" ° ~3' 'z • • ~ .«r3„,~.t,'v~,c:., ihn'a' •s:,' . ^`~b- ,~°s- N'i,~. daac- ~'y~~ "->~k' "e,Z,,.' ~t ° ~ , ,-'M ..E? a ` . . 4 a:Z~=~p ~'N:'m ~ . . .i?` . ~Y;+.; f ..y: ; A~%":ry. ,e ' ~ ~ e,:;~?; 3;~ : ;2..: ° `Mw"`•a;N<. : .:p/ ,.,pY9';~^cn, ,y ,s,,~.y:"' ~:~:~`•'~e• G... ,b..,~.~':~~, I a t~;•~ ~u~~w ~ 4a r~ WZr ¢ ~ t Fy,?y-~,~ ~ r, 9 a •y.' 3. The style, while Alpine, distributes its bulk and mass in the configuration of a traditional Atlantic City beachfront hotel. The configuration does not necessarily reflect the characteristics of a European alpine mountain resort hotel. Link: Enlarged view of graphic 8 The architectural design concept has changed since the first proposal. The original design of the building facades was ahigh-tech, tailored alpine modern. In response to criticism, more stone and wood surfaces have been amended to the design, seeking to give the impression of a more romanticized architectural theme. Gables have been added to break up the profile of the roof. Of the two proposed schemes, the "contemporary design," is the most successful. The contemporary proposal was considered too great a contrast with the Sonnenalp and other surrounding buildings that have the more traditional European design styles of the 1970's and 80's. It should be assumed that the more traditional buildings in the immediate area would remain. The proposed structure, no matter the style, in its present configuration, will dominate and "overshadow" the neighborhood. Many are of the opinion that the revisions have not been as successful as anticipated. Specifically, there is a desire to reduce the apparent height and massiveness of the facade. fire •~~ 1 ~ ~ k4 ~ ~ r ~1 ~ IRL A~~ r,J ~ X -~~ - -. - _ __ ~.~._../ South Elevation: rr.m~. Y ~..:r ~ a~~~~11~ ~~ k7 1 1~~1J ~ r.,.. ~. ..~ .. .:° ~: / '~ i '~ ~~~r _ ~ ~ ? . ig) ~ ~~~ _.~~, iill~ ~ 11; €1 Il Ij _~C~~t-~1[' iikk ~,~ `'~ ~ Oli~ ~~ q ~ ~~ ~ ~~'~`-~ Y r.: ~ .~,~y 1II~ Ae i~; .~ w~aYy ~ • ~ 1 „~ ~ .... ` ~~-~ l ~..'..: ,_ ~ a, rr ....,,......-~-~ ~ 1, ~i~ ~ rms.. ~, ~r~-,i lir:~~:.:,~~. ~~ w~ East Elevation: w 4~ r ...: r/ w vv/ ~~~ •~1 A~i .-~-.._ ~ --•-w canuoz warrK ww wr~me / .~ . w-r=yr~nam / e Y MOOC •c 1yt/l/) / ~y ' `Y~^yf r yy~ A~~!` :5 ilk I ` ~ Y, '~Fll rKC~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 7~~~I ~e l~i~' ~. ~ ~ !~ ~ ~t~ll1 -fir t r. ^. r i s,... ~.. ~~ ~~~~ ~`~~~ f ~: wf.~t~r~~ ~~l ~.. ~ ~ ~ l~ 9 ... dr.dv. ~~wrr WOYrY m~ rr war y~rr i~ 4~~ d~ ~ M: ~ ~ si' '~o~`~`lst~~~ir~ ~' t~~~g ~ r~lE ~~. `` c~'.~m:'~ ~~ ~ gin'? ~~, `~'~ a ~i~i ~ ~~,.-_/~ ~~ West Elevation: r ~~ ..°, a IJ mtw ^_ ', ~~~~~ ' Cii7f~~~~~31 J. ~ I4i. •~~! _! r", ~I j r ,~'~~p~~t~~'~~~' .,'~ ~~ ~ i ~1 ~-2~ " ,~ _._._ ~~µ-`-- ~ ~~ ~T ~_ p ~1. `S I I..: .~ ~ ~r~~ L ~~ rrm Mr rre. (a.Yy y / ~.. e., / ~- 1W~ ~~ ' ~ r a.rrm ~wmrr, I..' ~ WrM.I ~.- wrs~r ~ .. ... .. 9 1~~~ f~.'~rii~"~~A~ ~.' ~r ..! •r.r North Elevation: Crossroads -Main Plaza: Z~~'~1:~1„e ~ ~ '-- -~ ~ r?..},' ~ 1 _~~ ? y~~w!k~ ~ . j ~ ~ ct ~~~,~ r 1-=- ... t , ~ ~ ~ , ~ , , ~ ..~~, . ~r'i ~ z ~~~';. , ~~,.: q~ 411ewW. .r~Y Point of Compromise: The design for the plaza should be taken from examples of some of the oldest public squares in Europe. The plaza should contain canopies of deciduous trees that share the public space. The canopy should be grown in areas created where groves of Aspens can thrive. The plaza should be a sanctuary for pedestrians and winged wildlife. In winter, the trees could support a dramatically lighted canopy, which shelters the ice skating rink. 10 Point of Compromise: There is no substantive public benefit when the developer claims as a "public benefit", those "streetscape improvements", which are necessary and reasonable to conduct the business of the development. Point of Compromise: The ice rink, its sunscreen, and fountain are to be considered public benefit, subject to replacement, operations, and management agreements with the Town of Vail and property owners. 4 ;r j f , = ~y f" , "'' vjt,> ` } ~. ' ~ `~~ ~ T ~ ~~1i y, j ~~"'"" ~'~'"'""1 T. i. - - ~, `` ~ w The apparent height and massiveness of the building are intended to be mitigated by a large plaza. The plaza is to contain an ice skating rink, and provide ample frontage for two commercial floors of business frontage arranged along atwo-story arc on the north side of the plaza. The plaza design is carnival, to a fault. It is near empty of permanent landscaping, most particularly trees. To date, there has been no explanation of how the ice rink will be screened from the melting rays of the sun summer or winter at 9,000 feet elevation. In all likelihood, the ice rink will require a large fabric canopy that is not shown on the plan. rF' _ -~-; ,~ ~ ~~ ~~ , ~~ , ~. ~~y r L ~) r i R~ ~ ~ ~ f SJ R~~ . '_"Wi 1 • ~ ~ ~ ff ~ ~ R ~ S~r~'. m ~~~~ ;~~, ~~ ' ~R There is a preoccupation with putting no obstructions to interrupt the view of the storefronts from the adjoining pedestrian street, which is East Meadow Drive. Ample opportunity exists to shape the landscaping to insure that public spectacles, planned for the space, will not be inordinately obstructed. Bulk and Mass: The building is being proposed as a unified architectural theme. Unity of architectural theme, a repetitive roof form and uncomplicated geometry are increasing the apparent bulk and mass of the proposal. A more "village like" appearance, with multiple romantic themes, could contribute to reducing the apparent bulk and mass. Point of Compromise: Reduce further bulk and mass of the project. 11 rte, `'^ F 3 _ ~m . a z -~L ~ = -t i ` :~ ~ ~. x !. ~ ,;,,~ ~ . ~ ~~- ~~ .~~ ,:~:- = . "tom `` `~ -~ . ~ ,, ~ ~ .~ ~M ~;y _ ~`, ,. i~ •4i •'9t. •~... 1 i ~ _. ~2 .^ Y r `, ~= -~ ~~ ~.. ~ ,,; - ~. .,~ - .. ~~ 4 ~ { it Above: Computer animat~iun of the hulk and nias of the ~~rupuscd ('ruaroa~l c~impared~with the Vail Village Inn and the Vail Plaza Hotel to the west. ~~~ A,r. ,rte ~ ,. - ~ ~'~ ~ ~', ~ .}~ i ~~~` ~ w Above Left: Computer animation showing the appar ent bulk and mass proposals the Four Seasons, viewed looking East along South Frontage Road towards Vail Plaza HoteINVI and Crossroads Above Right: Computer animation of the Crossroads proposal looking west along South Frontge Road with VVI/Vail Plaza Hotel and Four Season in the background Height: The developer is proposing a roof height at the peak of 98 feet, which is a height that is precedent setting. The Four Season SDD approval allowed a precedent setting height of 89 feet. Point of Compromise: Reduce further the height of the project. The following computer animation shows the amount of building above the height of a fixed plane. The computer generated floating matrix shows the zoning permitted height of 38 feet. At the required height the proposed Crossroads building will be "in scale" with it neighbors, as the "relative" heights of nearby buildings being near equal. 12 _._.. :.w+~• yT*,:,N ~"` . , i y,~ y ."y," :.~.. ,y ..... _. ; ,~_ ....~. 1 _. _ _ ~. ..: ~~~ ~ ~ ~ -sue {~- .., ' r- r ~.:. va .. ,. _ __.._ __ .. - ~ ._--~~ _ _ _ r - ~. I I C I i ~ I,~, _-._ _ - __i~~' .1.rr ~.. s.'.i ~; ~. R. '.rig. .. r '.'~.` H~~~ ~~~ ~' '~ ' ~ ~ 'l'11~k 4~. .:. ~ ~~~ r LL: ~ ,.. i I - _<~ ~~ ~~ ~ `~~ :~. Above: Illustrates the amount of building area above the zoning 38' height limitation. - - - u ~ _. ... ~ ~ - _._ u ,,~ cr~~~ ~~~ . r < y . ~•:' . ~~~ I Tj~ ~_ ~~ 1 ~, 1 y~: ,^ ~ '~ ;{ 'r=ag. ~' .~ -~: ''~ y~ ., ~ ,~ _ '~..s~~ Above: Illustrates the amount of Crossroads building located above a computer animation matrix at 89'. A computer animated matrix analysis shows that the proposed height of the Crossroad proposal is a precedent setting 98 feet. 13 The West Wing - Height relationship of the Crossroads West Wing with adjacent VVI: The graphics below illustrates the controversy with the neighboring Vail Village Inn. _._ ,-~ - -r~- ~=:- ~ ~ ~` -~ ' ~' ~,~t~~~..# ~tla®~ , t~l, _ ~ ~. , _t , .. - ~ ~~ ~e ~ .. ,M i-i~- ~^ III '~. e .. ~.. ~L ;~~ - ,~ -~'- S ~~ '~'1 L- --- i~.,. _a' .~ ~ "._ R_, ~iC! ':'~ '~ 4~ ~{ a ~ . sv- `~~*..br ~E~ t ~~ ~~ rid" ` ~t'T`' r~~ ' ~ ~' cl i ~~ „~~,o. ~..... ~~ ~ ~ ~ -=a ~° <. ~ ~ ~ _ _, . ' _~ _~_ .,,. _.a _ _. Above: Illustrates the scale and height differences between the proposed Crossroads and the existing Vail Village Inn. The animations show the effects of the difference between setback requirements between Crossroads and the existing VVI. The Crossroad proposal is a "zero" setback along Meadow Drive. Relative Setbacks and Height Conflict: The illustrations show the setbacks and relative height between the West Wing of the Crossroads and the Vail Village Inn. The magnitude of the Crossroads incursions dwarfs those of the immediately adjacent buildings of the Vail Village Inn on Meadow Drive. The Crossroad appears to close off Meadow Drive. The setbacks should be more similar between the two projects so that one does not dominate at the expense of the other. The vitality of pedestrian movement along Meadow Drive is dependent upon unblocked visibility. Point of Compromise: The south fagade of the west wing should be stepped-down further and kept to the same setback line as the adjacent structure at the Vail Village Inn facing East Meadow Drive. 14 - _ _ W, ` Stair-Stepping Height Minimal: The effect of minimally stair stepping from the frontage road to Meadow drive is evident on the Crossroad proposal. The West Wing in particular should hold to a similar height as the Vail Village Inn. It appears that the 38' height limitation should be enforced on the West Wing of the Crossroad proposal. Point of Compromise: The West Wing should be stepped-down; it should keep to the same step-down profile of the adjacent structures at the Vail Village Inn. Shadowing Impacts Neighbors: Continuous sun shadowing occurs during the "extreme" period of the day and seasonally. Adjacent property owners believe this to placing a hardship upon them, the benefit of which solely benefits to the new redevelopment. w G fJ r _,~ ., ~. ., .. >. ~ ~; '~ ~ ~_ ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~. < ~'. 1 - -~ ~ ~ i w ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 . ~} 5`t r! .... .: ~ .n to _~f ~1. , .. Above: Illustrates the shadowing the Crossroads West Wing will cast on the adjacent Vail Village Inn during certain times of the day and seasonally. Shadowing can be reduced through lowering and reconfiguring the Crossroads proposal. Point of Compromise: Meadow Drive frontage, Crossroads West Wing, remove two "step back bays" from the West Wing so that the "setback" of the street facade is the same for Crossroads as it is for the VVI. Reduce the height of third bay to a height corresponding to the adjacent structure at the Vail Village Inn. The height of the west wing should follow the profile of the adjacent structures on the Vail Village Inn site. Precedents for Increasing Building Height: The relationship of height among the three projects, under construction or approved, along the South Frontage Road are similar. What differs between them is the stepping-down of height between the South Frontage Road and Meadow Drive. Crossroad is proposing less stair stepping and retains a greater height on Meadow Drive, with less of a setback from the property line. The precedent setting height has been justified because the building will become a sound barrier for Vail Village to the traffic noise from the adjacent Interstate 70. The height that has been approved for the Four Season, Vail Village Inn, and Vail Plaza Hotel far exceeds the height necessary to block I-70 noise pollution 15 __ ~~ ,,. ~, .. ti '~ ,~ t "Siy.. .~;_»iF1Ra_~1 tc. E.7 ~L '~"_~' j'_,_ 1'!{,, ~~ R :, .. .. W' 3 ,~~,~ ' ~"t __ ~ _ ' ~~ ~ w~ .. t ~y a~' .r ,. I - -- ~ _ ~ -_ 8 ~.___ . Above: Illustrates the amount of building that is located above a 38' computer animation matrix showing the Four Seasons (left), the proposed Crossroads/Vail Village Inn/Vail Plaza Hotel (Center and Right). Comparison of Height of Crossroads with Vail Village Inn: The Crossroad proposal has proportionally, significantly more occupied area at a greater height than the Vail Village Inn. The amount of space is obtrusive and not readily apparent from drawn building elevations. The result of overlaying of the Vail Village Inn and Vail Plaza Hotel with the proposed Crossroads partially illustrates the differences. .. ~,.~~. d ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - - - - ~ -^ - - - - - - - - ~ 58~ 9~ - - - - - -.. _. - - - - - - - - - - - - CROSSROADS ~ ~ VILLAGE INN PLAZA VAIL PLAZA HOTEL GATEWAY ROUNDA i~ i __ 1 _ ~ i ~ , ._ -t A . .~~ i ~ w- ~ f ~ ' r- ~ •. _w ~...-..tea ~- I ~ ._ .. ,~ ~~ i ~~~ S, ~ ~ ~~ r, 1 __ ~ _F,~ ~ _ -, ' fl i ~ ~ ~~ i CR0551tf?AB5 ~' :- / / VILLAGE IN!J PLA7.A VA4L P{,AZA HOTEL. GATL1'iAY ROUNbAFiOUT ! 16 ~~ Above: Illustrates the amount of the Crossroads building located above the height of the Vail Village Inn and Vail Plaza hotel. Superimposing the image of the Vail Village Inn and Vail Plaza Hotel over the proposed Crossroad building makes the comparison. Developer Initiated Reductions of Building Height: The developer reduced the height of his initial proposal at the suggestion of the Planning Commission. However, the reduction in height of the initial design was not a realistic proposal and would not have received serious consideration. Therefore, the gesture of lowering of height only brought the Crossroad proposal in line with the Vail Plaza Hotel and Four Season. Comparative View Study of Height, Bulk, and Mass -Computer Graphic Photo Montage: The following illustration shows a before and after comparison of the views of the site. Note: The developer has shown some public officials a larger selection of the images. All images should be available to the Town Council and general public. r 4 ~~..: T[ ~ ~ _. ~ x Before and :~ftcr ~~icw From Main ~ ail Roundabinit: i, ~~ ~~ 4 _1 ~ "`.' ~ .~~'~ ^T 1K~. ~y~ li {9; . ^'~ ~' f a ,- x~ ,~ ~ ~ . ~,, ~ j~ ,,~i _ 1 ~ y' 4 y ~ r. ~~RR ttt f ~ _. Y , __ ` .. __ ~.~~ `.T~ 1 , i tr~l l' YG~I y` ~. ~~a° _._.~ Before and After View from International Bridge: ._ ~~~ yHi ~ .... ~~ ~.._ ~ `y ~'% 4 _ Y . ~i~~ ,~ ~ J ' ss {~ ~~~ ~~ ~ _ __ x rr~let~ ~ '~ ~ ~~ ', ti ~, ~~ ~. . 1 A ~ ~?. 4 .Y~1 "~-`_~ ;~ -- ~.~-' r" ~' ' ~. ~ ~~ la _, y ~ ^, ~~ ~``.y i ' ~.T_ ~~ ~ ~t ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ` ; f h _ ~. l~ ~ ~ Kl~a _'c'*' l~~ti' ~ ~ _ ('. }lid ~~ I ~~~ ~~ ', Y ~/yFI~ ~{5 "Hl 17 .i' -. _ f ~.>~ r ~~ j 1 v.~ ~-.4h ~~ *~ i,~~M-~ ~~ ~ y ,~ F More and After View From East Meadow Drive Looking East: 1!V''p ' . ~C ~ ~ ~ I ~r- l ~ ~ ~ 0 i - p * ~ l:r 1 ~ r, ~. ~ ~; " t ~~` ~.w ~ ~. .~ ilrr 77 y ~ ~ . ~~ ~,,,x ~, ` J ~ r k ~ ~~ ti '~;' `r 1~ `~ ~~~ ~,~~~ i' - ,.~ ~ ~ t, - ~ ~. f ~. , ,. ~, _ :~ .. I Additional Information is available on the Association's website. Please forward to appropriate parties. Post Office Box 238 Vail, Colorado 81658 Telephone: (970) 827-5680 Voice MaiUFAX: (970) 827-5856 e-mail: wha(a~vail.net web site: www.vailhomeowners.com 18 Vail Town Council 75 Vail Road Vail, Colorado 81657 June 18, 2005 Dear Council Members, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Crossroads redevelopment. While in favor of seeing Crossroads redeveloped, there remain significant issues that concern me both as a long-time resident and business owner of Vail. The proposal is too massive for the site and varies greatly from both the underlying zoning and the 1Jrban Design Guidelines. The "public benefits" of the proposal have been misleadingly exaggerated by the proponents and thus the vaziances aze not justified under the Special Development language in the Vail Municipal Code. The architecture is not at all befitting the alpine environment of Vail Village or of the Meadow Drive neighborhood. And the massive height of the proposal will completely sever the views to the mountains north east and west of Vail Village from Willow Bridge Road and from Meadow Drive. As a long-time tenant of Village Inn Plaza, I am deeply troubled by the lack of consideration this proposal has given to our property. The setbacks on the west side of the Crossroads proposal should remain at ten feet and the massive wall abutting our property should be scaled back and the pedestrian linkages improved. I am particularly concerned by the prospect of chain stores coming in to Vail Village. Knowing personally the seasonality of the local business climate and having some idea of what the rents that will be charged at Crossroads, I fear that this is a real possibility should the proposal be approved. I hope that you will deny the application for a Special Development District at the Crossroads property. incerely, .-~ , Nanc Tezl 100 E. Meadow Dr., #5 Vail, Colorado 81657 ~_ Village Inn Plaza, Phase III, Condominium Association 100 East Meadow Drive, Vail, Colorado 81657 June 21, 2005 Vail Town Council 75 Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 RE: Ordinance for Special Development District No. 39 to Allow for the Redevelopment of Crossroads Dear Members of the Vail Town Council: I am writing to you as President of the Board of Village Inn Plaza, Phase III, Condominium Association regarding the ordinance before you today on first reading to establish Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads. Our homeowners urge you to request further changes to the proposed Crossroads redevelopment project before granting it your approval. I. Western Facade: 1. Height of the Crossroads Western Facade: While there has been some diminution of the overall height of Crossroads since it was brought before you in January, it is still massive-the tallest building in Vail. We have consistently urged further reductions in height for the building's western fagade immediately adjacent to us so that we are not faced with the massive "wall" of the new building right at the twenty foot setback line, a wall which is six stories high virtually the entire distance along our joint property line. The perfunctory stepping down to which the developer has acquiesced is to five and then four stories for very short distances right 'at the project's south property line at East Meadow Drive. We believe that Crossroads should be required to step down in height in increments of roughly equal length from six stories at the South Frontage Road, to five stories, to four stories, to three stories, and to not greater than two stories by East Meadow Drive, particularly since there is no setback from the south property line. 2. Loading Area: The Town of Vail has required the developer to have a large loading area in the new building's northwest corner to serve not only the new building but also other buildings in the vicinity. Parts of this loading dock are well within the western twenty foot setback line, coming virtually to our joint property line. The siting of this loading area will result in the destruction of approximately 13 mature trees and seven larger shrubs, which are currently located along our joint property line in that area. There is no requirement by the Town for mitigation of this loss, and this is not at all tolerable. Since last fall we have consistently expressed concern about ~•RE: Crossroads Redevelopment Ordinance page 2 the adjacent location of this loading area and have predicated any acquiescence regarding it on our expressed presumption that the Town of Vail will have regulations regarding its use which will not permit truck noise and truck exhaust to plague us. We have requested assurances that such will be the case, but the Town of Vail has, to date, done absolutely nothing to respond to or to assuage our concerns related to this. We continue to express our grave concerns regarding this and note that our cooperation for the construction of this loading area and the various stories below and above it will seemingly be necessary since it comes virtually to our property line. At this juncture in time, it would seem unwise for us to cooperate with the construction of something which will have an exceedingly deleterious effect upon our nearby homeowners from truck noise and truck exhaust fumes, from the loss of trees and shrubs which could have had some mitigating effect on the mass of the nearby large building, and from the intrusion of this part of the huge building almost the entire distance into the twenty foot set back. As an aside, the grove of attractive large confiers which look so nice just west of the loading area on the developer's North Elevation drawing cannot possibly be planted there since there is no earth into which to place the grove as shown! 3. Plantscape and Hardscape in the Vicinity of Our Joint Property Line: We have discussed in a very agreeable way with the developer (and the Town staff for that matter) both plantscaping and hardscaping possibilities related to adjoining portions of our property, both along East Meadow Drive in our existing plaza there and in the vicinity of the pathway connecting Village Inn Plaza's upper retail area with the Crossroads retail area, a pathway put in place because of wishes of the Town. The linking landscape could be a beautiful, park-like area, which could be a notable addition to landscaping excellence in Vail. We have sought, to no avail, the cooperation of the Town in making these items an included part of the Crossroads approval process so that Village Inn Plaza, Crossroads, and the Town of Vail could be party to an arrangement by which an exceptionally well designed and cared for plantscape and hardscape could be guaranteed in the future as a noteworthy asset for the Town. The Crossroads plan before you tonight for approval on first reading does not contain any of this. An earlier version of the Crossroads plan had a handicapped accessible pathway linking Village Inn Plaza, Phase III, and Crossroads in the above referenced area. Apparently the developer and the Town now unfortunately prefer a linkage which is not at all handicapped accessible. II. General Comments: We do not believe that Crossroads, as currently designed, meets the compatibility and public benefits requirements necessary for approval of the Special Development District ordinance before you .w .RE: Crossroads Redevelopment Ordinance page 3 tonight. Village Inn Plaza, Phase III, Condominium Association requests that you deny the Crossroads project's application unti l such time as there are noteworthy reductions in its size, height, bulk and mass and until the matters I have referred to in section "I" above are adequately addressed. While the Town of Vail's Community Development Department memorandum to the Vail Town Council dated June 21, 2005, recommends (paragraph III, 1) a written agreement for Town Council review and approval regarding, among other things, "public access to the plaza for pedestrians and Town sponsored events," there is nothing regarding any of this in the ordinance before you today which does contain various other requirements and conditions for the developer. With no requirement in the ordinance for plaza public access, etc., it is even more difficult to see how the plaza can be counted as a public benefit, supposedly sufficient to justify the enormous deviations being granted to the developer for the new Crossroads. It would appear that the Town of Vail is starting a move away from previously accepted building design and scale standards for our Town and is inching towards new ones, perhaps typified by the current Crossroads proposal. We would urge much wider public input regarding the Town's design and scale intentions for new construction projects and some clearly stated declaration by the Town of Vail of such a change rather than having it made in not-clearly-discernable steps which are not initially apparent to all of our citizens. I wish to state, as I have done all along since last fall when this matter first went before the Planning and Environmental Commission: We remain committed to working with the Town of Vail, the Crossroads developer, and other interested citizens and citizens' groups to find an agreeable solution to the Crossroads redevelopment situation which will give us all a project which will fit in much better with the Town, retaining our village character while allowing desirable and needed growth. We certainly seek an amenable agreement regarding the redevelopment of Crossroads and not an acrimonious one; however we certainly will not sit idly by should we feel that our interests are being further overlooked in this process. Respectfully submitted, ~l~ D. Deane Hall, Jr. President, Board of Managers Village Inn Plaza, Phase III, Condominium Association Rea ~ ~ ~niv ('at n f ca( o~.~ ~ .v s ANN REILLY BISHOP ATTORNEY AT LAW June 18, 2005 V1A E-MAIL TO TOWN COUNCIL AT VAIL.GOV AND HAND DELIVERED Members of the Town Council Town of Vail 75 Frontage Road Vail, Colorado S 1657 Re: Crossroads East One, LLC's Application to Establish a Special Development Dish~ict. Dear Members of the Town Council: L. INTRODUCTION 1 submit this letter on behalf of the Village Inn Plaza, Phase .III, Condo~l~inium Association, v~ asso- ciation of homeowners who live next to, and will be directly impacted by, the Crossroads project that is the subject of an application for the establishment of a special development district. A. The Village Inn Plaza, Phase III, Condominium Association Urges You to Reject the Present Application. By way of sununary the project sponsor, Crossroads East One, LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC, is seeking approval of the Vail Town Council to establish Special. .Development District No. 39, Crossroads, pursuant to Article 12-9(A), Special Development District, of Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of Crossroads, a mixed use development. The project will include some 75 residential units as well as significant square footage devoted to com- mercial uses, including athree-screen. theatre and a bowling alley. Additional elements of the project inchide an outdoor ice skating ri»lc; a major arcade to include indoor entertai~m~ent; meeting rooms and convention facilities; multiple-family dwellings and lodges; and a private club. The present zon- ing for the property is "Commercial Service Center." The project has been undergoing a public approval process since September 2004 and bas been previously considered and rejected by the Planning v~d .Environmental Conunission and Town Council. A revised project recently received an approval recommendation from the Planning and Environmental Commission. The Town Code's provision of Special Development District is a process by which the Town Council is required to achieve a delicate bal~u~ce between preserving the Lifestyle created tluough the Town's Zoning Code and the need, iu certain limited circumstances, to allow for deviations from the well- conceived Code in connection with the development of new projects if, generally, two speci~lic condi- tions are met. .First, the project must be compatible with the existing surrounding uses. More impor- POST OFFICE BOX 820 VAIL, COLORADO 81658 (970) 476-4501 FAX (970) 476-4490 • E-MAIL: ANNREILLYBISHOPC~COMCAST.NET Members of the Vail Town. Council June I b, ?005 page ~ tantly, public, as opposed to private, benefits generated by the project must outweigh the impacts that are caused by the deviatio~ls from the Zoning Code. The greater the deviation from the requirements oaf the Zoning Code, the more public benefits that must be generated in order to jus- tify a project's approval. The compatibility requirement serves as an ultimate limitation and is in recognition of the fact that in some cases, some projects cannot be approved i1o matter what the cache of public benefits created because the project will destroy and forever change the character of the surrounding neighborhood. The Town Council should not approve Crossroads East One LLC's application because nei- ther of these prerequisites has been satiistied and neither of them can be satisfied given the current design of the project. 11. rCH.E PROJECT IS NOT COMPATLBLE OR SENSITIVE TO THE LMMCUTATE ENVIRONMENT, NEIGHBORHOOD OR ADJACENT PROPERTIES Section 12-9A-7 of the Town. Code provides: .Determination of pecu~itted, conditional anal accessory uses shall be made by the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council as a part of the formal review of the proposed development plan. Unless further restricted tlu-ough the review of the proposed special. development district, permitted, conditional and accessory uses shall be limited to those per~liitted, conditional and accessory uses in a property's underlying zone district Under certain condi- tions, commercial uses may be permitted in residential special development districts if, in the opinion of the Town Council, such uses are primarily for the service and convenience of the residents of the development and the inunediate neighborhood. Such uses, if any, shall not change or destroy the predominantly residential character of the special development district. The amount of area and type of such uses, if any, to be allowed in a residential special development district shall be established by the Town Council as a part of the approved development plan. Section 12-9A-~ that provides: The following design criteria shall be used as the principal criteria i^ evaluating the illerits of the proposed special development dis- trict. Lt shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that sub- mittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved: Members of the Vail Town Council .lone I ~, ?00.5 page 3 Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the inu~~ediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to archi- tectural design, scale, bulls, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. Design Features: Site plan, building design and location. and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community In direct contriveiltiou of Town Code Section 12-9A-7, implementation of the proposed Crossroads pro-jest would significantly denigrate the character of the immediate and surroru~ding ~u-eas. h~deed, the proposed pro-jest is entirely inapposite to the spirit and intent of the Town Code's special development district provision because the project is incompatible with the sur- rounding environs. The Crossroads project cannot satisfy the compatibility requirement for the following reasons, among others: Height and Building Mass: The height of the project is simply too tall in relatio^ Co the building in the suu-ounding area.. The developer is proposing a roof height at the peals of 98 i:eet, a height which has never been approved in the Town, and which is nine feet taller than the tallest height that has been previously approved by the Town. The size of the project is also too large in comparison. with its surroundings viewed from the residences of the Village .lnn Plaza homeowners. Tl1e project has significant- lymore occupied space at greater heights than others. The proposed structure in its present configuration will dominate and "overshadow" the neighborhood. The amount of space is inappropriate and obtrusive. Further setbacks should be unposed so that the project does not dominate the view plane created by these neighboring buildings. The Crossroads project cannot be found to be compatible with the stu-rounding area until its size, height and bulk are fin-thec reduced. 2. Traffic: The Traffic generated by the Project renders it incompatible with the existing area. Project-generated traffic will reduce the i~ltersection of South L rootage Road and Crossroads Chute (Village Center Drive) to an ~nlacceptable level of service. While the project proposes the construction of roundabout to mitigate this impact, the devel- oper of the project is only required to pay its fair share conhibution. Under such cir- cumstances it is unclear when the mitigation will be constructed. The potential ripple effect that this will have on traffic patterns in the surrounding area will. dramatically changed the nature of the surrounding area. The conditions of approval :for the project should be changed to require Crossroads Last One, LLC, to fully fund, subject to reim- bursement from the fair share payments of other developers, the traffic iui_provement necessary to mitigate the traffic impacts. Ln the absence of such protection. the Members of the Vail Town Council tune 18, ?005 page 4 Crossroads projects cannot be found to have u~et the requirements imhosed by Section 12-9A-7 and 12-9A-8. Architecture: The architecture slated for the project exacerbates the incompatibility caused by the project size, height aad bulk. The building is being proposed as a uni- fied architectural theme. Unity of architectural theme, a repetitive roof form and uncomplicated geometry only magnify the bulls anal mass of the structure. The archi- tectural style resembles more of an Atlantic City Flotel than an alpine building. The architectural style for the building needs to reflect the characteristics of a Curopean alpine mountain resort hotel and until it does, the project is incompatible with the sur- rounding area. 4. Commercial Use: The intensity of the commercial. use proposed, which will create additional h-aftic, noise and other impacts, also makes this project incompatible with the surrounding uses. Ln sum, a substantial redesign of the project is required in order to meet the requirements of the Town Code with respect to the special development districts. II_L. .IMPACTS FOR THE PRO.IECT'S DEVIA'CION FROM. THE ZONING COllE ARL+'+' NOT OUTWELGH.ED BY THE ALLEGED PUB.LLC BENEFITS Another basis for rejecting the Crossroads project application is rooted in Section. 12-9A-9 that reads in pertinent part: Before the Town Council approves development standards that devi- ate fi-om the underlying zone district, it should be determined that such deviation provides benefits to the Town that outweigh the adverse effiects of such deviation. This determination is to be made based ou evaluation of the proposed special development district's compliance with the design criteria outlined in Section. 12-9A-b of this Article. Staff has concluded that the "proposed Crossroads redevelopment complies with this portion of the criterion as the proposed public benefits outweigh all deviations proposed." This conclusion is neither supported by substantial evidence or common sense. The benefits provided by the project do not meet this renuirement. The staff report for the project shows a significant deviation f~roni the development standards relating to lot area, buildable area, building height, density, GRFA, site coverage, and landscape. Suffice it to say there is not one significant development standard that is not substantially being exceeded by the project applicu~t. E-lowever, these unprecedented deviations which will forever change the character of this area are being justified based upon the provision of the public delivery facility, the public restrooms, and the complete streetscape improvements on Village Center Drive and East Meadow Drive. There Members of the Vail Town Council .lone 18, 2005 page 5 is no explanation for this conclusion. That should come as no surprise because, at best, these ben- efiits are meager and insuf~licient payment -and that is what they are intended to be -for the complete abandonment of the provisions of the Town's Zoning Code applicable to the property. Remarkably, staff has suggested that a public benefit arises as a result of the project applic~ult's development potential lost through the creation of the public plaza. This conclusion turns the Town Code's provision on special development districts on its head. In essence, stalf is suggest- ing that the developer's election not to seek a greater variance from the Zoning Code by adding another 24,000 to his project (rendering even more incompatible with the immediate environment) is a public bene~l;lt. Staff ~~tlso finds that the project sponsor design of the project to meet the objectives of the governing planning document, the Vail Village Master Plan, is a public benet7t. Approval of the Crossroads project in reliance on such a formulation would undermine the Town Cocmcil responsibility for Land use matters.. Adherence to the provisions of the Zowng Code alld the Master Plan. should be minimum requirements met as a prelude to development and not be viewed as conferring some additional public benefit. Oven if this approach were sanctioned, then the project's approval could not be.justitied because it violates many more provisions of the rele- vant codes than. it meets. This alleged public beuelit is illusory and teeters upon the precipice of SOpI11St1"y. TIZe projject's sponsor has advocated that the proposed bowling alley, the three screen theater and sports bar/arcade activity center are public amenities. Even if there is a demand for such uses, these activities are conuuercial enterprises designed to create profit for the developer and the operators of such businesses. Satisi:ying a demand or desire for such commercial enterprises is not a public benefit of the type required to satisfy the requirements of the provision oa' public ben- efits. The only way that the current slate oaf public benefits can be deemed suffcienC to justify the approval of the project is for the project to be redesigned to reduce the number and amount of deviations from the Town's Zoning Code. LV. CONCLUSION Through. this letter, the Village Inn Plaza, Phase lll, Condominium Association has summarized the basis upon which it believes the Town Council must reject the appiication to establish a spe- cial development district for the Crossroads project. As our elected officials, we look to you to protect and preserve the unique beauty, style and life provided by the Town. of Vail. One mecha- nism to achieve this, used by .jurisdictions all over the country, is enforcement of the Zoning Code. ~~/pile there must always be some flexibility in any planning scheme to permit modest deviations that will benefit the public, such flexibility call serve as a mechanism to abandon. the guiding principles of the Town's land use for a price. We Know that the balance that must be struck is not a simple one and that the burden of finding the right balance is a difficult task entrusted to you! . We also lalow that the appropriate balance has not been reached in comlection with this application. We respectfully urge you to deny the Members of the Vail Town Council .tune 18, 2005 page 6 application. At a minimum, the application. should be remanded back to the Planning and Environmental Commission and staff to work. with the project applicant to design a project that more Tully achieves the purpose, intent and goals of the special development district. Sincerely, fd~...- t ' ~ _....... .,.,,.~.-,~,.f ~. ~F ~~ ~,~ a ,~ ~ `''" ~` ~ Ann Reilly Bishop for Village Lnn plaza, Phase Ll_f, Condominium Association cc: Crossroads Last One, LLC ~ The Town Council's responsibility has been made all the more difficult by the positions taken by staff. Planning staff has not promptly responded to inquiries made by the public or been willing to hear the views of the public with respect to the issues outlined herein. Rather, they have viewed their principal point of responsibility to be meeting with the developer as opposed to the developer and the public. Equally distressing is Che unfounded position taken by the Town's Attorney who has suggested that Town Council members may not speak to citizens regarding any matter that might be deemed aquasi-judicial determinaCion. There is no policy that supports this position. The Town Attorney's rule is at odds with the overwhelming majority of jurisdictions that permit: and indeed encourage such communications. The pro- scription against the perceived ex pane communications are at odds wiCh t1~e Town Council's principles as articulated in the Guidelines 1:or Council .Meetings, which urge citizens to contact members of Che Town Council, by phone and email if these forms of communications arc permitted and encouraged, then there IS 110 pl'InclplCd bas1S Why these G0111LnLn]ICatlollS Ctll]1101: OCCUC 117 het"5011. ~"Inally, Cflel'C 1S 110 CepOL'CGd Case taw in Colorado or elsewhere which stands for the position advocated by the Town's Attorney. The case cited Co me, hl~ells n. Del Norte, 753 P.2d. 770 (Colo. 1987) is inapposiCc. That case involved a hearing officer who acted improperly when he had lunch with a lawyer and a witness during an employee dis- missal hearing. The position advanced by the Town's Attorney flies in the face of the 1 first Amendment's guaranCee of a citizens right to petition the governmenC. Frank and candid discussions with and input: from Che citizens of Vail can only help the Town Council fiil~till its responsibility. From: <JTWKY@aol.com> To: <cswisher@vailgov.com>, <rslifer@vailgov.com>, <klogan@vailgov.com>, <ddonovan@vailgov.com> Date: 6/21 /2005 3:21:57 PM Subject: CROSSROADS DEVELOPMENT while t am for development, I am AGANIST the plan which will be 100 feet high! Bigger is not always better! Don't confuse need with greed! Something in line with the existing tower would be more appropriate. Please vote NO on the height of'the plan. 100 feet is too high. My thanks. Sincerely, Joan Whittenberg (someone who has enjoyed Vail since 1978) TIMBERLINE COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE June 20, 2005 Vail Town Council Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 RE: Crossroads Redevelopment Dear Council Members: Please accept this letter as an indication of Timberline Commercial Real Estate's support of the proposed Crossroads redevelopment project scheduled for your review on June 21, 2005. We have followed this project from its inception and have attended the numerous public hearings held over the past year. We have listened to the arguments (both for and against) voiced by members of the public, as well as those expressed by the Planning Commission and Town Council. We remain confident that this project will be a tremendous benefit to our community. We hope that you seize upon this opportunity and allow a private developer to provide some of the public amenities and services currently lacking in the Village at his own expense rather than asking the local taxpayer to provide and pay for them at a later date. Thank you for your time and consideration. Most sincerely, Kevin Deighan Greg Ga ineau 12 Vail Road, Suite 600 Vail, Colorado 81651 ph. 970.476.3436 • fx. 970.476.1986 ._.. ._ .. Corey Swisher - VAIL CROSSROADS PROJECT Page~2 ... _....~~ m _.M~~ , . ~ ~.~__ ~~.,~. _._.., ~..____~ ~.._-___._~_____ ~ :__~,~-.~~.-.._--__ All of us own homes and property in Vail, and we leave the hustle and bustle of Washington, D.C. to relax and unwind in your beautiful village. PLEASE KEEP IT A BEAUTIFUL VILLAGE!! Among the families are the Hubbards, Galvins, Zevniks, Grenham, Strouds, Baileys, Smiths, Bentons, Kennedys and many more. The list is growing as we contact people and explain the situation and show them the plans. Unfortunately, since the impact has just become clear to us all, and it is now on an emergency basis, many people are on summer travel and it is difficult to get all of the signatures by the time of your Town Council meeting tonight. Again, we certainly support the redevelopment of Crossroads, but please consider the community surrounding the Crossroads, please consider the local residents of theVillage Inn and the rest of us who own homes in the village of Vail. I would suspect that if ALL OF THE OWNERS OF PROPERTY IN THE VILLAGE (including those of us who are not fortunate enough to live there full-time, but are homeowners, WERE CONTACTED TODAY AND SHOWN A COMPLETELY OPEN AND TRANSPARANT PICTURE OF THIS PROPOSAL, WE WOULD ALL VOTE A RESOUNDING "NO WAY -VOTE FOR CHARACTER AND COMMUNITY -SCALE IT BACK!!" Thank you for your attention to this critical matter, and for taking your time to maintain the integrity of Vail. Please do not hesitate to contact me by email or by phone (202-255-8762) should you need further information from us. Ginny Grenham President, Grenham Networks Paul A. Zevnik Entravision Communications CC: <CSwisher@vailgov.com> !Corey Swisher -VAIL CROSSROADS PROJECT Page 1 ~..~~..,~_w .~: ,~.~,~.,A~~~.«~_~..~~.. :~.~ ~ _.,., ,~~.~r._ _~_.~,.,.,._a:, From: <Ggrenham@aol.com> To: <TOWNCOUNCIL@vailgov.com> Date: 6/21 /2005 11:55:16 AM Subject: VAIL CROSSROADS PROJECT TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL RE: Proposal for Special Development District No. 39 to Allow for the Redevelopment of Crossroads We are writing to you as concerned property owners in the town of Vail. Our primary residence. is in Washington, D.C., but we own two properties in Vail Village. We are also speaking on behalf of many families from the Washington, D.C. area who have just learned about the massive Crossroads redevelopment project, which we all feel is overwhelming in terms of height and bulk) In addition, we (Paul Zevnik and partner) own the Denver and Aspen Univision affiliate and can speak for countless friends of Univision who own properties in Vail. (We will be happy to forward the developer's email address to our friends and listeners, if you think that would be helpful). In short, while we all support the redevelopment of Crossroads, it has come to our attention in the last few days that the current project before you is INCONSISTENT WITH THE LOOK AND FEEL OF VAIL! As of this morning, we have 16 families (and growing) from the Washington, D.C. area who own property in the town of Vail and who are willing to get involved in a grassroots battle to protect Vail, should this situation require more active involvement on our part. We represent a wide range of families -some of us work in the White House and current Administration in Washington, D.C. Others are doctors, lawyers; CEOs, internet executives -all types of people and income levels. We have all been united,. however, in our love of Vail in both the winter and the summer. We have taken our families there for years, and are blessed with wondertul memories. We would like to pass the same memories and beauty of Vail on to our children and their children. I might add that we have chosen Vail over the much more popular and charmng Aspen, or the more remote and beautiful Telluride -much to the consternation of many friends. Most people in the D.C. area will say to us "Why Vail? Aspen is so much prettier, you don't have the highways to look at, you don't have all of~thaf new development, Aspen is quaint; romantic,-has kepf its historical integrity, has tight zoning to protect it, is aesthetically much more attractive..." We hear this constantly, and yet all of us have chosen Vail over Aspen because we love the feel of it, the.family-friendly atmosphere,'the wonderful people, and the gorgeous mountain. We have committed to Vail because we love it -its open beauty and glorious mountains and the coziness .and friendliness of Vail Village.. We LOVE Vail, and yet we do NOT want it to become an over-developed, Las Vegas-style'compound, and this particular development of Crossroads is certainly headed in that direction. Yes, we put up with the highways and less-"charm'' than Aspen; less space than Telluride or• Jackson Hole, and it has been well worth it up "until now: However, should Vail over-develop without regard to visually compatible beauty, we will re-think our real investments in Vail.. We have no interest in looking at high-rise developments or over-built monstrosities. Vail Town Council 75 Vail Road Vail, Colorado 81657 June 18, 2005 Dear Council Members, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Crossroads redevelopment. While in favor of seeing Crossroads redeveloped, there remain significant issues that concern me both as a long-time resident and business owner of Vail. The proposal is.too massive for the site and varies greatly from both the underlying zoning and the Urban Design Guidelines. The "public benefits" of the proposal have been misleadingly exaggerated by the proponents and thus the variances are not justified under the Special Development language in the Vail Municipal Code.. The architecture is not at all befitting the alpine environment of Vail Village or of the Meadow Drive neighborhood. And the massive height of the proposal will completely sever the views to the mountains north east and west of Vail Village from Willow Bridge Road and from Meadow Drive. As a long-time tenant of Village Inn Plaza, I am deeply troubled by the lack of consideration this proposal has given to our property. The setbacks on the west side of the Crossroads proposal should remain at ten feet and the massive wall abutting our property should be scaled back and the pedestrian linkages improved. I am particularly concerned by the prospect of chain stores coming in to Vail Village. Knowing personally the seasonality of the local business climate and having some idea of what the rents that will be charged at Crossroads, I fear that this is a real possibility should the proposal be approved. I hope that you will deny the application for a Special Development District at the Crossroads property. incerely, ~ J ~~ R Nanc Tezl Tezla's Lin a Boutique 100 E. Meadow Dr., #5 Vail, Colorado 81657 v ~' ~ ., ART and ELAINE KELTON 1034 HOMESTAKE CIRCLE VAIL, COLORADO. 81657 June 10th ....2005 Dear Vail Town Council I am writing as Art and i will be out of town for the June 21St Meeting reviewing the Cross-Roads redevelopment. We are concerned by both the unrelenting density and scale of the building, and are skeptical about the "Public Benefits" received vs. the the variances given to the developer. We are an acknowledged World Class Resort built in scale to man, and allowing at all junctures a view of the mountain and out-of doors which seduced us all. To claim."Urbanization" as a benefit to, or goal for all of the second home owners is to fly in the face of all which has made us. so very successful. Aspen, St. Moritz, Boulder, Colorado have all re-gentrified their aging communities, but- not at the expense of the scale or ambience which contributed to their success. Well directed change has to happen, but please do-.not "throw the baby out with the bathwater". Our thanks..... C~~~~,-~ Elaine and Art Kelton Herman Staufer 954 Red Sandstone Road Vail, Colorado 81657 June 16, 2005 Deaz Vail Town Council, I am writing as I will be out of on June 21~` for the Meeting reviewing the Crossroads Redevelopment. Please adopt the position of The Vail Village Homeowners Association. The project as proposed is too big, too tall, and it pushes the building too close to the property lines. It is my belief that the Developer cannot meet their burden in "Design features" and "Compatibility". That is to say the azchutectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character and visual integrity aze not in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood and the Vail Village as a whole. I will be there for future meetings on this project, but my purpose in writing is to urge you to send this Developer back to the drawing board so he can develop a project that works for Vail and not Manhattan. Respectfully submitted, Herman S er . _s ., .~ Ann Reilly Bishop ______... -._~-----------.~-----.., _...__-- ---- _.______....-__..___.____---- -----_ ___ _._.__....-- --__-.._.~__~._v-_-----__ From: Operalvr37@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 200512:05 PM To: annreillybishop@comcastnet Subject: Letter- my draft response Dear Ann-Thanks for your faxes. My response is unrelated to vant vardeeln) EI ea group's. Let me know what you think- make any changes you feel would help. (also iYs a g Dear Members of the Vail Town Council: n to Vail in general and to the 1 am writing from my dinosaur perspective on what is being allowed to happe Crossroads redevelopment project in particular. Ithe developer's plans for a bu~Iding that~sgoo large (1 know- the f the originals of Vait than to abject strenuously to Bath for Vail- not for New York City) public amen~fies of slippery slope of "precedents"), architecturally inapprop bowling trading a public plaza for dubious value as enhancements to economic recovery of the town (skating, "special" contract consideration ?) While I'm willing to admit thaw ~ 9e retnThe gbeat beauty of the founldergs' concept for~whatlhaslbe~me The direction l believe we will co m9 au mi ht cast Greatest Ski Resort on Earth was the absence of greed and the pressure pol"tics it fuels. 1 hope y g your votes with that in mind. Thank you Sincerely Ellie Caulkins (Mrs. George P. Caulkins, Jr.) 304 Mill Creek CircleVail Vail Town Council 75 Frontage Road West Vail, CO 81657 Dear Ladies and Gentlemen of the Counc~~, I am submitting this letter in an effort to share my observations and concerns about the proposed development at the Crossroads Shopping Center. As you well know, Pepi and I have lived here for more than forty years and it's here that we have made our business, raised our children and contributed to the community whenever we've seen a need that we could positively address. So I write this letter, not with any contempt or personal angst, but because I hope to remind you of some of the values and objectives on which our town was conceived. Having looked at the plans presented by Peter Knobel, I am generally impressed and supportive of his design. I truly believe his efforts will help to revitalize our village core and I am enthusiastic that someone of such stature is eager to invest in our community. I do, however, have a genuine concern with the height of the building as a whole, but more specifically, the height of the wing of the west side of the proposal . I sincerely appreciate that the structure, as it parallels I-70, will in fact create a sound barrier and mitigate some of the highway noise. But I don't see a need to allow the same height considerations throughout the entire project. One of the things that has made our piece of paradise so inviting and unique is that the Bavarian style of architecture has surpassed the test of time. That is not to say that new buildings must recreate the past, but it is vitally important that we maintain the views and the visual corridors inherent in this mountain town. The proposed development, as is, dwarfs the existing buildings it abuts. Gone will be the views from Meadow Drive and the breathtaking site of the Gore Range throughout the day and in the evening's alpine- glow. I cari believe, no, I know for a fact that our founding father's vision for our town was to maximize its potential by maintaining its landscape, doing all that was possible to keep open spaces and the skylines building free. I think allowing the excessive height-on the west wing of Mr.-Knobel's project is-a discredit to that vision and will Beverly impact all that has been worked for in the last forty plus years. I have no reason to believe that Mr. Knobel's intentions are anything other than pure. But I caution you to remember that he is a new developer in our midst and though his plan has many positive merits, it is likely that once it is complete, he will be on his way to build in other areas. With that being said, I encourage you to trust some of us long- timers, listen to our wisdom and step back this proposed development to make it an enhancement rather. than a blemish to our beautiful town. Thank you for giving my thoughts your consideration. Michael E. Herman 343 Beaver Dam Road Vail, Colorado 81657 June 16, 2005 Dear Vail Town Council, I am writing as I will be out of on June 21St for the Meeting reviewing the Crossroads Redevelopment. Please adopt the position of The Vail Village Homeowners Association. The project as proposed is too big, too tall, and it pushes the building too close to the property lines. It is my belief that the Developer cannot meet their burden in "Design features" and "Compatibility". That is to say the architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character and visual integrity are not in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood and the Vail Village as a whole. I will be there for future meetings on this project, but my purpose in writing is to urge you to send this Developer back to the drawing board so he can develop a project that works for Vail and not Manhattan. Res c y submitte ~,, is ennan Vail Town Council Town of Vail Muui.cipal Bliiding 75 Frontage Road Vail, Colorado S16S7 Dear Members of the Vail Town Counci'.1: June 20, 2005 As original owners of Vail property ,since its beginning, we k~ate to see the Planned Cx'ossxoads Building be approved.. *e \,,o Special contract zoning permitting this large development is entizely out of sca~,e with Vail as .it was oxiga,nally plannE:d. The project in our opinion will detract fx'om tahat was the original. attractive Vail Village. We strongly a es you not to approve this plan. Sincerely, ~ '~'lt ~ / `,~ J n T~. Tyler . (Tim) Zia M. lylex (Nancy) ~:~, .. ~~ ~' SG~v h :s \,.o Vail Town Council Town of Vail Municipal Bluiding 75 Frontage Road Vail, Bolorado 81657 Dear Members of the Vail-Town Council: June 20, 2005 As original, owners of Vail property since i.ts beginning, we hate to see the Planned Cxoss7coads Building be approved.. e~ Special contract zoning permitting this large development is ent~.rely out of scale with Vail ae.it was oXig~,~lly planned. The project in our opinion will detract fx'om what was the original attractive Vail Village. We strongly a es you not to approve this plan. S~in,cerely, , ~~~ ~ ~- ~ J n 1,. 1`yler . (Tim) , lia M. files (Nancy) / ~S~ ~~.~ c~~`~ ~~ 3 ~ ~ ~e ~ h Michael E. Herman 343 Beaver Dam Road Vail, Colorado 81657 June 16, 2005 Dear Vail Town Council, I am writing as I will be out of on June 2 ]~ Sc for the Meeting reviewing the Crossroads Redevelopment. Please adopt the position of The Vail Village Homeowners Association. The project as proposed is too big, too tall, and it pushes the building too close to the property lines. ' It is my belief that the Developer cannot meet their burden in "Design features" and "Compatibility". That is to say the architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character and visual integrity are not in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood and the Vail Village as a whole. I will be there for future meetings on this project, but my purpose in writing is to urge you to send this Developer back to the drawing board so he can develop a project that works for Vail and not Manhattan. Resp c y submitte ich erman Vail Town Council 75 Vail Road Vail, Colorado 51657 3une 21, 2005 To the Town Council: The. proposed Crossroads redevelopment, as recommended for approval by the both the Town of Vail Town Staff and Planning Commission far exceeds anything that has ever been proposed in the Town. Far from improving the ambiance of Vail Village, the Crossroads proposal will detract from it, placing an enormous monolith at the end of Willow Bridge Road and adjacent to Meadow Drive, blocking any possible views of the Spraddle Creek area from the majority of the Village. The architecture. revised though it has been,, still remains more befitting a downtown or suburban setting than an alpine village. The gargantuan scale of it is not in harmony with the pedestrian ambiance that this community has strived to create and maintain, and it offers little interplay between the natural environment and man-made environment adjacent and surrounding it. The Town Staff and the Planning Commission have recommended approval of this proposal based on their findings of prior "precedents," and on the alleged public benefit of the project. That precedents should be viewed as a criteria for approval under the Special Development District Ordinance indicates a lack of understanding of both the ordinance and its intent. The public benefit of this project is so vague that the term has been intermingled and confused with rivate profit. There is little about this project that justifies the massiee deviation from the underlying zoning in regards to height, mass, bulk and setbacks that the developer has proposed other than the developer's desire to maximize profits. The proposed Crossroads development looks to spell certain doom Vail's small town atmosphere from an economic standpoint as well. While many are looking to various new developments around town to inject new life into an admittedly lackluster commercial environment, the clear and present danger to the majority of current businesses is that they will face ravenous and unfair competition from national chain stores as these stores have the lucre to weather the short seasons Vail is experiencing and the high rents that the new commercial developments will demand. It should be pointed out that, even when completed, all the projects currently approved and/or under construction will represent but a minute increase over the number of short term accommodations units that were available in 1995. "Bring People Back to Vail" The developer has branded the Crossroads proposal under the moniker `Bring people back to Vail." That this project will do so is exceedingly unlikely. That fewer down valley residents are shopping in Vail is a function of convenience -people shop and seek entertainment. near where they live. As down valley shopping, dig and entertainment options have increased. Vail's draw as a regional shopping destination has decreased. All of the amenities proposed are already available closer to Eagle County's major population centers, skating and movies are already available here in Vail. Further, the current management of the movie theatres is likely continue in any new development, and it is unlikely they will change their current program of running new movies down valley first, unless there is a significant change in the full time resident demographic in the Town of Vail which this project can not hope, as proposed, to precipitate. One can not fault the management of the movie theatres for this - it is common sense, good business practice to put your biggest draws in your biggest markets. Some of the difficulties Vail is experienc;in ig 'n regards to attracting down valley commercial traffic is a function of design. For most of its history, Vail has brilliantly focused on what has become termed "Ne:w Urbanism," and sought to build a pedestrian community that fell back on a terrific public transportation system. Unfortunately, this model has not been followed by down valley developments. The "Vail Valley" as it has been termed, is sowed together by I-70 and as it has grown, so too has increased reliance on the automobile, the effect of which being that the "Vail Valley" is now, for the most part, a highly suburban and highly mobile society. Centralized parking has done precisely for Vail what it was intended to do, but it is also viewed by the new suburban "Vail Valley" resident as highly inconvenient. This situation will not be resolved by the current proposal. While both merchants and the Town Council have expressed a fervent desire to see a return to the perceived shopping hey day of the mid-1980's, further forces have made this scenario unlikely. Without a net increase; in occupied short term accommodations units and without a substantive increase in the permanent year-round population base, Vail's primary target market is the down valley resident. The suburban population of the County see at as but a minor inconvenience to travel to the outlet stores of Silverthorne and to Denver to buy their major urchases. A~Ieanwhile many restaurants and retailers, seeing this change and seeking to meet increasing costs, have set their sites on a highly narrow upper income demographic that visits Vail infrequently, placing a large number of our stores beyond the spending limits i'or the bulk of our visitor base and our regional permanent resident population. The Crossroads proposal, which will likely demand- rents in the region of $80 per foot, will do nothang to remedy this issue. Parking and Traffic While the excess parking that has been proposed may be a public benefit, it is likely that such parking, in this location, will tax further an already severely taxed South Frontage Road. Further doubt is cast on whether parking is a true public benefit -with the current market being what it is, the developer will no doubt profit from providing parking to an overly automobile-reliant populace. It seems obvious that the proposed parking will be most heavily used when. the public parking garages are full. Already during peak parking usage periods, it is impossible to turn left on the South Frontage Road in order to travel to the east bound.I-70 on ramp or further west. Further parking between the transportation center and the on ramp and main Vail roundabout would exacerbate this problem 2 exponentially. To date, there has been no exhaustive study as to what traffic problems will be created by the .proposal and how traffic problems will be addressed. Deviations from Urban Design Guidelines and Town Code The Crossroads proposal deviates massively from underlying zoning and is not in compliance with the Urban Design Guidelines or with the Vail Municipal Code guidelines in regards to the establishment of Special Development Districts. Specifically: Architecture The architecture of the Crossroads proposal represents a radical departure from the architectural standards that have been employed in the East Meadow Drive neighborhood. At Village Inn Plaza. (SDD 6 Phases I; II, III and V), at the Sonnenalp redevelopment and current expansion and at the current construction of One Willow Bridge Road, the theme has been European alpine with a particular emphasis on human and pedestrian scale and interaction with the natural environment. Throu its very mass and bulk the Crossroads project feigns ignorance of its surroundings The monolith moniker is appropriate. The architecture appears pret a porter for an urban or suburban settin~• The proposal has been revised to include mare rock and timber on the facade. However, this has mostly served to exacerbate the already massive visual impact, and overall, the scale, mass, bulk and glazing lend to a feeling is still more center city than alpine village, and would perhaps be more at home in Keystone or Copper Mountain than in Vail Village. This is not in keeping with the Urban Design Guidelines, which go into some detail regarding roofing materials, siding, architectural elements, etc. At the aforementioned phases of SDD 6, and the current Sonnenalp expansion and at One Willow Bridge Road the Town of Vail indicated a desire to keep the height to an average of 2 and 3 stories adjacent to East Meadow Drive. The Crossroads proposal steps down to four stories only at the last possible minute on the west side, still dwarfing its western neighbor. The proposal, therefore, does not comply with the Vail Municipal Code which specifically outlines guidelines for compatibility: "Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate em~ironment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. " Vail Municipal Code 12-9A-8 at A. What is beins marketed as the chief public benefit the plaza is also more fittin fg ar an urban than an alpine setting in its immensity, paving, lack of landscaping and lack of communication with existing pedestrian features of neighboring properties, notably Village Inn Plaza. This lack of communication is not in keeping with the Urban Design Guidelines regarding pedestnanization, which state: "A major objective of ijail Village is to encourage pedestrian circulation though an interconnected network of safe pleasant pedestrian. walkways throughout the Tillage ". -Urban Design Guidelines, paragraph A. "Pedestrianization," emphasis added Further, it should be pointed out that the focal point of the proposed plaza, the proposed skating rink, will necessitate some mechanism by which the ice can be shaded and . protected. It has yet to be described how this will be accomplished and what aesthetic values will be affected. Variances from Underlying lone 1-istirict "Before the Tawn Council approves development standards that deviate from the underlying zone district, it should be determined that such deviation provides benefits to the Town that outweigh the adverse e~cts of such deviation. " Vaiil Municipal Code 12-9A-9 (emphasis added) While the Crossroads developer has prolosed that the public plaza is a public benefit to the Town and that therefore the allowable square footage should be transferred to the proposed building, the consideration mu:;t be made that a plaza is included in the Vail Master Plan. The argument could be made that this was agreed upon by the previous owners of the property, and the current owner therefore inherited the stipulation. It could also be argued that the plaza is not necessarily a public benefit, but an amenity that while benefiting the public generally will primarily benefit the developer by attracting more foot traffic to the proposed commercial spaces. Similar arguments could be made regarding the proposed skating rink. While centralized delivery .is a public benefit in that it removes delivery trucks from the streets and underground, it is again prim~u'ily a benefit to the developer who can stress the ease of access to prospective tenants. Removing the setback on the west side of the property in order to accommodate the de^veloper's loading and delivery access certainl,~is another strike in private versus public benefit column. Further, centralized delivery is specifically set out as an ob,~ective of the Urban Design Guidelines Gage 10 at H.) and therefore should be viewed as a requirement rather than a benefit to the public. Views The proposed Crossroads development well sever existing mountain views that, while not specifically protected by Chapter 18.74 of the Vail Municipal Code, certainly play a major part in projecting the alpine ambiance of this part of Vail Village. The Urban Design Guidelines state: When evaluating a development proposal, priority should be given to analysis of the project on views. Page 8A paragraph G The view north from Willow Bridge Road to the Spraddle Creek neighborhood and the National Forest surrounding it will be completely obscured by the proposed building. The view west from Meadow Drive to Red and White Mountain will also be completely obscured by the proposal. And finally, the view east from Meadow Drive to the cliffs beyond Spraddle Creek will be completely severed. Height While there has been some movement in the Town toward encouraging height against the South Frontage Road and Interstate 70, the Crossroads proposal takes advantage of this scenario to a maximum and egregious extent with the majority of the proposal to exceed the Urban Design Guidelines and exceed the maximum height of the alleged "precedents" of Vail Plaza Hotel and Four Seasons by 10 and 20 feet, respectively. The Crossroads 4 proposal does not comply with the Urban Design Guidelines in terms of building height. The Urban Design Guidelines quote the Vail Municipal Code for Commercial Core 1.. If it was the intention of the Urban Design Guidelines that future development in Vail Villaue should emulate CCl, the Crossroads proposal misses the mark by a mile On average, the building measures 99.9, or ten stories. The Urban Design Guidelines call for an average height of 33 feet with a maximum of 40% of the building to be 43% with some architectural elements not useable for Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) to exceed height limit by more than fifteen feet. On average the Crossroads proposal exceeds 80 feet. more than double what is called for in the Urban Design Guidelines and more than double what is allowed by existin zoning While not specifically outlined in the Town code, there has been little analysis as to how shading of the current proposal will affect the South Frontage Road and I-70 on December 20, typically a major concern for the Colorado Department of Transportation. Precedents A Special Development District is a specific piece of legislation for a specific property It does not allow for precedents That the Town Staff and the Planning Commission should site as "precedents" two properties that haven't even gotten out of the ground yet seems foolhardy at best. There has been no opportunity for a concerned public to see how either of these properties will benefit or detriment the special character that is Vail. If the argument is allowed and written into law that the Crossroads approval was based on the precedents of Vail Plaza. Hotel and the Four Seasons Hotel, the precedent that will be set by the Crossroads proposal will pave the way for Special Development Districts to be used to raise the average height of Vail Village from 30-40 feet to 60-SO feet, including in Commercial Core 1, and for the average mass and bulk to be increased exponentially as well. Such justification will be written into the record of decision should these plans be approved. It should also be noted that the primary justification for approval of Four Seasons and Vail Plaza Hotel at the scale that has been allowed was that they were providing short term accommodation units and they were required to provide on-site employee housing. This proposal does neither. Further, the Vail Plaza. Hotel was shielded from the Meadow Drive pedestrian area by the smaller buildings of SDD 6 Phases I, II, III and V. The Crossroads proposal provides no mitigating circumstances between the central mass and Meadow Drive. Problems with Special Development Districts The whole process surrounding the proposed Crossroads redevelopment underscores the need for the citizens and Town Council to take a serious look at how Special Development Districts are being used and what is resulting. Zoning is a set of covenants entered into a community with its individual property owners. It sets guidelines as to what is to be allowed based on the belief that such guidelines protect neighboring property owners and protect the common interest. Based solely on economics, it has become standard practice for an dy eveloper who sou t to exceed underlying_zoning_to apply for a Special Development' District The proposed Crossroads redevelopment is an extreme example of this. What has resulted, is a great deal of uncertainty on the part. of existing property owners as to what part of the commons -views, community character, 5 property values, etc. -will be detrimentally effected by various projects. As can be seen by the recent fluctuations in the currency, stock and energy markets, uncertainty does not make for good business. What has ensued in Vail's current redevel~ment rush is "spot zoning." the rules for which are, at best entirely arbitrary and caRricious, and at worst may violate Federal guidelines for equal treatment under the law. The arguments as to public benefit being exclusively in the purview of the Town Council leads frequently to highly charged and often contentious political debates which cost the developer and the taxpayers exceedingly large sums of money. We would be wise to do away with Special Development Districts altogether. We should start by denying this one. The developer has indicated, through this proposal, that for the most part, the commercial uses sought are very much those for which the property is already zoned. There is sufficient GRFA left in the existing zoning to redevelop the property, and to put in the amenities the applicant has suggested without sacrificing the .character of the neighborhood and the community. Where the Crossroads proposal seeks to exceed zoning is almost entirelxin the area that is Qro.~osed for condominium sales, and thus strictly to tlhe developer's benefit. Should an 5DD be granted, the Town Council should insist upon the following: - No variance from the underlyinu zone district should be granted in regard to hei h . Views from Willow Bridge Road to Spraddle Creek and from Meadow Drive East to Spraddle Creek and. west to Red and White Mountain must be protected as called for in the Urban Design Guidelines. At Meadow Drive, the building should drop to 20 feet, protecting the pedestrian atmosphere of the street as called for in the Urban Design Guidelines. - Loading and Delivery access should be moved to the east side of the buildinu, closer to Village Center Chute, thus minimizing impacts on neighbors - No variance from the underl iy nu zone district should be granted in regard to setbacks. - The building should be broken ux, especially at the center mass, in order that the project loses its monolithic appearance and fits in more cohesively with the neighborhood, as called for in the: Urban Design Guidelines. - _ Pedestrian interconnects with adiacent properties should be improved. - The architecture must be further modified in order that the project conform fully to the Urban Design Guidelines and the alpine village atmosphere of Vail Village and of the Meadow Drive neighborhood. - A comprehensive traffic study must be initiated with particular emphasis given to how the proposal will affect traffic patterns on South Frontage Road and how the Town of Vail and the developer vntend to remedy any problems and conflicts that might arise. - On-si t Long-term employee housing must be included in the proposal in commensurate proportion to the r,~umber of jobs that will be created by the project in order that the project does not iFurther tax an already severely tax long-term local housing market and in order that there is a daily guarantee of local traffic to the project and to the neighborha~d. 6 - Guarantees,. not vague promises of encouraging rentals, must be made that a certain number of the condominiums will remain short term accommodations ,units. Should no guarantee be possible, then the Town should insist that a number _. _ . - . . of the condominiums be turned~into liotel`~rooins. - The proposed second level retail should become second level office/services space in order that there is a daily guarantee of local traffic to the project and to the neighborhood of workers who are not in the seasonal tourism industry. - A comprehensive building plan should be developed in order that construction impacts on the Village as a whole and on the neighboring properties in particular is minimized. Thank you ve much for your time and consideration. Please do not hesitate to contact me~hould yot~l avq, any questions. I00 E` Meadow l~r., #~2 Vail, Colorado 81657 970.479.9463 jstaufer~earthlink.net 7 w .~ ~~, r From: Ggrenham@aol.com [mailto:Ggrenham@aol.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 10:54 AM To: TOWNCOUNCIL@yailgov.com Cc: CSwisher@vailgov.com Subject: VAIL CROSSROADS PROJECT TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL RE: Proposal for Special Development District No. 39 to Allow for the Redevelopment of Crossroads We are writing to you as concerned property owners in the town of Vail. Our primary residence is in Washington, D.C., but we own two properties in Vail Village. We are also speaking on behalf of many families from the Washington, D.C. area who have just learned about the massive Crossroads redevelopment project, which we all feel is overwhelming in terms of height and bulk) In addition, we (Paul Zevnik and partner) own the Denver and Aspen Univision affiliate and can speak for countless friends of Univision who own properties in Vail. (We will be happy to forward the developer's email address to our friends and listeners, if you think that would be helpful). In short, while we all support the redevelopment of Crossroads, it has come to our attention in the last few days that the current project before you is INCONSISTENT WITH THE LOOK AND FEEL OF VAIL! As of this morning, we have 16 families (and growing) from the Washington, D:C. area who own property in the town of Vail and who are willing to get involved in a grassroots battle to protect Vail, should this situation require more active involvement on our part. We represent a wide range of families -some of us work in the White House and current Administration in Washington, D.C. Others are doctors, lawyers, CEOs, Internet executives -all types of people and income levels. We have all been united, however, in our love of Vail in both the winter and the summer. We have taken our families there for years, and are blessed with wonderful memories. We would like to pass the same memories and beauty of Vail on to our children'and their children. I might add that we have chosen Vail over the much more popular and charmng Aspen, or the more remote and beautiful Telluride -much to the consternation of many friends. Most people in the D.C. area will say to us "Why Vail? Aspen is so much prettier, you don't have the highways to look at, you don't have all of that new development, Aspen is quaint, romantic, has kept its historical. integrity, has tight zoning to protect it is aesthetically much more attractive..." We hear this constantly, and yet all of.us have chosen Vail over Aspen because we love the feel ~'= , ._ '';. of it, the family-friendly atmosphere, the wonderful people, and the gorgeous mountain. We have committed to Vail because we love it -its open beauty and glorious mountains and the coziness and friendliness of Vail Village. We LOVE Vail, and yet we do NOT want it to become an over-developed, Las Vegas-style compound, and this partiicular development of Crossroads is certainly headed in that direction. -Yes, we put up with the highways and less "charm" than Aspen, less space than Telluride or Jackson Hole, and it has been well worth it up until now. However, should Vail over-develop without regard to visually compatible beauty, we will re-think our real investments in Vail. We have no interest in looking at high-rise developments or over-built monstrosities. All of us own homes and property in Vail, and we leave the hustle and bustle of Washington, D.C. to relax and unwind in your beautiful village. PLEASE KEEP IT A BEAUTIFUL VILLAGE!! Among the families are the Hubbards, Gal.vins, Zevniks, Grenham, Strouds, Baileys, Smiths, Bentons, Kennedys and many more. The list is growing as wf; contact people and explain the situation and show them the plans. Unfortunately, since the impact has just become clear to us all, and it is now on an emergency basis, many people are on summer travel and it is difficult to get all of the signatures lby the time of your Town Council meeting tonight. Again, we certainly support the redevelopment of Crossroads, but please consider the community surrounding the Crossroads, please consider the local residents of theVillage Inn and the rest of us who own homes in the village of Vail. I would suspect that if ALL OF THE OWNERS OF PROPERTY IN THE VILLAGE (including those of us who are not fortunate enough to live there full-time, but are. homeowners, WERE CONTACTED TODAY AND SHOWN A COMPLETELY OPEN AND TRAPJSPARANT PICTURE OF THIS PROPOSAL, WE WOULD ALL VINE A RESOUNDING "NO WAY - VOTE FOR CHARACTER AND COMMUNITY -SCALE IT BACK!!" Thank you for your attention to this critical matter, and for taking your time to maintain the integrity of Vail. Pl'~.ease do not hesitate to contact me by email or by phone (202-255-8762) should you need further information from us. Ginny Grenham President, Grenham Networks Paul A. Zevnik Entravision Communications Page 1 of 2 Ann Reilly Bishop From: Ggrenham@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 10:54 AM To: TOWNCOUNCIL@vailgov.com Cc: CSwisher@vailgov.com Subject: VAIL CROSSROADS PROJECT TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL RE: Proposal for Special Development District No. 39 to Allow for the Redevelopment of Crossroads We are writing to you as concerned property owners in the town of Vail. Our primary residence is in Washington, D.C., but we own two properties in Vail Village. We are also speaking on behalf of many families from the Washington, D.C. area who have just teamed about the massive Crossroads redevelopment project, which we all feel is overwhelming in terms of height and bulk) In addition, we (Paul Zevnik and partner) own the Denver and Aspen Univision affiliate and can speak for countless friends of Univision who own properties in Vail. (We will be happy to forward the developer's email address to our friends and listeners, if you think that would be helpful). In short, while we all support the redevelopment of Crossroads, it has come to our attention in the last few days that the current project before you is INCONSISTENT WITH THE LOOK AND FEEL OF VAIL! As of this morning, we have 16 families (and growing} from the Washington, D.C. area who own property in the town of Vail and who are wilting to get involved in a grassroots battle to protect Vail, should this situation require more active involvement on our part. We represent a wide range of families -some of us work in the White House and current Administration in Washington, D.C. Others are doctors, lawyers, CEOs, intemet executives -alt types of people and income levels. We have all been united, however, in our love of Vail in both the winter and the summer. We have taken our families there for years, and are blessed with wonderful memories. We would like to pass the same memories and beauty of Vail on to our children and their children. I might add that we have chosen Vail over the much more popular and charmng Aspen, or the more remote and beautiful Telluride -much to the consternation of many friends. Most people in the D.C. area will say to us "Why Vail? Aspen is so much prettier, you don't have the highways to look at, you don't have all of that new development, Aspen is quaint, romantic, has kept its historical integrity, has tight zoning to protect it, is aesthetically much more attractive..." We hear this constantly, and yet all of us have chosen Vail over Aspen because we love the feel of it, the family-friendly atmosphere, the wonderful people, and the gorgeous mountain. We have committed to Vail bec_ aus_ _e_ w_ e_ _lov_e_ it -its. open beauty and glorious.mountains and tP~e coziness and_ friendliness of Vail Village. We LOVE Vail, and yet we do NOT want it to become an overdeveloped, Las Vegas-style compound, and this particular development of Crossroads is certainly headed in that direction. Yes, we put up with the highways and less "charm" than Aspen, less space than Telluride or Jackson Hole, and it has been well worth it up until now. However, should Vail over-develop without regard to visually compatible beauty, we will re-think our real investments in Vail. We have no interest in looking at high-rise developments or aver-built monstrosities. All ofi us own homes and property in Vail, and we leave the hustle and bustle of Washington, D.C. to relax and unwind in your beautiful village. PLEASE KEEP IT A BEAUTIFUL VILLAGE!! Among the families are the Hubbards, Galvins, Zevniks, Grenham, Strouds, Baileys, Smiths, Bentons, Kennedys and many more. The list is growing as we contact people and explain the situation and show them the plans. Unfortunately, since the impact has just become clear to us ail, and it is now on an emergency basis, many people are on summer travel and rt is difficult to get all of the signatures by the time of your Town Council meeting tonight. Again, we certainly support the redevelopment of Grossroads, but please consider the community surrounding the Crossroads, please consider the local residehts of theVBage Inn and the rest. of us who own homes in the village 6/21 /2005 Ya~;e G of G ,. r of Vail. I would suspect that if ALL OF THE OWNERS OF PROPERTY IN THE VILLAGE (including those of us who are not fortunate enough to live there full-time, but are homeowners, WERE CONTACTED TODAY AND SHOWN A COMPLETELY OPEN AND TRANSPARANT PICTURE OF THIS PROPOSAL, WE WOULD ALL VOTE A RESOUNDING "NO WAY -VOTE FOR CHARACTER AND COMMUNITY SCALE IT BACK!!" Thank you for your attention to this crittcal matter, and for taking your time to maintain the integrity of Vail. Please do not hesitate to contact me by email or by phone (202-255-8762) should you need further information from us. Ginny Grenham President, Grenham Networks Paul A. 2evnik Entravision Communications 6/21 /2005 ~dSands Corporation May 27, 2005. Vail Town Council ~ Town of Vail Municipal Building l 75 Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657 ~ i Dear Members of the Vail Town Council: We are owners of Unit 25~ & 26 of Vail inn Plaza, and we have been very worried about the ovi rsized :proposed new construction for the Crossroads building. , We feel that its proposed I ize, even revised to six stories, would be totally out of~scale for Vail V~Ilage, it should be of such size so that this new building blends with the existing neighboring buildings and with the village itself. The redevelopment of proportion. . AR'cn hiy welcome at the right ~. R ~ pectFully yours,i e( .. ~~ Alejandro Rojas M ~ . President ZOOf~j ac:br enn~icn ~-gay- c i - u5 us : StsN ~ ob i n/K.estenbaum 609 823- 5802 F' _ 02 ~F'ran ancf~SyCvan rro6in 101 C,'Fceswofc~Ga~ae S<U 7-~a•Uerfor~ ~'~ 19041 Vail Town council Town of Vail Municipal Building 75 Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 Dear Members of the Vail Town Council: I am a homeowner at Village Inn Plaza, located next door to Crossroads. The proposed new Crossroads building is much too large. Massive buildings in Vail Village remind me of the horror that is Lionshead. We appear to be headed in the same direction. The new Crossroads will dwarf our buildling and change the charm and scale of Vail. The Town of Vail has required other new buildings to blend with the scale of existing neighboring buildings, but this is not being required of the new Crossroads. While I do approve the redevelopment of Crossroads, I do not approve change for change alone. We must improve the new Vail by adhering to the policies we now have in Vail. Respectfully yours, Fran and Sylvan Tobin Village Inn Plaza, PHase III, Condominiums UNIT 403 William P. Johnson Attorney at Law 303.628.9544 wjohnson@rothgerber.com ,~~ ROTHGERBER JOHNSON & LYONS LLP Denver • Colorado Springs • Cheyenne • Casper June 1, 2005 Vail Town Council Town of Vail Municipal Building 75 Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Council Members: One Tabor Center, Suite 3000 1200 Seventeenth Street Denver, Colorado 80202-5855 Telephone 303.623.9000 Fax 303.623.9222 www.rothgerber.com My wife and I are homeowners in Vail Village Plaza, Phase III. We are very mindful of the fact that Crossroads must be redone; however, the current proposal is far too huge for its current location and, in fact, is out of scale for the remainder of Vail Village. The Town of Vail has previously required that new buildings match the scale of existing buildings. This blending of scale should also be required of the new Crossroads construction. The developers of Crossroads seek a number of zoning variances. It is our belief that the project must be reduced in size to match the surrounding buildings and to justify any zoning variances. Resp tf ly y ' rs, •~ E /~ , _ Mr. and Mrs. William` P. Johnson Village Inn Plaza, Phase III, Condominiums Unit 201 00194137 / 1 Vail Town Council Town of Vail Municipal Building 75 Frontage Road VAII.,, COLOADO 81657 31 May, 2005 Dear Members of Vail Town Council: We own a home at the Village Inn Plaza, Phase 111 Condominiums next door to Crossroads. We believe that the proposed new Crossroads building is too large in size, too massive in form and grossly out-of--scale for Vail Village. The new building will dwarf our buildin€;, as it is six stories high along most of our joint property line. The proposed building steps down from ;;ix to five and to four stories as it nears East Meadow Drive, but it will still tower over our building, which is only one storey high at East Meadow Drive. The Town of Vail has required other new buildings to blend with the scale of existing buildings close by, but this demand is not` being made of the Crossroads developer. We feel strongly that the current Crossroads proposal does not provide enough public benefits to justify the many zoning variations requested by the developer. We agree that Crossroads needs to be redeveloped, but the mass of the proposed building -does not. -fit with the scale of Vail. Village. We will do everything possible to ensure that the new Crossroads will be more appropriate in size and scale than the development currently proposed. Respectfully yours, iti~-C~ d Dorothy Cordes age Inn Plaza, Phase 111 Condominiums Apartment 103 ~i..nv-v-cear~J 1J•JYJ UC ~rMPI rrcr~nuu Clb,3{07F~1 H:b1~1'~fb4f65461 P.1 6 junio 2005 Vail Town Council: First of all we would tike to thank you for the changes that have been made to the Crossroads Project, but we are still very concerned with the massive dimension this building would represent to the Town's scale since there is no other building as tall as this one. We ask you to reconsider requiring the developer for a building that would blend with the existing neighboring buildings. Sincerely. ~:- f.. :. -~r- c . ~ . Mr. And Mrs. Elmer Franco (Homeowner at Vail Village Inn Plaza, Phase III) v~~ ao: Monday 6, 2005. VAtL TOWN .COUNgL TOtNN OF YAIiL (MUNICIPAL 13t11LDING 75 FRONTAGE ROAD _ VAIL, COLORADO 81657 U.S.A. Dear Memb+ars of the Vail Town Council: I am a homeowner at Village Inn P1a~:a. Phase. III, Condominiums next door to Crossroads. This letter is regarding the project of the oonstrudion of the Crossroads building. that was presented to you some months 8go_ I want to egress to you my complete inconformity with the oonstn~ction of the proposed new Crossroads 6uildin~ since it is much too large for Vail Village. In addition to the mentioned above, the new Crossroads will tower over our building since it is six stories high most of the way along a,r join property line. Eesides, it steps down from these six stones to five and then to four stones only as it pots very near to East Meadow Drive, where it will stio! tower over our building's one story height at East Meadow Drive. t have been informed as w®It as other owners of Villages at Vllage Irm Plaza, that the Town of Vail has required other new buildings to blend with t~'te scale of existing neighboring building, but this is not being required of the new Crossroads. I do not feel that there are enough public b®nefits from the new Crossroads project to justify the large n_ umber of zoning variances being requested by_ the Crossroads developer. While I do see; the need for redevelopm®nt of Crossroads, t will do everything possible to see that the size of the new Crossroads fits much better with the scale o~# what we now have in Vail Village than does the currently proposed building. Respectfully- rs,- _. _ ._ _ .. ._-- .. . ~ ,~ MARIA Gll~ DALI~lP FRA~ICO ~Ila Inn PIS, Pl~as~ III Con~orehiiuun.~ ~R~ 4Q1 -- - ..__ ~,.....~ „~.,a ~u-.ar WtllVbltlN ~,f f'// fl Hratw be ~4, NY t t 7tS PAGE 02 ys' ~~.d,,f~e ~2v~ v~,c ~, ~~ 1 e r~ a.e~s ~~~ ~''/ ~Z~ Cixr, ss~vaos R~ot~v~'lu~nc~~' 4. ~G~I .d it ~ b!C' ~ o u~~~ f l ~e ~G PiKS % 1~t3.y G~ ~ M ~7~ o ~v ~r a t? ~ ~ ~t •w ~ '~+y ~4~Drt ~ y M'1 ~'~r ~ Fs ~~ ~t~ O ~ PhS ~~ o~ CEO w Q D ryy, y r ant ~Ar,f ' Irv ~ e ~~l P~ a ~- ~ t ~k ~e ~. Gi~tl~t~thtr+~ ~t ~~'OS.St-C~.S ~+rla~ ~3N4 ~+av~,,.., ~~ sb s~MC~ I q~~'• We a•.t ~) ~v oN s N't~r-s ,~,vd tuc ~c ~~~ospd ~~~t~~e ~~ ~~1~ r~~Ad~~ ~~ ~ rsf I h~ bpi/~ t M 13~ ~ ~ M~/ c~ ~ +~ - Ory1 ~ o 'y~4sS t vG ~a~' i ~~ ~r tMl~ / e r O~c~-w ~. /~ j~ e9c ~,~-a~Q ~, e, ~ ~o~ h Q6 bur t T uUr ~~/ ~ t"e S i J 9 1 ~-1 ~~ S ~~. ~~ ~~/wP if ~f ~~ e ~je~,f " ~S ~ - yit pd t~G~O' ~ ~ ~ f K~ a ~~'~ t~v e ~ ~ ~ D ul~Gn l~~P . -- ,~ ~ /1 9 .r ~a~ @~ oy ~v,o.~t c~ ~p~~ e~ cu., ~ Q.,t C~lu ~~ ~' ~'~` - -- - ---- t~°~ ~~` ~~i v~c~j ~ b~wltti.~ a~l/a~ ~Q~ wfs eat u e5 u.- ~ G~j`-~ c~.jLr,. f ~ e~ ~P ~, ar~"' en , ~s 5 wky ; s ~.~dns ~~ ate w ~-~-c~e ~~je ~' ~o ~s /~; ~, ""s C~``'~`d,tM:" ~h0(~?as~1L bo r ~~' ~D. ~L101~ . S~f ~ ~~' ~P/ Wt 11V5 I tllV PAIaE 03 ~11~QtL~ ~~lNVr. ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~a~,,~,r,~1s ~~ 1-~ ~ ~ LL~~ ~r`a 5~~~1t t~ V t ~ 4's frs S.> I ~'' ` J~ th ~/evr. 6J~ S ~ ~d~ a''0~ ~e ~• ,~e ~ d a t~a ~~~ / f~ ~~ l ~ (a ~ d h~ a c ~ ~~i ct/1-- ~8 ~t e ~ fit v c-,ft~r,~s i~ Jy,P ~ e ~ Iti b U~ a~ a- ,rd v~P ~ • 5 ~ ~ ~ ~"Ud' ~ d ~'Z-~¢" ~~ it w, /,d ~ ~, !~s ~ T `1 s Ciii ~ a e,~, ~ ro s~, ~ T~~1 you I 6 ~~ ~.rv ~ erg .S' 'e~~ ~. E a~.,n~~~cr5 RL•. Gntrsl Snheller Jr. 730 Cnnterb+oty U~. ~'ilTanrn-~ hA 1 `JpgS-2D32 ~/ ~ ~a~wk ~ ~ ~ ~~ rte,, rr~UE ~- ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ goo ~ - ~ ., ~. ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~A~ ea i , .. c",,-~--~ ;~, ~~~ - `' ~-~ , ~- ~ l G, o ~~ a.,,,.~~ ~.t- , M~ ~ ~~ ~ ' ~~~~ ~~- ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~. d~.,° ~ , ~~ ~~ ,.. f --- ~,'~ --- t ' ____ (~ i __ ! I - -- I f .. „~ u~r-~a,~ ~.~w17 rr~ut eu e3 r ''7 ~~~~~~~~~~ ;,r.~ ~ ~~•-- .._.._ _.w---..... r1 .. _. ..---'--_....._ _... ~.. J 7 , ... _. .~._ rol.._l-Ge-J.____L__- ..--- - ---... - •---.._~... .... - _... ~'...._ .,.o ~.. ,._. .. ..___~.h.u~,- -----~- . .. . ~ _ ,...__ /~` w - 7 ~ ~ .. ..=G r_ `~ ~ , J C.r "'yC ~~ -~ ~: u~r~oJ LGW1J 1"HUG t7J/ b.i ' ~ ...__... ..__ !, ~- ..,.. __.. 0 V -__.. r .. -._. ~_~_ . c__....:.a_..,._ , i - 1 - - ...-...Y_.._ ,. ~, -~- _, Vail Town Council 75 Vail Road Vail, Colorado 81657 3une 21, 2005 To the Town Council: The proposed Crossroads redevelopment, as recommended for approval by the both the Town of Vail Town Staff and Planning Commission far exceeds anything that has ever been proposed in the Town. Far from improving the ambiance of Vail Village, the Crossroads proposal will detract from it, placing an enormous monolith at the end of Willow Bridge Road and adjacent to Meadow Drive, blocking any possible views of the Spraddle Creek area from the majority of the Village. The architecture. revised though it has been, still remains more befitting a downtown or suburban setting than an alpine village. The gargantuan scale of it is not in harmony with the pedestrian ambiance that this community has strived to create and maintain, and it offers little interplay between the natural environment and man-made environment adjacent and surrounding it. The Town Staff and the Planning Commission have recommended approval of this proposal based on their findings of prior "precedents," and on the alleged public benefit of the project. That precedents should be viewed as a criteria for approval under the Special Development District Ordinance indicates a lack of understanding of both the ordinance and its intent. The public benefit of this project is so vague that the term has been intermingled and confused with private vrofit. There is little about this project that justifies the massive deviation from the underlying zoning in regards to height, mass, bulk and setbacks that the developer has proposed other than the developer's desire to maximize profits. The proposed Crossroads development looks to spell certain doom Vail's small town atmosphere from an economic standpoint as well. While many are looking to various new developments around town to inject new life into an admittedly lackluster commercial environment, the clear and present danger to the majority of current businesses is that they will face ravenous and unfair competition from national chain stores as these stores have the lucre to weather the short seasons Vail is experiencing and the high rents that the new commercial developments will demand. It should be pointed out that, even when completed, all the projects currently approved and/or under construction will represent but a minute increase over the number of short term accommodations units that were available in 1995. "Bring People Back to Vail" The developer has branded the Crossroads proposal under the moniker `Bring people back to Vail." That this project will do so is exceedingly unlikely. That fewer down valley residents are shopping in Vail is a function of convenience -people shop and seek entertainment near where they live. As down valley shopping, dining and entertainment options have increased, Vail's draw as a regional shopping destination has decreased. All of the amenities proposed are already available closer to Eagle County's major population centers, skating and movies au-e already available here in Vail. Further, the current management of the movie theatres is likely continue in any new development; anti . it is unlikely they will change their current program of running new movies down valley fast, unless there is a significant change in the full time resident demographic in the Town of Vail which this project can not hope, as proposed, to precipitate. One can not fault the management of the movie theatres for this - it is common sense, good business practice to put yow biggest draws in your biggest markets. Some of the difficulties Vail is e~eriencin in regards to attracting down valley commercial traffic is a function of design. For most of its history, Vail has brilliantly focused on what has become termed "New Urbanism," and sought to build a pedestrian community that fell back on a terrific public transportation system. Unfortunately, this model has not been followed by down valley developments. The "Vail Valley" as it has been termed, is sowed together by I-70 and as it has grown, so too has increased reliance on the automobile, the effect of which being that the "Vail Valley" is now, for the most part, a highly suburban and highly mobile society. Centralized parking has done precisely for Vail what it was intended to do. but it is also viewed by the new suburban "Vail Valley" resident as highly inconvenient. This situation will not be resolved by the current proposal. While both merchants and the Town Council have expressed a fervent desire to see a return to the perceived shopping hey day of the mid-1980's, further forces have made this scenario unlikely. Without a net increase in occupied short term accommodations units and without a substantive increase in the permanent year-round population base, Vail's primary target market is the down valley resident. The suburban population of the _County see at as but a minor inconvenience to travel to the outlet stores of Silverthorne and to Denver to buy their major purchases. Meanwhile many restaurants and retailers, seeing this change and seeking to meet increasing costs, have set their sites on a highly narrow upper income demographic that visits Vail infrequently, placing a large number of ow stores beyond the spending limits for the bulk of our visitor base and ow regional permanent resident population. The Crossroads proposal, which will likely demand rents in the region of $80 per foot, will do notlhing to remedy this issue. Parking and Traffic While the excess parking that has been proposed may be a public benefit, it is likely that such parking, in this location, wilt tax further an already severely taxed South Frontage Road. Further doubt is cast on whether parking is a true public benefit -with the current market being what it is, the developer will no doubt profit from providing parking to an overly automobile-reliant .populace. It strews obvious that the proposed parking will be most heavily used when. the public parking garages are full. Already during peak parking usage periods, it is impossible to turn left on the South Frontage Road in order to travel to the east bound I-70 on ramp or further west. Further parking between the transportation center and the on ramp and main Vail roundabout would exacerbate this problem 2 exponentially. To date, there has been no exhaustive study as to what traffic problems will be created by the proposal and how traffic problems will be addressed. Deviations from Urban Design Guidelines and Town Code The Crossroads proposal deviates massively from underlying zoning and is not in compliance with the Urban Design Guidelines or with the Vail Municipal Code guidelines in regards to the establishment of Special Development Districts. Specifically: Architecture The architecture of the Crossroads proposal represents a radical departure from the architectural standards that have been employed in the East Meadow Drive neighborhood. At Village Inn Plaza. (SDD 6 Phases I, II, III and V), at the Sonnenalp redevelopment and current expansion and at the current construction of One Willow Bridge Road, the theme has been European alpine with a particular emphasis an human and pedestrian scale and interaction with the naxtual environment. Through its very mass and bulk the Crossroads project feigns ignorance of its surroundings The monolith moniker is appropriate. The architecture appears.pret a porter for an urban or suburban settin~• The proposal has been revised to include more rock and timber on the facade: However, this has mostly served to exacerbate the already massive visual impact, and overall, the scale, mass, bulk and glazing lend to a feeling is still more center city than alpine village, and would perhaps be more at home in Keystone or Copper Mountain than in Vail Village. This is not in keeping with the Urban Design Guidelines, which go into some detail regarding roofing materials, siding, architectural elements, etc. At the aforementioned phases of SDD 6, and the current Sonnenalp expansion and at One Willow Bridge Road the Town of Vail indicated a desire to keep the height to an average of 2 and 3 stories adjacent to East Meadow Drive. The Crossroads proposal steps down to four stories only at the last possible minute on the west side, still dwarfing its western neighbor. The proposal, therefore, does not comply with the Vail Municipal Code which specifically outlines guidelines for compatibility: "Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, bu~`er zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. " _ Vail Municipal Code 12-9A-8 at A. What is being marketed as the chief public benefit the plaza, is also more fittin fg__or an urban than an alpine setting in its immensity, paving, lack of landscaping and lack of communication with existing pedestrian features of neighboring properties, notably Village Inn Plaza. This lack of communication is not in keeping with the Urban Design Guidelines regarding pedestrianization, which state: "A major objective of Vail Village is to encourage pedestrian circulation though an interconnected network of safe pleasant pedestrian walkways throughout the Pillage ". -Urban Design Guidelines; paragraph A. "Pedestrianization," emphasis added Further, it should be pointed out that the focal point of the proposed plaza, the proposed skating rink, will necessitate some mechanism by which the ice can be shaded and protected. It has yet to be described hotiv this will be accomplished and what aesthetic ' values will be affected. Variances from Underlying Zone Disf:rict "Before the Tawn Council approves development standards that deviate from the underlying zone district, it should be determined that such deviation provides benefits to the Town that outweigh the adverse effects of such deviation. " Vail Municipal Code 12-9A-9 (emphasis added) While the Crossroads developer has proposed that the public plaza is a public benefit to the Town and that therefore the allowable square footage should be transferred to the proposed building, the consideration must be made that a plaza is included in the Vail Master Plan. The argument could be made that this was agreed upon by the previous owners of the property, and the current owner therefore inherited the stipulation. It could also be argued that the plaza is not necessarily a public benefit, but an amenity that while benefiting the public generally will primarily benefit the developer by attracting more foot traffic to the proposed commercial <,>paces. Similar arguments could be made regarding the proposed skating rink. While centralized delivery is a public benefit in that it removes delivery trucks from the streets and underground, it is again primarily a benefit to the developer who can stress the ease of access to prospective. tenants. Removing the setback on the west side of the property in order to accommodate the developer's loading and delivery access certainly i~, another strike in private versus public benefit column. Further, centralized deliven,~ is specifically set out as an obiective of the UrbanDesign Guidelines (page 10 at H.) and therefore should be viewed as a requirement rather than a benefit to the public. Views The proposed Crossroads development will sever existing mountain views that, while not specifically protected by Chapter 18.74 of the Vail Municipal Code, certainly play a major part in projecting the alpine ambiance of this part of Vail Village. The Urban Design Guidelines state: When evaluating a development proposal, priority should be given to analysis of the project on views. Page 8A paragraph. G_ The view north from Willow Bridge Road to the Spraddle Creek neighborhood and the National Forest surrounding it will be completely obscured by the proposed building. The view west from Meadow Drive to Red and White Mountain will also be completely obscured by the proposal. And finally, the view east from Meadow Drive to the cliffs beyond Spraddle Creek will be completely severed. Height While there has been some movement in the Town toward encouraging height against the South Frontage Road and Interstate 70, the Crossroads proposal takes advantage of this scenario. to a maximum and egregious extent with the majority of the proposal to exceed the Urban Design Guidelines and exceed the maximum height of the alleged "precedents" of Vail Plaza. Hotel and Four Seasons by 10 and 20 feet, respectively. The Crossroads 4 proposal does not comply with the Urban Design Guidelines in terms of building height. The Urban Design Guidelines quote the Vail Municipal Code for Commercial Core 1.. If it was the intention of the Urban Design Guidelines that future development in Vail Villa e should emulate C 1 the Crossroads ro sal misses the mark b a mile. On average, the building measures 99.9, or ten stories. The Urban Design Guidelines call for an average height of 33 feet with a maximum of 40% of the building to be 43"/o with some architectural elements not useable for Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) to exceed height limit by more than fifteen feet. On average, the Crossroads proposal exceeds 80 feet. more than double what is called for in the Urban Design Guidelines, and more than double what is allowed by existing zoning. While not specifically outlined in the Town code, there has been little analysis as to how shading of the current proposal will affect the South Frontage Road and I-70 an December 20, typically a major concern for the Colorado Department of Transportation. Precedents A Special Development District is a specific piece of legislation for a specific .propertk It does not allow for precedents. That the Town Staff and the Planning Commdssion should site as "precedents" two properties that haven't even gotten out of the ground yet seems foolhardy at best. There has been no opportunity for a concerned public to see how either of these properties will benefit or detriment the special character that is Vail. If the argument is allowed and written into law that the Crossroads approval was based on the. precedents of Vail Plaza Hotel and the Four Seasons Hotel, the precedent that will be set by the Crossroads proposal will pave the way for Special Development Districts to be used to raise the average height of Vail Village from 30-40 feet to 60-80 feet, including in Commercial Core 1, and for the average mass and bulk to be increased exponentially as well. Such justification will be written into the record of decision should these plans be approved.. It should also be noted that the primary justification for approval of Four Seasons and Vail Plaza Hotel at the scale that has been allowed was that they were providing short term accommodation units and they were required to provide on-site employee housing. This proposal does neither. Further, the Vail Plaza Hotel was shielded from the Meadow Drive pedestrian area by the smaller buildings of SDD 6 Phases I, II, III and V. The Crossroads proposal provides no mitigating circumstances between the central mass and Meadow Drive. Problems with Special Development Districts The whole process surrounding the proposed Crossroads redevelopment underscores the need for the citizens and Town Council to take a serious look at how Special' Development Districts are being used and what is resulting. Zoning is a set of covenants entered into a community with, its individual property owners. It sets guidelines as to what is to be allowed based on the belief that such guidelines protect neighboring property owners and protect the common interest. Based solely on economics, it has become standard practice for any developer who sought to exceed underlying_zoning to apply for a Special Development District The proposed- Crossroads redevelopment is an extreme example of this. What has resulted'is a great deal of uncertainty on the part of existing property owners as to what part ofthe commons -views, community character, S property values, etc. -will be detrimentally effected by various projects. As can be seen by the recent fluctuations in the currency, stock and energy markets, uncertainty does not make for good business. What has ensued in Vail's current redevelopment rush is "spot zoning," the rules for which are. at best entirely arbitrary and capricious. and of worst mawviolate Federal guidelines for equal treatment under the law. The arguments as to public benefit being exclusively in the purview of the Town Council leads frequently to highly charged and often. contentious poflitical debates which cost the developer and the taxpayers exceedingly large sums of mo~ley. We would be wise to do awa~with Special Development Districts alto ether. We should start by denying this one. The developer has indicated, through this proposal, that for the most part, the commercial uses sought are very much those for which the property is already zoned. There is sufficient GRFA left in the existing zoning to redevelop the property, and to put in the amenities the applicant has suggested without sacrificing the character of the neighborhood and the community. Where the Crossroads ~r_oposal seeks to exceed zoning is almo5~t entirely in the area that is proposed for condominium sales, and thus strictly to the developer's benefit. Should an SDD be granted, the Town Council should insist upon the following: - No variance from the underlvin~ zone district `should be granted in regard to hei h . Views from Willow Bridge Road to Spraddle Creek and from Meadow Drive East to Spraddle Creek and west to Red and White Mountain must be protected as called for in the Urban Design Guidelines. At Meadow Drive, the building should drop to 20 feet, protecting the pedestrian atmosphere of the street as called for in the Urban Design Guidelines. - Loading and Delivery access should be moved to the east side of the building_ closer to Village Center Chute, thus minimizing impacts on neighbors - No variance from the underlying zone district should be granted in regard to setbacks. - The building should be broken ul~, especially at the center mass, in order that the project loses its monolithic appearance and fits in more cohesively with the neighborhood, as called for in thf, Urban Design Guidelines. - _ Pedestrian interconnects with adiacent properties should be improved. - The architecture must be further modified in order that the project conform fully to the Urban Design Guidelines and the alpine village atmosphere of Vail Village and of the Meadow Drive neighborhood. - A comprehensive traffic study muust be initiated with particular emphasis given to how the proposal will affect tragic patterns on South Frontage Road and how the Town of Vail and the developer intend to remedy any problems and conflicts that might arise. - On-sight lop -tg erm employee housing must be included in the~ronosal in commensurate proportion to the number of jobs that will be created by the project in order that the project does not further tax an akeady severely tax long-term local housing market and in order that there is a daily guarantee of local traffic to the project and to the neighborhood. 6 - Guarantees, not vague promises of encouraging rentals, must be made that a certain number of the condominiums will remain short term accommodations units. Should no guarantee be possible, then the Town should insist that a number .. __. of the condominiums be `turned into hotel rooms. - The oroQOSed second level retail should become second level office/services ace in order that there is a daily guarantee of local traffic to the project and to the neighborhood of workers who are not in the seasonal tourism industry. - A comprehensive building plan should be developed in order that construction impacts on the Village.as a whole and on the neighboring properties in particular is minimized. - Thank you ve much for your-time and consideration. Please do not hesitate to contact me~hould yo>~1 avq, any questions. J t '~tU 100 E Meadow ~ , # 2 Vail, Colorado 81657 970.479.9463 jstaufernearthlink.net 7 ~c~L~ ~O~l~/o.~ Vail Town Council 75 Frontage Road West Vail, CO 81657 Dear Ladies and Gentlemen of the COUncu, I am submitting this letter in aii effort to share my observations and concerns about the proposed development at the Crossroads Shopping Center. As you well know, Pepi and I have lived here for more than forty years and it's here that we have made our business, raised our children and contributed to the community whenever we've seen a need that we could positively address. So I write this letter, not with any contempt or personal angst, but because I hope to remind you of some of the values and objectives on which our town was conceived. Having looked at the plans presented by Peter Knobel, I am generally impressed and supportive of his design. I truly believe his efforts will help to revitalize our village core and I am enthusiastic that someone of such stature is eager to invest in our community. I do, however, have a genuine concern with the height of the building as a whole, but more specifically, the height of the wing of the west side of the proposal . I sincerely appreciate that the structure, as it parallels I-7Q, will in fact create a sound barrier and mitigate some of the highway noise. But I don't see a need to allow the same height considerations throughout the entire project. One of the things that has made our piece of paradise so inviting and unique is that the Bavarian style of architecture has surpassed the test of time. That is not to say that new buildings must recreate the past, but it is vitally important that we maintain the views and the visual corridors inherent in this mountain town. The proposed development, as is, dwarfs the existing buildings it abuts. Gone will be the views from Meadow Drive and the breathtaking site of the Gore Range throughout the day and in the evening's alpine- glow. I can believe, no, I know for a fact that our founding father's vision for our town was to maximize its potential by maintaining its landscape, doing all that was possible to keep open spaces and the skylines building free. I think allowing the excessive height-on the west wing ofMr: Knobel's project is a discredit~to~that-vision and will- - Beverly impact all that has been worked for in the last forty plus years. I have no reason to believe that Mr. Knobel's intentions are anything other than pure. But I caution you to remember that he is a new developer in our midst and though his plan has many positive merits, it is likely that once it is complete, he will be on his way to build in other areas. With that being said, I encourage you to trust some of us long- timers, listen to our wisdom and step back this proposed development to make it an enhancement rather. than a blemish to our beautiful town. Thank you for giving my thoughts your consideration. ,/ , ART and ELAINE KELTON 1034 HOMESTAKE CIRCLE VAIL, COLORADO 81657 June 10th ....2005 Dear Vail Town Council I am writing as Art and I will be out of town for the June 21St Meeting reviewing the Cross-Roads redevelopment. We are concerned by both the unrelenting density and scale of the building, and are skeptical about the "Public Benefits" received vs. the the variances given to the developer. We are an acknowledged World Class Resort built in scale to man, and allowing at all junctures a view of the mountain and out-of doors which seduced us all. To claim "Urbanization" as a benefit to, or goal for all of the second home owners is to fly in the face of aU which has made us so: very successful. Aspen, St. Moritz, Boulder, Colorado have all re-gentrified their aging communities, but not at the expense of the scale or ambience which contributed to their success: Well directed change has to happen, but please do not "throw the baby out with the bathwater". Our thanks..... C~~~~ Elaine and Ark Kefton 4 ~`I i Herman Staufer 950 Red Sandstone Road Vail, Colorado 81657 June 16, 2005 Deaz Vail Town Council, I am writing as I will be out of on June :Z 1 ~` for the Meeting reviewing the Crossroads Redevelopment. Please adopt the position of The Vail Village Homeowners Association_ The project as proposed is too big, too tall, and it pushes the building too close to the property lines. It is my belief that the Developer cannot meet their burden in'"Design features" and "Compatibility". That is to say the azcrutectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, chazacter and visual integrity. aze not in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood and the Vail Village as a whole. I will be there for future meetings on this project, but my purpose in writing is to urge you to send this Developer back to the drawing board so he can develop a project that works for Vail and not Manhattan. Respectfully submitted, Herman S er Ann Reilly Bishop From: Operalvr37@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 200512:05 PM To: annreillybishop cQcomcastnet Subject: Letter- my draft response ra~c ~ ~L Dear Ann- Thanks for your faxes. My response is unrelated to your VillageinnPlaza group's. Let me know what you think- make any changes you feel would help. (also- it's "avant garde" :-) Ellie Dear Members of the Vail Town Council: 1 am writing from my dinosaur perspective on what is being allowed to happen to Vail in general and to the Crossroads redevelopment project ~n pa us latolthe developer's plans for a building that isgoo large (1 know- thef the originals of Vail than to object strenuo IY ublic amernfies of slippery slope of "precedents"), architecturally inappropriate (for Vail- not for New York City) p bowling trading a public plaza for dubious value as enhancements to economic recovery of the town (skating, , "special" contract consideration ?) While I'm willing to admit that 9e ~etnThe gbeat beauty of the founlders' coi ncept forlwhatlhaslbecome The direction i believe we will co m9 ou mi ht cast Greatest Ski Resort on Earth was the absence of greed and the pressure poliiics it fuels: I hope y 9 your votes with that in mind. Thank you Sincerely Ellie Caulldns (Mrs. George P. Caulkins, Jr.) 304 Mill Creek CircleVail TIMBERLINE COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE June 20, 2005 Vail Town Council Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 RE: Crossroads Redevelopment Dear Council Members: Please accept this letter as an indication of Timberline Commercial Real Estate's support of the proposed Crossroads redevelopment project scheduled for your review on June 21, 2005. We have followed this project from its inception and have attended the numerous public hearings held over the past year. We have listened to the arguments (both for and against) voiced by members of the public, as well as those expressed by the Planning Commission and Town Council. We remain confident that this project will be a tremendous benefit to our community. We hope that you seize upon this opportunity and allow a private developer to provide some of the public amenities and services currently lacking in the Village at his own expense rather than asking the local taxpayer to provide and pay for them at a later date. Thank you for your time and consideration. Most sincerely, Kevin Deighan Greg Ga ineau 12 Vail Road. Suite 600 • Vail. Colorado 81657 ph. 970.476.3436 • fx. 970.476.1986 Core Swi r,..~"~` y sher -VAIL CROSSROADS PROJECT From: <Ggrenham@aol.com> To: <TOWNCOUNCIL@vailgov.com> Date: 6/21/2005 11:55:16 AM Subject: VAIL CROSSROADS PROJECT TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL _._. __ ~ __:~ ._ _ _ ___ ___. ~_~a.~._~ .__~.a,~. Page 1 RE: Proposal for Special Development District No. 39 to Allow for the Redevelopment of Crossroads We are writing to you as concerned property owners in the town of Vail. Our primary residence is in Washington, D.C., but we own two properties in Vail Village. We are also speaking on behalf of many families from the Washington, D.C. area who have just learned about the massive Crossroads redevelopment project, which we all feel is overwhelming in terms of height and bulk) In addition, we (Paul Zevnik and partner) own the Denver and Aspen Univision affiliate and can speak for countless friends of Univision who own properties in Vail. (We will be happy to forward the developer's email address to our friends and listeners, if you think that would be helpful). In short, while we all support the redevelopment of Crossroads, it has come to our attention in the last few days that the current project before you is INCONSISTENT WITH THE LOOK AND FEEL OF VAIL! As of this~morning, we have 16 families (and growing) from the Washington, D.C. area who own property in the town of Vail and who are willing to get involved in a grassroots battle to protect Vail, should this situation require more active involvement on our part. We represent a wide range of families -some of us work in the White House and current Administration in Washington, D.C. Others are doctors, lawyers, CEOs, internet executives -all types of people and income levels. We have all been united, however, in our love-of Vail in both the winter and the summer. We have taken our families there for years, and are blessed with wondertul memories. We would like to pass the same memories and beauty of Vail on to our children and their children. I might add that we have chosen Vail over the much more popular and charmng Aspen, or the more remote and beautiful Telluride -much to the consternation of many friends. Most people in the D.C. area will say to us "Why Vail? Aspen is so much prettier, you don't have the highways to look at, you don't have _ _ alt of that new development, Aspen is quairitj-romantic,-has kept its hisfo~ical integrity, has tight zoning to protect it, is aesthetically much more attractive..." We hear this constantly, and yet all of us have chosen Vail over Aspen because we love the feel of it, the family-friendly atmosphere,'the wonderful people, and the gorgeous mountain. We have committed to Vail because we love it -its open. beauty and glorious mountains and the coziness and friendliness of Vail Village. We LOVE Vail, and yet we do NOT want. it to become an over-developed, Las Vegas-style. compound, and this particular development of Crossroads is certainly headed in that direction. Yes, we put up with the highways and less"charm" than Aspen,°less space tharrTelluride or Jackson Hole, and it'has been well worth it up until now. However, should Vail over-develop without regard to visually compatible beauty, we will re-4hirik our realinvestmerits in Vail. We have no interest in looking at high-.rise developments or over-built monstrosities. _.~ ~, ... w .._~ ' Corey Swisher - VAIL CROSSROADS PROJECT Page 2 All of us own homes and property in Vail, and we leave the hustle and bustle of Washington, D.C. to relax and unwind in your beautiful village. PLEASE KEEP IT A BEAUTIFUL VILLAGE!! Among the families are the Hubbards, Galvins, Zevniks, Grenham, Strouds, Baileys, Smiths, Bentons, Kennedys and many more. The list is growing as we contact people and explain the situation and show them the plans. Unfortunately, since the impact has just become clear to us all, and it is now on an emergency basis, many people are on summer travel and it is difficult to get all of the signatures by the time of your Town Council meeting tonight. Again, we certainly support the redevelopment of Crossroads, but please consider the community surrounding the Crossroads, please consider the local residents of theVillage Inn and the rest of us who own homes in the village of Vail. I would suspect that if ALL OF THE OWNERS OF PROPERTY IN THE VILLAGE (including those of us who are not fortunate enough to live there full-time, but are homeowners, WERE CONTACTED TODAY AND SHOWN A COMPLETELY OPEN AND TRANSPARANT PICTURE OF THIS PROPOSAL, WE WOULD ALL VOTE A RESOUNDING "NO WAY -VOTE FOR CHARACTER AND COMMUNITY -SCALE IT BACK!!" Thank you for your attention to this critical matter, and for taking your time to maintain the integrity of Vail. Please do riot hesitate to contact me by email or by phone (202-255-8762) should you need further information from us. Ginny Grenham President, Grenham Networks Paul A. Zevnik Entravision Communications CC: <CSwisher@vailgov.com> Vail Town Council 75 Vail Road Vail, Colorado 81657 June 18, 2005 Dear Council Members, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Crossroads redevelopment. While in favor of seeing Crossroads redeveloped, there remain significant issues that concern me both as a long-time resident and business owner of Vail. The proposal is too massive for the site and varies greatly from both the underlying zoning and the Urban Design Guidelines. The "public benefits" of the proposal have been misleadingly exaggerated by the proponents and thus the variances are not justified under the Special Development language in the Vail Municipal Code. The architecture is not at all befitting the alpine environment of Vail Village or of the Meadow Drive neighborhood. And the massive height of the proposal will completely sever the views to the mountains north east and west of Vail Village from Willow Bridge Road and from Meadow Drive. As a long-time tenant of Village Inn Plaza, I am deeply troubled by the lack of consideration this proposal has given to our property. The setbacks on the west side of the Crossroads proposal should remain at ten feet and the massive wall abutting our property should be scaled back and the pedestrian linkages improved. I am particularly concerned by the prospect of chain stores coming in to Vail Village. Knowing personally the seasonality of the local business climate and having some idea of what the rents that will be charged at Crossroads, I fear that this is a real possibility should the proposal be approved. I hope that you will deny the application for a Special Development District at the Crossroads property. incerely, ~~ Nanc Tezl 100 E. Meadow Dr., #5 Vail, Colorado 81657 ANN REILLY BISHOP ATTORNEY AT LAW June 18, 2005 VIA E-MAIL TO TOWN COUNCIL AT VAIL.GOV AND HAND DELIVERED Members of the Town Council Town of Vail 75 Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 8.1657 Re: Crossroads East One LLC's Application to Establish a Special Development District Dear Members of the Town Council: I. INTRODUCTION I submit this letter on behalf of the Village Inn Plaza, Phase III, Condominium Association, an asso- ~ ciation of homeowners who live next to, and will be directly impacted by, the Crossroads project that is the subject of an application for the establishment of a special development district. A. The Village Inn Plaza, Phase III, Condominium Association Urges You to Reject the Present Application. By way of summary the project sponsor, Crossroads East One, LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC, is seeking approval of the Vail Town Council to establish Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, pursuant to Article 12-9(A), Special Development District, of Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of Crossroads, a mixed use development. The project will include some 75 residential units as well as significant square footage devoted to com- mercial uses, including athree-screen theatre and a bowling alley. Additional elements of the project include an outdoor ice skating rink; a major arcade to include indoor entertainment; meeting rooms and convention facilities; multiple-family dwellings and lodges; and a private club. The present zon- ing for the property is "Commercial Service Center." The project has been undergoing a public approval process since September 2004 and has been previously considered and rejected by the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council. A revised project recently received an approval recommendation from the Planning and Environmental Commission. The Town Code's provision of Special Development District is a process by which the Town Council is required to achieve a delicate balance between preserving the lifestyle created through the Town's Zoning Code and the need, in certain limited circumstances, to allow for deviations from the well- conceived Code in connection with the development of new projects if, generally, two specific condi- tions are met. First, the project must be compatible with the existing surrounding uses. More impor- POST OFFICE BOX 820 • VAIL, COLORADO 81658 (970) 476-4501 • FAX (970) 476-4490 • E-MAIL: ANNREILLYBISHOP@COMCAST.NET Members of the Vail Town Council June 18, 2005 page 2 tantly, public, as opposed to private, benefits generated by the project must outweigh the impacts that are caused by the deviations from the Zoning Code. The greater the deviation from the requirements of the Zoning Code, the more public benefits that must be generated in order to jus- tify aproject's approval. The compatibility requirement serves as an ultimate limitation and is in recognition of the fact that in some cases, some projects cannot be approved no matter what the cache of public benefits created because the project will destroy and forever change the character of the surrounding neighborhood. The Town Council should not approve Crossroads East One LLC's application because nei- ther of these prerequisites has been satisfied and neither of them can be satisfied given the current design of the project. II. THE PROJECT IS NOT COMPATIBLE OR SENSITIVE TO THE IMMEDIATE ENVIRONMENT. NEIGHBORHOOD OR ADJACENT PROPERTIES Section 12-9A-7 of the Town Code provides: Determination of permitted, conditional and accessory uses shall be made by the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council as a part of the formal review of the proposed development plan. Unless further restricted through the review of the proposed special development district, permitted, conditional and accessory uses shall be limited to those permitted, conditional and accessory uses in a property's underlying zone district. Under certain condi- tions, commercial uses may be permitted in residential special development districts if, in the opinion of the Town Council, such uses are primarily for the service and convenience of the residents of the development and the immediate neighborhood. Such uses, if any, shall not change or destroy the predominantly residential character of the special development district. The amount of area and type of such uses, if any, to be allowed in a residential special development district shall be established by the Town Council as a part of the approved development plan. Section 12-9A-8 that provides: The following design criteria shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating the merits of the proposed special development dis- trict. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that sub- mittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved: Members of the Vail Town Council June 18, 2005 page 3 Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to archi- tectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. Design Features: Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community In direct contravention of Town Code Section 12-9A-7, implementation of the proposed Crossroads project would significantly denigrate the character of the immediate and surrounding areas. Indeed, the proposed project is entirely inapposite to the spirit and intent of the Town Code's special development district provision because the project is incompatible with the sur- rounding environs. The Crossroads project cannot satisfy the compatibility requirement for the following reasons, among others: Height and Building Mass: The height of the project is simply too tall in relation to the building in the surrounding area. The developer is proposing a roof height at the peak of 98 feet, a height which has never been approved in the Town, and which is nine feet taller than the tallest height that has been previously approved by the Town. The size of the project is also too large in comparison with its surroundings viewed from the residences of the Village Inn Plaza homeowners. The project has significant- ly more occupied space at greater heights than others. The proposed structure in its present configuration will dominate and "overshadow" the neighborhood. The amount of space is inappropriate and obtrusive. Further setbacks should be imposed so that the project does not dominate the view plane created by these neighboring buildings. The Crossroads project cannot be found to be compatible with the surrounding area until its size, height and bulk are further reduced. 2. Traffic: The Traffic generated by the Project renders it incompatible with the existing area. Project-generated traffic will reduce the intersection of South Frontage Road and Crossroads Chute (Village Center Drive) to an unacceptable level of service. While the project proposes the construction of roundabout to mitigate this impact, the devel- oper of the project is only required to pay its fair share contribution. Under such cir- cumstances it is unclear when the mitigation will be constructed. The potential ripple effect that this will have on traffic patterns in the surrounding area will dramatically changed the nature of the surrounding area. The conditions of approval for the project should be changed to require Crossroads East One, LLC, to fully fund, subject to reim- bursement from the fair share payments of other developers, the traffic improvement necessary to mitigate the traffic impacts. In the absence of such protection the Members of the Vail Town Council June 18, 2005 page 4 Crossroads projects cannot be found to have met the requirements imposed by Section 12-9A-7 and 12-9A-8. Architecture: The architecture slated for the project exacerbates the incompatibility caused by the project size, height and bulk. The building is being proposed as a uni- fied architectural theme. Unity of architectural theme, a repetitive roof form and uncomplicated geometry only magnify the bulk and mass of the structure. The archi- tectural style resembles more of an Atlantic City Hotel than an alpine building. The architectural style for the building needs to reflect the characteristics of a European alpine mountain resort hotel and until it does, the project is incompatible with the sur- rounding area. 4. Commercial Use: The intensity of the commercial use proposed, which will create additional traffic, noise and other impacts, also makes this project incompatible with the surrounding uses. In sum, a substantial redesign of the project is required in order to meet the requirements of the Town Code with respect to the special development districts. III. IMPACTS FOR THE PROJECT'S DEVIATION FROM THE ZONING CODE ARE NOT OUTWEIGHED BY THE ALLEGED PUBLIC BENEFITS Another basis for rejecting the Crossroads project application is rooted in Section 12-9A-9 that reads in pertinent part: Before the Town Council approves development standards that devi- ate from the underlying zone district, it should be determined that such deviation provides benefits to the Town that outweigh the adverse effects of such deviation. This determination is to be made based on evaluation of the proposed special development district's compliance with the design criteria outlined in Section 12-9A-8 of this Article. Staff has concluded that the ``proposed Crossroads redevelopment complies with this portion of the criterion as the proposed public benefits outweigh all deviations proposed." This conclusion is neither supported by substantial evidence or common sense. The benefits provided by the project do not meet this requirement. The staff report for the project shows a significant deviation from the development standards relating to lot area, buildable area, building height, density, GRFA, site coverage, and landscape. Suffice it to say there is not one significant development standard that is not substantially being exceeded by the project applicant. However, these unprecedented deviations which will forever change the character of this area are being justified based upon the provision of the public delivery facility, the public restrooms, and the complete streetscape improvements on Village Center Drive and East Meadow Drive. There Members of the Vail Town Council June 18, 2005 page 5 is no explanation for this conclusion. That should come as no surprise because, at best, these ben- efits are meager and insufficient payment -and that is what they are intended to be -for the complete abandonment of the provisions of the Town's Zoning Code applicable to the property. Remarkably, staff has suggested that a public benefit arises as a result of the project applicant's development potential lost through the creation of the public plaza. This conclusion turns the Town Code's provision on special development districts on its head. In essence, staff is suggest- ing that the developer's election not to seek a greater variance from the Zoning Code by adding another 24,000 to his project (rendering even more incompatible with the immediate environment) is a public benefit. Staff also finds that the project sponsor design of the project to meet the objectives of the governing planning document, the Vail Village Master Plan, is a public benefit. Approval of the Crossroads project in reliance on such a formulation would undermine the Town Council responsibility for land use matters. Adherence to the provisions of the Zoning Code and the Master Plan should be minimum requirements met as a prelude to development and not be viewed as conferring some additional public benefit. Even if this approach were sanctioned, then the project's approval could not be justified because it violates many more provisions of the rele- vant codes than it meets. This alleged public benefit is illusory and teeters upon the precipice of sophistry. The project's sponsor has advocated that the proposed bowling alley, the three screen theater and sports bar/arcade activity center are public amenities. Even if there is a demand for such uses, these activities are commercial enterprises designed to create profit for the developer and the operators of such businesses. Satisfying a demand or desire for such commercial enterprises is not a public benefit of the type required to satisfy the requirements of the provision of public ben- efits. The only way that the current slate of public benefits can be deemed sufficient to justify the approval of the project is for the project to be redesigned to reduce the number and amount of deviations from the Town's Zoning Code. IV. CONCLUSION Through this letter, the Village Inn Plaza, Phase III, Condominium Association has summarized the basis upon which it believes the Town Council must reject the application to establish a spe- cial development district for the Crossroads project. As our elected officials, we look to you to protect and preserve the unique beauty, style and life provided by the Town of Vail. One mecha- nism to achieve this, used by jurisdictions all over the country, is enforcement of the Zoning Code. While there must always be some flexibility in any planning scheme to permit modest deviations that will benefit the public, such flexibility can serve as a mechanism to abandon the guiding principles of the Town's land use for a price. We know that the balance that must be struck is not a simple one and that the burden of finding the right balance is a difficult task entrusted to you? . We also know that the appropriate balance has not been reached in connection with this application. We respectfully urge you to deny the Members of the Vail Town Council June 18, 2005 page 6 application. At a minimum, the application should be remanded back to the Planning and Environmental Commission and staff to work with the project applicant to design a project that more fully achieves the purpose, intent and goals of the special development district. Sincerely, ~~ ~~ Ann Reilly Bishop for Village Inn Plaza, Phase III, Condominium Association cc: Crossroads East One, LLC 1 The Town Council's responsibility has been made all the more difficult by the positions taken by staff. Planning staff has not promptly responded to inquiries made by the public or been willing to hear the views of the public with respect to the issues outlined herein. Rather, they have viewed their principal point of responsibility to be meeting with the developer as opposed to the developer and the public. Equally distressing is the unfounded position taken by the Town's Attorney who has suggested that Town Council members may not speak to citizens regarding any matter that might be deemed a quasi judicial determination. There is no policy that supports this position. The Town Attorney's rule is at odds with the overwhelming majority of jurisdictions that permit and indeed encourage such communications. The pro- scription against the perceived ex parte communications are at odds with the Town Council's principles as articulated in the Guidelines for Council Meetings, which urge citizens to contact members of the Town Council, by phone and email. If these forms of communications are permitted and encouraged, then there is no principled basis why these communications cannot occur in person. Finally, there is no reported case law in Colorado or elsewhere which stands for the position advocated by the Town's Attorney. The case cited to me, Wells a Del Norte, 753 P.2d. 770 (Colo. 1987) is inapposite. That case involved a hearing officer who acted improperly when he had lunch with a lawyer and a witness during an employee dis- missal hearing. The position advanced by the Town's Attorney flies in the face of the First Amendment's guarantee of a citizens right to petition the government. Frank and candid discussions with and input from the citizens of Vail can only help the Town Council fulfill its responsibility. --- - r Corey Swisher VAIL CROSSROADS PROJECT - """~ .. ~`~ "`~- -~-". ..`° Page 1 From: <Ggrenham@aol.com> To: <TOWNCOUNCIL@vailgov.com> Date: 6/21 /2005 11:55:16 AM Subject: VAIL CROSSROADS PROJECT TO: VAIL TOWN COUNCIL RE: Proposal for Special Development District No. 39 to Allow for the Redevelopment of Crossroads We are writing to you as concerned property owners in the town of Vail. Our primary residence is in Washington, D.C., but we own two properties in Vail Village. We are also speaking on behalf of many families from the Washington, D:C. area who have just learned about the massive Crossroads redevelopment project, which we all feel is overwhelming in terms of height and bulk) In addition, we (Paul Zevnik and partner) own the Denver and Aspen Univision affiliate and can speak for countless friends of Univision who own properties in Vail. (We will be happy to forward the developer's email address to our friends and listeners, if you think that would be helpful). In short, while we all support the redevelopment of Crossroads, it has come to our attention in the last few days that the current project before you is INCONSISTENT WITH THE LOOK AND FEEL OF VAIL! As of this morning, we have 16 families (and growing) from the Washington, D.C. area who own property in the town of Vail and who are willing to get involved in a grassroots battle to protect Vail, should this situation require more active involvement on our part. We represent a wide range of families -some of us work in the White House and current Administration in Washington, D.C. Others are doctors, lawyers, CEOs, Internet executives -all types of people and income levels. We have all been united, however, in our love of Vail in both the winter and the summer. We have taken our families there for years, and are blessed with wonderful memories. We would like to pass the same memories and beauty of Vail on to our children and their children. I might add that we have chosen Vail over the much more popular and charmng Aspen, or the more remote and beautiful Telluride -much to the consternation of many friends. Most people in the D.C. area will say to us "Why Vail? Aspen is so much prettier, you don't have the highways to look at, you don't have alt of that new development; Aspen is quaint,- romantic; has kept its historical integrity, has tight zoning to protect it, is aesthetically much more attractive..." We hear this constantly, and yet all of us have chosen Vail over Aspen because we love the feel of it, the family-friendly atmosphere,'the wonderful people, and the gorgeous mountain. We have committed to Vail because we love it -its open beauty and glorious mountains and the coziness and friendliness of Vail Village. We LOVE Vail, and yet we do NOT want it to become an over-developed, Las Vegas-style compound, and this particular development of Crossroads is certainly headed in that direction. Yes, we put up with the highways and less "charm" than Aspen, less space than Telluride or Jackson Hole, and it has been well worth it up until now. However, should. Vail over-develop without regard to visually compatible beauty, we will re-think our real investments in Vail. We have no interest in looking at high-rise,developments or over-built monstrosities. Corey Swisher - VAIL CROSSROADS PROJECT ~ ~~~~ _ Page 2 All of us own homes and property in Vail, and we leave the hustle and bustle of Washington, D.C. to relax and unwind in your treautiful village. PLEASE KEEP IT A BEAUTIFUL VILLAGE!! Among the families are the Hubbards, Galvins, Zevniks, Grenham, Strouds, Baileys, Smiths, Bentons, Kennedys and many more. The list is growing as we contact people and explain the situation and show them the plans. Unfortunately, since the impact has just become clear to us all, and it is now on an emergency basis, many people are on summer travel and it is difficult to get all of the signatures by.the time of your Town Council meeting tonight. Again, we certainly support the redevelopment of Crossroads, but please consider the community surrounding the Crossroads, please consider the local residents of theVillage Inn and the rest of us who own homes in the village of Vail. I would suspect that if ALL OF THE OWNERS OF PROPERTY IN THE VILLAGE (including those of us who are not fortunate enough to live there full-time, but are homeowners, WERE CONTACTED TODAY ANC) SHOWN A COMPLETELY OPEN AND TRANSPARANT PICTURE OF THIS PROPOSAL, WE WOULD ALL VOTE A RESOUNDING "NO WAY -VOTE FOR CHARACTER AND COMMUNITY -SCALE IT BACK!!" Thank you for your attention to this critical matter, and for taking your time to maintain the integrity of Vail. Please do not hesitate to contact me by email or by phone (202-255-8762) should you need further information from us. Ginny Grenham President, Grenham Networks Paul A. Zevnik Entravision Communications CC:. <CSwisher@vailgov.com> Vail Town Council 75 Vail Road Vail, Colorado 81657 June 18, 2005 Dear Council Members, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Crossroads redevelopment. While in favor of seeing Crossroads redeveloped, there remain significant issues that concern me both as a long-time resident and business owner of Vail. The proposal is too massive for the site and varies greatly from both the underlying zoning and the Urban Design Guidelines. The "public benefits" of the proposal have been misleadingly exaggerated by the proponents and thus the variances are not justified under the Special Development language in the Vail Municipal Code. The architecture is not at all befitting the alpine environment of Vail Village or of the Meadow Drive neighborhood. And the massive height of the proposal will completely sever the views to the mountains north east anal west of Vail Village from Willow Bridge Road and from Meadow Drive. As a long-time tenant of Village Inn Plaza, I am deeply troubled by the lack of consideration this proposal has given to our property. The setbacks on the west side of the Crossroads proposal should remain at ten feet and the massive wall abutting our property should be scaled back and the pedestrian linkages improved. I am particularly concerned by the prospect of chain stores. coming in to Vail Village. Knowing personally the seasonality of the local business climate and having some idea of what the rents that will be charged at Crossroads, I fear that this is a real possibility should the proposal be approved. I hope that you will deny the application for a Special Development District at the Crossroads property. incerely, i ,,` ~ Nanc Tezl 100 E. Meadow Dr., #5 Vail, Colorado 81657 ,/ ART and ELAINE KELTON 1034 HOMESTAKE CIRCLE VAIL, COLORADO 81657 June 10th ....2005 Dear Vait Town Council t am writing as Art and I will be out of town for the June 21St Meeting reviewing the Cross-Roads redevelopment. We are concerned by both the unrelenting density and scale of the building, and are skeptical about the "Public Benefits" received vs. the the variances given to the developer. We are an acknowledged World Class Resort built 'rn scale to man, and allowing at all junctures a view of the mountain and out-of doors which seduced us aIL To claim "Urbanization" as a benefit to, or goal for all of the second-home owners is to fly in the face of all which has made us so,very successful. Aspen, St. Moritz, Boulder, Colorado have all re-gentrified their aging. communities, but not at the expense of the scale or ambience which contributed to their success. Well directed change has to happen, but please do not "throw the baby out with the bathwater". Our thanks..... Elaine and- Art Kelton .. .,, } ., .. .. . t ,. .- Herman Staufer 950 Red Sandstone Road Vail, Colorado 81657 June 16, 2005 Dear Vail Town Council, I am writing as I will be out of on June 21 ~` for the Meeting reviewing the Crossroads Redevelopment. Please adopt the position of The Vail Village Homeowners Association. The project as proposed is too big, too till, and it pushes the building too close to the property lines. It is my belief that the Developer cannot meet their burden in "Design features" and "Compatibility". That is to say the architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character and visual integrity are not in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood and the Vail Village as a whole. I will be there for future meetings on this project, but my purpose in writing is to urge you to send this Developer back to the drawing board so he can develop a project that works for V ail and not Manhattan. Respectfully submitted, Herman S er I'Q~',G t vi Ann Reilly Bishop From: Operalvr37@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 200512:05 PM To: annreillybishop@comcast.net Subject: Letter- my draft response Dear Ann- Thanks for your faxes. My response is unrelated to your Villagelnn EI ea group's. Let me know what you think- make any changes you feel would help. (also- it's "avant garde ) pear Members of the Vail Town Council: n to Vaii in general and to the I am writing from my dinosaur perspective on what is being allowed to happe Crossroads redevelopment project in particular. I feel that I could do no less to honor George's memo ~oVO thef the originals of Vail than to object strenuously to the oe na ~~r Vail- not for Newt YorkaCity) public amenities of slippery slope of "precedents°), architecturally inappr p bowling trading a public plaza for dubious value as enhancements to economic recovery of the town (skating, , "speciaP' contract consideration ?) While I'm willing to admit than nge `etnThee gb at beauty of the founldergs' concept fortwhatthaslbecome The direction 1 believe we will co -'e9 ou mi ht cast Greatest Ski Resort on Earth was the absence of greed and the pressure politics it fuels. I hope y 9 your votes with that in mind. Thank you Sincerely Ellie Caulkins (Mrs. George. P. Caulkins, Jr.) 304 Mill Creek CircleVail -- , ..r - _ ,~ _ - - ~ovGie ~'~~/off Vail Town Council 75 Frontage Road West Vail, CO 81657 Dear Ladies and Gentlemen of the COUncii, I am submitting this letter in an effort to share my observations and concerns about the proposed development at the Crossroads Shopping Center. As you well know, Pepi and I have lived here for more than forty years and it's here that we have made our business; raised our children and contributed to the community whenever we've seen a need that we could positively address. So I write this letter, not with any contempt or personal angst, but because I hope to remind you of some of the values and objectives on which our town was conceived. Having looked at the plans presented by Peter Knobel, I am generally impressed and supportive of his design. I truly believe his efforts will help to revitalize our village core and I am enthusiastic that someone of such stature is eager to invest in our community. I do, however, have a genuine concern with the height of the building as a whole, but more specifically, the height of the wing of the west side of the proposal . I sincerely appreciate that the structure, as it parallels I-70, will in fact create a sound barrier and mitigate some of the highway noise. But I don't see a need to allow the same height considerations throughout the entire project. One of the things that has made our piece of paradise so inviting and unique is that the Bavarian style of architecture has surpassed the test of time. That is not to say that new buildings must recreate the past, but it is vitally important that we maintain the views and the visual corridors inherent in this mountain town. The proposed development, as is, dwarfs the existing buildings it abuts. Gone will be the views from Meadow Drive and the breathtaking site of the Gore Range throughout the day and in the evening's alpine- glow. I can believe, no, I know for a fact that our founding father's vision for our town was to maximize its potential by maintaining its landscape, doing-all that was possible to keep open spaces and the skylines building free. I think allowing the excessive -- --~- - -height~on-the west wing of 1VIr: I~riobel's project is a discredit to that vision and will - ~ ---- -~ severly impact all that has been worked for in the last forty plus years. I have no reason to believe that Mr. Knobel's intentions are anything other than pure. But I caution you to remember that he is a new developer in our midst and though his plan has many positive merits, it is likely that once it is complete, he will be on his way to build in other areas. With that being said, I encourage you to trust some of us long- timers, listen to our wisdom and step back this proposed development to make it an enhancement rather than a blemish to our beautiful town. Thank you for giving my thoughts your consideration. ~~ ~~~~ i~ Vail Town Council 75 Vail Road Vail, Colorado 81657 June 21, 2005 To the Town Council: The proposed Crossroads redevelopment, as recommended for approval by the both the Town of Vail Town Staff and Planning Commission far exceeds anything that has ever been proposed in the Town. Far from improving the ambiance of Vail Village, the Crossroads proposal will detract from it, placing an enormous monolith at the end of Willow Bridge Road and adjacent to Meadow Drive, blocking any possible views of the Spraddle Creek area from the majority of the Village. The architecture. revised though it has been, still remains more befitting a downtown or suburban setting than an alpine village. The gargantuan scale of it is not in harmony. with the pedestrian ambiance that this community has strived to create and maintain, and it offers little interplay between the natural environment and man-made environment adjacent and surrounding it. The Town Staff and the Planning Commission have recommended approval of this proposal based on their findings of prior "precedents," and on the alleged public benefit of the project. That precedents should be viewed as a criteria for approval under the Special Development District Ordinance indicates a lack of understanding of both the ordinance and its intern. The public benefit of this pro}ect is so vague that the term has been intermingled and confused with private profit. There is little about this project that justifies the massive deviation from the underlying zoning in regards to height, mass, bulk and setbacks that the developer has proposed other than the developer's desire to maximize profits. The proposed Crossroads development looks to spell certain doom Vail's small town atmosphere from an economic standpoint as well. While many are looking to various new developments around town to inject new life into an admittedly lackluster commercial environment, the clear and present danger to the majority of current businesses is that they will face ravenous and unfair competition from national chain stores as these stores have the lucre to weather the short seasons Vail is experiencing and the high rents that the new commercial developments will demand. It should be pointed out that, even when completed, all the projects currently approved and/or under construction will represent but a minute increase over the number of short term accommodations units that were available in 1995. "Bring People Back to Vail" The developer has branded the Crossroads proposal under the moniker `Bring people back to Vail." That this project will do so is exceedingly unlikely. That fewer down valley residents are shopping in Vail is a function of convenience -people shy and' seek ,~. entertainment near where they live. As down vane shopping, dining and entertainment options have increased, Vail's draw as a regional shopping destination has decreased. All. of the amenities proposed are already available closer to Eagle County's major population centers, skating and movies are already available here in Vail. Further, the current management of the movie theatres is likely continue in any new development, andl it is unlikely they will change their current program of running new movies. down valley first, unless there is a significant change in the full time resident demographic in the Town of Vail which this project can not hope, as proposed, to precipitate. One can not fault the management of the movie theatres for this - it is common sense, good business practice to put your biggest draws in your biggest markets. Some of the difficulties Vail is e~eriencin~in regards to attracting down valley commercial traffic is a function of design. For most of its history, Vail has brilliantly focused on what has become termed "New Urbanism," and sought to build a pedestrian community that fell back on a terrific public transportation system. Unfortunately, this model has not been followed by down valley developments. The "Vail Valley" as it has been termed, is sowed together by I-70 and as it has grown, so too has increased reliance on the automobile, the effect of which being that the "Vail Valley" is now, for the most part, a highly suburban and highly mobile society. Centralized parking has done precisely for Vail what it was intended to do, but it is also viewed by the new suburban "Vail Valley" resident as highly inconvenient. This situation will not be resolved by the current proposal. While both merchants and the Town Council have expressed a fervent desire to see a return to the perceived shopping hey day of the mid-1980's,,further forces have made this scenario unlikely. Without a net increase in occupied short term accommodations units and without a substantive increase in the permanent year-round population base, Vail's primary target market is the down valley resident. The suburban population of the County see at as but a minor inconvenience to travel to the outlet stores of Silverthorne and to Denver to buy their major purchases. Meanwhile many restaurants and retailers, seeing this change and seeking to meet uicreasing costs, have set their sites on a highly narrow upper income demographic that visits Vail infrequently, placing a large number of our stores beyond the spending limits for the bulk of our visitor base and our regional permanent resident population. The Crossroads proposal, which will likely demand rents in the region of $80 per foot, will do nothing to remedy this issue. Parking and Traffic While the excess parking that has been proposed may be a public benefit, it is likely that such parking,. in this location, will tax fwrther an already severely taxed South Frontage Road. Further doubt is cast on whether parking is a true public benefit -with the current market being what it is, the developer will no doubt profit from providing parking to an overly automobile-reliant populace. It seems obvious that the proposed parking will be most heavily used when the public parking garages are full. Already- during peak parking usage periods,.it is impossible to turn left on the South Frontage Road in order to travel to the east bound I-70 on ramp or further west. Further parking between the transportation center and the on ramp 'and main Vail roundabout would exacerbate this problem 2 exponentially. To date, there has been no exhaustive study as to what traffic problems will be created by the proposal and how traffic problems will be addressed. Deviations from Urban Design Guidelines and Town Code The Crossroads proposal deviates massively from underlying zoning and is not in compliance with the Urban Design Guidelines or with the Vail Municipal Code guidelines in regards to the establishment of Special Development Districts. Specifically: Architecture The architecture of the Crossroads proposal represents a radical departure from the architectural standards that have been employed in the East Meadow Drive neighborhood. At Village Inn Plaza (SDD b Phases I, II, III and V), at the Sonnenalp redevelopment and current expansion and at the current construction of One Willow Bridge Road, the theme has been European alpine with a particular emphasis on human and pedestrian scale and interaction. with the natural environment. Throu its very mass and bulk_ the Crossroads project feigns ignorance of its surroundin s The monoli h moniker is appropriate. The architecture appears pret a porter for an urban or suburban settine. The proposal has been revised to include more rock and timber on the facade. However, this has mostly served to exacerbate the already massive visual impact, and overall, the scale, mass, bulk and glazing lend to a feeling is still more center city than alpine village, and would perhaps be more at home in Keystone or Copper Mauntain than in Vail Village. This is not in keeping with the Urban Design Guidelines, which go into some detail regarding roofing materials, siding, architectural elements, etc. At the aforemernioned phases of SDD 6, and the current Sonnenalp expansion and at One Willow Bridge Road the Town of Vail indicated a desire to keep the height to an average of 2 and 3 stories adjacent to East Meadow Drive. The Crossroads proposal steps down to four stories only at the last possible minute on the west side, still dwarfing its western neighbor. The proposal, therefore, does not comply with the Vail Municipal Code which specifically outlines guidelines for compatibility: "Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate enrvironment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative fo architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. " _ Vail Municipal Code 12-9A-8 at A. What is being marketed as the chief public benefit, the plaza, is also more fittin fg or an urban than an al ine settin in its immensity, paving, lack of landscaping and lack of communication with existing pedestrian features of neighboring properties, notably Village Inn Plaza. This lack of communication is not in keeping with the Urban Design Guidelines regarding pedestrianization, which state: "A major objective of fail Pillage is to encourage pedestrian circulation thou intercormected network of safe pleasant pedestrian. walkways throughout the lT page ". -Urban Design Guidelines, paragraph A. "Pedestrianization," emphasis added 3 .\ Further, it should be pointed out that the focal point of the proposed plaza, the proposed skating rink, will necessitate some mechanism by which the ice can be shaded and protected. It has yet to be described how this will be accomplished and what aesthetic values will be affected. Variances from Underlying 7.one District "Before the Town Council approves development standards that deviate from the underlying zone district, it should be determined that such deviation provides benefits to the Town that outweigh the adverse e ffects such deviation. " Vail Municipal Code 12-9A-9 (emphasis added) While the Crossroads developer has proposed that the public plaza is a public benefit to the Town and that therefore the allowable squaze footage should be transferred to the proposed building, the consideration must be made that a plaza is included in the Vail Master Plan. The azgument could be made that this was agreed upon by the previous owners of the property, and the current owner therefore inherited the stipulation. It could also be argued that the plaza is not necessarily a public benefit, but an amenity that while benefiting the public generally will primarily benefit the developer by attracting more foot traffic to the proposed commercial spaces. Similar azguments could be made regarding the proposed skating rink. While centralized delivery is a public benefit in that it removes delivery trucks from the streets and underground, it is again prim;~rily a benefit to the developer who can stress the ease of access to prospective tenants. Removing the setback on the west side of the property in order to accommodate the developer's loading and deliver access certainly is another strike in private versus public benefit column. Further, centralized delive , is specifically set out as an objective of the Urban Design Guidelines Gage 10 at H.L therefore should be viewed as a r uirement rather than a benefit to the public. Views . The proposed Crossroads development v~rill sever existing mountain views that, while not specifically protected by Chapter 18.74 of the Vail Municipal Code, certainly play a major part in projecting the alpine ambiance of this part of Vail Village. The Urban Design Guidelines state: When evaluating a development proposal, priority should be given to analysis of the project on views. Page 8A pazagraph_ G The view north from Willow Bridge Road to the Spraddle Creek neighborhood and the National Forest surrounding it will be completely obscured by the proposed building. The view west from Meadow Drive to Red and White Mountain will also. be completely obscured by the proposal. And finally, the view east from Meadow Drive to the cliffs beyond Spraddle Creek will be completely severed. Height While there has been some movement in the Town toward encouraging height against the South Frontage Road and Interstate 70, the Crossroads proposal takes advantage of this scenario to a maximum and egregious extent with the majority of the proposal to exceed the Urban Design Guidelines and exceed _the maximum height of the alleged "precedents" of Vail Plaza Hotel and Four Seasons by 10 and 20 feet; respectively. The Crossroads 4 proposal does not comply with the Urban Design Guidelines in terms of building height. The Urban Design Guidelines quote the Vail Municipal Code for Commercial Core I .. If it was the intention of the Urban Design Guidelines that future development in Vail Village should emulate CC1 the Crossroads proposal misses the mark by a mile On average, the building measures 99.9, or ten stories. The Urban Design Guidelines call for an average height of 33 feet with a maximum of 40% of the building to be 43% with some architectural elements not useable for Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) to exceed height limit by more than fifteen feet. On average the Crossroads pro sat exceeds 80 feet. more than double what is called for in the Urban Design Guidelines and more than double what is allowed by existingzoning_ While not specifically outlined in the Town code, there has been little analysis as to how shading of the current proposal will affect the South Frontage Road and I-70 on December 20, typically a major concern for the Colorado Department of Transportation. Precedents A Special Development District is a s ecific piece of legislation for a specific nropertX. It does not allow for precedents. That the Town Staff and the Planning Commission should site as "precedents" two properties that haven't even gotten out of the ground yet seems foolhardy at best. There has been no opportunity for a concerned public to see how either of these properties will benefit or detriment the special character that is Vail. If the argument is allowed and written into law that the Crossroads approval was based on the precedents of Vail Plaza. Hotel and the Four Seasons Hotel, the precedent that will be set by the Crossroads proposal will pave the way for Special Development Districts to be used to raise the average height of Vail Village from 30-40 feet to 60-80 feet, including in Commercial Core 1, and for the average mass and bulk to be increased exponentially as well. Such justification will be written into the record of decision should these plans be approved. It should also be noted that the primary justification far approval of Four Seasons and Vail Plaza. Hotel at the scale that has been allowed was that they were providing short term accommodation units and they were required to provide on-site employee housing. This proposal does neither. Further, the Vail Plaza Hotel was shielded from the Meadow Drive pedestrian area by the smaller buildings of SDD 6 Phases I, II, III and V. The Crossroads proposal provides no mitigating circumstances between the central mass and Meadow Drive. Problems with Special Development Districts The whole process surrounding. the proposed Crossroads redevelopment underscores the need for the citizens and Town Council to take a serious look at how Special Development Districts are being used and what is resulting. Zoning is a set of covenants entered into a community with its individual property owners. It sets guidelines as to what is to be allowed based on the belief that such guidelines protect neighboring property owners and protect the common interest. Based solely on economics, it has become standard practice for any developer who sought to exceed underlying zoning to apply for a Special Develapment`District The proposed Crossroads redevelopment is an extreme example of this. What has'resulted is a great deal of uncertainty on the part of existing property owners as to what part of the commons -views, community character, 5 property values, etc. -will be detrimentally effected by vau-ious projects. As can be seen by the recent fluctuations in the currency, stock and energy markets, uncertainty does not make for good business. What has ensues in Vail's current redevelopment rush is "spot zoning,'' the rules for which are. at bestLentirely arbitrary and capricious, and at worst may violate Federal guidelines for equal treatment under the law. The arguments as to public benefit being exclusively in the purview of the Town Council leads frequently to highly chazged and often contentious political debates which cost the developer and the taxpayers exceedingly large sums of money. We would be wise to do away with Special Development Districts altogether. We should start by denying this one. The developer has indicated, through this proposal, that for the most part, the commercial uses sought are very much those for which the property is already zoned. There is sufficient GRFA left in the existing zoning to redevelop the property, and to put in the amenities the applicant has suggested without sacrificing the character of the neighborhood and the community. Where the Crossroads proposal seeks to exceed zoning is almost entirely in the area that is proposed for condominium sales. and thus strictly to tlhe developer's benefit. Should an SDD be granted, the Town Cauncil should insist upon the following: - No variance from the underlying zone district should be granted in regard to hei h . Views from Willow Bridge Road to Spraddle Creek and from Meadow Drive East to Spraddle Creek and. west to Red and White Mountain must be protected as called for in the Urban Design Guidelines. At Meadow Drive, the building should drop to 20 feet, protecting the pedestrian atmosphere of the street as called for in the Urban Design Guidelines. - I,oadin~ and Delivery access should be moved to the east side of the buildinu. closer to Village Center Chute, thus minimizing impacts on neighbors , - No variance from the underlying zone district should be granted in regard to setbacks. - The building should be broken up, especially at the center mass, in order that the project loses its monolithic appearance and fits in more cohesively with the neighborhood, as called for in the Urban Design Guidelines. - Pedestrian interconnects with adiacent properties should be improved. - The architecture must be further rnodif ed in order that the project conform fully to the Urban Design Guidelines and the alpine village atmosphere of Vail Village and of the Meadow Drive neighborhood. - A comprehensive traffic study must be initiated with particular emphasis given to how the proposal will affect traffic patterns on South Frontage Road and how the Town of Vail and the developer intend to remedy any problems and conflicts that might arise. - On-sight long-term em,.,ployee housing must be included in the proposal in commensurate proportion to the number of jobs that will be created by the project in order that the project does not further tax an already severely tax long-term local housing mazket and in order that there is a daily guazantee of local traffic to the project and to the neighborhood. 6 - Guarantees, not vague promises of encouraging rentals, must be made that a certain number of the condominiums will remain short term accommodations units. Should no guarantee be possible, then the Town_ should insist that a number of the condominiums be fumed"into hotel'rooins. - The nrotiosed second level retail should become second level office/services space in order that there is a daily guarantee of local traffic to the project and to the neighborhood of workers who are not in the seasonal tourism industry. - A comprehensive building plan should be developed in order that construction impacts on the Village as a whole and on the neighboring properties in particular is minimized. Thank you ve much for your time and consideration. Please do not hesitate to contact me~hould yo~hav~ any questions. ~ l ~~ ,,i J t er 100E Meadow ., # 2 Vail, Colorado 81657 970.479.9463 jstaufer ,earthlink.net 7 Michael E. Herman 343 Beaver Dam Road Vail, Colorado 81657 June 16, 2005 Dear Vail Town Council, I am writing as I will be out of on June 21St for the Meeting reviewing the Crossroads Redevelopment. Please adopt the position of The Vail Village Homeowners Association. The project as proposed is too big, too tall, and it pushes the building too close to the property lines. It is my belief that the Developer cannot meet their burden in "Design features" and "Compatibility". That is to say the architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character and visual integrity are not in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood and the Vaii Village as a whole. I will be there for future meetings on this project, but my purpose in writing is to urge you to send this Developer back to the drawing board so he can develop a project that works for Vail and not Manhattan. Res c y submitte ich erman Vail Town CounCi~. Town of Vail Muui.cipal Buiiding 75 Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Members of the Vail Town Council: '' June 20, 2005 As ori.g~.nal owners of Vail property since its beginning, we hate zo see the Planned Cx'ossxoads Building be approved.. d ~..o Special contract zoning permitting tl'ais large development is ent~.xe~.y out of scale with Vail as .it was ox~.g~,~lly planned. The project in our opinion will detz•act £xom what taas the origi~tal attractive Vail Village. We strongly a es you not to approves this plan. J n 1;. Tyler (Tim) Zia M. Ty' lamer (Nancy) ~~~~ ~~~ ~ .e \,.o Vail Town Council 75 Vail Road Vail, Colorado 81657 June 21, 2005 To the Town Council: The proposed Crossroads redevelopment, as recommended for approval by the both the Town of Vail Town Staff and Planning Commission far exceeds anything that has ever been proposed in the Town. Far from improving the ambiance of Vail Village, the Crossroads proposal will detract from it, placing an enormous monolith at the end of Willow Bridge Road and adjacent to Meadow Drive, blocking any possible views of the Spraddle Creek area from the majority of the Village. The architecture, .revised though it has been, still remains more befitting a downtown or suburban setting than, an alpine village. The gargantuan scale of it is not in harmony with the pedestrian ambiance that this community has strived to create and maintain, and it offers little interplay between the natural environment and man-made environment adjacent and surrounding it. The Town Staff and the Planning Commission have recommended approval of this proposal based on their findings of prior "precedents," and on the alleged public benefit of the project. That precedents should be viewed as a criteria for approval under the Special Development District Ordinance indicates a lack of understanding of both the ordinance and its intent. The public benefit of this project is so vague that the term has been intermingled and confused with private profit. There is little about this project that justifies the massive deviation from the underlying zoning in regards to height, mass, bulk and setbacks that the developer has proposed other than the developer's desire to maximize profits. The proposed Crossroads development looks to spell certain doom Vail's small town atmosphere from an economic standpoint as well. While many are looking to various new developments around town to inject new life into an admittedly lackluster commercial environment, the clear and present danger to the majority of current businesses is that they will face ravenous and unfair competition from national chain stores as these stores have the lucre to weather the short seasons Vail is experiencing and the high rents that the new commercial developments will demand. It should be pointed out that, even when completed, all the projects, currently approved and/or under construction will represent but a minute increase over the number of short term accommodations units that were available in 1995. "Bring People Back to Vail" The developer has branded the Crossroads proposal under the moniker "Bring people back to Vail." That this project will do so is exceedingly unlikely. That fewer down valley residents are shopping in Vail is a function of convenience -people shop and seek entertainment near where thev live. As down valley shopping. dining and entertainment options have increased. Vail's draw as a regional shopping destination has decreased. All of the amenities proposed are already available closer to Eagle County's major population centers, skating and movies are already available here in Vail. Further, the current management of the movie theatres is likely continue in any new development, and it is unlikely they will change their current program of running new movies down valley first, unless there is a significant change in the full time resident demographic in the Town of Vail which this project can not hope, as proposed, to precipitate. One can not fault the management of the movie theatres for this - it is common sense, good business practice to put your biggest draws in your biggest markets. Some of the difficulties Vail is experiencing in regards to attracting down valley commercial traffic is a function of design. For most of its history, Vail has brilliantly focused on what has become termed "New Urbanism," and sought to build a pedestrian community that fell back on a temfic public transportation system. Unfortunately, this model has not been followed by down valley developments. The "Vail Valley" as it has been termed, is sowed together by I-70 and as it has grown, so too has increased reliance on the automobile, the effect of which being that the "Vail Valley" is now, for the most part, a highly suburban and highly mobile society. Centralized parking has done precisely for Vail what it was intended to do, but it is also viewed by the new suburban "Vail Valley" resident as highly inconvenient. This situation will not be resolved by the current proposal. While both merchants and the Town Council have expressed a fervent desire to see a return to the perceived shopping hey day of the mid-1980's, further forces have made this scenario unlikely. Without a net increase in occupied short term accommodations units and without a substantive increase in the permanent year-round population base, Vail's primary target market is the down valley resident. The suburban population of the County see at as but a minor inconvenience to travel to the outlet stores of Silverthorne and to Denver to buy their major purchases. Meanwhile many restaurants and retailers, seeing this change and seeking to meet increasing costs, have set their sites on a highly narrow upper income demographic that visits Vail infrequently, placing a large number of our stores beyond the spending limits for the bulk of our visitor base and our regional permanent resident population. The Crossroads proposal, which will likely demand rents in the region of $80 per foot, will do nothing to remedy this issue. Parking and Traffic While the excess parking that has been proposed may be a public benefit, it is likely that such parking, in this location, will tax further an already severely taxed South Frontage Road. Further doubt is cast on whether parking is a true public benefit -with the current market being what it is, the developer will no doubt profit from providing parking to an overly automobile-reliant populace. It seems obvious that the proposed parking will be most heavily used when the public parking garages are full. Already during peak parking usage periods, it is impossible to turn left on the South Frontage Road in order to travel to the east bound I-70 on ramp or further west. Further parking between the transportation center and the on ramp and main Vail roundabout would exacerbate this problem 2 exponentially. To date, there has been no exhaustive study, as to what traffic ,problems will be created by the proposal and how traffic problems will be addressed. Deviations from Urban Design Guidelines and Town Code The Crossroads proposal deviates massively from underlying zoning and is not in compliance with the Urban Design Guidelines or with the Vail Municipal Code guidelines in regards to the establishment of Special Development Districts. Specifically: Architecture ,The architecture of the Crossroads proposal represents a radical departure from the architectural standards that have been employed in the East Meadow Drive neighborhood. At Village Inn Plaza (SDD 6 Phases I, II, IlI and V), at the Sonnenalp redevelopment and current expansion and at the current construction of One Willow Bridge Road, the theme has been European alpine with a particular emphasis on human and pedestrian scale and interaction with the natural environment. Throu its very mass and bulk. the Crossroads project feigns ignorance of its surroundings. The monolith moniker is appropriate. The architecture appears pret a porter for an urban or suburban setting. The proposal has been revised to include mare rock and timber on the facade. However, this has mostly served to exacerbate the already massive visual impact, and overall, the scale, mass, bulk and glazing lend to a feeling is still more center city than alpine village, and would perhaps be more at home in Keystone or Copper Mountain than in Vail Village. This is not in keeping with the Urban Design Guidelines, which go into some detail regarding roofing materials, siding, architectural elements, etc. At the aforementioned phases of SDD 6, and the current Sonnenalp expansion and at One Willow Bridge Road the Town of Vail indicated a desire to keep the height to an average of 2 and 3 stories adjacent to East Meadow Drive. The Crossroads proposal steps down to four stories only at the last possible minute on the west side, still dwarfing its western neighbor. The proposal, therefore, does not comply with the Vail Municipal Code which specifically outlines guidelines for compatibility: "Compatibility: Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. " Vail Municipal Code 12-9A-8 at A. What is being marketed as the chief public benefit the plaza, is also more fittin for an urban than an alpine setting in its immensity, paving, lack of landscaping and lack of communication with existing pedestrian features of neighboring properties, notably Village Inn Plaza. This lack of communication is not in keeping with the Urban Design Guidelines regarding pedestrianization, which state: "A major objective of Vail Village is to encourage pedestrian circulation though an interconnected network of safe pleasant pedestrian walkways throughout the Village ". -Urban Design Guidelines, paragraph A. "Pedestrianization," emphasis added Further, it should be pointed out that the focal point of the proposed plaza, the proposed skating rink, will necessitate some mechanism by which the ice can be shaded and protected. It has yet to be described how this will be accomplished and what aesthetic values will be affected. Variances from Underlying Zone District "Before the Tawn Council approves development standards that deviate from the underlying zone district, it should be determined that such deviation provides benefits to the Town that outweigh the adverse a ects o, f such deviation. " Vail Municipal Code 12-9A-9 (emphasis added) While the Crossroads developer has proposed that the public plaza is a public benefit to the Town and that therefore the allowable square footage should be transferred to the proposed building, the consideration must be made that a plaza is included in the Vail Master Plan. The argument could be made that this was agreed upon by the previous owners of the property, and the current owner therefore inherited the stipulation. It could also be argued that the plaza is not necessarily a public benefit, but an amenity that while benefiting the public generally will primarily benefit the developer by attracting more foot traffic to the proposed commercial spaces. Similar arguments could be made regarding the proposed skating rink. While centralized delivery is a public benefit in that it removes delivery trucks from the streets and underground, it is again primarily a benefit to the developer who can stress the ease of access to prospective tenants. Removing the setback on the west side of the property in order to accommodate the developer's loading and delivery access certainl~s another strike in private versus public benefit column. Further, centralized delivery is specifically set out as an objective of the Urban Design Guidelines (page 10 at H.) and therefore should be viewed as a requirement rather than a benefit to the public. Views The proposed Crossroads development will sever existing mountain views that, while not specifically protected by Chapter 18.74 of the Vail Municipal Code, certainly play a major part in projecting the alpine ambiance of this part of Vail Village. The Urban Design Guidelines state: When evaluating a development proposal, priority should be given to analysis of the project on views. Page 8A paragraph G The view north from Willow Bridge Road to the Spraddle Creek neighborhood and the National Forest surrounding it will be completely obscured by the proposed building. The view west from Meadow Drive to Red and White Mountain will also be completely obscured by the proposal. And finally, the view east from Meadow Drive to the cliffs beyond Spraddle Creek will be completely severed. Height While there has been some movement in the Town toward encouraging height against the South Frontage Road and Interstate 70, the Crossroads proposal takes advantage of this scenario to a maximum and egregious extent with the majority of the proposal to exceed the Urban Design Guidelines and exceed the maximum height of the alleged "precedents" of Vail Plaza Hotel and Four Seasons by 10 and 20 feet, respectively. The Crossroads 4 proposal does not comply with the Urban Design Guidelines in terms of building height. The Urban Design Guidelines quote the Vail Municipal Code for Commercial Core 1. If it was the intention of the Urban Design Guidelines that future development in Vail Village should emulate CCI, the Crossroads proposal misses the mark by a mile. On average, the building measures 99.9, or ten stories. The Urban Design Guidelines call for an average height of 33 feet with a maximum of 40% of the building to be 43% with some architectural elements not useable for Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) to exceed height limit by more than fifteen feet. On average, the Crossroads proposal exceeds 80 feet, more than double what is called for in the Urban Design Guidelines, and more than double what is allowed by existing zoning While not specifically outlined in the Town code, there has been little analysis as to how shading of the current proposal will affect the South Frontage Road and I-70 on December 20, typically a major concern for the Colorado Department of Transportation. Precedents A Special Development District is a specific piece of legislation for a specific property It does not allow for precedents. That the Town Staff and the Planning Commission should site as "precedents" two properties that haven't even gotten out of the ground yet seems foolhardy at best. There has been no opportunity for a concerned public to see how either of these properties will benefit or detriment the special character that is Vail. If the argument is allowed and written into law that the Crossroads approval was based on the precedents of Vail Plaza Hotel and the Four Seasons Hotel, the precedent that will be set by the Crossroads proposal will pave the way for Special Development Districts to be used to raise the average height of Vail Village from 30-40 feet to 60-80 feet, including in Commercial Core 1, and for the average mass and bulk to be increased exponentially as well. Such justification will be written into the record of decision should these plans be approved. It should also be noted that the primary justification for approval of Four Seasons and Vail Plaza Hotel at the scale that has been allowed was that they were providing short term accommodation units and they were required to provide on-site employee housing. This proposal does neither. Further, the Vail Plaza Hotel was shielded from the Meadow Drive pedestrian area by the smaller buildings of SDD 6 Phases I, II, III and V. The Crossroads proposal provides no mitigating circumstances between the central mass and Meadow Drive. Problems with Special Development Districts The whole process surrounding the proposed Crossroads redevelopment underscores the need for the citizens and Town Council to take a serious look at how Special Development Districts are being used and what is resulting. Zoning is a set of covenants entered into a community with its individual property owners. It sets guidelines as to what is to be allowed based on the belief that such guidelines protect neighboring property owners and protect the common interest. Based solely on economics, it has become standard practice for any developer who sought to exceed underling zoning to apply for a Special Development District. The.proposed Crossroads redevelopment is an extreme example of this. What has resulted is a great deal of uncertainty on the part of existing property owners as to what part of the commons -views, community character, 5 property values, etc. -will be detrimentally effected by various projects. As can be seen by the recent fluctuations in the currency, stock and energy markets, uncertainty does not make for good business. What has ensued in Vail's current redevelopment rush is "spot zoning," the rules for which are, at best, entirely arbitrary and capricious. and at worst may violate Federal guidelines for equal treatment under the law. The arguments as to public benefit being exclusively in the purview of the Town Council leads frequently to highly charged and often contentious political debates which cost the developer and the taxpayers exceedingly large sums of money. We would be wise to do awa, wy ith Special Development Districts altogether. We should start by denying this one. The developer has indicated, through this proposal, that for the most part, the commercial uses sought are very much those for which the property is already zoned. There is sufficient GRFA left in the existing zoning to redevelop the property, and to put in the amenities the applicant has suggested without sacrificing the character of the neighborhood and the community. Where the Crossroads proposal seeks to exceed zonin is almost entirely in the area that is proyosed for condominium sales, and thus strictly to the developer's benefit. Should an SDD be granted, the Town Council should insist upon the following: - No variance from the underlying zone district should be granted in re and to hei h . Views from Willow Bridge Road to Spraddle Creek and from Meadow Drive East to Spraddle Creek and west to Red and White Mountain must be protected as called for in the Urban Design Guidelines. At Meadow Drive, the building should drop to 20 feet, protecting the pedestrian atmosphere of the street as called for in the Urban Design Guidelines. - Loading and Delivery access should be moved to the east side of the building, closer to Village Center Chute, thus minimizing impacts on neighbors - No variance from the underlying zone district should be granted in regard to setbacks. - The building should be broken up, especially at the center mass, in order that the project loses its monolithic appearance and fits in more cohesively with the neighborhood, as called for in the Urban Design Guidelines. - Pedestrian interconnects with adjacent properties should be improved - The architecture must be further modified in order that the project conform fully to the Urban Design Guidelines and the alpine village atmosphere of Vail Village and of the Meadow Drive neighborhood. - A comprehensive traffic study must be initiated with particular emphasis given to how the proposal will affect traffic patterns on South Frontage Road and how the Town of Vail and the developer intend to remedy any problems and conflicts that might arise. - On-sight long-term employee housing, must be included in the proposal in commensurate proportion to the number of jobs that will be created by the project in order that the project does not further tax an already severely tax long-term local housing market and in order that there is a daily guarantee of local traffic to the project and to the neighborhood. 6 Guarantees, not vague promises of encouraging rentals, must be made that a certain number of the condominiums will remain short term accommodations units. Should no guarantee be possible, then the Town should insist that a number of the condominiums be turned into hotel rooms. The proposed second level retail should become second level office/services space in order that there is a daily guarantee of local traffic to the project and to the neighborhood of workers who are not in the seasonal tourism industry. A comprehensive building plan should be developed in order that construction impacts on the Village as a whole and on the neighboring properties in particular is minimized. Thank you ve much for your time and consideration. Please do not hesitate to contact me~hould yo~havq, any questions. S ~\ 100 E~ Meadow mr., #~2 Vail, Colorado 81657 970.479.9463 istaufernearthlink.net 7 MEMORANDUM TO: Vail Town Council FROM: Community Development Department DATE: June 21, 2005 SUBJECT: First Reading of Ordinance No. 1, Series of 2005, an ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, and setting forth details.in regard thereto. Applicant: Crossroads East One LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC. Planner: Warren Campbell I. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, Crossroads East One LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC, is requesting a first reading of Ordinance No. 1, Series of 2005, an ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, and setting forth details in regard thereto. The purpose of Ordinance No. 1, Series of 2005, is to facilitate the .redevelopment of Crossroads, located at 141 and 143 Meadow Drive. The staff and applicant are requesting that the Town Council listen to a presentation on the proposed ordinance and approve Ordinance No. 1, Series of 2005, upon first reading. II. BACKGROUND On January 18, 2005, the applicant appeared before the Vail Town Council for a worksession meeting to discuss the Crossroads _Redevelopment Project. The Town Council advised the applicant to return to the PEC to workout any issues of concern before returning to the Town Council for further review. On April 25, 2005, the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing on a request to establish Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads. The applicant received approval for the establishment of a new special development district with the following deviations: • A maximum allowable building height of 99.9 feet versus 38 feet, • An increase in allowable density to 28.4 units per acre versus 18 units per acre (28 dwelling units over allowable number of dwelling units), • An increase in allowable Gross Residential Floor Area to 210,054 square feet versus 46,051.6 square feet, • An increase in site coverage to 107,772 square feet versus 86,346 square feet; • A reduction in the required minimum area of softscaped landscaping from 18,420 square feet to 14„898 square feet; and • Encroachments of the proposed structure into the required setbacks on the north, south, and eastern property lines. Upon consideration of the request, the Commission voted 7-0-0 to forward a recommendation of approval of i:he request to the Vail Town Council. The Commission's recommendation of approval includes eleven (11) conditions of approval, as outlined in Section 4 of Ordinance No. 1, Series of 2005. The Commission's recommendation of approval includes the following findings: "That the proposal to establish Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, complies with the nine design criteria outlined in Section 92- 9A-8 of the Vail Town Code. Furthermore, the applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Commission, based upon the, testimony and evidence presented during the public hearing, that any adverse effects of the requested deviations from the development standards of the underlying zoning are outweighed by the public benefits provided. Lastly, the Commission finds that the request is consistent with the development goals and objectives of the Town. With regards to proposed building setbacks, that: a. Proposed building setbacks provide necessary separation between buildings and riparian areas, geologically sensitive areas and other environmentally sensitive areas. b. Proposed building sE~tbacks comply with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations. c. Proposed building setbacks will provide adequate availability of light, air and open space. d. Proposed building setbacks will provide a compatible relationship witl`~ buildings and uses on adjacent properties. e. Proposed building sE~tbacks will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by conformance with prE~scribed setback standards. With regards to proposed building height, that: a. Proposed building heights comply with applicable elements of the Vail Village Master Plan. b. Proposed building height will adequately preserve views of the Gore Range from Vail Valley Drive. c. Proposed building height will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. d. Proposed building height will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved b.y conformance with prescribed setback standards. 2 x. e. Proposed building height of 99.9 feet, while setting precedence, was mitigated by the proposed public benefits, of which the provision of a public plaza on the site per the Town's Master Plans was the most offsetting element. That the proposed gross residential floor area of 182% of lot area, additional twenty-eight dwelling units over allowable (at 28.4 units per acre total), site coverage of 107, 772 square feet (93.6%) and landscape area of 42, 255 sq. ft. (deviation from percent hadscape) in the Commercial Service Center zone district is in conformance with applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Master Plan. That the development is in compliance with the purposes of the Commercial Service Center zone district, that the proposal is consistent with applicable elements of the Vail Village Master Plan, the Vail Land Use Plan, and the Vail Streetscape Master Plan, and that the proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of the neighborhood, and That the proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan. " A copy of the staff memorandum to the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission has been attached for reference. 111. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends that the Vail Town Council approves Ordinance No. 1, Series of 2005. Staff further recommends that the Developer shall address the following issue prior to appearing before the Vail Town Council for second reading of an adopting ordinance for the establishment of Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads: The Developer shall prepare a written agreement, for ,Town Council review and approval, outlining the responsibilities and requirements of the required offsite improvements, as indicated on the proposed Approved Development Plan. This agreement shall include, but not be limited to, all streetscape improvements along Village Center Road and East Meadow Drive, public access to the plaza for pedestrians and Town sponsored events, which may include the establishment of an easement on the plaza and language in the covenants and declarations for owners of property in the project regarding the use of the plaza for special events, inclusion of the loading and delivery facility in the overall loading and delivery system, payment of traffic impact fees and credits given to offset fee, and details for funding public art. IV. ATTACHMENTS A. Ordinance 1, Series of 2005 B. Proposed plans for redevelopment dated March 28, 2005 C. Memorandum to Planning and Environmental Commission dated April 25, 2005 3 ORDINANCE NO. 1 Series of 2005 AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0.39, CROSSROADS, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE A, SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT (SDD) DISTRICT, CHAPTER 9, TITLE 12, ZONING TITLE, TOWN CODE OF VAIL, AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO. WHEREAS, Title 12, Zoning Title, Chapter 9, Article A, Special Development (SDD) District, Town Code of Vail establishes a procedure for establishing special development districts; and WHEREAS, Crossroads East One, LLC has submitted an application to the Town of Vail Community Development Department to establish Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, to facilitate the redevelopment of an existing mixed use development; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail held a public hearing on April 25, 2005, on the application to establish Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, in accordance with the provisions of the Town Code of Vail; and WHEREAS, upon due consideration, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail found that the request complies with the design criteria prescribed in the Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vait Town Code, and furthers the development objectives of the Town of Vail; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail has forwarded a recommendation of approval by a vote of 7-0-0 of this request to establish Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, to the Vail Town Council; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council finds that the request to establish Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, complies with the design criteria prescribed in the Title 12, Zoning Title, Town Code of Vail; and provides a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses consistent with municipal development objectives; and WHEREAS, the Vail Town Council considers it in the interest of the public health, safety, . and welfare to adopt Ordinance No. 1, Series of 2005, and establish a new special development district in the Town of Vail. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1. District Established Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, is established for development on two parcels of land, legally described as Lot P and A Part of Tract C, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, which comprise a total of 115,129 square feet (2.643 acres) in the Vail Village area of the Town of Vail. Said parcels may be referred to as "SDD No. 39". Special Ordinance No. 1, Series 2005 ~ Development District No 39 shall be reflected as such on the Official Zoning Map of the Town of Vail. The underlying zoning for Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, shall be Commercial Service Center (CSC) District. Section 2. Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, Approved Development Plan An approved development plan is the principal document in guiding the development, uses and activities of a special development district. The Vail Town Council finds that the Approved Development Plan for SpE;cial Development District No. 39, Crossroads, complies with each of the requirements set forth in Sections 12-9A-5 and 12-9A-6 of the Town Code of Vail. The Approved Development Plan for Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, shall be comprised of materials submitted in accordance with Section 12-9A-5 of the Town Code of Vail and those plans prepared by Barnes Coy Architects and Davis Partnership Architects, entitled "Crossroads Redevelopment", dated March 28, 2005, and stamped approved July 5, 2005. Section 3. Development Standards In conjunction with the Approved Development Plan described in Section 2 herein, the following development standards are; hereby approved by the Vail Town Council. These standards are incorporated in the Approved Development Plan to protect the integrity of the development of Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads. The development standards for Special Development IDistrict No. 39, Crossroads, are described below: 1. A. Permitted, Conditional, and Accessory Uses: The permitted, conditional, and accessory uses allowed in Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, shall be those uses listed in Title 12, Chapter 7, Article E, Commercial Service Center zone district, Town Code of ,Vail, as may be amended from time to time. The approval of SDD No. 39 shall restrict the uses upon the plaza level tenant spaces to "retail/restaurant' uses solely and shall not be utilized for "professional offices, business offices, and stur~ios" uses, as defined in Title; 12. A professional office intended for real estate sales may be allowed on the plaza level of the building during the first two years of occupancy fi~llowing the issuance of a certificate of occupancy to allow for the sales of the on-site dwelling units and leasing of commercial spaces. No space rooted as retail/restaurant space on the Approved Development Plan shall be converted to a dwelling unit. B. Lot Area: The minimum lot area for Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, shall be 11,5,129 square feet (2.643 acres). C. Setbacks: The minimum setbacks for Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, shall be as indicated on the Crossroads Approved Development Plan, described in Section 2 herein. D. Height: The maximuim allowable building height for Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads shall be ninety-nine and nine tenths feet (99.9'), and as indicated on the Crossroads Approved Development Plan, described in Section 2 herein. Ordinance No. 1, Series 2005 2 E. Density Control: The maximum allowable Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) for Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, shall be 210,054 square feet and the maximum allowable density shall be seventy- five (75) dwelling .units, and eight (8) attached accommodation units, as indicated on the Crossroads Approved Development Plan, described in Section 2 herein. F. Site Coverage: The maximum allowable site coverage shall be ninety- three and six tenths percent (93.6%) or 107,772 square feet of the total lot area, and as indicated on the Crossroads Approved Development Plan, described in Section 2 herein. G. Landscaping and Site Development: At least thirty-six and seven tenths percent (36.7%) or 42,255 square feet of the total lot area shall be landscaped. The landscaped area of 42,255 square feet shall be divided as follows: thirty-five and three tenths (35.3%) or 14,898 square feet shall be softscaped area and in no instance shall the hardscaped area of the development site exceed sixty-four and seven tenths percent (64.7%) of the minimum landscaped area. The landscaping and site development .shall be as indicated on the Crossroads Approved Development Plan, described in Section 2 herein. H. Parking and Loading: The minimum number of off-street parking spaces shall be three hundred thirty-eight (338) of which ninety-two (92) will be included in a private parking club and the minimum number of loading and delivery bays shall be five (5), as indicated on the Crossroads Approved Development Plan, .described in Section 2 herein. Section 4. Conditions of Approval The following conditions of approval shall become part of the Town's approval of the establishment of Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads: The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to submitting a building permit application to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for the Crossroads project (a grading permit/excavation permit shall constitute a building permit): The Developer shall submit a revised site and landscape plan indicating a larger landscape island located at the Porte cochere entry to the proposed building for review and approval by the Design Review Board. 2. The Developer shall submit a final exterior building materials list, typical wall section, architectural specifications, and a complete color rendering for review and approval of the Design Review Board. 3. The Developer shall submit a rooftop .mechanical equipment plan for review and approval by the Design Review Board. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be incorporated into the overall design of the lodge and enclosed and visually screened from public view. Ordinance No. 1, Series 2005 3 4. The Developer shall address the written final comments outlined in the memorandum from the Town of Vail Public Works Department, dated April 22, 2005. The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to the issuance of a building permit from the Town of Vail Community Development Department for the Crossroads project: 1. The Developer shall submit a fire and life safety plan for review and approval by the Town of Vail Fire Department. 2. The Developer shall receive all required permits from the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) prior to submitting for a building permit. Failure to receive the appropriate permits to access they South Frontage Road per the Approved Development Plan may require an amendment to the Plan. 3. The Developer shall install a public safety .radio communications system within. the subterranean parking structure which meets the specifications of the Town of Vail Communications Center. The specifications and details of this system shall be depicted on the building permit set of plans and submitted to staff for review and approval. The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to requesting a temporary certificate of occupancy: 1. The Developer shall submit a comprehensive sign program for review and approval by the Design Review Board. 2. The Developer shall be assessed a traffic impact fee of $5,000 per net trip increase in p.m. traffic, or $345,000. The construction of the South Frontage Road improvements by the Developer, as indicated on the Crossroads Public Improvements Plan, shall satisfy this requirement. 3. The Developer shall post a bond i:o provide financial security for 125% of the total cost of the required off-site public improvements not completed at the time of the TCO request, as indicated on the Approved Development Plan. 4. The Developer shall provide deed-restricted employee housing for a minimum of five (5) employees which complies with the Town of Vail Employee Housing requirements (Chapter 12-13), as may be amended from time to time. The Developer shall cause the deed-restricted employee housing to be.made available for occupancy and the employee housing deed restrictions shall be recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder. The Developer shall have the right to participate in a pay-in-lieu program, if one is established by the Town, if he/she so chooses. Section 5. If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Vail Town Council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the i~act that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid. Ordinance No. 1, Series 2005 4 Section 6. The Vail Town Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof. The Council's finding, determination and declaration is based upon the review of the criteria prescribed by the Town Code of Vail and the evidence and testimony presented in consideration of this ordinance. Section 7. The amendment of any provision of the Town Code of Vail as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under or by virtue of the provision amended. The amendment of any provision hereby shall not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein. Section 8. All bylaws, orders, resolutions and ordinances, or parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw, order, resolution or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed. INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, APPROVED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED ONCE IN FULL ON FIRST READING this 215` day of June, 2005 and a public hearing for second reading of this Ordinance set for the 5th day of July, 2005, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Vail Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado. ATTEST: Rodney Slifer, Mayor Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, READ, ADOPTED AND ENACTED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED IN FULL this 5th day of July, 2005. ATTEST: Rodney E. Slifer, Mayor Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk Ordinance No. 1, Series 2005 cJ ~Z<~;sed aG.~J•o5 RESOLUTION NO. #10 Series of 2005 A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RESPECT AND ADMIRATION FOR THE HARD WORK BETTY FORD HAS CONTRIBUTED TO THE TOWN OF VAIL. Whereas, Betty Ford was the First Lady of the United States at a time of great crisis for our country. Whereas, Betty Ford is the recipient of many awards and honors including the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Whereas, President and Mrs. Ford made one of their first homes in Vail, making it .~ their summer White House, bringing great attention and publicity to our Valley. Whereas, Betty Ford worked diligently with many locals to make women more aware of the dangers of breast cancer and the need for periodic check- ups. Whereas, Betty Ford was instrumental in establishing the Vail International Dance Festival as a premier attraction in our community. Whereas, Betty Ford worked tirelessly to help people suffering from alcohol and drug addiction. Whereas, Betty Ford was Vail's extraordinary hostess for heads of state and visiting dignitaries from around the world at the World Forum. Whereas, Betty Ford was. instrumental in launching the Betty Ford Alpine Gardens, the world's highest alpine garden which protects and displays over 3,000 varieties of rare and endangered flora to visitors from around the world. Whereas, Betty Ford has been our dear friend and open hearted neighbor for many years. INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 21st day of June, 2005. ATTEST: Rodney Slifer, Mayor, Town of Vail Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk, Town of Vail CROSSROADS REDEVELOPMENT VAIL. COLORADO Rendered Slle Pian Slta Plan GrarM1ng Plan roads Public ImprovanenLS %an ~naa~pe %an Lanaaw~enreas Parking Level 7, Publc Restreomsa~ Metllanral Room Palling Leval 2. Plea. Realaurznls, Relail, Iw Rlnk, FamJy Enterlainmant Gomger, Thealen' artl BarAirg wley PaM1ing Level 1. Promena0e, Re512u2nL5 and Re18il Lobby Le~e~. conea Level . am Loatling oea conea Lapel z cwao Level 7 condo Larai a caotla La~ei s Cmen Level E Norlb ElevaOOn Easl Elevation SouP~Elevabon Wasr Elevatim New Notlh Elavaoon vs C4J Noll HevaAon New West Eleva4on vs. Gltl West Elevalron Franlage RoaO Elavaton Canpanson Building Heigh Roof Plan Irllslmc gmtlel Building Reignl Rool Pian ladual gra0e) son swekPian Site Plan ~ Beaver Creak Ice Rink OJerlay BARNES COY ARCHITECTS A LL__L_____~_ w 1. ' ~Archit is ~o -__ EAST MEAL URE x CROSSROADS VAIL, COLORADO RENDERED SITE PLAN kale' t" - 30'-0" BARNES COY ARCHITECTS 1. ' ~Archit t5 5 ~t ~_ v, i ~~~~ -' 1 _>_,~~ II PARKING STRUCTURE 1 ~ I ~r OPTIONAL ROUNDABOUT DESIGN 8Y OTHERS ~~; ~~,~~~' ~,~,~ ~ mo-~b Smle', 1'=3G-0' INSIMxsectlan aM~not gefdateatleei brtleiela. trassroads xfl Ody be resportlde br Rs permlbge dotal tramcoa'MhNt01 b any fwlre roundabout construNm and wlll M b7e form dmetamc ImpaR fee dlaryd to Ceawre. PLAZA SITE PIAN WITH ICE RINK sde: r=wa CROSSROADS valL, coLORADo Vu l ..._ S~'i~' 'iNE PROPOGEDSOUM fROMME ROM INPROVEMEMG, INCLUDWGOILVtUGE, sN~LL LIE~IN MID MgTCH IMPRGVEMENiG BEING PRDPGGED RYVaIL PVIA HOTEL. SOUlN PnUNTA~ '~~_ Ap SITE PLAN BARNES COY ~: t~.dtlP ARCHITECTS MARCH 29, 2005 PARKING STRUCTURE ~~z_~ ~_ _,_ - ___ __ ~ -~ T._ e~ _ ,: -__ k ~_ - ~~~~ _ ~ ~a ~---- -~ ~ '1 ,: ~---'' ~~' _ - -- ~~_ -. ~ `~ "~_ GAAiE ELEY - 8134.0 ` i1' \ ~A `'r'h~h~~~~ ~"f. ~ ~,,,_.~ -- -- 8' (W) INV 007 8132.31 `»°~':,~ ~ I I ,i# ~ - -~~ ~-_ x~. 6,;7 _ IN" 8742.4 -~_ - =w -~ r --_. ~ . Y ~~~.-~~.,~~ ~ ,_,. - ~ -3`.... p y -'; ~ ,,.. ,.. J/`_.%~, ~ .818].5 _. `° ~ ~i~ 11`_ X78 +r _ _ _ ~' _ -~ - r 8J8(7~ ~ 1 _ -- `. i4 ~ - .~ r,. ~~~ ~ ~ _ . y ..; ~~ ~ - q ~ ~"- ~ - ~ ~ sr>n t ----" ~~o+4~Br~~7 , ,__ >~`; '~. ^~ ` - v.M~ASOUO uN~==~ ----- ~ ~ " ~-~~~"~~. _ 7 _ ': ~ - ~; .. ~ ~ ~._ -. ~_ !~ _ _. d ~ ~ ~-~~~PHALT r ew B7 ~~--~arK-et7B3--~ ~; .. i ,._ ,: ,i ~ 7'W 81dq IN' 87803 _ y, 0 __ '" - a ° „; ., ~, o ,_' „` ._. -4v ,. '~. ..,, .c ~~ ti t o- ~ =~ ~~ z~ f '1 7 --- ' a ` Aer.~ , .. , _ _ ~~ 7W-S, .. ~ .-._._ __ ., w B ~- I ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ 1 - ~ ..~ - ~ '~~ 1 `~, ~~ BW 877 9~ 't , i - I ~ ~ /.q~ vH ~ •' ~ a r ,. y - ~ v '• ..,+¢ I BW-3 >.. ~' _ ` 1. ~I._ ,tl~ '~l _ -,. 774' 8177.9 .. ~ _ ~_ ,, `• i ' 814'-8/69.1 • „ , - ._ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ iRE~ ~ ~ i, ._ ~ 1 ~ ,; a>r BJfa.7 ~ ~7 ~ , r 1 Iw Brn: , ~~ ~ ~, a ~ 0 a o j~ a ~; ~; I o, ,- ~. _ ~ , b r e,~ ~,- 1.. ,. i ~ h j _ . _' ~~. ~ a j i- i.~ _ ._~ r ., ~~) I l ,.. J ~ ~ ' .. ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ .- ,. ~ ~ ,. ~ I - _ r 1 _ -, _ ~~ ~ -, __ _ ,, -~., 7 11 IC NAM1HtI.E. '~~ ~ ~ ~ ;/'~ V = 801.3 ~ I^ i r~ ~~~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ` ~~ ` I .. ,. _ ~ ~~ ~ ,~ 1` f ~.. ,~, ~ 5.. ' _. , r , ,, a a ,_ _, ~ ~ 8 ~ ~~~ o . -; -- ~,.-- -ter ~ ~ 1. ~ ~~"~~" ® t ~ ,;a, 1 , ' '- ~'~ - - ~ r--` -~ ~ ' ~ OU TUNE OF PhRKINC SiAU~ ~ ~ , _ ' ~ '~- _~ I ~gg3~ ,~ (~ ~~4 -._ r ___ r: yf/ '1 ~ ~ ; ~A - r - _ ~ °. _ _ ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ ^~ ' ' ~ Imo' '~I ~ ' ~- ~ " ~ : ' .~ ~; . `\, I' rr ~ ~ ~ ~ tp _ ._ ^-,. y_.. r~ a~ d ~j ~~ I~.f w r IC ~ .'.I 3/ I! i ~{~~~ I %~ _ t I~ III a y /k` v 1 I .~ ~~ I[ { V~ ((Jt ~ , I ~ e ~,_, E~ ~ I,:r f7+r;-__ ~(I G lr J~~ ~ '. '• _ _ I' FLOW `j ,(' I "'k~.~p,3#* ~I~ j~1; ,/ ~~ 11 Y /y~dt i ~ ,~, _ ~ ~ ) Lt7 - ~~ i ~ OUiI1NE OF )~~ry ~~~~.: y8 R ~ ~ (;, i ~ ~ ~~ ~ ; ~ (~ ~~ ~' ~~' ~ ~. e 1NC aeovE ~ '~ . ~ +~~- ~ '~'-.., ` ~ ~ ~j 1 ~ a 1 ~ rl ~ , ~~~j ~ ~'L ~ r~ ~I ~: ' ~, , r: ~ ~ .. I ~ ~ 7 ,~ ~,~ as _ -,1 .,~ ~' ~, ~, ~ ,,.~ ,, ,~ ,~ ~ ', ~ ~,~ 7 I'~~, .> ~r-r. -,.._ `~" ~~ ~.... I coNCAe~E _ ~~- f~. j 'y--'~.~. - ~! ,~ ~>~ll, 7 4 , n ~d.,`- its :~.~, ~'`: ~tanP~ unarA :Ne o:rTe~ su,~rrn~a; ~ t:C:+D FOR MC W 6ENnAF OF ,R nFC.~'. 0 4 W Q a a yz W z z W Q i- Q v7 c Q O J ~n i7 ~> i~ 3 t3 3915:'.:?. _ r ,,, ; ~,~ ~ ,,moo ,~~ ~~ ~, I \ 1i I i J '-' t -~ ~ _ ~ 0 ~ ~1 ,10 1 ~ I _ ~, I ~ ~ ~ yr i i ~~ ~ ~ _ r 1 ,a _ 18EI,DW- 1- ` ~ ~ . ~~ ~~` ~ -'t ~„!! _~L~ I ~ B ABOVE ~^, -_] `'+ ~ , ' f~1j (J ~ _ ((j .t ri ~ ( ~ ' /. d o ' r F ~ i i ~ '~- `. ' ~~ ° CBNCREif `-` ~ i _ r .; ~- ` RET. WALL ~ /~~ i V` t t - -_.__ / ~ ~ ~.I I/ I~'I ~ -. 1 -~.r~ ~ _ ii. -, 1. 1 ~ 7 e i ~, • I 1~' I r,h~ r--' ~ ~~ , _ ~ _ lK;,. ~ }°. ~' ~~ _ - i r ~. ~ ~~ .- ~~1- ~~ ~^:"~~ ~_ ~ in ~ --. ~ i ,ice ~ ~. ~ ~ / - ;1 'q,• Y ~ I 1 .~„ ~ I } ~, lr~ A r, ~. ,., i r r ` ~ a i ` +.~- R ~ c ,. _ _ ~„ ~ -~- ~ _ t"i ~ ~ ,-.~~" -. - ~ ~., ,, ~ ~ ~ 1, ~ ~, ~ ,, ~` ,..., -...: ,, ,i - ~ ~ ~~~ _ -• F ~ .•_ r4 '2--\ ~'t . 7 ~ ~ __ :ryTX_`;. R" _ k ~ f~ ~>:6 ~•'.,l' i /y~ _ L y ~ ~ .. I 1 ;, ~; _. _ _ i ~. - r °- _ ~ ~~ ~ iF i ~ - ~ i ~/" - _. .. 5f X _ _ A. ~ per.. I .~., y ~ r&3~_ - "°~~ '~'~ ". iJ' m~~ ~ fib ,fit `` ° _ ..., ,. - _ `; . ~ ~ ~~ r ~' ./n j sty t ~ ~ ~ a ~ '~ v ~ . r. i`~ 3~ s ,~ ~ / rT~ r ~ ~' i ''~c_) ~y ~ _ .. ~~y+ ~~ ,~ ~ ~ ~+~ -~-~-- --v ~ ~~r ~~ F ,W rs J _ ,,'- - •~* ~ 7;,~ CS t ~ •~~~_ =-.-aeTi~L eiv i ~y ra PAZZO'S \ ar ~~ ~- ~ " I `` ~ ._i - ~ % ~ 0' .ri ' ^ ~ ' ~ BRICK PAV4Pa s „ ._ ~ jl _. ~ "T~, ~ ~ -~ / ! _ -`, ~'.: a _, t~_ ~,,' „.,. _ 1 y - ` . _ - ~ ~ I / \` / tiJ / / r BAC AND PACK ,~v ,, ~ i - _ _ ~,_ ~.~.. ,- _ - ~~ _ _. .., _ A. di ~.~ e ~,-,~±. ~~ i ,~ y ~ na ... ., ~ r~_ I~ ~.nrr~ ' ~ ,, -' ,., ~, ~ ~~ , ~. masN _ - - = 5 E,NCYOSORE `. s. ~ ,,,,''~ "ANC RECYCLING .- ~ .' ~. ~ (~ BINS ~ _ ~ ~, I r 4 11 ~_ ~~_~ - ~ ~~ l ~ ~ \ \\ ,m ./_` \\ \ 11 r \*,p~ Rt•Ae a CQMCREIE RALN rov RE1 ENTR`(-wa• ~ , 0 0 w a i~ a yz W z ~z7 M a i I i ~ s Q V Z C '~ ~ G IZ C Q ~ i> ~' C% ~. Sc 3gS.OC \ \ ~.\\\~1~1 ~~ D j I p ! ¢( A~ \ 1 ~1~ q~~ FLCV+~RE _ ..~.. ,, ~ ~` I ~ ~ ti~~~ ~,~;- a sA~ , > \, `~ ~p ~~ \ \ \ ~`•.~. 111111'. ! ~ ,t" -~ i f,~BCAe~ ix,~Ba ~ o-~c: suvr~vsa+ a 1 ~ ~ Q `. \ \ \\ ~\ ~ 1,111 ,I I ' \~\ \\ \\ \ .\„ ~ srllc. ~.~, 11 \~p~pT R 7 i ~„~ \~ v\ v `.; !~ ma ~~ \ \ _,,, ..- i1 f ~ aECFp1a ~~ JFi ~= ~ - -... - it v A ~1 t -~ \\ \\~`` 'ri,~ .{C!\1 ~ ~ ~ ~ LPo>RHONE ~ - - - ~ . ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~' ~~ A8 v.~~~~ .. ~ ___ ,,, ~..~ _ I' , t{~' -- ^~ ,. 1''-~ \- FOF U!C Ch BENAL'" CF S.t - --, ~ - .~ •••• . MEDIANS AND_HEATED ,. • ..... ,;. C~ '~ ~~~ i ~ ~~ ~~ •• .,, ~ _ SIDEWALK FUNDED BY' _> =; • ••.. _ R ~ ", ' I T ~ (-`' I ~ -, ~~ ~_ ~ - _ OA'7A6E ROA /~ r s L' -. _ ~ ~ VYILAGE INN PLA7~ ~'~ : ~ ~ ~: ~ ~ ~' ~~ . ` -~ ~ ~ `\ ~ ,_ ~ \ ~ ~ I _~ ~~ h ~S_ 7 -",-~_ 1 •,~ terry, ..-:, ,1 ^~ i ~^•r, ~•ai^^ ~ ~~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~t ~ _ -_ ---_ ° ~ "1 `1 '1'1 ~~ ~` j 1, i ,_ , ~ _ _ ~ =1~ ~~- '~ ~ ~„'fit ~_ '~ ~ '~ '~- ' ~ ~ "1 ~ '~ ~ STREET~C_~E IMPROVEMENTS AND HEATED ,~- ~ ~ ~~ s ~ - - '=SIDEWALKFUNDED BY,CROSSROADS ' f\ , r ~ ~ STREETSCAP$ IMPROVEMENTS BIND HEATED `r ` w~ ~- ~ I 0 1 SIDEWA,CI~ FUNDED BY CROSSROADS _ ,' -.~ ~ _- , I ' ~- ~ , ~ i ~ ~ ~ , '` r? `i ; . ~ 1- ~ ~~'~~ - ~ ~ ~ ' - ~ ,~~ d X17 ~ ~ ~'- ~"~ ~ _ ~ t ,~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~~, ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ i 1 ~ 1 , ~ °"~ yr ,1 ~ ~` ~~ ~ - ~ 1~ i .., ~ ~~ ~~,'', i; , ~ , v ~,..~ \~ ~ ~ ~; ~ ~ ~ ~ -~ ~ ~ I` I ~ ;~ , TO BE CONSTRUCTED BY ~ _. o., _ ~ ~ TOWN 0 _ - ~.' ~ ~ I UTa ~~ ~~ ; -tea .: ~ .~ N~ ~ ~ r1 '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~r'~~!-_ ; ~ ~ ~~ •~ +.. Q ~_°' .~,r it -~_. ~ P ~,~ ~ -_ 1i. ~ OK t _ ~ l - i ~+t ` ~ ~ t 0 :., ~ ~ ~ _ _ EAST MEA00'N OR~_ II 11, ~ !~ ~ ~ ~'SS M~ ~ ~ i ~' ' ^~` -~ _„-._ ___ -_ ,- ~~ ~ __ ~~ _~~,. ~ '-~ icy 4 . ~~ ~ _._\__~ i ~ _- /~ ~ -_. ~ 1 - ~ -~ ~ ., ~ ,~~, y ~ , r-~ _-~~ ~ ~ 1=- - -- ~a 1 ~~~ ~ ,,i, _- ~ \\ V k _ ~ J i. ~ r~ ~ . ;- ~'-;~, CROSSROADS VAIL, COLORADO °~"~ j ~ \..%' REQUIRES COOPERATION -- I, ~~ ~ - _ ~v~ , ~'~ ~~~E,,~ER VIILTH VILLP~GE CENTER _~-- ____- ~i t °~ >__ I_- _ - ~'"~~.~ .~~TOBEFUNDEDBYONE, ,~ `1 r ~~ , I ~ °' F M I~ ~, TO ~ I i ~_ T,O~V i Y. I a ~I ;i :'L~ ;7i s II ~' ~~ CROSSROADS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS PLAN BARNES COY ~~ ~._~~ ARCHITECTS MARCH 26, 2005 1. ' ~Archit is OONSTRUCTED BY OF VAIL AND OTHERS LEGEND ~\y,. `.~ ~ Y EXISTING DECIDUOUS TRE S q= ~~= ES ~~.il~. ' ' ~1 \, EXISTING SPRUCE TREES r~1~ ~~ DECIDUOUS TREES \~~ JS'-40' SPRUCE TREES {~~~;~~+ 20'-25' EVERGREEN TREES fC+ +- ORNAMENTAL TREES\SHR UBS SHRUB PUNTINGS PERENNIALS/ GROUND COVER PLANTING SCHEDULE SCIENTIFIC NAME SYM, COMMON NAME Qtt SIZE REMARKS DECIDUOUS TREES PT Populus lremuloides QUAKING ASPEN 167 2.5"-3.0" B&B Staked SPRUCE TREES PA P'cee ah'es COLORADO SPRUCE 26 20'-25 B&B Staked P9 Plcee ahles COLORADO SPRUCE 10 35'-40' BkB Staked PB Pinus arislata BRISTLECONE PINE 6 20'-25' B&B Sloked ORNAMENTAL TREES SHRUBS AG Acer gmnalo GINNAU MAPLE 14 X15 48' Ht. A4 Amelanchier elnifofie SASKATOON SERdCEBERRY 29 ~5 18"-24" Ht. CI Caryopterls ncane 'Blue Miet' BLUE MIST SPIRU 19 ~5 18"-24" Ht. CH Cotonecster hor zontols SPRUDING COTONUSTER 31 g5 18"-24" Ht. PO Physocarpus opu(ol ous D'abld DIABLO NINEBARK 3 ~5 18"-24" Hl. PF Patentilla frutlcosa POTENTILU 95 ~5 18"-24" Ht. CC Cornus slolon. coloradense COLORADO DOGW000 13 ~5 18"-24" Hl. CB Cornus sericea '8oiley' BAILEY DOGWOOD 9 ~5 18"-24" Hl. CS Cornus slolon 'Isanti' IsANn DocwooD 12 ~s IB"-za' w. RA Ribes oureum GOLDEN CURRANT 25 ~5 18"-24" Ht. PC Prunus cislena PURPLE-LEAF SANDCHERRY 13 ~5 18"-24" Ht. JS Juniperous scopulorum TABLE TOP BLUE JUNIPER 38 ~5 18"-24" Sp. PM Pinus mugo 'Mops' MINIATURE MUGO 102 ~{5 18'-24" Ht. UNDSCAPE NOTES 1. FINAL PERENNIAL AND GROUND COVER SELECTION TO BE COORDINATED WRH lAI4DSCAPE COMRACTOR. 2. TERRACE PUMERS SHALL HAVE A MIMMUM SOIL DEPTH OF 30" FOR SHRUBS AND PERENNALS AND 36" FOR TREES. CROSSROADS VAIL, COLORADO ~.~ ' ~~ ~ - ..`.~ ~ _ ~•"'a ~~~, ~.7 LANDSCAPE PLAN BARNES COY Sale: t'=Y7-0' ARCHITECTS MARCH 28, 2005 ~- _ ~ ",--_... 3PA PEREN \ -__ '~-~-., ~l' ~ . _ '~--__ PLAMIN~G BED -~--__~` `" ~ --~ PERENN AC ~_ -- WS g PUNTING BED ~ Y' ~ -.~ _ _, ~ 5PF ~' '"----_-- SOUTH F ~~``_._ _"' ~ ~``' ,~~ u '- ~ ' IPA A 3 -..._.__ '---_~ - .. RGgp ~ \ ~\ ~ t -_ _ S PE INER N AL ~"'-- ~ ~~..-..~.~_`-.. '~ I N 1 tPT ~, ~ 1,'F - P NTING BED D 40 JPA pptG~E N `~~~""' ~"~-~~-_., r 1 ~H _ \ \", ~L(AGE INN PLAZq ._'. 1PA ~ _ ED _ ~;`.-.._ ~ ~ .~' ~f iPA, IAMI KGB ~ '~~-_.. , W9 ~ _ ? ~_- r ~ 2PT -< I 1 ~ ip6 .,;. .,r, ._. ~ 5RA S '~ 1r: ~' I rte'-~ '" ~ ' f ~ :. ~ - t -_._ ~ ~ ! f - '~_ PERENNIA ~ ~ ~ 2PA .~; I I ~ ~ ~T 2PT (•_. ~ ~ PUNTINGLBED ~ -@ r i ~ ~ ~ I _ _ 1 ~.* , n '~. r _ ~ ~- 2A4 g 1 I I ~ ~ ,. ' ~ y 3PA 9FT / 1 ~ lPT~- -, _ ` -_ \ ~ ~PT 4 PF - ~ 2PA tpg PT ~, i _ i II 2P / SJS 1. V~ SPC z - J ~: . _ - i- _ I , i ~ ~ ~ ~. 1 1 -~ ~ ~ I ~- -- f" J ~ ~ I~ -~ i ~, .~, ~ ~ I i PEURENNtAL NTI GS -- ~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ r~ I, i; \ c UNDER ASPENS " 1 PERENNIAL ~ ~ J ~ \ , 1 A : ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ I aurlTlNCS 3P ~- ~ zcH ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~~°• - ~ ~ UNDFR ASPEN -- _ I ~ -_ ~ I ~ r %~ _ e _ ~~ , __ i 2CH M -._ \ P .,~~ I 2CH I~ r I ~ ~ T Pf -; _'1 ~ 2P 7PM `_ `_ ~ ~ / ~ I _ _ 2~H ~ ~ ,: J ~ e _ e _ r// I 1 I sPM 2cH I ~ 2CH ~~- ~zCH ~ '~ ~~ -. ~ -- _" Y ~ ~ ~-, aPle _ ~ ~ 3V ~TPN 1~-~ PARKING STRUCTURE ~ ~: ~ B , ~. ,Pr , ~- ~ «, " , , ~ ~ 2CH 3PM h 1PP ~ ~ -_ CH ~~. I ~ 41.1. { ~ J .~ ,f ~ . ~ Y S - 4PF ~ _ !~ ~ ~ ~1P~ ~ ~ i . 7PN i - 2AG I 1PT " ~_ 2CH } .. ~ I 1 ~ iPM ' 1 JPT ' ~ ~~ ~IPT ~:I ~ ~2 _ 1 r ~J l 4AA r f ~~- I ~ 5PF . ~ I ~ 3f,1 _ 4PF r 'J'-_'-~_ i' ___ ___ ~ I i , 3Pld - l I ', _~ ,~ , 3PF i .' , 1PT IPB ~PA ~ , J~ if 4PF 3CI 'i P! 3PF pF I ---„ Ir c : I 3CI - ~ I / . I ~. ~f (f , (1 `"c r ~_ i 3PT i ~ _ ~ r I 2Pi - /~'~ •(~ , !r tt I ~ I P7 _7- .. ~1 ~. - IAL D~. I ~ II 1 r ~~ ~ q ~ S~A 3PM ~iT' J PNDERNASPENS,"~ ~ .. ~~I I FPM- :f ~ I+ \ ~ YP - ! ~- ~ - Y ~ ~ 2 3CI ~~, ~~ ~ _ ~' ~ ` ZPt I ~ ~ I 13JS l~ ~ ~ ~I 2P~ L L I ': `, 7PM I -..,' 11 ', l 4P~ ~ 2PIJ, - I_ Y,. 4PF ~~ -~-~~~ 3PM ~r. iF 1 f \ I Il ~I ~ 2PM 3PF . _. '---~ ' I I ~ _ ~r 1 11 ~ PERENNIAL PLANTINGS 3PT 3PT PERENNIAL " - ~ ~" ! UNDER ASPENS L _~ I I 4PF, E2~ ~ - '- ~-h I ~ P% 3PM JPF 3P3PM " PW4IING5 _ ~ I lr";. ~~ I~~/"/ ;li t~ ~ I '~ W~ ~ ~ ~..'.. UNDER ASPENS - "~~?r~fz~"""~ !I i~ l( IW . r~ ~ w OpIVE zPM _ I EAST ~ ~' 3PT 1P it 1M ~~ M~pO 1PF ~ ~~~ M~GOW DRN~~ Ci, ~.; ~ - ~ II 1 PT ~~~ _'7+~" "~ fAgT ~ ~ ~,~PMPF 11~ F , ` ~" ~ PT i' 2PM -: I, ~ : ..,--~ ~ _. ~, _.~ _~ - _ - - .; _ ~ ~~ ~ -'-'i. 5PT PERENNIAL PLAMINGS - ~\ 1 1 / 'N is, ~ ~ IN PUNTERS .=' i _ ~ i / ~ /: ~ l ~,. A ~ ~~ I r ~ ~ ~~ ,' ~ ~~ . ; I ~ , 1y,GE -- _ V - '~ ,v , , ~ __ - '_ U , _- _. ~T _ '~' ~ ': / ~ I / J1 ~1 r 1 ` 1PT ' ,„ ---- ~ , - _ , , ~ _ ~:.,._ t - ~ n:: ~e~~~4 E%ISTING DECIDUOUS TR EES ~,A.'_ ~„~~T*R~'_ EXISTING SPRUCE TREES DECIDUOUS TREES "^y `; )5'-40' SPRUCE TREES ~'~z ~. ~~ f 2D'-25' EVERGREEN TREES ~ ". ORNAMENTAL TREES\SHRUBS ,j~ SHRUB PUNTINCS ~~~ PERENNIALS/ GROUND COVER ~~ `^ R PLANTING SCHEDULE SYM. SCIENTIFlC NAME Ott SIZE REMARKS COMMON NAME . DECIDUOUS TREES PT Popolus tremuloides QUAKING ASPEN 167 2.5"-3.0" B&B Staked SPRUCE TREES PA Picea abies COLORADO SPRllCE 26 20'-25 B&B Staked PA Picea abies COLORADO SPRUCE 10 35'-40' B&B Slaked PB Pinus aristoto BRISTLECONE PINE 6 20'-25' B&B Staked ORNAMENTAL TREES SHRUBS AG Acer ginnalu GINNALA MAPLE 14 X15 48" Ht. AA Amelanch'ier alnifolia SASKATOON SERVICEBERRY 29 ~5 18"-24" Hl. CI Caryoplerie Incona 'Blue Mlst' BLUE MIST SPIREA 19 ~5 18"-24" Ht. CH Cotaneaster harizontolis SPREADING COTONEASTER 31 ~'S 18"-24" Ht. PO Physomrpus oputolious 'Diablo' DIABLO NINEBARK 3 ~'S 18"-24" Ht, PF PotenTilla fruticosa POTENTILLA 95 ~5 18°-24" Ht. CC Cornus stolon. coloradense COLORADO DOGWOOD 13 ~5 18"-24" Ht. CB Cornus sericea 'Bailey flAILEY DOGWOOD 9 ~'S 18 24" Ht. CS Cornus slolon. Isant' ISANTI DOGWOOD 12 ~5 18"-24' Ht RA Rbes aureum GOLDEN CURRANT 25 NS 18"-24" Ht. PC Prunus cisteno PURPLE-LEAF SANDCHERRY 13 NS 1g"-24° Ht. JS Juniperous scopulorum TABLE TOP BLUE JUMPER 38 ~5 18"-24" Sp. PM Pinus mugo 'Mops' MINIATURE MUGO 102 R5 18"-24" Ht. LANDSCAPE NOTES 1. FINAL PERENNIAL AND GROUND COVER SELECTION TO BE COORDINATED WITH LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. 2. TERRACE PLANTERS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM SOIL DEPTH OF 30" FOR SHRUBS AND PERENNIALS AND 36" FOR TREES. CROSSROADS VAIL, COLORADO '.-.s., "S..' _ VILLAGE INN PLq~ rA ~ q~',:e 1 ' ~_~'__~ PARKING STRUCTURE 77 ~sT ^'~~; ~, " ~/i //,~ ~.~ 4 ;~ .a~, ...~ :i ,y. y °~ ~ , ,? ); ~ "~ ~ ~ . ~ h L G t6 ~~ ~ ~j ,r ,Y 1 ~ ' fl J1L~G ~ ~ ~ }, swiss CNALEi A i l~ q ~ TOTAL ON-SITE BDRSCAP Ff 15 326 50 P~ M //l I a . . E = , ~~S 2P - _ r ~ ff~y , , ¢ f ad ~ a ~ LESS AREAS UNDER 300 S.F. - -428 Sp. FT. - ~, _ r ~`' ~~~f _ ~ ~ ~-y ~1~~' 'f` ~ ~ TOTAL ON-SRE HARDSCAPE = 27,357 8O. FT. / ~ ~~~ 9T ~~G ~ ~'I'I «M. ~ W~ ~^Y" r „<° TOTAL ON-SITE LANDSCAPE AREA = 42255 50 Fi. `t~ ~' f c; ~x ~ ~ ~ ;~ am ~ ~, c ~ ~ - ~,,.,D ~ ADDITIONAL OFF-SITE tANDSCAPINC = 14,670 50. FT. ~q .. ~, p i ' ,; ~ L ; " m LANDSCAPE AREAS - Sidl I"=~-0~ BARNES COY . e ~ e ~ ; `' ARCHITECTS ~ ~ " ~f/; ~ * l' '~ 1 ~ „z 113 1 114 I i 1 FRT 1 ELEV PIT 1 1 1 CROSSROADS VAII, COLORADO PUBLIC l RESTROOMS I z„ ~ r ~' /,, l1 PARKING LEVEL 3 (+8152.34' DATUM) BARNES COY 5ple: 1' =16'-0' ARCHITECTS MARCH 28, 2005 M 1. ' ~Archit is i - cnanc L ~ L { L { I I ~ t ~ I MECH. T 1 T d5 (<4 43 42 41 40 ~ 38 38 97 ~ 36 36 34 73 32 ~ 71 10 69 68 ~ 81 1 66 li 85 61 ~ 87 ~ B2 I 61 ' 60 59 THEAIER ~ ~T I I V I I ~ I ( ll I ~ 11 I (now. . ~ 190 STOR. sEATS I tL t~ 11j PU9LICPARKING 1 1 L L L L 1~ ~ ~ OOWN SN ~M ~ XCHANG i F ! L L F L rp 1 L t 57 I Sp 49 ? ~48 17~ 98 ~ 79 71 71 ? ( 76 i 76 I 74 ' 79 TNEATER 145 sEnrs I } oN ' i L r L L L. ! I } 1 _ W.RR M.RR 1 L L 1 TORABE L . ~ L I I ELEVRTOR 1 y 62 r.n1 I 5q E ~ VESTIBULE Sfi 56 1 57 58 ' ~ 1 I L } 1~ I I VE9TIBUlE UP . _ ~ ~ . . THEATEN ~ 73 SEATS ..~.w. - ~ ~~l i • I -ri r*t-~- : : . i REIOH MEWS ELEV ----KITCHEN BOWIING REWH ~-~-rn '-rr~ y T% -KRCHEN EIEV WOIAEN'S STAIR4 ~Q RESTRURANT, Q(I~Q3 py,' WOMEN'S S } REfAL V - y h " " ?7 S ~ 'S E 4 ~ / ~ \ ~ BAR \ MEM9 aerniL \ ^ coNCC~rsNSr <?0 ResTnuwC,~ ~y a0 l % ~ I I I RETAIL ao°~ s^sw°e ~ RETAIL CM I niearea f ~ VESTIBULE -q ; RETAIL ~ ~ r ' 11 , I oNO ~ i ELEV, L ~ ~ .1 . J, ~i RETaL ° ~ o 0 " - PARKIN , P AND REfAIL +8165,34' DATU . CROSSROADS Sc3le ~e~ - BARNES COY VAII, COLORADO ARCHITECTS iArchit cs MARCH 28, 2005 L L L { ~ ------- °~`- ---- 1 1 OARA01 t ~ 4L L ~ t L L IS dl 43 42 /1 d0 39 30 37 30 35 J4 33 32 71 TB 69 88 67 68 e6 64 63 62 61 60 59 ~4 MECH. THEATER ~ ~ I 1. L I I ~ i ~' ~. 190 STOR. I '~~ - - $EATS ([ L j L L 1 L L ~ PUBLIC PARKING SNOW MI i1 L I 1 I ~ DOWN .r, ~' HEAT L I 1 ! ~ L ~ '. CHAN( THEATER 1d55ERTS THEATER 73SEAT5 / I REIG r'r't-r7 ~ ryK --I ,.. ~J \...~.{~M1/L ELEV 'r~ tyy iy- MEN'B I //,~'Q\\\'I' _~ '' 'I REIGH rrr-r+ rr ~r \\ /II~i~ ~ ELEV rrr+t WOMEN'S 'rrr-rryyy- STAIRI 1 1 / _ \ k~ I ~~~\ .~ I ~i ~\~ ~' ~~ ~L--I CONCEBSIONSf I\. ~ ~I TICKETS ~ 1~ ~ I /. ~. ~~Ir I RETAIL I'I THEATER /` VESTIBULE 'J! / I RETAIL `% 1 I ~~ 1 I o I 1 I I 1 I OBBY I / I EIEV. ~ i I - I I I C'~ I I RETAIL I ~' I I ~ ~1~ II ~@ I II ---- -._""_- ~ I o' ~._- -- - h 0 0 0 0 0 ~ _ ^ __~ CROSSROADS VAIL, COLORADO ~ 51 i 50 49 ® 40 di 46 80 19 18 77 ® I i6 TS 76 73 `~J ~. DN emVv W. RR M. RR - - I Jµ~m~rn~ I STORAGE 52 53 51 ELEVATOR ~- ,~qpA E .--- ~ ELEVATOR S5 56 57 5B ~ .,~ VESTIBULE Ii , VESTIBULE ~ I I i UF: .. ., ~~ KRCHEN ~\ BOWLING .r,. _[7 ,yQ ~ ~(ITCHEN C((1}"~ YIT~~ \~ ~~ ((~ `{ n ~REBTAURMIT ~ WOMEN'S d,9,1^' RETAIL `N LLL777~~"" ,_ ~q ~ ` ~\ ,~p ~° i (~ (~ i ~ illy V`tl V4 ~ MEN'S `~ ~ RETAIL 'I' Illi~l ~I~~ ftESTpAUvRp4N~ (may VV ~ C q~`Sy~ \ ,,/ ~~ RETAIL 7 1 y y y i (~y Y O~ OB Y CV ~\(~ ~ `'\ W V4 (]~~VV COpO ~P E ~\\ ~~~ 1 ~~ ~ lHl ~~~ ~,; A ~~ ~ S ~ ~, '1 ~ ,~ / ~O~p i i I -~:. -'~~ _. ~~J~ / O~ Ow\J V ~~p,0 ~'S~ '~'~~= BARNES COY ARCHITECTS / , MARCH 26, 2005 1. ' ~Archit is 37 ( JO I 29 2B 27 26 25 24 I 23 I Z2 ( 27 20 19 1B ~a 17 I6 15 14 73 12 III E%HRUST THEATER 777 SEATS THEATER ussEArs / ` ~,• ~ i 1 f It REIGN / ".rl ELEY [ ~` I ~,' 'I REIG ELEV ~~ 1 I, ~, ~~i ,~~ /:~. x,i ~ !li '~ ~\\ ii . ry l/ ~` E ~1i I, (_ fl 1- f 11 1~ ~I ~ I j t I I r ~ ~,~ ,~ I yyyr ~ L ~~ ~ I ~, \\\ i 1 ~, ~.,~ "ra i"I~r7 ~ I I II I I II I I II I i it ! I II I I II 7 I it I i II 1 I I 0 ~ ~ 30 PUBLIC PARKING 6PgCE9 (.~//I X11 WlllllWll II II I 11 10 i1ya.9A'r ca 8ux(,1~~~~1 LlllllllWl IH~ 7 6 5 ~ 4 3 2 1 O v ~v n ` I~~ .'~ ®~® THEATER ,- 73BEATS ~' ^ ^ -m m~ / ~ ~-7 // LOBBY LEVEL _4. ._ I ~ RETAII 0 ~ "~ RETAIL ~ ! ~-'~/N 111111 ~, II III I I I ~fll ~//// ~ RE6AB ~/m / RETAIL RETAIL I l 1/' i /ril ~ ~I ~ :nL:.r, 1 iT'~il ~ 1 i ~ i ~; 1 ~J', ~ 1 1 ( ~I ~ 1 j 0 I RETAIL li \ I ~ I 1 1 II ~~_~ ~ 1 .V~~ 1 I ~ i 1 s i I I ,~ ~~ ~ '1~~ I ~I 1 -{'___ ~ it ~ ~~~~ 1 ~ ~ I ~~ 1~ I i r e 1 1 Y ~ I~~ ;'~` II RETAIL ~ ( 1 i II \/ ~~\\\\\\\\\ ~ ~ \\\ ~11'"1~~ III __ - -- - 1 ~.' - i >T ~ ~:~ 'I'II ~-- O O 0 O ~ ~_ - - =~~-- VAIL, WLORADO ~pW DRIVE \~ ~r ~ r, u.:.-; " r/ ~ Ili fi~ TI ~ ~ ' ~ ~~ \~_ I~ ~"',1 ~ ~ ~ y \r ~~ 4' 1- ~ ~.'~ ~~ . ~~ ~~ 'i z P 75 _, -_ ~~ ~, _ ~j'-- - ~ ~ ~ ~ T r`1~'I'~ 1 ~ -- i ~ - RETAIL RETAIL j- // i //i ~ }- \~ _ i ~/ / it ;~; ~~: ~ /'ii// ~~ ----- Sri; _ %/ ./~ - I_ ~G / is ~ ii ~/ ~r- ~! I~ I i t i i ~ ~~ ~~ / '~ i~ ~ ~~ (~ v I ~- ~ /l. 11 f ~ ~, = 1 ' ~~, ; . ~' ~a ~~ j '~ 0 I : ;- ~' 1 BIKE STORAG 3 -- _ k ~ ~i ~7~, ~\~ '~ l.\I;1 3 \: = ` ,~~" ~.~rY i M r-- ~~ ~` ~~~ ~~~ i I I \ ~~ :F~ ' `I II ~~- I ~ ~ I __-- - ----.~ / ,r ~ ~~' ,, .`'~~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ PARKING LEVEL 1 AND RETAIL ~%~ ~: 1•==8~-0' (+817934' DATUM) BARNES COY ~ i ARCHITECTS ~Archit is q~: +7~I ,ti ~~ ~~ i%~ MARCH 28, 2005 F-~ I`~I /~ ~_~ MECH. ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~f~: ~ I.K.' \~ ~ ~~ I~ RETAIL ~ ~ ~ f I \ / ~ \ ~ \~ RETAIL ~ r ~ ~ \ 7 ~ ~ { i ~; a^ ~~ i r ~ l ~ / ai. s~v I I x y (/ / f /' Y ~^ / % ~ /RETAIL ~~ ~1\`T S Y ~, ~" 4 J /~ ., :, ~, !; / ~ F r /' ~; . , y __ ~4~ . . ; Ha . . , . , • • , ~ , , 1 ~ , . . . \ I I/~ oaor oFF aREa ~ ~ • - - - - UN M ' SQ. (UNITK' 2., F--------- - w > 0 0~~ LoaBY ~ \II I ~sArt. CIXJQERGE af Q ~ saA / aEraEaoaN ~1,\ I ]03650,Ff E ? LL Il\7 I X t ~e,~ , a,c o S LLI Claju a e~wca ~ ~~a W ~ iAUCR fRUCK iRUCK CaRIUDOR O ~ o.c. W Loloi~c ooqRpr~ v R ? ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ 61 G ' I o.c i ~ / oc o.c I oc ~ W840 W840 ~ON.a o.c ~J IRIICN IRUL1( ~ ; vExoiec ~ ~ Li ~ I { ? ? t1NIT0' ~wR. g,qp,qqp ]BEp100M ul F ~uO~ ~ uNIT o.cW ..ev, tr ~4 rr a= ~LJ l1ryIT]t semuSQmn TEAAAfE 427ssQLff. LU LU I ~ iA~~//?~ ~ i ~ 1IDm'u'I~ i'iu~u~u ~ ~ ~ . y. ~ V R ~ ~ NffP l ~ 4 elftaoan 3~~ ' o n ~ -I-- p=p p~Q I LT ? 3zr \I ~ II K ~ \SiWA 5i! ~ I "I°Is oo _ _ 1 _ ~ PS~ o L--- ~ CROSSROADS L08BY LEVEL (+8192,34' DATUM) gARNES COY Sde: UI6":1'9" 1 VAIL, COLORADO 12 UNITS THIS LEVEL ARCHITECTS o Archit ts 0 LOCK-OFFS THIS LEVEL ~ \ MARCH 2H, 2005 . . . . ; . . : - , - - - - - _ , , , - - - . ~ ~ • ~ nR~ - ~ . - - - - - \7\ II i iam~oDww _..o ' - - - mw ~I~\ ~~w' Kn.,1 Fl~.srsiomamnmi~ smavoun~sa,~ ] O~VUpM 3 B~AOOI . . o 29 P)A W A M ~ o o n ~ > /~)C CD 3emr 3'BW&W C= IIJ)ll II~ , : ~i ~ man LJ J~ / ~ / i Wllll wunil i q~yi~ i aa ~ 1 `al ~ e + W \'lllYl li o ~ g~ ~ o ~ ~ W z t ;E>y~ ~ I eK,wwu, oc ME] °C aem~~on U o RN OOR W ~ . teci sQ, ~r. issa sp rt, ,n ~ r ' V O.C 2~ ~6 0.4 ~ ~ 1 \ oc J / o. e e ~ o, i ~ E4 4q UlliL 30maeon {'y, I I I I~ I 0 0 0 V ~ CD 022. i ac Isl/ ~vR o UNII B ~ IJLJ :axsAn. ty 17 o 4 eEOaaax ~eE o uNrt~~L ~ . 1 BFOSPOQM 9 BEMSWOM~ o , , . ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ . , , _ ~ 219 , , ~,mw.. ~ o 10~IUIpN I 0 (T~ II ` \I ~ • ` - ~ 11H~ Ff. / ~ 3 8E0.00M ~ 1 A~ADOM ~ I J/ _ - ~ ~ ~ • y 0 O ~Q ; -r UNrFM2 z 860= 7jk 7 x o 0 0 - - --0 PS~~~ - = _ _ -t3~ - - ~ ug o_ CROSSROADS • CONDO 2 LEVEL (+8203.84 DATUM) ~ sa1e: uie"=ra BARNES COY ~ va[~, COLORADO - 18 UNRS THIS LEVEL ARCHITECTS Archit ts 2 LOCK-OFFS 1HI5 IEVEL • / MARCH 28, 2005 G~ , . . . . . . ~ .ya ~ d, . . . • .i u~ ~ ~ : ' ' " ' a r . . _ . 'i . . ~ . . , ; ~ , ~pp W • ~~I\\\\\\ ~ IBmP00M , ~~1\\\\\\ ~ ~(1 I \ 0 -9 i ~ ~ ieio~'u~i' DUPLE(I1N G3 . 5pPL ~ NITK2 - Yq1N~Fl(SPoffµ) . ;Ktl:~6~qtY2 7 W~SPfQ ~ 4 5p~e{T uEl I\ W \I ; CD CD 32 E~UA001 n~s ~ 400~ ~ ~ c Q~ W ~ R ~ Z . I . arcrevxa. o.c ieca na~ ~W ~ i ? ? % ~~a ~R W 43 4~ ~ , a.c ~ zb~~ o.c. J o~ o,c J a o 0 m~~ n I I ~II; NR ~ n~R4 . ~ u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ zwZ , ~LL~ ~ ~ i+sa s . n. a 1BFDPfIOM 4 WPCaM 0 ~NR 98 3 ~ No . ~ . _ _~M SQ. ff. ])1 9 fT. ~ 99F I/I ? GC J . p ~vd i i ~ oo _ a~~3~R t I 1 ~ - I /II 1 ~ I ~ O O ~ V ~ ~,~°°~y i""" ~ C ~ ( V ? ~ - - ~ _.y_..._... , ~ T f - RIO - N i _ N m3 _ 7 ~ 3195p.Ff. oemc5oi~ 1 ' 31a 141v o u=q ~ o - - / ~~~P _ 5 _ ' CROSSROADS - - CONDO 3 LEVEL (+8215,34' DATUM) gARNES COY VAIL, COLORADO 3 ~k: u1b.-r-0. isuNrrsTMisLEveL ARCHITECTS ' Archit ts 2 LOCK-OFhS THIS LEVEL MARCH 28, 2005 C . . . . . . . . . . 0 ~ . . . • ` , • . \ " , 1 • \,~q~I/~ • . _ _ _ _ _ / r L N F o ~ DtIP~CI.. P 1 . ~ ]0 p INXSp, IOTN) '0.RSTSTOAYWPMSPA~~µ) ~ ` 1 ~ LU B 3 - WNEtSP~ . . 3 -COOM CD w ilmul ~~pp~~pp ~ ~ ~ rIF9 ~ o.c ~ , ~~UWll ~ 9 A i W x . , • • ~~i ~ ~J o.c 8 i f e ` ° Z UNRAU ~di1NRI w i ~ u[emiwa 0,4 ? ~ 4B ~ ? O.G O.L 1ZB~q5p~y * W ~ I D~~~-1 59 611 ~~~m~ K ; I Q ~ nc ~ D o,c °.c J oc J o.c = o p o I' I'I II ~~I O II (~i',II y 3 BEptlCM . Q ~ fJ I II I ~ I ~ I ~ I I ~ I "i ~ Gl ~ II ' I I I I I I T'~. I~ li u p 0 000 4 n /~I ~ ~ O ~ I I i ~ I I I I ~ 0 ~ A /nI j ~I I ~ I CD 0 ~ o.c a ~ 50 51E 5 1492 5Q.R. i192sQ.R. 4 emaoa+ ~e~aaan o 0 ~ , ~ IINR D 1IABS,Ft. UM5p.R. 1 99EDPlICM G~ a~ ~ ~ , • ~ _ ' a ' - I 'I s ~ , . ~ ~ i P NCf H-1 CA -M 4 ~swi . i ~eto~a~ i O , ~ a - • e ~ ' y . o . ~ , ~ I . . , , ~ - . ,r, ~ ~ ~ . . UNII m4 , , I ~ r- us~sprt. , , , . ' zazoaooH ' . ~ . ~ ___.t_'.. . ; ~ ~ / 0~ i 0 46 i~ ~ N , _ ~`a` - ~ ~oo~ . ~ ~ ~ - ~ - ~ ' ! CONDO 4 LEVEL (8226.84' DATUM) ~ CROSSROADS - Sule:,- 16'-0* BARNES COY vis, vAIL,coLowADo v uNRS tHu LereL ARCHITECTS Archit ts z LaK-oFFs rHis LEVEL MARCH 28, 2005 i _ -- _ - i _. - `, i ; - _ - VI ~ ._ _. _ -_... _ _ \\I __ ii _-- - _ _ . -R it - -.. ~l _ i ~~ , - - - I ~ ~ - ~ P - _,~_ ----- - 0 ~'~ --__ ------- ~ ---- - ~ ~ 5~ a i ~~~ - - --- CROSSROADS - - .li -- -- __ -- ._ CONDO 5 LEVEL (+8238.34' DATUM) BARNES COY Stale : 1" = l6'-0' I1 UNRS 11115 LEVEL ARCHITECTS 2 LOLK-OFF THIS LEVEL MARCH 28, 2005 y 0 ~ X ~ E'W%EIfS°/Q1fRAl1 . •71 ~1998~.fT.RR11~ \ • . _ . . . ~ QIN.'R' ~ ? ' ~ \~/J • ~ ~ - ,7B ~ql . . . , ~ , ~ - B~fmdl IXmfQ " ' i ` _ _ , - " _ _ _ . - iA • . N 2 ~~I I NRF2 / \ . 31115QFi.iOfNl ~ e I / \ 60 .lOf/ll ~ VNli~ OASTOVNi ~ 0 1 ~ W 73 > i MEGi MEGI W MEUI, - ~ \ Li W ff I I ? ? - I I" ~i I ~ ' - ~ ~A~~ w . a CORRIDOR co~ 757 ~/I , . - i . i i _ o ' = . , ~ ' ~ i I n[Ot = _ J ~ . _ ~ EOrl o o " gnm , . j I~ - I ~ I U~ R 1~ I I', I . I i i II I 1 I ~ I I' I i j •I Ijij~ ~ I~ i'I ~ I ~ - il~ II ~i ~ ~ ~II ~ I~I !~I II, ii ~il~_ i~l I ii ~ lil,olll I ' ~ ~ I~ II a, !~I ~ ~ I I!I - _ .E] ~ - I - - r LIED ~ I ( I - - - - ~ oo - ' I - nEa . ' I - _ - - - - - - - _ i_ i ~ ~ I a DUPLIXUNR ~ PLEXUNR}2 ~ / I 1116S7.Fi.(Em dl) SQ,R.(J9}B$,FT.NI . I _ • ~I \ I I~~ i~ I . N sKaxoRaaa xaoROOemnEx _ I I I i ~ i _ 68- ~ • i / . ~ • 1\II i' I III' II I~I IIIII , ~ \u ~ I I ~ I ~ I i 1 i I IB~A]YI ~ _ ~ I y_~ I ~ I I I I I t I . . ~ • I I ~ 0 0 - -f - , ~ ~ • - ~~I ~ ~ _ I ~ • , ~ I~,i~ . : , , - • • ~pa ......1 H J . . , , , . ~ - - ~E ~ - ~ 0 _ - - • ~P~~~~P - ~ ~II~._ ~li • CONDO 6 LEVEL (+8249.84' DATUM) • CROSSROADS = _ Sale: 1•-16-0• BARNES COY VNL,COLORADO - - 2 UNITS THIS LEVEL ARCHITECTS ' Archit ts r_ 0 LOCK-OFFS TH15 LEVEL MARCH 26, 2005 ~ d / I V ~ ' p o 1. ~ ~ p b°e ~ L - - - - ~ , ~ S o u t h Frontage Road PARTIAL ROOF PLAN OUTLINE smie : r" = is-o' Noeni stoE F9R REFEAENCE NAPoSg aNLY I Wl Stttk SfOne - Drxced Pmber Bwms 6 MOws / D~ors ~ _Dry THluritle Gold e2de~ wl steel MAnI 0ad rwotl rearsed diimreymaa an~eNonsard6raong inNOpa~irqminfi" /Balcony - ¶mbcrw7P~ PeekdCe tlarBeams& MelMnkweaNettO" Dr~e171mhereeams& 6enmswS~l [qummwAhs~el syAemwlNrewzl &adetswl~N tradaFOnfin6h,an0 unnaeorrsandhracing, col~AansaMbanng timber pmis S(xk Slwie Sb~k Smne R onalSanEStme AegimalSaMridie FlbmxmmtPaaMSiding cj RheloilnkpreweaMereB' ilnk"pre wrztlcretl" _Sll"modulewl~hAeel madukwXM1tteel '~~.&Mdz)andMm doMkshndngseamwl amondaiem~mwi r~c~cememmamswiny ~ana~~~dm~ re~im~l~s ~ urg m& mPk e9~me`&4y'~ehhe M1.BFanx.)arAtrim ~ 9 ~ vguar4Nedemtm 6o3NS AhrcmntBDnrdSMirg PetlelCeEarBeams@ Nbemax9wNHeek 60 • / ir ~ (Vehflhom.)aM(nm CalUmASwO sN9 ~ • Q°~ f' ~ :Qu• bards mnneNaSaMMxh9, wrau ght ilo nfinuh r4~ Oressed imlRrBeamsfl F ~ . ~ . ~ . " ' Q in / , / ~ ~.m„ . u• Brackets swel wnnectimsaM brKing PededfedarBeamsfl 4 , Wumns»M sceel mmectlrougAtimfnTh - , ' 'q• . Stak Stone - ~ 1 - ~ ~ , 1j~~~r..., ~ , ~t . ; ~ ~?a,~u.~ ~ ~ ~rtf Re9kra45ard4- {?~aL ~ Small" moduk wRh uEel reuealdunnet jOlMs ~ykmY- fimEasiqpoR A a~ LS a+ a beamsWms1-1 . ~ ~ ~s ~~ron fini,n,ana . ~ ~ amber oCS'G. _ lff~ 7ry 5tad 4me- i ¦ ~y{€ ~a ~~~~ia.~` ` . Y ~ illndeGdd ~ ( ~ ' M E1irw:~,w~~ : ~ , f t ~ I.. "maduk, ~ M " w9bllcwd , r ` • „ , . . r . ' 'a , x W ' <K ~ - F, „ . , , . T. .rom . ~ . . . „ r . . . ~ . . . _ . . . ~ . ° ~ , : , . . . . _ ~ ..yw.`•. MebI Q ~ ie~un4efu10 ad rvoo0 rttautl Stack Stme - Regonal 5and4one /Medum"modlk, 'aRA4NCE70l04DINGIXXK ~ Intoopenl~gmU6" ~e ~ ,oe„s "Small module M steN . , 1~IUn0eGoltl 'euiLOia ¢.nvlrhamelparts ~ pi¢q¢cesNn¢lio~'s, 'MMwm'motlule, Dryltt<kAone / rf pot46k abwe IuGtry Ind ielWride Go10 Slack Smne - J RegionalSaMVnne "large" Motluk, . L z r g e ^ „oaae ,mn,teel S o u t h F r 0 n t a g e R 0 a d Romende s p~ Levels reueal crannel joina NORTH ELEVATION Smle : 1' = 16'-0' - _ CROSSROADS BARNES COY VAIL, coLow,oo ARCHITECTS - Archit( ts , MARCH 28, 2005 / I CROSSROADS VAIL, COLORADO .\ .\ .\ .\ .\ ,~ "w~ ~~~ ",~ 9ng i"9, Reel Rcel BARNES COY ARCHITECTS MARCH 28, 2005 1, ' Archit is `- PakmY-Ti~wCGOrt beano rvdh RBI EAST ELEVATION ~''~' ""~"'~ - -- tlmDerpmts. srzie 1' = 16'-0' CROSSROADS VAIL, COLORADO 4 s /~ ~.` ' i l ~~ - Dry Sled Hone. J Tduktle Grid "large' Mofuk, Prar~ade 8 Pau Le21s ~a Stttk Anne telluride Gold cMmney mass Balmny ~ rmbg support beams wiN sleH belU9lddes Iran fnlsM1, and ember posts. Meinark"pre weaLMr~" dldmcnd hk Syslem WI edge gutter filnple Nhe rr snow guaN Heele sysem IY - Nfirdrwsl OOms~ Pazled CCdar Bearewa MMal add Wood rEteLfd COIINMSINN Steel INo apeNng min 6° mnrzieons aril hanhg, wmugN imn finish -RhelnSnk"prew~ed' parel system wbh reveal jainn Stack Stone - Regional5andtone 'Small" module wide strel meal LhdnnelJgnn ~'\ East Meadow Drive ll'~ Rheintlnk " pre w~thazed" OouNe standing seam wl be9e gorier ssem a triple dne:nowgaa`d"`~~` CONDO-2 PA RTIAL PLAN OUTLINE stem kale 1' = 16'-p" SOUTH SIDE Grimed Timber eearr5 a Brazktls wl sNel FOR REFFAENCE mmecdms aM bao'lg PBRPOSFS ONLY - oedai cedar seams a COOrMe W~dl Std mnnectiavs aM bating, WfOVdlll lfgl brash Flhacertwnt BoaN String ;~ ~j ~e ~~_ .yw'"'w'_'tx..~ f . ., lef;~. ~ Stall Stone Aegenal5aM9nne 'Large" module with s~ rH'~ dlarre inn i, c~~~ orvSkadStone TeMurge WM "Medlun"module, above mhby IeWd SOUTH ELEVATION Scale ~. 1' =16'0' Dosed amber Beams & Bracken wl s1eN mmeNOra and baring AMinain N " pre w~Ueretl' douNeAand'ng seam wl .._ I ~~! elge gutter sysem ahrDle. ~a~i a~ „- ride snow guard Hede /< ~, system ~. ' ~ Balmny-iimbersuppM- L beams with sNel ^alustratla inn hnhh, and drabs posh. veM1 a bon:.) and Nm beards'~i ~4 r Sntk Stone .yional5and4nnel- - M '~~xJUle wiN s+xel ~~. {?~L ~ gal hannel pNn ~ ', I ~ENTIUfa'E i0 ' ..~~YY ~'ll~`~ PPRY,INf, LEVf15 y,.~reau.... - ON 56d Slgp~ Telluride Grid "large" Module, Prnmendda&%dad ipyeS BARNES COY ~ ARCHITECTS ~. Archit t5 MARCH 20. 2005 RMnrink"pre weal doude starping sa edge gutter syAmn & tithe snow guard s Ressed Nn6er B~ Backe6 wi fDIrIttOOne dnd b Petled Char Be: ColumnswL connx9ms aM M »ttnlghbrOn StMk Sta RegianN SdndA "Small' module widl s meal rnannel jr Bektxry-Tmbera beams wib bnRSbada iron flnisl tlmhar Py Skatk S Tellu~di "Medium" m shore lbbb ~wovr wA maotn~ ooa arsrad s ieYurid .large' M Romenade 8 0aza CROSSROADS VAIL, COLORADO i I I I i 'Snail"8"IZrge modu@ WEST ELEVATION wiM steelrewal danrcl sra~e ~. r =is~' pna I I I I I 1 I BARNES COY ARCHITECTS 1. ' :whit is ,, .\ ,,. .,. ~~ ,. ,,. .~ , .,. NEW NORTH ELEVATION US. OLD NORTH ELEVATION CROSSROADS xak '~=16`°~ BARNES COY ~ ~ VAIL, COLORADO ~ ARCHITECTS ~ ~Arcmte~ts MARCH 7R. Jfll1S CROSSROADS VA[L, COLORADO NEW WEST ELEVATION VS. OLD WEST ELEVATION Scnie t" = 16'-0" BARNES COY ARCHITECTS SIN CROSSROADS VAIL, COLORADO CROSSROADS VILLAGE INN PLAZA FRONTAGE ROAD ELEVATION COMPARISON Scale : N.T.S NOTE: Frontage Road drops 16'•6" from Crossroads front door to Gateway front door. VAIL PLAZA HOTEL BARNES COY ARCHITECTS MARCH 28, 2004 ROUNDABOUT t -. ~, „ ~ _ I \ ~-._ ~ ., __ -~ ~j ` \ ~ , v ~.. ,_ _ > k \ _ ~/'~ ; ~ ~ , ~ _,- _ _ FROrvTq =~ , - - i . ; -~ . , , ~, ~ ~ Ii ~ ~ ~ _ _ --~ apAp - - _ ~~ - - ~ ,-a ~ ~ ? ~ ~ ~, ~~ ; ~. ~ ~ ~1 ~ I _~ ~V ~ J i ~ s .f_~ 1 ~~ - _ _ '~-,_,w - - _ :` _ =~ f , ' _ __ i ~ ~ ~ i, :' -. ~~ V ~~ ~V ~I~ ~r '~~ r ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ _ ,~ -~ _ ~ _ a - - j `, ~ _ ', _ ,_. ~, __ _ ~~ I -`-~ ~, a } r ' i~ 1°). Y~ (a7e~py -„l' ~ ice' \ ` ~'"~* t~q~~ . ___ __~ .~ s ~ ~ V ` b~V~H ~ ~ ~~ __ ~ ~i ~ ~, ,'~~ ' ~~ --__ i _ y- ~' ~ ~ ~ - ~'~ ~-- - ~ d \` F 4 ,- \ ~ti /~ ~ it \ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ \\ ~ N` ~ B16~p~ I-- ,, A o V y i~ I ~~ v ~__ I ~~ I ~ ~ i ~..~~: ~ 11- I. TS s..- _ ~ _ v s ~. Ins ~) .. ,e ~ n ~ ~ , ~ gyn. .rv ~ n ~ ~ . ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'~ .e v v 7 I ~ ~ ~ _ '_ __ ~ \ ~ ~ .--- ~ ~,, fig ~ ~~ J. /. ~~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ eae, ~ I I ~- '~ t .~ . ~~ ~ i L --V \ -" " ' r ~ I J __r ra V ~ ~~ ., .. - " ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 - ` `~ ~ ~I 'e~ I ~~ ~.~ ., \ ,~'~ I`. ,~ ` ~ ~ ~ a _ ~~ ~ z m ~a I ~ ,., M1 ~_ 6 ~ - ~ I - I ~ , ~ - ~~ `~ q ~ ~ t ~~ I \\ / \ \ ~ ~.._-J \ ;`~ ~ I \ BMW I ``\ _ -~"~~ ~ t ,, ~~ - ~ ~.- ~~ V ~ ~ ~~ a _ z, ,. ~ - ~ ~ ~. ~~ r -_ I - ~ ~ ~ - _ ~ , ,.~ , I I . A - ~ /~ \ 1 ~ ~._ ~.---- ~ '~ s ai ~ n ~ '~~ pie I ' I ~ ~ - ~ J ~ ,~ ~ r ~ - F ,~ _, r ~ I, ~ ~ J ~, ,~ ~ , _, _ ~ ~ _._ -_ - i i _ _ ~' ~ ~ J 4 I ~ ~ ~` I y\ ~ ; i }. ~ ~ ~ k ~ ~1 ~\ _ i I \~ i~ l i ^' A ~ f tee, I I e ~ ` ` ~ i I. , - ; ~-, ~` , I' ~i _ ~ ~ ~,~ i ~ _ _ ~ ;, ... ~ -., - ,4~ ~ ' I ~ ', _ r: r. ~ ~a m I e =.~-,. ~. \ I `• ~~ l \ ~ I r i r ~„ ~. . ~ _ ~~ i ~ ~ B ~'' i i~ r I II ( \~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ l '~i ~ ,.. t ~ ~.~ i I -_ _ r I o /~ ~ ~~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ I `~ _ ~ ~~ - --`^ ~' ~ ~ I L `~~~~ i~ I,.,,.~ ~V ~., per \t ~ ~~ ,~~ ~, - . - J ~~~~~ ~~ ~ ' ~` ~ ~ ~ 1 ~. 7 l- ~ I ~~ ~"~, ~ ~t \~ ,~ \ `~ ~. ~ ~ ~~\ ~7 ~~ . ~ '~~ I, ~ ~. ~I '_ X1,+.1 ~\ ~~~' - i ~ .11 ~~ ~ '~ ,- , , ',~ ~ ~- • 1: h; ~- C ~ )~ 'ice _s~ '~ , „~ , ~ l ~ ~ ,, ~ i~'~ ~ - ~ ,. ~ - ,: ~ ~ llm ~ ~ ~ \,, ~?s~ \~ ~, it ~ v' ! '~:~ .' B 1I c _ I. ~, `, ,:~ :. ~ ~~ ~~\ is ,ej5 `~r ~ : a,. :__~ ...,._ '= i~i~~~~~ r" r~ " ~ z=' `\ ~'~, .r' _ \ _ ,. ,~ ~~ ~ ~,_ ~- _. ~ _ - __ _ , ~, ~~ ~~ ~~ ___ ~ ,. _ / :.~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ , ~ 0 ~ ~ ~r 0`~ ~ _ = -_--_ ~ n ~~..~- ~-~''~-~' --- ~~ EAST =~-; .. ,;"",~- --_ ~ ~ . ~~ ~P z ~„~ , ~~ ~q., ~r,~a~~~5 y-.`o~~ a~ MEgppwpRlVE~',___ y ~ ~ ~, ii '1-`~L`. 1ti.....~i.- ~gSM ~s4 ,~,~- ~_ ~°~ ~ ~c; i~~ a, ; ~ ` Y~` '_ --"'_~_ _-\\ "\ ' '~ ~~ ~`= L~, i ~ ~-'I.- , ~j~ ~ ~I ~ .~ D ~~f~ ~k i~'~}j~l ~ --_ N ,``\ F?~~ ~ s'~x7z.5x~v'~ _ ..,J ~ y,~ „ I:,, i ~~~-'ITz'~ l ,~~,` li ~---.-~ ~ ~~ ~ „rt'I'1~ ~1~_ .., c=~~ rr~1x':~Fl~u i~,U,~.., ~'~.'~ ~~ 1----L ®(„~ CROSSROADS VAIL, COLORADO BUILDING HEIGHT PLAN (historic grade)- BARNES COY ~~.. ~,=~a-0. ARCHITECTS MARCH 28, 2005 -~ ~ A ~ ~ ~~~ ~i~_ VA ' ~ j \ , \ !-'rte n ~ \ \ ~I ~\ i / ~~M' ., ~' - \- ~---• ~\~ \~= VILI.,gGE INN PZA~ ,___ \ ~ _ ,----- ,~~ r -,,~ '~~q ~ II ~ Q"P // ~ ~ +' ~~ ~ r 1~X ~ ~~' / u\ 0~ 0 ~ A _.-~, c' TA v, r-~ =- - ~ `---~~ ~ SAD '~f \ _ _ ~'--- t \ ~ it\g~,9o ° ,-~ :~,. ~.,. `~ ~~ __ __--_ -.--- ~-. , f ~ .-__ _ Ab 0 -~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ''` ~~i i~ ~ i =- ~. -- ~~~ ~~ - ~ ~ ~. \~ ~I ~ ,~. ~ ~ II _ III ~( aturo~ f e~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ p ~ ~ ~~~C~C ~ ~, `~ ~ t ~ ~ I ij ~ ~~ nl n m ~ ~~ ~ ~~ _ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~~ ~ _ -- ~ - - ~~ - ~ a~; _. _ ~ -_ - ~-~, _-T, ~ ~ ,_ y I#~R 1'. ~' ) _ m yam' - `~ ~ / \ \ ~ .._ - ~ ~ ~ t .- ~ a -~' ~ ~. ~ ~ 11 .»~. i_ -- m ~ ~ ~ I ,~ ~ n~ i a Y -, ., eae~ +m o - ~ ~~; ~) fad+.~. m ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "~ i ray, ~ r~ I t. h n ~ 'i :\1 ~ ,~e1:. ~ ~~1 ,i~ ~~ - - (~ ' re~s~~. ~ ~ ~ r . , ,- ~ o ~ ~e~s ~ 17 , . - ~'~' ~ ~ _ ~ 3 (8 i _. ~~ ~~>. I ~~ P ~~ P I i r_ ze . ~ B261 pp ~ = ~ ~ ~816~ p~ n ~ / w v l I ~ ~ l~ ~ ..._-. . ~~ i ~ .. I ~ ~.~ .. ~ ~,. 1Y ~T' - n7 ~J i ~ ~~ ~ r ~ i ~ ,, ~ ~ ~~~ ,_ II Ali. ~ ~ ~ P'- ~ ,, it i .r. ... _. i ~' ~~ ., .. I I.. _ - ~ ~ ~~ : , ~ it .~ ~-~.-.'~ J ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o _ `~ ~~\ ~ , ::,, ~ ; _, _. ~ i, - ,: ,u~ ii / ma ~ ' ;' ,~ ~ _ t ~` r, I - - x.. ~'~ - ' -7- ~ e ' ~ I ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~~ \ V i ~~ r ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ..-~ ~ ~ i 4 ~~ 1 ~ ~ k -_ A ~~ I ~ ~ ,- ~ ~' - ~ - .. , : ~~ ~ i i ~~ ~ G . '-- ' ~ ~ ~~ ~~, ~ ~ -- ~, ,. i :` ~ ;, ,,. i ;, .; - ~ ~~ .lam _ HI, ~ ~ ~'^S ~i \~'_ em~ ~~ri '~,,4- ° ~ ~ _n: ,~~~ ~" <Yp ~~'Z~~'~ '~'. ,. `~ ~ k\ .. ~ ~ ~- ,.. ', ,. ~ ~i .i ,~ ,~ °~ I v l n `~ ~ ~ '.. v '~ ~ ~~~ ~ Syr - _ - r ,~ i _'--~-_-_ V ~ .~ ~.. '~ r ~~ .,. -"~ \ . Cam,. !+_ . I ~ ' 'I ~ ~ II 1 1'"`r\.~.i i I~~ \ .~~ `` -~'~ - 1f \'~\ ~ -r-\ _ ~ _~_~1 ~~ ~ 'T MEADOW DRIV(: ~_ ~~~ CROSSROADS VAIL, COLORADO i ,;. ~. ~ ~ ~ ~~,~ - , ~. ~ RSV I ~" ,y ~ ~ ~ Vd ~ Z ~~ ~~~ •~ ~ ,~ s~~' :.>~t~ Banc- -~ ~', 1I „~~ J sN. BUILDING HEIGHT PLAN (actual grade) BARNES COY ~ ARCHITECTS ~Archit is MARCH 26, 2005 ,_,~,~ •., ~ - w g g _.. _ _ B 4 _ -, -e s -e -a ~~ e ~+ - `~J-~ ~ ®_ (~-~~.y.- ~~ a ~ , ~ ~ y ~~` 1 e % f ~1 L ~,_~ , ~ , --- -1 ~ ~ tiy- ~ ~ ~~ ~~ c; - ' Z. r'1. '~ M WINRA SOLSTICE DECEMBER 21, 10:OOam saAR AzINIrtN: Isp SOUR ELEVA710N: 21' ___._-_ _ e I _ ',~ r ~~~~>- r~ ~T~T !},_ ~~ - ~ - ~ i I ,~ -e I 9 ~ ~ ~ - .~ I.~ ~j~~, ~.-~ .-e - ~.~~, ~i o , 11~~ I ' ~; ~~~; y i 1 '~~' ~~~ ~-' ~; I a~ =-_-- ~D i ~;. 1-- ~ - ---- ~~-_ - - - r~ --'--~ ~ /', fT - ~ ~°~~ ~~ ~ Y ~ -I Ill ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ I~ '~; ~~,~~ ~ r/ 1 I. --1 ~ • I~ I ~ AJ ~ 1 ~ ,~ ~~ / f V w1xTER soLmc <~ Pl v~i~~ }~ ~ ~ Sl >'~ 1 f' wINtEA saLSncE ~4ti __.. 4 ~;~1 -_ i' b ~ ~ >e a - r.. ... I ~_ <~ -e-a ~aa -e ..~% ' -a "-' -. ~ s ,~ ~ ~ ~~^ ~~,~ I ~, ~~ 1 ~ ~ ~''~~'~~~i~-rte I _ `. ,~~ ~ _-( I ,.>,:~ f SPRING M!D fW1 EOUINO% ^ " ~ ' - ~ \N y~ MAR ZO k SEP 20, 10:OOom SOUR AZIMUTH: 135' SOUR ELEVATION: W w ~~~.;, , 1 .l~~/ f IJ Im 1 ' ,~~ is ,~ 1 1 _- 1~~ CROSSR( VAIL, COLORADO N ~I SVMMER SOLSRLE JUNE Z7, t0:00am SOUR AZIMUTH: TIP SODA ELEVATION: 59' m ~~,~ ,~~ I ri .. T n ~a ~` ~~ ~' ~ ~ ~ `/ _i_ ~~~ ~ r ~i \a 11 ~I ~, I ,~ Sl -e -a~ '-a -e ~e - 1 1 a - - 3-e?-a ~~-~ 1-~ ,- `'-" -e ;-~ + . r ~~ ~' ~~~~~~ " ~: ~ ,~y i ' ~ .W~~ l-~ E OECEMSER 21, 12:OOpm DECEMBER 2f, 2:OOpm sauR AnuurH na souR A21NUrH: 2oa SOUR ELEVATION: 2T SOLAR ELEVATION: 2Y _____._ - -~'- i - __ - ~..e I _ - I -_.J---- - - _ -- ~- ~T~,~ ° t a n a ~. s~ ~_ ~~~~~~,~ e e 1 0 a - ~'' ~ ~ 1 ... ~1 '-1 ~ - e ' - ~ ' > e > a 1 I , ~,~a I~, 1 .J ` Ni. _ ~~~~ ~ _ ,a ~ ~ -~ -- `~l L:. / /r i. -, ~V1 VW`r~~~ r ;ii1/ SPRING AND fALI EOUINO% ~~i~( ( J 1[ `LI l~ ~ I l .~0 ;~ SPRING OND FALL EWINOM MAR 20 k SEP Z0, 12:OOpm MAR 20 k SEP 20. 2:OOgn SOLAR AZIMUTH: 1Z5' SgAR AZIMUTH: 211' SOUR ELEVATION: 51' SOLAR ELEVATKIN~ 44' ____ - -® .___._._ .._----~-._ ._._________~--~1 ~r_ _~ i11' $ 3 ~' ,tIY 8 ! ~ l~ `>~~ R ,. ~ o~b ° ~x .~ ~~ , I b: a -a' xa - '' ~• _' ~ I~~ I .. I j -~ '-~ ~ -° -a ..111 I ; I~~I ~ o ~f ~~~ fit. I ~_`~' I 1, ~ QI- ( ~ I -. ~ f . ~ 4~ ~nT ~' ~`~/~ , ~1II ® ~~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ SUMMER SIXSTICE ~,~ ~( T„J~/i~~/v ~,~~ )4 1~~/ :~~ fV~ SUMMER SOLSTICE BARNES COY JUNE 21, 12:OOpm JUNE Z1, 200pm solAR AzIMUrN: v,' SUN_ STUDY SUMMER AND WINTER SOLSTICE PLAN ~ AZINOM: 2~' ARCHITECTS SOUR Effl0.TI0N: 74' - ---._- --_--- -- SOLAR EIEVAMUl: 61.5' N1S MARCH 20, 2005 ',. r___-_- I j ~ ~~ ~ j ~ ~ __-_-___~_ _- ---_- - -~- ~ ~ _' _.1 -: ~ _ ~ .__._- 8 - ~h ~( I - - a o 11 II II I- ~ CI I ~( LI - 0 11- o II. / o ~o° v r - o . ~ ~ .. . ~I \ v \ I ... o o o o - J. - .. /^ 0 0 \ ~ - - ` I \ ,. ,I ~ o o r `;\ \v \~ J B ~ = ~ 0 B ~ I V ~--- ,, B ~ B ~ - L ; ---_--~----- ~ I / //.~. ~~~~~t t~~%~ BEAVER CR~ISIf ]CE RINK COD4P)(RISON BARN EAST MEADOW DRIVE sae: G~ ~~~~ I i .i c\~/ ~a~ ~, JN PLAZA -\~ f I ~ ~~ ~~ ~._ ~ ~ ~,~ iNl\ ~~ ~~= ~ ~ ~- , , k ,, ~,~ i'~ ,~. \ ~ ~~ _. S;1 __ - /..h~2Yai~ ' ~1^: ~ - „_. i I . -- - - ~I ;~ ~~ q II I( 11 I . ~I II I i _ i ~. I J ~ I ~ ; ' ~, ' . I ~ ~ I '~ ~ ' I ~ i - ~, J B~ 0 0 B~ ~ ~~ ..~~ ;~ , -, I - ~ I ~~ I I --r------------z-- ; I F --- 1 ~ , =,__ , B ~ B ~ ; j I - .. 0'-4" ~ ~ Its. ~~ i ~ I - --- --------------- ~ I ~.~ , . .-~ ;, j~f~ I ~ j s . - B ~ ~.; = _ ; ~ ; B ~ ----~- _~ . - ,, ~ ~„ I -- ~ ~_ - I ,. ~. ~ t r, ~ ~ _~ ~ - ~ - - ~ i ~ - _ "~.,, i ~ ~ 0 ~1 2`~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ •_ ., .~ r f y i ~~ ,-- ~ ~" .. ~ ~ i. ~~ : I - - i ~. I I ~~ ~ ~ _ ~.,, ,, ~ A i _ is ~ ~ i _ I ~ ~ l ~ ~ ; :\ i f I / ~ I l ~ I ~ ~ ~ . ~.~ ~, f;~ i ~~ ~~ / I ~/ ~ i~a ~ } rl ~ ~ I ~~..~' ~ y r ~ i .I i P~ / L~-------~ .-a sh + (~ S w ~. i ~' ~ -' ~2A i -~_, A ~--- m------ ~ - ,t _. t ~ v ~ \ / w, ~~ ~ r /.. ~ !i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~. ~ '~ , 1 ii .„ ~ ~' I r ~~ ~. ~ a I ~ ~ ~ [ s - ' i ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ I ~ ' ~~ ~ `~' it ~ rt ~i i ~ ~, I \~ S~ ~ ,_~ ~, ~ r _ ~ i ~:.. i '~ ~~- I ~ I l ~/ .._ ~ . Y ~ - _ ~~ ' ~~, i~~y?,f' ~ I ~ ~~ ~~ ~`~.S..~S'k, h.S, ; ~ ~.~- "- ~~K'M ~ ~ ~ III II I -~~ ' ~, L ~.- --- ~~ ~ ~ ~,~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~(, ~ C S ~ ~~.;~ ~'''~ ~ ~ ~ ~ *~ ------ ~ _ _ _ ~ ~' p,0 ~~~ y ~ _ _~ .. -_.__ ~,.. s?=~ r~ ~ I I I ~ I ~(.P ~ NFL ;ii=; ~~~ ,. "1' G. i / # ' ~~ - --- - ----- _ __ - .. _ ~~ I I I ~~~ ~~ ~a 4,~~5~,7 4 S~i"S ' ' ~ 0^~ ~, h ~ ~ ~ I I I ~~ ~V~, ~ L____-_ _J ~ <StiS ~ ' f ~ ~.:_. ~' .>i: ~,. ", y~~~. ~ S ti, ~, ~~ CROSSROADS BUILDING DIAGRAM (Extent of Building Beyond 20' Setback) BARNES COY vA~~, COLORADO Scale : 1'' = i6~-o° _ ARCHITECTS n.,,, ,~.,~, a.,.i..ti.....__ ...:.u:,, im _,.. ~,_.i. ~ ~~-- --- , ~ ~ .. , ~ --- - i ~ ~ ~ ~' 1 5~fr 7" ~~ ~ ----- - . ,~ ~ r l~~ y5 ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ,~„ ~~ ` ~ '~' C I~~,~~ ~?s, ;'v ~~2~~ t ' ' ~ ~ ~~ EAST MEADOW DRIVE - ~ ~, ~, k ~ '~ ,> ~P < 1 air y ~ ~ ~ ,,~ id~~ ..; I I ~ r ~ i .,\l ~~` ~~`~~~ n{k~. ~~ IL.~J J ~ .. ~, OV. Jtz ail __. ~ _......_._ _.-n ~ - ~ 1 / ~n~ ,,, ~ a ~,, ~-- ~~ ~ V ~ ~ \` ~ ~ ~ Y ski;-~~ ~,; ~~ s5 < ~ ~, r ~ ~~Sv" f~ ~,~4~~~~K"TS~ i ~______ _____ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "4.,, ~ __ ~~ b-% , - ~' ~ ~, ~ ~-,~ ., ~ _ ~', ~ \~-~ ~ I CROSSROADS VAIL, COLORADO ~~ ~ ' - SWISS ; -~ CHALET ~, s ~ ,~: ~~,~~ i'~ Y k a ~ ~ \ ~ r j ~ ,, A ~~ ; ~ ~; r ~, ~~r a~.w ^,~~, , ~ ~ ,,' / ~ s, ~ ,' ~~ ~~~ ti`~ / -0. ~ ~. ,~~ PIJaZA AREA Scale : 1" = 16'-0" AREA OF PLAZA 24,130 SF gyp;, AREA OF PROMENADE 6,388 SF BARNES COY ARCHITECTS 1. ' ~ o,rCML is MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE:' April 25, 2005 SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on a proposal to establish Special Development District No. 39 (Crossroads), pursuant to Article 12-9(A), Special Development District, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of Crossroads, a mixed use development; a request for a text amendment to Section 12-2-2, Definitions, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, to add a definition for bowling alley; a request for a text amendment to Section 12-7E-4, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, to add bowling alleys as a conditional use; and requests for conditional use permits to allow for the construction of an outdoor operation of the accessory uses as set forth in Section 12-7E-5 (ice skating rink); a major arcade to include indoor entertainment; a theater, meeting rooms, and convention facilities; multiple-family dwellings and lodges; and a private club to allow for the establishment of a for sale parking club, pursuant to Section 12-7E-4, Vail Town Code, located at 141 and 143 Meadow Drive/Lot P, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Crossroads East One, LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: Warren Campbell SUMMARY The applicant, Crossroads East One, LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC, is requesting a recommendation from the Planning and Environmental Commission to the Vail Town Council regarding a development application to establish Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, pursuant to Article 12-9(A), Special Development District, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of Crossroads, a mixed use development; a request for a text amendment to Section 12-2-2, Definitions, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 12-3- 7, Amendment, to add a definition for bowling alley; a request for a text amendment to Section 12-7E-4, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, to add bowling alleys as a conditional use; and requests for conditional use permits to allow for the construction of an outdoor operation of the accessory uses as set forth in Section 12-7E-5 (ice skating rink); a major arcade to include indoor entertainment; a theater, meeting rooms, and convention facilities; multiple-family dwellings and lodges; and a private club to allow for the establishment of a for sale parking club, pursuant to Section 12- 7E-4, Vail Town Code, located at 141 and 143 Meadow Drive/Lot P, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1. Upon review of the applicable elements of the Town's planning documents and adopted criteria for review, the Community Development Department is recommending the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval with conditions of the applicant's request to the Vail Town Council. A complete summary of our review is provided in Section VIII of this memorandum. 1 Attachment: C II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST 'The applicant, Crossroads East One, LLC, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, Ll_C, is requesting a recommendation from the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission to the Vail Town Council of a development application to establish Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, to allow for the redevelopment of the Crossroads site. The establishment of Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, is intended to facilitate the redevelopment of Crossroads, located at 141 and 143 Meadow Drive/Lot P, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1. A vicinity map has been attached for reference (Attachment A). The applicant is .proposing to remove the existing improvements on the site and construct a new structure and public plaza. According to the Official Town of Vail Zoning Map, the proposed development site is located in the Commercial Service Center (C:SC) zone district. As such, development on the site shall be governed by the regulations outlined in Article 7E, Commercial Service Center (CSC) District, Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code. The key elements of the proposal made since the Commission last saw the proposal on December 13, 2004, include: • The reduction of the number of dwelling units from 76 to 75 and the incorporation of eight (8) lock-offs. A proposed deviation from the allowable number of dwelling units (47) which is 28 dwelling units greater; • Proposed $1.1 Million in public art; • A reduction in the proposed Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA) from 219,000 square feet to 210,054 square feet. A proposed deviation from the allowable amount of GRFA (4fi,051 sq. ft.) which is 164,003 sq. ft. greater; • A reduction in the proposed building height at its peak from 107.5 feet to 99.9 feet with additional reductions in height ranging from 16 to 28 feet. The reduction of one floor plate of the building; • Provision for employee housing units located off-site to accommodate the net increase in employees generated by this redevelopment; • Elimination of setback encroachments along the west property line except for the one-story portion of the building containing the enclosed loading and delivery facility and other architectural changes to the west elevation. • The elimination of all subterranean encroachments into the Village Center Road and East Meadow Drive right-of-ways and the removal of subterranean improvements within a minimum of 10 feet of the west property line to preserve existing trees; • The establishment of the extension of the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan by creating a plan and installing streetscape improvements for the intersections of Meadow Drive and Village Center Road and Meadow Drive and Willow Bridge Road and the South Frontage Road; • 338 subsurface parking spaces (92 in excess of Town Code); • A 3 screen movie theater with stadium seating accessed at the pedestrian level of the proposed public plaza; • A 10 lane bowling alley and sports bar/night club/family arcade accessed at the pedestrian level of the proposed public plaza ; • An outdoor ice skating rink for public skating in winter/water-recreation feature (I>op- jet fountain) in the spring and summer months; 2 • A~ public plaza of 24,130 square feet at the intersection of Willow Bridge Road and Meadow Drive (Approximately 40,000 sq. ft. including East Meadow Drive and Willow Bridge Road public right-of-ways) for public gatherings and events; • Public restrooms at the pedestrian level and within the lower level of the parking garage; • The incorporation of a covered bus stop on the southwest corner of the building; • 61,596 square feet of new retail and restaurant space at the pedestrian level and one floor above surrounding the public plaza; • Potential reduction of skier parking from South Frontage Road on busy days by allowing use of Crossroads parking facility; • Establishment of an enclosed 5 berth loading and delivery facility with access from the South Frontage Road which will be made available for public use; • Reduction in the width of the building located at a zero setback in the southwest corner of the site from 52 feet to 44 feet along East Meadow Drive; • Changes to the architecture and height were made to the northwest and northeast portions of the building; • The addition of.a roof feature which wraps around the loading and delivery bay on the northwest corner. The addition of an awning on the west elevation over the pedestrian access proposed to connect the public plaza and Vail Village Inn Phase III; and • A greater detailed design for the two commercial floors of the project. Details of the design will be worked out with the Design Review Board. In conjunction with the requested establishment of a new SDD, the applicant is requesting a text amendment to the zoning regulations and multiple conditional use permits. The specifics of those requests are identified below: A request for a text amendment to Section 12-2-2, Definitions, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, to add a definition for "bowling alley". A request for a text amendment to Section 12-7E-4, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, to add bowling alley as a conditional use. Requests for conditional use permits to allow for the construction of an outdoor operation under the accessory uses as set forth in Section 12-7E-5 (ice skating rink/pop jet fountain); a major arcade to include indoor entertainment; a theater, meeting rooms, multiple-family dwellings and lodges; and a private club to allow for the establishment of a for sale parking club, pursuart to Section 12-7E-4, Vail Town Code. A reduced copy of the floor plans and elevations have been attached for reference (Attachment B). Pursuant to Section 12-9A-9, Development Standards, Vail Town Code, the applicant is requesting deviations from the prescribed development standards for building height, density (number of units), Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA), additional bulk and mass in required setbacks, site coverage, and landscape area. 3 III. BACKGROUND • This property was annexed into the Town of Vail by Court order on August 26, 1966, as a part of the Original Town of Vail. • The existing Crossroads was developed in the 1970's as a mixed use development which has changed little since. • The Crossroads property is one of three properties zoned Commercial Seniice Center. The other two properties are the Gateway Building and the WestStar Bank Building, both of which are Special Development Districts. • On September 7, 2004, the Town Council granted unanimous approval for the applicant to proceed through the development review process. Several memt~ers expressed concern over the extent of the encroachments into the right-of-way (all right-of-way encroachments have since been eliminated from the plans, with the exception of landscape/streetscape improvements). • On September 13, 2004, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a public work session with the applicant. At that meeting, the applicant gave a presentation which generally discussed the project goals and objectives. The Commission generally expressed support. However, it was identified that there were some issues to be resolved. • On October 6 and 20, 2004, the Design Review Board held a conceptual review meeting with the applicant. At that meeting, the applicant gave a presentation wl'~ich generally discussed the project goals and objectives. The Board generally expressed support for the project. However, it was identified that there were issues and concerns to be addressed regarding the materials and architecture. • On October 25, 2004, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a public work session with the applicant. At that meeting the applicant gave a presentation which generally discussed the project goals and objectives. The Commission generally expressed support for the project. However, it was identified by the Planning and Environmental Commission that there were issues to be resolved such as the height of the building along the western property line. Staff identified height in the southwest corner, landscaping, setback encroachments, right-of-vvay encroachments, mechanical venting, and the retail design as concerns. • On November 8, 2004, the Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed and tabled the proposal. In general, concerns were expressed about the scale of the structure and in particular the heights of the structure along the westem property line. Several members expressed satisfaction regarding the mix of uses and the ability of the retail and public space to create an activity center in the heart of Town. • On December 13, 2004, the Planning and Environmental Commission forwarded a recommendation of denial to the Town Council regarding the adoption of SDD IVo. 39. The Commission cited encroachments into setback, height, and the lack: of relationship in terms of bulk and mass of the proposed structure to surrounding buildings. • On January 18, 2005, the Town Council reviewed the application and identified concerns with bulk, mass, encroachments into the Town right-of-way, relationship to neighboring properties, height, and public benefits. • On February 1, 2005, the Town Council remanded the application for SDD No. 39 back to the Planning and Environmental Commission for review of an amencled application which addressed the issues identified by the DRB, PEC, and Town Council. 4 IV. ROLES OF REVIEWING BOARDS A. Special Development District Order of Review: Generally, applications will be reviewed first by the PEC for impacts of use/development, then by the DRB for compliance of proposed buildings and site planning, and final approval by the Town Council. Planning and Environmental Commission: The PEC shall. review the proposal for and make a recommendation to the Town Council based upon the findings made on the criteria located in Chapter 12-9A, Special Development District, Vail Town Code. Design Review Board: The DRB has no review authority on a SDD proposal, but must review any accompanying DRB application. The DRB review of an SDD prior to Town Council approval is purely advisory in nature. Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines. Staff provides a staff memo containing background on the property and provides a staff evaluation of the project with respect to the required criteria and findings, and a recommendation on approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Staff also facilitates the review process. Town Council: The Town Council takes into consideration the PEC's recommendation when reviewing an application for a special development district and is responsible for final approval/denial of an SDD. The Town Council shall review the proposal and approve/approve with conditions/deny the application based upon the findings made on the criteria located in Chapter 12-gA, Special Development District, Vail Town Code. B. Conditional Use Permit Order of Review: Generally, applications will be reviewed first by the PEC for acceptability of use and then by the DRB for compliance of proposed buildings and site planning. . Planning and Environmental Commission: The PEC is responsible for final approval/denial of CUP. The Commission's decision to approve/approve with conditions/deny a conditional use permit are based upon the criteria found in Chapter 12-16, Conditional Use Permits, Vail Town Code and conformance of the proposal with the zone district in which it is located. Design Review Board: The DRB has no review authority on a CUP, but must review any accompanying DRB application. Town Council: Actions of DRB or PEC maybe appealed to the Town Council or by the Town Council. l'own Council evaluates whether or not the PEC or DRB erred with approvals or denials and can uphold, uphold with modifications, or overturn the board's decision. Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided and plans conform to the technical requirements of the Zoning Regulations. The staff also advises the applicant as to compliance with the design guidelines. Staff provides a staff memo containing background on the property and provides a staff evaluation of the project with respect to the required criteria and findings, and a recommendation on approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Staff also facilitates the review process. C. Text Amendment Order of Review: Generally, applications will be reviewed first by the PEC for acceptability of use and then by the DRB for compliance of proposed buildings and site planning. Planning and Environmental Commission: The PEC shall review the proposal for and make a recommendation to the Town Council on the compatibility of the proposed text changes for consistency with the,Vail Comprehensive Plans and impact on the general welfare of the community. Design Review Board: The DRB has no review authority on code amendments. Staff: The staff is responsible for ensuring that all submittal requirements are provided. The staff advises the applicant as to compliance with the Zoning Regulations. Staff provides analyses and recommendations to the PEC and Town Council on any text proposal. Town Council: The Town Council shall review and approve the proposal based on the compatibility of the proposed text changes for consistency with the Vail Comprehensive Plans and impact on the general welfare of the community. V. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Vail Land Use Plan The Vail Land Use Plan was adopted by the Vail Town Council on November 18, 1986. The plan is intended to serve as a basis from which future decisions may be made regarding land use within the valley..The primary focus of the Vail Land Use Plan is to address the long-term needs and desires of the Town as it matures. 'The Town of Vail has evolved from a small ski resort founded in 1962 with approximately 190,000 annual skier visits and virtually no permanent residents to a community with 4,500 permanent residents. The Town is faced with the challenge of creatively accommodating the increase in permanent residency as well as the increase in skier visits, while preserving the important qualities that have made Vail successful. This is a considerable challenge, given the fact that land within the Valley is swell-defined finite resource, with much of the land already developed at this juncture. The Vail Land Use Plan was undertaken with the goal of addressing this challenge in mind. A secondary purpose of the Vail Land Use Plan was to analyze a series of properties owned by the Town of Vail, to determine their suitability for. various types of community facilities. The goals articulated in the plan reflect the desires of the citizenry. The goal statements that were developed reflect a general consensus of the comments shared at public meetings. The goals contained in the Vail Land Use Plan are to be used as the Town's adopted policy guidelines in the review process for new development proposals. Staff has reviewed the Vail Land Use Plan and the goal statements that staff believes are applicable appear Section VI II under staff's review of Criterion D. According to the Official Town of Vail Land Use Plan map, the applicant's proposed redevelopment site is located with the "Vail Village Master Plan"land use category. Pursuant to the Plan, the "Vail Village Master Plan"land use category description, "Vail Village has been designated separately as a mixed use area and accounts for 77 acres or about 2 % of the Plan area. This area has not been analyzed in this Plan document because the Vail Village Master Plan study addressed this area specifically in more detail." Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan The Town of Vail is in the process of preparing a revision to the adopted Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan. The original Master Plan is'an outgrowth of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan. The Guide Plan was created in 1982 to give guidance to the overall physical development for the Village. In addition to providing broad design guidelines, the Guide Plan suggested specific physical improvements for the Village. Improvements such as new plazas, new landscape area, etc. Along. with the construction of these public improvements included proposals to complete numerous private sector improvements. improvements such as building additions outdoor deck expansions, and fagade improvements. The Streetscape Master Plan was written in part to provide clear design direction for coordinated public/private improvements. According to the Master Plan, the purpose of the plan is to provide a comprehensive and coordinated conceptual design for streetscape improvements that: 1. is supported by the community; 2. enriches the aesthetic appearance of the Town; and 3. emphasizes the importance of craftsmanship and creative design in order to create an excellent pedestrian experience. Vail Village Master Plan The Vail Village Master Plan is based on the premise that the VillagE: can be planned and designed as a whole. It is intended to guide the Town in developing land use laws and policies for coordinating development by the public and private sectors in Vail Village and in implementing community goals for public improvements. It is intended to result in ordinances and policies that will preserve and improve the unified and attractive appear,~nce of Vail Village. Most importantly, this Master Plan shall serve as a guide to the staff, review boards, and Town Council in analyzing future proposals for development in Vail Village and in legislating effective ordinances to deal with such development. Furthermore, the M~~ster Plan provides a clearly stated set of goals and objectives outlining how the Village will I~row in the future. The Vail Village Master Plan is intended to be consistent with the Vail Village Urban De+sign Guide Plan, and along with the Guide Plan, it underscores the importance of the relationship between the built environment and public spaces. Goals for Vail Village are summarized in six major goal statements. W hile there is a certain amount of overlap between these six goals, each focuses on a particular aspect off the Village and the community as a whole. The goal statements are designed to establish a framework, or direction, for the future growth of the Village. A series of objectives outline specific steps that can betaken toward achieving each stated goal. Policy statements leave been developed to guide the Town's decision-making in achieving each of the stated objectives, whether it be through the review of private sector development proposals or in implementing capital improvement projects. The Vail Village Master Plan's objectives and policy statements address key issues rel~~tive to growth and development. These statements establish much of the context within which future development proposals are evaluated. In implementing the Plan, the objectives and policies are used i~ conjunction with a number of graphic planning elements that together comprise this Plan. While the objectives and policies establish a general framework, the graphic plans provide more specific direction regarding public improverents or developrent potential on a particular piece of property. The Vail Village Master Plan is intended to serve as a guide to the staff, review boards and Town Council in analyzing future proposals for development in Vail Village and in legisl~~ting effective ordinances to deal with such development. The most significant elements o~F the Master Plan are the goals, objectives, policies and action steps. They are the working tools of the Master Plan. They establish the broad framework and vision, but also layout: the specific policies and action steps that will be used to implement the Plan. As noted on page 35 of the Master Plan, "It is important to note that'the likelihood of project approval will be greatest for those proposals that can fully comply with the Vail Village Master Plan." Staff believes this statement re-emphasizes that the Master Plan is a general docurnent providing advisory guidelines to aid the Town in analyzing development proposals and that full compliance is not required in order for a project to be approved. The stated goals of the Vail Village Master Plan which staff believes are applicable to this 8 application appear in Section VIII under staffs assessment of Criterion D. Specific Sub- Area Details found in the Vail Village Master Plan Mixed Use Sub Area (#1) The Mixed-Use sub-area is a prominent activity center for Vail Village. It .is distinguished from the Village core by the larger scale buildings and by the limited auto traffic along East Meadow Drive. Comprised of true major development projects, this sub-area is characterized by a mixture of residential/lodging and commercial activity. There is a great deal of potential for improvements to both public and private facilities in the area. Among these is the opportunity to develop gateway entries to the Village at the 4-way stop and at the intersection of Vail Road and Meadow Drive. It is also a long term goal to strengthen the connection between this area and the Village core area byreinforcing the established pedestrian linkages. Pedestrianization in this area may benefit from the development of retail infill with associated pedestrian improvements along East Meadow Drive and the development of public access to Gore Creek. A significant increase in the Village's overnight bed base will occur in this sub-area with the development of the final phase of the Vail Village Inn project. In addition, commercial and residential/lodging development potential is identified in sub-area concepts 3, 4, 6, and 8. The completion of these projects will essentially leave the sub-area "built out" #1-6 Crossroads Infill Commercial infill over new underground parking lot in conjunction with a large public plaza with greenspace area (existing and new parking demand to be provided on site). While configuration ofin~ll maybe done a numberof ways, it is the overall intent to replace existing surface parking with pedestrian corridors into a commercial area, as well as to provide a strong building edge on Meadow Drive and streetscape improvements. Improvements of the planted buffer adjacent to the Frontage Road is also important. Relocation of the loading and delivery functions and entry to parking structure is strongly encouraged to reduce traffic on Meadow Drive. Potential fo improve fire access also exists in the redevelopment scheme. Special emphasis of 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 3.1, 4.1, 5.1, 6.1, and 6.2. 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. Objective 2.4: Encourage the development of a variety of new commercial activity where compatible with existing land uses. Policy 2.4.1: Commercial infill development consistent with established horizontal zoning regulations shall be encouraged to provide activitygenerators, accessible greenspaces, public plazas, and streetscape improvements to the pedestrian network throughout the Village. s Policy 2.4.2: Activity that provides night life and evE~ning entertainment for both the guest and the community shall be encouraged. Objective 2.5: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to better serve the needs of our guests. Policy 2.5.1: Recreation amenities, common areas, meeting facilities and other amenities shall be preserved and enhanced as a part of any redevelopment of loa'ging properties. Policy 2.5.2: The Town will use the maximum flexibility possible in the interpretation of building and fire codes in order to facilitate building renovations without compromising life, health, and safety considerations. Objective 2.6: Encourage the development of affordable housing units through the efforts of the private sector. Policy 2.6.1: Employee housing units may be required as part of any new or redeveloped project requesting density over that allowed by existing zoning. Policy 2.6.2: Employee housing shall be developed with appropriate restrictions so as to insure their availability and affordability to the local work force. Policy 2.6.3: The Town of Vail may facilitate in the development of affordable housing by providing limited assistance. Goal #3: To recognize as a top priority fhe enhancement of the wa6king experience throughout the Village. Objective 3.1: Physically improve the existing pedestrian ways by landscaping and other improvements. Policy 3.1.1: Private development projects shall incorporate streetscape improvements (such as paver treatments, landscaping, lighting and seating areas), along adjacent pedestrian ways. Policy 3.1.2: Public art shall be encouraged at appropriate locations throughout Town. Policy 3.1.3: Flowers, trees, water features, and other landscaping shall be encouraged throughout the Town in locations adjacent to, or visible from, public areas. 10 Goal #4: To preserve existing open space areas and expand greenspace opportunities. Objective 4.1: Improve existing open space areas and create new plazas with greenspaces and pocket parks. Recognize the different roles of each type pf open space in forming the overall fabric of the Village. Policy 4.1.1: Active recreation facilities shall lie preserved (or relocated to accessible locations elsewhere in the Village) in any development orredevelopment of propert.yin Vail Village. Policy 4.1.2: The development of new public plazas, and improvement to existing plazas (public art, streetscape features, seating areas, etc.), shall be strongly encouraged to reinforce their roles as atfractive people places. Policy 4.1.3: With the exception of ski base-related facilities, existing natural open space areas at the base of Vail Mountain and throughout Vail Village shall be preserved as open space. Policy 4.1.4: Open space improvements including the addition of accessible greenspace as described orgraphically shown in the Vail Village Master Plan and/or Urban Design Guide Plan, will be required in conjunction with private infill or redevelopment projects. Goal #5: Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency, and aesthetics ofthe transportation and circulation system throughout the Village. Objective 5.1: Meet parking demands with public and private parking facilities. Policy 5.1.1: ,For new development that is located outside the Commercial Core l Zone District, on-site parking shall be provided (rather than paying info the parking fund) to meet any additional parking demand as required by the zoning code. Policy 5.1.2: The expansion of the Vail Village parking structure shall maximize the number of additional parking spaces available for public parking. Policy 5.1.3: Seek locations for additional structured public and private parking. Policy 5.1.4: Continue to promote the lease parking program as a means for maximizing the utilization of private parking spaces. ~~ Policy 5.1.5: Redevelopment projects shall be strongly encouraged to provide underground or visually concE~a/ed parking. Goal #6: To ensure the continued improvement of the vital operational elements of the Village. Objective 6.1: Provide service and delivery facilities for existing and new development. Objective 6.2: Provide for the safe and efficient functions of fire, police and public utilities within the context of an aesthetically pleasing resort setting. Policy 6.2.1: Development projects and other improvements in Vail- Village shall be reviewed by respective 1"own Departments to identify both the impacts of the proposal and potential mitigating measures. Policy 6.2.2: Minor improvements (landscaping, decorative paving, open dining decks, etc.), maybe permitted on T own of Vail land orright-of--way (with review and approval by the Town Council and Planning and Environmental Commission when applicable) provided that Town operations such as snow removal, street maintenance and fire departrnent access and operation are able to be maintained at current levels. Special design (i.e. heated pavement), maintenance fees, or other considerations may be required to offset impacts on Town services. #1-7 Village Center Road Improvements Redesign of intersection as shown on the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan. Goal of this project is to create a visual landscape barrier to prevent unnecessary vehicular traffic. Bus, delivery and pedestrian traffic must also be accommodated in this design. Special emphasis on 3.1, 3.2, 5.3, 5.4. Goal #3: To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking experience throughout the Village. Objective 3.1: Physically improve the existing pedestrian ways by landscaping and other improvements. Policy 3.1.1: Private development projects shall incorporate streetscape improvements (such as paver treatments, landscaping, lighting and seating areas), along adjacent pedestrian ways. Policy 3.1.2: Public art shall be encouraged at appropriate locations throughout Town. 12 Policy 3.1.3: Flowers, trees, wafer features, and other landscaping shall be encouraged throughout the Town in locations adjacent to, or visible from, public areas. Objective 3.2: Minimize the amount of vehicular traffic in the Village to the greatest extent possible. Policy 3.2.1: Vehicular traffic will be eliminated or reduced to the absolute minimal necessary levels in the pedestrianized areas of the Village. Goal #5: Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency, and aesthetics of the transportation and circulation system throughout the Village. Objective 5.3: Concentrate the majority of interconnecting transit activity at the periphery of the Village to minimize vehicular traffic in pedestrianized areas. Policy 5.3.1: The Vail Transportation Center shall be the primary pick up and drop off point for public transit and private shuttle vans and taxis. Objective 5.4: Improve the streetscape of circulation corridors throughout the Village. Policy 5.4.1: The Town shall work with the Colorado Division of Highways toward the implementation of a landscaped boulevard and parkway along the South Frontage Road. Policy 5.4.2: Medians and right-of--ways shall be landscaped. Vail Village Design Considerations The Town of Vail adopted the Vail Village Design Considerations in 1980. The Design Considerations were revised in 1993. The Design Considerations are considered an integral part of the Vail Village Urban Design Plan. The Design Considerations are intended to: guide growth and change in ways that will enhance and preserve the essential qualities of the Village; and • serve as design guidelines instead of rigid rules of development; and • help influence the form and design of buildings. The Vail Village Design Considerations are divided into two categories (urban design considerations and architectural/landscape considerations): URBAN DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS These considerations relate to general, large-scale land use planning issues, as well as form considerations which affect more than one property or even 13 whole areas. These considerations are primarily the purview of the Planning and Environmental Commission. The considerations include focuses on pedestrianization, vehicle penetration, streetscape framework, street enclosure, street edge, building height, views and focal points, service and delivery, and sun/shade. The specifics of these considerations are addressed by staff in Section VIII under Criterion D. Town of Vail Zoning Regulations Staff has reviewed the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations (Title 12, Vail Town Code). We believe the following code sections are relevant to the review of the applicant's request: Article E. Commercial Service Center (CSC) District (in part) 12-7E-1: Purpose: The Commercial Service Center District is intended to provide sites for general shopping and commercial facilities serving the Town, together with limited multiple-family dwelling and lodge uses as may be appropriate without interfering with the basic commercial functions of the District. The Commercial Service Center District is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities appropriate to permitted types of buildings and uses, and to maintain a convenient shopping center environment for permitted commercial uses. 12-7E-3: Permitted Uses: The following uses shall be permitted in the CSC District: Banks anal financial institutions. Eating and drinking establishments, including the following: Bakeries and delicatessens with food service. Cocktail lounges, taverns, and bars. Coffee shops. Fountains and sandwich shops. Restaurants. Personal services and repair shops, including the following: Barbershops. Beauty shops. Business and office services. Cleaning and laundry pick up agencies without bulk cleaning or dyeing. Coin operated orself-service laundries. Small appliance repair shops, excluding furniture repair. Tailors and dressmakers. Travel and ticket agencies. Professional offices, business offices, and studios. Retail stores and establishments without limit as to floor area including the following: Apparel stores. Art supply stores and galleries. Bakeries and confectioneries, including preparation of products for sale on the premises. Bookstores. Building materials stores without outdoor storage. 14 Camera stores and photographic studios. Candy stores. Chinaware and glassware stores. Delicatessens and specialty food stores. Department and general merchandise sfores. Drugstores and pharmacies. Florists. Food stores. Furniture stores. Gift stores. Hardware sfores. Hobby stores. Household appliance stores. Jewelry stores. Leather goods stores. Liquor stores. Luggage stores. Music and record stores. Newsstands and tobacco stores. Pet shops. Photographic studios. Radio and television broadcasting studios. Radio and television stores and repair shops. Sporting goods stores. Stationery stores. Supermarkets. Toy stores. Variety stores. Yardage and dry goods stores. Additional offices, businesses, or services determined to be similar to permitted uses in accordance with the provisions of section 12-7E-2 of this article. 12-7E-4: Conditional Uses: The following conditional uses shall be permitted in fhe CSC district, subject to issuance of a conditional use permit in accordance with the provisions of chapter 16 of Phis title: Any use permitted by section 12-7E-3 of this article, which is not conducted entirely within a building. Bed and breakfast as further regulated by section 12-14-18 of Phis title, Brew pubs. Child daycare center. Commercial laundry and cleaning services. Dog kennel. Major arcade. Multiple-family dwellings and lodges. Outdoor operation of the accessory uses as set forth in section 12-7E-5 of this article. Private clubs. Public buildings, grounds and facilities. 15 Public park and recreation facilities. Public utility and public service uses. Ski lifts and tows. Theaters, meetings rooms, and convention facilities. Type 111 employee housing units (EHU) as provided in chapter 13 of this title. 12-7E-5: Accessory Uses: The following accessory uses shall be permitted in the CSC district: Home occupations, subject to issuance of a home occupation permit in accordance with the provisions of section 12-14-12 of this title. Minor arcade. Swimming pools, tennis courts, patios, or other recreation facilities customarily incidental to conditional residential or lodge uses. Other uses customarily incidental and accessory to permitted or conditional uses, and necessary for the operation thereof. 12-7E-7: Setbacks: In the CSC district, the minimum front setback shall be twenty feet (20), the minimum side setback shall be twenty feet (20), and the minimum rear setback shall be twenty feet (20'). 12-7E-8: Height: For a flat or mansard roof, the height of buildings shall not exceed thirty five feet (35). For a sloping roof, the height of buildings shall not exceed thirty eight feet (38'). 12-7E-9: Density Control: Not more than forty (40) square feet of gross residential floor area (GRFA) shall be permitted for each one hundred (100) square feet of buildable site area, and gross residential 1`/oor area shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of total building floor area on any site. Total density shall not exceed eighteen (18) dwelling units per acre of buildable site area. A dwelling unit in amultiple-family building may include one attached accommodation unit no larger than one-third (1/3) of the total floor area of the dwelling. 12-7E-10: Site Coverage: Site coverage shall not exceed seventy five percent (75%) of the total site area. 12-7E-11: Landscaping and Sife Development: At least twenty percent (20%) of the total site shall be landscaped. The minimum width and length of any area qualifying as landscaping shall be fifteen feet (15) with a minimum area not less than three hundred (300) square feet. 16 12-7E-12: Parking and Loading: Off-street parking and loading shall be provided in accordance with chapter 10 of this title. At least one-half (1/2) of the required parking shall be located within the main building or buildings. No parking or loading area shall be located in any required front setback area. 12-7E-13: Location of Business Actrivity: A. Limitations; Exception: All permitted and conditional uses by sections 12-7E-3 and 12- 7E-4 of Phis article, shall be operated and conducted entirely within a building except for permitted parking and loading areas and such activities as may be specifically authorized to be unenclosed by a conditional use permit and the outdoor display of goods. 8. Outdoor Display: The area fo be used for outdoor display must be located directly in front of the establishment displaying the goods and entirely upon the establishment's own property. Sidewalks, building entrances and exits, driveways and streets shall not be obstructed by outdoor display. Article 12-9A: Special Development (SDD) District (in part) Section 12-9A-1: Purpose: The purpose of the special development district is to encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land in order to promote its most appropriate use' to improve the design character and quality of the new development with the town; to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of streets and utilities; to preserve the natural and scenic features of open space areas: and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail comprehensive plan. An approved development plan for a special development district, in conjunction with the property's underlying zone district, shall establish the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included in the special development district. The special development district does not apply to and is not available in the following zone districts: Hillside residential, single-family, duplex, primary/secondary. The elements of the development plan shall be as outlined in section 12-9A-6 of Phis article. Chapter 12-16: Conditional Uses Permits (in part) Section 12-16-1: Purpose; Limitations In order to provide the flexibility necessary to achieve the objectives of this title, specified uses are permitted in certain districts subject to the granting of a conditional use permit. Because of their unusual or special characteristics, conditional uses require review so that they maybe located properly with respect to the purposes of this title and with respect to their effects on surrounding properties. The review process prescribed in this chapter is intended to assure compatibility and harmonious development between conditional uses and surrounding properties in the Town at large. Uses listed as conditional uses in the various districts may be permitted subject to such conditions and limitations as the Town may prescribe to insure that the location and operation of the conditional uses will be in accordance with the development objectives of the Town and will not be detrimental to other uses or properties. Where conditions cannot be devised, to achieve these objectives, applications for conditional use permits shall be denied. 17 VI. ZONING ANALYSIS According to the application information provided by the applicant, staff has performed an analysis of the proposal in relation to the requirements of the Vail Code. The deviations to the prescribed development standards are shown in bold text in the table below. Zoning: Commercial Service Center Land Use Plan Designation: Vail Village Master Plan Study Area (High Deinsity Residential/Mixed Use) Current Land Use: Mixed Use/Residential Development Standard Lot Area: Buildable Area: Setbacks: _ Front (Frontage Road): West Side: East Side: Front (Meadow Drive): Building Height: Density: GRFA: Site Coverage: Allowed Proposed 20,000 sq. ft. 115,129 sq. ft. (2.643 acres) 115,129 sq. ft. 20' 0' to 19' 20' 2' (loading dock) to 25' 20' 0' to 25' 20' 0' to 150' 38' 99.9 ft. 18 units/acre 28.4 units /acre 47.5 D.U.s 75 D.U.s 46,051.6 sq. ft. 210,054 sq. ft. (40%) (182%) 86,346.8 sq. ft. 107,772 sq. ft. (75%) (93.6%) Landscape Area: Total 23,025.8 sq. ft. 42,255 sq. ft. (20% total site) (36.7% total site) Minimum Softscape of total permitted 18,420.6 sq. ft. 14,898 sq. ft. (80%) (35.3%) Maximum Hardscape of total permitted 4,605.1 sq. ft. 27,357 sq. ft. (20%) (64.7%) Parking: 246 spaces 338 spaces (92 surplus spaces proposed to be in private parking club) BOLD indicates deviations from the prescribed development standards. . 18 VII. VIII SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING Land Use Zoning North: CDOT ROW None South: Mixed Use Commercial Core II District/Public Accommodation East: Public Parking General Use District West: Mixed Use SDD No. 6 THE SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ESTABLISHMENT AND REVIEW PROCESS Chapter 12-9 of the Town Code provides for the establishment of special development districts in the Town of Vail. According to Section 12-9A-1, the purpose of a special development district is, "To encourage flexibility and creativity in the development of land, in order to promote its most appropriate use; to improve the design character and quality of the new development within the Town; to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of streets and utilities; to preserve the natural and scenic features of open space areas; and to further the overall goals of the community as stated in the Vail Comprehensive Plan. An approved development plan for a Special Development District, in conjunction with the property's underlying zone district, shall establish the requirements for guiding development and uses of property included in the Special Development District." An approved development plan is the principal document in guiding the development, uses, and activities of the special development district. The development plan shall contain all relevant material and information necessary to establish the parameters to which the special development district shall adhere. The development plan may consist of, but not be limited to: the approved site plan; floor plans, building sections, and elevations: vicinity plan; parking plan; preliminary open space/landscape plan; densities; and permitted, conditional, and accessory uses. The determination of permitted, conditional and accessory uses shall be made by the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council as part of the formal review of the proposed development plan. Unless further restricted through the review of the proposed special development district, permitted, conditional and accessory uses shall be limited to those permitted, conditional and accessory uses in the property's underlying zone district. The Town Code provides nine design criteria which shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating the merits of the proposed special development district. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following standards, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or that a practical solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved. The following is a staff analysis of the project's compliance with the nine SDD review criteria: 19 A. Consideration of Factors Regarding Special Development Districts: A. Design compatibility and sensitivity to the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, identity, character, visual integrity and orientation. The Crossroads development site is located along the north. side of East Meadow Drive across from Village Center. An attached vicinity map has been provided for reference (Attachment A). The development site is adjoined on the north by the' South Frontage Road, on the east by Village Center Road and the Vail Village Parking Structure, on the soui:h by East Meadow Drive and Village Center, and to the west by Vail Village Inn Phase III. All of these surrounding properties have different zoning designations and thus must comply with differing development standards. Although .the neighboring properties must adhere to different zoning requirements, the buildings constructed on the neighboring properties are all two to seven story tall buildings. According to research of Town files, the surrounding properties have varying building heights. For instance, the new One W illow Bridge project (Swiss Chalet) will be 50 feet tall, and the Vail Village Inn Phase III varies in height from 68 feet along the Frontage Road to 25 feet along East Meadow Drive. The applicant is proposing heights of 93 feet (historic grade)/87.5 feet (finished grade) along the Frontage Road and 63.3 feet (historic grade:)/56 feet (finished grade) on the portion of the building located in the southwest corner oi` the property along East Meadow Drive. The proposed heights of the structure along the western property line range from 84 to 63 feet (historic grade)/79 feet to 56 feet (finished grade). The tallest point on the structure is 99.9 feet above historic grade on the southern end of~ the main ridge above the entry to the building. Since the January 18, 2005, Council meeting the applicant has reduced the proposed pitch of many of the roofs on the structure which had the effect of lowering many portions ot'the building by four (4) feet or more. In selected areas the reduction has been much greater, between 12 and 28 feet, as is the case along the. western property line. Please see the sheets provided in the attached plans which depict the lowering of the structure. Staff believes that the proposed height will set a new precedence as it will be taller than any building in Town. However, staff believes that the deviation in height is offset by the development potential lost by proposing a 24,130 square foot public plaza (Vail Village Master Plan recommends a public plaza in this location) and the other public benefits. In order to assess whether or not the deviations proposed by the project are outweighed by the benefits staff performed an analysis which took the area of the plaza and multiplied it by the allowable GRFA factor (40%). The allowable amount of GRFA was then multiplied by the Vail Village Master Plans maximum number pf stories (3-4 stories). Staff selected a factor of 3.5 stories to multiply the developable plaza area by as it was felt it was a reasonable expectation for the height of the structure which might be located in the location of the plaza. When the allowable GRFA is multiplied by the number of recommended developable number of stories this provides an approximate idea of the amount of GF;FA which could be constructed on the area being designated as public plaza. The next step was to subtract the amount of GRFA located within the setbacks and above the recommended maximum height in the Master plan of 78 feet on this portion of the site. Upon completion of this calculation it is found that the project is in excess of the amount of GRFA displaced by the proposed public plaza by approximately 121 square feet of GRFA. Therefore it is confirmed that the proposed public plaza has offset a majority of the 20 proposals GRFA encroachments of into setbacks and above the 78 foot height recommended in the Vail Village Master Plan. However, staff believes the deviation of 121 square feet in excess GRFA is outweighed by the proposed 5 berth loading and delivery facility which will be made available to the public, the two proposed public restrooms (870 s.f. total) and the installation of the complete streetscape improvements on Village Center Drive and East Meadow Drive. Area of Proposed Public Plaza: 24,130 s.f. CSC Allowable GRFA %: .40 Amount of GRFA: 9,652 s.f. Number of Developable Stories: x3.5 Square Footage of GRFA: 33,782 s.f. Amount of GRFA in Setbacks: -21,014 s.f. Remaining GRFA of Public Plaza: 12,768 s.f. Amount of GRFA on Floor 6: -12,889 s.f. Amount of GRFA in excess: -121 s.f. The computer model shows those portions of the Crossroads roof which exceed the heights granted at Four Seasons and Vail Plaza Hotel. Staff believes that the area of roof over the established heights of Vail Plaza Hotel and Four Seasons is offset by a combination of the public plaza, loading and delivery facility, public restrooms, and proposed streetscape improvements. In regard to setbacks the One Willow Bridge project varies between 0 feet (west end) and 20 feet. Setbacks along the east property line for Vail Village Inn Phase III vary between 15 and 55 feet. The proposed Crossroads development has setbacks along the north and east property lines which vary from one foot to 25 feet. Along the western property line the proposed Crossroads has aone-story enclosed loading facility which is within the required setback (3 feet off property line at closest location). Along East Meadow Drive the setbacks vary from 150 feet along the plaza to zero setback in the southeast and 4 feet in the southwest corners. Staff previously had concerns with the setback of the building along East Meadow Drive and the structure located in the southwest corner. Staff believed that it may be appropriate to have minimal setback along East Meadow Drive for several stories including a roof and then the structure would step back 15 to 20 feet before continuing up. The applicant has worked extensively on the portion of the structure located in the southwest portion of the site. The ridge is now 56 feet above grade which is six (6) feet taller than the actual height of the One W illow Bridge project from the grade of East Meadow Drive. The height of 56 feet (actual height above finished grade) is still located at a 4 foot setback from the property line for a distance of 44 feet along East Meadow Drive. The length of the structure along East Meadow Drive has been reduced from 52 feet to 44 feet. Staff and Jeff Winston believe that the height of 56 feet over a span of 44 feet is an acceptable design as it creates a "neck down effect" between to more open public spaces, the proposed Crossroads plaza and the Vail Village Inn plaza. To address the concerns of staff and the representatives of Vail Village Inn Phase III the proposal has been revised to remove all portions of the building located with the setback along the western property line with the exception of the enclosed loading and delivery facility which has access off of the South Frontage Road. The subterranean improvements along the western property line have been pulled back from the property line to be a minimum distance of 10 feet from the property line. The architectural design of the Crossroads development, like its neighbors, is governed by the design guidelines prescribed in Chapter 11, Design Review, of the Vail Town Code and 21 by the recommendations Vail Village Master Plan. As such, the architectural design of i:he proposed development is intended to be compatible with the unique European alpine vill2ige character prescribed for Vaii Village. The exterior design of the development is a mixturE: of stone, metal and wood. Many of the finer details have not been resolved in the two presentations made to the Design Review Board. Since the January 18, 2005, Town Council meeting the proposed project has undergone revision and refinement on 1'he architectural design of the structure. Both the staff and Jeff Winston agree that the applicant has made positive changes to the architecture and believe the overall architecture complies with the Town's guidelines. The concerns of staff and Jeff Winston are the use of large window systems especially in the upper portions of the structure, the appearance of panelized-type materials in some locations on the building, and the emphasis on the vertical verse the horizontal. Staff has addressed this project's conformance with the Urban Design Guidelines in Criteria D of this section. Staff believes the architecture of the structurE: is beginning to incorporate further "Bavarian" elements so as to fit in more harmoniously ~nrith the community. Staff believes that with additional work with the Design Review Board this project can fit into the overall architectural theme of Vail Village. The Vail Village Master Plan addresses the Crossroads development site throughout 'the Plan. In regard to building height, the Plan includes a conceptual map identifying potential heights of existing and future structures and states: "The building heights expressed on this Illustrative Plan are intended to provide general guidelines. Additional study should be made during specific project rev~~ew relative to a building's height impact on the streetscape and relationship to surrounding structures." The Plan identifies the northern portion of the Crossroads development site along the Frontage Road as being 5 to 6 stories in height and the southern portion as being 3 to 4 stories in height (the Plan identifies a story as being 9 feet in height and the Plan does not include roof structure). A copy of Conceptual Building Height Plan is attached for reference (Attachment C). Since the last hearing with the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Town Council staff has located the minutes of the adoption of the Lionshe:ad Redevelopment Master Plan in which the PEC had recognized a building story as being considered 11 feet 6 inches plus a roof. Most recently the Tivoli Lodge; identified as being 3 to 4 stories tall in the Plan, established SDD #37 in order to achieve a 56-foot height limitation. Although the Tivoli Lodge is not zoned Commercial Service Center, it is addressed within the Vail Village Master Plan. l~he Tivoli Lodge contended that the 48-foot limitation did not adequately address current hotel accommodation building trends. A 48-foot height limitation permits 9-foot floor to floor sections with an additional 12 feet for sloping roofs as recommended in the various town master plans (9' X 4 floors +12' = 48'). According to the applicants, the proposal leas achieved the heights of 99.9 feet at its highest point, down to 66 feet along East Meadow Drive as the floor plates they are proposing are 11 feet 6 inches from flaor to floor except: on the two retail portions of the building where the floor to floor height is 13 feet and 14 fE;et. The applicant states that consistent 11 foot 6 inch floor plates are due to the need to provide modern day living demands including air conditioning, 9-foot ceilings and flexibility in unit design. Furthermore, at this site there are the additional issues of I-70 traffic noise and exposure to the sun in this location. Once the units are dry-walled, the ceiling heights in the units will be 9 feet. In addition the applicant has proposed floor plates measuring 14 feet in height for the commercial levels to accommodate the additional height necessary to operate 22 a bowling alley's lane equipment and stadium seated theaters. The height of the floor plates in the residential levels and the added height necessary for the operation of a bowling alley and theaters explain the proposed heights on the building exceeding the recommended heights identified in the Vail Village Master Plan. Staff believes the height of the building in general is appropriate in relation to the uses proposed if the Commission agrees that an 11 foot 6 inch floor plate is appropriate for properties located within the scope of the Vail Village Master Plan. Staff has generally accepted an 11-foot floor-to-floor building plate on previous projects located within the scope of the Vail Village Master Plan such as the Tivoli Lodge and the Manor Vail Lodge (the PEC voted to adopt 11 foot 6 inch floor to floor in Lionshead as a part of the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan). In addition, it has .been previously determined that a roof structure is at an appropriate size when it is 12 feet from eave to ridge, as identified above. This particular project, according to the applicant, because of its proximity to the Interstate and large window areas (heat gain) will need to have climate control equipment which the two previous projects did not. If a floor-to-floor plate of 11 feet 6 inches and a 12-foot tall roof structure is acceptable the maximum height of structure, according to the Vail Village Master Plan should be 81 feet (11.5' X 6 stories + 12' = 81 feet) along the northern portion of the site and 58 feet (11.5' X 4 stories + 12' = 58) feet along the southern portion of the site. However, given the width of the proposed building forms and roof pitches, the proposed building will require more than 12 feet of roof height. B. Uses, activity and density which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. The uses, activities, and densities for the Crossroads development site are prescribed by the underlying zoning. According to the Official Town of Vail Zoning Map, the underlying zoning for the proposed special development district is Commercial Service Center zone district. The Commercial Service Center zone district encourages the development of commercial facilities serving the Town with limited multiple-family dwellings at a density of eighteen (18) dwelling units per acre. However, the Vail Village Master Plan, adopted in 1990, identifies the site as being approximately three quarters medium/high density residential and one quarter mixed use. See attached copy of the Land Use Plan from the Vail Village Master Plan (Attachment D). The proposal is to construct permitted uses such retail shops, restaurants and bars, offices, on-site accessory uses such as the ice skating rink, and conditional uses such as a major arcade, bowling alley, movie theaters, 75 multiple-family dwelling units, and a private parking club. The applicant has requested the appropriate conditional use permits which will be addressed in later sections of this memorandum. The applicant has suggested that the proposed bowling alley, 3 screen theater, and sports bar /arcade activity center are public amenities as they bring life and vitality to the Town. In previous memorandums to the Commission, staff identified that the uses will likely fill a niche which is missing in Town. The proposed application has two levels of at-grade or above-grade retail surrounding the proposed plaza. Staff has expressed concerns in previous meetings regarding the continuous arc shaped frontage of the retail. Staff's concerns were two-fold; first, does such a design lure visitors and locals to shop in the environment and; second, the geometric properties of an arc will not allow for material changes to the facade's of the individual tenant 'spaces. The Design Review Board in their meetings had also expressed a concern about the limited ability to individualize a tenant space store front. In response to the concern 23 expressed by staff, the Design Review Board, the Planning and Environmental Commission, and Town Council the applicant has brought additional staff onto their team to address'~ihe commercial experience. Since the last meeting the applicant has prepared several drawings which exhibit how the retail storefronts could be individualized. The staff and Jeff Winstton believe the changes made by the applicant were a tremendous step in alleviating our concerns regarding the design. However, staff, Jeff Winston, and the applicant believe fihat working with the Design Review Board will produce a functional and active design for'Ihe retail levels. The above criterion specifically identifies the proposed density of a project as needing to be compatible with surrounding properties. This property is restricted to 18 dwelling units/acre per the underlying zoning. The applicant is proposing a density of 28.4 dwelling units/acre with 210,054 square feet of GRFA. The neighboring property to the south, the One Willow Bridge/Sonnenalp Hotel development, is limited to 25 dwelling units/acre, which the new development has proposed 8 dwelling units for a density of 2.9 dwelling units/acre arith 135,184 square feet of GRFA. One Willow Bridge/Sonnenalp Hotel was substanti;~lly accommodation units (123. units) and fractional fee units (14 units) which do not count . towards density. The adjacent property to the west, Vail Village Inn Phase III (SDD #6), is limited to 25 dwelling units/acre with the underlying zoning. In the Ordinance adopting SDD #6 it is not clear the number of dwelling units allowed, however, it identifies a minimurrr of 148 accommodation units and 64,267 square feet of GRFA shall be located in Phase I~~ of the project, however the overall project has a much greater density. As can be seen the proposed Crossroads project has a greater density than the constructed or propo:~ed neighboring properties and more GRFA. Staff believes the proposed Crossroads redevelopment complies with this portion of the criterion as the proposed public benefits outweigh all deviations proposed. Employee Housing Requirements As indicated in a number of the goals and objectives of the Town's Master Plans, providing affordable housing for employees is a critical issue which should be addressed through the planning process for special development district proposals. In reviewing the proposal for employee housing needs, staff relied on the Town of Vail Employee Housing Report. This report has been used by the staff in the past to evaluate employee housing needs. l"he guidelines contained within the report were used most recently in the review of the Austria Haus, Marriott, Four Seasons, Manor Vail Lodge, and Special Development District No. 6 - Vail Village Inn development proposals. The Employee Housing Report was prepared for the Town by the consulting firm Ro~~all, Remmen and Cares. The report provides the recommended ranges of employee housing units needed based on the type of use and the amount of floor area dedicated to each use. Utilizing the guidelines prescribed in the Employee Housing Report, staff analyzed the incremental increase of employees (square footage per use) that results from the redevelopment. The figures identified in the report are based on surveys of the commercial-use employment needs of the Town of Vail and other mountain resort communities. As of the drafting of the report, Telluride, Aspen and Whistler, B.C. had "employment generation" ordinances requiring developers to provide affordable housing for a percentage of the new employees 24 resulting from commercial development. "New" employees are defined as the incremental increase in employment needs resulting from commercial redevelopment. Each of the communities assesses a different percentage of affordable housing a developer must provide for the new employees. For example, Telluride requires developers to provide housing for 40% (0.40) of the new employees, Aspen requires that 60% (0.60) of the new employees are provided housing, and Whistler requires that 100% (1.00) of the new employees be provided housing by the developer. In comparison, Vail has conservatively determined that developers shall provide housing for 15% (0.15) or 30% (0.30) of the new employees resulting from commercial development. When a project is proposed to exceed the density allowed by the underlying zone district, the 30% (0.30) figure is used in the calculation. If a project is proposed at, or below, the density allowed by the underlying zone district, the 15% (0:15) figure is used. The Crossroads special development district does exceed the density permitted by the underlying zone district in both number of dwelling units and GRFA so the 30% ratio was used. Proposed Project Employee Generation Calculations -Middle of Range a) Multi-Family (Dwelling Units) 75 new units proposed @ (0.4/unit) = 30.0 employees b) Retail and Service Commercial 45,000 sq. ft. @ (5.0/1000 sq. ft.) = 225.0 employees c) Bar/Restaurant/Arcade/Theater/Bowling 13,000 sq. ft. @ (5.0/1000 sq. ft.) = 65.0 employees 320.0 employees Existing Crossroads Project Employee Generation Calculations -Middle of Range a) Multi-Familiy (Dwelling Units) 22 units existing @ (0.4/unit) = 8.8 employees b) c) d) e) Retail and Service Commercial 22,116 sq. ft. @ (5.0/1000 sq. ft.) Office: Professional/Other 20,000 sq. ft. @ (5.0/1000 sq. ft.) Bar/Restaurant/Night ClublTheater 13,550 sq. ft. @ (5.0/1000 sq. ft.) Bank 2,750 sq. ft. @ (2.5/000 sq. ft.) = 110.58 employees = 100.0 employees = 67.75 employees = 6.88 employees 25 f) Grocery 6,240 sq. ft. @ (1.5/1000 sq. ft.) = 9.36 employees 303.37 employees 320.00 new employees - 303.37 exisitinq employees 16.63 net new employees x.30 4.99 required # beds. According to the calculations above, the applicant must establish 5 new deed-restricted employee beds ("pillows"). The applicants are proposing to provide the required de~sd- restricted employee housing units off-site through the purchase of units throughout Town or through spay-in-lieu program if it established by the Town prior to requesting a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy. The applicant will deed restrict the units under the appropriate deed restrictions depending upon which zone district the property is located within the community under the appropriate review process. In the previous meeting the Commission asked for greater detail on how a "bed" will be defined in regards to the deed restricting of units. For example if the applicant purchased a structure containing three bedrooms This could potentially count as six employee "beds". As expressed by the Commission a unil as described previously may likely be rented by a family and would still count as six emplo~iee beds. Staff recommends that the developer submit to staff, prior to issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Occupancy, the location of the units proposed to be deed restricted along with the appropriate review application which is applicable or remit payment in funds commensurate with any adopted pay-in-lieu program. Please see 'the applicant's employee housing unit proposal which is attached for reference (Attachment E). Staff believes that the proposal does comply with this portion of the criterion. C. Compliance with parking and loading requirements as outlined in Chapter 12-1 (I of the Vail Town Code. As indicated in the Zoning Analysis outlined in Section VI of this memorandum, the total number of required parking spaces for the Crossroads project is 246 spaces. l'he applicants are proposing to provide a total of 338 spaces, all of which are to be provided in the underground parking structure. The 92 additional parking spaces proposed to be constructed above and beyond that which is required are proposed to be placed in a private parking club. The proposed subterranean parking structure permits a public plaza on the surface which contains a proposed ice skating rink. In order to establish a private parking club offering parking spaces, the Town Code requires the review and approval of a conditional use permit by the Commission. The applicant is proposing to establish a 92 stall private parking club. Staff addresses the criteria for the establishment of a private parking club later in this section. The applicant is proposing to utilize all of the 92 surplus parking space s in a private parking club in which participants would lease a space or potentially purchase if the applicant 26 chooses to condominiumize the spaces. The applicant desires to maintain ownership of the parking spaces to avoid not having enough parking for the retail, restaurant, and office uses if the project becomes as successful as anticipated. There is a possibility that as various tenants begin to design and occupy their spaces that additional surplus parking may become available. When calculating the required parking staff and the applicant were conservative in estimating what percentage of retail and restaurant spaces will become areas not assessed parking. An analysis will need to be run as each tenant goes in for building permit and as tenants change out in the future. The applicant can return before the Commission at a later date if additional surplus parking is created based on tenant make-up to amend the conditional use permit. Staff recommends that the developer be permitted to establish a 92 parking space private club. The applicant has proposed a five berth loading and delivery facility which is the maximum required for this project. The proposed facility will be accessed off of the Frontage Road and made available to neighboring properties for their loading and delivery needs as well. The proposed loading and delivery facility is entirely enclosed and large vehicles can make all turning movements inside the structure. The applicant and the staff agree that the location, configuration, and public use of the loading facility are a public benefit to the Town as it reduces conflicts with pedestrians, reduces impacts due to being enclosed, and its availability to the public for use. Staff recommends that through the Developer Improvement Agreement the developer enter into an agreement with the Town to include'the loading and delivery facility in the overall loading and delivery system for the Town of Vail. Staff believes that the application complies with this criterion. D. Conformity with the applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan, Town policies and Urban Design Plan. The goals contained in the Vail Land Use Plan are to be used as the Town's policy guidelines during the review process for the establishment of a special development district. Staff has reviewed the Vail Land Use Plan and believes the following policies are relevant to the review of this proposal: 1.0 General Growth/Development 1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve both the visitor and the permanent resident. 1.2 The quality of the environment including air, water and other natural resources should be protected as the Town grows. 1.3 The quality of development should be maintained and upgraded whenever possible. 1.12 Vail should accommodate most of the additional growth in existing developed areas (infill areas). 2.0 Skier/Tourist Concerns 27 2.1 The community should emphasize its role as a destination resort while accommodating day skiers. 2.2 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders should work together closely to make existing facilities and the Town function more efficiently. 2.3 The ski area owner, the business community and the Town leaders should work together to improve facilities for day skiers. 2.4 The community should improve summer recreational and cultural opportunities to encourage summer tourism. 3.0 Commercial 3.1 The hotel bed base should be preserved and used more efficiently. 3.2 The Village and Lionshead areas are the best location for hotels to serve the future needs of the destination skiers. 3.3 Hotels are important to the continued success of the Town of Vail, therefore conversion to condominiums should be discouraged. 3.4 Commercial growth should be concentrated in existing commercial areas to accommodate both local and visitor needs. 4.0 Village Core /Lionshead 4.1 Future commercial development should continue to occur primarily in existing commercial areas. Future commercial development iri the Core areas needs to be carefully controlled to facilitate access and delivery. 4.2 Increased density in the Core areas is acceptable so long a~; the existing character of each area is preserved thorough implement~~tion of the Urban Design Guide Plan. 4.3 The ambiance of Vail Village is important to the identity of Vail and should be preserved. (scale, alpine character, small town feeling, mountains, natural setting, intimate size, cosmopolitan feeling, environmental quality:) 5.0 Residential 5.1 Additional residential growth should continue to occur primarily in existing, platted areas and as appropriate in new areas where high hazards do not exist. 5.3 Affordable employee housing should be made available through private efforts, assisted by limited incentives, provided by the Town of 2s Vail with appropriate restrictions. 5.4 Residential growth should keep pace with the marketplace demands for a full range of housing types. 5.5 The existing employee housing base should be preserved and upgraded. Additional employee housing needs should be accommodated at varied sites throughout the community. According to the Official Town of Vail Land Use Ptan map, the applicants proposed redevelopment site is located with the "Vail Village Master Plan"land use category. Pursuant to the Plan, the "Vail Village Master Plan"land use category description, "Vail Village has been .designated separately as a mixed use area and accounts for 77 acres or about 2% of the Plan area. This area has not been analyzed in this Plan document because the Vail Village Master Plan study addressed this area specifically in more detail." Staff believes that the application complies with the goals and objectives identified above. Vail Village Master Plan Staff believes that the following stated goals of the Vail Village Master Plan are applicable to this application: Goal #2: To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year-around economic healfh and viability for the Village and for the community as a whole. Objective 2.4: Encourage the development of a variety of new commercial activity where compatible with existing land uses. Policy 2.4.1: Commercial infill development consistent with established horizontal zoning regulations shall be encouraged to provide activitygenerators, accessible greenspaces, public plazas, and streetscape improvements to the pedestrian network throughout the Village. Policy 2.4.2: Activity that provides night life and everiing entertainment for both the guest and the community shall be encouraged. Objective 2.5: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to better serve the needs of our guests. Policy 2.5.1: Recreation amenities, common areas, meeting facilities and other amenities. shall be preserved and enhanced as a part of any redevelopment of lodging properties. Policy 2.5.2: The Town will use the maximum flexibility possible in the interpretation of building and fire codes in order to facilitate building renovations without compromising 29 life, health, and safety considerations. Objective 2.6: Encourage the development of affordable housing units through the efforts of the private sector. Policy 2.6.1: Employee housing units may be required as part of any new or redeveloped project requesting den;city over that allowed by existing zoning. Policy 2.6.2: Employee housing shall be developed u~iith appropriate restrictions so as to insure their availability rind affordability to the local work force. Policy 2.6.3: The Town of Vail may facilitate in the development of affordable housing by providing limited assistance. Goal #3: To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking experience throughout the Village. Objective 3.1: Physically improve the existing pedestrian ways by landscaping and other improvements. Policy 3.1.1: Private development projects shall incorporate streetscape improvements (such as paver treatme-~ts, landscaping, lighting and seating areas), along adjacent pedestrian ways. Policy 3.1.2: Public art shall be encouraged at appropriate locations throughout Town. Policy 3.1.3: Flowers, trees, water features, and other landscaping shall be encouraged throughout the Towrt in locations adjacent to, or visible from, public areas. Goal #4: To preserve existing open space areas and expand greenspace opportunities. Objective 4.1: Improve existing open space areas and create r-ew plazas with greenspaces and pocket parks. Recognize the different roles of each type pf open space in forming the overall fabric of the Village. Policy 4.1.1: Active recreation facilities shall be preservecl (or relocated to accessible locations elsewhere in the VillagEa) in any development or redevelopment of p-operty in Vail Vill~~ge. Policy 4.1.2: The development of new public plazas, and improvement to existing plazas (public art, streetscape features, seating areas, etc.), shall be strongly encouraged to 30 reinforce their roles as attractive people places. Policy 4.1.3: With the exception of ski base-related facilities, existing natural open space areas at the base of Vail Mountain and throughout Vail Village shall be preserved as open space. Policy 4.1.4: Open space improvements including the .addition of accessible greenspace as described or graphically shown in the Vail Village Master Plan and/or Urban Design Guide Plan, will be required in conjunction with private infill or redevelopment projects. Goal #5: Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency, and aesthetics of the transportation and circulation sysfem throughout the Village. Objective 5.1: Meet parking demands with public and private parking facilities. Policy 5.1.1: For new development that is located outside the Commercial Core 1 Zone District, on-site parking shall be provided (rather than paying into the parking fund) to meet any additional parking demand as required by the zoning code. Policy 5.1.2: The expansion of the .Vail Village parking structure shall maximize the number of additional parking spaces available for public parking. Policy 5.1.3: Seek locations for additional structured public and private parking. Policy 5.1.4: Continue to promote the lease parking program as a means for maximizing the utilization of private parking spaces. Policy 5.1.5: Redevelopment projects shall be strongly encouraged to provide underground or visually concealed parking. Objective 5.3: Concentrate the majority of interconnecting transit activity at the periphery of the Village to minimize vehicular traffic in pedestrianized areas. Policy 5.3.1: The Vail Transportation Center shall be the primary pick up and drop off point for public transit and private shuttle vans and taxis. Objective 5.4: Improve the streetscape of circulation corridors throughout the Village. 31 Policy 5.4.1: The Town shall work with the Colorado Division of Highways toward the implementation of a landscaped boulevard and parkway along the South Frontage Road. Policy 5.4.2: Medians and right-of--ways shall be landscaped. Goal #6: To ensure the continued improvement of the vital operational elements of the Village. Objective 6.1: Provide service and delivery facilities for existing and new development. Objective 6.2: Provide for the safe and efficient functions of fire, police and public utilities within the context of an aesthetic;ally pleasing resort setting. Policy 6.2.1: Development projects and otherimprovements in Vail Village shall be reviewed by respective Town Departments to identify both the impacfs of the proposal and potential mitigating measures. Policy 6.2.2: Minor improvements (landscaping, decor~~tive paving, open dining decks, etc.), maybe permitted on Town of Vail land or right-of--way (with review and approval by the Town Council and Planning and Environmental Commission when applicable) provided that Town operations such as snow removal, street maintenance and fire departrnent access and operation are able to be maintained at current levels. Special design (i.e. heated pavement), maintenance fees, or other considerations may be required to offset .impacts on Town services. Staff believes that the application complies with all of the goals, objectives, and policies identified above. Previously staff expressed that the proposal needed to address Objective 2.3. The proposal now includes a total of eight (8) lock-off units to increase the likelihood that the project will have a greater occupancy rate. The applicant has submitted a rental program to increase the likelihood of owners placing their units into a rental fool (Attachment F). Staff believes the applicant has made great progress in the architectural design and believes that through the Design Review process the architecture care be resolved. Staff, in previous memorandums, expressed concerns at~out the scale of the structure and its relationship to neighboring properties. Through the use of the computer model staff believes that the revised proposal will now be at an appropriate scale to neighboring properties, Four Seasons, and Vail Plaza Hotel. While it is true that this proposal will set a new precedence for height (99.9 feet) staff believes that the height and other deviations are offset by the combination of benefits such as the public pl~~za, streetscape, and incorporation of the loading and delivery facility in the overall loading and delivery system for the Town. Staff under Criterion A addresses the benefits and reasoning behind staff's belief that the new precedence for height has been offset by various elements of the proposal 32 Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan The Town's Streetscape Master Plan does identify East Meadow Drive and Village Center Road within the East Meadow Drive -Willow Bridge Road to Vail Valley Drive portion of the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan. The Plan identifies the following problems with the existing conditions within this sub-area: • The need to separate buses from pedestrians; • The need to provide a more comfortable shopping experience; • The need to restrict unnecessary vehicular traffic; • The need to maintain access to existing lodge units; and • The need to screen parking and accommodate loading and delivery vehicles. The Plan also identifies several key elements, landscaping, and site amenities for the East Meadow Drive -Willow Bridge Road to Vail Valley Drive sub-area which include: The asphalt road surface would be replaced by concrete unit pavers in most areas where pedestrians share the street with vehicles. IN the restricted access zone south of the Village parking structure, the pedestrian path would be paved with concrete unit pavers. However, the bus lane would remain asphalt. Additionally,~the Willow Bridge Road street surface, from the north side of Willow Bridge to the intersection of East Meadow Drive, would also remain asphalt. • Replacing the triangular planter at the intersection of Easf Meadow Drive and Willow Bridge Road with a larger circular planter that is centered in the intersection. In addition, the intersection will be accented with a special paving treatment and will act as a focal point. • Village Center Road would be narrowed to a minimum width of 28' (curb-to- curb) to discourage unnecessary traffic. Fix to six foot wide concrete sidewalks on each side of the street are planned to connect East Meadow Drive to the Frontage Road. • The railroad-tie planters along the parking lots for Crossroads and the Sonnenalp-Swiss House should be replaced with at-grade planting beds, similar to the planting beds along the south side of East Meadow Drive near the Vail Village Inn. • Landscaping is needed along Village Center Road, especially near the Frontage Road, so as to further inhibit vehicular traffic into the pedestrianized areas. • Landscaping, benches and a trash receptacle should be placed at the Crossroad's bus stop as shown on the Master Plan graphic. • Expanding the planter on the south side of the intersection of Village Center Road and East Meadow Drive has been suggested. This would provide better definition to the roadway as well as increasing the landscaped area. 33 Staff believes the proposal meets the requirements of the Streetscape Master Pl;~n. Previously staff identified that there was a lack of landscaping within the proposed public plaza to replace the "at-grade planting beds" identified by the Plan to replace i:he railroad-tie beds. The proposal has been revised to incorporate multiple landscapiing beds. Staff believes that the proposal complies with the recommendations of the ~~ail Village Master Plan East Meadow Drive -Willow Bridge Road to Vail Valley Drive sub- area. Staff would recommend that the applicant work to implement those portions of 11he Streetscape master which address the intersection of Village Center Drive and East Meadow Drive by working with the property owner of Village Center. Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations Portions of the Crossroads development site fall within the prevue of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations 1. URBAN DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS These considerations relate to general, large-scale land use planning issues, as well as form considerations which affect more than one property or even whole areas. These considerations are primarily-the purview of the Planning arid Environmental Commission. A. PEDESTRIANIZATION A major objective for Vail Village is to encourage pedestrian circulation through an interconnected network of safe, pleasant pedestrian ways. M<~ny of the improvements recognized in the Urban Design Guide Plans, rind accompanying Design Considerations, are to reinforce and expand 'the quality of pedestrian walkways throughout the Village. Since vehicular traffic cannot be removed from certain streets (bus routes, delivery access), a totally care-free pedestrian systern is not achievable throughout the entire Village. Therefore, several levels of pedestrianization have been identified. Staff Response: The Crossroads development site is bordered by East Meadow Drive on 'the south and Village Center Road to the east. Both East Meadow Drive ~~nd Village Center Road are designated as streets intended to accommodate pedestrian and vehicle traffic. East Meadow Drive is also a designated Tawn of Vail bus route. The applicants are proposing to implement the recommendations of the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan. According to the Plan, the Crossroads development site is located in the East Meadow Drive -.Willow Bridge Road to Vail Valley Drive Sub Area. The details of the goals in i:his sub area are identified earlier in this section. The primary goal of the East Meadow Drive -Willow Bridge Road to Vail Valley Drive Sub Area i:> to provide an effective and safe pedestrian system, while accommodai:ing vehicle and bicycle traffic. 34 The applicant has proposed to install pavers and heat tubing in the right-of- way of Village Center Road and East Meadow Drive. The proposed heat tubing could eventually be connected to the Town's boilers in the parking structure or elsewhere in the area. The applicant has proposed the narrowing of Village Center Road as the Streetscape Master Plan identified to discourage vehicular traffic and make the pedestrian more pleasant and safer. In addition, the applicant has proposed a large plaza with an ice skating ring located within it which would be coordinated in design with the intersection of East Meadow Drive and Willow Bridge Road. The proposed plaza would be heated as well and connected to boilers in the Crossroads development. As identified earlier in this section the applicant has proposed a portion of the building in the southwest corner to be at a 4 foot setback with an actual height of 56 feet. Staff believes this feature will serve an important purpose in the pedestrian feel of the streetscape by providing a "pinch point" between the proposed plaza and the plaza created by Vail Village Inn and the Sonnenalp. Staff believes that the proposed application does comply with this criterion. B. VEHICLE PENETRATION To maximize to the extent possible, all non-resident traffic should be routed along the Frontage Road to Vail Village/Lionshead Parking Structures. In conjunction with pedestrianization objectives, major emphasis is focused upon reducing auto penetration into the center of the Village. Vail Road and Vail Valley Drive will continue to serve as major routes for service and resident access to the Village. Road constrictions, traffic circles, signage, and other measures are indicated in the Guide Plans to visually and physically discourage all but essential vehicle penetration upon the Frontage Road. Alternative access points and private parking relocation, where feasible, should be considered to further reduce traffic conflicts in the Village. Staff Response: The Crossroads development has proposed a 5 berth loading and delivery facility with access from South Frontage Road. The applicant has stated that they are willing to participate in the overall loading and delivery scheme of the Village. All vehicles utilizing the Crossroads development will park in a subterranean structure which has access off of the narrowecl Village Center Road. The proposal includes several items which will help make East Meadow Drive and Willow Bridge Road more pedestrian friendly such as paver colors and treatments and narrowed roads. Neither street is intended to be pedestrian-only. Staff believes that the proposed application complies with this criterion. 35 C. STREETSCAPE FRAMEWORK To improve. the quality of the walking experience and give continuity t~~ the pedestrian ways, as a continuous system, two general types of improvements adjacent to the walkways are considered: 1. Open space and landscaping, berms, grass, flowers and tree planting as a soft, colorful framework linkage along pedestrian routes; and plaza:> and park greenspaces as open nodes and focal points along those routes. 2. Infill commercial storefronts, expansion of existing buildings, or new infill development to create new commercial activity generators to give streetlife and visual interest, as attractions at key locations along pedestrian routes. It is not intended to enclose all Village streets with buildings as in the core areas. Nor is it desirable to leave pedestrian streets in the open in somewhat undefined condition evident in many other areas of Vail. Rather, it is desired to have a variety of open and enclosed spaces, both built and landscaped, which create a strong framework for pedestrian walks, as well as visual interest and activity. Staff Response: The applicants are proposing to improve and enhance the streetscape framework along Village Center Road and East Meadow Drive. To this end, a plan has been proposed that incorporates narrowed streets, pavers with differing colors and patterns and a large plaza within .the proposed development. Staff believes the proposed plaza could be very positive for the community. Since the January 18, 2005, Town Council meeting the proposal for the public plaza has been improved greatly. The incorpor~~tion of additional plating beds and other features within the plaza have teen provided to address the items identified in the criterion above. The appliicant as also proposed to install heated sidewalks along the perimeter of the site. Staff believes that the proposed application complies with this criterion. D. STREET ENCLOSURE While building facade heights should not be uniform from building to building, they should provide a "comfortable" enclosure for the street. Pedestrian streets are outdoor rooms, whose walls are formed by the buildings. The shape and feel of these "rooms" are created by the variety of heights and massing (3-dimensional variations), which .give much o1= the visual interest and pedestrian scale unique to Vail. Very general rules, about the perception of exterior spaces have been developed by designers, b<~sed on the characteristics of human vision. They suggest that: "an external enclosure is most comfortable when its walls are approximately 1 /2 as high as the width of the space enclosed; if the ratio falls to 1/4 or less, the space seems unenclosed; and if the height is greater than the width it comes to resemble a canyon". 36 In actual application, facades are seldom uniform in height on both sides of the street, nor is this desired. Thus, some latitude is appropriate in the application of this 1/2 to 1 ratio. Using the average facade height on both sides will generally still be a guide to the comfortableness of the enclosure being created. In some instances, the "canyon" effect is acceptable and even desirable. For example, as a short connecting linkage between larger :spaces, to give variety to the walking experience. For sun/shade reasons it is often advantageous to orient any longer segments in anorth/south direction. Long canyon streets in an east/west direction should generally be discouraged. When exceptions to the general height criteria occur, special consideration should be given to create awell-defined ground floor pedestrian emphasis to overcome the "canyon" effect. Canopies, awnings, arcades and building extensions c~~n all create a pedestrian focus and divert attention from the upper building heights and "canyon" effect. Staff Response: The configuration of the Crossroads development site and the desire to create a large plaza in the interior largely dictates the orientation of the building and the impacts that result regarding street enclosure. The two street facades of the building are articulated and varied, horizontally and vertically, along the lengths of the building. The applicant has chosen to utilize an 11foot 6 inch floor plate which has the net effect. of this building being taller. Staff and the applicant have worked together to address the relationship of this proposal to neighboring properties. Compatibility with adjacent buildings has been accomplished by reducing the pitch of the roof, removing a floor in the building in several locations, changes to the northeast and northwest corners of the building, and the addition of roof features along the western facade. Staff believes that the application complies with this criterion. E. STREET EDGE Buildings in the Village core should form a strong but irregular edge to the street. Unlike many American towns, there are no standard setbark requirements for buildings in Vail Village. Consistent with the desire for intimate pedestrian scale, placement of portions of a building at or near the property line is allowed and encouraged to give strong definition to the pecestrian streets. This is not to imply continuous building frontage along the property line. A strong street edge is important for continuity, but perfectly aligned facades over too long a distance tends to be monotonous. V1~~ith only a few exceptions in the Village, slightly irregular facade lines, building jogs, and landscaped areas, give the life to the street and visual interest for pedestrian 37 travel. Where buildingsjog to create activity pockets, otherelements can be usE;d to continue the street edge: low planter walls, tree planting, raised sidew~~lks, texture changes in ground surface, arcades, raised decks. Plazas, patios, and green areas are important focal points for gathering, resting, orienting and should be distributed throughout the Village with due consideration to spacing, sun access, opportunities forviews and.pedestrian activity. Staff Response: The Crossroads proposal, as stated previously, includes a large plaza which opens up the pedestrian area at the intersection of Willow Bridge Road and East Meadow Drive. It has been stated by the applicant that it is the intention to make the plaza available to the public and Town for events such as "S1lreet Beat" concerts. Staff believes that the plaza is a great idea. However, :staff would like to see a public easement recorded for the space and agreements on the Town's rights to schedule events in the space. The proposed plaza would compliment the eventual construction of the public venue sF~ace associated with the construction of the Vail's Front Door project. Staff believes the proposal substantially complies with this criterion. However, details of the public easement need to be clarified. F. BUILDING HEIGHT Vail Village is perceived as a mix of two and three story facades, although there are also four and five story buildings. The mix of building heights gives variety to the street, which is desirable. The .height criteria are intended to encourage height in massing variety and to discourage uniform buil~~ing heights along the street. Staff Response: The applicant is proposing to construct an eight story structure (six storiE;s of residential on top of and set back from the base two stories of commerc;ial). Staff believes that the building has been revised to better compliment neighboring properties as identified in previous portions of this memorandum. As stated earlier in the memorandum, the applicant is proposing to utilize an 11 foot 6 inch floor plates in place of the established 11 foot floor plate. If the Commission agrees with the applicant's reasons for the need of an 11 foot 6 inch floor plate it wilt become the new standard and staff believes that the application will comply with this criterion. G. VIEWS AND FOCAL POINTS Vail's mountain/valley setting is a fundamental part of its identity. Vieti~s of the mountains, ski slopes, creeks and other natural features are reminders to our visitors of the mountain environment and, by repeated visibility, are orientation reference points. Certain building features also provide important orientation references and visual focal points. The most significant ~riew corridors in the Village have been adopted as part of Chapter .18.73 01` the 38 Vail Municipal Code. The view corridors adopted should not be considered exhausted. When evaluating a development proposal, priority should be given to an analysis of the impacted project on public views. Views that should be preserved originate from either major pedestrian areas or public spaces, and include views of the ski mountain, the Gore Range, the Clock Tower, the Rucksack Tower and other important man-made and natural elements that contribute to the sense of place associated with Vail. These views, which have been adopted by ordinance, were chosen due to their significance, not only from an aesthetic standpoint, but also as orientation reference points for pedestrians. Development in Vail Village shall not encroach into any adopted view corridor, unless approved under Chapter 18.73. Adopted corridors are listed in Chapter 18.73 of the Vail Municipal Code. Whether affecting adopted view corridors or not, the impact of proposed development on views from public ways and public spaces must be identified and considered where appropriate. Staff Response: The Crossroads development site is not located within any of the Town of Vail adopted view corridors. The projects location adjacent to the South Frontage Road lends the project to potentially affecting only the views of residential unit owners in Phase III of the Vail Village Inn towards the Gore Range; not an adopted view corridor. It is important to note, however, that .many of the units in Phase III of the Vail Village Inn currently do not have views of the Gore Range except for potentially the top two floors. The primary views of both the Crossroads development site and Vail Village Inn Phase III is to the south towards Vail Mountain. Staff believes that the application complies with this criterion. H. SERVICE AND DELIVERY Any building expansion should preserve the functions of existing service alleys. The few service alleys that exist in the Village are extremely important to minimizing vehicle congestion on pedestrian ways. The use of, and vehicular access to, those alleys should not be eliminated except where functional ali!ernatives are not provided. In all new and remodeled construction, delivery which avoids or reduces impacts on pedestrian ways should be explored; and adopted whenever practical, for immediate or future use. Rear access, basement and below ground delivery corridors reduce congestion. Weather protE:ction increases delivery efficiency substantially. Below grade delivery corridors are found in a few buildings in Vail Village (Sitzmark/Gore Creek Plaza, Village Center, Vail Village Inn). Consideration should be given to extending these corridors, where feasible, and the creation of new ones. As buildings are constructed or remodeled, the opportunity may exist to develop segments of a future system. Staff Response: The applicant has designed a service and delivery system which will avoid 39 and reduce the negative impacts on the pedestrian ways ,adjacent to 'the lodge. As stated previously the applicant has proposed an enclosed 5-t>ay loading and delivery system which has access off of the South Frontage Road. The proposed design allows for neighboring properties to utilize ~Ihe facility and eliminates truck traffic on Village Center Road and on East Meadow Drive. The applicant shall be required to participate in the overall loading and delivery plan for Vail Village in a similar fashion as the Willow Bridge project and the Vail's Front Door project. Staff believes that 11he application complies with this criterion. SUN/SHADE Due to Vail's alpine climate, sun is an important comfort factor, especiall~~ in winter, fall and spring. Shade areas have ambient temperatures substanti;~lly below those of adjacent direct sunlight areas. On all but the warmest: of summer days, shade can easily lower temperatures below comfortable levels and thereby, negatively impact use of those areas. All new or expanded buildings should not substantially increase the spring and fall shadow line (March 21 -September 23) on adjacent properties or the public right-of-way. In all building construction, shade shall be considered in massing and overall height consideration. Notwithstanding, sun/shade considerations are not intended to restrict building height allowances, but rather to influence the massing of buildings. Limited height exceptions may be granted to meet i:his criterion. Staff Response: The proposal does shade the South Frontage Road to a great extent and for short periods of the late morning it shades Vail Village Inn Phase Ill..ln or~~er to eliminate the shading of Vail Village Inn Phase III the project would have; to be pulled much further back from the property line than even just 'the setback. Staff believes that the extent of the shading and the durations of shade on Vail Village Inn Phase III is minimal and acceptable. A copy of'the sun/shade study has been attached for reference (Attachment C). Staff believes that the application complies with this criterion. As previously discussed in this section of the memorandum, staff believes that 'the application complies with all the goals and objectives of the Vail Comprehensive plan. E. Identification and mitigation of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect Ithe property on which the special development district is proposed. According to the Official Town of Vail Geologic Hazard Maps, the Crossroads development site is not located in any geologically sensitive areas. Staff believes that the application complies with this criterion. F. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed) to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. 40 The proposed site plan shows the building encroaching into the setbacks surrounding the property. The applicant states that the primary reason for this is the proposed creation of a large plaza which will have an ice skating rink during the winter and a pop jet water feature in the summer. Staff previously expressed concerns regarding the "forward looking expression of European alpine herifage and more contemporary forms" (taken from the applicant's proposal document) and how it would compliment the character of the Village. Staff and the applicant have worked together on the architecture of the building and agree that the overall architecture of the building is compatible and consistent with existing buildings in the area, the potential future redevelopment of structures in the area, and the Town's design guidelines. Staff and the applicant agree that any remaining details of the architecture will be worked out with the Design Review Board in the review of the project upon approval of the Town Council. As discussed previously the applicant has proposed an ice skating rink/pop jet waterfeature within the proposed plaza. Staff agrees that there is public benefit to this proposed use. However, staff believes that in order for the plaza to achieve the maximum value as a public benefit and to offset the deviations proposed staff believes that a pedestrian access easement and usage agreement should be entered into with the developer. The easement and agreements would establish rights for the Town to coordinate potential events on the public plaza. In the absence of such an agreement, the public plaza does riot have value as a public benefit. Staff recommends that the Commission requires a condition that would establish an agreement between the Town and Developer regarding the proposed public plaza. Staff believes the proposal complies with this criterion. G. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation. The Town of Vail Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed plans for circulation to ensure that it is designed .well for both vehicles and pedestrians on and off the site. Following the review of the plans, the Public Works Departmentforwarded theirwritten final comments in a memorandum, dated April 11, 2005. Many of the final comments are time sensitive actions that can only be accomplished at a later date or are only necessary to address if the applicants receive approval of this request. To require full compliance at this time would thus be inappropriate. A copy of the memorandum with the final written comments from the Public Works Department has been attached for reference (Attachment G). The traffic report submitted by the applicant depicts overall intersection levels for existing and future service being maintained at a Level Of Service (LOS) A. However, two individual turn movements within the intersection have decreased their level of service. More specifically the north bound left off of Village Center Road onto the South Frontage Road has decreased from a LOS of C to a D and the west bound left from South Frontage Road onto Village Center Road has decreased for a LOS of A to B. The overall impact on Village Center Road's north bound left turn lane is a queue increase of 25 feet in length to 50 feet in length. Staff believes that it will be imperative to assess the applicant a fee of $5,000 per additional peak PM trip generated by this project should it be granted approval. The traffic report identifies that there is a net increase of 69 PM Peak Hour trips for the Crossroads project. At $5,000 per net trip this results in an impact fee of $345,000. This impact fee can 41 6e offset by any proposed improvements to the South Frontage Road and intersection of Village Center Road including, curb and gutter, drainage improvements, paving improvements, removal of right turn lane, new median improvements, sidewalk improvements, etc. To address the concerns of circulation of pedestrians and vehicles and the conflicts that are present between the two, the applicant has proposed improvements to Village Center Road and East Meadow Drive which make the area feel more pedestrian oriented and restriicts errant vehicular traffic from finding its way into the pedestrian area by narrowing the roads. The proposal will also improve loading and delivery traffic in the area, The proposal also includes a fully enclosed 5 berth loading and delivery facility with access off of the Front~~ge Road. Currently, there is a fairly high volume of loading and delivery vehicles on Vill~~ge Center Road and East Meadow Drive. The applicant has expressed tFrat they are willing to be a member of the overall loading and delivery system which currently has participai:ion from the eventual Vaii's Front Door facility and the One Willow Bridge project facility. Staff recommends that through a developer improvement agreement that the 5 berth loading <~nd delivery facility is made available for inclusion in the overall Town of Vail loading and delivery system which may include the establishment of an easement. H. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize rind preserve natural features, recreation, views and functions. The applicant has proposed a large plaza along East Meadow Drive which contains an ice skating rink in the winter and apop-jet water feature in the warmer months. The proposed plaza has been reworked to include greater landscaping than in previous submittals. 'fhe planter bed locations and the landscaping to be planted in each will be carefully selected in order for the retail to be as visible as possible. As has been stated previously the applicant's proposal does not comply with the minimum requirement of landscaped area as defined by the Code. While the overall total landscaped area, 42,255 square feet of hardscape ;end softscape is well over the minimum required, 23,025 square feet, it is the ratio of hardscape to softscape which does not meet the Code requirements. By Code 80% of the required landscape area (18,420 s.f.) is to be softscape (green vegetation) and a maximum of 2'.0% (4,605 s.f.) can be hardscape (pavers, plazas, patios, etc.). The proposal includes a ratio of .the provided landscaped area, 42,255 square feet, which is 64.7% hardscape (mainly the proposed plaza) to 35.3% softscape. This ratio leaves the proposal 3,522 square feet under the minimum requirement for softscape on the site. Staff believes that the inclusion of the proposed public plaza is a benefit which warrants the minimum deviation requested in the Code .required ration for landscaped areas. Since the Commission last saw the applicant's proposal focus has been placed upon the landscaping plan and incorporating the appropriate scale of landscaping upon the plan. 'The current landscaping plan includes a variety of plants. In order to mitigate the proposed height of the structure the plan includes numerous evergreen trees ranging from heighi:s of 20 feet to 40 feet. Staff believes that the changes are an improvementwhich now makes this proposal cornply with this criterion. 42 I. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the special development district. The applicant is proposing to construct the .project in one phase and a subdivision of the property will be necessary to facilitate the development of the Crossroads project. B. Consideration of Factors Regarding Text Amendments Before acting on an application for an amendment to the regulations prescribed in this title, the Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council shall consider the following factors with respect to the requested text amendments: 1. The extent to which the text amendments furtherthe general and specific purposes of the zoning regulations; and The proposal to add "bowling alley' as a definition within Section 12-2, Definitions, Vail Town Code, and as a conditional use within the Commercial Service Center zone district furthers the general and specific purposes of the zoning regulations by providing a restricted opportunity to introduce a land use which, when appropriate, makes Vail a more vibrant location for visitors and guests. The applicant is proposing the following language be included as the definition of bowling alley: BOWLING ALLEY.' A recreation and entertainment facility where the sport of bowling takes place. A bowling alley may also includes accessor)r entertainment facilities and uses such as eating and drinking facilities, retail shops, night clubs, arcade facilities, billiards, ping pong, darts, meeting rooms, and similar uses. 2. The extent to which the text amendment would better implement and better achieve the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives, and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the town; and Staff believes that the proposed text amendments to Section 12-2, Definitions, and Section 12-7E-4, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, will further the goals and objectives outlined in the Vail Comprehensive Plan which are found in Section V of this memorandum. 3. The extent to which the text amendment demonstrates how conditions have substantially changed since the adoption of the subject regulation and how the existing regulation is no longer appropriate or is inapplicable; and The proposed amendments demonstrate that the code has many uses which are not defined nor identified as being permitted or conditional uses. Staff believes that a bowling alley is a use which is becoming more popular and one in which makes Vail a more year-round, active place for locals and tourists. 4. The extent to which the text amendment provides a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land use regulations consistent with municipal development objectives; and 43 The proposed text amendments to the Code allow the proposed development to include a land use which could bring year round activity to the Village which will be a draw for both locals and visitors. The addition of "bowling alley" as a conditional use will allow applicants to propose the use as part of a coordinated mixed-use development which will relate snore harmoniously with adjacent properties and land uses. Staff believes that the proposec text amendments give the Planning and Environmental Commission the control necessary to regulate a use which could potentially be negative if not properly regulated. 5. Such other factors and criteria the commission and/or council deem applicable to the proposed text amendment. Before recommending and/or granting an approval of an application for a text amendment, the Planning and Environmental Commission and the Town Council shall make the following findings with respect to the requested amendment: (1) That the amendments are consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the town; and (2) That the amendments further the general and specific purposes oi` the zoning regulations; and (3) That the amendments promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. C. Consideration of Factors Regarding Conditional Use Permits: 1. Relationship and impact of the use on the development objectives of the Town. Multi-family Dwelling Units: The proposed project has six floors of condominiums comprising a total of 75 dwelling units. It is the number of levels which give this project its bulk and mass. Within Section 12-7E-1, Purpose, Vail Town Code, states: The Commercial Service Center District is intended to provide sites for general shopping and commercial facilities serving the Town, together with limited muhFiple- family dwelling and lodge uses as maybe appropriate without interfering with the basic commercial functions of the District. The Commercial Service Center District is intended to ensure adequate light, air, open space, and other amenities approc~riate to permitted types of buildings and uses, and to maintain a convenient sho~C~ping center environment for permitted commercial uses. The purpose statement anticipates that multiple-family uses could be located on properties zoned Commercial Service Center zone district as long as they do not interfere with the primary commercial functions of the district. Staff believes the number of proposed dwelling units does not interfere with the commercial nature of the ;zone district. There is a requirement in the Commercial Service Zone District limiting GRI=A to 50% of the total floor area of a development, Section 12-7E-g, Density Control, Vail Town Code. The GRFA requested in addition to the limit identified previously is a 44 deviation which staff believes the public benefits within the proposal off-set. Staff would also point out that the land use plan for this site as contained in the Vail Village Master Plan does identify this site as being substantially high density multiple-family. The applicant has provided a plan which they believe encourages owners of condominiums to be involved in the rental pool. According to the applicant, the key to achieving the participation in a rental pool program is to emulate the management of a fine, high quality, luxury hotel. The management program is a hospitality program above all else. On-site management and management offices are a necessity. Top level services need to be provided to renting guests and owners alike. Great service and a first class property will attract the kind of clientele that not only can afford a fine resort but will respect the property of others. Owners become proud of being part of the resort and have confidence that their asset is being well cared for while producing a painless, welcome income to offset their ownership expenses (Attachment F). The level of service to be offered by Crossroads includes daily or twice daily maid service, 24-hour desk and concierge, bell and valet staff, local transportation service, pre-arrival activity, in-house amenities such as workout rooms, massage rooms, a lap pool, meeting rooms, and a world class lobby, ski and grocery service and premium rental equipment. An in-house maintenance staff not only quickly provides for guests needs but corrects problems in units before they become a major problem and expense to the renting owner. Owners become confident that their arrival will be hassle free and as enjoyable as a vacationing guest in spite of a renting guest occupying their unit the night before. The final piece to encourage owners to rent is creating a financial structure that strongly rewards owners that rent. The cost sharing structure between the Homeowners' Association and the Rental Program needs to be an integrated program that equitably balances all of the services being offered to owners and renters alike. Properly and efficiently designed, owners will be financially rewarded for renting instead of carrying the service costs for all owners, as is the case in many condominium hospitality programs. Staff and the applicant have also provided a retail analysis of both Vail Village and Lionshead which we believe demonstrates that the amount of commercial space proposed to be constructed on the site does meet the purpose statement of the CSC zone district. The new Crossroads development would be approximately 19.6% (Currently 13.8%) of the total commercial square footage in the Vail Village. The report is attached for reference (Attachment H). Private Parking Club: Staff believes that the proposal to establish a private parking club will address several of the goals and objectives established in the Vail Village Master Plan. Those goals are Goal #5 and Objective 5.1 as identified in Section V of this memorandum. Staff believes the parking club could have a very positive effect on the parking issues the Town faces through out the year. The proposal no longer identifies the parking club as a public benefit but as a public amenity which has indirect benefit to the community. Meeting Rooms, Movie Theaters, Maior Arcade, outdoor operation of an accessory use dice skating rink),and Bowling Alley: The Vail Comprehensive Plan identifies the need make the Village a more vibrant and economically viable location. Goal #2 of the Vail Village Master Plan, which is detailed in Section V of this memorandum, is positively addressed by these requested uses. 45 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. Multi-family Dwelling Units: A great majority of the bulk, mass, and height of the proposed structure is generated by the six floors of condominium units. Previously staff believed that there could be some negative impacts on the neighboring residential portion of Vail Village Inn Phase III in terms of light and air as the proposed building encroached into the western setback. Since the January 18, 2005, Town Council meeting the proposal has been reduced in height and the building has been pulled out of the western property line setback with the exception of the enclosed loading and delivery bay. This change has greatly reduced the impact to the Vail Village Inn Phase III. As with any development on this site, there will be shade and shadow on the adjacent properties. However, the magnitude of shade and shadow proposed is really no different on the adjacent property than if the building was constructed even a story or two shorter. Private Parking Club: Staff believes that the proposal to establish a private parking club will address several of the goals established in the Vail. Village Master Plan. Those goals are Goal #5 and Objective 5.1 as identified in Section V of this memorandum. The private parking club, which is subterranean, will not have any negative impacts on the above listed criteria. Meeting Rooms, Movie Theaters, Maior Arcade, outdoor operation of an accessory use (ice skating rink), and Bowling Alley: The proposed uses will add to the recreation choices of locals and guests alike. The uses will also provide year entertainment choices. All of the uses proposed will be located in the subterranean portions of the structure except for the ice skating rink.. The surface ice skating rink and the associated plaza is identified by the applicant as one reason why the building encroaches into the setbacks on a majority of the :site. Reducing the size of the ice skating rink would potentially allow the building to pull in from the property lines which could improve the impacts on light and air of the current structure. 3. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive .end pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, accE~ss, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the street and parking areas. Multi-family Dwelling Units: The proposed 75 dwelling units will generate increased vehicular traffic. The payment of the traffic impact fee and/or the construction of roadway traffic improvements to the South Frontage Road and Village Center Road will off-set any negative impacts. Private Parking Club: The proposed 92 space parking club will generate additional vehiculartraffic in the area. The payment of the traffic impact fee and/or the construction of roadway traffic improvements to the South Frontage Road and Village Center Road will off-set any negative impacts. 46 Meeting Rooms, Movie Theaters Maior Arcade outdoor operation of an accessory use (ice skating rink), and Bowling Alley: These proposed uses will generate increased vehicular traffic. The payment of the traffic impact fee and/or the construction of roadway traffic improvements to the South Frontage Road and Village Center Road will mitigate any negative impacts. 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. Multi-family Dwelling Units: The Purpose statement of the Commercial Service Center zone district identifies multiple-family dwelling units as a conditional use because the primary function of the district is commercial. It is primarily the impact of six floors of residential which give this project its bulk, mass, and height. While the applicant is proposing a building which exceeds the height limits in the Vail Village Master Plan this is caused by the 11 foot 6 inch floor plates proposed and the taller floor plate in the commercial floors to accommodate stadium seated theaters and a bowling alley. If the Commission agrees that the 11 foot 6 inch floor plate is acceptable staff believes the proposal complies with this criterion. Private Parking Club: The proposed parking club is located within a completely subterranean structure. The subterranean nature of the parking club has no negative impacts on neighboring uses. Meeting Rooms, Movie Theaters Maior Arcade outdoor operation of an accessory use (ice skating rink), and Bowlina Alley: These proposed uses are located in the subterranean, except for the ice skating rink, portions of the structure and have little impact on the visible portions of the upper portions of the structure. The surface ice skating rink and the associated plaza is identified by the applicant as one reason why the building encroaches into the setbacks on a majority of the site. Staff and the applicant have performed an analysis which depicts that the increased height and encroachments into setbacks are indeed created by the public plaza containing the ice rink as the amount of development potentially lost by establishing the public plaza is on the same scale as the height deviations and setback encroachments proposed within the project. B. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings before granting a conditional use permit: 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 Commercial Service Center Zone District. 2. That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it will be operated or maintained will 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 will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code. 47 IX. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval with conditions to the Vail Town Council of the development application to establish Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, located at 141 and 143 Meadow Drive/Lot P, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1. Staffs recommendation is based upon a review of the criteria and findings as outlined in this memorandum and.from the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to forward a recommend~~tion of approval with conditions of the applicants' request, staff recommends that the following findings be made as part of the motion: Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads "That the proposal to establish Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads, complies with the nine design criteria outlined in Section 72-9A-8 of the Vail Town Code. Furthermore, the applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Commission, based upon the testimony and evidence presented during the public hearing, that any adverse effects of the requested deviations from the development standards of the underlying zoning are outweighed by the public benefits provided. Lastly, the Commission finds that the request is consistent with the development goals and objectives of the Town. With regards to proposed building setbacks, that: a. Proposed building setbacks provide necessary separation between buildings and riparian areas, geologically sensitive areas and other environmentally sensitive areas. b. Proposed building setbacks comply with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design Considerations. c. Proposed building setbacks will provide adequate availability of light, air ,and open space. d. Proposed building setbacks will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. e. Proposed building setbacks will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits that could not otherwise be achieved by conformance with prescribed setback standards. With regards to proposed building height, that: a. Proposed building heights comply with applicable elements of the Vail Vill;~ge Master Plan. b. Proposed building height will adequately preserve views of the Gore Range fi om Vail Valley Drive. c. Proposed building height will provide a compatible relationship with buildings and uses on adjacent properties. d. Proposed building height will result in creative design solutions or other public benefits That could not otherwise be achieved by conformance with prescribed setback standards. e. Proposed building height of 99.9 feet, while setting precedence, was mitigated by 48 the proposed public benefits, of which fhe provision of a public plaza on the sife per the Town's Master Plans was the most offsetting element. That the proposed gross residential floor area of 182% of lot area, additional twenty- eightdwelling units over allowable (at 28.4 units per acre total), site coverage of 107, 772 square feet (93.6%) and landscape area of 42,255 sq. ft. (deviation from percent hardscape) in the Commercial Service Center zone district is in conformance with applicable elements of fhe Vail Comprehensive Master Plan. That the development is in compliance with the purposes of the Commercial Service Center zone district, that the proposal is consistent with applicable elements of the Vail Village Master Plan, the Vail Land Use Plan, and the Vail Streetscape Master Plan, and that the proposal does not otherwise have a significant negative effect on the character of the neighborhood, and That the proposal substantially complies with other applicable elements of the Vail Comprehensive Plan." Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the applicant's requests, staff recommends that the following conditions: The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to appearing before the Vail Town Council for second reading of an adopting ordinance for the establishment of Special Development District No. 39, Crossroads: The Developer shall prepare a written agreement, for Town Council review and approval, outlining the responsibilities and requirements of the required offsite improvements, as indicated on the proposed Approved Development Plan. This agreement shall include, but not be limited to, all streetscape improvements along Village Center Road and. East Meadow Drive, public access to the plaza for pedestrians and Town sponsored events, which may include the establishment of an easement on the plaza and language in the covenants and declarations for owners of property in the project regarding the use of the plaza for special events, inclusion of the loading and delivery facility in the overall loading and delivery system, payment of traffic impact.fees and credits given to offset fee, and details for funding public art. 2. That the approval of the conditional use permits and text amendments are not valid unless an ordinance approving the associated special development district amendment request is approved on second reading. 3. The Developer shall submit a fire and life safety plan for review and approval by the .Town of Vail Fire Department. 4. The Developer shall submit a revised site and landscape plan indicating a larger landscape island located at the Porte cochere entry to the proposed building for review and approval by the Design Review Board. 5. The Developer shall submit a final exterior building materials list, typical wall section, architectural specifications, and a complete color rendering for review and approval of the Design Review Board, prior to submittal of an application for a building permit. 6. The Developer shall submit a rooftop mechanical equipment plan for review and approval by the Design Review Board prior to the issuance of a building permit. All 49 rooftop mechanical equipment shall be incorporated into the overall design of the lodge and enclosed and visually screened from public view. 7. The Developer shall submit a comprehensive sign program for review and approval by the Design Review Board. The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to submittin<~ a building permit application (a grading permit/excavation permit shall constitute a building permit); The Developer shall receive all the required permits from the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) prior to submitting for a building permit. Failure to receive the appropriate permits to access the South Frontage Road per the Approved Development Plan will require the project to return through the special development district review process. 2. The Developer shall addresses the written final comments of the Town of Vail Public Works Department outlined in the memorandum from the Town of Vail Public Works Department, dated April 22, 2005, prior to submitting an application to the Town of Vail Community Department for the issuance of a building permit for this projecit. 3. The Developer shall submit a written letter agreeing to install a public safety radio communications system within the subterranean parking structure which meets i:he specifications of the Town of Vail Communications Center. The specifications and details of this system shall be submitted to staff for review and approval with 1:he . application for a building permit. The Developer shall address the following conditions of approval prior to requesting a temporary certificate of occupancy or a final certificate of occupancy; 1. The Developer shall be assessed a traffic impact fee of $5,000 per net trip increase in p.m. traffic, or $345,000. The construction of the South Frontage Road improvements by the Developer, as indicated on the Crossroads Public Improvements Plan, shall satisfy this requirement. 2. The Developer shall post a bond to provide financial security for 125% of the total cost of the required off-site public improvements. The bond shall be in place with the Town prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy. This includes taut is not limited to the proposed streetscape improvements. 3. The Developer shall commence initial construction of the Crossroads improvements within three years from the time of its final approval at second reading of the ordinance establishing Special Development District No. 39, and continue diligently toward the completion of the project. If the developer does not begin and diligently work toward the completion of the special development district or any stage of the special development district within the time limits imposed, the approval of said special development district shad be void. The Planning and Environmental Commission and Town Council shall review the special development district upon submittal of an application to reestablish the special development district following the procedures outlined in Section 12-9A-4, Vail Town Code. 50 4. The Developer shall provide deed-restricted housing that complies with the Town of Vail Employee Housing requirements (Chapter 12-13) for a minimum of five (5) beds generated by the redevelopment of Crossroads, and that said deed-restricted employee housing shall be made available for occupancy, and that the deed restrictions shall be recorded with the Eagle County Clerk & Recorder, prior to issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the Crossroads project. The required Type II or III deed-restricted employee housing units will be regulated by the Town of Vail Employee Housing requirements (Chapter 12-13). The applicant shall purchase and deed restrict the employee housing beds prior to requesting a temporary certificate of occupancy. The units purchased must be approved as acceptable by Town staff and deed restricted as Type II or III units depending on the zone district in which they are located and by the appropriate review process. The developer shall have the right to participate in any pay-in-lieu program, if one is established by the Town, if he/she so chooses. Participation in a pay-in-lieu program shall occur prior to requesting a temporary certificate of occupancy. 5. The approval of SDD No. 39 shall restrict the uses upon the plaza level tenant spaces to retail uses solely and shall not be utilized for professional offices, business offices, and studios. The second floor retail space maybe utilized for any allowable or conditional use as listed in the Commercial Service Center Zone District. No space noted as retail space on the Approved Development Plan shall be converted to a residential dwelling unit. Temporary real estate sales offices may be allowed on the plaza level of retail during the first two years following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy in order to allow effective sales of dwelling units on-site. Text Amendments: The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission forwards a recommendation of approval of the text amendments to Town Council based upon the criteria in Section VIII of this memorandum and the findings below. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the applicant's request, staff recommends that the following findings be made as part of a motion: 1. That the amendments are consistent with the applicable elements of the adopted goals, objectives and policies outlined in the Vail comprehensive plan and is compatible with the development objectives of the town; and 2. That the amendments further the general and specific purposes of the zoning regulations; and 3. That the amendments promote the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the town and promote the coordinated and harmonious development of the town in a manner that conserves and enhances its natural environment and its established character as a resort and residential community of the highest quality. Conditional Use Permits The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and Environmental Commission approves the applicant's requests for a conditional use permit to allow for the construction of an outdoor operation of the accessory uses as set forth in Section 12-7E-5 (ice skating rink); a major arcade to include indoor entertainment; a theater, 51 meeting rooms, and convention facilities; multiple-family dwellings and lodges; and a private club (92 parking spaces) to allow for the establishment of a for sale parking club, pursuant to Section 12-7E-4, Vail Town Code, located at 141 and 143 Meadow Drive/Lot P, Block 5D, Vail Village Filing 1. Staffs recommendation of approval is based upon the review of the criteria described in Section VIII of this memo and the evidence and testimony presenl:ed. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the applicant's request, staff recommends that the following findings be made as part of a motion: 1. That the proposed locations 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 locations 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. X. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Reduce plans of the proposal dated March 28, 2005 C. Vail Village Master Plan: Conceptual Building Height Plan D. Vail Village Master Plan: Land Use Plan E. Applicant's Employee Housing Unit Proposal F. Applicant's Rental Program Proposal G. Public Works memo dated April 22, 2005 H. Retail Analysis Dated April 12, 2005 I. Public Notification J. Letters from Public 52 _. ,.,_ -, .. _ -. .. ~n ~ ~r;:-~ - _ -- ~~ - :: .- - " ,._ _~ ~t~::s ~~ti: `~ ' - - --- - - - Lz~_ - r ~ t Crossroads Proposed New. Special Development District #39, ~ }~ ~- ~. ~~` ~ ~,y Texf Amendment and Conditional Use Permit Requests ~~I . ~: ~, , ., ,,. Planning and Environmental Commission Aprif 25; 2005 ,: ~t ~` ~ ~ ~} _ t .+~.'. ~ _ ~ r..w ' t~. + t , ~A ; ~1~` ~' -ti.;t ~; ~:'l~~ ~.7 ~ h ".*5dy~~~~ ~_ ~t S ~ _ f ~ -~~f ~ ~~ w:~ `,~1 _ - '~ °"~.`f~) ~,~ ~t7 ~'~,I ~~''I a~~ r air ~~~,.t 'gyp.` ~; r - _ 4 t ,~1 I ,~ ~~ ~. ~ '~~' '~ ~ ~ _y' .. _ }~t ~l '`tj~...~~•~ j~\2-dw: ~ ,+~1 .., r ~ J ~ ,~:. ii (; ~ ~r it .A1.y ~ / , i -~,;~1 F`_I _° ~`.x"f++_- ~4~ ~ f ;,~ ~r.,,~.~„~~. ~?~i~ Yr ~-f~ h_ j(rt _ r~f L~ d 1 - ~~'l i~`~ `~ ; }~~ l Jp~wyy ;4`- ~.y. l'~ .~ _ `il {~~ _ ~~ix1 `t " - t •~~ •/ f'~.~;; ~k'~'~`r{ '~A'L~ .{`1,'~ + ~ ' :-L;7+ ,"en-~ ~ L-~~~ ~_ -~a~" ~ ~ k ~: is C':' ~ 4,r~d~Z~j -•~'T ~' :~"C f '`~~ 'k,: i ~', +_% ~' ~ ~r ~2 ~, -'`l *,. 1 c„ ; r fY( j ~ ~h' 1~ l~ •~i)1 ~'R•~~T? r~ I vt ~ ~ --~`~1^ ~~.:~ ~ ~~',~~:>r'`~, r y` I ~_t ..h ~~~ t -y ~~, ` ~__ v. ~~~~~ -~ ~~:,~ .' -~-y' .zo~~~ /~ __ 't... _, ~.n syi~ ~ ft.~; 1 -. ~ ~l 4 - ~ ~ I, ~ ~ • ~F ~ t ~ 51 ~ r Y ~~ 'Tl Y ._1a- ~ ~Hf~~i~^Yr~~ ~ ~ •. _`~ r K: -`-J 1 t~ _ r ~~ ~l ~.... l .tom :, _ y y, _ .~~-y_ r - ~.. ~ A~ .~. ~~ - - :_ r :-~ -arq iii ,. ~ ..~ _ k< ~ f" ~~. x ~~ cti. ~j ~~ w. FLT ~ - ~fi1 1~ ~n ~'f' ~i i Z ~ 1 tj.~` 'S ~ n - ~, :. ,. ~ ~'-'~ ~a-'~t~. _ ~ ~ ~ • s r /`"`1t. -ti r.;: ~~r_ . r $~ •' ~ ~_ t r i ~ ~ ; L~ ~ ~ .. ~ 1 i i _ . ~ ~ ~ 1, _ ,+ ' ` t. ~'~ l _. ,~ ..~ '' ~:• ,. ~~ r ~~ = ~ ; ~ ,, '~ f~ ~ ~~ ,~. l .. _ . ,., .~ ~ .. .. . r.,. .,___.: ~ ~ _ ® 50 0 50 Feel - This maP was created by the Town of Vail GIS Department. Use of this map should be for general purposes only , 1 " - 100' The Town of Vail does not warrant the accuracy of the information contained herein. (parcel line work is approximate) CROSSROADS REDEVELOPMENT VAIL, COLORADO 5M IMe. w~~~ ~M v~x%~w. ~w.~ ~.~~..~~w.. BARNES COY ARCHITECTS Ww W ic~Pm .,. dwL~ aN., M..a~., ~.,, zoos 1, ~ A¢hi[ u .+ C7 T_ rr _ ___ '-~_ . _ < ~ ~ _ ~ r,..~#s~ _~ ~~~~_~-..~"^~_- :SO=i=~ NiA~G+E~,L~O~"~3 ~.~ ~~.~ _ __ ~_ R "" ~-~~``a~s X11 ~ ra .~L~~~~ _'~4-~ _-:=- _ . _ 1 I! j1 ~ e , e a _. 0 _ _ ~ e i '! r , . d .z ~'` `6 1 '9 9 ~ . `' ~ / 1 ~ ~ "~ r ~ f ~ ~r 1 B' ~ ~ ~ f rF ~ ! ~ tit ~ ~ i V -~ ~-~ A- -uF .., _`~I y ~ 3 ~"~. R'yKWC 3}R ~q 1 _ f I ~ w.y '~.,~ 1 /I ~ s - t S I ~' ~~ ya, v1~r ~. 1 1,,,~ F. . 1 - c i ~ ! ~ s ~; ~; ~ ~ ~j11 A ~,, ~. ~ { ~ f -mow EASr~o~ p ,tom •'~.'°4 .{ n ~ _. _ - j~~ _ vsi u'°°lly.A,:iF° ~ ~'7. ^'',s. --`e...:pZ ~; ... swiss cRaEr ! k I !!~- ~, flj rY~ f`r~ I~ c~ .1 ~ . . ~~ S: i CROSSROADS R~NDER~ED S1TE PIAN BARNES COY YA14 COLORADO ~ ' ARCHITECTS .nrcnic c: .~ ~ _ 4. ~,tl ` - ^~ ~~~ n.o ~ '~ ~~--_ ~ ' ~ c>- ~..-\~~:.:~----: :~ - YT/h'L~'t'lISS9!iI~I~ RMRWG STRUCTURE OPTIONAL ROUNDABOUT DESIGN BY OTHERS 01v„~,'„^a,yn",,,°".m~ „,,"""",,,,,,,awe sw~. i -~ov a... kaa.~-n ~~ ~ T„ - _ ---- .~..,...,.A.,.b~ ~~ K,r~ .f-, 1 Y' ~ ~~ _ ~~~ 500TR FRONTAGE ~ ~___ f1 I l 1 ': . ~ ~ :: JJ/ -_~1 -6. I =. H I fAl' lgr 11 ~T~~~ ~~ G~SEP E N~ i I; EASTMEAOpry pR~~E S1N155 0 O t a RARNWO STRUCTURE II f a. li J ~ }gs ~ Fi nupy7,~~+ ~~ ~ '- ARE PLAN m ~~ ~~ r ~ . BARNES COY ~ , \ ARCHITECTS .~A~~mL L: i"'~ ~. ~ =~ ~ . ~~ ~) M,.R~., tea. zooms PLAZP. SRE PLAN WifH ICE RINK CROSSROADS vaa,coLORaoo CROSSROADS vAtL, caoRAOo _ -__ TO BE CONSTRUCTED BY ..r- TOWN OF VAIL CROSSROADS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS PLAN RARNES COY pF ARCHITECTS ~ - -MEDIANS AND_HEA7ED ~~~'i. ~~~ ~' y Y SIDEWALK FUNDED BY-- -_---_ _ _ : __ '- CROSSR ADS - - _ _ - __ ___ Wit.`. 1 ' '- - '_ ~- _ _ ~i~tl `,'~y~ ' ... ^.y.' FRONTROF R~ ~.e's ~.. '~ -_ _ `-_ __-_ ~ -r ~O +~L -.-~ ~ - _ __ ~ ~~_~-~~=.~_ ._ y _._ STRFF75CAPF_IMPR(-IVFMFNTC-n n~tl-HRflTGn~~~. \~~ aS .a?... .._ ~ Z.~ LEGEND ~~~A ExlziWC pEaouous TR EES •~~jG - I II~\ ERISTWC SPRVCf TREES ~ hc ~ DECDUOUS 111EE5 v<,y ~ 3 JS -a0' BPRUCE TREES ~~ ~~~+~ .i1~ HV 30'-25' EYEgtgCEx TRE [j~i ~^ ' ES E~ ORNeuENfAL igEES\SHRUBS SHRUB PLANpNCS PERFNNUIS/ cR0UN0 C J~r•., OVER PLANTING SCHEDULE m' uuONCwuEE OM. SIZE PENNiRS u0u5 TREES t POPUIUa 1 OuwxINC rASPEN va 161 2.5"-J.0' BkB SlvYa SPRUCE TRECB ~ PD Fcav a COLORADOa SPRUCE CDLORA00 SPRUCE 36 10 30'-35 ]5'-t0' BYB SlpkaB BYB SlvYax PB Plrw< vrlslab BRISTIFCONC %NE s 0'-25' BkB SIVYaE ORNUA N R 5 SHRU S <r ginnvly cwN4A MAPLE axupr t. /IS ' Ae• HE. 1 SASgATOON SERNCFBFPRT Caryvplaria in v 'Blue Nn 39 /5 '-2i IN. CH GIVE NISI SPIRFw Cvlon valar xvri 1 14 t9 /5 -3A N PO < <vn v BPRFMINC COtONUSTfR PN apcvr ua X I 'OIml ' JI i5 1B"-2~ Ht. Pf p ap~ P pua 9 Y p1aBCp NINEBARq PplenUlly rrutr J /5 18"-2~ Nr. CC pw POTENTf1A Co 95 /5 Is'-3A' H ce m u e~.y cs auEn oocwoop cw„~a npm~ •H mr 9 /s te•-3A• N L R EsAWn Dpcwoop Rye<, p tx /s e--ts' Hl. P[ camEN cunqurt xs /s e--2r He. S PURPIFv,IEX SANOCNERM tJ /5 le'-3<' HE. J Junipup+a acopubrum TABIF LOP BWE JUNWEA 'u i JB /5 B'-3t" Sp. < mpv pp uINIATURE NUC0 102 /5 1B'-3i n I<~fAP~F[, 1. FINK PERENNPE ANO GROUNp COVER SCEFCpON TO BF CppRpINATEp w.m wosuPE cpxtRwcioR. 2. TERRACE PtAWTFRS SHNE HAVE ~ 4WI4UN 500. DEPTH 0< JO" fOR SIIRUCS A.:'^ PERENNUIS u p ]6' fOR TREES. CROSSROADS VAIL, COLORAOO __~~ ,~`r ~ '~t~ ::..` ~~R ~afy: _ ~„s . Fi' l: OER ASPExS ' LEGEND ~ry ~; L9 Ex15lwG OECNUOUS TR EES_ I / ~ E%I6iwG SPRUCE RIEEB DE6DWU5 TREES }~ ]]'-a0' SPRUCE TRFFS]J'-a0' SPRUCE TRFFS J 20'-x3' EVCRCREEN TR EES E~ RNAUEN(Ai TREES\SNRU06 ~, SHRUD PLxxiInGS ' M~ PFRENNALS/ GFWND C L- OVER PLANTING SCHEDULE ~, CIEM1fIC ~ E CORUON N OIY. SZE ENUtK6 DECIDUOU TREES PT Pupu ~e lrem~dd OVAN NG ASPEn a I6 25'-].0' BkB STOW SPRUCE TREES PA COL ae u ORAW SPRUCE 20 x0'-2J ek6 Stp4ed er: P,~.d Ra.. COLORA00 SPRUCE BR STtECOUE PIxE ID fi ]J'-.D• 20 25' BeB 61oN.d BkB Stoked RILwEUiAL TREES SHRUBS AG Acer q nnoR ~wNxU uAPLE eidncP er o Nl ' IA /IS e' HL C o d SASNAi00N SERNCEBERRT o r ppl ncand ON Y l 2] /S IB'-2a' H I CH ry ST M e s OWE $PIRFA e C t t n t9 /B e' 2a' Nt PO o on as <r or zontoNe RUD NG CgiON(ASTED cor u PH Y Jt /5 fe' xa' HI. PE p yeo a o u o ow P 0491q NINERARN m ] /J 19' 2~ Ht -DD e~ o m POTENOW toad H D 93 /J tB' xa' Ht CB proo. oo~ xee.pd 00Y1000 enu COLORbO D Carn cart B I] /5 e' 2. N Cs eO es o ey RNIfY OOGx00y r eb o x a /J e'-2a" H M p nue n v s.wr DocwooD ~ o r R O 12 /J le• xr m c De~ u dum En CIURRAM 23 /S e' xa' HL PuRPIEc LO.F SNIDCHfRM I] I6 1B' 1a' HI JiA per T S UppWOrum O P BLE BLUE JunWFR P' u JB /S B' 2~ Sp nue mu pp M NUNRE uUGDe IOx /S IB' 2a' HI I FINAL PERENNULL ANO GROUND CWER SELECTgN i0 BE COOROINATFD rtH UNDSCAPE COMMCTOR 2 TERRACE PLV1lEA5 SHNL HAVE A NNNWI Shc DFPIH OE b' fOP SHRUBS uID PERENnu15 AND ]6' FOR TRFES CROSSROADS vAL4 COLORADO 5 .. •~i' 1 %1+ yt7R __ . \ ^ .~~~ L fr,.~~ih3 souTH ~ .-. FRONTAGE ROgO -- ~ . )~._. L'RLAGE INN PFAxA ...per __,I ..,t -~~~ 1 ~ ~ 1 ~ - \~,n~ ~~ _ _ ,. pp 1 n ~.' ~~ _ e ` e ~\ I _ ~, ~~ - ` -~ e l ~ 9 6 t . ~ ~~_~ ~ ~'.., 11 ® i'~ .- ! ~ ~.,-- e _ .. ' ~ _ ~, ~ - ~ 1,T PARNWO RE 1 ~ ~ B e i I L~ BERUCTU `~~ ~:::'- \ \ \ : ~'\R i k .I ~7 r J` ns R r E I +~~ I ~ _ %' ~ ~ ~ I fii PY'~-- ~ ~ ~ r~\ ~ r ~ ~ _A ~ L ~ i -• I } ~r I, ~ ~' ~ ~M1. ~,d ( I ,~ ~ y ~ ~.. f ~ ,€'vRT'x ~1FS` i~.~ o _ 1 I f~ P ~ 1LJ\ _ ~i~ :, J E i F ~E~;: 16 - 3 ~ ,P u "~~q~`1~t~ 1.;.. -,`T`y''~ S -y' ~_ ~~ ~ - 5{, p ~i~ ~lytll~l~,` J f `..-.~. -/ ~ ~ ~{e ~ TB~ I V ~ rs~• l+~ 1T~(t II~F~~ ~.. ~~ ,~l ~~_.__~ V?', ii Y ~` ~N' I.i; L~_ 'l\. X11 '~1~ GENSEP 1 oe{d ~., I d1 ~,1- Fal ~~~ ~ ~ ~ , , j. . ~1 /~~~ ~ ~_ svlss cAW.Er ~ {{.. lil~;l' ~" 1 ... . /( 1 ~ _ ~ 1~ 1 - - TAL GN_6RF 60ET~ ~ TD ' t t ~ S ~^N yC,~~ ~ ~1 1 \ ~11~ 1, CME 15.]26 50. fi. .. ` -a ~ ~ ,r .t_ _ - W Mr" ~ ~ M•'9 J 1 '.~ ~ LE55 MEAS - ' ~~` ~A` ~ ~\ 1 AY; .. ~1 ~( UNDER J00 SE a2B SD. Fi. ~ l ~~~ ~®a~` ~ ~~` c. _9` ] ~ _ ,~ ~ Tor,u on-slrz wwoscnE - vasT sa. rT. / ~~ I" -• yg,}_~y ~Ej ~ ~¢ F N~~ -~ f~~\ \ \ ~. ~ _ infix ON-srtE ANn rApE ARFa ~ 5D FT >°' ~ Y .. ~~ - '~ ~ ~ ~,.Ri..^ i +q~ ~ AnaTOxAL osr srtECUNOSCwPwc -x~. elo so. n. 1\'~x'~~ - 1 - `~c ~ 'fir` - ~~~ `' `~° ~~t~ \ , ~ ~ - g, ~ It`_ ~~ ~ LANDSCAPE AREAS 6ARNES COY ~ o i ~"' `"~ g ~~ ~-~ ARCHITECTS eArcmc L] _ ~ ~~ ~~ t :<rJ~ I 000 I o~ ~ "- ,m ~ .. ., m ., .. ., ., ,. .., ., ., .. .. m ., ., ~ -- ----- ^ 0 001 ~ , , /r' ~ .. ~ ~ II ~ ~ ~ ~ X000 M ~' s ftz y NP PUBLIC PARKING SPACES ----- ; 1 ,,. ~ J ~ o 0,1 ' ~ ~, , , ,oe ~ , , ~' ^ o t SH ^ I ~ MECHANICAL t oo. you i*; ~ ROOM ,t~ ~~ ~ ~ % / [tn. I Fin. ~ ~ ~ / ~' ~ ~ [L_v. ' FLty_ ~/ i % I _~ ~ ELEV IOBBV /,/ ~ / ~ LEV LOBBV ,~/ / ~ / / I ~' .,. ~ ~ I BOWLING ALLEV ~~ ~"a I ABOVE i~/ tm j Vyyj~4y WTE E ~ PRIVATE PARKING SPACES ~ ® i/ p55 \ \ zs\ z .c\.o \ ... e~V!ll Lww'\ / ~ i t 0 i z \t\\z. \ x \ v\ \,\ § \ zt \ ~ \ .z \ .z\ s \ z\ u 0 . ~ ~ ~ ,~----- ,v E \, / tz. a PARKINS ONTROL GATE ~ PRIVATE PARKING SPACES - 1 to ~{ 1e ze . w ., ~ a u m /M /n ee ~ ~, / .z /w . a s, / ~ . , , ~m ~ / t~. H t ~ z / ///'(//~,///////J~/ / / / // / ~ / / / / / 1 ,v ~ ~ / t 1 / t I t / / ,y / ~ / w~w~y`K OO / B38 TOTAL PARKING SPACES I>a YS ~ ~ ~' CE RINK MECHANICAL "' 6 .c ~ PUBLIC PARKING SPACE9 zu ® / ~ ;. ~. ~ °" ~i ~~ PUBLIC PARKING SPACES 1 ~~ I / 1 / I / / i~/ / ~ / ~/ / / I ~ el /~u /gym '"' ,"' .UY`, ~/ /fir ;, J;; ~ /-- ~_~ .~.,~._ _eoo; a ..~ ~~ ----L PUBLIC RESTROOMS ~ i CROSSROADS PARKING LEVEL 3 (+8152.34' DATUM) BARNES COY '~ _.r vw~,coloRAOO .a ARCHITECTS , .ARh,~~Ls --~+- F ------- ~.- f ` ~ o `~ ~,Aw u~ -r ~ - -- ! % ,oaf _ f II ... --i ~ -- >~ _ l;. ~ ~ ~~. +- II~~ .; ~, , ~ -- CROSSROADS VAIL, COLORADO I t I w~~ ~ ~ I r"", `. .. - .. .R~~E~ ~ B~WO ... ~,w -~ -- ~~ ~ ~ s,. ~. ~~ ~~ . ~,~ `~ tea" .- _-~~ ~E EPS~ M~PO. _i /~~ j j~ ``~ 1 CV ~., 5.39' DATUM- 'gARAJ`~ ~~~ _ ARCHITECTS ~ ~ ~ .A~~nlc cs ' ~\ r~..ac.. ze, zoos i % `4't o ~ , z , A I „ ~ , ~ ' I? O H ~ I E I ' ° FECL t S. ? O o~~. ' i r.e I =~i.;i~: 9>: ~ ~ ~I~!.~i l ~ `ii• 1~~ I,J:Zy~\x;..,_~ , ~ ' ' ''ti~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ,I ~ . ~~a, •s/ , 1 / ~ ~ Li ~ma A Jf TI~`~ ~ ~~p: i •~'N z . ~ ~ cr-`.i \l,n\\\\. 1_' ly~ ~I~~ t1 ~ ~if i .i _ ~ r ' •~-~~cs~ ) 7 ~ _ y ~ y I-D ' `I ,L~; ' . ` r~y~~~•~r~ II-~..'~ i.,:,7 '7 1 1\ OR~~~c ~ ~ ` 1 ~l , -i ~ : l~~y ~ o~N , = I? I ~ 1;,, :I - . , '-`u- I• - I ' f::;+. ii. ~ S~.C~` : - , . . . F~ - , - ~ I, P _ - . ~ ~ 7 I, - ~ - - " - ~a-- ~ - ~ , t4,,- _ - IIMZ PARKING LEVEL 1 AND RETAIL (+8179.34' DAT - CROSSROADS--=- - BARNES COY VAlI. COLORADO ~OW DRIVE ' % ARCHITECTS ARnlt ~ i i _ . . , ~ a • _ ~ . • • ~ ` ~l , • r ~ rt ~~II~` ~ r-_- - ~ - - - - - i - - - - ~ ~ ~9~ ; `t W Et: , j ) O~~ t~ ~ ~ f•_ h 41 z j ti .~w.c a 8 rql ~ 19w. / . SO 9 ? ? ~ ~ \ ?E' _/X . • ~ , ~ ' ? ~ ~.~-s e~. ^ l , m m ~ \II. CDJ or=mo ~ 2 col O(IDO go ~O \J_ 0~ ~ 1 - - - - 1 _ 015 CROSSROADS e9o I~ _ / ~:~G LO6B; LeV •EL ~ c+a:92.34'c;,Tur.'.; VA[L,COLORADO gARNES COY 1=UNR5-5~EL ARCHITECTS ~Archi[ ~5 o iacK-oFFS rnB ~ ~ _ . ~ _ . . . _ _ ; ~ ~ ~ T : , . ~ ~ - = ~ . . \~1W/ ?.~'~„'r - ' - ~/II JUM CD CD C) 0 0 0 20 'Z,6 > ~l . . , CD . ~ ,if C:D r~ • ~ ~ - , , ' ~ ~ : ~ _ Fmo:64~33 Z ~ - I;A - c:nD - ~ ~ o~`J u ~ ' - / ~~~POO~ -1.39 ~ - t7+ .E CONDO 2 LEVEL (+6203.84' DATUM) gARNES COY ~ CROSSROADS a VAIL,COLORADO 1BUNIISTHISLEVEL ARCHITECTS qrchi[ ts 2 IOCK-OFFS TNIS ~tVE1 r.,~ ;W~ e 4~1 ~~ I~ ~_ ~~ ~ 31 - _ ~, ,may ---_ - --- .; __ - CROSSROADS - - IAIL, COLOIL:DO _ ------ - ------- - ~ r- ~. t `' ~ ~ -, ~ ~:.- ( ,~ ~ --- ~. i~~. ~~- ~~ • , ) ~l~ ~ ~ i . . '~1~.. - - ~~ - ~ w ri '2 ~ ,/( i K i- ~ ~~\I ~m y T ~ " _ - "~i ~ ~ , 3~~ ~.. 3~ - ~;~ ~ .- -- °.~° p1 ~ .~ ~ _ . I /II\ ~ \`~.. Iii ~~., ~ ~ . ~~~JC ,~YIF" ~. Pooh O~~J~ ~~ ~ - BPS ~ ~ CONDO 3 LEVEL (+8215.34' DATUM) - ~~~,~ F.v..,,,,.,~ BARNES COY ®.~ is unrrs THLS IEVEL ARCHITECTS , fArchit is 2 LOCK-OFfS THIS tFVF1 4 C . . . . . . . . _ - ~ ~ ~ - - - _ - ~~';~'c, \ ~ ~ Aiz 72- ~ - ~ LM o- ,~,a~D~pn~'[o~q ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ U ~ \ q'w~'(~ ..~'1 • ~ F' ~ ~Q ~ I ~ ~ j'{~/~l ~ Qt~VJ, 4LLO cD IIf _ 0 nO °5~ C:); ~rm7., ~ , Lt~ i ~ , ~~P ~ - - - - / - hk , - ~ i?.~:. ~S ~ ~ - CROSSROADS _ - a~ CONDO 4 LEVEL (8226.84' DATUM) VAII_ COLORADO BARNES COY ~ . ~ 5~,; . iiuNRSma LEVEL ARCHITECTS ~Amhi[ [s 1'' 2 LOCK-OFFS THIS IFVCL \~V{i tirnacr~ 2a. 2oos ; ~~~Y/ - -- ~ - _ ~, ~ ~ ~' _ ___ '>w WET- _ 'S? ,;-.. ~. ~. ®® -- --- ~y - -- _~ --- - - - -- - ---- K. ~x o~^ ,;9 --~ KQ ~ ~, ~, ~ ~`~ a ~r rnn~ g`'g ~ i - ~ - -I' - _ B® ®~ - 7~ IO ~JI. .' I I I I I I ~- ~-~ ®O ®B - ® 48® II ~ ~ Ii, i I ,i~ ® ~~° ~ -~I Iili ~I II ~ II ` ill - ~ ~ ~~ ®® ~ _ __ _ O O _ ~~ _ e ~!I i~. Ls. . ®® "I"I it ~ dill - 47 _II~I VIII I~I _-1 ' ~ '. I _~ __ _ `5 ° p~~- __-_---- ~ . - ~ - i _ ------ CROSSROADS - _ _. _ .- ___ VAIL., COLORADO -___.____ -i-~ -- ~~ ~~ ~ ~I I z ~~ ~ ~ - _ 4 F _ i r~ 58~~~ f ~~:~ W ~ `~ ~ .~ ~~ :v':' ,'. Z ~_ ~~... _., ,t f I _ U ~ ~, I w ~~ SV - I. , > ~ ~mi,r _ ° o ~ ~~ ~~ 'I _~ o ~ - . O F'.T4 JWi ~ ~ II ~ ~ ''`~ i Popes OR~J 5'( ~~ EP /??~~ con;oo s ~~'€L ~ cAr~+~~ BARNES COY ~ ~" / It UNRS TH6 lFVEl `T ... 2LOCK-OFF THIS LEVEL ~~ ARCHITECTS - - _~ .ARn~1 ~ ~~% M,.R~., tee. zooms ' ~ti. >. ~~{"/ i- - _ ~ `~'~ - ~ _ ,-, - ~~l ~ ~~~ ~ ~.. _ ~; r - -- ~if_~~h~~'~~~,~`..-' r - __ - -_- - _ `~~ - ~~~'~-~ - _ _ R, n L . I f _ - f~ ~~ --- ii I. ~~li~ IIIIIiI: ~Il~ I~i~lll~l- ~\` \ ,~ . ~ ~V ~ ~~ I,I ~ I. lli ~: •v t ~• ~ ~ - ~ l . - r III' ~. ~, ~ ~~II/~ i ~ \ i w »a„ \\1/ ~ < - - - - ~ _ Z ~~c ~ - - ~°~~ vs`a`r ` `°' \ 1 Ili { • C7 ~ C - __ 4'.I _ = tit, '~ i* °~1 ' $~' j ' ~ _ - ' _ g ~~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ill ~'lli (' ill i I ~~ .I i illl..l- - +s, ~~ - ~ r ~!'~ ~IIL_- fIi' _ '-~i... Iii 11 1111 ~ li > ~ '_~. li Il __ I a ~ i ~ '~ - -- I I ~ i III _ ~ ~ ~l I i~l ~ i~~ lii~~ ~ I~ I! Ill -- _ ~ I i ~iil ~ i_ _ _= i~j~ I - - _II i I ~ I~ l ~ ~I.,~' i •~ ~~ji ~~ri~lll ii ~' ~ ;'i;i iji - _ ~ ~ ~ l - ill~~~i ._ ~~ I (I~ il... ~ ~ij ~,G~ --v~~~ j ~li II~II~'i.~~~l~~l~l~l~~~~l ~_ _ _ i ~~ I~ l ~ ~ - _ - it I~~i _~ ~ I~ ~I ' !i~~ ~I~i~li ~ ~ ~" ~~~~,-- ~~~~ I i'ilil~l ;` I~~'l - - ~ ~!1 ~ I~li~~~ ~I ~ _ -- ~ ~- ~ ~ ~ ~ r~~ I~ ~ ~;v -~ ~ i ~I ~ i~~l_~ ~ _ __ - -i IIII, ~li:,iil, .Ili = __ _~~~~__--~~ !~ ( ~~~~~ i ~ll~ -, - 1- ~~'~~; i it i II~iII~~~I i ~~ ~ _/ ~ ~I` `~ ~„ -_ - ~ ~ - _- r ~ _~\\ ~--~ \\1 / / / \ ~~ -=~~a iI Ili- III III I~~ I~ ~~I O ~ j• ---- ~- ~~~G ,. ', -- ~ I~ ii sill - _ - -nti x ~__ =~~ > ~"`~-• ~ •~ ~• '~ ~. _e ~ ~ m • 'G ~- -- - -- - -- - ~ ~- -'c _- ------- - • 1•/ 1 - -_ -__ - - - - ' ., _ _ / ~1 ~_~ ' ~ a4~~k ~ BOND 6 EVEL (+8249.84'DATUM) BARNES COY CROSSROADS •\•~ VAIL, COLORADO I -- _ - _ - "" ~ ~'~~ ]ONRS THIS IkVEL ARCHITECTS ~ ~- .A2n~c c: ////~«~ MOCK-OFFS THIS LEVEL r.. ~' l . ~'!~ ~ r~.aaCr. ~6, 2005 - U__ ~ - - - - _ _ i i - ~ _ ~~~:~.1:\\.\ ~IIIIIII ~ a ~ _ ~ - - ~ ~ - - - L t- - . -T - - - - ~ i _ , . - - - - - Sou[h F r o n t a g e Hoad PARTIAL ROOF PLAN OUTLINE . . sa.. ~ ~sv rar.uFxw¢nsroseaer . u mmem.~ °S°*"/ Sod4n. ~!'HenMm FmqvuVeu~f Wvqw tr~ip blmy~Mb~Ra hbelewtrm~ a~~~ purfilyde&amt• ~dNva mromardtr+n'4 prt m.cmeadtr+na ~ Aesmn- ma~w- u'~tl^ i~~~~y ~mw~veue~ ~.y~.mwe . Iwn~~.)ue~ mae~cpv.nN msw*.~~m~ (~v~bm.)w~ maeunaw~ nncannaY~ ~aM~muvs^Ve vw.mndwbµvem m'm Remrc~eEUa5d~9 ~ ~s etevai~n~ Iwitrob.) ~ v v 'lT a• om,„m„ ~e",.,"'„ C~; ~~~k. ~ ` _ . Ili ~ i' ~f~ , ' ~~~~I ~ ~~v~ yW.n ~ •*•s ~ .._;rn,~: i ~~_,mo-+na j~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : I : . _ ~I I . ` i ',~~ir~~ o q~ ~ , 1j B ~ ~ ' ;,1~ ~ ~ ; ~ ;f; i ~ - ~ ~ ~ - _ ~ ~ ~ _ 1- ~W 1 ¦ ~ ' ' ' , : ~ ~ ~ ~ . '~~1~¦ „ L~ ~ ~I ~!I ~ i Y u. ~ I . ~ ~~~d2 ¦ _ ~ . l y~~ ~ _ . ~ ~ , ~ •iwa~~mma. , r ff, ~f . ,.i ~ ~x d ¦ _ ~ii ~+1~~L - t•. ~~Ri~r•:. _.i ~'~1 s. : ' ~c ~wem. ..am . , . r~uw.+~wmv ~`~`'i,.e ~r~cm . urtwu~m~owu~mu rt ~.wc.wnm u.o~.~,.w. .m.m~amr. - -•:~".w S o u t h F r o n [ a g e R o a d , NORTH ELEVATION CROSSROADS BARNESCOY vnu,coLoruoo ARCHITECTS , ~ ~A¢hi[ Li - -~ I_„ - - ~ ~ ,. I .\ ~\ j ~~. ~~ ~ ~~ .. i ~~~ ~~ ~.\ ~ ;~ .\ - - ~ i ~~~ i%~i ~. ~" .. i ~~ ~ ~~ ~:;~ ~ ^, ~ ~~ ~~ ~ i _ 1 I~l ' ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ! Ali 1.: ~ill~i ~Q, ~ ii ~ ~ ~ .~'~Ji. L.~i _ ~a~ ~I~' Ili ~ ~ 1 ~~ -I. ~ ....I ~ °r`I d- ~. r ~ ^ ~j^ .-,~. ~ - _ ,a.d.~ any,.. ~• ~ rL ~~ .. :__:_ ma cr rmr, ~.. wwu~scwwc v~o~.e.wewo~..m emw~ wwa~s.mm~: ~dwei~ k:n °° ~ CROSSROADS ~sr e~~nnoN ~~'~~ va~,co~oanno yro„~ BARNES COY ~ ARCHITECTS ~ARh~~ ~~ `~ _ ~_ - - ~~, - __ U Q \ _ ~ L ~f ~% / _ r ~~-~ u /~~)) ~~"~i/1 ~. ~~_. ~, ~_I~+. wdv~t'ewama ~u Reay rY~ P aou, ~msV wv W 5[a Sae- M°I rN m~Wb~. ~ae[~wr~aEIYR °Y""'O° uw..•~,eo«.r ""~"'~"~ °~„cm, CONDO-2 PARTUL PLAN OIfILINE e.mn.nwe wvwn wW~w.m..n~w sa..~.uu wu*„sme w~..an and ~ Mme. `~ mu sw-~~'a om wiavaavn - ~~ m.en..welva nvwsFSanr - n ~~ ~a d" .. ~ s•+a Q~ ~ smm Wesel - ~ ~~ ill -~ i i,r ,~~1~-, ~ ~ ,, N, ~ + t.~ 1 a , F*~ ~' F~ { I '~ ~ ~ ~ \ I / C -.. ~~ ~ ~`?~': 'R ® I I ~~:~r~ i / ~ S wewN •p~rem.iee ~y1~,,,~~N~ ~I ~_._~ ~ ~ _ 1. ~is•_I Iif _ ~.• 1^ 1 .... ~1; ^ ~ i~ _~iY^'~ Op_.! ~,. 0 ~ 4~ _~~ 1 ~~ .~IVI l i.+~.:.1 :~ ymnr. wM. _ _~°~- °E 9, ~ 1 ..wso,~~o^ - . .- .;- sjfy -. ~ rrii~~i ;;I. .~~ , ; _ I y wl ~i .. ^] ~n 1 _ ^ limo 1 9~^ 0 it ~ tl _ ~l~ - ~ ,I ~; . - ~. - -°~_ ~ im , ~ s.~ ~ ~ ~i"7~~~^ 7 ~Lr~n' , *v ~ •,,;~ i~~Y~x i; r-~^~~,' ~ ~1 ~r ~ `' ;r~ _ ,~rrra...~ t .. ~. - F~ ~: ,, .- _ ~ '. I k: ,.: y _ t ®' ®U. ®®~"°F ®~ ~~ `f ® ®~ ®~' 37., rum u~usm .. .... _. -._ _ s~a~. o, aes~. o„ s.o v c~wis.~ r.wurm .mm. rea ww•aba..~m o<. ~ ~~ w9.•rou.. n..e,un ~w """°°0" Eas[ Meadow Drive CROSSROADS BARNES COY VAIL, COLORADO SOUTH ELEVATION ARC`riITECTS , •- aAr[hi[ C5 i ) -~° ~- ~ I i i j - :' •' ~ ~ _ ~ ~ _ I ~ I _ ~ - I ,,o, ..-. I I I ~ .\ _ _ _._ ~•~ r •_ ~~~ - -' ~_ ~~~w ~~ m„~ ~p~ ~:~~ ,~, .~, t I 1 .. :.- . age Ivlm4b ~ 71 4~" ~I :mow ~. 'r~ I !~ t ~I ` r ~ ~~~ `~r~'?'?'~ Illi.._ ., _g~ ~ I I I i {iil - ~ - ~.~~ ~ I ~ ~ r~' ~ , L "m"'r~.m~a.~ ~~ . r 1 . I, Ip~l ir'.r' ~ 11 ' I t I II ~1 i.j~~ 11 '_ i, I I~ 1 ~ ' ~~. -- ~ ~~ T - i ^ n-iG - ~j ={ i~l ~~ l i r ~5 t = ~I •! ~ r ~T ~I~ I I ~~' ~F• _'' t I I Y - 1~ _ -11 j"~T1 Il T~,`, -n ~~- ~i - ' 'I' -~t ,I!I~-.!I~ I ~~ ra, r ~ u Is l~ ~ ~ ~-~ _ ~ I ! ~~ 1~ - !~ ~ - ~~ r _ .;. ~ ~ -- - .. '~`'_ _ T~`I. C - ~ _ ~~ •. 1 ~. ~ LuW6 n~3 s~ ~: 't" ~ 4 tr v , ... .,. --.: ... ... ~ ..... :. ..... Y N-}A~[QSSCIX.IroP I.qW Sw:tte ~ ~.. _ .. .. WEST ELEVATION mwvm~~ seg. ~ - uc p,a ~ _ CROSSROADS valL,coLOaAOO BARNES COY ~ ARCHITECTS ARncc a CROSSROADS VAII, COLORADO NEW NORTH ELEVATION V5. OLD NORTH ELEVATION "` BARNES COY ARCi-iITECTS • ~.Archit is ~ ~ I - ~ I - ~ ~ I I~ I II~ ~i, _ - - - - - -----~+r"- r I I °'PII - = = = i + I I = 4~~ = t ~ _ . % Y T NEW WEST ELEVATION VS. OLD WEST ELEVATION ' CRO ~S~ ROADS BARNES COY VAIL, ARCHITECTS ~nRnic u s ~ _ . • -i _, . . .. ~- _ _ ;~ ~. ~~ •. -- = ,_~- e __._ - r I -- _ _. :. - o - - - -. o- :: ,. - ~ __. - . J i _ _ . _ e- e 0 _ ~ ~, x _. o B -~ _ _ - I -~ _ _ _ _ _ - -_ - -- - . -- : 1 i .. _ 1 I ~- ... _ _. ,~ I -- - -- _ ~ -- - . ~ . / __ _: _ _ r _ __ _.. ___~ I B e ~IbG , I ,- -- ' I P I_ ___ __ - ).L ___ _____~ I. ~ Ir`,1 _ . I _ 1 I Y\ _ --- ~ 1 _ I m ._. ` ' ; Z 1 0 -- ~:I ~ I ~ F- --- Ir , p ~,,,,,,pppppp,,,,,,~ III - _ -~ ~ ~ I ~ _ ~ / .L 1~ _ J y 1I~J~~~A•A1I`` i i I. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i .I,I ~_ _ _ ~~-I- - - ~- - - - - ' . ~ ;i . _ _ ' I . - -I -i \ ~ ,tt~ ~~~j ~'i iii .~_- ~~ ~ i _ ~ a.,. ~ ? ~ ~ ~ E.~ ~ x, ~- z `:, M~Pao _ -. - -~ .i-_ -- _-- -...: i ~ ~ I ~----- ----___~ I , - ~ 1e ~ ~i., n -- - ---~-- ~ . =vio - ;•RQ • r•' ~ - ~' .~ " rn~- ~BARNES~COY 7 _ \~~ ~~ CRS Ice a~nK cnMra.a,son ~A\RCHITE~S EAST MEADOW DRIVE __ - - - i '. ~~ ~ G ~N PLAZP. it --l 1 ! \ - - - y ... .... ___ I I__ ' _.._ . _' _ _' _ i ~ I ~e :.: I - _ ~ -. - _..: ._ .. _._ .. _ ~ - .__. _. _e' _ .. _. _ _. ... _. ~ . _ o __ e 'I o B `y~ ~ - - - - - - - - •' R --- B i _. o ' 0 0 ..~~ 1 r~ - -_ -B -~_ e - - - --- ~ .i. ; I ._ I _ r ;: -: F~ i ~ _ __ _ _ ~ 0 _- :_ - -:: a _=_ :: - ---. ~~, , a - --- --- -- - -- -.. - _ - ~ 6 ~r - / I l ~/' ~ _ - r -_ _ ~-- I - _I r' _ -- - \ I ~' ~ ,-r .~ _ I to ~ r i c~,Y ~ `) ,'~.~,k t I4~~~ /,'. ~` ~,y4c I~ - _ I . - / ~ ill! ' ' ,L rr "~Lf --~~ - ~ ;+ ~ SAM ~ ' \r ~ I _I ~_ ._~ t l 7?,ice.. ;, ~~ ,. ~ \~ 1x,111 - II ~•., ,~~.ti, I I .: `~ ,~ I CROSSROADS BUILDING DIAGRAM Extent of Buildin Be and 20' Setback BARNES COY van, cotoanoo __ - -~- 9- Y - -.~ scale : T" =ib'=1i° ARCHITECTS One story dock structure within ZB' set back L` J Buildable area out of setback ~.. ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~... - ~ ~' -.. -. - I ~~ I B L +~ Utz ~ ~;~_ .~ " " .. e _~ll~-- ~ _. - - - - ~ • -- - - _ .. _ ' ~ °. - ,~.~ ., ~i/ :~,;. , _- ___ ~~/G , x,41 `I _ .:-. - ~,~+~ ~ %ir~~f ~i ~ - .. - - --- . ,, .; .. . ' _ ,i i .. / r ~ i _ r ~~yy~~ , .J ,Y - --- /• - ~^ ~.. r~ _- .. ~/. . / •. .: 5 i 'o _. . -` Y~ ,; . :. .._ '.iii 7'' i~ / ~/~` :~ . '• ,. .. ......., r. .. , .' .. .; . .;.:%. c _ .. .. ', ::~ - :~ ir:' ~ ..::' ~ _ ~ .. .: ,.. i ~~~ '• 1 R,r , its '. U'' :y;,i l ~ Z~~ i tl - i ~ - .... - f 1;-= O~~ .-~~ tic:, :_ E -- r. . -t------- --- .. ...-_.._. i i ,u ..v ,~Z~„ ~~3'• -- -- ~~ ~~~ ~~ .. .~. • GEC` EAST MEADOW DRIVE - _ __ -_ ~ ,.,\ A'.\\ ~ ~; -s\ I '^t; :ti 7< ~ rig _ •~~~„ ,rf,y SWISS CHALET 2~ ''?. :~'~;;~ PLAZA AREA CROSSROADS Scale : 1' = 16'-0" VAIL, COLORADO - AREA OF PLAZA 24,1305E BARNES COY ~ ~ARFA OF PROMENADE 6,3885E ~ ~ ARCHITECTS r~ArchR is CROSSROADS VAIL, COLORADO SIN in VILLAGE INN PLAZA FRONTAGE ROAD ELEVATION COMPARISON Scale : N.T.S NOTE: Frontage Road drops 16'-6' from Gossroads front door to Gateway front door. VAIL PLAZA HOTEL GATEWAY BARNES COY ARCHITECTS ROUNDABOUT 1.` - r A¢hit Is iE \`\~. _ .\\\ ``, VILLgGE INN PLg2A ~\ CROSSROADS vuL,coLOaaoo EAST MEgpOL,y DRIVE `i: -~_ .:a -..,eta r \r '_~~~. ,~^'~y -~__-----~.__.__ --- _'--_ -- ' _- -__ -_ ..--- ~_- _' r ~~ ---- __ ~--~_ ~_. __ 'i~"ich~~~~r~_ _~=. --~~_ ___~_SOUTIi FRONTAGE ROgp_~-- ~~_..,~a'~i:~.~__ __-`"-~--~__ - -_ ~i ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~C=~~ ~'+ q S J. r ~ `.. i ~ I '_'\+ ~~- ."~--rte .y„ ~ --c~ F'} / ",-', r~-`L7,,<.F,.. - '--', , Irk ~ ~/ ~ f. i~~ 1 1 _ ~r T.~ I ~T't~ ~ L 1 ~'+;4\A~ !' "+h~?.,yrt 3J ~4 "ol>=et ~-_ ~, r ~- , ` y. r, x 1 T r' i'~ rfi~„ ~ r i*.-'~' ~ "~ .'~ `.. 2 L ~-~.„r tom. t ~~i . h °' #'~ r ..~ ~4..,,, \ ~ ~.. tirr"- .rxc ;y,~, ~t~~ i-~ -+.I~f~'d- xi~.t.=i~ r~ 1 /I 17 ~.; ~ jai a a _ ~e .r /r. z'~_ ~ ti~ `~.~" i ~'S, ~ X /\ f ~ _f - ~ r-\ ~ ~ x a `~. J 1 .. r - ~ - - r 't ~1 ~'\ \ T ~\ 1 r ~ 1 r . 1 * - ~l ~ ~, i .-- - - i. I~~~ \:,` }~~a %_r ~- dill`".,., .. B 1 .1,. ti n ~ J - s~ T/^~~)s.`vU` f 1-f :: -~ ~t ~ C a .- f /7( 17: _ ~- .~ 1 :. ., ' 1 "Arm? ~ \ \ _ \~~\ ~ li_ -"`4~ ~°M / \ t"+~}~ ~! I C ~ - ~ . / j ~` ="i T -' ~ ~` s ~ ~\ 14~~ h rV ~r i ~ `' ~- ,.,,ter ! r ~\~'-r :7 ~ ~ - i <' ~'T'rSti \ ,w = `~ ~ ~ I` `~ {{ ~ ~ ~ 4 >/ - - I~I 41 a /'4 i- '~4 ,yC 1~ 71 .{ ~~ ~~ \ ,~ _ 7; ~ ~ 3 Y 1 `l- ~ ~4,. ~,.la -.~•>:-nom '~'x _ III ~ ~ I _. ~-''.~/ Iv ~~.. v~ _.-_.-_ _ -_ _ 2 /~. __ ~ i ~ - ~+'~~ S MEP ~~ r ~ ..~,,,m.,+, r S ~^~ v rr.'1iG ~~ BUILDING HEIGHT PLAN (historic rade BARNES COY ~I=>r ®~ ARCHITECTS ;~~~ ~nrcML cs u; - , - " ~ - - -N~~_>,i,;. sou .;.;II -'--_TH .,~pNTAGE_-- 1~~',~ ^ ~ ' ~ ~ ' ~ I I ~ ~ • 7~- I ~ sS -s~' ~ ~ I "q 1 ~ il' : • ' 1 1 ~ , ~ ~ ~ o--n ~ ~a ~ a, -a ;,,.;,o~- ~ ~ VILLqGE1N _ ~ L_ 1- l` ~ ~ ~ - -~iT~'~r ~'T' fz~ '.~,'C~`"` t i ~ _ ---~7 _ _ ~I • ' 1' - ~ i - - 5-' ~ - 1 ' - Jr~(r'~-`~ ~ ~r xi,y~~ . .'t. f. ~iro-l~ ~ r• ' ~ } .0 /..~~1~~' ~_~4~.i I ~a,,.,.'i ~ ~ a~. ~ i i 1 :-i _ qC1 r} i I~'( ~~1~/ ` ' z"~J~,. `*Y i~•._ ~ c~l : ~u ? ~~~'-f' If' l, ? L \ \ . ' If 'Al r-- l . ~ - \ , f',~ . ~ : ~ i } i' ~ y , f c~ - - ~ ` ~ ir i f -a _J ~1 \ '==1t:~ t~ J' ~ i . ~ ~ i~ r+=1 7~ 1 1~ I'mi~ !L ~ F _ ~ ~ J ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ \ . i ~~4:~ ; r ~ TCN ~~:J. ' ~.,.~..m•~ I•'~,,,,,,, ~ y . ~ ~ I 1 . i ~ i ~ ~ ~ 't;. . I , ~ /~,y ? ~ ~,p ~~b _ ~y T _ ~ \G ~ I bn~j\-~4 i r -y., 'v, Nr~?~,~j i~~ ~i ~ _t~'v~~•...,.,., :i) ~ ~ j;~ " t -~r~ .Z~,~ i ~ i~ - r S 1 I ~ ~ ^ .;~i,. ~ ~ \ .•C~;' ~--;;--~'i , _ ~.1 ;`v. 2R` I ~ - - '?j.~f,,.• ~ ~~.^':~""-...,.~,.,~,1. . ,i" ' ~ ~ ~ \ ~ ~„yt; ~ l•.. „`I- t+-~% ~ ~r% ;C`~, rJ,_~_ M""`u:s o a,~'h -~^F': ~ / ~t ~ --;_j.•,~ ;~."4-,~.>\~. 'i i ~ ~ ~ aij~. /~;j ,.r,,~r?~ 'j . '~y~ .a+y,,~/;,1:~' 1 ~ ! ~~1/G"::.~~'`^',. ::f^. .E.. - ~ ~:4 1~ e~; .~^it<:^~p q`~ ,l '4• ) -1 ~ 1..i r~~ ~ 1~` i~ ` -i ' ,,c ~ I '~f,(~ +..u~ci } n a"°p"-y~ II.._ ~ n ~ ~~--a~ 1. r.-1~P~"~• ~z__ i i .-:~R ° ~ ~ ':;f.~i~:.. v~ ~C'••t~' I ~'L~~ ~1~ 1 ~f*~°~=~~ ii ' - .t :I'~ ~ ~e..•.Z'o.;c` l ? ^l, -r i ./_,i V .1 ` - ~ -ti. ~ ' .:~.i, \ ( _ ~ h-~ ~ _.R ~ - ~ ^ - n ~ ~ •'J Y F: - _ ' ~ - :'at , 3a~. ~ ;•`F,.: ( 5 y 1 ,:~ct' ' t ~ '•t . ~ v- '.~"t'o ~r`•;.r`agi, ~~cJ`.:'L.. - ._C. n"t:~ - ".7~. - _ _ ~ ~ . sr:t'>>•:,: : o . . J~. Rilll~. . o . - ..w ~ _ y.' .r -_i,~ 'f' _ ::~c~) • ~ : r c ^ S ~v"~-~ ~ C ..,.,a.. If I ?~(l. ~ . , . _ j: _ •"Y `.\J - i . s ~ ~ I - ~..5.°' '-t~ • ~ ' ~ { 1~.. • _ L; .:..q z i C'~":.~~ •r'•~,ri~ ~n I 1 _ ?i.:, ~ - ~ - . n . 'St: r. . . Ln"f'~.. . - `-"L-'~ J~'< T~ l:~.~iZ~~. _ - \ VF / l- - 1 - ,o~., u~~~ , , ar~:,,, c:rcicn>--= - B - _ C• 1 - °:i. ..~5, _ , ; c~.a,~ " , ~i.•.o%'~ ~E T y~~=`-~ . ~ I '~T~. _ J EP .~1~ c . :.m~'• - ~ i :4„ _ '\,~:1 =~j,- . ^~2 h1EADOW DRIVE ir .t' '~c'.• (0 `%`,L=", ':5.~~ 1 .^3'": ~ ~ ~ - .,,Y ri;r' - ~ . K. ,.fi.<.a .~k..k~i \ ;~;,:~r:?~~ ~ ~ \ - ,t~..".~.t.,} ~+:'r r` • _ _ ~P~~ ~ ',F.~.~. ~ I CROSSROADS BURDING HEIGHT PLAN (ac[uaf grade) gARNES COY ~ VAIL,.COLOAADO ARCHITECI"S t .n2n+c a M4R~., ~e, ~oo~ ,;:<'~ y -~ t - _ ~ ~~ i t J ,~ _ •~ I I ~ ' 1 1 - ~ - ~ i. 1 1• ~ __ I 1 ~ it N +. ~~ ,. m tE ~ m ~' , t . ~ ..k ~- ~ ~~ 1 ' ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ • ,lit.. 3.~ - - ~ ® ~_ ~~• ~ ,~3 i~ ;~+a "" - t^ ~~ ~?~;: is ~ '~i. ~ i ~ ~* ~ ~ i ~ ~'~ c u%ilf-~"k ~ . - ...,~---- --, c f ~ - i0 -~ ~+. y,~s •m .fig Li,w ~Y}~ ~ _ ~,,, ~ ' n• ~ Ii ~.y 'I s-• ~. ? •.u ~ ~ ~ 1 , t _ .r ~ / k .r ,.. J _ h 1 1 j - ~ s , , ~ ~ ~ s ~ ~ I~~ ICI I~~_ aE 1l.~ 6 ~yP ~/~ ~ ~ ._;~.. ~ ~ ~~ ~ QC' i''.~...~-• a .L a ,r Y CROSSROAD '\ ~~. „~ s ~ ~° • < -~ ` _ 's ~ y f` ® ~.-,..=~_'C_ V~ vAIL, coLORAOO ~ 4 ~ ~ r' _~ ~Pj'\ y] `C ~ ~~ ®- BARNES COY p, ~ so..n •,~,,,,,,, ~. SUN STUDY SUMMER AND WINTER SOLSTICE PLAN ''~ ~ ~ ,o,.. ~•~... ,~ ~,.„ E,r,.,e„.. s ARCHITECTS .I •Afcmt ~ V{ r . ~ ~ 1 ~ • ~ Aa'~~ . ,o. r a.._ qi i f ~ ~ •g t - _ ~~fi~' ~ ~ - 7 1F f ~ ~ J~ti',~ -i ~i i 8 II ~ . i ( ',f'_. . .'t"~, ..ti ~p~ ~ e: ~ti ~ :~~,p'r ti: L ' . t ` ~ 1 ~i • }~ip r L.,~ ~ .^S~^ ~ ~ ~ . x~ t~ y Ki~ ~,1~,~` 3 i :r . r p p ~ "e•~.-_~.- ~1~. ~ ~~'a~~~ , ii * .~~ta~d { ;l~'~~'.~+A- T~~ ~ _ ~'y_.r-•4"S~ . ~~r, f ) "i ¦ ~ ~ y ~ .c~`~~°,Ti ~-.~.~~r . . ~ ~ ,H '_',,,~"',u..t - « . 6 -~-T-r,= K£~]'~.. i t ry~?.C.:y'F[1 ~'~j~•~~k .F - ~~c• ~F~ ~..a • 1: ~ a-s~, , ~ , s . =i.q• i ~q~j' r , - ~l~ s! , ~ p~~ s • . '~Fy g, " r • _ 1_~ . ~yj 7 `i y'} ] 1r- ~ ~YTx. - v ~ ~ d i. i 7 !1 7 F 1 ' ~w E..~ .,ijret~~.. f -1~ 7., !'w ~t S ~.l_ x: ~.WS~'~.`'`Ykr- ~-.J ~j~=.:.lr ,~v ,~Y"Y ' '~7..,4~ p•+ ft ?;se . - e.."1 _~R:.~ ^~+;Ti _ . SiJ %'y., - `:~1~ ~ ~ ik~~, ae~ :1;~A ~`^T: ?rr~^,x~~.l; - f .R.°. - . ~ ~f ~~rI~~,r;~ j ~.q.t;~ Fatx : ~ ~a= - F t~ ~ . .tt ~ f _ _ _ ~4• r :~i' ~ - yc ~ 'rt ~ ' t k . X r~" ~,,,y 4 _ : ~'l r{i,'1k~,}~ ~~lt~,` ,F . 'r.tk} . x~~ .1 ' ,I" .t ~j~~_ +e.'•w„~i,;"~' gg 11. . . . . . . . t~;4`f'?'EIS.< "'e`~.. rr~ ' ' ~ ~4- ..r^'- , - ,M;.: ~ ~7: .'L ~''~r--'A'z~ j4 --,~~-~.~.y -.;:-,_,y,-~{ ?r 'C", } . h F7, .~„r. r! ,I ` , k:, r~ ~ ~ 4 ~ v, ~xr~ ~a~~ .i`-:t-.+,~T ~ i~ .,:{~`~.~4F~~: ' ~ i~e~' ::x::. •p,<:. .y~. t~-a. ~t„~:.+~.~. _ _ ~f..r-r.. ~~:v.;2'~ f iu-~~~~j' {a. ~ ,~Xi1~'p. ~'`N• ,qi ~:~~Y' u' ••'n' t ~,'.'r`'L- s~~i_~r .:C4~J~~ 1~ t .s.~.':zr'!~'. 7'~ ~rt `~,~T ~r~ . , - ° ~t 4~' 3 ;~i'?- w~+;,~-?b::: •~-~1.y~.G t ~~C~: y..r~ «t% F., f'~?.,.. d'r',.'R°`' ~ rt`o%'~' ~ ' ~ ~ i o L. "'I .,-~,±r~'.~~^"e` i' r . .Y%' t . F ft -d , c `v ;.o'. ~ ' 14 ' - r ".f,f. • ~ . ~ . ~~y~. J{*f~ ti: ~ f n,?-._ . + ~~''3, q ~ J 1~ . ;'9: r.:: -~~,~t ~ - i ~ ~ a, r~ a t Y. Y °'-~f }4'U~_.i~'~+r,`F_:iydi~' ~:'~-?as>-a: ~ ,a. ~ .3-;~•- t~ . fo` v. n L'` . ~ ,~c . .iy. .r-` r: _ .p ~"-'r~~~ " '.is .,:A`-. {`n: i ~~ti ~f~ - Jft ~~<.:Y~ -~~-c~.^~G~-• ' ' *q'.-F..; _,~.c ~ ~:_r ~r~-...y.t~~,sy~ ~`~~p~~y-a ~3'~~~ S. ,(~s,::~~ ~ - - $ ~.'n•b' ~r 't ' ~..:+W-. '.S» f . r _ ,F~ . ~ @ i : = I ~ 5 ~•~+y"'-,d-'~• - .;yp„„.:I •.;'-1..~rr.-,. u' ~ ~ y.~..~.. _ [y v~ ~,Zi.;~'Z]~ ..h~,,~:0.~ ~ .~:Y,Y•9 iM.,i . ' ~ , -~'~'x-~ .hr~°"I'. _ .~:'.to-; i~~~..._ .i.- > w s, x'-',4y,,.. . 4~~r` ~r _ ~ e .t ? 'F, 'h ; s`~' avr e ~ :iL 1~~~~,. 7 ~ .`~~51! h~5:,'-a~~.-'-'. ~t, _ =,y~~~PE~.~~~_. ~ - ~a."~;~+,- '`r.=•'~-, ~ ~F l~tr r i~..Yit:~tiF m.Y:: • . . d .~'-r. t yL f~. ~ -s~. Paf ~ ~ .y :k'~ .a 'k t- {t .ry`F'-i~6~?'~ ~~5.- x ' ~a ~~'„~r.'• ' - • 5~ ~a._ ~ ~ ~ , v ~ ~ .~r~"'a3^"'~ ~y-:--"~s t e~~~~ ~,_z~.~ t'~ ,~~~i~ai*s+" ~ . : ~,+t . ~ -~=..4 ~ : z4 • . ..g - ,~7[y~*~~ . a., , . . r s'r'_Jf~~~.-;~ ~~i_:r• x• ~ _ ' f~" ~ ~~:T.v~'.~c,,~:.~,., ,t „5~:, "~L~ .,.<r - . T ~.r;,f+,-.. -ty~5 t'F` +r j, 1'^ y~'~-r.: ~~~r i.;=. :7' - ~ i :h'. 2~•~Vr„ ~`2. . r -pR~, ' T... b ~ ' ~ .,r~ ~~~.ria`x ~.T.~ .P ,'Y F i . , ~ ' - `-ti ~r . 'r '3 x st . ~ ~y~ ~+ric"- •r ti ,t~ ~ r _;.~k' - . 7.. ~ g . ' ~ . ~ >k> ft~ *P~,``~ _l-. ' h'f".~-- . t. ..~~~y, i,4~~•„ "4- t.' .i t S''i > , ~.~i' ~,r ^`y~'$~ ~r:'k~~:~~,'• ~tx+.~ ; , ~,t: •k~. s.. ~3:~{~~ m~"~ ,Y"a' ~ ~„'~at 3- ~~..~u~~.,~ ~w _~.',~l:~ i` ~F~..^y6r^:'~ ' P _ ~.k. _ v nx R. : d5r .a _ ~ . •+~~'~"'sf~~ ~.x :i 4 . ~ ~t ~ i~ . -'L..~,~'~^ . 4 a' ~,x' } t r, { Y.e* +t2-'4 ,~yx,~_' 'sx'-.~ ~ J'~ . . N . _ ~~',,~`f,:s,_,~, aw „r Ni.if.~~-*;. :.d~'~ ~.r~a~`t:~"x& ~.'i.`;~~ ~,a.~,.5 •~-~*3.~ y~ !r . ..s.-~ k~•!'~:~ r '3r ~."~i kVo PON~.~ , .,K` ~i.•~~ , ~ r`~"'3 ~s r t-i i,~ ~e"-,-,•~ ~ ' a~ `""~"y-- dt ~__•---.~4Y r ~'.z"~ , ,ti'jat_r 'k ~SJ .'t, ~ . ..a.; ~ . ~ _ ~ _( \ ~ ~~ _~ r C~ossr~~ ~~~t~~~¢ . Scf~ . -~. i ~_ __ -.____-_.~..:. - .rte ~. A ~~ \ ~:. _:. - - ~_. --~ . _ ~• ~_ - I t ~; ;~~ n \ 1.=~ 5 ~ f..,, ~ 1 ~,-. r t -,~~_~ ~:~~~a% -^~ sue-, , ~i - sl ""1 ~~ ~-'~` 1 ?. 3.4 nnF:tIMUL9 RPFIGE OF 6LnLDrtJG HEIGHT IN STORIES \~:-"~`'+-:_ e~~• n Anbing Story is Oelinetl a. 9 Itel of neiphl :.i ;/~~':\ ~ . root irrlueaol. E.acl negnl reslrtirims ~ I.~^ill be tlelerm~netl oy zarung. varied rael nei?nIi .Y_! within range specAietl is tlesreE IN aCn Ovikling ' ..; DENOTc'0 EY.LSieJ.a CA .~PPADVED Bu~_OW(',5 NMCH r DO NOT COrarOAU TO -ME COI.ICEPTWI 6uaDING HEIGHT PLAN SHaDIrIG DENOTES :RE.15 OF SevLaA HEIGHT tE :,xrnnu,-m. ~, ~, _--~;;~\~-'~''`,YZ~ \\~::. ~. ~ - S, i r. S ~ ~ ~ {~"~'~!ptf', ,,n~ ~.c-s "~"~.'~~ ~i \, ~ ~ ,`~r_L r ,. C~,~~~~ ~r. \ ~"s.~;3 ~~~ ~~ .. \~ \ r~.-1 el'{..\\~ ~`~ `'C`,"' '"~`~' P~ ~ 'Jtit . 1L ~1~ / io~o, \~ CYO r J+ .~ ~Y'~ tf U~~~ ,l %~ ~ ~ l~r~~y ~ - `~-y\ ~. l~~< ~ ~\ i- ate /~ +~x '.'~.`~ ~S~c~. -_. 1 r -~ -.r `>~J ~ ~~C, ,\_~~q Sy`yc~~_.2%' { '~~,., ~` ~~~~ 4\ "'~ ~v~,~~-. : \ '~~^ ~1 - ~ - ~~\~~\~\4 _ ~\` /^ ~\ r ',, F ~ /. ~-cv ~ ~.~ . ~~ , -yam '~~~ . \ \~ . ~ < ~_~'" \~ :. ~. 1. / / ~ ~\ .. t ~- ... ,. .. _ ,., j i .~ ~-.,:~ .. -~~ -~ ~~_~~~r'~-. :I ~iEiiii:iiiF;''a EE;r.:SE!5 - _.-- .. :{^~_ ~ ~_ i - _` .'ice/~_ ``_ ~ _ ~ '~__ ~. -~1 =_.! `, 7 ~.._~,sy 5 >„~ _/ ~ ~_ ~. ~ -~ --- - > „"~-`-x~~-~_ -- ~ ~\~--~~~.~ `_. 1' - / .'iii - _I ~"~ ~- ~ ~-.`' -~_- \,_ ~_-~ ~~~i'' CONCEPTUAL LEGEruD ~~~ -- ~`~ ~~~~~ ~`: ~~~i. /f::e`f/ !, ~ ~~ ! li3U~ i~ PLAItl ~---- ^~ W n .--- ~ CCp~v~-~~ ~vel~ ~ite., - ` . -~-~ _ .. :..>. ... ~ r ;:y:~, :: _ ~l v ..,v (~yy. ~~ ~.k~ ~ II `GORO ~~,~~1 ~~ I ~ ~ ~. = =-' e-...i _ u Ill PoNC , -,. _ ~ _ ~ -+-r 'I F ~ IIII I I , Cls - 1~~,_~-1~~ .yZ ., \ -~~ ~ ^~'~'\~ ~~ r _-- 1 ~ 4 _ _ _ ~ \ _ 11 f~ ~_ '~~)1 ~ I ~H n~'r r ~I 4 a rl~~~~~. _,•/, I~' YTII r ~ r ,_ ~`\ 1 - \ \`\`` T\ %fJ _11ai N'--f _ ~ I ._ `= f/ J ~-r .~~ ,f ~~. ~If ice' L - 3 - ~ ,~~, ~~~ -- `~ i _ 1 ~ 1 ~r = 1 ~ I r -fir" "i I ~ ~ ~.• a• -T`~ ~~., { 1 ~ l , i~ ~ A / 1 A'~ ~ ~iy ~ t.:. ~!i` - ~ ~ ~-~_ -,,. i..<.. ~y ~^L~F' ~I'r:`~i ~ I I~ ~i= I ~?ii .._..` u~~: _" ' '!,- / 'rte'' - - ~_ .tom :'~ ~(< r .G ~ ~ I~~ _ tom= ~ ~ + -- ~ >~ ~ i -~ - , ~ o -_= =___---__ ~1~~\~ ~ ~ f~~ ~ ~.. LAND USE PLAN LEuEI"lU *. - ~ . !.. _ V.UL VILLAGE ^L'iN :PUBLIC FALM1flY lPAflKING t.,+ ~~~~=`` ~\` i!iliilll• rxAEG u5c . . rdEf%UFn/HGM DEIISRY RESIOENTIAL SKI BASE /RECREATION ~ / ~ ' ~ ~/~~' LOw DENSITY RESIDEMIAL `~` Crossroads Employee Housing Plan The employee housing requirement for the Crossroads Redevelopment project is proposed to be accommodated in one or both of the following methods: • Payment in lieu of providing housing to the Housing Authority or Town of Vail; or • Deed restricting, existing housing units dispersed throughout the Town to meet the required number of beds. We understand that the Town and the Housing Authority maybe considering the establishment of a fee in-lieu exercised on a case-by-case basis. Depending on the fee which is established, the owner of Crossroads would prefer to make this payment in order to fund future housing endeavors throughout the Town. If the payment in-lieu system is either not established or the fee is otherwise not acceptable to the owner of Crossroads, the owner will purchase and deed restrict existing housing as has been permitted for numerous other development projects over the last 20 years. Attachment: E Condominium Rental Program Crossroads Intent: The condominium rental program is being developed by input and direction from Stan Cope who has more than 30 years of experience with successful rental programs. The rental program is focused on three main goals, which have proven successful for Stan at the Lodge Tower, as well as numerous other high quality, tourist oriented properties: 1. Owner asset management; 2. Owner rental income; and 3. Owner's personal usage and satisfaction. When these three goals can be achieved, condo owners in a large condominium projects will rent units voluntarily. Currently, 75% of the units in the Lodge Tower rent and the renting owners yield 63% of the gross rental revenue: In summary, the key to achieving the above goals is to emulate the management of a fine, high quality, luxury hotel. The management program is a hospitality program above all else. On-site management and management offices are a necessity. Top level services need to be provided to renting guests and owners alike. Great service and a first class property will attract the kind of clientele that not only can afford a fine resort but will respect the property of others. Owners become proud of being part of the resort and have confidence that their asset is being well cared for while producing a' painless, welcome income to off-set their ownership expenses. The level of service to be offered includes daily or twice daily maid service, 24-hour desk: and concierge, bell and valet staff, local transportation service, pre-an-ival activity, ski. and grocery service and premium rental equipment. An in-house maintenance staff not: only quickly provides for guests needs but corrects problems in units before they become; a major problem and expense to the renting owner. Owners become confident that their arrival will be hassle free and as enjoyable as a vacationing guest in spite of a rentin€; guest occupying their unit the night before. The final piece to encourage owners to rent is creating a financial structure that strongl~~ rewards owners that rent. The cost sharing structure between the Homeowners' Association and the Rental Program needs to be an integrated program that equitably balances all of the services being offered to owners and renters alike. Properly anti efficiently designed, owners will be financially rewarded for renting instead of carryinl; the service costs for all owners, as is the case in many condominium hospitality programs. Strategies for successful asset and rental management 1. Client asset management. Attachment: F Condo owners are reluctant to rent their homes if they perceive that their asset is at risk from damage, theft, or other property degradation. When there is proper staffing to allow for daily inspections of property and proper assurance of damage replacement, condo owners feel more comfortable renting their homes. Crossroads will employ an adequate staff to insure proper property supervision and inspection to the highest level of quality. Daily maid service is made available to owners and automatically provided for guests in order to provide convenient service to the guests as well as a supervision mechanism for the management of the property. If the property is managed at the highest level of quality then owners feel comfortable allowing their asset to be utilized. Crossroads plans to manage the property at the highest level of quality with 24- hour on-site management, security, and client services. 2. Client rental income. Condominium management can be an expensive non-deductible expense for condo owners. The Crossroads rental program will be structured similar to that of the Lodge Tower where the overall condominium ownership expense can easily be offset by the income generated by the rental program. Additionally, condominium owners can expect net rental income reaching 63% of the total revenues from renting one's condominium. 3. Personal usage and satisfaction. Probably the most important aspect of a rental program is flexibility. Some owners will purchase a condominium in Vail for personal use as a higher priority to rental income. Having ones home available when one wants to use it is extremely important to the success of a rental program. An owner does not want to feel trapped by committing to certain days or weeks. To create flexibility owners are asked to set aside dates they think they maybe in Vail and dates they know they will not. Owners are able to check back frequently with changes to schedules. Additionally, management staff stays in close contact with owners when bookings are being made to make sure the owners usage is not being infringed upon. Based on Stan's experience working at the Lodge Tower, we believe that at least 50 of the 76 proposed condominiums will be successfully rented. This exceeds the predictions utilized in the revenue analysis prepared by Steve Thompson who assumed only 30% of the units would be rented. Amore detailed management program will be developed in the coming months. • 24 Hour front desk and concierge • High level of service to unit owners • Fee structure allowing those participating in rental program to offset management and maintenance fees and obtain rental income • Daily maid service available • Full-time management/rental staff located on-site • ,Food service delivery available from on-site restaurants • Fulltime on-site security • Active marketing program for rental units locally and nationally • Participation in national condo rental/exchange club MEMO To: Warren Campbell, Senior Planner From: Tom Kassmel, Town Engineer Re: Crossroads Redevelopment-Public Works Comments Date: 4-22-OS After a review of the resubmittal of the Crossroad redevelopment plans, the Public Works Departments finds the following issues that will need to be addressed prior to final approval. It is noted that the grading and civil drawings have not been fully updated to match this newest submittal. These will. require additional review and comment. The following outlines comments that will need to be conditions of approval of PEC. Public Works conditions of approval: 1. Final Civil Engineering drawings and Final Drainage Report must be approved prior to Building permit submittal and meet all Town codes and standards. An additional review and comment period will be required for this submittal. 2. The access off the S. Frontage Rd. is key to this development. A C-DOT access permit shall be submitted and approved prior to Building permit submittal and shall be a condition of PEC approval. If changes to the PEC approved plans are required by C-DOT to facilitate an Access Permit the applicant will be required to return for an amendment to the PEC approved plans. 3. The Porte-cochere circulation shall be approved by C-DOT as part of the C-DOT access permit. 4. Village Center Road shall be graded with a normal crown. 5. Applicant shall be responsible for the complete design and construction of the roadway improvements as shown on the Crossroads Public Improvements plan dated 3/28/05 and also the complete design of the remainder of Willow Bridge Rd. going south to the International Bridge, excluding but matching those improvements being designed and constructed by One Willow Place Road. 6. All private improvements within the public ROW, including any temporary shoring that is to remain in place, will require a Revocable ROW permit. 7. All shoring walls shall remain within the private property limits. 8. The proposed drainage system along the S. Frontage Rd. shall be coordinated with Vail Plaza Hotel and tied into the Vail Plaza hotel proposed storm sewer system. 9. Limits of Streetscape improvements to be discussed and approved prior to DRB approval. 10. Show all grades and drainage for parking structure. Provide asand/oil separator. 11. Is the loading and delivery access shall be right-in right-out. Right-in and right- . out operations may facilitate receiving an approval from C-DOT. However this may also require a roundabout at the Village Center Rd./S. Frontage Rd. Attachment: G intersection to accommodate vehicles needing to return to I-70 at Main Vail. This will require further investigation with C-DOT. 12. The Traffic impact fee of $5000 per additional pm peak trip generation shall be assessed and put forward directly to mitigate traffic impacts. These fees may not be deferred to indirect public improvements (i.e. streetscape, landscape) that are otherwise required for approval. 13. All necessary easements, agreements, bonds, and permits must be in place prior to building permit submittal. (i.e. construction easements on adjacent properties, utility easements, pedestrian easements, drainage easements, access easements, revocable ROW permit, ROW permit, etc...) 14. An excavation shoring plan shall be required to be approved prior to Building permit submittal. 15. The developer shall be responsible to construct all necessary storm water improvements in order to convey all contributing on-site and adjacent off-site drainage to gore creek. 16. The open plaza should be dedicated, similar to the Lionshead Core Site Pedestrian Plaza as a public access easement. 17. The developer shall incorporate Art in Public Places. 18. The loading and delivery facility should be made available to provide capacity to other sites. This will require easy access from the delivery facility, down a service elevator, then direct access to the plaza level. 19. A stormwater discharge permit and erosion control plan will be required prior to building permit approval. 20. An approved staging plan, phasing plan, and construction schedule shall be required prior to Building Permit approval. Mauriello Planning Group April 12, 2005 Warren Campbell, AICP Senior Planner Town of Vail 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 8 1620 Re: Crossroads Redevelopment -Retail Area Study Dear Warren: This letter shall serve as an update to the commeroal area analysis provided to you previously on the Crossroads project (see attached analysis). I hope you will find this useful in your analysis of the project. The analysis shows that the current Crossroads contains approximately 13.8% of the all of the commercial space in the Vail Village area (40,53 I sq. ft. of a total of 293,343 sq. ft.). Upon completion of the redevelopment of Crossroads ~t will represent 19.6% of the total commercial floor area in the Vail Village (6 I ,596 sq. ft. of a total of 3 14,408 sq. ft.). This figure represents a significant increase in the available commercial area within the Vail Village. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, ~~~ Dominic F. Mauriello, AICP Principal PO Box 1127•Avon, CO 81620.Office: 970-748-0920•Fax: 970-748-0377^Cell: 970-376-3318^mauriello@comcast.net Attachment: H Summary of Vail Village :Retail Analysis .................................... Com lex ----- Retail SF A&D Tawer 4,b30 Bell Tower 6,950 Casino Buildin 3,749 Christiania 1,p00 Cnvered Bridge 8,81)3 Creekside 9, ] 36 Crossroad_'s Wort 40,531 C mn's 5,434 .Fitz. Scott Buildin 900 Caller Buildin _ 5,247 Gastof Grams i 4,01.1 Golden Peak House G,581. Coro Creek Plaza 7,14b F1i11:Buildin~r 8,OSb Loaf eat Vail :17.982 Manor Vail 4,200 McBride Buildin 22,640 Mill Creek Court 3.553 One Vail Place ~ 2,691 Plana Lode 14,000 Red Lion Buildin 13,G43 Rucksack : 4,528 Sitzmark 11;929 Slifer Building _ 638 Sonnenal . 9,506 Vail Village Inn 44,3f.-1 Village Center 14,127 Wall Street 7,371 Total 293,~~i~t3 • Shopping and Dining are the Znd mast attractive features of Vail fnr VisitnIS • The .Bavarian and Tyrolean architectural styles of buildings airing with the "public-space" environment created by public art and monuments positively impacts the shopping experience for visitors. • Range of retail sales in Vail Village - $1b5/sfto $1,450/sf; Average retail sales in Vail Village - $224Is£ • Range of retail space in Vail Village - 250sf to 8,057sf; Average reta.i l space - 1,858sf. • Art Galleries -Average Sales of $400s:f • Gift Stores -Sales Range of $25Usf to $400sf Jewelry Stc~:re -Average Sales.of $1000sf • Spurts .Retail -Average Sales o.f $230sf • Apparel .Retail ~-Sales Range of $800 to $1,000sf • Mast Leases are .Five=Year .l.~eases with only a F-landtul of Stores Reparti.ng Ten-Year Leases. • ,Retailers report that the biggest. 'threat to Vail is a "sta.le.°' .retail enviratunent. Retail & Restaurant Sn.tce by i3se Type SF % of '1"otal __ Retail -Food 11,350 4.G% Retail. -Apparel 32,G82 13.4% Retail -- S art 60,135 24.6%° Retail -Jewelry 8,951 3.fi%~ Retail -Geller 24,032 9.8°,% Rotail - Ofher 1 K,196 Z.4°lo Food & Beverages G4,092 2G.2% ' Ni htclubs 8,SG3 3.5% L VII~V~ I.~ THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with section 12-3-6, Vail Town Code, on March 14, 2005, at 2:00 pm in the Town of Vail Municipal Building, in consideration of: A request for final review of a final plat for a major subdivision, pursuant to Chapter 13-3, Major Subdivisions, Vail Town Code, to allow for the creation of the Vail Mountain Park Subdivision; a final review of a variance from Section 12-8A-5, Lot Area and Site Dimensions, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for the creation of a new lot less than 35 acres in size, located at Tract E, Vail Village, Fifth Filing and a part of Lot C, Block 5-C, Vail Village First Filing, and setting for details in regard thereto. Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Braun Associates, Inc. Planner: George Ruther A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-7G-3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow for an accessory use (soil and ground water remediation system), located at 2313 North Frontage Road/Tract B, Vail das Schone Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: West Vail Shell Planner: Bill Gibson A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-6D-3, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, to allow for a public utility and public service use, located at 2734 Snowberry Drive/Lot 14, Block 9, Vail Intermountain, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: ' Elisabeth Eckel A request for a final review of a text amendment, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendments, Vail Town. Code, to allow for an amendment to Section 12-21-14, Restrictions in Specific Zones on Excessive Slopes, Vail Town Code, to increase the amount of allowable site coverage on lots with excessive slopes from 15% to 20%, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Helmut Reiss, represented by Isom & Associates Planner: Matt Gennett A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council on a proposal to establish Special Development District No. 39, pursuant to Article 12-9(A), Special Development District, Vail Town Code, to allow for the redevelopment of Crossroads, a mixed use development; a request for a text amendment to Section 12-2=2, Definitions, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Section 12-3-7, Amendment, to add a definition for bowling alley; a request for a text amendment to Section 12-7E-4, Conditional Uses, Vail Town Code, Attachment: I Mauriello Planning Group Adjacent Property Owner List Crossroads Redevelopment February 2005 TOWN OF VAIL FINANCE DEPARTMENT 75 S. FRONTAGE ROAD VAIL, CO 81657 CROSSROADS OF VAIL CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION 143 EAST MEADOW DR STE 360 VAIL, CO 81657 VILLAGE INN PLAZA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION COLORADO REGISTRATION INC. PO BOX 666 VAIL, CO 81658 VILLAGE INN PLAZA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION C/0 ANN BISHOP PO BOX 820 VAIL, CO 81658 VILLAGE INN PLAZA CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION 100 EAST MEADOW DRIVE, #34 VAIL, CO 81657 SONNENALP PROPERTIES INC 20 VAIL RD VAIL, CO 81657 VAIL DOVER ASSOCIATES LLC 4148 N ARCADIA DR PHOENIX, AZ 85018 VILLAGE CENTER ASSOC 124 WILLOW BRIDGE RD VAIL, CO 81657 AUSTRIA HAUS CONDO ASSOC INC 20 VAIL RD VAIL, CO 81657 COLORADO DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 4201 E ARKANSAS AVE DENVER, CO 80222 MAURIELLO PLANNING GROUP, LLC PO BOX 1127 AVON, CO 81620 Crossroads Redevelopment CSC Text Amendment Additional Property Owners List (Gateway Building/Weststar Bank Buildnng) SUGAR NOTCH LP C/O RUSSELL STANDARD CORP PO BOX 479 BRIDGEVILLE PA 15017 WHITE RIVER ACQUISITION CORP C/O MANUEL MARTINEZ WW CNSLTNG GRP 905 BRICKELL BAY DR SUITE 230 MIAMI FL 33131 LIPCON, CHARLES R. & IRMGARD -JT 430 N MASHTA DR KEY BISCAYNE FL 33149 SEBOLD, DAVID L. & CYNTHIA L. -JT 80 W 78TH ST CHANHASSEN MN 55317 575M LLC 18 SUMMERFIELD LN SARATOGA SPRINGS NY 12866 GGG LLC PO BOX 5963 VAIL CO 81658 PALMOS, LEO 2775 IRIS AVE BOULDER CO 80304 DEER SPRING LP 1351 FREEPORT RD PITTSBURGH PA 15238 VANGALIS, ANTHONY - PEEPLES, PATRICIA E. PO BOX 3007 VAIL CO 81658 HSE INVESTMENT PARTNERS LLC 12 VAIL RD STE 500 VAIL CO 81657 -JT TIMBERLINE COMMERCIAL HOLDINGS LLC 12 VAIL RD 600 VAIL CO 81657 VAIL PBK LLC 392 MILL CREEK CIR VAIL CO 81657 KILMUR LLC PO BOX 2879 AVON CO 81620 VAIL GATEWAY PLAZA 12 VAIL RD STE 600 VAIL CO 81657 CENTRAL ROCKIES SPECIALISTS LLC PO BOX 4250 FRISCO CO 80443 VAIL CLINIC, INC. C/O STAN ANDERSON 181 WEST MEADOW DRIVE VAIL CO 81657 Village Inn Plaza Condominium Association 100 East Meadow Drive, #34, Vail, Colorado 81657 February 4, 2005 Mr. Peter Knobel Crossroads East One, LLC 143 East Meadow Drive Vail, Colorado 81657 RE: Crossroads Redevelopment Proposal Dear Peter, Regarding changes you are in the process of making for the Crossroads redevelopment, let me note some comments from Village Inn Plaza, Phase III, Condominium Association. 1. We are delighted with your plan to take the underground garage and the other below grade spaces away from the property line (except this is not done adjacent to our east garage entry driveway) so as to remove the danger to the large spruce trees on our side in the central and southern portions of our joint property line. While we would also like to preserve the trees along the more northerly parts of the joint property line, we understand the constraints of the loading dock area which has been requested by the Town. 2. We are also delighted that you have found a way to move all of the garage exhaust and other venting away from our side of your proposed building. 3. The lowering of some of the roofline, roughly in the central portion of your proposed building's western fagade facing Village Inn Plaza, Phase III, is also a positive step .along wii~h the moving back of some portions of the above grade footprint to ~, the twenty foot setback line. 4. Your offer to work .with us on plans for and to pay fo:r I RE: Crossroads Redevelopment, page 2 the installation and maintenance of landscaping between our buildings which would give the area a park or natural area look, possibly containing a recirculating cascade or stream, is a welcome addition to what you propose for Crossroads. 5. We applaud your intent, per the request of the Town of Vail, to install and heat a system of stepless (or, we hope, nearly so) walkways linking the southwest corner of your building and your building's plaza (via a through-the-building passageway) to the central west-to-east walkway at Village Inn Plaza, Phase III. So that we might be a good neighbor to you and those others around us on East Meadow Drive, we would appreciate the opportunity to talk with you about possible participation in the heating of the plaza sidewalk area in the vicinity of Vail Boot & Shoe and Annie's, particularly since we have no place to put boiler facilities for sidewalk heating there. 6. It appears from the partial plans which I have received this week by E-mail that you have changed the previous 45 degree orientation of the northwest corner of the building (above the loading dock area) to a 90 degree corner, thus possibly affecting the northeasterly views from our building which earlier you had sought to preserve in some form. I am not at this time able to assess the effect on us of this apparent change. 7. We are quite disappointed that you have not found it feasible to have the western section of your. proposed building next to us have heights of even roughly comparable levels to the facing portions, especially the central and southern ones, of Village Inn Plaza, Phase III. Your proposed building still is considerably higher than is ours along much of your new building's western side. There remains no major stepping down from the South Frontage Road to East Meadow Drive, a stepping down which we were required by the Town of Vail to do. We fully understand that it is not feasible with the building's current design for you to step back from the ground floor footprint on its western side, but I still do wonder whether you might not be able to step the building's western wing down from your present height at the South Frontage Road to two or three stories at East Meadow Drive. Doing so would present a far less massive facade in the central and southern portions of your west wing immediately adjacent to us. You have noted that in line with what you are proposing to do at Crossroads, we could likely receive permission to increase our building's height along East Meadow Drive. For us to do that would have a very direct, and quite negative, effect on many of our homeowners; thus, we do not see that as an option for us to consider even though it might be a profitable endeavor.' RE: Crossroads Redevelopment, page 3 I hope that you will find it possible to continue discussions with us (and others, too) about changes which will make your proposed building (which has many very nice design elements and which also offers us all a vast improvement over the, shall we just say, ~~aging" Crossroads of today) a more suitable and more welcomed addition to the Vail scene. It would be unfortunate f~~r you to give up discussions now and revert, as you said on Wednesday that you might, to the earlier plan which you seem to feel you may be able to get accepted by a slim majority of the Town Council._ We all want to see, and see sooner rather than later, a. thriving new Crossroads which will amicably fit with its surroundings, and we don't want to see what you further said is possible: an empty and dead Crossroads, something which would be a detriment to our community. Let us work together with other interests in the community to enable you to bring us what both you and we want: an invigorated Crossroads, bringing new life to Vail both by its economic vitality and by a design which fits beautifully and amicably into its setting. Sincerely yours, D. Deane Hall, Jr. President Board of Managers Village Inn Plaza, Phase III:, Condominium Association w k Inc~rfia~~rzCi~zg The British House Sign Comp~uiy Town of Vail 3/9/05 Planning and Environmental Commission Design Review Board Town Council esmGlislxd I)S4 Fine Dear Town of Vail, Clothing I am writing today to give my support to the Crossroads project. I attended the last two planning approval sessions before this project was sent to council. I have to say that I arrived at the first meeting somewhat critical of the size. However, after hearing from the project managers and seeing the drawings and comparisons I was converted into a supporter of the project. Now; we have meet with the new Crossroads Management and they have shown us some of the new drawings and described their plans for the retail and other commercial space. I believe that this new structure addresses the bulk and mass concerns voiced by planning officials and council members. We also feel that the team that Mr. Nobel has put together has worked very hard with many members of the community to find out what is needed and how best to go about it. It is really refreshing to see this proactive approach to Unig2se development in this valley when so many greedy developers and landlords Gifts have messed up Vail's true potential. We also discussed the future retail lease structure and were pleasantly surprised to find them very open to our ideas and opinions. The developer wants to create a vibrant town core site that will definitely add to Vail's appeal while also providing for some needed public benefit. I believe that Vail needs to approve the Crossroads project now so that it is not put off for another year till they can demo/ break ground. Any delay will only hurt a village already struggling with its third year of poor revenues. Almost everyone is agreed that Vail has been desperate for redevelopment for a long time. Now that it is finally starting to happen we must move forward with all projects in an efficient and timely manner. The Crossroads project should be approved by the town so we can start to build Vail's future now. Celtic Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments. Origin Sincerely, Robert A. Swimm Owner Scotch on the Rockies Office: P.O. Box 459, Vail, CO 51655 Tel: 970.74S.0022 Fax: 970.74S.0033 email: scotch@vail.net Shop: 242B E. Meadow Drove,Vail, CO 51657 Tel: 970.476.1957 Fax: 970.476.2660 21/04 2005 THU 14:58 FAX 30.3 226 4924 r A~ ll S ~ V It ~, S C> R'1" ti"' V)<A, ~+'~1,CSIMILL MACIIIN)C Apri121, 2(l(?5 Mr. Warren Campbell, AICP Senior Planrzcr, 't'own of Vail 75 South l;rontagc Load . . Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Mr. Campbell: It has come to my attention that the Crossroads project in Vail is in the final stages of approval and that one of the •I'own's potential concerns is I I'-G" floor-to-floor heights. ~1s you may be aware, Exclusive .Resorts is a z~~ajor in.veslor in luxury properties around the world, and we support tl~e planned Crossroads re-development project. We believe that at least 11'-6" floor-to-floor is critical for the success of a building that will contribute to the overall duality of the "Town of Vail. Nine- to fen-foal clear inferior heights are considered minimums in the luxury real estate industry, both fox hotel xoorxzs and residential unfits. Extra inches are noticeable even to the untrained eye, especially in residences in multi-story, multi-unit buildings with open floor plans. Greater room volumes can make up for smaller floor areas since they allow more flexibility for architectural features and acccnts~ larger windows and taller door frames -all features that enhance both tangible anal i><~tangibie properly values. Por instance, typical residences at Horizon Pass, a new a~.d highly successful project irz $aehelor Gulch, have nine- to ten-foot clear interior ieig~Zts which affords than a sense of luxury and comfort despite modest floor areas. II The Crossroads re-development project has the potent Vail~Village. As zrtajor investors in the Valley, contr'3 appreciators of Vail's unique character and charm, w floor-to-floor heights and hope the Town will too. Sincerely, ti Brian Corbett Director of 12.ca1 l~statc tali Irer: 600.447.n988 lax: 303.474.690 153p IGth Slrctt, Srutc 500 f.~rrwer, Co&)rncG, $0207 mlhPht:~([Ir 15ivf.IftOt (5 f.0i11 www.QxCIuSlvffC.St)r IA G(im al to k~c the crown jewel in the ne~N Tutors to sales tax revenue and support the project with 11'-6" ~ 002/002